Saturday, May 29, 2004
Islam=Rights. Christianity=No Rights
At least their minds.
“They have a right to do what they want,” [Masud] Kahn [secretary of the Al-Islah Islamic Center] says quietly. “And we have a right to do what we want. It’s America.”
No you don't, rag-brain. For one thing you can't yell "Fire" in a crowded theater. Christmas can't be publicly recognized in the same New Jersey schools that will now recognize Islamic holidays.
If Christian children can't express their beliefs on school grounds (in the name of "separation of church and state") you sure as hell shouldn't be allowed to rant over a public address system, force-feeding an entire town your bigoted, female-oppressing, anti-Semitic, suicide-bomber-enabling religious cult.
MORE: This cartoon says it all. Found via The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
Wednesday, May 26, 2004
Tolerance Day Intolerable to Gays
Tongue Tied linked to an interesting story in the San Jose Mercury News (Free registration required.)
"Gay Pride Day Rebuffed"
"The Los Altos High School Gay Straight Alliance had hoped to wrap up a strong year with a picnic to celebrate Gay Pride Day.
"On June 7, they'll picnic, but without a city proclamation. To students' dismay, the city council rejected their proposal for a Gay Pride Day in Los Altos, opting instead for a Tolerance Day.
``I felt that in a community like Los Altos, gay pride is too divisive and polarizing,'' said Councilman Ron Packard, who wanted the day to be more inclusive. ``I hope the high school students have tolerance for other points of view and don't consider tolerance being a one-way street.''
"But the decision offended gay rights organizations and left the student group wondering why the mayor changed his position after assuring them that Gay Pride Day would be an easy sell.
``Tolerance implies putting up with -- not accepting,'' said student Alison Tarbell, 18. ``It's just not what we wanted.''
From the mouths of brats--er--babes--and one with a very poor knowledge of vocabulary, I might add.
Tolerance is defined as "The capacity for or the practice of recognizing and respecting the beliefs or practices of others." Acceptance, on the other hand, is "Favorable reception; approval; belief in something; agreement."
It was never part of the gay agenda to accept "mere" equal recognition and respect, and they certainly are not interested in compromise with any religious believers. No, only complete agreement, approval, and celebration of their lifestyle is acceptable. If they don't get it?…well, they have no qualms about imposing their views--by fiat--on believers who are willing to respect--but not approve--their private practices. Once again the single-minded, shallow, selfish "me-me-me" gay "rights" agenda is revealed.
And at last someone openly admits the truth.
Tuesday, May 25, 2004
An Out-of-This-World Look at Global Warming
Really. The aliens are causing it and warning us about it at the same time. Yeah, it does sound like a plot line straight from Stargate SG1 . Unless you're Al Gore. Then it sounds like the truth.
Day After Tomorrow: A lot of hot air"
by Patrick J. Michaels
"As a scientist, I bristle when lies dressed up as "science" are used to influence political discourse. The latest example is the global-warming disaster flick, The Day After Tomorrow . This film is propaganda designed to shift the policy of this nation on climate change. At least that's what I take from producer Mark Gordon's comment that "part of the reason we made this movie" was to "raise consciousness about the environment."
"Fox spokesman Jeffrey Godsick says, "The real power of the movie is to raise consciousness on the issue of (global warming)."
"How do I know so much about a movie that isn't out yet? I've seen the promos, and I've read and reviewed the book upon which it is based, The Coming Global Superstorm by Art Bell and Whitley Strieber. In Strieber's previous work, Communion , he explained that he was told of the Earth's upcoming apocalypse by aliens. And how this knowledge was communicated is much more the purview of an adult Web site than a family newspaper. What's on the movie's Web site is worse — nothing but out-and-out distortion."
OK. Full stop right there. Frankly there has always been some serious debate about whether either of those two "authors" have their tin foil lids screwed on tight enough. How the hell can the media attempt to pass off a movie fashioned from one of their books as scientific fact? Or maybe a better question is how gullible are the American people?
Everyone knows Art Bell, right? The conspiracy theorist broadcasting late at night from a trailer parked in the Nevada desert? (My great aunt listened faithfully and still insists mysterious black airplanes fly back and forth over the U.S. "seeding" us with germs to test their effectiveness.) Now I'm not exactly sure when the hardcover edition of Superstorm came out, but the paperback was released in December 1999. In 1997 Bell received an unusual phone call. Well, actually, it was a pretty normal phone call for the type of radio show Bell had/has/had/has. The link I found is entitled "Art Bell gets a Frantic Phone Call from an ex-Worker of Area 51, about earth changes" and purports to be "…a short segment from a radio show that Art Bell did…in 1997." (If you read this article don't try either link in the first two paragraphs. The "official" Art Bell web site seems to be down [insert X-Files theme here] and PlanetX is an amateur porn site.) As you read through the transcript of the "call" you might get a hint of how Bell came up with his half of this sci-fi "disaster" book.
"...they're EXTRA-DIMENSIONAL BEINGS...that an earlier precursor of the SPACE PROGRAM MADE CONTACT WITH... the DISASTERS that are coming...the GOVERNMENT knows about them.... but they are NOT doing anything about it... THEY WANT THE MAJOR POPULATION CENTERS - WIPED OUT SO THAT THE FEW THAT ARE LEFT WILL BE MORE EASILY CONTROLLABLE...." [Emphasis in the original.]
More Art Bell links for your amusement:
Whitley Strieber, on the other hand, is the world's most famous alien abductee. He wrote horror novels like The Hunger and Wolfen . Communion was the best-seller he wrote recalling his alleged abduction by extra-terrestrials, and that turned him into a UFO expert.
So how did he manage to become a climatologist? Read this bit of an interview Strieber had in November 1999 with a Dr. John Mack on [I believe] Art Bell's radio show Dreamland :
"JM: We also planned to go to South Africa for a week, and right then and there I was met at the airport and we were taken to a television station and there by satellite was Credo Mutwa because he had heard that I was going to talk about these experiences with these strange beings which he calls, or his people calls, Mandindas. Which to hear him describe those beings, [are] very much like the grey beings that we hear so much about here. […] We spent several hours with him, and in a very movingly candid way, talked about the trauma that he'd undergone when he was a young man in the bush and had been through an experience very much like the ones that you have been through, Whitley.
"WS: Which is quite extraordinary. "I am shown that the world is dying. These creatures are trying to warn us about danger. The thing that you are looking into is real, it is not a figment of anybody's imagination." This was part of the message of Credo Mutwa and it certainly is related to the kind of messages that I have been getting. And the book that Art and I wrote, The Coming Global Superstorm , is a direct response to that kind of message." [Emphasis mine.]
Got that? Strieber himself admits he wrote the book from which The Day After Tomorrow is taken based on messages he was receiving from aliens ! This is the movie Al Gore is touting as a true warning of catastrophic global warming? Tell me again how this isn't politically motivated.
"Will Godsick and Gordon get their way? They're sure being aided and abetted by MoveOn.org, the liberal advocacy group and billionaire George Soros' policy toy. They've got Al Gore front and center, plumping the film. They've got their Web site using the movie to drum up support for legislation by Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions, which only failed by 12 votes last fall. [Emphasis mine]
"This isn't Hollywood's first attempt to scare people into its way of thinking. How about Jane Fonda in the 1979 anti-nuclear-power flick, The China Syndrome ?
"Twelve days after its release, the accident at Three Mile Island occurred. Despite the fact that it released only tiny amounts of radiation, the politics of that hysteria effectively killed any new nuclear plant[s]."
Can you say "high energy costs?"
Saturday, May 22, 2004
Tyranny of the Minority
With so many misguided Americans still whining about Gore winning the popular vote while losing the election--in the mistaken impression we have a pure democracy in the United States--I often wonder how they reconcile that complaint with this:
"An invocation during graduation at Avon High School will be dropped from the program because the Indiana Civil Liberties Union is threatening a lawsuit if the school endorses any sort of prayer. It all started with a graduating senior.
"Laura McGinley, 18, sought legal help from the ICLU to stop the invocation. She said she was raised to respect all beliefs and the best way to do that is not to force prayer on other people. Some students say they wanted the invocation.
"One student's objections have garnered the support of the ICLU. "Actually her sister graduated in the class of 2001 and she wrote a letter to our superintendent asking for the same thing and she didn't quite take it as far as Laura has decided to this year,” said Keiper.
"[I]t's part of the First Amendment which calls for the separation of church and state."
NEWS FLASH FOR LAURA McGINLEY: Grow up, brat. Being "offended" by one thing or another is a way of life and what gives you the right to push your slanted beliefs down everyone else's throats?
How I wish the other Avon High School seniors would take a stand and fight back. How I wish just one student would have the guts to take the podium and announce: "This is where we would normally have our invocation. However, thanks to Laura McGinley we are no longer allowed that privilege. "
Ironically it was just last month the Christian citizens of Hamtramck Michigan were told they would have to hear the Muslim calls to worship publicly broadcast all over their town five times a day. In fact, the objecting citizens were upbraided by a "Jewish person" letter-writer who asked "…what exactly threatens these Christians by hearing the Islamic call to worship."
Well, I might ask what exactly threatened Laura McGinley by having to hear a non-denominational invocation? And why does she get special treatment while the long-time Christian residents of Hamtramck, Michigan get the Islamic shaft--or simitar as the case may be?
I'm getting real tired of saying this year after year. THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE DOES NOT EXIST IN OUR CONSTITUTION. It was "discovered" by the 1947 Justice Frankfurter-controlled Supreme Court. (Frankfurter was one of the founders of the ACLU just to give you some frame of reference.)
But more important to the "prayer-in-school-is-government-sponsored-religion" argument is how our schools were originally established. School systems were not established by the federal government and, in fact, the federal government does not provide majority funding for public schools.
So how were early American schools established? For the majority of Americans, home schooling or small community schools was the norm, and the Bible was frequently used as a reading primer.
New England communities banded together to use their resources for a school system, and were the first to establish (in 1647) compulsory elementary education. During these early years New Yorkers were too busy making money to worry about establishing schools (some things never change, do they?) so wealthy families hired tutors and the rest of the children were on their own. Planters in the south sometimes got together with their nearest neighbors to hire tutors and some more populous areas had community schools. Poorer families taught their children themselves.
The Quakers of Pennsylvania created one of the more sophisticated educational systems. (For those who are recent products of our current educational system, Quakers are a religious denomination.)
"The first school, begun in 1683, taught reading, writing, and the keeping of accounts. Thereafter, in some fashion, every Quaker community provided for the elementary teaching of its children. More advanced training-in classical languages, history, literature-was offered at the Friends Public School, which still exists in Philadelphia as the William Penn Charter School. The school was free to the poor, but parents who could were required to pay tuition for their children."
And Pennsylvanians had more innovations up their sleeves:
"The [Pennsylvania] law of 1683 mandates: "A. Anyone having charge of children must make sure they can read and write by age twelve; B. All children should be taught a useful trade; and C. Five pound fine for every child that does not meet these standards."
Heart be still! They were holding teachers financially accountable!
Even the pioneers--primarily the Scotch-Irish--living on the edges of civilization made the effort to bring educated ministers to their new communities, believing in the necessity of developing "mental talents."
Wherever you look, the Bible and prayer were considered a normal part of the school day for American children, right up through the 1960's.
In the 1830s and '40s various states became serious about standardizing public education, an effort lead by Horace Mann of Massachusetts and Henry Barnard of Connecticut. In 1867 the federal government made Barnard the first United States commissioner of education and ultimately developed the Bureau of Education.
Yet it wasn't until nearly 100 years later--in 1953--that our public education system was "federalized" with the creation of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Only in 1979 was a separate Department of Education established. (And we all know who was President in 1979, don't we? Jimmy "America-Held-Hostage" Carter.)
Now, what the federal government really doesn't want the average citizen to figure out is that the majority of education funding comes from state and local taxes, not federal funding . In fact, most districts only get about 6% to 8% of their money from the feds and that's generally earmarked for specific programs and special education.
Yet because they kick in that measly 6%, the federal government claims the right to tell everyone what they can teach and how they must teach it.
Pull back the curtain, Toto. We've been snookered.
Friday, May 21, 2004
Known By the Company You Keep
Or defined by the enemies you make, some people say. And when it comes to the Muslims you find they had some surprising enemies.
Prince Vlad Dracul I've already mentioned several times, noting he is listed among the "Christian princes" who led the resistance against the invading Ottoman Empire.
"They included Mircea the Elder in Wallachia (1386-1418); Ioan Corvin of Hunedoara, Duke of Transylvania (1438-1456), afterwards regent of Hungary; Vlad the Impaler in Wallachia (1456-1463); Stephen the Great and Holy in Moldavia (1456-1504),…and Michael the Brave of Wallachia (1593-1601), who for the first time united the three Romanian Principalities into a single state in 1600, and has since remained a symbol of unity for the Romanian People." [Emphasis mine.]
But nearly 150 years before Prince Vlad, the Islamists' murderous arrogance enraged the mighty Genghis Khan when they executed the emissaries he sent to Persia [Iran].
The usual disaster to the Muslims ensued.
While most of us consider Genghis Khan himself a murderous tyrant (and to his enemies he certainly was) a little research uncovers some amazing facts:
"[…] Genghis Khan…organized the empire which he had conquered so that it long survived and greatly thrived after he was gone. In every detail of social and political economy he was a creator;his laws and his administrative rules are equally admirable and astounding to the student. Justice, tolerance, discipline - virtues that make up the modern ideal of a state - were taught and practised at his court."
[NOTE: Genghis Khan mandated religious tolerance and even granted priests and some other religious leaders an exemption from tribute taxes .]
The Muslims certainly have a long history of attacking the wrong people at the wrong time.
Thursday, May 20, 2004
"I have been more scared of Iraq watching it from the news over here…"
Today Rush Limbaugh had a soldier recently home from Iraq (and returning shortly) on the air. The young man's commentary is most enlightening.
On Waging the War/Peace:
"[…] they're saying that they've not changed the rules of engagement at all, but I can tell you it's trickled down to the soldiers and a lot of it is due to media coverage. There's a reporter on every corner in Baghdad. You dang near have to be shot before you feel comfortable enough to shoot back, and it's a very serious, a very scary situation. […]
"We would take mortar rounds and not do a damn thing about it, and that's scary when you're leading, man.
"[…] we still have a lot of embeds, and those kinds of people that had gone through the war, and they knew the deal -- and then we started getting people from all over the place coming in and pretty much dictating…what we would do on the street by just being there. Making simple arrests, there would be a camera stuck in your face, and you'd have to be very careful, and I'll tell you right now the Iraqi people are not real nice people. Now, I would say the majority them want us there, but there are some out there that just absolutely don't like us and they will cause problems -- and the thing of it is, they know they got media in their back pocket." [Bold emphasis mine]
On A Prisoner He Put in Abu Ghraib:
"Well, I'll just tell you an example of what kind of person this guy was. I had a young male come up to me. … He said, "I need help. I need help. My mother's been stabbed," and we went ahead. […] When we got to his house, there was a small girl, probably about the age of six or seven. There was another girl about ten, and another girl that was 13, and then the mother. All three of them had been stabbed and raped, and they showed us up to the room where this guy was drunk and passed out, and of course we went in there and we grabbed him, and we come back downstairs and found out what the story was, what this guy had been doing. […] it takes everything you can do to keep your composure to not want to cut his head off for something like that. It was beyond belief, and we sent him out to Abu Ghraib, […] You cannot imagine what he had done to those kids. I saw it with my own eyes and so did my whole platoon, and it was beyond belief, and those are the people that we're dealing with over there, […]"
On the Media Here and There:
"I have been more scared of Iraq watching it from the news over here than I ever was over there -- and I was in quite a few little skirmishes, lots of firefights, about 75 hostile raids and I have never been so scared in my life watching it over here on this news. It's not near as bad as people think it is."
On the Muslim Warrior:
"I can tell you in the Arab nations, for the most part, the Arab fighter is a coward, a straight-up coward. When we can put more pressure on him than he can put on us, he'll quit. […] When you get into a firefight with them instead of them standing -- of course, I understand, they can't put up with what we can give them, but they just won't fight. They have to fight on an ambush, bushwhack kind of way to fight us or they just simply can't fight us. […] you'd have to turn off the TV camera to get [rid of those people]."
On Americans and the War:
"But the thing that really blows me away is the people that say, "God, we really, really support the troops, but, man, I don't support what we're doing over there." Well, I would just like to say, "If you're supporting the troops, you're supporting what's going on over there and the soldiers over there."
"I'm really worried about this nation. I'm worried about it, and I see it from the perspective now, after being at war for this nation. I come back and I'm scared to death at just how stupid people are. Just forgive me if that's a bad thing to say on the radio but I just cannot believe how stupid people are, and it's scary to me, […]
"They don't understand what's actually going on,…there's people out there misleading them, running them down the wrong road. […] The one thing that really chaps me more than anything else is that, "We're over there for oil," and it chaps me to no end… But at the level that I'm at, this is the farrest [sic] thing from oil. There is a real threat in the Middle East." [Bold emphasis mine.]
On Iraqi attitudes:
"Those people hate us. I've never been hated so much before in my life as we run up against some of these people -- [ …] They hate us simply because we're not them and until we find some kind of way to bridge that gap -- and maybe just call a spade a spade and let's get it on.
"[…] the general Iraqi population -- at least where I was in what they call the Sunni Triangle, […]-- the Sunnis are…almost completely westernized. They're more of a pagan. They go to mosque once in a while, but they really don't follow. […] The Shi'a would be really more the problem because they're a little bit more fanatical, and then we have the Wahhabi coming in […] -- they're causing a lot of trouble. They're causing a lot of trouble, and it's based -- it's soundly based -- in their religious beliefs
"The normal Iraqi person in Baghdad. […] We have upped their lifestyle maybe a hundredfold. […] [Now they] want to live a lifestyle like the Kuwaitis, where the Kuwaitis don't work at all. All of their labor is done from outside."
Wednesday, May 19, 2004
But Can They Spin the Critics?
The opening line of this Richard Leiby column says it all:
"Those who love conspiracy theories entwining Hollywood and Democratic politics, please have at it: Miramax Films has hired a team of hardened Clinton-Gore spinmeisters to help promote the new Michael Moore documentary, "Fahrenheit 9/11," saying it wants to counter any Republican attacks on the decidedly liberal filmmaker."
Ummm…so any critic who pans the movie is automatically part of the Republican attack machine?
Actually the funniest part of the column is not something Mr. Leiby wrote. It's the link on the right side of the page. A picture of le montagneux Moore stares out at the reader, his hand raised in a popish gesture of benevolent blessing. Beneath, in small print, are the instructions "enlarge photo." Now there's a bad idea…
Once you've cleaned up the regurgitative mess you made on your keyboard, scroll down to read Bill Cosby's oh-so-politically-incorrect remarks. He didn't leave his liberals buddies laughing Monday night that's for sure.
Monday, May 17, 2004
We have gone way overboard in our effort to be "diverse" and "politically correct." Allowing CAIR, who has proven terrorist ties, to dictate what can and cannot be said about Islam is absurd. Their sole modus operandi is to claim they are "insulted" whenever anyone questions Islam's goals or beliefs.
Well, I'm insulted and outraged by the Twin Towers destruction, the Madrid bombing, the Palestinian murders, the Berg beheading, etc. etc. etc. In fact, I'm insulted whenever a CAIR spokesman opens his mouth.
Along those lines I ran across this article which presents some very unsettling predictions.
"[Prof. Yonah Alexander, a leading expert on terrorism and director of the Inter-Universities Center for Terrorism Studies] feels that al-Qaeda's next theater of operations will be Europe, where they have established an extensive network. What he doesn't say is that besides the terror network they've set up, Muslims have been converting Europeans in droves to Islam.
"In the United Kingdom, according to the first authoritative study of the phenomenon, carried by the Sunday Times on February 22, some of Britain's top landowners, celebrities, and the offspring of senior establishment figures, have embraced Islam after being disillusioned with Western values.
"Many converts have been inspired by the pro-Islamic writings of Charles Le Gai Eaton, a former Foreign Office diplomat. "I have received letters from people who are put off by the wishy-washy standards of contemporary Christianity and they are looking for a religion which does not compromise too much with the modern world," said Eaton, who is author of Islam and the Destiny of Man .
So why is contemporary Christianity so wishy-washy? Because Christians have been under a sustained attack since the mid-60s and have attempted to compromise their beliefs to suit the minority. While fundamentalistic Islam is acceptable--and taught as a "culture" in Western schools--fundamentalistic Christianity (i.e. a belief in the inerrancy of the Bible) is scorned and marginalized. In fact, Christians are frequently the ones portrayed as "terrorists."
"Alexander continued, "We can expect to see an escalation in terrorism on a global scale with a continuation of conventional acts of terror, such as suicide bombings and shooting, as well as mega-terror like September 11 in the US and March 11 in Spain. There will also be a move towards the use of non-conventional weapons: biological, chemical, nuclear as in dirty bombs, and cyber-terrorism, whereby perpetrators will try to disrupt power supplies and air traffic, for example, at the touch of a button."
"But, I feel Alexander is mistaken when he said, "Islam has been hijacked and taken hostage by extremists who are using it to serve their own interests."
"This is the same line of reasoning that George Bush and others have been using to divide the Arab/Islamic world into friends and foes. I don't agree. I believe the Jihadists speak for real Islam, as originally set out by Mohammed and his barbarian hordes. Islam started out as an Arab Imperialist movement, and has only put a "thin veneer" of "religion" over it. Notice, they started in Arabia and ended up ruling everything throughout the Middle East and North Africa, up to Spain and Southern France by the 700s. The Jihadists openly state that they want to introduce a worldwide caliphate, i.e. global Islamic conquest. But this has always been "traditional" Islam's ultimate goal too."
Mr. Pasko has it exactly right. If Bush and other western leaders continue to equate Christianity/Judaism with Islam, they will suffer a rude awakening. And many, many people will die.
Hamid Golpira recently wrote a column for the Tehran Times . No link is available to that publication, but you can find it at MEMRI. In the artilce Golpira attempts to explain (and excuse) the concept of "jihad."
"Once our teacher taught us about the rules of Jihad . He said that every Muslim must first do Jihad-i-nafs , the struggle against the desires of the lower self, for self-purification. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family) said that Jihad-i-nafs is the great Jihad . We should reflect upon this deep Hadith .
"After performing Jihad-i-nafs to a satisfactory level and committing oneself to lifelong performance of Jihad-i-nafs , a Muslim can do the other Jihad , the lesser Jihad . This Jihad determines the three types of people in the world: (1) the true Muslims; (2) the non-Muslims who are not enemies of Islam actively fighting against Islam; and (3) the enemies of Islam, which includes all munafiqin (hypocrites who claim to be Muslims).
"The true Muslims are our brothers and sisters and we must never fight against [them]. Also, we must never fight against the non-Muslims who are not enemies of Islam, since some of them live in Islamic countries and have paid the jizya tax, making them dhimmis (people protected by Islam), and others are citizens of non-Muslim countries who are not personally fighting against Islam or assisting a war against Islam.
"As far as the enemies of Islam, we are only permitted to fight against them if we have done everything in our power to avoid war and to encourage them to stop being enemies of Islam and to join one of the other two groups." [Emphasis mine.]
Two statements totally invalidate Mr. Golpira's arguments.
The first is "…we must never fight against the non-Muslims who are not enemies of Islam, since some of them live in Islamic countries and have paid the jizya tax, making them dhimmis (people protected by Islam)…"
This is nothing more than something all Americans should recognize as a "protection racket," much loved and practiced by the Mafia. If history was still taught in our schools, they would also recognize it as something the English overlords in pre-Revolutionary Virginia already tried. In fact, it's one of the reasons we have something called the First Amendment. Don't ever let a Muslim brag they have religious tolerance in their countries!
The second is " …and [we must never fight against] others [who] are citizens of non-Muslim countries who are not personally fighting against Islam or assisting a war against Islam."
Considering Muslims are waging individual wars across half the globe, that particular caveat gives free rein for Muslims to attack any country that recognizes Israel as a sovereign nation.
They want to exterminate us. Period. The sooner we accept that fact the safer we will be.
Sunday, May 16, 2004
Everyone Loves a Winner
Except the New York Times , of course.
"Smarty Jones Is a Great Horse, but He's Not America's Horse" screams the headline on William Rhoden's May 16th article. As has become their habit in recent months, the Times endeavors to raise "serious questions" about a positive achievement.
Let's review. One-half of the Smarty Jones/Chapman/Servis/Elliott team could be sitting at home collecting Social Security disability payments--if SSI paid disability to equine claimants, that is. (The way that particular government agency operates it's not beyond the realm of possibility.) Everyone knows by now how Jonesy reared up during a starting gate training session and fractured his skull. I've read the vet's descriptions and it easily could have been a career-ending-before-it-began injury. Instead, he's won eight races at eight different distances, five different tracks, in five different states. Not only is he unbeaten, of the seventy-seven horses he's faced, not one has managed to pass him even briefly in the stretch. Now the little fireball is poised to win the Triple Crown.
(As I write this a neighbor, who is known to the local police as a stalker, harasser, and sexual predator, is sitting on his front stoop swilling beer paid for by SSI. Five years ago he suffered a stroke and is considered "mentally disabled." Two weeks ago he suffered a fractured skull. Neither injury has hampered his ability to do anything except be a productive member of society.)
Speaking of beer… Stewart Elliott is a recovering alcoholic with a record of aggravated assault as a result of a 2000 fight and a second violent altercation in 2001. Since alcoholism is considered a disease rather than a lapse of responsible self-control, Elliott could have found himself a good lawyer and sat back to collect a monthly SSI check. He didn't. Now, at 39 years old (ironically the same age when an acquaintance of mine suffered a back injury and decided, in her words, it was time the government supported her) Elliott is still riding his daily assignments at Philadelphia Park and, oh, yes, sitting atop Smarty Jones en route to a possible Triple Crown.
Two overcomers. Two major triumphs in the face of adversity. (Three if you count the Chapmans' devastation after their first trainer's murder.) So how does the revered Times deal with these successes?
"Elliott has guided a horse through two winning legs of the Triple Crown; he's pointed toward posterity. But now his past will be brought into sharper focus than ever, a past that has come to light as the news media dug deeper into what appeared to be the sort of Cinderella story we love so much.
"Details about Elliott emerged after he won the Derby, and he quickly went from Cinderella to a man who lied on his application for a license to ride in the Derby. He didn't check the box that said "Check Here" for having a criminal record. He had twice pleaded guilty to assault charges.
"The details are part of the Triple Crown story. More than preparing the horse for New York, Elliott had better prepare himself."
So, if Smarty Jones wins the Triple Crown, the New York Times wants to be sure it's permanently smeared with Stewart Elliott's past mistakes. Do you doubt that? Read on:
"The subject of Elliott's past came up briefly after the race yesterday.
"Sure, the past, I just think about the past and I look where I was, and now the future — look where I am," Elliott said.
"He's going to have to do a lot better than that. I would have one soul-searching session with reporters and say, "This is the last time I'll talk about it."
Well Mr. William I'm-more-important-than-God Rhoden. No one cares what you would do. In fact, why don't you have a major soul-searching session to squeeze out the pus of your bitter jealousy and leave Stewart and Smarty to their work.
"I'd like Smarty Jones to make history. But I'd also like to see us tone down all the talk of America's horse, or the idea that a sports team or athlete or animal can synthesize some great national vision. America is too vast for one dream."
Oh, sod-off, Rhoden. Go back to wallowing in your pig sty of lies and plagiarism or pimping for negative stories about other American successes.
The problem is not that America is too vast for one dream--especially when that dream involves overcoming long odds with no help from a government program. The problem is that the New York Times is too small to embrace the quintessential American dream.
"Let's go, Big Boy."
Saturday, May 15, 2004
Many news reports say Nick Berg was merely a young Jewish man intent on helping the Iraqi people. Certain Muslim "warriors" don't care about helping their fellow Islamists, though. They only care that Mr. Berg was an infidel Jew . His beheading is not the exception to Muslim warfare--it's the rule. And it's a rule Muslims have been following since Muhammad initiated the practice.
"According to Muhammad’s sacralized biography by Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad himself sanctioned the massacre of the Qurayza, a vanquished Jewish tribe. […] Muhammad ratified this judgment stating that it was a decree of God pronounced from above the Seven Heavens. Thus some 600 to 900 men from the Qurayza were lead on Muhammad’s order to the Market of Medina. Trenches were dug and the men were beheaded, and their decapitated corpses buried in the trenches while Muhammad watched in attendance. Women and children were sold into slavery, a number of them being distributed as gifts among Muhammad’s companions, and Muhammad chose one of the Qurayza women (Rayhana) for himself. […]
"The classical Muslim jurist al-Mawardi (a Shafi’ite jurist, d. 1058) from Baghdad was a seminal, prolific scholar who…wrote the following, based on widely accepted interpretations of the Qur'an and Sunna…regarding infidel prisoners of jihad campaigns:
“As for the captives, the amir [ruler] has the choice of taking the most beneficial action of four possibilities: the first to put them to death by cutting their necks; […] Allah, may he be exalted, says, 'When you encounter those [infidels] who deny [the Truth=Islam] then strike [their] necks' (Qur'an sura 47, verse 4)”....Abu’l-Hasan al-Mawardi, al-Ahkam as-Sultaniyyah." [The Laws of Islamic Governance, trans. by Dr. Asadullah Yate, (London), Ta-Ha Publishers Ltd., 1996, p. 192. Emphasis added.]"
Forget the seventy-two virgins waiting in Paradise. From that century to this, torture and death have been the handmaidens of the Muslims.
Muslims Torture Christian to Death
"Muslim seminary students in Pakistan tortured a young Christian for five days and nights to force him to convert to Islam, according to a British human-rights monitor.
"Upon learning of his faith, the students accosted Anjum and took him to a seminary run by Maulvi Ghulam Rasool, who along with others, tortured the Christian for five days.
Anjum's tormentors ordered him to deny his Christian faith and embrace Islam.
Report: Muslims Slaughter 600 Christians
"Muslims have slaughtered an estimated 600 Christians this week in Nigeria, according to the Christian Association of Nigeria."
The article states 12 churches were burned and two trucks loaded with corpses were seen traveling the streets.
"Hundreds of people were killed," said Christian leader Mark Amani. "Some corpses were burned in wells. Even little children were killed. "The bodies of pregnant women were ripped open and their bodies burned," he said.
"A spokesman for [the British-based monitor of persecution against Christians] Barnabas Fund said its source reports the killing of several hundred people "when defiant mobs of Muslim youths armed with clubs and machetes and cutlasses rampaged at about 1 a.m. on Thursday despite a police imposed curfew."
"Mobs went from house to house looking for Christian victims and in some cases trapped the occupants inside and torched the houses," the Barnabas spokesman said. "Police have been issued orders to shoot armed rioters on sight."
And don't forget the Sudan, which Kofi Annan insists we cannot ignore, even as he and the United Nations are doing exactly that.
"It has been a pretty bad last few weeks if you’re black in Darfur Province in Sudan. If you weren’t murdered, you may have simply had your village burned to the ground. If you escaped the murderous Arab/Muslim Khartoum regime and their Janjaweed militia’s death sentence, you may have escaped into Chad. Or worse, you may have ended up in what many are calling concentration camps."
But Islam is a religion of peace, so anything its followers do must be someone else's fault. At least that's the impression being put out by NPR’s Julie McCarthy when reporting about the massacre of a pregnant mother and her four children by Palestinian terrorists.
"The settlers rallied support saying Israel was withdrawing under fire. But there was ample evidence yesterday to show that their continued presence in Gaza is provoking bloodshed. Israeli troops shot dead two Palestinian gunmen after the men ambushed mother and her four small daughters outside the Gaza settlement of Gush Katif. The family was shot and killed on their way to the Israeli city of Ashkelon where they intended to campaign against Ariel Sharon and his plan to uproot them from Gaza. Julie McCarthy, NPR news, Jerusalem."
When outrage resulted from those comments, NPR issued the following statement:
"In a story that aired Monday, May 3, on the political setback to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to disengage from Gaza, correspondent Julie McCarthy reported on the killing of an Israeli mother and her four daughters outside a Gaza settlement by Palestinian gunmen who were later shot dead by Israeli troops. However, in the report McCarthy said "... there was ample evidence yesterday to show that their [the settlers'] continued presence in Gaza is provoking bloodshed." The purpose of the report was to take note of the continuing violence. The story in no way meant to suggest that the killings were justified. NPR regrets that the report made any such implication."
Many of the world's self-styled elite intelligentsia have replaced their crush on communism with an infatuation for Islam. They better wake up soon because if Sharia Law worms its way into the United States, their necks will be the first on the chopping block. Don't think you'll be spared, Barbra Streisand, because you are a superstar. Don't think you'll escape, Steven Spielberg, because you are a brilliant filmmaker. To Muslims you are merely decadent American Jews who can accomplish no good thing in this world. Just ask Nick Berg.
Wednesday, May 12, 2004
America's Dirty Secret
I have a friend who has a website of what is termed "romantic erotica." While it's always lumped in with ordinary "pornography" (and to some people, it is) the site is not pornographic. The stories never descend into the crude language of so many "erotic stories" and there are no pictures or photographs depicting debasing sexual acts. (There are illustrations from 16th-19th century nude and erotic paintings and no, I'm not providing the link!)
However, because of the "pornography" classification, she is always receiving requests to link with other sites that do post such pictures. Shortly after the first pictures appeared of the "abuse" at Abu Ghraib, she commented they looked like reenactments of photos she had seen on a number of "FemDom" sites--websites detailing the aggressive control of men by women. In fact, she notes, the pictures on such sites were far more graphic and severe.
She sent me a link to one such site. (No, I'm not going to post that one either.) A free site open to any inquisitive eyes of any age. The pictures there were indeed like what has been shown from Abu Ghraib.
Considering the age of the soldiers involved, the fact many of the guards were women, and that a woman took many of the pictures, I began to wonder about the influence of such sites and the whole "Mistress/Master/Slave" BDSM subculture. Was it possible these young soldiers, inundated with such pictures and stories, decided to act out their fantasies? As much as we try to deny it, there is ample proof young people have been desensitized to such images and secretly wish to "act out" what they see. Sex, after all, is no longer a private, special time between two people, but a near-public celebration of self-gratification.
Donna M. Hughes dealt with the issue in her National Review article, but she concentrates primarily on women and children using information she collected in the former Soviet Union and its former satellite states.
I was interested in finding what was available to the most casual web surfer in the United States. And was there evidence what was portrayed on such websites was being acted out in real life?
To my surprise, I found an actual Iraq connection! In a December 3, 2002 column, Alexander Cockburn writes of a certain "Jack" McGeorge who was nominated to join Hans Blix's weapons inspection team.
"The weapons inspection team massing in Baghdad under the indomitable Hans Blix is possibly the first such unit to be graced, if that's the word, with an experienced torturer. The Washington Post set the ball rolling last Thursday with a story by John Grimaldi to the effect that Harvey John "Jack" McGeorge of Woodbridge, Va., then in New York waiting to be sent to Iraq as a munitions analyst, is a figure of consequence in the world of BDSM, aka bondage, domination and sado-masochism.
"Co-founder and past president of Black Rose, a Washington-area pansexual S&M group, and the former chairman of the board of the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom, McGeorge is also a founding officer of the Leather Leadership Conference Inc., which "produces training sessions for current and potential leaders of the sadomasochism/leather/fetish community," according to its Web site.
"[John] Grimaldi noted that "several Web sites describe McGeorge's training seminars, which involve various acts conducted with knives and ropes." McGeorge was interviewed in person by Blix and joined the team as a temporary staff member in December 2001.
"McGeorge is a former Marine and Secret Service specialist…"
After you've finished reading that, try this link and scroll down:
"And for political courage, let us hail a group of youths who "have an interest in BDSM," a Girl Scout Gold Award project. The organizers are firmly to the left of the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom, since NCSF is always making a point of fighting for adults-only sexual freedom. This news comes courtesy of Lavender Magazine of Minneapolis, Minn. Queer Youth Exist was created by two high school students, Hedge and Katze, as their Girl Scout Gold Award project.
"The two see BDSM and fetish culture as alluring to the younger crowd. "They're attracted to the young goth BDSM culture -- to the shiny clothes, attractive people, great music and club nights," claims Katze. "It's a fun culture, and people want to be part of it, even if they don't practice BDSM. They want to separate themselves from the Abercrombie and Fitch jock crowd -- they want to be with older people who are in their culture scene."
"We'll probably have a presidential candidates 40 years down the road, saying that as a kid in the Twin Cities she "experimented with BDSM" and it was first-class training in the art of firm government."
Good Lord I hope not!
NOTE: According to its website, "The National Coalition for Sexual Freedom is a national organization committed to creating a political, legal, and social environment in the United States that advances equal rights of consenting adults who practice forms of alternative sexual expression. NCSF is primarily focused on the rights of consenting adults in the SM-leather-fetish, swing, and polyamory communities, who often face discrimination because of their sexual expression."
The more I surfed, the more apparent it became the soldiers in those "abuse" photos thought what they were engaged in was merely a huge game--a joke from the looks of their grinning faces--something people would accept and understand. In reality, they are no more than moral infants in a playpen.
Ironically a mere three days after the DoD made the official information release on January 16, 2004 about the abuse at Abu Ghraib, Time published an article entitled "Bondage Unbound," with the subhead of "Growing numbers of Americans are experimenting with sadomasochistic sex."
"But those who practice sadomasochism—including those halting dabblers who tee-hee their way through spankings, hoping to paddle excitement into their marriage—know it's still taboo. (After all, if it weren't, it would lose its power to excite.) To reconcile the icons with the actual practice, I spent several weeks recently talking to SM practitioners around the U.S.—in New York City and San Francisco, yes, but also in North Carolina and New Mexico. Whether they were nervous novices or experienced dungeon masters leading some of the nation's 250 SM organizations, virtually all of them asked for anonymity. One man said he had lost a job when his boss found directions to a bondage workshop in his office. Others said they would be embarrassed if their families learned of their proclivities. We live in a culture in which sadomasochism is everywhere—from Versace billboards to at least a dozen college campuses where SM support groups have been established—but somehow it remains unseen and unspoken, just beyond the edge of respectability."
It was beginning to look like we are a nation of hypocrites.
That thought was strengthened when I read the story of the Iowa State bondage and sadomasochism group "Cuffs."
"The National Coalition for Sexual Freedom [see above note ] sent a letter to the Office of Judicial Affairs last week asking for charges against ISU bondage and sadomasochism group Cuffs to be dropped.
"National Coalition for Sexual Freedom founder Susan Wright said S&M is not assault and does not involve unwanted, offensive or fearful activities.
"Keith Bystrom, associate counsel to the university, said Iowa State can investigate incidents without someone filing a complaint because it has the responsibility to make sure all student organizations are following Iowa law.
"Bystrom said that under Iowa Code, a demonstration at a November Cuffs meeting was assault because Long was striking someone with the intent to cause pain. However, BDSM supporters said it was not assault and should fall under an exemption to the law, because Cuffs workshops are voluntary and therefore by definition cannot be criminal.
"The university still recognizes Cuffs as a student organization and has lifted its interim suspension."
That last sentence was a real shocker. Iowa State officially recognized a BDSM student group! And they are permitted to hire call girls for their "demonstrations."
Not only that, but they're evidently still meeting.
We have allowed certain minorities to define sex as "anything goes." Our military has a "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Yet we are shocked when our young people engage in such behavior and consider it amusing. How far are we willing to take the idea of tolerance?
Larry Abraham Essay
I imagine a lot of you might have read this already since it was passed around on the 'net pretty thoroughly. What I didn't know was if anyone actually posted the correct, original link to the Insider Report and the essay in question, "The Clash of Civilizations and the Great Caliphate" (Part I January 29, 2004 - Part II May 1, 2004)
While Mr. Abraham definitely has an agenda, he also has a solid, deep knowledge of history and the nature of the Muslims. Even the most allegedly neutral, cosmopolitan Muslims harbor a deep, secret desire to see their people rise to a position of superiority, by whatever means possible.
As for the rest…
"Force is the only thing which is respected in that part of the world and this force need not be tied to “reform”. I suggest Mr. Rumsfled acquaint himself with a copy of Julius Caesar’s Gallic Wars and Sun Tsu’s Art of War. All the tactics and strategies necessary to subdue the Iraqi insurgents can be found in those two military gems."
Or if that fails, there is always the Dracula Option.
Tuesday, May 11, 2004
Unemployed? Benefits running out? Facing financial hardship? Blame John Kerry.
"The Senate by a single vote rejected an election-year effort Tuesday to extend federal unemployment benefits.
"Democrats tried to attach the benefit to a corporate tax bill. On a 59-40 vote in the GOP-controlled Senate, they fell just shy of the 60 votes needed to overcome objections that extending the benefits violated last year's budget agreement.
"Massachusetts Sen .John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, was the only senator who missed the vote. Kerry was campaigning Tuesday in Kentucky."
What makes this tidbit even more ironic is that John Kerry is/was running an ad claiming he cast the deciding vote to create 20 million jobs. Aside from the fact it's impossible for the government to create 20 million jobs, John Kerry is lying . Former Senator Bob Kerrey from Nebraska cast the over-the-top vote on that bill.
It's Time for the Dracula Option
I mentioned this briefly before but after reading the following headlines/articles, it should be mentioned again.
Everyone knows this headline:
"Video Shows Beheading of American in Iraq"
"BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - A video posted Tuesday on an al-Qaida-linked Web site showed the beheading of an American civilian in Iraq in what was said to be revenge for abuse of Iraqi prisoners."
But have they read this one?
"Hamas Displays Israeli Soldiers' Remains"
"GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip (AP) - Hamas militants triumphantly displayed remains of some of the six Israeli soldiers killed in a roadside bombing in Gaza City on Tuesday, prompting Israeli threats of punishing reprisals if body parts are not returned."
Apparently the only thing these animals understand is death, desecration, and their own perverted methods of counting coup .
Am I suggesting American soldiers emulate them? No. But I do think we should "allow" an Iraqi force to handle the job of locating and dealing with the anti-democracy terrorists. And if they choose the "Dracula Option," so be it.
As I wrote previously, almost everyone knows Vlad Dracul, the bloodthirsty 15th century Prince of Wallachia who was the model for Dracula. His nickname was Vlad the Impaler and he got his reputation for cruelty because he literally impaled his enemies on stakes. Row upon row of dead and dying enemies covered the fields as an example of what happened to those who waged war on Prince Vald Dracul.
But--how many people know (or ever knew) who Vlad Tepes was fighting? Not many I imagine. Well, it was the Muslim hordes from Turkey who were trying to expand their empire into his country! And why did he resort to such a hideous display? Because he knew the Muslims were a cruel, heartless, debased enemy who tortured their prisoners with slow death. Dracul rightly decided the only way to defeat them was to show them the fate they would suffer if they continued their attacks.
[From the Vlad Dracul web page.]
"Could you imagine being a foot solider of the Turkish army marching into Wallachia (now part of Romania). And once there seeing the burned and dismembered corpses of those men who fought before you, each one impaled on long poles, stretched across miles and miles of enemy real estate."
Prince Vlad Dracul is even listed among the "Christian princes" who led the resistance against the Ottoman Empire.
"Three Romanian feudal states, known as "principalities" arose in Transylvania, Moldavia and Wallachia. The Magars settled on the Pannonian plains and by force of arms gained political control over Transylvania.
"The Romanian Principalities represented a rampart against the Ottoman Turkish expansion into Europe, after the fall of Constantinople in 1453 and the fall of the Balkan Orthodox states of Bulgaria and Serbia. Romanian prices led Christian resistance against the Ottomans for centuries.
"They included Mircea the Elder in Wallachia (1386-1418); Ioan Corvin of Hunedoara, Duke of Transylvania (1438-1456), afterwards regent of Hungary; Vlad the Impaler in Wallachia (1456-1463); Stephen the Great and Holy in Moldavia (1456-1504),…and Michael the Brave of Wallachia (1593-1601), who for the first time united the three Romanian Principalities into a single state in 1600, and has since remained a symbol of unity for the Romanian People." [Emphasis mine.]
Prince Vlad died fighting the Muslim hordes. His head was chopped off (sound familiar?) and carried back to Constantinople where it was displayed on a stake. Thanks to Bram Stoker, however, no one remembers that footnote of history. And, thanks to the dictator Nicolae Ceausescu claiming Dracula was his idol, many are loathe to consider Vlad Tepes might, in many ways, be a hero.
Apparently all those beasts in Baghdad and other Islamic fascist states understand is raw, unadulterated, cruelty. It's time they were re-introduced to Dracula.
I Don't Believe It!
Rush Limbaugh predicted this reaction shortly after he went on the air at noon EDT.
This story was filed at 2:34 p.m. by Jason Straziuso
"PA family angry with American government over son's brutal death."
"Berg's family said U.S. State Department officials on Monday had told them Berg was decapitated. The family, though, had wanted that information to remain private.
"Michael Berg lashed out at the U.S. military and Bush administration, saying his son might still be alive had he not been detained by U.S. officials in Iraq without being charged and without access to a lawyer.
"Nick Berg, a small telecommunications business owner, spoke to his parents on March 24 and told them he would return home on March 30. But Berg was detained by Iraqi police at a checkpoint in Mosul on March 24. He was turned over to U.S. officials and detained for 13 days.
"Michael Berg said he blamed the U.S. government for creating circumstances that led to his son's death. He said if his son hadn't been detained for so long, he might have been able to leave the country before the violence worsened.
"I think a lot of people are fed up with the lack of civil rights this thing has caused," he said. "I don't think this administration is committed to democracy."
"Berg's mother, Suzanne Berg, said her son was in Iraq to help rebuild communication antennas. "He had this idea that he could help rebuild the infrastructure," she said.
"Michael Berg described himself as fervently anti-war, but said his son disagreed with him. "He was a Bush supporter," Berg said. "He looked at it as bringing democracy to a country that didn't have it."
Why was this guy (1) detained by the Iraqi police then (2) detained by the U.S.? Did the family really think our State Department could keep it private with all the Arab media on the hunt?
Nowhere in the story do the Bergs fault the actual criminals! Their son was doing what he thought was right. Now his family will turn it into a political football--with the slavering help of the media, of course--dishonoring his name and everything he worked for in his life.
Look for them in an upcoming "Kerry for President" ad…
Where Are They Now?
I was putting together this post last night but got delayed searching for the original articles mentioned. This morning I discovered these comments at Vodka Pundit (via Instapundit).
Although he doesn't say so, Stephen Green might be referencing Dershowitz's comments cited in this NewsMax article. Working links (at this moment in time, at least) to both Dershowitz's column and Jonathan Alter's November 5, 2001 Newsweek column are in the body of the piece.
"9/11 Flashback: When Libs Backed Torture
"In the months after Sept. 11, when the shock of the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history still angered most Americans, even the most vigorous civil libertarians were in favor of getting tough with detainees in the war on terrorism - even to the point of actually recommending torture.
"Leading civil libertarian, Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz, actually argued that the torture of terrorist suspects was legal under the U.S. Constitution and should be employed when a suspect refused to divulge information about potentially deadly terrorist plots.
"Is it justified to resort to unconventional techniques such as truth serum, moderate physical pressure and outright torture?" Dershowitz asked in a Nov. 8, 2001, Los Angeles Times op-ed piece. ["Is There a Torturous Road to Justice?"]
"Any interrogation technique, including the use of truth serum or even torture, is not prohibited," the noted civil libertarian insisted.
"Dershowitz explained that while evidence obtained through torture could not be used in a criminal prosecution, it "could be used against that suspect in a non-criminal case - such as a deportation hearing - or against someone else."
"Likewise, Newsweek mega-liberal Jonathan Alter argued that it was time to take the gloves off with enemy detainees [in his November 5, 2001 column "Time to Think About Torture."].
"It's a new world, and survival may well require old techniques that seemed out of the question," he wrote the same week Dershowitz spoke out. "In this autumn of anger, even a liberal can find his thoughts turning to ... torture."
"Couldn't we at least subject [al-Qaida suspects] to psychological torture?" Alter wondered plaintively. "How about truth serum, administered with a mandatory IV? Or deportation to Saudi Arabia, land of beheadings?"
"Some people still argue that we needn't rethink any of our old assumptions about law enforcement," Alter said. "But they're hopelessly 'Sept. 10' - living in a country that no longer exists."
"On that last point Alter was clearly wrong - at least about his media colleagues. If their hysteria over the so-called Iraqi prison abuse scandal proved nothing else this week, it's that they have very much returned to the America of Sept. 10."
Saturday, May 08, 2004
Another Prison Abuse Scandal
Only this one-- and others like it in Nigeria--is being studiously ignored by our self-righteous Democrats.
John Kerry's legacy of peace in Vietnam. When the Democrat presumptive nominee returned from his four months in country, he immediately went about loudly giving aid and comfort to the Communists of North Vietnam--even meeting with them to discuss "peace." Encouraged by the vocal and media-driven opposition to the war in the United States, the Vietcong fought on and we ultimately gave up.
What do you think would be the response if the prisoners in question were Muslim ?
From Freedom House, Center for Religious Freedom:
"Another prisoner is Mua Say So, the brother of Mua Bua Senh who was beaten to death by provincial and district public security police in Lai Chau Province in August 2002, as reported by the Center at that time.
"These arrests are part of a wave of anti-Christian persecution underway in the Hmong areas of Vietnam. The Center reported earlier this month that the Vietnamese military has used drug injections in Lai Chau Province as part of its campaign to pressure Hmong Christians to sign statements recanting their faith
“As long as Hanoi sanctions despotism against religious belief – as evidenced by these and other cases of imprisonment – Vietnam can not be a citizen of the international community of democracies and should be considered among the worst repressors of religious freedom in the world,” stated Center director Nina Shea. “These Hmong Christians are among the poorest and most marginalized people in the country and Hanoi mistakenly believes it can get away with torture, deprivation, cruelty and, in some cases quite literally, murder,” Shea stated."
I guess this sort of atrocity would be just too, too embarrassing to admit. It might sully John Kerry's current platform as "Vietnam War hero."
Letter From a Current Abu Ghraib MP
Interesting information on the current situation at the prison. Everyone seems to be forgetting (or ignoring for political purposes) the "abuse" took place last year between October and December. This pretty much shoots a hole in the "I wasn't told about the Geneva Convention" defense, which was stupid to begin with.
"There has never been, as far as I know, any abuse while my company and I have been at Abu Ghraib. The abuse incidents were already under investigation by the time we got here. I have never been instructed to do anything abusive to prisoners by anyone. The incident is only being reported now, but again, nothing further has happened that I know about.
"I received training on the Geneva Conventions at Basic Training, AIT, during mobilization in Puerto Rico, in Kuwait, and when I arrived here at Abu Ghraib. I also received a card with the Geneva Conventions and the Rules of Engagement printed on it. […]
"The claims that these people are making regarding lack of training or being told to perform certain acts seems to us that they are just passing blame. We believe that even if they are telling the truth, a sense of human decency should have told them that what they were doing was wrong.
"It is not a matter of not enough supervisors, but, rather, not being able to trust soldiers to do their jobs."
[Found via World Mag Blog. Link above.]
Friday, May 07, 2004
"The Night of January 16th "*
Explain please…The Department of Defense released information they were investigating the abuse of Iraqi prisoners on January 16, 2004. The announcement was buried in the back pages of both the New York Times and the Washington Post .
"Release Number: 04-01-43
"FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
"DETAINEE TREATMENT INVESTIGATION BAGHDAD, Iraq An investigation has been initiated into reported incidents of detainee abuse at a Coalition Forces detention facility. The release of specific information concerning the incidents could hinder the investigation, which is in its early stages. The investigation will be conducted in a thorough and professional manner. The Coalition is committed to treating all persons under its control with dignity, respect and humanity. Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, the Commanding General, has reiterated this requirement to all members of CJTF-7." News release, U.S. Central Command, Jan. 16, 2004."
The entire Senate was vacation until January 20, 2004, but after that date, what was the response/reaction of all these now-outraged senators to such a "repulsive" revelation?
Here is a list of the Democrat members of the Armed Services Committee. Follow the links to find their public "concerns" immediately after the DOD's January 16, 2004 statement. (In case you're wondering, NOT ONE made a single comment.)
Carl Levin (Michigan) - Ranking Democrat
Go here and enter a date range.
Edward M. Kennedy (Massachusetts)
January 2004 press releases
Robert C. Byrd (West Virginia)
Speeches and comments, January 2004.
Joseph I. Liberman (Connecticut)
Go here and enter a date range.
Jack Reed (Rhode Island)
Senate Armed Service Committee News (Press Releases)
Daniel K. Akaka (Hawaii)
January 2004 Press Releases
Bill Nelson (Florida)
(Senator Nelson's media releases link was not working.)
E. Benjamin Nelson (Nebraska)
Press Release Archives
Mark Dayton (Minnesota)
January 2004 Press Releases
Evan Bayh (Indiana)
January 2004 Press Releases
(Includes a pop-up ad for his newsletter.)
Hillary Rodham Clinton (New York)
2004 Press Releases
Mark Pryor (Arkansas)
January 2004 Press Releases
Just for good measure, here are a couple of Republican Senators who should know better--except they're always leaning in the wrong direction…
John McCain (Arizona)
Susan M. Collins (Maine)
*A play by Ayn Rand.
Incontinence is a National Health Priority*
Leaking secret documents has become a sport in Washington D.C. Perhaps the unknown leaker mention in Wind Rider's post had visions of wealth or glory or both. Money undoubtedly changed hands, but motivation is the sticking point for me.
Was it a Muslim sympathizer? Someone who secretly supported Bin Laden and Saddam and Arrafat who hoped to get the exact reaction we're now exhibiting?
Or was it some young, uneducated dolt who believes the media hatred spewed about the Bush Administration and looked at the investigation as a way to bring down an "illegitimate" President?
If the first, we need to do some serious investigating in the backgrounds of those second- and third-level paper pushers and/or translators.
If the second, it's the media and the Democrat Attack Dogs who need to be investigated.
Either way, what was done is treason. Legally, perhaps not, although that option should be strenuously examined. But morally and ethically most certainly.
Rumsfeld should not have apologized. Congress should not have demanded he apologize to either the prisoners (who were there because they were trying to kill American soldiers) or to anyone in Congress for not keeping them "informed." Hell, I don't blame anyone for refusing to hand sensitive, confidential information over to the Armed Services Committee or the Intelligence Committee. The Democrats (and their staffs) on those two committees leak so badly they need a giant-sized, industrial-strength box of Depends.
We are at war . What part of that sentence isn't clear to the leaker(s) or to Democrats? The crimes (if any) were already being investigated and handled. The leak only served to give aid and comfort to our enemies and put our soldiers in harm's way.
But that is their agenda, isn't it? Ratchet up the insurgency so there will be more attacks and more deaths. Then the DAD's can run on the "Quagmire" platform.
I still blame Walter Cronkite.
*Statement from the IFFGD website.
Thursday, May 06, 2004
Sometime during the second hour of his radio program, a caller to Rush Limbaugh (NOT Rush Limbaugh) raised the issue of the "homoeroticism" in the "abuse" photos.
Outrage to follow…
Wednesday, May 05, 2004
How Muslims Treat Their (Child) Prisoners
Just a bit of balance from the other side…
56 Boy Slaves Freed in Sudan
[Sudan is a member of the United Nations Human Rights Commission and has criticized the U.S. for its treatment of Iraqi prisoners.]
"Over four dozen boy slaves have been freed from cattle camps near the border between northern and southern Sudan.
"According to Christian Solidarity International, the operation to free the 56 boys was a joint effort of CSI and the Arab-Dinka Peace Committee. The boys had been abducted during jihad slave raids sanctioned by the Khartoum government that targeted non-Muslim communities in northern Bahr El Ghazal.
"The boys, who were rescued at the end of April, had been serving as slaves in cattle camps of Arab nomads. The organization says the boys revealed a clear pattern of physical and psychological abuse. They reported cases of beatings, stabbings, rape, racial insults, death threats and forcible conversion to Islam."
[Via World Net Daily]
Tuesday, May 04, 2004
Abuse or SOP?
Andrew Sullivan, Virginia Postrel, Ann Althouse, Sissy Willis and a lot of bloggers are linking to this story originally published 5-3-04 by the AP. (Sissy Willis links to a fascinating FrontPage article by Phyllis Chesler who references a forthcoming book by psychoanalyst and Arabist Dr. Nancy Kobrin.)
The rest generally pull out Dhia al-Shweiri's quotes about what he had undergone as a prisoner of Saddam and his complaints that he was humiliated by the US military, having to strip naked and made "…to feel as though we were women, the way women feel, and this is the worst insult, to feel like a woman."
Speaking of insults… What a porthole into the mind of an Islamic male.
Like everyone else I have my own ideas on the abuse charges, some of which will remain unprinted because (although a number of friends have made the same comments vis a vis the American general in charge of the Maryland reservists) it would only cause more harsh feelings if anyone ran across them. (Not likely, but possible.)
Two other ideas are (perhaps) less controversial. Everyone who quoted the story used the same passage, but they all eliminate the statements immediate before it.
"He said he and six other prisoners - all hooded - had to face the wall and bend over a little as they put their hands on the wall.
"They made us stand in a way that I am ashamed to describe. They came to look at us as we stood there. They knew this would humiliate us," he said…"
First thought: when coupled with the later comments about being made to "…feel as though we were women…" it makes me wonder exactly how Islamic men er--ah--engage with their wives in the bedroom.
Second (and more important) thought: this is a rather standard "search" procedure in American prisons, isn't it? As disgusting as it is, searching prisoners' body cavities is a necessary evil.
As I recall, there was a rather infamous prison battle in Afghanistan involving the "American Taliban" Johnny Walker Lindh. CIA agent Johnny "Mike" Spann died in that uprising and numerous questions were raised about how thoroughly the captured Taliban fighters had been searched.
According to this Newsweek account, Walker-Lindh was part of a Taliban force that surrendered to Northern Alliance and was taken to the fortress of Kala Jangi. Lindh (who is called Abdul Hamid in the Newsweek article) relates how as soon as they reached Kala Jangi,
“Two of the [Taliban] threw grenades they had hidden in their clothes, and killed a couple of people .”
"The next day when the prisoners were taken out of the basement of the prison to be interrogated, Walker-Lindh explains: “I saw two Americans there. They were taking pictures with a digital camera and a video camera. They were there for interrogating us. As soon as the last of us was taken out of the basement, someone either pulled a knife , or threw a grenade at the guards, and got their guns, and started shooting."
The ensuing pictures of the humiliating "piling on" of the prisoners in Iraq are gross and unworthy of the American military. But so are these, just to remind some of the more "righteously indignant" leftists.
But al-Shweiri's complaints alone do not sound like abuse. They sound like a full body search of potentially dangerous Islamic fighters who are dedicated to killing as many American soldiers as possible. American soldiers who might very well remember what happened to Johnny "Mike" Spann at Kala Jangi.
Monday, May 03, 2004
Are There Porn Pop-Ups in the Democrat Agenda?
"Three Hollywood Hills [FL] High School teachers have been ordered to stop using a survey after a complaint it was designed to persuade students to become Republicans…
"The survey was titled, "What Political Party Do I Agree With?" It was written by Jose Roquett, who teaches government and economics, according to parent Scott Douglas and Broward Schools spokesman Joe Donzelli.
"Students were asked whether they agree or disagree with a dozen statements, such as "We pay too much in taxes," "I am against abortions" or "We should be harder on criminals." If the student agrees with the statements, the survey says they are Republican.
"I was very upset because it's slanted. This seemed to be designed to convince 18-year-olds they should register Republican," said Douglas, whose daughter, Magda Goitia, received the survey."
Why? If his daughter disagreed with all three statements given in the article along with the other nine in the survey (and since his daughter is 18, he certainly has had enough time to train her to his liking) she would merely have been told to register Democrat.
Could it be Mr. Douglas is ashamed of his party's platform and agenda? Could it be he doesn't want his daughter to know Democrats support higher taxes, abortion, and leniency for criminals?
No. Couldn't be. Democrats are proud of their agenda. Aren't they? They say they are. So why do they try to hide it from their children--like pop-up porn on the Internet?
"Douglas complained to school Principal Joyce Ferguson, School Board member Lois Wexler and various Democratic activists .
And for all of you out there who still believe the majority rules…
"Donzelli said 180 students were given the survey by Roquett and two other teachers. "After one parent complained, the principal requested that it no longer be used," Donzelli said. No action will be taken against the teachers, he said."
In case you missed that, one Democrat complained--out of 180 total surveys given--and the surveys were immediately discontinued.
Do I hear a screech of protest from the free-speech brigade?
Teach That Principal How to Spell!
He obviously doesn't know the difference between "dam" and "damn."
I wonder if this school includes Islam in its curriculum?
Actually I find this rather amusing. During the years I taught in the California elementary schools, 4th through 6th grade students regularly wore a T-shirt proclaiming "Sex Wax." When I questioned the principals about it, I was told the T-shirt wasn't a problem. "Sex Wax" was merely the name of a popular surfboard wax.
I always wondered what sort of parent sent their child off to school wearing that kind of advertisement.
The March Continues
It really wasn't my intention to go through such a list of how Muslims are worming their way into positions of major influence in Christian society. It just sort of happened. And no one else seems to be collecting them all in one place.
But there is no avoiding the fact Muslims are intent on taking control any way they can.
"A top textbook consultant shaping classroom education on Islam in American public schools recently worked for a school funded and controlled by the Saudi government, which propagates a rigidly anti-Western strain of Islam,
"The consultant, Susan L. Douglass, has also praised Pakistan's madrassa schools as "proud symbols of learning," even after the U.S. government blamed them for fueling the rise of the Taliban and al-Qaida.
"Critics complain that Douglass, who taught at the [Islamic Saudi Academy in Alexandria, Va.] for at least a decade, has convinced American textbook publishers and educators to gloss over the violent aspects of Islam to make the faith more appealing to non-Muslim children. The units on Islam reviewed by WND appear to give a glowing and largely uncritical view of the faith.
"Asked about it, Douglass referred questions to the Council on Islamic Education, which did not respond…
"CIE is a Los Angeles-based Muslim activist group run by Shabbir Mansuri, who has been quoted in the local press saying he's waging a "bloodless" revolution to fight what he calls anti-Muslim bias in public schools and promote Islam in a positive light in American classrooms.
So where's the separation-of-church-and-state patrol when we need them?
"Mansuri, who consults with Saudi education ministers at his center, claimed in a 2002 op-ed piece that Islam has been on American soil "since before this nation was founded."
Notice that's the same nonsense they're trying to peddle about Israel--the non-existent ancient Palestine and all that.
The bottom line is these people have no "ancient culture." They're scavengers, cobbling an ersatz history together piecemeal--a mosaic of broken pottery stolen from all the other cultures they've usurped.
"The three major U.S. publishers of world history texts – Houghton Mifflin, McGraw Hill and Prentice Hall – have all let Mansuri and Douglass review their books. In fact, Houghton Mifflin's seventh-grade text, "Across the Centuries," was republished according to CIE's suggestions."
Read the whole study and then write to the publishers:
222 Berkeley Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02116
Submit a comment
The McGraw Hill Companies
P.O. Box 182604
Columbus, OH 43272
Hey Muslims! You Lost, We Won, Get Over It!
Enough is enough. It's time we woke up to the fact Islamists are using our Christian sense of fair-play and equality against us. They have no interest in living peacefully in the world; they intend to control the world. And since they couldn't do it with force--having had their sorry asses handed to them from one end of Europe to the other----they're doing it with guile.
"Church to remove Moor-slayer saint"
"A statue in a Spanish cathedral showing St James slicing the heads off Moorish invaders is to be removed to avoid causing offence to Muslims.
"Cathedral authorities in the pilgrim city of Santiago de Compostela, on Spain's north west coast, plan to move the statue to the museum. Among the reasons for the move is to avoid upsetting the "sensitivities of other ethnic groups".
Bullshit. I'm part of an ethnic group whose sensibilities are offended that they're moving the statue, and they don't care about my "sensitivities."
"The statue of St James "the Moor-slayer" is expected to be replaced by one depicting the calmer image of St James "the Pilgrim", by the same 18th century artist, Jose Gambino.
"The Saracen-slaying image of St James, or Santiago in Spanish, is a symbol of the fight between Christianity and Islam and the reconquest of Spain from eight centuries of Moorish rule before 1492.
"The saint is said to have appeared to Christian troops fighting Moorish army at the Battle of Clavijo in 844, the crusaders rallying to the cry of "Santiago y cierra Espana" - "St James, we will reconquer Spain."
And they did. Now everyone's busy giving it back. Fools.
The padres of Santiago de Compostela should perch good ole' Saint James on the highest spire of the Cathedral as a warning to Muslims who are considering another venal attack on innocents. Better yet, move it to a flood-lit pedestal in the center of the Madrid train station to remind every ethnic group that what had to be done to defeat the Muslim usurpers 1,160 years ago must be done again.
"…avoid causing offence to Muslims." Crap. From a to z they're nothing but a horde of abusive, bigoted, cowardly, degenerate, envious, fanatical, greedy, hypocritical, intolerant, jactitatious* killers; lunatic, mendacious, neurotic, obsessive, pitiless, querulous, rapacious, savage, tyrannical, ungrateful, violent, warped, xenophobic, yellow-bellied zealots.
*given to public or ostentatious boasting
Scared (Frozen) Stiff
I will always remember a debate I had waaaay back in 1970 on the eve of President Nixon creating the Environmental Protection Agency. Everyone around me was young and idealistic. Sometimes I felt I was the only one I knew who was young and logical .
They said we had to save the world. I said we had to save ourselves from money-grubbing do-gooders and bureaucrats who couldn't hold down a job in the private sector.
They said it would save precious resources. I said it would drain our wallets from here to eternity. Even in my callow youth I already knew nothing good came from centralized governmental meddling. (You'd think they would have realized that from the mess Washington made in Vietnam.)
Sometimes I feel like tracking down those people I debated back then just to say "I told you so!"
Charities 'spread scare stories on climate change to boost public donations'
"Environmental charities are exaggerating the threat of climate change in an attempt to raise more money from public donations, according to a report by Oxford University academics.
"The report says: "It might serve the interests of particular actors in the chain to 'sex-up' the story by linking climate change with the imminent threat of massive extinctions and jump on the resulting bandwagon.
"By this means . . . conservation charities generate donations and politicians gain an agenda that may attract votes and enhance careers. This could increase public cynicism and complacency about climate change and biodiversity loss."
"The report, Crying Wolf on Climate Change and Extinction, examined environmental charities' responses to climate change research conducted by the University of Leeds in January.
"Dr Paul Jepson, one of the new report's authors and a senior research fellow of the conservation practice programme at Oxford's Environmental Change Institute, said that the charities had "overstated the evidence to meet fundraising targets".
"…Part of the problem was "the rise of the professional fundraiser whose job it is to meet fundraising targets and who might not be involved in the science aspect".
"Dr [Richard] Ladle said that WWF's response to criticism of the claims was that the ends justified the means.
"However, a spokesman for WWF-UK insisted that it was unfair to judge fundraising in the same way as academic research. "Climate change is real and it endangers species," he said. "But you have to simplify issues for appeals. There is no way you can cover all the science. Fundraising appeals are very emotional."
Like David Hannum once said, "There's a sucker born every minute." (If you thought that quote was from P.T. Barnum, think again. See how easy it is to misinform the public?)
[Via NRO The Corner]
Being ignored, of course, except for this article from the Overseas Security Advisory Council:
"Zamfara Government Orders Demolition of All Churches
"Governor Ahmed Sani of Zamfara State, has ordered the demolition of all churches in the state, as he launched the second phase of his Sharia project yesterday. Speaking at the launch in Gusau, the state capital, Governor Sani disclosed that time was ripe for full implementation of the programme as enshrined in the Holy Quran.
"He added that his government would soon embark on demolition of all places of worship of unbelievers in the state, in line with Islamic injunction to fight them wherever they are found."
This is indeed the Islamic injunction. The debate among Muslims is not so much should unbelievers be fought but how they should be fought. Here in the United States they are using the freedom and tolerance of our Christian -orientled laws and society against us. Just ask the Christians living in Hamtramck, Michigan.
"Commenting on Governor Sani's decision, a lawyer and Chairman of Somolu Local Government, Barrister Ademorin Kuye, described the move as unconstitutional.
"The governor has no constitutional power to demolish churches in his state. The constitution guarantees the right of worship of every Nigerian. Nigeria is a secular state and a serving governor should not be seen as promoting one religion over the other," Barrister Kuye declared.
"It would be recalled that Governor Sani introduced the Sharia Legal Code in the state in the year 2000, despite opposition from the federal government and religious groups."
Obviously the "government" did nothing to stop or limit Sani in 2000. Does anyone believe they'll stop him now and risk yet another Muslim-induced civil war in the world?
[Found via NRO The Corner]