For anyone who has hoped and believed, as I have, that the British way of integrating Muslim citizens is more promising than the French one, the last year has been discouraging. Following the shock of the July 7 London bombings, perpetrated by young Muslims born and educated here, we now have the results of two recent opinion polls, an excellent TV documentary by Channel 4's Jon Snow, and the sombre warnings of Britain's most senior Muslim policeman. All convey the same message. Not only do many young British Muslims feel more alienated from the country they live in than their parents did - that's true of Muslims from immigrant families right across Europe - but the sense of not belonging seems to be even more acute in Britain than in France.
In a poll conducted for the Channel 4 documentary, only half the British Muslims questioned said they thought of Britain as "my country", whereas nearly a quarter said they thought of it as "their country" - meaning someone else's. The younger respondents were, the greater the alienation. Shockingly, one in three British Muslims aged between 18 and 24 said they would rather live under Sharia law than under British law. In a Pew poll of Muslims worldwide, a gob-smacking 81% of British Muslims said they thought of themselves as a Muslim first and a citizen of their country only second. This is a higher proportion than in Jordan, Egypt or Turkey, and exceeded only by that in Pakistan (87%). By contrast, only 46% of French Muslims said they were Muslims first, compared with 42% who felt themselves first and foremost citizens
#1
Articulate British Muslims, as encountered on Jon Snow's Channel 4 documentary and in magazines such as Q-News and Emel, are not merely telling us non-Muslim Brits a lot about themselves. They are also telling us something about ourselves.
#2
The answer seems pretty clear. The left in France loves France. The left in Britain hates the British. Should we be surprised if that extra level of bile comes out in Muslim opinion polls?
#3
I have no qualms with anyone living as they wish, as long as they don't try to force their way upon the rest of us. Once that happens, we need to beat the heads in of those that want to do the forcing, and either convince them their ideas will not be accepted, or evict them from our nation by force. That applies to the US, to Britain, and to all the world. Either live and let live in peace, or die by the sword. No exceptions allowed, including "religion".
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
08/10/2006 15:01 Comments ||
Top||
#4
The left in France loves France? Why wasn't I told?
#6
Speaking of the need to beat some heads in... it seems the Belgian government is trying to shut down The Brussels Journal for "internet racism," i.e., criticising Islam. (scroll down to get to the article)
Some people are DAMN determined to be dhimmi.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
08/10/2006 16:24 Comments ||
Top||
#7
The left in France hates France, exactly as the Left in America hates America.
#8
The left in France loves France? Why wasn't I told?
Okay, perhaps I'm wrong. Would you say the left in France has a more positive image of French culture or British culture? If you answer British my point is still correct.
#10
A lot of Muslim women want the Sharia laws to be imposed, too. Islamist fascism is rooted in the mind of a lot of Muslim women, as it is in the mind of a lot of Muslim men.
In his excellent book "The third Reich from rise to fall", William Shirer describes hordes of German women fanatically applauding nazi speeches.
#12
Is there something about the particular religiosity of Kashmiri, Pakistani and more broadly south Asian Islam, and the way it develops in interraction with a European host culture, as opposed to the Islam of the Maghreb, from which most French Muslims come?
Yes.
ONLY in the Indian subcontinent did islam become preoccupied with the dilema of living among a kafir majority population.
There are numerous fatwas on dealing with the kafir majority culture.
According to one imam who justified the creation of Pakistan, a good muslim suffers takleef when on the way to mosque, he encounters a dirty hindu.
Best to live apart.
The Indian muslim system of handling life among a majority non-muslim population is THE template for muslim communities. Saudis know nothing of this. The Pakistanis know.
Posted by: john ||
08/10/2006 19:19 Comments ||
Top||
#13
90% of British muzzies say their allegiance is to Islam first, not their country. Take them at their word. Make every British citizen of muzzie origin swear an oath of allegiance to the United Kingdom. Deport all non-citizen muzzies and all citizen muzzies who refuse to take the oath. Problem solved, or at least greatly alleviated.
An old frail man snaps awake, and stares: theres a stranger seated next to the bed, a long, unlit cigar in one hand. He leans back and smiles.
Dont be alarmed, says the stranger. Its just me, the Angel of History. I like to have a chat with men of your stature at times like this. Good run, old chap; dying in bed. Well played! A little advice? Pretend to die just as youre telling them the secret Swiss bank account numbers. Drives them mad, and its most amusing to watch. Mind if I smoke?
The old mans eyes are wide and frantic; the uninvited guest leans forward. Whats that? Right, right, your funeral. You want to know. Oh, next week, next month, hard to say. Theres the usual jostling for power right now. Odd, really: in this democratic, egalitarian nation, the only man you saw fit to follow happened to be your brother. What are the chances of that, eh? Most people in America dont know a thing about him. Another Castro? the Americans think. They had a spare?
When it all shakes out, and enough people have been put against a wall, youll get a funeral. Second-tier diplomats will attend, mostly Europeans who will privately complain that you didnt have the dignity to die in a cooler season. The show will be stolen by Chavez, of course. Hes rather like you, without the iconic facial hair and rhetoric that was stale when Woody Allen was funny. He has money, too. Good suits. I have my eye on that one. But we were talking about your funeral, werent we? The general consensus will be simple: at least it wasnt as long as one of your speeches.
After that? Ah. Well. You know how it goes. . . . "
Go read it all.
Posted by: Mike ||
08/10/2006 06:46 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
I've been an avid reader of Rantburg for several years now and have noticed a trend going from informative, insightful, and educated comments to plain and simple crap. Yes, occasionally there are comments under the posts from dependable Rantburgers but allot of them have nothing to do with the articles and are nothing more then lame wise cracks.
Is there any way to reverse this trend and get back to the quality of comments that made Rantburg what it was?
Thanks,
Yosemite Sam
Posted by: Yosemite Sam ||
08/10/2006 10:23 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The wise cracks are part of the reason I like Rantburg so much, why I've been coming here for three or four years now: the hard news mixed with opinion, extra knowledge, and wit.
However, I do know what you mean - before I took a long lurking spell, I remember all sorts of interesting discussions. I see a few of those, but often the article is far more informative than the things that have been said. Even the number of comments seems to be a fraction of what it once was.
And I miss .com's entertaining takes; whatever happened to him?
Posted by: The Doctor ||
08/10/2006 10:50 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I agree and miss .com, the uber commentator here for several years.
YS is right. If you have information to add then do so, but there is way too much (self-)ego massaging here these days.
Try to stick to facts, analysis and considered opinion. Some people here can be clever, ironic and funny, but most of us are not that good at it.
#3
I agree about the trend. Part of it is events. I have noticed that the quality of comments declines when little is going on in the world. Participants also change and not beneficially. This is not exclusive to RB, either. Another is the broadening of the articles accepted. Articles are accepted now that would have been booted years ago when the focus was much more narrow. I sense a Ph.D. thesis on the phenomenon of decline in blog comment quality.
#5
Does that mean no more 'Good Morning' articles? Those threads consist of mostly 'lame wisecracks' about towels and stuff...
I do agree that the quality of some of the comments are declining. (and yes, I have made my own contribution to that trend - I will try to do better. :)
On the other paw some of the 'classics' threads have been great stress relievers :). I enjoy some of the better wisecracks - others (even my own) have been plain dumb.
I guess the ultimate judge would be Fred and the moderators.
#6
I'm not one of the oldtimers but even I've been around long enough to miss Dan Darling's comments which had tons of useful information and analysis.
#11
So, now RB is an exclusive club? I had hoped that RB would be receptive of others that have a common interest in current events. If someone makes a comment that is not of your high intellect, maybe you should look at it as a different approach to a streesful subject. Some people deal with stress through humor. When I started reading RB I told myself "here are people of a same mind set that can help me understand and provide insight to the events going on today", but now I feel like Rodney Dangerfield in Caddishack. We will try to not disturb your sense of intellect Judge Smells, and we'll make sure to hold our pinkies up when we drink from our "whine" glasses.
#17
Should I dump page 5? Page 3? The bloid? The Opinion page? I'm open to suggestions.
When I started out, the 'Burg was pretty compact. August 10,2002 we had 14 posts. August 10, 2003 we had 25 posts. The same day in 2004 we had 100 and last year about the same. It's harder to keep up with that number -- even to understand all that's going on. There are more news sources, and there's more going on that the public hears about.
We've lost some best-loved commenters: .com, TGA, Lucky, Not Mike Moore, Mark Espinola, Tom Roberts and others have moved on for one reason or another. Dan's moved on to a new job that keeps him away from blogging. Chuck Simmins, Mike Calderon, Old Patriot, Phil F. and others are occupied with their own blogs and don't comment as much.
Luckily we're a movable feast. When things heat up or we get Instalanched we pick up new readers and commenters, and some stay, with one or two joining the core of the community. AP and Frank G and Pappy and the rest are always here, as are JFM, A5089, phil_b, tw, liberalhawk, and a host of others.
There are times when I get tired, and then my in-line comments are fewer and further between. A lot of times I'll let the picture or the sidebar make the comment for me. All the mods go through periods where they slack off from the 'Burg to enjoy their lives or to concentrate on their jobs.
I'm going to take a couple weeks off myself soon -- I've been five years without a break, and there are times I'm afraid I've run out of things to say. I work 10-hour days tracking the personal effects of the killed and wounded and then I work on the 'Burg when I get home. I want to read a novel, play with the granchild, and go fishing, all things I don't do now.
The comments and the wisecracks go up and down, in quantity and in quality. Some are consistently good, though. You're just not thinking of them when you comment on the occasinal flipness.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/10/2006 12:17 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Thanks Fred. In addition to what I said above, I should have said, it's still the best
#19
Fred, the Burg is great just the way it is; I wouldn't change a thing. Thanks for all you do.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
08/10/2006 12:22 Comments ||
Top||
#20
Don't change nuthin' Fred. Take a break.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
08/10/2006 12:24 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Sometimes I feel compelled to snark just to show I'm there.
anyway . THANK YOU FRED !
Posted by: J. D. Lux ||
08/10/2006 12:28 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Fred, you take your vacation - if anyone deserves it, it's you.
I think this sort of thing is cyclical - and does have something to do with the events that can be commented on, and the personal lives of the "regular" commenters. So please don't change a thing.
I do miss .com and TGA, especially. If y'all are lurking, please give us a sign you're OK.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
08/10/2006 12:30 Comments ||
Top||
#23
It's the middle of the summer, too...
Posted by: Mark E. ||
08/10/2006 12:59 Comments ||
Top||
#24
So, now RB is an exclusive club? I had hoped that RB would be receptive of others that have a common interest in current events. If someone makes a comment that is not of your high intellect, maybe you should look at it as a different approach to a streesful subject. Some people deal with stress through humor. When I started reading RB I told myself "here are people of a same mind set that can help me understand and provide insight to the events going on today", but now I feel like Rodney Dangerfield in Caddishack. We will try to not disturb your sense of intellect Judge Smells, and we'll make sure to hold our pinkies up when we drink from our "whine" glasses.
Hey, I don't think that's the problem at all. It isn't the humor, and it doesn't have anything to do with anybody being a snob. It's more that in the past many articles had a lot of people making jokes and adding in useful commentary: we had computer techs, engineers, housewives, pilots, lawyers, etc., and they all had their own take and information to share, which made combing through the comments as much of a learning experience as a couple of minutes on Wikipedia. There just seems to be less of that lately.
The reason you said you came here is, as I previously noted, one of the reasons I keep coming back. Smart-ass humor has, for several years, been one of Rantburg's coolest features, and I for one hope it sticks around. You should, too, because your initial impression was probably fairly accurate. And it's still possible - look at the discussion this article has prompted!
Posted by: The Doctor ||
08/10/2006 13:10 Comments ||
Top||
#25
Here ya go, Yosemite..
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." Marcus Aurelius
#26
Fred, we appreciate all you do here, even if we don't always say it out loud. If you wnat to take some time off, please do; the Army of Steves are certainly equal to the task of covering for you.
Sam, I'm not sure there's been any overall decline in the quality of the conversation. Some threads just kinda lay there and don't do much, some get trollificated or suffer from topic drift, and some really rock (like this one). Sometimes the snark and smartassery add to the experience; other times not.
The 'Burg is still one of my favorite hangouts--small enough to feel like a close-knit family; big enough to contain an impressive breadth of expertise and experience; enough bad attitude to delaminate and neuter a DU troll at thirty paces, but with a big enough heart to take care of our own and the sense of humorto not take ourselvestoo seriously. The best mix of geopolitical analysis and vintage pinups the world will ever see.
I noticed that TGA dropped off the radar about the time that Angela Merkel came to power, and I just kind of assumed he had an official position in the new government. Anyone know different?
Posted by: Mike ||
08/10/2006 13:24 Comments ||
Top||
#27
I think Fred's words sum the situation up quite well YS. The 'burg has grown much bigger over the last few years, example;
today: rants 80, comments 356 (and the day is not over yet), whereas three years ago it was 25 rants and 111 comments. There has also been a big turnover in regular commenters, but that's to be expected, people want to move on and we don't want to get stale!
These are troubling times, and some of us are just trying to make sense of a world that seems to have gone mad. You look at the MSM and think "that's not right, surely", and then you find a place like this, where people with exceptional knowledge spare the time to frame a complex situation, which on the MSM is given a paragraph or 15 seconds of tube-time, in a way that allows ordinary folk to make sense of it, and that helps immensely. I think it's hardly surprising that when you do find a resource like the 'burg, it's entirely likely new posters will react with a "me too! - I agree with that" post to try and get some of the spleen vented. I know when I started posting here it helped me - a lot.
And I totally echo the calls for Fred to have a vacation!
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
08/10/2006 13:25 Comments ||
Top||
#28
I have been around a long time and I love this site it is the first thing I read when I get up in the morning and the last before I go to bed. Thanks Fred keep up the good work.
#30
The insightful comments are still around, just not as much at the moment. Like somebody said, I think it's tied to events in the world. We seem to be in a lull at the moment (the non-full strength cleaning operation still counts as a lull in my eyes, they need to get serious and get on with it).
When events spike back up so will the insightful comments. Mixed in with snark, though. Just as Gawd intended. :)
Fred, take that vacation! The mods will keep this lot in line. :)
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
08/10/2006 13:29 Comments ||
Top||
#31
the non-full strength Israeli cleaning operation
Preview is my friend, preview is my friend, preview is my friend...
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
08/10/2006 13:31 Comments ||
Top||
#32
Mike,
Those are some excellent finds from the archives!
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
08/10/2006 13:36 Comments ||
Top||
#33
I'd also add that anonymous2u, #12 comment is particularly insightful.
To my mind, there's a horrible sense of inevitability as we watch events unfold. 11A5S posted yesterday that Wretchard's Golden Moment may well have passed, and the final comment in that thread from OP should be enough to give anyone the willies. In short, it may well be the calm before the storm...
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
08/10/2006 13:56 Comments ||
Top||
#34
I thought .com had switched aliases (as I, for one, have)?
I remember wishing years ago that there would ALSO be a Rantburg for more peripherally WOT stuff. Now there is, which is good -- though more work for Fred et al. (thanks Fred!). I don't think the main product is getting too diluted however.
#36
I agree with all the above about Fred taking a well deserved vacation. I've been here long enough (with more frequent hiatuses than Fred) to recognize it's basically due to turnover. By that I mean, .com/TGA/et al have moved on to greener pastures. While I do miss the days of .com ripping the trolls a new one, I come here more for the technical insight, the logical thinking, and most of all, links to news that I know in my heart is going on, but the MSM hides it from us. I sum it up this way...I used to surf multiple news sites daily (newsmax, worldnetdaily, boortz, rush, hannity, opinionjournal, michelle malkin, ann coulter, etc.), but now I can get the "headlines" from ALL of those sites (plus international sites) that are related to the WoT all in one spot, with snark, smart-assedry and female pics in one site. Sorry to be so long winded, but I've learned to cut down on which articles to read, and RB has truly opened my eyes to the interconnectedness of the Islamo-fascist movement with the Int'l news links too. An unbelievable resource. thanks, Fred and mods for all you do!
Posted by: BA ||
08/10/2006 14:23 Comments ||
Top||
#37
I found Rantburg late. I've made a few contributions, but mostly, I've found people of like mind. I have become aware of the writing on the walls. I know what to expect from my fellow man. I am frustrated, I am depressed, I am aware of what lies ahead, I am ready to face it. There is nothing left to say. The field has been frammed, the only thing left is the battle itself.
As I wait, sometimes I'll read or laugh or cry or curse. None of that matters.
#38
I've been lurking or posting or both since about February 2003, and I think the board is as good or better than ever -- which is to say, it's the best site of its kind on the web. I do miss .com, TGA etc., but other people have picked up the slack. Tony, for example, has really been on a roll, and Dave D. is the god of my idolatry. And the resource value of the site has increased as a result of Fred's tireless efforts.
What I most appreciate is the humor (Belmont Club is consistently insightful, but it's not exactly a barrel of laughs) and the near-absolute lack of pretentiousness: comments get cheered or jeered on their merits and with no respect for the asserted expertise of the commenter. (MSM comments, in contrast, are frequently mere bombast preceded by a recitation that the commenter was the second assistant secretary to our embassy in Botswana during the Clinton administration.)
I've also had the chance to meet some of the regulars in person, and they make me proud to be an American.
Posted by: Matt ||
08/10/2006 14:45 Comments ||
Top||
#39
Damn. I thought a lack of recent Hyper schlocommentary would have raised the "Comments" IQ sufficiently...
Regardless of the level Snarkism vs Informed .Commentary, Rantburg is still the greatest clearing house of WoT information I've found.
#40
I may not be able achieve such standards. It my inate dumbing down characteristic. Some say it is a familt trait. I will try to limit my snarky comments and provide pithy (not pissy), insightful, erudite editorial comments--however, this is difficult for underachievers in our family.
#41
Well, hell--I just gave up drinking and posting--what more do you want from me?!
Seriously, I've been visiting Rantburg regularly for over 3 years now, and I've noticed as well we get periods where comments and posts get rather lame (and I admittedly contribute some of that!). I think it's just the price to pay as long as Rantburg's audience grows, and of course there are times that the news isn't so dramatic and we get a lot of "filler".
Fortunately we're not as big as LGF and we still have some sense of community and regulars! I hope that many of the more savvy commenters we've had are still lurking though and will give us their insights when they are so motivated.
Posted by: Dar ||
08/10/2006 15:45 Comments ||
Top||
#42
I can't imagine keeping tabs on the GWOT without Rantburg. It is an indispensible resource. Nothing else on the net comes close to the breadth of coverage and depth of insight. Oh, and humor too!
Sure, the quality of comments waxes and wanes, and some of the best posters have gone by the wayside, but these are natural cycles. I've one thing to say on the topic: most places I go I'm usually the one with the penetrating insights and profound observations. At Rantburg, I generally don't have much to add that hasn't already been said earlier and better.
Thank you moderators for the great work. Fred, have a great vacation when you can. (Maybe sneak in a few days before the 22nd.)
#45
Fred, I'm still around, I'm just not commenting _as much_ either here or on my 'blog because I've been busy with work and had some bad health problems earlier this year. Things are slowly getting better, and I HOPE things will start getting caught up when I get the new CNC mill in here.
If we _are_ going to discuss The Grand Future Direction of Rantburg, I do have a question: Will you be doing something kinda-sorta like an RSS feed soon (or again? I think you'd worked on something like that earlier?)
Alternatively, could there be something like "the bloid" tied up into a single image file with a persistent image url pointing towards the current one?
So that we could put something like
(img src="http://rantburg.com/todaysbloid.png") in our sidebars?
When I get more free time again (hahahaha!) I want to experiment more with aggregator-type stuff.
And I gotta run, I need to track down some material that was supposed to be here already.
Posted by: Phil ||
08/10/2006 16:32 Comments ||
Top||
#46
I don't comment as often as I used to, mostly because I don't have anything to say I haven't already said. If I come up with something new, I say it, otherwise I sit here and read, read, read. That includes the "snarky" comments. I do pass over some of the articles because they're duplicates (from different sources, usually), and some of the comments, because they AREN'T worth reading. I do agree that Rantburg is the BEST site on the web, and the first place I go to every day.
Fred, if you come to Colorado, I'll take you fishing. I know a few good spots. It's been a lot cooler here than it has been in the DC area. We all appreciate both the job you do for a living and the one you do with Rantburg. God bless you and keep you strong!
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
08/10/2006 16:33 Comments ||
Top||
#47
Y-Sam, perhaps you have the wrong website.
Rant: a loud bombastic declamation expressed with strong emotion
Personally, I find the long-winded comments something I don't spend much time on because reading off the computer is less enjoyable than skimming over some words.
Posted by: Captain America ||
08/10/2006 16:34 Comments ||
Top||
#48
Oh, One More Thing:
("Our two main weapons are fear, suprise, and an almost fanatical devotion... maybe I should come in again?")
OK, seriously, maybe the main reason there hasn't been the sort of quality analysis Yosemite Sam wants is that there hasn't been much movement in the strategic situation of late?
Things could change a lot tomorrow, or maybe even later today, but we're still following a "slow and steady" attrition-style counterinsurgency campaign in Iraq, and despite all the news headlines, the Israelis aren't exactly fighting All-Out Total War in Lebanon. Hizbollah has launched a lot of rockets, but they haven't accomplished much with them, at least compared to what those same rockets could do with western or even modern ex-soviet command and control guiding them.
We're in what basically amounts to the "sitzkreig" phase of WW2. When we look back from the future we'll probably wish we'd done things differently, or maybe not. All we can do is muddle through now with imperfect vision. But given the path the US has chosen much of the victories we accomplish today, if we do, are only going to be obvious in hindsight many years from now, if at all. Or they're going to be classified. Or some combination of the two.
Now there was some good news today. In fact, some excellent news. A major terrorist plot was foiled in Britian. Doesn't mean there won't be successful ones in the future, but I believe the failure of this one to be a good sign.
Posted by: Phil ||
08/10/2006 16:47 Comments ||
Top||
#49
At Rantburg, I generally don't have much to add that hasn't already been said earlier and better.
I'll dissent from that CL. Your comments are excellent.
#50
I promise to resist any dumbing down of my comments, even if it makes me all the more abrasive. This place has way too much vital information to be fettered with PC or "sensitivity" related constraints. Now as to the occasional humorous anti-Islamist filked song, you'll have to pry those out of my cold dead hard drive.
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
08/10/2006 16:58 Comments ||
Top||
#52
I should also add that Rantburg is the first place I go to in the morning and almost always the last place I go to at night. It's a terrific resource and I've learnt a shedload here from experts in many fields.
Thanks heaps for the site Fred, it is greatly appreciated!
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
08/10/2006 17:03 Comments ||
Top||
#53
I, for one, applaud the Dumbing Down of Rantburg. I had a hard time understanding stuff back then. Now I don't.
#54
And don't forget, we also have Rantburg Junior as a backup in case of Atomic Attack. It is the email equivalent of a party line composed of tin can telephones.
As far as .com (PD) goes, no joy there. We have emailed and faxed him. He has gone completely off the radar screen, as far as we can tell. No other details, sad to say.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
08/10/2006 17:12 Comments ||
Top||
#55
Rantburg is a good information blog. The articles and links are usually well selected.
#56
Suggestion: Allow one funny off topic post per day. Even if there were few comments on the "Giant Crab" post, I bet a high percentage opened that page. And AOL should be trashed at least once per month.
#57
I don't understand the title's premise...Fred does a great job along with the mods to produce a top-quality product, even in the face of my best efforts to drag it down to my level. Hey....wait a minute...damn :-(
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/10/2006 18:58 Comments ||
Top||
#58
Rantburg's the last thing I read before I start my day, figure it'll put me in the right mood to deal w/disgruntled employees and managers... Glad I wandered by many moons ago and never left!
#59
I've been a reader and lurker for many years and only recently started posting. And I miss several of the mentioned departed posters.
RB is without doubt the best news aggregator on the 'net for WoT stuff - these news bits warrant serious "rant".
But it also has a lot of posts regarding other issues and philosophy - as well as just plain weird and humorous stories.
It's the latter, IMO that evokes some of the snarkiness and perhaps dumbness.
If my own posts are part of what is considered the "dumbing down", then all I can say is that there was no intent to offend, and that some of the guys/gals here are just plain smarter and more informed than me.
I do the best I can.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
08/10/2006 19:27 Comments ||
Top||
#60
LOL Dreadnought!!
I don't have a problem with funny posts, most of the Crossfire Gazette ones are hilarious, as long as the main focus is the WoT, or will it be renamed WoI - War on Islamofascism?
One concern I have is for the mods. and whether they have the time for the quantity of posts that flow through the 'burg.
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
08/10/2006 19:32 Comments ||
Top||
#61
No way no mo uro - there's been several comments of yours recently that I've found very informative.
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
08/10/2006 19:37 Comments ||
Top||
#62
I've been completely incommunicado in Hospital Hell for some time - got home today.
First thing I did: Read Rantburg. Not even eating real non-hospital food came close. I'll order a pizza with extra sausage - later.
I love Rantburg. It's that simple. I missed it more than anything else, and that's one helluva long list. Hooked for life.
#63
Rantburg is my favorite spot on the web. I can't tell you how much I learn here every single day. Fred, what you do is simply outstanding and is an incredible resource for anyone with an open mind willing to learn.
I've read many positive kudos for various posters in this thread, all well deserved. I'd like to add that Trailing Wife writes some of the clearest, most incisive comments I've read anywhere. Truly impressive stuff. Thanks to you all. I think we are going to need one another a whole lot more in the future.
#64
Much love to all my Rantburg homies, both posting and lurking. It's a privilege to spend time with all of you. I think we will need each other *that much more* in the coming months/years...the road ahead looks rocky indeed, and possibly mined. Everyone go read some Homer or Shakespeare, 'k? Go listen to a symphony, or spend some time with the works of Vincent Van Gogh. We *must* bear witness to the goodness, the greatness, of our heritage and our legacy. We can't let the darkness overtake us.
#70
Do not underestimate the effort that goes into a good lame wisecrack. My lame wisecrack production process is as follows:
1) First draft of lame wisecrack.
2) Review of lame wisecrack by lame editorial committee.
3) Analysis of lame wisecrack by lame wisecrack Artificial Intelligence engine to compute Lameness Coefficient. Insufficiently lame wisecracks are rejected at this point.
4) Speelling error insertion.
5) Error grammatical insertion.
6) Final review by senior editorial committee.
7) Comment typed into Rantburg by my pet ferret.
8) Posting for enjoyment by RB readers throughout the civilized world.
9) Post posting analysis and continuous process improvement.
#71
RD :) I missed ya, bro. I have this frickin' huge shiny new zipper running from my navel to my sternum, LOL. And several other "randomly placed" holes, as well, LOL. Bastards love their scalpels and toys. I guess I'm now a work of art... My Doc would bring others by to show off his carving skills - no shit. Sent me home with a pile of expensive pain killer dope, which I won't take - and told them ahead of time, the pricks. Wasted $.
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/10/2006 21:40 Comments ||
Top||
#73
Its this war on terror thing, these Muslims fellows just don't seem to be actling like the reasonable chaps we beleive them to be; they refuse to take a holiday, no matter how much we try to be diplomatic with them and talk them into taking some time off. Quite puzzling.
(Still around, but work has been eating my life - very little brain or time left for posting - and when one is tired one is seldom funny. Short staffed - half our people are reservists or guard, so about 1/4 the office seem to be prepping for, recovering from, or out on, a deployment. Thigs are easing a bit now, so I hope to get back to posting and being snarky and informative)
#76
Dumbed down? I don't see it. And I've been here for awhile. I've seen dumb people here occasionally, but they aren't here for long. Or they don't stay dumb for long. On the contrary, most of the folks here are a helluva lot more aware of what's happening in the world then a majority of the population, probably a vast majority. I've read folks here that have written dissertations on a subject and other folks that can sum it up in one line on every subject from the Grand Jirga to lesbian supermodel bounty hunter movies that can crack you up, make you cry or make you want to learn more about a certain subject . It's a microcosm of modern day life here. They oughta put it in a time capsule for fity years down the road. And we owe it all to Fred.
Posted by: Mike ||
08/10/2006 22:04 Comments ||
Top||
#78
I don't comment as much because there is so much TO Rantburg now: In recent days, it's been the ONLY blog I've visited.
Keep up the good work, fred, and enjoy that vacation. In fact, if I were you, I'd take up OP's offer: a worthy man who sounds competent, both with regard to work and to relaxation.
#80
YS, I have to disagree. Rantburg simply reflects a broad spectrum of commentary. Just as there are the less educated and less informed in the general public, so it is here -- of course, to a much lesser extent because an interest in the body politic and world events is a given for Rantburgers.
Personally, I enjoy the smart ass remarks and third rate wisecracks intermingled with the more serious and informed pieces. I can't count how many times I've laughed my ass off as I seriously read through a thread and suddenly come upon a smart alek remark. And, I'm not averse to offering a few myself.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
08/10/2006 23:07 Comments ||
Top||
#83
Let's just blame Frank G in post #57 for Yose Sam's observation of plain and (funnier than hell)simple crap (for not reading the iron clad DMFD formula of success in post #70) and my mia culpa of lurking without a license. Best site on the net. Take a vacation, recharge the batteries, Fred. Be back before 8/22... :)
"They're nuts, Jim"
"Have to keep the Sheep Afraid."
"What "plot"? Has Jerkoff provided any evidence of the plot? Or would that jeopardize "security" and "embolden the terrorists."
"Yeah...it's sad, but my first reaction is "it's a sham" I mean...they could have legitimate concerns for my wife's legitimate safety (she's taking off out of Hartsfield-Jackson literally as we speak), but my gut reaction is that it's all a PR attempt to prop up the chimp's numbers"
"It is reminding me of V for Vendetta, the TV station blasting all of the terra alerts over and over."
"a thought here....all the carry ons..add weight to a flight ..more weight.. more fuel consumed..now with BP oil shut down..could Blair being holding back fuel for the british airlines..and US carriers..in preperation for a air strike on Iran? i believe Blair shut down the oil fields of BP to reserve oil..in case of a oil shortage in the event of air strikes on Iran! think about it..its a self imposed reserve of oil..."
"Exactly, Why NOW Why is this major disruption being discussed NOW. What else is going on? This sounds lke another Bush diversion tactic...Get the media to discuss terror, because there is something else that they don't want us discussing. Bait & Switch technique."
"its needed to keep the Lamont win out of the headlines. otherwise, all we would hear about today is how Lamont swept the floor with Lieberman's butt. Cant have good headlines for Dems. Rove plan A."
"Terror alert increases in summer in an election year...Okay, let's check and see who won the "When will the government start using the terror rainbow to scare people into voting Republican?" office pool...I don't doubt the attack attempt was real, BTW. I do wonder if they pulled a Zarquawi on the public, where they could have stopped the plot earlier but let it develop until foiling it would occur at a politically-favorable time."
"9/11 was an inside job... anyone who believes the next will be any more legit is kinda livin in la la land. As was said above: terrah, terrah, terrah.....be very afraid. Humans are really pathetic. And Amerika has a greater proportion of sheeple (fat, lazy, TV addicted, uncritical sheeple) than any other locale on earth."
"Why NOW? We know why...This Terror Alert is totally necessary... coz freaking Leibermann lost his senatorial bid..... and The Left Wing candidate got a toe in the door. Every time there's a criticizm of the Bush Embargo on Freedom, every times there's an election that might change the writing on the wall... they haul out another sinister 'plot.' Every time.... it's been ages since they had to play the "Color Alert" on us.. but now... when its obvious to the rest of the world that the Emperor and all his courtiers have no clothes (metaphorically speaking)... they trump us again. When I heard this, I was livid! Why in LOndon? Well, don't we all agree that Tony Blair is bush's bitch..? What's next? I have had it."
"Very Well Timed Indeed At dinner last night, I was commenting that there would be an elevated terror alert soon. Elections are coming. A BIG primary just happened and BushCo needs cover. My BULLSHIT detector is going off. WAY OFF.
Naturally, the media will spin this for Boosh. How awesome would it be if his poll numbers went DOWN as a result of this?"
Now excuse me. I have to wipe my hard drive and go shower.
Posted by: Steve ||
08/10/2006 09:38 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Cheese. Called that one, didn't I?
Posted by: Fred ||
08/10/2006 10:39 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Thank God I'm no longer a Democrat.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
08/10/2006 10:52 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I sometimes think DU is the lefty version of The Dozens, with one nutbag trying to come up with an even more bizarre theory then the previous loon who is then tried to be topped by the next one. I think there's a secret panel of judges and they award swell prizes...
#4
I love the comparison to V for Vendetta in there. V for Vendetta was an idiot directors attack on Bush so using it as an example of Bush's evils is just naval gazing to infinity.
#5
What amazes me is I never been to DU or Daily KOS I just listen to you guys and wonder if it just some machine that pushes this out whenever sometning about terror comes up.
#6
djohn66, you should go there - just once though.
The mindset that some of those people have is surreal.
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
08/10/2006 15:01 Comments ||
Top||
#7
TOny, it will remain surreal until the dear members of the ROP drag the DU/KOS kids from their beds and put a bullet in their heads. I think even then that they will believe it is Bush's storm troopers doing the draggin/shootin.
Via AP: "This should serve as the latest, most serious evidence that we are in a war against a brutal enemy that intends to attack us over and over again in the most indiscriminate way." Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn. Short and to the point. BTW isn't LaMont a FRENCH name?
The lesson of the Reuters photo fakery scandal is nothing any hapless once-bitten carnival mark couldnt have warned them about.
Discredited photographer Adnan Hajj was employing the oldest and worst-kept secret in any con artists bag of tricks: People will see what they want to see. They will believe what they want to believe.
Hajj used Adobe Photoshop to make smoke from an Israeli airstrike on Beirut bigger. He did it in very clumsy, obvious fashion ... like something youd see on a stage set that is stylized and intended to be suggestive of more smoke. Maybe he did it just to make his photo more dramatic. Maybe, as a number of bloggers whove scrutinized his work suggest, he did it for ideological reasons, to denigrate the hated Israelis and give heroic Jew-killing Hezbollah a boost.
Photo editors need big drama, wreckage, emotional faces, things that will carry a sense of urgency and attract the eye of readers. Freelancers like Hajj are paid per picture, and need money. Those factors may explain why, as noted by bloggers such as www.freedomszone.com, www.littlegreenfootballs.com, www.hotair.com, www.riehlworldview.com, photos of the same easily identifiable Lebanese wreckage were posted by Reuters and the Associated Press weeks apart, sometimes with the same people in them, with no suggestion that it was anything but new wreckage. It would explain why Hajjs photos of a bridge strike showed the same individuals running in one direction, then in the other, with great urgency, but with greatly divergent damage in frames of the same area, and no smoke, though an airstrike is said to have just occured. Hajj and others may have figured out how to chisel more money out of the gullible western news agencies. Perhaps with the side benefit of adding to global outrage over the suffering of the Lebanese people.
Hezbollah also knows that people see what they want to see. That would explain why, as these blogs and others have pointed out, different news photographers who arrived at Qana hours apart, have similar photos of the same bodies being carried out of the wreckage and loaded onto ambulances. Photos of the dead are important. People around the world need to know about the realities of war, no matter how they feel about the justification of a particular war. In America, police, medics and firefighters usually shield the dead from the view of news cameras whenever possible. But it would appear that Hezbollah, or worse, Lebanese rescue workers, decided the best use of a dead child was to be dragged around for propaganda purposes.
Now the bloggers have noted that several New York Times photos appear to show the same man walking into some wreckage who is later shown as a bombing victim being carried out. The bloggers were drawn to this because they noticed that, unlike anyone and anything that has been subjected to an urban bombing, the "body" was clean. It wasnt covered with dust ... except on the hands, where the "victim" may have been rumaging around in the rubble. Thats when the facial similarity with the perfectly healthy, similarly shirtless man was noticed.
Rank or perhaps willful ignorance of the realities of warfare is also demonstrated by photos such as a car allegedly hit by an Israeli airstrike that looks like its been in a bad fender bender, with no sign of the kind of blast damage a car hit by a missile or bomb would have sustained. Youd think after handling three years of war photos out of Iraq, not to mention the many wars of preceding decades, photo editors might be more conversant with the particulars of the subject.
The question is, why would photo editors who presumeably are looking at a chronological series of photos from any given scene, fall for tricks that have been uncovered by amateurs? Because people see what they want to see. Magicians and scammers have known this since the time of the pharoahs. Psychological studies have confirmed it is true.
In Lebanon, where Hezbollah has made widespread use of human shields, firing missiles on Israel from positions dug in next to UN observer posts and within inhabited villages, what the international press has wanted to see and has reported is evidence of Israeli war crimes. Until now, Hezbollah and photographers like Hajj have been able to ensure that they will.
Everyone in the news business gets taken for a ride sooner or later. Its an occupational hazard. What is surprising is the scale of it in Lebanon. And what is tragic about this is, as a Boston Herald photo editor noted, editors everywhere can no longer trust the pictures from Lebanon. The public cannot know what is staged and what is real. They cannot know the true scope of the devastation that Hezbollahs aggression against Israel and its cynical tactics have brought on the Lebanese people. The con artists have shafted themselves and their own people with their cheap tricks.
The government's decision comes late, very late, but not too late.
Destroying Hizbullah's fighting capacity and missile arsenal remains the objective that Israel must achieve. Clearly, air power alone cannot do so and a major ground offensive is necessary. While this should have been done considerably earlier, it nevertheless should be done today.
Firstly, on the military front, our goal should be victory over Hizbullah, a proxy military force for Iran.
Secondly, on the hasbara (public relations) front, we have to fend off the attacks and vilification of Israel in order to gain time for the military objective.
And thirdly, on the civilian front, the government must immediately declare a state of emergency. This is a war that, for the civilians, is worse than previous wars - longer and more costly in lives and property.
These are the objectives that I will support.
In war, you must achieve your objectives. It is painful, but it will be much more painful for the country - in lives lost, cities paralyzed and security imperiled - if we have to face future rounds because we did not win this one.
#1
I assume this was written before the Cabinet's latest hold-off decision. I also assume Bibi was not apprised of that decision until it was a done deal.
#2
This OPINION was presented under why Olmert (Israel) cannot win. Not my hope but this summation is to the point:
Israeli Bolshevik dictator Ehud Smolmert and his "Defense" Minister Amir Peretz Stalin have made it clear that their goal in the current war is to get an international force to guard Israel's northern border. Smolmert and Peretz Stalin are begging NATO to become the new international force.
This proposal is an unmitigated catastrophe for Israel. A NATO international force will be even worse than the current UN international force on the northern border of the Jewish state.
In 1982, after decades of murderous Arab Muslim Nazi terrorist attacks against northern Israel, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) went into Lebanon to crush the PLO and other Islamic terrorist gangs.
However, then as now, Israel tied the hands of her soldiers, ordering them not to fire on Arab Muslim Nazi civilians, even though all of Lebanon's Muslim "civilians" fully support the Islamic terrorists.
The Islamic terrorists were able to massacre over 1,000 Israeli Jewish soldiers, who were ambushed thousands of times by Muslim "civilians."
At the end of the disastrous 1982 Lebanese war, the Israeli army decided to hold on to a buffer zone in southern Lebanon in order to prevent further Muslim terrorist rocket attacks.
From 1982 until 2000, the Israeli army remained in the south Lebanon buffer zone.
But Israel did not expel the local Arab Muslim Nazi population in south Lebanon, and so murderous Islamic terrorist attacks continued to take a heavy toll on Israeli soldiers throughout the 18-year period in which the IDF remained in the buffer zone.
Instead of finally expelling the Arab Muslim "civilian" mass murderers, Israel decided to retreat from the south Lebanon buffer zone in 2000.
In 2000, Israel retreated from south Lebanon in panic. Israeli soldiers were being fired upon by the arrogant Hezballah Muslim terrorists even as the soldiers literally fled to the Israeli border.
Israeli soldiers left behind valuable equipment, weaponry, and religious articles in their desperate and cowardly dash out of southern Lebanon.
The full-scale panic in the 2000 south Lebanon retreat was one of the most shameful moments in Israeli history.
In exchange for Israel's complete retreat, the United Nations agreed to send an international force to the northern border "to keep the peace." The UN force is called UNIFIL.
Hezballah leader Hassan Nasrallah met in April 2002 with a UNIFIL commander - a Pakistani Muslim, by the look of him.
But the UN force did not "keep the peace."
On the contrary, the UN force has consistently helped the Hezballah Muslim terrorists carry out their murderous attacks against Israeli Jews.
A United Nations ambulance was used as a cover by Hamas Muslim terrorists to ship Qassam rockets in the Gaza District (October 2004) - The long object in the surveillance video is a rocket
In October 2000, Hezballah Muslim terrorists drove a UN-marked vehicle up to the border and then ambushed three Israeli soldiers. The soldiers were kidnapped and subsequently tortured to death by the Islamic terrorists.
The UN never complained about the use of its vehicle by Hezballah Muslim terrorists, and it was clear that UN "peacekeeping" soldiers willingly gave the vehicle to Hezballah to carry out the brutal atrocity.
In 2004, Israel filmed Hezballah Muslim murderers loading a Qassam terrorist rocket into the back of a UN ambulance for safe transport.
In the current war, UN "peacekeeping" soldiers openly shield Hezballah Muslim terrorists. Hezballah sets up their Islamic terrorist nests right next to UN positions, and the UN protects them from Israeli retaliation.
The recent killing of four UN soldiers occurred when Hezballah used the UN position to fire missiles into northern Israel. When the Israeli army returned fire, the UN soldiers tried to shield the Hezballah terrorists.
The UN did not complain about Hezballah using their positions to fire missiles into Israel. Instead the UN condemned Israel for defending herself against Hezballah terrorist attacks.
America-hating, Jew-hating UN Secretary General Kof Annan accused Israel of deliberately killing the UN soldiers.
Indeed, even before this incident, Kof Annan always fully supported the Muslim terrorist war to destroy little Israel.
On the very first day of the current war, when Hezballah murdered and kidnapped Israeli soldiers, and started firing hundreds of missiles into northern Israel, Kof Annan accused Israel of engaging in "terror."
After so many nightmarish experiences with international "peacekeeping" forces, one would think that Israel would finally learn her lesson.
But instead, Israel's traitor leaders are proposing making a bad situation even worse.
Smolmert now wants NATO to become the new UN-mandated international force on Israel's northern border.
NATO is infinitely worse than UNIFIL.
UNIFIL has many soldiers from Third World countries who are not very bright, which is better for Israel. It is always better to have enemies who are not bright, and any international force will be an enemy of Israel.
On the other hand, NATO is comprised of soldiers from European and Western countries. Therefore, NATO soldiers are much smarter and much more dangerous for Israel.
There is no difference in terms of the degree of Jew-hatred that exists in NATO and in UNIFIL. Europe hates Israel and the Jewish people just as much as the Third World does.
General Wesley Clark of the U.S. Army, later a Democrat White House hopeful, was supreme NATO commander during the Traitor-in-Chief Bill Clinton's war crimes in the Balkans - A Belgrade television station was bombed on April 23, 1999; on May 7, 1999, an American cluster bomb landed in a residential area, murdering 19 civilians.
Also Israel will be much more reluctant to defend herself if NATO troops are stationed in Lebanon and are shielding the Hezballah Muslim terrorists. Israel foolishly is always afraid of offending the European Nazis.
Moreover, America is deeply involved with NATO. So Israel will not want to do anything that might antagonize America.
NATO decried attacks on mosques but had no problem invading a Serbian church in search of a Bosnian Serb "war criminal" - The invasion took place in April 2004 and resulted in the shooting of an Orthodox priest and his son, both of whom were critically wounded.
This decision to rely on international forces raises the question of why we even need a Jewish state. If Jews can no longer defend themselves, if the Jewish army is no longer the defender of Israeli Jews, then what is the point of having an independent Jewish nation?
Israel came into being in part to defend the Jewish people after the horrors of the Holocaust, when we saw that the "international community" never lifts a finger to save Jewish lives. Now are we going back to the days of depending upon the "good graces" of the Jew-hating world to protect millions of Jews whose lives are in mortal danger?
jtf.or . . .
#1
What happens when liberals get in power. They present a danger to the world by their inaction and ineptness. These people are like the appeasement crowd during early WW II. Appeasement just fuels the fantasies of would-be dictators and wannabee rulers of the world. I don't care whether the cause is Nazism or religious theocracy foisted upon the rest of the world by force.
#2
This is the background of yesterday's surprise effective dismissal of OC northern Command Maj. General Udi Adam. According to various media sources, Olmert was incensed at Adam's remarks that he had not been allowed to fight the war that had been planned. Adam allegedly made these remarks in response to criticism against his running of the war, and the results so far achieved.
That shocks me. Why there isn't a no-confidence vote scheduled is beyond me. This is the most fubar clusterfugh since Mog. I'm shocked the Paks aren't involved.
#3
Hezbos in part tipped their hand by indicating they were more than willing to fight from entrenched positions near Israel-Lebanon border.
If they want to die that way, it is Israel that has to oblige them. So far, she hasn't. 10,000 to 12,000 troops fighting against a well-entrenched, light infantry division is insufficent. What's needed is a hammer and anvil strike, pushing from both north and south of these hilltop positions, and in order to do that, the IDF will need between 30,000 to 40,000 troops.
There are two ways to take out Hezbollah. (1) Hard and fast and bloody. Get the job done with ground troops before world opinion changes. (2) Slow and methodical. Get the job done using airpower to cut off and soften the enemy to minimize Israeli casualties.
Option 2, if carried to completion is the far better option but there is serious doubt if the plans can be carried to completion against growing world pressure. Many in the military don't think the PM will see things through.
#6
There is only one legitimate way to fight a war - use the maximum amount of force possible to kill and destroy as much of the enemy's force structure (personnel, equipment, supply lines, rear staging areas, etc.) as possible in the shortest amount of time. Anything else is playing at war. The United States hasn't fought a serious war since World War II. It's about time we started, or we're going to lose another one. Israel is in the same boat vs the hezbollocks and Lebanon/Syria/Iran.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
08/10/2006 19:25 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Ahmen OP. The US needs to go on a war footing. NOW, not after thousands more of our civilians are killed. We need to cut non-defense spending to the frickin bone and increase the size of our military. We are playing around while the enemy probes and looks for weaknesses. If Western Europe won't wake up, we have to. The Brits have some serious soul searching to do.
Link goes to a Youtube video showing 'Green Helmet' guy placing a civilian child in an ambulance. Then, not being satisfied, he goes and gets his helmet, and they pull the girl's body back out of the ambulance and uncover her so that the video can get a better shot.
Why is America waiting to be attacked by Iran? Why do we sit on the sidelines while Tehran makes war on our ally Israel in order to provoke America to join the fighting, first against Syria and then against Tehran itself? Why do we listen to the European appeasers as they pretend the Lebanon front is a regional conflict, a national liberation contest, when it is demonstrably the prelude to the wider war the Spain 1936 to the continental war of 1939? What is the explanation for America's willful fiction that the United Nations Security Council can engineer an accommodation in Lebanon, when it is vivid to every member state that this is a replay of September 1938, when Europe fed Hitler the Sudetenland as the U.N. now wants to feed the jihadists the sovereignty of Israel?
The most threatening answer is that America waits to be bloodied because it has lost its will to defend itself after five years of chasing rogue-state-sponsored gangsters and after three years of occupation in failed-state Iraq against Tehran- and Damascus-backed agents. A grave possibility is that America is now drained, bowed, ready to surrender to the tyrants of Tehran.
Then again, perhaps America has been here before, and it is part of America's destiny as the New Jerusalem that we rarely start wars but that we are unusually good at finishing them.
At least so far - though the MSM bitched about the end of WW II as well.
My treasured evidence that America knew what was coming is Life Magazine, Volume 11, No. 23, dated December 8, 1941, which means it was printed and distributed a week before Pearl Harbor.
The astonishing 13-page cover photo essay by Clare Boothe on Commander of the Far East General Douglas MacArthur is complete with maps showing America's strategic challenges at Manila, including the daunting air and sea mileage from San Francisco to Manila and from "Tokio" to Manila. "Will the Island of Luzon then become the great theater of war, and General MacArthur the outstanding khaki-clad figure in it?" asks Boothe. "Or will peace descend upon the Pacific while the U.S. plunges into the war across the Atlantic?"
Interesting - I did not know that.
-----
What this all means to me today is that America was expectant of the crisis that fell on December 7, 1941; and yet America remained reluctant to say out loud that war was unavoidable, inevitable, already under way the nation holding back as if the obvious war plans in Berlin and Tokyo were going to vanish like a lightning storm. When the Japanese fleet did maul our Pacific fleet, the Roosevelt administration was rattled and the public was grim. It will be the same for us when this premonitory waiting lifts and the main action begins, both frightful and logical. The Lebanese Front, the Iraqi Front, the Afghan and Kashmir Fronts, or the Haifa blitz will no more solve themselves than did the China-Burma Front, the North African Front, the Atlantic Front, the London blitz of 65 years ago. Who will publish the last magazine before the day of infamy comes again?
Doesn't matter. Unlike that 1941 Life, the present-day one will be lying its ass off right up to the fateful day - and making excuses for the enemy thereafter. (Assuming anyone at the magazine survives the attack, which I quite frankly hope they don't.)
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
08/10/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Thanks for moving this to the correct category, Fred - got caught up in pasting the story & forgot. Until just after I'd hit the "Post" button.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
08/10/2006 0:01 Comments ||
Top||
#2
But at least I included the link! ;-p
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
08/10/2006 0:02 Comments ||
Top||
#3
We noticed ;-)
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/10/2006 0:20 Comments ||
Top||
#4
MARY MATALIN > the Dems as taken over by [post-Lieberman] MOVEON.org and the FAR/RADICAL LEFT only plan is to run away from everything. We can prob add "Iff we pretend or delude we are = are not, it is". Maybe after a few Amer Hiroshimas, or the Motherly Commie Airborne Peacekeeping = Occupation Army starts rafting across the Colorado River-Mississippi towards Washington DC, the future CPUSA-Amerikan Politburo-United Socialist Republics "MIGHT" DECIDE, "MAYBE",
"COULD" DECIDE TO FIGHT. They swear, they tell ya, LIFE WILL BE BETTER, OR AT LEAST UNCHANGED, ONCE 200 MILYUHN OR MORE DESPICABLE NAZI = WELL-MEANING BUT INCORRECT LIMITED COMMUNIST-STALINIST-TOTALITARIAN, AMERICANS = AMERIKANS ARE PUT TO DEATH, POLITELY-VOLUNTARILY = FORCIBLY-NECESSARY.
#5
Pre-emption is central to US Military Strategy. There is no scenario in which Iran is not attacked in some form. The US played "doble cara" - military-diplomacy - with success in the Central America conflict. History repeats.
#6
At least so far - though the MSM bitched about the end of WW II as well.
Well, not in 1945 it didn't. And it didn't for the 50s and most of the 60s till late in the decade when the radical left started to indoctrinate 'hate America' in the universities and their 'true believers' infiltrated MSM.
As amply demonstrated by the nut case leading Iran today, someone is going to do something stupid. All restraints will be removed and the problem solved. We'll get around to agonizing about it twenty years later in a more civil world. Hopefully, by then well treat the guilt salesmen with the contempt they deserve.
#7
Diplomatically, the decks will be cleared for the US if the Iranians commit a major act of war first. No other nation, by Cold War rules, can even object if they launch a nuclear missile in an aggressive manner at us.
But the US and perhaps Israel, are the only two countries that plan far enough ahead so that they don't *have* to respond with nukes themselves. This is done by setting up the resources to shoot down any nuclear capable missile or missiles that Iran can launch, with layered defense, for extra security.
Ideally, the Iranians will attack first, but in such an ineffective manner that they will be our bitch, as it were. Then we will have carte blanche to respond as we see fit.
#9
Unless the Iranians decide to play an apocalyptic version of Suicide By Cop as we discussed yesterday, there is no reason for them to attack anyone directly when they can operate through proxies like Hezbollah and transnational terrorism. That way, when a container ship blows up in the Houston Ship Channel, everyone can make big innocent eyes while simultaneously gloating and denying any involvement.
#10
TU6878, Were you unaware that U. S. Newspapers told the Japanese that they were setting their torpedoes too deep or that we were reading their secret codes? The MSM has not changed, only our remembrance of it. This book should give you a start on why nothing you will ever read about a war in real time may be relied upon.
#11
#6 TU6878 - You must not have seen the scans of the NYT et al. in the years immediately after WW II with their headlines about how we were "losing the peace."
I think they've always been a bunch of anti-American tools - they just used to hide it better. Nowaways, they don't even bother to try to hide it.
Plus ça change, plus c'est la meme chose. :-(
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
08/10/2006 12:22 Comments ||
Top||
#12
In WWII, the press supported the US forces because the American forces were fighting the Nazis and were allied with Stalin. When we started fighting the Communists in Korea, the bring the boys home drumbeat started.
#13
Does the MSM really want to write what the islamofacists tell them to write after the prophesized takeover (according to the Koran)? Do they want to be a mouthpiece for Al Jazeera? Just think...the precious freedom of the first amendment will no longer be available for protection. The Bill of Rights and constitution will no longer be available in the scheme of the islamofacists. There will be no forum for the arrogance of the MSM. I saw Marvin (?) Kalb, Harvard professor defending the rights of the press to write a story that was a spin article. A young 22 year-old soldier who had fought in Iraq and as a result lost a limb was interviewed (if you can really call it that) by the Boston Globe. The Boston Globe did a hatchet job on him. Kalb defended the reporter and had little to say in defense of the soldier who had been set up. Basically, the writer injected his or her opinions in the article so it made this young man appear to be against the war which he was not. The story became about the reporter and his or her opinions and not the reporting of this fine soldier's experiences and opinions based on his experiences. The press is a very perverse--somewhere close to child molestation in the hierarchy of ethical behavior. What the hell crap are they getting pumped into their skulls in the journalism schools. The MSM is an arrogant bunch of elitest that try to become the story rather than just report the story. They think they should tell the rest of us what to do, think, and feel. Is there no objective reporting anymore. Do they really want to see the U.S. and the Western democracies fail? They are a party to this and are complicit. That makes them traitors in my book. Look at the pro-Hezzballah stance the MSM takes. What as*holes.
#15
Seems to me to be a generational memory flaw in humans.
As soon as those who experienced the true close calls of history, who beat back the [insert foe here], are too old to be heard and seen for the examples they are by the children and young adults, the memory and meaning of the evils they faced and the means that had to be employed to defeat them vanish from the memory pool.
#16
Our schools no longer teach history to save our lives.
Posted by: ed ||
08/10/2006 22:12 Comments ||
Top||
#17
A good point Flyover, and one I've posted about (at the TCP).
I wonder, do things improve as our lifespans increase? Or do gaps form with older and younger that become increasingly wide? Will a point come when it is not just one generation removed but two? Hmmm, interesting topics.
#18
The Band of Brothers "marathon" is about to continue on the History Channel - at which point I go AWOL, heh. This is the sort of honest re-telling, with the brave souls who survived to provide commentary and guidance, which could help. If the education system wasn't thoroughly infiltrated by the losers, perhaps this would be included in the curriculum.
I think we have socially isolated our older, wiser, generations to the point that they have minimal, if any, impact on the young in many (most?) of our households. I sat at my grandfather's feet and watched him like a hawk. He embodied all of the good traits. It was scary - only those nasty damned cigars marred his record, otherwise he was almost a perfect role model. I guess I was lucky to have grown up then, when 3 generations (at least) were commonly or frequently present.
I'm no sociologist - just an observer. I leave to those with the tools and training to analyze.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
08/10/2006 22:55 Comments ||
Top||
#20
My 10-year old is watching the BoB marathon. His grandfather was at St. Vith during the Ardennes offensive, and I've told him that the Bastogne episodes are a pretty good representation of what his grandfather saw.
Posted by: Mike ||
08/10/2006 23:51 Comments ||
Top||
Hypocrisy alert! Juicy....
Al Gore has spoken: The world must embrace a "carbon-neutral lifestyle." To do otherwise, he says, will result in a cataclysmic catastrophe. "Humanity is sitting on a ticking time bomb," warns the website for his film, An Inconvenient Truth. "We have just 10 years to avert a major catastrophe that could send our entire planet into a tailspin."
Graciously, Gore tells consumers how to change their lives to curb their carbon-gobbling ways: Switch to compact fluorescent light bulbs, use a clothesline, drive a hybrid, use renewable energy, dramatically cut back on consumption. Better still, responsible global citizens can follow Gore's example, because, as he readily points out in his speeches, he lives a "carbon-neutral lifestyle." But if Al Gore is the world's role model for ecology, the planet is doomed.
For someone who says the sky is falling, he does very little. He says he recycles and drives a hybrid. And he claims he uses renewable energy credits to offset the pollution he produces when using a private jet to promote his film. (In reality, Paramount Classics, the film's distributor, pays this.)
Public records reveal that as Gore lectures Americans on excessive consumption, he and his wife Tipper live in two properties: a 10,000-square-foot, 20-room, eight-bathroom home in Nashville, and a 4,000-square-foot home in Arlington, Va. (He also has a third home in Carthage, Tenn.) For someone rallying the planet to pursue a path of extreme personal sacrifice, Gore requires little from himself.
Then there is the troubling matter of his energy use. In the Washington, D.C., area, utility companies offer wind energy as an alternative to traditional energy. In Nashville, similar programs exist. Utility customers must simply pay a few extra pennies per kilowatt hour, and they can continue living their carbon-neutral lifestyles knowing that they are supporting wind energy. Plenty of businesses and institutions have signed up. Even the Bush administration is using green energy for some federal office buildings, as are thousands of area residents.
But according to public records, there is no evidence that Gore has signed up to use green energy in either of his large residences. When contacted Wednesday, Gore's office confirmed as much but said the Gores were looking into making the switch at both homes. Talk about inconvenient truths.
Gore is not alone. Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean has said, "Global warming is happening, and it threatens our very existence." The DNC website applauds the fact that Gore has "tried to move people to act." Yet, astoundingly, Gore's persuasive powers have failed to convince his own party: The DNC has not signed up to pay an additional two pennies a kilowatt hour to go green. For that matter, neither has the Republican National Committee.
Maybe our very existence isn't threatened.
Gore has held these apocalyptic views about the environment for some time. So why, then, didn't Gore dump his family's large stock holdings in Occidental (Oxy) Petroleum? As executor of his family's trust, over the years Gore has controlled hundreds of thousands of dollars in Oxy stock. Oxy has been mired in controversy over oil drilling in ecologically sensitive areas.
Living carbon-neutral apparently doesn't mean living oil-stock free. Nor does it necessarily mean giving up a mining royalty either.
Humanity might be "sitting on a ticking time bomb," but Gore's home in Carthage is sitting on a zinc mine. Gore receives $20,000 a year in royalties from Pasminco Zinc, which operates a zinc concession on his property. Tennessee has cited the company for adding large quantities of barium, iron and zinc to the nearby Caney Fork River.
The issue here is not simply Gore's hypocrisy; it's a question of credibility. If he genuinely believes the apocalyptic vision he has put forth and calls for radical changes in the way other people live, why hasn't he made any radical change in his life? Giving up the zinc mine or one of his homes is not asking much, given that he wants the rest of us to radically change our lives.
Peter Schweizer is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and author of Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy.
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/10/2006 08:30 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The good 'ol "Do as I say, not as I do" motto of the democratic party.
By Jon Ham RALEIGH The first thing we did when our newsroom got a copy of PhotoShop in 1991 was put a third eye in the middle of Kimberly Bergalis forehead. That memory reminded me once again of the seductive powers of the PhotoShop cloning tool. Ms. Bergalis, if you recall, was a young woman from Ft. Pierce, Fla., who, it was later determined, got AIDS from her dentist. Her photo just happened to be among those moved by AP that day, and we picked it at random to practice on. I remember, as we looked at the manipulated photo, that we suddenly became aware of the power and dangers of photography's new digital age.
...as we looked at the manipulated photo, that we suddenly became aware of the power and dangers of photography's new digital age.
First thing I did was give a flat-chested lady of my acquaintance a magnificent pair of honkers. But I didn't work in a newsroom. At least not that kind.
Prior to digital photography, about the only things you could do to a photo were dodge, burn and crop. As a weekly editor some years before, I had spent many hours in a darkroom doing just that: burning to darken a too-light area, and dodging to lighten a too-dark area, and cropping to eliminate irrelevant areas of an image. Sometimes your negative would get dirty or scratched in processing and youd end up with lines or specks on your print. Thats when youd have to take an art brush to the print to eliminate these blemishes. But thats about it. The level of technology back then was simply inadequate to allow major photo fraud.
Photo fraud required more skill than Photoshop requires. And there are simpler programs that require even less skill. But photo fraud still existed. Weekly World News has been around since pre-Photoshop days.
So has Cosmopolitan, the true geniuses of photo-manipulation. I had the opportunity to see the 'resume' of one of their air brush artists once. He showed, step by step both with the old methods and with Photoshop, just how to give a picture of a supermodel that 'Cosmo' look. Fascinating, and this fellow was as good an artist as any sculptor.
If you really wanted to fake up a photo, youd have to paste things from one photo onto another, like Ted Baxters dressing-room photos on The Mary Tyler Moore show. Then youd have to take a photo of that picture and make another print, a step Ted left out.
But only because he was comic relief...
PhotoShop changed all that. Using PhotoShop you can change a photo pixel by pixel. If youre good at it, the manipulation will be almost impossible for a layman to notice. And it doesnt take years of training to do it well. That third eye on Ms. Bergalis looked like the real thing, and we had just opened the program.
Done right, it's hard for a professional to notice, much less a layman. Even with cheap software, you can get down to the pixel level, and resizing will cover a multitude of imperfections. Not that we'd ever use Photoshopped images on the Burg, of course...
The two photos in question, one showing smoke rising over Beirut and another showing flares being dropped by an Israeli jet, are so clumsily altered that it is hard to believe it was done by anyone who has any knowledge of PhotoShop.
Which is what makes the recent incidents of unethical photo manipulation by a Reuters photographer so puzzling. The two photos in question, one showing smoke rising over Beirut and another showing flares being dropped by an Israeli jet, are so clumsily altered that it is hard to believe it was done by anyone who has any knowledge of PhotoShop.
Hurried work, coupled with a lack of skill at Photoshop, I'd guess, the while coupled with a belief that The Enemy us isn't as smart as True Believers. He knew what he wanted to do, he just wasn't very good at it. And he probably thought he was better at it than he is.
While one is required to consider that the enemy is smart, sometimes he isn't ...
Those photos, and several other egregious examples of staged photos used by major news outlets, have prompted widespread criticism of photojournalists, especially those covering the Middle East. But none of the professional photojournalists Ive worked with over the last 25 years would have been a party to such nonsense.
... none of the professional photojournalists Ive worked with over the last 25 years would have been a party to such nonsense.
"No, no! Certainly not!"... Depends on how serious they are about pushing their political points. If you can lie or distort in a story, you can lie or distort in a photo.
In 1994 my newspaper at the time, The Herald-Sun in Durham, N.C., hosted the Electronic Photojournalism Workshop. This was an annual event designed to promote digital photography. The organizers were positively adamant that nothing be done to an image other than tweaking brightness and contrast and cleaning up specks and streaks that were not part of the original image. So insistent were they on this point that, when we published the newspaper containing the stories and photo assignments from the conference, no layout that let type intrude into a photograph was allowed.
One of those organizers was Kenny Irby, who was then with Newsday but is now Visual Journalism Group Leader and Diversity Director at the Poynter Institute in St. Petersburg, Fla. Many in the mainstream media have reacted defensively to the blog pressure to expose unethical photo manipulation or staging of photographs. Irby, to his credit, has not succumbed. Some are playing a gotcha game with media outlets, and want to make their point that the editing and fact-finding in a lot of newspapers are flawed and incompetent," Irby told the Christian Science Monitor. "But I've had more conversations with bloggers who just say they want to make sure [the media] projects accurate information. That's a good thing. Media organizations have to be aware that we're not the absolute authority."
That's all very altruistic. In reality, most of us just like an occasional chew toy. Gnawing on Rooters strengthens the intellectual jaws, keeps that yellow calciumy stuff from building up in the mind, and gives us good exercise as we run around the blogosphere, hollering "woof! woof!" We wouldn't be doing it if Rooters hadn't made themselves fair game.
How to explain what has gotten into those photographers covering the Middle East is beyond me.
How to explain what has gotten into those photographers covering the Middle East is beyond me.
That would imply that the writer doesn't know an awful lot about the Muddle East, where lies are generated and consumed often willingly by the bucket. I don't think anyone who's familiar with the ME or with totalitarianism is surprised at the lies, to include the photographic lies. What we still manage to find surprising, despite an accumulation of evidence to the contrary, is that supposedly professional photo editors are willing to suspend disbelief when the product is submitted for their stern-eyed consideration...
To be sure, the widespread use of freelancers who have too-close ties to terrorist groups plays a part.
"I'm not surprised, but..."
But what explains the uncritical approach stateside photo editors have taken to what they send? Why have so many questionable images been accepted by mainstream news organizations?
Because they want to believe. If you already have the belief, and the photo "Pictures don't lie!" confirms that belief, then you're more willing to ignore any little inconsistencies.
Strangely, the journalistic establishment seems largely unconcerned about this. There has been no open letter from journalism school deans condemning manipulated images and the use of staged photos. The top journalism blog, Romenesko at Poynter Online, has barely mentioned it, but it did manage with a headline ("Johnson's critics say his agenda is anti-Muslim, pro-Israel, hateful") to imply that the blogger who exposed the Reuters fraud, Charles Johnson, was anti-Mulsim. Interestingly, the story that headline was linked to had a very different headline: "A blogger shines when news media get it wrong."
Again, we're back to Psych 101: You believe what you're prepared to belief. If something goes against it, then you don't believe it until you're thumped on the head with it. And often not then.
I also visited several other journalism and photojournalism sites and forums in the past few days and found barely a mention of the issue. It is clearly not a hot topic among journalism professionals, as it is with bloggers. They seem to be trying to ride this out in hopes it will just go away. Someone with only two eyes can see that's not likely.
Jon Ham is vice president of the John Locke Foundation and publisher of its monthy newspaper Carolina Journal.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/10/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"How to explain what has gotten into those photographers covering the Middle East is beyond me."
Try this on for size: They're murderous Jooooo-hating ASSHOLES who know the anti-American, anti-semitic Western media will be happy to be complicit in their lies.
How do they know it, you may ask? From experience.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
08/10/2006 0:07 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Unless its a dynamic situation, even on the local level, news photos and television coverage are staged and orchestrated.
#3
Strangely, the journalistic establishment seems largely unconcerned about this.
I honestly believe there was a time when mythical creatures roamed the earth in defense of journalistic integrity. Call it blind faith but even today, every so often, I swear I catch a glimpse of them. Occasionally, a specter will distinguish itself from the shadows reinforcing my hopes that they havent gone the way of the dinosaur. Sadly though, the sightings have become less frequent as of late. I pray all the backslapping and puffery over the narrative known as Katrina wasnt the sound of the Death knell for these Beasts of Burden. But we are living in times when a so-called journalist writes an article based on leaked, classified information dropped in their lap. (The very definition of an agenda driven story) Only to be rewarded by her peers with a Pulitzer Prize for investigative journalism.
Maybe one day these scarce entities will wander back out of seclusion, if for nothing else, to avoid complete extinction.
#4
That's why the picture from His Girl Friday is so appropriate. After all, few of the reporters in that movie cared about anything but getting a sensational headline. They made up stories, bruited rumors as facts, and generally acted as partisan hacks. Does this seem familiar?
Just imagine Cary Grant's Walter Burns in a moden newsroom. Of course, I can't imagine the character being anti-US or anti-Semitic.
Anyway, it's a great film. The Front Page is much better with Hildy as a woman.
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
08/10/2006 15:46 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I use tint, sharpness, anti-Red Eye, and other utilities on 100% of all pictures I take. Fakery isn't the only use of the new software.
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.
An old frail man snaps awake, and stares: theres a stranger seated next to the bed, a long, unlit cigar in one hand. He leans back and smiles.
RALEIGH The first thing we did when our newsroom got a copy of PhotoShop in 1991 was put a third eye in the middle of Kimberly Bergalis forehead. That memory reminded me once again of the seductive powers of the PhotoShop cloning tool. Ms. Bergalis, if you recall, was a young woman from Ft. Pierce, Fla., who, it was later determined, got AIDS from her dentist. Her photo just happened to be among those moved by AP that day, and we picked it at random to practice on. I remember, as we looked at the manipulated photo, that we suddenly became aware of the power and dangers of photography's new digital age.
