Saturday, January 13, 2007

Acts of War (one-way?)

A little war talk over at the Washington Monthly. Kevin Drum posts about the attack on the Iranian consulate (note: not a consulate) in Iraq and quotes Andy McCarthy talking about it being an act of war.

ACT OF WAR....The big buzz today is that war with Syria and Iran is all but imminent. Over at The Corner, Andy McCarthy seems to be pretty happy about this:

With that in mind, the raid on the Iranian consulate in Iraq's Kurdish region has to be welcome news. We would certainly regard that as an act of war if the tables were turned.

Points for honesty, I guess. But what if it doesn't work? What provocation will we dream up next to ensure that we get the war conservatives so desperately want?

UPDATE: Nope, it turns out it wasn't a consulate. I guess we'll have to try something else after all.(link)

Notice how Drum states, "I guess we'll have to try something else..." {ellipsis mine-LN} on the fact that it wasn't a consulate (and therefore may not be an act of war). What Drum and his commenters (especially Blue_idiot_in_a_red_state) fails to remember (or is it this just not in their 'history') is that in 1979 the Iranians stormed the U.S. consulate and took people hostage. Now this is indeed an act of war and has never been answered.

Also, we have Iranian weapons in the hands of people in Iraq shooting at our soldiers, Iranian guardsmen (Quds) training terrorist to shoot at our soldiers (they stop being insurgents and become terrorist when they target civilians, think about it idiots). So now we have 3 acts of war (yes there are more over the intervening years, but I think this is enough to illustrate) against the U.S. by Iran. Where are the posts from Drum and tWM posters (and commenters) belaying that fact?

There won't be any. To those people, the U.S. is wrong (always) and no matter what any other country does, it is our fault if we do anything back except roll over and play France.

Read a few left-wing sites, in almost every thread there will be at least 1 (if not many) comments saying that ' and so right-winger... should enlist and grow some... etc.), the ironic fact that these people say this from there home and not in the military is just ... lost?

Hi to the tWM readers/commenters who click here :) feel free to spit in my comments.
Reason to fear the left in power
Filed: , , , , , , , ,


Democrats and other anti-war 'activists' need to take note. You guys are talking/protesting the wrong government. You guys need to direct your actions toward the Iraqi government, as soon as they say go, we go.

Kurdish General Training Troops for Baghdad Mission; Iraq's P.M. Says He Backs Bush Plan

Saturday, January 13, 2007

KIRKUK, Iraq — An Iraqi army brigade based in the northern Kurdish region is undergoing intensive training in urban combat and will be dispatched to Baghdad as part of a new joint U.S.-Iraqi security drive in the sprawling and violence-ridden city, the commander said Saturday.

The brigade is one of two coming from the Kurdish region and a third brigade will come from southern Iraq. The second Kurdish brigade will come from the northern city of Sulaimaniyah.

"We will head to Baghdad soon. We have 3,000 soldiers who are currently undergoing intensive training especially in urban combat and how the army should act inside a city," said Brig. Gen. Nazir Assem Korran, commander of the 1st Infantry Brigade, 2nd Division of the Iraqi army that is based in the city of Irbil.

Click here for more news on Iraq.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, in his first comments on the new Bush administration plan for restoring security in Baghdad, said the proposal was "identical to our strategy and intentions."

Al-Maliki, however, continued to avoid naming the Mahdi Army Shiite militia of one of his key supporters as a target of the military operations to cleanse the capital of Sunni insurgents and Shiite militia gunmen and death squads.(link)

As long as the Iraqi government wants us there and W is in the whitehouse, we'll be there. Democrats on Capitol Hill won't pull funding and risk votes in '08 (just look at their promises vs their actions, they are looking ahead, not worrying about today). So you're only chance to end this war early is to get the Iraqi government to say it's over.

Note: Nifong got his wish and is pulled from the Duke (no)Rape Case.

Sports: Anyone that watched the Ohio State - Tennessee game, tell me how the OSU guy walks out of bounds (at the end of the game) and there is no call?
Reason for ire

Friday, January 12, 2007


The greatest put-down on the 'net that I've been a personal witness to.
  1. “So a pathetic fucked-up black stripper with a couple of kids gets hired by some all american white boys-all I have no doubt from “good families” - and somehow your gloating over whatever went down gets tied up by by you and your peanut gallery of whiteboy dimwits with Glenn Greenwald?”

    The use of the racist term “White boy” twice in one paragraph? In a post accusing the proprietor of the site of racism?!? Wow. Got Irony? Don’t worry, though - what you lack in a sense of the absurd, you more than make up for in your lack of coherence.

    Let’s look past your virulent racism to the predicate conditions in your …um … statement. Parsing your words, you seem to think that all this case revolves around is a mercantile exchange between individuals of different races. Why their race would matter to you I’ve no idea. Oh wait, I do: it’s because you’re a racist.

    Moving on from that unhappy fact (I recommend Samuel Clemens to combat your peculiar instit- er, malady), and looking deeper at the case we find that it’s not *at all* about mercantilism – it’s about a rape charge that, according to the evidence in the public domain, is fraudulent - or, as you so pithily put it - “…whatever went down…”

    Seeing how rape is a charge that, should it be well-founded, is fraught not only with steep criminal, but also steep social and moral penalties, it is only proper that the false accuser be subject to those same social and moral (and legal – but let’s not hold our breaths) penalties. If it comes out, as I believe it will, that she has played fast and loose with – among other things – the truth, then it will be only just that she be mocked and publicly scorned for her actions. And the truth is leaking out; hence the scorning is commencing.

    Greenwald gets dragged into this because:

    a. He’s guilty of multiple counts of public douchebaggery, and as such should be mocked whenever possible.

    b. He’s the most perfect example of “un-credible-ness” in the known blogosphere, therefore he’s used as a superlative to compare to something so completely unbelievable you’d have to be a leftist to even *begin* to think it was true.

    As an aside – it’s perfectly delicious how you drag in “…with a couple of kids…” as though this is some sort of marker in her favor.

    Now, I’m all for reproductive freedom – everyone should be able to have kids. But the fact that she’s a prostitute and a drug addict who choose to have children at a young age should not ennoble her in anyone’s mind.

    While we’re on the topic, the notion that many of her supporters have that this woman is somehow not responsible for her situation in life, or it’s the fault of some ephemeral force of society, is absurd (see: 88, Statement of the). She made the choices that led her to the failure to live a good and decent life. She keeps making the same choices and they (surprise!) keep leading her to the same failures. That’s not the “White Boys” fault.

    ”The boorishness, vulgarity and racism gets to be a bit much.”

    Stop engaging in it, then.

    ”And then you still waste time with Jamil Hussein.”

    Create your own blog, and then you can write about whatever you want, and you can even dictate the content. Meanwhile, if it’s such a “waste [of] time” to deal with the Jamil/AP story, why do you bother to read and/or comment on it? Why not simply read the headlines of the posts and say to yourself, “My goodness, that silly Patterico is yapping about that story again, I think I’ll go down to the corner store and pickup a case of 40’s with my welfare check.”

    “I wish you had something more than your ego in mind when you posted here. You’re an expert, why not behave like one?”

    Ah yes – you knew P’s state of mind when he posted did you? Can you also read my mind; can you tell what I’m thinking of you right this very moment?

    ”Why make the choice for narcissism.”

    Because narcissism is the new black this year?

    “You’re a big fish in your own pond.”

    Patterico is the *only* fish in this pond. He pays the bills, he decides the topics of discussion. Here’s an idea: you could start your own blog and you could title it “Crackheads for Defending Spurious Rape Charges Against White Boys.” That’s just a suggestion, of course – I’m sure you could come up with something more elegant.

    “This site could have been more.”

    Yes, it could have: it could have had trolls that make at least a modicum of sense. Thanks for queering *that*.

    ”ban me if you want. It’s a serious question”

    When will you learn that off-point, imbecilic postings do not an argument make?

    It’s a serious question.

    Comment by Abraxas — 1/12/2007 @ 1:50 pm

Since Patterico needs readers (give him some slack, he's new) [heh], I'll post just the response, you'll have to jump over and read the comments (at least) to see what this response was too (although Abraxas did quote most of them). [link] While you are there, if you havn't read any of Patterico's items before (tell me you have??) then please, look around, it's a very good site that usually is busy fisking the LA Times.
Reason to hide in shame

Life and terrorism

I seem to have some very serious MAJOR personal issues going on right now, so my posting will necessarily slow down. Hopefully Thai or EMB can jump in and fill-in for me.

I will still be posting, but it may (and probably will) drop to 1 - 2 items a day, everyday for a good while. For those that know me personally, send an email and we'll discuss it, I am not going to air dirty laundry or personal issues (such as this) over the 'net at least until the conclusion of such.

Rocket attacks and 'cease-fires':(link)

Jan. 12, 2007 16:38 | Updated Jan. 12, 2007 18:04
Four Kassams hit W. Negev; IDF troops find two bombs

Kassam rockets were fired at Friday from the Gaza Strip at southern Israel, as IDF troops operating in Gaza and the West Bank discovered and safely detonated two bombs.

Four Kassams landed in the western Negev on Friday afternoon. No one was wounded and no damage resulted from any of the hits.

An police sapper carries the remains of a rocket that landed in a field near Sderot, despite a declaration of a cease-fire.
Photo: AP
Notice the caption on the A(w/t)P photo? When will it occur to them that a 'cease-fire' by terrorist organizations is meaningless? What will the headlines be when/if Israel retaliates to these attacks? I'll bet that the press will brand Israel the aggressor for violating the cease-fire hehTM

Time for Friday free-for-all again over at Jay's place ~Stop the Aclu go visit, give him some love.
Reason amongst the infidels

Thursday, January 11, 2007

Judgement in terror

Slow day for me, worked off midnights last night and slept alot today. Then I had to do some family business and watched a movie. So I thought I'd post a little snippet and probably head off to bed.

News | 12.01.2007 | 02:00

Lebanese face life for German bomb plot

A judge in a Beirut court has laid charges against six Lebanese men in connection with attempts to blow up two German trains last summer. The judge recommended life sentences with hard labour for all six suspects, five of which are in Lebanese custody. The other suspect, who is in German custody, is to be tried in absentia. Under Lebanese law, the accused can not be extradited to be put on trial in Germany. The charges stem from the discovery of home-made bombs placed on two trains in the western-German state of North-Rhine Westphalia last July. Both were defective and failed to go off.(link)

Justice is a fickle thing, but at least someone has the insight to enact HARSH penalties for terrorism (unlike the 15 years the last newsmonger got).

It's also nice to see Lebanese courts still hold to law instead of hizballah.
Reason to incarcerate

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Liberal Ass of All-Time award

There's been alot of posts lately about the worst liberal of '06 (and worst dressed, worst conservative, worst etc.); but this clown takes the prize for all-time worst. His name is John Seery and he is a regular poster at the Huffington Post (or Puffington Host as it is called on the right).

Blog Index RSS

Predict the Number of Troops Killed in the Next Year! (13 comments )

READ MORE: United States, Iraq

How many U.S. troops will be killed in Iraq in the next year?

Submit your best estimate here.

The Bush administration won't dare go public with such hard and somber calculations about expected casualties--which would help weigh the costs of this renewed war effort. So I figure conscientious HuffPo readers will step into that breach.

I'll keep track--our memories are long--and we'll notify the "winner" one year from today.

I'm not sure, however, what you'll win, or even if you could call it a victory. But Americans like to play to win, we've been told. And it doesn't take much of a sacrifice to ponder the possibility of someone else's death.

Not even the commenters at HuffPo like this one. Shows just how crass you can be if the left doesn't like your idea. People wonder exactly why people on the right call them unpatriotic and claim they want the U.S. to lose (in anything), yet the put out junk like this.
Reason seems to be missing
Filed: , , , ,


There is simply something seriously wrong with some people. This 'teacher' is in jail for having sex with a student. Not a high-school student, a 13-year old student. The judge dismisses most of her 8 year sentence on the grounds that she simply leave the boy and his family alone and what does she do?

Teacher's obsession costs her two more years in jail

Associated Press

McMINNVILLE, Tenn. — A former teacher serving an eight-year prison sentence for having sex with a 13-year-old student agreed Wednesday to serve two more years for sending him nude photos of herself.

Pamela Rogers pleaded guilty to two counts of solicitation of sexual exploitation of a minor. She admitted sending the photos, and investigators allege she also received photos and videos from the boy, now 15.

“She had become obsessed with him,” her lawyer, Peter Strianse said. “I think she is over that.”

Ms. Rogers, 29, was arrested in February 2005 and pleaded no contest to having sexual intercourse and oral sex with the student. A judge suspended most of her eight-year sentence on the condition that she not contact the student or his family or use the Internet. (link)

Now that's a decent looking woman (sigh). Of course there are going to be plenty of 'I wish I had a teacher like that' comments (the only comment on the site is one) and such from the people reading about this. However, as much as men and boys dream of things like this, it doesn't make it right. If the woman is a 'sex-addict' she should have simply had more sex with (gasp) her husband? or any of the millions of adults NOT in her class.

For any teacher to have sex with their students is simply wrong, no matter the gender or how appealing the person is.
Reason for outrage
Filed: , , , ,

As the war turns

If you are searching flights to amsterdam on the malaysian airlines, you might just not make it. You stand a higher chance of getting las vegas flights on the midwest airlines instead. This is just like expecting travel lodge where even travel trailers are a rare sight.

Finally getting serious with the militias?

Iraq PM tells Shiite militias to give up

1/10/2007, 7:05 p.m. ET
The Associated Press

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) — Iraq's prime minister has told Shiite militiamen to surrender their arms or face an all-out assault by U.S.-backed Iraqi forces, senior Iraqi officials said Wednesday, as President Bush said he will commit an additional 21,500 American combat troops to the war.

Under pressure from the U.S., Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has agreed to crack down on fighters controlled by his most powerful political ally, Muqtada al-Sadr, a radical Shiite cleric, according to officials. Previously, al-Maliki had resisted the move.

"Prime Minister al-Maliki has told everyone that there will be no escape from attack," a senior Shiite legislator and close al-Maliki adviser said. "The government has told the Sadrists: 'If we want to build a state we have no other choice but to attack armed groups.'"(link)

It seems that finally Al-Maliki is strong enough (or perceives he is) to tell Al-Sadr to go rot. For any 'nation-building' to have any chance of success, the government of Iraq must be totally involved and this looks like a promising step. Of course there have been other steps that didn't pan out, but I'll be optimistic on this one until I see the results.

If nothing else, the Iraqi government's intention to allow attacks against the militias may cut down on the violence that the everyday Iraqi faces, as the militias will become defensive. They cannot stand against the U.S. backed Iraqi forces if the latter is given the green light to go all out.

The Anchoress is tieing up all the loose ends on the surge and reactions to (against) it.
Reason for optimism
Filed: , , , ,

U.S. blasting terrorists in Africa

Islamists in Somalia continue to be hit by American forces. For the third day, American forces are bombing suspected Al-Qaeda terrorists in Somalia near Kenya.

AP Al-Qaida chief in Somalia may be dead
A civilian, center, walks past two Ethiopian soldiers, left, and Somali government forces on a truck with a mounted gun outside Villa Somalia housing President Abdullahi Yusuf, in the Somali capital, Mogadishu Tuesday, Jan. 9, 2007. Two U.S. airstrikes in Somalia killed large numbers of Islamic extremists, government officials and witnesses said Tuesday. The targets were suspects in the bombings of two U.S. embassies in East Africa in 1998. President Abdullahi Yusuf told journalists in the capital, Mogadishu, that the U.S. 'has a right to bombard terrorist suspects who attacked its embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.'  Monday, Yusuf had entered the restive capital for the first time since his election. (AP Photo/Mohamed Sheikh Nor)
AP Photo: A civilian, center, walks past two Ethiopian soldiers, left, and Somali government forces on a...

By SALAD DUHUL, Associated Press Writer 33 minutes ago

MOGADISHU, Somalia - A senior al-Qaida suspect wanted for bombing American embassies in East Africa was killed in a U.S. airstrike, a Somali official said Wednesday, a report that if confirmed would mean the end of an eight-year hunt for a top target of Washington's war on terrorism.

In Washington, U.S. government officials

said they had no reason to believe that the suspect, Fazul Abdullah Mohammed, had been killed. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the information's sensitivity.

The report came as U.S forces apparently launched a third day of airstrikes in southern Somalia. At least four separate strikes were reported around Ras Kamboni, on the Somali coast near the Kenyan border. Witnesses said an AC-130 gunship attacked a suspected al-Qaida training camp. (link)

If the politics of Iraq won't let us destroy the terrorists there (and that seems to be changing somewhat) at least we can hunt them somewhere. The Somalis, Ethiopians and the U.S. forces in Somalia are having great success in routing the Islamist terrorists.

Of course, when you set out to do something and then use the force necessary to do it, the job is much easier than trying to do the same job with a 'U.N.' approach. When you aren't burdened down with the french reaction to your plans/actions, they seem to work so much better.

Now if we could get the same kind of action going in Iraq and (next) Iran, the world will be a better place, at least for a little while.
Reason for optimism

Tuesday Night Video

Tuesday Night Video. Something different this week, instead of Vidilife, I'm going to link to Glumbert for the Video. They don't have an embed option (and I don't want to just steal it) so you'll have to follow the link.


This is hands down the funniest video I've seen in a long time. I'm still laughing.
Reason to cry
Filed: , ,

Tuesday, January 9, 2007

The Surge

I am working tonight so I won't be able to catch the President's message on the Iraqi war. I can look at the online news however and I see this.

Tuesday, January 09, 2007
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's new Iraq plan will call for all Iraqi provinces to be under Iraqi control by November 2007, a U.S. official tells CNN.

Bush will also call for 20,000 additional forces to be sent to the war-torn country. Most would be sent to Baghdad, but 4,000 would be sent to the Anbar Province, the official said.

The official also said the first additional forces would go into Iraq by the end of this month.

-- CNN White House Correspondent Suzanne Malveaux

November of '07 would give the U.S. and Iraqi forces just enough time to clean up the streets of Baghdad and Anbar, IF they are serious about it. They must fight the insurgents (Al-Sadr especially) and not fight with diplomacy but weapons. The surge may or may not be a good idea, but the message it sends to the insurgent groups is a good one. It tells them that we will do what we say, no matter what. Hopefully now the Iraqi government will become more self-governing and not operate on the whims of the death squards and anti-US clerics.

No matter what happens though, the Democrats will be upset about it. Of course now they are backing off the 'no funding' approach and looking at a non-binding resolution that says simply: "We don't approve, but you're the boss". G-d how Kos will love that.
Reason amongst the dhimmikrauts
Filed: , , , ,

Jimmy Carter - Quite possibly the WORST President in U.S. History

Well, life has been a whirlwind for me since I last posted and Nazh has been kidding me on when I'll get off the Hollywood-kick so here goes...

Ok - the question was raised last month (if I remember correctly) about Jimmy Carter. At the time I said he was the main reason why we have the problems in the Middle East (M.E.) we have today. Lets take a gander into why I believe that.

Lets look at the current trouble spots in the M.E. (the French call it the Levant). Lebanon... Gaza... West Bank ... Iraq ... Syria. If you look closely, what country has a hand in each one being as much trouble as they are? One guess... Please? One tiny guess... Ok give up??

The answer is

IRAN !!!

Yes, thats right ... I-R-A-N !!!

"Now Thai", you tell me, " Iran can't possibly be the puppeteer could it".

Yes... it can and it is.

Iran is providing materiel support (rockets, guns) and funding to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

As for Gaza, in the story below it reveals that Iran has ties with Hamas.

Note the last paragraph [emphasis mine];

Conversely, Iran is honing its retaliatory capabilities. Several hundred Hamas operatives recently left Gaza for Iran for special training by Revolutionary Guards, according to Israeli intelligence. Iran has also re-equipped Hezbollah in Lebanon with thousands of missiles and rockets to replace those fired at Israeli targets for 34 days last summer.

Same with the West Bank and Syria is in Iran's back pocket as everyone knows.

As for Iraq, Iran is providing funding and training for the groups fomenting the violence and continues to do so in an effort to fight a proxy war against us and sap our nation's will (think of what we did to the Soviets in Afghanistan in the Cold War )

"But Thai", you say, "Even if true, Iran is governed by a bunch of fanatical Shiite rulers who have always been against us."

To that I say...


Iran was our ALLY for over 30 years before the revolution came in the late 70's. I'm going to let that sink in again and in case anyone missed it I'll say it again.




ALLY !!!

There was probably no bigger U.S. supporter in the Middle East than the Shah. And Jimmy Carter basically pissed on him when it counted and pissed away an extremely valuable ally and quite possibly doomed the rest of the Middle East in the process.

Remember that during the Cold War, we had Israel, Turkey and Iran as pro-Western M.E. countries that joined us as "listening posts" and bulwarks against the growing threat of the Soviet Empire.

The Shah was a loyal American friend and was trying to modernize his country. Was he entirely "clean" as a ruler? No. M.E. countries to this very day display an affinity for a "strongman" to run them. He was, in the words of, former Sec. of State, Alexander Haig more of an;

"essentially benevolent despot who was a good friend of the United States, an implacable enemy of the Left and an obstacle to the religious right."
Carter was offended that the Shah's governance didn't look exactly like America's so threatened to cut off aid to Iran unless the Shah went through with certain "reforms"., These reforms led to an impression that he was "weak". And in the M.E. you do not want to be perceived as the "weak horse". So what did militant religious leaders and students, who were offended by the Shah's push to modernize, do? They plotted a revolution.
Now this revolution erupted when the Shah came to the U.S. to visit and while he was here the revolution could've still been put down by the Shah's government. Carter told the Shah to basically "do nothing" and so he did just that. His reasoning was that the "American government has never let us down" and he had no reason to believe it would this time either.
The Shah made one crucial mistake... he trusted Jimmy Carter.
Jimmy Carter did what he always did when confronted with evil... NOTHING !!!
He stated that this was a problem " for the Iranians to decide" and that it had nothing to do with the U.S. He basically believed that there was no difference in the way the Shah ran the country and the way this new rabble threatened to run it. Even though the revolution's sponsors quickly shouted that they would "export the revolution to the four reaches of the earth". We immediately "recognized" the new militant government in the most shameless display of appeasement in my lifetime.
What happened then? Anyone know??
That's right... we were rebuffed by the new revolutionaries as former "friends of the Shah".
In fact, quite alot of people in Iran were executed as former friends and government workers
Instead what happened was that the Ayatollah Komeini came to power and his son then took over our embassy. We then had the indignity of watching our soldiers and embassy personnel being paraded, blindfolded, in front of the TV cameras.
So what the Carter administration perceived as purely an "Iranian" matter, the rest of the world saw as a U.S. defeat (anyone see shades of this today in Iraq with Dems saying this is purely an Iraqi matter now and the Repubs saying that if we leave now we will be seen as defeated?).
Later the Ayatollah would expound that he had expected the U.S. to militarily come to the aid of the Shah and help the Iranian military and government tamp out the revolution. When that initial fear had passed and Carter blinked, the Ayatollah proclaim that "American can do nothing to us". That same thinking stayed with Iran's leadership and is still on display today.
Reagan said it best when he said this;
"Our government's decision to piously stand by while he [the Shah] was forced from office led to the establishment of a despotic regime in Tehran that was far more evil and far more tyrranical than the one it replaced. And as I was to learn through personal experience, it left a legacy of problems that would haunr our country for years to come"
I can go on and on about how this lead to Iraq declaring war on Iran and how the West supported Iraq in its war on Iran in the 80's, but that wouldn't leave more stories for next time would it?
Suffice to say... the Appeaser-in-Chief... Mr. Jimmy Carter... is quite possibly one of our worst presidents. We went from having a strong moderate ally in the M.E. to that country being a hostile, anti-American supporter of terrorism (in fact it is THE chief supporter of terrorism). All because Jimmy did nothing. Remember, appeasement isn't just a one-time thing. It doesn't just happen and then everyone forgets about it after you've gone from the world stage. It stays with people and causes more problems as it rolls on. Think of the harmless little snowball as it rolls down the mountain of snow. As it keeps rolling it gathers more mass and speed and eventually is a juggernaut too big to stop.
When all one had to do at the beginning was smash it with your boot.
Too bad that Carter's idea of a proper foreign policy response (the "boot") to an invasion of one country (Afghanistan) by another ( the Soviet Union) was to boycott the Olympics.
BTW- this is all for now and I'll have more on Jimmy in the coming weeks. I will be getting into how an ex-president should and should not act and how his "outreach" and "peace efforts" always seem to favor Arabic countries and why that is (think - financial reasons). And of course his lovely deal he worked out with the N. Koreans in the 90's so that they would give up nukes.
That sure worked out well.
Way to go Jimmy !!!
P.S. - my next post is on Global Warming and then the one after that will deal with a bit of Hollywood "goings-on" (sorry Nazh, I just can't resist).

{no problem, I get lonely on here by myself-LN}
Filed: , , , ,


Cindy Sheehan's favorite dictator is making moves to become a 'real' dictator and not simply an elected official.

Chavez pushes nationalisation

Chavez won a big victory in last month's election and has vowed to further nationalise the economy [AP]
Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan president, has called on Venezuela's congress to grant him special powers while launching a far-reaching package of nationalisation.
He also promised to strip the central bank of its autonomy.

Chavez, in power since 1999, said he would nationalise telecommunications firm CANTV and unspecified energy companies.
Re-elected in December with a huge margin, he pledged on Monday to deepen what he called a socialist revolution.

The opposition says Chavez is seeking to create a Cuban-style single-party state, a charge he denies. He said he would submit a "revolutionary enabling law" to legislators through which he would be able to pass bills by decree to accelerate economic reform.
"We are making the final revisions so we can send it to the National Assembly in the next few days to request special powers," he said in a speech at the swearing-in of new cabinet ministers. (link)
Notice the highlighted passage (emp. mine) in the text, Chavez is setting up the government the same way that Hitler did in Germany before WWII. Anyone want to bet on whether his 'enabling laws' will only extend to economic reform?

Yes the source is Al-Jazeera, but the story is all over and I wanted to link to a source not much read by the people that visit here. Also wanted to get a different perspective on the subject from different journalists. The underlying message (that I get) from the text is anti-chavez. A much different opinion than you'd expect to see in say the LA Times or NY Times.
Reason for fear
Filed: , , , ,

Florida Gators

The University of Florida. National Champions in football and basketball same academic year (first time in D-1 history). My top 5 after this: Florida #1, USC #2, LSU #3, Boise St. #4, Wisconsin #5.

Chris Leak
(Jason Parkhurst/US PRESSWIRE)
Chris Leak was nearly perfect early as the Gators built their lead.
Gate-R Done
Ohio State started the night off with a bang but it was Florida which fired off the most rounds. The Gators routed the Buckeyes 41-14, claiming the BCS title. Box Score
This game was never close. OSU looked like Notre Dame did against LSU in the Sugar. Troy Smith was on the run for the whole night (he ended with 35 passing yards and -25 rushing yards I think) and the OSU offense looked like it had taken 2 years off, instead of simply 51 days.

Florida's offense, led by Chris Leak (with assists by Tim Teabow) was unstoppable for most of the night. When the Buckeyes managed to stop Leak and Co. the Gator defense put a stop to any hopes of a comeback.

From the openening kickoff you could see that this game would be high scoring, with lots of big plays. Yet, after that stunning start, Ohio State folded up and went home early. The lack of overall team effort reflects badly on coaching and preperation. Possibly they watched too much ESPN and read too many papers that had them winnning easily and going 'wire-to-wire' to win it all for Tressell's second title in this century.

Big win for the SEC and bigger win for Florida. Go Gators (note: I hate Florida^^)
Reason to celebrate
Filed: , , , ,

Monday, January 8, 2007

BCS Championship

Florida leads Ohio State 34-14 at the end of the 1st half in the Championship.
Buckeye defense looks outmatched and outgunned, the offense is misfiring badly. Maybe ESPN will finally start waiting on the games to be played before annointing the champs.

Welfare Cuts

NPR is reporting that Gov. Schwarzenegger is going to cut welfare for illegals.

California Governor to Propose State Welfare Cuts

Listen to this story...

Day to Day, January 8, 2007 · California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is expected to propose a major reduction in the state's welfare funding. Families whose primary workers are in the country illegally are among those likely to be affected by the rollback. Los Angeles Times reporter Evan Halper talks with Alex Chadwick about the proposed cuts.(link)

Seems my real player didn't want me to listen to the interview so I can't really tell you much about it. The pro-illegal group (ie. most democrats) will be up in arms over this reduction of 'rights' to a group of people that have no business in this country.

This doesn't really seem like something we would see from the new 'centrist' Arnold either, but it is good news for the Americans living in California. Too many illegal immigrants are granted free rides in our system simply because of liberal fancy. The media and most left wing people concentrate on branding right-wingers and the secure border people as against immigration when that simply is not true. We are against ILLEGAL immigration, there's a world of difference in the two. This country was founded on people immigrating from one place or another to live, work and become part of this country. The U.S. shouldn't be the mother of all the world's peoples simply because their country of origin is less than perfect.

If people want to become Americans, then become Americans. The process is not easy, but well worth it. If you want to be a proud citizen of Mexico, or Cuba, or any other country, then don't do it by illegally living in the United States.

Personal note: I slept all day today (took my medication when I got home from work) so I'm probably missing alot of news out there, leave me a tip for something good to read. Also, notice the news at the top of this page, LNDR was accepted as a Reuters affiliate and will be bringing you the 'video' headlines and news stories from them. Click the link at the top and the player will load on a separate page. Thanks for visiting and please bookmark and return.
Reason for a fence

Sunday, January 7, 2007

Execution and execution (of)

Interview in Der Spiegel with the Iraqi executioner of Saddam Hussein. It's a good read and refers specifically to the comments between Saddam and the people in the room. Focusing on the insults and such that were hurled at Hussein before his sentence was executed.

"The Execution Was Done Correctly"

Iraqi prosecutor Munqith al-Faroon, 53, discusses the execution of former dictator Saddam Hussein and the investigation into the execution video that is now circulating on the Internet.

Munqith al-Faroon: "It isn't unlike the hunt. First you hunt down the animal, but once you look your prey in the eyes, you ultimately feel pity. That was the way I felt."

Munqith al-Faroon: "It isn't unlike the hunt. First you hunt down the animal, but once you look your prey in the eyes, you ultimately feel pity. That was the way I felt."

SPIEGEL: Mr. Prosecutor, you were a witness to the execution of Saddam Hussein. What did you see and hear?

Faroon: I, together with 13 other official observers, was flown by helicopter from the Green Zone to the execution site. There were seven of us in each helicopter. We entered the execution chamber, where there were already four other people: the condemned man and three masked men. Two of these men prepared Saddam Hussein for the execution, and the third man later opened the trap door.

SPIEGEL: How many people were present in total?


Faroon: Only the 14 official observers, Saddam and three masked men. However, the door between the execution chamber and another room was open, and a few men gathered at this door over time -- guards who had been assigned to protect this facility.

SPIEGEL: Who shouted the first insults at Saddam?

Faroon: It was one of those guards, who called out the name of Muqtada al-Sadr.

SPIEGEL: If this man can be identified -- did he commit a crime?

Faroon: No. And I attach importance to the conclusion that the execution was done correctly -- as required by the law. Otherwise I would have stopped the procedure at that point. (link)

Read all of it. Interesting piece, but then again, Der has had alot of good interviews lately.

Democrats in Congress (the newly minted BMOC) are preparing to stop the President's plans involving Iraq.

Democrats Vow to Challenge Bush's Iraq Proposal

Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, January 7, 2007; 2:38 PM

Democratic leaders of Congress vowed today to use their powers of spending and policy oversight to challenge President Bush's expected proposal this week for boosting U.S. military forces in Iraq by as many as 20,000 troops.

Calling Iraq a nation in "complete chaos," new House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and other Democrats cast the anticipated Bush plan as an escalation of the Iraq war rather than the significant change of course sought by American voters, and said as a result they would treat the plan -- and new funding requests -- with strong skepticism.

"If the president wants to add to this mission, he's going to have to justify it," Pelosi said on CBS's "Face the Nation," emphasizing that while Congress will not cut off funding for troops now in Iraq, the White House will no longer have a "blank check" for expanding the war effort.(link)

Of course, I can't see any amount of justifying that the President could do for Pelosi to give her go ahead for any extra funding. It will be hard enough to keep EXISTENT funding going much less get more.

I wonder (hopelessly) what it will take to get the democratic side of America to realize just what type of war we are involved in.

Well, that was fun :) Heading back to work tonite, hopefully the back will do ok. Got plenty of meds (although I'm not going to take them to work, as they make me feel terrible) and have had plenty of rest in the past few days. Wish me luck.

Also, welcome EvilMidniteBombr to the team, if he ever posts anything that is ...
Reason amongst the dhimmikrauts