Barack HUSSEIN Obama; there - I dared say it

This nonsense is getting ridiculous.

The United States of America has become much too hypersensitive as a nation, and much too obsessed with the concept of race when it is considered a racial slur simply to call a man by his given name.

According to Michelle Obama, the name "Hussein" is a "fear bomb". Republicans have already run for cover and pledged not to use it anymore.

For years, it's been considered perfectly acceptable to call George W. Bush "Dubya" after his middle name. Why should Obama get special treatment?

Obama's parents gave him the name in the first place; does this mean they are racists and fear-mongers as well? Well, no. Apparently, it's ok for some (presumably the enlightened) to use it. Time has it on the money:

So who gets to say Hussein? At the Oscars, host Jon Stewart took innuendo about as far as it can go, saying that Barack Hussein Obama running today is like a 1940's candidate named Gaydolph Titler. But that reference, served up to a crowd that presumably swoons for Obama, got laughs. So maybe the H-word is more like the N-word: you can say it, but only if you are an initiate. Blacks can use the N-word; Obama supporters can use the H-word.

We don't need a new "N word" in our society. Just let people use his name. If there's nothing wrong with it (and there isn't), then it shouldn't bother you. Simple.

Click here for more...

The Prince in Afghanistan [Updated]

Harry firing the .50 cal (my favorite machine gun) - photo embedded from the Daily Telegraph

I shy away from big-media stories, but here I had a few comments. An Australian magazine and German Newspaper recently leaked that Prince Harry was fighting in Afghanistan, and the news quickly spread to the Drudge report and beyond.

Last year, the Ministry of Defense formally announced that Harry would not deploy to Iraq with his unit, which I felt was a bad decision at the time. After all, why waste time and money training an officer if you won't let him do his job, unless the Royal's only purpose now is tabloid fodder instead of cannon fodder (I would prefer the cannons myself). Besides, British royals have usually gone to war throughout their history. But I understand that the unwanted attention this brings to the unit is not helpful, and is a nightmare for that unit's commander. At the same time, if you don't send him, you are misusing a trained officer, and showing the world undue favoritism toward the Royal family. I thought at the time that the best thing overall would be to send him there secretly. They did so, but to Afghanistan instead. Great minds think alike.

Apparently, Prince Harry works as a "JTAC" Joint Terminal Attack Controller, an officer inside an infantry unit that works with forward deployed troops and coordinates air strikes from the ground. This improves target accuracy and reduces the danger of friendly fire. The term "JTAC" is also used in the US military, and the job is exactly the same, although it actually goes to an Air Force liaison officer who is attached to an Army unit [correction: a JTAC is actually an enlisted soldier; ALOs are different - see first comment below]. This goes a bit outside my area, but in my experience, this is usually an officer of lieutenant grade (like Harry) at the Brigade or Division level, or with a Special Forces team, but it belongs to an enlisted soldier at the battalion level or below (when needed). There are exceptions. During my first deployment, our Cavalry squadron had helicopters that were organic to the unit, so one of our pilots (usually a warrant officer) filled the role. Since we were in a city, air strikes were rare, so the job was not terribly demanding at that time.

I wish Prince Harry all the best. After watching a few of his taped interviews there, he looks and sounds pretty much like every other soldier I've ever seen, British or American.

There is only one thing I'm jealous about:

Prince Harry was due to complete a four-month tour without the standard two-week R&R break other soldiers enjoy.

Four months?? That's it? In the current war, US Army soldiers have to go for 12-15 months at a time with a two-week break, and US Marines deploy for 7 months, with no break. A four month tour with a two-week break is scarcely enough time for someone to thoroughly learn their job. By the time they're just settling in, it's time for vacation, and before you know it, they are going home!

Trivia time: Bet you didn't know his real name is not Harry, but Henry Charles Albert David, and his official title is His Royal Highness Prince Henry of Wales.

UPDATE 29/02/2008 03:07:00 PM:
The Ministry of Defence has officially announced that Prince Harry will be withdrawn from Afghanistan back to the UK. I wouldn't rule out the possibility that he will be secretly redeployed elsewhere in Afghanistan or even Iraq.

Their reason:

BBC royal correspondent Peter Hunt said it was "inevitable" Prince Harry would have to leave because of the risk the Taleban would increase attacks on British forces in Helmand due to a royal being in their midst.

I understand that risk, but I still think withdrawing him would be a mistake. First of all, it looks like they are giving in to threats, and in any case, if the Taliban don't attack his unit in Helmand, they will simply conduct their attacks elsewhere. The Prince would be safer but overall the safety doesn't increase or decrease. Secondly, his unit can be augmented with additional forces to handle the problem, and in fact, this situation can be used to draw elusive enemy forces out into the open to be destroyed. They also shouldn't ignore the positive effect his presence can have on troop morale.



Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

New UK passport photo guidelines

Hat not good, headscarf good...

Expat Yank got ahold of the latest guide in the UK for passport photo guidelines, and it's actually pretty amusing the lengths that political correctness has gone. Apparently, there are no white males left in Britain anymore, and you can cover all your hair, as long as you don't wear a hat! This is officially sanctioned silliness beyond belief. I didn't put the whole thing here because I don't want to steal his thunder. Go visit his blog and check it out.

Click here for more...

Mayor is gone

Earlier (with photo) I wrote about the mayor of Arlington, Oregon, Carmen Kontur-Gronquist, who was facing a recall vote after pictures surfaced of her in her underwear (not nude photos - underwear). The photos were taken before she was elected mayor.

Well that recall vote was successful, barely. 142-139 (obviously, Arlington is a very small town).

Since she didn't actually do anything wrong, I think this reflects badly on the people of Arlington and they should be ashamed of themselves.

In fact, as a mayor, she was what we call in the military "leading by example". With her washboard stomach she was an example of physical fitness that couch potato kids today need to see more of, not less.

Jules Crittenden has more, and asks:

who comes off looking like the bigger boobs in this?

Now Ms. Kontur-Gronquist is selling photos of herself on Ebay, starting at $15 each, and donating part of the money to the local volunteer amublance service.

Click here for more...

Immigration and Crime: Here we go again

San Quentin State Prison, by Telstar Logistics - California's prison population is bursting at the seams.

Here we go again. Every few years, another news report comes out to inform us of a study that destroys the "myth" linking immigration and crime, and telling us that immigrants in the United States are actually less likely, not more, to commit crimes than native-born Americans (about 2.5 times less likely, in this case). And predictably, immigration advocates always use these studies to denounce the "racism" of the majority of Americans who want to keep illegal aliens out of the country.

This most recent study by The Public Policy Institute of California, concentrated on California only. The actual report can be found here.(Incidentally, why do these press releases never tell us how to find a copy of the actual study? Are they afraid we might read it for ourselves?)

I'm not going to question the objectivity of the researchers because I have no reason to (yet). But while the intentions may be good, some of their assumptions and methodology are flawed (see below). Also, this study has little to do with the debate on illegal immigration, although it will certainly be spun that way.

1) Here is the main problem: US-born adults have spent far more years of their life, on average, in the country than foreign-born adults. Ergo, they have had more time to rack up crimes and offenses here. If "Joe American" has lived in the United States for all of his 30 years, and "Jose Mexicano", also 30, arrived here only 3 years ago, then Joe has had roughly ten times as long to rack up a criminal record here. Granted, Joe was unlikely to commit many crimes while he was in diapers, but even if you only count the years after he could be tried as an adult (usually age 16) then he has had almost 5 times as long to add offenses to his criminal record. The only way to compare it fairly, would be to add into the equation any criminal offenses these foreign-born people have been convicted for before they entered the United States. This study does take a half-hearted stab at analyzing what it calls "exposure time", but says that it does not entirely "close the gap". No it doesn't, which leads me to my next points. Incidentally, it also throws out the ludicrous theory that spending more time in the US may equal less crime, since it gives people more time to be assimilated. This flies in the face of their own conclusions, unless they think that native-born US citizens have somehow not assimilated themselves!

2) The study doesn't include those held in federal prisons. This is significant, because the number of legal/illegal immigrants in federal prisons is far higher. The authors claim that the federal system holds only 8 percent of all prison inmates nationwide, so the number wouldn't affect the study very much. But they don't compare this number to California only, just nationwide in general. And they must know that the federal system doesn't hold people for things like non-payment of parking tickets; those in federal prisons are far more likely to have committed a more serious offense, to put it mildly, which leads to my next point below.

3) The study doesn't compare types of crimes between these groups. If, for example, the majority of crimes by citizens are property crimes, and by foreign-born are violent ones, that would make a difference, no? Probably the worst crime in US history was the 9/11 attacks, which were primarily committed by men who were in the US illegally at that time.

4) The real issue is illegal, not legal immigrants. If legal immigrants commit less crime than natives, great! Let's get more of them. But this is not terribly surprising, because they are supposed to have a criminal background check before receiving a resident alien card. But illegal immigrants have a 100% crime rate to begin with, since the very act of entering the country illegally is a crime. The authors concede that they have no way of dividing immigrants into legal/illegal, since the law enforcement often doesn't even ask this question or verify immigration status on a suspect. But they should go a bit further - how confident are they that the US citizens in the study are in fact US citizens? A Mexican arrested in California has every reason in the world to claim he was born in the US in order to avoid deportation, and if he can't actually prove his place of birth, so what? Are the police going to refuse to arrest a man because he can't produce his birth certificate?

5) Some portions of this study are certainly going to be ignored by immigration activists; I think the wildly disproportionate amount of the US black population in prison shown in Fig. 9 is likely to make some very uncomfortable indeed.

In any case, if immigrants are underrepresented in crime statistics overall, I think that's great news. But it doesn't change my feelings on iota about illegal immigrants, and this study reads like another attempt to conflate illegal/legal under the same umbrella, so that anyone who opposes illegal immigration can be simply smeared as "anti-immigrant".




Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

RIP, William F. Buckley, Jr

Leading conservative thinker William F. Buckley, Jr, has died at the age of 82.

"Life can't be all bad when for ten dollars you can buy all the Beethoven sonatas and listen to them for ten years."
-WFB

I'm not going to say very much about him, because so much is already written elsewhere. But some things you might not know: Spanish was his first language, believe it or not. In addition to writing many books, and founding the National Review, he also joined the US Army in WWII, and served as a member of President Roosevelt's honor guard at his funeral. He also worked for the CIA for a short time, and wrote a series of fiction about a CIA agent to help counter their negative image in the popular media. I didn't agree with him on absolutely everything, but he was a fabulous writer and a real American patriot. I will miss him.

Interesting notes on reactions to this news at Jammiewearingfool.

Click here for more...

Noam Chomsky, Iraq, and Panama

Noam Chomsky, an oft-quoted professor at MIT, has written a lot of books on foreign policy and occasionally gives interviews. Thing is, his field of study is actually linguistics. Yet, a look at his bibliography shows that he writes far more about foreign policy, particularly in regard to the United States, with which he is more critical than any other nation (while simultaneously enjoying its benefits, of course).

Anyway, he recently brought up a point to which, for one fleeting moment, I thought I might actually agree with him. He said:

Not very long ago, as you all recall, it was taken for granted that the Iraq war would be the central issue in the 2008 election, as it was in the midterm election two years ago. However, it’s virtually disappeared off the radar screen, which has solicited some puzzlement among the punditry.

Unfortunately, after that valid observation, he goes into conspiratorial waters to claim this same thing has gone on since Vietnam, and the article goes downhill from there (see below).

We do need to hear more about Iraq in this race, but Chomsky misses the fact that the race hasn't really started yet. The major parties haven't chosen their nominees; and within the parties there was little debate because the candidates generally all agreed with one another on the war. Once the real campaign begins, Iraq will be a major issue again (I hope).

The article is also good for illustrating how this man thinks. Here's an example:

Last month, Panama declared a Day of Mourning to commemorate the US invasion—that’s under George Bush no. 1—that killed thousands of poor Panamanians when the US bombed the El Chorillo slums and other poor areas, so Panamanian human rights organizations claim. We don’t actually know, because we never count our crimes. Victors don’t do that; only the defeated.

In his narrow-minded hatred of America, this brilliant scholar doesn't think beyond the consequences of what he just said. He's merely parroting the left-wing meme that started after General Tommy Franks said of Iraq "we don't do body counts".

But suppose the US did do body counts? Suppose the US Department of Defense set up a website and updated enemy military and civilian casualties daily? Do you think that maybe it would look like they were boasting about the numbers? Like maybe they were treating it like a score at a football game?

Don't you think that the anti-war crowd would then protest over such a count? Moreover, there's no requirement in the Geneva Convention or anywhere else that the victor must count his kills.

Chomsky goes on:

It aroused no interest here; there’s barely a mention of the Day of Mourning. And there’s also no interest in the fact that Bush 1’s invasion of Panama was a clear case of aggression, to which the Nuremberg principles apply, and it was apparently more deadly, in fact possibly much more deadly, than Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait, happened a few months later

The invasion of Panama killed 23 US servicemembers and 400-600 Panamanians. Chomsky takes advantage of the fact that Kuwait doesn't have official figures on deaths during the Iraqi occupation, but since at least 600 Kuwaiti hostages were taken to Iraq and never returned, that figure alone would trump the Panamanian invasion even if you didn't count the additional number of Kuwaitis and foreign nationals that died during Iraq's invasion and seven-month long occupation. In fact, that is another difference; while the US occupied it for weeks, and gave it back to a democratic process voluntarily, Saddam had to be removed from Kuwait by military force.

Moreover, in calling the invasion of Panama a "clear case of aggression" he either doesn't know or neglects to mention several hostilities that Panama engaged in, including the murder of Marine Lt Robert Paz.

Incidentally, the "day of mourning" is an interesting story by itself:

"This is a recognition of those who fell on December 20 as a result of the cruel and unjust invasion by the most powerful army in the world," said Rep. Cesar Pardo of the governing Democratic Revolutionary Party, which holds a majority in the legislature.

Footnote that CNN doesn't mention: The Democratic Revolutionary Party is the very same party that Manuel Noriega belonged to. And, if the invasion was so unjust, why didn't he call for the release and/or reinstatement of Manuel Noriega as president of Panama? (instead they have sought extradition to serve out his sentence there - Noriega is currently being held in the Metropolitan Correctional Center of Dade County, Florida) Is it because they know the invasion was just but don't want to admit it? CNN has it on the money:

Polls at the time indicated Panamanians overwhelmingly welcomed the invasion that rid them of Noriega, who was later convicted in absentia here and sentenced to 60 years in prison on charges of embezzlement, corruption and murdering opponents.

But there have been increasing feelings that the invasion was a blow to the nation's dignity.

That's the real problem. Pride. People accuse the US of bowing the sin of pride without questioning their own motivations as well. I'm sure the United States military does it. And so does Noam Chomsky.



Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

Iranian pot doesn't even notice the Iranian kettle

Tired Iranian girl, whose working hands look far older than her face. Photo by Horizon

The Tehran Times is an English paper that bills itself as "Iran's leading International daily". On their "about" page, they claim the paper was formed in 1979 to give a worldwide voice to the Iranian revolution. Their motto:

“The Tehran Times is not the newspaper of the government; it must be a loud voice of the Islamic Revolution and the loudspeaker of the oppressed people of the world.”

Two weeks ago, the Tehran Times ran an article titled "Deadly Hubris: A million Iraqis dead -- for what?". It hit the front page of Reddit today. It was actually a reprint of an article that appeared on Anti-war.com earlier in the month.

It claims that more than one million have died as a result of the invasion of Iraq (the figure is impossible for many reasons; in fact, the most recent peer-reviewed estimate is 151,000, but that's another topic). The Reddit article called it "genocide". Tehran Times published it because they believe the United States is an evil nation, and like Antiwar.com, they want everyone else to think so too. So, apparently, if the United States leaves, everything will be better again.

Here's the problem with their logic: Even by the highest estimates of the killings, most Iraqis are killed by other Iraqis, not by Americans. The Americans are the ones caught in the crossfire trying to stabilize the country. What do you think will happen when no one is there to stop the militias?

There's another problem as well. Since Iran is actively arming and training Shia militias in Iraq, aren't they responsible for a good number of these casualties? (See here for some of their future plans)

It's also strange to take lessons in morality from the Islamic Repubic of Iran, who, to give just one example of many, is planning to execute a 17 year-old girl for the crime of being a rape victim. How, you might wonder, do they even sleep at night? It's easy - their concept of "jihad" justifies everything else - especially blaming the USA ("the Great Satan") for things they have done themselves.

Incidentally, I wasn't terribly surprised to find out that the author, Justin Raimondo, wrote a book a few years ago titled "Terror Enigma: 9/11 And the Israeli Connection" - a conspiracy theory piece that claims Israeli agents were either behind the 9/11 attacks, or knew they were going to happen beforehand and decided not to warn anyone!



Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

Hamas Bunny tells us to kill Danish cartoonists

"Pioneers of Tomorrow"

This is beyond unbelievable. Memri-TV has clips of the Hamas children's show "Pioneers of Tomorrow", with a giant bunny character "Assud", who is encouraging children to assassinate the Danish cartoonists and others that dare insult their prophet Mohammed. The rabbit also says he will "eat them up". The show was broadcast earlier this week (clip is a little long, so transcript is below).

None of this is very new. In addition, they discuss some of the usual topics, such as the destruction of Israel (euphemistically called "the return of Palestine"), and the establishment of a united Arab and Islamic state (or the return of the Caliphate, also a goal of Al-Qaeda's).

Ironically, the producers rely on electricity supplied by Israel to broadcast a program that calls for Israel's destruction. But whenever Israel pulls the plug, they are accused of "genocide".

Here is a partial transcript:

Child host Saraa Barhoum: Amani, you've seen the kind of attack that the West launched against the Prophet Muhammad. What do you have to say on behalf of the Prophet Muhammad?

Amani, by phone: In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate, I say to those cowardly infidels...

Assud the Bunny: Those criminals...

Amani: Yes, those criminals... You mock our Prophet Muhammad, but look, my beloved Prophet Muhammad, how Allah responded to them: "Allah shall pay them back for their mockery, and He leaves them alone in their excess, blindly wandering on." My beloved Messenger of Allah, they mocked you with their drawings, because they do not know the mercy in your heart. My beloved Muhammad, if they had known the mercy in your heart, they would not have done this to you. Allah knows that we love you, and that we will redeem you with our souls, our blood, and our hearts.

[...]

Assud: Do you boycott Israeli and Danish products?

Amani: Yes, Assud. I do.

Assud: You've stopped eating them altogether?

Amani: I have.

Assud: That's great. Keep it up.

Saraa: All of us will definitely boycott Danish products, and even before that, we will boycott Israeli products, Amani.

Amani: With your permission, I'd like to continue.

Assud and Saraa: Go ahead.

Amani: Finally, I'd like to apologize to the Messenger of Allah. May Allah curse these infidels, who have gone astray. We the soldiers of the pioneers of tomorrow, apologize to you, beloved Messenger of Allah. Denmark has spoken heresy, but you are a source of pride and mercy for Islam and the Muslims.

Assud: The [American] cowboys have spoken heresy as well.

[...]

Amani: Our brothers, the Americans, have affronted the Prophet Muhammad...

Assud: They are not our brothers, they are criminals.

Amani: What?

Assud: They are infidels, not our brothers.

Amani: They are enemies of Allah, and they have affronted the Prophet Muhammad.

[...]

Saraa: How did these Danes have the audacity to affront the Messenger of Allah? Do you have an answer to that, Assud?

Assud: No, I don't. Maybe because the Arabs and Muslims keep silent, [the Danes] humiliated them and did these things to them.

Saraa: That's one reason, but there is an even more important reason, Assud.

Assud: I have no idea.

Saraa: It's because the West has seen that we've moved away from the religion of Allah, and from the Sunna of our Prophet Muhammad. They have also seen that we have forsaken the religion of Allah, and therefore, they could affront the Prophet, because... We have done nothing to redeem the Prophet Muhammad. But I say to them: You haven't seen anything yet. Allah willing, the soldiers of the Pioneers of Tomorrow will redeem the Prophet Muhammad with all that they possess, and even with their blood, Assud. They will not allow them to do this again.

Assud: If they do it again, Saraa, we will kill them, right?

Saraa: Allah willing.

Assud: I will bite them and eat them up.

Saraa: Yes.

[...]

Assud, we are not terrorists. All we want is to get our beloved homeland, Palestine, back. We want all of Palestine to be ours. We are not terrorists...

Assud: Because it was ours to begin with, right?

Saraa: Right. They say we are terrorists merely because we want this, but of course, we're not terrorists...,/p>

Assud: They are the terrorists.

Saraa: Yes, Assud. Allah willing, we will regain the cities under Zionist occupation, such as Jaffe, Haifa, Acre, Ashdod, the village of Hoj, and all the Palestinian cities.

Assud: Saraa, do you know what I'm hoping for? I want us to take Jaffe, Acre, Haifa, and all of Palestine, Allah willing, and then we'll go to Iraq. All the borders will be opened. Between Egypt and us, there will be no barriers, and the same goes for Jordan and Saudi Arabia. We'll come and go by car. I hope this comes true. Do you think this will come true?

Saraa: Allah willing, this will come true soon.

Assud: Allah willing, when I am martyred, a tiger will take my place... Allah willing, I will be the one to fix things, and there won't be any tiger. The "Pioneers of Tomorrow" and I will make this dream come true.

[...]

Who will host this show if you are martyred? Will 100,000 Saraas take your place?

Saraa: Allah willing, Assud.

Assud: We'll take them from among the Pioneers of Tomorrow, Allah willing.

Saraa: Allah willing, there are thousands of soldiers of the Pioneers of Tomorrow.

Assud: Martyrdom for the sake of Allah is what we hope for, right?

Saraa: Right, Assud.

[...]

Saraa: What do you have to say to the cartoonist who started all this, and affronted the Prophet by drawing him?

Assud: He's a criminal...

Saraa: Yes, a criminal.

Tasnim, by phone: I say to him, and to all of them, that no matter how much they try to hide him, we will manage to kill him, to assassinate him.

Assud: Allah willing.

Saraa: I pray that Allah makes the earth swallow him up, so that he serves as a lesson to others like him, Tasnim.

[...]

Assud, it appears that our show is coming to an end. What do you have to say to this criminal, the cartoonist who affronted the Prophet by drawing him?

Assud: I say to him what you already said: You criminal, you lowlife, you scum of the earth – right, Saraa? Allah willing, the day will come when you will regret what you did.

As par for the course, certain Jewish critics of Israel's policies, like Norman Finklestein, Richard Silverstein, or Noam Chomsky (no blog), never say a word to condemn this filth. The mainstream media doesn't like to discuss it as well.




Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

Sadr extends his cease-fire

For at least another six months. This is good news for Iraq, but beyond that, it is rather disturbing that this is an issue at all.

Muqtada Al-Sadr's Mehdi army, sometimes on his orders and sometimes without, is responsible for countless incidents of torture, kidnappings, roadside bombs, snipings and executions. One example: in 2006, an 8 year-old boy was found in one of our sectors in Baghdad dead, with drill marks in his body (torture with a power drill was a signature of Sadr's forces). And this is all in addition to his uprising of 2004 where his people directly engaged US forces (and paid a dear price for it).

So he extends the cease fire, and that's supposed to be generous? Why wouldn't he? His men have thoroughly infiltrated the Iraqi police and Army, and hold many powerful positions in government. Whenever we captured a Mehdi member, they would often be myseriously released later by the Iraqi Army/Police. Sadr is sitting pretty; he doesn't have to rock the boat.

I understand that getting rid of him would greatly destablize the country. Still, I look forward to the day that this man is jailed and put on trial for his crimes.

Click here for more...

The Obama comment - and John Cole unhinged

There was a minor dustup this week when Barack Obama quoted an Army Captain who said his unit was undermanned and underequipped in Afghanistan. He was making an overall point to criticize the current war policy. The anecdote itself is rather weak; it turns out it occurred 4-5 years ago, and the source is entirely anonymous (the reporter's editorializing at the end of that article doesn't raise my confidence either).

In any case, Obama's supporters jumped all over Jake Tapper's article above like it was the next gospel. I left a few comments about the issue there and on other web sites (as I frequently do). In return, I often get a lot of abuse, but none so much like at John Cole's "Balloon Juice" blog. His response was so over the top (even for him), that I just had to print it here. Just wanted to show you what some left-wing extremists in the US are really like. Warning: Objectionable language.

This was my comment:

Predictably, I knew that John Cole would jump all over this, and just as predictably, I knew he would simmer about the “right-wing wankosphere”, while totally ignoring the “left-wing wankosphere” which is all jumping on Jake Tapper’s article like it was a new book of the Bible, with all the armchair-warrior commenters weighing in.

Two problems:
1) The story is 4-5 years old, but Obama spoke as if it were a current issue
2) The source (a la Beauchamp) is 100% anonymous.

Incidentally, I agree with Phil Carter about using captured equipment. But here’s the thing: There isn’t anything wrong with that. That’s what soldiers are SUPPOSED to do. Incidentally, the miltitary currently spends about ten times what it did per soldier in WWII, adjusted for inflation. Trust me, they have plenty of ammo. I might be convinced otherwise if we had ever lost a single battle in this war due to lack of ammunition.

His response surprised even me:

You know, John Rohan, if allegedly patriotic motherfuckers like you would stop fellating this disastrous president long enough to be honest and admit why we are currently in the mess we are in, I would start to care what you think. The military is in a fucking pickle right now despite record spending levels, and retards like you are still all about the evil liberal.

Fortunately, you won’t change. So piss off, as I don’t have to waste my time with you.

There you have it. Generally, I notice that people resort to insults when they have no facts, and the vitriol of those insults increase as the amount of facts on hand decrease. Why he has so many fans, I will never know.

"Retard" is also not a terrible politically correct term, which would upset many of Cole's friends in the left-wing political spectrum. I responded to him and several others, but you probably don't want to read the whole thread, unless you are a masochist.



Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

Lunar Eclipse

embedded from APOD

Yesterday was a rare lunar eclipse, when the Earth's shadow passes over the full moon. Here in Germany, it was visible between 0400-0500 am, but since Wiesbaden was completely cloudy at that time, I couldn't see it or get a photo (rats!). But above is a beautiful picture of the eclipse from Astronomy Picture of the Day, a composite photo enhanced through the use of several filters.

Click here for more...

UK: Police arrest man who successfully defended himself from knife-wielding attacker

I swear I'm not doing it on purpose. Aside from my photo of the week, this is the sixth post in a row featuring the UK. It's just that they provide such a wealth of fun stuff to write about - stuff that you don't hear much about in the United States.

Here's the short version: A knife-wielding robber (Liam Kilroe), with a long criminal history tries to rob a shopkeeper (Tony Singh) one evening. They struggle, the attacker is stabbed and dies.

Who to arrest? The robber is dead, so arrest the shopkeeper instead!

Here's the longer version:

Mr Singh was attacked at 9.40pm on Sunday after a 13-hour day minding his corner shop in a parade of stores in Skelmersdale, Lancashire.

Kilroe appeared at the window of the businessman's Ford Focus, smashed it with the butt of his knife and demanded the takings.

Mr Singh fought back and during the struggle the knife went into Kilroe's chest. A post-mortem examination revealed he had died of a single stab wound.

After his arrest, Mr Singh was taken to hospital where his wounds were stitched up.

He was then questioned for several hours at a nearby police station. Mr Singh is believed to have told senior officers the knife went into Kilroe's chest by accident.

He was released on police bail in the early hours of Monday morning.
...
Mr Singh was freed on police bail after witnesses gave "consistent accounts" claiming Kilroe had attempted to rob Mr Singh.

They said the criminal had been stabbed with his own knife.

...
Lancashire Police confirmed a file had been sent to the Crown Prosecution Service for lawyers to consider whether murder, manslaughter or assault charges should be brought against Mr Singh.

Strangely, the Daily Mail doesn't have its usual comment section with the story.

The Sun leads with a typically over the top headline, but they give some more background on Kilroe's history:

Kilroe, originally from Billinge, near St Helens, began his campaign of robbery and violence in 1999, aged just 17, with his first conviction for assault and burglary.

Three years later he was convicted of possessing cannabis and an offensive weapon. Around Skelmersdale, there are a number of local people who know exactly what it is like to be on the end of one of Kilroe’s terrifying robberies.

In 2002, shop assistant Susan Pye was serving alone in the High Street Store in Old Skelmersdale when Kilroe, then aged 19, held a knife to her face and helped himself to cash from the till, a bottle of spirits and a packet of cigarettes.

In the same month he continued his campaign against lone, female shopkeepers, robbing a newsagents and a post office, also in Old Skelmersdale.

He was eventually sentenced to four years in youth custody but his punishment seemed to have little effect. He continued to target shopkeepers on his release and last September he was back in court accused of committing two armed raids in the space of four days.

In one, postmaster Terry Limb was hit over the head with a handgun at his post office in Skelmersdale.
...
In the second raid in the four days, Kilroe was said to have been with a masked pal who raided a general store at gunpoint and stole £8,000.

So why was he free?:

The trial went on for two days but the jury was discharged for legal reasons and Kilroe was given bail pending a retrial in December. However, he went on the run and a warrant was issued for his arrest.

Rather than an arrest, Mr. Singh deserves a medal. Someone finally stood up to this career criminal.

Some might think that the discrepancy is due to racism (the victim is of Indian background), but as it turns out, police in the UK are politically correct to a fault (see here). I'm more apt to blame simple incompetence and/or bad judgement. Very bad judgement.

(Via Dock Green and Expat Yank)



Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

"'Who do you love?' 'I love Sheikh Osama Bin Laden,'...'who do you kill?' 'America'"

Brainwashing children toward terrorism is bad enough. It's even worse when its happening not in Palestine, but your own backyard. I wrote about Parviz Khan earlier, the Pakistani living in the UK who was just sentenced to life for plotting to kidnap and behead a British soldier ("life" in the UK could mean as little as 14 years, but that's another issue). If anyone had any doubts about his intentions, you can just look at transcripts of him speaking to his five year old son:

Khan ordered the boy to put down a toy he was playing with and said: "Stand up straight. Who do you love?".

Child: I love Sheikh Osama Bin Laden.
Khan: Allah, and...?
Child: Sheikh Abu Hamza [a convicted extremist cleric].
Khan: Who do you kill?
Child: America.
Khan: And who else do you kill?
Child: Bush I kill.
Khan: And who else?
Child: Blair - kill.
Khan: And?
Child: Both, I kill.
Khan: I speak, my son. Who else you kill? Kuffar? [a non-Muslim]
Child: Yeah, kuffar.
(Khan goes on to ask his son about black people, Indians, alcohol and Hindus. The boy replies "kill" to each one.)

How else did he treat his children?

He was so committed to waging war on Britain that he forced his four children to sleep on the floor without heating to toughen them up in case he ever took them to the Afghan mountains.

Khan's defense was rather pathetic. And for some reason, part of this quote was removed from the original article (although you see it referred to in the comments):

In mitigation, Michael Wolkind QC [Queens' Counsel], defending Khan, told the court that his client's plot had been a "mixture of fanaticism and fantasy".

"His plan might have changed had British foreign policy changed," he said. "He might have withdrawn if the British troops were withdrawn."

In other words, all you had to do was surrender to the terrorist's demands, and he wouldn't have plotted any terror. Totally logical, if complete surrender and capitulation don't bother you.

Finally, people who support the UK's generous welfare state should take note:

Khan - who was paid £20,000 a year in benefits - also boasted of making non-Muslims "bleed financially" and said Muslims had a duty to "take from the Kuffar" (non-believers).

£20,000 is $39,309 US dollars at the current rate. That's more money than a lot of hard-working people earn in full time jobs; certainly very generous of the British.

Original tip: jammiewearingfool.



Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

Photo of the week

Photo embedded from pinupsforvets.com

The woman in the photo is the gorgeous Gina Elise, who set up a project called "Pin-ups for vets", which sells nostalgic pin-up calendars in the WWII-era tradition to raise money for wounded veterans, and to distribute as gifts to soldiers worldwide.

Very reminicent of Betty Grable or Bettie Page, and that's a good thing.

Click here for more...

UK tried to arrest Israeli general

This is unbelievable, on many levels. This happened back in 2005, but was just publicly reported today:

An Israeli general wanted for alleged war crimes escaped arrest in the UK because police officers feared an armed confrontation with the airline’s armed air marshals.

Documents detailing why the Metropolitan Police failed to act in their own jurisdiction, despite being in possession of a warrant, have emerged today.

They show that the police were unable to obtain advice as to their right to proceed and feared risks to the public if its officers boarded the plane as well as “the international impact of a potentially armed police operation at an airport”.
...
Palestinian campaigners had lobbied for the Metropolitan Police to act over allegations that the general had ordered the destruction of over 50 Palestinian homes in the Gaza strip, in retribution for a Palestinian militant attack. Lawyers argued that this contravened the laws of war protecting civilian property.

I wonder why the same Palestinian groups didn't lobby for arrest warrants for Hamas leaders. You have to also wonder why the UK would have any jurisdiction here at all; could Israel likewise decide to arrest one of the UK's generals for war crimes in Iraq?

In a more hopeful vein, I'm speculating that the real reason the police didn't arrest him was because they thought the warrant was bogus in the first place. Just a thought.

Click here for more...

BBC readers mourn Castro's retirement [Updated]

There are parts of Havana that tourists don't always see - by Robbie Garbett

Dear Lord, I hope this isn't a reflection of the world as a whole...

As you probably know by now, the 81 year-old President/Dictator of Cuba, Fidel Castro, just officially announced his retirement after ruling the island for nearly 50 years. Not that much is expected to change; his 75 year-old brother Raoul will take over instead. This is good news, although a trial followed by a jail sentence would be far more appropriate.

Anyway, there is a point to my rambling here. Not everyone is happy about him retiring. I would expect that far-left sites would heap praise on the dictator, and I was right. But I would think that readers of a hard news site would have a more level head on their shoulders; I was wrong.

In fact, BBC News reasders were the worst of all! On the Beeb's "Have Your Say" (note: hit the "reader recommended" tab), almost two thousand comments have piled in, but most of these are saying how sorry they are to see Castro leave! Here is a sample below. What makes it more frightening is that I didn't just sift through the masses of comments and cherry-pick the few worst; these were the top 13 reader recommended comments - in order, (you have to go all the way to the 14th to find even one that is not praising Castro or bashing the US). Over the course of the day, this can change a bit, but here is now they stand now:

What does Mr Castro's decision mean for Cuba? What did Cuba achieve during his rule?

Cuba achieved a highly educated population, high life expectancy. low infant mortality rates.......All this despite a massive trade embargo from the US.

Economic and political reforms are needed, what is not needed is a return to the corrupt vice ridden pre Castro days of Batista.

[Ifancyapint], United Kingdom
Recommended by 181 people

....

having been to Cuba on several occasions I can only give a glowing report, those that think it a backward nation are grossly wrong, this is one of the most forward thinking countries I have visited, they think their way around problems in a similar manner to the Scandinavian countries instead of throwing money at them, something the pro-US lobby will never understand, they export medical care in the form of doctors and look after the health of the nation, all this is a result of Castro

Alex, Liverpool
Recommended by 147 people

....

People can say what they like about Castro but Cuba has a better health service than we do so not all bad !

Piers Catton, Gosport, United Kingdom
Recommended by 145 people

....

His decision means I have to get my skates on and visit before the americans get their greasy paws on the country and ruin it.

Sergio, Bristol
Recommended by 143 people

....

His legacy? Standing up to and winning against American Imperialism....A true leader in every sense and a tough one. And also world class healthcare and education unlike its enemy to the north.

A J Smith, London
Recommended by 126 people

....

Generally I'm very pro-US but America's relationship with Cuba has been one of 50 years of stupidity and petty vengence. Cuba was a grossly corrupt country effectively run by the Mafia and rich landowners until Castro (himself a rich landowner) took over. Initially he was also pro-US but the US favoured the mafia over a popular leader so he was forced to turn to the USSR for support.

I can't see anything changing in Washington with Raul 'on the throne' in the short term.

[Peter_Sym], Nottingham
Recommended by 111 people

....

Anyone who had the courage to stand up to bullying by the USA and Fascist exiles has my respect, whatever his faults!

Neil
Neil Breward, Nottingham, United Kingdom
Recommended by 109 people

....

Nothing but maximum respect and admiration to Mr Castro for standing up to American aggression and interferance. Communism may not be the best way of life but it sure beats so called democracies such as the US.

ENJOY YOUR RETIREMENT MR CASTRO.

Rizwan Saleem, Bradford
Recommended by 106 people

....

"He leaves one of the most backward, undemocratic, oppressed, poor countries on the planet."

What utter nonsense. They enjoy better health care than we do in the UK! I should know, I've experienced both.

bryan, salisbury
Recommended by 100 people

....

Castro has shown the world how communisn could work under responsible leadership. Every person in Cuba has an education, a roof over they're heads and food to eat. He may not have got it perfectly right but his efforts can inspire future leaders.
The majority of problems we suffer in the UK are born from the problems with democracy.
Maybe our future leaders can be inspired by Castro?

Colin, London
Recommended by 89 people

....

Fidel is one of the very few great intellectual leaders of our times who did his best to create an egalitarian state inspite of crippling international sanctions.

[aejazz], United Kingdom
Recommended by 85 people

....

"He leaves one of the most backward, undemocratic, oppressed, poor countries on the planet. Since the Cuban marxist revolotion he has goiven his peoiple precisely nothing and driven large nuimbers of them away"
[imsickofitall]

Driven to the US to live a life of consumerism, debt, unaffordable healthcare...

The US Cuban's I've seen interviewed on TV always seem such a miserable angry bunch, whereas the ones I met in Cuba were happy, healthy and had a real zest for life.

[frazzled]
Recommended by 84 people

....

He freed his people from oppression only to have them enslaved again by the rest of the world, Cuba's ills cannot all be laid at Castro's feet, the biggest aid to the situation have been successive American governBents.

Rev Brown, northampton, United Kingdom
Recommended by 84 people

Just some observations:

1) Why is it that the same people who constantly demand that President Bush be impeached, have no problem with the crimes of a man like Castro who sat in his chair, unelected, for 49 years?

2) One common theme among Castro's supporters is praise for ending the Batista regime. But Batista's corrupt government was only in power for seven years, from 1952-59 (or 11 years, if you count his 4 year stint as President from 1940-44). Castro has been in power seven times that long. Who really damaged Cuba the most?

3) Why are people fleeing Cuba to reach the United States? Why not the other way around?

4) Just what do they teach at schools in the UK?

Finally, as a side note, there is a large Cuban art exposition going on in Montreal, called "¡Cuba! Art and History from 1868 to Today". The rather pathetic attempt to elevate works of art officially approved by the Cuban state gets deservedly scornful treatment in the National Post. Not surprisingly, the New York Times art reviewer thinks that it's just peachy!

UPDATE 20/02/2008 12:14:00 PM:
Chris Betram at Crooked Timber:

So let’s hear it for universal literacy and decent standards of health care. Let’s hear it for the Cubans who help defeat the South Africans and their allies in Angola and thereby prepared the end of apartheid. Let’s hear it for the middle-aged Cuban construction workers who held off the US forces for a while on Grenada. Let’s hear it for Elian Gonzalez. Let’s hear it for 49 years of defiance in the face of the US blockade. Hasta la victoria siempre!

Not surprisingly, Chris Betram is a Professor of Social and Political Philosophy and Head of the School of Arts at the University of Bristol, UK. Besides his enthusiasm for communist Cuba, does anyone else find his cheering on the enemy who faced the US on Grenada just a wee bit unsettling?



Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

£2,229,371.54 pounds sterling

Is the equivalent of $4,352,241.98 US dollars, or €2,969,277.07 Euros. This is, according to official UK figures, the amount of money that has been wasted so far on fishing for conspiracy theories in the latest Princess Diana inquest. The British tabloids have been making a bundle off of this, and the panel has had fun trips to Paris and been able to meet several celebrities, but the British taxpayers are the ones who are being cheated here.

As I explained a few months back, the British and French already completed their investigations long ago, and found nothing other than an accident caused by excessive speed and drunk driving.

Unfortunately, this third inquiry came about due to the constant bullying, harassment, and outlandish accusations of Egyptian-born millionaire Mohammed Al-Fayed. He has convinced himself that his son Dodi (who also died in the crash) was the victim of an assassination plot by MI6, the CIA, and the British Royal family. According to his latest testimony:

"I'm in no doubt whatsoever that my son and Princess Diana were murdered by the British security services on the orders of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh", Mr Al Fayed replied: "Yes."

He pinpointed driver Henri Paul, alleged security forces in the ambulance crew, the then British Ambassador to France Sir Michael Jay, the princess's brother-in-law Sir Robert Fellowes and former Prime Minister Tony Blair as all being involved in the plot.

And he said Prince Charles was complicit, hoping to make way so he could marry "his crocodile wife" Camilla Parker Bowles.

Why not accuse musician Elton John while you are at it?

He also now claims that Diana confided in him that her in-laws were out to kill her, and that she was pregnant with Dodi's child. Very personal information, that somehow she didn't even share with her sons, her doctor, or her closest friends (whose testimony earlier contradicted Mr. Al-Fayed at every turn). There also was no indication that Diana was pregnant from her autopsy.

Moreover, Mr. Al-Fayed has yet to provide us with an explanation of just how the British Secret Service somehow made the crash happen (the driver also died, and was an employee of Al-Fayed in any case).

Just to show a little more of this man's paranoid lunacy:

In his evidence, Mr Al Fayed branded Prince Philip a "Nazi" and a "racist" and said: "It's time to send him back to Germany from where he comes."

"You want to know his original name - it ends with Frankenstein," he added.

After this farce is concluded, I hope the criminal justice system charges Mr. Al-Fayed with slander, false accusations, perjury, and extortion, and then deports him back to his native Egypt (one can dream). Good riddance.



Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

Saudi Prince threatened to aid terrorists against the UK

This is absolutely shocking, if true, and I'm floored as to why it hasn't received more widespread coverage:

Saudi Arabia's rulers threatened to make it easier for terrorists to attack London unless corruption investigations into their arms deals were halted, according to court documents revealed yesterday.

Previously secret files describe how investigators were told they faced "another 7/7" and the loss of "British lives on British streets" if they pressed on with their inquiries and the Saudis carried out their threat to cut off intelligence.

Prince Bandar, the head of the Saudi national security council, and son of the crown prince, was alleged in court to be the man behind the threats to hold back information about suicide bombers and terrorists. He faces accusations that he himself took more than £1bn in secret payments from the arms company BAE.

He was accused in yesterday's high court hearings of flying to London in December 2006 and uttering threats which made the prime minister, Tony Blair, force an end to the Serious Fraud Office investigation into bribery allegations involving Bandar and his family.

The threats halted the fraud inquiry, but triggered an international outcry, with allegations that Britain had broken international anti-bribery treaties.

"BAE" is BAE Systems, a British defence and aerospace company.