"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours." -Sir Charles Napier
BigEarth of New Mexico sez, The warmest places in hell are reserved for those who, in times of great national moment, reserve their neutrality.
Bill Whittle's mom sez, If you can’t say anything of deep and meaningful scientific or political import that is not supported by fact, reason, historical precedent and in-depth step-by-step logical analysis then don’t say anything at all!
A study backed by the European Union on the rise of anti-Semitism has been shelved after officials decided that its findings were "too controversial".
The 112-page survey, commissioned by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia based in Austria, found that many anti-Semitic incidents were carried out by Muslim and pro-Palestinian groups.
Is it any damned wonder we have had to fight and win their wars for them for the past century?
The leftie at Claireified says the right thing about the Trafalgar reenactment of Fardus Square.
I also can't help but feel like this mocks a time-honored act of liberation. Usually a statue that gets knocked down is one that some tyrannical dictator put in the middle of town square to celebrate himself and intimidate the little people. It is usually a glorious moment -- a "ha, take that Mr. I'm all made of bronze and think I'm so great. I'm not afraid of you anymore." Would anyone think it cool to replace famous flag raising moments, like Iwo Jima or India's liberation, with made up, fake flags ... sheesh...
But seriously, why build a statue to tear it down? That's what effigies are for, easy-to-make, stuffed sheets with black magic marker saying who it's supposed be. No muss, no fuss. What do they do with that statue now
She's absolutely right about what statue-pullings are for, and what they did is far more than raising a flag to set it on fire. Their contempt for that moment in Iraqi history was more like putting on blackface to entertain an audience of African Americans.
LA Times cartoonist Ramirez recently took the famous Vietnam execution photo image and changed it to "Politics" executing the President on a street in Baghdad. That, however, was was not offensive. It did not mock a sacred moment in the history of an oppressed people.
In a numbers game reminiscent of the Million Man and Million Mom Marches, the government count of protesters in London is 70,000 while the protesters claim double. Will they sue Scotland Yard for a greater number like Louis Farrakhan threatened to do to the Park Service? Hell, even Clinton left DC during Farrakhan's march.
Amnesty International displayed its true colors in support of those imprisoned at Guantanamo by dressing up as the enemy combatants who were picked up on the battlefield. This brings back the days when Amnesty's website was all over the situation in Gitmo but had very little to say about the September 11 attacks - almost nothing to say, actually, in comparison to their fixation on our prisoners, except for the solutionless slogan, "Justice not Revenge."
After the revelation that actual spying was going on there, via Muslim chaplains, has anyone thought that might suggest they are exactly the enemy we say they are? Why would the enemy want to spring them if they weren't with the enemy? If they were ordinary Muslims they would just be down the list to blow up after the Islamists are done in Istanbul.
Now that depends on your definition of ordinary. Let's go back to Nigeria for riots reminiscent of the Miss World Pageant. Then it was an insult to Mohammed (PBUH) on the op-ed page of the Lagos daily. This week, it was a single Christian student who was rumored to have insulted the Prophet. Since he evidently wasn't disciplined by the university with a good necklacing (Where is UNC Chancellor Moeser when you need him?), they have torched thirteen churches, plus stores and other buildings after looting them. No word yet on whether ordinary Muslims in India will again follow the Nigerian lead and murder dozens of Hindus.
Of course, the case is made by some that the statue-toppling in Fardus Square was staged for the international media, pointing to the sparse crowd present. Why these people think that a huge crowd would be out on the streets during an invasion points to their faulty thinking.
The only case that can be made today is that the enemy America fights is one that only wants to steal and kill and destroy, as demonstrated, again, in Istanbul. These protesters oppose the men who fight that enemy, an enemy that beyond any shadow of a doubt kills its own people in its own territory.
Trafalgar Square, the pigeon shit capital of the world, is in that way a fitting gathering place for these people. But history is what is represented at that square, a fact that will be missed, or dismissed, by the 150,000 who will rally. With their contempt for history's lessons and for doing what is right, what is really stopping them from pulling down Lord Nelson as well? Too much work, perhaps. In exposing themselves as showmen for the international media, these were the human shields who fled Baghdad when the Baathists wanted them to make their stand in dangerous places.
Watching the predictable protesters in London, you see, again, a very nice contrast between the President and the unruly people who oppose him.
Enough was said on that subject - the real left - when the feminists opposed the war in Afghanistan and when the head-up-its-ass Queers for Palestine banded together.
Now, right now actually as I write, as the left in England bitches about the cost of extra security, the President is praising the exercise of free speech there in London, and noting that free speech is now happening in Baghdad as well.
Of course, the left's leadership could help curb extra spending on security if they didn't encourage such huge demonstrations with their exaggerations and by turning the defintions of words and the meanings of actions upside down.
But I am still taken back to President Bush's inaugural parade, the protesters, particularly the environmental protesters, waving such signs as the policy-inspiring "Bush is a Moron" and "Hey Cheney - I'm hot for your lesbian daughter!" They dropped them on the ground and walked away for the extra forces paid by the taxpayers to clean up after them.
London is going to have a lot of extra rubbish this week as well.
:: michael Wednesday, November 19, 2003 [+] ::
:: Tuesday, November 18 ::
A LORD HAW-HAW FOR THE NEW CENTURY
Since Paris seems to award an honorary citizenship only every thirty years or so, perhaps John Muhammed won't get the honor, unless the Mayor of London would choose to follow Paris' lead.
Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, launched a stinging attack on President George Bush last night, denouncing him as the "greatest threat to life on this planet that we've most probably ever seen".
Mr Livingstone recalled a visit at Easter to California, where he was denounced for an attack he had made on what he called "the most corrupt and racist American administration in over 80 years". He said: "Some US journalist came up to me and said: 'How can you say this about President Bush?' Well, I think what I said then was quite mild. I actually think that Bush is the greatest threat to life on this planet that we've most probably ever seen. The policies he is initiating will doom us to extinction."
Mr Livingstone, who is holding a "peace party" for anti-war groups in City Hall tomorrow, added: "I don't formally recognise George Bush because he was not officially elected. So we are organising an alternative reception for everybody who is not George Bush."
His drag name, by the way, is Carol Moseley Braun.
It is speech such as this that makes one think poor Elizabeth Windsor - what is the point of being a monarch if you cannot have someone like this beheaded? Livingstone's actions are not simply the product of free expression and opinion because it's his right. He is deliberately misinforming the masses, encouraging them to protest and exhaust England's police resources in the process. Further, with North Korea and China peddling nuclear material, with unstable Pakistan having already repeatedly tested the Islamic bomb near India's borders, Iran's clear nuclear ambitions, and the Muslim leadership of the world awarding standing ovations to speeches calling for the eradication - not of Israel - but of the Jews in general, it is clear the mind of the Bush-hating left will overturn the definition of any word and the meaning of any action in the modern-day version of yelling, "BARABBAS!"
The aims of the east to annihilate itself, particularly in the Iran-Iraq war, and the seemingly imminent Pakistan-India war, threaten far more life in the most populous region of the world than an even twisted argument could make of the aims of George Bush. Perhaps Livingstone projects his own racism while he downgrades the value of life in Asia.
I woke up thinking I would catch up on Iraq this morning, and ended up reading about breast feeding.
Dennis Prager mulls over not breast feeding, actually, but the current mentality surrounding it. I didn't know that there was a war currently against bottle feeding. Prager, as usual, sees the human condition within:
In much of the West, the well educated have been taught to believe that they can know nothing and that they can draw no independent conclusions about truth, unless they cite a study and "experts" have affirmed it.
"Studies show" is to the modern secular college graduate what "Scripture says" is to the religious fundamentalist.
A second explanation is the God-like status of health in the secular West. As G. K. Chesterton foretold a hundred years ago, when people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing, they believe in anything. When people stop worshipping God, they begin worshipping many gods. Health, for example. In the name of Health, condoms are given out to high school students. In the name of Health, many parents would rather their teenager cheat on tests than smoke. And in the name of Health, women are pressured into breast-feeding.
Such are my thoughts when they come to peacemongers and anti-racism zealots. I have watched people in my own church overturn their Messiah in order to march against the hateful bigot Franklin Graham for doing his job as an Evangelical Christian minister. Never mind that Graham's charity benefits Muslims, he wouldn't deny the God he believes in.
"Well, he shouldn't have said those things. I think all Americans - and this is a joke! - all Americans, even if they're from the South and 'stupid,' should be represented"
I do not believe that Clark was calling all Southerners stupid.
However, Clark has with this remark proven himself an utter failure at diplomacy and why he should not be allowed to address other nations as a head of state.
He has given his opposition some powerful ammunition, and very likely has lost most of the South for the Democratic Party. Reminders of Clark's Little Rock origins will serve as reminders of another (in)famous Democrat's Little Rock origins.
This Democrat general also ignores that the South is always overrepresented in the US military, which will show for him the same disdain deserved by General Eric Black-berets-for-everyone Shinseki.
For all the jokes we've heard about Bush's malapropos, the worst example I have heard so far is from the time he called the People of Pakistan "Pakis". Compared to Clark, that is a big, big difference.
However, the writing contradicts what the President has been saying since 9-11, that ordinary Muslims are not responsible for the actions of the Islamists. This weekend's bombing in Riyadh seems to back that up. The Postal Service, given effective pressure to stop printing this stamp, may also elect to stop printing Christmas, Hanukkah, and Kwanzaa stamps while pretending to run under the thought-vacant umbrella for separation of church and state.
If the President is correct in his recent Reaganesque speech that Islam is compatible with democracy, then we should not give productive American Muslim citizens the idea that democracy does not want them.
Still, there is something very wrong with that religion. You can add many, many events to that list (state-sanctioned persecution of Christians in Muslims countries, mass killings in Nigeria to protest the op-ed page, mass killings of Hindus in India to protest the Nigerian op-ed page, the 1972 Olympic slaughter of Israeli athletes, the alarming number of “honor killings” within Muslim families in England, the dancing in the streets by ordinary Muslims after 9-11, and Palestinian streets named after suicide bombers). Anyone remember the 2002 boycott of Starbucks by American Muslims for Global Peace and Justice? It was their response to Starbucks' CEO denouncing the rise of anti-semitism. Religion of peace, my ass.
Further, the now-retired Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad received a standing ovation at the 57-nation Islamic conference after he ranted about how the Jews control the world and how Muslims should arm themselves to defeat that enemy. We also know that something is wrong with that religion given how fiercely liberals (like Paul Krugman) have run to its defense.
In this country, a better alternative to boycotting a stamp is for Christians to continue the work of reaching out to Muslims and working, prayerfully, to convert them. -Don’t think that can happen? Ask the underground Christians in Mecca.
Remember the much-forwarded e-mail story about Hillary Clinton playing a significant role in defending Black Panthers accused of torturing and murdering Alex Rackley? It's false. The newer version claims Paul Harvey featured it on "The Rest of the Story," which is even more false.
What's so frustrating here is how true stories with even more power get forgotten. This February 2000 WSJ article about Al Sharpton and the massacre at Jewish-owned Freddy's Fashion Mart needs get circulated instead:
Mr. Sharpton is best-known for the Tawana Brawley hoax, in which he insisted that a 15-year-old black girl had been abducted and raped by a band of white men practicing Irish Republican Army rituals. In fact she had made up the story to protect herself from her violent stepfather.
But at Freddy's, Mr. Sharpton was even more malevolent. He turned a landlord-tenant dispute between the Jewish owner of Freddy's and a black subtenant into a theater of hatred. Picketers from Mr. Sharpton's National Action Network, sometimes joined by "the Rev." himself, marched daily outside the store, screaming about "bloodsucking Jews" and "Jew bastards" and threatening to burn the building down.
After weeks of increasingly violent rhetoric, one of the protesters, Roland Smith, took Mr. Sharpton's words about ousting the "white interloper" to heart. He ran into the store shouting, "It's on!" He shot and wounded three whites and a Pakistani, whom he apparently mistook for a Jew. Then he set the fire, which killed five Hispanics, one Guyanese and one African-American--a security guard whom protesters had taunted as a "cracker lover." Smith then fatally shot himself.
Senator Joe Biden just asked Imus, "How the hell are we better off if we've got France and Germany and Russia giving us trouble?" that's a good question. I was passing through the room and do not know the context, but by itself, the Democrat asked a good one.
The positive answer exists, however, in the allies known as Britain, Australia, Israel, Poland, Spain, and the six other European nations who signed their names with us. The actions of these nations, plus others, are what a leaked Democratic memo continues to call "unilateral." This has gone way beyond not understanding the word's meaning. These people know exactly what it means.
This refusal to think was also on show in last night's Democratic debate. For saying he wants "to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks," Howard Dean was saying, "It's the economy, stupid." In other words, Dean has not written off the redneck vote, he believes they can be persuaded. Of course, the other candidates, too intimidated by the anti-racism-indoctrinated student body before them, continue to demand his apology. If I were a Democrat, I would admire Dean.
The former personal injury lawyer from North Carolina, Senator John Edwards, walked forward, spoke in his best Southern accent, and denounced Dean's divisive language as well as denouncing him for coming down from up north and telling us Southerners what to do. So much for undivisive language.
:: michael Wednesday, November 05, 2003 [+] ::
:: Tuesday, November 4 ::
So there was another left-right debate over conservative pressure to cancel "The Reagans" on CBS. On Fox this morning, the woman on the right sat silently while the man on the left ranted on about how the right complains about every little thing and complained all through the 90's. He actually sited Filegate and Travelgate - two events involving illegal acts and rights violations, as examples of when conservatives whined. She called him a window to the Democratic soul. Indeed.
She had a chance, however, to say where conservatives agreed with the left during the 90's, and here is a list of it. I don't know who put this list together - many people could have. But these quotes are worth remembering:
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That
is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We
want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass
- President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal
here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear,
chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest
threat we face."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times
since 1983." S
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.
Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate,
air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to
the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction
- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John
Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he
has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs
continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam
continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a
licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten
States and our allies."
- Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others,
December 5, 2001
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction
and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to
deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing
weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to
build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence
reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority
to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe
that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real
grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively
to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the
next five years .. We also should remember we have always underestimated
the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every
significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his
chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has
refused to do" Rep.
- Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that
Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weap ons
stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has
given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members
.. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will
continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare,
and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam
Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for
the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a
particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to
miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his
continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction
.. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003