Long opinion piece on how South Korean President Roh Moo-hyu is bringing about the end of the US-South Korea alliance. Hat tip Gates of Vienna.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/19/2006 00:12 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Good. Can we have a few months to move our stuff to Pusan and ship it out before we whack Kimmie.
Seriously, pulling out of SK is the most aggressive thing we can do to the Norks. Once our 'hostages' -- as one SK lawmaker referred to our troops -- are off the peninsula, we can pursue a policy vs. the North that is independent of the corrupt "Sunshine Policy."
#2
I have read articles by Lee before. I think he is overstating the threat to US security. SK has been acting foolishly for a while. It is good for us that their foolishness is now disentangling us from them.
But if they do throw us out, it will be interesting to see what happens. Countries that throw the Americans out do not necessarily have great track records. Think France, the Philippines, and to a large extent Germany. Making the barbaric Aemrican occupiers the focus of attention may be a good way to distract attention from domestic problems, but it does not solve those problems. American troops are not always good neighbors, but throwing them all out will either increase defence costs or reduce security. And why alienate the world's largest market? For what?
And the Japanese will not watch the eviction of the Americans without response. That would ultimately be the stengthening of Abe's hand in the depacification and remilitarization of Japan. Though there's lots of hand wringing in the Military-Industrial Complex about the growth of the Chinese military, it would be mooted in a year by the transformation of the Japanese self-defence forces into a robust military. This is something for China to consider well as they continue to prop up Kimmie.
Likewise, markets could shun South Korean exports, particularly durable goods such as automobiles, due to the increased political risk of Korean sourced parts as well as anti-Korean reactions in the U. S. and possibly Japan.
All-in-all a very irrational policy. No wonder it may be adopted by the Koreans.
#6
Throw us out? Why would they do that, they will have to pay to protect themselves then. And money is one thing that those little guys understand in no uncertain terms. I think you are looking at it wrong if you think we may get thrown out. They should be worried that we will leave.
#8
The SKors already pay for most of their defense. Remember, they have a capable army. Plus they pay part of the upkeep for the American forces there. So money-wise it wouldn't be that big a hit to them if they needed to upgrade their military after our departure.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/19/2006 9:57 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I hope we get our troops out of there before Kim sends his starving millions to pillage the South. Then the SKs can see how they enjoy a life free of the "Damn Yankees".
Al
Posted by: frozen al ||
09/19/2006 10:45 Comments ||
Top||
#11
We should have pulled out in the early 90s. South Korea is a democracy and a fairly wealthy one at that. They don't need us and if Clinton had foresight he would have given them a few years notice before pulling back. Then we started bribing the Kim kids in the North and withdrawal with face became difficult.
Subtitle: Western civilization really is at risk from Muslim extremists.
Wow, it only took him 5 years and 8 days to figure it out! That has to be some kind of new record for a liberal.
Snip:
"But my correspondence with liberals has convinced me that liberalism has grown dangerously out of touch with the realities of our world specifically with what devout Muslims actually believe about the West, about paradise and about the ultimate ascendance of their faith.
On questions of national security, I am now as wary of my fellow liberals as I am of the religious demagogues on the Christian right.
This may seem like frank acquiescence to the charge that 'liberals are soft on terrorism.' It is, and they are." Rest at link
#1
Unless liberals realize that there are tens of millions of people in the Muslim world who are far scarier than Dick Cheney, they will be unable to protect civilization from its genuine enemies.
Increasingly, Americans will come to believe that the only people hard-headed enough to fight the religious lunatics of the Muslim world are the religious lunatics of the West. Indeed, it is telling that the people who speak with the greatest moral clarity about the current wars in the Middle East are members of the Christian right, whose infatuation with biblical prophecy is nearly as troubling as the ideology of our enemies. Religious dogmatism is now playing both sides of the board in a very dangerous game. So the trunks are almost as bad as the libs? Or is he just establishing his "liberal bona fides"?
While liberals should be the ones pointing the way beyond this Iron Age madness, they are rendering themselves increasingly irrelevant. Being generally reasonable and tolerant of diversity, liberals should be especially sensitive to the dangers of religious literalism. But they aren't.
The same failure of liberalism is evident in Western Europe, where the dogma of multiculturalism has left a secular Europe very slow to address the looming problem of religious extremism among its immigrants. The people who speak most sensibly about the threat that Islam poses to Europe are actually fascists.
To say that this does not bode well for liberalism is an understatement: It does not bode well for the future of civilization.
Maybe Scoop Jackson returns?
Posted by: Bobby ||
09/19/2006 17:21 Comments ||
Top||
In a clear sign of the deepening Unholy Alliance between the Democratic Party Left and Islamist extremists, Minnesotas Democratic Party has nominated for U.S. Congress a former member of the Nation of Islam who has defended membership in the Bloods street gang, and called cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal and leftist terrorist Sara Jane Olson freedom fighters.
Voters in the Democratic Farmer-Labor Party (DFL), the Minnesota state affiliate of the national Democratic Party, elected Keith Ellison Hakim as their candidate to replace Minneapoliss outgoing 14-term DFL Congressman Martin Sabo in the 5th Congressional District. Encompassing Minneapolis and its near suburbs, the Fifth is the state's most liberal urban district and the DFL's greatest stronghold, writes the Minneapolis St. Paul City Pages. Rejecting three other well-funded and highly qualified DFL candidates, the DFL endorsed Ellison, who has dropped his Islamic name, Hakim, for the race.
The DFL is now handing its greatest stronghold over to a candidate with long ties to Louis Farrakhans anti-Semitic Nation of Islam and who has already accrued at least an estimated $20,000-$35,000 in funding from the terrorist-connected Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), including the maximum personal donation from CAIR chief Nihad Awad.
#1
calls for a secessionist black land base consisting of Arkansas, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Mississippi.
That's all they want? Sounds reasoble to me, just give us a right of way over the Mississippi River at Baton Rouge. It'll raise our national statistics in everything from GDP per head to educational achievement.
There used to be a time when Joe Scarborough, host of MSNBC's Scarborough Country, considered himself-and was considered-a conservative. He was a presenter at the 2004 Media Research Center (MRC) Dishonors Awards, which "honors" the most blatant and biased examples of distorted liberal reporting at a dinner that includes hilarious clips of the offending statements. Recently, however, Scarborough put himself up for a nomination, as he devoted his show to the question, "Is Bush an Idiot?," and won the plaudits of the Washington Post and the left-wing bloggers at Mother Jones.
I say to my friends at the MRC, who have been kind enough to include me as a judge of those awards for many years now, that Scarborough should be "honored" at the next dinner for his pathetic excuse of a program. It is obvious that Scarborough, like his associate Keith Olbermann, has decided that he needs to increase his audience by appealing to the anti-Bush fringe.
The producers at the ratings-starved Scarborough show hit on the perfect theme guaranteed to make one famous in the liberal press. But Scarborough is the one who came across looking like a buffoon, if not an idiot.
During a follow-up appearance on MSNBC, where it was proclaimed by anchor Amy Rohbach that the video of this particular show on Bush had been played thousands of times on iTube!, Scarborough repeated his claim that a number of conservatives in and out of Congress think Bush is a shallow thinker. But he wouldn't name any names, except to say that he doesn't think Bush is an idiot. He's either a coward or he's making it all up.
I had fled "Scarborough Country" a while back, having been dismayed by nauseating segments on celebrities. It was becoming truly difficult to watch. Here are some ground-breaking "stories" covered by Scarborough:
Still ahead on Scarborough Country. First it was Oprah. Now Madonna is the latest celebrity crashing weddings Plus, a catfight on the catwalk. What was that movie? Two supermodels face off for the title of the body.
A French paparazzi magazine got itself into hot water today by publishing a picture of this French politician scantily clad on the beach.
And finally, the shocking news, fans of "Saved by the Bell" probably aren't shocked by it, but Dustin Diamond, the actor who played Screech, was mugged. Jill, what happened to this? I heard he was mugged by a girl.
Still ahead: a controversial new music video showed Jesus smoking, drinking and gambling. That sounds like my college friends. Why does trashing Jesus Christ sell records in Hollywood?
And later, KISS rocker Gene Simmons opens up about life, sex and Mel Gibson.
The issue isn't Bush. It's whether Scarborough regards his audience as a bunch of idiots. In any case, this "average Joe" has lost touch with with the heartland he once represented in Congress.
Scarborough's lurch to the left is unfortunately typical of what has been happening at the network. We had hoped that Dan Abrams, the former host turned MSNBC executive, would make better use of conservative Monica Crowley, but she has been reduced to occasional appearances as an anchor. She deserves her own show and, considering Scarborough's erratic conduct, should be given his time slot.
Crowley was in the anchor chair when Abrams "broke" the story that a suspect in the Ramsey murder case had been found. That "exclusive" looks increasingly shaky. Abrams should spend less time obtaining questionable exclusives and more time putting real conservatives on the air.
Anne Apoplebaum, WaPo columnist channels .com. You go, girl!
We've been here before, of course. Similar protests were sparked last winter by cartoon portrayals of Muhammad in the Danish press. Similar apologies resulted, though Benedict's is more surprising than those of the Danish government. No one, apparently, can remember any pope, not even the media-friendly John Paul II, apologizing for anything in such specific terms: not for the Inquisition, not for the persecution of Galileo and certainly not for a single comment made to an academic audience in an unimportant German city.
But Western reactions to Muslim "days of anger" have followed a familiar pattern, too. Last winter, some Western newspapers defended their Danish colleagues, even going so far as to reprint the cartoons -- but others, including the Vatican, attacked the Danes for giving offense.
Clearly, a handful of apologies and some random public debate -- should the pope have said X, should the Danish prime minister have done Y -- are ineffective and irrelevant: None of the radical clerics accepts Western apologies, and none of their radical followers reads the Western press. Instead, Western politicians, writers, thinkers and speakers should stop apologizing -- and start uniting.
By this, I don't mean that we all need to rush to defend or to analyze this particular sermon; I leave that to experts on Byzantine theology. But we can all unite in our support for freedom of speech -- surely the pope is allowed to quote from medieval texts -- and of the press. And we can also unite, loudly, in our condemnation of violent, unprovoked attacks on churches, embassies and elderly nuns. By "we" I mean here the White House, the Vatican, the German Greens, the French Foreign Ministry, NATO, Greenpeace, Le Monde and Fox News -- Western institutions of the left, the right and everything in between. True, these principles sound pretty elementary -- "we're pro-free speech and anti-gratuitous violence" -- but in the days since the pope's sermon, I don't feel that I've heard them defended in anything like a unanimous chorus. A lot more time has been spent analyzing what the pontiff meant to say, or should have said, or might have said if he had been given better advice.
All of which is simply beside the point, since nothing the pope has ever said comes even close to matching the vitriol, extremism and hatred that pour out of the mouths of radical imams and fanatical clerics every day, all across Europe and the Muslim world, almost none of which ever provokes any Western response at all. And maybe it's time that it should: When Saudi Arabia publishes textbooks commanding good Wahhabi Muslims to "hate" Christians, Jews and non-Wahhabi Muslims, for example, why shouldn't the Vatican, the Southern Baptists, Britain's chief rabbi and the Council on American-Islamic Relations all condemn them -- simultaneously?
Maybe it's a pipe dream: The day when the White House and Greenpeace can issue a joint statement is surely distant indeed. But if stray comments by Western leaders -- not to mention Western films, books, cartoons, traditions and values -- are going to inspire regular violence, I don't feel that it's asking too much for the West to quit saying sorry and unite, occasionally, in its own defense. The fanatics attacking the pope already limit the right to free speech among their own followers. I don't see why we should allow them to limit our right to free speech, too.
The reaction to the Popes speech is going to hurt the trunks in the election one bit, either.
#3
I say the more riots the better. It keeps them occupied so they're not a) doing something about their pitiful economies b) building bombs and c) breeding. I don't think even the Mighty Mullahs can fight human nature, eventually we'll get the "boy who cried wolf" reaction and we can start making some progress.
Something's wrong. As I thumb through the pages of newspapers and magazines and flip through newscasts on radio and television, it seems that something is terribly wrong.
While the overwhelming majority of Muslims in America are peaceful citizens, their voices are not ringing out.
We are at war. Islamofascists have declared war on the United States and stated that they intend to kill all Americans. And they've shown us that they mean business.
We've just passed the anniversary of the worst attack on America in history, 9/11, when Muslim terrorists killed nearly 3,000 innocent men, women and children as they turned passenger planes into missiles. Yet the news is filled with stories of Muslims -- not loudly condemning the Muslim murderers -- but complaining of their treatment here and demanding Americans change their attitudes.
We Americans should change our attitudes? Terrorist cells have been discovered here. Plots to blow up bridges and the Sears Tower have been uncovered. Bomb-making supplies carried by Muslim terrorists have been stopped at our borders. A plot to bomb 10 airliners bound for the United States was foiled. Yet we Americans should change our attitudes?
America has opened its doors and universities to Muslims from foreign countries -- perhaps the best way for these students to see our freedoms and develop a new respect for our country. But where, I ask, is the returned show of support?
Pope Benedict is calling on moderate Muslims to speak out against the violent strain of Islam, calling jihad a movement against the nature of God. But where are the moderate Muslim voices here? Why aren't they speaking up to repudiate the kidnappings, suicide murders and beheadings done by Islamofascists?
For an answer, I went to the Web site of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, CAIR. But the CAIR site highlights a workshop on how to "Know Your Rights"; a section on "Political Empowerment"; a demand to put a Muslim holiday on all school calendars.
This past spring, Muslim students at Michigan State University held a protest -- not to decry Islamic terrorists -- but to speak out loudly against Danish cartoons depicting Mohammed as a terrorist. What's worse is this: When a tenured professor, I.S. Wichman, sent an e-mail to a student, the school's Muslim Student Association made the letter public and demanded that the professor be officially reprimanded.
What had Wichman written? He wrote that, more than being offended by the cartoons, he was offended "by beheadings of civilians, cowardly attacks on public buildings, suicide murderers, murders of Catholic priests (the latest in Turkey), burnings of Christian churches, the continued persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt, the imposition of Sharia law on non-Muslims, the rapes of Scandinavian girls and women, the murder of a film director in Holland, and the rioting and looting in France."
He went on to write, "If you do not like the values of the West -- see the First Amendment -- you are free to leave."
It seems that the students believe they have the right to protest cartoons, but professors don't have the right to speak out against murderous atrocities. Something's wrong.
To Michigan State's credit, the professor will not be reprimanded as he was exercising his right to free speech.
We are at war. Our soldiers are following the rules of war -- but their opposition is not.
CIA counterterrorism officers are buying private insurance to cover legal costs in case they are charged with a crime, as is being hinted at by some members of Congress who feel their interrogation techniques might be too "tough."
In Iraq, Americans have been kidnapped, tortured, beheaded, burned, hanged from bridges, dragged through streets. But the CIA's method of questioning a terrorist in a cold room while playing loud music is too "tough"?
We're fighting a war for civilization against an enemy bent on destroying it and creating an Islamic world based on a warped view of what true Islam is -- yet where are the voices of American Muslims condemning this enemy?
Something's wrong.
Silly Rabbit. She still believes in tooth fairies, Santa Claus, and 'moderate' muslims....
#1
While the overwhelming majority of Muslims in America are peaceful citizens, their voices are not ringing out.
They're content to pay for jihad, so that others may slaughter their way into paradise to vouch for them.
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
09/19/2006 11:10 Comments ||
Top||
#2
This is the sound of one hand clapping.
What's the Cluebat's batting average, I wonder... given the voting record, about .500?
I'm going to give her a little bit of credit... You're right, Mary. Something is wrong.
Although I favor a knockout punch, perhaps, with ever so gentle nudges like this article and enough time, time we probably do not have if we are to avoid some future disasterous attack, a few more will begin asking the same questions - and eventually get it. Better than most articles on the topic since it does beg the question she poses.
#3
Never before has an entire civilization depended upon its survival upon the self-restraint of those they constantly attack. Self-restraint only goes so far.
The Muslim world view tends to favor Muslims, even psycho ones who "aren't Muslim" above all others. This attitude will make it easier to rationalise the destruction of Islam if they score another big hit.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/19/2006 18:57 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Dear Silly Face,
Since you're in Chicago, you know there are no MM's present. You have some of the most virulent Muzzies in the US (outside of Dearborn) right there among you. Those mosks sprouting up all over the burbs are spouting the most unbelievable garbage imaginable. Silly Faces like you will be among their first victims. Although I hope they jump the fat hog O'Donnell first. The ones you don't hear spouting are busily donating to their favorite charity buying more weapons for their cousins back home. It's time for all do-gooders to awaken from their slumber.
#2
and I think a lot of the hundreds of domestic busts of terrorists and their symp's are made possible by muzzies who are moderates. They're just being..moderate about it.
#6
" . . . there are 154 Democrats in the House of Representatives who get a 100% rating from the terror apologists at CAIR. Currently there are 201 Democrats total in the House, which means that a full 76%, more than 3/4's, of them get the CAIR stamp of approval.
On the flip side, there's only 8 Republicans who get CAIR's approval out of the 231 GOP'ers in the House. That's 3.5%.
Muslims are outraged over Pope Benedicts recent speech, in which he denounced violence as a means of bringing about religious conversion. How did they demonstrate their anger? Ironically, with violent protesteven murder.
The highlight of the Popes visit to his native Germany was an address at Regensberg, where he once taught. The speech was supposed to be memorable for its forceful response to the crisis caused by Western secularism. Instead, its more likely to be remembered as further proof, if we needed any, that ironyto say nothing of civilityis not one of Islams strongest suits.
The Pope spoke about the importance of reason within Christianity. As he put it, The encounter between the biblical message and Greek thought did not happen by chance. It was intended by God.
This encounter helped create Western civilization. And in rejecting Christianity, the Pope warned, Europe is rejecting the basis of the rationality that made Western achievements possible. That is a point you heard me make in commentaries on Rodney Starks terrific new book, The Victory of Reason.
This part of the Popes remarks was well received, even by some of his harshest critics. Unfortunately, this part, which was ninety percent of the speech, was washed away in the controversy.
The fuss is about what the Pope said about Islam. He quoted a fourteenth-century Byzantine Christian emperor, who, in a discussion about Christianity and Islam with a Persian scholar, said this: Show me just what Muhammad (May the Lord have mercy on his soul) brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.
Benedicts point was that forced conversion is contrary to Gods nature, as well as to both reason and faith. The effort to forcibly convert people to Islam is, for Benedict, an example of how the differences between the Christian and Islamic conception of God manifest themselves in the real worlda difference on display just a few weeks ago when Islamists tried to force the conversion of two Fox News journalists taken hostage.
In response to the Popes reasonable and factual comments, Muslims took to the streets demanding an apology and attacking Christian churches. The Iraqi branch of al-Qaeda pledged to break the Cross and spill the wine, leaving Christians with no choice but Islam or death. And on Sunday, Somali Islamist gunmen shot in the back and killed a Roman Catholic nun ministering to the poor in Mogadishu.
If Muslims had protested peacefully, they would have undercut the Popes remarks. Instead, they proved him correct.
Pope Benedict is the second religious leader of international stature to really call Islam to account. Franklin Graham did it a while back and was beaten up by the press for months. Well, the Pope is now going to suffer the same fate. The New York Times in a Saturday morning editorial blamed the Pope, and no mention was made of Muslim violence.
This controversy underscores the unpleasant truth that Islamic violence is deeply rooted in both the religious and cultural fabric of the Muslim world. It is time for the West to face that painful truth and to buckle down for what will be a long struggle. Thankfully, Pope Benedict is making us do that.
The lesson of history, learned over the centuries, is that where synagogues burn, so too will churches. Just a year ago, the abandoned synagogues of Gaza were desecrated and burned. There was little condemnation, except by those of us who knew that a society that burns a synagogue, will also kidnap, murder and terrorize. There was little mourning for the beautiful houses of worship that were attacked by rampaging mobs, except by those of us who knew
What was born in Gaza that day was a people who believed they had won. They saw our withdrawal as the beginning of their victory; our weakness as their strength. What they did to the synagogues of Gaza, they would do to churches given 'cause.'
that what was born in Gaza that day was a people who believed they had won. They saw our withdrawal as the beginning of their victory; our weakness as their strength. What they did to the synagogues of Gaza, they would do to churches given "cause."
What came out of Gaza, out of Iraq, out of Afghanistan is a movement to bring Islam to rule the earth. So intolerant is this religion that a picture is enough to incite murder, an errant word enough to justify rioting and the burning of holy sites. The Christian world and the Jewish world shy away from these truths because they are as abhorrent to the world we wish to believe exists as is ethnic profiling. We don't like the idea that it is possible to determine the threat someone poses based on his or her ethnic appearance. It is racist. It is wrong.
Though no 67-year-old Jewish grandmothers have hijacked plans or blown up buildings, to be fair, we must search and stop them as we would a young Muslim man. And if, in the time we take to search that grandmother, Abdullah or Mohammed succeeds in passing security unfettered and does blow something up, goes the reasoning, at least we have our humanity. At least we didn't single out one ethnic group. We may have 30 funerals to attend, but we have our humanity.
The bottom line is simply that we in the Western world don't act that way. We don't riot when insulted; we don't burn when inflamed.
But this concept is taking a beating as little "mistakes" trigger violent reactions in the Muslim world. No matter how we try to understand and excuse, the bottom line is simply that we in the Western world don't act that way. We don't riot when insulted; we don't burn when inflamed.
First, it was a cartoon in Denmark that showed a caricature of Mohammed's face. Poor taste, ill-advised; but justification for murder? Not in the Western world. Yet, in the Arab world, it was enough to cause rioting, which led to several deaths and a $1 million dollar death threat against the cartoonist. Interestingly enough, when an entire "art" show of cartoons against Israel and the Holocaust was officially sanctioned in Iran recently, there were no riots in the world, no burned buildings, no death threats. Go figure.
When the president of Iran calls for the destruction of Israel, and presumably the more than 5 million Jews within its borders, there were no riots, no death threats, no burned mosques or kidnapped journalists. When Jews were beaten in Russia, France, Yugoslavia, England and Belgium, there were no violent demonstrations, no riots and death threats.
The truth is in the flames that burned the churches and the firebombs thrown in Gaza. Last year, the world was silent to the atrocity of synagogues being burned. Just one year later, where synagogues burn, so too do churches.
Now, the Pope has spoken a few words, perhaps ill-timed, perhaps badly phrased, but the result is the same. The Arab world is alight. Despite the calming words of Jakarta rally organizer that "we Muslims have no violent character," violence seems to prevail. Several churches in Palestinian areas have been fire-bombed.
Deputy leader to the Turkish prime minister said the Pope was "going down in history in the same category as leaders such as Hitler and Mussolini." Hitler was responsible for the murder of at least 10 million people, by conservative estimates. His close ally Mussolini established a fascist dictatorship in Italy. To have an Islamic leader compare the Pope to these men of evil may help shed light on the ongoing propaganda war to paint Muslims as victims rather than aggressors. But the truth is in the flames that burned the churches, the bullets that were shot in the air, and the firebombs thrown in Gaza. Last year, the world was silent to the atrocity of synagogues being burned. Just one year later, the lesson returns. Where synagogues burn, so too do churches.
Posted by: Fred ||
09/19/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Interestingly enough, when an entire "art" show of cartoons against Israel and the Holocaust was officially sanctioned in Iran recently, there were no riots in the world, no burned buildings, no death threats. Go figure.
I am at the end of all possible patience.
Every genocidal and terrorist utterance needs to see another mosque put to the torch. My tolerance has reached its limits. Let the Muslims know what awaits even another single genocidal pronouncement by their psychotic mullahs. Every fatwah sees another mosque reduced to smoking embers.
#2
"Though no 67-year-old Jewish grandmothers have hijacked plans or blown up buildings, to be fair, we must search and stop them as we would a young Muslim man. And if, in the time we take to search that grandmother, Abdullah or Mohammed succeeds in passing security unfettered and does blow something up, goes the reasoning, at least we have our humanity."
And if, on seeing Abdullah and Mohammed about to board the plane, and knowing what you know about the threat we face, you decided to give them a closer look instead of pointlessly hassling the 67-year-old Jewish grandmother standing next to them, that would somehow mean you DON'T have your humanity???????
I have no patience for this kind of shit anymore.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
09/19/2006 6:03 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Dave,
I think you may be misinterpreting the 'we still have our humanity' line - I read that as sarcasm on the writer's part.
Best regards,
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
09/19/2006 9:47 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I don't know that the author's attitude toward political correctness quite rises to the level of "sarcasm," though he's clearly uncomfortable with it and sees-- at least a little-- the disastrous consequences of it. Yet he still sees ethnic profiling as "abhorrent."
Posted by: Dave D. ||
09/19/2006 10:16 Comments ||
Top||
#5
the world was silent to the atrocity of synagogues being burned. Just one year later, the lesson returns. Where synagogues burn, so too do churches.
I don't get this last line. Is he saying that no cares until churches start to burn? A bit of irony in that, isn't there. Christians have been massacred and churches have been burning all around the world, on a regular basis, for many, many years but no one reports it in mainstream media and there is no outrage. I stumbled across an internet site that kept track of Christian persecution. It was years ago. If I remember correctly it was one of those updated daily kind of things. It was a very long list.
#8
The writer is specific to Israel and the Palestinian territories, tabd. In that particular bit of the world, his chronology holds -- and the caring, such as it is, too. Although I suspect that had the pope not made that speech, about as much attention would have been paid in either case; nobody fussed when the PA hostage-holders used the alter of the church in Bethlehem as their toilet, and the prayer book pages to wipe their bottoms after.
#13
" . . . nobody fussed when the PA hostage-holders used the altar of the church in Bethlehem as their toilet, and the prayer book pages to wipe their bottoms after"
September 19, 2006: The U.S. Department of Defense's new microwave ray, crowd control system (ADS, for Active Denial System) has been delayed entering service, once again, and maybe for keeps. The generals are worried about the bad press they are certain they would receive if they used a "death ray" on civilians, or even armed hostiles. ADS broadcasts microwaves at a frequency that makes people feel like their skin is on fire. Tests have shown that no one can stand it for more than about five seconds, before desperately seeking to get away from the area. But after twelve years, and over nearly $100 million, ADS has solved numerous technical problems, but appears permanently stalled because of potential public relations difficulties.
All this is a common problem with "non-lethal weapons" (as things like ADS are called), which are not one hundred percent non-lethal. But people love to call them non-lethal, because such devices are intended to deal with violent individuals by using less lethal force.
A classic example of how this works is the Taser. A gun like device that fires two small barbs into an individual, and then zaps the victim with a non-lethal jolt of electricity, the Taser has been popular with police, who can more easily subdue violent, and often armed, individuals. Before Taser, the cops had a choice between dangerous (for everyone) hand-to-hand combat, or just firing their weapons and killing the guy. While the Taser has been a great success, for every thousand or so times you use it, the victim will die (either from a fall, another medical condition, use of drugs or whatever). This has been fodder for the media, and put Taser users, and non-lethal-weapons developers, on the defensive.
So the Department of Defense has to go through more human testing to get a better idea of what kind of accidental deaths the ADS could cause. The most common would be from falls, or getting trampled, as victims fled the ADS microwave ray. While the potential ADS users know, from combat experience, that ADS would cause far fewer fatalities than existing methods (firepower), they also know that any fatalities from ADS use would generate bad press. That could be a career ending event. When you have one dead body, you can't use the fact that you don't have ten, or a hundred, as a defense. OK use the MOAB instead
The war on terror has made ADS more acceptable for some situations, as it could be used to guard sensitive targets. This would include targets thought vulnerable to suicide bomber attack. ADS can be effective several hundred meters away, more than enough range to stop suspected suicide bombers who have ignored all other warnings. Navy ships in ports vulnerable to terrorist activity could also use ADS.
However, each ADS system costs about four million dollars, so they won't be passed out like riot shields and tear gas grenades. In 2004, it was thought that ADS could enter service in 2005, but then it was delayed for an additional year of testing and lawyer-proofing. That has turned into a delay of at least another year, or more. However, if the right emergency arose, ADS could be flown out right away.
Current thinking is that it might be better if ADS was used on some rioting Americans first, before using it a lot on foreigners. At the moment, however, there's a real shortage of nasty mobs in the United States. In the meantime, ADS cowers in the shadows, fearful and unused because of indignant lawyers and politicians, and journalists ready to exploit it for all its worth. Indignant lawyers and politicians, and journalists would be good test subjects. Use the green ray and turn the power to max. Of course the squiggly red ray would do in a pinch.
#8
You know what they should do? Say screw the non-lethal. You don't like tasers, fine. We'll use bullets. Oh? Someone /might/ get hurt if we zap them with the ADS? Okay, we'll stick to rifles so instead of hurt they get dead.
#9
AoS I got it, put it in the headline. Please excuse the new guy. While many were attending college I was developing an allergy to hot lead. But, I can still learn and take constructive criticism.
Link Death Ray Dies of Fear
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/19/2006 18:13 Comments ||
Top||
#12
GB USMC - you get a couple mulligans :-)
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/19/2006 18:15 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Damn, more PC idiotic bullshit. OK, get one to Dearborn fast. Next time they parade for Hezbollocks, set it to well done and french fry them. Next time Teddy starts screaming and tryinng to speak Espanol, set it to high fry and melt about 150 pounds of blubber off him. That's sufficient testing, then get it to Iraq pronto.
Exiled Muslim Cleric Behind London Protest Calling for Pope's Death
As suspected, it was followers of exiled cleric Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed who organized a rally yesterday outside of London's Westminster Cathederal calling for the death penalty for the Pope's blasphemy. Here is the call for the protest on a password protected internet forum run by Omar Bakri Mohammed from exile in Lebanon where he directs his followers in Britain. I figure a pair of 1000 pound bombs on his home should about do it.
#2
How did the process of evolution arrive at something so foul, so grotesque, so repulsive, so pustulent, so revolting, so ugly, and so utterly lacking in any redeeming qualities whatsoever, as Omar Bakri?
#5
Bullets cost money. If you're really wanting to off someone and send a message, skin them alive with dull rocks. It might take you several days, since it'll mostly be done with elbow grease, but I'm quite certain that anyone suffering such a fate will get the message you're irked at them. Of course, rolling them in salt and red pepper is just the dessert.
#8
How did the process of evolution arrive at something so foul, so grotesque, so repulsive, so pustulent, so revolting, so ugly, and so utterly lacking in any redeeming qualities whatsoever, as Omar Bakri?
Personally, I thank blame his spiritual progenitor, Abu Bakr Bashir.
Not to get sidetracked (that never happens on Rantburg) but yes, there are .50 caliber hollow points. My Desert Eagle is chambered in 50AE and there are plenty of ammo manufacturers which offer the 50AE in jacketed hollow points. Makes quite an 'impression'.
#11
Wonder if this is Omar's way of getting himself extradited back to England? I mean, they kicked his ass off the boat the last time he tried to slink out. British prisons probably beat Lebanese welfare bennies hands down.
#12
My Desert Eagle is chambered in 50AE and there are plenty of ammo manufacturers which offer the 50AE in jacketed hollow points.
Ah! Okay, that makes sense. Whenever I think of .50 cal, the .50 BMG is what comes to mind. No need for hollow points with that puppy, it makes more than an impression.
#14
How did the process of evolution arrive at something so foul, so grotesque, so repulsive, so pustulent, so revolting, so ugly, and so utterly lacking in any redeeming qualities whatsoever, as Omar Bakri?
Because scum floats, as does crap. And the astrologers who called us to the dawning of the age of Aquarius warned that evil would float to the surface and need to be dealt with through that dawn.
We're behind schedule. And space awaits. Hurry up dammit.
#5
Sirhan Sirhan was a Palestinian who converted twice to Christianity, presumably from that other religion we are not allowed to mentioned cos of blah, blah.
#7
Sirhan Sirhan was a Palestinian who converted twice to Christianity...
Twice?
Was he Muslim when he killed Kennedy?
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
09/19/2006 8:46 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Heh-heh - Dr. Adams is always great for a laugh.
Posted by: The Doctor ||
09/19/2006 8:58 Comments ||
Top||
#9
"he threatened to flush copies of The Vagina Monologues and the Communist Manifesto (both sacred and holy texts at his university) down the toilet of the Womens Resource Center"
You too can become a tenured professor at a major university!
Al
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
09/19/2006 14:36 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Muslims are outraged over Pope Benedicts recent speech, in which he denounced violence as a means of bringing about religious conversion. How did they demonstrate their anger? Ironically, with violent protesteven murder.
The lesson of history, learned over the centuries, is that where synagogues burn, so too will churches. Just a year ago, the abandoned synagogues of Gaza were desecrated and burned. There was little condemnation, except by those of us who knew that a society that burns a synagogue, will also kidnap, murder and terrorize. There was little mourning for the beautiful houses of worship that were attacked by rampaging mobs, except by those of us who knew 
September 19, 2006: The U.S. Department of Defense's new microwave ray, crowd control system (ADS, for Active Denial System) has been delayed entering service, once again, and maybe for keeps. The generals are worried about the bad press they are certain they would receive if they used a "death ray" on civilians, or even armed hostiles. ADS broadcasts microwaves at a frequency that makes people feel like their skin is on fire. Tests have shown that no one can stand it for more than about five seconds, before desperately seeking to get away from the area. But after twelve years, and over nearly $100 million, ADS has solved numerous technical problems, but appears permanently stalled because of potential public relations difficulties. 
Exiled Muslim Cleric Behind London Protest Calling for Pope's Death
