The al Qaeda Syria Connection
Very scary. Read the whole thing. TCS:
Regarding the December rocket attacks against Israel from the south of the country that Zarqawi (Al Qaeda's leader in Iraq) claimed responsibility for, Fatfat [Lebanese Interior Minister] confirmed it was indeed the work of Al Qaeda. He added that it was an attack carried out by the Palestinian terror group FPLP-GC based out of Damascus, but financed directly by Al Qaeda. Finally Fatfat affirmed that FPLP-GC answers directly to Damascus and that a branch of Al Qaeda could be manipulated by Syrian security services....
"It seems that the Iraqi Al-Qaïda branch has been thinking for a long time to transform Lebanon into a strengthened base, and to make in particular the area of Tripoli (in the north of Lebanon) a new Afghanistan since several of its bases are in this city", specified the source. He added that the interrogations carried out by the Lebanese police force of 13 Al-Qaïda members brought precise details on the infiltration operation, carried out under the direct supervision of Zarkawi [Abu Musab al-Zarqawi]. "Some 700 experienced militants of the terrorist network would have left Iraq for Lebanon", adds this anonymous witness....
Lastly, when questioned by Al Hayat about Al Qaeda's presence in Lebanon, Hassan Nasrallah, leader of the Lebanese Shia terror group Hezbollah which controls much of the south of the country, did not deny it. He pointed to the possible implication in the December attack of elements in the Ain Al Hilweh Palestinian camp "who have pledged their loyalty to al-Zarqawi". He acknowledged that it was a "dangerous and unacceptable" situation but thought it was "unlikely" that Hezbollah would clash with Al Qaeda in the future.
1
I wonder if that is why we have not heard from Zarqawi of late?
Some 700 experienced militants of the terrorist network would have left Iraq for Lebanon
It would seem to me that Hezbollah would have a major problem with Al-Qaeda muscling in on their gig due to the fact that Al-Qaeda has attacked the Shia people in Iraq with improvised bombs, kidnapping, and executions and they also have done nothing (apart from the failed rocket attack) to attack Israel.
It's always amazing to see ties that people have denied for years being placed in the open by the terrorists themselves, like the LGF story the other day about Hezzbolah funding.
Posted by: dave at February 16, 2006 12:00 PM (CcXvt)
2
Since their formation in the 60's the PFLP-GC have been secular marxists.http://cfrterrorism.org/groups/pflp.html Perhaps not really a true love match, just a marriage of convenience
Posted by: john ryan at February 16, 2006 12:21 PM (TcoRJ)
3
AFTER ALL WHAT SYRIA HAS DONE RECENTLY, IM NOT SURPRISED.
Posted by: ELIE BOUTROS at February 16, 2006 04:11 PM (7STv6)
4
Hey the MSM actually has coverage of this very thing, but it only sounds like crickets chirping, so nothing to see here, move along.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 16, 2006 05:08 PM (0yYS2)
Only 325,000 Names on U.S. Suspected Terror List
The MSM is spinning the fact that the U.S. has placed over 325,000 names on the suspected terrorist list as an affront to civil liberties. However, because many of the names are simple variations of spelling, the actual list is closer to 200,000. And U.S. Citizens comprise "only a very, very small fraction" of that number.
So, you're going to tell me that there are only 200,000 potential terrorists in the world identified by the NSA's National Counterterrorism Center? In Britain alone 37% of Muslims agreed that Jews in the U.K. are "legitimate targets as part of the struggle for justice in the Middle East."
50,000 people in Pakistan rallied to suppress free speech in the world today. 3,000 Muslims in the Philippines were at a rally in which cartoon blasphemers were beheaded in effigy today. And you're telling me that 200,000 is a large number? Are you people out of your effing minds!?!?
It's simply amazing the depths of the denial going on in the world about the nature of Islam and the gravity of the threat it poses to Western liberalism. Alleged 'civil liberty' groups express outrage at this number as if there is no relationship between between Islam and terrorism.
Timothy Sparapani, an expert on privacy rights at the American Civil Liberties Union, said the ACLU's response was one of incredulity, and alarm that many people are likely to be on the list by mistake, with serious impact on their lives and few, if any, means of getting themselves off it.
Okay, so the ACLU is 'incredulous' and 'alarmed' that some Muslims might be inconvenienced by the fact that they are being watched. Personally, I'd like to express my incredulity and alarm that so many Muslims support terrorism, the murdering of Jews, and the fascism that is Islamic law!
It's true, as Mr. Sparapani notes, that there probably needs to be a better vetting process so that innocent Muslims can be taken off the list quicker, but the solution to that problem is in increasing the NSA budget by leaps and bounds. I wonder how the ACLU would react should some one propose to double the NSA budget? Let me predict that they would be 'incredulous' and 'alarmed' at the potential impact on civil liberties.
While the list is problematic and should cause us some concern, 'Outrage', another word used by the ACLU, should be saved for those who support jihad and terrorism, not directed at those trying to prevent another 9/11.
1
Ya gotta love a lib/left story that has absolutely positively no legs whats-so-ever!
I'm shocked! I'm shocked I tell ya! The Govt actually complies lists of suspected foreign national terrorists in foreign countries! Oh the horror!
Posted by: hondo at February 16, 2006 09:50 AM (fyKFC)
2
325,000-The number of Americans killed when one of these terrorist groups pops off a nuclear device in a major city. That is the number I'm worried about, not how many terrorists the NSA has on a list. It's much better to err or the side of too many rather than not enough.
Posted by: jesusland joe at February 16, 2006 10:03 AM (rUyw4)
3
wow that is a whole lot of names. I didn't even realize that there that many different names. Do you think that you get placed on this list for advocating killing Americans? like hanging them ?
Posted by: john ryan at February 16, 2006 10:32 AM (TcoRJ)
4
Only if you want to hang them for, you know, blasphemy as opposed to convicting some one of murder and then hanging them.
Posted by: Rusty at February 16, 2006 11:27 AM (JQjhA)
5
OK, now the FISA Court should get to work and issue those easily-obtainable warrents so that the NSA can listen in on their phone calls.
Should have them all issued by...2010, maybe.
Posted by: Fred Fry at February 16, 2006 11:39 AM (JXdhy)
6
I hope the next terror bomb hits the ACLU's headquarters. Highly unlikely since the terrorists and the ACLU are the same people, but a nice thought!
Posted by: Andy at February 16, 2006 11:44 AM (tMU4W)
7
325,000 out of a world population of some 6.5 billion people...
How dare we!!!
Posted by: Keith, Indy at February 16, 2006 12:36 PM (pVUxX)
8
That would be about 1% of the US population or about 5/1000 ths of 1% of the world population of the world. Not bad. Lets "zero-in" on the bad guys and leave us law abiding citizens alone.
Posted by: Chief RZ at February 16, 2006 02:17 PM (iNTGz)
9
Actually it is 00.01% or America's population. Or 99.99& or us are not on it.
But the real point is that the America hating MSM/DNC would fault the # no matter what it was; 35,000,000 or 150.
Posted by: Rodney A Stanton at February 16, 2006 03:14 PM (lwdxR)
10
Rod
Whats up Marine! Ya got that right! whatever figure - they will bitch.
Hell, call their hand! Don't think there should be a list - or one with just a couple of names .... THEN FUCKIN' SAY SO! As we have all learned - they don't actually have the balls to take a definitve positioned specific stand .. not until they get the results from about 300+ polls and focus groups.
Posted by: hondo at February 16, 2006 05:47 PM (fyKFC)
Fatwa This: Insulting Muhammed Videos, Cartoons, Riots, Murders and Other Links of the Day
It's the religion of peace roundup, featuring this Zipperfish video. "Saying Muslims aren't extremists is kind of like saying Christians aren't annoying."--I'll take annoying.The best part? The Muhammed totally gay review. (thanks to Dan Riehl for sending link)
Google baiting for Muhammed cartoon fatwa is fun. Will somebody please fatwa this guy already!!
1
Hey the guy in the video is a sikh not muslim. lol.
Posted by: s at February 16, 2006 09:03 AM (kmwDH)
2
Portray a muslim fictional character who's a member of AQ and is killed by a Christian in a tv show - expect lots of islamic indignation. A muslim vendor's kids get ripped apart by a car bomb put there by other muslims - expect nothing. Nice set of values they have there.
Posted by: Graeme at February 16, 2006 09:59 AM (JGqNP)
3
I was at Makati about a month ago. I remember being in the mall there and at one fast food joint they had a sign assuring their muslim brothers and sisters pork products where not used in making any of the products in the resturant. Funny to see a place i was at mentioned in reguards to these moron muslims.
BTW, Makati is in the Philippines so you can narrow down what I am talking about.
P.S. Feed Muslim children more gummy bears.
Posted by: Andre at February 16, 2006 10:51 AM (bQ3vG)
4
Let's not quibble over, as Jean-Francois Kerry would say, the nuances. The greater message is spot on.
Outstanding. And very funny.
5
Re - Lost: Could this be what finally sends this series over the shark? ABC's already given it a good push in that direction with its beyond-lame "Addicted To Lost" ad during the Super Bowl.
Posted by: Joshua at February 16, 2006 01:52 PM (2c7xL)
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 16, 2006 05:16 PM (0yYS2)
7
The flash is nice but it inaccurately reports Americas response to the riots, going so far as the claim that the New York Times speaks for anyone. The part with Bush was just confusing.
Posted by: Vent at February 17, 2006 05:57 PM (9tI8J)
8
You are awesome, I love this google! Thanks for all you do and for having a blog.
Posted by: Wild Thing at February 17, 2006 06:12 PM (tj1zH)
9
A AL QUEDA version of SPY vs SPY white and black AL QUEDA try to destroy one another and the lady in gray blows them both up
Posted by: sandpiper at February 19, 2006 10:34 PM (stdEd)
10
Thanks for the help, but I finally had to fatwa myself.
Posted by: Jeff H at February 20, 2006 11:54 AM (s927e)
Posted by: TT at February 24, 2006 02:29 PM (wFmRC)
12
Why haven't you mentioned the bombing of Iraq and hundreds of thousands of innocent people dying, not to mention what they did to Afghanistan. If muslims are what you say they are, your'e even worse, look at the hate you have built up inside you. Don't let the media get to you. You really should go educate yourself
Posted by: Liz at February 24, 2006 02:35 PM (wFmRC)
UPDATE: Rusty says he posted this a week ago. Well, tough noogies. I'm going to keep posting this until every last one of you has clicked over and watched the Ayatollah of Rock and Roll-ah!
Posted by: Howie at February 16, 2006 08:25 AM (D3+20)
4
Ok, now I understand why they blow themselves up..this is their idea of entertainment! Hair loss is not their problem I believe they need Metamucil or some equivalent..some regularity in their life..how 'bout getting a life!
Posted by: Debby at February 16, 2006 08:37 AM (E0cxW)
5
Rusty who? Sorry man, it's the first time I caught the action. This particular procedure whereby the expelling of trapped baby demons, in my area, is more commonly known as a "riggin fit". In this case he gets the honorary "Bums Rush", likely due to his soiling of the holy chair. If you look close, you can see the bottom of the chair is removable, but some funny dhimmi left in in on purpose, thereby fouling the number two in progress, as it were. Free expression is encouraged, naturaaaaahly!
Posted by: forest hunter at February 16, 2006 06:03 PM (Fq6zR)
Our informal corporate motto is "Don't be evil." We Googlers generally relate those words to the way we serve our users – as well we should. But being "a different kind of company" means more than the products we make and the business we're building; it means making sure that our core values inform our conduct in all aspects of our lives as Google employees.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. lawmakers lashed out at Google Inc. and other prominent Internet companies on Wednesday, with one Democrat questioning "how your corporate leadership sleeps at night" because of the companies' alleged complicity in human rights abuses by the Chinese government.
"Your abhorrent activities in China are a disgrace. I simply do not understand how your corporate leadership sleeps at night," said Rep. Tom Lantos, the ranking Democrat on a House International Relations subcommittee on human rights.
A bill to be introduced by Republican Chris Smith would make it illegal for Google or other US companies to continue to abet repressive regimes like Communist China.
1
Cool... does the same apply to companies doing business in Saudi Arabia too? /rhetorical
Posted by: Ariya at February 16, 2006 12:25 AM (uxW3N)
2
As to how they sleep at night, what was traded years ago in the name of "good business" is how. Moral fiber is a term known to have very short and ever changing limits. The money is our God like no other theme, simply ID's the whore for what it is and now you know the price of Google's services----today.
Posted by: forest hunter at February 16, 2006 12:40 AM (Fq6zR)
3
I used to work for one of those companies.
Now, I sleep well at night.
Posted by: Russ at February 16, 2006 12:58 AM (utsLN)
4
Ariya do you always answer JawaReport posts with a scatter gun?
It isn't anything to do with Corporations doing business in foreign countries, but the ethics of the things they do to stay there:
Yahoo provided electronic records to Chinese authorities that led to an eight-year prison sentence for writer Li Zhi in 2003.Smith used a laptop to show how a search for "Tiananmen Square" on www.google.com turned up images of tanks and carnage from the 1989 army killings while entering the same term in the new Chinese site led to pictures of smiling tourists.
Less of course you are citing a specific event with a U.S Corporation and Saudi Arabia that you forgot to reference?
Posted by: dave at February 16, 2006 01:12 AM (CcXvt)
5
I'd much rather a business regulate itself than by these moralizing hypocrites but no matter, there is no principle.
Posted by: Javapuke at February 16, 2006 02:12 AM (VOGUE)
6
Self regulation requires ethics, and only works when there are no liberals involved in running a business, because they have none, and see no problem with helping jail innocent people for a buck or two. Every day their own actions show that liberals should all be ground up for dog food.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 16, 2006 05:14 AM (0yYS2)
7
I don't know about that, Maxie. I would rather my dog eat gar or carp rather than ground-up liberal. Of course, that's just me, and my dog is a Golden Retriever, and she is pretty particular about what she eats. Ground-up liberal would be perfect for fertilizer!
Posted by: jesusland joe at February 16, 2006 10:26 AM (rUyw4)
Posted by: hondo at February 16, 2006 05:53 PM (fyKFC)
9
Don't be evil? All that's missing is "Be good" and a flower pot! Both childish and stupid. Maybe they believe you can't be evil unless your wearing a Darth Vader mask and a nazi armband.
Does leave open an immense gray area, doesn't it? - for goggle to play word games with.
Posted by: hondo at February 16, 2006 05:58 PM (fyKFC)
On Heroism True
Sometimes, maybe once in a generation, a true hero stands up. An epic figure who does not care what others say or what others may think. These giants of humanity are not afraid to be alone and hold their ground in the face of overwhelming odds. We see these people and think they are John the Baptist reborn, a lone voice in the wilderness.
Today, ladies and gentlemen, we have seen one of these heroes. I present to you, the Honorable Representative of the 1st District in Hawai'i, Neil Abercrombie.
When presented the chance today to vote on the bill "expressing the sense of Congress that no United States assistance should be provided directly to the Palestinian Authority if any representative political party holding a majority of parliamentary seats within the Palestinian Authority maintains a position calling for the destruction of Israel," Representative Abercrombie had the courage to oppose the votes of Reps. Jackson (D-IL), Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Conyers (D-MI), and Minority Leader Pelosi (D-CA). He also managed to oppose the vote of Majority Leader Boehner (R-OH) at the same time.
Represenative Abercrombie was the lone 'Nay' vote.
For some reason, I am reminded of an old Monty Python sketch on the value of not being seen. Really, if you feel this way, maybe it would have been best for you to not stand up. Though it helps me weed out the mega-loons from the regular nuts.
Take some time to let Rep. Abercrombie know how you feel here.
Posted by: Leopold Stotch at February 15, 2006 09:57 PM (2oQaU)
3
Did anyone bother to click on his "Iraq watch" button ? He also voted yes on one of the bills with the strongest language to bring the troops home from Iraq.
Posted by: john ryan at February 15, 2006 09:57 PM (TcoRJ)
4
You are the only one to publish his name. The press is silent on who voted against this. Talk about secrecy!
Posted by: Fred Fry at February 15, 2006 10:31 PM (HJnrm)
5
I'm not American. I'm an Aussie, so I don't think I should criticise how your poli's vote. I'm glad Australia stuck with the US in Iraq.
Posted by: jonny at February 15, 2006 11:32 PM (nytWC)
6
No one could ever be further out there than Neil ( pronounced Kneel ).
He's lampooned in the Movie classic "Joe vs The Volcano". The scene with the yellow taxi: it's his personal campaign car, unique in all Hawaii.
All of the jibes about a counter-dependent personality are spot of for Neil.
He has been a terrible child all his 'adult' life.
Posted by: blert at February 16, 2006 02:22 AM (kxhLo)
7
Maybe he was just intellectually incapable of understanding what the vote was about?
Posted by: Don Miguel at February 16, 2006 08:42 PM (UAn5X)
Muslim Porn: Sheep Magazine
This all started with exchanges of yo momma insults in the comments section here. Do a Google image search of: Muslim porn (Warning: NSFW). Actual hits on first page. Google = hate site.
Sheep magazine: Hide your sheep, Muhammed is coming!more...
1
So where's the cowboys - er I mean shepherds? I guess now tall in the saddle is to become the new euphemism down in the West Village and other oddly fashionable haunts of NYC.
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 07:47 PM (fyKFC)
2
Muslim Porn!
Hell, let me at it!
I'm a gonna Ba ah ahaa ahaha hahggg me one.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 15, 2006 08:05 PM (q5wwn)
3
Maxie
You are talking about shooting a sheep, aren't you? I mean, hey - it's none of my business - I'm cool - your cool - we'll leave it at that.
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 08:18 PM (fyKFC)
4
Lame. Dude, don't diminsh the value of your site with such crap. We all know that Muslims are peaceful, loving people, who reject Man-boysheep relations.
No, they prefer Llamas ...
Posted by: Leopold Stotch at February 15, 2006 10:00 PM (2oQaU)
5
Hey there,
You included a picture of mine from the Muslim Porn image search. Actually, I don't know if you know this, but my site has ranked #1 for "Muslim Porn" on the google search for years. I get tons of hits for it every day and I've written several entries about it.
Banagor.
Posted by: Banagor at February 16, 2006 03:50 AM (cjAU5)
6
You know you've made it when some libtard starts using your name for gag posts. Oh, and stalking you, that's a good sign too. I wish the little cocksuckers would really stalk me and show up at my house, oh the fun we'd have.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 16, 2006 05:04 AM (0yYS2)
7
SHEEP is just an acronym for Sandniggers Humping Ewes Everywhere in Palestine.
SHEEP is a dangerous terror outfit in lamb's clothing.
SHEEP must be stopped before they do more damage to the land of Israel.
Posted by: Steve Sharon at February 17, 2006 12:54 PM (oKDxa)
1
MSM physical contact with the Iraqi people is actually quite minimal. Same goes for the so-called independents and various peace-groups. What contacts they do have are, oddly enough, with Sunnis (allied with the insurgency).
The Sunnis constitute 20+% of Iraq's overall population and have a long history of repression directed at the others.
That leaves apx 80% of the Iraqi population out in the cold (and being murdered by the others).
These people tend to remember - and hold grudges. I wonder how this particular oddity is going to play out in the future. It will come into play eventually.
Payback can be a bitch - I'm am not going to be overly caring.
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 05:32 PM (fyKFC)
Posted by: Rusty at February 15, 2006 06:49 PM (JQjhA)
9
I've discovered that Sabrina Tavernise of the New York Times was present at a Multi-National Force press briefing on January 19, 2006 at which excerpts from this letter were read. Tavernise's reaction was to ask a question about the number of insurgent attacks in Iraq. She ignored the letter. What a cunning stunt.
10
Good new is bad news for some - or is it bad news is good news? I get them confused.
Give Sabrina credit - she knows exactly the "news" she needs - and nothing is gonna stop her from getting it.
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 07:22 PM (fyKFC)
Posted by: Rusty at February 15, 2006 07:32 PM (JQjhA)
12
No, it doesn't bother me one bit hondo. I am simply asking for proof that it's real, that's all.
The Libtards could easily dismiss this as some fabrication. Proof would mean something.
Posted by: Ariya at February 15, 2006 10:02 PM (uxW3N)
13
Oh, and btw, thanks traderrob, for the links...
Posted by: Ariya at February 15, 2006 10:15 PM (uxW3N)
14
Thanks for the info! I'll post the letter on my site as well
Posted by: DLoy at February 16, 2006 12:21 AM (fW1cW)
15
Please, it's Pentagon war propaganda dissiminated by defendamerica.mil back in mid January:
http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/jan2006/a012606wm2.html
Now it's making rounds among the lock-stepped military families at the encouragement/direction of our government.
Posted by: bobby fletcher at February 21, 2006 06:24 PM (vm83q)
16
This letter was discussed this morning on the Johnboy and Billy radio program. A retired Air Force general said he had discussed this letter with the pentagon and that it was legit.
As for the comment about military families doing anything at the prompting of the pentagon, I would like to say the majority of us have no contact with anyone in the military but our loved ones.
We support them strongly due to the fact we could lose them at any moment so yes we do celebrate any little positive news we can find since the American media refuses to do so.
From the proud father of a U. S. Army Ranger.
Posted by: John Beane at February 24, 2006 07:48 AM (/t6+k)
17
I also questioned the authenticity of the letter and did some research. I found it mentioned in the New York Post http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/63838.htm
so I think the chances are good that it's legit.
Posted by: Alex at February 24, 2006 01:44 PM (snhi/)
18
I just, today, saw the letter from the Iraqui mayor. My son is a Marine officer, currently serving in Iraq for the 2nd time, and he has related a far different "news" picture than is presented by our treasured national print and network media. I would tend to think the mayors words could be true.
Posted by: Larry Holland at March 08, 2006 10:13 AM (Uf3JS)
Gay Muslims Eating PuddingIn the Name of Allah: New independent film about gay Muslims may spark violence. Life imitating Hollywood imitating South Park imitating The Jawa Report. Hopefully the film will have little in common with the bad gay of Brokeback Mountain. Perhaps they can get Dannii Minogue and her lesbian stripper friend to star in the sequel In the Name of Allah II: Good Gay Muslims in Love?
more...
1
Gay happy - whatever. Considering most images of muslims show them as angry, enraged, stern etc ..... its nice to know at least a few of them are ..... happy.
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 05:14 PM (fyKFC)
2
I know which one is worse, but at least I can stand looking at a riot.
Posted by: Rusty at February 15, 2006 05:16 PM (JQjhA)
3
Is that the movie that has part of its soundtrack "cowboys are frequently secretly fond of each other" by Willie Nelson. If so it is iTunes big seller of the day
Posted by: john ryan at February 15, 2006 05:21 PM (TcoRJ)
4
Finally!
I knew that the lefty alliance with Islam would blow up some day over the bad gay thing.
It was only a matter of time. I canÂ’t wait for the demonstrations and counter demonstrations to clash.
Some guy with a beard knife and little white hat getting spit on by a transvestite in a tutu and fake boobs.
Get me the popcorn. Start the show!
Posted by: Brad at February 15, 2006 05:22 PM (3OPZt)
5
Interestingly, the same guy made a film about gay Hassids and Orthodox Jews. Remember all those riots in Tel Aviv about it? No? That's odd, I could have sworn I read in a meme somewhere about all religions being basically the same.
Posted by: Rusty at February 15, 2006 05:27 PM (JQjhA)
6
Remember some years ago a big UN conference on Women's Rights - dominated by Planned Parenthood n' kind and heavily focused the abortion issue.
Lot of fanfare and hype leading up to it then suddenly muslim countries in the UN started rumblin' & tumblin'.
UN thing got all kinda quiet and quietly slinked away - with lots of vague generic babble about Women. Left's weak parting shots oddly enough all directed at the .... Pope(?).
Ideological clash between islam and the left (ha) is essentially inevitable ... but will be verbal & weak ... and definitely not physical ... for the left has shown itself to be ... pussies.
My greatest nightmare is to find myself at a clash of demonstrations - libs/leftists/gays whatever and enraged islamists. They would of course all run away from the islamists - and a few of them would be clinging to my legs and back and shrilling begging ... SAVE ME HONDO! SAVE ME!
NOW WHAT DO I DO?
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 05:52 PM (fyKFC)
7
Holy shit the hate, wtf did i do to u ppl?? what a website. Is this website's entire purpose to humiliate muslims?? Have u even met a muslim before?
Posted by: a muslim at February 15, 2006 05:56 PM (dYZrS)
8
Ya, weÂ’re all the same. I canÂ’t decide whether to burn down my lesbian neighborÂ’s home or just behead her.
Actually, I changed a flat tire for her about a week ago so she could get to work. We actually get along pretty well, but those Impeach Bush signs in her window still piss me off.
Hondo, the bad gays in Seattle have some attitude. They will spit on a Catholic at the drop of a hat.Key your car if it's an SUV with a W sticker.
Muslims..Who knows?
Posted by: Brad at February 15, 2006 06:01 PM (3OPZt)
9
All western religions are pretty much the same especially where the deity is personified (hey he looks just like we do !. In the eastern religions creation itself is worshiped.) Buddhism is more of a philosophy than a religion. Beef, pork, shellfish,pot, pussy, its all OK when you're a buddhist.
Posted by: john ryan at February 15, 2006 06:04 PM (TcoRJ)
10
Met a Muslim before? Er, I just had dinner with two. So, the answer is NO.
Posted by: Rusty at February 15, 2006 06:20 PM (JQjhA)
11
a muslim
I re-read this entire thread - what are you talking about? If your going to comment here at least have half a brain and put it in a thread with the real meat & potatoes!
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 06:20 PM (fyKFC)
12
Snappy answers I wish I had said:
"No, I've never met a Muslim before. Unless of course you count the time I had sex with your mother."
Posted by: Rusty at February 15, 2006 06:21 PM (JQjhA)
13
John Ryan is a Buddhist - just in case anyone didn't know.
John,
What I like about this board is that a lot of the conservatives here are not of the religious variety - quoting scripture etc. Some pop by once in a while. I like them personally - but am not (nor others here) in that group.
You however have a very annoying habit of wearing your religion on your sleeve. Why is that?
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 06:26 PM (fyKFC)
14
And how do they feel about this nice website you have made??
P.S. Do you play a game called SubSpace, I've seen your nick somewhere. :S
Posted by: a muslim at February 15, 2006 06:31 PM (dYZrS)
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 06:36 PM (fyKFC)
17
Rusty!
A Momma joke? To what appears to be a 15 yr old boy who plays computer network games!
That's low! Even by our own low standards!
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 06:42 PM (fyKFC)
18
Damn right there goes another KFC. Their chicken is horrible. Here is a website that I found very interesting after I tried to convince my friend how crazy suicide bombing in Palestine is. Then he showed me this website. http://users.powernet.co.uk/mkmarina/palestine/palestine.html
Posted by: a peaceful (but dont piss me off) canadian that is muslim at February 15, 2006 06:51 PM (dYZrS)
19
Hondo--I have yet begun to tell yo momma jokes!!
Posted by: Rusty at February 15, 2006 06:51 PM (JQjhA)
20
Ah the elusive 'peaceful' Muslim warns us not to piss him off, then, predictably, points us to a website that equates an Israeli soldier killing a Hamas gunman to a 'terrorist'.
Brilliant these followers of the pedophile Muhammed.
Posted by: Rusty at February 15, 2006 07:00 PM (JQjhA)
21
WTH IS THIS. Y ON EARTH WOULD U TALK ABOUT GAY GAY MUSLIMS, DONT U HAVE NETHING BETTER TO TALK ABOUT, TALK ABOUT THE CARTOONS IN HOLLAND, DONT TALK ABOUT GAY PEOPLE, THEY ARE GOING IN HELL HANGING BY THERE TTESTICLES
Posted by: TURKEY at February 15, 2006 07:10 PM (DJXEj)
22
Turks got a thing for testicles - I've noticed.
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 07:17 PM (fyKFC)
23
man you ppl analyze everything dont u. Well iam peaceful belive it or not and that website is nothing but the truth. Israel is an occupier that deserves everything coming its way. I hope it gets wiped off the map soon. The Jewish people can go to America where they are loved most.
Posted by: a muslim at February 15, 2006 07:19 PM (dYZrS)
24
btw i got a whole buncha my friends to comment on your little website here. But dont expect too much, none of em are very smart except for dudelove. he's a palestinian and his cousins are all dead (jews).
He's pissed.
Posted by: a muslim at February 15, 2006 07:24 PM (dYZrS)
25
Your actually comically funny a muslim.
I mean - the irony of it all. Muslim countries - Mohammed's paradises - a place to maybe visit - but you wouldn't want to live there.
Guess it's easier to shovel snow than sand, eh?
I always wanted to ask this of a muslim living in the West (in your case Canada). WHY?
Why forsake the holy lands of Allah for the decadent corrupt West?
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 07:31 PM (fyKFC)
26
My response:
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/157980.php
Posted by: Rusty at February 15, 2006 07:35 PM (JQjhA)
27
I'm glad his cousins are dead. Dead terrorists are the only good terrorists.
And this whole thread just goes to show that Muslims are the most thin skinned of all religious peoples.
Posted by: Rusty at February 15, 2006 07:37 PM (JQjhA)
28
yo hondo the thing i have to do with testicles is i have them n u suck them
Posted by: turkey at February 15, 2006 07:50 PM (DJXEj)
29
I had bull's balls once - at a barbeque in Colorado - of course my buddy didn't tell me till afterwards. They were all right - an aquired taste of course.
Never tried Turk balls - but I'm open-minded as long as I get to broil them first.
You do have two, don't you? You know what they say - you can never broil and eat just one.
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 07:58 PM (fyKFC)
30man you ppl analyze everything dont u. Well iam peaceful belive it or not and that website is nothing but the truth. Israel is an occupier that deserves everything coming its way. I hope it gets wiped off the map soon. The Jewish people can go to America where they are loved most.
Ah, a peaceful Muslim that prays for Genocide. I'm glad I don't run into any hardcore Jihadi's, if you're peaceful.
How is it America is criticized for not doing anything for Palestine? giving them money/aid etc? Why can't all the loving Muslims in the Middle east give them money ?
Posted by: dave at February 15, 2006 09:08 PM (CcXvt)
31
Anyone who has spent time in the Middle East knows that homosexual sex (among males) is widespread. One of the dirty little secrets of the Arab world. Most of the people who practice this do not consider themselves to be homosexuals - it's just that that's all that is available to them. If you are 18-whatever and all you have ever seen of a woman is her kohl'ed eyes and 1 quarter inch of ankle, and maybe leafed through an infidel porno magazine a couple of times, I guess you'd be happy to get it where you can. Sometimes the habit sticks with them even after marriage.
Found this out in Saudi Arabia 25 years ago. Lots of Saudi households have Yemeni houseboys, and they do a little more than just make the tea, if'n ya know what I mean.
I don't mean this as propaganda, or to incite anyone - it just a fact. Not that it won't infuriate the Arab/Muslim world if/when the knowledge becomes widespread.
Posted by: Been There at February 16, 2006 01:53 AM (VdoM/)
32
Yes! Keep talking goatboys, you're doing my work for me. As soon as enough people realize the truth about muslims, we'll send all your primitive asses packing back to whatever third world rathole you came from, if you're lucky enough to get out. Personally, I want to decorate the overpasses with your filty corpses dangling like so many Christmas ornaments, but most Americans are about a million times more civilized that any muslims, so you'd better be glad that I'm very much in the minority, because I'll show you unevolved assholes what medieval really means.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 16, 2006 05:11 AM (0yYS2)
33
I just can't believe Rusty missed out on the most obvious, killer title for this post: "Bringing Brokeback Mountain To Mohammed".
Posted by: Joshua at February 16, 2006 02:03 PM (2c7xL)
34
His cousins weren't terrorists you fucking retard. They were kids.
A terroist is someone that spreads terror. Did you not read the website I showed you? Who is the terrorist? The terrorist is Bin Laden and his friends, Israel, and ANYBODY THAT SUPPORTS ISRAEL. You are responsible for giving Israel the weapons it uses to kill the Palestinians every year. You are responsible for the 1000's of Iraqis that you have killed in the name of "democracy". What are Palestinians responsible for compared to Israel and America?? Nothing. You are just so stupid. Look at the stats. You are spilling more blood. This is only the beginning, and I hope you live another 50 years to see what I'am talking about. You are the occupying terrorist and we are the resistance. Why do you supply Israel with so many weapons? Why do you keep getting into peoples business and thinking you have to be involved everywhere?? All you do is make these situations more complicated.
But anyways, why I'am I even talking to you, you represent the part of America that EVERYONE HATES. And you guys are such a small minority I feel stupid typing this shit. Your country will never be run by you because there are just too many gays and Christians who don't give a fuck about Christianity.
Your website is a joke. Its whole purpose is to try and humiliate Islam and the Middle-East, as if anyone really cares what you have to say about Islam. Lol you talk every Muslim in this world is a Sheikh or something. Go to Syria. Go to Lebanon. Go to Egypt. Go to Pakistan. GO TO SAUDI ARABIA. Do you know what Saudi Arabians do?? Lol. They go to Saudi Arabia, pretend their Muslims, get rich and then they come to America for your blondes. Thats what they do. Bin Laden did the exact same thing.
I'am going to go eat now, good bye.
Posted by: This is pointless. at February 16, 2006 03:11 PM (nzOnn)
35
Pointless is always coming back for more after your ass is kicked. Was Palestines ass not kicked for sure in 1967? Get over it. Like any idiot. Hey kick my ass again. Oh the American Jew consipracy is supressing us. Stealing our oil money. Yeah right if your own gov't is stealing your oil money kick it's ass grow some balls. We kicked England's ass three times. But no, you take the cowards way by brainwashing some poor hungry little bastard to blow himself up. Your mommy will never go hungry agqin we promise! You hate Israel well then fucking line up with your AK's and kick it's ass today! Come on pussy. Not our fault you throw rocks at fully armed soldiers and get your ass shot off. Dumbasses. Idiots always blame others when they find themselves in a bad way. Because they are too chickenshit to admit to themselves they made thier own bed.
Posted by: Howie at February 16, 2006 03:28 PM (D3+20)
36
Why?
I was born here, my parents came here for a better education and a better life in a more advanced country.
Btw, if you didn't already know. Jesus was born in the Middle-East. He is a Semite. He wasn't an American or a European, he was Arabic, or spoke a language similar to it. Similiar enough that he called his god (or his father), whatever you want to believe, Allah.
Posted by: for hondo at February 16, 2006 03:44 PM (E4zdV)
37
Why stay?
What's wrong with islamic countries? They are your brothers and sisters - and I am not and will never be.
Jesus was a jew - whats your point? Judaism & Christianity were born in the ME - it was the heartland of both religions - until an interloper slaughtered his way thru centuries later.
I like that word interloper - not vile, obscene or deflamatory - try to avoid language like that. how about intruder or
Posted by: hondo at February 16, 2006 06:13 PM (fyKFC)
38
Why stay?
What's wrong with islamic countries? They are your brothers and sisters - and I am not and will never be.
Jesus was a jew - whats your point? Judaism & Christianity were born in the ME - it was the heartland of both religions - until an interloper slaughtered his way thru centuries later.
I like that word interloper - not vile, obscene or deflamatory - try to avoid language like that. How about intruder or trespasser or impostor or gatecrasher. I could come up with more.
I personally have no interest in the ME - wish the day would come when we can all turn our backs on it.
But your still here - you just chatter to keep up appearances and asuage your feelings of guilt.
Posted by: hondo at February 16, 2006 06:20 PM (fyKFC)
39
Gays been around before B.C. now who's going to hell? lol
Posted by: Turboz at February 18, 2006 11:57 AM (70ayy)
Taqiya: British Imam Condemns Terrorism to Infidels, Praises Terror to Muslims
Taqiya is an idea which justifies deceiving the enemy for the sake of Islam. Hamid Ali, an imam from West Yorkshire, is clearly practicing it.
A week after the attack [London transit bombings] he had told newspapers that the perpetrators ought to be punished. But in a secretly taped conversation, he said: “What they [the bombers] did was good. They have warned that we are here, we Muslims. People have taken notice that we are here. They died so that people would take notice . . . big meetings and conferences make no change at all. With this, at least people’s ears have pricked up.”...
He also praised the bombers as the “children” of Abdullah al-Faisal, a firebrand Muslim cleric, who was convicted of inciting murder and racial hatred in 2003.
Ali revealed that the leader of the London suicide bombers had attended sermons in Yorkshire by al-Faisal and tapes of al-FaisalÂ’s teachings were still circulating within his mosque.
Al-Faisal, who has branded non-Muslims as “cockroaches” ripe for extermination, is serving a seven-year prison sentence but is eligible for early release next week.
1
Imams against the West all have one common denominator aside from hatred; they are very, very determined decievers. Lie after lie after lie... hell its all justified in the name of their Allah.
And do their followers care? Not when their pride is a psychopathic mental illness.
Posted by: Javapuke at February 15, 2006 05:26 PM (nOy9u)
2
For those who may have missed it:
Link to Video song - Taqiyya
http://savethesoldiers.com/j/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=98&Itemid=53
Posted by: heroyalwhyness at February 15, 2006 05:46 PM (XU9K/)
3
This is why we must close all mosques in the US. There is absolutely no way of telling which ones are spewing America-hate, and which ones are not. The ACLU has made it impossible, with their lawsuits, for the FBI to surveil these "houses of worship".
Posted by: Richard at February 15, 2006 06:22 PM (7KF8r)
4
It's easy to tell which ones are anti-American Richard; if it says "mosque" anywhere on it, it needs burned down with everyone inside.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 16, 2006 05:06 AM (0yYS2)
1
Serenity - hands down! I'm hanging up my uniforms come Aug after 27 years. If I'm gonna crew with anybody now its going to be with a bunch of ragtag renegades looking for that mythical bank with all that gold - woof woof!
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 04:17 PM (fyKFC)
Fair is Fair
My impulsive insight for the day is that if we in the West can put up with our inboxes polluted with 75% offensive spam, driving out loving or urgent messages from friends and family, the Ummah ought to be able to put up with a few off-color cartoons that no one was paying attention to anyway. The reaction reminds me of the old lady in our neighborhood who lodged a complaint with the police about the firemen in the firehouse next door "displaying" themselves in the nude, while in the shower. So the cop came over, looked out the window, and said: "Ma'am, I can't see any nude men over there." To which she replied: "Well of course not. You have to stand on the chair!."
On the other hand, a fatwa against spammers might actually win Islam some converts, not that they're savvy enough to figure that out...
1
The muslim reaction to the cartoons far out weighs their reaction to al the Abu Ghraib photos. In our American culture the reverse would be true. Cartoons about Jesus would hardly raise an eyebrow, but torture of our soldiers would drive us into wildeyed frenzy.
Posted by: john ryan at February 15, 2006 03:25 PM (TcoRJ)
More Graphic Abu Ghraib Images: Moral Idiots who Equivocate and Hypocrites in the Media
Be prepared for new Abu Ghraib images. I've seen them all. They are much worse than the ones you've already seen. I can also tell you that some of the images being shown by Australian media and then re-broadcast by Arab media of dead Iraqis who have been shot in the head and which are being reported as 'Abu Ghraib photos' are hoaxes. UPDATE: If you must see the most recent photos from Abu Ghraib, here they are.
For any one who equivocates between American troops and Saddam Hussein, I'd suggest that you are uniquivocally an idiot. Yes, Abu Ghraib was very bad indeed. However, the Abu Ghraib abuses were discovered by U.S. troops and were being investigated before any photos were ever leaked to the press.
"This is truly American ugliness that no other country in the world can compete with," journalist Saleh al-Humaidi told Reuters in Yemen.
"The Americans ought to apologise to mankind for their government's lie to the world that it is fighting for freedom and that it came to Iraq to save it from Saddam Hussein's oppression," he said.
Truly amazing how stupid people are. But I guess if you already believe the U.S. is evil than any evidence will be taken as proof of our ill intentions.
Further, the abuses that occured have led to a series of convictions against those who participated. More than 25 at last count. Abu Ghraib is not, as is asserted by Andrew Sullivan, a reflection on President Bush and only fools would equivocate between the unauthorized crimal act and the officially sanctioned act. Andrew Sullivan is one such fool.
Even the most enlightened and peaceful nations on earth have their share of sadists. Both Iran and the Netherlands have had citizens murdered because they appeared to utter or publish blasphemous things. What differentiates the two is that in Iran it is official state policy to execute blasphemers while in the Netherlands the man who killed Theo Van Gogh is treated as a criminal.
The U.S. condemns acts of torture and prosecutes those who engage in these barbaric acts, while the Baathist state of Saddam Hussein had an official policy of torture and rewarded those who engaged in cruelty. To not understand the distinction is to be utterly moronic and morally confused. Unfortunately, the world has its fair share of morally confused idiots.
Sistah Todjah finds that WaPo is ready and willing to publish photos which they know will bolster the terrorist insurgency in Iraq, yet were unwilling to publish the Muhammed cartoons for fear of offending. The insurgents fight us because they believe we are evil and many Muslims are convinced that America is essentially the same as their own dicatatorial regimes...thank you WaPo for confirming their deepest suspicions.
More from Dread Pudit Bluto, LGF, Caerdroia, Tim Blair, Fraters Libertas , In the Bullpen, Ace of Spades HQ, and Stop the ACLU who notice that it's not just WaPo who refused to print the Muhammed cartoons 'because they are offensive', but are showing these disgusting photos. I'm more than an little offended that they are publishing these photos. Perhaps if we rioted it would affect some change?
An Australian television station broadcast on Wednesday what it said were previously unpublished images of abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison, fuelling more Arab anger against the United States.
The Special Broadcasting Service's "Dateline" current affairs programme said the images were recorded at the same time as the now-infamous pictures of U.S. soldiers abusing Abu Ghraib detainees which sparked international outrage in 2004.
Some of the newly broadcast pictures suggest further abuse such as killing, torture and sexual humiliation, Dateline said.
I saw this from Church and State. I'll disagree. While the last Abu Ghraib photos that came out were abusive, they weren't torture. These are.
1However, the Abu Ghraib abuses were discovered by U.S. troops and were being investigated before any photos were ever leaked to the press.
In fact, the existence of the investigation and, I believe, the filing of charges, were mentioned during daily briefings as the events occured. At the time, the press just ignored the story.
It wasn't until a defense attorney passed the photos on to muckrakers that the story became big, and, against the facts, the press decided to run with a "COVER UP" theme.
Posted by: Robert Crawford at February 15, 2006 01:17 PM (1j9aH)
2
I was watching a protest march in Iraq last night on the news. the protest ws to demonstrate against the British treatment of the tenns who pitched rocks at them. The Brits are prosecuting these men. Whil I can understand why they kikc the crap out of them the proper action would have been to simply arrest them. A mistake. Howiever the thought I had was if Sadam was still in power and teens had pitched rocks at his men what would have happened? Probably much worse and the protest would have definately been a no no.
Posted by: Howie at February 15, 2006 01:30 PM (D3+20)
3
The images themselves are not what disturb me the most. What's really disturbing is the fact that we are supposed to be different than other people in the world. We are'nt freaking barbarians. We were in a state of war from 1940-1945 too, with Hitler brutalizing our people, but everyone agreed we dont do business that way, because we are American. Crap like this makes us absolutely no better than anyone else in the world. We're just a bunch of bloody savages now. The privates and sergeants who did this crap should get a slap on the wrist and the high level officers should be publically tried and jailed for life, made an example of. Instead our political leaders try to defend the behavior.....makes me absolutely sick
Posted by: Dave at February 15, 2006 01:34 PM (a7716)
4
Dave,
Much worse happened in WWII. MUCH MUCH WORSE by AMERICANS. And, during WWII, OUR troops were sometimes CONVICTED, just like they are today. The ONLY difference between now and then is that the media wanted us to WIN during WWII. Now, the media doesn't care one way or another.
Posted by: Rusty at February 15, 2006 01:58 PM (JQjhA)
5
I remember reading about all of the German soldiers that surrendered as we entered Berlin, and the hundreds of our troops that were taken from the battlefield in order to detain, and secure them.
Oh wait. no I didn't.
Posted by: dave at February 15, 2006 02:12 PM (CcXvt)
6
You didnt "take" Berlin Dave, that was the Red Army.
Posted by: sonic at February 15, 2006 02:18 PM (Gsn6c)
7
I am just waiting for Saddam to use the "few bad apples defense". Command responsibility is the key to maintaiing proper discipline. Abu Ghraib was a tilting point both in Iraq and in Afghanistan. We lost badly in public opinion. Americans started to ask "Is this what we are asking of our troops?" And Rusty WWII was 60 years ago, our country and our military holds itself to a higher standard than that now. Segregation and internment by ethnicity (or religion) would no longer be accepted by most Americans.
Posted by: john ryan at February 15, 2006 02:18 PM (TcoRJ)
8
Oh boy. Lectures on morality from a Yemeni. Great.
Found those missing boomies yet, burqa-boy?
What say we pull a few dozen Islamonuts outta Gitmo cages and ACTUALLY shoot the bastards? Then feed 'em to the sharks.
Works for me.
Posted by: mojo at February 15, 2006 02:20 PM (qRH1D)
9
Yes, but John, we are holding our troops to a high standard--that's the whole point. It's idiotic to say that because standards are broken that the standards do not exist.
Posted by: Rusty at February 15, 2006 02:32 PM (JQjhA)
10
Howie, the Brits were in full uniform and armed. . . those 'teens' (such an innocuous term for thugs) got off easy (IMHO).
As for the Abu Ghraib nonsense . . .the prisoners are all alive. I wouldn't waste any ink prosecuting our military personnel for anything I saw in the photos.
Posted by: heroyalwhyness at February 15, 2006 02:38 PM (XU9K/)
11
One thing that really sickened me, but which I didn't mention in my post, was how the Reuters presentation of the new photos almost caressed them, showing zooms and pans and lingering on the most brutal images. It was a very effective technique, if your intent is to disgust and anger. I'm sure it will be very helpful in Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria and so on.
Posted by: Jeff Medcalf at February 15, 2006 02:41 PM (eer2X)
12
Wow! Unreleased photos from an old story that was investigated and brought to trial. My My - why recycle an old story just because more of the orignal evidence is available?
Simple - hopefully it will aid in inciting further violence and even death of American military personnel and civilians in the region, along with fueling attacks aimed at American and related targets. May even be helpful in speeding up the executions of currently held hostages in region.
All this makes for good theater and drama - vivid newstories with gory details and loads of time for babbling overall commentary. Could also help in upcoming 06 and 08 elections too!
Why wouldn't the MSM here go near publishing the cartoon story?
Simple - muslims would get angry and may try to kill their personnel where accessible - attack & destroy their bureaus in other countries - and possibly attack them & their families right here in the US. It wouldn't be hard - ABC headquarters here in NYC (57st) is easily reachable - you could wait outside and simply shoot newspeople coming out of the building - or a suicide bomber can simply run into the lobby of NBC etc etc etc.
So - what we have here is an odd combination - self-serving dicks who are also cowards. Such is the state of the MSM - thank God for alternatives!
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 03:15 PM (fyKFC)
13
Howie
What you are referring to was actually filmed - as suspected - the video has been selectively edited. Involved immediately prior was a grenade attack on the British compound (great footage of explosions on the roof - unknown if any Brit casualties - seems to be left of recent commentary).
Video is from Brit spotters on adjoining roof - ID'd perps and fowarded info to unit in compound.
Why Brits didn't open fire and kill "youths" is beyond me. Moved in in riot gear (assuming snipers in overwatch) and beat the crap out of them. Me personally would have killed them and not risk the lives of my personnel - Brits! Go figure!
Now they are in the position of having an "investigation" of what should have been seen from the start as a defensive combat operation.
I wish there was a Brit here who could explain all this lunacy to me.
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 03:29 PM (fyKFC)
14
"Even the most enlightened and peaceful nations on earth have their share of sadists. Both Iran and Denmark have had citizens murdered because they appeared to utter or publish blasphemous things. What differentiates the two is that in Iran it is official state policy to execute blasphemers while in Denmark the man who killed Pym Fortun is treated as a criminal."
Denmark?
I think you'll find that whether you were actually referring to Pim Fortuyn, the right-wing gay Dutch politician who was assassinated during his election campaign by a left-wing environmentalist, or Theo van Gogh, the Dutch filmmaker stabbed to death by a fundamentalist Muslim over his movie Submission, who I think you're confusing Pim with, both were Dutch.
I don't always agree with you. Sometimes I do, but either way, the facts should be correct - it makes your argument much more compelling.
Posted by: Fact Checker at February 15, 2006 03:29 PM (Oym8h)
15
"Self-serving dicks who are also cowards".
Lol! Yep, hondo, I couldn't have described the MSM any better had I tried. Thanks for a good laugh!
Posted by: jesusland joe at February 15, 2006 04:16 PM (rUyw4)
16
Thanks Fact Checker. Fixed. But let's just pretend it never happened. Nothing to see here folks, move along!
Posted by: Rusty at February 15, 2006 04:53 PM (JQjhA)
17
The press has been the biggest scapegoat in this whole mess. Idiots like Rumsfeld and the Bushies bitch about the press being too liberal and not reporting the "good things." The Liberals point at Fox News, Bill O'Reilly, other media outlets, embedded reporters, etc. and weep about the "right-wing bias."
Let's face it: It's all entertainment, and people want to be entertained by content that meets their personal viewpoints. Me? I don't have any idea why we're in Iraq because my president lied to me about it, so it's hard for me to judge which side of the news is "real." Watch what makes you happy and don't pretend to know the truth.
Namaste.
Posted by: abuseguy at February 15, 2006 06:01 PM (Q7dPy)
18
Thanks for shout out in your post to my related post at Church and State: http://nathanbradfield.blogspot.com/2006/02/abu-ghraib-vs-danish-cartoons.html
I am not making excuses for these soldiers. I feel like some went too far and need to be dealt with. But I like the line of thinking in your response to Dave's comment on Feb 15th, 1:58pm. Nice post.
Posted by: Nathan Bradfield at February 15, 2006 06:10 PM (u/q7n)
19
Thanks for the linkage Rusty. Much appreciated.
Posted by: jwookie at February 15, 2006 06:15 PM (x0sPW)
20
What basis do you have for declaring the photographs of prisoners shot in the head as hoaxes ?
Posted by: Tank at February 15, 2006 08:11 PM (aFscR)
21
Actually I kinda hope the muslims seethe and riot over these photos. A lot of westerners are sick and tired of how these animals react to these types of things. It just strengthens the idea that islam and western culture are incompatible.
Posted by: REMF at February 15, 2006 09:30 PM (7RMSi)
22
That Australian TV station SBS (*spit*), is well known among us to be plainly anti american and anti australian, infested with commies and left wing lunatics, just that we are stupid enough to fund them and their poison.
Personally i think most Australians will just go about their business if a JDAM was to go completely off course all the way from iraq and, shock-horror, hit their SBS HQ (*hack-spit*) here in Sydney.
Just be sure to apologise and let the loony leftists squeal and run with spines in hand to the UN/EU for a week or two and the whole thing will just fizz away, the world will probably be a lot safer, not to mention outfits like BBC and CNN might suddenly find their spines and support the soldiers that give them the right to 'free speech'.
Posted by: MathewK at February 15, 2006 09:57 PM (pVHqF)
23
The irony is that while for days now CNN, along with most other major American news outlets, has literally cowered, and failed to show solidarity with their brethren news outlets and publications in Europe (who have had the courage to do so), and to stand up for "Freedom of Speech, and of Expression," repeatedly refusing to show the controversial Mohammed Danish cartoons, claiming that they did not want to “add more fuel to the fire” in a plethora of Wolf Blitzer “apologia,” no sooner had new pictures of the Abu Ghraib Prison scandal been made public by some “sleazy” Australian news channel, than Paula Zahn had it on her show within hours, complete with “dissident ex-serviceman” bashing our Military et al, without the least apparent qualm about any consequences: the lives it would cost, as happened with the first round of Abu Ghraib pictures with Nicholas Berg, or how many more of our Servicemen will be exposed to greater danger, and be killed as a result! That even in the face of the fact that it is not breaking news, that the case has been exhaustively investigated by the Pentagon and the Military, and all those that were involved in the scandal have been courtmarshalled, disciplined, reprimanded, or demoted!
I must say, that for CNN, Paula Zahn, and her fellow pundits, who were so overly "concerned" with accommodating Muslim sensitivities: “barbarity” and “intolerance,” when it came to showing innocuous Danish cartoons of Mohammed, to propagate these new Abu Ghraib pictures, which at any rate just basically show more of the same as those already published, is nothing but an abhorrent exercise in “ journalistic pornography,” and is totally unconscionable!!!
Perhaps the real reason that CNN, Blitzer, and Zahn did not wish to risk showing the pictures of the Mohammed cartoons was that they did not want to run the risk of being “personally” targeted, and their lives endangered by irate Islamists, for doing so, and so they hid under their desks.
But now, they scrambled to show the Abu Ghraib pictures, which they believe boosts their Liberal biased “political perspective” against the Administration and its policies, while generally not placing “THEIR” lives in danger (after all, how can it, since with it they aid the “Islamist Propaganda machinery, and Al Qaida?”), yet places the lives of our soldiers, and others working in Iraq, at greater risk. After all, if as a result of these pictures there are more American casualties, wouldn’t that also bolster their position of blaming it on what CNN Chief International Correspondent Christiane Amanpour openly calls the “failed policies” of the Administration in Iraq?!?!
The blood of every US casualty, every civilian death, and every beheading that results from Paula Zahn and CNN enthusiastically, needlessly, helping to disseminate these new Abu Ghraib pictures is on their hands!!!
How can we be expected to win the War on Terror, with such as these amongst us?!?!
It is appalling!!!
Althor
Posted by: Althor at February 15, 2006 11:06 PM (BJYNn)
24
The moral cowardice you all display is disgusting.
When an American institution acts in a certain way, we as Americans must accept the consequences, even if those consequences are a long time in coming and even if those consequences are not to our liking.
Your wild desire to rid yourselves of this burden borders on the treasonous. You are beneath contempt.
Posted by: Jon at February 16, 2006 02:26 PM (lNT5f)
25
oh please these animals deserve more than that compare to what they did to america give me a brake life goes on
Posted by: nikkie at February 16, 2006 11:58 PM (oX0Md)
26
The Americans have always been, and are, hobnobbing with the Muslim dictaors and rulers (including Saddam Hussain) so long as it is profitable for them. When it is inconvenient they will talk about democracy, threat to world peace because of WMD etc. Real humbugs. Now they are caught in a vicious cycle. They have been helping the Afghans against the USSR during the cold war period and the Iraqis when Saddam was their puppet. Now those Arabs have turned against them. Quite a logical end.History, recent history of the world, reveals the fact that the Americans have always been involved in the breach of world peace.
Posted by: a.sathyamurthy at February 22, 2006 07:52 AM (+6OYe)
More Things That Make Me Grab The Duct Tape
Uh... I forgot about the caption contest. Um... everyone gets a fatwa!!! And people think I'm not a compassionate conservative.
An Arrogance of Power
I'll let David Ignatius of the Washington Post write the opening paragraph for me, with just a couple of minor changes:
There is a temptation that seeps into the souls of even the most righteous politicians journalists and leads them to bend the rules, and eventually the truth, to suit the political needs of the moment. That arrogance of power is on display with the Bush administration American mainstream media.
Ignatius is writing, of course, about the MSM's hysterical behavior in the aftermath of Vice President Dick Cheney's hunting accident, though he thinks he's writing about the incident itself.
This is a press corps suffering a collective psychotic break, completely out of control; willing to do anything to reach its frustrated political goals.
more...
1
Still trying to determine what kind of choke Cheney was using on that 28ga gun He seems to have gotten close to 50% of his pellets (100-200) in an 18" ring at 30 yards. I myself have never gone over "improved cylinder" especially on something as fast as quail that I need a wide coverage on. On a lighter note I always get a little skeptical when news reports identify someone as "third hunter present". Also the owner of the ranch was quoted as saying alcohol was consumed. I don't know how Mrs Cheney feels about all of that, but I can tell you how a Mrs Ryan might feel about me going drinking and fishing with a babe 25 years younger than me. ouch !!
Posted by: john ryan at February 15, 2006 01:16 PM (TcoRJ)
2
Here's the inside story from my friends in the vast rightwing conspiracy. Cheney was doing shots from Mrs. Armstrong's navel while Dick's lesbian daughter watched. The Veep, staggering from the massive amounts of alcohol he had consumed, and with a used condom hanging from his zipper, twisted his gun's choke to maximum and deliberately shot his buddy because of a love triangle, then tried to get Mrs. Armstrong to cover the entire incident up. The plan was to helicopter the body to Massachusetts and throw it over the Chappaquidick bridge in an effort to implicate Teddy Kennedy, who was having a lurid homosexual affair with Barney, the Presidential scotty dog.
Fortunately, an intrepid reporter at the Corpus Christi Caller-Times was able to penetrate the plot by cleverly listening to a call from Mrs. Armstrong and the whole scheme blew up in Cheney's face.
Does that satisfy your hatred, john ryan? Did you get a chubby reading it?
3
A self-proclaimed Buddhist - that hunts? What's wrong with this picture.
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 03:57 PM (fyKFC)
4
Cheney's daughter is a ....... lesbian!
Wow! Sounds like grounds for resignation or impeachment to me!
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 03:59 PM (fyKFC)
5
If ya can't get victory - you might as well settle for a chubby - or a reasonable flacid facimile.
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 04:02 PM (fyKFC)
6
He' hunting for his mind and a place to bury before the wretched stench brings on Grizzl E Bear. The NYT has been covering his quest. They quoted him as he ran over a ridge and away from his mind "There's a gland in my organ! There's a gland in my organ!" Fade to a weenie Deanie sheep call.....EEEEEEAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!
Posted by: forest hunter at February 16, 2006 02:15 AM (Fq6zR)
Remember, this is a tiny minority of extremists. CBS News:
Gunfire and rioting erupted Wednesday as more than 70,000 people joined Pakistan's biggest protest yet against Prophet Muhammad cartoons, burning movie theaters, a KFC restaurant and a South Korean-run bus station....
1
It is a minority, but its not tiny. Read somewhere that the % threshold for potential domestic success(sic) of an aggressive violent minority movement (ex. radical islamic fascisism) is apx. 15% of the population. I suspect they are close to in in a number of muslim countries.
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 11:30 AM (fyKFC)
2
Given that more than 1/3 Muslims in Britain claim that English Jews are legitimate targets in the Pali/Israeli conflict, I suspect that the number is MUCH higher than that.
Posted by: Rusty at February 15, 2006 12:07 PM (JQjhA)
3
% in a muslim country is what matters. In Britain its mostly SOP BS - their version of acholol muscles.
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 12:26 PM (fyKFC)
4
iam ashamed. iam sure though these ppl arent doing this because of their "extreme religious beliefs", they just think its cool to look big and bad and they think their being made fun of.
like this is sensitive stuff. u dont go to a black guy and call him a nigger. u would get snuffed. this the same.
Posted by: a muslim canadian at February 15, 2006 06:12 PM (dYZrS)
Posted by: a muslim canadian at February 15, 2006 06:39 PM (dYZrS)
7
thts stupid i would tell. am not sure if this is true. but if it is it doesn`t have anything to do with islam,Islam doesn`t even accept stupid guys like those.I am muslim and am living in a neighbourhood made up of both muslims and christians we love each other and we all care about each other.those ppl are not muslims. Indeed they hate islam so they`re trying to make islam look bad.
Posted by: noname at February 15, 2006 07:17 PM (2WFPu)
8
u know usama bin ladin is not allowed to visit saudi arabia and all of the muslim countries. look at the pakistani army. they are teaming up with the us to find al zarqawi and beat him up.
Posted by: dodo at February 15, 2006 07:23 PM (2WFPu)
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi Sentenced to Death in Abstentia
It's a start. You may remember Abu Musab al-Zarqawi from such classic films as 'Nick Berg beheading' (in which he had the starring role as murderer) and 'blowing up shit' (which is now a weekly serial). Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq.
more...
Posted by: Howie at February 15, 2006 10:44 AM (D3+20)
2
I would imagine he expected to die for what he believes in long before he committed to any direct action. Maybe Batman can track him down - it's about the best we have to offer for any counter-message in the war of images and messages. Let's face it, it's just more exciting to see the burning and cyberhacking over cartoons than the slow turning wheels of Justice and its paper edicts. You know Zarqawi is peeing all over himself about now knowing Jordan wants him dead. Sorry for the cynicism, it's the next best thing to fighting back.
Posted by: goesh at February 15, 2006 11:13 AM (1w6Ud)
3
Its actually quite foolish to believe legal action and courts are an effective tool, let alone a deterrent, to a large fanatical cult movement eager to kill and die for its "cause".
Suspect Legal action in any country is solely for the purpose of some sort of bizzare self-justification, rationization, and intellectual amusement.
Its kind of like taking lots of aspirins for pain - just to avoid seeing the doctor and fear of surgery.
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 11:46 AM (fyKFC)
Question to "living document" advocates
If the Constitution is a "living document" which can be changed without amendment based on current social needs, then why did the Founders write it down? The British had (and still have) a 'living Constitution' that wasn't written. Surely if they believed the Constitution was 'flexible' then they would have adopted the British model, wouldn't they?
1
The "living document" theory of the Left is just that, a theory. It is obvious that the Founding Fathers never intended for the Constitution to be changed by the Courts, or why would they have put a mechanism in the Constitution that allows for change.
This is just another tactic used by the Left to USURP the Constitution of the United States of America, and it is illegal, no matter what the Left says. We should never have allowed change without using the mechanism for change that exists in the Constitution. And we should allow no more.
Posted by: jesusland joe at February 15, 2006 10:14 AM (rUyw4)
2
>>>...or why would they have put a mechanism in the Constitution that allows for change.
There is a mechanism by which the Constitution can be changed-- it's called ammendments. But that process requires popular support-- something the Left has zero hope of ever achieving. Thus their whoring it out to sympathetic judges.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 15, 2006 10:20 AM (paKD6)
3
Carlos,
I hear the Left constantly complaining about Congress giving up its power to the Executive Branch, but in truth the Congress has given up the majority of its power to the Judicial Branch.
The Judicial Branch is constantly making law that cannot gain the majority in Congress. This is wrong and is where the Congress has given over even its powers of budget making and taxation.
When a federal judge makes another obviously unconstitutional decision, the Congress has the power to remove that judge from office, but how many times has the Congress used that power? The unilateral power grap by the federal judiciary is the least reported event of the last century.
Posted by: jesusland joe at February 15, 2006 10:39 AM (rUyw4)
4
Only 2 of the current supreme court were appointed by democrats. Most people in polls no longer would support even the Bill Of Rights. For instance on the matter of bail for the presumed innocent the founding fathers were rather unambiguous on this matter. For certain they all had grave concerns about empowering the central federal government with too much power. Powers already granted to a "good" executive branch would be difficult to control in a "bad" executive branch. Even if we are certain that this power will be wisely used now who knows about the next regime ?
Posted by: john ryan at February 15, 2006 11:12 AM (TcoRJ)
5
- the burning and unanswered question is whether or not Scalia will go duck hunting with Cheney again??
Posted by: goesh at February 15, 2006 11:16 AM (1w6Ud)
6
Since "perfection" is a lofty and unattainable goal - you have two choices. a "living" constitution subject to the often whims of societal change that fluctuate like the winds - or a contitution written with an ammendment process designed to be demanding and difficult.
I'll take #2
John - I can't make any sense out of what you said!
Posted by: hondo at February 15, 2006 11:57 AM (fyKFC)
7
I have fun asking lefties if the Constitution is still a "living document" whenever they start complaining about Bush or the courts doing something they think is unconstitutional.
Posted by: Phillep at February 15, 2006 12:31 PM (Xg00m)
8
"Socialists have always spent much of their time seeking new titles for their beliefs, because the old versions so quickly become outdated and discredited." - Margaret Thatcher
Posted by: b at February 15, 2006 02:32 PM (tWlBT)
A bomb exploded Wednesday on a central Baghdad street, killing three girls and a boy walking to school, police and relatives said. The dead included two sisters and their brother.
[ ... ]
Police said the children were between the ages of 10 and 14 and included two sons and a daughter of Jamil Mohammed, a poor vendor who works in a nearby public market.
"We are poor people who has nothing to do with politics," the father sobbed at the local police station. "We only wanted to live a decent life. What is the guilt of my dead children? They were only heading to school. Now I am left with only two children. This is a disaster for my family."
First of all, does anyone at USAToday proofread? The first paragraph says "two sisters and their brother" were murdered. A couple paragraphs down, it says "two sons and a daughter" were murdered. Hello, USAToday, anybody home? In a WaPo story, three boys are reported to have been murdered.
If one reads several reports, a conclusion can be drawn that four children were murdered, three boys and a girl. Why can't the mainstream media get the numbers right? You tell me. I do know that the MSM are fairly much in unison at providing justification for the killings. Without exception, it's reported that a store which sold black-market liquor was bombed, among other stores, by the way. So, the MSM can't get the number of kids murdered right, but they sure can reach into the minds of the thug criminals and extract a motive to justify the bombing. You see a slant? I do.
Moving on, it has to be assumed that there's no room on the moderate Muslim protest schedule to express outrage at the murder of innocent children. On the other hand, it might be that murdering children doesn't meet the threshold criteria for outrage. Planned protests, I believe, are reserved for more significant criminal acts than the murder of children. Like cartoons.
1
More journalist have been killed covering Iraq then in Vietnam. The security situation there is not getting any better. It is often impossible or simply too dangerous to move around the country. There is really no place in the country except Kurdistan that is safe.
Posted by: john ryan at February 15, 2006 10:21 AM (TcoRJ)
2
John, you need to broaden your horizons and read more than the NYT.
Posted by: jesusland joe at February 15, 2006 03:47 PM (rUyw4)
3
How many journalists have been killed pontificating from their ivory towers at the Greenzone?
Are you somehow amazed that a guerilla insurgency that targets Iraqi citizens and foreigners for kidnap and execution, that has roadside bombs detonated to kill *anyone* not just military targets is a dangerous place?
The journalists would probably be better off if they didn't hire stringers hired from the midst of the terrorists.
Posted by: dave at February 15, 2006 04:18 PM (CcXvt)
4
Yes, children murdered by terrorists are fine and all, but DICK CHENEY SHOT A LAWYER!!!
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 15, 2006 05:57 PM (0yYS2)
5
These are the child killers they murder kids with abomb they are facless cowards
Posted by: sandpiper at February 15, 2006 08:59 PM (9NBAS)
