Monday, January 31, 2005

The Yin and Yang of British reporting






Iraq confounds the prophets of doom
Opinion, The UK Telegraph



Hope your sitting down because this opinion column will knock your socks off! We hear so little positive journalism from British print media overall, despite the fact Blair is a staunch ally.

The today's opinion commentary in the Telegraph is nothing less than mindblowing. It demeans those hoping for post-election failure merely to justify their anti-war, anti-Bush stances. It looks back at history, drawing parallels to South Africa's first election. And it minces no words, directly accusing the continued doom'n'gloom broadcasts as "coming perilously close to siding with jihadi murderers.".

A worthy read in it's entirety. Bravo, Telegraph. Bravo.

That elections are a better thing than tyranny seems a truth so obvious as not to be worth stating. Yet such were the passions aroused by the Iraq war that many Western observers now find themselves hoping, disgracefully, that that country's first free poll will fail.

Left-wing commentators, in Britain as in much of Europe, have focused disproportionately on the difficulties that any state must undergo during a transition process. To many of them, every terrorist bomb, every murdered election official, every sign of heightened military alertness - even the loss of a British aircraft - makes a nonsense of Iraq's democratic aspirations.

(snip - highly recommend continued reading at above link)


Of course, Brian Whitaker is the yang to the yin here. The Guardian commentator is the quintessential profile of those which the Telegraph's opinion speaks.

In his
"Fig-leaf freedom" column today, Mr. Whitaker parrots the same idiot'ology uttered by MSNBC's Chris "Lob Ball" Matthews. Both seem to believe that an election means life should change overnight. They believe it is already rife with influence from interest groups and the wealthy, place undue import upon the violence, and gnash their teeth over the plight of the minority Sunnis.

So far it sounds like a healthy democracy in growing stages to me.

Dare I point out that the USA didn't change the moment Clinton took over from Bush the elder? Nor will changes be immediate when Bush yields office to his successor.

And does anyone remember that the few Founding Fathers, who designed our Constitution, were the wealthy and influential of early America? Despite the fact that Whitaker would most likely consider them wealthy, capitalist pigs, they sure did a great job of creating the ultimate role model for democracy and economic growth.

For the naysayers, praying for failure in Iraq is redemption to their years of abusive journalism for the war. It's always something they must decry as failure. They have been proven wrong about the election, so they look further to hype on the next obstacle of doom they can see.

I'm with the Telegraph... but considerably less PC about it. The doom'n'gloomers *do* side with the jihadists. They just do not have the integrity to proclaim their quiet allegiance. This puts them one step below the terrorists on the human scale. For while terrorists are indeed scum of the earth, they at least do not deny who they are.

Who needs Kerry?




War Critics Paris,
Berlin, Moscow Hail Iraq Vote

By Mark John, Brussels (Reuters)



Kerry's about to lose the wind in his sails... again. He's getting less and less to whine about, and the 2nd term of the Cowboy Prez is still in it's infancy.

For all his blustering about the absence of aid in Iraq from those he calls "the international community" - or more specifically, France, Germany and Russia - it appears that the success of the election itself was enough for them to pledge the heretofore non-existant support that Kerry has been demanding.

But it was done on the terms of Bush, the coalition and Iraqis, and not the acquiescence and cajoling as put forth by the Congressional loser.

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Iraq war opponents France, Germany and Russia Monday hailed elections in the country as a success and, in a sign of warming transatlantic ties, pledged to back U.S. efforts to restore stability.

In a bigger than expected turnout, up to 8 million Iraqis cast ballots Sunday, braving suicide bombs and mortar attacks by insurgents that killed 35 people.

EU leaders, despite concern over the low turnout among minority Sunnis, joined Washington in declaring the poll a success, three weeks before a Feb. 22 summit with President Bush that is meant to relaunch Europe-U.S. ties.

President Jacques Chirac, who faced U.S. wrath for leading a diplomatic campaign against the war, told President Bush by telephone the vote was "an important step in the political reconstruction of Iraq" and declared the turnout and organization a success.

German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer said Berlin still believed it was right to have opposed the war but wanted to look to the future and what it could do to help in Iraq.

"The challenge of putting Iraq on a stable democratic footing is one we must all take on together -- within the political limits we have set," he told reporters in Brussels, reaffirming Germany's refusal to send troops to Iraq.

In Moscow, Russian President Vladimir Putin praised the election as "a step in the right direction" and told ministers at a government session to work for Iraq's future stability.



The Iraqis, and the US Coalition of countries did it... against all odds, without the help of the so-called "human rights minded" int'l community who chose to ignore Saddam's tyranny, and despite everyone's predictions of failure. The plans as laid out by Bush, the US military and Iraqis, despite flaws, has paved its way to a successful election, laying the groundwork for a free Iraq to emerge. And now the desires of a nation craving peace, economic and social reform are clear. The majority Shi'a intent to reach out to the minority Sunnis appears to be genuine.

And with the Iraqi success, everyone wants in on the action.

All I can say is "better late than never". Oh yes... perhaps a bit of a "naaa naaaa na naaaaaa naaaaaaaa!"



UN says "no genocide" in Darfur





U.N. Darfur Report Does Not See Genocide
By Dino Mahtani, Nigeria (Reuters)



No surprises here. The UN stops short of calling the murders in the Sudan "genocide", as the US sees it, for one reason. If classified as genocide, it requires more specific and direct action which entails more than talks and sanctions. And we all know the UN does whit besides talk.

Instead, Kofi pronounces it as "gross violations of human rights". One can only wonder of those being assailed in Sudan feel the same way.

Annan said Sunday "gross violations of human rights" had occurred in Darfur and recommended the Security Council consider sanctions on the oil-exporting country.

Monday, Canada, Australia and New Zealand said in a letter the council should look at "targeted measures" that could include travel bans and an assets freeze.

The United States is preparing a resolution to this effect, but Russia, which supplies arms, and China, which has oil interests in Sudan, have opposed penalties on Khartoum.

The letter also said the council should refer cases to the International Criminal Court (ICC). The United States vigorously opposes the tribunal. Instead the United States recommends using facilities of an ad hoc tribunal in Tanzania, set up to try suspects of the 1994 Rwanda genocide, for suspects in Darfur.

Ismail said "sanctions will not help Darfur."

Rights groups and some governments have become frustrated by the lack of action over Darfur. Last week, the Sudanese government launched a bombing raid that killed about 100 civilians and displaced 9,000, the United Nations said.


While Iraq has captured the bulk of the world's attentions, the plight in Darfur has had to claw it's way slowly to the attention of the world leaders... including our own.

During the Clinton administration, Madeline Albright was quoted as saying "the human rights situation in Sudan is not marketable to the American people." This was prior to Darfur, and referred then to the Sudanese gov'ts assaults against the southern citizenry.

Albright's dismissal energized one Massachusettes Smith College profession, Eric Reeves. He took leave from his job to do something about it - letter writing campaigns, organizing human rights and church groups, and a tougher stance by the world community was born.

And now, all the same tactics are again being used in Darfur. The same tactics the UN fails to recognize as genocide in order to shirk away from the required prescription.

Today we find an article by Sebastian Mallaby of the Washington Post, entitled " Marketing Darfur. Reeves had resurrected his campaign for the assailed Sudanese last year, and his "genocide" language has been adopted by the US officials and EU Parliament.

Now all find themselves up against the world body, who fears the word and the responsibilities it brings.

Each day the UN delays and talks, signing useless cease fires than do not last, more lose their lives to the violence. Will the UN step up to the plate? And will the EU, for once, side with the Americans on the severity of the situation?

'If you don't take a job as a prostitute, we can stop your benefits'

Of course, this is today's fascinating, tantalizing headline for what is going on in Germany under their bizarre mix of socialism and, ahem, capitalism (what the market demands). Of course, any who have done much study at all of "capitalism" -- knows that capitalism without a moral base is little more than a thug regime. Socialists in America have been harping for "legalization of sex workers" for a number of years. It's happened in spotty places like San Francisco and Berkeley. However, I think those are self-negating locations within the United States.

A 25-year-old waitress who turned down a job providing "sexual services'' at a brothel in Berlin faces possible cuts to her unemployment benefit under laws introduced this year.

Prostitution was legalised in Germany just over two years ago and brothel owners – who must pay tax and employee health insurance – were granted access to official databases of jobseekers.

The waitress, an unemployed information technology professional, had said that she was willing to work in a bar at night and had worked in a cafe.

She received a letter from the job centre telling her that an employer was interested in her "profile'' and that she should ring them. Only on doing so did the woman, who has not been identified for legal reasons, realise that she was calling a brothel.

President Bush's Statement on Iraqi Elections

Click here.

A snip:

The commitment to a free Iraq now goes forward. This historic election begins the process of drafting and ratifying a new constitution, which will be the basis of a fully democratic Iraqi government. Terrorists and insurgents will continue to wage their war against democracy, and we will support the Iraqi people in their fight against them. We will continue training Iraqi security forces so this rising democracy can eventually take responsibility for its own security.

There's more distance to travel on the road to democracy. Yet Iraqis are proving they're equal to the challenge. On behalf of the American people, I congratulate the people of Iraq on this great and historic achievement

Soar, Iraqi People, Soar!

Rush for the Border : Limbaugh issues a warning to President Bush

ORLANDO, Fla.--In the aftermath of 9/11, conservatives bottled up their frustrations over some of President Bush's policies. Then they muted their criticism during the presidential campaign. But now it is spilling out in all directions--and the White House had better pay attention.

On Friday Rush Limbaugh, a staunch Bush supporter, took two separate opportunities to warn the president that he faced conservative opposition on some key issues that could hurt his chances of passing the rest of his second-term agenda. First was federal spending, which "is surging out of control," according to the Heritage Foundation's new "Mandate for Leadership." The other was immigration, which, Mr. Limbaugh told his listeners, "could break up the Republican-conservative coalition" à la Ross Perot. "We cannot maintain our sovereignty without securing and protecting our borders in an era where terrorists around the world seek entry to this country," he said.


Alia Vibe: ...and Hillary is addressing this issue: She's becoming more and more hardline against "illegal immigration". I did predict that the Arizona popular bill would be put in jeopardy after it passed. I had CA's Prop 187 experiences to draw upon.

I'll say as little as possible here... but the gulf between the plan and conservatives' perception(s) is a little too huge, at moment. This "perception" is being fueled by some very hard core anti-illegal immigrationisms. Unlike some folks, I don't see America as the "last white bastion" of the world. I never have. It is not a skin color issue, nor necessarily a language issue; it's a dollars and security issue. I wish to see immigrants pay their fair share of taxes. I wish to see them assimilate into the American culture.

These eyes and ears of mine have seen and heard some alarming things which have been in bed with the anti-illegal immigration groups. Conversely, rotten criminals are indeed sneaking over the border into this Brave Country with some "sheepish" people living in counties. The costs of supporting illegal immigrants is staggering.

I say, let's acquire Mexico. We've already so many refugee businesses established there (screw you, overregulatory EPA!) -- and our real problems, closeby are more so with South America than with Mexico.

I say this and because IT IS TOO LATE TO PUT UP SOME FREAKIN IRON GATE. 12 years of Clinton/Democratic policy, placement of stooges in prominent position, judicial activist judges, etc., not to mention the mere "blue zones" which keep on supporting the illegal issue. The coyotes, the innocents-but-thirsting-for-Freedom dying in the back of suffocating trucks and campers. And then there are conservatives demanding President Bush stop "illegals" from entering the country...Now! Like how? Waging a WOT at the border? Is this the illustration? If so, it's not very intelligent nor cogent. IMHO, both sides of this need to refine their arguments.

And I say: Time for a bigger can.

Kerry on Iraq: Don't Hype the Election

Democrats cautiously welcome Iraqi elections

Massachusetts Senator John Kerry (news - web sites), who lost the November presidential election against Republican President George W. Bush, described the Iraqi elections as "significant" and "important" but said they should not be "overhyped."

"It is significant that there is a vote in Iraq," Kerry said in an interview with NBC television's Meet the Press. "But ... no one in the United States should try to overhype this election.

"This election is a sort of demarcation point, and what really counts now is the effort to have a legitimate political reconciliation," Kerry said. "And it's going to take a massive diplomatic effort and a much more significant outreach to the international community than this administration has been willing to engage in.

"Absent that, we will not be successful in Iraq," he said.
...
Another influential Democrat, Delaware Senator Joseph Biden, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, also rejected Kennedy's call for an immediate withdrawal of some American forces.

[Evan Bayh] he disagreed with Kennedy's call for the start of a US troop withdrawal from Iraq. "We've planted our flag," Bayh said. "I think that we need to be successful now, and unfortunately that's going to require our presence for some time.

"I think to cut and run at this juncture would be a terrible mistake."

Michigan Senator Carl Levin, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee (news - web sites), said, challenges remain.

"I'm afraid there were some areas where the turnout is extremely low, and that's the Sunni Triangle areas or parts thereof," he said. "And that's the challenge that we now face.

"But Iraqis that did turn out in large numbers, at least in some areas and in some places, took their lives in their hands in doing so, and we're very delighted with that," he said.


For an excellent COUNTERPOINT to the above, might I suggest your persual of Jed Babbin's excellent column today.

John Howard blasts 'irrational' Europeans

During a vigorous panel debate on US global relations at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, several European officials attacked President George W. Bush's Iraq policy, but Mr Howard stood up to defend his ally.

...
"Some of the criticism (of the US) by some of the Europeans is unfair and irrational," Mr Howard said in the panel debate, organised by Britain's BBC TV.

"I mean the negative mindset of the last five minutes (of this debate) is ridiculous - of course America has made mistakes," he said.

Later Mr Howard told The Australian he found the European "irrational level of anti-Americanism" perplexing.

"It is a sign of parochialism and it is disturbingly intense."

He said the BBC debate "was based on an anti-American mindset which was established right at the beginning by the moderators from the BBC".

Sunday, January 30, 2005

Media Reactions in Brief



Mata Musing

With a history of negative reporting in the months preceding the Iraqi election, I had to wonder what would pass as "news" come the hours following election day.


Arab reaction to Iraq elections
By CNN Senior Arab Affairs Editor Octavia Nasr



The above CNN article contains excerpts from 7 different Arab media. Four of the three sing of hope and rebirth. A Jordanian (home to al Zarqawi) and Qatar publication both have negative cartoons, portraying a scene that never came to be. And al Jazeera bemoaned it's inability to spread it's propaganda within the nation due to a ban imposed by the Iraqi Interim Government, and managed to find a few in Falluja who weren't planning on heading to the polls.

'What a bloody charade'
By Robert Fisk, The Sunday Independent (South Africa)



Mr. Fisk oozes doom'n'gloom with each paragraph. He mocks the US military presence there to enable voters to travel to the polls with as much safety as possible, followed up by a paragraph about a "fierce battle" in the Green Zone. Forget the fact that the violence that day was not out of the norm for any other day, and especially light when considering Zarqawi had declared "war on election day", threatening the streets will run red with blood.

Mr. Fisk thinks the terrorists are winning. He snidely bandies about the terms "freedom" and "democracy", implying they are little more than advertising sales campaigns by the media. Predictions of future failure, suggestions that the election will produce nothing more than a glib form of "democracy", and equating US soldiers with terrorists as "the foreign fighters" provide the mainstay content.

If you want your blood to boil, this is your article...

New Dawn in Iraq
By Hassan Hanizadeh, Tehran Times



There's a vote of cautious optimism from Iran's Tehran Times. A direct opposite of Mr. Fisk's offering above. Indeed, Mr. Hanizadeh even admits that Iraq's tyranny could not have existed without the support of other Arab nations.

After enduring eight decades of dictatorship and crime, the Iraqi nation has taken the first steps on the path toward a bright future and democracy -- a new phenomenon in Arab world.

The Iraqi people have experienced great suffering due to dictatorships, geopolitical conditions, and demography.

And, unfortunately, some neighboring Arab countries played a direct role in setting up despotic governments in Iraq, since they cannot tolerate the rule of democracy in Iraq due to its complicated ethnic makeup.

Indisputable evidence discovered after the fall of the Baath regime showed that Saddam Hussein could not have committed such crimes against his own people without these Arab states’ support.



Perhaps the most heartwarming coverage comes from my favorite Tennessean journalist, Tim Chavez.

Mr. Chavez devoted 2/3rds of his column to reactions from soldiers families... those who have paid the highest of prices for the Iraqis dawn of hope. I have duplicated these comments below.

Tennessee's stakes in Iraq's election are no less than huge



The importance of the Iraqi vote in history is undeniable. The sacrifice of Tennesseans and Americans in dying for this birth will be remembered forever in the war on terror. But only families of the fallen can say whether the deaths for a new democracy were worth the cost.

''I remember Brent saying he knew he could die over this, but he wanted to help these people have freedom, especially the kids,'' said Mike Morel of McKenzie. His son, Capt. Brent Morel, died in Iraq saving his convoy from ambush. ''He felt this was the most important thing he could do. He also likened it to our Revolutionary War.''

Brent's mom, Molly, adds: ''He was prepared (for the possibility of dying) because it was a battle that needed to be fought. Not only was he thinking of the Iraqis, but he didn't want other American generations to have to fight terrorists. As his mother, I proudly watch this important step that he believed in so deeply. I think about him looking down from heaven with a smile and a big Marine 'Ooh rah!' ''

Cpl. Patrick Nixon was the first Tennessean killed in the Iraq war. He led a charge to secure a bridge into Baghdad.

''I agree that this day is being made possible because of the sacrifices of soldiers, Marines, Navy and airmen and their families,'' said David Nixon of Gallatin, Patrick's father. ''Patrick and others have given their full measure for this day to come about, but I'm not certain that they understood that. They were there to remove an evil man and his regime from power and in so doing have brought the possibility of a free Iraq.

''There have been huge sacrifices made on their behalf (Iraqis), and if they don't take advantage of it, they will get what they deserve and Pat's and others' sacrifices will have been for naught. I hope to God that this will not be the case. I don't believe that we can allow the madness of the insurgents to continue. We need to do whatever is necessary to eliminate them.''

Donna Berg of Franklin was like a second mother to Patrick, who was best friends with her son, Johnathan. Both enlisted in the Marines together.

''Patrick believed in his mission,'' Berg said. ''Upon leaving for battle, he did not want any tears and, I believe, would not want any tears and regrets now.

''He wanted support for himself and his comrades and requested our prayers. He and all who served honorably carried out their mission, with selflessness and generosity, to give the Iraqi people a chance to be free.

''The Iraqis will hopefully honor their sacrifice and act with like courage and determination to protect that gift.''

For Patrick's comrades, the elections provide new dangers. But Lt. Col. Mark Smith, who leads a Marine reservist unit in Iraq's most hostile region, emphasized their cause in a recent e-mail to families:

''Let me offer you two quotes. The first is from Abu Musab al Zarqawi: 'We have declared a bitter war against the principle of democracy and all those who seek to enact it.'

''The second is from Thomas Jefferson on the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence: 'May it be to the world what I believe it will be (to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all), the signal of arousing men to burst the chains under which monkish ignorance and superstition has persuaded them to bind themselves, and to assume the blessings and security of self-government.'

''On whom do you want the hope of the world to rest? AMZ or Thomas Jefferson?'' Lt. Col. Smith asked.

''The Arab world must be shown freedom. I fully realize that this stands in stark contrast to others' opinions and squarely calls out most of what is portrayed in the mainstream media, but your Marines are not fighting and, in some very unfortunate cases, dying, for anything less than this.''

New democracies can only be born and old ones survive if men and women are willing to die for an ideal and loved ones are willing to endure personal loss for the greater gain of all.

Saturday, January 29, 2005

Biden opens mouth, changes feet... again




Sen. Biden, Iran Minister Clash Over Nukes
By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press Writer



DAVOS, Switzerland - Sen. Joseph Biden and Iran's foreign minister clashed Friday over Tehran's nuclear ambitions, with Biden hinting at the possibility of armed conflict unless fears of an Iranian weapons program were put to rest.

The rare and frank public exchange between a senior American politician and a ranking member of the Iranian government came at a dinner during the World Economic Forum held in this Alpine resort town.



Considering that the US has no official contacts with Iran, why on earth is Biden conducting his "occasional" meetings with Iranian officials at all? Certainly he is no spokesman for the administration and, instead is a top representative of the Congressional far left.

Biden's "hoof in mouth" ailment became apparent with his "tempered" comments that the US may seek armed conflict in order to implement regime change.

No where in Bush's history of public speeches has he suggested that the US military would go into Iran. What he has wisely said is that military action would not be pulled from the table of options should Iran refuse to cease and desist it's uranium enrichment. Get real... promises of no military repercussion will do little to fuel cooperation from countries determined to develop WMDs.

Instead, Bush has made it clear that the matter should be put in front of the UN Security Council ... an action you'd think would have the American and int'l left jumping for joy. But no... with the anti-Bush crowd, it's always something.

Instead we have a big mouth Senator over there, breaking bread with Iranian officials and muddying the waters with his unsanctioned blather about an Administration of which he is no part.

Biden expressed hope that the Bush administration in its second term would reconsider its position and try to engage Iran, saying that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was receptive to his "initiatives to reach out to the Iranians for discussions" in her earlier capacity as national security advisor.

"I hope we're all smarter about this, smarter than we've been," he said. Alluding to the refusal by Bush to rule out an armed response to Iran's nuclear plans, he said: "I hope our leadership is brighter because if it's not, it's a very dull picture for the region, and for humanity."



As usual with extreme leftist viewpoints, Biden misses the larger picture.

Talks with a government that openly supports and funds terrorism is not only counterproductive, it is against all Bush has firmly stood for since 9:11. The Cowboy President is consistant in his refusal to deal with *all* despots and tyrants who harbor and support terrorists - just as he ostracized Arafat in his first term, tabling any engagement to broker yet one more failed Middle East truce.

What Biden also misses is that Iran is a country that is likely to fall from within in time. The US will have little need to effect regime change, as the Iranian youth crave what the current leadership denies - freedom of expression and a penchant for western economic benefits and trends.

And in the Iranian youth lies the country's future. Needless to say, should they wish to speed up that process for freedom on their own, they will find a friend in America under the current leadership.

Biden should not dilute the President's convictions on non-tolerance for terrorist leaders. Bush is, afterall, a man who says what he means, and does what he says... behaviour foreign to the likes of Biden and ilk.

By America's refusal to engage in talks with Iran's current leadership, we reinforce the Bush policy of no tolerance for those who harbor and support terrorists, and Bush remains a leader of his word. Therefore, in the event of failure of the 4-party talks, the next logical step is the UN Security Council. This is far removed from the Biden hints of military intervention.

It is high time that Iran decides just who's side they are on in the WOT. Perhaps Biden should be doing the same.

Good riddance to a loser




It's not his war
U.S. deserters put their faith in Canada

By Jason Botchford, Toronto Sun



Boy oh boy. If Botchford, the Canadian journalist, was hoping to drum up sympathy for the "hundreds" of soldiers he says are pining to desert to become a Canuck, he couldn't have picked a more un-symPATHETIC (emphasis is deliberate) character than Kentucky deserter, Darrell Anderson.

After serving in combat in Baghdad for seven months, the 22-year-old Kentucky-bred soldier turned his back on his home, his family -- including his 4-year-old daughter -- and his country to come to Toronto two weeks ago so he didn't have to go back to Iraq and train his gun on one more innocent child.


Now I'm not sure why Anderson was pointing a rifle at an "innocent child", but it was certainly to his benefit to remember that even children are enlisted by terrorists to become suicide bombers. Such children are far from innocent, and a soldier would be risking his life, assuming all Iraqi children are as disaffected as American offspring. Perhaps, tho he may have found the action deplorable, it is the main reason his sorry ass made it back in one piece to the States, and enabled his desertion.

But this much is clear... Mrs. Anderson must be dancing in the streets, ridding herself of such a loser.

Palestinian in-fighting after elections




Hamas Victory Rally Erupts Into Shootout
Associated Press - Jerusalem



JERUSALEM Jan 29, 2005 — A political rally by the militant Palestinian group Hamas turned violent Saturday, as supporters of the rival Fatah faction opened fire, sparking a melee that left more than 25 people wounded, a Palestinian official said.

The incident in the Maghazi refugee camp in central Gaza was the first instance of violence between rival Palestinian factions since the election of Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas in early January.

(snip)

The Palestinian official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the Hamas supporters chanted victory slogans, angering Fatah supporters in the area.

One of the Fatah supporters opened fire, seriously wounding one Hamas supporters and causing shrapnel wounds to four others, the official said. Some 25 other people were hurt by knives, clubs and beatings in the ensuing melee, the official said.

(snip)



Obviously the Dems need to set up some of their infamous "anger management" classes in Palestine.... LOL!

Look at the bright side. If these hotheads keep it up, Israel won't have much to do but sit back and wait for them to destroy each other!


Critiquing Euro-appeasement




Europe -- Thy Name Is Cowardice
By Matthias Dopfner, Front Page Magazine



A few days ago Henryk M. Broder wrote in Welt am Sonntag, "Europe -- your family name is appeasement." It's a phrase you can't get out of your head because it's so terribly true.

(snip)

Rather than protecting democracy in the Middle East, European appeasement, camouflaged behind the fuzzy word "equidistance," now countenances suicide bombings in Israel by fundamentalist Palestinians. Appeasement generates a mentality that allows Europe to ignore 300,000 victims of Saddam's torture and murder machinery and, motivated by the self-righteousness of the peace-movement, to issue bad grades to George Bush. A particularly grotesque form of appeasement is reacting to the escalating violence by Islamic fundamentalists in Holland and elsewhere by suggesting that we should really have a Muslim holiday in Germany.



This article is a bit old... Jan 7th. Then again, I've been somewhat MIA this past week. Active in listening and following what has been going on, but not posting.

But this one is a worthy read despite it's age. Europe's deliberate blind eye to acquiesence and non-action to Muslim terrorists is an ongoing story. And truthfully, it's a rare bird who dares to portray and criticize his own country, as well as Mother Europe, as accurately as Broder has apparently done in the German rag, and as Mr. Dopfner continues in his Front Page Magazine article.

Everyone's a military expert nowadays...




France repeats call for foreign troop pullout from Iraq
Paris (Reuters) from Sign On San Diego



French PM Jean-Pierre Raffarin is adding his voice to the whining American left, led by Senators Boxer, Byrd and Kennedy, pushing for nigh on immediate withdrawal of US Coalition troops from Iraq.

As fodder for his utter nonsense, Raffarin quotes UN Resolution 1546, - another winning little ditty by the UN Security Council that unaminously supports the interim govt, a constitutionally elected government by 12/31/2005, and an "end of occupation" by June 2005.

All this BS is from a body who has done nothing to help the Iraqis, nor believed that Saddam should have been deposed despite violations of 17 previous Resolutions. It might also be pointed out that the humanitarian efforts were snuffed as aid workers fled the moment they were in harm's way.

However the US representative made it quite clear that the UN's suggested timetable was subject totally to the Iraqis themselves.

The United States’ representative, a lead sponsor, called the passage a vivid demonstration of broad international support for a unified Iraq. He said the resolution defined the key political task in which the United Nations should play a “leading and vital” role. It made clear that Iraq’s sovereignty would be “undiluted” and that its Government would have the final say on the presence of the multinational force.


For the French PM to demand the US stick to his version of the Resolution is quite absurd. For the first to break rank with the responsibilities laid out was the UN itself, who is virtually invisible with it's support, and has done nothing with reconstruction of the country.

But then, everyone's a military expert today. And even more astounding, not one of these puffed up wannabe commander-in-chiefs seems to care an iota of what the Iraqis want.

Perhaps all these bozos should all bone up on their reading skills, and clean their ears out with wax. Bush has repeatedly said over and over again that the US troops would leave the minute the Iraqis say "go".

But the Iraqis are no fools. They do not plan on risking their new found opportunities because of the inability to fight the terrorists who impede their progress. When they are confident they have the training, equipment and manpower to stand on their own, they will waste no time in bidding the coalition troops adieu.

Considering that the US coalition is not unwanted by those who are benefitting directly from their presence in this stage, all the MSM and elected elitists' opinions on exit strategies and withdrawal timetables is nothing more than leftist grandstanding. It's certainly not what the Iraqis want. And it certainly doesn't qualify as news.

Brits & Euros clueless to EU membership




Europeans 'ignorant' of EU treaty
BBC News



Euro-nations are resting high hopes on an EU success. Britain, likely to lose independent control over issues governed by the central EU government, risks it all in order to become part of what has been called "The United States of Europe".

But evidently British and Euro citizens prefer to bash the US and coalition rather than read up on their fate.

The EU Constitution was approved last month, with Hungarian and Lithuanian parliments already making ratifications. But a single nay vote can stop the EU's finalization in it's tracks.

Polls show the Constitution will be the hardest sell in the UK, where 30% are firmly opposed, 20% support. That leaves half the population clueless to the whole subject.

An Euro-wide poll of 25,000 showed 89% of those polled knew whit about the content or details.

The EU-wide poll, conducted by Eurobarometer in October last year, found that only 11% felt they knew the content of the European Constitution "globally".

Some 56% said they knew a little, while 33% had never heard of the constitution.


But they are quick to add they'll be voting in favor.

It'll be a tough lesson learned for Euro-citizens... they should take the time to research the issues before hitting the polling sites. Since they know not what they cast ballots for, they'll be living with the results - like it or not.

Friday, January 28, 2005

NYT: Clinton Is Pressed to Clarify Her Stance on Abortion Laws

According to the NY Times, Hillary Clinton clarifies her stance on abortion laws:

"The advocates said Mrs. Clinton appeared to be going out of her way to appeal to opponents of abortion with her comments on parental notification, made at a news conference on Monday that followed a speech to about 1,000 supporters of abortion rights.

In response, two of Mrs. Clinton's aides qualified her support for parental notification laws, saying she preferred an approach like New York's, which does not require minors seeking abortions to tell their parents, but does provide them with information about their medical options.


Alia Vibe: oh, ick. Spoken like a lawyer, and the Pied Piper of NY.

NH: Bill would eliminate hate crime Laws

CONCORD, N.H. -- A group of lawmakers is pushing to eliminate New Hampshire's hate crime laws, claiming the state is punishing people for unpopular beliefs.

"With the introduction of hate crime laws, the government has entered the realm of prosecutions based on attitudes and belief," Rep. Robert Giuda, R-Warren said.


Alia Vibe: The bill is getting blasted by ACLU and Racialists. It seems to me that people who harm others purely because of skin color, creed, etc., are not haters, but nuts. What? No "insanity" pleas here, eh? The libs are fully aware that the "insanity plea" worked very well to "release" from hard sentencing criminals. Ergo... "hate crimes". The "hate crimes" laws are stupid and a pox upon enlightened people. This law is an ass. As long as "hate crimes" laws remain the increase in "hate" will grow.

Thursday, January 27, 2005

Hillary's "Head-Fake"

George Neumayr, The American Spectator.

"Hillary Clinton's contrived overtures to pro-life groups represent a return to the fake mantra of safe, legal, and rare that Dick Morris taught her to memorize. To fool mainstream America Hillary Clinton figures that she will have to head-fake her supporters from time to time (à la her husband and Sister Souljah). But what is said beneath the podium at pro-abortion events by the Alexander Sangers is far more significant than any self-serving political noises she makes above it. When Hillary Clinton says safe, legal, and rare, they hear safe, legal, and often."

Alia Vibe: Hillary Clinton, last year: "I'm going to have to take something from you for the common good".

Bush says Social Security shortchanges black seniors

Read it here at Newsmax. (Buffalonews.com).

"Race became a significant factor in the debate over Social Security on Tuesday when President Bush told black leaders that the government retirement program shortchanged blacks, whose relatively shorter life span meant they paid more in payroll taxes than they eventually received in benefits.
...
Caucus leaders contend that blacks rely disproportionately on disability and survivors' benefits paid by Social Security, and that Bush's changes would jeopardize the entire system - hurting black beneficiaries far more than the private accounts might help them. Furthermore, the White House's opponents argue, the vagaries of the stock market could leave private-account holders with fewer benefits than the current system guarantees.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush did not support altering the disability-benefits or survivors'-benefits pieces of Social Security - only the retirement benefits.

"This will enable (blacks) to build a nest egg of their own and be able to pass that nest egg on to their survivors," McClellan said.

Dem Journalists/Newsies on Dem Payrolls?

Dems answered back then: Who Cares?

Journalists on Clinton White House Payroll?

Lib Attack!: Were you a Republican Before You Were Born: You must Disclose!

Today is chock full of fascinating data. First off, my sorrow over the marines (31) in Iraq. Second, the suicidal (blue zoner?) responsible for 10 dead, hundreds injured in Southern CA train crash. He was trying to commit suicide, like a feminist - changed his mind, and many, many people paid the price for his "decisions'. He's going to be charged with murder as he should be.

However, the litmus "test" on conservative commentators must be disclosed at all times! lol. Today, it is Mr. Krauthammer, being accosted by liberal illogic.

Mr. Krauthammer was "among a group of people invited to the White House" pre-inauguration speech, and then he had the audacity to both praise President Bush's speech AND while not disclosing that he already may have had a "gist" of it before it was delivered.

OH! THE HUMANITY!

So. Let's see if I have this right. John Kerry voted Yes before He Voted No. Whereas, Mr. Krauthammer is accused of attending "yes" before writing "yes". Oh, my!

Could it be that, all media are implicated in this charge? YEP.

Pre-release excerpts of President Bush's inauguration speech were sent out to all major media prior to the actual presentation. Therefore, all negative commentary, editorials, articles, slamming the President's speech are guilty of not-disclosing that they'd already read excerpts of the speech in advance of presentation; ergo, and according to their own illogic: they are guilty of disliking the speech before ever HEARING IT, and are therefore also guilty of not disclosing this fact in their own columns, editorials, and punditry on air and in print.

Yo, Dem? Get off your feet -- yer standing on 'em!

Tuesday, January 25, 2005

Media responsible for rise in anti-Semitism





Rising UK anti-semitism blamed on media
By Chris McGreal (in Jerusalem, The Guardian



Ya THINK? LOL! To journalists, they think their headlines are merely catch phrases. Why on earthy they can't understand that they are helping to shape culture and nurture hatred because of their sensationalism is beyond me.

But the facts are that assaults by Arabs and Muslims against Jews in Britain is rising, and the blame is settling on the British media and it's biased and sensationalized reporting of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

It might be prudent to mention here that Britain is not the "winner", based on the total number of attacks on Jews. That dubious honor belongs to the French. Surprise, surprise.

The report is the product of the Israeli gov't. Not that I question it's results, mind you. But I guarantee you that most will discard the message because of the ethnicity of the messenger... a connundrum that exists because the results of the report are, indeed, fact.

But more British voices are chiming in with their support.

The Board of Deputies of British Jews, which is publishing its own statistics next month, supported the report's conclusions. Its spokesman, Jason Pearlman, accused the BBC of "unrelenting anti-Israel bias".



Unfortunately they too will have the same "messenger" problem.

With the British about to yield their sovereignty to the EU all too soon, they will find themselves among kindred spirits. The anti-Semitic attitudes running rampid thru the EU elitist countries, and espoused in the UN Security Council voting, is all too common.

The terrorist revolving door...





Last UK Guantanamo Detainees Arrested on Return
By Peter Graff, London (Reuters)



ALLLLLL RIGHT, TONY!!! Britain evidently won't be buckling to ACLU-type minded legal eagles on their home soil.

All too many terrorists have been released from various detention sites, only to be recaptured or killed on the battlefield while taking up arms against the US Coalition forces.

Well Britain just slammed a rock into that revolving door. Detainees walked out the Gitmo door, only to be ushered right back into a British cell at the tarmac for "involvement in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism." That gives British authorities two weeks to either charge, or free the detainees.

Before anyone gets up in arms about Gitmo's denizens, allow me to add that most of the detainees there had already been released. Of the 500 some left? Well, they were caught with their hands in the cookie jar. Meaning they were arrested on the Afghanistan battlefield.

The lawyers, of course, are concerned with the further detention on British soil, adding insult to injury. Cue the violins....

Merci, France





France Says It Smashes Iraq Recruitment Ring
Paris (Reuters)



Since I've been so vocal about the French of late, I thought I'd post some good news from our dubious ally. While they won't pitch in with whit for Iraq, they will at least thwart the recruitment efforts going on under their noses.

Merci beaucoup, mon amis. Even if this is all you'll do, we do so appreciate it.

PARIS (Reuters) - France has smashed an underground Islamic network recruiting French nationals to fight U.S. forces in Iraq, a source close to the dossier said Tuesday.
The five men and two women were arrested by the DST domestic intelligence agency Monday in Paris, where youths close to radical Islamic groups are known to be based, said the source, who is close to Interior Minister Dominique Villepin.

The seven remain in custody in the DST's headquarters pending a further investigation.

"This operation has allowed us to completely smash this network," the source said. "This is the first operation of its kind, and an important one. The fight against radical Islamic groups is one of the Interior Minister's priority."

A formal judicial investigation into recruitment networks was opened following the death in Iraq of a number of French nationals in the oil-rich Middle East state.

The number of foreign volunteers in Iraq is difficult to estimate with certainty. The Le Monde daily last month quoted intelligence services as saying there were about 1,000-2,000, mostly from Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Kuwait.

Dem Senators spit venom




Democrats Call Rice Liar, Bush Apologist
By ANNE GEARAN, AP Diplomatic Writer



Democrats, in the minority in Congress, often resort to delaying what they cannot defeat.

Byrd, the longest-serving Democratic senator and a student of the Constitution, insisted that his party is merely doing its duty.

"I am particularly dismayed by criticism I have read that Senate Democrats by insisting on having the opportunity to debate this nomination have somehow been engaged in nothing more substantial than petty politics or partisan delaying tactics," Byrd said, his voice rising in anger.



Considering that Condie will be approved with a majority, and that she was exonerated - along with the Bush administration - of all "liar" charges by the bi-partisan 9:11 commissioners, I'm not sure what else to call this BS *except* exactly that which Byrd doth so protest.

It IS petty, partisan and obstructionist. Most of all, it is nothing more than counterproductive. This is nothing more than the usual posturing, and embarrassing behavior which we have come to expect from Senators in blue.

Personally I am hoping some research media types will start dredging up the truths. That those who failed the US citizens for prevention of 9:11 are Congress members themselves. Their halos are way too tarnished for me to stomach this accusatory manure much longer.


Libs: Make UP YOUR minds on Race and "Gender", pls?

CHAIRMAN: EXAMINE RACE, GENDER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CHANGES

Shazaam... LOL!

"House Ways and Means chairman Rep. Bill Thomas [R-CA] on Sunday claimed Congress should consider looking at Social Security reforms that would payout future benefits -- on such factors as race and gender!"

Depressed and determined Dems are ready to rip hard, top party sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.

"Bush's Republican Party is full of ill-conceived, dangerous ideas about the future of Social Security. But no idea seems more dangerous or patently unfair than linking Social Security benefits to a person's race and gender," blasted one well-placed Dem.



Alia Vibe: Let's take a walk down memory lane here... CA -- Proposition 54 by Ward Connerly. Ward was out to abolish the "race" boxes. CA Lib/Dem Community went into overdrive claiming that Ward was OUT to hurt "races" and harm "women". You see, they explained that race and health were EXPLICITLY LINKED. Therefore, according to their thinking... Ward was out to "kill" minorities. Lib/Dem/Kaiser claimed that different races had different life "issues" and therefore in order to save their lives, make their lives "longer" -- those race boxes were necessary!

Harumph!

And now, the Dems are saying... what? That "race" and "gender" is irrelevant to "lifestyle" "health" "longevity"?

tsk.. tsk.. tsk.

Bill Thomas is merely trying to help the Dems. Isn't he.


Pentagon Explaining Intelligence Group to PR starved Dem Politicos

Pentagon Tries to Explain Secret Group

Headline Bias Alert! lol. "Tries". Hm. I suppose this headline can go either way. In any case, an existing, known group of intel for strategic defense in re WOT had been renamed. Dem Politicos are swooning that they hadn't been "told" and are demanding an "investigation" (read: the charge is more serious than the issue at hand). What do I read between the lines? Dems are angling for committee positions. This "threat" of investigations is their Damocles sword, their hidden ace.

I've seen these types of Dem political "strategy" plays way too many times. The threat continues -- even if an investigation has no grounds whatsoever of being held -- that the Dem Politicos are gonna tell their "big daddy" PR to run with "rumors" against the Republicans, more specifically Donald Rumsfeld.

I hate to say this; but I have to: I knew of this "reorg" in structure. I have no secret access to info; nor no "secret" clearance nor info spotting.

My two cents Hint: Elaine Donnelly has been addressing this issue, peripherally.

Nonetheless,

Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., urged hearings.

"While I fully support improving the ability of our men and women in the field to get accurate real time intelligence, the creation of this unit raises a number of questions that this committee has a duty to examine," Tauscher said
.

It's just fine and dandy with Ole' Ellen that men AND WOMEN are deployed in this capacity; but dang-it! She had better have access to everything this group finds out.

Yo, Dems! GOTCHA! :>

This, by DOD, has been a very clear part of the military restructuring but Dems in their desperation are trying to respin the issue, matter by matter. It's called "blocking" our military from winning. Dems prefer, however, that it be called an "investigation". I call what Dems are doing is putting our men and women in military at risk. Anti-US Countries will now be looking very keenly for these "restructured" units. Got that?

And while our enemies are looking for those particular units...

See. Dems hate the military; hate sports too. Ergo, they cannot, ahem, see. But who knows; could it actually be that Ellen is helping the cause by "raising" this issue? Hmmm?

We got elections coming up in Iraq. Enemies were focused on harming Iraqi citizens, and preventing same from voting. Now, perhaps, they'll be looking for these units.

History, however, tells me that Ellen isn't clued in. She fell right into it.

Pentagon Explaining Intelligence Group to PR starved Dem Politicos

Pentagon Tries to Explain Secret Group

Headline Bias Alert! lol. "Tries". Hm. I suppose this headline can go either way. In any case, an existing, known group of intel for strategic defense in re WOT had been renamed. Dem Politicos are swooning that they hadn't been "told" and are demanding an "investigation" (read: the charge is more serious than the issue at hand). What do I read between the lines? Dems are angling for committee positions. This "threat" of investigations is their Damocles sword, their hidden ace.

I've seen these types of Dem political "strategy" plays way too many times. The threat continues -- even if an investigation has no grounds whatsoever of being held -- that the Dem Politicos are gonna tell their "big daddy" PR to run with "rumors" against the Republicans, more specifically Donald Rumsfeld.

I hate to say this; but I have to: I knew of this "reorg" in structure. I have no secret access to info; nor no "secret" clearance nor info spotting.

My two cents Hint: Elaine Donnelly has been addressing this issue, peripherally.

Nonetheless,

Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., urged hearings.

"While I fully support improving the ability of our men and women in the field to get accurate real time intelligence, the creation of this unit raises a number of questions that this committee has a duty to examine," Tauscher said
.

It's just fine and dandy with Ole' Ellen that men AND WOMEN are deployed in this capacity; but dang-it! She had better have access to everything this group finds out.

Yo, Dems! GOTCHA! :>

This, by DOD, has been a very clear part of the military restructuring but Dems in their desperation are trying to respin the issue, matter by matter. It's called "blocking" our military from winning. Dems prefer, however, that it be called an "investigation". I call what Dems are doing is putting our men and women in military at risk. Anti-US Countries will now be looking very keenly for these "restructured" units. Got that?

And while our enemies are looking for those particular units...

See. Dems hate the military; hate sports too. Ergo, they cannot, ahem, see. But who knows; could it actually be that Ellen is helping the cause by "raising" this issue? Hmmm?

We got elections coming up in Iraq. Enemies were focused on harming Iraqi citizens, and preventing same from voting. Now, perhaps, they'll be looking for these units.

History, however, tells me that Ellen isn't clued in. She fell right into it.

Monday, January 24, 2005

Gitmo "torture" pays off in arrests






Guantanamo tip tied to arrests of 22 in Germany
Charlie Savage, The Boston Globe



What? You mean to say that "torture", as the ACLU would call anything short of delivering Mickey D happy meals late, yielded tips? My my... This must have been a tough story for the Globe's editors to approve. LOL!



WASHINGTON -- Information obtained through the interrogation of a Guantanamo Bay detainee led to a spectacular series of counterterrorism raids in Germany this month, in which more than 700 police swept through mosques, homes, and businesses in six cities and arrested 22 suspected militant extremists, according to a senior Defense Department official.

The role of the Guantanamo interrogations in triggering the raids had not been previously reported. In Europe, the interrogations have been widely denounced as flagrant violations of international law, and many leaders have expressed concern over alleged abuses.

The United States is holding 558 detainees at Guantanamo, and some have been imprisoned for as long as three years. Officials say that only a quarter of the detainees still regularly meet with interrogators, but they maintain that that core group still provides valuable intelligence.

The German raids of Jan. 12 are the most extensive intelligence coup attributed to the operation. The sweep was the largest counterterrorism operation in recent months in Europe.

continue reading at link above









What's Congress up to?



Mata Musing

There's so much the elite, never-going-to-go-away Congressional types are doing of late that I decided to do a cyber-montage of their antics.

If you haven't figured out by now, I am not a huge fan of our Congress. I think they are pompous, inefficient, bought and paid for by interest groups and personal acquaintances, they make too much money as public servants, and they've been the biggest reason that Washington has to play "the game" because they, themselves, created the game rules.

Needless to say, I am very Libertarian in my belief that there should be term limits on Congress. The presence of the likes of Kennedy, Boxer, Feinstein, even McCain in Congress for our entire lifetime is not to our country's advantage. With fresh new faces, unhep to "the game", we might get more honest work done, have less intrusive legislation enacted, and Congressional elitists would remember what it was like to be a real citizen that worked for their money. 'Nuff said...


Congress Concerned Over Iraq Elections



First off my lips? "So what." Why there's an entire article devoted to the negative rabble musings of Congressmen and women, predicting Iraqi failure instead of success, is beyond me. This is what qualifies as news?

It's also NOT news that the speculative naysayers get far more press than those speculating success. Thus this entire bit is nothing more than a re-run of Congressional belief that "we don't think we should be there, we don't think it's being managed right, and we don't think the elections will be 'legitimate'".

Yawn...

Senate Democrats Ready Anti-War Speeches



If there is one area of expertise for Congressional members, it is that of obstructional politics. And this week's target is the appointment of Condie. On Tuesday they are setting aside 9 hours so they can vent. Sigh....

Why the devil they want to slow up the inevitable is beyond me. It is yet another waste of tax payers time and money as they echo their same ol'd talking points for days in Congress, and try like hell to nail at least one Bush scapegoat for the entire Iraqi affair. It is nothing more than losers behaving badly.

Of course this brings me to the burning thought I have - like why in heaven's name does Congress have the right to approve or disapprove of cabinet members? In this climate, it could take Bush's entire second term to pull together a cabinet that pleases this group of snippy powerhouses.

I think the cabinet should be an extension of Presidential advisors, and of his election success. The President doesn't tell Congress who they can have on their staff. They shouldn't be able to tell him who to have on his. Who thunk this process up, anyway?

Oh yeah... Congress. No wonder.

Bush to Seek About $80 Bln for Military Operations



Mark your calendars, and pocket this info for future reference. The White House will be sending a request for new military funding for Iraq and Afghanistan next month. Ummm...Februrary entry into Congress. How long before that cash reaches the troops with the needed equipment? Shall we start a drawing?

Let's see... how many months did they hold up body armor and other funds in the "I voted for it before I voted against it" appropriations bill? And, when they finally DID approve it in fall, it still took over 6 months for the appropriate paperwork and funds to reach the manufacturers. Good thing the military was already on the case with up-armoring from different sources and general funds. The troops took it in stride, as our magnificent military does.

Needless to say, it's predictable that while they are holding up the bill and the allocation and dispersment of such funds with their tirades, they will also be screaming at the top of their lungs about our soldiers not having what they need.

Is anyone else besides me getting tired of listening to these people whine day in and day out???

Congressional Leaders Lay Out Conflicting Legislative Agendas



The war strategy is laid out and ready to go. The lines are drawn in the sand, and everyone has picked a side. Of course they are *all* only concerned with us... the mere American voter. Our heads spin in confusions as each side claims moral high ground when it comes to our best interests. .....right.....

The only "best interest" I can see right now is Congressional term limits so we can literally clean "house" and "senate". Since it's unlikely these folks are likely to diminish their earnings, power and pensions by voting in such a law, I can only say it's going to be a long, unproductive 4 years while all these elitists continue to do little but snipe at each other.

What would make me smile today? A Presidential directive, booting them all out into the real world if they have served over one term. Mercy, would that make me grin!

Hopeful dreaming on my part. Afterall, the guy can't even choose his own cabinet without waiting for their blessings.

UN ignores its own failures... again



UN: Lessons of Holocaust
Lost in Rwanda, Bosnia

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters)



UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - If the world had listened to horrors of the Holocaust, perhaps mass murder in Cambodia, Bosnia and Rwanda could have been prevented, speakers told the first-ever U.N. General Assembly session on the Holocaust of World War II.

Both U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan and Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel, a death camp survivor, also asked how some of Europe's most cultured people could participate in mass murder of Jews by day and read Schiller and listen to Bach in the evening.



I don't even know where to start here. While the UN certainly can't be blamed for genocide in Bosnia and Rwanda, their handling of the situation leaves one shaking their head at the extraordinary inefficiency displayed. From negotiations to military action, the UN's record is deplorable and ineffectual.

But if the UN suits just wish to publicly wring their hands, wishing that the world was filled with kind people who would never consider genocidal acts... okay.... join the rest of us who'd love to live in utopia.

Annan told the assembly that at this moment, "terrible things are happening today in Darfur, Sudan." He asked the U.N. Security Council to take action once it received a U.N. report on Tuesday determining whether genocide has occurred and identifying gross violations of human rights.



Perhaps the most glaring omission here is the mention of Israel when Annan speaks of today's genocide. They remain conveniently blind to the fact that Muslim terrorists are bent on the extinction of Israel and Jews even today. And they most certainly show no morosity, not accept responsibility in that arena - historically leaving Israel out in the cold time and time again, voting against Israel's requests for help to the Security Council.

And Israel's foreign minister, Silvan Shalom, warned that "the brutal extermination of a people began not with guns or tanks but with words systematically portraying the Jews and others as not legitimate, something less than human."


Even today the UN, EU and world community perpetuate that which they proclaim they deplore. They support jihadists and their quest for genocide by their silence and repeated inaction. They are too busy acquiescing to terrorists and despots running roughshod over 3rd world countries under the banner of "tolerance", and do absolutely whit to stop the extreme Muslim preachings of hatred to the Muslim youth.

Simultaneously, while ignoring the terrorists quest of a 3rd world, anti-human rights caliphate, they are busy condeming the US Coalitions' efforts to introduce forms of democracy in these 3rd world countries that would contribute to minimizing the ability for this hatred to fester into murders - not to mention improve their economic status.

All in all, the UN has little, if any, room to talk about lessons not being learned when speaking of Jewish genocide. When confronted with the aftermath, they are useless. And on prevention, they are on the wrong side of the fight.

Sunday, January 23, 2005

Democrats Retooling for a Fool'em

Democrats Find Promise in Western States

"Democrats have lost the South, so we have to look for another field to mine," said Arizona Democratic chairman Jim Pedersen. "And here is where the opportunity is."

To succeed in the region, Western Democratic activists said, the party must better understand the West's pressing concerns, including land use, water and urban sprawl. They also must frame traditional Democratic issues such as education and health care in language that speaks broadly to Western voters, activists said.


Bill & Hill Push for 'Anybody But Dean'

"The Clintons don't like Dean on substance or style, seeing him as too left and too loose-lipped," reports Newsweek in Monday editions.

The former first couple headlined an inauguration night bash at the D.C. home of former Clinton pollster Mark Penn, where one attendee said, "There was a ton of positive energy at the house - except for the fear and loathing of Dean."


Western State Democrats Interview Dean

Dean, whose fiery anti-war rhetoric captivated millions of activists during his upstart presidential campaign, said he was not concerned that his image as an anti-war, pro-gay rights liberal would alienate voters in conservative states and provide fodder for Republican media campaigns.

"My attitude is that they are going to run those ads anyway, so why not go down and stand up for what you believe in?" Dean said. "How are we going to convince people in Mississippi that their economic interests are the same as ours if we don't show up? It is incredibly insulting to people."

Earlier this week, Dean seemed to be steamrolling to front-runner status in the race, announcing that he had secured the endorsement of several state party chairs and other voting DNC members.

But that move produced a backlash among other state chairs and some activists. For example, several Oklahoma Democrats publicly criticized the decision by state party chair Jay Parmley to endorse Dean.

"Like most Oklahoma Democrats, I do not believe Gov. Dean shares our values or is the right person to lead our party at this time," state Sen. Debbe Lefwich, a DNC voting member, said Thursday
.

Democracy is "un-Islamic"




Purported al-Zarqawi tape: Democracy a lie
CNN World News



On an as of yet unverified internet recording posted on websites, Zarqawi again lays out that the right to choose a religion is "against the rule of God." Oh yes... he also felt that perhaps a name change was good for marketing, so he dumped the "Unification and Jihad" title and officially proclaimed his followers "al Qaeda in Iraq".

A rose by any other name.... they still remain human cockroaches.

For an example of a Zarqawi-land theme park, we only have to look at the Taliban's Afghanistan, or even Saddam's Iraq. The Taliban wreaked terror on their citizens daily, putting on public executions and systematically oppressing women. Saddam cut off his citizens from the world with bans on communications, conducted midnight kidnappings, torture and murder of dissenters and families, all the while starving them as he siphoned off Oil for Food funds.

Contrast a similar Iraqi future promised under the Jordanian terrorist with that of the Iraqi interim gov't, who recognizes that Iraq can not be ruled without consensus between it's groups. It is easy to see why the polls consistently show Iraqis, tired of such rule for decades, remain bent on holding their election despite the shower of violence perpetrated on them by the radical minority elements.

Violence, death and oppression are no strangers to Iraqis. But democracy of their own fashion is the composition of their dreams, and they are determined to go for it... even without the help of the world community.

It is a herculean task Zarqawi undertakes - convincing Iraqis and the world that the oppression and poverty under fundamentalist Islamic rule is superior to freedom of choice and a slow, steady emergence from third world economic status.

"Oh, people of Iraq, where is your honor?" he asked. "Have you accepted oppression of the crusader harlots ... and the rejectionist pigs?"

US? Oppression? Get the man a dictionary, please.

Zarqawi makes headway with his propaganda only by the help of media pundits and int'l leaders. They give the terrorist's tyrannical concepts voice and legitimacy by their constant criticism of the US Coalition's presence, the Iraqi Interim Gov'ts efforts, and flouted promises of failure.

I am continually amazed at the dichotomy. As the world screams human rights at every avenue, they remain silent on the obviously despotic visions of jihadists. By their refusal to condemn such forms of rule in the vision of global peace, they have essentially put a stamp of approval on the terrorists' jihad.

Does the EU, UN and world community think it better to allow the Islamic caliphate to come to fruition, and ignore the elimination of human rights it brings? Can they not see the economic ramifications involved, deliberately allowing more of the world to embrace third world living conditions?

They would be wise to watch the progress of the Netherlands, abandoning much of their extreme liberal policies and "tolerance" in self defense, as they battle the slow take over of violent Islamic immigrants within their own borders. It is only a harbinger of what will spread thru the rest of an apathetic Europe if unchecked.

Abbas trades role in gov't for cease-fire





Abbas Secures Palestinian Militants' Truce - Israel
Jerusalem (Reuters)



JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has secured an agreement with leading Palestinian militant groups for a cease-fire of about a month in the Middle East conflict, Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz said on Sunday.
Hamas and Islamic Jihad had agreed to the cease-fire in return for a future role in the Palestinian Authority, Mofaz told Israel Radio in an interview.

"As far as we understand, there is an agreement between (Abbas) and the heads of Hamas and Islamic Jihad for a cease-fire for a certain period ... about a month," said Mofaz.

Officials from Abbas's Palestinian Authority and the two militant groups were not immediately available for comment on Mofaz's comments. Abbas has been holding cease-fire talks with militant factions in the Gaza Strip in the last few days.



So it begins. Demonstrating dedication to his campaign promises, Abbas brokers a fragile agreement for a halt to the violence, and the assaults in Gaza have been quieted since the talks between Abbas and his militant factions began.

But it hasn't been the first time such promises have been made. All hinges now on how long militants honor their word, and what Abbas does if Hamas and ilk renege on their agreement of peace.

So the world, along with Israel, embarks on a hope and prayer, tinged with caution.

Saturday, January 22, 2005

Laughable media coverage...





Iraq refuses to say if Zarqawi detained
Jerusalem Post



Contrast the above possibility, which we all hope is so, with the bold statement from the Detroit Free Press below.

U.S. in danger of losing the war
Analysis finds troubling trends in Iraq: Rising fatalities, attacks



Ummm... let's see. An avowed rise in terrorist desperation to stop the elections results in more deaths and actions. Yup... the statistics are correct. The analysis, however, leaves much to be desired. Emphasis on the *ANAL* part of analysis, please. Stats the trends... what a bunch of whoohah.

It's a good thing Knight Ridder pundits and associates aren't in control of our military eh?

Poll results to be published Monday





Most Dutch see Muslims as a threat
Amsterdam (Reuters)



An update on the Netherlands fight against Muslim terrorists running rampid in their country. This poll, to be released formally on Monday, also has results from Spain and Italy. Ooo weee... can't wait...

Those who see Muslims as a threat say they are afraid they will eventually have to live under Islamic religious rules. Those living outside big cities, women and the well educated were more likely to have negative views, the newspaper said.

Blaming America - the ignored debate




Mata Musing

Perhaps the most stimulating interchange I have heard this week was a panel discussion, post-inaugural, on Scarborough County between Joe and one of my favorite orators, Pat Buchanan. The subject? Blaming America for terrorism. It is, bar none, the first time I have ever seen a healthy discourse on the subject.

Pat has been a long time favorite of mine. He is eloquent, and well versed on foreign policy, economics and world history. But after 9:11, I found myself on the opposite sides of one who I so respect. Pat's not had the opportunities to expound on his "whys" for it all. In fact, I think this time it slipped out accidently, much to Joe's surprise. I've noted his discontent for our action in Iraq immediately on our plans to take Saddam down. Apparently Joe didn't.

So, when Pat said to Scarborough that terrorists were attacking us because of our presence in that region of the world, Joe... a friend and fan of Buchanan's himself... said "I'm beginning to worry here, Buddy". Evidently he didn't notice that Pat - a firm believer that we should not meddle in foreign nations - harbored a viewpoint akin to "blame America first".

And, in this phrase - "Blame America" - lies the very heart of the pro/ or con Iraq debate.

This was made crystal clear by none other than Janeane Garafolo - a former comedienne who has since morphed into a spirited, angry fury of liberalism - and one of two Air America mouthpieces ranting whenever given the chance on the same panel. She angrily lashes out - again paraphrasing since there are no transcripts available - "why do you keep making divisive statements, like saying we blame America?".

Well, Ms. Garafolo, it's simple. Blaming America is not a divisive statement. It is simply a factual observation on the anti-Iraqi belief. Is she against the Iraqi liberation? Absolutely. Does she believe that we are wrong with our presence there, and inciting more terrorist attacks because of such presence? Absolutely.

Thereby it has to follow that she believes America and our policies are responsible for the terrorists battling the US Coalition and Iraqi citizens. She is "blaming America". And what's so divisive about an accurate assessment?

But that is all too easy a conclusion on the war on terrorism in general. Iraq was not the beginning of terrorist attacks on America's diplomats, military and citizens. Nor will it be the end.

Consider the reality that we were no where near Iraq when they flew planes into the WTC and killed almost 3000 citizens. Does Ms. Garafolo believe we and our foreign military bases were responsible for that as well? Do the previous attacks on embassies, military barracks and vessels, and previous bombings on the WTC do not count as terrorist invasions of our country?

Pat, certainly more eloquent and less hormonal in expressing his similar anti-Iraq position, comes from a long history of believing that the US should not be entangled in foreign affairs that do not directly threaten our borders.... period. But I differ with him, holding to the belief that our presence of foreign bases is integral to the US safety.

And, quite simply, that is Bin Laden and his band of merry thugs' main beef with the US - our presence in his homeland of Saudi Arabia, and the exposure of our evil western culture to fellow Muslims.

Our assault against al Qaeda in Afghanistan, which Mr. Buchanan supports, would not have been as smooth, or perhaps even possible, without our already established military presence, and the added support of Pakistan... another country who's improved relationship is the work of this administration.

The debate as to the "whys" of terrorism is an important one, and one that has not been fully addressed. The media pundits like to simplify the cause, saying that they are "jealous" and resent our culture and wealth. While this may be true, it hardly forms the foundation for their violence. Jihadists' proclaim they would be content if we would just steer clear of their desired caliphate state.

If we even for a moment considered doing as the terrorists wish, what are the repercussions? It goes far beyond simple freedoms stripped from denizens, Muslim and non-Muslim alike.

In a world that abounds in international trade and communication, a fundamentalist Muslim state would never be immune or isolated from the products and cultural influence of the West. It is important we never forget the al Qaeda vision of the caliphate state, as shown to the French journalist by his captors... what they want is from Spain to China.

Giving control of most of Europe, the Middle and Southeast Asia to fundamentalist Muslim clerics' would be an economic disaster of global proportions. Even if a Muslim caliphate and the US could co-exist in peace, without warfare, most of Europe, including France, would revert to nothing more than a third world country.

To prevent any western influences computers, internet, satellite dish... so many technologies would be prohibited. Broadcast and print media would be controlled by the clerics. The truth of this is historic - using merely two such examples out of many in Afghanistan's former Taliban rule, and Saddam's Iraq.

Quite simply, the world's trade and economy would crash. The majority of products offered to today's modern society would be prohibited. Even items as simple as cosmetics for women. With the slash in available market, manufacturers would go under or downsize to stay afloat. Americans would be left to deal only with her own marketplace, and any other country who managed who stay out from under dictatorial rule of Muslim clerics.

It isn't a pretty picture.

Mr. Buchanan's and Garafolo's attitudes that America should sit back and let other countries do as they choose... or as their despots choose... lost it's validity as a modern day foreign policy on 9:11. Today, what happens in those countries affects our own safety. Our stakes in how a country is governed have upped considerably.

But one thing could be said for the "blame America" attitude. If we sat back, withdrawing to our borders, and let Muslim terrorism overrun the rest of the world, I wager the rest of the world, in unison, would be begging for our help. But that's a dangerous way to obtain unity.



Doubleday to "educate" Americans on al Qaeda

,

On the heels of my above tirade comes the news that Doubleday publishers are planning to add their two cents worth to the "blame America" debate by giving the terrorist platform an outlet in a "book intended to educate American people" on the al Qaeda viewpoint.

A spokeswoman for publisher Doubleday said it was important for Americans to understand the mind of their enemy.

"This gives a direct perspective on their philosophy," Suzanne Herz said on Thursday.


I have no problems with the "blame America" crowd, or anyone else, reading Bin Laden interviews and hearing pretty much what I said above... that Islamic fundamentalists want western interests to steer clear of the Muslim world.

In fact, reading the words of one so filled with hatred for simple freedoms may backfire, giving even more Americans insight to the dangers of the existance of a caliphate state to free countries. However I doubt the book will tie in the repercussions of the existance of such a state, and it's effect on the rest of the world. So it will fall short of a true "education".

Yet the book and it's subject matter bother me little. What I really have a problem with is what will being done with the proceeds.

Doubleday promises they will donate their profits to "charity". So my question is twofold.

First, *what* charity? How much of the profits? All or part? And are they positive these charities do not support terrorist groups?

Secondly, who is the author - conveniently avoided in all reports thus far on this publication? And what is he/she to do with his/her profits? Doubleday is a publisher, and the one who pens this nonsense will also reap benefits that can not be controlled by the publisher.

If even one penny of the cash proceeds can fall into the hands of terrorist groups, then Doubleday should be prosecuted for aiding and abetting the enemy. Period. And until we have answers, Americans should contribute not one penny to this "educational" book.

"we don't need your stinkin' freedom..."




Self-doubt leaves French feeling down in the mouth
The Scotsman



IT IS official: the French are a nation of depressed pessimists, wracked with self-doubt and unable to see a positive future.

This gloomy portrait of the current state of Gallic morale - or rather the lack of it - was made public yesterday in a damning report by France’s prefects, the country’s top administrators.



I've been laying low on posting this week. Did you notice I was gone? LOL

I've just been quietly observing the inaugural fall out, monitoring what's doing inbetween the personal needs of trying to make a living. For the most part, I really liked the content of the Bush acceptance speech, tho his delivery did little to get my blood racing. But hey... that's not a huge requirement for me. I'll take substance over "rah rah" emotions any day of the week.

The speech generally laid out the Wilson-esque strategy that the more nations that exist with elected gov'ts and freedom, the less garbage dumps... er, countries... are left to provide safe haven for human/cockroach species. It is the only logical way to wage the WoT, and to minimize the impact of violent minorities on the world.

As predicted, there are bemoanings from left pundits and the world community, taking Bush's speech to the extreme. They ignore his "diplomacy and incentives first" statements and portray the Cowboy Prez with defined plans to march to war everywhere there is tyranny. All of them forget the lessons of Libya and Ghadafi, yielding his nuclear programme without a single shot fired after the fall of Saddam.

But what really got me roaring was a totally unanticipated comment INRE the spread of freedoms. French journalist Georges LeClere takes the prize for absolute absurdity with his comment on Hannity & Colmes 1/21/05, paraphrased as "not everyone wants your freedom".

Oh HO... Really now? I had no idea people craved having less freedom. The French care so little for control over their own lives?

So, to my ultimate amusement, I then ran across the above article about Mr. LeClere's homeland, and their antipathy to just about everything.

"The French no longer believe in anything," the report said. "That is the reason that the situation is relatively calm, for they believe that it is not even worthwhile expressing their opinions or trying to be heard any more."



Well now, perhaps Mr. LeClere is right on the money. If the French believe their voices are no longer heard and opt to stay silent, they obviously don't care one whit if they have the freedoms of expression, and powers to influence government, that we enjoy here in the evil US of A. And that is one sad state of affairs.

The country’s 100 prefects went on to use the words "lifelessness", "resignation", "anxiety" and "pessimism" to describe the attitudes they believe prevail in France today.



I suggest that, contrary to Mr. LeClere's proclamation of French resignation, they could use a shot of good ol' fashioned freedoms and a tad more rebellious spirit. Like Iraq, who is experiencing unprecedented economic growth in the wake of the US Coalition liberation , they might find their economic woes improved by their efforts.

A little noticed report by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), issued last November, shows that even now the Iraqi economy is, relatively speaking, performing better than anyone else’s in the Arab Middle East. The report makes a predication that some might find audacious: In the next decade, Iraq could become the engine of growth for the region.



Alas, the French would be hardpressed to accept the US's influence and the spread of such nonsense as freedom. It would, afterall, entail admitting they were oh so wrong.