Wednesday, November 30, 2011

After Attack On Its Embassy In Iran Britain Closes Iranian Embassy and Gives Staff 48 Hours To Leave

I was under the impression that the Iranian people (especially the youth) were fed up with the lack of freedom and major oppression they've been subjected to for the  past 30 plus years. After all, wasn't it mostly students who initially galvanized the pro-democracy "Green Movement" in 2009 after what was deemed a fraudulent presidential election?   But there are still those who are so mired in that backward, Islamist mentality, that they would rather live under subjugation than live in a free society. Witness the students who attacked two British diplomatic compounds in Tehran, vandalizing and destroying property and shouting the usual "Death to" England mantra, all in full view of the Iranian police who did pretty much nothing at first.  Unlike the pro-democracy crowd who risked everything to protest against a repressive regime, these students love their religious masters.

The demonstrations were reported to have been staged by a new pro-regime group called The Muslim Students Followers of the Supreme Leader. They were protesting against tough new financial sanctions imposed by London last week over Iran's nuclear programme.

And though I believe that the attack could not have taken place without government knowledge and approval, officials deny any involvement.  One Tehran University associate professor, Mohammad Marandi,  claims that

 “It was planned and organized by the students but it was not something that came from the government. The students were telling me days before that they were planning to be there in large numbers. They said some students would try (to storm the embassy),” he said. “I don’t think the government is happy with what happened.”

But that seems unlikely.

Britain has now retaliated by closing down its Embassy in Tehran, removed all personnel for their own safety, and has ordered the closure of the Iranian Embassy in London. Iranian diplomats have 48 hours to leave the country. I say, good for the Brits!

 Not surprisingly, Iran has responded with what they do best- veiled threats.

“The British government’s asking Iranian diplomats in London to leave this country is a passive and hasty action,” the Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said in statements emailed to AFP.

“Obviously the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran will take reciprocal action in this regard and holds the British government responsible for protecting the diplomatic properties and belongings in London,” he added.

“What happened at the British embassy in Tehran was unpredictable. It occured due to the anger of some demonstrators over Britain’s policies regarding the Islamic republic,” Mehmanparast said.  He noted that none of the British diplomats were hurt and said the judiciary was “dealing” with the “violators.”

Right, unlike many of the pro-democracy activists who are still rotting in jail, nothing will happen to these pro-regime thugs; and since Britain is a civilized country, nothing will happen to the  personnel or the property belonging to the Iranian Embassy.

It's hard to imagine that there are still people who are pro-Ahmadinejad, pro-Mullahs. Then again, it was  the Persians themselves who ushered in those dark years of Islamism back in the late 70s when they actually voted for an Islamic Republic.

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

U.N. Allegations Of Sexual Torture and Murder Of Children In Syria

A U.N. investigation has determined that, since the beginning of November, government  troops have also targeted young children in the chaos that is Syria. According to a U.N. report, the organization has received information from credible sources that over 256 boys and girls have been murdered, including a young 2-year-old girl who was shot and killed. The alleged reason for killing the little girl was to ensure that she did not grow up "to be a demonstrator."  There have also been allegations of sexual torture.

The panel's report to the U.N. Human Rights Council says government forces have used excessive force to "shot indiscriminately at unarmed protesters" while snipers targeted others in the upper body and head.
Their report, released Monday, said Syrian security forces along with militias were given "shoot to kill" orders to crush demonstrations.

If indeed true, though unconscionable, it wouldn't be surprising since it's not unusual for children to be abused in that region of the world.  Like women, children mean nothing in Islam, and suffer greatly as a result.  Look at how children in Muslim-majority third world countries are often encouraged and groomed to become suicide bombers.

But, in the case of Syria, it's not just the children suffering under a brutal, autocratic leader who is willing to fight to the death (as did Libya's Qaddafi), if his country is invaded.  It probably has much to do with the whole idea of martyrdom that so many Muslims cherish so deeply, and the unwillingness to give up power that so many people find so incredibly intoxicating.

At least the Arab League has finally approved sanctions against the Syrian government, for whatever good that will do; but at least it's something. Of course, it's the Syrian people who will suffer, as Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem so bluntly put it.

"Let them study the history of Syria very well. Neither warnings nor sanctions will work with us."

An estimated 3,500 have been killed since the people's revolt started 8 months ago. 

But President Bashar al-Assad still has his fervent  supporters, just like Qaddafi did and just like the Iranian government still does.  I think Assad might just end up like Qaddafi did. Dead.

Other sources: New Kerala News

Buh-bye Barney- Frank Won't Seek Reelection In 2012

Well, well, Barney Frank is finally hanging up the proverbial hat and will not be running again in 2012. Of course, as he put it, it had more to do with redistricting than a desire to retire to some Florida beach town.

After 30 years, it's good riddance.  Though few want to admit it, Barney Frank and the Democrats were pretty much responsible for the failure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which was a major factor in our economic downturn.  Though some Republicans were responsible, it was mostly Democrats who stymied efforts to regulate Fannie and Freddie.  This video proves that.

And then we have Barney, in his own words, caught lying<a href=" http:="http:" v="2UZ9l_AxKjA&feature=related" watch="watch"""> here.

Buh-bye Bawney.

Monday, November 28, 2011

Islamic Violence Burns Down 8 Churches In Nigeria and Blows Up Hotel In Philippines

I picked up my local paper this morning and discovered that those harbingers of peace and enlightenment were busy this past weekend, as per usual.

Boko Haram, Islamic extremists-cum-terrorists, had a field day attacking Christians, burning down eight churches, a bank (which they robbed), a police station and several local businesses in Geidam, in northeastern Nigeria.

"The Geidam divisional police headquarters and First Bank were bombed on Saturday evening by Boko Haram and fire was exchanged into the night between police and Boko Haram members," a police spokesman told reporters. "Four policemen were killed, 20 wounded, eight churches and 20 market stalls as well as Geidam council secretariat are completely destroyed."

No-one knows the exact casualty count, yet, but they managed to kill over 100 people during an attack the beginning of November, in the capital of Damaturu. 

Even though southern Nigeria is mostly Christian and the north is predominately Muslim, Boko Haram, which means "Western education is forbidden"  is hell-bent on establishing Shariah Law in all regions of the country.

Then we have the bomb blast that literally blew off the roof of a modest two story hotel in Zamboanga, Philippines. Although not directly linked  to a local Christian wedding that was being hosted there on Monday,  it is being blamed on one of that country's small but deadly Islamic terrorist groups Abu Sayyaf. At least 3 people were killed and over 27 wounded in the blast, two seriously injured. Apparently, Abu Sayyaf had planned two attacks, one in Isabela City where a bomb was defused near a local business. Authorities believe the owner was being extorted and refused to pay. The owner of the hotel in Zamboanga denies any extortion threats. Abu Sayyaf are bucking for an independent Islamic state in Mindanao.

Interesting to note that not only are they religious extremists, they're also common criminals.

All in a weekend's work for the religion of peace.

Sunday, November 27, 2011

Bill Clinton Praises Newt Gingrich In Newsmax Interview

Well this is interesting.  Bill Clinton praised would-be presidential candidate Newt Gingrich in an interview with Newsmax

“He’s articulate and he tries to think of a conservative version of an idea that will solve a legitimate problem,” Clinton told Newsmax in the exclusive interview this week, by way of explaining the Gingrich resurgence. Gingrich holds frontrunner status in the race for the GOP nomination, as several polls have him surpassing former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

Clinton continued: “For example, I watched the national security debate last night. And Newt said two things that would make an independent voter say, ‘Well, I gotta consider that.’

“He said, ‘OK, I don’t want to legitimize immigrants who came here undocumented, illegally.’ On the other hand, a lot of those people have been here for years, they worked hard, they paid taxes, they’ve got kids in the schools, they’re not criminals, we’re going to have a hard time sending them all home, there’s millions of them. So, I’d like to have a process where they could be here legally but not have a path to citizenship. That sort of splits the difference between the immigration reforms proposed by President Bush and President Obama, which would give a path to citizenship, and would be a version of what President Reagan did.”

Gingrich is definitely smart and he's a great debater. He will probably get my vote, since I don't really care about his 'baggage' and I think he might be the only one who can beat Obama. But I am still giving it my thought.

It's rare for a Democrat to praise a Republican, so it makes one wonder why such praise.

Islamists Win Majority In Morocco- Is Egypt next?

Islamists are gaining in popularity in Muslim-majority North African countries.  The Ennahda Party won a majority of assembly seats in the recent Tunisian elections, mostly thanks to the poor.  Now, according to the Moroccan government, the Justice and Development Party (PJD) won the majority of assembly seats over there, capturing at least 80 out of 395. With a low voter turnout (many boycotted the elections), the so-called 'moderate' Islamist party was heavily supported, like Tunisia, by poor folk.

And for all their claims of being 'moderate', these are the same people who wanted to ban an Elton John concert because he was homosexual, and were trying to ban alcohol. Apparently, they are now focused on combating  high unemployment and corruption in that country; but who knows what will happen down the line.

With the continuing trend towards Islamism in the Middle Eastern and North African regions, was it any surprise that they won? I think not. 

Next up, Egypt?

Saturday, November 26, 2011

Turkey Continues To Demand Apology and Payment From Israel- What about the Armenian Genocide?

It seems Turkey continues to insist that Israel apologize for the 9 activists that were killed on the Mavi Marmara, the Turkish ship that was part of the 'Gaza Freedom Flotilla' back in May of 2010. In addition to the apology, they want compensation before they re-establish full diplomatic ties with Israel.

One of the few Middle Eastern/Arab/Muslim countries that had diplomatic ties and friendly relations with Israel, that friendship ended after the Freedom Flotilla attempted to break the the Gaza strip blockade, at least according to Ahmet Davutoglu Turkey's Foreign Minister who said  "Israel buried our friendship in the deep waters of the Mediterranean."

Though it's unfortunate anyone died, placing total blame on the Israeli commandos is questionable. Who, after all, started the violence? In this video it seems quite apparent that the Turks initiated it, and the IDF navy was simply responding.

The flotilla, after all, was forewarned, and obviously chose to ignore those warnings.

The Israel Navy requested the ships to redirect toward Ashdod where they would be able to unload their aid supplies which would then be transferred over land after undergoing security inspections.

Had they truly been interested in 'helping' Gazans in their 'humanitarian crisis', one would think they would happily comply with the Israeli Navy and redirect; but it's quite obvious those flotillas were there as part of the anti-Israel movement. This was made even more obvious with the Red Cross statement that there is no humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip.

It's too bad Turkey feels that way, considering they have yet to officially apologize for the Armenian Genocide, let alone acknowledge it. 

Maybe Israel will apologize after Turkey does.  As for compensation, I think Israel would come out ahead: 9 dead versus upwards of 1 million Armenians. 

People who live in glass houses, as they say.

Friday, November 25, 2011

Richard Landes On Charlie Hebdo and Freedom Of Speech

Richard Landes, an American professor, writer and historian, has written an excellent response  to Bruce Crumley's commentary (on Time's website) regarding the Charlie Hebdo firebombing incident.

Crumley, is your typical apologist/appeaser who believes anyone critical of Islam is 'Islamphobic', and wants that criticism to stop:

Okay, so can we finally stop with the idiotic, divisive, and destructive efforts by “majority sections” of Western nations to bait Muslim members with petulant, futile demonstrations that “they” aren't going to tell “us” what can and can't be done in free societies? Because not only are such Islamophobic antics futile and childish, but they also openly beg for the very violent responses from extremists their authors claim to proudly defy in the name of common good. What common good is served by creating more division and anger, and by tempting belligerent reaction?

Landes, on the other hand, believes  Muslims should just "grow up". Although he does agree "in principle" with Crumley's objection to "gratuitous insult", he does not believe the criticism should stop.

Gratuitous insult is not what we need. Much better purposeful, serious criticism. If Crumley really embodied the maturity he pretends to, then he’d have serious challenges to Islam to his credit. That would attest to his readiness to treat Muslims as adults, capable of listening to as well as proffering criticism, to his faith that “the vast majority of Muslims are moderates.”
But if he is primarily trying to spare Muslims’ feelings – if he secretly believes that they are incapable of playing by the minimal rules of civil society; that they are not far from sympathising with jihadis for whom violence is a legitimate response to any form of criticism of Islam – then he unconsciously reveals that he thinks Muslims are primitive, violent people who must be appeased at all costs.

Here’s where Crumley and I part ways: he treats Muslims as animals or little children, and believes that he can win them over with carrots. Sticks will just spook them. So he finds Charlie Hebdo’s behavior “childish, futile, Islamophobic [sic!]… inflammatory… obnoxious, infantile… outrageous, unacceptable, condemnable.”
I’d rather treat Charlie Hebdo as a teaching moment, as a shibboleth for detecting genuinely moderate Muslims. Here’s an occasion to teach our Muslim co-citizens about “sticks and stones.” If we can’t find Muslims to whom we can say: “this part of modern civil society, and your learning to get past the implied/imagined insult constitutes minimal adherence to principles of reciprocity,” then what does it mean to carry on about “moderate Muslims”? This reciprocity is especially significant given how virulently critical of infidels many of the most vocal Muslims are.

This radical (and pre-modern) asymmetry of “us” and “them” reflects one of the most disturbing – and to liberals, incomprehensible – principle of Wala wa bara - “loyalty to Muslims and enmity for infidels.” It constitutes the exact opposite of the modern principles that underlie civil polities in which citizens are guaranteed “human rights.”

Landes is spot on in his analyses, and it's worth a read. Click here for the whole article.

Raped Afghan Woman Gets Choice of 12 Years In Jail or Marry Her Rapist

Imagine getting raped and then being forced to make a decision between two equally horrendous choices:

A. marry your rapist or
B. 12 years in jail.

This is what a young Afghan woman, Gulnaz, faces after her cousin's husband allegedly violated her 2 years ago at the age of 19. Convicted of adultery, courtesy of Islamic Afghan law, she still could face being killed by family members who feel they have been dishonored.  The rapist, who denies he raped her, is also in jail, admits as much. But according to him, it won't be his family who will kill her, it will be her family.  

Gulnaz says of the rape,

He had filthy clothes on as he does metal and construction work,’ she told CNN in an exclusive interview.

‘He closed doors and windows. I started screaming, but he shut me up by putting his hands on my mouth,’ she said.

Faced with having to spend 12 years in jail, along with the child she gave birth to as a result of the rape, she has said she is willing to marry her rapist.

I was asked if I wanted to start a new life by getting released, by marrying this man’.

She added: ‘My daughter is a little innocent child. Who knew I would have a child in this way. A lot of people told me that after your daughter's born give it to someone else, but my aunt told me to keep her as proof of my innocence.

I'm sure there are those who might be skeptical about the rape allegations, but even if it was consensual (which I doubt) 12 years for adultery?

Only in Islam is the female victim re-victimized.

Source: Dailymail

Who Should I Vote For In The Republican 2012 Primaries?

Let's face it, our pool of presidential hopefuls isn't very thrilling, and it's hard to determine which of all the candidates has the greatest potential to beat Barack Obama in the 2012 elections.

But fear not, the UK Telegraph has a great little test to help you with that decision.  With a series of questions from Defense/Foreign Policy/Homeland Security to Healthcare,  it matches you with the candidate who is most closely aligned with your political beliefs.  Obviously, not all the candidates are listed, only the main contenders.

Those listed in this particular quiz (in alphabetical order) are:

Michelle Bachmann
Herman Cain
Newt Gingrich
Ron Paul
Rick Perry
Mitt Romney

To take the test, click here. At the end of the quiz, where it asks you to enter your email address, just click on "skip this", and you will get your results.

I can't vouch for its accuracy, neither does VoteMatch, the company that created the quiz, but it certainly is a fun way to give you an inkling of who you should consider.


Here's another great quiz, with different questions, from  It has a more comprehensive list, including Obama, and also has listed politicians who might not be running.

UPDATE 1/23/12

And another presidential quiz from ABC that includes Obama.

Thursday, November 24, 2011

Happy Thanksgiving 2011

Wishing everyone a blessed and Happy Thanksgiving. Enjoy your family, friends and the yummy food, but remember to take stock of all the things to be thankful for.  And remember to save a special thanks for all our military who are far away and unable to spend it with their loved ones.

God Bless you all and God speed!

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Occupy Black Friday- Occupy Movement Targets Retailers

I'm not one of those consumerists who plans to snuggle up close with hundreds of shoppers lined up waiting to snag the best deals at retail stores on Black Friday. But there will definitely be hordes waiting in front of  places like Wal-Mart and Burlington Coat Factory, at some ungodly hour, looking for that great buy.  Some crazy young woman (and friends) in Tampa/St. Petersburg, Florida will have camped out 9 days in advance at their local Best Buy to get those discounted goodies.

But Black Friday participants might have their shopping fun thwarted by those gadfly Occupiers who have decided to take aim at large retail stores including Wal-Mart and Burlington Coat Factory. Yes, they are moving on from banks and wall street to retail: the big chain stores, and the publicly traded ones, that is, like:

Abercrombie & Fitch,, AT&T Wireless, Burlington Coat Factory, Dick's Sporting Goods, Dollar Tree, The Home Depot, Neiman Marcus, Office Max, Toys "R" Us, Verizon Wireless and Wal-Mart.

Small businesses are cool, however, and they encourage you to shop there on Small Business Saturday, just don't use your credit cards. Because American Express and Visa and MasterCard are, after all, evil corporations that force people to max out their credit cards. At least that's what the Occupy Black Friday movement seems to think. It has its very own website, (created by some malcontent called 'thescreaminghead' with his very own Facebook page), which states that

... the credit cards the 99% overcharge will allow the 1% to enrich themselves gluttonously on the backs of hardworking people who simply want to provide a memorable time for their families. So just imagine what would happen to the 1% if the 99% did not spend on Black Friday."

Yes, those nasty credit card companies are holding a gun to every credit card holder's head telling him/her to "shop 'till you drop, or else."

What about taking responsibility for your own actions rather than blaming corporations for your lack of self-control? Of course, these are the leaches who want to be provided for by the government and can't be bothered to realize that many of those 99% of hardworking people work at those retail stores they plan on "Occupying".

They do make a point of saying: "We are NOT anti-capitalist, just anti-crapitalist."


I don't think Occupy Black Friday will have much traction, and I don't expect too many will participate, but according to the stopblackfriday blog they do have some protests planned for Boston and Seattle. Seattle is targeting a Wal-Mart.

Please give these people jobs and get them off our streets!

Source CNN

Michael Moore Likens UC Davis Pepper Spraying To China's Tiananmen Square

 I've always considered Michael Moore a dolt, and his latest ramblings regarding the U.C. Davis pepper-spraying incident confirms that.  In an interview on MSNBC he compared what happened to the 11 seated  students blocking a sidewalk on the U.C. Davis campus to the "tank man", the lone man in a white shirt who bravely stood in front of tankers in Tiananmen Square in 1989.

 I certainly don't condone what the police did to those silly students, but they have nothing in common with the Chinese people who demonstrated in Tiananmen Square; and to compare the two is asinine.  11 kids got pepper sprayed, they'll live, but hundreds to thousands got killed in China. No-one definitively knows the actual death toll, but it ranges from the official number of 241 to $3,000 found in a Soviet archive. It's safe to bet it was probably somewhere in between.  While Moore calls it an iconic moment in the history of the Occupy Wall Street Movement, it is in no way comparable to the truly iconic moment of the Tiananmen Square protests. 

While I believe people have the right to protest, peacefully, they don't have the right to break the law, and if they do so they suffer the consequences. If the police ask you to move because  you are obstructing a pathway, then you move. The kids were allegedly asked to move and warned they would be sprayed, and they refused. What the U.C. Davis police did was overkill, but the kids knew what was coming if they disobeyed.

Thomas Sowell On The Occupy Wall Street Movement

Brilliant piece on the Occupy Wall Street movement, by Thomas Sowell. He is spot on, as per usual.

Democracy Versus Mob Rule

In various cities across the country, mobs of mostly young, mostly incoherent, often noisy and sometimes violent demonstrators are making themselves a major nuisance.

Meanwhile, many in the media are practically gushing over these "protesters," and giving them the free publicity they crave for themselves and their cause — whatever that is, beyond venting their emotions on television.

Members of the mobs apparently believe that other people, who are working while they are out trashing the streets, should be forced to subsidize their college education — and apparently the President of the United States thinks so too.

But if these loud mouths' inability to put together a coherent line of thought is any indication of their education, the taxpayers should demand their money back for having that money wasted on them for years in the public schools.

Sloppy words and sloppy thinking often go together, both in the mobs and in the media that are covering them. It is common, for example, to hear in the media how some "protesters" were arrested. But anyone who reads this column regularly knows that I protest against all sorts of things — and don't get arrested.

The difference is that I don't block traffic, join mobs sleeping overnight in parks or urinate in the street. If the media cannot distinguish between protesting and disturbing the peace, then their education may also have wasted a lot of taxpayers' money.

Among the favorite sloppy words used by the shrill mobs in the streets is "Wall Street greed." But even if you think people in Wall Street, or anywhere else, are making more money than they deserve, "greed" is no explanation whatever.

"Greed" says how much you want. But you can become the greediest person on earth and that will not increase your pay in the slightest. It is what other people pay you that increases your income.

If the government has been sending too much of the taxpayers' money to people in Wall Street — or anywhere else — then the irresponsibility or corruption of politicians is the problem. "Occupy Wall Street" hooligans should be occupying Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington.

Maybe some of the bankers or financiers should have turned down the millions and billions that politicians were offering them. But sainthood is no more common in Wall Street than on Pennsylvania Avenue — or in the media or academia, for that matter.

Actually, some banks did try to refuse the government bailout money, to avoid the interference with their business that they knew would come with it. But the feds insisted — and federal regulators' power to create big financial problems for banks made it hard to say no. The feds made them an offer they couldn't refuse.

People who cannot distinguish between democracy and mob rule may fall for the idea that the hooligans in the street represent the 99 percent who are protesting about the "greed" of the one percent. But these hooligans are less than one percent and they are grossly violating the rights of vastly larger numbers of people who have to put up with their trashing of the streets by day and their noise that keeps working people awake at night.

As for the "top one percent" in income that attract so much attention, angst and denunciation, there is always going to be a top one percent, unless everybody has the same income. That top one percent has no more monopoly on sainthood or villainy than people in any other bracket.

Moreover, that top one percent does not consist of the "millionaires and billionaires" that Barack Obama talks about. You don't even have to make half a million dollars to be in the top one percent.

Moreover, this is not an enduring class of people. Nor are people in other income brackets. Most of the people in the top one percent at any given time are there for only one year. Anyone who sells an average home in San Francisco can get into the top one percent in income — for that year. Other one-time spikes in income account for most of the people in that top one percent.

But such plain facts carry little weight amid the heady rhetoric and mindless emotions of the mob and the media.

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Ron Paul Groupies As Clueless As Ron Paul

I just spent precious time (that I will sadly never regain) responding to a Ron Paul devotee who also happens to be a mega asshole.  Unrighteousfury, who is obviously  as enamored of Ron Paul as Chris *tingles* Matthews was of Barack Obama (back in the day before his recent disillusionment), stumbled upon my blog post about clueless Ron Paul's naive belief that we can reach out and befriend the Iranians. Like Paul, unrighteousfury is under the delusional assumption that we can actually engage Iranians through "offering friendship and open trade", as if a little kumbaya and trading some rice and kebabs for some snicker bars will make things all better. 

He accuses me in an uber-long, yawn-inducing post on his blog of being a "dolt", a "dumb ass woman" and for not doing my research. Ironically, the man obviously has not done his research because he has absolutely no clue about Islam, let alone the inner workings of ultra religious conservatives like Ahmadinejad and the Iranian Mullahs.  He, like Paul, believes that Iran's nuclear ambitions are overblown. Why? because there's no actual proof.  Unrighteousfury, lets call him UF,  apparently has no idea about the concept of 'taqiya', nor does he have any clue why Ahmadinejad and the Mullahs' belief in the "12th Imam" might be reason enough to conclude their nuclear ambitions are far from innocent.

He can be forgiven for the woeful ignorance he shares with all the other Ron Paul groupies out there, who for some reason are drawn to a wacky former doctor-turned-politician, but UF is a piece of work. This is what he says about women in the piece dedicated to me:

I swear we need to repeal women’s voting rights. They keep writing this crap and I keep debunking it. Women should just stop blogging about politics all together. Stick with what you know. Here are some helpful examples of things you can occupy your time with that are far more productive than your silly ass opinion about politics.

But checking out the rest of his blog, it's quite obvious the man is a misogynist. In an incredibly insensitive post about women and rape, he says all women claim to have been raped and says this:

Look, to all you dumb women out there: We know that rape is a terrible thing and a tragedy. By lying about it over and over again, people literally lose interest in it even being a big deal.

Well, UF, I have never been raped nor do I have any friends who were, so your claims are bogus, as is the whole piece you wrote about it. But if you peruse most of UF's posts, you will find that they are replete with references to his 'manliness', which begs the question- why doth the man protest so much?

Ron Paul groupies are certainly a bizarre bunch, unable to respond to criticism of their guru in a civil manner. But we encountered that back in 2008, during his last bid for Presidency. I'll be glad when this is all over.

Ameneh Bahrami Iranian Woman Blinded By Acid Denied Compensation By Courts

It seems the Islamic way for some  men to deal with rejection is making sure that if they can't have a particular woman no-one else will either. One of the methods of choice is throwing acid on the face of the one who spurned them. This happens quite frequently in countries including Pakistan and Iran. A horrifying practice, the women are left permanently disfigured and the men usually get off with a light sentence; that is, unless the woman demands qisas (an eye for an eye) retribution.

Not common, but perfectly acceptable as part of Shariah law, a victim can request similar punishment for the perpetrator.   In the case of Ameneh Bharami, who had acid thrown in her face and was blinded in both eyes by Majid Movahedi after she refused his marriage proposal, Movahedi was sentenced to a similar fate.  But Bharami had to wait 4 years before her wish for retribution was granted in 2008, and another 3 years before it was actually to be carried out.  However, at the last minute she changed her mind and pardoned him, though she still was seeking monetary compensation. Reaction was evenly split between those who commended her for changing her mind (in spite of the reasons why), and those who felt the man deserved to suffer for the horrendous crime he committed.

But after all that, after sparing his eyes, Bahrami is being re-victimized, this time by the Iranian courts. According to Radio Zamaneh,  she was just informed that she is now not entitled to any compensation.

The Shargh daily newspaper reports: “Amaneh says she has foregone the ghesas ruling but wants to get the dieh (monetary compensation), but they say the minutes indicate that she has completely forgiven the crime.”

Shargh reports that Bahrami has rejected the veracity of the minutes, but officials have responded that the case is finalized. Bahrami has claimed, however, that she was not told what was written in the minutes, and since she was blinded by her assailant, she was not able to read for herself.

 She was eligible to receive  $200,000, money that she needs for medical treatment.  As a woman, of course, the likelihood of receiving that compensation is slim to none.

Movahedi, on the other hand, will only spend 10 years in jail, and 5 years of exile.

U.N. Resolution On Human Rights In Iran Asks For "Unfettered Access"

The following members of the U.N. General Assembly's Third  Committee (dealing with Human Rights):
Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic,
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland,
Ireland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta,
Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway,
Palau, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia,
Spain, Sweden, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America

passed a resolution with a 6 page bucket list of concerns regarding Iran's abysmal stance on human rights, and asking Iran to:

to positively avail itself of the opportunity to cooperate fully with the Special Rapporteur and other international human rights mechanisms, including by allowing the Special Rapporteur unfettered access to the country to carry out his mandate.
The resolution passed with 86 "yes" votes, 32 "no" votes, and 59  "abstentions".  According to the United For Iran website, the resolution gained some new votes from countries that abstained or voted no in the past, including Tunisia (surprisingly), Libya (surprisingly),  Central African Republic, Colombia, Haiti, South Korea, Haiti, Malawi, Senegal, Seychelles and Tanzania.

Among those voting "no", not surprisingly, were China, Russia; communist countries like Myanmar (Burma) and Vietnam;  all the leftist Latin countries including Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Cuba and Nicaragua; most if not all of the 'istan" countries like Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Pakistan. And, of course, most of the Muslim majority countries either voted  no or abstained. I was very surprised, however, that India actually voted no, but perhaps that's because of their contentious neighbour Pakistan.

Of course, why the U.N. even bothers drafting resolutions for countries that have no intention of complying is another issue. Iran is not going to let the Special Rapporteur, Dr. Ahmed Shaheed, have 'unfettered access' to the country, and they're certainly not going to change their ways simply because the U.N. "urges" or "asks" them to. It's incredibly naive to think so. The only chance for change in that country, is when (if ever) the Mullahs and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are laid to rest or in exile somewhere far away.

For a list of how each country voted, click here.

Monday, November 21, 2011

The Thrill Is Gone: Former Democratic Pollsters Tell Obama Not To Run For 2nd Term

Although most of my colleagues in the entertainment industry are still thoroughly enamored of Barack Obama, there are people out there who have shifted their opinions regarding his worthiness as President.

Take Douglas E. Schoen and Patrick H. Caddell-  though now critics of the Democratic Party in its current incarnation, they are former Democratic Pollsters who believe Obama should jump ship and let Hillary Clinton take over as party candidate. They believe that if Harry Truman and Lyndon B Johnson could do it, so should Obama.

“He should abandon his candidacy for re-election in favor of a clear alternative, one capable not only of saving the Democratic Party, but more important, of governing effectively and in a way that preserves the most important of the president's accomplishments. He should step aside for the one candidate who would become, by acclamation, the nominee of the Democratic Party: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton,”Caddell and Schoen wrote.

“One year ago in these pages, we warned that if President Obama continued down his overly partisan road, the nation would be ‘guaranteed two years of political gridlock at a time when we can ill afford it.’ The result has been exactly as we predicted: stalemate in Washington, fights over the debt ceiling, an inability to tackle the debt and deficit, and paralysis exacerbating market turmoil and economic decline."

But this isn't recent dissatisfaction, with the Commander-in-Chief, they felt the same way about Obama back in November 2010 when they wrote:

 “.... we believe, that the president has largely lost the consent of the governed.” 

Then there's Chris 'Tingles' Matthews who once sweet on Obama, now seems to have soured on his object of adoration .

Of course, Obama's narcissistic nature would never allow him to give up the potential for a second term, which is probably just as well since Hillary Clinton would be a formidable opponent to all our potential candidates.

Joke of the day: Obama's Math

Sunday, November 20, 2011

Video- Message From Iranian Women To Tunisian and Egyptian Women

Interesting YouTube video showing the journey from freedom to oppression (in photos) of Iranian women. Iran was certainly different pre-revolution. I'm sure they had no idea what would eventually happen to them. However, the Egyptians, Tunisians and Libyans have no excuse. If they choose Islamism over democracy, they will suffer the same fate as the Iranians, and it will be their fault.

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Spain's Conservative Popular Party Poised To Win Election

After 8 years of being governed by Socialists, it looks like the disillusioned Spaniards are finally aware of their folly, and will be voting for the conservative Popular Party (PP) at the polls tomorrow.  Expected to win the plum role of Prime Minister is 56-year-old Mariano Rajoy. His won't be an easy job, however, with a country on the brink, like so many other European nations, and the highest rate of unemployment in the European Union at a whopping 22 percent.

The PP is expected to win a majority which is

...deemed necessary to push through a new round of austerity measures and job-creation incentives intended to cut the public deficit while creating economic growth.

Rajoy is not promising that things will be easy:

In his final rally on Friday evening, Mr Rajoy warned that the road ahead would be difficult.

"We are not fooling ourselves, we're not going to sort everything out from one day to the other," he told thousands of blue-flag waving supporters in traditionally PP-supporting Madrid.

"We Spaniards know that it will take a lot of effort to get things done, and there is more effort ahead to take Spain forward. We know that nothing is free."

But after 8 years of economic stagnation under the Socialists, the Spanish people are banking on a man who was second in command under Jose Maria Aznar's leadership,  a time when the country's economy was booming. 

The Socialists had 8 years to prove their form of government works- they failed miserably.  Hopefully, the U.S. people will take note and vote conservative in 2012.

Buying The Vote: Islamists Trying To Win The Hearts and Minds Of The Egyptian Voters With Free Meat

Initial parliamentary elections in Egypt commence on November 28th, 2011. There are over 11,000 candidates, but like Tunisia, they are predicting a win by Islamist groups. Both the Salafists (ultra conservative) and the Muslim Brotherhood are taking advantage of the Islamic holiday EID to essentially buy votes. And with over 40 percent of Egyptians living in poverty, that's not a hard sell.

In an apparent bid to win over voters in the working class areas, Islamist contenders have set up kiosks to sell meat at economical prices. Candidates in the southern Egyptian province of Assiut distributed sacrificial meat for free with their photos pasted on the beef bags, according to the semi-official newspaper Al Ahram.

In Beni Sueif, another province in southern Egypt, parliament hopefuls reportedly offered cash gifts to children.

Other contenders, mainly from the Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party, arranged raffle draws in which winners received valuable prizes including sheep.

For 60 years, under Hosni Mubarak's leadership,  the Islamists were banned from politics. They are now out in force trying to win over the hearts and minds of the Egyptian people.  Although still banned from campaigning in 'places of worship', the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafists are bucking the law and doing it anyway. Voters are being urged to

"elect candidates who know well God's religion and are careful to implement Sharia."
"The enforcement of God's law is coming," said Sobhi Saleh, an Islamist contender in a sermon in the coastal city of Alexandria. "The Tunisians did this and so can the Egyptians," he added, referring to the big win made by Tunisia's Islamists in the October vote.

The liberals and secularists are not very happy with this turn of events, and fear for the future of Egypt, with very good reason.

"The candidates are obviously exploiting the religious sentiments of the Egyptians to win them over," said Fat'hi Mansour, a professor of political sociology. "They are also illegally using mosques in their campaigns. This is dangerous and should be stopped," he told this newspaper.

According to him, sermons delivered by Islamist contenders or their supporters inside mosques threaten to divide Egypt into religious and non-religious people. "This was clear in the slogans chanted inside mosques against liberals and secularists," said Mansour.

"There is also an apparent manipulation of people's needs in the poor areas in campaigning. Addressing religious feelings instead of promoting religious tolerance poses a threat to Egypt."

There are female candidates, which is a promising sign, until you delve into who some of those candidates are.  Muna Salah, a veiled Salafist,  believes that

....women are deficient in intelligence and religion, and it is not permissible for them to be in authority or to occupy the office of the presidency. She defended her candidacy for the People's Council, saying that acting as a representative in the Council only partial authority and not complete authority [sic], such as the presidency of the republic. She added that she seeks to apply the Islamic shari'a, including cutting off the hands of thieves, preventing the mingling of men and women, and specifying black clothes for women and white clothes for men.

According to Translating Jihad, those sentiments are taken directly from one of the hadiths (Sahi Al-Bukhari).

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: Once Allah's Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o 'Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle ?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion." -Sahih Bukhari 1:6:301

With so much ignorance and poverty, the country is ripe for the overtaking by Islamists and their religious agenda.  So much for the Arab Spring and the reach for democracy.

Friday, November 18, 2011

Class Division In Occupy Wall Street- Jon Stewart's The Daily Show

As will happen in any society, the Occupy Wall Street movement (#OWS) in New York's Zucotti Park automatically divided into separate classes.
Samantha Bee on Jon Stewart's 'The Daily Show' investigates that class division. Some funny stuff.

There is no socio-political system that can eliminate the 'have's and the have-nots', that's just the way it is.

Thursday, November 17, 2011

I am Israel- video

Great video!

"Patriotic Millionaires" Calling For Higher Taxes Refuse To Donate To Treasury Department

Ha! From the Daily Caller:

Two dozen “patriotic millionaires” traveled to the national’s capital on Wednesday to demand that Congress raise taxes on wealthy Americans.

The Daily Caller attended their press conference with an iPad, which displayed the Treasury Department’s donation page, to find out if any of the “patriotic millionaires” were willing to put their money where their mouth is.

Watch video here.

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Northwestern Professor Mary Patillo Endorses Government Seizure Of Housing At OccupyChicago

Another wacko leftist professor indoctrinating our university students.

Mary Patillo, Professor of Sociology and African-American Studies, at an Occupy Chicago rally, talks about how the U.S. government should seize housing and make it public. She references 1959 revolutionary Cuba as a model. Guess she hasn't been there, because I have.

This is the kind of person teaching our kids.

Cain's Libya Gaffe Versus Obama's Hawaii/Asia Gaffe

Interesting how differently the media has treated Herman Cain's Libya gaffe over Obama's reference to Hawaii as Asia. It's okay for liberals to make monumental mistakes, but not conservatives.

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Lefty Law Professor Michael Avery Says It's "Shameful" To Send Care Packages To Troops

Most Americans claim to support our troops regardless of their position on the various wars we have been  fighting abroad.  One of the ways we show that support is by sending care packages to those deployed in some of the most God-forsaken places on this planet.  They have little to nothing and sending some comforts and treats from home shows compassion.  We do pride ourselves on being a compassionate people.  However, there are some malcontents like Suffolk University  Law Professor Michael Avery who seems to have allowed his leftist politics to trump his humanity. 

Apparently, Avery was disgusted by a campus call to gather care packages for the troops overseas, and sent a short email voicing his objection to his collegues.

"I think it is shameful that it is perceived as legitimate to solicit in an academic institution for support for men and women who have gone overseas to kill other human beings."

Not only did he disapprove of soliticing care packages he also complained about the U.S. flag hanging in the Law School atrium:

“Since Sept. 11 we have had perhaps the largest flag in New England hanging in our atrium. This is not a politically neutral act. Excessive patriotic zeal is a hallmark of national security states. It permits, indeed encourages, excesses in the name of national security, as we saw during the Bush administration,and which continue during the Obama administration.”

Not surprisingly, he attended the University of Moscow, smack dab during the Cold War, and has been to Cuba, to commune with fellow commies.

In a 2005 letter obtained by Fox 25, Avery writes about a conference he spoke about in Cuba. The theme of his talk: "The Hypocrisy of US Policy Towards Terrorism." It was a speech he says he gave to a crowd including Fidel Castro himself.

The University responded to the backlash from students and others concerned by saying:
“We respect the right of our faculty members to exercise academic freedom and support all members of our community in speaking freely and expressing their opinions.”

Which is indeed true, and that is what our men and women in the Armed Forces are doing- fighting for democracy and freedom, and he has the gall to begrudge them sanitary products and goodies from home.

What I find 'shameful' is the fact that professors like this are still allowed to teach in our universities.

Shame on you Michael Avery!

Monday, November 14, 2011

Divorce Islamic Style: Egyptian Divorce Rates Spike With Women's Divorce Law (khula)

There are state laws governing divorce in this country and it can be very complicated, especially with children involved. This is a good thing considering the divorce rates have increased substantially over the past 50 plus years.  And depending on the reasons for the dissolution of a marriage, and the competence of the  lawyers involved, men and women  are treated fairly equally.  Not so for Muslims.  As with most things in Islam, the woman does not fare as well as the man.  If  a Muslim man wants to divorce his wife, he simply has to give talaq and tell her "I divorce you", as long as she's not unclean (i.e. menstruating). There is a three stage process they are supposed  to go through, with a short waiting period in between, but many men out of anger will perform triple talaq without bothering to wait, and the woman is out on the streets. Text-messaging and emailing triple talaq has become so commonplace, some countries like Tajikistan have actually banned it.

Although women are supposed to be allowed to ask for a divorce (khula), it's not quite the same thing.  Unlike men who have very little obligations when they divorce, women are forced to give back everything.  And in countries like Egypt, wives were banned from seeking a divorce until 2000.  Now that it is so easy for both parties to part ways, Egypt's divorce rates have skyrocketed. And the ones suffering the most are the children.

If it's true that divorce cases have increased with the "khula" law, that's a pretty damning indictment against the Egyptian male if so many women are willing to leave their husbands with virtually nothing.
Of course, not only are the women being blamed (as they usually are), fingers are being pointed at the evil West:

According to the statistics presented in the conference, the unconditional divorce law, which allows the woman to end the marriage provided that she waives her financial rights, has contributed to a remarkable hike in divorce rates in Egypt.

With the “khula” law, divorce cases have amounted to 5.4 million and around seven million children ended up in orphanages or in the streets especially after one of the parents or both remarry, said Sameh Mekhlef, head of the Association for the Rescue of the Egyptian family and member of the Egyptian Family coalition.
“We should also steer away from Western values that have a negative effect on the unity of the family and that promote ideas which are strange to our society."
Right.  Islamic values are so much more egalitarian and family friendly.  I think Mekhlef should take a deep, hard look at why women are so willing to leave their husbands if the Muslim life is so perfect.  It has far more to do with the oppression and abuse of women under Islam, than Western values.

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Religious Intolerance: Hindu Doctors Murdered In Pakistan

Pakistan has no tolerance for those of other religions including their own minority Muslim sects, but that's just part and parcel of a predominately Muslim nation.  Minority religions are persecuted, discriminated against and marginalized. And often they are killed for no apparent reason other than the fact that they don't happen to be Muslim.

Take Dr Ashok, Dr Ajeet Kumar and  Dr Naresh- three Hindu brothers who were attacked and murdered in Sindh province. A fourth doctor, Satya Pal, was injured but survived the attack.

There have been the obligatory condemnations of the attack, but that is small comfort to a mother who lost 3 sons in one fell swoop.

Cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan has strongly condemned the killing of Hindu doctors by armed assailants in Pakistan's Sindh province.
Khan, chairman of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), in a satement [sic] issued by his party's central secretariat, said that the murder of Dr Ashok, Dr Naresh and Dr Ajeet Kumar marked a sad day for Pakistan, as PTI (Paksitan Tehreek-e-Insaf) believed in peaceful and harmonious co-existence of all religious and ethnic groups and an indiscriminate practice of the rule of law, Daily Times reported.

It's nice to know that one political party in Pakistan believes in unity and co-existence, but words are cheap and until words are put into action nothing will change. 

Human rights groups are planning a rally to protest the killings, but that too won't change things. 

Unfortunately, as long as the 'Sharia law', 'non-Muslims are infidels' mentality pervades, and laws are not enacted to protect minority religions in countries like Pakistan, those minorities will continue to targets.
On Thursday, condemning the brutal murder of Hindus in Shikarpur, civil society and human rights organisations announced they would stage "Fill the Besant Hall Road against Religious Intolerance" rally in front of the Theosophical Society's interior Sindh centre in Hyderabad Nov 14.

Stating abdication of governance by the corrupt ruling mafias had resulted in an increase of violence in the society that needed to be checked immediately, Khan condemned the role of the law-enforcement agencies that tended to side with the criminals.

Afghan Widow and Daughter Stoned To Death For Adultery

Nothing has changed much in Afghanistan. Women are still severely oppressed, and as long as the Taliban remain there, life will continue to be hell for them. 

The latest atrocity:  According to Bilal Sarwary of the BBC, a young widow and her daughter were stoned and then shot to death after the mother was accused of "moral deviation and adultery"  in Ghazni province. And this all happened within earshot of

..  the governor's office, the police chief's office and a Western-backed Provincial Reconstruction Team.
According to an official, the woman and her daughter were dragged into the yard, but no-one bothered to help or call the police in time to save them. That's probably because the neighbours were either too afraid to intervene, or the ones who reported the woman to the Taliban in the first place; since there have been fatwas issued by the Taliban asking people to tattle on adulterers. But was she even guilty of adultery? With Shariah law, all it takes is a jealous neighbour to falsely claim someone has done something wrong and they can end up dead. That's justice Shariah-style. And how could she be guilty of adultery if she was a widow?

And what about the daughter- what did that young girl do to deserve to die?

Even though the Taliban is not in control of the Afghan government, they still hold sway over much of the country.  Sarwary says of Ghazni:

There are 18 districts in Ghazni. Seven are in government control. In 11 the government only exists inside the district headquarters.

In much of the region, the Taliban are taxing people and banning girls from schools. Joint weddings have been banned - the bride and groom are not allowed to be together as it is thought the woman makes too much noise walking to the wedding hall, disturbing the men.

The Taliban are killing and imprisoning people who work for the government. They control all of the major roads. Drivers are regularly beaten. There are instances where district officials have been beheaded. The Taliban have banned mobile phones, video cameras and music apart from Taliban radio stations playing hypnotic chants.
I don't hold much hope for that country, especially when we pull out.

Joke of the day: Anti-Liberal Humor

Found this on someone's Facebook page. I'm sure there are many variations including anti-conservative, but this is funny, as is.

An elderly man had a massive heart attack and the family drove him to the emergency room. After a while the ER doctor appeared wearing a long face. With the family eagerly awaiting the news, the ER doctor glumly spoke.  "I'm afraid Grandpa is brain-dead, but his heart is still beating." 'Oh, Dear God,' exclaimed his wife, 'We've NEVER had a liberal in the family before!!!!'

Saturday, November 12, 2011

Taliban Breeding Child Suicide Bombers in Pakistan

The Palestinians aren't the only ones who breed their children as suicide bombers. It seems the same thing is happening in Pakistan and Afghanistan. BBC reporter Orla Guerin interviews a young  13-year-old Pakistani  who managed to escape from the Taliban after she was scheduled to blow herself up.  According to Meena, her 8-year-old sister was fitted with a bomb, placed in a car and was never seen again.


H/T Shoebat Foundation

Friday, November 11, 2011

11/11/11 Veterans Day

With heartfelt thanks to all our veterans and those who still serve.
God Bless and God Speed!

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Occupy Oakland Deposits $20,000 In Wells Fargo Bank After Defacing One

How's this for irony mixed in with a big dose of hypocrisy. After plastering a Wells Fargo Bank in Oakland with "Fuck the bank" and other nasties:

"Occupy Oakland" took $20,000 they received in donations and deposited that money in - you got it - a Wells Fargo Bank! Of course, they claim it's only temporary. They're looking to eventually move their dollars into a community bank or credit union.

Too bad Wells Fargo didn't just tell them where they could put it, in the interim.

Wednesday, November 09, 2011

Joke of the day: "Didn't Read It" Eric Holder

Michael Ramirez from Investors Business daily on Eric Holder.

"Cruel and unusual punishment": Florida Pedophile Inmate Suing Prison For Serving Soy Products In Meals

Florida seems to rank high in the frivolous lawsuit category, but this one takes the cake.

A 32-year-old pedophile, Eric Harris, who was sentenced to life in prison, isn't happy with his food options so he's filed a law suit against the Florida state prison system for cruel and unusual punishment. Apparently in 2009, Lake Correctional decided to start serving soy-based products in prison meals. Prisoners receive soy by-products in up to 70% of their meals and many are unhappy. They claim that the soy is causing all sorts of health issues.

Serving soy products saves the Department of Corrections (and hence the taxpayers) a lot of money. According to spokeswoman Joellen Rackleff, they have a budget of $47 million for food, if they were to serve 100 percent meat, it would cost twice as much. .

But after a lot bitching and moaning to an anti-vegetarian, anti-soy organization, The Weston A. Price Foundation  is suing on behalf of Harris, pro-bono, and plans on filing a class action suit on behalf of others, including taxpayers. Hello, serving soy products is saving the tax payer money, why sue on their behalf? And thanks to the foundation's  frivolous law suit, more taxpayer's money will be wasted on a totally unworthy cause.

Inmates get 3 square meals a day- they're lucky they're not getting bread and water. If they don't want to eat the soy foods, don't eat it. Prison isn't the Ritz Carlton, you don't get choices when you commit crimes.
.. including chronic constipation followed with debilitating diarrhea and vomiting, passing out, heart palpitations, and rashes.

Tuesday, November 08, 2011

Clueless Ron Paul Wants To Befriend Iran To Deter Its Nuclear Ambitions

Thankfully, presidential-hopeful Ron Paul is in no way a viable candidate- straw polls be damned- because if this country wasn't in trouble already, we'd take a further nose dive under his leadership.  Paul is a naive fool at best when it comes to foreign policy.  His latest comments regarding Iran categorically prove that he is totally clueless, and would be a monumental disaster for the U.S.

Most everyone in the world knows that Iran is in no way trustworthy, and that their nuclear ambitions are not as innocent as they would have us believe.  In fact, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the U.N.'s  nuclear watchdog,  is set to publish a report claiming that the Iranians  worked diligently and secretly (thanks to Russians, North Koreans and Pakistanis!) on gathering all the information needed to build nuclear weapons.  Apparently they now have pretty much all they need, and with a mere 6 months to enrich uranium they would be good to go.  They are not saying that Iran has plans to do that, but the possibility of a nuclear Iran should strike fear in everyone.  But not Ron Paul.  No, Paul believes that the Iranian nuclear issue has been "blown out of proportion", and seems to think that "offering friendship to them"  is a far better deterrent to their nuclear goals than sanctions.  At least that's what he told Fox News Sunday.  Well, I have news for Mr. Paul. It won't work. They have no desire to befriend "the great satan".  They despise us and everything we stand for. 

Ron Paul isn't going to change the Islamist mindset, and he's a major fool to think he can.

Monday, November 07, 2011

U.S. General Fired For Telling The Truth About Karzai and the Afghan Government

U.S. Major General Peter Fuller, Nato's deputy commander in charge of training in Afghanistan, was recently fired for being uber-candid about President Karzai and the situation in Afghanistan. Thing is, he was absolutely correct, and although he probably should not have made public those sentiments, he verbalized what most people think about Karzai's nebulous leadership skills, and major lack of gratitude.

About a month ago, Karzai had claimed that trying to deal with the Taliban was pointless, and blamed Pakistan for harboring militants.  Then just weeks later, he turned around and said that if the U.S. were to engage in a war with Pakistan, he would side with Pakistan, since Afghans would "never betray their brothers."

Of course Karzai would side with his Muslim brothers over infidel Westerners, in spite of the fact that the U.S. (and its allies) has been fighting their terrorists for all these years and pumping money into a losing battle.  In response, Fuller said of Karzai in an interview on

“Why don’t you just poke me in the eye with a needle! You’ve got to be kidding me … I’m sorry, we just gave you $11.6 billion and now you’re telling me, ‘I don’t really care’? When they are going to have a presidential election, you hope they get a guy that’s more articulate in public”

A recent meeting Fuller had with Afghan generals revealed how utterly clueless they are.

“I said, ‘You guys are isolated from reality.’ The reality is, the world economy is having some significant hiccups. The U.S. is in this [too],” Fuller told POLITICO. “If you’re in a very poor country like Afghanistan, you think that America has roads paved in gold, everybody lives in Hollywood. They don’t understand the sacrifices that America is making to provide for their security. And I think that’s part of my job to educate ’em.”

According to Fuller, the Afghans had requested  battle tanks to

“put them on a flat bed and drive them around in a parade. You can teach a man how to fish, or you can give them a fish. We’re giving them fish while they’re learning, and they want more fish! [They say,] ‘I like swordfish, how come you’re giving me cod?’ Guess what? Cod’s on the menu today.”

$11.6 billion is a hell of a lot of money to be diverting from a country in need (the U.S.)  to a country that would rather side with a nation that has been prolonging the war on terror by harboring terrorists and thereby contributing to the continuing chaos in that land.  Had either Afghanistan or Pakistan truly wanted to rout terrorism from the region, it would have happened billions upon billions of dollars ago.

At least someone had the guts to tell the truth.

Saturday, November 05, 2011

Offices of Charlie Hebdo Firebombed Over 'Charia Hebdo" Islam Edition

Charlie Hebdo is back in the headlines again.  In 2007, the far-left, French satirical weekly took major heat for re-publishing the Danish Jyllands-Posten 'Mo-toons', and posting on the front page a cartoon of Mohammad with the caption "It's hard to be loved by idiots" in French. As a result, publisher Philippe Val was sued by the Paris Grand Mosque and the Union of French Islamic Organizations for racism. A staunch supporter of Israel, the lefty Val won that lawsuit.

The latest with Charlie Hebdo came the day it was due to publish its latest weekly edition skewering Islamic Shariah law.  The name Charlie was replaced with Charia, Prophet Mohammad listed as guest Editor-In-Chief,  captioned with "100 lashes if you don't die of laughter" and dedicated to the Arab Spring.

This time, no-one was going to wait to lose a lawsuit, so in the wee hours of the morning on Wednesday November 2,  the offices of Charlie Hebdo were firebombed, and their website was hacked. Apparently, there was a photo of Mecca and "No God But Allah" along with messages in Turkish and English. But as of today, there are just the words "it works!",  on the screen. Whatever that's supposed to mean.

There are, of course, those dhimmis who condemn Charlie Hebdo for provoking Muslims, like Romina Ruiz-Goiriena of France24 in her Huffington Post article.

By definition, satire is based on the premise that however serious the subject, it can achieve a greater effect if a society's follies are held to ridicule. The greater purpose is constructive criticism. However, the Charia Hebdo number did everything to scorn the Arab Spring abroad and nothing to contest French clichés and institutional racism against Muslims.

The issue was not thought-provoking; it simply contributed to burgeoning anti-Muslim sentiment. What it should have been doing was pushing the conversation forward to confront the seemingly dormant but rampant institutional bigotry. After all, is that not the point of having a free press tradition in the first place?

An extremely angry editor, Stéphane Charbonnier (Charb), said that
"The arsonist didn't read this magazine -- no one knows what's in this magazine except for the ones who will buy it this morning.  People acted violently over a magazine where they don't even know the content. This is what is most deviant and dumb."
But Muslims who commit these kinds of violent acts don't think before reacting. They just lash out because it's the only thing they know, and people are intimidated enough to give them reason to continue acting out. Granted, many in the Muslim community have condemned the violence, but there's something fundamentally wrong when your adherents find no other recourse but to resort to threats and violent pursuits.

Back in 2006 Jacques Chirac was highly critical of  Charlie Hebdo for the Mo-Toons publication, which he claimed was  "overt provocation" adding,

"Anything that can hurt the convictions of someone else, in particular religious convictions, should be avoided."

The current government, however, values freedom of speech and fully supports the magazine. Interior Minister Claude Gueant said

"The freedom of the press is a sacred freedom for French people. Everything will be done to find the perpetrators of this attack."

The  mayor of Paris said it best,

"We may not agree with this week's edition of Charlie Hebdo, but we are in a society that needs freedom of expression, and any violence that undermines this freedom... is absolutely unacceptable."

If we continue to allow violence or the threat of violence to dictate how we conduct our lives, we might as well lock ourselves up and throw away the key.

Friday, November 04, 2011

Iranian Soccer Players Nosrati and Rezai Face Lashes and Imprisonment For "Immoral" Celebration

Two Iranian soccer players are in beaucoup trouble for conduct unbecoming, well, soccer players- in Iran, that is.

Mohammad Nosrati and Sheys Rezai both face 74 lashes and jail time for committing “ an act against public morality.”  What might that be, you ask?  What possibly could warrant a whipping and a prison sentence?  Well,  according to the Soccer Federation the two players committed an "inappropriate and shameful" act. Criminal court judge Valiollah Hosseiny claims they engaged in "inappropriate and immoral acts", all caught on camera.  And since thousands of people were privy to this horror, they should be punished.

As a result,
The two have been banned from attending any games with their team. Nosrati has been banned indefinitely and received a 15-percent cut in his pay, while Rezai has been banned from two games and received a similar pay cut.
See for yourself exactly what happened in the video below.

Only in Iran!

UPDATE: 11/5/2011
Sheys Rezai received a whopping $300,000 fine, and will not be allowed to play for the rest of the season.
Nosrati was fined only $250,000 and gets to start playing again mid-season.  The judge apparently is still trying for the flogging and jail time.

UPDATE: 11/6/2011
From the Tehran times (thanks Robert) Rezai was fired and fined $230,000. Nosrati $194,000 and will sit out 6 games. And still no word about lashings and/or jail time.

Bottom line, whatever the final outcome is-  the fact that these two are being punished so severely for simply celebrating a victory goal (along with the rest of the team) is totally ludicrous. But, so typical of the Iranian mullah mindset.

Florida City Commissioner Blocks Muslims From Sacrificing Animals For EID

Sheila Alu, a Florida city Commissioner, managed to prevent the slaughtering of goats and lambs as part of the Muslim Eid ritual sacrifice scheduled for this Sunday in Sunrise. Although not a vegetarian, nor anti-Muslim, Alu is simply an animal lover who was very alarmed at the idea of animals being slaughtered in her backyard, so to speak.

"Yes, I was trying to stop it. It's shut down. I'm trying to protect innocent animals. This is not an appropriate setting for the slaughtering of animals in an open field in a city that's as populated as Sunrise. Usually these religious ceremonies take place in a rural area." [snip] I have no ill will toward the Muslim faith," she said. "I'm just an animal lover."

As expected, a representative of CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), Nezar Hamze, balked at the fact that someone dared prevent them from butchering all those goats and lambs.

"Wow," Hamze said. "That is very upsetting. We'll find another venue. But that's very disturbing. I'm very disappointed in that. We asked for permission and went through the proper channels and now it's off because a commissioner has a problem with it."

However, it's not just the commissioner that has a problem with it.  As of this moment, according to a Sun-Sentinel poll, an overwhelming 60% feel the exact same way.

Apparently, a bunch of Muslims from local area mosques were set to celebrate the Festival of Sacrifice at a 45-acre farm this coming Sunday.  According to Hamze, Eid ul-Adha is in  commemoration and remembrance of Abraham's trials, and ritual sacrifice is a required part of that celebration.

"The meat is sacrificed according to state and Islamic law," Hamze said. "There is no bloodbath. It's very humane. It's a slit on the throat real quick. And they bleed out in a couple seconds. The animals do not suffer."

Sorry, but this extremely graphic video (WARNING) of a goat being slaughtered is far from quick and painless.

I have no clue why sacrifice is still allowed in a civilized country, but apparently  it is.

The Florida Humane Slaughter Act governs the handling and killing of livestock, and a 1993 U.S. Supreme Court decision stemming from a case in Miami-Dade County upheld the right for animal sacrifices for religious purposes. That decision grew out of a lawsuit filed by the Lukumi Babalu Aye church charging the city of Hialeah with illegally enacting ordinances designed to persecute Santeria practitioners.  That means animal sacrifices for religious purposes enjoy protection from government interference, said Derek Newton, spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida.

Alu believes that animals should be killed in  a slaughterhouse, not in a field in the middle of a farm in Sunrise. Apparently the owners of the farm were not aware of what was about to take place, since it was the caretaker, Derek Matherly, who made all the arrangements.  He said of Alu,

"I find it appalling that people are so upset when they eat lambs and goats every day," he said. "Let's go back a couple thousand years ago. They used to slaughter animals and then burn them for sacrifice. I don't see the big story here. It's not like animals are being tortured."

Well, Mr. Matherly, this is the 21st century not biblical times, and the burning and/or killing of animals for sacrifice should be left in the past.

They will, of course, still be slaughtering those animals, but Hamze is keeping mum as to the location.