#2
I disagree with Anonymous especially that last paragraph is right on. I dont agree 100% and I personally believe Bush will do what has to be done with or without the rest of the west. But the basic point especially from the point of view looking mainly at Europe side makes perfect sense.
I fully agree that if the US takes action now we will not get the support. If we wait a year we will get the support but it will cost a heavy price.
It is an unfortunate European fact that in twentieth century they have acted late and their dithering has cost millions of lives.
I would like to say the Western world would stand together as the goliath it is but I fully expect the US with a handful of willing to do the dirty work. If we are lucky we way get some money and a UN vote OKing some 3rd world peacekeeper assistance, maybe even some NATO peacekeepers in Iraq or more in Afghanistan. Although I would say the most likely is that we will just get silence then depending on how it goes either words of we were always with you or jeers of our failure or faults.
#1
Funny stuff. Honorable mention to "Allah in the Family" starring Khalid Sheik Mohammed as Archie Bunker. For sheer cringe factor, "Married to Children" takes first prize.
Posted by: ed ||
02/14/2006 12:38 Comments ||
Top||
By Wolfgang Bruno, a FaithFreedom.org associate.
The victory of Hamas in the Palestinian elections follows the election of a hard line president in Iran and the Jihad riots in France. Hamas is not part of a struggle for "national liberation," it is a part of a global anti-democratic movement that is now threatening to plunge the world into a devastating war. The Jihad has been simmering for years, but is now entering a phase of much more open hostility towards the infidels. Hamas is right: There is no peace process in the Middle East. There probably never was, but at least Israel is now faced with enemies, both among Palestinians and the Islamic regime in Iran, who state this quite openly. As Hugh Fitzgerald writes: Though very few would recognize it, the infidels of Europe in fact owe the Israelis a debt. For it is the Israelis who, like a lightning rod, have until recently borne the brunt of Arab and Muslim hatred and attention. The Lesser Jihad against Israel is simply part of the Greater Jihad against all non-Muslims.
Europeans should support Israel for several reasons. The first one is moral: It is immoral for Europeans to sit back and watch threats of a new Holocaust, which the Iranian president has repeatedly suggested. It is especially immoral because it is our appeasing "dialogue" with the mullahs that has enabled them to progress this far with their nuclear program. We simply have an historical obligation to oppose forces spreading anti-Semitism into the mainstream once again.
The second reason is cultural. A stronger stance in solidarity with Israel would send a message to Muslims and Multiculturalists: The West isn't a Christian club, it's a Judeo-Christian club. And no, the Jewish component is not a cliché. The fact that such a statement would also be in direct opposition to the thinking behind the current version of the Eurabian Union is a welcome side effect. We need to assert our cultural identity to be able to defend ourselves against Islam.
The third reason is ideological. Bat Ye'or has demonstrated convincingly in her book "Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis" how closely linked the rise of Eurabia and the ongoing Islamization of the continent are to the institutionalized Euro-Arab dialogue that has been going on for several decades. The same goes for the growth of European anti-Israeli attitudes that this has ensued. If the growth of anti-Israeli sentiments is indeed linked to Eurabia, creeping dhimmitude and European submission to Arab-Islamic demands, showing a pro-Israeli point of view becomes an act of defiance and a symbol of resistance to the Eurabian establishment. Being European and pro-Israeli is a statement that: "I'm not a dhimmi, but a proud defender of the Judeo-Christian Western civilization." It can be used to demonstrate that the European Union in reality is the Eurabian Union.
The fourth reason for supporting Israel is plain self-interest. WW2 started with the persecution of Jews, one of the smallest and most vulnerable ethnic groups. Once the Nazis got away with that, they were strong enough to intimidate everybody else, too. The result was a world war. Those who burned Jewish stores eventually burned down much of the European continent. History is about to repeat itself. This world war seems to start with threats to attack and annihilate the Jews, just as the previous one did. Europeans turned a blind eye to Islamic suicide bombers and the Jihad ideology they represented as long as they targeted only Jews in Israel. Now Europeans themselves live in fear of the same suicide bombers in Paris, London and Madrid. We should have learnt our lesson by now. If we don't, we will soon have to pay the price for this mistake.
The most important task in the immediate future is preventing the mullahs in Iran from getting nuclear weapons. A strike against Iran should be combined with steps to weaken the foundations of the Islamic Republic, and encourage the people to overthrow their oppressors. Ironically, the election of hardliner Ahmadinejad for president just made this easier. Ahmadinejad is a brute who has killed off the illusion of "reform" and the deceptive "good cop - bad cop" game his predecessor Khatami kept alive for eight years. The right thing for Europeans to do is to help Iranians get rid of that barbaric and oppressive regime. This also happens to be in our own best interest. The current wave of Islamic radicalism has been closely tied to the history of the Islamic Republic in Iran. Bringing down the regime installed by Khomeini will deal a severe blow to the international movement of political Islam, and thus to the very forces that are increasingly threatening Europe itself. Most Europeans don't seem to understand the implications of the fact that Iran now has nuclear-capable missiles that can reach parts of Europe. A regime with this mentality cannot under any circumstances be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. This must be prevented at all costs, including the option of armed strikes against nuke facilities inside Iran. Iranians may not be happy about the idea, but the brutal truth is that unless this is done, the Islamic regime may very well drag their nation into a nuclear war, with Israel or some other nation. The new president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is questioning the reality of the Holocaust, threatening to wipe Israel of the face of the earth, and urging that a Jewish state be relocated thousands of miles away. Some have suggested that the United States should propose the quick admission of Israel into NATO as a full member, an idea that deserves some consideration.
Binyamin Netanyahu has stated that Muslims don't hate the West because of Israel, they hate Israel because of the West. And he's right. If Muslims manage to overrun and subdue the Little Satan, that means that the Great Satan is weaker than he appears. The Great Satan here is usually referring to the USA, but it really is the West in general, and very much includes Europe, the cradle of Western civilization. How would the Danish cartoon issue have looked like if Iran used its nuclear umbrella to "protect Europe's Muslims?" Does anybody in Europe want to find out?
EU claims to superpower status ring rather hollow. When the time comes to face a real challenge, Europe does not have the will, perhaps not even the means, to defeat it. An entire continent is now hiding behind a few million Jews, the descendants of a people we almost decimated, to defeat an enemy we have been feeding for years. The EU isn't a soft superpower, the EU is just soft, and incapable of disarming a threat it has by itself participated in creating. Israel is the Constantinople of our time, and Israelis have been at the front line of the battle against Islamic Fascism for years. Israel should finally be allowed to defend herself. It's time Europe stops laying obstacles in her way.
#1
Pretty damned bad. And no cure possible if the people won't give up their Nanny State goodies and the Pols haven't the spine to spell it out and lead them out before they collapse. Hey, enjoy your time off - sitting on the park bench wistfully wishing you were as well-fed as the pigeons.
Hey, I know: put on a brave front, organize a march, make some big puppets, lotsa banners n' stuff, proclaim Socialism as the answer to, um, everything, be really smug, feel superior, wear the dreaded Bérets de la Sophistication, drag out some of that tradition and heritage shit and sneeringly explain to us, yet again, how superior you are.
#4
It may not be news to us, and it may not even be news to the Newsweek crowd. But it is a useful, succinct and (for that reason) powerful review and summary of the situation.
"You can't beat something with nothing." People intuitively understand that but somehow think that their 'nothing' is 'something'. That's the trouble with Europe: most of its citizens aren't willing to look in the mirror and say, "well folks, we are shortly to be well and truly fucked."
If they could say that, they'd then be able to start analyzing why, and then perhaps implement a plan to change their situation. But knowing that you have a problem is the first step, and there are way too many Euros who can't admit it.
So Zakaria writes an article that is a useful cudgel. Don't know how many people will face a mirror because of it. He'll need to write the same article again and again.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/14/2006 14:44 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Right minded europeans concerned for their children and grandchildren need to immigrate to the west (usa/austraila). NOW. leave the leftists behind for they are not needed or wanted. once europe has been cleansed they can return if they wish. although unless they have the pioneer spirit, i don't recommend it. europe is lost. we all know it even if we won't say it. gather now the best people europe has to offer. we'll fight from the shores of the usa to defend western civ. we're the last best hope to defend, conquer, and retake.
Posted by: Mark Z ||
02/14/2006 16:50 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Wby do you think Koffe Annan wants the UN to have the right of taxation and pushes it every chance he gets? So that the West can subsidize the failed welfare states of Europe (as well as the Thugs of Africa and ME) and, evnetually, Europe can drag the West down with it.
Accident my eye. Or rather, Harry Whittington's eye.
If you believe it was just an accident that Vice President Dick Cheney shot his hunting companion last weekend, you obviously have never seen "The Godfather" movies.
Just as surely as a fish wrapped in a bulletproof vest means "Luca Brasi sleeps with the fishes," that shotgun blast to Whittington's face was meant to convey that I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby had better bite his tongue and forget about testifying against Cheney, his former boss, in the Valerie Plame spy case.
What'll it be, Scooter: a case of amnesia or lead poisoning?
The woman who owns the ranch on which the shooting occurred said Whittington shot a bird, went to retrieve it and then snuck up on Cheney.
The vice president, she said, was shooting at a covey of quail when he hit the tall, orange-vest-wearing lawyer. Oy.
Libby, Cheney's former chief of staff, recently told a grand jury that leaking Plame's identity as a spy was authorized by his superiors who were angered by Plame's husband's public criticism of the war in Iraq.
That revelation had many questioning how low this administration would go to quash dissent.
Now we know.
A vice president who'll shoot an ally to get across his message of omerta -- that's mobspeak for "hush up" -- may be considered a national disgrace by some.
Not by me. I embrace the prospect of a lead-slingin' veep. Think of the impact Cheney's shot heard 'round the world will have on America's diplomatic efforts. When obstinate countries declare their unwillingness to negotiate with Secretary of State Condi Rice, all we have to do is roll out Deadeye Dick.
The prospect of having to sit across the table from Cheney, in orange vest, Elmer Fudd hat and a chaw of Red Man in his cheek, will, for instance, make Iran give up its plans to develop plutonium.
Shooting a hunting companion in the face, intentionally or not, is not Dickie Boy's worst gun-related transgression. Remember a few years ago when he went hunting at an exclusive resort in Pennsylvania and reportedly shot 70 ducks and pheasant?
That was "hunting" in the way that raising fish in a barrel and then tossing in a baited line is fishing. Conservationists objected because the birds, raised in pens, didn't know that, after a lifetime of being cared for and fed, they must suddenly flee for their lives.
Imagine a couple of the domesticated pheasants lounging around Pennsylvania's Rolling Rock club, awaiting dinner.
Phred: I say, old bean. This is the life. They keep us caged up and just bring us three squares a day. No flying south for us.
Philip: I'll say. It doesn't get any better than this. They were a little tardy with the food yesterday, but here they come now. Good. I'm hungry ... POW!
Phred: Hey! What the ... are they shooting at us? Well, I'll just walk right over there and give that baldheaded one with the glasses a piece of my -- Ugggghhhhhh. He got me.
Not very sporting, eh?
Cheney's fascination with hunting is puzzling because when he had a chance to take up arms for his country during the Vietnam War, he sought every deferment under the sun.
Of course, ducks and quail don't detonate roadside bombs.
Our top goal is ending right-wing Republican control of Congress but to make progress on core issues we think MoveOn should challenge right-wing Democrats in primary elections. What do you think? Give us feedback.
Dear MoveOn member,
This year our top goal is breaking the right-wing Republican stranglehold on Congress. That is our main focus every day.
It is also part of our work together to hold Democrats to their Party's highest values on issues like foreign policy, economic prosperity and good government.
That sometimes means grappling with specific right-wing Democrats who consistently side with big corporations and right-wing Republicans.
One approach is to support progressive primary challengers to right-wing Democrats. We think this makes sense but it's a big decision so we wanted to check with you and other MoveOn members. What do you think? Click below to let us know.
http://political.moveon.org/whattodo/?id=
The story about "the Democrat who sold out" has become too familiar. Too often progressives tip toe around these betrayals. But there needs to be real consequences for these Democrats.
Replacing a right-wing Democrat with a more progressive Democrat will help voters more clearly understand what Democrats stand forand that will help Democrats win.
Many of these conservative Democrats we would challenge represent states or districts that are heavily Democraticso we're not imperiling a Democratic majority by doing this.
Why is this a big decision? At some level it isn'twe've consistently held Democrats feet to the fire on a long list of issues. But challenging right-wing Democrats in an electoral setting would be new for MoveOn.org Political Action. That is why we're asking for your feedback. Click below to let us know what you think.
http://political.moveon.org/whattodo/?id=
Who are the Democrats we would challenge? One example is Congressman Henry Cuellar in Texas. Cuellar is a right-wing Democrat infamous for supporting the Bush agenda and Republican legislation.
He is wrong on many core Democratic issues like the war and Medicare, he often undermines key Democratic initiatives and too often pokes progressives in the eye with his votes and statements. (More on Cuellar tomorrow.)
We would start with the worst like Cuellar and work to build a progressive majority one election at a time.
A Democratic majority will be a big step towards progressive reform. But at the same time we have to work to build a progressive majority that will work towards bold reforms.
Please help by giving us feedback on this decision.
http://political.moveon.org/whattodo/?id=
Thanks for all you do.
Tom, Jennifer, Rosalyn, Justin and the MoveOn.org Political Action Team Tuesday, February 14th, 2006
P.S. Here are some key practices we'll follow:
Member endorsement. MoveOn.org Political Action only endorses candidates with the consent of MoveOn members in the state or districtsurveying them before an endorsement. If members are split, we won't endorse.
Viable candidates. We don't want to waste your moneyso we work hard to pick candidates who have a real shot at winning.
A progressive majority. We believe that all Democrats are not the sameand we work to elect progressive members of Congress when we can. Support our member-driven organization: MoveOn.org Political Action is entirely funded by our 3.3 million members. We have no corporate contributors, no foundation grants, no money from unions. Our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. If you'd like to support our work, you can give now at:
http://www.moveonpac.org/donate/email.html?id=
PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION,
http://political.moveon.org/?id=
Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. "Bwahahahahahahaha!" -- Karl Rove (allegedly)
#3
"Our top goal is ending right-wing Republican control of Congress but to make progress on core issues we think MoveOn should challenge right-wing Democrats in primary elections. What do you think?"
I think you're certifiably insane, every bit as much as the droolers, dribblers, munchers, shufflers and head-bangers locked up in Bellevue.
But what the fuck: go for it, dudes, you're on a roll. You've already driven most of the sane folk out of the Democratic Party, so why not evict the rest? Have a ball.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
02/14/2006 17:24 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes.
Replacing a right-wing Democrat with a more progressive Democrat will help voters more clearly understand what Democrats stand forand that will help Democrats win.
First part -- right on. Second part -- no freaking way.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
02/14/2006 19:26 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Oh please please do, this would be the greatest event to watch Democratic party implode.
#6
I watched feminist Kate Melcham (or something like that) halking her book on TV the other night. She was lecturing to a group of like minded women.
I found it fascinating. Mostly because it was an interesting insight into just how dejected the lefty dems feel.
One girl said, "how do we get the campus democrats off life support" and "feminist" is almost a dirty word.
Kate clearly believed that the only reason their product wasn't selling was because the evil Christian right is better organized and if only the far left could organize as well as they could, then everyone would want to think just like them. The cognitive diss was strangely compelling to watch.
#7
#6 2b: "I watched feminist Kate Melcham (or something like that) halking her book"
Not to nitpick, but it's spelled "hawking."
However, in this context I like your spelling better. "Halking her book" - sort of sounds like something a cat would do with a hairball. Same dif, I suspect. ;-p
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
02/14/2006 22:14 Comments ||
Top||
#8
sounds like Kate Michelman - Nat'l Abortion Rights Action (?) League (NARAL)
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/14/2006 22:22 Comments ||
Top||
Reminder of why being a dhimmi sucks, even if the multiculti insist on the famed "tolerance of islam, as illustrated by al andalous" ("I'll tolerate your abuses, and you'll tolerate my breathing", or something like that), by the UK version of the "Answering islam" website.
#4
It fails to mention a couple essential provisions, even if I am not sure they are accepted by all s
1) A Christian is forced to provide three days of free hospitality to a travelling Muslim who so requires. It can be prolongated if the Muslim is ill.
2) Since the testimony of a Muslim ven when a notorious criminal and crook is superior to the one of a Christian, in many regions and notoriouly in Bosnia the Christains have had their lands and richnesses stolen by Muslims. The solution had been to buy Muslim witnessess but at macro-economic level that meant Christains getting poorer and Muslims richer
3) If a Christian converts to Islam he will egt allheirloom from his parents
4) A Christain is not allowed to strijke a Muslim even in self defence. In fact entire villages were massacred or deported just on susupicion one of its inhabitants a had killed a Muslim. Also while Muslim men aren't supposed to throw stones at Christians for the sake of it boys are encouraged to do so: this makes Christains feel what place is theirs in Islamic society: below Muslim brats.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
