How the Left loves to extol the need for justice, and to denounce naked power, yet at the end of things, they are the first to cave in to naked power, and the last to allow the use of power by the good in order to combat evil! What is this phrase, Our moves in Iraq are breeding more terrorists than ever, if not a divulgement of their thought that Islamic terrorism is a reaction to Western provocation? And who can you count on to denounce even defensive measures, never mind counter-offensives, against Islamic terrorism if not the ACLU or any human rights NGO? And they do all this with the thought, the sincerely-held thought, that it is righteous, that it is good, that it is lawful.
#1
I read somewhere else that Jewish law mandates self-defense, something closed related to the dignity of innocent human life and human society.
The article also cautions against "gratuitous hatred" as a special danger.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
02/15/2007 08:05 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Dr Naseem can denounce 7/7 until el Andalus becomes Muslim again, but the fact remains that he caters to the sense of oppression that fuels jihadi violence.
Bingo!
This is a well written article and I will be interested to watch the comments section develop at the Times online site.
Pact gives loopholes to Pyongyang, sends risky signal to other foes. By Bruce Klingner
The six-party agreement announced in Beijing Tuesday has significant shortfalls that will hinder efforts to denuclearize North Korea. Its vague provisions and deferred requirements provide Pyongyang with loopholes that it will seek to exploit. Moreover, the accord sends a dangerously accommodating signal not only to North Korea, but also to Iran and other aspiring nuclear weapons states.
Conspicuously absent is any direct reference to North Korea's uranium-based weapons program, which was the catalyst for both sides abrogating a 1994 agreement. The accord doesn't address the steps by which North Korea must divest itself of nuclear weapons it has. Nor does it provide assurances that Pyongyang will agree to verification measures sufficient to allay international concerns over past cheating. The Beijing agreement defers settlement of most of the significant issues to five working groups.
It may still be possible to salvage the results. Doing so, however, requires insisting upon stricter measures in follow-on negotiations to ensure that North Korea divests itself of nuclear weapons expeditiously and in a rigorously verifiable manner.
During these subsequent negotiations, the six party countries must: ensure that the uranium-based nuclear weapons program is subject to the agreement; require verifiable dismantlement of all nuclear weapons and programs; and make progress in providing security reassurances, a permanent peace treaty and formal diplomatic recognition conditional on North Korean behavior and satisfactory resolution of the Japanese and South Korean abductee issue.
At the same time, the United States should maintain pressure on Pyongyang, including taking action against any North Korean entities engaged in illicit activities; pressing countries to comply with United Nations sanctions against North Korea's weapons of mass destruction and missile programs; and continuing efforts to deter North Korean proliferation of WMD or missiles.
Washington should underscore that its willingness to continue discussions is not an open-ended commitment and recommend a deadline. Doing so would prevent Pyongyang from dragging out negotiations and solidifying international de facto recognition of North Korea as a nuclear weapons state. We must not lower the bar for success.
Bruce Klingner is senior research fellow for Northeast Asia at The Heritage Foundation.
Most European countries are still losing ground to the US in economic terms and most of those that are closing the gap are doing so very slowly.
That is the somewhat dispiriting conclusion of the latest report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Going for Growth, which looks at comparative international performance within the developed world and what might be done to lift the laggards.
Italy, France and Germany are not only poorer [than the U.S.] but becoming even more poor in relative terms.
The benchmark is the US because it remains almost the richest country in the world in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) per head and has almost the highest productivity per head. Only Luxembourg, which is tiny and has a special position within the EU, and Norway, which has oil, have higher GDP per head.
As for productivity, those two plus the Netherlands, Belgium, France and Ireland, are the only ones that have higher productivity per hour worked. Among those, Belgium and France have high unemployment (thereby excluding their less productive workers from the statistics), the Netherlands has high concealed unemployment and Ireland has benefited from massive high- productivity inward investment.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/15/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
HHHHHHHHMMMMMMM, 2007 figures > CHINA >1.3-plus Bilyuhn Chinese get by on US1.0 a day GDP = US$30.00 a month; RUSSIA > US$27.0 Bilyuhn ESTIMATED/ROUGH GDP, ergo its the MINIMA US$500-plus Trilyuhn - MAXIMA $1.0 Quadriyuhn GDP America thats going down, AND D *** NG IT DON'T YOUSE FERGIT IT.
#2
You noticed his assumptions about the social and cultural advantages of being European? Me too. Wanker.
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
02/15/2007 6:01 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Europe's power elite have all of the information of history at their fingertips, and are unable to apply logic to the data at hand.
The descendant philosophies of the French revolution have - all of them - been brutal, demeaning, spectacular failures. (Actually, the most recent version can't even deliver "spectacular" to its failure, since the socialist/highly regulatory/evangelically secular welfare capitalist state is dying in a sort of weak, amasculated, and boring fashion.) Given the proven failure of any and every derivative of July 14, 1789 - failure which is not hidden but rather on display (particularly in an age o' internet), you would think that otherwise rational adults could look at the facts and draw the only possible grownup conclusion, which is that there is another system (U.S.) which came out of the Enlightenment which is superior.
Then again, there are people who smoke cigarettes knowing the risks. Free to do so, but I'm free to question their brains and sanity.
The point is, all decisions are not reached using rational thought, and it seems that Euroland is unwilling to apply rational scientific conclusions to the data set they have. Emerson's comments on foolish consistency may apply: it is intellectually easier for them to stubbornly hold onto ideas, even ones that don't work, than to go through the difficult process of rebuilding your meme set from the ground up.
Oh, well, we'll take their scientists and entrepreneurs in trade for our "artists" and activists any day.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
02/15/2007 6:07 Comments ||
Top||
#4
There is no magic ability or skills that Americans have that Europeans do not have.
Yes there is. Most Americans believe you work hard, you get ahead. Most Europeans believe that you show up for work, and the government should take care of you.
We want to make our lives better, Europeans want the government to make their lives better. The "magic ability" is simply the desire to better one's own life. Which is why many of American ancestors left that pit called Europe in the first place.
#5
You know, it's a sad state of affairs when the Uro-Peons can't even do some introspective soul-searching and see that socialism/communism has freakin' failed (or is on it's way to failing) in every nation tried. I guess their attitude is "I'm an expert, dang it, and those others just didn't do XYZ right in implementing socialism."
What's sad is that most of these people know how to run a business, come up with a budget and stick to it on a personal level. But apply that to gov't or a national scale? Nah, someone else is paying for it. I learned all I needed to know about the rest of the world when I learned that California alone has the world's 5th or 6th largest economy.
Posted by: BA ||
02/15/2007 9:22 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Did you expect the people who have no stomach to confront the anti-thesis of civilization both in the 20th Century and 21st Century have any stomach to confront the thesis of a modern energetic capitalistic economy? The usual routine of denouncements, conferences, meaningless if not self-defeating legislation and regulation to follow. It's the Alzheimer's phase of a one time player in history.
#9
One of the aspects he doesn't mention is the much higher return on investment in the US:
In America money goes toward productive enterprises whereas in Europe they go toward white elephants (see Airbus).
Al
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
02/15/2007 13:18 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Frozen Al: In America money goes toward productive enterprises whereas in Europe they go toward white elephants (see Airbus).
Don't be too sure.
This country spends billions of dollars a year throwing money at non-productive enterprises such as the Department of Education, public schools which are not performing (or even turning out educated students), and such stupid venues as the National Endowment for the Arts (while I believe in art for art's sake this idiotic organization funds pustulescent orgasms of anti-Americanism the likes of which only Stalin could love). There's even a joker who likely makes millions telling people how to cheat the government (and thus the taxpayer) out of money by applying for government grants (he wears a green suit with dollar signs all over it).
American taxpayer money goes towards far too many of these kinds of ridiculous boondoggles and it's high time the give-aways were stopped.
Sunday, February 11 A room full of students listened as a US Marine told of the invasion of Baghdad and Falluja and how he killed innocent Iraqis at a check point. He called them collateral damage and said he had followed the rules.
A Muslim-American student in front of him said I could slap you but then you would kill me. A young female Muslim student gasped I am a freshman; I never thought to hear of this in a class. I feel sick, like I will pass out.
I knew in that moment that this was what the future of teaching about justice would include: teaching war criminals who sit glaring at me with hatred for daring to speak the truth of their atrocities and who, if paid to, would disappear, torture and kill me. I wondered that night how long I really have in this so called free country to teach my students and to be with my children and grandchildren. What really happened, most likely: Prof. Terpstra went on a spittle-flecked rant about "war crimes" and those Marines decided not to just sit there and take it--and they out-debated her without breaking a sweat.
Nor did the Marines curse, nor were they rude, nor did they use anything other than quiet, simple logic to break her down. That's what so infuriating, ya know ...
The American military and mercenary soldiers who sacrificed their lives did not do so for the teachers freedom to teach the truth about the so-called war on terror, or any of US history for that matter. They sacrificed their lives, limbs and sanity for money, some education and the thrills of the violence for which they are socially bred. Sacrificing for the bling and booty in Iraq or Afghanistan, Philippines, Grenada, Central America, Mexico, Somalia, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, or any of the other numerous wars and invasions spanning US history as an entity and beginning with their foundational practice of killing the Indians and stealing their land.
Many of the classes that I teach now include students who served in the US military and security corporations. There are also many students who intend to join the US military upon completion of a degree because with the degree they get a bigger sign on bonus of ten to fifty thousand dollars. Their position is supported by many of the student body, who, vegetating according to the American Plan, believe they should support their troops.
The excuses that they give for joining or intending to join the US military terrorist training camps are first and foremost motivated by a desire for money.
. . . And now, here they sit in my course on social justice, terrorist war criminals, wanting high paying criminal justice jobs in a university Justice Studies program. They want approval, appreciation and honors for terrorism, torture, and murder. They want a university degree so they can get an even higher salary terrorizing more people around the world with security companies such as Blackwater or Halliburton. They want that appropriately named sheepskin so they can join the CIA, FBI, and other police and track down and terrorize US residents here. "But I'll get my revenge, I will. Remember, I control what grade you get in my class! You'll never graduate as long as I have anything to say about it! Bwahahahahahaha!"
These military and mercenary terrorist-students are trained in terrorist training camps all under the USA, funded by American taxpayers. In fact, people under the USA are sacrificing their health care and their childrens educations while donating their tax dollars to these terrorist training camps. These terrorist camps train money hungry working class stiffs to murder, steal and plunder for the power hungry US corporate war lords.
There is a saying that if you do the crime, you do the time. "Only if you don't have a good defense lawyer."
My response is that If you do the war crimes, you will do time in hell, whether the hell of war trauma and shock, of diseases such as those caused by depleted uranium, the old-fashioned traditional hell, fire and brimstone assigned to malefactors or the hell of sitting in a social justice class and discovering what the hell you are in hell for, or are about to be.
She's got a point: an hour in her class certainly would pass for the sixth circle of Hell per Dante ...
There's only one comment to the article, but it's a good one.
Our esteemed author has also penned a piece entitled "War and Ideology" with Husayn Al-Kurdi--ostensibly a Kurd--from 7/15/05. The conclusion is predictable, but says all we need to know of the good doctor:
"This is war. It is a war based on the ideology of might makes right to plunder planet and people. The bad guys are the greedy, powerful men who have and have used the weapons of mass destruction and operate the means of mass distraction to divert the potentially dangerous thoughts and passions of oppressed and exploited vast majorities everywhere. The good guys are those who fight back by all the means available to them. They are fighting the eternal good fight against tyranny and oppression. "
One could presume she made up her mind about how much she hated U.S. soldiers long before she posted her vapid blog piece.
These "good guys" kill fellow Iraqis now more than they kill U.S. soldiers. These "good guys" kill journalists by beheading or disembowlment.
What a fool.
When the Angry Left claims to support the troops, this is what they really mean. They support the bad guys.
Posted by: Mike ||
02/15/2007 13:32 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[13 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
June Scorza Terpstra is an idiot who enjoys the freedom of this country.
#2
For what fine institution does this paranoid schizophrenic work? Not that I'm looking to get her canned... more for knowing where not to send my kids.
#4
A room full of students listened as a US Marine told of the invasion of Baghdad and Falluja and how he killed innocent Iraqis at a check point. He called them collateral damage and said he had followed the rules.
Since you make this accusation and don't include a name of our intrepid Gyrene, I have no choice but to assume this just another lefty wet dream.
But I think I've heard this story before and will try to find it...
Former Marine Staff Sgt. Jimmy Massey served with the 3rd Battalion, 7th Marines, in Iraq for nearly a year during 2003. During that time, he claims, he and other Marines (whom he labeled "psychopathic killers") deliberately gunned down innocent Iraqi civilians, fired on peaceful protesters, and shot a 4-year-old child through the head at a checkpoint. Or was it a 6-year-old?
"How is a 6-year-old child with a bullet in his head a terrorist, because that is the youngest I killed," Massey told an audience at Cornell University. Or was it a girl? "That's war: a 6-year old girl with a bullet hole in her head at an American checkpoint," he told a Vermont audience.
Except, as Massey later acknowledged to the Post-Dispatch, he'd never actually shot any child, boy or girl. "I meant, that's what my unit did," he explained. Except that it didn't, according to Massey's fellow Marines and the journalists who covered them. Nor did they target civilians and protestors. In fact, as the Post-Dispatch documents, each one of Massey's claims is "either demonstrably false or exaggerated --according to his fellow Marines, Massey's own admissions, and the five journalists who were embedded with Massey's unit."
#7
...This whole thing smelled of some serious BS from the very beginning. I'm guessing that this was that Massey idiot - IF it was a Marine (curent or former) at all.
And dear sweet Jesus in heaven above:
who, if paid to, would disappear, torture and kill me.
If the Nutty Professor can show me ONE instance where this has happened to ANYONE, Iraqi or American, on orders, I'll defend her to the death.
But I don't really expect to have to deliver on that one.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
02/15/2007 16:32 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Ahhh...but the good Doctor did allow this post to stand - at least when I was there. I wanted to leave a comment, but was not about to "register" at her site.
The class is taught at a Catholic institution just down the road from me but I find little evidence of any sort of commitment to a Catholic approach, social justice or in general. The profound ignorance of the laws of war that seems so widespread is clear and evident in the post. Let me spell it out.
As policy, intentionally, the anti-Iraq forces (as they are termed by the elected government of Iraq and by our own forces) daily commit war crimes. One of their crimes is to not wear uniforms. They blend in with civilians. It is this blending in that allows them to keep fighting but the strategy comes with a price, dead civilians who are mistaken for the enemy. This is why the rules for wearing uniforms were adopted world-wide. The moral fault for these tragedies of war are the war criminals who refuse to follow norms and do not wear uniforms.
Everybody in the military understands this and, like every bureaucratic institution, they develop shorthand terms of art to speed communication. In this case, the resultant civilian casualties due to those war crimes by the enemy are called "collateral damage". I didn't pick the term but I care about truth enough to learn it. The good professor did not bother.
There is no search for truth, no commitment to justice, no Catholic commitment to the souls of *everybody* shown in this article. It is a betrayal of the faith and the ideals of the institution and is just plain sad. One can certainly be against the war and do it in a way that is faithful to Catholic social doctrine but this isn't it.
Smart guy.
Posted by: Bobby ||
02/15/2007 17:22 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Surprise she is a moonbat among moonbats. Follow her links to many LLL Mo0nb@+ pages where Cindy Sheehan and other praise Lt "Traitor" Watada as if her were Jesus Christ (if they believed in that). I would bet the after the Lt serves his time in the brig he will become a very well paid public speaker on the LLL Moonbat teaching circuit.
#10
HHHHMMMMM, HHHHHMMMM, WTC destruction + 3000 dead Amers = winning the WOT by:
(1) doing nothing.
(2) let our enemies attack us at their unilater will and discretion. Victory = Success = Peace > letting your enemy kill you or control you.
(3) pretending that fatwas/declarations of war + violence/terror against Amer is = invited to party at McDonalds + local barbecues, etc.
(5) GOVT and ONLY GUBMINT WILL DE FACTO PROTECT ALL AMERICA FROM A DE FACTO THREAT AMER PRETENDS DE FACTO DOESN'T EXIST TO BEGIN WITH.
(6) A TEXAS STATE GUBNOR IS ALWAYS MORE RESPONSIBLE FOR NATIONAL ISSUES THAN A NATIONAL PRESIDENT.
(7) A DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS IS NEVER RESPONSIBLE FOR IMMIGRATION-CUSTOMS-BORDERS NO MATTER WHAT THE LAW SAYS - once again, a Texas STATE Gubnor is more responsible for national issues than an elected National Congress.
(8) Are winning in the ME, ergo Amer people = voters must be told are losing. ETHICS/TRUTH > DOING SOMETHING WITHOUT NEED OF EXPLAINING OR JUSTIFYING WHY TO THE VOTERS.
(9) Universalism + World-wide/Global Equalism = a pre-selected Few are not affected by any consequences-outcomes. The Majority have the Right to have no Rights.
(10) Being blamed for Nothing = Taking credit for eevrything = John Wayne + "Damn the Torpedoes" Farragut.
(11) OWG > "USSA, NOT USSR, ergo USSA must surrender or be destroyed by USSR". Amers can unilaterally, singularly war for Empire and ditto pay for Empire, but Amer taxpayers just can't rule the empire they are fighting for = paying for.
(12) Just to make sure that America is properly defended, Amer must recognize and work in collusion wid those nations that wilfully provide advice, materiel, weapons, $$$, tech and manpower to the Nation(s), Govt(s), or group(s) that attack and kill us.
(13) Competition = Substitution of Nations > ONLY AMER IS NOT ALLOWED TO CHANGE = BLAMED FOR ANY AND ALL CHANGES.
Pundits of all political persuasions have been chattering about whether Rudy Giuliani, whose name is invariably modified by the description "social liberal," can overcome the objections of many religious conservatives to win the Republican nomination. Will his assurances to appoint judges in the mold of Roberts, Alito and Scalia be "enough" to put their concerns to rest? Will conservatives overlook social issues in an election focusing largely on foreign policy?
If the definition of "social conservative" is merely a checklist of several hot button issues, specifically abortion and gay rights, Giuliani is certainly to the left of his principal rivals. He might give assurances to appoint strict constructionist judges and might stipulate that his support of civil unions is not the same as support for gay marriage. However, on these issues he is unlikely to win the hearts of single-issue voters who care passionately about a candidate's beliefs and not just the likely outcomes of a candidate's policies.
But the commentators and consultants may have gotten the questions wrong. The better, at least the more interesting, question is whether Giuliani can establish a new description of what it means to be "socially conservative." Perhaps to be socially conservative means something more than just fidelity to pro-life and anti-gay marriage positions. Giuliani has a convincing argument that he is an ethical or cultural conservative who in the end will protect the values that most conservative Republicans hold dear. What does this mean? It means that he sees the world as a battle between good and evil, and politics as a struggle between decent hard working people and elites who have too little respect for their values -- public safety, respect for religion and public virtue.
It must be news indeed to liberal New York elites -- the ACLU, the teachers' unions, the New York Times, the upper West Side art crowd -- to hear that the former mayor is a "social liberal." Whether inspired by his Catholic education or by his often-quoted parents, Giuliani never seemed "liberal" in any sense to them. This was the mayor who scrubbed Times Square of the porn shops, railed against the ACLU for challenging aggressive police tactics, and routinely insulted proponents of racial and special interest politics. Defending his crusade against petty crimes he took the side of ordinary people over "squeegee men shaking down the motorist waiting at a light." Certainly Chris Matthews has figured out his crusade for social order belied the term "liberal," going so far as to suggest (outrageously) the mayor might be "a little bit of a fascist." Far from accepting all family arrangements as equal, Giuliani enraged welfare advocates by requiring that deadbeat dads find a job or participate in the city's workfare program to help support their children. He succinctly described the best social program for ending poverty: "fatherhood."
His world view is not one of multi-culturalism or moral relativism. He shows no empathy for bullies -- be they Mafia bosses or Al Sharpton. Giuliani, of course, first rose to public prominence by fighting the largest bully he could find: the Mob. Time magazine called his prosecution in 1985 of 11 Mafia leaders the "Case of Cases" and quoted his declared intention to "wipe out the five families." For him, it is all about who is good and who is not, regardless of whose feathers he might ruffle. In a 1999 interview with the Daily News he explained that he had no patience with Italian activists who did not appreciate his use of the name Mafia: "I learned a lot about prejudice when I was investigating the Mafia, because there were a lot of people of what would be considered my subgroup, Italian-Americans, who were very angry at me. Not that I was investigating the Mafia, but that I would use the word Mafia. I was not supposed to say that word because it would give all Italians a bad name."
Indeed he disdains interest group politics with a vengeance. When black activists repeatedly invited him and then dis-invited him to ceremonies he minced no words in this same Daily News interview: "It's the constant barrage of criticism from some of the so-called leaders of the community. The games of inviting me to ceremonies and then uninviting me, as if I'm the devil. It's the fact that I don't subscribe to the bells and whistles that some politicians will subscribe to just to pander to a community."
His world view is no different than his dichotomized view of urban life. Liberal sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians and diplomatic niceties did not prevent him from tossing Yasser Arafat (with great delight) from Lincoln Center. He succinctly dismissed criticism, remarking: "Maybe we should wake people up to the way this terrorist is being romanticized."
As for supporters of cultural relativism, they should look elsewhere for a defender. Declaring the work to be "sick stuff" (a view of modern art likely shared by more Americans than art museums would dare admit), he tried unsuccessfully to pressure the Brooklyn Museum of Art into disbanding the "Sensation" exhibit (depicting, among other things, the Virgin Mary smeared with elephant dung). No doubt to the horror of the New York Times art critic, Giuliani declared: "You don't have a right to government subsidy for desecrating somebody else's religion, and therefore we will do everything that we can to remove funding for time until the director comes to his senses." He eventually lost in court, but not before he had made his point.
His list of enemies is certainly long, but his friends and admirers are numerous and devoted. He is the best friend of the cop, the fireman, the school parents, the Catholic parishioners and even the Midwest tourists who now flock to New York City. For him and those he has befriended, social conservatism means defending a functioning civil society where families enjoy physical security, religious respect, and public decency. These may sound like pedestrian concerns, less dramatic than the battles some wage against gay marriage or embryo destruction in stem cell research. Nevertheless, if they seem be more concrete and immediate to the ordinary Republican primary voter, Giuliani may prove to be not only the Republican nominee but a new kind of "social conservative."
#1
For all of Giulianis strengths and accomplishments, at the end of the day he is, has been, and always will be a centrist pure and simple. He may be a helluva guy but look no further then to his views on gun control and illegal immigration to tell you he is just another "Country Club Republican".
#1
Why is the first response (by the press and the some authorities) to these types of killings to deny that they were incidents of Muslim terrorism--Even before any evidence is available? Has PC crippled up from considering such possibilities?
Moved to Opinion given the source, but it sure does seem like Murtha's M.O.
Top House Democrats, working in concert with anti-war groups, will pursue a "slow-bleed" strategy designed to gradually limit Bush's options. But those doing the bleeding, slowly, will be US troops.
Led by Rep. John P. Murtha, D-Pa., and supported by several well-funded anti-war groups, the coalitions goal is to limit or sharply reduce the number of U.S. troops available for the Iraq conflict, rather than to openly cut off funding for the war itself.
Murtha plans to attach a provision to an upcoming $93 billion supplemental spending bill for Iraq and Afghanistan. It would restrict the deployment of troops to Iraq unless they meet certain levels adequate manpower, equipment and training to succeed in combat. Thats a standard Murtha believes few of the units Bush intends to use for the surge would be able to meet.
In addition, Murtha will seek to limit the time and number of deployments by soldiers, Marines and National Guard units to Iraq, making it tougher for Pentagon officials to find the troops to replace units that are scheduled to rotate out of the country. Additional funding restrictions are also being considered by Murtha, such as prohibiting the creation of U.S. military bases inside Iraq, dismantling the notorious Abu Ghraib prison and closing the American detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Pelosi and other top Democrats are not yet prepared for an open battle with the White House over ending funding for the war and they are wary of Republican claims that Democratic leaders would endanger the welfare of U.S. troops. Like making it impossible to deploy enough troops to fight and win the war? So they're cowards and traitors. What a disgrace.
"CHAIRMAN JACK MURTHA TO OUTLINE COMMITTEE STRATEGY ON BUSHS IRAQ FUNDING REQUEST
THURSDAY, FEB. 15th AT 11:00 AM EST
Join Us!"
[Posted in the "Anti-War Room" at this pitiful site: http://www.movecongress.org/content/index.php]
#2
"What we have staked out is a campaign to stop the war without cutting off funding" for the troops, said Tom Mazzie of Americans Against Escalation of the War in Iraq. "We call it the 'readiness strategy.'"
Same results as cutting off funding, just not as obvious or honest. A different way to 'A New Vietnam'.
Posted by: Bobby ||
02/15/2007 6:07 Comments ||
Top||
#3
If anyone had told me right after 9/11 that barely five years later it would come to this, I would have called them insane.
This is not going to end well.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
02/15/2007 6:54 Comments ||
Top||
#4
It's over our country can't survive this treasonous stupidity. Get your beasn and bullets put by, these same people want to put most of you in "camps" because you will not go along with them.
Redneck Texan said...
The partisans are stirring in the forest.
And thats good to see. I applaud your efforts to jump start the resistance, because I have about zero confidence in a non extra-judicial solution to our problem.
And not to marginalize your short term goals, but the best results you can probably expect from protesting the sign or the compound's existence is that they take down the sign and relocate the compound somewhere else where the locals are a little more complacent. Worthy goals, but much more will be required to remove the threat they and their kind pose.
I'm figurin' the American Spirit that flows in our veins will be awakened in earnest when an attack on our infrastructure cripples our transportation network enough to cause sustained empty shelves in the grocery stores or no fuel to power our wage earning commutes. Or one that leaves everything inside the Washington Beltway permanently inhabitable. There's nothing like an empty stomach to help get your priorities in perspective, and the remnants of a government whose entire leadership has been vaporized will have better things to worry about than groups of like-minded rednecks taking the opportunity to reestablish the old rules of engagement our ancestors exercised during our expansive stage.
That could happen tonight, or it might never happen.
#6
Is there any way to cut off Murtha's "Funding" say by firing his aides, disconnecting the power, etc and leave him sitting alone in a dark room without anyone to "assist" him?
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
02/15/2007 9:07 Comments ||
Top||
#7
You gotta hand it to the Democrats. Theyre not going to let little things like dignity or principle stand in their way of power and greed.
#9
The American economy is more fragile than many think. If its leadership is annihilated and its fuel runs out, the survivors will be far more involved in getting enough to eat and staying warm than in settling old political scores. The collapse of the Roman empire in the west took its citizens by surprise. One story among many is that of a Roman military detachment keeping the peace somewhere on the frontier near what is now Switzerland while barbarians ravaged the rest of the Empire. The soldiers sent a delegation to Ravenna, the then capital of the Western Empire, to pick up their annual pay in gold. The detachment was never heard from again. The remaining soldiers found other employment, and so Roman rule abruptly ended in that locality. Most of the people and local resources were untouched, but their way of life had ended. Think of the TV show "Jericho". That's what it would be like, no central authority, scanty resources, things going from bad to worse.
Some of our current options are to inform & persuade & take measures to make local communities more resilient.
I was not as surprised by 9/11 (and its political aftermath) as many. When I saw the planes hitting the WTC, I knew who was behind it, and thought "They said they would hit it again, and they did." I didn't need the MSM or the government to tell me that, I had been reading the news (such as it had been) about al Qaeda and its ilk since 1993. I called my brother in Boston & warned him to look out for the prevailing winds in case dirty bomb material was involved in the attack, knowing the US government would suppress such information if it existed. (Fortunately that wasn't the case, but remember how quick the EPA was to tell people the dust was not dangerous, when in fact it was dangerous. Your tax dollars were again misused.)
On 9/11 I searched all over the internet, for some info on what else might have been involved. I was aware of the shock/grief/anger of the attack, and tried not to be distracted by it. I was more interested in those Americans and Europeans were did not feel that way. The same day I found reports of Palestinians and Lebanese celebrating the attacks, of the notes in European papers saying we deserved it, and most especially noted the efforts of the Fifth Column in this country to organize and blunt if not reverse the impact the attacks on 9/11 made on the country. The internet had lots of material on those efforts on 9/11, and more as time passed. The only thing that surprised me was the efforts of people like Murtha to make political hay out of 9/11 to secure political power. I knew politicians to be crass & venal, but never to that degree.
#10
The dhemmicrats just want to obstruct. They are a treasonous bunch along with the MSM. In the long run they will find they don't want what they have been working so hard for--the downfall of this country. They put partisanship above country.
If support for the military is pulled, I doubt anyone will want to be in the military again. They deserve better than this. The country will be vulnerable. AQ and all the terrorists will have won. The next war will be here--soon. We will be fighting for our survival.
#11
Given Murtha's history of corruption, what are the odds he's been bought off, rather than doing this simply because he's a complete idiot?
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
02/15/2007 11:55 Comments ||
Top||
#12
You can't blame Murtha exclusively - he was, after all, re-elected by the idiots moonbatsgood citizens of PA, long after his nasty senilityreal views were made public.
/Of course, living in Mass, I'm in the ultimate glass house on this point.
#13
Yeah, I was about to comment throw stones too, xbalanke, but then I realized that I live next door to (not in, thank God) Cynthia McKinney's (D-People's Republik of DeKalb) former district. That doesn't even take into account the only p-nut farmer to sit in the oval office, Jimmuh.
Posted by: BA ||
02/15/2007 13:49 Comments ||
Top||
#14
How far do the traitors to this country have to go before some one starts putting bullets in them?
I am amazed at the restraint of our ex and current military that have the ability to vent this idiot's head and don't do it.
I agree that the economy of the West is very fragile.
As to Murtha et al: I hoped for better, but this sort of "just this side of treason" political sniping isn't new. Lincoln had the same troubles, with the same party, with similar effects on the opposing armies.
Posted by: James ||
02/15/2007 15:57 Comments ||
Top||
#16
LUCIANNE > Russia threatens to unilater pull out of INF treaty. Officially its Dubya-USA's fault. unofficially is toss-up bwtn CAN'T HAVE ASYMMETRIC, ANTI-US/WESTERN, "ASSASSIN'S MACE" + NUCLEARIZED "WAR/BATTLE ZONE" ACTIVE-DEFENSE STRATEGIES WITHOUT INTERMEDIATE/TACNUKES; versus = DEMOGRAPHICALLY DYING RUSSIA'S FEAR OF CHINESE NEED FOR "LIVING SPACE" IN CENTRAL EURASIA/ASIA. Russia > Putin > no new Cold War but does prefer "limited military actions" + Russia will not = never give its right to UNILATERAL PRE-EMPTIVE MILITARY STRIKE in support of Russian security andor other national interests. ERGO AMER HAS NO RIGHT OF PRE-EMPTION LIKE RUSSIA[CHINA].
Among the worst members of the it's-all-a-conspiracy pack are those who insist that every Muslim is in on a vast Jihadi conspiracy to make Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks wear a chador (not a bad idea, aesthetically speaking). But those most anxious to condemn Islam in its entirety skip over annoying facts: Overwhelmingly, the victims of Islamist terror have been other Muslims; even the Taliban or the Khomeinist regime never rivaled the Inquistion's ferocity; and Europeans, not Muslims, long have been the heavyweight champions of genocide (with the Turks a distant runner-up).
All monotheist religions have been really good haters. We just take turns.
But the biggest obstacle to establishing the Caliphate in California is that Shi'a "Islam" never bought into the Caliphate at all. At bottom, it's a different religion from Sunni Islam. They're not just different branches of a faith, as with Protestantism and Catholicism, but separate faiths whose core differences are more-pronounced than those between Christians and Jews.
Technically, Sunni militants are correct when they label the Shi'a "heretics." Persians and their closest neighbors, with long memories of great civilizations, were never comfortable with the crudeness of Arabian Islam--which the anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss aptly called "a barracks religion."
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/15/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I agree Saudi funded hate is a bigger problem to West than the Persian people who i feel would love to get rid of their leaders with the help of the West!!!!
#4
Mr. Peter's (Colonel, ret'd, I think) big picture is all very well, but our immediate concern must be that both Sunni (mainly Saudi Arabia and Pakistan) and Shia (Iran, aided by Alawite Syria) are actively sponsoring terror groups that are aimed at Western interests, ie actively at war with us as well as each other... not to mention that both sides are sponsoring groups putatively belonging to the other side. We simply cannot throw up our hands at their stupidies and wait for them to get over it.
#5
"The struggle has never ended between the ascetic, intolerant Bedouin faith of Arabia, with its fascist obsession on behavior, and the profound theologies of Persian civilization that absorbed and transformed Islam. "
actually this is a rather simplistic view of SUNNI Islam, which has moved very far from Beduin roots, and became an urban faith, with influence from Persian (and to a lesser extent Greek) culture, and was quite as sophisticated as medieval Shia. The identification of civilization with Shia, and barbarism with Sunni, is as distorting as it would be to identify Protestantism with modernism (pace extreme fundamentalism) and Catholicism with medievalism (pace Vatican 2, and the last couple of hundred years of Catholic civ)
There are extremist in both the Shia and Sunni camps, and moderates in both, even if there isnt quite a Shia equivalent of Salafi fundamentalism.
#6
When the Spanish inquisition is blamed for killings, the number of political killings carried out by the former Muslim rulers of Spain must also be included (note that it never is). Do you think it is just a coincidence that the Spanish become so rigid in their rooting out of infidels after they took their land back from the Muslims?
All generalities are false, including this one. Nevertheless noting dominant characteristics of collections of anything & anyone can be useful even if not politically correct. Descriptions of the essentials of Islam (jihad, sharia, death for apostasy & blasphemy, its other fascist aspects) for the Kufr are especially useful nowadays.
I want to give a nod to the Muslim sheikh who gave a talk in Muslim Spain in the 12th century. To paraphrase: "You would scoff if I were to predict that a piece of matter as big as a pea could utterly and in an instant destroy this city and its surroundings for a great distance." The volume of uranium in the Hiroshima bomb that actually did the damage was the size of a pea. The rest of it was blown away by the force of the explosion before it could actually undergo fission. Know your enemy but avoid gratuitous hatred.
You've made a good point re: Spain. Almost every world history student learns about the horror of the Spanish Inquisition. However, very very few learn about the horror of the Islamic persecutions of Christians and Jews from about 1300 to 1492. I would be willing to be that most Jews (including graduate school educated ones)believe Maimonides left Spain because of Christian persecution when it was actually Islamic persecution.
#9
All monotheist religions have been really good haters. We just take turns. BFD. All monotheistic religions that I know of have left the persecution and actual hate in the past. All except Islam. It is incapable of moving out of the 7th Century.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
02/15/2007 19:27 Comments ||
Top||
#10
mhw, I'd be willing to counter bet that most Jews have no idea where or when Maimonides lived, only the key bits of what he wrote. Probably most don't know he was one of the leading physicians of his day.
By Michael J. Totten
I met the wizened Druze warlord and Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt during Hezbollahs ongoing slow-motion putsch to topple Lebanons government.
No other high-profile March 14 leader matches Jumblatts fierce opposition to Syrias Assad regime, its Iranian patron, and its Hezbollah proxy militia. He spends most of his time in his castle at Mukhtara high above Beirut in the Chouf mountains, but he took time out between meeting members of the Socialist International at his house in the capital to meet me for coffee in his salon.
Jumblatts history with the imperial Baath government is a long and twisting one. His father Kamal was assassinated by Syrian agents during the civil war in 1977. The details of the assassination are shrouded in mystery even today. In the most common version Baath-aligned terrorists in the Syrian Social Nationalist Party pulled the trigger. Another (unreliable) version of the story goes like this, as told to me by a young Druze friend while we stood on the murder site in the Chouf: Kamal Jumblatt was ambushed on the forested road by two Palestinian gunmen. The Palestinian hit men reported to Damascus after the deed was finished. Two Syrian exterminators then shot Assads Palestinian agents and buried them in the desert. The two Syrian hit men were then murdered by yet two more Syrian hit men, all the better to cover the tracks of original and cover-up crimes.
I dont know what actually happened. Syrias decades-long assassination and terrorist war in and against Lebanon has always been fought, serial killer style, from the shadows. Diabolical theories about the precise methods of Syrian terrorism serve Syrian interests just as much as the murders themselves serve Syrian interests... Long, worthwhile interview with Wally. Lotsa good insight on the Leb-Syria-Iran nexus.
This article starring:
Walid Jumblatt
Posted by: Fred ||
02/15/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
And yet he gave a speech yesterday at the Beirut rallies where he blamed Syria on Israel.
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
02/15/2007 6:04 Comments ||
Top||
#2
That's a convention of Leb politix. If they admit that they have more in common with Israel than they do with Syria they're assassinated. Like Kamal was, and like any number of Gemayels have been.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/15/2007 8:02 Comments ||
Top||
#3
no mention if Wally did that trick where he's hidden smokes in his forehead wrinkles, just takes one out and lights up....
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/15/2007 8:06 Comments ||
Top||
#4
The Palestinian hit men reported to Damascus after the deed was finished. Two Syrian exterminators then shot Assads Palestinian agents and buried them in the desert. The two Syrian hit men were then murdered by yet two more Syrian hit men, all the better to cover the tracks of original and cover-up crimes.
Looks like our team won this round of Spook-the- Mook. A best-in-show source in Baghdad confirms that Muqtada al-Sadr took off on a road-trip to Iran. And he wasn't just cruising in search of a Reuben sandwich.
The game ain't over until the fat mullah's scared. No matter how he tries to explain it away, Muqtada's public cowardice is going to hurt him - after he encouraged his followers to martyr themselves. There already had been rumors of mutinies in the Mahdi Army that threatened Mookie himself. One more reason to run.
It's going to be hard for him to maintain his image as an Iraqi nationalist after running to mommy back in Qom or Tehran. To be fair, the Mookster hasn't always done Iran's bidding in the past - but now he's going to owe the Shiraz Sopranos.
Oh, and that trusted source tells me that Mookie's not the only bad actor who's fled the country - he's the marquee act, but the supporting cast took off, too. Leaving the chumps with the push-brooms to deal with the mess.
We and the Free Iraqis shouldn't miss a chance to portray that melon-bellied bigmouth as a wuss. He's always been glad to deliver fiery sermons, but whenever we delivered firepower he disappeared - letting others do the fighting for him.
In the past he at least went to ground on his home turf, hunkering down while his underlings fought and died. This time, his nerve failed him so badly that he jumped the border.
Why now? One thing Muqtada's always had is a strong survival instinct. He calculated just how far he could push - then ducked when the rounds started impacting. In 2003 and 2004, when we had the justification and means to kill him, he accurately judged that our leadership didn't have the guts to take him out.
What's changed? Plenty. Mookie's probably sensed that President Bush is cornered politically and, with little left to lose, isn't going to settle for more half-measures. The troop surge that Sen. Barack "I'm entitled!" Obama and so many others in Congress deride got his attention, too: Sadr City's no longer a safety zone.
And after being beaten sufficiently about the head and shoulders, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has decided that maybe Mookie's not the man of the future. Najaf and Karbala just don't feel safe anymore.
Over the past several weeks, we've taken out or busted nearly a dozen high-ranking Sadrists, the boys who decide where the bombs will go off and who choose the death-squad targets. It's hard to feel warm and fuzzy when your deputies keep going down.
And there's a new kid in town: Gen. Dave Petraeus is a different kind of adversary and Muqtada, who made his bones judging the limitations of his opponents, recognizes that the rules just changed. Petraeus has a tactile sense of Iraq that his predecessors in Baghdad simply lacked. And King David's out to win.
Muqtada's new strategy is to go dormant for this winter of discontent, to lay low himself and throttle back the activities of his Mahdi Army until we conclude the battle for Baghdad's been won and relax. He hopes we'll defeat his Sunni enemies for him, leaving him in position to call out his reserves and dominate the political scene thereafter.
We need to flush him out. By shaming him.
If he returns to Iraq, we should bust him. If he doesn't return, he'll bust his credibility. Either way, it looks like Muqtada's previously sound instincts failed him this time. He made the wrong call by sending himself into exile.
What should we do now? In addition to taunting Mookie in public, we need to hit his organization even harder - while he's hiding and his courage is in doubt. Nobody wants to die for a braggart who bails out when the flak starts.
Or perhaps we should meet quietly with the Iranians to encourage them to keep Muqtada in a gilded cage. And they just might: They only backed him reluctantly, after our early indecisiveness let him become a serious contender for power. From Tehran's perspective, Mookie's not a team-player, but a free agent with an unpredictable streak.
The fact that he's run to the Iranians now for safety and support makes backing him less attractive: Hakim and the Badr boys again look like the favorites to finish the race with their legs still under them.
Even more important, there's a pattern emerging that goes far beyond Iraq:
* Mookie ran to Iran.
* Osama's so scared he won't let himself be photographed.
* Hassan Nasrullah of Hezbollah ducked for cover as soon as Israel started shooting.
* The key leaders of Hamas hide out in Damascus, not Gaza or the West Bank.
Anybody see a pattern here?
Not only does the effectiveness of leaders-in-hiding plummet, but it makes an obvious case - which we've failed to exploit - that the demagogues who order in the suicide bombers and the AK-armed "martyrs" are personally in no rush to enter paradise.
Yes, leaders in any organization have different responsibilities than their line doggies. But real leaders lead from the front sufficiently often to inspire the troops and stay grounded in reality.
What Mookie's hasty hejira to Hamadan tells us is that our fanatical enemies, Sunni and Shia, face a leadership crisis. The dons of terror are afraid.
#2
Bravely bold al Tater
Rode forth from Najaf.
He was not afraid to die,
Oh brave al tater.
He was not at all afraid
To be killed in nasty ways.
Brave, brave, brave, brave al Tater.
He was not in the least bit scared
To be mashed into a pulp.
Or to have his eyes gouged out,
And his elbows broken.
To have his kneecaps split
And his body burned away,
And his limbs all hacked and mangled
Brave al Tater.
His head smashed in
And his heart cut out
And his liver removed
And his bowls unplugged
And his nostrils raped
And his bottom burnt off
And his pen--
Brave al Tater ran away.
("No!")
Bravely ran away away.
("I didn't!")
When danger reared it's ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled.
("I never!")
Yes, brave al Tater turned about
And gallantly he chickened out.
("You're lying!")
Bravely taking to his feet,
He beat a very brave retreat.
Bravest of the braaaave, al Tater!
Posted by: Evil Elvis ||
02/15/2007 12:46 Comments ||
Top||
#3
That's very unfair of Peters, mookie only got to teheran because he had a long overdue appointement with a dentist. Can't blame him, really, can we?
#5
Mook is actually starting his long-overdue course of treatment with the best orthodontist in Iran. Should take about 10 years to complete. And he refuses to be seen with his braces.
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.
by June Scorza 
