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

April 03, 2006

Saudi King Abdullah Speaks Against Al-Qaeda.

He vows to wipe them out, annihilate them and other positive steps. He vows to wipe them out, annihilate them and other positive steps.

The Peninsula Qatar : Â“We renew our pledge to annihilate the deviant group of the terrorist killers,Â” he said using a term that refers to Al Qaeda network in Saudi Arabia. He also vowed to Â“combat the ideology of those who accuse others of infidelity,Â” as he addressed the Shura (consultative) Council at the beginning of its term.
There is no place for extremism in the land of the two (Muslim) holy sitesÂ” of Makkah and Madinah, he added. He said that his countryÂ’s development Â“cannot be achieved unless there is an atmosphere of security and peace.Â”
King Abdullah vowed gradual reform to bring the kingdom closer to the rest of the world without violating the principles of Islam.
Â“We canÂ’t remain rigid and the world around us is changing,Â” he said. King Abdullah said the envisaged reforms, which would be debated through a state-sponsored national dialogue would seek to Â“meet the desires of society and be in harmony with ShariahÂ”. The kingdom will also continue liberalising its economy, fighting graft and poverty and improving public governance, King Abdullah added.

Capitol Idea if I do say so King Abdullah. Now how about freedom of worship in the kingdom?

Posted by: Howie at 07:54 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 232 words, total size 2 kb.

Death in my life

A good friend died over the weekend. I am involved in making the final arrangements. I will be back next week.

Posted by: Rusty at 07:10 AM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 29 words, total size 1 kb.

April 02, 2006

Iran Test Fires High-Speed Torpedo

Fox News was showing video earlier today of the "new" Iranian Hut high-speed torpedo, which travels in excess of 220 miles per hour underwater, and is said to be undetectable by sonar. It seems likely that it could, however, be heard by passive means from some distance underwater.

From Bloomberg:

April 3 (Bloomberg) -- Iran's navy said it successfully test-fired its fastest torpedo capable of reaching a maximum speed of 360 kilometers (223 miles) an hour, the official Islamic Republic News Agency said.

Coincidentally, in the 90s the Russians deployed a high-speed torpedo, developed years earlier by the Soviet Union, called the Shkval (Squall) that is capable of speeds up to 230 miles per hour. It achieves this velocity by deliberately cavitating the water around the torpedo to reduce friction.

Neither the Hut, nor the Shval offers protection against incoming B-1 bombers, something that Iran might want to take into consideration.

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

Posted by: Bluto at 11:13 PM | Comments (21) | Add Comment
Post contains 171 words, total size 1 kb.

1 "Fox News was showing video earlier today of the "new" Iranian Hut high-speed torpedo, which travels in excess of 220 miles per hour underwater, and is said to be undetectable by sonar. It seems likely that it could, however, be heard by passive means from some distance underwater." I bet this sucker makes all sorts of noise. The problem is that if you happen to be in front of it (ie the target) you won't hear it as it travels faster than sound travels in water. So you won't be able to hear it unless you are not the intended target. Firing this thing and being able to hit something with it are two completely different problems.

Posted by: Fred Fry at April 03, 2006 05:29 AM (JXdhy)

2 When we go to war against Iran, this thing will probably take out one or two ships, maybe even an aircraft carrier, but they will lose their country. Muslims are animals and we should kill them all.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 05:57 AM (0yYS2)

3 Assuming the Hut's a direct derivative of the Shkval, it's range is very short (7 km), which means that the large vessel carrying it (because the missile's 26 ft long) will have to get in very close to use it. A Harpoon missile has a range of almost 100 km. The Iranian ship would have been taken out long before it had a chance to get a shot off. They may instead use it against commercial ships in the Straits of Hormuz until the US forces put an end to it.

Posted by: Graeme at April 03, 2006 06:25 AM (o1ojb)

4 Ok. SO they have super speedy torpedos, and the multiple-warhead radar-evading missile. Quite the blustering intimidation factor for a country that can't make their own nukes without Russian, Pakistani and North Korean help. Wake me when they've got their own Zionist death ray.

Posted by: AbbaGav at April 03, 2006 06:32 AM (5XR09)

5 All the more reason to GIVE them some nuclear technology, say, in the form of items like n-jdams, at least twenty, at key sites all over Iran. Hey, is that mushrooms I smell?

Posted by: n.a. palm at April 03, 2006 07:03 AM (nwcKF)

6 Graeme, Russia sold China about 50 of these missle/torpedos in the mid-1990's and I'm wondering if maybe the Chinese gave this technology to Iran, or if Russia did. It had to be one of the two. My theory is that Iran might place these missles on civilian maritime vessels, and try to use them as a first strike against our aircraft carriers. I don't think they can get a military vessel close enough to our carriers to hit them. Just one avenue of attack, perhaps high speed military craft might be used in a night attack. I wouldn't underestimate the craftiness of these guys, that's for sure.

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 03, 2006 07:43 AM (rUyw4)

7 The way I see it is that if the thing is any good, we would already have a better version of it and have a way to take them out before they were able to get close enough to do any damage. Every time we have to take one of these chumps out, we learn of some new military technology that we've developed and had operational for a while. By the time we take out Iran, we'll have some kind of missle that will knock on the door of their huts and take a DNA sample before determining if that particular hut is a prime target.

Posted by: slug at April 03, 2006 07:55 AM (wcNc2)

8 Hey Fred Fry, Sound travels about 4 times faster in water than it does in the air. Assuming the 7km (~4mi) range to be accurate... With their torpedo, the 3355mph soundwave would be heard by those within range, in ~4 seconds. Which if my guesstimate is close, is 12 seconds shorter than it would take the Iranian's new toy to get up to speed anyway.

Posted by: me at April 03, 2006 11:41 AM (/l2PJ)

9 They use it once, they lose their navy, most likely their air force as well. Which means the calculation they have to make is, will it be worth the loss of their air and sea forces in order to be able to destroy whatever it is they're aiming (carrier? submarine? American-flagged merchant vessel?) when they shoot the One and Only. I think that's the case with any attack by any system of theirs on our forces. Things are on a hair trigger now, and one side is lead by a man who thinks world leaders don't blink when he is speaking, and is preparing the way for the return of an 800 year old man who has been hiding in a well since the 12th century.

Posted by: Mike James at April 03, 2006 01:37 PM (BJYNn)

10 So once again, the unevolved savages come out to throw rocks at their betters. We should exterminate them like the vermin they are.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 10:57 PM (0yYS2)

11 DonÂ’t know what you guys are talking about but if they can field a few hundred of those speed boats w/ torpedoes they may do some damage. Our ships are good but as the ant said to the elephant hold on my 3million relatives would like to play.

Posted by: john at April 04, 2006 12:59 PM (koOZj)

12 john, I believe that each torpedo is 26 feet long (as Graeme noted above) and they require a specialized tube for firing. That most likely puts it outside of the capabilities of a "speedboat".

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at April 04, 2006 01:36 PM (RHG+K)

13 i don't mean a small miami vice boat but somthing like a 60' fast patrol boat.thats what it looked like on cnn

Posted by: john at April 04, 2006 01:57 PM (koOZj)

14 John, do you mean the type of fast patrol boat that destroyers and aircraft would target and swat like flies within minutes of leaving port?

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 04, 2006 08:29 PM (0yYS2)

15 The gulf is a small area, by the time we know were under attack it could be to late. DonÂ’t forget they are not as stupid as saddam was. I bet there ports have anti ship missile batteries protecting them. They had an exercise a few years ago call millennium. Where they pulled a retired general out to be the opforce . And he pulled just that kind of attack and he kicked there butts with 16 ship kills. Naturally they stopped the game and sent the old guy home. Then set the rules so they would win

Posted by: john at April 05, 2006 05:27 AM (5zbYP)

16 We are living at an important time. Atheism, which people have tried for hundreds of years to portray as Â“the way of reason and science,Â” is proving to be mere irrationality and ignorance. Materialist philosophy that sought to use science for its own ends has been in turn defeated by science. A world rescuing itself from atheism will turn to God and religion. And this process has begun long ago. It is clear that believers have important duties in this period. They must be aware of this major change in the worldÂ’s way of thinking, interpret it, make good use of the opportunities that globalization offers and effectively represent the truth along this road. They must know that the basic conflict of ideas in the world is between atheism and faith. It is not a struggle between East and West; in both East and West there are those who believe in God and those who do not. For this reason, faithful Christians, as well as faithful Jews are allies of Muslims. The main divergence is not between Muslims and the "People of the Book" (Jews and Christians), but between Muslims and the People of the Book on the one hand, and atheists and pagans on the other. Of course, we must not show hostility to such people but view them as people who need to be rescued from their error.

Posted by: TO pagant I.M at April 06, 2006 10:31 AM (zqsRN)

17 Those boats wouldn't even get out of the ports before our radar and jets rip them to shreds ha ha ha ha ha ha the torpedos would just add to the fireworks.

Posted by: Tom at April 06, 2006 07:18 PM (CGl+5)

18 i hope you guys are right about them. they seem a little to willing too die

Posted by: john at April 07, 2006 02:07 PM (x+DJD)

19 Odds are the speedy torps are useless against military type vessels. What about vs civvy ships.. like.. oil tankers? Take out two or three of those and what happens to our economy? Can these torps be mounted on supertankers filled with oil.. heading to Russia.. or.. China? How will they react if we take out these full tankers. The situation there is far more complex than most realize. We could threaten to pull out of the non proliferation treaty.. and threaten to ship nukes and tech to countries hostile to China and Russia.. and Iran. this has it's own dangers.. but.. the game Iran is playing is no less dangerous. If China and Russia come aboard and take a stronger stance against Iran's erichment program.. it would be more likely Iran would seek to halt.. or at least to freeze it's capabilities. Sometimes the only way to win is not to play.

Posted by: Dave at April 12, 2006 11:29 PM (/gJOn)

20 The problem will not be the torpedos, but the hundreds of "SUNBURN" anti ship missiles thatIRAN has aquired from Russia. They are land, air, or ship launched, travey at twice the speed of sound, hug the water and perform violent side to side manevours en routhe to the biggest ship in the group,,, (they seek the biggest one activly) i.e. the carrier. These are undoubtedly (hundreds of them) in the mountains on the north shore of the gulf, and be sure lots in the Hormuze area. The Phalanx machine gun defence can NOT even get a fix on them before they HIT. IRAN will not do a a 1 or 2 launch, they will launch a whole lot of these things, and several at tankers crossing Hormuz. Sink a few there and it's "closed", then no one is able to get IN OR unfortunatly no one out either. ANY US navy vessle in the gulf will be SUNK, and any tanker trying to get out too... ALSO where do you think supplies for 130000 US troops come in to IRAQ, Answer, through HORMUZ, if HORMUZ is closed, soon Bushie will have to supply 130000 troops by air as they are surrounded by "insurgents" I sincerly hope sane minds prevail, otherwise I fear there will be lots of US boy's blood in the gulf. NOTE the gulf is small, shallow and very clear water. There are almost NO places that a sub can get deep enough to avoid easy detection from air. Recipe for a disaster greater than Pearl Harbour and the Twin towers combined times 10...

Posted by: Patrick at April 21, 2006 07:17 AM (8QuYO)

21 I read a paper detailing such a scenario; however, it doesn't take defensive innovation into consideration. Perhaps that's why there's the new SeaRAM ASMD system. They are drop-in replacements for the Aegis and are designed to detect and successfully intercept even supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles. Last I checked, it had been tested against Sunburns or the equivalent and had won. It can also deal with multiple targets at once. Put a lot of SeaRAMs on the ships of the fleet, and even a hundred Sunburns will have a hard time getting through. As for blocking the strait with sunken ships, could not a sufficiently large missile or bomb set on the blockade help to clear it? I see it as sorta like busting a dam, and the British developed dambusting technology all the way back in World War 2.

Posted by: Charles at June 13, 2006 06:53 AM (rudhd)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Islamic Cleric Murdered in Pakistan

Call this what you get when you are Muslim and speak out for Islam and against terror and death.

Khaleejtimes DERA ISMAIL KHAN, Pakistan - Suspected Islamic militants killed a cleric in a Pakistani tribal region near the Afghan border over suspicion he was a spy for the United States and Britain, officials said on Sunday.
The bullet-riddled body of Maulana Zahir Shah, who ran an Islamic school, was found Sunday in Sararogha, a mountainous area in the lawless South Waziristan tribal region, three days after five armed men abducted him from his seminary.
Shah helped authorities run an FM radio station that aired programs critical of the militants from his school in Tajori, a town near the border with South Waziristan, about 80 kilometers (50 miles) north of Dera
In a sign of growing strength in South Waziristan, militants have issued orders for local tribesmen to grow beards or face punishment.
On Friday, the militants held a meeting in Jandola, a small town in the region, and warned local clerics not to solemnize the weddings or funerals of men who do not have beards, an internal police report said. A copy of the report was made available to an Associated Press reporter in Dera Ismail Khan on Saturday.
Radical Islamists consider shaving facial hair to be un-Islamic

Well what did you expect heÂ’d get, a new washer and dryer? Hairy.

Posted by: Howie at 10:43 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 239 words, total size 2 kb.

Dr Sanity Finds Nut!

Yep.

Dr. Sanity Unbelievable material from MEMRI (hat tip: LGF). Read/watch the entire interview, but here is the final bit:

And now the nut.

Mermi : The first is the khifadh circumcision of the girls. The second factor is modesty, the third is the mother's monitoring of the daughter's behavior, and finally, the observance of prayer.
[...]
Interviewer: Is the girl asked whether she wants to be circumcised or not?
Dr. Muhammad Wahdan: No. We ask the doctor, who makes the decision.
Dr. Malika Zarrar: God help us.
Interviewer: So what about the girl's opinion?
Dr. Muhammad Wahdan: What do you mean?
Interviewer: What if she says: I don't want to be circumcised. What happens then?
Dr. Muhammad Wahdan: If a girl says she doesn't want it, she's free. No problem.
Interviewer: Is this what happens in reality?
Dr. Muhammad Wahdan: I have no relation to reality. I am talking about how things should be.
Interviewer: You are a religious sheik, from Al-Azahar University. You cannot say you have no relation to reality.
Dr. Muhammad Wahdan: Reality is a mistake, we must rectify it.
[...]
In Egypt we have four and a half million spinsters. The definition of a spinster is a woman who has reached 30, without ever receiving a marriage proposal. We have a spinster problem in the Arab world, and the last thing we want is for them to be sexually aroused. Circumcision of the girls who need it makes them chaste, dignified, and pure.

Whoa man you see that nut? That man is crazy!

Posted by: Howie at 09:22 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 260 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I hope all the idiot liberal whores like getting clitorectomized when their new masters take over.

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

2 Wow. And the West and Israel get blamed for making Islam look bad.

Posted by: Graeme at April 03, 2006 07:24 AM (o1ojb)

3 Shocker! I tell you I'm shocked. Surely the ROP would not be for such a think, women having more rights than men and all in the Islamic World.

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 03, 2006 07:48 AM (rUyw4)

4 "thing" is what I meant, not think. We all no these radicals don't think.

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 03, 2006 07:55 AM (rUyw4)

5 Yeah, he's crazy, all right. Circumcision of that sort is not going to keep women from getting aroused, it will just keep them from doing much about it. All them horny, frustrated old maids. Sounds like he is going to get an appropriate punishment.

Posted by: Phillep at April 03, 2006 09:11 AM (BPRoL)

6 "Reality is a mistake" sounds like a bumper sticker from the doped-out 1960s.

Posted by: Mike at April 03, 2006 09:26 AM (b10wT)

7 Reality is Americans circumcise like Mohammadans on crack. They just prefer penises to clitorises. We got our own circ problem. Good post, but for irony only.

Posted by: David at April 03, 2006 09:18 PM (H5Y3b)

8 The USA is the only place in the world that circumcises for aesthetic reasons, informed consent is not applied to infant boys here. Wash it, don't amputate it!!! Our infant boys are not farm animals!!!

Posted by: David at April 04, 2006 07:40 AM (2ZQe6)

9 The specific origins of FGM are somewhat obscured by time. Most often the historic justifications cited are marital fidelity, controlling the woman's sex drive, preventing lesbianism, ensuring paternity, "calming" her personality, and hygiene. It is commonly considered an important rite of passage. In some regions, a celebration accompanies the event while in others there is no particular ceremony, gifts, or ritual. FGM is practiced, to some degree, by Muslims, Christians, Jews, and animists alike. In many cultures, sexual pleasure is considered to be for men alone. Overall attitudes can vary greatly between the various FGM practicing ethnic groups and cultures. Within some ethnic groups, adolescent sex is permitted, even encouraged, until circumcision is performed and "adult" responsibilities commence.

Posted by: Female Genital Mutilation at April 06, 2006 10:57 AM (zqsRN)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Will Iran Respond with Terror?

That is the question an article at MSNBC seeks to answer. ItÂ’s logical to prepare for that possibility given IranÂ’s past behavior. It seems the US is investigating this as the UN takes up the Nuclear Arms issue. Given IranÂ’s bragging this week about itÂ’s militaryÂ’s technical capabilities I find it a stretch that they Say, Â“Hey we love hi-tech stuff all of it except the bomb of courseÂ”. LetÂ’s not forget IranÂ’s other military capabilities.

MSNBC : Before Sept. 11, the armed wing of Hezbollah, often working on behalf of Iran, was responsible for more American deaths than in any other terrorist attacks. In 1983 Hezbollah truck-bombed the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 241, and in 1996 truck-bombed Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, killing 19 U.S. service members.
Iran's intelligence service, operating out of its embassies around the world, assassinated dozens of monarchists and political dissidents in Europe, Pakistan, Turkey and the Middle East in the two decades after the 1979 Iranian revolution, which brought to power a religious Shiite government. Argentine officials also believe Iranian agents bombed a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires in 1994, killing 86 people. Iran has denied involvement in that attack.

Iran is a terrorist supporting state? Nah.

Iran's intelligence services "are well trained, fairly sophisticated and have been doing this for decades," said Crumpton, a former deputy of operations at the CIA's Counterterrorist Center. "They are still very capable. I don't see their capabilities as having diminished."
Both sides have increased their activities against the other. The Bush administration is spending $75 million to step up pressure on the Iranian government, including funding non-governmental organizations and alternative media broadcasts. Iran's parliament then approved $13.6 million to counter what it calls "plots and acts of meddling" by the United States.

Hey sounds like we can outspend em. But hey America is nothing but not the best in money politics. I reckon VOA booming over every square inch of Iran would be well worth the bucks. Meddle my ass, hold your dirty hands up to the light is more like it.

"Given the uptick in interest in Iran" on the part of the United States, "it would be a very logical assumption that we have both ratcheted up [intelligence] collection, absolutely," said Fred Barton, a former counterterrorism official who is now vice president of counterterrorism for Stratfor, a security consulting and forecasting firm. "It would be a more fevered pitch on the Iranian side because they have fewer options."

We should spell out very clearly how we would respond if the US were to be attacked by Iran or agents thereof, and pretty damn quick too!

Posted by: Howie at 09:08 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 446 words, total size 3 kb.

Hey, That's Not A Fatwa!

Gee, bitch and moan at 3 in the morning and look what it gets you:

Oh, ye of little faith and reading comprehension skills. I never mentioned the video, only these facts, which remain the same.
http:/(no link whoring for you! -Vinnie)
Jill Carroll's an extremist. And you apparently have a problem with premature articulation. Next time, read first.
You got something wrong, though. More than thirty seconds in a room with you, and I think I'd have to kill you.
Debbie Schlussel

"Premature articulation." Ha-ha, coming from someone who couldn't get laid at a Chippendale's convention with a purseful of Benjamins. Plus, I'd be dead by my own hand 29 seconds before you got around to it, spanky. Especially if you showed up without those 800 lbs of makeup that disguises your fugliness.

I heart friends:

Beth

Misha

Don Surber

Florida Cracker

Decision '08

Middle Earth Journal

Frankly, I'm relieved that Debbie Schlussel wants to kill me. After all, she'd probably mistake a water gun for a real one.

Now can I get a real fatwa please?

Posted by: Vinnie at 07:00 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 188 words, total size 2 kb.

I Am So Sick Of This (UPDATED)

"Our troop's time is better spent doing this or that rather than rescuing him/her."

Oh, STFU.

Our military, which you statistically never bothered to join, takes pride you will never have, rescuing civilians from harm, no matter their ideology.

Idiot commenters like that fail to grasp the basic concept that our military is designed to protect us. All of us.

Not just here, but there as well.

That's what they do. We do (er, I did heh). Kill people, break things, and protect Americans. Not leftist Americans, not conservative Americans, not American Indian African Irish Indo-Chinese Jamaican Arabian Pashtu Tobrukian Americans.

Just Americans.

And, truth be told, they like doing it.

Here, or there.

So give us a goddamned break on the You-Think-You-Know-Best-What-The-Military-Should-Spend-It's-Time-Doing-Thing.

Unless you have 4 stars on your epaulettes. Then I might listen. But probably not, I have an issue with authority figures.

Updated with revised and extended remarks. more...

Posted by: Vinnie at 03:34 AM | Comments (32) | Add Comment
Post contains 528 words, total size 3 kb.

1 "they (er, we) like doing it"? What a fucking joke. I'm an infantryman with the 2nd battalion, 22nd infantry regiment with the 10th Mountain Division. Our sector is the Abu Ghraib province, bordering the al-Anbar province about 30 minutes humvee's drive outside Baghdad. My job as of now is PSD for our battalion's command group. We drive around the battalion commander, sergeant major, XO, and ops major. Ok, none of them have 4 stars on their chest, but it's as close as I'm ever going to get. We spent almost a full month looking around the areas in our sectors (we're responsible for 2) where known kidnapping cells operate for this strumpet. Maybe I shouldn't say "spent", more like "wasted" a month. We had pushed the insurgency in our area back several weeks in operational capability. In the time we wasted looking for this idiot, the insurgency was allowed to restock and refit their cache's. So we had to spend the next month doing raid after raid busting up cells that had regrown. Which would have been unneccessary if we had never been sent on a retarded mission to find this chick. Civilians and reporters over here know the risks. They leave the wire knowing what kind of danger they're in at all times. Jill Carroll left Baghdad alone, unarmed, and disguised as a muslim woman. But time after time they make the same mistakes over and over again. It's just a matter of time before they get themselves kidnapped, and then waste our time when we have to go look for them. Do I take pride in finding civilians? Hell no. And that's straight from a grunt's mouth that's on the ground, who was involved in the search for Jill Carroll, and also found the French civilian engineer Bernard Planche.

Posted by: Ryan at April 02, 2006 05:20 AM (aLiCo)

2 Sorry you feel that way Ryan, but you can't expect every day to be like a recruiting commercial. If you don't like doing the job, you can always get out when the time comes, or make enough trouble until they discharge you. Remember, you don't just work for the Army, you work for We the People, as did I, as have millions of others. Suck it up and drive on.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 02, 2006 07:25 AM (0yYS2)

3 Ryan--thanks for writing from real knowledge, and for your service. It is an interesting debate. If we don't have reporters going outside the Green Zone, we don't know enough. If we do, they will inevitably get kidnapped, some of them, and our military will be less effective at its main job because it will spend resources searching for them. So, are you suggesting that they don't leave the Green Zone? Or that if they do, the military should not be tasked with looking for them?

Posted by: jd at April 02, 2006 07:27 AM (uT71O)

4 NOrmally I would agree with you, however, these people who are going over often have no business being there. The term freelance journalist in Jill Carroll's case is generous at best. She was a defender of the insurgency and was going over there with an agenda which she knew she could sell to the Christian Science Monitor, a paper which sides with Hamas over Israel as an example of its bent. Meanwhile the military needs to 24-7 bust up these bastards and IF they have the time to go around and save these people fine, but I would say that right now this is a military that already has one hand tied behnd its back and is never allowed to go out and do its business of killing the enemy as best it can. This just makes its job that much harder.

Posted by: Steve Sharon at April 02, 2006 07:54 AM (/wox2)

5 Vinnie -- you know I'm a long-time fan. It is therefore with a heavy heart that I tell you that this is one of the worst, least considered things you have written.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at April 02, 2006 08:00 AM (XN4gd)

6 Jill Carroll was one of the few reporters who would leave the Green Zone, she did not think that she could do a good job covering Iraq from the inside of an armored vehicle. Being a war reporter has never been more dangerous in any other war. I will miss her reporting. If anyone has any links to anyone else who is doing that kind of reporting please post them.

Posted by: john Ryan at April 02, 2006 08:35 AM (TcoRJ)

7 Ralph Peters and Michael Yon have given some of the best reporting out of Iraq by going out of the Green Zone and embedding with Coalition units for protection. Jill Carroll could have done the same thing.

Posted by: Michael in MI at April 02, 2006 09:52 AM (GANmF)

8 Here's a link to Michael Yon's outstanding coverage: Michael Yon with the Duece Four

Posted by: Michael in MI at April 02, 2006 09:55 AM (GANmF)

9 >>>which you statistically never bothered to join, So only those who statistically bothered to join the military have a right to voice some opinion about the military or U.S. policy? To me, it would seem entirely irrelevant. I haven't formed an opinion yet one way or the other about the substance of your post, and I'm not just looking to pick a nit with it either, but your comment sounded remarkably like the Liberal cheapshot against "chickenhawks" who support the war yet haven't bothered to join the military. It's fantastic rhetoric, but it has little or no substance. It reminds me too of the Liberal tactics the Bush Administration used against those who opposed the Harriet Myers nomination and Dubai ports, calling us "sexist" and "racist." There is an attitude behind those tactics that I find disturbing and dissapointing coming from conservatives. We shouldn't let ourselves stoop to that level.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 02, 2006 09:58 AM (8e/V4)

10 Vinnie's been reading too much starship troopers. Hey newsflash: civilians can express opinions too, and they can also be valid, even if they are about the military. Amazing, I know.

Posted by: MiB at April 02, 2006 10:00 AM (2hPsb)

11 Vinnie, you strained at a gnat, and swallowed a camel.

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 02, 2006 10:22 AM (rUyw4)

12 Was that a biblical reference, JJ?

Posted by: MiB at April 02, 2006 12:08 PM (2hPsb)

13 Why, yes, it was.

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 02, 2006 12:48 PM (rUyw4)

14 A few years ago some liberal politician wanted to send our troops to south america to guard the rainforests what a waste of troops

Posted by: sandpiper at April 02, 2006 01:31 PM (0Wk0b)

15 For those of you who haven't looked into any background, Jill Carrol DID travel with U.S. troops for a month as a reporter. The CSM even quoted the company captain, who seemed to speak well of her. And how many of you have actually read her articles? They seem balanced enough to me that you could read pretty much anything into them you want. For me, I detect a moderately liberal slant, but let's be fair. She frequently wasn't particularly supportive of Iraqi officials and certianly didn't paint the insurrection in glowing terms. Suffering civilians, whatever the percieved cause, seemed to be the burr in her saddle. I probably wouldn't agree with her politics if she discussed them with me, but that hardly qualifies her as a "moonbat."

Posted by: David at April 02, 2006 01:39 PM (wZLWV)

16 >>>First off, I'm not calling anyone a chickenhawk. I know you weren't calling anybody a chickenhawk. But dismissing somebody's comments about how to best use our military just because they haven't served in the military is a specious argument-- just like the chickenhawk slur the Left uses. >>>it helps to have an insider's view when telling the military what you think they ought to be doing. Whether or not to use our military to rescue moonbats who've placed themselves in harm's way is a civilian decision-- not a military one. This isn't Starship Troopers. So I disagree.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 02, 2006 04:06 PM (8e/V4)

17 Yup, Carlos. You're right. This isn't Starship Troopers. Damned shame in my opinion.

Posted by: MCPO Airdale at April 02, 2006 05:27 PM (WOQ34)

18 I know you weren't calling anybody a chickenhawk. But dismissing somebody's comments about how to best use our military just because they haven't served in the military is a specious argument-- just like the chickenhawk slur the Left uses. Actually it's not. The specious comes in when bloggers and blog commenters pipe up with the notion that a person's ideology should be the determining factor as to whether or not it's worth it for the military to rescue them. Which, to me, is in the same vein as the Left's constant carping that the military should be utilized only as a perpetual Meals-on-wheels organization run under U.N. auspices. Whether or not to use our military to rescue moonbats who've placed themselves in harm's way is a civilian decision-- not a military one. This isn't Starship Troopers. So I disagree. Yeah, but it isn't made by bloggers or blog commenters. Starship Troopers: Never read it, never saw it. Don't have the slightest clue why it keeps being referred to.

Posted by: Vinnie at April 02, 2006 05:42 PM (/qy9A)

19 In Starship Troopers, only military veterans were granted full citizenship and a say so in political matters.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 02, 2006 06:07 PM (8e/V4)

20 I'll have to catch it when it's on. I certainly don't advocate that view. Look, man, when the 4 contractors were murdered and their bodies burned and hung from the bridge in Falluja, Kos said "screw 'em." It just doesn't sit well with me that when a lib is held hostage by terrorists, people on our side seem eager to say "screw 'em" as well.

Posted by: Vinnie at April 02, 2006 06:41 PM (/qy9A)

21 >>>I'll have to catch it when it's on. It was a pretty good scifi book written in the 50's. They made a lame movie version of it a few years ago. I generally agree with you. The distinction I might make, however, would not be based on their ideology, but rather on whether they had ignored our government's warnings to stay out of the danger zone. Add to that the moron's goals of thwarting our government's objectives there (and our military's), and I can see why some people would object.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 02, 2006 06:58 PM (8e/V4)

22 Bravo to Vinnie for not wanting to only save those who support the president's policies (and bravo to the person who pointed out that the reporter did not, as evidenced by her stories, at least, hate the president's policies). We are all Americans in the war on terror. On 9/11 they killed Republicans and Democrats and Greens and libertarians and independents. And our troops are conservatives and liberals and all points in between. And you know what? To Osama, we are all infidels deserving of death. same with Zarqawi.

Posted by: jd at April 02, 2006 07:06 PM (uT71O)

23 That's the problem as I see it Carlos. If it had been Mark Steyn instead of Jill Carrol, I fear we wouldn't be having this debate. I'm a conservative, I believe in the sanctity of human life. If I want to be consistent, that life has to include stupid people who willingly go into danger zones where they ought not be. We cannot stand one of our neighbors. They drive us nuts. But if their house was burning down, I wouldn't hesitate to go in and rescue them.

Posted by: Vinnie at April 02, 2006 07:30 PM (/qy9A)

24 What I would see as reasonable is our government saying--hey, if you go into X area, you are on your own because of the danger it poses to our soldiers, whether that area is Somalia or Anbar province. I don't think that is what journalists in Iraq were told, particularly as so many in government from Wolfowitz on down have complained about the press not getting out of the GZ and getting the real story. But our obligation to rescue or not rescue must NEVER be affected by the politics of the person kidnapped. The criteria must be neutral (an obvious exception should of course be made for true traitors and spies, but that almost goes without saying). I feel the same as Vinnie. I don't currently have any neighbors I dislike, but I grew up next to a truly awful human being...but I still would want him rescued if his house caught on fire.

Posted by: jd at April 02, 2006 07:37 PM (uT71O)

25 Allright, did anyone read Ryan's post? I mean for crying out loud, he said it best. And Maximus, that was a whacked comment.."he can get out when his time comes," and sounds like you could use a tour in Abu Ghraib, to open your eyes. Ryan, 1AD OIF1 03-04 here, I too was in the same area, and your post is similar to one of mine earlier... Some of these arguments crafting a soldier's responsibilities to include looking for goofball, glory-hounding journalists instead of using that time to as you put it work on more pressing concerns is naive, unrealistic, unfair and lacking any kind of practical application. Good post and well said Ryan, blogroll anyone?

Posted by: capster at April 02, 2006 09:03 PM (IARJ7)

26 What didn't you understand about my comment capster? If Ryan doesn't like how the Army does business, he can take a discharge at the end of his enlistment, and that's the way it is, because the Army doesn't care about a soldier's opinion. I don't like the fact that our soldiers waste their time trying to resuce these idiots who take side with the enemy then get bitten by the rabid dog they were trying to pet, but if I was still in, I'd have to follow orders too, or get out. As far as your Abu Ghraib comment, it was an incoherent non-sequitur, so I will disregard it as a brain fart on your part.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 06:15 AM (0yYS2)

27 Poor Vinnie... Somehow he's attracted a legion of useless, clueless moonbats...

Posted by: juandos at April 03, 2006 06:20 AM (2bfAx)

28 Vinnie, I'm not saying anything against Jill or for the contractors, but comparing the two was like comparing apples and oranges. There's too much hooplah always surrounding the reporters. Peters and Yon wouldn't even be there were it not for the vast majority of left-leaning journalists hampering the effort and being used for the enemy's propaganda. If we're complaining that reporters are lazy for not leaving the green zone and stupid for venturing out unarmed and unprotected, I'd imagine that says a lot. It says they're useless.

Posted by: Oyster at April 03, 2006 06:31 AM (YudAC)

29 Oyster nails it again. All of you had better listen, because she knows what she is talking about. Useless is the best adjective I've heard in this whole Jill Carroll mess. It speaks volumes about the liberal media and is spot on.

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 03, 2006 08:02 AM (rUyw4)

30 From an earlier chat (a month or so ago) with Ryan doesn't like it but he still does it anyway. As Improbulus Maximus said, orders is orders. He also said he wouldn't mind looking for people who got captured who were normal imbeds, following the troops. It's the random yahoos; free-range journalists, peace activists, moronic children wanting to 'visit' Iraq, etc; that tick him off. I don't think Vinnie's sinking ship analogy really works that well in this case. Unless, of course, the libs were making speed-holes in the bottom of their boat to reduce drag. Oh yeah, and I first learned about Jill Carrol from Ryan. He was doing typical grunt complaining about house-to-house searching for the entire day earlier in the week. He was surprised I hadn't heard about it since the news was making a big deal about it, which I had missed because of schoolwork.

Posted by: Ranba Ral at April 03, 2006 09:34 PM (GyNTD)

31 That should be *with Ryan, he* and *analogy doesn't really work that well* That'll teach me to try to post on 4 hours sleep in the past 3 days.

Posted by: Ranba Ral at April 03, 2006 09:37 PM (GyNTD)

32 vinnie, about "starship trooper", don't bother with the movie, as someone said above it's a lame hack job by a director who has said it was his intent to trash the book. the original book was written by robert a. heinlien and it's worth a read, he made a number if comments about society that were entirely missing from the movie.

Posted by: "gunner" at April 16, 2006 10:16 AM (SCa13)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Just Five Minutes, Your Honor, Her And Me Alone

I've heard of grasping at straws, but this is ridiculous.

Okay, so, Jill Carrol arranges her own kidnapping with her Islamist buddies, hangs out with them for three months, gnawing on falafel and gettin' funky with that down home Ashura thang, you know, chips dips chains and whips. Or she realizes the Sunni really does rise in the East, and bows down whenever the hell Achmed says it's time, because, well, she left her watch back in the room. Or maybe she just likes Kurds with her whey.

Well, then, she says this:

I want to be judged as a journalist, not as a hostage. I remain as committed as ever to fairness and accuracy _ to discovering the truth _ and so I will not engage in polemics. But let me be clear: I abhor all who kidnap and murder civilians, and my captors are clearly guilty of both crimes.

Wow, that's some anti-American sentiment right there. That's right up there with ole Giuliana Srgena. Nay, dare I say it? That is downright....Nazi propaganda.

If you want to be judged as a journalist, ok, well, I think you suck at it. If you wanted fairness and accuracy, you would have gone out like Ralph Peters did and rode with the troops. You didn't, you rode with your translator, and now he's dead and you're an ex-hostage.

But I'm going to judge you as a hostage, despite your plea. You did what you needed to do with a gun to your head. You said what you said, and wrote what you wrote, under duress. You wore the hijab as ordered, you conductecd yourself in the manner which was prescribed for you.

Not because you're some inane leftard moonbat (although you may be, but, that's irrelevant) but because you wanted to live. And the desire to live overpowers everything we do in the course of our days. Even, yes, our basic ideology.

5 minutes with Schlussel in my basement, and I'd have her singing the praises of Stalin. It's just that simple.

Could you see the blog titles on that one? "Schlussel endorses Stalin." "Schlussel embraces Marxism." "Schlussel says: Lenin, not such a bad guy after all."

Frankly, I'm sick and tired of people sitting behind a computer trying to divine the intuitions of someone thousands of miles away. People who do it like Schlussel does it are no different that buzzards circling a decaying corpse.

BTW, I just have to wonder if Schlussel would have even bothered to post anything if Jill Carrol's headless body had appeared on a Baghdad street one day.

We at the Jawa Report do, and always will, hope for the release of all hostages held by Islamofascistpricks. Better to celebrate the release of one Giuliana than to lament 10 Nick Bergs.

F.E.T.E.

Posted by: Vinnie at 03:13 AM | Comments (21) | Add Comment
Post contains 485 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Nope. Don't buy it for a second. Anyone who isn't a complete idiot can tell which way the wind is blowing. If she wants to sell that book/movie deal, she's gotta have a sympathetic market. Call me a cynic, but cynic is the opposite of sucker.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 02, 2006 07:32 AM (0yYS2)

2 Oh, ye of little faith and reading comprehension skills. I never mentioned the video, only these facts, which remain the same. http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2006/04/premature_artic.html Jill Carroll's an extremist. And you apparently have a problem with premature articulation. Next time, read first. You got something wrong, though. More than thirty seconds in a room with you, and I think I'd have to kill you. Debbie Schlussel

Posted by: Debbie Schlussel at April 02, 2006 01:04 PM (Awh+P)

3 Uh, actually Jill Carroll DID travel with U.S. troops as a journalist for a month. The captain of the company was even quoted by the CSM shortly after her release and he spoke pretty well of her. BTW, how many of you have actually read her articles? I'm sure some of you have, but I only detect a moderately liberal slant. And no, she did not portray Iraqi officials in a necessarily favorable light nor did she paint the insurrection in glowing terms. Suffering civilians appeared to be the burr in her saddle.

Posted by: David at April 02, 2006 01:24 PM (wZLWV)

4 Nothing that anybody says while a gang of fanatical thugs stand behind them sharpening their scimitars counts for anything at all. When your head is about to roll you tend to co-operate. Jill Carroll may well be an extremist (she's a journalist after all), but she did what 99.999% of people would have done in those circumstances. Including Brave Debbie Schlussel.

Posted by: Martin at April 02, 2006 01:30 PM (7T22U)

5 You got something wrong, though. More than thirty seconds in a room with you, and I think I'd have to kill you. With what? The exploding Silicone Implants Of Doom? Or would you grab a trowel and remove the makeup. That would scare the piss out of me. Sounds threatening, maybe I need to hire a lawyer.

Posted by: Vinnie at April 02, 2006 02:08 PM (/qy9A)

6 Wow Vinnie. That saggy titted, sow faced shithead Schlussel just threatened to kill you. I would pass that little tidbit on to the FBI. Oh wait, she gives regular freebie blow jobs to the FBI so they probably wonÂ’t arrest her. Anyway, I sure that was a warning not a threat. I suspect she meant that if she were in a room for more than thirty seconds with you, the stench emanating from her crotch would kill you.

Posted by: Ranger 6 at April 02, 2006 03:33 PM (o+/cZ)

7 Debbie Schlussel - Definitely, we should "call the fbi" on her - as she threatened to do to me. . The beeatch thinks that anyone who disagrees with her on anything should be in jail. Bwaaaahahahahaha

Posted by: Beth Donovan at April 02, 2006 04:10 PM (9FPYz)

8 Really, why aren't you on medication? You're the right's version of the unhinged moonbat. Quit pretending to be right of center--you are an embarrassment, distressingly like Fred Phelps. We're all tired of your deranged, negative bloviating. Is there ANYTHING you actually support? While I will note there are profound areas of disagreement between my views and many who post here... I applaud the intellectual honesty of those who call out the purveyors of manufactured outrage. It shows me there is reason to hope we will finally stop gravitating towards the extremist poles and lobbing grenades at each other. Nobody's going to have any "reading comprehension" problems with that crack. Goddamned nutcase. I will forego the obvious jokes that such comments call to mind... I have never heard of Debbie Schlussel. However, a couple minutes on her site and it is clear she is a low frequency in the echo chamber ...seeking to till the same fields where Malkin and Coulter run wild ... she isn't worth commenting on further. On to a more substative matter: Vinnie and I see eye to eye on virtually nothing... so the areas of agreement are notable. The point he makes, which is particularly worth noting by those on the left, is the fact that most American soldiers see their mission as protecting Americans...without regard for race, sex, religion or creed. As I have noted before, it was the US Army that found evidence of death squads operating in the Interior Ministry basement. It was Maj. General Joseph Peterson who provided the first official confirmation that death squads are operating within the Iraqi police force. I believe there is a material distinction between the leadership of Gen. Petraeus and Gen. Peterson, as significant as the difference between Westmoreland and Abrams. Unfortunately, I think it is too late to change the reality on the ground...things have spun so far out of control over the last year and a half. However, the point worth remembering...especially as reports of torture and abuse continue to build... those who participate or condone such behavior deserve to be punished. Those who have the courage to reveal or rebuke such behavior deserve our support. Remember, the only reason we even heard about Abu Gharib was a young sargeant from a small town in Maryland knew this was not what he was there to do. He and his family have paid dearly for that. They have been the victims of harassment in their community. They have been shunned by friends and neighbors. Their property has been vandalized, and they now reside in protective military custody at an undisclosed location. On May 16th 2005, he received a John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award, recognizing his bravery in uncovering the abuse at Abu Ghraib. That is the kind of soldier that Americans should be proud of. They are a clear concrete example of why I am so opposed to the present administration. The policy makers of this administration are not worthy of the men and women who serve them.

Posted by: 8ackgr0und N015e at April 02, 2006 04:11 PM (K5Ko+)

9 Oh wait, she gives regular freebie blow jobs to the FBI so they probably wonÂ’t arrest her. Freebie blow jobs? Who would ever do that?

Posted by: Feisty at April 02, 2006 05:38 PM (HYxlu)

10 Debbie Does The Blogosphere strikes again. It's reactionary feces flinging idiots like her that makes me want to give up blogging and politics completely. Vinnie, do us all a favor and use amend the post with basil's handy link redirect trick. I hate to think of Debbie getting off on the referrals from My Pet Jawa. (Sorry for any visual images that might have produced. Feel free to poke out your mind's eye now.)

Posted by: Janette at April 02, 2006 05:44 PM (OcgcA)

11 Schlussel's a pathetic propagandist. She keeps using words like "documented" to mean "in a previous post I vaguely inferred". She uses racist nicknames for white United States attorneys she doesn't like. She throws out words like "Islamist", simply flaunting her ignorance of what that ideology is or means. You're smart to disassociate yourself from such a wack-job.

Posted by: Dan Hartung at April 02, 2006 06:12 PM (WVHXm)

12 Hah, I'm using Basil's redirect link for her too. LOL.

Posted by: Donnah at April 02, 2006 08:13 PM (1q3hZ)

13 Wow Debbie Schlussel you threatened the life of one of my friends (Vinnie) who is also my Blog brother. Debbie you are totally fucked up! I knew that before but this confirms it even more. OH and Debbie, you are the perfect example of a woman that ONLY got ahead in her career because of HEAD if you get my drift! In other words girls that work on the street have more class then you have in one of your fake eyelashes. You are truly pathetic!

Posted by: Wild Thing at April 02, 2006 09:24 PM (tj1zH)

14 As a chef (a person who gets paid to cook things and must continually suffer white collar retards explaining to me earnestly that they would be a great chef) Feisty I feel your pain, but for some folks it's more of a hobby than a profession.

Posted by: Jake Jacobsen at April 02, 2006 11:02 PM (X2ChO)

15 Since Debbie Schlussel keeps asking people to apologize to her I decided to step up just so she could see how it's done: http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2006/04/premature_artic.html#comments

Posted by: Jon Swift at April 03, 2006 03:09 AM (fNQUw)

16 Dear Debs, You are clueles. Completely clueless. You couldn't get a clue if we doused you in clue musk and set you to dancing the clue mating dance in a field of horny clues. STFU, would ya? LindaSoG

Posted by: LindaSoG at April 03, 2006 05:27 AM (TET2s)

17 To bad the cunt didn't get the Nick Berg treatment...

Posted by: juandos at April 03, 2006 06:14 AM (2bfAx)

18 Announcing the Bimbo Schlussel Blogroll! Tell everybody you can!

Posted by: rightwingprof at April 03, 2006 09:05 AM (hj1Wx)

19 I think I misunderstood the Carrol story, thinking she had made those statements _after_ being rescued, and safely outside of Iraq. Usually what a hostage says while having been a hostage seems to me to be suspect; if they confirm the stories once they are safe & sound, that's different.

Posted by: h0mi at April 03, 2006 04:42 PM (zpJBl)

20 The whole thing with Jill Carrol seemed strange from the start. The people who "captured" her wanted women prisoners released. We released several women and then we heard nothing from her. Then several weeks later after the "deadline" we heard from her again. This time she was seen alone crying but, she only said that we must do what the people holding her said. She never said what that was!! What did these people want in return for her release? So she was released. I saw her when she was released and she looked great next to most that are/were being held. She said that her captures never threatened to hit her but, they held guns to her head while she was making those statements? There were no guns anywhere near her in those videos. I have seen others make statements that are captured, like the ones that have their heads cut off, and they have men standing next to them holding guns to their heads. Today, I saw Jill when she came home to see her family and I wondered when she had time to get red highlights in her hair. I know that most people wouldn't care about that after they were held by brutal animals like those who take Americans in Iraq. I know a thing or two about the war in Iraq and the people that do this sort of thing and I can't understand why these people would pass up the chance to use this person to get everything they want. Why is it that no one has heard of this group? Why did they just let her go? The only thing that "they" got was the release of some women. I am glad that Jill is home with her family and safe but, I can't help wondering if maybe Jill made this whole thing up just to make a story or try and free some women because she doesn't like the war. That would be horrible and the worst kind of journalism I have ever seen. Something someone should spend many years in jail for doing. I really hope I am wrong. I want to believe that this whole thing really was true. I hope that the men and women in the military didn't spend countless hours looking for her for no reason. Until I have proof I am going to wonder.

Posted by: scooterbell at April 04, 2006 12:31 AM (rZTWE)

21 Vinnie, to put it in as few words as I possibly can: you're a prick. You're the kind of limp-wristed dweeb that used to get the hell beat out himself in highschool. Yeah, actually, I do think Debbie could bitch-slap you around the parking lot. I know I could.

Posted by: Tanker at April 05, 2006 08:50 AM (6G6z9)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

April 01, 2006

Jill Carroll Open Thread

open thread

Posted by: Vinnie at 10:26 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 10 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Back to issue a mostly full and humble apology to Jill Carroll and her supporters on Jawa. Said she was a Hajib wearing, Ann Arbor/America hater, blah, blah, blah. Easy for me, when she has guns aimed at her head. Sorry, Jill. You look good in jeans and no head gear, and I reserve all judgment until you've had a burger and a beer.

Posted by: Jaibones at April 02, 2006 02:31 AM (wes5d)

2 A search of Jill Carroll's Christian Monitor articles show a lack of outright moonbat activity. However, lets not forget that her careless actions in setting up a meeting with the venerable, or shall I say Sunni politician crossed the line of journalism independence by telegraphing her actions before hand, in violation of several policies. Question, can one become a moonbat merely because of their selfish actions in a war-torn country? And by selfish I mean, lets not forget all those troopers who were looking for her ass, going on raids, conducting patrols, when they could have focused their efforts elsewhere? How many soldiers/marines patrolled the Anbar province on a dark, Baghdad night, looking for Carroll's noble ass, when they could have been focused on insurgents or bomb-making material. Thanks Jill!! Glad your home moonbat by implication or not!!!

Posted by: capster at April 02, 2006 02:50 AM (IARJ7)

3 The bitch is a fraud.

Posted by: Filthy at April 02, 2006 04:43 PM (AvsR8)

4 For someone held captive for 3 months, she sure came out looking healthy. I smell a rat. Not buying her story.

Posted by: Bunkergurl at April 02, 2006 07:53 PM (MgtKq)

5 Thanks for having some sense Bunkergurl; at least I know I'm not completely alone, but that makes just a few of us who can see the truth.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 06:44 AM (0yYS2)

6 Ah the Monday Morning quarterback wingnuts. What is so interesting is how the so called Patriot right addressed Carroll's situation upon her release. The disgusting sexual fantasies with which they framed their remarks. To all the fellows who indulged themselves imagining pornographic humiliations, I say get off your butts and go to Iraq. Become journalists or fight for your country. Then come back and talk about how someone whose friend and colleague was murdered and she held captive for months was a traitor. As an American citizen, I am disgusted with the whole lot of you.

Posted by: barryology at April 03, 2006 07:42 AM (jXKBW)

7 Dressed in traditional garb worn by Islamic women, Christian Science Monitor Free Lance reporter Jill Carroll appeared on television after being released by her Islamic captors after nearly 3 months after being taken hostage by an Islamic Terror group called Â“The Vengance BrigadeÂ”. DonÂ’t get me wrong, I am extremely happy that Carroll was released, but being the inquisitive Jew that I am, I find myself highly suspicious of her story and of her being a hostage. Arab men, Islamic men in particular donÂ’t exactly hold women in very high regard. Under the Taliban in Afganistan, women were forbidden from holding jobs and going to school. Thoughout the Arab world, women are forbidden from leaving the home without a male family member. Honor killings occur frequentlyÂ…Why was Jill Carroll treated with more respect then most Islamic women? Was she really being held against her will or was this a stunt by a Left wing peacenik trying to exploit the Left wing mainstream media for her own purpose? I feel that these are questions that need to be asked. Jill CarrollÂ’s Â”kidnappersÂ” had set a Â“final deadlineÂ” of Feb. 26th for their demands to be met or else they would kill her. The deadline came and went, yet 32 days later she was freed. It would be the second deadline set by her abductors, who have repeatedly said they will kill Carroll if the United States does not release all female prisoners it has in custody in Iraq. Why suddenly did Islamic men all of a sudden care about women prisoners? Why not their comrades that are behind bars for terrorist activities? According to Amnesty International, women in the Arab world deserve more respect and dignity. They are discriminated against and their potential and capabilities are usually ignored. In the home and in the community, in times of war and peace, women are beaten, raped, mutilated and killed with impunity. In past videos featuring Americans who were being held hostage and later executed, they were shown wearing orange jumpsuits. Why was Jill Carroll allowed to dress in a traditional Islamic outfit worn by Arab women?. Several Islamic groups called for her release and were condemning her capture. Where was their cries for help when Daniel Pearl, Nick Berg and Paul Johnson, all of whom were later beheaded by the monsters who kidnapped them? The Muslim world stood silent. But alas, the pleas and the calls for release were loud as hell for Jill Carroll. Why? Am I the only one who questions this? Is she a pawn for the peace movement or possibly a person that has fallen to the Stockholm Syndrome? Let me know. Email me roguejew65@sbcglobal.net and let me know what you think. In the meantime, I am happy that Jill Carroll is on her way home to her family, but I still have to wonder. Did she fake her own kidnapping?

Posted by: Chris at April 03, 2006 10:32 AM (rm2LC)

8 Did anyone notice that she was using her LEFT hand to gesture in the videos? In Arabic/Muslim culture, becasue you wipe your ass with the hand, using it is an insult on par with the American Bird salute or the British reverse victory salute (so that was what Churchill was trying to express in WWII). Anyway one thing POWs in previous wars have done when making bs propaganda is to do some type of visual or verbal sign that what they are saying is pure BS. By using her left hand, she could have been signalling that she doesn't believe a word she is saying and that it is under duress.

Posted by: Privateer6 at April 03, 2006 09:59 PM (W3MO4)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Jill Carroll Says Video Interviews Taken Under Duress.

You might say? Good job Jill and weÂ’re glad you are safe.

AP via Yahoo : "During my last night in captivity, my captors forced me to participate in a propaganda video. They told me I would be released if I cooperated. I was living in a threatening environment, under their control, and wanted to go home alive. So I agreed," she said in a statement read by her editor in Boston.
"Things that I was forced to say while captive are now being taken by some as an accurate reflection of my personal views. They are not."... ...In the statement, Carroll also disavowed an interview she gave to the party shortly after her release. She said the party had promised her the interview would not be aired "and broke their word."... ..."At any rate, fearing retribution from my captors, I did not speak freely. Out of fear, I said I wasn't threatened. In fact, I was threatened many times," she said. "Also, at least two false statements about me have been widely aired: One Â— that I refused to travel and cooperate with the U.S. military, and two Â— that I refused to discuss my captivity with U.S. officials. Again, neither statement is true."

I can certainly understand why Jill might have said those things. We all would too most likely. She did the right thing remember they said they would kill her it she said this after her release. Brave statement.

Another Yahoo link.

More here at the Christian Science Monitor.

Also see LGF no fooling around, In The bullpen and Captain Ed.

Posted by: Howie at 09:34 PM | Comments (16) | Add Comment
Post contains 279 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Party pooper.

Posted by: Vinnie at April 01, 2006 09:56 PM (/qy9A)

2 Rusty, You called it guy! Thanks for putting the breaks on our cynacism. It's difficult to avoid an instinctive reaction of suspicion, after so many recent deceptions.

Posted by: Mirra at April 01, 2006 11:26 PM (F9FUD)

3 Its so easy to keep a bad taste in the mouth, especially after the previous hostages. Its still important for me to know her priorities when going there. I thought she was there to report on Iraqis suffering, ultimately because of coalition forces? I hope I'm wrong and she was just doing her job as an objective reporter but is it nuts to think that? I'm not ready to judge her a person of integrity, yet. I'm glad she's free. At least, unlike previous hostages she's beginning to set the record straight and call the bad guys (with her) for what they are.

Posted by: Javapuke at April 02, 2006 12:08 AM (NQkft)

4 I don't see why her original motives, if they were indeed motives we wouldn't approve of, should dictate whether or not people crash down upon her now. If in a couple of months she starts writing on how good the terrorists are and how bad Coalition soldiers are, and I doubt she will, then we can crash down upon. As Howie said, now isn't the time and most of us would have said the same things if we thought that would be our ticket out of a box and back to freedom. There have been questionable hostage cases in the past, some that Rusty and I have disagreed upon. This case though, at least in my opinion, was legitimate and from the onset it was clear it was a ransom case. Why are more of the "peace sells" kind taken hostage? I don't know, but I assume it is largely because they are the type that seem to think their opinions are better protection than Marines. Sadly they continue to learn the hard way that our enemies don't care if they agree with them or not, they hate them because they are American and not Muslims. The CPT hostage ordeal is a prime example of that. Maybe it's just me, but I don't think I'd go around Iraq without protection speaking the word of Jesus Christ. And what gives with all the open threads? Has Rusty turned Duncan Black on us?

Posted by: Chad Evans at April 02, 2006 12:50 AM (uimQk)

5 Well, apparently you can fool some of the people all of the time. So her pre-kidnapping diatribes against America were caused by duress too, then? She just realized that nobody gave a shit about her when the world didn't cry over that Christian Peacekeeper dude when he got the chop, so she decided to de-camp while the opportunity was viable. She'll do a book deal, and possibly a made-for-TV movie, and her captors will be freedom fighters while the soldiers who were looking for her will be scum-of-the-earth types. Moonbat is as moonbat does.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 02, 2006 01:30 AM (0yYS2)

6 Dr Rusty, You were right, I was wrong. Sorry, Jill; based on years of conditioning by your fellow Ann Arbor America haters, I was willing to sell you out in a heartbeat. IM: join me in reserving all other judgment until she has had a Bud or two...

Posted by: Jaibones at April 02, 2006 02:35 AM (wes5d)

7 I must admit that I was one of the cynics. I think I was just tired of these hostage frauds. For instance, in the Sgrena case, Italian magistrates are investigating a US soldier for murder, in the case where the Italian agent was killed. And, get this, attempted murder for the wounding of terrorist fundraiser Sgrena. In my opinion, she should be the one on trial. I thought there were some parallels between Sgrena and Carroll. That clearly is not the case. Carroll is not Sgrena.

Posted by: Kate at April 02, 2006 04:19 AM (QKJeY)

8 She was on their side before she got kidnapped, so I don't give a good flying rat's ass about her one way or another. She slept with the enemy, so in my book she's a traitor, and it's too bad they didn't give her the chop too.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 02, 2006 07:37 AM (0yYS2)

9 But IM people fuck up. Could be a life changing experience maybe? She has value. Not let's see what she does with it now.

Posted by: Howie at April 02, 2006 09:29 AM (D3+20)

10 IM, yes, she's a moonbat, but a conservative is nothing but a moonbat who got mugged by reality. Jill Carroll got mugged by reality. There may be hope for her yet.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 02, 2006 10:13 AM (8e/V4)

11 Perhaps we should send a list to the terrorists of whom we all agree should have there heads chopped off.

Posted by: john Ryan at April 02, 2006 12:20 PM (N+r4D)

12 No probably we shoul dnot advocatebeheading anyone no matter how much they might deserve it. Like he guy that confessed to what was it 116? He deserves it but being civilized he should probably just be hanged or shot after a fair and speedy trial of course.

Posted by: Howie at April 02, 2006 08:44 PM (D3+20)

13 Jesus H., I can't believe this. You guys are falling all over yourselves to apologize for a traitor. I have no hope anymore, so I'm preparing myself for the downfall of our nation, which shouldn't be long when even "evil neocons" refuse to call a spade a spade. The moonbats have won the propaganda battle, but it will be a Phyrric victory, because when the muslims and illegals take over, then even their most aredent apologists will be rounded up and killed off. At least that's some small consolation.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 06:43 AM (0yYS2)

14 I would have rather Jill said warÂ’s not my thing IÂ’ll help in the effort in my own way.. Caring for the Iraqi people is good. We need people like Jill and CPT in a way. You canÂ’t win just by war along you have to work with the people. While is with they had not been so naÃƒÂ¯ve and said silly things before hand. She kind of had just who is the bad juys mixed up. No liberals have a place in this war if they want it. What better example of the evil as a liberal like her comes along and they turn on her too. Bad bad press for the enemy this time. IÂ’m sure a lot of people would rather she did not go and cost the man power and intelligence to look for her. But surely some things were learned in the process and when she is debriefed even more will/was learned to tie in with that. I would rather Jill not have got herself into that but like Vinnie says we fight for her right to be a fool too. If she feels she must, she must. LetÂ’s just hope she doesnÂ’t get a wild hair again and the rest learn a good lesson. I don't agree with what she said before but whqat happened sure pust one hell of a dent in that line of thought.

Posted by: Howie at April 03, 2006 07:57 AM (D3+20)

15 I don't agree with everything you said, IM, but you are right about the lack of courage of convictions I see developing on the conservative side. You see, you can't be popular with the press, the Hollywood types, the CofC types, the soft liberal and conservative stooges, or even the hard Left. I see this all the time with parents now trying to be friends with their kids rather than being a parent, which requires control and guidance for children. I think that our country may be lost. I see very few even willing to fight these illegals who come into our country and then proceed to tell us what to do. Between the Democrats, who wish to use this horde to gain power, and the lazy ass Republicans who use this illegal labor for ill gains, I believe this to be an alliance that destroys our nation.

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 03, 2006 08:55 AM (rUyw4)

16 As usual JJ, you're right on the money. You're welcome to join me in my fortress in the mountains when the time comes, but apologists shouldn't bother, because food, shelter, and ammo will only be for those with the guts to fight.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 04, 2006 08:33 PM (0yYS2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Where I Rebut Jeff Goldsteing AGAIN

open thread.

Posted by: Vinnie at 08:43 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 14 words, total size 1 kb.

Open Thread

Open thread II

Posted by: Vinnie at 08:41 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 7 words, total size 1 kb.

Open Thread

open thread

Posted by: Vinnie at 08:39 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 6 words, total size 1 kb.

OMFG

Not only is this ridiculous, did you see the shoes he wore to the Oscars?

Atrocious! Get the man some proper footwear!

And that tie! Tres gauche, darlings.

Posted by: Vinnie at 06:34 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 30 words, total size 1 kb.

Jawa Issues Fatwa

As most readers know, your Sith Master recently entertained the prospect of a new job. Imagine the thrill of interviewing for a more challenging and rewarding position only to be let down by being rejected. Denied with a simple, "We're sorry. We've chosen someone else." Okay, fine. Brush it off. Life has its ups and downs and there'll be other opportunities.

But today, guess what? Back channel scuttlebutt has it that your blogging mainstay and candidate was rejected for an academic position because he is a conservative. In fact, the rumor is that The Jawa Report was specifically mentioned as an indicator of your Sith Master's lack of appropriate liberal credentials. Realizing The Jawa Report reflects conservatism and conservatism in academia is tantamount to having the Eboli virus, there was no chance from the get go.

Blogging anonymously provided no protection because someone leaked to the university administration the information about your Sith Master and The Jawa Report. The administration recoiled and totally disregarded such things as qualifications and capabilities. Being a conservative is a deal-breaker in academia.

Therefore, The Jawa Report officially issues a fatwa declaring a war of words against the leaker who is also a blogger. People are already investigating. A field of suspects is being narrowed and you will be found soon. So, declare yourself, you stinking vermin, and let the games begin.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 03:05 PM | Comments (25) | Add Comment
Post contains 233 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Oh I just said something to the university as a joke. The only reply I got was that they didn't believe they actually interviewed Pat Buchanen.

Posted by: Chad Evans at April 01, 2006 03:31 PM (uimQk)

2 Dr. Shackleford, As always, I will turn my bow in the direction of the sound of cannon fire. A sailor can rarely go wrong if he brings his ship alongside the enemy. Standing by for you to identify a target as hostile. A humble brigantine are we, but standing by to lay aside the scurvy dog. No quarter.

Posted by: CDR Salamander at April 01, 2006 03:48 PM (YEJjq)

3 If that's the case Rusty, you're better off without that job and the morons that would have come with it.

Posted by: Graeme at April 01, 2006 04:34 PM (IhVC3)

4 There is no diversity when it comes to academia. I learned that in the early 90s when a prof made clear his thoughts about the 'evil' Republicans. I used his bigotry against him by spewing such things in a paper that I didn't actually believe and he gave me an "A" for the class. As a student, I fought back the only way I could. Rusty, I hope you find the jerk and bust this wide open.

Posted by: RepJ at April 01, 2006 04:35 PM (y6n8O)

5 Rusty, as we say in Texas, a good old fashioned ass kicking is in order.

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 01, 2006 04:44 PM (rUyw4)

6 >>>Realizing The Jawa Report reflects conservatism and conservatism in academia is tantamount to having the Eboli virus, there was no chance from the get go. That's curious. I thought Liberals celebrated diversity.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 01, 2006 05:02 PM (8e/V4)

7 Horrible news. I'm so sorry Jawa

Posted by: pka at April 01, 2006 05:04 PM (UA1kS)

8 Yeah,kick some ass, Doc.

Posted by: See-Dubya at April 01, 2006 05:37 PM (Zozmz)

9 I think that really sucks...what kind of a world are we living in. Can you sue? Suing seems to work for everyone else. I think the University needs to be put on notice that they shouldn't discriminate against someone just because they hold conservative political views. It's a free country, isn't it?

Posted by: Heroic Dreamer at April 01, 2006 05:42 PM (aH6Zf)

10 Wait, does this mean when most liberals talk about a right to privacy, they really mean some else (like abortion)? I'm shocked.

Posted by: Capp at April 01, 2006 05:45 PM (XgLFc)

11 Have you considered a place like Liberty University? They're relatively unknown, but their debate team is ranked #1 in the country (Harvard is #14). I don't know the caliber of school you currently work at, or was applying to, but you might want to consider some alternative, non-big name schools. Domino's Pizza owner Tom Monaghan just opened Ave Maria University in sunny Naples, FL. It's new, and I'm sure they're searching for a few experienced, qualified professors.

Posted by: Rob at April 01, 2006 06:21 PM (BHl1d)

12 Actually, Harvard dropped to #33 overall. Liberty is still #1. http://www.whitman.edu/rhetoric/ndt/index.htm

Posted by: Rob at April 01, 2006 07:11 PM (BHl1d)

13 Sucks. I'm an academian myself, but since I teach a skills-based course at an obscure school where few qualified people apply, no one seems to really give a rip about my politics. Still, I know how political and backstabbing it can be at schools. Again, sucks, and BTW, I'm new to the blog and don't even know you're real name so it wasn't me. Heck, you could be Dale Gribble for all I know (and just how did his alter-ego ever get a Phd., anyway?)

Posted by: David at April 01, 2006 07:15 PM (wZLWV)

14 Excuse me, "...were applying to...".

Posted by: Rob at April 01, 2006 07:16 PM (BHl1d)

15 You can't get an academic job because of your beliefs, but the unrepentant Taliban ambassador with a fourth-grade education is recruited into Yale for diversity reasons. Go figure.

Posted by: Timbo at April 01, 2006 07:45 PM (u6zaV)

16 I tried to resist they tortured me but finally after many hours of continuous strippers all over me begging and begging and rubbing and rubbing I said it, "Dale Dribble!!!!"

Posted by: Howie at April 01, 2006 07:59 PM (D3+20)

17 Dude, it was Reynolds. He didn't want any blogging competition at UTK.

Posted by: Preston Taylor Holmes at April 01, 2006 08:40 PM (XNuZO)

18 As a Democrat and a graduate of the ultimate northeastern liberal university, in Massachusetts no less, allow me to extend my apologies on behalf of the left (whom I really don't speak for because I'm more of a centrist but I digress!) What was done to you was an outrage. Colleges are supposed to be places where debate occurs, and where ideas are debated. It's pretty tough to get that done with one side under-represented. The blogger who leaked your ID should be ashamed of themselves, but at the end of the day, it's the university that should be hanging its head, because the leak should not have mattered. Keep on keepin' on, Dr. R.

Posted by: JoyReid at April 01, 2006 09:08 PM (o1EiK)

19 It will be a sweet day when we can finally hang these scumbags from the very windows of their ivory towers, and it can't come soon enough. I just hope I can get enough rope when I need it; I think there'll be a run on it.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 01, 2006 09:52 PM (0yYS2)

20 Why are the left so mean spirited, bitter, back stabbing and full of bile? Is it because they are losing nearly every argument? Have they always been this way? My best to you. My own experience is that everything happens to teach us a lesson, and we ARE stronger after the lesson.

Posted by: Counter Revolutionary at April 01, 2006 10:39 PM (Hr52v)

21 Damn Rusty, that's lame as hell for them (the University) and the rat to do. Stay strong, keep applying, your future success will be like wet farts on the nose of the leaking blogger.

Posted by: MidnightSun at April 01, 2006 11:50 PM (bHQwL)

22 No worries there, IM, I've been stockpiling for years, just waiting... Rusty, obviously this was not the place for you. Good thing you found out BEFORE you signed a contract. You're place is still out there, waiting... for its time.

Posted by: Sly2017 at April 02, 2006 01:44 AM (UADHi)

23 Bite me.

Posted by: CDR Salamander at April 02, 2006 09:45 AM (YEJjq)

24 Here's my reaction. Piece of crap.

Posted by: Leopold Stotch at April 02, 2006 03:14 PM (AxdDu)

25 Must have been Debbie!

Posted by: Sonic at April 02, 2006 08:51 PM (Gsn6c)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Jawapalooza In Sin City

I'll be in Vegas in early June to attend this.

I won't have time to meet any fellow bloggers though. I'll be too busy either listening to the fine roster of speakers or handing out pamphlets to the tourists on the Strip. Although I may take in a show.

Sorry.

Posted by: Vinnie at 06:08 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 58 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Isn't that when the US Army will detonate the 700-ton bomb?

Posted by: enzo at April 01, 2006 06:44 AM (7BIKb)

2 They'd better be careful or Chimpy will have the CIA turn the JOOOO-built earthquake machine loose on them, or maybe a tsunami or hurricane. In the desert. Yeah, he can do it.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 01, 2006 06:47 AM (0yYS2)

3 I don't know, Rusty, that convention sound more like a pukefest to me. But on the bright side you can bone up on your math skills counting all the lies told by that panel of "experts".

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 01, 2006 08:52 AM (rUyw4)

4 Hey JJ, this is kinda OT, but is there any good quail shooting in your neck of the woods? I'm planning a fall quail safari, so I'm open to suggestions.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 01, 2006 09:24 AM (0yYS2)

5 No, IM, the quail have been decimated by fire ants and habitat destruction. The last quail hunt I went on was in Kansas. They were plentiful during my younger days, and I enjoyed hunting quail and doves both. Times have changed for the worse, IM. A real shame.

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 01, 2006 10:32 AM (rUyw4)

6 Well that sucks. I remember there used to be lots of quail and grouse habitat here too, but not much anymore. We have tons of geese, doves, and turkeys, but I don't eat geese or doves, and you don't wingshoot turkeys. I guess I'll have to go to one of those big Georgia plantations and pay the price.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 01, 2006 10:36 AM (0yYS2)

7 That errr.. sounds like uhhhh... fun... You know... the kind of fun like... say... sticking pencils up one's urethra...

Posted by: LC CanForce 101 at April 01, 2006 10:38 AM (3smJS)

8 Damn LC! I just got up - turned on the computer - and went straight to Jawa - and the 1st thing I see is this IMAGE you just painted in my mind! Uuurrrgggghhh! Thanks a lot Cannadian buddy!

Posted by: hondo at April 01, 2006 10:44 AM (StM4D)

9 Hey Joe, What are you doing with that Niger yellowcake document in your hand? I'm goin' down to expose my old lady, I caught her messin' 'round with some more WMD plans.

Posted by: MidnightSun at April 01, 2006 11:54 PM (bHQwL)

10 Sorry Hondo, it just seemed almost as pleasant as attending these events in Las Vegas.

Posted by: LC CanForce 101 at April 02, 2006 12:57 AM (3smJS)

11 Hey Joe, What are you doing with that Niger yellowcake document in your hand? I'm goin' down to expose my old lady, I caught her messin' 'round with some more WMD plans. Posted by MidnightSun at April 1, 2006 11:54 PM

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 02, 2006 01:31 AM (0yYS2)

12 Hey Joe, What are you doing with that Niger yellowcake document in your hand? I'm goin' down to expose my old lady, I caught her messin' 'round with some more WMD plans. Posted by MidnightSun at April 1, 2006 11:54 PM Well. All rightey then.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 02, 2006 01:32 AM (0yYS2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

She Never Was All That Hot Anyway

I just don't admire Angelina Jolie anymore. Really, she's just doesn't do it for me any longer.

Besides, she's not really good gay, she's only part-time good gay.

It's time to get past superficial things and admire the true champions of good gay.

Mmm....Rosie O'Donnell....

Posted by: Vinnie at 06:00 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 59 words, total size 1 kb.

ACLU Sues in Support of 'Creative' 'Non-Threatening' Student Poet

From First Coast News in Brunswick, Georgia:

ROME, GA (AP) -- The American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia filed a federal lawsuit Monday against Murray County schools for expelling an eighth-grader for writing a poem on school violence.
The student, whose name was not released, was suspended and expelled last year after he showed a notebook full of poems to his English teacher, according to an ACLU statement.
"Kids are being raised in a society where there are violent images around them, not just in movies but in the news," said ACLU attorney Beth Littrell. "Their writing may reflect that and the school should not be punishing them for their creative expression unless it's truly threatening."

The poem is not included in the story, but Jay at Stop the ACLU received the poem in question in an email: more...

Posted by: Bluto at 12:11 AM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 359 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Call me an old fuddy-duddy, but this kind of poetry for a child denotes a psychological problem. He's what, 13 or 14? How will the ACLU plead the case? That he has a right to express himself and leave it at that? He needs help.

Posted by: Oyster at April 01, 2006 07:23 AM (YudAC)

2 As long as he's contributing to the downfall of civilization in some small way, they'll back him. Liberals all need killing.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 01, 2006 08:01 AM (0yYS2)

3 And any person who would defend this little creep needs help, too. The ACLU, well, I think IM pointed out the motivation of that organization. Destroy society as we know it and remake it into what? It boggles the mind.

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 01, 2006 08:57 AM (rUyw4)

4 in high school i've written some stuff in when I was in a funk or depressed mood.. (and who hasn't gotten depressed a time or two in high school) but NEVER turned it in as an assignment.. I would hope to think that most other students could use disern that too.. if they can't or if that is the tamest poem that kid turned in, then yes, he/she could use help or a 'safe' place to talk..

Posted by: The Other Dave at April 01, 2006 08:58 AM (W0Vif)

5 Since when is school instruction limited to the 3 R's? The teaching of acceptable societal behavior and limits (threats are not acceptable or tolerable)should be supported by legal standards not reproached by them.

Posted by: justa at April 01, 2006 09:41 AM (XU9K/)

6 Imagine what would happen if someone had tried to intervene months prior with that pair in Columbine. Same story I suppose. "Truly threatening"???? Truly??? How does one quantify that?

Posted by: hondo at April 01, 2006 10:51 AM (StM4D)

7 I taught Jr. High, and I can't imagine any of my students writing something like that. It's simply not age-appropriate "creative expression." I hope the teachers aren't so LLL that they won't oppose this kids' re-admission.

Posted by: amyc at April 01, 2006 02:10 PM (d4MD5)

8 ugh apostrophe fault

Posted by: amyc at April 01, 2006 02:11 PM (d4MD5)

9 Destroy society as we know it and remake it into what? A feudal, hegemonic, communist dystopia, ran by the party, of course. I've read Marx, Lenin, et al, and the unifying theme in all their works is that Western civilization must be destroyed and replaced with a "workers paradise", wherein the few live in parasitic splendor off of the labor of the many, with no way for one of the many to become one of the few. In short, communism is a twisted form of feudalism. Socialists and muslims are the blood enemies of civilization, and must be killed if we're going to save it.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 02, 2006 07:43 AM (0yYS2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

March 31, 2006

ABC Producer Suspended Over Email: 'Bush makes me sick.' (Updated)

ABC weekend Good Morning America producer John Green (previous post here) has reportedly been suspended for a month by ABC. From the New York Observer:

ABC News executives have suspended Weekend Good Morning America executive producer John Green for a month, after two politically charged personal e-mails Green sent to a colleague were leaked to the press, according to two network sources.

Click here to see memo.

The exposure of Green's gross bias went virtually unreported by the mainstream media.

Update: protein wisdom notes that another Green memo describes Green's distaste for Madeleine Albright because she has "Jew shame".

Meanwhile, the mainstream media have remained silent on the original memo story and the decision to suspend Green, which was made, conveniently, on a Friday in order to minimize its impact in the standard news cycle. ABC needn't have bothered; their buddies are covering for them just fine.

Via the Drudge Report.

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.

Posted by: Bluto at 05:27 PM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 177 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Is that with or without pay? If they're just giving him a bonus month vacation, that would make me sick.

Posted by: Stephen Macklin at March 31, 2006 06:08 PM (DdRjH)

2 He was set up by KKKarl Rove and/or the Hellibacon/Zionist/Neocon/Space Alien cabal. Da JOOOOooooooooOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooozzz got 'im!

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 31, 2006 07:06 PM (0yYS2)

3 hahaha! another one bites the dust.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 31, 2006 07:15 PM (8e/V4)

4 You know, I don't care that the guy thinks this or that he sent personal e-mails to that effect. It's not a first amendment issue--his employer is private--but I've sent politically charged personal e-mails from work and I wouldn't expect to get fired for that. I do care about biased news coverage. Let the guy work, just be honest about his biases and quit pretending that ABC is objective.

Posted by: See-Dubya at March 31, 2006 07:26 PM (Zozmz)

5 >>>Let the guy work, just be honest about his biases and quit pretending that ABC is objective. I see your point. By firing him ABC gets to pretend they're objective even though they aren't. They'll only replace him with another one just like him.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 31, 2006 07:32 PM (8e/V4)

6 As far as I know, they didn't fire him; they suspended him for a month. What's more telling, and chilling, is the near total MSM news blackout on the memo and the suspension.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at March 31, 2006 08:54 PM (RHG+K)

7 I like to look at this as more testimony to the power of the Internet, with no consensus control to silence real news.

Posted by: Javapuke at March 31, 2006 11:37 PM (bt+Dw)

8 Were the emails sent through his work account? That would make a difference. Otherwise, I'm with C Dub. If they'd all just qust quit pretending... And I'm still wondering why Jews largely remain in the Democratic Party when most of the anti-semitism we hear of comes from that party.

Posted by: Oyster at April 01, 2006 06:04 AM (YudAC)

9 Oyster, What an interesting comment about Jews and the Democrat Party! Might it be that, in general terms, Republicans do not support the Bill of Rights that protects people from an abusive government? (They may have experience in that regard.) (Today being April Fools Day, it is difficult to know when one's leg is being pulled... or not)

Posted by: Dale at April 01, 2006 06:14 AM (bmPgK)

10 "...Republicans do not support the Bill of Rights that protects people from an abusive government..." What? Hey everyone, here's a liberal knock-knock joke. Knock-knock! Who's there? BUSHISHITLER! Bushishitler who? YEAAARGH!!!

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 01, 2006 06:45 AM (0yYS2)

11 "Might it be that, in general terms, Republicans do not support the Bill of Rights that protects people from an abusive government?" Even if such a statement were true, what the heck does it have to do with mine?

Posted by: Oyster at April 01, 2006 07:26 AM (YudAC)

12 ABC News its still the Awful Broadcasting Company

Posted by: sandpiper at April 01, 2006 08:52 AM (uo3LX)

13 Let's see. Just for the moment I am a Jew. Hey! I'm rich. Ok, not really, but here we go. Conversation overheard between me and my Jewish neighbor who is a Democrat: "Uh, Aaron, the Democrats are now saying that the Jews are the ones at fault in Palestine, and if we would just surrender Israel and let the Palis take over, they would be so kind and loving toward us, especially to our women." "The Democrats said that. And they now call us Zionists and obstructionists and xenophobic. But, the Democrats promise to protect us from the evil Republicans. You know, the evil party that supports Israel and fights terror. And when you talk to al-Queda and other terrorists in the ME like Hamas and Hezbollah, they listen in without telling you. Now this is very bad, especially for the terrorists and their enablers. I don't know, Joseph, I've been a Democrat all my life, and just because they have become a party of anti-Americanism and pro-terror is no reason to leave now." "Ok, Aaron, I see your logic. The Democrats have turned against us, but hey, they are sure to need us sometime in the future, so ride that jackass to the bitter end."

Posted by: jesusland joe at April 01, 2006 09:22 AM (rUyw4)

14 Oyster, there are basically two factions of Jews; those who love America and support Israel, and those who do not. There are a few who love America and do not support Israel, but I have met few of these. I used to think the divide was along secular and religious lines, but now, having met many of both persuasions and read many works from both sides, I see it goes deeper and is much more complex, but the fact remains that there are many in the echelons of power in this country, Mayor Bloomberg of New York, for example, who seem to feel that they should side with muslims who want to kill them rather than with Americans, (read: Evil Whitey), who have been their only champions for the last half-century. My short answer is this: I don't trust anyone anymore, because such inexplicable behavior of taking sides with a declared enemy, or known traitors, is either indication of insanity, stupidity, or ulterior motives. Our own president refuses to do his job, defends the enemy's doctrine while pretending to fight them, and muslims and illegal aliens are still flooding into our country with the one goal of taking over. Nero was more attentive to his duties than Bush. At this rate, America will be unlivable in a few years, but we have no place else to go, so we must choose to fight, or submit and lose our country. I choose to fight, even if it means fighting against our own government, which it looks like will be the case, since they seem to be thoroughly infiltrated by communists, muslims, and appeasers.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 03, 2006 06:37 AM (0yYS2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

164kb generated in CPU 0.3242, elapsed 0.4614 seconds.
137 queries taking 0.3229 seconds, 493 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy

Monthly Traffic

Pages: 19963
Files: 74
Bytes: 343.3M
CPU Time: 30:38
Queries: 2181394

Content

Posts: 5690
Comments: 76631

Feeds

April 03, 2006

April 02, 2006

April 01, 2006

March 31, 2006

Search Thingy

Recent Comments

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

Monthly Traffic

Content

Feeds