"The Europe as you know it from visiting, from your parents or friends is on the verge of collapsing," Geert Wilders said in a speech in the United States last year. The leader of the Netherlands' populist Party for Freedom added: "We are now witnessing profound changes that will forever alter Europe's destiny and might send the Continent in what Ronald Reagan called 'a thousand years of darkness.' " And not just Europe, but America as well.
Been to Europe lately? Thought it was bad? You ain't seen nothing yet. The passage of the Lisbon Treaty, hailed by President Obama, nailed the coffin shut on national sovereignty in Europe. The people of Europe fought it, but were overwhelmed by their political elites and the lack of American leadership in this age of our rather Marxist, collectivist U.S. president. Come Jan. 1, 2010, a disastrous and suicidal pact called the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (Europe/Mediterranean) goes into effect with little fanfare or examination. It boggles the mind that such a consequential and seismic cultural shift could be mandated and put into play without so much as a murmur from the mainstream media.
Why should Americans care about this? Americans have to care because this global gobbledygook is coming to our shores, thanks to our globalist president.
The European human rights group called Stop the Islamization of Europe (SIOE) has been working tirelessly to expose the mass Muslim immigration plan of the Euro-Med Partnership. A statement on the SIOE Web site criticizes the secrecy of the process: "It was shocking to hear about the plans and at the same time knowing that Danish politicians and a [cowardly] Danish press - who is otherwise proud to be critical - has told nothing to the Danish people about this project which begins in January. This also showed clearly at the conference. Only very few politicians showed up and no media. Those politicians who showed up had obviously never heard about the Euro-Mediterranean project.
The goal of the Euro-Mediterranean cooperation is to create a new Greater European Union encompassing both Europe and North Africa, with the Mediterranean Sea becoming a domestic Eurabian sea. The goal is to establish a "comprehensive political partnership," including a "free trade area and economic integration"; "considerably more money for the partners" (that is, more European money flowing into North Africa); and "cultural partnership" - that is, importation of Islamic culture into post-Christian Europe. According to the SIOE, in the Euro-Med plan "Europe is to be islamized. Democracy, Christianity, European culture and Europeans are to be driven out of Europe. Fifty million North Africans from Muslim countries are to be imported into the EU."
Skeptical? It's already happening. The British newspaper the Daily Express reported in October 2008 on "a controversial taxpayer-funded 'job centre' " that opened in Mali at that time as "just the first step towards promoting 'free movement of people in Africa and the EU.' Brussels economists claim Britain and other EU states will 'need' 56 million immigrant workers between them by 2050 to make up for the 'demographic decline' due to falling birthrates and rising death rates across Europe." To offset this decline, a "blue card" system is to be created that will allow card holders to travel freely within the European Union and have full rights to work - as well as the full right to collect welfare benefits.
A Muslim population from Africa moving freely into Europe threatens America. On Christmas Day, a Nigerian Muslim flew from Amsterdam to Detroit and tried to explode a bomb on the plane - after he was allowed to board the plane without a passport. The Euro-Mediterranean Partnership will make jihad attacks like this one all the easier.
And once in Europe, Muslims have already begun demanding special privileges and accommodations. IslamOnline reported on Dec. 21 that "Muslims activists from 26 European countries have come together to launch the first rights council to enlighten European Muslims about their rights, monitor rising Islamophobia and defend Muslim rights in European courts of law." Ali Abu Shwaima, a Muslim leader in Italy, explained: "We think European human rights groups are not doing enough to defend the rights of Muslims. Therefore we thought that we need this new council, especially that all laws and constitutions in Europe respect freedom of religion and oppose all forms of discrimination and racism."
"Islamophobia," "discrimination" and "racism" are all terms Muslims in Europe and America use to confuse people into thinking that the perpetrators of Islamic terrorism are the real victims. And it is working: Mr. Wilders is going on trial in the Netherlands, instead of all the Islamic hate sponsors he is fighting against. It has to be this way, to increase harmony among the Muslim and non-Muslim member states of the Euro-Med Partnership. This internationalism is already destroying what has made Europe free and great. And now Mr. Obama seems to want to do the same to America.
#1
Great article ...but politically naive or motivated an American journo trying to explain Europe from a touristic experience smell...a little
middle eastern and Africans north, south and central are hired by companies that the owner is usually a conservative and politically talking,leftist politically are against of non European emigrants
#7
I care about Europe - egad, it's where I keep all my stuff! /The Tick mode off
Agree with first sinktrapped commenter is that it's the view from a 'ourist', in some way; I certainly can't predict what's coming next, and then next, and then next,... but talks of "demise" certainly are premature. But SHTF, messy stuff, collapse of Nation-States, etc, etc...? Maybe, probably, I don't know, maybe the scenario will unfold like that, or like this. I'm not being shallow, it's basically all that, right now, everything's, everybody's opinion is hot air.
Wait & See.
As for the prevaling meme expressed say by Pam, or Grumpy G(r)om, why not? 2010 Western Europe has nothing to do with the 1960's one, this one is dead (according to local wingnuts, in no small part through jooooooooooooish influence, which is the ironical exact counterpoint to Grumpy G(r)om's own scapegoatism and victimhood-based bitgotry, and actually has some valid roots, as a good 50% of the post-WWII "destructive left" HAS been jewish, without delving into any imaginary GRand Conspiracy)... but, I just am bothered by premature post-mortem of "Europe", IE white european cultures and white european civilization.
We'll see what happens.
And, please, if push comes to shove, and the effeminated EUros try and fight back, please, please, please, don't lapse into that other "conservative" meme, the "fascistic by nature, racist, narrow-minded, tribal,... Europe-from-which-our-ancestors-once-escaped). I love the USA, at least my own imaginary version of it, but, spare me the Ralph Peters fantasies of the diverse, multicultural, race-blind USA having to rescue the hapless "european" muslims from an upcoming genocide, when the unenlightened EUros revert back to their roots.
#8
"Fifty million North Africans from Muslim countries are to be imported into the EU."
Sorry but that's utter BS
Posted by: European Conservative ||
12/30/2009 8:52 Comments ||
Top||
#9
I'm not being shallow, it's basically all that, right now, everything's, everybody's opinion is hot air.
Just ONE, single, thoughts exercise : set yourself back in late 2001, or early 2002 mindset; now, devote a part of your mighty brain to dwelve into what is known of BHO's background, with all its "colourful" and byzantine bits.
Pray tell, does any of the gentlemen (and the odd female) reading this would have simply DARED to imagine having HIM as president in 2010? Think about it... 2001 ----> Nov 2008. Dude.
Really, think about it, and come back and try to tell EUropeans that they are sick - they (we) are, can't deny it, but, well... so are you, and, believe me, no schadenfreude at all here.
Just understand it's not "you" and "us" against "them", it's "us" (yeah, even the israeli, sorry, G(r)om, but AFAIC, israelis are white europeans, in last analysis) and "them".
#10
EC, knock it off! Can't you see I'm trying, with my feeble means, to sound all deep and wise here! Don't you dare inject some rationality here, you're making me look bad by comparison, you're exposing my schtick. How am I supposed to work my self-esteem here? Have some heart.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
12/30/2009 9:15 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Pray tell, does any of the gentlemen (and the odd female) reading this would have simply DARED to imagine having HIM as president in 2010? Think about it... 2001 ----> Nov 2008. Dude.
Play your own game, think back to 1992 and Billy Boy just being elected defeating Bush I, would anyone then think that Bush II would be elected in 2000 [and then barely by the hanging chad] or that we'd fact 8+ years of full war whose warning was in the first Trade Center bombing then.
The hair breathe win of Bush and the harsh division of the election outcome should have signaled that the country was indeed deeply divided and that the 'other side' would go to any lengths to manufacture a candidate that would gather power. They didn't care who or what it took, just get power back. It could have been Kerry, but the tradition of not changing leaders during war made the difference. When the opportunity presented itself they could have run just about anyone to include Hillary with their traditional alliance while dancing on the corpse of the Republicans who alienated their own with their rapacious behaviors.
#13
I certainly concur with your "feeble" assessment. You may also wish to belay the Ralph Peters drivel. I don't recall him ever saying anything of the sort, and I read it all.
#14
WIth EC on this. The "Eurabia" thesis is crap.
For starters, the vast majority of the muslims who come to Europe quickly become secular, or at most, weakly or rarely observant like Christmas-and-Easter Christians. The riots in France were simply race riots by bored, unemployed, 100% secular punks in the cites [projects]. When the imams told them to cease and desist from their favorite pastime of Grand Torch Auto, the kids told the imams to f--- off.
Second, even if most of the muslims in Europe were actually observant, their numbers aren't anywhere close to the 25% threshold that our own Mexicans have already crossed in the southwestern US. The 2nd- and 3rd-generation muslim immigrants have smaller and smaller family sizes than their immigrant forebears.
Finally, you get the sense the tide is turning for ordinary white (and non-white Christian) Europeans. Many of the Dutch have had it. The Swiss have just made their feelings known, in the minaret referendum. The Brits are starting to recover their ancient love of liberty and are protesting their leaders' embrace of sharia and multiculti idiocy.
As to the Euro-Mediterranean thing, it's nothing more than a trade bloc. All about money. Which, when you get down to it, is all the EU really signifies.
#16
How about a US-EU free trade zone? I don't want to live in an Asian Century. Our Euro in-laws p*ss us off from time to time, and we them, but let's get real: we and they have vastly more in common than either of us will ever have with the Asians or our respective neighbors to the south.
God help us and our children if "Asian values" ever displace western ones from pride of place in the world. If you don't like euro-socialism, just consider the Indian caste system or the bandit capitalism practiced by the Chinese government and military.
Peoples of the north, unite. Nothing to lose but a dim and bleak future.
#17
I don't recall him ever saying anything of the sort, and I read it all.
Besoeker, can't point to the very article, but I *did* read it (a couple years+ ago, maybe?), and it turned me off him, was reminded of noting it by having poster the JW article above earlier.
#18
One last dig: I don't care for EUcrats and Gore-style crony capitalism any more than the rest of youse, but really, our transatlantic p*ssfest is a tempest in a p*sspot. You ain't SEEN corruption till you've been to countries like India, China, Indonesia, for that matter Brazil, Russia, Ukraine.
We and the EUros are like a old couple. We quarrel constantly, he-says-she's-a-nag-and-she-says-he's-domineering, but neither of us has ANYTHING in common with the primitive, brutal, authoritarian and thoroughly corrupt and rapacious political economy you find outside the West.
It would behoove us to remember who the real enemies of freedom and individual dignity are.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
12/30/2009 9:41 Comments ||
Top||
#20
I certainly concur with your "feeble" assessment.
Sorry, I do what I can, with what I have, the internet allows for people to vent off anonymously, just take it as it comes, and not too seriously... it's not like I am responsible for what I do or say, anyway, or should be held responsible for, at least. That's my whole premise.
I plan on hitting the tipjar for the New Year to alleviate the guilt of being able to speak along others, like if I were a real person (I'm not, but I'm mostly harmless, on the bright side).
Note that I don't read much RP, certainly haven't looked after him lately, but I really liked his "the shah always falls" piece eons ago. I don't have anything against him, it's just that he's not my cup of tea (Steyn falls pretty much in the same camp, though he's very entertaining to read and often funny).
#21
And yes I agree with Lex. Mrs Geller needs an extended trip to Europe.
There's no such thing as the "Islamization" of European culture. It's simply not there.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
12/30/2009 9:44 Comments ||
Top||
#22
I don't want to live in an Asian Century.
I don't mind it. I have more in common with people who work hard, study hard, take care of their families and don't endorse every new intellectual fad that comes along than I do with Europe.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/30/2009 9:50 Comments ||
Top||
#23
I live in California. Was involved with a new school for kids here which, at one point, I hoped might offer my kids an alternative to the dreadful public schools. But now the project has been taken over by an Asian foundation which seeks to promote "Asian values," including
-- putting 40 kids into a classroom
-- kicking back 10% of the California revenues to the foundation, and squeezing profits out of the operation by paying staff slightly more than min. wage
-- violating CA employment laws, eg intervening in employees' private lives and political activity
I miss Europe. I miss the America that looked to Europe as the ultimate source of the best in our civilization and culture.
#24
Steve, I'm all for Americanized Asians. But Asian institutions as they exist today in CHina, India and pretty much all of Asia are profoundly opposed to our basic concepts of individual dignity. Side by side with respect for elders, respect for learning etc is utter contempt for any notion of transparent and honest government, rule of law, individual rights, equality of opportunity etc. Remember, the Asian Americans are the ones who escaped from those sh*tholes. They don't want their girls to wear saris or their boys to have to become gov't whores to make a living.
#25
Just understand it's not "you" and "us" against "them", it's "us" (yeah, even the israeli, sorry, G(r)om, but AFAIC, israelis are white europeans, in last analysis) and "them".
#28
anonymous5089, about half of the Jewish population of Israel come from Arab countries, Iran and North Africa. Given birth rate differentials, that proportion will be considerably higher. The culture of Israel is becoming less European to follow the birthrate -- which the neighboring countries will no doubt discover the hard way. The guilt of the colonizer is a European attitude, not an Arab one.
#30
In 2050 Europe (and the rest of the civilized world) will look very different. We will live (me only hopefully) a high tech information society, with little use for unskilled labor. Automatization in factories will be dominant, services done by intelligent machines (you won't see a cashier in the supermarkets by then).
High skilled services will remain... but we really won't have use for unskilled labor from North Africa.
And Islam is of little or no appeal to the average European not born as a Muslim. That won't change either. If there is a "respiritualization", it will be predominantly Christian.
Muslims living in Europe will also change, and 4th and 5th generations will differ little from, non-Muslim families. You won't see 5th generation Muslim families with 6 kids.
Extremists exist and will exist. We will have to watch over them closely. But Islam is not going mainstream in Europe and never will.
"Euroabia" is a myth created by Bat Yeor. Europe is certainly looking to expand its influence to North Africa and the Middle East, but it will not tolerate things the other way round.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
12/30/2009 23:04 Comments ||
Top||
#31
It's okay. Maybe once we all are exposed to non-western European values for a sufficient period, we'll learn to fight back.
#1
Best of all, the bill contains a provision that, in the event of another government request for emergency aid to prop up the financial system, debate in Congress be limited to just 10 hours.
STFU and give us the money! -- Bawney
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
12/30/2009 13:10 Comments ||
Top||
There is no more solemn duty for an American commander-in-chief than the martialling of all elements of American power the phrase Obama himself used on Monday to protect the people of the United States. In that key respect, Obama failed on Christmas Day, just as President George W. Bush failed on September 11th (though he succeeded in the seven years after that).
Yes, the buck stops in the Oval Office. Obama may have rather smugly given himself a B+ for his 2008 performance but he gets an F for the events that led to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab boarding a Detroit-bound plane in Amsterdam with a PETN bomb sewn into his underpants. He said today that a systemic failure has occurred. Well, hes in charge of that system.
The picture were getting is more and more alarming by the hour. Here are some key elements to consider:
1. Abdulmutallabs father spoke several times to the US Embassy in Abuja, Nigeria and visited a CIA officer there to tell him, apparently, that he feared his son was a jihadist being trained in Yemen. According to CNN, the CIA officer wrote up a report, which then sat in the CIA headquarters at Langley for several weeks without being disseminated to the rest of the intelligence community. This was not just a casual encounter. Again according to CNN, there were at least two face-to-face meetings, telephone calls and written correspondence with the father. If its true that the CIA sat on this then it beggars belief.
2. After 9/11, the huge bureaucracies of the Homeland Security Department and the Directorate of National Intelligence (DNI) were created. Inside the DNI, the National Counter Terrorism Center was created. These organisations were created to connect the dots. It may well be that the fault lay with NCTC and not the CIA CIA spokesman George Little says here that key biographical information and information about possible extremist connections in Yemen was passed to NCTC. If NCTC knew about it, then did someone at the National Security Council within the White House? Theres a huge blame game beginning so well no doubt know soon enough.
3. It wasnt just the meeting with the father. According to CBS, as early as August of 2009 the Central Intelligence Agency was picking up information on a person of interest dubbed The Nigerian suspected of meeting with terrorist elements in Yemen. So there were other parts of the jigsaw that were not put together.
4. In his studied desire to be the unBush by responding coolly to events like this, Obama is dangerously close to failing as a leader. Yes, it is good not to shoot from the hip and make broad assertions without the facts. But Obama took three days before speaking to the American people, emerging on Monday in between golf and tennis games in Hawaii to deliver a rather tepid address that significantly underplayed what happened. He described Abdulmutallab as an isolated extremist who allegedly tried to ignite an explosive device on his body phrases that indicate a legalistic, downplaying approach that alarms rather than reassures. Todays words showed a lot more fire and desire to get on top of things well see whether Obama follows through with action. In the meantime, he went snorkelling.
5. There has been a pattern developing with the Obama administration trying to minimise terrorist attacks. We saw it with Abdul Hakim Mujahid Muhammad, a Muslim convert who murdered a US Army recruit in Little Rock, Arkansas in June. We saw it with Major Nidal Malik Hassan, a Muslim with Palestinian roots who slaughtered 13 at Fort Hood, Texas last month. In both cases, there were Yemen connections. Obama began to take the same approach with Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. Well see whether this incident shakes him out of that complacency. Whether its called the war on terror or not, its clear that the US is at war against al-Qaeda and radical Islamists.
6. Guantanamo Bay. It seems that two of the Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) planners behind this attack were released from Guantanamo Bay during the Bush administration. That calls into question the competence of Bush administration officials but also the wisdom of closing Guantanamo Bay. How many other enemies of America and the West are going to be released back to the battlefield? As Mike Goldfarb asks: Is the Obama administration seriously still considering sending some 90 Yemeni detainees now being held at Gitmo back to their country of origin, where al Qaeda are apparently running around with impunity?
7. Janet Napolitano, Obamas Homeland Security Chief, has been a distaster in this, exhibiting the kind of bureaucratic complacency that makes ordinary citizens want to go postal. On Sunday, she told CNN that one thing Id like to point out is that the system worked and ABC News that once the incident occurred, the system worked. A day later, she grumbled that quoted out of context before reversing herself, telling NBC: Our system did not work in this instance. No one is happy or satisfied with that. An extensive review is under way. The system worked comment was a heckuva job, Brownie moment. Is she up to the job?
8. Will Obama hold individuals accountable? Briefing the press today behind a cloak of anonymity as a Senior Administration Official, Denis McDonough, NSC chief of staff (he gave the game away by saying he was from Minnesota), said that Obama intends to demand accountability at the highest levels before adding: It remains to be seen what that means exactly. If heads dont roll and soon then Obamas words will seem hollow. Its an opportunity for him to show some real steel.
9. Theres a continued, unfortunate tendency for everyone in Obamaland to preface every comment about something going wrong with a sideswipe against the Bush administration. On Sunday, Bill Burton, Deputy White House Press Secretary, briefed: On the Sunday shows, Robert Gibbs and Secretary Napolitano made clear that we are pressing ahead with securing our nation against threats and our aggressive posture in the war with al Qaeda. We are winding down a war in Iraq that took our eye off of the terrorists that attacked us, and have dramatically increased our resources in Afghanistan and Pakistan where those terrorists are. Why pat yourself on the back for winding down a war in Iraq that took our eye off of the terrorists that attacked us when the issue at hand is why the US government under Obama, er, took its eyes off a terrorist who did try to attack us and nearly killed 300 people? Its bordering on the juvenile. Obamas been president for a year now. Its time for him to accept that things that happen as his responsibility, not Bushs. Its time for him to echo Ronald Reagan, who said over Iran-Contra: I take full responsibility for my own actions and for those of my administration.
10. Will there be US air attacks against targets in Yemen? Watch this space. Its safe to say that Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula or AQAP, described to me by a senior intelligence official today as officially recognised and in corporate terms a sanctioned franchise of al-Qaeda that is plainly now seeking to become an international rather than just a regional Islamist player.
#1
We are winding down a war in Iraq that took our eye off of the terrorists that attacked us
I wonder how many terrorists died in Iraq when they might otherwise have attacked us somewhere else? Does anybody ever stop to think how much it bothers them that we beat the crap out of them in Iraq? Does anybody stop to think how easily we could transport a couple hundred guys from Iraq into Yemen to chill a few mooks there?
Afghanistan is the "good war", huh? Let's see how we're all feeling about that in 2012. In the meantime do something about Muslim men with bombs in their pants...and leave the little old white ladies alone.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
12/30/2009 12:19 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Do you really want to get these guys? I thought Bambi knows the Chicago Way.
#1
Where did you find this guy? He's a gem. Loved this part:
And what did Messrs. al-Harbi and Shari/al-Awfi do to reform themselves in the Saudi Kingdom?
American officials agreed to send the two terrorists from Guantanamo to Saudi Arabia where they entered into an "art therapy rehabilitation program" and were set free, according to U.S. and Saudi officials.
"Muhammad, Said, you both show great promise. The tensile strength of the drawing of the detonator is remarkable. And that smoke issuing from the World Trade Center, what can I say? It has a quiet intensity. Said, my goodness, the quality of light you have captured in your painting of the Pentagon's penetration ... some artists work a lifetime without being able to achieve such effects!"
Friday brings an end to a decade most Americans will be glad to see the back of. What's to like about a 10-year span that started with an embarrassingly botched election, moved on to the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history and ended with a harrowing financial crisis?
The "Aughties" were awful. But all the media-driven doom and gloom is getting a little out of hand. Yes, it was a rotten 10 years for America. But cheer up: Things aren't as bad as they seem, and there's a good chance they'll get better.
This was the "decade from hell," Andy Serwer proclaims in a recent Time cover story: a period of economic apocalypse and unrelenting terror, "the most dispiriting and disillusioning decade Americans have lived through in the post-World War II era."
Holy hyperbole, hackman. Has Serwer never heard of the "misery index," the measure of unemployment plus inflation that Ronald Reagan used to pummel Jimmy Carter in the 1980 race? At 11.84, it's at its decade-long peak right now, but it hit 22 in Carter's last months and busted Obama's record in four of the last six decades.
Surely the 1930s -- the decade that saw Hitler's rise to power and a U.S. unemployment that routinely passed 20 percent -- has to count as more "dispiriting" than the 2000s. And how about the '60s -- a decade of assassinations, vicious race riots, rising crime and a pointless war that killed more than 50,000 Americans?
The Aughties were worse, Serwer says, because "the idea that terrorists can attack anytime and anywhere is new and profoundly unsettling."
Well, settle down. The latest "Human Security Brief," tabulating political violence worldwide, reports that over the last decade, "fatalities from terrorism have declined by some 40 percent," while "al-Qaeda has suffered a dramatic collapse in popular support throughout the Muslim world." Every year of this decade -- including 2001 -- many more Americans died from the flu than died from terrorism.
Doomsayers like Serwer could benefit from a little historical perspective. As P.J. O'Rourke once put it, if you think there was some golden age in the past you'd rather live in, "let me say one word: 'dentistry.' "
The fact is, a lot of good things happened in the 2000s, and, typically, the bounties of the era were provided by private enterprise, not the machinations of government do-gooders. The Internet put the means of production in the hands of the workers, leading to a dynamic do-it-yourself culture in which bloggers compete with established columnists, bands without a record contract can hit it big, and anyone with a digital camera can get his 15 minutes on YouTube.
History comes in cycles. The Aughties resemble a milder version of the '60s, a decade that began with high trust in government (as happened after 9/11) and ended with Americans relearning the old lessons about federal incompetence and the limits to American power.
But whenever pessimism gets its hooks in me -- which is fairly often -- I think back to the introduction my colleague David Boaz wrote a few years ago for "Toward Liberty," a collection marking 25 years of the Cato Institute.
Boaz describes the stagnant America of the late '70s, with a top tax rate of 70 percent, 91 percent of television viewers chained to the big three networks -- a time when people literally couldn't imagine a world without the Soviet Union: "Energy czars. Gas lines. Raging inflation. ABC-NBC-CBS. Mao Tse-Tung. The Soviet Union. Apartheid. It was a different era. What wasn't so obvious at the time was that it was the end of an era."
That era ended because Americans corrected their course after two difficult decades, doing the right thing after exhausting all other possibilities, in Churchill's phrase. And the years to come will give us plenty of incentive to put America on the right path again.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/30/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
many more Americans died from the flu than died from terrorism
Now that's something the Government can do something about! Bring on Obamacare!
Posted by: Bobby ||
12/30/2009 6:13 Comments ||
Top||
On Sunday the administration told us "the system worked."
On Monday, the president said it merely failed to prevent an "isolated extremist."
By Tuesday, though, the president acknowledged a "systemic failure" and two administration officials told CNN that this was a conspiracy so vast we were looking for bombing targets in Yemen to retaliate.
#1
In other words, the administration has not a clue to what is going on. Seems like at lower levels we know a lot. It also seems our leaders run to the podium as soon as they can to deny any mistakes. Just maybe if they paid attention, for just a minute, then communicated among themselves, they would not look soo stupid. This is clearly amature leadership at best, neglegent leadership, more likely. Now we will be in full contact damage control, blame Bush, blame the "Government system", blame anyone they can. If they would have taken 15 minutes to talk with key leaders they might have learned this was a coordinated effort to bring down this airplane. They also migh learn that there are other efforts to hurt America out there. Then they can act to stop them and protect our ountry, the primary mission of the federal government, not health care, buying GM, bailing out AIG, etc...
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
12/30/2009 16:01 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Some of the words I want to hear from the President:
I'm not taking it any more from any towel wearing son of a b____, who thinks tying a fire bomb to his d___k is a good idea;
... ordered to shoot on sight
... ordered to start an easy to get on "double search" list
... non-American saboteurs will be sent to a military tribunal
... shot
... a foreign spy or saboteur does not get the same protections as American citizens
...Gitmo prisoners are being moved to Antartica to allow prisoners to cool down and reflect on things...
#3
whatadeal, I like that last one, especially if you make it one of those rapidly disappearing ice-flows. They get a chance.....if AGW is wrong then they can survive long enough to freeze solid.....if it's right, they survive long enough to drown.
Via FrontPageMag The agencies that maintain watch lists have come under withering criticism that rights are being abused, which may have led to the under-inclusion of potential terrorists.
The case of the alleged Christmas bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, is being called a massive intelligence failure. And the evidence thus far does suggest a possible lapse in the government's management of terrorist watch lists.
But if so, the blame doesn't lie wholly with government agencies charged with maintaining the lists. Some share of responsibility lies with civil libertarian extremists who have ceaselessly lambasted the entire no-fly system.
Maintaining a terrorist watch list is a highly complex task. The problem includes not only assembling a list of potential suspects but distributing the information on the list to visa offices, border checkpoints, cargo facilities and the like in a timely fashion. The correct spelling of foreign names, with all the variants arising from translation, is in itself a highly complicated endeavor. Criteria for inclusion of a subject on a watch list must be established. And then there is the difficulty of training agents, many of them with little understanding of the nuances of places such as Yemen and Nigeria, to operate the system.
News reports suggest that Abdulmutallab's name was added to a government list of people with suspected ties to terrorism in November, after his father warned the American embassy in Lagos, Nigeria, that he had embraced Islamic extremism.
Abdulmutallab was not, however, on the far shorter no-fly list maintained by the FBI, which is why he was able to board without apparent problem the Northwest Airlines flight bound for Detroit. According to testimony before a Senate committee in early December by Timothy J. Healy, director of the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, the consolidated watch list maintained by the FBI currently consists of about 400,000 names. But of these, only about 3,400 have been placed on the no-fly list. In other words, about 396,600 individuals who have a suspected link to terrorism are permitted to fly.
A Justice Department audit last spring found numerous flaws in the terrorist watch system. As new information flows into the FBI, it is required to update the lists. Yet according to the audit, in 67% of the cases it sampled, "the FBI case agent primarily assigned to the case failed to modify the watch list record when new identifying information was obtained during the course of the investigation, as required by FBI policy."
The inevitable complexity of the watch list process guarantees significant errors. On one side lies the problem of innocent people finding themselves on the list: There have been more than a few notorious cases of error, including instances in which federal air marshals were themselves barred from flying. On the other side lies the problem of alleged terrorists like Abdulmutallab being allowed to fly.
Reducing both types of errors is obviously highly desirable. But given the nature of the dangers that the lists are designed to avert, a reasonable policy would tilt toward over-inclusiveness.
And here is where the political context becomes critical. The Bush administration was subjected to withering criticism for the way it managed the no-fly list. The American Civil Liberties Union put the system on its own list of the "Top Ten Abuses of Power Since 9/11," asserting that "the uncontroversial contention that Osama bin Laden and a handful of other known terrorists should not be allowed on an aircraft" has been exploited "to create a monster." In one of several lawsuits the group has filed involving terrorist lists, the ACLU alleged that they "violate airline passengers' constitutional right to freedom from unreasonable search and seizure and to due process of law."
Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has been one among a chorus of voices that accused the former administration of being far too sweeping, placing "infants, nuns and even members of Congress" on terrorist watch lists. The writer Naomi Wolf has called travel restrictions such as the no-fly list, "a classic part of the fascist playbook" akin to the depredations of Nazi Germany, where "families fleeing internment were traumatized by the uncertainties that they knew they faced at the borders." This was hysteria directed against Bush counter-terrorism mechanisms that the Obama administration has left almost entirely unchanged.
The Department of Homeland Security has indeed received a high volume of complaints about airport screening by individuals attempting to travel. Yet only a minuscule 0.7% of the complaints stemmed from issues relating to the watch lists. And of that 0.7%, about 51% of the complaints led to the conclusion that the individual in question was appropriately on the watch list. Whatever problems exist, the system is not outrageously over-inclusive. Indeed, if anything, the opposite is the case.
We will never know whether fierce criticism from the left had any direct effect on the processing of Abdulmutallab's file, but the political environment is important to consider going forward. The officials managing the watch lists are not eager to be hauled before a congressional committee if they blunder and bar innocent people from getting on flights. But they are also acutely aware of the potential price tag of being under-inclusive.
The problem with over-inclusiveness is that innocent people will suffer major inconvenience and that counter-terrorism resources are wasted. But if the lists are under-inclusive, innocent people can die, and in large numbers. If asked to choose between over- and under-inclusiveness on the watch lists, the passengers of Northwest Flight 253 no doubt would have their preference.
Gabriel Schoenfeld, a resident scholar at the Witherspoon Institute and a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, is the author of "Necessary Secrets: National Security, the Media, and the Rule of Law," due out in 2010.
Posted by: ed ||
12/30/2009 07:08 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
But if so, the blame doesn't lie wholly with government agencies
When national security is involved, "blame" should always lie at the TOP!
FP: Andrew C. McCarthy, welcome to Frontpage Interview.
Your thoughts on how the Obama administration is handling Abdul Mutallab in comparison to how it handled Hasan? The embarrassing and leaving-us-open-to-terror saga continues? Napolitano, as we know, emerged with some moronic statements. Your thoughts?
McCarthy: Jamie, thanks for having me. Its a pleasure.
It would be nice if the government spent half as much energy focusing on what actually catalyzes jihadist terror as it does denying that there is terrorism. This problem is not unique to Obama officials, but this administration is raising willful blindness to a new level.
Basically, unless they catch a guy wearing an al Qaeda t-shirt, their default position is that everyone is a lone-wolf with no connection to any larger enterprise and God forbid that we should ask exactly what it is that somehow inspires all these lone-wolves to attack Americans.
In my book, I describe how, right after Sayyid Nosair murdered Meir Kahane in 1990, the first impulse of the NYPDs chief of detectives was to portray him as a lone, crazed lunatic who was certainly not part of a broader conspiracy and whose religious beliefs were irrelevant and, as their public statements at the time demonstrate, the FBI went right along publicly with that theory.
Of course it was idiotic for Napolitano to say Hasans was not an act of terrorism and that there are no indications Mutallab is part of a larger terrorist conspiracy. Already, evidence to the contrary is overwhelming, on both scores. But this is the same error weve been making for 20 years. We dont want to come to grips with the fact that something we cant control something we can only fight or surrender to is causing Muslims to terrorize us. So we pretend the something and the terrorism dont exist.
FP: It appears that former Gitmo detainees released in 2007 may be behind this latest terror effort. The significance?
McCarthy: Well, we plainly should not have been releasing jihadist detainees all along, and this obsession to shutter Gitmo is sheer madness. Common sense says that, if even the Obama administration realizes it would be problematic to release the last 200 of them, these remnants must be a very serious national security threat. And yet, less than two weeks ago, we shipped another half-dozen back to Yemen as a harbinger for what the administration hoped would be the return of dozens more (Yemenis account for about 90 of the remaining 198 or so detainees). Thats nuts.
The Yemeni government, while it periodically feigns friendship with the U.S., makes common cause with Qaeda jihadists using them to help fight Shiite insurgents. The government has a history of releasing and allowing the escape from custody of anti-American terrorists. Sending them to Yemen as well as to Afghanistan and Somaliland, as weve taken to doing is like sending them right back to bin Laden.
The only thing possibly more absurd is the delusion that we can move them away from jihadism by sending them to a Wahhabist re-education course run by the Saudis, who have spent billions of dollars and half a century propagating the ideology that fuels Sunni terrorism. Rest at link
Posted by: ed ||
12/30/2009 07:01 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Christmas Day 2009 witnessed another attempted terrorist attack on U.S. territory. Al-Qaida and its affiliates intend to spill American blood on American soil -- lots of it.
For the clear-thinking, there is no question Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab is a terrorist with connections. Yemen's government confirmed The Christmas Terrorist lived in Yemen from August to early December 2009. "Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula" (based in Yemen) claimed credit for operation.
Yet two days after the incident, the Obama administration's queen of incompetence, Janet Napolitano, said she had no evidence of a wider terrorist plot involving Abdulmutallab. Napolitano also stuck to the "terrorism is crime" narrative. Abdulmutallab committed an act of war, a strategic terror bombing of Detroit, but the ideologues running the Obama administration just can't acknowledge that. The Obama administration recently sent six Yemeni terrorists from Guantanamo Bay to Yemen. Why? Well, according to the terror apologists, George W. Bush treated these poor men like war criminals, which violated their rights ...
Posted by: ed ||
12/30/2009 06:36 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Yet two days after the incident, the Obama administration's queen of incompetence, Janet Napolitano, said she had no evidence of a wider terrorist plot involving Abdulmutallab.
Which simply means she is NOT reading daily classified intelligence traffic and updates, or for political purposes is refusing to accept or believe any of it. You decide.
It's easier with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. First, she should be placed under oath and directed to explain why terrorists will not now detonate their weapons 61 minutes before arrival. And then reconsider her job.
Since the terrorist attempt Friday on Northwest/Delta flight 253, Napolitano has repeatedly said "the system worked." But it didn't. A terrorist was able to get a bomb aboard the airplane. It is no thanks to Napolitano that the passengers on 253 are alive, not in fragments in a warehouse somewhere, being identified by technicians. The system failed, but fortunately the bomb did too.
Unfortunately for the rest of us. For a tiny cost, terrorists apparently have panicked officials into inflicting more damage on the global air transportation system, by imposing humiliation and discomfort on passengers, while not making the terrorists' job any harder.
It's time to apply some serious security discipline to the protection of air transportation, on a global scale. This rests on the fact that no security measure is perfect. But if there are multiple measures in place, the attacker can't count on the imperfections to line up - link several slices of Swiss cheese - and has a much more difficult task.
Today's system wastes a huge amount of time and money searching people who are not homicidal maniacs - and this is the incontrovertible fact behind all the arguments about "profiling." Not only are most passengers not bombers, but most passengers are linked to a mass of data, an electronic identity that makes it easy to confirm that they are unlikely suspects.
Yes, some people will argue, but there's always the chance that a 44-year-old woman who's lived in Des Moines for 16 years and has travelled 20 times a year on business, on average, for the last decade has suddenly decided to become a suicide bomber. There is a chance, but it is a very small one, and if terrorist groups have to start recruiting in that demographic it will put a big crimp in their activities. Which is what we want.
So one way to greatly improve aviation security would be to take advantage of what we already know about people. Offer passengers a smart card, linked to a security rating - akin to a credit rating, based on personal details, life events, a travel record, the data trail behind the ticket and other factors, rated against the profile of known attackers.
(Privacy? Count yourself lucky if that's all anyone knows about you. The other day I was dealing with a bank online: In 30 seconds it was asking me to confirm what city a family member lived in, and it knew where I lived - 25 years ago. That horse is not just out of the barn - it has galloped across the open plain into the sunset.)
Use any of several hard-to-spoof biometric systems to match the card to the holder - they have to be better than photo IDs, and I speak as a person bearing not the slightest resemblance to my passport photo - and your high-rated passengers can sail through. Maybe not every time - I'd happily trade the imbecile shoes/jacket/laptop routine for a once-in-10 thumbprint scan and explosives check - but at least most of the time.
Then you can get rid of the low-paid, bored-to-death screeners doing the same thing over and over again and focus on the low-rated types. I'd guess that the alleged flight 253 bomber would have been among them: boarded in Nigeria, paid cash, no bags, 20-30 years old and male.
The absence of any kind of critical thinking along those lines is why Napolitano maybe should be fired. But that would reflect badly on her boss, and what we've seen in the last year is that, ultimately, that's what matters in Washington.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/30/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Learn from the Israelis. Use well-educated, professional, highly-trained airport screeners to ask a few q's of every single passenger while he or she's waiting in line at security. Very easy to spot liars and nervous nells, esp those with one-way tix but no bags, islamic surnames, strange appendages strapped to the sides of their trousers etc.
Works for the Israelis and has done so for going on four decades. Cost? Maybe a billion or two per year. Cheaper than yet another stupid tech non-fix.
#2
#1 Learn from the Israelis. Use well-educated, professional, highly-trained airport screeners
What! No slip shoe, post-dap hand jam or grinning sociolect jive? Who will we find for Hartsfield-Jackson?
We trained hard at TSA . . . but it seemed that every time we were beginning UNIONIZEto form up into teams we would be reorganized. I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing....
#3
I keep telling you guys, the system DID work. You just have to understand what the system is supposed to do.
1) provide thousands of gov't employee jobs that can be controlled for maximum political benefit;
2) provide after the fact cover for every politician and bureaucrat;
3) sort the shredded aluminum from shredded people so that the greenies will be impressed by the recycling.
The cover of Al Gore's new book, Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis, features a satellite image of the globe showing four major hurricanes--results, we're meant to believe, of man-made global warming. All four were photoshopped. Which is nice symbolism, because in a sense the whole hurricane aspect of warming has been photoshopped.
True, both greenhouse gas emissions and levels in the atmosphere are at their highest, but this year had the fewest hurricanes since 1997, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. For the first time since 2006 no hurricanes even made landfall in the U.S.; indeed hurricane activity is at a 30-year low.
None of which is really all that remarkable. What's remarkable is that the hurricane hysteria essentially reflects a "trend line" comprising a grand total of two data points in one year, 2005. Those data points were named Katrina and Rita.
In a 2005 column, I gave what now proves an interesting retrospective.
"The hurricane that struck Louisiana yesterday was nicknamed Katrina by the National Weather Service. Its real name was global warming." So wrote environmental activist Ross Gelbspan in a New York Times op-ed that one commentator aptly described as "almost giddy." The green group Friends of the Earth linked Katrina to global warming, as did Germany's Green Party Environment Minister.
The most celebrated of these commentaries was Chris Mooney's 2007 book Storm World:Hurricanes, Politics and the Battle Over Global Warming. Mooney, for the record, is also author of the best-selling book The Republican War on Science.
Yet there were top scientists in 2005 such as Roger Pielke Jr., a professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder, publishing data showing the Rita-Katrina blowhards had no business building a case around two anomalies.
Pielke published a report in the prestigious Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (written before Katrina but published shortly afterward) that analyzed U.S. hurricane damage since 1900. Taking into account tremendous population growth along coastlines, he found no increase. His paper was dutifully ignored by the powers that be.
But the so-called Climategate scandal, which illuminated efforts by climate change scientists to squelch opposition viewpoints, has now caught up to one scientist, Kevin Trenberth, who vociferously and influentially demanded that Pielke's paper be shunned.
Trenberth works in the same town as Pielke and is one of the top researchers on the strongly warmist Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). In a leaked e-mail from two months ago, he admitted to colleagues what he had hidden from the outside world: that there's been no measurable warming over the past decade.
Yet two years earlier he told Congress that evidence for man-made warming was "unequivocal" and things were "apt to get much worse." And in 2005 he told the local newspaper that Pielke's Bulletin article was "shameful" and should be "withdrawn."
"Our paper shouldn't have been controversial," notes Pielke today, "and since then our conclusions have been reinforced by the IPPC." The panel's latest report, from 2007, concluded that whether warming is causing increased hurricane activity is "pretty much a toss of a coin."
Yet Pielke's paper was excluded from that report. Why? Says Pielke, "a scientist at a high level of the IPCC saw fit to disparage a paper in his domain, said it should be ignored by the panel, and subsequently it was." He added, "After seeing [leaked] e-mail discussions in which the scientists talked about keeping literature out of the report ... well, you can connect the dots."
But it wasn't just Trenberth. In one of the hacked e-mails, Phil Jones, director of the British climate center from which the e-mails were stolen (and who has since resigned) wrote to colleagues about Pielke's complaints of not being published, "Maybe you'll be able to ignore them?"
For many millions of American homeowners, the 2005 tempest tirade was hardly just academic. Half a year later, a company called Risk Management Solutions (RMS) issued a five-year forecast of hurricane activity predicting U.S. insured hurricane losses would be 40% higher than the historical average. RMS is the world leader in "catastrophe modeling," and insurance companies use those models to set premium rates charged to homeowners as well as by reinsurance companies and others.
With four years of data in, losses are actually running far below historical levels and at less than half the rate that RMS predicted. A lot of individuals and a lot of companies have grossly overpaid.
This hardly supports rushes to judgment on global warming consequences. "If you overestimate or underestimate risks there will be costs," says Pielke. "It's honesty and accuracy that count."
#1
Environmentalists have developed a simply technique for communicating with the public called lying. The WWF is running a commercial about the poor endangered polar bears and how "climate change" is killing them off. Gore frequently talks about the endangered polar bears. The facts are that polar bear population has increased by a factor of four to five in the last fifty years.
#2
ION FREEREPUBLIC/OTHER > RUSSIA ARMAGEDDON PLAN TO SAVE EARTH FROM COLLISION WITH ASTEROID [Comet APOPHIS [2029-2036].
Again, in terms of size both GUAM'S KAMALEN/CAMARIN + APOPHIS are relatively small - Its their consequences + ultimately their SYMBOLISM which is significant. The defense of GUAM-WESTPAC from KAMALEN is more of US-SPECIFIC PEROGATIVE given the time frame, not one for desired OWG-NWO at this time as would be for APOPHIS 2029-2036.
1960's - early 1970's GUAM TAOTAMONAS > Its NO ACCIDENT that the USDOD desires to base a US ARMY MISSLE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, includ BMD batteries, here on Guam as part of the reloc of Marine forces from Okinawa + US realignment of Pacific forces. Iff I were Guam's HR Delegate Bordallo, Governator Camacho, andor GovGuam Legislature Politicos = so-called "HOUSE OF HESSLER" [Guam PDN Forums], I would try to get the BMD task force here ASAP, or at least USAF strike aircraft [F15's, B52's,etc] equipped wid high-atmospheric defensive missles.
Aagin, what makes people think that a POST-WOT?, ECON- + GEOPOL WEAKENED AMERICA = AMERIKA, the mighty USSA = weak United Socialist Republiks of Amerika-NORAM, UNDER OWG WILL HAVE THE NATIONAL-GLOBAL SOVEREIGNTY, ETC. TO UNILATERALLY FIRE POTENT MISSLES AT ANY SPACE ROCK, WIDOUT OWG = "UNIVERSAL" CONSENT + DEBATE???
E.g. WMF/OTHER > the ECON BANKRUPT USA in future may have to depend on an INTERNATIONAL MERCENARY SYSTEM TO SATISFY US-SPECIFIC MIL MANPOWER, RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS [e.g. Hessians, Irish Legion = "Wild Geese", French Foreign Legion, etc.]International or "Global" milfors paid by the weak USA but not necessarily LOYAL to the USA - DITTO FOR SCIENCE-BASED SPACE DEFENSE??? WHAT MORE A WEAK USA STILL FIGHTING AGZ A STRONGER BUT NOW NUCLEARIZED ISLAMIST-MILIT THREAT AROUND THE WORLD???
Clearly NOT voting for OWG-NWO and related has no consequences for mainstream America = Amerika, doesn't it?
[Asharq al-Aswat] By Tariq Alhomayed
It is normal for Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah to defend of Hamas, and to make reference to Egypt with regards to the issue of [the construction of] the wall along the border with Gaza. This comes following [Hamas chief] Khalid Mishal's recent visit to Iran, and prior to this Hamas met with Hezbollah in Lebanon, and almost a month ago an Iranian official met with Hamas in Damascus. However what is strange is that Hassan Nasrallah's talk about Egypt comes at the same time that Ali Larijani was meeting with the Egyptian president in Cairo, and following this [meeting] he spoke to the media about the necessity of activating Egyptian -- Iranian relations, and also Arab -- Iranian relations, in order to reach a strategic relationship based upon an Arab -- Turkish -- Iranian alliance. Larijani's conciliatory talk completely contradicts the speech given by Nasrallah on the occasion of Ashura, in which he lectured Egypt and the Egyptians.
Nothing can be understood from this other than that there are two trends reacting against each other in regional Iranian politics...two trends that were born from the womb of the [original] conservative trend, and they are the hard-line trend, and the most hard-line trend. The Iranian reformists are busy, and in fact have concentrated all their efforts on the internal struggle that has begun to develop in a concrete and substantial manner, and this indicates that something might happen there.
The talk about a hard-line trend and the most hard-line trend in Iran is justified if we recall the course of events, especially those events that are connected to Iran in our region, and there is the contradiction of Larijani's position [towards Egypt and the Arabs] with Nasrallah who is associated with the most hard-line [trend] in Iran, particularly the Revolutionary Guards. However apart from Egypt, there is another example of this [contradiction], and that is the occupation of the Iraqi Fakka oil well [by Iran], which came at an awkward time for Iran's allies in Iraq, and was embarrassing to the attempts of some Iranian officials who wanted to improve their regime's image in our region.
Of course there are the attempts made by Ahmadinejad and others, to accept uranium enrichment abroad during negotiations with the west on the nuclear issue, however this was an issue that Tehran soon backed down from in the face of internal pressure from the most hard-line [trend] in Iran. This is something that could cause the Islamic Republic serious difficulties with the West, and particularly the US, and this will become clearer over the course of the month.
Therefore the internal division that has struck Iran seems to be causing larger cracks between the hard-line trend and the most hard-line trend, and this is something that will aid the west in dealing with Iran at a time when Tehran is in more danger than ever. It is clear that the most hard-line trend does not hesitate in moving forward to achieve its interests, the most prominent of which is removing all of those that stand in their way internally. This is something that increases Tehran's vulnerability, and everybody is expecting a dangerous event to take place as a result of this, especially the [reformist] Green movement is growing, and this proves that the movement is continuing its advance, without being concerned about being the Revolutionary Guards, or the Wali Al Faqih, and they are not concerned about what is happening abroad and continue to focus on the internal struggle that is now sweeping the cities, and not just the [political] circles.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/30/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under: Hezbollah
#1
Basic English---you too can get along with 700 word vocabulary.
#2
OK, OK, I'll say it. After watching who commits terrorist acts over the last 30-40 years, one has to conclude the majority of recent terror acts are committed by muslims. I have tried to separate "good" muslims from "bad" muslims and keep things in that perspective. However, I think I was just being PC. One never knows when a "good" muslim is going to go jihad and become a "bad" muslim and kill a bunch of infidels and anyone who gets in the way. Collateral damage means nothing to these jihadists. The "bugs" in the religion seem to be "features" adhered to by a many or most muslims. I don't trust what muslims say and profess versus what I see. The Doomsday mentality, going to visit the virgins, lying in the name of religion, violence, etc. all seem to be built into the religion. You look at Christians, Jews, Buddhists, etc. and they are not the ones committing terrorist acts. Maybe I'm exhibiting discrimination and/or theophobia--maybe not.
#3
For a more in-depth analysis John, if you've not read Rosenberg's "Inside the Revolution" I'd strongly encourage it. An amazing eye opener into this sickening cult of death.
...Having known Jimmy Carter when I was a Congressman and Mayor, I have a minimum of high regard for him. I believe that he has often used his position - most recently as an author - to damage the State of Israel, and in doing so, he has injured the Jewish community worldwide.
...When Jimmy Carter asks the Jewish community for forgiveness, I believe it is incumbent upon him to list what he believes he has done that requires forgiveness. I also think we should know if after leaving the presidency he received any gifts, lecture fees or loans from Arab nations. He should make available any correspondence he has had during that period with Arab governments and list all the compensation, if any, he has received from them. I also would suggest that he hold a press conference at which journalists could ask him questions on the entire subject. Then and only then would the Jewish community be in a position to decide whether or not to grant him forgiveness. He should also know there is no one person in the community who can grant him such forgiveness.
The thought surely has occurred to many, as it has to me: Why is he suddenly so concerned and in need of forgiveness?
...Skeptics say his sudden interest in bettering relations with the Jewish community comes as a result of his grandson's running for public office in a community with a large Jewish population.
Carter went to see a fortune teller. The fortune teller told him "You will die on a Jewish holiday!". Carter was in a panic, he replied "Which one, there are many Jewish holidays". The fortune teller told him "Any day that you die will be a Jewish holiday".
#4
LBJ, Carter and Clinton. I learned all I need to know about Democrats from those guys. Unfortunately, now I have Obama to teach me things that I never even wanted to know.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
12/30/2009 11:54 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The Carter legacy:
On November 25, 1977, President Jimmy Carter hosted the shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, and his wife, Empress Farah, at a sumptous state receptiono on the South Lawn of the White House. Despite thousands of Iranian students protesting outside the White House gates, denouncing the shah's human rights abuses and retrictions on personal freedom in the country of their birth, the president spoke warmly of his "close personal friendship" with the shah and called Iran "an island of stability" in the Middle East, reflecting on the personal and strategic ties between the two men and the nations they led.
Cited by Baqer Moin, Khomeini: Life of the Ayatllah, p. 186.
#6
...Skeptics say his sudden interest in bettering relations with the Jewish community comes as a result bf his grandson's running for public office in a community with a large Jewish population.
Um, good luck with that. I think (hope?) that the J-Street bunch may have learned a little from the past year....
#7
ironically, there are many doctrinaire libs among the Jews of Fulton county, GA; including many that hold no opinion on Israel or are peace-now types or don't really care what the dad of a State Senator says on foreign policy
this suck up might not change many minds
Posted by: lord garth ||
12/30/2009 13:51 Comments ||
Top||
If you had invested $100 in the stock market in January 2000, by now it would be worth just $90. This has led some writers to describe the past 10 years as the lost decade.
I disagree. Loss assumes an unconscious act of forgetfulness. This, by contrast, was a decade of deliberate escape, an era in time when America chose to enter an alternate reality. A 10-year interval where otherwise responsible citizens decided that the best way to deal with their problems was to simply ignore them.
#1
Any different from the previous decades when the rest of West and the international trading community relied solely upon America to provide its real security and economic foundation while all the time engaging in actions to undermine both? America just caught the disease everyone else was carrying, severe self centered behaviors. Things become 'interesting' when someone else is no longer around to provide the environment that made life comfortable. That creates anxiety and fear which can be read in the words they articulate.
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.
By Pamela Geller
Friday brings an end to a decade most Americans will be glad to see the back of. What's to like about a 10-year span that started with an embarrassingly botched election, moved on to the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history and ended with a harrowing financial crisis?
It's easier with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. First, she should be placed under oath and directed to explain why terrorists will not now detonate their weapons 61 minutes before arrival. And then reconsider her job.
