From Thursday's New York Times: "Nalchik, Russia -- Insurgents launched a series of raids today in this southern Russian city, striking the area's main airport and several police and security buildings in large-scale, daytime attacks that left at least 85 people dead."
"Insurgents," eh?
From Agence France Presse:
"Nalchik, Russia: More than 60 people were killed as scores of militants launched simultaneous attacks on police and government buildings . . ."
"Militants," you say?
From the Scotsman:
"Rebel forces battled Russian troops for control of a provincial capital in the Caucasus yesterday . . ."
"Rebel forces,'' huh?
From Toronto's Globe & Mail:
"Nalchik, Russia -- Scores of rebels launched simultaneous attacks on police and government buildings . . ."
"Rebels," by the score. But why were they rebelling? What were they insurging over? You had to pick up the Globe & Mail's rival, the Toronto Star, to read exactly the same Associated Press dispatch but with one subtle difference:
"Nalchik, Russia -- Scores of Islamic militants launched simultaneous attacks on police and government buildings . . ."
Ah, "Islamic militants." So that's what the rebels were insurging over. In the geopolitical Hogwart's, Islamic "militants" are the new Voldemort, the enemy whose name it's best never to utter. In fairness to the New York Times, they did use the I-word in paragraph seven. And Agence France Presse got around to mentioning Islam in paragraph 22. And NPR's "All Things Considered" had one of those bland interviews between one of its unperturbable anchorettes and some Russian geopolitical academic type in which they chitchatted through every conceivable aspect of the situation and finally got around to kinda sorta revealing the identity of the perpetrators in the very last word of the geopolitical expert's very last sentence.
When the NPR report started, I was driving on the vast open plains of I-91 in Vermont and reckoned, just to make things interesting, I'll add another five miles to the speed for every minute that goes by without mentioning Islam. But I couldn't get the needle to go above 130, and the vibrations caused the passenger-side wing-mirror to drop off. And then, right at the end, having conducted a perfect interview that managed to go into great depth about everything except who these guys were and what they were fighting over, the Russian academic dude had to go and spoil it all by saying somethin' stupid like "republics which are mostly . . . Muslim." He mumbled the last word, but nevertheless the NPR gal leapt in to thank him and move smoothly on to some poll showing that the Dems are going to sweep the 2006 midterms because Bush has the worst numbers since numbers were invented.
I underestimated multiculturalism. After 9/11, I assumed the internal contradictions of the rainbow coalition would be made plain: that a cult of "tolerance" would in the end founder against a demographic so cheerfully upfront in their intolerance. Instead, Islamic "militants" have become the highest repository of multicultural pieties. So you're nice about gays and Native Americans? Big deal. Anyone can be tolerant of the tolerant, but tolerance of intolerance gives an even more intense frisson of pleasure to the multiculti- masochists. And so Islamists who murder non-Muslims in pursuit of explicitly Islamic goals are airbrushed into vague, generic "rebel forces." You can't tell the players without a scorecard, and that's just the way the Western media intend to keep it. If you wake up one morning and switch on the TV to see the Empire State Building crumbling to dust, don't be surprised if the announcer goes, "Insurging rebel militant forces today attacked key targets in New York. In other news, the president's annual Ramadan banquet saw celebrities dancing into the small hours to Mullah Omar And His All-Girl Orchestra . . ."
What happened in Russia on Thursday was serious business, not just in the death toll but in the number of key government installations that the alleged insurging rebel militants of non-specific ideology managed to seize with relative ease. The militantly rebellious insurgers of no known religious affiliation have long said they want a pan-Caucasian Islamic state from the Black Sea to the Caspian Sea, and the carnage they wreaked in the hitherto semi-safe-ish republic of Kabardino-Balkaria suggests that they're more likely to spread the conflict to other parts of the Russian Federation than Moscow is to contain it.
Did you see that news item in Stavropolsky Meridian last October? "Strontium, Uranium And Plutonium Found In Train To Caucasus." When a region already regarded as a Bud's Discount Warehouse for nuclear materials is getting sucked deeper into the maw of Islamism, why be so sheepish about letting us know the forces at play?
The Russians couldn't hold on to Eastern Europe. They couldn't hold on to Central Asia. Why would they fare any better with the present so-called Russian "Federation"? The country is literally dying. It's had a net population loss every year since 1992, one of the lowest fertility rates in the world -- 1.2 children born per woman -- and one of the highest abortion rates: some 70 percent of pregnancies are terminated. Russian men now have a lower life expectancy than Bangladeshis -- not because Bangladesh is brimming with actuarial advantages but because, if he had four legs and hung from a tree in a rain forest, the Russian male would be on the endangered species list.
Yet, within their present territory, there remain a few exceptions to the grim statistics cited above, parts of Russia that retain healthy fertility rates and healthy mortality rates. And guess what? They're the Muslim parts. Or, as the New York Times/NPR/Agence France Presse/Scotsman/Toronto Globe & Mail would say, they're the insurgent rebel militant parts. Many of these Russian Muslim areas -- like Bashkortistan (and no, I didn't make that up, it's a real stan. Check it out in the World Book Of Stans) -- are also rich in natural resources.
If you're an energy-rich Muslim republic, what's the point of going down the express garbage chute of history with the Russian Federation? The Islamification of significant parts of present-day Russia is going to be a critical factor in its death spiral.
I'm aware the very concept of "the enemy" is alien to the non-judgment multicultural mind: There are no enemies, just friends whose grievances we haven't yet accommodated. But the media's sensitivity police apparently want this to be the first war we lose without even knowing who it is we've lost to. C'mon, guys, next time something happens in the Caucasus, why not blame the "Caucasians"? At least that way, we'll figure it must have been right-wing buddies of Timothy McVeigh.
Three line summary:
I am against the McCain Amendment!
I will only support Republicans with my dollars who vote against it.
I request our Republican senators strip amendment 1977 from the defense budget bill!
The Divided House: What happened to the Commander in Chief's authority to prosecute the GWOT?
S.AMDT.1977 to H.R. 2863 (Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2006 )
Sponsor: Sen McCain, John [AZ] (submitted 10/3/2005) (proposed 10/5/2005)
AMENDMENT PURPOSE:
Relating to persons under the detention, custody, or control of the United States Government.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S10908-10909
10/5/2005:
Amendment SA 1977 proposed by Senator McCain. (consideration: CR S11061-11072, S1114; text: CR S11062)
Amendment SA 1977 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 90 - 9. Record Vote Number: 249.
COSPONSORS(11):
8 so-called Republicans (including sponsor John McCain)
Graham, Lindsey [R-SC] - 10/3/2005
Hagel, Chuck [R-NE] - 10/3/2005
Smith, Gordon H. [R-OR] - 10/3/2005
Collins, Susan M. [R-ME] - 10/3/2005
Alexander, Lamar [R-TN] - 10/5/2005
Warner, John [R-VA] - 10/5/2005
Chafee, Lincoln [R-RI] - 10/5/2005
4 Democrats
Durbin, Richard [D-IL] - 10/5/2005
Levin, Carl [D-MI] - 10/5/2005
Sununu, John E. [D-NH] - 10/5/2005
Salazar, Ken [D-CO] - 10/5/2005
nine NAY votors (all Republicans)
Allard (R-CO)
Bond (R-MO)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Stevens (R-AK)
President George W. Bush was re-elected President in 2004 in a stunning Republican victory.
Immediately, a series of events occur where the victory is forgotten and the President is painted a lame duck.
The War on Terrorism and our soldiers are forgotten.
Republican congressmen turn attention to their re-elections in 2006.
Democrats look to Hillary in 2008.
As a Rantburg.com devotee, I have been in WOT (War on Terrorism) heaven reading about our military's great successes against terrorist.
Now it looks like our congressmen have joined with those who want to undermine our troops effectiveness
by tieing our Commander in Chief and our troops down with political rules in the fight against global terrorists
who operate unburdened by any rules and are shielded by the PC Nazi's who our congressmen are now caving to.
I make it clear I will give no money to any Republican who caves to the demands of anti-American groups who
attempt to burden our soldiers with any limitations in their prosecution of the War on Terror other than what
the Commander in Chief or the Pentagon and the Secretary of Defense deem necessary.
I have full confidence in the Chief, the Pentagon and our soldiers.
I have zero confidence in our politicians who are seeking reelection.
I salute the 9 Republicans with my dollars support who got it right voted for the troops and against the McCain AMDT 1977.
Senator Jeff Sessions was the hero standing up to the self righteous media darling John McCain in support of our troops over our acusers
Please, contact and urge the Republicans on the resolution committee to strip the McCain amendment from the defense bill for our soldiers sake:
http://stevens.senate.gov/contact_form.cfm
http://cochran.senate.gov/contact.htm
http://bond.senate.gov/contact/contactme.cfm
http://burns.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Home.Contact
http://domenici.senate.gov/contact/contactform.cfm
http://gregg.senate.gov/sitepages/contact.cfm
http://hutchison.senate.gov/e-mail.htm
http://mcconnell.senate.gov/contact_form.cfm
http://specter.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactInfo.Home
Also, please, contact house representatives not to let the McCain amendment stand.
Please, tell our Commander in Chief, George W Bush, we will support his veto of the defense budget if congress fails to strip it from the defense bill.
If Congress wants to play with the defense bill then we should amend any hurricane relief bill until the defense budget is passed.
From the Religion of Peace website, where you can also find a comprehensive, updated list of islamic terror attacks, in addition to other ressources, on the Beltway sniper for example.
Long text deleted here. A link to call people's attention to the article is a good use of Fred's bandwidth, but please don't post the full text of long articles from blogs.
#1
For 1400 years, Islamic terrorists have always found reasons for hating and killing unsubmissive infidels, in keeping with the teachings of their religion. No amount of appeasement will ever change this.
This should head each and every news conference. Or should be physically beaten into each and every reporter and anchor who lies about what is happening.
#5
Long text deleted here. A link to call people's attention to the article is a good use of Fred's bandwidth, but please don't post the full text of long articles from blogs.
Ok, sorry, my bad (again). Usually, when I post from a blog I leave only a link with an intro, but since this was not a blog afaik, I left the whole thing here. Sorry for the inconvenience, this rates for a new low on my self-esteem-meter and a 10.2 on my catholic guilt-meter.
#6
Lol a5089 - I'm sure lotp meant no offense or to dissuade you. She's got a job to do here and she does it entusiastically, lol. Your posts are (almost, lol) terrific. Slap that guilt down - it can cut the wrong way, as easily as the right way. Keep up the great work - please!
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/16/2005 11:50 Comments ||
Top||
#11
I'm sure lotp meant no offense or to dissuade you
S'truth. Just want to balance the value of full text here with Fred's bandwidth and server load. As you may recall, he's had trouble with his hardware of late, so if you all haven't kicked in a little through Paypal, and if you're so inclined and able to, you might consider that button on the front page .... hint
#12
PS: that was not meant to lessen Catholic guilt - far be it from me to interfere in anyone's religious rites so long as they don't include blowing people up .... LOL
#15
For another 2 or 3 days, methinks. I offered a shitload of soon-to-expire domains to the email crowd, but YOU don't join in... so there, lol. And that's not all you're missing, either, lol.
#1
Interesting that she can pay for everthing else except a $350 charge. I bet she suddenly materializes that $350 on about week 21 if nobody coughs up the dough.
#2
Good questions in the comments. I've got a better one: Is she pregnant because a male guard raped her in prison?
IF NOT (& I'm betting not, or the lawyer would have said so), how is this the taxpayers' fault?
She wants to exercise her (judge-bestowed) "choice." Strikes me she already did that. She chose to break the law, and she chose to have unprotected sex, either between her arrest and trial/sentencing, or in prison.
I'd like several do-overs in my life, too. Ain't gonna happen.
(By the way, I don't care if someone gets an abortion or not. I just don't think the state's taxpayers should have to pay for her stupidity and lack of self-control.)
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/16/2005 14:02 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I'd just as soon the criminal justice system not be burdened by having to deal with her offspring. I suggest she be offered a two-fer. Abortion and sterilization. I'd let the taxpayers spring for that. Cheaper in the long run.
#1
The Ancient Celtic Solution: The most popular warrier was named chieftan, was idolized, had his choice of women and lived a life of luxury for a year, and was then executed.
It would prevent us from listening to the moonbat rantings of the mindless Hollywood has-beens.
#2
And the Wealey Clarks, too? Please? Lol. That futz was pontificating again on Fox this AM. Fox (and everyone else) needs to run a dislaimer before allowing this self-serving shithead to speak: "This was the asstard who was forced asked to resign from his military post because he's a political shill, backstabber, and all-around gutless turd."
Army Special Forces Soldiers, as my U.S. News colleague Linda Robinson writes in her riveting book, Masters of Chaos, are very much aware of "the tradition of their military history." On the eve of a difficult mission, "more than one soldier went to sleep hoping that the next days would prove him a worthy member of that lineage." That's one reason the military maintains old units, so that soldiers will be motivated to match the deeds of those who came before and prove worthy to those who come after.
Similarly, one of the comforting aspects of attending religious services is the knowledge that you are doing what others have done before you and others will do after: Even nonbelievers often feel a twinge of awe when they attend Christian or Jewish weddings or funerals and witness liturgies with centuries-old roots. And then there's the flag. Most Americans feel a shiver when they hear "The Star-Spangled Banner" played and reflect on the triumphs and tragedies that those serving under that flag have won and suffered over more than 200 years. You're part of something larger than yourself.
But not all of us cherish ties to past traditions. "America's business, professional, intellectual, and academic elites," writes Samuel Huntington in his 2004 book Who Are We? have "attitudes and behavior [that] contrast with the overwhelming patriotism and nationalistic identification with their country of the American public. . . . They abandon commitment to their nation and their fellow citizens and argue the moral superiority of identifying with humanity at large." He believes that this gap between transnational elites and the patriotic public is growing. Huntington knows whereof he speaks: He's been at Harvard for more than half a century.
New elites. This gap is something new in our history. Franklin Roosevelt spoke fluent French and German and worked to create the United Nations, but no one doubted that his allegiance was to America above all. Most Harvard professors in the 1940s, 1950s, and early 1960s felt a responsibility to help the United States prevail against its totalitarian enemies. But in the later stages of the Vietnam War--a war begun by elite liberals--elites on campuses began taking an adversary posture toward their own country. Later, with globalization, a transnational mind-set grew among corporate and professional elites. Legal elites, too: Some Supreme Court justices have taken to citing foreign law as one basis for interpreting the U.S. Constitution.
This gap between transnational elites and the patriotic public has reverberations in partisan politics. Americans in military service and those with strong religious beliefs now vote heavily Republican. Americans with strong patriotic feelings are more closely split between the parties, but the growing minority with transnational attitudes vote heavily Democratic. Which doesn't necessarily help the Democratic Party. Democrats Bill Galston and Elaine Kamarck, both Clinton administration veterans, point out in a recent paper that two thirds of liberals, the dominant force in the party at least in 2004, reject pre-emptive use of military force and want to cut the defense budget, while only one third of the electorate agrees. "While social issues and defense dominate today's political terrain," they conclude, "it is in these areas that liberals espouse views diverging not only from those of other Democrats but from Americans as a whole. To the extent that liberals now constitute both the largest bloc within the Democratic coalition and the public face of the party, Democratic candidates for national office will be running uphill."
"A nation's morale and strength derive from a sense of the past," argues historian Wilfred McClay. Ties to those who came before--whether in the military, in religion, in general patriotism--provide a sense of purpose rooted in history and tested over time. Secular transnational elites are on their own, without a useful tradition, in constructing a morality to help them perform their duties. Most Americans sense they need such ties to the past, to judge from the millions buying books about Washington, Adams, Hamilton, Jefferson, and other Founding Fathers. We Americans are lucky to live in a country with a history full of noble ideas, great leaders, and awe-inspiring accomplishments. Sadly, many of our elites want no part of it.
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.
