#2
..My friends/family back home say that there is very quiet resentment - especially among the blue collar ethnic neghborhoods of Cleveland - towards Al-Guardian's jihad.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
10/19/2004 14:10 Comments ||
Top||
#3
In Cleveland? Now that's good news - as it's Dhimmidick country. Thx, MK!
#4
Prof. Dawkins doesn't get it.
In this country, Tony Martin wouldn't be charged with a crime. And it would be a long time before he was charged for a drink.
Posted by: Richard Aubrey ||
10/19/2004 14:37 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Spot on, Richard!
I'd sure as hell buy him one or several.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/19/2004 14:57 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Since I lived in the UK when Martin did his deed I can attest to the British press, especially the left wing sector, getting their knickers tied up in knots over his actions. In fact, they painted him the agressor and the thieving petty criminals (one a young guy - the dead one)as the victims. It is this kind of LLL mentality nurtured by the leftwing press of socialist UK that makes their understanding of America, Ohio, Clark County and 2nd amendment rights so pathetically wrong. I will never understand the British class system but I have seen it at work everyday and it is alive and well. Do I go around writing letters and standing on a ladder in Hyde Park denouncing it. Hell no. It not my business, nor was the vote on fox hunting, privitizing hospitals, Railtrack or any other UK political issue. It is up to them to solve their own problems. We can give advice when asked, technology when required and services when needed. I don't think this is going well with theh majority of the UK public only the noisy nannies of promoted socialism.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
10/19/2004 15:06 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Good grief!, I didn't realise they'd brought Tony Martin into their letter. Bloody idiots (but I'm very pleased that they did!), this may have given Cook County to Bush.
So, do we think Bush is going to make it? I'm certainly hoping so.
As an aside, a lot of people are fed up of the nanny state here (and *royally* pissed off with the friggin' EU!), so I'm still hopeful we'll get ourselves sorted out...
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
10/19/2004 15:15 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Hell, here in Texas Tony Martin would have the thanks of a greatful constabulary for reducing the quantity of a--hole thieves they have to deal with regularly.
And Prof. Dawkins may think it teddibly, teddibly uncivilized...but the odd thing is... home invasion is a pretty rare crime around here
#10
Here's Steyn's Tony Martin quote: The reason is advice like this, from Guardian reader Richard Dawkins, Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University. Dawkins begins his missive to the Clark County swing voter with a little light Bushophobia: "An idiot he may be, but he is also sly, mendacious and vindictive... thuggish ideologues. pariah state. brazenly lying. cynical mendacity" yada-yada. But then he goes on: "Now that all other justifications for the war are known to be lies, the warmongers are thrown back on one, endlessly repeated: the world is a better place without Saddam. No doubt it is. But that's the Tony Martin school of foreign policy."
At this point, the Guardian's editors intervene with an explanatory parenthesis: "[Martin was a householder who shot dead a burglar who had broken into his house in 1999]." And then Dawkins continues: "It's not how civilised countries, who follow the rule of law, behave. The world would be a better place without George Bush, but that doesn't justify an assassination attempt."
You just blew it big-time in Clark County, prof. Voters may be divided on Bush and on the Iraq war but, in the American heartland, they're generally agreed on a homeowner's right to take out a burglar.
Posted by: Steve ||
10/19/2004 15:55 Comments ||
Top||
This may have been a typo, or it may not. For Bush to win Crook County (IL)is still a long shot at best, but I don't anticipate the votes coming in from Chicago as furiously for this present JFK as they did for the original JFK.
Reaons?
1) Hizzoner Da Mayer, Richard M. Daley was pretty pissed off when Kerry blew off the mayor's convention due to the presence of a picket line. (Something that didn't bother him the other day in Orlando, incidentally.)
2) Daley doesn't want to get on Bush's bad side since the mayor badly wants O'Hare expansion to go through.
Daley will be lukewarm (at best) for Kerry while decidedly not attacking Bush.
Personally, I figure Cleveland will go for Kerry -- especially considering the 1,000 fraudulent registrations they've found there.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
10/19/2004 17:02 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Could someone send some YOBS around to see Professor Dickless Dawkins. I may not be well spoken but I have had it with UK assclowns who think it's OK to bash my counrty. I defy any one to find any mainstream paper in the US that has the nerve to attack the UK, it's leadership or government let alone the temerity to attack Britain.
For those who aren't subscribers, I present it unedited. John Kerry may or may not have been quoted correctly (he says not) in an Oct. 10 New York Times Magazine article in which he envisioned reducing terrorism to a mere "nuisance" level. But if author Matt Bai got it anywhere near right, as seems likely, the comment implies that the senator still doesn't understand why the U.S. is at war. Or maybe he did understand but has forgotten.
"Nuisances," like muggings and prostitution, can be managed by cops. Foreign countries harboring and sponsoring terrorists have to be subdued with armies to root out the terrorists before they can strike. Even the most limited effort, say, a lone fanatic uncorking a poison-gas canister in a crowded railway terminal or sports arena, could hardly be described as a "nuisance."
Most Americans clearly understood after 9/11 the need to go after terrorists where they live before they can get to that train station or arena. President George W. Bush set about to do just that in 2001 with the full support of Congress. Sen. Kerry fully approved before reverting to the pacifist mindset that has guided his career.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: trailing wife ||
10/19/2004 8:02:19 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11132 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
the terrorists who pulled off the 9/11 attacks had earlier taken a great interest in the art of flying crop-duster airplanes. What could that have been all about?
Precisely read, this is not true. The US Government no longer alleges that any of the 9/11 hijackers expressed any interest in crop-duster airplanes.
Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 20th hijacker, collected information about crop-dusters.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/19/2004 8:52 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Classic photo here:
Kerry caught picking his nose...well almost...he can't decide which side.
#3
That's even worse. At least we know Mohamed Atta is dead. According to the link, it was another Arab trying to get a gov loan to buy a cropduster. The same man that the gov employee said threatened to cut off her head when the load was refused. In addition, 'a group of 12-15 "arab- looking" men who had visited the airport and asked about crop-dusters' are still out there and their identities and motives are unknown. We do know that the first anthrax attacks started in Florida. Were the perpetrators colleagues of Atta?
Posted by: ed ||
10/19/2004 9:04 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Re #3 (Ed): According to the link, it was another Arab trying to get a gov loan to buy a cropduster. The same man that the gov employee said threatened to cut off her head when the load was refused.
The gov employee, Johnell Bryant, is a fabricator. Neither Atta nor the other man came to see here about a crop-duster. She fabricated the entire story from beginning to end.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/19/2004 9:47 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Mike,
Looked at your link and can accept what it says. When these conflicts in dates became apparent after the FBI re- interviewed the two witnesses, the Department of Justice decided to drop the terror crop-dusters from its case. On June 25 2002, it replaced the previous indictment with a new one that omitted the claim that "Mohammed Atta made inquiries regarding starting a crop dusting company," any other references to"crop dusting" encounters by anyone alleged to be part of the conspiracy.
So which of these are true?
1. Bryant/Lester were lying.
2. FBI did not find them believable.
3. Stories did not have corroboration and could not be proven in court.
Do you have more info (e.g. they recanted).
Posted by: ed ||
10/19/2004 10:44 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Re: #5 (Ed)
I don't know or remember what the problems were with Lester's story. As I recall, he didn't specifically identify any of his Arab visitors. They were just some Arabs. I'm not sure about that, though. I'll have to review that story.
As for Bryant, her story was simply not believable for several reasons. The first reason is that Atta was not in the USA yet. The main reason is that her entire story is absurd.
When I read the transcript of her TV interview the first time, I believed her. When absurdities were pointed out to me and then I reread the transcript, I clearly recognized the absurdities. Her story is obviously imaginary.
By the way, I think that that Al Qaeda very probably has intended to attack the USA with chemical weapons and has considered the use of crop-dusters. That's probably why Moussaoui was collecting information about them. There's no good evidence (Lester aside), though, that any of the 9/11 hijackers (Moussaoui aside) collected information about crop-dusters.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/19/2004 21:45 Comments ||
Top||
#9
As for Bryant, her story was simply not believable for several reasons
please provide evidence. I'll be back to check at 2300 zulu time. Would appreciate references, footnotes, bookmarks and highlighting of relevant points. Neatness counts
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/19/2004 21:50 Comments ||
Top||
#10
2300Z, Frank, is already passed. It is almost 0200Z. Mah mah mah, how tahm flahs......heh heh.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
10/19/2004 21:53 Comments ||
Top||
#11
I didn't say today..heh heh - I can hedge as well as Mr. S
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/19/2004 22:09 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.
John Kerry may or may not have been quoted correctly (he says not) in an Oct. 10 New York Times Magazine article in which he envisioned reducing terrorism to a mere "nuisance" level. But if author Matt Bai got it anywhere near right, as seems likely, the comment implies that the senator still doesn't understand why the U.S. is at war. Or maybe he did understand but has forgotten.
