Thursday, October 30, 2003

Jesuits and Vatican blast Islam

In an article in the “La Civiltà Cattolica,” the Vatican has perhaps taken it's gloves off against Islam. Perhaps they building of Europe's largest mosque down the street from St. Peter's being finaniced by Saudi money while at the same time in Saudi Arabia it's a caplitol crime to have a bible got them fighting mad. This is a must read.

Thus, in all of its history, Islam has shown a warlike face and a conquering spirit for the glory of Allah. [...] against the “idolaters” who must be given a choice: convert to Islam, or be killed. [...] As for the “people of the Book” (Christians, Jews, and “Sabeans”), Muslims must “fight them until their members pay tribute, one by one, humiliated” (Koran, Sura 9:29)

Where there by a call to "pick up the cross"?

(0) comments

Pics from the "anti-war" front.

As said before but needs said again and again the communists running the peace rallies are not anti-war, they are merely anti any war that helps the US out. Belligerent Bunny has a great series of pics from this past weekend's "anti-war" rally.

(0) comments

Are the Dems bankrupt?

Six months ago I made speculation on what I though where possible problems with the way the Dems were looking at getting back into the White House. They mainly dealt with their reaction to the War on Terror, knee-jerk anti-Bushism and taking a tact that they could only win if America loses, but I was first to say that with the election 18 month off anything was possible. Now 12 months away from the election still anything it possible but the Dems are looking worse off.

Jonah has a very clear piece on how the Dems have lost all respectability when it comes to the War on Terror and the Fight in Iraq;

Every single good thing about liberalism in foreign policy would have the Democrats seeking more money for Iraq. Liberals should be the ones demanding that we send more teachers, more doctors, more librarians, and more troops to protect them. They should be standing on the tarmac helping to load another shipment of soft-ice-cream machines and ping-pong tables bound for Fallujah, Tikrit, and Basra.

The Dems needs the people of Iraq to rise up against US "occupation" and photos of US soldiers committing atrocities in order to turn the opinion of the people against rebuilding Iraq. They need this because the media is failing in it's months long attempt at Vietnamizing the Fight in Iraq. They need this because while they mostly all supported going into Iraq they are now against rebuilding it. The last thing they want is for Bush to successfully setup a liberal secular government in Iraq and mark me words even if we do set one up the Dems will never admit it's a success. No matter how good a job we do Iraq, Islamic culture simply lacks the ideas of liberty, personal freedom and others that Western culture developed during the Enlightenment, will never aproach the peacefulness of say, Iceland and since the Dems can simply set the goal posts wherever they like Iraq will never be a success in their judgment.

On the home front where Bush himself is weak are the Dems trying to counter their broken old failed ideas with new ones thereby stealing to domestic show from Bush as it seem he simply has none? No. More of the same.

Henry Payne points out great weaknesses within the Democratic party on domestic issues;

Tuesday's good news on consumer confidence and durable goods orders is surely bad news for the nine Democrats trying to convince America that George Bush should be fired as America's CEO. But, as this week's Detroit Democratic debate and Senate fuel-economy vote highlight, the Democratic party may have deeper political problems in the blue-collar, urban industrial heartland they have long taken for granted

Henry points out several areas where Democratic policy has failed and is in need of reform. Reform that the Dems fight tooth and nail against. Bush is weak because he has no ideas on the table and the media makes tale of that over and over but what is not mentioned is that the Dems are also weak. They are weak not because they lack ideas, but because they ideas they have are the same one they've had for the last 40 years and the same ones that have been failing for the last 20.

Education is a great example of the failure of Democratic ideas. 40 years ago the Dems said even though the US had some of the best schools in the indutrialised world what we needed was a top down approach with the Federal Gov. in the drivers seat and thus Lyndon B. Johnson signed the act creating the US Deptarment of Education. By the early 80's people where already tripping the alarms to the fact that our schools where falling apart. What was the Democratic answer? More money. More money for buildings, teachers, daycare, more money for everything. Now another twenty years has pasted and we are now burdened with the worst schools in all the indutialised world and what is the Democrats answer? It is still more money. If someone tries to suggest an alternate idea such as charter schools the Dems will attack and vilify the people trying to shake up the obviously failing status-quo. And NPR says the Bush is the one with a weak domestic policy?

The real bad news for the Dems is that it looks like the economy is going to improve despite their best efforts;

Third-quarter gross domestic product, a measure of all the goods and services produced in the U.S., rose at a sizzling 7.2% annual rate, more than double the 3.3% rate in the second quarter, the Commerce Department said Thursday.

Just this week on NPR I heard John Kerry say that America needs an administration with a "plan" to "try" and rebuild our shattered economy. What? Shattered Economy?!? Since when did 24 months of growth equal a "shattered economy"? Did NPR press him on it? No, they went right along with the lie like the pandering leftist lapdogs they are.

So as it is right now the Dems needs a massive and quick failure in Iraq (without any new 9/11's to galvenise the populace) and for the economy to go back into the tank in order to defeat Bush. The worst for them would be an improving Iraq with continued improvement in the economy coupled by either Bush, the Republican Party or just a Conserative group showing America how bankrupt the ideas of the Dems our and how they fight reforms.

If that happens the Dems might be on the outside looking in for a long time.

(0) comments

Wednesday, October 29, 2003

Jihad Watch

From Robert Spencer's Jihad Watch comes news of yet another Islamic group, this time Hizb-ut-Tahir, openely stating that their goal is control of the entire world. Why is it that AP, CNN, RUETURS, BBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, NBC, etc. are not able to find and report this?

Hizb-ut-Tahir plans to allow non-Muslim countries, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, not to join the caliphate provided that they pay a tax to it. They would then fall under the protection of the caliphate and it would defend their interests. If non-Muslim countries refused to pay the tax, the caliphate would launch military attacks against them.

Millions on defense, not one penny in tribute.

(0) comments

Tuesday, October 28, 2003

Washington Post shows pro-electric car, anti-business bias

I used to read articles and think I was getting the truth. I used to think I was getting an honest unbiased view of the topic at hand. Why did I think this? Because the news media told me so. Then one day I knew more about the automotive industry than they did and the fig began to lift. More and more I saw things being slanted, overlooked, misrepresented or out right lies in seemingly mundane articles on cars and the industry.

The last straw was the media driven witch hunt on GM's side saddle gas tank pick up trucks. It came to an end when Dateline was found to have falsified their safety tests of the trucks. Seems that the trucks everyone in the media knew to be unsafe weren't leaking gas and exploding when wrecked and so Dateline reacted to this discovery not by breaking a news story that the media is on a witch hunt after trucks that are actually quite safe but instead loaded their test trucks with TNT and blew them up with remote triggers to prove they were unsafe. Now I can't find an article in the main stream media that isn't full of lies and bias.

In the latest piece to get me fired up we have want seems to be a simple article on GM ending the EV1 electric car program but it might as well have been written by a committee made up of battery industry wonks and envirofacsits. I'm going to rip this apart Misha style...

Instead of roaring with power and guzzling gas, his car whispered along on rechargeable batteries. But make no mistake, Dibner's all-electric GM coupe could zoom away from a stoplight with drag-strip speed.

BULLSHIT. The EV1 does 0-60 in 8.5 seconds. For those of you that are not "into cars" that puts the EV1 in a league that is only slightly faster than your average minivan. The EV1 is almost a full second slower to 60mph than a V6 equipped Chevrolet Malibu and 2 full seconds slower than the Nissan Altima 3.5. Exactly how can you say a car that would get smoked by midsized family sedans has, "drag-strip speed"? You are either a liar or completely uninformed on the topic you are writing, both condemnations of the Post.

He was saving money on fuel, causing no pollution and "driving the coolest, sexiest, most interesting car on the road," said Dibner, a bassoonist with the San Francisco Symphony

causing no pollution? Again... BULLSHIT. There might not be a tailpipe to sniff but that electricity didn't come from heaven. It came from a big ugly nuclear/coal/fuel oil power plant creating loads and loads of pollution. And what are you going to do with the batteries? Lead/Acid, Ni/Cad, Potasium/Sulfur, Lithium, etc. You'll have 50 times the car batteries to throw into land fills than today. Sounds like no pollution to me! Also note the quote heaping praise upon the EV1 by an owner.

Automakers say that electric vehicles cost too much to manufacture and that batteries will never provide as much driving range as a full tank of gas... But scientists who have spent careers working on batteries say the auto industry is retreating just as progress in battery technology is finally pushing toward a breakthrough.

Here the author paints the picture that right as things are getting better they are pulling out. But there have been scientists claiming the the "Battery Breakthrough" since the end of WWII. In 1990 when CARB (California Air Reasources Board) created the ZEV law. A law that stated by model year 2000 car manufacturers where to have 3% of total sales be ZEV's (Zero Emission Vehicles: which CARB only classified as electrics) with it going up to 10% by 2003. They stated that their law was going to force auto makers to make the long awaited, "Battery Breakthrough", in effect attempting to mandate technological advance.

Some of us still believe in electric drive and pure battery power," said Robert C. Stempel, the former GM chairman and chief executive who helped start the EV1 program. Forced out in the early 1990s, Stempel now runs a company that develops batteries and alternative automotive technology.

Nice. A quote from Stempel who was forced out of GM in a boardroom coup, has an axe to grind and is working for the battery industry. Any interviews with current GM staff? Of course not.

The EV1's rear wheels were set closer together than the front, creating a teardrop shape with little wind resistance. Combined with new lightweight materials and electronic controls, the design overcame battery limitations to result in a vehicle that could go roughly 100 miles on a two-to-four-hour charge.

Overcame limitations? BULLSHIT. Sorry but a car that can only go 90 miles in perfect conditions on a flat surface at a constant speed and then needs hours to refuel seems awfully God dam limited to me. And what's with "roughly 100 miles"? The reality is that it got about 75 miles on a charge in the beautiful weather of southern California. In the north in cold weather with the heat on you'd be lucky to get 30 miles on a charge (that's why they were never sold outside of fair weather SoCal). Yet the author states "roughly 100 miles" implying much higher numbers. I wonder what the author would have said had the EV1 been able to run 101 miles, "well in excess of 100 miles" perhaps?

It also had no gears to shift and delivered full power instantly, so the EV1 accelerated from zero to 60 mph in 8.5 seconds -- comparable to some Mustangs and performance cars.

BULLSHIT As I stated earlier mundane family sedans can eat an EV1 up and yet now it's on par with "some" Mustangs and performance cars. Those "some" Mustangs must be the gutless 4 cyl. models from 20 years ago and there is not a performance car that is 8.5 seconds to 60mph. Your name can be Ferrari but if you are that slow to 60 you are not performing well enough to be a "performance car".

Car companies -- and the oil industry -- fought California's electric-car mandate "every way you can think of," said Jerry Martin, spokesman for the California Air Resources Board.

Nice. A quote from a bitter member of CARB that had the hubris to think they could "mandate" technological breakthroughs and needs to point the blame. The ZEV law didn't fail because it was a bad idea... NO! It failed because the evil automotive and oil industries stopped it. I'm still waiting for a quote by someone that doesn't have a vested interested in making the EV1 look like an angel. Waiting...

"There is that whole collection of business interests that certainly don't want to see the gasoline-powered car disappear," said historian Charles Hyde, a professor at Wayne State University in Detroit. "I have a gut feeling that if electric cars really became more and more viable, you'd suddenly start to see gasoline prices really go down, to keep people in tow."

Nice. Now we get a flat out conspiracy theory quote. And just who in the hell is Charles Hyde and what the fuck does he have to do with this debate? I didn't realize electric cars where a field of study by historians.

"My wife and I both loved that car. It was the best car we ever had, for sure," said former EV1 driver Tom Dowling, 66, a retired bank worker from Folsom, near Sacramento.

Nice. Yet another quote by an EV1 adoring owner. Still waiting for that non EV1 loving quote. Just one.

But GM executives viewed the cars as a liability. One industry official said each EV1 cost the company about $80,000, including research and development costs; leasing them out at $350 a month was a money-losing proposition. Building the EV1 was "so prohibitively expensive that to continue to market them at that level was financially untenable," said Chris Preuss, GM spokesman

WOW! Looks like I got my one quote. Oh, and that $80,000 price tag for an EV1 doesn't include the $1 billion spent in development.

Burns, the GM research chief, said the company simply can't wait around for battery technology to improve. While there may be thousands of people who would be happy to overlook an EV1's limitations, he said, "you've got to get on a pathway where you can be thinking millions and tens of millions of vehicles."

Oh no, 2 quotes that counter the slant. Perhaps I was hasty to judge.

"Lithium [ion batteries] will eventually be found to be the good substitute for gasoline-powered cars," MacCready said... Lighter and more durable than their predecessors, lithium ion batteries have not yet been scaled up to car-battery size, but AC Propulsion has found a way around that. The San Dimas-based company, whose founder, Alan Cocconi, developed electric drive technology for the EV1, has built a car called the Tzero that's packed with 6,800 tiny cell phone batteries.

6,800 cell phone batteries? That's what, $250,000 in consumer costs based on current cell phone battery costs. That's so pie in the sky it shouldn't even be mentioned.

"I think the battery technology is already there, as far as being practical for a typical commuter car," Takamura said. "It is really more of a costing issue. Without people actually going out there and buying it, you can't get the volumes up enough to bring down the cost."

Here is the last quote, from a guy trying to market and sell electrics in India, and while he is right that an electric can be fine as a commuter car (in warm climates only like Southern Cal or India) he is omitting the fact that they are simply not capable of distance travel. How many people out there have a car for commuting and a car for visiting the folks? Most people need a car that will do more that go back and forth to the store cause they can't afford a different car for each day of the week.

This piece paints the EV1 to be a fast car (lie) A car without a limited range (lie) That we are on the verge of the big "Battery Breakthrough" (lie) That the EV1 produced no pollution (lie) That CARB and it's ZEV mandate where defeated by a cabal of big industry powerbrokers (lie) GM stopped making the EV1 cause they where bleeding money on it. (true) That a little extra mass production of already mass produced Lithium/ion batteries will make them drop 1000% in cost so it only costs $270 for you car's battery and not $270,000 (drug induced dream) That everyone involved in this is a real big supporter of the EV1 and electrics except the bean counters at GM (slant)

Now I'm not going to go a rant about electric cars. The point of this exercise was to show how amazingly awful our mainstream press is and to offer this food for thought, if they can't get an article on electric cars right how can we expect them to be honest on Iraq and the war on terrorism?

(0) comments

Friday, October 24, 2003

Grenada and Lebanon: 20 years on

While I have a few sparse shady memories of Vietnam and yellow ribbons, Grenada was my first "war" and Lebanon my first encounter with Islamists. Someone was threatening American students and we put an end to it. I remember liberals deriding Reagan for picking on a small country. That the only reason Reagan went in was to make America feel better and the students, runway, communist coupe that assassinated the previous "moderate" Marxist leader had nothing to do with it. My whole life the left as lived in a lala land where the only reason we go to war is cause conservatives are either feeling sad or greedy. Meanwhile in the Middle East 241 US Marines lay dead, buried alive in rubble, crushed to death or blow to bits by Islamic terrorists in Lebanon. And why did they attack us? Cause we where standing on the line and making it hard for Hez'bollah to attack into Israel.

The hawks at NRO are taking a moment to remember the 20th anniversary of Grenada with an article by Lawrence W. Reed:

It's hard to imagine that, if Jimmy Carter had been president, there would have been any American response other than sweet talk, vacillation, and appeasement. Washington would not have considered military action unless the students had been rounded up and taken hostage. But Reagan was made of much sterner stuff. In his first year as president, he told an audience at Notre Dame University, "The West will not contain Communism, it will transcend Communism. We will not bother to denounce it; we'll dismiss it as a sad, bizarre chapter in human history whose last pages are even now being written." Ronald Reagan understood the enormous geopolitical significance of rolling back the Evil Empire.

No mention of Lebanon...

So while we should fondly remember it was 10/25/1983 that Reagan's swift dealings with the reds in Grenada started a ball rolling that eventually smashed down the Kremlin walls and ended the era of the "Soviet experiment" we must not forget that while troops were landing in the Caribbean the US was tucking it's tail between it's legs and running away. If only he had dealt as decisively with Islamic terrorism when he had the chance we could have tuagh the Ismalists a different message about attacking the US.

Imperical evidence shows that we live in a world that is more Hobbsian that any of us wish and in this world safety can only be (at best) partially ensured be constanly making examples of those who would be want to disturb the peace.

(0) comments

Tuesday, October 21, 2003


Some will deride the Subaru WRX based 2004 Saab 9-2 as nothing more than another example of GM badge engineering and as such only worthy of contempt. For some it's as if the act of sharing a part somehow magically renders that part junk. This line of thought ignores the realities of the situation on the ground and the fact that the WRX is a solid car.

2004 Saab 9-2 "Saabaru"

I like that GM is broadening Saab's line, that there is finaly an AWD Saab, that there is a 227hp Aero version (that's more ponies than the top 9-3) and that the WRX, a car I always thought was hidious looking is finaly draped in an atractive Swedish skin. I don't like that it's using Subaru's boxer H4 and not Saab's L4 and that the interior is base WRX design which means the key is on the wrong place. I understand that time didn't alow Saab to develope the WRX platform into a unique car using their own interior and engines but there is the good news that Saab and Subaru are co-developing the platform for the next generation in '07. Long in short is that I am glad the 9-2 is here but I probably wouldn't consider it until the replacement comes in 2007.

(0) comments

For John

Guns and old Saabs, can it get any better?"

(0) comments

Monday, October 20, 2003

Is there light at the end of the French tunnel?

Sabine Herold seems to have received a lot of press earlier in the summer but I somehow managed not to hear a word about her and her a burgeoning pro-market, pro-American movement in France. Better late then never I guess but I wonder if she is strong enough to save France from itself. I hope so.

The next Joan d'Arc?

(0) comments

Thursday, October 16, 2003

Is Malaysia ruled by a lone madman or the voice of Islam today?

Now we would all like to think that Malaysian Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohamad is a wacko wacky from the land of wackerstons but facts tell a different story. Malaysia is a country of 22 million that is only 52% Muslim so for Dr. Mahathir Mohamad to stay in office he would need either support across the Malaysian electorate or blind loyal support from every single Muslim. So here you have a Parliamentary monarchy whose Prime Minister is constantly spouting insanity. Every month or so Mahathir will get in front of the microphone and attempt to rally Muslims world wide into fighting against the West and when Mahathir speaks the Muslim world listens. The Muslim world is listening and believing the firebrand the issues from Mahathir's mouth while Americans setting their VCR's to recorded Entertainment Tonight live oblivious to what it happening.

At the OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference) this week Mahathir has managed to go beyond the pale of anything I have heard him say before. Now while you read his words I want you to remember this is not some blind monk in a cave, this is the elected Prime Minister of Malaysia, a major trading partner with the US and home to the Petronas Towers, the world's tallest building and a respected honored leader in the Islamic world.

Mahathir says...

"The Europeans killed six million Jews out of 12 million. But today the Jews rule this world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them,"...

Mahathir said they could at least take a common stand on the Palestinian struggle against Israel and it was time to plan a "counter-attack" against the enemies of Islam who treated Muslims with "contempt and dishonour"...

He called on Muslims to emulate the Jewish response to oppression, saying the Jews had "survived 2000 years of pogroms not by hitting back, but by thinking. They invented and successfully promoted socialism, communism, human rights and democracy so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong, so they may enjoy equal rights with others. With these they have now gained control of the most powerful countries and they, this tiny community, have become a world power."...

However, he did call on Muslims to match their studies of religion with attention to science and mathematics because "we need guns and rockets, bombs and warplanes, tanks and warships for our defence". This was apparently a reference to what he sees as a broader assault on Muslims by the Western world in the guise of the war on terrorism. He said enemies of Islam "attack and kill us, invade our lands, bring down our governments"...

Those words pretty much speak for themselves you just need to remember this isn't a lone nut job attacking windmills this is a person with sway and power, a person to whom people listen.

There is another thing to consider. Many of the Left who were/are angry with Bush's "you are either with us or against us" attitude in regards to terrorism but isn't that the very same attitude the Muslim world has had since 642?

(0) comments

Organization of the Islamic Conference on what's wrong with Islam

It would seem, according to the OIC, that there are a few major problems with Islam today.

#1: Israel

Syed Hamid also lashed out at Israel, saying that "the Israeli army's vicious military campaigns, provocations and destruction of Palestinian homes will only lead to a spiraling upheaval in the already volatile situation. Israel should immediately cease ... all acts of violence, terror, provocation, incitement and destruction in the occupied Palestinian territories," Syed Hamid said.

If only Israel would stop defending themselves then Islam would be free to correct their number one problem.

#2: United States of America

"However, foreign occupation of the country must be brought to an end as soon as possible. ... It is our moral duty to assist the people of Iraq to regain their sovereignty and integrity."

If only the Americans would go away and stop trying to fight terrorism at its source and Allah forbid they succeed in creating even a semi stable partial democracy in Iraq. The thing that gets me is the moment the US started to put feet on the ground to push Saddam out suddenly the Islamic world became concerned with the well being of the citizenry of Iraq that for the previous 30 years of Ba'thist lead bloodshed they never made a pee over.

#3: Globalization

"The threats of unilateralism, globalization and terrorism, the precarious situation in the Middle East and the uncertain future of Iraq ... have only served to threaten our very survival."

If only the D'jinn of technology could be put back in the bottle and they could hide the existence of happy free wealthy societies from the people they lord over under the guise of Islam.

What is being said at this conference is a good illustration of one of the real problems with Islam today and that is the complete and absolute inability to accept responsibility for anything. 100% of the problems in the Islamic world are cause fully by infidels that are out to destroy Islam. Now that's not to say every single Muslim buys into that mind set but as a whole this is how the "Islamic World" believes and as long as they do they will never change.

(0) comments

Wednesday, October 15, 2003

DaimlerChrysler to go all wagon

Now I like wagons. I like me a 9-5 Aero Wagon. I like me a 1972 Olds Custom Cruiser wagon. I loves me some woodies. I like the wood bodies for their beauty, the boats for their offishness and respect the new ones for good performance, handling and great cargo space. Having said that I think the huns over at DaimlerChrysler are taking a big risk in the US market by going away from sedans.

"There is an undertow at Chrysler, and at some degree at Mercedes, to live and die by this tourer body style that they essentially launched with the Pacifica,"

2005 Chrysler 300C, a face only a German engineer could love.

It will be interesting to see how far Chrylser's sales will fall as the Neon and Sebring lines go, "wagon only".

(0) comments

Tuesday, October 14, 2003

Mercedes has to be smoking crack.

Perhaps is a reflection of the fact the DaimlerChrysler 100% a German company with no idea of the American market place dynamics but regardless I was stunned to read that DC honestly thought they could move the Chrysler brand up market in 3-5 years. What kind of crack are they smoking in Frankfurt? DC now states that they may have to double the time table for moving the up in the market. What?

The Germans seem to have a knack for great achievement and spectacular failure and boy are they working on a whopper of a failure with this plan. I imagine that it's the German engineer mind thinking that if you improve a product the market place (i.e. consumers) will instantly recognize the improvement and give the proper respect. That's fine for Germany but there are two major problems with this tactic in the US. Cars aren't machines in the US, they are living breathing members of the family that get named, loved and lamented when their soul passes on. When you start to mess with a cars image and place in the pantheon you're in for trouble. Can it be done? Yes but it takes a complete commitment to change. Second you have to improve the product and quality which they have failed to do. Their new products are poor in design and quality. The Crossfire is a horrible "halo" vehicle. It's performance is run of the mill. It's styling is hit and miss, love or hate which is fine for a niche car but is bad news for a "halo" car. Goofy niche cars hide in the corners but a halo car like the Crossfire is on TV 47 times an hour appearing on any and all Chrysler commercials. And that make the millions that find it's styling awful wince each time. As for the Porkcifica it's just a big fat under powered station wagon. Its newest will attract for a while but it won't hold those sales unless it eats into the high end of the minivan market.

What new products are in the pipe? Big giant fat odd looking hemi powered boats? It took GM 15 years and 5 billion dollars to get Cadillac to where the CTS-V can best an M3 on the Nürenburgring, a XLR sports car that can hang with the worlds best and a SRX that can beat Porsche and those where Americans bringing back the car brand that represents America a brand that was once the undisputed "Standard of the World". Can a bunch of soulless Germans do the same in less time with a brand so good at being a lousy #3 that they got bought out?

The Germans are about to lose again.

(0) comments

Friday, October 10, 2003

Victor the myth buster

We are at war. Most would say we have been at war since 9/11/2001, but the cold reality is that we have been at war since 2/26/1993. A war starts not when one side starts to fight back in force but rather when the first shots are fired. WWII didn't start for America when the Doolittle raid bombed Tokyo on 4/18/1942, it started on December 7th of 1941 when the Japanese struck us. The US Civil war didn't begin when Union troops marched into Bull Run it started months earlier when newly ceded South Carolina fired on Ft. Sumter.

We are at war whether or not we like it. We are at war even if we choose not to fight back, as all 9 current candidates for the Democratic nomination would choose. We are at no matter how many myths exist regarding it and this is where Victor Davis Hanson comes in with his latest piece on National Review.

While we may be in various stages of bellicosity with differing states, the fact is that after September 11 we will either accept defeat and stay within our borders to fight a defensive war of hosing down fires, bulldozing rubble, arresting terrorist cells, and hoping to appease or buy off our enemies abroad - or we will eventually have to confront Syria, Lebanon's Bekka Valley, Saudi Arabia, and Iran with a clear request to change and come over to civilization, or join the Taliban and Saddam Hussein.

We are at war until the war is over and that means one side surrenders or is destroyed. They picked the fight now we have to choose how it ends.

(0) comments

Thursday, October 09, 2003

Throw the Runge out!

In a recent Washington Post editorial they glossed over the regulatory mess that is the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). They only scratch the surface of how awful and intrusive NHTSA is. Since Clinton took office in '92 through to today the leadership of that over inflated mostly redundant bureaucracy has run full steam ahead on the idea that they have the right to create any regulation they wish as long as they can claim it's trying to make the roadways safer.

The Post mentions the motorized seatbelts, which now are mostly broken and not in use in the 8-13 year old cars they reside in. Millions of Americans are driving old cars with faulty belts they can't afford to fix thanks to NHTSA. The Post fails to mention that the overly strong airbags from the '90s that are risk for serious injury or death for smaller adults and children where strong not because the manufacturers screwed up but because in the face of pleading from automotive engineers it was NHTSA that ordered the airbags be so strong. When the lawsuits started to roll in NHTSA tried to lay the blame on the makers claiming they should have known better when in the '70s they already had the safer staged bags.

SUV's are not a plague on the world, we don't need "black boxes" in cars and the ensuing fat bureaucracy to maintain all the data, we don't need photo radar sending iron clad criminal charges to innocent people. NHTSA is runaway mess with Runge and if it weren't for the Dems complete failure on the Islamist issue he'd be enough for me to want Bush out on his ass.

UPDATE: Runge referred to above is Jeffrey Runge, M.D. a Bush appointee to the head of NHTSA.

(0) comments

Syria cries foul

It seems the state run Syrian news is upset that the US Congress has preliminary approval of a bill authorizing sanctions against the state of Syria. Reading this is a great insight into the mind of the "moderate" Arab Muslim.

First the they describe the House International Relations Committee 33-2 vote in favor of Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act as the work of "ultra-extremists." This, I think, is a great example of the worldview constantly on display in the Arab/Muslim world. So twisted, so skewed that either they really think that 35 freely elected members of the Congress of the United States of America, the worlds most dynamic liberal democracy, are nothing more than ultra-extremists or they are hinting at something much worse. That Congress is doing the bidding of some secret cabal of Zionist masters.

Also so you see the denial so prevalent in the Arab/Muslim world. A denial where the state run Syrian news says:

"The whole world knows that Syria is the country that demanded, and is still demanding, the clearing of the whole (Middle East) region of weapons of mass destruction, and it is abiding by the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which Israel is refusing to join,"

In one sentence they claim to be pure of heart while also getting in a dig at Israel. The article goes on to reiterate Syria’s long held denial of what is nothing other that complete and open cooperation with the terrorist groups Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad while also getting in a dig at Israel. Of course they’ll lie about supporting terrorists you might be thinking and if so you are wrong. For in the mind of the average Arab/Muslim thinker those groups are freedom fighters not terrorists and when you believe that the denial of reality rolls off the tongue with great ease.

Even the Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa displayed the same worldview when he stated he "is very worried about these baseless accusations against Syria". There are not terror training camps in Syria? There are not open meetings between terror groups in Damascus? There are not Syrian troops occupying Lebanon and assisting Hezbollah there? No says the Arab/Muslim worldview. Those aren’t terror camps they are training grounds for freedom fighters. Those aren’t terror leaders meeting those are heroes risking their lives to defend Palestine. Those troops aren’t occupying Lebanon, they are there to assist the Lebanese get back on their feet.


(0) comments

Can you call this Journalism?

Jenna Debryn shows off a Razanne doll at her home in West Bloomfield Township, Mich., Aug. 27, 2003. Razanne is all about modesty and piety compared to Barbie's gelled and buffon-coiffed beau flaunts. The doll fills not only a marketing void, but also offers Muslim girls someone with whom they can relate. (AP Photo/Carlos Osorio)

Okay, I know it’s just a picture caption but what in the name of all that’s good is the AP printing Islamic cheerleading crap like this for? I am stunned by the line, “Razanne is all about modesty and piety compared to Barbie's gelled and buffon-coiffed beau flaunts.”. Why doesn’t the AP just come out with it and say that the west is a depraved craven godless immoral mess and only by committing ourselves to the service of Allah can we achieve paradise?

One thing the AP got right is that Razanne does offer young Muslim girls a doll they can truly relate. Really, how could a young Muslim girl understand Barbie when Barbie is a free, emancipated women living in a culture that holds liberty and freedom of expression as some of it’s highest ideals? How can young Muslim girls be asked to understand a doll that can do as it pleases, marry whom it wants, go where it chooses at any time of the day and with whomever she likes? Thank Allah that Razanne is here to teach young Muslim girls their place.

(0) comments

Thursday, October 02, 2003

A peak at the 69th edition of the New Liberal dictionary

Patriotism - Open knee-jerk poorly thought out politically motivated attacks on the Republican administration regarding the War on Terror whose goals are not either improving America's defense or helping defeat the Islamic terrorist movement but instead seek to remove the Bush from the White House, at all costs. It's okay for America to lose as long as we win.

Freedom of Speech - The constitutionally guaranteed right to say anything, lie, obfuscate, slander, insult and generally make it up as you go along in any verbal attack against the Bush White House. (Ex: Quotes from Bush's SOTU address where he lied about Saddam and Niger which he in fact never said)

McCarthyism - Any suggestion that the Left's mindless harping that Bush=Hitler, America needs to give into all Muslim demands, that we should bow down to a obviously anti-American UN lead by a cabal of, "less than democratic" countries and Democrats endless political attacks on Bush that have the effect of hampering the war effort might in fact be unpatriotic.

Hate Speech - Any Bush administration / Republican / Conservative response to anything said by anyone on the Left or in the Democratic party. (Ex: Kennedy said that President Bush "hatched" this war in Texas for political reasons? President Bush called Kennedy's unproven assertions "uncivil." Representative John Conyers responded, "The White House should immediately apologize to Senator Kennedy for calling his legitimate criticism of the rush to war 'uncivil.'")

Hypocrisy - [Error 34: File not found.]

Question: Is it my skill as a brilliant writer that I am able to so easily illustrate the massive hypocrisy of the Democrats currently enthralled with the more left members of their party or are they simply being open hypocrites?

(0) comments

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