or
Join Now!
|
|
These are answers that Itsdb has provided in Politics
| Question/Answer | | paraclete asked on 09/21/07 - The gaffe of the day? Saddams dead, Nelsons dead, is Osama dead? they are all dead, so maybe that's why they can't find Osama?
Bush's Mandela death gaffe 'out there'
By staff writers
September 21, 2007 10:27pm
Article from: NEWS.com.au
NELSON Mandela is still very much alive despite a gaffe by US President George W. Bush, who alluded to the former South African leader's death in a speech yesterday.
"It's out there," said Achmat Dangor of the Nelson Mandela Foundation of Mr Bush's comment, which received worldwide media coverage.
"All we can do is reassure people, especially South Africans, that President Mandela is alive," he said.
In a speech defending his administration's Iraq policy, Mr Bush said former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's brutality had made it impossible to find a leader who could unite the country.
"I heard somebody say, 'Where's Mandela?'," he said.
"Well, Mandela's dead because Saddam Hussein killed all the Mandelas."
The bizarre gaffe was made in a press conference in Washington yesterday.
Mandela became South Africa's first black president in 1994. He won a Nobel Peace Prize for preaching racial harmony and guiding the nation into the post-apartheid era.
References to his death – Mandela is now 89 and increasingly frail – are seen as insensitive in South Africa.
With Reuters
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
with thinking like this and a genius at the helm it's no wonder they can't solve problems, oh well George can solve it at the next OPEC meeting Itsdb answered on 09/24/07:What's bizarre Clete, is that the Aussie press was either too stupid to get his point or too biased to give him kudos for making it. | | Question/Answer | | pradeep asked on 07/24/07 - your ideal job briefly describe your ideal job Itsdb answered on 07/30/07:I'd like to be the guy in the pit crew that peels the windshield laminate off of a Nascar driver's car.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | Dark_Crow asked on 06/22/07 - Why do the European’s hate America?.............. I’m told it is because of capitalism; especially Germany, others say it is still a “Jewish” problem. That the moods of the rural populations reflect the mood of the thirties, and when the economy fails, and it will, there will be hell to pay.
Which brings me to the other question: Why don’t we pay attention to where our future lies, across the Pacific, and forget about the E.U. and especially Germany; where Democracy will soon end - That is, stop asking why certain people are not our friends (I already know, they have become Socialist.) .
Itsdb answered on 06/25/07:Ah, they're just jealous. They're no longer the big dogs on the world stage and they resent it ... but not enough to turn down our tourist dollars.
As to the second question, I think we are paying attention but why give up on Europe? Isn't it still in our interest to maintain friends in Europe? | | Question/Answer | | paraclete asked on 06/21/07 - A lesson for George and Condi on how to deal with the Iranians
'Robust' Aussies fend off Iranians
June 22, 2007 08:38am
Article from: AAP
* Colourful language helps Aussies avoid capture
* Aussies react quickly, Brits caught at most vulnerable
* Video: 'You can't take us, we're Aussies'
AN Australian Navy boarding crew in the Gulf of Persia repelled an Iranian gunboat that threatened them a matter of weeks before 15 British sailors were captured in a similar incident, it was reported today.
The capture of the British crew in March developed into a major diplomatic incident before their release was negotiated.
But BBC reporter Frank Gardner, a security specialist, reported the Australians managed to avoid a similar incident - pointing their guns at the Iranians and used "colourful language" before a gunboat withdrew.
Escape
"What I've been told by several sources, military sources, (is that) there was a similar encounter, in this case between the Royal Australian Navy and Iranian gunboats, some months ago, or at least some months prior to the seizing of the British sailors," Gardner said on ABC radio.
"The Australians escaped capture by climbing back on board the ship they'd just searched. I'm told that they set up their weapons.
"No shots were exchanged but the Iranians backed off and the Australians were able to get helicoptered off that ship and they didn't get captured."
Robust attitude
He did not mention the name of the Australian ship.
Australians ships rotate through duties in the Gulf, chiefly searching ships.
"What I'm hearing is that it was a pretty robust attitude by the Australians," Gardner said.
"The words that somebody said to me was that they used pretty colourful language but I'm sure that alone didn't make the Iranians back off.
"They reacted, I'm told, incredibly quickly, whereas the Brits were caught at their most vulnerable moment climbing down off the ship (and) getting into their boats."
Gardner said the British should be embarrassed about the incident, but the issue was whether military intelligence had been passed on.
Cowards
"The point of this story is not that the Aussies were fantastically brave and the Brits were a bunch of cowards, although I'm sure some people will interpret (it that way)," he said.
"Lessons should have been drawn from what happened to the Australian crew."
He said he had not been able to find out whether the information on the Australian incident had been passed on to the British.
Prime Minister John Howard said today he was not in a position to confirm the report, but told Channel 7: "I'll be getting some further advice on it later this morning.
"The only thing I can say is that the people we have in the Gulf are engaged in very dangerous work and the RAN has done a fantastic job and a very courageous job.
"As to the particulars of that claim, I'm not advised." Itsdb answered on 06/25/07:Clete, what does this have to do with George and Condi? Sounds like a lesson for the Brits and an example for the rest of us. Good job, guys.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | MarySusan asked on 06/14/07 - NEW MODERATOR TO BE MARYSUSAN I will be the new moderator for the Improved Policics Board when it opens. At that time, I will post the guide of conduct for discussing Politics here.
Cordially,
Mary Sue Itsdb answered on 06/18/07:>>To people I like, Crow. :):):)<<
And to the rest? | | Question/Answer | | MarySusan asked on 06/13/07 - SITE OF FUTURE IMPROVED POLITICS BOARD!! I plan on upgrading this Board by inviting new folks to participate, citizens who want a lively give and take about political issues that effect the lives of all decent citizens.
People who want to learn about the serious issues of our time, and people who want to share their knowledge (not propaganda and/or hate)with others for the betterment of all concerned.
STAY TUNED FOR FUTURE ANNOUNCEMENTS. Itsdb answered on 06/14/07:Well thank you for the warm welcome. | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 06/07/07 - Letters for Libby The letters submitted to the Judge in favor of Scooter Libby are linked at The Smoking Gun web site .
David Frum at National Review makes an interesting observation about the letter sent by Paul Wolfowitz .
I also remember how Mr. Libby offered his services pro bono or at reduced costs after he had returned to private law practice - to help former colleagues and friends with legal issues. In one case he helped a public official defend himself against libelous accusations, something that is extremely difficult to do for anyone in public office. The official in question was Richard Armitage who more recently served as - Deputy Secretary of State.
As we have learned from the trial . Not only was Richard Armitage the leaker that Plame worked for the CIA ,but both he an Colin Powell were aware of that fact at the beginning of the investigation.To add further to this misjustice ;prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald was aware of this fact before he even began to question Scooter Libby .
That Armitage and Powell remained silent during this whole affair shows how low they were willing to wallow to get Vice President Dick Cheney .Powell has permanenty soiled his previously fine reputation in my book .Armitage proved he is just pond scum p.o.s. for throwing someone who gave him a hand under the bus.
Itsdb answered on 06/07/07:So not only did Libby work on Marc Rich's defense while Fitzgerald prosecuted, he defended the real leaker against "libelous accusations" as a favor. Is there anything about this that was about anything of substance?
Brian Carney wrote an excellent piece I believe explains it all rather well. Here is his conclusion:
If there was a conspiracy, then, it was a conspiracy of dunces. At every stage where a top administration official could have exercised authority to ameliorate the problem caused by Wilson’s op-ed and Armitage’s indiscretion, that official failed to do so.
If a lesson about the Bush administration lies buried in this tale, it is close to the opposite of the accepted one. It is a lesson about an administration caught in an uncomfortable position as a result of one State Department official’s indiscreet remark to a skilled columnist, an administration straining to appear to be doing the right thing even at the expense of actually doing anything right. But the real lesson here has nothing to do with the Bush administration, any more than it has to do with prewar intelligence or with the First and Fifth Amendment rights of CIA officers.
The modern American government is a vast and largely self-sustaining bureaucracy. That bureaucracy acts, first and foremost, in its own interest, and not necessarily in the interests of its putative but temporary political bosses. The CIA, its intelligence having been challenged, sold out the White House on the sixteen words—even though that intelligence would later be upheld. The State Department, faced with the knowledge that one of its own was responsible for the Valerie Wilson leak, preferred keeping the White House in the dark to revealing what it knew. The Justice Department did what prosecutors do when ordered to investigate, which is to charge people with crimes.
In other words, the Republican party’s alleged “full control” of government prior to the 2006 midterm elections was more myth than reality. The Bush administration lost control of the Wilson story almost from the beginning, and while on a number of occasions it failed to exercise the control available to it, it was also denied the opportunity to control its fate by entrenched interests that no elected administration can ever fully master without the consent of the bureaucracy that supposedly serves it.
The President, however, does still hold one trump card, left in the hands of the chief executive by the founding fathers. The only unchecked power held by any single person in the federal government is the power to grant a pardon. That power is nothing more than the authority to restore personal liberty to another person—that is, to release a man or woman from the grip of the state.
Within hours of Libby’s conviction, Democrats, led by the Senate majority leader Harry Reid, called on President Bush to preclude the possibility of a pardon. This the President has of course refused to do. Neither has he yet offered a pardon. But there are good reasons, partly political and partly personal, for delay.
A pardon, it is generally agreed and the Supreme Court has ruled, carries with it the taint of guilt, and its acceptance an acknowledgment of guilt. This is something that Libby may yet hope to avoid. While he is due to be sentenced in June, his lawyers have announced their intention to appeal the conviction.
A pardon, whether it comes now or later, will inevitably occasion another round of scab-pulling about the case for the war and the administration’s commitment to the rule of law. It was partly out of a wholly unjustified fear of such criticisms that Libby was put in his current position in the first place. Before the President leaves office, it would be a rough sort of justice to defy those criticisms, and those who level them, by setting him free.
What's one more round of "scab-pulling" at this stage? | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 06/06/07 - The world at a cross roads .
Increasingly, the world is divided between liberal democracies (or regimes that are striving or pretending to be liberal democracies) and regimes that are tyrannical or are tending in that direction. And it is states in the latter category that are the source of the growing security threats that confront us. Though these regimes differ greatly in many other respects, their leaders seem to be drawn together more and more by their common fear and hatred of liberal democracy--think of the unholy trinity of Ahmadinejad, Chavez, and Lukashenka. It is the tyrannical regimes that support terrorism and threaten not merely to acquire but to use nuclear weapons. Any illusions that might have emerged in the 1990s that the world was entering an era of peace or that the further expansion of liberal democracy would be smooth and inevitable have now been rudely dispelled. Liberal democracy has real and powerful enemies who are bent upon its destruction. We no longer have the luxury of pretending otherwise. Once again, as was the case during the Cold War, the imperative of maintaining our security and our way of life requires that we defend and support democracy.
Marc Plattner Editor' Journal of Democracy '
comments ?
Either 9-11 was an exception that Bush turned into a bumper sticker ;as John Edwards claims ,and all we need concern ourselves with is global warming ......or men like Marc Plattner and Frank Gaffney Jr. are correct ;and we need to consider a higher degree of mobilization than we currently are prepared to engage.
Itsdb answered on 06/06/07:And don't forget, our ol' pal Daniel Ortega is back and buddying up to Chavez and the Mahdi Hatter.
But all of this is our fault as you know. If only we'd quit interfering in the affairs of other nations to feed our insatiable energy demands on behalf of big oil (and all that other crap we hear), we can create "a world where the rules really were fair for everyone" and no longer have to imagine peace - it will be a reality. | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 06/05/07 - 9-10 mentality I tortured myself Sunday by watching a part of the Democrat debate . Mostly it was typical pablum not worth much commentary .
However, I was struck by a comment by Dennis Kuchinich that has mostly been overlooked (probably because of his overall irrelevence ) but that I thought was a stunning admission .
Mind you ;this was just hours after the announcement that the JFK plot had been foiled .Wolf Blitzer was asking the candidates if the country was safer because of GWB anti-terror policies. For the most part the candidates cynically dismissed the notion out of hand; Hillary being the big exception .She grudgingly admitted that the country was safer BUT we still had a long way to go AND the Iraq war of course is a distraction yada yada. Triple H Edwards [home,haircut,hedgefund] repeated the nonsense that the war on terror is a bumper sticker.Obama eventually conceded after an emphatic NO that “there are some things that the Bush Administration has done well,” but failed to name them.
When it came time for Kucinich to comment he said “Americans need to reconnect with our deeper sense of self here,” ... “And I want to have what I call the 9-10 Forum to recreate—to help us reconnect with a deeper sense of who we are as Americans.”
If that didn't encapsulate the whole Democrat attitude about the war against jihadistan I don't know what does !! .
The 9-10 Forum appaerntly is an invention byDennis and his lovely wife Elizabeth Kucinich ,and is tucked away in his 2008 campaign web site. It is mostly Age of Aquarian dribble ;read it if you must. If you open it link by link ;peeling away the onion, you find it is mostly tin-foil hat material .
But this campaign poster best illustrates the over-all premise of the site :
![]()
(excuse me while I have some fun)
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
ok ;where was I ... oh yeah ...Nationalism, defense of the Nation, and the ordinary person are all loathsome things beneath a true citizen of the World like the Democrat elites .If there is any doubt where a Democrat majority coupled with a Democrat Administration will take us ;I think this 9-10 Forum is a perfect indicator.
Itsdb answered on 06/05/07:![]()
So we've got astrology, karma and whatever guiding the Kucinich's - and thus the nation - to a higher plane. I loved this:
This year marks the fifth anniversary of 9/11, a series of events that marked a day of awakening for the people of the world to the revelation of the very real and powerful forces at play in these times. Not falling prey to the black hole of 9/11 rhetoric which highlights the evil of otherness, rhetoric into which our lives have been sacrificed, together with our freedom and liberty. No, I am speaking of the forces at play within the depths of each of our hearts and the dark side of our souls traveling the shamanic journey into the underworld and the opportunity for our transformation into beings of light.
Wow, I didn't realize there was a dark side of my soul "traveling the shamanic journey into the underworld." Thanks for pointing that out, Liz.
The rest sounds a bit like episode 4 of Kung Fu.
Buchanan screams: "If I don't have a right to vengeance, who does?"
Caine answers in that dreamy, perfectly intoned way Carradine gives the character: "No one."
I find it hard to believe these people are for real. And even harder to believe he's a congressman ... and people actually voted for him. | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 06/04/07 - Scooter Libby sentencing Here are some highlights of the probation report in the Scotter Libby case .
http://www.scooterlibby.com/docs/sentencingmemo.pdf
Distinguished public servant. Generous mentor. Selfless friend. Devoted father. This is the rich portrait of Mr. Libby that emerges from the descriptions of him in the more than 160 heartfelt letters submitted to the Court on his behalf. The letter writers, who range from administrative assistants to admirals, neighborhood friends to former colleagues, Democrats to Republicans, bear witness to Mr. Libby’s character and patriotism. As detailed below, Mr. Libby’s accomplishments in the State Department, the Defense Department, and the Office of the Vice President demonstrate his extraordinary commitment to public service. His dedication to promoting freedom abroad and keeping American citizens safe at home is beyond question. Mr. Libby has also earned a reputation for treating people fairly and kindly and comforting those who are distressed. He has avoided the Washington limelight to focus on nurturing his young children. Even those who disagree vociferously with policies he supported while serving in the government believe his conviction is not characteristic of the life he has led .
The report requests probation or at worse no more than 15 - 21 months . It stresses the many factors factors warranting a diminution of his sentence;including that he has already suffered considerably as a result of this conviction and is expected to lose his license to practice law, his outstanding record of public service and prior good works, the improbability of recidivism and the fact that the conduct for which he was found guilty was aberrant and out of character.
Patrick Fitgerald has ignored the request and filed his own report that the judge should rightfully give Fitzgerald a smack down about. According to the Wall Street Journal :
Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has decided this was a leak case after all. Last week he filed a brief with the court arguing that Mr. Libby should receive a prison sentence in line with crimes that neither he nor anyone else was ever accused of committing. If the court accepts Mr. Fitzgerald's logic, the sentence meted out in this fantastic case would at least double, to a minimum of 30 months. So it goes in a case brought by an unaccountable prosecutor now requesting an unreasonable penalty based on evidence he never introduced at trial. This is America?
At trial, Fitzgerald denied the defense access to classified records about Plame's status, saying her status was irrelevant because he was charging no violation of that law.Now in his sentencing request he turns around and claims that Plame's status was indeed relevent.
Clearly Fitgerald has gone off the deep end . If Judge Walton goes along with this nonsense it is incumbent that President Bush issue an unconditional pardon. Scotter Libby should not spend one minute in jail due to the over-reaching of that lunatic Inspector Javert wanna-be .If anyone loses their license to practice law because of this case it should be he .
Itsdb answered on 06/05/07:I guess you've now heard, 30 months and $250,000 fine. "We need to make the statement that the truth matters ever so much," said Fitzgerald.
Why now? It hasn't seemed to matter much for the past 7 years. | | Question/Answer | | kindj asked on 06/04/07 - I hate to say "I told you so..." Dunno if anyone remembers (or if I even said it here), but I've maintained since day 1 that Putin is a bad guy, who wants nothing more than a return to the bad ol' days.
Well, here's another reason:
Updated: 8:15 a.m. CT June 4, 2007
MOSCOW - Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that Moscow could take “retaliatory steps” if Washington proceeds with plans to build a missile defense system for Europe, including possibly aiming nuclear weapons at targets on the continent.
Read the rest: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19013495/
I don't like the guy. I don't trust the guy.
DK
Itsdb answered on 06/04/07:The responses are getting interesting...
Washington wants to deploy interceptor rockets in Poland and a radar base in the Czech Republic to counter what it describes as a potential threat from "rogue states" such as Iran and North Korea.
It insists the shield is not aimed at Russia.
"As far as I am aware, the only country speculating about targeting Europe with missiles is the Russian Federation," Nato spokesman James Appathurai said.
"These kind of comments are unhelpful and unwelcome."
The new French president will hold his first talks with Mr Putin at this week's G8 summit in the German resort of Heiligendamm.
"I will listen attentively to him. He called for a frank dialogue. From my side, it will be frank," Mr Sarkozy said.
"Sarkozy has promised to confront Putin about human rights violations in Chechnya and about the slaying last October of journalist Anna Politkovskaya."
I'm starting to like the French a bit more these days.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 06/04/07 - Peshmerga babes on patrol Check out this recent posting by Gateway Pundit
![]()
Female pershmerga, the Kurdish security force, show off some moves during a hand-over ceremony from US forces to the Kurdish regional government in the northern city of Arbil. Reponsibility for security in Iraq's three northern provinces -- Sulaimaniyah, Arbil and Dohuk -- was given to the Kurdish regional government today.(AFP/Ahmad al-Rubaye) Itsdb answered on 06/04/07:They certainly look like a force to be reckoned with ... and easy on the eyes :)
I'm with Airborne Vet who commented, Way freakin' cool! Now why can't this be shown on the news?
Probably for the same reasons you won't hear this on the news:
If George W. Bush ever fell into the hands of Peshmerga soldiers, what do you suppose they would do to him? Here, in vivid detail, is what our President might look forward to:
“I would kiss him one thousand times,” the company commander, Sheikh Fattah, said. “I would carry him on my shoulders and shout songs to him,” another officer, Farouk Khaled, added. “I would sacrifice one thousand sheep and two thousand chickens for him,” a third officer, Mam Siamand, said.
We can't have anyone hearing that now can we?
Steve | | Question/Answer | | kindj asked on 06/03/07 - Just heard on the news... Fred Thompson is running! Just heard on NBC news.
Cool?
DK Itsdb answered on 06/04/07:Now it's getting fun :)
Steve | | Question/Answer | | ETWolverine asked on 06/01/07 - Follow-up of Steve's Global Peace Index post I have now read the report. Thanks, Steve, for the link to the report.
Here's my take on it.
The Global Peace Index report put out by Visions of Humanity makes certain assumptions about what constitutes “peace” that are not necessarily true.
The report used 24 separate indicators of what constitutes peace, each quantified, translated to a 1-5 score and then given a weight within the overall index. The problem is that not all of the indicators used necessarily mean what the report assumes they mean. For instance, the report looks at the number of guns per 100,000 people as an indicator of “internal militarism” and “crime”, when in fact the opposite may be true… gun ownership may very well be a deterrent to both crime and internal militarism. Another example: the percentage of GDP used to support the military is considered an indicator of militarism, when in fact a strong military may be a deterrent to other countries making war against them. The number of population jailed per 100,000 might actually be an indicator of decreasing crime rather than an indicator of violence. And why is the indicator “Potential for terrorist acts” given the LOWEST weight of any indicator in the list? Terrorism would seem to me to be the single greatest threat to world peace in the modern era.
The indicators are as follows:
Indicator---------------------------------Weight (1-5)
Level of distrust in others--------------------4
Number of internal security
officers per 100,000 people------------------3
Number of homicides per 100,000 people---------4
Number of jailed population per 100,000--------3
Ease of access to weapons of minor destruction--3
Level of organized conflict (internal)---------5
Likelihood of violent demonstrations-----------3
Level of violent crime-------------------------4
Political instability--------------------------4
Respect for human rights-----------------------4
Volume of transfers of major weapons
as recipient per 100,000-----------------2
Potential for terrorist acts-------------------1
Number of deaths from organized conflict-------5
Military expenditures as a percentage of GDP---2
Number of armed services personnel
per 100,000 people---------------------------2
UN Deployments 2006-07
(percentage of total forces)-----------------4
Aggregate number of heavy weapons
per 100,000 people---------------------------3
Volume of transfers of major weapons
as supplier per 100,000----------------------2
Military capability/sophistication-------------2
Number of displaced people as a
percentage of population---------------------4
Relations with neighboring countries-----------5
Number of external and internal
conflicts fought: 2000-05--------------------5
Estimated number of deaths from
organized conflict (external)----------------5
Furthermore, the report tries to combine indicators of external war, internal war and crime into a single index. However, this ignores the fact that the reasons for each are different, and thus cannot be dealt with as a single item. Bringing an end to external war in a specific country will not necessarily end crime or internal conflict within that country. Lowering crime will not necessarily bring an end to war, either internal or external. To try to deal with all of these issues under the single banner of “peace” is naïve and shows a lack of understanding of what causes crime, war and internal conflict.
Finally, this report does nothing to state whether a specific war is or is not necessary. Nobody would rightly argue that defeating Hitler in WWII was a “bad” thing or that the war should not have been fought. Peace was not as desirable as victory against Hitler in that case. There have been other ‘righteous’ wars in the past as well… the war to free Kuwait from invasion by Iraq is a good example. Stating that armed conflict is bad without putting the conflict into context is naïve and not very useful to establishing true world peace.
For these reasons, I find the Global Peace Index report to be lacking in substantive information that can be used to bring peace. While it is an interesting attempt to quantify “peace” I believe that it fails in its goals of defining and quantifying peace and determining the indicators of peace.
What's your take?
Elliot Itsdb answered on 06/01/07:Thanks Elliot, all great points. I think it was just a meaningless, 'feel-good' liberal exercise. I'm sure they're all patting each other on the back and plotting on how to use this for 'meaningful change,' based on the innovative notion that a greater level of internal peace is likely to lead to, or at least correlate with, lower external conflict—in other words, if ‘charity begins at home’ - so might peace.
In addition to what you've said about war I think it's a waste of time to weigh the aspects relating to the military the same for all countries. For instance, volume of transfers of major weapons can affect peace differently depending on the country. Do F-15's in South Korea and Iranian weapons in the hands of Jihadists in Iraq have the same effect? How do you equate China arming the Janjaweed with sending Patriot missiles to Israel?
And why on earth should "Military deployments to UN peacekeeping missions worldwide 2006-07" get a weight of 4?
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/29/07 - Hostage update Well now ;it sure was a good idea to sit down over the weekend for a"positive " sup of tea with a representative of the thugocracy in Iran. It accomplished soooooooo much !!!
U.S. academic Haleh Esfandiari and two other Iranian-Americans have been ''formally charged'' with endangering national security and espionage, Iran's judiciary spokesman said Tuesday.
''Esfandiari has been formally charged with endangering national security through propaganda against the system and espionage for foreigners,'' spokesman Ali Reza Jamshidi told reporters. ''She has been informed of the charges against her.''
Jamshidi did not say when the specific allegations had been read to Esfandiari, director of the Middle East Program at the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars. She has been held at Tehran's notorious Evin Prison since early May.
Jamshidi said the same charges also had been lodged against Kian Tajbakhsh, an urban planning consultant who also has worked for the World Bank, and journalist Parnaz Azima. No trial date has been announced and Jamshidi said the investigation against all three is continuing.
Imagine the progress we'd achieve if only we let Ahmamadjihad arm and train the Iraqi Army !
Itsdb answered on 05/30/07:And now they've got another of those American 'Velvet Agents.' I guess we'll just have to get better at matching wits with the Jihadists in the spin and propaganda department.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | ETWolverine asked on 05/30/07 - Doing the Booing Americans Won't Do Michelle Malkin
The United States government is on the verge of approving a mass amnesty to millions of illegal aliens — a plan pushed aggressively by meddling Mexican officials who reap billions of dollars in remittances (illegal aliens' earnings sent back to Mexico) without having to lift a finger to clean up their own country.
And the thanks we get? Internationally televised public humiliation.
On Monday night, the beautiful young woman who represented America in the Miss Universe pageant was booed and mocked as she competed on stage in Mexico City. Rachel Smith, 22, did her best to respond with grace and dignity during the Top Five finalists' interview segment as the audience disrupted the event.
As soon as co-host Vanessa Minnillo invited Miss USA to pick a judge's name from a bowl of index cards, widespread howls broke out at the mere mention of "USA." The verbal derision continued as judge Tony Romo asked Smith to pick one moment in her life she would relive.
Definitely not this one.
Smith soldiered through her answer, describing an educational trip to South Africa. Catcalls and whistles nearly drowned out Smith's reply until she wrapped up with " Buenos noches, Mexico. "
I wouldn't have been so polite.
None of Miss USA's fellow Americans participating in the interview segment — neither Minnillo, nor macho co-host Mario Lopez, nor the dashing Romo — came to Smith's defense. Instead, Minnillo pleaded briefly with the unruly mob: "Okay, una momento, por favor. " Lopez stood mute with a dumb grin on his dimpled face. Pathetic.
In fact, Smith was subjected to anti-American hatred throughout the week-long event. Last week, during the contestants' national costume fashion show, Smith smiled bravely as a rowdy outdoor crowd hissed and booed at her. According to pageant observers, no other contestants received such treatment.
Pitifully, Donald Trump and his Miss Universe officials are downplaying Smith's experience — ignoring the fact that the last time the pageant was held in Mexico, Miss USA was abused in similar fashion. 1993 Miss USA Kenya Moore was infamously heckled when chosen for the semi-finals that year.
Just a tiny minority of America-haters, right? How quickly we forget.
Do you remember what happened in Guadalajara in 2004 during an Olympics qualification soccer match between the U.S. and Mexico? The stadium erupted in boos during the playing of "The Star-Spangled Banner." Fans yelled "Osama! Osama!" as the U.S. was eliminated by Mexico.
The following year, in March 2005, Mexican soccer fans again cheered the al Qaeda mastermind's name at a World Cup qualifier. ESPN reported the audience again booed and whistled during the U.S. national anthem, and plastic bags filled with urine were reportedly tossed on American players.
One Mexican fan told the Christian Science Monitor: "'Every schoolboy knows about 1848. . . . When they robbed our territory,' referring to when Texas, California and New Mexico were annexed to the U.S. as part of a peace treaty ending the war between the two countries, 'that was the beginning.'"
This bitterness is long-standing, deep-seated and stoked by top Mexican government officials and elites. But pointing this reality out in the context of our crucial national debate over sovereignty, immigration, assimilation, border security and the rule of law will get you labeled a bigot. Our leaders have concluded that it is better to pander, hide, pull out a friendly Spanish phrase like Minnillo did, and pray that the hatred will go away by giving the pro-amnesty lobby its legislative goodie-bag.
Meanwhile, as Manhattan Institute fellow Heather Mac Donald points out, the White House continues to attack opponents of the Bush-Kennedy amnesty package as "nativists." Conservative columnist Linda Chavez accused amnesty critics of "not liking Mexicans." Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff suggested enforcement advocates wanted to "execute" illegal aliens. And Republican Sen. Lindsay Graham trashed immigration enforcement proponents as "bigots" in front of the ethnocentric, open-borders group La Raza.
Yeah, we're the nativists.
Next, they'll tell us the mob at the Miss Universe pageant was simply "doing the booing Americans won't do."
Will President Bush speak out against the treatment Miss USA received in Mexico? Will any amnesty peddler in Washington? Imagine if Miss Mexico were booed, heckled and subjected to chants of "USA, USA" if the pageant had been held here.
Smith can hold her head up high. Those who are selling out our country, on the other hand, should hang their heads in shame.
Michelle Malkin is author of "Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild." Her e-mail address is malkinblog@gmail.com.
COPYRIGHT 2007 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
---------------
Great points by Michelle Malkin. I have no use for the Miss Universe pageant in any case. But why should anyone be forced to go through the publicly humiliating experience that Rachel Smith went through? And where is the thanks from the Mexican people for our open borders policy, the free money they get from us, and the de-facto citizenship they eventually attain though illegal means? Mexico doesn't reciprocate with its illegal aliens... it throws them in jail (if they are lucky, that's all that happens to them) and send them back to their countries of origin. Why are we pandering to a country that clearly hates us?
Elliot Itsdb answered on 05/30/07:I have no idea, Elliot, and it really ticks me off. I'm flat sick and tired of 'Americans' bashing their own country, Mexicans (and 'Mexican-Americans') and their blathering about stealing Texas, NM and California, ungrateful hypocrites that take our money then spew about how evil we are, more ungrateful hypocrites that want our tourist dollars but not our presence with them - and people like this that are afforded all manner of hospitality in our country then crap on us in theirs.
I guess I'm just a bigot, eh?
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/29/07 - What happened to that vaunted and anticipated Taliban Spring offensive ? While we continued to divert resources away from the "real " war on terror ;the Taliban prepared for an "intense " spring offensive .
Well ,so far things aren't going so well for Mullah Omar and his band of thugs . Mullah Dadullah ;the key military commander for the Taliban was killed by NATO troops May 12 .
“Mullah Dadullah was the backbone of the Taliban,” said Asadullah Khalid, governor of the former Taliban stronghold of Kandahar. “He was a brutal and cruel commander who killed and beheaded Afghan civilians.”
Another key leader ,Mullah Akhtar Mohammad Osmani ,said to be a top aid to Mullah Omar ,was killed in December .
Evidently the killing of Mullah Dadullah has thrown the Taliban into disarray .The Economist reported that inside the Taliban there are rumors of him being betrayed . Something that the Guardian confirmed yesterday :
Taliban insurgents fighting in Afghanistan and Pakistan have been hit by a wave of defections and betrayals that has resulted in a witch-hunt within the militant movement....
..two of the Taliban’s most senior commanders have now been killed after being betrayed by close associates. Up to a dozen middle-ranking commanders have died in airstrikes or other operations by Afghan, Nato or Pakistani forces based on precise details of their movements received from informers. Few details have been publicly released, but senior military sources speak of ‘major hits’ that they wish they could talk about openly…
‘There is a feeling that there are spies everywhere,’ said one tribal leader speaking by telephone from the violent and anarchic North Waziristan ‘tribal agency’ along Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan. ‘People are very worried and no one is trusting anyone any more.’…
According to Rahimullah Yusufzai, a senior Pakistani journalist and expert on the Taliban, ’suspicion is now falling even on trusted men and is creating tension in Taliban ranks’.
The coalition ,primarily led by the British contingent launched a major offensive of it's own im March called Operation Achilles ;an operation involving 4500 NATO troops and 1000 Afghan soldiers. Although much of the news from the front is subject to a black out,initial reports is that it has been decisive with reports that "scores" of Taliban rebels have been killed during heavy fighting. This is being conducted concurently with Operation Silicon . Effectively ,the Taliban Spring Offensive stalled before it began.
But ;when all else fails they always have that ole' back up plan ......targetting innocent civilians .....putting the emphasis on "offensive ".
Itsdb answered on 05/30/07:It seems the only thing I've seen in the news on Afghanistan lately has been about the 'deteriorating' situation there. I came across this humorous - but almost plausible - post from Wizbang on Dadullah:
And Murtha will call for a war crimes investigation, saying the US attacked a handicapped man when they killed the Pegleg Mullah.
It's bad when you read something like that and think, "it wouldn't surprise me." But then the left doesn't seem to understand what we're fighting over there:
One suspected traitor accused of betraying senior commander Mullah Akhtar Mohammed Osmani last December was decapitated with a knife by a 12-year-old boy before cameras.
At least the left is sticking to indoctrinating (and gagging) our kids on sex, drugs and Transgender Bisexual Gay Lesbian Awareness. They haven't quite gotten to the point of having them behead evangelicals ... I think.
This just makes me wonder how smart these Jihadists really are though:
The suicide bomber was apparently targeting foreigners in an armored vehicle, but they were unhurt in the blast. A purported Taliban spokesman claimed responsibility for the bombing.
I'm sure they claimed it was a victory for Allah.
I kind of wish those senior military sources could speak more openly about their successes, too. Someone needs to report more on successes than the neverending gloom and doom we hear now.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/28/07 - Fred Thompson's Memorial Day posting I remember when I was a kid; one thing was clear to me. The more I learned about the rest of the world, the luckier I felt just having been born in America. The more I learned about America, the more I appreciated what those who came before us built; and how exceptional they were.
Not that there aren't other great places to live, but America is unique. It's not just that we are the freest and most prosperous country the world has ever seen. America has also freed more people than any other nation in history.
A lot of people have done their part to see that we are blessed with the advantages we enjoy -- from hardworking pioneer mothers to the Framers of the Constitution. Memorial Day is coming up, though, and I'm thinking more about American soldiers who have made the ultimate sacrifice -- those who died to protect our way of life and make the world safe for democracy.
There are some people, though, who don't think that's such a good idea. Some people even want to use Memorial Day to protest our military's presence in Iraq. The irony is that their right to protest was paid for by people willing to risk everything to keep the forces of tyranny at bay -- here as well as Japan, Germany, France, Italy, Korea, Burma, Vietnam, the Philippines and dozens of other countries.
Over the years, a lot of people have tried to talk us out of feeling about America the way we do. Instead of pride in what America has done, they want us to feel guilty -- generally because we have so much more than rest of the world. Of course, it wouldn't help the rest of the world one whit if we had less -- either of freedom or of prosperity. On the contrary, it’s our liberties that have made us prosperous and there's no reason the rest of the world couldn't be just as well-off -- if they embraced freedom as well.
Almost always, when I talk to people who see America as the problem, their arguments are based on ignorance or an outright tangling of history. What they thought they knew about America and the world came second- and third-hand through people with axes to grind.
That's why I was troubled recently when I came across a report by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. The report's conclusion was that American colleges and universities are failing to increase their students' knowledge of America's history and institutions.
Students polled in a wide range of colleges and universities showed no real improvement in their historical knowledge. Some actually forgot part of what they'd learned in high school by the time they graduated -- and I'm talking about some of our best-known Ivy League schools.
Less than half of college seniors knew that, "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal" is from the Declaration of Independence. Less than half knew basic facts about the First Amendment. Half didn't know that the Federalist Papers were written in support of the Constitution's ratification. Only a quarter of seniors knew the purpose of the Monroe Doctrine.
This is our quandary. Memorial Day is about remembering. It’s about remembering those who died for our country; but it's also about remembering why they believed it was worth dying for. Too many Americans, though, have never been taught our own history and heritage. How can you remember something that you’ve never learned?
posted by Fred Dalton Thompson on 5/25/2007 4:17:26 PM
(click on link for podcast ) Itsdb answered on 05/29/07:tom, I couldn't imagine what your average history class is like these days - especially in colleges and universities.
Over the years, a lot of people have tried to talk us out of feeling about America the way we do. Instead of pride in what America has done, they want us to feel guilty
And you know what puzzles me is how the left thinks a life of so much guilt is 'liberating.' Being a liberal must be a miserable existence.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/28/07 - U.S. frees 42 Iraqi captives in raid American forces freed 42 kidnapped Iraqis — some of whom had been hung from ceilings and tortured for months — in a raid Sunday on an al-Qaida hideout north of Baghdad, the U.S. military said.
Military officials said the operation, launched on tips from residents, showed that Iraqis in the turbulent Diyala province were turning against Sunni insurgents and beginning to trust U.S. troops.
"The people in Diyala are speaking up against al-Qaida," said Maj. Gen. William Caldwell, the top U.S. military spokesman in Iraq.
This is indicative of what the new Iraq would look like if we were to leave prematurely ......very simular to the Iraq we liberated. What is the utility of such slaughter houses ? Certainly they are not for information gathering . Why did Uday Hussein put his rivals into woodchippers? What did he gain beyond pure sadistic pleasure that the terror and fear produced ? This to him and I suspect to the al-Qaeda scum is nothing more than a form of recreation .
WE know by the capture of the illustrated torture manual (one of the most under-reported stories in this war )that this is what they have in mind as the future Iraq. This was not done to get information. This was done for the same reason Saddam Hussein and his thugs did it: To intimidate the civilian population.
What we fight is a cult of evil and it doesn't matter if it's leaders names are Hussein or bin Laden. They are all heads of the same hydra.
Happy Memorial Day . We have tasked our brave soldiers with a mission worthy of the fight by the 'Greatest Generation'.The liberation of a small torture cell is small compared to the liberation of the Nazi camps ;but the spirit is the same. Then we fought evil because we recognized the imperitive. Today too many of us see it as optional. Itsdb answered on 05/29/07:42 Iraqis freed, some of whom had been hung from ceilings and tortured for months BEFORE 'the "Face" of the American anti-war movement' resigns. I wonder if she'd mind commenting on this before putting away her "Imagine Peace" sign.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/29/07 - Cindy Sheehad quits the Democrat Party Guess they weren't radical enough for her . Her bitter resignation note is here at Kos .
Tammy Bruce translates Cindy's resignation posting for us :
1. Everyone hates me now, even the Dems ("I have endured a lot of smear and hatred since Casey was killed and especially since I became the so-called "Face" of the American anti-war movement...I have been further trashed on such "liberal blogs" as the Democratic Underground.")
2. The money has dried up. (" [W]hen I started to hold the Democratic Party to the same standards that I held the Republican Party, support for my cause started to erode...")
3. People stopped paying attention to me. ("I guess no one paid attention to me when I said that the issue of peace and people dying for no reason is not a matter of "right or left", but "right and wrong.")
4. Democrats are blind and stupid and just like Repubs because they don't agree with me, either. ("It amazes me that people who are sharp on the issues and can zero in like a laser beam on lies, misrepresentations, and political expediency when it comes to one party refuse to recognize it in their own party.")
5. America is evil. ("a fascist corporate wasteland...")
6. I wasted all my money and ignored my family to try to prove to myself I am not the attention whore that apparently I am. ("I have also reached the conclusion that if I am doing what I am doing because I am an "attention whore" then I really need to be committed.")
7. America is an ungrateful bitch. ("I have invested everything I have into trying to bring peace with justice to a country that wants neither.")
8. I'm in debt and won't pay my bills because America is evil. ("my hospital bills from last summer (when I almost died) are in collection because I have used all my energy trying to stop this country from slaughtering innocent human beings.")
9. Americans are stupid and vapid and don't care. ("Casey died for a country which cares more about who will be the next American Idol than how many people will be killed in the next few months.")
10. Everyone is jealous of me because I get all the attention. ("This group won’t work with that group; he won’t attend an event if she is going to be there; and why does Cindy Sheehan get all the attention anyway?")
11. Everyone is doomed, so I'm getting out while I can. ("Our brave young men and women in Iraq have been abandoned there indefinitely by their cowardly leaders who move them around like pawns on a chessboard of destruction and the people of Iraq have been doomed to death and fates worse than death ...I am going to take whatever I have left and go home.")
12. I need money. ("Camp Casey has served its purpose. It’s for sale. Anyone want to buy five beautiful acres in Crawford , Texas ? I will consider any reasonable offer.")
13. America is evil. ("Good-bye America ...you are not the country that I love and I finally realized no matter how much I sacrifice...")
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To that I'd like to add :
George Bush will never be impeached because if the Democrats dig too deeply, they may unearth a few skeletons in their own graves
YA THINK ????
This isn't a surrender ,it is a redeployment to California.
What a sad person. It took her a long time to realize that she was just another useful idiot.
Itsdb answered on 05/29/07:Maybe her pal Hugo Chavez will bail her out. I understand he needs some new TV personalities more to his liking...
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tropicalstorm asked on 05/27/07 - moonbat! LOL ![]()
Itsdb answered on 05/29/07:Moonbats do exist. You have your "shrieking moonbats":
![]()
And "barking moonbats":
![]()
Apparently they're shapeshifters:
![]()
![]()
![]()
Moonbats are obviously delusional:
![]()
Research is ongoing:
![]() | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/25/07 - Subject: Baby Boomers
It was fun being a baby boomer... until now.
Some of the artists of the 60's are revising their hits with new lyrics to accommodate aging Baby
Boomers.
They include:
Herman's Hermits - Mrs. Brown, You've Got a Lovely Walker.
Ringo Starr - I Get By With a Little Help From Depends.
The Bee Gees - How Can You Mend a Broken Hip.
Bobby Darin - Splish, Splash, I Was Havin' a Flash.
Roberta Flack - The First Time Ever I Forgot Your Face.
Johnny Nash - I Can't See Clearly Now.
Paul Simon - Fifty Ways to Lose Your Liver
The Commodores - Once, Twice, Three Times to the Bathroom.
Procol Harem - A Whiter Shade of Hair.
Leo Sayer - You Make Me Feel Like Napping.
The Temptations - Papa's Got a Kidney Stone.
Abba - Denture Queen.
Tony Orlando - Knock 3 Times On The Ceiling If You Hear Me Fall.
Helen Reddy - I Am Woman, Hear Me Snore.
Leslie Gore - It's My Procedure, and I'll Cry If I Want To.
Willie Nelson - On the Commode Again
any others ?
Itsdb answered on 05/25/07:How about...
Rolling Stones - Can You Help Me up?
Turtles - Napping Together
The Lovin' Spoonful - Did You Ever Manage to Wake Up Your Mind?
The Lovin' Spoonful - Do You Believe in Viagra?
The Who - Who are YOU?
The Everly Brothers - All I have To Do Is Pee
Otis Redding - Sittin' On the Pot All Day
The Beatles - Here Come the Runs
Chicago - Does Anybody Really Know What Time it Is
Ringo Starr - You're Sixty-Four, You're Wrinkly, And You're Mine???
Eagles - Queasy, Greasy Feeling
The Beatles - Let Me Pee
The Osmonds - One Bad Apple (and I'm goin' all day)
And finally...
Village People - AARP | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/25/07 - Torture put in perspective A torture manual ,fully illustrated ,was captured in a raid of an al-Qaeda safe house . Smoking Gun has the graphic photos.
It was there, during an April 24 raid, that soldiers found a man suspended from the ceiling by a chain. According to the military, he had been abducted from his job and was being beaten daily by his captors. In a raid earlier this week, Coalition Forces freed five Iraqis who were found in a padlocked room in Karmah. The group, which included a boy, were reportedly beaten with chains, cables, and hoses.
I looked for it ,but no where in the illustrations are pictures of water boarding or humiliation by women interrogators .
I will search to find the international condemnation ;the mass protests ;the human rights reports by the UN over the barbaric treatment but I don't expect to find much . Hmmm . what was on the menu at GITMO today ? Lemon glazed chicken ? Yum . Itsdb answered on 05/25/07:"blowtorch to the skin" and "eye removal" 101, eh? Since the left and al-Qaeda are on the same side it won't get much notice.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/25/07 - Hostage update # 3 First posted on 5/9/07 .
The husband of Haleh Esfandiari ,Shaul Bakhash ( teacher of Middle Eastern history at George Mason University in Virginia),wrote an article published in the LA Times .
```````````````````````````````````````````````````
My wife, a prisoner in Iran
ON MAY 8, the walls of Tehran's Evin prison closed around my wife, Haleh Esfandiari, a 67-year-old scholar, grandmother and dual citizen of Iran and the United States.
Haleh, director of the Middle East Program of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, went to Iran in late December to visit her 93-year-old mother, a trip she has made almost twice each year for a decade or more. On Dec. 30, on her way to the airport to fly back to Washington, she was stopped by three masked, knife-wielding men who took all her belongings, including her Iranian and U.S. passports. In retrospect, it was clearly an inside job; Iran's Ministry of Intelligence fielding "highwaymen" against Iran's own citizens.
Without a passport, Haleh was forced to return to her mother's apartment. When she tried to apply for a new one, a member of the Ministry of Intelligence took her aside. Over the next six weeks, Haleh was subjected to 50 hours of interrogation.
At first, she told me by e-mail and phone, her inquisitors asked about her work, who spoke at what conference, where and when — things they could easily find with the click of a mouse on the Wilson Center's website. But Haleh told them what she remembered about the lectures, exchanges, panels and classes she had arranged. To help with the details, I e-mailed piles of downloaded documents at night.
If the questions seemed almost laughable, the interrogations were not. They were accompanied by threats, accusations and intimidation — and always the implication that Haleh was involved in something nefarious. She also was pressured to provide information she did not have, to identify alleged "networks" of whose existence she was unaware, to admit that she was holding things back. She refused.
Then, on Feb. 14, the interrogations ended. Except for two unpleasant phone calls from her interrogators inviting her to "cooperate" and warning her that worse things were to come if she did not, there was silence — for 10 weeks. But on May 7, Haleh was called to the Ministry of Intelligence. The next day, when she arrived for her appointment, she was arrested. The unofficial charge, we would later find out, was working for an organization that was conspiring to foment a "velvet" revolution in Iran.
Since her incarceration 17 days ago, Haleh has been allowed only one- or two-minute phone calls with her mother. She speaks as if a minder is present. No visits are allowed, no legal representation. With so little contact, I have every reason to assume the worst: that she is subject to blindfolding, solitary confinement and harsh, even brutal interrogation calculated to extract a false confession.
Some suggest that hard-liners wanted Haleh in custody to block next week's U.S.-Tehran talks. Others say the government wants to trade her for Iranians held in Iraq. This is mere speculation. The only explanation I've been given came in a statement issued Monday by the Ministry of Intelligence, a fantastical accusation that reveals the imaginary web Tehran wants to weave to entrap my wife and others.
It goes like this: American think tanks such as the Wilson Center are advancing a U.S. government plan for a "soft toppling" of Iran, creating "links" between Iranian intellectuals and U.S. institutions and forming "informal communication networks" that can then be used "against the sovereignty of the country." In effect, in the eyes of the Iranian government, any exchange among scholars is tantamount to treasonous conspiracy.
Should you wake up one day to find your wife or child or parent in the hands of the secret police in a country that routinely violates the rule of law, you will likely choose quiet probing over publicity. You have no recourse to law or courts. You fear publicity may make things worse. You believe, almost always wrongly, that if you work quietly, use the contacts you have and wait reasonably, the nightmare will be over.
When Haleh was initially prevented from leaving Iran and the interrogations began, it was principally at my insistence that we did not "go public." Repeatedly I was told by those who supposedly understand the inner workings of Iran: "Don't worry; it's only an interrogation; once they have finished with their questions, they will let her go."
Once Haleh was arrested, however, silence was no longer an option. It is preposterous that she is accused of conspiring to overthrow the Iranian government by organizing conferences and encouraging dialogue between Iranians and Americans. The Wilson Center issued a fact sheet; Lee Hamilton, its president and director, held a news conference; and I began to speak openly about Haleh's frightening predicament.
The extraordinary media attention, as well as the support for Haleh from presidential candidates and political leaders, from scholars and academic associations, from the students at Princeton University who she taught to love the Persian language, from women's groups, human rights organizations and people everywhere have astonished and gratified her family and friends.
It is easy to feel powerless in the face of a state's overweening power — especially a state that arrests, incarcerates and accuses its citizens at will. But the events of the last few weeks — the universal condemnation Iran has earned by imprisoning Haleh and others — have taught me that people also have power when they condemn injustice and stand up for wronged individuals. Is the Iranian government listening?
```````````````````````````````````````````````````
Sadly the answer to that last question is a definite no. The regime has defied the UN and all attempts to pressure it to change it's ways . Further I do not see the pressure ;the universal condemnation that he refers to .
Yes ;many of the Presidential candidates have made statements (as I refered to in my last posting on the subject ) ,but I do not see the international press picking up the mantle and ratcheting up the pressure at all.
In fact ,I see the opposite. As I posted yesterday ,I see a major attempt ,as represented by the ABC network leak ,to undermine efforts to influence the regime.
Itsdb answered on 05/25/07:I haven't seen this universal condemnation either, but I'm sure the UN will 'deplore' something eventually. But what do you think will happen now that Iran has nabbed a 4th hostage with ties to George Soros? | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/24/07 - ABC News ,and the CIA should be investigated by the Justice Dept. with the same dogged determination that Patrick Fitzgerald used to hound Scooter Libby.
As you know by now ;ABC disclosed a covert black-op authorized by the President to destabilize the Iranian Regime.It was aired on the ABC Evening News by Brian Ross .
The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert "black" operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell the Blotter on ABCNews.com.
The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the subject, say President Bush has signed a "nonlethal presidential finding" that puts into motion a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iran's currency and international financial transactions.
Well thank you very much ABC News !!!! It is no longer a secret .(or maybe I should just give ABC the benefit of the doubt ...that the President wanted this information putting our operatives at risk revealed ......but somehow I don't think so . )
Mitt Romney's reaction almost get's it :
“First of all, I woke up this morning, and I was shocked to see the ABC News report regarding covert action in Iran. I was not shocked because of the covert action. I was shocked because a news organization with such a renowned reputation as ABC News would deem it appropriate to publish information about a covert action existing, and publish that not only to America but to the entire world. The reporting has the potential of jeopardizing our national security. Stated quite plainly, it has the potential of affecting human life. We may never know.
“As you know, Iran is developing a nuclear bomb. Iran sponsors terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas. Iran’s President has denied the Holocaust. Its leadership has incited to genocide. Its leadership has suggested the use of nuclear weapons. In fact, the spread of nuclear terror – nuclear proliferation – is certainly the most threatening of all the prospects on the planet today. And Iran is the most noted perpetrator of this nuclear proliferation. And Iran is supplying weapons and expertise that kill American soldiers in Iraq.
“And with all those things in mind and despite those factors, ABC News published classified information that warns Iran and that has the potential of putting Americans at risk. Now no one wants in a country like ours any form of censorship, but the media has a responsibility to police itself. And in the last little while, we’ve seen two examples of a failure in this responsibility. One by The New York Times with regards to reporting on the electronic eavesdropping on potential terrorists and the other is this report by ABC News. Responsible policing I just don’t think happened on their part. Responsible policy-making happened on their part.
“And I think it’s important to recognize that we have a global war on terror which continues. It’s a global war against violent jihad. We’ve seen six years of this. It’s not about to disappear anytime soon. With that in mind, I think it’s time for leadership in the media to consider and adopt voluntary rules of responsible reporting with regards to matters of national security. Of course, we have a First Amendment which we cherish and value. It provides for freedom of the press but with this freedom goes the responsibility of the press. I’m not looking, as I said, for government censorship. I’m looking for corporate responsibility.”
Corporate responsibility ? That is for big oil,the drug companies and Walmart .....not for the MSM gate-keepers . When it comes to news ,they are the decider ! Anyway Govenor ,you got it slightly wrong. In cases involving national security violations it is not for the corporations to self police;it is for the government to police. Judith Miller was jailed to compel her to reveal her source. I expect no less for Brian Ross.
Itsdb answered on 05/24/07:>>When it comes to news ,they are the decider<<
Yep, which is why it was such an outrage to out Valerie Plame and put her life as a covert agent (at her desk in) in danger and not guys on the ground in the land of Ahminajihad, the Iranian Nutjob - while reporting that Iran is continuing to make progress on its expanded efforts to enrich uranium in CBS' case.
And did you notice ABC's little feature to their article?
Click Here to See Photos of the Players in Another Iran Operation -- the Iran-Contra Affair: Where Are They Now?
Yeah, that's what's important here.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/23/07 - Read a review of Al Gore's new book here .
Itsdb answered on 05/23/07:About all I can say is the left has a helluva lot of chutzpah.
"A visionary analysis of how the politics of fear, secrecy, cronyism, and blind faith has combined with the degration of the public sphere to create an environment dangerously hostile to reason.
You mean like these classics?
“Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, children could not be taught about evolution.” -Ted Kennedy
"Shamefully we now learn that Saddam's torture chambers reopened under new management, U.S. management." -Ted Kennedy
"Under the Bush administration and this Republican Congress, America is less safe, facing greater threats and unprepared for the dangerous world in which we live." -Harry Reid
"This development on the Korean Peninsula is further proof that you can't trust Republicans to keep America safe." -Howard Dean
"The truth is the American people can't trust Republicans with their security." -Howard Dean
"By any measure, five years after 9/11, America is less safe and more divided because of President Bush and Secretary Rumsfeld." -John Kerry
"The bottom line is Judge Alito cannot be trusted on the Supreme Court. We can't trust him to stand up to government abuse of power. We can't trust him to ensure all citizens enjoy equal protection under the law. We can't trust him to protect our right to privacy. We can't trust him to defend mainstream American values." -John Kerry
The Durbin Classic
And on and on and on...
We live in an age when the thirty-second television spot is the most powerful force shaping the electorate's thinking, and America is in the hands of an administration less interested than any previous administration in sharing the truth with the citizenry. Related to this and of even greater concern is this administration's disinterest in the process by which the truth is ascertained, the tenets of fact-based reasoning-first among them an embrace of open inquiry in which unexpected and even inconvenient facts can lead to unexpected conclusions.
"The first thing we're going to do is we're going to have ethics come back to Washington again." -Howard Dean
'Nuff said
Gore's larger goal in this book is to explain how the public sphere itself has evolved into a place hospitable to reason's enemies, to make us more aware of the forces at work on our own minds, and to lead us to an understanding of what we can do, individually and collectively, to restore the rule of reason and safeguard our future. Drawing on a life's work in politics as well as on the work of experts across a broad range of disciplines, Al Gore has written a farsighted and powerful manifesto for clear thinking.
And that answer is ... get out your tin-foil hats
![]() | | Question/Answer | tomder55 asked on 05/22/07 -
Your tax dollars at workMay 8, Congress passed HR 1595(288 - 133 ) The Guam World War II Loyalty Recognition Act .
The bill recognizes recognizes the island's suffering and loyalty to America during WWII . Cool
But then it goes on to authorizes reparations for the descendants of those killed by the Japanese. So who else do we have to pay off for the atrocities of the Japanese during WWII ? Let's say we by some kindness think the survivors deserve restitution by us . Why would there descendents be simularily eligible ? Why don't we simularily pay the families of the American soldiers who paid the ultimate price to liberate the Island July 21,1944 -August 10,1944 (3,000 killed,7,122 wounded)? Itsdb answered on 05/22/07:Interesting. This is related to Guam Meritorious Claims Act of 1945 (pdf).
The original act basically gave residents of Guam a year to claim a loss that was "the result of or incident to hostilities or hostile occupation, or is caused by or incident to noncombat activities of the United States Army, Navy, or Marine Corps forces or individual members thereof, including military and civilian employees thereof.
This congress is giving them an extension - over 60 years later. I have no problem with compensating the folks in Guam, helping them get back on their feet, helping them rebuild, etc., but it seems this congress is just looking for excuses to give away money. I'm sure it's a guilt thing - along with keeping a constituency by in their pockets.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | kindj asked on 05/22/07 - Another one of my hypothetical questions.... Would the rise of a dictator/tyrant such as Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, etc. be possible in 21st century America?
I know the libs are already chomping at the bit on this one, but I think that's just a knee-jerk reaction in this particular day and age.
I was thinking about it some this morning. I'm no historian--not by a long shot--but didn't Hitler "campaign" on a platform of fear, and create a common enemy while at the same time bolstering national pride? I know there was more to it than that, but you get the picture.
Right now, I can see why the conservatives couldn't pull it off, despite the many accusations to the contrary. The left's illegitimate child, the press, would counter ANY move made by a conservative at this point. However, I personally worry more ABOUT the left than the right--even the far right (whoever THEY are). I mean seriously, let's look: the left is the group of "tolerance, love, peace, fairness," and whatever other PC words you want to toss in there. However, who is gradually squashing freedom of religion? The left, if that religion is Judaism or Christianity. Who is quite overtly trying to take away the 2nd Amendment? The left again. While they are not quite restricting freedom of speech (unless it's "non-PC"), who "filters" the information the average American gets? The left, via their willing lapdogs in the media. And so on and so on....
So is it possible that America could voluntarily elect and hail a leader that is, in fact, a cruel tyrant and dictator?
DK Itsdb answered on 05/22/07:You're right that it is the left doing all of those things ... while accusing Bush/Republicans/conservatives/compliant media of being the ones eroding our rights.
I can totally see it, in my opinion liberals/progressives or whatever you want to call them are a serious threat to this country. They're louder, meaner, more intolerant and basically don't give a damn what anyone else thinks. They believe they're superior in every way and anything not conforming to their ideology is not even worthy of consideration.
And what's frightening to me about it is the American public in general doesn't see it. Partly because it's been a well-orchestrated effort for decades to gradually erode rights, indoctrinate the most impressionable (our kids), and infiltrate the media and education.
So we now have a generation of Americans that grew up influenced largely by liberals/progressives/secularists, etc) - skulls full of mush - exactly as they've wanted it.
I'm telling you, if we get a Democratic president (beholden to the moonbat base) and a Democratic congress in 2008 we'll start seeing at least the beginnings of your scenario. The public was fooled by a bunch of lying opportunists last fall...
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/22/07 - A letter to my cousin serving in Iraq The Guardian has a story today about Iran unleashing their al-qaeda and Sunni surrogates in a summer offensive that I guess is designed to have the same negative psychological impact the U.S. as the Tet Offensive .(sorta blows that theory that Sunni and Shia will not cooperate )
http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,2085195,00.html
The official said US commanders were bracing for a nationwide, Iranian-orchestrated summer offensive, linking al-Qaida and Sunni insurgents to Tehran's Shia militia allies, that Iran hoped would trigger a political mutiny in Washington and a US retreat.
"We expect that al-Qaida and Iran will both attempt to increase the propaganda and increase the violence prior to Petraeus's report in September [when the US commander General David Petraeus will report to Congress on President George Bush's controversial, six-month security "surge" of 30,000 troop reinforcements]," the official said. ...
US officials now say they have firm evidence that Tehran has switched tack as it senses a chance of victory in Iraq. In a parallel development, they say they also have proof that Iran has reversed its previous policy in Afghanistan and is now supporting and supplying the Taliban's campaign against US, British and other Nato forces.
Our feckless political leadership has set up this scenario ;and when the attacks come I'm sure Speaker San Fran Nan will be the first to the podium proclaiming the surge a failure.Our enemies know we have a 3 year tolerance ;but anything longer than a 100 hour campaign ,the white flags begin to unfurl .
To those who complain that we did not follow the Powell doctrine by having a clear exit strategy I have said that the exit from Iraq is a road that goes through Tehran and Damascus.
Sorry for the rant but it's frustrating reading stuff like that . I can just imaging how it affects our troops . Maybe I should just be like the rest of America. ........Gee ...I wonder who is going to win the American Idol finals ??
Tom
Itsdb answered on 05/22/07:"Iran is perpetuating the cycle of sectarian violence through support for extra-judicial killing and murder cells. They bring Iraqi militia members and insurgent groups into Iran for training and then help infiltrate them back into the country. We have plenty of evidence from a variety of sources. There's no argument about that. That's just a fact," the senior official in Baghdad said..
Well I'm with you, this just infuriates me ... but not as much as the way Madame Pelosi and co. will likely interpret this. They'll say "this is all Bush's fault!!! Our presence there is the problem!!!"
Who cares about Idol, will Apolo Anton Ono win Dancing With the Stars???
Steve | | Question/Answer | | ETWolverine asked on 05/22/07 - My e-mail to President Bush Mr. President,
I realize that you most likely will never see this message. However, I felt it was my duty to log my concerns with your immigration policies.
First, I believe that I should tell you a bit about myself so that you understand my perspective on immigration. I am a 38-year-old banker working for a mid-sized bank in New York. I am the son and grandson of immigrants from Poland, survivors of the Holocaust. My parents were born in German DP camps after the war and are naturalized citizens. (My mother still keeps her green card as a keepsake due to her pride at having come to this country.)
My grandparents worked very hard to become successful in this country. My father’s parents were candy-shop owners (after years of running pushcarts to scrape together the funds needed to buy the shop) and my mother’s parents were tailors. They came to this country with literally nothing in their pockets, and managed to become productive members of society. They managed to put their children through college, and all of them became professionals. My father is an attorney and a stock broker for a major Wall Street firm (coincidentally, he was once the youngest attorney to be admitted to argue before the Supreme Court, a record that has since been broken but that my father is still proud of to this day), and my mother manages real estate. My family made good on the American dream within a generation, and I am very thankful for the opportunities that the United States afforded my family. Thanks to the opportunities that this country affords us, I became the first member of my family born in this country, and with the support of my family I graduated Brooklyn College with a BA in economics. I married a girl from your own home state of Texas (Houston, to be precise) and we have two wonderful children, a home in New Jersey, and a solid middle-class income. My sister is a teacher living in Brooklyn, and my brother is an MD, a graduate of SUNY Downstate Medical School. I truly believe that my family is a text-book success story for immigration within the USA.
As you can see, Mr. President, I am hardly an opponent of immigration. I value immigration as an important source for “new blood” and new ideas into the pool of American resources. I try to keep in mind that some of the greatest acheivements of our great country have come from immigrants: Albert Einstein and Nikola Tesla, perhaps the two greatests scientists of their times, were both immigrants. Eli Weisel is an immigrant. And there have been many others as well… too many to name in such a letter. Immigration is important to our national identity and an important tool for remaining at the top of the economic and technological food chain.
However, your recently announced immigration bill concerns me greatly.
Mr. President, part of the reason that my family was so successful in this country was the fact that we became part of American culture. Another important factor is that we didn’t demand support from the government for what was really our own responsibility to provide to ourselves. And finally, and perhaps most important, is the fact that we caqme here legally after waiting on the appropriate lists and doing the appropriate paperwork. We did not sneak into the United States, we came here legally.
Mr. President, these are important factors to consider, and none of them are addressed in your bill.
While I do not necessarily support making English our national language (though it would be nice to see), I also don’t believe that accomodating other languages in government business supports the idea of joining American culture. Language is one of the most important factors in any culture, and not giving immigrants a reason to learn English by forcing them to conduct government business in English is a barrier to cultural acclimation. It sets immigrant apart from the rest of society, which in turn hurts American society as a whole. (Not to mention the economic costs of providing government assistance in multiple languages.) Your bill does not address this point at all.
Secondly, your bill has not appropriately addressed the costs of illegal immigration. The vast majority of illegal immigrants are low-skilled labor. The Heritage Foundation did a study in which they found that the average cost of a low-skilled labor family to the US Government is roughly $22,000 after taxes. Mr. President, with 11 million illegal immigrants in this country, the government is spending roughly $242 Billion per year on supporting low-skilled laborers from other countries. That equates to $2.4 trillion over a 10 year period. When we consider that your proposed national budget for 2008 is only $2.3 trillion, the cost of illegal immigration is one of great concern. This is potentially the biggest disaster to our economy since the Great Depression. We can barely afford to support our own low-skilled workers and their families. We do not need to be importing poverty from other countries to support. Instead of low-skilled laborer’s, we should be encouraging the immigration of high-skill employees and innovators… the likes of Eli Weisel, Nikola Tesla and Albert Einstein… people who will push this country forward economically, socially and culturally, not those who will hold us back.
Thirdly, your bill grants amnesty to an entire sub-class of law-breakers. I know that you object to the use of the word “amnesty” in reference to this bill, but that is exactly what this bill is: an amnesty bill. Mr. President, the American Heritage Dictionary defines amnesty as "A general pardon granted by a government, especially for political offenses." It is difficult for me to see how this bill is anything but amnesty. It grants a general pardon to a specific group of people for the illegal political offense of entering this country illegally. This is potentially a very big mistake, Mr. President. It makes US citizenship cheap. My grandparents worked very hard to become citizens, and they hold that citizenship dear because it was something worth working for. But your bill makes it cheap. It makes coming to this country illegally a method of gaining relatively quick citizenship.
Mr. President, one of your predecessors, President Carter, made the mistake of legalizing illegal immigration. The result was the Mariel Boatlift, a huge rise in crime, particularly drug crime and violent crime, and influx of convicted murderers and rapists to the United States, and a financial and economic burden that we are still paying to this day. I beg you to reconsider your current course of action. Legalizing 11 million illegal aliens in one felt swoop is an economic, social and criminal burden that this country cannot bear without serious and irreversible consequences.
I have supported you with regard to the War on Terror and the War in Iraq (which I consider to be one and the same), the USA Patriot Act, your tax relief plans, and your handling of judicial appointments, as well as on most other issues. But on this issue, Mr. President, I must log my strong disagreement.
I know that you have the good of this country at heart, and I know that your compassion for your fellow man is what drives you to support this bill. I respect your motivation. But this is not good for America or the American people. I urge you to reconsider this immigration bill.
With greatest respect from your constituent and supporter,
Elliot (my full name)
Edison, New Jersey
God Bless the President of the United States of America
------------
What do you think? Did I catch the high points? Itsdb answered on 05/22/07:Elliot ... well done!
Did you know this about the phantom immigration bill? According to our two senators, Kay Bailey Hutchinson and John Cornyn, This proposal would enable illegal immigrants to collect SS benefits for the time they were unlawfully in our country.
Come again? This bill would retroactively give illegal immigrants Social Security benefits?
I realize there is no easy answer to the problem of 11 or 12 million illegals already here, but to give them SS benefits for the time they've spent here illegally? Nice.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/20/07 - Want to buy some property in quiet upstate NY ? In the United States al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Muslim Brotherhood – to name but a few terrorist organizations – have set up regional headquarters in Boston, Chicago, New York, Dallas, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, Tampa, Washington DC and over 38 other cities around the country. They are not only raising, laundering and funneling money back to the Middle East to support their terrorist organizations, they are setting up jihadi training camps right here in the United States.
This week Paul Williams of the Candian Free Press wrote an expose about one small enclave situated in the previously quite Catskill Mts. in N.Y. It is called Islamberg (I kid you not).
Situated within a dense forest at the foothills of the Catskill Mountains on the outskirts of Hancock, New York, Islamberg is not an ideal place for a summer vacation unless, of course, you are an exponent of the Jihad or a fan of Osama bin Laden.
The 70 acre complex is surrounded with "No trespassing" signs; the rocky terrain is infested with rattlesnakes; and the woods are home to black bears, coyotes, wolves, and a few bobcats.
The entrance to the community is at the bottom of a very steep hill that is difficult to navigate even on a bright sunny day in May. The road, dubbed Muslim Lane, is unpaved and marred by deep crevices that have been created by torrential downpours. On a wintry day, few, save those with all terrain vehicles, could venture forth from the remote encampment.
A sentry post has been established at the base of the hill.
The sentry, at the time of this visit, is an African American dressed in Islamic garb - - a skull cap, a prayer shawl, and a loose fitting shalwat kameez. He instructs us to turn around and leave. "Our community is not open to visitors," he says.
Behind the sentry and across a small stream stand dozens of inhabitants of the compound - - the men wearing skull caps and loose fitting tunics, the women in full burqa. They appear ready to deal with any unauthorized intruders.
The hillside is blighted by rusty trailers that appear to be without power or running water and a number of outhouses. The scent of raw sewage is in the air.
The place is even off limits to the local undertaker who says that he has delivered bodies to the complex but has never been granted entrance. "They come and take the bodies from my hearse. They won't allow me to get past the sentry post. They say that they want to prepare the bodies for burial. But I never get the bodies back. I don't know what's going on there but I don't think it's legal."
On the other side of the hill where few dare to go is a tiny village replete with a make-shift learning center (dubbed the "International Quranic Open University"); a trailer converted into a Laundromat; a small, green community center; a small and rather squalid grocery store; a newly constructed majid; over forty clapboard homes; and scores of additional trailers.
It is home to hundreds - - all in Islamic attire, and all African-Americans. Most drive late model SUVs with license plates from Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, South Carolina, and Tennessee. The locals say that some work as tollbooth operators for the New York State Thruway, while others are employed at a credit card processing center that maintains confidential financial records.
While buzzing with activity during the week, the place becomes a virtual hive on weekends. The guest includes arrivals from the inner cities of New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania and, occasionally, white-robed dignitaries in Ray-Bans from the Middle East.
Venturing into the complex last summer, Douglas Hagmann, an intrepid investigator and director of the Northeast Intelligence Service, came upon a military training area at the eastern perimeter of the property. The area was equipped with ropes hanging from tall trees, wooden fences for scaling, a make-shift obstacle course, and a firing range. Hagmann said that the range appeared to have been in regular use.
Islamberg is not as benign as a Buddhist monastery or a Carmelite convent. Nearly every weekend, neighbors hear sounds of gunfire. Some, including a combat veteran of the Vietnam War, have heard the bang of small explosives. None of the neighbors wished to be identified for fear of "retaliation." "We don't even dare to slow down when we drive by," one resident said. "They own the mountain and they know it and there is nothing we can do about it but move, and we can't even do that. Who wants to buy a property near that?"
The complex serves to scare the bejeesus out of the local residents. "If you go there, you better wear body armor," a customer at the Circle E Diner in Hancock said. "They have armed guards and if they shoot you, nobody will find your body."
At Cousins, a watering hole in nearby Deposit, a barfly, who didn't wish to be identified, said: "The place is dangerous. You can hear gunfire up there. I can't understand why the FBI won't shut it down."
Islamberg is a branch of Muslims of the Americas Inc., a tax-exempt organization formed in 1980 by Pakistani cleric Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani, who refers to himself as "the sixth Sultan Ul Faqr," Gilani, has been directly linked by court documents to Jamaat ul-Fuqra or "community of the impoverished," an organization that seeks to "purify" Islam through violence.
Though primarily based in Lahore, Pakistan, Jamaat ul-Fuqra has operational headquarters in New York and openly recruits through various social service organizations in the U.S., including the prison system. Members live in hamaats or compounds, such as Islamberg, where they agree to abide by the laws of Jamaat ul-Fuqra, which are considered to be above local, state and federal authority. Additional hamaats have been established in Hyattsville, Maryland; Red House, Virginia; Falls Church, Virginia; Macon, Georgia; York, South Carolina; Dover, Tennessee; Buena Vista, Colorado; Talihina, Oklahoma; Tulare Country, California; Commerce, California; and Onalaska, Washington. Others are being built, including an expansive facility in Sherman, Pennsylvania.
Before becoming a citizen of Islamberg or any of the other Fuqra compounds, the recruits - - primarily inner city black men who became converts in prison - - are compelled to sign an oath that reads: "I shall always hear and obey, and whenever given the command, I shall readily fight for Allah's sake."
In the past, thousands of members of the U.S. branches of Jamaat ul-Fuqra traveled to Pakistan for paramilitary training, but encampments, such as Islamberg, are now capable of providing book-camp training so raw recruits are no longer required to travel abroad amidst the increased scrutiny of post 9/11.
Over the years, numerous members of Jamaat ul-Fuqra have been convicted in US courts of such crimes as conspiracy to commit murder, firebombing, gun smuggling, and workers' compensation fraud. Others remain leading suspects in criminal cases throughout the country, including ten unsolved assassinations and seventeen fire-bombings between 1979 and 1990.
The criminal charges against the group and the criminal convictions are not things of the past. In 2001, a resident of a California compound was charged with first-degree murder in the shooting of a sheriff's deputy; another was charged with gun-smuggling' and twenty-four members of the Red House community were convicted of firearms violations.
By 2004 federal investigators uncovered evidence that linked both the DC "sniper killer" John Allen Muhammed and "Shoe Bomber" Richard Reid to the group and reports surfaced that Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl was captured and beheaded in the process of attempting to obtain an interview with Sheikh Gilani in Pakistan.
Even though Jamaat ul-Fuqra has been involved in terror attacks and sundry criminal activities, recruited thousands of members from federal and state penal systems, and appears to be operating paramilitary facilities for militant Muslims, it remains to be placed on the official US Terror Watch List. On the contrary, it continues to operate, flourish, and expand as a legitimate nonprofit, tax-deductible charity.
For perspective: the area is very rural, without too many rules or oversight. Yet it’s just a few hours drive from NYC, with fairly cheap land. As pointed out, there are many more little jihadist communites nestled in simular locations around the country where Islamist paramiltaries practice and train .We chastise other countries, including some who we consider allies, for allowing terrorist training camps to exist within their borders. This is the pot calling the kettle black.
The obvious question is : If most of the residents have criminal records then the use and ownership of firearms by felons is prohibited; Why haven't the authorities gone in and busted the community ?
They had no problem with the idea when they raided the Branch Davidians under far less pretext .
Itsdb answered on 05/21/07:Well now Tom, just take a peek at Islamberg and see the wildflowers, playground and the beautiful sunsets and all your worries should be eased. Why, you can even donate to their Masjid building fund while you're there.
Apaprently we needed a training ground for all those Muslims converted in prison to eliminate the need to ship them off to Pakistan for Jihadi lessons. Where's Janet Reno when you need her?
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/21/07 - Fred Thompson v Michael Moore Michael Moore's new docu-fantasy-propagandist film "Sicko" is released and is getting praises from the ususal souces and some suprising ones .
If you have been in a cave then you don't know that he critiques the US Healthcare system . Agreed; there are parts of it that could be improved upon ,but he 'jumps the shark 'when he tries to favorably compare it to Cuba's system.
In a key moment in the film, Moore takes a group of patients by boat to the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba because of its outstanding medical care. When they can't get into the U.S. naval base, Moore proceeds onto Havana where the patients are treated well and cheaply.Some of the patients were people with health problems resulting from the 9-11 attacks on the WTC.
This stunt was challenged by Fred Thompson in an editorial entitled Paradise Island .
The truth is that Cuban medical care has never recovered from Castro's takeover--when the country's health care ranked among the world's best....
As many as half of Cuba's doctors fled almost immediately--and defections continue to this day. Castro won't allow observers in to monitor his nation's true state, but defectors tell us that many Cubans live with permanent malnutrition and long waits for even basic medical services. Many treatments we take for granted aren't available at all--except to the Communist elite or foreigners with dollars.
For them, Castro keeps "show" clinics equipped with the best medicines and technologies available. It was almost certainly one of these that Moore went to, if the stories in the New York Post and the New York Daily News are true.
Well Michael Moore seized on this opportunity to promote his new flix. He published a letter on his web site (picked up by Drudge ) challenging Thompson to a debate ,and calling him a hypocrite for smoking cuban cigars .
Within hours Thompson responded on You Tube .... with an unlit cigar in his mouth .Thompson's video was played more than 200,000 times the day of it's release and has gotten extensive coverage on the net ,on Bill O'Reilley's show ,CNN MSNBC,The New York Daily News ;the Des Moines Register,and other venues.This on the same day as the Republican GOP Fox debate . Again ;Thompson stood out above the pack in this Sista Soulja moment.
"You know, I've been looking at my schedule, Michael, and I don't think I have time for you," ...."But I may be the least of your problems. You know, the next time you're down in Cuba visiting your buddy Castro, you might ask him about another documentary filmmaker. His name is Nicolas Guillen . He did something Castro didn't like and they put him in a mental institution for several years, giving him devastating electroshock treatment. A mental institution, Michael. Might be something you ought to think about."....
"As to the cigars, they are the result of the generosity of a friend of mine who gives me a few from time to time. We intend to see to it that they are destroyed over the next few months."
The Hotline put the impact of the exchange this way :Thanks to Michael Moore, Fred Thompson may have upstaged the entire GOP field with out even showing up to 5/15's debate....
Thompson closes: "Mental institution Michael. It might be something you ought to think about." Bloggers went gaga:
Instapundit: "If this is a foretaste of a Thompson campaign, it's pretty potent."
Kausfiles: "More important ... the video is itself evidence of Thompson's actual presidential qualifications. You can't make a quickie spot like this unless
a) you know what you think (or have a really fast pollster)
b) you can react to new situations quickly, and
c) you have some sense of theater. Those are all extremely important things for a president to have."
Captain's Quarters: "It's 38 seconds of a down-home rhetorical spanking that manages to both address Moore and belittle him. I'm thinking Jack Palance in City Slickers, telling Bill Crystal, "I crap bigger than you." ... Man, I could watch this over and over again. Talk about pitch-perfect."
NRO's Jim Geraghty: "In a way, if every GOP candidate on stage tonight plays it safe, a potential candidate bit- er, slapping around Michael Moore might actually spur more discussion in GOP circles."
Thompson has taken internet campaigning to a new level . Howard Dean and others have been successful launching their campaigns and raising funds on the net ,but eventually he still slogged through snowy Iowa before he imploded . Thompson last week posted at Pajama Media and praised the Internet as a way to send a message beyond the Washington beltway.
Whether or not the Internet can elect any particular candidate in any particular race, it’s clear that all of you and our many friends across the blogosphere and the Web are part of a true information revolution. That’s why so much of my effort has been focused on talking to Americans through this medium. By empowering individuals and building communities, the Internet provides a way of going around the inside-the-beltway crowd to reach people in numbers unheard of not that long ago.
I believe this direct communication and discussion is going to have an enormous impact on our political process.....
It is apparent that Thompson intends to test the hypothesis that a candidate can run a successful internet campaign. "Hopefully, we'll continue this conversation."
Itsdb answered on 05/21/07:"Mental institution Michael. It might be something you ought to think about."
What other 'candidate' would dare utter those words let alone say them with such authority and flair? I'm with Elliot, I love this guy, and I would relish the chance to see him face the Dems in a showdown.
"We intend to see to it that they are destroyed over the next few months."
Beautiful.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/17/07 - Hillary took lessons from John Kerry That's the only conclusion one can reach when reading this AP report
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton voted Wednesday to advance legislation cutting off money for the Iraq war, then refused to pledge to support the measure if it came to a vote, then said she would........
"This is consistent with what I've been saying for several years."
Itsdb answered on 05/17/07:We're as confused as anyone on Senator Clinton's position," said Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd's campaign spokeswoman, Christy Setzer.
Are they surprised by that? I've been confused about Democrats for years.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | paraclete asked on 05/16/07 - He's bad and mean, .. .. and worse than George Bush?
Does this mean he must be doing something right?
'Howard is a war criminal
Australia is funding terrorism and Prime Minister John Howard is a war criminal, Zimbabwe's Information and Publicity Minister Sikhanyiso Ndlovu says.
Zimbabwe's latest attack on the Australian government comes after Mr Howard banned the one-day cricket team from touring the southern African nation this September because of the despotic regime of President Robert Mugabe.
"The Australian people should really stand against John Howard's gestapo tendencies and interference with other states. He wants to cause insecurity in our country and that we will not allow," Dr Ndlovu told ABC Radio today.
"He is the international gestapo and a criminal ... he is worse than anybody else, his actions in banning the cricket is just one example of being the gestapo," Dr Ndlovu said of Mr Howard.
Last week, Mr Howard said he did not want the team to tour Zimbabwe because Mugabe was a "grubby dictator".
Cricket Australia was faced with the possibility of paying a multi-million dollar fine to the International Cricket Council for its failure to play the three one-day matches, but the council decided to not to impose the fine.
Dr Ndlovu said Australia was financing people who were destabilising the Zimbabwean regime.
"You continue to finance your puppets in our country who don't love their country.
"They are also the ... monies that come to them are to cause violence, you know, terrorist activities, I've got a long list of their terrorist activities here," Dr Ndlovu said.
AAP
Itsdb answered on 05/17/07:Does this mean he must be doing something right? Obviously. Anyone that can call a true "grubby dictator" a "grubby dictator" is alright in my book.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/15/07 - I can't figure this shiite out The Boston Globe,a NY Slimes affiliate reported yesterday about the Iraqi Shiites growing influence in Iran .
So some Iranians are intrigued by the more freewheeling experiment in Shi'ite empowerment taking place across the border in Iraq, where -- Iraq's myriad problems aside -- imams can say whatever they want in political Friday sermons, newspapers and satellite channels regularly slam the government, and religious observance is respected and encouraged but not required.
In Tehran's storied central bazaar, an increasing number of merchants are sending their religious donations, a 20 percent tithe expected from all who can spare it, to Iraq's most senior Shi'ite cleric -- rather than to clerics closer to Iran's state power structure, said Jawad al-Ghaie, 48, a wholesaler of false eyelashes and nail extensions and a respected lay donor.
Speaking carefully to avoid directly challenging the Iranian government, he and several fellow merchants suggested that Iraq's Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani holds more spiritual sway because of his lifelong commitment to quietism. That is the school of thought that says Shi'ite leaders should stay out of government, and Sistani has stuck to it despite the great temptation to wade into the chaos of Iraqi politics.
So here is some direct positive improvements rippling across the Iraq border (that coincidently neo-cons predicted )being reported by a NY Slimes sister paper .Potentially good news right ?
Yet the NY Slimes editorial board still is beating the drum that all is lost .
Itsdb answered on 05/15/07:Potentially good news? You betcha, and the Times will have none of that in spite of their Boston child's temporary bout of sanity.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/13/07 - Update on The Howard Dean's tornado implode So what do the Democrats do when they are caught with their pants down ? The unleash their lawyers. This 'cease and desist'letter was sent to the Freepers and another one was sent to XM Radio to silence Quinn (who still maintains his source is solid ).
SANDLE, REIFF and YOUNG, P.C.
50 E Street, S.E., Suite 300
Washington DC 20003
Telephone: 202.479.XXXX FAX: 202.479.XXXX
May 10, 2007
VIA E-Mail
Mr. James C Robinson FreeRepublic.com PO Box 9771 Fresno, CA 93794
Re: Statement re Democratic National Committee
Dear Mr Robinson:
We are writing on behalf of our client, the Democratic National Committee (DNC).
A post by “coffee260” on FreeRepublic.com today states that this morning, on the Quinn & Rose show on XM, co-host Quin stated that the DNC chairman, Gov. Howard Dean had called Gov Kathleen Sebelius (D-Kans) “around 5:00am on morning after a tornado destroyed the town of Greensburg, Kansas and discussed with here what to say about the tornado and how to blame the war in Iraq and the Bush administration on a slow response to the aftermath.”
The statement was made by Mr Quinn, repeated on FreeRepublic, is demonstrably, unequivocally and absolutely false. Gov Dean had no such conversation with Gov Sebelius, ever.
No effort was made by FreeRepublic to contact anyone at the DNC for comment or to check the accuracy of these statements before they were published. FreeRepublic not only repeated this statement, but further stressed that Quinn’s “source” was extremely reliable and in a position that would give him direct knowledge of these revelations.
The statements quoted above are false and defamatory, are libelous and slanderous and clearly threaten to interfere with the DNC’s operations and ability to solicit support and raise funds by predjuding the organization in the eyes of the Democratic Party supporters and the public. For these reasons, we demand that FreeRepublic immediately cease and desist from Further dissemination of the above quoted statements or any statements similar in substance and immediately post a retraction of these statements in a location on its web pages at least as prominent as that on which the original story appeared.
Please let us know by noon, May 11, 2007, whether you intend to comply with these requests.
Thanks for your time and immediate attention to this important matter.
Sincerely yours,
(Signature)
Joseph E Sandler
Sorry sreamin Dean .... I'm not sure about Quinn,but I am sure that the Coffee260 at FreeRepublic(and tropicalstorm for that matter )
is immune from defamation action based on The NY Slimes v.Sullivan ruling.It states that "no court of last resort in this country has ever held, or even suggested, that prosecutions for libel on government have any place in the American system of jurisprudence," and it endorses this tradition as being constitutionally mandated. In other words ,the threshold for libel suits by public figures is very high .
Here is Quinn's orginal story which btw also takes Sen.Brownback to task for not being upfront about thie conversation he had with Govenor Sebilius :
BREAKING NEWS From the Quinn and Rose Show
10 May 2007
Same Words -- Different Mouth Piece
By Rose
PLEASE NOTE: The following is information we have received from a reliable source. We have never been misinformed by this person in the past.
After Mother Nature did a number on the good people of Kansas, Governor Sebilius did a "Mother" of all numbers on the American people -- especially the people in Greensburg, Kansas.
Kansas Kathleen Sebelius had said that because Bush sent too many of our National Guard Members and resources to Iraq -- there weren't enough left to go around in Kansas. After those remarks to the media, she made a phone call to Senator Sam Brownback (R).
Keep in mind that Governor Sebelius has a decent relationship with Senator Brownback and other Kansas Republicans. In fact, she has, for the most part, led as a moderate rather than a liberal in Kansas.
According to our source; during her phone conversation with the Senator, she offered an excuse for her words to the media. She explained that because everything is so political right now -- she was told not to allow an opportunity like this pass.
She went on to say that "Howard" called her around 5:00 am and told her not to ask the White House for any help, or make any statements until she heard back from him. Then "Dick" (Durbin ?) called her an hour or two later and told her to use the excuse of the Guard being at war.
Hoping Brownback would understand, she apparently went on to say that he had to understand that with everyone feeling the heat about the war, they needed to get press on something else. She said she didn't think it was right to use it like this, but she didn't feel she had much of a choice with current climate.
She also promised that she'd try to move away from the comment when she and Brownback were to meet up later and tour the damage.
This certainly sheds a lot of light on Katrina -- and confirms the suspicions that many of us had at that time. Katrina was engineered in much the same way.
If they are going to read from the same script every time something like this happens, the least they could do is mix it up a little. The are just so darn predictable. They will do anything for political gain.
Brownback should show some spine and tell the American People and the Administration the truth. Where is his sense of deceny -- where is his loyalty to his party? Quinn and I were on Sean Hannity's radio program this afternoon. Sean had invited Senator Brownback to respond. So far, we haven't heard anything from him.
Let me ask this of Senator Brownback; What in the world would you have to lose if you were to be honest about the phone call from the Kansas Governor? Or, perhaps this is the better question; What do you have to gain by protecting Sebelious? Do you honestly think she would be there for you down the road? Do you think she gives a rat's ass about your bid for the Presidency? These aren't people you can count on -- when will we learn this?
Senator Brownback is not exactly the Paul Bunyan of Politics -- but he could be. He has an opportunity to do what no politician has done before him -- tell the truth.
Itsdb answered on 05/15/07:If they are going to read from the same script every time something like this happens, the least they could do is mix it up a little. The are just so darn predictable. They will do anything for political gain.
Exactly what I said to TS, it was a page out of Blanco's book and Katrina - which makes me think Blanco took her cues from the DNC.
Here's something I'd like to ask the Deaniac and the DNC, how many Bush administration officials and other Republicans have you publicly defamed based on information from "a reliable source" or an official that "spoke on the condition of anonymity?" I mean geez, isn't that generally the entire basis for every Republican 'scandal' of the past 6 years, some anonymous source said something and we not only believe it but we're going to virtually beat the hell out of the person(s) involved?
The only way the left can accomplish their goals is to shut out, shut up and out shout the other side. And what's ironic is to do so they don't mind trampling every right necessary - including the ones they've accused Bush of tranpling - to accomplish their objective.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | kindj asked on 05/14/07 - Did you know....................................... .......that trying to teach the concepts of chivalry (honor, dignity, selflessness, etc) to 7th grade wannabe gangsters is like trying to teach a damn pig to sing?
....sigh....
Where are we going, and why are we in this handbasket?
DK Itsdb answered on 05/14/07:Honestly Dennis, you might have better luck with the pig. Until you get more good parenting I don't think it's going to change much, you know parents that actually exhibit and instill some of that character in their kids. Plus, I know you guys have basically no options when it comes to discipline and the kids know it.
But hang in there buddy, just keep doing your part and you'll get some of them.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/13/07 - Culture of Corruption update It's getting so bad that even AP is beginning to notice.
House Democrats are suddenly balking at the tough lobbying reforms they touted to voters last fall as a reason for putting them in charge of Congress.
Now that they are running things, many Democrats want to keep the big campaign donations and lavish parties that lobbyists put together for them. They're also having second thoughts about having to wait an extra year before they can become high-paid lobbyists themselves should they retire or be defeated at the polls.
The growing resistance to several proposed reforms now threatens passage of a bill that once seemed on track to fulfill Democrats' campaign promise of cleaner fundraising and lobbying practices.
"The longer we wait, the weaker the bill seems to get," said Craig Holman of Public Citizen, which has pushed for the changes. "The sense of urgency is fading," he said, in part because scandals such as those involving disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff and former Rep. Duke Cunningham, R-Calif., have given way to other news.
The situation concerns some Democrats, who note their party campaigned against a "culture of corruption" in 2006, when voters ended a long run of Republican control of Congress. Several high-profile issues remained in doubt Friday, five days before the House Judiciary Committee is to take up the legislation.
This of course was a completely predictable turn of events. The Democrat leadership has been there for years (and in some cases decades .... Charlie Rangel & John Conyers have been there 40+ years. John Dingell’s been there 50+ years. John Murtha has been their 30+ years).They had a vested interest in keeping the status quo .That makes them inherently anti-reform. The whole reform campaign to win Congress was a lie.
Several high-profile issues remained in doubt Friday, five days before the House Judiciary Committee is to take up the legislation.
They include proposals to:
Require lobbyists to disclose details about large donations they arrange for politicians.
Make former lawmakers wait two years, instead of one, before lobbying Congress.
Bar lobbyists from throwing large parties for lawmakers at national political conventions.
You can be sure that the version of the legislation that makes it out of Conyers Judiciary Comittee will be a very watered down version of the current bill .
The 'most ethical,most open least corrupt' Congress.........never mind.. The funny thing is ;I actually prefer it when the Democrats do nothing . I sleep better at night.
Itsdb answered on 05/14/07:I read that over the weekend in my paper. It's getting a bit more common to find AP articles pointing out Democrat corruption and ineptitude. Not much, but it's getting a little notice. I've noticed the media is even getting tired of the Alberto Gonzales whimper.
And you're right, it was completely predictable, it was a complete lie, and the good news is they aren't accomplishing anything. Your followup points to more predictability, they aren't interested in any alternate views and the American public isn't interested in their radical ways so the only way they can accomplish their goal is to tie the hands of the opposition and stick a gag in their mouths. Or, by reviving the "fairness" doctrine.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/11/07 - Democrat logic The House Democrats once again showed the electorate why they cannot be entrusted with national security. Incredibly, the Democrats passed provisions in the Intelligence Authorization Act funding a global warming study. Silvestre Reyes, Intelligence Committee Chairman argued that "this is an area we may vulnerable in terms of potential terrorists."
![]()
HUH ??????????
ok then ...there is a link between terrorism and global warming but none between al-Qaeda and Iraq.
and Chlorine truck bombs are not WMD.
Reyes claimed that a commission of 11 former Generals and Admirals support the plan .Vice Admiral Richard Truly did say "Its an issue, not in the sense the climate is going to declare war on the United States its not that kind of problem but its slowly building stress and its time to build into the nation's security planning." I guess I have to use the Democrat template to judge this statement ..... is it an imminent threat ????
Maybe I'm wrong....but with all the hot spots in the world (no I don't mean temperature ) ..tracking terrorist threats ,nukes in Iran and the NORKS .I'm sure there are more pressing concerns for our intelligence agencies resources.
The legislation passed this morning by a vote of 225-197.House members rejected a Republican bid to remove the provision of the bill requiring a study of climate change and its impact on national security, 185-230.
They also slipped in a provision as an amendment to the legislation saying that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) should govern any domestic electronic surveillance used to collect foreign intelligence.(245-178 )
The bill authorizes funds for the intelligence community at around $44 billion or $45 billion.And what is gravy for the collective body of the Congress,most of the ear-marks in the bill are classified. We never get to see what is pork and what isn't .
The Senate will begin debating their version of the bill next week.
Itsdb answered on 05/11/07:"there is a link between terrorism and global warming but none between al-Qaeda and Iraq."
That's due to the fact the Democrats have spent way too much time in this position:
![]()
But then, that's what we get when Madame Pelosi taps Reyes as Intelligence Committee Chairman - the guy who when asked about Hezbollah by Jeff Stein of Congressional Quarterly, answered, “Hezbollah. Uh, Hezbollah . . . “Why do you ask me these questions at five o’clock? Can I answer in Spanish? Do you speak Spanish?” Go ahead, said Stein. “Well, I, uh . . .” said the congressman.
Why then should he know anything about intelligence? And to think of the fit they threw over John Bolton...
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tropicalstorm asked on 05/10/07 - Howard Dean on the hurricane Listen to
Jim Quinn of www.warroom.com
on XM satelite radio channel 165 6 a.m. to 9 a.m.
For follow ups on....
He says reliable source says
The Kansas Governor told Brownback that she
'could not allow an opportunity pass. I made sure not to blame anybody outside the whitehouse. With Bush's numbers you can't really blame me for that'.
Brownback replied he was 'disappointed in her'.
She said, 'you know me I wouldn't say that if I didn't have to but Howard Dean told me [to].' She tried explaining it away saying 'well it could happen' [that way someday]. 'I didn't think it was right to use it either but in this climate I had to' [to not disappoint Dean]
She also said they have more than enough National Guard and humvees.
QUINN SAID HIS SOURCE SAID 'HOWARD DEAN CALLED HER AT
5 AM AND SAID HE WOULD GET BACK TO HER WITH THE DETAILS' [of what he wanted her to say].
DICK DURBIN CALLED HER BACK WITH THE DETAILS.
Layhe is somehow involved too.
She (the governor) called Brownback's office and the call was forwarded to him personally on his cell phone.
Itsdb answered on 05/10/07:Now what makes anyone think Howard the Scream would use a disaster for political advantage? She took a page right out of Blanco's playbook - who I'm thinking now may have taken a page out of Dean's. There is nothing sacred to these people, they can't put aside their BS over a natural disaster.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/10/07 - Rudy's donations The MSM and bloggers on the left and right are all abuzz over an interview that Laura Ingraham had with Rudy .She took him to task for making donations to Planned Parenthood. He claimed he made them because of their work in adoptions . I find that doubtful but ...whatever.
There is no way to conclude by this donation (about $900) that Rudy supports their agenda regarding abortions . The truth is ;he has given far more to pro-family organizations .
Here is the breakdown according to David Brody
$1,200 To the Children's Aid Society (focus on adoption)
$150 To Adoption Provider Graham-Windham
$2,000 To the Hale House In 2006.(the Hale House tries to reunite birth parents with their child and deals with adoption)
$1,400 to The Boys & Girls Club
$1,100 To the Covenant House (helps runaways and homeless children)
$250 To the Starlight Children's Foundation (they Help Seriously Ill Children And Their Families Cope With pain and fear)
$100 To Great Joy Baptist Church
$200 To St. Agnes Church
$750 To St. Aloysius Church
$1,250 To St. Cyrils Methodist Church
$250 To St. Dominicks Church
$2,100 To St. Monica's Church
Hunter Baker at Red State has said Rudy's done because a donation to Planned Parenthood is considered the same as a donation to the KKK to conservatives .That is probably an exageration but if Rudy doesn't clarify his abortion position better ,his poll numbers will continue to drop. Will it be a decisive issue ? Possibly.
Itsdb answered on 05/10/07:He may be right, I for one am a very vocal critic of Planned Parenthood - I find them to be one of the most vile, despicable organizations ever. I do know however they also do some good things - and I will reserve judgment on Rudy. We aren't going to get a perfect candidate and I'm looking for someone to run the country, not my church.
Steve | | Question/Answer | tomder55 asked on 05/10/07 - Democrats again display their lack of ability....
...to conduct foreign policy .Bob Novak describes the brutal treatment Colombia's President Alvaro Uribe received from the Congressional Democrats :
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Colombia's President Alvaro Uribe returned to Bogota this week in a state of shock. His three-day visit to Capitol Hill in Washington to win over Democrats in Congress was described by one American supporter as "catastrophic." Colombian sources said Uribe was stunned by the ferocity of his Democratic opponents, and Vice President Francisco Santos publicly talked about cutting U.S.-Colombian ties.
Uribe got nothing from his meeting with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic leaders. Military aid remains stalled, overall assistance is reduced, and the vital U.S.-Colombian trade bill looks dead. The first Colombian president to crack down on his country's corrupt army officer hierarchy, and to assault both right-wing paramilitaries and left-wing guerrillas, last week confronted Democrats wedded to out-of-date claims of civil rights abuses and to rigidly protectionist dogma.
This is remarkable U.S. treatment for a rare friend on the South American continent, where Venezuela's leftist dictator Hugo Chavez can only exult in Uribe's embarrassment as he builds an anti-American bloc of nations. A former congressional staffer, who in 1999 helped author Plan Colombia against narco-guerrillas, told me: "President Uribe may be the odd man out, and that's no way to treat our best ally in South America."
Uribe has not given up on the Yankees. When he returned to Colombia, he issued boilerplate about his visit being "very important in opening a dialogue with American leaders." This week he publicly urged the sluggish army to "rescue the hostages" held by narco-guerrillas and "go after the ringleaders," while privately chewing out the generals for inactivity. At the same time, Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte, whose Foreign Service career includes Latin American duty, was in Bogota Tuesday insisting that the United States remains a great friend of Colombia.
A truer portent of the Colombian reaction to the rebuff in Washington last week was Vice President Santos's television interview Tuesday. Santos, a University of Texas graduate and former editor of the influential El Tiempo newspaper, said failure to ratify the free-trade agreement would "send a message to the external enemies of the United States" (meaning Venezuela's Chavez) that "this is how America treats its allies." He added that Colombia might "have to re-evaluate its relationship with the United States." A U.S. diplomat called that "a cream pie in the face" of the visiting Negroponte.
Hopes that the Democratic majority in Congress might perceive the importance of supporting Colombia were dashed April 20 when Al Gore canceled a joint appearance with Uribe at an environmental event in Miami. Gore cited allegations of Uribe's association with paramilitary forces a decade ago, charges denied by the Colombian president.
Gore's snub legitimized what the new congressional majority is intent on doing anyway. Democrats follow both left-wing human rights lobbyists and AFL-CIO President John Sweeney's protectionist campaign against the Colombian free-trade agreement. Rep. Sander Levin, chairman of the Ways and Means subcommittee on trade, as usual echoes labor's line against the bill.
In the wake of Uribe's visit to Washington, two prominent House Republicans -- former Speaker J. Dennis Hastert and Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, ranking minority member of the Foreign Affairs Committee -- made a quick trip to Colombia. Visiting there for the first time in many years, they were struck by the progress. They met with Colombian national police who had just returned from Afghanistan, where they advised NATO forces in techniques for dealing with narco-terrorists.
Democrats in Congress seem oblivious to such help or such progress. Sen. Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Appropriations subcommittee dealing with foreign aid, last month held up $55.2 million in military aid to Colombia because of "human rights" concerns. While Pelosi and her colleagues could not find a kind word for Uribe, Leahy insisted that he "supports" the Colombian president. As Lenin once put it, he supports him as a rope supports a hanged man.
President George W. Bush at least gave lip service to Uribe last week, but his concentration is on Iraq as the U.S. position in its own backyard deteriorates. Passivity is the best description of the administration's posture, while Democrats follow human rights activists, environmentalists and labor leaders on the road to losing an important ally.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What we have here is a moderate leader ,a key ally in a region where trouble is brewing coming to Washington and seeing the extremism of the Democrat party in action .I'm sure all our allies and the other fence sitters around the world are looking on with interest and concern over the actions and rhetoric coming out of Congress .As VP Santos said failure to ratify the deal would ``send a message to the eternal enemies of the United States that ... this is how America treats its allies. I guarantee ;if the US doesn't do business with Columbia ,Panama ,Peru ,the Chinese will be more than willing to do so.
I'm sure if Hugo Chavez or Daniel Ortega were to pay Pelosi a call I bet she'd be orgasmic in her praise. Word of advice to Uribe ; Next time you visit Washington ,wear a Che Guevera T-shirt and chant "gringos out of Iraq" . You'll be treated like a rock star. . Itsdb answered on 05/10/07:tom,
Again I am at a loss to explain liberal behavior. Piling onto a guy like Uribe over human rights concerns while genuflecting to Islamists that not only represent EVERYTHING they hate about fundamentalism - but practice it to the extreme. How can anyone with a lick of sense explain that?
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/10/07 - National Guard Strength Well first we have Guv. Sebelius claiming that the Kansas National Guard could not effectively respond in Greensburg because of some of them being deployed to Iraq . (this evidently is not the case ;the Kansas National Guard has responded well and with sufficient equipment for the task at hand.)Evidently some of the residents also disagree .
You saw the contrast yesterday .Bush provide empathy and support vs. Sebelius dirty political tricks.
Then we have the mathematically challenged Barak Obama saying that the National Guard is "over-stretched ".
But according to this report , The Army National Guard has exceeded its end-strength goal of 350,000 . In fact ,almost all the active duty and reserve forces have already met their goal for the year . http://airforcepundit.blogspot.com/2007/04/us-military-surpasses-recruiting.html
As far as I can tell the only thing that is hampering readiness is Congress' refusal to send a supplemental funding bill to the President's desk that doesn't have phony withdrawal dates and other earmarks attached to it.
Govenor crybaby and Obama can't have it both ways. If they are concerned about readiness then The Govenor should support the proper funding of the troops and Obama should get back to Washington and pass legislation without strings attached.
Itsdb answered on 05/10/07:The good governor apparently took lessons from Blanco. But then that's what Democrats do best, bitch and whine while sitting on their hands. This has gotten way beyond old.
Apparently the Kansa National Guard also has a different take...
More than 300 members of the Kansas National Guard have been activated in response to a powerful tornado that almost destroyed the town of Greensburg, Kan., May 4.
Guard members are assisting in search-and-rescue efforts in the wake of the tornado, which was classified as an F-5, the highest rating given by the National Weather Service.
The tornado wiped out much of the small town, knocking out power, water, natural gas and communications. To date, 10 deaths and more than 100 injuries have been reported.
The Kansas National Guard's 278th Sustainment Brigade has established a joint task force near the incident site. In addition to search-and-rescue efforts, the troops are working on power generation, logistical support, debris clearing, support to law enforcement, supporting establishment of shelters and distribution of food and water.
Currently, the Kansas National Guard has 88 percent of its forces available, 60 percent of its Army Guard dual-use equipment on hand, and more than 85 percent of its Air Guard equipment on hand, said Randal Noller, public affairs officer for the National Guard Bureau. Under the Emergency Management Assistance Compact, which is a national partnership agreement that allows state-to-state assistance during governor or federally declared emergencies, Kansas has more than 400,000 Guardsmen available to it, he pointed out. However, Kansas has not yet requested assistance from other states.
The National Guard Bureau has offered liaison, operational, communications, contracting, search-and-rescue, public affairs and community relations support, and is prepared to support the governor in any way possible, Noller said.
I guess these Democrat governors can't figure out they have to follow protocol before they have anything to whine about.
If they have 60 percent of their equipment on hand, that would be at least:
211 Humvees
56 Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Trucks
14 medium and light tactical vehicles
91 2.5-ton cargo trucks
45 series 5-ton trucks
7 M916 tractors
522 trailers
31 Heavy Equipment Transport Systems
18 Palletized Load System Trucks
3 road graders
9 bulldozers
4 scoop loaders
43 dump trucks
Ya think they could handle Greensburg with that? | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/09/07 - Kansas I lived there for 4 years . The Govenor of Kansas says they are being hampered in their relief efforts in Greensburg because the National Guard trucks are deployed in Iraq. As I recall ;there were never a shortage of trucks /tractors /pick ups in the state ;especilly deep hauling wheat trucks. Nor were there ever a shortage of willing civilians to volunteer to tackle natural disasters.There were many times when all the able bodies men would race to the river bank of the Arkansas River (pronounced Ar-Kansas in those parts ) to build sandbag barriers against a rising river .
I think that Govenor Kathleen Sebelius is taking a page out of the Govenor Blanco playbook . It doesn't fly . Itsdb answered on 05/09/07:I can't imagine a lack of heavy equipment in Kansas. Speaking of of overstating the problems there...
RICHMOND, Va. (AP) - Barack Obama, caught up in the fervor of a campaign speech Tuesday, drastically overstated the Kansas tornadoes death toll, saying 10,000 had died.
The death toll was 12.
"In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died—an entire town destroyed," the Democratic presidential candidate said in a speech to 500 people packed into a sweltering Richmond art studio for a fundraiser.
Obama mentioned the disaster in Greensburg, Kan., in saying he had been told by the office of Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius that the state's National Guard had been depleted by its commitment to the Iraq War.
"Turns out that the National Guard in Kansas only had 40 percent of its equipment and they are having to slow down the recovery process in Kansas," Obama said, his shirt sleeves rolled up and his head glistening with sweat.
As the Illinois senator concluded his remarks a few minutes later, he appeared to realize his gaffe.
"There are going to be times when I get tired," he said. "There are going to be times when I get weary. There are going to be times when I make mistakes."
Obama spokesman Bill Burton said later that the senator meant to say "at least 10," instead of 10,000.
Ten, ten thousand, what's the difference? And what's with that "shirt sleeves rolled up and head glistening with sweat" stuff? Did Danielle Steele contribute to the article?
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/09/07 - Iran kidnaps again. An employee of the organization that Lee Hamilton heads, the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, has been kidnapped and is being held hostage by Iran.
This must be disheartening to Hamilton who, along with James Baker, headed up the Iraq Surrender Group that proposed "outreach" and diplomacy with Iran as a solution to the Iraq war. The way I see it ;kidnapping "outreach" has always been a part of the Iranian diplomatic play book . Itsdb answered on 05/09/07:From the article:
Esfandiari and the other soft hostages appear caught up in an Iranian reaction to the Bush administration's $75 million program to promote democracy in Iran, which was unveiled last year. Tehran has since cracked down on human rights advocates, labor groups and women's rights campaigners, according to human rights activists.
What the heck is a "soft hostage?" Is that the PC way of referring to one of these Iranian kidnappings? Naturally of course, this is Bush's fault.
So when will the cries from the left over the crackdown on "human rights advocates, labor groups and women's rights campaigners" in Iran begin?
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/09/07 - Fort Dix Here is my reply to Fred's post about Fort Dix.
What do you think of this??????????????????????????? arcura 05/08/07
6 Arrested in Alleged Fort Dix Murder Plot
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
MOUNT LAUREL, N.J. — Six Islamic militants from Yugoslavia and the Middle East were arrested on charges of plotting to attack the Fort Dix Army post and "kill as many soldiers as possible," authorities said Tuesday.
In conversations secretly recorded by an FBI informant over the past year, the men talked about killing in the name of Allah and attacking U.S. warships that might dock in Philadelphia, according an FBI criminal complaint.
"This was a serious plot put together by people who were intent on harming Americans," U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie said Tuesday. "We're very gratified federal law enforcement was able to catch these people before they acted and took innocent life."
One suspect reportedly spoke of using rocket-propelled grenades to kill at least 100 soldiers at a time, according to court documents.
"If you want to do anything here, there is Fort Dix and I don't want to exaggerate, and I assure you that you can hit an American base very easily," suspect Mohamad Ibrahim Shnewer said in one conversation secretly recorded by a government informant, according to the criminal complaint.
"It doesn't matter to me whether I get locked up, arrested or get taken away," a suspect identified as Serdar Tatar said in another recorded conversation. "Or I die, it doesn't matter. I'm doing it in the name of Allah."
Another suspect, Eljvir Duka, was recorded saying: "In the end, when it comes to defending your religion, when someone is trying attacks your religion, your way of life, then you go jihad."
White House spokesman Tony Snow said Tuesday there is "no direct evidence" that the men had ties to international terrorism.
The FBI was tipped off in January 2006 when a shopkeeper alerted agents about a "disturbing" video he had been asked to copy onto a DVD, according to court documents. The video showed 10 men in their early 20s "shooting assault weapons at a firing range ... while calling for jihad and shouting in Arabic 'Allah Akbar' (God is great)," the complaint said.
Six of the 10 men on the tape were identified as those arrested in the plot. They were arrested Monday trying to buy automatic weapons from an FBI informant, officials said.
Christie said one of the suspects worked at Super Mario's Pizza in nearby Cookstown and delivered pizzas to the base.
"What concerns us is, obviously, they began conducting surveillance and weapons training in the woods and were discussing killing large numbers of soldiers," said Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd.
The six were scheduled to appear in U.S. District Court in Camden later Tuesday to face charges of conspiracy to kill U.S. servicemen, said Michael Drewniak, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in New Jersey.
Four of the men were born in the former Yugoslavia, one in Jordan and one in Turkey, officials said. All had lived in the United States for years. Three were in the country illegally; two had green cards allowing them to stay permanently; the other is a U.S. citizen.
Besides Shnewer, Tatar and Eljvir Duka, the other men were identified in court papers as Dritan Duka and Shain Duka. Checks with Immigration and Customs Enforcement show that the Dukas were illegally in the U.S., according to FBI complaints unsealed with their arrests.
Five of the men lived in Cherry Hill, a Philadelphia suburb about 20 miles from Fort Dix.
"They were planning an attack on Fort Dix in which they would kill as many soldiers as possible," Drewniak said.
A law enforcement official, speaking on condition of anonymity because documents in the case remain sealed, said the attack was stopped in the planning stages. The men also allegedly conducted surveillance at other area military institutions, including Fort Monmouth, a U.S. Army installation, the official said.
By March 2006, the group had been infiltrated by an informant who developed a relationship with Shnewer, according to court documents. The informant secretly recorded meetings in August in which Shnewer said he and the others were part of a group planning to attack a U.S. military base, the complaints said.
Shnewer named Fort Dix and a nearby Navy base, explaining that the group "could utilize six or seven jihadists to attack and kill at least one hundred soldiers by using rocket-propelled grenades" or other weapons, the complaints said. The Navy base was not named in the papers.
Fort Dix is used to train soldiers, particularly reservists. It also housed refugees from Kosovo in 1999.
The base has been closed to the public since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and has heavily armed guards at entrances, yet the main road through neighboring Cookstown cuts through the base and is accessible to the public.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Forgetting the flippant answers you've received ;security at domestic bases have been low and they were vulnerable to the very type of plot that was being attempted. The jihadists had accumulated and were seeking a pretty impressive arsenal for the attack . Since they planned it to be a 'suicide ' attack ,they could've inflicted alot of casualties .And of course it would've been a P.R. boost to jihadistan to attack a base on U.S. soil.
But any attempt of additional security gets criticized by the ususal suspects .
![]()
After 9/11, the Pentagon began developing a database of people and groups in the United States that it deemed to be potential threats to defense facilities or workers. It drew widespread criticism when news reports revealed that some of the data included people who had been monitored at anti-war rallies. Last month the Pentagon's intelligence chief recommended the program be shut down.It is possible that the names of the plotters were on that list .
Thier plot was in fact detailed .Here is the charges Read attachment B . The jihadists had been active working on this plot since 2005. They saved money to buy weapons, and subsequently purchased them. They had maps of Fort Dix – one of them used to deliver pizza there. He also knew how/where to cause power outage on the Fort to make attack easier. They trained in the Pocono Mountains in PA. They wanted to kill as many GIs as possible .
Who knows ? It is very easy to ridicule the authorities after a plot is broken up and claim it was not a serious as it is being portrayed. But had the plot been carried out to conclusion the same people would've been ridiculing the ineffectiveness of the security measures taken.
The same people would've scoffed at the notion of terrorists using fertilzer as a weapon; until a plotter proved it could be done. Now in the UK jihadists have plotted to blow up venues including a nightclub in London using basic materials such as flour and hair bleach . Sounds dumb and implausable but ignore it at your peril .
Itsdb answered on 05/09/07:tom,
I didn't bother to answer the post, it's an exercise in futility over there to explain the obvious.
Instead, I've opted to try a different tactic - occasional religion in the news pieces. :)
Steve | | Question/Answer | | ETWolverine asked on 05/07/07 - A Change in France? For the better? A FRENCH RUDY
By FRED SIEGEL
May 7, 2007 -- IF Nicholas Sarkozy, the new president-elect of France, reminds you of Rudy Giuliani, there's a reason. Sarkozy really is a kind of French Giuliani. More, he's clearly learned some things from Rudy (the two have met) - and his success may have lessons for Giuliani in his bid to become U.S. president.
Most accounts simply note that Sarkozy is remarkably pro-American for a French politician - describing America as "the greatest democracy in the world."
But when you get into the details of his admiration, you start hearing echoes of Rudy:
* "France," Sarkozy quips, "is like the Anglo-Saxon countries when it comes to inequality and poverty - but without their social mobility and full employment."
* He also mocks French anti-Americans as people who "envy" America's "brilliant success."
* Speaking to 300,000 French citizens who've fled the stagnation of their homeland for jobs in London, Sarkozy committed blasphemy by the normal rules of French politics: He praised England's less regulated and more dynamic economy as a model for France.
Yes, the French elected a man who promises a "rupture with the past" - for the same reason New Yorkers reluctantly elected Giuliani in 1993: because conditions were bad enough to risk change.
Some 70 percent of the French think their deeply indebted and grossly over-taxed country is in perilous decline; books on the country's bleak future have become a small publishing industry in Paris. Like Giuliani in ྙ, Sarkozy bluntly presents himself as a turnaround artist who can redeem the promise of lost greatness by challenging the conventional political assumptions of the permanent government of civil servants, political insiders and over-mighty interest groups who all feed off of a bloated state.
Both men are hard-edged originals with bruising political styles, energetic and inner-directed - outsiders to their political establishments who attract both a devoted following and bitter hostility.
Above all else, each has a hard-to-categorize politics - one that capitalizes on popular resentment of insulated elites clinging to the outdated ideologies of the 1960s.
Giuliani as mayor mocked the "compassionate" liberalism that left masses of people trapped in welfare while providing guaranteed jobs and votes for Gotham's Democrats. Sarkozy similarly mocks the "egalitarianism" of the French civil service - who have near-total job security and fat pensions, even as their management has left French unemployment running double the American rate for 30 years.
The two men met in 2002, when Giuliani had been invited to France to provide advice on how to combat the rising crime rate and Sarkozy was serving as Interior minister. The Frenchman talked to the American about "broken windows" policing and New York's famed COMSTAT program, which provided a meaningful metric for policing. More recently, Sarkozy has been talking up New York-style welfare reform - requiring the able-bodied to take available jobs.
Just as Giuliani wanted to make New York, with its Francified bureaucracies, more like the rest of America, Sarkozy wants to make France more like the more market-oriented Anglo-American economies. Both are critics of multiculturalism - and neither accepts that crime or terrorism can be explained by social causes.
Each talks in a language foreign to the elites - emphazing personal responsibility and the importance of the work ethic. In his recent book, "Témoignage" ["Testimony"], Sarkozy takes aim at those on the French left who depict the rioting Muslim youth of the banlieues as victims of police brutality and French racism. In a riff that's nearly pure Giuliani, he points to the massive social spending in the banlieue - and notes that it seems to have sown far more resentment than good will. Rudy-like, he argues that the young rioters have to adjust to France - rather than the other way around.
The similarities go beyond policy and persona. Sarkozy ran not only against Socialist candidate Segolene Royal, but against criticism of his own aggressive political style. Facing Royal in a crucial debate just days before the election, he managed to constrain his combatative personality lest he be seen as too aggressive. He passed the test, can Giuliani?
Sarkozy also had to overcome the unpopularity of sitting President Jacques Chirac, a member of his own party. Placed on the defensive by the failures of his fellow Gaullist, Sarkozy carefully but convincingly called for reversing the economic policies associated with the incumbent - without mentioning Chirac by name.
Giuliani, who has offered himself up as the salvation of a sinking Republican Party, should be watching closely. If he wins the Republican nomination, he'll similarly have to thread the needle of distancing himself from President Bush's foreign-policy failings without too directly criticizing the president.
The French Rudy pulled it off. Will the American Sarkozy manage it, too?
Fred Siegel is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute; his books include "The Prince of the City: Giuliani, New York and the Genius of American Life."
------------------------
Does this bode well for the future relationship between the USA and France, and regarding France's place in the GWOT? I would certainly like to think so.
And can Giuliani learn the lessons of restraint or rhetoric that Sarkozy managed to learn? Sarkozy has learned from Rudy. Can Rudy learn from Sarkozy?
What's your opinion?
Elliot Itsdb answered on 05/07/07:People who "envy" America's "brilliant success?
Requiring the able-bodied to take available jobs?
Wants to make France more like the more market-oriented Anglo-American economies?
A critic of multiculturalism?
Doesn't accept that crime or terrorism can be explained by social causes?
Emphasizes personal responsibility?
Thinks the young rioters have to adjust to France - rather than the other way around?
I like the guy already - makes me want to go out and buy some French wine.
Personally I think Giuliani just needs to be Giuliani and not overly concern himself with 'threading the needle.' I think Americans are looking for someone neither right nor left that will inspire, take charge and lead the way, and whoever gets that impression across best will be the next president.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/07/07 - Major James Gant ...will be receiving the Silver Star for heroic actions in Iraq.
The enemy on that stretch of road was well trained and waiting, Gant said. But he knew his crew was ready. After spending 17 years in the Army, he should know.
"I had a really well trained transition team," he said. That confidence was also extended to his Iraqi brethren as well, with good reason.
"On Nov. 24, (insurgents) hit my vehicle (with an improvised explosive device) and it flipped three times," said Gant, half of a dual-military couple of 11 years. His wife, Maj. Giselle Pozzerle, currently serves at Fort Bragg, N.C. "One of my Iraqis got me out of that vehicle."
That was just a recent example, and the training and experience of the Iraqi policemen and U.S. Soldiers were about to be tested. As the patrol headed south, machine gun fire started from the west.
Gant ordered his gunner, to return fire, eventually breaking contact and moving towards Baghdad. In the initial fight, one of his Iraqi Police "Commandos" was injured with a gunshot wound to the face.
"It wasn't a wound that we could continue without treatment right then and there," he said.
Using his advanced medical skills that he gained during his time in the Special Forces, he dismounted and rushed to stabilize the Iraqi and called in a medical evacuation helicopter.
In order for a helicopter to land, an area had to be cleared. They moved into nearby palm groves on foot pushing the enemy back in a close range fire fight.
"At this point, it became very apparent to me that the (insurgent's) intent was to destroy our patrol," he said. "We had over 20 vehicles with us that were spread out across a large area. It is a large enemy force to have our entire patrol engaged at once."
They moved back to their landing zone, but the fire intensity increased on both sides. If they could not clear the landing zone the helicopter would not be able to land.
"The fire was so heavy you could feel it inside; you could see and feel the shake of the gunfire, with the Commandos fighting just as heroically as the Americans" Gant said.
After pushing the enemy back, the bird was able to land, but before the fight took a turn for the worse, Gant wanted that helicopter out of the danger zone.
"I told the flight medic, ‘I believe you have about two minutes before we start receiving mortar fire. They know we are here and we are going to start receiving mortar fire within the next 60 seconds to two minutes,'" he said.
They swiftly loaded up the casualties and within 15 seconds of the helicopter taking off, the landing zone started receiving mortar fire, he said.
He considered the fact that they were still in contact a good thing, though.
"We try to maintain contact with the enemy as long as possible and kill as many as we can," Gant said. "We were going to do some serious damage that day.
"It is easy to sit in a room in safety and talk about it," he said. "I came here to fight. I came here to kill the enemy. I knew at the time what a huge engagement it was... I also had a huge concern for my team and my Iraqis, because I love these guys. I wanted to ensure that we didn't take unnecessary risks or have unnecessary casualties."
He decided that he needed to get the insurgents out of their well built positions. It was obvious to him that this complex attack was well planned. They mounted up and started to move again toward Baghdad still taking fire from both sides.
"We were receiving some sporadic machine gun fire (as we moved,) and I got word that the rear was being pinned down with intense small arms fire," he said.
He peeled his vehicle to the rear putting him between the patrol and the incoming fire. Laying down suppressive fire, his gunner went through 18,000 rounds that day. The rear of the convoy was moving up out of the hot zone, and Gant's humvee pushed back to the lead of the convoy.
They were moving toward an urbanized area, with the threat of improvised explosive devices and rocket-propelled grenade teams rising. This is when the heaviest fire of the day began, and in the middle of the median, was an obvious IED.
He wasn't going to put his team in a situation where they are forced to pull security in the area, especially since they were still under small arms fire. His logic was if the IED struck one of the police vehicles that did not have any protective siding the results will be catastrophic and they would be pinned down.
"We couldn't get off the road. There were markets and such on the sides of the road," Gant said. "The IED had to go off and I wanted it to be on an up-armored vehicle. I wanted it to be mine."
He told the rest of his patrol to push left, and pulled his gunner inside of the vehicle. He told his driver to have the IED detonate on his side.
"We moved up. Nothing. (We) got closer. Nothing," he said. "We were within about twenty feet, when (the IED) went off."
Nobody was hurt and the vehicle was still operational. They continued on, discovering a second IED about 50 feet from the first.
"My driver was fearless that day. He didn't even hesitate," he said.
They started the same drill but at this point a civilian vehicle had linked up with the convoy. He knew it was there, but he still needed the second IED to go off on an armored vehicle. The passengers braced themselves for the second blast. Everyone was all right, once again.
"There was a bend in the road. We were receiving machine gun fire from the front and both flanks," Gant said.
There was a third IED; a ploy to get them to stop and be sitting ducks for another ambush. It was a hoax.
This is when Gant received word that a woman in the civilian vehicle had been severely injured in the first blast. Still under heavy small arms fire in a hasty perimeter, he got out and tried to perform first aid on her.
"She didn't want me touch her. She was going to die and she didn't want me to touch her," Gant said. His Iraqi counterpart, consoled the woman saying, "It's OK. He is my brother."
She then allowed him to apply tourniquets to both of her severely wounded legs. There was also a little girl in the vehicle. Gant, a family man with two kids of his own back in North Carolina, Tristen, 9, and Scout, 7, wanted to keep this child safe.
"I realized that we might all die today, but this little girl will not," he said, talking about how he put the child in his up-armored vehicle. "We had some sporadic small arms fire after that, but we had broken their back. They wanted us to stop there.
"I later found out that the women lived, and the little girl," he said with a smile, "was still afraid of U.S. forces, but she was really small... maybe one. She didn't understand; (she) just knew that someone had grabbed her from her mom and dad. She didn't know that it was for her own protection. I hope that one day, her parents tell her what happened that day."
They engaged the insurgents until the patrol was able to get out of the area, eventually making it into Baghdad and down a route known for explosively-formed projectiles.
When they finally made it back that day, they were met with a celebration. There were more than 200 Commandos singing and bathing the road with goat's blood and planting bloody handprints all over there war-torn, bullet-ridden vehicles. There were celebrating.
"I will never forget them hugging and kissing us, their brothers in arms," he said of their return. "They do this in celebration, when they think we gave our lives for them, or could be dead."
Though nearly six months has passed since that battle occurred, Gant can tell the story of the battle like it was yesterday.
Only two Soldiers remain on his crew that were with him that day, most of the American Soldiers have rotated back to the United States, but he remembers all of his team.
“On that day, there were no Americans. There were no Iraqis, no whites and no blacks. There were no Sunnis, Shias, Christians. There was just a group of warriors working and fighting together,” he said. “All the men I fought with that day showed incredible courage and bravery. That was one of the highlights of my life; working with those men that day.”
Itsdb answered on 05/07/07:"They do this in celebration, when they think we gave our lives for them, or could be dead."
And here I thought the Iraqis didn't want the Americans there. THAT is what it's all about, "a group of warriors working and fighting together" to defeat the Islamists. Winning the Iraqis' trust, dedication, bravery, selfless sacrifice - the stories we are NOT hearing - and the most important stories on the whole effort.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/06/07 - Pim Fortuyn Europe's Champion of Liberty
BY BRUCE BAWER
May 4, 2007
http://www.nysun.com/article/53818?page_no=3
Sunday, May 6, marks the fifth anniversary of the assassination of Pim Fortuyn. Fortuyn was nine days away from an election from which he was expected to emerge as Dutch prime minister. As he walked out of a radio studio near Amsterdam, a left-wing activist named Volker van der Graaf pumped five bullets into his back. Fortuyn died almost instantly.
The killer would later explain that Fortuyn's views on Muslim immigration made him a "danger." It was the Netherlands's first political assassination in over 300 years.
Fortuyn had been an active politician for only a few months but had already shaken things up dramatically. Before him, Dutch politics had been essentially a closed club whose members shared broadly similar views on major issues and abhorred open conflict.
Then along came Fortuyn, a writer and sociology professor who'd grown increasingly concerned about the rapid Muslim influx into the Netherlands — and about the fact that while the Dutch government lavishly subsidized immigrant families, schools, mosques, and community centers, it made little effort to integrate newcomers and refused to challenge the patriarchal, often brutal values that held sway in Muslim enclaves.
Fortuyn recognized the rise of fundamentalist Islam in Europe as a menace to democracy. And he said it straight out — eloquently, forcefully, fearlessly. Back in 1997 he'd published one of the first books anywhere to sound the alarm. Only days before September 11, 2001, he wrote that communism's role as a threat to Western freedom "has been taken over by Islam."
But instead of recognizing him as a prophet, Dutch leaders saw him as a threat. On September 11, Dutch Moroccans gathered in the streets to cheer. But the interior minister, Zaken De Vries, ignoring these enemies within, warned instead that counterintelligence services would "pay sharp attention to persons who want to … conduct a cold war against Islam." Meaning Fortuyn.
In November 2001, Fortuyn became head of a new party, Livable Netherlands, only to be tossed out three months later for being too outspoken. So he started another party. The more he spoke out, the more journalists and politicians smeared him — an openly gay man and life-long liberal — as a right-wing extremist, a racist, a new Mussolini or Hitler.
Yet millions of his countrymen knew better. Accustomed to leaders who shunned controversy and spoke in empty formulas, Dutchmen were stunned and delighted to hear Fortuyn say things they'd long been thinking themselves. Voters from all over the political map became his ardent supporters. He seemed poised not only to transform the Netherlands but also to lead the way for all of Western Europe.
And then, suddenly, he was dead. Van der Graaf's explanation of his motives read like a précis of every lie that had ever been told about Fortuyn. Dutch citizens were justifiably outraged at the journalists and politicians who'd told those lies. Feeling the heat, the Dutch parliament reformed immigration law — to an extent. It overhauled integration policies — somewhat.
Leading the way in advocating these policy changes were two admirers of Fortuyn's — filmmaker Theo van Gogh and Parliament member Ayaan Hirsi Ali. But by early 2007 they, too, were out of the picture.
In November 2004, an Islamist murdered van Gogh. In 2006, in a crisis that brought down the government, Ms. Hirsi Ali was hounded out of Parliament by colleagues desperate to unload this troublemaker. When she moved to Washington, D.C., last year, polls showed that many Dutchmen wouldn't miss her. The elite, it seemed, had reasserted its power, and the Dutch people, tired of conflict, had embraced the status quo ante.
This was confirmed by the March 2006 elections, in which immigration — incredibly — was a minor issue. Five years ago, Fortuyn inspired widespread hope and determination. Today, all too many Dutch citizens seem confused, fearful, and resigned to gradual Islamization. No wonder many of them — especially the young and educated — are emigrating to places like Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
Yes, some politicians, notably Parliament member Geert Wilders, are carrying on Fortuyn's battle. But momentum has given way to malaise. Politicians and journalists who once kept mum on Islamization now openly defend it as preferable to culture clash: Amsterdam mayor Job Cohen has called for "accommodation with the Muslims," including toleration "of orthodox Muslims who consciously discriminate against their women."
Only last week, Mr. Wilders was called in by Dutch intelligence and security officials who, he said, "intimidated" him by pressuring him to tone down his rhetoric on Islam. Fortuyn's brief shining moment seems very long ago.
Many political assassinations leave behind haunting questions. How would Reconstruction have gone under Lincoln? Could the Vietnam debacle have been avoided if President Kennedy had lived? Five years after Fortuyn's murder, it can feel as if Volkert van der Graaf robbed Europe not only of a brilliant champion of liberty, but of its one great chance to save itself before it's too late.
Mr. Bawer is the author of "While Europe Slept" and lives in Oslo, Norway.
Itsdb answered on 05/07/07:>>Amsterdam mayor Job Cohen has called for "accommodation with the Muslims," including toleration "of orthodox Muslims who consciously discriminate against their women."<<
Whatever Perc's beef, (which I answered here), Cohen's position alone should be enough to bring out Perc's shouts of outrage. But somehow in the minds of these people they manage to justify excusing such behavior among Muslims in the name of 'tolerance' - yet watch them throw a fit if a male Christian quotes Ephesians 5:22.
Check out my next post along those lines...
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tropicalstorm asked on 05/04/07 - HIllary sHillary she accents a southern gospel persona
now she pitches her voice to sound like a farmer claiming she grow up on the farm working along side with illegal migrant Mexican workers babysitting their children
yet here is her biography
does it all add up or not?
Hillary Diane Rodham was born at Edgewater Hospital in Chicago, Illinois, and was raised in a Methodist family in Park Ridge, Illinois. Her father, Hugh Ellsworth Rodham, was a son of English immigrants and operated a small business in the textile industry. Her mother, Dorothy Emma Howell Rodham, was a homemaker. She has two younger brothers, Hugh and Tony.
As a child, Hillary Rodham was involved in many activities at church and at her public school in Park Ridge. She participated in a variety of sports and earned awards as a Brownie and Girl Scout.[2] She attended Maine East High School, where she had participated in student council, the debating team and the National Honor Society
A curmudgeon was the way one Hillary biographer, Norman King described Hugh while another, Roger Morris finds him guilty of the "psychological abuse of his children. Chief Petty Officer Hugh Rodham was a drill instructor who trained recruits in the Navy during World War II. Afterward he became a successful businessman in Chicago who moved his family to Park Ridge, an upper middle class suburb from a city apartment three years after Hillary was born. He was a regal presence in this family; Hillary says it was like the television sitcom, Father Know Best. But the humor was lacking according to Dorothy who said of Hillary, "She had to put up with him." Of course, Dorothy did too.
Hillary was Daddy Hugh's girl but what does this mean?
She was Hugh Rodham's victim who wanted his love and approval even as she tried to escape his stinginess, irascibility and perfectionism. The victim survived and was marked by an identification with the aggressor. Like Hugh the adult Hillary became irritable, demanding and the family breadwinner but that's getting ahead of her story. When she brought home a report card with all A's, Daddy replied that it must be an awfully easy school. We're not told what Dorothy Rodham said when she saw the grades maybe because this wasn't important or perhaps Mother Dorothy was also hard to please. It was Dorothy who said there was no room in the house for cowards when little Hillary ran home after an attack by an "obnoxious girl." Forced to confront her attacker, she won the battle and now had the respect of the neighborhood players, says biographer David Brock.
While Hillary's childhood is usually described as solidly middle class, Oppenheimer offers a grim portrait. Hugh Rodham may have driven a Cadillac and owned a home in a white-bread Chicago suburb, he writes, but he was a cheapskate who refused to take care of the place, and his drapery business was a one-man shop with walls stained brown from chewing-tobacco juice. Hillary has her brother Tony to thank for many of these details, since Tony told Oppenheimer about a cousin, Oscar Dowdy, who became the source for them. Dowdy also says that Hillary's mother was given to making anti-Jewish slurs (some about Hillary's grandmother's second husband Max Rosenberg).
Itsdb answered on 05/04/07:I heard a guy on the radio yesterday that said he went to high school with her, and the only non-whites were pretty much foreign exchange students.
>>the adult Hillary became irritable<<
Now THERE's a revelation, not only irritable but extremely irritating - even moreso when she lays on that nasal southern drawl, lol.
Grew up surrounded by farms? Not a chance I don't believe, and if she had one would think she could cook more than soft scrambled eggs. I guess those illegal Mexicans her family exploited cooked all their meals.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/04/07 - Republican debate Well ,what do you expect when you have a rabid Democrat operative moderate a Republican debate packed with 3 serious candidates and 7 ankle biters ? You can read the transcript if you must . But here are some of the highlights :
to Romney (by far the strangest question in a night of them): What do you most dislike about America ?
to McCain : What's the difference between Shia and Sunni ?
to another candidate : How many Americans have been killed or wounded in Iraq ?
to Rudy: is there anything you learned ,or regret during your time as Mayor in your dealings with the African-American community ?
to Trancedo : will you work to protect woman's rights as in fair wages and reproductive rights ?
to Huckabee : do you believe global warming exists ?
to Gilmore : is Karl Rove your friend ?
to all : Does Rove deserve a pardon ? (Ron Paul really screwed this one up )
to all :how many of you believe in evolution ?
the dumbest question of the night :Would it be good for America to have Bill Clinton back in the White House ?
Kudos to all the candidates for knowingly stepping into a hornets nest ,the Dems. did not have the testicle fortitude to step up and answer questions from Fox (and Ihave no doubt Brit Hume would've elevated the playing field compared to Matthews ).Overall their answers were good (except Ron Paul is a joke .....He looked more like a Kossack than a libertarian).Rudy's answers seemed muddled at times .Romney and McCain seemed suprisingly comfortable .
But I can't help but think that Fred Thompson came out the big winner by not participating .
Itsdb answered on 05/04/07:I didn't catch a minute of it, I'm not quite ready to put up with debates yet.
That reproductive rights question gets me though. How exactly does the abortion lobby get away with using "reproductive rights" as the PC term? Aren't 'reproductive' and 'abortion' on complete opposite ends of the spectrum?
Anyway, by the sound of those questions it seems the left was 'prepared' to try and trip them up. "Is Karl Rove your friend" the best they can come up with? And why the heck should anyone ask Republican candidates if it would good to have Clinton back in the White House? Maybe ol' Kos sent his best and brightest, lol.
Fred may very well be the winner, he seems to be creating quite a stir from where he's at.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/04/07 - Hillary calls for sunset of Authorixation bill Evita took to the Senate floor yesterday to support Robert Byrd's call for a de-authorization of the declaration of war against Iraq. Can someone show me the Constitutional legitimacy for this ? I know Congress has the right to declare war . But I thought their only legit way to force the Commander in Chief to end the war is by defunding it. Itsdb answered on 05/04/07:tom,
I believe you're right, and George Will agrees:
They lack the will to exercise their clearly constitutional power to defund the war. And they lack the power to achieve that end by usurping the commander in chief's powers to conduct a war.
What pisses me off in this is the blatant hypocrisy. The left has made it very clear over the past few years that they believe Bush - and the Republican congress - were running roughshod over the constitution:
"They're running roughshod over the Constitution, and they're hiding behind inflammatory rhetoric" -Patrick Leahy
"Just as disturbing as the president's use of press releases to announce which laws he will follow is the abject failure of the Republican-controlled Congress to act as a check against this executive power grab." -Patrick Leahy
"It is not for George W. Bush to disregard the Constitution and decide that he is above the law." -Harry Reid
"I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution." -Barack Obama
"All of us in this body took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and bear true allegiance to the same. Fulfilling that oath requires us to speak clearly and forcefully when the President violates the law." -Russ Feingold
"The resolution before us today is not only a product of haste; it is also a product of presidential hubris. This resolution is breathtaking in its scope. It redefines the nature of defense, and reinterprets the Constitution to suit the will of the Executive Branch." -Robert Byrd
By shunning the oversight of the courts and ignoring the express language of the laws passed by Congress, this president is, in my judgment, defiantly and stubbornly ignoring the Constitution and laws passed by Congress ... The Constitution took effect in 1789 - and it is still good law today. -Ted Kennedy
Now they find themselves in the same place, wanting to reinterpret the constitution to suit the will of congress.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/03/07 - Fred Thompson about socialized medicine Cuban style “Paradise Island”
The myth of Cuban health care.
By Fred Thompson
You might have read the stories about filmmaker Michael Moore taking ailing workers from Ground Zero in Manhattan to Cuba for free medical treatments. According to reports, he filmed the trip for a new movie that bashes America for not having government-provided health care.
Now, I have no expectation that Moore is going to tell the truth about Cuba or health care. I defend his right to do what he does, but Moore’s talent for clever falsehoods has been too well documented. Simply calling his movies documentaries rather than works of fiction, I think, may be the biggest fiction of all.
While this p.r. stunt has obviously been successful — here I am talking about it — Moore’s a piker compared to Fidel Castro and his regime. Moore just parrots the story they created — one of the most successful public-relations coups in history. This is the story of free, high quality Cuban health care.
The truth is that Cuban medical care has never recovered from Castro’s takeover — when the country’s health care ranked among the world’s best. He won the support of the Cuban people by promising to replace Batista’s dictatorship with free elections, and to end corruption. Once in power, though, he made himself dictator and instituted Soviet-style Communism. Cubans not only failed to regain their democratic rights, their economy plunged into centrally planned poverty.
As many as half of Cuba’s doctors fled almost immediately — and defections continue to this day. Castro won’t allow observers in to monitor his nation’s true state, but defectors tell us that many Cubans live with permanent malnutrition and long waits for even basic medical services. Many treatments we take for granted aren’t available at all — except to the Communist elite or foreigners with dollars.
For them, Castro keeps “show” clinics equipped with the best medicines and technologies available. It was almost certainly one of these that Moore went to, if the stories in the NY Post and the Daily News are true.
Nothing about this story inspires doubt, though. Elements in Hollywood have been infatuated with the Cuban commander for years. It always leaves me shaking my head when I read about some big-time actor or director going to Cuba and gushing all over Castro. And, regular as rain, they bring up the health care myth when they come home.
What is it that leads people to value theoretically “free” health care, even when it’s lousy or nonexistent, over a free society that actually delivers health care? You might have to deal with creditors after you go to the emergency ward in America, but no one is denied medical care here. I guarantee even the poorest Americans are getting far better medical services than many Cubans.
According to Forbes magazine, by the way, Castro is now personally worth approximately $900 million. So when he desperately needed medical treatment recently, he could afford to fly a Spanish surgeon, with equipment, on a chartered jet to Cuba. What does that say about free Cuban health care?
The other thing that irks me about Moore and his cohort in Hollywood is their complete lack of sympathy for fellow artists persecuted for opposing the Castro regime. Pro-democracy activists are routinely threatened and imprisoned, but Castro remains a hero to many here. According to human rights organizations, these prisoners of conscience are often beaten and denied medical treatment, sanitation or even adequate nutrition.
If Moore wants a subject for a real documentary, I would suggest looking into the life of Cuban painter and award-winning documentarian Nicolás Guillén Landrián. He was denied the right to practice his art for using the Beatles’ song, “The Fool on the Hill,” as background music behind footage of Castro climbing a mountain. Later, he was given plenty of free Cuban health care when he was confined for years in a “mental institution” and given devastating, repeated electroshock “treatments.”
There are many other artists and activists who have enjoyed similar treatment. I suspect we’ll see movies with sympathetic portrayals of terrorists held in Guantanamo before we ever hear about the torture of true Cuban heroes. Even Andy Garcia’s brilliant fictionalized movie about the real Cuban experience, The Lost City , was given the Hollywood silent treatment. My bet, though, is that we’ll hear lots about how Michael Moore showed that Cuba’s socialized medicine is better than ours.
So go ahead and start working on the Oscar speech, Michael.
Itsdb answered on 05/03/07:>>their complete lack of sympathy for fellow artists persecuted for opposing the Castro regime<<
Well now, that puzzles me, too, especially for a guy like Michael Moore that holds his own film festival.
I try and try but I just don't get these people. I think they are more in love with an idea than results. That would explain how they can fawn over Castro and gloat over his "show" clinics while missing the wreck that is the rest of Cuba. And it explains how they can bitch about Bush with no factual basis while the economy soars, unemployment is low and no terror attacks in almost 6 years.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | kindj asked on 05/03/07 - An add-on to TS's PC post.... Please don't misunderstand the meaning of my story. I love the school district where I work, and I love who I work for and with. I'm not exaggerating when I say it's the best place I've ever worked--bar none.
Earlier this year, we were figuring out how to spend our department budget. We'd spent quite a lot of our allocation on needed supples and stuff, and were really doing quite fine. However, as you know, these budgets are funny--spend every dime this year, or you don't get as much next year. Seems irresponsible to me, but who am I......
In any event, one of the things that my dept. head was going to order were these metal rods that you use to pull down the screen for overheads and stuff. Well, for four of them, they were going to charge us like sixty dollars. I said, "BS! I'll go to Home Depot and make us some good wooden ones for less than ten bucks." OK, Mr. K., you go and do that.
So I do. I bring them back, and there was much rejoicing and celebrating over my frugality, brilliance, ingenuity, and raw talent.
Until one day...
The principal (who I admire and respect, remember) comes to me and very apologetically said that we couldn't have our pull-down-rod-things. I asked if it was because I made them, to which she said no. I asked if we were supposed to irresponsibly over-spend to get them from the "approved" vendor. Again, no.
Why couldn't we have them, you ask?
Because the district (read: spineless, insulated, denying-there's-any-gang, violence, or drug problem school board, who are elected officials who don't know sh!t about education anyway) said they could be used as weapons.
My reply to my boss?
"You're damn right they could!"
You see, while it wasn't their original intent, I did in fact select the one-inch diameter dowel rods for my little project with just that very idea in mind.
I asked Ms. Principal if she would forward a question to our school board on my--and all the teachers in the school's--behalf: "So let me get this straight: We've had 3 students on 3 different campuses threaten violence in the school on a mss scale JUST IN THE LAST WEEK ALONE. Before that, a darn serious and well thought-out plot was discovered that involved the outright murder of MY principal and a few selected teachers--yours truly among them. There is NOTHING to prevent a student or an adult from strolling onto any campus in the district with heavy firepower and doing as they please.
Yet I can't even have a STICK? Well, OK. I'll do as I'm told. You see, I abide by the rules and laws that are given to me, unlike the aforementioned folks. The only request I have for you, Mr. School Board Dude, is 'Do you REALLY think that your dumbass and ignorant rules will be ANY comfort to my widow and my fatherless children? My blood--and that of countless other teachers and students--will be on YOUR inept hands."
She wouldn't relay my question, but did say that there was going to be a special meeting on school security over the summer, and she wanted me to present my plan for security that I had drafted at the beginning of the year to them.
But A STICK?
Don't do a damn thing to keep punks with cheap pistols off the campus, that's bad enough. But take away anything that someone can use to defend the students--THAT ARE THEIR RESPONSIBILITY--and themselves.
Genius. Pure genius.
See what you get when the inmates run the asylum?
DK Itsdb answered on 05/03/07:Gee, no pull-down stick thingy's. So who are they trying to protect from who? Does your school district have baseball teams? Do they use bats? How about football? Track? Golf?
I'm betting they do, I mean what Texas school is NOT going to have at least a football team? So I'd guess they already have some potentially powerful weapons; bats, balls, cleats, helmets, golf clubs, weights and weight bars, etc.
Perhaps the district would like to be consistent and eliminate the sports program, too?
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tropicalstorm asked on 05/02/07 - hotels taking Bibles out of drawers and replacing them with An Inconvenient Truth.
California taking mom and dad out of books because some kids now have one parent or two same sex parents therefore promoting heterosexual behavior.
Pittsburgh delays smoking ban largely because of lawsuit by Mitchels restuarant (which happens to be where the Lawyers and Police go for lunch during court)
What next besides the threat of a ban on my barbque grill? Itsdb answered on 05/03/07:What, don't they get that the bible IS an inconvenient truth?
What's next is anything that could possibly physically harm anyone or the environment, including conservatives, hot coffee, deep-fat fryers and of course talk radio.
Soon they'll be collecting all the plastic Wal-mart bags, stuffing them in all the leftover leisure suits from the 70's and wrapping us up like the little brother in A Christmas Story so we can clean up the environment and can't get hurt.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | kindj asked on 05/03/07 - George Bush RESIGNS!! We all have our disagreements with President Bush. Immigration, U.S. Attorney firings, Iraq, Darfur, etc. are all hot topics these days. The following "speech" was written yesterday by an ordinary Maineiac. While satirical in nature, all satire must have a basis in fact to be effective. An excellent piece by a person who does not write for a living. Sent with the author's permission.
The speech George W. Bush SHOULD give:
Normally, I start these things out by saying "My Fellow Americans." Not doing it this time. If the polls are any indication, I don't know who more than half of you are anymore. I do know something terrible has happened, and that you're really not fellow Americans any longer.
I'll cut right to the chase here: I quit. Now before anyone gets all in a lather about me quitting to avoid impeachment, or to avoid prosecution or something, let me assure you: there's been no breaking of laws or impeachable offenses in this office.
The reason I'm quitting is simple. I'm fed up with you people.
I'm fed up because you have no understanding of what's really going on in the world. Or of what's going on in this once-great nation of ours. And the majority of you are too damned lazy to do your homework and figure it out.
Let's start local. You've been sold a bill of goods by politicians and the news media. Polls show that the majority of you think the economy is in the tank. And that's despite record numbers of homeowners including record numbers of MINORITY homeowners. And while we're mentioning minorities, I'll point out that minority business ownership is at an all-time high. Our unemployment rate is as low as it ever was during the Clinton Administration. I've mentioned all those things before, but it doesn't seem to have sunk in.
Despite the shock to our economy of 9/11, the stock market has rebounded to record levels and more Americans than ever are participating in these markets. Meanwhile, all you can do is whine about gas prices, and most of you are too damn stupid to realize that gas prices are high because there's increased demand in other parts of the world, and because a small handful of noisy idiots are more worried about polar bears and beachfront property than your economic security.
We face real threats in the world. Don't give me this "blood for oil" thing. If I was trading blood for oil I would've already seized Iraq's oil fields and let the rest of the country go to hell. And don't give me this 'Bush Lied People Died' crap either. If I was the liar you morons take me for, I could've easily had chemical weapons planted in Iraq so they could be 'discovered.' Instead, I owned up to the fact that the intelligence was faulty. Let me remind you that the rest of the world thought Saddam had the goods, same as me. Let me also remind you that regime change in Iraq was official US policy before I came into office. Some guy named 'Clinton' established that policy. Bet you didn't know that, did you?
You idiots need to understand that we face a unique enemy. Back during the cold war, there were two major competing political and economic models squaring off. We won that war, but we did so because fundamentally, the Communists wanted to survive, just as we do. We were simply able to outspend and out-tech them.
That's not the case this time. The soldiers of our new enemy don't care if they survive. In fact, they want to die. That'd be fine, as long as they weren't also committed to taking as many of you with them as they can. But they are. They want to kill you. And the bastards are all over the globe.
You should be grateful that they haven't gotten any more of us here in the United States since September 11. But you're not. That's because you've got no idea how hard a small number of intelligence, military, law enforcement and homeland security people have worked to make sure of that. When this whole mess started, I warned you that this would be a long and difficult fight. I'm disappointed how many of you people think a long and difficult fight amounts to a single season of 'Survivor'. Instead, you've grown impatient. You're incapable of seeing things through the long lens of history, the way our enemies do. You think that wars should last a few months, a few years, tops.
Making matters worse, you actively support those who help the enemy. Every time you buy the New York Times, every time you send a donation to a cut-and-run Democrat's political campaign, well, dammit, you might just as well Fedex a grenade launcher to a Jihadist. It amounts to the same thing.
In this day and age, it's easy enough to find the truth. It's all over the Internet. It just isn't on the pages of the New York Times or on NBC News. But even if it were, I doubt you'd be any smarter. Most of you would rather watch American Idol.
I could say more about your expectations that the government will always be there to bail you out, even if you're too stupid to leave a city that's below sea level and has a hurricane approaching. I could say more about your insane belief that government, not your own wallet, is where the money comes from. But I've come to the conclusion that were I to do so, it would sail right over your heads.
So I quit. I'm going back to Crawford. I've got an energy-efficient house down there (Al Gore could only dream) and the capability to be fully self-sufficient. No one ever heard of Crawford before I got elected, and as soon as I'm done here pretty much no one will ever hear of it again. Maybe I'll be lucky enough to die of old age before the last pillars of America fall.
Oh, and by the way, Cheney's quitting too. That means the smiling, vacuous nitwit Pelosi is your new President. You asked for it. Watch what she does carefully, because I still have a glimmer of hope that there're just enough of you remaining who are smart enough to turn this thing around in 2008.
So that's it. God bless what's left of America. Some of you know what I mean. The rest of you, * off.
--
Charles F. Hovey, Jr.
Managing Director
Molpus Woodlands Advisors
85 Eastern Avenue
Gloucester, MA 01930
978-282-8251
Fax: 978-282-1182
Corporate offices in Jackson, Mississippi
please see: www.molpus.com
Itsdb answered on 05/03/07:Well Dennis, Bush has surely thought those things, but since so many of us have been saying them for so long and still no one is listening it wouldn't much matter ... until they hear the words "President Pelosi."
Steve | | Question/Answer | | kindj asked on 05/02/07 - How much do you REALLY know about global warming? This is interesting, and the science teacher on my hall (she has her MS, so I figure she's pretty smart) said the science was sound.
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html Itsdb answered on 05/02/07:Well Dennis, I admit I missed 3, but one was just a mental lapse on my part. But not bad though. The one interesting thing I got (and missed) was that nightime temps would increase while daytime temps may even decrease. That doesn't sound so bad to me :)
Steve | | Question/Answer | | ETWolverine asked on 05/02/07 - Global warming or just breaking wind? Experts: Rice Farming Huge Source of Methane Emissions
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
Associated Press
BANGKOK, Thailand —
As delegates to a climate conference here debate how to reduce greenhouse gases, one of the problems — and a possible solution — lies in the rice fields that cover much of Thailand, the rest of Asia and beyond.
Methane emissions from flooded rice paddies contribute to global warming just as coal-fired power plants, automobile exhausts and other sources do with the carbon dioxide they spew into the atmosphere.
In fact, the report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change meeting this week in Bangkok concludes that rice production was a main cause of rising methane emissions in the 20th century. It calls for better controls.
• Click here to visit FOXNews.com's Natural Science Center.
"There is no other crop that is emitting such a large amount of greenhouse gases," said Reiner Wassmann, a climate change specialist at the International Rice Research Institute in the Philippines.
"Methane emissions are unique to rice," he said. "If Asian countries are exploring possibilities to reduce greenhouse gas, they have to look at rice production. I'm not saying it's the biggest source, but in Asia it's a source that cannot be neglected."
It's the bacteria that thrive in flooded paddies that produce methane, by decomposing manure used as fertilizer and other organic matter in the oxygen-free environment. The gas is emitted through the plants or directly into the atmosphere.
A molecule of methane is 21 times more potent than a molecule of carbon dioxide as a heat-trapping gas.
Although carbon dioxide is still the bigger problem, representing 70 percent of the warming potential in the atmosphere, rising levels of methane now account for 23 percent, reports the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
After decades of atmospheric buildup, methane — also emitted naturally from wetlands and from other manmade sources, such as landfills and cattle farming — has leveled off in the past few years.
Some scientists credit changes in rice production, and some also trace it to repairs in oil and gas storage facilities that can leak methane.
A 2005 study by U.S. scientists focused on China, which produces a third of the world's rice and where rice fields have shrunk by 24 million acres in the past decade as farmers shifted to other crops and abandoned marginal land.
The study also found that nitrogen-based fertilizer has replaced manure, and many Chinese farmers are using less water on their fields.
For Asians, modifying rice production might prove easier and cheaper than some of the other fixes proposed in the IPCC draft report, such as switching from coal to solar, wind power or other renewable energy sources.
But despite the recent leveling off, the EPA projects that global methane emissions will rise again, as rice fields expand with growing populations.
Wassmann said few countries have followed China's example, instead ignoring such solutions as periodically draining their fields or shifting to locations that need less water.
Scientists say such measures pose the same challenge for poor countries as proposals to introduce environmentally friendly tilling methods or capping methane from livestock manure: Farmers often lack the funds and know-how to shift away from techniques in use for generations.
"In the developing world, you really have to think first and foremost about providing population with food," said Pete Smith of the University of Aberdeen in Scotland, lead author of the IPCC report's section on agriculture. "You can't start thinking about climate mitigation if you have to feed your family."
Thailand, the world's largest rice exporter, shows both the promise and limitations of trying to make the industry greener.
Most large mills here burn leftover rice husks for power — a more climate friendly source than coal or oil — and are increasingly selling excess power back to the state.
"Instead of letting it rot in the fields and produce bad gas, we burn it and make use of it," said Rut Subniran, executive chairman of the Patum Rice Mill and Granary outside Bangkok. "This is good for the country because it can reduce our oil imports. It's good for the environment."
But a few miles away, impoverished rice farmers have largely ignored government calls to periodically drain their fields to help reduce methane emissions.
Busy harvesting the latest crop, some blamed tradition and habit, but others said draining the fields was just too costly.
"The government has told us how rice paddies release methane," said Adisak Wantayachiwa, who farms 28 acres north of Bangkok. But most farmers "don't want to pay the cost of draining their fields," he said. "They would just rather keep them flooded."
----------------
So... technology is not solely responsible for global warming. Agriculture, specifically rice paddies, which are a main source of a staple food product in most third world countries, are a major source of greenhouse gasses.
So, what are we to do. We can't use technology because it causes carbon dioxide, and we can't farm because it causes methane. Can't raise cows, pigs or chickens either... they are also major sources of methane production. We also have to cork our own butts, since we also fart methane. How will we live?
That is the idiocy of the whole eco-movement. They try to get us to change our lifestyles based on their biases, with no scientific proof to back up global warming or the greenhouse effect. But in order to comply with the restrictions they would have on us, we literally would have to kill ourselves off.
Between you and me, if it came down to a choice of possibly dying off in a few hundred thousand years or definitely dying off now, I'll choose the first option. But that's just me; I'm selfish that way.
Elliot Itsdb answered on 05/02/07:>>But in order to comply with the restrictions they would have on us, we literally would have to kill ourselves off.<<
Sadly, too many people are more interested in mother earth and manatees than people. They wouldn't miss you one bit Elliot, that would just be one less human carbon footprint.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | kindj asked on 05/02/07 - A primer on modern liberal tactics The stuff in these articles probably won't surprise many of you.
Even though this is an article written by a Christian and geared toward the same, I don't see how ANYONE could NOT benefit greatly from reading it.
The link is to part 2; however, there is a link once you get there that'll let you read part 1.
http://www.crosswalk.com/homeschool/11538484/page1/
Let me know what you think.
DK Itsdb answered on 05/02/07:Dennis,
All one needs to do is visit the "Everyone hates Christianity board" as you so aptly named it, to see this article is true. For instance:
Article: I was offended to find the movie showing religious people to be intolerant, backward creatures who are afraid of progress.
Example
Article: Who makes it onto these news shows? Is it the normal looking Christian who is rationally and politely sharing God's love and God's Word? No.
Example
Article: As I mentioned earlier, the left has learned that if you yell something loud enough long enough, and get enough people to yell along with you, you can make anything look like a fact.
Example
And you know Dennis, I would love to have actually discuss issues with liberals and skeptics, but I can't seem to find many that will play by the same rules they expect of me.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 05/01/07 - Tenet to testify. We hope Representative Henry Waxman, chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, enforces the subpoena of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to discuss prewar claims about Saddam Hussein’s long-gone weapons programs. Ms. Rice, who was national security adviser before the war, says she has answered every possible question. Actually, we don’t have room for all our questions.
Just a few: Did she vet the briefing Mr. Bush got from Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s rogue intelligence shop on Iraq’s alleged efforts to acquire uranium? The Central Intelligence Agency and the State Department thought, correctly, that the report was false. So why did Ms. Rice permit the president to repeat it to the world? Or did Mr. Bush also know what he was claiming was wrong?
The same applies to other claims about Iraq, including a false report about the purchase of aluminum tubes for bomb building, talk of mushroom clouds and fairy tales about links between Iraq and Al Qaeda.......
Above quote is from the editorial pages of the NY Slimes last week.
Given that this is George Tenet's week of infamy ;perhaps the Slimes and Congressman Waxman could save us all alot of time and money by referencing the Tenet testimony to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence ;Feb.11,2003
Iraq has established a pattern of clandestine procurements designed to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program. These procurements include-but also go well beyond-the aluminum tubes that you have heard so much about
Iraq has tested unmanned aerial vehicles to ranges that far exceed both what it declared to the United Nations and what it is permitted under UN resolutions. We are concerned that Iraq's UAVs can dispense chemical and biological weapons and that they can deliver such weapons to Iraq's neighbors or, if transported, to other countries, including the United States.
Iraq is harboring senior members of a terrorist network led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a close associate of Usama Bin Ladin. We know Zarqawi's network was behind the poison plots in Europe that I discussed earlier as well as the assassination of a US State Department employee in Jordan.
Iraq has in the past provided training in document forgery and bomb-making to al-Qa'ida. It also provided training in poisons and gasses to two al-Qa'ida associates; one of these associates characterized the relationship he forged with Iraqi officials as successful.
Mr. Chairman, this information is based on a solid foundation of intelligence. It comes to us from credible and reliable sources. Much of it is corroborated by multiple sources. And it is consistent with the pattern of denial and deception exhibited by Saddam Hussein over the past 12 years.
If they wish to dig a little deeper they could refer to this post war address by Tenet entitled :Iraq and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Let me tell you some of what was going on in the fall of 2002. Several sensitive reports crossed my desk from two sources characterized by our foreign partners as "established and reliable."
The first, from a source who had direct access to Saddam and his inner circle said . . . Iraq was aggressively and covertly developing such a [nuclear] weapon. Saddam had recently called together his Nuclear Weapons Committee irate that Iraq did not yet have a weapon because money was no object and they possessed the scientific know how. The Committee members assured Saddam that once the fissile material was in hand, a bomb could be ready in just 18-24 months. The return of UN inspectors would cause minimal disruption because, according to the source, Iraq was expert at denial and deception.
The same source said Iraq was stockpiling chemical weapons and that equipment to produce insecticides, under the oil-for-food program, had been diverted to covert chemical weapons production. . . .
A stream of reporting from a different sensitive source with access to senior Iraqi officials . . . stated that a senior Iraqi official in Saddam's inner circle believed, as a result of the UN inspections, Iraq knew the inspectors' weak points and how to take advantage of them. The source said there was an elaborate plan to deceive inspectors and ensure prohibited items would never be found.
Now, did this information make a difference in my thinking? You bet it did. As this and other information came across my desk, it solidified and reinforced the judgments we had reached and my own view of the danger posed by Saddam Hussein and I conveyed this view to our nation's leaders.
Of course today Tenet claims that no one agreed that Saddam was a growing or 'imminent threat'. But this certainly shows he wasn't councelling caution. Perhaps it is he who needs a supoena to answer some questions. I wonder if he'll get the same soft ball treatment that Valerie Plame got ?
Itsdb answered on 05/01/07:Yep, as Elliot noted, asked and answered, asked and answered, asked and answer ad infinitum. There is at this juncture NO POINT in going over it again.
The only point this congress wants to make now is a case for impeachment of someone. If they haven't made that case through all of the committees and reports and blowhards by now they aren't ever going to make it. And that, much to the chagrin of the NY Slimes. Bush should stand his ground and tell the Dems to shove their subpoenas up their arrogant butts.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | Mathatmacoat asked on 04/28/07 - Now for something of absolutely Earth shattering importance!
Cricket World Cup
Adam Gilchrist
Farce ruins Cup defence
By Toby Forage
FOXSPORTS.com.au editor
April 29, 2007
AUSTRALIA won an historic third successive World Cup this morning, but not before celebrating prematurely as the tournament's troubled run ended in complete farce.
With three overs left in the match, reduced to 38 overs-a-side because of rain, Sri Lanka's batsmen were offered the light and accepted, sparking wild celebrations from the Australia players.
But after whoops of delight and much prancing around, Ricky Ponting's men were told the game wasn't over after all, and after a long discussion with umpires Aleem Dar and Steve Bucknor, as well as off-field officials, play continued in near darkness.
It was an appalling way to finish a tournament that has been pilloried for its excessive length and lack of depth, and the International Cricket Council will have much to ponder in the four years between now and the next tournament on the sub-continent
The biggest shame is that Australia historic moment, and a performance of sheer class from Adam Gilchrist, will be forgotten as a result of a quite ludicrous finale.
Even the presentation rostrum was sent back into the stands by the officials when the only result possible was an Australia victory.
Three overs in darkness and another wicket later, the game mercifully ended with Sri Lanka on 8-215, chasing Australia's imposing 4-281, losing by 53 runs in a match punctuated by rain delays and the chaos of the ilk Fawlty Towers scriptwriters would have been proud of.
Australia's total was set up by an awesome knock of 149 by Gilchrist, who racked up his runs in little more than two hours from just 104 balls to set a new individual high score record in the World Cup final, beating Ponting's record of four years ago of 140.
"It's been a while between drinks for my hundred, and really pleasing to do it on such an important day," Gilchrist said in the gloom as Australia celebrated in front of a crowd that was probably grateful for its bright yellow team colours, given the ridiculous gloom.
"It's an unbelievable feeling. The guys have worked so hard," he added, without making mention of the bizarre circumstances of victory.
Gilchrist, dropped on 31, and fellow left hander Matthew Hayden's stand of 172 was a World Cup final first-wicket record, surpassing the 129 shared by England's Mike Brearley and Geoff Boycott during West Indies' 92-run win at Lord's in 1979.
Gilchrist opened up in Chaminda Vaas's second over. He flicked the bowler's eighth ball for four over square leg, and next ball he drove him over long-on for six.
Vaas, after an expensive three-over spell costing 24 runs, was replaced by fellow quick Dilhara Fernando, retained despite conceding 45 runs in five overs during Tuesday's 81-run semi-final win over New Zealand.
Fernando, in his second over, dropped a low caught and bowled chance off Gilchrist's checked drive, with the keeper on 31 and Australia 0-47, and conceded 74 from his eight overs.
Next ball Gilchrist struck him for four through mid-wicket to bring up Australia's fifty. The ball after was lashed through long-on and Gilchrist immediately topped that with a six in the same area.
He completed a 43-ball fifty with two sixes and five fours.
Off spinner Tillakaratne Dilshan wasn't let off the hook, Gilchrist driving the bowler over his head for two superb straight sixes as he passed his previous best score this tournament, 59 not out against Bangladesh.
The 35 year old then saw Australia to 100 in just 102 balls by off driving Fernando for six.
Gilchrist swept Murali for a six that soared over mid-wicket before Sri Lanka skipper Mahela Jayawardene brought back trump card Malinga in a bid to break the stand. His first ball back was smashed for six over long-off by Hayden.
Gilchrist then struck Malinga to the same boundary to bring up a superb century in 72 balls with six sixes and eight fours.
Hayden, renowned as a power-hitter and the tournament's leading run-scorer, was still in the 30s.
Sri Lanka's chase began badly when Upul Tharanga edged a ball into Gilchrist's gloves behind the wicket after less than 10 minutes of the reply.
But Kumar Sangakkara and veteran left hander Sanath Jayasuriya gave Sri Lanka hope of a repeat of the 1996 final, when it beat Australia, with a partnership of 116 before Sangakkara was caught on 54 by Ponting off Brad Hogg's spin bowling.
When part-time bowler Michael Clarke clean bowled Jayasuriya for 63 with a short ball that didn't bounce, Sri Lanka's chase had faltered, and victory began to look inevitable.
After the farce of the end that wasn't, victory eventually was Australia's, and it's third straight World Cup in the bag.
Australia did not lose a single match at this World Cup, extending an extraordinary run of victories that goes back to 1999 and defeat to Pakistan in the group stage of that tournament, which it won to start the hat-trick of titles.
With Agence France-Presse
Itsdb answered on 04/30/07:I have no idea what any of that means other than Australia won. Congratulations - even if it was a farce.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/28/07 - MNFI You tube cite Multi-National Force - Iraq established this YouTube channel to give viewers around the world a "boots on the ground" perspective of Operation Iraqi Freedom from those who are fighting it.
Video clips document action as it appeared to personnel on the ground and in the air as it was shot. We will only edit video clips for time, security reasons, and/or overly disturbing or offensive images.
What you will see on this channel in the coming months:
- Combat action
- Interesting, eye-catching footage
- Interaction between Coalition troops and the Iraqi populace.
- Teamwork between Coalition and Iraqi troops in the fight against terror.
What we will NOT post on this channel:
- Profanity
- Sexual content
- Overly graphic, disturbing or offensive material
- Footage that mocks Coalition Forces, Iraqi Security Forces or the citizens of Iraq.
This YouTube channel is brought to you by www.mnf-iraq.com, the official Web site of Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Check it out here
I have to say ;this is something General Casey would not have considered .As Jed Babbin says "Why is this there? Because for every snuff flick the terrorists use to recruit (showing their bravery in hacking off some handcuffed hostage’s head) there should be one showing the good guys winning. Petraeus gets it. Forget psychobabble about “hearts and minds.” Petraeus understands laptops and IPods. This guy gets it."
Read Babbin's article .It is eye opening .
Itsdb answered on 04/30/07:It's about time we unleash "the power of the internet" to counter all the crap that's been put out by the critics and the terrorist themselves. "This guy gets it."
Indeed.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | kindj asked on 04/29/07 - A little reality for the left to deal with... A bit long, but trust me, it's worth your time.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
When mass killers meet armed resistance.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
It took place at a university in Virginia. A student with a grudge, an immigrant, pulled a gun and went on a shooting spree. It wasn’t Virginia Tech at all. It was the Appalachian School of Law in Grundy, not far away. You can easily drive from the one school to the other, just take a trip down Route 460 through Tazewell.
It was January 16, 2002 when Peter Odighizuwa came to campus. He had been suspended due to failing grades. Odighizuwa was angry and waving a gun calling on students to “come get me”. The students, seeing the gun, ran. A shooting spree started almost immediately. In seconds Odighizuwa had killed the school dean, a professor and one student. Three other students were shot as well, one in the chest, one in the stomach and one in the throat.
Many students heard the shots. Two who did were Mikael Gross and Tracy Bridges. Mikael was outside the school having just returned to campus from lunch when he heard the shots. Tracy was inside attending class. Both immediately ran to their cars. Each had a handgun locked in the vehicle.
Bridges pulled a .357 Magnum pistol and he later said he was prepared to shoot to kill if necessary. He and Gross both approached Odighizuwa at the same time from different directions. Both were pointing their weapons at him. Bridges yelled for Odighizuwa to drop his weapon. When the shooter realized they had the drop on him he threw his weapon down. A third student, unarmed, Ted Besen, approached the killer and was physically attacked.
But Odighizuwa was now disarmed. The three students were able to restrain him and held him for the police. Odighizuwa is now in prison for the murders he committed. His killing spree ended when he faced two students with weapons. There would be no further victims that day, thanks to armed resistance.
You wouldn’t know much about that though. Do you wonder why? The media, though it widely reported the attack left out the fact that Bridges and Gross were armed. Most simply reported that the gunman was jumped and subdued by other students. That two of those students were now armed didn’t get a mention.
James Eaves-Johnson wrote about this fact one week later in The Daily Iowan. He wrote: “A Lexus-Nexis search revealed 88 stories on the topic, of which only two mentioned that either Bridges or Gross was armed.” This 2002 article noted “This was a very public shooting with a lot of media coverage.” But the media left out information showing how two students with firearms ended the killing spree.
He also mentioned a second incident. And while I had read many articles on this shooting for an article I wrote about school bullying not a single one mentioned the role that a firearm played in stopping it. Until today I didn’t know the full story.
Luke Woodham was a troubled teen. He felt no one really liked him. In 1997 he murdered his mother and put on a trench coat. He filled the pockets with ammunition and took a handgun to the Pearl High School in Pearl, Mississippi. In rapid succession killed two students and wounded seven others.
He had the incident planned out. He would start shooting students and continue until he heard police sirens in the distance. That would allow him time to get in his car and leave campus. From there he intended to go to the nearby Pearl Junior High School and start shooting again. How it would end was not clear. Perhaps he would kill himself or perhaps the police would finally catch up with him and kill him. Either way a lot more people were going to get shot and die.
What Woodham hadn’t planned for was the actions of Assistant Principal Joel Myrick. Myrick heard the gun shots. He couldn’t have a handgun in the school. But he did keep one locked in his vehicle in the parking lot. He ran outside and retrieved the gun.
As Myrick headed back toward the school Woodham was in his vehicle headed for his next intended target. Myrick aimed his gun at the shooter. The teen crashed his car when he saw the gun. Myrick approached the car and held a gun to the killer who surrendered immediately. There would be no further victims that day, thanks to armed resistance.
So you didn’t know about that. Neither did I until today. Eaves-Johnson wrote that there were “687 articles on the school shooting in Pearl, Miss. Of those, only 19 mentioned that” Myrick had used a gun to stop Woodham “four-and-a-half minutes before police arrived.”
Many people probably forgot about the shooting in Edinboro, Pennsylvania. It was a school graduation dance that Andrew Wurst entered to take out his anger on the school. First he shot teacher John Gillette outside. He started shooting randomly inside the restaurant where the 240 students had gathered.
It was restaurant owner James Strand, armed with a shot gun, who captured the shooter and held him for police. There would be no further victims that day, thanks to armed resistance.
It was February 12th of this year that a young man entered the Trolley Square Shopping Mall, in Salt Lake City. The mall was a self-declared “gun free zone” forbidding patrons from carrying weapons. He wasn’t worried. In fact he appreciated knowing that his victims couldn’t defend themselves.
He opened fire even before he got inside killing his first victims immediately outside the front door. As he walked down the mall hallway he fired in all directions. Several more people were shot inside a card store immediately inside the mall. The shooter moved on to the Pottery Barns Kids store.
What he didn’t know is that one patron of the mall, Kenneth Hammond, had ignored the signs informing patrons they must be unarmed to enter. He was a police officer but he was not on duty and he was not a police officer for Salt Lake City. By all standards he was a civilian that day and probably should have left his firearm in his vehicle.
It’s a good thing he didn’t. He was sitting in the mall with his wife having dinner when he heard the shots. He told her to hide and to call 911 emergency services. He went to confront the gunman. The killer found himself under gun fire much sooner than he anticipated. From this point on all his effort was to protect himself from Hammond, he had no time to kill anyone else. Hammond was able to pin down the shooter until police finally arrived and one of them shot the man to death. There would be no further victims that day, thanks to armed resistance.
In each of these cases a killer is stopped the moment he faces armed resistance. It is clear that in three of these cases the shooter intended to continue his killing spree. In the fourth case, Andrew Wurst, it is not immediately apparent whether he intended to keep shooting or not since he was apprehended by the restaurant owner leaving the scene.
Three of these cases involved armed resistance by students, faculty or civilians. In one case the armed resistance was from an off-duty police officer in a city where he had no legal authority and where he was carrying his weapon in violation of the mall’s gun free policy.
What would have happened if these people waited for the police? In three cases the shooters were apprehended before the police arrived because of armed civilians. At Trolley Square the shooter was kept busy by Hammond until the police arrived. In all four cases the local police were the Johnny-come-latelys.
Consider the horrific events at Virginia Tech. Again an armed man enters a “gun free zone”. He kills two victims and walks away long before the police arrive. He spends two hours on campus, doing what is unknown. He then enters another building on campus and begins shooting. He never encounters a police officer during this. And all the students and faculty present had apparently complied with the “no gun” policy of the university. So no one stopped him. NO ONE STOPPED HIM! And when he finished his shooting spree 32 people were dead. It was the killer who ended the spree. He took his own life and when the police arrived all they dealt with were the dead.
There were many further victims that day. The shooter never met with armed resistance.
Itsdb answered on 04/30/07:Dennis,
Oh the horror, armed Americans walking around with concealed weapons taking the law into their own hands. That seems to be better than the alternative. I've already shown how it's worked in Texas, it'll be interesting to see how it works now that we'll soon have the right to use deadly force in self-defense without jumping through hoops first.
Steve
Don't mess with Texans... | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/30/07 - George Tenet's imaginary encounter I saw him weave his tale last night on ླྀ Minutes' .I can't wait to read his book;Probably a better fiction than the latest Harry Potter episode.
Bill Kristol describes what must be either a flight from reality or an out right lie.
Tenet claims that the Administration ;or at least the neocons in it;were determined to get Saddam even before the facts were in. This I do not dispute. It is clear that the policy of the government regarding Iraq had been regime change for some time. Sept. 11 made the matter more urgent.
But Tenet claimed that he ran into Richard Perle,the head of the Defense Policy Board,and a card carrying neo-con on Sept. 12 ,2001 . He claims that Perle said "Iraq has to pay a price for what happened yesterday. They bear responsibility."
The problem with this narrative is that Richard Perle was out of the country until Sept. 15 . You would think that such an esteemed spook as George Tenet would've done some basic fact checking before he published.
Itsdb answered on 04/30/07:I watched as much of it as I could stomach, and I have to say that at the time if what Tenet (or Tenant as that arrogant schmuck Pelley called him) claimed Perle said was true then it sounded damaging to me. Kudos to Kristol for debunking that so quickly.
Condi and State pointed out more of Tenet's memory problems. As reported in the NY Times:
It quoted him as saying of the emerging terrorist threat, in the spring and summer of 2001, “reporting was maddeningly short on actionable details.”
“The most ominous reporting hinting at ‘something big’ was also the most vague.”
It also quoted him as saying that upon taking office, “The new group,” meaning the Bush administration in early 2001, “also immediately understood what we were talking about here, and bin Laden and Al Qaeda became an agenda item early on with the national security adviser and the president.”
And the drumbeat goes on - and on, and on...
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/27/07 - A big carbon foot print in South Carolina. A flock of small jets took flight from Washington Thursday, each carrying a Democratic presidential candidate to South Carolina for the first debate of the political season.
For Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd and Joe Biden, it was wheels up shortly after they voted in favor of legislation requiring that U.S. troops begin returning home from Iraq in the fall.
No one jet pooled, no one took commercial flights to save money, fuel or emissions.
All but Biden, who flew on a private jet, chartered their flights -- a campaign expense of between $7,500 and $9,000.
http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-campaign-planes,0,4666247,print.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines
The rest of the story is about how the campaigns paid for the flights. So much for fiscal responsibility . Edwards denies that he had an in-flight hair cut.
From the debate :
MODERATOR: Time has expired. Staying on the notion of the environment, which somewhat unbelievably is where that question started, what in your personal life, Senator Obama, have you done personally to make for a better environment? Personal life...
OBAMA: Well, you know, we just had Earth Day. And we actually organized 3,000 volunteers to plant trees, which...
MODERATOR: I mean, like light bulbs...
OBAMA: Well...
(LAUGHTER)
I thought the tree thing was pretty good.
MODERATOR: Well, yes, but...
OBAMA: We've also been working to install lightbulbs that last longer and save energy. And that's something that I'm trying to teach my daughters, 8-year-old Malia and 5-year-old Sasha.
And that was the only reference to the environment in a 90 minute debate.(except for the single inane comment by Kucinich who said we should "move away from global warming and global warring". ) ;Obama planted trees and changed light bulbs.
How can they claim to be stewards of the environment when they would not even coordinate with each other so that one chartered flight was used? I guess an 8 hr. bus trip was out of the question.They could've lived that stap-hanger life style they tell the rest of us to live by taking Amtrack .
The Goracle is shocked ! A Quinnipiac poll suggested Gore would run more strongly against the Republicans than either Clinton or Obama.
Any day now .
Itsdb answered on 04/27/07:The Breck Girl didn't get an in-flight haircut? You know tom, if they suddenly became 'green' then they would save the planet, the aerth would no longer have a fever, and the issue would go away. We can't have that now can we?
Biden clarified the Iraq issue for us: this is not a game show. You know, this is not a football game. This is not win or lose.
Alrighty then. He also thanked God that Bork is not on the Supreme Court.
Obama stood his ground: I am proud that I opposed this war from the start, because I thought that it would lead to the disastrous conditions that we've seen on the ground in Iraq.
Did the "magic Negro" ever express those thoughts before the vote to authorize? I'm just curious.
Kucinich actually made sense at one point: Any of my appointments to the high court would necessarily reflect my thinking.
When asked what the most significant political or professional mistake they've made in the last four years, Sen. Gravel (I didn't even know was running), said I was beginning to feel like a potted plant standing over here.
Biden's worst mistake was Overestimating the competence of this administration and underestimating the arrogance.
The humility is breathtaking...
Asked about how they would respond in case of a terror attack on two American cities, not one said anything about doing everything they could to prevent that from ever happening.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/27/07 - Who's side is she on ? the score card .
San Fran taliban Nan has met with Bashar Assad
Refused to meet with General Petraeus
and now refuses to meet with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe when he is in Washington next week.
Uribe has been struggling against communist terrorist groups financed by Venezuelan thug Hugo Chavez.If it were Chavez coming to town I'll wager she'd drool over him.
Uribe is a strategic partner with the US .It is irresponsible of her to give him the snub. The Gorical also refused to meet with him citing "human rights violations " but he is insignificant .Pelosi ,like it or not ,is in a leadership role in this country and even if she though Gore had a point;Uribe's human rights record cannot be any worse than Assad's . Gimme a break !
Itsdb answered on 04/27/07:LOL, man these people sure have their outrages and priorities all mixed up. Who's side is she on? Apparently she made this secret visit while on her Jihad tour:
![]()
She then delivered his message to the president:
![]() | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/27/07 - The Taliban leaves a calling card Read the gem that Wrechard at Belmont Club published today ...especially the excellent commentary (also do not neglect the followup comments ). The taking of Ghazni is not the relevent point (that will be retaken easily );it is the nature of how the war against jihadistan has evolved .As Wrechard points out ;if the jihadists are willing to invest so much in Afghanistan then what are they willing to invest in Mesopotamia ;the cradle of civilization and as Wrechard puts it "terra incognita"...that stretch of undiscovered country constitutes the single most valuable piece of real estate in the 21st century. America and radical Islam are locked in a battle for the future of Iraq and by extension the Middle East; for Afghanistan and by extension Southwest Asia; for the Horn of Africa and by extension for the vast swath of territory above the Sahara. Billions of people are watching to see what the outcome will be. Watching to see which side can lay claim on the future.
What is common in both the Afghanistan and Iraq campaigns is that we have not developed a plan to cut off the enemy from it's supply source . When this began President Bush said it was a war against terror and State Sponsors of terror. I still say that the only way to settle Iraq (short of the white flag surrender option that Congress passed this week)is to engage Iraq's neighbors....diplomatically if possible ;but not likely ,or squash them . Itsdb answered on 04/27/07:The first excerpt the defeatocrats and Sheehads, etc. need to take to heart in this:
Then the tables could be turned and Iraq, rather than being a political and ideological victory for the West could be transformed into its complete opposite: a demonstration of the moral and ideological superiority of of radical Islam.
That is what's at stake here and this congress' attempts to give the Islamists a surrender date is EXACTLY what bin Laden et al are waiting for and predicted would happen. That's a far cry from what they said leading up to this war, and their defeatist behavior is the polar opposite of the message that they - and the complicit media - should be sending, both to the terrorists and the American people.
If they don't get over themselves and change that message there's going to be more American and other innocent blood on their hands than they can imagine.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/27/07 - Who misled ? The mantra of the Democrats has been that the country was misled into the Iraq war . They claim that intelligence was manipulated .
Senator Dick turban Durbin ,the number 2 ranking Democrat in the Senate ,who once compared the guards at GITMO to the henchmen of Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Pol Pot ,claims he knew that the American public was being misled but remained silent because he was sworn to secrecy as a member of the intelligence committee. He made these statements on the Senate floor during the recent debate about troop funding .
"The information we had in the intelligence committee was not the same information being given to the American people. I couldn't believe it" ....
"I was angry about it. [But] frankly, I couldn't do much about it because, in the intelligence committee, we are sworn to secrecy. We can't walk outside the door and say the statement made yesterday by the White House is in direct contradiction to classified information that is being given to this Congress."
He claims there was no "ethical" way to notify the public of specific misleading information because it would have required revealing top-secret information .(like that has ever been an impediment before ).He said that 1/2 the Dem~rats from the Intelligence Committee voted against the original Iraq authorization bill ;which of course begs the question : Why did the other Democrats in the committee who were privy to the same intelligence as him ,vote in favor of the authorization ?
He got Mitch-slapped by an e-mail circulated by the office of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.The e-mail said Durbin's comments were inconsistent with the words of other Democrats on the committee, including Sens. John D. Rockefeller IV and Carl Levin .Rockefeller voted for the authorization and Livin did not .
Do you believe his line of cr*p? If in fact the Administration was lying to us ,and he had the proof ,then it was incumbent on him to do something about it.His vow of secrecy certainly does not prohibit him from stating an opinion. God knows he's never been shy of doing that before .He could have announced he had seen additional intelligence information and came to a different conclusion than the administration. What is he really saying ....that he is responsible for the deaths of 3000 + US troops because he remained silent ? “Durbin lied, people died"
The best part of this loony line of reasoning is that now he can make this claim and STILL not have to provide the intelligence that lead him to a different conclusion.He cannot prove he saw information that “was not the same” unless he reveals it and the administration cannot confirm or deny intelligence information that is not even named.
Kathryn Jean Lopez at National Review accesses the e-mail .
SAY WHAT? DID SEN. DURBIN RUN THIS PAST HIS COLLEAGUES?
DURBIN SAYS INTEL COMMITTEE MEMBERS WERE AWARE THAT IRAQ INTEL
DID NOT SUPPORT THE RHETORIC IN RUN-UP TO IRAQ WAR
“I was a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee and I would read the headlines in the paper in the morning and I'd watch the television newscast and I'd shake my head. …[T]he information we had in the Intelligence Committee was not the same information being given to the American people. I couldn't believe it.” (Sen. Dick Durbin, Floor Speech, 04/25/07)
“You see, in the Intelligence Committee, we're sworn to secrecy. We can't walk outside the door and say, ‘The statement made yesterday by the White House is in direct contradiction to classified information that's being given to this Congress.’” (Sen. Dick Durbin, Floor Speech, 04/25/07)
“And so in my frustration, I sat here on the floor of the Senate and listened to this heated debate about invading Iraq thinking the American people are being misled. They are not being told the truth.” (Sen. Dick Durbin, Floor Speech, 04/25/07)
IS SENATOR DURBIN SAYING THAT DEMOCRAT INTEL COMMITTEE MEMBERS WILLFULLY MISLED THE PUBLIC?
SEN. CARL LEVIN (D-MI): “[Saddam] has ignored the mandates of the United Nations, is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.” (Committee On Armed Services, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 09/19/02)
SEN. JOHN ROCKFELLER (D-WV): “There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons. And will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years.” (Sen. John Rockefeller, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p.S10306)
SEN. EVAN BAYH (D-IN): “Bill, I support the president's efforts to disarm Saddam Hussein. I think he was right on in his speech tonight. The lessons we learned following September 11 were that we can't wait to be attacked again, particularly when it involves weapons of mass destruction. So regrettably, Saddam has not done the right thing, which is to disarm, and we're left with no alternative but to take action.” (Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor," 03/17/03)
AND THE CURRENT SENATE MAJORITY LEADER HARRY REID?
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): “Saddam Hussein, in effect, has thumbed his nose at the world community. And I think that the President's approaching this in the right fashion.” (CNN's "Inside Politics," 09/18/02)
But wait .......there's more !!! The e-mail forgot to mention these choice cuts :
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of an ilicit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
- Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime...He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation...And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction...So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real."
-Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
I excluded statements made during the Clinton years for berevity . oh ok .....one more
“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”
Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, California)
Statement on US Led Military Strike Against Iraq
December 16, 1998
Senator Durbin ;stick with dog food ...you are incompetent in matters involving national security .
Itsdb answered on 04/27/07:There's more:
"I come to this debate, Mr. Speaker, as one at the end of 10 years in office on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, where stopping the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction was one of my top priorities. I applaud the President on focusing on this issue and on taking the lead to disarm Saddam Hussein. ... Others have talked about this threat that is posed by Saddam Hussein. Yes, he has chemical weapons, he has biological weapons, he is trying to get nuclear weapons."
Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, California) Addressing the US Senate October 10, 2002
"We stopped the fighting [in 1991] on an agreement that Iraq would take steps to assure the world that it would not engage in further aggression and that it would destroy its weapons of mass destruction. It has refused to take those steps. That refusal constitutes a breach of the armistice which renders it void and justifies resumption of the armed conflict."
Senator Harry Reid (Democrat, Nevada) Addressing the US Senate October 9, 2002
"It is the duty of any president, in the final analysis, to defend this nation and dispel the security threat. Saddam Hussein has brought military action upon himself by refusing for 12 years to comply with the mandates of the United Nations. The brave and capable men and women of our armed forces and those who are with us will quickly, I know, remove him once and for all as a threat to his neighbors, to the world, and to his own people, and I support their doing so."
Senator John Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts) Statement on eve of military strikes against Iraq March 17, 2003
"It appears that with the deadline for exile come and gone, Saddam Hussein has chosen to make military force the ultimate weapons inspections enforcement mechanism. If so, the only exit strategy is victory, this is our common mission and the world's cause."
Senator John Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts) Statement on commencement of military strikes against Iraq March 20, 2003
And rather than drag this out even further, a personal favorite:
"There is now no incentive for Hussein to comply with the inspectors or to refrain from using weapons of mass destruction to defend himself if the United States comes after him. And he will use them; we should be under no illusion about that."
Joseph Wilson, Advisor to John Kerry 2004 Presidential Campaign in a Los Angeles Times editorial: "A 'Big Cat' With Nothing to Lose" February 6, 2003; Page B17
-5 months before his "What I Didn't Find in Africa" column, and a year after his trip to Niger
Steve | | Question/Answer | | curious98 asked on 04/26/07 - Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch For quite sometime I have been hammering on the head of some of our colleagues on these Q&A boards that Government Administrations all over feel no repulsion whatsoever about lying to us in the most deliberate and obnoxious way. I have read today this article which seems to show that I am not totally wrong:
Quote:
The searing congressional testimonies from the family of Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch may sound the long overdue death knell for mainstream American public support for the Bush administration and its criminal war.
Tuesday, one unwilling and outraged war poster child and the agonized family members of the other stood before Congress, looked the Bush administration in the eye, and said, “Enough.”
Kevin Tillman, who served with his brother, accused the Bush administration of intentional deceit.
The accounts of the Tillmans, Lynch, and their fellow soldiers lay bare the fact that the Bush administration engaged in an elaborate and deliberate criminal cover-up of Tillman’s fratricide, as well as Lynch’s ordeal, to deceive the American people.
In what can only described as post-facto rape, the administration hijacked the images of Tillman and Lynch for war propaganda, fabricated elaborate pro-war fantasies around both, and then flooded the media with these pro-Bush, pro-war falsehoods.
The violation of Tillman will prove to be even more grotesque and appalling if investigations determine that Tillman’s disapproval of the war contributed in any way to his death.
An historic turning point has been reached. The American people who embraced the Pat Tillman/Jessica Lynch lie will “get” the Pat Tillman/Jessica Lynch truth, now that it has been honestly and heroically presented.
Now the tidal wave begins.
Piece by piece, the Bush administration’s criminal construct is finally being undone. The Bush administration, and its “war on terrorism” (in its present incarnation), will not recover from this mortal blow.
By Larry Chin
Online Journal Associate Editor
Apr 26, 2007, 00:40”
Unquote:
Your comments, please.
Curious98
PS:
BTW. The above case is making a lot of noise in Europe and we are wondering what the Bush Administration is going to say in their defence.
Itsdb answered on 04/26/07:Claude,
As tom touched on, President Bush does not have his fingers in every detail of anything.
I find it outrageous that the same people that criticize Bush incessantly over his delegating responsibilities - so much that they don't believe he has a brain other than Karl Rove, people who believe Bush couldn't find his butt with a GPS attached - actually believe Bush was on these two cases so fast as to concoct such heroic tales.
Of course Bush is ultimately responsible, but it starts with the Army. Someone screwed up, and you can bet they damn sure did NOT want this to reach the president. It is this Democratic congress that wishes to ignore channels, chain of command and constitutional duties, not Bush.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | kindj asked on 04/26/07 - Oil wars? Hmmmm....I think not. Crude Oil and Total Petroleum Imports Top 15 Countries
February 2007 Import Highlights: Released on April 17, 2007
Preliminary monthly data on the origins of crude oil imports in February 2007 has been released and it shows that four countries have each exported more than 1.10 million barrels per day to the United States. Including those countries, a total of five countries exported over 1.00 million barrels per day of crude oil to the United States (see table below). The top five exporting countries accounted for 72 percent of United States crude oil imports in February while the top ten sources accounted for approximately 89 percent of all U.S. crude oil imports. The top sources of US crude oil imports for February were Canada (1.838 million barrels per day), Mexico (1.358 million barrels per day), Saudi Arabia (1.185 million barrels per day), Venezuela (1.115 million barrels per day) and Nigeria (1.061 million barrels per day). The rest of the top ten sources, in order, were Angola (0.451 million barrels per day), Algeria (0.392 million barrels per day), Iraq (0.325 million barrels per day), Ecuador (0.178 million barrels per day), and Kuwait (0.158 million barrels per day). Total crude oil imports averaged 9.047 million barrels per day in February, which is a decrease of 1.145 million barrels per day from January 2007.
Canada remained the largest exporter of total petroleum in February, exporting 2.386 million barrels per day to the United States, which was a slight decrease from last month (2.470 thousand barrels per day). The second largest exporter of total petroleum was Mexico with 1.507 million barrels per day.
Crude Oil Imports (Top 15 Countries)
(Thousand Barrels per Day)
Country Feb-07 Jan-07 YTD 2007 Feb-06 Jan - Feb 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CANADA 1,838 1,856 1,847 1,710 1,740
MEXICO 1,358 1,435 1,398 1,774 1,735
SAUDI ARABIA 1,185 1,559 1,382 1,418 1,375
VENEZUELA 1,115 955 1,031 1,178 1,204
NIGERIA 1,061 1,106 1,085 1,342 1,232
ANGOLA 451 553 504 464 441
ALGERIA 392 548 474 163 201
IRAQ 325 531 433 450 493
ECUADOR 178 269 226 222 302
KUWAIT 158 172 165 152 110
UNITED KINGDOM 137 61 97 82 58
BRAZIL 103 204 156 164 110
CHAD 87 70 78 77 76
COLOMBIA 73 137 106 126 148
LIBYA 63 9 35 58 48
Total Imports of Petroleum (Top 15 Countries)
(Thousand Barrels per Day)
Country Feb-07 Jan-07 YTD 2007 Feb-06 Jan - Feb 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CANADA 2,386 2,470 2,430 2,262 2,287
MEXICO 1,507 1,566 1,538 1,878 1,835
VENEZUELA 1,353 1,195 1,270 1,475 1,508
SAUDI ARABIA 1,207 1,563 1,394 1,451 1,408
NIGERIA 1,102 1,136 1,120 1,377 1,277
ALGERIA 554 778 672 446 586
ANGOLA 464 574 522 478 454
IRAQ 325 531 433 450 493
VIRGIN ISLANDS 312 425 371 318 297
UNITED KINGDOM 257 194 224 205 196
RUSSIA 236 347 294 304 259
ECUADOR 185 272 231 234 311
KUWAIT 168 172 170 158 114
BRAZIL 150 250 203 203 152
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO 135 121 128 62 102
Note: The data in the tables above exclude oil imports into the U.S. territories.
Seems to me that if the left wants to insist that we are waging war in Iraq over oil, then they need to step us and explain why--if oil is our motivation--why we haven't taken over Canada, Mexico, etc.
This was easy to find, it's here: http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html
So why do we still get this erroneous babble from the left?
DK Itsdb answered on 04/26/07:Dennis,
The hardcore left does not care about facts, the only thing they care about is their agenda - to be carried out at any cost.
Have you ever persuaded any of these liberal types here with facts? I didn't think so. I can't even get one to acknowledge a fact that contradicts their venom, was even presented - a concession would be miraculous.
You have to understand that liberal/progressive/freethinker, etc. knowledge is so far superior to anything that comes out of a conservative - especially a Christian conservative - that anything that conflicts with their wisdom is irrelevent and therefore dismissed out of hand. At least until they find a way to use it to their advantage.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tropicalstorm asked on 04/26/07 - new planet answer the new planet they discovered that is 20 light years away may contain the answer for liberals they can take themselves and their PC life and live on that planet and leave us to destroy ourselves. Rosie O'Donell will weigh twice her current weight. I wonder what other wonders they would encounter when they get to their new planet???? Itsdb answered on 04/26/07:Seems I recall Sean Penn (and probably some others) threatening to move out of the country if Bush were re-elected ... we've now found the perfect place for a relocation. | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/26/07 - Haditha revisited Newsmax is reporting that an intelligence office provided substantial exculpatory evidence in the Haditha case, evidence he says the NCIS sat on, evidence that supports the defendants' version of the facts, and indicates the entire incident was an ambush which was being videotaped by our enemies who edited it and handed it over to anti-war activists to present the case in the worst possible way to our troops. If this is so, it would substantiate the belief of those who were skeptical of the claims underlying this case.
In a nutshell, the case exploded when an intelligence officer dropped a bombshell on prosecutors during a pre-hearing interview when he revealed the existence of exculpatory evidence that appears to have been obtained by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) and withheld from the prosecutors.
This officer, described by senior Marine Corps superiors as one of the best and most dedicated intelligence officers in the entire Marine Corps, was in possession of evidence which provided a minute-by-minute narrative of the entire day's action - material which he had amassed while monitoring the day's action in his capacity as the battalion's intelligence officer. That material, he says, was also in the hands of the NCIS.
Much of that evidence remains classified, but it includes videos of the entire day's action, including airstrikes against insurgent safe houses. Also included was all of the radio traffic describing the ongoing action between the men on the ground and battalion headquarters, and proof that the Marines were aware that the insurgents conducting the ambush of the Kilo Company troops were videotaping the action - the same video that after editing ended up in the hands of a gullible anti-war correspondent for Time magazine.
When asked by the prosecution team to give his copies of the evidence to the prosecution, he told NewsMax.com that he was reluctant to do so, fearing it would again be suppressed or misused, but later relented when ordered by his commanding general to do so.
Confronted by the massive mounds of evidence that Marine Corps sources tell NewsMax proves conclusively that the cases against the Haditha Marines are baseless, the prosecutors were forced to postpone the Article 32 against Lt. Col. Chessani and two of the enlisted men in an attempt to regroup.
I want that NCIS jerk-off keelhauled ! Between that and allegations that the NCIS mistreatment of the prisoners ;this is not a good day for the U.S. Navy . Looks like they have to clean house in NCIS and JAG . You can possibly expect this from an overly ambitious prosecutor like Nifong ,Sutton,
Fitzgerald,or Ronnie Earl,but not from the uniformed services .Naval and Marine officers are supposed to be made of better stuff
Speaking of that ;I'm expecting former Marine John Murtha to make a public apology to the troops anytime now...................still waiting .............
![]()
And of course I'll ask the obligatory question . Why wasn't this first page news in the New York Slimes?
Itsdb answered on 04/26/07:Was this front page news anywhere but Newsmax? You know tom, more and more of the left's most outrageous tantrums are being discredited by the facts, and I'm really getting pissed that the exhonerations are getting shoved under the rug instead of trumpeted from every media outlet.
I'm really getting pissed that the Reids, Schmuckys, Durbins, and Murthas aren't getting their feet held to the fire over all the manure they've spread the last 4 or 5 years.
Instead, we have the media playing along with redundant things such as that bulldog Waxman demanding Rice testify about pre-war intelligence. I mean seriously, hasn't that been done to death already?
This story was nowhere to be found in my paper ... but al-AP made damn sure we knew about subpoenas, immunities and outrage over 8 fired US attorneys and 'insurgent' attacks in Iraq.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | PrinceHassim asked on 04/25/07 - New adventures for Bush ..................
................... The discovery of a new planet thought capable of sustaining life has had the White House abuzz, says a correspondent.
It has been mooted that there could be vast oil reserves a little over twenty light years away, and already
White House staffers are preparing plans to invade the planet and take over all availble fuel sources.
Karl Rove is understood to be collecvting a dossier on the putative inhabitants of the newly discovered orb, and has posited that they will have WMDs capable of blowing the earth back into the past in little over twenty years.
The denizens are not known to be friendly towards the Buish administration, so a pre-emptive strike is already on the table in the White House War Room.
Should we be worried? Should we join the National Guard?
Itsdb answered on 04/26/07:On a related note, Tom Cruise has reportedly purchased a sizable parcel on Gliese 581c for a proposed "Scientology outreach center." | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/26/07 - Rosie v Crow When told about Sheryl Crow's idea about saving the earth by reducing the number of toilet paper sheets you use ,Rosie made perhaps here most profound contribution since she went on 'The View ' . She said have you seen my ass ?
![]()
It is not clear from the photo if she is demonstrating the size of her ass or her mouth in above photo Itsdb answered on 04/26/07:tom, she may be demonstrating the size of her rectum but that definitely wouldn't begin to cover the size of her ass. In any case, mouth, rectum, whatever, I think she'll have difficulty reaching her goal:
I know, that's a very disturbing image to consider...
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/25/07 - My 401 K thanks you NEW YORK (Reuters) - Stocks rose on Wednesday, sending the Dow Jones industrial average above 13,000 for the first time , boosted by stronger-than-expected profits and Alcoa Inc.'s plan to sell its packaging unit.
Shares of Alcoa, the world's largest aluminum company and a Dow component, registered their biggest gain in more than two months after the company said it might put its packaging arm, whose products include Reynolds Wrap, on the block.
Maybe so ,but I got a simpler explanation for Alcoa's profit jump. In the last 4 months the sale of tin-foil hats and aluminum foil deflectors has sky-rocketted !!
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Itsdb answered on 04/25/07:It's not just tin-foil hats for moonbats, they're available for pets:
![]()
Office cubicles:
![]()
In cap style:
![]()
And check out this exciting new model for Pelosi's next mideast trip:
![]() | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/25/07 - Copperheads vs the tinfoil hat Congressional majority I just find it striking the comparison between the cabal of appeasocrats led by Reid /Pelosi and their Civil War counterparts ,the Copperheads
Mackubin Thomas Owens at the Christian Science Monitor does a great comparison .
Owens explains that the Copperhead is a poisonous snake and that Northern “peace Democrats” of the Civil War era were often called “Copperheads.” Why? Although from the North, Copperheads were Confederate sympathizers and obstructionists against the Union war effort. In the end, they were almost successful in defeating President Lincoln’s effort to save the nation and end slavery.
Copperheads exploited antiwar sentiment. They actively interfered with recruiting and encouraged desertion. Their venom was so vile that by the end of the war,according to Owens, Union soldiers had more distain for Copperheads then they did for Confederate soldiers.
The Copperheads ended up on the wrong side of history. The lesson that has been lost is the effect that their polarizing actions had on their party. Copperheads radically politicized the country and helped to turn many Democrats into life-long Republicans. They also made a powerful enemy of the Union veterans.
Nancy Pelosi who recently met with Bashar Assad ,the terrorist thug dictator of Syria ,indicated that she has no plans to meet with General Petraeus ;nor will she attend when the General briefs Congress on the progress of the "surge ". What could she possibly have on her agenda that is more important ?
![]()
Harry Reid dismisses the General's testimony out of hand and pretty much called the General a liar.
BASH: You talked several times about General Petraeus. You know that he is here in town. He was at the White House today, sitting with the president in the Oval Office and the president said that he wants to make it clear that Washington should not be telling him, General Petraeus, a commander on the ground in Iraq, what to do, particularly, the president was talking about Democrats in Congress. He also said that General Petraeus is going to come to the Hill and make it clear to you that there is progress going on in Iraq, that the so-called surge is working. Will you believe him when he says that?
REID: No, I don't believe him, because it's not happening.
So that is what leadership means to the modern Copperheads ;Reid maligns the character of the General in the field and Pelosi just avoids him. Both claim that one of their major roles is oversight . Well;nows their chance. They are living in a cocoon where only their beliefs are to be heard and accepted. Now that they have power in Congress, they are doing their absolute best to lose this war as quickly as they possibly can.
Itsdb answered on 04/25/07:>>They are living in a cocoon where only their beliefs are to be heard and accepted.<<
And isn't that EXACTLY the criticism been leveled at the Bush administration for all these years? It's just like his little 'feud' with Cheney yesterday:
Cheney: "Some Democratic leaders seem to believe that blind opposition to the new strategy in Iraq is good politics ... Senator Reid himself has said that the war in Iraq will bring his party more seats in the next election ... It is cynical to declare that the war is lost because you believe it gives you political advantage."
Reid: "I'm not going to get into a name-calling match with the administration's chief attack dog."
Of course not, he's just going to call people names and refuse to answer for his statements because he can't see out of his cocoon.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/24/07 - Fred Thompson vs, Ramesh Ponnuru on the nature of Federalism These two are in the middle of a text book illustration of how to have a political debate . Thompson is looking more Presidential every day .
Ramesh Ponnuru fired the salvo in an editorial at National Review when he criticized Thompson's support for Tort reform or rather his inconsistent support for Tort reform . When he has opposed it is has been on grounds of federalism .
Ponnuru concludes his critique with the challenge if conservatives mean what they say when they complain about the dangerous rapacity of the trial bar, they ought to ask Senator Thompson a few hard questions.
Well Ponnuru did ,and Thompson was more than happy to reply at Redstate.com ;where Thompson is becoming a heck of a blooger as well . He gives a well reasoned explanation of his interpretation of federalism .
For the record, I oppose the federal regulation of any fees negotiated by two competent
parties at the state and local level. This goes for lawyers, doctors, butchers, bakers or the occasional candlestick maker. Even if excessive fees offend Congressional sensibilities, there are other remedies that make far more sense than the federal one. In the tobacco case, for example, those who negotiated the attorney’s fees had to run for re-election. Also, local courts strike down fees they find excessive. Apparently the absurdity of Patrick Leahy and me (or our staffs) rummaging through records to determine exactly what some second-year lawyer in a Hoboken law firm did to earn their hourly rates is lost on some of my conservative friends. All that matters is that I “sided with the trial lawyers.” This is always supposed to end the debate.
This discussion is not an idle exercise. Republicans have struggled in recent years, because they have strayed from basic principles. Federalism is one of those principles. It is something we all give lip service to and then proceed to ignore when it serves our purposes. During my eight years in the Senate, I tried to adhere to this principle. For me it was a lodestar. Not only was it what our founding fathers created – a federal government with limited, enumerated powers with respect for other levels of government, it also provided a basis for a proper analysis of most issues: “Is this something government should be doing? If so, at what level of government?”
As I understood it, states were supposed to be laboratories that would compete with each other, conducting civic experiments according to the wishes of their citizens. The model for federal welfare reform was the result of that process. States also allow for of diverse viewpoints that exist across the country. There is no reason that Tennesseans and New Yorkers should have to agree on everything (and they don’t).........
Adhering to the principles of Federalism is not easy. As one who was on the short end of a couple of 99-1 votes, I can personally attest to it. Federalism sometimes restrains you from doing things you want to do. You have to leave the job to someone else – who may even choose not to do it at all. However, if conservatives abandon this valued principle that limits the federal government, or if we selectively use it as a tool with which to reward our friends and strike our enemies, then we will be doing a disservice to our country as well as the cause of conservatism.
Ramesh Ponnuru replied yesterday .
The word “federalism” does not appear in the Constitution. But the Constitution does lay out specific rules for the interaction of states with one another and with the federal government, and a theory about those relations can be inferred from it. The federal government can, and has, violated those rules and that theory, and Thompson has steadfastly resisted those encroachments. But state governments can do the same thing, and increasingly do. Senator Thompson has given more thought to federalism than, I would guess, any of the other presidential candidates. But he has never shown any evidence that he understands this point, either in his Senate career or in this peculiar letter.
I can't wait for Thompson's reply . This exchange ;no matter which side of the debate you agree with is the template of how resonable political discourse should be approached .
Itsdb answered on 04/24/07:And here I thought reasonable political discourse was a lost cause. Regardless of the subject matter here to me this sums it up There is no reason that Tennesseans and New Yorkers should have to agree on everything (and they don’t).........
It's not that people disagree, it's the manner in which we do disagree. These days there seems to be no common ground between opposing forces - and the left in particular has made it clear there is little or no room for debate - they've decided what's best for us and they intend to force it down our throats.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/23/07 - A response to Harry Reid From Corporal Tyler Rock
From PatDollard.com (the site has quit posting the link )
This Email To Me, Harry, And America, Direct From A Grunt On The Front Lines Of Ramadi, Is Just Hours Old.
![]()
Corporal Tyler Rock, 1/6 Charlie Company, on the left
A view from OP Horea, “Most Dangerous Spot On Earth”, Downtown Ramadi. I no sh*t watched several terrorists die, on several different days, on this small strip of asphalt. We also took many IED strikes on it. This photo is from Corporal Rock.
Today, from Corporal Tyler Rock in an outpost in downtown Ramadi. His first sentence is in response to an email from me:
“yeah i know how you feel. its going to be very weird leaving this place and going back to america. weve been here for almost an entire year and have lived in the center of it the whole time. its crazy that when we got here it was so hectic and now its calmed down so much. so it was awesome to be able to see that turn out.
yeah news worth reporting…. well ramadi was once dubbed by everyone as the worst city in the world. but we have done such a great job here that all the families in the area have worked with us on driving out the insurgency and that we work directly with the IA and the IP’s. the city has been cleaned up so well that the IP’s do most of the patrols now and we go out with them to hand out candy and toys to the children. you can tell that the people want us here to protect them from the thugs and gangs (insurgents). granted they would rather have peace and quit but they know that if we arent here they will be thrown around by the insurgents. a good example is this one mission we did. long story short we got blown up in multiple buildings and had to run into a families house. i spent my christmas holidays covered in ash from the mortar fire and the IED’s, sleeping under a dirty rug i found in the house. everyone was sleeping way to close for comfort just to stay warm. anyways. a family was there and they obviously didnt want us there. atleast at first. the daughters were very sick so our corpsman treated them. they didnt have electricity so we got them a generator for power, they were cold so we got them gas heaters, we got them food and water and then we gave them $500. by the end of the week long visit with them we were drinking tea with them. when we left we cleaned their house better than it was when we got there. i even have pictures with the family. they told us that they liked marines and they would help us as much as they could and they gave us some information on the insurgents in the area. we ended up catching a HUGE target down the road from there house because of it.
yeah and i got a quote for that douche harry reid. these families need us here. obviously he has never been in iraq. or atleast the area worth seeing. the parts where insurgency is rampant and the buildings are blown to pieces. we need to stay here and help rebuild. if iraq didnt want us here then why do we have IP’s voluntering everyday to rebuild their cities. and working directly with us too. same with the IA’s. it sucks that iraqi’s have more patriotism for a country that has turned to complete shit more than the people in america who drink starbucks everyday. we could leave this place and say we are sorry to the terrorists. and then we could wait for 3,000 more american civilians to die before we say “hey thats not nice” again. and the sad thing is after we WIN this war. people like him will say he was there for us the whole time.
and for messages back home. i have a wife back home who is going through a tough time. i just cant wait to be back home and see everyone. haha and i cant wait to go back home and get some starbucks. i love it when those people serve me. hahaha”
Itsdb answered on 04/23/07:>>people like him will say he was there for us the whole time.<<
Yep. Thanks tom, I hope "that douche harry reid" and Schmucky both got a copy of this.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | kindj asked on 04/23/07 - Liberals are "compassionate?" Please!!! I've been practicing restraint for months now, trying to rise above the filth that contaminates a good portion of this globe. However, I am about to jump into the fray with both feet, loose the figurative broadsword and mace, and take some figurative scalps.
The "Everyone Hates Christianity" board is out of control, as most of you know.
The same group that preaches "tolerance," "compassion," and "understanding" cannot live by those words they spout everytime the opportunity comes up. I'm thinking of one in particular. She claims to be an "intelligent" person and a compassionate one; however, her posts belie her position, and reveal her as nothing more than a bitter, hate-filled person who has no tolerance or love for anyone who doesn't think exactly like her. A couple of the others that folks seem to have problems with will usually give credit where credit is due, and agree to disagree, at least to a point.
But a simple post showing the severe storms in our area--just for the sake of passing along the info--were met with disparaging comments about God by one (to which I think I responded appropriately) and another.....well, never mind.
I think I'm about done with them, on second thought. Between the people who rabidly defend their version of the faith while at the same time attacking others are getting on my nerves as much as the ones running any Judeo-Christian belief into the ground.
I seem to remember something about not casting pearls before swine.....you think that applies to that board?
D "gettin' just plain pissed off" K Itsdb answered on 04/23/07:D "gettin' just plain pissed off" K,
That board is a waste of time, but for some reason I can't seem to keep myself from still trying to point out the very intolerance and hypocrisy you're speaking of.
It makes me want to just step aside and let them fight it out, but I know the ones that speak the loudest are the ones being heard these days. I have difficulty sitting back while that "liberal compassion" is being forced down our throats, so I'll probably keep plugging away selectively to try and counter the biggest and most dangerous lies.
I gotta hand it to you though buddy, you have far more restraint most of the time than I do over there. Maybe I should learn more from your example - or then again maybe we should both "jump into the fray with both feet, loose the figurative broadsword and mace, and take some figurative scalps." :)
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/23/07 - More on Cheryl Crow When it comes to Sheryl Crow's touring requirements, if it's Tuesday, this must be Bombay. Gin that is. The rock star's performance contract includes specific day-to-day instructions on what kind of booze Sheryl needs in her dressing room For each show, Crow requires 12 bottles of Grolsch beer, 6 bottles of "local" beer, and a bottle each of "good Australian Cabernet" and "good Merlot." As for the harder stuff, promoters are directed to purchase specific booze depending on what day of the week the concert falls, as the below rider excerpt reveals.
Additionally, when the global warming warrior hits the road, her touring entourage (and equipment) travels in three tractor trailers, four buses, and six cars. Now that's a carbon footprint!
Additional requirements found at The Smoking gun Itsdb answered on 04/23/07:They even have to furnish her a pack of Marlboro Lights and three large and many small ashtrays for the band? How many cities does she visit with smoking bans? There's no indication if the private toilets should have TP or not, but at least she demands hand soap for the guys.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/23/07 - Paul Wolfowitz As you probably know ,there was a little firestorm at the World Bank over allegations of nepotism regarding Paul Wolfowitz current President of the World Bank and former Deputy Sec. Defense (that damned neo-con).
The charges are that he gave an increase in severance to his "companion" Shaha Riza who was working at the Bank as a senior communications officer at the bank with expertise in Middle East affairs . The increase was from $132,660 to $193,590 when she was ultimately transfered to the State Department .
This got under the skin of the establishment inside the Bank who's relationship with Wolfowitz has been nothing if not combative since he took the reigns .
When he came into the position he offered to recuse himself from any decision regarding Riza and he disclosed his relationship with her. An ethics committee refused his proposal. The panel decided Riza couldn't remain employed at the bank.She was in the middle of a successful career at the bank and was being told she would have to give it up. Yes it was a generous package ;but it likely would've cost the Bank more if she decided to litigate her dismissal. Since Wolfowitz was involved in the negotiations the clarion call about corruption was sounded by the establishment at the Bank,and the drumbeat calling for Wolfowitz's resignation began.
As I said ; the establishment has a burr in their ass about Wolfowitz that has nothing to do with this charge. Wolfowitz has made cleaning up corruption his primary objective at the bank, and in recent months, his efforts have made tremendous progress.In the past two years, 22 staff members have either been terminated or barred from being rehired and 11 others have been disciplined.Also;Wolfowitz obstructed the flow of funds to countries that he viewed as corrupt, disregarding staff judgments.
This I see is beginning to shape up just like the U.N. Why is the entrenched establishment so concerned about the reforms ? Could they be hiding something deeper ? Will Wolfy uncover another' Oil for Food' scandal ? Maybe ;giving them the benefit of the doubt ;they just don't want it disclosed how readily they were willing to finance corrupt regimes ? Their job is to dispense the money . They want to close their eyes as to what actually gets done with it.
Since Wolfy is shaking up the status quo ;he has to go . They latched onto this relatively minor issue as the exuse they need to do a coup de gras on him .
Suprisingly the Washington Compost has come out in favor of Wolfowitz on this issue .
So when Mr. Wolfowitz dictated her new terms of employment he was responding in part to the committee's instructions. Further raises were intended to be equal to what she might have earned had she stayed at the bank, responding to the committee's advice that she receive "compensation to offset negative career impact" from her reassignment.
Was the package nonetheless too generous, even by cushy World Bank standards? The executive directors should answer that question. But there's a relevant fact here, too. The ethics panel reviewed the situation again a half-year later, in February 2006, after receiving an anonymous complaint from a bank employee precisely on the issue of excessive pay. Once again it found, "on the basis of a careful review," that the allegations "do not appear to pose ethical issues appropriate for further consideration by the Committee."
If nepotism becomes an issue in International Organizations (hello Annan clan ) then some welcome reforms could come out of it. If the establishment at the World Bank is so concerned about nepotism regaring Wolfowitz perhaps they should look a little closer at their house before he came . The NY Sun documents some real examples there and at the U.N.
"Until 2005, the wife of the bank's managing director, Shengman Zhang of China, worked directly under him. The bank also employed a brother of its chief economist and senior vice president, Nicholas Stern of Britain, violating its own rule against employing siblings.[snip]
Mr. Melkert [the then-head of the Bank's Ethics Committee which demanded on conlfict grounds that Ms Riza be seconded from the Bank] has since moved on to the UNDP, an agency that habitually hires office employees recommended by local governments. In many cases, the United Nations ends up being represented locally by friends and family of the country's dictator.
During his visit to Syria this week, Secretary-General Ban should be on guard. A local UNDP officer, Khaled Mouallem, might relay internal U.N. communications to his father, Foreign Minister Walid Mouallem, at the dinner table. (The daughter of Walid Mouallem's predecessor, Farouk Shara, also worked for the UNDP during her father's tenure.)
What else should Mr. Ban watch out for? Someday, an Indian national who works for the United Nations Children's Fund in Nairobi, Siddharth Chatterjee, may want to be promoted to a top UNICEF position, known as country resident, in an African country. Such a promotion would require the approval of the U.N. secretary-general, who happens to be his father-in-law. Mr. Chatterjee's wife, Hyun-hee, is Mr. Ban's daughter, and she also works at UNICEF's Nairobi office.
Itsdb answered on 04/23/07:>>Since Wolfy is shaking up the status quo ;he has to go .<<
That's the whole crux of it. That's why Bolton was never confirmed to the UN but you knew that. And anyone (any damned neocon that is) that tries to shake things up will get the same. As long as corruption (liberal/progressive/Democratic/globalist, etc.) runs in the family it's fine.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/20/07 - It's official The Iraq war is lost . Harry Reid has proclaimed it so it must be true. "I believe ... that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week." He is as certain of it as Churchill was of victory .
Chuck the schmuck Shumer is besides himself with glee. “We are going to pick up Senate seats as a result of this war.”....“The war in Iraq is a lead weight attached to their ankle,” “We will break them [the Republicans ...not the jihadists ], because they are looking extinction in the eye.”
DNC will host a victory party this weekend .......BE THERE !!
Win the war, they lose. Lose the war, they win.
If buttercups buzz'd after the bee,
If boats were on land, churches on sea,
If ponies rode men and if grass ate the cows,
And cats should be chased into holes by the mouse,
If the mamas sold their babies
To the gypsies for half a crown;
If summer were spring and the other way round,
Then all the world would be upside down.
("The World Turned Upside Down")
Itsdb answered on 04/20/07:I find it odd, or is it ironic, that Schmucky would speak of "looking extinction in the eye." These guys are demented ... and Schmucky sounds a little like al-Zawahiri in his quote. Has he been attending a madrasa recently?
Steve | | Question/Answer | | ETWolverine asked on 04/16/07 - I finally figured out the cause of global warming. I have done a study of this issue, and I have come to the conclusion that the Liberals are right. Global Warming is indeed a man-made occurance. Furthermore, it is the fault of the Federal Government of the United States, just as the Libs have been saying for years.
The cause of global warming?
Taxes.
After having done a study of the issue, I have come to the conclusion that there is a positive corallary between taxes and temperature records.
First of all, just as temperatures have been going up for years, taxes have been going up as well. So there is the first correlation.
But the evidence is much stronger than that. I have done a review of Federal tax receipts as a percentage of GDP for the period of 1946 - 2006. I have also done are review of temperature records to obtain the average temperatures for the month of April (tax month) in Albany, NY. While temperature records for Federal tax collections were complete, the temperature records for Albany were missing 9 years worth of information. Nevertheless, despite the incompleteness of the data, I continued my study. (After all, if the pseudo-scientists who make claims of global warming can do so with huge amounts of data lacking, so can I.)
My study led to the following conclusion. Over the past 60 years, tax receipts as a percentage of GDP have gone up by 190 basis points. If we eliminate the years for which we do not have temperature records, the increase in taxes as a percentage of GDP increases by 210 basis points. During the same period, temperatures for the month of April have increased an average of 0.03 degrees Celcius. This shows a clear correlation... taxes up, temperatures up.
Furthermore, there were 23 cases where both temperatures and percetage of GDP moved in the same direction. That is, when taxes as a percentage of GDP went up, the temperature went up, and when taxes as a percentage of GDP went down, temperatures went down. That's 23 out of 51 times when there was congruity between the movement of taxes as a percentage of GDP and temperatures in Albany. This shows a clear correlation between taxes and global warming.
Since US Federal taxes are a function of the US government, temperature change must also be a function of the US government. This would mean that the US government is at fault for Global warming, just as the Liberals have stated.
There are two clear solutions to global warming. The first would be to increase GDP while holding taxes at their current level. We need to increase the productivity of the United States so that taxes become a smaller percentage of GDP, thus driving environmental temperatures down. Of course, this would require an increase in our industrial performance and capacity. But since we have now proven that industrial emmissions aren't the real cause of global warming, that shouldn't be too much of a problem.
The second solution would be to hold GDP steady, but lower taxes. This too would result in taxes being a lower percentage of GDP. This might sound easier than the first solution... after all, it just takes a vote of Congress to make that happen. However, in reality, getting Congress to agree to lower taxes is never an easy task. It is easier to build thousands of new industrial plants than it is to get Congress to cut taxes. Nevertheless, it might be time for Congress to take the hard actions necessary to protect the world from tax-driven global warming. The US government has a responsibility to act.
Below are the data used to come to the above conclusions.
.......Taxes..%Chng..Albany..Chng in
Year...% GDP...GDP.. Temp....Temp.
1947...16.5...-1.1...6.4.....-0.7
1948...16.2...-0.3...8.5......2.1
1949...14.5...-1.7...9.1......0.6
1950...14.4...-0.1...6.3.....-2.8
1951...16.1....1.7...8.6......2.3
1952...19......2.9...10.2.....1.6
1953...18.7...-0.3...8.0.....-2.2
1954...18.5...-0.2...8.9......0.9
1955...16.6...-1.9...9.8......0.9
1956...17.5....0.9...5.8.....-4.0
1957...17.8....0.3...9.4......3.6
1958...17.3...-0.5...9.5......0.1
1959...16.1...-1.2...9.1.....-0.4
1960...17.9....1.8...9.8......0.7
1961...17.8...-0.1...6.8.....-3.0
1962...17.6...-0.2...8.7......1.9
1963...17.8....0.2...7.9.....-0.8
1964...17.6...-0.2...8.0......0.1
1965...17.0...-0.6...N/A
1966...17.4....0.4...N/A
1967...18.3....0.9...N/A
1968...17.7...-0.6...N/A
1969...19.7....2.0...N/A
1970...19.0...-0.7...N/A
1971...17.3...-1.7...N/A
1972...17.6....0.3...N/A
1973...17.7....0.1...9.2
1974...18.3....0.6...8.9.....-0.3
1975...17.9...-0.4...4.9.....-4.0
1976...17.2...-0.7...9.9..... 5.0
1977...18.0....0.8...8.6.....-1.3
1978...18.0....0.0...6.2.....-2.4
1979...18.5....0.5...7.7......1.5
1980...19.0....0.5...8.9......1.2
1981...19.6....0.6...9.1......0.2
1982...19.1...-0.5...7.2.....-1.9
1983...17.5...-1.6...8.0......0.8
1984...17.4...-0.1...8.8......0.8
1985...17.7....0.3...9.6......0.8
1986...17.4...-0.3...10.4.....0.8
1987...18.4....1.0...10.3....-0.1
1988...18.2...-0.2...8.0.....-2.3
1989...18.4....0.2...6.9.....-1.1
1990...18.0...-0.4...9.5......2.6
1991...17.8...-0.2...10.6.....1.1
1992...17.5...-0.3...7.0.....-3.6
1993...17.6....0.1...9.0......2.0
1994...18.1....0.5...9.0......0.0
1995...18.5....0.4...6.7.....-2.3
1996...18.9....0.4...7.9......1.2
1997...19.3....0.4...7.0.....-0.9
1998...20.0....0.7...9.5......2.5
1999...20.0....0.0...8.6.....-0.9
2000...20.9....0.9...7.4.....-1.2
2001...19.8...-1.1...8.7......1.3
2002...17.9...-1.9...9.9......1.2
2003...16.5...-1.4...7.0.....-2.9
2004...16.3...-0.2...9.3......2.3
2005...17.6....1.3...10.1.....0.8
2006...18.4....0.8...10.0....-0.1
Average Change 0.19..........0.03
Hey, it makes about as much sense as any argument the pseudo-scientific knuckleheaded environ-mental cases put out.
Elliot Itsdb answered on 04/18/07:And I thought I did a lot of research around here. But hey, I'd just as soon go with this as anything else, and now we have a concrete connection of how man is causing global warming - not to mention even more reason not to vote Democrat.
Steve | | Question/Answer | tomder55 asked on 04/16/07 - When is a slam dunk not a slam dunk ?
No; it's not when the NY Knicks play a game. It's when George Tenet tells the President that the case about Saddam Hussein's WMDs is a "slam dunk".
In George Tenet's new book 'At the Center of the Storm' he explains that a slam dunk may not really be a slam dunk.
![]()
maybe it should be called 'Hindsight' after his miserable performance in predicting 9-11 .
Bob Woodward reported in "Plan of Attack" that Tenet assured the president that it was a "slam dunk" case that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. Pre-release promotional material says that Tenet will provide “real context” to the remark. You see ;when President Bush asked him for confirmation ,the President actually believed that in the opinion of his Director of the CIA that there was substance to what he is saying . Tenet evidently is going to argue that he was not telling Mr. Bush that there was rock-solid evidence that Mr. Hussein had chemical and biological weapons, only that the president could make a “slam dunk” case to the American public about these weapons programs. As Tenet's former boss said "it depends on what the meaning of the word "is " is. But then again;if President Bush was lying about WMD he was simply repeating a lie told by Clinton,and just about every other nations intelligence agencies .
Expect the Intelligence Committee's of both Houses to have high profile hearings with Tenet as the star witness ,quickly followed by all the obligatory subpoenas .Can Tenet support his claim when someone reminds him that he sat behind Colin Powell when Powell went before the UNSC and laid out in detail the Administrations case about Saddam's WMDs while Tenet nodded approvingly ?
But I hope that while they softball him on the above issue they also revisit his other slam dunk claim ;that being of Saddam's high level contacts with al-Qaeda. He wrote in an October 7, 2002 letter to head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Bob Graham (D-FL). "We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade." That Iraq and al Qaeda "have discussed safe haven and reciprocal non-aggression." Tenet warned, "We have credible reporting that al-Qaeda leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire WMD capabilities. The reporting also stated that Iraq has provided training to al-Qaeda members in the areas of poisons and gases and making conventional bombs." And, "Iraq's increasing support to extremist Palestinians, coupled with growing indications of a relationship with al-Qaeda, suggest that Baghdad's links to terrorists will increase, even absent US military action.”
Itsdb answered on 04/16/07:>>But then again;if President Bush was lying about WMD he was simply repeating a lie told by Clinton,and just about every other nations intelligence agencies.<<
Those are inconvenient facts, tom. I think between you, Elliot and myself we've stated that at least several dozen times and I can't recall one instance of a Bush critic acknowledging that reality. It's much easier to just repeat the lie that "Bush lied."
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/14/07 - Another example of the Democrat era of accountability California Senator Dianne Feinstein abruptly stepped down from the Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee this week, hoping to stem the tide of questions surfacing about the role she has played in defense contracts won by her husband, Richard Blum. An investigation revealed that a number of defense contracts awarded to Blum’s companies have interesting links to appropriations actions made during Feinstein’s term on the committee.
In March 2003, after she asked the Pentagon about anti-terrorism protection on Army bases, Blum’s company, URS, won a $600-million contract to provide Army bases with anti-terror-protection services. Additionally Feinstein inquired as to when money would be spent on a maintenance facility for the C-17 Globemasters at Hickam Air Base in Hawaii. URS later announced a $42-million contract to build it. In 2005, the committee approved funds to reinforce roofs at military stations in Iraq, and in October of that year, another Blum company got a $185-million contract to perform the work.
Feinstein’s office, which at first refused to comment, has now predictably stated that she did not leave the committee because of the inquiry. Her spokesman Scott Gerber went so far as to say that Congress has no role in the awarding of military contracts, which is true; that is the job of the Pentagon. However, the Pentagon gets its approval from Congress, specifically from committees such as the one Feinstein chaired.
Itsdb answered on 04/16/07:And yet, the Dems have still forgotten their main campaign theme, to end the "culture of corruption" in Washington. Gee, that sounded familiar.
Let's play a game, Google 'Halliburton Cheney' (without the quotes) and see how many scandal references you find - in spite of the facts. All the while we have DiFi, chairperson and ranking member of MILCON for six years while her hubby is making a killing on defense contracts. Can you say conflict of interest?
And let's not trivialize the fact that the subcommittee she headed oversees "quality of life" issues for veterans, which includes building housing for military families and operating hospitals and clinics for wounded soldiers. Walter Reed ring a bell?
Alrighy then, when is the drive-by media going to relentlessly harp on the Democrat "culture of corruption?"
Steve | | Question/Answer | tomder55 asked on 04/14/07 - Top 10 things Steny Hoyer said to Mohammed Saad el-Katatni of the Muslim Brotherhood.
10. “Everything will be OK just as soon we get a Democrat in the White House.”
9. “I agree: the U.S. should apologize for..... what were we talking about again?”
8. “After we overcome the remaining Christians, then we can really remake the world!”
7. Did you know Nancy Pelosi has a burqa by Prada?”
6. “Essentially, I hold my office for life. Can you believe who people will vote for?”
5. “Where would we be without the New York Slimes!”
4. “I oppose increased border security .......a lot of my supporters sneak into America illegally.”
3. “Murtha is a useful idiot. "
2. “I receive a ton of my contributions from cab drivers in D.C.”
1. “So all you do is have your major backers break their donations up into lots of little checks from the unions they control, and then route those as “earmarked” for whatever candidate you want through your PAC, rather than sending in one oversized illegal check. Then it doesn’t matter what limits the law puts on you! I’m telling you, you could learn a lot from how we do politics in my country.”
Itsdb answered on 04/16/07:And yet, the Dems have still forgotten their main campaign theme, to end the "culture of corruption" in Washington. | | Question/Answer | | tropicalstorm asked on 04/13/07 - now rap is being the fault of the slave owners and the -white- kids who buy the music and made it popular. Not the black kids that buy it or the musicans that make it.
Sounds like a 'black' Peddler with her evolution=eugentics equation! Itsdb answered on 04/16/07:Well TS, I was wondering what this was in reference to, but I watched Michelle Malkin hosting O'Reilly's show Friday and saw morons in action.
It isn't just the fault of white kids making it popular, it's George Washington's fault!
And so while Imus is being crucified, "New Black Panther Party" leader Malik Shabazz refuses to apologize for convicting the Duke lacrosse players without a trial - the "real victim" is the girl - and thinks Michelle should apologize for being a "political prostitute."
Since it's all the white man's fault it apparently gives blacks free reign to call whoever they want a whore with impunity.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tropicalstorm asked on 04/13/07 - obama fraud? What happened in Selma, Alabama and Birmingham also stirred the conscience of the nation. It worried folks in the White House who said, “You know, we’re battling Communism. How are we going to win hearts and minds all across the world? If right here in our own country, John, we’re not observing the ideals set fort in our Constitution, we might be accused of being hypocrites.” So the Kennedy’s decided we’re going to do an air lift. We’re going to go to Africa and start bringing young Africans over to this country and give them scholarships to study so they can learn what a wonderful country America is.
This young man named Barack Obama got one of those tickets and came over to this country. He met this woman whose great great-great-great-grandfather had owned slaves; but she had a good idea there was some craziness going on because they looked at each other and they decided that we know that the world as it has been it might not be possible for us to get together and have a child. There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama, because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. So they got together and Barack Obama Jr. was born. So don’t tell me I don’t have a claim on Selma, Alabama. Don’t tell me I’m not coming home to Selma, Alabama.
Obama told his audience that, because some folks had the courage to
> "march across a bridge" in Selma, Alabama, his mother, a white woman
> from Kansas, and his father, a black Muslim from Africa, took heart. It
> gave them the courage to get married and have a child. The problem with
> that characterization is that Barrack Obama, Jr. Was born on August 4,
> 1961, while the first of three marches across that bridge in Selma
> didn't occur until March 7, 1965, at least five years after Obama's
> parents met.
Obama went on to tell his audience that the Kennedys, Jack and Bobby,
decided to do an airlift. They would bring some young Africans over so
that they could be educated and learn all about America. His grandfather
heard that call and sent his son, Barrack Obama, Sr., to America.
A Kennedy program helped bring Obama’s father to the United States? Really? According to Obama’s first book,
He eventually won a scholarship to study in Nairobi; and then, on the eve of Kenyan independence, he was selected by Kenyan leaders and American sponsors to attend a university in the United States, joining the first large wave of Africans to be sent forth to master Western technology and bring it back to forge a new, modern Africa.
In 1959, at the age of 23, he arrived at the University of Hawaii – the first African student there.
Itsdb answered on 04/13/07:TS,
Whoever posted this apparently made some corrections, as did Obama's camp, saying of the bridge march he was "speaking metaphorically about the civil rights movement as a whole."
Still, a fraud? Maybe - it's hard for me to picture him having a "claim on Selma" being raised by a white, middle-class mother and her maternal grandparents "mostly in Hawaii" with a significant stint in Jakarta with his white mother and Muslim, Indonesian stepfather. Sounds a lot like Kerry and Edwards stopping at a Wendy's to show how in tune they are with the common people before going to a 5 star dinner at Nikola's.
Steve | | Question/Answer | tomder55 asked on 04/13/07 - BRAINLESS HYPOCRITES WIN AGAIN
HEY, as long as we're at it, why not make every second week of April National Hypocrites Week? Yeah, a week in salute to those who teach us that identifying the difference between wrong and right should only be a matter of timing.
MSNBC on Wednesday fired Don Imus. That clearly indicates that on the day in 1996 when MSNBC hired him, its decision-makers had absolutely no idea what his show was about. I did. You did. But MSNBC didn't? MSNBC attached its name and financing to a five-day-a-week program that its execs had never before heard? Fascinating.
MSNBC didn't know that when Imus finishes playing cleaned-up patty-cake with media and political bigwigs, his show returns to "Dig Through the Dumpster with Don"? How odd. Everyone else, including his big-shot guests, knew for years.
Same with the advertisers who jumped Imus' barge the day before he was sacked. All that time they pumped millions into his show they had no clue? They got blind-sided? Remarkable.
And yesterday, Imus, heard here over WFAN, was canned by CBS Radio, which owns WFAN and whose execs apparently didn't know what the Imus show was about even longer than MSNBC's execs.
Those young women on Rutgers' basketball team? It's hardly surprising that they'd be deeply offended by Imus' characterization of them as "nappy-headed ho's." Exactly who was supposed to be amused by such a comment, anyway? And it's admirable that they'd be moved to speak their outrage during a university-facilitated news conference.
We can only presume, then, that none of them are in possession of music performed by, among many others, Jay-Z, Snoop Dogg and 50 Cent, artists who regularly refer to young women as "ho's" and "bitches" while black men are as regularly called "niggas."
As low as Imus has aimed, little can compare to much of the violent, bigoted stuff heard from so many popular rappers - and sold at a mall near you!
So it's not possible, is it, that even one of these young women has any of that racist and misogynistic stuff downloaded onto her iPod, right? After all, the use of "ho's" as a substitute for "women" can in large part be directly traced to black rap artists, not Don Imus.
And we can only presume that Rutgers, a state university, had well before Imus' comment worked diligently to rid its campuses of such hateful, hurtful and harmful words as those chanted in rap music.
Why I'll bet that RU must have long ago banned concerts that would include such offensive lyrics. And surely RU students known to enjoy such disturbingly hate-filled music were ordered to sensitivity training sessions - under threat of expulsion.
And with such socially sensitive souls as Jay-Z and Snoop Dogg increasingly called upon by shoe manufacturers, phone companies, clothing labels, automakers and breweries to push product, we're sure that the advertisers who cut and ran from Imus would never allow any public hate-speaker to speak for them.
Rev. Al Sharpton? Call me crazy, but does it strike you that if there was a fair-play advocate who ostensibly represents whites exactly as Sharpton ostensibly represents blacks, Rev. Sharpton would identify him as a selectively indignant, conveniently blind, hypocritical, divisive and dangerous race hustler?
And Sharpton would be given to slamming the media for empowering such an "activist." "How," Sharpton would be moved to ask, "can this man be anointed a legitimate, fair-minded voice of white America? Can't white America do any better than this guy?"
And most Americans would agree.
And perhaps if Imus, MSNBC and CBS Radio had immediately cut a check to one of Jesse Jackson's favorite "organizations," Imus would have only been in half as much trouble.
And gosh, look how in the last few days so many TV, radio and print commentators for the first time were moved to note that Imus and Co. have this nasty habit of speaking unfunny, hate-filled words. Some additionally noted that Imus would sanitize his show only when big shots were on with him. They just got around to mentioning that?
It's easy to kick a guy when he's down. No sweat. But how many were willing to kick Imus when he was up - when it counted? How many were willing to risk his nationally televised and syndicated radio ridicule?
Yep, the second week of April every year would be a good time to salute those professionals everywhere who call it as they see it and call it as they hear it - the moment the wind changes.
By PHIL MUSHNICK
phil.mushnick@nypost.com
Itsdb answered on 04/13/07:Why just April? Why not have a "brainless hypocrites" day or week every month? I would be prefectly willing to submit names of honorees so nobody else has to do any more than just announce the winners.
al-Ap has been kind enough to explain why this particular incident cut so deep.
NEW YORK - Call it "the other N-word." Since slavery times, "nappy" has been used to malign the natural hair texture of many people of African descent: dense, dark and tightly curled. So when Don Imus referred to the women of the Rutgers basketball team as "nappy-headed hos," it cut deeper than many who are unfamiliar with the term might realize.
"When I hear it from someone who doesn't understand the depth of pain, they just don't have the right to say it," said Carla Lynne Hall, a singer from Harlem.
During slavery, "If your hair wasn't straight, it was called nappy. Nappy hair meant you weren't beautiful or desirable," said Nsenga Burton, professor at Goucher College in Baltimore.
There are accounts of African slaves attempting to change their hair using axle grease or dirty dishwater with oil, said Neal Lester, chairman of the English department at Arizona State University. "Slaves knew the ideal of beauty didn't fit them," he said...
The irony of Imus' comment is that many of the Rutgers players have straightened hair - and at their news conference Wednesday, it seemed nary a straightened hair was out of place.
"None of them fit the cultural description of what nappy is," Jacobs-Huey said. "Don is telling us something about himself."
Making matters worse was Imus' use of the word "hos," a hip-hop slang synonym of "whore" or "slut" heard in many rap songs. "That is one of the lowest things you can call a woman," Burton said.
There you have it. | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/13/07 - Are the Democrats trying to take down Mubarak ? I noted in the tail end of my response to tropicalstorm about Pelosi violating the Logan Act , that Dem. Majority Leader Steny Hoyer had taken a junket to Egypt and was schmoozing with the Egyptian opposition group The Muslim Brotherhood. I thought that this was a worse example of a foreign policy coup detat.
The website's editor, Khaled Salam , said the meeting "clearly signals a positive shift in the attitude of both sides to explore the prospects of a more formal dialogue which hopefully will gain more supporters in the U.S. if Democrats win the White House in 2008."
"The meeting is expected to cause anxiety in the U.S. especially among the powerful pro-Israel supporters who will not be happy to see any rapprochement between the U.S. and M.B. in any forms or shape," Salam continued.
"There are also many within the M.B. who are very reluctant about any possibility of dialogue with the U.S. and are highly skeptical of the U.S. intentions and plans for the region."
It gets better ;evidently the Democrats are not content to wait until 2009 for a formal change in U.S. policy. MEMRI is now reporting that Muslim Brotherhood General Guide Muhammad Mahdi 'Akef, several members of his office, and Muslim Brotherhood MPs had been invited by U.S. Democrat congressmen to visit the U.S. next month and to speak to Congress.
The Muslim Brotherhood as Elliot pointed out yesterday is the ideological grandfather of the al-Qaeda movement .Dr. Zawrahiri is a direct decendent of the movement.
I'm wondering ;have the Democrats suddenly discovered a new appreciation of democratization in the M.E.? ...or perhaps regime change ? If the Muslim Brotherhood is enabled in Egypt then surely Hosni Mubarak's days are numbered . Egypt's relatively moderate policies towards it's neighbors would certainly be replaced by a radicalized foreign policy .
Yes ;the Bush administration has pressured Mubarak to open up the political process in Egypt in the hope that legitimate democratic forces could ultimately offer a third way alternative from dictatorship and radical Islam .But it appears to me that the Democrats would more than welcome a radical Islamist takeover of Egypt by a group who's tenticles spread far beyond the borders of Egypt.
Itsdb answered on 04/13/07:You and Elliot both make great points. I'm just absolutely puzzled though, and this local moonbat is an example of why I'm puzzled. Mr. William H. Seewald contends basically that the capture and abuse of the British captives is - you guessed it - our fault. If we hadn't been forcing 3 square halals a day, prayer rugs and prayer calls, rock music and pics of women on those detainees, we would not have "fueled Iranian determination to humiliate the West by abusing these British victims."
Yes, "diplomacy could well free its service members", the European "soft power" approach and "multilateralism is precisely what helped Britain avoid the need for the kind of unilateral, militaristic response" the Bushies are famous for.
"The number of countries like Syria that intervened on behalf of Britain to urge the release of the hostages surprised Iran and changed the dynamic."
I read this, your news of Dems schmoozing the MB and think of Pelosi's tour and all I can think is the left is perfectly willing to cut off their nose to spite their face. They are so blinded by their hatred of Bush and so infatuated with their 'solutions' they can't see the threat right in front of them.
To our local moonbat, the resolution of this hostage crisis was a smackdown of Bush, a victory for diplomacy and multilateralism, and vindication for the 'new direction' in foreign policy the Dems are taking on. He can't see the message to the rabid Islamic world that was sent by British troops groveling to a smiling Ahmadinejad. That's not just pathetic, it's extremely dangerous, and the Dems in congress are perfectly willing to travel that very treacherous road.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/12/07 - Who are they more afraid of ? Monday Hillary ;John Edwards ,and Barack Obama withdrew from participation in a debate sponsored by The Congressional Black Caucus and Fox Network .
Color of Change.org , a black advocacy group, has issued petitions, launched a letter writing campaign, and orchestrated activists, including Jesse Jackson, to shame the caucus and demand that it scrap its plan to co-host debates with Fox . They call it "Dancing With the Devil". Other black bloggers are saying the CBC is for rent .
Jackson thinking he is clever wrote :
“I am disappointed by the Congressional Black Caucus Institute’s partnership with Fox, and strongly encourage them to reverse that decision. Why would presidential candidates, or an organization that is supposed to advocate for Black Americans, ever give a stamp of legitimacy to a network that continually marginalizes Black leaders and the Black community? Fox moderating a presidential debate on issues of importance to Black Americans is literally letting the Fox guard the henhouse – Fox should be rejected.”
But yesterday he fell short of calling for a break in the arrangement .The DNC and Howard Dean have already made it clear they would not support or sanction the debates .
Moonbats are besides themselves . Markos Moulitsas, of DailyKos, calls the CBC "corrupt and compromised" for "doing Fox's bidding." There is of course no evidence that there is a quid pro quo pay-ff to the CBC . But perhaps the CBC is uncomfortable taking it's marching orders from Markos or George Soros and the Moveon crowd ? The moonbats have already proclaimed they own the Democrat Party . They have tried to defeat Democrats like Joe Leiberman who won't tow their party line. Apparently the major players of the party cower at their presence. Democrats who would be moderate are drifting ever more to the left in the positions they take.
So back to the original question . Who are the 3 candidates afraid of :
1. The CBC
2. Fox Network
3. The moonbat coalition of lefty bloggers
To their credit ;the CBC has not capitulated to the will of the moonbats . Too bad the candidates aren;t made of stronger stuff.
Itsdb answered on 04/12/07:Definitely 3, The moonbat coalition of lefty bloggers. I can imagine what Jackson would say if Republican candidates withdrew from participating in a debate sponsored by say, MSNBC - he'd be the one asking "what are they afraid of?"
Steve | | Question/Answer | tomder55 asked on 04/12/07 - U.S. Navy Directive 16134 (Inappropriate T-Shirts)
The following directive was issued by the commanding officer of all
naval installations in the Middle East, (obviously directed at the
Marines.)
"To: All Commands Subject: Inappropriate T-Shirts
Ref: ComMidEast For Inst 16134//24 K All commanders promulgate upon receipt.
The following T-shirts are no longer to be worn on or off base by any military or civilian personnel serving in the Middle East:
"Eat Pork or Die" [both English and Arabic versions]
"Shrine Busters" [Various. Show burning minarets or bomb/artillery shells impacting Islamic shrines. Some with unit logos.]
"Napalm, Sticks Like Crazy" [Both English and Arabic versions]
"Goat - it isn't just for breakfast any more." [Both English and Arabic versions]
"The road to Paradise begins with me." [Mostly Arabic versions, but some in English. Some show sniper scope cross-hairs.]
"Guns don't kill people. I kill people." [Both Arabic and English versions]
"Pork. The other white meat." [Arabic version]
"Infidel" [English, Arabic and other coalition force languages.]
The above T-shirts are to be removed from Post Exchanges upon receipt of this directive. In addition, the following signs are to be removed
upon receipt of this message:
"Islamic Religious Services Will Be Held at the Firing Range at 0800 Daily."
"Do we really need 'smart bombs' to drop on these dumb bastards?"
All commands are instructed to implement sensitivity training upon receipt.
Itsdb answered on 04/12/07:"The road to Paradise begins with me." I like that - and I may have to get me an 'infidel' T-shirt of my own. I wonder if they'll still be allowed to wear them in the US? Probably not once the guardians of free speech get wind of this...
Steve, just another infidel
![]() | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/11/07 - GWOT is merely a colloquialism “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean do many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”
Rep. Ike Skelton, the Chair of the House Armed Services Committee decided lasst week that he is not comfortable with the phrase The 'Global War On Terrorism'. Can't say I blame him ;I quit using it a long time in favor of the 'War Against Jihadistan' or 'Islamo-Nazi scumbags' .
the chairman , said the decision to limit use of the “global war on terror” and the “long war” was done as part of an effort to the standardize grammar and terms to be used in writing the 2008 defense authorization bill. “Each year, the members and staff of the House Armed Services Committee work to prepare the best possible defense authorization bill,” Skelton said in a statement. “When writing legislation, the words we choose are important, and we make every effort to be as precise and specific as possible so that congressional intent may be understood.”
U.S. military operations in Iraq are “separate and distinct from the war against terrorists, who have their genesis in Afghanistan and who attacked us on 9/11, and the American people understand this,” Skelton said, adding that Republican objections to “our efforts to clarify legislative language represent the typical Republican leadership attempt to tie together the misadventure in Iraq and the overall war against terrorists.”
So his real transparent motivation is to isolate the funding of the Iraq theater from the global war against the jihadists . When they tire of that one they will soon tire of Afghanistan ;and so on and so on.
By banning the phrase Skelton hopes to
restore the sense of calm and peace that prevailed during the Clinton Administration ;in other words ;let's just bury our heads in the sand like the good ole days and ignore those who want us gone. In Harry Potter lingo it is "the war that must not be named" . Just sprinkle some pixie dust and wave that magic lexicon wand ..maybe if we don't mention it it will go away !
I got it ! Let's change the name "Armed Services Committee " to "Surender Monkey Committee".I think I'll email San Fran Nan Belle al-Pelosi with the idea .
Itsdb answered on 04/12/07:Sounds a lot like Eurabia's "common lexicon." At least they still used the words Islam and terrorist in the same sentence - "terrorists who abusively invoke Islam".
Ike is right, the words they choose are very important, so if his intent is for congress to "be as precise and specific as possible so that congressional intent may be understood," I suggest they use your term, 'War Against Jihadistan.' Otherwise congress may be funding a "Dancing with the Muslims" competition where viewers get to vote one couple off each week until the last couple standing wins the Jihad of their dreams.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tropicalstorm asked on 04/11/07 - LOL driving directions from New york to London
1. Head southwest on Broadway toward Warren St 0.2 mi
1 min
2. Turn left at Park Row 0.1 mi
1 min
3. Slight right at Frankfort St 0.3 mi
1 min
4. Turn left at Pearl St 56 ft
5. Turn right onto the F.D.R. Dr N ramp 0.4 mi
1 min
6. Merge onto FDR Dr N 7.7 mi
12 mins
7. Take exit 17 on the left for Triboro Bridge/Grand Central Pkwy toward I-278/Bruckner Expy 0.4 mi
2 mins
8. Merge onto Triborough Bridge
Partial toll road 0.4 mi
1 min
9. Merge onto I-278 E via the ramp to I-87 N/Bronx/Upstate N Y/New England 0.6 mi
1 min
10. Take exit 47 to merge onto Bruckner Expy/I-278 E toward New Haven 1.9 mi
2 mins
11. Take the I-278 E exit toward New Haven 0.3 mi
12. Merge onto Bruckner Expy 5.0 mi
6 mins
13. Continue on I-95 N
Partial toll road
Entering Connecticut 62.1 mi
1 hour 12 mins
14. Take exit 48 on the left to merge onto I-91 N toward Hartford 36.8 mi
37 mins
15. Take exit 29 for US-5 N/CT-15 toward I-84/E Hartford/Boston 0.4 mi
16. Merge onto CT-15 N 1.7 mi
2 mins
17. Merge onto I-84 E
Partial toll road
Entering Massachusetts 40.7 mi
38 mins
18. Take the exit onto I-90 E/Mass Pike/Massachusetts Turnpike toward N.H.-Maine/Boston
Partial toll road 56.0 mi
56 mins
19. Take exit 24 A-B-C on the left toward I-93 N/Concord NH/S Station/I-93 S/Quincy 0.4 mi
1 min
20. Merge onto Atlantic Ave 0.8 mi
3 mins
21. Turn right at Central St 0.1 mi
22. Turn right at Long Wharf 0.1 mi
23. Swim across the Atlantic Ocean 3,462 mi
29 days 0 hours
...
24. Slight right at E05 0.5 mi
2 mins
25. At the traffic circle, take the 2nd exit onto E05/Pont Vauban 0.1 mi
26. Turn right at E05 5.7 mi
10 mins
27. Take the exit onto A29/E44 toward Amiens
Toll road 27.8 mi
23 mins
28. Take the exit toward Dieppe/Amiens/Calais/A151/Rouen
Toll road 1.1 mi
1 min
29. Merge onto A29/E44
Toll road 22.6 mi
19 mins
30. Take the exit onto A28/E402 45.6 mi
37 mins
31. Take the exit onto A16/E402 toward Boulogne/Calais
Toll road 44.3 mi
38 mins
32. Take exit 29 toward Boulogne-Centre/Outreau/Le Portel 0.6 mi
1 min
33. Merge onto N416 1.1 mi
1 min
34. At the traffic circle, take the 1st exit onto N1 0.4 mi
1 min
35. At the traffic circle, take the 2nd exit and stay on N1 0.1 mi
1 min
36. At the traffic circle, take the 2nd exit and stay on N1 0.9 mi
2 mins
37. At the traffic circle, take the 1st exit 0.6 mi
1 min
38. Slight left at Rue Ferdinand Farjon 427 ft
39. At the traffic circle, take the 2nd exit 0.4 mi
1 min
40. Slight right at Dover - Boulougne-sur-Mer 30.1 mi
1 hour 50 mins
41. Continue on Dover - Boulogne-sur-Mer 0.2 mi
42. Continue on Eastern Service Rd 0.3 mi
2 mins
43. Turn right at E Ramp 0.4 mi
2 mins
44. Slight right at Dock Exit Rd 0.1 mi
45. At Eastern Docks Roundabout, take the 2nd exit onto A20 0.6 mi
2 mins
46. Slight left to stay on A20 0.3 mi
47. At Prince of Wales Roundabout, take the 2nd exit onto A20/Limekiln St 0.2 mi
1 min
48. At Limekiln Roundabout, take the 3rd exit onto A20 0.3 mi
1 min
49. At Western Heights Roundabout, take the 1st exit and stay on A20 7.0 mi
8 mins
50. Continue on M20 (signs for M20/London/Ashford) 49.7 mi
47 mins
51. Continue on A20 (signs for London (SE)/Lewisham) 9.7 mi
15 mins
52. At Clifton's Roundabout, take the 2nd exit and stay on A20 2.2 mi
6 mins
53. At the traffic circle, take the 2nd exit and stay on A20 1.3 mi
4 mins
54. Slight left at A2 0.7 mi
2 mins
55. Slight right at A2/Kender St 72 ft
56. Turn right at Kender St 0.3 mi
1 min
57. Turn left at A2 1.9 mi
5 mins
58. At Brick Layers Arms, take the 1st exit onto A201/New Kent Rd 0.6 mi
2 mins
59. At the traffic circle, take the 2nd exit onto A302/St George's Rd 0.4 mi
1 min
60. Turn left at A3203/Lambeth Rd 0.6 mi
3 mins
61. At the traffic circle, take the 2nd exit onto A3203 0.2 mi
1 min
62. At Horseferry Rd, take the 3rd exit onto A3212
COMPARED TO
Driving directions from Myrtle Beach, S.C. to San Diego, Ca
1. Head northeast on N Kings Hwy toward 5th Ave N 0.4 mi
1 min
2. Turn left at Main St 0.2 mi
1 min
3. Continue on US-501 14.1 mi
20 mins
...
4. Turn left at US-378 28.8 mi
42 mins
...
5. Slight right at SC-51 29.8 mi
44 mins
...
6. Continue on W Evans St/SC-S-21-31 0.2 mi
1 min
7. Turn left at W David H McLeod Blvd 1.6 mi
3 mins
8. Continue on I-20 W
Passing through Georgia
Entering Alabama 420 mi
6 hours 17 mins
...
9. Take exit 136 for I-459 toward Montgomery/Tuscaloosa/Gadsden 1.1 mi
1 min
10. Merge onto I-459 S 28.5 mi
25 mins
...
11. Take the I-20 W/I-59 S exit toward Tuscaloosa 1.2 mi
1 min
12. Merge onto I-20 W
Passing through Mississippi, Louisiana
Entering Texas 1,084 mi
15 hours 50 mins
...
13. Merge onto I-10 W
Passing through New Mexico
Entering Arizona 542 mi
7 hours 33 mins
...
14. Take exit 199 to merge onto I-8 W toward San Diego
Entering California 336 mi
4 hours 43 mins
...
15. Take the CA-125 S/CA-125 N exit toward CA-94 0.3 mi
16. Keep left at the fork to continue toward CA-125 S and merge onto CA-125 S 2.4 mi
3 mins
17. Continue on CA-94 W (signs for CA-94 W) 8.5 mi
8 mins
18. Exit onto F St 0.7 mi
3 mins
19. Turn right at 9th Ave 0.1 mi
courtousy Google
from shore to shore
62 steps across the ocean
19 across the USA
Itsdb answered on 04/11/07:It's only 7 more steps to get there from the Texas panhandle...and you still get to swim the Atlantic. | | Question/Answer | | paraclete asked on 04/10/07 - So we are accused of hating Muslims? I wonder why?
Time to stop all the anti-Western hatred
By Andrew Bolt
April 11, 2007 01:00am
Article from: Herald-Sun
MAYBE this time, I thought. Maybe this first Australian Islamic Conference would at last show us the moderate Muslim leaders we've searched for.
God, we need them. Look at the latest doings of the hate-preachers we have now.
Take the Mufti of Australia, Sheik Taj al-Din al-Hilali, who has just given interviews in Iran demanding Muslims stand "in the trenches" with its hostage-taking regime, and is now being investigated for allegedly giving $12,000 to a Lebanese propagandist linked to terrorists.
Meanwhile, the head of the Lebanese Muslim Association, which pays him to preach at Australia's biggest mosque, has had to seek police protection for suggesting this fool had best shut up.
Yet, even now, the Federation of Islamic Councils, which made Hilali mufti, refuses to sack him, though he's vilified Jews, praised suicide bombers as "heroes", called the September 11 terrorist attacks "God's work against oppressors", excused convicted pack rapist Bilal Skaf and said raped women should be "jailed for life".
The greatest pity is that Hilali isn't the only hate-preacher in our mosques.
Other radical sheiks have been accused of telling followers not to pay taxes to this infidel Government.
Worse, the Howard Government sidelined its Muslim Community Reference Group after finding a third of the 14 "moderates" it handpicked actually backed the Iranian-backed Hezbollah extremist group, notorious for its terrorist wing.
So, after all this and more, we desperately need to hear from those moderate Muslim leaders we keep telling each other must surely exist. Must.
Was it so dumb to think Mercy Mission would at last provide them - Muslim leaders who would demonstrate (in the mission's own words) that they "benefit the communities in which they live"?
You may have dared to hope, given this new group's leaders include the highly educated Tawfique Chowdhury, a Bangladeshi-born and Australian-raised IT project manager, and Adel Salman, who so impressed his employers at Cadbury Schweppes that he was selected for the prestigious Asialink leaders program.
It was Salman, so polished, who organised for Mercy Mission its first annual Australian Islamic Conference at Melbourne University over the Easter weekend.
The odd timing was surely just an innocent coincidence, because the conference had a noble aim: to "present a true picture of 'Islam in action' to the wider community" and convince Australians that "Islamic values are universal values".
So who, among all the Muslims in the world, did Mercy Mission choose to fly in to give us this "true picture" of a moderate Islam?
Of the six international speakers it advertised, let me introduce you to two.
The first is Bilal Philips, a Jamaican-born Canadian who was a communist and worker for the Black Panther terrorist group before converting to Islam and becoming a preacher.
His message is uncompromising: "Western culture led by the United States is an enemy of Islam." Which makes him an odd choice as speaker at a conference to reassure us that "Islamic values are universal values".
But the choice of Philips is even odder given the United States named him as an "unindicted co-conspirator" over the 1993 bombing of New York's World Trade Centre, and our own security agencies judged him such a threat he was banned from coming here.
Philips insists he rejects terrorism and considers al-Qaeda a "deviate" group. But from his own website and interviews you'd see why some might not take him at his word.
He freely admits he was hired by the Saudi air force during the first Gulf War to preach to American soldiers stationed in Saudi Arabia and convert them to Islam.
He says he succeeded, and "registered the names and addresses of over 3000 male and female US soldiers".
Philips didn't just take down their names; he also visited them back in America. "My role was confined to encouraging them to train Muslim-American volunteers and go to Bosnia to help the mujahidin and take part in the war (against Serbia)," he boasted. That worked, too.
Philips says his name was dragged into the investigation of the first World Trade Centre bombing, in which six people were killed, because some African-American soldiers he'd converted were offered by someone else to Sheik Abdel Rahmen, spiritual head of the terrorists behind the attack. These ex-soldiers would be great for domestic sabotage, the sheik was told.
But Clement Rodney Hampton-El, an al-Qaeda-trained American bombmaker now serving a 35-year sentence for the World Trade Centre bombings, claimed Philips also gave him the names of soldiers who were about to leave the military and who might help the Bosnian jihadists.
To repeat: Philips denies any links to al-Qaeda, and swears he is opposed to terrorism, although he does say Muslims are entitled to defend their faith by force.
But given his support for jihadists, his past contacts with jailed terrorists and the allegations against him, why on earth did Mercy Mission choose him to preach here?
To invite one such extremist speaker might seem like bad luck, but to invite two might make you think Mercy Mission wouldn't know a moderate Muslim if he blew up in their face.
I say that because also high on Mercy Mission's guest list was another convert, British journalist Yvonne Ridley, with a much nastier line in preaching.
Ridley didn't just marry a colonel in one terror group - Yasser Arafat's Palestinian Liberation Organisation - but has been busy since defending others like it.
Some highlights:
Soon after the September 11 terrorist attacks Ridley actually accused Islamic sheiks of going soft.
"Muslims have lost confidence since September 11," she complained. "Something as simple as suicide bombers being martyrs is being denied by prominent sheiks."
That's one of her mantras. At a Belfast meeting of Islamic students, she insisted there were no innocent Israeli victims in suicide bombings. Not even children.
"There are no innocents in this war," she reportedly raged, because Israeli children could grow up to become Israeli soldiers.
She even hailed as a "martyr" the Chechen terrorist Shamil Basayev, who planned the attack on the Beslan school in which 333 hostages - many of them children - were killed. An "admirable struggle", she called his life's work.
Ridley has never called on Muslims to boycott such terrorists, but instead demanded British Muslims "boycott the police and refuse to co-operate with them in any way, shape or form".
And when relatives of al-Qaeda's then leader in Iraq, the head-hacker Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, denounced his bomb attacks on three hotels in Jordan, she was livid.
"While the killing of innocent people is to be condemned without question, there is something rather repugnant about some of those who rush to renounce acts of terrorism," she sneered.
True, among the 61 dead were many members of a wedding party, she conceded, but some of them "were part of Jordan's upper echelons of society", and "others had flown in from America".
What's more, the "bars (were) serving alcohol", and the evil Jordanian regime "provides backing, support and intelligence to the American military".
Having proved to her satisfaction the guilt of the dead civilians, she asked: "I wonder if you see that attack on the Jordanian hotels in a different light now?"
And she concluded: "I'd rather put up with a brother like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi any day than have a traitor or a sell-out for a father, son or grandfather."
What, in Ridley's foul incantations of hatred and her defence of child-killers and wedding bombers, makes her the kind of Muslim who would "benefit the communities in which they live"?
What does it say about Mercy Mission that Ridley - and Philips - were hired as speakers to tell us "Islamic values are universal values" and we have nothing to fear?
Oh, and about that fear.
It was this same Ridley - happy to "put up with a brother" like Zarqawi, once filmed cutting off the head of American hostage Nick Berg - who last week accused Australians of being among the worst haters of Muslims.
How like her to condemn the fear her own words rightly provoke. And how disturbing that Mercy Mission holds her up as the kind of Muslim who does us good.
Or - I hesitate to ask - is this really the best our Muslim leaders can offer? Is this really their "true picture" of Islam?
I beg of them. Prove it isn't. Until you do, I'm afraid I shall take you at your grim word.
Itsdb answered on 04/11/07:Clete,
Did you post this on the Christianity board? I'd love to see the reaction :)
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/10/07 - Imus Why was he suspended when fools that spew hatred like Rosie ODonnell routinely get a pass (recall her insulting lame attempt at humor by speaking in broken Chinese ) ?
Personally it has been years since I have listened to him . Some of his schtick was amusing .He has always parodied racial issues as part of his act .But you would really be stretching it to believe he is a racist. I recall that on MLK day for years he would play the 'I have a dream ' speech in it's entirety .
He called the Rutger's woman's basketball team 'nappy headed hos' in a lame attempt at humor. Insensitive ? Sure ;but not as bad as many things he has said and done in the past . Besides ;I bet you could find scores of examples when hip-hop artists have referred to black women as hos.
Ironically it is Jesse Jackson (called NYC Hymetown )and Al Sharpton (called a Jewish store keeper a 'white interloper 'and perpetrated the Tawana Brawley hoax)who are leading the charge .Nary a liberal (who's cause Imus has championed for years ) is there to defend him. They dropped him like a hot potato. Don't be suprised if Jesse Jackson's and Sharpton's self directed charities and foundations get generous compensation /pay-offs by NBC network and CBS radio to shut them up . Jackson expanded the issue to include NBC's hiring practices yesterday on 'Hardball'. If he is to be canned it is for the bad judgement in winding up this pair of inflamers .
Both networks suspended him yeaterday ,but look for him to be toast .My guess is that he will follow Howard Stearn to satellite radio and ratings oblivion.Stern of course get's a pass on simular language because he has a black female side-kick.
Itsdb answered on 04/10/07:I saw where Al also chastised Imus for calling himself a "cracker" on Al's show. He noted that it was Imus himself doing so and advised him to respect his own race on his show. By golly I think Al's finally got it, he needs to advise his following to repect their own race - maybe then much of this "ho" stuff will go away.
Like you said, sure it was insensitive, but as long as all these hip-hopping, gang-banging blacks are running around calling each other "niggas" and "hos" and whatever, what do they expect to happen? That's the example they've set.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 04/09/07 - Fred Thompson has joined the blogsphere... at Red State .org and he smacks the Brits around because of their handling of the Iranian piracy .
Oil prices fell. The stock market rose. Video images of smiling British soldiers with Iranian President Ahmadinejad were everywhere. So were pictures of the 15 freed hostages embracing family members back home. The relief over the return of the Brits was so tremendous; you could almost hear birds singing.
Maybe it's because military action won't be needed or maybe it's just because the ordeal won't drag on and on, but the world is breathing easier now. A lot of folks are happy. The problem, as I see it, is that Ahmadinejad seems to be the happiest.
And why shouldn't he be? He has shown the world that his forces can kidnap British citizens, subject them to brutal psychological tactics to coerce phony confessions, finagle the release of a high-ranking Iranian terror coordinator in Iraq, utterly trash the Geneva conventions and suffer absolutely no consequences.
The UN Security Council summoned its vaunted multilateral greatness to issue a swift statement of sincere uneasiness. The EU, which has pressured Britain to rely on Europeans for mutual defense instead of the US, wouldn't even discuss economic sanctions that might disrupt their holidays. Even NATO was AWOL.
Please do keep reading . . .
Tony Blair doesn't appear to be in much of a mood for celebrating. I don't know how he could be, given the troubling spectacle of British soldiers shake the hand of their kidnapper as a condition of release. In the old days, they would have kissed his ring -- but wearing Iranian suits and carrying swag more appropriate to a Hollywood awards ceremony may have been as embarrassing. Ironically, Blair's options are fewer by the day as his own party moves to mothball the British fleet, once the fear of pirates and tyrants the world over.
Some in the West seem part of Iran's propaganda war; claiming that the release of the hostages was a victory that proves the Iranian dictatorship can be reasoned with. To misrepresent unpunished piracy as a victory is as Orwellian as the congressional mandate banning use of the term "the global war on terror." What are we — Reuters?
Ahmadinejad must be particularly pleased to see "deep thinking" journalists making the case that American actions in Iraq were the true cause of the kidnappings. To believe this, all you have to do is ignore the history of the Iranian Revolution, which has been in the extortion business ever since it took power. Between the 1979 American embassy crisis in Tehran and the seizure of Israeli soldiers last year by Iran's Hezbollah proxies, there have been more than a hundred other examples.
If you include the imprisonment of pro-Democracy dissidents and non-Shi'a Muslim minorities within Iran, the number reaches easily into the tens of thousands. The dwindling and persecuted Christian population of Iran, I suspect, found little joy in Ahmadinejad's explanation that he was freeing his victims as an "Easter gift."
It is critical that we see this incident as part of a long pattern of behavior -- that will continue as long as the current leadership is in power. More importantly, it will escalate unimaginably if Iran achieves nuclear status, and with it the ability to hold millions rather than individuals hostage.
I have no idea if Ahmadinejad and those who put him in power really believe the Shi'a Twelver doctrine that they can spur the messiah to return by triggering Armageddon. You have to admit, though, that the possibility that they look forward to entering paradise as martyrs would make them a whole lot scarier as a nuclear power than the USSR ever was.
There is hope, though. The Iranian people are not an anti-Western horde. They're an educated and freedom-loving people for the most part, and reformers there have been begging us for support and sanctions that would weaken the ruling theocracy. Instead, they've just seen the Iranian dictatorship successfully bully the West into impotent submission. This is not a good thing.
We need to understand this and use every means at our disposal, starting with serious and painful international sanctions, to prevent Iran's rulers from becoming the nuclear-armed blackmailers they want to be. Unfortunately, we are hearing demands that we abandon the people of the Middle East who have stood up to Islamo-fascism because they believed us when we said we would support them.
If we retreat precipitously, the price for that betrayal will be paid first in blood and freedom by the Iranian people, the Kurds, the Afghanis, the secular Lebanese, the moderates in Pakistan and the Iraqis themselves. And America's word may never be trusted again.
Right now, the pirate Ahmadinejad is clearly more confident about the outcome of the Global War on Terror than we are. That ought to give us pause.
Combine this with a report I had buried in my to do files from the NY Post ;and Thompson alludes to ; and it paints a bleek picture of the future of one of our steadfast allies :
THE STRANGE DEATH OF THE ROYAL NAVY
By ARTHUR HERMAN (BRITS WILL NOW RELY ON EUROPEANS FOR THEIR DEFENSE)
January 14, 2007 -- A 400-YEAR epoch of world history is about to draw to a close. If Britain 's current Labor government has its way, Britain 's Royal Navy will mothball at least 13, and perhaps as many as 19, of its
remaining 44 ships, or nearly half its effective fleet.
With one bureaucratic stroke, the Ministry of Defense will end a naval tradition reaching back to Sir Francis Drake - reducing the Royal Navy, which 40 years ago was still the second-largest fleet in the world, to the size of navies of countries like Indonesia and Turkey .
This decision, of course, has to be set against the background of Britain 's decades-long decline as a world power. But it also reflects a struggle for the soul of Great Britain that has been going since World
War II: Is Britain part of an English-speaking, Atlantic-based strategic alliance that includes the United States and Canada ? Or is it part of Europe as envisioned by technocrats in Paris , Brussels and Berlin ?
NEXT month's final decision on whether to scrap the Royal Navy may supply us with the answer. Because the Blair government's drastic plans include more than taking existing ships out of commission. The service's entire future as a blue-water navy (that is, a navy capable of operations outside Britain 's own waters) may be forfeit.
According to The Daily Telegraph, plans for two new fleet carriers of the kind vital for fighting today's War on Terror and projecting power overseas - and for which $6.9 billion had already been set aside - will
also be scrapped. Two new destroyers, which were supposed to replace at least some of the retired ships, are also out of the picture. The Telegraph even reports (Jan. 8) that all officer promotions in the navy
are to be suspended for the next five years.
Many in the government and in the media blame these cuts on Tony Blair's support for the U.S. war in Iraq . They claim the British troop presence there is eating up the British defense budget, leaving the other services like the navy to fight over table scraps.
But this is far from the whole story. Since the mid ྌs, British defense spending has shrunk by more than 30 percent, to less than 2.5 percent of GDP. Today it is at its lowest level since 1930. Even welfare states such as France and Germany spend more on their military. (Meanwhile, Blair is busy hacking back the British commitment in Iraq from 7,000 to 4,500 troops - less than 4 percent of the coalition total.
The truth is that for two centuries Britain and the Royal Navy played the role of globocop, policing the world's sea trade lanes which keep the global economy going. (Even today, 95 percent of the weight of all
intercontinental trade travels by sea.)
AFTER World War II, the U.S. Navy gradually took over that thankless but essential task; the British felt free to relax. From a postwar peak of 388 ships and submarines in 1950, the Royal Navy had dwindled to 112
vessels in 1980. By 2004. it was down to just 46.
Yet the British navy still takes pride in sharing the globocop burden with the United States in vital strategic areas like the Persian Gulf , and even being able to project power trans-oceanically alone when it has
to, as during the Falklands War.
Analysts agree that once these forecast cuts go through, this will be impossible. Indeed, a Royal Navy of only 25 vessels would require at least some cooperation from its European neighbors even to defend
Britain .
This is a ominous trend for many reasons. It not only increases the burden on the U.S. Navy around the globe. It also reflects a decision to move Britain away from its traditional maritime culture, which is the
basis of its strategic relationship with the United States , and toward a decaying Europe .
SINCE 1945, Britain has been torn between the two, like a would-be bride torn between two suitors. Winston Churchill (who was half-American) and Margaret Thatcher knew which to choose. "There is no hope for civilization," Churchill used to say, "if we drift apart," meaning the United States and England .
Blair, it is true, has been supportive on Iraq . But (like many recent British politicians) he has been eager to ingratiate himself with his continental neighbors, including by compromising Britain 's defense capability. For example, his government stuck with the ill-fated EFA-2000 Eurofighter project, even though it cost Britain 21/2 times the original estimated cost ($37 billion versus $13.7 billion) and the RAF only got its planes after a 41/2-year delay.
Then in 1998 he endorsed Germany and France 's idea of a European Defense Force separate from NATO - and the United States . Again, the cost of cooperation will be to reduce the British army to just one more unit in a European military coalition led from Brussels , not London .
Now come the naval cuts. Pure coincidence? It is not difficult to see the distant hand of the Paris-Brussels-Berlin axis at work.
And disasters like this will continue as long as British politicians fool themselves into thinking their future lies with the shrinking economies and aging populations of the continent of Europe .
IRONICALLY, Britain just celebrated the 200th anniversary of its naval vic tory over France at Trafalgar, which allowed Britain to build an empire and dominate the world's oceans. If these navy cuts go into effect, France will have a larger fleet than Britain for the first time since the mid-1600s.
The victory the French couldn't win at sea, they will win effortlessly and painlessly at the bureaucrat's desk.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Arthur Herman is the author of "To Rule the Waves: How the British Navy Shaped the Modern World," which was nominated for the Mountbatten Prize for best book in naval history in 2005. His latest book, a study of Gandhi and Churchill, will be published next year.
This is the future that Francis Fukuyama sees as the model . Admiral Lord Nelson wept .
Itsdb answered on 04/09/07:![]()
Yeah ... the idiots really believe this was a good thing.
| | Question/Answer | | HANK1 asked on 04/07/07 - Wouldn't This Be A Hoot:
In 2008:
President: Hillary Clinton
Vice - President: Nancy Pelosi
Secretary of State: Bill Clinton
Is it probable and/or possible?
HANK
Itsdb answered on 04/09/07:Possible? I suppose. Probable? No. Although having Bill as SecState would get him out of her hair more often - just think of all the foreign interns he could cross paths with and Hillary nowhere in sight.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | paraclete asked on 04/02/07 - for itsdb, who thinks things are getting better in Iraq Monday: 3 GIs, 1 Briton, 84 Iraqis Killed; 280 Iraqis Wounded, 10 Kidnapped
Updated at 6:10 p.m. EST, Apr. 2, 2007
At least 84 Iraqis were killed or found dead today and another 280 Iraqis were wounded in violent attacks. Also, 10 people were abducted at a fake checkpoint. In the largest incident, about 200 were wounded and 13 killed during a truck bombing in Kirkuk. Three American and one British soldier died in four separate attacks today.
An American soldier died during a truck bombing in Kirkuk; it is unclear whether the event is the same that killed 134 and wounded 200 Iraqis. Asecond GI was killed during combat operations today in Anbar Province. A roadside bomb killed a U.S. servicemember in Fuhaylat. Also, a British soldier died in Basra, the second in as many days.
Thirteen people were killed and about 200 were wounded during a truck bomb attack in the northern city of Kirkuk. Many children are believed to be among the dead and injured. The number of casualties is expected to rise. American soldiers were filmed among the injured.
The bodies of 23 men were found near Baquba in Bani Saad; among the dead were 19 who were kidnapped together at a fake checkpoint yesterday. Today, 10 more people were abducted from a fake checkpoint.
In Baghdad, 14 dumped bodies were found scattered throughout town. A suicide car bomber drove into a police checkpoint in the Doura neighborhood where he killed two people and wounded five others. Near a Bayaa area courthouse, a car bomb killed four and wounded ten. Elsewhere, an interior ministry motorcade came under fire; two guards were seriously wounded. Two guards were killed and three more wounded by a roadside bomb in Bab al Muathim. A roadside bomb in Qahira injured three people. A mortar damaged a school. In al-Ghadeer, a sniper killed an Iraqi soldier, while an off-duty Iraqi soldier was gunned down at a checkpoint in Yarmouk. Also, mortars fell in several neighborhoods late yesterday where they killed one person and wounded 20 more. And, the body of a Baghdad University director was found two days after he was kidnapped.
A suicide bomber killed four people and wounded 30 near a popular Khalis restaurant.
In Mosul, U.S. troops raided two homes where they killed six people who belonged to two families. Three dumped bodies were found.
Gunmen killed a police officer in Amara.
In Fallujah armed men killed a member of the Fallujah Clerics Council. Three unidentified bodies were discovered.
Mortars injured two civilians in Hibhib.
Mortar rounds fell on a U.S. base in Haditha, but casualties were not reported.
In Diyala province, clashes took place at Iraqi army headquarters in Ghalbia. Also, five civilians were injured when the were fired upon; the injured had to be taken to Baghdad as routes to other hospitals were too dangerous to use.
A truck carrying rice to Mandii was bombed; the blast destroyed seven months of food rations.
Iraqi and U.S. forces arrested at least 50 suspects in Dour, including the mayor. Two suspected al-Qaeda were arrested in Ramadi. Nine people were detained in Latifiya. Three gunmen were arrested in Karbala. Also, Iraqi forces killed two suspects during security operations. Itsdb answered on 04/03/07:Clete,
Did I just say things were getting better in Iraq? No, I believe my post was on "Good news on Iraq," and it was just heralding one day of no bad news in one newspaper. However, there IS progress:
Baghdad sees significant increase in street venders
IRAQ THE SURGE IS WORKING
I'm sure there's more if I wanted to take the time to post it, but I fear it wouldn't change your mind anyway. One day you're calling radical Islam the biggest threat we face and the next you're criticizing our fight against it, so you're a hard case to figure out. So whatever you feel about the war, how it reached the point of our engaging in it or whatever else, let me remind you what it's about now, at this present moment in time:
Bombing in Kirkuk injures schoolgirls near police building
![]() | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 03/30/07 - EU is the first 2 letters in Eurabia The EU begins it's 2nd 50 years by celebrating one of the finest traditions of Europe that made the EU possible ........appeasement.
The European Union has drawn up guidelines advising government spokesmen to refrain from linking Islam and terrorism in their statements.
Brussels officials have confirmed the existence of a classified handbook which offers "non-offensive" phrases to use when announcing anti-terrorist operations or dealing with terrorist attacks.
Banned terms are said to include "jihad", "Islamic" or "fundamentalist".
One alternative, suggested publicly last year, is for the term "Islamic terrorism" to be replaced by "terrorists who abusively invoke Islam".
An EU official said that the secret guidebook, or, "common lexicon", is aimed at preventing the distortion of the Muslim faith and the alienation of Muslims in Europe.
This while they continue to celebrate their 50 years together by demonstrating a feeble weak lame (fill in the adjective) response to one of their fellow nation's sailors being kidnapped by the pirate regime of Iran. While the EU did nothing for over a week now ;these sailors have been forced to make confessions and other acts of public humiliation broadcast around the world . Where is there rapid response force ? What does this say to their strawman concept of "soft power" ? They talk a good game about unity but when one of their members needs their help they won't commit a dinghy to the effort .
They cowered and capitulated when rioters objected to the publishing of harmless cartoons . Now they may as well cut out their tongues for all the good it does them . These are our allies . We really are alone.
Itsdb answered on 03/30/07:Yep, it is generally verboten to mention "Islam" and "terror" in the same sentence, just check the Christianity board. Just for that I think I'll make it even more a part of my 'common lexicon,' I refuse to say anything as pathetically PC as "terrorists who abusively invoke Islam". If "fascist right-wing homophobic Christian bigot" is ok to use, so is "Islamic terrorist." And Rosie thinks the view 'here' from 'over there' is frightening.
Steve | | Question/Answer | tomder55 asked on 03/30/07 - Shumer has an mole inside the Justice Dept.
That's the rumor I keep hearing ....that Shumer and Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty are orchestrating and coordinating the attack on Attorney General Gonzales. Emails from the White House confirm that McNulty was deeply involved in the deliberation leading to the firings of the District Attorneys .Yet,in testimony , Shumer asked former Gonzales chief of staff Kyle Sampson to confirm that McNulty had been left out of the loop . A rather strange line of questioning knowing what White House Documents have already revealed. McNulty is a product of the same Southern District of New York that I unfortunately live in , which produced Comey and Fitzgerald. He shows the same loyalty to Schumer as do the other two.
Sampson for his part was unintentionally outstanding .....like he was trying to fall on his sword but missed . He called 'the distinction between 'political' and 'performance-related' reasons for removing' a U.S. attorney something 'largely artificial.' He pointed out that they simply 'may be asked to resign for almost any reason with no public or private explanation.' All correct and to the point
At the same time he squirmed and inadvertently pointed his finger at Gonzales who had in public statements claimed that he was not involved in the deliberation . Emails from the White House prove otherwise.
Shumer ,and Sen.Leahy are trying to set up another Scooter Libby situation ,hopefully to catch Karl Rove ,but anyone in the White House (except perhaps McNulty )will do. Leahy's euphanism 'misleading explanations'is just a clever way to accuse someone of pergury.
Monica Goodling certainly would like to go before the Senate Judiciary Committee and tell the truth . But her lawyer realizes that if they can't catch the big fish ,Shumer et al have no problem snatching the small fry. Remember the Libby standard ;'No crime, but different recollections of events will lead to prison time' and we already know that Mcnulty is trying to throw Goodling under the bus.Monica Goodling ,a bit player in this drama deserves better .
To sum it up . The President was in his right to fire the attorneys. To call them 'performance related 'firings was lame spin. McNulty to suck up to Shumer some more exposed it. The President fell into the trap once when he exposed his staff to FBI grilling during the Plame investigation and he is falling into the same trap again . He should invoke Executive Privilage and play hardball with both Houses of Congress and their never ending investigations ;run the clock out and go home in 2009 thumbng his nose at the whole lot of em .
Itsdb answered on 03/30/07:That last sentence says it all for me. The Dems have nothing on their mind but getting Bush and he needs to flip them the proverbial bird and stand his ground. You notice after they finished their 蔴 hours" they've concentrated almost exclusively on the White House in one way or another - as if the only pressing issue in the country is revenge.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 03/30/07 - None dare call it pork The Senate passed their version of the Iraq Surrender Act . Just like the House version it is loaded with bribes .This time they seem to prefer sugar beets and Christmas Trees . Washington Compost has an article that details some of the $20 billion in pork .
Specifically, it includes $40 million for a Tree Assistance Program that provides help for Christmas trees and ornamental shrubs. Also in the Senate's version of the Iraq bill: $24 million for sugar beets, $3 million for Hawaiian sugar cane, $13 million for the Ewe Lamb Replacement and Retention Program, $100 million in compensation for dairy losses, $165.9 million for fisheries disaster relief, and money for numerous other "emergencies."
Ewe Lamb Replacement and Retention Program ????
Notable in the article is the absense of the word "pork" .Instead the phrase of choice is “pet projects.” I guess the Lamb retention project means that the Democrat Senators have decided to adopt a Lamb as a pet.
Dana Millbanks is not alone in shunning pork .Andrew Taylor also has commentary where the word "pork " is never used . Headline : Conservatives Oppose Pet Projects .(Harry Reid will adopt Mormon Crickets as his pets)
So there you have it:
Republican earmarks =pork
Democrat earmarks =pet projects
Republican lobbyists are...lobbyists
Democrat lobbyists are activists .
Itsdb answered on 03/30/07:That's correct, but not the whole story. According to al-AP, Democrat pork = "domestic priorities." I kid you not:
The debate came on legislation that provides $122 billion to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as domestic priorities such as relief to hurricane victims and payments to farmers.
See there, not "pet projects," they are much needed "domestic priorities" such as hurricane relief and payments to farmers - that Bush obviously neglected. How can anyone be against that?
Steve | | Question/Answer | | kindj asked on 03/29/07 - The Iron Code After years of reading volumes of literature--from ancient to modern--and seeing countless movies and TV shows, and having observed the actions of others and ourselves, a friend of mine and I condensed what we think it is to be a man into a short and succinct form--a code, if you will.
You see, we (and others like us, few though they are) believe that today's passive and pu**ified world no longer has any standard whatsoever that a man may be measured by, or ideals to live up to. Therefore, I humbly submit to you a masterpiece, crafted by a friend:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
THE IRON CODE (or "being male doesn't make you a man")
NEVER VIOLATE A WOMAN NOR HARM A CHILD.
DO NOT LIE, CHEAT OR STEAL. THESE THINGS ARE FOR LESSER MEN.
PROTECT THE WEAK FROM THE EVIL STRONG . NEVER ALLOW THOUGHTS OF GAIN TO LEAD YOU INTO THE PURSUIT OF EVIL.
NEVER BACK AWAY FROM AN ENEMY. EITHER FIGHT OR SURRENDER. IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO SAY I WILL NOT BE EVIL .
EVIL MUST BE FOUGHT WHEREVER IT IS FOUND.
Being born a male in this world doesn't make you a man. That is simply a process of horomones and D.N.A. Being a MAN is about the choices that we make and how we respond to the outcome of those choices. Do we follow the rest of the herd waiting to die? Just another number in the staus quo? Or, do we stand up and become the kind of men that GOD created us to be?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is teachable stuff. Even as we speak (or read), it is being crafted into a poster to hang in my classroom, in the hopes that this next generation won't turn out to be as f***ed up as they seem to be trying to be.
Next, I'm consulting with various strong and moral women to come up with one that can be taught to the young females who would like to one day become a lady.
What do you think?
DK
Itsdb answered on 03/29/07:Dennis,
That's way too politically incorrect, man. In other words it's great! Just one suggestion for that 4th line, I'm not sure surrender is the right word. A real man needs to know humility, know when to admit they're wrong and how to choose their fights wisely. Whadyya think?
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tropicalstorm asked on 03/29/07 - why we banned Legos
Rethinking Schools Classic.
From RS Editor Bill Bigelow:
Why We Banned Legos
Volume 21, Issue 2 As they watched their elementary-age students playing with Legos, Ann Pelo and Kendra Pelojoaquin saw some disturbing trends.
In the current issue they describe how some kids hoarded the "best" pieces, denied their classmates any access at all to the pretend town they were building, and displayed other undesirable behavior surrounding ownership and the social power it conveys.
So the teachers banned Legos, and worked with the kids to surface the issues raised by the ways they had been using the popular building blocks.
Our children are political beans.
Legos ban )
more on Legos )
Itsdb answered on 03/29/07:Well now if that don't take the cake. People like this ARE what's wrong with our schools. Take a look at their philosophy:
While the scope and influence of Rethinking Schools has changed, its basic orientation has not. Most importantly, it remains firmly committed to equity and to the vision that public education is central to the creation of a humane, caring, multiracial democracy. While writing for a broad audience, Rethinking Schools emphasizes problems facing urban schools, particularly issues of race ... At a time when racial and class inequalities are growing in our country, we believe that any vision of schooling must be grounded in "the common school."
What a load of crap. And these people can't put together a coherent sentence or tell the difference between people and fruits and vegetables - or is that what they're trying to produce in the classroom? I went to their "Just for fun" page to see what they consider 'fun.' I found this sentence, linking to a puzzle of 'produce':
Put this jigsaw puzzle together for a picture of some of the most important people in education the students .
Come again? And then, they whine and cry about childhood obesity while banning games like tag and dodgeball because it's 'dangerous' and 'creates self-esteem issues among weaker and slower children.' And then we all know how evil it is to have a family pizza night to encourage reading.
This nonsense just pisses me off...
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 03/28/07 - Bauer v. Bond James Bond on Jack's Turf: Taunts Bauer Again, Calls Him "Rubbish"
-- New York Times headline, February 30, 2007
After months of transatlantic bickering and tabloid name-calling, the public feud between Jack Bauer and James Bond has taken on an ugly new coloring. The battle for espionage bragging rights, now affecting U.S.-UK relations, has become a classic barroom brawl, as the clandestine torture tactics championed by both principals is bandied about in television spots, print articles, and YouTube videos the world over, aided and abetted by the New Media Youth.
In an effort to calm the dispute, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice issued a statement yesterday calling on the two men "to begin acting like gentlemen again. Their countries expect a certain degree of decorum from them, not adolescent temper tantrums." She added, "This is not, and never was, a competition." In London, Conservative Party leader and Calvin Klein model David Cameron struck a more partisan note. "Brits know about a stiff upper lip," he said, "and Commander Bond will show Mr. Bauer just what that means."
At U.S. detention facilities in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, this "spy war" is all too real. Detainees are terrified that the celebritized "torture tactics" championed by Mr. Bauer might tsunami their peaceful Caribbean retreat. A statement released through an ACLU-court-appointed-human-rights-free-of-charge lawyer said, "We prisoners of conscience worry we will lose our three daily, politically correct squares in an effort to boost the tough guy image of Jack Bauer." The Bond-leaning EU and ICC are considering sending "food troops" to the base to ensure that religiously ordained, and nutritious, meals are in fact still being served.
Despite mounting pressure from both governments to "hold the high ground," neither man appears willing to resist upping the ante. Commander Bond made a pre-emptive appearance on the Late Show with David Letterman Monday night, one day after being snubbed at the 79th Annual Oscars in Los Angeles. Asked by Letterman if he was Mr. Bauer's moral as well as tactical superior, Bond responded, "I don't try to have it both ways, Dave. I make decisions and let the chips fall where they may" -- a none too subtle allusion to Mr. Bauer's rather conflicted decision-making patterns. Letterman clearly understood, telling his guest, "That would imply you think Jack Bauer hasn't defended his country to the best of his ability." Bond merely smiled his famous "come hither" smile.
And with that, the fists began to fly again. Bond had to engage an extra security detail to escort him from the CBS Studios through the gauntlet of angry Bauer sympathizers arrayed outside.
To respond to Bond's accusations, Mr. Bauer immediately booked himself on a special world telecast sit-down with Ms. Oprah Winfrey, or Oprah, as she is popularly known. He said of the quarrel with Bond, "I am just a simple man with simple tastes. I believe in God. I believe in the love of a woman. I believe that good always triumphs over evil, and I believe in ice hockey." "But," Oprah prodded, "now that Congress is cutting funding to Homeland Security, won't that affect your ability to get your job done in order to protect us?" "I don't need fancy pants cars, watches, and the rest of it to do my job," Mr. Bauer intoned.
In a rare evening edition of the Guardian, 007 snapped back, "I can get down and dirty with the best of them, too!" Poll numbers, however, suggest that Bond is losing favor, even among his strongest demographic, the prep school educated Alpha male set. To bolster support for the MI6 agent, the BBC is putting together a special report entitled, "Men of the Shadows: Why the British Provide More Comforts and Resources to Special Forces Than the Yanks," to air on BBC Prime, a channel not available in the United States, but popular in India and points farther west.
As the feud rages on, pro-Bauer and pro-Bond websites and blogs are popping up all over the Internet, with Wall Street hearing rumors that should the clash continue, Google or MySpace will attempt to buy out a majority on one side in order to capitalize on the awesome advertising opportunities opening up as the entire world watches and waits for the next blow to land.
You Decide -- Who Is Tougher? Jack Bauer or James Bond?
Amy K. Mitchell is managing editor of The American Spectator. Itsdb answered on 03/28/07:Bauer is definitely tougher, no question. Besides all the comforts 007 is afforded, he's on his 6th incarnation in just 21 missions. Bauer is still Bauer, and Jack goes through that much every day! It's no contest.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tropicalstorm asked on 03/28/07 - what to do! with San Francisco's ban on plastic garbage bags
what are the alternatives for people walking their dogs
and obeying the law to clean up after Rover?
Now I guess you have to walk with the dog chain in one hand and a super dupper pooper scooper and something to bag it in in the other. A paper bag doesn't sound very good of an option.
I think we should come up with an invention here. Itsdb answered on 03/28/07:Personally I think folks should carry their pooper scoopers along and deposit the contents in Gavin Newsom's office trash can. Being San Francisco though, I'm sure they'll find a way to turn dog poop into clean-burning briquettes for tailgating at Monster Park.
I actually despise those plastic bags. We live in an area where windy is almost a daily forecast, and at times it seems every other tree in town is flying a "Wal-Mart flag." People are pigs, and they let those things escape in droves to fly around and tangle up in your trees, shrubs and fences. So while I have problems with an outright ban I would not be sad to see them go away permanently ... along with morons that think might front yard must be decorated with a Budweiser bottle.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tropicalstorm asked on 03/27/07 - vote for your favorite ![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Itsdb answered on 03/27/07:Actually none of the above...
![]()
![]() | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 03/27/07 - Hide the pork this is a "what a suprise !! "moment
According to John Fund at the Wall Street Journal ;the Congressional Research Service (CRS)...a publicly funded, nonpartisan federal agency has decided that after 12 years it will no longer track earmarks put into Congressional spending bills .This after a 12 year run of doing so.
What event happened 12 years ago? Well ...12 years ago the Republicans became the majority .Now they are no longer the majority so obviously pork spending is no longer a concern. Itsdb answered on 03/27/07:Well ain't that grand. So much for the transparent government the left has been clamoring for.
Did you catch Obey's remarks in the article? "The fact is, that an earmark is something that is requested by an individual member. This item was not requested by any individual member. It was put in the bill by me!"
Maybe he said that for the benefit of those "idiot liberals" he referred to earlier. | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 03/23/07 - Further proof that the 'insurgency'/'civil war' in Iraq is being driven by Iran is being reported in USA Today .
The violent Shiite militia known as the Mahdi Army is breaking into splinter groups, with up to 3,000 gunmen now financed directly by Iran and no longer loyal to the firebrand cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, adding a potentially even more deadly element to Iraq's violent mix.
Two senior militia commanders told the Associated Press that hundreds of these fighters have crossed into Iran for training by the elite Quds force, a branch of Iran's Revolutionary Guard thought to have trained Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon and Muslim fighters in Bosnia and Afghanistan.
The breakup is an ominous development at a time when U.S. and Iraqi forces are working to defeat religious-based militias and secure Iraq under government control. While al-Sadr's forces have battled the coalition repeatedly, including pitched battles in 2004, they've mostly stayed in the background during the latest offensive.
The U.S. military has asserted in recent months that Iran's Revolutionary Guards and Quds force have been providing Shiite militias with weapons and parts for sophisticated armor-piercing bombs. The so called EFPs — explosively formed penetrators — are responsible for the deaths of more than 170 American and coalition soldiers since mid-2004, the military says.
In the latest such attack, four U.S. soldiers were killed March 15 by a roadside bomb in eastern Baghdad......
....In recent weeks, Mahdi Army fighters who escaped possible arrest in the Baghdad security push have received $600 each upon reaching Iran. The former Mahdi Army militiamen working for the Revolutionary Guards operate under the cover of a relief agency for Iraqi refugees, they said.
Once fighters defect, they receive a monthly stipend of $200, said the commanders.
Alireza Jafarzadeh, a spokesman for an Iranian dissident group, told reporters in New York on Tuesday that Iraqi Shiite guerrillas and death squads were being trained in secret camps in Iran with the blessing of top Tehran government leaders and at least three senior Iraqi political figures.
The Mahdi Army is of course the group we had surrounded twice and let off the hook.
Now the optimist in me says that the breakup of a large force of militia ,and it's leader discreditied is a good thing ,and further proof that the surge is winning ...leave it to al-AP to spin it as a major setback .God forbid that the cohesive leadership of fat Mookie is eliminated ! Let's just ignore the fact that he has been the most disruptive force in Baghdad .But ,I have contended almost since it became apparent that there is an "insurgency "that any "exit strategy " had to address the outside interferance of Iraq's neighbors. The Iraqi gvt. is holding talks with other armed groups with the dual goal of bringing them into the fold and expelling al-Qaeda according to IraqSlogger. Omar at Iraq the Model reports from the ground about progress in defeating al-Qaeda and the Mahdi militia . Conceivably the only reason our goals cannot be achieved is due to interferance from Iran and like it or not ;that is where we need to start focusing attention .
Itsdb answered on 03/23/07:tom, there you go throwing stones again. "fat Mookie," "expelling" or "defeating al-Qaeda?" Wholly unacceptable coming from a Christian with ties to the Crusades and Inquisitions ... sorry, I must have been channeling another expert.
Have you ever wondered though, why the critics of those of us unafraid to call a Jihadist what he is never seem to understand that millions of other Muslims will benefit from the defeat of those Jihadists? But I digress again...
You're absolutely right, but proof of Iran driving the 'insurgency' will only open the doors to more teeth-gnashing over confronting the obvious Iranian threat.
Steve | | Question/Answer | | ETWolverine asked on 03/22/07 - Some prices of common products (approximations only) Jack Daniels Bourbon =$94.90 per gallon
1792 Bourbon = $149.90 per gallon
Reposado Tequila = $139.90 per gallon
Balvinie Single Malt Scotch Whiskey = $179.90 per gallon
Crappy domestic merlo = $29.90 per gallon
Crappy domestic beer = $23.09 per gallon
Sparkling water = $18.90 per gallon
Pantene Pro V shampoo with conditioner = $41.50 per gallon
Listerine mouthwash = $26.52 per gallon
Toothpaste (cheap stuff) = $42.45 per gallon
Evian bottled water = $11.43 per gallon
Tropicana Orange Juice = $7.99 per gallon
Coca Cola = $6.20 per gallon
Gatorade sports drink = $14.56 per gallon
Pet Promise canned dog food = $16.25 per gallon
And the cost of gasoline at the pump averages about $2.57 per gallon (nationawide average as of 3/19/07).
What in the hell is the big issue with gas prices. Why is everyone in such an uproar over the high cost of gas or the profits that oil companies are making? Your shampoo maker is making more per gallon than your oil company is. Why isn't anyone talking about the high price of shampoo and the shampoo company profits that should be taken away from them?
Elliot Itsdb answered on 03/22/07:You can however get a decent pinot noir for $37.45 per gallon. And stay away from the canned dog food...
Steve | | Question/Answer | | tomder55 asked on 03/22/07 - Fred Thompson continues to impress Here is part of his commentary tha the delivered on the Paul Harvey show this week .
Southern Exposure
By Fred Thompson
We are all very well aware of the fact that we have an illegal-immigration problem in this country. As usual, we avoided the problem for as long as we could and when we couldn’t avoid it any longer we were told that, indeed, somewhere between 12 and 20 million people had somehow come into this country unnoticed.
It’s like we went overnight from “no problem” to a problem so big that it now defies a good solution. It’s become one of those “there are no good choices only less bad choices” that Americans are becoming all too familiar with.
We know that the overwhelming majority of illegals come across the Mexican border. Fortunately, we’ve got someone who is all too willing to tell us what we should do about it — the president of Mexico Philipe Calderon. President Calderon doesn’t think much of our border policies. He criticizes our efforts to secure the border with things such as border fencing. He says that bottle necks at U.S. checkpoints hurt Mexican commerce and force his citizens to migrate illegally in order to make a living (and of course send money back to Mexico). He apparently thinks we should do nothing except make American citizens out of his constituents. Calderon also accused U.S. officials of failing to do enough to stop the flow of drugs in to the United States. Mexican politicians gave President Bush an earful of all of this during his recent trip to Mexico.
I think its time for a little plain talk to the leaders of Mexico. Something like:
hey guys, you’re our friends and neighbors and we love you but it’s time you had a little dose of reality. A sovereign nation loses that status if it cannot secure its own borders and we are going to do whatever is necessary to do so, although our policies won’t be as harsh as yours are along your southern border. And criticizing the U.S. for alternately doing too much and too little to stop your illegal activities is not going to set too well with Americans of good will who are trying to figure a way out of the mess that your and our open borders policy has already created.
My friends, it’s also time for a little introspection. Since we all agree that improving Mexico’s economy will help with the illegal-immigration problem, you might want to consider your own left-of -center policies. For example, nationalized industries are not known for enhancing economic growth. Just a thought. But here’s something even more to the point that you might want to think about: What does it say about the leadership of a country when that country’s economy and politics are dependent upon the exportation of its own citizens?
— Fred Thompson is an actor and former United States senator from Tennessee.
© PAUL HARVEY SHOW, ABC RADIO NETWORKS
Itsdb answered on 03/22/07:Sounds like ol' Fred may be getting serious about jumping in the race. Shouldn't be long before the left starts their preemptive strikes against him - if they haven't already. Oh, too late, he's apparently "a Denier."
Here's another Thompson commentary you should enjoy:
Gandhi's Way Isn't the American Way
Collective suicide is no foreign policy.
By Fred Thompson
I feel bad for Nancy Pelosi, AND her neighbors. Anti-war activists from the group Code Pink have been giving her the same treatment the president gets at his Crawford, Texas, ranch. Camping on her San Francisco lawn, they’re demanding she cut off funds to the troops in Iraq.
Besides coolers and mattresses, protesters have brought along a giant paper mache statue of Mahatma Gandhi, who is pretty much the symbol of the anti-war movement. Code Pink was founded on his birthday, and when Saddam Hussein was being given a last chance to open Iraq to U.N. weapons inspectors, posters appeared around America asking “What would Gandhi do?”
And that’s a pretty good question. At what point is it okay to fight dictators like Saddam or the al Qaeda terrorists who want to take his place?
It turns out that the answer, according to Gandhi, is NEVER. During World War II, Gandhi penned an open letter to the British people, urging them to surrender to the Nazis. Later, when the extent of the holocaust was known, he criticized Jews who had tried to escape or fight for their lives as they did in Warsaw and Treblinka. “The Jews should have offered themselves to the butcher’s knife,” he said. “They should have thrown themselves into the sea from cliffs.” “Collective suicide,” he told his biographer, “would have been heroism.”
The so-called peace movement certainly has the right to make Gandhi’s way their way, but their efforts to make collective suicide American foreign policy just won’t cut it in this country. When American’s think of heroism, we think of the young American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, risking their lives to prevent another Adolph Hitler or Saddam Hussein.
Gandhi probably wouldn't approve, but I can live with that.
— Fred Thompson is an actor and former United States senator from Tennessee.
© PAUL HARVEY SHOW, ABC RADIO NETWORKS | | Question/Answer | | tropicalstorm asked on 03/22/07 - Hybrid green car lie Once I get more facts and sources I plan to post this on the Christianity board----oooowwwwwhh!
"The Prius costs an average of $3.25 per mile driven over a lifetime of 100,000 miles"
"The Hummer costs a more fiscal $1.95 per mile to put on the road over an expected lifetime of 300,000 mile"
green car’ is the source of some of the worst pollution in North America; it takes more combined energy per Prius to produce than a Hummer.
the Prius is partly driven by a battery which contains nickel. The nickel is mined and smelted at a plant in Sudbury, Ontario. This plant has caused so much environmental damage to the surrounding environment that NASA has used the ‘dead zone’ around the plant to test moon rovers. The area around the plant is devoid of any life for miles.
The plant is the source of all the nickel found in a Prius’ battery and Toyota purchases 1,000 tons annually. Dubbed the Superstack, the plague-factory has spread sulfur dioxide across northern Ontario, becoming every environmentalist’s nightmare.
“The acid rain around Sudbury was so bad it destroyed all the plants and the soil slid down off the hillside,” said Canadian Greenpeace energy-coordinator David Martin during an interview with Mail | |
|
