A JAIL boss apologised to fanatic Abu Hamza and other Muslim terror suspects when they were offered pork for dinner. They were furious when "spicy pork chops" was listed on the prison menu. Despite a Muslim ban on eating pigs they were told the meal was "suitable for Halal diets". Hook-handed cleric Hamza is in Belmarsh jail, South East London, fighting extradition to the US on a terror rap. Governor Geoff Hughes sent a letter of apology to all inmates. He wrote: "The mistake should never have happened. Spicy pork chops were described as suitable for Halal diets. Clearly that is nonsense." He ordered pork to be removed from the menus of all prisoners, including non-Muslims.
Gotta enforce those religious rules, whether the boyz are religious or not...
A prison source said: "The Muslims saw it as some sort of planned insult to their religion but that's crazy. It was just a mistake. But the governor still had to apologise. It's a joke."
Tales of the intentionally sensitive...
Posted by: Howard UK ||
08/19/2004 04:35 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
They should label it "another chicken meat" on the menu. Let it digest and then reveal the origin, pointing out that no 72 raisins would be fortcoming in the afterlife.
Would I be that nasty? Lemme think... ABSO-effing-LUTELY!
#7
"Governor Geoff Hughes ... ordered pork to be removed from the menus of all prisoners, including non-Muslims."
I hope this starts a riot. Why the fuck should other inmates' food options be determined by the presence of Muslims? What is going on in that idiot governor's head?!
#9
Since the Brits made the mistake of using Cow grease (unholy to Hindus) and pig grease (unholy to Muslims) in the cartridges they sent the Sepoys (composed of Hindus and Muslims) and got all of India up in arms against them I would think they'd be a bit more careful these days.
Anyway, if you can't do the time, don't do the crime hookman.
#11
He doesn't like spicey pork chops? Fine, feed him calimari three times a day. Undercooked calimari. In fact, RAW calimari. Hell, just catch it and throw it at him...
Maybe he'll get the hint... On second thought, probably not - not enough synapses firing sequentially.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
08/19/2004 16:57 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Put 'em all on the "Swift" diet - 100% farm-bred baby. Yum!
#15
Now come on, Hookboy. Hundreds (thousands, millions) of your Palestinian friends are supposedly starving in prison over there. They'd be glad to have porkchops. Here comes the big airplane...rrrrrrrrrrrrrr....
From the Davids Medienkritik 'blog. EFL, and some internal links omitted.
I should be very interested in what TGA has to say about this one.
The staff of ver.di, Germany's largest service-sector union and the largest independent, individual trade union in the world, is worried. Its leaders now realize that there won't be enough warmongers around to adequately support members' Socialist way-of-life. They rightfully "fear" that the planned withdrawal of tens of thousands of US military personnel and their dependents from Germany will result in thousands of lost union jobs, particularly in areas surrounding affected bases and installations.
"ButâŠwarmongers?" You ask. Well sure, that is exactly how ver.di's chairman, union kingpin Frank Bsirske, described the American government and military just last year. . . . Given Mr. Bsirske's strident opposition to the Iraq war, the Bush administration and the US military, one would have thought that he and his union would have been overjoyed at the prospect of thousands of "imperial hegemons" withdrawing from Germany. In fact, the opposite is true.
This apparent contradiction highlights the fact that there is indeed something more important to Germany's leftist dominated unions than exploiting anti-American sentiment for political gain. That something is ensuring that union members be able to suck at the teat of the Socialist welfare state into the indefinite future. And if that means accepting money and jobs from members of the US military, people the unions have repeatedly derided and demonized as warmongers from a heartless capitalist society, well, then Frank Bsirske and ver.di are entirely prepared to do just that.
As the beautiful Lt. Uhura once said, "be careful what you wish for."
Posted by: Mike ||
08/19/2004 8:33:04 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#3
The re-deployment should have commenced years ago, after the Berlin wall came down. I'm glad that GWB and Rumsfield have the courage to implement what is obvious. I'm happy the Germans finally realize what a beneficial influence the US presence had on Germany's economy. Alas, now they may be forced to go back to a 40 hour work week and 3 weeks of vacation max.
Posted by: rex ||
08/19/2004 11:25 Comments ||
Top||
#4
They can always get a job at Subway.
Posted by: Chris W. ||
08/19/2004 11:53 Comments ||
Top||
#5
JFKerry, says the redeployment is bad for US Security.
Stupid me, I think its long overdue. I think our Euro buddies have Kerry's ear.
#6
Funny to see this posted today. Two hours ago the German ice cream man was asking me how soon we'll leave. He has a yearly contract with the American housing areas. I said, "Hey, I work as a civilian for the Army. I'm not in the loop about those things." I feel bad for some of my German coworkers though. They're good workers and good people. I give it 2 years before we're gone in my area, but then again it's about the time I'm due to rotate back to the states.
Also, for those of you that didn't have a clue, since the start of the deployment to Iraq, the Bundeswehr (German Army) has been providing guard and security forces protecting the Army Kasernes and their families. They're some of the most professional soldiers I've ever dealt with.
For that we should be thankful to them.
#7
Well, there isn't much to say about a guy (and a union) who is even left of Schröder (and fights his timid "reformist" agenda).
But I checked the article that Medienkritik referred to and Bsirske isn't really complaining so much about the leaving "warmongers", he's just trying to milk the state into subsidizing new jobs for those workers and members of his union. That's his job, even if he's an idiot otherwise.
In question are the jobs of about 7500 German civilian workers. And THOSE workers certainly didn't subscribe to the "warmonger" thing in the first place.
The whole thing just follows the time honored "wash me but don't make me wet" routine... see Puerto Rico.
#8
The answer is simple. They can earn money in Germany's brothels. I'm sure they'll have lots of French customers, I mean, how often does a Frenchman get to screw a German?
No mercy, no compassion - Imperialist Warmonger Party
#10
TGA, thanks for the link. I myself am not so giddy about the upcoming changes, but I do recognize them as being realistic and unfortunately necessary...not because US-German relations have changed, but because the world has. Sigh.
#11
TGA RIGHT ON! I feel for those that will lose jobs but it's time to bring the troops home and end the occupation (sic). I visited Germany while I was stationed in Greece. I found the people, cities, culture, and beer very enjoyable. I saw the Puerto Rican scenario all over this one.
BILL Clinton has accused Tony Blair of "betraying" him over the way he backed the Iraq War. The former President has privately told Democratic Party friends Mr Blair should have challenged George Bush more. A senior Labour source who visited Democrats in the US revealed: "Clinton feels betrayed by what Blair did. He feels the PM gave Bush respectable cover for the war and under- estimated his influence, which could have been put to better uses. But he has made it clear he's not going to hold a grudge."
In that case, why'd he say anything?
Senior Democrats are dismayed at the closeness between the PM and Republican Mr Bush - and his failure to publicly back Democrat presidential candidate John Kerry. They have assured Labour figures they will "not hold a grudge" if they win November's elections. But ex-Foreign Secretary Robin Cook hinted Labour's relationship with the Democrats could be wrecked. He said: "They're confident they're going to win. This is good news for the world but not unalloyed joy for Tony Blair." Two months ago ex- Democrat presidential hopeful Howard Dean said: "We don't know what to make of Tony Blair. He was a strong friend of Clinton, now he's an ally with President Bush."
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
08/19/2004 17:00 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Well, this is the Mirror, but they probably do pick up on scuttlebutt like this.
Clinton probably is sick that Blair likes Bush--although I heard Cherie was tacky! Surprise!--and has stood so firmly with Bush and the United States.
Blair was the only world leader besides Arafish who was Bubba's big pal.
Thank God Blair has a bigger vision for Britain and for his role as PM, emulating great PMs like Churchill, Thatcher and Disraeli whereas Clintoon was so selfish and awful a Prez that he can't even equal a Ulysses Grant, who at least was a good general.
No, it's definitely a photo-finish between Slick Willy and Jimmuh Cartuh as to who was the worst.
#6
Dean shows how sophisticated and nuanced the Democrats are. When did Blair's job description become toady of the Democrat party and not Her Majesty's Prime Minister?
And Clinton demonstates why he could never have fought this war even though he could have had the chance; everything comes down to politics for him. This is something that is not true of W or Tony. That is why both will go down in history with reputations that will ascend while Clinton's will decline..
Finally, Clinton sucks more oxygen out of the room for Kerry. This election may have to be called on account of asphyxiation.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
08/19/2004 17:01 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Whut a bunch of arrongant asses, led by Klynton. Blair is a friend of the US, NOT just the individual currently in the White House.
#8
From the American Heritage dictionary: Betrayal
1.) Commit treason against
2.) Be disloyal to
3.) Make known unintentionally
4.) Show, reveal
5.) Lead astray, deceive
Clinton "feels the PM gave Bush respectable cover for the war and under-estimated his influence..."
Any guesses what he is really thinking? With Clinton, you never know. You should always have a dictionary handy for the obscure meaning of "is".
Now Hillary, she could teach him what betrayal means-his betrayal of her, and her betrayal of her own beliefs.
#9
Senior Democrats are dismayed at the closeness between the PM and Republican Mr Bush - and his failure to publicly back Democrat presidential candidate John Kerry.
Why would these dumbasses want Blair to publicly proclaim support for their candidate? Don't these people have any kind of moral compass??? Sakes.
#10
the brit left line - Blair is bushes poodle. The obvious Blairite response - Clinton still says the war was not a mistake, and Blair was always close to Clinton. The brit left HAS to show that Clinton thinks Blair was to close to Bush on Iraq, even if theyve got to make stuff up. Not something theyre not used to doing anyway.
#14
The same Bill Clinton whom reportedly supported Dubya's decisions for war, saying that he prob or likely would had made the same ones, but did so while lauding the UNO's effort to challenge America's alleged GOP-Right-Far Right Extremists!? The same Clinton whose alleged American "CENTRISM" presumes that Mainstream/Middle America, Blue-Collar America = majorially or predominantly, and COVERTLY, per se Left-based COMMUNIST andor Left-based SOCIALIST while also being OVERT VERSIONS OF THE GOP-RIGHT
[Anti-Unitarian Unitarianism]; and that in reality America's Global WOT = INTER-SOCIALIST WAR/CONFLICT, for the "KIND OF SOCIALISM" that America will have, where each and all USPOTUS Elex > INTRA-SOCIALIST COMPETITION AMONGST DIFFERENT AMERICAN SOCIALIST FRACTIONS??? If one accepts that the Clintons lead the Democratic Party, then the Clinton agenda = Democrat agenda = Kerry agenda = America-GOP/Right must be absolutely DISCREDITED in order to empower American-specific COMMUNISM, SOCIALISM, and any Commie-Socialist America under SOCIALIST UN-based OWG! As per Bill Clintons own anti-USA/Weak USA "BIG BOY" speech, what the Communist Clintons and their cabal want is a COMMUNIST SOCIALIST, NON-SOVEREIGN AMERICA THAT IS NO LONGER IN CONTROL O'ER ITS OWN GOVERNMENT, ECONOMY, RESOURCES, AND ENDOWMENTS, A MERE AUTONOMOUS WEAK WORLD-GLOBAL SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OR DOMINION OR SUB-STATE AMONGST OTHER WEAK SOCIALIST REPUBLICS OR DOMINIONS OR SUBSTATES - if the Clintons lead the Dems or DemLibs, their DNC and Convention psekaers, including the Clintons themsleves, ONCE AGAIN didn't even have the GUMPTION or ADULT MATURITY or professionalism or LEFT-BELOVED SECULAR ETHICS to tell their own dedicated believers they and all Americans are now all Communist(s)-for-Fascism-for-Communism, Leftism-for-Rightism-for-Leftism, and Asianists-forAmericanists/Westernists-for-Asia! During the Cold War FRANCE and the FRENCH LEFT, amongst all the Euro-/Western Lefts, was the most PRO-SOVIET/COMMUNIST/STALINIST of the batch, and directly or indirectly dominated French Leftism - given the current ANTI-AMERICANISM, which the Clintons are a major part of, its very possible that POST-COLD WAR, ANTI-US FRANCE = MINI-USSR or USSR EUROPE-WEST! Just as Dubya has pro-Islamist IRAN between US/Brit/Coalition-controlled IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN, the Failed Left, including and espec "DOWN-BUT-NOT-OUT" CREEPING/INVISIBLE COMMUNISM, has EUROPE and its anti-USSR EuroLeft between FRANCE and RUSSIA, just as democratic JAPAN is being surrounded by nuclearizing Commie NORTH KOREA and CHICOMS IN RUSSIA's FAR EAST-SIBERIA, just as democratic SOUTH KOREA-TAIWAN is between Communist NORTH KOREA and CHINA proper, just as AMERICA per se has to deal with Terrorists INFILTRATING BOTH CANADA and MEXICO. soon enough one day invading Commie armies to ALLEGEDLY SAVE AMERICA FROM ITSELF, FROM ITS OWN ALLEGED EMPIRIC, "ANTI-DEMOCRATIC" "IMPERIALISM"! Reagan has his anti-Communist DUAL-TRACK and FLEXIBLE RESPONSE policies, now so do the post-Cold War "ANTI-COMMUNIST" COMMUNISTS have their own ANTI-DEMOCRACY/WEST DUAL TRACK and FLEXIBLE RESPONSE against America and the West - while American warriors kill Failed Leftism-Socialism-Communism's Islamist mercenaries-proxies abroad, THE REAL BATTLE IS FOR CONTROL OF AMERICA, AMERICA'S GOVERNMENT, AND THE WHOLE OF AMERICA'S ESTABLISHMENT - Leftism = Rightism, Socialism = Capitalism, Communism = Fascism, Confederatism = Federalism........etal, Communist Fascist America = Communist Fascist RUSSIA and wannabe CHINA. Decapitate and Kill America like captive Nick Berg, and the rest of Europe and the Democratic World will die quickly. Russia and China are already prepping their modernizing armed forces to wage GLOBAL NUCLEAR WAR SCENARIOS against America and only America - read, if the Clintons and America-destabilizing LIMITED WARS FAIL TO SUBVET AMERICA UNTO SOCIALISM, circa 2015-2020 as per LeftBlog desire, Russia and China are preparing to wage de facto MUTUALLY DESTROYING GLOBAL NUCLEAR WAR AS FAILED LEFTISM-SOCIALISM's FINAL, DESPERATE, SPITEFUL "PARTHIAN SHOT" FOR SOCIALIST POWER AND VICTORY, ala BETTER TO RULE OVER A POOR, REGRESSED ANDOR DESTROYED, UNITARY SOCIALIST WORLD, OR REMNANTS OF A WORLD THAN FOR COMMUNISM AND SOCIALISM TO NOT RULE THE WORLD AT ALL, EVER! The Failed Left knows Leftism-Socialism in any form are grotesque failures - BUT, THEY REFUSE TO REFORM, REFUSE TO SHARE POWER OR COEXIST, AND REFUSE TO ADOPT AMERICAN METHODISMS. THE LEFT IS SO POLITICIZED, POWER-MAD AND DELUSIONAL THEY'D RATHER SEE EVERYONE AND EVERYTHING DESTROYED RATHER THAN HONESTLY REFORM LEFTISM-SOCIALISM, EVEN FOR THEIR OWN BENEFIT - as illustrated by 9-11, the Clintons, and their desire to cause or induce world-wide wars to destabilize America while arguing against same, THEY NEED TO FORCE OR TRICK AMERICA, AND AMERICAN VOTERS, EVEN THEIR OWN, UNTO SOCIALISM AND "JUSTIFIED" SOCIALISM, AND FINAL COMMUNISM!
ITS NOT "GLOBALISM", STUPID, NOR IS IT TO PROVE THAT ONLY-IN-AMERICA CAN SOCIALISM OR EMPIRICISM OR IMPERIALISM WORK - ITS [DISGUISED] COMMUNISM, STUPID, WITH SOCIALIST AMERICA NOT INTENDED TO BE THE LEADER IN ANYTHING ANYMORE! As also illustartred by the Clinton-led DNC's desire for American Democrats to begin using the sur-SOCIALIST/REGULATOR label PROGRESSIVE, instead of LIBERAL, any each and all so-called American LIBERALS NOW BELONG TO THE GOP-RIGHT WHETHER THEY KNOW IT OR NOT, LIKE IT OR NOT, JUST ANOTHER "USEFUL IDIOT" FOR POLITICS, FAKERY, AND
SOCIALISM, AS YOUSE ALWAYS WERE TO THE LEFT, AND WHOSE STILL A "USEFUL IDIOT" FOR COMING NON-AMERICAN LED AND ANTI-AMERICAN GLOBAL COMMUNISM -ooooooooooooooooooppppppppppppppsssssss, I meant GLOBALISM!
#16
JoeM. Bro you need to break that down a little. Were pretty good here at banging our heads about everything natural under the sun. But your logic is still in a stage that is beyond my feeble mind. But, alas, I'm easily lead. So in the coming days make your argument take shape.
For instance; Nuke Mecca, free muslims, or some such. But don't, please, be put off. I look forward to yours.
I almost commented on this last night - reading the title I thought, "I usually do, too." but reading the story it became clearer to me that there is actually a great issue underlying this story. In the UK, they'd be toast, because they take their national security seriously.
Perhaps the decision will represent a sea change in how US laws should, no must be secondary to national security. We shall see.
CAPITOL HILL The Senate Judiciary Committee has heard this morning from one of its own about some of the problems with airline "no fly" watch lists.
The airline security is under new management, eh Senator? US management? Did your pocket flask set off the metal detector?
Massachusetts Democrat Ted Kennedy says he had a close encounter with the lists when trying to take the U-S Airways shuttle out of Washington to Boston.
That rascally Bush administration is playing a practical joke on me.
The ticket agent wouldnt let him on the plane. His name was on the list -- in error. After a flurry of phone calls, Kennedy was able to fly home, but then the same thing happened coming back to Washington.
Psst - he needs two seats - make an excuse. . .
Kennedy says it took three calls to Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge to get his name stricken from the list. The process took several weeks, in all.
Ted who? From where? Your Brother was what? {aside} we got a nut that thinks he's Senator Kennedy. Got the accent down great, though. . .
#3
Ridge: "they meant a different Senator Ted Kennedy, our bad"
*snicker*
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/19/2004 14:09 Comments ||
Top||
#4
The TSA is even hapier they didn't have to do a cavity search. Have you noticed how big that nose has gotten?
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
08/19/2004 14:11 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Prolly wasn't a typo. Talk to some of the commercial flight crews that have had to haul this arrogant, obnoxious a**hole around. Also, I doubt that Teddy was any more polite to the ground folks. They're all most likely enjoying this story.
#7
The way I heard the story the airlines used to each have there own lists of obnoxious passengers and the lists were all merged in with the no-fly list.
Teddy drinks to much and they can't keep enough little bottles of booze aboard for both him and the rest of the passengers so they put him on the list.
#10
So what was the mistake? Ultra-liberal Democrats like Kennedy and Kerry side with the likes of Hanoi more often than they side with the Republicans across the aisle. Kerry should be on the list too.
Posted by: Tom ||
08/19/2004 20:10 Comments ||
Top||
#11
This wasn't a mistake, it was a fuel conservation measure.
#12
It was not a mistake. Teddy, because of the fumes he emits is HAZMAT. Details follow:
From 49CFR 172.101
Ethanol (UN1170) is limited by the aforementioned regulations to 5 liters on passenger aircraft. Given Teddy's drinking history, and his toxicity, he posesses too much ethanol to fly. Maybe after a detox program, he can be retested and then recertified for passenger aircraft. Cargo only aircraft are allowed 60L, but reclassifying him as cargo gets into a very politically sensitive area. I hope that this clears up the misunderstandings, and why the incidents occured, as described in the article.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
08/19/2004 21:08 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Please! No smoking near the Senator!
for all our sakes!
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/19/2004 21:09 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Now...ahhhhhm...I've nevah...ahhhhhm...had a problem with...ahhhhhhm...aircrahft. I could see being on the...ahhhhhhm..."no drive list", as I have had...ahhhhm... problems with that in the...ahhhhhm...pahst. I blame...ahhhhhhm...Ashcroft.
Posted by: Senator Fatboy M. Kennedy ||
08/19/2004 22:59 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Your VRWC at work. Way to go, neocon hate-mongers!
Posted by: Chris W. ||
08/19/2004 23:57 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Bwahahahahaha-HIC! Sank you vewwy mush, shir..
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
08/20/2004 0:01 Comments ||
Top||
From The New York Times
.... officials at the [New York] State Department of Motor Vehicles have begun a crackdown on license fraud that will take away the driver's licenses of as many as 200,000 immigrants who cannot prove that they are here legally. There was scant reaction in January when the state started mailing out the first of a half-million letters threatening to suspend the licenses of drivers whose Social Security numbers did not match federal records.
Hummmmm, my wife got one of these yesterday here in Texas. Must be a computer glitch, she's a born american citizen. So she sez........
Fear and protest spread in places like Westchester County and Staten Island as the letters reached longtime immigrant drivers who depend on their cars to work as landscapers, construction workers or housecleaners. And the outcry grew as immigrant advocates learned of cases in which bewildered immigrants who responded in person to motor vehicle offices had their licenses confiscated on the spot for lack of a Social Security number. ...
Wife's letter sez a "alert" was placed on her license. I'll miss her..
... though only about 600 licenses have been suspended so far, state officials said that in November, a second wave of notices would begin suspending the licenses of those who have not responded, at the rate of 4,000 a day. State officials say 250,000 licenses are in line to be suspended, and immigrant advocates estimate that 200,000 of these are held by immigrants unable to satisfy the state's requirement.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
08/19/2004 9:39:01 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Lok for California to start offering mail order SSN's for illegals in New York.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
08/19/2004 11:08 Comments ||
Top||
#2
There was scant reaction in January when the state started mailing out the first of a half-million letters threatening to suspend the licenses of drivers whose Social Security numbers did not match federal records.
Why'd they wait all this time to do this checking? Checking a person's identity has to be the FIRST THING before going any further. Can't these government officials and employees use their heads for a change?
Fear and protest spread in places like Westchester County and Staten Island as the letters reached longtime immigrant drivers who depend on their cars to work as landscapers, construction workers or housecleaners. And the outcry grew as immigrant advocates learned of cases in which bewildered immigrants who responded in person to motor vehicle offices had their licenses confiscated on the spot for lack of a Social Security number.
#3
in CA the Assembly Dems are still trying to get CA Drivers Licenses for illegals. Arnold to date, has refused to sign it unless the illegals are required to pass background checks and their CDL's would clearly distinguish them as illegals (through different colors or notations/marks). Gil Cedillo and other Dem activist legislators don't want that...
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/19/2004 12:00 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Note, this is about ILLEGAL ALIENS and not IMMIGRANTS at all. I (myself) refuse to call them IMMIGRANTS since they are here illegally and have not been granted 'immigrant' status.
Good for new York State. Looks like we are starting to take some tiny baby steps in the right direction....
#5
I wonder if New York's policy has something to do with recent events in that state...
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
08/19/2004 12:09 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Late in 2001 I had a mortgage applicant who worked as a housekeeper at the airport hotel. The SSN showing on her paystubs belonged to a DEAD PERSON according to all three credit bureaus.
Hmmm. Fake SSN, working at airport, likely illegal. The only thing that stopped me from calling the Feds was the fact that she was Hispanic instead of Arab (but that's profiling on my part, and profiling is WRONG...).
Posted by: Chris W. ||
08/19/2004 13:33 Comments ||
Top||
#7
The only thing that stopped me from calling the Feds was the fact that she was Hispanic instead of Arab
So what is the difference? The lady was ILLEGAL and she was using FORGED documents, so she was financing other illegal operations in our nation. This lady broke our laws 2x over. Sorry, #6, but illegal is illegal.
Posted by: rex ||
08/19/2004 14:02 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I've written it before and I'll write it again, the activists have had 3 years to have been part of the solution, they have chosen to be part of the problem.
When the next attack comes and/even if it (doesn't) does involve coming over either border, the border will be sealed.
To be blunt, Hispanics will find out how much pull they really have.
#11
in CA the Assembly Dems are still trying to get CA Drivers Licenses for illegals.
And the SJ Mercury News is throwing their two cents in also. On today's opinion page, there's a piece titled "Give illegal immigrants licenses -- with a difference". Got that? Now get a load of the header: "COMPROMISE WOULD PROVIDE SAFETY, RECOGNIZE CITIZENSHIP"
"Citizenship"? Say what? What are these people smoking????
The only thing that stopped me from calling the Feds was the fact that she was Hispanic instead of Arab.
Wouldn't have stopped me. An illegal alien is an illegal alien regardless of what their ethnicity is. Now whether the INS would have actually taken action is certainly up for debate...
#12
The INS would not do crap if you turned in an illegal. I know because I have done itb repeatedly. Their line is "they don't have the manpower. My line they don't have the will. I live in California BTW.
#13
My line is they get screwed by Boxer, Feinstein, Portnoy Stark, Don Edwards, Dan Burton, Anna Achoo, et al every time they pick up an illegal. For all I know the Central Valley Republicans don't want theri cheap labor threatened either. No matter. In 20-40 years, Caliphornia will secceed democratically to be reunited with the mother country.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
08/19/2004 17:46 Comments ||
Top||
#14
I expect another terror attack within five weeks. If that fails, we'll get one within six months for certain, even if it's a pinprick. The Wahabbis HAVE to, or lose all credibility. When it happens, we'll probably learn that the majority of the people involved, and most of the explosives used, came across our southern border, undetected. There will probably also be some indication they had help from one or more group in Mexico. How we respond will determine if we remain a sovereign power or become just another "used to be great nation".
I'm working on a proposal that doesn't have a snowball's chance of being approved at the moment, but that will shut down our southern border to illegals in 30 days after the next attack. It's going to involve a lot of sacrifice from a lot of people, including probably a half-dozen readers in this forum. Bitch now, because after the next hit, it's going to be time to stop bitching and start shooting.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
08/19/2004 21:48 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Bitch now, because after the next hit, it's going to be time to stop bitching and start shooting.
I don't have a problem with it. Our national security is of paramount importance, the "services" of illegals be damned.
Yes, illegal IS illegal. But you have to understand that these were potential clients, and they have friends who might be looking for mortgages too. I am against illegals as much as anyone, but your average Latin illegal is not a threat to our national security and it is therefore not Priority #1 for me to turn them in, particularly when it can affect my future business dealings.
That being said, I would LOVE to see the illegal problem stopped, but since it's been going on for soooo loooong it is not practical to deny "benign" illegals such as Mexicans. Start with terrorists and their co-conspirators, and work on the rest of the problem once we secure ourselves against the worst of them.
Posted by: Chris W. ||
08/19/2004 22:43 Comments ||
Top||
#17
your average Latin illegal is not a threat to our national security and it is therefore not Priority #1 for me to turn them in, particularly when it can affect my future business dealings.
well, Chris your avg Mooslim illegal may not be a threat either, it's the extremes (here in So. cal we have a lot of crimes: killings, rapes, auto theft - BIG!) by illegals that hurt and kill Americans. Turn em in
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/19/2004 23:02 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Point taken Frank G.
We will have to agree to disagree on this one. I made a judgement call on these particular (probable) illegals, and stand by it. It's unlikely that a housekeeper and her husband (I forget what he did for a living) are involved in killings, rapes, or auto thefts, particularly when you consider that they were in the market for a new home. Criminals are more likely to plot their next crime rather than go shopping for home loans.
Posted by: Chris W. ||
08/19/2004 23:56 Comments ||
Top||
Iranian Defence Minister Ali Shamkhani has warned that Iran might launch a preemptive strike against US forces in the region to prevent an attack on its nuclear facilities. "We will not sit [with arms folded] to wait for what others will do to us," Mr Shamkhani told Al Jazeera television when asked if Iran would respond to an American attack on its nuclear facilities. "Some military commanders in Iran are convinced that preventive operations which the Americans talk about are not their monopoly. America is not the only one present in the region. We are also present, from Khost to Kandahar in Afghanistan; we are present in the Gulf and we are can be present in Iraq. The US military presence [in Iraq] will not become an element of strength [for Washington] at our expense. The opposite is true, because their forces would turn into a hostage" in Iranian hands in the event of an attack. These guys have just the right phrasing to stir Cthulu from the pit, don't they? What will they do next, openly say they're going to detonate a nuke in NYC? Threaten to assassinate the US Congress? Send an entire Division to invade Russia? Are they completely nuts?
Posted by: Anonymoose ||
08/19/2004 12:11:25 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
With Sadr retreating,they must bluster to keep what fires they have in Iraq burning,maybe ?
#2
What a gift this would be. What are the chances they will follow through?
Posted by: Rafael ||
08/19/2004 0:38 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Time to gather up a list of GPS target coordinates to send to all U.S. naval vessels and U.S. Air Force attack aircraft in the Gulf region. These guys are pushing their luck, and hopefully they are about to find out what it's like to be in Saddam Hussein's shoes.
#4
What more is required in order for there to be unalloyed bipartisan support of military action against Iran? There are no more excuses, save the flagrant and treasonous desire for a terrorist nuclear attack on American soil.
#5
B.A.R. - What makes you think they don't already have that target list already dialed in - and have the targets under surveillance? SLAR can look a loooong ways into Iran from 40,000 feet along the Iranian borders with Iraq and Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf. Not to mention satellites...
#6
What makes you think they don't already have that target list already dialed in - and have the targets under surveillance?
Oh, I don't know; a goodwill gesture perhaps? Pardon me if I don't sound all that confident that our forces are fully prepared, but the "sensitive" tendency of the tactics employed by our forces as of late don't exactly inspire confidence that the proper response will come at the proper time.
#7
Here is a terrific roundup of intel, news, capabilties, analysis, speculation, and informed guesswork. I love these guys - cuz they're informed and organized, heh.
Can you believe John Pike (easily one of the best miltary analysts you see brought in to act as expert on the news shows when the shit hits the fan) & GlobalSecurity exist on donations? Yep. Hit their tip jar, too, if you can spare a buck or three.
#8
BAR - don't let the press fool you. I believe that the denizens of Najaf spent a good deal of time squeegeeing Mahdi parts into the sewers recently. Our military is still the same force that burried Sadaam's forces with bulldozers in '91.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
08/19/2004 1:36 Comments ||
Top||
#9
I am pretty sure that some of the naval group in the "region" can equip "thermo nuclear weapons" very quickly. I also am pretty sure there are all the necessary data to target them as well. Iran is on crack. They attack the US and all bets are off. Their will be no land war. We do not have any agreement about "not introducing nuclear weapons to the region." Listening to Condi Rice I don't doubt in a second we would use them if we felt it was required in our intrest.
#10
Verbally baiting the US has been determined to be non-hazardous. I recommend that they don't move forces or otherwise provike us.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
08/19/2004 2:27 Comments ||
Top||
#11
iran as already admited to posses nuks If you moron amerikan do not get that you are really fuck.
you rant-hamburgher should join that army one soldier one moron
one ranhamburgher 100000000 morons
Posted by: iran will kick your ass ||
08/19/2004 2:48 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Iran Will Kick,
The vapors from your drool must be inhibiting the coherence of your prose, but here is some clarification:
1. Iran can admit up one side of a tree and down the other, but it has no working nukes.
2. Reagan dealt with Iran quite effectively. When I sailed through the Gulf of Hormuz a number of times in the spring and summer of 89' and the Iranian forces sat quietly like a mutt that had been disciplined by a rolled up gazeta.
3. Reagan would have dealt more completely with the Iranian surrogates in Lebanon had the Congressional wankers like Kerry had the will to support man's work.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
08/19/2004 3:03 Comments ||
Top||
#13
You all know that Iran really is the last piece of the puzzle in the war on terrorism.
North Korea has nukes, so that Korean peninsula has been written off in the event of aggressive action by Norks.
Iran, is a different matter.
They have to know their number is up in 2005.
But I can see a scenario whereby Iran deploys some crude nucelar device in the Gulf or in an allies' terrirory and starts making demands. I really believe the Mullahs are stupid enough to try something like this and judging by the past it is pretty certain that if they do in fact have a nuke, they will use it.
#15
There is no Iran that can kick the ass of the USA!
Hell, Iran can't even kick Israel's ass!
It's just more mullah dreaming..something they do lots of.
But your Moooslim dreams always involve death--too bad you can't see it will have to be yours and not ours.
Iran under the mullahocracy sucks--you know it does.
Just admit it. You'll feel better!
#16
Iranian Defence Minister Ali Shamkhani has warned that Iran might launch a preemptive strike against US forces in the region to prevent an attack on its nuclear facilities.
Bwahahaha!! I hope the Brits are invited to the party, cheeky swines!
Posted by: Howard UK ||
08/19/2004 4:25 Comments ||
Top||
#17
interesting thoughts, but I'm also seeing another clear signal in all this.
Iran might launch a preemptive strike against US forces in the region to prevent an attack on its nuclear facilities.
This combined with the article about Putin and Sharon causes me to believe that a strike on Iran's nuclear capablilities is such a serious option that everyone has stopped bothering to pretend that it's not.
#18
This Ali Shamkhani is not the most smart person is he, he is a bit off to reality if he really made such a statement, but I begin to like this guy. He can replace my other comic hero AL Sahaf.
Posted by: Murat ||
08/19/2004 4:44 Comments ||
Top||
#20
LOL, B!
At least they like each other.
Misery loves miserable company.
And interesting thought about the doing away with the pretension to take out Iran's nuke facilities.
Like idiots they just keep rattliing their sabers and someday soon they'll know it's not just a game of blindman's bluff anymore.
No country--least of all Iran--can outdo the stockpile of bad bombs we've got or their reach or their accuracy.
If they doubt, they should ask the Japanese and we've had 60 years to work on them since then.
(BTW, OBL loves to point to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as one of America's many "crimes" and yet he encourages his people to follow suit...)
Posted by: Murat ||
08/19/2004 6:47 Comments ||
Top||
#23
Shame the mosque aint burnin...
Posted by: Howard UK ||
08/19/2004 6:49 Comments ||
Top||
#24
LOL, Howard!
You ask me, it's a pretty great promo poster FOR the Coalition and the War on Terror!
(Better smoke in Baghdad than in New York, Washington and Shanksville, PA!)
#28
Ah, Murat. I come back and so do you, how 'bout that? And I see you've already broken a few harp strings.
Posted by: Steve from Relto ||
08/19/2004 9:42 Comments ||
Top||
#29
Yeah, my old bad habbit dear Stevo
Posted by: Murat ||
08/19/2004 9:51 Comments ||
Top||
#30
Murat, what is Blair holding in that image? If its a gas can it doesn't really work with the title. It looks more like something you would use in your garden to me. Very confusing, as if they couldnt' find a decent picture of Blair or something.
#31
Headline: Iran warns of preemptive strike on US forces
Actually, they've already attacked the US repeatedly - Embassy hostages, the Marine bombings in Lebanon, et al - without suffering the consequences. Why wouldn't they be belligerent? Another attack on the US, at this point, would be an invitation to take the war to Iran.
#32
It's your own harp, Murat. Ever hear of a guy named Fflewdur Fflam?
Posted by: Steve from Relto ||
08/19/2004 10:07 Comments ||
Top||
#33
This Ali Shamkhani is not the most smart person is he, he is a bit off to reality if he really made such a statement, but I begin to like this guy.
#37
Murat got a little picture for us all eh, how nice. Anyway we think its time you crawled back into the little islamic slime hole you came from,go on slither away back to your islamic fantasy land.
Posted by: Shep UK ||
08/19/2004 12:49 Comments ||
Top||
#38
could this be someone aspiring to be like his hero Murat then? mildly amusing i suppose,carry on
Posted by: Shep UK ||
08/19/2004 12:51 Comments ||
Top||
#39
RC - I wonder if one of the mods can check IP / ranges from then Murat & now Murat from their postings & confirm your theory?
Aug. 18, 2004 21:57
South Africa will not assist Iran's nuclear development and will not sell any uranium to the Islamic Republic, the South African Ministry of Defense told The Jerusalem Post Wednesday. Ministry spokesman Sam Mkhwnazi confirmed statements made earlier in the day by South Africa's ambassador to Israel Maj.-Gen Fumanekile (Fumie) Gqiba, who told Army Radio that South Africa will not aid Iran's nuclear program, and will not support any country wishing to develop nuclear weapons. Mkhwnazi and Gqiba were reacting to Israeli media reports Tuesday which claimed that a recent South African-Iranian defense agreement included a sale of uranium to Teheran. South Africa's Defense Minister Patrick "Terror" Lekota and his Iranian counterpart Rear Admiral Ali Shamkhani met in Teheran this week to discuss an expansion of mutual cooperation between the two countries, especially in the domain of defense, the Islamic Republic's news agency (IRNA) reported. At the conclusion of the meeting the two countries signed a Memorandum of Understanding on bilateral cooperation. On Tuesday night, Israel's Channel 1 TV reported that the understanding included an arrangement for South Africa to sell uranium to Iran. One look at the article's accompanying photograph is enough to set your hair on end.
Mkhwnazi rejected the claim. "This can't be correct. South Africa totally gave up its nuclear abilities when the ANC came to power in 1994. We are not going to supply them [Iran] with uranium. That issue was not even discussed in the meeting [between the South African and Iranian defense ministers.]," he told the Post. Mkhwnazi would not comment on the particulars of the Memorandum of Understanding, nor would he say if Iran had made a request to buy uranium from South Africa. Gqiba told Army Radio Wednesday that the two countries had not signed a defense agreement, and that Israeli claims on the issue of uranium sales were the result of a misunderstanding on the part of journalists covering the meeting between South Africa's and Iran's defense ministers. Gqiba added that what was signed was a protocol summing up the defense talks.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Zenster ||
08/19/2004 12:16:19 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
via CBS - EFL
LONDON, Aug. 17, 2004
(CBS) If the pen is mightier than the sword, the keyboard has become the new weapon in the war of terror, promoting it and fighting it. As CBS News Correspondent Mark Phillips reports, sometimes, the intent is simply propaganda. Sometimes, deeper in the net, hidden within other sites, is something more sinister: sites advocating violence, perhaps even providing instructions and commands. One site, which pops up and then disappears regularly on servers around the world, shows Osama bin Laden and a map of Manhattan.
It contains "red sites (that) appear to be identifying targets for being attacked," says Neil Doyle, a new kind of private detective. And what worries the freelance cyber-terrorist buster about the site, one of thousands he's discovered, are the numbers running across the page. "The repeated sequence at the top there and it's thought that, well, that does match up to a known al Qaeda cryptography method," says Doyle.
Doyle believes the site's code could be a means of command and control. ...more...
When the West becomes serious about terror, the Internet will become the best source of intel - and the easiest means of crippling jihadi communications. The Internet Death Penalty can be dealt to any domain, network, or ISP. The technology is easy (NAPs, Peering, etc.) - the will to coordinate and execute is all that's lacking.
Posted by: .com ||
08/19/2004 12:49:15 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"When the west becomes serious about terror", sadly but true. Another big blow and maybe then.
Dot, did you read Podhoretz WW4 piece? All I could think of was your "We finally have a president willing to fight."
#2
Lucky - You bet - Wretchard the Cat pointed me to it yesterday. Great read! I've got FoxNews on right now and the BS is hot 'n heavy from Skeery & Co. Can you imagine him as President? Can you picture him actually doing anything of substance? Even though he has some warts, and I had to eat a lot of crow to arrive at the conclusion (I was a Dementocrat / Independent, sigh), Bush is the only guy we have with stones and a valid vision, bro.
All the marbles are on the table - and many (including here on RB) want to argue what shape / color the table should be, instead of supporting the only leader we have. Intellectual cowardice, emotional dysfunction, and zero ethicality, heh.
Boggles.
We're on our way to a truly bloody never-forget / never-forgive campaign - and well beyond. So much for dialog, debate, reasoning together, concensus, putting the public interests above petty partisanship...
#3
Actually, the best thing to do, once we do figure out what the "other side" is doing with the Internet, is nothing. Let them continue, let them think their words go unseen, let them think their plots go undiscovered, let them think they're pulling one over on the "dumb Americans". Then let us continue, as the Navy did during World War II, and the United States did frequently during the Cold War, to use these snipits of information we do gather, and can use without disclosing that we "read their mail", to disrupt their groups, degrade their capabilities, and destroy their bases. Shutting them down will only drive them to use something else - something we may not discover until it's way, way too late. In the meantime, keep hammering them from every direction. That includes continuing to put the screws to Iran. In order to be more successful at that, we need to begin putting more pressure on Europe, especially France and Russia, to curb their dealings with the Ayatollahs. IF that means a much more serious embargo of French and Russian products, so be it. We've already proven that the actions of plain old American citizens can have far-reaching effects in dealing with ass-hat countries, far easier and with less political costs than having the government get involved. The Internet in general, and the blogosphere in particular, is a potent weapon, and we need to learn to use it with rapier-like precision.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
08/19/2004 15:40 Comments ||
Top||
#4
What OP said. Double. On the Internet and all the rest.
Posted by: too true ||
08/19/2004 15:47 Comments ||
Top||
Watching the proceedings of the controversial National Conference for the last three days, most of it transmitted live on Al-Iraqiya channel, has been an enjoyable experience... Raw democracy, unpretentious and enthusiastic, is a blast. It brings a smile to your face.
Sudan asked Libyan leader Muammer Gaddafi on Tuesday to "intervene personally" in the escalating crisis in Darfur, Libya's official Jana news agency said. However, a political observer expressed dismay over the development. "How can they seek help from a leader who has himself created a mess in his country?" he asked. Sudanese Foreign Minister Mustafa Osman Ismail delivered the request from President Omar Hassan El Beshir at a meeting with Gaddafi in the central town of Sirte. "President Beshir is pleased with Colonel Gaddafi's opposition to foreign intervention in Darfur and asks him to help settle the crisis in the region and assist in the repatriation of refugees," Ismail said.
African Union-sponsored peace talks between the Sudanese government and the Darfur rebels are expected to take place in Nigeria next Monday. But last week, Libya hosted informal talks in Sirte which brought together Khartoum and the two Darfur rebel movements as well as representatives of the African Union and neighbouring Chad, which hosts the lion's share of Darfur refugees. At the time, a Chadian official expressed concern that Libya might be trying to seize a bigger role in the peace process. "We are afraid it will be taken over by Gaddafi at the expense of the African Union," the diplomat said. Libyan has strongly opposed foreign intervention in Darfur warning last week that it could spark another Iraq-style conflict.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/19/2004 12:00:59 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sudan, Chad and Libya.
Partners in Progress.
Potentates of Peace.
A powerful trade block in it's infancy.
Palestinian deputies narrowly rejected a motion Thursday calling for a suspension of parliament until veteran leader Yasser Arafat follows through reform pledges with firm action. A motion filed by 13 MPs calling for an indefinite suspension until Arafat followed up his recent admission of mistakes by his Palestinian Authority with written commitments for reform was rejected by 24 votes to 23. The vote at the parliament in this West Bank city came after Arafat rebuffed a committee of MPs as they urged him to act on his pledge to correct errors which he acknowledged on Wednesday in a keynote speech to deputies.
Committee chairman Abbas Zaki, a member of Arafat's Fatah movement, said that the parliament had instead agreed to adjourn until Tuesday to allow for further discussions with Arafat. "Until Tuesday we will continue our discussions with Arafat when we will put our report to the PLC (parliament)," Zaki told AFP. "The speech yesterday had some positive positions about reforms and for that we will continue our discussions in a very deep way."
One of the MPs who proposed the suspension of parliament said it was a sign of frustration at foot-dragging by Arafat. "We tried in this session to postpone the work of the PLC as a protest against Arafat's refusal to sign any decisions after his speech yesterday," Jamal Shaati, head of the parliament's human rights committee, told AFP. The 75-year-old Arafat has been facing mounting calls for reform of his administration amid rampant corruption and a breakdown in security, illustrated last month by an unprecedented spate of kidnappings and arson attacks on government buildings.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/19/2004 11:50:31 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
nothing good will happen til the fish closes his gills for good
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/19/2004 12:42 Comments ||
Top||
#2
So who "honor kills" who? The 24 or the 23? Dissent anywhere in the Mideast but Iraq has severe consequences.
#3
Palestinian deputies narrowly rejected a motion Thursday calling for a suspension of parliament until veteran leader Yasser Arafat follows through reform pledges with firm action.
It's funny how these guys go through the motions of having a government, yet so little of substance with a positive nature comes out of it.
nothing good will happen til the fish closes his gills for good
Quite frankly, I'm beginning to believe that even the death of Arafart wouldn't be much of an improvement.
EFL
Egypt's highest religious authority has ordered the banning and confiscation of two books written by U.S. and Egyptian authors on grounds they violated Islamic principles and harmed Islam's image, a senior cleric and newspaper reports said Wednesday.
"If you read them, the water in your eyeballs will start to boil and they'll explode right out of your head!"
Al-Azhar University, considered by many to be the world's leading Sunni Islam seat of learning, [and several Rantburgians have hopes that this place will facilitate a more progressive Islam]
ordered the ban against the "Studies of Muslim Apocalyptic," by U.S. writer David Cook, 37, and "Responsibility for the Failure of the Islamic State," by Egyptian author Gamal al-Banna. Turns out one of the books could be read to imply that the Koran took some thoughts from Judaism and Christianity. The other book was straight forward history but the title annoyed the Al Azhar committee
Posted by: mhw ||
08/19/2004 9:04:29 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Some other books on the banned list:
1. Advanced Building Techniques: Why Kafr Buildings Don't Collapse
2. Modern Water Treatment
3. Contract Law: Business Dealings with Non-Family Members
#3
Also Banned was the childrens book, "The Cat in the Hat", because the cat character is really an Imam, who is made to look irresponsible, and that it was written by a Joooooooooooo!
#2
Badanov, if this woman had asked The Washington Post not to name her, then do you think that The Washington Post should have refused to publish this story? Would that satisfy your principles better?
Please name a major newspaper that doesn't publish stories based on unnamed sources.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
08/19/2004 8:09 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Okay, I'll bite.
I was kinda half joking when I posted that, but I will admit that a few 'major' newspapers do use unnamed sources to publish stories, but you have to admit when an unnamed source is used, there is an agenda in the story.
But not the Times and the Wapo. There is an agenda with these folks no matter what garbage they sell in their rag.
You never see in a NY Times/WaPo a story that says something like, an unnamed source in the administration has said that Rumsfeld refuses to alllow the US Navy to bomb baby ducks and kittens because they are so cute.
However, you will see a story that says something like Rumsfeld refuses to allow the US Navy to bomb kittens and baby ducks because we could kill more jaihadis and he is secretly working against Bush to help them... etc. you get the picute (I hope)
I would hope it gained your attention that the NY Times/WaPo was all too happy to use this woman's face and name; the only they left out was her street addfress her home phone number and email address for this story.
Inasmuch as thewriter did these things, there is still an agenda with the WaPo. WaPo writers think nothing of using an unnamed source to preserve that source's job within the administration, using press shield laws in a political manner, to press an agenda, just as they don't even blink when using a poor women's tragedy including detailed information on her personally, to endanger her in a land and culture that hates women and freedom.
Now, you see what you made me do? A little comment meant to be humorous has been explained in a non-humorous manner to someone who either can't take a joke, or wouldn't recognize one if the WaPo had published it as a lead page one story...
#4
I suppose all reporters slant articles, consciously or unconsciously. I don't think the phenomenon is peculiar to The New York Times or The Washington Post.
When the subject is controversial, some readers will always be annoyed that their particular opinion is not fully expounded.
Journalists quote unnamed sources because the sources themselves request anonymity, not because the journalist promotes his own agenda through the anonymity. Sources request anonymity usually because they will be punished by their superiors where they work for revealing facts or expressing their opinions.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
08/19/2004 9:26 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I'm sure the Alphabet-soup networks will be more then eager to talk to her and do interviews about her ordeal...
... once she mentions the panties they placed on her head.
Stories like this should be on every newspaper and every news-show. But the farking MSM will completely ignore it because muslims are doing it and it cannot be blamed (yet) on Bush...
This article was published in The Washington Post.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
08/19/2004 10:12 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Sources request anonymity usually because they will be punished by their superiors where they work for revealing facts or expressing their opinions.
Or, more often in recent days, they're lying out their asses and don't want to be caught.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
08/19/2004 10:25 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Or, more often in recent days, they're lying out their asses and don't want to be caught.
Or even more likely, the sources themselves have an agenda and know the press shield law will protect them, their agenda and their jobs, and the WaPO and NYTimes is only too happy to accomodate them.
#9
I've seen this story before. It's genuinely moving and I'm very happy to see the Post has printed it. I don't see an "agenda" on this one.
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/19/2004 21:42 Comments ||
Top||
#10
This article was published in The Washington Post.
Good for them. Sorry I was talking about the TV MSM networks (ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN/ETC....). You won't see any interviews (or even a mention) in 'We Hate America' or the 'Toadie show'...
#11
Steve, Check my remarks. My original post was actually a quip that Mikey took umbrage from.
I never said there was an agenda in this story In fact I quipped that this story is a departure from the usual agenda peddling for the WaPo in that they used named sources; But I also pointed out apparently WaPo writers love to protect the identities of unnamed sources whom oftentimes do have an agenda to push, yet here is a poor unfortunate woman who has a great deal to lose by stepping forward, so we get a photo, and everything but her home address and her cell phone number.
So if the Moose Limbs in Iraq decide to go after her for violating Sharia, as she has and as could conceivably happen, can the writer say his craft was any better served than if he had protected a unnamed bureaucrat in Washington, who has little to lose, than if he decided to protect this partcular source?
My answer is of course not.
And I believe that is the type of sense of proportion we are dealing with with liberal news sources such as the Post and the NY Times, and such a sense of proportion leads to the type of journalism they crank out on a regular basis. Unnamed sources, and unattributed facts and passages in stories which barely deserve to go on a socialist website as editorial, let alone the front page of a national newspaper which is still trying to convince the rest of the country they are actually selling news rather than an agenda
#12
badanov, it's been my experience that just about every story in the WaPo promotes their Leftist agenda; it's gotta to be editorial policy.
The only real journo there is Krauthammer, since Michael Kelly got killed in Iraq (RIP).
Ditto the NYSlimes on promoting the anti-Bush, anti-American agenda with the exception of William Safire.
They are both dedicated to bringing down the Bush Administration and what it stands for, which is America itself.
Just because Mike Sylwester refuses to acknowledge that it's true doesn't make it any less true.
And it's not that all newspapers publish stories from time to time with unnamed sources--this is SOP for the WaPo.
That's the problem and what makes this story remarkable.
via NYT BugMeNot was 'down' at the time of this post. If a Login becomes necessary, try the link.
By SABRINA TAVERNISE - August 19, 2004
BAGHDAD, Iraq, Aug. 18 - After four marathon days of back-room bargaining and strident debate, a political conference here selected a national assembly on Wednesday, putting Iraq on the road to becoming a constitutional democracy in a jumbled process that never included a formal vote.
The political jockeying grew intense in its final hours, with some delegates climbing on a stage to protest what they said was a process monopolized by large political parties. In a final dramatic moment, some of the delegates withdrew their candidacies in protest. But they ultimately remained in the conference, giving the assembly legitimacy.
The result was a list of names to fill a 100-seat assembly that will act as a parliament, overseeing the interim government of Prime Minister Ayad Allawi until elections slated for January. The body as chosen will present a broad cross section of Iraqi society, taking in sheiks and social workers, bureaucrats and religious leaders. One delegate, Hamid al-Kifaey, said the seat distribution ended up relatively proportional to the religious and ethnic demographics of this country of 25 million, including Sunni and Shiite Arabs, Kurds and Turkmens.
"Today the interim national congress has been formed," said a tired-looking Fuad Masum, the Iraqi official who is organizing the conference. "It was legal." ...more...
Now we wait and see if they "get it", though not very likely given the Sadr Peace Mission, or if they turn it into an Arab Tribal Confederation, complete with Shari'a Rights Councils and Ministry of Baksheesh. Sigh.
Posted by: .com ||
08/19/2004 12:33:33 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
from the stuff i saw in the WaPo, it looks like theyve got the full spirit of democracy, as practiced in our delightful windy city. The 5 big parties go to a back room (cigars, anyone?) and hammer out a slate. Everyone else complains about being left out "We need more independents!!!" i can hear the ghost of Da Mayor saying "Independents? fucking goo-goos - send em back to Hyde Park".
Puts me in mind of a story the one "reform" member of the Cook County Democratic Commitee recounted to me (this when i lived in Hyde Park, of course)
New inexperienced ward boss pipes up at the central comm meeting - "I want Cousin Vinnie made a judge" Older experienced guy turns to him and says "you dont understand, its not your TURN to get a judgeship!"
I am fairly stunned the conference concluded successfully with selections for an assembly, especially one that presents "a broad cross section of Iraqi society". It's progress. How miraculous it will be if all the assembly members prove capable of working with each other.
#1
the Army turned to Mist Mobility Integrated Systems Technology, Inc., a small civilian company based in Ottawa, Canada
Uh-oh.
Posted by: Rafael ||
08/19/2004 0:36 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I saw these being tested on TV. They had to hit with in 100 meters (all of them of each other in in a 200 meter target) They had no problems other than one of 5 had a complete steering failure (the chute worked as it was supposed to.)
Updated Aug. 19, 2004 0:20
Talks with Egypt over a possible security role in Gaza - after Israeli disengagement from the area - are not progressing because the Egyptians are raising unrealistic demands, Israeli diplomatic officials said Wednesday. "Egypt wants to cut more coupons than are available," one official said. The official said that the Egyptians want Israel to reopen a safe passage from Gaza to the West Bank; to withdraw entirely from Gaza, including from the Philadelphi corridor; to allow the Palestinians to open air and sea ports to Gaza; to permit Palestinian laborers entrance into Israel; and to ensure that Egyptian security specialists won't be harmed if they are dispatched to Gaza. Not just one deal breaker but almost half a dozen of them. Let's examine these little gems:
1.) [R]eopen a safe passage from Gaza to the West Bank.
Sure thing. Why not just let all of the terrorists congregate freely in order to better facilitate their murderous attacks?
2.) [T]o withdraw entirely from Gaza, including from the Philadelphi corridor
Great idea. Eliminate one of the only intercept points for arms flowing in from Egypt. Why not just open the border instead?
3.) [T]o allow the Palestinians to open air and sea ports to Gaza
Just perfect. No more troublesome interdiction of those pesky arms shipments from Iran like the Karine-A, which was carrying some 50 tons of weapons.
4.) [T]o permit Palestinian laborers entrance into Israel
How splendid. Open up the flood gates for Hamas' legendary 800 bomb vest mass murderers. What could be better?
5.) [T]o ensure that Egyptian security specialists won't be harmed if they are dispatched to Gaza.
Simply wonderful. Promise not to harm those who have been covertly supplying the Palestinian terrorists with substantial quantities of RPGs and automatic weapons. What a great idea!
What is it that permits Arabs to make demands like these with a straight face? They might as well just ask all of Israel to pack their bags and move on. Once again, there needs to be a penalty for suggesting things so flagrantly insulting as this. Diplomats who parrot this sort of crap should be expelled instantly and anyone in the Palestinian territories who spouts this sort of poppycock should come home to smoking ruins. Among Arabs, there seems to be a congenital inability to pursue rational and coherent thought patterns. Pedaling banana oil like this should come at a price. Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Zenster ||
08/19/2004 12:11:34 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
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.
