sometimes you got to laugh, rockwood helps.

"History does not long entrust the care
of freedom to the weak or the timid."
Dwight D. Eisenhower
(ive noticed because I tend to include a lot of photos, a tendency for my blog to sometimes need to be loaded more than once to get all the graphics to show.)

"the clear & present danger" presented by islamo supremacists, radical islam and what it wants.

We don't make a distinction between civilians and non-civilians, non-civilians, innocents and non-innocents. Only between Muslims and unbelievers. And the life of an unbeliever has no value. It has no sanctity.
-Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad, head of the al Muhajiroun group in London.

Asked about his comments that he wanted to have the banner of Islam at 10 Downing Street, Muhammad said, "Yes, it's my dream. I believe one day that is going to happen. Because this is my country, I like living here."

Hussein Massawi, former leader of Hezbollah, summed it up very pithily:"We are not fighting so that you will offer us something. We are fighting to eliminate you."

"Muslim institutions, schools and economic power should be strengthened in America. Those who stay in America should be open to society without melting, keeping Mosques open so anyone can come and learn about Islam. If you choose to live here, you have a responsibility to deliver themessage of Islam ...... Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."

Omar Ahmad Co-founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations

become aware find out about cair

Daniel Pipes has been researching Islam for the past three and a half decades. He directs the Middle East Forum - a Philadelphia think tank. Among his twelve books, four focus on Islam. In 2003, President Bush appointed him to the board of the U.S. Institute of Peace.
Pipes on islamofascists~~~ "militant Muslims are at war with America, not because of what America did, but because Islamists perceive themselves as being in a long-term conflict with the values of the West.
Excerpted from Arab & Iranian telecasts in March & April of this year. Available & thoughtfully subtitled by the indispensable MEMRI.
[suicide attacks] carried out by boys and girls… these redeem self-confidence and hope… because a nation that does not excel at the industry of death does not deserve life.
"The Muslim Students' Association on american campuses ~~
Queensborough Community College in New York in March 2003 "We reject the U.N., reject America, reject all law and order. Don't lobby Congress or protest because we don't recognize Congress. The only relationship you should have with America is to topple it … Eventually there will be a Muslim in the White House dictating the laws of Shariah."

Islamic fanaticism was not created by anything that we have done


Goodbye my Love,
I will carry Your memory within me,
as I await the travail of time.
Which I must cross,
before I will touch your face again.
resting in the warmth of your soul,
together again.

Friday, April 30, 2004

Americans should be wary of their European Allies or, why europeans are a bunch of smug fops who's testicles havent dropped yet. 

spotted this thru occam's toothbrush

Americans should be wary of their European Allies

By Linda McDonald

I was working at a UK newspaper based in Edinburgh on Sept. 11, 2001. I was standing in the newsroom watching the TV when the second plane hit the World Trade Center. "Oh my God!" I said aloud, almost in sync with the TV reporter. The TV was tuned to Sky News, a satellite news channel, and everyone in the newsroom was staring at the screen. I heard news of the other two planes crashing and watched the Towers implode. I started to cry.

Sky News was taking reports from a number of sources, but there was one reporter on the ground in New York City. His accent was American and he was running frantically through the crowd, shouting into the microphone, trying to get reactions from those running from the scene. He was emotional, out of control and clearly affected by what was going on around him. "Typical American," were the first words I heard anyone else say aloud. It was the newspaper's editor.

In the days following Sept. 11 and during the war in Afghanistan, I witnessed an unleashing of anti-U.S. sentiment that was shocking in its callousness. A few days after the attacks, a BBC prime time television program, "Question Time," packed its audience with anti-American sympathizers. Among the panelists was Philip Lader, the former U.S. ambassador to Great Britain. Mr. Lader was driven to tears as he tried to express his sadness while the audience fiercely accused the United States of finally getting its due.

I watched our editor choose front pages that best portrayed the viciousness of U.S. military action in Afghanistan -- young children looking wide eyed and scared. I read column after column about how the United States finally would get its comeuppance and how the world would be a better place for it. There was not a complete void of sympathy. Many other columnists wrote moving tributes to those killed and about America. America's embassies were overflowing with flowers and messages of condolence. But resentment toward America simmered underneath it all.

This should not have surprised me. When I first moved to the UK in 1993 I worked between London and Paris and traveled everywhere in between. I experienced a disdain for all things American. Fanny packs and sneakers signaled an American in London. "Must be one of yours," my friends would groan as we drove past a group of Americans in Nikes outside Kensington Palace.

Our advertising director in Paris never missed an opportunity to publicly state that I did not have the class, the culture nor the couture to represent our newspaper because I was an American. I listened and nodded in polite agreement. I was appreciating and showing respect for cultural differences. When an Italian businessman felt compelled to explain to me on a flight from Milan that the infiltration of American culture in Europe was what caused most resentment towards America, I thought, "OK, you do have us to thank for Jerry Springer. I would be mad at us, too."

But everything changed on Sept. 11, 2001. When those hijacked planes crashed and the United States went to war against terrorism, I wanted to be with other Americans. I wanted to be with people who fully understood that what happened on that day was an unprovoked attack on U.S. soil; people who would bravely fight for what was in our best interest. In December, I moved back to America.

This year, two of the most important differences between the two leading presidential candidates is foreign policy and how best to win the war on terrorism. Americans should not be fooled into thinking that we have staunch allies in Europe. For eight years, I listened to my European friends criticize us --



digging your own grave and paying for the shovel 

By Ann Coulter

Arab Hijackers Now Eligible For Pre-Boarding
April 28, 2004

In June 2001, as Mohamed Atta completed his final "to do" list before the 9-11 attacks ("... amend will to ban women from my funeral ... leave extra little Friskies out for Mr. Buttons ... set TiVo for Streisand on 'Inside the Actors' Studio' ..."), Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta was conducting a major study on whether airport security was improperly screening passengers based on ethnicity. As Mineta explained: "We must protect the civil rights of airline passengers." Protecting airline passengers from sudden death has never made it onto Mineta's radar screen.

A few months later, after 19 Muslim men hijacked U.S. airplanes and turned them into weapons of mass destruction on American soil, Eastern passengers to an added degree of pre-flight scrutiny. He sternly reminded the airlines that it was illegal to discriminate against passengers based on their race, color, national or ethnic origin, or religion.

Mineta would have sent the letter even sooner, but he wanted to give the airlines enough time to count the number of their employees and customers who had just been murdered by Arab passengers.

On Sept. 27, 2001, The ACLU sent out a press release titled, "ACLU Applauds Sensible Scope of Bush Airport Security Plan," which narrowly won out over the headline: "Fox Approves Henhouse Security Plan." As a rule of thumb, any security plan approved by the ACLU puts American lives at risk. ACLU Associate Director Barry Steinhardt praised Bush's Transportation Department for showing "an admirable degree of restraint by not suggesting airport security procedures that would deny civil liberties as a condition of air travel." The ACLU had zeroed in on the true meaning of 9-11: Americans needed to be more tolerant of and sensitive toward ethnic minorities.

Flush with praise from the ACLU, Mineta set to work suing airlines for removing passengers perceived to be of Arab, Middle Eastern or Southeast Asian descent, and/or Muslim. If we're going to start shifting money around based on who's rude to whom, my guess is Muslims are going to end up in the red. But that's not how Mineta's Department of Transportation sees it.

Despite Mineta's clearly worded letter immediately after the 9-11 terrorist attacks and another follow-up letter in October, the Department of Transportation found that in the weeks after the 9-11 terrorist attacks carried out by Middle Eastern men, the airlines were targeting passengers who appeared to be Middle Eastern. To his horror, Mineta discovered that the airlines were using logic and deductive reasoning to safeguard their passengers – in direct violation of his just-issued guidelines on racial profiling!

The Department of Transportation filed a complaint against United Airlines, claiming United removed passengers from flights in "a few instances" based on their race, color, national origin, religion or ancestry. Mineta gave United no credit for so scrupulously ignoring ethnicity on Sept. 11 that it lost four pilots, 12 flight attendants, and 84 passengers (not including the nine Arab hijackers). In November 2003, United settled the case for $1.5 million.

In another crucial anti-terrorism investigation undertaken by Norman Mineta, the Department of Transportation claimed that between Sept. 11, 2001, and Dec. 31, 2001, American Airlines – which lost four pilots, 13 flight attendants and 129 passengers (not including 10 Arab hijackers) on Sept. 11 by ignoring the ethnicity of its passengers – removed 10 individuals who appeared to be Middle Eastern from American Airline flights as alleged security risks. On March 1, 2004, American Airlines settled the case for $1.5 million.

The Department of Transportation also charged Continental Airlines with discriminating against passengers who appeared to be Arab, Middle Eastern or Muslim after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. In April 2004, Continental Airlines settled the complaint for $500,000.

Like many of you, I carefully reviewed the lawsuits against the airlines in order to determine which airlines had engaged in the most egregious discrimination, so I could fly only that airline. But oddly, rather than bragging about the charges, the airlines heatedly denied discriminating against Middle Eastern passengers. What a wasted marketing opportunity! Imagine the great slogans the airlines could use:

"Now Frisking All Arabs – Twice!"

"More Civil-Rights Lawsuits Brought by Arabs Than Any Other Airline!"

"The Friendly Skies – Unless You're an Arab"

"You Are Now Free to Move About the Cabin – Not So Fast, Mohammed!"

Worst of all, the Department of Transportation ordered the settlement money to be spent on civil-rights programs to train airline staff to stop looking for terrorists, a practice known as digging your own grave and paying for the shovel. Airlines that have been the most vigilant against terrorism are forced by the government into re-education seminars to learn to suppress common sense. Airlines are being forced, at their own expense, to make commercial air travel more dangerous.

Finish the opinion piece


U.S. to give Iraqi soldiers another try 

U.S. to give Iraqi soldiers another try


FALLUJAH, Iraq ---- When a loud crack sounded from the adjacent building in Fallujah on Thursday, the frontline Marines chalked the blast up to their noisy new neighbors and waited for the report of another "kill."

The new Iraqi Counter Terrorism Force soldiers hidden in the house next door had just fired on a man carrying an AK-47 assault rifle in a neighborhood where U.S. forces have declared there are "no friendlies."

As the violent stalemate in Fallujah bags a third week, the appearance of specially trained Iraqi snipers this week was a welcome development for Marines at the front ---- and an opportunity for the Iraqis and their U.S. Army Special Forces advisers to prove that not all Iraqi troops will cut and run when the shooting starts.

"They're doing all right ---- damned good shots, actually," a U.S. Special Forces adviser said Thursday, refusing to give his name.

He said his small team of Iraqi Counter Terrorism Forces, part of a larger group of tough Iraqi volunteers who recently returned from four months of training in Jordan, were on their way to becoming a lethal weapon against the insurgents of Fallujah and elsewhere in the beleaguered country.

"We're kind of moving in steps, one at a time," he said of enlisting the Iraqis in the fighting along Fallujah's northern edge. "They can't learn everything at once, but we're trying."

Iraqi troops motivated

The Iraqi troops sounded even more confident than their American trainers Thursday, saying that with the Marines and Army Special Forces soldiers at their sides, they could clean Iraq of "terrorists" and rescue it from anarchy within a year.

"We came to Fallujah to kill terrorists," one 31-year-old Shia soldier who identified himself as Abu Sajad said through an interpreter.

"Why else come to Fallujah," he said. "The Iraqi and American special forces will cleanse Fallujah of the terrorists and foreigners who contaminate it."

Like his comrades, Sajad wears a scarf over his face and dark sunglasses under his Kevlar helmet to hide his identity.

During a break from shooting insurgents Thursday, he and two comrades eased back into the soft couch in the living room of an Iraqi home that Marines recently "requisitioned."

Holding a heavy, black Remington sniper rifle in one gloved hand and gesticulating wildly with the other, Sajad said he was abused under Saddam Hussein.

Although he was a soldier in the Iraqi army, he said he was jailed for a year because he visited the Shia holy city of Karbala to worship at the Mosque of the Imam Hussein. Shias under the Sunni Baathist rule were barred from observing Shia holy days and festivals.

Now, he said, he and the others are fighting and killing some of those who enforced such policies, some of them former fellow soldiers in the Iraqi military who are now fighting the Americans in Fallujah.


Thursday, April 29, 2004

spirit of america update 

here's an email I recieved detailing the progress spirit of america has made.


Today we delivered to Marines at Camp Pendleton, CA the equipment that will be used to equip Iraqi-owned and operated television stations in Al Anbar province. On Saturday, May 1 the Marines will fly the equipment from March Air Force Base to Iraq. This initiative and the original request is described here: http://www.spiritofamerica.net/req_12/request.html. We try hard to provide rapid response to requests we receive. Here is the timeline of this project:

April 8: SoA receives Marines request for television equipment.
April 14: SoA posts the request on our Web site and begins fundraising.
April 29: SoA delivers $82,687 of TV studio equipment to Camp Pendleton.
April 29: Marines pack donated equipment and prepare for shipment to Iraq.
May 1: Marines fly equipment to Iraq.

This rapid turnaround makes a difference in Iraq.

Here is one photo from the event of Col. Robert Knapp, Commanding Officer of the 1st Marine Division at Camp Pendleton, and yours truly with a small amount of the gear we provided.

We have received $1,532,931 in donations in the last two weeks. Contributions from 7,438 donors have been made to every request and every area of Spirit of America's operations. I can't begin to describe the effects this generosity will have on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan - both in helping the people of those countries and in supporting the hard work of those serving there.

As encouraging as the last 14 days have been, I believe we are just at the beginning of seeing homefront support for America's efforts in Iraq. We're fortunate to receive emails, letters and handwritten notes from our donors that thank us for finally getting the opportunity to make a meaningful contribution. Since 9/11 many have felt helpless. That no longer need be the case.

You can find more on what's happened and what next at: http://www.spiritofamerica.net/blog. As promised, we have an accounting there of how the money was spent on the first phase of the Marines TV request.


bastard sword fashions a story, worth reading. a story of alternate endings,  

a story that gives anyone with empathy (this wouldnt include "rene" who I wrote about a little further down my blog) a way to see the conection between pat tillmans service and our liberty and saftey in a more personal concrete way. this is a graphic counterpoint to the morally bankrupt cynical self centered self absorbed outlook rene has on service to country, community, friends and family

written by bastardsword

"Who are you?"
"My name is Clarence. I'm here to take you home."
"What happened Where am I?"
"You died in that ambush back there."
"What? What are you talking about? Just who the heck are you, anyway?"
"Why, I'm an angel, Pat."
"Yeah, and I'm the Dali Lama."
"Oh, you don't have to believe me, but we do have to move along now."
"Move along? Where to? What is this place?"
"Why, this is no place at all, but we do have to go to a someplace."
"I don't get what's going on."
"Oh, you'll get it figured out. Like I told you, you got killed."
"Funny. I don't feel hurt."
"Oh, that's right. You won't. Everything is fine now. Just come along with me."
"And just who are you again?"
"I told you. I'm Clarence. I'm your guardian angel."
"Well it looks you haven't been guarding too well lately."
"Oh, I watch over a lot of other people too. That's why you're here."
"What the heck are you talking about?"
"I'll show you. Take my hand and I'll show you something before I take you home."
"Show me what? Where are we going?"
"We're going to go watch a football game."

The scene changes to bathroom in a stadium locker room. The roar outside is deafening.

"What the…"
"Here we are. Oh, what a nice bathroom, don't you think?"
"Where are we?"
"We're in the bathroom. Nice?"
"I suppose so. Now just what is going on? Why the heck am I in a football uniform?"
"Oh my. Well I said we were going to watch a game."
"You didn't say anything about me playing!"
"Well ok, I left that part out. I'll just be watching, but you'll get a much better view of it."
"Look, I'm not a football player anymore. I'm a Ranger."
"You never became a Ranger here. Here you chose to stay in the game."
"What the heck do you mean, Clarence?"
"Well, this is the life where you chose to keep playing football. You never joined the Army."
"That doesn't make sense."
"Well this is the life that went differently. Here you're still in the NFL. See, you're already suited up."
"Yes, I suppose I am."
"Half-time's almost over, so you better get back in the locker room."
"Alright, alright."
"2005 NFC championship game too. You're up 14 to 10."

He opens the door and walks out. He blends back in with his teammates and walks back onto the field, where he sees his wife in the stands, sitting in the middle of the other wives. He waves madly and aches to run up and sit with her, but keeps his place, enjoying once more the game he loves so much. Then he's on the line, driving the assault forward with his mighty heart, playing like a champion. The game moves into the fourth quarter, growing ever tighter. He remains focused and alert, absorbed fully into the contest now. Clarence just watches from the sidelines, smiling and clapping now and then.

Then a dozen impossibly loud explosions go ripping through the stands in a rapid staccato, scattered from down near the field to the upper deck. Whole sections of stands are stripped bare of both seats and people. Thousands are injured and others completely vaporized by the explosions. High velocity debris flies out from the center of each flash, and smoke, blood, and fire go roiling up under the bright stadium lights. Total shock and pandemonium engulfs the scene. Tillman instinctively dives to the ground, his Ranger training taking over where football leaves off. He keeps covered as pieces of metal, flesh, and bone shower down around him.

read on


deserters harbored in canada~~~~ Bill O'Reilly may call for a boycott 

Bill O'Reilly has something to say about Canada, and I think its worth considering, I would add to what he says by bringing up the booing of children league american sports teams, visiting canada to play,booing our national anthem, spitting on the children, it all comes together into what I call we want your money but we want to treat you like shit.

Crunch time for Canada, that is the subject of this evening's "Talking Points Memo." Last night, we told you about two American Army privates who deserted, fled to Canada, and are being hailed by heroes by some Canadian media.

The two have filed for asylum even though they are not entitled to it under Canadian law. We said that if granted asylum, "Talking Points" would call for a boycott of Canadian goods and services by all Americans.
Well, that's caused all kinds of angst in Canada.
Thousands of letters have poured in. And we will read some of them to you in our mail segment, but one caught my eye. Paul in Kingston, Ontario writes, "I feel real anger towards Canadian media people who are so blatantly anti-American.
Please do not use my last name, I fear government reprisal." More than a few Canadian e-mailers said the same thing.
They're afraid of their government if they dissent from the anti-American party line. Since 9/11, the Canadian government has done the following. Refused to crack down on known terrorist organizations. Not one individual has been prosecuted for terrorist activities, even though U.S. intelligence has identified at least 50 pro-terror outfits operating north of the border. Continued its loose immigration policies. Is allowing Islamic courts in Ontario to decide on some civil cases involving Muslims. Refused to send troops to Iraq. Decriminalized marijuana, making it easier for smugglers to send pot into the U.S.A. And supported a quasi-legalization of heroin in the city of Vancouver. Now, however, the last straw is in the drink. If the Canadian government provides sanctuary to American military criminals, deserters, "Talking Points" believes that action would directly undermine the U.S. war on terror. At this point, I believe the Canadian government will send those guys back here. But if it doesn't, then we, the people, of the U.S.A. should hold that country accountable, just as we are holding France accountable. All of us in America should be soldiers in the war on terror. If a foreign country's helping those who want to kill us, then we have an obligation to confront that. These deserters weren't drafted. They signed up. And when the going got tough, they split. If all our military people did that, 9-11 would be on constant instant replay.

Canada is now on notice. Undermining the American military by giving sanctuary to deserters will bring action by the most powerful force on this earth, the American people.


shopping malls targeted? 

NBC News and news services
Updated: 8:16 a.m. ET April 29, 2004

LOS ANGELES - Westside residents were being asked to be on the lookout for unusual activities around local shopping malls after a terrorism task force reported an “uncorroborated” threat of a possible attack Thursday.

No specific shopping mall was named, but the warning indicated a mall near the Federal Building in West Los Angeles could be targeted.

asks the public and mall security to look for:

People or activities that don't "fit" into the mall environment.
People sitting in a parked vehicle for a long time.
People sketching or taking notes, photographing or videotaping areas not normally associated with tourism.
Someone wearing a heavy coat in hot weather.
Anyone carrying unusually heavy bags or backpacks.
Vehicles improperly parked or in spots not normally used for deliveries.
Any suspicious activity can be reported at 877-ATHREAT (877-284-7328).


radical islam will not be reasoned with  

Jihadists on rise in Europe


LUTON, England - The call to jihad is rising in the streets of Europe, and is being answered, counterterrorism officials say.

In this former industrial town north of London, several young Britons whose parents emigrated from Pakistan after World War II have turned against their families' new home. They say they would like to see Prime Minister Tony Blair dead or deposed and an Islamic flag hanging outside No. 10 Downing St.

They swear allegiance to Osama bin Laden and his goal of toppling Western democracies to establish an Islamic superstate under Shariah law, like Afghanistan under the Taliban. They call the Sept. 11 hijackers the "Magnificent 19" and regard the train bombings in Madrid, Spain, as a clever way to drive a wedge into Europe.


a ranger speaks up and takes miss gonzalez to task. (im hoping he new rene was a guy, the whole time he refered to him as "she" rene deserves that) 

I am quite sure that if Spc. Tillman could do so, he would stand up next to Ms. Gonzalez and remind all of us that one of the reasons he chose to do what he did was so that she could do what she is doing, however revolting it may be. Spc. Tillman knew that what one did was far more important than what one said. Nothing anyone here says or does will be able to convince Ms. Gonzalez that she is wrong, that her words are brutally insensitive, that she has covered herself and her neighborhood with a cloak of shame. There have been people like this amongst us during all times of war. Thankfully our precious liberty does not rest on the shoulders of people like Ms. Gonzalez. How ironic that a person living in the cradle of American liberty, whose streets saw the noble courage of people willing to stand up for freedom, would make statements such as those Ms. Gonzalez made. Unfortunately, the intellectual elites of our nation, many of whom are condensed onto college campuses have utterly forgotten that their precious pillars of academic freedom rest comfortably on the graves of patriots who have been willing to act, rather than merely talk or write. I believe a person’s choices in life tell you all you need to know about them. That having been said, I give you two people to compare: Spc. Pat Tillman or Ms. Rene Gonzalez. Each has chosen to make their beliefs known to the world. You decide whose beliefs are the more honorable.

A fellow Ranger
Knoxville, TN

this retired ranger had some words for the weasil

The toughest part about serving my country has been listening to dribble like this and not having a stroke. I you are not the type to serve your country, then fine. But demonizing those who provide the very freedoms you take for granted, when you have done nothing to contribute is unforgivable.

You speak of Ranger Tillman as if you know what his motivations were. I am here to tell you that there is no way a graduate student knows what motivates a man like Ranger Tillman, or all of the other brothers in arms who have actually gotten off their fourth points of contact and served. Someone must protect our liberties, so who is going to do it? You? I think not. Men like him do it simply because we know that people like you will not. You would rather sit back in security and speak down to the hand that feeds you.

Veterans do not want or need your praise, but the least you can do is not demonize a man that has just died for US! Yes, even those as confused as you. If they have taught you in graduate school that demonizing a dead veteran to further your political agenda is acceptable, maybe you should ask for your money back.

Ranger veteran


Wednesday, April 28, 2004

how much do the smug "academics" who proudly loath patriotism and alegiance to country hate anyone who displays those qualities? this much. 

you dont get much more pathetic than this assclown/grad student who thinks he's educated. so educated that he smarmily declares that Pat Tillman got what he deserved because he was a macho jerk living out a fantasy. afganistan was an unnecessary "stupid" war, and he goes on to say that had he been killed defending the east coast from foriegn invaders that would have been heroic!!!

apparently while he was getting this "education" he missed the whole 911, three thousand dead, attacked by terrorists based in afganistan, protected and sponsored by the despotic taliban who refused to turn them over thing!!!!!!

before 911 the liberal/ivory tower academia refrain was allways "I will fight too, if someone attacks america! well that went away after 911 because it was shown as the lie it was. now that a few years have passed people like rene can conveniently forget we were attacked. and bring that straw man argument back to assuage his own conscience for being a weasil.

we had to go to the "nest and root them out. but that ruins rene's childish argument. so much easier to construct an argument built on ommision, jealousy, contempt and flawed reasoning because you secretly hate the jock, who makes you look pathetic.

rene who's "educated" also has a pathetic grasp of the history of afghanistan and the rambo pop culture movies too. Rambo didn't work with the Taliban in Rambo III. He was with the Mujahedeen,The taliban didn't come into afghanistan from pakistan untill 1995. the Mujahedeen would later call themselves the northern alliance and would go on to help us topple the taliban.

here is an excerpt from rene the "weasil" gonzalez writing for "the daily collegian" new englands largest college daily

Pat Tillman is not a hero: He got what was coming to him

By Rene Gonzalez
April 28, 2004

When the death of Pat Tillman occurred, I turned to my friend who was watching the news with me and said, "How much you want to bet they start talking about him as a 'hero' in about two hours?" Of course, my friend did not want to make that bet. He'd lose. In this self-critical incapable nation, nothing but a knee-jerk "He's a hero" response is to be expected.

I've been mystified at the absolute nonsense of being in "awe" of Tillman's "sacrifice" that has been the American response. Mystified, but not surprised. True, it's not everyday that you forgo a $3.6 million contract for joining the military. And, not just the regular army, but the elite Army Rangers. You know he was a real Rambo, who wanted to be in the "real" thick of things. I could tell he was that type of macho guy, from his scowling, beefy face on the CNN pictures. Well, he got his wish. Even Rambo got shot in the third movie, but in real life, you die as a result of being shot. They should call Pat Tillman's army life "Rambo 4: Rambo Attempts to Strike Back at His Former Rambo 3 Taliban Friends, and Gets Killed."

But, does that make him a hero? I guess it's a matter of perspective. For people in the United States, who seem to be unable to admit the stupidity of both the Afghanistan and Iraqi wars, such a trade-off in life standards (if not expectancy) is nothing short of heroic. Obviously, the man must be made of "stronger stuff" to have had decided to "serve" his country rather than take from it. It's the old JFK exhortation to citizen service to the nation, and it seems to strike an emotional chord.(luckily rene doesnt suffer from any belief in service or loyalty) So, it's understandable why Americans automatically knee-jerk into hero worship.

However, in my neighborhood in Puerto Rico, Tillman would have been called a "pendejo," an idiot.(and you sir would be described as the son of a cockroach) Tillman, in the absurd belief that he was defending or serving his all-powerful country from a seventh-rate, Third World nation(and I would counter that you are a leach on the ass of that "all powerfull" country) devastated by the previous conflicts it had endured, decided to give up a comfortable life to place himself in a combat situation that cost him his life. This was not "Ramon or Tyrone," who joined the military out of financial necessity, or to have a chance at education. This was a "G.I. Joe" guy who got what was coming to him. That was not heroism, it was prophetic idiocy.

Tillman, probably acting out his nationalist-patriotic fantasies forged in years of exposure to Clint Eastwood and Rambo movies, decided to insert himself into a conflict he didn't need to insert himself into. It wasn't like he was defending the East coast from an invasion of a foreign power. THAT would have been heroic and laudable. What he did was make himself useful to a foreign invading army, and he paid for it. It's hard to say I have any sympathy for his death because I don't feel like his "service" was necessary. He wasn't defending me, nor was he defending the Afghani people. He was acting out his macho, patriotic crap and I guess someone with a bigger gun did him in.

Im sure "rene" will recognize this family member...

UPDATE: what ever you opinion, on this guy and his article, share it with him.

Rene Gonzalez
grad student
Amherst, MA

UPDATE:UMass president criticizes student's column on felled soldier

By Associated Press | April 29, 2004AMHERST --

A University of Massachusetts graduate student who wrote a campus newspaper column saying former NFL player Pat Tillman was not a hero for being killed while fighting in Afghanistan was sharply criticized Thursday by the school's president.

UMass president Jack Wilson issued a statement saying Rene Gonzalez' comments in The Daily Collegian "are a disgusting, arrogant and intellectually immature attack on a human being who died in service to his country."

While recognizing Gonzalez' right to free speech, Wilson said the student owes Tillman a "debt of gratitude," and said he should apologize to Tillman's friends and family.


brave freedom fighters instruct women & children about marksmanship 

of course that would be the al jezeera headline to this story.... or maybe michael moore's take on these scum.


U.S. forces launched a fresh attack on insurgent positions in Fallujah on Wednesday, targeting a train station used by enemy forces.
Marines called in two attack helicopters, which blasted three buildings with a mixture of machine gun fire and missiles. Billowing black smoke rose from the site and the firefight was captured by television cameras.

The helicopters attacked after a U.S. sharpshooter team that was trying to position itself in the area came under heavy fire by insurgents, military officials said.

Witnesses on the ground said insurgents were hiding behind women and children during the firefight.


weapons have been found. 

cought this at haight speech

Some investigative reporting by Kenneth Timmerman has turned up some interesting information. Saddam's WMDs were found, they were documented, and were acknowledged by both the US Government and Iraqi scientists now cooperating with the United States.

When, you ask? A long time ago. It's ongoing. And the media doesn't care because the magical "stockpiles" they keep asking about are not what's being found, so it doesn't count. Documented discoveries include:

 A prison laboratory complex that may have been used for human testing of BW agents and "that Iraqi officials working to prepare the U.N. inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the U.N." Why was Saddam interested in testing biological-warfare agents on humans if he didn't have a biological-weapons program?
 "Reference strains" of a wide variety of biological-weapons agents were found beneath the sink in the home of a prominent Iraqi BW scientist. "We thought it was a big deal," a senior administration official said. "But it has been written off [by the press] as a sort of 'starter set.'"

 "Plans and advanced design work for new long-range missiles with ranges up to at least 1,000 kilometers [621 miles] - well beyond the 150-kilometer-range limit [93 miles] imposed by the U.N. Missiles of a 1,000-kilometer range would have allowed Iraq to threaten targets throughout the Middle East, including Ankara [Turkey], Cairo [Egypt] and Abu Dhabi [United Arab Emirates]."

 "clandestine attempts between late 1999 and 2002 to obtain from North Korea technology related to 1,300-kilometer-range [807 miles] ballistic missiles - probably the No Dong - 300-kilometer-range [186 miles] antiship cruise missiles and other prohibited military equipment[.]"

And yet, it seems, even the mythical stockpiles did turn up, after a fashion:

But what are "stockpiles" of CW agents supposed to look like? Was anyone seriously expecting Saddam to have left behind freshly painted warehouses packed with chemical munitions, all neatly laid out in serried rows, with labels written in English? Or did they think that a captured Saddam would guide U.S. troops to smoking vats full of nerve gas in an abandoned factory? In fact, as recent evidence made public by a former operations officer for the Coalition Provisional Authority's (CPA's) intelligence unit in Iraq shows, some of those stockpiles have been found - not all at once, and not all in nice working order - but found all the same.
And what exactly did the ISG make of the chemicals discovered? Apparently the explanation that they were pesticides was accepted. As Timmerman remarks (emphasis mine):

At Karbala, U.S. troops stumbled upon 55-gallon drums of pesticides at what appeared to be a very large "agricultural supply" area, Hanson says. Some of the drums were stored in a "camouflaged bunker complex" that was shown to reporters - with unpleasant results. "More than a dozen soldiers, a Knight-Ridder reporter, a CNN cameraman, and two Iraqi POWs came down with symptoms consistent with exposure to a nerve agent," Hanson says. "But later ISG tests resulted in a proclamation of negative, end of story, nothing to see here, etc., and the earlier findings and injuries dissolved into nonexistence. Left unexplained is the small matter of the obvious pains taken to disguise the cache of ostensibly legitimate pesticides. One wonders about the advantage an agricultural-commodities business gains by securing drums of pesticide in camouflaged bunkers 6 feet underground. The 'agricultural site' was also colocated with a military ammunition dump - evidently nothing more than a coincidence in the eyes of the ISG."
". . . It seems Iraqi soldiers were obsessed with keeping ammo dumps insect-free . . ."

So let's ask this question: What do you think weapons of mass destruction should look like?

Is the media's real problem here that nothing short of a functional nuclear missile in a silo would meet their criteria for "weapon of mass destruction"? Is it an all or nothing scenario, in which anything else discovered outside of these criteria is, ipso facto, of no concern?

I have known about some of this evidence for a while know, as do many people who have been reading the blogosphere. But the true scale and depth of the network for the weapons program is greater than I had realized, and we need to be talking about this. All of this evidence needs to be brought into the light of the mainstream news to counteract the "we found no WMD" and "Bush lied" refrain that emanates endlessly from the left.

This goes beyond political party affiliation and who's conservative and who's liberal and who's socialist. It's not about defending a "side". We're talking about the truth here, people

to which I would add, plenty of people dont care a wit about the truth, only about political power. which is truth to them.


moonbats in the mists, a field study of species identification and thier migration  

magnificent field work by Bill at INDC journal! this rivals Dian Fossey's work in gorrillas in the mist, as played by sigourney weaver!!!

see it all here before it comes out in a panoramic imax theatre near you!

this is a must see!


Tuesday, April 27, 2004

wanna know how its finally gonna go down in faluja? 

read the belmont club. everything he has been saying so far, has panned out.


group distributed leaflets in Najaf threatening to kill members of Mr. Sadr's Mahdi Army unless they fled Najaf immediately 

looks like people who are native to that city have finally had enough, I blogged about the growing anger earlier.


In another development the Americans were watching, reports from inside Najaf said the growing anger of residents there against Mr. Sadr and his men, who have sown a pattern of lawlessness since their uprising in the city began this month, had taken a startling new turn, with a shadowy group killing at least five militiamen on Sunday and Monday.

Those reports, from residents who reached relatives in Baghdad by telephone, said the killers called themselves the Thulfiqar Army, after a two-bladed sword that Shiite tradition says was used by the patron saint of Shia, Imam Ali, the martyred son-in-law of the Prophet Muhammad. The group distributed leaflets in Najaf threatening to kill members of Mr. Sadr's Mahdi Army unless they fled Najaf immediately, according to accounts.

One Najaf resident said some of Mr. Sadr's militiamen were shedding the black clothing that has been their signature. The same resident said that he knew of two killings of Mahdi Army members on Sunday and that three others had been killed later on Sunday or Monday.

If reports of violence against Mr. Sadr's followers suggested that the American occupiers might be seeing the beginnings of Iraqis' taking action of their own to curb the cleric

update:Bengoshi posting at the command post had a take on this worth considering.

"The article is co-bylined by John Burns who, notwithstanding his NYT affiliation, is one of the more level headed journalists out there. Remember, Burns was the journalist accosted by Sadaam’s thugs, in the last days of the hot war, and was the one journalist not afraid to exress his extreme distaste for the former regime. Indeed, even NPR’s Terry Gross was forced to air Burns’ view that losing Sadaam was overall a good thing. Andrew Sullivan calls Burns, “The best reporter by far on Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.” He’s no Peter Arnett, thats for sure.
Anyway, I saw Burn’s give this account last night on CNN. His description of these secret assasin forces going after the Mahadi militia and gunning for Sadr himself was fascinating. Something is going on in Najef — is it Sistani, CIA, Chalabi, the new Baathists brought aboard, former strongmen from the Iraqi army, or just pissed-off ordinary Iraqis? Bears watching closely."


Monday, April 26, 2004

such a great post I thought it should have a repeat performance~~~~ quote of the day  

A.E. Brain found this gem.

Quote of the Week

We don’t make a distinction between civilians and non-civilians, non-civilians, innocents and non-innocents. Only between Muslims and unbelievers. And the life of an unbeliever has no value. It has no sanctity.
-Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad, head of the al Muhajiroun group in London.

Asked about his comments that he wanted to have the banner of Islam at 10 Downing Street, Muhammad said, "Yes, it's my dream. I believe one day that is going to happen. Because this is my country, I like living here."

wow, this "cleric" puts a real happy face on the "religion of peace", I so want to have him and his "kin" as "neighbors". I get warm and fuzzy feelings from him.

his other dream (after his first comes true) is to put all the british who refuse to convert to the sword......except the children, them you can just smash against the nearest wall, cause you know,... thier lives have "no sanctity" anyway..

what a hoot this guy is.... yeah I want people like him as my nieghbor......


Brain Shavings, The Kerry Lexicon, Volume I 

Brain Shavings is providing a handy translation sheet to help translate the kerry speak for the anicipated Bush/Kerry debates. check it out.


They hate us. They want to destroy us. They want to see to it that we collapse as a world power. By the way, so do the terrorists. ~~~JimS  

anti war at this point is anti american as layed out by the junkyard blog in this editorial. and is also borne out by the image "journalists" like this are trying to paint on american soldiers and marines.

Do you want to help America's enemies defeat us? Form an anti-war movement:

Question: How did Hanoi intend to defeat the Americans?

Answer: By fighting a long war which would break their will to help South Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh said,

"We don't need to win military victories, we only need to hit them until they give up and get out."

Q: Was the American antiwar movement important to Hanoi's victory?

A: It was essential to our strategy. Support of the war from our rear was completely secure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement. Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda, and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and that she would struggle along with us.

That's according to Bui Tin, a former colonel in the North Vietnamese army. His comments echo A Vietcong Memoir by Truong Nhu Tang, a Communist activist, urban organizer and North Vietnam cabinet member during the war. They also fit well with statements and writings of General Giap, Hanoi's Chief of Staff. Giap would later thank anti-war movements in the US, such as John Kerry's Vietnam Veterans Against the War, for making the Communist victory possible.

To review the results of that anti-war movement's efforts, the US and our South Vietnamese allies lost the war. South Vietnam was overrun and hundreds of thousands of innocents were either slaughtered or put into "re-education" camps. Thousands fled to neighboring states or even made their way however they could to the US. The US sustained a humiliating defeat which echoes in every war we have fought ever since. US troops found themselves smeared by one of their own as "murderers," "torturers," and "baby killers," as well as "rapists" and "criminals." That one of their own was none other than Navy Lt. John Forbes Kerry. He mainstreamed the whole "baby killers" lie and made it believable to a nation that until then largely respected its soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines. Kerry's lie took the better part of a generation--until the first Gulf War, which he voted against--to wear off.

Based on this history I'll reiterate a statement I've made before. America is at war now and has been since 9-11. Whether you agree with our military engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq or not, to continue to agitate against them is to invite the same sort of defeat we suffered in Vietnam, but with potentially far greater consequences for Americans at home. The time and place for responsible people to engage in anti-war activities was before we engaged the enemy on the battlefield. Now that we are in battle, indeed have been in battle since late 2001 in Afghanistan and since March-April 2003, the time for street marches and other continued anti-war activism is past. To continue in such activities--whether you're a street marcher or just an agitator trying to break war morale on a blog--is to help the terrorists. It really is that simple, as our sad history with Vietnam shows clearly.

finish his well reasoned opinion, repleat with all the evidence to prove the point. he has a lot more.


wow! the truth laid bare! not in a blog but on the pages of a newspaper! 

saw this at Occam's toothbrush.
all that I can say is WOW! an editor with a backbone! and one who see's reality without the rose colored glasses. I know for a fact that thier are muslims of good will out in the world. here is one but the bottom line is this editor is right and playing make believe over whats really going on wont change it. this guy nails it so that even some one with only two brain cells to rub together will get it.

The News Herald, Panama City Fla.

Up against fanaticism

By Phil Lucas
Executive Editor

If straight talk of savagery offends you, if you believe in ethnic and gender diversity but not diversity of thought or if you think there is an acceptable gray area between good and evil, then turn to the funny pages, and take the children, too.

This piece is not for you.

We published pictures Thursday of burnt American corpses hanging from an Iraqi bridge behind a mob of grinning Muslims.

Some readers didn’t like it.

Mothers said it frightened their children. A woman who works with Muslim physicians thought it might offend or endanger them.

Well, we sure don’t want to frighten, offend or endanger anybody, do we? That’s just too much diversity to handle. I mean, somebody might get hurt.

We could fill the newspaper every morning with mobs of fanatical Muslims. They can’t get along with their neighbors on much of the planet: France, Chechnya, Bosnia, Indonesia, Spain, Morocco, India, Tunisia, Somalia, etc. etc. etc. Can anybody name three ongoing world conflicts in which Muslims are not involved? Today, where there is war, there are fanatical Muslims. We might quibble about who started what conflicts, but look at the sheer number of them.

One thing is sure. Muslim killers started the one we are in now when they slaughtered more than 3,000 people, including fellow Muslims, in New York City.

Madeline Albright, the former secretary of state and feckless appeaser who helped get us into this mess, said last week Muslims still resented the Crusades. Well, Madame Albright, if Westerners were not such a forgiving people, we might resent them too.

Let’s recap the Crusades. Muslims invaded Europe and when they reached sufficient numbers they imposed their intolerant religion upon Westerners by force. Christian monarchs drove them back and took the battle to their homeland. The fight lasted a couple of centuries, and we bottled them up for 1,000 years.

Now, a millennium later, Muslims have expanded forth again. Ask France. Ask England. Ask Manhattan. Two-and-a-half years ago fanatical Muslims laid siege to us. We woke up to the obvious. Our president announced it would be a very long war, then took the battle to the Islamic homeland. Sound familiar?

Let’s consider the concept of a “long war.” Last time it was 200 years, give or take.

Anybody catch Lord of the Rings? You know, the good part, the part that wasn’t fiction, the part that drew us to the books and movies because it was the truest part: the titanic struggle between good and evil, between freedom and enslavement, between the individual and the state, between the celebration of life and the worshipping of death.

That’s the fight we are in, and it never ends. It just has peaks and valleys.

There may be a silent majority of peaceful Muslims – some live here – but that did not save 3,000 people in the World Trade Centers, the millions gassed and butchered in the Middle East, the tens of thousands slain in Eastern Europe and Asia, the hundreds blown to bits in the West Bank and Spain, or the four Americans shot, burned and hung like sausage over the Euphrates as a fanatical minority of Muslims did the joyful dance of death.

Maybe we are so tolerant, we are so bent on “diversity,” we are so nonjudgmental, we are so wrapped up in our six-packs and ballgames that our brains have drained to our bulbous behinds. Maybe we’re so addled on Ritalin we wouldn’t know which end of a gun to hold. Maybe we need a new drug advertised on TV every three minutes, one that would help us grow a backbone.

It doesn’t take a Darwin to figure out that in this world the smartest, the fastest, the strongest, and the most committed always win. No exceptions.

Look at your spouse and children. Look at yourself in the mirror. Then look at the pictures from the paper last Thursday. You better look at them. Those are the people out to kill you.

Who do you think will win? You? Or them? Think you can take your ball and go home and they will leave you alone? Read a little history. Start with last week, last month, last year, and every other year back for half a century. Then go back a thousand years. Nobody hides from this fight.

Like it or not, that’s the way it was and that’s the way it is.

The News Herald, Panama City Fla.


how many ways are their to call some one a lying sack of shit? 

how do you even begain to deal with this much bullshit? this "writer" wants you to believe that highly trained american snipers with thier spotter are killing anything that moves and doing it in the american held areas of fuluja, also, shooting little old ladies holding white flags and leaving them alive. get a fucking grip! how does that benefit the U.S.? or the soldier on the ground? but the "jihaddi's and the terrorist scum would love that wouldnt they?

Eyewitness in Fallujah: By Jo Wilding

Screaming women come in, praying, slapping their chests and faces. Maki, a consultant and acting director of the clinic, takes me to the bed where a child of about 10 is lying with a bullet wound to the head. A smaller child is being treated for a similar injury in the next bed. A US sniper hit them and their grandmother as they left their home to flee Fallujah.

The lights go out, the fan stops and in the sudden quiet someone holds up the flame of a cigarette lighter for the doctor to carry on operating by. The electricity to the town has been cut off for days and when the generator runs out of petrol, they just have to manage till it comes back on. The children are not going to live.

I am ushered into a room where an old woman has just had an abdominal bullet wound stitched , a white flag still clutched in her hand. She tells the same story: “I was leaving my home to go to Baghdad when I was hit by a US sniper.” Some of the town is held by US marines, other parts by the local fighters. Their homes are in the US controlled area and they are adamant that the snipers were US marines.

then the reporter joins in to go retrieve people laying in the streets, and the "trigger happy american soldiers" who "have shot everyone" including grandma holding a white flag are willing to let this idiot live?

We edge along to the hole in the wall where we can see a car, spent mortar shells around it. Feet are visible, crossed, in the gutter. I think he’s dead already. The snipers are visible too, two of them on the corner of the building. As yet I think they can’t see us so we need to let them know we’re there.

“Hello,” I bellow at the top of my voice. “Can you hear me? We are a medical team. We want to remove this wounded man. Is it OK for us to come out and get him? Can you give us a signal that it’s OK?”

I think I hear a shout back. Not sure, I call again.



“Can we come out and get him?”


Slowly, our hands up, we go out. The black cloud that rises to greet us carries with it a hot, sour smell. Solidified, his legs are heavy. A Kalashnikov is attached by sticky blood to his hair and hand and we don’t want it with us, so I put my foot on it as I pick up his shoulders and his blood falls out through the hole in his back. We heave him into the pick-up and try to outrun the flies.

so when he goes on his heroic ride along the only thing he brings back is a dead combatant? evidenced by the weapon stuck to him? hmmm so far rational critical thinking says this article is full of crap. but im just an unfrozen caveman so im going to bring in some other bloggers much smarter than myself to slash and burn this propaganda dressed up as reporting.

here's bastard sword tearing this clown apart with his thoughts below, and a link to more of his analysis

The key thing about getting shot by a sniper is that absolutely nobody knows who did it. You get hit by a bullet that came out of nowhere. The bullet precedes the sound. Another point would be that snipers don't snipe in their own territory. They can just wander on over and ask somebody what they're up to. If you get shot by a sniper while in an area controlled by A, you've been shot by somebody in area B. Apparently Arabs and Journalists are the only two classes of human two freakin' stupid to understand this.

I mean, we have entire headlines like Fallujah Is Realm of Snipers on Both Sides, and one side absolutely revels, indeed glories, in killing old men, women, and children, yet nobody bothers to wonder who keeps shooting the old ladies in the head. Could it be the teenage punks who think killing an Arab collaborator advances the cause of Islam? The same punks who stage ambushes, blow up Iraqi civilians in constant attacks at all hours of the day? Naaa.... Couldn't possibly the idiotic jihadis from Syria. Just couldn't be.

● 1) We have the US military sniper, who is trained to take out his target with one shot, if that target is presenting a threat. We've had a cease-fire, and can only return fire. So the odds of us firing unless fired upon are very slim. It's that thing the military pounds into everyone's heads, called fire discipline. And our snipers have so much fire discipline they can make the regular troops look like they were shootin' up ammunition on a commission basis. A sniper can stare at an enemy soldier for hours, with the crosshair on him, and never take a shot until it's warranted.

● 2) All our snipers have incredibly good optics (well, not as good as mine), and there's no way they can confuse these civilians, since all the moonbat accounts keep saying things like "The old man was sitting in a chair in front of his house, and an American sniper shot him in the forehead."

● 3) US sniper will not take a shot and risk revealing his position to the enemy unless there's a payoff.

● 4) These attacks on civilians are reportedly in "the US controlled zone". Wouldn't we be shooting people over in zones that we don't control, where the bad guys are? Hmm....

● 5) The Arabs and aid workers lie like dogs, as we found out during the initial hostilities. Remember Baghddad Bob or the host of his supporters? Killing Iraqis so the US could take the blame was the bulk of Iraqi foreign policy for over a decade. The European press was complicit in this, being bought out by Saddam's oil money and the overall worldview they shared with the head of the Arab National Socialist Pary.

● 6) There's a huge body of political thought, dating back to the Tatar invasions, which is preached by the Muslim brotherhood, Al-Qaeda, and all the other jihadis. It states to kill anyone trading with the enemies of Islam, and if it can't be determined which Muslims are and are not trading with the enemy, kill all the Muslims, because Allah will reward those who did not trade, and punish those who did. This is the Muslim equivalent of "Kill 'em all and let God sort them out."

● 7) The jihadis have shown absolutely no compunction about intentionally killing civilians, especially women and children, in complete contrast to the US forces. We've gone out of our way to avoid civilian deaths, which is why we're stilll stuck outside Fallujah and Najaf. Conversely the jihadists have no compunction about blowing up UN buildings, Red Cross buildings, or anything else that they think will strike fear and terror into our hearts.

● 8) Thejihadis have been specifically targeting women and children to try and get Iraqis upset with the American occupation. Very few of their attacks have resulted in more Americans dying than Iraqis, and their typical attack results in no US deaths at all, just Iraqi women and children.

● 9) Early on the moonbats and jihadis started making the claims of killing civilians. Again, they're intentionally trying to blame US forces for the massacre of civilians, to demonize the Americans and get the public on their side. They've been at this from day #1, with America blamed everytime a piece of AA happened to land right smack in the middle of Sadr City. Ba'athists killing Iraqis so they could blame the US for it is a time tested formula that's been used again and again and again.

● 10) The portrayals in the press, aided by Voices in the Wilderness", has been somewhat successful, and so if a Muslim civilian was in the American zone, it would be in the best interest of the jihadi to put a bullet through their head, citing reason #6, #8, and #9. They want dead civilians in front of US lines, and as they've shown have no compunction about killing civilians.

● 11) We've had numerous reports that many of these jihadis are foreign forces, who don't care a fig about anyone living in Fallujah. To them, anyone not fighting with them is a collaborator and is therefore fair game. The US military, on the other hand, has the rule of land warfare drummed into their heads.

● 12) They know that the European press will buy anything they say, and won't investigate any incident, nor report any evidence that it wasn't US forces doing the shooting. The Western press, in blaming the Americans for these incidents, is merely encouraging more and even greater incidents in the future.

now bastard swords reader calliope adds his two cents

Suffice it to say that a sniper is a highly trained specialist with a specific weapon equipped with an outstanding scope that let's him clearly see a target a mile away. Further, snipers act in teams with a spotter also equipped with superior optics to help him identify targets. Any sniper in the US military that was popping little old ladies with white flags in the head would be committing murder in front of a witness.

The suggestion that our soldiers are doing this is simple slander. There is NO F*CKING WAY a US sniper would draw down on a civilian target. No way.

and lastly my sentiment on this garbage/propaganda is unless your brain damaged, a leftist, eurotrash or an arab, you can now see what utter bullshit that whole article is. hell im just an unfrozen caveman tending bar in this dive tavern and I see through it, but now the ammunition to defeat it has been layed out at your feet.


why the french are weasilssss. or how to colaborate with the enemy while still maintaining a haughty indignance over being caught back stabbing 

steven den Beste from the uss clueless got some mail from an irate frenchmen for his critique of the french reporters vile behavior, im not surprised, but I stopped thinking of the french as friends of americans a long time ago..... I will put it this way, with the propensity for backstabbing displayed by the french, you wont find me turning my back on a frenchmen holding a knife.....

here is the text from his encounter.

Last November, I posted this article where I roundly condemned the magazine Paris Match for having reporters observe attempts by Iraqi insurgents to shoot down an American jet using SAMs. Somehow or other, I have no idea how, one of their reporters just stumbled on that post. He was inspired to write the following email to me:

I don't know who you are but what I just found on your web-site is really unfair and disgusting. You probably picked up the fact that our reporters were with the Iraki insurgents on the mainstream news. That is right. The fact that we were a French magazine was enough for you to spread the usual French bashing bullshit.

Now let me tell you one thing. If only you had taken the time to get a copy of the magazine, you would have found that in the same issue, we ran a eight page story + interview of Donald Rumsfeld in the Pentagon. That alone tells that contrarily to what you think we don't present one aspect of the story. We do journalism. Hey guys, we are not Fox News !


Regis Le Sommier
US Correspondent for Paris Match

I responded:

If you liked that, you'll love this post from Jan 2003.

[In that post I speculated that one explanation for French opposition to an invasion of Iraq was to prevent exposure of treacherous French dealings with Saddam.]

He responded:

Quite frankly I don't care. You have the right to your opinion about the French. The only thing I meant is when you throw things like the ones concerning the work of my collegues, please learn to read the complete story. For in the same issue, Rumsfeld granted us the first one on one interview with a European media, and no one said we were on his side or that we are helping the Pentagon.

And I just wrote back:

I'm rather appalled, but not in the least bit surprised, that you see complete moral equivalence between an interview with an official of an allied government, and observation/glorification of a direct attempt by hostiles to kill people who are from an allied nation, or at least a nation the French pretend is an ally.

I'm appalled, but not surprised, that you think that having both in the same issue of your magazine represents balance and that the presence of one excuses the presence of the other.

Even if I had known about that interview with Rumsfeld, it would not have affected my opinion, or my condemnation of the direct coverage of the attempt to shoot down an American jet. But that's just my American simplisme, I guess. I dislike people who try to kill Americans, and I despise "allies" who help them in those attempts, such as by providing publicity for their agitprop.

Your magazine has the ethical standards of a pimp.

Update: He has now responded:

Let me remember that the first journalist ever to do a story on the Iraqi insurgents was Michael Ware from Time magazine "one of the few Western journalists to have met with insurgents" according to CNN. His work was fantastic. Also you are wrong, we are not the only one to have produced the DHL story. The video version of it has been on CNN ABC, CBS amongst others. I think you are mistaking politics and journalism.

I do not intend to respond to him. There's clearly no point.

My original article discussed the source of the video material used by CNN, and showed how it was not ethically equivalent. By the same token, I seriously doubt that Ware accompanied Iraqi insurgents and observed them while they made attacks against American soldiers. It's evident that distinction is lost on Le Sommier.

In my original article, I asked whether Paris Match would have acted the same if the insurgents had been African and the anticipated targets had been French soldiers. Last November, that was a rhetorical question. But now I am not sure of the answer.

chiming in with hardcore rebuke that would shame the french journalist (if he wasnt a weasil) bastardsword sheds light on what constitutes being a weasil facilitating and colqaborating with an enemy, as oposed to just a jouralist covering a story.

Steven den Beste has been debating an idiotic French journalist from Paris Match. This is the magazine that had a reporter working with and filming Iraqi terrorists who were trying to shoot down an airliner just outside of Baghdad. The French journalist and a few bloggers have missed the point, so I'd like to clarify a little, using just a basic bit of common sense human standards. Unfortunately this went longer than I wanted, which is how I ran myself out of smokes while sitting at work. Damn...

Suppose you're working as a reporter for your local TV station, oh, Action 10 or something. You cover the city beat, and come up with a cute idea for a behind the scenes look at crime. So you start running around with some people who make the mafia look like boy scouts, as they commit sabotage, arson, and murder. But to preserve your "exclusive access" to these nefarious thugs you carefully protect their identities so they can keep on murdering people. Finally you find yourself out in a field near an airport with them, where they're going to try and shoot down an airliner full of people. Maybe all the reporters for your competing stations are on that airliner, who knows? But if they pull it off it will surely lead the local news, now won't it? Still you do nothing but film their little escapade, even making sure they'll get away with the act if the missile actually downs the airliner full of people. You don't warn anyone. You don't call the police. You don't call the airport. You don't provide any information that can even help prevent a future attack. At that point you're working with the terrorists.

You get called on this outrageous and unacceptable behavior and try to hide behind the fact that your evening news program also covers the mayor's office and chief of police, so what you did just represents "balanced" reporting. Clearly this is not the case, and every station that isn't running around acting as the PR representative for mass murderers also covers the mayor's office. The fact that these other TV stations don't employ morally vacuous reporters who aid and abet terrorists doesn't mean they're "biased". It means they retain some integrity and act with at least a minimal level of public responsibility.

There are many ways that reporters cover crime. They can simply report on the story that's already unfolded, which is not much different than covering other incidents. They can go undercover to get the story, then in later reporting expose the criminal's activities so the public is better protected. They can write articles sympathetic to the criminals if they so choose, after the criminals are captured. They can try to explain the motivations of criminals still at large, to advocate for broad social change for example, so the public is better protected. They can even interview the criminal if in setting up the interview the criminal makes sure that there's no way the meeting will get him arrested. The criminal by his anonymity or methods of self-protection can render the reporter unable to inhibit his actions or impinge on his freedom, which also absolves the reporter of doing so.

What the reporter can't do is happily run around with the criminals for an extended period, while the criminals are actively attempting to kill people, when the reporter has both the means and opportunity to stop them, yet instead makes sure they're protected from capture and prosecution. In doing nothing of the sort the reporter becomes nothing but a criminal co-conspirator with a camera and an audience. Having a camera and a notebook doesn't confer any extra rights and privileges on a person, and any normal civilian running around with a criminal, with full knowledge of his crimes, and especially staying with him while these crimes are being committed, is himself committing a crime. On top of this the reporter is even more involved because the criminal will commit extra crimes just to gain notoriety.

read on


a closer look at the media and why they hate blogs like this for bypassing them as your only filter for news. 

honestreporting.com examines bias in media and anylizes it.

Recent media coverage focuses on Palestinian emotion, ignoring the altogether rational process at work.

What do President Bush's endorsement of the Sharon Plan and ongoing Israeli strikes against Hamas leaders mean for Palestinians? The answer is complex, but media outlets are focusing overwhelmingly on one factor alone ― raw Arab rage.

This week, accompanying pictures of angry Palestinians, were ubiquitous headlines such as:

- Reuters: 'Furious Palestinians Reject Bush Pledges'
- The Scotsman: 'Hamas Vows Bloody Revenge'
- Arizona Daily Star: 'Arab World Seething over U.S.'
- BBC: '...Wounded, Humiliated, Threatened'

The subtext in these reports is that Palestinian/Arab emotions are of utmost significance, and that this Arab fury will likely result in a backlash of terrorism.

Sometimes this is explicitly stated ― the Washington Post rationalized a Palestinian rocket attack against Israeli civilians on Wednesday (Apr. 21) as motivated by 'Palestinian rage against Israel and the United States [that] has escalated since the assassination of Rantisi and President Bush's endorsement three days earlier of an Israeli plan.' The Toronto Star editorialized that by killing terror leaders, Sharon is 'more likely to radicalize people, set Arabs against America and Israel, and cost Israel more lives.'

But while the media are obsessed with Arab emotion, an entirely rational process has been taking place on the Arab street:

● The IDF anti-terror policy is working: Israel's stepped-up campaign against terrorist leaders since early 2003 has resulted in a 50-percent decrease in the number of Israeli terror victims. Palestinian deaths have likewise decreased significantly.

● Terror groups are in disarray, their leaders in hiding: Senior Hamas official Ismail Haniyeh told a reporter this week, 'Hamas might have a crisis on its hands after losing its leaders.' Another terror leader said people are 'unaware of the limitations and amount of pressure imposed against the Palestinian combatants.' And as opposed to Rantisi's bravado ("I prefer to die by Apache"), Hamas' new leader is afraid to reveal his identity or location.

● Palestinian leaders are getting the message: Yassir Arafat today expelled 21 Fatah fugitives from safe haven in his compound. And after the Yassin strike, 60 Palestinian leaders urged restraint in a prominent newspaper ad, arguing that the suicide bombings have backfired and calling for 'a peaceful, wise intifada.'

It seems that the stereotype of Arabs as 'rash' and 'emotional' ― as opposed to 'calculating' and 'rational' Westerners ― is coloring media coverage of this conflict. This is a variation on the 'soft bigotry of low expectations' that excuses the lack of Palestinian democracy by presuming Palestinians are incapable of reform.

read the rest


Sunday, April 25, 2004

auction of original cox and forkum artwork 

for a fundraising for Spirit of America, an organization that raises money for Marines to use for humanitarian and public relation purposes in Iraq and Afghanistan. something I blogged about earlier.



IMAO has a new test to weed out terrorists 

I hope he puts this on a T-shirt. itll go nicely with his how to identify a terorist T which I bought. that way I could wear one on even days and one on odd ........

test for terrorists

I had to travel by plane over the holidays, and that got me thinking about what are some actually effective ways to prevent terrorists from getting on board. Why not, instead of bothering me about my trusty pocketknife, they try to psychologically screen for terrorists using a short quiz.

Here is what I came up with:


QUESTION 1: What is your name?

Non-terrorists have names like Larry, John, or SpongeBob. If the person answers with "Mohammed" or the nickname "The Engineer," he's probably a terrorist.

QUESTION 2: Fill in the blank: I want to ____ Americans.

Terrorists will not be able to help themselves from completing the sentence with the word "kill". Non-terrorist foreigners will fill the blank in with "thank", "hug", or "kneel down before".

QUESTION 3: Fill in the blank: The ones to blame are the ____.

Non-terrorists will probably become confused by this question and leave it blank since they would need to know more information about the problem before being able to assign blame. Terrorists will instinctively fill in the blank with "JEWS!!!" or "jooooos!".

QUESTION 4: What is your opinion about the Crusades?

Most non-terrorist Americans’ knowledge about the Crusades will come exclusively from the beginning of the movie Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (or Robin Hood: Men in Tights), so one should be wary of any answer that doesn't mention Kevin Costner. Even if the person does know something about the Crusades, he or she will probably not have much of an opinion about it as it seems as relevant to modern life as the battle between Thag and Zork in 30,000 B.C. over who got to next paint a buffalo on the cave wall. Only dirty terrorists care about the Crusades.


The terrorist answer to all of these is D.

Islam means ____.
A. peace.
B. submission.
C. That you are a "lam."
D. kill the Jews!!!

Children should be
A. seen and not heard
B. cherished
C. given Ritalin
D. blown up

If you got a new puppy, what would you name him?
A. Rover
B. Fluffy
C. GK Chesterton
D. Infidel... and then hang him

The sun sets every night because of
A. the earth rotating
B. the earth revolving around the sun
C. the sun revolving around the earth
D. a Zionist conspiracy

My parents want me
A. to be happy
B. to make something of myself
C. to get a job
D. to blow myself up in a crowded area

At the end of the Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, I immediately thought
A. "What a great movie!"
B. "It could have been more faithful to the book."
C. "I need to pee."
D. "Kill the Jews!"

If the test reveals the person to be a terrorist, proper procedure should be for the ticket taker to pull out a gun and unload it into the person while shouting, "Take that, you dirty terrorist!" I know that if I see a terrorist gunned down in front of me just before boarding the plane, I'll feel much safer.


Saturday, April 24, 2004

and the lie's about the terrorist sympathizer corrie's death continue 

for the record. corrie was not trying to stop a house from being destroyed when she died of stupidity. she was trying to stop the demolition of a smuggling tunnel that palistinian terrorists used to bring in explosives. and she knew that. she was a traitor who hated america and burned the american flag while protesting in gaza. fuck her.


Protesters target Caterpillar over bulldozer sales to Israel

The Associated Press
4/23/04 10:42 PM

PEORIA, Ill. (AP) -- More than 300 protesters renewed demands that Caterpillar Inc. stop selling bulldozers to the Israeli military, arguing Friday that the equipment is used to destroy Palestinian homes and killed an American activist in the Gaza Strip.

Protesters used a wooden replica of a bulldozer to re-enact the March 2003 death of Rachel Corrie during the rally outside the company's headquarters in downtown Peoria.

"The image (Caterpillar) should want to have out there is that they're building, not destroying," said Craig Corrie, Rachel's father.

The 23-year-old college student from Olympia, Wash., was crushed to death while trying to block an Israeli army bulldozer destroying a row of Palestinian homes in a refugee camp near the Gaza-Egypt border. (no she wasnt and this reporter knows it)

Caterpillar officials declined to meet with Corrie's parents and leaders of the Stop CAT Coalition, which organized Friday's protest.


get out 

found this bit of interesting news over at the command post

Radical Cleric Is Unwanted by His Neighbors

Standing in the courtyard of [Najaf’s] golden-domed Shrine of Ali on Friday, staring at 2,500 worshipers seated on rugs, the imam, Sadr al-Din al-Kubanchi, hurled words as sharp as scimitars at the army that had invaded this holy city.
But the soldiers he denounced were not Americans but members of [Moktada al-Sadr’s] Mahdi Army…

“It’s not brave to take refuge in the house or the mosque or the markets and use women and children as human shields,” Mr. Kubanchi said of the Mahdi Army. “They are people who are trying to cheat you, and they are people from the regime of Saddam Hussein, former intelligence officers. They want to drag you into battle to be destroyed. If that happens, the soldiers will attack Najaf, and our enemies will happily see our blood flow.”

The standoff in Najaf has turned into a showdown between the clerics of the city and Mr. Sadr, as the religious and tribal leaders here try to nudge their unwanted neighbor out of town…

Gingerly, since Mr. Sadr now runs the city, they have handed out flyers and given speeches urging the Mahdi Army to take its fight elsewhere. They have done so while their mosques and homes are surrounded by undisciplined militiamen…


Friday, April 23, 2004

my wife is home 

any of the few people out thier who read this blog regularly know what a relief that is.


what are our choices as the western world..... how do we win.  

wretchard at the belmont club never ceases to amaze me. here is just a small piece.

No More Groupement Mobile 100s

Osama Bin Laden can be forgiven for believing that the defensive phase of Islam's war against the West has long ended. He considered it to be in its final offensive stages, so far advanced that a strike against New York City, the Pentagon and White House was perhaps overdue. Osama draws confidence from his belief that the new Arab Way of War has never been defeated, not in Algeria, Soviet Afghanistan nor in Somalia. The possible withdrawal of Honduras, the Dominican Republic and perhaps Thailand from Iraq truly shows the power of his methods. Most conventional military establishments are simply incapable of surviving on the terrorist battlefield, their armed men no better than civilians. But the withdrawals solve nothing. Radical Islamists know there is no reason in principle why they cannot follow retreating European forces to their home ground and rout them there, where they will if anything be more hamstrung, using the immense Islamic immigrant communities as their base. For the first time in 600 years, Western Europe stands before an Oriental enemy it cannot defeat on the battlefield. The commander of the 18th Airborne Corps, Lt. General John Vines contrasted the GWOT to Vietnam. This, he says, is a "national war for our survival as a nation". Europe knows this too but are subconsciously already beaten.

The sole obstacles to the wave of darkness are the Anglosphere -- and ironically for the Europeans -- Israel. The strongest proof against the irresistibility of terrorism is Israel, which is often dented, but never seriously hurt by Arab Way of warfare. Indeed, at each clash the terrorists whine at being unfairly worsted because the Israelis have shown themselves capable of dealing out punishment an order of magnitude greater than they suffer. Israel is particularly irksome because it diminishes the psychological aura the Islamists work so hard to achieve. How can terrorism plausibly defeat America if it cannot beat a handful of Jews?



how vile? how evil? this vile this evil. 

charles at LGF got wind of this.

this college campus newspaper at rutgers shows thier disdain and contempt for remembering the deaths of millions. the Medium, which is published 13 times each semester receives nearly $10,000 through the Rutgers College and Livingston College student governing associations.

Pastor Martin Niemöller

In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.


I wrote to the president of rutgers. here is what I said, and here is the e-mail address

Sir, I would like to convince you that although they may have free speach rights to print whatever vile crap they wish, they have no "right" to be funded by the college coffers to produce this evil paper.

please consider de-funding them and inviting them to compete in the market place of ideas by selling thier paper, or charging for ads if this horrible noxious crap is desired by the community they will keep them in business by paying for it or advertisement space..

please stand up for what is right

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Old Queen's - College Avenue Campus
83 Somerset Street
New Brunswick, NJ 08901

Telephone: 732/932-7454
Fax: 732/932-8060
Email: president@rutgers.edu


death of an american hero  

WASHINGTON (April 23) -- Pat Tillman was killed in Afghanistan after walking away from an NFL career to join the Army Rangers, U.S. officials said Friday.

"A U.S. official told Reuters that Tillman, who was 27, died in a firefight.".....
Some members of the Army's elite Ranger units were taking part in the hunt for al-Qaida and Taliban fighters in southeastern Afghanistan, the military official said."

"Tillman's agent, Frank Bauer, has called him a deep and clear thinker who has never valued material things.

In 2001, Tillman turned down a $9 million, five-year offer sheet from the Super Bowl champion St. Louis Rams out of loyalty to the Cardinals, and by joining the Army, he passed on millions more from the team."


he was described by friends as loyal to his wife, family, country. more important than football was giving back to his community. and after 911 defending his country through personal service.......


Thursday, April 22, 2004

On Earth Day Remember: If Environmentalism Succeeds, It Will Make Human Life Impossible 

Apr. 14, 2004

By Michael S. Berliner

Earth Day approaches, and with it a grave danger faces mankind. The danger is not from acid rain, global warming, smog, or the logging of rain forests, as environmentalists would have us believe. The danger to mankind is from environmentalism.
The fundamental goal of environmentalism is not clean air and clean water; rather, it is the demolition of technological/industrial civilization. Environmentalism's goal is not the advancement of human health, human happiness, and human life; rather, it is a subhuman world where "nature" is worshipped like the totem of some primitive religion.
In a nation founded on the pioneer spirit, environmentalists have made "development" an evil word. They inhibit or prohibit the development of Alaskan oil, offshore drilling, nuclear power—and every other practical form of energy. Housing, commerce, and jobs are sacrificed to spotted owls and snail darters. Medical research is sacrificed to the "rights" of mice. Logging is sacrificed to the "rights" of trees. No instance of the progress that brought man out of the cave is safe from the onslaught of those "protecting" the environment from man, whom they consider a rapist and despoiler by his very essence.
Nature, they insist, has "intrinsic value," to be revered for its own sake, irrespective of any benefit to man. As a consequence, man is to be prohibited from using nature for his own ends. Since nature supposedly has value and goodness in itself, any human action that changes the environment is necessarily immoral. Of course, environmentalists invoke the doctrine of intrinsic value not against wolves that eat sheep or beavers that gnaw trees; they invoke it only against man, only when man wants something.
The ideal world of environmentalism is not twenty-first-century Western civilization; it is the Garden of Eden, a world with no human intervention in nature, a world without innovation or change, a world without effort, a world where survival is somehow guaranteed, a world where man has mystically merged with the "environment." Had the environmentalist mentality prevailed in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, we would have had no Industrial Revolution, a situation that consistent environmentalists would cheer—at least those few who might have managed to survive without the life-saving benefits of modern science and technology.
The expressed goal of environmentalism is to prevent man from changing his environment, from intruding on nature. That is why environmentalism is fundamentally anti-man. Intrusion is necessary for human survival. Only by intrusion can man avoid pestilence and famine. Only by intrusion can man control his life and project long-range goals. Intrusion improves the environment, if by "environment" one means the surroundings of man—the external material conditions of human life. Intrusion is a requirement of human nature. But in the environmentalists' paean to "Nature," human nature is omitted. For environmentalism, the "natural" world is a world without man. Man has no legitimate needs, but trees, ponds, and bacteria somehow do.
They don't mean it? Heed the words of the consistent environmentalists. "The ending of the human epoch on Earth," writes philosopher Paul Taylor in Respect for Nature: A Theory of Environmental Ethics, "would most likely be greeted with a hearty 'Good riddance!'" In a glowing review of Bill McKibben's The End of Nature, biologist David M. Graber writes (Los Angeles Times, October 29, 1989): "Human happiness [is] not as important as a wild and healthy planet . . . . Until such time as Homo sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along." Such is the naked essence of environmentalism: it mourns the death of one whale or tree but actually welcomes the death of billions of people. A more malevolent, man-hating philosophy is unimaginable.
The guiding principle of environmentalism is self-sacrifice, the sacrifice of longer lives, healthier lives, more prosperous lives, more enjoyable lives, i.e., the sacrifice of human lives. But an individual is not born in servitude. He has a moral right to live his own life for his own sake. He has no duty to sacrifice it to the needs of others and certainly not to the "needs" of the nonhuman.

read on to see how to save mankind from environmentalism...


Quote of the Week  

A.E. Brain found this gem.

Quote of the Week

We don’t make a distinction between civilians and non-civilians, non-civilians, innocents and non-innocents. Only between Muslims and unbelievers. And the life of an unbeliever has no value. It has no sanctity.
-Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad, head of the al Muhajiroun group in London.

Asked about his comments that he wanted to have the banner of Islam at 10 Downing Street, Muhammad said, "Yes, it's my dream. I believe one day that is going to happen. Because this is my country, I like living here."

wow, this "cleric" puts a real happy face on the "religion of peace", I so want to have him and his "kin" as "neighbors". I get warm and fuzzy feelings from him.

his other dream (after his first comes true) is to put all the british who refuse to convert to the sword......except the children, them you can just smash against the nearest wall, cause you know,... thier lives have "no sanctity" anyway..

what a hoot this guy is.... yeah I want people like him as my nieghbor......


no war for oil, ...just tyranny opression mass graves and coruption on an international scale 

From http://OpinionJournal.com

JAMES TARANTO Best of the Web Today

It's All About Oil

ABC News has new information about the U.N. Oil-for-Food scandal:

*** QUOTE ***

At least three senior United Nations officials are suspected of taking multimillion-dollar bribes from the Saddam Hussein regime, U.S. and European intelligence sources tell ABC News.

One year after his fall, U.S. officials say they have evidence, some in cash, that Saddam diverted to his personal bank accounts approximately $5 billion from the United Nations Oil-for-Food program.

*** END QUOTE ***

The most prominent accused U.N. official is Benon Sevan, who ran Oil-for-Food for six years:

*** QUOTE ***

Documents have surfaced in Baghdad, in the files of the former Iraqi Oil Ministry, allegedly linking Sevan to a pay-off scheme in which some 270 prominent foreign officials received the right to trade in Iraqi oil at cut-rate prices.

"It's almost like having coupons of bonds or shares. You can sell those coupons to other people who are normal oil traders," said Claude Hankes-Drielsma, a British adviser to the Iraq Governing Council.

*** END QUOTE ***

The "smoking gun" letter, found in the Oil Ministry and obtained by ABC, "contains a table titled 'Quantity of Oil Allocated and Given to Mr. Benon Sevan.' The table lists a total of 7.3 million barrels of oil as the "quantity executed'--'an amount that, if true, would have generated an illegal profit of as much as $3.5 million."

The report also includes a list of other politically connected individuals, companies, and institutions who received Iraqi oil contracts--including four Frenchmen, two of them ex-government officials. Did France and Russia, which threatened to use their Security Council veto in hope of discouraging the coalition to liberate Iraq, back Saddam in order to keep the money rolling in?

As for the U.N., how in the world can anyone claim with a straight face that this cesspool of corruption, tyranny and anti-Semitism is qualified to convey "legitimacy" to the new Iraqi government or anyone else?


and I would add facilitator of genocide round the world. anyone want to argue why this isnt true? and the UN really isnt a craphole?

**************************************************************************** Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?


this mans essays on the defense of and value of western culture are amazing and if you are a liberal you need to read them, maybe when you are done (if you have a moral compass or soul) you might turn your self around from a life spent attacking america. and if you are of right mind but feeling down, again they are a must read.
  • Eject! Eject! Eject!

  • STRENGTH (part 1).
  • STRENGTH (part 2).

  • *************
  • eurabiantimes
  • armies of liberation
  • Aaron’s Rantblog
  • The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
  • The British Pickle
  • Blackfive
  • mypetjawa
  • USS Clueless
  • The Official Al Franken Website
  • ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  • bastardsword
  • exellent critical analysis on the news. this guy can chew the propagandists up and spit em out. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  • History's End
  • history in the making is being taught at this blog. I like it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  • command-post
  • lgf: contains petroleum distillates
  • http://junkyardblog/
  • voice of reason form iraq
  • AlphaPatriot
  • Pink Flamingo Bar & grill
  • coincidently I used to work at a nightclub called the pink flamingo bar & grill, good times good booze, good food and bad girls what a great combination...
  • blaster's blog
  • haganah
  • jihad watch
  • Armies of Liberation
  • IMAO
  • Cox & Forkum Editorial Cartoons
  • ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ this guy has a grasp of history, its nuances, and an ability to make comparative analysis that blows my socks off.
  • Belmont Club
  • want to know what real critical analysis is? here's must read homework from Belmont club
  • Smoke and Mirrors Versus Gunsmoke
  • Smoke and Mirrors Versus Gunsmoke Part 2
  • ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  • Allah Is In The House
  • funny stuff sharp and to the point
  • iowahawk
  • new political satire blogger (and really funny unlike that washed up jackass al franken who would'nt know funny if it was stenciled to the front of a city bus that just ran him over.)
  • grandvizier
  • grandvizier is a fellow traveler in the verbal war against the death cultists
  • A.E.Brain
  • IRAQ NOW an american soldier with boots on the ground
  • A Nice Jewish Boys' Weblog
  • ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If like me, you enjoy a good cigar, but hate paying retail this is the joint. I've bought hundreds of good cigars from them, allways with great service
  • ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ meet the bouncers gunther,tasha, sweetpea & the new kid ottzie

  • Friends of Israel
  • archives
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Free Web Page Hit Counters
    Manhattan Lasik ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    this site listed on

    Blogarama - The Blog Directory ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Fallen Patriot Fund