As spoken by Zacarias Moussaoui, the "alleged" 20th hijacker of 9/11 :
A federal judge ruled Tuesday that confessed al-Qaida conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui will not be in the courtroom for jury selection at his upcoming death-penalty trial, after Moussaoui again defied the judge at a pretrial hearing...
He launched into yet another effort to disavow his court-appointed lawyers and in the process offered diatribes against President Bush and the French people.
At various points in a rambling speech, he called Bush "a crusader" who was "launching a new campaign of revenge against terrorists."
Despite his French citizenship, he said in heavily French-accented English: "I'm not French .... I stand here as a Muslim only. I do not stand here with a nation of homosexual crusaders."
As Brinkema repeatedly tried to quiet him, Moussaoui complained that for four years she had denied him an opportunity to explain his objections to the defense lawyers. "Today is my day," he plunged on. "If I can't make sure that those people are not going to represent me I know that I am dead."
He then referred to his three attorneys as a "federal lawyer," a "KKK" (Ku Klux Klan) and a "geisha."
Brinkema sternly broke in: "I'm not going to permit you to use a federal courtroom to malign your lawyers."
Without raising his voice, Moussaoui responded, "You own everything — the defense, the judge, the attack (prosecutors). I am al-Qaida. I am your sworn enemy."
To which Brinkema responded: "Mr. Moussaoui, you are the biggest enemy of yourself."
She asked again if he would remain quiet or leave. "I'm going to leave," he responded. He gathered his papers, leaving his text behind. "This is for you."
"God curse you and America," Moussaoui said as he left the courtroom...
Where is Al Gore to champion Moussaoui's status as a victim of a midnight roundup, a man held in horrible conditions under the flimsiest of charges? At least Moussaoui knows who his enemies are; that's more than can be said for the liberals of the Democratic Party...
Link here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060214/ap_on_re_us/moussaoui
วันอังคาร, กุมภาพันธ์ 14, 2549
Judas!
Judas sold out Jesus Christ to the Romans for thiry pieces of silver; how much did the Saudis pay Al Gore to come overseas and sell out America?
Former Vice President Al Gore told a mainly Saudi audience on Sunday that the U.S. government committed "terrible abuses" against Arabs after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and that most Americans did not support such treatment.
Gore told the largely Saudi audience, many of them educated at U.S. universities, that Arabs in the United States had been "indiscriminately rounded up, often on minor charges of overstaying a visa or not having a green card in proper order, and held in conditions that were just unforgivable."
"Unfortunately there have been terrible abuses and it's wrong," Gore said. "I do want you to know that it does not represent the desires or wishes or feelings of the majority of the citizens of my country."
Unbelievable...why do they hate us, you ask? Maybe because a man who was Vice-President for eight years, and came within a haresbreath of being President, is inciting hatred with lies about "midnight roundups"? And for how much money? When Ronald Reagen went overseas after his presidency for speaking engagements (with friendly countries), the media dug and dug until they found out what Ronnie's payday was. But Al Gore, taking money from a nation that was home to 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers, in order to spew pro-terrorist propoganda? No story there, folks!
Tigerhawk's response, (link via Damian Penny), hits the nail on the head
So this is what Gore has done: he has traveled to Jiddah to explain to the elites of an ugly and tyrannical regime that the big problem in the world isn't the oppression of Arabs by Arabs throughout the Middle East and North Africa, but the mistreatment of a few hundred Arabs in the United States...
There is simply no defense for what Gore has done here, for he is deliberately undermining the United States during a time of war, in a part of the world crucial to our success in that war, in front of an audience that does not vote in American elections. Gore's speech is both destructive and disloyal, not because of its content -- which is as silly as it is subversive -- but because of its location and its intended audience. He should be ashamed. But he won't be. The leadership of the Democratic party should disavow Gore's Jiddah speech. But it won't.
The Democrats will not repudiate this speech, because they believe it. Just ask Ted Kennedy, or Dick Durbin, or Robert Byrd, or Nancy Pelosi. If they were there, they would have been standing and applauding.
And I still want to know how much Gore was paid to speak at Jiddah. I want to know what the price of treason is in 2006. Sadly, Judas' 30 pieces of silver two thousand odd years back was probably a heftier price in today's dollars than Al Gore recieved to sell out the last good country.
Traitor.
Daimnation! here: http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/005750.html
Former Vice President Al Gore told a mainly Saudi audience on Sunday that the U.S. government committed "terrible abuses" against Arabs after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and that most Americans did not support such treatment.
Gore told the largely Saudi audience, many of them educated at U.S. universities, that Arabs in the United States had been "indiscriminately rounded up, often on minor charges of overstaying a visa or not having a green card in proper order, and held in conditions that were just unforgivable."
"Unfortunately there have been terrible abuses and it's wrong," Gore said. "I do want you to know that it does not represent the desires or wishes or feelings of the majority of the citizens of my country."
Unbelievable...why do they hate us, you ask? Maybe because a man who was Vice-President for eight years, and came within a haresbreath of being President, is inciting hatred with lies about "midnight roundups"? And for how much money? When Ronald Reagen went overseas after his presidency for speaking engagements (with friendly countries), the media dug and dug until they found out what Ronnie's payday was. But Al Gore, taking money from a nation that was home to 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers, in order to spew pro-terrorist propoganda? No story there, folks!
Tigerhawk's response, (link via Damian Penny), hits the nail on the head
So this is what Gore has done: he has traveled to Jiddah to explain to the elites of an ugly and tyrannical regime that the big problem in the world isn't the oppression of Arabs by Arabs throughout the Middle East and North Africa, but the mistreatment of a few hundred Arabs in the United States...
There is simply no defense for what Gore has done here, for he is deliberately undermining the United States during a time of war, in a part of the world crucial to our success in that war, in front of an audience that does not vote in American elections. Gore's speech is both destructive and disloyal, not because of its content -- which is as silly as it is subversive -- but because of its location and its intended audience. He should be ashamed. But he won't be. The leadership of the Democratic party should disavow Gore's Jiddah speech. But it won't.
The Democrats will not repudiate this speech, because they believe it. Just ask Ted Kennedy, or Dick Durbin, or Robert Byrd, or Nancy Pelosi. If they were there, they would have been standing and applauding.
And I still want to know how much Gore was paid to speak at Jiddah. I want to know what the price of treason is in 2006. Sadly, Judas' 30 pieces of silver two thousand odd years back was probably a heftier price in today's dollars than Al Gore recieved to sell out the last good country.
Traitor.
Daimnation! here: http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/005750.html
วันอาทิตย์, กุมภาพันธ์ 12, 2549
Kofi to U.S.: Sudan is YOUR Problem!
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Secretary-General Kofi Annan' intends to ask President George W. Bush on Monday what the United States can contribute to a mobile UN force to stop the killings, rape and pillaging in Sudan's Darfur region.
"It is not going to be easy for the big and powerful countries with armies to delegate to third world countries. They will have to play a part if we are going to stop the carnage that we see in Darfur," Annan told reporters on Thursday.
Asked if Bush would be asked to participate, Annan said, "I will share with him the facts that I have shared with you, the needs that we have, and the countries that I think can supply those needs, and that will include the U.S."
[link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060212/wl_nm/sudan_un_usa_dc ]
How many years has the UN been mucking up things in the Sudan? And now they want to send American troops into combat against a heavily armed Muslim militia in Africa?
Typical liberal warmaking - using your armed forces to protect your country is automatically an evil, imperialistic act, but going into a poor war-torn country where you have no business being in is OK; regardless of the potential cost in lives/prestige/treasure.
The world can't have it both ways; they must decide if the US is a dark, hegomonic power or an actual force for good in this world. Before Bush commits a single Hummer to this mission, I want to hear 'ol Kofi say, loud and clear, that we are the world's best hope; the one nation good citizens of the world can turn to in a dark hour. I want him to strike out verbally against the America-bashers that populate his own offices; the ones whom work against us in matters of both war and peace, and set them straight, clearly and publicly.
If he can't bring himself to speak the truth about how the UN brought us to this point, and how only the US can save their sorry asses, than President Bush should not lift a finger to help. After all, we wouldn't want to be unilateralists...
"It is not going to be easy for the big and powerful countries with armies to delegate to third world countries. They will have to play a part if we are going to stop the carnage that we see in Darfur," Annan told reporters on Thursday.
Asked if Bush would be asked to participate, Annan said, "I will share with him the facts that I have shared with you, the needs that we have, and the countries that I think can supply those needs, and that will include the U.S."
[link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060212/wl_nm/sudan_un_usa_dc ]
How many years has the UN been mucking up things in the Sudan? And now they want to send American troops into combat against a heavily armed Muslim militia in Africa?
Typical liberal warmaking - using your armed forces to protect your country is automatically an evil, imperialistic act, but going into a poor war-torn country where you have no business being in is OK; regardless of the potential cost in lives/prestige/treasure.
The world can't have it both ways; they must decide if the US is a dark, hegomonic power or an actual force for good in this world. Before Bush commits a single Hummer to this mission, I want to hear 'ol Kofi say, loud and clear, that we are the world's best hope; the one nation good citizens of the world can turn to in a dark hour. I want him to strike out verbally against the America-bashers that populate his own offices; the ones whom work against us in matters of both war and peace, and set them straight, clearly and publicly.
If he can't bring himself to speak the truth about how the UN brought us to this point, and how only the US can save their sorry asses, than President Bush should not lift a finger to help. After all, we wouldn't want to be unilateralists...
Iran: Strategies...And an Unlikely Ally?
This article in the UK's Telegraph is stating the obvious in alarmist tones, but considering all the rhetoric about there being no "military solution" to the current Iranian crisis, I find it refreshing to hear:
Strategists at the Pentagon are drawing up plans for devastating bombing raids backed by submarine-launched ballistic missile attacks against Iran's nuclear sites as a "last resort" to block Teheran's efforts to develop an atomic bomb.
Central Command and Strategic Command planners are identifying targets, assessing weapon-loads and working on logistics for an operation, the Sunday Telegraph has learnt.
Of course, the "Cowboy" theme is right behind - this is, after all, European media:
The prospect of military action could put Washington at odds with Britain which fears that an attack would spark violence across the Middle East, reprisals in the West and may not cripple Teheran's nuclear programme
Yeah, yeah, the feared and dreaded "Arab Street", (whom perhaps, if they lived under free governments that helped provide jobs, wouldn't have so much time to protest)...been there, done that. The Telegraph reports strategy:
The most likely strategy would involve aerial bombardment by long-distance B2 bombers, each armed with up to 40,000lb of precision weapons, including the latest bunker-busting devices. They would fly from bases in Missouri with mid-air refuelling.
The Bush administration has recently announced plans to add conventional ballistic missiles to the armoury of its nuclear Trident submarines within the next two years. If ready in time, they would also form part of the plan of attack.
Teheran has dispersed its nuclear plants, burying some deep underground, and has recently increased its air defences, but Pentagon planners believe that the raids could seriously set back Iran's nuclear programme.
Seems pretty mundane; I have the feeling that if and when this goes down, we'll see something unexpected. If two years is the time frame, there will probably be options out there that we can't conceive quite yet.
Meanwhile, is France upgrading its nuclear arsenal, preparing for just this type of war?? Debka reports:
French paper’s military source reports two major changes: nuclear bombs can now be fired at high altitude to create an “electromagnetic impulsion” to destroy the enemy’s computer and communications system; and the number of nuclear warheads has been cut down to enhance the missiles’ range and precision.
Chirac last month warned that states promoting terror and threatening France could face nuclear retaliation.
Interestin - they have refitted some of their submarine missles to go from a six-warhead payload to one, thereby increasing accuracy and allowing it to be used to cause, well, catastrophic as opposed to apocalyptical damage:
French submarines carry 16 French-made M45 missiles, each fitted with six nuclear warheads. On being fired, each warhead separates to hit a different target, in effect giving each submarine 96 bombs.
By reducing the number of warheads to one per missile, the weapon is lighter, has a longer range and is more accurate.
French defense minister said the reduction of nuclear warheads “are aimed at better taking into account the psychology of the enemy.” She added: “A potential enemy may think that France, given its principles, might hesitate to use nuclear weapons against civilian populations. We now have “…the possibility to target the control centers of an eventual enemy.”
It is now capable of firing a relatively weak warhead into a deserted zone far from centers of power and habitation where terrorists may hide their rear command bases.
For some reason, I can only see a French Minister surrendering rather than using these weapons, "for the good of all mankind", or something like that. Still, with France tinkering with its nukes, and with the United States having it's birds ready to fly at a moment's notice, maybe this will give Mr. Ahmadinejad some pause...
Or is he just so nuts, that this may just be an Armageddon he's striving for?
Telegraph here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/12/wiran12.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/02/12/ixnewstop.html
Debka here: http://www.debka.com/index.php
Strategists at the Pentagon are drawing up plans for devastating bombing raids backed by submarine-launched ballistic missile attacks against Iran's nuclear sites as a "last resort" to block Teheran's efforts to develop an atomic bomb.
Central Command and Strategic Command planners are identifying targets, assessing weapon-loads and working on logistics for an operation, the Sunday Telegraph has learnt.
Of course, the "Cowboy" theme is right behind - this is, after all, European media:
The prospect of military action could put Washington at odds with Britain which fears that an attack would spark violence across the Middle East, reprisals in the West and may not cripple Teheran's nuclear programme
Yeah, yeah, the feared and dreaded "Arab Street", (whom perhaps, if they lived under free governments that helped provide jobs, wouldn't have so much time to protest)...been there, done that. The Telegraph reports strategy:
The most likely strategy would involve aerial bombardment by long-distance B2 bombers, each armed with up to 40,000lb of precision weapons, including the latest bunker-busting devices. They would fly from bases in Missouri with mid-air refuelling.
The Bush administration has recently announced plans to add conventional ballistic missiles to the armoury of its nuclear Trident submarines within the next two years. If ready in time, they would also form part of the plan of attack.
Teheran has dispersed its nuclear plants, burying some deep underground, and has recently increased its air defences, but Pentagon planners believe that the raids could seriously set back Iran's nuclear programme.
Seems pretty mundane; I have the feeling that if and when this goes down, we'll see something unexpected. If two years is the time frame, there will probably be options out there that we can't conceive quite yet.
Meanwhile, is France upgrading its nuclear arsenal, preparing for just this type of war?? Debka reports:
French paper’s military source reports two major changes: nuclear bombs can now be fired at high altitude to create an “electromagnetic impulsion” to destroy the enemy’s computer and communications system; and the number of nuclear warheads has been cut down to enhance the missiles’ range and precision.
Chirac last month warned that states promoting terror and threatening France could face nuclear retaliation.
Interestin - they have refitted some of their submarine missles to go from a six-warhead payload to one, thereby increasing accuracy and allowing it to be used to cause, well, catastrophic as opposed to apocalyptical damage:
French submarines carry 16 French-made M45 missiles, each fitted with six nuclear warheads. On being fired, each warhead separates to hit a different target, in effect giving each submarine 96 bombs.
By reducing the number of warheads to one per missile, the weapon is lighter, has a longer range and is more accurate.
French defense minister said the reduction of nuclear warheads “are aimed at better taking into account the psychology of the enemy.” She added: “A potential enemy may think that France, given its principles, might hesitate to use nuclear weapons against civilian populations. We now have “…the possibility to target the control centers of an eventual enemy.”
It is now capable of firing a relatively weak warhead into a deserted zone far from centers of power and habitation where terrorists may hide their rear command bases.
For some reason, I can only see a French Minister surrendering rather than using these weapons, "for the good of all mankind", or something like that. Still, with France tinkering with its nukes, and with the United States having it's birds ready to fly at a moment's notice, maybe this will give Mr. Ahmadinejad some pause...
Or is he just so nuts, that this may just be an Armageddon he's striving for?
Telegraph here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/12/wiran12.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/02/12/ixnewstop.html
Debka here: http://www.debka.com/index.php
Danes = The New Jews!!
Via Tim Blair:
Angry Palestinians have gathered in East Jerusalem to protest against the publication in Europe of cartoons of the prophet Muhammad.
One group of menacing young men went up to a TV cameraman who was filming the event and demanded to know if he was Danish. He replied that he was Israeli. “Oh, that’s all right, then,” they said, and left him alone.
Hmmm...I'm sure they'll get back to him later. Poor Danes, suffering an international Kristallnacht for printing a few cartoons...The Bully Pulpit gives us a photo comparison - now:
Angry Palestinians have gathered in East Jerusalem to protest against the publication in Europe of cartoons of the prophet Muhammad.
One group of menacing young men went up to a TV cameraman who was filming the event and demanded to know if he was Danish. He replied that he was Israeli. “Oh, that’s all right, then,” they said, and left him alone.
Hmmm...I'm sure they'll get back to him later. Poor Danes, suffering an international Kristallnacht for printing a few cartoons...The Bully Pulpit gives us a photo comparison - now:
And then:
And yet, we are told that thes Islamofascists are "misunderstood", and "victimized", by Western liberals. There is very little to misunderstand here; I reckon we have seen it all before...
Don't believe me? Take it from the source!
The Bully Pulpit here: http://windsoffreedom.blogspot.com/2006/02/kristallnacht-2006-historical-warning.html . Tim Blair here: http://timblair.net/ee/index.php/weblog/palestinian_outrage_recalibrated/
วันเสาร์, กุมภาพันธ์ 11, 2549
Freedom of Speech, Under Seige
Dutch politician Ayaan Hirsi Ali rallies to Denmark’s defense:
"Shame on those politicians who stated that publishing and re-publishing the drawings was ‘unnecessary’, ‘insensitive’, ‘disrespectful’ and ‘wrong’. I am of the opinion that Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen of Denmark acted correctly when he refused to meet with representatives of tyrannical regimes who demanded from him that he limit the powers of the press. Today we should stand by him morally and materially......
... I do not seek to offend religious sentiment, but I will not submit to tyranny. Demanding that people who do not accept Muhammad’s teachings should refrain from drawing him is not a request for respect but a demand for submission.”
For a lesson in abject cowardice, see how the quivering Dutch prime minister has said that he does “not have much use” for Hirsi Ali’s views. Now that's a man who'd rather live as a slave than fight to be free.
And from Mark Steyn's site, a reader comments:
The issue is cultural intimidation. Does a free society have the right to print its own cartoons in its own newspapers without getting death threats and boycotts from others? If not, what other rights have the Muslims taken away from us?
Failure to do so leaves the Danes and a few European newspapers to face the music alone. The fundamental insight which produced the First Amendment was that you can’t protect free speech on a case by case basis. Either Danish Newspapers have the right to publish stupid cartoons and Hugh Hewitt has the right bring enlightenment to the radio masses or neither has any right but what the most militant will permit... [here: http://www.steynonline.com/index2.cfm?edit_id=66 ]
The Brussels Journal shows us how the Swedes have, er, lost their fighting spirit:
Vikings. Once they were brave. Today some are brave and some are cowards. The brave ones are the Danish and the Icelanders, the cowards the Norwegians and the Swedish (at least where the governments are concerned).
Yesterday the Swedish government shut down a website because it had published Muhammad cartoons. Has Stockholm ever shut down a website because it posted Jesus cartoons? No, it hasn’t. During the past week a number of appeasing Western governments have said that they are not happy with papers and websites republishing the Danish Muhammad cartoons, but Sweden is the first Western country to exercise censorship.
"Censorship" these days is a nice way of saying, "We are handing over control of our press to Islamic fundamentalists".
Again, I wonder, with the freedom of the West under attack, if the British can find the "lion's heart" that helped them roar through WWII, and if the last decendants of the Viking warriors of old can find the spirit that made them masters of land and sea. Today we still tell tales of the strong and powerful Norsemen; does any of their blood still run in the veins of their children?
We must all find the inner strength within our people, ourselves, to grid ourselves for the dark days on the horizon...
Brussels Journal here: http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/807
"Shame on those politicians who stated that publishing and re-publishing the drawings was ‘unnecessary’, ‘insensitive’, ‘disrespectful’ and ‘wrong’. I am of the opinion that Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen of Denmark acted correctly when he refused to meet with representatives of tyrannical regimes who demanded from him that he limit the powers of the press. Today we should stand by him morally and materially......
... I do not seek to offend religious sentiment, but I will not submit to tyranny. Demanding that people who do not accept Muhammad’s teachings should refrain from drawing him is not a request for respect but a demand for submission.”
For a lesson in abject cowardice, see how the quivering Dutch prime minister has said that he does “not have much use” for Hirsi Ali’s views. Now that's a man who'd rather live as a slave than fight to be free.
And from Mark Steyn's site, a reader comments:
The issue is cultural intimidation. Does a free society have the right to print its own cartoons in its own newspapers without getting death threats and boycotts from others? If not, what other rights have the Muslims taken away from us?
Failure to do so leaves the Danes and a few European newspapers to face the music alone. The fundamental insight which produced the First Amendment was that you can’t protect free speech on a case by case basis. Either Danish Newspapers have the right to publish stupid cartoons and Hugh Hewitt has the right bring enlightenment to the radio masses or neither has any right but what the most militant will permit... [here: http://www.steynonline.com/index2.cfm?edit_id=66 ]
The Brussels Journal shows us how the Swedes have, er, lost their fighting spirit:
Vikings. Once they were brave. Today some are brave and some are cowards. The brave ones are the Danish and the Icelanders, the cowards the Norwegians and the Swedish (at least where the governments are concerned).
Yesterday the Swedish government shut down a website because it had published Muhammad cartoons. Has Stockholm ever shut down a website because it posted Jesus cartoons? No, it hasn’t. During the past week a number of appeasing Western governments have said that they are not happy with papers and websites republishing the Danish Muhammad cartoons, but Sweden is the first Western country to exercise censorship.
"Censorship" these days is a nice way of saying, "We are handing over control of our press to Islamic fundamentalists".
Again, I wonder, with the freedom of the West under attack, if the British can find the "lion's heart" that helped them roar through WWII, and if the last decendants of the Viking warriors of old can find the spirit that made them masters of land and sea. Today we still tell tales of the strong and powerful Norsemen; does any of their blood still run in the veins of their children?
We must all find the inner strength within our people, ourselves, to grid ourselves for the dark days on the horizon...
Brussels Journal here: http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/807
Holocaust Denial and Threats, From Joey Nukes!
The MSM seems to have decided to tune out the words of the President of Iran (probably because they are simply too scared; maybe if they ignore him, he'll just go away...like Hitler did!), so to keep up with the latest threats, we need to turn to the Bangkok Post:
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Saturday that the Palestinians and "other nations" will eventually remove Israel from the region. Addressing a mass demonstration in Tehran - one of many organized throughout Iran to commemorate the 27th anniversary of the Islamic revolution - he once again questioned the Holocaust "fairy tale".
"We ask the West to remove what they created sixty years ago and if they do not listen to our recommendations, then the Palestinian nation and other nations will eventually do this for them," Ahmadinejad said in a ceremony marking the 27th anniversary of the Islamic revolution. "Do the removal of Israel before it is too late and save yourself from the fury of regional nations," the ultra-conservative president said.
He once again called the Holocaust a "fairy tale" and said Europeans have become hostages of "Zionists" in Israel.
Again, the Holocaust denial and the threats of violence to Europe and to Israel...wonder what'll happen to the Jews if he "removes" Isreal? Any guesses?
But our old terrorist pal Ahmadinejad does speak honestly, albiet unwittingly, at least once:
The president said that the results of the parliamentary elections in Palestine and the victory of the Hamas group "clearly showed what the people really want"
That is correct - the Palestinians elected Hamas because they want war with Israel. And they are gonna get it, but good, and it will be interesting to see who leaps to the poor Palies defense after they get crushed in a war they supported by legislative democracy.
And here's another threat that I have no doubt is meant seriously:
...the Iranian president warned that in case of harsh measures against Tehran over its controversial nuclear programme, the country would revise its commitment toward the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
The policy of Iran has so far been pursuing nuclear technology within the framework of the NPT and IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency)," he said. "But if you (the West) continue efforts to deprive the Iranian nation from this (nuclear) right, then we would reconsider this policy," he warned.
So it seems either way, Ahmadinejad is going to build his nukes, but if we try to stop him, well, he's going to sell them to terrorists who will use them against the countries that dared get in his way.
See, this is why we need a doctrine for pre-emptive war. If this guy get nukes, millions will die, and millions more will be enslaved - look at how the European and American media have "dhimmi'd up" at the sight of the infamous cartoon violence. What lengths would they go to appease a Mad Muslim with a nuke?
And don't you think Ahmadinejad knows this?
Link to Bangkok Post here: http://www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/breakingnews.php?id=78985
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Saturday that the Palestinians and "other nations" will eventually remove Israel from the region. Addressing a mass demonstration in Tehran - one of many organized throughout Iran to commemorate the 27th anniversary of the Islamic revolution - he once again questioned the Holocaust "fairy tale".
"We ask the West to remove what they created sixty years ago and if they do not listen to our recommendations, then the Palestinian nation and other nations will eventually do this for them," Ahmadinejad said in a ceremony marking the 27th anniversary of the Islamic revolution. "Do the removal of Israel before it is too late and save yourself from the fury of regional nations," the ultra-conservative president said.
He once again called the Holocaust a "fairy tale" and said Europeans have become hostages of "Zionists" in Israel.
Again, the Holocaust denial and the threats of violence to Europe and to Israel...wonder what'll happen to the Jews if he "removes" Isreal? Any guesses?
But our old terrorist pal Ahmadinejad does speak honestly, albiet unwittingly, at least once:
The president said that the results of the parliamentary elections in Palestine and the victory of the Hamas group "clearly showed what the people really want"
That is correct - the Palestinians elected Hamas because they want war with Israel. And they are gonna get it, but good, and it will be interesting to see who leaps to the poor Palies defense after they get crushed in a war they supported by legislative democracy.
And here's another threat that I have no doubt is meant seriously:
...the Iranian president warned that in case of harsh measures against Tehran over its controversial nuclear programme, the country would revise its commitment toward the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
The policy of Iran has so far been pursuing nuclear technology within the framework of the NPT and IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency)," he said. "But if you (the West) continue efforts to deprive the Iranian nation from this (nuclear) right, then we would reconsider this policy," he warned.
So it seems either way, Ahmadinejad is going to build his nukes, but if we try to stop him, well, he's going to sell them to terrorists who will use them against the countries that dared get in his way.
See, this is why we need a doctrine for pre-emptive war. If this guy get nukes, millions will die, and millions more will be enslaved - look at how the European and American media have "dhimmi'd up" at the sight of the infamous cartoon violence. What lengths would they go to appease a Mad Muslim with a nuke?
And don't you think Ahmadinejad knows this?
Link to Bangkok Post here: http://www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/breakingnews.php?id=78985
Muhammed Cartoons - Exposing Hypocrites Everywhere!
The publishing of a dozen cartoons of Muhammed, and the violent upheavel that followed, left us boatloads of hypocrites to examine in its wake. Charles Krauthammer exposes the first group - "Curse of the Moderates" - he calls it - for what they really are:
What passes for moderation in the Islamic community -- "I share your rage but don't torch that embassy" -- is nothing of the sort. It is simply a cynical way to endorse the goals of the mob without endorsing its means. It is fraudulent because, while pretending to uphold the principle of religious sensitivity, it is interested only in this instance of religious insensitivity.
Have any of these "moderates" ever protested the grotesque caricatures of Christians and, most especially, Jews that are broadcast throughout the Middle East on a daily basis? T he sermons on Palestinian TV that refer to Jews as the sons of pigs and monkeys? The Syrian prime-time TV series that shows rabbis slaughtering a gentile boy to ritually consume his blood? The 41-part (!) series on Egyptian TV based on that anti-Semitic czarist forgery (and inspiration of the Nazis), "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," showing the Jews to be engaged in a century-old conspiracy to control the world?
A true Muslim moderate is one who protests desecrations of all faiths. Those who don't are not moderates but hypocrites, opportunists and agents for the rioters, merely using different means to advance the same goal: to impose upon the West, with its traditions of freedom of speech, a set of taboos that is exclusive to the Islamic faith. These are not defenders of religion but Muslim supremacists trying to force their dictates upon the liberal West.
Yup, that's why I said yesterday I need to actually see some Muslim moderates before I can acknowledge they exist. You want to see how crowded a "moderate" anti-terrorism Muslim demonstration can get? See the sad results here: http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/610
Michael Kinsley, usually a liberal house organ, takes his shots at the Muslim hypocrisy as well in today's Washington Post:
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the noted wit, expert on freedom and unelected religious leader -- the leader who counts -- of Iran, observed the other day that in the West, "casting doubt or negating the genocide of the Jews is banned but insulting the beliefs of 1.5 billion Muslims is allowed...
...In a spirit of "see how you like it," a European Muslim group posted on the Web a cartoon of Anne Frank in bed with Hitler....
...Muslim complaints about a Western double standard would be more telling if the factual premise were accurate. But it is not. In fact, it is nearly the opposite of the truth. Nothing is easier and more common in the West, including the United States, than criticizing the United States -- except for criticizing Israel.
The other problem with his little joke about double standards, and with the whole, supposedly mordant, comparison between denying the Holocaust and portraying the prophet is that the offended Muslims do not want a world where people are free to do both. They don't even want a world where people are not free to do either, which would at least be consistent. They want a world where you may not portray Muhammad (even flatteringly, slaying infidels or whatnot), but you may deny the Holocaust all day long.
[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/09/AR2006020901432.html]
I believe that this great awakening is dawning on Kinsley only because he sees his freedom to write whatever he pleases without threat of death slowly disintergrating. Well, it should've smacked these guys upside the head when Theo Van Gogh was executed on a busy Dutch street, but better late than never....
And for some guys that will never, never get it, Timeswatch points us to a new low perpertrated by the Old Gray Whore:
...the Times wrote in an editorial on the Danish cartoons of Mohammad that “The New York Times and much of the rest of the nation's news media have reported on the cartoons but refrained from showing them. That seems a reasonable choice for news organizations that usually refrain from gratuitous assaults on religious symbols, especially since the cartoons are so easy to describe in words.”
Apparently the Arts pages didn’t get the memo, because it runs a photo of Chris Ofili’s dung-clotted “Holy Virgin Mary” in Wednesday’s Arts section story by Michael Kimmelman, who calls the Danish cartoons “callous and feeble.”
This is the most striking example yet of the double standard by the Times when it comes to art that offends religious sensibilities.
[Link: http://www.timeswatch.org/twarticles/2006/20060208.asp]
The Times acts with all the heart of a fey Frenchman...they editorial board knows that they are a big target for Muslim Rage if they print the Muhammed cartoons, but since Catholics in America have no history of group violence, well, we can show their patron saint covered in elephant sh*t with no fear. They bash Christians because the atheists at the Times hate them ("fundamentalist" Christians appear as an enemy in the Times as often as Doc Ock in a Spiderman comic book), they appease Muslims because they are terrified of them. All the while, they wallow, self-lovingly, in their own filthy hypocrisy as a publication that "refrains from gratuitous assaults on religious symbols".
I'm gonna reprint this cartoon, 'cause it says it all:
What passes for moderation in the Islamic community -- "I share your rage but don't torch that embassy" -- is nothing of the sort. It is simply a cynical way to endorse the goals of the mob without endorsing its means. It is fraudulent because, while pretending to uphold the principle of religious sensitivity, it is interested only in this instance of religious insensitivity.
Have any of these "moderates" ever protested the grotesque caricatures of Christians and, most especially, Jews that are broadcast throughout the Middle East on a daily basis? T he sermons on Palestinian TV that refer to Jews as the sons of pigs and monkeys? The Syrian prime-time TV series that shows rabbis slaughtering a gentile boy to ritually consume his blood? The 41-part (!) series on Egyptian TV based on that anti-Semitic czarist forgery (and inspiration of the Nazis), "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," showing the Jews to be engaged in a century-old conspiracy to control the world?
A true Muslim moderate is one who protests desecrations of all faiths. Those who don't are not moderates but hypocrites, opportunists and agents for the rioters, merely using different means to advance the same goal: to impose upon the West, with its traditions of freedom of speech, a set of taboos that is exclusive to the Islamic faith. These are not defenders of religion but Muslim supremacists trying to force their dictates upon the liberal West.
Yup, that's why I said yesterday I need to actually see some Muslim moderates before I can acknowledge they exist. You want to see how crowded a "moderate" anti-terrorism Muslim demonstration can get? See the sad results here: http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/610
Michael Kinsley, usually a liberal house organ, takes his shots at the Muslim hypocrisy as well in today's Washington Post:
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the noted wit, expert on freedom and unelected religious leader -- the leader who counts -- of Iran, observed the other day that in the West, "casting doubt or negating the genocide of the Jews is banned but insulting the beliefs of 1.5 billion Muslims is allowed...
...In a spirit of "see how you like it," a European Muslim group posted on the Web a cartoon of Anne Frank in bed with Hitler....
...Muslim complaints about a Western double standard would be more telling if the factual premise were accurate. But it is not. In fact, it is nearly the opposite of the truth. Nothing is easier and more common in the West, including the United States, than criticizing the United States -- except for criticizing Israel.
The other problem with his little joke about double standards, and with the whole, supposedly mordant, comparison between denying the Holocaust and portraying the prophet is that the offended Muslims do not want a world where people are free to do both. They don't even want a world where people are not free to do either, which would at least be consistent. They want a world where you may not portray Muhammad (even flatteringly, slaying infidels or whatnot), but you may deny the Holocaust all day long.
[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/09/AR2006020901432.html]
I believe that this great awakening is dawning on Kinsley only because he sees his freedom to write whatever he pleases without threat of death slowly disintergrating. Well, it should've smacked these guys upside the head when Theo Van Gogh was executed on a busy Dutch street, but better late than never....
And for some guys that will never, never get it, Timeswatch points us to a new low perpertrated by the Old Gray Whore:
...the Times wrote in an editorial on the Danish cartoons of Mohammad that “The New York Times and much of the rest of the nation's news media have reported on the cartoons but refrained from showing them. That seems a reasonable choice for news organizations that usually refrain from gratuitous assaults on religious symbols, especially since the cartoons are so easy to describe in words.”
Apparently the Arts pages didn’t get the memo, because it runs a photo of Chris Ofili’s dung-clotted “Holy Virgin Mary” in Wednesday’s Arts section story by Michael Kimmelman, who calls the Danish cartoons “callous and feeble.”
This is the most striking example yet of the double standard by the Times when it comes to art that offends religious sensibilities.
[Link: http://www.timeswatch.org/twarticles/2006/20060208.asp]
The Times acts with all the heart of a fey Frenchman...they editorial board knows that they are a big target for Muslim Rage if they print the Muhammed cartoons, but since Catholics in America have no history of group violence, well, we can show their patron saint covered in elephant sh*t with no fear. They bash Christians because the atheists at the Times hate them ("fundamentalist" Christians appear as an enemy in the Times as often as Doc Ock in a Spiderman comic book), they appease Muslims because they are terrified of them. All the while, they wallow, self-lovingly, in their own filthy hypocrisy as a publication that "refrains from gratuitous assaults on religious symbols".
I'm gonna reprint this cartoon, 'cause it says it all:
วันพฤหัสบดี, กุมภาพันธ์ 09, 2549
"Sick Bastards"
That was Mark Levin on his talk show this evening; he was referring to liberals in general and one certain Democratic Congressman in particular:
Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., the leading Democrat on the House Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, told a large group of Katrina evacuees today that the government's response to the hurricane is tantamount to "ethnic cleansing by inaction."
He was speaking to a Democrat-sponsored forum of about 350 predominantly African-American evacuees who had just arrived on Capitol Hill after a 24-hour bus ride from the Gulf region. They are here to meet with FEMA and lawmakers to air their complaints about what they regard as the inadequate response to the housing crisis there.
The room was rockin'. Reps. Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Calif., Maxine Waters, Calif., and others drew shouts and standing ovations as they enumerated the alleged sins of the government on such issues as trailers, insurance, hotel accommodations, etc.
And these are the people that claim to be "uniters, not dividers"? Note the code words they drop with a wink and a sly smile when they deign to talk to black audiences: "Plantation", "ethnic cleansing", and so forth.
I think the Democrats see blacks moving off the "plantation" their party has so lovingly provided, and they are getting real scared. Frightened enough to use hateful and racist rhetoric to keep their voters on the plantation; hoping they'll stay on if fed enough raw meat.
And yet - what is with the growth of black Republicans running for higher offices?? See this website -Republicans for Black Empowerment here http://www.theblackgop.com/ - to read about those whom get it, and are trying to shine as a beacon to others...
Anyway - second choice for a sick bastard is EU Justice and Security Commissioner(?) Franco Frattini, whom offers to surrender European editing rights to the Islamists:
In an interview with Britain’s Daily Telegraph, EU Justice and Security Commissioner Franco Frattini said the charter would encourage the media to show “prudence” when covering religion.
“The press will give the Muslim world the message: We are aware of the consequences of exercising the right of free expression,” he told the newspaper. “We can and we are ready to self-regulate that right.”
Message that the Muslims will get is...burn a few embassies, gain editorial oversight over so-called free press of the West. Wars were fought to retain theee freedoms; apparently our EU Security Commissar is ready to hand them over for free, bent on one knee...
Sick Bastards, indeed...
EU quote at LGF here http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=19152_Spineless_EU_Rushes_to_Surrender&only
Barney Frank et al here: http://dailynightly.msnbc.com/2006/02/strong_rhetoric.html
Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., the leading Democrat on the House Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, told a large group of Katrina evacuees today that the government's response to the hurricane is tantamount to "ethnic cleansing by inaction."
He was speaking to a Democrat-sponsored forum of about 350 predominantly African-American evacuees who had just arrived on Capitol Hill after a 24-hour bus ride from the Gulf region. They are here to meet with FEMA and lawmakers to air their complaints about what they regard as the inadequate response to the housing crisis there.
The room was rockin'. Reps. Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Calif., Maxine Waters, Calif., and others drew shouts and standing ovations as they enumerated the alleged sins of the government on such issues as trailers, insurance, hotel accommodations, etc.
And these are the people that claim to be "uniters, not dividers"? Note the code words they drop with a wink and a sly smile when they deign to talk to black audiences: "Plantation", "ethnic cleansing", and so forth.
I think the Democrats see blacks moving off the "plantation" their party has so lovingly provided, and they are getting real scared. Frightened enough to use hateful and racist rhetoric to keep their voters on the plantation; hoping they'll stay on if fed enough raw meat.
And yet - what is with the growth of black Republicans running for higher offices?? See this website -Republicans for Black Empowerment here http://www.theblackgop.com/ - to read about those whom get it, and are trying to shine as a beacon to others...
Anyway - second choice for a sick bastard is EU Justice and Security Commissioner(?) Franco Frattini, whom offers to surrender European editing rights to the Islamists:
In an interview with Britain’s Daily Telegraph, EU Justice and Security Commissioner Franco Frattini said the charter would encourage the media to show “prudence” when covering religion.
“The press will give the Muslim world the message: We are aware of the consequences of exercising the right of free expression,” he told the newspaper. “We can and we are ready to self-regulate that right.”
Message that the Muslims will get is...burn a few embassies, gain editorial oversight over so-called free press of the West. Wars were fought to retain theee freedoms; apparently our EU Security Commissar is ready to hand them over for free, bent on one knee...
Sick Bastards, indeed...
EU quote at LGF here http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=19152_Spineless_EU_Rushes_to_Surrender&only
Barney Frank et al here: http://dailynightly.msnbc.com/2006/02/strong_rhetoric.html
Iraq: No Cartoonish Violence?
Ann Coulter takes a lot of smack, mostly for daring to be a good-looking conservative woman (Hillary's "Plantation" effect, again...). She makes a lot of sense here, with tounge planted firmly in cheek, on the issue of the Muslim's cartoonish cartoon violence:
...One showed Muhammad turning away suicide bombers from the gates of heaven, saying "Stop, stop -- we ran out of virgins!" -- which I believe was a commentary on Muslims' predilection for violence. Another was a cartoon of Muhammad with horns, which I believe was a commentary on Muslims' predilection for violence. The third showed Muhammad with a turban in the shape of a bomb, which I believe was an expression of post-industrial ennui in a secular -- oops, no, wait: It was more of a commentary on Muslims' predilection for violence.
In order to express their displeasure with the idea that Muslims are violent, thousands of Muslims around the world engaged in rioting, arson, mob savagery, flag-burning, murder and mayhem, among other peaceful acts of nonviolence.
The little darlings brandish placards with typical Religion of Peace slogans, such as: "Behead Those Who Insult Islam," "Europe, you will pay, extermination is on the way" and "Butcher those who mock Islam." They warn Europe of their own impending 9/11 with signs that say: "Europe: Your 9/11 will come" -- which is ironic, because they almost had me convinced the Jews were behind the 9/11 attack.
...The belief that Islam forbids portrayals of Muhammad is recently acquired. Back when Muslims created things, rather than blowing them up, they made paintings, frescoes, miniatures and prints of Muhammad.
Largely unnoticed in this spectacle is the blinding fact that one nation is missing from the long list of Muslim countries (by which I mean France and England) with hundreds of crazy Muslims experiencing bipolar rage over some cartoons: Iraq. Hey -- maybe this democracy thing does work!
Thanks Ann! Link here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucac/20060209/cm_ucac/calvinandhobbesandmuhammad
...One showed Muhammad turning away suicide bombers from the gates of heaven, saying "Stop, stop -- we ran out of virgins!" -- which I believe was a commentary on Muslims' predilection for violence. Another was a cartoon of Muhammad with horns, which I believe was a commentary on Muslims' predilection for violence. The third showed Muhammad with a turban in the shape of a bomb, which I believe was an expression of post-industrial ennui in a secular -- oops, no, wait: It was more of a commentary on Muslims' predilection for violence.
In order to express their displeasure with the idea that Muslims are violent, thousands of Muslims around the world engaged in rioting, arson, mob savagery, flag-burning, murder and mayhem, among other peaceful acts of nonviolence.
The little darlings brandish placards with typical Religion of Peace slogans, such as: "Behead Those Who Insult Islam," "Europe, you will pay, extermination is on the way" and "Butcher those who mock Islam." They warn Europe of their own impending 9/11 with signs that say: "Europe: Your 9/11 will come" -- which is ironic, because they almost had me convinced the Jews were behind the 9/11 attack.
...The belief that Islam forbids portrayals of Muhammad is recently acquired. Back when Muslims created things, rather than blowing them up, they made paintings, frescoes, miniatures and prints of Muhammad.
Largely unnoticed in this spectacle is the blinding fact that one nation is missing from the long list of Muslim countries (by which I mean France and England) with hundreds of crazy Muslims experiencing bipolar rage over some cartoons: Iraq. Hey -- maybe this democracy thing does work!
Thanks Ann! Link here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucac/20060209/cm_ucac/calvinandhobbesandmuhammad
Graven Images of Muhammed?
Just another excuse for the Islamic fascists to burn and pillage...Amir Taheri, in today's Wall Street Journal, gives numerous examples of images of the prophet throughout the ages:
...a miniature by Sultan Muhammad-Nur Bokharai, showing Muhammad riding Buraq, a horse with the face of a beautiful woman, on his way to Jerusalem for his M'eraj or nocturnal journey to Heavens (16th century); a painting showing Archangel Gabriel guiding Muhammad into Medina, the prophet's capital after he fled from Mecca (16th century); a portrait of Muhammad, his face covered with a mask, on a pulpit in Medina (16th century); an Isfahan miniature depicting the prophet with his favorite kitten, Hurairah (17th century); Kamaleddin Behzad's miniature showing Muhammad contemplating a rose produced by a drop of sweat that fell from his face (19th century)...
Some of these can be seen in museums within the Muslim world...One statue of Muhammad can be seen at the building of the U.S. Supreme Court, where the prophet is honored as one of the great "lawgivers" of mankind.
...a miniature by Sultan Muhammad-Nur Bokharai, showing Muhammad riding Buraq, a horse with the face of a beautiful woman, on his way to Jerusalem for his M'eraj or nocturnal journey to Heavens (16th century); a painting showing Archangel Gabriel guiding Muhammad into Medina, the prophet's capital after he fled from Mecca (16th century); a portrait of Muhammad, his face covered with a mask, on a pulpit in Medina (16th century); an Isfahan miniature depicting the prophet with his favorite kitten, Hurairah (17th century); Kamaleddin Behzad's miniature showing Muhammad contemplating a rose produced by a drop of sweat that fell from his face (19th century)...
Some of these can be seen in museums within the Muslim world...One statue of Muhammad can be seen at the building of the U.S. Supreme Court, where the prophet is honored as one of the great "lawgivers" of mankind.
So if the mainstream Muslim is not truly offended by images of Muhammed, why are they not standing up to the radical elements within their religion, instead of allowing them to speak as if representative of the group as a whole? And why are there no protesters outside the U.S. Supreme Court? And how dare Islamists say America "disrespects" their religion, when we put their most hallowed Prophet onto the halls of our most sacred institution?
Maybe Condi has it right when she accuses the governments of Iran and Syria of instigating these riots within their countries as a political distraction (although the Palestinians needed no such urging - "In the most violent Palestinian protest yet against cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad, crowds smashed windows and threw stones Wednesday at the headquarters of international observers, prompting them to quit this volatile West Bank City {Hebron}"); but where are the forces of moderation to stand up to such manipulation and terror?
I need to see them act, before I can be certain they even exist...
WSJ article here: http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007934
Hamas: The War on Israel Begins...
Exiled political leader Khaled Mashaal reiterated that Hamas would not bow to Arab and international pressure to recognize Israel and that the group — once in power — would not act to prevent militant attacks on the Jewish state...
The smaller militant group Islamic Jihad, meanwhile, declared it would forge ahead with attacks against Israel — signaling that even if Hamas eventually bows to pressure, other Palestinian radicals will not. Islamic Jihad has been responsible for all six suicide bombings since Palestinian factions agreed to a cease-fire a year ago.
Mashaal said Hamas would not renounce violence or act to stop anti-Israeli attacks because it was obliged to resist what it regards as Israel's occupation of Palestinian land.
[here: http://news.yahoo.com/fc/World/Mideast_Conflict ]
Bad? How about this?
A top Hamas leader laughed Tuesday at Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's plans for Israel's final borders, while another Hamas leader said that Jews could be citizens in a Palestinian state.
Hamas, which won the Palestinian legislative elections by a landslide in January, wants Israel to cease to exist and a Palestinian state to be created on all of mandatory Palestine...
Sheikh Yasser Mansour, No. 5 on the Hamas national list, chuckled over the phone from Nablus when he heard from The Jerusalem Post the list of Jewish settlements in Olmert's vision of Israel's final borders.
"If he wants to find a solution [to the Israel-Palestinan conflict] he must accept less than what he wants," said Mansour evenly....
But remember the Washington Post's favorite terrorist, Moussa Abu Marzouk? He has a most generous offer:
"When historic Palestine is reinstated, they can come and live among us. They will have a Palestinian nationality," he told AP.
In other words - the Jews become dhimmis in a Palestinian state, or die. [J-Post story above here: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1138622572913&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull]
I give it a year, maybe less, before full-scale warfare breaks out, and the Palestinian people see themselves set back another twenty years...oh, how they never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
But the sympathy meter here stays stuck on zero...
The smaller militant group Islamic Jihad, meanwhile, declared it would forge ahead with attacks against Israel — signaling that even if Hamas eventually bows to pressure, other Palestinian radicals will not. Islamic Jihad has been responsible for all six suicide bombings since Palestinian factions agreed to a cease-fire a year ago.
Mashaal said Hamas would not renounce violence or act to stop anti-Israeli attacks because it was obliged to resist what it regards as Israel's occupation of Palestinian land.
[here: http://news.yahoo.com/fc/World/Mideast_Conflict ]
Bad? How about this?
A top Hamas leader laughed Tuesday at Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's plans for Israel's final borders, while another Hamas leader said that Jews could be citizens in a Palestinian state.
Hamas, which won the Palestinian legislative elections by a landslide in January, wants Israel to cease to exist and a Palestinian state to be created on all of mandatory Palestine...
Sheikh Yasser Mansour, No. 5 on the Hamas national list, chuckled over the phone from Nablus when he heard from The Jerusalem Post the list of Jewish settlements in Olmert's vision of Israel's final borders.
"If he wants to find a solution [to the Israel-Palestinan conflict] he must accept less than what he wants," said Mansour evenly....
But remember the Washington Post's favorite terrorist, Moussa Abu Marzouk? He has a most generous offer:
"When historic Palestine is reinstated, they can come and live among us. They will have a Palestinian nationality," he told AP.
In other words - the Jews become dhimmis in a Palestinian state, or die. [J-Post story above here: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1138622572913&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull]
I give it a year, maybe less, before full-scale warfare breaks out, and the Palestinian people see themselves set back another twenty years...oh, how they never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
But the sympathy meter here stays stuck on zero...
วันพุธ, กุมภาพันธ์ 08, 2549
Muslims Turn on The Jews, Of Course...
The black heart of the Muslim world, on full display:
What is really insulting, some Muslim clerics and politicians say, is that Europeans do not think twice about denigrating Islam but view ridicule of Judaism as anti-Semitic.
"What about freedom of expression when anti-Semitism is involved? Then it is not freedom of expression. Then it is a crime," said Arab League chief Amr Moussa.
"But when Islam is insulted, certain powers ... raise the issue of freedom of expression. "The double standards are as clear as the sun," said Abdul Latif Arabiyat, a senior member of Jordan's main Islamist party.
"They (Europeans) don't dare lampoon the Holocaust or their own sacred religious symbols but sanction attacks on our sacred values. They only hold implacable enmity toward Islam."
It is always, always, about the Jews to the Islamo-fascists. The new Nazis of the 21st century attempt to make all issues, especially those regarding their own failings, about the Jews. And for some time, Europe has allowed them to succeed...
No sympathy here - see the cartoon in the post below for clarification... above picture courtesy of E-Nough! here: http://www.e-nough.hmdnsgroup.com/archives/001220.html
วันอังคาร, กุมภาพันธ์ 07, 2549
Cartoons? Blame the Jews!
We were trashing Bill Clinton the other day for equating "anti-Islamic prejudice" with anti-Semitism, and we spoke thusly:
Thanks Bill, for once again blurring the issue with liberal "objectivity", neutral values, and reverse victimization! When they resort to Jew-bashing to "even the score", will we find you suddenly silent? No doubt....
[http://jerseynut.blogspot.com/2006/02/thanks-bill-clinton-you-wanker.html]
And what do we get today?
Iran’s supreme leader on Tuesday accused Western newspapers of an Israeli conspiracy for publishing caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad....
...The West condemns any denial of the Jewish holocaust, but it permits the insult of Islamic sanctities,” Khamenei said.
The caricatures amounted to a “conspiracy by Zionists who were angry because of the victory of Hamas,” he said, referring to the Palestinian militant group that won a surprise landslide victory in last month’s elections.
[LGF: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=19129_Iran_Leader-_Cartoons_Are_a_Zionist_Conspiracy&only ]
And how are our civilized Muslim friends prepared to reply to this obvious Zionist plot?
Iran's best-selling newspaper has launched a competition to find the best cartoon about the Holocaust in retaliation for the publication in many European countries of caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad...
The Iranian daily Hamshahri said the contest was designed to test the boundaries of free speech -- the reason given by many European newspapers for publishing the cartoons of the Prophet.
"Does Western free speech allow working on issues like America and Israel's crimes or an incident like the Holocaust or is this freedom of speech only good for insulting the holy values of divine religions?" the paper asked.
[link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060207/wl_nm/religion_cartoons_iran_holocaust_dc_5 ]
Well, beards, bring it on. Cartoons of Muhammed with a bomb wrapped in his turban is going to be nothing compared to the horrific bile that the Islamists are going to put out here. And with the advance publicity, it will not miss the public eye like so much of the virulant anti-Semitism that is doled out daily in the Arab press. And I hope once and for all the true hypocrisy of the Islamists is revealed as they viciously slander the Jews, then demand no one even dare draw their Prophet (of the "divine religion"), lest they suffer from violence.
That's called fascism, boys and girls. And it is on the march. Time to fight them, with everything we have. Now.
And where is Bill Clinton, now that the Islamists have busted out their anti-Semitism and plastered it onto their sleeves? Has he spoken out to critisize the Iranian press, the way he spoke out against the Western press?
Silent, as we expected...
Thanks Bill, for once again blurring the issue with liberal "objectivity", neutral values, and reverse victimization! When they resort to Jew-bashing to "even the score", will we find you suddenly silent? No doubt....
[http://jerseynut.blogspot.com/2006/02/thanks-bill-clinton-you-wanker.html]
And what do we get today?
Iran’s supreme leader on Tuesday accused Western newspapers of an Israeli conspiracy for publishing caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad....
...The West condemns any denial of the Jewish holocaust, but it permits the insult of Islamic sanctities,” Khamenei said.
The caricatures amounted to a “conspiracy by Zionists who were angry because of the victory of Hamas,” he said, referring to the Palestinian militant group that won a surprise landslide victory in last month’s elections.
[LGF: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=19129_Iran_Leader-_Cartoons_Are_a_Zionist_Conspiracy&only ]
And how are our civilized Muslim friends prepared to reply to this obvious Zionist plot?
Iran's best-selling newspaper has launched a competition to find the best cartoon about the Holocaust in retaliation for the publication in many European countries of caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad...
The Iranian daily Hamshahri said the contest was designed to test the boundaries of free speech -- the reason given by many European newspapers for publishing the cartoons of the Prophet.
"Does Western free speech allow working on issues like America and Israel's crimes or an incident like the Holocaust or is this freedom of speech only good for insulting the holy values of divine religions?" the paper asked.
[link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060207/wl_nm/religion_cartoons_iran_holocaust_dc_5 ]
Well, beards, bring it on. Cartoons of Muhammed with a bomb wrapped in his turban is going to be nothing compared to the horrific bile that the Islamists are going to put out here. And with the advance publicity, it will not miss the public eye like so much of the virulant anti-Semitism that is doled out daily in the Arab press. And I hope once and for all the true hypocrisy of the Islamists is revealed as they viciously slander the Jews, then demand no one even dare draw their Prophet (of the "divine religion"), lest they suffer from violence.
That's called fascism, boys and girls. And it is on the march. Time to fight them, with everything we have. Now.
And where is Bill Clinton, now that the Islamists have busted out their anti-Semitism and plastered it onto their sleeves? Has he spoken out to critisize the Iranian press, the way he spoke out against the Western press?
Silent, as we expected...
We identify Hollywood liberals as traitors all the time here; maybe that's because they identify themselves as...traitors. From today's NY Daily News:
Anti-war mom Cindy Sheehan, fresh from being arrested outside President Bush's State of the Union speech, got a five-minute standing ovation from Ron Howard, Marisa Tomei, Sally Field and others at the V-Day L.A. benefit premiere of Eve Ensler's "The Good Body."
A five minute standing "O" for a women who espouses Jewish conspiracy theories and calls New Orleans "occupied". And these self-absorbed narcissists wonder why they are feeeling more and more scorn from middle America...Link here: http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/388765p-329866c.html
And if you recall, a few days ago the Washington Post saw fit to give a boatload of editorial space to one Mousa Abu Marzook, the deputy political bureau chief of the "Islamic Resistance Movement", aka Hamas. He spoke warmly of Hamas' peaceful intent, interspaced with standard media PC bile for Isreal (here: http://jerseynut.blogspot.com/2006/01/is-it-1932.html). But he couldn't maintain his facade for long, as Little Green Footballs reports:
Senior Hamas member Musa Abu Marzuk described the Palestinian Authority's recognition of Israel as "an error, which can be rectified," speaking to reporters in Cairo Sunday.
Abu Marzuk's comments came shortly after Damascus-based Hamas leader, Khaled Mashaal said last week that Hamas would never recognize the legitimacy of the "Zionist state which was established on our land".
[here: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=19114_Hamas_Leader-_Recognizing_Israel_Was_a_Mistake&only ]
Can the Washington Post justify giving this Jew-killer a column? Probably they would tell us that Ron Howard and Sally Field said it was OK, so...
As a counterpoint, Mortimer Zuckerman, chairman and publisher of The Daily News, shines the harsh light of reality on the Palestinian's new government, and their intent:
Facing up to hellish truth
At one time, Mariam Farahat was a mother of six, but, with her encouragement, three of her sons blew themselves up on suicide missions to murder innocent Israeli citizens, so now she's a mother of only three. Along with several dozen other Hamas terrorists, Farahat was just elected to the new Palestinian Legislative Council.
What better metaphor could there possibly be for the cancer now afflicting the Palestinian body politic than the election of a terrorist group to a majority in the parliament? As one commentator put it, "The Palestinians are the first terrorist people."
...Hamas, which claims the blood of almost 600 innocent Israelis on its hands, could not have been more explicit than it was in a TV advertisement that aired Jan. 17: "We do not recognize the Israeli enemy, nor his right to be our neighbor, nor to stay, nor his ownership of any inch of land."
Hamas doesn't even pretend to want peace with Israel. Its goals are, quite simply, the annihilation of the Jewish state in favor of an Islamic state throughout the Holy Land - an Islamic regime whose source of authority and laws is Islamic law as codified in the sharia. As Zahar put it, "In the Islamist Palestinian State, every citizen will be required to act in accordance with the codes of Islamic religious law."
[ http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/388801p-329891c.html]
Wanna bet Howard, Field, et al. would give Farahat and Marzook a standing "O" as well? All while urging Isreal to open "dialogue" with Hamas, of course, so that they may better understand each other...Hey! Maybe Speilberg can do a movie showing the moral equivilance of dead Isreali civilians and the terrorists of Hamastan! After all, the Islamists are equal-opportunity offenders; they trash churches too:
BEIRUT, Lebanon — Thousands of Muslims rampaged Sunday in Beirut, setting fire to the Danish Embassy, burning Danish flags and lobbing stones at a Maronite Catholic church as violent protests spread over caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad.
[eolympian.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060206/NEWS/60206035]
And yet, the liberals in Hollywood and the MSM applaud Sheehan, give Hamas free propoganda, and attempt to undercut the President's every move to protect us from this fascist Islamist evil, which is spreading like a malignent cancer across the globe. Yet they say nothing about the death of Theo van Gogh, offer only silence on the "Prophet" cartoonists now in hiding, but still find voice to accuse George Bush of totalitarianism.
I no longer need to ask whose side these people are on; it has become obvious...
Anti-war mom Cindy Sheehan, fresh from being arrested outside President Bush's State of the Union speech, got a five-minute standing ovation from Ron Howard, Marisa Tomei, Sally Field and others at the V-Day L.A. benefit premiere of Eve Ensler's "The Good Body."
A five minute standing "O" for a women who espouses Jewish conspiracy theories and calls New Orleans "occupied". And these self-absorbed narcissists wonder why they are feeeling more and more scorn from middle America...Link here: http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/388765p-329866c.html
And if you recall, a few days ago the Washington Post saw fit to give a boatload of editorial space to one Mousa Abu Marzook, the deputy political bureau chief of the "Islamic Resistance Movement", aka Hamas. He spoke warmly of Hamas' peaceful intent, interspaced with standard media PC bile for Isreal (here: http://jerseynut.blogspot.com/2006/01/is-it-1932.html). But he couldn't maintain his facade for long, as Little Green Footballs reports:
Senior Hamas member Musa Abu Marzuk described the Palestinian Authority's recognition of Israel as "an error, which can be rectified," speaking to reporters in Cairo Sunday.
Abu Marzuk's comments came shortly after Damascus-based Hamas leader, Khaled Mashaal said last week that Hamas would never recognize the legitimacy of the "Zionist state which was established on our land".
[here: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=19114_Hamas_Leader-_Recognizing_Israel_Was_a_Mistake&only ]
Can the Washington Post justify giving this Jew-killer a column? Probably they would tell us that Ron Howard and Sally Field said it was OK, so...
As a counterpoint, Mortimer Zuckerman, chairman and publisher of The Daily News, shines the harsh light of reality on the Palestinian's new government, and their intent:
Facing up to hellish truth
At one time, Mariam Farahat was a mother of six, but, with her encouragement, three of her sons blew themselves up on suicide missions to murder innocent Israeli citizens, so now she's a mother of only three. Along with several dozen other Hamas terrorists, Farahat was just elected to the new Palestinian Legislative Council.
What better metaphor could there possibly be for the cancer now afflicting the Palestinian body politic than the election of a terrorist group to a majority in the parliament? As one commentator put it, "The Palestinians are the first terrorist people."
...Hamas, which claims the blood of almost 600 innocent Israelis on its hands, could not have been more explicit than it was in a TV advertisement that aired Jan. 17: "We do not recognize the Israeli enemy, nor his right to be our neighbor, nor to stay, nor his ownership of any inch of land."
Hamas doesn't even pretend to want peace with Israel. Its goals are, quite simply, the annihilation of the Jewish state in favor of an Islamic state throughout the Holy Land - an Islamic regime whose source of authority and laws is Islamic law as codified in the sharia. As Zahar put it, "In the Islamist Palestinian State, every citizen will be required to act in accordance with the codes of Islamic religious law."
[ http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/388801p-329891c.html]
Wanna bet Howard, Field, et al. would give Farahat and Marzook a standing "O" as well? All while urging Isreal to open "dialogue" with Hamas, of course, so that they may better understand each other...Hey! Maybe Speilberg can do a movie showing the moral equivilance of dead Isreali civilians and the terrorists of Hamastan! After all, the Islamists are equal-opportunity offenders; they trash churches too:
BEIRUT, Lebanon — Thousands of Muslims rampaged Sunday in Beirut, setting fire to the Danish Embassy, burning Danish flags and lobbing stones at a Maronite Catholic church as violent protests spread over caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad.
[eolympian.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060206/NEWS/60206035]
And yet, the liberals in Hollywood and the MSM applaud Sheehan, give Hamas free propoganda, and attempt to undercut the President's every move to protect us from this fascist Islamist evil, which is spreading like a malignent cancer across the globe. Yet they say nothing about the death of Theo van Gogh, offer only silence on the "Prophet" cartoonists now in hiding, but still find voice to accuse George Bush of totalitarianism.
I no longer need to ask whose side these people are on; it has become obvious...
วันจันทร์, กุมภาพันธ์ 06, 2549
Thanks, Bill Clinton, You Wanker!
Nothing like our ex-Presidents traveling overseas to give aid and comfort to the enemy, right? I complained about Bill Clinton's choice of words here http://jerseynut.blogspot.com/2006/01/bill-clinton-dhimmi.html when he said:
Former US president Bill Clinton warned of rising anti-Islamic prejudice, comparing it to historic anti-Semitism as he condemned the publishing of cartoons depicting Prophet Mohammed in a Danish newspaper.
"So now what are we going to do? ... Replace the anti-Semitic prejudice with anti-Islamic prejudice? "he said at an economic conference in the Qatari capital of Doha. In Europe, most of the struggles we have had in the past 50 years have been to fight prejudices against Jews, to fight against anti-Semitism, he said.
And now, of course, we have this:
The prime ministers of Spain and Turkey issued a Christian-Muslim appeal for calm, saying "we shall all be the losers if we fail to immediately defuse this situation."
But Turkey's Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said media freedoms cannot be limitless and that hostility against Muslims was replacing anti-Semitism in the West.
[here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060206/ap_on_re_mi_ea/prophet_drawings ]
Gee, I wonder where he got that thought from?
Thanks Bill, for once again blurring the issue with liberal "objectivity", neutral values, and reverse victimization!
When they resort to Jew-bashing to "even the score", will we find you suddenly silent? No doubt....
Former US president Bill Clinton warned of rising anti-Islamic prejudice, comparing it to historic anti-Semitism as he condemned the publishing of cartoons depicting Prophet Mohammed in a Danish newspaper.
"So now what are we going to do? ... Replace the anti-Semitic prejudice with anti-Islamic prejudice? "he said at an economic conference in the Qatari capital of Doha. In Europe, most of the struggles we have had in the past 50 years have been to fight prejudices against Jews, to fight against anti-Semitism, he said.
And now, of course, we have this:
The prime ministers of Spain and Turkey issued a Christian-Muslim appeal for calm, saying "we shall all be the losers if we fail to immediately defuse this situation."
But Turkey's Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said media freedoms cannot be limitless and that hostility against Muslims was replacing anti-Semitism in the West.
[here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060206/ap_on_re_mi_ea/prophet_drawings ]
Gee, I wonder where he got that thought from?
Thanks Bill, for once again blurring the issue with liberal "objectivity", neutral values, and reverse victimization!
When they resort to Jew-bashing to "even the score", will we find you suddenly silent? No doubt....
วันอาทิตย์, กุมภาพันธ์ 05, 2549
The Philadelphia Inquirer Shows Some Guts!
First major US newspaper, as far as I know, to show the cartoons of Muhammed that have so riled the Muslim world, is the Philadelphia Inquirer:
The Inquirer on Saturday published the most controversial image, which depicted the Prophet with a turban resembling a lit bomb, and it posted on its Web site an Internet link to the rest of the cartoons.
The Inquirer included a note with its publication of the image which read, in part, "The Inquirer intends no disrespect to the religious beliefs of any of its readers. But when a use of religious imagery that many find offensive becomes a major news story, we believe it is important for readers to be able to judge the content of the image for themselves."
The note compared the image with the earlier publication of a 1987 photograph by Andres Serrano of a crucifix in urine, a work which angered many Christians.
We're running this in order to give people a perspective of what the controversy's about, not to titillate, and we have done that with a whole wide range of images throughout our history," Bennett said.
Most U.S. news outlets, including The New York Times, The Washington Post and USA Today, have declined to run any of the images so far, instead describing them in words as they cover the outraged reaction by Muslims to the cartoons.
Many broadcast programs and news networks including ABC have shown either full or partially obscured images of the cartoons.
Bravo to the Inquirer and their parent ownership, Knight Ridder Inc., for jumping into the fray with honesty and heads held high. The cowardice (dhimmitude?) of the NY Times, Washington Post, and USA Today is duly noted. The Inquirer certainly displays more clarity and backbone than the U.S. State Department, that's for sure...
I couldn't find the cartoon itself on the website, but here is the article that has the weblink: http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/13788640.htm
al-Reuters link to above story here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060205/ts_nm/religion_cartoons_inquirer_dc
The Inquirer on Saturday published the most controversial image, which depicted the Prophet with a turban resembling a lit bomb, and it posted on its Web site an Internet link to the rest of the cartoons.
The Inquirer included a note with its publication of the image which read, in part, "The Inquirer intends no disrespect to the religious beliefs of any of its readers. But when a use of religious imagery that many find offensive becomes a major news story, we believe it is important for readers to be able to judge the content of the image for themselves."
The note compared the image with the earlier publication of a 1987 photograph by Andres Serrano of a crucifix in urine, a work which angered many Christians.
We're running this in order to give people a perspective of what the controversy's about, not to titillate, and we have done that with a whole wide range of images throughout our history," Bennett said.
Most U.S. news outlets, including The New York Times, The Washington Post and USA Today, have declined to run any of the images so far, instead describing them in words as they cover the outraged reaction by Muslims to the cartoons.
Many broadcast programs and news networks including ABC have shown either full or partially obscured images of the cartoons.
Bravo to the Inquirer and their parent ownership, Knight Ridder Inc., for jumping into the fray with honesty and heads held high. The cowardice (dhimmitude?) of the NY Times, Washington Post, and USA Today is duly noted. The Inquirer certainly displays more clarity and backbone than the U.S. State Department, that's for sure...
I couldn't find the cartoon itself on the website, but here is the article that has the weblink: http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/13788640.htm
al-Reuters link to above story here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060205/ts_nm/religion_cartoons_inquirer_dc
Cartoon Violence
So here is one of the cartoons deemed so offensive that Muslims worldwide have felt the need to engage in lawlessness, arson, robbery, and rioting:
I guess we shouldn't be so shocked, remember the worldwide Jewish riots of 2003 when this cartoon below was published in England?
You mean...there were no Jewish Riots? Even when the old anti-Semitic libel about using non-Jewish blood for sacraments was revived, and plastered onto Isreal? Even when showing the head of the Jewish state eating babies? Even after this henious cartoon won the UK's "Political Cartoon of the Year" in 2003 ??
No riots. Just two points:
-there is a severe flaw in Islamic culture if the cartoon image shown on top is regarded as just cause to go on a rampage of violence worldwide. This mindset cannot currently coexist with the West, period.
-Why do British newspapers feel free to print cartoons slandering the Jews without a second thought, but absolutely refuse to even allow images of Islam's Muhammed? Maybe because they know the Jews won't hunt them down at their homes and slit their throats for expressing a right to free speech? Lesson learned by Islamists: Intimidation works; keep applying it.
Why We Need Gitmo
'Cause this is what happens when they get locked up in indiginous prisons:
USS Cole attack mastermind escapes prison
A man considered a mastermind of the USS Cole bombing that killed 17 sailors in a Yemeni port in 2000 was among 23 people who escaped from a Yemen prison last week, Interpol said Sunday.
The international police agency issued an “urgent global security alert” for those who escaped Friday from the prison via a tunnel. It called the escapees “dangerous individuals.”
...Interpol said in a statement that at least 13 of the 23 escapees were convicted al-Qaida fighters, who escaped via a 140-yard-long tunnel “dug by the prisoners and co-conspirators outside.”
[MSN here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11172994/ ]
Good work by the Kingdom of Yemen, apparently "not noticing" a 420 foot tunnel being dug on the outside of a prison holding high-value convicts.
Nowhere to go if you are gonna try to flee Gitmo - shark-infested waters or the People's Paradise of Cuba...no surprise I haven't heard much about escapees....
USS Cole attack mastermind escapes prison
A man considered a mastermind of the USS Cole bombing that killed 17 sailors in a Yemeni port in 2000 was among 23 people who escaped from a Yemen prison last week, Interpol said Sunday.
The international police agency issued an “urgent global security alert” for those who escaped Friday from the prison via a tunnel. It called the escapees “dangerous individuals.”
...Interpol said in a statement that at least 13 of the 23 escapees were convicted al-Qaida fighters, who escaped via a 140-yard-long tunnel “dug by the prisoners and co-conspirators outside.”
[MSN here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11172994/ ]
Good work by the Kingdom of Yemen, apparently "not noticing" a 420 foot tunnel being dug on the outside of a prison holding high-value convicts.
Nowhere to go if you are gonna try to flee Gitmo - shark-infested waters or the People's Paradise of Cuba...no surprise I haven't heard much about escapees....
สมัครสมาชิก:
บทความ (Atom)