This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Politics

  • Bin Laden to Europe: End the war, I’m getting my ass kicked

    Okay, so I made that up. But if you read between the lines of the latest tape from Islamofascist Dead Man Walking, the desperation in his voice is very satisfiying. 

    Osama bin Laden called on European powers to end their involvement in the war in Afghanistan and cease military alliances with the U.S., according to an audio tape of what purported to be his voice played on the Al-Jazeera television channel.

    Europe “walked behind” the U.S. when it invaded Afghanistan, and “it would be better for you if your politicians who flock to the White House instead worked to end the wrong done to oppressed peoples,” bin Laden said, speaking in Arabic. The recording could not be immediately verified independently.

    Those ‘oppressed’ people were far worse off under the thumb of the Taliban, if you count total censorship of media, music, freedom of speech, and the barbaric subjugation of women, that is.  If you know what’s good for you Osama, keep hiding. Once we get you, we’ll put your head on a stick and broadcast it on YouTube.

    “The European countries in this war don’t respect the conventions of war and are attacking women and children,” he said, before reiterating that he was responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.

    That’s coming from a brutal, souless, piece of shit who uses the conventions of Islam to kill men, women, and children, who are used as human shields in the name of “allah”.

    He’s still taking credit for his 9/11 attacks, which the tin-foil hat conspiracy wackjobs will never believe.

    The statement is the fourth from bin Laden since September, according to Virginia-based IntelCenter, an organization that monitors extremist Web sites.

    ……The Washington-based SITE Institute said on Nov. 26 that a message to Europeans from bin Laden would soon be broadcast by the network’s As-Sahab media arm.

    Link: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aIJprkc_Pwb8&refer=home

    I bet they can hardly wait.

  • The latest in the Islamofascist ‘Teddy Bear’ saga

      More from the ‘tolerant’, ‘peaceful religion’ of Islam:

    KHARTOUM, Sudan —British teacher Gillian Gibbons was convicted of insulting Islam for letting her pupils name a teddy bear Muhammad and sentenced to 15 days in prison and deportation from Sudan, one of her defense lawyers said Thursday.

    Ali Mohammed Ajab, of Gibbons’ defense team, said she was found guilty of “insulting the faith of Muslims in Sudan” under Article 125 of the Sudanese criminal code, a lighter conviction than the original charge of inciting religious hatred. A charge later confirmed by a judge leaving the closed court session.

    All this stemmed from a ‘British National Curriculum course designed to teach young pupils about animals and their habitats’, which was in this case, the bear.Ms. Gibbons asked one of her students to bring in her teddy bear, then asked the children to name the toy.

    Among the choices were: Abdullah, Hassan and Muhammad. The children would then put the names to a vote.

    Twenty out of the 23 children chose Muhammad. Each child was allowed to take the bear home for weekends and asked to keep a diary about what they did with the toy. Each entry was collected in a book with a picture of the bear on the cover, next to the message “My name is Muhammad.”

    Link: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312895,00.html

    Apparently, it’s alright to name yourself or your children Mohammad, but not a frickin’ Teddy Bear.

    “I feel this is very serious and very unfair,” he told The Associated Press outside the courtroom. Ajab, who also works for the Khartoum Center for Human Rights, said the issue was raised by “hard-liners who are always trying to make some noise,” in an apparent reference to religious conservatives.
    ……Religious conservatives in Sudan have been outraged by the naming of Gibbons’ class teddy bear “Muhammad” in an apparently insulting reference to Islam’s most revered prophet and defense lawyers reported receiving death threats.

    Yeah, the perpetually outraged muslim zealots tend to foam at the mouth when their precious Mo-Ham-Ass is “insulted”.

    The maximum penalty for the original charge, which has attracted world wide attention, was 40 lashes, a fine and six months in prison.

    Gibbons is expected to serve out her sentence in the Omdurman women’s prison near Khartoum. It was not immediately clear if following the verdict in the closed hearing, she went immediately to prison.

    Link: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,313690,00.html

    The “perpetually outraged” National Organization for Women is mum on this, as they usually are with regard to any one who represents America’s enemies.

    In the U.S., a spokeswoman for the National Organization for Women said the situation is definitely on the radar, and N.O.W. is not ignoring it.

    But she added that the U.S.-based organization is not putting out a statement or taking a position.

    Radio personality Tammy Bruce, former president of the Los Angles chapter of the National Organization for Women and past member of their board of directors, criticized the organization for not taking a stand.

    “We have a duty to make a difference for women around the world,” Bruce told FOX News. “The supposed feminist establishment is refusing to take a position in this regard because they have no sensibility of what is right anymore. They’re afraid of offending people. They are bound by political correctness.”

    “The American feminist movement has not taken one stand to support the women of Iraq, the women of Afghanistan, the women of Iran,” she said.

    Link: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,313426,00.html

    But let ‘em get a whiff of any ‘human rights abuses’ by Americans or those we support, and the squalling banshees can’t shut up.

    Being a strong, independent female, who believes in and practices equal rights and responsibilities, I’ve had it up to my mammary glands with women’s groups who won’t spread their disdain for discrimination across the board.

    Ms. Gibbons is a nice, idealistic teacher who mistakenly believed that she could bring some goodness and civility into the lives of young muslim children.

    Unfortunately, she learned a valuable lesson about trying to cast pearls before swine.

  • Global Warming Causes: Everything

    Global Warming is THE Cause of EVERYTHING, thus is the conclusion gained from the OVER SIX HUNDRED links in Christopher Alleva’s brilliant entry on the American Thinker
    What is amazing is the number of things that are directly contradictory of each other.
    There is a link for LOGIC, and that clearly was the first to go, although I didn’t see a link for common sense, it is also a casualty of global warming “science”

  • Dump debates

    I haven’t watched any of the debates – and I haven’t commented on many of them here. People who know me, know that I’m an old-fashioned kind of guy and that’s why debates never interested me. It all seemed like theater – theater forced on us by the networks who are convinced that they put John Kennedy in office after his debate with Richard Nixon.

    Abe Lincoln never campaigned or debated for his office (the famous Lincoln-Douglas Debates were two years before his election to the Presidency). People just knew his position on issues – which is why, without having said a word about slavery, or his intentions as President, the South made plans to secede while he was taking the train from his Illinois home, where he spent the election season, to his Inauguration. It’s also the reason why my fellow Marylanders plotted his assassination before the inauguration and he had to sneak through the State to Washington.

    Well, enough of the history lesson. The reason I bring all of this up is that stupid crap that happened last night at the Republican CNN/YouTube debate. If ever there was proof that we’re being manipulated by the media, it happened last night.

    Michele Malkin is STILL uncovering plants;

    Welcome to Horticulture Journalism 101. (Keep scrolling down for new updates to this handy CNN/YouTube illustrated plant guide.)

    So far, I count eight Democrat operatives from various Democrat campaigns. In addition to Michele, there’s Powerline, Powerline and Powerline, Hot Air, Patrick Ruffini, Glenn Reynolds, Gateway Pundit, Wizbang,JasonColeman, and another JasonColeman.

    Joe Scarborough says it’s “total crap” that CNN didn’t know these were plants according to Newsbuster’s Mark Finkelstein. Vivian Lee, also at Newsbusters, writes that CNN, which chose the YouTube videos, chastised the candidates for not answering any questions about healthcare – a subject for which CNN chose no questions;

    And shame on them for actually answering the questions they were asked instead of drifting off topic and discussing other things.

    Well, my whole point, I guess, is that we should dump these debates, for no other reason than that they are so carefully scripted by the candidates as well as the media, debates are useless now. It’s just an opportunity for candidates to make a four or five word sound bite that’ll propel them over the heads of the others – for one night.

    Then again, the malfeasance of the networks, the candidates and the questioners at these debates provide employment opportunities for thousands of super-attentive bloggers, apparently.

  • CA Decides Gender Doesn’t Mean What it Used to

    No, you did read that right. In SB 777 FULL TEXT HERE California does indeed define gender differently than the male has penis, female has vagina NORM. Actual definitions are so discriminatory, don’t you know?

    The relevant section is §210:
    SEC. 10. Section 219 is added to the Education Code, to read:
    219. Disability, gender, nationality, race or ethnicity,
    religion, sexual orientation, or any other characteristic contained
    in the definition of hate crimes set forth in Section 422.55 of the
    Penal Code includes a perception that the person has any of those
    characteristics or that the person is associated with a person who
    has, or is perceived to have, any of those characteristics.
    You got that?
    So if a 16 year old high school boy declares his femininity he cannot be discriminated against and must be, instead catered to. So, if he (SHE!) decides to shower with the “other” girls, that would be fine, this will, Schwarzenegger signed it, in fact make it a violation to force “her” to shower with the boys (you know, those WITH the same genitalia…)
    OK, so this is the crap the schools are wasting tax dollars on.
    Well, you can be sure, this “Perceived Gender” idiocy won’t stop there. At some point, a convicted rapist, could, declare he is in “Fact” a woman, and, after demanding to be treated as such, join a gym, and hang out, really hang out in the women’s locker room, ogling to his heart’s content, sitting buck naked in the steam room “sporting wood” (How dare you discriminate against “her” she is a lesbian and has no control over the physical signs of her attraction…)

    The liberals constantly tell us that we cannot legislate morality. A more stupid statement you would be hard pressed to find. Morals are and have always been legislated. Murder, rape, theft, these things are immoral and have always been illegal, that is legislated to be contrary to the law, in every civil society since time immemorial.

    What you cannot legislate is changes to rules of nature. In nature males have one type of genitals and females another, legislation or imagination does not alter this fact. Pretending that this is a choice is as harmful to children and society as it is foolish.

    Just because you may not be happy with the way things are does not mean pretending they are wildly different actually makes them different.

  • KosKids buy Chavez’ fake coup story (Updated)

    The article I picked up from the Canadian bogus organization that calls itself “Global Security” has spread across the ‘net. The article claims to be sourced from Chavez’ counterintelligence agency who intercepted a letter from a CIA agent named Michael Steere supposedly stationed in the US embassy in Caracas. But anyway, the KosKids are up in arms;

    A memo from CIA officer Michael Middleton Steere, addressed to CIA Director General Michael Hayden in Washington DC, has been intercepted by Venezuelan counter-intelligence; and it shows that the US plans to attempt another coup d’etat against the democratically elected government of Venezuela on the eve of a historic constitutional referendum that will democratize political power to the grassroots of the majority more thoroughly than anything we have seen in this hemisphere… ever.  This outcome by a major oil producing nation that has confronted the US government is intolerable to the American political class, not merely the Bush administration.  It is part of a continental drift of Latin America away from US domination; and it has world historic significance.

    It is very important that this CIA plot get maximum exposure immediately across the net, because the US media, the Republican and Democratic Parties, and the US dominant class, will do everything in their power to assist the desired outcome of this illegal and immoral interference by the United States government in the democratic self-determination of Venezuela.

    Widespread, rapid distribution via alternative media has the potential to expose and disrupt this CIA plot.  You can do something right now.  Get the word out.

    Read more here, and stay abreast of developments.  A Google News search of “Michael Middleton Steere” will help keep you updated.

    Be part of a real politics of resistance.  Help expose this international malfeasance now.  Be an ally to the Venezuelan people, whose government was democratically elected (unlike our own).

    The web address is; http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/11/28/18227/641 but you’ll have to paste it in your browser.

    First of all the story is obviously false. If there was indeed a plot against Chavez in the US Embassy, there’d be no hard copy for the Venezuelan counterintellegence agents to get a hold of – this isn’t the 1950s. Do they think the CIA still acts under conditions in John LeCarre novels? Am I the only one who thinks that it’s odd that this story breaks just as Chavez is losing support for his Constitutional rewrite?

    Secondly, even if it were true, who do these punk ass crybabies think they are to undermine our nation’s intelligence operations? Well, the Kos diarist is Stan Goff who has a website called “Insurgent American” so I suppose he fancies himself some kind of revolutionary and the commenters invoke Che Guevarra – so we know whose side their on.

    But the story is so obviously fake, Stevie Wonder can see it from space. 

    Venezuelanalysis.com has been busy writing stories about the coup plot, stories about anti-chavistas killing poor chavistas, and warning of the risk of anti-reform deception in the vote Sunday. The norteamericano propaganda mill is working over time.

    UPDATE: How could I have missed this? Kate from A Columbo-Americana’s Perspective points out that the memo was in Spanish. Why would the CIA be sending it’s memos around in Spanish?

    Even the New York Times let a column through today that question the veracity of the memo;

    State television also broadcast coverage this week of a memorandum in Spanish claimed to be written by the C.I.A. in which destabilization plans against Mr. Chávez were laid out. A spokesman for the United States embassy here was unavailable for comment on the report.

    Others analysts, including investigators who had previously uncovered financing of Venezuelan opposition groups by the United States government, expressed doubts about the authenticity of the memo, dubbed by Venezuelan officials as part of a plan called “Operation Pliers.”

    “I find the document quite suspect,” said Jeremy Bigwood, an independent researcher in Washington. “There’s not an original version in English, and the timing of its release is strange. Everything about it smells bad.”

    Of course, the standard Kos response will be that the Times is part of the Bush machine.

  • CNN; The assassin network

    Hugo Chavez has accused CNN of plotting his assassination, according to Reuters;

    Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said on Wednesday CNN may have been instigating his murder when the U.S. TV network showed a photograph of him with a label underneath that read “Who killed him?”

    The caption appeared to be a production mistake — confusing a Chavez news item with one on the death of a football star. The anchor said “take the image down” when he realized.

    But Chavez called for a probe in an interview on state television, where he repeatedly reviewed a tape of the broadcast, questioning why the unconnected photograph and wording were left on screen for several seconds.

    “I want the state prosecutor to look into bringing a suit against CNN for instigating murder in Venezuela,” he said. “… undoubtedly it is part of the psychological warfare.”

    Yeah, the cheese has slid right off of Chavez’ cracker. But what gets me is the lengths to which Reuters will go to defend CNN;

    The anti-U.S. president often denounces plots to kill him without providing much detailed evidence. On Tuesday, he said a sniper trained his gun on him at a political rally this month.

    And

    Well-known for wild accusations and harsh insults, Chavez usually focuses his attacks against the United States during campaigns. With the Bush administration avoiding being drawn into a spat, he has become involved in disputes with Spain and Colombia and repeatedly lambasted the Roman Catholic Church.

    In defense of CNN Reuters does everything except send the men in white suits to pick up Chavez. But let him accuse the Bush Administration of trying to kill him and all Reuters gives us is “A Bush Administration official later denied that this Administration has as it’s official policy the assassination of pudgy lunatics in red shirts.”

  • BDS at Columbia

    Just perusing the usual sources, I ran across an article at The Weekly Standard this afternoon by John McCormack entitled “Columbia’s Concern” about a group of professors at Columbia University who’ve expressed their “concern” about the tone of University President Bollinger when he had the opportunity to question the president of the Islamic Republic, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad back on September 24th. Their letter to the university president reads in part;

    3) The president’s address on the occasion of President Ahmadinejad‘s visit has sullied the reputation of the University with its strident tone, and has abetted a climate in which incendiary speech prevails over open debate. The president’s introductory remarks were not only uncivil and bad pedagogy, they allied the University with the Bush administration’s war in Iraq, a position anathema to many in the University community.

    4) In the name of the University, the president has publicly taken partisan political positions concerning the politics of the Middle East in particular, without apparent expertise in this area or consultation with faculty who teach and undertake research in this area. His conflation of his own political position with that of the University is unacceptable.

    At the New York Sun link is also a list of the numerous professors who signed this letter back on Novemebr 12th, in case anyone is interested. The real intellectual vacancy here is the line that accuses Bollinger of aligning with the Bush Administration simply by asking tough questions of the half-pint mahdi-worshipper. Excuse me?

    Well, over at the Huffington Post, Alan Dershowitz explains it;

    It all seems so inconsistent unless you understand what the real agenda is, and then everything becomes completely clear and totally consistent. The agenda is Israel. If you’re against Israel — as Matory, Foner, and their ilk are — then they want you to have complete freedom to speak against the Jewish state (as they certainly should and do). If, on the other hand, you’re perceived as pro-Israel (or pro-American, for that matter), then suddenly you have no right to free speech. It is so transparently cynical that I’m amazed that any reasonable person actually falls for it.

    Well, Alan, were not talking about reasonable people. Eric Foner is the guy who wrote “He’s the Worst Ever“, the Washington Post piece last December explaining why Leftist history professors want to impress upon us that President Bush is the worst president in our history – the article the Left drags out everytime they want to show us their authority for making such an idiotic claim – it ends with this line;

    It is impossible to say with certainty how Bush will be ranked in, say, 2050. But somehow, in his first six years in office he has managed to combine the lapses of leadership, misguided policies and abuse of power of his failed predecessors. I think there is no alternative but to rank him as the worst president in U.S. history.

    McCormack writes that about 60 Columbia professors have come to Bollinger’s defense;

    Bollinger’s defenders appear to have most liberal foreign policy observers on their side, according to Andrew Grotto, a senior national security analyst at the left-wing Center for American Progress. Grotto says it’s simply a fact that Iran is “financing and cooperating” with “certain Shia insurgent groups” in Iraq. “I’m not aware of any serious debate that Iran is not meddling in Iraq,” he says.

    “Serious” is the operative word in that sentence, of course. Grotto is a critic of the Bush administration, but he says, “We need a serious debate about Iran policy, and we can’t have that unless we’re pretty straight on the facts.” Grotto also thinks it’s unproductive for people to argue that “if Bush says it, it must be false.”

    So I guess Columbia nor the entire Left are completely awash in BDS. But to simply state that criticism of the Islamic Republic should not be allowed because it is a political position is incredibly intellectually vacant. Has Foner or his fellow boneheads seen what goes on in Iraq and Iran? Or are they just being willfully blind.