The article at the link is just one of many I have seen lately documenting the growing strength and militancy of Canada's Tamil population. Pappy has posted an article elsewhere in today's 'Burg that a Buddhist Temple had a mystery fire that might be linked to Tamils. And naturally, some of Canada's politicians (of the Liberal persuasion) are praising the Resistance, and feeding the hand that will eventually bite them. The situation warrants more scrutiny, methinks...
Toronto - While thousands of Tamil-Canadians protested at Queen's Park on Wednesday, a separate group of demonstrators, speaking out against the Tamil Tigers, gathered on a pedestrian overpass across the Don Valley Parkway.
Approximately 40 people stood on the overpass, just north of Gerrard, with signs saying "Protect Canada, stop the Tamil Tigers." The sentiment of these protesters was also seen earlier as a plane, carrying the same message, flew over the Tamil demonstrators at Queen's Park.
Police will be investigating the airplane message as a possible hate crime.
For a given value of hate. Somebody didn't get the message after the Mark Steyn situation. Although perhaps they're hoping that what holds for magazine articles does not for airplane messages.
#2
Somebody didn't get the message after the Mark Steyn situation. Although perhaps they're hoping that what holds for magazine articles does not for airplane messages.
Not exactly, tw. The Tamils are a NON-MUSLIM minority. Ezra Levant (and have you bought his new book yet?) and Mark Steyn have between them done a pretty good job of "denormalizing" (and bringing well-deserved scorn upon) those malignant "Human Rights Commissions" in Canada. The Tamils will make an excellent poster child for the "Save the CHRC" movements, with pix of real dead Tamil kidlings as backup.
From Haaretz, which prides itself at being the New York Times of Israel. Have at it, O Rantburg Experts.
Israeli government ministers and Knesset members who will help make the decision about whether to attack Iran's nuclear facilities do not have to wait any longer for a preparatory briefing by the Israel Air Force. They can read about all the possible scenarios for a strike on Iran, and about the potential risks and chances of success, in a study by Abdullah Toukan and Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
Never before has such an open, detailed and thorough study of Israel's offensive options been published. The authors of the 114-page study meticulously gathered all available data on Israel's military capabilities and its nuclear program, and on Iran's nuclear developments and aerial defenses, as well as both countries' missile inventory.
"Loose lips..." no longer applies in these degenerate times, it seems.
The Mad Mullahs got a courtesy copy by e-mail, I'm sure ...
After analyzing all the possibilities for an attack on Iran, Toukan and Cordesman conclude: "A military strike by Israel against Iranian nuclear facilities is possible ... [but] would be complex and high-risk and would lack any assurances that the overall mission will have a high success rate."
#1
Well, an armed society is a polite society. Unless one of the parties is stark raving mad. Or has just way too much rhetoric built up to be able to back down and still save face.
And I doubt that the bunker busters are going to do the job. Multiple bunker busters failed to do more than rattle the expensive china in Saddam's bunkers the last couple of go-arounds. I suspect that's why W ordered the development of the mini-nukes with the shaped blast effects.
#4
The study also analyzes the possible Iranian response to an Israeli strike. In all likelihood the result would be to spur Iranians to spend years and years trying to rebuild it.
#5
Here's how Israel would destroy Iran's nuclear program
A few old B53 bombs would do that very well. Wonder if any are still around?
Posted by: ed ||
05/17/2009 13:51 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Lookee what SAC saved for a rainy day: The B53 was intended to be retired in the 1980s, reducing the stockpile to 25 weapons by 1987. On 5 August 1987 SAC decided to halt the retirement and return 25 more weapons to service, for 50. Those weapons are no longer in active service, but are retained as part of the "Hedge" portion of the Enduring Stockpile.
Posted by: ed ||
05/17/2009 13:58 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Israel always has the Samson Option. The B53, A.K.A. the "Crowd Pleaser®".
#8
but a distinction must be made between a willingness to bankroll terrorists, and an intention to launch nuclear missiles against Israel.
The willingness to bankroll terrorists is a big part the problem. Why go thru the trouble of launching a missile with its undeniable return-to-sender signature when you can simply hand off a nuke to your terr pals to smuggle into, for example, Haifa by sea?
#9
See also BHARAT RAKSHAK [India] > WASHINGTON TIMES Artic > CHAPIN: AMERICA'S SURVIVAL AT RISK [Nukulaar Pakis-Taliban, Iran]. 70-80% of Amer's population could be dead within a year iff Iran launches a successful major EMP attack agz the USA from a disguised freighter; + OMAN NAVIGATES BETWEEN IRAN AND ARAB NATIONS. The two Muslim nations are close to signing a REGIONAL SECURITY PACT [read, US MILBASES IN "BASE(S) TOO FAR" QATAR OUTFLANKED].
(2009-05-14) The boom in childbirth by unwed mothers has some American homosexuals concerned about the sanctity of their newly-minted marriages, according to a spokesman for the Defense of Gay Marriage Association (DOGMA).
Some 40 percent of all children are now born to unwed mothers, according to National Center for Health Statistics. Among minority groups, the news is even more stunning. Black single Moms give birth at twice the White rate, and Hispanic solo mothers bear babies at triple the rate.
All of this is bad news for the institution of traditional gay marriage, said the unnamed source at DOGMA. Its hard not to see this as another example of homophobia. Gays finally start getting the right to marry, and what happens? We see straights abandoning the practice. Heterosexual bigots are looking at marriage and apparently saying, Thats so gay!
The advocacy group claims that no society has survived the collapse of the institution of marriage, and it backs a Constitutional amendment forcing cohabiting couples to wed.
#2
The unwed mom boom also raises another unfortunate by-product: child abuse. What movies that glamorize the single mom lifestyle leave out is that the child's mental health is what suffers, oftentimes well into adulthood. A study conducted in New Zealand showed an exponential increase of many disorders among offspring from single parent homes.
Single parenthood increases stress, financial difficulties, time management issues and all of these difficulties don't occur in a vacuum, but instead occur in the absence of a meaningful support system.
#3
"all of these difficulties don't occur in a vacuum, but instead occur in the absence of a meaningful support system directly throught the self-centered choice of the mother"
Fixed that for ya', GT.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
05/17/2009 11:54 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Yes, Barbara, self- centered wouldn't even begin to cover all the things wrong with it. Spot on.
#6
No revelations here. If society confronted single moms more often about their dubious assumption that everyone thinks its cute when they become single moms, maybe it would inspire women stop thinking its glamourous or a last ditch way to be a mom if a dad doesn't materialize.
#7
Black single Moms give birth at twice the White rate, and Hispanic solo mothers bear babies at triple the rate.
That's a Scrappleface stat. The real stats:
40% Total
17% Asian
28% White
51% Latino
65% Indian
72% Black
Posted by: ed ||
05/17/2009 13:34 Comments ||
Top||
#8
If my memory serves me correctly, history only provides the details of one "immaculate conception." Mandetory DNA testing at birth and strict financial accountability of the father/impregnator/worthless kak voël might help a damn site more that anything else. Just my umble opinion as a father, offspring care and feeder, college fund provider, taxpayer, etc.
#9
Take away the welfare and garnish the wages of the deadbeat dads. Nobody wants to remove the support system for the single moms and their babies but, let's face, if we don't we're just encouraging more of the same. They know they can get away with it so they do.
My liberal brother in law is astounded by my attitude on this subject. He says, "You mean you wouldn't let those girls get an abortion but you would let their babies starve?"
Yeah. Call it tough love. Call it I don't want the blood on my hands but I don't want to pay for it either. And, yes, it is a threat to our society. It costs the taxpayers a helluva lot of money and it is not healthy for the kids which is not healthy for society.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
05/17/2009 15:10 Comments ||
Top||
#10
BRAVO, Abu Uluque
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
05/17/2009 17:02 Comments ||
Top||
#11
you can still work to pay for your out-of-wedlock-and-unsupported offspring if you're a eunuch....just saying
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/17/2009 17:05 Comments ||
Top||
#13
I say spay and neuter, snip snip, we are America, land of the free to breed, but that can be remedied! Under Obama's health care ambitions, I wouldn't be suprised if it did.
A lot of these single parent kids become our military early 17 year old enlistees, or end up in prison and then end up in the military on prison release programs.
#15
or end up in prison and then end up in the military on prison release programs.
Got stats on that GT? or did you forget the /sarc line? Number of waivers is small to overall numbers and generally on things that have been criminalized in the last decade or so [like DWI].
#16
No sarcasm intended. I was enlisted. Two of my neighbors whom I spoke with daily went from a jail-cell into the Army in a matter of weeks. I would not joke about something as serious as that. And they were admirable for their efforts and great success at being rehabilitated.
#18
I'm surprised no one else mentioned a bizarre little belief that I've heard quite a few times.
"Yeah, we're having a kid, but we're not getting married....we're not ready for that kind of commitment..."
I don't know how many stupid pills instead of birth control pills you gotta take to believe that BS, but there's a lot of girls and guys takin' 'em.....
#19
I'm surprised no one else mentioned a bizarre little belief that I've heard quite a few times.
"Yeah, we're having a kid, but we're not getting married....we're not ready for that kind of commitment..."
I don't know how many stupid pills instead of birth control pills you gotta take to believe that BS, but there's a lot of girls and guys takin' 'em.....
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.
