Perhaps we could pool some funds and get the Rantburg navy started. Why simply verbally castigate the various sundry asshats of the world when you can park a carrier on their doorstep?
Posted by: Mark O ||
06/11/2004 2:34:24 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11133 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Yeah, but can you use it to waterski?
Besides isn't a carrier a sitting target without an escort / screen?
#2
It figures that people who support torture would be calling for castigation. That's just sick - get rid them by eliminating the next generation. That's ethic cleansing if I ever heard it, and Bush is probably for it too.
Posted by: Jennifer ||
06/11/2004 16:53 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Jennifer, What the HELL are you blathering about?
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/11/2004 16:58 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Yep Jennifer, I see what you mean and that is awful. Castigation is what we do with child molesters in Texas. It does take care of the next generation.
Posted by: Jennifer ||
06/11/2004 17:12 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Jennifer are you castigating castrators? Why? And what the hell does that have to do with an old aircraft carrier on the auction block? You make less sense every day, girl. BTW what is that you're smoking?
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/11/2004 17:39 Comments ||
Top||
#9
"Why simply verbally castigate the various sundry asshats . . ."
I didn't bring it up - I was just commenting that its awful, and that Bush probably supports it too. You people are all alike - torture is ok, castigating is ok, and you think it is funny. I bet Bush passed the law that allows them to do it to child molesters in Texas.
Posted by: Jennifer ||
06/11/2004 17:46 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Well...when I was young I didn't appreciate castigation at the hands of my parents. But now that I'm a parent myself, I can see how it is actually a positive thing. Bush is a parent too...I'm sure he approves of castigation.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
06/11/2004 17:50 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Torture them, castigate them, but whatever you do, don't humiliate them.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
06/11/2004 17:50 Comments ||
Top||
#12
I think they only do chemical castigation of child molesters in Texas.
Posted by: Carlos ||
06/11/2004 17:57 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Hint for Jennifer: I dont think castigation means what you think it means: (I think you mean castration which is the removal of ...).
From Dictionary .com :
cas·ti·gate ( P )
tr.v. cas·ti·gat·ed, cas·ti·gat·ing, cas·ti·gates
1. To inflict severe punishment on. See Synonyms at punish.
2. To criticize severely.
#14
No, Jennifer, you did bring it up, what Mark suggested was using an old war vessel instead of mere criticism.
Castigate: to subject to severe punishment, reproof, or criticism
What you believed he said was removing someone's reproductive capability.
castrate 1 a : to deprive of the testes : GELD b : to deprive of the ovaries : SPAY
There's a big difference. If you cannot afford a dictionary, there are some good ones on line.
e.g. http://www.m-w.com/home.htm
Go play somewhere else, kid.
I was jokingly suggesting that instead of casting verbal frowns at people, we should pool some cash and put a carrier on the doorstep of the world's loonies.
(oops, should I have used the word "casting" up above?)
Damn... sometimes I'm too clever by a half :)
rofl !!
Posted by: Mark O ||
06/11/2004 20:14 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Why buy this thing when we could get a decent used Whiskey Class submarine for $497,000.000? Hell, my house is almost worth that much!
#22
On a serious note, if you look at the various pictures at that page, you'll find some military aircraft included in the photos, with associated insignia.
I'm curious about whose Navy this ship is being scrapped from. My first thought was perhaps Pakistan. Can anyone identify the insignia on the aircraft in the photos on the site?
Mark O
Posted by: Mark O ||
06/11/2004 21:07 Comments ||
Top||
#23
Castigation of asshats is not only legal, it is protected by the First Amendment.
#26
Mark, this is the ex-Brazilian aircraft carrier Minas Gerais (note hull # A-11). Contrary to the ad, she has been out of service for almost 3 years. The ship is the former HMS Vengeance, completed late in WW2 and sold to Brazil in 1956 after an extensive modernization. She could operate A-4 Skyhawks, but usually served as an anti-submarine carrier with S-2 Trackers and various helicopters. Her catapults were repaired during the 1998 refit and the A-4s made a few flights from her deck before her replacement by the ex-French Foch, modernized and recommissioned as Sao Paulo.
A helicopter tour company said a man took off his seat belt, opened a door and intentionally fell to his death during a sightseeing flight over the Grand Canyon National Park Thursday. Authorities say the investigation of the man's death continues. They've offered few details on what led up to his exit from the helicopter about 90 miles northwest of Flagstaff, Ariz. The man fell about 4,000 feet. Officials don't know if the man had any connection to the others on board the helicopter. The pilot and four other passengers were shaken by what happened but weren't hurt. Authorities say the cause of death won't be determined until the body is recovered from White's Butte.
Not that I want to display my superior medical knowledge, but ...
The search in the rugged terrain will resume Friday.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/11/2004 3:26:18 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11132 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Not that I want to display my superior medical knowledge, but ...
"Blunt force trama" @ 9.8 meters per second per second. . .
#4
"Officials don't know if the man had any connection to the others on board the helicopter."
Think the other passengers would confirm a connection? "I'm sorry, I don't know why Dad - er - that man leap out."
The authorities are doing a great job on this investigation.
Posted by: Sam ||
06/11/2004 17:20 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Distance is the primary value
Change of distance over time is velocity
Change of velocity over time is acceleration (in this case deceleration)
Change of deceleration over time is the jerk.
It wasn't the deceleration that got him, it was the jerk.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
06/11/2004 17:21 Comments ||
Top||
#6
I thought it was cause he jumped out of a helicopter and hit the ground hard.
#2
YS--You're scaring me! Especially after the roast beef pic yesterday!
Posted by: Dar ||
06/11/2004 15:20 Comments ||
Top||
#3
To be joined by Lindsay Lohan and her new boobies on July 2. Soon to be followed by the usual trash behavior of child stars who grow up without a future as actors. I see... Playboy in their futures.
#6
The Olsens could buy Playboy magazine. Their estimated net worth is $300 million. One industry estimate says that will grow to $1 billion by the time they're 21.
Pub promises end to mouse-eating
A Brisbane pub at the centre of a mice-eating scandal said it was unaware of the "appalling incident" and promised to end so-called Jackass competitions. The Exchange Hotel in the heart of the city was the scene of a pub competition in April in which live mice were chewed up and spat out by contestants. The incident outraged the RSPCA which wants to prosecute the two men involved for animal cruelty.
For killing vermin?
RSPCA chief inspector Byron Hall said those involved in the competition in which the pair were challenged to bite a mouse in order to win a holiday faced fines of up to $75,000 and two years in prison. The Exchange Hotel issued a statement condemning the incident and promising an end to the Jackass competitions, modelled on the US TV show and movie in which participants perform stupid stunts and gags. "We are embarrassed this incident occurred at our hotel," said the hotelâs senior manager Scott Agnew. "The offensive part of the promotion on April 14 was conducted without the knowledge of our senior management and after this incident was brought to our attention we immediately made changes to stop such unacceptable behaviour." Mr Agnew insisted the pub was working with the appropriate authorities and making changes where necessary.
"Mice, is it? Damn. That's yucky. Can we get squirrels instead?"
"Management have cooperated fully with the RSPCA in their investigations into this unacceptable incident," he said. "We have now significantly tightened our management procedures to ensure this type of shocking incident cannot be repeated." The RSPCA said it was still seeking the man who chewed up the mouse to win a $500 prize, but had interviewed the other competitor.
Over dinner?
Queensland Primary Industries Minister Henry Palaszczuk urged anyone with any information to contact the RSPCA. "All animals deserve respect," he said. "How we treat animals is a measure of how civilised our society is. Chewing a mouse and spitting it out is not entertainment, it is barbaric."
Posted by: tipper ||
06/11/2004 11:31:03 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
#6
haha. very funy. jackass good name for what they are do. this just plain cruelty for sport and your not dare even given me that top of em foodchain argument you guys are use becuz they are not eat them just chew them up and kill them and spit them out. these jackass are beter hope them mice arent have any disease or mouse are going have last laff on them. the fine and 2 year prison is make them think twice ever do that again.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
06/11/2004 13:35 Comments ||
Top||
#11
I am a one-year old gray and white cat residing in California. The fact that my preferred prey is lizzards has no relevance to my ability to comment on this story. My only complaint is that you two-legged folks have so many more choices than us Felis domestici. Look, the SPCAs are meddlesome do-gooders. You two-leggers stick to your cows, pigs, and chickens, although your sharing is appreciated and let us cats handle the mice.
Posted by: Martin Whiteshoes ||
06/11/2004 13:38 Comments ||
Top||
#12
ha! im see how this is work. take me out of it context. this is what i am said:
these jackass are beter hope them mice arent have any disease
#13
mucky - my apologies in advance for being so culturally insensitive with my insistence on adhering to those archaic rules of grammar, punctuation and all that.
#14
Maybe I'm weird but I always understand what Muck says. I agree with Muck. These people deserved to be punished.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
06/11/2004 14:34 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Mr 4doo, et al:
Thank you for your support. But mice are passe. I've caught mice. They are nothing compared to a swift moving reptile running along the top of a brick wall. But punish the micemashers for taking our jobs. Yes!
Purrrrrrfect!
Posted by: Martin Whiteshoes ||
06/11/2004 15:01 Comments ||
Top||
#2
This made me chuckle but there is some value in the notion behind these sentences: making people understand exactly what they have done to others. I know from personal experience: my mom had a terrible time trying to get me to stop biting other kids. Finally, she bit me back one day (boy, would she be in trouble for that in OUR times). I never did bite a kid again.
..and not well, either. These are from www.juancole.com from one of our guys there.
Why Did the Chicken cross the Road?
Coalition Provisional Authority: The fact that the Iraqi chicken crossed the road affirmatively demonstrates that decision-making authority has been transferred to the chicken well in advance of the scheduled June 30th transition of power. From now on the chicken is responsible for its own decisions.
Halliburton: We were asked to help the chicken cross the road. Given the inherent risk of road crossing and the rarity of chickens, this operation will only cost the US government $326,004.
Muqtada al-Sadr: The chicken was a tool of the evil Coalition and will be killed.
US Army Military Police: We were directed to prepare the chicken to cross the road. As part of these preparations, individual soldiers ran over the chicken repeatedly and then plucked the chicken. We deeply regret the occurrence of any chicken rights violations.
Peshmerga: The chicken crossed the road, and will continue to cross the road, to show its independence and to transport the weapons it needs to defend itself. However, in future, to avoid problems, the chicken will be called a duck, and will wear a plastic bill.
1st Cav: The chicken was not authorized to cross the road without displaying two forms of picture identification. Thus, the chicken was appropriately detained and searched in accordance with current SOP?s. We apologize for any embarrassment to the chicken. As a result of this unfortunate incident, the command has instituted a gender sensitivity training program and all future chicken searches will be conducted by female soldiers.
Al Jazeera: The chicken was forced to cross the road multiple times at gunpoint by a large group of occupation soldiers, according to eye-witnesses. The chicken was then fired upon intentionally, in yet another example of the abuse of innocent Iraqi chickens.
Blackwater: We cannot confirm any involvement in the chicken-road-crossing incident.
Translators: Chicken he cross street because bad she tangle regulation. Future chicken table against my request.
U.S. Marine Corps: The chicken is dead.
(NOTE: That last one should probably read, "The chicken is dead, SIR!" )
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
06/11/2004 12:20:31 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11126 views]
Top|| File under:
#6
Although the targeted roosters escaped harm, dozens of innocent hens and small chicks were killed by the tires of the infidels. This will infuriate the Chicken Street, and the roosters are already strapping suicide bomb vests on brainwashed chicks.
Posted by: Tom ||
06/11/2004 9:17 Comments ||
Top||
#7
That was a plastic chicken! The whole story is a fraud!
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
06/11/2004 9:22 Comments ||
Top||
#8
LLL: Bush lied! Chickens died!
Posted by: Chris W. ||
06/11/2004 10:12 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Baghdad Bob: The chicken never crossed the road! He is safe in Baghdad, miles from the marauding vehicles of the infidel! THERE IS NO ROAD!
#10
USAF:
"As you can see here in the target video, the bomb was locked onto the chicken...and there it goes...the chicken is still moving...still moving...and unfortunately passed out of the parameters of the guidance system so that the bomb completely missed it and hit the weasel instead. Gotta admit thought, it's impressive footage..."
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
06/11/2004 10:39 Comments ||
Top||
#11
LOL! This thread has "Classics" written all over it...
#12
I thought Hans Blix and his elite team of UN inspectors couldn't find any chickens?
Posted by: Dar ||
06/11/2004 11:26 Comments ||
Top||
#13
"Kerry: 'The chicken crossed the road before it did not'"
That's "The chicken crossed the road before it did not and did you know I served in Vietnam?"
"LOL! This thread has "Classics" written all over it..."
I agree wholeheartedly.
Posted by: Tom ||
06/11/2004 12:02 Comments ||
Top||
#15
AFLAC Duck: "I'm NOT A CHICKEN!"
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/11/2004 12:17 Comments ||
Top||
#16
UN: The situation in Iraq is not safe for chickens. Our four-star chef needs chickens for his menu. So the UN will not be in Iraq anytime soon, because we cannot get Chicken Cordon Bleu for lunch.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
06/11/2004 13:18 Comments ||
Top||
#21
PETA: The Chicken was on it's way to work to provide for his family, when the death squads of Tyson spotted the Chicken and began chase. The Chicken was caught and will be sent a concentration camp where he will then be "processed" and divided up into 4 Chicken McNugget Happy Meals. The Chicken will be in our hearts forever, along with Adolf Hitler, who gave us an excuse to run "Holocaust on Your Plate" ads.
#25
IDF: The chicken was caught smuggling weapons through a tunnel underneath the road. This tunnel has now been sealed. With the chicken in it.
Posted by: Rafael ||
06/11/2004 15:13 Comments ||
Top||
#26
Rafael - And, 10,000 years from now, palaeontologists find a chicken skeleton with some indistinguishable rusted metal with a trace of heretofore unknown minerals. A worldwide confrence of the scientific community is called to discuss the find. Charles Darwin, MCMIC (the
1999th) will chair the discussion. It is titled - "Regressive Evolution: The Chickens Used WMDs; Now They're Only Good for Dinner".
Many of my family died fighting fascism abroad in the last century, yet when it arrives on our shores and is present on our high streets we do nothing.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
06/11/2004 8:28 Comments ||
Top||
#2
They're not gonna get it until we have militant Islamists actually running through the streets with automatic weapons, and they still won't get it until half their infidel family gets killed by them.
I'd hate to live in the UK. No offense Howard.
Posted by: Chris W. ||
06/11/2004 10:37 Comments ||
Top||
#3
good. do you really want these mokes making decisions anyway?
#4
Yup. I just watched the video. These boys have "issues".
I think what is interesting is that you have the two major party leaders.
Tony Blair, Labour : Biggest US supporter against Sadahm, and The Taliban, and
Michael Howard, Conservative : A Joooooooooooooooo
These boys are in the middle stages of apoplectic fittery.
Haiti's interim prime minister said Thursday he hoped a small number of U.S. troops would remain in his country after the United Nations takes over full responsibility for peacekeeping. "The armed gangs, they will not go out if they know there are American Marines in Haiti," said Gerard Latortue, who took over after the Feb. 29 ouster of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. "This is the only force in the world ... they will respect."
As Glenn Reynolds would say, "heh".
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/11/2004 12:42:33 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11129 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"I plan to have an entire company guarding my my most prized posession - me - full time."
#4
I thought Jesse Jackson was the only force in the world they will respect?
Posted by: Chris W. ||
06/11/2004 10:39 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Mr Latortue (missing the second 'r') should ask himself and that rag-tag population why Haiti is in such a dismal state and why it can't sustain itself, instead of depending upon aid. The situation is of their own endless making. CIA WorldFact Book.
Maybe they can sucker the Dominican Republic into merging and drag them down into the same hole -- or, be still my beating heart, they could emulate them - and pull themselves out of the stinking cycle of stupidity and poverty.
There are limits to how long you can feed at the trough without contributing.
The 68 year old also has nothing good to say about Paris prostitutes.
"Our lovely, kind street-walkers have been replaced by girls from the East, Nigerians, travellers, transsexuals, drag-queens, bearers of Aids and other friendly gifts. Having a risk-free go is becoming a real exploit."
Itâs been sixty years since there were Germans in Paris. Nobody appreciates a high quality French whore like a German soldier.
"Iâm against the Islamization of France...our grandfathers, our fathers gave their lives for centuries to chase all successive invaders out of France," one excerpt said.
Asked what passages shocked him, Tubiana said: "saying, for example, that Muslims canât be French - thatâs a real problem - or that Muslims are invading France, that Muslims are all terrorists. ...This type of generalization is unacceptable."
Passages about Muslims, Tubiana contended, break French anti-racism laws that prevent inciting hate and discrimination on racial or religious or racial grounds.
Bardot, 68, a former screen siren and animal rights campaigner, was convicted in 1997 and 2000 of inciting racial violence after she criticized in print the Muslim practice of slaughtering sheep.
French human rights groups are busy defending the rights of Moslems. Someone should make them all sit down and memorize the facts about the Battle of Tours. One battle won by the French, btw, headed by Charles "The Hammer" Martel. Despite the name, he was not a professional wrestler. In those days, they meant "Hammer".
#3
I think its stupid that she can't write what she wants without getting fined. It would be interesting to see what would happen if someone wrote something similar about Christians.
Posted by: Yosemite Sam ||
06/11/2004 15:29 Comments ||
Top||
#4
As long as the French officials count the words "infidel" and "kuffar" as hate speech, I'm all for this law.
Posted by: Kevin ||
06/11/2004 07:55 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11129 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
One of the biggest ironies in our times? That most of the people in the continent which brought the world the Holocaust, and who, by their own admission, have suffered national shame and personal horror for the anti-Semitic crimes of their political leaders and populaces, are not seeking a fair life for Jews, helping them to live in this world with security and respect, but instead are enabling the suffering but misguided Palestinians to fixate on violence as the solution--Palestinians whose terrorists are trying to accomplish what Hitler couldn't: extermination of the Jews.
#2
Because the pro-Palestinian cause depends on competition for sympathy. The Palestinians suffer more (which is true), therefore they are morally superior (which isn't true).
Another monumental load of horseradish. The majority of Palestinian suffering has been brought about, not by Israel, but by Arafat and the other terrorist leaders who have steered their people on a dead-end political course.
Regardless of their dubious intentions, Egypt's calling for Arafat to step down or be subject to Sharon's tender mercies is ample demonstration that even the Arab world has begun to realize how the festering sore of Palestinian terror is doing no one any good, least of all the Palestinians themselves.
With scar tissue from the Holocaust still bright pink within the minds of so many Europeans, that they have begun reverting to anti-Semitism again is a core indicator of residual bigotry that will bring upon them more Madrid atrocities. As Islamists focus their displeasure upon all who defy the jihadi's avowed intent to impose global Sharia law, Europe must quickly and decisively move towards an active stance against terrorism. In an ultimate irony, their continued support for Palestine's cause has only legitimized the terror with which they shall be attacked.
These twits are the lowest scum imaginable! Can you imagine what any of the family in the funeral procession must have thought looking out and seeing these a-holes with their signs "Reagan in Hell"?! Are you proud of yourself, Ted Rall, you piece of s--t?! Isnât that your slogan?
I ask for two things--
1. That the officer move out of the way.
2. That someone loan me a hand grenade.
Posted by: Dar ||
06/11/2004 1:51:11 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11129 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Mean spirited people, looking for a cause. As my mother use to say:
It says more about them than it does about anything else.
Posted by: B ||
06/11/2004 15:35 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Yeah but if we knew where they had parked, we could deflate all the tires on all their cars.
Not vandalism, mind you, but mischief. No permanent damage. Just a whole lot of inconvienence.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
06/11/2004 15:56 Comments ||
Top||
#4
This is, I believe, what is meant by the term "no class."
Posted by: Mike ||
06/11/2004 16:33 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Looks like some of the .308 targets vermin are giving the nazi salute. The guy on the right has a "middle-eastern look" as the collaborationist PC media might put it.
#6
Obviously this is an attempt by L-Cubo devils to emulate the tactics of the barking moonbat gay- basher, "Reverend" Fred Phelps. These, as everyone knows, have been a great success in garnering support for Phelps' agenda *deep sarcasm*.
#8
Although I did not like living in DC (too cold in the Winter, too hot in the Summer) I wished that I still lived ther just so I could 'show' these idiots how wrong that move was! No doubt this is the MoveOn/DU crowd. I hope that someday I get to exact some revenge for this treatment of our beloved President. If Reagan went to 'Hell' I hate to see whats in store for this crowd.
#10
AC, this may have been Fred Phelps. That link goes to a pdf file at Phelps's site. It's a protest flier, reading, in part:
[Phelps's "church"] to picket funeral proceedings of Ronald Reagan...in religious protest & warning to a doomed nation: REAGAN IS IN HELL!
He betrayed the Great King! He gave America to sodomites! It is altogether fitting that the one who sold his nation out for Rock Hudson sodomites should now be buried by filthy Bishop Gene Robinson Episcopalian sodomites.
There's much much more. I just had to get the Rock Hudson part in there. There's even a bad xerox of a photo of Hudson on the flier.
Phelps's religion is not Christianity, it is hatred. He's just dressed it up in Christian trappings.
By the way, note that the photo of the protesters was taken by a Gay.
Fred is not an LLL, though he is in solidarity with their position on the Iraq war and US policy in general. Fred also has a site called "God Hates America".
Among other things, this charming work features a cartoon of an American soldier raping a little Iraqi boy.
#12
Maybe it's the way I look at that photo, but it seems there are only about 3 people protesting...the ones holding the placards. That gray-haired old lady seems to be there for the right reason.
Posted by: Rafael ||
06/11/2004 18:36 Comments ||
Top||
#13
oops..nevermind.
Posted by: Rafael ||
06/11/2004 18:38 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Thanks, Angie. You were a little ahead of me with that.
I should have recognized the signs, the striped "caution" motif is almost a Phelps trademark.
This mob of weirdos protested outside my church a while back (in Lubbock, TX) for Fred alone knows what reason. I remember reading that nine of his thirteen children are lawyers and two or three of them work for the Kansas Department of Corrections.
Fred himself is a disbarred lawyer.
They have bought up all the property around his home/church in Topeka, moved in, and set up a kind of fortified moonbat compound.
#15
We jumped the gun a little in assuming that the Phelps Phreaks were LLLs, but it turns out there were some positively identified El-Cubos emulating his mob today. Castro slaves protest Reagan funeral.
In stark contrast to the Phelpers, this tribe of rancid freaks accuse Reagan of being ANTI-gay.
Like Phelps, these aging derelicts desecrate not only a funeral, but the Cross itself by using it as a prop in their shameful display of petty heartlessness.
** Requiescat in Pace Rex Veritas, Ronald Wilson Reagan, 1911 - 2004! **
("Rest in Peace, the True King!)
Posted by: Edward Yee ||
06/11/2004 21:46 Comments ||
Top||
#18
That someone loan me a hand grenade
"Loan" you a hand grenade? Do we get it back?
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/11/2004 22:01 Comments ||
Top||
#19
Somebody should organize a protest against Phelps outside his own church.
Posted by: Charles ||
06/11/2004 22:35 Comments ||
Top||
#20
They're participation demonstrates Reagan's true greatness. I was hoping that A.N.S.W.E.R. or Ted Kennedy would step forward to embarass themselves and damage their own credibility. Reagan's presence divided the wheat from the chaff.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/11/2004 22:37 Comments ||
Top||
Brace yourselves. The left is going off in a new tangent. They could not generate enough horror/anti war sentiment about Iraqi prisoners tapping American ass, now they trot out this ex-Marine and self-confessed war criminal.
Read the article. Some of you may find as I did, the desciptions rather fishy, especially considering this guy was a 12 year veteran and didnât know the proper acronym for artillery-fired cluster munitions.
Posted by: badanov ||
06/11/2004 8:06:59 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11132 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Yes. I killed innocent people for our government. I blame the president because he said they had weapons of mass destruction.
Who ordered you to kill innocent people? And if you thought it was unlawful to kill them, why did you do it. If you want to blame someone, blame yourself, don't shift the blame to others.
From all the intelligence reports we were getting, the cars were loaded down with suicide bombs or material. That's the rhetoric we received from intelligence.
Rhetoric? Bullshit. Go read the book Thunder Run, by the journalist, David Zucchino. It describes the armored attack into Baghdad. It is full of suicude attacks on the armor and the subsequent secondary explosions.
They came upon our checkpoint. We fired some warning shots. They didn't slow down. So we lit them up.
So you killed civilians under the rules of engagement and we are supposed to infer a war crime? You gave them the opportunity to exercise judgement and they did not. That is their fault not yours. Take your guilty conscience elsewhere.
#4
The gentleman was driving a stolen work utility van. He didn't stop. With us being trigger happy, we didn't really give this guy much of a chance
So you were undisciplined? You were a 12 year veteran staff seargent leading the platoon and you are complaining about being trigger happy? Son, you were in charge of that platoon, what did you do to ensure fire discipline? Did your men run you or did you run your men?
Posted by: Chris W. ||
06/11/2004 10:22 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Reporter: Baghdad was being bombed. The civilians were trying to get out, right?
Marine: Yes. They received pamphlets, propaganda we dropped on them.
Civilians were not trying to get out. Again see Thunder Run. The civilians had no clue the US military had arrived in Baghdad until they stumbled into battles. Why did they have no clue? Because they believed there own government when Baghdad Bob said the American attacks had been repulsed. Why should they think differently when Andrew Gilligan of the BBC was saying the Americans were lying and had not entered Baghdad. Blame Saddam and the BBC, not the US military.
#9
This guy is cut from the same cloth as LtCol whats her name (retired Air Force). She claims that she personally lobbied against the Iraq War becuase she knew it was wrong. She also claims to be an 'Itelligence Expert' but there are MANY gaps in her stories. I wouldn't be surprised if Kerry makes her the next NSA and this Marine his 'Special Assistant'. They both make me sick.
#10
If you have any doubts about this guy, check his comments about DU. He toes the party line quite nicely.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/11/2004 15:12 Comments ||
Top||
#11
That's the rhetoric we received from intelligence. That's not the way Marines talk. I can't put my finger on it, but there is something about the idiom of Marines that have served on active duty even for less than a year that cannot be faked and doesn't wear off quickly. Maybe he was a reservist that played oboe in the band. I guess Jarhead would be able to tell more definitively.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/11/2004 23:06 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Google Jimmy Massey and see the links like Alternet. This guy's an asshole.
Posted by: Tibor ||
06/12/2004 2:56 Comments ||
Top||
#1
Attorney-General Michael Bryant told reporters yesterday that the Islamic Institute for Civil Justice â the group that plans to use existing arbitration legislation to apply a form of sharia law to settle disputes in the Muslim community â will not begin until later this year.
i.e SES poll on Canadian Parliament Election 6/9 : Cons 37 Lib 32. Liberals in deep doodoo. Don't make things worse.
AND http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3799881.stm
These should work. I'll send an error message to Mod's and ask them to re-post the link. Sorry.
Posted by: rex ||
06/11/2004 21:46 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Mulroney was just fantastic. The Bushes followed him, and they just couldn't compete. Whatever else you think of the President, he's just not a very good speaker. He started out badly, but got better as he went on. Big George just stayed terrible (then again, he started to choke up at one point).
Hat tip to Drudge. EFL Russian President Vladimir Putin stepped into the U.S. political campaign on Thursday, saying the Democrats had "no moral right" to criticize President Bush over Iraq. ... He went on: "I am deeply convinced that President Bushâs political adversaries have no moral right to attack him over Iraq because they did exactly the same. "It suffices to recall Yugoslavia. Now look at them. They donât like what President Bush is doing in Iraq." Oh dear, what is sKerry left to say about Bushâs "failure" to build an international consensus on important international issues -- that Bush is now a commie? Nuance alert in 5, 4, 3 . . .
Posted by: cingold ||
06/11/2004 1:45:11 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11130 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Pull my finger" joke in 5, 4, 3...
Posted by: Rafael ||
06/11/2004 4:13 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Let's keep in mind that Vlad the ImPutin is not endorsing America's actions. He's merely pointing out the America has the long habit of interfering in Russia's playgrounds with this "wierd" habit of defeating dictators, ethnic cleansing and bringing freedom and prosperity to people.
I'm proud of that.
Rather live in Iraq in five years, than Chechnya (or the German-French Republic, for that matter....according to the polls).
#5
My guess is Putin won't get invited to any Speaking Truth to Power rallies.
Posted by: john ||
06/11/2004 7:24 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Al-Rooters throws in the last line that both men go out of their way to avoid criticizing each other publically, is that because they can't believe KGB Master Putin actually means what he is stating?, and that he doesn't wish to criticize Bush?
Is it me or is that a hunk of opinion in a "news" piece?, another example why I no longer bother with the mainstream media.
#7
Ugh. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't want that man supporting me in a free election. How do you avoid getting tarred by association? His FSB is "disappearing" public officials at home. Putin actually is what the paranoids accuse Bush & Ashcroft of being.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
06/11/2004 7:54 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Mitch, maybe...but there are a couple of things I think I'm right on which others often disagree with me and one of them, IMHO (or in this case, should it be IMO), is that
... ulitmately...
Russia will side with the US on the war on terror , just like it did in WWII, because it is in their own best interests to do so.
Excluding the Islamist and dictator-supporting EU types, the other world leaders can see that Kerry is a smarmy, empty-headed, flip-flopping, egomaniacal worm. With the WOT threatening us all, much as they don't like our super-power status, they'd prefer Bush.
Posted by: B ||
06/11/2004 10:01 Comments ||
Top||
#10
guess putin isn't one of those world leaders skerry was harping on a few months ago..
Posted by: Dan ||
06/11/2004 11:30 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Some people may be too blind to see it but Putin is not "siding with Bush" but playing the anti-American card instead -- instead of blaming Iraq to Bush's administration or even just the Republicans, he's blaming it instead on the whole of the American system and calling both major political parties equally rotten.
I can recognize it for what it is because it's the same rhetoric that I've heard the Communist Party of Greece use. It's not an effort to support or excuse any specific American administration, it's instead an effort to aggravate Europe towards the entirety of America, REGARDLESS of whether Democrats or Republicans are in governance.
Unless you people think that the Communist Party of Greece that still has fond memories of the Soviet Union and currently supports Cuba, China and North Korea, also supports Bush when it calls the Democrats equally bad?
Yeah, it's not helping Kerry, the same way that anything hurting the whole of America or its unity with Europe isn't helping Kerry.
The game is bigger than a November US election. Russia is turning dictatorial again, the center of the neo-Soviet block. If it happens as B said and it sides with the US in the "war on Terror", which I personally doubt, that still won't make Putin any less of a dictator wannabe, or his new Russia any less of a Soviet-Union wannabe. And as much an eventual enemy of Western civilisation as the old Soviet union was.
#12
You're paranoid Aris. You fail to understand the Russian people or the eastern european mentality, not to mention your basic grasp of economics is lacking.
You might be right OTOH, if free elections in Russia result in a Zhirinovsky-like head of state. Then all bets are off.
Posted by: Rafael ||
06/11/2004 13:09 Comments ||
Top||
#13
I don't believe I said anything about economics in my post above.
And as for failing to understand the Russian people, that's a bit like saying we failed to understand the Afghani people, and the Islamic dictatorship of the Taliban is just what they wanted in their "culture".
Possible, but also quite quite irrelevant -- the new Soviet block would be a threat to more than just Russians, same as the old Soviet block was.
#14
"I am deeply convinced that President Bushâs political adversaries have no moral right to attack him over Iraq because they did exactly the same."
Forgive me for not being as 'nuanced' as my Eurpoean betters counterparts, but it's nigh impossible to infer an anti-American intent of such a statement. I read it more as an attempt (successful or otherwise) by Putin to earn a few brownie points with Bush; he probably realizes by now Kerry has next to no chance at beating Bush in November.
#15
I don't believe I said anything about economics in my post above.
But you see, economics has everything to do with it. You can't make a leap from communism to full fledged capitalism overnight and expect everything to be rosy. Right now there are millions of people in Eastern Europe, much more so in Russia, who are disenchanted with capitalism and for that matter with democracy. Just because YOU think it is good for them, it will not make things easier for people whose pensions have dwindled, whose jobs have disappeared, and whose standard of living basically dropped like a ton of bricks (on their heads). Entire generations have been lost because of this conversion to capitalism. In an environment such as this, it is not inconceivable that a despot worse than Putin can climb his way to power and wreak havoc (such as Zhirinovsky). That this has not happened so far is a sign that there are indeed people who are prospering under the current system (aside from the super-wealthy). So the situation is not hopeless.
Putin has yet to show that he will be economically bad for Russia. For the time being, for the average Russians the concern is whether their next paycheque arrives on time, if at all, and not whether Putin controls the local newspaper. If Putin is still president 20 years from now, I *might* be concerned. It will take 100 years to undo communism.
Comparing this to Afghanistan is ridiculous since Afghanistan was never an economic power to begin with. It is easier to start from scratch, then attempt to regain what you once had.
Posted by: Rafael ||
06/11/2004 14:47 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Raj> "I am deeply convinced that President Bushâs political adversaries have no moral right to attack him over Iraq because they did exactly the same." Forgive me for not being as 'nuanced' as my Eurpoean betters counterparts, but it's nigh impossible to infer an anti-American intent of such a statement
Yeah, you also need to have the memory cells to recollect that Russia and Putin personally *did* oppose what USA did in Iraq *and* Serbia. So his statement is transformed into "The Democrats don't have the moral right to attack Bush because they are as bad as the Republicans -- the Russians on the other hand do have that moral right."
It'd be indeed different IF it had come from a person that had supported either war on a moral level.
But as I said you need to have the memory cells to remember certain annoying facts.
Rafael> Right now there are millions of people in Eastern Europe, much more so in Russia, who are disenchanted with capitalism and for that matter with democracy. Just because YOU think it is good for them
Yeah, you see, whether it's economically good for them or not is a *triviality* compared to whether Russia is a reemerging imperialist power that will become again an opponent to western liberal democracy or not.
Putin has yet to show that he will be economically bad for Russia.
I HOPE he is economically bad for Russia, because if he's *only* politically bad but economically he's splendid then that'd be a repeat of the Hitleric industrial success. I believe the Nazis also caused a financial marvel.
It will take 100 years to undo communism.
Bull. It took far less than that in the smaller countries of Eastern Europe to undo most of the harm done by communism.
But the healing must begin by the defeat of the old state mechanism like KGB and Stazi and so forth. In East Germany Stazi was BURIED, and so East Germany was allowed to begin to heal --- but in Russia, KGB has reclaimed the fullness of its power, and so Russia is still ailing.
How many decades will it take to undo the *continuing* rule of the KGB?
#17
whether Russia is a reemerging imperialist power that will become again an opponent to western liberal democracy
So far I don't see that happening. The probability of that happening with Putin in power is....0% I'd say. That's like worrying about a civil war in America. Sure it's possible, but not in the foreseeable future.
that'd be a repeat of the Hitleric industrial success
I knew you would revert to the Nazi analogy. Again, so far I don't see any concentration camps in Russia, neither is Putin bent on destroying an entire race. Hell, Putin isn't even interested in invading his neighbours.
Bull. It took far less than that in the smaller countries of Eastern Europe to undo most of the harm done by communism
Not everywhere in Eastern Europe. And *most* of the harm hasn't been undone yet. All you have to do is compare wages, and employment prospects for university graduates. Not to speak of pensioners and those without higher education. But this is Eastern Europe, now part of the EU. Russia itself is in far worse shape.
KGB has reclaimed the fullness of its power, and so Russia is still ailing.
That's not why Russia is still ailing. Like I said, it has to do with economics, and to some extent with sociology (perhaps equal measures of both).
Transitioning from communism to democracy and capitalism, for Russia, is like walking a tightrope. So far I don't see any reason for panic. And I don't see any widespread unrest in Russia just because Putin is in power either.
Posted by: Rafael ||
06/11/2004 15:47 Comments ||
Top||
#18
I missed one more thing:
It took far less than that in the smaller countries of Eastern Europe
Yes, the operative word there being smaller.
Posted by: Rafael ||
06/11/2004 15:50 Comments ||
Top||
#19
I'm amused that someone would accuse a Greek national of not understanding Eastern Europeans. Has someone moved Greece recently? That might explain the construction delays on the Olympic facilities, come to think of it...
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
06/11/2004 15:58 Comments ||
Top||
#20
LOL! This is politics, not philosophy or even economics. Who cares WHY Putin said it, or how badly Aris the Geek needs it to "really be" a put-down of all Americans
.... the bottom line of the exchange was that Putin dissed Kerry on a world stage.
Posted by: B ||
06/11/2004 16:17 Comments ||
Top||
#21
So far I don't see that happening
Russia is the lone supporter of the one remaining full-fledged dictatorship in Europe, that of Belarus.
Hell, Putin isn't even interested in invading his neighbours.
Actually he's already put army in Georgia IIRC and encouraged pro-Russian secession movements in Moldovia (Transnistria), Ukraine (Crimaea) and Georgia (South Ossetia and Adjaria I believe). And ofcourse as long as Russia has not even managed to put down the Chechenyan's revolt, they aren't going to overextend themselves.
Again, so far I don't see any concentration camps in Russia,
More than 250,000 Chechens were killed -- one quarter of the entirety of the Chechen population. Putin and his fellow KGBers would have to consolidate their tyranny a bit further before they do more, and as always not play their hands too soon.
Mitch> To an extent, Rafael is right -- Greece is not one of the Slavic nations populating most of the Eastern Europe.
But it is Eastern Orthodox, unlike Roman Catholic Poland, and I *have* seen some madmen visualising a great Orthodox arc reaching down from Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Serbia-Montenegro and including Greece. Such an arc would be a new Axis directed against the West, caring little about democracy or human rights, and lots about religious-nationalistic fanaticism.
That's the nightmare worst-case scenario ofcourse -- and decades in the future either way. And only possible if the EU is first destroyed.
But Russia-as-imperialistic-power that causes unrest and dominates her neighbours through force and the threat thereof... that's real *now*.
#22
B> Yeah, that's indeed the bottomline -- which makes me think that Kerry may perhaps be better than generally believed here, if Putin doesn't want him in the White House. Or atleast not as bad as Bush was.
Or perhaps Putin simply doesn't want the Europeans to have an excuse to make up with the USA and help it out in the Middle East.
#23
Kerry may perhaps be better than generally believed here, if Putin doesn't want him in the White House
LMAO!! That's one of your best yet, Aris.
Mitch, I shall try to be more precise. It's just that "the former Soviet satellite states" is so awkward to use. Besides, I think Aris got the point.
But Russia-as-imperialistic-power that causes unrest and dominates her neighbours through force and the threat thereof... that's real *now*.
There might be some influence, confined to the states that made up the USSR. That's about as much as I'll give you.
Posted by: Rafael ||
06/11/2004 16:38 Comments ||
Top||
#24
...Russia and Putin personally *did* oppose what USA did in Iraq *and* Serbia. So his statement is transformed into "The Democrats don't have the moral right to attack Bush because they are as bad as the Republicans -- the Russians on the other hand do have that moral right."
This seems like a pretty close interpretation to me.
What is Putin? A very clever opportunist. Hate to say it, cause I kinda like George, but George? You didn't see his soul in his eyes...you saw a maze.
Charles Krauthammer gets the liberal media (but I repeat myself) coverage on Reagan's funeral right.
...In the early '80s, the West experienced a nuclear hysteria -- a sudden panic about imminent nuclear destruction and a mindless demand to "freeze" nuclear weapons. What had changed to bring this on? Reagan had become president. Like George W. Bush today, the U.S. president was seen as a greater threat to peace than was the enemy he was confronting.
The nuclear freeze and the accompanying hysteria are an embarrassment that liberals prefer to forget today. Reagan's critics completely misunderstood the logic and the power of his nuclear posture. He took a very hard line on the Soviets, who had broken the nuclear status quo by placing missiles in Europe. Backed by Margaret Thatcher and Helmut Kohl, Reagan faced the Soviets down -- despite enormous "peace" demonstrations throughout the West, including the largest one to date in U.S. history (New York City, 1982) -- and ultimately forced the Soviets to dismantle the missiles and begin their overall retreat.
Rarely has a president been so quickly and completely vindicated by history. The Berlin Wall came down 10 months after Reagan left office. His policies of unrelenting toughness won the Cold War and brought a new peace. That is because Reagan understood that the key to peace was never arms control. Security had nothing to do with the number of weapons; it had everything to do with the intention and power of those who possessed them.
Accordingly, Reagan put relentless pressure on the possessors of that power, the Soviet commissars, through his nuclear hard line, military buildup, Strategic Defense Initiative and the Reagan Doctrine of supporting anti-communist guerrillas everywhere (especially Nicaragua). Ultimately, that pressure brought about the collapse of the overextended Soviet empire. The result was the most profound peace the world had experienced in 60 years -- since the very beginning of the totalitarian era in the early 1930s.
This success is an understandable embarrassment to the critics who opposed his every policy. They supported the freeze, denounced the military buildup, ridiculed strategic defenses, opposed aid to the Nicaraguan anti-communists and derided Reagan for telling the truth about the Soviet empire.
So now they praise his sunny smile. Normally, people speak well of the recently deceased to honor the dictum of being kind to the dead. When Reagan's opponents speak well of him now, however, they are trying to be kind to themselves.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/11/2004 12:45:54 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
Why did I have to Oversleep!?! WHY!? I can just imagine the President saying this speech, in his slow and methodical way of pausing for a couple seconds every few sentences. It must have been beautiful...
He believed that bigotry and prejudice were the worst things a person could be guilty of.
Wonder who Bush was staring at when he said that? So many choices.
Posted by: Charles ||
06/11/2004 22:18 Comments ||
Top||
From Boy Scouts to Supreme Court justices, tens of thousands of Americans filed solemnly past Ronald Reagan's casket at the Capitol on Thursday, a quiet prelude to a majestic funeral shaped by his own hand. Visitors from the Reagan-era ranks of power and friendship flocked to his widow's side.
Longer description of Pres. Reagan lying in state at the link.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/11/2004 12:09:20 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11130 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The wife and I just got back. 4.5 hours in line but well worth it. Everybody was extremely respectful, patient and polite throughout. It was truly moving to see people of all sorts lining up to pay their respects. Those near us in line ranged from people in wheelchairs, wounded vets, clergy, active duty military (private to brigadeer general) and many well behaved children. We will never forget witnessing the changing of the guard for the casket.
#2
JAB, I would have loved to have been there -- unfortunately I'm on service this month so no-go, literally. Sounds like a real cross-section of America was there, which is (I'm comfortably certain) exactly what would have made Ronnie happy.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/11/2004 0:43 Comments ||
Top||
#3
People who could not attend personally have also spent many hours watching the ceremonies on television with a great sense of involvement, remembrance and respect.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
06/11/2004 7:09 Comments ||
Top||
#4
On CSPAN now without talking head BS.
Gorbachev sits next to Thatcher. Former PM Mulrooney & wife next to Prince Charles. . .
#5
I went by the Capitol about 12:15 this morning after a gathering of the Lizaroid Minions in DC. The cop I talked to said the wait in line was about 7 hours long at that point (and they would close it down at 7 a.m., less than 7 hours away). What I could see of the line stretched for blocks. I paid my respects from the car and started the 2-hour drive back home.
I also was impressed by the people shown on TV lining the streets (several persons deep, both sides) for the processional from the Capitol to the National Cathedral this morning - even though it was raining. A fitting tribute to a good and decent man who deeply loved America.
The LLL and leftist media will all have huge dental bills from grinding their teeth to nubs over this.
Godspeed, Ronnie. We are a better nation, and a better world, because of you.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
06/11/2004 12:56 Comments ||
Top||
#6
My wife and I were laying in bed this morning and listening to the funeral on the radio(it is fairly early morning in Alaska when the funeral took place). This ceremony was done so well, and the eulogies were from the heart. I was really moved. When I drove into work, I saw people crying and listening to the radio. What a class act. I think that Reagan's death and ceremonies surrounding his deat were a means of reconnecting the country to itself. At least that is what I hope.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
06/11/2004 13:54 Comments ||
Top||
#7
AP: But, but...Jimmy Breslin said it was all just cheap distasteful display of American publicity.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
06/11/2004 14:15 Comments ||
Top||
#8
With all peace and love, respect, etc. Jimmy Breslin does not have what it takes to follow a class act.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
06/11/2004 14:21 Comments ||
Top||
#9
yep..the LLL is showing their true colors right now. Apologies though for getting off track..don't want to take away from the true sentiments in this thread.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
06/11/2004 14:31 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Rex, & AK Paul : Drudge has some of the "Flower of Humanity" and their signs. We have to remain above these . . .
#12
Re: The long lines to see Ronnie - they turned people away later in the wee hours. The line was so long that they would not have been able to see him until after the funeral procession started. Line was up to 9 hours long at one point!
Posted by: B ||
06/11/2004 17:46 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Watching the procession on TV now from the air base in California back to the Reagan Library for interment. The processional is going up a freeway (which has been cleared on that side); the cars on the other side have spontaneously stopped, people are out of their cars watching the processional pass by. Also stopped on overpasses - they're packed several people deep in each side. Amazing (this is a California freeway at rush hour), and fitting for this great and humble man.
The leftists (and leftist media) must be going nuts, wondering why the great unwashed don't listen to their betters, the "mainstream" media, who know how bad Reagan really was. Seethe, you jerks. Grind those teeth to nubs. (heh)
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
06/11/2004 21:04 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Estimates heard on TV:
250K in California.
over 400K in DC.
and about 100K or more lining the route home in CA tonight.
A greatful nation is showing its true appreciation for a great man.
#15
Barbara: actually, I saw the most stunning thing today, which was Bernie King on CNN admitting that they'd failed their viewers (!!!) by missing the greatness of Reagan at the time.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/11/2004 03:33 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11128 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
35 minutes. That is a long, long, long time under many circumstances. It's an eternity in what could be civilly called a "gotcha!" game. He does it (almost) every day. Amazing. No amount of money would be worth being in Boucher's shoes, IMHO.
In a speech laden with implicit criticism of President Bush and the American invasion of Iraq, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan told graduates and alumni of Harvard University yesterday that the world needs John Kerry "enlightened American leadership" and countries should not launch unilateral action to shape world events. Like the UN intervening in the Sudan? Oh, wait...
Speaking at Harvardâs graduation ceremonies, Annan did not mention Bush by name but took clear jabs at the administrationâs policy of preemptive self-defense. "What kind of world would it be, and who would want to live in it, if every country was allowed to use force without collective agreement, simply because it thought there might be a threat?" he said. Not much âthoughtâ there when every intelligence agency, as far back as 1998, was convinced Saddam had WMDâs. The concept, my addle-brained friend Koffee, is to intervene against openly belligerent states (remember those âNo-Fly Zones?) before they become a threat, ties to al-Queda notwithstanding.
Annan earned frequent applause during the speech, one of the most pointed critiques he has made of the Bush administration. Itâs the Peopleâs Republic of Cambridge, folks. Koffee could call for Bushâs assassination and the crowd would have applauded.
Annan said an international system can work only if countries accommodate different points of view and reach decisions collectively. Buit it doesnât work when countroes donât âaccommodate different points of view and reach decisions collectivelyâ, which is why Bush was going to ask for your help once, maybe twice, before deciding that this dog and pony show does nothing to prevent further terrorist attacks on our soil.
"All great American leaders have understood this," he said, as the 15,000 gathered in a damp Harvard Yard erupted in cheers and laughter. I donât think Reagan, or Truman, would have agreed. Implicit in leadership is the probability of making unpopular decisions.
He praised the United States for seeking a UN resolution endorsing Iraqâs interim government, which passed the Security Council unanimously two days ago after US officials acceded to demands from European countries. "Iâm still relevant! They like me! They really, really like me!"
Taking a longer view, he also acknowledged Americaâs financial historical support for the United Nations and allowed the audience to draw the comparison with todayâs administration. "American leaders have generally recognized that other states, big and small, prefer to cooperate on the great issues of peace and security," he said. "They have accepted that others with a different view on a specific issue may, on occasion, be right." Not on this occasion, Iâd say.
The UN head also reserved some muted criticism for his own organization, acknowledging that UN peacekeepers watched massacres in Bosnia and Rwanda in the 1990s without intervening. ...and repeating, as we speak, with respect to the Sudan.
The UN Security Council "cannot expect to be taken seriously unless it fulfils its responsibility to protect the innocent," he said. Any plans to deploy peacekeepers to the Sudan, Koffee?
Annan also said the threat of global terrorism and rogue states requires the international community to change and adapt, deciding when preemptive action is justified and how it can be taken in time to be effective. And if the âinternational communityâ decides not to take measures, are we just supposed to sit around with our thumbs up our asses waiting for your approval, Koffee? Is that your idea of leadership?
Annanâs visit had drawn protest the night before in Harvard Square, where about 100 people gathered to criticize him for failing to take action to prevent genocide in Sudan. He touched on the Sudanese situation very briefly in his speech, saying the international community must insist that Sudan allow humanitarian supplies to reach the 1 million people forced from their homes in the Darfur region, disarm the militiamen destroying villages, and help displaced people return home. And what do you do when they donât, Koffee? Are you unable to draw the oh so obvious parallel between that and Iraq?
Many of the thousands of students, parents, and alumni gathered yesterday afternoon greeted his remarks warmly, sometimes standing spontaneously to applaud in the middle of his talk. "I pledge allegiance, to the United Nations..."
"I thought it was great," said Sheena Lee, a member of the class of 2004. "He said a lot of things that needed to be said, without being rude." Not rude, perhaps, but insulting nonetheless.
Others showed their support for US policy by applauding when he mentioned the post-9/11 view that "you canât afford to wait till you are sure that someone has weapons of mass destruction." Annanâs speech came during the afternoon portion of Harvardâs elaborate commencement, which featured several ceremonies and took place under heavy security, as police searched bags and roamed the aisles in Harvard Yard. But, but, arenât you unilateral police supposed to wait until an international consensus is reached first?
The university conferred more than 6,000 degrees, nearly 1,600 to undergraduates and the rest to students from Harvardâs 10 graduate schools and continuing-education program. Some of these graduates are, indeed, in need of âcontinuing educationâ.
A light drizzle began just before the afternoon ceremony, but the sun soon peeked out. Harvard president Lawrence H. Summers joked that this was the first time in his first three years as president that the "veritas" in his commencement remarks has not been marked by the element of "humiditas." Summers spoke about reducing economic barriers to college, an issue on which he has sought to make Harvard a leader. Easy. Revoke tenure. As good a first step as any...
"The American dream is becoming more remote, as the gap between the life prospects of the children of the fortunate and the less fortunate widens," Summers said. How about dipping into that massive endowment?
Earlier this year, Summers announced a new financial aid policy, under which families that make less than $40,000 a year do not have to contribute money toward their childâs Harvard education. He described how Harvard is investing more resources, beginning this summer, to recruit students from disadvantaged backgrounds. The university will use school visits, personal phone calls, and student-to-student contacts -- the same techniques "that have worked well for us in recruiting minority students." But universities canât solve the crisis of inequality alone, he said. "The battle for Americaâs future will be won or lost in Americaâs public schools," he said. Which still sucked, last time I looked.
Posted by: Raj ||
06/11/2004 11:41:22 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11130 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It irks me that this A**hole is basically on the American tax payroll, and has the stones to use his bully pulpit to excoriate the hand that feeds him. Not to mention, most likely charged a speaker's fee in the six digits...
#2
"What kind of world would it be, and who would want to live in it, if every country was allowed to use force without collective agreement, simply because it thought there might be a threat?"
What kind of world would it be? Well, if the Allies had made pre-emptive defence their policy in 1938 or before, it would have been a world without World War II. And Kofi and his ilk still would be bitching about unilateralism and pre-emption.
Screw this idiot and all his kind. Like mjh said: US out of the UN, UN out of the US!
Posted by: Dave D. ||
06/11/2004 12:24 Comments ||
Top||
#3
"All great American leaders have understood this," he said, as the 15,000 gathered in a damp Harvard Yard erupted in cheers and laughter.
Clinton. Bosnia.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
06/11/2004 12:43 Comments ||
Top||
#4
There has been so much flatulance at the college graduations this year that it is a wonder more people haven't passed out from the noxious odors.
#5
Strange.... he did not mention the Oil-for-Palaces program (Run by the HIS OWN OFFICE) or the ongoing investigation into the bribes from Saddam to (gasp!) France, Germany, and Russia (all of whom were agaist the war..). As I recall his own son somehow benefitted as well....
The UN head also reserved some muted criticism for his own organization, acknowledging that UN peacekeepers watched massacres in Bosnia and Rwanda in the 1990s without intervening.
And Bosnia is 'heating up' again while the bluehelmets watch. And no mention of the villiages razed, men and boys murdered and women and girls being raped in western Sudan.
I assume that since Sudan was voted to the Human Rights Comission that the United Nations (and Mr. Kofi personally) approved of the Genocide which is even now going on in Sudan.
Right after they solve global warming and whirled peas.
Dozens of experts armed with a new global treaty began Thursday to plan a decades-long assault on PCBs, one of the most widespread and difficult to eradicate chemical pollutants. Billions of dollars will be spent globally "to make the world PCB-free by the year 2028" under the treaty that went into force last month, said James B. Willis, director of the chemicals unit at the U.N. Environment Program. Production of the chemicals is banned, but they are still in use in a wide array of electrical equipment, it said. Replacing the equipment and removing the pollution from the environment will take years. The most common way of disposing of them is through high-temperature incinerators, which are expensive to run, officials said. Other methods also are being developed.
PCBs are among "the most widespread of all environmental pollutants, found worldwide in air, water, soil, food and the fatty tissues of humans and animals," the agency said. They maybe, perhaps, might, could can cause health problems, including weakened immunity, and maybe, quite possibly cancer, it added. PCBs are one of several toxic chemicals covered by the treaty known as the Stockholm Convention that went into force May 17. The list of pollutants also includes DDT, dioxin and pesticides. Some 65 countries have already ratified the accord, and about 100 more have signed it. The United States is among the signers, but the Senate has yet to ratify the treaty even though President Bush has given it his strong backing.
Lookeedat: GWB learned something from Bill Clinton.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/11/2004 12:33:11 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This is a natural for the UN. Worldwide ban for years (1977 in the USA) so there will be hardly any left in use. The UN can spend a few billions, do their usual indescernable from nothing, and claim success. Removing it from teh environment is a joke. We have no choice except to wait for natural decay.
Also note this particularly weasily example of journalism - but they are still in use in a wide array of electrical equipment,. The casual reader would take this to mean PCBs are still in widesread use, which they are not.
Posted by: Phil B ||
06/11/2004 1:44 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Dozens of experts armed with a new global treaty began Thursday to plan a decades-long assault on PCBs, one of the most widespread and difficult to eradicate chemical pollutants. Billions of dollars will be spent globally "to make the world PCB-free by the year 2028" under the treaty that went into force last month, said James B. Willis, director of the chemicals unit at the U.N. Environment Program.
Sounds like a corporation made one of their protection money payments to Kofi Inc. late.
#1
This is a superb article. Here's the conclusion:
Some may think a thriving sex trade in a theocracy with clerics acting as pimps is a contradiction in a country founded and ruled by Islamic fundamentalists. In fact, this is not a contradiction. First, exploitation and repression of women are closely associated. Both exist where women, individually or collectively, are denied freedom and rights. Second, the Islamic fundamentalists in Iran are not simply conservative Muslims. Islamic fundamentalism is a political movement with a political ideology that considers women inherently inferior in intellectual and moral capacity. Fundamentalists hate women's minds and bodies. Selling women and girls for prostitution is just the dehumanizing complement to forcing women and girls to cover their bodies and hair with the veil.
In a religious dictatorship like Iran, one cannot appeal to the rule of law for justice for women and girls. Women and girls have no guarantees of freedom and rights, and no expectation of respect or dignity from the Islamic fundamentalists. Only the end of the Iranian regime will free women and girls from all the forms of slavery they suffer.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
06/11/2004 7:13 Comments ||
Top||
#4
officials of the Social Department of the Interior Ministry suggested legalizing prostitution as a way to manage it and control the spread of HIV. They proposed setting-up brothels, called "morality houses," and using the traditional religious custom of temporary marriage, in which a couple can marry for a short period of time, even an hour, to facilitate prostitution.
#5
In 2002, a BBC journalist was deported for taking photographs of prostitutes. Officials told her: "We are deporting you ⦠because you have taken pictures of prostitutes. This is not a true reflection of life in our Islamic Republic. We don't have prostitutes."
Islam-the religion of deadly contradictions and world class denial.
This article says it all. Women are pisspots in Islam, men hide under hypocrisy.
#3
I heard Brit Hume's reaction to the Clintons' closed eyes camera shots. Ever the gentleman, Brit suggested that sometimes people close their eyes when they're in deep concentration and perhaps that's what the Clinton couple were doing-pondering the import of the sermon and eulogies.
Posted by: rex ||
06/11/2004 17:32 Comments ||
Top||
#4
im cant tell but it kinda looking like lady behind them is have eyes close. you shure they not praying here?
I'm sure all of that America, the beacon of freedom and light stuff was just soooo boring to them.
Posted by: B ||
06/11/2004 17:49 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Clintons fell asleep? They need to be castigated!
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
06/11/2004 17:52 Comments ||
Top||
#8
What else would you expect from two rednecks? Only someone as grossly inappropriate and selfish as the Capitol Hillbillies would do something that damn stupid and rude. And to think, he wanted to speak!
Posted by: The Doctor ||
06/11/2004 18:04 Comments ||
Top||
#9
I think Mucky's right. Or, he could be right; you can't tell from the shot.
One bizarre Clinton moment I saw was when the choir sang a hymn I know as "Jerusalem" aka "England's Mountains Green". It was the same tune, but I don't think they were singing in English. They did a great job, and both Clintons were nodding along to the music like an uber-repressed couple at a rock concert. No one else was doing that. It was kinda weird.
#13
That doesn't look like they're asleep at all to me. Looks like they were praying or in a moment of silence. You guys are just looking for excuses to bash the clintons ;)
Posted by: Darth VAda ||
06/11/2004 18:54 Comments ||
Top||
#16
"Clintons fell asleep? They need to be castigated!"
Well, that's a rather excessive punishment for snoozing at a funeral, IMHO; though I can sure imagine Monica Lewinsky's father must've wanted to castigate Bill with a pair of rusty scissors.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
06/11/2004 19:09 Comments ||
Top||
#19
Sorry guys, I don't buy it. Especially not on the evidence of a single video frame. The woman behind the Clintons appears to have her eyes closed. Hillary has her hands folded in her lap. Bill's hands are just out of the frame. Same as the eyes of the man behind them. Useful bits of evidence that 'just happen' to be excluded? Hmmm.
Sure Clinton bashing is fun but this looks to me like a moment of silence.
#20
The jury's out on Clinton (I didn't watch him), but Hillary definitely had her head tilted to the side in *boing*-sleep-off mode ...
Posted by: Edward Yee ||
06/11/2004 20:06 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Say what you will about his integrity and backbone; Clinton is a superb politician. I can't imagine someone so conscious of his image snoozing at a state occasion when the cameras are out. Prayer or moment of silence . . . (And I'd bet he has an inconspicuous way of waking Hillary if she falls asleep.)
Posted by: James ||
06/11/2004 20:26 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Hey Doc.
Rednecks? We don't claim them. We have too much self respect. I think you mean white trash. Please get your definitions straight.
#25
Hmm ... the crowd at Reagan's burial just laughed, but for a good reason -- Patti Davis just recounted how when heaven was described for her (Ronald had just eulogized her pet goldfish), she'd suggested that they kill the other goldfish so they could go there too.
Posted by: Edward Yee ||
06/11/2004 22:14 Comments ||
Top||
#26
It somehow seems fitting that someone should doze off on a session memorializing Reagan. Kind of like a Cabinet meeting.
[I mean that in a friendly way. I voted for him twice and would have done it a third time.]
What kind of coverage is his funeral getting in Europe? Have they covered the people standing in line for hours to pass by his casket and pay their respects, and lining the streets in the rain as his motorcade passed by? Or just the talking heads whining about his getting so much coverage, and the worthless "demonstrators"?
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
06/11/2004 22:37 Comments ||
Top||
#29
Yes coverage has been rather balanced, although I'm watching CNN now to get live coverage.
#30
TGA, we really appreciated Gerhard Schoeder's show of respect to Reagan by coming to the Reagan service--Veillen Danke!
Don't know if you saw the final service for President Reagan at the Reagan Library in California, but they held a service outside near their burial crypt and right there was a big chunk of the old Berlin Wall--what a wonderful tribute and nice to look back and see that Germany is united and free!
Posted by: Jen ||
06/12/2004 0:04 Comments ||
Top||
#31
Yes Jen, when the sun set in California it rose in Germany.
It was a very moving, beautiful, decent and astonishingly uplifting burial.
I was just comparing it to the three Soviet funerals in the early 80s. What a difference!
#32
If you want to compare funerals, compare Sen. Paul Wellstone's funeral and the resulting rhetoric to President Reagan's funeral. Your head will spin!
Posted by: Dar ||
06/12/2004 1:43 Comments ||
Top||
#33
Even my ultra-lib friend Harvey admits that the Wellstone memorial service "was a disgrace." It is an astonishing contrast.
#34
i watched it while it was happening, he was snoozin'! i was so embarrassed! this pick may be during a prayer, because i see other closed eyes. but he DID, in fact nod a little. i have nothing against bill, so i have no reason to lie. i'm just infuriated about this...HOW RUDE!!
In his lifetime Ronald Reagan was such a cheerful and invigorating presence that it was easy to forget what daunting historic tasks he set himself. He sought to mend Americaâs wounded spirit, to restore the strength of the free world, and to free the slaves of communism.
These were causes hard to accomplish and heavy with risk. Yet they were pursued with almost a lightness of spirit. For Ronald Reagan also embodied another great cause - what Arnold Bennett once called "the great cause of cheering us all up." . . .
. . . it is hard to deny that Ronald Reaganâs life was providential, when we look at what he achieved in the eight years that followed [his election].
Others prophesied the decline of the West; he inspired America and its allies with renewed faith in their mission of freedom.
Others saw only limits to growth; he transformed a stagnant economy into an engine of opportunity.
Others hoped, at best, for an uneasy cohabitation with the Soviet Union; he won the Cold War - not only without firing a shot, but also by inviting enemies out of their fortress and turning them into friends. . . .
Ronald Reagan carried the American people with him in his great endeavours because there was perfect sympathy between them. He and they loved America and what it stands for - freedom and opportunity for ordinary people.
As an actor in Hollywoodâs golden age, he helped to make the American dream live for millions all over the globe. His own life was a fulfilment of that dream.
He never succumbed to the embarrassment some people feel about an honest expression of love of country.
He was able to say "God Bless America" with equal fervour in public and in private. And so he was able to call confidently upon his fellow-countrymen to make sacrifices for America - and to make sacrifices for those who looked to America for hope and rescue.
With the lever of American patriotism, he lifted up the world.
And so today the world - in Prague, in Budapest, in Warsaw, in Sofia, in Bucharest, in Kiev and in Moscow itself - the world mourns the passing of the Great Liberator and echoes his prayer "God Bless America."
She got it absolutely right: Ronald Reagan, the Great Liberator.
Posted by: Mike ||
06/11/2004 4:46:37 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11128 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Moving and powerful, but not as much as Bush's. I wonder if this was written for her, or if she did it herself ahead of time (not for any particular reason other than curiosity; it was very well-done).
Posted by: The Doctor ||
06/11/2004 18:07 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"And so today the world - in Prague, in Budapest, in Warsaw, in Sofia, in Bucharest, in Kiev and in Moscow itself - the world mourns the passing of the Great Liberator and echoes his prayer 'God Bless America'."
#4
This was one of the most truly awesome speeches and tributes that I've heard in my life.
God bless you Dame Thatcher and God bless "the special relationship!"
#5
Baroness Margaret Thatcher and President Ronald Reagan were the team of two which defeated an evil empire leftists overtly assisted during the late 1940's, all of the 1950's 1960's and through the 70's & 80's by their inaction.
The 'liberal' Left ('progressives', buzz word for communists) hate the fact the USSR and Soviet Bloc could not counter the conservative duel of Lady Thatcher & President Regan's persistence to set millions free from Soviet 'socialism's iron claw of death.
Note how much liberalism has suffered this week alone with the majority of the American people rallying to give tribute to President Reagan, and Ronald Reagan the actor, with over 53 movies to his credit, coupled with scores of TV & radio shows.
The public as spoken for the Great Liberator!
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
06/11/2004 19:03 Comments ||
Top||
From the White House website; EFL.
Go read it all.
When the sun sets tonight off the coast of California, and we lay to rest our 40th President, a great American story will close. . . .
. . . Ronald Reagan believed that everything happened for a reason, and that we should strive to know and do the will of God. He believed that the gentleman always does the kindest thing. He believed that people were basically good, and had the right to be free. He believed that bigotry and prejudice were the worst things a person could be guilty of. He believed in the Golden Rule and in the power of prayer. He believed that America was not just a place in the world, but the hope of the world.
And he believed in taking a break now and then, because, as he said, thereâs nothing better for the inside of a man than the outside of a horse.
Ronald Reagan spent decades in the film industry and in politics, fields known, on occasion, to change a man. But not this man. From Dixon to Des Moines, to Hollywood to Sacramento, to Washington, D.C., all who met him remembered the same sincere, honest, upright fellow. Ronald Reaganâs deepest beliefs never had much to do with fashion or convenience. His convictions were always politely stated, affably argued, and as firm and straight as the columns of this cathedral.
Ronald Reaganâs moment arrived in 1980. He came out ahead of some very good men, including one from Plains, and one from Houston. What followed was one of the decisive decades of the century, as the convictions that shaped the President began to shape the times.
He came to office with great hopes for America, and more than hopes -- like the President he had revered and once saw in person, Franklin Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan matched an optimistic temperament with bold, persistent action. President Reagan was optimistic about the great promise of economic reform, and he acted to restore the reward and spirit of enterprise. He was optimistic that a strong America could advance the peace, and he acted to build the strength that mission required. He was optimistic that liberty would thrive wherever it was planted, and he acted to defend liberty wherever it was threatened.
And Ronald Reagan believed in the power of truth in the conduct of world affairs. When he saw evil camped across the horizon, he called that evil by its name. There were no doubters in the prisons and gulags, where dissidents spread the news, tapping to each other in code what the American President had dared to say. There were no doubters in the shipyards and churches and secret labor meetings, where brave men and women began to hear the creaking and rumbling of a collapsing empire. And there were no doubters among those who swung hammers at the hated wall as the first and hardest blow had been struck by President Ronald Reagan.
The ideology he opposed throughout his political life insisted that history was moved by impersonal ties and unalterable fates. Ronald Reagan believed instead in the courage and triumph of free men. And we believe it, all the more, because we saw that courage in him.
As he showed what a President should be, he also showed us what a man should be. Ronald Reagan carried himself, even in the most powerful office, with a decency and attention to small kindnesses that also defined a good life. He was a courtly, gentle and considerate man, never known to slight or embarrass others. Many people across the country cherish letters he wrote in his own hand -- to family members on important occasions; to old friends dealing with sickness and loss; to strangers with questions about his days in Hollywood.
A boy once wrote to him requesting federal assistance to help clean up his bedroom. (Laughter.) The President replied that, "unfortunately, funds are dangerously low." (Laughter.) He continued, "Iâm sure your mother was fully justified in proclaiming your room a disaster. Therefore, you are in an excellent position to launch another volunteer program in our nation. Congratulations." (Laughter.)
Posted by: Mike ||
06/11/2004 4:39:35 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11128 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I thought the 'moronic' and 'incompetent' President gave a great speech.
It's so funny that with a few strategic soundbites from the past, the LLL and their media paint him into a corner. I hope that GWB will be at least half as successful as Ronnie in defeating his foes and stumping his critics.
This guy gets it. And I think he gave a great eulogy for our 40th President.
(And I found it funny to see the different people nodding off.)
#2
A beautiful speech. Absolutely wonderful. I'd like to insult those who fell asleep, but I also feel sorry for them, for what they missed, both in what the word respect means and for the words they didn't hear.
Posted by: The Doctor ||
06/11/2004 18:00 Comments ||
Top||
#3
And Ronald Reagan believed in the power of truth in the conduct of world affairs. When he saw evil camped across the horizon, he called that evil by its name. There were no doubters in the prisons and gulags, where dissidents spread the news, tapping to each other in code what the American President had dared to say. There were no doubters in the shipyards and churches and secret labor meetings, where brave men and women began to hear the creaking and rumbling of a collapsing empire. And there were no doubters among those who swung hammers at the hated wall as the first and hardest blow had been struck by President Ronald Reagan.
#5
The story about the kid with the messy room was hysterical. I expect it will become like the host of Lincoln stories that have lived on for almost a century and a half.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/11/2004 22:25 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Fred ||
06/11/2004 16:01 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I had a $3 bill once. Actually, it was a "TWE" dollar bill, given away by some salesguy at a car dealership as some sort of promotion. On the front of the "bill" the picture was of the dealership's owner, the Treasurer of the U.S. was signed, "A. Phoneybill", and the Secretary of the Treasury was "U. Cantcashit".
Posted by: Jimmy Breslin ||
06/11/2004 18:27 Comments ||
Top||
#3
His comment about "containment" was idiotic. Was Breslin one of the ones calling Reagan an idiot way back when for suggesting that we _try_ to contain the Soviets instead of just wishing they'll go away?
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
06/11/2004 23:01 Comments ||
Top||
Via NewsMax, so you know itâs true... :-)
Newsdayâs Breslin: Reagan Funeral âCheap, Utterly Distastefulâ Isnât Breslin, like, 200 years old by now?
Americaâs largest circulation suburban daily newspaper, Newsday, wins the prize (for which there are many nominations - Ed.) for the ugliest bit of Reagan-bashing on the day of the great manâs funeral, publishing a bile-filled screed by columnist Jimmy Breslin that trashed the American icon as "a callous man" who "hated children." Cutting federal programs = "hated children". This is what passes for logic with the LLL nowadays; sad if it werenât so pathetic.
Oh, there's a certain logic to it allright, but I wouldn't want to claim it.
"I donât see how anybody can summon grief [over Reaganâs death]," Breslin observed. "His whole weeklong funeral is cheap, utterly distasteful American publicity." As opposed to the thoughtful, eloquent expressions of this column...
The Reagan-bashing writer usually inhabits Newsdayâs editorial section. But in a remarkably bizarre editorial decision, Newsday decided to move up Breslinâs hate-screed to page A8, in the midst of its news section, right behind a page headlined "Paying Respects to Ronald Reagan." Tag team effort. How charming...
Newsdayâs Breslin tribute to Reagan continued thusly: "He was a callous man with a smile who cut taxes in 1981 and left [New York] city and state without funds for such things as help for dependent children. How about funds from the parents?
Come now, they were being oppressed by The Man.
He proudly hurt the boroughs of this city more than anyone before or after him. If you live in Brooklyn, the record shows that Ronald Reagan hated children." Acutally, Reaganâs economic policies were a boon for New York - both city and state. Back at ya, asswipe!
"Before the Gipper came along, New York, the city, was an economic disaster area," noted New York Post columnist Robert Ward on Friday." But during his tenure, "Wall Street boomed, and thus, so did city and state revenues." As Paul Harvey would say, âthe rest of the storyâ.
New York City added 254,000 jobs and hundreds of thousands of new residents, Ward noted. Their taxes helped fund the war on crime, rebuild infrastructure and minister to thousands afflicted with AIDs. Kinda forgot about state and local governments, Jimmy? Oh, those were run by DemocRATS, never mind...
Most of which, apparently, went unnoticed by Breslin, who proclaimed that a suitable memorial for Reagan would be to put his face on a $3 bill. Not unnoticed, more like conveniently ignored. Since when did the LLL let facts get in the way of a chance to piss on someoneâs grave?
Newsdayâs editors liked the idea so much they used it to headline his column.
#2
What can anyone say about a second-rate has-been with no future and a past littered with invective and failure/blame pieces? Does anyone actually read this diseased drunk with a hole where his brain should be? Whatever he's paid, it must be considered charity. Such an inconsequential wannabe surviving on a diet of bitter envy of substance and relevance should be in a home for the utterly deranged. Newsday, huh? Well, perhaps he already is.
#3
So what is Breslin's excuse? Did his mom lock him in a closet when he was 5, and forget about him?
If you live in Brooklyn, the record shows that Ronald Reagan hated children."
I guess Breslin's editor removed the reference to the President hating puppies, kittens, and little bunny rabbits, because that would have been over the top. . .
Note : In the funeral we heard about Reagan feeding the squirrels on the white house lawn peanuts. Breslin doesn't want to reference that either. Goes against his psychotic thoerem.
#7
Once upon a time, Breslin did a story about me and my family. I was just about to graduate from college at a very early age. As we found out the next day, he had contempt for us all, and we returned the sentiment. But he had the newspaper, and there were no blogs in 1977.
And, distasteful? Has anyone seen a more dignified observance in recent memory?
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
06/11/2004 16:50 Comments ||
Top||
The U.N. Security Council decided Thursday that peace in Liberia was still too fragile to lift sanctions but acknowledged progress by the West African country toward meeting conditions to end timber and diamond embargoes.
They did, however, comtemplate establishing a "Diamonds for Food" program. The French were enthusiastic in support.
Liberia's interim leader, Gyude Bryant, had appealed to the council last week to lift the sanctions, saying his government desperately needed revenues from these major exports to maintain stability. The council noted that no major violations of the arms embargo and diamond and timber sanctions had been reported since former warlord and president Charles Taylor fled into exile in August 2003.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/11/2004 12:38:20 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
Striking workers and police have clashed in Nigeriaâs capital, Abuja, after a second day of a national stoppage, the BBC reported Thursday. Tempers flared outside a trade union headquarters, with eyewitnesses saying two people were injured. A court ordered the unions to halt their strike, but also ordered the government to reverse recent gas price increases. But union leaders say the strike will continue until at least 50 percent of gas stations have reversed the price climb. Prices are reportedly beginning to roll back in Abuja and in the commercial capital, Lagos. Yet the strike was still being widely observed, with many gas stations, banks and offices closed. The BBC said there appeared to be more traffic on the roads Thursday than on the previous day. Though widely observed in the city, the response to the strike has reportedly been less evident in other parts of the country.
Keep an eye out for Soddy money behind the unrest...
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
06/11/2004 12:06:45 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11126 views]
Top|| File under:
Really long for here, but hit the link for the article.
This article, written by an immigration lawyer for FOX News, addresses a subject dear to my heart and to our nationâs security and sovereignity. Before I get flamed for being racist, my parents were immigrants but they did it legally. They instilled a pride and respect in their children for the citizenship they earned by their hard work and sacrifices on behalf of the Promised Land. They recâd no govât welfare nor any advice from the likes of the ACLU. Thatâs how immigrants should view America - with respect and with gratitude. Er...sorry for the pontification, but I suspect many of you are 3rd or 4th generation Americans and you take your citizenship for granted.
Posted by: rex ||
06/11/2004 12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11128 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ketsup,not salsa is still the condiment of choice,right ?
#2
Actually, #1, the source country of immigrants is not as big a deal to me as much as there be an identified need in our country that immigrants fullfill - this idiotic "family reunification" as a priority reason for immigration that Drunken Teddy pushed through in 1965 needs to be deep-sixed. We don't have room or the resources for the extended family members of Sultana or Pedro ages 2-82. As well as what our country needs in terms of fulllfilling employment gaps, I strongly believe that immigration be conducted in an orderly efficient legal fashion. Right now there's a huge migratory movement going on in the world and we cannot take in every poor person who washes up on our shores. The EU has really clamped down on immigration, even going so far as paying off poor nations to take back their indigent peoples who fled to greener pastures. If the West takes every immigrant who sneaks across the border, the Third World will never get better. No one stays around to make things better. Also, in this age of deadly disease like Ebola we need to scrutinize potential immigrants for health issues very carefully. It's our nation's right. Also, we can no longer allow the Human Rights Commission of the UN determine our national identity 20 years from now by sluffing off X number of thousands of refugees on the West each year, no questions asked. There I've said my piece. The article is good by the way, and it speaks to how the GOP have strayed so far away from Reagan's beliefs. If you think Reagan is a hero, then you should be on top of what the current Rinos are doing. The Demoicrats have not changed much from Reagan's day, but the GOP have.
Posted by: rex ||
06/11/2004 3:14 Comments ||
Top||
#3
this idiotic "family reunification" as a priority reason for immigration that Drunken Teddy pushed through in 1965 needs to be deep-sixed
I agree. Unfortunately, though, it's not on the political agenda at all.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
06/11/2004 7:05 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Back in '91-'92 I was working in Cambridge, Massachusetts (I got thrown out of the MIT bar which is another story) and I met a very nice lady who was trying to get a job in a department store. They wouldn't hire her because she couldn't speak Spanish. Where was the ACLU? She wasn't a deprived minority, only a WASC so "tough luck". Now here in East Tennessee there are a lot of Mexicans and Vietnamese. The Mexicans are hard workersand for the most part good people who are here recently. The Vietnamese have been here for a long time. Neither groop speaks English but the schools here are still supposed to teach the children. In the case of the Mexicans, the children are learning English. The Vietnamese are not so the Feds have decided the school system must hire teachers who can speak Vietnamese. This has put quite a burden on these small county school systems. These Vietnamese children are grandchildren of people who came here right after the Vietnam debacle and have never been taught English. They are at a very big disadvantage now and unless they learn English will be at an even gretaer disadvantage later. This multi-cultural system just doesn't work.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
06/11/2004 7:56 Comments ||
Top||
#5
This article is not about immigration but illegal immigration and giving these lawbreakers amnesty - and take a good hearty power-shit on the millions of law-abiding people who are patiently waiting their turn to immigrate LEGALLY.
I have a big problem with this. First they will have no respect for their citizenshp or residency since they did not have to 'earn' it. Second it is a big farking hole in our national security (That should worry some people but apparently it doesn't....) and third it has a huge impact on local economies -- Just look at how much California and Texas are spending on medical and education for illegals.
Did you know that to sponsor a 'legal' you need to sign an 'Affadavit of Support' saying that you will support that person for a certain period of time (I think it is 10 years or so)? Illegal aliens get free medical and education care while LEGAL aliens, and their sponsors, have to pay for their own as well as the Illegal's.
Finally, as I mentioned, there is an established, legal, process for immigration which controls the flow (and you *want* to do that), performs background checks, and does not favor those who are dishonest and violate federal law. Granting amnesty will remove all incentive for people to follow the 'legal' path since they can get it much easier and faster (and cheaper) by being illegal.
#6
This was the issue that Bush lost my vote on-no rule of law here, just placating a constituency. If we think long-term, a continuance of this hands-off, PC approach will be disastrous for our country. This is not only a work question; it is a question of demographics. A country's laws are created from the beliefs of its citizens. To imagine that unchecked and ethnically imbalanced immigration will have no impact on the character of the US is just silliness. Yes, we welcome people from every part of the world, but the chest of charity is not bottomless, the capacity to absorb immigrants is not limitless, and no one ethnic group should be favored over any other if we are to stay a truly free nation of hope and opportunity.
#7
Thank you, #5, for getting the discussion back on track- indeed,the article addressed illegal immigration. I'm not sure if any of you have read:
a) Winter, 2004 City Journal article by Heather McDonald[neocon]entitled "The Illegal-Alien Crime Wave" It's long and packed with statistics and it will make your hair stand on end. If you can't read it now, bookmark the url for later. http://www.city-journal.org/html/14_1_the_illegal_alien.html
b) also, a short piece in the Washington Times that ties the burden of un-reimbursed health care costs to illegal immigration http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040225-112041-3958r.htm"Report ties health care struggles to immigration" ...in some hospitals, as much as two-thirds of total operating costs are for uncompensated care for illegal aliens...hospitals near the U.S.-Mexican border reported losses of almost $190 million in unreimbursed costs for treating illegal aliens in 2000, with an additional $113 million in ambulance fees and follow-up services; and that the increase in uncompensated care for immigrants has forced some hospitals to reduce staff, increase rates, cut back services and close maternity wards and trauma centers...
Posted by: rex ||
06/11/2004 11:11 Comments ||
Top||
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.