jawa.mee.nu

December 11, 2006

Who is Omar Shahin?

Katherine Kersten has the details here. Excerpt:

How about Omar Shahin, the imams' spokesman and also president of the North American Imams Federation? He is a native of Jordan, who says he became a U.S. citizen in 2003. From 2000 to 2003, Shahin served as president of Islamic Center of Tucson (ICT), that city's largest mosque.
The ICT is well known. The mosque has "an extensive history of terror links," according to terrorism expert Steven Emerson, who testified about terrorist financing before the Senate Banking Committee in July 2005.
The Washington Post described these links in a 2002 article. "Tucson was one of the first points of contact in the United States for the jihadist group that evolved into al Qaeda," the Post reported. And the ICT? It held "basically the first cell of al Qaeda in the United States; that is where it all started," said Rita Katz, a terrorism expert quoted by the Post.

There's much more. Read it all.

h/t : PowerLine

Posted by: Ragnar at 01:05 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 167 words, total size 1 kb.

December 05, 2006

Free Passes to Stratfor Premium

Stratfor is offering 7-day free passes to its premium services.

For the record, I don't have any affiliation with Stratfor other than being a subscriber and enjoying their updates. I've been impressed with their insights and have found them to often be well ahead of the curve.

Posted by: Ragnar at 12:12 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 52 words, total size 1 kb.

December 02, 2006

The Beer Ape

h/t : Allah.

Posted by: Ragnar at 11:46 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 6 words, total size 1 kb.

Mary Katherine on Leftivus

Posted by: Ragnar at 11:37 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 4 words, total size 1 kb.

November 27, 2006

A Moderate Muslim Identified in Tulsa?

Appears so. Unfortunately, his fellow Muslims also identified him--so they kicked him out of the mosque and threatened him with violence:

Mr. Miftah's letter is here. I suspect this is the part that got him in trouble: more...

Posted by: Ragnar at 11:07 AM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 413 words, total size 3 kb.

November 24, 2006

US Flag = Genocide

That's what one trustee of the Orange Coast College system believes. I have a nephew that goes to one of the OCC Community Colleges. The trustees stopped the Pledge of Allegiance, the students voted it back in. I hope my nephew was one of those pushing to reverse the lunacy.

Daily Pilot:

Trustee Coyotl Tezcatlipoca, who voted along with Ball against the final decision, said he had a personal contention with the American flag but believed that others should be allowed to salute it during the public comment session.
"That represents genocide to me, and I'm not going to pledge allegiance," he said, in a statement that drew a number of angry retorts from the audience.

The other trustees are baffled at all the media attention they've received since their real objection to the Pledge of Allegiance is because it mentions "GOD". Only lunatics and fringe elements believe in God, right?

Posted by: Rusty at 11:14 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 153 words, total size 1 kb.

CENTCOM Roundup

Because the mainstream media is invested in propagating only bad news from the War on Terror, here's the CENTCOM roundup of stories the mainstream media refuses to run. more...

Posted by: Bluto at 10:56 AM | Comments (19) | Add Comment
Post contains 602 words, total size 6 kb.

1 Yeah Bluto why isn't the MSM reporting on all of the GOOD things happening in Iraq and all of the troops that are NOT being killed?

Posted by: John Ryan at November 24, 2006 12:35 PM (TcoRJ)

2 Because that wouldn't be to Democrats political advantage, JR. You're not stupid enough to dispute these press releases are you? Hmm, maybe you are...

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 24, 2006 12:36 PM (vBK4C)

3 Is it truly the MSM's job to run anyone's happy talk, including CENTCOM's?

CENTCOM is a government source, edited and approved with military and government oversight. The job of the press in a democracy is to question government as part of their reporting; to put it more succinctly, to assume government with massive resources at its disposal is spinning unless proven otherwise.

Why, then, would they quote sources assumed to be spinning--unless of course they followed up and THEN reported a story of their own?

I went ahead and read several of the releases. Some present mildy interesting stories, features that talk about re-building fire stations, and schools, and servicemen receiving awards for merit and the like. But these don't fit the definition of news; they are much like typical corporate press releases, wrtten to put client subject matter in the best possible light. I've read thousands in my lifetime and assign most to be ignored entirely.

News is what is uncovered, not what is provided, at least to my way of thinking. The CENTCOM releases are OK stuff to read, and maybe should be given a little more airplay. But news? Nope.

Posted by: Gleep! at November 24, 2006 04:57 PM (a7sMc)

4 News is what is uncovered, not what is provided, at least to my way of
thinking. The CENTCOM releases are OK stuff to read, and maybe should
be given a little more airplay. But news? Nope.

Yeah....not like the CNN worthy terrorist press releases of snipers.

Posted by: Randman at November 24, 2006 05:14 PM (Sal3J)

5 Greg, you incredible imbecile. All of the events posted here are "news" by any definition, just as the casualty reports that the MSM DOES take from CENTCOM are news. The MSM have deliberately suppressed these stories to further their political agenda - successfully, for now. Pull your head out of your ass for once in your useless life.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 24, 2006 05:32 PM (vBK4C)

6 I went and talked to some active people who were ack from Iraq. They are suppossed to be non-political (I forget what part of the code) antway, they said the mainstream media was treating them unfairly,an ddid not reflect the reality they had experienced themselves.

MSM = More Sneaky Misinformation

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at November 24, 2006 05:47 PM (2OHpj)

7 All of the events posted here are "news" by any definition, just as the
casualty reports that the MSM DOES take from CENTCOM are news.

Casualty reports listing American dead ARE news in America, you myopic twit; a press release about American soldiers helping school children install new basketball hoops in their school is NOT ... it's human interest fluff. Where the hell did YOU get your J training?

Posted by: Gleep! at November 24, 2006 05:53 PM (a7sMc)

8 Gleep: kindly cut and paste from my post the part about basketball hoops, you disloyal, retarded dwarf. Where did you learn to read?

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 24, 2006 06:28 PM (vBK4C)

9 Good Lord it was hyperbole to illustrate a point Bluto ... you've used this debate strategy and defended its use by others many a time.

Posted by: Gleep! at November 24, 2006 06:45 PM (a7sMc)

There's a huge difference between hyperbole and simply lying. Try again.

The fact is, you didn't bother to read the post before commenting, did you? What a moron.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 24, 2006 07:23 PM (vBK4C)

11 CENTCOM will become an Establishment Media standard if a Democrat is elected President in 2008.

It's funny how the government only lies to the people when republicans are in the White House. Thank God the so called MsM is here to tell us what to think and how to feel.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 25, 2006 12:35 AM (bLPT+)

12 News is what is uncovered, not what is provided

Come now Gleepo. What about CNN running the sniper vid from the terrorist?

Posted by: Randman at November 25, 2006 01:19 AM (Sal3J)

13 News is what is manufactured, not what transpires.

Ask any first year journalism student. Better yet, take a look at any establishment media story. They're all works of fiction, to some extent.

The Gleeps and Creeps are only too happy to see fabricated news stories, so long as they continue to espouse the left's Marxist, P.C. dogma.

No wonder newspapers are dying out and Fox News, moderate blogs and conservative talk radio kick ass. The tolerant majority is sick of the MsM indoctrination apparatus.

Cry me a river, Gleep.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 26, 2006 04:14 PM (bLPT+)

14 Democrats never lie: I never had sex with that women, Miss Lowenski, never, not one time. ha, ha.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 26, 2006 11:24 PM (aghaS)

15 http://www.stazzz.net/shemales.php shemales pictures

Posted by: shemales pictures at November 27, 2006 06:37 PM (t+vh2)

16 http://www.stazzz.net/shemales.php shemales pictures

Posted by: shemales pictures at November 27, 2006 06:37 PM (t+vh2)

17 http://www.stazzz.net/shemales.php shemales pictures

Posted by: shemales pictures at November 27, 2006 06:37 PM (lu7rp)

18 http://www.stazzz.net/shemales.php shemales pictures

Posted by: shemales pictures at November 27, 2006 06:39 PM (lu7rp)

19 sejwaryg qwhu xbalwtuf vzgdrmluj ihloard urpfo srpjd

Posted by: pmegjt wxdpk at April 05, 2007 07:02 PM (9jgQr)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Michelle : The Giving Season

As you all probably know, conservatives are more charitable than leftists. How better to exercise those charitable habits than to support causes that promote freedom in the world?

Michelle has some suggestions for giving:

*A group from one of my favorite, indispensable blogs, My Pet Jawa, is headed to Darfur to film footage for a documentary. They're asking for donations. Please help them out.
*Bill Ardolino of INDCJournal, one of the best citizen journalists on the 'net, is headed to Iraq next month as an embed. He's being sponsored by The Washington Examiner, but could use help covering some of the initial expenditures of the trip. Please help out here.
*Bill Roggio, another pioneer, is returning to Iraq. He deserves your support, too.
*Operation Gratitude sends CARE packages to the troops. Give, give, give.

UPDATE by Rusty: We're one of Michelle's favorits blogs? Wow, all of us here are sooooo honored.

Posted by: Ragnar at 09:33 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 154 words, total size 1 kb.

Pim's Ghost : Re-examining Islam

The lovely and talented Pim's Ghost, blogging at "What Would Charles Martel Do?" features an interesting essay highlighting Hilaire Belloc and his writings on Islam:

Millions of modern people of the white civilizationâ€”that is, the civilization of Europe and Americaâ€”have forgotten all about Islam. They have never come in contact with it. They take for granted that it is decaying, and that, anyway, it is just a foreign religion which will not concern them. It is, as a fact, the most formidable and persistent enemy which our civilization has had, and may at any moment become as large a menace in the future as it has been in the past.

That may not be a particularly brilliant insight in 2006, but Belloc wrote those words in 1936, in a time when Communism and Fascism were considered the great threats to Western Civilization. As Belloc noted, Islam was, for the most part, 'off the radar' in the Western mind.

Posted by: Ragnar at 08:30 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 161 words, total size 1 kb.

November 23, 2006

The True Story of Thanksgiving

It's somewhat disturbing to me to learn that everything I thought about Thanksgiving is apparently wrong. However, thanks to a report today in The Arizona Republic, I'm now aware of the academically accurate version of the story of Thanksgiving.

From AZCentral.com:

Teaching about Thanksgiving can be fraught with problems anyway, given that there are so many misconceptions about the holiday.

And, boy, there are some misconceptions.

Teachers no longer rely only on textbooks but use the wealth of information available through the Internet, historical research and the media. They show children first-person accounts, photographs and artifacts.
First-graders in Luz Campos' class at Herrera School in Phoenix learn about Thanksgiving as part of their ongoing study of Native Americans, researching how the Wampanoag Indians lived compared with other Native people.

Now, in all my years of schooling, no one ever mentioned the first-person accounts and photographs from the first Thanksgiving. It's probably because my school system was underfunded.

"We're teaching more from a historical and more-balanced perspective," says Elie Gaines, a first-grade teacher at Grayhawk Elementary School in Scottsdale. "Because of the multicultural emphasis over the last 10 or 15 years, people are much more aware that there is more than just one side of the story."

By golly! All sides of the controversial Thanksgiving story should be aired. In particular, it's obvious that Thanksgiving was a traditional Indian feast long before the Pilgrims arrived in the New World. more...

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 03:28 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 518 words, total size 4 kb.

1 So tell me, where did the Wampanoag Indian tribe come from or inherit 'their' land from?

Posted by: whuptdue at November 23, 2006 04:49 PM (MAPKL)

2 At the risk of being non-PC...I wonder how long it will be before we start hearing about underrepresentation of gays and lesbians in Thanksgiving history.

Posted by: Philosopher at November 23, 2006 05:51 PM (YiEms)

3 I think they were teaching that thanksgiveing was a tradition borrowed from the indians in 1973 when I was in first grade. I got me a 6th grade education.

Posted by: Howie at November 23, 2006 06:33 PM (YdcZ0)

4 Pretty much all people with some sort of advanced culture celebrated a harvest festival.
The only fedaerly recognized reservation of the Whompanoags is in the town that I live(d) in on Martha's Vineyard, called Aquinnah.
They were able to be recognized fedrerally because their culture had remained intact to some degree.
Their fall festival is really called Cranberry Day.
They were also traditionally the harpooneers on the whaleboats.

Posted by: John Ryan at November 23, 2006 09:20 PM (TcoRJ)

5 I can't tell if this is /sarc or not.

Posted by: MegaTroopX at November 23, 2006 11:04 PM (v5fbO)

6 It seems that somewhere along the line the idea of a time to give thanks to God for His blessings has gotten lost. But then the whole idea of God is now in disfavor, isn't it?

Pity.

Posted by: Subvet at November 23, 2006 11:58 PM (DNVxw)

7 Some Thanksgiving cheer for all:

http://www.teambio.org/2006/11/william-burroughs-thanksgiving-prayer/

Posted by: Greg at November 24, 2006 12:41 AM (19GwZ)

8 One of the things I reflected on today is Mike's utter and unabashed ability to link-whore himself.

You are the master, Mike, bar none. Narcissus had nothing on you!

Cya in the Sandcrawler, buddy!

(note to uninterested participants, we co-bloggers needle each other like this incessantly)

Posted by: Vinnie at November 24, 2006 02:41 AM (/qy9A)

9 Actually the true story of Thanksgiving is that French Protestants celebrated it in Florida in the Mid 16th century..They were killed the very next year by the Catholic Spanish.. I guess that does'nt make for a very good story...

Posted by: gene at November 24, 2006 02:28 PM (chC+F)

10 Reading the left-wing fantasies about Thanksgiving on this thread proves the point of pechar's story.

The moonbats running our schools have indoctrinated entire generations in mindless anti-Americanism and outrageous lies.

Obviously, the more intelligent among us were able to resist the brainwashing. The stupid and self loathing never had a chance. They have become self declared enemies of civilization.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 26, 2006 05:11 PM (bLPT+)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

November 22, 2006

Tucker Throws it Right Back at CAIR

Hat tip: LGF

Posted by: Ragnar at 08:47 PM | Comments (24) | Add Comment
Post contains 10 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Let me second Tucker: it's not "racism", BECAUSE ISLAM ISN'T A FUCKING RACE YOU MORON.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 23, 2006 12:23 AM (8e/V4)

2 Did I hear this guy correctly?
"I believe everyone should be able to practice their own religion in this country".
What about the idiots that are screaming sharia for the entire world?
Carlos, I am with you.
NOT a race!

Posted by: Melissa In Texas at November 23, 2006 04:04 AM (bbxLM)

3 Not a race true. But far more racist than most realize. Question? If all Israelis converted to Christianity Monday morning would the Iranians, Syrians, Iraqis, etc stop trying to destroy them? What if they all converted to Islam. Would the killing stop then. I don't think so. Racial?

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 23, 2006 07:53 AM (ewTnp)

4 What if they all converted to Islam.

rooster,

the killing would stop almost instantaneously.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 23, 2006 10:56 AM (8e/V4)

5 the killing would stop almost instantaneously.

And so would the Noble Prizes as the brilliant Jewish kids would stop
studying physics, computers and medicine in favor of wife beating, goat
fucking and bomb belt design.

Posted by: Randman at November 23, 2006 11:54 AM (Sal3J)

6 Something we can all agree on?

Race and religion are 2 different things?

On a lighter note, did you ever google the word "moron" and see what pops up as the number 1 answer?

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 23, 2006 01:13 PM (uY2e6)

7 the killing would stop almost instantaneously.

Yeah, sure it would.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 23, 2006 01:14 PM (v3I+x)

8 By the way, it's nice to hear someone, anyone, stand up to lying, murderous muslim scum in any mainstream media format.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 23, 2006 01:18 PM (v3I+x)

9 "By the way, it's nice to hear someone, anyone, stand up to lying, murderous muslim scum in any mainstream media format.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus "

Tell me something, Improbable Minimus - are all American muslims lying, murdering scum, or just this American muslim?

We do see the muslims as middleeastern, even the American muslims, so the discrimination against muslims is racial as well as religious, since we can't separate the race from the religion.

I think Tucker just likes to argue, because it helps to increase his ratings.

Like Bill O'reilly, Sean Hannity and Rush Limpballs, I don't think he really believes most of the bullshit he spews.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 23, 2006 01:56 PM (Vaoz4)

10 "By the way, it's nice to hear someone, anyone, stand up to lying, murderous muslim scum in any mainstream media format.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus "

Tell me something, Improbable Minimus - are all American muslims lying, murdering scum, or just this American muslim?

We do see the muslims as middleeastern, even the American muslims, so the discrimination against muslims is racial as well as religious, since we can't separate the race from the religion.

I think Tucker just likes to argue, because it helps to increase his ratings.

Like Bill O'reilly, Sean Hannity and Rush Limpballs, I don't think he really believes most of the bullshit he spews.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 23, 2006 01:57 PM (Vaoz4)

11 Having a little trouble posting. Sometimes double posting. Must be a problem with my ISP.

Sorry for the double posts.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 23, 2006 01:59 PM (Vaoz4)

12 Having a little trouble posting. Sometimes double posting. Must be a problem with my ISP.

Sorry for the double posts.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 23, 2006 02:01 PM (2xoLT)

13 If the circumstances were identical, except that it was Christians, praying in public, before getting on a plane and they were then thrown off the plane, because they were acting "suspicious", would it be OK with you?

Or does it make a difference, who is doing the praying?

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 23, 2006 02:23 PM (osb1B)

14 I love it when these snakes get their heads and their arses handed to them.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at November 23, 2006 02:28 PM (vixLB)

15 But the big question is.....what happened to his bow ties? (you can tell how much boob tube I watch)

Posted by: Randman at November 23, 2006 05:04 PM (Sal3J)

16 If the circumstances were identical, except that it was Christians,

puddle,

the circumstances can't be identical because it's not christian terrorists trying to hijack our planes and fly them into skyscrapers, it's islamic ones. That makes all the difference in the world.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 23, 2006 05:18 PM (8e/V4)

17 PuddleDuck
Or anyone, this is long so skip it if you don't have time.

Religious bias can be directed at anybody.

Once, I was publically denounced, and slandered by (Gasp) a Christian. You love this ... he was ethnically Jewish, but a Christian convert.

Now I am a non-denominational Christian. I was at various times an Atheist, and experimented with (GASP !!!) Nordic Paganism. At the time in question I had come back to Christianity. I went through a process of spiritual evolution (Hee he)

I accept Jesus, and find great worth in my current spirituality, but my faith is usually kept out of conversation because I am not like a lot of other Christians. Intelligent design is interesting, but as science it belongs in a Philosophy class, not Biology, or Paleontology.

We had been hosting activities at a game/model store that was affiliated with Games Workshop. We had kids, and dads, and moms, contests, and birthday parties, and it was fun.

We also saw it as a benefit to the community because it was something for kids to get excited about besides drugs, or getting in trouble.

Some people didn't agree. One Chamber of Commerce rep was overheard on the sidewalk saying 'it' was Satanic.

We didn't wory about that, but the owner was going out of business. I found another store where the owner welcomed us, and he even took on the Games Workshop stock because he could see the kids enjoyed it. So he said.

So anyway, this new fellow (call him 'Fred') owned a hobby, and slot car store. We even helped him reset the store, and order more stock. We did so without pay, or any other expectation thn that we were doing something worthwhile.

Then the first conversation happened.

We were talking about 'Fred's' conversion, and family life. He was telling me more than I wanted to know, and got very direct with me about what exactly I believed in. I said I believed in Jesus. "Fred' said the Bible was the literal word of God, and I said it was "A book" and needed interpretation. We got interupted.

Things were fine for a few weeks when 'Fred' decided to spring it on me that these games, and models were evil. I asked him what he was going to do with the stock, some of which was still technically on consignment from the previous store. He said he would throw it in the dumpster.

He said basically, it was statring to make a profit, and he was becomeing seduced by it. He only had brought it into his store to wean kids off of it, not to keep selling it. I asked him to let me seperate the other peoples stuff before he junked it. He said he would think about it.

The next day he had no problem with it anymore. He had said something about it being no big deal, because if you build a model of a Nazi Airship, it doesn't make you a Nazi.

A few more weeks passed with activities ongoing, and enjoyed by all. Then he called us about a broken chair in his store. He was furious, and in front of customers, called my wife and I "Satanic", and told us to leave his store.

I heard about, and evetually saw for myself, he had reset the game section so you about had to climb over a large volume of the Bible, to get to anything. H alsoe displayed a portrait of Jesus, blocking the opposite end of the aisle. He guared the aisle with intensity if anyone should go in to select a purchase.

He told people in our small community that my wife, and I were Satanic, and he threatened to call my employer about it. I tipped off my employers, and they just laughed. they knew better.

'Fred's' business went to 'hell' pretty fast though. It wasn't my fault. He scared his customers with his overzealous behavior.

We salvaged the activities we could, and held them in our own home, with approval of parents, who were always welcome to pop in. We had annual Halloween parties and it was fun.

Any comments? Anyone want to say I'm some sort of Nazi for ever considering Nordic paganism? Or maybe I'm not Christian enough?

Or does the real moral come through?
'Fred' screwed himself, by being extreme. My area is full of churches, but he was to looney for the folks here. We don't have to be alike. We just have to not be extreme to each other.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at November 24, 2006 06:51 AM (2OHpj)

18 "If the circumstances were identical, except that it was Christians,

puddle,

the circumstances can't be identical because it's not christian terrorists trying to hijack our planes and fly them into skyscrapers, it's islamic ones. That makes all the difference in the world.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos"

So, tell us again, JC - how many Americans attacked us on 9/11?

Well, at least, though you do admit that there are "Christian terrorists".

I guess they're too busy planning to bomb women's clinics, to bother with flying airplanes into buildings.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 24, 2006 08:07 AM (p5LDo)

19 We don't have to be alike. We just have to not be extreme to each other.

I wish I would have said that. But I am so glad someone did. Thank you.

Posted by: No Fear at November 24, 2006 09:09 AM (ZQepB)

20
So, tell us again, JC - how many Americans attacked us on 9/11?

puddle,

how many Japs bombed Pearl Harbor? But you know those are stupid questions, right? Because regardless of the number, they were muslim terrorists on 9/11, not christian. So the circumstances can't be identical.

Re "christian terrorists", if that were a real issue there wouldn't be a single abortion clinic in operation today. But if the "christian terrorists" of your fevered imagination were real, I'm sure you'd be the first to ban christians from congregating in front of abortion clinics in violation of the constitutional right to do so (oh wait, you already do that!).

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 24, 2006 10:22 AM (8e/V4)

21 But is ok is a woman mourning her son gets dragged out of an event she was invited to for wearing an anti-war t-shirt.

Hey if you want to protest, get a permit. Light all the candles you want. At a death penilty execution or an abortion clinic. I just can't remember the last time they was a shooting at a anti -death penilty rally. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Posted by: No Fear at November 24, 2006 11:16 AM (ZQepB)

22 http://www.stazzz.net/shemales.php shemales pictures

Posted by: shemales pictures at November 27, 2006 07:27 PM (2An8I)

23 jonny

Posted by: jonny at November 30, 2006 12:05 AM (RPsKH)

24 jonny14

Posted by: jonny16 at March 27, 2007 07:12 PM (/wHPX)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Plainclothes No-Knock Raids?

Picture this:

You're a 92-year-old woman. You live in a rough neighborhood--the kind of neighborhood where you feel the need to have bars on all the windows of your home. A gang of men in REGULAR CLOTHES shows up on your front porch and smashes in your front door. What should you do?

Apparently, you're expected to assume they're cops unless you're sure they aren't. Otherwise, you're likely to end up dead.

As always, I'm reserving final judgment until all the facts are in, but it looks pretty bad so far.

It's a damn shame, really, that the radical lefties have done such a great chicken little job on the government with their constant cries of "POLICE STATE!!! POLICE STATE!!!" Like the word "RACIST" and "BIGOT," people's ears have just become deadened to the sound of those words.

Obviously, we DON'T live in a police state--as evidenced, for example, by the fact that lefties are allowed to fly the flags of our enemies in massive rallies, the fact that government critics can publish blatant lies without consequences and the fact that government employees can leak national security secrets with impunity. If we're living in a police state, it's the LAZIEST damn police state in the HISTORY of police states.

At the same time, at least some of our law-enforcement agencies have acquired some very bad habits as of late--including the overbroad and sloppy use of no-knock warrants.

Posted by: Ragnar at 11:13 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 240 words, total size 2 kb.

1 The police relied on a CI (complete idiot) who told them that's the house where a drug dealer lived. Three of them were wounded in the raid, but are expected to live.

And this is exactly the sort of thing we should expect when we outlaw plants.

We aren't in a police state YET. But that's clearly the direction we're headed. It's just taking a little longer to get rid of the First and Second Amendments than it did the Tenth, Ninth, Eighth, Seventh, Sixth, Fifth and Fourth.

The only way to stop this sort of thing is to admit that Prohibition II, the so-called War on Drugs, is even more of a failure than Prohibition I, and end it.

Posted by: Michael Hampton at November 22, 2006 12:48 PM (FVbj6)

2 Oh, here's some updates from a press conference today.

Posted by: Michael Hampton at November 22, 2006 01:00 PM (FVbj6)

3 Very bad habits of late?? You're kidding right. This incident is just another in a long time of "bad habits" the SWAT team has picked up in the last 10 years. Starting to look like the stromtroopers of the ATF.

TheAgitator.com, has been writing about all the crap these no-knock raids has caused. Inncent, non-violent criminals and such are ending up dead, beacuse some jerk off get's the wrong address. ONE. Not two jerk offs.Oh and I know the whole tried and true phrase of "Cops are overworks and underpaid", it's all lies.

And it all comes back to the so-called War on Drugs. The majority of cops look at us citizens as the enemy. When did this all happen??

Protect and service my ass...

Posted by: RegularRon at November 22, 2006 02:08 PM (qZJTO)

4 This happens all the time. The war on terror creates far more misery
for society than the alternative of some level of decriminalization. We
had an old lady a few years ago who had the cops get the wrong address
and bust in her house in the middle of the night. All she did was sit
up in bed real fast and they gunned her down.

Posted by: Randman at November 22, 2006 02:19 PM (Sal3J)

5 This is a very angry spot I'm in.

I have been angry about ATF abuses, and DEA abuses for a long, long time. I knew kids in school who would come back to class stoned after lunch, but they were otherwise pretty OK. I also knew kids who drove to school in a pickup, with a gun rack, and a rifle. They also were pretty OK.

None of these kids would have deserved to be shot down for whatever little violation they had commited. The rifle and gun rack weren't even an item of conversation years ago. One kid could meet another and hunt after school.

I blame the mommy government for nearly all of these 'glamorous' police raids that go ugly.

Who had the f*cking great idea to put tanks at Waco? I mean really ???

What about times like the one where the authorities drove an armored vehicle through the front of a ranch house? The wife screamed as the wall came crashing in, and the husband ran armed to the rescue, only to be kiled by 'the good guys'. This was suppossedly all about maybe a dozen pot plants, that as I recall, were never actually found.

The stupid part is we are heading for more of this, not less. Bush's government held back the ATF (the natural enemy of most lawful gun owners) and seems to have been laid back about 'prohibition 2' as it has been called. Terrorism is the big problem. We are going to see an increase in police thuggishness as the war comes here.

I figured it was only a matter of time before police, and tanks became common allies. Just remember, you have to beat the man inside. The tank is just a machine.

Excess force by the police is the same. You can't realistically fight the police, even when they are wrong. You can influence the man behind the badge though. Any decent man can't feel good about shooting down someones grandma. Make a noise about that. Let them no in letters to the editor, or e-mails, or any other way you can. "Decent cops don't kill grandma's"

Just like decent cops don't need Main battle Tanks in a standoff. And decent cops don't snipe wmoen holding small children either.

I hope the truth is told in a way that does some good after this tragdey.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at November 22, 2006 03:21 PM (2OHpj)

6 I'd have thought the lesson would have been learned at Waco, guess not.

The BATF has decided to storm many gunsmiths and confiscate their customers arms and his tools, shutting down their buisinesses lately simply to argue about the definition of "manufacturing" or "customizing" in court. this crap has to be dealt with, but who is going to do it? Pelosi?

Guess the cops really would rather harass the law-abiding rather than the dangerous criminals because it's safer for them, and yields more fines, (they got fooled this time).

Posted by: Mark Krauss at November 22, 2006 05:04 PM (7G5pq)

7 Despite a visiting lefturd's efforts to spin it as a "war on terror"
issue, the fact is this sort of domestic terrorism has been perpetrated
by various Gestapo-type agencies of the government against US citizens
for a long time now. Every one of those cops should be dead on that old
lady's front porch, and the story should end there as a warning to
every Nazi cop in the country that we have had enough of their shit.
The war can't come home soon enough.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 22, 2006 05:59 PM (v3I+x)

This story made me ill because that woman did exactly the right thing. Opinions like the ones stated by Mr. Hampton earlier in these comments are the same that bounced through my head when I saw this on the news. Police meed to go back to treating us like citizens and not a gang of potential criminals.

Posted by: AZ at November 22, 2006 10:15 PM (ZuckG)

9 wow.. I always support cops, but this lady did do the right thing. When strangers decided to barge into your house, you have every right to shoot first and ask questions later. What a bad scene.

Posted by: Richard H. at November 22, 2006 10:41 PM (/xUS1)

10 In relation to this post; does anyone here doubt that when the jihad
comes home, the cops will be taking away far more loyal citizens than
muslims, you know, just to keep prove we aren't islamophobic? The
government is no less our enemy than the muslims are, because they're
still not securing the border or deporting the scum.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 23, 2006 01:45 PM (v3I+x)

11 "the cops will be taking away far more loyal citizens than muslims"

That's kinda what I was getting at further down my typically epic posting. Blue States more, red states less, but more or less correct.

I think after California goes completely to hell, there will be some recovery in other ares. Rural police won't want those kind of confrontations, and populous liberal areas woill be war zones distracting the larger Federal resources.

It will be good to have some idea on how you might stop a tank though, just in case.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at November 24, 2006 06:54 PM (2OHpj)

12 http://www.stazzz.net/shemales.php shemales pictures

Posted by: shemales pictures at November 27, 2006 07:27 PM (Oa39L)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

November 20, 2006

Iran Building 60,000 Centrifuges

This is a step BACK from the previous reports that they were building 100,000 centrifuges. So that's good news. Sorta. I guess.

But have no fear, folks--I've no doubt Hans Bricksh (or his current incarnation) will be sending a sternly worded letter to Mahmoud any day now.

Posted by: Ragnar at 09:22 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 51 words, total size 1 kb.

HotAir Goes to the Movies

Fahrenheit 12/7?

Posted by: Ragnar at 08:21 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 7 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Of course it WAS the right wing of American politics that were most against "FDRs" war prior to 12/7 a not so minor point that is now often conveniently forgotten

Posted by: john ryan at November 20, 2006 09:16 AM (TcoRJ)

2 It's all about the Midlle East in the news today. However,
Iraq is a diversion. As the army attacks Iraq, the US gov't erodes rights at home by suspending habeas corpus, stealing private lands, banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon, rigging elections, conducting warrantless wiretaps and starting 2 illegal wars based on lies. Soon, another US false-flag operation will occur (sinking of an Aircraft Carrier) and the US will invade Iran, (on behalf of Israel).
Final link (before Google Books bends to gov't demands and censors the title):
http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0

Posted by: John D at November 20, 2006 09:50 AM (wCFzG)

3 I saw the preview earlier, this is a film I have to get! I wonder if I can arrange a screening of it? Hmmm

Oh and as far as 'false flags' go, that is crap. First of all, who needs to make an excuse to attack our sworn enemies, who act against us and our interests? If you need an excuse to stand up against Saddam, or the Taliban, or Ayatollaland, I am so sorry for you.

If on the other hand, you are propagandizing against our nation with sinister intent, you have joined the enemy. If so, I am so sorry for your parents. So sorry for your children.

FDR had to do a lot more radical things during his war, than we have let GWB do, so quit screwing around John D. With the presence of an Islamofascist fifth column on our own soil, we need to be more watchful, not less.

I had family living near where one of those Islmaoterrorist whose name I can't remember, was trying to set up a terror training camp.

You want my gut reaction to your kind of stupid nonsense? Your part of that fifth column, and you create a situation where bastards like the one I was talking about can set up their little horror cells, and not get caught!

If some jerk-jahadist ever hurts my family because idiots like you protect them from surveilance, I'd count you, and people like you guilty! As guilty as the terrorists! I am editing myself ...

Let me put it another way ...
Your either with us, or against us!

Don't make the wrong choice! Just don't!

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at November 20, 2006 10:27 PM (2OHpj)

4 If AL GORE want to stop all this GLOBAL WARMING POPPYCOCK i suggest he keep his piehole shut becuase thats the biggist source of HOT AIR

Posted by: sandpiper at November 21, 2006 04:10 PM (XGDTE)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

November 19, 2006

"Asshat?"

Apparently, you heard it here, first.

Posted by: Ragnar at 11:18 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 7 words, total size 1 kb.

A Rabbi's Open Letter to the World

Posted by: Ragnar at 07:31 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 7 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Wow. The Jawa's have jumped the shark. Even the Israeli government disavowed Kahane and outlawed his political party as racist. This is the man who inspired the Hebron massacre which led to Hamas shifting tactics toward suicide bombings.

Posting this really helps his cause.

Posted by: Professor Chaos at November 19, 2006 09:36 PM (DUMOD)

2 I agree with a lot of what is said in the video, but Chaos is right about the source.

Posted by: Ranba Ral at November 19, 2006 11:47 PM (VvXII)

3 Ragnar according to the CNN exit polling of a total of 13000 people 87% of the Jewish vote went to the Democrats.

Posted by: John Ryan at November 20, 2006 12:04 AM (TcoRJ)

4 My critique of the video is here:
http://yoelnatanbooks.blogspot.com/2006/11/critique-of-rabbi-meir-kahanes-open.html

Posted by: Mark James at November 20, 2006 12:30 AM (qxECM)

5 Critique of Rabbi Meir Kahane's "Open Letter to the World" is at the link below (click on my name).

Posted by: Mark James at November 20, 2006 12:33 AM (qxECM)

6 CNN exit polling. Ha, ha, ha. Only a real dipshit would believe that. Jane Fonda's legacy. Idiots like John Ryan. Wonder if his mother ever lets him out of his room?

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 20, 2006 08:29 AM (R6qo5)

7 Hamas is responsible for its own decisions.

A man will always find any reason to kill, whether it exists or not. Like the video says, someone always found a reason to hound the Jews throughout history. The question is, once the world slaughters its scapegoats, who would be next? We will always find a reason to kill.

Posted by: Ernie Oporto at November 20, 2006 09:20 AM (/lpvu)

8 which led to Hamas shifting tactics toward suicide bombings.

Suicide bombing, like everything else, is the jooos fault, of course!

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 20, 2006 09:22 AM (yJKSD)

9 CNN exit polling.

LOL. Everybody knows Libs answer answer exit polling more than conservatives do (we still believe our vote is secret and private).

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 20, 2006 09:24 AM (yJKSD)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

What the Hell Happened at SNL?

I thought the time was long since passed when I might have a reason to use the phrase "Saturday Night Live" and the word "balls" in the same sentence, but I think I just did.

If this "humor"-type stuff keeps up, I just might have to start watching that show again...

Posted by: Ragnar at 04:40 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 57 words, total size 1 kb.

November 04, 2006

A Veteran on Saddam's Iraq

I'm reproducing this note by commenter "Jason" to the comments section of the "CRAZY" video. I thought his comments deserved to be repeated:

It will be 7 years for me in January. I'm a detailed recruiter with 13 months until I get back to the real Army. I'm a two-time combat veteran with deployments to Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq. I am pro-Iraq and Afghanistan. We need to be there. I was originally against the Iraq War. I was in Afghanistan when OIF kicked off and I thought that we should have secured that country before we invaded another one.
But I was wrong. We couldn't have invaded Iraq soon enough. Saying that Saddam was a bad guy is one thing, actually witnessing the suffering he caused is another. Talking to people that do not know where their children or loved ones are buried is painful.

Posted by: Ragnar at 11:23 AM | Comments (34) | Add Comment
Post contains 149 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Well, if we need to invade every country who's citizens are being mistreated then we need to get on the stick with North Korea and Iran and Lebanon and Africa and on and on. Point being we are not the world's policeman and we need to take care of our own for a change!

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at November 04, 2006 12:59 PM (Dd86v)

2 Mr. Anti-World police, Larry:

Some problems can be solved diplomatically and some can't. Iraq was one of those problems...

Speaking of Africa... the World's police will have to invade Somalia at some point in the near future. The failure to capture the bad guys back in '93 has led to the entire region being ruled by vicious Islamists including al-Qaeda. Oh yeah, and a whole lot of innocent Christians being slaughtered...

Posted by: newyank at November 04, 2006 01:19 PM (XT7OJ)

3 Larry, every great war in history has begun with brutal tyrants
oppressing their own people first, and thus could have been prevented
by removing those tyrants at the earlies opportunity. Of course, I
don't expect you to be able to wrap your mind, such as it is, around
this concept, but it wouldn't kill you to try.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 04, 2006 01:41 PM (v3I+x)

4 Larry,

Stop crying little girl, and stfu.

Posted by: dick at November 04, 2006 02:39 PM (XlQVK)

5 The US occupation is responsible for between 450,000 and
650,000 deaths of innocent Iraqis so far, outpacing Saddam, assuming his fiercest critics are correct.

Easy to understand if you take note of the seemingly insoluble crime rate of our own major cities.

Posted by: Ken Hoop at November 04, 2006 03:39 PM (EPkr9)

6 So we invaded Iraq to free it's people from a tyrant?

Somehow, that doesn't quite sound right.

I thought we attacked Iraq, because Iraq was an imminent threat to the US.

Correct me, if I'm wrong, but didn't the "free them from the tyrant" excuse for going in, surface, after we didn't find any WMDs?

So when are we going to invade all the other countries, whose leaders are murdering their own people?

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 04, 2006 03:46 PM (fMHQi)

7 ajacksonian -

A couple of points -

1. Iraq did not bring a fight to our shores.

Osama Been Forgotten brought the fight to our shores and was being protected by the Taliban, in Afghanistan.

2. Americans have fought and died, fighting for our country. I don't remember a time when we unilaterally decided to invade and occupy a country, because it's leaders were enslaving and murdering their own people.

Bush's daddy did the right thing by running Saddam's army out of Kuwait, during the Gulf war.

But that was a case of one country invading another.

The current Bush's foreign policy has been all over the map.

When can a country, unilaterally, decide to invade a sovereign nation?

When they are developing WMDs, whether they are threatening their neighbors with them, or not?

When they are torturing and murdering their own people?

When they threaten to cut off their oil supplies to us?

If it was such a good idea to invade Iraq in 2003, why wasn't it a good idea for Bush's daddy to invade and occupy Iraq during the first Gulf war.

There was sure a lot more justification, for going in there then, than there was in 2003, if you use the current justifications.

He really did have WMDs and was torturing and killing his own people, then.

Was Bush's dad a wimp, because he didn't finish the job, that his son is now "finishing"?

Or maybe Bush's daddy was a better student of history and did his homework so he wouldn't get us stuck in Iraq.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 04, 2006 04:13 PM (fMHQi)

8 Ken,

You're an idiot.

Posted by: dick at November 04, 2006 04:35 PM (XlQVK)

9 Why we fight in Iraq: watch and listen the testimonies of those who survived from Democratiya.

What is the cost of liberty?

The moment you put a cost on it in lives or money, then You are available to the highest bidder.

And then to use the death of those fighting to BE free and to REMAIN free as a reason to desert them, that is beyond the pale. Unless you actively adore tyrants and madmen and warlords and barbarians and the return to Empire. Put a price on those that we help to be and remain free, our friends and allies, and you do put a final valuation what that help is *worth* and, what this Nation is worth.

When is the right time to fight the butchers bringing back a past we had thought left behind? When do you STOP running from the butchers of this world? The bloody bill is in their hands and it has us and everyone who stands for freedom, liberty and justice on it. When do we start *paying* that bill to put an end to them. The few lost today and everyday is a small price compared to Nations falling and an Empire rising. Unless that is what you actively seek... then, indeed, you are enemy to freedom and liberty.

Is liberty without value or priceless beyond cost in blood and money and lives?

Listen and watch those who have seen the butcher's work and tell me it is NOT worth fighting against that and WORSE.

We did not start this fight, that was brought to Our Shores.

But we sure, as hell, will END IT.

Or die trying.

Or be without any worth to anyone anywhere, even ourselves.

Free or slave? The butcher is coming for us, so choose quickly.

Posted by: ajacksonian at November 04, 2006 04:37 PM (VLjJI)

10 Wow PuddleDick! Your a real bright one.

"
I thought we attacked Iraq, because Iraq was an imminent threat to the US.

Correct me, if I'm wrong"

There were many reasons listed for going in the Iraq War Resolution but I know reading all of them would wear out your lips.

"didn't the "free them from the tyrant" excuse for going in, surface, after we didn't find any WMDs?"

No...there are two clauses in the resolution that state that we are
helping the people become free from Saddam but you prefer to display
your vast ignorance.

"
So when are we going to invade all the other countries, whose leaders are murdering their own people?"

The legislation listed a myriad of reasons but your obviously too
fucking dumb to understand a complex and multi faceted explanation.

"I don't remember a time when we unilaterally decided to invade and
occupy a country, because it's leaders were enslaving and murdering
their own people."

Uhhhh...try Clinton in the Balkans. He only got UN authorization AFTER we went there.

"
When can a country, unilaterally, decide to invade a sovereign nation?"

The realist foreign policy answer is when they have the power to do so
but the Clinton Doctrine, from the idealist angle, states we can do the
same thing. Look it up.

"If it was such a good idea to invade Iraq in 2003, why wasn't it a good
idea for Bush's daddy to invade and occupy Iraq during the first Gulf
war."

Uhhhh...we didn't occupy Iraq then. Bush 41 was authorized to only kick
them out of Kuwait and all the bleeding hearts and our Arab allies
screamed bloody murder to stop the war when that was done. You really
should read this new thing they have called books.

Thanks for playing.

Posted by: Randman at November 04, 2006 06:02 PM (Sal3J)

11 Puddlefuckhead is a bigger enemy of America than Osama Bin Laden. He's also a lying phoney.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 04, 2006 08:27 PM (cNF2m)

12 Puddlefuck,
I'm sending you a dollar to go and buy yourself a clue. Try Walmart, I hear they're rolling back prices.
You suck, and you're a liar. That was the sugar coated version.
But the truth is, I almost believe you're a set up.
Nobody can be as boldly stupid, as you and your buttbuddy Last Gasp.
Have a nice day!

Posted by: dick at November 04, 2006 10:25 PM (MeFt3)

13 hm....

most iraq's wish saddam was back. why?? you may ask.

the reason is simple ( like most people here) they knew when to keep their heads down and away from saddams troops!!

Now they can't do that! they are attacked my shea, suni and sheit, as well as western troops!
every where they go they are under threat of attack. no wonder they are starting to want that dictator back....

how many innocents have died since we invaded Iraq? how many died in the 10 years BEFORE then?? do the maths and post here.... if you dare....

Posted by: sol at November 04, 2006 11:45 PM (VFilb)

14 damm crud spelling, so i'm dsylexic so sue me!!!

Posted by: sol at November 04, 2006 11:47 PM (VFilb)

15 Wonder who puddlefuckhead is going to impersonate next? The military thing didn't fly.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 05, 2006 01:15 AM (cNF2m)

16 Hey GreyWooster

Damm i'm to good looking to be PuddleDuck.

Sorry PD it's True!! no offence!! As i'm a Scot i'm born 'n' bread to be hot to all US babes

Posted by: sol at November 05, 2006 01:19 AM (VFilb)

17 Oh yeah, and a whole lot of innocent Christians being slaughtered...

Posted by: newyank at November 04, 2006 01:19 PM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

The more the better. I've known maybe 3 Christians in my life who even came close to being really Christian. The rest, like most freepers, hid behind Christianity for political and monetary gain. Hypocritical posers.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 05, 2006 01:43 AM (eNwl1)

18 10 Wow PuddleDick! Your a real bright one.

Posted by: Randman at November 04, 2006 06:02 PM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

You're (note that "you're" is a contraction of "you are" and thus has an apostrophe and an 'e' on the end) not too bright yourself. Thanks for playing.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 05, 2006 01:45 AM (eNwl1)

19 11 Puddlefuckhead is a bigger enemy of America than Osama Bin Laden. He's also a lying phoney.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 04, 2006 08:27 PM

Can win a fight with facts and thus resort to name-calling. Way to be a five year old. We're all so very proud that you claim to be an American.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 05, 2006 01:46 AM (eNwl1)

20 15 Wonder who puddlefuckhead is going to impersonate next? The military thing didn't fly.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 05, 2006 01:15 AM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

I take it that you're (note the contraction again) a decorated war veteran?

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 05, 2006 01:48 AM (eNwl1)

21 any american who blindly follows the president is a fool...
"who is the more foolish? the bind man or those who follow?"

Posted by: sol at November 05, 2006 01:51 AM (VFilb)

22 bind man? Now you're talking about bondage. You're going to get the freepers all excited and the next thing you know they'll all be calling male escort services and bring the communication to a screeching halt due to overloaded lines. Way to go sol.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 05, 2006 01:53 AM (eNwl1)

23 sorry Caffeman!! forgot i was in the presence of those that stand by mistress choking Repugs....... it will never happen this side of an election again....

Posted by: sol at November 05, 2006 01:56 AM (VFilb)

24 No offense taken, sol -

At my age, the looks are the second thing to go.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 05, 2006 07:41 AM (fMHQi)

25 The leftists here are throwing a lot of phony, anti-American figures around. Same old, same old. Facts are anathema to the left. So is integrity.

Hussein is gone, and he'll soon pay for his crimes. I know that makes you moonbats sad, but decent human beings are glad. We're in charge, while you juveniles carp from the sidelines. Get used to it.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 05, 2006 08:57 AM (bLPT+)

26 "You're (note that "you're" is a contraction of "you are" and thus has
an apostrophe and an 'e' on the end) not too bright yourself. Thanks
for playing."

A language Nazi on a blog. How quait. Go back to fucking your sister seeing as you have no content to add.

Posted by: Randman at November 05, 2006 08:59 AM (Sal3J)

27 No puddleduck, I think freeing the Iraqis of a tyrant was excuse #3.
I think #2 was links to Al Qaeda attacks on us. That one had over 35% believing Saddam had something to do with 9/11.
They keep falling back on other excuses (lies). Its hard to keep up anymore.
Anyone know what the current one is?

Posted by: JB3 at November 05, 2006 09:00 AM (ajA3Q)

28 Randman -

You really do tow the party line, don't you.

What did Colin Powell say to the UN and the rest of the world, including the American people, in an attempt to convince them to pass a resolution, authorizing force against Iraq?

"After asserting that Iraq still maintained a banned weapons program and had not complied with inspectors as required, Powell noted: "Iraq has now placed itself in danger of the serious consequences called for in U.N. Resolution 1441. And this body places itself in danger of irrelevance if it allows Iraq to continue to defy its will without responding effectively and immediately."

Powell's second argument concerned the risk Saddam Hussein's government posed to the United States and its allies. Alleging that Iraq's "weapons can be connected to terrorist organizations that have no compunction about using such devices against innocent people around the world," Powell asserted that Al-Qaeda "could turn to Iraq for help in acquiring expertise on weapons of mass destruction." This potential has put the United States in grave danger, he suggested. "Given Saddam Hussein's history of aggression, given what we know of his grandiose plans, given what we know of his terrorist associations, and given his determination to exact revenge on those who oppose him, should we take the risk that he will not some day use these weapons at a time and the place and in the manner of his choosing at a time when the world is in a much weaker position to respond?" he asked.

INTERNATIONAL LAW ON THE USE OF FORCE
Powell's missionâ€”like that of his colleagues over the past monthsâ€”was to fit the Bush administration's case against Saddam Hussein into the U.N. structures governing the use of force as laid out in the U.N. Charter. Whether the United States chooses to continue to pursue this path or not has serious implications for the future of international law and the United Nations.

The international legal rules governing the use of force take as their starting point Article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter, which prohibits any nation from using force against another. The charter allows for only two exceptions to this rule: when force is required in self-defense (Article 51) or when the Security Council authorizes the use of force to protect international peace and security (Chapter VII)."

http://www.worldpress.org/specials/iraq/

Sounds pretty clear to me, what Bush's "justifications" were.

I didn't hear anything about Saddam being a bad man as part of the justification into going into Iraq. If it was in there, it was way down on the list.

And then Bush turned around and violated international law, by attacking Iraq, after failing to prove his case to the UN.

And as far as Bush's daddy is concerned, if he had really felt that removing Saddam from power, at that time, was the right thing to do, he would have done it, regardless of whether congress or the UN approved, since as commander-in-chief it is his duty to protect the citizens of the United States.

What we now know is that the WMDs were destroyed, but once exposed that they were destroyed, the WMDs no longer were a deterent to keep Iran from getting involved in Iraq.

Just one of the many consequences in our "all hat, no cattle" president's bad judgment to attack Iraq.

I can see Bush's daddy trying to talk his son out of going in there.

"Son, if you break it, you've bought it. If you really have your mind set on taking down Saddam, learn the lessons of history, even if you've never been very smart, do your homework or you will get us stuck in Iraq".

I believe that Bush's daddy took his presidential duties, way more seriously, than his moron son.

And, by putting Colin Powell in a position of having to mislead the world, on Iraq's threat to the world, the Bush administration succeeded in destroying another war hero.

But he won't be remembered as the war hero, that he is.

He will be remembered as the guy that Bush sent to the UN to lie for him.

Here is what Powell said, in 2005, about his speech to the UN -

Powell calls pre-Iraq U.N. speech a 'blot' on his record
WASHINGTON (AP) â€” Former Secretary of State Colin Powell said Thursday his prewar speech to the United Nations accusing Iraq of harboring weapons of mass destruction was a "blot" on his record.
Ex-Secretary of State Colin Powell said he was a "reluctant warrior" even when illustrating Iraq's threat to the U.N.
By Mario Tama,
"I'm the one who presented it to the world, and (it) will always be a part of my record. It was painful. It is painful now," Powell said in an interview with Barbara Walters on ABC-News. (Related story: The story of WMDs that weren't)

The presentation by the soldier-diplomat to the world body in February 2003 lent considerable credibility to President Bush's case against Iraq and for going to war to remove President Saddam Hussein.

In the speech, Powell said he had relied on information he received at Central Intelligence Agency briefings. He said Thursday that then-director George Tenet "believed what he was giving to me was accurate."

But, Powell said, "the intelligence system did not work well."

"There were some people in the intelligence community who knew at the time that some of those sources were not good, and shouldn't be relied upon, and they didn't speak up," Powell said.

"That devastated me," he said.

Powell in the TV interview also disputed the Bush administration's linking of Saddam's regime with terrorists.

He said he had never seen a connection between Baghdad and the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington in 2001. "I can't think otherwise, because I'd never seen evidence to suggest there was one," he said.

Still, Powell said that while he has always been a "reluctant warrior" he supported Bush on going to war the month after his U.N. speech. "When the president decided that it was not tolerable for this regime to remain in violation of all those U.N. resolutions I am right there with him with the use of force," Powell said.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-09-08-powell-iraq_x.htm

And, yet, Powell still maintained his loyalty to his commander-in-chief, like the good soldier he is, even though he was unconvinced about the justification to invade Iraq.

It simply amazes me that any of you morons still support Bush, after all he has done to defame our war heros.

And you call me a liar and a "traitor"?

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 05, 2006 09:20 AM (fMHQi)

29 Yep, CP -

They really need for someone to do some critical analysis of their bullshit, before they put it out for the world to see their stupidity.

But the good news is that I will probably get another "Bushisms" desk calendar, for Christmas, since there are way more "Bushisms" than can fill only one 365 day calendar.

What is that one Bush said "the terrorists are doing their best to destroy our freedoms, and so am I".

Either he really fucked up the line, or he knew he was telling the truth, but it just slipped out.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 05, 2006 09:32 AM (fMHQi)

30 "A language Nazi on a blog. How quait (sic). Go back to fucking your sister seeing as you have no content to add.
Posted by: Randman"

Yet another thoughtful and insightful post.

The quality of their posts and responses, spelling aside, is simply overwelming.

I just hope they don't get stuck in Iraq, as Kerry has suggested they might, since these guys seem to be the guys Kerry was talking about.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 05, 2006 09:38 AM (fMHQi)

31 The current one (41

was that religious unrest was threatening the stability of the region. We couldn't wait to see what would happen. This excuse is brilliant in that it cannot be proven wrong. He's right, we don't know that in 20 years there could have been some sort of dramatic shift in the region endangering the USA's supply of oil. Kudos to Karl. They even put it in small words so most of their base could follow along. So they'll run with that one, their latest fax from the Whitehouse since they seem incapable of reasoning this out all on their own. They also will continue to label 66% of the population as anti-American and traitors for their lack of support of the debacle. Sometimes I'd wish their actually read their own words and say to themselves "Does that actually make any sense". I've seen it a few times here.

Posted by: CP at November 05, 2006 10:02 AM (m9IYH)

32 The leftists here are throwing a lot of phony,
anti-American figures around. Same old, same old. Facts are anathema to
the left. So is integrity.

Hussein is gone, and he'll soon pay
for his crimes. I know that makes you moonbats sad, but decent human
beings are glad. We're in charge, while you juveniles carp from the
sidelines. Get used to it.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 05, 2006 08:57 AM

Um yea, some decent human beings who are Persian Gulf I vets are happy and are going, well DUH..

But why didn't HW, finish the job back in 1991, when
I lost 6 friends in the scud attack in Rhiyad? And why did we give him
the chemicals and cause the Highway of Death?

What really confuses me is, the charges are from 14 years ago, yet none
of them were for present day including the years 2001-2006.

Why is that?

Really, as a veteran I want to know why? When the real mission was Osama Bin Laden?

According to your lame ass theories we have to wait another 15 years of
the GOP to actually get the same results for the REAL MISSION that was
not accomplished in Afghanistan and infact given a free trip out
courtesy of Bush and Iraq at Tora Bora.

But then, since we can now pre-emptively attack people for really no
reason at all., I guess that means Bush and Cheney can also hunted when
they leave office and to be tried with US tax payers dollar via the
Saddam way.

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 05, 2006 12:01 PM (kHZm0)

33 woot! to puddleduck.

this place needs a dose of reality once in a while.

Posted by: Dot Calm at November 05, 2006 12:15 PM (hnrcu)

34 Dee PbD:

More leftist canards added to an already steaming pile?

America did not provide Hussein with his WMD, and the "highway of death" canard is over 10 years old now.

"The" real mission is Bin Loser? Do you know what the definite article is supposed to be used to express? Do you realize that all terrorist organizations are on Bush's hit list, not simply Al Qaeda, which has already been devastated?

Tora Bora? Would you like an extra portion of LSD to go along with your BDS?

The laundry list of reasons Bush listed for deposing Hussein only qualify as "no reason at all" to the delusional. Take your meds and stop barking at the moon.

If it weren't for the assigned DNC talking points, you moonbats would have to rely on the jihadis for your dogma, because the jihadis espouse the exact same line as the Democrats.

You cowardly weaklings can cower in your homes, hiding from the jihadis, but the rest of us are going to see that they're dealt with. All you pussies can do is sit back and watch, because if you had the power to stop us, you wouldn't be hiding from the jihadis in the first place.

You need to change your screen name to Dee, Dee Dee! Carlos Mencia has you pegged.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 05, 2006 01:40 PM (bLPT+)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

October 21, 2006

Ignorant Race-Baiting From the Guardian

The Drudge Report, which should know better, links to this pathetically uninformed Guardian story designed to foment racial resentment, and, incidentally, attack a rarity in Hollywood these days - an unabashedly patriotic movie.

Flags of Our Fathers opened yesterday, and the Guardian immediately launched their assault[emphasis added]:

in Flags of Our Fathers, Clint Eastwood's big-budget, Oscar-tipped film of the battle for the Japanese island that opened on Friday in the US. While the film's battle scenes show scores of young soldiers in combat, none of them are African-American. Yet almost 900 African-American troops took part in the battle of Iwo Jima, including Sgt McPhatter.

The Guardian is not a newspaper that likes to let a little fact-checking get in the way of a good rant. If they were, they might have found out that the United States sent 110,000 Marines to invade Iwo Jima. That means that the 900 African Americans who participated represented eight tenths of one percent of the invasion force.

So, if the movie, as the Guardian says, portrayed "scores of young soldiers" (and by the way, they weren't "soldiers", they were Marines, you insipid socialist limey jackasses), and we generously allow "scores" to mean "100," that means that a proportional representation of African Americans would require that eight tenths of a Marine be portrayed as black. Given the ferocity of the battle for Iwo Jima, perhaps that would be appropriate.

What's not appropriate is for a foreign leftist scandal rag, whose editors are so blindingly stupid that they don't even know the difference between a soldier and a Marine, should seek to foment racial tension.

Update: Just for "Joe Public", the commenter from The Netherlands who doesn't see why I refer to the folks at the Guardian as "blindingly stupid," this should explain it. more...

Posted by: Bluto at 05:57 PM | Comments (96) | Add Comment
Post contains 355 words, total size 3 kb.

1 You refer to the editors of the Guardian as 'blindingly stupid'. Little as I might agree with their politics, reflect on this; they're making a shitload of cash plying their trade, whereas you're pecking at their ankles on a blog, for free. The guardian is lefty, no doubt about that - but it's not a 'scandal rag'. You question their use of nomenclature - I invite you to research the definition of 'soldier'... not the US Army terminology, but the actual definition of the word. You'll find that the Marines, god bless 'em, qualify quite nicely.

Posted by: Joe Public at October 21, 2006 07:45 PM (k9ls9)

2 Joe Public from Amsterdam: Paris Hilton is worth more than the combined salaries of all the Guardian's employees. By your logic, that makes her more intelligent than them, as well.

As typical European, you don't understand the significance of the difference between Marines and soldiers, just like the Guardian staff. but you're right about one thing: I shouldn't have insulted scandal rags by comparing them to the Guardian. At least scandal rags don't hire Islamist extremists. You can google "Dilpazier Aslam" if you're curious.

Other than that, did you have a point...besides ankle-biting for free?

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 21, 2006 08:30 PM (vBK4C)

3 Joe Public:
Just because someone is paid doing something, does not legitimize their trade, nor their methods. I am sure you're aware that drug dealers, hookers and burglars all make money, doing their 'job' too.
According to your standard though they must be much more noble than a volunteer worker, because they're making cash.
Logic must escape you a lot.

Posted by: davec at October 21, 2006 08:38 PM (QkWqQ)

4 davec: Joey's writing from the Netherlands. The only occupation on your list that's illegal there is the burglary. At least I think burglary is still illegal there...

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 21, 2006 08:43 PM (vBK4C)

5 Bluto:
Good point, Burglary is probably legal if you can show your Welfare check does not allow you to live your lifestyle

Posted by: davec at October 21, 2006 08:49 PM (QkWqQ)

6 Joe Public,

Kiss my rosy red Marine Ass.
There is a hell of a lot difference between Marines and soldiers.
Ask the Marines on Tarawa.

Posted by: 1sttofight at October 21, 2006 08:49 PM (UxDGU)

7 No, I simply detect a trace of the green-eyed monster, here. I don't agree with the guardian's politics, never have - but their journalists are rigourous. Alright, they have their take on things, they apply the spin, same as any other newspaper - but they're also consummate professionals. And they run a decent cross-word.

I'm unsure where your Paris Hilton analogy fits into the discussion. Were you an amateur vapid blonde whore, you'd have a point - she'd be better at it that you. You're not, though - you're an amateur journo - and they're still better at it than you. This is a not partisan observation; their politics aside, you've not earned the right to call them stupid.

Posted by: Joe Public at October 21, 2006 08:53 PM (k9ls9)

Improbulus Maximus is a former marine and black man who tried out for the movie but was rejected.

Posted by: Anti-Racists at Jawa at October 21, 2006 09:01 PM (HSkSw)

9 Joe Public:
So by your logic if you criticize something, you're jealous of it?
Why are you jealous of the Jawa Report?

Posted by: davec at October 21, 2006 09:02 PM (QkWqQ)

10 As it goes, I like the Jawa Report. I like the fact that it's taking a stand against the increasingly-vocal and unpalalable Islamic right-wing. But this particular post was simply lame.

Posted by: Joe Public at October 21, 2006 09:09 PM (k9ls9)

11 Joe Public:
I don't think this post was lame. You should keep your swishy European ideas to yourself.

Europeans are bent on societal suicide, so why should be give a damn about your European opinions?

Why don't you Euroqueers go back to rolling over on your soft bellies while the Islamists drill you from behind.

Theo Van Gogh was the only European male who had a pair, but the Muslims killed him leaving only sexual deviants and passive perverts to share Amsterdam with the ever-growing Muslim hoard.

Demographically, you Euroqueers are fucked.

Posted by: Sharia is coming to Eurabia at October 21, 2006 09:25 PM (HSkSw)

12 But Joe, you never addressed the central point of the post: that's it's blindingly stupid to ask why an ethnic group that made up less than one percent of the invasion force would necessarily be represented among "scores" of Marines.

The Guardian's "journalists" are nothing like "rigorous", in fact, by the strictest definition of journalism, they're propagandists, pamphleteers.

I would also submit that it's blindingly stupid to support those who are dedicated to tearing your home country's society apart and replacing it with sharia law, and that it's blindingly stupid to hire reporters without even a cursory background check, only to have them exposed as anti-Semites later. It's also blindingly stupid to fail to recognize satire, even when it's labeled with a disclaimer (I have an icon on my home blog pointing to the story of how the blindingly stupid editors of the Guardian did exactly that to one of my posts, naming my blog "most extreme").

And also, Joe, you dodged davec's point. Since you criticized my post, by your logic, that means you're jealous of me. Why?

Joe, you're not very good at making a case. Is it the pot?

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 21, 2006 09:26 PM (vBK4C)

13 Please. you have to be brain dead to not see the anti-American slant in European media, like this article that claims the Administration used Helicopter Gunships to kill starving black people in the wake of Katrina:

"Most Americans barely have the brains to walk on their back legs" - he turned to the desperate scenes being played out in New Orleans: "On the streets you've got some poor, starving soul helping themselves to a packet of food from a ruined, deserted supermarket. And as a result, finding themselves being blown to pieces by a helicopter gunship. With the none-too-bright soldiers urged on by their illiterate political masters, the poor and needy never stood a chance. It's easier and much more fun to shoot someone than make them a cup of tea.
"Especially if they'reblack."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/09/13/do1302.xml

If some Euro paper doesn't want to get called out about race baiting, perhaps they shouldn't paint Americans as slackjawed yokels one cup of coffee away from stringing up the black folk, while reading their Bible and speaking in tongues.

Posted by: davec at October 21, 2006 09:30 PM (QkWqQ)

14 Maybe the pot is why Dutch "men" are so effete. Pot is well-known to shrinks testicles.

Posted by: Sharia is coming to Eurabia at October 21, 2006 09:34 PM (HSkSw)

You're quite correct. I didn't address the central point of the post. Truth is, I've not watched the film, probably won't ever watch the film, and don't really care much about the film. I take my history from more reliable sources.

I don't even particularly care if any of the on-screen actors are black. So far as I can see, a soldier (or Marine, if you prefer) is what he is regardless of skin-tone. The people who were there know who they are, and they should be proud of it - doesn't really matter much who portrays them on the silver screen.

The only reason I bothered to comment at all was your labelling of the Guardian's journos as 'blindingly stupid'. Once again - I do not agree with their political agenda - but they're good journalists. You'll struggle to find any newspaper that doesn't add some element of spin, propaganda - the Guardian folk might (at times) be pathetically-eager to appease those who would destroy our way of life, but they ain't stupid.

Posted by: Joe Public at October 21, 2006 09:40 PM (k9ls9)

16 Europeans with their heads in the sand...

1400 Amsterdam Muslims are Extremists

Son of Theo Van Gogh beaten by Muslims

Muslims overtaking native Dutch in Amsterdam

Posted by: Sharia is coming to Eurabia at October 21, 2006 09:41 PM (HSkSw)

17 davec - the bit you quoted was, in fact, a quote - admittedly a quote from an Englishman (Jeremy Clarkson), but he's widely acknowledged as a nauseating prick.

Much as you'd like to play the martyr, most Brits (can't speak for the rest of the Euros) do not dislike America, or Americans. I'm not sure if you'd noticed, but we've actually been supporting you all the way.

Posted by: Joe Public at October 21, 2006 09:48 PM (k9ls9)

18 As it goes, davec, if you read the rest of the piece, it comes down quite heavily on the side of the republicans... I think your quoting of a quote was perhaps a little disingenuous.

Posted by: Joe Public at October 21, 2006 09:52 PM (k9ls9)

19 Joe: I've backed up my case with examples of the blinding stupidity of the Guardian staff, including the central point - that it's blindingly stupid to complain that the .08% of Marines represented by one ethnic group wasn't portrayed.

In response, you've supplied nothing but your opinion. Are you familiar with the old American simile about opinions?

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 21, 2006 09:54 PM (vBK4C)

20 Oh, shit, did I express an opinion? Sorry about that. I was labouring under the mistaken belief that I was allowed to do that.

You've thus far failed to convince me that they're stupid. Had you picked 'misinformed', or 'naive' as your insult du jour, I'd have happily agreed.

Posted by: Joe Public at October 21, 2006 10:03 PM (k9ls9)

21 But you are allowed to express an opinion, Joe. Do you recall your earlier comment in which you stated that I didn't have the "right" to mine?

Again, I invite you to address the central point of my post. It's not necessary to have seen the movie to understand it.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 21, 2006 10:17 PM (vBK4C)

22 Davec: Being blown apart by a helicopter gunship? ha, ha. They were trying to blow apart the ambulance helicopters. Televisions, watches, tennis shoes and cadillacs are not edible. Some feel exaggeration is not a crime.

What 900 blacks. The Marine corps was not integrated until the Korean war. We haven't won a war since.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 21, 2006 10:46 PM (iPzFO)

23 Technically, Greyrooster is correct that the Corps was not integrated until the Korean War, however, black Marines, known as the "Montford Point Marines," (because they trained at Montford Point, NC, rather than at Parris Island) were recruited starting in 1942.

Greyrooster is ignoring, however, Grenada, Panama, and the first Gulf War in trying to make a racist point.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 21, 2006 11:03 PM (vBK4C)

24 Joe:
Well perhaps you would have a valid point, except:
I am a British person, living in the United States, who has both lived and travelled inside Europe and already know the opinion of Americans from the average joe in Europe.

That aside, the Quote came from a reporter who published it in "The Sun" Newspaper, no? and makes a direct reference to that quote being in the "The Sun" newspaper:

'Flood That Released America's Demons", said the Sun on Saturday. Underneath the arresting headline was a column by Jeremy Clarkson followed by the above quote.

So don't give me it was just a quote- -- it was quoted from an article published in a national newspaper.

Posted by: davec at October 21, 2006 11:08 PM (QkWqQ)

25 Improbulus Maximus is a former marine and black man who tried out for the movie but was rejected.

WTF? Who thought of this stupid shit? I was in the Army, you stupid
lefturd dumbass. Jesus H., lefturds are stupid. I hope Osama gets that
nuke into DC double quick so that we can be free from the Feds in order
to do what we need to do.

And Joe Pubic, if you'll stop being an idiot for a just a tic, you'll
see that black really isn't white, but I guess you're incapable of
that, and so I hope you like the smell of unwashed muslim man-musk,
because you're going to have to get used to it whether you do or not
when they're banging you like the little bitch you seem to be. But
then, I guess lefturds like that sort of thing, eh?

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at October 22, 2006 05:35 AM (v3I+x)

26 Ah, along come Improbulus for his daily contribution of witless indignation. Why do you even bother? I can sum up what passes for your point (every time) right here:

1) all True Patriots wear white sheets and carry burning crosses.

2) If you don't, you're a lefty islamophile, a traitor, and probably gay.

Fortunately, a verbal attack from you is like being flogged with a damp noodle. You just don't gots the intellectual firepower.

Posted by: Joe Public at October 22, 2006 06:48 AM (NhDYO)

Joe â€“ You obviously have never been to war. The difference between a Marine and a soldier is the difference between a Major leaguer and a â€œBushâ€ leaguer But â€œDictionary.comâ€ defines a soldier as ,â€ a person who serves in an army; a person engaged in military service.â€ Marines do not serve in the Army. Never have and never will.

As a former Fifth Marine let me give you a little history of how the Army thinks about soldiers and Marines. Black Jack Pershing faced a turning point in the â€œGreat Warâ€ in early June 1917. The Huns were about to break through at Belleau Wood. They had 5 divisions charging into France (237,197,87,28,10).. Black Jack needed at least 4 Army divisions (12 regiments) to halt the advance. He did not have them. He did have 2 Marine regiments the Fifth (best warriors to walk the earth in the 20^th century) and the Sixth. When we engaged the Krauts we were out numbered 9:1. Three days later we were still out numbered but only 4:1. The Huns knew it was over and retreated. â€œThey ran so fast even the hounds couldnâ€™t catch em.â€ The Krauts did give us a terrible nickname that was the basis of the tattoos many of my buddies got â€“ Dogs from Hell â€“ â€œTeufel Houndenâ€.

Even a 4 star Army General â€œBlack Jackâ€ Pershing knew that one Marine was as good as or better than 12 soldiers. It was true 100 years ago and it is true today!

An oldexJarhead

Fifth Marines Nam 1967+1968

PS I support another Fifth Marine Nam vet Jimmy Webb

Posted by: Rod Stanton at October 22, 2006 07:02 AM (82HAR)

28 Joe is only having a problem with an adjective. And has
dilligently dug a hole deeper with each reotrt. That adjective
being not only "stupid", but "blindingly stupid". I think it fits.

From the American Heritage Dictionary:

Stupid

Slow to learn or understand; obtuse. Tending to make poor decisions or careless mistakes. Marked by a lack of intelligence or care; foolish or careless: a stupid mistake. Dazed, stunned, or stupefied. Pointless; worthless: a stupid job

1, 2 and 5 about sums it up. (3 is questionable as well) One must
also consider what their definition of a good journalist is. One
that just uses two-dollar words to describe a stupid idea giving it a
patina of legitimacy? (There's that stupid
word again) Or one that does their research and gets the facts straight
adhering to the oft repeated mantra that they're "unbiased and
thruthful"?

It was a stupid article by an obtuse journalist who made the poor decision to research his subject carelessly. In other words, it was pointless; worthless.

Posted by: Oyster at October 22, 2006 07:02 AM (YudAC)

29 er ...retort.

Posted by: Oyster at October 22, 2006 07:03 AM (YudAC)

30 My bulleted points didn't work either. I hate this automatic HTML thingy.

Posted by: Oyster at October 22, 2006 07:04 AM (YudAC)

31 davec, I'm not sure I understand your point. The Telegraph piece, in responding to the quote, was nothing short of scathing. As for the initial quote - well, The Sun has about the same intellectual clout as The Beano - it's a prole comic. And Jeremy Clarkson, whilst he does have a column, isn't exactly a 'reporter' - he's a used-car salesman with a sideline in occasionally-amusing, mostly-rubbish polemics.
As I mentioned above, I can't speak for the majority of Europe, but I've not noticed any significant rise in yank-bashing from the Brits. That which there is tends to come from the loonie left, but they'll have a pop at anything that isn't in a burkha.

Posted by: Joe Public at October 22, 2006 07:07 AM (NhDYO)

32 I showed a native American, what else do they want.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at October 22, 2006 08:09 AM (8e/V4)

33 It showed...

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at October 22, 2006 08:14 AM (8e/V4)

34
Get a brain Bluto. Yea. We whipped Grenada alright. A real war. The girl scouts could whip Panama and if we whipped Iraq how come we are still losing troops there everyday? The truth is we knocked the shit out of them from the air and then quit before the job was done. Who was flying those fighter aircraft? The boys from the ghetto? I know who was doing the flying and I know who invented, designed and manufactured the weapons and technology. You are the product of academic bullshit that has predominated our culture for 50 yrs. See the mess its gotten us into? Take a look at our cities. Ostrich symdrome.

Black marines charging the beaches at Iwo Jimo. Tell the truth. What job did they really have. In ten years the four flags raisers on Iwo Jima will be pictured as black. Well, they might leave the Indian.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 22, 2006 08:14 AM (KMjdm)

35 rooster,

blacks were put to cleaning latrines back in the day. When they fought, blacks and asian and hispanics fought as bravely as anybody. Some of the most decorated soldiers in WW2 were blacks and asians. That isn't PC bullcrap (which you know I too despise), it's fact.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at October 22, 2006 08:21 AM (8e/V4)

Number 1: Why are you bringing Hispanics and Asians into the history of black troops? Sounds leftist to me. 26,000 Marines died on Iwo Jima. It's a crime to give credit to those that didn't fight on the front. The truth is the 900 blacks where support troops. Amunition carriers. They were not brought into areas until secured. The Marines on Iwo Jimo were 98% white. Most asians, particularly Japanese fought in Europe and did a good job. Remember you are talking to someone who lost is father over there. I refuse to let cowards change history in order to make another race feel better.

PS. Did you see the people rioting in the bowling alley on the news this morning? Attacking people with bowling balls and que sticks. Ruining someones business. Why color where they? What color were the football players in last weeks brawl? Kicking and stomping on the heads of other players. Who robbed and killed the tourists in New Orlaens last night? Goes on and on and those like Bluto contribute to the problem. Maybe it will go away all by itself. Bullshit!

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 22, 2006 08:42 AM (KMjdm)

37 rooster,

I agree. If blacks, etc., were not part of Iwo Jima, then they shouldn't be painted in retroactively just to meet the race quota. Facts and truth should always prevail over PC bullshit.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at October 22, 2006 08:44 AM (8e/V4)

38 Also Carlos your statement that blacks fought as bravely as any others is bullshit! Black units were sent to Italy. They had the same weapons, training and leadership of other soldiers. They ran at the first sound of gunfire. The Germans laughed so hard you could heard them ten miles away.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 22, 2006 08:48 AM (KMjdm)

39 rooster,

bullshit.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at October 22, 2006 08:53 AM (8e/V4)

40 Bluto - alright, I'll hold up my hands on this one. Two of my friends down at my local are ex-forces - a para and a marine. Both got sniffy when I suggested that marines could be referred to as 'soldiers'.

Back to your original point - I'm not sure that this lack of knowledge in one particular areas makes me 'blindingly stupid'; I didn't know something, I looked into it, and now I know. As a matter of respect, I will never again refer to a Marine as a soldier. In the same vein, I'm not sure it makes the Guardian bloke 'blindingly stupid', either, as he may well simply suffer from the same dearth of information. However, I'll see your 'uninformed', and raise you an 'incompetent'; as a professional journalist, it's his job to take the time and research these things before putting pen to paper.

Posted by: Joe Public at October 22, 2006 09:03 AM (NhDYO)

41 Check your history. When I was young I talked to many soldiers who were there.
What part is bullshit.? Show me.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 22, 2006 09:12 AM (KMjdm)

42 "you inspid socialist limey jackasses"

For this line alone you deserve a standing ovation, Bluto!

Posted by: John at October 22, 2006 09:14 AM (tROri)

43 rooster,

black fighting units were segregated and few in number, so I doubt any of your army buddies ever saw a black soldier on the field unless it was in the mess or cleaning the latrine. So their claims sound like bull.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at October 22, 2006 09:23 AM (8e/V4)

44 "Blindingly" was used as an adverb above.

Posted by: YBP at October 22, 2006 10:07 AM (gVQMS)

45 Joe Public: the aspect of the Guardian article I found most inept was not referring to Marines as soldiers (and I mean no insult to Soldiers, it's just that Iwo Jima was a quintessentially Marine battle). That was just the cherry on the top. The real stupidity of the reporter and editor is in not bothering to find out the truly vast number of Marines in the invasion force, 110,000, and how tiny the number "almost 900" blacks is in comparison.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 22, 2006 10:15 AM (vBK4C)

46 Carlos: When I have time I will look up the black units in Italy that ran off. I believe it was called the buffalo brigade. It is such common knowledge amonst war bluffs I assumed you would know about it. Just thinking if it were'nt true I would already have been attacked by the excuse makers and black huggers. Ha, ha. That should be proof it itself. Heh, heh.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 22, 2006 10:26 AM (KMjdm)

47 "... but the he-bitch hasn't been slapped in a while."

CLASSIC !

Posted by: Dill Doe at October 22, 2006 10:42 AM (HSkSw)

48 Hey Rooster,

There were 6 flag raisers. Ira Hayes was Pima Indian

Mike Strank was a Czech immigrant. Neither man had to join the services because constitutionally they were not citizens of the US. Neither could vote either.

Franklin Sousley, John Bradley, Harlon Block and Rene Gagnon were the other four.

Most blacks were excluded from combat. They held support billets like supply, mess, armorer. In the early days of Iwo, there was not much room on the beach for anone who was not in the fight.

My point here is regardless of what color of skin, everyone fought to win in WW2. Foreign jackasses who assume the privilege to comment on American history should be very careful not to make sloppy errors and uninformed opinionated mistakes. Joe Public I recommend you do go see the movie. But I suggest you read the book first. James Bradley is the author of Flags of our Fathers. His father is John Bradley, one of the flag raisers. This book is a historical reference of the battle. John Bradley was a Navy Corpsman.

One more fact Joe, 3 of the men involved in the flag raising never left the island alive. That is 50% mortality rate. Two of every three who landed was injured to a degree he could not fight. One in three died. There were 22,000 Japanese all dedicated to Japan to their deaths. They were fanatical in their commitment to victory or death. That is exactly the type of enemy we face in radical islam. 27,000 men lost their lives or were injured in the fight for Iwo. Never before or since has this lopsided result happened. Before you can defeat your enemy, you must know him. It is obvious Euros don't know who the enemy is. Nor do they appreciate the enemies dedication and willingness to die for allah.

Posted by: SeeMonk at October 22, 2006 10:52 AM (n4VvM)

49 What is with the Eurofemme spelling of Grey, Greyrooster?

For a self-hating homosexual like yourself, is your racism a defense mechanism for displacing your self-hatred onto others?

Posted by: Dill Doe at October 22, 2006 10:55 AM (HSkSw)

50 DPB,

Is Joe P possibly a writer for the Gaurdian? In one of the comments he referred to "we here" which made me think immediately Joe C was associated with the gaurdian.

Posted by: SeeMonk at October 22, 2006 11:22 AM (n4VvM)

51 Good pick up, SeeMonk.

What is the IP Joe Public is posting from?

Posted by: Dill Doe at October 22, 2006 11:43 AM (HSkSw)

52 It would be a hoot if it turned out a Guardian employee was posting on a blog from work.

A la Reuters...

Posted by: Dill Doe at October 22, 2006 12:19 PM (HSkSw)

53 A RIPE search puts Joe in Oxfordshire.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 22, 2006 01:54 PM (vBK4C)

54 Dill Doe is correctly named. And Dill Doe, I don't associate with your kind. Namely those to fucking stupid to know anything about what they are talking about. Yea. I'm having great fun over here in Europe. Back to the ghetto where you belong.

SeeMonk: I don't need a lecture on the flag raisers. I have a feeling I have known who they were far longer than you. I have also lived long enough to see attempts to rewrite history. What has Mr. Starnk or Ira Hayes have to do with blacks on the beach? Always the same discuss the black situation and people bring up Indians, Mexicans, Chinese, Japanese, etc; They have nothing to with blacks. Always thought is was a liberal thing.

JC: Yea the 92nd was so few in number thats why the Germans never seen them after the battle started. You really need to do some research. Look it up under (withdraw and regroup) that's the title black authors call it 60 yrs later. We called it something different then.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 22, 2006 03:28 PM (iNNhu)

55 Oh! By the way the 92nd was a division. Far from being a few.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 22, 2006 03:36 PM (iNNhu)

56 "Namely those to fucking stupid to know anything" -- Geyrooster

Posted by: Dill Doe at October 22, 2006 03:38 PM (HSkSw)

57 Joe Public: I don't believe you are a member of Guardian or anti-American. The posters and commenters are a bit touchy as you have found out. Just their way of saying we disagree. Don't take it personal and keep commenting. I enjoy hearing from the Brits and others in Europe.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 22, 2006 03:42 PM (iNNhu)

58 Joe Public: Insipid socialist limey jackasses is not what I call the only nation that has stood with us in Iraq. I call you guys damn good friends. I hope the Brits remain so.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 22, 2006 03:45 PM (iNNhu)

59 I take my history from more reliable sources.

Like the Grauniad?

Posted by: Rob Crawford at October 22, 2006 04:11 PM (bH9q3)

60 as a professional journalist, it's his job to take the time and research these things before putting pen to paper.

Which is why it's "blindingly stupid" that the idiot got it wrong.

Posted by: Rob Crawford at October 22, 2006 04:14 PM (bH9q3)

61 Greyrooster:
While the political support for the War comes from the Prime Minister, etc there still is competition between our armed forces.
Most of my family are serving in the British armed forces, and said they do not like serving along side the American forces what so ever. My Uncle was saying their (being the British) tactics worked so well in Basra because unlike the Americans the British don't drag women and children out of beds and don't mistreat people during home searches.
The British tactics work, because well Basra is not the Sunni triangle.
They also talk about the dangers being more from American friendly fire, than from the enemy (I guess due to the friendly fire incident in the Gulf war)

I guess there will always be friendly rivalry between both nations armed forces, both believe their tactics and training is the best!

Posted by: davec at October 22, 2006 04:53 PM (QkWqQ)

62 Greyrooster, you stupid old fart, "insipid socialist limey jackasses" refers to the dhimmis at the Guardian, not all the Brits. And, if you weren't an inbred idiot, you would have realized that the post is about the Guardian trying to stir up racial resentment over nothing. Pinhead.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 22, 2006 05:11 PM (vBK4C)

63 I would like to see how Joe Public would portray in film, the reality of allied liberation of North Africa. Some of us who read remember the French fired upon allied forces! I don't mean just a few of them either.

Usually, because most films about the war are trying to focus on a big picture of events, little details like that get neglected.

When Islamists have forced the second great capitulation of Europe, I suppose we will have to come over and try to save whatever is left of your culture from slow suffocating death. I suppose some of you Europeans will shoot at us again. I don't mean just a few of you either.

Why not balance things out while you still have a diverse culture? You can thank the Black Americans who helped liberate Europe with General Patton. You guys could make a much deserved tribute film to those fine Black patriots, many of whom died so you could give your land away to radical Islam 60 years later.

Hey, its OK. I do agree that some people get under represented on important issues. For one example, I would really like to see more Europeans "on screen" in the fight against the global Jihad. I couldn't care less what color you are either.
USA all the way.

Posted by: Michael Weaver at October 22, 2006 05:52 PM (2OHpj)

64 Sorry if I got rude ... but I get so freakin tired of having the Neville Chamberlain fan club tell us how screwed up we are.

Posted by: Michael Weaver at October 22, 2006 06:00 PM (2OHpj)

65 To Joe Public.
I'll concede they may not be stupid at the Guardian, but they have picked their side. I believe that actually makes them worse than stupid.

Again, I am sorry if I was rude, but a lot of the time it feels like the Europeans, including the beloved UK, should just be shooting at us. It would be easier to understand, and respond to.

I really think its going to come down to the US and (hopefully) the UK, having to go in and liberate the Europeans again.

All I wanted to do was read lots of books, watch reruns of Star Trek, and play video games.

Now I have family living only a short way from a place where a Jihadist terror training camp was located. In the US! That to me kind of takes the fun out of the weekend I wanted to have.

The Guardian picks petty and incidental sins stumblingly committed by this or that "American", and uses them to deligitimize who and what we really are about. All the time crying for the slightest insult made to people who would stone your daughter to death, for holding her boyfriends hand in public.

You know what I think finally makes the case for the Guardian being "blindingly stupid". They somehow think, they have picked the 'right' side. There is the stupidity. I'm done ...

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at October 22, 2006 06:26 PM (2OHpj)

66 Davec: I won't argue that point. All I can say is that my son Scott is a Marine Corps Captain and Company Commander in Iraq as I type this. His company doesn't act that way. All he wants to do is kill anyone who tries to kill him or the 220 men under him. He doesn't look beyond that. He must do as he is told and there is always above him that has a political type above him. After 8 years in the Marine Corps with a promising future he is now considering resigning his commission.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 22, 2006 06:31 PM (/r/kS)

67 Bluto: When I refer to blacks as insiped socialist blackie jackasses it only refers to those that follow Al Sharpton. The rest shouldn't take offense. You low bred friggin Idiot.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 22, 2006 06:42 PM (/r/kS)

68 Joe Public
I see you can get mad too. Thats good. I said the Allies got fired upon. I neglected to mention Monty, and Churchill. I was talking about black people, and they werent black ... Sorry I hurt your feelings. But no ... I am not ill informed. Or a 'redneck', though I reserve the right to be condescending. It flows both ways.

I hope you noticed that that I mentioned in my post just prior, the "beloved UK". I meant that. I never, never discount the losses suffered by the Brits. I also tend to think of them as somehow better, braver, generally superior, and distinct from "Europe"

It freaks me out that you would lower your flag for anyone. I do not mean that as a slam. But what about the flap with the English Flag? the cross of St George?

You think I am trying to slight the UK, but I am desperate to see you rise! You know, get mad at me. Get mad at nything! Just get mad enough to survive. My family history runs many courses out of the British Isles. I am as proud of England, as I am of the USA's willingness to resist her. If that seems a contradiction, hey, its just how it is.

Like I also said, sorry if I sound rude.

That having been said, FUCK YOU TOO, my beloved UK kinsman, and no hard feelings

Posted by: Michael Weaver at October 22, 2006 06:44 PM (2OHpj)

69 Let me save you the effort of attemping to trace my IP. I live in Somerset, which is towards the south-west of England. I've no idea where my pipeline is based, but I doubt it's in Oxfordshire - most likely, london, somewhere. I'm an IT nerd, not a journalist - and I don't even read the Guardian (unless I happen to find a copy lying about), let alone write for it. You might have taken the hint when I said, quite plainly, that I do not support their political agenda in any respect. Sorry to disappoint you.

Rob Crawford - you're late to the party, but I imagine that's probably your whole life story. You take a quote from a comment in which I 'fessed up to being wrong, in order to show that I was wrong... What, exactly, were you attempting to prove?

Rooster - thanks for that. Nice to know that at least some Americans are not yet so far gone in the 'everyone hates us' mentality to realise that we really don't. I've not yet had to fight for my country, or yours - but if the chips were really down, to the point that they needed more than more bodies than the professional armies could provide, I'd step up for either one.

Posted by: Joe Public at October 22, 2006 06:55 PM (NhDYO)

70 Greyrooster:
Even if he did, there is no room for mistakes in the Sunni triangle, different places, means different tactics, and the violence in Al-Anbar province is much more intensified, and frequent than it is in Basra -- however that might change whenever Iran gives the go ahead to intensify attacks against the coalition in an attempt to swing the election.

Posted by: davec at October 22, 2006 06:56 PM (QkWqQ)

71 Michael Weaver - just fuck right off, you condescending, patronising, ill-informed length of distended rectum. Your brand of retarded arrogance is the main reason why there is a backlash against America at all. You think your boys just popped over and won the day? Nope. They fought very bravely, they took horrendous casualties, won battles, and ultimately, ensured that the war ended the right way - but the Brits had been doing that for years before you decided to chuck your hat into the ring. Do not fucking dismiss us, you redneck piece of shit.

Posted by: Joe Public at October 22, 2006 07:01 PM (NhDYO)

72 to Greyrooster
I am not rewriting history, but sheding some light on a part of it ...

"Black soldiers were generally restricted from combat, but the realities of war would soon blur the lines of race. One major breakthrough came during the Battle of the Bulge, in late 1944, says Ambrose.

General Dwight D. Eisenhower, faced with Hitler's advancing army on the Western Front, temporarily desegregated the army, calling for urgent assistance on the front lines. More than 2,000 black soldiers volunteered to fight. "

Patton also had black tank crews segregated, but under his chain of command. They fought, and deserve praise!

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at October 22, 2006 07:06 PM (2OHpj)

73 Joe Public: There you go. Now you're talking like a real Jawa blogger.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 22, 2006 07:07 PM (/r/kS)

74 Fine black Americans who liberated Europe with General Patton. Here we go rewriting history again.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 22, 2006 07:11 PM (/r/kS)

75 Eh. I take that a bit personally. I spend a lot of time with an old solider named Pat - all curled up and useless now, which is why I have to help him with meals and cleaning. But I've seen the photos of him back in the day, I've listened to what he has to say on the matter.... And if anyone even starts to disrespect him, or those he fought with, I'll kick their sorry asses until they're wearing their sphincter as lipstick.

Posted by: Joe Public at October 22, 2006 07:12 PM (NhDYO)

76 What are you talking about and to who.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 22, 2006 07:42 PM (/r/kS)

77 Still rambling on about Michael Weaver denigrating the efforts of the WWII Brit veterans....

Posted by: Joe Public at October 22, 2006 07:47 PM (NhDYO)

78 to Joe Public
I am still smiling about recieving an "F" bomb from you. That sort of thing keeps my hope for the future alive. I am not at all mad at you, and look forward to my great grandchildren being f-bombed by yours. I want the England of my Grandfathers, to be the England of my Grandchildren, with all my heart! They can be rude to each other, or not. Yours can come visit Yellowstone Park, and mine can go visit the birthplace of English Common Law. At the end of a century. This century.

On the wall behind me as I type this, I have a miniposter I snatched of the internet and printed maybe a year ago. The Union Jack fills the rectangle, and to the bottom left, holding aloft the English Flag, is Piglet, riding atop Ee-or. From the center, running to the right are the words "Let the Flag (and the pig) Fly Free!". I first heard about the Cross of St George being offensive to Muslims back when I saved this poster, and I was shocked to read that in some places your leaders had taken the Flag down.

I have kept the mini-poster where I will see it everyday, because it just kills me to think that the world our (yours and mine) fathers fought to save, would go down without a fight. If your leaders lower your flag for Islam, then who in Europe is left? Who will be mad at our "oversexed, overpaid" Americans if somehow you are defeated? God I would miss you.

If you can get that kind of angry over my percieved injustice, then I trust you are already angry about injustice to your Flag.

I'll go be condescending somewhere else now, but just so you don't feel left out ...

USA all the way! Not without the UK! Cheers!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at October 22, 2006 07:51 PM (2OHpj)

Although, reading upwards, it seems like he's clarified that a little. And I'm glad that we're not always lumped with the lazy-ass Eurotrash.

By the by, are the timestamps getting a bit fucked here? New comments seem to be appearing half way up the page....

Posted by: Joe Public at October 22, 2006 07:54 PM (NhDYO)

80 "Flags Of Our Fathers" was a movie about the men who raised the flag over Iwo Jima and their experiences. None of them were Black. Why the hell should Clint Eastwood include depictions of the eight tenths of one percent of Black men who participated in the battle--mainly as ammo and supply--runners in his movie?

Did "The Guardian" complain because there weren't enough White jazz musicians in Eastwood's "Bird?"

Eurotrash firmly believe in the upside down myth of Blacks being oppressed in America, and no amount of reality will convince them otherwise. Hating America trumps all reason.

The notion that hyper-tolerant Whitey is keeping the Black man down is unequivocally stupid.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at October 23, 2006 05:43 AM (bLPT+)

81 Michael Weaver... No-one in the UK is happy with the way things are going - and public opinion seems to have shifted towards 'no more appeasement'; the BBC, that arch-conservative (small c) network, is tonight screening a documentary questioning whether or not Islam is the enemy of free speech. That's going to have to be a big, resounding 'yes'... I just hope this all gets acted upon.

No hard feelings.

Posted by: Joe Public at October 23, 2006 06:11 AM (NhDYO)

82 Well said Jeff: The problem is we have idiots here in the states that have been conditioned and educated to believe the same baloney. When I ask them to name one instance they never can. My buddies and I spent this mornings coffee get together talking about how we can keep the black man down. Yea Right!

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 23, 2006 08:06 AM (ug+Sg)

83 Hey Rooster, you said there were four of them. I pointed out there were six. Not trying to equate the indian or the Czech to blacks. I also only pointed out the blacks were held out of combat in large numbers and placed in support roles. I did not mean to step on your delicate racial sensablilities again. There were six, and I merely corrected you in saying there were six after you mistakenly mentioned there were four. Only four are clearly visible. I still love you man.

Posted by: SeeMonk at October 23, 2006 10:13 AM (7teJ9)

84 The actual raising or the multitude of staged pictures what we have seen the last 60 yrs. You do no that the picture was staged don't you. Hate to bust anyone's bubble but even my glorious Marine Corps had photographers and newsmen with them. Only difference with today is that they were on our side.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 23, 2006 10:21 AM (4/EZz)

85 A better picture would have been of every Marine who survived in a group photo. Who says the Marines in the picture did any more than the next Marine? They just got the glory.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 23, 2006 10:26 AM (4/EZz)

86 After reading this thread I'm still a little confused as to the difference between a soldier and a marine.....

From what I've read Bubba must have been a soldier because he was black and got his ask kicked and Forest Gump would be the Marine because he was white and a hero ???

Wow

Posted by: rob at October 23, 2006 01:05 PM (QpkBe)

87 The Rosenthal pic of the second raising was not staged. The group photo where they are all standing around was staged. I have that one framed and on my wall here at work. As far as the glory goes, three of the flag raisers were killed before the battle ever ended. No glory for them. Of the remaining 3 only Reney Gagnon ever expected glory or reward. Ira Hayes pretty much drank himself to death of guilt about surviving when others died, and John Bradley never talked about it after the bind tour ended and the war was over. All men said they did nothing noteworthy. They all knew the picture was of the second and reletively unimportant raising. It was the fact that image was released first that made it such a sensation. It is a dramatic picture.And yes US military photogs are very capable of a posed shot. But the Rosenthal image was not posed if you are referring the one that is so famous.

Posted by: SeeMonk at October 23, 2006 01:05 PM (7teJ9)

88 I have it on good authority that a cross dressing lesbian Hispanic
Eskimo was on the beach that fateful day and won the Navy Cross after
beating back, single handedly, a viscous Japanese bayonet charge with
nothing more then a 12 inch dildo and 55 gallon drum of KY jelly and we
have no representation for him/her in the movie. Damn right wing
Hollywood.

Posted by: Randman at October 23, 2006 01:25 PM (Sal3J)

89 Picture of the second raising. That in itself, says in all. Why do you insist on assuming others don't know the history of the event and what happened to the men involved? Ira Hayes drank himself to death because of guilt feelings? Who says? Ira didn't. Makes for a good story and that's what it is. Did the other Marines drink themselves to death because of a feeling of guilt. Perhaps he was just another drunk Indian. You haven't spent much time in Arizona or New Mexico, have you. He's not alone and the rest were not at Iwo Jima. Six guys all holding a flag at once. Let us grow up. As they are said. They did nothing more than any other Marine. The picture was posed. Makes no difference to me. I'm just not that gullible. I posed for a few myself but I'm honest and thought to myself better him than me.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 23, 2006 01:38 PM (6c/Sq)

90 Lesbian Hispanic Eskimo. Sounds like we need a book about her glorious achievement. Then a movie. Then a street named Lesbian Hispanic Eskimo in San Francisco. Then a post humus award ceremony. Then dig up her grave and rebury her in the national cemetary and the dildo society of America can do a fund raising for a monument. All who don't show up must be racists, bigots, and Nazis.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 23, 2006 01:52 PM (6c/Sq)

91 I'd pay a dollar to see it.

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 23, 2006 11:43 PM (Dd86v)

92 Naughty cam here
http://xxxcam-1.best-free-hosting.com/

Posted by: Xcam-1 at December 23, 2006 02:11 AM (DC14a)

93 Neverseen sex webcam
http://xxxcam-1.best-free-hosting.com/

Posted by: Xcam-1 at December 29, 2006 02:16 PM (ASLRs)

94 Nice works, Admins.
http://villasincrete.net/hardcore
http://villasincrete.net/hardcore
w2gh4
http://arachno.name/t/161693

Posted by: hrad at January 19, 2007 07:02 PM (YuVtd)

95 Thanks!
http://villasincrete.net/best_pharmasy
http://villasincrete.net/best_pharmasy
s9h6q
http://arachno.name/t/161706

Posted by: serg at January 24, 2007 06:08 AM (YuVtd)

96 No drugs!!
http://villasincrete.net/travel
http://villasincrete.net/travel
jmsq6
http://arachno.name/t/161693

Posted by: mark at January 27, 2007 09:41 PM (YuVtd)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

October 17, 2006

How Move America Forward Lost My Support (Updated)

Reposted from The Dread Pundit Bluto

Last Saturday, I received an email from Joe Wierzbicki, who works for Move America Forward's ad agency and who wanted me to post about Fox's rejection of their recent anti-Clinton ad. While checking it out, I came across this appallingly ignorant spot they had produced about airport security. The spot defames TSA uniformed personnel, possibly to the point of libel.

I know more than a little bit about airport security. Following 9/11, being over the (arbitrary) age limit for military service, I was able to make a contribution wearing the uniform of my country in the brand new Transportation Security Administration. The salary was significantly less than what I had made in advertising, and the working conditions were not quite on a par with a 9 to 5 creative career (it would eventually cost me one of my knees as well, TSA has one of the highest injury rates in the Federal service). more...

Posted by: Bluto at 10:05 AM | Comments (35) | Add Comment
Post contains 478 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Rusty, the ad shows screeners turning their backs while jihadis slip past, and failing to detect a rocket launcher in an x-ray machine. In reality, everyone is screened, and most screeners can look at an x-ray image of a laptop and tell you what brand it is.

Absurdity is one thing, gratuitously insulting people is another.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 10:32 AM (vBK4C)

2 SeeMonk, most of what I hear against screeners is unconfirmable anecdotal evidence such as yours.

Each "command center" at each airport interprets the policies in their own way. That's why you note inconsistencies. Under pressure from the airlines, TSA now allows small tools and blades. That's why your awl and tape weren't taken.

Did you know that the "genius" is subject to requalification if they miss a test object during their time on the x-ray? And that they can expect to get several such test objects during each half hour shift? How would you like that sort of scrutiny in your own job?

You're absolutely wrong in your assessment of the average screener.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 10:39 AM (vBK4C)

3 BC, your comment shows an, unfortunately widespread, ignorance of security procedures and their purpose.

The gospel of airport security is that EVERY alarm must be resolved. Do you know for a fact that the old lady being searched kept her carryons in sight and that no one tampered with or added a little something extra to them? Of course not, and neither does the screener.

In my experience, the loudest complainers were almost always the condescending and arrogant business travelers who are too important to put up with the same inconveniences that little people do.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 10:43 AM (vBK4C)

4 The Dread Pundit Bluto made his concerns known, but as I explained to him, we will just have to agree to disagree.

This television spot is not an indictment of TSA agents, for they do not set the policies that are in question. The ad is a comdedic spoof - it demonstrates absurdity by being a bit absurd itself.

As I explained to the good Dread Pundit Bluto:

Appreciate your feedback. But I think you've missed the point we are making in the ad. It is not the TSA screeners who set the policies that we are critical of.

Rather I would refer you - as just one of many examples, and I can provide others - of policies by the DOT and Homeland Security to avoid using criteria that is common sense:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Coulter also writes that a few months later, at Mr. Mineta's behest, the Department of Transportation (DOT) filed complaints against United Airlines and American Airlines (who, combined, had lost 8 pilots, 25 flight attendants and 213 passengers on 9/11 - not counting the 19 Arab hijackers). In November 2003, United Airlines settled their case with the DOT for $1.5 million. In March 2004, American Airlines settled their case with the DOT for $1.5 million. The DOT also charged Continental Airlines with discriminating against passengers who appeared to be Arab, Middle Eastern or Muslim. Continental Airlines settled their complaint with the DOT in April of 2004 for $.5 million.

http://www.womenswallstreet.com/columns/column.aspx?aid=578

*I'm very sorry we lost the confidence of Bluto, but I'm not sure what we can do to earn it back, given that we stand behind the spot we produce and we know the message we wish to convey. It is not consistent with how Bluto says he interprets it.

Posted by: Joe Wierzbicki at October 17, 2006 11:24 AM (R8SvA)

5 Isn't another way to look at this that the TSA is being hampered by politically correct regulations? I didn't take the ad as anything but a criticisms of p.c. rules that don't allow ethnic/religious profiling. Not of the TSA.

Posted by: Rusty at October 17, 2006 11:28 AM (JQjhA)

6 TSA screeners are doing as they are told. Nice. They are incossistant across the country. I was allowed to take my toothpaste through Atlanta, but not through White Plains despite the fact there was two additional days use on the tube before passing through WP.

I had an awl in my computer bag (not intentional) and a roll of packing tape with a serrated edge in the same pack as the toothpaste yet they did not have a problem with them. They confiscated my toothpaste. The awl they missed, the tape they held up and put back in my bag.

In fact short of carrying a gun, the only thing they have ever caught on me beside toothpaste was a lighter and that was two years ago.

Where as I am sure you were a great TSA rep Bluto and I believe the dead weight remained post 9-11, the genius operating the typical screening machine and those who frisk are not exactly the cream of the crop when it comes to common sense. That is what the ad is trying to say. My cammo colored back pack is more likely to be hand searched than a typical carry on.

Posted by: SeeMonk at October 17, 2006 11:28 AM (7teJ9)

7 Dammit - comment thing ate my first comment.
While I'm sure mabny TSAers are well-intentioned and dedicated, the org as a whole is a disaster.
We constantly hear of ridiculous searches of 80yrold ladies and infants, while penetration-test show that a determined badguy would have no problem getting through.
As a govt worker myself, I am stung by barbs that seem overbroad but am honest enough to ademit that the complaints are by-and-large justified.
While it might be nice if a spot showed a dedicated ramrod-straight TSA checker being grilled by a moron for not performing enough cavity searches on old white ladies, the spot as is is just fine.

Posted by: BC at October 17, 2006 11:33 AM (/UAJE)

8 Joe: you can gain my confidence back by doing the right thing and pulling this spot, and having the sense to pick your targets more carefully in the future.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 12:54 PM (vBK4C)

9 Hi Beth: One thing to point out. As a 501c3 MAF *cannot* make ads expressing support for or against a particular candidate for office. Do note that the Clinton ad in question features Clinton and Bush - 2 people who are currently not candidates for public office. I hope this explains why the ad was produced the way it was and highlighted the individuals it highlighted.

Posted by: Joe at October 17, 2006 01:40 PM (R8SvA)

10 Telling me that government workers on any job are dedicated and the cream of the crop is hard to swallow. They all must have changed overnite. Bluto took this personal. But the past has proven that to be his nature. Tremenous injury he got. Does it warrant a monthly check?

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 17, 2006 02:25 PM (Igoub)

11 Bluto, you're being way too defensive about this.
Ignorant of security procedures?
Confiscating a GI-Joe doll's teensy plastic rifle, diosallowing military from flying with medals...
Give us all a break. Far too many anecdotal incidents to believe any valid security purpose is being served by this crud.
When my (thouroughly "anglo") boss's two-yr-old gets searched on a Texas to Nevada flight, something has gone severely out-of-whack.
I don't care where the orders/directives are coming from or who is tasked with executing them, the TSA is one of the biggest jokes in the country, and by defending it you harm your credibility.

Posted by: BC at October 17, 2006 02:39 PM (/UAJE)

12 Lightweight arguments of a person who has been offended.

Get over it Bluto, or better yet, go tell your mom.

I've seen thicker skin on pudding.

Posted by: dick at October 17, 2006 03:03 PM (XlQVK)

13 "...too many anecdotal incidents..." - BC, this is an admission that you don't have any real facts to back up your instincts. How many "anecdotal incidents" are there about US troops being rapists and murders? I don't put much store by them, do you?

dick: you're pretty mouthy for a poufter who posts gay porn on his site. Why don't you go ask your boyfriend what he thinks?

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 03:16 PM (vBK4C)

And BC, it was the screeners who complained enough to get the policy on military travelers changed. They were all being flagged by the airlines because of the way the government buys tickets. Screeners filed formal grievances with the TSA ombudsman over having to do secondary screening on them. The policy was changed.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 03:20 PM (vBK4C)

15 You know how Move America Forward lost me? dozens of e-mails each week asking for money. I gave a couple of times and then I was harassed ungodly. I like to give when I feel I can and I don't like to be harassed and believe me I was harassed. I always add conservative places I like to donate to onto my links and when I can I send more, however one week I actually rec'd 24 e-mails. I can honestly say when I donated to Rightroots I only got a thank you e-mail so I donated again and that is the way it should be. I hope to never get another e-mail from Melanie Morgan.

Posted by: Rightmom at October 17, 2006 03:24 PM (0lpqx)

16 DPB,

I was in possession of an all access badge for the Atlanta airport. I worked there for almost six months. Perhaps things were different where you worked. The folks in Atlanta were taken right off of the unemployment line.

Additionally, there is as much more danger to most flights from FOD on the flightline as there is from terorists trying to get on to a plane with a weapon. I was shocked to see all of the trash and debris that was allowed to drift. Employees are always wandering about as well with tools and stuff that could be picked up by a passenger after they had passed through security.

Posted by: SeeMonk at October 17, 2006 03:27 PM (7teJ9)

17 Seemonk: You'd have to back up the claim about the unemployment line, but I do know that so many original hire screeners have left due to injury and burnout that they're trying to replace them with part-timers. That's what happens when your management culture is based on abusing your uniformed people.

Keep in mind that every federalized airport represents a three-way civil war between TSA suits, the "stakeholders" (airlines and vendors) and the FAA. A couple of the things that upset me the most were the easy availability of all-access passes for maintenance personnel and the fact that TSA management had no contingency plans in place for emergencies.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 03:42 PM (vBK4C)

18 How does a screener get injured? Half of them at San Francisco Airport are little Phillipino women who barely speak English and go berserk if you tell a joke.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 17, 2006 04:16 PM (Igoub)

19 Maybe this will help, Greyrooster:

TSA screeners have the highest injury rate of all federal employees:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4441227/

This article is from 2004, maybe things have improved since then, but I doubt it.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 04:29 PM (vBK4C)

20 Farmers have the most dangerous job of almost any worker. If the PTO don't get you the bushhog will. Heard story of one guy cuaght in a baler that used it to chop off his arm rather than go inside. Just last month a man's wife fell into a bushhog while her husband drove the tractor. They had been doing this 30 years right up until.......

Posted by: Howie at October 17, 2006 04:35 PM (D3+20)

21 How do TSA screeners get injured? Other than falling down on the job, that is...

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at October 17, 2006 07:31 PM (v3I+x)

22 This message is in response to RightMom's email. I just sent this to her and am posting it here as well:

Saw your email complaining about emails from Move America Forward. So I am responding there but also emailing this to you to make sure you received a response from someone associated with Move America Forward.

Sorry you felt so put off about the volume of emails you received. To explain why they do what they do, it's simple. MAF has become the largest grassroots pro-troop organization in the country and accomplished an amazing list of successes. And the reason is that there is so very little fat in the organization. Melanie Morgan and Howard Kaloogian never received one cent in compensation.

There are no monthly payments to the PR firm (who I work for). There's a reason you are getting this email from me at 6:30 PM and not between 9:00AM - 5:00 PM and a reason my associates and I worked this weekend. And last weekend. And the weekend before. We believe in this cause, and we know to advance the ball we have to do the most we can with the resources we have.

There is 1 full time staffer and 2 part time staffers working for Move America Forward. I think between all three of them they are paid less than $55,000 per year.

But, the organization is also not a special interest group - there are no big donors or corporations who have a secret agenda and who use the group as a front (like so many other organizations). Instead the organization relies on the contributions of thousands upon thousands of small donors.

And here's just a few things they've done with it. If I were you, I would feel proud that you invested in something that helped to make all of this possible:

* Sent over 16 tons of coffee, cookie, gatorade, beef jerky to the troops.

* Organized and led the "You Don't Speak for Me, Cindy" tour at a time when the pro-troop movement was paralyzed about taking action to present an alternative voice to the wild-eyed rantings of Ms. Sheehan.

* Organized and led the "Voices of Soldiers" Truth Tour to Iraq where hundreds of our military men and women were able to go on talk radio programs across the nation and speak direct to the American people - unfiltered.

* Are about to embark on a 2nd trip to Iraq, this time bringing Gold Star Families, the mothers and fathers who lost a child in the war on terrorism.

* Conducted the 20-city "We Support Our Troops & Their Missions" bus tour across the nation from San Francisco, California to Washington, D.C.

* Rallied support around the nomination to serve as John Bolton as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations - at a time when almost no one knew who he was, the anti-war Left was destroying his name, and many conservatives sat back and didn't do a whole lot.

* Led the 9/11 "Believe in Freedom" rememberances in several cities across the nation in 2004. Led the "9/11: We Remember" observation in California in 2006.

* Worked with Deborah Johns to arrange Operation Fuzzy Wuzzy which sent over 5,000 teddy bears to the children who survived the terrorist attacks at that school.

That's just a partial list. I am proud of the work Move America Forward does. If it wasn't valuable to the cause of freedom, then I don't believe enough people would contribute. Or the organization could ask for help less often, and just done less work - but that doesn't seem like a logical idea to me.

Hope this letter explains to you that you weren't being harrassed, there's a reason MAF does what it does. This is it.

Good Wishes to you,

Joe Wierzbicki

Posted by: Joe Wierzbicki at October 17, 2006 07:34 PM (R8SvA)

23
Bluto: Doesn't help because you didn't answer the question of how do they get hurt on the job? Could it be irate travelers in the Airport punching them in the nose? Could it be falling down the escalator on the way to a smoke brake? Could it be lifting the little change bucket in front of the X-ray machine? Could it be lifting the 20lb carry on baggage? Could it be eating over priced airport food? Please explain cause of these injuries.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 17, 2006 08:12 PM (Igoub)

24 I'd hazard to Guess that most of the injuries are in the cargo areas and related tot he fact that the whole damn industry runs late and people are in a hurry. The rest are probably from prolonged hours on the feet. You go tell your waitress down at the greasy spoon she is a puss, she doesn't lift more than 20 lbs at a time. Good luck with that and hope she doen't kick you.

Posted by: Howie at October 17, 2006 08:35 PM (D3+20)

25 Gee: Tomorrow I have to disc up 10 acres and plant rye grass for this winter. I find staying on top of the tractor is the best place. I never have anyone but my Mexican helper on the ground changing equipment. The way I figure if he gets chopped up I can take my back hoe, dig a 10 deep hole and push him in. Since he's illegal no one will ever know.Another reason for hiring non tax paying illegals.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 17, 2006 08:40 PM (Igoub)

26 IM and Greyrooster: I gave you a link. It's up to you to read it. Let me know if any of the words are too big for you.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 10:11 PM (vBK4C)

27 Uh .......... quite a farm you got there, greyrooster.....

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 18, 2006 01:18 AM (Dd86v)

28 Last gasp Larry: I said disc 10 acres tommorrow. Enough for one day considering one must then change to a harrow and go over the same ten acres. Then change again to a seeder and spread lime. Then go over again and spread fertilizer. Then again and seed. Then again with harrow to cover seed. Then again with culdepacker. Then wait for two months before putting cows on it. Ten rye grass acres will feed 15 cows from Jan to May. If I get good weather I can do 10 acres per day until November the first. Then we start interseeding the main summer pastures. Care to pay my diesel fuel bill?

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 18, 2006 04:26 AM (Igoub)

29 Howie: We must go to different restaurants. You talk like a liberal democrat. Same exact retoric.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 18, 2006 04:29 AM (Igoub)

30 How do you keep the bodies down when it rains real hard?

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 18, 2006 04:53 PM (Dd86v)

River gravel.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 19, 2006 07:52 PM (ZVu3J)

Oh. ... I guess I'll pay the deisel tab then.

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 19, 2006 11:03 PM (Dd86v)

33 I was going to say its diesel. But then that would make me like Howie. Shutter.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 20, 2006 07:59 PM (AP2ro)

34 You mean making an attempt at learning spelling?

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 23, 2006 12:23 PM (Dd86v)

35 Never.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 24, 2006 10:47 AM (zqSqi)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

October 15, 2006

Imperium - a Novel of Ancient Rome

"Imperium, a Novel of Ancient Rome" by Robert Harris, Simon & Schuster.

I love this genre; the well-researched, authoritative historical novel. Robert Harris has done a wonderful job of bringing the waning days of the Roman Republic to life, as seen through the eyes of Tiro, personal secretary, confidante...and slave... of Marcus Tullius Cicero, one of the greatest orators in history. more...

Posted by: Bluto at 01:05 PM | Comments (32) | Add Comment
Post contains 415 words, total size 3 kb.

1 The 'with us or against us' verbiage sure sounds gratuitous and anachronistic, but the policy of 'any ruler who refuses to cooperate will be regarded as Rome's enemy' is historically acurate. The author would have been better to omit the Bushism and retain the essentially Roman element.

Posted by: ThomasD at October 15, 2006 02:26 PM (p6WXs)

2 If you're not familiar with Stephen Saylor's Roma sub Rosa series and Lindsey Davis' Marcus Didius Falco series, I highly recommend them both. Saylor is a bit more serious, and takes place during the same era as Imperium (Cicero is a client and sponsor of the main character, Gordianus the Finder.) Falco is a bit more freewheeling but also more fun, I think. It takes place a bit later, during the time of the Emperor Vespasian.

Posted by: Eric J at October 15, 2006 03:34 PM (5PRM2)

3 I'm glad I read this. I've read Pompeii, and I was debating whether to buy Imperium. Now I'll get it.

Posted by: Philosopher at October 15, 2006 05:59 PM (WOaIC)

4 "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." Thomas Mann, as seen on THE JAWA REPORT.

Only the neoconservatives have the testicular fortitude to defeat jihadism and eradicate Al Qaeda from Iraq. Democrats and the "Withdraw Now Crowd" would tolerate Islamofascism in Iraq in exchange for "peace"...

"Lovely and honorable it is to die for one's country." -- Horace, 65 BC - 8 BC

Generally, this is not the philosophy of Democrats and leftists.

Posted by: Voting Republican at October 15, 2006 07:49 PM (HSkSw)

5 Comrades,

   yup: "Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori!"

    It's quite easy to wear a t-shirt with Che's picture on the front, and shout and stomp and raise one's fist oh so mightily. It's quite another to risk your life for your beliefs. Moonbats still don't get that part. They seem to think that lawyers and briefs will stop car bombs and RPG's.

   The Barbarians are at the gates, and we who man the ramparts look earnestly for Charles Martel. Where is our Roland? Our Richard Couer D'Lion?

   Respects,

       Gwedd

Posted by: Gwedd at October 15, 2006 08:47 PM (8hKJB)

6 Yeah well, constant warfare worked out real well for the Romans - why not try smashing all our problems away too? Brilliant. You cite history and in the same breath forget its' lessons... If we do not assimilate the barbarians, they will win. We can sit in our castle and ignore the screams of the peasants but ask yourself, who has more to lose? They are throwing rocks and we are launching million dollar cruise missiles. Instead of million dollar bombs we should launch sewage treatment plants to kill the terrorists - anyone telling you differently is selling something.

Posted by: tbone at October 16, 2006 12:02 PM (HGqHt)

7 The lesson of Rome is that amoral populist politicians will do anyting for power, even if it harms the country. We see in America today that one major political party is heavily invested in a US defeat in the Middle East.

Is that what you meant, tbone?

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 16, 2006 01:04 PM (vBK4C)

8 TDPB, you just illuminated my point nicely. I wasn't talking about Rs but thanks for drawing the parallel - if Republicans were not so heavily invested in our defeat (they are the controlling party of all 3 branches of Government) then why are we being defeated in every M.E. country we invaded? That's a rhetorical question, they obviously want our defeat since that is what they planned for and that is what we are getting. The lesson from the Romans is: if we do not stop flailing about like a mad monster in desperate search for an enemy we will fall into the same oubliette as the Romans - death by a thousand cuts (pirates, enemies and allies all wanted Rome taken down after the period of permanent war was started - Interesting that Rome began as a farming community, will we end as a decadent travesty also?). Anyway, way to drop the ball Americans - China is the real threat to our standing and they own our asses while most people have been conveniently side tracked by a side show.

Posted by: tbone at October 16, 2006 02:28 PM (HGqHt)

Wow, that's gotta be a record for the most twisted logic yet from a lefty surrender monkey.

No, tbone, it's Dem party loyalists such as yourself who are betraying us hoping to regain power. And you betray yourself by using the vocabulary of defeat, hoping that if you repeat the lie often enough, it will come true. Truly disgusting.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 16, 2006 02:39 PM (vBK4C)

10 When did we get defeated? I must have been on vacation. How could an Army still occupying another country be defeated? Ahhhh The liberal mind. Someone has been listening to the Sheehan bitch.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 16, 2006 04:03 PM (TLJ7a)

11 Oh, disgusting - what a cranium cracker! TDPB, try again, I am no more leftie than you are right (or correct). Like I said, apologist, I'm sure Bill Clinton was resposible for Rome's fall also. Rome was over-stretched, seeking enemies anywhere and everywhere to stave off domestic discord. Sexual slaves and predators in the senate were rampant there too but you sure showed me and my idea up with your labels. No cute come back for the very real threat I mention from China or does that only concern leftie-defeatest-appeaser-whatevers? Don't delude yourself because I don't parrot your opinion sorry, I have original ideas and if you are going to use labels atleast try to be creative!

Posted by: tbone at October 16, 2006 04:03 PM (HGqHt)

12 Sorry to break the news to you GR. Yeah, we pretty much had our asses handed to us. The US had pacified two continents in less time - smell like victory to you?

Posted by: tbone at October 16, 2006 04:07 PM (HGqHt)

13 The Romans lasted for a thousand years. We've been top dog for less than 100. I think Rome fell because of the foreign influence. Not because of the lack of it. In Roman times numbers counted for everything. In todays world technology is king. Numbers are a handicap. Example: The Soviet block. A small country like Germany or England would wipe out the entire African continent. Israel took on the surrounding countries 3 times and easily won. The Roman analogy doesn't hold water. ahhhh liberals.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 16, 2006 04:10 PM (TLJ7a)

14 Sorry GR, thats a pile of BS, technology was what brought Rome up above the rest while they were surrounded by subjugated nation-states. Nothing has changed except time and place.

Posted by: tbone at October 16, 2006 04:15 PM (HGqHt)

15 "Had our asses handed to us". Which war are to talking about? Lost six hundred per year doing a police action. How many cops do we lose each year in the states? American has fought wars and lost 30,000 in a day and still won. We have merely put our soldiers in harms way because of the cry baby liberals more worried about Iraqis and terrorists than Americans. Quit smoking that shit. Or share.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 16, 2006 04:18 PM (TLJ7a)

16 Not a lefty? "...we should launch sewage treatment plants to kill the terrorists..."

Kumbayah, my Lord, kumbayah.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 16, 2006 04:34 PM (vBK4C)

17 You don't enjoy sewage treatment? How would you feel about being occupied in a country that had sewage flowing in the streets and no electricity or *gasp* (ultra-leftie fantasy comin up) Jobs? I'd be a little pissed and so would you.

Posted by: tbone at October 16, 2006 04:37 PM (HGqHt)

18 Would you start beheading people? If you're really concerned with history, Google "Grand Mufti" + Hitler. It might be an eye-opener for you to know that radical Muslims were eager to kill Jews before George W. Bush was born...and before there was an Israel.

And when you come back, see if you can link to a picture of one of terrorist-killing sewage plants. Maybe Popular Science has a story on them?

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 16, 2006 04:42 PM (vBK4C)

19 Oh yeah...Someone's laughing, Lord, kumbayah.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 16, 2006 04:43 PM (vBK4C)

20 Liberal view of high tech. The high tech sword is longer than the low tech one.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 16, 2006 06:28 PM (xyiUv)

21 Sorry but you already lost the argument with over usage of labels, then you mention Hitler (ding ding ding) next you'll finish the trifecta with... 9 what what? The Sore Pundit Loser.

Posted by: tbone at October 16, 2006 06:36 PM (XDUhP)

22 GR, their swords were actually shorter. And they knew how to use them.

Posted by: tbone at October 16, 2006 06:43 PM (XDUhP)

23 Google it. The result will surprise you.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 16, 2006 10:13 PM (vBK4C)

24 tbone: You missed the point. I know what a gladius is. Yes he did lose when he started the Hitler thing. Normally, Hitler is followed by racist, bigot, KKK'r. Jew Killer, ya da, ya da, ya da. Never anything new. Just the same crap going round and round every month. Bluto's sore knee, which he injured in a heroic act protecting America must hurt him. Calling the disability insurance people. Calling, calling. Knee hurts, can't work. Ha, ha.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 17, 2006 03:29 PM (Igoub)

25 Someone's high, .... Lord, kumbayah.

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 18, 2006 06:11 PM (Dd86v)

26 Diasarrono, Brandy and orange juice. Good for the soul.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 20, 2006 08:17 PM (AP2ro)

27 Darn! Now I've got to go mix me up one!

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 21, 2006 08:25 PM (Dd86v)

28 Neverseen sex webcam
http://xxxcam-1.best-free-hosting.com/

Posted by: Xcam-1 at December 30, 2006 01:46 AM (L3ciX)

29 Naughty cam here
http://xxxcam-1.best-free-hosting.com/

Posted by: Xcam-1 at January 01, 2007 02:50 PM (7k/fn)

30 Hi all. Admins your site the BEST!
http://villasincrete.net/search_travel
http://villasincrete.net/search_travel/
vq6fs
http://arachno.name/t/161927

Posted by: vikrot at January 20, 2007 03:08 AM (YuVtd)

31 No drugs!!
http://villasincrete.net/travel
http://villasincrete.net/travel
hx5q6
http://arachno.name/t/161927

Posted by: mark at January 27, 2007 07:14 PM (YuVtd)

32 Your Site The BEST!
http://villasincrete.net/italy_ser
ci2ys
http://arachno.name/t/161927

Posted by: wert623 at January 28, 2007 04:20 AM (YuVtd)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

October 13, 2006

YouTube Jihad : Basic Training

Several people have been asking how to get started making videos and uploading them to YouTube.

There are a number of tutorials available explaining how to CREATE a video file using the Windows Movie Maker software that's most likely already installed on your computer. The following video is a fairly decent tutorial. It covers the basics fairly well. It won't be of much use to anyone who's already been through the process of creating a basic video using the Windows Movie Maker software.

Once you've created your video, you'll likely want to share it with the world. That will require that you upload it to the internet. The following video is a decent video tutorial on how to UPLOAD a video to YouTube. Again, this is just the basics. There's not much here for the experienced video masters.

Posted by: Ragnar at 06:18 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 143 words, total size 2 kb.

October 09, 2006

The 300

Is it just me, or is this...

... the most BADASS movie trailer of all time?

Posted by: Ragnar at 08:31 PM | Comments (25) | Add Comment
Post contains 18 words, total size 1 kb.

1 That does look like a pretty f'n badass movie.

Posted by: Moose at October 09, 2006 09:10 PM (3btGz)

2 I agree, and my butt's going in a movie seat on opening weekend. (See the Quicktime trailer for the uber-high quality glory: http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/300/)

As purely an aside, am I the only one who sees some major homoeroticism all over the trailer? I have a feeling all the boys from the warehouse district are going to come out in droves for this film.

Posted by: patrick at October 09, 2006 09:42 PM (lX/QL)

3 "Joey, do you like movies about gladiators?"

"Joey, did you ever hang around a gymnasium?"

"Joey, have you ever been in a Turkish prison?"

Posted by: Darth Vag at October 09, 2006 10:10 PM (HSkSw)

4 I was there.

Posted by: George S. Patton at October 09, 2006 10:33 PM (FWrFx)

5 Molon Lave!

I've got to see this movie.

Posted by: JeepThang at October 09, 2006 10:35 PM (yZQoS)

6 its just you...

Posted by: hank at October 09, 2006 10:40 PM (pU0SG)

7 Read "Gates of Fire", a novel about this battle, several years ago. Spartans rule. Hope the movie is more than music video imagery. It seems promising.

Posted by: eman at October 09, 2006 10:41 PM (FWrFx)

8 its just you

Posted by: hank at October 09, 2006 10:41 PM (pU0SG)

9 Awesome.

In the true sense of the word.

Posted by: GI Joe at October 09, 2006 10:56 PM (0euLV)

10 Nice, but the apple.com/trailers has a much higher res version. The movie looks very awesome, and I cant wait to get this miserable year for the box office behind us.

Posted by: BelchSpeak at October 09, 2006 11:01 PM (ggu4G)

Ayup. That's badass all right!

Posted by: Subvet at October 09, 2006 11:41 PM (DNVxw)

Seems like a gay thing. I'm feeling it. I'm with you, boy.

Posted by: Mark Foley at October 09, 2006 11:48 PM (HSkSw)

13 Yah wait untill you conservatives find out that many of those Bad Ass spartans were gay, that will harsh your mellow.

Posted by: Wormpaste at October 10, 2006 01:08 AM (rtnQC)

14 Don't bet on it wormputz. Most of us don't give a hoot what some one does in the privacy of their bedroom, we just don't want it rammed into our face. And we feel the same way about heterosexuals who can't keep their pants up & zipped in public.

You, on the other hand, may have a real problem with the Spartans. They maintained a decidely militaristic culture, held personal weakness in contempt, honored valor, sacrifice and many other supposed outmoded values that conservatives hold dear.

Posted by: Subvet at October 10, 2006 02:10 AM (DNVxw)

15 More racist bullshit from the racist all seeing idiot. Notice notice they threw the only black guy in the pit. Friggin racist nazi, bigot.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 10, 2006 05:27 AM (xJ3Xm)

16 I'll be in the theatre for this movie.

_____________________

BTW Subvet: Well put, Sir.

Posted by: Oyster at October 10, 2006 06:55 AM (YudAC)

17 Anyone remember the old Hollywood version of this movie?

Posted by: SeeMonk at October 10, 2006 09:20 AM (7teJ9)

18 The Battle of Thermopylae was one of the most heroic battles EVER fought, hell with a little bit more training, they may even have made good MARINES !!!

Posted by: memphis761 at October 10, 2006 09:52 AM (YdcZ0)

19 Being a fan of Frank Miller's work, I have no doubt this film will be amazing. And damn that trailor does makes me even more excited to see it.

I'm always leary when certain comic books go to film, but this looks like it will do it justice.

RR

Posted by: RegularRon at October 10, 2006 10:31 AM (qZJTO)

20 I notice you are trying to move in on HotAir's turf with movie trailers and such, but you have no hope of success until you get Bethany on your site.

Posted by: old_dawg at October 10, 2006 12:07 PM (mvlLy)

21 I can't wait to see how folks on the left and CAIR try to claim that this movie is an example "anti-muslim hate speech." "Xerxes was just trying to travel a little with his army and them those hateful, racist Spartans had to start killing them!" Nevermind that this is HISTORY. History adapted into a graphic novel by Frank Miller, I know ;p But still history. Several hundred spartans and several hundred Thespians stood up against a Persian army of at least 250,000. No doubt this will be played as an example of anti-muslim sentiments.

Posted by: Tyler at October 10, 2006 12:38 PM (vqhcd)

22 I will be there. "Then we will fight in the shade."

I like that the men were hot, being a chick and all, and not gay.

Posted by: Stormy70 at October 10, 2006 01:07 PM (SXQle)

23 Most cultures that were predominatly warrior/military oriented had a culture of homosexuality- not so much that the guys didn't like women, but rather it was accepted that you would get some of your sexual urges out with other guys when in combat. You might be married with 3 kids, but when you were out to war, you got it on with other guys. In Sparta is was more formalized:
"pederasty,
claimed by some ancient historians to have been of a chaste nature, was
practised whereby older warriors would engage a youth in a long-lasting
love relationship with a pedagogic purpose. The boy was expected to
request the relationship, which was considered important in passing on
knowledge and in maintaining loyalty on the battlefield â€“ when
sacrificing to a god before battle, the Spartans sacrificed to the god
of love, Eros."

I gotta be honest- when they are driving a spear through some Persian invader- do you really care where they were last night?

Posted by: Tyler at October 10, 2006 02:29 PM (vqhcd)

24 This is the most historically relevant movie of the year, and possibly
of our age, because it was at Thermopylae where just a handful of men
stood against an army of a million and saved the West from becoming
just another province in a vast empire of slaves. They gave their
lives, but kept their honor, and we are free because of them, and they
are immortal as long as the West lives. Thus it always was and always
shall be; young men die so that their people may live, and the cowards
who betray them shall only be remembered with shame and loathing.
Remember that greg, you piece of shit.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at October 10, 2006 07:21 PM (v3I+x)

25 Spartans? Faggots always attempt to show others as faggots. Stupid attempt to make their behavior acceptable. Some history is written by faggots.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 10, 2006 10:01 PM (xJ3Xm)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

October 01, 2006

What's Missing?

After downloading a whole buttload of images of Hugo Chavez, I noticed the following two overxposed images, featuring El Commandante holding up what appears to be a blank sign and a blank notebook, respectively.

Not being that talented with Photoshop myself, I was hoping maybe some of y'all could perform some "dodge and burn work" on these pics and shed some light on what's missing:

chavez drawing on map-pshop.JPG

If you come up with anything, you can send the results of your "photoanalysis" to larsmoisturefarm at hotmail dot com.

Posted by: Ragnar at 11:34 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 87 words, total size 1 kb.

September 22, 2006

HS Govt Class: Supreme Court Elected Bush

(NE Ohio) On Tuesday, the teacher in my son's 12th-grade American Government class complained that Al Gore actually won the 2000 presidential election and George Bush was named President because of his buddies. Specifically, the teacher said it was relationships with brother Jeb Bush and Florida SecState Katherine Harris coupled with a majority conservative Supreme Court that made George Bush President of the U.S.

I sense an underlying distaste for the American form of representative democracy on the part of this teacher. Possibly, she's not the best match for teaching American Government.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 02:32 AM | Comments (17) | Add Comment
Post contains 99 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Sounds like another ringing endorsement for home schooling!

Posted by: Subvet at September 22, 2006 05:03 AM (DNVxw)

2 This goes right along with the type of government teachers that I remember from school.

Posted by: LC S at September 22, 2006 06:08 AM (k29k6)

3 I've been preaching against these academic meatheads for years. Teachers should shut up, leave their personal opinions at home and teach.

Posted by: greyrooster at September 22, 2006 06:23 AM (m9HAJ)

4 "a majority conservative Supreme Court"

That one made me laugh.

Posted by: Oyster at September 22, 2006 06:40 AM (YudAC)

5 I have a simple recipe for fixing our country. You will need:

A few million lefturds.
A few hundred acres of otherwise useless land.
A few hundred bulldozers.
Lots of guns and ammo, and Patriots to use them.

Take the bulldozers and dig trenches, then line up the lefturds and give each one a shot to the back of the head and pitch them off into the trench. Cover with dirt and voila!, liberty and common sense restored.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at September 22, 2006 07:22 AM (v3I+x)

6 I hope you have contacted the school board. That is a serious violation of policy. What she has done is lie to the students and misled them on the process of how our constitution dictates the electorial process. she should be repremanded and have an entry put in her file. And then she should be bitch slapped for being such an idiot.

Posted by: SeeMonk at September 22, 2006 07:36 AM (7teJ9)

7 As what she said is demonstrably false, I'd suggest to the principle and school board that she is lying to the students, back it up with data, and ask that she be dismissed. As Senator Howard Metzenbaum (and many others) said, "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but no one is entitled to their own facts."

Posted by: baboy at September 22, 2006 08:05 AM (skBQT)

8 Because a teacher lives in an alternate reality does not mean they can teach alternate history. But they will continue to do so as long as no parent calls them on it. Contact the school board and find out how to issue a formal complaint against the teacher. Most school boards have formal methods for such complaints. Then do it. You can even ask you child what other kids are in that class and contact the parents. It should not matter their political leanings, they should want history taught, not history taught on the opinion of the teacher.
We sent our children to school to be educated, not indoctrinated.

Posted by: retire05 at September 22, 2006 08:44 AM (hq0B1)

9 Could be a good thing. At that age I took care to make sure I totally disagreed with everyone in authority. I had a liberal english teacher (no my english is bad because it's my worst subject) and a liberal social studies teacher. I made sure to give them conservative hell every day. rebellion can be good.

Posted by: Howie at September 22, 2006 08:49 AM (D3+20)

10 Name her and the school and the district will suddenly get thousands of letters asking to have her fired.

Posted by: The Curmudgeon at September 22, 2006 12:35 PM (jeBXX)

11 Considering the level of skill my teachers displayed, perhaps we should just have one man video tape lectures, make up a complete FAQ for the course, and let the kids watch a video teacher.

Saves money, stops creeps like this, and really if we had like guidance counselors to make up for some of the teachers, the kids would get a better education. I remember one teacher Miss Sendry, she used babble all class wrong, no one could understand her, her writing was horrific, we couldn't read the equations, and we all ended up teaching ourselves out of the textbook. Ever since then, I have wondered, why the hell is there a teacher up there, might as well make it a well made video that I can understand. Most of my college teachers would spend half their time on unrelated topics, and we would end up simply reading the book. In fact, I bet more than half the classes I took since 6th Grade I had learn myself from the book because the teachers just plain sucked, AND HAD TENURE.

Posted by: Naieve at September 22, 2006 01:42 PM (+PWjE)

12 Seriously, anything that is done now about this "teacher" is reactive. How do we as parents nip this crappola in the bud before it hits the ears of our kids? Does anyone know what we can do to get more involved in what our children are being taught? Having to counter the garbage that is poured into their heads isn't good enough. We need to insure that garbage never hits the classroom. Any suggestions?

Posted by: Subvet at September 22, 2006 11:14 PM (DNVxw)

13 Yes home schooling and get them away from these rotten teachers and leftists NEA time to shut down the dept of education and end computiary schooling and shut down their prisons

Posted by: sandpiper at September 22, 2006 11:15 PM (YIXxO)

14 Sandpiper, I hear ya. But home schooling isn't feasible for all of us and though my kids will be in private schools in a few years it really irks me to think it's necessary. I'll wind up paying for their schooling twice, once for tuition for the specific schools and again via my taxes for the kids in public schools. Damn it, we and our kids deserve better than to be driven out of the schools we pay for. I've a feeling I'm not alone in my frustration, when and how do we the people take back these public institutions?

Posted by: Subvet at September 22, 2006 11:21 PM (DNVxw)

15 I find it fascinating that they continue to perpetrate this lie. If you haven't noticed, the left and the media have never acknowledged that he is actually president, now we see why the teachers associations across the united states need to be changed. This particular teacher, apparently, failed to keep herself objective and, rather than that, imposed her own personal opinion on a high school student. Isn't it curious why the teachers associations, across the United States, seem to need union assistance, even though they all have agreements with their employer that are separate from their union membership

Posted by: Christopher Perruzzi at September 23, 2006 06:15 AM (B+dFZ)

16 Tenure is worse than Islam.

Posted by: greyrooster at September 23, 2006 07:48 AM (dRys2)

17 Gimme the school system, I want the name of the teacher, the name of the school, city, state, principal... I want it all. I have access to one of the greatest young right wing attorneys in the history of man kind. Gimme the info.

Posted by: bigdaddy at September 25, 2006 02:18 PM (MzEXW)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

290kb generated in CPU 0.0766, elapsed 0.126 seconds.
54 queries taking 0.0694 seconds, 601 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy

December 11, 2006

December 05, 2006

December 02, 2006

November 27, 2006

November 24, 2006

November 23, 2006

November 22, 2006

November 20, 2006

November 19, 2006

November 04, 2006

October 21, 2006

October 17, 2006

October 15, 2006

October 13, 2006

October 09, 2006

October 01, 2006

September 22, 2006

Recent Comments