We should try collecting RBers' New Year's resolutions such as these...
to tick off Chavez, get Kofi a real job, make Kim Jong Il go bald...
By Bridget Johnson
With each New Year come the same cookie-cutter resolutions: lose weight, get a dream job, be nice to people, make more money, learn a language, get organized, etc.
I have decided that, noble though they may be, these resolutions are also officially boring; so this year Im getting a bit more creative. After all, Ive already taken up running, keep dreaming about the job, am fairly nice to everyone save dictators and tyrants, have a pathetic income ceiling as a journalist, did the language thing this past year, and have come to realize that over 150 pairs of shoes can only get so organized without being given a room of their own.
So bring it on, 2007: I'm ready with the best resolutions ever! · Throw a party when Castro dies. That is, after all, the only acceptable Communist party, right? Bring your own cigars (but, in the spirit of California, take them out on the porch). I and other party guests will conclude the fiesta by bracing for the whole week that Raul Castro will last in power. · Do a dramatic oral reading of Jimmy Carters new book at a Bay Area coffeehouse. After all, great works of fiction deserve such flair, care, and attention. And there is no danger that anyone there will be so flabbergasted by the absurdity of the book that he will choke on his organic peanuts. · Vacation in Afghanistan. Yahoo Travel now lists eight hotels in Kabul; those rated are between four and five stars. Bargain! They even list customer reviews. Yes, after the big, bad coalition liberation, Afghanistan has apparently worked its way up to concierge service and minibars. Meanwhile, Mullah Omar is still cowering in some fetid cave. And although the Taliban are still trying to raise hell, that just means I might not have to separate work from vacation (write-off!). · Launch the campaigns for John Bolton for president and Donald Rumsfeld for the next American Idol. Lord knows if Rummy can carry a tune, but he sure fits the title! Will also get Kofi Annan to volunteer on the Bolton campaign hey, now that he needs a job. · Serve Hebrew National hot dogs to anti-Israel protesters. This is the year that I have finally had it with all of the demonstrators who claim theyre not anti-Semitic, not anti-Israel, just against the Israeli leadership, as they stomp on and burn the Israeli flag, call Israelis Nazis, and praise Hezbollah and Hamas as saviors of humanity. This past year we frighteningly saw some people embrace Mahmoud Ahmadinejads Holocaust denial conference as a legitimate tool for questioning the existence of Israel. Anti-Israel is far too often a cover for anti-Semitic, and in the interest of never again (remember that, United Nations?) I intend to annoy the Israel-bashers as much as possible this year. · Lobby the international community to place sanctions on the sale of Rogaine to Kim Jong Il. After all, luxury products should be banned as punishment for his little look at me test missile firings, and I cant bear to look at Kims coif anymore. · Become a U.N. Good Policy Ambassador. Considering that U.N. Goodwill Ambassador has become the hot new fallback career for celebrities (unseating the fragrance launch or handbag designs), there has to be a spot for someone intent on being more than window dressing at Turtle Bay. The Good Policy Ambassador can help ensure that human-rights-abusing nations dont sit on the Human Rights Commission, that the U.N. starts to give a rip about genocide, and that Irans regime is faced with some punishment besides stern language for its nuclear development. The Good Policy Ambassador will avoid photo ops that involve kissing up to tyrants, while still maintaining good hair days like Angelina Jolie. The Good Policy Ambassador will also hose Hugo Chavez with sulfur next time he takes the podium at the General Assembly. · Pimp Dennis Kucinichs ride. I feel compelled to give the guy a bit of a boost in his quest for the Democratic nomination. And since the cover of Rolling Stone is probably out for Denny the Demmy, I believe that Kucinich should instead employ an all-female crack bodyguard squad like Moammar Gadhafi, undergo a makeover from the Queer Eye for the Straight Guy quintet, and join Justin Timberlake in a new duet of SexyBack. · Grab other conservative pundits for a weekend of headline-grabbing partying in the manner of Lindsay Lohan, Britney Spears, and Paris Hilton. I shall be Lohan, pre-gothic hair dye, because unlike Britney, I remember to put on unmentionables. The New York Daily News will catch up with the squad of conservavixens and christen the GOP the Republican Par-TAY! · Hugo Chavez will call me a capitalist tart. This is a carryover from one of this past years resolutions, something that came up while joking around with my good friend Gay Patriot West. If Hugo issues a personal rant in your direction, its a clear-cut sign that you are doing good work. And if he wants to grab you in a creepy red-shirted bear hug, you have really, really gone astray in life. Perhaps its asking for a bit much to hope that Chavez uses such precise phraseology in his denunciation, but it shouldnt be such a stretch once he has read the aforementioned N.Y. Daily News story.
So there you have it ten juicy New Years resolutions fit for a highly ebullient and slightly irreverent columnist.
Most single people would also submit a New Years resolution to find true love. Fair enough. However, I am of the belief that true love can be found while taunting Hugo Chavez, among those special fellas who also believe in the value of a hard days work tormenting tyrants, mocking Jimmy Carter and reminding anti-Semitic lefties how utterly lame they are.
Because after a year of enduring the sight of Chavez snuggling with Cindy Sheehan, there really has to be a morning after.
#1
I resolve to down one bottle of nice white wine everytime Bush vetos major leftist legislation. That along should keep me relatively sober the whole next year.
I will resolve next year to convince everyone in the world that the statue at the Lincoln Memorial of Lincoln did a break dance to Snoop Dogg if the new democratic congress cuts domestic spending increases military spending with promises of winning the war on terrorism.
I resolve to learn ballet dancing if the leftist congress cuts NPR funding.
#2
I resolve to:
- Party hearty when Saddam swings
- Spend more time with my wife and kids
- Party hearty when Castro croaks
- Start that novel I've been thinking about
- Party hearty when the Venezuelan people croak Chavez
- Lose 502510 a couple pounds. No, really.
Posted by: Jonathan ||
12/28/2006 15:03 Comments ||
Top||
#3
.com: Your #5 is genius I tell ya...GENIUS!
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
12/28/2006 15:07 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I resolve to piss on John Kerry's leg if the opportunity ever arises.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
12/28/2006 15:09 Comments ||
Top||
#7
i only hope the comment "Grab other conservative pundits for a weekend of headline-grabbing partying in the manner of Lindsay Lohan, Britney Spears, and Paris Hilton." was a snark. a panty-less Rush Limbaugh or Bill R. is really more than i want to even contemplate. please pass the steel wool.
1) To lose at least 20 lbs
2) To spend more time exploring the great outdoors
3) To quit Skoal
4) To finish the rewrite on my 1st novel and complete my 2nd novel
5) To write more, more often, and to do so consistently
6) To fight back against creeping liberalism and multiculturalism in America
7) To defend my country and conservative values with gusto when challenged by some idiot dhimmi
8) To win the lottery
9) To become independently wealthy
10) To celebrate uproariously when Saddam hangs, when OBL is bagged and tagged, when Sadr meets Allah, when the Hildebeast drops out of the Presidential racer, and when the US finally tells the UN to STFU and get the hell out.
#12
I resolve:
1-Lose 30+ pounds.
2-Find a better job.
3-Kick my lazy son out of the house
4-Complete construction of my study/office/fortress of solitude.
5-Co-host at least one Rantapaloza in Sacramento.
6-Clean up my Garage.
7-Find and destroy whatever is creating that smell in my son's room.
8-Explore running for a local government post.
9-Train my dog to bite Democrats (except my parents).
10-Hit tip jar once a quarter.
#14
I made a New Year's Resolution about 20 years ago that I've easily kept ever since.
The Resolution?
To NEVER AGAIN make a New Year's Resolution.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
12/28/2006 19:21 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Learn how to make a perfect Hangman's Noose in time for Saddam's big night. And a damn fine daiquiri just in case I can't make it to Miami when El Jefe officially assumes room temperature.
#19
I've kept my resolutions for the last two yeats. Now comes the hardest one:
I resolve to get more exercise, including running, which helps me get lean and fit (even though I have to hold up the rack while doing it, otherwise, ouch!)
Keeping resolutions short, sweet and ATTAINABLE...that's what works for me.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
12/28/2006 21:57 Comments ||
Top||
#21
I resolve to survive two trailing daughters behind the wheel. I don't think I can handle much more this year -- td #1 got her licence today, td#2 will get her learner's permit by the end of the summer. And I'll mail off my pittance to Fred when the year rolls over ('cause I'm an end user and I don't do paypal, that's why).
Of course I'll keep reading Rantburg and trying to learn whatever y'all are willing to teach. But that's an easy one. :-) And throw celebratory tea parties for the certified deaths of certain overachievers in the wrong direction... with the hard stuff on the sideboard for those who don't like tea, of course.
#22
Oh, and buy a Mac and give up on Windows once and for all. Ptui.
Posted by: Jonathan ||
12/28/2006 22:19 Comments ||
Top||
#23
I resolve to start smoking. I resolve to choke slam a liberal war protestor. I resolve to kick my brothers ass when he gets back from Bagdad. I resolve to keep enjoying dating the "wrong" girls. I resolve to move to a warm climate. I resolve attend a rant-a-palooza.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
12/28/2006 22:26 Comments ||
Top||
2836 French "internautes" (internet users) were polled on attitudes to religion. 92% of froggies think Muslims aren't integrating into the Gallic republic. The French are smarter than I thought.
Question 1: What is your general opinion on the three following religions? The Catholic religion
... very good 17 %
... rather good 38 %
... rather bad 27 %
... very bad 14 %
No opinion 4 %
No response 0 %
The Jewish religion
... very good 8 %
... rather good 39 %
... rather bad 29 %
... very bad 16 %
No opinion 7 %
No response 1 %
The Islamic religion
... very good 2 %
... rather good 13 %
... rather bad 32 %
... very bad 47 %
No opinion/Jihad chill 5 %
No response/Jihad chill 1 % By "jihad chill" I mean that some respondents would fear exercising free speech about the terror cult.
Question 3: Do you believe that the following religions are well integrated in contemporary France? The Catholic religion
Completely 13 %
Somewhat 33 %
Barely if at all 32 %
Not at all 20 %
No opinion 2 %
No response 1 %
The Jewish religion
Completely 8 %
Somewhat 30 %
Barely if at all 31 %
Not at all 24 %
No opinion 7 %
No response 1 %
The Islamic religion
Completely 1 %
Somewhat 4 %
Barely if at all 23 %
Not at all 69 %
No opinion/Jihad chill 2 %
No response/Jihad chill 1 %
Question 6: Lastly, which words would you use to describe the Islamic religion? CHOOSE FOUR
Influential 60 %
Not very influential 12 %
Tolerant 4 %
Intolerant 82 %
Courageous 12 %
Cowardly 27 %
Open-minded 5 %
Close-minded 81 %
No opinion/Jihad chill 3 %
No response/Jihad chill 1 %
Question 9: In your estimate of the following religions, do they express respect for French laws in public debate? The Catholic religion
Yes 67 %
No 26 %
No opinion 7 %
No response 1 %
The Jewish religion
Yes 60 %
No 27 %
No opinion 12 %
No response 1 %
The Islamic religion
Yes 15 %
No 77 %
No opinion/Jihad chill 8 %
No response/Jihad chill 1 %
Question 10 : In your estimate, in the case of conflict of values which believers of the following religions would respect French laws over those of their religion? Catholics
France first 78 %
Religion first 15 %
No opinion 7 %
No response 1 %
Jews
France first 48 %
Religion first 40 %
No opinion 11 %
No response 1 %
Muslims
France first 8 %
Islam first 84 %
No opinion/Jihad chill 7 %
No response/Jihad chill 1 %
Could make for an interesting election. If the FN gets in, the slums (dar-Islam) could be napalmed.
#9
My point , French waited for others to save their derriere.
Yes, the 1,4 millions frenchmen kiled in 1914-18 were just holding the huns back while waiting for someone to fight in their place, you're right, Gromgoru. They were only pretending.
And we didn't wait to be saved in 1939, we were beaten, plain and simple, some then joining the victor (mostly leftists and socialists, actually, for ideological reasons; the Maréchal Pétain and the conservative right piggybacked the defeat to try to impose a national revolution, but never were pro-german, and for example kept on arresting and executing german spies and infiltrators until 1942), some joining the resistance, the vast, vast, vast majority trying to get on with their life under difficult conditions.
When the "corporate prayer" movement first started in 1996, few people in Holland took any notice. Why should they have done so? After all, Holland's manifest destiny was to become a fully secularized country, in which prayer was considered at best an irrational but harmless pastime. That was then. Cue forward to 2006, when prayer in the workplace is fast becoming a universally accepted phenomenon. More than 100 companies participate. Government ministries, universities, multinational companies like Philips, KLM, and ABN AMRO--all allow groups of employees to organize regular prayer meetings at their premises. Trade unions have even started lobbying the government for recognition of workers' right to prayer in the workplace.... ...rest at link...
In short, the kids are going to evangelical church, and mooslims won't be taking over Holland any time soon.
#1
"Post secular" presumes that the post-modern, secular-fundamentalist, class of '68er's don't destroy (or allow to be destroyed) the world first.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
12/28/2006 6:43 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Two quotes from the article show why this is not necessarily the unalloyed positive step it seems:
The reason the Christian population of Holland has stopped shrinking and is likely to avoid further decline is a phenomenon that until now has been largely overlooked by commentators on Dutch politics and society: Christian immigration. Analysts usually focus on the one million Muslim immigrants and their offspring who have made the Netherlands their home since the early 1950s. But in the past decade, Muslim immigration has been overtaken by a larger stream of immigrants, namely Christians from Africa, Asia, the Americas, and Europe. An SCP estimate puts the number of Christian immigrants in Holland at around 700,000-- and rising fast. Recent immigration reports suggest that for every new Muslim moving to Holland, there are at least two new Christian immigrants.
While Dutch Christianity is making the move from church buildings to living rooms, sports centers, and factory halls, Dutch Islam is moving in the opposite direction. At the Kostverlorenvaart in the Amsterdam suburb of De Baarsjes, the foundations are being laid for a new mosque, with a 110-foot-high dome and 140-foot-high minarets. "We don't want to pray in basements and school buildings anymore. We want a proper mosque," is how Fatih Dag explains the idea behind this project. Dag is chairman of the board of the local Aya Sofia Mosque. He says he understands local objections to the scale of the project: "Of course, if I were living in Turkey and people wanted a big new church next to my house, I might object too. But the fact is that we are here, and we're here to stay. And we want a place to worship." Indeed, in all major towns in Holland, building projects are under way for the construction of supersized mosques.
The Atlantic (only two ¶ free) had an article claiming the 21st century would be dominated by a robust Christianity from the southern Hemisphere overwhelming Islam and incorporating Northern Christianity. The decision of Episcopalian congregations which claimed George Washington as vestryman to place themselves under the authority of a Nigerian bishop is also, perhaps, a precurssor of such a monumental transition.
Excerpt: "Barbara Boxer was a stock broker before she was a politician. While a Senator, she made some quick profits in at least sixty six energy stock transactions during 2000, including shares of Halliburton."
The Reign of the Dhimmis is gonna be a non-stop barn-burner.
The abiding cliché about Gerald Ford--who died Tuesday at age 93--is that he was a decent man who steadied the country but held the White House too briefly to leave a major imprint. We've always thought that view of his Presidency is too diminishing, not least because he led the nation at a dangerous time and resisted political furies that could have done the U.S. far more harm.
"America's Suicide Attempt" is how the historian Paul Johnson describes the 1970s. And it is important to recall the bad temper of the times that Ford inherited in becoming the 38th President. He succeeded Richard Nixon, who had resigned over the Watergate coverup and amid an unpopular war in Vietnam. He faced large liberal majorities in Congress that were emboldened by their ouster of Nixon and set to revive the Great Society. And he had to clean up the financial problems caused by a burst of inflation and wage and price controls. Ford navigated all of these traumas better than he gets credit for. . . .
Posted by: Mike ||
12/28/2006 06:20 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
His hubris was the office. Instead of accepting the stewardship, he too was corrupted by the power. [One ring to rule them all]. Those of us old enough to remember, he had a primary challenger for the '76 election, Ronald Reagan. Had he chosen not to run, the likelihood that Ronald would have been in office four years earlier and the Shah would have had the backing he needed and the Islamic terror campaign would have been limited to the small anti-regime cells that existed before. Wonder if the Soviets would have contemplated their Afghan adventure if Ronnie was in office? Decent guy, but as the song says know when to fold them.
#3
I don't know about all of that. First, as the sitting (if unelected) President, Ford didn't have any obligation to step aside for Reagan. Calling his decision to run hubris is a stretch.
I remember both of those elections, and the '76 general election would have been no slam dunk for RR. It may be hard to believe or remember now, but 30 years ago lots of people didn't think Reagan was either bright enough or tempramentally well suited for the Presidency. Watergate was still a very recent memory, and after 8 years the country tends to get a little itchy for a party change in White House anyway
By 1980, four years of Jimmy Carter made almost anybody looked like an improvement, so voters were more willing to take the chance. Ford's decision to run may not have delayed the Reagan presidency, it may have made it possible.
A rather interesting piece, mainly for the distinctly Russian view. I just love the classic fatalism mixed with unfounded optimism, lol. Boggle.
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Pyotr Goncharov) - Iran may become one of the top 10 features of the outgoing year for a number of reasons, including its nuclear dossier and the Holocaust conference, as well as the anti-Israeli rhetoric of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
In short, Iran has made others view it as a regional superpower and the key player in the Middle East.
Its nuclear program remains the top issue, with good reason, because it threatens the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
If Iran implements its nuclear program in the proclaimed format, namely on the basis of its own uranium enrichment technologies, this will deal a death blow to the NPT. Iran's program will trigger the domino effect, encouraging Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan to follow suit.
The bomb is not the issue, as Iran will most likely decide against creating it. But it will hover merely one step away from it, forcing Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan to cover the same distance. Tehran promises to share its nuclear technology with Kuwait and Syria, which, taken together with Israel's 200 nuclear charges, will turn the region into a nuclear powder keg.
Continued on Page 49
#2
a long article on the Iran's Oil problem appears at: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/0603903104v1
(its funded by the National Academy of Sciences).
It goes into depth about (with respect to Oil):
1. Iran's difficulties in production
2. Iran's problem with rapidly increasing consumption
3. Iran's problem in domestic refining.
The author proposes govt regulated fuel efficiency measures in consuming countries.
#3
Iran is also facing a demographic crisis this century, falling birth rates and a rapidly increasing number of retirees to support. They have to strike while their iron is hot, so to speak.
Nothing like a finger-wag from a total fucking tool. He bases all of his blather upon the presumption that if it's on paper, it's sacrosanct, perfect, inviolable, no exceptions. Lol. Coming from a Mad Mullah puppet, that's a scream. Legalese is all he knows, so it's his chosen field of defense. Fuck him. Only fools, or tools, would argue that there are no exceptions, no flaws, no reason to abrogate a bad agreement or position. Shit changes - then shit happens.
Insane assholes who've threatened for years to annihilate another nation qualify as an exception, methinks. Fuck this clown.
by Hossein Askari - 12.27.2006
The UN Security Council resolution to sanction Iran certainly is the foreign-policy coup for the Bush Administration it has been trumpeted to beat least in the narrowest sense and in the short term. But it also undermines U.S. interests and is a liability for the United Nations and its fragile credibility.
In the run-up to the Iraq War, some ideologues charged that the United Nations consigns itself to irrelevance by failing to cooperate with and harness the clout of the worlds only superpower. But Americas continuing bleeding in Iraq has attenuated that argument by graphically demonstrating the potential cost of acting virtually alone and without legitimacy. The superpower, therefore, has its own interest in harnessing the cooperation of the Security Council and key alliessomething it achieved, at least nominally, with the Iran sanctions. But what the United Nations, including the Security Council, needs to bolster its own credibility is a demonstrated independence from the United Statesa phenomenon underappreciated within the confines of the Beltway.
The United Nations therefore should tow closely to the rule of law and act with consistency. By approving the sanctions on Iran, the Security Council has failed in this regard, and the resolution will surely prove counterproductive.
Continued on Page 49
#3
The United Nations therefore should tow closely to the rule of law and act with consistency.
This is the big, BIG hole in his argument. His assumption that Iran, the Norkies, etc. are big on that "rule of law" stuff.
While he might be willing to bet his life on it, I most definitely am not...
On that note, two quick thoughts that I've been meaning to flesh out further:
1) What are al-Qaeda's fears? The men who make up the organization are not fearless.
Ive heard some cite the tale of General Pershing dipping his bullets in pigs blood, or burying his defeated foes with pigs carcasses. Betrayal? Failure? Doubt that God is not really on their side? These guys pledge loudly that they dont fear death. But everyone knows fear. So what keeps these guys awake at night? And how can we use that to our advantage?
2) Al-Qaeda's sales pitch to young Muslim men is explicitly theological. This is what Allah wants you to do. This is why you were created; your life has meaning, it has a purpose, you are special and you are called to a great destiny in a divine plan. This purpose is to kill infidels. In exchange for your sacrifice, you get 72 virgins in the afterlife and will be remembered and revered forever. It is an evil message, but it is easy to grasp its appeal.
The counterargument from the West is variations of, its illegal, its immoral, its wrong. But I don't know how much weight has been put behind the argument that it is apostasy, that is not Allahs will, that bin Laden and his ilk are offering Muslims a false doctrine that angers and insults Allah, and those who choose this path will be damned for all eternity.
Our enemies make an explicitly religious pitch, and offer not merely a cause to fight for but a worldview that lets the poor and uneducated reinvent themselves as noble and brave warriors for a cause synonymous with all that is good, complete with unseen and unimaginable rewards. Our counterargument has been largely secular, and thus ignores the spiritual, matters of the soul, a confused persons yearning for a meaning and purpose to his life. What if we did? What if we systemically argued that following bin Laden betrays Islam, and that no good Muslim would consider that path?
Im sure many in the West would scorn the idea of making that argument, and many Muslims would probably contend that those of us outside the faith have no standing to debate their theological doctrines, or declare what is and what isnt Allahs will. (On the other hand, of course we have standing to make this argument; were the ones who will be the targets if they decide that conversion by the sword has been given a heavenly thumbs-up.)
That's the short version of those thoughts...
Discuss.
Posted by: Mike ||
12/28/2006 12:52 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
These guys pledge loudly that they dont fear death.
Today, I can think of lots of Somali guys that blow that theory all to shit.
#4
We can only use their fears to our advantage if we are willing to stick with it. They greatly fear sexual humiliation, as do Islamists of all stripes. We tried that (nude pyramids and leashes, remember?), and then turned around and prosecuted some folks for it. Better make our minds up what fears we're willing to exploit.
The "killing of infidels is against Islam" argument would be great if the majority of Muslims were proactively working it. They're not. They're hamstrung by the literal reading of the Quran, which does not protect infidels, and they're afraid of being personally accused of apostasy for calling to defy Mohammad's will, so they're busy covering their mouths and butts.
Fear of the loss of Mecca, Medina, etc-the holy cities-would have to be a big fear. Fear of losing dominance in any arena but especially political/governmental/religious dominance is another. That last one could be worked, if the world had the will and confidence. I'd say it's too soon to tell, but so far, the world has been found lacking.
#8
An eradication of Mecca & Medina is not likely to matter much to the True Believers, who will simply redefine the meaning of the Hajj. The Holy Cities are not as significant as some infidels like to think.
Mass movements like Nazism tend not to deflected by fear as much as by killing large numbers of followers until the rest believe resistance is useless.
#9
AH9418-Do you happen to recall the enraged reaction to absolutely harmless Mohammad cartoons this year? Muslims were riotng and killing people over the mere insulting of Mohammad; what do you imagine they would do with the permanent desecration of their holiest cities? You can make the argument it would stir up a hornet's nest but I doubt the ummas would shrug it off.
#10
I am not arguing the destruction of their holy cities would stir up the Umma. Our very existence offends them. I am arguing that the destruction wouldn't matter much either way, except as being a waste of effort on our part. Baghdad was once the home of the Caliphate until the Mongols seized the city and smashed (literally) the Caliph. Islam got over that, too.
By Ann Coulter
President Bush's Kwanzaa message this year skipped the patently absurd claim of years past that: "African-Americans and people around the world reflect on African heritage during Kwanzaa." Instead, he simply said: "I send greetings to those observing Kwanzaa."
More African-Americans spent this season reflecting on the birth of Christ than some phony non-Christian holiday invented a few decades ago by an FBI stooge. Kwanzaa is a holiday for white liberals, not blacks.
It is a fact that Kwanzaa was invented in 1966 by a black radical FBI pawn, Ron Karenga, aka Dr. Maulana Karenga. Karenga was a founder of United Slaves, a violent nationalist rival to the Black Panthers and a dupe of the FBI.
In what was probably a foolish gamble, during the madness of the '60s the FBI encouraged the most extreme black nationalist organizations in order to discredit and split the left. The more preposterous the organization, the better. Karenga's United Slaves was perfect. In the annals of the American '60s, Karenga was the Father Gapon, stooge of the czarist police.
Despite modern perceptions that blend all the black activists of the '60s, the Black Panthers did not hate whites. They did not seek armed revolution. Those were the precepts of Karenga's United Slaves. United Slaves were proto-fascists, walking around in dashikis, gunning down Black Panthers and adopting invented "African" names. (That was a big help to the black community: How many boys named "Jamal" currently sit on death row?)
Continued on Page 49
#4
As a teacher, I have long noticed that Kwanzaa is given equal time with Chanukkah and Christmas in the schools. But then again, Auschwitz and 1940's Japanese Detention Camps are twinned as equals also... :((
#7
As one of those ubiquitous PTA moms I noticed that none of the African-American kids (as opposed to Black -- we had a few real Black Africans... and a white Rhodesian via Australia) kids actually celebrated Kwanzaa. Christmas seemed to suffice their families.
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.
Excerpt:
