Well, looky here. It seems that the Communists over in Vietnam would like to extend a warm hand of gratitude to those who opposed the Vietnam war.
Twenty-nine years after the end of the Vietnam war, communist military mastermind General Vo Nguyen Giap remains grateful to the Americans who opposed it.Oh, yes - wonderful, ringing endorsement. I can hear it now: "Join with the ideology that has condemned more than 100 million to death - protest American involvement in the world!"
The Vietnam War, known in Vietnam as the American War, has become a hot issue in the U.S. presidential race with Democrat John Kerry drawing attention to his service and President Bush's Republicans disparaging Kerry's later anti-war stand.
"I would like to thank them," the 93-year-old veteran said on Friday of those Americans who opposed the war.
TODAY IS May Day. And it's a good thing working people can claim a day as their own and celebrate their efforts and triumphs.Far too many.
But the day has also been used over the decades to proclaim socialism and communism and to wave the red flag. It is supposed to be the colour of justice and equality. Unfortunately, it is more the colour of blood.
From coast to coast to coast this country is populated with victims of socialist states. Russia, Ukraine and the various Soviet republics. Poland and the other East European nations raped by Moscow. China, Vietnam and an assortment of African and Middle Eastern countries ravaged by Marxism at different times in their history.
So much loss, so much pain.
So on this day let us remember the people of Ukraine who were starved, beaten and murdered. Let us remember the Soviet guards outside enormous food centres, watching as Ukrainian children died of hunger. Let us remember how The New York Times denied this was happening.
Let us also remember that The New York Times knew of the Holocaust and yet never gave it more than a token mention.
Let us remember the Poles -- their best and brightest killed by Marxist socialists from the east and National Socialists from the west. Let us remember that the gangster Stalin prevented Polish Battle of Britain pilot heroes from marching in London's 1945 victory parade, so obsessed was he with snuffing out Polish identity.
Let us remember ethnic Germans murdered and transported by the Soviets. Let us remember the millions killed in the new Marxist dawn of Cambodia, some of them simply because they were able to read and write.
Let us remember The Cultural Revolution in China, with the blood running under the doors of the mass prisons -- and clever people in the West lauding China's Communist party leadership for its actions.
Let us remember the terrified boat people of Vietnam fleeing firing squads and concentration camps.
Let us remember all of those who died because of a twisted philosophy.
For those I did not mention by name, forgive me. There are just so many to list.
The UN has gotten so bad, even Canada is starting to withdraw its support.
With yesterday's landmark speech, Paul Martin tacitly acknowledged what Canada's foreign policy establishment has refused to accept for decades: that the United Nations is a failure, for which there is no solution.This is quite a development - especially since Canada continues to hold fast to its relationship with Cuba. What does it say when a country that heaps praise upon a Communist dictator known for stifling all dissent starts to decry (even tacitly) the UN?
I was originally going to append this to the end of my last post on the subject as an update, but it's just too big and important to relegate to the backwater of unread additions. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the destruction of the UN.
The vast majority of the United Nations' oil-for-food contracts in Iraq have mysteriously vanished, crippling investigators trying to uncover fraud in the program, a government report charged yesterday.This is just absolutely horrifying. The level of corruption is incredible. Destroy this malevolent body and do it quickly.
The General Accounting Office report, presented at a congressional hearing into the scandal-plagued program, determined that 80 percent of U.N. records had not been turned over.
The world body claims it transferred all information it had - including 3,059 contracts worth about $6.2 billion for delivery of food and other civilian goods to the post-Saddam governing body, the Coalition Provisional Authority.
But the GAO report also found that a database the U.N. transferred to the authority was "unreliable because it contained mathematical and currency errors in calculation of contract costs," the report found.
The GAO findings, which were aired at a hearing of the House International Relations Committee, raise new questions about corruption and mismanagement in the biggest-ever U.N. aid program - and what has been called the biggest financial scandal in history.
Congratulations to the Toronto Maple Leafs on tonight's win over Philly. Now that the Dallas Stars are out of the picture, I can unreservedly say that I hope and cheer for a Leafs' Cup victory (whether or not that long-overdue triumph is feasible is, of course, highly debatable).
On a similar note, Andrew Coyne celebrates playoff hockey with a post full of gems:
The one thing I don't look forward to is the moronic hockey commentary. Hockey commentary is always moronic, but it reaches a special intensity of moronitude at playoff time. You know what I'm talking about: the "this game is critical" analysis, sometimes phrased as a question ("Pat, how critical is it to win this game?"). Fellas, can I let you in on a secret? In a seven-game series, every game is critical. Lose that first game, and you're down 0-1: you're behind the eight-ball right off the top. Then there's the critical second game: win it, and the series is all tied up, the momentum is all yours; lose, and you're facing a 2-0 deficit, and as we know, only 35 teams in 962 series have come back from 2-0 to win (gosh: you mean teams that lose games usually lose series?).So here's to Brian, Al, Debbye and all the other 'Leafers' out there (yes that's my term, and I'm sticking with it!): go Maples! er...Leafs!
Just a bit of a note, nothing all that important really...Saddam's WMDs have been found.
New evidence out of Iraq suggests that the U.S. effort to track down Saddam Hussein's missing weapons of mass destruction (WMD) is having better success than is being reported. Key assertions by the intelligence community that were widely judged in the media and by critics of President George W. Bush as having been false are turning out to have been true after all.But of course, we all know that, regardless of the facts, no WMDs will really be found until the New York Times blares the news on their front page...or maybe page 24A?
In virtually every case - chemical, biological, nuclear and ballistic missiles - the United States has found the weapons and the programs that the Iraqi dictator successfully concealed for 12 years from U.N. weapons inspectors.
The Iraq Survey Group (ISG), whose intelligence analysts are managed by Charles Duelfer, a former State Department official and deputy chief of the U.N.-led arms-inspection teams, has found "hundreds of cases of activities that were prohibited" under U.N. Security Council resolutions, a senior administration official tells Insight.
"Saddam Hussein's prohibited missile programs are as close to a slam dunk as you will ever find for violating United Nations resolutions," the first official said. Both senior administration officials spoke to Insight on condition that neither their name nor their agency be identified, but their accounts of what the United States has found in Iraq coincided in every major area.
Sudan has ordered the removal of Syrian missiles and weapons of mass destruction out of the African country.Now how exactly did Syria get these weapons and components in the first place? They don't have the capacity to create this stuff, so they have to either purchase it, or import it. And what neighbor was recently looking to move large quantities of WMD at better than wholesale prices?
Arab diplomatic and Sudanese government sources said the regime of Sudanese President Omar Bashir has ordered that Syria remove its Scud C and Scud D medium-range ballistic missiles as well as components for chemical weapons stored in warehouses in Khartoum. The sources said the Sudanese demand was issued after the Defense Ministry and Interior Ministry confirmed a report published earlier this month that Syria has been secretly flying Scud-class missiles and WMD components to Khartoum.
The sources said the Bashir regime has been alarmed over the prospect that the United States would discover the Syrian arsenal and conclude that Damascus and Khartoum were cooperating in the area of missiles and WMD. They said this would have delayed or dashed U.S. plans to lift sanctions from Sudan.
A U.S. official confirmed the Syrian missile shipments to Sudan, saying they were meant for use against rebels in the south.
Wow. Now this is something you'd never see in North America. For one, it's a clear acknowledgement of perspective and opinion. For two, it takes serious chutzpah.
SADDAM-supporting MP George Galloway blew his top yesterday after The Sun sent him a barrel of OIL.I can't help but laugh at Mr. Galloway - his name was on the list of Saddam's bribery beneficiaries discovered in Iraq and released worldwide, and he takes umbrage when someone confronts him about it? I think he's got some 'splainin' to do.
Mr Galloway claims he has never seen one - so we arranged for him to have his own 200-litre drum.
It came as the Glasgow Kelvin MP fiercely denied pocketing ?1million from Iraqi tyrant Saddam.
His name was on a list of people allegedly rewarded by the dictator with vouchers for millions of barrels of oil.
We delivered our drum, complete with Sun logos to the front door of his £500,000 [1.2 million CAD] home in South London.
It sat in his drive for three hours before he dragged it away and hid it from view in an 8ft privet hedge.
One passer-by applauded our gesture and said: "Good on the Sun for sticking it to Galloway. He's so oily."
Angry Mr Galloway, 49, told Sky News yesterday: "I have not benefited by a brass farthing from Iraq, the Iraqi regime or any businessman dealing with Iraq. This is a smear campaign."
And he was less than a barrel of laughs about The Sun's gift of oil.
When we asked if he would comment on why his name had appeared on the list put before the US congress, he said: "I don't have to explain myself to The Sun. I'm not going to talk to you. Why talk to guttersnipes?"
Shall we take that as a No then, George?
The story that has been bouncing around the blogosphere for months now has finally caught the attention of Big Media.
ABC News reported Wednesday that Iraqi Oil Ministry documents showed that Benon Sevan, who was in charge of the oil-for-food program, directed which company should handle alleged bribes in the form of vouchers he received to buy oil, and also implicated two other U.N. officials. In January, the Iraqi newspaper Al-Mada listed 270 former Iraqi Cabinet officials and legislators, diplomats, officials in companies and journalists from more than 46 countries suspected of illegally profiting from the program.A quick google will bring you up to date as to what's going on, so I won't waste space here with a recap. But I will point you to a rather new blog that is closely following events as they develop.
'War without the UN is unthinkable," huffed The Guardian's Polly Toynbee a year ago, just before it happened. For a certain type of person, any action on the international scene without the UN is unthinkable. And, conversely, anything that happens under the UN imprimatur is mostly for the unthinking.I was arguing with a few friends during the run-up to the American invasion of Iraq, and the issue was raised that the UN was a necessary body for world peace. Today, with all this new information at my fingertips, I say 'hooey.' [I'd say something stronger, that would more accurately represent my feelings on the subject, but I try to avoid that kind of language. -- Ed.]
No matter how corrupt and depraved it is in practice, the organisation's sunny utopian image endures. Say the initials "UN" to your average member of Ms Toynbee's legions of the unthinking and they conjure up not UN participation in the sex-slave trade in Bosnia, nor the UN refugee extortion racket in Kenya, nor the UN cover-up of the sex-for-food scandal in West Africa, nor UN complicity in massacres, but some misty Unesco cultural event compered by the late Sir Peter Ustinov featuring photogenic children.
Any moral standing the U.N. possessed ended soon after U.N. weapons inspectors returned to Iraq. On January 25, 2003, 29-year-old Adnan Abdul Karim Enad jumped into a U.N. inspector's jeep, screaming "Save me! Save me!" As television cameras rolled, U.N. security guards dragged him from the vehicle and handed him to Iraqi soldiers.There's a lot more, and you owe it to yourself to read.
Pat Tillman, former safety for the Arizona Cardinals, has died in Afghanistan.
Pat Tillman overachieved in football, and just about everything else. He worked his way from seventh-round draft pick to starting safety for the Arizona Cardinals, then walked away from millions of dollars to join the Army Rangers and serve his country. This week, he paid with his life. Tillman was killed in an ambush Thursday night in Afghanistan. He was 27.Indeed, like all of our soldiers throughout world, Pat Tillman is a modern-day hero. He and all of his like-minded compatriots should be celebrated as such.
"Pat represents all that is good with this country, our society and ultimately the human condition in general," said Seattle Seahawks general manager Bob Ferguson, who was GM with the Cardinals when Tillman was drafted.
"In today's world of instant gratification and selfishness, here is a man that was defined by words like loyalty, honor, passion, courage, strength and nobility. He is a modern-day hero."
You have our deepest gratitude for your sacrifice. Our prayers are with you.
This is a terrifying look into the mindset of many in the Middle East [emphases in original].
In an article in the Egyptian government daily Al-Gumhouriyya titled 'The Secret Israeli Weapon,' deputy editor Abd Al-Wahhab 'Adas accused the Jews of perpetrating all terrorism throughout the world, including the Madrid bombings. The following are excerpts from the article:(1)As Damian Penny notes, this is why Israel needs nuclear weapons. Disgusting.'The Zionist Jews are Behind All the Violent and Terror Operations that have Occurred Everywhere In the World'
"If you want to know the real perpetrator of every disaster or every act of terrorism, look for the Zionist Jews. They are behind all the violent and terror operations that have occurred everywhere in the world. [They do this] first of all in order to slap [the label of the attacks] on the Arabs and Muslims, and second to harm them, distort their image, and represent them to the world as terrorists who endanger innocents. What is even more dangerous is that after every terror operation they perpetrate, they leave a sign, clue, or traces meant to show that the perpetrators are Arab Muslims.
Well, this was just too good to pass up. It would appear, for all their rhetoric on the subject, that Canadians just can't get enough of American beer:
Upheaval at Molson as well as Labatt takes place amid indications that U.S. giant Anheuser-Busch Cos. Inc.'s Budweiser is poised to unseat Labatt Blue as the top-selling beer in Canada....Budweiser has "had tremendous momentum over the last few years," said Bob Scott, president of Toronto-based Ascot Marketing, which tracks the industry.Hmmm...interesting, no? The article continues:
Some critics wonder if it isn't too late in the game for the big boys to turn things around.So tell me (a non-drinker), if Canadian beer is so much better than American beer (a point that has been shoved into my head more times than I can count), why are Canadians buying more of the American stuff? Are they choking down 'bile' to save a few bucks? Or is it that American beer is actually better than most of my friends would care to admit?
"They have a really tough marketing problem," said Chris Staples, a partner at Vancouver advertising agency Rethink. He says brands like Blue and Canadian as mass brands that are in danger of losing their appeal in a splintering market.
"Mass brands like Canadian and Blue that once spoke to a huge cross-section of people are endangered. The danger is, if you try and recalibrate to attract a more youthful customer you end up turning off your core consumer."
He believes that both Molson and Labatt missed "one of the major trends in marketing over the last 10 years: the extension of the mainstream brand equity into niche markets."
Well, I'm back in TO again...for the day, anyway. As I was passing the time until my mid-afternoon review, I thought I might work out a few thoughts I've been having over the last few days. Ready for some blind rambling? Me, too:
[A bit of out-of-nowhere comment first - anyone who doesn't own both of Five For Fighting's latest two albums should go purchase them...now. Pop in the second, and play "100 Years" as you read this, to get the feeling I'm currently having. -- Ed.]
I was involved in quite a number of deeper discussions this past week, most of which occurred on the weekend. It got me to thinking, as most things do, about the nature of disagreements, and the purpose they serve in every day life. Given the nature of this blog, its contents and its readers, I have inevitably come across a lot of argument and disagreement on various issues. I've also come to the resigned conclusion that I'm not going to change the minds of most people (if that were the point, I think I'd go crazy from the frustration). So why do we, as humans, insist upon persisting in vehement and (occasionally) violent discussion, if it's not going to bring about change in our opponents?
I think my answer has a few parts. First, it's not a given that our oppenents won't change their minds. The possibility is very slim, perhaps - maybe so slim as to be infintessimal - but hope springs eternal, as they say.
Second, the focus of debate and discussion is not always on the two parties arguing their sides. Quite often, there are a number of third parties that are watching and listening to debates; and just as often, those watching have not yet made up their minds on whatever issues are being discussed.
It's an interesting construction that forms. It's certainly not directly intentional, it just-kinda-sorta-happens this way. Every time I've been involved in a deep discussion, there have almost always been more people around than just myself and my 'opponent.' And the thing is, even if they aren't exactly interested in the exact contents of the debate, per se, they are (like most humans) drawn to the note of competitiveness in the tone of the discussion. And indeed, it is a contest - but we aren't competing for the minds of the opposite sides, we're 'fighting' for the affirmation of the third-party. So those innocuous bystanders who just happen upon the argument (assuming, of course, it's not of an intensely personal focus) become the de facto prize and judge.
So we are competing when we debate and discuss, but it's for the minds and opinions of those with whom we are only peripherally acquainted.
Third, it's the nature of human frailty to attach our egos to ideas. To ego-identify with ideologies or dogmas or concepts is a dangerous thing, but it happens all the time, to everyone. So when we, who are deeply invested in an idea or concept, take a defensive fight-for-our-ego stance when we realize that someone doesn't agree with us, it becomes intensely personal - even if the issue itself is generally benign. But because we've attempted to equate the truthfulness of our position with our personhood, we feel personally attacked (and are liable to fly off the handle rather quickly in defense) when those who disagree with us speak up.
And why do they speak up? Because everyone broadcasts their ego wherever they are. We do it in our speech, in our body language, in our demeanor. Everything we do, generally speaking, has some aspect of ourselves in it. Sometimes we crave affirmation of our ego, sometimes we're looking to attack an overly aggressive ego-presentation, but it always boils down to 'me vs. them.'
Argument, discussion, and debate are intrinsically wired into our lives. We can't escape it, unless we use it to find those who completely agree with every aspect of our personal ego and just seclude ourselves to living with them (very impractical, not to mention impossible). So if we have to live with it, why not make it valuable?
That is, why not be open to ego-critique? Sure it's painful, but in the end, it's all that will save us from a massive waste of energy - which is really all that argument is, assuming nothing changes afterward. The success of work is not measured in how much effort one exerts, but in how much is accomplished. Wouldn't it be better, then, to give argument a purpose that can be achieved? So that all this frustration is not in vain?
Tell you what, I'll go first: I hereby promise to fully examine the positions that others present to me, even as I argue against them - so that I might be open to correction in my thinking.
That wasn't so hard. Now you try...
Folks, you've got to make The Religious Policeman regular reading. From the site description:
A Saudi man's diary of life in the "Magic Kingdom", where the Religious Police ensure that everything remains as it was in the Middle Ages.It's now on my BlogRoll, and will be something I check into everyday.
In Memory of the lives of 15 Makkah Schoolgirls, lost when their school burnt down on Monday, 11th March, 2002. The Religious Police would not allow them to leave the building, nor allow the Firemen to enter.
You want the future of Canada?
A Christian dinner at a Calgary hotel on Saturday night was invaded by a pack of masked hooligans calling themselves the "Queer Militia". They disrupted the dinner, hurling obscenties and chanting against the diners, calling them "bigots" and generally ruining the evening. They left just before police arrived.The video may be seen here - option-click (right-click) and 'download link' ('save as') to watch.
The diners simply closed their eyes and prayed.
I'm taking a bit of a break from my studying just now, and wanted to post about something I came across this afternoon.
Those of you who know me know that I'm a rather big fan of Orson Scott Card and his various fiction. I enjoyed Ender's Game so much that I finished the novel 25 hours after first picking it up. While I wasn't quite as quick about completing Seventh Son, I think I may have enjoyed it even more.
All this to say that I've got a lot of emotional investment in Card's work. So how do I respond to the news that they are making Ender's Game into a film? With a mixture of elation and trepidation.
It's not the same as Lord of the Rings in my view, because with LOTR you had a 'doable' story for a movie. Granted, it would (and did) take a lot of effort and technology to bring it about, but it's still a feasible book-to-film transfer. I'm not so sure that EG is.
Think about it - the primary characters in EG are all under the age of 10, with the main character starting at age 6. How in the world do you accurately cast this film? Unless you are M. Night Shyamalan, I don't think it's possible to get the required performances out of children this age - and even he might shy away from displaying on film what Card does with his characters on the page. Violence between children, both technological and physical (those of you who have read the book know what I mean), may not go over too well with audiences. Shyamalan himself said (on the DVD commentary track of the Sixth Sense) that showing a child cry on the screen has the effect of totally draining your audience of emotional resource - how much more so for depicting the wanton cruelty of children?
Further difficulty is summed up by Card himself:
No matter who writes the script, there are only a hundred and twenty pages available to tell a story that took more than five times that many to tell in novel form. Trying to include everything would make a lousy movie. Something is going to get left out.So not only are there tremendous casting obstacles to overcome, but we're also going to lose quite a bit of the story in general. This, of course, is to be expected in any move adaptation, but I wonder now if the project might be trying to do the impossible.
Okay, so yes - technically I'm finished with classes and assignments (I just finished the last paper today), but I still have to prepare for my final exams. Also, I'm taking a break - not just from school, but from blogging, too. Never fear, it won't be that long, but I need some time to recuperate after the stress of those last two or three weeks.
I've got a final this coming Monday, a review for my second final on this coming Thursday, and my second (and final) final on the 3rd of May. Lots of time there for rest and relaxation, and by the time I'm wrapping up that last test, I should be getting in gear for the summer courses I'm finishing off - these are the last 1 and 1/2 credits I need to graduate.
As it stands now, I'm spending the majority of my time at my family's home in Hamilton. When it gets closer to the beginning of summer classes, I'll be back in Toronto and, as a result, closer to my computer (which, by the way, is soon-to-be replaced...). Closer to my personal CPU means more apt to blog - hence, you can all expect a return to (relatively) normal in just over two weeks.
Until then, you owe it to yourself to go read Let It Bleed, The Western Standard's Shotgun, and Mader Blog. Those are the three Canadian blogs that I haven't plugged enough of late - all are well done, well written, and, well, right. (After all, they agree - for the most part - with me...and what other definition of 'right' is there?). Of course, you should already be paying daily visits to Andrew, Debbye, Damian, and Jaeger (among others); but if you aren't, go do so now. And if you need more material, you can always glance at my BlogRoll for pointers. Go ahead, expand your horizons!
I may blog again in the intervening weeks, if the mood and opportunity strike, but if I don't: I'll talk to y'all in three weeks time!
Okay, I'll admit right of the bat that this feels like fluff, but (as others have noted before me) I think it's a great example of modern media and what I like to call 'bias-bleeding.'
Now, normally, on recaps of the Miss USA pagent, you expect to hear the usual high-minded platitudes and rather naive expectations of the winners in their responses to the question about what they are going to try and do with their newly won position. The usual suspects generally file in here - world peace, starving children, save the whales, etc. So what did this year's winner say?
A Republican, [Shandi Fennessey] told Reuters she would use her position to help explain America's involvement in Iraq. "What needed to be done had to be done," she said.Never mind the tautology, the point she's obviously making is that she supports the US's actions in the liberation of Iraq. Now go take a look at the Associated Press' version of the story. Notice anything? Huh. The quote's not there. Matter of fact, they don't mention what she'll be doing with the title at all.
Ah, I can't resist - I'm done with all my work, and I should be collapsing into a bed right now, but this is just too good to pass up:
Here's the problem for the Democrats. You can't be both for and against unilateral action. You can't be both for and against a pre-emptive attack against a known enemy who has vowed to do us harm. You can't talk about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction in the 1990s and then pretend now that they never existed. You can't call for toppling Saddam Hussein and then criticize someone for actually doing it. Actually, I guess you can do these things, because that's exactly what the Democrats have been doing.Evan Coyne Maloney nails it again. The Democrats are the Quantam Party: We're All Over The Board.
According to principles of quantum mechanics, it is possible for a subatomic particle to occupy multiple positions at the same time. Perhaps the Democrats hope to become the quantum party. If so, it explains why John Kerry, the consummate Quantum Candidate, is the perfect person to head the Democratic ticket this fall. Here's a man who criticizes President Bush for not giving our troops in Iraq sufficient supplies and equipment. But when he was given a chance to vote for an $87 billion package to supply our troops, he ultimately voted against it. (Although, in fairness to Kerry, I should note his nuanced stance on the issue: he explained his vote by saying, "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.")
Well, folks - aside from one last paper - that's it. I've pulled through the toughest week of the semester; and though I've had a few stumbles, I'm still in good shape where it counts.
I can't tell you how good it feels to be free...more free than I was yesterday, that is. Why can't I tell you? Because I don't know how it feels yet. It hasn't quite sunk in. But hey - now I can read all those books I've been meaning to get to! (Expect a review of Mystic River - both book and film - over at The Entertainment Center sometime soon).
No 'serious' blogging for me just yet - I'm going to take some time off, maybe come back after Easter Sunday to rattle off some more drivel. In the meantime, if you need a fix (I'm looking at you, Brian), head on over to Let It Bleed and take a gander. He's just as insightful as Trudeaupia and a bit more prolific. I added Mr. Tarantino to my BlogRoll (now powered by Bloglines, whom I highly recommend) a few weeks ago, but failed to alert anyone to the addition. Well, I'm telling you now - if you read Trudeaupia every day...or multiple times a day (even though he doesn't write more than once a day)...go see Let It Bleed.
Whew - bed time for Austin. It's about time I had a full night's sleep.
Whew! Here I sit, on Wednesday, circa 2pm EST (or is it EDT? I can never remember), in the library across the path from my third of four appointments today. I've gotten through Monday's opening half of my CanLit final, Tuesday's double-whammy Ancient Israel paper/final, this morning's CanLit wrapup, and my appointment with the registrar. Now I've got around 45 minutes before my Buddhism 'presentation' (really just a group talk) and then it'll be another two hours until my Philosophy of Math final. And Brian is complaining about his fix?? [BTW, Brian, you really need to correct your Permanent Link feature - there's something wrong in your template. I can help this weekend, if you'd like/need. -- Ed.]
Ah, well. To tide you over, Brian (and the other myriad readers I have who can't get enough of this junk - ha!), here's a PowerLine entry that expands upon my Ann Coulter post a few days ago.
When the terrorists murdered American servicemen in Somalia in 1993, Clinton retreated. When they plotted to assassinate former President Bush and the Pope, Clinton had no comment. Even when they plotted to assassinate President Clinton himself in the Philippines in 1995, Clinton took no visible offense. When, in 1995, a plan to blow up twelve airliners simultaneously over the Pacific was discovered at the last moment, Clinton thought no response was necessary. When more than 300 people were killed in the bombings of two American embassies in 1998, Clinton finally reacted by attacking a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan--but only, to all appearances, to distract attention from Monica Lewinsky's grand jury appearance the same day. When a bomber was discovered en route to Los Angeles in 1999, intending to blow up that airport on the eve of the millenium, Clinton was unconcerned. When the USS Cole was attacked in Yemen early in 2000 and seventeen sailors murdered, Clinton vowed retribution in the form of a military reprisal, but never got around to doing anything before leaving office. And, of course, most notoriously, Clinton had at least two opportunities to kill or capture Osama bin Laden, but passed on them because he wasn't sure the lawyers would approve.Hope that helps...I'll be back to semi-regular posting after Easter. Now, to the next test!
I tend to refrain from referencing Ann Coulter in my posts. As a pundit, she can be as shrill and vindictive as the worst of them, even if she does theoretically agree with positions that I hold. (Interestingly, left-leaning Bill Maher considers her a close friend). However, despite her slip-ups in the past, I need to link what she has written today. It's something that needs reading. It's too detail-oriented to excerpt, so just go Read The Whole Thing™.
[HatTip to Let It Bleed.]
Latest Music On iTunes