March 29, 2006
Canadian Blogger Forced to Apologize to Mullahs
Canadian blogger
Hossein Derakhshan was recently forced to apologize to the Mullahs before they would let him leave the Islamic Republic. Consider me
not shocked.
more...
Posted by: Rusty at
03:26 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 109 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I'm surprised they didn't murder him like they did with that Canadian reporter, Zahra Kazemi.
Good thing he got out of there alive!
Posted by: LC CanForce 101 at March 29, 2006 06:09 PM (3smJS)
2
I wonder what would have happened if he had refused?
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at March 29, 2006 07:44 PM (oxw/s)
3
He probably would have been hung from a crane to be made an example of as many other political dissidents in Iran have been.
If he was female, he'd likely have befallen the same fate as Ms. Kazemi (raped and beaten to death).
Posted by: LC CanForce 101 at March 29, 2006 07:58 PM (3smJS)
4
WorldSex Daily Updated Free Links to Hardcore Sex Pictures, Movies, Free Porn Videos and XXX Live Sex Cams
Posted by: SEXMENS at April 06, 2006 09:21 PM (P4bEs)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Why We Should Be Sad Charles Taylor Will be Brought to Justice?
Yes he's a war-criminal, but here is
the final word on Charles Taylor:
Yes, certain do-gooding goo-goos can cheer that "justice is being served," but if this becomes common proactice, how many hundreds of thousands will die needlessly because dictators understand that the deals they are being offered aren't worth the spit they will be signed with?
Indeed.
Posted by: Rusty at
03:14 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 81 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Rusty
Will be?????? I will be it when I see it - until then, let the UN, African Union, International Communiity show go on.
Taylor is scum - screw him - but let's let the above parties make a fool of themselves once again.
Posted by: hondo at March 29, 2006 05:08 PM (StM4D)
2
Wow! Mr. President of Nigeria Kudos!. How quickly your men got the job done. I wonder how this would have played out if the White House had not threatened to call off the scheduled summit! In a way, yes Mr. President you are 'vindicated' but only probably because the 'snob' from Big Brother Sam's officer would have been too high a price to pay for letting a mass murderer escape apprehension. Maybe a Charles Taylor in handcuffs and put behind bars will show the rest of us that no matter how much we may think of ourselves, we are still only human and the final word truly lies not in our hands or even in the hands of our spiritual advisors. The Almighty truly rules in the affairs of men... He can bring down the high and mighty anytime...
Posted by: esinu at March 29, 2006 07:58 PM (JylYt)
3
I live in the USA and have kept abrest of the Charles Taylor story. My Problem with the way this matter is being handled is I do not understand how this man will ever get a fair trial in Sierra Leone. I believe that the UN should take possession of this man and move him to a democratic country that has existed for many years and not one of these phoney proped up so called democracies. I would suggest that he be taken to the Hague and tried there or a special Un court in France or Sweden or Holland. Then I would believe that he would have a chance of getting a fair trial. Also, they have taken the funds that he had with him and those funds belong to him and should be placed in a special imprest account where he can hire the council or attorneys of his choice to defend him and have the funds to pay them. We must remember that many of the leaders of African nations came into power by way of the death of thousands. Charles Taylor is not the only "Warlord" who came into power of a country by way of the death of tens of thousands of innocent people. Look right now how many people, innocent children and women, not counting the men, are killed each day in some effort of some individual that wants to become the ruler of his country no matter what he has to do to take control. The whole world must get involved in every place where these awful murders of all these innocent people is occuring and we must come to a resolution that allows people to live in peace and safety and able to support and feed there families.
Posted by: Leonard Jeter at March 30, 2006 12:03 AM (D0Mrg)
4
Send him to the Hague? So he can die of old age before conclusion of the trial?
Posted by: Oyster at March 30, 2006 05:48 AM (YudAC)
5
I hope he gets some good old fashioned African justice, i.e., a burning tire around the neck.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 30, 2006 06:46 AM (0yYS2)
6
Improbulus Maximus, I think that may be the Haitian custom of "necklacing" that is so popular with Papa Doc, Baby Doc, Ton Ton Macoute(sp?) and Aristide's crew. It'd be much more entertaining if they'd put him and LRA's Joseph Kony in a Deathmatch, fighting to the death with sporks.
Then again, I may be wrong about the car tire thing. Libs won't support it, releasing all that foulness into the air, oh yeah, the smoke can get pretty nasty too.
'Pick
Posted by: icepick at March 30, 2006 08:46 PM (/QwmR)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Can we fight the long war?
So, the
Democrats have a 'plan' to win the war on terror? Unfortunately, their plan seems to be exactly what the Mullahs of Iran, and their Salaafist rivals of the Sunni extremist camp, all predict. Withdrawal from Iraq is exactly what they want.
Amir Taheri in the WSJ:
For the past several weeks Mr. Abbasi has been addressing crowds of Guard and Baseej Mustadafin (Mobilization of the Dispossessed) officers in Tehran with a simple theme: The U.S. does not have the stomach for a long conflict and will soon revert to its traditional policy of "running away," leaving Afghanistan and Iraq, indeed the whole of the Middle East, to be reshaped by Iran and its regional allies.
To hear Mr. Abbasi tell it the entire recent history of the U.S. could be narrated with the help of the image of "the last helicopter." It was that image in Saigon that concluded the Vietnam War under Gerald Ford. Jimmy Carter had five helicopters fleeing from the Iranian desert, leaving behind the charred corpses of eight American soldiers. Under Ronald Reagan the helicopters carried the corpses of 241 Marines murdered in their sleep in a Hezbollah suicide attack. Under the first President Bush, the helicopter flew from Safwan, in southern Iraq, with Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf aboard, leaving behind Saddam Hussein's generals, who could not believe why they had been allowed live to fight their domestic foes, and America, another day. Bill Clinton's helicopter was a Black Hawk, downed in Mogadishu and delivering 16 American soldiers into the hands of a murderous crowd.
According to this theory, President George W. Bush is an "aberration," a leader out of sync with his nation's character and no more than a brief nightmare for those who oppose the creation of an "American Middle East." Messrs. Abbasi and Ahmadinejad have concluded that there will be no helicopter as long as George W. Bush is in the White House. But they believe that whoever succeeds him, Democrat or Republican, will revive the helicopter image to extricate the U.S. from a complex situation that few Americans appear to understand.
Mr. Ahmadinejad's defiant rhetoric is based on a strategy known in Middle Eastern capitals as "waiting Bush out." "We are sure the U.S. will return to saner policies," says Manuchehr Motakki, Iran's new Foreign Minister.
And if the present batch of Democrats take the White House or Congress, they could be right.
Hat tip to Allah. No, not really, hat tip Bill at INDC.
Posted by: Rusty at
03:06 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 425 words, total size 3 kb.
1
We have to keep fighting until there are no muslims left. Extermination is the only option, because that's their plan for us, so we can't afford not to win.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 30, 2006 06:47 AM (0yYS2)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
We Didn't Start this War
Rob and American Future have more on the jihad started by Muhammed and which continues today.
Posted by: Rusty at
02:02 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 26 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Islam again. I can not stand Islam, and their boy Mo. It seems everyday there is something about those Muslim losers. It is like going home after work every day, and asking the wife what she cooked for dinner.
Honey, what's for supper? Meatloaf again?
Posted by: Leatherneck at March 29, 2006 02:38 PM (D2g/j)
2
Rusty, you are correct. The Muslims drew first blood.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 29, 2006 02:44 PM (rUyw4)
3
To all the limp liberals - you know - we could always blame it on the Jews - the muslims will buy that - along with many of your lefty friends.
Posted by: hondo at March 29, 2006 05:54 PM (StM4D)
4
Big Mo was a child rapist.
Posted by: Ayatrollah at March 29, 2006 06:26 PM (3AP/0)
5
A good muslim is a dead muslim.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 30, 2006 06:47 AM (0yYS2)
6
Maybe I wasn't paying attention but I thought Saddam and the Iraqis weren't involved in 9/11 and our war only drew Al Quida into Iraq after Saddam had outlawed them.
And then there was the whole Kuwait War Part 1 where we went in, guns drawn. Whene did Iraq attack us? It's like saying that a country can come invade the US because we have members within our borders of violent extremist groups, some of whom may have been tied to a large terrorist attack in another country.
Why aren't we in Saudia Arabia fighting? They were the ones who were aiding the 9/11 hijackers.
Posted by: Navajo Homeland Security at March 31, 2006 03:50 PM (hu96W)
7
Navajo Homeland Security,
Let's be honest. Iraq was Bush's chance to leave his legacy on America. What did he accomplish prior to 9/11? Nothing. You think this is about terrorism? It's about money, plain and simple, just like every other war. Ask yourself this question:
Why the hell is gas creeping towards $3 a gallon when we have an entire land mass rich with oil, half the size of the continental US that is not being utilized? (Alaska)
You think that Bush, an oil tycoon, didn't see this opportunity a mile away?
I'm not trying to draw a conspiracy. Yet there is much friction between the US friendly Arab & Muslim states in the Middle East and Iraq. Believe it or not, they would prefer stability over war, and Bush is attempting to provide this.
The big picture comes into focus. . .
Posted by: Garner at March 31, 2006 05:49 PM (dfrWc)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Morrissey: Canada = Hitler
Former
The Smiths frontman, Morrissey,
equates Canada to Hitler. Killing baby seals, killing Jews....six of one, half a dozen of the other.
Posted by: Rusty at
01:51 PM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
Post contains 30 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Who in the hell is Morrissey, and who are The Smiths? I've heard of The Whites, but The Smiths, nah!
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 29, 2006 02:02 PM (rUyw4)
2
Joe, you never heard of the Smiths? Yeesh, dude.
Looks like no one is safe from the Hitler label. Excuse me if the definition seems watered down these days.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 02:27 PM (rGS2g)
3
I do not understand why the world loves to kill those Jewish folks. Is it because they brought morality to the world? Perhaps, it is because they will not worship any false gods. Whatever it is, the world just can't seem to get enough of blowing up Jews. What a world.
Posted by: Leatherneck at March 29, 2006 02:45 PM (D2g/j)
4
HaHa The Pogues were the best band of the 80s and everyone knows it. Morrisey is a f'in freak.
Posted by: joey jojo at March 29, 2006 04:51 PM (aBQ9h)
5
I didn't know baby seals were kosher.
Posted by: hondo at March 29, 2006 05:12 PM (StM4D)
6
hondo!!!!!! Where have you been? And I didn't either.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 29, 2006 05:39 PM (rUyw4)
7
JJ - Busy
Submitting retirement papers in a month - have 2 disability claims to prepare for DA/VA.
Posted by: hondo at March 29, 2006 05:43 PM (StM4D)
8
Well, busy or not, I missed ya! And I don't think you saw that apology I made to you a few days ago. You sure do know those Euros, hondo. Haha!
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 29, 2006 06:32 PM (rUyw4)
9
joey jojo: The Pogues best song EVER was "Dirty Old Town". I
love that song.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 07:43 PM (YudAC)
10
Morrissey is Galic for sea shell. I thought you might want to know.
Posted by: Leatherneck at March 29, 2006 10:12 PM (D2g/j)
11
Letherneck: My head is already crammed with enough useless information. Thanx a lot. Now I have to discard some other useless tidbit to fit that one in. ;-)
Posted by: Oyster at March 30, 2006 08:11 AM (rGS2g)
12
Morresy is a idiot why dont he just get lost and SCREW GREENPEACE
Posted by: sandpiper at April 01, 2006 09:02 AM (uo3LX)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi to Personally Liquidate Osama
From the
Associated Press:
WASHINGTON - Congressional Democrats promise to "eliminate" Osama bin Laden and ensure a "responsible redeployment of U.S. forces" from Iraq in 2006 in an election-year national security policy statement.
Please pardon my skepticism, but this comes from a political party that represents those who
pretty much agree with Osama bin Laden.
Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.
Posted by: Bluto at
12:39 PM
| Comments (13)
| Add Comment
Post contains 81 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Will they also dish out witty one liners as they kill OBL with their bare hands?
Posted by: Rusty at March 29, 2006 12:43 PM (JQjhA)
2
Don't ask them hey're going to do it, Rusty... the important part is saying they will.
Posted by: Brian B at March 29, 2006 01:03 PM (rGfpg)
3
I think they'll kill him
with the one-liners. And I must say that I am
shocked, shocked I tell you that they openly advocate violating Osama's civil rights. What about the Geneva Conventions? Oh, the humanity...
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at March 29, 2006 01:04 PM (RHG+K)
4
One liners ? Osama has heard them before. The first time I heard them I believed them, now I am not so sure.
Posted by: john Ryan at March 29, 2006 01:25 PM (nkDPg)
5
We really ought to have a contest: What will Harry Reid say as he personally blasts OBL?
"Tell Satan Dirty Harry sent you!"
Posted by: Rusty at March 29, 2006 01:29 PM (JQjhA)
6
Stop me if you've heard this before:
How do you intend to stabilize Iraq to withdraw our troops?
I have a plan for Iraq
how do you intend to get the United Nations involved with Iraq?
I have a plan to get the United Nations involved in Iraq
How do you intend to fight the war on terror?
I have a plan to fight the war on terror
It's the John Kerry "I have a plan™ for < insert situation here>"
Welcome to the new plan, same as the last plan.
No details, nothing other than a promise.
Posted by: davec at March 29, 2006 01:34 PM (CcXvt)
7
I'm shocked too, Bluto. What? No trial? No ACLU lawyers? Where's Ramsey Clarke when you need him? Why Nancy Pelosihitler and harry Reidmarx are trying to turn us into a fascist state. I feel an uncontrollable urge to start an "imsorryosama.com" site to make sure he understands that we respect his right to exist.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 01:41 PM (rGS2g)
8
Right,left repubcrat or democan, we all have plans don't we? What a pack of fools on both sides. What would happen if all this absurd scapegoating stopped and someone actually took responsibility based on reality,not some dunderheaded political myth?
Posted by: whatthe at March 29, 2006 02:04 PM (VSHgb)
9
I'm still tryin' to figure this one out - if we re-locate out the enemy will come to us?
If we re-locate out - then it's totally out of the region - no one's gonna take us in (why would they).
OK - so let's re-locate back to the States! Weather is nicer and shopping and amenities much better. Let'em come! It would be a hell of a lot more efficent and easier cleaning up after a car/truck bombing when all the casualties speak English and most have health insurance. Works for me.
Posted by: hondo at March 29, 2006 05:24 PM (StM4D)
10
Maybe they meant that they plan to eliminate him from the dhimmicratic party?
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 30, 2006 06:48 AM (0yYS2)
11
The secret plan: Howard Dean and John Kerry get on Kerry's magical flying swiftboat and Kerry uses his Vietnam-senses (think Spider-senses) to detect where Osamma is. They descend and Dean uses his Hypersonic Scream of Justice to collapse the cave on Osamma.
Posted by: Ranba Ral at March 30, 2006 10:52 AM (GyNTD)
12
You mean they dont want to play a freindly game of checkers with his?
Posted by: sandpiper at April 01, 2006 09:04 AM (uo3LX)
13
WorldSex Daily Updated Free Links to Hardcore Sex Pictures, Movies, Free Porn Videos and XXX Live Sex Cams
Posted by: SEXMENS at April 06, 2006 09:24 PM (8RU62)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Google's Jawa Fatwa
Okay, so it's not a fatwa, but the fact that Google has found in necessary to put a content warning page on my
Flush the Koran blog leaves me all warm and tingly in a funny place. A
Koran in the toilet is offensive, but not
softcore porn (NSFW blogspot site)! It's almost like
Google was full of hypocrisy or something.....
UPDATE: Related
more...
Posted by: Rusty at
12:31 PM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
Post contains 69 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 12:34 PM (D3+20)
2
Content warning? Hey, it's a step in the right direction. I think this calls for a cocktail.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 01:26 PM (rGS2g)
3
What's wrong with the content?
Posted by: Leatherneck at March 29, 2006 02:52 PM (D2g/j)
4
Hey -- they list my site as being part of Jawa Report.
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at March 29, 2006 02:52 PM (LECsA)
5
Wow! cocktails on me! It's a slippery slope from content warning to fatwa. You're on your way, Rusty!
Posted by: Heroic Dreamer at March 29, 2006 03:00 PM (aH6Zf)
6
Where how? linky linky?
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 03:01 PM (D3+20)
7
Heroic D, I'll have a Captain and Coke.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 03:12 PM (rGS2g)
8
You know, now that I think about this a little more, will they put a content warning on all websites now that show the piss Christ? Or the elephant dung Virgin mary? Or the Joooo cartoons from just about every site from the Middle East?
Leatherneck, the content warning is on Rusty's Flush the Koran blog.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 03:19 PM (rGS2g)
9
The offensive thing is that everyone is oh-so-quick to photoshop the Koran in the toilet, but no one is willing to do the heavy lifting to actually order one and give it the appropriate watery burial.
Posted by: a4g at March 29, 2006 03:30 PM (X/md9)
10
Congratulations Rusty! Started out my day being called an assinine, ultra-conservative freak in the Nevada Appeal (or the Appall as we lovingly call it here locally)... Time for a cocktail indeed - only one more thing would perfect my day and that is an actual fatwa... Bring it on...
Posted by: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton at March 29, 2006 06:14 PM (ytltE)
11
I was kidding. However, I don't think there is anything wrong with it. There is so much crazy stuff going on in the world.
Posted by: Leatherneck at March 29, 2006 08:02 PM (D2g/j)
12
let's see: hate-inciting images leading to violence versus arousal-inciting images possibly leading to love.
where is the hypocrisy?
Posted by: cum on the bible at March 31, 2006 03:41 PM (hu96W)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Rahman Free and Safe at Last
To update
RustyÂ’s post here we have good news.
AP is reporting that Abdul is safely out of Afghanistan.
AP via Yahoo :KABUL, Afghanistan - An Afghan man who had faced the death penalty after converting from Islam to Christianity left Afghanistan Early Wednesday, according to a foreign legal expert closely connected to the case.
The official, who declined to be identified due to the sensitive nature of the case, said Abdul Rahman, 41, had been flown out of Afghanistan, but it was unclear to where.
Italian authorities said Wednesday that they had granted asylum to Rahman, who faced the death penalty for converting to Christianity.
The Italian authorities said Rahman could arrive in Italy as soon as Wednesday. Now he is reported to have arrived in Italy. Good news indeed. If we work hard we may be able to gain more freedom for Christians in Muslim nations. This man is only one of many who face persecution and death.
""If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under."
"No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women."
- Ronald Reagan
Just as correct now as ever. Credit is also due the Catholic Church, Pope Benedict and the nation of Italy for their hard work. Also to Afghanistan for moving one step closer to freedom.
more...
Posted by: Howie at
10:52 AM
| Comments (32)
| Add Comment
Post contains 257 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Great! Something good happens for a change. Hallelujah!!!!
Posted by: n.a. palm at March 29, 2006 11:21 AM (LIokd)
2
According to the Italian Prime Minister Mr Berlusconi, Abdul Rahman has arrived in Italy yesterday and is staying at a top secret location. Thank God for that!
Posted by: enzo at March 29, 2006 11:34 AM (7BIKb)
3
>>>top secret location
gee, I wonder why. Perhaps it's all those buddhists and hindus who want him murdered.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 29, 2006 11:39 AM (8e/V4)
4
Well, he is a threat, after all...
Exposing the 8th century mullahcracy that apparently runs Afghanistan when the World's flashlight isn't shining on them could be... bad for business.
Posted by: heldmyw at March 29, 2006 12:23 PM (LvGT1)
5
It's good to know that he's out of Afghanistan safely. However I don't think the country has taken a step towards freedom. Rahman was only spared because of international pressure. As with many of these cases, he was informed on by someone holding a grudge. What may very well happen now is that these cases will no longer be reported to the Afghan authorities but rather straight to the clerics who'll take swifter, quieter action.
Posted by: Graeme at March 29, 2006 12:41 PM (wSwVN)
6
Oh Graeme you are so right. I wish you weren't. At least the government took a small step in this case at great risk. We'll see what the reaction is. This case worked out left and right, free nations standing together like the cold war. When we do that we have a good chance to get things done. When I was younger people from Soviet nations were news seeking asylum. I feel we can do the same now against a different form of oppression.
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 12:53 PM (D3+20)
7
Well, now that the Christian right has landed their poster boy, letÂ’s see what theyÂ’ve gotten in the bargain (lifted from the current edition of Time)
"The picture painted by the local police who arrested him shows a candidate not quite ready for family values. Rather, a portrait emerges of a deadbeat dad with psychological problems who couldn't hold down a job, abused his daughters and parents and didn't pay child support.
From Colonel Mohammed Saber Monseffi, the chief crime officer at the 15th district police station in Kabul, after Abdul Rahman was brought in for questioning after a domestic dispute turned violent late last month, "He told me, 'I'm a Christian,' and I said that is not of any interest to me. I asked him why did you beat your father, why did you beat your daughters?"
From his teenage daughters Mariam and Maria, aged 13 and 14 "He behaves badly with us and we were threatened and disgraced by him. He has no job and has never given me a stitch of clothing or a crust of bread. Just his name as a father."
A statement by his mother Ghul Begum reads: "We brought up his children and for eight years he didn't come home."
This is THE Christian?
Posted by: Cosmos at March 29, 2006 01:14 PM (UHKaK)
8
So Cosmos will be the first in line to "Tear him to Pieces". These statments also come from those who seek to have him killed. Nothing more Nasty or less credible than statements during a family dispute.
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 01:30 PM (D3+20)
9
Also these kids were five and six a lot of ideas can be put in a younsters head in eight years.
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 01:33 PM (D3+20)
10
OK welcome to all christians fleeing Islam !! let's see about 1 million in Dafur will we welcome them to our shores ? I think there may be quite a lot of Christians facing persecution in muslim countries that would like to leave. This would be a good time since we are about to grant a massive amnesty anyway.
Posted by: john Ryan at March 29, 2006 01:34 PM (nkDPg)
11
Howie:
I'm not advocating tearing him to pieces or having him killed; I'm just pointing out the simple truth that it pays to bone up on inconvenient facts before making someone your hero. If blogs are really about truths the pointy-headed MSM refuses to shed light on, then you gotta be able to live with both edges of the sword.
P.S. If this guy were a Christian who donned a turban and converted to Islam, would anyone here be quite so relieved that he'd escaped persecution?
Posted by: Cosmos at March 29, 2006 01:40 PM (UHKaK)
12
Rather than take them all we could advocate for freedom and take those we can take. I guess the lefties would rather not stand up fof their values. Attacking the right has become such a habbit they have forgotten their roots.
OH and I'm not conservative Christian as you imagine. I'm a moderate Christian Reagan Republican with conservative Democrat parents from a rural conservative Democratic district. I know the real Democrats and they would like to drop the nutso part of the party like a hot rock.
So cosmos solution would be to leave him as his redemption is false he is disqualified from salvation or our help because of his past. just becuase we took up his cause he is our "poster boy or hero". So what's the deal? Is it because the right wanted to help him it must be a farce? If the left were fighting as hard for his freedom they would crow all day long. Jealousy is an ugly thing we have outdone them at thier own game and rather than say good job they attack as usual.
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 01:44 PM (D3+20)
13
Cosmos,
Would he have the problem if he converted back to Islam? No we wouldn't, he'ld go back home and resume his life. We wouldn't be hearing about it.
Posted by: Marcus Aurelius at March 29, 2006 01:52 PM (ffPYG)
14
Cosmos, the point is that he was going to be put to death for converting. That is maybe an inconvenient fact, but a fact nonetheless. If he's a lousy dad then his wife has a right to divorce him even under Sharia law. It's quite easy I hear. If he abused his family then jail him for that abuse; not call for his death because he converted from Islam.
He's not anyone's "hero", but he is a symbol of everything that's wrong in the Middle East. You first sounded more like you were advocating for his dire situation because he's an asshole and insinuated that we would defend his social behavior. Last I heard there was nothing even in the UN Charter that advocates death for being an asshole.
This is information that should be known,
if true, but no one here has relegated him to "hero" status. Even assholes are allowed to walk free.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 01:57 PM (rGS2g)
15
Oyster: Had he been given over to the Mullahs they would attack us for supporting a bad government. Damned if you do damned if you don't, typical.
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 02:01 PM (D3+20)
16
No question, death is a little, er, harsh for being an asshole; but did you read the main post I was responding to?
My God, this guy was made out to be a combination of Nelson Mandela and Ghandi, "suffering for his beliefs." Of course I dont' think the guy should be put to death for being a deadbeat and a dick to his family. But let's not deify -- or vilify -- the man any more then neccessary to make our points, shall we? Again and again, I'm told this is the failing of the MSM ... and here it show up on the blogosphere's doorstep!
Posted by: Cosmos at March 29, 2006 02:12 PM (UHKaK)
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 02:16 PM (D3+20)
18
The most interesting thing you've said in weeks.
Posted by: Cosmos at March 29, 2006 02:18 PM (UHKaK)
19
I still don't see how you say I deified the man, whine to yahoo or AP. I don't blog to please anyone but Rusty and myself so that dart missed the target altogether. Nice try.
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 02:27 PM (D3+20)
20
Well, good luck with that then.
Posted by: Cosmos at March 29, 2006 02:37 PM (UHKaK)
21
Thanks, and sorry but please show me what
I wrote that upset you. He has become a symbol. I am glad he's free as I've followed this and done several posts on him. So if I'm giddy that he made it out it's because I feared what might have been. I'll not be sorry for being happy about the outcome.
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 02:49 PM (D3+20)
22
My opinion, regardless of his family life, still stands. We fight for the right of our fellow citizens to continue to enjoy freedom of speech and religion no matter how vehemently we disagree or how disguted they may make us feel, but it doesn't mean we would relegate any of them to a status of more than a fellow human. I think you misread Howie's intent. We are all gleeful that he is free from the threat of death. Just as relieved as we were of the CPT hostages who might have well just slapped us in the face. It still doesn't diminish the seriousness of what they were faced with.
Again, I appreciate your wanting to impart that information, but it doesn't change anything.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 02:56 PM (rGS2g)
23
Nah, I'm not upset. at all, just didn't want to keep beating it. I was just trying to make the point that this guy is, by at least a few accounts, pretty shaky in the Christianity department -- turns out Rahman is kind of an asshole, just like the rest of us. So instead of setting this story up as a "Christian Escapes" tale, let's celebrate the fact a guy that needed help got it. Probably a pretty find point anyway!
Posted by: Cosmos at March 29, 2006 03:11 PM (UHKaK)
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 03:17 PM (D3+20)
25
>>>>before making someone your hero.
We didn't make him our hero. YOU made him our hero! lol!
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 29, 2006 03:20 PM (8e/V4)
26
Welcome any Michelle Malkin readers. Holy cow, I'm giddy now baby! Thanks to Michelle for the linky linky as well.
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 03:35 PM (D3+20)
27
Cosmos: you don't want to set this story up as a "Christian escapes" tales because Rahman is apparently far from perfect - I don't think anyone has set this up as a Christian story.
Rahman was going to be put to death for apostasy - apostasy meaning the renunciation of the Muslim faith. His conversion to Christianity was sort of icing on the cake, or salt in the wound, depending on how you look at it.
This is about freedom of religion in Afghanistan. Did we fight and "win the war" in Afghanistan so that the new government could turn around and do exactly what the Taliban did - forbid people do believe what they want to believe?
Rahman's story has a happy ending because freedom of religion prevailed. But will it be just an exception because of all of the media attention? Will the Muslims ever lay off and just allow people to have their own beliefs?
Posted by: Heroic Dreamer at March 29, 2006 03:42 PM (aH6Zf)
28
Three thoughts; I wouldnt' say freedom of religon prevailed; rather this fellow was allowed to leave. There is still no freedom of religion in Afghanistan. Secondly, I would disagree that we have won the war in Afghanistan. Fighting continues, Al Queda is still floating around, and according to some, regaining footholds in areas they had access to under the Taliban. Thirdly, no, the most extreme Muslims -- including Islamic governance -- will probably not lay off because they are, well ... extreme, dangerously literal interpreters of the Koran.
Posted by: Cosmos at March 29, 2006 04:35 PM (UHKaK)
29
A collection of negative analysis statements - yet no conclusion is offered?
Have a lil' courage - say it - run, surrender, quit, give up, its hopeless, we're beaten, etc.
Having a difficult time taking a stand stand?
Posted by: hondo at March 29, 2006 05:33 PM (StM4D)
30
Cosmos: I agree with you on all three points in the comment directly above.
But what point are you making earlier when you complain that Rahman is being "deified," or that he is a Christian poster boy etc.? And that he is unworthy of being a poster boy?
He is in many ways just a bit player in the larger story of freedom v. tyrrany. His story is one where his freedom to believe escapes the death sentence. In this sense, it is a step in the right direction.
Posted by: Heroic Dreamer at March 29, 2006 05:36 PM (aH6Zf)
31
I'm glad Rahmann's safe, but I wish that it had been the U.S. that stepped up and offered asylum...
Posted by: Lonevoice at March 29, 2006 07:18 PM (utb8z)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
32 Bad Guys, Two Good Guys Killed in Afghanistan
We are at war with the Taliban, yet
Yale has no problem admitting a Taliban spokesman as a student. I wonder if Goebbels would have been admitted in 1943? God Bless our soldiers fighting in Afghanistan and may those who gave the ultimate sacrifice rest in peace.
Forbes:
Militants attacked a coalition forces base in southern Afghanistan on Wednesday, sparking a fierce battle that killed 32 suspected Taliban militants and two troops - one American and one Canadian, officials said.
The battle in Helmand province's Sangin district also wounded three Canadian soldiers, Canadian Brig. Gen. David Fraser told reporters at a base in southern Kandahar city. In addition, a U.S. military statement said an American soldier was hurt.
The fighting was the deadliest in months and highlights the threat rebels still pose four years after the Taliban was ousted by U.S.-led coalition forces. Direct attacks on foreign bases are unusual, and Wednesday's assault comes after the Taliban warned of a renewed offensive this year.
Posted by: Rusty at
09:11 AM
| Comments (19)
| Add Comment
Post contains 181 words, total size 1 kb.
1
16 to 1 isn't bad odds. Get bigger bombs and make it 100 to 1. The fact that they are attacking in mass means they are being trained, probably in Iran. Iran has got to be next.
Posted by: 10ksnooker at March 29, 2006 09:27 AM (7evkT)
2
If this is an example of a renewed offensive, they haven't learned much. Direct attacks on the coalition are not a bad strategy for the coalition.
Posted by: Javapuke at March 29, 2006 09:54 AM (z1nSd)
3
I think a more important question might be "how did he ever get a visa?" I am more troubled by the fact that he was allowed INTO the United Staes then where he is going to school. Shouldn't his name have been on the no-fly list ? That must have been a great flight across the Atlantic for the person making conversation with him "So Sayed what did you do before gettting into Yale ?"
Posted by: john Ryan at March 29, 2006 09:58 AM (TcoRJ)
4
Now you're thinking, John Ryan. I've asked this question, and have been told that bureaucrats at the Embassy in Islamabad issued a visa for this guy. Why he wasn't on a no-fly list is another good question. I've tried to find that out to no avail. Contact your congressman. Perhaps you will have better luck than I had from my Democratic congressman.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 29, 2006 10:08 AM (rUyw4)
5
Those afghan muslimes are probably pussed off because Addul Rahman got away. But hey, at least they're coming out of their holes and caves to attack fortified positions in force.
Sounds like a great plan to me.........
Posted by: n.a. palm at March 29, 2006 10:16 AM (LIokd)
6
Actually, I think both issues are important in regards to Hashemi's presence. One being,
What official thought it was a good idea to give him the stamp of approval?" and the other being,
"What the hell is wrong with our universities?" Another good question is who offered him university admittance besides Yale? Yale admits to competing for one other person of questionable character, and losing much to their dismay, although they won't say who it was. It's almost like a competition on who can have the most controversial person on their student rolls.
They don't just hand out "student" visas to people who haven't even applied to a university. It's not like Hashemi just wandered into the country on a "visitor" visa and then decided to go to school.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 10:27 AM (rGS2g)
7
32 dead Muslims? Now that's a good start
Posted by: Andy at March 29, 2006 10:31 AM (tMU4W)
8
Oyster, after some research, Hashemi was aided by a group of liberals from Jackson, Wyoming. They run an organization called The International Education Foundation. (www.intedfoundation.org)
Go to their web site and see what appeasement looks like. It is in living color.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 29, 2006 11:02 AM (rUyw4)
9
Yes a great victory for the mujahadbeens or at least I expect them to claim that any minute now. In a way it is they dug up 32 suckers that we made to die for their cause.
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 12:05 PM (D3+20)
10
JJ, I went to that site and found some pretty amazing propaganda to promote Hashemi in order to solicit funds:
"In the spring of 2001 he came to the U.S. for a series of talks to try and bridge the growing gulf between the moderate Taliban and the U.S. government." Get that? The "moderate" Taliban.
And this:
"He speaks four languages, is married with two small children, and his hobby is "gravitational theory as it applies to astrophysics."" Amazing! A fourth grade education and this is his "hobby"? hahaha.
This was almost their entire pitch to raise $10K for his "summer education" and Yale nearly guaranteed him a full scholarship if he could only improve his English enough to keep up with reading requirements.
My mouth is still hanging open.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 01:19 PM (rGS2g)
11
No doubt all these "facts" were used to gain Hashemi entry into the US. I still haven't found out how Yale entered into all this, or even how they knew about this guy, but I imagine one of the moonbats in Wyoming is a Yale graduate with some connections. I'm bound to find out. Stay tuned.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 29, 2006 02:55 PM (rUyw4)
12
JJ as I understand when he was in Pakistan he met some Yale Grads there and they helped him get started.
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 02:57 PM (D3+20)
13
Howie and Oyster,
There is a wealth of information out there on this group of moonbats and the International Education Foundation. Mike Hoover, the founder of this organization, was active as a free lance reporter in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation. He is better known as a filmmaker.
Tat Maxwell, another of the IEF supporters, just recently led protests against Vice President Cheney when he returned to Wyoming after his hunting accident. She and about five others protested his visit to Jackson Hole.
Robert Schuster, a personal injury lawyer, is also a supporter of the IEF and the DNC. If you want, oyster, you can go to his website, but it is nothing more than the typical personal injury lawyer site. Apparently he met Hoover after representing Hoover in a wrongful death action. Hoover's wife was killed in a helicopter crash in 1994 along with the rest of the passengers and crew, except for Mike Hoover.
It is possible that a former CBS News reporter by the name of Kurt Lohbeck also participates in IEF, but I am not sure yet. I will find out.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 29, 2006 03:42 PM (rUyw4)
14
JJ needs a password methinks.
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 03:56 PM (D3+20)
15
MSM headlines all have quite a different spin on this one. Negative Framing all the way around.
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 04:01 PM (D3+20)
16
Still all - it takes a lotta juice for getting him into Yale - the answer is there along with the trail to his "sponsors".
Posted by: hondo at March 29, 2006 05:38 PM (StM4D)
17
hondo, some of these guys, Hoover and Lohbeck both, had close ties to the CIA. I think you have to look no further than that to find the grease.
Welcome back!
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 29, 2006 05:48 PM (rUyw4)
18
Wow, good work, Joe. The only thing is, when you dig deep enough to get to the gist of an issue, it can get pretty depressing finding out that there are so many far left whack-jobs in this country who work very hard to undermine everything that made this country great. Sometimes I just wanna cry.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 07:58 PM (YudAC)
19
Yes, Oyster, it makes you want to give up, but I have three children, and I want them to grow up with a chance to live in a decent world. And I marvel at the information and power we regular people have at our fingertips. A few years ago we were not able to counter anything the liberal media said, and now look at the power we have. I am now hopeful, rather than hopeless.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 29, 2006 08:10 PM (rUyw4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
WTW Apostate Howie
Yes I’ve been you know a bit bored with being Baptist and I’ve been looking for a “Death Cult” to join you know mid life crisis. I’ve been seeking danger and generally missing being young and stupid. So I tried the Satanists but they wanted me to strangle a live kitten to gain power and hey man I just won’t go there.
So after hearing all the cool stuff about Islam, I thought, hey next best thing.
I mean you can rip off, screw over, lie to, and blow up infidels whenever things donÂ’t all go just your way. ItÂ’s so much more fun than pesky Christianity. You know all that admit itÂ’s your fault, no sin, and treat people well stuff. ItÂ’s hard. Plus add to the fact I can abdicate my responsibility for my wife and children with just three words!
Rape hot Infidel women with impunity. So I decided to convert to Islam.
Here Goes, the following events occurred yesterday at the Tatooine Bureau between 8 am and 9 amÂ….
more...
Posted by: Howie at
09:05 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 534 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Whew ! Howie, good thing Rusty was there to remind YBP to let you up, otherwise you and old St. Pete would be meeting face to face. That would have been a little awkward to explain how you died. "Yeah, I was getting RE-baptized and they kinda forgot to let me up" I can see St. Peter rolling around on the clouds laughing his rump off.
Hey, maybe that's where thunder really comes from, St. Peter ROFLAO when someone dies in a really stupid manner.
Posted by: memphis761 at March 29, 2006 09:47 AM (D3+20)
2
You forgot the part where your fellow Muslims issue a death sentence for being dunked.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 10:37 AM (rGS2g)
3
Yikes. Now that Howie has left islam, it is now the duty of good muslims everywhere to kill him. Sorry, but them's the rules, apparently.
Posted by: Insomniac at March 29, 2006 10:46 AM (IEpte)
4
Yes you can divorce them quite easily but you know they are rather expensive to replace. When I lived in Afghanistan the bride price was about 1500 dollars. About 5 years pay for a common man.Now she would come with a dowry, but that leaves with her on divorce, they have a much lower rate of divorce than here in the USA.Death in childbirth is common, so if you can afford it is good to have a spare.
Posted by: john Ryan at March 29, 2006 10:46 AM (TcoRJ)
5
John do you have
any sense of humor at all?
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 02:10 PM (D3+20)
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 04:32 PM (D3+20)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
It's Official: Our Afghan Allies Are Fascists
I guess the only positive way to spin the story that the Afghani Parliament is demanding that Abdul Rahman remain in the country so he can receive punishment for apostasy is that at least they're
our SOBs. Between the Taliban and the new fascist leaders of Afghanistan who are pro-American, I'll take the latter.
AP:
Afghanistan's parliament demanded Wednesday that the government prevent a man who faced the death penalty for abandoning Islam for Christianity from being able to flee the country.
Abdul Rahman was released from prison Monday after a court dropped charges of apostasy against him because of a lack of evidence and suspicions he may be mentally ill.
"We sent a letter and called the Interior Ministry and demanded they not allow Abdul Rahman to leave the country," parliamentary speaker Yunus Qanooni told reporters on behalf of the entire body.
BBC:
The issue was discussed in the Afghan parliament on Wednesday, with almost all MPs in agreement that "his leaving Afghanistan must be prohibited", the AFP news agency reported.
Dr Assadullah Hymatyar, an MP from Logar province, told the BBC that parliament was planning to investigate the events that led to Mr Rahman's release.
"We will ask the judge to explain to us why he was released. In the beginning they said he was mentally fit. So why is he mentally unfit now?" he asked.
"If he is really mentally unfit than that's a separate issue. But if not we will ask the judge why he allowed international pressure to influence him."
Posted by: Rusty at
08:11 AM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
Post contains 268 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I think the problem is it's the religion.
Posted by: 10ksnooker at March 29, 2006 08:38 AM (7evkT)
2
>>>>Our Afghan Allies Are Fascists
You mean they're muslim.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 29, 2006 08:41 AM (8e/V4)
3
>>>>>> Our Afghan allies are Fascists ? Italy offerred him asylum. The USA refused to; it might have upset our allies.
Posted by: john Ryan at March 29, 2006 11:27 AM (TcoRJ)
4
>>>The USA refused to
really? He asked, and was REFUSED? Source please.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 29, 2006 11:31 AM (8e/V4)
5
We refused? Are you sure of that. I think Italy did becuase of the involvement of the Catholic Chruch. Worse comes to worse we should take him threats, problems and all.
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 11:33 AM (D3+20)
6
Looking at this post carefully, I wonder if it isn't a hoax...
Parliamentary speaker Yunus Qanooni, "You Noose Ka-Nooney"? Ok. Maybe.
Howsabout Dr. Assadullah Hymatyar? "Ass a dulla"? C'mon. What were his parents thinking? And what do they call him 'for short'?
Granted, the action and language DOES sound like something that would come from a rabid, backward, theocracy, but even that seems a little 'over the top'.
It's a hoax. Look around fors Seymour Butts, Claude Balls and Amanda Hugenkiss.
Posted by: heldmyw at March 29, 2006 12:32 PM (LvGT1)
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 01:24 PM (rGS2g)
8
As I've said before; a good muslim is a dead muslim.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 30, 2006 06:49 AM (0yYS2)
9
WorldSex Daily Updated Free Links to Hardcore Sex Pictures, Movies, Free Porn Videos and XXX Live Sex Cams
Posted by: SEXMENS at April 06, 2006 08:36 PM (NwhNX)
10
What is the most important information I should know about Clonazepam?
• Use caution when driving, operating machinery, or performing other hazardous activities. Clonazepam will cause drowsiness and may cause dizziness. If you experience drowsiness or dizziness, avoid these activities.
• Use alcohol cautiously. Alcohol may increase drowsiness and dizziness while you are taking Clonazepam. Alcohol may also increase your risk of having a seizure.
• Do not stop taking Clonazepam suddenly. This could cause seizures and withdrawal symptoms. Talk to your doctor if you need to stop treatment with Clonazepam.
What is Clonazepam?
• Clonazepam is in a class of drugs called benzodiazepines. Clonazepam affects chemicals in your brain that may become unbalanced and cause seizures.
• Clonazepam is used to treat seizures.
• Clonazepam may also be used for purposes other than those listed in this medication guide.
Posted by: CLONAZEPAM at April 08, 2006 09:38 AM (k6n96)
Posted by: Ingrid at May 12, 2006 01:35 PM (caxYi)
12
Thank you!
http://drlfokux.com/xelx/uhxj.html | http://hzffdnir.com/scap/myet.html
Posted by: Gina at May 12, 2006 01:35 PM (oxn//)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
March 28, 2006
Nuking Mecca Back on the Table
Remember that whole
nuking Mecca uproar I caused awhile back? Knowing that the
Saudis are developing nukes just adds a whole new dimension to it.
more...
Posted by: Rusty at
08:16 PM
| Comments (18)
| Add Comment
Post contains 101 words, total size 1 kb.
1
All of the middle-east is going to attempt to buy, or produce their own Nuclear weapons. Emboldened by Iran, and the non-response from the West, everyone will attempt to acquire them.
The argument will be, well Iran has the bomb, and as we have the right to self-defense by having our own nuclear deterrent.
Posted by: davec at March 28, 2006 08:22 PM (CcXvt)
2
A hypernuclear proliferation is likely to result in the use of nuclear weapons. God only knows what will happen to the World.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 28, 2006 08:32 PM (rUyw4)
3
countdown to liberal that believes his
superior intellect is needed to point out the United States is the only country to have ever used a Nuclear Weapon, starting now.
I nominate John Ryan, the math obsessed, equate everything with something the U.S does/has done, super hippy to be first.
Posted by: davec at March 28, 2006 08:51 PM (CcXvt)
4
The world will be a juster place if/when every country has the bomb.
Posted by: Kiumars at March 28, 2006 08:54 PM (4mH9A)
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 28, 2006 09:01 PM (rUyw4)
6
Well thanks davec. Sometimes the math is a little dry of emotion., so I will try to put a little humor in this one just for you. So about the math OK here goes Your statement that "the United Staet is the only country to have used a nuclear weapon" well the math on that is wrong lol we actually used 2 nuclear weapons. And of course Pakistan has had nuclear capability and was directly responsible for advancing Iran's capability. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_weapons#Iran this wikipedia article ws interesting especially the section on the crude South African bombs that they built in the late 1970's. A gun type bomb where the fissile material reached critical mass by being fired together so no need for sophisticated electronic detonation.
Posted by: john Ryan at March 28, 2006 11:47 PM (TcoRJ)
7
oh and also the first Indiand test back in 1974 the code name for that test was "smiling buddha"
Posted by: john Ryan at March 28, 2006 11:50 PM (TcoRJ)
8
If these countries had even an ounce of inteligence, they'd all see what a horrible idea a nuclear armed Middle East is. Look at the level of restraint used so far with just conventional and chemical weapons. If this does happen (God, US and Israel forbid) it will be a cycle of constant nuclear testing anytime someone has a point to make, like India and Pakistan. Even if one is silly enough to believe that all the region wants is nuclear "energy", where are the environmentalists? Anytime someone proposed a new power plant in the US or Europe or moved a truckload of waste, Greenpeace was right there with their banners and shouting.
In the interest of making my arguments sound better, I shall employ the John Ryan formula of utilising random facts which happen to fall under the same category as the topic, but at the same time are unrelated to it. Here it goes: For weapons, Pu-240 is regarded as a serious contaminant and it is not feasible to separate Pu-240 from Pu-239. An explosive device could be manufactured using plutonium extracted from low burn-up reactor fuel, but any significant proportions of Pu-240 in it would make it dangerous to the bomb makers, as well as unreliable and unpredictable. Typical plutonium recovered from reprocessing used power reactor fuel has about one-third non-fissile isotopes (mainly Pu-240).
Posted by: Graeme at March 29, 2006 05:34 AM (UJ+fk)
9
Soon, very soon, everyone will understand why we don't let monkeys have guns. Of course, by then it'll be a moot point, because we'll all be sifting through the ruins of civilization looking for something to eat, while running from mobs of cannibals. Well, maybe most people will be sifting and running; I'll be on the greatest safari ever.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 29, 2006 05:45 AM (0yYS2)
10
Graeme, you SHOULD have been a mathmetician. Haha! Or perhaps a career in nuclear technology would be in order. Or if that fails, I suggest a career as a politician.
I only say this because my oldest son has a major in mechanical engineering with a minor in nuclear technology.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 29, 2006 07:25 AM (rUyw4)
11
Actually JJ, the plutonium info comes from the Uranium Information Centre. My field is petroleum engineering, specifically, the production aspect. I'm severely allergic to politics and mathematics.
Posted by: Graeme at March 29, 2006 07:46 AM (wSwVN)
12
Actually, I alwasy favored invasion of Mecca. Take the moonrock and set it at ground zero in NY. Make the bastards pray towards Time Square.
Posted by: Jones at March 29, 2006 08:01 AM (SJ35d)
13
Ok, Graeme, I'm allergic to those two career paths myself, as I chose geology for my major. I work for a small oil company and have been doing nothing but oil and gas leasing for the past six months. What a pain that is. And here in Arkansas(where I have been for the past few months) it is even worse than most places because the land owner can sell mineral rights, royalties, parts of each or both, and the mineral rights are forever separated from the land. After a few generations, you can well imagine what a pain it is to find all the heirs and get them to sign leases.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 29, 2006 08:26 AM (rUyw4)
14
Graeme I do not think that Greenpeace would be allowed to demonstrate in either Iran or Saudi Arabia. These countries are not democracies.
Posted by: john Ryan at March 29, 2006 08:42 AM (TcoRJ)
15
Leave it to john to take the math challenge and apply it where there is no math. To go from "the United States is the only country to have used a nuclear weapon" to
that's wrong, they used two weapons is totally wrong. The logic does not follow. At all. And I sincerely hope that the fact that it doesn't follow is the "humorous" part.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 08:47 AM (rGS2g)
16
However, John Ryan, Greenpeace could demonstrate against Iran and Saudi Arabia at various locations around the World, such as embassies and cultural centers of these two states. If Greenpeace had any credibility that is.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 29, 2006 09:05 AM (rUyw4)
17
Use it before we lose it, or before some other one of these tiny places looses it on one of our cities. Iran without Tehran might be a country that decides the nuke is no longer worth pursuing.
Posted by: Ernie Oporto at March 29, 2006 11:05 AM (/lpvu)
18
Just once I would like to see the reason America used nukes to end WWII.
Here it goes: Truman used nukes on Japan, because it was believed it would cost America one million men to take Japan. One million. That is a lot of dead Americans, and I am glad Truman was in office to do the right thing, not some little girl like Clinton.
Posted by: Leatherneck at March 29, 2006 03:19 PM (D2g/j)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Declassified Iraqi Intel Documents Reveal Ties to French State Owned Oil Company
Another translated Iraqi intel document has been released which implicates a French state run oil company in efforts to stop the U.S. led invasion of Iraq. Document:
ISGZ-2004-028179 as
translated here ties two European businessmen convicted in France's largest corruption scandal to the Saddam Hussein regime. The first is Loik Le Floch-Prigent, the former head of the French state owned oil company Elf-Aquitaine, convicted of fraud and bribery late in 2003. His conviction revolved around a scandal involving bribes and kickbacks to various corrupt oil rich governments around the world. His conviction also implicated the Socialist government of Francois Mitterrand in the scandal. Because Elf-Acquitaine is a state owned enterprised, it has long been thought to be a
secret arm of French diplomacy.
In 1994, under the leadership of Loik Le Floch-Prigent, the French oil company negotiated lucrative contracts with Iraqi Oil Minister Safa al-Habobi, giving Elf-Acquitaine exclusive rights to the Majnoon oil fields on the border with Iran. Another French government owned company, Total SA--which would later merge with Elf-Acquitaine--was given rights to another oil field. The contracts were worth $100 billion over seven years but were conditioned on the U.N. sanctions being lifted. The major share of oil pumped during the oil-for food regime was done by the now merged Elf-Total SA & Russia's Gazprom.
France, then, had considerable financial interests in seeing that no U.S. invasion took place, and Loik Le Floch-Prigent's former company would be the main conduit for that gain. In January 2003, when this document was written, Le Floch was an independent energy consultant, presumably working for one or another of the French state owned companies.
Dieter Holzer is a German lobbyist connected to the French company. He helped arrange the sale of the East German Leuna oil refinery, during the privatization of formerly Communist run state enterprises, to Elf-Acquitaine during the early 1990s. Holzer is said to have ties to the German intelligence community and was convicted of taking kickbacks in the Elf scandal in November 2003.
From the translated Iraqi intel files. Emphasis mine & my comments in brackets. The entire document is not republished, only those parts which I felt needed more commentary:
more...
Posted by: Rusty at
08:02 PM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1338 words, total size 11 kb.
1
Dr. Rusty,
Tell me this isn't so.
The French had other interests in Iraq other than the high moral road they staked out at the UN Security Council?
LOL - Maybe someone should look into their mining connections in Niger. Nothing goes on their the French mining concerns don't know.
The Am Thinker has suggested the whole Plame Affair was a disinformation compaign by high level French intel operatives to cover French tracks and to discredit President Bush. Amb Wilson was either a knowing participant or a willing stooge.
RBT
Posted by: rocketsbrain at March 28, 2006 08:04 PM (MrS6I)
2
What treachery!!!
Oh well what goes around comes around, France is falling apart as we speak, if it isn't the arab youth burning and pillaging while Chirac and his lackeys are reciting the Koran, its the leftists shrieking for less work and more pay while the economy goes down the crapper.
Richly deserved i say.
Posted by: MathewK at March 28, 2006 11:34 PM (pVHqF)
3
I certainly hope Sec Rice is as cordial to the Syrians/sarc. Is this huge? It seems so to me. Chinese intel believed Saddam moved WMD to Syria, but Powell is told no, so that's it? I have never believed there were none, it makes little sense. I trust Chinese intel to not worry about the niceties we do.
Posted by: Baldy at March 29, 2006 12:05 AM (y6n8O)
4
I was going to ask a question, but by asking, too much is given away, and loose lips...
Posted by: Baldy at March 29, 2006 12:17 AM (y6n8O)
5
The french are still the same lowlife scum they always were, and I hope the muslims wipe them out soon, so we can wipe the muslims out and take france and a new territory.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 29, 2006 05:47 AM (0yYS2)
6
Every one of these documents have proven more of a theory I've been formulating for over two years. I wanted to comment here, but it was far too long for a comment so I did my own post.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 07:23 AM (YudAC)
7
IM, I've always wanted a chalet on the Riviera.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 07:25 AM (YudAC)
8
Chalet in France? They will all be mosques before we have a chance to buy one. Darn it!
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 29, 2006 07:30 AM (rUyw4)
9
[Oyster ponders a chalet with a minaret.]
Yeah! That's the ticket!
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 08:50 AM (rGS2g)
10
Can I vacation at your Chalet, Oyster? Me, my wife, my three kids, the dog and the cat would not be very much trouble. The dog and the cat are both house trained, but me and my number two son, well, we like to go outside and find a tree. Ok, we live out in the country and we are from Texas. Hope that Chalet is forested!
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 29, 2006 09:10 AM (rUyw4)
11
Joe, I'll send a formal, embossed invitation.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 09:49 AM (rGS2g)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
TypePad = Bad Gay
Below the fold is a link to my wife's OLD TYPEPAD BLOG, before she
moved to mu.nu.
Let me repeat. Her OLD TYPEPAD BLOG
If you are a TypePad customer, take note. If you leave TypePad, this could happen to you.
TypePad refuses to remove the site, although it clearly violates their TOS.
UPDATE: Link removed, that's enough sending it traffic. Just remember, TypePad members, your old URL may be converted into a porn site.
more...
Posted by: Vinnie at
08:01 PM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
Post contains 87 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Damn, take that link off there. You pull people into a trap to click and then they see what the site has been replaced with. You are evil.
Posted by: Chad Evans at March 28, 2006 09:43 PM (FrWEy)
2
need to stick a rel="nofollow" in that link tag
Posted by: MacStansbury at March 28, 2006 10:03 PM (bJexd)
3
Maybe it's just me, but those images are actually a little hot.
Posted by: Lifter at March 28, 2006 10:14 PM (G+aAM)
4
Geez! And Rusty yelled at me for the Goatse-Jihadi link!
Guess TypePad sucks even more than Blogger.
Posted by: Abdullah al-Libi at March 28, 2006 10:43 PM (S3UBA)
5
"And stop letting use domains they way they do"
What?
Posted by: Kent at March 28, 2006 10:56 PM (V7Dms)
6
As much as this sucks for Merri, this is the nature of capitalism. Merri made the URL have value, but then relinquished it back to Six Apart. Someone else saw the value of the URL and paid Six Apart for it (as it was now theirs to resell). So S.A. and the new owner are making money in true capitalistic style.
Posted by: Malcom Y at March 28, 2006 11:19 PM (4FgNX)
7
No, TypePad made the URL have value. Merri purchased it, and used it properly, and
deleted it.
TypePad re-sold it to someone who is violating their TOS, and refuses to do anything about it.
S.A. and TypeMaxiPad have Terms of Service. They're letting the new owner violate them.
Not only that, "Merri Musings" is copyrighted material.
G'head, Malcolm Y, try setting up a URL with "Microsoft" in it.
Posted by: Malcom Z at March 28, 2006 11:34 PM (f289O)
8
1) The 2-word phrase "Merri Musings" is not copyrighted
2) You're confusing trademarks vs. copyrights with "Microsoft"
3) There are plenty of COMPANYX-sucks.com websites out there, where COMPANYX cannot do anything about it.
Posted by: Malcom Y at March 28, 2006 11:46 PM (oYQ15)
9
I'm just wondering what possessed Merri to relinquish the URL to begin with. Didn't she realize that she had all these links referring back to the typepad blog? Especially high-visibility ones like the Weblog Awards link. Wouldn't it have been worth it to just pay for another year and set up a static page redirecting people to her new blog?
Posted by: Malcom Y at March 28, 2006 11:52 PM (LIaFd)
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 07:28 AM (YudAC)
11
Malcom Y,
Um, no it wouldn't be worth it for me to pay for TypePad for another year - I blog for fun, and I would prefer my hard-earned income go toward other things. PLUS, based on their TOS, I never expected TypePad to permit (and almost WELCOME) such filth to be housed on their platform, so it never entered my mind that this would have happened when I closed my account. I'm not a fool enough to think they would have kept my URL and not "sold" it for a long time, but I think a company should stand behind the TOS they put out for all of their customers to review and agree to. That makes Six Apart as scummy as the person running that site and in my book, I've made a GREAT decision to dump TypePad.
Most people that have that old URL on their site have been very responsive, of course, by changing it to my new URL. Over time, this will be a non-issue anyway as I continue to build traction at the new URL.
Andthatisall.
Posted by: Merri at March 29, 2006 08:41 AM (5j/8t)
12
Yep that's pretty nasty. I'd be less than thrilled as well.
Posted by: Howie at March 29, 2006 10:20 AM (D3+20)
13
Someone must be listening. They've doubled the number of pictures there in the last 12 hours (more comments too).
Posted by: Kent at March 29, 2006 11:38 AM (oYQ15)
14
The domain is not merrimusings.typepad.com but typepad.com.
In the Internet domain scheme typepad.com is addressed by registering the domain with an internet authority or an agency so designated (for example I use an outfit called Namesecure to register domains). Then the Internet becomes aware of the domain and knows how to direct traffic destined for the particular domain.
However, anything to the left of typepad in the domain typepad.com is under control of typepad.com. In the case we are talking about merrimusings is a subdomain of typepad.com and traffic first goes to typepad.com and then typepad.com directs the traffic to merrimusings.
So in this case Merri has to rely on the good graces and TOS of typepad.com.
Posted by: Marcus Aurelius at March 29, 2006 02:04 PM (ffPYG)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
The Latest Blood Libel Lie in Iraq
What would you do if every day you saw images of dead civilians, women, and children? Now, imagine that you are told these deaths were the result of Americans intentionally killing civilians. If this was your perception of reality, then you too would probably feel an obligation to fight America. At the very least, you would support those that took up arms.
Now imagine that it was mainstream media sources that were reporting Americans had massacred Iraqi civilians. The media, instead of challenging the version of the story as delivered by radical Islamists that routinely lie, equivocate and act as if the story told by U.S. soldiers is only one version of the truth. That the word of a U.S. soldier is just as suspect as that of Muqtada al Sadr.
Propagating the lie that U.S. soldiers massacre mosque worshippers constitutes a form of blood libel. By portraying American troops as blood thirsty murderers, jihadi propagandists create an atmosphere of obligatory vendettas. What moral person could stand by and let the Americans get away with this type of murder? By treating that lie as if it was a legitimate viewpont, the media help prolong the war on terror. Worse, they give jihadis recruiting power, which leads to the death of more U.S. soldiers and eventually civilians.
Take for instance this story from the Christian Science Monitor--a publication usually known for its excellent reporting--which treats the 'truth' as something unknowable:
Did US forces attack a mosque in a Shiite district of Baghdad Sunday night, killing 17 unarmed worshippers, an act that Iraq's Shiite interior minister called a "horrible violation" that has dominated Iraqi TV and sparked a political outcry?
Or, did Iraqi special forces, backed up by US advisers, take on a "terrorist cell" at an office complex, kill 16 "insurgents," and free an Iraqi hostage - only to have Iraqi provocateurs, as top US commanders allege, "set the scene up" to look like an atrocity?
See how that works? Two versions of the story, both of equal weight.
The Asian Tribune is even worse, stating that a massacre occured as a matter of fact:
Iraq: US mosque massacre deepens occupationÂ’s crisis
The massacre of as many as 40 unarmed worshipers in a northeast Baghdad mosque Sunday has triggered a political crisis that threatens to accelerate IraqÂ’s descent into civil war while sharply intensifying the hatred of millions of Iraqis for the three-year-old US occupation of their country.
Here, the
Chicago Tribune talks about a 'mosque raid' as if it were a
fact. U.S. troops have said that there was a raid, but it was not in a mosque:
Deadly mosque raid in Iraq enrages Shiites
Shiite political leaders erupted in anger Monday over a U.S.-Iraqi raid that killed at least 16 people at a Baghdad mosque complex, suspending negotiations on the formation of a new government and spurring the provincial governor to cut ties with U.S. officials.
By the way, the authors of the above Tribune article are
Aamer Madhani &
Nadeem Majeed. You'd expect such nonsense from the official newspaper of Saudi Arabia, the Arab News --
and you wouldn't be disappointed--but not the Chicago Tribune.
The British taxpayer supported BBC aids in the murdering of its own troops in Iraq by publishing pictures of the aftermath of the raid in which it declares as a matter of fact that it was against 'a Baghdad prayer complex'.
And here is a Washington Post article which also equivocates between the two sides. It identifies AP reporters who were oonvinced the complex raided was a mosque. Hmmm, I wonder if it was local pro-insurgent AP stringers often employed by that organization?
The question that arises is whether or not the media has some culpability in the death of U.S., British, Iraqi, and other Coalition soldiers when the stories they write inflame the fans of hatred and make winning the war impossible. When did the Chicago Tribune forget that it was in Chicago? When did the Washington Post forget that it was in Washington? Do these organizations have any loyalty whatsoever to their country and fellow citizens? Or are they so cosmopolitan that they believe the death of a U.S. soldier is no more sad than the death of a member of Muqtada al Sadr's terror brigades?
UPDATE: More commentary from Bluto here.
Posted by: Rusty at
03:26 PM
| Comments (22)
| Add Comment
Post contains 730 words, total size 5 kb.
1
The answer to your question Rusty, is yes, the media is culpable for the death of hundreds of soldiers in Iraq. The lies the media is telling through the jihadist stringers they hire to take photos and write stories is shameful. The media makes only a half-hearted attempt to verify what has happened.
This latest incident is nothing more than jihadist propaganda being spread by the media. One would think these people would have better sense, but what it all boils down to is BDS.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 28, 2006 03:56 PM (rUyw4)
2
This from al-Jazeera,
"An al-Sadr aide, Hazim al-Araji, said: "The American forces went into Mustafa mosque and killed more than 20 worshippers ... They tied them up and shot them.""
Consider the source. Even al-Jazeera's report is giving both sides.
Posted by: Oyster at March 28, 2006 03:57 PM (rGS2g)
3
NPR reported that all middle eastern press show this stuff over and over all the time. Pics of dead Iraqi's coupled with anti American propaganda. The perception you speak of is promoted even more there that's all they see all day long. No wonder! And liek you said our own press doesn't help any.
Posted by: Howie at March 28, 2006 03:58 PM (D3+20)
4
The only heartening thing is that America has survived near-treasonous press coverage in the past and come out stronger. Revolutionary war, civil war, even WWII.
On the other hand, I suppose it's a bit like being the human cannonball at the circus, and hoping you hit the net just right for the eleventy-seventh time.
Okay, I'm depressed again.
Posted by: a4g at March 28, 2006 04:20 PM (X/md9)
5
The US military does lie. Often. In this case it became clear yesterday afternoon that the military press people were being less then honest with their verion of events. Calling it a "prayer complex" was the term used by the US even though a prayer complex and a mosque are the same thing. Their mistake was not being honest about what happened at the get go. We have attacked mosques before when there have been insurgents hiding inside, so it isn't like we are breaking new ground. Just say we were getting bad guys in mosques, don't lie about it being a mosque or not.
They are busy spinning a lot of scandals these days, so maybe they need to hire some more spinners. Get your application in, Rusty.
Posted by: John Gillnitz at March 28, 2006 04:22 PM (eHLUP)
6
I share your despair and frustration re: press & Co.
I posted only yesterday an article titled "Undeserved Hostility" in which I lay the blame on several columnists for giving the impression that Bush & Co have become Mesopotamian bandits...
If you have time...
http://cercasidemocrazia.blogspot.com/2006/03/undeserved-hostility.html
Posted by: enzo at March 28, 2006 04:25 PM (7BIKb)
7
Enzo, I read your post and I thank you for your kind words.
Posted by: Oyster at March 28, 2006 04:37 PM (rGS2g)
8
John, the photo by the BBC didn't appear to be a mosque. I don't claim to know the difference between a mosque and a prayer complex, but I didn't see a mineret. Perhaps you meant to say we attacked the Fellowship Hall. That would be kinda like attacking a church. Sorta, in a way, or perhaps jihadist stringers with an agenda hired by the MSM would see it that way. Who knows?
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 28, 2006 04:48 PM (rUyw4)
9
The military and Administration have to call the media on this nonsense. They can remind the public that one of CBS's crack photographers in facing trial for inciting violence.
The media was on the defensive last week and didn't like it one bit. Call them on this blood libel.
Posted by: Kate at March 28, 2006 05:02 PM (dZUpK)
10
John Glintz is one of those Liberals who "supports" the troops even while vilifying them and contributing to their deaths.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 28, 2006 06:26 PM (8e/V4)
11
John is most likely very comfortable with jihadist stringers hired by the media to report on the war. After all, they are highly unlikely to have an agenda. And for a plus they can get those odd photos of setups....uh, the aftermath of battles that took place inside "prayer complexes". And he accuses someone else of spin while he is playing like a top. Are you getting dizzy yet, John?
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 28, 2006 06:39 PM (rUyw4)
12
Does anyone know who the portraits represent in the BBC's third picture? The one in the middle, a little higher up from the others, seems to have a glow about him.
Posted by: Randy at March 28, 2006 07:04 PM (njLsB)
13
Joe very few mosques have minarets only the largest. Here in the USA most mosques also go not have minarets. They are even often located in strip malls. Mosques are very much like fellowship halls often small and local in nature. Do I believe that the insurgents were handcuffed and executed ? No Do I believe that at least some of this occured at/in a mosque ? Yes. But I also realize trhat I could be mistaken, I do not fully believe either side. They have both lied often. CYA seems to be the correst career path.
Posted by: john Ryan at March 28, 2006 07:11 PM (TcoRJ)
14
MSM like CNN, the New York Times, and NPR will continue to lose customers for their misleading of the public. Hopefully they will fold.
NPR will continue with our tax money. Those who work at NPR feel they should have a position, not a job, and paid for by our taxes. It is called socialism, and it looks like France.
Posted by: Leatherneck at March 28, 2006 07:11 PM (D2g/j)
15
John Ryan, I was referring to John Gillnitz's post, but I would never believe anything one of the jihadists said. Islam gives them permission to lie, cheat, steal, rape, plunder, murder, and commit any form of mayhem on the kuffirs without any guilt or punishment conferred on the pepetuator. I know of no other religion that encourages these things.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 28, 2006 07:37 PM (rUyw4)
16
Isn't the most likely story the one told my the military John? They didn't say it wasn't a mosque, only that since they found weapons, IED materials, prisoners, and appeared to be using it in the sectarian murders we've been hearing about lately, that they didn't "consider it a mosque". Since, you know, mosques are places of worship and not usually places where you execute people. Oh, wait a second. So, the point was not that this wasn't a mosque, but that the military didn't walk into a place where a bunch of dudes were praying, they walked into a place where a bunch of thugs and terrorists were holed up.
Posted by: Rusty at March 28, 2006 08:03 PM (JQjhA)
17
The irony that is lost on these anti American, pro-terrorist media figures is that if, God Forbid, America loses against these jihadists, the jihadists will be the first to come for their western media lackeys and merrily slit their treacherous throats.
A recent example if this was the whole cartoon fiasco, you see all these haters heaping dirt on the US Army but they all had to find hiding places and carry packets of underwear when it came to publishing a few cartoons.
The western public rightly dislike them but their jihadist masters despise them.
Posted by: MathewK at March 28, 2006 11:44 PM (pVHqF)
18
The point that Rusty was making, as a couple people appear to have missed, is that the majority of the media, without the benefit of a formal investigation, have told only one side of the story.
Even al-Jazzera told both sides awaiting a final decision. Frankly, to say "both sides have lied" is only part of it in more than just general terms. One side has lied
every single time. Me? I'll defer to the US side until I have proof otherwise.
Posted by: Oyster at March 29, 2006 07:37 AM (YudAC)
Posted by: WPB at March 29, 2006 02:31 PM (T35yi)
20
"Isn't the most likely story the one told my the military John?"
In this case, no. Often the military can not say what actually happened for a number of different reasons. In this case the story changed a few times. Each time it changed it caused more questions then answerers. Its bad PR.
Do I think we came in and killed a bunch of innocent people? No. I think we killed a bunch of Shiites who have been killing Sunnis. The military can't come out and say that because Shiite death squads aren't supposed to exist even though it is quite clear that they do.
Posted by: John Gillnitz at March 30, 2006 03:49 PM (eHLUP)
21
WorldSex Daily Updated Free Links to Hardcore Sex Pictures, Movies, Free Porn Videos and XXX Live Sex Cams
Posted by: SEXMENS at April 06, 2006 09:24 PM (4JDsW)
22
What is the most important information I should know about Clonazepam?
• Use caution when driving, operating machinery, or performing other hazardous activities. Clonazepam will cause drowsiness and may cause dizziness. If you experience drowsiness or dizziness, avoid these activities.
• Use alcohol cautiously. Alcohol may increase drowsiness and dizziness while you are taking Clonazepam. Alcohol may also increase your risk of having a seizure.
• Do not stop taking Clonazepam suddenly. This could cause seizures and withdrawal symptoms. Talk to your doctor if you need to stop treatment with Clonazepam.
What is Clonazepam?
• Clonazepam is in a class of drugs called benzodiazepines. Clonazepam affects chemicals in your brain that may become unbalanced and cause seizures.
• Clonazepam is used to treat seizures.
• Clonazepam may also be used for purposes other than those listed in this medication guide.
Posted by: CLONAZEPAM at April 08, 2006 10:10 AM (ejZe+)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Iraqi Terrorists Admit Saudi Behind Suicide Blast
In a press statement released yesterday, the al Qaeda linked Mujahdin Shura Council of Iraq announced that a Saudi national was behind the suicide-murder of between 18 and 40 Iraqis outside of a U.S. base near Tal Afar. The attack, near the Syrian border, wounded at least 30 others. Here is a copy of the press release along with commentary in brackets.
more...
Posted by: Rusty at
11:56 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 251 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Can't say I'm surprised about this. Now, if it turned out that it was an operation coordinated by the Saudi government, then I might be a little surprised.
Posted by: KG at March 28, 2006 12:07 PM (SZsz5)
2
It must be a real pain in the arse to have to preface everything you write with several paragraphs of praise to Allah before you can say what you want to say and then just when you think you're done, a few more paragraphs of praise. I wonder how many other fanatics actually read all that crap as
"Allah is great, blah, blah, blah." As a matter of fact it must get really tiring to have to pray before you eat, sleep, drink, pee, walk, breathe, etc. How do these people get any work done at all?
Posted by: Oyster at March 28, 2006 12:32 PM (rGS2g)
3
Don't tell Bush, he thinks it is still a religion of peace, and the House of Sauid are friends in the war on terror.
Allah Akbar!
Posted by: Leatherneck at March 28, 2006 03:03 PM (D2g/j)
4
I have some great news for everyone. The number of Saudi students coming to the US will triple to over 6000. I wish someone could tell me why.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 28, 2006 03:32 PM (rUyw4)
5
Saudis, Iraqis, Iranians...they don't give a damn about nationality!
It's all in the Qu'ran...
Kill the kaffirs...
These groups have hundreds of names, meaning hundreds of different things...but they all come down to the same thing: TERROR!
Their target?
The kaffir...
Any kaffir around...?
Posted by: enzo at March 28, 2006 04:13 PM (7BIKb)
6
I couldn't comment for some reason on the post above, but that is the one I am replying to.
You are spot on. I wrote about another incident similar to this a week or so ago, about Haditha:
http://takeastandagainstliberals.blogspot.com/2006/03/answer-this.html
All I asked is for people to consider all options before flaying the soldiers alive.
Posted by: Jenn at March 28, 2006 05:05 PM (QD9ey)
7
well Joe here is who can not claim a major portion of the blame for allowing 6000 Saudi students into the USA. moonbats, liberals, dimmixrats, the French, Ted Kennedy, illegal immigrants, MSM. Actually I wouldn't have any problem with these students attending college here. But only if they attended either fundamentalist christian schools, or total party schools with mandatory fraternity participation.
Posted by: john Ryan at March 28, 2006 07:30 PM (TcoRJ)
8
Our government is selling us out to our enemies as fast as they can arrange it. It's time for revolution people. If you don't have a gun, buy one, and lots of ammo too. Bush is a traitor, the GOP and Dems are traitors, and all should burn in hell.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 29, 2006 05:51 AM (0yYS2)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Sean Penn Has Ann Coulter Voodoo Doll
From
Contact Music, via the
Drudge Report:
Hollywood activist SEAN PENN has a plastic doll of conservative US columnist ANN COULTER that he likes to abuse when angry. The Oscar-winner actor has hated Coulter ever since she blacklisted his director father LEO PENN in her book TREASON. And he takes out his frustrations with Coulter, who is a best-selling author, lawyer and television pundit, on the Barble-like doll. In an interview with The New Yorker magazine, Penn reveals, "We violate her. There are cigarette burns in some funny places. She's a pure snake-oil salesman. She doesn't believe a word she says."
Pinkie the Sensuous Sailor, special Hollywood correspondent to
The Dread Pundit Bluto, has learned that the "torture doll" is actually a specially modified full-size Corinthian leather "Courtney Love 3-Input Receptacle" model, which Penn uses for other purposes besides the symbolic abuse...
Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.
Posted by: Bluto at
11:54 AM
| Comments (22)
| Add Comment
Post contains 162 words, total size 1 kb.
1
With his voodoo doll, Sean Penn has just illustrated in a microcosm the level at which the Left "debates" the Right these days. Just one big flaming war by a bunch of high school and college dropouts in Hollywood.
Can you blame the guy? He's an illiterate college dropout with a stunted ability to communicate, whose only real skill is memorizing lines and pretending to be other people.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 28, 2006 12:10 PM (8e/V4)
2
Big deal. I violate my full-size Ann Coulter blow-up doll fortnightly.
Posted by: Rusty at March 28, 2006 12:22 PM (JQjhA)
3
"...Coulter is a best-selling author...)
Yeah! Her audience is the 36% of lunatics who support Bush. That's best-selling all right. "...a pundit...". See the 36% mentioned above. ? "... a lawyer...". She graduated from a third-rate law school.
Posted by: Devil's Advocate at March 28, 2006 12:42 PM (Kv9eJ)
4
Think he kicks his dog too? What a child.
Posted by: Oyster at March 28, 2006 12:51 PM (rGS2g)
5
University of Michigan Law School is "third rate"? lol! It's one of the top law schools in the country you big dope.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 28, 2006 01:29 PM (8e/V4)
6
-what a stupid looking freak. Is he one of these actors with no college under his belt but has become an expert on foreign affairs, domestic policy, etc etc ?
Posted by: goesh at March 28, 2006 01:31 PM (1w6Ud)
7
and ps., not to mention she was editor of the law review at Michigan. In other words, college dropout Sean Pean would be mowing her lawn if he hadn't found a gig in Hollywood.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 28, 2006 01:31 PM (8e/V4)
8
If he hates her that much, why not offer to debate her publicly on the issues, instead of being the traitorous little coward he is and abusing a doll (something that I think qualifies as requiring therapy).
Posted by: Graeme at March 28, 2006 01:35 PM (N89lv)
9
We should get ourselves a SEAN PENN voodoo doll and stick pins in its rear end and bop it on the head with a hammer to show we dont care for his rotten acting and his putrid movies
Posted by: sandpiper at March 28, 2006 02:39 PM (UwJcR)
10
Ann Coulter doll? I bet that doll never shuts up.
Posted by: Leatherneck at March 28, 2006 02:45 PM (D2g/j)
11
I understand Sean turned to abusing the doll in frustration after failing to defeat it in debate.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at March 28, 2006 03:08 PM (RHG+K)
12
Thanks Bluto, I needed to spray down my monitor with iced tea anyway.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 28, 2006 03:31 PM (0yYS2)
13
That boy ain't right.
"I bet that doll never shuts up."
And, it has Man Hands.
Posted by: CUS at March 28, 2006 03:33 PM (bbXZq)
14
He probably rescued that doll from the floodwaters of New Orleans. You did say "voodoo doll", now didn't you?
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 28, 2006 04:04 PM (rUyw4)
15
The fact that a grown man violates a doll in effigy is actually intensely disturbing if one thinks about it for a minute...
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 28, 2006 05:16 PM (0yYS2)
16
Ann Coulter doll? I bet that doll never shuts up.
I suspect it's one of these.
Posted by: Anachronda at March 28, 2006 05:46 PM (NmR1a)
17
Idiot looks like eraserhead
Posted by: Purple Avenger at March 28, 2006 06:15 PM (WjdPM)
18
There's nothing wrong with hating Ann Coulter. I hate her too. She insulted a vietnam vet a few years ago. The poor guy is paralyzed.
Posted by: Derek Falkan at March 28, 2006 06:47 PM (CnDtU)
19
I do not hate Ann, I'm just saying...
Posted by: Leatherneck at March 28, 2006 07:26 PM (D2g/j)
Posted by: LC CanForce 101 at March 28, 2006 07:52 PM (3smJS)
21
I personally find Coulter to be annoying. However, this is some freaky stalker-type stuff here.
Posted by: Ranba Ral at March 28, 2006 10:40 PM (GyNTD)
22
i have a sean penn doll that i abuse when i get angry i twist off the head and play hacky sack with it.
Posted by: Billy Faeth at March 28, 2006 11:06 PM (mBI/D)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Moderate Islam Exists
If it's true that MSM has failed to tell the story about our strategy in Iraq, omitting not only the big picture but most of the successes, why is it not also true that MSM has failed to tell
the story of moderate Islam? The same juvenile ethic that promotes bang bang over hard work and dedication is also fixated on jihadism, for the same reasons. And anyone who counts on MSM to keep them well informed, isn't. (h/t:
Winds)
Posted by: Demosophist at
09:24 AM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 86 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Yup, moderates sure do exist, just check out these two blogs:
http://muttawa.blogspot.com/
http://bigpharaoh.blogspot.com/
The top one is a Saudi, the second one is Egyptian
Posted by: goesh at March 28, 2006 09:50 AM (vX0fY)
2
That makes 3 total moderates out of how many billion?
I'm sure moderate (hypocritical) muslims exists, that doesn't really...matter. Since they're emphatically silent, either because they don't have the numbers or organization to attract attention (and, consequentially, have any power) or out of fear of the non-"moderate" muslims.
I'm sure there were "moderate" nazis, too, who wern't down with killing jews and stuff. I don't really care.
Posted by: MiB at March 28, 2006 10:22 AM (XRlh2)
3
Wow, grammar check. I need to posst after my morning cup of tea. But I think the idea is still clear. Moderate muslims are powerless and inconsequential.
For once, the MSM does something right. Ignores moderate muslims, because they're not news items. They'll be news items when they, you know,
do something.
Posted by: MiB at March 28, 2006 10:24 AM (XRlh2)
4
Morning cup of tea? Where the heck are you? Coffee is the bomb!
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 28, 2006 10:38 AM (rUyw4)
Posted by: Oyster at March 28, 2006 10:58 AM (rGS2g)
6
Here's how I differ with you Demosophist:
These people are emphatically not 'moderate' Muslims, they are 'liberal' Muslims. I don't think I'm playing word games either.
A) There are important implications to those words if Muslims are distributed on a normal bell-shaped curve.
B) Those words are contextual, and the word 'moderate' when applied to different ideological orientations matters greatly.
Now, having said that, it is great to see secular Muslims speaking up.
Posted by: Rusty at March 28, 2006 11:03 AM (JQjhA)
7
The Religious Policeman would be regarded as apostasy and the guy is living in England. I have no doubts real fatwas have been issued against him. His site meter shows 533K visits, predominately English speakers and Americans. 2% of the viewers come from UAE, 1% from Kuwait and Malaysia.
The Big Pharoah shows 132K site visits, again with a very heavy English/American presence. 2% are Arabic speakers, 5% of the viewers are Egyptian, 1% from Jordan, Morocco and Kuwait. The Big Pharoah would be considered a reformer, pro-Democracy type blogger.
It is hard to extrapolate from such general numbers. I would speculate that a fair percentage of the English speakers are muslim though. There are very, very few antagonistic responses in the comments section, for what it's worth.
Enemies are easier to identify than friends sometimes.
Posted by: goesh at March 28, 2006 11:38 AM (vX0fY)
8
Coffee is bad for you. If it gives you context, I havn't had a soda in years. Tea is really the strongest thing I drink. After that its juice, gatorade, and water.
Posted by: MiB at March 28, 2006 12:48 PM (XRlh2)
9
MiB, coffee is good for you. The latest research shows that two to three cups of coffee leads to longer life.
The research did not include adding whiskey, except of Fridays.
Posted by: Leatherneck at March 28, 2006 02:55 PM (D2g/j)
10
MiB, coffee is good for you. The latest research shows that two to three cups of coffee leads to a longer life.
The research did not include adding whiskey, except of Fridays.
Posted by: Leatherneck at March 28, 2006 02:57 PM (D2g/j)
11
I know some muslims who are the most civil, liberal people you could meet, but in conversation, they still bring up the JOOOOOOS now and then. We've a long way to go.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 28, 2006 03:33 PM (0yYS2)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
New Jawa Look
After many complaints, I've decided to go with the light background as the default until I reconfigure the template. Personally, I like the black. However, you can set which background color you like by clicking the link in the upper corner of the right hand column.
Posted by: Rusty at
08:55 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 52 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I like it. All that black was friggin depressing me.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 28, 2006 09:51 AM (8e/V4)
2
Kind of like a mommyblog with the choices and all.
Posted by: Dick at March 28, 2006 10:04 AM (XlQVK)
3
I've gone with white all along. I was so happy to find I had the option. White is more professional - or at least any very light color.
Posted by: Oyster at March 28, 2006 11:15 AM (rGS2g)
4
Paper is white... must be a reason... :-)
I prefer white, makes for easier reading imho.
Posted by: RobC at March 28, 2006 01:50 PM (o0N0R)
5
Oh please stop it with the white background.
The black looks much better, and it's a lot easier to read.
Keep in mind that while paper is light colored, it also reflects light; it isn't itself a light source, like your monitor is.
Posted by: Homeland Stupidity at March 28, 2006 04:24 PM (FVbj6)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
164kb generated in CPU 0.0522, elapsed 0.163 seconds.
137 queries taking 0.1316 seconds, 522 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.