Here's some Pic's from a religion of peace lovefest in Londonistan lately, enjoy!
Saturday, July 29, 2006
Some views from Londonistan
Here's some Pic's from a religion of peace lovefest in Londonistan lately, enjoy!
Food for thought.
This is some food for thought, from Hal Lindsey, of late great planet earth fame, and illustrates the obvious modern day anti-semitism.
Oracle Commentaries 7/28/2006
So, What Would They Do?
I was listening with interest when a British reporter was called in by Fox News to give her 'analysis' of the current Middle East conflict between Hezbollah, Hamas and Israel. The context of the interview was in relation to Hezbollah's upping the ante by firing a new, longer range rocket into Afula, some ten miles south of Haifa.
The interviewer pointed out President Bush's statement that the root cause of the violence was Hezbollah and Hamas.
The British reporter, Hillary McKenzie, immediately took exception to Bush's statement, saying that 'in Europe's view' (which obviously was shared by McKenzie) the root of the problem was really Israel's refusal to grant the Palestinians a state of their own.
The fact that every 'occupied' territory vacated by Israel was immediately used to stage new attacks against Israel aside, what would, say, the British do? Let's just suppose that a group of Irishmen living in Ireland wanted an independent Irish state in place of the British mandate in Northern Ireland?
Let's sweeten the pot by pretending that the Irishmen wanting an Irish state on Irish soil in place of the British-ruled state set up by the British after conquering its inhabitants won't take 'no' for an answer?
To make it even more interesting, let's pretend that these Irishmen set up an anti-British terrorist group and gave it a nationalist-sounding name, like, maybe the "Irish Republican Army" with a cool acronym like the Palestinians have in the Palestinian Liberation Organization's acronym, PLO?
So, supposing there was an entity called the IRA that used bombs and terrorist attacks aimed at driving the British off Irish land and setting up an Irish state under Irish rule?
What would the British do?
Would they conduct ground wars against the IRA? Would they imprison the Irish 'freedom fighters' who were fighting with the only weapon they had -- terrorism -- against a ruling external nation much too powerful for the IRA to fight by conventional means?
Or would they, as McKenzie says Europe sees it, immediately turn Northern Ireland over to the Irish 'rebels?'
Indeed, would ethnic Irishmen seeking to free themselves from foreign rule even qualify as 'rebels'? Wouldn't they be 'freedom fighters' like the Palestinians?
What IS the difference between British rule in Northern Ireland and Israeli rule over the West Bank and Gaza? Is there one? You bet there is. Before there WAS a Britain, there was an Israel. And before the British ever discovered there was an island across the Irish sea, the 'Palestinian territories' were part of ethnic Israel. Northern Ireland was never composed of ethnic Britons.
And Britain did not come into possession of Northern Ireland as a consequence of repelling Irish invaders whose goal was the extermination of the British race.
While we're on the subject, China voiced its opposition to Israel's incursion into Lebanon at the Security Council, demanding Israel be condemned for its actions against Hezbollah.
What if there were an island composed of ethnic Chinese that had NEVER been part of the People's Republic of China? What if that island declared itself an independent nation? What would China do if Tawan resisted forcible unification with the Red Chinese? According to Beijing, it would use all the weapons at its disposal to bring Taiwan back under its rule.
What if Chechnya were to declare it did not want to be part of the new Russian Federation after the Soviet Union collapsed? What would Moscow do? Would it grant Chechnya the independence its population demanded? Or would it conduct a decade-long war, killing thousands of civilians in the process, to force Chechnya into the Russian Federation against the will of the majority of Chechen citizens?
What would the French do if the Vietnamese, after decades of colonial rule, declared its independence? Would it wish the Vietnamese rebels 'bon chance' and give the country back to its people? Or would it fight a ten-year war to keep Vietnam inside the sphere of French colonial influence?
Of course, none of these are exactly in parallel with the Israeli-Arab war. The Irish Republican Army poses no existential threat to the continued viability of Great Britain. The IRA has not sworn to annihilate every living Englishman and then seize Britain's assets for itself.
The Taiwanese have not attacked Beijing, or threatened the annihilation of the Red Chinese state and every living Chinaman on the mainland.
The Chechens have not banded together with the express purpose of destroying Russia and setting up a Chechen state in its place.
And the Vietnamese defeated the French, after which, it left them alone.
What would the United Nations do if New Zealand attacked Australia with the express purpose of annihilating Australia as a nation and exterminating every Australian it could find, simply because they were Australians? Would they urge Australia to show 'restraint'?
We already know what the British would do. They would increase their troop presence in Northern Ireland, and capture or kill every Irishman that lifted a hand against them. And they would NOT call the IRA 'freedom fighters'. They'd call them terrorists.
China has threatened to launch an all-out invasion of Tawian and overthrow any Taiwanese government that dared to formally declare independence from the Red Chinese government Taiwan was never part of.
And Moscow has been conducting an all-out war against Chechen 'rebels' whom Moscow calls 'terrorists' and not 'freedom fighters'.
But Israel, a sovereign member state of the United Nations, has fought five wars for its existence against the combined forces of the Arab world. In each case, the provocation for the Arab attacks was the mere existence of a Jewish state called Israel.
In each case, Brits, Chinese, Russians and UN have demanded Israel withdraw to indefensible borders, insisted on a cease-fire in order to give Israel's enemies a chance to rest and regroup before launching a new war. And in each case, it blamed Israel for causing the war BY ITS EXISTENCE, demanding it surrender parts of itself to the aggressors in exchange for a 'peace' that never came.
History tells us what THEY would do. But, of course, their situation is different.
They aren't Jews.
Hal Lindsey
© http://www.hallindseyoracle.com
Oracle Commentaries 7/28/2006
So, What Would They Do?
I was listening with interest when a British reporter was called in by Fox News to give her 'analysis' of the current Middle East conflict between Hezbollah, Hamas and Israel. The context of the interview was in relation to Hezbollah's upping the ante by firing a new, longer range rocket into Afula, some ten miles south of Haifa.
The interviewer pointed out President Bush's statement that the root cause of the violence was Hezbollah and Hamas.
The British reporter, Hillary McKenzie, immediately took exception to Bush's statement, saying that 'in Europe's view' (which obviously was shared by McKenzie) the root of the problem was really Israel's refusal to grant the Palestinians a state of their own.
The fact that every 'occupied' territory vacated by Israel was immediately used to stage new attacks against Israel aside, what would, say, the British do? Let's just suppose that a group of Irishmen living in Ireland wanted an independent Irish state in place of the British mandate in Northern Ireland?
Let's sweeten the pot by pretending that the Irishmen wanting an Irish state on Irish soil in place of the British-ruled state set up by the British after conquering its inhabitants won't take 'no' for an answer?
To make it even more interesting, let's pretend that these Irishmen set up an anti-British terrorist group and gave it a nationalist-sounding name, like, maybe the "Irish Republican Army" with a cool acronym like the Palestinians have in the Palestinian Liberation Organization's acronym, PLO?
So, supposing there was an entity called the IRA that used bombs and terrorist attacks aimed at driving the British off Irish land and setting up an Irish state under Irish rule?
What would the British do?
Would they conduct ground wars against the IRA? Would they imprison the Irish 'freedom fighters' who were fighting with the only weapon they had -- terrorism -- against a ruling external nation much too powerful for the IRA to fight by conventional means?
Or would they, as McKenzie says Europe sees it, immediately turn Northern Ireland over to the Irish 'rebels?'
Indeed, would ethnic Irishmen seeking to free themselves from foreign rule even qualify as 'rebels'? Wouldn't they be 'freedom fighters' like the Palestinians?
What IS the difference between British rule in Northern Ireland and Israeli rule over the West Bank and Gaza? Is there one? You bet there is. Before there WAS a Britain, there was an Israel. And before the British ever discovered there was an island across the Irish sea, the 'Palestinian territories' were part of ethnic Israel. Northern Ireland was never composed of ethnic Britons.
And Britain did not come into possession of Northern Ireland as a consequence of repelling Irish invaders whose goal was the extermination of the British race.
While we're on the subject, China voiced its opposition to Israel's incursion into Lebanon at the Security Council, demanding Israel be condemned for its actions against Hezbollah.
What if there were an island composed of ethnic Chinese that had NEVER been part of the People's Republic of China? What if that island declared itself an independent nation? What would China do if Tawan resisted forcible unification with the Red Chinese? According to Beijing, it would use all the weapons at its disposal to bring Taiwan back under its rule.
What if Chechnya were to declare it did not want to be part of the new Russian Federation after the Soviet Union collapsed? What would Moscow do? Would it grant Chechnya the independence its population demanded? Or would it conduct a decade-long war, killing thousands of civilians in the process, to force Chechnya into the Russian Federation against the will of the majority of Chechen citizens?
What would the French do if the Vietnamese, after decades of colonial rule, declared its independence? Would it wish the Vietnamese rebels 'bon chance' and give the country back to its people? Or would it fight a ten-year war to keep Vietnam inside the sphere of French colonial influence?
Of course, none of these are exactly in parallel with the Israeli-Arab war. The Irish Republican Army poses no existential threat to the continued viability of Great Britain. The IRA has not sworn to annihilate every living Englishman and then seize Britain's assets for itself.
The Taiwanese have not attacked Beijing, or threatened the annihilation of the Red Chinese state and every living Chinaman on the mainland.
The Chechens have not banded together with the express purpose of destroying Russia and setting up a Chechen state in its place.
And the Vietnamese defeated the French, after which, it left them alone.
What would the United Nations do if New Zealand attacked Australia with the express purpose of annihilating Australia as a nation and exterminating every Australian it could find, simply because they were Australians? Would they urge Australia to show 'restraint'?
We already know what the British would do. They would increase their troop presence in Northern Ireland, and capture or kill every Irishman that lifted a hand against them. And they would NOT call the IRA 'freedom fighters'. They'd call them terrorists.
China has threatened to launch an all-out invasion of Tawian and overthrow any Taiwanese government that dared to formally declare independence from the Red Chinese government Taiwan was never part of.
And Moscow has been conducting an all-out war against Chechen 'rebels' whom Moscow calls 'terrorists' and not 'freedom fighters'.
But Israel, a sovereign member state of the United Nations, has fought five wars for its existence against the combined forces of the Arab world. In each case, the provocation for the Arab attacks was the mere existence of a Jewish state called Israel.
In each case, Brits, Chinese, Russians and UN have demanded Israel withdraw to indefensible borders, insisted on a cease-fire in order to give Israel's enemies a chance to rest and regroup before launching a new war. And in each case, it blamed Israel for causing the war BY ITS EXISTENCE, demanding it surrender parts of itself to the aggressors in exchange for a 'peace' that never came.
History tells us what THEY would do. But, of course, their situation is different.
They aren't Jews.
Hal Lindsey
© http://www.hallindseyoracle.com
Friday, July 28, 2006
A celabration of life, and a celabration of death
July 28, 2006
Walkie-Talkie
Nancy Beggs - Idyllwild, California
First hand account from her father-in-law:
Last week I was in Atlanta, Georgia attending a conference. While I was in the airport, returning home, I heard several people behind me beginning to clap and cheer. I immediately turned around and witnessed one of the greatest act's of patriotism I have ever seen.
Moving thru the terminal was a group of soldiers in their camo's, as they began heading to their gate everyone (well almost everyone) was abruptly to their feet with their hands waving and cheering. When I saw the soldiers, probably 30-40 of them, being applauded and cheered for it hit me. I'm not alone. I'm not the only red blooded American who still loves this country and supports our troops and their families.
Of course I immediately stopped and began clapping for these young unsung heroes who are putting their
lives on the line everyday for us so we can go to school, work and home without fear or reprisal. Just when I thought I could not be more proud of my country or of our service men and women a young girl, not more than 6 or 7 years old, ran up to one of the male soldiers. He kneeled down and said "hi," the little girl then she asked him if he would give something to her daddy for her. The young soldier, he didn't look any older than maybe 22 himself, said he would try and what did she want to give to her daddy. Then suddenly the little girl grabbed the neck of this soldier, gave him the biggest hug she could muster and then kissed him on the cheek.
The mother of the little girl, who said her daughters name was Courtney, told the young soldier that her husband was a Marine and had been in Iraq for 11 months now. As the mom was explaining how much her daughter, Courtney, missed her father, the young soldier began to tear up. When this temporarily single mom was done explaining her situation, all of the soldiers huddled together for a brief second. Then one of the other servicemen pulled out a military looking walkie-talkie. They started playing with the device and talking back and forth on it.
After about 10-15 seconds of this, the young soldier walked back over to Courtney, bent down and said this to her, "I spoke to your daddy and he told me to give this to you." He then hugged this little girl that he had just met and gave her a kiss on the cheek. He finished by saying "your daddy told me to tell you that he loves you more than anything and he is coming home very soon."
The mom at this point was crying almost uncontrollably and as the young soldier stood to his feet he saluted Courtney and her mom. I was standing no more than 6 feet away from this entire event unfolded. As the soldiers began to leave, heading towards their gate, people resumed their applause. As I stood there applauding and looked around, their were very few dry eyes, including my own. That young soldier in one
last act of selflessness, turned around and blew a kiss to Courtney with a tear rolling down his cheek.
We need to remember everyday all of our soldiers and their families and thank God for them and their sacrifices. At the end of the day, it's good to be an American.
from Pasadena pundit
Consider the above story with the following one, many people these days insist there's a moral equivelance between our military, or Israel's military and terrorist organizations engaged in this activity, random bombing of civilian locales, random rocket launchings into towns and villages, intentional use of civilians as shields, etc. ad nausium.
Personally, I think such people are bugshit f**kin crazy.
Walkie-Talkie
Nancy Beggs - Idyllwild, California
First hand account from her father-in-law:
Last week I was in Atlanta, Georgia attending a conference. While I was in the airport, returning home, I heard several people behind me beginning to clap and cheer. I immediately turned around and witnessed one of the greatest act's of patriotism I have ever seen.
Moving thru the terminal was a group of soldiers in their camo's, as they began heading to their gate everyone (well almost everyone) was abruptly to their feet with their hands waving and cheering. When I saw the soldiers, probably 30-40 of them, being applauded and cheered for it hit me. I'm not alone. I'm not the only red blooded American who still loves this country and supports our troops and their families.
Of course I immediately stopped and began clapping for these young unsung heroes who are putting their
lives on the line everyday for us so we can go to school, work and home without fear or reprisal. Just when I thought I could not be more proud of my country or of our service men and women a young girl, not more than 6 or 7 years old, ran up to one of the male soldiers. He kneeled down and said "hi," the little girl then she asked him if he would give something to her daddy for her. The young soldier, he didn't look any older than maybe 22 himself, said he would try and what did she want to give to her daddy. Then suddenly the little girl grabbed the neck of this soldier, gave him the biggest hug she could muster and then kissed him on the cheek.
The mother of the little girl, who said her daughters name was Courtney, told the young soldier that her husband was a Marine and had been in Iraq for 11 months now. As the mom was explaining how much her daughter, Courtney, missed her father, the young soldier began to tear up. When this temporarily single mom was done explaining her situation, all of the soldiers huddled together for a brief second. Then one of the other servicemen pulled out a military looking walkie-talkie. They started playing with the device and talking back and forth on it.
After about 10-15 seconds of this, the young soldier walked back over to Courtney, bent down and said this to her, "I spoke to your daddy and he told me to give this to you." He then hugged this little girl that he had just met and gave her a kiss on the cheek. He finished by saying "your daddy told me to tell you that he loves you more than anything and he is coming home very soon."
The mom at this point was crying almost uncontrollably and as the young soldier stood to his feet he saluted Courtney and her mom. I was standing no more than 6 feet away from this entire event unfolded. As the soldiers began to leave, heading towards their gate, people resumed their applause. As I stood there applauding and looked around, their were very few dry eyes, including my own. That young soldier in one
last act of selflessness, turned around and blew a kiss to Courtney with a tear rolling down his cheek.
We need to remember everyday all of our soldiers and their families and thank God for them and their sacrifices. At the end of the day, it's good to be an American.
from Pasadena pundit
Consider the above story with the following one, many people these days insist there's a moral equivelance between our military, or Israel's military and terrorist organizations engaged in this activity, random bombing of civilian locales, random rocket launchings into towns and villages, intentional use of civilians as shields, etc. ad nausium.
Personally, I think such people are bugshit f**kin crazy.
Turning a blind eye to child suicide bombers
Where's the outrage over the Palestinians' mistreatment of children?
By Dan Abrams
Updated: 10:37 a.m. CT March 26, 2004
It has happened again, still with no ensuing outrage from the human rights groups. Another Palestinian child was narrowly prevented from becoming a human bomb. This one, a 16-year-old (although some have reported that he is only 14 years old), was wrapped in explosives vests under his clothing and was stopped by Israeli forces at a West Bank checkpoint. His family is saying he has the intelligence of a 12-year-old and yet still the human rights groups continue to turn a blind eye.
When an 11-year-old was stopped with a bag filled with explosives on March 15, I asked in my “Closing Argument” the next day, Where is the outrage? Why aren’t the human rights groups chastising the Palestinians as they do others who misuse or mistreat children? Amnesty International told us they “condemn these attacks, regardless of the age of individual.” But they never felt the need to specifically condemn the use of children as suicide bombers because there had been “no previous incidents.”
I offered numerous examples of other incidents. But really, that’s just the beginning of the problem. They still don’t get it. When children are involved, they are being used and manipulated by adults who have indoctrinated them. Just condemning suicide bombing says nothing about the abuse of children. This is not just about Palestinians targeting Israeli civilians. It’s about Palestinians targeting Palestinian children. But when it came to the Sierra Leone conflict, for example, Amnesty International singled out the recruitment or use of children by parties to the conflict as a war crime.
Why are they so reluctant to do it here? Interestingly, Amnesty has long condemned targeted assassinations or what they call “extra judicial executions” by the Israelis. But when Israel killed the leader of the terror group Hamas, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, earlier this week, Amnesty still felt it necessary to issue a specific press release condemning that attack. It seems general comments about suicide bombing suffice when it comes to the Palestinians’ efforts to use children to target civilians and yet, when Israel kills a terror leader, it makes for headlines on the Amnesty Web site. What a shame that such a well respected and veritable organization that has done so much to protect so many just can’t be an honest broker when it comes to the Mideast conflict.
'Closing Argument' is a regular segment of 'The Abrams Report.' 'The Abrams Report' airs weeknights, 6 p.m. ET on MSNBC.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4601244/
Thursday, July 27, 2006
The positive news from Iraq
News and polls you will never see on cnn. Here's an few facts from the war zone.
Psych war
I find myself quoting this Lady a lot, what can I say? she's got me beat in the IQ dept. (see link below)
Dr. Sanity is right about the jihadi's effective use of Psyops against us, using human shields, mosque's and such as they do, making sport of our values in the process, we need to turn this around, and i have an idea that will not only help make our troops job's more safe, but help your local farmer too!
PIGS! we need to use pig warfare against these jihadi's, pig blood covered bullets, pigfat loaded artillary shells, pig suicide bombers, and lots of those cute little vietnamese pot belly pigs for our troops to have as pets, to accompany them on patrol.
what do ya think?
Dr. Sanity is right about the jihadi's effective use of Psyops against us, using human shields, mosque's and such as they do, making sport of our values in the process, we need to turn this around, and i have an idea that will not only help make our troops job's more safe, but help your local farmer too!
PIGS! we need to use pig warfare against these jihadi's, pig blood covered bullets, pigfat loaded artillary shells, pig suicide bombers, and lots of those cute little vietnamese pot belly pigs for our troops to have as pets, to accompany them on patrol.
what do ya think?
Europe well on it's way to accepting dhimmi status
Europe subjects itself to not offending the jihadi's, only Europeans could come up with a plan like this (read link)
Monday, July 24, 2006
Cry me a handful
Palestinian leaders call for a general strike? from what? these are the world's welfare babies, I thought you had to have a JOB to strike from one!
the violence is easily fixed, whenever they quit being violent, peace will ensue.
(I thought about sayin f**k them, and the camel they rode in on, but i thought better of it)
the violence is easily fixed, whenever they quit being violent, peace will ensue.
(I thought about sayin f**k them, and the camel they rode in on, but i thought better of it)
Expectations of war
What is this idea floating around that there is such a thing as a war where only the combatants get hurt, and, if any others do, somebody's not following the rules? this does not make any sense whatsoever, not by common sense, not by the history of war, not by any commander of any army, or any wartime leader.
where did this notion come from? all the new precition munitions made nowadays? that makes for some more control, but cirtainly cannot garantee that NO civilians will feel the effects.
I don't get the idea.
where did this notion come from? all the new precition munitions made nowadays? that makes for some more control, but cirtainly cannot garantee that NO civilians will feel the effects.
I don't get the idea.
Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events.
Sir Winston Churchill
Saturday, July 22, 2006
A brilliant post on pacifism
Once again, Dr. Sanity is Worthy of note, with an insightful piece on pacifism, see link below
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
