January 25, 2006
I'm not dead yet
I'm feeling much better now.
TMI warning.
more...
Posted by: Rusty at
05:41 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 23 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Alright, I'll take one for the team. What are the 180s?
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 25, 2006 06:13 PM (RHG+K)
2
I was wondering that myself. Puking and the runs at the same time, maybe?
Posted by: Vinnie at January 25, 2006 06:36 PM (f289O)
3
I certainly hope you're on the mend by the time you read this.
Get well soon!
Posted by: her at January 25, 2006 06:43 PM (XU9K/)
Posted by: Leopold Stotch at January 25, 2006 07:06 PM (BcJKd)
5
No. I think it's explosive diarrhea that rebounds off the bowl. Backblast.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 25, 2006 07:22 PM (RHG+K)
6
You killed Rusty! You bastards!
Posted by: hondo at January 25, 2006 07:43 PM (3aakz)
Posted by: Howie at January 25, 2006 08:28 PM (D3+20)
8
Black death, perhaps? I hear it's been going around, along with TB and bedbugs, brought to us by our new neighbors fresh off the boat from the stone age.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 26, 2006 12:39 AM (0yYS2)
9
lemme guess.
you got the poo soooo bad that when you leave the toilet you take 3 steps only to realize that you have to do a 180 and repeat?
hope you feel better.
Posted by: Dr. Zubov at January 26, 2006 01:38 PM (mJD6w)
10
No, Vinnie has it right. It's where you endlessly rotate your position vis a vis the porcelin god. First one way, then the other.
Posted by: Rusty at January 26, 2006 01:47 PM (JQjhA)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Why Stop With Ben Franklin?
Because I'm a kind, caring, compassionate soul, I have decided to try and help our lefty friends by coming up with other famous quotes they can place on their
nearest convenient protest banner:
Mister, down this wall! - Ronald Reagan
4 score and seven years ago, we perish from this earth - Abraham Lincoln
Read my lips, no taxes - George H.W. Bush
We the order form establish justice - The Constitution
We hold that all men are endowed - The Declaration of Independence
Give or death! - Patrick Henry
A day that will live in the armed forces of Japan - Franklin Roosevelt
I did have sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinsky - Bill Clinton
Posted by: Vinnie at
03:51 PM
| Comments (16)
| Add Comment
Post contains 127 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Howie at January 25, 2006 04:16 PM (D3+20)
2
God almighty, Bill Clinton finally told the truth!
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 25, 2006 04:33 PM (rUyw4)
3
Hey, here's a couple more:
Mission! - George Bush
Bring it - also George Bush.
You're right. These are great.
Posted by: Mark Reilly at January 25, 2006 04:52 PM (UHKaK)
4
Hey, feel free to add your own. I could use a good laugh.
Posted by: Vinnie at January 25, 2006 05:14 PM (f289O)
5
If you want a good laugh, Vinnie, go to Babalu blog and read about Castro getting punked. I laughed my butt off.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 25, 2006 05:30 PM (rUyw4)
6
Okay, I'll have a go at this:
Ask, for you. - John F. Kennedy
Free, dream! - Martin Luther King Jr.
Yeeearrrrrrgh! - Howard Dean
Wait a minute.....something's not quite right with that last one.
Posted by: Graeme at January 25, 2006 05:51 PM (UrtKW)
7
We hold that all men are endowed
Heh. They wish.
If there was any doubt that Vinnie wrote these, it is hereby dispelled.
Posted by: tee bee at January 25, 2006 06:14 PM (q1JHF)
8
Take time to deliberate, but when the time for action arrives, stop - Andrew Jackson
Be religiously careful in our choice of all public fruits. - Elias Boudinot
When you are in any contest you should work to lose it. - Dwight D. Eisenhower
Let us resolve to be the victims of our history, giving way to blind suspicions and emotions. - John F. Kennedy
Posted by: Vonski at January 25, 2006 06:15 PM (Srmrz)
9
Move 'ZIG'
For great justice!
- Zero Wing
Posted by: Jeff Medcalf at January 25, 2006 06:42 PM (1kqww)
Posted by: SheriJo at January 25, 2006 08:35 PM (2F8P7)
11
Clinton (and say it like he would to yourself :
" I did have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Albright". "Actually it was a threesome, Arafat on one end, me on the other, I called heads! Ha Ha!"
Posted by: Howie at January 25, 2006 08:41 PM (D3+20)
12
How can you tell when BILL CLINTON is telling a lie? his mouth is open
Posted by: sandpiper at January 26, 2006 09:11 AM (U+eLg)
13
Bill Clinton doesn't have to speak to lie, even his body language is untrue.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 26, 2006 10:44 AM (0yYS2)
14
How about this great quote by Nietsche:
"That which does kill us makes us stronger"
Posted by: Brian D. Kohl at January 26, 2006 01:59 PM (/QwDV)
15
Be Franklin's full quote still applies to this situation. So I really don't understand your stupid reaction.
I don't know about you guys, but I consider the 4th Amendment to the Bill of Rights to be an "essential liberty" and I also think the NSA warrantess wiretapping qualifies as providing "temporary safety".
Then again, I actually care about the Constitution. Maybe that is my problem?
I appear to be stuck in that Constitution-loving pre 9/11 mentallity. Sorry about that.
Posted by: The Disenfranchised Voter at January 27, 2006 01:33 AM (agR1e)
Posted by: The Disenfranchised Voter at January 27, 2006 01:34 AM (agR1e)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Tin foil Patrol Across The Pond
Yes first we have Cindy, remember Cindy? She reveals herself as a hater of all government including Bill Clinton. No wonder the left has dropped her like a hot rock. Bill is Evil, Bush is Evil the only person she has not accused of evil is the terrorist er us excuse me “freedom fighters” who actually killed Casey. Her strategy for defeating terrorist is; just lay there and take it. Well practice does make perfect Cindy. She thinks it’s all mcbillarybusherburtonwardaddy’s fault anyway.
Via Alarming News :And about Bill Clinton . . . . You know, I really think he should have been impeached, but not for a bl*w job. His policies are responsible for killing more Iraqis that George Bush.
Oh but there is more Via
NEWSLINKER :
Idiotarianism: Cindy Sheehan has authored a statement of her ideology, called Matriotism. If I tried to explain it, you would think I was unfairly satirizing her position. You have to read it to believe it
Also via NEWSLINKER :
Pork Soup Becomes Political in France: Small groups linked to the extreme
right are ladling pork soup to France's homeless. Critics and some officials
denounce the charity as discriminatory: because it contains pork, the soup
is off-limits for Muslims. Critics view the stew — dubbed "identity soup" by
its cooks — as a cynical far-right ploy to penetrate the most vulnerable
level of society while masking their intentions as humanitarian.
Yes an evil rightwing conspiracy to feed people who love pork.
Posted by: Howie at
03:38 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 256 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Pork soup? Could it be that the French are finally going to start fighting back against the horde of subhuman scum that has infested their land? Hell, if they manage to expel the muslims from France, again, I'll have to stop making fun of them!
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 25, 2006 05:34 PM (0yYS2)
2
Could Casey Sheehan have committed suicide to get away from his sick, stupid, idiotic mother?
Posted by: greyrooster at January 25, 2006 06:47 PM (YjVDY)
3
I tried to read her "Matriotism" screed. I got to the second paragraph. I think that's a record. The farthest I had ever read any of her screeds was about one sentence.
Posted by: Oyster at January 26, 2006 06:03 AM (YudAC)
4
Do you think CINDY SHEEHAN will have her picture in the war museum there in HO CHI MIN CITY there in vietnam? after all JOHN KERRYS and JANE FONDAS pictures are there
Posted by: sandpiper at January 26, 2006 09:19 AM (U+eLg)
5
DO NOT TOUCH OUR PORK SOUP !
You may have heard about the Identity Soups. These traditional pork soups are distributed in several towns in France and Belgium by Identity associations that are wishing to help their compatriots living in poverty.
These de Identity soups have been accused of racism because, since they contain pork, they would exclude Jews and Muslims. Still, pork meat is key to the traditional Gallic art of cooking (Read again the AsterixÂ’ adventures !). It is also the cheapest meat and this is an important factor of choice for non-subsidised associations. And, last but not least, when Jewish or Muslim associations are helping their fellows from the same religion they choose to serve kosher or hallal soups and this does not shock us nor does it shock anybody elseÂ… Now, when Europeans are trying to help their fellow compatriots with pork, why should it then be considered as racism ?
January 14th 2006, following a request from the Mayor of Strasbourg (North East of France), the Prefect (representing the French State) has prohibited the distribution of the Identity Soup with the support of the police and has arrested the head of the association organising the soup, named Solidarité Alsacienne (Alsatian Solidarity).
IN FRANCE THE STATE PREVENTS
FRENCH PEOPLE TO HELP FRENCH AND EUROPEAN PEOPLE !
All European nations are concerned by this measure : if we do not react today, tomorrow they might prohibit the croissant as the racist symbol of the European victory against the Turkish Muslim army that was at the door of Vienna in 1683. Or, like a director of a British school did, they may prohibit to tell stories such as “The three little pigs” under the excuse that it could heart the sensitivity of Muslim kids. It is now that we shall react !
OUR ARMS ARE THE PHONE AND THE EMAILS !
If you want to protect French and European culinary traditions and especially the freedom of Europeans to live on their own soil according to their ancestral customs, phone, send a email and ask your friends to do the same to :
- the Prefect of Bas-Rhin, Jean-Paul FAUGERE : chantal.jaouen@bas-rhin.pref.gouv.fr - tel. (33) 03 88 21 67 6

,
- the Mayor of Strasbourg, Fabienne KELLER : fkeller@cus-strasbourg.net - (tel. (33) 03.88.43.65.0

- the Mayor’s « Premier Adjoint » Robert GROSSMANN: rgrossmann@cus-strasbourg.net - (tel. (33) 03.88.43.65.03),
- the local newspaper: redaction@dna.fr (tel. (33) 03.88.21.55.00),
- please copy us using the following address (this will be used to count the emails sent) : contact@les-identitaires.com
This call is sent in more than fifteen European countries as well as in North and South America, Canada and Quebec. Our objective: that the Prefect, the Mayor and the local newspaper receive each 100.000 emails asking for freedom for Identity Soups. No insult, no threat, no attachment, just these few words as a title :
FREEDOM FOR OUR PORK SOUP !
LIBERTÉ POUR NOTRE SOUPE AU COCHON !
For any information on Identity Soups :
http://solidarite-alsacienne.hautetfort.com
http://www.association-sdf.com
http://www.soulidarieta.org
http://www.renaissancesociale.be
Posted by: Identitaire at February 02, 2006 09:42 AM (o8BSM)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Hitchens at Slate.
The latest message from Osama Bin Laden may be an indication of weakness.
Slate : The conditions for this latest truce are of course impossible as well. All one needs, in order to earn Bin Laden's mercy, is to give up Afghanistan and Iraq. But this raises a more intriguing question. Why are formerly triumphalist jihadists using the language of "truce" at all? Not very long ago, God was claimed to be on their side and victory certain.
Debbie at ITB has more. Howie thinks it was a blink too. I find I only agree with Christopher half the time so I read one skip one so on and so forth.
Posted by: Howie at
03:22 PM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 116 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Howie, a truce offer from OBL is definitely a sign of weakness. This truce is nothing more than a hudna, a chance for al-Queda to regroup and regain its strength.
This is the time that we should re-double our efforts against these jihadists. We need to hit them hard, hit them often, and make them pay dearly. No matter what some believe, al-Queda is running out of quality recruits or they would never offer a truce.
No Islamist has ever offered a truce that they intended to keep. It is only done in an effort to fool the opponent. Remember, lying to a non-Muslim is acceptible and good, and should be used to whatever advantage may be attained. That is the reason they offer a truce.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 25, 2006 04:00 PM (rUyw4)
Posted by: Howie at January 25, 2006 04:14 PM (D3+20)
3
I disagree that a truce offering is a sign of weakness. In the history of militant Islam, a truce often is suggested to rebuild, but it has also been a last-chance offer before a strike.
I don't know which one this is from Bin Laden, but I do think it's too early to suggest this is a sign of weakness. There are many signs of weakness for AQ and OBL specifically, but I'm not sure this is one of them.
Posted by: Chad Evans at January 25, 2006 04:34 PM (+DXHJ)
4
When has a truce been offered by militant Islam as a last chance previous to a strike? I can't think of one, but I'm here to learn, so clue me in.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 25, 2006 05:07 PM (rUyw4)
5
>>>last-chance offer before a strike.
oh bull honkey. Mohamedans are blood thirsty savages, yes, but they aren't stupid.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 25, 2006 05:42 PM (XA7De)
6
I think Chad missed it by about a mile. For Osama to even speak the word truce, it shows that he has given up hope. He probably won't last much longer with his health and all, and sees his organization's infrastructure falling apart, his fighters killed by the scores, and nobody in the world making more than token efforts to come to his aid. He is screwed coming and going, and is afraid he will live long enough to see the end of islam as a serious threat to civilization if he can't call a time-out. I hope he does live that long. Just.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 25, 2006 05:42 PM (0yYS2)
7
Bin Laden is tired of running I mean, Chasing Americans down and wants a truce so we will stop and wait for him to catch up.
This is how I predict the war will go:
Bin Laden makes the call. Al-Zawahiri shoots to the right, (look at 'em go!) Meanwhile Ahmed Mohammed Hamed Ali will fake with a running play and go for long play down the middle. BIN LADEN Hammers the ball.... straight Down the center -- WHOA!
(there's a flag on the play)
(REF-CANADA) "face mask against the Defense (U.S.) 5 yard penalty," repeat 4th down".
OKAY...
4th down and with only 3 yards to go.
JIHADI Cave Dwellers have called their 3rd and final time out While they speak with their coach, PAUL MARTIN
Oh MY GOD! DID YOU SEE THAT! The Cave Dwellers Mascott just spit on the The fans of the U.S. Patriots and now he's kicking the U.S. Patriots Mascot.
This is despicable, This is really bad sportsmanship. Someone please get that Camel off the field.
I can't believe this. We apologize folks for the delay. Let's get back to the game, shall we.
28 - 23 U.S. Patriots are in the lead. Here at IRAQI STADIUM,(I'm Steve, and I'm BOB and we're your host for tonights show)(BOB) 4th quarter with only 40 seconds left on the clock. U.S. Patriots are really dominating the JIHADI Cave Dwellers.
(Yes, BOB)"Cave Dwellers really need to make something happen out there tonight".
Well Steve; looks like they heard your demands and they're going for it!
here's the break and WHOA!...U.S. Brings the House to the line of scrimage. (WOW! They look ready to INVADE this QUARTER BACK!!)(IT COULD BE WORLD WAR 3 ANY SECOND!!)
Here's the snap and Bin Laden pulls back and out of the pocket breaking 1, 2, no wait..3 tackles.
He looks left, see's no one open. Looks right, see's Abdelkarim Hussein Mohamed Al-Nasser
(bet you can't say that 3 times fast BOB)(I won't even try steve) (CHUCKLES...)
he's wide open, Bin Laden draws back and drives the ??pig skin?? over the heads of the defense.. BUT WAIT...Here's BUSH Down the center and in the air.. EAT YOUR HEART OUT MICHEAL JORDAN!...He DENIES THE BALL PASSAGE.
if you think that's strange BOB,look at that!!!.. "WHAT THE HELL"!!... IT can't be.. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN...it's RONALD REAGAN.. vearing down the left side, HOOKS THE QUERTERBACK! and down goes BIN LADEN. Ronald is now, what appears to be biting BIN on the ankle. Ouch Steve, that looks like that hurts. (and the Jihadi fans are booing) (Glad the REF didn't see that one BOB)WAIT!!! WHERE's The BALL??? FUMBLED and it's picked up by...... TACO BANDIT....(LISTEN TO THAT CROWD CHEER LOUDER THAN EVER) to the 50...40...30...20...HE... COULD... GO... ALL... THE... WAYYYYY....!!! TOUCH DOWN AND THE U.S. PATRIOTS HAVE DONE IT AGIAN!
I'm Bob and I'm Steve saying this has been the weirdest friggin football game in history. I'm up for a beer wadda ya say Bob, sounds good steve....
Please stay tuned for Bin-ladin On ICE....
Posted by: Taco Bandit at January 25, 2006 05:56 PM (MOKXn)
8
Taco Bandit gets a new lightsabre!
Posted by: Howie at January 26, 2006 08:22 AM (D3+20)
9
"Blink" is the term I've been using for it. Nerves or maybe trying to sucker us in. Either way don't let up.
Posted by: Howie at January 26, 2006 08:40 AM (D3+20)
10
Chad is talking about the attacks in London and Madrid. Offers of a truce were given prior to these two attacks. There may be other examples.
Posted by: Debbie at January 26, 2006 11:43 AM (RHhPT)
11
Debbie,
Rather than a truce I consider these offers to be a ruse. I suppose you could say that he proposed a truce with parts of Europe, but I think it was more of a threat against Spain and Britain to withdraw their troops from Iraq. I don't consider that particular offer to be a truce. However, I might be mistaken as my memory is not as good as it once was.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 26, 2006 09:11 PM (rUyw4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Pine Bluff Chemical Arsenal Security Breach
Probing to see test our security or maybe nothing.
Seattlepi : WHITE HALL, Ark. -- The Army stepped up security at an arsenal where chemical weapons are stored after three people entered a restricted zone, officials said Wednesday.
The security measures were taken as a precaution at the Pine Bluff Arsenal after the intrusion at a forested federal preserve 30 miles south of Little Rock. Officials didn't know what the three people were doing there, spokeswoman Cheryl Avery said.
Worth watching.
Posted by: Howie at
03:18 PM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 92 words, total size 1 kb.
1
This story has popped up a couple of times in obscure sources over the past few weeks. I have no idea what this is about.
Posted by: hondo at January 25, 2006 03:25 PM (3aakz)
2
You do know that we have members of our military whose job it is to breach security at these joints.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at January 25, 2006 03:48 PM (5ceWd)
3
Yes I the only common thread I found was they were all vauge. Maybe someone testing our security. They tresspass and then obsereve the reaction to that or some drunk kids mudding and got off in the wrong area. If anyone see's the resolution before we do email me or one of the others ASAP.
Posted by: Howie at January 25, 2006 03:49 PM (D3+20)
4
Err uh add a please to that last request.
Filthy: So how long would that target in your idea be allowed to go on before the revaltion and the bawling out part? Good point. Filthy has a pretty good sniffer on these things I think he may be correct. But I have seen reports as well that the enemy also does this to guage our security reaction. It will all come out in the wash I reckon.
Posted by: Howie at January 25, 2006 03:55 PM (D3+20)
5
I was over at Bayou Meto, which is pretty close to Pine Bluff, last weekend duckhunting and I can tell you that the locals think that potential terrorists are probing the security at the Pine Bluff Arsenal.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 25, 2006 04:08 PM (rUyw4)
6
Down that way it could easily be a couple of off-season hunters - something to jaw about down at the local Dinner.
Remember once long ago pulling guard duty on an isolated explosives point in Missouri. Got the hold security briefing spiel.
Boring gig! But 2am - car with lights out off in the distance pulls behid some buildings - partner and I are armed, fired up and spooked! - commo's not working (typical).
Partner is a nervous trigger happy dickmoron from Bumfuck Ohio (no offense). We carefully approach the vehicle ...
I get up to the window - shine a flashlight n' point my M16 - two teen locals doing the horizontal bop in daddy's car - she screams - partner freaks n' accidentally fires round into ground (nearly shot himself in the foot!).
Some night! Talk about interuptus!!! Anyway - they leave - I keep private spare rounds - for accountiblity purposes (ha ha) - n' document - nothing! n' smack Ohio Bob!
few weeks later I hear "stories" - possible terrorists (White Supremist type), security breech, shots fired, they fled - all started by Ohio Bob.
Senior NCO comes to me - whats up? - Nuthin'! Who ya gonna believe - smart guy like me from NY or dickhead Bob who likes his barracks room cause its bigger than his trailer back home!
Senior NCO is PR from Jersey City - nuff said.
Simple story - but this is how stories begin. Wouldn't be surprised if Ohio Bob was an aging square badge security guard there.
Posted by: hondo at January 25, 2006 05:03 PM (3aakz)
7
Poachers. That's my bet.
Posted by: Rusty at January 25, 2006 05:34 PM (JQjhA)
8
Rusty
On all military facilities hunting is either not allowed or severely restricted - and the game do know this! Its a hunters paradise if you don't get caught.
Watched a herd of whitetail waltz thru and munch out on a 45cal range - shut range down - popped of a couple of rounds to spook them off - they didn't flinch!
Posted by: hondo at January 25, 2006 06:17 PM (3aakz)
9
In answer to your question Howie, in the book "Rogue Warrior" the author describes how he left SEAL Team SIX, and was tasked with doing security intrusions into Naval bases, and other important facilities, as a team called "RED CELL"
He said his team was able to breach one U.S Embassy that was later targetted for a bomb, and had warned about suspicious local activity and the possibility of it being a target of attack.
I had never heard that before, I should imagine it would be covered-up and corrected, and not become a news story if possible?
Some people question his stories though. I thought I'd throw it out there.
Posted by: dave at January 25, 2006 06:19 PM (CcXvt)
10
Hondo: White supremists are not terrorists.
Posted by: greyrooster at January 25, 2006 06:57 PM (YjVDY)
11
I happened to be in St Louis on Friday and was able to read the Post Dispatch they report a guard thought hw say people but further investigation found nothing. However Security was increased as a precaution.
Quote " whatever it was it was not human"
So there you have it Aliens or wildlife the dogs got all happy and wanted to chase but did not indicate human was what they were smelliin.
Posted by: Howie at January 29, 2006 11:52 AM (D3+20)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Essential Liberties
Jay at
Stop the ACLU points us to an important
post by Michelle Malkin exposing the radical Left's hijacking of Benjamin Franklin's famous, and always mangled, quote:
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
In this photo, you see one of the most popular variations of Ben's words.
more...
Posted by: Bluto at
11:33 AM
| Comments (26)
| Add Comment
Post contains 93 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I've got one by Jefferson that says, "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither".
That being said the NSA search for information to prevent an attack during a time of war I find entirely reasonable. This info is not used for prosecution just for military protection of the US. Now I'm sure 99% turns out useless but then again they have no idea just where good info will come from. You have to have evidence to take to the judge if you want a warrant not much but at least a smidgen so you could go after acceptable evidence that could be used in criminal prosecution. I would imagine that being around here that my communications are monitored. Gee I sure feel sorry for that guy his job really sucks he must be bored beyond comprehension. So I'm all for liberty and don't really like the Patriot act much I'd rather just fight them. But the NSA stuff don't bother me it's
reasonable to me. If the NSA did not look and there was an attack they would blab on about how we should have been looking. Dem-ned if you do and Dem-ned if you don't.
Posted by: Howie at January 25, 2006 12:00 PM (D3+20)
2
It always kills me how they never plan ahead for their home-made posters. They always have to squeeze in the last few letters and often have to squeeze a forgotten letter into the middle somewhere.
Posted by: Oyster at January 25, 2006 12:12 PM (osKlJ)
3
Oh well, the blanket seems about the same as the original quote, or close enough to be used in propaganda.
Well, anyways, I was going through some oldies, and I noticed many people threatening me with viruses and giving out my server infos, and the other Baber tried to Nemesis some pic to me but apparently N. doesn't support umlauts so blaah blaah blaah....
The actual point was to say how very public commenting actually seems to be. Despite threats being seemingly pointless as they certainly haven't shown any actual activity
(except some floodbot for MSN Messenger, which I don't even use and probably some e-mail viruses I never read due to hotmails "all in the trash"-option (last time I read my e-mail: spring 2005 or autumn 2004)), I'm shocked at how easy it is to get info just by asking or checking my own temp. files and such with a rather unstable omni-reader.
I strongly support selfcensorship, as the Internet is not a private place thanks to "terrorism" and "international security" laws that allow pretty much anyone to gather info on pretty much anything if it seems even remotely anti-system or near-criminal. Especially if you're using a non-Windows-system, you can't even blend in with the mass then.
They can even keep a track of what you search if they have even the slightest excuse to do so. So you can't search for porn. =F So see ya, I'm off the Canuck, Brit, Arab and Yankee sites, they're the ones under Big Brothers allseeing eye already. They are after Google now, goodbye freedom to search for "weapons of mass destruction", "Allah kill president" and anthrax.
Posted by: A Finn at January 25, 2006 12:32 PM (lGolT)
4
After reading her comments on DOWDIFYING BEN FRANKLIN, it seems to me Ms. Malkin's largest complaint is not with civil liberty absolutists or Maureen Dowd; it is with the intellectually lazy.
The quote generally attributed to Benjamin Franklin--though sometimes attributed to author Richard Jackson--has surely been mangled by the left in their efforts to voice displeasure with the Bush administrations’ recent eavesdropping revelations. But why be selfish; political discourse is littered with miquotations of this line. As Richard Minsky has stated in researching his upcoming, The Bill of Rights, (www.futureofthebook.com), the phrase has been widely misquoted by “libertarians, conservatives, neo-Nazis, and and every imaginable mainstream and fringe group.” Sorry, but all in all, her wriitng is a pretty disingenuous --and intellectually lazy--piece.
Posted by: Drew at January 25, 2006 12:37 PM (UHKaK)
5
Of course they miss the irony that the original statement was made regarding capitulating to an aggressor for the sake of peace. Or maybe they don't?
Every argument they've made since time immemorial has basically been a version of why we should either pay the Danegeld or surrender outright without putting up even pretense of a fight in either case. Liberals are cowards and traitors and should be treated with all due and proper contempt.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 25, 2006 12:51 PM (0yYS2)
6
Also missed is the fact that the original 1755 writing became most famous for its use in a 1759 book written solely for the purpose of ... you got it; propaganda.
Posted by: Drew at January 25, 2006 01:10 PM (UHKaK)
7
Quotation aside - the entire basis for using it is the left's "what if" exaggerated and hysterical arguement and fears of AMERIKA THE POLICE STATE. This is part and parcel of their core fundamental belief systems - the current NSA flap is simply being incorporated into it - they've had these beliefs long before it - and will retain them long afterwards.
I don't buy or accept their "what if" arguements or opinion of AMERIKA. I also know the the majority of Americans don't either. That's why I'm not interested in playing this "NSA Debate Game Thing".
I know where their heads are at - thats what matters - they need to sell their hysteria and fears to the general population - and they've never been any good at that.
What they are good at is alienating the uncommitted bystanders with their idiotic antics, "performance art", and ideological baggage which they invariably drag along. Go to an anti-war protest and what you will see are banners - Free Mumia, Pro-Abortion, Gay Rights, Save The Rainforrest, etc etc etc and a few actually about the War (but often twisted to their own Anti-Amerika rant).
They have no clue about presentation or salesmenship! They couldn't sell a bottle a water to a thirty man in the middle of the desert without first giving him a 2 hour speech on the logic of one of the causes - and not notice that he's already moved on to look for water somewhere else!
Posted by: hondo at January 25, 2006 01:20 PM (3aakz)
8
So successes in politics are just really good sell jobs?
Posted by: wavygravy at January 25, 2006 04:07 PM (UHKaK)
9
Er, Yes wavygravy! That is a BIG part of it - and thankfully - you didn't know that!
You can't do jack till your actually sitting in the big seat first!
So wavygravy! Go sit on the floor in yoga fashion and hum.
Posted by: hondo at January 25, 2006 05:10 PM (3aakz)
10
A Finn: (1) doesn't sound like you. Have you reached puberty at last?
(2) Do you have a point?
Posted by: greyrooster at January 25, 2006 07:06 PM (YjVDY)
11
Thanks for clarifying Hondo. I was under the mistaken assumption that public policy was based upon the merits of said policy,its stated goals, whether or not it served the interests of the public and actually required their input. I should have been more cynical, realizing it was all about who's the better "salesman." Works for cars and furniture, why not public policy, right?
Posted by: wavygravy at January 26, 2006 08:32 AM (UHKaK)
12
Pompous and pretentious, aren't you? Keep on hummin' and chantin'.
Posted by: hondo at January 26, 2006 01:13 PM (3aakz)
13
Not really; it just seems that way to the ignorant and the ill-mannered. And you keep on sellin'
Posted by: wavygravy at January 26, 2006 03:13 PM (UHKaK)
14
"I was under the mistaken assumption that public policy was based upon the merits of said policy, its stated goals, whether or not it served the interests of the public and actually required their input".
The problem, wavy, is that most of us can't agree on the merits of said policy. What you might think is meritorious I might think is downright stupid, such as welfare. I'm not trying to put words in hondo's mouth, but perhaps he was referring to an attempt to get other people to see your side of the argument. And I just used welfare as an example, and I'm not saying I oppose it. j/s
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 26, 2006 04:36 PM (rUyw4)
15
Sure, I see the point he was making about the necessity of persuasion, i.e. "selling", in policy making and who does it better, but that's what's so maddening---that's almost all it is today. Hondo's sentiments are dead-on with the way vast swaths of the public thinks about government policy in general; he or she who packages the "truth" best and then sells it to the most people is the winner and should be. I like to think there more to defining a policy's merit that that.
Posted by: wavygravy at January 26, 2006 05:02 PM (UHKaK)
16
Public policy is based on debate, arguement and functional concensus - you have to talk to people and convince them ...
You have to sell your arguement - you have to market your position - anyone who can't see the functional analogy with salesmenship - is a disillusioned fool.
When they lose - they look everywhere for an explanation, someone or something to blame - but never self-examination - never themselves.
The public is stupid - ergo - they are smarter - which gives them solice. that's cool - I can live with that - I am an illiterate backwoods racist sexist yahoo living in a trailer park with a truck outside parked up on concrete blocks - if that makes you feel better wavygravy (love the handle) - that's absolutely fine with me!
Posted by: hondo at January 26, 2006 06:45 PM (3aakz)
17
"I was under the mistaken assumption that public policy ..... whether or not it served the interests of the public and actually required their imput."
WOW! Did you even read what you wrote? - Classic Meritocracy is also Classic Elitism! You spelled it out so beautifully! Others (who are worthy) will decide what serves and whether public imput is required - all for their own good of course!
And for a moment, I thought you were smart! You just "advertised" your strongest belief - and greatest weakness!
Way to go wavy - I love it!
Posted by: hondo at January 26, 2006 06:58 PM (3aakz)
18
The full quote still applies to this situation.
I don't know about you guys, but I consider the 4th Amendment to the Bill of Rights to be an "essential liberty" and I also think the NSA warrantess wiretapping qualifies as providing "temporary safety".
Then again, I actually care about the Constitution. Maybe that is my problem?
Posted by: The Disenfranchised Voter at January 26, 2006 07:18 PM (agR1e)
19
Hondo: Yeah, I didn't put that well; the "whether or not" was only meant for the part about serving the public interest, not the part about public input--that is ALWAYS required and not to be left to the leaders to decide.
And....I think you're reading way too much into it what I've been saying. Your original post above was something to the effect of Dems being lousy at selling their ideas, that they couldn't sell water to a guy dying of thirst and that's the biggest reason why their ideas never gain traction.
My retort was to say that there is a lot more to putting good policy in place then being good at selling it--or at least there should be.
Yes, you must get people on your side and yes, you must persuade. But the ideas have to be good ideas in the first place and THAT is what's missing.
I think these days some real crap is being well-marketed by politicos of all stripes and either too many people paying too little attention are letting this stuff slip past them or they're letting their partisan loyalties suspend their critical thinking --conservative, liberal and everything in between.
The idea that a well-marketed but poorly conceived idea deserves its place in public policy--which I took your original statement to say-- is just bad government.
If that's not your position, then I stand corrected.
Posted by: wavygravy at January 26, 2006 07:46 PM (oxMjD)
20
What is good - is by its very nature - open to subjective interpretation. I would never advocate (sell) something I did not thing is "good". I do believe in what I say and think (its not an act or con) - You can disagree - fine - but the simple act of disagreement doesn't make my "good" bad - save your own personal interpretation.
You still have to convince (sell) others - as I/we must continuously convince same.
Things aren't going your way - self-examination is in order - but you don't do that. Your still looking for ways to dismiss the opposition and critize the others (public) for not seeing things your way.
Not a winning strategy - winning is everything - otherwise your "good" remains nothing more than unfulfilled wishes and dreams.
Posted by: hondo at January 26, 2006 08:21 PM (3aakz)
21
Two points of disagreement: not all "goods" are subjective, some are universal. Examples: policies that do not allow for child exploitation and those that permit any race to vote.
Second, at the governmental level, it's not really a zero-sum game; I think you'll find more "goods" are typically "won" through compromise than not. Otherwise, you make sense.
Posted by: wavygravy at January 26, 2006 09:00 PM (oxMjD)
22
Yep, wavy, their are some things we can all agree on, that's for sure.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 26, 2006 09:17 PM (rUyw4)
23
Your smart - and you knew damn well what I meant about "goods". Of course there are agreed universals - but by even bringing up the obvious (which is not in contention) you achieve nothing but mischieviously sidestepping the issue that much of everything else IS SUBJECTIVE!
You want to score a point - fine - but see how meaningless that was - and how the selling (yes! Selling!) of ideas is so extremely important. Would you feel better if I used a thesaurus and used a different word?
Compromise goes hand in hand with selling - it is OBVIOUS! (Hell! There even is a political term called horse-trading!) When you have to - you do - when you don't - you don't. But bear this in mind - on compromise you automatically assume two distinct sides - there are not! There are MANY! Some differing from one another by only degrees. To achieve success/compromise you work with that reality and built the consensus for action.
I understand what your saying - I'm not being confrontational - I'm actually trying to be helpful (in my subjective way).
Posted by: hondo at January 26, 2006 10:06 PM (3aakz)
24
Hondo: yes, I did know what you meant and when you boil it all down, you're right -- without the sell, nothing actually ever gets put into action. Like all of politics, it's a matter of degrees. Set, game, match: Hondo.
Posted by: wavygravy at January 26, 2006 11:24 PM (oxMjD)
25
wavygravy
OK - Oh, welcome to the board if you wish to hang around. You may encounter a few voices who will want to gut you with dull knives and kill all liberals (along with a lot of other things) - but it goes with the territory - take it in stride (and give back and use your head when doing it!). Other than that - join in and try to enjoy - comedy works for me (sometimes satire - there is a difference).
Posted by: hondo at January 26, 2006 11:33 PM (3aakz)
26
Hondo: yeah, I see you've noticed I probably lean a bit further to the left then the typical blogger here. But what the hell, that's why I came, to try and find good political debate--helluva lot more informative than seeking out an echo chamber of my views. So far, so good.
I'll take you up on your offer and drop by now and again. As for those who'll want to hang me, I've found that trying to give their opinions a little respect (when possible of course) goes a long way in disarming even the hardest of the hardcore. And when I'm out-argued, out-foxed or plain out-matched, all the better it be a conservative. Good talking with you.
Posted by: wavygravy at January 27, 2006 12:04 AM (oxMjD)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Sunnis to Zaqueery GTFO My Province Beotch
Sunni insurgent groups join together to run Al-Qaeda out of Anbar Province in Iraq.
Via The Australian News :
"There was a meeting right after the bombings," one Ramadi resident said, speaking anonymously for fear of reprisals.
"Tribal leaders and political figures gathered to form the Anbar Revolutionaries to fight al-Qa'ida in Anbar and force them to leave the province.
"Since then, there has been all-out war between them."
Last week, three local Islamist groups around Ramadi - the 1920 Brigades, the Mujaheddin Army and the Islamic Movement for Iraq's Mujaheddin - met to distance themselves from their fellow Islamists in al-Qa'ida.
The statement condemned "armed operations which target innocents" and affirmed "a halt to co-operation with al-Qa'ida".
In a further sign of the rifts emerging within Iraq's insurgency, Zarqawi has also stepped aside as the head of a new council of radical groups in favour of an Iraqi, according to a posting on a website used by al-Qa'ida.
Hat Tip:
Jihad Watch.
Sing it with me! GTFO GTFO GTFO my province Beotch!
Posted by: Howie at
10:05 AM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 185 words, total size 1 kb.
1
It's just a turf battle. Don't read too much into this.
Posted by: Ariya at January 25, 2006 10:24 AM (uxW3N)
2
Ah yes but a turf battle I can delight in.
Posted by: Howie at January 25, 2006 10:28 AM (D3+20)
3
Me too, Howie. And kind of interesting how the "civil war" has not manifested itself. Instead, those who try to instigate such a war end up getting their a$$es thrown out.
Posted by: Oyster at January 25, 2006 10:33 AM (osKlJ)
4
You're right Ariya, but it would be far better for Iraqis to be in control rather than al Qaeda, even if they are still fighting our forces, because they're fighting for different reasons, and are not committing acts of terrorism against their own people. Also, if they are just fighting to get US troops to leave, then local sheikhs can be put in charge of local affairs, and our troops can go fight AQ elsewhere.
This is a compromise situation, but any compromise which gets us closer to our goals is acceptable. We don't necessarily have to have the Iraqis as our allies, but we certainly don't want them as enemies, so if they're willing to take up the fight against AQ, we should try to make an agreement with them.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 25, 2006 10:33 AM (0yYS2)
5
Well, the Sunnis just want Al Qaeda out so they can force their own standard on the country (again). And we know how that went...
Posted by: Ariya at January 25, 2006 11:06 AM (uxW3N)
6
Yeah but it's too late for that now, they've gotten to like the taste of freedom, and voting seems to be all the rage these days, so any recidivists will be engulfed by the majority who just want peace and prosperity.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 25, 2006 11:19 AM (0yYS2)
7
Heh...
Article from Rooters:
-----
An Iraqi television cameraman was killed in clashes between Sunni rebels and U.S. forces in the insurgent stronghold of Ramadi on Tuesday, witnesses said on Wednesday.
-----
Like I said... turf war.
Posted by: Ariya at January 25, 2006 01:06 PM (uxW3N)
8
A muslim is still a muslim. Same as a rat is still a rat. Vermin at best.
Posted by: greyrooster at January 25, 2006 07:12 PM (YjVDY)
9
Heh. Couldn't have said it better myself rooster, but in defense of rats, they can't help what they are, but muslims are
supposed to be human beings, complete with free will and that little thing we call humanity, but which we know they lack.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 26, 2006 12:42 AM (0yYS2)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Iranian Official Calls Ahmadinejad “Certafiably Insane”.
If you suspect IranÂ’s moves are just to drive up oil prices to make more money, yes thatÂ’s true. But is that all? I think not.
MichNews : "’This guy is not a politician,’ the source quoted the official as saying. ‘He is certifiably insane.’" (In America, we would call a person like that a "religious nut.")
Why? Because he is such a religious fanatic of the lunatic sort that he is causing alarm even among his own Muslims. There are Muslims and then there are even the fringe, "insane"
Muslims who believe that the world will change for the better when it gets worse.
The Messiah can only reappear when there is global chaos. At present, there is not enough of that. Therefore, the Messiah awaits his disciple, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to see through the details. That is why the President will not heed UN Security Council sanctions, nor dialogue with mere mortals, when he is already hearing messages from the invisible one yet to return.
Chaos part of the plan indeed! ItÂ’s in IranÂ’s interest to push up tension. More tension = higher oil prices. But is that all?
That is why Muslims in Iran state that the new President is not actually a politician. He is a religious zealot of a killing cult called "Islam." Actually, all Muslims are a part of that murdering cult; but the President is even more so.
Muslims believe that America is the Great Satan and should be conquered; however the more astute hold that such should not be broadcast globally. However, this new President says what he believes for the world media to pick up his every breath. That is because he seizes so strongly his fanatic message network with the invisible that he concludes the world should know of his privileged status with the one yet to return.
“Murdering cult”, not my words but hey at least he’s honest about it.
Note the cultic rituals overseen by the new Iranian President: "Meeting with his cabinet shortly after taking office last August, the new president reportedly had Cabinet members sign a loyalty oath to the 12th imam, which they dropped into a well near where the Shiite messiah is believed to be hiding.
"Reports in government media outlets in Tehran have quoted Ahmadinejad as having told regime officials that the 12th imam will reappear in two years. That was too much for Iranian legislator Akbar Alami, who publicly questioned Ahmadinejad's judgment, saying that even Islam's holiest figures have never made such claims."
So when members of a “murdering cult” describe you as a “religious nut”…never mind enough said.
Related Via Drudge :
TEHRAN - Iran's defence minister hit back Wednesday at veiled Israeli threats of an attack, saying Iran and its allies could put the Jewish state "in an eternal coma" like that of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
Hat Tip: Cube Neighbor Dave in whom I've now succeeded in creating an addiction to Michelle Malkin's blog. Muahahahahaha!
Posted by: Howie at
09:14 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 501 words, total size 3 kb.
1
So he's 'insane' not because he wants to destroy Israel and the US and have Islam rule the world, but rather because he unceremoniously kicked people out of their priveledged positions and blabs about the secret plans for Islam to rule the world. Okee Dokee.
Posted by: Graeme at January 25, 2006 10:10 AM (UrtKW)
2
Oh no it's all the above +.
Posted by: Howie at January 25, 2006 10:13 AM (D3+20)
3
He's a grab-bag of symptoms really, all of which cry out for immediate termination.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 25, 2006 10:35 AM (0yYS2)
4
Muslims believe America is the great Satan? The problem with muslims is that they fornicate with swine. This affects their ability to think rationally because they like pigs better than muslim women. On this, we agree. A yorkshire is more appealing than a raghead in a veil running down the street with fist raised cursing their betters.
Posted by: greyrooster at January 25, 2006 07:20 PM (YjVDY)
5
Yes, I agree that the iraian president is
totaly insane. And his remarks about the
holocaust being a myths makes him look like
the fool that he is. The world does not need
some one like him in it. And the idea of
making the whole world islamic, no way. He
needs to be commited into a mental ward.
Posted by: T.J. at March 14, 2006 03:52 PM (WdYWm)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
WTW Free Ham! Or Why I love The JOOOOOS
Cube neighbor M, just one row over and forward of my current location, is having company this weekend. Parts of her family are Jewish so they have a Kosher and Non-Kosher fridge. A set of dishes and pans as well one “
no pork allowed” and another “
has touched pig” set. I’m not really privy to all the details but one affects me greatly. When they come over M also finishes off all the pork. That way there ain't any pig in the house when said fine Jewish guests arrive. Well, by golly, prosperity has hit me in the ass again! They were unable to finish off all the ham they had so today I gets me some
FREE HAM and all day long.
Outstanding!!! Now if you will excuse me time fer breakfast.
Living high on the hog, baby, high on the hog.
Here are your White Trash Wednesday Bloggers
Posted by: Howie at
08:31 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 168 words, total size 1 kb.
If I Get This Stupid, I'll Be A Government Contractor AP Reporter Too
WASHINGTON (AP) - Stretched by frequent troop rotations to Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army has become a "thin green line" that could snap unless relief comes soon, according to a study for the Pentagon.
Andrew Krepinevich, a retired Army officer who wrote the report under a Pentagon contract, concluded that the Army cannot sustain the pace of troop deployments to Iraq long enough to break the back of the insurgency. He also suggested that the Pentagon's decision, announced in December, to begin reducing the force in Iraq this year was driven in part by a realization that the Army was overextended.
Germany, Spain, UK, S. Korea, Kosovo, Croatia, Japan, do I really need to list all the places where no war is currently being waged where U.S. troops are deployed?
But only Iraq is hindering our abilities?
Will anyone admit to hiring "retired officer" Krepinevich?
Nice try, Associatedantiamerican Press, but it still won't work. You've been beating this drum for over 4 years now.
Now get back to the real news you're good at. We thirst for all that is Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie.
UPDATE: My apologies to Mr. Krepinivich, wherever you are. It's not your fault the AP is going to take the slightest hint of bad news and run with it.
Anyway, my point is, if the Army is stretched too thin, a large part of the problem is the fact that they're sitting in places where they're not needed to be.
Just what the hell are we still doing in Kosovo anyway? Weren't we supposed to be out of there like, 7 Christmases ago? What are we defending Germany from now? The war's only been over for 60 years.
Posted by: Vinnie at
03:41 AM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
Post contains 309 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Horn of Africa, Malaysia, Phillipines, Central and South America...it is a global war on terror.
Lest we forget.
Durand
Posted by: durand at January 25, 2006 03:59 AM (IdRWM)
2
"will anyone admit to hiring "retired officer" Krepinvich?
Whoever that lost soul was disappeared on a rendition journey. deservedly LOL, but that won't stop the usual suspects from holding up Krepinvich's still born child all thru out the 2006 election cycle.
great site this btw.
Posted by: Rubin at January 25, 2006 04:41 AM (AFNsp)
3
What a tease! Where are the Brangelina pics?
Oh well. I'm sure the troops in Iraq agree with this guy. "Oh God, we marines... we just can't TAKE it anymore. Somebody, please, get us out of here! Can't UNICEF handle this?" This is opinion, not fact, but I just don't see it.
Posted by: AbbaGav at January 25, 2006 04:59 AM (5XR09)
4
Haven't we seen throughout history what a broken fighting army looks like: starving soldiers, ragged uniforms, broken down equipment, ammunition and fuel shortages, mass surrenderings, desertions, high casualty rates. Maybe I'm looking at the wrong reports and images, but the US Army doesn't look anything close to broken to me. It makes me wonder how much the Pentagon paid for this study.
Posted by: Graeme at January 25, 2006 05:54 AM (UrtKW)
5
"Germany, Spain, UK, S. Korea, Kosovo, Croatia, Japan, do I really need to list all the places where no war is currently being waged where U.S. troops are deployed?
But only Iraq is hindering our abilities?"
I wonder what's different between those places and Iraq?
Posted by: actus at January 25, 2006 09:19 AM (TEHSD)
6
Krepenovich is a highly regarded analyst in military and national security policy circles. He's a West Pointer with a Harvard PhD and has written more important books and articles on defense subjects than just about anyone alive today.
That doesn't mean that he's right--much less that the AP assessment of what he said accurately captures his report. But he's not just some yahoo.
Posted by: James Joyner at January 25, 2006 09:38 AM (UjbiU)
7
Graeme, I'm with you. I realize that equipment and training are very important, but morale and will are the two most important aspects of victory. Our soldiers have high morale and they intend to win this one in Iraq, so I totally disagree with the study, or how the study has been portrayed by the AP.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 25, 2006 10:05 AM (rUyw4)
8
Vinnie Andrew Krepinevich isn't a fool. His opinions are respected by many which is why he was chosen to do this study. Nor does he say that the army is broken however if we expect to stay in Iraq until the insurgency is eliminated that our army may well be in danger of breaking. He may not be as adept as some in talking points such as "tipping point" but his views do deserve more than a cursory dismissal. You might try reading his Sept 2005 article in Foreign Affairs which is published by the Council of Foreign Relations, which would really be difficult to view as "left leaning".
Posted by: john Ryan at January 25, 2006 10:17 AM (TcoRJ)
Posted by: Graeme at January 25, 2006 10:18 AM (UrtKW)
10
Of course rectus doesn't understand the difference between what's happening in Iraq and every other place where the Army is deployed, so I'll spell it out with small words so he can understand.
Rectus, men and women join the Army so they can do do Army stuff, like kill the enemies of their country with all those cool bombs and guns and such. This is fun. This is why most soldiers and Marines volunteer for multiple tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, but very few join the military because they want to do a Kosovo tour where they are consumed by boredom from following the same pointless routine in a long, pointless deployment, instead of fighting the enemies of their country. Let me make it even simpler: Killing jihadis = good, spending 18 months watching North Korean soldiers watching you = bad.
I don't expect you to understand, because you're just a whining, snivelling, limp-wristed, bedwetting liberal, and therefore
not a man, and so not likely to understand manly things, like war, muscle cars, red meat, cold beer, hot chicks, etc.. War is an act between two groups of people, one of whom is the aggressor and the other the defender, and is usually undertaken because one group wants to control the other, or simply wants something the other has. Of couse this is where you start mindlessly chanting about blood and oil, but you're an idiot, and that's to be expected, but you're still wrong.
In case you've been comatose, living in a cave, or liberal for the past few decades, and therefore unable to keep up with things in the world, you might be surprised to learn that muslims have been at war with civilization since they started calling themselves muslims, and have been attacking America and murdering its citizens for the last 27 years, counting from 1979, when Iran, currently the largest burr under our saddle, attacked our sovreign soil, i.e., the embassy, and took Americans hostage, for which they have not yet paid. This is mainly because there are too many whiney liberals like you who would rather hide under the bed than go out and make the bad men go away, like Men are supposed to do. Well, they are basically savages from the late stone age, and therefore are no smarter than you, although at least they have enough balls to face their enemies, suicidal though that course may be for them. You, on the other hand, have probably already bought a koran, a mandress, and a prayer rug so that you can show them what a good little dhimmi bitch you are.
Liberals like you offer nothing to the furtherance of civilization, but rather contribute to its destruction at every chance. If your kind aren't stopped, you will eventually have wiped all trace of it from the earth, and will have replaced it with some corporate-branded, neo-tribal, socialist multiculturalism in which the only sin is to be an individual who thinks for themselves. Your kind are the ones who were first in line to join the Nazi's in Germany, and the Fascists in Italy, and the Communists anywhere they were committing their murders in the name of whatever demegogue was leading them. You are subhuman scum and should be taken out and shot, and are only saved by the fact that you are afforded the right to be so by the very system which you seek to overthrow. Liberals should all be killed for the good of civilization.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 25, 2006 11:00 AM (0yYS2)
11
"... the Army cannot sustain the pace of troop deployments to Iraq long enough to break the back of the insurgency."
The study is something that should have been done. The conclusions may even be true. But I don't understand why this statement should not have been 'classified' - its release is clearly damaging to the war effort, whether the conclusion is correct or not.
Posted by: Glenmore at January 25, 2006 11:30 AM (h/mwe)
12
The guy is a good officer. This wasn't intended to give aid and comfort to left - but you all should expect something like this to be twisted and used for the anti-Iraq and Afghan crowd.
There have been other similar analyses within the military - its all part of a current internal debate revolving around a massive on-going re-organization/direction and utilization within the military initiated by Rumsfeld and his supporters. I'm not one of them.
There are "complaints" - there have been "mistakes". Normally we would be able to discuss these "openly" and deal with them - but given the current internal political climate and the nature of the internal opposition - we can't.
We are stretched thin and overtaxed - funding is skewered as well as resources.
Some of us are looking at three possible corrections. Withdrawl from Korea, the Balkans, and reduction of NATO involvement to a few key airbases and some small troop deployments in Eastern Europe only.
Posted by: hondo at January 25, 2006 12:16 PM (3aakz)
13
Any anti-Iraq, Afghan anti-war anti admin-adherent who wants to cuddled up we me because of what I've just said - I'll bitch slap ya like a lil' pussy n' go off on ya like a Jersey truckdriver! - And I norally DO NOT converse like that - but I will make an exception this time.
Posted by: hondo at January 25, 2006 12:22 PM (3aakz)
14
Did I just get bitch-slapped by James Joyner?
Sweet!
Hey, if I'm wrong I'm wrong, I don't mind being corrected. Except on my own blog. I'm never wrong on my own blog.
Posted by: Vinnie at January 25, 2006 12:51 PM (f289O)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Google Bows to Beijing
(San Francisco) When Google opened a research office in Beijing last year, the obvious purpose was to convince the communist government that the company could adequately deny Chinese citizens access to information. Well, guess what? Google succeeded.
From Reuters:
"In order to operate from China, we have removed some content from the search results available on Google.cn in response to local law, regulation or policy," Andrew McLaughlin, Google's senior policy counsel, said in a statement.
"While removing search results is inconsistent with Google's mission, providing no information (or a heavily degraded user experience that amounts to no information) is more inconsistent with our mission."
Google, known for its "Don't do evil" mantra, is developing its China approach as it seeks to strike a balance between the freedom of information it champions and the censorship demanded by Beijing, which controls access to China's 111 million Internet users.
John Palfrey, an Internet censorship investigator, estimated that tens of thousands of search terms will be blocked to Chinese Web users. However,
according to Rebecca MacKinnon of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society, if the average Chinese user is adequately informed of the censorship, "That is defiantly a significant step toward transparency and honesty with the users."
I think MacKinnon is justifying Google censorship in China by indicating it's a "foot in the door."
One question that hasn't been answered thus far is whether Google will be providing information to the government about the users who search for censored information. Google has refused to comply with a similar request from the U.S. government.
Notably, Google will not offer email or blogging services until it can figure out how to strike a "balance between user interests and local conditions." Whatever that means.
Companion post at Interested-Participant.
Posted by: Mike Pechar at
03:18 AM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
Post contains 298 words, total size 2 kb.
1
"Don't do evil."
Is censorship evil? It is my opinion that China is shooting itself in the foot by creating a huge sandbox for it's citizens to play in. The Chinese powers in charge want the best of both worlds. They want absolute control and they want an open and expanding market. Well, that is a tough balance.
China is a massive market. Companies cannot avoid it really. I have heard all kinds of estimates, but they all point to the fact that China will have immense economic influence from now on, regardless of their politics.
Kelly
Posted by: Kelly at January 25, 2006 07:41 AM (Dv2l6)
2
So, Google is against correcting flaws in their search engine that allows anti-conservative links to pop up like a summer storm. They are against helping law enforcement track down child porn sites. And now they fall in goose-step with a communist country that has murdered itÂ’s own people in cold blood for supporting democracy. All this going against there mantra of free, unbiased flow of information.
Up until this point, we were supposed to accept that all the bogus, conservative bashing, search result that Google digs up is a result of “other people manipulating” the search engine. This clearly shows that Google’s administration has other ulterior motives and that the “manipulation” isn’t a random occurrence, but something more deliberate.
WhatÂ’s some good alternatives for search engines?
Posted by: JohnMc at January 25, 2006 07:45 AM (y+I+a)
3
Our grandkids will be using chop sticks and grinning over chop suey and there aint a damn thing anyone can do about it. China , the next superpower on the planet. We had our shot and couldn't keep the belt - the title fight wasn't even a close call, pretty much a 1st round knockout by China, since the cultural conglomerate called America didn't have the balls and gumption to look out for its own best interests, now pouting and sniveling and weak, the nation of service providers longs for the glory days that will never return... quite an obituary but to be expected when the individual's rights are equal to that of the collective
Posted by: goesh at January 25, 2006 09:35 AM (1w6Ud)
4
I guess I won't mention the 90's and the proclivity the last administration had toward all things Chinese. I would be accused of redirecting attention from the crimes of the McBushitlerchimpyburton conglomerate. But mention it I have.
Posted by: Oyster at January 25, 2006 09:58 AM (osKlJ)
5
I'm so glad we are fighting for freedoms in Iraq so that the very companies which benefit from that blood can go over to China and sell the benefits of that freedom for money. This goes all companies not just Google and Microsoft. It's absolutely repugnant.
Posted by: David at January 25, 2006 10:04 AM (BhVb3)
6
Goesh,
Wah..wah..wah....blah...blah...blah...I've been hearing this Chinese crap for 5 years now. The new superpower on the planet...the great hope of Europe, Africa, Asia, and the rest of the World. A counterbalance to America, a way to show those damn Yankees that they cannot control the World.
Well, I heard this same shit about Japan and the Asian Tigers(Taiwan, Korea, Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, etc.) in the 1980's. The US was finished, the balance of power in the World was shifting to Japan, and the good times in the US were over.
You know what, we(the US of A) are still standing. Standing after all the small minds of the World want us knocked down, without realizing how stupid that is.
Did China rescue people and send emergency aid to the Indian Ocean nations hit by the tsunami? Who was the one nation in the World that got aid there quickly, efficiently, and had the helicopters, expertise, and will to save people's lives. Was it China? Hell, no. And I want to give credit to Australia and NZ for responding to the tsunami, but could they have responded if the disaster had been 7000 miles away? Where was the UN, the French, the British, the Belgiums, hell, the whole EU for that matter?
My point is this, one had better hope and pray that the US doesn't go away, because I wonder how many people in the World would die if we had to depend on China to feed the hungry of the World?
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 25, 2006 10:26 AM (rUyw4)
7
China as a growing superpower might be scary if the Commies were still solidly in charge, but there are now officially more Christians than Communists in China, and the Christians are pretty much the American Protestant variety, which means that ties between our countries should grow stronger with the passing of time. The Christianization of China, along with the fact that the Chinese are incredibly civilized people, despite the depredations of rectus' beloved Communism, and have possibly the oldest collective cultural memory on the planet, hints that a post-Communist China may be no more threatening, and no less beneficial to America's and the world's economy than post-war Japan.
Many people who have not read Sun-Tzu are afraid that China will attack us as soon as they feel capable, but the Chinese
have read Sun-Tzu, and indeed tend to live their lives by his philosophy. The Chinese have never been needlessly aggressive, and Sun-Tzu says that to win without fighting is best, whereas to win after a long and costly war is least good. Why would China, now our largest trading partner, want to start a war with us? Wars of conquest destroy economies and cause generations of misery and suffering, both for the conquered and the conquerers, and the Chinese are too smart for that. Besides, they know they can buy and sell our leaders like pigs in the market, after all, they already bought one President of the US, and nobody cried foul, so why should they want war with us?
What's good for America is good for everyone else, and all the Chinese want is respect from other nations and prosperity, and if we give them one, and become their partner in the other, there should be no problems. The biggest stumbling block to full normalization of relations right now is Taiwan, and once a few more bitter old Communists have died out, that will be sorted out peacefully, and we can move forward to a more stable, peaceful world.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 25, 2006 11:16 AM (0yYS2)
8
Goggle does this for China because there's money to be made.
Goggle refuses the US Govt because its good PR with no risks - and there's money to be made.
Goggle is a whore.
Would like a discussion on Goggle's US refusal reference the porn thing - wish however it be expanded to include their direct and indirect dealings and relationships with ALL ADVERTISERS AND PROMOTERS! see it as a customer service issue - Goggle is a whore and in bed with a new form of spammin' for dollars.
Posted by: hondo at January 25, 2006 12:35 PM (3aakz)
9
Speaking of computer related whores, I saw on the news last night where Washington state is raising taxes again, despited a budget surplus. (There's a Communist, oops, I mean democrap in office, should we be surprised?) That's not the kicker though; Bill Gates' dad was interviewed for some reason, and he said that
government creates wealth, therefore it has the right to take it away. He's pretty old, so maybe he'll croak soon and that'll be another dead Communis, but his son is firmly entrenched with the Chinese, and along with Google, are doing their best to repress freedom in the world's largest emerging economy, and help keep control in the hands of the ruthless elite. Kinda like how Microsoft does business. Birds of a feather flock together, they say.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 25, 2006 12:59 PM (0yYS2)
10
There is a very simple way to take care of Google, that piece of garbage company, and it is called this:
www.answers.com
Posted by: Steve Sharon at January 25, 2006 02:39 PM (qoUk5)
11
Try Altavista.com
Alltheweb.com
Dogpile.com
Posted by: Lonevoice at January 25, 2006 02:45 PM (a8/75)
12
IM - I too caught Gates' father on the tube last night. Either the guy is senile or stupid or both.
Posted by: Mike at January 25, 2006 03:04 PM (zeZwP)
13
He's neither - he just knows that wealth is nothing more that a vehicle to power and influence. Those who have power and influence can then poo hoo wealth - while looking for ways to maintain their power and influence. One way to maintain it is to insure others don't gather the wealth to challenge them.
And the ones who get squeezed and hosed? - the middle classes of course! The wealth and power crowd are secure - the poor and naive lib/left (non-affluent ones of course) are lulled into happiness - and the middle classes are handicapped and screwed.
Its an interesting system - it does provide the greatest good for the greatest number of people - but it is annoying.
Posted by: hondo at January 25, 2006 03:21 PM (3aakz)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Joel Stein: "...what do you mean by 'honor'?"
Radioblogger has
posted a transcript and audio of
Hugh Hewitt mercilessly (yet politely) bitchslapping Joel Stein over Stein's
anti-troops column in the
LA Times. Here is one of the many telling points in Hugh's interview:
HH: Do you honor the service that their son did?
JS: To honor the service their son...now this is a dumb question, but what do you mean by honor? That's a word you keep using. I'm not entirely...maybe that's my problem. But I'm not entirely sure what you're...
Yeah, big surprise that Stein has no concept of honor.
Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.
Posted by: Bluto at
12:29 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 120 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I appreciate Stein's comments because I believe he is being more honest than most Dems and others on the Left. They believe the troops are as guilty as the president and that's why they feel justified in undermining the war effort and encouraging the enemy.
You've probably heard, they loathe the military.
Posted by: Chris Malott at January 25, 2006 08:03 AM (wZLWV)
2
Libs like Stein are too smart to be fooled by such antiquated notions as "honor". Honor is like patriotism, religion, family, gender, etc.-- just social constructs manufactured by the Man to manipulate the little guy. But Libs are too smart for that.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 25, 2006 09:32 AM (paKD6)
3
It's funny how the libtards, with no notion of honor, are allied with the 'slamotards, whose notion of honor is to repressive as to prevent the normal routine of life without having to be avenged for some obscure offense which was neither meant nor even intended. They deserve one another.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 25, 2006 11:18 AM (0yYS2)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 24, 2006
Cindy Sheehan's Visit to Venezuela: guest commentary by Gary from Team America: World Police
Cindy Sheehan is a p**sy.
Hugo Chavez is an as*hole.
George W. Bush is a di*k.
Update from Rusty: Thanks for joining the Jawa team, Gary. Here is a related story which I got via Professor Chaos. Notice who is paying for Cindy Sheehan's visit to Venezuela?
Anti-war protester Cindy Sheehan, mother of a US soldier killed in
Iraq, joined more than 10,000 anti-globalization activists in Caracas, where she hailed Venezuela's leftist President Hugo Chavez....
She said Venezuela's foreign ministry sponsored her visit.
Posted by: Rusty at
07:18 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 110 words, total size 1 kb.
1
GAWD! I love how she and her lil' following marginalized themselves and have begun this slow trip to irrelevant oblivion ... and the DEMS .... all moooovvvved away from her.
Next stop - a footnote question in Trivia Pursuit and an indi-docudrama shown in a handful of Arthouse theaters to an audience of hundreds 10 years+ from now.
Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 07:43 PM (3aakz)
2
Does this mean I can cuss above the fold now?
Posted by: Vinnie at January 24, 2006 07:45 PM (f289O)
Posted by: Rusty at January 24, 2006 08:02 PM (JQjhA)
4
Thats right Gary, now suck my ^#$&*^
Posted by: Filthy Allah at January 24, 2006 08:41 PM (uxn8Q)
5
Dirk, Dirk, Allah.
Mohammed Jihad.
Shirpa shirpa.
Baklava.
Posted by: The Good Lt at January 25, 2006 04:26 AM (yT+NK)
Posted by: Dick at January 25, 2006 09:50 AM (XlQVK)
7
My name is Hugh Go Chavez. I am the only man in Venezuela who can not play baseball.
America is bad,
Cindy Sheehan is good;
I wish that I had Cuba,
In my neighborhood.
Posted by: Steve Sharon at January 25, 2006 11:49 AM (ZqQAl)
8
Sheehan bitch, Sheehan bitch, Sheehan bitch. Enough of the Sheehan bitch. Her son committed sucide to rid himself of the bitch. Forget the bitch.
Posted by: greyrooster at January 25, 2006 08:40 PM (YjVDY)
9
God Bless Cindy Sheehan.
Not afraid of GW in any way.
Posted by: Robert at January 26, 2006 04:20 PM (ByaZN)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Ghost of Hitler Lives on in Linz, Austria
Muslims fathers in the town of Linz, Austria are demanding that female teachers put on the hajib--or traditional Muslim headcover. What is so interesting about Linz? It is the town where Adolf Hitler went to school! Hitler also claimed Linz as his 'hometown', one which would be a 'model' for the Third Reich.
Interestingly enough, 3/4 of the students at this Linz elementary school are not native German speakers. Which is ironical, to say the least.
Of course, one wonders the extent to which Linz's status as Hitler's home drew so many immigrants. After all, Mein Keimpf is still a best seller in practically every Muslim nation.
First demand: headscarves for women.
Second demand: yellow stars for Jews.
Charles Johnson has a rough translation from an Austrian newspaper here.
Posted by: Rusty at
06:33 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 145 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Let's be fair,
I'm sure they would be satisfied if the Jews just left.
Posted by: Brad at January 24, 2006 07:17 PM (3OPZt)
2
That was a lousy translation! Couldn't make any sense out of the story! Is it covered anywhere else? Even a German version will do. Sounds interesting.
Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 07:22 PM (3aakz)
3
Speaking of Nazi's, I just saw James Carville on Fox, excuse me,
Faux News, and he looks like he should be wearing the classic dictator's toadie uniform.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 24, 2006 07:44 PM (0yYS2)
4
Maxie
You see him as a Nazi? I always pictured his as NOSFERARTU - his wife is a babe - and a conservative one at that too - he had to bite her in the neck!
Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 08:26 PM (3aakz)
5
"First demand: headscarves for women.
Second demand: yellow stars for Jews."
Sounds like things in Linz came in the opposite order.
Posted by: actus at January 24, 2006 10:33 PM (TEHSD)
6
Unfortunately the article is not complete in its translation. If you read further down (last two paragraphs) you will find that they said they have a choice to home school.
And:
Austrian Freedom Party secretary general Kickl ascertained, immigrants would have to adapt themselves to the customs usual in Austria and not vice versa. Headscarfs for teachers would not be possible. " Now on the contrary a headscarf ban in schools and all public institutes according to French model would be an order of the hour ". BZÖ speaker Scheuch explained, it cannot be that Muslim's fanatics of the home population would force her customs: " If they do not want to adapt themselves in Austria, they should leave the land ".
The google translation is very poor and does translate well into English. Better to use the IM translator.
Posted by: Ginifer at January 24, 2006 11:45 PM (TcvL+)
7
Correction: my last sentence should read that the google translation does NOT translate well into English.
Posted by: Ginifer at January 24, 2006 11:48 PM (TcvL+)
8
Its a strange story - I'll see if I can find it in German and translate it myself - its too stupid to be something serious.
Good to have you back actus.
Posted by: hondo at January 25, 2006 01:36 AM (3aakz)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
British Hostage Released, No One Notices
I certainly had no idea British journalist Phil Sands was being held hostage in Iraq. I also didn't know he was freed by U.S. troops. Glad to hear he is safe and sound, sad to hear that no one noticed.
Phil Sands was taken by a group of Sunni terrorists, threatened with beheading, forced to make a video calling for the withdrawal of British troops--the whole hostage nine yards. Five days into his ordeal, American troops freed him. He was held for such a short period of time, his terrorist captors had not had time to upload the video to the internet or send it to al Jazeera. No one, not even the troops that freed him, knew he was missing.
Thanks to Tribeca for noticing this. BBC:
A British journalist who was kidnapped in Baghdad and held for five days has been rescued by US forces - despite never being posted as missing.
Phil Sands, a freelance reporter was taken hostage on Boxing Day and released on 31 December, it emerged.
Not even his family had reported Mr Sands, from Poole, Dorset, missing and his captors had not made any demands.
British authorities were completely unaware he was in the country until he was brought to the British embassy.
"We can confirm that Phil Sands was kidnapped on December 26 but we were not notified, nobody told us and the hostage-takers weren't in contact," said a spokesman from the Foreign Office.
"He was released during a routine US military operation on December 31 and he left the country after a medical check-up and having been in touch with his family."
Mr Sands, who freelances for The Scotsman newspaper, told the paper of his shock when men brandishing AK47 rifles forced him into a car.
more...
Posted by: Rusty at
04:19 PM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1126 words, total size 6 kb.
1
Guess no more ad hoc lil' trips for Phil! Don't these guys ever read the memos!
Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 04:34 PM (3aakz)
2
Reading that made me tear a little, i think. It was great to hear what Real Heroes do for others. Remind me to punch someone in the lip the next time I hear them talk bad about our troops and them being there. They just saved another life.
Posted by: Taco Bandit at January 24, 2006 05:24 PM (MOKXn)
3
No, hondo, this guy was a Lefty and they think the memo doesn't apply to them, because in their mind they don't see why the insurgents and terrorists would want to harm someone who intends to help them.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 24, 2006 05:28 PM (rUyw4)
4
God bless our troops. They go to do good things and end up doing great things.
Posted by: Bill Dautrive at January 24, 2006 05:36 PM (G95Uf)
5
And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the–of–the historical customs, religious customs.
Posted by: John Kerry at January 24, 2006 06:02 PM (nMd9J)
6
I heard about this a week ago. I'm surprised you didn't know about this.
Posted by: George Ramos at January 24, 2006 06:42 PM (5E0ex)
7
Well thanks for letting me in on the secret George!
Posted by: Rusty at January 24, 2006 06:47 PM (JQjhA)
Posted by: George Ramos at January 24, 2006 07:44 PM (5E0ex)
9
Seriously though, I knew you were going to find out eventually. I can't help you find everything.
Posted by: George Ramos at January 24, 2006 07:46 PM (5E0ex)
10
Whether he's a lefty or not, he was very human and I thought his story was a far cry from the rhetoric spewed by some of those hostages that survived their ordeal. He kept it personal without peppering the story with politics.
Posted by: Oyster at January 25, 2006 07:19 AM (YudAC)
11
Oyster, I imagine he is glad to have gotten out of there with his head still on his body, and is thankful for the American troops who rescued him. I know I would be!
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 25, 2006 03:39 PM (rUyw4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Billionaire Seeks Virgin Bride
Okay, I get the whole
online dating thing. I get the whole a
dvertising for a mate in the newspaper thing. But, if you advertise that you're a billionaire seeking a 'virgin', what do you think the chances are that the golddigger that responds will be, you know, a virgin? And, as the old line goes, "Darling, we've already established
what you are. Now we're just discussing price."
Via Simon's World, an oddly candid story out of China's official English mouthpiece:
more...
Posted by: Rusty at
03:12 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 192 words, total size 1 kb.
1
The next thing I know you will be telling me the guy is marrying a nine-year old. Well, it was done one time, and look how that turned out!
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 24, 2006 03:16 PM (rUyw4)
2
Why would a billionaire want to marry at all?
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 24, 2006 04:00 PM (0yYS2)
3
And if you're going to spend that much money on a chick, wouldn't you want her to have some, er, 'experience'? Just sayin...
Posted by: Rusty at January 24, 2006 04:20 PM (JQjhA)
4
It would be nice to see the ad "Billionaire bride seeks virgin."
Posted by: Beth at January 24, 2006 05:04 PM (flYwq)
5
Or the TV show. I'll bet some television producer will be after the guy before long. I can see it now, "The Billionaire Bride". But who would be the star, that is the billion dollar question?
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 24, 2006 05:32 PM (rUyw4)
6
I'm not that type of guy (not that there's anything wrong with that) but did he specifically ask for a female? I mean, that's an awful lot of money and everyone has their price. A billion dollars can change a lot of preferences.
Also just sayin ...
Posted by: slug at January 24, 2006 06:27 PM (0YdQw)
7
I'd rather rent Lisa Sparxxx from time to time than marry a virgin.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 24, 2006 07:46 PM (0yYS2)
8
Couldn't he just buy all the Chinese women? I mean 2 bucks a piece (1/2 a billion women).
2 bucks goes a long way in China!
Posted by: Digger at January 25, 2006 05:36 AM (Fy2zf)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Mexican Troops Violating U.S. Sovereignty?
Q: Where do Mexican Generals keep their armies?
A1: In their sleavies
A2: No, you dimwit, in our sleavies. In addition to constantly violating the border, it looks like they are helping smuggle drugs in too.
UPDATE BY SEE-DUBYA: Much more info in this Ontario (CA) Daily Bulletin article that made the rounds last week. There have been 216 documented incursions by the Mexican military since 1996.
Posted by: Rusty at
02:51 PM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
Post contains 77 words, total size 1 kb.
1
And what could possibly be wrong with that, Rusty?
Posted by: See-Dubya at January 24, 2006 03:12 PM (IDj0S)
2
But their
our sleavies, that's what!
Posted by: Rusty at January 24, 2006 03:14 PM (JQjhA)
3
Competition for the gringo/cartel dollars is heating up, some units now seem willing "to go the extra mile" in servicing their favored clients.
Posted by: john Ryan at January 24, 2006 03:19 PM (TcoRJ)
4
Lets be honest - this is not the actions of the Mexican Govt - if they are military - then they're rogues and criminals within its ranks (which is not a shocker).
This is not good for Mexico - it makes them look like a 3rd rate banana republic. These guys are criminal gangs - if they assist in smuggling here, imagine what other criminal activity they engage in Mexico!
The biggest threat they pose is to Mexico itself.
Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 03:27 PM (3aakz)
5
This is not good for Mexico - it makes them look like a 3rd rate banana republic.
Quack quack....
Posted by: Brian B at January 24, 2006 03:32 PM (rGfpg)
6
So when did they stop smuggling tequila?
Posted by: Howie at January 24, 2006 03:58 PM (D3+20)
7
Sorry hondo, but you're dead wrong. Not only is this old news to some of us, but it is well known that Mexican Generals and politicians directly control, and profit from, drug smuggling. The entire Mexican government is nothing but a criminal organization, and for some reason, our government is trying to pretend nothing is happening. It kinda makes me wonder who's getting a cut on this side of the border.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 24, 2006 04:02 PM (0yYS2)
8
Actually, these incursions have been going on for quite some time. Reports from So. Texas and Arizona tell of Mexicans in military uniforms providing protection and riding shotgun for drug smugglers and illegal immigrants. The Mexican government is bound to be aware of what is going on, but to tell you the truth, both the drug smuggling and illegal crossings of the border are beneficial to the Mexican government. Both of these illegal activities provide Mexico with dollars, and prop up a government that might otherwise fail. Why do you think the Mexican government so forcibly opposes border security on the part of the US?
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 24, 2006 04:03 PM (rUyw4)
9
Don't doubt higher ups have knowledge/involvement. Mexican Govt is in sad shape - a never ending cycle of going nowhere on the richest continent on the planet. I'm just sympathetic for the average Mexican - if this is bad for us - its a nightmare for them.
Pity - there never was any real reason (other that their own failings) why Mexico never matched the achievements and status of the US and Canada.
Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 04:10 PM (3aakz)
10
Only poor government and stupid economic policies kept Mexicans from succeeding. I know many Mexicans who have come to the US and become very successful, and great citizens. I truly feel sorry for the average Mexican who is forced to live in the present circumstances in Mexico.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 24, 2006 04:57 PM (rUyw4)
11
Mexico used to be ruled by France and Spain, two nations which never even managed well at home, much less abroad. In fact, the only post-colonial nations that ever truly succeeded are the ones that the British had. Any nation which was ever ruled or even partly ruled by France or Spain during its formative years is a de facto basket case today.
The only hope for Mexico is that enough Mexicans will learn proper civics in
El Norte, and return home to eventually straighten things out. This should happen right about the time Osama bin Laden converts to Judaism I should say.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 24, 2006 07:51 PM (0yYS2)
12
Gee, Maxi, you're confidence level is real high on a turnaround in Mexico. Lol!
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 24, 2006 07:54 PM (rUyw4)
13
Well, we pessimists are rarely disappointed, but often pleasantly surprised. We must not forget that Americans have a long relationship with the ideals that are at the very heart of Western civilization, whereas the people of the rest of our hemisphere still mostly live in some state of post-colonialism, in which societies are stratified, and there is no hope for liberty for the masses. To make things worse, almost every other nation in our hemisphere, including Canada, is infected with the disease of Marxism, and so given these two factors, it will take much longer than anyone can imagine to spread Enlightenment ideals to every corner of the globe.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 24, 2006 08:14 PM (0yYS2)
14
Why has the President let this go on for so long? Has he forgot that 19 of the 21 Fasists 911 attackers were illegal aliens?
Most if no all snuck in via Mexico in 2001. What is he waiting for? Another attack?
Posted by: Jo macDougal at January 26, 2006 03:30 PM (xcy9v)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Iran Threatening War
Iran is now threatening that if the EU imposes economic sanctions that they will use force to close down oil exports out of the Persian Gulf. This would be an overt act of war. Not only would the U.S. responds with military action, but the Europeans as well. Yes, even the French.
Via Jihad Watch this from Haaretz:
The news site, affiliated with the radical student movement in which President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was once a member, quoted Mohammed-Nabi Rudaki, deputy chairman of the Iranian parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission.
According to the report, Rudaki said that "if Europe does not act wisely with the Iranian nuclear portfolio and it is referred to the UN Security Council and economic or air travel restrictions are imposed unjustly, we have the power to halt oil supply to the last drop from the shores of the Persian Gulf via the Straits of Hormuz."
Posted by: Rusty at
01:27 PM
| Comments (19)
| Add Comment
Post contains 156 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Wow, they put a lot more stock in the UNSC than I do.
Posted by: Oyster at January 24, 2006 01:44 PM (osKlJ)
2
So far its still internal tough talk to the choir.
I am leery of this whole Iran thing. This whole nuclear thing involves their deliberate flouting of International/United Nations Treaties. The failure is theirs and I am uncomfortable being the muscle to prop them up and give them crediblity.
Whatever happens - it has to be unilateral - for our own reasons and for our own goals.
Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 01:48 PM (3aakz)
3
We as a nation much watch Irans jesters closely ,they said Israel must be wiped off the face of the map,and we all know that Israel will not accept Iran being a nucleur power,we car ebecause when they act ,they muslim world will condem and side with Iran,will the west including the U.S. will protect Israel,WW3, in the worst way,we must stop them before they can sell the technoligy on the black market,our sons and daughters will pay the pice if we do nothing
Posted by: Walt at January 24, 2006 01:52 PM (jL8SK)
4
Let em cut off the oil. I would gladly pay 12 bucks a gallon if need be to see this greasy fucker squirm in the sand.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at January 24, 2006 01:57 PM (5ceWd)
5
Suspect we are looking at a regional "Cold War" developing over the next few years. Could get Hot, but might be containable. Maybe someone should start working up some potential environmental and economic impact studies. The oil will still be there - most of the regional populations would however be dead or sick & starving. Might be bearable to much of the rest of the world - 'cept the 3rd world of course - no oil, no outside money, resourses etc - they would be screwed and drop like flies too.
Who knows? Maybe there is a silver lining here somewhere.
Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 02:06 PM (3aakz)
6
There could be a silver lining, if the USA has the political will to do what is necessary, which I believe is turn off the spigot on Iranian oil.I think that doing so would also show the other OPEC countries what our real power is. After Iran buckles to sanity I would then go right down the list: Nigeria no more fraud/spam : Sudan get nice in Dafur: Saudi Arabia Just say no to Terror Financing: Kuwait hey where is that democracy that was supposed to happen after Gulf War I ?
Posted by: john Ryan at January 24, 2006 02:39 PM (TcoRJ)
7
I guess if they shut down their oil exports, a lot of Americans are going to quickly know where Canada is...
Posted by: Venom at January 24, 2006 02:58 PM (dbxVM)
8
Yeah, they'll probably be syphoning oil from our cars through straws. friggan OIL BANDITS.
Posted by: Taco Bandit at January 24, 2006 03:07 PM (MOKXn)
9
John Ryan
You tend to babble senselessly - I have absolutely no clue what point you think you were trying to make. Try again type slowly.
Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 03:30 PM (3aakz)
10
Another silver lining!
International Treaties, the United Nations - they are the ones on the line as useless and irrelevant. could help bring about the collapse of the UN, EU and like. Then it would be every nation (or groups of nations (new alliances) for themselves. No one ever notices but we are in the best position to cope/deal with/ and profit from that.
Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 03:37 PM (3aakz)
11
To me, this is just an idiotic threat with no basis for being taken seriously. Blockading the Straits of Hormuz would be an overt act of war and the Iranian ships doing so would be obliterated quickly. Nobody, including the other oil producers, would support the blockade, since they couldn't sell their oil either. And, it would give Israel and the US a perfect excuse to attack Iran's nuclear facilities.
So, I'd really love to see the morons try to pull it off. Things have been kind of boring lately.
Posted by: Eye Doc at January 24, 2006 03:51 PM (YlVBM)
12
Everyone keeps looking at this situation from the angle of the sane Western mind, i.e., war is a bad thing to be avoided if at all possible, but one must look at it from the point of view of the insane Middle Eastern muslim, i.e., war will bring about muslim dominance in the world. The people who are hatching these plots do not possess modern minds or civilized sensibilities, and they cannot be dealt with other than as madmen, i.e., killed as quickly as possible.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 24, 2006 04:07 PM (0yYS2)
13
Maxie
Stay sane - and stay cool - thats the professional way to do things. If it comes down to war - stay sane and cool.
Are they insane? Maybe. Work it to your advantage - add it to the equation.
Global muslim dominance? Their bigest unspoken desire is to dominate each other - and slaughter each other as required. Their dream is a fantasy based on period a thousand years ago - by a Kurd no less - oh the irony!
Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 04:21 PM (3aakz)
14
"...killed as quickly as possible."
IM has my vote on that one. Lets just do what needs to be done here and get it over with. Why delay the inevitable?
Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at January 24, 2006 06:02 PM (CtVG6)
15
I don't place much stock in the WW3 scenario - even though some might call it that. Our military technology is advancing exponentially. We're light years ahead of WW2 technology (or Gulf I for that matter) so the need for boots on the ground doesn't have to be necessary to step on every single bug.
The answer is to get Rusty to use his contacts to get in touch with Dale's Dead Bug. There are some vermin who have no redeeming value and must be exterminated.
The sooner we get the Death Star in orbit next to the Dish Network satellite to take care of these things remotely, the better.
Ahmadinejad: channel 117
Kim Jong Il: channel 234
Assad: we'll notify you when your account is ready
Posted by: slug at January 24, 2006 06:15 PM (0YdQw)
16
I just wanted to point out that I'm not a plagiarist. I was writing my reference to the Death Star above before the new jawa post at http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/153538.php or the link referenced in it.
Not that anyone cares ...
Posted by: slug at January 24, 2006 06:23 PM (0YdQw)
17
Not only is it unwise to attempt to delay the inevitable, because bad news does not get better with time, but it is in fact better to pre-empt it. The Iranians expect us to go through the whole rigamarole like we did in Afghanistan and Iraq, and they know they can drag the whole thing out until they feel ready for it, so we should hit them now, hit them hard, and take Syria next.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 24, 2006 08:08 PM (0yYS2)
18
Lets get it on and get in over. Going to happen sooner or later. Why not now? Git er done.
Posted by: greyrooster at January 25, 2006 08:28 PM (YjVDY)
19
Excuse my spelling. Just finished a bottle of Bailey's Irish Cream in 10 minutes. Not my record, but Okay. Only in the land of the free. For everyone's info my son is home for 3 weeks and we are partying, fishing, eating and enjoying all the greatest nation on earth offers.
Posted by: greyrooster at January 25, 2006 08:34 PM (YjVDY)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
9/11 Conspiracy Theorist Takes Over Pacifica Radio
Will the lunacy coming out of the Left stop today? First we posted about a
Daily Kos writer who plans to march at Ground Zero and place a citizen's arrest on Rudy Giuliani for 'his part in the 9/11 coverup'. If that wasn't enough,
a Lefty in a major newspaper says he does not support the troops. Now this. I need some aspirin.
Via the Puppy Blender this from Marc Cooper--who is no right-winger--who gives us the low-down on the new Pacifica radio executive director, Greg Guma.
Most of the country is privileged enough to not have the pleasure of listening to Pacifica radio. Since I grew up in L.A., I was subjected to it from time to time. Pacifica is kind of like NPR, only, if you can imagine this, far to the Left and way more boring (apologies to Marc Cooper, former drive-time host).
Pacifica is the kind of radio network that broadcasts it's own station meetings. I recall listening to one a few years back where angry listeners were protesting the 'corporate' nature of the Pacifica board.
It's also the kind of radio network that seems to have endless supplies of interviews with Noam Chomsky. And no, no one was holding a gun to my head and forcing me to listen to Noam Chomsky drone on and on about East Timor. Call me a masochist.
It turns out that Pacifica's new director, Greg Guma, is a certified 9/11 conspiracy nutbag. Here is what he had to say about David Ray Griffin's book The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11:
Hammering home the point that most of what we think we know may be mistaken, Griffin also points out that even the identities of the hijackers remain in doubt. In the months following 9/11, the London Times, Associated Press, and Saudi embassy in Washington reported that at least five of the 19 men whose photos and names circulated worldwide were still alive.
So, was bin Laden really the mastermind? If he was a player, did he have some help? These are two of the many troubling questions that arise from Griffin's analysis. At this point, we simply don't know, and not much can be said with complete certainty, except that without 9/11, George Bush would not have been able to declare himself a "war president" and there would have been no convincing reason to expand the federal government's power through legislation like the USA PATRIOT Act.
Given the administration's now discredited claims about Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's connection to the attacks and weapons of mass destruction, it doesn't stretch credulity to conclude that, based on the considerable conflicting evidence (rather than more comforting assumptions), the public has yet to hear the whole story. For that to change, however, the media's self-imposed myopia will have to end, at last granting Griffin's research a thorough review, and perhaps even prompting a more credible and comprehensive official examination than has so far been conducted.
Ouch. Cukoo!
Posted by: Rusty at
12:35 PM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 514 words, total size 4 kb.
1
I love Pacifica Radio, Rusty! Whenever I need a chuckle a give a listen here in NY. Love their inhouse fighting which usually explodes every 5 years or so - ha ha - leftists angry at other leftists calling each other fascists and Nazis - its hilliarious!
Best moment 15 yrs ago - prelude to Desert Storm - they are covering an ad hoc anti-war march/demonstration late at night - they decide to march on Brooklyn Bridge - but never told anyone!
Bridge dimly lit and they are walking into on-coming traffic (you can't make this stuff up!)
BOOM! 1 killed several injured! Marchers then attack offending car & driver - a black transit worker heading home after a couple of beers with no clue what is going on!
Pacifica coverage all solemn in their droll pompous way! The first casualty of the war! Etc Etc. ...
All this covered live on radio! it was hilliarious!
Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 03:55 PM (3aakz)
2
Damn they sound interesting. All we get here is Rush, Boortz, Hannity, Michael Savage, and Tammy Bruce, all daily, and a local leftard show on Sunday, which gets around a half dozen listeners considering that the same six guys call so regularly I thought they were co-hosting. Not that I don't like conservative talk radio, but I still need my Two Minutes Hate now and then.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 24, 2006 04:12 PM (0yYS2)
3
Here in NY Maxie - I got leftists up the yazhoo! They even gravitate here from other parts of the country. I'd send some your way for entertainment purposes if I could.
Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 04:27 PM (3aakz)
4
hondo, how can you stand it? I turn the TV off sometimes and just listen to music so I can get away from the lefty moonbats. One wonders how a person like you can maintain the sanity of yourself and your family in NYC. Frankly, I admire you very much. And here's to sanity, even in a moonbat haven!
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 24, 2006 05:11 PM (rUyw4)
5
Google: "Arrest Bush 41" ... My goal is to make polygraph test results admissible as evidence in courts worldwide.
Posted by: David Howard at January 24, 2006 06:28 PM (s7zvg)
6
Who ever said I was still sane?
Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 07:29 PM (3aakz)
7
I need target practice more than entertainment, but then, who says the two have to be mutually exclusive? Send 'em down m'boy!
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 24, 2006 08:16 PM (0yYS2)
8
>>>"The first casualty of the war! Etc Etc. ..."
hahaha! more for the Liberalism is a mental disorder files.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 24, 2006 08:28 PM (XA7De)
9
It was a live broadcast - I was up late at home packing for deployment n' just had the station on to listen to the anti-war loonies. I wish someone had filmed the whole sequence of events - it was totally surreal!
I know - shouldn't have thought it funny - some kid did die - but the simple decision to walk into oncoming traffic on a dimly lit bridge late at night as an ad hoc political statement! I swear! I SAW IT COMING AS I WAS LISTENING!
Imagine! A bunch of white young affluent wannabe leftys beating up this poor middle-aged black guy just driving home on a bridge at 50mph - he had no clue what was happening!
Cops rescued black guy - n' gave him a ticket for expired inspection sticker I think - believe he pressed charges and sued the white kids - white kids claimed at first it was all a govt plot to crush the growing anti-war movement - then they and the story quietly faded away. Probably their parents dragged them home and got lawyers.
YA CAN'T MAKE STUFF LIKE THIS UP!
Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 10:06 PM (3aakz)
10
Your consolation prize for hearing Noam Chomsky drone on about East Timor is watching leftists squirm and explain that Osama was just kidding when he included the liberation of East Timor on his list of grievances against the West.
Posted by: ConservativeMutant at January 25, 2006 01:10 AM (zdxlm)
11
Bush criticism isn't just for lefties anymore. Many righties like myself also know the truth about 9/11. To say that only lefties know the truth is an insult.
Posted by: Rex at January 29, 2006 04:19 PM (E3mUh)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
167kb generated in CPU 0.1319, elapsed 0.2194 seconds.
137 queries taking 0.1842 seconds, 490 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.