From the Telegraph:

The parents of Charlotte Wyatt have been told that doctors are to be allowed to let their profoundly ill baby daughter die if they feel it is in her best interests.

A High Court judge yesterday lifted a previous ruling that she should always be resuscitated, on the grounds that the two-year-old was now on a "downward rather than an upward trend".

Mr Justice Hedley heard an emergency application from doctors treating her that she had developed an aggressive chest infection and was unlikely to survive any moves to keep her alive.

Via Stop the ACLU and Michelle Malkin.

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.

Posted by: Bluto at 12:07 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 143 words, total size 1 kb.

From the Guardian:

Ken Livingstone was today suspended from office for four weeks by a disciplinary tribunal for likening a Jewish Evening Standard reporter to a Nazi concentration camp guard.

While being recorded, the mayor asked him: "Were you a German war criminal?" On being told the reporter was Jewish, he added: "Ah, well, you might be but actually you are just like a concentration camp guard, you are just doing it because you are paid to, aren't you?"

"When John Profumo apparently slept with Christine Keeler and then committed the far more serious offence of lying to the House of Commons about it, he was compelled to resign, but no one could seriously think that that affected the reputation of the office of secretary of state for war. It reflected badly on John Profumo but not on his office.

"When David Blunkett was allegedly inappropriately involved in assisting an application for a work permit and he resigned, that could not be regarded by an informed observer as damaging the reputation and bringing into disrepute the office of home secretary."

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto .

Posted by: Bluto at 03:55 PM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 223 words, total size 2 kb.

Would that my powers of parody were such that I could create from my mind the discussion that follows. Alas! It is all true! Praise be to the Goddess Gaea that such sensitive young folk are poised to carry on for us.

From PETA2.com: more...

Posted by: Bluto at 10:46 AM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 711 words, total size 5 kb.

...As An Imbecile
I love it when certain Hollywood types fly into snits and babble witlessly in public:

So, I suppose the question is...what kind of civil trial will we see, or not see, between Cheney and Whittington? Whittington is certainly no stranger to a court room and to civil litigation. Will Cheney pay him off, preemptively? Will they go to court? I would imagine if a guy with a few beers in him shoots you in the face on a hunting trip, how could you turn down that opportunity?

Posted by: Bluto at 12:41 PM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 280 words, total size 2 kb.

Like all good autocracies, Libya doesn't want its citizens slaughtered openly.

Moammar: Nasr, how many times have we told you, put them in prison, then we kill them.

Nasr: My apologies, sir, it won't happen again.

Moammar: You're damned right it won't, you're getting the firing squad....er, you're fired!

pssst, check out how many times the word "peaceful" is used in the news article linked above.

Posted by: Vinnie at 11:42 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 74 words, total size 1 kb.

Stop the ACLU reports that the ACLU is leading another assault on the Boy Scouts, sponsoring a lawsuit by a lesbian couple to have the Scouts thrown out of a San Diego park:

One can readily assume how this will be ruled; we are talking about the 9th Circuit here. The ACLU want to force the BSA to welcome professing homosexuals and even to recruit gay Scout leaders. They’d also like to erase the mention of “duty to God”. The ACLU is waging more than just a battle; it is waging a campaign. Since 1981, it has participated in at least 14 cases against the Boy Scouts.

The ACLU's past championing of the child molestation advocacy group, the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), makes their continued fascination with the BSA, and inserting homosexuals into its leadership, appear all the more sinister.

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.

Posted by: Bluto at 01:16 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 198 words, total size 1 kb.

Having never forgiven the Boy Scouts of America for successfully resisting ACLU attempts to foist overtly homosexual Scout leaders on them (the Supreme Court ruled in 2000 that the Scouts could select their own leaders), the ACLU is now threatening Boy Scout charters with local governments. The ACLU feels that there is excessive mention of "God" and "reverence" among the Scouts, and that this violates the doctrine of separation of church and state. more...

Posted by: Bluto at 12:09 AM | Comments (16) | Add Comment
Post contains 372 words, total size 3 kb.

All of the appeasers, and at least a few of the agitators, in the comment section of this post at Samizdata (h/t: Wretchard) are missing the point. When the author refers to the editors of UK periodicals who refuse to publish the cartoons as "craven" he doesn't have in mind a matter of whether they're worried about "offending religious believers," because things have gone far beyond that. What he means is that these editors are so far behind the curve that they believe it's still a matter of giving or taking offense. They're craven because they fail to recognize that there's no legitimate moral or ethical ground standing between "I am Spartacus" and the illegitimacy of "discretion is the better part of valor." With one possible exception, discretion is cowardice and foolishness.

That exception? There's something largely missing from this debate, because there would seem some ground upon which principled Muslims might have stood. They could have made the argument that the Danish cartoons could not have depicted The Prophet, regardless of the intent, but must have been of a False Prophet honored by Al Qaeda and the Salafists. What does it mean that most of the Ummah assumes Al Qaeda honors Muhammed? Are there any Muslims with the view that the controversy is over a False Prophet and a false Islam? Maybe the few who take this position need an amplifier to be heard over the "street din?" Come to think of it, giving those Muslims a larger voice might still be the better part of valor.

(Cross-posted to Demosophia and The Jawa Report)

Posted by: Demosophist at 09:18 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 271 words, total size 2 kb.

Stop the ACLU and Patriotic Mom post about protestors disrupting the funerals of Iraq War vets, and the extremes that their families have been driven to just to bury their loved ones with dignity.

more...

Posted by: Bluto at 08:51 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 353 words, total size 3 kb.

From the Associated Press:

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., predicted on Sunday that an effort to try to block a final vote on Alito would fail on Monday. That would clear the way for Senate approval Tuesday of the federal appeals court judge picked to succeed the retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

"We need to recognize, because Judge Alito will be confirmed, that, if we're going to oppose a nominee that we've got to persuade the American people that, in fact, their values are at stake," Obama said.

"There is an over-reliance on the part of Democrats for procedural maneuvers," he told ABC's "This Week."

"I think a filibuster makes sense when you have a prospect of actually succeeding," Biden said on CNN's "Late Edition." "I will vote one time to say to continue the debate. but the truth of the matter" is that Alito will be confirmed, he said.

Answer: the Democrats have veered so far to the Left that they have to pander to the tantrums of these nutcases.

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.

Posted by: Bluto at 03:47 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 228 words, total size 2 kb.

From the Associated Press:

An Italian judge heard arguments Friday on whether a small-town parish priest should stand trial for asserting that Jesus Christ existed.

The priest's atheist accuser, Luigi Cascioli, says the Roman Catholic Church has been deceiving people for 2,000 years with a fable that Christ existed, and that the Rev. Enrico Righi violated two Italian laws by reasserting the claim.

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.

Posted by: Bluto at 10:37 AM | Comments (26) | Add Comment
Post contains 111 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Tell this Italian Cockbag (hey Filthy, nice word) to bring it on. WeÂ’ll send his ass to hell along with Tom Hanks.

Posted by: Brad at January 27, 2006 11:00 AM (Ffvoi)

2 Why is Tom going to hell?

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 27, 2006 01:04 PM (0yYS2)

3 Counter sue the commie and make him prove Jesus didn't exist.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 27, 2006 01:27 PM (FBm0F)

4 He stars in the DaVinchi Code movie. ItÂ’s going to lead a lot of people in the wrong direction. I donÂ’t know where Tom will end up, but I would have walked away from this one. I think itÂ’s true that some people will sell their soul for fame. IÂ’ve enjoyed most of the movies by Ron Howard and Hanks. Apollo 13 is one of my all time favorites. I was disappointed to hear both were behind this load of crap.

Posted by: Brad at January 27, 2006 01:33 PM (3OPZt)

5 Brad, did you ever read the DaVinci Code? I'm a Christian myself and enjoyed the book very much. I can't wait for the movie... On the topic at hand, however, this is kind of like life imitating art. I see a big courtroom drama a la "Miracle on 34th Street" happening. Heh. I guess "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't play well in Europeville.

Posted by: Vonski at January 27, 2006 01:54 PM (Srmrz)

6 Vonski, No I have not read the book. I have read and listened to a few knowledgeable Priests and Catholic apologists critique it. I do not believe Jesus had a sexual relationship with Mary Magdalene. I donÂ’t think people who write books or make movies that portray this are going to fair well in the end.

Posted by: Brad at January 27, 2006 02:11 PM (3OPZt)

7 Vonski I see a big courtroom drama a la "Miracle on 34th Street" happening. Heh. I guess "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't play well in Europeville. OK, all you boys and girls, let's get out the pen and paper and start writing letters to Jesus, ICO: the Vatican . Then make them prove the Italian Post Office isn't an official agency of Italy .

Posted by: mamapajamas at January 27, 2006 02:16 PM (YmdvN)

8 Ironic (to me at least) that not only Christians, obviously, believe Jesus existed but so do many Jews and Muslims, generally speaking. I also am a Christian but speaking strictly from a historical point of view, I thought it was pretty much common knowledge even among historians who are atheists, that Jesus did exist. They may disagree on His importance in the grand scheme of things but I'm not aware of many who deny the He existed. I doubt this guy is going after the clerics at the mosque. *** Spoiler Alert on the Da Vinci Code *** Vonski, I read the Da Vinci code and many are offended because Dan Brown is passing this off as being a fairly accurate historical account of the children of Jesus and Mary Magdalene and the secret organization that 'protects the bloodline'. It is obvious to most that Brown had his plot already decided and then took a bunch of unsubstantiated material on Da Vinci and drew lines to connect the pieces of the story he wanted to tell. Everywhere the story needs to make a serious leap of faith, it is explained away as 'well Da Vinci didn't have the freedom to say what he knew to be factual from being leader of this secret organization so he left us clues in his paintings.' Then he expects the reader to make other leaps of faith on presumed hidden meanings behind Da Vinci's 'The Last Supper' by referring to a specific part of the painting and saying 'this means ...'. On one TV show, he made reference to the letter 'V' that Jesus and the person to his right form in the painting and then expects you to believe his conclusion based on a made-up premise. Sorry, I can't remember the conclusion based on the 'V' or I would so so. I can't say I was offended by the book ascerting that Jesus had children but I was a bit offended as him passing it off as being historically accurate after making a series of leaps-of-faith that sound good when written in a fictional story. I am a Christian who understands the Bible was written by many different people over many years and has gone through many translations that could allow some detail to be lost but it seems to be a reach when no account (Matthew, Mark, Luke, ...) of Jesus' teachings and his adult life have mentioned a wife. Mary Magdalene is generally seen by scholars as another one of his closest disciples but probably not mentioned as such due to 'a woman's place' being subserviant. I have heard many priests who say they don't believe the story is true but that it's certainly not impossible. Sure, a lot of people are going to see it as 'the work of Satan' but most of us just have a problem with Brown because he's passing his story off as being based on truth when all of his 'proof' requires you to believe in the dots he has conveniently connected for us. Yes, it is a work of fiction but Brown has been on many television shows explaining why the book is based on events that are historically accurate. If he were to admit that he made it all up, there wouldn't be as much controversy and, therefore, fewer sales. It has definitely made him a very rich man.

Posted by: slug at January 27, 2006 03:07 PM (wcNc2)

9 I would like to believe the "V" stood for Vonski, but I doubt it. Surely anyone with a firm foundation in Christianity would recognize the work as a fiction. And, there is no denying that people do believe that Christ and Mary Magdalene bore children, in spite of the fact that there is no evidence to support this claim. I agree that Brown stretches things to the point of breaking, but I was able to take it with a grain of salt and see it as entertainment versus letting it challenge my faith. In regards to my initial response to Brad, I would hope that we would not wish to condemn someone to hell for reciting lines in front of a movie camera. That was a bit excessive. Rather, even in spite of the glaring discrepancies, I hope that some good comes of the picture. There might be some that come away convinced that they should research this Jesus fellow a bit more. I suggest starting with the Bible, New Testament, book of Matthew

Posted by: Vonski at January 27, 2006 03:22 PM (Srmrz)

10 Of course none of this would matter if Christitanity were really based on the teaching of Christ the teacher rather than a cult based on the alleged divinity of Christ as the Son-O-God. Neither Christ nor Buddha, (both appelations, not names, by the way), wanted to have a cult of personality founded on them, but rather wanted only to spread enlightenment throughtout the world. Both failed and succeeded to varying extents, but no matter what, islam takes the prize as the greatest ideological blight to ever befall humanity.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 27, 2006 03:49 PM (0yYS2)

11 Another thing; modern Christianity is derived directly from the Council of Nicea, which was basically nothing more than an instument that allowed the emperor Constantine to unify all Christianity in one official church, under his control, of course, and thus consolidate power through his direct appointment and control of the various bishops. Any sects or teachings which did not contribute directly to such consolidation and control were deemed heretical, and the followers were marginalized and persecuted throughout the empire. In effect, the same people who murdered Jesus took control of the various religions established in his name, and put it to work for their own purposes. As I've said before, Christinity inc. has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus, but everything to do with power, control, and money. To find the true Jesus, one must first abandon Christianity.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 27, 2006 03:58 PM (0yYS2)

12 Ok Vonski, I can't condemn anyone to hell and really would not want to anyway. I was a little carried away. Shit Maximus, every time I think IÂ’m not being a good enough Christian I read one of your rants and damn if I donÂ’t think IÂ’m actually going to make it. You make me feel so holy. Vonski, I guess we disagree about the seriousness of Hanks making this movie. I would not do it for all the money in the world. Even if you say youÂ’re sorry; there it is for the entire world to see 20 years later. To me, itÂ’s a lot. Finally, IÂ’m going back through the posts and trying to find the thing that set poor young George off and made him snap. Can someone direct me to the thread? It has to be pretty good.

Posted by: Brad at January 27, 2006 04:13 PM (3OPZt)

13 Does anyone else get the impression that IM was abused by a priest as an altar boy? Please do not confuse the 'pastors' on TBN and abortion clinic bombers as being ambassadors of the true Christian religion. Constantine's attempt to catholicize all of the sects failed if you haven't noticed (we call this failure "denominations" hehe). And, Jesus did not deny His godhood (and therefore the "good news" that He died for our sins, so no further sacrifice was necessary) in any respect so I don't know where you got that idea. But, that isn't really what this blog post is about. If we are merely talking about whether or not someone should have to go to court to prove that Jesus existed, there is ample historical evidence of this. I don't think the comments section is the appropriate place for a lengthy discussion as to veracity of the claims that Jesus is God and who is true followers are and what exactly they believe.

Posted by: Vonski at January 27, 2006 04:26 PM (Srmrz)

14 Frankly, I don't know of any passage in the bible that says thou shalt not say Jesus had a girlfriend. And if I were a Christian I would be more concerned about whether Hanks was "saved" than what role he might play in a ficticious story. Afterall, if he was a Christian wouldn't he already be forgiven for playing the role? What's most interesting about it is that I haven't heard any Christians threaten to kill anyone over it or blow up a bus.

Posted by: Oyster at January 27, 2006 04:28 PM (YudAC)

15 IM, Agreeing with your basic premise of church + absolute power = corruption, I definitely have to disagree with your assertion that Christ's message was separate from himself. There is no way you can read the book of John and not walk away with the doctrine that Jesus is God. Even acknowledging him as the "Christ" is attributing character beyond that of any human. Christianity (not the religion, mind you) is still first and foremost about the salvation accomplished by Christ (literally, the Saviour). The cults can usually be easily identified on this one point alone.

Posted by: Henry at January 27, 2006 04:37 PM (CNngs)

16 True, Oyster, but I am going to give Tom Hanks a noogie next time I see him. I'll bet he will stop with the anti-Christian movies after he hears about this threat. Haha!

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 27, 2006 04:39 PM (rUyw4)

17 Vonski, it sounds like we are in agreement. Like I said (or at least meant), the religious statement wasn't my issue with the book because I did recognize it as a work of fiction. My only issue is the continual sermonizing by the author on every liberal media outlet to try and make people believe this a story based on fact. IM, I may not agree with the philosphical part of your argument but you're at least a man of strong conviction and it sounds like you know your history.

Posted by: slug at January 27, 2006 04:45 PM (wcNc2)

18 First to Brad: If you're feeling holy, then you're standing at the gates of hell, metaphorically speaking. There's no righteousness like self-righteousness. Next, to Vonski: No, I wasn't an altar boy, nor was I even Catholic, for which I am grateful, considering the odds, but it is telling that you resort immediately to personal slurs rather than attempt to engage in enlightened discourse. Unfortunately, this is not atypical behavior of most Christians with whom I debate. If you're afraid I'm too smart for you to take head on, then don't try a sneak attack, because I'm too smart for that too, and you'll get busted, like you just did. My kung fu is stronger than your kung fu. What happened to me was that I learned to think for myself, which put me forever in opposition to any and all dogma and doctrines that pretend to the truth, whether in the form of an ancient text or some televangelic fraud selling redemption and family vacations at Jesusland USA in one package for only twelve easy payments. Don't take this personally, but if you believe that any person can find the truth for you better than you can find it for yourself, then I've got a bridge I'm looking to sell... As for Jesus not denying his godhood, (we call it divinity, hehe), the Council of Nicea, along with deciding whether Christ was human, divine, or both, was also tasked to assemble the various gospels and other texts into the Bible, and Eusebius was a fairly thorough editor, changing, deleting, and adding as he saw fit, and even saying that falsehoods, if they served the cause, were perfectly acceptable. Even Pope Leo X said "it has served us well, this myth of Christ". The Bible exists in the form it does because Eusebius wanted it that way, and all other conflicting gospels he ordered burned, as was also threatened to the newly-denounced heretics, but many survived, though most are even more preposterous than the ones that were kept. And now, to Henry: Read the previous paragraph then continue. The word Christ doesn't mean savior, it means anointed, and may be etymologically related to the word for golden, chrysos.This is an academic argument and I have to take the dog for a walk, so it'll have to wait for another time, but I will be glad to continue at a later time. As to the word Christ, I use it not because I wish to acknowledge his divinity, but because if I called him Ye-sh-ua bin Yu-suf, (damned filter),nobody would know who I was talking about. The salvation that Jesus offered did not then, nor does it now, require membership, twelve easy payments, nor the abandonment of reality, but it does require letting go of all sin, along with the willingness to forgive yourself and others for being human, though not to the point of absurdity. And absurdity is something in which Christianity inc. is well practiced. Finally, to slug: Thanks, and you bet I know what I'm talking about, otherwise I'd keep my trap closed.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 27, 2006 10:40 PM (0yYS2)

19 Pope Leo X never said that except in a satire by a British anti-Papist named John Bale. The work was titled, Pageant of the Popes. Show me where he said it in an encyclical and I will entertain the notion. Until then, the quote is non-existant as a historical matter.

Posted by: J Rob at January 28, 2006 04:03 AM (tYi+A)

20 Well Rob, it looks like you were right. I had never researched that quote on the internet, and now I know better. Thanks. See? I'm honest in my dealings, because the truth is all that matters to me, and I will readily lay aside anything other. Can the same be said for my antagonists?

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 28, 2006 09:50 AM (0yYS2)

21 That's the thing about IM. He's an atheist, but he's an honest atheist and he doesn't have an axe to grind. I can live with atheists like that. Our country is big enough for the both of us. Unlike the anti-christian Leftards who should all be packed into shipping crates and handed over to IM to dispose of as he sees fit.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 28, 2006 11:45 AM (XA7De)

22 JC, Maxie ain't got that much free time on his hands, even if he is semi-retired. Haha!

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 28, 2006 01:16 PM (rUyw4)

23 Oh I've got time on my hands if I want it, I just don't want to waste my time tilting at windmills. Besides, my differences with Christianity are generally philosophical and ethical in nature, i.e., purely academic, and what I want is not to see Christianity destroyed, but reformed once again and taken out of the gigantic, palatial temples of wealth where it's broadcast live on national television and sold in vacation packages for just twelve easy payments, and put back into the hearts of people. I'd rather the the Christianity the Jesus taught, not that which was given by the Pope's armies at the threat of fire and sword. Christians have always contributed to the greatness of America, and it wouldn't be half a nice a place to live if not for Christianity. Anyone who thinks different should live in a muslim or communist country for a while, or one of the post-Christian secular European hellholes where morality is about as fashionable as steam driven locomotives and sailing ships. This, however, does not excuse the excesses committed and excused by many in the name of Christianity, and everyone knows what I'm talking about, so I won't go on about pedophile priests or televangelical frauds. Anyway, I'm not against Christians or Christianity, but I am against hypocrisy, and well never, ever, let hypocrites get by without notice.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 29, 2006 10:08 AM (0yYS2)

24 Which goes to show that there is a vast difference between being athiest and being anti-religion or anti-Christian.

Posted by: Oyster at January 29, 2006 02:28 PM (YudAC)

25 >>>Which goes to show that there is a vast difference between being athiest and being anti-religion or anti-Christian. True dat.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 29, 2006 03:21 PM (8e/V4)

26 That italian atheiist jackass needs to get a bolt of lightning in his rear just like the atheist jackass MICHEAL NEWDOW who is trying to force the who nation to abide by his wishes they both nned a bolt of lightning in their rear ends

Posted by: sandpiper at January 30, 2006 09:49 AM (A2P9P)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Apparently Raymond Flowers, one of John Hawkins' readers, has noticed a pattern that might explain the "nose drama" phenomenon I posted about a few weeks ago. It hadn't occurred to me that it might be evidence of yet another dark Bush conspiracy, but the RWN reader doesn't seem to be aware of the use of the "nasals" in older Americans. Heh.

Has anyone noticed the use by George W. Bush and Jeb Bush and the republican party of nasal control implants in children as their family continues to re-entrench itself from World War II where it used the control technology on the German population running the yes sir Nathan Hales of the Hitler youth.

They use stories to continuously bombard students creating day dreams producing what is commonly called attention deficit disorder in addition to hyper activity and they even produced dyslexia using the nasals to get the visual from the optic nerve and a Hewlett-Cray-Motorola computer did a dictionary look up for the current pattern which was regenerated weekly in some locations and is the reason that words written very poorly didn't jumble as the primitive software couldn't figure out what the word was and either left it alone or broke connections between letters to re-arrange what looked like components between humps or risers on the letters.

Well, that sure explains why Mary Baker Eddy is barking at me in Louis Farrakhan's voice. It's a software glitch!

(Cross-posted to Demosophia)

Posted by: Demosophist at 04:54 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 247 words, total size 2 kb.

Congress, in its infinite wisdom(cough choke gasp), has passed a law and the president has signed it making it against federal law to annoy people over the internet anonymously. Holy cow that means everything on the internet is now against the law! Also it has special consequences here at the Jawa. I guess Rusty must have the other Co-Bloggers post all that “annoy a terrorist” stuff? It also means that 99% of our comments are now “unlawful”. Don’t forget to email your congressman and the President. Just be slightly more than bothersome, slightly less than annoying and yourself. Whatever the hell that means.

News.com :In each of those three cases, someone's probably going to be annoyed. That's enough to make the action a crime. (The Justice Department won't file charges in every case, of course, but trusting prosecutorial discretion is hardly reassuring.)

Does this mean posts like this or that or here or there or maybe this one are now unlawful?

The article tries to blame Republicans (Sen. Arlen Specter for one) but I also see Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose), and Jerrold Nadler are sponsors as well. This garbage was attached to a “violence against women” bill. Just another reason why I support the idea that a bill should be about what the bill is about. Too often pork and crap like this is put with critical bills because they can’t stand alone. It’s time to put a stop to that and also if a judge doesn’t strike this down PDQ I’ll be surprised.

Hope I didnÂ’t annoy anyone. Oh well WTF IÂ’m me, so screw you hippie!

Also see Ace of Spades HQ.

Posted by: Howie at 12:12 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 278 words, total size 2 kb.

So a commenter sends this in from the trenches:

Pat Robertson thinks God struck Sharon for not keeping the territory intact.

Um...no. He thinks the Bible says that God will strike any Israeli PM that gives land for peace. A twisted interpretation to be sure, but not the same thing. Nice try at moral equivalence, though, given the post it was left on.

Palestinians are just as thankful about Sharon's condition as the Israelis were about Arafat's condition.

Once again, no. You see, the people who were thankful about Arafat's condition thought that maybe, just maybe, it might increase their chance of surviving a simple bus ride to the supermarket. The people thankful about Sharon's condition think that maybe, just maybe, it will increase a suicide bomber's chance at blowing up a bus on it's way to the supermarket.

Perhaps it's just human nature to hate your enemy so much that you rejoice when tragedy strikes.

Gee, thanks, now I have angst. I promise from now on to light a candle on the anniversary of their deaths in honor of the following:

Caligula

Mohammed

Vlad Tepes

Edward the Longshanks

King George III

Vladimir Lenin

Josef Stalin

Adolf Hitler

Chairman Mao

Pol Pot

Ho Chi Minh

Kim Il Sung*

And I promise to wear a black armband in honor of my sorrow when Osama is found with a .50 cal round in the skull, Saddam is swinging from the gallows, and Kim Jong Il's shadow is found on the irradiated remains of his presidential palace.

Because I see the light now. All men are not created equal. All men are created evil.

Pat Robertson's goofy Bible interpretation, well, that's no different than that PFLP joker's exhortations. The fact that Pat Robertson's followers aren't detonating themselves in a crowd of civilians is irrelevant.

As for the Israelis, how dare they show their hate by allowing their enemies, Arab Muslims, full citizenship, including voting rights, and seats in the Knesset. They're no different than the Palestinians, who allow no Jew to hold office, and routinely kill the members of rival factions.

Thank you, Dale the commenter, for showing me the shining light of the gray areas. more...

Posted by: Vinnie at 10:41 PM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 380 words, total size 2 kb.

Scheming with Saddam and skimming profits from the oil-for-food program was bad enough. According to the Guardian (admittedly not the most reliable source) the mad mullahs of Iran have been shopping in Europe for nuclear missile parts...and finding sellers.

From the Guardian:

The Iranian government has been successfully scouring Europe for the sophisticated equipment needed to develop a nuclear bomb, according to the latest western intelligence assessment of the country's weapons programmes.
Scientists in Tehran are also shopping for parts for a ballistic missile capable of reaching Europe, with "import requests and acquisitions ... registered almost daily", the report seen by the Guardian concludes.

Posted by: Bluto at 01:56 AM | Comments (28) | Add Comment
Post contains 124 words, total size 1 kb.

I snore pretty loudly, or so others tell me. I've never heard it, myself. However sometimes, just as I'm falling asleep my nasal passages emit sounds like a poorly tuned reed instrument leaving me the impression, in my half-dream stupor, that there's a crowd cheering close by, or that some poor soul next door is screaming his bloody head off in agony. I usually awake with a start. I think the muscles that generally hold those passages open, relax just enough to turn the whole nasal chamber into a sound synthesizer that hits my half-conscious mind with windy reverberations it interprets as shrieks, howls and shouts. Once I even heard elephants charging and several times Mary Baker Eddy yelled at me to turn off the damn TV, which I often leave on because the sound is off anyway.

How do I know it's Mrs. Eddy? Well, she has a voice like Louis Farrakhan's. It's the result of being dead for nearly a century coupled with the self imposed moral burden of having stolen many of her spiritual notions from the Freemasons, without attribution. So, she thinks it's her job to keep me on the narrow regarding my exploitation of major electrical appliances. Or it could just be my deep-seated religious guilt, a legacy of childhood.

Come to think of it I don't recall ever hearing this nasal racket before I turned 50, so it could be something God designed into us for its entertainment value, just to break up the monotony as things get really tedious in the autumn of life. Well, that's my theory. It could also be adenoids, I guess.

Update: Or Bush-family-supported nasal implants.

(Cross-posted to Demosophia)

Posted by: Demosophist at 03:07 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 292 words, total size 2 kb.

Indication #1: 50 Cent plays a bat mitzvah

Indication #2: Celebration of absolutely dreadful writing

Indication #3: Sen. Kerry still sees himself as an important voice for policy matters (ha, the joke's on him though... he was never important)

Indication #4: Rusty gives me the key to this place. Certainly some will recognize me, as I have been around here since the beginning. My comments usually make no sense and involve the International Jewish Banking Conspiracy in some way, or are latent with extreme hostility.

In order to prevent the fall of the west, I will do the one thing I know how. I will rant with furious anger, babble with furious anger, and bring this blog back to it's core and true foundation -- ethnic slurs and Star Wars. Expect lots of both. You have been warned.

Wine-aholic

UPDATE: Rusty reminds me that I should always make room for "religious slurs" as well as ethnic ones. Tally-ho, sir. I couldn't agree more.

Posted by: wineaholic at 03:43 PM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 175 words, total size 1 kb.