Oriana Fallaci on Trial for Connecting the Dots
Oriana Fallaci is on trial for "defaming Islam." This is apparently prohibited in Italy. From the Guardian:
The trial of Oriana Fallaci, a journalist and author accused of defaming Islam in a book, was opened and adjourned yesterday in an Italian court.
The charge stems from a recent book, The Strength of Reason, one of a trilogy she has published since the September 11 attacks on the US. In the book, Fallaci, 77, is alleged to have made 18 blasphemous statements, including referring to Islam as "a pool that never purifies".
1
Islam, a pool that never purifies. Can I use that statement, or do I have to quote her each time I write that?
Thank you for your concern in this matter.
Posted by: Leatherneck at June 13, 2006 02:54 PM (D2g/j)
2
Oriana Fallaci should be receiving medals of honor from the Italian government for revealing why the Islamic Trojan Horse was planted in Italy (and the rest of Europe). She only wrote what is true; but, of course they don't like the truth when it concerns them selling out the citizens for oil.
Posted by: mariro at June 13, 2006 07:31 PM (ZEM1o)
3
Though I agree with many of the points made in this posting, I'm utterly mystified by the gratuitous ACLU name-drop. 'America' would seem to be the key world in 'American Civil Liberties Union.' They couldn't become involved in an Italian(or Canadian, or British, or Dutch) court action no matter how much they wanted to.
Posted by: ethan at June 13, 2006 09:11 PM (SQana)
4
You wrote: "This unfortunate idea of the "valueless" nature of "hate speech" may no longer be confined to the left wing. David Weigel at the libertarian Reason.com...". I've never mistaken the libertarians as anything but whimworshippers, anti-ideologists and America haters. They are what Ayn Rand called them, the "hippies of the right". A sorry bunch.
Posted by: Kai Bugge at June 14, 2006 08:40 AM (66i+t)
I don't think that Rusty chose that quote for his blog lightly.
We are in a war. Not a cold war, not a proxy war, but a red hot shooting war.
To date, no war has been won by American jurisprudence.
Under the United States Constitution, the prisoners in Guantanamo have no rights.
Under the Geneva Conventions, the prisoners in Guantanamo have no rights.
None. Zero. Zip. Nada.
Yet we have gone out of our way to make their stay in the tropics as comfortable as possible. From meals prepared in accordance with Islamic teachings to prayer rugs given upon arrival. Riots have occurred over fictional accounts of Koran flushing, never mind that we have no obligation to provide them with Korans. In short, they are being treated under the Geneva Convention even though it doesn't apply to them.
Were German POWs, who actually wore a uniform, and carried arms openly, given copies of Mein Kampf and shown newsreels of Hitler's speeches? Hardly.
While the focus is on three terrorists who committed suicide, no mention is being made of the dozens released who returned to their chosen vocation of killing Americans.
1
It appears to be part of an anti U.S. military front being fought on many fronts....http://www.securitywatchtower.com/archives/003477maybe_the_children_were_just_playing_with_machine_guns.html
Posted by: Mark Eichenlaub at June 13, 2006 12:12 AM (j+tr0)
2
I hope they ALL commit suicide. Scum-sucking maggots from hell need to return there ASAP.
No seventy-two rasins for YOU, mo-fos.
Good riddance.
Faster, please.
Posted by: Hucbald at June 13, 2006 01:02 AM (YHNwX)
3
Why hasn't John Esposito been relocated to Guantanamo. He could lecture his rabid heart out to a captive audience...
Posted by: Andrew Brown at June 13, 2006 02:11 AM (REZpd)
Who Buys This Crap? (Pun Intended)
So there I am, sitting on the gilded Editor In Chief Pro Tempore throne, minding my own business and thumbing through the latest edition of Entertainment Weekly (shutup, bastards) when I notice that the Dixie Chick's latest..uh..album is in week 2 at the top of the charts.
The natural question is in the title of the post.
But then I notice the numbers. And the undisguised attempt to put lipstick on a pig:
Life may be twice as "Nice" for the Chicks, still on top in week 2 with 271,000, a less than 50% drop
I think they scored around 500 large with the first week, and 271 large this week, with a grand total of about 871,000 plus-minus sold.
In a nation of 280,000,000 people.
What an accomplishment. I felt better after thinking about that.
I like irony. The anti-American Dixies Chick's defiant, triumphant return to the CD shelves dropped almost 50% in the same week that Kos had his Konvention.
1
I heard that they cancelled 40%(?) of their concerts in the states due to stagnant ticket sales.
They're trying to spin it as "broadening their fan base abroad" as they try to book dates in Candada.
Maybe some Jihadis there will want to go, after all...the Dixie Chicks hate BOOOOSH too.
Posted by: mrclark at June 12, 2006 11:53 PM (4QhQ1)
2
Sooper-sikret message to Vinnie:
Does Mrs. aut Morire know you're rummaging through her mags in search of fashion tips?
Posted by: Rusty at June 13, 2006 04:46 PM (RwmBV)
Posted by: cobalt blue at June 11, 2006 01:07 AM (cJXpZ)
5
"Lies! I tell you it's all lies! Zarqawi is still alive. He is right behind this curtain. All I have to do is open this curtain and you shall see he is still alive. He is right behind this curtain I tell you. You shall see ... What's that? What means this 'Duck. Incom-
Posted by: Remy Logan at June 11, 2006 01:09 AM (T9XF+)
6...oh holy Mujahideen, you the fearless Lions of Islam, with regret I inform you, that our warrior Zaqawi has claimed his seventy-two virgins in paradise.
One of the things given to me, by my Abu, was my 'pious callous' it was caused by the slapping of the lions, holy nutsack against my forehead for hours.
Ah Abu, or 'mighty rimmer' as I called him, I remember fondly the things he could do with a date,masking tape and a rubber glove by Allah
Posted by: davec at June 11, 2006 01:56 AM (CcXvt)
11
Andrew Sullivan told me he likes my facial hair but the flowing robes were a little metro for his taste.
Posted by: Darth Vag at June 11, 2006 05:51 AM (+nlyI)
12
I trained as a surgeon in an attempt to constructively redirect my basal Islamic impulse to cut throats...
Posted by: Darth Vag at June 11, 2006 05:54 AM (+nlyI)
13
Andrew Sullivan is my bearded ally.
He is helpful to our cause.
Even though the total number of US troops involved in murder and torture is just about 10 out of 140,000 (0.0000625), he impugns all US troops, and the US command structure, for the crimes of a few.
God help him.
Posted by: Darth Vag at June 11, 2006 06:06 AM (+nlyI)
Posted by: Darth Vag at June 11, 2006 06:26 AM (+nlyI)
15
...oh, you're asking about the dent in my forehead? That was from Sheikh Osama trying to get Sullivanish on me.
Posted by: Darth Vag at June 11, 2006 06:47 AM (+nlyI)
16
Al Qaeda might not winning, but our fan base at dailykos remains strong!
Posted by: Darth Vag at June 11, 2006 06:48 AM (+nlyI)
17
"With Brother Zarqawi and his undependable membership fee payments gone, the organisation finds itself with a large hole in its funding, so for the next six months we shall be experimenting with a new format. Firstly, these videos will be pay-per-view. Secondly, as incentive to watch, I shall slowly remove my clothing as I issue my threats and hype our accomplishments. How far will I go? You'll just have to tune in to find out. Now if you'll excuse me I have to go cancel my cable subscription. You can thank Ummah and Garden TV and my wives for the lame ass backdrop. "Oh Ayman, you'll love what we did with your broadcast room. Ak-47s against the wall just aren't Feng Shui." You in the West mock us about our goats, but you have no idea about the kind of camelcrap we married jihadis have to put up with."
Posted by: Graeme at June 11, 2006 06:50 AM (QO12b)
20
"This happened when I went "DOH!" one too many times"
Posted by: Laura at June 11, 2006 08:21 AM (WeRWZ)
21
Oh infidels, I do not fear you! Your bombs are useless against me, inshallah. You don't believe me? Observe the dent in my forehead caused by an infidel bomb bouncing harmlessly off my skull. It stung a bit and left a mark, but am I not still among the living? Am I not speaking to you now on Al-Jazeera? I do not fear your infidel bobms for Allah protects me an you cannot kill me, oh infidels!
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 11, 2006 08:41 AM (8e/V4)
22
There once was a man named Zawahiri,
Of him and his ilk, please be leery.
He looked up to sky,
And said "Why, Allah, why?"
Now his carcass is all nice and smeary.
Posted by: astuddis at June 11, 2006 09:46 AM (+4CC2)
23
There once was a man named Zawahiri,
Of him and his ilk, please be leery.
He looked up to the sky,
And said "Why, Allah, why?"
Now his carcass is all nice and smeary.
Posted by: astuddis at June 11, 2006 09:46 AM (+4CC2)
24"Pay no attention to the Jewish stars on the curtain behind me. We're just making do while we reconstruct a new safehouse."
Posted by: Oyster at June 11, 2006 11:52 AM (YudAC)
25
I have prepared my forehead for the next bomb the infidels will drop on me.
Posted by: Leovinus at June 11, 2006 01:49 PM (I42Iw)
Posted by: Jester at June 11, 2006 02:50 PM (TuAMG)
29
Light my firecracker .. plezzzz.
or
I'm a little teapot short and stout,
Here is my handle and here is my turban ..
give me a whirl, girl. Cheap thrills all around.
or
What do I hear bid for this binding across my chest? This binding is made from authentic, double-strength isamofascist duct tape that will hold any camel in place for hours of allahu snackbar pain and pleasure.
or
Camel. Camel? Did someone mention camel? Which way did he go, which way did he go?
Posted by: Bubbe at June 11, 2006 03:27 PM (vZBQO)
32
Who the hell would wish to fuck a muslim. They stink like pig shit. That's why they don't eat pork. Then they double stink. Outlaw Islam. Its members are dirty and smell bad.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 12, 2006 10:45 AM (fDZgg)
33
No you won't fuck me or us. We're a bit more feisty than your little arab boys who stand like a gazelle for you. Hear that whistling overhead?
Posted by: Howie at June 12, 2006 10:46 AM (NdGSM)
34
"Hello? Is the microphone on? Hello? Should I begin?
On the goooood ship, The Jihad
Where the decks run red with the infidels' blood...
Abdul, I don't think the mic works. And the curtains are filthy! And my beard is a mess! How will I ever land a spot on Survivor: Jihad Edition with all these problems?! I'm so angry I could kill myself!"
Posted by: Venom at June 12, 2006 11:42 AM (dbxVM)
35
Ayman: "I tell you now. This dent on my forehead is from repeatedly being smacked with Osamma's pelvis, ok? I keep telling the bitch to stay still and let me do all the work - but noooo!"
BTW, Gotta love the name of the producers "AsS-ahab".
Posted by: JustPlainJoe at June 12, 2006 11:46 AM (Xj6+u)
Posted by: Good Lt at June 12, 2006 05:43 PM (jWYAe)
2
It's like the guy who owns the cheese steak shop in Philly. He's posted signs informing people they need to order in English, or don't order. I LOVE that. This guy has some major courage. Again, it's middle America that will lead the way on getting the borders under control. Speaking of that I wonder how JC's stint at the border went? Or is he still there?
Posted by: Richard at June 12, 2006 06:26 PM (7KF8r)
3
English is just a passing fad...
Once the worldwide Caliphate is established and everyone is speaking Arabic and reading the Koran, maybe we will be able to understand why both Zarqawi and Mohammed, who were throat-slitters and child molesters, are heroes to Muslims.
Posted by: Darth Vag at June 12, 2006 06:33 PM (+nlyI)
4
DarthVag I was aware that Mohammad (pigs be upon him) was a paedophile - but didn't realise that Zapdasswipe was too. Did the zapped one have a six year old wife like Mo (pigshit be all over him)?
Posted by: Andrew at June 12, 2006 06:43 PM (I+dcA)
Net Neutrality : Who do you trust?
I've been hearing more and more about "net neutrality" lately. It came up often at YearlyKos (they apparently like it). To be honest, I haven't paid much attention to the issue prior to last week. Apparently, net neutrality comes down to a conflict between increased government regulation (which I'm generally against) and the interests of a coalition of huge corporations (of which I'm also not the biggest fan). Further complicating the issue is the fact that MoveOn.org is apparently taking a lead in favor of net neutrality regulation.
more...
1
Net neutrality is a fairly new concept to me, but it seems a slam-dunk as to why the left would be for it: it's "equal time" and "affirmative action" all over again. It's the government enforcing its own system of quotas and "fairness."
To the question you asked about what safeguards would we have that "unapproved" speech wouldn't be squeezed out, the answer is... none.
IMHO, anything that gives government bureaucrats more control over the internet is a bad idea.
Posted by: reverse_vampyr at June 12, 2006 05:12 PM (Ns5kk)
2
I wrote a long post to carefully explain this issue, but it was rejected by the blog software.
All Seeing Eye, check your email for subject: [MyPetJawa] An Intro to Net Neutrality
I've wasted too much time, so it may not be well-formatted for email, since it was intended for a blog comment.
-anon
Posted by: anon at June 12, 2006 05:50 PM (QcCiO)
3
Net neutrality legislation is completely unnecessary and would retard the further growth of the Internet.
High speed video on demand? Forget it.
Next-generation web services? Only if the FCC approves.
Staying online at all? Oops, now you need a license for that.
Posted by: Michael Hampton at June 12, 2006 06:47 PM (vhWf1)
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 12, 2006 06:55 PM (rUyw4)
5
I don't trust either group. What I have yet to figure out is who would harm me the least. All the growth in the Internet that we've seen so far has come as a result of "net neutrality" and government ignorance. Now the telecoms see an opportunity to enrich themselves by "taxing" certain types of Internet traffic, via increased user fees. If you live in a metro area, you can always vote with your check book (change providers). If you live out in the sticks, like I do, the choices are "take or leave it." On the other hand, more government regulation stinks.
Posted by: olddawg at June 12, 2006 08:37 PM (Si1mC)
6
It will keep the large drums of ink in the hands of them that can afford it, as it has been in the past, before the equalizing factor of the net. Not to tell you what you stand for, but you are against it.
Posted by: Defense Guy at June 12, 2006 08:45 PM (hckq8)
7
Here's the basic situation, in as small a package as possible:
The Internet was designed around a "dumb network" (neutral network, if you prefer) that knew nothing about the content of the packets crossing the network: the network's job was (and is) simply to route the packets that come across it.
I pay for my connection to the Internet, you pay for yours, and Google pays for theirs.
The long-haul network provider companies want to make the network "smart", inspecting the packets to see who they're from. Based on the company's decisions about those packets, they then want to get, say, Google to pay them extra so that you can get Google's content at full speed, as it is now. If Google doesn't pay the extra, of if the company decides that a given service is a competitor to it and won't even get the chance to pay extra, good luck visiting the site: it will be like using dial-up.
For me, it's a no-brainer: if the network providers aren't making enough money to cover their costs, they need to charge me the appropriate amount. Charging a third party just because they can (or can if they are allowed to, anyway) and punishing me if the third party doesn't pay (knowing the whole time that I'll complain not to the provider, but to the third party that's also getting the shaft) is just wrong.
On the other hand, this might be just what's needed to get a second-generation Internet (with more comprehensive addressing, better built-in security, and other nice features built right in) off the ground. A tiered pricing scheme could possibly generate enough backlash to overcome the built-in infrastructural inertia.
Posted by: Jeff Medcalf at June 12, 2006 08:57 PM (nDgte)
8
Sometimes people say that some decision made by some company about what it sells to whom and for how much "is just wrong." Whenever I read that or something like it, it sets off alarm bells. It's what I hear about "price gouging." Charging X dollars for gas that cost the company only Y dollars "is just wrong," or so we are told.
Moralizing about business decisions is just wrong.
Posted by: Constant at June 12, 2006 10:38 PM (4q2dc)
9
Without being a guru in all matters Internet, I'm inclined to keep with Medcalf's "dumb network". I've read a bit about this. Money may be (rather is) a motivator for improving any product, as well as the Internet, but I would rather they charge me for my access, because I'm the one who's going to get charged in the long run anyway. I would prefer to know how much I'm paying for what without wondering what hidden charges are in the cost of anything I buy. I'll stand up for big business when I think they're getting a bad rap, but it doesn't mean I trust them on everything. This sounds too much like government.
I vote no.
Posted by: Oyster at June 13, 2006 05:23 AM (YudAC)
10
I looked but Pixi has removed my size limits in favor of his own better scripts. If length is still a problem we'll have to check with him.
Posted by: Howie at June 13, 2006 06:48 AM (D3+20)
11
The telcos use the example of Fed Ex. Some mail delivery can be at the standard, "best effort" speed at the standards USPS rate. But some mail needs to get there faster, so it's worth paying more to send it FedEx. That's all well and good, EXCEPT. When I want to send something, *I* decide whether it goes USPS or Fed Ex. Without net neutrality, the *telcos* decide what content gets delivered to my desktop at priority speed versus best effort. Do you really think the telcos will give access to this high priority transmission service to their competitors? Do you often access web pages from Google, YouTube, CDBaby and others? If so, you may find that if net neutrality doesn't pass, in a year or two every time you try to access those websites it will be like doing it over dial-up, regardless of what premium speed package you pay your ISP for.
Net Neutrality is NOT new regulation; it's simply protection for preserving the current status quo of neutral treatment of all content over the public Internet, without discrimination of packets. However, emergency communications and urgent medical data can be exempted from NN provisions to allow for that data to go priority. Also, Net Neutrality would not prevent telcos from providing Virtual Private Network services (VPN) to companies who want faster, priority service and are willing to pay for it. With net neutrality, everyone gets what they want.
Posted by: Brenda at June 13, 2006 07:52 AM (vKhLM)
1
Quick, take my picture before I fall down laughing.
Is that Vinnie, or Howie? It looks like something you guys would do just to make those moon god worshippers mad. I mean religion of peace individuals.
Posted by: Leatherneck at June 12, 2006 04:28 PM (D2g/j)
Posted by: Andrew at June 12, 2006 06:18 PM (I+dcA)
8
Afghanistan, Bosnia, Lebanon, Iraq... A Jihadi needs a break now and then. I think I'll hide in this house in the date palm grove. What is that light I see up above????
Posted by: olddawg at June 12, 2006 08:28 PM (Si1mC)
9
If I'm old enough for a suicide vest, I'm damn sure old enough to drink beer!
Posted by: Howie at June 12, 2006 08:56 PM (sX5Qy)
10
A new born fatwa gift to bring, Haraam pum pum pumm...
Posted by: Dan Lew at June 12, 2006 08:59 PM (r09m/)
Posted by: Master Shake at June 12, 2006 09:25 PM (mq3NB)
12
Hey, is that one of the hot Filipina chicks Chris presented yesterday, only now dressed like that drag queen Mohammad?
Posted by: whocares at June 12, 2006 09:32 PM (hGibF)
13
Ackmed, did you shove this bottle up where the mooongod don't shine?
Posted by: mrclark at June 12, 2006 09:37 PM (4QhQ1)
14
A fatwa was issued against Aisha for drinking a totally lame-o Leinie beer. Real Jihadis DON'T drink berryweiss!
Posted by: Marcus Aurelius at June 12, 2006 09:44 PM (v2l2P)
15
To the tune of Elvis' "Suspicious Minds"..
we're caught in a trap
I can't take a crap
because the potty's outside baby
Posted by: Andrew at June 12, 2006 11:24 PM (I+dcA)
16
"Ahhh that was one hell of a binge. Now back to protecting our leader Zarqawi. Hey, anybody seen him around today?"
Posted by: JustPlainJoe at June 13, 2006 05:59 AM (Xj6+u)
17
You gotta fight! For your right! To jihaaaaaaaaadi!
Posted by: Graeme at June 13, 2006 07:45 AM (+2uH1)
18
My God, the terrorists have taken over Lambeau Field!
Posted by: Rodney Dill at June 13, 2006 12:29 PM (SPSiT)
19
"I'm just goin' up nort for the weekend to shoot some Pike."
Posted by: Rodney Dill at June 13, 2006 12:30 PM (SPSiT)
20
Rodney Dill,
I feel like issuing a fatwa against you for that obligue suggestion berryweiss is consumed at Lambeau Field!
Posted by: Marcus Aurelius at June 13, 2006 04:37 PM (v2l2P)
21
i hope no one here is implying that honey weiss is of the infidel. i will cut you and ur neck for such sacrilege.
Posted by: catbat at June 13, 2006 05:20 PM (8kJqM)
22
I am implying no such thing. I am saying BERRYweiss is wussy beer.
Also, unless you like Blue Moon (or belgium beers) don't try the new Sunset Wheat. It is a okay for a bottle or two but beyond that, not really.
Posted by: Marcus Aurelius at June 13, 2006 07:09 PM (v2l2P)
Reader Love Mail Turkish Fatwa Edition
As Rusty noted earlier we here at the Jawa Report have a brand new Fatwa from Turkey. Now Rusty promised to update us on the details but has not gotten to it. So all I know now is a Jihadi website based in Turkey has been making us even more infamous. So far it has resulted in DDOS attacks on mu.nu as well as lots of cool spam attacks. We have survived this so far. So lets all do a collective phttttt.
Today we have some cool reader love mail. WeÂ’ve not been getting so many of these lately since we always post them. But a new Fatwa brings new suckers.
Now this first one left a valid email. They posted from India and are trying to hide on an old thread. Of course as always itÂ’s the joooooos!
joji cherian
kunnumpurathujoji@yahoo.co.uk
who said there is democracy in us. us stands and exist for israel. it has no national interests, israels' interest are us intersts. there is no christianity. no freedom. every thing that us is doing is unchristian.americans are being murdred for israel. the slaves they are, they can not even wisper against it. americans are a terrorised people, condmned to to perish for israel. ppeople like bin laden are sending wake up calls to the american Christians
The next fun love mail comes from Istanbul Turkey and was posted on Vinnie’s Caption contest thread. But this brave mujahadbeen despite his threat to, “make love to us” was too chicken to leave a valid email. Pussy.
F*ck Anti Muslims
i will f*ck you,zarqavi is my favourite man,and usame bin laden,Adam olun
http://www.ciddi.com
za@hotmail.com
Also we have five, count em, five new authors here so welcome aboard one and all.
Update :
Vinnie, Editor In Chief Pro Tempore: What do you mean "we." You're retired.
Yeah I know retired, retarded something.
Update II: More reader Love mail from the UK Below the break.
more...
1
At least their taking the time to learn English. Thats more than the illegal aliens are doing.
Posted by: Leatherneck at June 12, 2006 04:22 PM (D2g/j)
2
You know..at first I did'nt like that zac guy what with all the killing and beheading of innocent men woman and children..but now that he's fertilizer...I like him a lot! I hope the coroner did'nt drop any of his ham sandwich in zac before he sewed him back up.
Posted by: morning wood at June 12, 2006 04:33 PM (+aNmG)
Posted by: greyrooster at June 13, 2006 08:34 PM (ZVFO9)
7
Of course Fatwa issued against Dr. Rusty Shackleford for "Heading for the Mountians".
Of course there is also that little matter of the stuff you mainly you/we/us already did that got the first two actual fatwas so can't undo that. I forecast as 60 percent likelyhood of even more fatwas.
Posted by: Howie at June 14, 2006 07:38 AM (/Xibe)
Confidence
England has been invaded. No, not by rampaging hordes of All Qaeda 'martyrs' (though they are probably here as well) but by England flags.
They are everywhere. Hanging from office buildings, shops, homes, fluttering from (not very well secured) antenna on cars and trucks. Even painted on people's faces.
Its World Cup time and England at least is looking as confident and patriotic as it always is just below the surface. Of course I feel sorry for my poor Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish brethren, whoÂ’s teams didn't make it to the finals (ha ha!) but at least my non-English fellow Britons seem to be taking this football* inspired burst of Englishness with good humour.
Not everyone is of course. The usual suspects are complaining that the flags which you now cannot now avoid are 'racsist' and 'intimidating'. Can you guess who those usual suspects are?
That's right, some of those who voluntarily came to this country to escape their own homeland's despotic regimes and their defender's in the 'we hate ourselves' liberal so-called elite.
Of course, what they really object to isn't the flag itself but the confidence in the country, it's dominant culture and political freedoms that it is indicative of. The bullishness it inspires amongst Englishmen and women of all colours and creeds.
The Islamofascists and their allies have successfully undermined large sections of the media and the establishment but the disconnect between those sell-out sections of our society and the majority of the population they supposedly represent is as comfortingly wide as it has been for decades.
As with any war, the real key to victory is confidence in the cause and the values it protects. Confidence is abundant, no matter what anyone might tell you.
(*Even for my guest slot here I'm refusing to use that hideous 's' word, just as I'm refusing to spell humour incorrectly).
1That's right, some of those who voluntarily came to this country to escape their own homeland's despotic regimes and their defender's in the 'we hate ourselves' liberal so-called elite.
It's madness in the guise of "tolerance." Here's another example of Leftwing dhimmitude in the face of muslim imperialism :
English flag offensive to Muslims?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_yorkshire/4305798.stm
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 12, 2006 04:19 PM (8e/V4)
2
Please humor me with an email for the Contact Page, soccer boy.
;-)
vinceautmorire@gmail.com
Posted by: Oyster at June 12, 2006 04:36 PM (YudAC)
5
I'll never understand the audacity of an outsider coming into a new country who has welcomed him with an opportunity for a better life and once ensconced, proceeds to whine because something doesnt suit him. Fly your flag proudly and if your muslim houseguests don't like it, they need to head back to the frikkin motherland.
Posted by: Richard at June 12, 2006 05:08 PM (7KF8r)
6
The cross of St George should be flown with pride. Muslims can go to hell. This is the same cross worn by Richard I, who kicked their asses in the crusades.
Posted by: Jester at June 12, 2006 06:02 PM (TuAMG)
7
Who gives a shit whether the British flag offends a Muslim or not? They knew what the flag was when they came there. What a bunch of whiners you have. We have them, too, but I fly the Confederate flag to further piss them off. It usually works.
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 12, 2006 07:02 PM (rUyw4)
Yearly Kos : What Fame Will Bring to KosLGF links to an article by Byron York of National Review discussing the attention Kos is likely to garner in the wake of his convention:
While [Kos'] writings—and the controversies they have caused—are an old topic in the blogosphere, they have remained largely unexamined in major media outlets....
Castro Blacks Out U.S. Mission in Havana
Although the Cuban government has harassed the U.S. diplomatic mission in Havana for years, the latest move is a troubling escalation.
The Cuban government has cut off electricity to the U.S. diplomatic mission in Havana as part of a sharp increase in harassments that include holding up visas for American diplomats waiting to take up posts there and restricting gasoline supplies, the State Department said Monday.
The electricity to the U.S. Interests Section in Havana -- not quite an embassy because Cuba and the United States do not have formal diplomatic relations -- was cut off at 3 a.m. on June 5, said Ashley Morris, a State Department spokeswoman
Although electricity in Cuba is notoriously unreliable, Morris said no other buildings around the Interests Section on Havana's seaside Malecon boulevard have been affected, so U.S. officials believe the cutoff is deliberate.
Asked if the Cuban government had given any reason for the cutoff, Morris said, "you'll have to ask the Cubans. We'd like to know as well."
The mission has backup generators but lack gasoline. Restrictions have been imposed on the importation of equipment and supplies. I'd guess that all the harassment amounts to a not-very-subtle campaign to elbow the Americans out of Cuba. Understandably, mission staff are destroying documents that are not essential.
One expert believes the lights were cut off in retaliation for the "electronic billboard that the U.S. mission hung on the side of its building earlier this year to show anti-Castro messages." Yeah, that might have tweaked old commie Castro to cut the lights. Fortunately, the water hasn't been cut off yet.
1
Well let's be honest - the billboard IS nothing less than a direct provocation.
Castro may be a $^*@ (pretty sure he is!) but I really can't blame him for this one.
Were the situation reversed, I'd either jail or expel any "diplomats" who were tro display a sign which urged revolt.
Posted by: G'Knark at June 12, 2006 05:14 PM (/UAJE)
2
Castro has been able to place the blame for all of his economic shortcomings on the USA embargo. We serve as an easy scapegoat because of the embargo. The only ones that seem to have any vested interest in maintaing this embargo are Castro..... and the anti-Castro Cubans. The only ones it hurts are the ordinary Cubans who can now no longer even receive remitances from their relatives in the USA because of our embargo.
Posted by: john ryan at June 12, 2006 05:32 PM (TcoRJ)
3
Oh, hell, Castro is just mad that we torched the Z-man. He knows that his time is running short, also. I have a bottle of champagne in the frig just waiting for the day Castro kicks the bucket. Now that will be another great day.
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 12, 2006 07:44 PM (rUyw4)
4
This is the same tyrant whom the liberals have a big thing for i mean JIMMY CARTER and the usial crowd of jerks from hollywood think he is the worlds greatest person then he gose to the whole crappy UN and gets a standing ovation from those ratfinks why should have anything at all to do with ether castro or the UN
Posted by: sandpiper at June 12, 2006 09:14 PM (FpZEl)
Yearly Kos : Monday-morning Quarterbacking
The Kossacks themselves are all over the map as to what went right and what went wrong this past weekend. Mark Warner's massive party is a hot topic of conversation on the internet:
Think about it this way: if Gov. Warner has now established himself in the front of the pack, and grabbed onto a great big piece of the mindshare of the blogosphere, for only $70,000 (or whatever it cost), then GOOD FOR HIM - it shows he knows how to reach the audiences he needs to reach, when he needs to reach them. It's called "marketing." If there's anything the Democrats need it's marketing know-how, and if it means we get to eat free sushi, all the better.
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 12, 2006 01:29 PM (rUyw4)
2
Can't you just picture it:
Slow day, no JOOOs around, ...Why not burn something down? How bout we kidnap someone?
Hey, there are those assholes from Hammas.......
Posted by: B rad at June 12, 2006 01:55 PM (3OPZt)
3
Maybe if we just show a little more patience they'll kill each other off.
Posted by: Oyster at June 12, 2006 02:33 PM (ULAbo)
4
Does it strike anyone as strange that Muslims all over the world are so hellbent on killing each other like its their favorite pastime? WTF is wrong with these people?
Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at June 12, 2006 02:40 PM (CtVG6)
8
>>>>I believe Fred Phelps ran for governor of Kansas as a democrat.
You'll here all about David Duke running as a Republican ad nauseaum, but not a peep about this lady being a Democrat.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 12, 2006 12:45 PM (8e/V4)
Posted by: Howie at June 12, 2006 01:06 PM (NdGSM)
10
As a christian myself, these legalistics types annoy me!
Does this lady and the church she is in not remember what Jesus said to the crowd that was about to stone the prostitute Mary Magadalene?
"Let he who is w/o sin cast the first stone."
By the way, someone needs to tell this lady that passing judgement on others is a sin, and so is activism...
12
Ummm...
Never wrestle with a pig.
You'll both get dirty, and the pig will like it.
Posted by: QC at June 12, 2006 02:15 PM (PX+vn)
13
Horrible interview. Two heffers screaming at each other...Could Banderas not have kept her cool and simply made the Phelpszombie look like subhuman scum in an audible, understandable way? All that gabbing and yacking sounded like Jerry Springer not Fox News.
Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at June 12, 2006 02:43 PM (CtVG6)
14
Banderas is hot. She could yell at me all day, and I would never hear a thing. I would just answer, "Yes my Queen".
The sea hag would get a good slap, and told to STFU.
Posted by: Leatherneck at June 12, 2006 03:15 PM (D2g/j)
15
I can't stand Banderas, she's a female Geraldo. As a 'reporter', which is what she is supposed to be, she is not supposed to be part of the story. She is to present each side of the story.
Yes the woman she was interviewing was a crazy, dangerous, ugly, loon. But Banderas didn't have to stoop to the loon's level. Not professional!
Yes, she is married. heh
Posted by: Debbie at June 12, 2006 03:19 PM (rWxDT)
16
It's stupid to have any kind of an interview with that woman. Listen, she's shot her mouth off enough that at this point every soul in the country, but for the few parishoners at their God forsaken little "chrurch", would give her a wide berth on any sidewalk.
Actually I'm thinking maybe Zarqawi is in hell right now asking where his virgins are not knowing that Ms. Phelps (and Helen Thomas) is just running a little late.
Posted by: Oyster at June 12, 2006 04:51 PM (YudAC)
17
Thanks for the link. As a gay man I can handle whatever nonsense she and her ilk spew my way. Heck as someone who is also conservative, I may not agree with but respect the fact that some people have religious disagreement with my orientation. I'll be the first person to defend her free speech and religious liberty, but all of us (i.e. all Americans) have the same rights too. What she and her despicable bunch are doing by attacking servicemembers and 'protesting' the funerals of the fallen among them is so beyond the pale that I cannot put into words adequately enough what I think of it. She has the right to do so, within certain bounds, but we have just as much right to oppose her. God bless the Patriot Guard Riders! What Phelps-Roper and her inbred Klan are doing in my view is anti-Christian and un-American.
Posted by: John (AGJ) at June 12, 2006 05:04 PM (D5Sti)
18Fred Phelps is gay!
In all seriousness, I've wondered that myself at times. The stunts he and his bunch have pulled which are actually anti-thetical to the Gospel message he supposedly preaches, leads one to wonder if perhaps he is a deeply-disturbed closet-case or maybe was molested as a child and blames all gays for this. Whatever it is, the man is a loon.
Posted by: John (AGJ) at June 12, 2006 05:07 PM (D5Sti)
19
No, Banderas is hot. Any man who thinks she is not, is messed up in the head.
But wait, that was not compassionate of me. Please, go ahead and rape women, and children, drink boozs until you are in the hospital, do other drugs until you are in ICU, and please go ahead and keep buggering each other in the ass, there is no bloody right, and wrong. It is all OK. Remember, there is no such thing as sin.
Posted by: Leatherneck at June 12, 2006 05:41 PM (D2g/j)
20
You'd expect Leatherneck to ring in unable to resist speaking on the same side as the Phelpers.
Who cares if they are Republicans or Democrats? David Duke ran as a Democrat before he ran as a Republican. For fringe people like LaRouche, Phelps, Duke...it doesn't matter the name of the party. What matters is getting any media coverage at all. Lefties who use Phelps against conservatives are wrong, it's wrong in the reverse. Phelps is just batshit crazy, homophobic, and quite probably gay. He sure sees gayness everywhere.
Posted by: jd at June 12, 2006 05:48 PM (aqTJB)
21
Right, anyone who see buggering each other in the ass as wrong, is Homophobic, and anyone who thinks there is wrong, and right is like the Phelps. In jd's eyes.
Deal with that jd, and deal with the majority of Americans.
Posted by: Leatherneck at June 12, 2006 08:58 PM (D2g/j)
22
Leatherneck, I agree wholeheardedly with jd on this one. You're entitled to your opinion on this, but you're wrong in your approach. You sound just like "them".
Posted by: Oyster at June 13, 2006 04:43 AM (YudAC)
23
I don't think that everyone who is opposed to sodomy is homophobic. No one is forcing you to engage in sodomy, Leatherneck, unless you have camping buddies with control issues. I do think people who equate sodomy with drug abuse to the point of landing in the ICU have some issues with homophobia. Remember, sodomy in many state laws was oral and anal, hetero and homo. Look in your dictionary. Many churches used to teach the same. So are you saying you've never committed sodomy? You don't know what you're missing, man.
DUBAI (Reuters) - Al Qaeda in Iraq named a successor following the killing of the group's leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, according to an Internet statement on Monday.
"The shura council of al Qaeda in Iraq unanimously agreed on Sheikh Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, to be a successor to Sheikh Abu Musab al-Zarqawi," said a statement signed by al Qaeda and posted on a Web site frequently used by Islamist militants.
Most experts had speculated that Abu Ayyub al-Masri would be the one to take over for Zarqawi. Could this be the reason they were wrong?
Posted by: Andrew at June 12, 2006 05:53 PM (I+dcA)
6
That Jordan report on Abu Ayyub al-Masri's death is intriguing. One wonders why we haven't heard more of this. It would be fantastic if his #2 were taken out in the same strike. I look forward to learning of the identities of the other terrorists killed in the attack.
TIME reflects on the al-Masri character based on an interview with an AQ member in Iraq...
http://tinyurl.com/fhj95
The Time reporter, who met with the enemy, is likely a conduit of AQ spin, since I doubt they are going to reveal who is in charge so soon after losing Zarqawi.
Nonetheless, the Time report suggests that al-Masri doesn't exist but, based on the meaning behind Al-Muhajer, which means foreigner, that "Abu Hamza al-Muhajer" is probably a non-Iraqi Arab. The report also says that "Sheikh Abdel-Rahman" (Spiritual Adviser of Al-Zarqawi who was supposedly killed in the same attack) and "Abu Abdul Rahman al Iraqi" are different men. The report mentions another local terrorist, "Abu Abdullah Rasheed al Bagdadi," as being head of the Shura Council.
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Abu Musab al-Zarqawi lived for 52 minutes after a U.S. warplane bombed his hideout northeast of Baghdad, and he died of extensive internal injuries consistent with those caused by a bomb blast, the U.S. military said Monday.
One hopes that during those fifty-two minutes Zarqawi's Maker was giving him a perfect understanding of his actions, that Zarqawi realized he was experiencing a tiny portion of the suffering he so joyously handed out.
He added that no decision had been made on what to do with the remains of al-Zarqawi and his spiritual adviser, Sheik Abdul-Rahman, who also was killed instantly in WednesdayÂ’s airstrike.
1
They used to hang pirates in irons for all to see - not a bad idea, but I suppose to be practical about it and squeeze the utmost value of this animal's death, a video of hogs eating his body should be made and plastered all over the internet. "Porky and the Z Man" now showing in a Special Ops camp near you..........
Posted by: goesh at June 12, 2006 10:30 AM (1w6Ud)
2
Just toss his head on a spike and put it somewhere prominent, with an appropriate messege. Toss the rest out as pigfeed.
I'm not much for knee-jerk emotional reactions, but inspiring a little fear in your enemies never hurt anyone.
Posted by: MiB at June 12, 2006 10:35 AM (RwDCC)
3
1) Cut off his pen-is and stuff it up his @ss.
2) Sew strips of pigskin into his skin giving him a piebald appearance.
3) Hang him from a very tall tree/telephone pole/etc. with a constant feed via a web-cam on a website for the entire internet community to see.
4) Wait until there is *NOTHING* left.
Posted by: JeepThang at June 12, 2006 11:49 AM (0411H)
5
I do believe the Zark saw US soldiers and knew who nailed his ass. That is comforting to me, and I believe not so comforting for the jihadists in Iraq. Very nicely done!
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 12, 2006 12:13 PM (rUyw4)
6
Well, he is going to be buried. Time enough to dig him up and kill him again!
Posted by: Dan at June 12, 2006 12:20 PM (Z2OsI)
7
Sew their bodies in pigskins. That way they can't get their 72 virgins.
Posted by: RayRio at June 12, 2006 12:31 PM (1CTkD)
8
In Baghdad, in a stadium, burn the bastard in a pit, charge admission then take the ashes and dump it in the Euphrates.
For his 16 year old wife and their 18 month old child, allow family to take care of them. For the Prince of AlQaeda Iraq, feed him the fishies.
Posted by: whocares at June 12, 2006 01:12 PM (EFQfG)
9
Dump him like garbage on the outskirts of Bahgdad just like he did his victims.
Posted by: Howie at June 12, 2006 01:15 PM (NdGSM)
10
I have been rejoicing that Zarqawi lived long enough and suffered enough to realise the coalition were the ones that killed him. Where's allah now, you prick? has been the theme of the week for me.
Posted by: Jester at June 12, 2006 02:24 PM (TuAMG)
11
Bury him upside down, facing the west, wrapped in an Israeli flag, 3 weeks after his death. Include a dead pig, a dead hooker, an ounce of coke, a pound of weed, a handle of Jim Beam, and a large dildo up his ass. I think that should be enough to interfere with admission to the false afterlife.
Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at June 12, 2006 02:51 PM (CtVG6)
12
The pig feed comment is most appropriate, and a well-developed tradition in Deadwood.
Posted by: Alan at June 12, 2006 03:54 PM (qCYc3)
13
I say bury him completely properly according to Islamic tradition, in a well publicized ceremony, thus maintaining the moral high ground, while at the same time allowing anyone less "friendly" an opportunity to show up after the fact and do as they will.
Posted by: j at June 12, 2006 05:33 PM (ssh6o)
14
Maybe we can buy tickets for the Phelps family to go picket Z's funeral. Let them get a taste of what kind of society their doctrine will breed.
Posted by: Oyster at June 13, 2006 05:45 AM (YudAC)
The New Band of Brothers
The Weekly Standard published a fantastic article by Michael Fumento on troops in Ramadi. He has now placed a copy on his own website, with the addition of links, photos and videos. You need to read it all to get the in-the-action flavor of the piece. Here are a few excerpts:
Ten days before I arrived, during the night of April 9, 1st Battalion suffered its worst casualties of the deployment in a mini-"Black Hawk Down" situation. An IED flipped a Humvee, killing the driver from D Company. An M-1 Abrams tank went to retrieve it. For good reason, Corregidor has a large complement of tanks and other armored vehicles. Unfortunately, another IED made a lucky strike on the tank, cutting the fuel line and setting it ablaze. The men inside scrambled to safety, but now things got really messy...
So the troops set up a perimeter and waited. As with the real downing of the Black Hawks in Somalia, the burning tank attracted bad guys from throughout the city. They kept pouring into the area to kill the infidels. But with their night-vision equipment and laser pointers, Americans own the night. The enemy came in droves and they died in droves. "The insurgents were so desperate to gain momentum against us that they were literally running into the streets to plant IEDs right in front of us or throwing them over walls," says Claburn. "It was purely amazing." By the time the rounds had stopped flying and the tank was recovered, 30 jihadists were confirmed dead. Disaster had been averted. But the price in blood was high. Two more soldiers from Headquarters Company had died when another IED ripped their Humvee apart. Later the engineers whose job it was to detect and remove IEDs came into Col. Clark's office, apologizing with tears in their eyes. "I told them you tried; you did your best; but you can't get all of them all the time," Clark said....
Right place at the right time indeed. I look where I had been standing exposed to the windows. About where my head had been there's a large pock mark in the opposite wall. The bullet might have drilled me had I remained there; I can't say. Then I see the window. There's a nice clean hole just where my upper right side was – where my body armor has absolutely no protection, much less the new side ceramic plates everybody in 1st Battalion wears. This puts me in a pensive mood. No Killionesque whoops. But there's little time to contemplate my mortality before the order comes to "exfil" for real and start trekking back to the pickup point at a good trot. All quiet on the OP Hotel front. Or so I think. But now it's going to get really bad.
It is the single best article I have read on the war. Go read it!
1
How would the MSM report this? "IEDs exploded and tore apart 2 Humvees in the town of Ramadi. Two more American soldiers died in the ensuing firefight and 30 Iraqis were killed in the confusion. An unidentified Iraqi said some were women and children. This brings the total American deaths in the war to 2 thousand (and whatever). The insurgency is growing! WE'RE LOSING, WE'RE LOSING, WE'RE LOSING!"
Am I exaggerating? Well, a little.
Posted by: Oyster at June 12, 2006 09:06 AM (ULAbo)
2
It seems that the Army is moving in on the city. They cordoned it off!:
http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=ramadi11&date=20060611&query=ramadi
Posted by: Dan at June 12, 2006 09:44 AM (Z2OsI)
3
We hare being to nice. 300 should ever time a American HumVee is attacked.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 12, 2006 10:06 AM (fDZgg)
4
Wow, this is some good stuff. Would that more Americans could read stories just like these, but the trash covering the war, with a few notable exceptions such as Fumento, are just not up to the task. That, in itself, speaks volumes about our media.
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 12, 2006 10:28 AM (rUyw4)
5
Thanks for the posting of my web-based version. I hope to insert more streaming video into it tonight. As to the "cordoning off" of Ramadi, it's true that for some reason no more embeds are being allowed into the city. Something appears to be up. That said, it would take a massive amount of troops to try a repeat of Fallujah. 1,500 isn't enough. It could be a major "search-and-destroy," but it won't be a "grab-and-hold."
Posted by: Michael Fumento at June 12, 2006 10:55 AM (aOJuO)
6
Thank you, Michael, for great wartime reporting along the lines of Ernie Pyle and other great reporters who followed our troops into WWII. It's a damn shame that so few are actually reporting from the front. Nonetheless, that doesn't take anything away from people like you and Yon and a few others. A job well done, Michael Fumento!
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 12, 2006 12:18 PM (rUyw4)
7
Here's another great piece on the war, by the well known liberal John Derbyshire, at the commie National Review. Some conservatives are capable of admitting error. The whole piece is worth reading:
We are not controlling events in Iraq. Events in Iraq are controlling us. We are the puppet; the street gangs of Baghdad and Basra are the puppet-masters, aided and abetted by an unsavory assortment of confidence men, bazaar traders, scheming clerics, ethnic front men, and Iranian agents. With all our wealth and power and idealism, we have submitted to become the plaything of a rabble, and a Middle Eastern rabble at that. Instead of rubbling, we have ourselves been rabbled. The lazy-minded evangelico-romanticism of George W. Bush, the bureaucratic will to power of Donald Rumsfeld, the avuncular condescension of Dick Cheney, and the reflexive military deference of Colin Powell combined to get us into a situation we never wanted to be in, a situation no self-respecting nation ought to be in, a situation we don’t know how to get out of. It’s not inconceivable that, with a run of sheer good luck, we might yet escape without too much egg on our faces, but it’s not likely. The place we are at is surely not a place anyone in 2003 wanted us to be at—not even Vic Davis Hanson.
Since the Iraq war was obviously a gross blunder, is it time for those of us who cheered on the war to offer some kind of apology? Here we are—we, the United States—in our fourth year of occupying that sinkhole, and it looks pretty much like the third year, or the second. Will the eighth year of our occupation, or our twelfth, look any better? I know people who will say yes, but I no longer know any who will say it with real conviction. It’s a tough thing, to admit you were wrong. It’s way tough if you’re a big-name pundit with a reputation to preserve. For those of us down at the bottom of the pundit pecking order, the stakes aren’t so high. I, at any rate, am willing to eat some crow and say: I wish I had never given any support to this fool war.
Posted by: jd at June 12, 2006 05:32 PM (aqTJB)
8
jd, WTF prompted you to insert this piece of bull into this thread? It's totally off topic. Let's talk about our soldiers. Crap, is there nothing sacred to you? Insert that garbage into another thread that covers our entry into the war. There are only about 10 million of those at any given time on the internet. Crap!
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 12, 2006 07:56 PM (rUyw4)
9
So jd, since someone may not agree with you, it means they're incapable of admitting error? And Derbyshire's "opinion" had no place in this thread as JJ stated. Unless he's reporting from Iraq on actual events, it has no place here and continues to be "opinion".
As many people here have openly and readily admitted that many errors have been made, you don't consider them honest unless they join your ranks in wanting to throw the baby out with the bath water. Allow me to predict your response, as you've reiterated it so many times: "The majority of Americans are now against the war." So what? You're part of that majority. I'm happy you have friends. Good day.
Posted by: Oyster at June 13, 2006 06:10 AM (YudAC)
10
I think if you look at comments here, many people have posted stuff that is not directly related. I certainly didn't intend to denigrate our troops. The troops succeeded; the president has failed. We needed a leadership equal to the valor and sacrifice of our fighting men and women. Unfortunately, Bush, Cheney, and Rummy aren't fit to be mentioned in the same sentence as our fighting heroes in Iraq and Afghanistan. Their incompetence, bluster, and meretricious partisanship in the war on terror has made a mockery of their oaths of office.
New Nukes for Ontario
The environmentalists and the not-in-my-back-yard liberals will surely protest this news. I'd suggest that the citizens of Ontario have left themselves with few options. Alternative energy sources won't come close to providing the anticipated 12,000+ megawatts of continuous capacity needed to meet demand over the next 20 years. It's either nuke plants or turn off the lights.
The provincial government will announce tomorrow that Ontario is embracing more nuclear power plants, sources told the Toronto Star.
Premier Dalton McGuinty has privately spoken of his government's plans to confidants for days, insiders say.
In an off-the-record speech on Saturday night in Ottawa to the secretive Bilderberg group, McGuinty discussed the pros and cons of more nuclear plants.
While he did not divulge the government's plans to that audience of 160 business and political leaders, the premier privately admitted the public will officially learn of the plans tomorrow when his government announces its long-awaited response to the Ontario Power Authority's report on the province's energy supply mix.
The Sierra Club and Greenpeace have already weighed in with their disapproval. Nevertheless, it appears that $40 billion worth of new and refurbished nuclear generating capacity is now on the table as the primary focus of the Ontario Power Authority's next 20 years.
3
Tell the antinuke granola munchers to go ride the bicycles clear across the atlantic ocean and stop boing so dumb
Posted by: sandpiper at June 12, 2006 01:41 PM (kexrr)
4
greyrooster you make as much sense as Prez Bush without a teleprompt. sure its cleaner, as long as you have some place to put the waste.
you'd be surprised to see how many non-granola intellegent people are against the idea. at the end of the day I like my room colder and my air cleaner. too bad i can't have both
Posted by: hillbilly-bob at June 12, 2006 03:32 PM (fANv+)
Haditha, The Gatekeepers and The Groundshift
Cross-posted at Mein Blogovault
Much (not all) of what is contained in this post has been stated or articulated elsewhere in the blogosphere, so please forgive and indulge me for the sake of reflection on this important issue.
In its apparent zeal and fervor, the mainstream press may have shot itself in both legs with the outlandish and one-sided Haditha coverage over the past few weeks. It is certainly now evident that there have been glaring and troubling inconsistencies from the “eyewitnesses” to these alleged incidents. It is also evident that the “sources” for the TIME story were presented in a catastrophically misleading way. These corrections, backtracks, misleading statements, scrubbings, retractions and inaccuracies are now (thanks to the fact-checkers residing in the new media – the readers) surfacing on a daily basis. The mainstream press, it figures, can merely outrun the new media with their nightly news megaphone and printing presses; assuming quite correctly that irreparable damage to our image and our military has been done simply by printing allegations, misleading suggestions and hysterical “eyewitness accounts” from nameless, faceless sources who are turning out to be not-so-nameless, faceless or agenda-less.
There have also been rumblings in the blogosphere about the potential for this story to become a bigger referendum and embarrassment for the “old media” then the Dan Rather Memogate scandal. There has undoubtedly been a recent emerging of hasty and sloppy media coverage when it comes to certain incidents both tangentially and directly involving our war on worldwide Islamic terrorism (especially when it comes to the conduct and effectiveness of our military), but no proportional cynicism or distrust of the “sources” from which stories like Haditha emerge. Herein lies the root of the problem – the enemy gets the benefit of the doubt, and the military (by proxy, the US) gets smeared.
A few recent examples of this emerging pattern are in order. Newsweek published a completely bogus story of our troops in Gitmo flushing Korans down the toilet; the facts revealed that precisely the opposite was occurring on a daily basis. We often hear about how the military is broken and strained, and yet, we have stories indicating that the Army and other armed forces are meeting their recruiting goals. We have hyperventilating coverage of “alleged massacres” that come from hard-line Sunni insurgents bent on driving the US out of Iraq so that they can resume what they do best – slaughtering innocents. We have the incident at Ishaqi – released (intentionally released at the time this supposed story was breaking) to enhance the “pile-on” effect. Unfortunately for the anti-war left, that “massacre” turned out to be nothing of the sort, complete with acquittals. This is a partial and incomplete list, but there is an undeniable pattern of incompetence and gun-jumping now established.
Just what is it, then, that causes or allows for this hysterical and shoddy press coverage of the war? For one thing, it could be that the general political leanings of many in the media business fall on the left-of-center side of the aisle, and that these media have already “dug in” (starting after 2000) against the actions of the Bush Administration regardless of facts and reality. It could also be that the formative experiences (1960’s drug-addled hysteria, unmediated leftism and Viet Nam) of many of these media progenitors (think Pinchy, Bill Keller, Mary Mapes, Dan Rather, Eason Jordan, etc.) are disproportionately influencing their perspectives on modern events. It could very well be that the left’s go-to 40 year old narrative of “US bad, Military = baby killers, Vote Democrat or else" is deteriorating at a rapid rate. This rapid erosion of mainstream television and print media power and influence is causing the retaliatory emergence of tabloid-like sensationalism and “gotcha” journalism, sort of like how a fish desperately flails for dissolved oxygen on dry land. This is perhaps a predictable response from those who feel that their “integrity” and their “professionalism” is being challenged unfairly. As this current Haditha story is indicating, those criticisms are perfectly valid and are evidently getting under the skin of certain publications known by their “credibility.”
Whatever the collective and aggregate socio-psychological reasons that elicit such childish and knee-jerk reactions from members of the press on all matters military, it is almost irrelevant. For the most part, I’m willing to bet that the majority of members of the old media know that the ground is shifting as it did when they assumed power in the 1970’s. There is an entire world of information literally at the fingertips of anyone willing to look for it, and this is a terrifying prospect to media organs whose primary function is to act as what David Manning White termed the “gatekeepers” of information. Being the gatekeeper of information bestows upon said gatekeeper an inordinate amount of influence of power – for whatever reason you choose, you get to decide who talks about what, how much of it they can talk about, when they can talk about it , in what context, etc. These gatekeepers (reporters and editors, sometimes management and ownership) don’t necessarily tell the audience what to think (although this is debatable in many circumstances when linguistic biases within media writing are exposed), but the gatekeeper is essential in telling the audience what to think about. A recent Pew Institute reportsuggested that the Internet is now the most adhered-to source of information and news – surpassing long-time stalwarts like print and television.
To those who have built virtual empires on the commercial viability of television news and printed news, this is a potentially terrifying prospect. In response, the old media fires back with the only weapons in its arsenal that it knows how to use – their legacy influence over an unsuspecting audience and their ubiquitous “coverage” that permeates nearly every home and workplace in the country. It is during this loosely-coordinated counter-attack that the new media asserts its importance and relevance. For your convenience, I have assembled a representative roundup of counter-MSM Haditha coverage. Hopefully, this provides and continues to validate how the new media performs the editorial functions that those “gatekeepers” in the old media are either don’t perform or perform over-zealously at the expense of the entire story being laid out.
1
Great post. Remember the Greyrooster said it was all bullshit from the start. Same with the Duke Lacrosse team. Too many Tawana Brawley going around. WHY? Because the stupid childlike liberals wish to believe anything bad.
Liberals and leftards are sich shits who have been disturbing this great nation for far too long. They offer nothing on the good side of the ledger. Only lies, distortions because of their own self loathing. Pitiful little friendless shits.
Outlaw Islam.
Outlaw Leftards.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 12, 2006 07:17 AM (KM2nY)
2
I cancelled my local newspaper (a bullhorn for the AP) and no longer rely on the 3 networks for TV news. My information gathering comes, almost exclusively, from the internet. I find myself much more informed about world events than most in my circle of friends.
The old media is like the last mammouth, struggling through the snow in a vain attempt to find a mate.
Posted by: MCPO Airdale at June 12, 2006 07:53 AM (3nKvy)
3
So what is the opposite of troops flushing the Koran down the toilet?? - your words. Can't imagine the koran flushing troops down the toilet, more's the pity.
Posted by: kevin aylward at June 12, 2006 08:15 AM (e97lE)
4
Observe how Liberals will hang on by their nails to dream that Haditha must true, instead of hoping that maybe, just maybe it could be false. You see, when you want things to be true, you insist to your dying breath that it is true, and when you want it to be false, you dont. Libs won't give our boys even the slightest benefit of the doubt because they WANT to believe they're cold-blooded murderers.
But don't you fucking DARE question their patriotism, or call into their """"support"""" of the troops. Just remember, their "dissent" is """"patriotic."""""
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 12, 2006 08:19 AM (8e/V4)
5
"So what is the opposite of troops flushing the Koran down the toilet?? - your words. Can't imagine the koran flushing troops down the toilet, more's the pity"
Umm...How about the DETAINEES flushing, tearing and urinating on their own Korans that I and my fellow Americans paid for? Are you really that dense?
Posted by: Good Lt at June 12, 2006 08:21 AM (yT+NK)
6
Well, well, the Zarq bites the dust, Time Magazine stoops to a new low(how low can they go, you ask), the antique media shills for Islamists, and the Democrats do their best to undermine the troops. What looked like a complete disaster for the Republicans just a few weeks ago has now backfired.
I figured the Democraps were a shoo-in to take at least the House, but now Murtha and Kos, along with Polosi and a few others seem ready to hand the Republicans the House again. They just can't figure out that most Americans have more respect for the military than they have for politicians.
Now the only hope the Dems have to win elections is fraud. And be prepared for plenty of that, as most Dems who were convicted of fraud got away with a slap on the wrist. Look for millions of illegal aliens to vote, along with thousands of criminals and the dead. Should be interesting watching how it plays out.
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 12, 2006 08:36 AM (rUyw4)
7
The good guys planted Murtha there. Ha. Ha.
Didn't you know Cidny Sheehan really works for the GOP.
Ha! Winning is so easy when dealing with leftards.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 12, 2006 10:11 AM (fDZgg)
8
The Democraps next hero with be Willie Jefferson from the Chocolate city. He didn't do it. Ha, Ha. Here be comes the black caucus, the naacp, willie nagin, leftards, Al sharpton, The REV. (cheats on his wife Jackson) (aka buys the ho a house with contributions),those on welfare and the normal democrat group. He be insent. Youse white folks all lying trin to put de black man down.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 12, 2006 10:17 AM (fDZgg)
9
Excellent piece, Good Lieutenant. Now I'm off to read the links.
Posted by: Oyster at June 12, 2006 11:01 AM (ULAbo)
10
Thanks for the support, fellow Siths! More to come!
Posted by: Good Lt at June 12, 2006 11:12 AM (jWYAe)
11
Greyhawk had an excellent point in the Mudville Gazette link. Jonathan Karl did nothing more than to try to portray the original press release, as it stands, as an unwillingness by the military to correct the record. (incidentally, the military's correction won't be one square inch on the inside, bottom right corner of page 18 of a sixty page publication) But the investigation isn't over yet so exactly what does the media suppose they correct it with? The answer is: They don't care. They've already painted the picture with their perception by simply asking the question.
The military, unlike the media, is gathering facts on this issue - all of them - before correcting, recounting what happened and rendering a verdict. The media has already rendered their verdict.
Posted by: Oyster at June 12, 2006 12:02 PM (ULAbo)
Rot in Hell, Zarqawi
The Z-man was a beheader, murderer of innocents, and a pedophile:
The Jordanian security official told TIME that the bombing killed Abdul-Rahman and Mr. X, in addition to al-Zarqawi's 16-year-old wife.
Since his baby was 18 months old, that means he impregnated his wife when she was 13 or 14 years old. That is one more reason to hope he is burning in hell.
Posted by: actus at June 12, 2006 06:39 AM (nnhSu)
3
By now the Z man has found out that there is indeed one true God, but his name isn't Allah, and that, instead of being a martyr, he will be sent to eternal hell. Where he awaits his judgement, it's already worse for him than anything he ever did to anyone on earth. And by now he had also found out that,
THERE AIN'T NO VIRGINS THERE SUCKER.
Wake up, islam, before it's too late for the rest of you.
Posted by: n.a. palm at June 12, 2006 06:40 AM (2ePu9)
4
That's how they do things there. You can't judge or condemn. Only condemn how we do things here.
Posted by: AbbaGav at June 12, 2006 07:05 AM (5XR09)
5
What kind of hatefull little shit would the brat have grow up to be?
Posted by: greyrooster at June 12, 2006 07:19 AM (KM2nY)
Posted by: Jester at June 12, 2006 02:25 PM (TuAMG)
7
He is down there with HITLER,STALIN,MOA,KHOMENI,ATTILA,GINGAS KHAN,and a few of his followers complaning HEY YOU LIED TO US YOU SAID WE WERE GOING TO PARIDISE
Posted by: sandpiper at June 12, 2006 09:19 PM (FpZEl)
