#1
You need to deal with the organ grinder not the monkey ie Pak Army not Mullah Omar.
Posted by: Paul D ||
05/28/2011 3:31 Comments ||
Top||
#2
If you can find Mullah Omar, assassinate him.
But honestly: Afghanistan is costing $10 billion a month to the US Government.
Every month, $10 billion.
It's too much. You have $14 trillion in debt and must raise the ceiling just to pay the bills
Pretty soon you won't even be able to pay the interest on the loans let alone repay the principal, leading to a default or debt restructure. Ie: economic disaster.
Posted by: American Delight ||
05/28/2011 8:03 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Americans are free to criticize Jews, Just-Ass.
For instance, your Jewish mother should have had an abortion.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
05/28/2011 22:15 Comments ||
Top||
#5
She offered, but Justice's Mom was too skanky. Even drunk, I have standards
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/28/2011 22:31 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Justice, it is because of ill-mannered brats like you that Saudi Arabians are despised the world over. We've tried to help you learn how to think and speak so you would be acceptable in polite company, but you do not appear to be trainable.
The 8 wealthiest industrial countries, meeting at the G-8, urged that the world give Egypt, Tunisia and liberated Libya (emerging democracies in the Arab world) some $40 billion in aid. The sum will make headlines but there is less to it than meets the eye.
The G8 is only ponying up $10 billion itself, and that is only in the form of relatively vague promises of a sort that have often not been completely followed through on in the past. It is urging that the Gulf oil states to give $10 billion, though some of them, like Saudi Arabia, were not actually very happy about Hosni Mubarak being overthrown and it is not clear that they will want to help grassroots democratization succeed. That $10 bn. may or may not come through, and if it did it might have strings attached that would actually be undemocratic. Saudi Arabia is very afraid of the outbreak of press freedom in Egypt, which could end its stranglehold over Arabophone journalism and open its authoritarian system to critique. What price would it extract from Cairo for its billions in aid?
Then the G8 is urging that the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank provide another $20 bn., but that aid is likely to be in the form of loans.
But Egypt alone is carrying $80 billion in debt, and its debt servicing costs have risen because its credit rating has been downgraded in the wake of the political crisis.
More
#1
The Marshall Plan worked because Europe was industrialized and educated so once they rebuilt they could prosper as before. A Marshall Plan for the Arab Spring Nations would simply be throwing money away and making a handful of crafty unscrupulous people wealthy. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
#1
Well no surprises here. The blacks think "Africa is for the Blacks, and Europe is for the Whites" notwithstanding they only came to South Africa around the same time as the Whites.
They invaded from the north east the same time the whites landed in the south west. Like a pincer movement the two tribes drove out the only natives in the area, the San - the Bushmen of the Kalahari who are not black or white.
Now SA is being flooded by more fast-breeding refugees from Zimbabwe and other areas.... more people flooding in every day when they cannot even build houses quick enough for the fast-breeding population at home.
Shanty towns are springing up overnight on any green hillside near the city in Cape Town. First night, one or two little corrugated iron shacks. By the end of the week, 20 to 40. In a month, 500 to 1000. In a year, 30,000 shanty town.
If I was young and white I would leave SOuth Africa anyway I could before the inevitable genocide.
You know how Africa deals with these stresses eventually. The machetes come out.
#2
oh yea there have been noises made on the desire to reclaim farmland, Zimbabwe-style
I am sorry but that country is just going to fall apart because the blacks have not had the education behind them to build modern infrastructure.
They still have the corruption in their culture which is tribe and family before civic duty, so there will just be a repeat of the nepotism and looting that is a function of almost every african nation.
The best thing the whites could do is to all move to one state of south africa and start again. They could take the Cape Coloureds and the Indians with them but in the long run they just can't live together with the Blacks I don't think. That rainbow nation is a lovely idea but in reality it really is just a dream.
I hate to say that as it goes against the grain. But i've been there and seen the two cultures and it really just won't work. It's like trying to mix oil and water.
It might not be today, tomorrow or in the next 20 years - but one day sooner or later it will erupt in a big fat ugly genocidal mess.
Blacks came down from the north WEST (started in the Great Lakes region, around Uganda and came through central africa in what is now the congo, hit the coasts of angola and fanned south through Namibia and into South Africa).
Whites came from southEast - their colony was i believe
Since the United States is not leading the anti-Islamist forces in the Middle East and protecting the relatively moderate Arab states, the new leader is Saudi Arabia.
But, you say, isnt Saudi Arabia also Islamist? Well its as Islamic as you can get without being revolutionary Islamist. Isnt Saudi Arabia profoundly anti-Jewish? Yes, but it mostly just talks about it. Isnt Saudi Arabia anti-democratic? Yes, wed prefer the United States but President Barack Obama is busy with other things.
Obama wants Middle East Muslims to love America. There are only two problems:
1. His policy doesnt work. They dont love America.
2. The Muslims he keeps appealing to are those who are radical and pro-terrorist. For those who are Muslims but dont want to overthrow their neighbours, go to war with Israel as soon as possible, throw out U.S. influence, and transform their countries into something like Iran and Taliban Afghanistan, Obama is a problem.
So the Saudis are doing what Ive been telling the Obama Administration to do for 2.5 years: Form an alliance opposing revolutionary Islamism. Of course, the Saudis wont include Israel (at least publicly) and they wont get Europe, but at the moment theyre all weve got.
This was completely predictable. Some weeks ago, Nawaf Obeid, who speaks for the Saudi government, in an informal and deniable way, of course. And he voices the Saudis anger and disappointment with a U.S. government that fails to fight against revolutionary Islamism and protect it from Iran.
Ive been writing about this split for two years and now it has happened. The thing is that the Saudis are right and Obama is wrong. It helped overthrow the Egyptian regime and was ready to help bring down the government in Bahrain. The Saudis have had enough. The Jordanians would do the same if they could, as would Israel.
And there are plenty of countries in South America, Central Europe, and Asia that also feel this U.S. government has let them down.
Wasnt this the U.S. government that was going to win over the Muslims, make the Arabs love America, and make the United States popular again?
Saudi Arabia has plenty of shortcomings. It wont even let women drive! But at least it wont let Tehran and the Muslim Brotherhood get in the regions drivers seat.
#1
Saudi Arabia is the root of the problem, culturally and religiously.
If the Saudis wanted to help remove terrorism they would start in their own country, modernising the Imams to promote respect for the rights of women, respect for science, reason and modernity and the modern secular state.
Then they would ensure that all that oil money wasn't being recycled to fund terrorist training camps and fundamentalist Wahhabi madrassahs around the world in places such as Indonesia, Somalia, Malaysia etc.
Saudi Arabia is our biggest enemy.
15 of 17 hijackers were Saudis.
The only reasons Saudi evaded a war with us after 9/11 was because
1) they have the oil the world depends on and
2) if you attack the holy land you are instantly at war with a billion Muslims round the world.
Ill be at Slutwalk with my three sons aged eight, nine and 13. Theyll be wearing tee shirts that read YOURE NOT ALLOWED TO RAPE SLUTS EITHER.
Sure, I could go vintage with FAT CHICKS SHIT ME, rocking the retro with ALL YOU VIRGINS THANKS FOR NOTHING or getting my postmodern on with NO ROOT NO RIDE but they just dont cut it. Youre not allowed to rape sluts either is the message we need to get across. The medieval caveat on slut rape has expired. Sluts are people too, I dont know much about sluts but I know what I like, Im a slut and I vote and so forth.
Just quietly Im rapt with the slogan. Its not mine. It was my boyfriend Anthonys response when I asked if he was coming to Slutwalk. Sure. Cause youre not allowed to rape sluts either.
Whats in it for me? he asked.
A shag, I said, And an opportunity to meet heaps of sluts.
Cool. Ill bring Mum. She loves sluts.
Didnt she used to be one?
I think she still is.
Ah bless her. Tell her well pick her up at noon. And to wear something slutty.
LOL LOL
Anthonys fathers only advice to him about women was all women are molls. He grew up watching his father abuse, diminish, degrade and undermine women he loved. Many other beautiful men in my circle may not have been fathered by such plain-speaking and non-apologetic misogynists but grew up surrounded by strong subliminal messages from men they were expected to look up to, relentless one-dimensional images in the media of sexual objectification of women and the constant representation of females as trophies, slaves, bitches or service providers. The subterfuge made it more confusing. It would have been clearer if they just came out and said it. But thats the point? She wouldnt sleep with you so now youre calling her a slut. What?
Despite what you may have been lead to believe misogyny is not genetic, inherited and nor is it a default setting. Slut shaming may be a comfort or convenient excuse for some but it diminishes all men by inferring that none of them have any ability, responsibility or desire to control their sexual urges. Where is it written that its the job of women to be The Gatekeepers Of Sexuality? And who says no man has ever considered any woman ever as anything other than a F--k Thing (calm down, someone used that term on QandA on Monday so its okay. She was doctor). What crap.
As a mother of boys, a lover of men and just a plain old human being this idea men have no honour, decency, basic courtesy, no ability for restraint and no sense of judgment I find deeply offensive and profoundly troubling. Indeedly, I also. And I cant help wondering who has a vested interest in propagating this myth. And why. Because someone has. Only a very small percentage of men are creeps. (Noted there is a disproportionate amount of them in the NRL, AFL and the Catholic Church unfair not to mention Islam at this point I think... but at least Hilaly reference to follow.) Perhaps the propagation of this myth is to excuse the behaviour of a few, to lower the standards for all and set everyones expectations to Neanderthal.
Anthonys father was not a good man. But an inspiration. He was an effective anti-role model. In his teens Anthony, not surprisingly found no shortage of great men to teach him how to be a man. I say, not surprisingly, because most blokes are grouse. yay!
You can easily get bogged down in arguments. About the meaning of the word slut, the use of the word, if a protest is a good idea, if this is the right kind of protest, if its as good as the Reclaim The Night rallies, if there are better ways to tackle the problem (insert duplicitous words like inappropriate, provocative and self- respect here). Dont get bogged down. Just go.
Someone once said to me (and I wish I could remember who because its brilliant) Conservatives eat other peoples babies. Progressives eat their own. Which is sadly often the case. The amount of nit picking, analysing, defining and tribalism the left can complicate things with as a by-product of every kid gets a kick of the footy and thats the exception to prove the rule can rid all steam from an idea before it even begins.
Organised fascism is far more effective at getting stuff done than fractious bickering egalitarianism.
How long until the slut splinter groups emerge? Sluts Against Sluts, Sluts For Jesus, Feminists Sluts Collective, The United Coalition of Sluts, Scrags and Slags, Sluts Anonymous, Planking Sluts?
The word slut is loaded and powerful. And its been made that way to control women. If youre looking for an exhaustive and definitive unpacking of the word slut youll have to wait for my up and coming book Sluts For Dummies. For now lets stick with Youre not allowed to rape sluts either. This is the clearest, simplest and most accurate message we need to get across to everyone. Huzzah!
Its as simple as this. If you believe that no-one deserves to be raped or sexually abused come to or support Slutwalk.
If you understand and would like others to understand that if a woman is labelled as a slut (a term open to debate) by her behaviour or attire the moron majority consider it as a fair reason to blame her for being raped or sexually assaulted then come to or support Slutwalk.
If you understand that debating if a victim of rape or sexual abuses clothes or activities were sluttish is futile and counterproductive and the only effective way forward is to dissolve, dismantle and distort the common use of the word slut in an attempt to lessen being, dressing or acting like a slut as an excuse for rape or sexual abuse then please come to or support Slutwalk.
Forget about the hair splitting and think of Slutwalk like when a kid comes back from having chemotherapy and the whole class has their head shaved. Its like that. Brilliant!
As far as the word being offensive inappropriate or provocative according to who? Explain. Unpack. Its a word with power used to control. And its just a word. Meanings and uses of words change. Use it frequently e.g. Would anyone fancy a cup of slut? Only if it's a nice *hot* cup of slut!
The word slut has an ability to generate an amount of heat that demonstrates how important it is to find where that heat comes from. What it says about us. What is actually behind the power and fear of the word slut? A terror of female sexuality? yes, i think so The fear of the power unleashed if we let women go about their day unchallenged and unmolested by their sexual choices?
There are well-meaning moron apologists on the comment threads of Slutwalk articles saying, I dont agree with rape and sexual abuse. I think its wrong. I dont like it and its not nice but its true. If a woman dresses inappropriately, shes naïve not to realise she is putting herself at risk.
Clementine Ford has written an upcoming piece subtly pointing out how mainstream Australia is comfortable saying these things but for Sheik Al Hilay to talk about women being like uncovered meat left out for the cat and not being the cats fault for eating it but the meat for being uncovered well thats outrageous. that would be a point but for the Islamic community sanctioning the rape of non-muslims evidenced by family members of leb gang rapist Bilal Skaf who turned up at his trial and spat at the victims. At least Westerners know its wrong.
Whats with the she was asking for it? If someone driving a brand new BMW has their car stolen why do we never hear, They were asking for it? Or if someone with a multi-million dollar house get robbed? Were never told They were asking for it. Or if someone is stabbed at an ATM? Oh he was asking for it flaunting his money and withdrawing in a back street after dark.
And yes I know you cant find logic from something that has not come from logic but there seems to be no victim of rape or sexual assault whose circumstances, behaviour or attire cannot be found as sluttish and therefore asking for it. The only one who wasnt asking for it is the 85-year-old woman asleep in her bed raped by an intruder. But, between you and I, you should have seen her nightie
The urge for women to not dress like sluts. Can someone explain how covering up has been sold as some guarantee of rape proofing a woman? Its not. There is no less sexual abuse in societies where women are forced to cover up. Its not like sunscreen. LOL LOL
A mate of mine asked if I thought he should take his daughters aged five and eight to Slutwalk. Absolutely, I said. The earlier the words are dissolved of power and the code is explained the better. This is education. Think history, religion and politics. Never too young.
I told him I wished someone had taken me to Slutwalk when I was five. Instead I was bussed into anti-abortion rallies by the Catholic Church. He said, See this worries me, cause if you turned out the way you did from that, my kids will end up in church. true...
My 13-year-old is all I know all of this. Why do I have to go?. To set an example, to support, to perhaps find out something you didnt know.
We all find ourselves in situations and only afterward think of what we wished wed done or said. Immersing ourselves in the subject equips us with the words and familiarises us with the situations before they happen which gives us the jump.
I explained that he may be in a situation one day where he can speak out, set an example and keep someone safe. Theres a girl passed out, and a mate says, She wont know. Lets have a go. You first. Hes in a car full of young fellas trying to impress each other and they pull up next to a staggering 15-year-old girl they leer, jeer and call her a slut. When someone is photographed or videoed unaware in circumstances which are private and the image is about to be texted, Tweeted or Facebooked. He can say No, not cool, and help them get home safe. Good point, good teaching point.
I told my sons about a program I saw on sexual abuse education currently being used with footballers. Particularly the stunning difference in reaction when the players were shown a clip of a woman waking up next to a man she had had sex with the night before after a drunken night to the players reaction to a clip of a man waking up next to a man he had had sex with the night before after a drunken night. I explained to them the widely accepted but slowly changing double standard. pinpointed... you can almost hear them thinking... but she's a slut so it's OK. Incorrect, boyz
My sons have a choice of tee-shirts. Between YOURE NOT ALLOWED TO RAPE SLUTS EITHER, MY MOTHER IS A SLUT or MY MUM TOOK ME TO SLUTWALK AND ALL I GOT WAS THIS LOUSY TEE-SHIRT. And they can wear a jumper over the top. tremendous!
The question should not be why I am taking my sons to Slutwalk. But perhaps, what is more illuminating is why others would question it.
My boys and I will be wearing tee-shirts but you dont have to. There is no Slutwalk dress code. Come as you are and come as who you are. Just come. And bring your kids. And if not, support people who are. Or come up with a better idea. Or do something. Not just boycott and criticise it because you dont think its perfect way to prevent rape and sexual assault. Because when you dont know what to do, do anything. Cause youre not allowed to rape sluts either.
Yes, ma'am, brilliant and persuasive argument with a few laughs thrown in for kicks, you have won me!!
** Catherine Deveny is a writer, comedian, social commentator and slut.
#2
isn't DSK in home detention now? He's keeping his mouth shut or he'll be going straight back to the island....
This is likely to be BIG in Sydney were we were subjected to a number of years of gang rapes by leb muslim gangs who viewed non-muslim women as "sluts" - drove them from house to house, raped them then hosed them down, drove to another house.
Relatives were involved, friends involved - up to 200 adult males involved but only 3 ever went to jail.
And yet Americans put up with it. According to the Small Business Administration, the cost to the economy of government regulation is about $1.75 trillion per annum. You and your fellow citizens pay for that -- and it's about twice as much as you pay in income tax. Or, to put it another way, the regulatory state sucks up about a quarter-trillion dollars more than the entire GDP of India. As fast as India's growing its economy, we're growing our regulations faster. Oh, well, you shrug, it would be unreasonable to expect the bloated, somnolent hyperpower to match those wiry little fellows back at the call center in Bangalore. Okay. It's also about a quarter-trillion dollars more than the GDP of Canada. Every year we're dumping the equivalent of a G7 economy into ever more ludicrous and wasteful regulation.
As my fellow columnists Charles Krauthammer and Victor Davis Hanson like to point out, decline is not inevitable; it is a choice. The voters of New York's 26th district chose it just the other day, presumably on the basis that it will be relatively pleasant, as it has been in certain parts of Continental Europe. But genteel Franco-Italian decline is not on the menu. As those numbers suggest, the scale of American decay is entirely different: a trillion-and-three-quarter dollars in regulatory costs, a trillion dollars in college debt, four-and-a-half billion dollars spent by Washington every single day that we don't have, 70 percent of which the United States government "borrows" from itself because nobody else wants to lend it to us -- and a governing party whose Senate leader boasts about not passing a budget and whose plan for Medicare is not to have a plan at all and whose crusading regulatory reformer's greatest triumph is getting Daisy the cow moved out of the same federal classification as the Exxon Valdez.
Like a young couple forced into an arranged marriage (something you would be far more familiar with than I) I don't like you, and you don't like me. Still, I have much for which to thank you. I understand how contradictory being thankful may sound to you, but I assure you this is not a joke, unlike the literacy rate among your children in Afghanistan. For that I will refrain from making any other jokes for the rest of this letter because, as you will see, I have much to genuinely thank you for. ...
And there is still more I would like to thank you for, Islamic extremists. You cannot break the will of this country, or that of its people, and while you won't stop trying, you will only succeed in making us stronger. With every sand-lot plot of yours we foil, every amateur video you shoot with our thrown-away camcorders spouting your anti-American propaganda, millions of Americans are taking it personally, and doing something about it. You have given us something to fight for together. You've taken selfish, lazy youth like me and turned them into great Americans, great people who are physically and mentally equipped to deal with anything you throw at us. With the constant threat of your cowardly attacks the people of my country are ever diligent to protect each other and the morals that bind us together. Without you and your actions in the past, present, and future, I promise you our focus would not be so clear as we set our sights on you.
Though you've had success in breaking the hearts of families across this country whose loved ones have died as a result of your terrorist attacks, or in protecting the innocent from you, it only hardens the souls of those who surround them. Your small victories provide far more powerful motivation to the caring communities of the American people. Their loss is a nation's collective gain, and that loss will not be in vain. In time, even the families of our fallen heroes will be stronger because of your actions, and they, too, will unite against you. You have provided an example, for all of mankind, of what not to do, of how not to live. The natural will of all men is to be free, to be free to interact with whomever they want, think what they want, and say what they may. Your suppression of free thought and expression has largely kept your side of the world in the dark ages, and shown the rest of the world how important it is to educate and encourage individualism.
An interesting perspective from one who knows well whereof he speaks. More at the link.
-Andrew Kirkland, Sergeant, United States Marine Corps, October 2003 - October 2007
#1
Name an Islamic state with a viable economical model?
Get rid of the oil and these people will be killing each other just to survive.
Posted by: Paul D ||
05/28/2011 13:20 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Before the discovery of oil, only Bahrain and the port cities of the UAE were much to look at. Iraq was always somewhat wealthy but that was because of the rivers in it and the agriculture. All of the other North African Arab areas were pest holes, even the Ottoman Turks only bothered with Arabia because it held Mecca.
#3
While those of us ineligible for military service face a future consisting of a crappy economy without any worthwhile jobs, the creation of a generation of battle-hardened veteran members of the military caste can only be a good thing for the future of our nation.
When, in the 1920s, a botanist and a field marshal dreamed up rival theories of nature and society, no one could have guessed their ideas would influence the worldview of 70s hippies and 21st-century protest movements. But their faith in self-regulating systems has a sinister history
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.
