Thursday, January 31, 2008

Misery loves company

Forbes Magazine has done a survey of the most miserable cities in the United States, and not surprisingly, Detroit finished #1: What surprised me was that Philadelphia was NOT on the list. Philadelphians really are miserable, and to be honest, they revel in their misery. It's a bad of honour to them. It stems from the collective lack of success of their sports teams, and goes downhill from there. I was only in Detroit once, and even that visit was a brief one. Detroit natives, for all of the travails facing their city, didn't seem to be as fundamentally unhappy as Philadelphians...............

Recognizing a fact of life

There is and always has been a double standard in the world insofar as Israel is concerned. Palestinian desire for a "homeland"? Legitimate! Jewish desire for a homeland (a/k/a Zionism)? Racism! Arabs blow themselves up at Passover Seders or in pizza parlours? Self-defense. Israel kills terrorist leaders? Collective punishment. France kills over 80,000 Algerians in trying to keep Algeria from declaring its independence? Acceptable. Israel kills approximately 1,000 Lebanese in a limited war after Lebanese nationals cross the Lebanese-Israel border and kill eight soldiers while abducting two others? DISPROPORTIONATE (just ask the French, who screamed about this from Day One of the 2006 Second Lebanese War). Sudan kills at least 250,000 Christians in its south? The world frets and then forgets about it. Israel kills a fraction of that number in Arab Muslims in defending itself against terrorism? It's genocide.

The examples go on and on. There was an excellent Op-Ed in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer of all papers on the world's double standard on Israel, and it can be found here:, or for a British perspective, go here:

John McCain on Israel

Much has been made about the supposed links between John McCain and James "F--- the Jews" Baker, as well as his alleged quotes in a Haaretz article for a more "balanced" U.S. policy vis-a-vis Israel. Turns out, he is quite aggravated with Haaretz for not giving the full quotes, and he wanted to set the record straight on his position regarding Israel:'Proudly%20Pro-Israel'%20%20-%20%3Ci%3ESays%20Haaretz%20Article%20Left%20'Serious%20Misimpressions'%20%3C/i%3E.

Take it for what it's worth.

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

Louise Arbour opens mouth, inserts foot (yet again)

Rarely do you see a supposed government official so at odds with the official policy of the government for which she supposedly worked. Louise Arbour, a fellow Canadian and a United Nations Commissioner on Human Rights, has endorsed an Arab State resolution which calls for the eliminations "of all forms of racism and Zionism":

Now, Arbour has never been a friend of Israel, but over the past two years or so, she has taken an ever higher profile in which she seeks to condemn any and all things Israeli. This is just the latest such act on her part. The irony here is that under Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Canada has become a fairly solid supporter of Israel.

Why Victor Davis Hanson rocks

Op-Eds like this one, that's why: I wish that I could think as well as Hanson, let alone write like him. He neatly skewers all of the stereotypes and falsehoods about Israel, and then turns the "logic" of the anti-Israelis upside down. What makes him (and this article) so effective is that he points out the blatant hypocrisy of those who constantly pass judgment on Israel. Right of return and compensation for refugees? Sure, we'll address that at the same time as we talk about the 500,000+ Jewish refugees who were summarily evicted from the Arab countries in 1948, forcing them to leave all of their possessions behind. Want to talk abou "illegal occupations"? Not a problem, just as soon as we address the fate of East Prussia (he doesn't even bring up West Prussia). It goes on, but you get the point............

It really does take all types

I don't know why this story caught my attention, but it did. Some nutcase goth guy in England (where else?) has taken to leading his teenage girlfriend around on a leash, and she (obviously) is okay with that:

I'm no psychologist or psychiatrist. I don't pretend to understand all aspects of human nature. However, that this girl allows this guy to do this to her tells me that she has some severe self-esteem issues. I can't understand why he would want to do this, and why she would allow him to do it................

An open letter to those who now want to "sit out" the 2008 Presidential Election

A listserv of which I am a member just had a posting from someone who is none-too-pleased about the fact that Senator John McCain is now poised to win the Republican Presidential nomination. The poster added that he was now going to "sit out" the next Presidential election. Here was my response:

"Respectfully, I couldn't disagree more with your sentiment. I am not thrilled with Senator McCain either, given his views on illegal immigration and "torture". That said, the man has a 90% agreement rating from the American Conservative Union, and if it means keeping Hellary or Obama out of the White House, then I'll pull the lever for McCain. Don't you remember what President Clinton did to the military from 1993-2001? Shrillary will be much worse. By the time she was done, we'd be lucky if the military could field one well-equipped division. You want socialized medicine? Sit out this election and get ready for the waiting lines to see your doctor. Like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Medved, Dennis Prager, Michael Savage, Marc Levin, Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham, Michael Reagan? Say bye-bye to them as the Fairness Doctrine is reimposed. No one is a bigger supporter of Israel than me, and I can't stand the fact that Senator McCain is apparently chumming it up with James "F--- the Jews" Baker, but let's not forget that Hillary's best buddy in the whole world is Suha Arafat, and that the Junior Senator from New York (then the First Lady) just sat there like a statue when Ms. Arafat blamed Israel and Jews for infecting the Palestinian people with AIDS. So, on Israel, I'll take McCain over Hellary. And that's just for starters.

So, go ahead, "sit out" the 2008 election. You'll have only yourself to blame when the Angry Left takes its vengeance for what it sees as the "wrongs" of the past eight years.............."

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

A disconsolate Rudy Giuliani supporter

That's what I am right now. Though the vote totals are far from complete in the Florida Republican primary, those polls from the Sunshine State are being proven right. It's a neck and neck battle between John McCain and Mitt Romney, with Rudy Giuliani barely holding off Mike Huckabee for third place:

Honestly, none of the other candidates excites me, and I think that Giuliani was the only one to call Islamofascist terror what it was, and who would be willing to treat terrorists like what they are. Will John McCain? Mitt Romney? Will any Democrat? I think not..........

BDS run amok

Here's a memo to all of the angry lefties out there (and there are obviously a LOT of them): President Bush is leaving office in LESS than one year, okay? We KNOW that you HATE him. Get over it. Focus on the future for a change, instead of the past.

At least one angry leftie is obviously incapable of following this advice:

I don't know why I bother reading MSM newspapers anymore............

Monday, January 28, 2008

Want frightening? I'll give you frightening!

This is enough to turn your hair white, or make it fall out (I've opted for the latter category). James Lews, a blogger with the American Thinker magazine, has postulated on the fact that the Syrians, just four months after Israel took out a suspected nuclear facility, are rebuilding the facility in the exact same place:

His theory is that the Iranians through their Syrian proxies, and with the connivance of the Russians, are daring Israel to attack again, with the intention of drawing Israel into a protracted conflict, one which (given its relatively limited resources) it cannot hope to sustain over the long-term. Even more ominously, the Russians are engaging in war games in the area, and it is a fairly safe assumption that it wouldn't take much to get them directly involved. Of course, if THAT happened, the United States, even given the Bush 43 Administration's mixed signals on the subect of Israel, would have to get involved as well. Once that happens, just watch as all hell breaks loose.

The latest act of insanity from the left

The left in this country is nothing if not inventive. And, there is no place more chock full of inventive angry lefties than Verment (except maybe San Francisco). The town of Brattleboro, Vermont (I have actually been there. It's a very nice town.) is going to vote on whether President Bush and Vice-President Cheyney should be indicted and arrested if they ever set foot in the town:

As to the point of this latest act of BDS, I am not sure. It will have no legal effect whatsoever, but I suppose that it helps the angry left vent. It's just a shame to me that government resources are being wasted on it.

Primary Season

My old friend Paul, who is as conservative as they come, recently e-mailed an analysis of the primaries on both sides of the political fence. I thought that it was too good not to pass on.

One caveat: He knows that Dennis Kucinich has already withdrawn from the race, but couldn't resist commenting on him. Here the full text of his comments, unaltered from the e-mail he sent to me:

As for the primaries, I have some comments & observations:

The Republicans:

Mitt Romney: I have come to the conclusion that Mitt Romney is a cyborg (a cyborg with $1,000,000,000,000 in cash)-- and his programmers need to download some levity into his hard drive. Also, his name backwards is Tim Yenmor. Somewhere in this country is a guy by the name of Tim Yenmor who does not realize that his name backwards is Mit Romney. If he gets the nomination, he should immediately change his name to Mitt Lazio, in reference to what the Clinton machine will do to him, too.....

Rudy Giuliani: Hey, what a campaign Hizzoner has run-- on top of all Republican polls since 9/11, and you decide to exit from the first 6 primaries under the 'inevitable nominee' rationale. Who do you think you are? Hillary Clinton? Oh, I'm sorry-- she's actually been campaigning since Iowa. Who is your campaign manager? Shemp Howard? I will say this-- hearing Rudy in recent interviews give the Pee-Wee Herman "I-meant-to-campaign-like-this" explanation for his deplorably-run effort is truly hysterical.

John McCain: War hero. POW. Great American. President??? Uh, I don't think so. First, by his own admission, the economy is not his "strong point." Disqualifier right there-- that's like saying, "I'm going to be a surgeon, but science is not my strong point." At least the Cyberdine Systems' Mitt Romney Model 101 has run a business. We like you, John, but face it-- you're the Bob Dole of 2008 (but without the charm). Hillary will eat you for lunch.

Mike Huckabee: The Republican answer to Jimmy Carter (Mike Huckacarter??). The only difference is that you won't get the nomination. Hope you've enjoyed your 15 minutes....

Ron Paul: Dude, isolationism is so.....1920's. Your campaign motto should be "Back to Normalcy." And your last name is a first name. Disqualifier right there. The good news is that most polls & primaries to date have you ahead of Rudy-the-Inevitable.....

And now, the Democrats:

Hillary: Looks like my 5th grade math teacher is going to be president for the next 8 years. Yay. Nurse Ratched with a screetch that peels paint. And please-- stop that phony, forced guffaw of a laugh; it only underscores that you have no sense of humor (it's like the 12-year old who smokes-- it only reinforces their immature status). And by the way-- who's running, you or Bill??? Either way, it doesn't matter-- you two are the Terminators of American politics right now. They can't be bargained with; they can't be reasoned with; they feel no pity, or remorse; and they absolutely will not stop. Ever. Until they are running the world......

Barack Obama: From class president to U.S. President? I have to say, though, those five days between Iowa and New Hampshire were a lot of fun-- pigs were flying, the Earth was flat, Hell was a brisk 32 degrees, supermodels were interested in guys like me, Bush was competent (okay, let's not get carried away...), and you had brought the Hillary coronation to a swift and precipitous halt. And then we all woke up (and don't think for a minute that South Carolina, or even Florida, will save you-- Hillary is kicking your ass on Super Tuesday). That's alright, though-- you'll make a good Veep. And stop with the dancing. I also haven't forgot that you flipped out on Maureen Dowd (who's over 50 and still hot) when she teased you about your ears. Lighten up....

John Edwards: At this point, you are reminding most people why they dislike lawyers. Shoo. Go away. Go home to your 28,000,000-square foot house, Mr. Man of the People. You have NO chance. Any part of that statement you don't understand??

Dennis Kucinich: Look, this guy stated in one of the debates that he has seen UFO's. Enough said. Get him off the stage. Now.

Just some stream of consciousness during our current exercise in democracy. Sorry for all the Terminator references.....



I truly believe that that's what Rudy Giuliani did in the Republican primaries, and polls are starting to bear out that assertion: Rudy is now a very distant third in the Florida polls, and is trailing in his "home states" of New York and New Jersey. Eight years ago, I commented that Al Gore had lost an "unlose-able" Presidential Eleciton by running an absolutely terrible campaign (I stand by that assertion, by the way. Gore's decision to abandon Ohio and ignore West Virginia cost him the election. If he wins either of those two states, Florida is irrelevant). I have come to believe that the campaign Rudy Giuliani has run for the Republican Presidential nomination makes Gore's 2000 campaign look brilliant by comparison. Now, maybe Rudy will shock me (and many others, apparently) and pull out a win tomorrow in Florida, but I'm not betting on it.

UDPATE (2:38 p.m.): How big a joke has Rudy Giuliani's campaign become? It is now the fodder for humour columnists such as Dave Barry (who, I must admit, is an incredibly funny guy):

Where's James "F-- the Jews" Baker when you need him?

Aside from possibly advising the John McCain campaign on foreign policy questions, that is. Well, when he gets some free time, he ought to read this Op-Ed from Iran, which calls for the killing of Israeli (of course), American and European civilians for their "crimes" in Gaza: Don't you feel all happy when you read this? Who knows, maybe Baker does, given his antipathy towards Jews. I have little doubt that Pitchfork Pat Buchanan and the members of probably nodded their heads in agreement.

Remember, Baker et als. want us to cozy up with the Iranians, and this is the type of stuff that they are writing.

Sunday, January 27, 2008

Support Israel? Then you might want to think twice about supporting Barack Obama

I'm starting to wonder where supporters of Israel have to turn right now. Rudy Giuliani has eliminated himself. Mitt Romney is still an unknown. John McCain has ties to James "F--- the Jews" Baker. Hillary Clinton is lovey-dovey with Suha Arafat, and sat there quiet as a mouse while Ms. Arafat said that Israel had planted the AIDS virus in the Palestinian people. And now, Barack Obama has apparently bought completely into the Walt-Mearsheimer thesis about the "undue and improper" influence of that evil Israel lobby:

So, again, I ask: Where do supporters of Israel turn now?

Saturday, January 26, 2008

Durban II followup

As it turns out, the the decision by Canada's Conservative government to (possibly) back out of the Durban II "anti-racism" conference isn't sitting too well with some people in Canada, especially those in the opposition Liberal Party and in particular, a representative of the Canadian Arab Federation (who is also closely tied in with the Liberal Party). Steve Janke at "Angry in the Great White North" blog (on my blogroll) has more on this:

What is fascinating to me is that the far left NDP party, which normally says "black" if the Conservatives say "white", is supporting the Conservative's decision, to my surprise and pleasure. In any event, I don't think that this is over. Canada is likely going to have a federal election before Durban II, and (unfortunately) the Liberals stand an excellent chance of taking power once again. If the Liberals do win, expect Canada to be at the Durban II Conference.

Condoning murder

In essence, this has been what the West has done in Lebanon: It started with Syria's assassination of Rafik Hariri (for more on that, go here:, and has been going on ever since. The Wall Street Journal Op-Ed to which I linked places the blame for this squarely at the feet of the United States, and I find it difficult to disagree. Syria's intransigence received a huge boost when Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi kowtowed to the chinless wonder, Basher Assad, followed rapidly by Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice's equally obsequious pandering to him since 2006. The Syrian leadership may be a collection of bloodthirsty, terrrorist-enabling thugs, but it is not stupid. It understands very well that the West in general and the United States in particular lack the will to do anything about its murdering of political opponents.

So, the sad fact of the matter is that until we in the United States get serious about Syria, the Syrians will certainly not get serious about us............

Friday, January 25, 2008

A sobering thought for Republicans

Forbes Magazine has a thought-provoking Op-Ed from a USC professor which rightly points out the fact that Illinois Senator and Presidential candidate Barack Obama has captured the public imagination, regardless of whether or not he wins the Democratic nomination or goes on to become President: He notes, correctly, that the Republicans have no one (so far) on their side who can match Obama's popularity. That is something that should cause even the most devoted Republican voter to be very nervous come next November's election.

The crisis that isn't

Western media outlets are full of handwringing over the "Crisis in Gaza", which they blame (of course) on Israel. The thing is, even Palestinian journalists realize that the so-called crisis is being manufactured by Hamas:

A stunning development

This will come as a shock to everyone, I am sure, but the United Nations Human Rights Commission ("HRC") has--gasp!--condemned Israel over the situation in Gaza: Yes, I know, this is a startling development. After all, it's not like the HRC has ever done this before. Well, except for the 15 other times it has condemned Israel over the last two years, during which time onlyMyanmar was also cited. That must have been a mistake. Was there an Israeli in Myanmar at that time?

In any event, kudos again to Canada for voting against the condemntation resolution, and the typically gutless Europeans should once again be ashamed of themselves for only abstaining.

Thursday, January 24, 2008

2008 Presidential Election

One of my blog readers (yes, I do have a few, apparently) wanted to know my take on the Democratic and Republican presidential primaries. I haven't really talked all that much about them, for the simple reason that my candidate of choice, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, appears to be tanking so badly. That is not a matter of opinion; it is an objective fact:

When he announced his candidacy, Rudy was the favourite to win the Republican nomination, if not the overwhelming favourite. He has since proceeded to run one of the most incomprehensibly bad electoral campaigns that I have ever seen. Simply put, he elected to sit out the early primaries/caucuses, focusing instead on Florida and the Super Tuesday states. The only effect of this was that he made himself an afterthought. While Mike Huckabee was scoring points with evangelicals in Iowa and John McCain was resurrecting his campaign by repeating his 2000 primary triumph in New Hampshire, and then Mitt Romney knocked 'em dead in Michigan, Giuliani was ignored, to the point where Ron Paul has more delegates at this point than he does. Now, he is even trailing in Florida, in a distant third place, which is a state on which he had effectively staked his whole campaign. He is also trailing Senator McCain in his proverbial "backyard" of New Jersey:

The worst part of this for me is that I thought Rudy was by far the best positioned candidate to take on the threat of Islamofascism. He is not afraid to tell it like it is, a trait not shared by very many of the other candidates. His lacklustre campaign has left me unenthused about the whole campaign, hence my lack of posting on the subject.

The bottom line is that on the Republican side, I think that we are looking at either John McCain (pro-Amnesty, and possibly tied to James "F-- the Jews" Baker, though he has backpedaled away from the latter individual) or Mitt Romney (very vulnerable to charges of being a John Kerry-like flipper, the claims to the contrary of pundits like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, et al., notwithstanding). The way I see it, Romney in particular would be clobbered by Hillary Clinton in a presidential election (more about her below). McCain might be a tougher out, but I can't see him beating Hillary in California, New York, Florida, Ohio, Michigan or any of the other large states, with the exception of Texas.

On the Democratic side, I think that Hillary will steam to the party's presidential nomination at this point. Barack Obama had his moment of glory, and while he will be close the rest of the way, and may even win a few states here and there, he will NOT beat the Clinton machine. Let's face the ugly facts here: When do the Clintons EVER lose? They specialize in winning elections. That's all they do. If Hillary is smart about her running mate--and you can be sure that she will be (don't bet against a Vice-President Obama)--she will be almost impossibly to beat in November, especially given the prevailing anti-Republican sentiment in the country.

The scarier thing yet for Republicans and/or conservatives, a President Hillary Clinton will have a pliant Senate and House of Representatives to do her bidding. I expect that the Democrats will pick up anywhere from 2-5 Senate seats and will at a minimum hold their majority in the House of Representatives. Ready for the reimposition of the Fairness Doctrine? Socialized medicine? A complete repeal of the Patriot Act? The return of that "Chinese wall" between the FBI and CIA in terms of sharing information on terrorist suspects? A ban on treating terrorists as anything other than criminals? That's all coming your way, and more...........

Another week, another "honour" killing

Where else but in the Islamic cesspool that the U.K. has become? Another young Muslim woman who dared to have a relationship with a man of whom her family disapproved was killed in horrific fashion:;jsessionid=QN0NOJETBUMWXQFIQMFCFGGAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2007/07/20/nbanaz120.xml, by being strangled with a wire and having her neck stomped. Even worse, she expressed her fears to the police about her family on four occasions but they did not take her seriously.

Where's the article from Ms. magazine on this? Where's the statement from N.O.W. about this awful crime? Frankly, the silence of feminist organizations on this subject is a crime in and of itself.

Immoderate Islam

This is one of the more bizarre stories I have seen in quite some time. An Iraqi politician has decried the rise of Islamic extremism..................IN GREAT BRITAIN: If this isn't the ultimate sign that we in the West have gone completely off the deep end, I don't know what is.

Honesty is the best policy

It really is the best example of the twisted world in which we live. Islamofascists tell us exactly what they want to do (and will do), and we just pat them paternalistically on the head and say "Well, you don't REALLY mean that".

The latest comes from Hamas leader Khaled Mashal, who has vowed to continue terrorist attacks against Israel and to liberate ALL of Palestine (memo to Europe, the dhimmi left here, and ESPECIALLY American Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice: When he says "all", he doesn't just mean the West Bank and Gaza): What is wrong with us that we can't see these people for what they are?

The best Super Bowl champ of all time

The New England Patriots are one victory away from history. Should they beat the New York Giants on Sunday, February 3, they will complete only the second unbeaten season in the NFL since the merger with the AFL, and they will become the first 19-0 team in history. That has spurred a debate among football fans as to the best team in the Super Bowl era. Let me put my cards on the table--I am a longtime Chicago Bears fan, so when you see where I ranked the 1985 Bears in my "Top 10 Super Bowl Champs" list, keep that in mind.

So, here goes:

1) ***2007 New England Patriots (19-0): Obviously, if the Pats lose, this becomes moot, but if they do run the table, they're #1. I don't care what the competition was like. Even the best teams lose a game here or there, and the proof of that is in the fact that there aren't more unbeaten teams. This team will have maintained its focus for an entire season, when every other team was gunning for them.
2) 1972 Miami Dolphins (17-0): See my comment on the Pats above. The difference? New England will have played two more games and won them both.
3) 1989 San Francisco 49ers (17-2): By the end of the season, the 'Niners were unbeatable. The offense was every bit as scary as this year's New England team, and the defense could shut down any offense it faced, hence the three post-season wins by a combined score of 126-26 over the Vikings (41-13), Rams (30-3), and Broncos (55-10).
4) 1976 Oakland Raiders (16-1): How long ago this must seem for Raiders fans, given the current state of the team. John Madden coached this team to a 13-1 regular season record, and three victories later, Oakland was sitting atop the football world.
5) 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers (17-2): Nobody was beating this team; a dominant running game, a passing attack that featured three Hall of Famers (Bradshaw, Stallworth, Swann), and of course, the Steel Curtain on defense.
6) 1985 Chicago Bears (18-1): Everything came together for Da Bears in 1985. The D was magnificent, as it had been the previous year and would be again the next, but more importantly, Jim McMahon, who made the offense click, stayed healthy. As a result, Chicago steamrolled virtually every team it played, with the exception of that one hiccup Monday night in Miami against a fired-up Dan Marino and the rest of the Dolphins. In the post-season, Da Bears pancaked the Rams (24-0), Giants (21-0) and Patriots (46-10). Yikes..........
7) 1998 Denver Broncos (17-2): This Denver team was the antithesis of the Broncos teams that got flattened in the 1980s Super Bowls against the Giants, Redskins and 49ers. It could run the ball, and it was as physical a team as has ever played. By the team it ran into the overmatched, "just happy to be here" Atlanta Falcons in the Super Bowl, it had stamped itself as an all-time great team.
8) 1984 San Francisco 49ers (18-1): A lot of people would say that this version of the 49ers was actually the best, and it would be hard to disagree. They were the first team to win 15 games during the regular season, and were never seriously challenged until the Super Bowl. The offense was as balanced as you will ever see, and the D could stuff anyone.
9) 1992 Dallas Cowboys (16-3): Another revelation: I absolutely detest the Dallas Cowboys, and always have. But, that said, you can't take away from this team's greatness. The defense was underrated, and do I really need to go through the laundry list of Hall of Famers on offense? The Super Bowl victory, 52-17 over the completely overmatched Buffalo Bills, was completely predictable.
10) 1986 New York Giants (17-2): They started the whole Gatorade shower thing. The G-men rode the incredibly accurate passing of Phil Simms, the power running of Joe Morris and hellaciously punishing defense to their first Super Bowl title.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Signs of hope in Europe?

At least SOME of the rhetoric is changing. An EU official has categorically refused to call Israel's response to the neverending barrage of rockets from the Gaza Strip a war crime, and has added that the EU has for too long been one-sided in its condemnations of Israel and absolution of the Palestinians:,7340,L-3497543,00.html, and a Dutch official has expressed a similar sentiment:

While Europe is still a cesspool of anti-Israeli sentiment, that these statements were even published (though not in any Western newspaper, mind you) presents at least a glimmer of hope...........

Good on Canada!

The Conservative government of Canada has been a breath of fresh air ever since it took over, and here is the latest indication of that fact: Canada is apparently set to pull out of the 2009 U.N. anti-racism conference, which is already being called "Durban II", after the 2001 anti-racism conference. The logic of the Canadian government is unassailable: This conference is already looking like it will be a repeat, or even more venomous version, of the anti-Semitic, anti-American hatefest which took place in 2001.

If only other world governments had the same courage of conviction that the Harper government apparently does..............

Ineffective, but long overdue

For over 35 years, Quebec's non-French speaking minority has been (for lack of a better word) oppressed. English has been banned in certain businesses, for a long period of time it was banned on all commercial signs. Essentially, English-speaking residents of the province (known as Anglophones, or "Anglos") are treated as though they are unwanted and inferior. Every now and then, an Anglo rights group emerges, but they always prove to be ultimately unsuccessful in maintaining public support. Well, the latest effort is being made at forming a political party to speak on behalf of those whose first language is not French:

I don't know where this will go, but wish the party all the success in the world. For too long, the French majority in Quebec has trampled the rights of those who either do not speak French or for whom it is a second language.

As an aside, I have long thought that French-speaking Quebecers (or their political leaders, more specifically) are the North American answer to the Palestinians (without the rocket attacks and homicide bombings, of course). They specialize in grievance theatre, complaining constantly that any problem that affects Quebec is the fault of the English-speaking "Rest of Canada". They whine, they seethe, and generally govern themselves with a sense of entitlement that no other Canadian has. Don't get me wrong; I am not condemning all French Canadians--I grew up in Montreal, in Quebec, and spent the first 25 years of my life there (with the exception of one misbegotten year in Ottawa), and would not trade that for anything in the world. However, I feel that the province in which I grew up is not the same place it is now, and that is truly a tragedy.

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Markets in Turmoil

For all of the criticism of the United States, for all of the gloating overseas that the American "economic hegemony" is over, for all of the claims that China now matters more than the United States, that India matters more, that the European Union matters more, the United States STILL drives the world economy, and we are seeing no better an example of that fact than in the turmoil that has whipped through stock markets around the world since Friday, all of which have been in freefall over fears of an AMERICAN (note: I did not say "world") recession. Now, even after the Federal Reserve interceded and made a huge Prime Rate cut of 3/4 of a percent, global stock markets remain down:

It bears repeating: We MUST get our economic house in order. The budget deficit MUST be eliminated. The national debt MUST be paid down and eventually eliminated. Our absurd trade deficit MUST be trimmed. And, all of this MUST be done soon. To fail to do so will imperil the futures of all of us, as well as (more importantly, in my mind) our children.

Sharing Sharia

Where else but in the U.K. would this be happening? Apparently, there is consideration being given on the other side of The Pond to granting legal recognition to at least some aspect of the Islamic Code of Sharia:

I've long thought that the self-hating British elites had a death wish for their society, but this may be their most brazen exhibition of that sentiment yet. I don't know that the ordinary Brits have it in them to fight this tide anymore..............

An unhappy convergence of interests

An American military commander is warning about the growing ties between Iran, Venezuela and South American crime bosses: I've blogged about this before, but had not mentioned the tie-in with the crime bosses. It makes sense, as all harbour a mutual hatred of this country.

Defending the West

This was in The Guardian of all places. It's an Op-Ed by former heads of NATO, wherein they excoriate the current, feckless leadership of the organization and call for a revamping of it to respond to the current threats facing the West:,,332160591-111202,00.html.

I have long wondered what has become of NATO, which began as a military alliance to counter the Soviet threat, and has evolved over time into a Western global response team...........or so I thought. In reality, NATO is rarely willing to "stick its neck out" for anything or any reason, and many of its members seem unwilling to risk their soldiers getting hurt for any reason. If so, what's the point in being a member?

Mark Steyn debunks another myth

Needless to say, it's the New York Times which is perpetuating this latest fantasy, one which has American veterans of Afghanistan and Iraq committing crimes on a "disproportionate" basis: And the thing is, as Steyn notes, the NYT is RIGHT. American veterans are committing crimes at a disproportionate rate relative to others who are their age...................DISPROPORTIONATELY LOWER.

The left-wing (I won't dignify it by calling it "liberal") bias of the New York Times is well known, but at some point, doesn't that bias become so absurd that even the most devoted reader has to ask "Are you for real?"

Monday, January 21, 2008

Those wacky Iranians!

They're just SO much fun, aren't they? Here they are again, threatening the Netherlands if it lets an "anti-Islamic" film get shown:,2933,324406,00.html. Apparently, that whole concept of free speech still seems a little unclear to them.

You want to know what's scary about this Iranian threat? I'll bet that the Dutch are seriously considering not allowing the film to be shown because of it. Wouldn't want to offend the Prophet now, would we.......................

The decidedly non-Twentieth Centry roots of Jihad

It seems to have almost become a cliche that the roots of Jihad go back only to the founding of the State of Israel, or at worst, the 1917 British capture of the Middle East from the decaying Ottoman Empire. Melvin Lee has a fascinating article in the Middle East Quarterly on how Jihad has targeted the West in general and the United States in particular since the early Nineteenth Century:, when the Barbary Pirates were waging economic and religious Jihad against American trading vessels, leading President Thomas Jefferson to send the American Navy after them.

Thus, the "commonly-accepted wisdom" is anything but. Personally, I see the war that Islam has waged against the West started long before that, but at least there is some recognition being given to the fact that this is a centuries-old conflict, and not just a modern phenomenon.

Giants vs. Patriots

The next Super Bowl is set, with the unbeaten, history-seeking New England Patriots gunning for an unbeaten season and their fourth Super Bowl title since the 1999 season against the heavy underdog New York Giants: The spread in this game has already ranged from 13 to 14 points, which I find kind of strange given that the Patriots only beat the Giants by three points during the last game of the regular season for both teams, and when New York had absolutely no incentive to play for anything other than a chance at spoiling history.

I think that New England will win the game, but it will be very close, and I wouldn't be overly shocked at a New York win.

On a rant

Pat Condell is never one to mince his words, and he is in a major snit over the Canadian Human Rights Commissions who are hearing complaints by Muslims about being offended:

I know that the PC streak runs deep in Canada, maybe as deep as it does in Condell's homeland of Great Britain, but the point he makes is very valid. With every one of these lawsuits or complaints even being heard, free speech gets chilled that much more.

Saturday, January 19, 2008

When the legal system fails

Stories like this one pop up all the time, but as an attorney, I find them extremely disheartening: How can a man who presents a clear and imminent danger to his ex-spouse get released from custody so easily? How does the system fail like this?

Regardless of the answers to these questions, the sad end to this story is that a woman who committed no sin other than to marry a violent criminal is now dead.


The Dutch pride themselves on being a very "tolerant" people. That said, a Dutch filmmaker's plan to release a short film which is "critical" of Islam has raised red flags across The Netherlands, as the country prepares for the inevitable rioting and civil unrest that will follow: It's at the point where the country's leader has called the film a "provocation".

Umm...................the last I checked, in a democracy one does NOT have the right to be free from being offended. Lord knows, any Jew or supporter of Israel faces that fact on a daily basis.

Tinpot dictatorships

In the eyes of at least some representatives of the Canadian government, that is what the United States and Israel are, at least in terms of their treatment of prisoners:, or The current Canadian government, which has good relations with both states, is obviously embarrassed by this.

I have to ask, does this report not acknowledge the world in which we live? Sorry, but both the United States and Israel face serious and constant threats from Islamofascists, and yes, Canada does too, though not to the same degree. As well, the conduct which is criticized can hardly be classified as "torture", in my mind.

Friday, January 18, 2008

No longer searching for Bobby Fischer

Bobby Fischer, chess prodigy and self-hating Jew, has died at the age of 64: I am old enough to remember Fischer's confrontation with Soviet chessmaster Boris Spassky in 1972. It's one of the only two times I can recall there being a "buzz" about chess, with the other time being Gary Kasparov's matchup with the computer back in the 1990s.

Still, Fischer's brilliance on the chessboard was overshadowed by his increasingly bizarre behaviour, which included rants about the United States and bizarre anti-Semitic pronouncements (Fischer's mother was Jewish, hence my description of him as a self-hating Jew). All in all, despite his genius, Fischer's legacy will never be what it could have or should have been.

The P.C. Police State

It's bad here, but nowhere is it worse than in the U.K. Not satisfied with its previous efforts to appease Islamofascists, the Gordon Brown government has now apparently decided to say that Islamic terrorists "are pursuing anti-Islamic activity":

Since we're going down this politically correct road, why not go all the way? The Nazis weren't genocidal maniacs; rather, they were purusing "anti-German activity". The same can be said for every other bloodthirsty group in the history of this planet.

At what point do clear-thinking people say "enough is enough"? At what point do we tell our idiot politicians to get their heads out of their rear ends and SPEAK THE TRUTH? Not only are we ignoring that 800 pound gorilla in the corner of the room, we're leaving the room entirely.

Thursday, January 17, 2008

Addition to my blogroll

I've made the first addition to my blogroll in quite some time. The new addition is Ezra Levant, the former publisher of the Western Standard. You may have heard his name previously. Mr. Levant, you see, has committed the unforgivable sin (in Alberta, anyway) of publishing the "infamous" Mohammed cartoons. Needless to say, this raised the hackles of a Muslim or two, and a complaint was filed with the Alberta Human Rights Commission because Muslims' feelings were hurt by the publication of the cartoons.

All of this falls on the heels of the prosecution (or should I say, PERSECUTION) of Mark Steyn, again because he ostensibly offended Islamic sensibilities. What is going on in Canada?

In any event, Mr. Levant's blog is a fine one, and I urge everyone to stop by and pay it a visit, if for no other reason than to get updated on his battles with the government-sponsored Political Correctness Police.

UPDATE (8:02 p.m.): At the request of a reader, Ezra Levant's blog address is And, let me be the first to thank a courageous Muslim blogger, Thank you for stopping by, as well as for your courage. It is people such as yourself who give me hope.

Your friendly neighbourhood Jihad

Yid with Lid (on my blogroll) has a great discussion of how a California (where else?) textbook talks about Jihad in glowing and soothing terms, as it blandly describes the Jihad as a form of personal struggle, or sometimes doing something your parents want you to do but that you don't want (to do): There is no mention of the thousands of people who have been killed around the world in the name of Jihad, or that little thing we here on the East Coast like to to call 9/11.

Somewhere, Ayman al-Zawahiri is reading this story and smiling....................

Sports and Politics overlap

Do any of you watch the Golf Channel? How many of you even knew that there was such a thing as the Golf Channel? I know that my cable system offers it, but unless I want to start wistfully at palm trees, I really don't pay much attention to it. Apparently, a host on the network, in discussing the dominance of Tiger Woods, made an ill-advised comment that the rest of the golfers on the PGA tour should "lynch" him if they want t0 win:

There is no question but that the comment was stupid. The host has apologized, and Woods himself has said that he wasn't offended by the comment and holds no ill will towards the host who made it. You would think that it would end there, but........................enter the Reverend Al Sharpton. Sharpton has never met a molehill he didn't want to turn into a mountain, and he is now demanding that the host be fired, apology be damned.

I've said it before about Al Sharpton, but it bears repeating. How and when did he become the arbiter of good taste and racial sensitivity in the United States? I'm still waiting for him to apologize for the Tawana Brawley hoax and Crown Heights. The man is a race-baiting hypocrite, and every time he opens his mouth to whine and complain, he does a disservice to the legitimate civil rights issues that unfortunately still do exist. That he receives so much attention is an absolute disgrace..................

UPDATE (12:43 p.m., 1/18/08): The fallout from this tempest in a teapot continues. Golfweek Magazine did a story on Kelly Tilghman, the commentator who made the "lynching" comment, and the cover of the magazine featured a noose on it. THAT editor has now been "removed" from his duties:

Wednesday, January 16, 2008


Two articles this morning caught my attention. One was from John Yoo, Esquire, a former Justice Department official who is being sued by terrorist-wannabe Jose Padilla: The other is from the Middle East Forum: Both address the same issue, which is the insidious legal Jihad waged by the Islamofascists against western society in general, and anyone who dares to point out their Islamic supremacist beliefs in particular.

I guess that what upsets me the most about this is that so many here in the West seem eager to help the Islamofascists achieve their goals, and I just can't understand why. Ultimately, those who they are helping want them to be just as subservient (or dead) as the individuals against whom they are litigating. If I can see that, why can't they?

An expansion of the blog?

A number of people have e-mailed me privately to ask why the blog is "so political". They would like to see a broader range of topics covered--more on sports, which I used to discuss more often than I do these days, it seems; more on my family, more on the commando basset hounds, etc.

The reason that the blog is "so political" is that as I have gotten older, my interests have shifted. I used to be a sports freak, watching sports over just about anything else on television, particularly if that sport was hockey! I would say that this was true even as I got well into my thirties. However, I have always been an Israel freak, and the (planned) eruption of the Second Intifadah made me focus more on the crises facing the Jewish state. Then came 9/11, which will forever be one of the defining events of my lifetime. Like so many others in this area of the United States, I knew someone who died in the Twin Towers. I thought then that the world had changed forever, and continue to believe that this country--or at least a significant chunk of it--simply does not understand the threat it faces from the Islamofascism. As as result, I have become a largely political person.

Don't get me wrong, I am still very into sports. I will forever be a fan of the Montreal Canadiens, Miami Hurricanes, Boston Red Sox and Chicago Bears. When I pay attention to the NBA, I will follow the travails of my new favourite team, the Los Angeles Clippers (no, that isn't a misprint. Someone has to be a Clippers fan. Why not me?). It's just that my interests have been focused elsewhere (on political stuff) of late.

That said...................I think that perhaps I should "expand my horizons", so to speak. Though I have only been blogging for about 10 months, I don't want to burn myself out on politics. Sports remains an interest for me, so why not spout off on that subject as well? I also will bring in some more discussion of my family, what I am doing, etc. I love my family, and Lord knows, the actions of the kids and the dogs certainly provide me with plenty of material. The blog will still be heavily political, but some other topics will work their way in.

So, that's where I plan to take the blog, or at least I'm going to make an effort to do so. I hope that you'll stick with me for the ride!

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

I'll believe ANYONE (except a Republican)

So apparently thinks the "esteemed" Professor of Middle East Studies, the inimitable Juan Cole: Cole wrote in his blog last Friday that the Republicans were behind the confrontation between the U.S. Navy and the Iranian speedboats in the Straits of Hormuz (I had NO idea that Karl Rove had a hotline to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but apparently, he does!), and that the state-run Iranian press is, apparently, completely credible.

Anyone out there wonder why I fear for the future of our kids, when leftist Islamofacsist apologists like Cole are out there teaching them?

Let the rioting begin!

An article in the Asian Times has postulated that the Koran may not be entirely genuine:

All I can say is, I hope that whoever wrote this has a very large life insurance policy and very good security. As well, the Asian Times MIGHT want to think about setting up a roadblock or two around its headquarters..................

More lunacy out of the U.K.

This one is almost beyond belief. A British vet of the second Iraq War has been forced to move out of Great Britain (and to Bulgaria, of all places) because the British Army won't pay him a decent pension after he suffered severe combat-related injuries:;jsessionid=DAM3BG4F5CQCNQFIQMFSFFWAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2008/01/14/narmy214.xml. It gets worse, too. While he was in the hospital, he was ordered to remove his uniform because "it might offend the ethnic patients" at the hospital. Gee, I wonder who THEY might have been?

What is wrong with England, anyway?

I can't believe it!

Apparently, Hamas is using aid shipments to Gaza to smuggle in bomb-making supplies! No, honest, it's true:

A terrorist government acting this way. Can you imagine such a thing?! The MSM hasn't had a chance to spin this yet, but I can't wait to see how it tries...............

Monday, January 14, 2008

Shocking report (well, maybe not) on the 2006 Lebanon War

The IDF has just published a detailed report on the second Lebanon War, and it analyzed in great detail the claims that Israel "disproportionately" (how I hate that word) Lebanese civilians, and how Hezbollah terrorists deliberately placed themselves in civilian areas so as to maximize casualties, and thereby enable the terrorist organization to decisively win the PR War:

The whole report is very long, but it is well worth the read. I urge everyone to do so, and it will help you deal with some of the arguments the Israel-haters out there spew forth so venomously...............

R.I.P., G.B.

The Telegraph has a good article summarizing how the U.K. has allowed rampant multiculturalism to simply overwhelm it, thereby creating areas where native Britons simply do not feel welcome:;jsessionid=AN52MP2BLJ4NHQFIQMGSFGGAVCBQWIV0?xml=/global/2008/01/14/noindex/nalien113.xml&page=1. While the article does unfortunately fall prey to the same politically correct gobbledygook as so many other MSM articles, it at least acknowledges that there is a problem in Great Britain.

Recognizing that a problem exists is often the first tentative step towards dealing with it.

The chasm between Israel and the Bush 43 Administration widens just a little bit more

I have blogged several times over the fact that since late 2005 or certainly, early 2006, the Bush 43 Administration has beaten a hasty retreat from its position of strongly supporting Israel. This change in policy parallels the ascension of Condoleeza Rice to the position of Secretary of State and the publishing of the findings of the Iraq Study Group, which somehow seemed to argue that Iraq would become more docile if only Israel were sacrificed on the altar of Palestinian "nationalism".

Well, despite Ehud Olmert's headlong rush to prostrate himself before his American and European masters in an effort to appease them, that appears not to be enough, as American officials, including White House Press Secretary Dana Perino and the President himself have both spoken about how Israel "MUST' address the "Right of Return" question:

Of course, allowing a Right of Return would be demographic suicide for Israel. Conversely, forcing Israel to pay compensation to those who left would be tantamount to economic suicide for the Jewish State. Further, why isn't the President, or the dhimmi-loving Condoleeza Rice, speaking about compensation for the hundreds of thousands of Jewish refugees who were either expelled or fled from Arab countries in1948?

I wrote in another post that Israeli-American relations were heading for their darkest days ever. If Ehud Olmert remains in charge, that period might be put off a little bit, but his incredible unpopularity (which is well-deserved) means that he may not be around that much longer--or one can only hope. If he goes, the relations between the United States and Israel will likely be on a par with those between the Bush 43 Administration and France under Jacques Chirac............if they are even that good.

Sunday, January 13, 2008

Anti-Semitism comes home

I live roughly an hour from New Brunswick, New Jersey. Police there reported that a mass desecration of graves there was being investigated as a hate crime: Gee, ya think?

Well, four teens have now been arrested and charged with the crime:

Their parents must be so proud......

Saturday, January 12, 2008

An open message to one of my blog readers

I don't have many "regular" readers, but am appreciative of the ones I do have. One of the people who hasn't been shy about posting to my blog has been a British reader who has posted under the byline "Najistani". No blog links were provided by Najistani, so I never knew exactly who he/she was, whether they were a blogger, etc.

Well, today Najistani linked to a blog called "". The site claims to support the British National Party, which as I understand it, is racist and anti-Semitic. The caption of the blog read as follows: "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White children". That is a verbatim quote.

So, Najistani, I ask you the following: Are you a supporter of this party? What is your understanding of the party's positions? Do you share their anti-Semitic beliefs? We may have positions in common with respect to Islamofascism, but I want nothing to do with the BNP or the positions it espouses.

For my readers, here is an outline of the BNP's policies, which is taken from the British National Party's own website: For a detailed examination of the party (and the anti-Semitic roots it has), check out this article in the London Times:, or this analysis: If you want more, just type in the words "British National Party" and do a web search. There will be no shortage of articles on it.

UPDATE (9:45 p.m.): Turns out that my "Payback's a bitch" series ties in here as well. British blogger Lionheart, who I've defended, is a supporter of the BNP as well:


UPDATE (7:11 a.m., 1/13/08): A commenter to the blog asked about free speech (regarding Lionheart. I believe in Lionheart's right to say what he wants, when he wants. Just don't expect me to support his other views, given his views on the BNP.

Violence against women? A-OK, according to the Yemen Times

Rarely am I left speechless, but this article came pretty close: The article can be summed up with the following two sentences: "The Koran says that it's okay, so it is. If you don't agree, it's because you don't understand Islam and are trying to impose your culture on us".

Where is the National Organizaion Women when articles like this come out? Where is Ms. magazine? Oh, that's right, Ms. is too busy refusing to publish ads on Israeli women who have achieved leadership positions in the society, and heaven forbid that Israel ever be made to look good in any way, even if it (the success of women) would seem to be exactly that which you are seeking. For more on that, go here:, and here's a direct link to the ad itself:

I'm not surprised

There is increasing alarm among Jews around the world at the rising anti-Semitism in Venezuela: Why would anyone be surprised by this? Venezuela's closest ally in the world is Iran, a country not exactly known for its warm and fuzzy feelings about Jews. As well, Iranian proxy Hezbollah has a very strong presence to the south, in southern Brazil. We can stick our heads in the sand all we want, but it's only a matter of time before another major terrorist attack against a Jewish target in the Western Hemisphere (that's right, I said another. Let's not forget the 1994 Jewish Community Center bombing in Buenos Aires) takes place. The pieces are being put into place...............

A different kind of Arab state?

Dubai's former leader has penned an Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal where he extolls the virtue of his country: He talks of the "new Middle East" and how Dubai aspires to be a different kind of Arab country.

Well, okay. You want to be different? How about establishing diplomatic relations with Israel? What's that, you don't want to be THAT different? Didn't think so...............

Friday, January 11, 2008

Islamic anti-Semitism

The New York Times, of all publications, had a fascinating piece in Tuesday's newspaper (in its book review section) on the roots of Islamic anti-Semitism, which can be found here: While those roots are of interest to me, I am more concerned about where we ARE, as opposed to where we WERE. And, where we are is a place where Muslims publish and believe the most vile, base stereotypes and caricatures about Jews..................

Payback's a Bitch, Part Two

This is a followup to my post on January 5, where I discussed the predicament of British blogger "Lionheart", who is facing charges in his home country for daring to be critical of Islam. Blooger and journalist Phyllis Chesler has tracked Lionheart down and conducted an interview with him, which can be found here:

It's both a fascinating and a sobering read. This is the world in which organizations like CAIR want us to all live, one where non-Muslims fear to say anything which could even remotely be construed as being "anti-Muslim". We're heading down the same path here.................

Selective Editing

I have long harped about how the MSM slants stories against Israel by the way it words articles. The latest example comes from my hometown newspaper, the Montreal Gazette, which reported on President Bush's visit to Israel. In discussing the visit, the paper picked up an article from its parent company, CanWest. To its considerable credit, CanWest has never shied away from calling terrorists what they are, and the article picked up by the Montreal Gazette was no different.......................except in the Gazette, where the word "terrorist" was neatly excised from the story, which also discussing Palestinian TERRORISM against Israel: The story was picked up by newspapers all across Canada, but the Gazette was alone in dropping the word, ostensibly to save space. bias there.

More Bush Delusional Syndrome

I'm starting to wonder. When President Bush speaks about Israel, do James "F--- the Jews" Baker's lips move? Do Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice's? First, he spouts off that he wants an indepenedent Palestinian State before he leaves office. Now, the President is spouting off about a how a Palestinian State must be "contiguous": Well, here's a little geographical fact for the White House: The only way to make sure that that happens is to slice Israel in half, which would mean that Israel would no longer be "contiguous". Hello? Anyone listening? McFly?????

Pardon my French, but what the hell has gotten into the White House? This is beyond absurd. Is the President aware that there is a little organization known as Hamas which runs the Gaza Strip, and which has said that it will never accept the existence of Israel?

You know, at this point I'm so disgusted with this Administration that I just want it to leave office. Go away.....................

This one's pretty good

Americans, it has been said, never met a conspiracy theory they didn't like. I've never been a big fan of that particular saying, but someone e-mailed the following clip from YouTube to me which makes me think that maybe I was wrong:

The internet is a wonderful thing, but if not used responsibly, it poses dangers as well. The clip to which I linked above was sent to me by two people, one of whom clearly saw this for the conspiracy lunacy which it is. The other, however, was a teenager who took it very seriously. Therein lies the problem. People see something on the internet and think that it MUST be true. That is why roughly 1/3 of all Americans now believe that 9/11 was an inside job. That is why about half of all the people in this country think that the invasion of Afghanistan was done to build an oil pipeline. It's why a vocal and growing minority of people question the occurrence of the Holocaust.

We can't ignore what is going on, and in fact, it would be dangerous in my mind to do so. There's an old adage that one should not debate a fool, because observers may not be able to tell the difference. Fighting these conspiracy theorists might be the one exception to that rule........

Thursday, January 10, 2008

The shame of the BBC

It's a given that most media organization harbour an anti-Israel bias. Sometimes it's quite subtle, but in other cases it's quite open and obvious. Such is the case with the BBC, whose bias is so extreme that it hired an ombudsman to investigate the bias, and then presumably because it didn't like what he found, successfully suppressed his findings (the Balen Report, which no one outside the upper echelon of the BBC has ever seen).

Honest Reporting has just completed a year-long analysis of the BBC coverage of Israel and shockingly, the study revealed that "The Beeb" demonstrated a clear anti-Israel orientation: What a stunning development. I just wish that someone could "steal" a copy of the Balen Report, so that I could read for myself how the BBC recognized its own bias................

Wednesday, January 9, 2008

Ron Paul.....Ron Paul........Ron Paul............Ron Paul, Part Eight

He has about as much chance of securing the Republican Presidential nomination as I do, but I thought that I would share a selection of excerpts from various publications put out under the Texas Congressman's name:, or here:


BDS has been the acronym that many, including me, have used to refer to "Bush Derangement Syndrome", that affliction of the Far (and not so Far) Left which caused those whom it affects to harbor an irrational and pathological hatred for President George W. Bush.

However, I think that it can be equally applied TO the President himself, if it is changed to mean "Bush Delusional Syndrome", which I would characterize as a naive and borderline insane belief that the Palestinians really want peace with Israel (I am sure that some do, but most? Many? Probably not.), and the leftist State Department view of the Middle East is correct (Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice is a longtime sufferer from this chronic affliction). You see, President Bush is now in Israel, and he has already proclaimed that a peace deal can be achieved before he leaves office (does Hamas know about this?), and that the Israeli town expansions adjacent to Jerusalem "have to go": His prior pronouncements that they were fine have apparently been forgotten.

Statements like these are why I am of the belief that U.S.-Israeli relations are heading for their lowest ebb since the Bush 41 Presidency, and arguably since Eisenhower was in the White House.

New Hampshire

Someone is going to have to explain this one to me, because I just don't get it. Senator Hillary Clinton entered primary season as the prohibitive favourite to win the Democratic nomination for the Presidency. She then loses Iowa, and all of a sudden, she's a prohibitive underdog? How the hell did that happen? Since when are the Clintons underdogs to anyone (since 1992, anyway):

I know that the MSM is largely an arm of the Democratic Party anyway, but this type of obsessive fawning over Hillary Clinton is just too much. Has the MSM invested so much in her that it will resort to any means to make her look good, even to the point of painting her as a "comeback kid" when she is anything but? It just boggles the mind...............

Tuesday, January 8, 2008

She gets worse by the day

Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice is turning out to be a complete disaster insofar as Israel is concerned. Apparently, she wasn't satisfied with comparing Palestinains to African-Americans seeking civil rights in the 1950s and 1960s. Now, going beyond any previous statement of any previous American Administration, she has called all Jewish construction in East Jerusalem "illegal settlements":

Her boss may be a friend of Israel, but his underlings sure aren't.............

A kinder assessment than I would render

Fouad Ajami, who's a fairly astute Middle East scholar, writes a fairly generous asessement of the Bush 43 Administration insofar as its relations with the Middle East are concerned:

I think that Ajami is a little off in his assessment. Though I agree with his evaluation of the Surge and its effect on Iraq, he seems a little overly generous in his comments on the current state of U.S.-Israeli relations, which despite the impending visit of the President to Israel are at their poorest state since the Bush 41 Administration.

Monday, January 7, 2008


I wonder if this word still has meaning. An individual such as Adam Gadahn regularly issues statements calling for the death of Americans and terrorist attacks against the United States, yet I have zero doubt that in the event that Gadahn is ever captured by U.S. forces or somehow is taken into custtody, there would be no shortage of groups such as the ACLU which would fall all over themselves to represent him and screech that he should be given a "fair trial", and that, in short, there is no such thing as treason. No, they would say, he was just exercising his right to free speech.

If Gadahn is ever captured, just watch. I have no doubt that I will be proven right.

"No Go" Areas for non-Muslims in the U.K. and Islamic Exgtremism? It's all the fault of the United States!

Articles like this one just fascinate me:;jsessionid=GSJJAXBNLUC3NQFIQMGCFF4AVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2008/01/06/nislam106.xml. An Anglican Bishop comments that there are areas in the United Kingdom which are becoming forbidden territory for non-Muslims, and as the last line of the article comments, a Muslim comments in response that, in short, whatever problems do exist are being caused by U.S. Middle Eastern policies.

So let me get this straight: If a Briton of Pakistani descent kills his daughter because she dresses too much like a Briton, that is because the U.S. has troops in Iraq and doesn't believe that all Israelis should be killed? Hmmm........

Okay, sounds reasonable to me!

Islamic childbirth insanity

Doctors in Holland now have a code of conduct to deal with Islamic women, while in Belgium, some male doctors have angrily been told by some aggrieved husbands that they are not to to be in the delivery room at the same time as their wives:

At what point do we in the West say, "This is insane"? Is there such as point?

Sunday, January 6, 2008

Tampering with an election, okay. Engaging in policies with which I disagree, not okay

Today's example of BDS comes from former Presidential candidate George McGovern. Turns out, he was okay with the President Richard Nixon's attempt to tamper with an election, but well, when it comes to possibly "torturing" terrorists and doing things with which the rest of appeasement-minded world disagree, that's just too much:

Just reading this idiocy gave me a headache.

I don't get it

I truly do not understand the far left in this country, mainly because its many contradictions so conflict with each other that they simply cannot be explained away. Chris Hedges is your prototypical angry leftie, which is why he is featured so prominently in the leftie-loving Philadelphia Inquirer. In tonday's edition of the paper, he pens a flowery dissertation on why Dennis Kucinich is the man who can solve all of America's many problems, be they real or perceived: You read that right.

What I want to know is, how can the Left be so convinced that the government is completely incompetent when it comes to affairs of national security and dealing with overseas threats (for example, in "getting Iraq wrong"), yet it is completely willing to place the health and welfare of every American in the hands of that same government by establishing a national single-payer health care system? How can it completely distrust our current government (and I don't just mean the Bush 43 Administration, I mean the entire concept of the White House, Congress, Judiciary, etc.), but it has 100% faith in the U.N.?

Those are just two questions that jump immediately to mind. Am I just missing something here?

Saturday, January 5, 2008

Payback's a bitch

Sorry for the nasty language in this caption. One of my blog readers (I have readers! YEAH!) has suggested that one of the reasons that English blogger Lionheart may have been targeted by the Luton police for prosecution under the UK's hate crimes laws was that he hasn't exactly been shy about pointing out the failings of the local police department in dealing with Islamic criminals:

One would like to think that the police would not be so petty, but the facts might suggest otherwise.


When the British Journal "The Lancet" published its findings in 2006 which asserted that 650,000 Iraqis had been killed as a direct result of the American-led invasion, it became a gospel on the left that the Americans had been slaughtering Iraqis at an almost unheard-of rate (except for some on the left who think that even this number is far too low).

An exhaustive study of the Lancet Report has revealed that there are numerous, serious flaws in the Lancet Report, and that worse yet, the people "behind the scenes" who supported were and are all outspoken critics of the Iraq War, including such "luminaries" as George Soros:

Of course, this won't stop the Angry Left from citing to this study, but at least it gives those of us who questioned it from the get-go some ammunition to respond.

Friday, January 4, 2008

Do NOT defame religion..........ESPECIALLY Islam

This one comes from the comments section of my blog, and thank you to the individual who posted it. While we were all distracted by other issues and the holidays, the U.N. Commission on Human Rights did what it does best, which was to promulgate a declaration (rapidly adopted by the General Assembly, of course) that religion--especially Islam--should not be defamed:

The enactment of this proclamation is clearly a part of the Islamofascist's "The best defense is a good offense" strategy, and I'll give credit where it is clearly due: It is working swimmingly for them. We in the West cower with fear when they riot, and scream "racism" whenever there is even a muted comment that SOMETHING might be wrong with the Islamic faith given the sheer number of its adherents who seem to think that homicide bombing is acceptable, that Jews are vermin, or that everyone in the West should be subjected to Shariah Law. In fact, we threaten to imprison bloggers who dare speak ill of the Islamic faith. Such is the fate facing one British blogger:

From the "Everybody hates us" Department

Angry leftie bloggers are nothing if not consistent. Despite strong evidence that the Surge is working, we still see them calling for an immediate end to the "illegal and immoral" occupation of Iraq:

Let's keep in mind, the people who think this are THE base of the Democratic Party. They are its core, now. Given that, it is nothing short of shocking to me that they haven't pushed Congressman Dennis Kucinich to the front of the pack in the field of Democratic Presidential Candidates............

Today's "Sign of the Times"

Organizers of the annual Paris-to-Dakkar auto race have canceled it this year after they received warnings that participants would be the victims of terrorist attacks:

I wonder who's responsible for those threats......................

The Iowa Caucauses

I don't profess to be an expert on election politics, but there were several interesting developments to come out of yesterday's Iowa Caucauses: First of all, on the Republican side, the "Huckasurge" carried the day, and the former Pastor and Arkansas Governor won big. The person most hurt by this is former Massachussets Governor Mitt Romney, who poured a ton of money and time into the state, but still only finished second. He must now win New Hampshire, or the perception will be that his campaign is dead in the water. Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson placed third, and all I can ask is "Why?" What has Thompson done? He was an average Senator at best, and frankly, his presidential campaign has been lacklustre.

On the Democratic side, Illinois Senator Barack Obama won going away. He deserves credit; his campaign message has been unfailingly positive, and he has not descended into the gutter through the use of negative ads. Former North Carolina Senator John Edwards placed second, just percentage points ahead of the presumptive Democratic nominee for the Presidency, New York Senator Hillary Clinton. This third place finish has to be setting off panic attacks in her campaign headquarters, and now she, like Mitt Romney, needs a win in New Hampshire. If Obama beats here there too, it would deal a grievous blow to her presidential hopes.

I am still pulling for former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, though my affection for Arizona Senator John McCain from eight years ago is still strong. As well, McCain's campaign seems to have found its stride, while Giuliani's is drifting aimlessly. Watch out for McCain in New Hampshire.............

One other side note on the election. Fox News is running a debate this coming weekend, and it is apparently going to exclude Texas Congressman Ron Paul. Those who read my blog know that I do not like or support him. That said, the decision by Fox is dead wrong. Paul has earned his way into the debate, and to exclude him is anti-democratic, plain and simple.

Good police work

I previously blogged about the story of a Philadelphia man whose dog was kidnapped and apparently then tortured to death, all as part of an extortion attempt. The extortion call to the man came from a cell phone, and one of the side issues in the case was that it Verizon an inordinate amount of time to turn the phone records over to the police. Well, they finally did so, and an arrest has now been made: This is great news for animal lovers, all of whom were horrified by this story.

Thursday, January 3, 2008

In no particular order

Here are the 40 most obnoxious quotes of 2007, according to Right Wing News: Some of these are truly priceless. On the other hand, some are depressingly vile...........

9/11: The Video Game

I kid you not. Some creep (from France, naturally) has designed a video game based on 9/11: The goal of the game is to shoot down planes before they crash into the Twin Towers. The maker of the game has claimed that the game is designed to show the futulity of "America's War on Terror", because "no one can ever win".

Rarely am I speechless, but this is just such an occasion.

Who can serve on the U.N. Security Council?

Except for the five permanent members, every country in the world....................except one: That's right, alone among the countries in the world, Israel is not permitted to serve on the U.N. Security Council, or any other major U.N. body. This is because Israel does not belong to any "regional group". Based purely on geography, Israel shoud be a member of the Asian bloc, but of course the Arab states would never permit that. So, Israel (with the backing of the United States) has sought membership to the bloc which includes Western Europe, Canada, Australia, etc., and even they haven't admitted it.

So, Israel is truly alone..................

Wednesday, January 2, 2008

How to kill a party

Invite Cindy Sheehan. It's that simple, really. I'm not a big fan of parades, so I missed this, but apparently, Cindy Sheehan and her fellow BDS sufferers decided to protest the Rose Bowl Parade and thereby ruin the enjoyment of everyone who witnessed her actions:

She really is a piece of work. I would think that whatever sympathy she had engendered had long since evaporated, but then again, what do I know?

Oil tops $100 a barrel

There is no good or easy way to spin this: The most obvious effect will be higher gasoline prices, but the impact will be felt everywhere, ranging from food prices to how much you pay for that new computer. Everything either has oil-based products in it, requires oil to transport it, or both. As well, it will exert further downward pressure on the already beleaguered U.S. Dollar, which will have a domino effect on an economy which is being battered as well by the neverending credit crisis. Can you say "Recession"? I sure can. Can you say "Depression"? If not, you might want to think about learning how.

As well, now that this psychological barrier has been broken, look for prices to continue up to and beyond the $150 a barrel mark, as we continue to enrich the countries who hate us (any Arab state, Russia, Venezuela, etc.).

Pakistan continues to disintegrate

There have long been rumours that Osama Bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri are now in Pakistan's tribal regions, along with Mullah Omar and the former Taliban leadership. What most people don't know is that the Waziristan area, which the Pakistani government abandoned to the Islamofascists in 2006, has long been a source of concern for others:

The question is, what (if anything) can we do about what is going on there? Pakistan is a sovereign country, one with nuclear weapons. The only thing that seems fairly certain is that the status quo is unacceptable.

Tuesday, January 1, 2008

The Los Angeles Times abandons the pretext of objectivity

The Los Angeles Times has been anything but objective when it comes to the subject of Israel. At its absolute best, it is occasionally neutral. Most of the time, it follows the "Palestinian Narrative" to the letter. However, as reported by Camera, it has now abandoned any effort to appear even remotely interested in actual facts, instead spewing out Palestinian proganda which is completely unconnected to reality:

I know that I have some readers in the L.A. area, so to you I direct this question: WHY do you read this newspaper? If you're reading my blog, odds are that you agree at least in a general sense with what I have to say on the subject of Israel. The Los Angeles Times proves everyday that it has picked a side in this war, and it is not the Israeli side. It really doesn't merit your support, or anyone else's for that matter.

Some are hopeful, I am not

Some Israelis are hopeful that a repeat of the 2001 Durban "Anti-Racism" Conference can be avoided: What I don't get is that they are largely basing their hopes on A) The feckless U.S. State Department, whose anti-Israeli bent has become even more pronounced since Condoleeza Rice became the Secretary of State; B) The Europeans, who have never been known for being fair when it comes to the subject of Israel; and C) Japan, which while not an enemy of Israel can always be trusted to vote in whichever fashion will guarantee it ongoing oil shipments.

2009 is now next year, and it WILL (in my view) unfortunately see a repeat of Durban......only this time it will be worse, as the anti-Israeli sentiment is much more widespread than it will have been eight years earlier.