mypetjawa v. 2.0 (beta) "<i>Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to ev

April 21, 2006

Danish Supermodel Arrested

Danish supermodel May Andersen has been arrested for assaulting a flight attendant. Fox News:

Danish supermodel May Andersen has been arrested for hitting a flight attendant on a flight from Amsterdam to Miami, police said.
Airport police arrested the woman when the flight landed. She continued her unruly behavior with officers, police said.

Obviously, Andersen can be dangerous, but the mug shot below isn't a particularly good likeness. Therefore, as a public service, The Jawa Report has uncovered some other pictures of Andersen to aid concerned citizens in identifying her and taking appropriate precautions.

more...

Posted by: Bluto at 04:30 PM | Comments (16) | Add Comment
Post contains 104 words, total size 1 kb.

CIA Officer Fired For Leaking to Media (Updated)

A CIA officer, not assigned to public relations, has admitted to passing classified, operational information to the media, specifically, the Washington Post. From Fox News:

WASHINGTON Â— A CIA officer has been relieved of his duty after being caught leaking classified information to the media.
One official called this a "damaging leak" that deals with operational information and said the fired officer "knowingly and willfully" leaked the information to the media and "was caught."
A second law enforcement official confirmed said the CIA officer had provided information that contributed to a Washington Post story last year saying there were secret U.S. prisons in Eastern Europe.

The CIA is expected to prosecute. Expect Leftist traitors all over the country to spring to this weasel's defense.

Via the Drudge Report.

Update: NBC News has identified Mary O. McCarthy as the CIA officer fired. Interestingly, Fundrace.org identifies a Mary O. McCarthy, with occupation listed as "Analyst" for the U.S. Government as having donated $2000 to John Kerry's 2004 Presidential campaign.

Cross-posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.

Posted by: Bluto at 04:14 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 187 words, total size 2 kb.

Co-Blogger Thanks

Thanks this week to all our co-bloggers for helping out while Rusty is off doing whatever the heck he does.

Thanks to Demosophist.
Vinnie.
Mike Pechar.
See-Dubya who also posts here.
Chris Short.
Traderrob.
The Dread Pundit Bluto.
Chad Evans.
Drew.
Richard.
Jane from Armies of Liberation.
And letÂ’s not forget Wine-O-Holic and the mysterious El Guapo.

And last but not least I'm your little Paduan Beotch Howie.

Also thanks to all of you who sent links and information that was a big help. Also thanks to our regulars and new visitors for participating in the comments this week despite the difficulties. And thanks to some a$$hole for forcing me to learn at least a little perl.

If IÂ’ve left anyone out feel free to email me or update this post. If you need to read something I suggest this article via Jihadwatch.

Jihadwatch :Andrew Bostom in FrontPage reviews Efraim Karsh's Islamic Imperialism, a new book that is refreshing in acknowledging what I have been saying for years: that Islamic jihad violence and subversion is not a "hijacking" of Islam, but a recrudescence of traditions, teachings and assumptions that are deeply embedded within the religion:

We expect my master the Macktastic Rusty Wicked will return on Monday.

Posted by: Howie at 01:58 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 209 words, total size 2 kb.

Michael and SeanÂ’s Trip to Iraq, The End

Read how they almost became evil tobacco smugglers too. And if poor old Howie can spare some change for Michael so can you. I enjoyed the whole series. Worth every cent I reckon.

Michael Totten :Hey, Joey. Have you ever seen the inside of a Turkish prison?
I did not want to see the inside of a Turkish prison.

Himdad handed Sean five cartons of cigarettes and pointed at his backpack. Sean looked at me without a word.
Â“I donÂ’t know,Â” I said. Â“What do we do?Â”

If we didnÂ’t carry five cartons apiece Himdad would be busted for smuggling again before we even got back into Turkey. Then what? He was our ride. Would we get in trouble, as well? Aside from stupid tourists like us, who on earth goes into Iraq for six hours? Who tries to bribe his way across the border except people who are up to no good?

Posted by: Howie at 01:01 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 168 words, total size 1 kb.

America's Sons Come Home After 62 Years

From a Department of Defense press release:

The Department of Defense POW/Missing Personnel Office (DPMO)
announced today that the remains of eleven U.S. airmen, missing in action from World War II, have been identified and are being returned to their families for burial with full military honors.
They are Capt. Thomas C. Paschal, El Monte, Calif.; 1st Lt. Frank P. Giugliano, New York, N.Y.; 1st Lt. James P. Gullion, Paris, Texas; 2nd Lt. Leland A. Rehmet, San Antonio, Texas; 2nd Lt. John A. Widsteen, Palo Alto, Calif., Staff Sgt. Richard F. King, Moultrie, Ga.; Staff Sgt. William Lowery, Republic, Pa..; Staff Sgt. Elgin J. Luckenbach, Luckenbach, Texas.; Staff Sgt. Marion B. May, Amarillo, Texas.; Sgt. Marshall P. Borofsky, Chicago, Ill.; Sgt. Walter G. Harm, Philadelphia, Penn.; all U.S. Army Air Forces.
On April 16, 1944, Paschal and Widsteen were piloting a B-24J Liberator with the other nine men aboard. The aircraft was returning to Nadzab, New Guinea after bombing enemy targets near Hollandia. The plane was last seen off the coast of the island flying into poor weather.

Most of the men will be buried today in Arlington National Cemetery. The families of three of the men have decided to bury them in their hometowns.

Cross-posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto, Stop the ACLU, and Vince Aut Morire.

Posted by: Bluto at 12:39 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 231 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Dude -- you might want to check the batteries in that calculator. Its should have come up with 62 years, not 52. Or is the problem "operator error"? Regardless, it is fantastic to have these men home again. May God bless them and their families.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at April 21, 2006 01:36 PM (4nXaP)

2 Good deal.

Posted by: Howie at April 21, 2006 02:25 PM (D3+20)

3 They remain forever young.

Posted by: Dave K at April 21, 2006 03:50 PM (YaR8u)

4 I wonder if there were any leftards there to protest against our unjust war against Hitler?

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 22, 2006 05:06 AM (0yYS2)

5 Actually, it was the right that opposed the war against Hitler. Don't you read history? The left wanted to take on fascism as early as 1935. It's why Hemingway went to spain to fight with the leftists against Franco's fascists, allied with Hitler. It's why FDR's big opponent in the rearmament battle of 38-41 was the right wing, led by racists like Lindbergh and isolationists of all stripes (including the pacifist left, but they were the smaller part). Try again, IM, try again. (There were even some on the right who, after Pearl Harbor, advocating only going after the Japanese, and leaving the Jews and Hitler's other victims to burn. Please get me right--I am NOT using that historical position by a minority of the Right to characterize today's conservatives. I'm saying you couldn't be more pathetic and ignorant in your attempt to compare WWII and Iraq. The "left" was far stronger in the fight against fascism than the right was, in part because many on the right had sympathized with Franco, and yes, with Hitler (and in fairness, many on the left with Stalin)

Posted by: jd at April 22, 2006 01:06 PM (ccFYg)

6 Finally JD provides us with the anicdote to all the ultra right crap spewing over this site. I await the "educated" response from Inprobulus Maximus after he picked up a history book. Thank God our founding fathers were not so close minded, otherwise we would would be in a world of . . . .

Posted by: Garner at April 22, 2006 05:05 PM (x7v0S)

7 Yes JD, I read history, and pathetic and ignorant are words that you shouldn't throw around lightly, as you have no idea how ill equipped you are to tangle with me. I know more about history than you know the inside of your house, I'll warrant, and if I feel like it, I can bury you in facts without even referencing any material. You use the term "Right" to describe anyone who isn't a piece of shit Communist, which I guess is true, but hardly accurate to describe who "we" are today, and who "they" were yesterday. The terms Right and Left originated in France, based on where the Statists and the Populists sat, and like everything else they produce, is generally useless except in a superficial sort of way. Fascists and Communists are blood brothers because both creeds are Statist in nature, and both seek to crush freedom. With rare exception, it has always been the respect for individual liberty that has motivated the people of this nation, and to try to paint it otherwise is dishonest. But then, I expect nothing else from the likes of you. The leftards also opposed our stance against Hitler, right up until he invaded Russia, then it was okay, though that didn't stop them from trying to pass military and industrial secrets to the Communists, who were also our sworn enemies, but who were less immediate a threat than the Nazi's. It was an American Communist, Ted Hall, who passed our nuclear secrets to the Russians, thus setting the stage for the Cold War and the nuclear proliferation nightmare we have today. Your party has much for which to answer, so watch where you point your fingers. Regarding Hemingway, his decision to fight in the Spanish war was based purely upon his opposition to Fascism, though your kind would like to paint him as a good Communist. Hemingway was a populist at heart, because he liked people, but he opposed Statism of any kind, even that of FDR's Great Society. To try to use him, a good example of the American spirit, to bolster your love of Communism, is the very definition of pathetic and ignorant. Leftards today are either misinformed idiots or bald-faced liars, and they oppose everything that makes this country great, and are trying to destroy it at every turn, as they have been for a hundred years now, but you and your Tvarischi will fail, because liberty will always live in the hearts of enough people to remain when your idiotic Socialism is a thing of the past.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 22, 2006 05:21 PM (0yYS2)

8 Wow, I guess being being objective and open minded really pisses people off. Funny how this liberal worked in Iraq for the State Department. I must have been secretly trying to conspire with the terrorists to attack the Us forces stationed there. Improbulus, ever go Iraq? I pray to God you don't have to.

Posted by: Garner at April 22, 2006 05:42 PM (x7v0S)

9 Yes, I did go to Iraq in 1990, and not as some government parasite, but as a soldier, which is something you don't have the balls to be. I wish to God that I could go again, but they can't use me with all my injuries that I received in the service of my country, though I'd be glad to go with my bad back, torn ligaments, and all. Don't start crowing about what you've done, because you haven't done shit.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 22, 2006 07:45 PM (0yYS2)

10 IM--you know as little about Hem, as you do about world history. Read any one of several bios of Hem to figure out some of his politics. The Kenneth Lynn was is the best, IMHO. He was a committed leftist at one time, and his anger at Dos Passos and others who moved right was real. He and his eventual third wife Martha Gellhorne fought in Spain as leftists. Having seen Batista in action in Cuba, he was also pretty ambivalent about Castro. (I don't think he was ever very sophisticated politically, but like many great writers, he assumed that brilliance in one area was transferable universally) You are correct that the Communist Party in this country briefly endorsed the Molotov-Ribbentrop peace of 39-41--but that in no way makes untrue what I said about the left and right in the 30s and their attitudes towards fascism. In fact, the Comintern's aboutface on Hitler led to massive upheavals in the far left in this country, as many finally saw that Moscow was controlling the Comm. Party USA. Most on the left remained opposed to Hitler, regardless of cynical orders from Moscow. Even rightwing histories of the American left cover this; it is not in dispute. It was one of the things that led to neo-conservatism among Jewish intellectuals---how could the communist party preach alliance with the anti-semitic Hitler? As for my use of right: I don't think it applies to everyone who isn't a communist. It is a vague term, but since you throw around "left" and of course the lovely neologism "leftard", I'm rather surprised at your hypocrisy in objecting to the term "right". Are you saying that Lindbergh and the Liberty League were not "right"? Conservatism as you articulate it briefly above sounds far more like "libertarianism" a related but distinct ideology.

Posted by: jd at April 23, 2006 07:48 AM (uT71O)

11 JD, you're obviously well-versed in propaganda, so why don't you just admit that you're a Communist? You see the world as two camps; Yours, and everyone else's, with America as the prime enemy. Do you think you're the first to come here trying to sell that shit? The way you phrase everything as Fascim vs. Communism tells us at once what you are and where your loyalties lie. Just move to France, Cuba, or North Korea or anywhere else, but please get the hell out of America; we don't need you.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 23, 2006 05:52 PM (0yYS2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Student Indicted in Terror Plot

(Atlanta, Georgia) A 21-year-old mechanical engineering student at Georgia Tech, Syed Ahmed, was arrested last month by FBI agents on charges related to terrorism.

From 11Alive.com:

"Mr. Ahmed knowingly and unlawfully attempted to provide, conspired to provide materials, support, and resources, knowing the materials, support and resources were going to be used in the preparation for and the carrying out of two other federal terrorism laws," said U.S. Attorney David Nahmias.
Ahmed's family suspects a videotape of their son made of a building is what made authorities suspicious but FBI agents will not confirm that. The family reportedly allowed federal agents to take computer information from their son's room.
"Yesterday, Mr. Ahmed appeared in court for his initial appearance and arraignment in front of Judge Feldman," said Nahmias. "He entered a plea of not guilty and is presumed not guilty until the government proves his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."

Ahmed's family came from Pakistan in 1997 and became U.S. citizens. Syed is reported to have become increasingly involved with Islam and allegedly attended a terrorist training camp in Pakistan last year. If he's guilty, it seems obvious to me that Ahmed was recruited through a mosque in the U.S.

Ahmed was taken into custody and ordered held until trial. No date has been set.

From Interested-Participant.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 11:31 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 225 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Just another disgruntled yute.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 21, 2006 11:50 AM (8e/V4)

2 That's the moon god worshipper I was writing about. Another POS in this country. Thanks for posting this fine example of the religion of peace. ROPMA P.S. Any of you false god worshipping A-holes out there, (CAIR), want to make peace, I will cook up some pork stew. You folks are all welcome at the peace table. I will even say grace to Jesus who died for everyone's sins.

Posted by: Leatherneck at April 21, 2006 01:36 PM (D2g/j)

3 How in the world do these people immigrate to our country and become citizens so quickly? Were they covered by one of Clinton's amnesties, or can you become a citizen that quickly?

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 21, 2006 08:31 PM (rUyw4)

4 Don't you only need to be a resident for five years to apply for citizenship? I believe it is that way up here in Canada.

Posted by: LC CanForce 101 at April 21, 2006 10:03 PM (3smJS)

5 To get fast-track citizenship, one must be a turd-world piece of shit, Euroleftard, or muslim. My friends from Russia have been waiting for over a decade now, with no word. I told them they should change their names and fly to a town in northern Mexico, sneak across the border, get caught, and voila!, citizenship. Our government sucks and should be thrown out part and parcel, and all the bums hanged on the capitol steps.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 22, 2006 05:11 AM (0yYS2)

6 IM--take your medication, and step away from the keyboard...

Posted by: jd at April 23, 2006 09:24 AM (uT71O)

7 http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49865 Wonder what the DHS is up to not arresting all those morons?

Posted by: Andre at April 23, 2006 11:21 AM (/u+1F)

8 JD, if you think that one word you write is going to have any effect on me, or anyone else here, other than boredom, you're wrong, just like about everything else. You're an idiot liberal who supports terrorism by undermining the war efforts, and you don't even deserve a new rope.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 23, 2006 05:58 PM (0yYS2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Cologne Killing Young Saudi Men

(Jeddah, Saudi Arabia) Social science experts are calling for a national awareness campaign after a rash of deaths of young Saudi men who drank cologne containing methyl alcohol. Although alcohol is prohibited in the Kingdom, 17 young Saudis have died in the recent past believing anything that lists alcohol as an ingredient is safe to drink.

From ArabNews.com:

Al-Nadwa daily recently launched an investigation into the practice in an effort to warn young people and hopefully save lives.
"This problem started four years ago when a number of university and high school students fell victim to it," said Dr. Saleh Awad Al-Garni, an expert in Islamic studies. "At that time, the Ministry of Commerce and Industry withdrew all the cologne from the market where ethyl alcohol exceeded 90 percent and methyl alcohol exceeded 50 percent."

Unfortunately, a typical result of banning a product is the creation of a black market.

"It's very sad that these people are buying the cologne to drink it," said Dr. Muayad Al-Hashmi, a general practitioner. "The Ministry of Commerce warned us about these colognes and limited sales to spray bottles. Smugglers, on the other hand, import the dangerous colognes into the Kingdom caring only about making fast money -- not about people's health.

Experts blame a variety of causes for the behavior of the young men. These include personality disorders, social and family troubles, and satellite television. I don't know, but if I lived in a hot, desert environment, I'd want a cold beer. You could blame it on my . . . uh . . . personality disorder . . . or anything you'd like. And despite flowery-pleasant breath, I'll pass on the foo-foo.

From Interested-Participant.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 11:00 AM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 288 words, total size 2 kb.

Hamas Appointment Reaffirms Terrorist Roots

Hopes held by some that Hamas' new responsibilities as the elected government of the Palestinian Authority would civilize the terrorist organization fade a little more each day.

From Reuters:

GAZA (Reuters) - A militant leader appointed to a senior security position in the Hamas-led Palestinian government said on Friday he would not abandon the fight against Israel which has long sought to kill him.
Jamal Abu Samhadana, high on Israel's most wanted list as leader of the Popular Resistance Committees (PRC), was appointed on Thursday to supervise the Interior Ministry and set up a new police force from militants to crack down on anarchy and chaos.
"Factions and security services should unite in one trench against the daily Israeli aggression against our people," Abu Samhadana told Reuters in an interview.

In case there was any hope that high office and its responsibilities would mellow Samhadana:

"I will continue to hold the rifle and will pull the trigger whenever required to defend my people," he said.

As has become apparent from recent events, "defending" the Palestinian people still means killing Israelis in falafel houses.

Cross-posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto, Stop the ACLU, and Vince Aut Morire.

Posted by: Bluto at 09:23 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 203 words, total size 2 kb.

George W Bush ChinaÂ’s Beotch

Yesterday a heckler heckled Chinese President Hu Jintao. Today I read that she was not only removed she has been charged with Disorderly conduct and more serious charges of Â“annoying important peopleÂ” are being considered.

NEWS24 : Secret Service spokesperson Jim Mackin said Wang had been charged with disorderly conduct and a separate charge of intimidating or disrupting foreign officials also was being considered.

I kind of worry about being critical of W, some days it does not go over too well. But when your President has his head up the ass of a communist dictator it's pretty much required (plus It's Friday). See we are asking for China to free political prisoners like Hao Wu. Then at the slightest provocation we charge a person and are considering even harsher charges for political speech. Does any one else see the hypocrisy in this? We are falling all over ourselves to apologize for this when China deserves to be heckled on human rights.

Yahoo News : China "must know that this Bush administration is good at controlling crowds for themselves, and the fact that they couldn't control this is going to play to their worst fears and suspicions about the United States, into mistrust about American intentions toward China."

Let me translate that for you. ItÂ’s a good thing Hu Jintao was kept busy yesterday for if he ever came to a complete stop it would have taken the Surgeon General an hour to remove George W BushÂ’s head from the Chinese PresidentÂ’s rectum.

China can now say,Â” What do you mean? You hypocrite you arrested that woman in DC. You have your nuts, we have ours. Get lost!Â”

IÂ’m sorry Mr. Bush for being a troll but itÂ’s all IÂ’ve got, make a few calls and have the charges dismissed. Worse than giving China a pass, you turned right around and did the same damn thing at least in spirit. Some times I wonder just what the hell our President is thinking about besides what he is doing.

Others : Michelle Malkin who is hosting the video of the hecklingand Gateway Pundit who has a good post on China recent Human rights record.

Hey Rush translates too.

Chinese President Hu Jintao : We will bury you!

Hat Tip : Steve Keeper of the Crimson Love Monkey.

For those of you without broad band click the Fatwa below or here for Church and States transcript of Rush's translation.

Posted by: Howie at 08:35 AM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 412 words, total size 3 kb.

1 I'm with you Howie. What do we teach the Chinese if we punish her for shouting at leaders? Of course, the same thing happened to American citizens at Bush appearances in 2004...but....

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 08:42 AM (uT71O)

2 Welcoming an Oppressor to the White House

Posted by: WPB at April 21, 2006 09:23 AM (uz6kb)

3 Some people try to get arrested some don't. In general I think unless they resist violently just give em the boot. Seems we are a bit uptight. The appearances you speak of I think should be handled the same boot em. There will always be some guy trying to be arrested. But most of the time let them go. There is a reason why we can drop a charge.

Posted by: Howie at April 21, 2006 09:24 AM (D3+20)

4 Yeah, I agree sometimes people try to get arrested. But removing someone from a public event for wearing a t-shirt that was anti-bush (and placing them under arrest), or removing people from the parade rout for carrying anti-bush signs, have all been documented. They even wouldn't admit people with anti-bush bumper stickers on their cars at some events. Bush's bubble was the worst since Nixon in 72, and I'm glad he's loosened up his own tolerance for dissent in the last six months. It's good for democracy here, and it's good for emerging democracies around the world to see that a strong leader doesn't fear dissent.

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 09:54 AM (uT71O)

5 jd, I've seen film of these Leftard protesters disrupting Republican events. I have no sympathy for them. Their free speech rights doesn't give them a right to disrupt other people's free speech rights.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 21, 2006 11:09 AM (8e/V4)

6 Anyone disrupting an event should be removed, for the reason you give. But many of the Bush limitations on speech during the 2004 election were Orwellian, and went way beyond that standard, or any reasonable security concern. I'm glad he has relaxed about confronting people who disagree with him. It is a positive development for our democracy.

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 11:36 AM (aqTJB)

7 Good post. ---- But I don't agree with Rush on one point. I don't think the CHICOMS knew Jack Bauer was alive.

Posted by: Oxen at April 21, 2006 11:44 AM (w9vWW)

8 Agreed Howie. I've lost a lot of respect for W. He's become an ignoramous.

Posted by: Richard at April 21, 2006 01:46 PM (U+YqD)

9 Some think the protester's free speach rights were denied. I think the protester tried to deny Mr. Hu's free speach rights. Regardless of what you think of Chineese policy, Mr. Hu had a right to speak at that assembly. He was the one invited to speak there, after all, not the protester. Had she shouted her slogans outside the assembly, no harm. If she had silenty carried a picket sign at the rear of the assembly with anti-China slogans, no harm. And some think it's the Presidents job to invite foreign guests so he can criticise and lecture them publicly. Not! Well mannered people shake hands and make nice with invited guests.

Posted by: Doug Purdie at April 21, 2006 04:13 PM (00DOn)

10 She had no RIGHT to interrupt a media event that was NOT open to the public. And the differnce between the way the US will handle this protester and the way China would, is that she will get a harmless disorderly conduct charge, which may even get quietly dropped. In China, she'd be in prison until she rotted. So please stop the hand-wringing about how we aren't being a better model for China to follow. Yeeesh!

Posted by: Craig at April 21, 2006 04:55 PM (6VSMY)

11 the chinese lady disrupts an event at the white house, she's arrested, and charged the next day. the women from georgia physically strikes a policeman performing his offical security duties and weeks later she has yet to be arrested or charged. whats up with that?

Posted by: kepa poalima at April 22, 2006 02:22 AM (PxxMB)

12 Actually Craig, she'd most likely be shot. I used to have a page bookmarked that had lots of pics of executions of women for doing things like selling stuff without a license, so imagine what this one would get. A bullet would be merciful.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 22, 2006 05:14 AM (0yYS2)

13 The website/news agency that Dr. Wang works with posted a nice disclaimer about the incident also. http://www.theepochtimes.com/news/6-4-21/40651.htmlpe I applaud Dr. Wang for seizing the opportunity to speak her mind. After all, this being America, one should not fear the government when one has a grievance.. until now.

Posted by: JeepThang at April 22, 2006 08:47 AM (yZQoS)

14 So, Doug, how do well mannered people wash the blood off after that?

Posted by: Erik at April 22, 2006 11:04 AM (XHfLv)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Senior Al-Qaeda Suspect Killed

(Khar, Pakistan) There's strong indication that a close associate of Ayman al-Zawahiri was killed yesterday in a gunfight in northwestern Pakistan. As a reminder, Zawahiri is second in command of al-Qaeda after Osama bin Laden.

From Aljazeera.net:

The suspect, thought to be Saudi-born Abu Marwan al-Suri, was killed on Thursday close to the Afghan border.
Major-General Shaukat Sultan, the Pakistan army spokesman, said al-Suri was in a vehicle on the outskirts of Khar, a town near the Bajur tribal region.
Al-Suri opened fire when he was asked to stop his vehicle at a roadblock. He killed a Pakistani security official and wounded two others before he himself was killed.
His body has been transported to a hospital in the city of Peshawar for identification.

Seized from al-Suri's vehicle were a video camera, a laptop computer, hand grenades and some documents. However, according to a Pakistani intelligence officer, al-Suri is probably not the man's real name. Nonetheless, since al-Suri was so closely associated with al-Qaeda leadership, I tend toward the thought that his elimination means the perimeter around bin Laden is tightening.

From Interested-Participant. Also posted at In The Bullpen.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 04:44 AM | Comments (51) | Add Comment
Post contains 195 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Wow, it's sure tough to be a leftard these days, what with all their heroes getting killed and all. With any luck, they'll join them soon.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 21, 2006 06:58 AM (0yYS2)

2 Our enemy is a "boogyman" or some such thing according to one of the unhinged who called into the Bill Bennett show this morning. I know of about 3000 or so people who would disagree with him....if they could.

Posted by: mrclark at April 21, 2006 07:28 AM (IMrft)

3 LIVE BY THE SWORD DIE BY THE SWORD nuff said

Posted by: sandpiper at April 21, 2006 07:48 AM (aTvBX)

4 "Terrorism is not a threat." ~~Michael Moore

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 21, 2006 07:53 AM (8e/V4)

5 Great. Another one gone............ just a billion or so more to go.

Posted by: n.a. palm at April 21, 2006 07:59 AM (XPviN)

6 Great, looks like IM has found an apostle of hate, who also wants to kill all Muslims. I doubt anyone with a moeity of his marbles thinks that the Left worships Al Qaeda terrorists. People on the left tend to want sexual equality, personal freedom, religious freedom, gay liberation, limited government...all values that are anathema to Al Qaeda. But keep it going, guys. This should do wonders for all the readers here who might believe mistakenly that the left spews more hatred than the right. Each advocate of genocide on the Muslims makes up for, oh, about 250 people who advocate abusing conservative columnists (because genocide is a little more serious). (clarification for the reading comprehension challenged--that is NOT an endorsement of leftwing haters--it is merely a comparison)

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 08:12 AM (uT71O)

7 But jd, if the muslims take over, you will be among the first to be beheaded by the 'religion of peace' boys. If there's one group they hate worse than christians, it's agnostic liberals like you.

Posted by: n.a. palm at April 21, 2006 09:24 AM (XPviN)

8 My point exactly, Palm. That's why "leftards" don't make heroes of Al Qaeda members or supporters. Sure, some on the left ask the question--why are so many in the Muslim world ambivalent about or supportive of Al Qaeda? And some of their answers offend some on the right. But asking that question is NOT the same as supporting Al Qaeda. Also--how do you know I'm an agnostic liberal? I hold a lot of views that would disqualify me for both categories. Just because I don't want to kill a billion muslims, I'm an agnostic liberal? And are you serious about wanting to kill all the Muslims? If you are, how would you describe your "religion" or views? Peaceful? For the record, the vast majority of Muslims don't want to kill all Christians and agnostics (hell, even Al Qaeda doesn't want to kill us all--they want to kill enough of us to get us out of historically Muslim lands from India to Spain, and build a new caliphate, but after that, they're happy to let us roast our way to hell by ourselves)

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 09:34 AM (uT71O)

9 I should note that the Islamofascists would probably kill all the Jews, Christians, wiccans, Shi'ites, Bahais, agnostics, atheists, Sufis, Buddhists, and Yazeris who remained in the caliphate lands. Luckily, there is more chance of Donald Rumsfeld winning the Democratic nomination in 2008 than this caliphate will ever be built. Ironically enough, for a movement that venerates history, this would be an act ignorant of history. Compared to Christianity, in the middle ages, the Islamic world was far more tolerant of religious diversity, at least towards Jews and Christians. They considered them "people of the book" who were almost as good as Muslims (the Muslims were much more brutal towards pagans of all kinds, at least until they conquered India). They didn't have full civic equality, they paid a higher tax for not believing, but their general status was higher than religious minorities in the West. It was a much better deal to be a Jew in Baghdad or Damascus than it was to a Jew almost anywhere in the Christian world. And, of course, several of the crusades were about massacring our own pagans in Europe, so pagans had a rough go of it wherever they were. Still, it is only in the last 100 years that Jews have been massacred or persecuted to the extent that they have been forced to emigrate from most of the Muslim world.

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 09:50 AM (uT71O)

10 Jd: Slight correction needed: I doubt anyone with a moeity of his marbles thinks that the Left worships Al Qaeda terrorists. People on the left tend to want sexual equality, personal freedom, religious freedom, gay liberation, limited government..for the people of the United States. We know they don't want gay liberation in Iran, religious freedom in Saudi Arabia -- personal freedom? why, that is for the AMERICAN people only, pesky brown people don't deserve freedom.

Posted by: davec at April 21, 2006 09:56 AM (CcXvt)

11 >>>People on the left tend to want sexual equality, personal freedom, religious freedom, gay liberation, limited government...all values that are anathema to Al Qaeda. True dat. If anything is pissing off the terrorists it's the decadent values of the Left. Which proves Bush was right when he said the terrorists hate our freedoms. But the Left only wants the U.S. to change its foreign policies-- which they claim is pissing off the radical muslims. Is the Left similarly willing to change its own decadent values that also piss off radical muslims? Of course they aren't. Which just shows what huge hypocrites they are. The Left doesn't mind pissing off radical islam, but then they try to weaken our efforts to protect ourselves against the very terrorism which they themselves help create. Hypocrites and buffoons. That's today's Left. Liberalism is a mental disorder.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 21, 2006 10:04 AM (8e/V4)

12 It was one week ago that operation "Mountain Lion" began with the participation of 2500 coalition troops in the Afghan province opposite Bajur. This resulted in a total of 6 casualties for the enemy, Kunar province is the home to Hektmatyar. His group claimed responsibility for shooting down the special operations helicopter in which 19 died. He was probably using one of his leftover stingers.

Posted by: john Ryan at April 21, 2006 10:05 AM (TcoRJ)

13 Amen Jesusland Carlos.

Posted by: Howie at April 21, 2006 10:07 AM (D3+20)

14 Dave--just because they do not advocate invasion of Iran, this means they don't want gay people to be free there, because they are racist? That's a long, tendentious stretch of logic. I agree that sometimes, people on the left have been torn between their egalitarian social values and their anti-colonialism. This point was made most effectively in Allan Bloom's the Closing of the American Mind. A paleo-con (also gay, but whatever), Bloom would stump liberal college students by asking them--you are a colonial administrator in India. A widow is about to be burned alive. You have the power to stop it. What should you do? Enforce your own Western values, as a colonial, or let the woman die, and tolerate male hegemony and murder? They couldn't answer. But your example is hardly as compelling. If we accept that, say, Amnesty International is a "liberal" group, they have been working against Saudi and Iranian treatment of sexual minorities for decades. And Republicans of the pro-oil variety have been tolerating those same regimes, enthusiastically. Just because someone doesn't want to invade Iran/Saudi, doesn't mean they oppose freedom there. Sometimes invasion is not the best way to bring freedom. Sometimes it is.

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 10:07 AM (uT71O)

15 I disagree that the terrorists are pissed off most by gay liberation here, or our sexual freedoms generally. If you read the lifestories of the major terrorists, or read their writings, they are certainly critics of the decadent west (in terms that echo that of Dobson, etc). But they see these as self-correcting problems. We will become weak, and disease-ridden, through homosexuality, female sexual freedom, etc. They LIKE those things, here, because it helps them win the war. What drives them to commit acts of mass murder are the presence of foreign troops in their holiest areas, the support by the west for the most corrupt and authoritarian and often secular regimes, and our support for Israel (probably in that order). They object, of course, to Baywatch being broadcast in Qatar, but they can handle it by taking over the governments there. It is not baywatch or "our freedoms" that makes them terrorists against us. In what way is liberalism a mental disorder? At the extremes, all ideologies are populated by the unhinged, whether right or left, because at the extremes you find sociopaths, megalomaniacs, the truly paranoid, and the socially isolated. But this is no more true of the left than the right. Surely there is evidence of mental disorder among far right extremists on these very boards, right?

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 10:14 AM (uT71O)

16 jd To be clear, I do not advocate the extermination of all muslims. That is not christian. However, it would be nice if somehow all the devil worshipping cult-like, throat- slitting, wife-beating, child-raping, mega-murdering ones would disappear from the face of the earth. And you know, they will. When God has had enough of this, He will put a stop to it.

Posted by: n.a. palm at April 21, 2006 10:17 AM (XPviN)

17 >>>I disagree that the terrorists are pissed off most by gay liberation here, or our sexual freedoms generally. Then you would be denying the obvious. If you can't acknowledge obvious facts like that, then what use is there in arguing the more debateable points with you.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 21, 2006 10:17 AM (8e/V4)

18 Dave--just because they do not advocate invasion of Iran, this means they don't want gay people to be free there, because they are racist? That's a long, tendentious stretch of logic. Talking about a stretch of logic, I don't believe I mentioned a military strike against Iran, perhaps you should quote me on it. I can't remember the last protest I saw, or call to disgrace Iran for hanging homosexuals, or code pink protesting women's rights in Saudi Arabia, they're only obsessed with American rights, screw everyone else.

Posted by: davec at April 21, 2006 10:26 AM (CcXvt)

19 I dunno, Jesusland. When have they attacked gays or abortionists or feminists here? Yes, they stone gays there. Yes, they put women in Burkhas there. But the reason they hate us is not because gays kiss in the streets of SF. They hate us because we have propped up Egypt, and Saudi, and those governments have imprisoned and tortured them. They disapprove of our freedoms, but they think God will punish us for them, and that will be good for them. In this, they echo the rhetoric of Falwell and Robertson. In the theocratic worldview, God helps those who resist sodomy, and punishes those who practice it. They aren't blowing us up because we tolerate homosexuality or let women parade around dressed like whores--they are blowing us up because we give 2 billion a year to Mubarak, a corrupt, authoritarian neo-socialist bastard, because we support Israel, and because we have, in their view, exploited the Arab and Muslim world for three hundred years (we, the west). I'm not AGREEING with them. I'm just saying you're wrong to think that they are angry over butt sex over here. Give them a caliphate over there, and we can have all the buttsex we want.

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 10:29 AM (uT71O)

20 >>>I dunno, Jesusland. When have they attacked gays or abortionists or feminists here? jd, They don't go around attacking neocons here either. Which proves nothing. But they do attack homos overseas: It may be Europe's most liberal city - but if you are gay, you had best beware http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1611374,00.html

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 21, 2006 10:34 AM (8e/V4)

21 JD, nobody really cares what you have to say, because we all recognise you for the apologetic dhimmi sycophant that you are. This is the most ironic situation possible; you hate we evil conservatives more than anything else, and side with the terrorists against us, but if the terrorists win, you leftards will be the first to get the chop, as conservative moral values are far more compatible with those of islam than are yours. You are banking on us to lose, which would guarantee your own demise, proving that liberalism is not just a mental disorder, it is suicidal dementia.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 21, 2006 10:36 AM (0yYS2)

22 Dave--maybe you don't spend enough time on gay activist websites, but they do protest Iranian abuse of gays. http://www.sgn.org/sgnnews32/page1.cfm Code pink is an anti-Iraq war group. Asking them to work for women's rights in the Islamic world is like asking pro-life groups to support the war in Iraq. Many members may agree with that goal, but it isn't what the group is about. But be certain that if you did some research, you would find MANY liberal women's groups that have tried to bring the world's attention to the miserable status of women in many Islamic countries. One question I love to get liberals with is this: if the women of Saudi Arabia were blacks, would we be in such a tight alliance with that country? After all, by some measures it was better to be black in South Africa than to be a woman in Saudi Arabia. We seem to have, as a nation, a higher tolerance for sex discrimination than racial discrimination.

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 10:39 AM (uT71O)

23 IM--I don't hate conservatives. I often agree with them. Our nation needs liberals, conservatives, and moderates, because truth seldom walks with one group at all times. Dhimmi? Sycophant I know, but Dhimmi? Democrat? Dimwitted? Demonic? Looks vaguely arabic, but I confess, you got me. I don't side with the terrorists. You are fond of Mannichean logic, aren't you? If I disagree with the war in Iraq, I must side with the terrorists. I can understand why that is pleasing to you, but trust me, it isn't true. (Zinni? Buckley? George Will? Do we ALL want the terrorists to win? Man, hating America must be more widespread than I thought!)

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 10:44 AM (uT71O)

24 JD: what point does people protesting in London about Iranian's hanging homosexuals have to do with my point: ..for the people of the United States. I guess because a U.S gay newpaper carried the story? My point is that their policy is centric only to providing freedom, liberty and justice to the people of the United States, and providing their trust in the United Nations to do the rest, a very bad gamble, the United Nations is tied up by member countries self-interest financial, and political to ever get anything done anymore. Tell me if you haven't heard the following from left-leaning people: "it's not the job of America to bring freedom to Iraq, if the people wanted it, they would have overthrown Saddam Hussein" This is exactly the attitude I am addressing when I said they want these things for themselves, and screw anyone else. Actually IM summed it up much better in one of his posts the other week, where he said the Left doesn't care as long as they're not the ones doing the suffering or the dying.

Posted by: davec at April 21, 2006 11:28 AM (CcXvt)

25 Actually, Dave, if you read the article, it is about demonstrations all over the world, including here. There are many examples, if you look at Amnesty, you'll see. Also, in regards to your earlier post about muslim extremists attacking gays in Europe--I don't think that is the same as Al Qaeda targeting gays. My point is not that Muslim extremists like gays, they clearly don't. They will kill them when they control a polity, and they will kill them individually if they get power over them. I just don't think homosexuality here is a prime motivating force for their activism. Incidentally, consider this: discreet homosexuality is widely tolerated in rural Afghanistan. There is an old Pashto saying: Women for procreation, boys for pleasure. Rich men in Afghan culture sometimes "purchase" boys as companions. I'm not in favor of it, I'm just saying that the Taliban was stoning gays who sought rights, but not those who were rich and discreet. The islamicist attitude about sexual immorality is hardly as monolothic as you suppose, nor is it as large a motivating force as the others I named.

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 11:43 AM (aqTJB)

26 Hey, Dave--do you have any problem with citing IM as an authority on anything? He has advocated the extermination of all liberals and Muslims, worldwide. I have friends in both categories, and I would not want to see them slaughtered. How do you feel about genocide, Dave?

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 11:45 AM (aqTJB)

27 jd: You have a muslim friend? Are you sure? Do you turn your back on him? I wouldn't, because they're all only friendly until it's time to fulfill allahs will to murder.....Islam is not a religion, it is a psycho-pathology, of murder, revenge, hatred and death. I wonder why you don't know this yet.

Posted by: n.a. palm at April 21, 2006 12:01 PM (XPviN)

28 I had muslim friends back in my Lib days whom I was very fond of. I still have the best memories of them. They were elites back home-- not ignorant rubes that Libs like to claim are the radicals-- and they were charming and educated and very warm people. But in hindsight I now understand that despite their personal qualities, they were/are in bondage to a deception called islam. I got a real wake up call the day the mullahs put a hit on Salman Rusdhies head because of that novel he wrote. Guess what. My "moderate" muslim buddies were all for it. I spent hours yacking my Liberal mouth off trying to reason with them, to no avail. These so-called "moderates" turned out to be nothing of the kind when the rubber hit the road. In hindsight I can now see that Islamic radicalism is their mainstream. And it doesn't make any difference how nice and charming my muslim buddies were. It doesn't change the fact they are in bondage to a lie.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 21, 2006 12:45 PM (8e/V4)

29 Our freedoms are more entwined with the freedoms permitted in other countries than you may think. So railing against those who rob others of their freedoms is in our best interests. Not the "it's none of our business" attitude promoted by the far-left. "They hate us because we have propped up Egypt, and Saudi, and those governments have imprisoned and tortured them." And exactly how do they show this hatred? Oh yeah, with imprisonment, torture, beheadings, killing women and children and violating even the most basic of human rights like freedom of religion and speech. It looks pretty simple to me. They don't like that their kind have been punished by someone else, but they're not a bit concerned about others, you know, like Christians or Jews or anyone "not like them". Okay - I get it.

Posted by: Oyster at April 21, 2006 01:13 PM (okCpP)

30 Oyster--thanks for adding "far" to left. I wish more people would do that here when they make statements about the extreme fringes. Don Wildmon isn't "the Right" and neither is Ann Coulter. I agree with you that some on the far left have a neo-isolationist attitude--whatever they want to do over there is fine, just don't invade them, leave us alone. (so do some on the paleo-right, Buchanan, etc) This violates Jefferson's vision of universal human rights. Americans should not be ignorant or uncaring about the rights of others. Neither, however, should we be invading and imposing our values. It is a balance. Are you really so surprised that the Islamicists are torturing in response to torture? Palm, above, in response to anti-Christian prejudice among Muslims, now judges all Muslims as the same, and advises no one to ever be friends with one. No one to ever trust one. It is not a religion, it is a pathological illness. Jesusland had some Muslims defend the fatwa on Rushdie, and ever since, he's known that all muslims were the same. They sound exactly like islamo-fascists talking about Christianity, homosexuality, judaism, or agnosticism. We often become a mirror image of that which we loath. As Nietzsche put it: wrestle ye not with monsters, lest ye yourself become a monster. And know that when you stare into the abyss, the abyss stares also into you.

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 02:49 PM (aqTJB)

31 >>>Jesusland had some Muslims defend the fatwa on Rushdie, and ever since, he's known that all muslims were the same. jd, On the contrary, I don't believe all muslims are the same. The muslims I knew back in college were of the "moderate" variety. I don't consider all (perhaps not even most) muslims to be moderate. And if these were the moderates, then no surprise at all that islam is in conflict with its neighbors all over the globe. When the monsters wrestle us, we have to wrestle back. No choice.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 21, 2006 03:03 PM (8e/V4)

32 I know a few "moderate" muslims, and while they don't openly support the slaughter of all non-muslims, they still blame the Jooooooos for everything. Regardless of their particular affiliation to doctrine, I still don't trust any of them for the same reason black people don't trust David Duke.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 21, 2006 03:12 PM (0yYS2)

33 IM--how uncommonly moderate of you. You've gone from wanting to kill them all, to saying that you simply don't trust them. That's progress. I'll start the weekend hopeful for the spread of progressive ideals. As for blaming the Jews--I remember last summer, talking to some Arab students brought over here by our State Dept to teach them about the US. Really educated, elites, much like the folks Carlos is referencing. They seemed so reasonable, so smart...then it got to 9-11. And half of them were convinced that Mossad had done it, to make Muslims look bad. Arab countries have been lying to their people for so long, that such anti-semitic fictions are remarkably and depressingly common. Yet, at the same time, this was when a study of American public opinion was being released. Turns out a majority of Americans at one time (and a majority of Fox News viewers as late as 2005) thought that Iraqis had been on the planes of 9-11. That WMD had been found in Iraq. And that Saddam helped plan 9-11. Thinking that Saddam helped plan 9-11...that Iraqis were on the planes...not AS crazy/stupid/dumb as thinking Mossad planned 9-11. But still pretty crazy dumb stupid.

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 03:23 PM (aqTJB)

34 >>>Thinking that Saddam helped plan 9-11...that Iraqis were on the planes...not AS crazy/stupid/dumb as thinking Mossad planned 9-11. But still pretty crazy dumb stupid. The former-- that Iraqis were on the planes-- is merely wrong, while the latter-- that jews and "Bush" brought down the Twin Towers-- is lunatic. There's an ocean of difference between wrong and lunatic. You think yourself subtle and "nuanced" in your little equivalency exercises (that's seems to be your gig here), but you merely exhibit a black or white thinking where, for example, being mistaken Fox viewer is no different than being a loon brainwashed by hateful ideologies inculcated over generations. They aren't the same, and you aren't nuanced for trying to make them the same. You are simplistic.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 21, 2006 03:49 PM (8e/V4)

35 ummmm, jd: 1. WMD have been found in Iraq. Lots of them. 2. Also former Iraqi Air force pilots said they flew many plane loads of them to Syria. 3. Saddam was in touch with al Quaida. 4. He tried to kill G.H.W Bush. 5. An Iraqi was involved in OKC bombing. Stay tuned as we translate more captured documents, we'll find more evidence of iraqs plans. Oh I forgot, you leftists don't want to know these truths. Because YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH.......

Posted by: n.a. palm at April 21, 2006 03:50 PM (XPviN)

36 WMD have been found in Iraq? Hmm...like the ones Powell described? Like the ones Cheney described (a "reconstituted nuclear weapons program)? UAVs capable of transporting bio weapons thousands of miles? Or some old shit from 1991, inoperable? I think you mean the latter. And I never said Saddam wasn't "in touch" with Al Qaeda. I said that at a certain point prior to March 2003, a majority of Americans thought he was involved in the planning. There was never a scintilla of evidence of this. A lot of implied statements from the WH folk, but no evidence. And you can say that I said it was the same as thinking Mossad planned 9-11, but I distinctly said that was worse.

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 10:55 PM (uT71O)

37 JD, Actually I don't have a problem quoting anyone who made a valid point, I'm sorry if you are shocked at his opinions on killing Muslims and/or liberals. I don't care.

Posted by: davec at April 21, 2006 11:24 PM (CcXvt)

38 >>>I distinctly said that was worse. jd, Of course it's worse. So then why are you trying to compare the two? Answer: because you want your cake and to eat it too. You want to make a stupid comparison, but sound "reasonable" doing it. lol!

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 21, 2006 11:32 PM (8e/V4)

39 JD, can you not understand that one may dislike someone and distrust them at the same time? The two are not diametrically opposed you know, and in fact follow one another. I know you're desperately grasping at straws to find ways to excuse and apologize for terrorists, but you have to do better than that. Now go be a good dhimmi and tell them over at Kos how mean we are here.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 22, 2006 05:17 AM (0yYS2)

40 I think the essence of nuanced ratiocination is careful comparison of how various concepts and facts are similar or different. My point in making the Mossad did 9-11 to the Saddam did 9-11 stupidities is to say that one must examine one's own country's blindness and prejudices in order to comprehend another country's. The Arab paranoia and anti-Semitism do not emerge organically out of Islam; for many centuries, Islam was more tolerant than Christianity. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was not written by Arabs and did not have wide circulation in the Arab world until long after it was popular among Americans like Ford and Lindbergh and Father Coughlin. Dave--I'm shocked that you don't care about someone advocating genocide. IM's views represent a threat to the health of our democracy--a democracy that he sees as corrupt, and worthy of armed revolt. You can be silent in the face of a Tim McVeigh, if you want. Your call, man.

Posted by: jd at April 22, 2006 08:20 AM (uT71O)

41 Ok JD yo see what you just wrote. Now do you understande IM's function? Yes IM says thos things but that's his calling card and when others do the same it just ain't funny because well it's a knock off. Second note the name. Improbulus Maximus. Let me see if understand that I reckon improbulus means improbable or unlikely. Maximus means to the maximum extent possible. So if he says kell em all read that as it's damn near impossible that we will kill everyone but some days I feel like doing that and it would be easy. Also he's funny now and then. First he posts his little bait then you engage him and maybe say something good because you were motivated to by his post. I lie your comment and I dont think you would have ever written it otherwise.

Posted by: Howie at April 22, 2006 08:51 AM (D3+20)

42 So IM serves as a court jester, provoking others to rethink accepted positions? I'll grant the possibility that he really isn't serious--are you willing to grant that those on the left, who call Bush Hitler, are SOMETIMES doing the same? IE, by stating an extreme case of how they see the admin trending, they hope to provoke passion and debate? I very much doubt you would. IF you wouldn't, why not (note: I don't say I would grant them that, but then, I don't really see the utility of granting IM that privilege.) I think it equally likely that IM is tolerated around here because he voices in raw form the feelings of many, who upon further reflection would reject those expressions, but enjoy seeing their ideological id expressed in virulent and uncompromising terms--which is pretty much why many on the left tolerate "Bush is Hitler" when they should know better. Bush isn't Hitler, and anyone who sat down and thought about it for six seconds would know that. But it FEELS so good to read it, for some people, just as it FEELS so good for some people to read "Liberals are clinically insane" "All Liberals should be shot as traitors" "Kill the Muslims!!!". I'm not denying that these things can provide pleasure--but do they really lead us to discussion and debate and positive outcomes for the country as you think?

Posted by: jd at April 22, 2006 10:23 AM (ccFYg)

43 jd: sounds like a job for the Thought Police, preemptively taking a slice out of crime -- tomorrow. Have a read of the following it might help you differentiate true threats -- from thoughts -- The horror!! http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/virginiavblack.html or perhaps seek a place in "overreact anonymous", seeing as you seem to think an anonymous person's opinion on the Internet is a "true threat".

Posted by: davec at April 22, 2006 11:21 AM (CcXvt)

44 I think it equally likely that IM is tolerated around here because he voices in raw form the feelings of many, who upon further reflection would reject those expressions, but enjoy seeing their ideological id expressed in virulent and uncompromising terms lol! That was funny. I would put it differently. For instance, I've said on occassion about IM's posts that I agree with the sentiments behind his comments but I disagree with the content. When I say I agree with the sentiments I mean I understand his frustration but that doesn't mean I agree with his faux calls for genocide on a mass scale. I think I speak for everybody on this blog. Alos, IM is the exception on the Right, while the "Bush=Hitler" crowd are the mainstream of the Left.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 22, 2006 11:40 AM (8e/V4)

45 Dave--I wasn't suggesting that IM couldn't say it, or that he should face ANY criminal or civil penalties or even denial of ISP service, or banning by Jawa, or whatever. Please be assured that I would oppose any and all of those. The solution to error in speech is further debate. I was just disturbed that no one said anything when someone advocated killing all the liberals, or that liberalism is a mental illness. I don't think IM himself represents a threat. Nor do, like Bluto, think that some random internet deaththreat is dangerous. A lot of BS gets said on the web (yes, I'm evidence of that). The problem was that I actually think people LIKE IM's opinions, even if they don't cognitively admit it--like many on the left burst with happiness upon reading Bush=Hitler. Nice O'Connor opinion--I hadn't spent time with that one before. Bright gal. Almost as good as Scalia's vote in Texas v. Johnson, upholding the right to burn a US flag, for much the same reason as O'Connor articulates here. And the writer who authored the dissent in Texas? That dangerous liberal Stevens, who said it was allowable to punish someone for unpatriotic acts.

Posted by: jd at April 22, 2006 11:41 AM (ccFYg)

46 Hey, Dave--do you have any problem with citing IM as an authority on anything? He has advocated the extermination of all liberals and Muslims, worldwide. I have friends in both categories, and I would not want to see them slaughtered. How do you feel about genocide, Dave? no, what you are saying however is everything he says should be discounted because you personally do not agree with one particular view he has, and then that should also extend to me, and that I should therefore have a problem with everything he says, because you do -- and if I don't, I'm worse that mugabe because I agree with someone who makes statements that pertain to "virtual" genocide. I however am able to see it for what it is, no more than I think the show 'twenty four' is reality, do I believe IM is about to take it to the next level.

Posted by: davec at April 22, 2006 01:09 PM (CcXvt)

47 Well said, Dave. I never thought there was any danger of IM having the power to do anything, and I never meant to suggest you were worse than Mugabe. I guess I was just asking if, since he was so wrong on one point, might he not be wrong on many others? But you make a good case. I seem to be more sensitive to the advocacy of genocide than others, as well as the idea that all liberals are mentally ill and suicidal. Your mileage may, and does seem to, vary. And if you are right, that IM is just provocative and not serious, then your stance is 100% the right way to go.

Posted by: jd at April 22, 2006 04:46 PM (uT71O)

48 "Faux calls for genocide"? Where'd you get that idea Carlos? one doesn't learn to live with plague rats; one exterminates them. As for my handle, as with everything else in Latin, context is everything, but it has nothing to do with improbability. It can be translated several different ways, but applied to myself, it means the best at being bad, or the worst at being good. Take it as you will. The solution to error in speech is further debate. So when the muslims say they want to kill us and take our women as war booty, etc., that we should talk to them? They are vermin, they are scum, and they should be exterminated to the last. I said it, I mean it, and I will stand by it until they learn civility or are all dead. I know only one way to deal with an enemy; muslims are the enemies of civilization, and liberals are their brothers in arms who stand in opposition to our efforts to defend ourselves from this scourge.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 22, 2006 05:34 PM (0yYS2)

49 OK, Dave--now that IM has come out and once again reaffirmed that he is not just mouthing this stuff to provoke, that he really believes he is a lonely paladin in an existential struggle with an entire religion... Incidentally, IM, if Muslims SAY those things, yeah, I think the solution is to talk to them. If they DO those things, ie, attack us, then the solution is a military one. The Muslim world is tremendously weak. They talk a big game because that is the only game they have (other than terrorism). 400 million Arabs have been unable to defeat 5 million Jews. What does that tell you? You are preaching the unnecessary ruthless extermination of 1.2 billion people. I don't for a moment think that you yourself present a threat to liberals or Muslims. I'm quite confident your ignorant bluster (historically ignorant and politically ignorant--and my brother is a Latin-Greek scholar, so we'll soon find out if you are linguistically ignorant as well) reflects not only a lack of knowledge but also a lack of influence of a profound nature. Thank God.

Posted by: jd at April 22, 2006 05:59 PM (uT71O)

50 Oh! No! IM repeated another unspecific thought of his! Quick, someone call the Department of Homeland Security, and tell them to up the threat level to the maximum -- level Neocon. What color is threat level Neocon you ask? -- Black of course, like their damned scurvy hearts. 400 million Arabs have been unable to defeat 5 million Jews. What does that tell you? 19 Arabs killed 3,000 of your fellow countrymen in a single day...what does THAT tell you?

Posted by: davec at April 23, 2006 12:15 AM (CcXvt)

51 Oh no! JD is all over my case now! I'm doomed! Doomed! DOOOMED!!! Heh. I can just imagine him sniffing and whining to himself as he posts, and then turning to water his fern, Charles, and telling him how mean I am, and how I'm gonna get it, but then he apologizes for the negative vibes, and Charles forgives him and asks for some organic plant food. Then his mom comes in and mentions that a grown man could at least pick up his room now and then.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 23, 2006 06:03 PM (0yYS2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

April 20, 2006

Mr. Hu Jintao Free Hao Wu

Today's visit by the Chineese head of State also marks the 58th day of this bloggers captivity. According to Chineese law that's illegal.

Washington Post reporter Rebecca MacKinnon: He (Hao Wu) continues to be held -- this is the 58th day of his detention -- despite the fact that Chinese law limits the maximum detention without charge to 37 days.

Hat Tip: Glenn Reynolds Via Instapundit..

Posted by: Howie at 02:16 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 77 words, total size 1 kb.

HowieÂ’s Roundup Spam Trolls Suck Edition.

Palestinian police work for free!

The CIA may be reading your blog. If they read this one I hope they post comments and participate a bit. You know send cool links and stuff.

Congressman Jim McDermott (Moonbat-WA), will have his own jihadi on staff! Via LGF.

"President Hu, your days are numbered,"

Remember the Professor in Kentucky who encouraged and took part in the destruction of an approved pro life display on campus. She's history.....via Exposing the Left

Teach me baby!

Caption this.

Hugo Takes Play from SaddamÂ’s Handbook.

Posted by: Howie at 02:16 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 101 words, total size 1 kb.

The Preaching of Hate

Via Jihad Watch we have these fine snippets from Muslim Friday services. Makes me want to run out and convert right now, not.

Spiegel : In a Berlin mosque, a television crew secretly recorded the sermon of a Turkish imam who described the Germans as godless and railed against their alleged stench. In London, hate preacher Abu Hamza al-Masri called upon the faithful to murder female tourists in his native Egypt, saying: "If a woman, even a Muslim woman, is naked and you have no way of covering her up, it is legitimate to kill her."

Woah! These people are screwed up in the head. When I see a hot half nekkid chick walking around killing her is the last thing on my mind! What I am thinking I doubt will even come close to killing her. I get tired.

In an interview with SPIEGEL, television imam Yusuf al-Qaradawi, perhaps currently one of the most influential Islamic scholars around, magnanimously conceded that there is also room in heaven for devout Christians and Jews. But on his Arab-language website a short time later, he made it clear that he believes that Christians and Jews are ultimately nothing more than infidels.

Rouge Eh? Infidel eh? Why themÂ’s fighting woyds!

But at the same time, often in the same sermon, imams ask God for help in confronting everyday woes, issue moral appeals to their own political leaders and constantly return to the Islamic world's greatest lament: a comparison between the gloomy present and the glorious past.

Yes a glorious past of blood and death thatÂ’s just what I was searching for so I can find peace in my heart. To be fair some people are fighting this doctrine.

Dr. Id Abd al- Hamid Yussuf, 65, is completely against the use of Islam for political purposes.
The Prophet forgave those who committed injustices against him. He pardoned the murderer of his uncle, Hamsa. He forgave his people when they banished him from Mecca Â… Islam spread throughout the world through argument and conviction, but not through the sword, as the enemies of Islam have claimed. Islam only used the sword when it was attacked Â… The Prophet forbade extremism and fanaticism. He said: "I was sent to you out of the generosity of God. Night became day. Anyone who strays from this path will fall victim to ruin." For some, religion is like a maze. Enter it with caution, because whoever approaches religion as an extremist will perish in his extremism.

Perish they shall because weÂ’ll bring the perishing to them.

Posted by: Howie at 01:36 PM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 428 words, total size 3 kb.

1 "He forgave his people when they banished him from Mecca..." Didn't he go back and slaughter them?

Posted by: Oyster at April 20, 2006 02:11 PM (AMLvC)

2 Oyster, Well yeah but after he slaughtered them he felt a lot better and forgave them.

Posted by: Howie at April 20, 2006 02:43 PM (o+Psq)

3 Islam makes it is easy to hate. Every Sunday, I am reminded to love, not hate. But, it sure is hard to love folks like that. ROPMA

Posted by: Leatherneck at April 20, 2006 03:42 PM (D2g/j)

4 I can remember growing up as a catholic and being taught that only catholics could go to heaven, I think that changed in 1962

Posted by: john Ryan at April 20, 2006 04:08 PM (U2ePk)

5 I remember growing up and being told that most Catholics would not go to heaven. I didn't much think that was true. But, nobody said that we should kill Catholics because we didn't agree with their interpretation of the scripture. Or harm them in any way. Later on in life I was lucky enough to get to know some Catholics, and I've liked every one of them I have met so far. I haven't met you yet, John Ryan, so my record is still intact. Oh, you're a Buddist now, so my record will have little chance of being broken. J/K, John!

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 20, 2006 05:04 PM (rUyw4)

6 No, but the language was certainly softened so as to not "offend."

Posted by: YBP at April 20, 2006 06:59 PM (42Ghj)

7 Here is some offence for you lefturd. The FBI just arrested some student in Georgia named Salied, or something like that, for supporting terror inside the United States of America. More of my tax money being wasted, when they should have put a round in his head, and shipped his moon god worshipping ass back to some middle eastern country! ROPMA

Posted by: Leatherneck at April 20, 2006 07:34 PM (D2g/j)

8 You gotta love that Islamist duplicity. Speak warm fuzzy nothings to the soft minded west and preach murderous hate in arabic. Nice racket.

Posted by: nuthin2seehere at April 21, 2006 02:14 AM (blNMI)

9 "I can remember growing up as a catholic and being taught that only catholics could go to heaven, I think that changed in 1962" And how does that compare to what's being said in the Mosques?

Posted by: Oyster at April 21, 2006 04:39 AM (YudAC)

10 I go to Mass every week, 3 times in fact last week. John, I have never heard a Priest advocate that the State, Church or any of our parishioners put anyone to death for any reason. We do pray for those who we think are on the wrong path. Why pretend this is similar to what is being preached in some Mosques around the world? That was your point wasnÂ’t it?

Posted by: Brad at April 21, 2006 08:17 AM (vaSc7)

11 I don't think all Muslims preach killing Christians. In fact, the Muslim world has been one of coexistence, peacefully, for far longer than the west. There are large Christian communities in Lebanon and Egypt, and smaller ones in Iraq, Syria, and Jordan, among others. There were, until the 1960s, large populations of Jews that coexisted peacefully throughout the Arab world and Iran (the Sephardim). They were thrown out, often brutally, or emigrated, under threat of grave persecution, relatively recently. Islam, instead of going through a reformation similar to our own, is undergoing a radicalization. Bernard Lewis, in What Went Wrong, diagnoses this very well, and I commend it as a short book that makes Islam come alive in its modern form. I take it that John Ryan's point is that we win the West are not so far removed from a time when we also preached doctrines of exclusion and hatred. Those on this board who denigrate Islam generally, or call for the killing of all Muslims, are proof that we are not much removed at all. The president is right. What is needed is not a war against Islam, but a war within Islam.

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 10:23 AM (uT71O)

12 JD I also do not think most Muslims preach killing Christians. However, it is not uncommon. What I find amusing it the leftÂ’s ability to rush to the defense of a Religion that is so intolerant.

Posted by: Brad at April 21, 2006 11:35 AM (3OPZt)

13 "...the Muslim world has been one of coexistence, peacefully, for far longer than the west..." as long as you don't pray to anyone but Allah and you pays yer dhimmi tax.

Posted by: Oyster at April 21, 2006 01:16 PM (okCpP)

14 Thanks, Oyster, for the translation on Dhimmi. I thought it was Arabic. My point is not that the Muslim world was some paradise for jews and christians in the Middle Ages. It was just that it was much better to be a Jew there than in most Christian countries. Many of the most important Talmudic scholars and Jewish philosophers of the era freely lived and wrote in the Muslim world, when they would have been persecuted and kept out of elite circles in almost every Christian country. I'm not DEFENDING Islam, in the sense that I endorse its spread or cheer for its promulgation. I'm just saying--this is not a religion that should be judged by its extremes. What I find amusing is that when I point this out, there is a blizzard of posts challenging me. When someone advocates the extermination of all liberals (the actual murder of other Americans), no one, not one person, nada, zip, no one, has challenged the person who said that on that point. Nor has anyone challenged the idea that liberalism is not just an ideology, but a mental illness, a suicidal dementia. Uh...folks? Are they, liberals, ALWAYS, pathologically wrong? Are conservatives, always, in every situation, right? Reality check...

Posted by: jd at April 21, 2006 02:57 PM (aqTJB)

15 JD, why do idiot liberals like you keep trying to equivocate Christian Europe of a thousand years ago with islam of today? Do you think everyone is as stupid as liberals are?

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 23, 2006 05:29 AM (0yYS2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

DPRK Accuses US of Planting Counterfeit Bills

Hey at least they didn't blame the jooooos

Yahoo News :A spokesman for the Ministry of People's Security said in a statement the North had obtained "shocking evidence" Washington and Tokyo are producing false material that gives the impression Pyongyang is a criminal state, the North's KCNA news agency said late Wednesday.
"The CIA secretly enlist(s) experts on counterfeiting notes claimed to be the 'most sophisticated in the world' and invite(s) them to issue lots of fake currencies at 'counterfeit notes printing houses of North Korean-style' operating in U.S. military bases in different parts of the world," the spokesman said.

Apparently conspiracy theory is a favorite sport in more than just the Middle East.

U.S. Treasury officials have briefed various governments about Washington's suspicions that North Korea has for years been producing a high quality copy of its $100 bill. U.S. officials have dubbed the copy the "supernote."
"Although Pyongyang denies complicity in any counterfeiting activity, at least $45 million in such supernotes of North Korean origin have been detected in circulation, and estimates are that the country earns from $15 million to $25 million per year from counterfeiting," the U.S. Congressional Research Service said in a report in March.

North Korea doesnÂ’tÂ’ need us to foster the impression they are a criminal state they do just fine on their own.

Posted by: Howie at 01:21 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 231 words, total size 2 kb.

Students Protest Â“RadicalÂ” Teaching in UK.

At least some Muslims realize the damage and shame Islam suffers at the hands of those who preach the doctrine of hate.

Times Online :MUSLIM students training to be imams at a British college with strong Iranian links have complained that they are being taught fundamentalist doctrines which describe nonMuslims as Â“filthÂ”.
The Times has obtained extracts from medieval texts taught to the students in which unbelievers are likened to pigs and dogs. The texts are taught at the Hawza Ilmiyya of London, a religious school, which has a sister institution, the Islamic College for Advanced Studies (ICAS), which offers a degree validated by Middlesex University.
The students, who have asked to remain anonymous, study their religious courses alongside the university-backed BA in Islamic studies

Asked to remain anonymous? Let me translate that, wished to keep their heads attached to their bodies.

Mr Moezi is also the director of the Islamic Centre of England in Maida Vale, a large mosque and community centre that is a registered charity. Its memorandum of association, lodged with the Charity Commission, says that: Â“At all times at least one of the trustees shall be a representative of the Supreme Spiritual Leadership of the Islamic Republic of Iran.Â”
Both the Irshad Trust and the Islamic Centre of England Ltd (ICEL) were established in 1996. Mr MoeziÂ’s predecessor as Ayatollah KhameneiÂ’s representative, another cleric called Mohsen Araki, was a founding trustee of both charities.

It is strange why they tolerate this from Iran. Note the nesting of politics and Islam because Islam is both religion and politics they are not separate.

Â‘The water left over in the container after any type of animal has drunk from it is considered clean and pure apart from the left over of a dog, a pig, and a disbelieverÂ’
Â‘There are ten types of filth and impurities: urine, faeces, semen, carrion, blood of carrion, dogs, pigs, disbelieversÂ’
(You get that? Your blood is equated with fecal matter)
Â‘When a dog, a pig, or a disbeliever touches or comes in contact with the clothes or body [of a Muslim] while he [the disbeliever] is wet, it becomes obligatory- compulsory upon him [the Muslim] to wash and clean that part which came in contact with the disbelieverÂ’

Filthy Kufr! Let me again translate for you. Disbeliever means you most likely and that includes liberals. I again heard calls for Â“bridges of understandingÂ” in the Middle East on NPR this AM. ThatÂ’s all fine and dandy if you are dealing with people who consider you human and act in a civilized manner. The terrorists and those who follow their doctrine will cross over that bridge to cut your throat. As long as the first cut is in the direction of Mecca itÂ’s all good. Now do you understand?

Also see Jihad Watch, Michelle Malkin, who includes new pic of Muhammed on her post and USS Neverdock.

Posted by: Howie at 08:55 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 484 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Does it mean that since these students have spoken out against these teachings that they're islamophobic?

Posted by: Graeme at April 20, 2006 10:17 AM (xnfHT)

2 Here's where some Leftard apologist for islam tells them "it's not in the Koran."

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 20, 2006 10:19 AM (8e/V4)

3 Anything similar to that in the old testament ? I know their are a lot of really weird things in those old books. I think the problem is the muslims just still believe in all of that ancient texts.

Posted by: john Ryan at April 20, 2006 10:27 AM (TcoRJ)

4 Not wishing to totally side with the terorists but I am thinking that if I get someones blood on me or feces etc it might be a good idea to wash it off. My mom always advocated that, and that was even in the pre AIDS era.

Posted by: john Ryan at April 20, 2006 10:36 AM (TcoRJ)

5 But John whick blood is worse? Infidel blood. Catholic Blood, Baptist blood. See how this works?

Posted by: Howie at April 20, 2006 10:47 AM (D3+20)

6 >>>Anything similar to that in the old testament? The difference between islam and christianity is that christians believe Christ has paid the price, so we no longer have to. That's the difference between how christians read the old testament vs how muslims read the Koran. There is no such softening of the ancient texts in islam, so it's no wonder radical islam is so dominant.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 20, 2006 10:53 AM (8e/V4)

7 Don't be in to much shock folks, it has been going on here a lot. Now you can be in shock.

Posted by: Leatherneck at April 20, 2006 03:48 PM (D2g/j)

8 Uh, John, they are comparing you to feces, vomit, etc. They are not saying to do these things if another Muslim touches them in that way. Can't you see the difference? Duh?

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 20, 2006 05:10 PM (rUyw4)

9 In as much as there are invariably different issues that are raised against some forms of Islam and rightly so, I personally, having read al-Hilli have to say that the above piece is very one-dimensional and does not depict the truth of his stance. Not everyone falls into one bag and the People of the Book i.e, Christians, Jews and Sabians are excluded. There is also difference in opinion amongst them as to the position of the Zoroastrians and other modern day dualists. Secondly, this ditsy approach to an important matter astonished me coming from the Times, but within the lines of the article you can orchestrate a symphony about Iran and their Supreme Leader. All that about al-Hilli was a side show my friends, the real matter for the coalition is now Iran, so let's wake up to it and not be played around like fools.

Posted by: Xi Xhing at April 20, 2006 05:49 PM (NrsdV)

10 "Not wishing to totally side with the terorists..." Just "partly" right?

Posted by: Oyster at April 21, 2006 04:42 AM (YudAC)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Free Breast Exams

(Lauderdale Lakes, Florida) A 76-year-old door-to-door illegal breast examiner, Philip Winikoff, was arrested for playing doctor and sexually assaulting women.

From Local10.com:

The man found at least two Lauderdale Lakes women who took him up on his offer.
One 36-year-old woman said she let Winikoff into her apartment. She (sic) after he touched her breasts, he moved his hand to her genitals. She said one (sic) she realized that Winikoff was not a real doctor and she called the Broward Sheriff's Office.
Investigators said by that time, Winikoff had already found another victim; a 33-year-old woman who lives in the same complex. That woman told deputies that Winikoff also sexually assaulted her.

Obviously, Winikoff didn't read the rule book which specifies that a person must quit playing doctor after promotion from grade school. Winikoff instead might want to consider playing a congressman. By his picture, there's a remarkable resemblance to Rep. Jack Murtha of Pennsylvania who has recently shown that he would help the country more by being a breast examiner. Okay, that was a cheap shot. I apologize.

Winikoff has been booked into the Broward County Jail on sexual assault charges.

From Interested-Participant.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 08:15 AM | Comments (16) | Add Comment
Post contains 198 words, total size 2 kb.

Iran Doesn't Think We're Serious

From Reuters:

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran scoffed on Thursday at the idea of U.S. military action to halt its nuclear program and gave no hint of compromise before a visit by U.N. inspectors to assess Iranian compliance with Security Council demands.

Iran is correct to scoff at us. Partisan political opportunists, subversive organizations, and outright traitors on the Left and in the Press have given the Iranians every reason to think that the United States is a paper tiger.

Cross-posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Stop the ACLU.

Posted by: Bluto at 08:11 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 98 words, total size 1 kb.

April 19, 2006

The True Voice of the Left

What appears below is not the usual fare for this website. It is a reprint of the bile and abuse that conservative blogger Michelle Malkin has received following her reposting of a Students Against War press release that contained contact information for SAW head conspirators. SAW is the group that rioted against military recruiters at UC Santa Cruz.

Now the SAW fools are claiming that Michelle's repost of their press release is resulting in death threats. Of course, since they themselves first posted this information it's hard to see their complaint.

This is how the Left reacts when they become too unhinged to maintain the veneer of civilization. If you're easily offended by gutter language, don't read any further: more...

Posted by: Bluto at 10:56 PM | Comments (29) | Add Comment
Post contains 481 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Simply charming!

Posted by: LC CanForce 101 at April 20, 2006 12:10 AM (3smJS)

2 That must be some of that lefty "nuanced" thinking I keep hearing about.

Posted by: nuthin2seehere at April 20, 2006 12:28 AM (blNMI)

3 Man, have you got WAY to much time on your hands. Does your mommy know that you're playing on her computer?

Posted by: Lonevoice at April 20, 2006 01:09 AM (QnxoD)

4 Because of how evil the amerinazis have made America, Jesus Christ has removed His blessing. Can't you tell? http://www.deanberryministries.org/index3.h*ml

Posted by: DEAN BERRY -- REAL AMERICAN at April 20, 2006 02:14 AM (h/YSB)

5 dean berry - NO YOU AREN'T A REAL AMERICAN, BECAUSE IT WAS EUROPEANS WHO CREATED DEATHCAMPS AND USED ZYCLON B, AND YOUR HINT THAT YOU CONFUSE AMERICANS WITH THE NAZI'S OF GERMANY TELLS ME YOU ARE CONFUSED. SO LET ME CLEAR THINGS UP FOR YOU: IN AMERICA WE DO NOT PUT THE VERB AT THE END OF THE SENTENCE UNLIKE THE GERMANS IN AMERICA WE HAVE FREEDOM OF RELIGION, UNLIKE THE EUROPEANS IN AMERICA WE DO NOT HAVE DEATH CAMPS OR DEATH MARCHES LIKE THE FOLLOWERS OF COMMUNISM DID IN CAMBODIA (REMEMBER COMMUNISM IS EUROPEAN IN ORIGIN) IN AMERICA WE HAVE WENT TO EUROPES ASSISTANCE TO SAVE THEM FROM THE KAISER AND HITLER AND THE HEIRS OF VLADIMIR LENIN, BECAUSE THE EUROPEANS WERE SO HELPLESS. IN AMERICA WE CREATED MORE WEALTH IN 225 YEARS THAN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD COULD DO IN 3000 YEARS THUS BENIFITING AMERICAN CITIZENS AND WE ARE GENEROUS TO SHARE WITH OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD IN AMERICA WE HAVE A DYNAMIC ECONOMY RATHER THAN THE SLUGGISH EUROPEAN ECONOMY BECAUSE WE ARE NOT SOCIALIST (look at what happened with the berlin wall, the west berliners were living in luxury while over the wall in soviet east berlin the citizens could only look at the superior life everyone on the other side of the wall enjoyed)

Posted by: I GET DRUNK WITH TED KENNEDY at April 20, 2006 04:11 AM (Uvtly)

6 Why must some people on the left be obsessed with her genitalia?

Posted by: Leovinus at April 20, 2006 05:36 AM (I42Iw)

7 "If you had a conscious..." Some real mental giants there. I guess that's opposed to having an UNconscious. Are these people in college? I noticed none of them misspelled the C word. Leovinus, it seems many on the left, when in a snit, resort to very UN-PC epithets all the time. They simply cannot fathom how a minority person wouldn't be on their side so since said minority person doesn't toe the line that they think minorities should, they call them by the derogatory names they normally rail against others doing. You see, if a conservative calls someone stupid or ignorant, in the eyes of a lefty they're a misogynist, xenophobe or racist. But the double standard does not allow for the reverse. As far as the death threats go, I don't know what to say. None of them ever reprint them to for others to see. And of course, if that has happened, that's wrong too. The problem there is that they willfully claim their own whereas we quickly reject the nut cases.

Posted by: Oyster at April 20, 2006 06:02 AM (YudAC)

8 I guess this is exactly what Michelle talks about when she describes them as "unhinged." What remarkably unclever people.

Posted by: Asgerd at April 20, 2006 06:53 AM (w4Fe9)

9 That is disgusting. Not only are these people not very articulate, but they're obvioulsly bigots too. But then that's all the left really has.. invective, vitriol, and a deep intolerance for anyone with views different than their own.

Posted by: Richard at April 20, 2006 07:43 AM (7KF8r)

10 I donÂ’t support for a moment the language of abuse, sexism, and racism that Malkin was subjected to. Having been on the receiving end of some of that from some on the right, I think it hurts us all, regardless of the source. But IÂ’m frankly shocked at you, Bluto, for not having sympathy for those who have been threatened with death as a result of their personal info being posted at MalkinÂ’s site. Several weeks ago, you declined to provide any specifics of a bar fight you were engaged in back in 1975, for fear that to do so on your blog would lead to some in your small town identifying you, and thus exposing you to Al Qaeda and its supporters, who had threatened you with death on some other website. I donÂ’t believe that the death threats these people have received are any less credible than that. (I donÂ’t believe either of you is in any danger, but since you thought YOU were in danger, that Al Qaeda would identify you, out of all the right wing bloggers, it is at LEAST as credible that some right wing fringe nut job would commit violence against these lefties). Why donÂ’t you have sympathy for people, like you, who take extremely unlikely death threats very seriously? No one should face a death threat for political activism in this country, just as no one should be abused like Malkin was. You should read some of the unbelievable hate mail that Andrew Sullivan gets from left and right. People on the right in particular write at length about how they long for his AIDS death. Nice.

Posted by: jd at April 20, 2006 07:44 AM (uT71O)

11 They simply cannot fathom how a minority person wouldn't be on their side Liberals are terrified of minorities escaping the Democrat plantation. It would mean political extinction for the Dems.

Posted by: dcb at April 20, 2006 07:47 AM (8e/V4)

12 jd, as Bluto has already stated, since the SAW folks themselves first posted this information it's hard to see their complaint. When people like SAW publicly post their contact info, it means they're not trying to hide their identity. Savvy? And you don't get people like Michelle Malkin to do you any favors by calling her a slanty-eyed cunt. Maybe they should have asked nicely.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 20, 2006 07:55 AM (8e/V4)

13 jd, the SAW idiots posted their own info. Michelle simply reposted their "press release". In response, the Left has threatened Michelle's children, and posted directions, with map, to her house. There is also the question of the remarkable similarity in the grammar and sentence construction of the alleged email "death threats" that SAW has reproduced, sans headers, on their site. As is your wont, you mischaraterize and tell outright lies about past comments. That is why I seldom engage you, and, frankly, hold you somewhat in contempt; only somewhat, because your prevarications seem to stem more from mental deficiency than conscious intent to deceive.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at April 20, 2006 07:57 AM (RHG+K)

14 I agree that they were foolish for posting their personal info anywhere, but you have to admit, on the blogosphere, the location matters, too. Some websites get 10 hits a day, others several hundred thousand. My main point is, why isn't Bluto sympathetic to their fears, when they so closely mirror his own? There have been right wing killers in this country, domestic terrorists, whether they have shot abortion providers, gay activists, bombed clinics and gay clubs, attacked moderate Cubans, etc, just as there have been animal rights activists who use terrorism, etc. I also think that local right or left wingers are far more likely than Al Qaeda terrorists to take actions short of murder--like egging houses, vandalizing cars, which Malkin's publicity also exposes these folks to) Also, Jesusland--you are assuming that every person who asked for their info to be removed was abusive. I very much doubt that to be the case. I think some of the insulters were angry that she didn't remove it after being asked.

Posted by: jd at April 20, 2006 08:04 AM (uT71O)

15 SAW are these the same collage educated crap heads who have those stupid 70s antiwar bumper stickers on their cars i understand where UC Santa Cruz has gotten some retaliation over their blocking military recruters their leader a lowlife bit of pond scum CHARLES PETERSON was suspended and theres talk of cutting off US SANTA CRUZES money

Posted by: sandpiper at April 20, 2006 08:10 AM (nMpEK)

16 >>>I think some of the insulters were angry that she didn't remove it after being asked. I'm sure you'd like to think that. But Malkin has been taking this kind of abuse for years. The fact that the Left is populated by angry haters isn't really even news.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 20, 2006 08:10 AM (8e/V4)

17 If I misrepresented your past comments on the death threats you received, and your using them to refuse to talk about an incident more than thirty years ago, then I apologize. To avoid future misunderstandings, please specify what I'm getting wrong. I'm aware of some mental deficiencies but not as applicable to this case. I don't know that similarity in grammar/language in the death threats mean they aren't real. Again, why don't you have some sympathy for people who are in the same boat you found yourself in? Do death threats only matter when they threaten rightwingers? And isn't it a little simplistic to say "The LEFT" posted Malkin's information? I could just as simply say "The Right" destroyed an airliner when Orlando Busch used a missile to shoot down a civilian plane. Judging right or left by the actions of its fringers is a poor debating tactic that besmirches those who engage in it.

Posted by: jd at April 20, 2006 08:14 AM (uT71O)

18 >>>Judging right or left by the actions of its fringers is a poor debating tactic that besmirches those who engage in it. We on the Right dissavow our lunatics. But on the Left, the lunatics have taken over the insane asylum. That's the difference.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 20, 2006 08:22 AM (8e/V4)

19 Carlos--I don't know if I agree that the Left hates more than the right. There seems to be a lot of hate on both sides. Certainly, in the Clinton years, the hate was more on the right, at least that's the way it seemed to me. What is alarming is the level of hatred infesting American politics at all levels. It's very different from the 70s, or even the 60s at their worst, I think. It is tough to imagine our elected officials being as friendly to each other as John Kennedy and Barry Goldwater were in the Senate, or Hubert Humphrey and Dick Russell, or Ev Dirksen and LBJ or Tip O'Neil and Gerald Ford. Politics has become very bitter, very partisan, very personal, and very much about destroying the opposition. They aren't just wrong, they are EVIL LYING BASTARD IDIOT FASCISTS with mental deficiencies. I think we all should be concerned about that, whether we are left, right or center. It's very bad for the country. Bitter discourse tends to precede revolutionary upheaval.

Posted by: jd at April 20, 2006 08:23 AM (uT71O)

20 Commenting specifically on the leftists' communication skills, who knew there were keyboards in the sewer?

Posted by: Mike at April 20, 2006 08:27 AM (XeoHY)

21 I don't think the right has disavowed Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, or other obvious spewers of hate. John McCain is going to speak at Jerry Falwell's college. Falwell blamed 9-11 on gays and abortionists and feminists. He blamed 20 murders on Clinton. Pat Robertson has been disavowed by some, but many have not, and he called for placing a nuke in the State Dept and assassinating a foreign leader. You have your haters, the left has theirs. I don't think you are right to say that one side has disavowed its haters, while the other has not. If our haters our Sheehan, Moore, McKinney, they are no less "disavowed" than Coulter, Falwell, and Robertson on your side.

Posted by: jd at April 20, 2006 08:28 AM (uT71O)

22 >>>I don't think the right has disavowed Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, or other obvious spewers of hate. Show me where Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh have threatened to sew up Hilary Clinton's cunt with barbed wire, then you've got a point. Otherwise, the comparison is specious.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 20, 2006 08:33 AM (8e/V4)

23 >>Ann Coulter Our hard Right spewers aren't anti-American traitors like hard Leftists are. That's why we don't have to dissavow them.

Posted by: dcb at April 20, 2006 08:38 AM (8e/V4)

24 jd's defense of these lunatics is prima facie evidence that the Left sanctions, protects, and even nurtures hatred to serve its ends. His inability to point to equivalent behavior from the Right must be a source of great frustration to him. As a young college student, perhaps jd will yet outgrow his need to justify the excesses of his political brethren, and even embrace a rational political philosophy as his brain begins to mature.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at April 20, 2006 08:48 AM (RHG+K)

25 She posted the info to shine light on leftist, anti-war activities. These degenerates are the ones who are descending into crude obscenities. Michelle will always stand up for what she believes in, no matter what threats come her way.

Posted by: Andrew at April 20, 2006 08:58 AM (Q9gZ/)

26 A disavowal of hatred and violence ? Perhaps it is time to taker a look in the archives again. Does anyone remember any posts regretting what had been said during the early days of the kidnapping of the christian peacemakers ? I do not recall anyone chastisng the use of " a dull knife" on their throats.

Posted by: john Ryan at April 20, 2006 10:10 AM (TcoRJ)

27 john ryan, I remember clearly the dissavowal of and apologies for hyperbolic language used about the CPTs. Do you think Leftards will make similar apologies to Michelle Malkin? Hell would freeze over before that happenned. And on an unrelated topic, why is posting comments on this blog always so wacky? Half the time I get an error message saying commenting is suspended. What gives?

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 20, 2006 10:26 AM (8e/V4)

28 DPB--I NEVER defended the people who attacked Malkin. I did just the opposite. Why are you lying about that? And I think most people "on the left" would disavow someone who advocated sewing up Malkin's vagina, even as rhetoric. You are whipping up a hatred for a whole ideology, based on the extreme intemperate language of a few. I used Limbaugh, Coulter, etc, because you said the left was being led by the fringe. By that, I thought you meant the radical figures in the left: Moore, McKinney, etc. If you meant these specific commenters, then it is an even easier argument. They are NOT representative of the Democratic party, or the left generally. If you go to left/right blogs, you see very intemperate language, hateful language, depending on how extreme the webpage is. ON THIS BLOG COMMENTS SECTION, one poster has advocated the extermination of all Muslims and liberals. Killing them all. Asked for clarification, he repeated his desire for all of them to be killed, as threats to civilization. Only one poster even disagreed with him. Genocidal extermination--yeah, the left is the place of traitorous haters, exclusively. Note to DPB--by bringing up right wing haters, I'm not defending the people who attacked Malkin. I never have. I'm only restating that because you seem to think I did. Never did. Never would. Never will. Are we clear on that?

Posted by: jd at April 20, 2006 10:36 AM (aqTJB)

29 jd, can we at least put to rest the Leftwing myth of the "angry white male"? Not to mention all the other self-serving Leftwing myths about how loving they are, and how the Right is so "angry" and "hate filled". The Left is second to none in their hate-filled anger. Re Maxie's hate and anger, he's the exception on this blog, and others who have tried to go that route have been threatened with banning by Rusty & Company. Considering how hateful you Lefties like portraying this blog, you'd think it was populated by Maxies. It isn't.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 20, 2006 10:44 AM (8e/V4)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Syracuse University: Duke Lacrosse Players Not Welcome

Syracuse University Athletic Director Daryl Gross told the Syracuse Post-Standard today that he would not allow any Duke Blue Devils lacrosse players to transfer to the Syracuse lacrosse program.

At least one Duke University lacrosse player has indicated an interest in transferring from the troubled program. But Syracuse University athletic director Daryl Gross said Tuesday he will not sanction the transfer of any former Blue Devil to Syracuse.
"I think it would be inappropriate," Gross said.
SU coach John Desko said he's received written notification from Duke that sophomore attackman Zack Greer is seeking his release from the school. Athletes intent upon transferring from one program to another ask their athletic departments to issue releases to schools the athlete is interested in attending.

more...

Posted by: Bluto at 10:07 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 309 words, total size 3 kb.

Egypt Breaks Terror Cell

Twenty two more Â“insane peopleÂ” were picked up in Egypt this week. It appears they were planning to you know blow shit up. Like pipelines and Christians and Muslims that you know disagree with them.

VOA :The Interior Ministry says the secretive organization called itself the Victorious Sect, and its targets included tourist sites, religious leaders, and a natural gas pipeline.
A ministry spokesman, Major General Abdel-Karim, told VOA that all 22 members of the group have been arrested.
He says, this group was planning and organizing to conduct a number of terrorist operations, attacking some economic and tourist targets in greater Cairo. They were also targeting some religious figures, both Muslim and Christian, to create a split in Egyptian society.
The ministry says the secretive organization used code names and was led by a 26-year-old student named Ahmed Mohamed Ali Gabr, also known as Abu Musab. The ministry says his second-in-command is a preacher.
The general says the men used the Internet to research how to make explosives and poisons. He did not say whether they were successful in actually making them.

On Good Friday Â“insane peopleÂ” were captured after stabbing Christians while yelling, Â“There is no god but Allah!Â” Now on Wednesday a cell of Islamic Radicals is taken down. And they guy calls himself Abu Musab? Coincidence?

Posted by: Howie at 09:28 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 226 words, total size 2 kb.

182kb generated in CPU 0.0752, elapsed 0.3487 seconds.
135 queries taking 0.2981 seconds, 492 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy

Monthly Traffic

Pages: 16940
Files: 181
Bytes: 320.1M
CPU Time: 51:05
Queries: 1977133

Content

Posts: 5690
Comments: 76633

Feeds

April 21, 2006

April 20, 2006

April 19, 2006

Search Thingy

Recent Comments

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

Monthly Traffic

Content

Feeds