April 03, 2006
French University President Disgusted with French Youth.
So what do you want for nothing?
Guardian UK : The president of the world-renowned Sorbonne University has branded French students protesting about the country's new employment law "ignorant and stupid".
Reacting to protests over the law, which makes it easier for employers to fire, and therefore presumably more willing to hire, young workers, Jean-Robert Pitte said the youngsters had no dreams but believed everything was due to them as a right without having to work for it.
"I'm very angry about the demagogy, the ignorance and the stupidity of the young and of the French," said Dr Pitte, 56, a geography professor who has taught at Oxford and Cambridge and holds the Légion d'honneur.
"Today's youth don't have dreams, they have illusions. To dream is to want to accomplish something difficult that is a challenge. Instead youngsters believe they have a right to everything and if things don't go the way they want it's someone else's fault."
Oh I see just a free ride with no blisters required. Lazy punks been hanging with too many Muslims, donÂ’t they realize if you provide value to your employer you wonÂ’t be the one fired? Oh yes they do realize that and thatÂ’s why they are upset, never mind.
Posted by: Howie at
03:04 PM
| Comments (31)
| Add Comment
Post contains 219 words, total size 1 kb.
1
>>>>>>>"Today's youth don't have dreams, they have illusions. To dream is to want to accomplish something difficult that is a challenge. Instead youngsters believe they have a right to everything and if things don't go the way they want it's someone else's fault."
WOW!!! He just described modern Liberalism. lol!
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 03, 2006 04:12 PM (8e/V4)
2
Modern liberalism IS socialism. Which is why it's so utterly stupid.
Posted by: Homeland Stupidity at April 03, 2006 04:33 PM (FVbj6)
3
Why drag Muslims into this, becoming a bit obsessed?
Perhaps not everyone wants to live in the US system where you have a super-rich minority, a middle class getting screwed and 40% of people with no health insurance.
Posted by: Sonic at April 03, 2006 05:00 PM (Gsn6c)
4
"Lazy punks been hanging with too many Muslims"
:-D
Posted by: Javapuke at April 03, 2006 05:07 PM (HAnyY)
5
Yeah Howie! I just had some of what Sonic's smoking and he's right. It's not like muslims believe they have a right to everything (except to govern their own neighbourhoods, ban offensive cartoons, artwork and essays, kill their daughters, destroy the non-muslim world)and it's not like they believe that when things don't go the way they want it's someone else's fault (except those couple of times they've blamed the Jews). Man, you're so obsessed.
Posted by: Graeme at April 03, 2006 05:09 PM (qUTCg)
6
"a middle class getting screwed"
So now it is the middle class that is getting screwed?
Nothing like trying to pander to the largest audience. Next thing you know it will be the upper middle class that is getting screwed by those filthy rich neocons!
Too bad the majority of the filthy rich lean left...
Posted by: Duncan_ID at April 03, 2006 05:50 PM (WUH7G)
7
Yes thats right Graeme, thats all muslims, all 1.1 billion people, all exactly the same.
Of course if someone said all Americans were stupid ignorant doughballs, people would say "thats not true of us all, it's just Graeme who is like that"
But of course that is different isn't it.
Posted by: Sonic at April 03, 2006 07:20 PM (Gsn6c)
8
Sonic,
maybe what they really want is to be lazy bums who don't have to work for a living and that's why they want jobs where they aren't allowed to be fired.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 03, 2006 07:42 PM (8e/V4)
9
What they want is equal rights with other French workers. You all seem to find it really hard to grasp that there are alternative models to the US way of doing things.
You don't like Western European style social democracy, that's cool, you don't have to like it. We don't like the idea of working ourseoves to death with no social benefits like in the US model, but we don't blogpost on how stupid we think you are to put up with it.
Posted by: Sonic at April 03, 2006 08:11 PM (Gsn6c)
10
>>>>What they want is equal rights with other French workers.
I'm talking about the rioting students. They have equal rights with other French workers.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 03, 2006 09:21 PM (8e/V4)
11
Just like the idiots protesting for illegal aleins stupid and braindead
Posted by: sandpiper at April 03, 2006 09:38 PM (uTBPj)
12
jesusland, ever actually read what the demonstrations are about?
The govt is proposing that if you are under 26 you are not protected from unfair dismissal like the rest of the workforce.
Posted by: Sonic at April 03, 2006 10:04 PM (Gsn6c)
13
Yes Sonic, there are alternatives to the US way of doing things.
And they all suck.
We are the wealthiest, happiest, most free people in the world, and even our poor are fat, and you and every other whiney piece of shit like you in the world envies and hates us for it. So fuck off and peddle your Marxist crap somewhere else, because I don't have time for it, as I'm working seven days a week, eight to ten hours a day, and I'm making tons of money by my work ethic, self-discipline, and my dedication to my craft. What do you do, serve fries to people like me?
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 10:31 PM (0yYS2)
14
"We are the wealthiest, happiest, most free people in the world"
Yes thats right mate, you just keep thinking that and everything will be just fine.
Make sure though that you avoid ever going abroad, we wouldn't want your illusions getting shattered would we. Oh I forgot, you don't get to go on holiday do you, just working to hard.
Funny that your amazing work ethic seems to allow for you to waste time posting online, but who am I to comment.
Off to the beach.
Posted by: Sonic at April 03, 2006 10:55 PM (Gsn6c)
15
When is France going to burn (an I'm not just talking about the cars)?
Posted by: ALL MY LOVE at April 03, 2006 11:29 PM (HJbYT)
16
Make sure though that you avoid ever going abroad, we wouldn't want your illusions getting shattered would we.
Never mind going abroad, I
live abroad.
He's right. (Well, mostly. Australia is pretty darn good too.)
Posted by: Pixy Misa at April 04, 2006 01:23 AM (+PJVi)
17
GO SONIC!!!
I been overseas (through alot of Europe, Turkey and Egypt) and everywhere i went i heard Americans talking about how everything in America is Faster, Bigger, Better, More efficient. One man even said that America would be able to straighten The tower of Piza!!! HAHA!(italy could too but what bout the tourists retard) How stupid can you get? And these are the Americans that are interested in countried other than their own so they're the good ones! It's a pretty widespread opinion in Aus that Americans are selfish stupid and NEED TO LOSE WEIGHT!
Go Islam!
Posted by: Resurrected_Dragon at April 04, 2006 03:26 AM (UroH2)
18
Well, when a sense of entitlement is bred into you from day one I can understand why Sonic feels the way he does. The fact is that article is right. This is the way things are in France. The youth, in particular, think not getting fired from a job is a "human right" alongside free health care and lifelong unemployment benefits.
However, I still think the French went overboard with the new law. 2 years is, in my opinion, ridiculous. It doesn't take two years to evaluate a new employee to determine if you're going to keep them on.
Posted by: Oyster at April 04, 2006 04:26 AM (YudAC)
19
>>>Go Islam
Anti-Americanism is a mental disorder.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 04, 2006 04:36 AM (paKD6)
20
Ressurected Dragon, and I supposed they just loved your anti-Americanism. Why did you come back? You know - since we're all so stupid over here and you seem to be the only one who turned out right. Never mind that there are arrogant and stupid people all over the world. And here's a real shocker for you ... some of them visit the US and act like idiots while they're here too.
But don't let that stop you from your selective America bashing.
Posted by: Oyster at April 04, 2006 06:03 AM (YudAC)
21
Jesus Sonic, you little libtard morons
are as stupid as you seem, aren't you? Avoid going abroad? I've been abroad, and I'm really impressed with the way most of the rest of the world lives in some version of an open sewer and has to work twice as hard as I do for just a handfull of rice a day. I also love how European cities are rife with crime and packed with hostile third-worlders, and how you Kiwis have turned the Maoris into a nation of alcoholics. It's a good thing they don't use the American model, else they might actually get ahead, and we can't have that!
You're off to the beach, eh? Well I go about twice a year, and to the mountains as often as I like, not to mention fishing for every kind of freshwater fish, hunting, and shooting all my big, mean assault rifles at the range, and I'm going to buy a beach condo, or maybe a chalet in the mountains, or both. If you ever come to America, remember that I tip my pizza guys well if they're quick and polite.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 04, 2006 06:27 AM (0yYS2)
22
Unfair dismissal? My contract says I work at the pleasure of both parties. My employer and me. if one for whatever reason so long as it's not discriminatory or against the law either party can end the relationship at any time. for instance if my employer don't want me to work here. They can fire me. I can draw benefits. I get a big fat severance check. But see they keep me because I'm useful. I
ve been told by the VP I have a job for life if I want it but it's not in the contract. Who wants to be where they are not an asset and productive just to milk the check anyway? Idiots. My advice pass the law and make yourself useful. I doubt the law says the civil discrimination is now lawful. It just means that if you don't make money or provide an asset you need to move on. hard to compete with a bunch of dead asses hanging on your back.
Posted by: Howie at April 04, 2006 07:44 AM (D3+20)
23
Why sonic asks a good question. Always blaming others not our fault bullshit its was the evel jooooos who fired me cause I was a lazy screwup, oppressed me for 10,000 years crap. See it now?
Posted by: Howie at April 04, 2006 09:14 AM (D3+20)
24
Makes the beach twice a year!
All hail.
Idiot.
Posted by: Sonic at April 04, 2006 03:03 PM (Gsn6c)
25
Yeah, I go to the beach twice a year, even though it's about 400 miles away. Unlike you, I have a life, and do lots of other things with it, like hunting, fishing, hiking, boating, etc., but mostly I work and make lots of money. Now go get me a burger and fries, and maybe I'll let you mow my grass.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 04, 2006 04:46 PM (0yYS2)
26
Mostly you seem to post here, and in working hours as well...
Strange that.
Also you seem to be obsessed with fast food, watch out or you will get to big for your cubicle fatty.
(this is rather to easy)
Posted by: Sonic at April 04, 2006 05:44 PM (Gsn6c)
27
Rather
to easy? Unlike English, apparently, but I suppose the irony will be lost on you, so never mind.
Yeah, I eat a lot of fast food, because I burn about four thousand calories a day, and not in a cubicle, but building houses. Guys like you bring me my food and pick up after me while I flirt with the cute waitresses who won't give you the time of day because you're a loser. I work when I choose, and I stop when I choose, because I work for myself. I'm free, fit, healthy, happy, and very well paid, and that just kills you, which is the best part of it all.
Sorry, but as in the rest of life, you lose here too.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 04, 2006 08:24 PM (0yYS2)
28
Does anyone remember that Show Fantasy Island?
Interesting that building sites now have internet connections isn't it.
Still thats how improbable old improbulus is, women love him, men want to be him and I laugh at him.
Posted by: Sonic at April 04, 2006 08:35 PM (Gsn6c)
29
Oh that was a stinging comeback, it almost made me stop yawning. I'm posting from home you moron, but you can't be expected to know how the whole "work for a living" things goes. You see, I get up early, blogsurf for a bit, go to work, get my work done, go home, eat supper, blogsurf more, then go to bed. At the end of the job I deposit a large check in the bank and move on to the next job. You are a parasitic loser who thinks that you'll be able to make a career out of hanging onto society's teat. You will starve eventually, if the Maoris don't slaughter you, and that makes me happy.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 05, 2006 06:06 AM (0yYS2)
30
Oh look the remf blowhard is back posting again.
Posted by: Sonic at April 05, 2006 04:45 PM (Gsn6c)
31
Wow, that's some retort you've got there? Where'd you pick that up, the school playground? Isn't it time for you to deliver a few pizzas or something?
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 07, 2006 06:16 AM (0yYS2)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Christians Still Persecuted in Muslim Nations.
Although Abdul Rahman is now safe this week the Weekly Standard points out more intolerance by Muslims specifically this week Afghanistan and even harsher Iran. Also flunking the human rights grade is Saudi Arabia and Sudan. Yes Sudan rape and genocide capital of the world where and Arab can act like a true Arab.
Weekly Standard : Two other Afghan converts to Christianity were arrested in March, though, for security reasons, locals have asked that their names and locations be withheld. In February, yet other converts had their homes raided by police.
Some other Muslim countries have laws similar to Afghanistan's. Apart from its other depredations, in the last ten years Saudi Arabia has executed people for the crimes of apostasy, heresy, and blasphemy. The death penalty for apostates is also in the legal code in Iran, Sudan, Mauritania, and the Comoros Islands.
In the 1990s, the Islamic Republic of Iran used death squads against converts, including major Protestant leaders, and the situation is worsening under President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The regime is currently engaged in a systematic campaign to track down and reconvert or kill those who have changed their religion from Islam.
Iran also regards Baha'is as heretics from Islam and denies them any legal rights, including the right to life: There is no penalty for killing a Baha'i
No penalty at all for killing a human because his is Baha'i? I suppose you can rape his wife and kids too afterward with no penalty. Probably get a medal for being a good little murderer.
Posted by: Howie at
02:21 PM
| Comments (21)
| Add Comment
Post contains 266 words, total size 2 kb.
1
its been happening for 2000 years.
Posted by: s at April 03, 2006 02:35 PM (kmwDH)
2
If it was Muslims being killed, we would see Madelin Not So Bright, and Clinton wanting someone bombed. But, Sudan is an up and comming oil producer, and those who worship a false god like Allah are somehow Ok with the New World Order. On the other hand, those nasty Christians have to go.
Posted by: Leatherneck at April 03, 2006 03:18 PM (D2g/j)
3
Most Liberals are ignorant of it, and the ones that aren't think it's just fine.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 03, 2006 04:13 PM (8e/V4)
Posted by: Steve at April 03, 2006 06:34 PM (Tb8yM)
5
Wikipedia reports about 200 Baha i executed in the first 20 years after Iran's Islamic revolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baha%27i#Persecution I am not sure how much of an effect American liberals or conservatives can have in this matter. I suppose offering religous amnesty would only open the floodgates. But Sudan ? The American government could stop that which is probably like 10000 times worse very quickly if Washington really wanted to do so. Their one oil pipline is very vulnerable. One well trained company of Sudanese "freedom fighters" could keep it closed down until the genocide ended.
Posted by: john Ryan at April 03, 2006 06:47 PM (TcoRJ)
6
>>>>But the Koran doesn't call for the death of apostates.
Maybe the Q'uran doesn't, but islam does.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 03, 2006 06:55 PM (8e/V4)
7
John Ryan : There you see you can do it. You he just taken your first step into a much larger universe. (I hope it's him if not tell me and I'll trash the spoof.)
Hey I don't quote obi-wan unless I like it. John is rith for whatever reason Sudan/Darfur is being left to the dogs. everyone knows but I don't see much getting done and when someone does try Sadan bitches and whines balks. They need a good slapping.
Not much you can do with em except cram civilzation down their throats with a ax handle and that's expensive.
Posted by: Howie at April 03, 2006 07:34 PM (D3+20)
8
Steve,
Islam is a religion of death. Their boy Mo likes to rape little girls. Allah is a false moon god.
You don't have to believe me, look it up for yourself. It is in what we call history books.
ROPMA
Posted by: Leatherneck at April 03, 2006 07:35 PM (D2g/j)
9
Is that why those muslum nationa are getting all those earthquakes?
Posted by: sandpiper at April 03, 2006 09:39 PM (uTBPj)
10
Steve,
The punishment for apostasy in the Koran is unclear, but it is implied. I would refer you to many instances in the Hadiths, which put the Koran into it's proper sequential order, whereby the punishment of death for apostasy is quite clear.
Posted by: Oyster at April 04, 2006 04:44 AM (YudAC)
11
Islam is not a religion; it is a pathology, of hate, murder, rape and revenge, of epidemic proportions. One billion muslims, of which even moderates can be induced to mob behavior, is God's way of saying we'd better wake up and smell the Truth.
Posted by: n.a.palm at April 04, 2006 08:43 AM (uO8TL)
12
Some Teachings of the Jewish Talmud
Where a Jew Should Do Evil
Moed Kattan 17a: If a Jew is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there.
Penalty for Disobeying Rabbis
Erubin 21b. Whosoever disobeys the rabbis deserves death and will be punished by being boiled in hot excrement in hell.
Hitting a Jew is the same as hitting God
Sanhedrin 58b. If a heathen (gentile) hits a Jew, the gentile must be killed.
O.K. to Cheat Non-Jews
Sanhedrin 57a . A Jew need not pay a gentile ("Cuthean") the wages owed him for work.
Jews Have Superior Legal Status
Baba Kamma 37b. "If an ox of an Israelite gores an ox of a Canaanite there is no liability; but if an ox of a Canaanite gores an ox of an Israelite...the payment is to be in full."
Jews May Steal from Non-Jews
Baba Mezia 24a . If a Jew finds an object lost by a gentile ("heathen") it does not have to be returned. (Affirmed also in Baba Kamma 113b). Sanhedrin 76a. God will not spare a Jew who "marries his daughter to an old man or takes a wife for his infant son or returns a lost article to a Cuthean..."
Jews May Rob and Kill Non-Jews
Sanhedrin 57a . When a Jew murders a gentile ("Cuthean"), there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a gentile he may keep.
Baba Kamma 37b. The gentiles are outside the protection of the law and God has "exposed their money to Israel."
Jews May Lie to Non-Jews
Baba Kamma 113a. Jews may use lies ("subterfuges") to circumvent a Gentile.
Non-Jewish Children are Sub-Human
Yebamoth 98a. All gentile children are animals.
Abodah Zarah 36b. Gentile girls are in a state of niddah (filth) from birth.
Abodah Zarah 22a-22b . Gentiles prefer sex with cows.
Insults Against Blessed Mary
Sanhedrin 106a . Says Jesus' mother was a whore: "She who was the descendant of princes and governors played the harlot with carpenters." Also in footnote #2 to Shabbath 104b of the Soncino edition, it is stated that in the "uncensored" text of the Talmud it is written that Jesus mother, "Miriam the hairdresser," had sex with many men.
Gloats over Christ Dying Young
A passage from Sanhedrin 106 gloats over the early age at which Jesus died: "Hast thou heard how old Balaam (Jesus) was?--He replied: It is not actually stated but since it is written, Bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days it follows that he was thirty-three or thirty-four years old."
Posted by: To n.a.palm at April 04, 2006 10:09 AM (zqsRN)
13
Ah but the joooos have advanced a bit. Islam still wallows in the placenta of it's birth. There they go again pointing fingers at the jooooos in hopes it will distract from their own problems.
Posted by: Howie at April 04, 2006 10:36 AM (D3+20)
14
Dear "To n.a.palm"
"Whosoever disobeys the rabbis deserves death and will be punished by being boiled in hot excrement in hell." It appears they're leaving it up to God with that verse. In Islam, it's a bit different. Muslims are compelled to do that work on earth.
Everything else you've quoted is a bit different as well. There are some questionable teachings in Christianity too. The difference, in case you haven't noticed, is exactly what Howie said,
"Islam still wallows in the placenta of it's birth." In other words, they're still killing apostates, still stoning women for "adultery" and still cutting off limbs and poking out eyes and blowing up children and kidnapping and raping - all in the name of Islam.
The fact is most of the older religion's teachings were "of their time" and are no longer practiced in the literal sense. Except Islam. The fundamentalists and radicals strive to revert back to the literal interpretations and practices in everyday life.
But, it's all the same to you, isn't it?
Posted by: Oyster at April 04, 2006 11:52 AM (uZPWy)
15
To: to n.a. palm.......and your point is? You seem knowledgeable of the old testament and other hebrew writings, but so what? Neither those nor the Koran/hadiths/ etc. mean anything now.
Be careful when you "judge" others, because you will answer to God for it.
If you are a muslim, no wonder you are miserable, because you have no hope of salvation.
Posted by: n.a. palm at April 04, 2006 01:30 PM (uO8TL)
16
you wrote( be careful when you judge athers ,you will answer to god for it) exuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me ? what do you think you are doing all the time? about salvation Christianity and Islam differ regarding the concept of the Original Sin. According to Christianity, Adam and Eve, the first humans sinned when they ate the forbidden fruit. They were expelled from heaven and sin entered the world. Every child of Adam, you and I, according to Christianity has inherited this sin (as genetic inheritance). Therefore, every male and female is born stained with sin and is therefore destined to hell, from birth. This belief in Christianity gave rise to the doctrine of Atonement. According to this doctrine, God sacrificed his "only begotten" son, Jesus to wash away the sins of the world. The only thing people have to do to wash away their hereditary stain is to believe in Jesus as God's son and that he died for them.
Islam does not agree with all this. According to the Qur'an, every one is responsible for their own doings and nobody can carry the burden of another. God is forgiving and if a person sincerely repents, amends and does what is good and righteous, God forgives. Adam did not ask us before eating the fruit, so how can we be blamed?
In any society, where justice is one of the highest valued morals, killing an innocent man (Jesus) to wash away the sins of the guilty would be condemned as immoral, yet billions of people rejoice over this "gift" of injustice! Once again, the source of conflict is Paul and not Jesus. Jesus never talked about atonement or a "free-ride" through the blood of an innocent man.
On the contrary he said, "Â…If you would enter life, keep the commandments" (Matthew 19:17). It was Paul who brought the concept of the Original Sin into Christianity.
Posted by: TO N.A.PALM at April 04, 2006 06:54 PM (zqsRN)
17
In any society, where justice is one of the highest valued morals, killing an innocent man (Jesus) to wash away the sins of the guilty would be condemned as immoral, yet billions of people rejoice over this "gift" of injustice!
Are you kidding? The killing of Jesus IS condemned as immoral by christians (just watch Gibson's Passion of the Christ).
What christians are grateful for is not his unjust killing, but that Jesus submitted himself to such a gross injustice for our sakes. It was a gift, and no "quotes" around gift are necessary.
All sacrifices for others are inherently unjust-- that why it's called sacrifice-- somebody else pays the price. And that's what makes them heroic.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 04, 2006 07:14 PM (8e/V4)
18
DEAR OYSTER
There is no middle ground or compromise
[59:21] If we revealed this Quran to a mountain, you would see it trembling, crumbling, out of reverence for GOD. We cite these examples for the people, that they may reflect.
[29:43] We cite these examples for the people, and none appreciate them except the knowledgeable.*
[7:204] When the Quran is recited, you shall listen to it and take heed, that you may attain mercy.
Wisdom: A Great Treasure
[2:269] He bestows wisdom upon whomever He chooses, and whoever attains wisdom, has attained a great bounty. Only those who possess intelligence will take heed.
[6:126] This is the straight path to your Lord. We have explained the revelations for people who take heed.
[17:41] We have cited in this Quran (all kinds of examples), that they may take heed. But it only augments their aversion.
[17:89] We have cited for the people in this Quran all kinds of examples, but most people insist upon disbelieving.
Throughout the whole Quran, we learn that any choice we make, based on the Quranic teachings, has to come down to one out of two totally opposite choices. It's part of God's mercy and His infinite grace to cite the examples for us in a very clear manner by presenting very contrasting views, paths and destinies. However and as stated in the above verses, only the intelligent, knowledgeable and wise ones will take heed and the majority will end up with a miserable choice!
It's either God or Satan.
[2:208] O you who believe, you shall embrace total submission; do not follow the steps of Satan, for he is your most ardent enemy.
Satan Claims the Majority
[34:20] Satan found them readily fulfilling his expectations. They followed him, except a few believers.
It's one of two paths, straight or crooked,
[76:3] We showed him the two paths, then he is either appreciative, or unappreciative.
[7:45] "who repel from the path of GOD, and strive to make it crooked, and, with regard to the Hereafter, they are disbelievers."
It's either belief or disbelief.
[3:177] Those who choose disbelief, instead of belief, do not hurt GOD in the least; they have incurred a painful retribution.
The absolute truth or falsehood.
[10:32] Such is GOD, your rightful Lord. What is there after the truth, except falsehood? How could you disregard all this?
[6:73] He is the One who created the heavens and the earth, truthfully. Whenever He says, "Be," it is. His word is the absolute truth. All sovereignty belongs to Him the day the horn is blown. Knower of all secrets and declarations, He is the Most Wise, the Cognizant.
Doubtful or certain.
[3:7] He sent down to you this scripture, containing straightforward verses - which constitute the essence of the scripture - as well as multiple-meaning or allegorical verses. Those who harbor doubts in their hearts will pursue the multiple-meaning verses to create confusion, and to extricate a certain meaning. None knows the true meaning thereof except GOD and those well founded in knowledge. They say, "We believe in this - all of it comes from our Lord." Only those who possess intelligence will take heed.
[9:125] As for those who harbored doubts in their hearts, it actually added unholiness to their unholiness, and they died as disbelievers.
[2:4] And they believe in what was revealed to you, and in what was revealed before you,* and with regard to the Hereafter, they are absolutely certain.
In the Hereafter, will it be hellfire or paradise?
[59:20] Not equal are the dwellers of the Hellfire and the dwellers of Paradise; the dwellers of Paradise are the winners.
Should we choose this temporary life or the abode of the Hereafter?
God Controls All Provisions
[13:26] GOD is the One who increases the provision for whomever He wills, or withholds it. They have become preoccupied with this life; and this life, compared to the Hereafter, is nil.
Rearranging Our Priorities
[6:32] The life of this world is no more than illusion and vanity, while the abode of the Hereafter is far better for the righteous. Do you not understand?!
Who is to follow? Guided or misguided leaders?
[28:41] We made them imams who led their people to Hell. Furthermore, on the Day of Resurrection, they will have no help.
[32:24] We appointed from among them imams who guided in accordance with our commandments, because they steadfastly persevered and attained certainty about our revelations.
Please reflect on the following bright contrast of black and white:
[5:100] Proclaim: "The bad and the good are not the same, even if the abundance of the bad may impress you. You shall reverence GOD, (even if you are in the minority) O you who possess intelligence, that you may succeed."
[32:18] Is one who is a believer the same as one who is wicked? They are not equal.
[35:19] The blind and the seer are not equal.
[35:20] Nor are the darkness and the light.
[35:21] Nor are the coolness of the shade and the heat of the sun.
[35:22] Nor are the living and the dead; GOD causes whomever He wills to hear. You cannot make hearers out of those in the graves.
[39:9] Is it not better to be one of those who meditate in the night, prostrating and staying up, being aware of the Hereafter, and seeking the mercy of their Lord? Say, "Are those who know equal to those who do not know?" Only those who possess intelligence will take heed.
[41:34] Not equal is the good response and the bad response. You shall resort to the nicest possible response. Thus, the one who used to be your enemy, may become your best friend.
The Rich Believer is Better than the Poor Believer
[16:75] GOD cites the example of a slave who is owned, and is totally powerless, compared to one whom we blessed with good provisions, from which he gives to charity secretly and publicly. Are they equal? Praise be to GOD, most of them do not know.
[16:76] And GOD cites the example of two men: one is dumb, lacks the ability to do anything, is totally dependent on his master - whichever way he directs him, he cannot produce anything good. Is he equal to one who rules with justice, and is guided in the right path?
Higher Ranks for the Strivers
[4:95] Not equal are the sedentary among the believers who are not handicapped, and those who strive in the cause of GOD with their money and their lives. GOD exalts the strivers with their money and their lives above the sedentary. For both, GOD promises salvation, but GOD exalts the strivers over the sedentary with a great recompense.
[39:29] GOD cites the example of a man who deals with disputing partners (Hadith), compared to a man who deals with only one consistent source (Quran). Are they the same? Praise be to GOD; most of them do not know.
We're all here on this earth for a second and final chance. It's either redemption and eternal bliss or eternal retribution. Either the right choice or the miserable one. Being hesitant, will not help. Staying in the gray zone is a condemned apathy. Waiting and postponing our decisions is nothing but a hypnotizing act of Satan just to delay our certainty until it's too late.
Too Late
[32:12] If only you could see the guilty when they bow down their heads before their Lord: "Our Lord, now we have seen and we have heard. Send us back and we will be righteous. Now we have attained certainty."*
Posted by: TO OYSTER at April 04, 2006 07:31 PM (zqsRN)
19
If you believe we are here for a second, and final chance, you fit in just fine with the New World Order, and New Age beliefs.
The G-d I pray to sent his son into the world to die for my sins, so I can have enternal life. G-d sent his son into this world not to condem it, but to save it. Jesus said " I am the way, and the life, he who believes in me shall not perish, but have enternal life". What happens when I fall short of perfection is that I lose rewards in Heaven, but not my erternal soul.
Stop praying to a false moon god you can not know, and turn to Christ who died, but was risen, and sits on the right hand of G-d Almighty. I will not cut your head off if you do not believe as I do. I will not make you pay a tax either.
That is what everyone is angry about. Islam is a religion of hate, and death. Most people are sick and tired of tuning the other cheek.
Posted by: Leatherneck at April 04, 2006 07:50 PM (D2g/j)
20
Why is when muslims or their dhimmis speak, it sounds like someone with a head injury babbling incoherently? If it weren't for cut and paste, they wouldn't have much to say.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 05, 2006 06:07 AM (0yYS2)
21
Hey wheres AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL? wheres the UN human rights groups? their nowhere to be found
Posted by: sandpiper at April 05, 2006 08:43 AM (O2c+K)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Populists Beware Of Immigration Reform?
America is a melting pot because people of varying races and backgrounds come to the U.S. and bring their culture, and they choose to learn about America and our way of life. Many immigrants have assimilated. That is what ties us together as a family. When there are millions of illegal immigrants who do not wish to assimilate and go about the proper way to immerse themselves in American culture, and become legal, they undoubtedly isolate themselves. Americans should not feel that, in order to bridge the divide to communicate with an exploding Latino population, that we must take Spanish. - Felicia Benamon (an American first, an Afro-American second)
Edward Gillespie, former chairman of the Republican National Committee in the 2004 election cycle, has a piece titled "Populists Beware" in the Opinion Journal today in obvious support for a temporary guest worker program (surprise - his firm, Quinn Gillespie & Associates, represents clients who support a temporary guest worker program). He warns Republicans that the GOP must not become an anti-immigration party, and he irrationally draws a connection between being "anti-illegal immigrant" and being "anti-immigrant".
According to Gillespie, Republicans in Congress must choose either a comprehensive immigration reform package including a guest-worker program or a narrowly focused border-security bill. He then offers that the former would improve homeland security, help our economy and build greater Republican majorities, but the latter, conversely, would ignore fundamental problems, hurt our economy and risk the party's majority status. To support his premise, Gellespie accurately points out that between 2000 and 2004, President Bush increased his support in the Hispanic community by nine percentage points. Had he not, John Kerry would be president today (Perish the mere thought).
While Gillespie certainly knows his business, and who am I to argue with a political expert, reading his entire piece convinces me that while many of his points are valid, he, like so many of those supporting the guest worker program, fails to look at the issue in a balanced perspective. There's a very big difference between those that have come to America legally, and those that sneak into the country illegally.
No matter how you cut it, those that cross our borders illegally are criminals, and the fact that the U.S. government has failed to protect our borders and has also failed to enforce the enforcement of our laws is itself also criminal. To further fail to enforce the laws that have been criminally ignored is simply encouraging more criminal behavior and the continued invasion of America by an what has clearly become and "army" of illegal aliens in more ways than one.
And while I'm blowing my top, why is it that I keep hearing from politicians and the news media, even Fox TV, that we can't simply throw out 12 million criminals? Why not? Every time one goes to the doctor, a hospital, a school, receives a traffic ticket, applies for any program or job, aren't all of these opportunities to arrest them and spirit them back to where they came from? Shouldn't this have already been done during the last ten years while the federal government has sat back and allowed the problem to now reach a crisis point?
Frankly, I'm getting damned tired of having to go through a bilinqual menu every time I call a business, tired of paying to support services for people that have invaded my country illegally (although I certainly support caring for them during a very brief few days while we are arranging their transportation out of the country), tired of seeing Mexican flags flying over the streets of America, tired of hearing people that barely can speak English tell me on television about all of their rights and telling me what we legal Americas have to do for them while they are trampling all over ours (we have to obey laws, pay taxes, and behave responsibly (as do my kids who are not allowed to skip school), and yes, I'm also very tired of seeing politicians place politics way in front of what's good for America.
Continue reading...
Posted by: Richard@hyscience at
01:16 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 692 words, total size 5 kb.
1
If you look back in history, these so called illegal immigrants were here before any americans were!!! Read your history book guys. The english came over here and pushed the indians south and took thier land from them forming what is now the United States and the indians became Mexico. We took from them, go live the life that Mexicans have to live for 1 week, you'll never make it! I have been there and it is not easy! Why can't we just live together and be happy instead of all the bull we put each other through? Do u think in Heaven the Lord is going to separate us?
Posted by: April Castro at April 03, 2006 03:04 PM (msYTX)
2
April,
Yes, I can see and have a much better idea of what life in Mexico must be like than many. However,
ILLEGAL immigration lets the Mexican government off of the hook of fixin the Mexican economy and giving Mexicans an oppurtunity at home.
Up here, the government has to make sure it doesn't pursue economy killing policies because what happens if the economy is driven into the ground? Where would all of our unemployed go?
There are Mexican workers up here where I live. I talked to one last year who was tending bar at a local establishment. He is up here working, where are his wife and children? At home apart from him. Is that what the people of Mexico want?
There is one other nation on earth in a similar position. Its biggest source of foreign currency is its labor force and that is not what the people want, but it is what they must deal with.
I'm all for liberal immigration quotas but not for immigration law violation.
Posted by: Marcus Aurelius at April 03, 2006 03:33 PM (ffPYG)
3
The problem is the quota system. Immigration was last reformed in 1986, a lot has happened since then. People are coming from different place for different reasons today. Rather than having a quota for each country, there should be one number that doesn't pay any attention to country of origin.
I'm also not a big fan of the idea that it takes a decade for people to come to the US going through the proper channels - I think we could take a few years off that process with some new technology.
As far as the guest worker/blue card program. It's a bad idea to limit people to only "agricultural" jobs. It's damn near immoral to condemn people to entry level jobs with no chance for advancement.
Posted by: KG at April 03, 2006 04:41 PM (SZsz5)
4
Liberals, be they Republicans or Democrats, always resort to ad hominem attacks on those using facts to shut down their arguments. Bush and the liberals who have been, and are heading the GOP have been doing this the last few weeks. Gillespe is just the latest in a long line of liberal (we used to call them Rockerfeller) Republicans to call conservatives names. Liberals of both parties have no shame and not much honor.They play the race card at will. Bush and the "leaders" of the GOP are in the process of destroying the GOP.
But we saw this happen in 1992 with another liberal Bush President. Remember Bill "won" with only 42% of the vote, while Bush pulled in 33%. This is not the first time; and will not be the last either.
Posted by: Jo macDougal at April 03, 2006 06:17 PM (c2Gyu)
5
Excuse me, but is "Juan" an Aztec name? Is "Pablo" a Mayan name? No, they are Spanish names -- as in "European Spanish". As in the U.S., there are very few pure-blooded Indians/aboriginals left, so get over yourselves, amigos.
The 9% increase among Hispanic voters in the last election was from LEGAL citizen voters. They don't want law-breakers HERE any more than the other Americans.
Posted by: Veritas Regina at April 03, 2006 06:39 PM (jXE2n)
6
"...aren't all of these opportunities to arrest them and spirit them back to where they came from?"
Not as long as we keep allowing Los Angeles, New York and other cities to make their own rules by declaring themselves "sanctuary cities". The fact is they're in violation of a federal law, but no one cares. We can't even get a law passed which says they must obey an existing law. Is that ridiculous, or what?
Posted by: Oyster at April 04, 2006 05:50 AM (YudAC)
7
April, you stupid liberal whore, we didn't
push the natives out of North America; we pretty much wiped them out.
Oh, and by the way, there is now evidence that Europeans crossed into North America some few thousand years before Asians did, so we win again you stupid tart.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 04, 2006 06:15 AM (0yYS2)
8
The answer is really quite simple, Its time to "Annex" Mexico. With all we have to offer,Health care, unions and cable TV. lets let the mexicans vote on it! Viva La Annexation!!
Posted by: Vegas Vic at April 04, 2006 01:33 PM (LtJil)
9
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 (NrsdV)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Gauging the Media's Civil War in Iraq
Engram at
Best of the Fray (the blog, not the
Slate forum) has been doing some
research to substantiate the increasing carnage in the mainstream media declared civil war in Iraq:
more...
Posted by: Bluto at
11:59 AM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 193 words, total size 1 kb.
1
It seems whenever you guys start crowing about drops in US troop casualties the number suddenly spikes.
14 dead in last three days.
http://icasualties.org/oif/
If you cared about the troops I would suggest keeping it shut.
Posted by: Sonic at April 03, 2006 05:03 PM (Gsn6c)
2
I think that even though the absolute number being killed in Iraq is the same in the first 3 months of this year and the first 3 months of last, there has been a definite change in the way that they have been killed. Last year most of the civilian casualties were from terrorist bombs. This year they seem to be more of the abduction followed by torture/murder type.
Posted by: john Ryan at April 03, 2006 05:13 PM (TcoRJ)
3
Sonic, this is about deliberate misreporting by the mainstream media, not "crowing". I have to say, you are one of the stupidest sacks of shit I've ever seen post on Jawa, and it disgusts me to see people actually cheering for the terrorist insurgency, as you quite obviously are doing. You should get yourself a short rope and do the right thing.
john ryan, all the people you mention were killed by terrorists. I fail to see the significance of the tactics and methods of murder. With the MSM declaring a civil war in progress, it's interesting to note that the Brookings statistics do not bear out the hysterical reproting.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at April 03, 2006 05:37 PM (RHG+K)
4
Pointing out casualties=cheering on the insurgency. Hmm
Perhaps if we all kept quiet about the dead they would pop back to life?
Posted by: Sonic at April 03, 2006 07:22 PM (Gsn6c)
5
So Sonic, now you know what it's like to have someone deliberately and maliciously misconstrue something you wrote. Did you learn anything?
Stupid effing Kiwi.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at April 03, 2006 07:26 PM (RHG+K)
6
THE DOVE WILL FLY THE VULTURES WILL LIE
Posted by: sandpiper at April 03, 2006 09:41 PM (uTBPj)
7
Perhaps if we all just hanged one idiot liberal every day pretty soon the world would be a better place.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 04, 2006 06:30 AM (0yYS2)
8
The dove may fly, but in the end it's eaten by a vulture or a hawk.
Posted by: Ranba Ral at April 04, 2006 02:04 PM (GyNTD)
9
Ve have vays of making you squawk
Posted by: sandpiper at April 04, 2006 08:29 PM (PObDu)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Iraq Urged Hamas to Attack US.
Traderrob has the detailÂ’s here at Exposing the Left.
Translated Iraqi iItelligence Documents : Page 22 of this document IISP-2003-00026588 which was written during the Iraq War in 2003 is from an Iraqi Intelligence officer to the Director of the Iraqi Intelligence Apparatus where he discussed with him information about Hamas eagerness to participate in the war against the US via the Palestinians students who are studying in Iraq. The intelligence officer expressed his great gratitude to Hamas but he added that the Iraqi regime will be happier if Hamas attacks US and Israeli interests inside and outside Israel. “however we will be happier if we hear about any campaign that target the US and Zionist interests inside the occupied territories and outside it.”
Yes I imagine that would make Saddam happy almost as happy as 9/11 did. But just because he was pleased, gave money, support and laughed his ass off as people our died does not mean he was involved. See how this works? I donÂ’t.
Posted by: Howie at
11:34 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 178 words, total size 1 kb.
Yale Update
Rightwingsparkle as the lastest update on the Yale Taliban issue.
Rightwingsparkle : Yale seems to be hoping this thing will blow over. No such luck if Clint Taylor has anything to say about it. He isn't the only one who is outraged either. Go to townhall.com
And hey she may like it better cause this time I didn't link her on a big old boobie post like last time.
Posted by: Howie at
11:07 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 71 words, total size 1 kb.
1
How the hell did he ever get a visa ? Who gave him his recomendation Mullah Omar ?
Posted by: john Ryan at April 03, 2006 05:33 PM (TcoRJ)
2
Indite the entire YALE staff get RICO after them
Posted by: sandpiper at April 03, 2006 09:43 PM (uTBPj)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Scientist Wants to Kill 90% of People on Earth
(Beaumont, Texas) At the 109th meeting of the Texas Academy of Science at Lamar University, Dr. Eric R. Pianka, a University of Texas ecology and lizard expert, was named the 2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist. Pianka then gave a
speech saying people are ruining the planet and advocating the elimination of 90 percent of Earth's population by airborne Ebola. A fellow scientist attended and reported. Here's an excerpt.
AIDS is not an efficient killer, he explained, because it is too slow. His favorite candidate for eliminating 90 percent of the world's population is airborne Ebola ( Ebola Reston ), because it is both highly lethal and it kills in days, instead of years. However, Professor Pianka did not mention that Ebola victims die a slow and torturous death as the virus initiates a cascade of biological calamities inside the victim that eventually liquefy the internal organs.
After praising the Ebola virus for its efficiency at killing, Pianka paused, leaned over the lectern, looked at us and carefully said, "We've got airborne 90 percent mortality in humans. Killing humans. Think about that."
I'm thinking that a person named Eric Pianka should not be teaching young impressionable minds about science or anything else. Follow the link. More
here.
From Interested-Participant.
Posted by: Mike Pechar at
10:03 AM
| Comments (29)
| Add Comment
Post contains 223 words, total size 2 kb.
1
geez-where's the love and humanity.
If he's such a great scientist why can't he think of a more humane way of limiting the population.
Don't have to have a science degree to know germs and chemicals kill. How about limiting the birth rate-in undeveloped countries. They don't want so many kids anyway-they're just bored and pass the time getting their rocks off.
Posted by: splashtc at April 03, 2006 10:14 AM (zlay8)
2
That makes sense. Just about the percentage of slaves killed by communists. Politbureau in USSR was about 7%.
Posted by: Chief RZ at April 03, 2006 10:19 AM (iNTGz)
3
If you're "young and impressionable" past 16, you're going to be a gullible idiot as an adult.
Don't give the younger generation a pass by saying they're just "young and impressionable." That passed years before college started, and before high school ended. You know, all those years you were sending them to our exemplary public schools. So no, they aren't "young and impressionable," they're just at the tail end of a manufacturing process to make fools. And an unprecidentedly successful process, too. Too bad the vast majority of them are also too stupid to care about voting.
Posted by: MiB at April 03, 2006 10:19 AM (2hPsb)
4
That this man is teaching at a public university in the state of Texas after advocating such a thing as the murder of 5 billion people shows how corrupt our educational system is. Fire the bastard and anyone who supports that kind of genocide. They have no inherent right to work for the public while advocating the murder of over 10 million Texans and 250,000,000 Americans.
And if you see him in person, beat the shit out of his sorry ass.
Posted by: jesusland joe at April 03, 2006 10:37 AM (rUyw4)
5
Yup. Human beings as exalted among God's creation is a Biblical and judeo-christian concept. While to Lefties, humans are no higher than cats and dogs-- and worse, a virus on the surface of this planet (see Agent Smith's monologue).
Expect the "man as virus" view to become more and more predominant as society becomes more secularized and sheds its judeo-christian roots.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 03, 2006 10:54 AM (8e/V4)
6
>>>>geez-where's the love and humanity.
It's ironic that the biblical view that places God on a pedestal also serves to raise men's stature in the universe, while the humanist view that raises Man onto a pedestal reduces men's stature in the universe.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 03, 2006 10:58 AM (8e/V4)
7
WOW !! 90% !! Is that more than is called for in the Book of Revelations ? Is this a foretelling of the end times ? He sounds more to me like a Christian doomsdayer than a scientist. Repent Repent the end is near. Check World Net Daily for future warnings http://worldnetdaily.com/
Posted by: john Ryan at April 03, 2006 11:36 AM (TcoRJ)
8
The book of Revelations doesn't "call" for mass extermination-- it merely predicts it. A qualitative difference, no?
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 03, 2006 11:45 AM (8e/V4)
9
WOW !! 90% !! Is that more than is called for in the Book of Revelations ?
That kind of distortion--whether willful, or out of pure ignorance--is almost obscene. That's why discussing anything having to do with religion with Leftwingers is such an exercise in futility. In virtually all cases, they simply are too ignorant, or too dishonest (or both).
Posted by: dcb at April 03, 2006 12:01 PM (8e/V4)
10
I know Pianka from U.T. and also because I ran Cattle and he runs Bison on neighboring ranches.
He is an odd one. He struck a friend of mine who had been his graduate student over a minor dispute.
I always heard that the U.N also desires a massive reduction in population.
Can anyone confirm this about the U.N.?
Posted by: Greg at April 03, 2006 12:13 PM (q5wwn)
11
Apparently this idiot doesn't realize
Ebola burns out way to quick to be an efficient killer of people on his scale, even with mutations. I think maybe he believes in the
Gaia Hypothesis, and hopes his goddess will purge humanity.
Posted by: Thunder Pig at April 03, 2006 12:18 PM (PW/DE)
12
Christianity "raises man up"? Like in the Dark Ages, right?
I think you're trying to steal credit there.
Posted by: MiB at April 03, 2006 12:19 PM (2hPsb)
13
Thunder Pig, like most ignorant people, this guy probably got his information from the movie 'Outbreak'.
Posted by: slug at April 03, 2006 12:21 PM (wYW63)
14
>>>Like in the Dark Ages, right?
Wrong. The fall of the Roman Empire caused the Dark Ages, not christianity. In fact, Christian monasteries were the sole repositories of knowledge during the Dark Ages.
But even with your Dark Ages comment you demonstrate some of that ignorance dcb was referring to. You attempt to adress my statement about christian theology with a lamebrained response about Western history.
But your response actually shows how weak your grasp of history is-- not to mention how nonexistent your knowledge of christian theology is. You Lefties simply aren't equipped for an intelligent dialogue on the subject.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 03, 2006 12:30 PM (8e/V4)
15
mib,
your Dark Ages comment was a non-sequitor response if I've ever heard one (and evidence of either your ignorance or your intellectual dishonesty). The sins of the church (whether real or just imagined) have no little or no relation to christian theology or the judeo christian worldview.
Posted by: dcb at April 03, 2006 12:44 PM (8e/V4)
16
MiB what is your stinking problem? Do you hate your mother?
Scientist that want to kill 90% of the humans on earth would be given a medal by the United Nations.
Posted by: Leatherneck at April 03, 2006 03:39 PM (D2g/j)
17
Pianka was just on an Austin local news channel.
He is going to be on MSNBC tomorrow morning.
He is claiming that an intellectual rival has misquoted him in a smear campaign.
Posted by: Greg at April 03, 2006 05:12 PM (q5wwn)
18
Of the 400 scientist that gave Mr Pianka a standing ovation, do they realise that under his plan only 40 would live? Or were they thinking that they would be in the 10%? Would Mr Pianka be so kind as to lead the way and be the first to contract the "cure"?
Posted by: Reid at April 03, 2006 05:56 PM (Zwsx5)
19
He's probably right. Insane too but correct.
Posted by: Howie at April 03, 2006 07:52 PM (D3+20)
20
MiB, I am 16 and , trust me, you do not want most of the people in my generation voting. Many idiots at my school think that drilling for oil kills animals and global warming will kill us all and that type of BS. It is actually a blessing in disguise that most of the 18-20 year olds do not vote. Many of them believe everything the MSM tells them, they are, for the most part, brainwashed.
Posted by: Craig at April 03, 2006 08:50 PM (b3fZv)
21
Another radical lizard loving eco-freak he and PETER SINGER and PAUL ERLITCH are the same type of zero populationists freaks that are extremists
Posted by: sandpiper at April 03, 2006 09:46 PM (uTBPj)
22
Damn I live in Beaumont and would have went to this if I'd known about it.
Could have really had some fun with this ol boy ... at his expense! He is as bad as the Islamophuqenuts ... just from the other side of the planet. But when I really think about he's worse since he is an American citizen and teaching our children. God save us all ... or at least more than 10% of us!
Posted by: jack at April 03, 2006 10:30 PM (aitZQ)
23
Have you read the TOM CLANCY book RAINBOW SIX? its about radical enviromentalists along with a wealthy eco-freak who want to create a deadly virus to wipe out the entire human race and then watch the rewilding of the earth from their specialy encloser this extremists would fit right in
Posted by: sandpiper at April 04, 2006 08:14 AM (A09bm)
24
sandpiper,
that isn't the stuff of fiction. Humanism has indeed reduced us to the status of vermin on this planet. Without a religious worldview to give us inherent worth, these nihilists are free to reduce men to the status of meat puppets just taking up space. That's humanism for you.
“If I were reincarnated, I would wish to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”
~~Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 04, 2006 08:48 AM (WCwrR)
25
Greg, Yes, the U.N. has a statute (or charter orplan or whatever it's called at the U.N.) that says once the world hits a certain population level it would that they should cut off all support to countries under a certain level of economic and industrial development, reallocating food to the chosen few nations, letting the others starve.
Can't remember what it's called, but a buddy found it one time while searching the U.N.'s site for something else a few years back. We haven't been able to find it since. I'll search for it again.
Posted by: Ranba Ral at April 04, 2006 02:16 PM (GyNTD)
26
MiB, I'm an atheist, and even I'll admit that it was the Church that saved civilization and brought Europe back from the brink of barbarism, despite what many corrupt clerics did. Just because you don't like history doesn't mean that it didn't happen as it did.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 04, 2006 04:42 PM (0yYS2)
27
If by some miracle the Arab/Muslim world is victorious against this secular/atheistic influence of the NWO agenda is reduced to such a level as to allow the Christian West to regain its foothold where it once stood, it will be necessary to credit the religion of Islam and the Arab world for not buckling under in the face of attempted extermination. And it will be we, the Christian West and Western Civilization, who will be the beneficiaries of “Islamic Extremism.”
Posted by: TO improbulus maximus at April 06, 2006 10:17 AM (zqsRN)
28
That's the worst, most stupid attempt at apologetics I've ever heard. I'm going have to stop admitting to being an atheist because almost every other atheist I meet is a complete, raving idiot, and I don't want to be stigmatized by association.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 07, 2006 06:25 AM (0yYS2)
Posted by: youngbourbonprofessional at April 07, 2006 02:32 PM (tdhAh)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Hugo Goes For Your Vote.
Dean calls our attention to the fact that we are outsourcing the DP for our votes to none other than Hugo Chaves. You reckon the communist party will have a sudden boost in America next time?
Dean's World : Dean mentioned a Venezuelan company linked to Chavez has purchased a U.S. election machine company. This is far more important than most people realize.
MIT mathematicians using Benford's law have essentially proved Chavez stole the last election, in which Chavez faced recall. They calculated that the odds of the voter tabulations given happening without tampering were about 100:1.
Posted by: Howie at
10:01 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 106 words, total size 1 kb.
1
A socialist? Cheating?
Never.
Posted by: MiB at April 03, 2006 10:20 AM (2hPsb)
Posted by: john Ryan at April 03, 2006 10:38 AM (TcoRJ)
3
John Ryan's gotta love that Hugo!
Posted by: jesusland joe at April 03, 2006 10:39 AM (rUyw4)
4
Frankly we should hire a assasin and shoot HUGO CHEVEZ dead
Posted by: sandpiper at April 03, 2006 09:47 PM (uTBPj)
5
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 03:07 PM (Z9O0P)
6
Not much on my mind lately. My life's been completely boring these days. I've just been hanging out not getting anything done. So it goes.
Posted by: Kaka32626 at April 18, 2006 01:44 AM (6iy/h)
7
I haven't been up to much these days. Today was a loss. Nothing seems important. I've just been letting everything happen without me these days.
Posted by: Kaka93312 at April 20, 2006 10:46 PM (6iy/h)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Padilla Appeal
In a six to three decision, the Supreme Court decided not to hear the appeal of accused "dirty bomber" Jose Padilla, whose lawyers were challenging his detention as an "enemy combatant". Padilla is a US citizen accused of plotting with al Qaeda to set off a "dirty bomb", a conventional explosive laced with radioactive materials, in the US.
From Fox News:
Jose Padilla was moved in January to Miami to face criminal charges, and the government argued that the appeal over his indefinite detention was now pointless.
Six justices agreed not to hear the appeal from Padilla. Three justices said the court should have taken up the case: Justices David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.
The decision not to hear the case puts aside, for now, legal fights over the extent of the President's wartime powers.
Via Stop the ACLU.
More: Michelle Malkin, Independent Conservative, SCOTUSblog.
Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.
Posted by: Bluto at
09:45 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 169 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Most of the stuff I see talks like the court ducked the issue. No there was no issue for the court to take up but don't tell the MSM that.
Posted by: Howie at April 03, 2006 03:31 PM (D3+20)
2
padilla should get life in prison
Posted by: sandpiper at April 03, 2006 09:49 PM (uTBPj)
3
WorldSex Daily Updated Free Links to Hardcore Sex Pictures, Movies, Free Porn Videos and XXX Live Sex Cams
Posted by: SEXMENS at April 07, 2006 03:24 AM (shwGO)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Argentina Claims Falkland Islands Again
(Buenos Aires, Argentina) As
I recall, it was only a little over two decades ago that the Argentine government, ostensibly in a wag-the-dog move by the military leadership, invaded the British Falkland Islands. They were unsuccessful. Nonetheless, memories are short in the political realm and Argentina is again making noise about its
sovereignty over the South Atlantic islands of Falkland (called Malvinas in Argentina), South Georgia, and South Sandwich.
Argentine President Nestor Kirchner said the Argentine government chose to solve the dispute through dialogue and diplomacy and by peaceful means. He also said that the British government must "show willingness to negotiate the sovereignty of the islands" because the "claim for the islands is a permanent objective and undeniable right of the Argentine people."
Just what the world needs -- another hot spot preparing to flare.
From Interested-Participant.
Posted by: Mike Pechar at
09:18 AM
| Comments (21)
| Add Comment
Post contains 148 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I guess the Argentines wish for another ass kicking. They wish to take advantage of the British while they are in Iraq. What a bunch of idiots they are.
Posted by: jesusland joe at April 03, 2006 09:26 AM (rUyw4)
2
>>>>undeniable right of the Argentine people."
What about the undeniable right of the Falklands people? They're all English, for crissakes. I hope Argentina gets their ass kicked again.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 03, 2006 09:51 AM (8e/V4)
3
How soon they forget. They surely can't be that da*n forgetful....
Posted by: Lonevoice at April 03, 2006 12:47 PM (kTR7o)
4
However, on the day of the handover of Hong Kong, former British Foreign Secretary Douglas Hurd remarked to Argentine Foreign Minister Guido di Tella; "I know what you're thinking, but you will never see this happen in Port Stanley."
You can take that to the bank.
May God save the Queen.
Posted by: davec at April 03, 2006 01:11 PM (CcXvt)
Posted by: Flea at April 03, 2006 02:38 PM (KRJIQ)
6
Do the argentinans want to have their sorry butts kicked again? whats wrong with those goucho goofs?
Posted by: sandpiper at April 03, 2006 09:50 PM (uTBPj)
7
Hail Brittania, mother of us all!
God save the Queen indeed.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 10:53 PM (0yYS2)
8
How odd. The Falklands, South Georgia, & South Sandwich are remote. Really really remote. Were not talking tropical paradise here. This is ridiculous. Unfortunatly, Blair is no Margret Thatcher.
Posted by: nuthin2seehere at April 04, 2006 04:06 AM (blNMI)
9
>>>>Unfortunatly, Blair is no Margret Thatcher.
I'd say he's pretty darn close (for a Labourite).
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 04, 2006 08:55 AM (WCwrR)
10
For additional information Argentina at present has in its docks 2 british ships which can not leave. One is a falkland islands fishing vessel and the other is H.M.S. Endurance
Posted by: falklandsanon at April 04, 2006 10:21 AM (vEK2y)
11
The English forcibly occupied the Malvinas
until 1774 despite the Spanish protests. In
1819 an Argentine Governor was sent there. In
1831, after a dispute over whaling, the USS Lexington destroyed all Argentine installations at Puerto Soledad (Stanley) and Argentina broke diplomatic ties with the former British colony. On the 2nd January 1833, following Sir W. Parish's
advice (at the time the British Ambassador in Buenos Ayres), the English landed some families that were brought by Capt. Onslow aboard the Clio. The Argentine flag was taken down and the Union Jack raised instead in Lt. Colonel Pinedo's presence, who did not resist superior forces in both number and armament.
Argentina has protested since that very day but
the British crown gave its deaf ear to the
claim also since that day. The 1982 landing
tried to recover the islands and it was NOT an
invasion but a landing on own territory. Despicable and apparently useless as it might have been, the war served both countries well
to know who their real friends and foes are.
I have good acquaintances with people showing four and more generations in the islands and heartily respect their loyalties and what they consider their land. But it is not, although
if ever returned to Argentina, its legal owner, they should be allowed to keep their properties, language, religion and government, and whatever keeps their society together, even local laws and bylaws, EXCEPTION MADE of sovereignty. Some
English 'machos' writing in here have not had the
terrific experience that war gives. Perhaps
they should be careful with what they write.
They might be one day crying for their lives,
sweating hands trying to hold a rifle, rubber
legs trying to hold them upright, in the roar
of cannon thunder, whistling missiles, smoke,
cordite and blood smell and companions torn in pieces all around. Kindest regards. Salvador aka Argie
Posted by: Argie at April 04, 2006 12:06 PM (TPy7e)
12
The English forcibly occupied the Malvinas
until 1774 despite the Spanish protests. In
1819 an Argentine Governor was sent there. In
1831, after a dispute over whaling, the USS Lexington destroyed all Argentine installations at Puerto Soledad (Stanley) and Argentina broke diplomatic ties with the former British colony. On the 2nd January 1833, following Sir W. Parish's
advice (at the time the British Ambassador in Buenos Ayres), the English landed some families that were brought by Capt. Onslow aboard the Clio. The Argentine flag was taken down and the Union Jack raised instead in Lt. Colonel Pinedo's presence, who did not resist superior forces in both number and armament.
Argentina has protested since that very day but
the British crown gave its deaf ear to the
claim also since that day. The 1982 landing
tried to recover the islands and it was NOT an
invasion but a landing on own territory. Despicable and apparently useless as it might have been, the war served both countries well
to know who their real friends and foes are.
I have good acquaintances with people showing four and more generations in the islands and heartily respect their loyalties and what they consider their land. But it is not, although
if ever returned to Argentina, its legal owner, they should be allowed to keep their properties, language, religion and government, and whatever keeps their society together, even local laws and bylaws, EXCEPTION MADE of sovereignty. Some
English 'machos' writing in here have not had the
terrific experience that war gives. Perhaps
they should be careful with what they write.
They might be one day crying for their lives,
sweating hands trying to hold a rifle, rubber
legs trying to hold them upright, in the roar
of cannon thunder, whistling missiles, smoke,
cordite and blood smell and companions torn in pieces all around. Kindest regards. Salvador aka Argie
Posted by: Argie at April 04, 2006 12:07 PM (TPy7e)
13
Argentina is only holding one fishpoacher ship, the 'John Cheek' whose owners had the cheek of invading (or shall we say trespassing?) Argentinian waters for squid.
HMS Endurance came on its own to drydock in the Naval Base at Puerto Belgrano to get its ruddder fixed and to make certain reconditioning to follow international safety obligations.
Later on, not in Argentina to avoid our Gauchos from prying upon secret paraphernalia, certain ship's equipment will be upgraded. The package will include radar systems, gyrocompass, speed log, meteorological equipment, electronic chart system, GPS, navigational sounder and some internal comms.
A few weeks ago, the crew of the British ice patrol vessel, under the command of Captain Nick Lambert, paid tribute to those killed in the 1982 conflict. The event took place during the shipÂ’s visit to the port of Ushuaia. It was the first visit by the British icebreaker to Ushuaia since 1982. It is also the first time that the members of an Argentine war veteransÂ’ association stage a joint ceremony with members of the British Armed Forces.
The commanding officer of HMS Endurance laid a wreath at the foot of the war memorial with a message that read: “From HMS Endurance to the fallen in the South Atlantic”. Members of the Ushuaia Centre of Ex Combatants followed suit.
The ceremony was attended by a military formation commanded by Rear Admiral Estévez from the Argentine Navy, a delegation from the crew of HMS Endurance and members of the Tierra del Fuego Veterans’ Association. The provincial authorities and delegations of the other armed and security forces in Argentina were also present.
After the ceremony, the crew of HMS Endurance and the members of the VeteransÂ’ Association had an informal talk which continued later on board HMS Endurance when the veterans visited the ship.
Kindest regards. Salvador aka Argie
Posted by: Argie at April 04, 2006 12:32 PM (TPy7e)
14
What's your point Argie? Do you really want the Royal Marines to give you another asswhipping? Because that's what you'll get. Again.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 04, 2006 04:40 PM (0yYS2)
15
The "John Cheek" hasn't been charged as there is international verified proof to say it was fishing in Falklands Waters.
"HMS Endurance" can't leave after its rudder repair as there is a dock "Strike" and the majority of the crew are stuck in a hotel.
When you state a forceable takeover in 1833 it makes it sound like a major battle the fact the the british walked in and took control as "spain/argentina" had left all but minor staff. Unlike in 1982 when Argentina came in.
I can also assure you alot of the Islandsers know what war is, they were held at gun point, threated, held in capativity (goose green and pebble). movement restricted, witness death, homes destroyed.
Posted by: falklandsanon at April 05, 2006 05:33 AM (vEK2y)
16
RUE BRITANIA BRITANIA RUES THE WAVES SQUAWK
Posted by: sandpiper at April 05, 2006 08:48 AM (O2c+K)
17
"The 1982 landing
tried to recover the islands and it was NOT an
invasion but a landing on own territory. Despicable and apparently useless as it might have been, the war served both countries well
to know who their real friends and foes are.
I have good acquaintances with people showing four and more generations in the islands and heartily respect their loyalties and what they consider their land. But it is not"
Ok, I think it's time you look beyond all of that stupid Argentine propaganda.
Yes, Britain abandoned it colony in 1774, no one is denying that, but they still asserted Sovereignty. Now I'm sure that the original indigenous people of South America, who were living there a hell of a lot longer before Argentina ever existed would suddenly say that the land that the people form Spanish descent lived on was always threes and was there god given right to have. Of course not. They'd have no right to, since the people of Spanish decent have been living on that land for generations, they have every right to claim that land their own.
Now, how can you deny the very same thing to the people living on the Falklands? Who's families have been living there for generations? You can't, simply because if you do, then you claim that the land that YOU live on is not your own as well. That's how Argentines clam is so critically flawed.
The only way the islands would become part of Argentina is if the people of the Falklands agreed to it. So far, they have said NO, no matter how low the Argentine government as gone for support, with the use of bribes.
Posted by: Reality Check at April 08, 2006 12:10 PM (nFv13)
18
haha argie got murked by reality check!!
RULE BRITANIA
GOD SAVE THE QUEEN
Posted by: mekkaz at April 08, 2006 04:08 PM (G9BUr)
19
i think that mr blair might find a little invasion and controlled war in this area a perfect deflection from the missdemeanours of messrs two shags and co.
Posted by: y smythe at April 30, 2006 09:19 PM (2m2Gg)
20
I hope the resolution of this conflict with both powers over the falklands can inspire others to follow (especially in a not to distant future). Like in the Basque and Irish disputes that settled at similar periods for example. My message is positive and for comnication/understanding. I happen to believe in a pro-peace European Union. Not to get too political, but I believe in the positive energy that is slowly showing itself to its citizensa nd to the rest of the world. It would be excellent to have a negotiation with a third respected Ear, and possibly the people themselfs could decide and be heard.
Posted by: Scram Jet Squirrel at May 02, 2006 01:04 AM (4IDjB)
21
I believe Argentina is trying to asert itself as a world power, however trying to fight GBis not the smartest thing to do especially since the SAS/SBS is preforming better than the US Navy SEALS. Argentina would have a lot better luck invading Uruguay. As for the "who had original sovereignty" thing almost every single country exsists because someone invaded someone else. Ultimately it is up to people who live their to chose. So the people of the Falklands all say God save the Queen, I say GOD BLESS AMERICA
Posted by: the Brimerican at May 07, 2006 12:50 PM (uSuoa)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
US Casualties Nose Dive MSM Silent
Why of course they are if it bleeds it leads right. Say anything says it loud and clear even if cnnjazeera is all clamed up.
Say Anything : Have you noticed how, when in past months when U.S. casualties have been really high, the media leads off every story in Iraq with a comment like "amidst the highest levels of U.S. casualties in Iraq in three months..." Funny how they never do that when the U.S. finishes a month with the lowest number of casualties in a year.
Hat Tip :
Ace of Spades HQ.
Posted by: Howie at
09:14 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 105 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Even in stories not about the violence (like the elections, or Iraq forming a new government, etc.) the MSM will dedicate the second paragraph to some bomb going off somewhere or a GI getting killed by a sniper, and only then will they return to the main topic of the article. Almost as if to remind the reader not to be fooled by any good news coming out of Iraq. Sometimes it's the small-- but relentless-- instances like that which give away the MSM agenda.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 03, 2006 09:30 AM (8e/V4)
2
And if you're fooled or discouraged by this nonsense, you're just extra baggage to begin with.
Posted by: MiB at April 03, 2006 10:23 AM (2hPsb)
3
Any analysis on WHY the US casualties are declining ?
Posted by: john Ryan at April 03, 2006 11:01 AM (TcoRJ)
4
Yes that would be cause fewer people got hurt/killed. Glad to be of help John.
Posted by: Howie at April 03, 2006 11:15 AM (D3+20)
5
Howie, how did your link stop right in the middle of the word "year"?
Posted by: Oyster at April 03, 2006 06:26 PM (YudAC)
6
Er uh clipboard err. Oops I need to make them there blips all the same color.
Posted by: Howie at April 03, 2006 07:38 PM (D3+20)
7
The fewer dead the fewer for the sharks and vultures at CNN and the rest of the liberal left-wing news media to feed on
Posted by: sandpiper at April 03, 2006 09:52 PM (uTBPj)
8
Not all--from the WaPo (today): "The deaths came two days after a month in which there were 32 U.S. military fatalities, the lowest monthly figure since early 2004. At least 13 Americans have been killed already in April."
Posted by: Eric at April 04, 2006 10:51 AM (UHKaK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Saudi King Abdullah Speaks Against Al-Qaeda.
He vows to wipe them out, annihilate them and other positive steps. He vows to wipe them out, annihilate them and other positive steps.
The Peninsula Qatar : “We renew our pledge to annihilate the deviant group of the terrorist killers,” he said using a term that refers to Al Qaeda network in Saudi Arabia. He also vowed to “combat the ideology of those who accuse others of infidelity,” as he addressed the Shura (consultative) Council at the beginning of its term.
There is no place for extremism in the land of the two (Muslim) holy sites” of Makkah and Madinah, he added. He said that his country’s development “cannot be achieved unless there is an atmosphere of security and peace.”
King Abdullah vowed gradual reform to bring the kingdom closer to the rest of the world without violating the principles of Islam.
“We can’t remain rigid and the world around us is changing,” he said. King Abdullah said the envisaged reforms, which would be debated through a state-sponsored national dialogue would seek to “meet the desires of society and be in harmony with Shariah”. The kingdom will also continue liberalising its economy, fighting graft and poverty and improving public governance, King Abdullah added.
Capitol Idea if I do say so King Abdullah. Now how about freedom of worship in the kingdom?
Posted by: Howie at
07:54 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 232 words, total size 2 kb.
1
At least someone in power wants them whipped out and anialated
Posted by: sandpiper at April 03, 2006 09:54 PM (uTBPj)
2
A mere pebble, but of such are landslides born.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 10:52 PM (0yYS2)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Death in my life
A good friend died over the weekend. I am involved in making the final arrangements. I will be back next week.
Posted by: Rusty at
07:10 AM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 29 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Sorry to hear that Master, we'll hold the fort.
Posted by: Howie at April 03, 2006 07:22 AM (D3+20)
2
I'm very sorry for your loss.
Posted by: Buckley F. Williams at April 03, 2006 07:41 AM (/XWKc)
3
My condolences, Rusty. It is always difficult to lose a close friend. But great memories of your good times together will sustain you in this time of sorrow.
Posted by: jesusland joe at April 03, 2006 08:34 AM (rUyw4)
4
My condolences, Rusty.
We'll keep you in our prayers.
Posted by: phin at April 03, 2006 08:47 AM (Xvpen)
5
Sorry for your loss, losing friends truly sucks.
Posted by: Lonevoice at April 03, 2006 10:11 AM (kTR7o)
6
Rusty,
I am very sorry for your loss my friend. My heart and soul go out to you...
Posted by: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton at April 03, 2006 12:06 PM (ytltE)
7
Very sorry to hear that, Rusty.
Posted by: See-Dubya at April 03, 2006 12:41 PM (qf8md)
8
My condolences...Take all the time you need.
Posted by: Laura at April 03, 2006 02:01 PM (0QlDj)
9
I'm sorry for your loss. Sending good thoughts your way.
Posted by: Maggie45 at April 03, 2006 03:36 PM (FER8b)
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 10:54 PM (0yYS2)
11
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 03:07 PM (KKPBL)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
April 02, 2006
Iran Test Fires High-Speed Torpedo
Fox News was showing video earlier today of the "new" Iranian Hut high-speed torpedo, which travels in excess of 220 miles per hour underwater, and is said to be undetectable by sonar. It seems likely that it could, however, be heard by passive means from some distance underwater.
From Bloomberg:
April 3 (Bloomberg) -- Iran's navy said it successfully test-fired its fastest torpedo capable of reaching a maximum speed of 360 kilometers (223 miles) an hour, the official Islamic Republic News Agency said.
Coincidentally, in the 90s the Russians deployed a high-speed torpedo, developed years earlier by the Soviet Union, called the
Shkval (Squall) that is capable of speeds up to 230 miles per hour. It achieves this velocity by deliberately cavitating the water around the torpedo to reduce friction.
Neither the Hut, nor the Shval offers protection against incoming B-1 bombers, something that Iran might want to take into consideration.
Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.
Posted by: Bluto at
11:13 PM
| Comments (21)
| Add Comment
Post contains 171 words, total size 1 kb.
1
"Fox News was showing video earlier today of the "new" Iranian Hut high-speed torpedo, which travels in excess of 220 miles per hour underwater, and is said to be undetectable by sonar. It seems likely that it could, however, be heard by passive means from some distance underwater."
I bet this sucker makes all sorts of noise. The problem is that if you happen to be in front of it (ie the target) you won't hear it as it travels faster than sound travels in water. So you won't be able to hear it unless you are not the intended target.
Firing this thing and being able to hit something with it are two completely different problems.
Posted by: Fred Fry at April 03, 2006 05:29 AM (JXdhy)
2
When we go to war against Iran, this thing will probably take out one or two ships, maybe even an aircraft carrier, but they will lose their country. Muslims are animals and we should kill them all.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 05:57 AM (0yYS2)
3
Assuming the Hut's a direct derivative of the Shkval, it's range is very short (7 km), which means that the large vessel carrying it (because the missile's 26 ft long) will have to get in very close to use it. A Harpoon missile has a range of almost 100 km. The Iranian ship would have been taken out long before it had a chance to get a shot off. They may instead use it against commercial ships in the Straits of Hormuz until the US forces put an end to it.
Posted by: Graeme at April 03, 2006 06:25 AM (o1ojb)
4
Ok. SO they have super speedy torpedos, and the multiple-warhead radar-evading missile. Quite the blustering intimidation factor for a country that can't make their own nukes without Russian, Pakistani and North Korean help. Wake me when they've got their own Zionist death ray.
Posted by: AbbaGav at April 03, 2006 06:32 AM (5XR09)
5
All the more reason to GIVE them some nuclear technology, say, in the form of items like n-jdams, at least twenty, at key sites all over Iran.
Hey, is that mushrooms I smell?
Posted by: n.a. palm at April 03, 2006 07:03 AM (nwcKF)
6
Graeme,
Russia sold China about 50 of these missle/torpedos in the mid-1990's and I'm wondering if maybe the Chinese gave this technology to Iran, or if Russia did. It had to be one of the two.
My theory is that Iran might place these missles on civilian maritime vessels, and try to use them as a first strike against our aircraft carriers. I don't think they can get a military vessel close enough to our carriers to hit them. Just one avenue of attack, perhaps high speed military craft might be used in a night attack. I wouldn't underestimate the craftiness of these guys, that's for sure.
Posted by: jesusland joe at April 03, 2006 07:43 AM (rUyw4)
7
The way I see it is that if the thing is any good, we would already have a better version of it and have a way to take them out before they were able to get close enough to do any damage. Every time we have to take one of these chumps out, we learn of some new military technology that we've developed and had operational for a while. By the time we take out Iran, we'll have some kind of missle that will knock on the door of their huts and take a DNA sample before determining if that particular hut is a prime target.
Posted by: slug at April 03, 2006 07:55 AM (wcNc2)
8
Hey Fred Fry,
Sound travels about 4 times faster in water than it does in the air.
Assuming the 7km (~4mi) range to be accurate...
With their torpedo, the 3355mph soundwave would be heard by those within range, in ~4 seconds. Which if my guesstimate is close, is 12 seconds shorter than it would take the Iranian's new toy to get up to speed anyway.
Posted by: me at April 03, 2006 11:41 AM (/l2PJ)
9
They use it once, they lose their navy, most likely their air force as well. Which means the calculation they have to make is, will it be worth the loss of their air and sea forces in order to be able to destroy whatever it is they're aiming (carrier? submarine? American-flagged merchant vessel?) when they shoot the One and Only.
I think that's the case with any attack by any system of theirs on our forces. Things are on a hair trigger now, and one side is lead by a man who thinks world leaders don't blink when he is speaking, and is preparing the way for the return of an 800 year old man who has been hiding in a well since the 12th century.
Posted by: Mike James at April 03, 2006 01:37 PM (BJYNn)
10
So once again, the unevolved savages come out to throw rocks at their betters. We should exterminate them like the vermin they are.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 10:57 PM (0yYS2)
11
DonÂ’t know what you guys are talking about but if they can field a few hundred of those speed boats w/ torpedoes they may do some damage. Our ships are good but as the ant said to the elephant hold on my 3million relatives would like to play.
Posted by: john at April 04, 2006 12:59 PM (koOZj)
12
john, I believe that each torpedo is 26 feet long (as Graeme noted above) and they require a specialized tube for firing. That most likely puts it outside of the capabilities of a "speedboat".
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at April 04, 2006 01:36 PM (RHG+K)
13
i don't mean a small miami vice boat but somthing like a 60' fast patrol boat.thats what it looked like on cnn
Posted by: john at April 04, 2006 01:57 PM (koOZj)
14
John, do you mean the type of fast patrol boat that destroyers and aircraft would target and swat like flies within minutes of leaving port?
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 04, 2006 08:29 PM (0yYS2)
15
The gulf is a small area, by the time we know were under attack it could be to late. DonÂ’t forget they are not as stupid as saddam was. I bet there ports have anti ship missile batteries protecting them. They had an exercise a few years ago call millennium. Where they pulled a retired general out to be the opforce . And he pulled just that kind of attack and he kicked there butts with 16 ship kills. Naturally they stopped the game and sent the old guy home. Then set the rules so they would win
Posted by: john at April 05, 2006 05:27 AM (5zbYP)
16
We are living at an important time. Atheism, which people have tried for hundreds of years to portray as “the way of reason and science,” is proving to be mere irrationality and ignorance. Materialist philosophy that sought to use science for its own ends has been in turn defeated by science. A world rescuing itself from atheism will turn to God and religion. And this process has begun long ago.
It is clear that believers have important duties in this period. They must be aware of this major change in the worldÂ’s way of thinking, interpret it, make good use of the opportunities that globalization offers and effectively represent the truth along this road. They must know that the basic conflict of ideas in the world is between atheism and faith. It is not a struggle between East and West; in both East and West there are those who believe in God and those who do not. For this reason, faithful Christians, as well as faithful Jews are allies of Muslims. The main divergence is not between Muslims and the "People of the Book" (Jews and Christians), but between Muslims and the People of the Book on the one hand, and atheists and pagans on the other. Of course, we must not show hostility to such people but view them as people who need to be rescued from their error.
Posted by: TO pagant I.M at April 06, 2006 10:31 AM (zqsRN)
17
Those boats wouldn't even get out of the ports before our radar and jets rip them to shreds ha ha ha ha ha ha the torpedos would just add to the fireworks.
Posted by: Tom at April 06, 2006 07:18 PM (CGl+5)
18
i hope you guys are right about them. they seem a little to willing too die
Posted by: john at April 07, 2006 02:07 PM (x+DJD)
19
Odds are the speedy torps are useless against military type vessels. What about vs civvy ships.. like.. oil tankers? Take out two or three of those and what happens to our economy? Can these torps be mounted on supertankers filled with oil.. heading to Russia.. or.. China? How will they react if we take out these full tankers. The situation there is far more complex than most realize. We could threaten to pull out of the non proliferation treaty.. and threaten to ship nukes and tech to countries hostile to China and Russia.. and Iran. this has it's own dangers.. but.. the game Iran is playing is no less dangerous. If China and Russia come aboard and take a stronger stance against Iran's erichment program.. it would be more likely Iran would seek to halt.. or at least to freeze it's capabilities. Sometimes the only way to win is not to play.
Posted by: Dave at April 12, 2006 11:29 PM (/gJOn)
20
The problem will not be the torpedos, but the hundreds of "SUNBURN" anti ship missiles thatIRAN has aquired from Russia. They are land, air, or ship launched, travey at twice the speed of sound, hug the water and perform violent side to side manevours en routhe to the biggest ship in the group,,, (they seek the biggest one activly) i.e. the carrier.
These are undoubtedly (hundreds of them) in the mountains on the north shore of the gulf, and be sure lots in the Hormuze area.
The Phalanx machine gun defence can NOT even get a fix on them before they HIT. IRAN will not do a a 1 or 2 launch, they will launch a whole lot of these things, and several at tankers crossing Hormuz. Sink a few there and it's "closed", then no one is able to get IN OR unfortunatly no one out either. ANY US navy vessle in the gulf will be SUNK, and any tanker trying to get out too... ALSO where do you think supplies for 130000 US troops come in to IRAQ, Answer, through HORMUZ, if HORMUZ is closed, soon Bushie will have to supply 130000 troops by air as they are surrounded by "insurgents"
I sincerly hope sane minds prevail, otherwise I fear there will be lots of US boy's blood in the gulf. NOTE the gulf is small, shallow and very clear water. There are almost NO places that a sub can get deep enough to avoid easy detection from air.
Recipe for a disaster greater than Pearl Harbour and the Twin towers combined times 10...
Posted by: Patrick at April 21, 2006 07:17 AM (8QuYO)
21
I read a paper detailing such a scenario; however, it doesn't take defensive innovation into consideration.
Perhaps that's why there's the new SeaRAM ASMD system. They are drop-in replacements for the Aegis and are designed to detect and successfully intercept even supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles. Last I checked, it had been tested against Sunburns or the equivalent and had won. It can also deal with multiple targets at once. Put a lot of SeaRAMs on the ships of the fleet, and even a hundred Sunburns will have a hard time getting through.
As for blocking the strait with sunken ships, could not a sufficiently large missile or bomb set on the blockade help to clear it? I see it as sorta like busting a dam, and the British developed dambusting technology all the way back in World War 2.
Posted by: Charles at June 13, 2006 06:53 AM (rudhd)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Islamic Cleric Murdered in Pakistan
Call this what you get when you are Muslim and speak out for Islam and against terror and death.
Khaleejtimes DERA ISMAIL KHAN, Pakistan - Suspected Islamic militants killed a cleric in a Pakistani tribal region near the Afghan border over suspicion he was a spy for the United States and Britain, officials said on Sunday.
The bullet-riddled body of Maulana Zahir Shah, who ran an Islamic school, was found Sunday in Sararogha, a mountainous area in the lawless South Waziristan tribal region, three days after five armed men abducted him from his seminary.
Shah helped authorities run an FM radio station that aired programs critical of the militants from his school in Tajori, a town near the border with South Waziristan, about 80 kilometers (50 miles) north of Dera
In a sign of growing strength in South Waziristan, militants have issued orders for local tribesmen to grow beards or face punishment.
On Friday, the militants held a meeting in Jandola, a small town in the region, and warned local clerics not to solemnize the weddings or funerals of men who do not have beards, an internal police report said. A copy of the report was made available to an Associated Press reporter in Dera Ismail Khan on Saturday.
Radical Islamists consider shaving facial hair to be un-Islamic
Well what did you expect heÂ’d get, a new washer and dryer? Hairy.
Posted by: Howie at
10:43 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 239 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Didn't they get Bush's "Religion of Peace" memo? Muslims are murderous scum, bent on conquest and destruction of every country on earth, and our leaders are telling us lies that serve the enemy's purpose. It's time for revolution people, because things aren't going to get any better the way they are. Hang all the bastards and start over.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 06:02 AM (0yYS2)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Dr Sanity Finds Nut!
Yep.
Dr. Sanity Unbelievable material from MEMRI (hat tip: LGF). Read/watch the entire interview, but here is the final bit:
And now the nut.
Mermi : The first is the khifadh circumcision of the girls. The second factor is modesty, the third is the mother's monitoring of the daughter's behavior, and finally, the observance of prayer.
[...]
Interviewer: Is the girl asked whether she wants to be circumcised or not?
Dr. Muhammad Wahdan: No. We ask the doctor, who makes the decision.
Dr. Malika Zarrar: God help us.
Interviewer: So what about the girl's opinion?
Dr. Muhammad Wahdan: What do you mean?
Interviewer: What if she says: I don't want to be circumcised. What happens then?
Dr. Muhammad Wahdan: If a girl says she doesn't want it, she's free. No problem.
Interviewer: Is this what happens in reality?
Dr. Muhammad Wahdan: I have no relation to reality. I am talking about how things should be.
Interviewer: You are a religious sheik, from Al-Azahar University. You cannot say you have no relation to reality.
Dr. Muhammad Wahdan: Reality is a mistake, we must rectify it.
[...]
In Egypt we have four and a half million spinsters. The definition of a spinster is a woman who has reached 30, without ever receiving a marriage proposal. We have a spinster problem in the Arab world, and the last thing we want is for them to be sexually aroused. Circumcision of the girls who need it makes them chaste, dignified, and pure.
Whoa man you see that nut? That man is crazy!
Posted by: Howie at
09:22 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 260 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I hope all the idiot liberal whores like getting clitorectomized when their new masters take over.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 06:03 AM (0yYS2)
2
Wow. And the West and Israel get blamed for making Islam look bad.
Posted by: Graeme at April 03, 2006 07:24 AM (o1ojb)
3
Shocker! I tell you I'm shocked. Surely the ROP would not be for such a think, women having more rights than men and all in the Islamic World.
Posted by: jesusland joe at April 03, 2006 07:48 AM (rUyw4)
4
"thing" is what I meant, not think. We all no these radicals don't think.
Posted by: jesusland joe at April 03, 2006 07:55 AM (rUyw4)
5
Yeah, he's crazy, all right.
Circumcision of that sort is not going to keep women from getting aroused, it will just keep them from doing much about it.
All them horny, frustrated old maids.
Sounds like he is going to get an appropriate punishment.
Posted by: Phillep at April 03, 2006 09:11 AM (BPRoL)
6
"Reality is a mistake" sounds like a bumper sticker from the doped-out 1960s.
Posted by: Mike at April 03, 2006 09:26 AM (b10wT)
7
Reality is Americans circumcise like Mohammadans on crack. They just prefer penises to clitorises. We got our own circ problem. Good post, but for irony only.
Posted by: David at April 03, 2006 09:18 PM (H5Y3b)
8
The USA is the only place in the world that circumcises for aesthetic reasons, informed consent is not applied to infant boys here. Wash it, don't amputate it!!! Our infant boys are not farm animals!!!
Posted by: David at April 04, 2006 07:40 AM (2ZQe6)
9
The specific origins of FGM are somewhat obscured by time. Most often the historic justifications cited are marital fidelity, controlling the woman's sex drive, preventing lesbianism, ensuring paternity, "calming" her personality, and hygiene. It is commonly considered an important rite of passage. In some regions, a celebration accompanies the event while in others there is no particular ceremony, gifts, or ritual. FGM is practiced, to some degree, by Muslims, Christians, Jews, and animists alike. In many cultures, sexual pleasure is considered to be for men alone. Overall attitudes can vary greatly between the various FGM practicing ethnic groups and cultures. Within some ethnic groups, adolescent sex is permitted, even encouraged, until circumcision is performed and "adult" responsibilities commence.
Posted by: Female Genital Mutilation at April 06, 2006 10:57 AM (zqsRN)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Will Iran Respond with Terror?
That is the question an article at MSNBC seeks to answer. It’s logical to prepare for that possibility given Iran’s past behavior. It seems the US is investigating this as the UN takes up the Nuclear Arms issue. Given Iran’s bragging this week about it’s military’s technical capabilities I find it a stretch that they Say, “Hey we love hi-tech stuff all of it except the bomb of course”. Let’s not forget Iran’s other military capabilities.
MSNBC : Before Sept. 11, the armed wing of Hezbollah, often working on behalf of Iran, was responsible for more American deaths than in any other terrorist attacks. In 1983 Hezbollah truck-bombed the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 241, and in 1996 truck-bombed Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, killing 19 U.S. service members.
Iran's intelligence service, operating out of its embassies around the world, assassinated dozens of monarchists and political dissidents in Europe, Pakistan, Turkey and the Middle East in the two decades after the 1979 Iranian revolution, which brought to power a religious Shiite government. Argentine officials also believe Iranian agents bombed a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires in 1994, killing 86 people. Iran has denied involvement in that attack.
Iran is a terrorist supporting state? Nah.
Iran's intelligence services "are well trained, fairly sophisticated and have been doing this for decades," said Crumpton, a former deputy of operations at the CIA's Counterterrorist Center. "They are still very capable. I don't see their capabilities as having diminished."
Both sides have increased their activities against the other. The Bush administration is spending $75 million to step up pressure on the Iranian government, including funding non-governmental organizations and alternative media broadcasts. Iran's parliament then approved $13.6 million to counter what it calls "plots and acts of meddling" by the United States.
Hey sounds like we can outspend em. But hey America is nothing but not the best in money politics. I reckon VOA booming over every square inch of Iran would be well worth the bucks. Meddle my ass, hold your dirty hands up to the light is more like it.
"Given the uptick in interest in Iran" on the part of the United States, "it would be a very logical assumption that we have both ratcheted up [intelligence] collection, absolutely," said Fred Barton, a former counterterrorism official who is now vice president of counterterrorism for Stratfor, a security consulting and forecasting firm. "It would be a more fevered pitch on the Iranian side because they have fewer options."
We should
spell out very clearly how we would respond if the US were to be attacked by Iran or agents thereof, and pretty damn quick too!
Posted by: Howie at
09:08 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 446 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Upon the next attack, Americans should rise up and slaughter every muslim in the country, leaving none to escape. Hang them from every bridge and light post, then go after the libtards.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 06:05 AM (0yYS2)
2
I think there are enough armed Americans who still love their country to take care of any Iranians who might wish to do us harm.
All Iranians out there, it would be wise to report these would-be terrorists to the FBI before they can act, because it will not be possible to tell you apart after an attack. So, please report these guys now. You know who they are.
Posted by: jesusland joe at April 03, 2006 07:51 AM (rUyw4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Hey, That's Not A Fatwa!
Gee, bitch and moan at 3 in the morning and look what it gets you:
Oh, ye of little faith and reading comprehension skills. I never mentioned the video, only these facts, which remain the same.
http:/(no link whoring for you! -Vinnie)
Jill Carroll's an extremist. And you apparently have a problem with premature articulation. Next time, read first.
You got something wrong, though. More than thirty seconds in a room with you, and I think I'd have to kill you.
Debbie Schlussel
"Premature articulation." Ha-ha, coming from someone who couldn't get laid at a Chippendale's convention with a purseful of Benjamins. Plus, I'd be dead by my own hand 29 seconds before you got around to it, spanky. Especially if you showed up without those 800 lbs of makeup that disguises your fugliness.
I heart friends:
Beth
Misha
Don Surber
Florida Cracker
Decision '08
Middle Earth Journal
Frankly, I'm relieved that Debbie Schlussel wants to kill me. After all, she'd probably mistake a water gun for a real one.
Now can I get a real fatwa please?
Posted by: Vinnie at
07:00 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 188 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I r must be, and yore comment Is teh Roxxerrrzzz!1!!!!!
Posted by: Vinnie at April 02, 2006 07:19 PM (/qy9A)
2
so, like, did you see what stephanie was wearing yesterday? pshah, it was, like, totally not matching. And stuff.
Posted by: MiB at April 02, 2006 08:44 PM (2hPsb)
3
Are there any bloggers who Debbie does not want to sue or kill?
Posted by: Don Miguel at April 02, 2006 10:55 PM (UAn5X)
Posted by: Donnah at April 02, 2006 11:25 PM (1q3hZ)
5
Vinnie, what is your hard-on for Jill Carroll all about? She chose to take sides with the enemy, and they used her for propaganda, so to hell with her. You can't take sides with reservations, and wars are not won by allowing traitors to go unpunished.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 06:09 AM (0yYS2)
6
"Schlussel's unique expertise on radical Islam/Islamic terrorism and a host of other issues make her a popular speaker and television and radio news talk show guest, both nationally & internationally."
lol...
Posted by: Venom at April 03, 2006 08:11 AM (dbxVM)
7
She hasn't threatened to kill me, but she did threaten to sue. Does that make me fatwah-worthy?
Posted by: rightwingprof at April 03, 2006 10:29 AM (hj1Wx)
8
A Shlussel fatwa. What would that be called? A "fatwussel"? or a "shlutwa"?
Posted by: Oyster at April 03, 2006 06:29 PM (YudAC)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
I Am So Sick Of This (UPDATED)
"Our troop's time is better spent doing this or that rather than rescuing him/her."
Oh, STFU.
Our military, which you statistically never bothered to join, takes pride you will never have, rescuing civilians from harm, no matter their ideology.
Idiot commenters like that fail to grasp the basic concept that our military is designed to protect us. All of us.
Not just here, but there as well.
That's what they do. We do (er, I did heh). Kill people, break things, and protect Americans. Not leftist Americans, not conservative Americans, not American Indian African Irish Indo-Chinese Jamaican Arabian Pashtu Tobrukian Americans.
Just Americans.
And, truth be told, they like doing it.
Here, or there.
So give us a goddamned break on the You-Think-You-Know-Best-What-The-Military-Should-Spend-It's-Time-Doing-Thing.
Unless you have 4 stars on your epaulettes. Then I might listen. But probably not, I have an issue with authority figures.
Updated with revised and extended remarks.
more...
Posted by: Vinnie at
03:34 AM
| Comments (32)
| Add Comment
Post contains 528 words, total size 3 kb.
1
"they (er, we) like doing it"? What a fucking joke. I'm an infantryman with the 2nd battalion, 22nd infantry regiment with the 10th Mountain Division. Our sector is the Abu Ghraib province, bordering the al-Anbar province about 30 minutes humvee's drive outside Baghdad. My job as of now is PSD for our battalion's command group. We drive around the battalion commander, sergeant major, XO, and ops major. Ok, none of them have 4 stars on their chest, but it's as close as I'm ever going to get.
We spent almost a full month looking around the areas in our sectors (we're responsible for 2) where known kidnapping cells operate for this strumpet. Maybe I shouldn't say "spent", more like "wasted" a month. We had pushed the insurgency in our area back several weeks in operational capability. In the time we wasted looking for this idiot, the insurgency was allowed to restock and refit their cache's. So we had to spend the next month doing raid after raid busting up cells that had regrown. Which would have been unneccessary if we had never been sent on a retarded mission to find this chick.
Civilians and reporters over here know the risks. They leave the wire knowing what kind of danger they're in at all times. Jill Carroll left Baghdad alone, unarmed, and disguised as a muslim woman. But time after time they make the same mistakes over and over again. It's just a matter of time before they get themselves kidnapped, and then waste our time when we have to go look for them.
Do I take pride in finding civilians? Hell no. And that's straight from a grunt's mouth that's on the ground, who was involved in the search for Jill Carroll, and also found the French civilian engineer Bernard Planche.
Posted by: Ryan at April 02, 2006 05:20 AM (aLiCo)
2
Sorry you feel that way Ryan, but you can't expect every day to be like a recruiting commercial. If you don't like doing the job, you can always get out when the time comes, or make enough trouble until they discharge you. Remember, you don't just work for the Army, you work for We the People, as did I, as have millions of others. Suck it up and drive on.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 02, 2006 07:25 AM (0yYS2)
3
Ryan--thanks for writing from real knowledge, and for your service. It is an interesting debate. If we don't have reporters going outside the Green Zone, we don't know enough. If we do, they will inevitably get kidnapped, some of them, and our military will be less effective at its main job because it will spend resources searching for them.
So, are you suggesting that they don't leave the Green Zone? Or that if they do, the military should not be tasked with looking for them?
Posted by: jd at April 02, 2006 07:27 AM (uT71O)
4
NOrmally I would agree with you, however, these people who are going over often have no business being there. The term freelance journalist in Jill Carroll's case is generous at best. She was a defender of the insurgency and was going over there with an agenda which she knew she could sell to the Christian Science Monitor, a paper which sides with Hamas over Israel as an example of its bent.
Meanwhile the military needs to 24-7 bust up these bastards and IF they have the time to go around and save these people fine, but I would say that right now this is a military that already has one hand tied behnd its back and is never allowed to go out and do its business of killing the enemy as best it can. This just makes its job that much harder.
Posted by: Steve Sharon at April 02, 2006 07:54 AM (/wox2)
5
Vinnie -- you know I'm a long-time fan.
It is therefore with a heavy heart that I tell you that this is one of the worst, least considered things you have written.
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at April 02, 2006 08:00 AM (XN4gd)
6
Jill Carroll was one of the few reporters who would leave the Green Zone, she did not think that she could do a good job covering Iraq from the inside of an armored vehicle. Being a war reporter has never been more dangerous in any other war. I will miss her reporting. If anyone has any links to anyone else who is doing that kind of reporting please post them.
Posted by: john Ryan at April 02, 2006 08:35 AM (TcoRJ)
7
Ralph Peters and Michael Yon have given some of the best reporting out of Iraq by going out of the Green Zone and embedding with Coalition units for protection.
Jill Carroll could have done the same thing.
Posted by: Michael in MI at April 02, 2006 09:52 AM (GANmF)
Posted by: Michael in MI at April 02, 2006 09:55 AM (GANmF)
9
>>>which you statistically never bothered to join,
So only those who statistically bothered to join the military have a right to voice some opinion about the military or U.S. policy? To me, it would seem entirely irrelevant.
I haven't formed an opinion yet one way or the other about the substance of your post, and I'm not just looking to pick a nit with it either, but your comment sounded remarkably like the Liberal cheapshot against "chickenhawks" who support the war yet haven't bothered to join the military. It's fantastic rhetoric, but it has little or no substance.
It reminds me too of the Liberal tactics the Bush Administration used against those who opposed the Harriet Myers nomination and Dubai ports, calling us "sexist" and "racist." There is an attitude behind those tactics that I find disturbing and dissapointing coming from conservatives. We shouldn't let ourselves stoop to that level.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 02, 2006 09:58 AM (8e/V4)
10
Vinnie's been reading too much starship troopers.
Hey newsflash: civilians can express opinions too, and they can also be valid, even if they are about the military.
Amazing, I know.
Posted by: MiB at April 02, 2006 10:00 AM (2hPsb)
11
Vinnie, you strained at a gnat, and swallowed a camel.
Posted by: jesusland joe at April 02, 2006 10:22 AM (rUyw4)
12
Was that a biblical reference, JJ?
Posted by: MiB at April 02, 2006 12:08 PM (2hPsb)
Posted by: jesusland joe at April 02, 2006 12:48 PM (rUyw4)
14
A few years ago some liberal politician wanted to send our troops to south america to guard the rainforests what a waste of troops
Posted by: sandpiper at April 02, 2006 01:31 PM (0Wk0b)
15
For those of you who haven't looked into any background, Jill Carrol DID travel with U.S. troops for a month as a reporter. The CSM even quoted the company captain, who seemed to speak well of her.
And how many of you have actually read her articles? They seem balanced enough to me that you could read pretty much anything into them you want. For me, I detect a moderately liberal slant, but let's be fair. She frequently wasn't particularly supportive of Iraqi officials and certianly didn't paint the insurrection in glowing terms. Suffering civilians, whatever the percieved cause, seemed to be the burr in her saddle.
I probably wouldn't agree with her politics if she discussed them with me, but that hardly qualifies her as a "moonbat."
Posted by: David at April 02, 2006 01:39 PM (wZLWV)
16
>>>First off, I'm not calling anyone a chickenhawk.
I know you weren't calling anybody a chickenhawk. But dismissing somebody's comments about how to best use our military just because they haven't served in the military is a specious argument-- just like the chickenhawk slur the Left uses.
>>>it helps to have an insider's view when telling the military what you think they ought to be doing.
Whether or not to use our military to rescue moonbats who've placed themselves in harm's way is a civilian decision-- not a military one. This isn't Starship Troopers. So I disagree.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 02, 2006 04:06 PM (8e/V4)
17
Yup, Carlos. You're right. This isn't Starship Troopers. Damned shame in my opinion.
Posted by: MCPO Airdale at April 02, 2006 05:27 PM (WOQ34)
18
I know you weren't calling anybody a chickenhawk. But dismissing somebody's comments about how to best use our military just because they haven't served in the military is a specious argument-- just like the chickenhawk slur the Left uses.
Actually it's not. The specious comes in when bloggers and blog commenters pipe up with the notion that a person's ideology should be the determining factor as to whether or not it's worth it for the military to rescue them. Which, to me, is in the same vein as the Left's constant carping that the military should be utilized only as a perpetual Meals-on-wheels organization run under U.N. auspices.
Whether or not to use our military to rescue moonbats who've placed themselves in harm's way is a civilian decision-- not a military one. This isn't Starship Troopers. So I disagree.
Yeah, but it isn't made by
bloggers or blog commenters.
Starship Troopers: Never read it, never saw it. Don't have the slightest clue why it keeps being referred to.
Posted by: Vinnie at April 02, 2006 05:42 PM (/qy9A)
19
In Starship Troopers, only military veterans were granted full citizenship and a say so in political matters.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 02, 2006 06:07 PM (8e/V4)
20
I'll have to catch it when it's on.
I certainly don't advocate that view.
Look, man, when the 4 contractors were murdered and their bodies burned and hung from the bridge in Falluja, Kos said "screw 'em."
It just doesn't sit well with me that when a lib is held hostage by terrorists, people on our side seem eager to say "screw 'em" as well.
Posted by: Vinnie at April 02, 2006 06:41 PM (/qy9A)
21
>>>I'll have to catch it when it's on.
It was a pretty good scifi book written in the 50's. They made a lame movie version of it a few years ago.
I generally agree with you. The distinction I might make, however, would not be based on their ideology, but rather on whether they had ignored our government's warnings to stay out of the danger zone. Add to that the moron's goals of thwarting our government's objectives there (and our military's), and I can see why some people would object.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 02, 2006 06:58 PM (8e/V4)
22
Bravo to Vinnie for not wanting to only save those who support the president's policies (and bravo to the person who pointed out that the reporter did not, as evidenced by her stories, at least, hate the president's policies). We are all Americans in the war on terror. On 9/11 they killed Republicans and Democrats and Greens and libertarians and independents. And our troops are conservatives and liberals and all points in between. And you know what? To Osama, we are all infidels deserving of death. same with Zarqawi.
Posted by: jd at April 02, 2006 07:06 PM (uT71O)
23
That's the problem as I see it Carlos. If it had been Mark Steyn instead of Jill Carrol, I fear we wouldn't be having this debate.
I'm a conservative, I believe in the sanctity of human life. If I want to be consistent, that life has to include stupid people who willingly go into danger zones where they ought not be.
We cannot stand one of our neighbors. They drive us nuts. But if their house was burning down, I wouldn't hesitate to go in and rescue them.
Posted by: Vinnie at April 02, 2006 07:30 PM (/qy9A)
24
What I would see as reasonable is our government saying--hey, if you go into X area, you are on your own because of the danger it poses to our soldiers, whether that area is Somalia or Anbar province. I don't think that is what journalists in Iraq were told, particularly as so many in government from Wolfowitz on down have complained about the press not getting out of the GZ and getting the real story.
But our obligation to rescue or not rescue must NEVER be affected by the politics of the person kidnapped. The criteria must be neutral (an obvious exception should of course be made for true traitors and spies, but that almost goes without saying).
I feel the same as Vinnie. I don't currently have any neighbors I dislike, but I grew up next to a truly awful human being...but I still would want him rescued if his house caught on fire.
Posted by: jd at April 02, 2006 07:37 PM (uT71O)
25
Allright, did anyone read Ryan's post? I mean for crying out loud, he said it best. And Maximus, that was a whacked comment.."he can get out when his time comes," and sounds like you could use a tour in Abu Ghraib, to open your eyes.
Ryan, 1AD OIF1 03-04 here, I too was in the same area, and your post is similar to one of mine earlier...
Some of these arguments crafting a soldier's responsibilities to include looking for goofball, glory-hounding journalists instead of using that time to as you put it work on more pressing concerns is naive, unrealistic, unfair and lacking any kind of practical application.
Good post and well said Ryan, blogroll anyone?
Posted by: capster at April 02, 2006 09:03 PM (IARJ7)
26
What didn't you understand about my comment capster? If Ryan doesn't like how the Army does business, he can take a discharge at the end of his enlistment, and that's the way it is, because the Army doesn't care about a soldier's opinion. I don't like the fact that our soldiers waste their time trying to resuce these idiots who take side with the enemy then get bitten by the rabid dog they were trying to pet, but if I was still in, I'd have to follow orders too, or get out. As far as your Abu Ghraib comment, it was an incoherent non-sequitur, so I will disregard it as a brain fart on your part.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 06:15 AM (0yYS2)
27
Poor Vinnie... Somehow he's attracted a legion of useless, clueless moonbats...
Posted by: juandos at April 03, 2006 06:20 AM (2bfAx)
28
Vinnie, I'm not saying anything against Jill or for the contractors, but comparing the two was like comparing apples and oranges.
There's too much hooplah always surrounding the reporters. Peters and Yon wouldn't even be there were it not for the vast majority of left-leaning journalists hampering the effort and being used for the enemy's propaganda.
If we're complaining that reporters are lazy for not leaving the green zone and stupid for venturing out unarmed and unprotected, I'd imagine that says a lot. It says they're useless.
Posted by: Oyster at April 03, 2006 06:31 AM (YudAC)
29
Oyster nails it again. All of you had better listen, because she knows what she is talking about. Useless is the best adjective I've heard in this whole Jill Carroll mess. It speaks volumes about the liberal media and is spot on.
Posted by: jesusland joe at April 03, 2006 08:02 AM (rUyw4)
30
From an earlier chat (a month or so ago) with Ryan doesn't like it but he still does it anyway. As Improbulus Maximus said, orders is orders. He also said he wouldn't mind looking for people who got captured who were normal imbeds, following the troops. It's the random yahoos; free-range journalists, peace activists, moronic children wanting to 'visit' Iraq, etc; that tick him off.
I don't think Vinnie's sinking ship analogy really works that well in this case. Unless, of course, the libs were making speed-holes in the bottom of their boat to reduce drag.
Oh yeah, and I first learned about Jill Carrol from Ryan. He was doing typical grunt complaining about house-to-house searching for the entire day earlier in the week. He was surprised I hadn't heard about it since the news was making a big deal about it, which I had missed because of schoolwork.
Posted by: Ranba Ral at April 03, 2006 09:34 PM (GyNTD)
31
That should be
*with Ryan, he*
and
*analogy doesn't really work that well*
That'll teach me to try to post on 4 hours sleep in the past 3 days.
Posted by: Ranba Ral at April 03, 2006 09:37 PM (GyNTD)
32
vinnie,
about "starship trooper", don't bother with the movie, as someone said above it's a lame hack job by a director who has said it was his intent to trash the book. the original book was written by robert a. heinlien and it's worth a read, he made a number if comments about society that were entirely missing from the movie.
Posted by: "gunner" at April 16, 2006 10:16 AM (SCa13)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Just Five Minutes, Your Honor, Her And Me Alone
I've heard of grasping at straws, but
this is ridiculous.
Okay, so, Jill Carrol arranges her own kidnapping with her Islamist buddies, hangs out with them for three months, gnawing on falafel and gettin' funky with that down home Ashura thang, you know, chips dips chains and whips. Or she realizes the Sunni really does rise in the East, and bows down whenever the hell Achmed says it's time, because, well, she left her watch back in the room. Or maybe she just likes Kurds with her whey.
Well, then, she says this:
I want to be judged as a journalist, not as a hostage. I remain as committed as ever to fairness and accuracy _ to discovering the truth _ and so I will not engage in polemics. But let me be clear: I abhor all who kidnap and murder civilians, and my captors are clearly guilty of both crimes.
Wow, that's some anti-American sentiment right there. That's right up there with ole Giuliana Srgena. Nay, dare I say it? That is downright....Nazi propaganda.
If you want to be judged as a journalist, ok, well, I think you suck at it. If you wanted fairness and accuracy, you would have gone out like Ralph Peters did and rode with the troops. You didn't, you rode with your translator, and now he's dead and you're an ex-hostage.
But I'm going to judge you as a hostage, despite your plea. You did what you needed to do with a gun to your head. You said what you said, and wrote what you wrote, under duress. You wore the hijab as ordered, you conductecd yourself in the manner which was prescribed for you.
Not because you're some inane leftard moonbat (although you may be, but, that's irrelevant) but because you wanted to live. And the desire to live overpowers everything we do in the course of our days. Even, yes, our basic ideology.
5 minutes with Schlussel in my basement, and I'd have her singing the praises of Stalin. It's just that simple.
Could you see the blog titles on that one? "Schlussel endorses Stalin." "Schlussel embraces Marxism." "Schlussel says: Lenin, not such a bad guy after all."
Frankly, I'm sick and tired of people sitting behind a computer trying to divine the intuitions of someone thousands of miles away. People who do it like Schlussel does it are no different that buzzards circling a decaying corpse.
BTW, I just have to wonder if Schlussel would have even bothered to post anything if Jill Carrol's headless body had appeared on a Baghdad street one day.
We at the Jawa Report do, and always will, hope for the release of all hostages held by Islamofascistpricks. Better to celebrate the release of one Giuliana than to lament 10 Nick Bergs.
F.E.T.E.
Posted by: Vinnie at
03:13 AM
| Comments (21)
| Add Comment
Post contains 485 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Nope. Don't buy it for a second. Anyone who isn't a complete idiot can tell which way the wind is blowing. If she wants to sell that book/movie deal, she's gotta have a sympathetic market. Call me a cynic, but
cynic is the opposite of
sucker.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 02, 2006 07:32 AM (0yYS2)
2
Oh, ye of little faith and reading comprehension skills. I never mentioned the video, only these facts, which remain the same.
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2006/04/premature_artic.html
Jill Carroll's an extremist. And you apparently have a problem with premature articulation. Next time, read first.
You got something wrong, though. More than thirty seconds in a room with you, and I think I'd have to kill you.
Debbie Schlussel
Posted by: Debbie Schlussel at April 02, 2006 01:04 PM (Awh+P)
3
Uh, actually Jill Carroll DID travel with U.S. troops as a journalist for a month. The captain of the company was even quoted by the CSM shortly after her release and he spoke pretty well of her.
BTW, how many of you have actually read her articles? I'm sure some of you have, but I only detect a moderately liberal slant. And no, she did not portray Iraqi officials in a necessarily favorable light nor did she paint the insurrection in glowing terms. Suffering civilians appeared to be the burr in her saddle.
Posted by: David at April 02, 2006 01:24 PM (wZLWV)
4
Nothing that anybody says while a gang of fanatical thugs stand behind them sharpening their scimitars counts for anything at all.
When your head is about to roll you tend to co-operate.
Jill Carroll may well be an extremist (she's a journalist after all), but she did what 99.999% of people would have done in those circumstances.
Including Brave Debbie Schlussel.
Posted by: Martin at April 02, 2006 01:30 PM (7T22U)
5
You got something wrong, though. More than thirty seconds in a room with you, and I think I'd have to kill you.
With what? The exploding Silicone Implants Of Doom? Or would you grab a trowel and remove the makeup.
That would scare the piss out of me.
Sounds threatening, maybe I need to hire a lawyer.
Posted by: Vinnie at April 02, 2006 02:08 PM (/qy9A)
6
Wow Vinnie.
That saggy titted, sow faced shithead Schlussel just threatened to kill you. I would pass that little tidbit on to the FBI.
Oh wait, she gives regular freebie blow jobs to the FBI so they probably wonÂ’t arrest her.
Anyway, I sure that was a warning not a threat. I suspect she meant that if she were in a room for more than thirty seconds with you, the stench emanating from her crotch would kill you.
Posted by: Ranger 6 at April 02, 2006 03:33 PM (o+/cZ)
7
Debbie Schlussel - Definitely, we should "call the fbi" on her - as she threatened to do to me. . The beeatch thinks that anyone who disagrees with her on anything should be in jail. Bwaaaahahahahaha
Posted by: Beth Donovan at April 02, 2006 04:10 PM (9FPYz)
8
Really, why aren't you on medication? You're the right's version of the unhinged moonbat. Quit pretending to be right of center--you are an embarrassment, distressingly like Fred Phelps. We're all tired of your deranged, negative bloviating. Is there ANYTHING you actually support?
While I will note there are profound areas of disagreement between my views and many who post here... I applaud the intellectual honesty of those who call out the purveyors of manufactured outrage. It shows me there is reason to hope we will finally stop gravitating towards the extremist poles and lobbing grenades at each other.
Nobody's going to have any "reading comprehension" problems with that crack.
Goddamned nutcase.
I will forego the obvious jokes that such comments call to mind... I have never heard of Debbie Schlussel. However, a couple minutes on her site and it is clear she is a low frequency in the echo chamber ...seeking to till the same fields where Malkin and Coulter run wild ... she isn't worth commenting on further.
On to a more substative matter:
Vinnie and I see eye to eye on virtually nothing... so the areas of agreement are notable.
The point he makes, which is particularly worth noting by those on the left, is the fact that most American soldiers see their mission as protecting Americans...without regard for race, sex, religion or creed.
As I have noted before, it was the US Army that found evidence of death squads operating in the Interior Ministry basement. It was Maj. General Joseph Peterson who provided the
first official confirmation that death squads are operating within the Iraqi police force.
I believe there is a material distinction between the leadership of Gen. Petraeus and Gen. Peterson, as significant as the difference between Westmoreland and Abrams. Unfortunately, I think it is too late to change the reality on the ground...things have spun so far out of control over the last year and a half.
However, the point worth remembering...especially as reports of torture and abuse continue to build... those who participate or condone such behavior deserve to be punished. Those who have the courage to reveal or rebuke such behavior deserve our support. Remember, the only reason we even heard about Abu Gharib was a young sargeant from a small town in Maryland knew this was not what he was there to do. He and his family have paid dearly for that.
They have been the victims of harassment in their community. They have been shunned by friends and neighbors. Their property has been vandalized, and they now reside in protective military custody at an undisclosed location. On May 16th 2005, he received a John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award, recognizing his bravery in uncovering the abuse at Abu Ghraib.
That is the kind of soldier that Americans should be proud of. They are a clear concrete example of why I am so opposed to the present administration. The policy makers of this administration are not worthy of the men and women who serve them.
Posted by: 8ackgr0und N015e at April 02, 2006 04:11 PM (K5Ko+)
9
Oh wait, she gives regular freebie blow jobs to the FBI so they probably wonÂ’t arrest her.
Freebie blow jobs? Who would ever do that?
Posted by: Feisty at April 02, 2006 05:38 PM (HYxlu)
10
Debbie Does The Blogosphere strikes again. It's reactionary feces flinging idiots like her that makes me want to give up blogging and politics completely.
Vinnie, do us all a favor and use amend the post with basil's handy link redirect trick. I hate to think of Debbie getting off on the referrals from My Pet Jawa.
(Sorry for any visual images that might have produced. Feel free to poke out your mind's eye now.)
Posted by: Janette at April 02, 2006 05:44 PM (OcgcA)
11
Schlussel's a pathetic propagandist. She keeps using words like "documented" to mean "in a previous post I vaguely inferred". She uses racist nicknames for
white United States attorneys she doesn't like. She throws out words like "Islamist", simply flaunting her ignorance of what that ideology is or means.
You're smart to disassociate yourself from such a wack-job.
Posted by: Dan Hartung at April 02, 2006 06:12 PM (WVHXm)
12
Hah, I'm using Basil's redirect link for her too. LOL.
Posted by: Donnah at April 02, 2006 08:13 PM (1q3hZ)
13
Wow Debbie Schlussel you threatened the life of one of my friends (Vinnie) who is also my Blog brother. Debbie you are totally fucked up! I knew that before but this confirms it even more.
OH and Debbie, you are the perfect example of a woman that ONLY got ahead in her career because of HEAD if you get my drift! In other words girls that work on the street have more class then you have in one of your fake eyelashes. You are truly pathetic!
Posted by: Wild Thing at April 02, 2006 09:24 PM (tj1zH)
14
As a chef (a person who gets paid to cook things and must continually suffer white collar retards explaining to me earnestly that they would be a great chef) Feisty I feel your pain, but for some folks it's more of a hobby than a profession.
Posted by: Jake Jacobsen at April 02, 2006 11:02 PM (X2ChO)
15
Since Debbie Schlussel keeps asking people to apologize to her I decided to step up just so she could see how it's done:
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2006/04/premature_artic.html#comments
Posted by: Jon Swift at April 03, 2006 03:09 AM (fNQUw)
16
Dear Debs,
You are clueles. Completely clueless. You couldn't get a clue if we doused you in clue musk and set you to dancing the clue mating dance in a field of horny clues.
STFU, would ya?
LindaSoG
Posted by: LindaSoG at April 03, 2006 05:27 AM (TET2s)
17
To bad the cunt didn't get the Nick Berg treatment...
Posted by: juandos at April 03, 2006 06:14 AM (2bfAx)
Posted by: rightwingprof at April 03, 2006 09:05 AM (hj1Wx)
19
I think I misunderstood the Carrol story, thinking she had made those statements _after_ being rescued, and safely outside of Iraq. Usually what a hostage says while having been a hostage seems to me to be suspect; if they confirm the stories once they are safe & sound, that's different.
Posted by: h0mi at April 03, 2006 04:42 PM (zpJBl)
20
The whole thing with Jill Carrol seemed strange from the start. The people who "captured" her wanted women prisoners released. We released several women and then we heard nothing from her. Then several weeks later after the "deadline" we heard from her again. This time she was seen alone crying but, she only said that we must do what the people holding her said. She never said what that was!! What did these people want in return for her release?
So she was released. I saw her when she was released and she looked great next to most that are/were being held. She said that her captures never threatened to hit her but, they held guns to her head while she was making those statements? There were no guns anywhere near her in those videos. I have seen others make statements that are captured, like the ones that have their heads cut off, and they have men standing next to them holding guns to their heads.
Today, I saw Jill when she came home to see her family and I wondered when she had time to get red highlights in her hair. I know that most people wouldn't care about that after they were held by brutal animals like those who take Americans in Iraq.
I know a thing or two about the war in Iraq and the people that do this sort of thing and I can't understand why these people would pass up the chance to use this person to get everything they want. Why is it that no one has heard of this group? Why did they just let her go? The only thing that "they" got was the release of some women.
I am glad that Jill is home with her family and safe but, I can't help wondering if maybe Jill made this whole thing up just to make a story or try and free some women because she doesn't like the war. That would be horrible and the worst kind of journalism I have ever seen. Something someone should spend many years in jail for doing.
I really hope I am wrong. I want to believe that this whole thing really was true. I hope that the men and women in the military didn't spend countless hours looking for her for no reason.
Until I have proof I am going to wonder.
Posted by: scooterbell at April 04, 2006 12:31 AM (rZTWE)
21
Vinnie, to put it in as few words as I possibly can: you're a prick. You're the kind of limp-wristed dweeb that used to get the hell beat out himself in highschool. Yeah, actually, I do think Debbie could bitch-slap you around the parking lot. I know I could.
Posted by: Tanker at April 05, 2006 08:50 AM (6G6z9)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
210kb generated in CPU 0.0442, elapsed 0.1681 seconds.
136 queries taking 0.1367 seconds, 532 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.