mypetjawa v. 2.0 (beta) "<i>Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to ev

January 23, 2006

Brits Spying in Moscow?

(Moscow) This story is breaking world wide but little has come out of Russia.

Russia's intelligence services accused British embassy officials on Monday of spying in Moscow after state television said diplomats had used a transmitter in a fake rock to secure state secrets.
"Yes. I can confirm that everything that was shown was true and based on our information," a spokesman for FSB intelligence told Reuters.
"The diplomats were shown to be involved in activities that were incompatible with their diplomatic status," he said, using diplomatic jargon to refer to spying.

The Foreign Office in London has denied the allegations. However, according to ABC News Online:

"Four British diplomats are suspected," a Federal Security Service (FSB) spokesman said. "I am not ready to give their names yet but this is all being investigated."

The FSB admitted seeing one of the diplomats near the fake rock which they thought was a dead drop. Later, they found the rock to be a high-tech receiving and transmitting communications device. One FSB officer said:

"This was absolutely new spy technology."

No doubt, designed by Q. I'm sure Ian Fleming would be proud.

Companion post at Interested-Participant.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 05:34 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 197 words, total size 2 kb.

Wanna See Something Really Scary?

This goes well beyond anti-semitic rhetoric and nuclear saber-rattling:

"On the last day when I was speaking, one of our group told me that when I started to say 'Bismillah Muhammad', he saw a green light come from around me, and I was placed inside this aura," he says. "I felt it myself. I felt that the atmosphere suddenly changed, and for those 27 or 28 minutes, all the leaders of the world did not blink. When I say they didn't move an eyelid, I'm not exaggerating. They were looking as if a hand was holding them there, and had just opened their eyes - Alhamdulillah!"

The speaker is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, president of Iran.

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.

Posted by: Bluto at 12:11 AM | Comments (16) | Add Comment
Post contains 131 words, total size 1 kb.

January 22, 2006

Carroll Kidnapping Delays Release of Iraqi Female Detainees

A Reuters story about conflicting messages from US and Iraqi officials implies that six female detainees were scheduled for release before the Jill Carroll kidnapping:

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's Justice Ministry said on Sunday it still expects U.S. forces to release six Iraqi women prisoners this week, despite U.S. comments to the contrary.

The confusion seems to stem from plans made prior to the terrorists' demands to release the women:

"We talked to the Americans and they agreed to put them before the review board. On January 17 we reached an agreement that they will be released," the official said.

January 17 was also the day that terrorists released a video of Carroll, demanding the release of the Iraqi women in exchange for Carroll's life. The US does not negotiate with terrorists. Releasing the women now would be seen as caving in to the kidnappers' demands, and would encourage more such acts.

Thus, the kidnappers have effectively ensured that the women detainees will spend more time behind bars.

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.

Posted by: Bluto at 12:13 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 188 words, total size 1 kb.

The Iran Dilemma

Well, my first impulse after reading Strategic Forecasting's attempt to untie the Mullahs' Gordian Knot was that the Geneva Convention should have banned tortured logic. The author of the report, George Friedman, believes that Iran isn't actually serious about developing a nuke. They're faking it for strategic reasons. Friedman's conclusion in the Stratfor piece, that Iran's new belligerence is intended to reclaim their mantle as the supreme leader of the Islamic Revolutionary Movement, inappropriately bestowed on those Al Qaeda pikers, has the same kind of appeal as our apparent misread of Saddam's intentions. Well, the truth is I don't really understand the totalitarian mind very well, and I certainly missed the boat when Saddam chose to act as though he was concealing WMD even though he didn't actually have diddly. So maybe I'm misreading the Iranians in the same way. I really hope he's right, but just can't quite swallow the pill. For one thing, the analysis rests on the following dubious premise:

Having enticed Iran with new opportunities -- both for Iran as a nation and as the leading Shiite power in a post-Saddam world -- the administration turned to Sunni countries like Saudi Arabia and enticed them into accommodation with the United States by allowing them to consider the consequences of an ascended Iran under canopy of a relationship with the United States. Washington used that vision of Iran to gain leverage in Saudi Arabia. The United States has been moving back and forth between Sunnis and Shia since the invasion of Afghanistan, when it obtained Iranian support for operations in Afghanistan's Shiite regions. Each side was using the other. The United States, however, attained the strategic goal of any three-player game: It became the swing player between Sunnis and Shia.

I know that Iran had agents in southern Afghanistan and that they were nominally opposed to the Taliban, but they've also had players in Central Asia for quite awhile according to Robert Kaplan, and have sought, themselves, to play the "swing" role in the region in order to become a major regional power. Whether or not this is entirely commensurate with Friedman's analysis I'm not sure, because I can't follow the strands all the way the ends. It may be that Iran gave up trying to play the swing role, having been outclassed by the US... which begs the question of why they adopted that strategy in the first place. Doesn't seem all that savvy to me. What it suggests is an internal struggle within the country's elites very much like the one that was going on in China during Tiananmen. However, I'm not sure the battle between the moderates and hard liners in Iran was ever much of a contest. I could be wrong. Hope so.

Friedman goes on: more...

Posted by: Demosophist at 02:49 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 1162 words, total size 7 kb.

1 What Iran is accomplishing is what Washington couldn't: create a greater need in the eyes of Europeans to side with the US. The less we're viewed as arrogant and imperialistic in our "fear mongering" toward Mid East threats, the more belligerent nations like Iran and Syria lose. When Chirac threatens nuke retaliation I don't think its a very good strategy.

Posted by: Jawapuke at January 22, 2006 08:18 AM (aOqX1)

2 It probably goes without saying, but Sy Hersch's credibility on foreign intelligence is close to zero. He acts as a water carrier for anti-administration folks in CIA and sometimes State, but these are lower-level people who don't have much insight or access, if Hersch's past "revelations" are taken as a yardstick.

Posted by: Jeff Medcalf at January 22, 2006 09:53 AM (eer2X)

3 Heh, I like that. "(T)he Geneva Convention should have banned tortured logic." I'll have to work that into one of my arguements with a "liberal".

Posted by: Phillep at January 22, 2006 10:09 AM (XykI1)

4 Whatever else the morons in Iran are doing, they're playing a dangerous game. They are a bunch of dark-ages savages who think that they can play in the big leagues just because the US is busy in Iraq and Afghanistan. They seem to forget this is the nation that crushed to fascist empires simultaneously, and later faced down the Soviet Union. They also seem to not realize that a war with them would be little more than a grandiose training exercise for us. They want revenge on the West for every failure of theirs from Thermopylae, to Alexander, to the modern day, to which they have not advanced. Theirs is a doomed culture, because it cannot grow or change, but only seek to cling desperately to a long-dead past.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 22, 2006 10:28 AM (0yYS2)

5 Yeah, don't forget Sy Hersch said himself that it's okay if you're not accurate when giving a speech. Only when writing things down. So yeah, sure - now that he's clarified that, I hope he doesn't mind if I ignore everything that comes from his mouth or pen. If he's being "accurate" on any given issue, I should be able to get that info elsewhere without having to suffer his smug, elitism.

Posted by: Oyster at January 22, 2006 01:36 PM (YudAC)

6 The President has been unwavering in his opposition to IranÂ’s Nuclear Weapons program. He as described it as a threat to the world and is on record as saying that the West will not tolerate an Iran armed with Nuclear weapons. All of this is appropriate and correct. Unfortunately, the President has yet to prepare the American people for what could amount to the inevitable necessity of striking Iranian nuclear facilities. The Neocon understands the reluctance of the President to speak too loudly on this sensitive issue, because of the obvious unhelpful influence such loud rhetoric may have on the shot-term price of oil. However, we are reaching the point of decision. What is the greater danger to future generations? Higher oil prices or a nuclear armed Iran? It is the NeoconÂ’s position that a nuclear armed Iran represents the higher danger in the long run. Therefore we encourage the President of the United States to prepare the larger American public for the dangers that lay ahead, and for the approaching necessity of action. Joe Gelman www.neoconexpress.blogspot.com

Posted by: Joe Gelman at January 22, 2006 04:14 PM (ARqOM)

7 What exactly, praytell, is a neocon? As a rule I generally don't like to use labels to describe anyone, (at least anyone other than libtards and 'slamotards), because they're rarely even close to correct, so I would like to know what a neocon stands for, against, and in what one must believe in order to be one.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 22, 2006 08:40 PM (0yYS2)

8 I'm no longer a liberal, I wonder if that qualifies? It seems to me the term is used more to criticize Republican policies and leaders of the current Bush administration. I often confuse it with libertarian.

Posted by: Jawapuke at January 22, 2006 10:11 PM (STIsd)

9 On some websites, like Stormfront, it's synonymous with JOOOOO.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 22, 2006 10:59 PM (0yYS2)

10 Neocon particularly relates to Jews. However, the term has been used as a derogatory adjective for any conservative. It's like calling everyone on the left a "liberal" when in fact those on the far left don't deserve such a mild name. Thus the term "moonbat" was born. Liberals, in the classic sense, are not bad people. And it's all relative to the political landscape of any country. That's why the NYT tries to slip in the term "right-wing" to describe Iran's president and will use the same term to describe anyone on the right here in the US. It's all a game.

Posted by: Oyster at January 23, 2006 06:31 AM (YudAC)

11 "Liberals, in the classic sense, are not bad people." Damn straight, but modern liberals are not classical liberals any more than a Freemason is an unindentured bricklayer. I consider myself to be liberal in the classical, Enlightened, sense, in that I believe in the Rights of Man, free inquiry, and a representative republican government which is accountable to We the People. In contrast, modern liberals are just thinly disguised, (or not disguised at all), Marxists who, if history and their own words are any indicators, want to put an end to all the rights we enjoy, such as private property, self-determination, free expression, etc.. The Bible, speaking of certain people, says in Matthew 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? For all their fair talk about human rights and such, what good have Marxists ever accomplished really? Is there anything they have ever done which has not caused more trouble than it alleviated? I know of no such acts which have borne fruit other than misery and oppression. Liberals are the enemies of humanity, because they promise peace, plenty, and happiness, but bring nothing but war, lack, and misery.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 23, 2006 11:32 AM (0yYS2)

12 Make a liberal gringe - Iran is simply no more that the total abject failure of the United Nations Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty - as so is North Korea. Anyone else want to join the club - feel free - the Treaty is no longer any real effect and none inforceable by the United Nations.

Posted by: hondo at January 23, 2006 04:18 PM (3aakz)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

The Blog Sabbath Caption Contest Is Sleeping Edition

I got nuttin' for a caption contest this week.

Instead, click here to stoke your patriotic fires.

Or piss your pants, if you're a bedwetting leftist.

Posted by: Vinnie at 01:55 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 42 words, total size 1 kb.

January 21, 2006

Bad News For The Anti-War Movement

It appears that Michael Moore has departed from our fair earth while vacationing in England.

Our heartfelt sympathies go out to his family and friend.

UPDATE: It appears I may have erred. Sources are emailing me to say that Michael Moore is alive and well and rooting for the little guy from his million dollar pad on the Upper West Side.

Speculation is that the body found in the story is actually that of Rosie O'Donnell. I feel for the investigators, it's so hard to tell them apart.

Posted by: Vinnie at 06:18 PM | Comments (21) | Add Comment
Post contains 100 words, total size 1 kb.

Hamas Hires Spin Doctor

With generations of Jew-hating suicide bombers as members, Hamas has been perceived as a group of fanatical murderers. This apparently conflicts with a desire to be seen as a peaceful community outreach organization. As a result, Hamas has hired a spin doctor to establish a new image among the Europeans and Americans.

From the Guardian:

The organisation, also known as the Islamic Resistance Movement, has hired a media consultant, Nashat Aqtash, to improve its image at home and abroad because it expects to emerge from next week's Palestinian general election as a major political force, and wants recognition and acceptance by the US and EU.
"Hamas has an image problem. The Israelis were able to create a very bad image of the Palestinians in general and particularly Muslims and Hamas. My contract is to project the right image," said Mr Aqtash, who also teaches media at Birzeit University in Ramallah.

That's it. Hamas has an image problem because it was created by the Israelis. I suspect Mr. Aqtash may have difficulty selling that notion.

Aqtash has encouraged Hamas' leaders to quit saying they want to destroy Israel and to stop celebrating suicide bombings. Unfortunately, the destruction of Israel is in the founding charter of Hamas. Take it away and there is no reason for Hamas to exist. With regard to stopping celebrations after murders, good luck. Hamas has successfully created a whole culture centered on weapons, explosives, and hatred of Jews.

Nevertheless, Mr. Aqtash will reportedly get $180,000 for his efforts. It's not clear whether he has to achieve results to get paid. On a related note, if Mr. Aqtash is getting paid to paint Hamas in a positive light, one has to wonder how much the BBC, Reuters, NYTimes, WaPo, Ass. Press and others are collecting.

Companion post at Interested-Participant.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 05:58 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 307 words, total size 2 kb.

If Charlie Brown Were Muslim

Then the 72 Virgins would all be Marci. Funnyvia Professor Chaos.

Posted by: Rusty at 04:39 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.

CAIR Calls for Hostage Release (Sort of)

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is making a big deal out of the fact that they have sent two representatives to Iraq to work for Jill Carroll's release. Instead of taking the opportunity to show Islam as a humane religion by forcefully rejecting all hostage taking as barbarism, they base their appeal on the fact that Jill Carroll was an antiwar journalist.

Perhaps American hostages Dean Sadek and Jeffrey Ake don't merit CAIR's attention since they were in Iraq working with the U.S. or Iraqi governments.

CAIR press release:

Â“We, the undersigned representatives of the American Muslim community, call for the immediate and unconditional release of Jill Carroll, a journalist with a well-documented record of objective reporting and respect for both the Iraqi people and Arab-Islamic culture.

By "objective" CAIR means that she emphasized the suffering of the Iraqi people under war time conditions--something that would be immediately recognized as an anti-American statement in the Muslim world.

One might say that the conditional attached by CAIR was simply a tactic aimed at winning over the hostage takers. It is possible that CAIR finds all hostage taking barbaric, but chooses only to emphasize Jill Carroll's reporting because that might help win her freedom. But if that is the case, why did CAIR not send any one to Iraq when Jeffrey Ake or Roy Hallums was taken hostage?

Â“We ask that her captors show mercy and compassion by releasing her so that she may return to her family. Certainly, no cause can be advanced by harming a person who only sought to let the world know about the human suffering caused by the conflict in Iraq.Â”

The Islamofascist front group CAIR again reveals the shallowness of their devotion to the basic premise that taking hostages is uncivilized. I wonder if CAIR believes that a cause might be advanced had the hostage been some one dedicated to revealing what slimy pieces of filth the Iraqi 'resistance' really is?

If CAIR is the best that American Muslims can do, they are truly hurting for leadership.

Posted by: Rusty at 04:22 PM | Comments (43) | Add Comment
Post contains 355 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I'm praying for Jill Carroll. However, Dean Sadek is dead. Nothing has been heard from him for a year. No demands were ever issued. Just a video begging for his life. I'm not sure about Jeffrey Ake. It's been almost a year. He might still be alive but his company has never negotiated with the captors unlike the case with Roy Hallums who was later rescued. Jeffrey's wife tried to sell her house to pay for a very high ransom but the captors stopped calling her last May. I agree with you that since Jill is a very pretty woman and a journalist, the iraqi officials are fighting more for her release than they did with other Americans who were later beheaded.

Posted by: George Ramos at January 21, 2006 04:32 PM (5E0ex)

2 CAIR has long been known for having Muslime terrorist contacts. Several of CAIR's members have in fact been arrested on terrorism charges. This is clearly a PR ploy used by these goat herders and no one should be fooled. It's time the western human bloggers got together and got this porKoranic oil tick club shut down once and for all. I'm not buying any of pIslam's conversion or death crap and I sure the hell will never give into the Dhimmicrat liberals protecting this world domination at all costs desert cult.

Posted by: Pagan Allah at January 21, 2006 04:44 PM (4KFmw)

3 At the beheading video place. (www.LOL@lol.com) I'm sure you're familiar with that website.

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 21, 2006 07:20 PM (rUyw4)

4 CAIR and groups like it are a clear and present danger to the US. They have no business in the western hemisphere.

Posted by: Richard at January 21, 2006 08:34 PM (W8EsU)

5 Wouldn't it be sooo terrible if the CAIR crew ended up kidnapped?

Posted by: Phillep at January 21, 2006 11:23 PM (DllvA)

6 i think everyone needs to get off their soapbox and realize that a life is at stake. I am glad CAIR is taking a proactive approach. I think as Americans we've had enough of this "Islamiphobia" because it is honestly getting old. When someone is doing something good they should be commended and CAIR being the only American organization to send a delegation warrants respect, not bigotry.

Posted by: Aaron at January 22, 2006 03:46 AM (vR0eu)

7 Matt Maupin wasn't beheaded. His death was quick and painless. He was shot once in the head and twice in the chest. The video is not on the internet. Matt Maupin's family and the United States Army refuses to believe he is dead but he is. Terrorists have no reason to feed a soldier they declared dead two years ago. It's a shame a good patriot had to die at the hands of monsters. He was a hero. That's the damn truth. I'm in a military family myself. My father served in the Marines and Army for 30 years. He retired last March. Anyway at least Matt wasn't beheaded. A bullet to the head is nothing compared to your head being sawed off.

Posted by: George Ramos at January 22, 2006 09:33 AM (5E0ex)

8 When your criticism becomes ideology, then you are no different than the extremists you revile. CAIR, for all its faults, is making an effort to save and innocent persons life. At the very least, instead of falling back on your own deep seated prejeudice, try and reflect on that. They are actually doing alot more to save Jill Carrolls life than you are.

Posted by: Kazi at January 22, 2006 11:53 AM (5V/0S)

9 I agree with Kazi and Aaron. This IS getting old, how many more soldiers have to die for us to understand that this war is not ours to fight. It is truly sad that this young lady was caught in the middle. Did you ever think the reason why they are emphasizing her "objective" approach to reporting in order to appeal to the people who supposedly have her?

Posted by: Samantha at January 22, 2006 12:54 PM (RbqXF)

10 Yes, yes, let's sing the praises of CAIR, a radical group posing as moderate that seeks to gain a foothold in the US for radical Islam. I really don't know when you people are going to wake up to what these Islamists intend to do. 3,000 people killed in the WTC seems to be meaningless to you people. I wish to hell all of you CAIR supporters would take the time to look at what the people who formed CAIR have had to say in the past. They have supported Hamas among other terrorist groups. What more proof do you need? And yes, you will get real tired hearing all the Islamophobia before everything is settled, I'm sure. But it seems strange to me that every time a terrorist attack is perpetuated by these Islamists all we hear from CAIR is protect us from Islamophobia. Did it ever occur to you people to ask why CAIR is not condemning these Islamists? I can tell you why, because CAIR is nothing more than a front group for them. And I don't see them trying to help anyone else in Iraq other than Muslims, so the credibility of CAIR is zero.

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 22, 2006 04:28 PM (rUyw4)

11 As I said, all reservations about CAIR aside, what they are doing in Iraq is a GOOD thing. Lets try and separate the organization from the act that they just did - they are intervening on behalf of a non-Muslim journalist (who we only know is sympathetic to Iraqis) and advocating for her release. This is a good thing, regardless of CAIRs past dealings. THey are setting a precedent for other Muslims groups to intervene in these incidents. That cannot be a bad thing, to have America Muslims flying over to Iraq to try and save innocent human beings caught in the cross fire. The fact is that when you attack CAIR even when they do something half way decent, you are essentially saying that there is nothing that the American Muslim community can do to change your perception that they are a bunch of terrorists and that Islam is thet root of all evil. Which means you are not really interested in making the situation better, you are just interested in sticking your head in the sand and singing the same stupid song to yourself because your imagination is too limited to conceive of a Muslim doing something positive. That sir, lies at the roots of racism.

Posted by: Kazi at January 22, 2006 07:51 PM (/Kfu8)

12 You, sir, are wrong. Muslims are not a race. So how in the world can that be racism? I'm anxiously awaiting an answer, sir.

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 22, 2006 07:59 PM (rUyw4)

13 *crickets*

Posted by: dave at January 22, 2006 08:23 PM (CcXvt)

14 As a matter of fact, Kazi, if you use your criteria, then Muslims are racists. Muslims have a derogatory term they use for non-Muslim(kaffirs), claim Islam is surperior to every other religion, and force non-Muslims to live under a set of laws that do not apply to Muslims. So you tell me who the racist is, Mr. Kazi, sir? I'm still waiting for a response.

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 22, 2006 08:31 PM (rUyw4)

15 CAIR cannot and should not be Trusted for ANYTHING

Posted by: Takinstraight at January 22, 2006 09:01 PM (wZLWV)

16 When the KKK does something nice, should they be lauded? Hell no. Same goes for CAIR.

Posted by: Takinstraight at January 22, 2006 09:04 PM (wZLWV)

17 When the KKK does something nice, should they be be lauded? Hell no. Same goes for CAIR.

Posted by: Takinstraight at January 22, 2006 09:04 PM (wZLWV)

18 Should the KKK be lauded for doing something considered "good"? Hell no. They shouldn't exist as an organization. Same goes for the "Council on American-Islamic Relations"

Posted by: Takinstraight at January 22, 2006 09:08 PM (wZLWV)

19 Jesus what a bunch of leftards that came to crap here. Every goddamn liberal on the planet needs to be bulldozed into a giant hole in the ground and covered up; just imagine the things sane people could accomplish if we didn't have this bunch of idiots running around screwing things up constantly.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 22, 2006 10:57 PM (0yYS2)

20 for a HUGE organization like CAIR, you cannot condemn the whole organization for one or two bad apples. I know we are all more responsible than that. and the proof is in the pudding. you need to stop throwing out your venomous rhetoric and get off your Daniel Pipes bandwagon dance. If you truly care for your country, you will embrace Muslims because they are here to stay. I swear the bigotry in this country at this point and time is eerily similar to that during the civil rights struggles of the African Americans and Japanese and we all know no one wants to go down that horrific path. Fyi, statements CAIR as made against the Â“islamistsÂ”

Posted by: aaron at January 23, 2006 12:35 AM (vR0eu)

21 for a HUGE organization like CAIR, you cannot condemn the whole organization for one or two bad apples. I know we are all more responsible than that. and the proof is in the pudding. you need to stop throwing out your venomous rhetoric and get off your Daniel Pipes bandwagon dance. If you truly care for your country, you will embrace Muslims because they are here to stay. I swear the bigotry in this country at this point and time is eerily similar to that during the civil rights struggles of the African Americans and Japanese and we all know no one wants to go down that horrific path. Fyi, statements CAIR as made against the Â“islamistsÂ” http://www.cair.com/html/911statements.html

Posted by: aaron at January 23, 2006 12:36 AM (vR0eu)

22 Again, you guys are missing the bigger picture. If you think CAIR is a terrorist organization, I seriously have to laugh at that. Should the KKK members all be deported to .....wherever they came from? KKK Hide their faces, CAIR is very open and accessible. How many have talked to Muslims before? Have any of you aired your concerns. You are missing the bigger picture and making this poor girl your scapegoat. Would you have felt better had they done nothing? Thank God I am not a Bushite.

Posted by: Samantha at January 23, 2006 12:37 AM (RbqXF)

23 Samantha, et al, Then tell me why there is growing opposition to CAIR among Muslims here in the good ol' USA? CAIR isn't doing them any favors and they are slowly awakening to that realization. Go here www.freemuslims.org If you want to know how they feel about CAIR and their lack of support for ending Islamofascism then read this letter You don't know what you're talking about. Yes, some of us HAVE "aired our concerns". And the KKK hasn't "hidden their faces" for decades. And how is your point about their deportation relevant? How has anyone made this girl a "scapegoat"? You're flailing here.

Posted by: Oyster at January 23, 2006 06:54 AM (YudAC)

24 Saying Muslims are not a race is crazy Jesusland Joe. That's like saying the Holocaust never happened. Muslims are a race. Therefore you are a racist.

Posted by: George Ramos at January 23, 2006 08:33 AM (5E0ex)

25 Muslim is not a race. If a blond-haired, blue-eyed man is a Muslim then what race is he?

Posted by: Oyster at January 23, 2006 08:43 AM (osKlJ)

26 George, you need to do some research. Muslims are not a race, they cover the entire spectrum of races, from Causcasians to Africans to Asians. And saying Muslims are not a race is like saying the Holocaust never happened? George, please get a grip on yourself. I know you're a kid, but surely you are more intelligent than this.

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 23, 2006 08:43 AM (rUyw4)

27 Now back to CAIR. Samantha and other supporters of CAIR should know that CAIR is nothing more than a front group for the Islamists. Why do you make the assumption that if I am against CAIR I am against Muslims? CAIR does not represent the Muslims I know. All, and I mean all, of them are mistrustful of CAIR and see it for what it is. So don't say I am anti-Muslim just because I criticize CAIR. Muslims and CAIR are not interchangeble, no matter what you say. CAIR is a virus that Muslims should avoid at all costs.

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 23, 2006 08:51 AM (rUyw4)

28 Now, have at me, as we are logging a well today. See you whenever.

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 23, 2006 08:57 AM (rUyw4)

29 All right I made a mistake. Sorry.

Posted by: George Ramos at January 23, 2006 12:49 PM (5E0ex)

30 Okay, Muslim is not a race and you are not a racist (ofcourse), you are a bigot? What do you call someone who hates all people of a certain religion? ( I am not saying you do) Can you please define Islamist for me?

Posted by: samantha at January 23, 2006 02:12 PM (xfdnu)

31 About CAIR, someone already said, OKAY they may HAVE their faults (according to you), but what they are doing now is GOOD. That is how you are making the girl a scapegoat, instead of being encouraged and hoping it turns out for the best, you all just decide to focus on the negative aspect of it. Grow up?

Posted by: Samantha at January 23, 2006 02:15 PM (xfdnu)

32 An Islamist is a Muslim who believes his or her religion is superior to any other, who believes other people(and religions) should live under A DIFFERENT SET OF LAWS

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 23, 2006 04:11 PM (rUyw4)

33 cont. than they do(sharia), believe in violent jihad, believe that someone who leaves its religion to join another should be killed, believe in mutalation for certain crimes, believe in the death penalty for certain deviates, and believe that actions are not criminal when committed against apostates, ie rape, murder, robbery, etc.

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 23, 2006 04:23 PM (rUyw4)

34 hmmm...thats an interesting definition of islamist you gave there...according to princeton's dictionary...and islamist is a scholar who knowledgeable in Islamic studie or an orthodox Muslim... http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn my point is, these terms are quickly becoming fashionable by neocons, and other groups just for the "shock" theory. and dont you think if CAIR supported all that you say it does, our government, with all its resources, and surveillance, and NSA, and all the technology in the world couldnt shut them down? come on, we all know that if CAIR was not a transparent organization and had shady people in it or shady agendas, the DOJ would have had it shut down LONG time ago...and if you are going to now blame the gov't because for some reason you think you (a beer belly blogger) knows more than them, i think you're seriously delusional...

Posted by: aaron at January 23, 2006 04:44 PM (vR0eu)

35 hmmm...thats an interesting definition of islamist you gave there...according to princeton's dictionary...and islamist is a scholar who knowledgeable in Islamic studie or an orthodox Muslim... http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn my point is, these terms are quickly becoming fashionable by neocons, and other groups just for the "shock" theory. and dont you think if CAIR supported all that you say it does, our government, with all its resources, and surveillance, and NSA, and all the technology in the world couldnt shut them down? come on, we all know that if CAIR was not a transparent organization and had shady people in it or shady agendas, the DOJ would have had it shut down LONG time ago...and if you are going to now blame the gov't because for some reason you think you (a beer belly blogger) knows more than them, i think you're seriously delusional...

Posted by: aaron at January 23, 2006 04:47 PM (vR0eu)

36 Aaron, funny ... your "fashionable" use of the the word neocon.

Posted by: Oyster at January 23, 2006 05:46 PM (YudAC)

37 Okay, now that I've read the rest of your drivel. You can't indict an organization or a corporation. This is a country based on individual rights and people are held responsible individually for their actions. Five members of CAIR have been indicted for aiding and abetting terrorism. Contrary to what your little pea brain can process, we are still a free country and while they may wiretap the phones at CAIR, revoke their non-profit status or any other number of things they can't shut them down anymore than they could shut down the Klan or the jiffy mart down the street. So take your twaddle elsewhere.

Posted by: Oyster at January 23, 2006 06:17 PM (YudAC)

38 Your shortsightedness with your arguments are quite amusing. Equating CAIR to the Klan is not only idiotic, but not even similar at all. If you know anything at all about our jurisprudential system, we require organization ESPECIALL non profit one to abide by standards that are much higher than a corporation. Transparency is of vital importance when setting up a non profit and last I heard, CAIR is as abiding by all government standards as anyone. And let me just shoot down this notion that CAIR is some arab-filled foreigner controlled organization. A LOT of CAIRÂ’s employees including the directory of Government Affairs and its Press Security are Caucasian American Muslims. Most of the board across the country is full of African American Muslims and White Muslims. Get your facts right pleaseÂ….

Posted by: aaron at January 23, 2006 06:37 PM (vR0eu)

39 "jurisprudential" Aaron, you're posing as an American. You are most likely a radical Muslim posing as a moderate, just like the organization you are a mouthpiece for. You are probably a foreign student, but you had better watch out, you can and should be deported.

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 23, 2006 07:56 PM (rUyw4)

40 i used a word that you dont know and you call me a foreigner, lol. I'm as American as Apple Pie and frankly you're a moron which you keep proving time and time again. Shall i call you a jackass? is that American enough for you? Unlike you, I've actually studied our laws, and the very fabric of our nation, the Constitution. You do know what that is right? Do you know what the Commerce Clause is? Do you know the significance of Justice Marshall on the Supreme Court? Are you familiar with any of his decisions? What about Justice Leanard Hand? Do you even know who that is? Can you please tell me where we got most of our Civil Procedural Law in this country? What is the origins? Can you please explain the significance of the Common Instrumentalities Approach first adopted by the Southern Railway Case of 1911?....Ignorance should be a crime my friend, and you should be arrested!

Posted by: aaron at January 23, 2006 08:26 PM (vR0eu)

41 Did I take Constitutional Law? No. I know what the Commerce Clause is and I know who Justice Marshall is? I've read the Constitution many times. Now let me ask you a few questions? Do you know what structures in the SE United States are the most likely to contain oil and gas deposits? What is the Smackover Lime? The Fayetteville Shale? What is a log? What do you use when you frac a structure? What is perosity and what is permeability and what is the difference between the two? You're not nearly as smart as you think, are you Aaron? But then who could be? You are a waste of good oxygen! And you wouldn't have the balls to say what you said to my face, you little shit!

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 23, 2006 09:05 PM (rUyw4)

42 KAZI: Muslim are a race. The porkind race. And I am a racist. Muslims are inferior pigs who cannot be trusted. TALKINSTRAIGHT: Get off the heros in the KKK. They said the muslim were assholes years before the rest realized it was true. AARON: CAIR is a muslim organization and as such is an enemy of any nation not controlled by Islam. You are a fool. Assuming others are not educated in all your BS is moronic on your part. Knowledgeable people do not need to quote and test others with information anyone can obtain. A stupid response on your part. If you are pro muslim just be a man and say it. Be a man and say what you are. We can only think that you have been buggered by a raghead and liked it. If so, say so. We will understand.

Posted by: greyrooster at January 25, 2006 08:06 PM (YjVDY)

43 I'm pro Muslim. there i said it. I am pro Muhammad Ali. I am pro Malcom X. I am pro Michael Wolfe. I am pro the truth and I am pro any person with a conscience be it Muslim or otherwise. Grow up. Listen to your rhetoric, how far will you get in life, you better get down on your knees and pray for forgiveness my friend.

Posted by: aaron at February 02, 2006 12:27 PM (R6kq3)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Susanne Osthoff Hostage Taking a Hoax?

As the details of now released German hostage Susanne Osthoff emerge, the tale gets stranger and stranger. Remember, Ms. Osthoff was a convert to Islam and was in Iraq prior to the invasion. It was Susanne Osthoff who was one of those crying foul over all the looting of historical treasures from Iraqi museums, something that we now know was not nearly as severe as she and others made out. After a ransom was paid for her, news reports indicated that she may have been a German spy. At the time, I thought that might explain why she seemed to be so sympathetic to her hostage takers.

Now, it turns out that Susanne Osthoff may have been complicit in her own kidnapping and that she was helping terrorist forces in Iraq.

Via Charles Johnson at LGF this Reuters story:

Part of the ransom money alleged to have been paid by the German government to win the freedom of Iraq hostage Susanne Osthoff last month was found on Osthoff after her release, the German magazine Focus said on Saturday.
Without citing its sources, Focus said officials at the German embassy in Baghdad had found several thousand U.S. dollars in the 43-year-old German archaeologist's clothes when she took a shower at the embassy shortly after being freed.
The serial numbers on the bills matched those used by the government to pay off Osthoff's kidnappers, the magazine said.

I would love to give Ms. Osthoff the benefit of the doubt. If there is another explanation for why part of the ransom money turned up in her possesion, I would love to hear it.

Posted by: Rusty at 03:40 PM | Comments (25) | Add Comment
Post contains 281 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Why are you always calling left wing foreigners who were kidnapped a bunch of hoaxers? You did this with Guiliana, you did this with the CPT peacekeepers who let me remind you are still missing and now you do this with Susanne. These human beings's lives were threatened. First of all, there is no confirmation Germany paid a ransom. Anybody could make it up because they don't like the politicians. Second, if ransom was paid, maybe the captors gave her some of their money because they thought she was pretty. I don't know. But seriously, you need to stop insulting people who were nearly kiled by sociopathic insurgents. I'm not trying to be far left because I'm not. I'm just saying be compassionate. Just because Guiliana and Susanne are far left radicals doesn't mean they faked their kidnapping. Jesus Christ, I knew this blog was far right but damn.

Posted by: George Ramos at January 21, 2006 05:22 PM (5E0ex)

2 Let me take back the part about Germany paying ransom. After some research, I am now sure they did. I still don't know why Susanne had some of the money. My only guess is the captors gave her some as a "sorry for kidnapping you" gift. Kidnappers have been known for giving gifts to hostages they released. Still, I'm absolutely sure Guiliana did not fake her kidnapping. That's just crazy. Was she a communist? Yes! Did she hate the U.S.? Yes! Did she fake her kidnapping? Hell no. That's just crazy. You've stated that she looked in the camera when she begged for her life. Well what would you expect? Would you have liked her to look at the floor? I respect Guiliana. The poor woman saw a man die before her eyes. Make no mistake. I like you Rusty. I'm just saying don't criticize hostages who could have been beheaded just because they are left wing radicals. Thank you for your time. See you later.

Posted by: George Ramos at January 21, 2006 05:30 PM (5E0ex)

3 Okay, as I understand what George writes, Osthoff had some ransom cash in her possession because (1) she was pretty or (2) she received "sorry for kidnapping you" money. I'm unconvinced. I expect there is something more logical that explains why she had the money. Let me suggest that she was included during the divvying up process.

Posted by: Mike at January 21, 2006 06:21 PM (hgdBT)

4 Oh I so called this one I did!

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 21, 2006 07:08 PM (0yYS2)

5 George, That is possible, of course. And I would love to believe that since it is much more charitable to her. But, it is kind of hard to believe.

Posted by: Rusty at January 21, 2006 07:12 PM (JQjhA)

6 Yes, you did, Maxi.

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 21, 2006 07:12 PM (rUyw4)

7 George P.S. You'll notice the "hoax" is followed by a "?" and is therefore not to be taken as a definitive statement. Also, there was another case where a former Bulgarian hostage in Iraq was arrested because he actually helped plan his own kidnapping along with a TV news crew. So, it's not unheard of.

Posted by: Rusty at January 21, 2006 07:18 PM (JQjhA)

8 probably a tip for a job well done. Hey George, how about the 'gifts' they were giving to their hostages last year, a dull hunting knife.

Posted by: dave at January 21, 2006 08:18 PM (CcXvt)

9 George, I know that when you are young and impetuous it is easy to admire the Susanne's and Guiliana's of the world. But I would point out to you that these people have an agenda, and part of that agenda is to damage the West and its will to fight the Islamists. I suspect both these women were complicit in their kidnappings, and even though I obviously have no hard evidence to support my conclusions, the actions of these people speak volumes.

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 21, 2006 09:35 PM (rUyw4)

10 Follow the money is always a good starting point. Whether you are right or left money corrupts.

Posted by: David at January 21, 2006 10:07 PM (BhVb3)

11 Some among the German Left can't seem to help themselves when it comes to this sort of thing. Remember the Bader-Meinhof gang? They were populated by leftist "cowboys" only too happy to harm their own country's interests. Not one of them was able to make a coherent argument for their actions.

Posted by: Pigilito at January 22, 2006 03:34 AM (pXTtt)

12 I suppose we could apply apply the "most obvious answer tends to be the right one" theory here. However, the fact that her interpreter was killed does lead me to wonder: either she is guilty of causing his death - or she really was kidnapped. If it's the former, she should be charged as an accomplice to murder. Being in possession of some of the ransom money does not look good. I really don't know. (Oh great! I couldn't use my URL as it was deemed "inappropriate content", so I put [dot] in there. Now the rest of it is being rejected. Someone at MuNu needs to look seriously at its filters. They've run amok.)

Posted by: Oyster at January 22, 2006 08:02 AM (YudAC)

13 I was asking the same question about if she were involved back when she got kidnapped. She just seemed like an odd target considering her background. She probably believed that either they wouldn't harm her interpreter or she considered him expendable to the cause.

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt at January 22, 2006 08:40 AM (AlU3k)

14 Maybe she turned a few 'tricks' before she was released. I'm pretty sure archaeology doesn't pay all that well.

Posted by: mark at January 22, 2006 10:17 AM (/I/Y7)

15 I had a gut feeling from the start that this was a hoax designed to enrich this whore and her multitude of goatboy lovers.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 22, 2006 10:30 AM (0yYS2)

16 well at least we know that what information we do have on this matter came from a usually reliable source and that it has been corroborated by at least one other independent source. lol Any conjecture on this matter probably reveals more of the pre-judging done by the individual then on the actual reality of the situation. With this little information it seems to definitely be a "think what you wish on this mater" item.

Posted by: john Ryan at January 22, 2006 01:15 PM (TcoRJ)

17 Well, the German's are taking it seriously. Their parliamentarians want an investigation. The BKA, who allegedly checked the serial numbers, has "no comment". Only a stupid kidnapper would forget to ask for unmarked bills. Giving some to her could have been a way to find out if they were marked. -------------------------- Just throwin' stuff out there ... conjecturizing and all that.

Posted by: Oyster at January 22, 2006 02:09 PM (YudAC)

18 Her interpreter was expendable, brownshirt, he was a Christian. Perhaps that was part of the deal, also. I would not be surprised at anything these people do.

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 22, 2006 02:40 PM (rUyw4)

19 Any Westerner who converts to islam should be executed with all due and proper haste.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 22, 2006 11:02 PM (0yYS2)

20 If an investigation turns up that she was complicit in a staged event that resulted in the death of her interpreter, I hope she swings... But I guess Germany doesn't do that sort of thing... anymore. Also, maybe she had some of the cash on her because they were sending her out for pizza.

Posted by: Son Of The Godfather at January 23, 2006 03:44 AM (maXzk)

21 I think when you say "swings" in Germany, they have something different in mind.

Posted by: NJSoldier at January 23, 2006 01:38 PM (1QKZf)

22 They gave her 3000 Dollar, because they steal her 2700 Dollars, wich Susanne had at her place, as they kidnapped her. That you can read in German Newspapers today. And till now, there is no indication, that the german goverment payd a ransom. In my opinion, there is a smear campaign against her at the moment. Every day, there is another detail. One day she is an a German spy, than she is helping terrorists. And tomorow? Tobi, from Germany.

Posted by: Tobias at January 23, 2006 01:51 PM (7lAu7)

23 I'm going with her helping the terrorists, Tobias. Just a hunch.

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 23, 2006 08:01 PM (rUyw4)

24 Sorry Tobi, Many courageous young men made it so I don't have to read German newspapers. SOTG

Posted by: Son Of The Godfather at January 24, 2006 08:30 AM (maXzk)

25 Dear blogger, as many others articulating your opinion on a basis of quotations and newsflashes describing difficult circumstances within three sentances, will obviously make your opinion look like a puzzle you just started putting together and stop it because you already can imagine how the picture will look like. If you would really be interested in cases like Osthoff and others and have doubts about anything unclear to you, you would do better research in finding more suitable and complex answers for yourself and your readers, instead of easily combining a plausible explanation on extraordinary circumstances out of your office chair. By the way - according to german newspapers S.Osthoff got injured by a car hitting her recently...

Posted by: miranda at January 27, 2006 01:06 PM (zOB+F)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Thank you every one!

Thanks every one for all the well wishes on my blogiversary and for helping get word out about our small role in convicting a would-be terrorist.

Posted by: Rusty at 02:50 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 34 words, total size 1 kb.

Product Review: The Sumo Omni

Not too long ago, Dr. Rusty Shackleford was approached by the folks at Sumo Lounge and was asked if he could do a product review on their Sumo Omni. Rusty didn't have enough time to do a product review and offered it to his co-bloggers. I took up Rusty and Sumo Lounge on the offer and have put the Sumo Omni through an extensive week long test.

Originally Posted at Conservative Thinking more...

Posted by: Chris Short at 01:27 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 631 words, total size 6 kb.

Portrait Of The Author As A Literary Whore

As I previously noted in this post, Allah at Link Mecca discovered that Osama's newly released audiotape contains a recommendation for William Blum's book Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower.

Of course, as a loyal American, Blum was shocked and disgusted to have his work cited by the world's most evil living human - not. Newhouse News Service reports that Blum is pretty much delighted with the publicity for his book:

"I was amazed and amused," Blum said. "It's good publicity for the book."

Blum explained that Osama had actually confused Rogue State with another in his anti-America collection: Freeing the World to Death: Essays on the American Empire. more...

Posted by: Bluto at 01:05 PM | Comments (19) | Add Comment
Post contains 258 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Just more confirmation that the Left and Al Qaida are on the same page.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 21, 2006 01:30 PM (8e/V4)

2 How much evidence does our idiot-led government need to start prosecuting people for treason?

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 21, 2006 07:10 PM (0yYS2)

3 I came here for portraits of whores. Where are the pictures man? The pictures!!!!!!!

Posted by: Rusty at January 21, 2006 07:20 PM (JQjhA)

4 I guess you're right, Timmy. What was I thinking? Of course people who murder thousands of innocents and behead folks because they're "infidels" can't possibly be "evil" or "psycopathic". Idiot.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 22, 2006 01:44 AM (RHG+K)

5 Timmy, you're an idiot.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 22, 2006 09:51 AM (RHG+K)

6 Tim, you need to be killed for stupidity alone, but your willingness to apologize for terrorists is just the icing on the cake.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 22, 2006 10:33 AM (0yYS2)

7 For those who don't recognize Dr. Timmy's name, he is an American ex-patriate living in New Zealand, notorious for denying the involvement of al Qaeda in the Bali bombings. Dr. Timmy flirts with the notion that al Qaeda is a Rovian plot.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 22, 2006 10:54 AM (RHG+K)

8 Regardless of his nationality or identity, he is an enemy sympathizer and supporter, and doesn't deserve to live another day. We can't support killing terrorists without also supporting killing their supporters.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 22, 2006 12:43 PM (0yYS2)

9 I believe I labeled Blum a "whore". However, I was being polite, and IM is probably closer to the mark.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 22, 2006 07:48 PM (RHG+K)

10 Being an apologist, like you for example, is good enough for me. In for a penny, in for a pound, as it were. To me, you are no better or worse than Osama himself. No, I take that back. At least he is honest in that he is an open and declared enemy, though he may be a cowardly murderer. You, on the other hand, are a snivelling piece of shit content with being his waterboy.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 22, 2006 11:01 PM (0yYS2)

11 Timmy, when somebody like Blum, or yourself, provides useful propaganda to the enemy, he performs the function of Josef Goebbels (though Goebbels, at least, worked for his own side). Are you sure you have a doctorate? I'm not used to having to explain such simple concepts to readers. You might be happier reading a blog written a bit lower on the Gunning-Fog Index.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 22, 2006 11:49 PM (RHG+K)

12 Oooh, Dr. Timmy didn't like the Gunning-Fog crack, did he? Tough. Deal with it. You uncritically accept every bad thing said about the US as gospel, and claim to stand for "truth"? You excuse the murders of innocent people (as long as they're Americans, anyway), and have the stones to call me "mean spirited"? Thanks for exposing your true self, Timmy.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 23, 2006 12:48 AM (RHG+K)

13 I have to take exception with all posters labeleing Mr. Behrend as an "idiot". He is quite well spoken in his equivocation propaganda, and therefore, "asshole" is more correct.

Posted by: Son Of The Godfather at January 23, 2006 03:53 AM (maXzk)

14 "Useful idiot" puts Timmy in historical perspective.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 23, 2006 09:42 AM (RHG+K)

15 You're correct SoTG, thanks for the correction. He is, indeed, a world class asshole, and definitely a useful idiot. He probably even thinks that they'll behead him last. Heh.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 23, 2006 11:35 AM (0yYS2)

16 Timmah, the Gunning-Fog Index is used to gauge the level of writing in literature for adults who are semi-literate. Timmah, why would I want to restrict the right of folks like you to spout all manner of nonsense? How can the NSA identify and neutralize you if you're flying under the radar?

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 23, 2006 11:47 AM (RHG+K)

17 One more question, Timmah. Do you find it ironic that while you preen and preach about freedom of speech, you are able to do so openly, being a member in good standing of the academic liberal orthodoxy, while the creator of this blog, Dr. Rusty Shackleford, must remain anonymous because of the certainty of retaliation from the faculty and administration where he teaches? What does that tell you, Timmah?

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 23, 2006 11:55 AM (RHG+K)

18 I think Timmy has converted to Islam, so maybe he is a honest whore. Is there such a thing as a honest whore? I'll leave that one for Timmy to answer.

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 23, 2006 08:06 PM (rUyw4)

19 TIM: You are behind on your NAMBLA dues.

Posted by: greyrooster at January 25, 2006 07:45 PM (YjVDY)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Nutso Iran Prez To Europe: 'Take Back Your Jews'

The Persian Hitler is at it again. Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wants Europe to allow Israeli Jews to immigrate. Every last one of them. From Haaretz:

Ahmadinejad delivered the challenge after arriving in Syria for a two-day visit on Thursday. Addressing Europe, he asked: "Would you open the doors of your own countries to these (Jewish) immigrants so that they could travel to any part of Europe they chose?"
"Would you offer the necessary guarantees that you would provide for their security when they came to your countries and not allow another anti-Semitic wave in Europe?" he added in an apparent reference to recent attacks on Jewish cemeteries and properties in European states.

Mahmoud predicts that he won't get an answer to his proposal and that world leaders will accuse him of threatening world peace. Ya think?

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.

Posted by: Bluto at 12:08 AM | Comments (16) | Add Comment
Post contains 161 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Does anyone think that Israeli Jews would willingly go to Europe with its looming Islamic problem? Of course in throwing down the gauntlet "The Persian Hitler " is well aware of it and that his challenge is is an empty one. Then again I don't think that Israeli Jews are of the same mentality as yesterday's/today's European Jews to just sit back and suffer the iniquities of European society vis a vis the Jews without a fight. An interesting challenge for the Europeans would be whether they are willing to permit the Jews the freedom they experience in Israel or would they simply herd them into ghettos, or the equivalent of the French banlieues, again.

Posted by: Cynic at January 21, 2006 07:15 AM (FI4Pc)

2 I think the people of the civilized world should "encourage" the muslims who have infested our countries to go home.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 21, 2006 07:28 AM (0yYS2)

3 I agree. Civilization and islam just don't mix.. it's a bad fit. It's almost like civilization has hit its high-water mark and the dark ages are creeping back in. I really don't see any reason for muslims to be living in the West. What possible purpose does it serve? Why are mosques being built in the West? Isn't there enough physical space left in the Middle East? The obvious answer is that it's a slow-moving infection that needs to be halted yesterday.

Posted by: Richard at January 21, 2006 08:27 AM (W8EsU)

4 Yes, but this doesn't compare to "Pat Robertson".

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 21, 2006 10:02 AM (8e/V4)

5 Yeah, no matter how many 'slamotards chop off heads of innocent schoolgirls, somehow it's all about Pat.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 21, 2006 10:04 AM (0yYS2)

6 You've missed the salient aspect of his comments. He's clearing the decks. This is his peaceful alternative plan, Europe take back the Jews, so we don't have to nuke 'em. IMPLICIT in this statement, and his other ones as well, is the idea that they are being FORCED to nuke the Israelis, supposedly BECAUSE of the policies of the Euro-crusaders. These guys ARE SERIOUSLY GENOCIDAL. Nothing so tells me that he intends to obliterate the Jews, than these statements.

Posted by: Dan at January 21, 2006 10:49 AM (GAtBS)

7 This nutcase gives me tired head. He needs to be taken out, now.

Posted by: dick at January 21, 2006 10:56 AM (XlQVK)

8 If Alma..idma...jeed...whoozits is suggesting the Europe is not allowing jews who choose to live in Europe to live there, then he has one hell of a good point. But, of course, what he is really saying is, "Take them before I kill them all." And is somehow failing to draw the ire of the international peace-loving community. In fact, the worse he gets, the more Bush gets blamed. What a deal.

Posted by: Randall at January 21, 2006 11:21 AM (CHrO0)

9 I like that Almajinajawhatever is pointing the finger at the Europeans. It's because of European anti-semitism, culminating with the nazis, that the Jews decided they needed their own homeland. The Iraniam madman is making the Jew's case for them as far as I'm concerned.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 21, 2006 11:24 AM (8e/V4)

10 Perhaps the Europeans ought to consider the matter- just as soon as Iran installs the rightful heirs to the Peacock Throne. You know, lead by example.

Posted by: sigmund, carl and alfred at January 21, 2006 11:50 AM (dHZc2)

11 You may have a point, Timmy. I personally feel that New Zealand is a colonial artifact and that all you crackers need to get the hell out.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 22, 2006 08:25 PM (RHG+K)

12 Timmy, the only place with "indigenous" people is Africa. Everyone else is an immigrant (or an emigrant, depending on how you look at it). I wish more folk of your ilk would move on. We have an oversupply of selfish whiners. Couldn't you invite some of your soulmates to come live with you? And for exactly what, pray tell, is New Zealand "responsible"? The heavy lifting is being done here, so that New Zealsnd and the rest of the world can eventually live in peace. Gulliver is pissing on the fire so that you can mutter and grumble...and ultimately be safe.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 23, 2006 12:06 AM (RHG+K)

13 In other words, after a half-hearted attempt to help, New Zealand is largely sitting on its collective ass, bitching, as Americans make the sacrifices. Thanks for clearing that up, Timmy.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 23, 2006 12:53 AM (RHG+K)

14 So, Timmy, you believe that Islamic terrorism is an illusion? I've seen the hole in Manhattan, but I take it you think that it was created by Karl Rove in order to advance the Bushitlerburton agenda for worldwide hegemony? If I've mischaracterized your position, please don't bother to comment.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 23, 2006 09:46 AM (RHG+K)

15 Ah! The Extreme joy of living in relative isolation! You do realize NZ doesn't have to adher to any US security demands - that monetary figure? Oh soooo bloated - besides - you don't have to trade with the US. Your oil comes from AUS and Indonesia - if the price is too high - shouldn't you be talking to them? If the world's too unstable for you (when isn't the world unstable) then isolate yourself further - wrap yourself up in a wool blanket, build windmills, restrict immigration, build a bubble ... whatever.

Posted by: hondo at January 23, 2006 06:40 PM (3aakz)

16 Richard for president!!! Civilization and Islam don't mix. TRUE, TRUE, TRUE, TRUE, TRUE. JESUSLAND CARLOS: Damn good point. TIM BEHREND: Fine words, but underneath a cowards way. You little prick. The muslims will walk over your cowardice and have your kneeing to their god 5 times a day. Get some balls, be a man if you can. You left a nation with courage because you are a coward. We will win. We always win. Why???? America has balls. Get some. It feels great. Don't come back. You are not good enough. Sometimes it takes balls to be an American. You obviously don't have any. And for your info America is has its share of NZs living here because they are tired for being poor and getting the shit kicked out of them by native islanders. Again, a question of manhood. Something you wouldn't understand.

Posted by: greyrooster at January 25, 2006 07:41 PM (YjVDY)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

January 20, 2006

Jawa Report Helps Nab Would-be Terrorist (Blogoversary Surprise)

Two years ago today I started blogging by warning in my very first post, If you think this is offensive, just wait til I really get going! What a way to celebrate my blogoversary!!!

The long awaited moment has arrived that I can reveal some of the details of The Jawa Report's involvement in the capture of a would-be terrorist. Some of you already know some of the details as I have talked about them from time to time in a cryptic manner. I don't want to overemphasize our role in the wannabe terrorists capture, nor do I wish to claim that the man now in custody would have been able to accomplish his stated goal of building and detonating a nuclear bomb in the United States--clearly he did not have that capacity--but this website did play a role in his capture.

It is not the first time we have done some damage to a terror supporter. Longtime Jawa reader Filthy Allah helped get a terror supporter fired from an immigration law firm in Great Britain because of one of our posts. That ought to make the people of the U.K. feel slightly safer knowing that at least one less jihad supporter is in a position to help facilitate the immigration of terrorists to their country.

As satisfying as it is to help a terror supporter file for unemployment, it pales in contrast to the feeling of elation that I have knowing that I helped put a would be terrorist in jail. Even if my role was tiny, it is far more than I ever hoped for when I started this website. I simply wanted to make terrorists and their supporters mad, not help put them in jail.

This is what happened.

On March 12th of 2005 (later updated on March 14th) I wrote a post about a series of messages on the jihadi forum alm2sda.net about how to make various weapons of mass destruction, such as chemical weapons, by a poster calling himself ahmed_assalafil. I had first heard about Ahmed's messages from a website that I frequent which monitors jihad forums, Internet Haganah. Included in Ahmed's messages was the claim that the poster had information on how to make a nuclear bomb, along with some rudimentary (and erroneous) instructions on Hydrogen bomb construction. He was seeking help translating the allegedly secret materials into Arabic.

He asked fellow forum members who were part of the mujahidin to contact him so that he could help them carry out attacks with his special skills and because he was living in the U.S. Ahmed claimed to be a Palestinian living in the U.S. who was using a computer from a public library. As I noted at the time:

What is even more alarming is that the person posting the H-bomb plans is an American of Palestinian descent and posts the plans from a public library in the U.S. I suppose that the ACLU will cry bloody-murder should the FBI check the activity logs of whichever library this turns out to have come from.

I would emphasize that the provision of the Patriot Act which allows Federal law-enforcement agents to look at public library records is under attack from the Democratic party. This provision is at the heart of the present stalling over Section 215 by Democrats in the Senate who wish to take away this vital tool in the fight on terror.

After reading Aaron's post over at Internet Haganah and learning that the Arab News picked up on the story, I decided to have a little fun with Ahmed. I noticed that Ahmed had left his e-mail address at the jihadi forum so that terrorists could contact him and he could join their ranks.

Not wanting to disappoint Ahmed, I dutifully reposted his e-mail address. From time to time we like to have a little fun with jihadis. We post the e-mail addresses of those running terrorist websites or those who leave pro-terror messages at them. Posting Ahmed's address was meant to be a childish prank. Nothing more. After all, what could be more fun than signing a terrorist up for a gay singles website?

That was really the extent of our involvement. We found his e-mail address, posted it, and encouraged readers to e-mail him.

After Michelle Malkin gave in to my pleas for a link, the story received a lot of attention. Most of it was debunking Ahmed's claim that he had secret H-bomb plans. What was overlooked by the debunking was that Ahmed also was talking about building other, less complicated, weapons of mass destruction. However, he certainly was no nuclear expert.

Even so, I still found it troubling that this man was in the United States and that he was trying to make contact with terrorists so he could join them.

So did one of my readers. He took my advice and e-mailed him. Instead of calling him a filthy S.O.B., though, he started up a friendly conversation with him. "Ahmed" responded. Eventually this conversation would help put him in jail.

I do not have all of the information about the story, but I do know this much from various news accounts and from other sources.

[Image grab of WAVY video courtesy of Opinion Bug ]

It turns out that "Ahmed" was really Jordanian born Mohammed Radwan Obeid. Obeid had fraudulently immigrated to the United States by marrying an American woman, and then having the marriage annuled. Obeid was working as a cashier in Dayton, Ohio last year and living with his girlfriend in a nearby town. It was from the Troy branch of the Miami (Ohio) County public library that he began to seek out fellow jihadis.

Obeid's posts at jihadi forums was noticed by more than those anti-terrorist crusaders who monitor them. Obeid's posts about nuclear weapons and gun silencers was somehow noticed by reference librarian Laura Girolamo. Ms. Girolamo contacted the FBI who, using their newly found powers under the Patriot Act, were able to confirm the librarians suspicions.

At about the same time, a Jawa Report reader from Virginia, David Vazquez, began e-mailing Obeid. Obeid was under the false impression that Vazquez was a fellow jihad supporter. Obeid, he says, was now trying to recruit him for a terrorist cause.

Obeid told David Vazquez in e-mails that "we are starting a big operation that will make 9/11 nothing but a little bit of headache."

According to Vazquez, "I was very alarmed at the words (Obeid) was saying." He contacted the FBI.

Armed with the knowlege provided them by their ability under the Patriot Act to monitor public library computers, and by David Vazquez's saved e-mail conversations, the FBI picked up Obeid on March 28th for 'immigration violations'.

When asked about whether or not the e-mails were his, Obeid denied that they were. Since he was asked under oath, Obeid's denials amounted to knowingly and willfully making a false material representation.

A Federal immigration judge ordered Obeid's deportation in September. Obeid was indicted by a Federal Grand Jury in October. He pleaded guilty to the felony charge of lying to Federal investigators.

His trial is now in the sentencing phase where Federal prosecutors are using the testimony of David Vazquez, who is now a police officer in Norfolk, Virginia, to insure that Mohammad Radwan Obeid receives the maximum penalty of five years.

Like many other terror related cases prosecuted after 9/11, Obeid was charged first with immigration violations and then with lying to investigators. However, the content of those seemingly minor violations should not be overlooked. What was it that Obeid had lied about? About the fact that he was attempting to form a terror cell within the United States.

Perhaps Obeid would never have succeeded, but that misses the point. A Jordanian immigrant was hoping to start or join a terror cell in the U.S. He hoped to carry out terror attacks here on our soil. He dreamt that his act of terrorism would make the 9/11 attacks seem mild. Seems like kind of a big deal to me.

The Jawa Report played a small part in his arrest. For that, I am extremely proud. It's a kind of good that I never expected to play a role in. Thank you David Vazquez for helping nab this enemy of the United States and for allowing me a minor role.

Resources on the Mohammad Radwan Obeid case:

The Jawa Report: Nuke Bomb Plans Posted by American at Terrorist Website

Patriot Act's Controversial Library Provision Puts Ohio Terror Suspect Away (Blogs help too)

Jawa Report To Terrorist Supporters: "You're Fired!"

E-mail an al Qaeda Fan! (Updated with more e-mails)

Internet Haganah: How to build your own H-Bomb at home

Michelle Malkin: [JOKE] H-BOMB PLANS POSTED ON WEB SITE

Arab News: Terrorist Website Drops Dirty Bomb

Jihad Watch: Norfolk Officer Says Man Tried to Recruit Him for Terrorist Cause more...

Posted by: Rusty at 05:16 PM | Comments (78) | Add Comment
Post contains 1795 words, total size 12 kb.

Typhoons of Change

As a rule I don't usually drop Instapundit-like references to another blog. Nothing wrong with that, but I tend to think of myself as a short-winded essayist. However Winds of Change has two extremely provocative posts about the Iran dilemma, that are both long and well worth the effort:

"The Case for Invading Iran" - Thomas Holsinger

and the even more pessimistic,

"Our Darkening Sky: Iran and the War" - Joe Katzman

Bottom line: There aren't any "good" options left, only bad, very bad, and very very... From Joe (who is Canadian, by the way, if you're not familiar with WoC):

more...

Posted by: Demosophist at 02:24 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 391 words, total size 3 kb.

1 What about bad/very bad/very very bad/WORST: There is an article from News dot com dot au (which I cannot seem to post a link to for some reason)... From the article: IRAN may have received three shipments of sophisticated P-2 centrifuges capable of enriching uranium, diplomats said overnight, which could support Western claims that Tehran is hiding sensitive nuclear work. There were reportedly three shipments of one centrifuge each from the black-market network of disgraced Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan in 1997, one diplomat said. Centrifuges are used to enrich uranium for either nuclear reactor fuel or atom bomb material. Iran, which already has the less high-tech P-1 centrifuges, denies having received the more advanced machines, which make enriching uranium easier. Tehran says its nuclear program is a peaceful effort to generate electricity but the United States alleges it is hiding covert work on atomic weapons, for which highly enriched uranium is necessary. A second diplomat said the UN watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which has been investigating Iran's nuclear program for three years, was investigating the P-2 report. Asked if this could be the "smoking gun" for the West's fears, the diplomat replied: "Yes. If this is confirmed the game is over." --------------- The game has been over since 1997 I would imagine...

Posted by: Ariya at January 20, 2006 02:47 PM (uxW3N)

2 I swear it just kills me to see everyone pissing their pants over a backwoods shithole like Iran. Sure, they've got a lot of cold-war era Soviet hardware and a large military, which worked out so well for Saddam, and yeah, they're developing nuclear weapons, and are only about sixty years behind us in technology, but let's look at the flip side. In Afghanistan and Iraq we have enough troops, battle hardened veterans, mind you, to stage an invasion and drive toward Tehran like a knife through butter. We could put three or four carrier battle groups, along with attack subs and missile subs, in the Gulf or Indian Ocean, and we could put one or two Marine divisions in anywhere along Iran's long coastline. This isn't even considering the Air Force's long range strike abilities, which would probably be the first, and last, the mullahs would know of the invasion. In short, we could have military supremacy within a month or two at most, possibly sooner, considering that muslims of any type are generally inept at warfare, and most Iranians don't really have a vested interest in seeing their government continue unchecked. It's forgivable that anyone who is not a student of warfare would not be able to grasp all the concepts of modern war, or understand all the complexities and intricacies of waging such, but anyone who isn't a complete idiot, (i.e., liberal), or who hasn't been living in a cave, (and many who have been), should be able to see that anyone who stands up against the most lethal military in the history of the world will not be long shuffling off this mortal coil. To put it in perspective, even with the tactics of remote bombing, suicide bombing, sniping, and rockets and mortars, the terrorists are losing men, if you can call them that, at a ratio of 20:1 compared to us. Any time they face US forces head on, they lose closer to 100:1. In Desert Storm, our approximately 50,000 combat forces faced, and destroyed, Saddam's forces which numbered over ten times more. Their losses were in the tens of thousands, while ours were less than 300 for the entire campaign, most of which were accidental deaths or friendly fire deaths. Our technology, equipment, battle doctrine, training, and the individual soldiers themselves are superior to anything Iran can put in the field, and is so by several orders of magnitude, and anyone who says otherwise is simply an idiot whose opinion is based in ignorance, and who should be roundly ignored. Not only could we invade, be we should invade, and by the end of the year if we can get the Afghans and Iraqi forces up to speed so they can fight the terrorists themselves and leave us to more important tasks. Let them keep the heads of the hydra busy while we go for its heart.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 21, 2006 08:04 AM (0yYS2)

3 It looks like the US will let Iran get nukes --meaning it will make Israel do the dirty work of stopping them, if they are stopped. It looks like we are losing the race: democ racy in the ME, vs WMDs in the hands of Jew-haters.

Posted by: Tom Grey - Liberty Dad at January 21, 2006 02:31 PM (7QHXX)

4 Don't call the race until it's over.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 21, 2006 07:14 PM (0yYS2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Star Jones And The Talleywhacker War

From the New York Post:

Yesterday, the co-host of "The View" told viewers that the war on terror was nothing more than a clash of male egos between President Bush and Osama bin Laden.
"You know what? At some point, one of these men has to put it back in his pants and zip up the zipper," she said during a discussion of bin Laden's latest audio tape.

ABC's mouthy porkette has never been noted for deep thoughts, figuratively speaking, of course.

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.

Posted by: Bluto at 01:06 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 105 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Well er, she is an expert on egos now - isn't she?

Posted by: hondo at January 20, 2006 01:12 PM (3aakz)

2 More of what passes for "nuanced analysis" on the Left.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 20, 2006 01:27 PM (8e/V4)

3 FDR's "arsenal of democracy" was a great slogan during WWII. I'm not sure how well "schlong of democracy" would do in the present day.

Posted by: Graeme at January 20, 2006 01:34 PM (KEUFP)

4 Odd! Doesn't even acknowledging her give her existance? That's it for me on this topic.

Posted by: hondo at January 20, 2006 01:35 PM (3aakz)

5 Considering that one of the things that the two men disagree about is whether women should have the right to show their faces on TV, talk about penises, and insult political and religious leaders, you'd think the woman would be more prone to take sides. It's admirable objectivity from a modern political commentator, if that's what she's supposed to be.

Posted by: ShannonKW at January 20, 2006 02:07 PM (dT1MB)

6 Good lord. And "feminists" wonder why women aren't taken seriously in politics.

Posted by: Darleen at January 20, 2006 02:28 PM (FgfaV)

7 Remember that the dimwitted bimbos on the View made the EXACT same comments about Pres Bush after ChiCom Pilot Wong Way had his mid-air with our P-3 in spring of 2001.

Posted by: JohnBo at January 21, 2006 01:55 AM (m4rua)

8 She really needs to be taken off TV. She is embarrassing to America. As a Canadian who respects the USA, I know this.

Posted by: The Atheist Jew at January 21, 2006 08:13 AM (s0z/Q)

9 Anyone remember the photo of W. in his flight suit on the carrier? That wasn't a cruise missile in his pocket, baby. In comparison, Osama wears a man-dress and hides in caves where he plots the deaths of innocent people. Star Jones may know one hundred ways to eat TwinkiesÂ™, but she damn sure doesn't know much else, least of all anything about men or warfare.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 21, 2006 10:12 AM (0yYS2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Deadline Looms for Jill Carroll

The 72 hour deadline set by The Revenge Brigade may have already expired, depending on when they started the clock. We pray that Jill Carroll is immediately released unharmed.

Posted by: Rusty at 09:12 AM | Comments (32) | Add Comment
Post contains 39 words, total size 1 kb.

1 fingers crossed.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 20, 2006 09:38 AM (8e/V4)

2 Me too Rusty.

Posted by: Tim at January 20, 2006 09:39 AM (5rYy9)

3 Me three. I hope she lives but you never know with these bastards.

Posted by: George Ramos at January 20, 2006 09:52 AM (5E0ex)

4 If there was one ounce of humanity in these people, they would let this young woman go.

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 20, 2006 10:33 AM (rUyw4)

5 I think that's what we're all worried about, Joe.

Posted by: a4g at January 20, 2006 10:53 AM (nMd9J)

6 >>>If there was one ounce of humanity in these people, If that's what we're hoping for, then she's doomed. The best we can wish for is that the terrorists see her release as benefitting them in some way. They won't release her otherwise.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 20, 2006 10:59 AM (8e/V4)

7 She is getting what she deserves. WhatÂ’s so funny is that here she was competely brainwashed by sunni muslims to think that the country is suffering. Meanwhile 80% of the country was freed. Only the sunni are upset b/c they lost they stranglehold on the land. Now she will get a taste of the people she was Â“defending.Â”

Posted by: muhammed at January 20, 2006 12:06 PM (W6B0W)

8 The countdown begins from the first airing of the tape on Aljazeera, following a long held standard. That means between 4 and 5pm EST.

Posted by: Informed source at January 20, 2006 01:31 PM (blNMI)

9 I don't know jill, but what is important at this point is that she gets back safely, and for that I am praying. However, I don't think most of the people who have opined here know what you are talking about, nor, from what I do know of jill, would she support what you are saying. Everyone has humanity, and this war, in some way is not about that. the people who have her captive have humanity, but their goal is different. Jill knows they have humanity, that is why she is there in the first place. The kind of jingoistic nonsense of some of you bloggers literally makes me sick. Jill, I pray that you are ok. Millions are with you, but for the right reasons. This is now no longer politics, this is your life, and we appreciate it.

Posted by: Steven Cowfer at January 20, 2006 01:37 PM (LtT3+)

10 I heard the deadline was at 3 pm eastern time.

Posted by: George Ramos at January 20, 2006 01:47 PM (5E0ex)

11 Notice how the things we SAY makes Steven Cowfer "sick"-- and yet he can find it within his heart to see the "humanity" in the animals who are on the verge of sawing that innocent girl's head off. Thus literally SAYING the wrong thing (in his view) is worse than the DOING of something far more loathsome (ie., sawing an innocent's head off). And with this you have yet another perfect illustration of how Liberalism is a mental disorder.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 20, 2006 02:11 PM (8e/V4)

12 Yep, the guys who like to put bullets in women's heads have so much humanity. I'm being sarcastic by the way.

Posted by: George Ramos at January 20, 2006 02:17 PM (5E0ex)

13 While mister Jesusland has a point, It is not better to saw off an innocent's head than it is to bomb a country to the point of killing at least over 30,000 innocents. This was my point. You all seem to think that if it is a conservative ideal, then it is ok. My point is it doesn't matter what side of the aisle you are on. Killing is wrong. Both the killing of Jill Carroll as well as the killing of thousands of innocent Iraqis and Afghanis by US forces. Two wrongs don't make a right, mister Christian

Posted by: Steven Cowfer at January 20, 2006 02:19 PM (LtT3+)

14 Steven, infinitely more innocents died in our war against the Nazis. Was that war wrong? Just answer the question please. No tangents, no sidestepping, no red herrings. Just answer my question. If you don't answer, and instead go off into another pre-programmed screed, we'll just assume you just got pwned. I'll give you a hint though. The death of innocents isn't what makes a war right or wrong.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 20, 2006 02:27 PM (8e/V4)

15 Yes and no. The death of innocents doesn't even require a war, for that you are correct. And, you are also correct that WWII was not wrong and if it had happened today I would have fully supported the US efforts in it, if not actually fighting myself. However, there is a difference, for innocents to die in a just war is one thing, but for them to die in a war based on deceit and lies is not forgiveable.

Posted by: Steven Cowfer at January 20, 2006 02:31 PM (LtT3+)

16 Steven, you have yet to prove it was a war based on "deceit and lies". So until you do, your dead innocents fails to impress. But back to the topic at hand. How is it that you can forgive these terrorist headchoppers, and see their "humanity", but not George Bush? Why is it that it makes you "sick" to hear our "jingoism" against murderers, and yet your hatred of Bush should fill me with euphoric pleasure? In other words, please distinguish your hatred of "Bush", from our hatred of headchopping murderers. No tangents please, just answer the question.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 20, 2006 02:39 PM (8e/V4)

17 I fail to understand your tangents remark, but that is ok. when I refer to their humanity, I am not referring specifically to the "headchoppers" but rather arab people in general. There are lots of people here in the US that lump them all together in a derogatory way, and that is simply not reflective of reality. I don't expect my dislike of Bush to be pleasing to you. I come from a family of conservatives, and I respect conservative viewpoints, even if I disagree with them. I feel it is the conservatives and, admittedly many liberals, who lack respect for opposing viewpoints. finally, I don't hate Bush, I simply disagree with most everything he has done while in office.

Posted by: Steven Cowfer at January 20, 2006 02:57 PM (LtT3+)

18 >>I am not referring specifically to the "headchoppers" but rather arab people in general. Then you, sir, are a racist. Because when we refer to terrorist headchoppers, we aren't referring to arab people in general. But you are, apparently. Thus your offense at our hatred of Jill Carroll's captors. And you are free to dislike George Bush all you want, even hate him. But so are we free to dislike headchopping murderers. mkay? School's out. You are dismissed.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 20, 2006 03:02 PM (8e/V4)

19 I think you'll find the people being lumped together are "islamic fanatics" rather than people of Arab origin.

Posted by: dave at January 20, 2006 03:03 PM (CcXvt)

20 go back to school, I have better things to do with my time than argue with people who can't argue like rational adults

Posted by: Steven Cowfer at January 20, 2006 03:13 PM (LtT3+)

21 You've got a point there. I'll admit this board is filled with far right wing radicals. But that's life.

Posted by: George Ramos at January 20, 2006 03:20 PM (5E0ex)

22 >>>I have better things to do with my time than argue with people who can't argue like rational adults I love how Lefty dopes come in here with attitude, and then when you give it back to them, they get all huffy and self righteous. I can assure you that you'll generally be treated around here as you treated others. You flame, you'll get flamed. You stay civil, and you'll be treated civilly.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 20, 2006 06:13 PM (8e/V4)

23 Ok...What is the sense in debating here? Niether side is gonna win...I prefer to debate face to face...That's how adults do it...Further more... This is not a chat room...Although,it's very amusing to see what all you democrats & liberals write...Nothing sooths me more then watching you getting your feathers ruffled & making an ass out of your pathetic little selves...The sooner you realize Republicans are superior to you...The sooner you can have your last cry & move on... Anyways,the topic here...being "Jill Carroll"... Lets just stay positive & hope for the best...

Posted by: Clyde at January 21, 2006 12:47 AM (2Xc2N)

24 This has got to STOP! If they kill jill..then all the hostages that we have, must be put to death immediately! We must set a precidence-that this crap has t stop and we muststop playing games and forgiving these bastards. America seems like it has no power anympore and i am disgusted! Every day, these bastards put demands on us and everyday, we BEND-OVER-BACWARDS for THEM! I'm sick of it! We must shock those creeps over there BIG TIME with a NUKE. We must stop this insanity!!!!!!!! If we don't-this will continue forever...on- and on, and they will get everything they want. I think my country stinks. We're turning into a bunch of cowards. NUKE the BASTARDS!!!!!!!

Posted by: dave at January 21, 2006 07:48 AM (0kCXQ)

25 I agree...NUKE THE BASTARDS!!!

Posted by: Clyde at January 21, 2006 12:03 PM (2Xc2N)

26 The tard 'dave' ranting on about nuking Iraqi civilians and killing prisoners is not the same 'dave' as I, longtime Java reports poster. Just so we're clear, because that guys flipped his lid.

Posted by: dave at January 21, 2006 11:30 PM (CcXvt)

27 "Flipped his Lid" isn't the word! He's out of his "F"n mind! (no offense). I too wanted to kick some ass and forget taking the name. If we did that, we would only prove them right. America isn't about dropping bombs on humans. We are about freedom and muslims who want to live in peace deserve that chance. This group that say they are an organization are nothing more than a gang. Hell, America has gangs. Just the same as these groups in Iraq and surrounding cities, they too try and take over the neighborhood. Do you know why American gangs can't take a city like Al-Queda and taliban take cities? Because we have "kick-ass" Americans who stand up for this country, thats why! And we are trying to help Iraq become a "Kick-ass" country too. These thugs only want power over there country, America see's it and we are no dummies. We know what happens when they get a big chunk like that. They will keep growing and soon they will come for us. We did a right move by putting the "brakes" on them. It could have been a lot worse. If you want to help, look around on the web. Look for suspicious activity. If you can hack, shut down a web site that exploits terrorism. Let the terrorists know that they can't kill what they didn't create. We are all computer savvy in some way. we can shut them down! Note* If worse came to its worst, I would pay to see their faces when they finally realize they have pissed off everyone in America. If everyone stood up in America, you know someone's getting their ass kicked! Where's Ronald Reagan when you need 'em!

Posted by: Taco Bandit at January 22, 2006 04:57 PM (MOKXn)

28 "Flipped his Lid" isn't the word! He's out of his "F"n mind! (no offense). I too wanted to kick some ass and forget taking the name. If we did that, we would only prove them right. America isn't about dropping bombs on humans. We are about freedom and muslims who want to live in peace deserve that chance. This group that say they are an organization are nothing more than a gang. Hell, America has gangs. Just the same as these groups in Iraq and surrounding cities, they too try and take over the neighborhood. Do you know why American gangs can't take a city like Al-Queda and taliban take cities? Because we have "kick-ass" Americans who stand up for this country, thats why! And we are trying to help Iraq become a "Kick-ass" country too. These thugs only want power over there country, America see's it and we are no dummies. We know what happens when they get a big chunk like that. They will keep growing and soon they will come for us. We did a right move by putting the "brakes" on them. It could have been a lot worse. If you want to help, look around on the web. Look for suspicious activity. If you can hack, shut down a web site that exploits terrorism. Let the terrorists know that they can't kill what they didn't create. We are all computer savvy in some way. we can shut them down! Note* If worse came to its worst, I would pay to see their faces when they finally realize they have pissed off everyone in America. If everyone stood up in America, you know someone's getting their ass kicked! Where's Ronald Reagan when you need 'em

Posted by: Taco Bandit at January 22, 2006 04:59 PM (MOKXn)

29 Hey Mongoose...I'm not sure I understand you completely...Is it wrong that we post are opinions in here???Do you have nothing better to do then to pull the old fashion "look At Me, Look At Me Act"???The only thing you said that made any sense was how people here in America take their freedom for granted...I can understand that...I just think by posting what you did was a cry out for attention...First of all...You don't know 1 person in here...Although it is fun talking shit to Natasha...And though I dont agree with her on most of the things she has to say...1 thing she has shown is her support for "Jill Carroll"...As have I...& alot of others here...As far as you being in Iraq as you say you are...Well,I wish you the best & hope you come back...I was'nt shipped to Iraq...I was sent to Afghanistan...And I'm thankful I got out of that shithole...but I would go back if they asked me to...The only reason I'm saying this now is so you understand the point that you're not the only 1 who had to fight in this war...& so maybe you will think before you speak...I had no time to jump on a computer & run my mouth when I was there...There is nothing wrong with people expressing their views on here...Except for a few people that I've seen saying that "Jill" is getting what she deserves & bullshit like that... I would love nothing better then to bash their sorry ass faces in...Anyways,I just felt like you should know that...and to give you a tip... "Think Before You Speak"...I wish you the best... Stay Safe...

Posted by: Clyde at January 23, 2006 03:41 AM (3D94H)

30 Clyde, I can relate to your message. I would like to smack someone up-side the head for saying that Jill Carroll is getting what she deserves. Though the saying goes; "Know good deed goes unpunished", I still say she doesn't diserve this. No one diserves to be held captive, threatened, or killed without reason. What she did for Iraq and America and other great countries out there do not fit any reason to bring harm to her. I say GOD bless our troops and anyone who is over there. May they return safely to their family and friends.

Posted by: Taco Bandit at January 23, 2006 07:21 AM (MOKXn)

31 We'll wait. We can be patient. We're a kind and generous and very, very powerful people. That Islamist militants seem to misunderstand us is due either to their own lack of exposure and imagination... or because they are merely pretending in a game of "I'm crazier than you, so be afraid"... like uncertain but frantically belligerent schoolyard bullies. But we know that more than 60 years ago our friends were attacked by one nation and we ourselves by another. History has trouble remembering very clearly what grievances they espoused to mask their aggression. What is now clearly known is that they were completely and utterly defeated, their great cities shattered and melted by force undreamedof at the time. All this in spite of the then-widespread impression that they were too powerful and too cruel to stop ("how could we soft and kind Americans match their savagery?"). What's not well known, however, was that there were policy discussions held regarding the fates of the transgessors. Serious proposals were made and subsequently rejected that called for the extermination of the very people of the aggressor countries by the victors, who were largely the Americans. That such horror was not executed was fortunate but by no means inevitable as our very survival had been threatened. There is much fear, the mullahs and petty princes and their illiterate thugs become shrill with fright when we're roused from our comfortable slumber. So, we wait. We can afford to.

Posted by: Mr. Natural at January 23, 2006 02:07 PM (gPCww)

32 Another do-gooder gets too close and is grabbed by the vermin for whom she felt such compassion. We don't need reporters to interact with Iraqis, that's what beehive rounds are for. The Muslims aren't going to kill her though. Terrorism is theater and that wouldn't play well. The peacemaker folks will probably get what they asked for, but anyone opposing the war is effectively pro-Jihadi wether they intend it or no. They aren't young and cute, so news directors don't care either. More videos for Ogrish methinks.

Posted by: SR at January 30, 2006 10:18 PM (x2eX4)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Big News from The Jawa Report

Very busy this morning, but here is a hint to long-time Jawa Report readers. Remember all of those cryptic posts hinting at The Jawa Report's involvement in catching terror suspects? The occasional post that we pulled?

Today, all will be revealed.

Get your party shoes on.

Posted by: Rusty at 08:11 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 58 words, total size 1 kb.

Blogger on the BBC

Rocco di Pippa at The Autonomist was interviewed by the BBC. Me? The BBC called once, but they just wanted a guest appearance on The Benny Hill Show.

Posted by: Rusty at 08:07 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.

206kb generated in CPU 0.0502, elapsed 0.0663 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.0271 seconds, 370 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy

Monthly Traffic

Pages: 34606
Files: 14
Bytes: 206.3M
CPU Time: 20:38
Queries: 3008702

Content

Posts: 5690
Comments: 76631

Feeds

January 23, 2006

January 22, 2006

January 21, 2006

January 20, 2006

Search Thingy

Recent Comments

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

Monthly Traffic

Content

Feeds