Posted by: Leovinus at May 01, 2006 06:51 AM (I42Iw)
12
"of not having to use hand signals and my rotten Spanish."
Posted by: jesusland joe at May 01, 2006 06:56 AM (rUyw4)
13
thunderstorms. (In the distance they look nice, they are necessary, ie rain...but who wants them at their house...)
Posted by: tracy coyle at May 01, 2006 07:04 AM (Vu/UF)
14
a day when I can use the sidewalk and not be run over by an ignorant breeder pushing a stroller closely followed by her passle of illiterate kids.
I hope that's not too harsh.
Posted by: Richard at May 01, 2006 07:38 AM (7KF8r)
16
A day without illegal immigrants is like a day without having to press 1 for English.
Posted by: Good Lt at May 01, 2006 07:46 AM (yT+NK)
17
A day without illegal aleins is like a day without a headache
Posted by: sandpiper at May 01, 2006 08:09 AM (aTvBX)
18
Ah hell, let em in, I prefer em to fairy pricks like Richard.
Posted by: Brad at May 01, 2006 08:18 AM (Ffvoi)
19
A day without illegals!!!!!!! Hummm? Sounds refreshing.
Legals Okay. Illegals are cheaters who place themselves ahead of honest people using the system correctly.
If a person's first act in this country is breaking the law
what do we expect him to do later?
Posted by: greyrooster at May 01, 2006 08:27 AM (XioYD)
20
...a day without getting the shitters cleaned at Wal-Mart for an everyday low price.
Posted by: Glenn at May 01, 2006 08:28 AM (UHKaK)
21
Damn you, greyrooster, where have you been? And you are exactly right.
Posted by: jesusland joe at May 01, 2006 08:48 AM (rUyw4)
22
Richard says: ".. an ignorant breeder pushing a stroller"
I say: Free-range hate is obnoxious, Richard. Why not slam something actually at fault like the Communist march organizers, or open-border liberals, or employers seeking illegal cheap labor, or the corrupt Mexican government, or the tone-deaf, feet-dragging Republicans in the House, Senate, and White House? Leave Mexican mothers alone.
Posted by: Heroic Dreamer at May 01, 2006 09:24 AM (aH6Zf)
Posted by: Fidothedog at May 01, 2006 10:30 AM (axQ8U)
28
No change nada squat here. Just finished my Mexican lunch. It was scrumptious. Seems some of them saw an opportunity to earn extra tips. Maybe one or two hands short no biggie here.
Posted by: Howie at May 01, 2006 12:10 PM (6ex54)
29
I've been out running errands in Austin, and so far nothing amiss. Looks like we're going to make it.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 01, 2006 01:11 PM (WCwrR)
32
Anita Bryant.
By the way, I wish I had thought about this earlier. It dawned on me that I should have bought a bag of small US flag lapel pins and made a trip around town and given one to each immigrant I saw who was working today.
Posted by: crosspatch at May 01, 2006 02:54 PM (kNJth)
33
A day without illegal immigrants is like a day without...
...the Star Spangled Banner in Spanish.
Posted by: reverse_vampyr at May 01, 2006 04:55 PM (Ns5kk)
34
A day without Illegals is a day without 40 Kool Filters tossed in my yard as the dirty fuc&ers walk to the quicky mart.
Posted by: FilthyAllah at May 01, 2006 06:59 PM (/RE21)
Afghani RPG Fishing: Blog Sabbath Video Caption Contest
Since Vinnie punted on the Blog Sabbath Caption Contest, I thought I'd share this video with you. Caption this video made by U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan of some of the locals using their Soviet made RPGs to do a little catfishing. That's a catfish, not a trout.
Winners get a shiny fatwa. Thanks to Imperial Minister of Culture, Ghost of a Flea for sending the link.
Yeah, and I know you can't exactly "caption" an entire video.....but say something about it!
Posted by: Ranba Ral at April 30, 2006 08:36 PM (GyNTD)
8
"In their ongoing efforts to leave no stone unturned in their search for Osama bin Laden, Afghan forces are seen here firing into an Afghan lake 'just to make sure'. While there was no evidence that Osama was hiding in the lake, a fish was stunned to the surface where it was captured and eaten as a tasty lunch. Pvt. Hak of the Afghan National Army said 'we haven't found Osama yet, but the eatin's good!'."
Posted by: crosspatch at April 30, 2006 09:04 PM (kNJth)
9
Give a man a fish, feed him for a day; teach a man to shoot fish with an RPG, feed him for life - and laugh your arse off for hours.
As a side note, that is the best way I've seen to make fishing interesting.
Posted by: radtec at May 01, 2006 09:30 AM (zosCX)
24
Dick Cheney gives up hunting in favor of fishing.
Posted by: Rodney Dill at May 01, 2006 01:45 PM (6KL8j)
25
Those bastards websensed You tube, Hey they did Rush mp3.s too. Retards.
Posted by: Howie at May 01, 2006 02:56 PM (D3+20)
26
'Taking a little-known page from Roland Martin's latest book, "Get A Fish No Matter What", Ahmad chooses the Tankbuster over the Screamin' Eel baitcast rig and finally has some success.'
Posted by: Philosopher at May 01, 2006 04:52 PM (wtxQb)
27
Hey JJ, think an RPG would do when fishing for Alligator Gar?
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 01, 2006 06:45 PM (0yYS2)
Mexican Lawmakers Pass Bill to Legalize Drugs
The federal legislature of Mexico has passed a bill to legalize "small amounts of cocaine, heroin, even ecstasy" for personal use. President Vicente Fox's signature is expected to be forthcoming since his office has voiced support for the measure.
Currently, Mexican law leaves open the possibility of dropping charges against people caught with drugs if they can prove they are drug addicts and if an expert certifies they were caught with "the quantity necessary for personal use."
The new bill drops the "addict" requirement, allows "consumers" to have drugs, and sets out specific allowable quantities, which do not appear in the current law.
Specifically, the new law would allow a person to carry the following:
- Marijuana (5 gms),
- Heroin (25 mgms),
- Cocaine (0.5 gm),
- Peyote (2.2 lbs), and
- An array of other drugs, including:
I am stunned! A person could be a legal walking pharmacy. More surprising is the fact that the measure is being pushed while drug addiction among Mexicans is increasing.
To be fair, though, the bill reportedly stiffens some penalties for trafficking and possession by government employees and near schools. In support of the bill, backers say it will free up police to go after major drug traffickers and avoid crowding jails with small-time offenders. Of course, using their logic, Mexico should legalize convenience store robberies to allow police to focus on bank heists.
more...
1
A couple of notes:
May 1 is "Labor Day" in the rest of the world. It's primarily in the U.S. that the date was changed, so as to obscure its socialist origin.
And I have to wonder if the illegal border traffic won't start flowing two ways, with certain Americans going down to Mexico to get high.
Posted by: Michael Hampton at April 30, 2006 06:00 AM (FVbj6)
2
I think the US should legalize some drugs, particularly marijuana. The war on drugs drains enormous amounts of money from the government and has not improved the overall situation. People can still get drugs at a reasonable price. The only thing the war on drugs is doing is filling our prisons with pot heads.
Posted by: Scott at April 30, 2006 07:11 AM (a7tCL)
3
the government admits that it is able to stop only about 10% of the drugs at the border. Take all that money and use it where it will do the most good, on prevention and treatment..
Posted by: john Ryan at April 30, 2006 07:39 AM (TcoRJ)
Posted by: sandpiper at April 30, 2006 08:08 AM (b1Fi6)
5
I think that Michael has it right. If a government is willing to unashamedly encourage its citizens to cross into a neighbouring country illegally, just for the revenue it brings, it's highly likely that decriminalising an array of drugs is a strategy to get young Americans to visit in larger numbers and spend more money. Particularly when rampant corruption and strong links to the drug trade are present at all levels of the government.
Posted by: Graeme at April 30, 2006 08:46 AM (IX6/9)
6
Great strategy on the part of Mexico! A country going nowhere plagued by crime, corruption and total lack of hope ... export significant segments of their population and keep much of the poor reminder stoned!
Mexico will never change - build a wall 20' high - with a sufficent number of doors for the best, brightest, ambitious, and decent.
Posted by: hondo at April 30, 2006 11:25 AM (SeBrl)
7
Great opportunity for the tourist trade! A drug haven for affluent Americans and westerners - add an explosion in the sex trade (drugs help) and the Mexican government is gonna make some nice change!
Local Mexican police aren't stupid! This will be a great opportunity for selective drug enforcement with tourists! Think of the blackmail and extortion opportunities! an affluent American will pay 10-20 thou easy to keep their pothead children out of a Mexican prision!
Posted by: hondo at April 30, 2006 11:33 AM (SeBrl)
8
Suppose another country had almost no drug problem. Suppose
that country had less than a small fraction of one percent
of our drug arrests. And suppose that country had almost no
"drug-related crime" and that their robbery rate was a tiny
fraction of our robbery rate.
Do you think is might be wise and prudent to carefully observe
that other country's drug policy and that we should model that
other country's drug policy?
Well, there is such a country: The Czech Republic.
The Czech Republic is the only country in the world where adult
citizens can legally use, possess and grow small quantities of
marijuana. (In the Netherlands, marijuana is quasi-legal - not
officially legal.)
The Czech overall drug arrest rate is 1 per 100,000 population. The
United States' overall drug arrest rate is 585 per 100,000 population.
The Czech robbery rate is 2 per 100,000 population. The United States'
robbery rate is 145.9 per 100,000 population, according to our FBI.
According to our drug war cheerleaders, tolerant marijuana laws cause
people to use other, much more dangerous drugs, like methamphetamine
and heroin. Obviously, this doesn't happen in the Czech Republic.
Why not?
Could it be that when people can legally obtain marijuana at an
affordable price, they tend not to use or desire any other recreational
drugs?
Could it be that marijuana legalization actually creates a roadblock to
hard drug use - not a gateway?
Could it be that the vast majority our so-called "drug-related crime"
is caused by our marijuana prohibition policies?
Could it be that if we keep doing what we have been doing, we will
probably get the same results? Should we throw another trillion
dollars down the drug war rat hole? Or should we do something
different--dramatically different?
Kirk Muse
1741 S. Clearview Ave.
Mesa, 85209
(480) 396-3399
Thank you for considering this letter for publication.
Source for the 145.9 robberies per 100,000 population
statistic is from the FBI Uniform Crime Reports, 2002 final
statistics.
Source for the Czech Republic's marijuana legalization
policy: "A Czech Toke on Freedom," by Jeffrey Fleishman in the
Los Angeles Times, Jan. 24 2006.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-weed24jan24,0,7449540.story
Source for Czech crime rate statistics:
http://www.notebooktravel.co.uk/travellersguide/travellersguidepages/czechrepublic.htm
(Scroll to bottom of the page).
Posted by: Kirk Muse at April 30, 2006 12:49 PM (/ZDpr)
9
http://profiles.emcdda.eu.int/index.cfm?fuseaction=public.Content&nNodeID=2348&sLanguageISO=EN
If anyone's interested in the detailed realities of Czech/drugs .... which of course ... is totally lacking from the above.
Posted by: hondo at April 30, 2006 01:22 PM (SeBrl)
10
Wow! So cool! Two sources on Czech drug laws!!! One is an article for the LA Times (???) and the other is from a British Travel guide (???). What! No Czech sources????
Crime stats courtesy the FBI (????).
Kirk's been toting the weed too long! Wanna compare/talk about Czech drug laws etc. ...... well ... duh! ... some Czech input would, like, be helpful ... or is that too much to absorb thru the haze?
Posted by: hondo at April 30, 2006 01:33 PM (SeBrl)
11
I was just in Acapulco yesterday, and ten days ago a drug gang decapitated two cops who had participated in a lethal drug raid, and left their bodies on the front steps of a police station, with a sign saying "so that you will learn respect". I don't know about decriminalizing small amounts as a way of getting bigger fish, but it seems worth a try. Hondo, the danger of cops going after tourists with phony charges exists much more under the current law--many tourists say the cops plant a small amount of drugs, then ask for a bribe in return for not arresting them.
It is amazing how instructive travel is. I spoke to a lot of people down there about the upcoming elections, and the working assumption of many is that the PAN will steal the election, just as the PRI did in 88. By comparison, our own electoral system, for all its flaws, seems okay. Of course, they have several things we could learn from--like national voter registration and uniform election laws and a holiday for the election.
Posted by: jd at April 30, 2006 03:25 PM (uT71O)
12
JD:
If decapitated people makes you want to offer criminals amnesty, when do we offer it to the Taliban / Al-Qaeda?
I'm sure there is a lot of things we could learn from Mexico, like how to make a hut out of a sheet of plastic, and three sheets of corrugated steel or how to export poverty.
Posted by: davec at April 30, 2006 04:39 PM (CcXvt)
13
So wait, rather than try to help people overcome a drug addiction, it seems like a good idea to just legalize it so we don't have to chase after the drug dealers and addicts all the time. This will really boost moral in a country. Hey-maybe this will make people stay in Mexico, rather than come over to America...all our immigration problems are solved!
Posted by: crazy cat lady at April 30, 2006 04:45 PM (rjg51)
14
jd
You miss the point friend ... you speak of planting drugs and phony charges ... new senario ... no need for planting and the charges are real ... tailor made for an increase in corruption reference tourists.
Posted by: hondo at April 30, 2006 05:07 PM (SeBrl)
15
When the police ARE the criminals, they're bound to get decapitated every so often.
Posted by: Michael Hampton at April 30, 2006 06:16 PM (FVbj6)
16
I don't think I was understood. I'm not suggesting the decapitaters should get amnesty. The stated purpose of the law is so the police can focus on the traffickers, the ones who did the decapitating. The decapitations show that the drug problems they are facing in Mexico are simply much larger than the ones we face.
And yes, the Mexican police are badly corrupt. Some of the people I met down there said the attitude of most Mexicans is if your house gets robbed, don't call the police--they'll just case it for another robbery. Hondo, you may be right that as opposed to planting drugs in small amounts, the police can now arrest someone and exaggerate the amount he had. We'll see, I guess.
One thing we ARE learning from Mexico, Dave, is to tolerate increasing gaps between the richest and the poorest. If current trends of exacerbating the share of national income held by the top 1% and top .1% continue, we may have to learn many things that Mexico has known for years about money and class and social rigidity. Hopefully, it won't come to learning about hut creation.
Posted by: jd at April 30, 2006 09:04 PM (uT71O)
17
" Dave's not here man! "
" No, no, no! This is Dave! "
" Dave's not here man! "
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at April 30, 2006 11:32 PM (h4PzP)
18
Ted Carpenter at Cato's new blog thinks criminalization only increases the profit potential of illegal drugs and gives them a more lucrative, coveted place on the market.
Unfortunately, Mexican leaders show no willingness to legalize the manufacture or sale of marijuana, cocaine, and other drugs. Indeed, they have argued that the new law will enable law enforcement agencies to devote more resources to supressing trafficking. That means the huge potential profit in the drug trade will persist—and so will the corruption and violence that is tearing Mexico’s society apart.
Posted by: Anastasia at May 01, 2006 09:55 AM (lcebH)
19
At least one country has figured out the drug war is a COMPLETE waste of time, money, and resources.
Posted by: craig at May 01, 2006 08:13 PM (CMKoe)
20
As for Mikes "a person can be a legal walking pharmacy" comment, alot of people are walking pharmacys. Ever heard of the ghetto and drug dealers?
Posted by: craig at May 01, 2006 08:17 PM (CMKoe)
21
Thats awesome they should legalize marijuana its all for money
Posted by: josh at May 04, 2006 10:24 AM (2N1xj)
22
Thats awesome they should legalize marijuana a lot of people do it anyway and it would make it easier for everyone... drinking is worse for you so why not?
Posted by: josh at May 04, 2006 10:25 AM (2N1xj)
23
Not a good idea afterall, oh the mood swings ... pass that pipe ...
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 04, 2006 11:41 AM (FCC6c)
24
The drug war has failed. Consumers want drugs. Making drugs illegal only makes them more expensive and inconvienient to obtain. If you want to get drunk, you have to drive 5-10 minutes to the grocery store and spend about $10. If you want to get stoned, you have to drive 15-20 minutes to your buddy's house and spend about $40.
The best solution is to legalize and educate.
Policing, jailing, and court costs are large. Not only would legalization reduce the necessary sizes of our police forces, jails, and court systems; it would also make a very large market available for taxation.
Young people should be educated that drugs are often harmful. Education has been the main influence in the sharp decline in teen tobacco consumption. Should a person find themselves with a problem, the facilities should exist to help them recover.
1
I haven't seen it yet, but hopefully the locals will violate international copyright law yet again, so that the US Military members here in good old IZ can watch and remember why we are here. I volunteered that sunny day back in 2001 to go back on active duty (from the USAR), and have thus far spent 3 years away from my lovely wife, 4 year old son and 10 month old daughter. Some might ask why....but I think I just answered that. I have had the privilege of serving with some great American and Iraqi patriots, and a few have fallen to the hands of our enemy. But we are all willing to continue to do what we MUST to insure that the enemy does not bring its primary goal of a pan-Islamic state to fruition.
"We must all fear evil men, but there is one thing that we must fear more...the indifference of good men." – The Boondock Saints
Posted by: Moriarti at April 30, 2006 03:14 AM (bm/M7)
2
I saw it Friday night, and it was outstanding. I can't add much to the words of better writers than I. You can check out the reviews at rottentomatoes dot com. With a very few exceptions, the reviewers loved the film, as did I.
Go see it.
3
I saw it yesterday late afternoon. The theater was nearly full, I would expect the evening showings were sold out. I hope so.
I dreaded the beginning and I left the theater renewed in my belief that we must confront this enemy. If the film had been less objective in its presentation, I don't think it would have been so effective.
From the reviews I've read, I don't think they've discussed how one sees the day unfold, not just the Hero Flight. I found that with the earlier hijackings and subsequent attacks presented from the perspective of ATC, FAA, Norad, there was a different type of horror than that I experienced that day. The director does not add to the 'reaction' rather one feels that it was videotaped in real time.
On the Flight 93 in contrast, we 'see' and 'hear' the personal. We watch information come, decisions made. We see the post 9/11 America awaken on 9/11.
Posted by: Kathianne at April 30, 2006 03:55 AM (6bvSl)
4
I just saw the film and can only say it has reaffirmed my Faith and strengthened the resolve of the Patriot Brigade. Every arab man, woman, and child must be slaughtered and given the most violent and painful death possible. These are truly subhuman filth and of lesser value than a common cockroach.
The extermination of the arab race must be the ultimate and final victory if we are to have justice for these brave American souls who lost their lives on 9/11.
Posted by: Unashamed Patriot at April 30, 2006 04:09 AM (y+196)
5
Patriot-I hope you do not mean what you have said about the extermination of the arab race. There are some fine people in the middle east who are fighting beside our troops who just want a better life. Yes there is a segment that must be destroyed so Islam can regain it's moral footing in the world. Those who use Islam for evil means must be destroyed. That is the only way there will be peace in the middle east and the world for that matter.
Posted by: bags75 at April 30, 2006 05:15 AM (j4izh)
Posted by: rightwingprof at April 30, 2006 07:28 AM (hj1Wx)
7
I saw it last night and could not say a word to my wife for 20 minutes after it was over. I was so angry reliving what happened that day. We have to take the fight to them and this movie showed how they brought the fight to us. Thankfully people on that flight did not stand back and wait. They were the first warriors this country had fight back after the attacks on the Pentagon and WTC. The fighting spirit displayed over two hundred years before revealed itself again on that day. This movie depicts what happened on that flight in a way that should strengthen the resolve and shake the complacency of all our citizens. I feel everybody should see this movie and stay for the credits to see how many people played themself. Those characters in the movie will never land additional roles so they must have felt the importance to relive that day in this movie for everybody else.
Posted by: Stillmadashell at April 30, 2006 09:24 AM (rw9Aa)
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 30, 2006 11:37 AM (8e/V4)
9
I wish the hell the moonbats in NYC would decide to do something about the attack other than wondering why they hate us so much. Because you are an infidel, you dumn ass. Now, I've told you, so wake up and join the fight, and quit your stupid support of the very people who attacked you. While you march around acting stupid, the attackers are preparing worse for you. Wake up!
Posted by: jesusland joe at April 30, 2006 02:12 PM (rUyw4)
10
bagz75: you are very wrong. arabs are a subhuman filthy race. we should not be sending our soldiers to die trying to build a democracy for wretched evil people. they will only continue to send wave after wave of diseased filthy terrorists after us.
our brave troops should be on a mission to eradicate every last arab man, woman, and child in every country and on every continent. they attacked us on 9/11 but we will not rest until the last filthy subhuman arab exists no more.
Posted by: Unashamed Patriot at April 30, 2006 02:41 PM (y+196)
11
UP -
You sound more like someone who is spoofing conservative beliefs rather than someone who really believes them. If you really did believe them, you wouldn't leave them here at this site. Jawa readers don't believe in destroying everyone who doesn't agree with them. We want to get those who want to get us, and we don't believe every Arab wants to do that.
Besides, there are Muslims of many races. Eradicating the Arabs will not destroy Islam nor the Islamist issue. it still infects those in Thailand, the Phillipines, India and other areas.
What are realistic ways to stop the Islamists?
Posted by: eeyore at April 30, 2006 03:19 PM (0/sqo)
12
eradicating the arabs is just the first part of the final solution to global terrorism. the filth of islam eminates from the subhuman arab population. once that cancer has been eliminated we must root out all other followers of islam and liquidate them without delay.
watching the film's final moments gave me great inspiration in one such method of defeating terrorism. tossing the infants and children of arabs into boiling water as their pitiful parents watch--then suffer the same fate.
Praise Jesus and God Bless America
Posted by: Unashamed Patriot at April 30, 2006 04:03 PM (y+196)
13
I wince as I read the comments of a troll like Unashamed Patriot. Folks like him/her post here in order to tar true supporters of freedom and liberty.
If Unashamed Patriit really believed in what he was advocating, he'd attempt to persuade rather than to post inflammatory and outrageous comments.
Posts like this are part of the price of free speech. On the other side of the aisle, Daily Kos doesn't have the same problem. The reason is, they have an extremely efficient censorship system, so that divergent and wacked-out viewpoints can be effectively quashed in short order, so as to control the message. I certainly wouldn't advocate that system over here. I am convinced that the best answer to wrong speech is better speech.
If you're trying to stir up unfocused anti-Arab sentiment, you won't get much traction here. Some of the very best Americans are Arabs. Some of the most devout Christians are Arabs. You think that Americans would turn on Arab Americans because some a groub of Saudi Arabian Muslims blew up a plane? Not likely. Not in these parts, anyways.
Nice try, though.
14
By the way, if you knew anything about Christian philosophy, you'd know that Christians debate things like whether it is moral for the state to execute a man, even a man guilty of a heinous crime. They debate whether it can be moral to kill the unborn child. They debate whether a husband should be able to end the life of a debilitated wife.
Unlike some other religions, Christianity is a religion of life and peace. Jesus unequivocally taught Christians to submit to authority, to eschew violence and to turn the other cheek. It is nonsensical to advocate slaughter and torture in the same post that you say "Praise Jesus" and "God bless America".
15
arabs have not been and never will be Americans. they are filthy subhuman animals who originate as the spawn of satan. Issac vs Ishmael--Satan begat Ishmael who spawned the arab race. Christ commands his true believers to eradicate the forces of Satan.
Ragnar you are a traitor and deserve to be put in the gas chambers along with the filthy arabs. We will not allow you to tear away at the fabric of American Liberty.
Posted by: Unashamed Patriot at April 30, 2006 05:17 PM (y+196)
16
Just got back from seeing the movie, theater was only half full. At the end of the movie some one yelled out Islam is an evil religion another yelled out, any one still think we should not go after the terrorist? Many in the theater were weeping and saying God Bless America.
Any one notice at end of movie the European who stood up to warn the terrorist and serveral people jumped on him?
Wonder were that came from and if it is true?
Posted by: Patti at April 30, 2006 05:34 PM (2hEo4)
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 30, 2006 10:34 PM (8e/V4)
19
Wow! That movie sure brings the best out in people. You all should be tarred and feathered! Amen!
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at April 30, 2006 11:40 PM (h4PzP)
20
Anassnamed Patriot sez:
Ragnar you are a traitor and deserve to be put in the gas chambers with the filthy arabs.
Earth to Patriot: I'm a PIRATE. Of course I'm a TRAITOR. And of course I deserve to be put in a gas chamber. Who ever heard of a loyal pirate, anyway?
BTW, if you wanna be an effective troll, you really oughtta pay attention to what actual conservatives say, rather than what the DKos & DU freaks spout when they try to mimic conservatives. Those kids really have no concept at all.
Saudi Women Given Right to Sell Underwear
Currently in Saudi Arabia, only men are permitted to conduct retail business and the practice proves to be awkward when the items being sold are primarily female products. Therefore, whether purchasing panties, brassieres, see-through nighties, or lipstick and other cosmetics, women are helped by bearded and moustached male sales assistants. But times have changed and Saudi society is about to make a dramatic leap forward.
It is hailed as a major step forward for women's emancipation in Saudi Arabia: in the coming weeks they will enjoy the right to buy lingerie from female shop assistants.
This may be a far cry from bra-burning feminism but in Saudi Arabia the notion of buying one's brassiere from a woman is nothing short of revolutionary.
A new decree requiring shop owners to hire female staff to sell undergarments illustrates the cautious liberalisation the kingdom is undergoing - and how far it has yet to travel.
The change will probably be quite welcome since most women are reluctant to discuss their unmentionables with men who are likely total strangers.
On the other hand, the lingerie shop owners are ambivalent. Some intend to darken their premises to hide the fact that women are working while others complain that business will be stunted since most customers for women's underwear are men. (As an aside, I'm astounded by the fact that Saudi men are buying most of the women's underwear in the Kingdom. There has to be a psychological angle here somewhere.)
King Abdallah is the impetus behind the recent liberalization of Saudi society. He's even hinted at lifting the prohibition on women driving. Naturally, traditionalists believe that the changes go too far and are "not compatible with Islam."
1
"traditionalists" hmmmmm that is an interesting way to describe them
Posted by: john Ryan at April 29, 2006 08:36 PM (TcoRJ)
2
Women driving? At least the traditionalists have one thing right!
Posted by: Last word Larry at April 29, 2006 09:06 PM (h4PzP)
3
They're probably wearing nylons and garters under those sheik robes!
Posted by: Insomniac at April 29, 2006 11:50 PM (wZLWV)
4
Awwwww. I posted this story to Jawa's sticky "Help Me post" - except the source was the Independent and Greatnews.com. I'm feelin' cheated of a hat-tip . . .;-) Ok. . . Just checked out the Independent. The story's been archived already so you'd have to pay to see the article.
Posted by: Ansar-al-kufir at April 30, 2006 01:31 AM (y7gpG)
1
How can we post a link? Your forms don't allow some site links. I posted a link to a story about Saudi Arabia's new law about lingerie stores, but your site wouldn't permit the news source. The error message was:
Original link fixed by Howie.
Posted by: Ansar-al-kufir at April 28, 2006 10:00 AM (y7gpG)
2
Here's another link to the same story I tried to post earlier about Saudi Arabia's new policy on lingerie stores:
http://www.greatnewsnetwork.org/index.php/news/article/hello_boys_lingerie_leads_the_fight_for_saudi_womens_rights/?source=rss
Posted by: Ansar-al-kufir at April 28, 2006 10:02 AM (y7gpG)
3
Can you send trackbacks? If so that's best? If a link will not post you can email me Howie with the link. Post the comment with a "place link here" placeholder and I'll get to it.
Posted by: Howie at April 28, 2006 10:10 AM (D3+20)
4
Many conservative blogs are suffering from a DoS attack.
Hugh Hewitt
Powerline
JihadWatch
Instapundit
Captain's Quarters
Hosting Matters is under attack, but I'm not sure if they carry all of these blogs.
Posted by: astuddis at April 28, 2006 10:10 AM (IaRGs)
Posted by: Howie at April 28, 2006 10:12 AM (D3+20)
6
Some guy put up money last week to see JihadWatch hacked.
Posted by: astuddis at April 28, 2006 10:17 AM (IaRGs)
7
I posted at my own blog this morning on an alarming pandemic flu simulation that was conducted at the World Economic Forum in January; a report on it was just released yesterday - you may find it interesting:
http://moondawgden.blogspot.com
Posted by: MoonDawg at April 28, 2006 10:21 AM (HJS3X)
Posted by: Fred Fry at April 28, 2006 11:48 AM (JXdhy)
11
Actually Fred, I don't believe the price of Gasoline is the Government's problem to fix either, it lands squarely in the consumer to modify their consumption habits.
I don't support removing the tax at the pump, we are at war, and have to pay for it, somehow.
Posted by: davec at April 28, 2006 12:09 PM (CcXvt)
12
Davec,
Hard to say. It is their responsibility to maintain our society. What they should be doing is planning for the country's future energy needs. There is lots of flack given the oil companies that they are not spending enough on alternative energy. That's not their job. That is up to the Government to encourage research into those areas.
On the bright side, the high price of gas now makes alternative energy more viable, especially wind. The Europeans are actually complaining because the US is buying up all the wind generation equipment on the market and they can't get their hands on as much as they want any longer.
Posted by: Fred Fry at April 28, 2006 01:55 PM (JXdhy)
Posted by: rightwingprof at April 28, 2006 02:27 PM (hj1Wx)
14
Well Joe, I guess itÂ’s a good thing Texas won the BCS championship. With this Reggie Bush housing thing, they would have had to take the title away from SC anyway.
I knew those Trojans could not be that good without cheating. No one beats the vaunted Washington Huskies that many times by so many points without some monkey business going on.
Posted by: Brad at April 28, 2006 02:51 PM (3OPZt)
15
Fred:
Has it not also made extraction of oil from the Canadian shale / sands profitable now?
I remember they said in the past that extraction was much more expensive than drilling for oil, but that was back when it was less than a dollar for a gallon of Gasonline.
Posted by: davec at April 28, 2006 03:10 PM (CcXvt)
16
You zaney neocons!
Now you're pissed-off because our national anthem is being sung in Spanish.
Take a powder!
I'll bet you wish there was a 1 billion person choir of Muslims singing it with heartfelt fervor.
Such is the lunacy of the neocon. Rational conservatives, like me, welcome those who honor our country, regardless of the medium used.
Damn Homer Sectionals!
Posted by: Greg at April 28, 2006 04:02 PM (q5wwn)
17
I sent rusty a zarqawi clip earlier today, I was busy at work so it was only a quick edit, was still pretty good I think, the first time he points his finger in the air a fly follows his finger, had to be quick to notice it so I slowed it down, I can only assume he had recently been jamming his finger up someones ass, whatever, he seems to attract flies a bit like Linus.
Posted by: dave clarke at April 28, 2006 04:07 PM (tHsPx)
18
This is a man who should be remembered.
www.rickrescorla.com/
www.medaloffreedom.com/RickRescorla1.htm
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 28, 2006 04:20 PM (0yYS2)
19
Good call Improbulus.
Richard's deeds are something we should all aspire to.
Lets not forget him.
Posted by: dave clarke at April 28, 2006 04:27 PM (tHsPx)
20
Im:
Have you read the book James B. Stewart wrote about him?
Heart of a Soldier
it was a very interesting read.
Posted by: davec at April 28, 2006 05:29 PM (CcXvt)
21
Rush “Pills” Limbaugh, that self-righteous fat fuck, got popped again.
What a hypocrite! Or is it Hippocrit?
Posted by: Greg at April 28, 2006 05:46 PM (q5wwn)
22
No I haven't Dave, but I will see if I can find it.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 28, 2006 05:52 PM (0yYS2)
23
I love Rush and listen to him every day. Not because I agree with him 100% though, but mainly because I know that just the knowledge that so many people listen to him causes leftards great pain. Squirm you little bitch, squirm.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 28, 2006 05:54 PM (0yYS2)
24
Well, Brad, to be serious I wish the Texas Aggies had won the national title and not the Longhorns. UT-Austin is a little people's republic of Seattle right in the heart of Texas. Those liberals in Austin make you sick, don't they Greg.
Posted by: jesusland joe at April 28, 2006 07:09 PM (rUyw4)
Posted by: Greg at April 28, 2006 07:23 PM (q5wwn)
26Blackberry Winter in Southern Appalachia, the Year of our Lord Two Thousand and Six.
Late April brings late Spring showers and early Summer thunderstorms, and the Frost stops in to say goodbye as it heads to the Southern Hemisphere. Blackberrys are blooming right now, which means it's now okay to plant cold-sensitive crops, and too late to hang meat. And also, that in just a small eternity the briarpatches of high summer will
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 28, 2006 08:57 PM (0yYS2)
27
Oops. Let's try that again.
Blackberry Winter in Southern Appalachia, the Year of our Lord Two Thousand and Six.
Late April brings late Spring showers and early Summer thunderstorms, and the Frost stops in to say goodbye as it heads to the Southern Hemisphere. Blackberrys are blooming right now, which means it's now okay to plant cold-sensitive crops, and too late to hang meat. And also, that in just a small eternity the briarpatches of high summer, where a new generation of rabbits greet the world with wiggly noses, will yield manna from Heaven; ripe, wild mountain blackberries, from which Blackberry Cobbler and Wine will be made, and the best preserves ever.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 28, 2006 09:01 PM (0yYS2)
28
*Selfish plug that may be deleted because it is so very much a selfish plug*
Need something to do? I'm starting a project (to be announced on my blog soon i.e. tomorrow) which will attempt to document all the places mentioned in the Bible by book. The hope is to tell via cartograms which areas were considered important and when. I'm hoping to get an article published about religious geography. I would greatly appreciate any division of labor help.
Posted by: Catholicgauze at April 28, 2006 09:28 PM (UA1kS)
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 28, 2006 10:34 PM (0yYS2)
31
Spring By the Ocean
I was in my car when the rain began to fall. Large, unexpected drops hampering visibility and causing a small Mazda to swerve in front of me. I flicked on my windshield wipers and stared at the traffic in front of me. Like a swollen river, the freeway was suddenly clogged, unpredictable, and dangerous. I got off at Ocean, and unrolled my window. Wild blue waves crashed and churned the sand. The smell of the salty ocean spray mingled with the fresh rain.
Posted by: Heroic Dreamer at April 28, 2006 11:17 PM (aH6Zf)
32
Do we know if the Aztlan "take up arms against your European occupiers" letter is real yet?
http://my.opera.com/cbjohnso/blog/show.dml/237169
Penis festival in Japan...
http://my.opera.com/cbjohnso/blog/show.dml/235971
Posted by: Chris At Home at April 29, 2006 12:58 AM (5ve1C)
Posted by: rightwingprof at April 29, 2006 07:29 AM (hj1Wx)
34
The Caption Jam is up at OTB. The Sabbath contest is usually too late to include, but while you wait for it there are plenty of other caption contest ongoing.
Posted by: Rodney Dill at April 29, 2006 08:59 AM (tGTSA)
35
So Bluto
How's the knee? Those painkillers kick in yet? Moderation my friend -- in a few months you will be up and running about.
Maybe we should all chip in and get you a copy of the Karma Sutra - exercises to look forward to.
Rusty's probably got several copies - illustrated.
Posted by: hondo at April 29, 2006 09:19 AM (SeBrl)
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at April 29, 2006 09:15 PM (h4PzP)
38
What did you think Larry, that I was a barbarian or something? Just because I want to decorate every highway overpass and lamp post in the country with the stinking corpses of muslims and liberals doesn't mean I'm not civilized. Indeed, it is my love of civilization that makes me want to preserve it by destroying its enemies. Civilization wasn't built by gutless wimps, but by men with blood on their hands.
I really will pity liberals and muslims when TSHTF, because none are near as smart or as fierce as they believe themselves to be, and for all their violent demonstrations, I'm afraid they won't last long when it's time to start cutting throats.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 30, 2006 07:34 AM (0yYS2)
CAIRO, Egypt — Al Qaeda's No. 2 said the terror network's branch in Iraq had "broken the back" of the U.S. military with hundreds of homicide bombings, in a video posted Saturday that was the latest in a string of new messages by al Qaeda's leaders.
Well, forget the "it seems." In the grand tradition of organizations that seem not to realize we're already aware of the causes they ram down our throats in the name of "awareness," I am officially declaring April "Jihadi Awareness Month."
To be followed by "Illegal Immigrant Awareness Day" on May 1st. Which runs concurrent to "Vinnies Daughter Awareness Day." She turns five.
And remember, don't use your curling irons whilst sleeping.
1
Arabs haven't lost a battle since Saladin, or so it would seem based on their overblown rhetoric. The only backs being broken in Iraq are those of innocent Iraqis.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 28, 2006 11:06 PM (M3nr/)
Suspected tribal militants beheaded a cab driver in South Waziristan for being a "US spy" and a frequent visitor to an American military base in Afghanistan, official sources told Daily Times on Wednesday.
The body of the man, identified as Khan Mati, was found on Tuesday near Angoor Ada, the last Pakistani town before the Afghan border in South Waziristan, sources said.
Mati, who had been missing since April 17, was believed to be a frequent traveller to the US military base in Macha Dadkot in Paktika province in Afghanistan. He is the second taxi driver to be abducted and killed in Angoor Ada over suspicion of being a US spy.
Sources said that Haji Omar, the Taliban chief in South Waziristan, said that "we do not waste bullet on such suspects and prefer beheading them."
In my mind, the Taliban terrorists are murdering scum with no chance of redemption. Those poor cabbies were likely only trying to go with the flow and put food on the table for their families. Instead, they're murdered by Taliban fanatics.
And, all the while, Sen. Dick Durbin claims the U.S. is the bad guy and Yale University recruits students from the Taliban. The leftists have turned America into bizarro world.
1
IP you seem to overlook the most important thing about the ex(?) Taliban student. It Is not that he was accepted into one of the most prestigous institutions of higher learning in the entire country, it was that the Federal Government allowed him entry into the United States. I don't care if he was going to some no name community college, I DON'T WANT HIM HERE
Posted by: john Ryan at April 28, 2006 08:36 PM (TcoRJ)
2
John- It's even worse. Yale actively recruited him! This moron doesn't even have the equivalent of a GED. Furthermore, this SOB filled a slot that a MUCH more qualified student was denied. What crap.
Posted by: Mark at April 28, 2006 09:09 PM (VZyOx)
3
>>>The leftists have turned America into bizarro world.
Indeed. But it's so gradual that folks hardly notice it happenning. Suddenly things are just fucked up and people wonder why. BECAUSE LIBERALISM IS A MENTAL DISORDER, THAT'S WHY.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 28, 2006 11:38 PM (M3nr/)
4
Mark- Yale says he's not in a degree program, so it's not clear that he's taking someone's slot. What Yale sees in him is anyone's guess, but for my part I'd guess they just want him on hand because he's an interesting specimen. They'd probably enroll a Thuggee too, if any were available.
As to the the viciousness of the Taliban, you guys give them too much credit. The Afghans have been gut-spilling fiends before the Taliban was ever heard of. Or Islam, for that matter. Because our soldiers are among them we've just got a front-row seat to the same behavior the Sovs saw before us, and the Brits before them, and so on back to the days of Alexander.
Posted by: ShannonKW at April 29, 2006 01:58 AM (dT1MB)
5
john ryan: You can stop tooting that horn. We got it. It's of concern too. It's obviously not policy. Someone slipped him in under the radar and we all hope s/he gets caught. How do you know they're not looking for who got him in the US or that they haven't already found him/her and reprimanded them? The "real" problem is our educational institutions who compete to get these thugs. If they hadn't wanted him and if the guy out west hadn't lobbied to get him here, his name never would have appeared at the State Department for approval. Supply and demand.
Senator John Cornyn is all over this. He wants to review Hashemi's visa. Let's wait and see if he's able to get to the bottom of it.
Posted by: Oyster at April 29, 2006 05:06 AM (YudAC)
6
Anyone have any ideas how many FBI agents are watching the Taliban man -- or how many taps are on his phone? Sometimes things aren't what they seem.
Agree with the animals part, they warrant extinction as the final solution.
The war goes on, at least for half of the country.
Posted by: bill at April 29, 2006 05:32 AM (7evkT)
7
Bill, given past performance, the odds of the FBI even knowing about his presence in the country are pretty slim. The entire Federal government needs to be dismantled.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 30, 2006 07:29 AM (0yYS2)
Air America Losing New York
According to MediaWeek, Air America will lose its flagship station in New York City. The lease with WLIB-AM runs out as of August 31. As a network, Air America will no longer determine programming for the station. Instead, station owners are expected to offer liberal local programs.
A spokesperson for Air America, however, promised that the liberal radio network would "not grow silent on the New York City airwaves." It's not clear what that means. Maybe Air America has found another station that has no interest in accumulating an audience. Given enough seed money to prop it up, Air America will surely find a taker. Then, I think it will only be a matter of time before the backers back out.
1
Somwhere on this website for whomever guesses right there is a free r5d4 and death start droid action figure. Guesses will be accepted for 10 more days. Gee I hope I don't have to actually cough those up.
Posted by: Howie at April 28, 2006 08:10 PM (D3+20)
2
Aahhhh...so that's why Stuart Smally wants to run for political office.
He sees the last stop on the AirAmerica choo choo getting closer and closer...
Posted by: mrclark at April 28, 2006 10:49 PM (tKHno)
3
Air America isn't a radio network, it's a farse, a Liberal PAC, a paid extension of the Democrat party, propped up by billionaire Leftists. This was predicted from day one. Leftism can't survive in the free market.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 28, 2006 11:13 PM (M3nr/)
Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt to do Ayn Rand
Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt in Atlas Shrugged? That's what the Hollywood insiders are saying. I guess anything with Angelina Jolie is bound to attract some attention from me--on top of the fact that she is going to star in the screen adaptation of one of the Right's most beloved works of fiction.
Personally, I'm not a big fan. Hang around with enough libertarians (like I do) and you realize that there is a kind of cult of Ayn Rand among certain circles. So what I'm about to say is bound to offend.
In addition to being bad gay, I don't think Ayn Rand was that great of a theorist. I don't really get Objectivism--Ayn Rand's philosophy. I find it tired and boring in the same way that I do Marxism. I just don't have a lot of patience for any theory of absolutes--which is why I describe myself as a 'Burkean libertarian' when asked.
In my dealings with Obectivists, I always got the feeling that they were the Right's version of Scientologists. You know, like they couldn't let an hour go by without dropping Ayn Rand's name into a conversation, and that every time they walked into a book store they had to buy a copy of Atlas Shrugged. No wonder Allen Greenspan dropped out of their ranks years ago!
And it's not like I hated the books, I just didn't love them either. No epiphemy for me--but maybe that's because I've always had libertarian leanings? Just a good read. No big deal.
So, will I go see Atlas Shrugged? Sure will. The last time an Ayn Rand novel was put on to the silver screen it turned into an instant classic. But then again, we had Gary Cooper to convince us that one man could stand alone against the world. I just don't see Brad Pitt pulling the same thing off as tycoon John Galt.
But Angelina Jolie as Dagny Taggart? I'm so there.
And for my Objectivist friends, on a note of redemption, they will be glad that I passed on this news: Angelina Jolie is said to be a big Ayn Rand fan---and anything Angelina is into can't be all that bad, can it?.
Except Brad Pitt. And it turns out, Brad Pitt is into Ayn Rand, too. Go figure.
1
Brad Pitt as a philosophically influenced physicist... sorry don't see it. He should stick to sitting on a couch smoking pot out of an empty honey container or simply not bathing.
Posted by: PMain at April 28, 2006 04:12 PM (Wi32/)
2Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt to do Ayn Rand
You said "do Ayn Rand."
Your readers aren't the same as they used to be. They're like all serious and stuff.
Posted by: Leopold Stotch at April 28, 2006 07:25 PM (uvZMh)
3
Who wants to bet they spin this story into "Socialism is the solution" instead of "Socialism is the problem", or otherwise get the message completely spun into something the book did not intend?
This was one of my favourite books, unfortunately I do not think this movie will do it justice. Not just because books that are turned into movies tend to lose things in translation but because the message the book was trying to convey seems to be the antithesis to the ideology that is dominant in Hollywood these days.
Posted by: LC CanForce 101 at April 28, 2006 08:24 PM (3smJS)
4
You are clearly an idiot, but maybe you'll have an EPIPHANY and figure that out.
Posted by: Brad at April 28, 2006 10:08 PM (BJYNn)
6
I'd bet a thousand on this: they're going to make a pass at keeping the plot intact, and they're going to rip the guts out of the philosophy. This movie will have as much of Rand's thought in it as the Starship Troopers movie kept of Heinlein's ideas (which I like better than Rand's.)
Posted by: ShannonKW at April 29, 2006 02:14 AM (dT1MB)
Posted by: kadir at April 29, 2006 04:59 AM (9xsGY)
8
I really dread the thought of having the biggest leftist in Hollywood produce a remake of the antithesis of leftism. I mean really, after Munich what can we possibly expect?
As I've said elsewhere, it's absolutely sacreligious (not to mention the hypocrisy) that someone like Pitt and Jolie would rail against "corporate greed" yet, find comfort in Rand's philosophy to justify their own greed and sense of entitlement. This is just a Hollywood fad.
Most people who follow Rand believe that capitalism is good for everyone, not just themselves.
Posted by: Oyster at April 29, 2006 05:34 AM (YudAC)
9
Only time will reveal these two's real "motive". They are so self-involved it's sickening. To take advice and follow the lead of two such insensitive people would be the equivalent of listening to moral advice from Madonna. To viciously break up relationships and then justify it as it was already in trouble just fits right into their huge sense of entitlement, doesn't it? Anything with these two in it will end up in my rubbish bin where it belongs. I wouldn't let that woman anywhere near my kids.
Posted by: Diane Gillan at April 29, 2006 07:17 AM (/yM4k)
10
I predict Hollywood will massacre this book, not from any particular ideological reason but simply because that´s what they do to books of great length about ideas. There isn´t all that much action in it, and there´s a speech that lasts almost 100 pages out of about 1000. Also, the narcissism of the author is extraordinary: all men desire the lead female, and are willing to sacrifice anything (except capitalism) to have her. She goes from Cisco to Hank to Galt as each proves himself to be a better thinker. Everyone good is smart and beautiful. Everyone bad is dumber and ugly (except Robert Stadler).
Hollywood will be able to handle the narcissism, methinks, but have real trouble with the ideas. Any guesses to how long this movie will be?
Rusty--Are you sure Ayn Rand was bad gay? Nothing about it in the biography of hers I read, which was very critical (written by a former follower, who was married to Rand´s adulterous lover, Nathaniel Branden--great read, incidentally, The Passion of Ayn Rand).
Posted by: jd at April 29, 2006 08:57 AM (e2/tI)
11
No idea what they'll do with the philosophy of the book, but Brad Pitt is more than capable of pulling off a brilliant John Galt. If I had the choice, I'd almost rather see him as Howard Roark in a remake of The Fountainhead. He's already pulled off the "genius vandal" role in 12 Monkeys and Fight Club, and done an exceptional job in both. (Christian Bale is another actor I could definitely see knocking that role out of the park.)
If the standard for Brad Pitt to beat is Gary Cooper's role as Howard Roark, that's pretty much a walk. Cooper put in some great performances in his day, but his role as Howard Roark definitely wasn't one of them. Cooper's passionless closing argument at Roark's trial was nothing short of painful to watch.
I'm not the biggest fan of Angelina Jolie, but she could do a good job as Dagny.
I'm much more concerned with the storyline & philosophy than the actors, but the fact that there is a push to do this story tells me someone who understands the philosophy wants this movie to be made. There's definitely room for playing up an anti-corporate angle to the story, but I'm not sure that would necessarily be objectionable. The story of one group of industrialists teaming up with the government to squeeze out their competitors would play well across the political spectrum. Whatever the particular angle, it would seem to be impossible to tell anything even remotely resembling the story without including the message that the people should be very wary of government power in all its forms. If that message makes it through, I'll probably be pretty happy with the movie.
12
I'd much rather see the Fountainhead made, although didn't the Italian fascists do that one during the war? In any case, Fountainhead would be a much more compelling story, because it has the Nietzschean newspaper publisher, who is that rare thing in Randian fiction--a mixed type. Usually, people are either all good, or all bad, and the only time a good person is bad is when they are confused or misled. (Dagny when she struggles against Galt's plan until she sees the light, or Dagny's sister in law).
I wonder how they'll handle her strange attitude towards violence and sex? Should hit Hollywood's sweet spot.
Posted by: jd at April 30, 2006 03:31 PM (uT71O)
13
JD,
I always thought she was bad gay, but maybe I've just seen too many pics of her (shudder).
Posted by: Rusty at April 30, 2006 05:30 PM (JQjhA)
14
Your Comments Here
Big Secret
yes i know
she be pregnancy in the married
and living in
San Francisco
Fell/clay
she tell after three month
is dont be option for abortion
good friend
Separate and Unequal in Sweden.
Mulims in Sweden have no respect for Swedish law, in fact they would like a separate set of laws to govern themselves.
Via The Local :Sweden's largest Muslim organisation has demanded that Sweden introduce separate laws for Muslims, according to Swedish television. Sweden's equality minister Jens Orback called the proposals "completely unacceptable".
The Swedish Muslim Association, which represents around 70,000 Muslims in Sweden, has sent a letter to all Sweden's main political parties suggesting a number of reforms, SVT's Rapport programme reported.
The proposals include allowing imams into state (public) schools to give Muslim children separate lessons in Islam and their parents' native languages. The letter also said that boys and girls should have separate swimming lessons and that divorces between Muslims should be approved by an imam.
The letter provoked an instant, and damning, response from integration and equality minister Jens Orback.
"We will not have separate laws in Sweden. In Sweden, we are all equal before the law. In Sweden, we have fought for a long time to achieve gender-neutral laws, and to propose that certain groups should not be treated like others is completely unacceptable."
Orback said he had spoken to representatives of the Swedish Muslim Council, and they did not support the association's position.
"We have freedom of speech, we have the right to opinions and we have the right to make proposals - but if a law is going to be changed, it must be the same for everyone."
Asked whether the proposal plays into the hands of racists, Orback said that it did.
"I think it is very problematic and unfortunate that people who have been in Sweden for so long make proposals such as this that are so opposed to our intentions, when we are fighting for women's rights and the right to divorce," Orback replied.
Liberal Party leader Lars Leijonborg also slammed the idea of separate laws.
"Sweden has equality between men and women. To introduce exceptions for Muslims so that women can be oppressed with the support of the law is completely unacceptable to me," Liberal leader Lars Leijonborg wrote in a statement.
Sharia Law is unacceptable in general I think. I suggest that if Muslims in Sweden want to live in a nation with Sharia Law they should move to one. When in RomeÂ…..
Posted by: Howie at April 28, 2006 02:22 PM (D3+20)
3
I have to ask, for all those who claim that the vast majority of Muslims are moderate (and they may well be right):
1. Is this the action of moderate Muslims?
2. If not, where is the outcry from the moderate Muslim population?
3. If they're afraid to speak out due to Swedish extremists, can you list any examples?
Posted by: Lurking Observer at April 28, 2006 02:47 PM (/ZD7V)
4
Every time they get their numbers up, they demand this crap. It will happen here too.
Posted by: Leatherneck at April 28, 2006 03:56 PM (D2g/j)
5
Muslims have no respect for anything and should not be allowed into the civilized world.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 28, 2006 04:23 PM (0yYS2)
6
The request is ballsy, but it's not suprising. For many years muslims have been learning that western governments are willing to give them most of what they ask for with little fuss, all in the name of diversity. They didn't get a good reaction this time, so they'll go back, tweak the proposal to sound more gradual and benign and then try again.
Leatherneck's got it right. Everytime muslims demand something, locally or internationally, a population number gets quoted (look at how often we hear that there are 1 billion muslims in the world) as if that's the only justification needed to give them what they want - no matter how ludicrous.
Posted by: Graeme at April 28, 2006 04:28 PM (3wOSK)
7
I say we whittle down that number by a few hundred million. A few ICBM's should do the trick nicely.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 28, 2006 05:55 PM (0yYS2)
8
Sweden will give in. A few murders is all that will be needed to do the trick. I predict it will happen very soon, perhaps in as little as two years.
Posted by: jesusland joe at April 28, 2006 07:14 PM (rUyw4)
9Ontario, Canada is already on the path.
My question is, if Canadian law is secular and sees both parties, especially in family disputes, as equal parties AND Muslims contend (verbally) that men and women are treated equally, then what is the need for Sharia?
Posted by: Oyster at April 29, 2006 05:53 AM (YudAC)
10
I'll bet dollars to donuts that Sweden rolls over and gives islam its belly. I used to think that France would be first to do that, but Sweden is changing my mind.
Was it just last month that Sweden changed it laws to allow muslims to call for the death of Jews? I think so.
Posted by: LindaSoG at April 30, 2006 01:38 PM (GBBmd)
The Iranian nation won't give a damn about such useless resolutions,"
If leftist and Actors like Clooney finally see the evil genocide of Islamic Terrorism in Darfur they can also help with Iran. NPR reported that Iran is the #1 and only remaining producer of Caspian Sea Caviar. All other nations have stopped harvesting Caviar in the Caspian to preserve and prevent sturgeon becoming extinction there. You can start helping by boycotting all Caspian Sea Caviar. Iran may not give a damn about resolutions but they will earn 158 million dollars this year harvesting Caviar. I bet they do give a damn about 158 million bucks worth of unpurchased caviar.
1
They donated fifty million dollars to Hamas, I doubt they care about a measly one hundred and fifty eight million
I say that out of shame that I just purchased fourteen crates of the finest iranian Caviar myself, as most people do when you go to the super market.
Posted by: davec at April 28, 2006 01:14 PM (CcXvt)
2
>>>>If leftist and Actors like Clooney finally see the evil genocide of Islamic Terrorism in Darfur they can also help with Iran.
shhh, quiet. If the Left finds out Ahmadinejad is on our shit list, they'll be forced to oppose us on it. In fact, lots of them already have.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 28, 2006 01:23 PM (Wu4Nk)
3
Action against Darfur, and sanctions against Iran maybe, but how dare you ask George Clooney to sacrifice his caviar! that is worse than nuclear terrorism, perhaps even worse than global warming.
4
Look, Ahmadjehad is pointing out the 12th Imam. Also, he looks just like Larry.
Posted by: Leatherneck at April 28, 2006 01:51 PM (D2g/j)
5
The way this maniac is pushing for a confrontation leads me to believe that our Muslim brothers here in the USA already have the potential of WMD's and if we (US) attack Iran it will be exactly what they want. Justifiable retaliation (Sorry, to much sand surfin today! :-]
Posted by: Vegas Vic at April 28, 2006 02:27 PM (rF8RF)
6
George Clooney's sentiments about Darfur, are the only sane statements he's made in a long time.
Posted by: davec at April 28, 2006 03:19 PM (CcXvt)
Posted by: greyrooster at May 01, 2006 08:37 AM (XioYD)
13
Actually you need to get your facts straight. Iran is the only country exporting caviar right now because they are the only ones who have implemented a CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora) approved protection plan against poaching and over fishing. All other caviar producing countries couldn't care less about poaching and over fishing. Because of this they are not allowed to legally export caviar. Also, Iran has some of the best aqua culture projects in place right now to protect sturgeon from becoming extinct. Before you go bashing anyone you need to get your facts straight.
Posted by: caviargirl at May 02, 2006 10:29 AM (hAyYR)
14
Go ahead then slurp up all the Terror supporting caviar you can afford. And NPR reported the story but did not put a link on the ATC site. So no other nations are exporting caviar from the Caspian except Iran. Seems I had that fact pretty strait and it seems to me no fishing is better than some fishing. Since we are talking about harvesting females read to lay. That should help species recovery, not! Most of these agreements have no teeth. There are agreements meant to slow and stop the depletion of ocean fish stocks as well however stocks continue to decline. Seems to me the best protection for Caspian Sea Sturgeon is to not fish em and kill the demand. CITES may help and I hope it does but it cannot help as much as no demand. Send me some links I'm interested in reading up. teh Caspian is the most damaged ecosystem on earth or close to it.
Terroists Murder Over 14,500 in 2005.
The State Department has released it’s summary report on terrorism in the year 2005. The vast majority of all terror attacks were carried out by al-Qaeda and other “radical” Islamist groups. Iraq remains the focus of terrorist activity. Iran remains the most active state sponsor of Islamic terrorist groups.
Bloomberg :Terrorists killed more than 14,500 people in 11,000 attacks across the globe last year, the U.S. State Department said in its annual report on terrorism.
Al-Qaeda Threat
The al-Qaeda terrorist network remains a threat, with plans to attack the U.S. in a manner to match ``or even surpass the terror of 9/11,'' Henry Crumpton, the U.S. State Department's anti-terrorism chief said.
``Al-Qaeda is not the organization it was four years ago,'' the report said. The group's leaders are scattered and on the run, while its Afghan safe haven is gone. Its relationship with the Taliban has diminished, and its finances and logistics have been disrupted, Crumpton said.
For these reasons, ``al-Qaeda and its affiliates are desperate to claim Iraq as their own,'' Crumpton said. ``We and our allies, along with the emerging Iraqi government, must deny Iraq to al-Qaeda.''
Al-Qaeda is fragmented and desperate to create a safe have in Iraq.
Yahoo News : "Al-Qaida is not the organization it was four years ago," the report said.
However, "overall, we are in the first phase of a potentially long war," it said. "The enemy's proven ability to adapt means we will go through several more cycles of action/reaction before the war's outcome is no longer in doubt. It is likely we will have a resilient enemy for years to come."
A new generation of extremists, some of them getting training through the Internet, is emerging in cells that are likely to be more local and less meticulously planned, the report said. These small groups, empowered by technology, are very difficult to detect or counter, it said.
"We must maintain unrelenting pressure against al-Qaida," Henry Crumpton, the U.S. ambassador in charge of counterterrorism, said Friday at a briefing at the State Department. "We know they aim to attack the U.S. homeland."
The terrorist have threatened the American people directly with attacks even larger then the 9-11 attacks. After this years failure to produce civil war in Iraq by bombing Shite holy places it seems that the desperate Abu Musab al-ZarqawiÂ’s message last week indicates a change in strategy. Since he has been unable to drag large blocks of SunniÂ’s into a civil war he attempted to start he has not turned his attention to the Sunni themselves. Branding as Apostates any who cooperate with the new Iraqi government and targeting they and their families for murder. Just after ZarqawiÂ’s message last week there have been several targeted murders of prominent Sunni politicians and their families. By turning on his own sect he hopes to use fear to stop the participation of Sunni Muslims in the advancement of a new Iraqi government.
Zarqawi to Sunnis : Be extremely aware, those who join these apostate forces have nothing with us except the sharp swords, and between them and us will be nothing except grave days and nights.
Sunni of Iraq, will you stand for this murderer ruling over you? He stands in the way of both your freedom and our exit. Destroy him for he is certainly a murderer of his own and cares for nothing but power. He ignores the orders of his commanders while singing their praises. Truly he is the liar and the hypocrite. Fight and destroy al-Qaeda so all our peoples can have peace. Surely you heard him ignore and do the opposite of Bin LadenÂ’s call for you to come to Sudan. He has failed his assignment and now desperately rebels against his own, so has become his blood lust! Abu Musab al-Zarqawi must be destroyed.
Freedomdogs :Frank J from IMAO and I want to try to steal a march on the port side of the blogosphere. We want to proudly usurp their insulting jargon and turn it against them, and have a little fun while we do it. We'd like to fully embrace the moniker "101st Fighting Keyboardists" and the chicken hawk as our mascot.
When we looked into it, it turns out that the chicken hawk is a pretty impressive predator. ItÂ’s the largest of its family. This species vigorously defends its territory, getting even more aggressive when the conditions get harshest. It adapts to all climates. Most impressively, it feeds on chickens, mice, and rats.
Middle Earth Journal needs to get their head our of their Sci Fi books (substitute rectal reference here) for just a minute. Seems they would prefer that our troops not have the support of the nation they fight for. So we should just sit by and not support those fighting? Should an ordinary citizen not be allowed to support our nation and troops? Should we stop publishing the evil of the enemy or exposing their propaganda? I think not. I think ordinary citizens have a duty to help as they can with what they have. More than one way to skin a cat and there are also many ways to help in the fight. Men working at Centcom have thanked me for publishing their work. Hostages and their families and families of troops who gave their lives have thanked both Rusty and I for blogging their issues. We'll take their word for it that it helps. Wear the badge of The Pajamahadeen proudly. more...
Iraqi and U.S. forces have killed a senior member of al Qaeda in Iraq, Interior Ministry sources and the U.S. military said on Friday.
Humadi al-Takhi, who they said was a district commander of the group, was killed in a raid on a house on Friday about 10 km (6 miles) northeast of the city of Samarra, 100 km (60 miles) north of Baghdad.
Samarra is a stronghold for Sunni Arab miscreants, the city where a Shi'ite shrine was attacked in February. Intelligence reports led to the raid in which Humadi al-Takhi and two other thug terrorists were killed. According to Reuters, the news hasn't been independently verified. It appears that someone wants to see the body.
This latest success follows yesterday's news of the Iraqi Forces' capture of Abdul Khadir Makhol, senior leader of al Qaeda in the Tikrit region.
1
step over their bodies and move on to the next target - what else can ya' do but I doubt there will be any free beer for the grunts that took this terr down
Posted by: goesh at April 28, 2006 11:45 AM (vX0fY)
2
Probably finding out about now what being a minute man gets you for the next eternity of so.
Posted by: Brad at April 28, 2006 12:13 PM (3OPZt)
3
Man, the leftards just can't catch a break these days.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 28, 2006 04:23 PM (0yYS2)
Description:
MULTI-NATIONAL DIVISION - NORTH
101ST AIRBORNE DIVISION (AIR ASSAULT)
TIKRIT, IRAQ (FOB SPEICHER)
APO AE 09363
TIKRIT, Iraq– An Iraqi civilian kidnapped in Samarra was rescued April 27 when Soldiers from 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division stopped the would-be kidnappers’ vehicles and released the citizen.
Units stationed in Samarra had already been aware of a “be on the lookout” (BOLO) report for a silver sedan suspected of being involved in a kidnapping when some alert Soldiers noticed a pair of silver sedans along a major thoroughfare in southern Salah ah Din province.
The two automobiles were parked next to each other as observers noticed the occupants passing what appeared to be a rifle between the two vehicles. Soldiers began pursuit of the vehicles but were unable to maintain contact.
The pursuing Soldiers radioed other troops in the area to be on the lookout for the two sedans.
Soon afterward another patrol spotted one of the sedans and was able to stop the vehicle. Three occupants inside the car were detained while the vehicle was searched. While searching the vehicle Soldiers soon discovered the bound and gagged kidnap victim inside the trunk of the car.
Shortly thereafter Soldiers stopped two more cars matching the description of the suspected criminals involved, and detained their two occupants.
The victim was promptly transported to a nearby military medical facility and the five detainees taken to a secured location for further questioning.
Anti-Iraqi Forces, to include criminals, continue to victimize the common people of Iraq as they threaten and extort its citizens. Coalition and Iraqi security forces will continue to work together to eliminate this type of criminal threat so that the streets will be safe for all Iraqis.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximusi at April 28, 2006 05:14 AM (0yYS2)
2
I see no mention here of the issuance of warrants by a proper legal authority.
Such detentions are clearly illegal and the persons who are being held MUST be released immediately!
Meanwhile, someone alert the ACLU to start a lawsuit for the violation of the 4th Amendment. And if they didn't read them a Miranda warning, those troops had better watch out!
/I wish it was sarcasm.
Posted by: Lurking Observer at April 28, 2006 11:01 AM (/ZD7V)
Pakistani Minister Vows to Support Iran Upon U.S. Attack
(Islamabad, Pakistan) Pakistan's status as an ally of the U.S. seems to disappear when one travels into the hinterlands. Fundamental Islamic roots are deep and many in the population want Shariah Law imposed globally. I see this recent news as troubling.
Northwest Frontier Province (NWFP) Minister Sirajul Haq said the public would confront those who remained neutral if US attacked Iran. "As a Pakistani, I announce that if US attacks Tehran, it would be considered as an attack on Pakistan and Peshawar," he said.
In another development, the leader of Pakistan's largest Islamist party Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), Qazi Hussain Ahmed, announced on Sunday that he would have the religious parties' alliance, Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), "force the government to support Iran if America attacked it." Ahmed also praised terrorists who are fighting coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And from the Northwest Frontier Post (no link), it's reported that the goal is nation-wide Shariah Law and that Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) is achieving considerable success at recruiting.
The NWFP Senior Minister Sirajul-Haq has said MMA government would pave way for enforcement of Shariah based on social justice to remove centuries old English system of human exploitation from the country.
MMA was gradually heading towards success and we would soon emerge triumphant in this mission, he added.
[ ... ]
On this occasion, eminent religious scholar and Muhtamim Darul Uloom Taleemul Quran Maulana Saleh Faqir announced joining J.I. alongwith 70 other Ulema and hundreds of students and followers by appreciating active role of the party for enforcement of Shariah in the country. A local political and social figure Bashir Shakargah also announced joining JI with his 72 supporters.
Prudent observers should also note that Senior Minister Sirajul-Haq has recently spent time assuring Iranian President Ahmadinejad that the Pakistani people would support Iran in the event of U.S. aggression. "The people of Pakistan would not shy away from making any sacrifice for their Muslim brethren," he said.
1
"..Shariah based on social justice"
Holy nely, lefty socialists are going to love this one, now wonder those gutless lefty europeans are so eager to usher in their Islamist masters..
"..remove centuries old english system of human exploitation.."
Oh yeah, here's a brilliant idea, and replace it with stone age system of human oppression and pig ignorance.
Posted by: Mathewk at April 28, 2006 12:54 AM (pVHqF)
2
I've said it before, and I'll say it again; we're going to have to kill them all before it's over.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximusi at April 28, 2006 05:15 AM (0yYS2)
3
The deal we just inked with India is looking better and better.
Posted by: Stormy at April 28, 2006 06:12 AM (rnJqo)
4
Well I guess we will ve able to take comfort in the fact that the Pakis did not actually give the Iranians any nuclear weapons, just the blueprints on how to build them
Posted by: john Ryan at April 28, 2006 06:35 AM (TcoRJ)
5
And the weapons will sooner or later end up in the hands of the terrorists, John Ryan. Which is why we need to be getting ready right now for the unthinkable, because the terrorists will use a bomb on the US, and will use the threat of more bombs to blackmail the US and the rest of the World. We need to be getting ready for this. Right now.
Posted by: jesusland joe at April 28, 2006 09:16 AM (rUyw4)
6
We need to be getting ready for this, but our government and the liberal media insist on treating these people with kid gloves and giving them the status of human beings. Every time I do a blog on Muslims the love-thy-neighbor types attack me as being a racist. What can be done to open their eyes? I guess a nuclear bomb on Washington and New York will do it, but then it will be a bit late.
Posted by: Brenda Bowers at April 28, 2006 11:45 AM (Ev3GI)
7
I knew the EU three would not be able to stop Iran. Now, most level headed folks know force will have to be used. The UN, Russia, China, and the EU will do nothing, and want to continue to make money on Iran contracts at any cost to the world.
The United States will have to lead this fight, and I hope Briton, the Aussis, Japan, India, Poland, and a few small islands in the south pacific stand with the U.S. Perhaps, it is time to pull out of the UN, but I doubt the New World Order allow that to happen.
Put Israel into NATO, and everyone elce get two weeks of food, water, and a lot of wine. Because, I think there is going to be a big blow back from Iran. I hope just Iran.
Posted by: Leatherneck at April 28, 2006 03:52 PM (D2g/j)
8
Taking a muslim as an ally is like taking a scorpion into your bed. They are what they are, and the only way to deal with them is to kill them. They are either at your feet or at your throat.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 30, 2006 07:36 AM (0yYS2)
There are many reasons to object to extending Geneva Convention protections with full force to those, like Islamicists, who delight in cruelty and inhumanity. But one reason is psychological in nature, and nevertheless worth considering.
We cannot agree with the Islamists that we are subhuman and only they are entitled to honorable and humane treatement. We must insist, particularly with these racist thugs who consider those who do not share in their creed to be animals, that honor is based on reciprocal conduct and by compact.
We cannot agree that their status as fervent Islamists makes them our superiors and creates obligations towards them that they do not extend in return towards us.
For, if we do, are we not confirming their racist beliefs? Are we not telling them that we are, just as they believe, inferior to them by God's decree, and as such, fit only for slaughter or subjugation?
So, the answer to #2 is no, terrorist [my word] ought not be covered by the Geneva Conventions. But are they covered? This is a question of fact.
The Conventions apply to all prisoners of war. Should we consider Islamist insurgents prisoners of war? Let's see if they meet the conditions of a prisoner of war according to Article 4:2 of the Conventions:
(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance...
(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
Do the brave mujahidin wear uniforms or other regalia recognizable at a distance? No, they do not. Unless, of course, one considers Addidas knock-offs a distinctive sign.
more...
1
I agree. Yet we give most, if not all terrorists caught two hots, and a cot with ocean view, and a towel for their head.
We should do that, and do. If only the MSM would show how well those terrorists are kept, instead of the Abu Garab pictures, (about 48 front pages worth for the Old York Times), we could win the hearts, and minds of those who are brain washed to follow allah.
Not only are we giving fair treatment to the Islamists, we are being stabbed in the back by the MSM. Perhaps, they are a form of terror, and as such should be given some type of treatment.
Posted by: Leatherneck at April 27, 2006 09:15 PM (D2g/j)
2
We treat these terrorists better than any legit POWs have been treated in any previous war. It's ridiculous. And still the Leftards complain. Fuck them all. They make me sick.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 27, 2006 09:54 PM (M3nr/)
3
The "logic" of libtards who say that the Geneva conventions "ought to apply" is mind-bending. I think they should consider applying their logic to the golden rule.
A. Everyone "ought" to follow the golden rule. (Do unto others as you would have them do unto you).
B. Since it "ought" to be, we should pretend that everyone in fact does follow the golden rule.
C. Since the terrorists, [ahem] "militants", kidnap people, saw off their heads, bomb people indiscriminately, set their enemies on fire, torture, and so on, then they necessarily must want to be treated that way (because they are doing unto others as they would want others to do unto them)
Conclusion: According to libtard logic, we must behead, torture, incinerate and otherwise abuse the crap out of these bastards because that is how they "want" us to treat them.
Posted by: Ansar-al-kufir at April 28, 2006 12:50 AM (y7gpG)
4
The Geneva Convention is a quaint relic of a time long past, and should be relegated to the history books where it belongs. I say put jumper cables on their nuts and electrified needles in their armpits until they tell all. And the goddamn liberals too, for that matter.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximusi at April 28, 2006 05:16 AM (0yYS2)
5
Ansar al-kufir
Spot on, chap. The left, frustrated that they can not draw an actual equivalence between the sickening barbarity of our enemies and the ridiculously humane treatment that child-murdering human debris recieve at the hands of our soldiers, they are forced to invent equivalence.
Projection - they want the US to be as bad as they think it is, so they have invent supportive information and pathetic straw-men in order to support their asinine assertions (since reality won't do it for them).
The fact v. opinion point is also an important one. The Geneva Conventions, if anyone on the left actually read them, are written specifically to ferret out and to guard against barbaric destruction like the kind that the Islamists practice - namely, the targeting, hostage taking and torture of civilians.
No mercy. Every Islamist in the world must be killed. Now.
Posted by: Good Lt at April 28, 2006 05:19 AM (yT+NK)
6
I delved into the question of whether the Geneva Convention covered terrorists after Amnesty International came out with their ridiculous report and sensationalized statements that Guantanamo was the new gulag.
The essay was titled, Amnesty's Insanity, Part II
Take a look. It covers both of your questions concerning both the law and ethics of the definition/protection.
7
Good Lt --
Yes. The libtards (excuse my ad-hominem) are an inventive lot, aren't they? To argue that the U.S. is in violation of the Geneva conventions if it mistreats these flea-ridden mongrels (my apologies to fleas and dogs) is akin to saying that a man who kills an assailant in self-defense is guilty of murder.
Such an argument ignores the ethical nature of the action (motivated from self-defense, not animus), the moving actor (the terrorist or in this case, the assailant, created the situation necessitating the use of force) and the legal definitions (which ultimately define the obligations and duties of parties living in a society governed by the rule of law). There is no equivalence between a premeditated cold-hearted murder and the killing of someone by means of lethal force in defense of one's own life. The end result is the "same" (someone is dead) but that's where the similarity ends. Period.
Posted by: Ansar-al-kufir at April 28, 2006 04:08 PM (y7gpG)
8
I'll take it a step further -- if, by some chance, the Geneva Conventions were determiend to apply to the Islamist insurgents, then they would be morally wrong and ought not be followed.
9
The Conventions state that non-uniformed combatant are to be executed. I'm okay with that.
Posted by: Doug Halsted at April 28, 2006 09:22 PM (VVB4J)
10
I covered this earlier, just like the previous commentator to this thread, when AI tried to fool us into thinking that the headchoppers and homicide bombers enjoy Geneva Convention protections.
Short answer: no.
Long answer: Oh HELL no.
IF we had signed the 1977 "protocols", THEN the jihadists MIGHT be covered. The reason that we did not do this was because the US Governemnt, exercising rare foresight, felt that we would be made too vulnerable to potential asymmetrical warriors.
Ace, and your understanding of the 1949 Conventions, is entirely correct. Someone has to be wearing a uniform and fitted out as a soldier to warrant that kind of coverage.
Sympathy for the Devil.
Jihadi Delento Est.
http://okipunk.com/?p=158
Posted by: Peter Bland at April 29, 2006 01:00 PM (nZC0w)
11
This from a country that gives rights to animals
Posted by: sandpiper at April 30, 2006 12:56 PM (QtdTZ)