This column by Andy Borowitz is brief but fun, and when you think about NK nut-job Kim Jong-Il, well…

Raven at And Rightly So! has posted an excellent list of positive accomplishments in Iraq that MSM venues like the New York Times and other liberal “news” sources flat out ignore because, though it’s important for Americans to know about them, these treasonous, pitiful scumbags would rather lie to the public via omission than show that President Bush’s liberation of the Iraqi people is bearing fruit.

It really pisses me off that institutions that are trusted by the American people to keep them informed of current events are blatantly bullshitting the public, using that trust as a propaganda tool to try to make a sitting President look bad and to push a leftist agenda that doesn’t even remotely resemble the concepts that founded the United States of America and made this nation great.

Anyway, here is Did You Know….    

Radio talk show host Michael Graham(WMAL, Washington, DC), commented recently that “We are at war with a terrorist organization named Islam,” and immediately CAIR(Council On American-Islamic relations) zeroed in on the radio station. In a Washington Post article,

A local radio talk show host touched off complaints from an Islamic civil rights organization yesterday after repeatedly describing Islam on the air as “a terrorist organization” that is “at war with America.”

The organization, the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), asked the station to take disciplinary action against Michael Graham, who hosts WMAL-AM’s late-morning call-in program.

Michael Graham said Islam is a “terrorist” group. (By Stephen Salpukas)

A station executive, Randall Bloomquist, said yesterday that Graham’s comments were “amped up” but justified within the context of the program. He said the station, which is owned by the Walt Disney Co., had no plans to reprimand Graham.

The show host touched off the flap during a discussion of the Muslim community’s response to recent acts of terrorism. Graham suggested the fault lies with Muslims generally because religious leaders and followers haven’t done enough to condemn and root out extreme elements. “The problem is not extremism,” Graham said, according to both CAIR and the station. “The problem is Islam.” He also said, “We are at war with a terrorist organization named Islam.”

So, the station backed him up, and the only thought I had was, “good for them.”

Read the entire article here

On CAIR’s website, they had this to say.

But somehow, in the end, due to pressure on station owners ABC and Disney by CAIR, WMAL gave Graham the boot, another media venue giving way to the demands of political correctness that is increasingly stifling any truth and opinion in the “news” media that does not reflect the liberal viewpoint, right or wrong.

On CAIR’s website, they cite that their mission is to “enhance understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, and empower American Muslims.”

Hmmm, my understandin’ o’ Islam is, it’s got somethin’ to do with blowin’ folks up, ain’t that raht? 

An’ them bombers sure got them a real unique way o’ encouragin’ that there dialogue, ain’t they?

They sure protected a passle o’ them civil liberties back on September 11th of ‘01.

Yup, an’ any o’ them there Muslims‘d be pretty durn empowered oncet they git issued one o’ them suicide vests they set such store on, I s’pose it’s the Islamic fashion o’ the new millenium, or some such….

Living in San Francisco(not for much longer, thank God!) and “getting out quite a bit” I meet a lot of so-called feminists on a pretty regular basis. I have yet to meet one that is not a liberal, and I have yet to meet one that is not a hypocrite.

Why?

Here are women living in a free country, so free that it permits them to openly and vitriolically lambast their government, their president and the “reigning” GOP with a tenacity a hundred times more than would be needed to land them in a prison, a torture chamber or both in a lot of countries, including some of those that support global terrorism.  

These American feminists enjoy the right to go out without a father or brother escort without worrying about getting a critical, bloody beating or worse from male family members, and they can go out without having to cover their faces. These American feminists enjoy the right to go as far as they wish in both education and career venues under the law of the land. They are accepted as leaders in business, politics and in the military.

They purport to champion the cause of women’s rights and equality, all a lie as they take the stand of the Angry Left, protesting and obstructing wherever possible our efforts to liberate Muslim countries in which the women are both treated and viewed as fifth class citizens, slaves to husbands, brothers and even sons who can beat them or even kill them with impunity, where a woman who is not appropriately attired is pelted with fruit, rocks, whatever comes to hand, beaten by religious police or viewed as eligible for rape.

Why do these feminists not give the proverbial “flying fuck” about these women in Muslim countries? Because they hate Bush. Bush doctrine has freed women in Iraq and Afghanistan and caused women in other repressive Islamic countries to start rethinking their situations, and had Clinton had the spine to do what needed doing during his second term in office and beaten Bush to the punch, you can bet these same feminists would have been singing his praises.

Unfortunately, Slick Willy’s lightweight handling of terrorism and his obstructionism of national security operations(ie interagency cooperation between external intelligence and internal security agencies) were strong factors in the ability of terrorists to bring us 9/11.

But that’s what it’s all about where feminists are concerned: Supporting our liberation of these societies and the resultant freeing of their female populations would mean supporting a Bush agenda. Rather than do that, the rank and file feminist would just as soon see her millions of ”sisters” continue to be repressed, veiled, beaten, disrespected from birth to death. Is hypocrisy a strong enough term, do you think?

****************************

Perhaps one reason most Islamic nations are so backward is because they don’t allow their women to contribute, and that means they exclude potential major assets for bettering their lot and coming into the modern world.

Women in free countries have more than proven their value to our societies as a whole, in business, politics, science, journalism, culture, and there have been quite a few women inventors. Check out the site, it’s definitely worth reading and there are several pages listing women through U.S. history and their inventions in a wide variety of areas.

One of the most enjoyable and thought-provoking novels I’ve read in quite awhile was Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code. I think the concept of the Sacred Feminine is very real. Being Jewish, I can tell you that in my religion, women are considered very special and their contributions on all levels are welcome. A woman of our faith doesn’t need liberal feminists to do her talking for her. The Jewish-cum-atheist women or those who denounce Judaism or even deny God’s existence for social convenience, on the other hand, feel the need to support feminist movements that no longer serve any purpose save espousing the farthest left causes that come down the pike, whether they have anything to do with women’s rights or not. Of course, today it seems like all liberal based organizations are united in their War On Bush, and national security, the liberation of oppressed peoples and all other considerations be damned.

***************************

Women from both sides of the aisle who lean toward supporting groups like NOW should really give more thought to the actual level of sincerity these people have evolved to, and to what they actually support before sending them money or signing petitions on their behalf.

The feminist movement of today cares less about women’s rights and more about liberal political agendas. Period.

Given the events of the last sixteen days, one has to wonder if al-Qaeda and their murderous minions around the world are going into some sort of frenzied overdrive. Surely they’re doing their best to isolate themselves from the support and safe harbor they once enjoyed profusely from fellow believers(countries and individuals) in Islam.

In Iraq, they butcher infinitely more Muslims on a 9 to 5 basis than they do ”occupying infidels,” even while purporting to speak for Islam.

On 7 July 05 in London, a city that has traditionally welcomed Muslims and allowed them to practice their faith without hindrance, these Islamofascists detonated bombs  in three subway stations and aboard a double decker bus that claimed scores of lives and caused hundreds of injuries and massive property damage.

Members of London’s large Muslim population began expressing concerns that the bombings might precipitate a new surge of anti-Islamic aggression among Londoners.

On 21 July 05 in London, another series of bombings, these of comparably less damage and death toll rocked the London tube network.

On 22 July 05 in London, Metropolitan Police officers pursued a “south Asian” male onto a train in a tube station and capped him five times(the man, attired suspiciously in a loose fitting coat and carrying a ruck sack, had fled when approached by police and, suspected of being a suicide bomber, was taken out as a precaution against his setting off a bomb), killing him.

Members of the local Muslim population began expressing concerns of a new ”shoot-to-kill” policy among police that might lead to the deaths of innocent Muslims mistaken for terrorists.

It may be noted at this point that many Muslims in London and elsewhere have begun openly deploring the acts of terror that they claim is not the way of Islam, only that of an extremist minority and *get this* have been applying the term “terrorist” to the equation, previously a rare choice of reference coming from believers in The Religion of Peace.   

It seems al-Qaeda and friends are beginning to royally piss off their own fellow Muslims in the west and elsewhere.

On 23 July 05, early this morning, terrorists suicide bombed sites in the popular Egyptian beach resort Sharm el-Sheikh, destroying the most popular hotel, damaging neighboring hotels and businesses and killing more than 80 people, injuring at least 200 others. 

A group claiming links to the al Qaeda organization said it carried out the bombings in retaliation for “crimes committed against Muslims,” according to an Internet statement.

Considering the fact that the majority of the dead and injured(one of the bombers detonated himself and his car at a locale that was a local hangout, where the victims were mostly young Muslims, many of whom were service industry employees who worked at the hotels and other tourism venues in the resort town) were Muslims, it seems to me that this entire terrorist attack, though there were tourists killed who were from Europe and Asia, was a “crime committed against Muslims.”

The Sharm al-Sheikh bombings have drawn condemnation even from the Islamofascist theocracy in Iran, from Jordan and several other Muslim countries, and of course Kofi Annan of the useless UN deplored the terrorist atrocity along with most western governments.

Are the Jihadis painting themselves into a corner by committing “acts of war” against their own? Even the Muslims living in western countries like Britain have to see that Osama and friends are fomenting anger by host country natives against resident Muslims, causing suspicion and prejudice that are inherent in human nature, despite what terrorism’s apologists and other “intellectuals” might think, when a specific group of people is the source of countless acts of deadly aggression against everyone else. Terrorism, as it continues to rear its hideous head in western states, will inevitably bring about the institution, dissenters be damned, of blatant racial profiling at airports as a standard policy. Terrorism in the west is as disruptive to law abiding Muslims living in western cities.

And no one, not a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Hindu, a Christian, a Jew nor anyone else can honestly say that these terror groups are not making war on their own kind as much as they are on western democracies or coalition troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

So these animals-without-their-own-sovereign-state have, in the last couple of weeks, made it unarguably plain that they are at war not only with a few countries, but with the entire ”rest of the world.”

Meanwhile, in London, it turns out that the man the Metropolitan Police waxed in the tube was the wrong man. Despite any criticism of the police regarding that development, let’s face it: The police had probable cause to suspect the man might be a suicide bomber and he did run from them. Taking him out was the only way they could have assured that he wouldn’t have a chance to “do the deed.”

“To give license to people to shoot just like that, on the basis of suspicion, is very frightening,” Azim Tamimi of the Muslim Association of Britain told BBC television.

“It is human lives that are being targeted here, whether by terrorists or in this case unfortunately by people who are supposed to be chasing or catching the terrorists.”

Sure, Azim, but how would you feel if they hadn’t shot the fleeing man and he had been a suicide bomber, and he had taken the afforded 2 or 3 seconds’ opportunity to blow up both himself and scores of commuters? I side with the cops.

The sooner the law abiding world Islamic community joins the Global War On Terror, without reservation, to help destroy the extremists who claim to be mass-murdering on behalf of all Muslims(I suppose that also applies to those Muslims they kill, go figure), the sooner we might put an end not only to the al-Qaeda threat, but to the social and other inconveniences it is causing millions of Muslims who say they want to live in peace. 

As for all you apologists here at home who believe(or if you’re not profoundly stupid, shit-for-brains-morons and you’re simply comfortable with Americans being murdered by terrorists “to make Bush look bad”) that terrorism is America’s fault, I sincerely hope that if, God forbid, there are any further terrorist bombings on U.S. soil, the victims only include your ilk and not those of us who support our President and the GWOT. You want to endanger the rest of us by obstructing our defensive measures — and yes, those include our presence in Iraq, the Patriot Act, racial profiling at airports and the Camp Delta detention center at Guantanamo Bay – so it’s only fair that you, not the rest of us, pay any price incurred by your picayune political agendas.

It seems that numerous liberal-approved organizations that start out with the best intentions have a penchant for turning hard to port and establishing strong solidarity with extremist loony left organizations, joining their struggles to turn the United States into either an anarchist state or a socialist one, depending on how far asea the org happens to be.

PETA(People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals)’s has gone that route, big time. Among other things, they have donated more than $150,000.00 to criminal orgs like ELF(Environmental Liberation Front), an organization classified as enviro- terrorists by the F.B.I., to help defend arsonists and murderers. Their leaders encourage them to participate in illegal activities such as burning down restaurants, medical labs and banks.

These people are a true menace 2 society.

The following links are courtesy of Consumer Freedom.com:

First, 7 Things You Didn’t Know About Peta but definitely should.

Shocking, but true.  The next link is a petition to cut off Peta’s federal tax exempt status, a reasonable demand in view of what they’ve been playing at.

I must admit that it was the title of the petition that first caught my eye, “Take A Bite Out Of PETA.” Having been watching some DVDs of La Femme Nakita TV episodes, I thought they meant Peta Wilson and was all set to go, then I read on and found they meant…. Oh, well.

Just kidding.

Take A Bite Out Of PETA

To get an even more in-depth description of PETA and its activities, click here. You’ll also find that the year and a half old petition linked above is still valid by clicking the appropriate box in the right-hand sidebar. I “signed” it without hesitation.

Today’s activists want to force you to eat nothing but beans and greens, and wear nothing but cotton, rayon and rubber. They want to ban hunting, fishing, zoos, rodeos, and circuses. Some want to permanently end Kosher slaughter. They even want to outlaw the use of animals in the search for cures for AIDS, Parkinson’s Disease, and cancer….  

Sorry, guys, no can do, I’m a confirmed carnivore. You order the ’sprout salad and tofu, I’ll be the happy dude in the booth, there, having the 20 oz. T-bone with all the trimmings. Bon apetit. 

I’ll probably have a leather jacket with me, a leather belt holding up my pants and leather shoes or sneakers on my feet, and if I bring a date, she’ll quite possibly have a fur coat along. She won’t be eating roots and berries, either.

You might recall the recent story from North Carolina about the two PETA members getting caught out regarding the murder and subsequent disposal of dead cats and dogs in a dumpster, well they were to be  having their day in court yesterday.  

More from Hampton Roads.com, a little attempted damage control by PETA’s boss lady.

Back to that Islamic website again: This time it is to view the “winners” of the Annual Islamophobia Awards  presented on 31 May 2003.

Check ‘em out. Bush was the big winner, of course. Tony Blair was a winner also. Go check out the winners. I’m glad I ran across this, because it has confirmed what I thought was the true definition of the term Islamophobic to begin with.

Islamophobic: Any infidel who is opposed to being a) slaughtered by Muslims in the name of Allah, and b) enslaved by a theo-fascist government. 

So okay, I guess that makes most of us here in America, with the exceptions of most folks in the Bay Area, of course, Islamophobics. It is, of course, supposed to be an insulting term, implying that were we normal, we would simply submit ourselves to the nearest mosque for instant beheading.

Ohhhhkayyyy….

Last night, President Bush nominated John G. Roberts to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court.

President Bush nominated federal appeals court judge John G. Roberts Jr. to the Supreme Court, choosing a candidate with a long enough history in conservative legal circles to delight Republicans and an affable demeanor and short paper trail that could make him hard for liberals to attack.

Naturally, women’s groups are already beginning to carp that the President didn’t choose a woman to replace O’Connor, but look: Bush has already proven that he picks the people, regardless of gender or race, that he feels are the best for respective jobs. Here, he has another major consideration as well, and as the first paragraph in the Wall Street Journal article quoted above says, he needed also to consider whom he figures has the best chance of getting through the confirmation process with its inherent hostile Democrats. The short paper trail, as pointed out, gives the Democrats less ammo for turning the process into the same kind of three ring circus they’ve turned all other such transactions into of late. Sure, they’ll still pull the same obstructionist bullshit they have been, but the President apparently believes they’ll have a much harder time finding material to use against Roberts.

Roberts has, in the past, stated that he is anti-abortion, but when later queried, he said that since Roe vs Wade is the law, it is to be observed as such. Roe vs Wade is one of the liberals’ largest concerns, the right to murder fetuses under the dubious “scientific” pretense that they are not yet human life.

I suppose that all we can do now is sit back and see what the Dems will hit the nominee with to try to throw yet another stumbling block in the president’s way.

Read the article here.

Back on 16 June I posted about Starbucks boss Howard Shultz and his support of Israel, and one of the links I posted was to this Islamic website.

The above link will take you to the site, whose last entry is, at this time, as of 4 May 05. Reading the “Innovative Minds”(that’s a good one!) site illustrates the paranoia and bigoted single-mindedness of the Muslim.

“Campaign Against Operation Christmas Child” about shoeboxes of Christmas gifts sent to children in poor, largely Muslim countries by an organization called Samaritan’s Purse and how those shoeboxes are a way of stealing children from the religion(Islam, of course) of their parents because the head of Samaritan’s Purse, Franklin Graham, is “an Islamophobe” and a “bigot,” and because religious tracts are often handed out with these boxes.

I suppose that while these gifts as is are evidently abominable, they would be okay if the shoeboxes contained Semtex and detonators. It’s quite alright if their children are incinerated or blown to pieces, just don’t let them accept any gifts from Christians.

There’s also a BBC Radio moderated audio interview/ debate between a Muslim cleric and Graham. 

Anyway, follow the link and give the site a read.

In the “Good Day For Following Links” Department, I followed one from Michelle Malkin’s blog to Radio Blogger, where an interview with Victor Davis Hanson, author, writer of newspaper and magazine articles, book reviews, op-eds and Senior Fellow of the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, by Hugh Hewitt of Hugh Hewitt.com.

This interview is an absolute must-read, excellent questions and answers, the interviewee both highly informed and possessing a first class analytical mind that gets right to the heart of things. It’s about how serious our government is about fighting the Global War On Terror(GWOT).

The interview transcript is here.

Here is a quote I think refutes just about every argument the Democrats use against the Bush Administration regarding the GWOT and the economy.

“…we have more gross revenues coming in after the tax cut than before. The deficit’s going down. The problem is spending, not a revenue problem. Within four weeks after 9/11, we conducted this sophisticated military campaign seven thousand miles away. And in less than seven weeks, we took out that God-awful regime, and put democracy where it had never existed before. We took Saddam out in three weeks. We stayed on to try to create a democratic government . There’s change in Lebanon, Syria, places like Libya, Pakistan’snuclear roguery is being exposed. So, it(the mainstream Democratic Party)’s just oblivious to that. But it is symptomatic that we’ve had a midterm election, we’ve had another election since 9/11, and the electorate, even after the unleashing of the New York Times, CBS, Michael Moore, the electorate still doesn’t trust Democrats.”  

Read the entire transcript, it’s worth it…