The U.S. Department of Homeland Security raised objections to selling the rights to U.S. ports to a Dubai based company. Well slap my rear and call me Charlie!

AP:

The Homeland Security Department objected at first to a United Arab Emirates company's taking over significant operations at six U.S. ports. It was the lone protest among members of the government committee that eventually approved the deal without dissent.

The department's early objections were settled later in the government's review of the $6.8 billion deal after Dubai-owned DP World agreed to a series of security restrictions.

Posted by: Rusty at 01:23 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 124 words, total size 1 kb.

Two-Man Bobsled
The brakeman grabs the sled powerfully, finding his rythmn in the rapid pistoning of his heavily muscled thighs. He insinuates himself into the cockpit and buries his head against the clenched buttocks of the driver. GAY

Figure Skating
So gay it makes the stars of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy look like British soccer hooligans. GAY

Snowboarding
The emphasis on styling points moves a moderately dangerous sport into the metrosexual category. METROSEXUAL

Hockey
As straight as a slapshot to the crotch. STRAIGHT

Biathlon
Sort of straight. They could solidify their position by exchanging the pussy little .22s for something with more stopping power - 12 gauge deer slugs would do nicely. METROSEXUAL/STRAIGHT

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto .

Posted by: Bluto at 12:56 PM | Comments (107) | Add Comment
Post contains 135 words, total size 2 kb.

1 What about the 2 man luge? Even more gay.

Posted by: baba-phooey at February 25, 2006 01:18 PM (ET0mz)

2 I dunno who that figrue skater dude is but he sure looks like a big ol fruit cake! have a nice day reg g

Posted by: girish at February 25, 2006 01:53 PM (IpuE8)

3 Are they going to broadcast the BIATHALON?

Posted by: sandpiper at February 25, 2006 02:15 PM (AQZCQ)

4 Ah, but you forgot women's hockey. Good gay

Posted by: Vinnie at February 25, 2006 03:28 PM (f289O)

5 What would Scott Baitano do?

Posted by: Robert Savage at February 25, 2006 04:33 PM (CnDtU)

6 What would Brian Boitano do?

Posted by: Robert Savage at February 25, 2006 04:34 PM (CnDtU)

7 Homophobic angst masquerading as journalism. LAME

Posted by: Natasha at February 25, 2006 04:46 PM (i6py+)

8 Over-used words like 'homophobic angst' to describe guys being guys. LAME. Pseudo-intellectualism. VERY LAME. It's been a long time since the Olympics were relevant and anyone watched but when did they partner with ESPN and add X-game events?

Posted by: slug at February 25, 2006 05:07 PM (vQoK9)

9 Speak for yourself, Natasha. We haven't seen Boris around lately. Turing words: Brokeback Bullwinkle.

Posted by: Vinnie at February 25, 2006 05:35 PM (f289O)

10 WTF is metrosexual? Nere in NYC I see just 3 groups - straight, homosexual & confused. Is metrosexual = confused?

Posted by: hondo at February 25, 2006 05:47 PM (fyKFC)

11 hondo: metrosexuals are fad-driven, effeminate straight men overly concerned with clothing and hair. Natasha: So judgemental. Don't be hating.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 25, 2006 06:01 PM (RHG+K)

12 Metro's are just fags without the guts to pull the trigger. I'd rather have to work next to a butch gay guy than a faggy metro any day.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 25, 2006 06:44 PM (0yYS2)

13 I always drop any guy who starts talking trash about gays, because guys like that always have serious problems.

Posted by: Natasha at February 25, 2006 07:40 PM (i6py+)

14 Natasha, you seem to be saying that you're extremely promiscuous...that's a real turnoff for me. Promiscuous women always have self-image problems.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 25, 2006 07:52 PM (RHG+K)

15 The more you talk, the more you prove my point. Face it. You don't 'even' like women as people. You don't know why, but you deeply resent all of us. The truth is that deep down inside, you really are just jealous of us, because you yourself want to be a woman. I bet you are sitting there in a bra and panties right now. So deeply full of self loathing and shame. So terrified someone will discover your "secret". So you spend your whole damn life, trying to prove to others that 'you' are a 'real' "he man", and more than anything else you try to prove that you are absolutely NOT gay. No, not you. No. You deal with that fact of life, which you refuse to face, by convincing yourself that really you are a woman inside, and all of us women "who just take our womanhood for granted" are just evil scum who don't deserve what we have. You 'do' though, right? Face it boy. Accept who you are. Be a man about it, and just be the best damn gay guy you can possibly be. Or shut the hell up at least, because glass should be so easy to see through.

Posted by: Natasha at February 25, 2006 08:23 PM (i6py+)

16 Imagine the depth of courage it takes it for that figure skater, to just be who he really is, before the eyes of the whole world like that. Now that's a man baby! That is courage, determination, straight up honesty and GRACE under pressure. None of you guys are even half the man he is. But instead of convincing yourself that you are "really a woman inside", just be a man for change, and have the grace to let others be who they really are. There is not a woman, or a man for that matter, on planet earth who is worth a god damn, who would have you until you do.

Posted by: Natasha at February 25, 2006 08:32 PM (i6py+)

17 Natasha, if you are trying to be a bitch, you have succeeded. If not, well, then you're still a bitch. So get on your broom and fly away!

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 25, 2006 08:32 PM (rUyw4)

18 Takes one to know one, "Joe".

Posted by: Natasha at February 25, 2006 08:36 PM (i6py+)

19 Who says, "Natasha"? You are such a fake. You are probably a man pretending to be a woman. I know of no women who would believe in that screed you just posted.

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 25, 2006 08:41 PM (rUyw4)

20 Ignore them Natasha. It's nice to know you are not homophobic. Not all male figure skaters are homosexual. You're a good person. And I believe you are a woman. I'm not gay and I have no reason to hate gay people. It's their life.

Posted by: Robert Savage at February 25, 2006 08:58 PM (CnDtU)

21 Lets see now. Homophobic types, wonder and worry if that "pretty" guy they see who make them feel attracted, is a "fag". That 'is' the way it works you know, because it is really themselves whom they hate, not the guy who turns them on. Now could it be, that the same 'insecure' self hating sexually confused types, worry about women really being guys? Oh hell yes. Goes hand in hand. Like I said the more you guys talk, ... . Healthy, secure, sexually mature 'men', do NOT spend hours on-line talking about FAGS this and FAGS that, period. They just don't. Why do you?

Posted by: Natasha at February 25, 2006 09:00 PM (i6py+)

22 Very pleased to meet you Mr. Savage. I just thought I would give them something to think about. Who knows? They may not be beyond hope. Natasha

Posted by: Natasha at February 25, 2006 09:04 PM (i6py+)

23 You will notice, Natasha, that I have not used the malicious epithet you've been throwing around, nor was there anything hateful in the original post. You put me in mind of a fundalmentalist Muslim reacting to a Mohammed cartoon. But all that aside, lovely Natasha, there's nothing wrong with you that a massive injection of vitamin Bluto wouldn't fix.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 25, 2006 09:06 PM (RHG+K)

24 A "massive injection" huh. Sounds like overcompensation to me. It's been fun teasing you girls, but I have better things to do. Rave on. bye bye

Posted by: Natasha at February 25, 2006 09:11 PM (i6py+)

25 Natasha, I couldn't agree with you more. Everyomne should leave the Butt-monkey's alone. After all, it's their own business when they engage in male fellatio and butt reaming in public washrooms.

Posted by: Ken at February 25, 2006 09:13 PM (CYeOT)

26 The Biathlon originally used larger bore rifles. http://www.biathlon.net/intro.html I guess the euros couldn't handle a 30.06???

Posted by: ryanspeed at February 25, 2006 09:16 PM (yhZw5)

27 Just more pseudo-intellectual crap. A sure sign of such is applying a word like 'homophobe' to any reference to a gay person made by a straight, white, male. The 'enlightened' liberal likes to use the term because they think that we are either a)afraid of gays or b)have a subconscious desire to be gay. Hey, whatever makes you feel good about yourself, Tash. Truth is, most of the guys that you've gone through your life calling a homophobe were probably imagining your lips doing something other than flapping them if you have even a little bit of a game face. If you're less than a joy to behold, then we just tuned you out and went back to watching the game... or looking at your best friend. I'm going to put my vote in and say you're probably one of those Code Pink sweethearts. You might get yourself a good man if you just laid off that cute feminist talk. You'd get taken more seriously that way.

Posted by: slug at February 25, 2006 09:21 PM (vQoK9)

28 C'mon, Natasha, you know you like the bad boys. Secretly you dream of an outlaw buccaneer...say one about six-one, with an eyepatch and a bulging codpiece. You would tempt this untamed brute and gasp as he grips your bodice with his strong, long-fingered hand and rips the flimsy garment down...your cries of "No! You beast!" fade into passionate moans as you catch your first glimpse of his engorged manhood. Then he takes you! As every woman secretly dreams of being taken...again and again rising on crescendoes of passion until you are released from his spell and bask in afterglow with the scents of manmusk and sweat a delicious counterpoint to your racing heart. Would you like a smoke? Yes? They're in the den. Bring me a beer, too when you come back. Oh, and by the way, my friend Jake and his companion laughed out loud at the image of the Queer Eye guys as "British soccer hooligans". They love that sort of absurd and unexpected image. Unlike you, most gay men seem to have a well-developed sense of humor.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 25, 2006 09:24 PM (RHG+K)

29 Natasha sounds like a neurotic man hater who probably walks around with saggy boobs from burning all her bras 30 years ago.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 25, 2006 10:22 PM (8e/V4)

30 >>>they think that we are either a)afraid of gays or b)have a subconscious desire to be gay. cmon, you don't really think they actually believe that. They SAY it, yes. But BELIEVE it? I doubt it. It's just rhetorical poopie.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 25, 2006 10:26 PM (8e/V4)

31 Natasha will be joining us for awhile courtesy an exchange program with the Twilight Zone. Categorization will not work - he/she whatever is truly an army of one.

Posted by: hondo at February 25, 2006 11:19 PM (fyKFC)

32 JC, I DO think they believe it. Since when do any of these people think for themselves? We know they all believe the same talking points. The first time I remember hearing the word 'homophobia' was about 20 years ago. I laughed my ass off when I first heard the term because the thought of being afraid of gays or the thought of being called latently homosexual is absurd. It's a word that was coined by some liberal sociology professor and that in itself makes it pretty easy to dismiss. I don't care if someone is gay or not because it's not my place to judge. People like Natasha need to stop taking themselves so seriously. I'm sure she thinks we're all guilty of hate speech.

Posted by: slug at February 26, 2006 03:22 AM (vQoK9)

33 Natasha, you don't understand do you child? The reason that real men detest "fags" is because men are supposed to look and act like men, and women are supposed to look and act like women. It's not natural to cross gender lines, and it is generally frowned upon in any society. If you weren't a stupid little brainless twit you'd know that, but oh well. Take my above comment for example; I have two gay neighbors who are both fairly manly, and keep a house and lawn that Hank Hill would be proud of. They watch my pets when I go on vacation, and I like having them as neighbors. This would not be the case if they were a couple of queens though, because I find that crap disgusting. So, go pull your head out of your ass, put down your Chomsky, and accept that fact that a man worth having doesn't like fags, or just do us all a favor and have a nice, big glass of Drano, with my compliments.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 26, 2006 07:25 AM (0yYS2)

34 Slug.. I was thinking the same thing. I used to love the olympics. But it become just another XGames. It's all over-hyped with way too much time spent on personalities. I knew it was the beginning of the end when they added snowboarding.. bahhh. Did you hear the breathless interviews with some of the snowboard people? Every sentence contained the word, "Dude". It was real stupid.

Posted by: Richard at February 26, 2006 10:32 AM (7KF8r)

35 And I hate the term "homophobic". It's just so politically correct. Anytime anyone doesn't embrace some fringe element, they're accused of some kind of "phobia".

Posted by: Richard at February 26, 2006 10:38 AM (7KF8r)

36 >>>Anytime anyone doesn't embrace some fringe element, they're accused of some kind of "phobia". Well, there is "christophobia" for all those Lefties who live in sheer terror of anything related to christianity. How about "normophobia" for people who insist all fringe elements be wholeheartedly embraced to our bossom. Or how about "ameriphobia" for all those Lefties who hate America and always side with our enemies, or "caucasiaphobia" for the same Lefties who always want to stick it to whitey, or "authoriphobia" for the ones who always want to stick it to the Man, "whitemalaphobia" for fear of white males, etc.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 26, 2006 11:38 AM (8e/V4)

37 This post was meant as a joke! I don't think the Dread Pundit Bluto is "homophobic." I'd argue that the biathalon is far more straight than hockey. You don't have to touch other sweaty men and you don't end up in the same shower together afterwards. Yes, I would rather see something like a .270 Win or a .338 Lapua in the event than a .22 rifle, but it's still shooting, and that's an "athletic skill" that will save your life, as opposed to touching a man in a hockey rink.

Posted by: Abdullah al-Libi at February 26, 2006 12:01 PM (vlJD/)

38 The sure way to bring out the weirdos is to post on homosexuals or abortion. One brings out the thought police on homophobia and the other the fringe elements on both sides. I think the homos have a network who ply the net looking for any post on homosexuals. I wish they would all get a life and leave the rest of us alone.

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 26, 2006 03:07 PM (rUyw4)

39 LOL! You guys are unbelievable. 1. I am not a "liberal". 2. I am also most certainly NOT a fan of Noam Chomsky the globalist advocate of world government. Noam Chomsky, just like Bush Clinton 'and' John Kerry, is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. The misuse of the term "political correctness", is also being thoroughly misused here, to merely enforce a preferred version of it. Read above and see, how some here, forbid the use of the word homophobia as being just "too PC". Political correctness is a device employed to control the use of language, in order to limit thought and conceptualization, to a preferred political model. How come you guys can't see that political correctness, whether so called "left" or so called "right", is still just plain old political correctness? If you want to get some idea of what globalization is about, then see the thread here at JR, Homeland Security Objected to UAE Ports Deal. Here's a link to it. http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/160459.php

Posted by: Natasha at February 26, 2006 03:25 PM (i6py+)

40 >>>Political correctness is a device employed to control the use of language, in order to limit thought and conceptualization, to a preferred political model. Correct. Which is what terms like "homophobia" are. It's the use of language to control thought. We spit at such terms and wear them like badges of honor.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 26, 2006 03:35 PM (8e/V4)

41 Natasha, we are here to have fun, not listen to your drivel about globalization and homophobia, etc. We were poking fun at the ridiculous "sports" of the winter olympics. You can go to other threads here on the Jawa and post on the other stuff, but you are seriously off topic here. Now, shoo!

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 26, 2006 03:40 PM (rUyw4)

42 I certainly don't have to wonder whom you meant by we "jesusland joe", and it doesn't take a genius to see that you are not here "just having a little fun". You so called "christians" are particularly nasty, being well known the world over for your intolerance and vicious cruelty, toward those whose beliefs and way of life differs from your own. You guys are far worse than the Taliban, because you aspire to dominate the entire world, and indeed you have already slaughtered countless innocents in your lust for absolute power. I do not discount your hateful divisive propaganda as you guys "just having a little fun". You Xians are an evil menace. Take your hate somewhere else.

Posted by: Natasha at February 26, 2006 04:46 PM (i6py+)

43 >>>You guys are far worse than the Taliban, lol! I think we can safely assume that when Natasha says she's not a "Liberal", she actually means she's a marxist and a stalinist. Probably one of those International Answer types that make softie Libs look like Adam Smith capitalists.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 26, 2006 04:51 PM (8e/V4)

44 Natasha, if you continue with your bigoted hate speech you will be banned from this thread.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 26, 2006 04:51 PM (RHG+K)

45 Bluto, I try to wrap my mind around the mental delusion and seething hatred of people like Natasha, and I come up short every time. How anybody-- even a stalinist-- could make a comment like her Taliban comment (and believe it) is a complete mystery to me.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 26, 2006 05:01 PM (8e/V4)

46 "Did you hear the breathless interviews with some of the snowboard people?" Ahhh, no. I haven't watched one second of the Olympics unless you count up those split seconds that all men take for the show to register in their brains as they click right on by with the remote. My wife says I'm a world class channel changer. Keeping with the theme this topic has taken on, I don't know if homosexuals fall on the man or woman side of this issue. Maybe my phobia is keeping me from finding out. Why haven't they made that an Olympic event? If it was actually stuff that real guys would watch, the ratings would be better. Hey Rusty, et al, how about an open thread about what us real men would like to see added to the Olympics?

Posted by: slug at February 26, 2006 05:17 PM (vQoK9)

47 So now I am a "marxist and a stalinist"? Of course the scariest label they can find is to be preferred. Bluto is so anti "political correctness" he now threatens to ban me for being politically incorrect. Such astonishing blind hypocrisy. OK Bluto. Enforce your political correctness. Ban me, and don't forget to delete my posts too. No good stalinist censor would ever forget to sanitize the offending speech. Glass should be so transparent.

Posted by: Natasha at February 26, 2006 05:42 PM (i6py+)

48 Now, Natasha, what makes you think I am a xian? Jesusland is a geographical location, dumb butt, not a xian designation. Geez, you people get dumber by the hour.

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 26, 2006 05:44 PM (rUyw4)

49 I like Slug's idea. It's safe to say that the lightheartedness of this thread is unrecoverable. Natasha needs to take herself and her high horse elsewhere. How a humourous discussion on sporting events can devolve into commentary on Christian world domination and the Council on Foreign Relations (good grief!) is beyond me. Now if you'll excuse me, the recess is over and me and my fellow Christian cabal memebrs must return to the castle's inner sanctum to continue our discussion on, well.......stuff.

Posted by: Graeme at February 26, 2006 05:44 PM (RkR7z)

50 Don't ban the dumb ass, Bluto, as she has proven once again how truly stupid the "progressives" are. I'm lovin' it, and Graeme, I'll meet you in the cellar where we can secure our "xian plan for world domination". Who says the lightheartedness of this thread cannot be recovered?

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 26, 2006 05:50 PM (rUyw4)

51 Your "humor" is dependent upon sex and gender stereotypes requiring one also to despise sexual minorities for being different. The posts making sweeping generalizations about the supposed immoral conduct of all homosexuals, and the supposed "natural order" of masculine and feminine gender behavior and appearance, is also clearly of religious origin. Yet you ASS HOLES have the nerve to say live and let live, as long as we who find your hypocrisy offensive, are the ones remaining silent. Give me a freakin break.

Posted by: Natasha at February 26, 2006 05:53 PM (i6py+)

52 As always, there's plenty of room for a fellow co-conspirator, JJ. Since we're so hateful, the cabal has decided that one of tonight's topics should be the removal of Post "Fruity" Pebbles cereal from the market. We think it gives the children bad ideas - and we can't have that after all.

Posted by: Graeme at February 26, 2006 05:57 PM (RkR7z)

53 Natasha, are you British? I believe I have encountered you once before, and you were just as venal then. Surely there couldn't be two of you in the World. Well, no matter, I love the xian term and the evil cabal designation as I plot to take over the World. The next thing I know and I will morph into a Zionist, which is probably the only thing in your small mind worse than a xian. I tell you, the xian thing is just funny, and I love it.

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 26, 2006 06:00 PM (rUyw4)

54 I can't believe you guys are actually reading what she says anyway. We all know that the militant feminist has no clear or reasonable position to argue from. They only parrot what their leaders teach them. I stopped after reading her first post. Tash, no matter how pissed each of these posts is making you, we're just laughing and having a good time at your expense. That's what you really hate isn't it? Don't you get it? We're laughing at you and you're not being taken seriously. Go ahead and answer back. I can skip right over that one like I have the others. You. are. irrelevant.

Posted by: slug at February 26, 2006 06:11 PM (vQoK9)

55 Natasha, Natasha, Natasha, how do you endure the pain of existence without anything resembling a sense of humor? Have you ever heard the expression "tongue in cheek"? No? Let me explain something simple to you. The only "condemnation" of any lifestyle choice occurred in your own mind. Don't believe me? Go back and read the post again. (Don't worry jesusland joe, the threatened ban was only a device to expose Natasha's hypocrisy)

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 26, 2006 06:11 PM (RHG+K)

56 Natasha, nothing we've said about gays is nearly as vile as what you say about christians. Now go fuck yourself you stupid cunt.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 26, 2006 06:19 PM (8e/V4)

57 Natasha doesn't speak for all women, and she needs to know that. Some of us are confident enough in their sexuality to appreciate a little (straight) male humor. Give me real men -- like Bluto -- any day of the week. ;-)

Posted by: Asgerd at February 26, 2006 06:25 PM (3/J8G)

58 Now, fellow xians and co-conspirators, do not be so hard on Natasha. I believe she is a victim of Leftist professors, who have corrupted her mind and left her a virtual idiot. We know from past history that there is such a thing as a miracle(us xians believe in such things) that can bring her to her senses. I realize that such a thing is unlikely, but someone as hateful as she is can't continue in that vein forever, as her head is bound to blow. So, in the interests of World Peace, I request that she be left to mull over her thoughts without any interference from us, other than prayer for the state of her everlasting soul.

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 26, 2006 06:33 PM (rUyw4)

59 Asgerd, you are surely a European woman of distinction! And good sense! Natasha, now here is a woman for you to study and emulate.

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 26, 2006 06:36 PM (rUyw4)

60 Are you guys really too blind to see your own shit? Have you no sense of smell either? The answer is yes. Do you expect me now to waste my time and effort pointing it out. Should I cut and paste some of the more obvious crap? Forget it. I have not even been talking to you, but at you, to be overhead by the few of reasonable mind who may drop by to this political circus. I am confident that others also can discern, between those posts which truly are intended as humorous, and those even portions of posts by you which I refer to. Do not think that I failed to notice that sparkling wit peculiar to gay male culture either. The irony is not lost on me, nor the humor, and certainly not the more important, to me at least, unstated message of consequence. But you see, even among your number is there no small hatred, of those whom you deem guilty of gender transgression. A lot of gay men, assimilationist's for the most part, deeply despise queens and so called effeminate gay men. Hey. Fuck YOU for dissing that skater! You hypocrites need to get your community, pardon the use, straightened out about that BULLSHIT. The straights view you as hypocrites for it, as do I also, and sadly also you are wrongly taken to be THE gay rights movement which looses credibility for such garbage. You guys have never bothered to look at your own shit, and that stinks. You hurt us all. And no, all of you "all about me" queens, I don't by 'us' mean gay. I mean the fucking human race. Join it will ya! Man when are you assholes going to get over yourselves! Now if the admin here wants to play the re-framing game and spin this as other than it is, just know that doing so shall remain to be quite obvious. Funny how human vectors of such cultural malaise as sexism, reverse sexist pseudo feminism (feminism), racism, pseudo religious bigotry, gay centric transphobia and other assorted social rot, always try to weasel out by excusing it as humor taken wrongly. Fuck all you hypocrites, and the spin you rode in on. High horse indeed. Screw you! And another thing. Whom I sleep with, where I do it, how I do it, who I do it with and HOW FUCKING OFTEN, is none of your concern.

Posted by: Natasha at February 26, 2006 06:42 PM (i6py+)

61 Hey Asgerd, What makes you think I believe I speak for all women? What a ridiculous presumption.

Posted by: Natasha at February 26, 2006 06:49 PM (i6py+)

62 Natasha, I see you are the victim of Leftist professors, as I haven't heard that many isms in one post since my college days. Ah, the memories of moonbats in the making. I see you made all A's, and I bet your parents are proud. But trust me on this one. I really don't care who or even what you sleep with, as long as you do it in the privacy of your home, and do not seek to force your ideas on me or mine. See, that's how it works, and if you don't like what you read here, then leave. I don't go to lesbian or queer sites and flame them, as it is not polite. You have made yourself look foolish and ignorant, whatever you might think, and we have had fun at your expense, but really, you are too easy, and I don't mean that in a sexual way, regardless of what you think.

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 26, 2006 06:52 PM (rUyw4)

63 Leftists, urban atheists, and other assorted moonbats LOVE to accuse others of being hypocrites. It's their worst disapprobation. If they like you, they'll associate you with some sort of victimhood. If they hate you, then you're a hypocrite. Hey, I've been called worse. But seriously, Natasha. Girl to girl here. Lie back, relax, and admire the power of the penis. It's okay.

Posted by: Asgerd at February 26, 2006 07:01 PM (3/J8G)

64 The number of posts on this topic is HUGE !! Whta should an observer make of that ?

Posted by: john ryan at February 26, 2006 07:03 PM (TcoRJ)

65 Hey JJ. Your opinion of me, means nothing to anyone of consequence, especially I myself. So why bother dude? So this is a "hetero site" you say? We must adhere to the topic at hand say you? If this is a "straight site" as you claim, then why do you talk about gay sex and graceful pretty boy figure skaters? Why don't you talk about pussy, hot cars, guns, or something else a straight man of your caliber may find of interest? It would appear that your heterosexuality is just a bit askew, or really, 'off topic' as it were. The subject is Olympic Events: Gay Straight or Metrosexual. This is the sub thread of it, Gaystraight and Rural Outing 'as' an Olympic Event. Live with it boy.

Posted by: Natasha at February 26, 2006 07:32 PM (i6py+)

66 "...the power of the penis." Or in Natasha's case, the power of the dildo.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 26, 2006 07:37 PM (8e/V4)

67 Asgerdjesuslundtjoey Blutowski, More the proof that you know little of what we think or feel, and further evidence of your own leftist leaning, of a sort. OK. Now I really am bored. Rave on my skidly rightist wannabes

Posted by: Natasha at February 26, 2006 07:43 PM (i6py+)

68 But Natasha, I did mention guns and pussy in the same sentence. It's not my fault that the Olympics discriminate against NASCAR. Two outta three ain't bad. And guys, I don't remember who said it but that Bullwinkle crack was just uncalled for. Apologize to the little lady.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 26, 2006 07:44 PM (RHG+K)

69 Natasha, I didn't give you my opinion. I just made some observations based on what you said. And I made fun of you and your isms and xians. They really are funny, and you are completely lame(now that is my opinion). The fact that you take yourself serious is funny in itself, as you would make a study for a psychiatrist. Gay centric transphobia and reverse sexist pseudo feminism, now Natasha, you must admit that these are not terms you hear every day, or even once in a lifetime for that matter. Did you make them up?

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 26, 2006 07:50 PM (rUyw4)

70 JJ I didn't use the term Twilight Zone for nothing - Natasha's visiting from there and really not worth getting worked up about. He/she/whatever is from the outer fringe that's neither left nor right - same bizzaroland the L. La Rouche comes from I suspect - or something similar.

Posted by: hondo at February 26, 2006 08:37 PM (fyKFC)

71 Dang! I got here way too late. And now Natasha has threatened to leave again. Damn my broken computer, damn it to hell! Hey Natasha if you're still ou there: Gay men, butch or effeminate, don't need you to defend them. Unless you're a gay man, you couldn't possibly understand. And if you want to criticize someone for what you perceive as some kind of "phobia", it's best to stick to facts and personal experience. You started this crap and now you're in a snit because someone made fun of your holier than thou attitude. I'm left to wonder; if the post was poking fun at one of these Olympic hopefuls being a "Xian", which you have "accused" so many of being here, would you have bothered to even stop in? You picked the wrong battle here, sweetheart. It's really been an eye-opener watching someone use so much intolerance and hateful words to berate others for perceived intolerance and hateful words.

Posted by: Oyster at February 27, 2006 06:58 AM (YudAC)

72 OMG, I've not had this good a laugh in a long time!!! Thanks everyone for making my Monday oh so much more tolerable. This may be a good week afterall. But, now I have to go, gotta find the castle ... I'm late ya know, and it's my turn to bring the beer and pretzels.

Posted by: Sly2017 at February 27, 2006 10:58 AM (UADHi)

73 Oyster, Using your reasoning, only African Americans themselves, should be allowed to defend their right to equal treatment under the law. Had such illogicality been adhered, to in the past, they would all still be slaves. One need not be either gay or a man to see that fag jokes and other manifestations of prejudice excused here as humor are simply that. Intolerance of itself is not the problem. One not only 'may', but certainly should, be completely intolerant of injustice prejudice and bigotry. I am every bit as intolerant of racist humor as I am of the crap this thread is about.

Posted by: Natasha at February 27, 2006 11:07 AM (i6py+)

74 Natasha, you have zero credibility to preach about intolerance after the things you've said about christianity on this thread, you stupid cunt. Now go fuck yourself and put us out of your misery.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 27, 2006 11:28 AM (8e/V4)

75 Funny thing about humor (pun intended, Natasha), in it's base form, it knows no race, creed or color. What one person finds funny does not always meet with the same reaction from another. So, the fact that you don't see any humor within this thread is really not relevant. Many do. And your vitriolic reaction is the main reason why so many have. Please feel free to no longer read or post on this, but for the sake of humor, stay.....you really are funny.

Posted by: Sly2017 at February 27, 2006 11:28 AM (UADHi)

76 Anyone got the map to the castle? I've lost mine and the beer getting warm.

Posted by: Sly2017 at February 27, 2006 11:31 AM (UADHi)

77 Jesusland Carlos wrote, "you have zero credibility to preach about intolerance after the things you've said about christianity on this thread, you stupid cunt. Now go fuck yourself and put us out of your misery." Xianity and Christianity are distinctly different. The former is just legalistic false morality and hateful intolerant prejudice, dressed up AS IF it is Christianity, and the same goes for christianity as opposed to Christianity. What can anyone say about anyone, who defends their hateful prejudice and bigoted intolerance, by condemning those who oppose it as being intolerant of it? What did Jesus say to the sanctimonious religious people who did things like that?

Posted by: Natasha at February 27, 2006 11:49 AM (i6py+)

78 "Using your reasoning, only African Americans themselves, should be allowed to defend their right to equal treatment under the law." I did not say that you shouldn't be allowed to defend them or that anyone shouldn't be allowed. Neither did I imply that anyone, gay, black or "Xian", should not be allowed to defend their "right to equal treatment under the law", since you now want to bring the law and rights into it. Don't put words in my mouth. If you didn't think the post was funny, then just say so, rather than engage in the behavior you have accused others of using. It kind of detracts from your argument.

Posted by: Oyster at February 27, 2006 12:23 PM (7YTVr)

79 Ken wrote, "I couldn't agree with you more. Everyomne should leave the Butt-monkey's alone. After all, it's their own business when they engage in male fellatio and butt reaming in public washrooms." Some gay men do things like that true, and it isn't right. Most do not however, and it is WRONG to infer that all of them do. Straight men kidnap rape and murder little girls, quite often here in the States, but most men would never do such a thing, and it would be wrong to infer that all men do such evil things. Such bigoted remarks are NOT humorous. This thread invites the prejudiced bigoted and hateful, to spew their hate about "sissy boys" "man hating Dyke's" "butt monkeys" and on and on. There is nothing funny about this thread, and it was never intended to be humorous. Don't lie to yourselves saying I am intolerant and lack a sense of humor. Think about who you are fooling. Yourselves.

Posted by: Natasha at February 27, 2006 01:03 PM (i6py+)

80 You are intolerant of other viewpoints and you do lack a sense of humor - spectacularly so. Also, you are not a telepath. The posting was intended to be humorous, and, in fact, accomplished its mission. You were the only one too stupid and self-absorbed to see the humor. That's why you have been humiliated on this thread. Blame yourself.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 27, 2006 01:29 PM (RHG+K)

81 Improbulus Maximus wrote, "The reason that real men detest "fags" is because men are supposed to look and act like men, and women are supposed to look and act like women. It's not natural to cross gender lines, and it is generally frowned upon in any society." That is 100% BULL SHIT! This natural order you speak of, is a cultural construct foisted upon humanity by Judaic based religions, and there is nothing natural about it. Western society has been brainwashed to hate detest and discriminate against people, for the supposed crime, of being naturally 'gender different'. In fact people are even born all the time, who are not clearly male or female even genetically or bodily in any way, and they have no choice in the matter. Any standard by which you judge and condemn others, which is not related directly to their character, based upon 'their' deeds, not others of the same race, sex, religion, nationality etc, is irrational prejudice based on your own selfish desires and personal insecurity. "God" has never told any of you jack shit. You got that out of an old book. Instead of hating some poor guy, for having been born pretty and graceful, ask yourself why that bothers you so much, grow up, and STOP PUSHING YOUR CRAZY HATEFUL GARBAGE ON THE REST OF US! Instead of hating some poor gal, for having been born merely handsome and butch, ask yourself why that bothers you so much, grow up, and STOP PUSHING YOUR CRAZY HATEFUL GARBAGE ON THE REST OF US! Grow THE FUCK up, and STOP YOUR BULL SHIT. You people would be funny if the damage you do to society was not such a tragedy.

Posted by: Natasha at February 27, 2006 01:34 PM (i6py+)

82 Blotto the shithead pundit wrote, "You are intolerant of other viewpoints and you do lack a sense of humor .. " Your "faith based" bigotry and stupendously ignorant pseudo conservative dogma does not qualify as a viewpoint, because the only point from which you view anything, is clearly and obviously up your own ass.

Posted by: Natasha at February 27, 2006 01:47 PM (i6py+)

83 >>>"This natural order you speak of, is a cultural construct foisted upon humanity by Judaic based religions, and there is nothing natural about it." What absolute rubbish. Do you see men screwing men as the norm in Hindu cultures? Buddhist? Animist? The answer is no. Get out of your little bubble, travel and explore non-"judaic" societies, and you'll notice that men screwing men is just as anomalous in those societies as it is in ours. Stop repeating stupid platitudes you learned in college like they hold any intellectual water here. They don't. It just shows how brainwashed you are.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 27, 2006 02:03 PM (8e/V4)

84 Oh, Natasha, I love it when you talk dirty.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 27, 2006 02:15 PM (RHG+K)

85 1. I did not say it's OK to be gay in non western cultures. I spoke of the root of the prohibition HERE, and I told it like it is HERE. You always try to use something you 'think' you found, poke at something that 'looks' like a hole, and you 'always' fall on your face. Why? It is because you miss the point and seek to sidestep the issue at hand. you are FORCED to attempt to divert the conversation away from the topic, YOUR BIGOTRY, because you have NO DEFENSE. NONE at all.

Posted by: Natasha at February 27, 2006 04:30 PM (i6py+)

86 Most of the gay people I know and have worked for have a better sense of humor than Natasha.

Posted by: Howie at February 27, 2006 04:34 PM (D3+20)

87 Jawa: Fatwa issued against The Dread Pundit Bluto for: Charge of the Not-So-Bright Brigade. More pretzel logic and acrobatic 'spin' from wrongly rightist wannabe pundit "Blotto". http://dreadpundit.blogspot.com/2006/02/charge-of-not-so-bright-brigade.html

Posted by: Natasha at February 27, 2006 04:38 PM (i6py+)

88 The goyel is his oyster.

Posted by: Natasha at February 27, 2006 04:41 PM (i6py+)

89 Goodness! Natasha, your 5-cent psycho-analyses on everyone here accomplish nothing. So you didn't think it was funny - fine - apparently nobody here cares. Don't you understand that? You only have to call so many people here ignorant, closet-homsexuals, shitheads, bigots, assholes, etc. and you only have to yell (all caps) so many times before we dunderheads get your message. We're all heartless and hateful thugs. Why, if it wasn't for us megalomaniacal, closet type idiots the world would be just peachy. This is getting boring.

Posted by: Oyster at February 27, 2006 05:02 PM (YudAC)

90 Oh for heavens sake Oyster. Where's your sense of humor? Can't take a joke huh? Your sense of humor includes ridiculing sexual minorities, while mine includes ridiculing people with your sense of humor. Man! What a dour sourpuss 'you' are. tsk tsk

Posted by: Natasha at February 27, 2006 05:36 PM (i6py+)

91 I'll bet Natasha would really be offended by my theory of determining the likelihood of certain homo/hetero-sexual behaviors by the tone and pitch of farts.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 27, 2006 05:59 PM (RHG+K)

92 And before I forget, Asgerd; thank you for the kind words.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 27, 2006 06:00 PM (RHG+K)

93 >>>I spoke of the root of the prohibition HERE, and I told it like it is HERE. Yes, I know you spoke of it HERE. And you attributed it to a "judaic construct." But the evidence is against you because it's UNIVERSAL, not a "judaic construct". That isn't a sidestep. On the contrary, that's dragging you by your little nose away from your college indoctrination and into the basic facts of the matter. Your college brainwashing doesn't hold up against real world facts.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 27, 2006 06:44 PM (8e/V4)

94 "I'll bet Natasha would really be offended by my theory of determining the likelihood of certain homo/hetero-sexual behaviors by the tone and pitch of farts." No not at all Bluto. I realize in your case it is not theory, and so it is fine for you to poke fun, oops excuse the pun, at that. Have a good evening you little ass master you.

Posted by: Natasha at February 27, 2006 06:49 PM (i6py+)

95 Would someone please give "jesusland carlos" a pill? He just doesn't know when to say when, and he misquotes people twisting their words too.

Posted by: Natasha at February 27, 2006 06:52 PM (i6py+)

96 >>>Would someone please give "jesusland carlos" a pill? lol! just a tad ironic coming from you, Natasha dear. And I didn't "misquote" you. I copied and pasted you.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 27, 2006 07:20 PM (8e/V4)

97 Greetings, Natasha, I'm back. And I see you are still here entertaining all the folks with your, shall we say, rather strange ideas. I like the tongue-in-cheek stuff you say. And are you a girl or a boy? I still think you are a boy pretending to be a girl. Or vice versa? Or both, at the same time?

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 27, 2006 07:36 PM (rUyw4)

98 Here is what I wrote. [This natural order you speak of, is a cultural construct foisted upon humanity by Judaic based religions, and there is nothing natural about it.] Here is what you wrote and attributed to me. "And you attributed it to a "judaic construct." That is not a cut and paste, and what you wrote is not even close in meaning to what I wrote. Maybe you should make some effort to understand what people are saying before you try to argue against it.

Posted by: Natasha at February 27, 2006 07:37 PM (i6py+)

99 "jesusland joe" wrote, "I still think you are a boy pretending to be a girl. Or vice versa? Or both, at the same time?" huh? I strongly suggest that you either STOP taking whatever you have been taking, or that you take a whole hell of a lot more. I am not sure which would help.

Posted by: Natasha at February 27, 2006 07:43 PM (i6py+)

100 Answer the question, that is what would help. Geez, you're still dumb as ever, Natasha!

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 27, 2006 07:54 PM (rUyw4)

101 Natasha, I said "attributed" and you said "foisted". If you don't have a reasoned response, then just admit it. Or do what most pwned trolls do-- don't respond at all and just silently slip away.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 27, 2006 09:10 PM (8e/V4)

102 Wats wrong with figure skating. Its hard, and men have to be buff to do a double or eve triple luts.But that guys DOES look gay.

Posted by: Ashley at February 27, 2006 09:12 PM (BJYNn)

103 Wats wrong with figure skating. Its hard, and men have to be buff to do a double or even a triple luts.But that guys DOES look gay.

Posted by: Ashley at February 27, 2006 09:13 PM (BJYNn)

104 Still a lame thread. bleah

Posted by: Natasha at February 27, 2006 11:37 PM (i6py+)

105 DPB said: Asgerd; thank you for the kind words. You're very welcome. :-)

Posted by: Asgerd at February 28, 2006 06:51 AM (yjylD)

106 Bye, Natasha, and have a nice day! Whatever you are!

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 28, 2006 10:16 AM (rUyw4)

107 Haha, someone obiviously forgot to count in womens hockey when they said hockey is a straight game. Womens hockey = GAY! And Natasha, you go girl!! Good to see that not all Americans are stupid, homophobic, old fashioned, conservative white thrash. I'm happy to be gay. I get to meet all the good people.

Posted by: Brilliant at April 28, 2006 09:36 AM (OkiOz)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Today's attempted attack on the Saudi oil processing facility should have been a huge wake-up call for everyone.

ABQAIQ, Saudi Arabia (AP) - Suicide bombers carried out a bold attack on the world's largest oil processing facility Friday but were stopped from breaking in by guards who fired on their cars, exploding both vehicles and killing the attackers.

Al-Qaida purportedly claimed responsibility for the attack, the first on an oil facility in Saudi Arabia.

Al-Qaeda has been threatening to do something like this for quite awhile, which is probably why the attack failed miserably.

However, if we do not get our own oil out of our own ground, or figure out an economcially feasible way to get off foreign oil, we could be seriously screwed if one were to suceed.

Posted by: Vinnie at 12:29 AM | Comments (21) | Add Comment
Post contains 144 words, total size 1 kb.

1 what u gotta think is if they cant keep their own lands safe from terrorists how on earth are they gonna keep US ports safe ? later g

Posted by: girish at February 25, 2006 12:41 AM (05ati)

2 ANWR is just waiting for the enviro dolts to shut up and get out of the way. As I recall however, a year or so back, my President left that issue on the table, for some "reason".

Posted by: forest hunter at February 25, 2006 12:59 AM (Fq6zR)

3 We can't drill in our own back yard because the enviro groups, the Democrat party beholding to them, most in our MSM portraying it as destruction rather than safe production, and a percentage of weak-kneed moderate Republicans. No matter what Bush wants its simply impossible to get passed now. We're gonna have to experience huge price hikes doing serious damage to our economy as a result of foreign dependency before the majority of citizens demand it.

Posted by: Javapuke at February 25, 2006 01:16 AM (hg4kb)

4 I'm almost looking forward to a price increase in oil. The irresponsibility of Americans vehicle of choice is only taylored to looking as big, and expensive as possible with little to no consideration on mpg (at least before the oil price spike) Out of the immediate people I know that drive huge trucks, or SUV's none of them have more than two children, or use them to carry large amounts of cargo. At least two of these people have told me we should do something about our oil dependency, due to the price of gasoline -- there was not the same concern when gas was ninety-nine cents a gallon! The only way to make Americans care about breaking the dependency on foreign oil and stop them suckling the oil teet is to make it too expensive. Sad but true.

Posted by: dave at February 25, 2006 02:32 AM (CcXvt)

5 Dave, we own a F-150 and an Expedition. What a person in this country drives is really none of your, or my, business. To say that what we drive is "irresponsible" is as wrong as to say that those who chose to have the Clydesdale draw a wagon rather than a Shetland Pony was irresponsible because the Clydesdale has far bigger road apples. We have the resources to sustain our chosen way of life sitting underneath our feet, and currently inaccessible for whatever reason. I also agree that the greeniacs have played a large part in blocking our access to the resources bubbling below, but, we also have to acknowledge the fact that there are a large number of people on our own side willing to capitulate to their demands. If I'm not mistaken, it was our side that blocked installing more oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico. I believe that, for now, we have to get our own oil, from our own soil (hey, there's a bumper sticker!), until we have viable, affordable (g'bye hybrids!) alternatives. One last thing, it isn't just us. China and India are starting to place huge demands on oil. The have a quarter of the world's population, all by themselves. So our truck and SUV are but a drop within a drop within a drop of that. Be careful of berating people of their vehicle of choice, lest someone starts berating you of your air conditioner of choice, or heater of choice, or refrigerator of choice. You get the picture.

Posted by: Vinnie at February 25, 2006 04:03 AM (f289O)

6 I have a Jeep Wrangler and a Tahoe. My husband drives farther to work so he drives the Jeep. I work three miles from home and use less gas than the guy next door with a Civic. Being a home owner, and owning two other properties that need work all the time, I refuse to give up my Tahoe. Everytime I go to Home Depot (which is nearby too) I need that vehicle. Whatever the gas costs, I'll pay it. Try bringing a toilet back in a compact car, or lumber, or eight-foot lengths of PVC. If someone wants to give me grief about my big car, I have one word for them: Shutthehellupandhelpmeloadthismulch.

Posted by: Oyster at February 25, 2006 06:57 AM (YudAC)

7 I have a fuel efficient car, sadly. Today, I will pour a gallon of gasoline down the drain, to show solidarity with my fellow gas-guzzling citizens and to flout the stupid collectivist ramblings of Dave. Also, hey, I found the greatest solution ever to our oil problems. Stop shackling American businesses with tons of retarded/ing regulations and a fearful legislative environment where any big company has to buy off politicians just to not get his business effectively outlawed. I think that would work wonders for American efficiency.

Posted by: MiB at February 25, 2006 07:39 AM (tFcEO)

8 Kindly do not pour your gasoline down the drain. That is environmentally unfriendly, and you certainly don't want that! Besides, the EPA and the environmentalists will come visiting, so have the tea and cookies ready.

Posted by: Tom at February 25, 2006 08:38 AM (+Ip9P)

9 Oil can be extracted from coal for about $30 a barrel and from tar sands for about the same. Hydrogen is a pipe dream, electric cars impractical and alcohol at best a supplement. Environmentalists are the major obstacle to self-sufficiency. America and Canada have enormous petrochemical reserves. What we suffer now is a shortage of cheap, easily extractable oil. What we have is a huge reserve of more difficult to extract and therefore more expensive oil.

Posted by: Ken Lydell at February 25, 2006 10:26 AM (fEegS)

10 "We can't drill in our own backyard"... Well, if you're referring to ANWR you are a bit confused on the facts. True, environmentalists have fought exploration in ANWR for years. But there was another group opposed to the free market exploiting ANWR. Oil Companies. Not a single bill has been proposed over the years to develop ANWR that didn't include both tax breaks and royalty forgiveness for companies bidding on leases. Today with $55 + per barrel oil I think production in ANWR can be economically feasible without paying companies to explore there. And so I'm all for it. But in the past I was adamantly opposed to subsidizing exploration. Especially in ANWR. If you're wondering why it's not open now, you'll have to ask the GOP because the certainly could have suceeded in opening it up if it had been as big a priority as say, letting the UAE run a few ports.

Posted by: Davebo at February 25, 2006 11:04 AM (KqO+b)

11 You gonna amend your "Howard the Coward" post now, or are ya gonna make a "Bill the Pill" piece?

Posted by: jawablaster at February 25, 2006 11:45 AM (FkiCe)

12 I guess we should all get behind eminent domain then, in case geologists find an oil well below someones house flout the stupid collectivist ramblings of Dave. I'm sure that talking about peoples vehicles of choice is not popular, but it pretty much proved the point: if gas was down to 99¢ again, where it was five years ago no one would care about breaking dependency on foreign oil, just like there was no talk of it back then. The problem is not so much the fact you drive a big vehicle period, just it's consumption habits -- However you can have the same vehicle with cheaper fuel source. My father has two vehicles in the U.K, one a van and the other what we might concider an SUV. The price of Gasoline is around $5.74 a (U.S) Gallon in the U.K, he had both modified to use Propane fuel so much like an hybrid once the propane is gone, it starts using regular gasoline, while on Propane it is significantly lower price per mile to run. He told me the price he paid for modification paid for itself after the first year. What prompted alternatives in the U.K is exactly what I am talking about, unaffordable gasoline, apart from driving smaller engines (I'd never seen an engine the size of a V8!) peoples driving habits were unaffected when petrol was cheap, now money is being poured into cheaper alternatives. China and India are starting to place huge demands on oil. Indeed, which means if we continue to consume a huge portion of foreign oil, and block their access to it we're looking at a war, there will be real wars for oil. I'd prefer by that time we didn't care who got what oil, and domestic was used for things like pesticide and other oil-based production. My support for breaking dependency on oil, doesn't stop at access to cheap gasoline, especially the more expensive it gets the more people will demand an alternative.

Posted by: dave at February 25, 2006 12:24 PM (CcXvt)

13 Vinnie: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HB23Ak03.html No wonder we're trying to solidify ties with member countries of OPEC like the UAE, we're going to need all the influence we can buy.

Posted by: dave at February 25, 2006 01:53 PM (CcXvt)

14 Propane is just another gas that's produced from natural gas processing and crude oil refining. I thought the idea was to get away from oil and gas? If it's strictly for environmental purposes, then yes, it's cleaner. But you still gotta go through the old fossil fuel and gas extraction process to get it. Raising the price of oil may encourage people to buy more fuel efficient cars, but what about all the transportation industry? When it costs twice as much for your groceries and clothing and everything else because the cost of shipping them has become astronomical we've still got issues. "Great, I only spent five bucks to drive around in my car this week but eggs were three dollars a dozen." The impact of raising gas prices has wide-ranging ramifications.

Posted by: Oyster at February 25, 2006 04:28 PM (YudAC)

15 Geez, guys, I literally spent minutes slaving and sweating and typing my fingers into bloody stumps working on that cartoon riot post and ya'll are down here still being all serious and shit. It's the weekend d00ds and d00dettes, let's lighten it up a bit!

Posted by: Vinnie at February 25, 2006 04:34 PM (f289O)

16 Oyster: I gave an example of how the price of Gasoline caused for a focus on alternatives, not that we should all shift to propane. It isn't a relevation -- UPS vans all over the U.S use it as fuel. There is no reason the transportation industry couldn't follow suite, isn't that the reason that bio-diesel is catching on - requires little(?) / no modification. Read the article I pasted below to Vinnie, the Saudi's are courting two Nuclear nations, this could have severe ramifications for the U.S. If you believe that the U.S would protect certain OPEC members regimes from being toppled, to protect our interests, this is obviously beneficial to both parties; however with China selling them arms, and being closer in the region -- what would those regimes need us for? they can outsource their security to China instead of the U.S. The China/India deals also come at a time when nations are looking to secure their oil in case of problems, wonder what would happen if we all needed more oil (because of war/embargo/etc) and China / India offered to pay much more money over market price? if they no longer need the U.S for protection you can guarantee whoever is protecting them gets the oil they need.

Posted by: dave at February 25, 2006 04:48 PM (CcXvt)

17 hah, I'm still at work, no lightening up for me for a few hours ;/

Posted by: dave at February 25, 2006 05:07 PM (CcXvt)

18 We could always just invade. Make the oil producing parts of SA the 51st state, then everyone would just have to suck up to us. Y'know, like we did in Iraq.

Posted by: Vinnie at February 25, 2006 05:22 PM (f289O)

19 Yeah, all that cheap Iraqi oil is the 'bestist'! I think the 51st state is already allotted to Iran :/

Posted by: dave at February 25, 2006 05:33 PM (CcXvt)

20 Well, at least Iran has like, mountains and stuff.

Posted by: Vinnie at February 25, 2006 05:51 PM (f289O)

21 I like pie.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 26, 2006 07:26 AM (0yYS2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

From News24.com:

Copenhagen - Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, which angered the Muslim world by publishing cartoons of Prophet Muhammad last year, has won a Danish critical journalism award for its initiative, the jury said.

Denmark's largest daily was honoured with the Victor Prize for "having opened everyone's eyes by showing how easy it is to introduce cracks in freedom of expression and how so-called political correctness is infiltrating what we believe to be inalienable rights," Hans Engell, the editor of tabloid Ekstra Bladet which awards the prize, said during a prize ceremony in Copenhagen late on Thursday.

Via Michelle Malkin.

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

Posted by: Bluto at 12:14 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 167 words, total size 1 kb.

(Baghdad) The bullet-riddled bodies of three Al-Arabiya television journalists were found yesterday in Samarra, the site of Wednesday's Askariya mosque attack.

The three, all Iraqi citizens, included a prominent female television correspondent, 26-year-old Atwar Bahjat (pic), her cameraman and her soundman, Khaled Mahmoud al-Falahi, 39, and Adnan Khairallah, 36.

From E & P:

Bahjat had been reporting live Wednesday from the outskirts of Samarra, which security forces had sealed off after an explosion at a Shiite mosque.

Officials at the Dubai-based satellite news channel said they lost contact with their team after their last broadcast at 6 p.m. Wednesday.

A fourth team member managed to escape from the ambush and told police about the kidnappings. He said two gunmen pulled up in a pickup truck, shooting in the air and shouting: "We want the correspondent," The Associated Press quoted Al-Arabiya as reporting.

"Atwar was in the news van and shouted to the crowd to help her. The crew tried to speak to the gunmen, but they snatched them and took them an unknown location (sic). By this time, night had fallen," Reuters quoted Al-Arabiya's Baghdad correspondent Ahmed al-Saleh as telling viewers.

Condolences to the families and friends of Atwar Bahjat, Khaled Mahmoud al-Falahi, and Adnan Khairallah.

From Interested-Participant.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 05:53 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 260 words, total size 2 kb.

Here.

[I didn't cross-post that here because the person referred to in the post has already threated a lawsuit against one blogger and to report another to the FBI. For what I don't know. Rusty's trying to relax and doesn't need that aggravation. Plus, I'm no angel when it comes to insensitivity, but, more often than not, mine is directed at people who want to kill me and those that support them. And if I ever say anything that you think is way over the line like that, I would expect to be beaten over the head as bad as she is getting it. For an excellent roundup of the background of the kerfuffle, Beth has it.]

Posted by: Vinnie at 05:18 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 17 words, total size 1 kb.

From the Guardian:

Ken Livingstone was today suspended from office for four weeks by a disciplinary tribunal for likening a Jewish Evening Standard reporter to a Nazi concentration camp guard.

While being recorded, the mayor asked him: "Were you a German war criminal?" On being told the reporter was Jewish, he added: "Ah, well, you might be but actually you are just like a concentration camp guard, you are just doing it because you are paid to, aren't you?"

"When John Profumo apparently slept with Christine Keeler and then committed the far more serious offence of lying to the House of Commons about it, he was compelled to resign, but no one could seriously think that that affected the reputation of the office of secretary of state for war. It reflected badly on John Profumo but not on his office.

"When David Blunkett was allegedly inappropriately involved in assisting an application for a work permit and he resigned, that could not be regarded by an informed observer as damaging the reputation and bringing into disrepute the office of home secretary."

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto .

Posted by: Bluto at 03:55 PM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 223 words, total size 2 kb.

From Reuters:

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - A daytime curfew in Baghdad and calls for Muslim unity from mosques across the country on Friday damped down sectarian violence that has left 200 dead in the Iraqi capital alone over the past three days.

Iraq's most influential Shiite political leader called Friday for Sunni-Shiite unity and condemned all killings of Iraqis in a bid to pull the nation back from the brink of civil war after the bombing of a Shiite shrine and a wave of deadly reprisal attacks.

The sense in the streets and the statements given by some Shia clerics suggest that retaliation attacks are organized and under control and are focusing on mosques frequented by Salafi and Wahabi groups and not those of ordinary Sunnis.

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

Posted by: Bluto at 02:30 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 201 words, total size 2 kb.

The bombings burning and general chaos in Iraq this week are hardly conducive to the release of Ms. Carroll. However letÂ’s not let that stop us for praying for her freedom. Monsters and Critics gives us five reasons why Jill should be released, IÂ’ll sample one here.

Monsters and Critics :If Jill Carroll is killed, her captors will be denounced by Muslims worldwide for murdering an innocent woman. In short, they will have handed their enemies a huge propaganda victory.

Jill Carroll Archive here. more...

Posted by: Howie at 01:12 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 182 words, total size 2 kb.

Patriot Guard Riders Still on the Job providing support at the funeral for Cpl. Andrew Kemple, who died in Iraq Feb. 12. Stopping the McAssholes.

New group oppressed in Palestine since the Hamas election victory, Christians!

JPost : "Since Hamas took over, I cover my head in Ramallah," she says. "I don't feel comfortable." In the largely cosmopolitan Ramallah, though they comprise some 10 percent of the population, Christians are becoming less and less visible. The first time that Khoury ran into her local parish priest there with her head covered, he raised his eyebrows and laughed.
"I see more and more women covered up," Khoury says, explaining that for now, it's preferable to play it safe and assimilate on the street, even if she would never choose to cover her head otherwise. "Years ago I even used to go in short sleeves," she says. "You'd have to put a gun to my head to get me to wear short sleeves now."

Nigerian Hostages still Mcheld.

Feb. 24 (Bloomberg) -- Nigerian militants released photographs of nine foreign oil workers they kidnapped on Feb. 18 from a Willbros Group Inc. boat near Royal Dutch Shell Plc's Forcados export platform. The photographs were e-mailed by Jomo Gbomo, a spokesman for the militant group, the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta, MEND. In a separate e-mailed statement, Gbomo said the hostages won't be released until the government frees a former Bayelsa state governor and a jailed militia leader.

Don't miss Vonski's weekly roundup of important victories in the GWOT. Lot's of good news this week had been overshadowed.

Coalition Forces, with the assistance of the Iraqi Police, conducted a raid in northern Baghdad Feb. 24, which resulted in the death of Abu Asma, the Al Qaeda Military Emir of Northern Baghdad. Intelligence reports indicated Abu Asma was in possession of and expected to use suicide vests against the Iraqi people and security forces.

One of my very best friends is school worked for Ronald. Soon it was all “let’s get some McBeer, get McLoaded and try to get some McNookie”. I swear this will be the McLast time I McBlog.

Update: Dick cheney's got a gun! H/T memphis761.

more...

Posted by: Howie at 12:44 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 691 words, total size 5 kb.

Only one group is so evil to destroy a revered and I must say beautiful mosque this week. Only one little peg legged bastard has any reason to. This mosque I must say was a nice place. If there is one thing that impresses me about Iraq itÂ’s some of the fantastically opulent and beautiful mosques there. It has been a target several times and each time the attacks failed until Wednesday. This heinous act almost resulted in civil war and the danger is not over yet.

Robbins at National Review : The initial retaliatory attacks on Sunni mosques must have pleased Zarqawi; if taking down this site did not start the civil war, nothing would.
So the foreign fighters must have been stunned when Shiite and Sunni leaders rushed out statements saying they knew that the takfiri (i.e., those who accuse other Muslims of being infidels, a code word in this context for the foreign extremists) were behind the attack, and they would not let this act of brutality divide Iraq. In an announcement on his website Shiite leader Ayatollah Ali Sistani blamed “takfiris [who] meant to foment sedition among the Iraqi people, thus fulfilling their malicious goals.”… … Shiite radical Muqtada al-Sadr — remember him? — blamed the attack on the takfiri, Saddam loyalists, and “the occupation.” “We should not attack Sunni mosques,” he said on al Jazeera. “I ordered [his militia the] Al-Mahdi Army to protect the Shiite and Sunni shrines and to show a high sense of responsibility, something they actually did.”

The Australian News : Fearing even that would not compensate for their loss of influence, Sunni extremists, led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's al-Qa'ida in Iraq, have sought to ignite a broader conflict than has been waged in the past 18 months.
Analysts in Jordan believe Iraq is now on the precipice.
"A lot of Sunni Arab politicians have been working hard towards a government of national unity, but there are a number of spoilers in the Sunni community," said the Middle East project director for the International Crisis Group Joost Hiltermann.

Posted by: Howie at 12:17 PM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 604 words, total size 4 kb.

1 Mohammed at Iraq the Model reported yesterday that Sadr's Shia militias attacked Salafist and Wahabi Sunni mosques, but not "ordinary Sunni" ones. I haven't seen that distinction mentioned in the MSM. This suggests that even a murderous jackass like Sadr realizes that al Qaeda is the true enemy.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 24, 2006 12:39 PM (RHG+K)

2 Does anyone here believes it could of been orchestrated by Iran via the IRG, in order to tie up the allied forces?

Posted by: dave at February 24, 2006 01:26 PM (CcXvt)

3 I read that Dave. Nope did not buy it. It reminded my of the 911/ truth movement (we blew ourselves up). It's fun to think about but not very likely to actually be true. I suppose the Spanish and French and English blew themselves up too and then called UBL Hey cover our ass by claiming this would ya?

Posted by: Howie at February 24, 2006 01:29 PM (D3+20)

4 I'm not sure it could be considered blowing themselves up though? Despite the fact that they fought each other in the Iran-Iraq war, I have not read that Iranian people believe this to be one of the most important Shia Mosque (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong?) For two cultures that continually attempt to make their own country the pinnacle of the Shia faith I would imagine the Mosque is not as much consequence to the Iranian Government as we're lead to believe, not to mention the fact their Government came out blaming the Jews/American alliance for it's destruction (not unexpected)

Posted by: dave at February 24, 2006 02:10 PM (CcXvt)

5 Sorry I can't correct an opinion. Good points no one has had the balls to stand up and claim this one so we are left speculating(as far as I am aware). I lean toward AL-qaeda as I think it's safe to say they have been wanting this target for a long time. Also it fits their goals just oh so right. That being said I'm all for hearing other angles becauase it's possible I'm wrong.

Posted by: Howie at February 24, 2006 02:22 PM (D3+20)

6 Someplace between 120 and 200 mosques in the capitol were attacked. That is a large number.

Posted by: john ryan at February 24, 2006 03:25 PM (TcoRJ)

7 Yeah, it was most likely Zarqoward who was behind the attack on the Shiite mosque.

Posted by: tommy at February 24, 2006 04:03 PM (6nMOD)

8 Then again, maybe it was the New Black Panther Party that attacked the mosque http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004618.htm They are awfully fearsome!

Posted by: tommy at February 24, 2006 04:07 PM (6nMOD)

9 I found a very intersting post this morning over at 24 steps to liberty. He is an Iraqi blogger that says the news being reported in Iraq is very different from what we are hearing here in the US. I have an excerpt and a link to his post here

Posted by: The Ugly American at February 24, 2006 09:23 PM (hS6ZA)

10 It was da JOOOoooooOOOOOoooozzzz what did it, greg sez so!!!

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 25, 2006 07:55 AM (0yYS2)

11 three things are key in this bombing which suggest that it was not AMZ: 1. the timing, 6:45am, after morning prayers; AMZ would have made sure to kill people praying 2. whoever did this let the guards live. AMZ would have no problim killing guards and would have liked to get more victims 3. this bombing hurts the sunni and helps the shia. i know AMZ is on the ropes (praise allah) but he would not do anything which would create such obvious blowback. i was sure it was AQITLOTR, but now, looking at the facts and circumstances, i say it was iran and the rev guard - trying shift power from the govt to the religious leaders and militias

Posted by: dale at February 25, 2006 09:21 AM (z9YTo)

12 Good points dale. For those who think Iran wouldn't desecrate a shia holy site, I would love to hear why.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 25, 2006 10:48 AM (0yYS2)

13 I think it is also noteworthy that this attack was in the north, not the shia-rich south. It would appear that Iran was trying to throw people of their trail. Additionally, this was the fourth most important mosque from my understanding, not one of the top three. Lastly, the overall timing is weird. Iran is having setbacks with the government in Iraq, the nuclear issue seems to moving backward for them. It would make perfect sense for them to do this as a warning to the US of the trouble they can cause, at will, for the plans of the US to exit. Lastly, there have been NO CALLS for the US to leave despite the repeated threats of civil war. It is weird to me that all this occurring and NO ONE is calling for a US withdrawal. As to why Iran would NOT bomb a mosque, you pose a difficult side to argue for. I think those 5000 religious leaders calling the shots over there would do anything at anytime to try and retain their slipping power.

Posted by: dale at February 25, 2006 11:05 AM (+WIFW)

14 >>>>JOOOoooooOOOOOoooozzzz what did it bwahaha! I love when you do that.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 25, 2006 06:26 PM (8e/V4)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Besides fishing, I did have other business to attend to. Blogging may be very light for awhile. Personal stuff below. more...

Posted by: Rusty at 10:11 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 121 words, total size 1 kb.

On February 3, a U.K.-based militant faction formerly know as Al-Muhajiroun Helped organize a raucous demonstration outside the Danish, Norwegian and French embassies in London.

NEFA investigaters attended the protest and caught the event on camera.

After entering the website: look at the top for the link to "Prophet Mohammed Cartoon Protest"

FYI-this was the protest where the "Behead Those Who Insult Islam" posters were seen.

Posted by: Rusty at 09:07 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 72 words, total size 1 kb.

Went fishing. Who would have thought that fishing could be more relaxing than blogging?

Posted by: Rusty at 09:03 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 18 words, total size 1 kb.

I participated in a conference call tonight with Representative Curt Weldon (R-PA) and several other bloggers about the Able Danger program, 9/11, the USS Cole attack, and the ongoing coverup by mid- to senior-level bureaucrats spanning two administrations. Frankly, a lot of information was forthcoming and I need time to process it all.

But I do want to address a charming bit of character assassination by Washington Post writer William M. Arkin, who has a problem with Able Danger whistleblower Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer: more...

Posted by: Bluto at 08:11 PM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 337 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Well, character assasination is the only thing left to the anti-ideological ideologues of today in defense of Able Danger BS. Its rather interesting, how undifferentiated each major party has become from one another. Democrats are the socialists with more taxes, Republicans are the socialists with a few "tax cuts" and then some hidden taxes (deficeits.) Essentially the politics of today has more the feel of a sporting event than any actual ideological confrontation. Instead of a stand between principled opponents each attempting to prove their consistant ideology is what is best for the nation, you have a pair of personalities that are universally anti-idealistic, "pragmatic" (funny how so-called "pragmatists" are so unpractical, in the long run,) and totally divorced from any thought except how to justify themselves, not even the day after tomorrow, just tomorrow. This culture is evident in the numerous amount of spending, the inability to be fiscally responsible, and the flat-out refusal to deal with big issues - on the premise that, since nobody has any ideology to guide them on their actions as to what is right, they have no idea what is the good and proper thing to do. Thus, no one wishes to be the first one to act when the first one to do so is going to be blamed for the shebang. Thus, our "practical" politicians have an ever-shrinking range of concern, limiting themselves to issues that can be predicted by today's focus group, tomorrow's exit polls. And that, of course, is the price one pays for allowing that dirty word, "practical," into the political scene. To be "practical," in this day, is to compromise on whatever principles you hold for some (supposed) advantage. It has lead to the insane contradiction of a politician seeking election for the sake of being elected - as, once you've compromised enough, the only ideal you have left is that you must compromise to get anything done - and thus, you have nothing to compromise on and are incapable of any significant action in the political realm. A lesson to learn. Too bad it has to be learned at the worst possible moment - but such is the penance for America's abandonment of principled stands for the individual.

Posted by: MiB at February 23, 2006 09:59 PM (tFcEO)

2 Just found the site and my pagan ass loves it! keep up the outstanding work! love g

Posted by: girish at February 24, 2006 01:12 AM (IpuE8)

3 Anyone else noticed problems with Jihadwatch? Seems to be frozen up or possibly hacked.

Posted by: dave at February 24, 2006 04:07 AM (GHTct)

4 MiB, you're right on, I will only add that the only thing the parties agree on is that they must steal as much as possible from us before we wise up and hang them all. Girish, welcome. Dave, it works fine now.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 24, 2006 04:56 AM (0yYS2)

5 No, Jihadwatch still isn't updating, and the sidebar with the links and email form has vanished. Thats how it's appearing to me. I can't post a comment at all. Very odd.

Posted by: dave at February 24, 2006 05:44 AM (GHTct)

6 I think JW/DW has been cyber-attacked. By the way, I think MiB speaks truth.

Posted by: kentim at February 24, 2006 05:56 AM (CqTKB)

7 Dave, re: JW/DW, I didn't notice the side bar missing until you mentioned it . Since last night, I (only) noticed that the final comment on each thread was not identified by who posted it. It didn't dawn on me that I couldn't comment until you mentioned it. I thought it was my system blocking cookies or something . . .hmmmm.

Posted by: heroyalwhyness at February 24, 2006 06:00 AM (XU9K/)

8 JW has been frozen like that for at least 15 hours I'd say.

Posted by: dave at February 24, 2006 06:07 AM (GHTct)

9 oh, and sorry for butting into this thread.

Posted by: dave at February 24, 2006 06:11 AM (GHTct)

10 I had not heard about this "Able Danger" thing before. Senator Joseph McCarthy comes to mind(more and more every day), remember what he said? Paraphrased-- "if these things were mistakes due to incompetence, the perpetrators would do the right thing "accidently" at least once in a while, but instead there is a distinct pattern that suggests a coherent pursuit of a specific goal". I have no doubt in my mind anymore he was right. While chasing the Leninists, who were so obvious and easily identified, he stumbled upon the Pragmatic(Americanised) Fabians, that's where the real power is, and that was the force that destroyed him. Goldwater knew too, probably Wallace too. The fact is, with this knowledge, almost all "history", or "conventional wisdom" is suspect. This fact is dangerous for a truth-seeker. Power is what determines what is "sane and rational", but that may or may not coincide with truth and reality. "The Naked Capitalist" by Skousen and "Tragedy and Hope" by Quigley pretty much shatters the myth of "self-government" here.

Posted by: kentim at February 24, 2006 06:56 AM (CqTKB)

11 I'm still reading Shaffer's testimony, but so far I'm shocked that the megalomaniacal, self-aggrandizing attitudes of those charged with the defense of this country are so systemic. I guess I always knew it, but seeing so many individual accounts of it is still shocking. Has the House Armed S_ervices Committee subpoenaed any of Shaffer's documents or email (or anything) to corroborate his testimony? It would be a dereliction of duty not to. Unless they've been purged too. This entire investigation would be a farce without it. The House Armed S_ervices Committee member's list is extensive. I wonder how many of them are taking this seriously. I also read Cambone's testimony. Eighteen pages of obfuscation with no names and many generalities. His testimony reads like a parent making light of some child's game. His answers focus consistantly on Atta even when not requested to do so. So this is their Able Danger "expert"? Someone who was not involved in the program while it was underway and was charged with finding information on 2.5 terabytes of information which was purged? His testimony is basically useless. (Sorry for the underscores in some words. MuNu's filters are over-zealous)

Posted by: Oyster at February 24, 2006 07:06 AM (YudAC)

12 Everyone who has taken the time to read this, don't forget the numerous supporting military and contractor witnesses supplying their own statements backing up Colonel Shaffer, some found here: http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2006_hr/index.html#ad . P.S. Shaffer names conspirators in Pentagon--now anyone can call them and let them know what real Americans think of them.

Posted by: jim at February 24, 2006 10:17 AM (6Q9ZO)

13 Hang in there friend and pursue the able danger to the bitter end. It looks to me like there is far more being withheld than is being exposed.

Posted by: Earl J Prignitz at February 24, 2006 11:47 AM (m2XUf)

14 gambling addiction Probaly you should read this. gambling addiction Hope this helps. See you next life. Buy gambling addiction now

Posted by: gambling addiction at March 24, 2006 05:26 AM (0oDgr)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

A Few days ago Mohammed Shtawi swore he would never be caught and prosecuted for his terrorist activity against Israel. He was just as right then as he is dead now.

Yahoo News : One of those killed Thursday was identified as Mohammed Shtawi, a top Al Aqsa fugitive. On Wednesday, Shtawi told an AP reporter that earlier in the day soldiers surrounded his hideout for five hours, but he and several friends slipped away. "They will never catch me," he said at the time.

Posted by: Howie at 04:36 PM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 132 words, total size 1 kb.

Greg at RhymeswithRight get his very first death threat. Something to do with Bacon I hear.

A new comment has been posted on your blog Rhymes With Right, on entry #158774 (Toronto Cartoon Flap). http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/158774.php
IP Address: (removed tracks to New Dehli)
Name: aamir malik
Email Address: aamir834@yahoo.com
URL:
Comments:
ASALAM_U_ALIKUM
what the hell have you people made this?
how could you be so much rude ?
what do you think of yourself?
if you vl be here we will jst kill you>?

Posted by: Howie at 01:00 PM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 113 words, total size 1 kb.

The Freedom's Zone international blogging community is encouraging all bloggers to help 'Stand Up For Denmark' by immediately writing a post on Christopher Hitchens' call for a demonstration at the Embassy of Denmark, between noon and 1 p.m. this Friday, Feb. 24.

Please be outside the Embassy of Denmark, 3200 Whitehaven Street (off Massachusetts Avenue) between noon and 1 p.m. this Friday, Feb. 24. Quietness and calm are the necessities, plus cheerful conversation. Danish flags are good, or posters reading "Stand By Denmark" and any variation on this theme (such as "Buy Carlsberg/ Havarti/ Lego") The response has been astonishing and I know that the Danes are appreciative. But they are an embassy and thus do not of course endorse or comment on any demonstration. Let us hope, however, to set a precedent for other cities and countries. Please pass on this message to friends and colleagues.

Embassy of Denmark
3200 Whitehaven St., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20008
Tel: +1 (202) 234-4300
Fax: +1 (202) 328-1470

Email: wasamb@um.dk

More information and updates are available at Freedom's Zone.

Freedom's Zone was founded by a coalition of American and Italian bloggers, and is owned by the international blogging community that supports it through posting and sharing the message and it's mission.

A new "Stand Up For Denmark" Freedom's Zone logo will be available at the site tomorow. Just link back to FZ from your blog.

Posted by: Richard@hyscience at 12:45 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 353 words, total size 3 kb.

The Muslim riots in Nigeria earlier in the week have now produced a backlash from Christians in the south after Muslims rioted against Christians to protest the publication of satirical cartoons depicting Muhammad. Of course these were not spontaneous riots and never mind that Nigerians had nothing to do with it. They were incited by Muslim clerics in a misguided effort to get respect for Islam by use of fear. Rather than protesting peacefully against those actually responsible they took out their frustrations on those who had nothing to do with the issue. Burning Churches and murdering Christians in the street. In Nigeria where this kind of Muslim/Christian is fairly common the result has been that the Christians there are violently turning against Islam, burning Mosques and killing in revenge. Giving right back to the Muslims what they had been dishing out just a few days before. Now the Muslims are fleeing and finding themselves in the same position they put others in just a few days before. I cannot condone Christian riots and Killing. However the bible does say ye shall reap what ye sow. Looks like the Muslims in Nigeria are harvesting a bumper crop!

Washington Post : ONITSHA, Nigeria -- Muslims fled this southeast Nigerian city and corpses still smoldered in its streets Thursday as two days of sectarian violence that killed more than 50 people subsided.
Saturday in the northern city of Maiduguri, Muslim protests against cartoons caricaturing the Prophet Muhammad turned violent, razing 30 churches and claiming the lives of 18 people, mostly Christians.
Similar violence followed Monday and Tuesday in the northern city of Bauchi, where witnesses and Red Cross officials say 25 people were killed when Muslim mobs attacked Christians there.
The violence came to Onitsha Tuesday, apparently in reaction to the killings in Maiduguri and Bauchi, which like most of northern Nigeria, are dominated by Muslims. Onitsha, like most of the south, is dominated by Christians.

Christian mobs, seeking revenge for the killings of Christians in the north, attacked Muslims with cutlasses, destroyed their houses and torched mosques in two days of violence in Onitsha, where at least 85 people have died.
"We are very happy that this thing is happening so that the north will learn their lesson," said Anthony Umai, a motorcycle taxi rider, standing close to where Christian youths had piled up the corpses of 10 Muslims and were burning them.

Posted by: Howie at 12:25 PM | Comments (22) | Add Comment
Post contains 476 words, total size 3 kb.

1 An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Islamic Clerics unite. Please help stop the violence abroad. Even against your own. The world is getting fed up with the BS and it shows. No one is afraid anymore and this is only to worsen. Be the hero not the doomsayer of your own people.

Posted by: Joe at February 23, 2006 12:56 PM (Z2ndo)

2 The same thing happens in India when muslims riot there. Hindus just murder them right back. When will the moooslims learn. And no, their violence has not caused anybody to "respect" them, only abhor them.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 23, 2006 01:07 PM (8e/V4)

3 The Islamist's only weapon is our own tolerance of their violence, trying to pass it off as "righteous anger" or some legitimate form of demonstration. Burning an embassy, or destroying someone else's property, is not free speech. It is an attempt to put into place a thugocracy. Any government that does not harshly punish those involved has absolutely no legitimacy. Violence against these thugs and their supporters in light of a government which refuses to take action is not only called for, but absolutely just and a requirement if the Christians of Niger wish to remain a free people. And I say this as a rabid atheist. Mercy to the guilty is treason to the innocent.

Posted by: MiB at February 23, 2006 01:26 PM (tFcEO)

4 Death to Islam

Posted by: Andy at February 23, 2006 03:09 PM (tMU4W)

5 Way to go Christians in Nigeria! It is about time someone defended themselves. While we hold hands , and sing songs. Could any Muslims in America please burn an American flag close to me? Ft. Worth, Texas would be nice. Support Denmark, buy Danish.

Posted by: Leatherneck at February 23, 2006 03:12 PM (D2g/j)

6 well spoken MiB, you're my kind of an athiest :-)

Posted by: Javapuke at February 23, 2006 03:27 PM (zTtEv)

7 These Muslims in Nigeria have hopefully learned a hard lesson, and I sincerely hope that Muslims around the world will stop this silliness before they cause the entire world to hate them. And more people are getting fed up daily. I'm at my breaking point, myself.

Posted by: jesusland joe at February 23, 2006 03:35 PM (rUyw4)

8 JP, all those "atheists" who are constantly attacking Christians and Christianity, are really just communists parading in the guise of atheists. A real atheist is usually also a non-ideologue. That said, I hope the Nigerians kill lots of muslims.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 23, 2006 03:55 PM (0yYS2)

9 Christianity is as illogical as any religion; I'm not going to give them a pass on that. But they aren't trying to blow me up, either. So they can go on with their faith stuff and I won't bother them if they don't bother me. I like that arrangement; Islamists, obviously, do not give me this option. While I don't care for their faith at all, I do defend, and rabidly so, their right to it. And I will urge them to take action - violent action, in this case - to protect that right. Because, while I do not like Christians or Christianity very much, they are tolerable and tend to not cut the heads off of nonbelievers. I know which side I'm on in this war.

Posted by: MiB at February 23, 2006 04:52 PM (tFcEO)

10 Max I understand where you're coming from. It is not common an athiest has the convictions to bring him/herself to regard fundamental rights for Christians. This is almost humerous. MiB you're the exception but I have known others like you, usually more libertarian consistant in their values. Whatever your politics you'd be welcome in my home.

Posted by: Javapuke at February 23, 2006 06:29 PM (rzVXG)

11 Gezzzzz MIB, I quess your welcome at my table too. Now, who's turn is it to say the blessing?

Posted by: Leatherneck at February 23, 2006 08:01 PM (D2g/j)

12 JP, speaking as an atheist myself, it takes a lot of moral fibre to be a true atheist and a good citizen, because we have abandoned ideology-based morality in exchange for principle-based morality, and thus stand alone as an independant human being, knowing that we must answer to none but our fellow man and our own conscience for the things we do. As for me, my own conscience is a far more stern judge than any invisible man in the sky, so I tend to be well-behaved and will not wrong my fellow man without justification. This is why atheists don't go around killing people for no good reason, but religious people often do; we can't rationalize violence so easily, because we must answer to ourselves for our own sins.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 23, 2006 08:14 PM (0yYS2)

13 IM, just because atheists don't have religion doesn't mean they don't have ideology. And that ideology will cause them to kill in even greater numbers sometimes. See, you are still human, and that's what humans do. They kill, unless their particular ideology/religion tells them not to.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 23, 2006 09:08 PM (8e/V4)

14 Max I'd say you're an atheit's ideologue. A ton of lefties are atheists and commies, their problem is being honest enough to admit it. But I have no problem giving them the benifit of doubt. Nothing personal So you really think you're more stern than Allah?

Posted by: Javapuke at February 23, 2006 09:12 PM (2+rWy)

15 It appears that while 'turning the other cheek' may well work in many cases, it does not work with Islamofacists. The Nigerian Islamo's merely take it as an opportunity to 'Bitch slap' the Christians'. Maybe the Islamo's should read a few other Biblical references prior to butchering the innocent, in the name of their 7th century religion. References such as: He who lives by the sword... The Islamists keep harping on about the Crusades, it would appear that in Nigeria they've started another localized one; maybe the Islamo's should emigrate to the Arabian desert, where they can joyfully kill each other in the name of their particular Islamic sect; because it sure looks as though the Nigerian Christians' won't take any more of their shit.

Posted by: Ken at February 23, 2006 09:24 PM (CYeOT)

16 You guys are confusing atheism with communism, which is just a state religion. Carlos, there is no incident in history where atheists killed anyone stricly on behalf of atheism. There are however many examples of so-called atheists killing Christians in the name of - you guessed it! - Communism! Communism is nothing but a competing religion, and has been trying to wipe out Christianity for a long time, because Communism cannot exist alongside Christianity, although it does seem to overlay nicely with islam, which would go far in explaining how the global leftist movement is hand in glove with islamic terroristm, although the two appear on the surface to be ideologically different. Scratch a militant Atheist, (notice the capitalization), and you'll find a leftard every time, but there are plenty of us just like me, who cherish our culture, history, and civilization, and respect the rights of our fellow man, and ask, nothing more in return.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 24, 2006 05:06 AM (0yYS2)

17 Oh, I almost forgot to post on the original topic. I wonder how long it will take for the muslims to start crying about how the Christians in Nigeria are oppressing them, and calling for a jihad against them? I wish I could afford to take off for six months and go there on a little safari.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 24, 2006 05:10 AM (0yYS2)

18 IM, but you said that a true atheist cannot be an ideologue, and I beg to differ. Man needs to believe in something, so remove religion from the mix and an atheist will fill the void with an ideology. Your best hope is only that the ideology you choose is a good one.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 24, 2006 03:00 PM (8e/V4)

19 I guess you could consider a love of liberty and the Constitution to be an ideology, because that's all I've got. I'm not really into "isms", and neither are any of the true atheists that I know, we just like being free people in a free country, even if many of our fellow citizens act like ignorant assholes toward us sometimes.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 25, 2006 08:00 AM (0yYS2)

20 IM, your ideology is called patriotISM. It's a fine ideology.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 25, 2006 10:42 AM (8e/V4)

21 i think it's time for all the christians of the world to have a re-awakening to the true nature of christ.regardless of what the leftist , hippy infiltraters of the church of england would lead us to believe ; christ was not some pioneer woodstock wannabe in a white nighty. lets remember the over looked qoutes ; ' i did not come to bring peace to the world , but a sword.'. ' if you do not have a sword ; sell your cloak and buy one' and he also tells use that if anyone causes others to sin , it would be better to tie a large millstone around the persons neck and drown them in the sea. i think the christian brothers of nigeria are not ashamed of these more uncomfortable and challanging aspects of christs earthly ministry. armed self defence and the execution of thoughs that act as an impediment to the greater peace and as emermies of gods people, is totally justified. god bless the christians of nigeria.

Posted by: josiah at March 04, 2006 10:35 AM (0FZ2t)

22 i think it's time for all the christians of the world to have a re-awakening to the true nature of christ.regardless of what the leftist , hippy infiltraters of the church of england would lead us to believe ; christ was not some pioneer woodstock wannabe in a white nighty. lets remember the over looked qoutes ; ' i did not come to bring peace to the world , but a sword.'. ' if you do not have a sword ; sell your cloak and buy one' and he also tells use that if anyone causes others to sin , it would be better to tie a large millstone around the persons neck and drown them in the sea. i think the christian brothers of nigeria are not ashamed of these more uncomfortable and challanging aspects of christs earthly ministry. armed self defence and the execution of thoughs that act as an impediment to the greater peace and as emermies of gods people, is totally justified. god bless the christians of nigeria.

Posted by: josiah at March 04, 2006 10:35 AM (0FZ2t)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Michelle Malkin's website was down for most of the morning, presumably due to a Denial of Service attack from hackers. The site was back up as of around 10:30, when Malkin posted, noting that the FBI had been informed of the attack.

In an update posted at Pajamas Media, where Malkin rode out the attack, she notes that investigators have confirmed a DoS attack, apparently originating in Turkey.

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

Posted by: Bluto at 12:16 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 89 words, total size 1 kb.