G at In the Middle of America has posted an excellent piece about France kicking out 12 Muslim clerics, who the French government deems preachers of hate. You can also find outstanding commentary by Gindy at gindy.blogspot.com .
To see what we are doing to the rights of a radio talk show host that is doing nothing but merely warning the U.S., about what France apparently already knows:
Check out alwaysonwatch and socialsense.
I never thought I'd see the day when France would have more guts on a given issue, than the U.S.
Sunday, July 31, 2005
Saturday, July 30, 2005
The Tale Of Two Teddies
Click on the title for a WND article that links to video footage of our favorite drunken and murderous knucklehead Ted Kennedy. The video footage and the article itself, is self explanatory, and needs nothing more from me.
Friday, July 29, 2005
The Downside To Multi-Culturalism
Click on the title for a link to a Washingtom Times Op-Ed piece, by Wesley Pruden on multi-culturism and the hard realities it imposes, on a civilization.
First let me say that this country was built by hardworking immigrants, there is no debate from me in that area. But there is a marked difference in the kinds of immigrants that want better lives, dreams, and a hope, vs. the ones that seek to destroy one of the very producers, of such opportunities.
How does that sound? Is is offensive to you?
Well consider this, every empire that tried to accomodate multiple cultures within their boundaries has crumbled from within. Rome was a prime example. Although they were benevolent for an empire of that time (especially with that much area under its control), they still crumbled from within; because they tried to assimilate too many cultures and those cultures that were not compatible, with a free thinking society.
Now if this angers you, read on:
These people have nothing in common with the ideals set forth by any free and sovereign nation. They are mad dogs that preach violence, hate, and evil. And they do it manipulating the systems of the very civilizations that have welcomed them into their lands.
What a slap in the face. What an insult. And these people want me to feel bad because a group of these very same, like-minded people were stacked into a pyramid, naked? It may have not been right to do that, but I can't see anyone with the least bit of intelligence equating that with blowing up and beheading innocents.
And do not even mention the fact that whenever someone says something the least bit sensitive to those that are doing this evil, preaching this hate, and committing this violence, they are ostricized so greatly and so loudly by those that believe this garbage.
Why is this?
Because these two religions are peaceful. These religions are at peace with themselves as individuals and for the most part as, a whole group. Buddhists, Hindus, and other eastern religions are peaceful as well. Their very foundations are peace. But Islam is the one religion that has been evangelized and taught by the wrong end of the sword.
It's time for a new prophet to emerge in Islam, one that teaches the principles of love, respect, and understanding of those that don't share the same beliefs. It's time for a new voice, a voice of reason to put a stop this madness, and teach Muslims how much mightier the pen is, than the sword. Someone who will evangelize with a sermon, not a bomb.
Then and only then, will there be true peace.
First let me say that this country was built by hardworking immigrants, there is no debate from me in that area. But there is a marked difference in the kinds of immigrants that want better lives, dreams, and a hope, vs. the ones that seek to destroy one of the very producers, of such opportunities.
Some people learn things the hard way, and not all of them live in Washington. Our English cousins are getting a brutal lesson in reality:
Multiculturalism will kill you if you don't watch out.
How does that sound? Is is offensive to you?
Well consider this, every empire that tried to accomodate multiple cultures within their boundaries has crumbled from within. Rome was a prime example. Although they were benevolent for an empire of that time (especially with that much area under its control), they still crumbled from within; because they tried to assimilate too many cultures and those cultures that were not compatible, with a free thinking society.
Now if this angers you, read on:
The raids showed "insensitivity" toward Islam, and the authorities, ever eager to improve "community relations" with what Kipling might have called "the lesser breeds without the law," invited the "moderate" chairman of the Central Birmingham Mosque to participate in a press conference to discuss the raids.
The session had hardly begun before one Dr. Mohammed Naseem began a denunciation of the West, of Britain, of the police and other assorted infidels who had libeled Islam by suggesting that Muslims were in any way responsible for the bombing campaign in London, in which more than 50 men, women and children have died.
Prime Minister Tony Blair, he said, is "a liar," and the security forces are evil. The suspects were merely innocent commuters, and he isn't interested in hearing about DNA evidence because DNA science "could not be trusted." Well, of course it can't, since DNA science was developed after the eighth century, when the prophet set out everything that would ever be known about anything.
These people have nothing in common with the ideals set forth by any free and sovereign nation. They are mad dogs that preach violence, hate, and evil. And they do it manipulating the systems of the very civilizations that have welcomed them into their lands.
What a slap in the face. What an insult. And these people want me to feel bad because a group of these very same, like-minded people were stacked into a pyramid, naked? It may have not been right to do that, but I can't see anyone with the least bit of intelligence equating that with blowing up and beheading innocents.
And do not even mention the fact that whenever someone says something the least bit sensitive to those that are doing this evil, preaching this hate, and committing this violence, they are ostricized so greatly and so loudly by those that believe this garbage.
The real phenomenon of the age of terror is how the "infidels" -- the Christians, the Jews and the unbelievers -- have kept their cool and their ideals intact in the wake of a rich provocation to retaliate.
Why is this?
Because these two religions are peaceful. These religions are at peace with themselves as individuals and for the most part as, a whole group. Buddhists, Hindus, and other eastern religions are peaceful as well. Their very foundations are peace. But Islam is the one religion that has been evangelized and taught by the wrong end of the sword.
It's time for a new prophet to emerge in Islam, one that teaches the principles of love, respect, and understanding of those that don't share the same beliefs. It's time for a new voice, a voice of reason to put a stop this madness, and teach Muslims how much mightier the pen is, than the sword. Someone who will evangelize with a sermon, not a bomb.
Then and only then, will there be true peace.
The Story Of One North Korean Defector's Tragedy
Click on the title for an IHT article about one defector's struggle.
Those of you that read this blog and believe that understanding a state like North Korea is the key to some kind of altruistic enlightenment that will lead to peace in the world, need to read this very sad story.
Those of you that read this blog and believe that understanding a state like North Korea is the key to some kind of altruistic enlightenment that will lead to peace in the world, need to read this very sad story.
Sharon Praised By French After State Visit
Click on the title for the complete IHT article.
One piece of advice for Mr. Sharon:
If you are going to get into bed with Chirac's government, you had better sleep with one eye open.
Recurring tension has kept French and Israeli leaders from visiting each other in recent years. But Sharon's visit and the planned withdrawal from Gaza have ushered in friendlier relations.
One piece of advice for Mr. Sharon:
If you are going to get into bed with Chirac's government, you had better sleep with one eye open.
A Lesson In Imperialism
Forgive me if you already know the things I am about to express. But the parent in me wants some of my younger readers, to understand some things about history, they may not remember from history class.
The United States did not invent imperialism.
I know the MoveOn.Org types and Michael Moore lovers would have you believe otherwise. To hear them, and others, you would think that the world was nothing but one big eternal bliss before Bush. But the truth is, since the beginning of time there have been conflicts.
Early in mankind's history, some clans/tribes attacked other clans/tribes for different reasons. Some did it out of necessity, but many did it out of greed and envy. And as those clans/tribes grew in strength and numbers, civilizations and empires were eventually formed. They, in turn, had their battles and wars with other civilizations for many of the same reasons.
Who can forget the mighty Egyptians, the Babylonians, the Assyrians, and the Persians? They all held parts or all of the fertile crescent at one time or another. At times, it was in their best interests to do so, because to control that area meant plenty of food for their citizens and their armies. (Food is one of the main staples in the hierarchy of needs and if their civilization was hungry, they did what they had to do. It's only human nature.)
The Assyrians were an interesting story in that, during the early parts of their civilization, they were peace loving farmers and shepherds that kept getting raided and attacked by others so much, that eventually, it made them mean. (The old principle of "being mean to a dog makes him meaner", applies in this case.)
As time ticked on, the Greeks and Romans rose out of the dust, well after the Mesopotamian Empires had killed off millions. These two, were the foundations of western civilization and both had their share of battles and wars with various other peoples, for various reasons (not unlike those that lived in the fertile crescent in previous centuries).
As Europe rode through the dark ages into the age of mercantilism and kingdoms, it too was imperialistic in nature. The wars fought over this period were bloody and ruthless, for many reasons. And again, the reasons were not too different.
There are many, many other nations/empires that I can cover. The truth is, all nations and empires (of any major consequence) have been imperialist at some point in their history. So, if this is all you know, you are probably tempted to paint the concept of imperialism with one big broad brush. But, such is not the case.
There are two types of imperialism, beneficent and exploitative.
Many empires attacked and conquered lands occupied by others, for the sole purpose of making that empire bigger and richer. They may not have done so out of pure necessity, but they did it. And they held the lands under their control, until someone took it away from them, or the people that were conquered rose up and drove the conquerers out.
The ones that enslaved and oppressed the people they conquered, were exploitative imperialists. Colonial Africa is a prime example of exploitative imperialism. During that period, European mercantilists were in such a heated competition with each other, they conquered lands in Africa for raw materials and precious metals to pad their monarchs' treasuries. They enslaved the conquered Africans, used them for labor of their own resources; only to have the spoils shipped back to Spain, Britain, Portugal, or France. There was very little benefit to those conquered.
The ones that conquered a territory, made the area a better place for the inhabitants, and eventually offered them citizenship once they proved themselves, were known as beneficent imperialists. The Romans, the Greeks, and the Persians (during certain reigns) were examples of this.
(An important point to note in all of this is, not all imperialists were strictly one form or another. At times a regime may have conquered for exploitative purposes and at others, for beneficent purposes.)
So now, why have I said all of this?
Today we hear the arguments of the left, accusing the USA of being an imperialistic bully, when it comes to the affairs of other nations. To hear them tell it, we routinely exploit other lands for our own selfish and greedy purposes. We have in the past, there is no denying that we have had some questionable periods in our history. But the important thing to remember is, basic political science teaches us, every country looks out for its own best interests above and beyond the interests of others. And I would expect us to be no different or we will get exploited, ourselves.
The U.S. was guilty of exploitative imperialism in the Indian Wars, during our early western expansion. And slavery in the south could be cited as another eaxample. But for the most part, what has the U.S. done with people that we have militarily defeated? We only need to look back to WWII to see what we do with conquered lands and their people.
Today, Japan is no longer an imperialist monarchy, conquering foreign lands, and enslaving the people they conquered. They are a modern, prosperous, democratic republic that is living in peace with its neighbors. They no longer threaten, they compete. And they do it fairly and squarely. This current generation of Japanese vote for their leaders and have far greater freedom and liberty, than their forefathers.
Why? Because the U.S. taught them, instead of enslaving them. They were taught the value of having a free society and how to manage freedom. Germany and Italy were taught the very same principles and have flourished as free and democratic societies, as well.
Italy has been a bit rocky at times with their different governments, in the years after the war. But, they always get it together and form a new one, picking up pretty much where the old one left off. They have been a valuable ally in the war on terror.
Germany (though not on the right course at this particular moment) has done well with their freedom. The Brits, the French, and the Americans combined their sectors together and transitioned a pretty stable republic, far from the fascist and nationalist state it had been in the previous centuries. The Soviets, however, turned their sector into a satellite socialist puppet government, of the exploitative type. Just the opposite, of what we were trying to do.
And America? You know we financed it all. Don't get me wrong, we paid for it in blood and sacrifice, just like our allies. And our men died right alongside the Europeans. But when it came time to repair the damage and rebuild, we carried the bulk of the load. We made it happen. We didn't keep anything as our own.
Today, instead of setting up a puppet government in Iraq, we are leading them into the infancy of a democratic age and are carrying the load in the rebuilding process. We are doing it because a free and stable Iraq is in the best interests of the USA (and the whole world). We do it not by oppressing the Iraqi people, but by liberating them.
In all cases but a few, we have left those we conquered free and in much better shape, than before. Therein lies the huge difference between the USA style of imperialism, and that espoused by the Islamic Extremists. In fact that is the difference between us and many, many other civilizations that preceded us, as well.
So the next time a leftist calls the U.S. an imperialist nation, you can explain to him/her the difference. My guess is it won't matter to them, because it is hard to convince an extremist of any fashion, they are wrong. But you will know the difference and will not be tempted to fall for their distorted perceptions.
The United States did not invent imperialism.
I know the MoveOn.Org types and Michael Moore lovers would have you believe otherwise. To hear them, and others, you would think that the world was nothing but one big eternal bliss before Bush. But the truth is, since the beginning of time there have been conflicts.
Early in mankind's history, some clans/tribes attacked other clans/tribes for different reasons. Some did it out of necessity, but many did it out of greed and envy. And as those clans/tribes grew in strength and numbers, civilizations and empires were eventually formed. They, in turn, had their battles and wars with other civilizations for many of the same reasons.
Who can forget the mighty Egyptians, the Babylonians, the Assyrians, and the Persians? They all held parts or all of the fertile crescent at one time or another. At times, it was in their best interests to do so, because to control that area meant plenty of food for their citizens and their armies. (Food is one of the main staples in the hierarchy of needs and if their civilization was hungry, they did what they had to do. It's only human nature.)
The Assyrians were an interesting story in that, during the early parts of their civilization, they were peace loving farmers and shepherds that kept getting raided and attacked by others so much, that eventually, it made them mean. (The old principle of "being mean to a dog makes him meaner", applies in this case.)
As time ticked on, the Greeks and Romans rose out of the dust, well after the Mesopotamian Empires had killed off millions. These two, were the foundations of western civilization and both had their share of battles and wars with various other peoples, for various reasons (not unlike those that lived in the fertile crescent in previous centuries).
As Europe rode through the dark ages into the age of mercantilism and kingdoms, it too was imperialistic in nature. The wars fought over this period were bloody and ruthless, for many reasons. And again, the reasons were not too different.
There are many, many other nations/empires that I can cover. The truth is, all nations and empires (of any major consequence) have been imperialist at some point in their history. So, if this is all you know, you are probably tempted to paint the concept of imperialism with one big broad brush. But, such is not the case.
There are two types of imperialism, beneficent and exploitative.
Many empires attacked and conquered lands occupied by others, for the sole purpose of making that empire bigger and richer. They may not have done so out of pure necessity, but they did it. And they held the lands under their control, until someone took it away from them, or the people that were conquered rose up and drove the conquerers out.
The ones that enslaved and oppressed the people they conquered, were exploitative imperialists. Colonial Africa is a prime example of exploitative imperialism. During that period, European mercantilists were in such a heated competition with each other, they conquered lands in Africa for raw materials and precious metals to pad their monarchs' treasuries. They enslaved the conquered Africans, used them for labor of their own resources; only to have the spoils shipped back to Spain, Britain, Portugal, or France. There was very little benefit to those conquered.
The ones that conquered a territory, made the area a better place for the inhabitants, and eventually offered them citizenship once they proved themselves, were known as beneficent imperialists. The Romans, the Greeks, and the Persians (during certain reigns) were examples of this.
(An important point to note in all of this is, not all imperialists were strictly one form or another. At times a regime may have conquered for exploitative purposes and at others, for beneficent purposes.)
So now, why have I said all of this?
Today we hear the arguments of the left, accusing the USA of being an imperialistic bully, when it comes to the affairs of other nations. To hear them tell it, we routinely exploit other lands for our own selfish and greedy purposes. We have in the past, there is no denying that we have had some questionable periods in our history. But the important thing to remember is, basic political science teaches us, every country looks out for its own best interests above and beyond the interests of others. And I would expect us to be no different or we will get exploited, ourselves.
The U.S. was guilty of exploitative imperialism in the Indian Wars, during our early western expansion. And slavery in the south could be cited as another eaxample. But for the most part, what has the U.S. done with people that we have militarily defeated? We only need to look back to WWII to see what we do with conquered lands and their people.
Today, Japan is no longer an imperialist monarchy, conquering foreign lands, and enslaving the people they conquered. They are a modern, prosperous, democratic republic that is living in peace with its neighbors. They no longer threaten, they compete. And they do it fairly and squarely. This current generation of Japanese vote for their leaders and have far greater freedom and liberty, than their forefathers.
Why? Because the U.S. taught them, instead of enslaving them. They were taught the value of having a free society and how to manage freedom. Germany and Italy were taught the very same principles and have flourished as free and democratic societies, as well.
Italy has been a bit rocky at times with their different governments, in the years after the war. But, they always get it together and form a new one, picking up pretty much where the old one left off. They have been a valuable ally in the war on terror.
Germany (though not on the right course at this particular moment) has done well with their freedom. The Brits, the French, and the Americans combined their sectors together and transitioned a pretty stable republic, far from the fascist and nationalist state it had been in the previous centuries. The Soviets, however, turned their sector into a satellite socialist puppet government, of the exploitative type. Just the opposite, of what we were trying to do.
And America? You know we financed it all. Don't get me wrong, we paid for it in blood and sacrifice, just like our allies. And our men died right alongside the Europeans. But when it came time to repair the damage and rebuild, we carried the bulk of the load. We made it happen. We didn't keep anything as our own.
Today, instead of setting up a puppet government in Iraq, we are leading them into the infancy of a democratic age and are carrying the load in the rebuilding process. We are doing it because a free and stable Iraq is in the best interests of the USA (and the whole world). We do it not by oppressing the Iraqi people, but by liberating them.
In all cases but a few, we have left those we conquered free and in much better shape, than before. Therein lies the huge difference between the USA style of imperialism, and that espoused by the Islamic Extremists. In fact that is the difference between us and many, many other civilizations that preceded us, as well.
So the next time a leftist calls the U.S. an imperialist nation, you can explain to him/her the difference. My guess is it won't matter to them, because it is hard to convince an extremist of any fashion, they are wrong. But you will know the difference and will not be tempted to fall for their distorted perceptions.
Thursday, July 28, 2005
Missing Teen Alert
Click on the title for a link to information about a missing teen in Marin County, California.
Call the Sheriff's Office, if you have any credible information. Don't call if you are a crackpot, with no other means of entertainment.
Wednesday, July 27, 2005
What John Roberts' Thesis Tells Us
Click on the title for an interesting read by Christine DeLucia at History News Network. It is about the history of the Liberal Party in Britain.
Some highlights:
That's a good sign. Being ambiguous is not always being wishy-washy. Sometimes it means the person is careful to weigh all sides of an issue. It may also mean they see both sides of the coin, both the pluses and the minuses.
And that's a good sign. Justices are to not supposed to judge cases based on what their ideological beliefs are. They are there to interpret the laws and judge how cases line up with what is written in the Constitution.
But we all know that this won't be mentioned by the Four Knuckleheads. Boxer, Schumer, Leahy, and Kennedy. It paints Roberts as a fair thinking man in his youth.
What they want is a scandalous item, like him streaking across campus or a public intoxication arrest. They can look all they want, but they may not find anything. Because it may not be there. But rest assured if there is anything scandalous in his past, it will be found. The Democratic hacks are no doubt running 3 shifts a day, to find something.
Some highlights:
His thesis, 166 pages of terse prose and measured arguments, traces the rise and decline of the Liberal Party. His analysis is decidedly ambiguous.
That's a good sign. Being ambiguous is not always being wishy-washy. Sometimes it means the person is careful to weigh all sides of an issue. It may also mean they see both sides of the coin, both the pluses and the minuses.
We showed long excerpts of Roberts's thesis to Boston College Professor of History James Cronin, also an affiliate of the Center for European Studies at Harvard where he co-chairs the British Study Group. “For a B.A. thesis," he told us, "this is an impressive piece of work—it is well-written and quite thoughtfully argued and it appears that Roberts has done a good deal of research and has read the most recent literature. Roberts does not appear to be in any serious way an ideologue in this piece of work. He's fairly cynical and hard-headed, but not overtly ideological.
And that's a good sign. Justices are to not supposed to judge cases based on what their ideological beliefs are. They are there to interpret the laws and judge how cases line up with what is written in the Constitution.
But we all know that this won't be mentioned by the Four Knuckleheads. Boxer, Schumer, Leahy, and Kennedy. It paints Roberts as a fair thinking man in his youth.
What they want is a scandalous item, like him streaking across campus or a public intoxication arrest. They can look all they want, but they may not find anything. Because it may not be there. But rest assured if there is anything scandalous in his past, it will be found. The Democratic hacks are no doubt running 3 shifts a day, to find something.
IHT: The Roots Of Islamic Terrorism
Click on the title for an outstanding IHT article that is a must read.
If you are having trouble understanding just where this movement came from or you really believe that this current terror campaign began as a result of George Bush and Tony Blair removing Saddam, this is something you should look at very carefully.
If you believe that U.S. involvement in Mideast Affairs is the reason the terrorists are waging bloody war, then this piece is something you should examine very carefully, paying especially close attention to the dates.
If you are on the fence and don't know who to believe, the voices of appeasment and apology or the voices of reason and concern, then this is for you.
And even if you know this and fully believe this information is accurate, read it.
Take note that it is not written by neocons, but by Europeans. Maybe, just maybe, they are now getting it. But the sad part is, it didn't have to take this long.
Most commentators argue that Islamic terrorism is a fanatical perversion of Islam which deviates from its true teachings. They call for a Western-style modernization of the Muslim world, hoping thereby that radical Islam will be tamed.
This analysis misses the point. The nature of the terrorist threat is unambiguously Islamic and is not so much a deviation from Muslim tradition as an appeal to it. Al Qaeda's ideology draws on two traditions to legitimize itself: one classical, the other modern.
If you are having trouble understanding just where this movement came from or you really believe that this current terror campaign began as a result of George Bush and Tony Blair removing Saddam, this is something you should look at very carefully.
If you believe that U.S. involvement in Mideast Affairs is the reason the terrorists are waging bloody war, then this piece is something you should examine very carefully, paying especially close attention to the dates.
If you are on the fence and don't know who to believe, the voices of appeasment and apology or the voices of reason and concern, then this is for you.
And even if you know this and fully believe this information is accurate, read it.
Take note that it is not written by neocons, but by Europeans. Maybe, just maybe, they are now getting it. But the sad part is, it didn't have to take this long.
Kerry's Brother Considers Run For Office
Click on the title for the complete AP article.
Strike one, he is a lawyer. I don't understand why people think that just because they are attorneys, they will make a good elected official, in any office.
Strike two, he used to work for his brother. I don't understand why people think that just because they used to work for somebody, they will make a good elected official.
Strike three, he is supported by his brother, John. I don't understand what makes people think that just because they are related to somebody, they will make a good elected official.
In my book, he would be out.
But be that as it may, get ready Massachusetts. Here is what you may be hearing more and more on your regional news soundbites, very soon:
"Hello, My name is Cameron Kerry and I have a plan."
BOSTON - Sen. John Kerry's younger brother is mulling an elected office of his own after serving as his brother's close political adviser.
Cameron Kerry, a 54-year-old Boston lawyer, plans to seek the Democratic nomination for secretary of state if the current secretary leaves to run for governor.
Strike one, he is a lawyer. I don't understand why people think that just because they are attorneys, they will make a good elected official, in any office.
Kerry has served as an adviser to his brother throughout his career — from a failed 1972 congressional race to last year's presidential campaign.
Strike two, he used to work for his brother. I don't understand why people think that just because they used to work for somebody, they will make a good elected official.
"I love my brother, and I know he has the tenacity and passion to fight for the issues he cares about so deeply," John Kerry said in a statement.
Strike three, he is supported by his brother, John. I don't understand what makes people think that just because they are related to somebody, they will make a good elected official.
In my book, he would be out.
But be that as it may, get ready Massachusetts. Here is what you may be hearing more and more on your regional news soundbites, very soon:
"Hello, My name is Cameron Kerry and I have a plan."
New Law Would Make Firing In France Easier
Click on the title for an IHT article about labor law reform, in France.
In France, every worker is a union worker due to the laws currently on the books.. The burden it places on employers is such that productivity is severely affected, causing output to suffer. When unions drive the train, a business owner loses a significant amount of freedom to run his/her business. Not only that, but it is a huge factor that severely discourages the creation of new jobs.
Would you want to hire more people, if it was going to be hard to get rid of those workers that don't work out?
Sure they do. It is only human nature to want to do as little work as possible, for as much money as possible. When a good worker sees that no matter how hard he/she works and he/she gets the same amount of money as the one that does little, the good worker eventually slacks off.
But as we read further, there are critics of this proposal:
In France, every worker is a union worker due to the laws currently on the books.. The burden it places on employers is such that productivity is severely affected, causing output to suffer. When unions drive the train, a business owner loses a significant amount of freedom to run his/her business. Not only that, but it is a huge factor that severely discourages the creation of new jobs.
The easy-to-fire law, which would apply only to newly hired employees, would be a closely watched experiment for Europe. It might help answer the question of whether making it easier to get rid of employees - as is the case in Britain, Denmark and the United States - actually encourages companies to hire more people in the first place.
Would you want to hire more people, if it was going to be hard to get rid of those workers that don't work out?
Firing someone in France today is, as in many other European countries, a difficult, lengthy, multistep process. Employers' associations have complained for years about the bureaucracy involved in firing or laying off employees. Workers, on the other hand, treasure the security that the system provides.
Sure they do. It is only human nature to want to do as little work as possible, for as much money as possible. When a good worker sees that no matter how hard he/she works and he/she gets the same amount of money as the one that does little, the good worker eventually slacks off.
But as we read further, there are critics of this proposal:
Yann Duchesne, managing director in Paris of the private equity firm Doughty Hanson, and author of "France S.A." - which translates as France Inc. - said the new law was "cosmetic."
"My guess is that this will have a positive psychological impact on some people," Duchesne said. "But it will only have short-term impact."
Only time will tell. But I tend to agree with Duchesne. It looks to be treating an arterial bleed, with a bandaid. According to the report, the new law would only apply to companies with fewer than 20 employees, which is only a third of the French workforce. But at least, it is a start.
Bush To Consider Temporary Appointment Of Bolton
Click on the title for a post by Dionysus at the Daily Dissent blog, about the prospect of John Bolton being named to the UN post on a temporary basis. It is a short piece, but it poses an interesting question that I think I can answer.
Answer: When the Senate gives him an up or down vote.
Temporary basis. Could you please define "temporary basis."
Answer: When the Senate gives him an up or down vote.
Monday, July 25, 2005
A Question To Ponder
I will be very busy the next couple of days and therefore, blogging may be light on my end. But in the interim, I would like to pose a simple question, worthy of some thought.
If there was no USA and no Israel, who do you think the Islamofascist terrorists would be trying to destroy?
If there was no USA and no Israel, who do you think the Islamofascist terrorists would be trying to destroy?
Sunday, July 24, 2005
Brazil Demanding Explanation In London Shooting
Click on the title for the complete AP article.
Let me see if I can help Brazil out.
- Since London had been under attack twice in the previous two weeks, there was some concern about his intentions. He was wearing a heavy coat, just like suicide bombers normally do, when they want to conceal their bomb. The clincher is, he ran from police, he was ordered to stop, but did not see a reason to.
There you have it.
As corrupt and inept as the Brazilian government is, I am sure they can now better understand that which has been so difficult for them, to comprehend. After all, I am sure that has happened in their country to one of their own citizens, at least once or twice.
Hope that helps.
Brazil's government demanded an explanation Saturday for the fatal police shooting of Brazilian citizen on a London subway car.
Let me see if I can help Brazil out.
- Since London had been under attack twice in the previous two weeks, there was some concern about his intentions. He was wearing a heavy coat, just like suicide bombers normally do, when they want to conceal their bomb. The clincher is, he ran from police, he was ordered to stop, but did not see a reason to.
There you have it.
As corrupt and inept as the Brazilian government is, I am sure they can now better understand that which has been so difficult for them, to comprehend. After all, I am sure that has happened in their country to one of their own citizens, at least once or twice.
Hope that helps.
Egyptian TV Analysts Blame Israel For Terror Attacks
Click on the title for the complete Jerusalem Post article about where the fingers are pointing on Arab TV.
I can't say I am surprised, but they left out two other common blame getters, America and George Bush.
Wait. Never mind, that will come later in the week.
So, Muslim brothers are lying about bombing their Muslim brothers? We all know that wouldn't happen, don't we?
My theory is anti-semitic accusations sell more papers and generate more TV ratings in the Muslim world, than the truth. Hating Jews has been so deeply engrained to their heads over the years that confusing them with facts, would only throw them into a state of disequilibrium.
Several Egyptian "security experts" and "political analysts" interviewed by Arab TV stations after the Sharm el-Sheikh bombings on Saturday claimed that Israel and Jews were behind the carnage.
I can't say I am surprised, but they left out two other common blame getters, America and George Bush.
Wait. Never mind, that will come later in the week.
The accusations were made despite a claim of responsibility by a group citing ties to al-Qaida, according to a statement posted on an Islamic Web site.
So, Muslim brothers are lying about bombing their Muslim brothers? We all know that wouldn't happen, don't we?
My theory is anti-semitic accusations sell more papers and generate more TV ratings in the Muslim world, than the truth. Hating Jews has been so deeply engrained to their heads over the years that confusing them with facts, would only throw them into a state of disequilibrium.
Saturday, July 23, 2005
Iraq Constitution Offers Citizenship To Any Nationality Except Israelis
Click on the title for the complete WND article.
Even the most moderate of Muslims hate Israel. As long as this continues, there will be no peace anywhere in the Middle East (or the world).
Absolutely none.
The document updated July 20, says:
"Any individual with another nationality (except for Israel) may obtain Iraqi nationality after a period of residency inside the borders of Iraq of not less than ten years for an Arab or twenty years for any other nationality, as long as he has good character and behavior, and has no criminal judgment against him from the Iraqi authorities during the time of his residency on the territory of the Iraqi republic.
Even the most moderate of Muslims hate Israel. As long as this continues, there will be no peace anywhere in the Middle East (or the world).
Absolutely none.
Sarkozky Starting To Sound Like A Breath Of Fresh Air For France
Click the title for an interesting article at www.foreignpolicy.com on the man who wants to be France's next President, Nicolas Sarkozky.And I don't mind saying that I am starting to like this guy, more and more everyday.
And not a moment too soon.
Which is as it should be. Not all allies are going to agree with each other on every issue, 100 percent of the time. But as Mr. Sarkozky has realized, to throw the baby out with the bathwater, is a useless tactic that makes no sense.
We need a working relationship with our allies, not a power stuggle every time one does not get its way.
HT: eu-serf
Nicolas Sarkozy has become the most popular French politician by diving headfirst into the country’s most explosive political issues. If he has his way, this hyperactive, pro-American, Gaullist, free marketer will transform French politics for good.
And not a moment too soon.
Although he is careful to stress that he does not see eye-to-eye with President Bush on many issues, he is unabashedly pro-American. “I like America and the Americans a lot and I say it. Do I need help, doctor?” he quips, raising his eyebrows. “Some of my friends tell me not to talk about it so [loudly]. Why? I don’t get it.”
Which is as it should be. Not all allies are going to agree with each other on every issue, 100 percent of the time. But as Mr. Sarkozky has realized, to throw the baby out with the bathwater, is a useless tactic that makes no sense.
We need a working relationship with our allies, not a power stuggle every time one does not get its way.
HT: eu-serf
Terrorist Attack Devastates Sharm el-Sheik
Click on the title for the full AP story.
I doubt I am anyone's primary source of breaking news, but I would dare say that by the time many read this post, there will be many more than 83 dead and 200 injured.
The vast majority of the casualties were Muslim and Arab. Most of the MSM outlets are overlooking this fact. Why? Because it begs too many questions. Questions that they don't want to ask, because it might be offensive to someone.
But, I don't mind asking a few.
To the leftists (and anyone else that makes apologies for this kind action):
Is it not plain and apparent that these bastards do not care about anyone? Is it not clear that they have no problem killing their Muslim brothers and sisters? How long will you validate this kind of behavior as acceptable and understandable?
If you don't get out of the MoveOn.Org mindset, you are going to wake up someday and realize that your city is gone. What's it going to take to get you apologists to wake the hell up?
To Muslims:
How do you feel about radical extremists hijacking your faith and turning it into a killing machine? Do you think Muslims killing Muslims to protest the way Muslims are being treated in the world, is in your best interests? How long will you accept this?
Then rise up and help the world beat this thing. Do it and you can raise your children in a better world, free from these dastardly cowards. Don't do anything (just like most are, right now) and watch your hopes and dreams crumble before your very eyes. Because they don't care about you and they do not care about the Islamic faith. The only thing they care about is enslaving everyone that does not bow to their will. And, that includes you.
I doubt I am anyone's primary source of breaking news, but I would dare say that by the time many read this post, there will be many more than 83 dead and 200 injured.
"A total of 83 people had been confirmed dead, said Dr. Saeed Abdel Fattah, manager of the Sharm el-Sheik International Hospital where the victims were taken. Among the dead were two Britons, two Germans and an Italian, he added, and Czech officials said one Czech tourist was also killed. Rescue workers were still searching for victims at some attack scenes."
The vast majority of the casualties were Muslim and Arab. Most of the MSM outlets are overlooking this fact. Why? Because it begs too many questions. Questions that they don't want to ask, because it might be offensive to someone.
But, I don't mind asking a few.
To the leftists (and anyone else that makes apologies for this kind action):
Is it not plain and apparent that these bastards do not care about anyone? Is it not clear that they have no problem killing their Muslim brothers and sisters? How long will you validate this kind of behavior as acceptable and understandable?
If you don't get out of the MoveOn.Org mindset, you are going to wake up someday and realize that your city is gone. What's it going to take to get you apologists to wake the hell up?
To Muslims:
How do you feel about radical extremists hijacking your faith and turning it into a killing machine? Do you think Muslims killing Muslims to protest the way Muslims are being treated in the world, is in your best interests? How long will you accept this?
Then rise up and help the world beat this thing. Do it and you can raise your children in a better world, free from these dastardly cowards. Don't do anything (just like most are, right now) and watch your hopes and dreams crumble before your very eyes. Because they don't care about you and they do not care about the Islamic faith. The only thing they care about is enslaving everyone that does not bow to their will. And, that includes you.
Understanding The Recent Recession
Mark at Eclipse Ramblings posted a piece entitled, The Left's history with the CIA.
So what does it have to do with the recession? Read the comments.
A commenter that uses the typical political cultist jargon and phrasology, as taught by the University of Distorted Facts (better known as MoveOn.Org), somehow railroads the topic from that of the CIA to the Clinton economy.
Well, not wanting to pass up an opportunity to re-direct a misinformed American, I have attempted to clear up the person's misconceptions about the Recession of 2000. But to no avail.
(And since I do not want to overstay my welcome on Mark's blog, I thought that I would move the discussion here. So Dan, if you read this blog you are welcome to continue the debate here.)
For Dan and any other person that has chosen to believe left-wing political cults' revised economic chronologies over history, the recession began in 2000. As I said in my comments on Mark's blog, the Y2K Tech crowd lost a lot of jobs right after the beginning of the year, in 2000.
The result on Wall Street was a major drop in the Stock Market. In January 2000, the Dow index was at 11722. But by March it had dipped to 9796. That is enough to cause a recession (and it did). I don't care how many liberal Bush hating, non-fact loving elitists spin it, this is when the recent recession was born.
Some indicators may not have been able to measure it, until 2001. But the simple fact remains, anytime you have that much of a plunge in blue chip stocks, you are going to have a significant slow down period. But even more important to understand, is that the President (no matter what party he belongs to) does not control the stock market, and doesn't control any other aspect of the economy. Therefore, he cannot be praised, nor can he be blamed.
But if he did, it damned sure was not Bush's fault. Clinton was President then. And no amount of explaining, no amount of spinning, and no amount of excuses can convince any intelligent free-thinking individual, otherwise.
So what does it have to do with the recession? Read the comments.
A commenter that uses the typical political cultist jargon and phrasology, as taught by the University of Distorted Facts (better known as MoveOn.Org), somehow railroads the topic from that of the CIA to the Clinton economy.
Well, not wanting to pass up an opportunity to re-direct a misinformed American, I have attempted to clear up the person's misconceptions about the Recession of 2000. But to no avail.
(And since I do not want to overstay my welcome on Mark's blog, I thought that I would move the discussion here. So Dan, if you read this blog you are welcome to continue the debate here.)
For Dan and any other person that has chosen to believe left-wing political cults' revised economic chronologies over history, the recession began in 2000. As I said in my comments on Mark's blog, the Y2K Tech crowd lost a lot of jobs right after the beginning of the year, in 2000.
The result on Wall Street was a major drop in the Stock Market. In January 2000, the Dow index was at 11722. But by March it had dipped to 9796. That is enough to cause a recession (and it did). I don't care how many liberal Bush hating, non-fact loving elitists spin it, this is when the recent recession was born.
Some indicators may not have been able to measure it, until 2001. But the simple fact remains, anytime you have that much of a plunge in blue chip stocks, you are going to have a significant slow down period. But even more important to understand, is that the President (no matter what party he belongs to) does not control the stock market, and doesn't control any other aspect of the economy. Therefore, he cannot be praised, nor can he be blamed.
But if he did, it damned sure was not Bush's fault. Clinton was President then. And no amount of explaining, no amount of spinning, and no amount of excuses can convince any intelligent free-thinking individual, otherwise.
Thursday, July 21, 2005
Attack On London Fails
Click on the title for an article in the Scotsman about the failed attack today in London.
There is something weird about this. All four bombs failed? Was it gross ineptness or was it just a hoax designed to intimidate and terrorize further?
Whatever the reason, it was not unexpected.
With an idiot like this as mayor, it comes as no big surprise. Remember him? He is the one who said this:
Maybe he needs to take a page out of the Rudy Giuliani book of intelligence and wisdom, because he devoid of both.
There is something weird about this. All four bombs failed? Was it gross ineptness or was it just a hoax designed to intimidate and terrorize further?
Whatever the reason, it was not unexpected.
"Ken Livingstone, the London mayor, said the attacks were not unexpected. "It is not surprising that we have had another attempt to take life rapidly after the first attacks," he said."
With an idiot like this as mayor, it comes as no big surprise. Remember him? He is the one who said this:
"You've just had 80 years of western intervention into predominantly Arab lands because of the western need for oil. We've propped up unsavoury governments, we've overthrown ones we didn't consider sympathetic"
Maybe he needs to take a page out of the Rudy Giuliani book of intelligence and wisdom, because he devoid of both.
North Korean Defector Claims North Korea Has A Nuclear Bomb
Click on the title for an AFP article about a defector from North Korea that has claimed that that country now has a bomb. But that's not anything new.
Read this:
Maybe China might like to rethink their laid back approach to North Korea.
Read this:
"A defector claiming to have been in the North Korean parliament said the communist state has produced a nuclear bomb and attempted to sell missiles to Taiwan, a South Korean magazine reported."
Maybe China might like to rethink their laid back approach to North Korea.
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
Carson Middle School Students Get To Meet Marines They Wrote To In Iraq
Click on the title for a picture of the gathering for students from Carson Middle School and the Marines they wrote, while they were serving in Iraq. (At boortz.com)
This story broke on Neal Boortz's radio show and was reported here at PYY, on June 1.
(Read it here: poli-yy.blogspot.com )
This is the story where Ulrica Corbett, the principal, refused Sgt. Richardson admittance to the school grounds to meet and thank the students that wrote to him, while serving this great nation, in Iraq.
Looks like they had a great time.
(BTW, I bet Ulrica Corbett was out of town.)
This story broke on Neal Boortz's radio show and was reported here at PYY, on June 1.
(Read it here: poli-yy.blogspot.com )
This is the story where Ulrica Corbett, the principal, refused Sgt. Richardson admittance to the school grounds to meet and thank the students that wrote to him, while serving this great nation, in Iraq.
Looks like they had a great time.
(BTW, I bet Ulrica Corbett was out of town.)
IHT: What A Merkel Victory Would Mean For Europe
Click on the title for the complete IHT article.
As Angela Merkel is leading in the polls in Germany, many in Europe are becoming uneasy (especially Chirac and company) about the prospects of an old world nation, once again swinging toward the conservative side of the spectrum. But before conservatives in this country chomp at the bit at the hope Germany will suddenly and miraculously convert to the American version of conservatism, one must realize that Europe's view of conservatism, is not the same.
As Angela Merkel is leading in the polls in Germany, many in Europe are becoming uneasy (especially Chirac and company) about the prospects of an old world nation, once again swinging toward the conservative side of the spectrum. But before conservatives in this country chomp at the bit at the hope Germany will suddenly and miraculously convert to the American version of conservatism, one must realize that Europe's view of conservatism, is not the same.
Turning th EU into a counterweight to the U.S. was and still is a goal of Chirac, because he has failed to see what Ms. Merkel sees. And that is, the U.S. is not their enemy and needs no counter balance. The U.S. has plenty, already."Enough for her to tell Jacques Chirac in a visit to Paris on Tuesday that while she believes a strong French-German relationship is essential to Europe's success, the tandem won't re-emerge as a beacon unless it becomes more attractive and effective through economic reform - and abandons talk of turning the European Union into a counterweight to the United States. So say key Merkel advisers."
Honestly, we don't need German troops (or French troops for that matter). What we need is for France and Germany (as guided by Schroeder) to stop actively and maliciously undermining our efforts, in Iraq. Whether or not they supported the war, is irrelevent now. The fact remains, it is happening and it must be finished properly. A stable Iraq is certainly in Europe's best interests."But the message does not stop there. Chirac will also hear that a Christian Democrat-led government in Germany has no intention of sending troops to Iraq."
From what I read about Ms. Merkel, she understands that. The hope is, if she wins she can use her influence to help in other ways that do not involve sending troops. But more importantly she can stop the childish, passive-aggressive games that Chirac and Schroeder have been playing.
It hurts us minimally compared to how much it hurts Europe. And Ms. Merkel sees that, too.
Some More Thoughts On The Roberts Nomination From A Political Science Professor
Dr. Steven Taylor, from Troy University in Alabama, has some interesting thoughts on the nomination at Poliblog. Click on the title to access them.
One area of concern that has been expressed and no doubt will continue to be expressed by women's rights groups is, Bush did not nominate a woman, to replace a woman. Here is what Dr. Taylor has to say about that point:
I think that is more than enough to deflate that argument. Quota politics certainly is nothing to extol, especially when you are talking about the highest court in the land. But you watch the sound bites over the next few days and weeks and see if they don't try.
One area of concern that has been expressed and no doubt will continue to be expressed by women's rights groups is, Bush did not nominate a woman, to replace a woman. Here is what Dr. Taylor has to say about that point:
"On the one hand, are we arguing that once a female, African-American or whomever gets a seat that that seat is forever to belong to that group? Must Scalia be replaced by an Italian-American? Do we have to put a Bowtie-Wearing American in place to replace Stevens? Quota politics is nothing to extol."
I think that is more than enough to deflate that argument. Quota politics certainly is nothing to extol, especially when you are talking about the highest court in the land. But you watch the sound bites over the next few days and weeks and see if they don't try.
The Nomination
Who is this guy? Click on the title for a bio.
But honestly, I had never heard of Judge Roberts until yesterday. If the truth be known, I doubt many have. But rest assured, the Democratic Party Smear Committee is working overtime to come up with any and all potential negative press they can, to obstruct once again.
I listened to Schumer and Leahy comment on the nomination, on the radio, on my way home from work yesterday. It was the same old tired rhetoric that we have become accustomed to hearing from two Grand Champion Obstructionist Leftists with one twist. Schumer displayed his total ignorance by saying:
Make law? What kind of idiot has New York elected? New Yorkers that voted for him should be ashamed of themselves because he has no clue about anything, reality-based.
For those that don't remember their high school government class material, the Supreme Court's primary function is to INTERPRET the law. It is the Congress that MAKES law and the President that ENFORCES the law.
It's really simplistic, when you think about it. Where it gets confusing is when the judiciary at any level, tries to assert itself into another area of which it is not authorized, specifically the legislative branch. After a while, people come to accept that this is their role, when it it clearly is not.
Anyway, let the rhetoric machine start cranking out the lies, the half truths, and the facts. But those of us with level heads should wade through the muck that will be churned out, and seek the truth. Unless something of a serious nature comes up, like a crime or some serious issues involving severe ethical lapses, he should be confirmed.
Hat Tip on the bio: www.qando.net (Where there is fair and extensive coverage.)
But honestly, I had never heard of Judge Roberts until yesterday. If the truth be known, I doubt many have. But rest assured, the Democratic Party Smear Committee is working overtime to come up with any and all potential negative press they can, to obstruct once again.
I listened to Schumer and Leahy comment on the nomination, on the radio, on my way home from work yesterday. It was the same old tired rhetoric that we have become accustomed to hearing from two Grand Champion Obstructionist Leftists with one twist. Schumer displayed his total ignorance by saying:
"Now that he is nominated for a position where he can overturn precedent and make law, it is even more important that he fully answers a very broad range of questions,"
Make law? What kind of idiot has New York elected? New Yorkers that voted for him should be ashamed of themselves because he has no clue about anything, reality-based.
For those that don't remember their high school government class material, the Supreme Court's primary function is to INTERPRET the law. It is the Congress that MAKES law and the President that ENFORCES the law.
It's really simplistic, when you think about it. Where it gets confusing is when the judiciary at any level, tries to assert itself into another area of which it is not authorized, specifically the legislative branch. After a while, people come to accept that this is their role, when it it clearly is not.
Anyway, let the rhetoric machine start cranking out the lies, the half truths, and the facts. But those of us with level heads should wade through the muck that will be churned out, and seek the truth. Unless something of a serious nature comes up, like a crime or some serious issues involving severe ethical lapses, he should be confirmed.
Hat Tip on the bio: www.qando.net (Where there is fair and extensive coverage.)
Monday, July 18, 2005
Social Sense: Misplaced Priorities
In Misplaced Priorities at Social Sense, Mustang tells us about a couple of "moderate" Muslims. You are going to find this one very interesting.
Bolton Badly Needed To Clean House
Click on the title for a World Tribune article, about how desperately we need Bolton to be at the UN, and why the left does not want him there.
A diseased organization needs a surgeon and Bolton is just the guy, to excise the cancer.
This is a good article, definitely worth a read.
The smoke screen being generated by Senate liberals over Bush's nomination of John Bolton for ambassador to the United Nations obscures the real battle, one that has almost nothing to do with Bolton.
After all, if an abrasive personality and bad office manners were disqualifications for high office the Senate itself would be vastly different.
No. The real battle is over whether our sovereignty will be strangled by the UN.
A diseased organization needs a surgeon and Bolton is just the guy, to excise the cancer.
This is a good article, definitely worth a read.
Sat-1 Channel Investgation Reports: Traces Of Cocaine Found In EU Headquaters
The story is at The Road to Euro Serfdom .
It begs the question, what about the UN? How much nose candy do they suck up, before these meetings that put out the nonsense?
I think it's time to demand they straighten up or shut her down and relocate in Paris.
It begs the question, what about the UN? How much nose candy do they suck up, before these meetings that put out the nonsense?
I think it's time to demand they straighten up or shut her down and relocate in Paris.
Chirac's Popularity Continues To Fall; While Sarkozy's Rises
Click on the title for an article in the Guardian about the French President's fall from grace, while his Interior Minister begins to gain some traction with the French people.
I wouldn't bet on it. The cockroaches will all be hissing.
"It is not much fun being Jacques Chirac now. Deeply unpopular at home, his only chance of adulation will come this week when his plane lands in Madagascar for a two- day state visit. There, at least, he will be treated with the respect befitting a head of state."
I wouldn't bet on it. The cockroaches will all be hissing.
McQ at Q&O Online Magazine: The Religion Of Liberalism
Click on the title for an article that hits it square on the mark. Today's liberalism is a religion/cult and McQ explains this argument very well.
So give this a serious read. And if you have a loved one that is a member of MoveOn or another brainwashing group, maybe this will help you understand them better.
Seriously, give this a look.
So give this a serious read. And if you have a loved one that is a member of MoveOn or another brainwashing group, maybe this will help you understand them better.
Seriously, give this a look.
Sunday, July 17, 2005
French Leak Infuriates Brits
Click on the title for a link to a NYT article via the IHT about a French leak, concerning the nature of the explosives used in the London terrorist attack.
If I were Europe, I would isolate France until they stop undermining other nations' affairs. If they don't, they will likely continue this kind of behavior until they end up doing some serious damage.
If I were Europe, I would isolate France until they stop undermining other nations' affairs. If they don't, they will likely continue this kind of behavior until they end up doing some serious damage.
What The Left Does Not Want You To Know About Iraq
.:. WitNit .:.: The Mother of All Connections
Click on the link above to see some of the evidence that shows there was a connection between Saddam's Iraq and Al-Qaida.
The next time a leftist tells you the usual scripted message that there was no connection between the two, you can let them in on a secret that the leaders of the leftist political cults aren't sharing with their sheep.
I won't list it out, but Mark at Witnit does. Check it out.
Click on the link above to see some of the evidence that shows there was a connection between Saddam's Iraq and Al-Qaida.
The next time a leftist tells you the usual scripted message that there was no connection between the two, you can let them in on a secret that the leaders of the leftist political cults aren't sharing with their sheep.
I won't list it out, but Mark at Witnit does. Check it out.
Egyptians Resistant To Turning Chemist Over To Brits
Click on the title for the complete AP article.
Why, you ask?
Because they want to pin a medal on him and make him a hero for the cause. They can't do it, if he is in Britain facing the tough questions.
CAIRO, Egypt (AP) - Egypt says it is not prepared to hand over a biochemist detained in connection with the July 7 London bombings, Egyptian security officials said Saturday, as British investigators attended sessions questioning him.
Why, you ask?
Because they want to pin a medal on him and make him a hero for the cause. They can't do it, if he is in Britain facing the tough questions.
U.K. Sunnis Condemn London Attack
Click on the title for the complete AP article.
Forgive me if I don't sound too optimistic. Ten days after the incident does not impress me, the least little bit.
Even terrorists have PR campaigns, and this reeks of one.
BIRMINGHAM, England - Ten days after Islamic radicals carried out deadly attacks on the London transport system, Britain's largest Sunni Muslim group on Sunday issued a binding religious edict, a fatwa, condemning the July 7 suicide bombings as the work of a "perverted ideology."
Forgive me if I don't sound too optimistic. Ten days after the incident does not impress me, the least little bit.
Even terrorists have PR campaigns, and this reeks of one.
Saturday, July 16, 2005
French Bus Company Sues Car Poolers
For those of you that may still wonder why I am so hard on France, click on the title for a Guardian article about a French bus company that is suing some cleaning ladies that are car pooling to get to work.
French-style socialism does nothing but give French people and French companies a false and delusional sense of entitlement. And if this doesn't qualify as evidence for this statement, I don't know what does.
Boy oh boy, I thought I had heard it all.
Hat Tips to:
eu-serf
hubsandspokes
They might have been congratulated for their "green" efforts in an area of heavy air pollution.
Instead a group of French cleaning ladies who organised a car-sharing scheme to get to work are being taken to court by a coach company which accuses them of "an act of unfair and parasitical competition".
The women, who live in Moselle and work five days a week at EU offices in Luxembourg, are being taken to court by Transports Schiocchet Excursions, which runs a service along the route. It wants the women to be fined and their cars confiscated.
French-style socialism does nothing but give French people and French companies a false and delusional sense of entitlement. And if this doesn't qualify as evidence for this statement, I don't know what does.
Boy oh boy, I thought I had heard it all.
Hat Tips to:
eu-serf
hubsandspokes
Muslim-Buddhist Tensions Rising
Click on the title for an AP article about the escalating violence in Thailand, at the hands of Muslim terrorists.
This shows that it does not matter where you live or what your culture may be. If you are not Muslim and you have Muslims living in your population, you are at risk of being attacked for having a culture and belief system that is different than theirs.
Wake up America! Wake up World! Even though it has not been declared, the jihadists are at war with everyone not Muslim.
Beheadings and bombings are pushing tensions to boiling point since a long-simmering Muslim separatist movement launched an armed struggle early last year that has left more than 860 people dead.
This shows that it does not matter where you live or what your culture may be. If you are not Muslim and you have Muslims living in your population, you are at risk of being attacked for having a culture and belief system that is different than theirs.
Wake up America! Wake up World! Even though it has not been declared, the jihadists are at war with everyone not Muslim.
The Biggest Non-Scandal Of The Year
Read Mark's post at Eclipse Ramblings about the big non-scandal, the DNC's Smear Tactics and Strategies Department is waging against Karl Rove.
When this is all said and done, the Democrats are going to look even more foolish than they do now. But if they want to continue to alienate voters (as they seem to do so well), they will find something else to trump up to try and destroy a President, after this goes away.
When this is all said and done, the Democrats are going to look even more foolish than they do now. But if they want to continue to alienate voters (as they seem to do so well), they will find something else to trump up to try and destroy a President, after this goes away.
Friday, July 15, 2005
London Attack Condemned By Muslim Scholars
Click on the title to read the complete AP article. But let's take a look at part of it, shall we?
What a laugher. Here is why this guy is not to be believed:
-Civilians die more often than not in these two countries at the hands of these terrorist thugs. So this "scholar" (and I use the term very loosely) has somehow overlooked that fact. I wonder where he got his "scholar" status.
-The people of Iraq that want to join the police force or the military to defend their new country are targeted. Does that make them occupiers? The answer is yes. But it's their country to occupy. The foreign slime that has oozed in are the real occupiers, so I guess that gives the Iraqi government all of the validation needed, to squash the Al Qaida invaders.
-Innocents have been repeatedly targeted in Israel. Buses, shopping centers, places where children congregate are just fine in the "scholarly" imam's eyes. Rarely do they target the military, because that would expose just how weak these killers of innocents truly are.
Here we go, blaming the Western media. Blame anybody but the twisted ideologues that commit such heinous acts.
Besides that, the "scholar" has just contradicted himself again. He said, "Muslim law FORBIDS killing ANY innocent lives".
Here is what the so-called Muslim "scholars" should have said:
"We strongly condemn and hereby officially renounce ALL acts of terrorism in the past and in the future. Furthermore, we wish to offer our complete cooperation with authorities anywhere in the world, to prevent any further attacks; and to aid in any ongoing investigation related to the London attack or any other attack, that has previously occurred."
Then they need to go to their mosques and say to their followers, "Enough is enough, it stops right now and it shall go no further!". Then and only then, would I ever be inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt.
"There should be a clear distinction between the suicide bombing of those who are trying to defend themselves from occupiers, which is something different from those who kill civilians, which is a big crime," said Sayed Mohammed Musawi, the head of the World Islamic League in London."
Translation:
It is okay to engage in terrorist acts against the sovereign states of Iraq and Israel.
What a laugher. Here is why this guy is not to be believed:
-Civilians die more often than not in these two countries at the hands of these terrorist thugs. So this "scholar" (and I use the term very loosely) has somehow overlooked that fact. I wonder where he got his "scholar" status.
-The people of Iraq that want to join the police force or the military to defend their new country are targeted. Does that make them occupiers? The answer is yes. But it's their country to occupy. The foreign slime that has oozed in are the real occupiers, so I guess that gives the Iraqi government all of the validation needed, to squash the Al Qaida invaders.
-Innocents have been repeatedly targeted in Israel. Buses, shopping centers, places where children congregate are just fine in the "scholarly" imam's eyes. Rarely do they target the military, because that would expose just how weak these killers of innocents truly are.
"The media in the West are mixing the difference between these two, and the result is that some of our Muslim youth are becoming more frustrated and they think that both are the same, even though Muslim law forbids killing any innocent lives," Musawi said.
Here we go, blaming the Western media. Blame anybody but the twisted ideologues that commit such heinous acts.
Besides that, the "scholar" has just contradicted himself again. He said, "Muslim law FORBIDS killing ANY innocent lives".
Here is what the so-called Muslim "scholars" should have said:
"We strongly condemn and hereby officially renounce ALL acts of terrorism in the past and in the future. Furthermore, we wish to offer our complete cooperation with authorities anywhere in the world, to prevent any further attacks; and to aid in any ongoing investigation related to the London attack or any other attack, that has previously occurred."
Then they need to go to their mosques and say to their followers, "Enough is enough, it stops right now and it shall go no further!". Then and only then, would I ever be inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Thursday, July 14, 2005
Chinese Military Shipments Discovered In Ecuador
Click on the title for a World Tribune article about the discovery of a mysterious military shipment, in Ecuador.
I know there are many people out there that do not see China as anything to get worried about at this time. Many of them think that as we help facilitate their transition to freer markets, they will eventually embrace the concept of more political freedom. But I am skeptical.
If this story is true, there are many possible explanations. One of which, is they are trying to arm rebels in third world countries, for the eventual overthrow of any government that is friendly with the U.S.
The Quito Hoy newspaper reported last week that four containers were discovered in Guayaquil during a ceremony. The shipment included 12,000 uniforms, two helicopters, nine dump trucks and other military equipment.
I know there are many people out there that do not see China as anything to get worried about at this time. Many of them think that as we help facilitate their transition to freer markets, they will eventually embrace the concept of more political freedom. But I am skeptical.
China has been courting South American governments and has supplied military goods to Cuba in the past.
If this story is true, there are many possible explanations. One of which, is they are trying to arm rebels in third world countries, for the eventual overthrow of any government that is friendly with the U.S.
Two More New Blogrolls Added
I have found a couple of new blogs that I want to blogroll. I find these blogs to be ran by two very intelligent people that have a good handle on a variety of issues. The evidence is in their postings, so give them a look, if you haven't already.
Gindy.blogspot.com
OutsideTheBlogway
I am not done by any means. I will continue to seek more outstanding blogs to add. Yours may be next.
Gindy.blogspot.com
OutsideTheBlogway
I am not done by any means. I will continue to seek more outstanding blogs to add. Yours may be next.
Congrats To Flaming Duck
Stop by and congratulate VARepublicman at Flaming Duck for reaching the 3000 mark on his counter. VAR was one of the first blog pals I had and has been putting out some pretty good stuff, since I have known him. I highly suspect he will keep doing the same for a long time, so give him a hit now and then. You won't be sorry.
Congratulations VAR and if I ever get motivated enough to get a counter I will be looking for references to a good one (as well as inexpensive).
Congratulations VAR and if I ever get motivated enough to get a counter I will be looking for references to a good one (as well as inexpensive).
What A Paradox Department: France Has A Strength
Esther at Outside the Blogway has posted a piece you might find interesting and ironic, considering the weaknesses France usually shows in international politics and diplomacy.
Click on the link or the title for the details.
Click on the link or the title for the details.
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
Julianne Malveaux Implies U.S. Is A Terrorist State
Who is Julianne Malveaux? Go to Gindy.blogspot.com or click on the title for one example of who she is.
You may also remember she is the woman that said about Clarence Thomas:
She should have made the list, I linked to earlier. I can tell you what list she is on at this house, but I try to keep this a family blog.
You may also remember she is the woman that said about Clarence Thomas:
"The man is on the Court. You know, I hope his wife feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early like many black men do, of heart disease."
She should have made the list, I linked to earlier. I can tell you what list she is on at this house, but I try to keep this a family blog.
Did PA President Abbas Fund The 1972 Munich Olympics Attack?
The Roman Wanderer thinks so. Click on the title, read the post, and take the link from there to the Jerusalem Post's Uri Dan article and see what you think.
If this is true, then my friend Mustang at SocialSense must be right. There are no moderate Muslims. At least there are none that are in a position of power or authority, of any real significance.
In the Muslim world (like many others) you are a follower or you are a leader. The Muslim leaders tell the Muslim followers that if they don't follow, Allah will rain down fire on them. They are also told, if anyone that wants to die a martyr (by killing as many innocents as possible), their souls will be sucked up to a paradise, complete with harem. (I wonder, what do the women get?)
Abbas was sold to the Palestinian people and to the world as a kinder, gentler leader that would throw away the Yasser Arafat school of terror and would actively seek peace with Israel. We are waiting, but from where I sit, there seems to be a whole lot of inaction going on in the PA. Which can only mean they have to rearm, retool, and are waiting to restart the killing machine, as soon as this can be accomplished.
I have been skeptical about Abbas from the beginning, but not because there was any smoking gun and not because his views are nearly as hard core as those in the Hamas community. Do you ever just get a hunch? You have no solid evidence or support for why you have the hunch, but your gut tells you something?
If this is true, then maybe I now know why.
These people are truly consumed with unjustifiable hatred and age is no mellowing agent here. Saddam, Hitler, Stalin, and many other despots did not improve with age, megalomaniacs seldom do. And until proven otherwise, I will be inclined to believe that there has been none here, either.
And to think it's all over a strip of land that belongs to the Jews; a land that was once theirs many years ago. All of the oil is located in the rest of the Middle East, so what could be so damned important to them? To the Jews, the land has spiritual meaning and it has had for many more years than the Muslims.
If this is true, then my friend Mustang at SocialSense must be right. There are no moderate Muslims. At least there are none that are in a position of power or authority, of any real significance.
In the Muslim world (like many others) you are a follower or you are a leader. The Muslim leaders tell the Muslim followers that if they don't follow, Allah will rain down fire on them. They are also told, if anyone that wants to die a martyr (by killing as many innocents as possible), their souls will be sucked up to a paradise, complete with harem. (I wonder, what do the women get?)
Abbas was sold to the Palestinian people and to the world as a kinder, gentler leader that would throw away the Yasser Arafat school of terror and would actively seek peace with Israel. We are waiting, but from where I sit, there seems to be a whole lot of inaction going on in the PA. Which can only mean they have to rearm, retool, and are waiting to restart the killing machine, as soon as this can be accomplished.
I have been skeptical about Abbas from the beginning, but not because there was any smoking gun and not because his views are nearly as hard core as those in the Hamas community. Do you ever just get a hunch? You have no solid evidence or support for why you have the hunch, but your gut tells you something?
If this is true, then maybe I now know why.
These people are truly consumed with unjustifiable hatred and age is no mellowing agent here. Saddam, Hitler, Stalin, and many other despots did not improve with age, megalomaniacs seldom do. And until proven otherwise, I will be inclined to believe that there has been none here, either.
And to think it's all over a strip of land that belongs to the Jews; a land that was once theirs many years ago. All of the oil is located in the rest of the Middle East, so what could be so damned important to them? To the Jews, the land has spiritual meaning and it has had for many more years than the Muslims.
Hamas Condemns London Attack?
Could it be so (somehow, I doubt it) or is it just a bad analogy as the Noble Savage claims?
Click the link to Noble Savage: Bad Analogy Contest (or the title) to read the whole post.
Click the link to Noble Savage: Bad Analogy Contest (or the title) to read the whole post.
100 People Screwing Up America
Mark at .:. WitNit .:.: has posted the list.
The list was compiled by Bernard Goldberg, a former CBS news employee who has a book out by the same title.
Click on the title or the link to access the full list.
The list was compiled by Bernard Goldberg, a former CBS news employee who has a book out by the same title.
Click on the title or the link to access the full list.
2001 Essay Tells Us Who Won Cold War
Click on the title for a link to an essay by Arnold Beichman at the Hoover Institute, at Stanford University. It was published in July, 2001, before the 9/11 attacks. But it is applicable today, because the left is on a mission to revise history for the specific purposes of brainwashing a new generation of social collectivists.
You need to read the entire piece (it is short), but the key excerpt is:
Even those that can't bring themselves to admit it, know in their heart of hearts this fact. But the left, even today, wants your kids and grandkids to believe otherwise.
You need to read the entire piece (it is short), but the key excerpt is:
Ask Russians who won the cold war and their replies are unequivocal. Vladimir Lukin, onetime Boris Yeltsin foreign policy adviser; Aleksandr Bessmertnykh, former Russian foreign minister; Sergio Khrushchev, son of Nikita S. Khrushchev who recently became a U.S. citizen, all agree that the United States won the cold war.
Even those that can't bring themselves to admit it, know in their heart of hearts this fact. But the left, even today, wants your kids and grandkids to believe otherwise.
Monday, July 11, 2005
Here's What We Can Soon Look Forward To
Click on the title for a link to MEMRI (Middle East Media Research Institute). It links to some kinds of quotes that we can all look forward to seeing, when Al-Jazeera starts pumping their sludge into this country on a nightly basis (in English, no less).
These are some excerpts from the excerpts:
Note-The speakers are Mustafa Fiqi, chairman, of the Egyptian Parliament foreign affairs committee and with General Ahmad Abd Al-Halim of the Egyptian Council of Foreign Affairs. Their words are in response to the attacks on London.
Blame Jews, blame Americans, blame Christians. How many Jews, Christians, or Americans are actively seeking innocent Muslims to kill?
Denial, big time.
More denial (and I don't mean that river, either).
But hey, give him credit. He took me on a trip down Memory Lane by mentioning the Bader-Meinhof Gang and the Red Brigades, which went on a rampage in Germany and Italy (respectively) when I lived in Europe. Also to his credit, he didn't mention Jews and Americans.
Well, you can see what we are in for soon. But be not afraid, maybe the law of supply and demand will prevail and the cable companies will be forced to drop it due to lack of interest and ratings.
These are some excerpts from the excerpts:
Note-The speakers are Mustafa Fiqi, chairman, of the Egyptian Parliament foreign affairs committee and with General Ahmad Abd Al-Halim of the Egyptian Council of Foreign Affairs. Their words are in response to the attacks on London.
Fiqi:
There are terrorists in every religion and nationality. Perhaps, by chance, there are Muslims who carry out some of the terrorist operations at this stage, but Jews carried out terrorist operations in the past, and Christians have carried out terrorist operations as well. No religion has a monopoly on terrorism.
Blame Jews, blame Americans, blame Christians. How many Jews, Christians, or Americans are actively seeking innocent Muslims to kill?
Denial, big time.
General Abd Al-Halim:
These groups, as we said and as was mentioned, are not just Muslim. There are many extremist groups. We've all heard of Bader-Meinhof. We've all heard of the Red Brigades, the Red Army, and many other groups. Even if we don't hear about these groups in the media, we can't exclude them. It's possible that these groups operate today under the guise of Al-Qaeda, and it's attributed to Al- Qaeda, and there is a communiqué saying that Al-Qaeda and so on.
More denial (and I don't mean that river, either).
But hey, give him credit. He took me on a trip down Memory Lane by mentioning the Bader-Meinhof Gang and the Red Brigades, which went on a rampage in Germany and Italy (respectively) when I lived in Europe. Also to his credit, he didn't mention Jews and Americans.
Well, you can see what we are in for soon. But be not afraid, maybe the law of supply and demand will prevail and the cable companies will be forced to drop it due to lack of interest and ratings.
Fighting For The Heart And Soul Of Europe?
Click on the title for an AP article about the prospect of the Leftist Socialist German government being replaced with one that will regard the U.S. as a valuable and trusted ally, instead of a pariah that is responsible for all that is wrong with the world.
Here are a few excerpts with my views on the matter:
Maybe the economy has been more directly affected by the chilled relationship with the U.S., than many would like to admit. Less American investment can make a difference in any country's economy.
What is interesting to note, is that Germany's unemployment rate is in the 11 % range. Even with so much government money to invest in business and social programs (while not having to fund a military of any major consequence), they cannot get below 10 percent. They need us to this day and they are beginning to realize this slowly, but surely. Their buddy Chirac cannot help them. The French President has his own political troubles and is also struggling with growing unemployment.
I, for one, believe that this is not a good time to consider Turkey as a member of the EU (provided it ever gets off of the ground). With the current hostility that radical Muslims are bringing to Europe, they cannot afford to take a chance of bringing a nation into the fold that may become sympathetic to the jihadists, some point down the road.
If they do ( and I stress, IF), they had better make sure that Turkey renounces terrorism and jihad, as an ideology, philosophy, and way of life. They should take steps to ensure that what has happened in other Muslim countries never happens in Turkey, by requiring the Turkish government to outlaw jihadism and jail all those that openly espouse these beliefs.
If they are serious about becoming a member, they will not have a problem doing so. But the skeptic in me, has some strong doubts.
Sounds like this draft can and will be promoted as something quite similar to the Contract With America, the Republicans rose to power on.
I don't know if this lady can be the younger, modern-day German version of Maggie Thatcher, or not. But from what I have read about her, she has spunk, guts, and brains. And above all, do not sell her short.
We could very well be seeing the tide turning back in Europe. Blair gets reelected, Spain starts seeing the value of aligning itself with Britain more so than France, and now Germany looks to start moderating back toward the center-right. It certainly begs the question, could France be far behind?
Anyway, read the whole article and see what you think.
Here are a few excerpts with my views on the matter:
BERLIN - Germany's opposition aims to oust Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder with a program to boost Europe's largest economy and "reinvigorate" relations with the United States, according to a draft obtained Sunday by The Associated Press.
Maybe the economy has been more directly affected by the chilled relationship with the U.S., than many would like to admit. Less American investment can make a difference in any country's economy.
What is interesting to note, is that Germany's unemployment rate is in the 11 % range. Even with so much government money to invest in business and social programs (while not having to fund a military of any major consequence), they cannot get below 10 percent. They need us to this day and they are beginning to realize this slowly, but surely. Their buddy Chirac cannot help them. The French President has his own political troubles and is also struggling with growing unemployment.
The program, to be formally endorsed Monday by the Christian Democratic Union and its Bavarian sister party, includes an increase in sales tax and looser rules for companies to hire and fire staff. It also rules out Turkish membership in the European Union.
I, for one, believe that this is not a good time to consider Turkey as a member of the EU (provided it ever gets off of the ground). With the current hostility that radical Muslims are bringing to Europe, they cannot afford to take a chance of bringing a nation into the fold that may become sympathetic to the jihadists, some point down the road.
If they do ( and I stress, IF), they had better make sure that Turkey renounces terrorism and jihad, as an ideology, philosophy, and way of life. They should take steps to ensure that what has happened in other Muslim countries never happens in Turkey, by requiring the Turkish government to outlaw jihadism and jail all those that openly espouse these beliefs.
If they are serious about becoming a member, they will not have a problem doing so. But the skeptic in me, has some strong doubts.
"We will reinvigorate the trans-Atlantic cooperation with the United States," the draft said.
Sounds like this draft can and will be promoted as something quite similar to the Contract With America, the Republicans rose to power on.
The conservatives, led by Angela Merkel, have opened a wide lead in opinion polls ahead of the expected September election, raising the prospect of defeat for Schroeder's center-left government after seven years in office.
I don't know if this lady can be the younger, modern-day German version of Maggie Thatcher, or not. But from what I have read about her, she has spunk, guts, and brains. And above all, do not sell her short.
We could very well be seeing the tide turning back in Europe. Blair gets reelected, Spain starts seeing the value of aligning itself with Britain more so than France, and now Germany looks to start moderating back toward the center-right. It certainly begs the question, could France be far behind?
Anyway, read the whole article and see what you think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)