Friday, May 30, 2008
STOCKHOLM — World leaders, including UN chief Ban Ki-moon and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, on Thursday hailed Baghdad's progress in combatting violence and stabilising Iraq. A declaration adopted by 100 delegations at a Stockholm conference said the participants "recognised the important efforts made by the (Iraqi) government to improve security and public order and combat terrorism and sectarian violence across Iraq."
The computer-generated image below was posted on an Islamic extremists' website yesterday.
Washington is laid to waste. The Capitol is a blackened, smoking ruin. The White House has been razed. Countless thousands are dead.
This is the apocalyptic scene terrorists hope to create if they ever get their hands on a nuclear bomb. [snip]
Al Sahab puts out more than 80 'officially sanctioned' videos a year to keep up the propaganda on the West. And the Internet shows how easy it is to stir up militancy. One message with the Washington picture said: 'The next strike's in the heart of America. When? When? When? And How?'
Last night FBI sources said Al Qaeda was desperate to get its hands on a weapon of mass destruction, be it nuclear, chemical, or biological. So far that is only a dream... or, as this picture suggests, a nightmare.
[Scare mongering? : the consequence of a WMD attack on this nation are hard to overestimate, and we've every right to aggressively defend ourselves against such monstrous threats. Our best chance of preventing such an attack is a) using every intelligence means possible to monitor and interdict them, and b) staying on offense and denying them a stable base of operations from which to organize and project themselves - such as we'd be handing them if we abandoned Iraq]
Senior U.S. officials tell ABC News that in recent months there have been secret contacts between the Iranian government and the leadership of al Qaeda. It's a development that has caught the attention of top officials in the White House, the Pentagon and the intelligence community. (Snip) the contacts are on the status of high-level al Qaeda operatives, including two of Osama Bin Laden's sons, who have been under house arrest in Iran since 2003.
Democrats outraged by the remarks of President George W. Bush “appeasement” when he said, “America stands with you in breaking up terrorist networks and denying the extremists sanctuary. And America stands with you in firmly opposing Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions. Permitting the world’s leading sponsor of terror to possess the world’s deadliest weapon would be an unforgivable betrayal of future generations... [snip]
Obama wants talks with Iran without preconditions and Bush/McCain are totally against such talks. But in point of fact, Bush is already talking to Iran at a lower level. The real issue is not whether to talk but whether to appease...
Turn your clock back 70 years. Imagine that Wall Street banks and brokerages sold Nuremberg-compliant bonds and stock funds in 1938. American Nazi sympathizers bought financial instruments certified by Berlin-based advisors as free of "Jewish profits" from, say, Salomon Brothers and Bloomingdale's. In turn, a percentage of such funds' gains underwrote pro-Nazi charities, like the German-American Bund, and similar organizations in the Fatherland, like the Hitler Youth.
Seventy years hence, an analogous outrage grows on Wall Street, only this time for real.
Sharia-compliant finance (SCF) is expanding among banks and securities houses eager to absorb the hundreds of billions of petrodollars cascading into the Middle East, thanks to $100-per-barrel oil. To lure this cash, financial companies increasingly offer vehicles that don't involve or benefit from anything considered "haram" or "un-kosher" in Islam - and SCF is not limited to the bond market. SCF also goes far beyond 'marketing' to Muslims and Middle Easterners. IIFM lists "wider sharia acceptance" among its goals..
Selling sharia-compliant investments legitimizes a barbaric theocratic orthodoxy that should be defeated, not promoted.
Nicolas Sarkozy, France’s president, responded to growing public anger over surging oil prices by proposing to use windfall tax receipts generated by higher energy prices to subsidise the worst-hit people. As in other countries, high oil prices are a hot political issue in France as household budgets and businesses have been squeezed.
["windfall tax receipts" - priceless]
Imagine an America where the government decides what profits are acceptable. Imagine our country with the oil industry nationalized. Impossible? Not with Democrats in control of Washington. One California Democrat, saying out loud what many on her side of the aisle have been thinking for some time, has threatened to seize the oil industry....
[for anyone who missed it, Ms. Waters faux pas during the oil inquisition where she state that "this liberal intends to socialize --- ", and then froze and took the better part of a minute trying to reword he Freudian slip was laugh-out-loud funny - except for her word's meaning...]
The cost of cutting greenhouse gas emissions would certainly have a serious negative effect on human health, says the Fraser Institute's Philip Stevens. A new global treaty that claims would stabilize the climate at today's temperatures would cost a total of $18-20 trillion (U.S.) -- or 45 percent of the world's current annual economic output.
Such a treaty would create a massive drag on economic growth, which brings with it the resources that can be used to tackle the most significant causes of death in developing countries - all a direct result of poverty. The elimination of malaria in European and North America was a clear by-product of increasing prosperity:
• Exposure to mosquitoes decreased once people could afford windows for their houses and separate barns for cattle.Mandatory caps on carbon emissions would be a betrayal of the sick in the world's poorest regions because such regulations would undermine the one mechanism -- economic growth -- which allows people to move beyond the primitive living conditions that encourage the spread of such diseases. Restraining economic growth with the hope of staving off hypothetical threats to humanity will almost certainly reduce our ability to deal with today's genuine health problems.
• Farmers adopted practices such as tillage and field drainage which deprived the mosquitoes of feeding and breeding opportunities.
• In other wealthy countries such as the United States, public authorities were able to combine this with the mass spraying of the pesticide DDT to effectively eradicate the disease.
• It is no coincidence that malaria is currently confined to the poorest parts of the world, because these areas are the least able to afford such changes.
Orders to U.S. factories for big-ticket manufactured goods fell by a smaller-than-anticipated amount in April with many sectors outside of transportation showing unexpected strength. The Commerce Department reported Wednesday that orders for durable goods dropped 0.5 percent, dragged down by big declines in demand for commercial aircraft and autos [you know, the energy users]
The decline, however, was just one-third of what experts expected. Take out the volatile transportation sector and orders rose 2.5 percent, the largest gain in nine months. This reflected strength in areas ranging from heavy machinery and primary metals such as steel, and to a record surge in demand for electrical equipment and appliances.
Economists said this indicated the economy was entering the April-through-June period with some momentum...
[few things are more frustrating than an unreliable recession]
Three Democratic lawmakers who spoke Wednesday about alleged anti-immigrant coverage by conservative media outlets were not aware of a recent State Department travel alert warning Americans about military-like ''combat'' along the southern U.S. border in Mexico, where Americans are being kidnapped and murdered. (Snip) When asked about the alert after the briefing, Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) told Cybercast News Service: ''I haven't heard about the report specifically,''
At Michigan State University, I served on student government until a horde of leftist students organized a successful recall election. On the very same day that I took part in a public debate over the issue of affirmative action with a candidate for state representative, the vote was held in which I was recalled by approximately 93 percent to 7 percent (225 voted to recall while 18 voted to allow me to remain).
Why was I recalled? Because I proposed, among other things, that a United States flag be displayed in every room and lecture hall on campus, and that since black students, Muslim students, international students, and homosexual students get automatic representation on student government, it would only be fair if white students, Christian students, nationalist students, and heterosexual students get automatic representation as well. This did not bode well with my leftist peers, so they removed me from the low-level elected position that I held.
The leftists will allow no threat to their ideology to materialize. The seeds of discontent cannot be allowed to grow...
In an attempt to explain how race will impact Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama's run for the White House, Newsweek has created a "Racial Resentment Index" exclusively for white people without measuring such biases of non-whites.
Apparently, it's only important to Newsweek to identify if racism is a factor in why whites prefer Republican presidential candidate John McCain and not if racism is a factor in why blacks support Obama.
Such can be read between the lines in the article published Friday entitled "The White Stuff: A new NEWSWEEK Poll underscores Obama's racial challenge" (emphasis added, picture courtesy Getty Images): [snip]
[meanwhile, Obama enjoys a ninety-percent support rate of black Americans with nary a word in the press...]
Will Voters Go for the One Like Them?
For whom do voters vote? What motivates them? The ethnic group to which they belong, and the one to which the candidate belongs are factors, no doubt. A voter generally looks for one of his own, or at least someone from the neighborhood. It appears that 95 percent of African-American voters will vote for Barack Obama...
Reality check re: American 'racism','xenophobia'
To the Left, America is irredeemably racist, and those who want our border protected are xenophobes. The insanity of these claims is evidenced by what real racism and xenophobia look like. In black-led South Africa, a country that is held to be the embodiment of the triumph of a victory over racism, no less.
We have already covered the horrific racial violence (black on black) directed toward South African immigrants, but after almost two weeks running, it is spreading, according to this report from AFP:
[8 paragraphs of violence][snip]
That is what real xenophobia and racism look like. Demands for protection of our sovereign borders are not xenophobia. America actually gives racial preferences to minorities and welfare payments to immigrants, for better or worse.
Time to ash-can the defamation of America as a racist country, and go counsel Nelson Mandela about the racism of blacks in his country. Any leftists who denounces America as a racist country only demonstrates his hatred of America.