Sean Penn can now rest easy knowing he is the sole defender of all that is good and holy in the impoverished, earthquake ravaged nation. Wyclef Jean has been deemed ineligible to run in the November 28th Haitian presidential election.
The worst part is Jean’s proposed candidacy ended in a whimper. He made the mistake that has happened to countless neophyte, would be politicians and out of their usual stomping grounds lawyers make all the time--he did not read the local rules before filing. Jean did not meet the residency requirement, which said he must have lived in Haiti for five consecutive years prior to filing.
Jean has been in the United States since he was a young boy. While he has oe much good charity work for his native country, he does not live there. This fact seemed to be what irritated Penn. Jean lives in wealthy luxury I the United States, but decides to swoop into Haiti like a white knight o horseback. Haitians might resent such a person, considering the wealth and lifestyle gap with them. How Penn misses his hypocrisy would be beyond me if I had not had the displeasure of listening to his holier than thou clueless lectures before and therefore have a firm grasp of his mindset.
Jean is a unabashed celebrity progressive type with no political experience, but since Haiti could not possibly fall any lower, I was hoping he might make it as president. At the very least, he would not have been part of the tiny elite who have been robbing the already miserably poor population for decades. In fact, when I first heard jean was disqualified from running, I assumed said elites had cooked up some excuse to keep him out of the race. It is even sadder to learn it was just a careless mistake on Jean’s part.
Showing posts with label International. Show all posts
Showing posts with label International. Show all posts
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Russian Cult Worships Gadget from Chip 'n Dale's Rescue Rangers
I would almost guess this story was a hoax if I was not so convinced the introduction of Gadget into the Disney pantheon marked te beginning of the furry fetish.
If Olympic gymnast and all around cutie Shawn Johnson ever goes missing, we now know where to start looking:
If Olympic gymnast and all around cutie Shawn Johnson ever goes missing, we now know where to start looking:
Monday, August 9, 2010
The Ground Zero Mosque
One good turn deserves another. Which idea do you like better:1. Building the world's largest BBQ-strip club joint across the street from the mosque.
2. Convincing Benny Hinn to build a megachurch/theme park in downtown Baghdad.
Both will have Muslim heads exploding, but the latter will also force progressives to embrace their hypocrisy by explaining why they support the Ground Zero mosque i the name of religious tolerance, but not but not the reverse. After all, it would be a show of Christian charity after a war, right?
Did not think so.
Friday, August 6, 2010
Wyclef Jean Runs for President of Haiti; Sean Penn Wads His Panties Over the Idea
Haitian born rapper, singer, and ex-member of The Fugees Wyclyf Jean officially filed the necessary papers to run for president of Haiti. Opinionated actor and philanthropist Sea Penn is not happy about the prospect:
I dismiss Penn’s first accusation right off the bat. It is motivated by the stereotypical progressive notion that all capitalist corporations are evil entities enriching themselves off the poorest among us. In fact, capitalism has raised more people ought of poverty than any other economic system on Earth.
I note Penn cannot name any of these interests in the United States who will be taking advantage of a potential Jean presidency.
The second accusation is personal classless ego stroking. Penn is mad he has been on the ground aiding Haiti since the earthquake hit early this year--a noble gesture on his part--but upset Jean might get more credit by assuming political power. Who does Jean think he is muscling in on Penn’s spotlight like that?
Jean was born in Haiti and established a fund in 2004 to aid his impoverished countrymen. If you do the quick math, that means Jean was helping his people a full six years before the earthquake struck, which is also likely six years before Spicolli could even find Haiti on a map.
Penn has highlighted allegations Jean misappropriated $ 400,000 I donations to his charity, an allegation Jean denies.
"This is somebody who's going to receive an enormous amount of support from the United States, and I have to say I'm very suspicious of it, simply because he, as an ambassador at large, has been virtually silent. For those of us in Haiti, he has been a non-presence,"So Penn believes Jean is a corporate shill who has no connection to Haiti?
I dismiss Penn’s first accusation right off the bat. It is motivated by the stereotypical progressive notion that all capitalist corporations are evil entities enriching themselves off the poorest among us. In fact, capitalism has raised more people ought of poverty than any other economic system on Earth.
I note Penn cannot name any of these interests in the United States who will be taking advantage of a potential Jean presidency.
The second accusation is personal classless ego stroking. Penn is mad he has been on the ground aiding Haiti since the earthquake hit early this year--a noble gesture on his part--but upset Jean might get more credit by assuming political power. Who does Jean think he is muscling in on Penn’s spotlight like that?
Jean was born in Haiti and established a fund in 2004 to aid his impoverished countrymen. If you do the quick math, that means Jean was helping his people a full six years before the earthquake struck, which is also likely six years before Spicolli could even find Haiti on a map.
Penn has highlighted allegations Jean misappropriated $ 400,000 I donations to his charity, an allegation Jean denies.
"I haven't seen or heard anything of [Wyclef Jean] in these last six months that I've been in Haiti. I think he's an important voice. I hope he doesn't sacrifice that voice by taking the eye off the very devastating realities on the ground," Penn said. "I want to see someone who's really, really willing to sacrifice for their country, and not just someone who I personally saw with vulgar entourage of vehicles that demonstrated a wealth in Haiti that, in context, I felt was a very obscene demonstration."I sense jealousy on Penn's part more than any legitimate concern.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Ahmadinejad Attacks Paul the Octopus
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the famed eight legged world Cup prognosticator of spreading Western propaganda and superstition. He also said Paul the Octopus is a symbol of Western Decay and decadence.
I checked twice to make sure this article was not from The Onion before i posted. it is from The Telegraph.
It takes a special kid of crazy to think that having a little fun with an octopus randomly picking soccer teams to win is black magic or some such. Even if Paul did make better predictions than Alexi Lalas.
Should we have Paul predict the outcome of the Israeli bombing of Iranian nuclear sites next?
I checked twice to make sure this article was not from The Onion before i posted. it is from The Telegraph.
It takes a special kid of crazy to think that having a little fun with an octopus randomly picking soccer teams to win is black magic or some such. Even if Paul did make better predictions than Alexi Lalas.
Should we have Paul predict the outcome of the Israeli bombing of Iranian nuclear sites next?
Monday, July 12, 2010
Swiss Refuse to Extradite Roman Polanski
After a ten month house arrest which had much of Hollywood's panties in a wad, the Swiss have decided they will not extradite Roman Polanski. Their rationale is opposition to the "intricacies" of United States extradition law and that Polanski has moved respectfully through Switzerland in the past.
Presumably, the latter rationale means the director has not rugged and anally raped any thirteen year old Swiss girls. Unfortunately, he has done that in the United States ad ought to pay for it. The social contract demads it.
I would speculate the opposition to United States extradition law is European thumbing of their noses at the United States in general. The idea that Polanski has been a model visitor to Switzerland does not say much for them. This is the land of suicide tourism where people can go to take their own lives unhindered by any counseling or sense of morality. To a culture of death, what is the rape of a young child thirty years ago, particularly by such a gifted filmmaker? Obviously, a child’s innocence is inconsequential compared to the immortality of great “art” like Chinatown and Death and the Maiden.
You have to wonder now if more resourceful members of NAMBLa are not considering setting up shop in Switzerland now.
Presumably, the latter rationale means the director has not rugged and anally raped any thirteen year old Swiss girls. Unfortunately, he has done that in the United States ad ought to pay for it. The social contract demads it.
I would speculate the opposition to United States extradition law is European thumbing of their noses at the United States in general. The idea that Polanski has been a model visitor to Switzerland does not say much for them. This is the land of suicide tourism where people can go to take their own lives unhindered by any counseling or sense of morality. To a culture of death, what is the rape of a young child thirty years ago, particularly by such a gifted filmmaker? Obviously, a child’s innocence is inconsequential compared to the immortality of great “art” like Chinatown and Death and the Maiden.
You have to wonder now if more resourceful members of NAMBLa are not considering setting up shop in Switzerland now.
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Six Reasons Americans Do Not Like Soccer
I have kept an eye out for essays attempting to explain why the United States does not like soccer. They have been popping up on a regular basis since the American team was eliminated from the World Cup. Most essays have drawn the conclusion Americans hate losing to smaller countries if the author is being kind or that racist Americans do not like sports which the best players are foreigners of various shads of brown.
Both assessments are unfair. Granted, like George Patton told is men, Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser, there are better reasons for the American distaste for soccer. Observers appear too eaten up with political correctness or a blameAmerica first attitude to look at the issues honestly.
To begin with, it is unfair to single out the United States as the only country where soccer is not popular. India and Pakistan are far more interested in cricket. Russia is as into hockey as Canada. Basketball and ping pong attract more enthusiasm in China than does soccer. Even in parts of soccer crazed Latin America, the sport competes with baseball for hearts and minds. Soccer is ot exactly the worldwide phenomenon it is advertised to be.
Let us break down specific reasons why soccer is not popular in the united states.
First, it is socialist sport. Teams run back and forth for up to six miles a game, often with no one ever scoring. Soccer is a sport that rewards its players for nothing. The Spanish player who won the game against Germany earlier this week had not scored a goal since October 2009. How the heck was he even on the team? Apparently, it is that collectivist spirit that everyone contributes even when they do not. Oh, and the roving bands of hooligans destroy private property in a riot when it does not work out for them.
Teams can advance I the World Cup because of scoreless draws? That is just not natural. I blame the metric system, which is, of course, a communist plot.
Second, soccer is pot-colonial. There are two points here: tiny, third world countries gain victories over larger, wealthier nations, then go home to celebrate the victory as revenge for 200 years of oppression or countries like France import foreign soccer players from former colonies in order to build up their teams. Whichever the case, the united states does not relate.
Third, soccer is a sissy sport. So called “soccer moms” let their kids play it because it is a no contact sport where the score is rarely even kept for the youngest players and everyone gets a trophy. No one ha to feel like a loser because even if score was kept, it was probably atie game anyone. Americans think tie games are like kissing your sister on the lips. You are smooching a girl, but still…
In America, we want there to be a definite winner so badly, we like concepts such as sudden death overtime.
Woe be to anyone who does make contact with another player. He will collapse with pain as though he has been shot with a high powered rifle and roll on the ground in agony for…what? the chance to get hauled off on a stretcher in dramatic fashion or the bonus injury minutes that might be tacked unto the game? Why are those bonus minutes so magical? It reminds me of those kids I school who would make no effort in their regular work, then beg to eat a fried dog turd for extra credit. There is some magic in getting that elusive bonus.
Fourth, soccer is a defensive sport. One team scores and then plays keep away therest of the game. We have difficult time grasping exactly why a player will pass the ball to a certain teammate who is no where near the goal. In our minds, a player constantly tries to score when he has the ball. If he cannot score, he is trying. to pass the ball to someone who can. The object is to rack up as many points as possible.
Yes, there are some American sports in which running out the clock is a strategy. It is generally considered unpartisan-like behavior. We certainly do not hug every player on the team, the coaches, and the guy who mows the grass during every substitution in order to run the clock out.
Fifth, I do not think Americans readily understand a good kick can send soccer ball hurtling at 75 miles per hour towards someone’s head. It I easier to visualize what happens when a 280 lb defensive lineman knocks a quarterback down or a batter gets an 85 mph pitch right in the knee.
Finally, American do not get the penalty system. Yellow cards, red cards, what earns a penalty kick. It is difficult to keep track pg, particularly since there appears to be national bias in officiating.
Anyone else have insight?
Both assessments are unfair. Granted, like George Patton told is men, Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser, there are better reasons for the American distaste for soccer. Observers appear too eaten up with political correctness or a blameAmerica first attitude to look at the issues honestly.
To begin with, it is unfair to single out the United States as the only country where soccer is not popular. India and Pakistan are far more interested in cricket. Russia is as into hockey as Canada. Basketball and ping pong attract more enthusiasm in China than does soccer. Even in parts of soccer crazed Latin America, the sport competes with baseball for hearts and minds. Soccer is ot exactly the worldwide phenomenon it is advertised to be.
Let us break down specific reasons why soccer is not popular in the united states.
First, it is socialist sport. Teams run back and forth for up to six miles a game, often with no one ever scoring. Soccer is a sport that rewards its players for nothing. The Spanish player who won the game against Germany earlier this week had not scored a goal since October 2009. How the heck was he even on the team? Apparently, it is that collectivist spirit that everyone contributes even when they do not. Oh, and the roving bands of hooligans destroy private property in a riot when it does not work out for them.
Teams can advance I the World Cup because of scoreless draws? That is just not natural. I blame the metric system, which is, of course, a communist plot.
Second, soccer is pot-colonial. There are two points here: tiny, third world countries gain victories over larger, wealthier nations, then go home to celebrate the victory as revenge for 200 years of oppression or countries like France import foreign soccer players from former colonies in order to build up their teams. Whichever the case, the united states does not relate.
Third, soccer is a sissy sport. So called “soccer moms” let their kids play it because it is a no contact sport where the score is rarely even kept for the youngest players and everyone gets a trophy. No one ha to feel like a loser because even if score was kept, it was probably atie game anyone. Americans think tie games are like kissing your sister on the lips. You are smooching a girl, but still…
In America, we want there to be a definite winner so badly, we like concepts such as sudden death overtime.
Woe be to anyone who does make contact with another player. He will collapse with pain as though he has been shot with a high powered rifle and roll on the ground in agony for…what? the chance to get hauled off on a stretcher in dramatic fashion or the bonus injury minutes that might be tacked unto the game? Why are those bonus minutes so magical? It reminds me of those kids I school who would make no effort in their regular work, then beg to eat a fried dog turd for extra credit. There is some magic in getting that elusive bonus.
Fourth, soccer is a defensive sport. One team scores and then plays keep away therest of the game. We have difficult time grasping exactly why a player will pass the ball to a certain teammate who is no where near the goal. In our minds, a player constantly tries to score when he has the ball. If he cannot score, he is trying. to pass the ball to someone who can. The object is to rack up as many points as possible.
Yes, there are some American sports in which running out the clock is a strategy. It is generally considered unpartisan-like behavior. We certainly do not hug every player on the team, the coaches, and the guy who mows the grass during every substitution in order to run the clock out.
Fifth, I do not think Americans readily understand a good kick can send soccer ball hurtling at 75 miles per hour towards someone’s head. It I easier to visualize what happens when a 280 lb defensive lineman knocks a quarterback down or a batter gets an 85 mph pitch right in the knee.
Finally, American do not get the penalty system. Yellow cards, red cards, what earns a penalty kick. It is difficult to keep track pg, particularly since there appears to be national bias in officiating.
Anyone else have insight?
Monday, July 5, 2010
NASA's New Mission: Muslim Self-Esteem
One of NASA's new mission objectives does not belong here. Can you guess which one?
1. Re-inspire children to study science and math
2. Expand our international relationships.
3. Reach out to the Muslim world.
The only rationale I think of for handing the third responsibility to NASA is that Barack Obama must buy into the idea Muhammed based Allah on the pagan moon god. Hence, the crescent as a symbol of Islam. If he is not careful, the Muslims will declarea holy war on us for blasphemy.
Or would that be redundant? We are already the Great Satan.
Now, do get me wrong. The Muslim world’s accomplishments in science and math have been sorely lacking since they stopped making egg timers and inventing algebra for the more fruitful pastimes of suicide bombings, beheading infidels, and searching for a woman with a full set of teeth. But I really do not see why that is a United States responsibility in general, much less a NASA one specifically.
1. Re-inspire children to study science and math
2. Expand our international relationships.
3. Reach out to the Muslim world.
The only rationale I think of for handing the third responsibility to NASA is that Barack Obama must buy into the idea Muhammed based Allah on the pagan moon god. Hence, the crescent as a symbol of Islam. If he is not careful, the Muslims will declarea holy war on us for blasphemy.
Or would that be redundant? We are already the Great Satan.
Now, do get me wrong. The Muslim world’s accomplishments in science and math have been sorely lacking since they stopped making egg timers and inventing algebra for the more fruitful pastimes of suicide bombings, beheading infidels, and searching for a woman with a full set of teeth. But I really do not see why that is a United States responsibility in general, much less a NASA one specifically.
Friday, July 2, 2010
The Hippies Finally Score Two Generations Later
P. J. O'Rouke points out a angle in the whole Gen. Stanley McCrystal fired because of a Rolling Stone interview debacle--after 40+ years, the hippies finally scored.
I am echoing the same exaggeration as O’Rourke, but the observation does have merit. Rolling Stone, a magazine libertarian O’Rourke has written for, has along counter-culture lefty tradition. The magazine is largely written by young liberals for barely literate rock fans and aging hippies who cannot quite get over the fact the Summer of Love ended 43 years ago.
But look, no amount of John Lennon bed ins, doobie rolling, or peace signs ever forced a command change in Vietnam. Flower Power could only dream of forcing out Westmoreland.
I am neither celebrating the “accomplishment” or overselling it. Rolling Stone and its antiwar philosophy has not won a thing. Our policy in Afghanistan will continue, perhaps under better management with Gen. David Petraeus in charge. But I do have to note we have not had such low class media wield such influence before.
It was kind of funny when the National Enquirer blew the lid off the John Edwards lovechild scandal. It will be interesting if they got it right about Al Gore’s sexual assault rumor. But affecting a change in military command/ that is a bit uncomfy.
You should read all of O’Rouke’s article for a detailed take on the foreign policy angle.
I am echoing the same exaggeration as O’Rourke, but the observation does have merit. Rolling Stone, a magazine libertarian O’Rourke has written for, has along counter-culture lefty tradition. The magazine is largely written by young liberals for barely literate rock fans and aging hippies who cannot quite get over the fact the Summer of Love ended 43 years ago.
But look, no amount of John Lennon bed ins, doobie rolling, or peace signs ever forced a command change in Vietnam. Flower Power could only dream of forcing out Westmoreland.
I am neither celebrating the “accomplishment” or overselling it. Rolling Stone and its antiwar philosophy has not won a thing. Our policy in Afghanistan will continue, perhaps under better management with Gen. David Petraeus in charge. But I do have to note we have not had such low class media wield such influence before.
It was kind of funny when the National Enquirer blew the lid off the John Edwards lovechild scandal. It will be interesting if they got it right about Al Gore’s sexual assault rumor. But affecting a change in military command/ that is a bit uncomfy.
You should read all of O’Rouke’s article for a detailed take on the foreign policy angle.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Anna Chapman: Spy for Russia?
Maybe so. Give me an hour--better make that two--with her and I will find out. We have certainly come a long way from the Cold War Era vixens like Natasha Fatale:
Anna Chapman: Spy for Russia?
Maybe so. Give me an hour--better make that two--with her and I will find out. We have certainly come a long way from the Cold War Era vixens like Natasha Fatale:
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
The Biggest Question Regarding Gen. McChrystal's Rolling Stone Interview
Why the heck is the military brass in Afghanistan talking to Rolling Stone in the first place?
You would think after Generation Kill painted the war in Iraq in such a bad light, the Defense Department would have learned a little something. Namely, the writing staff of Rolling Stone is a bunch of young liberals catering to a readership of aging hippies. They are going to present the military in the worst light imaginable.
It certainly is not going to help matters any if McChrystal is playing Col. Kurtz of the desert.
Of course, I cannot help but think McChrystal is just expressing the contempt the military has for Obama and the political leadership he has surrounded himself with. He is not supposed to say that, mind you, particularly not to an reporter.
You would think after Generation Kill painted the war in Iraq in such a bad light, the Defense Department would have learned a little something. Namely, the writing staff of Rolling Stone is a bunch of young liberals catering to a readership of aging hippies. They are going to present the military in the worst light imaginable.
It certainly is not going to help matters any if McChrystal is playing Col. Kurtz of the desert.
Of course, I cannot help but think McChrystal is just expressing the contempt the military has for Obama and the political leadership he has surrounded himself with. He is not supposed to say that, mind you, particularly not to an reporter.
The Biggest Question Regarding Gen. McChrystal's Rolling Stone Interview
Why the heck is the military brass in Afghanistan talking to Rolling Stone in the first place?
You would think after Generation Kill painted the war in Iraq in such a bad light, the Defense Department would have learned a little something. Namely, the writing staff of Rolling Stone is a bunch of young liberals catering to a readership of aging hippies. They are going to present the military in the worst light imaginable.
It certainly is not going to help matters any if McChrystal is playing Col. Kurtz of the desert.
Of course, I cannot help but think McChrystal is just expressing the contempt the military has for Obama and the political leadership he has surrounded himself with. He is not supposed to say that, mind you, particularly not to an reporter.
You would think after Generation Kill painted the war in Iraq in such a bad light, the Defense Department would have learned a little something. Namely, the writing staff of Rolling Stone is a bunch of young liberals catering to a readership of aging hippies. They are going to present the military in the worst light imaginable.
It certainly is not going to help matters any if McChrystal is playing Col. Kurtz of the desert.
Of course, I cannot help but think McChrystal is just expressing the contempt the military has for Obama and the political leadership he has surrounded himself with. He is not supposed to say that, mind you, particularly not to an reporter.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Mahmoud Abbas Opposes Lifting the Gaza Blockade
Mahmoud Abbas being the president of the Palestinian Authority who fears Hamas gaining weapons otherwise. Egypt supports the blockade for the same reason. Will all the useful idiots, including the one in the White House, supporting Hamas take notice? Do not hold your breath waiting.
The big question here is, with the political leadership in Palestine in favor of the blockade as an ati-terrorist action, why is Barack Obama urging an end to the blockade? In doing so, he is takig the most extreme Palestinian position on the issue--one the Authority president does not even share.
The million dollar question: is Obama motivated by a hatred of Israel or is he just such an amateur at foreign policy, he has no idea what the proper course of action is? What he is doing now is standing in opposition to Israel, Egypt, and the Palestinian Authority while supporting Hamas and its apologists in Turkey.
There is no "smart power" in that.
The big question here is, with the political leadership in Palestine in favor of the blockade as an ati-terrorist action, why is Barack Obama urging an end to the blockade? In doing so, he is takig the most extreme Palestinian position on the issue--one the Authority president does not even share.
The million dollar question: is Obama motivated by a hatred of Israel or is he just such an amateur at foreign policy, he has no idea what the proper course of action is? What he is doing now is standing in opposition to Israel, Egypt, and the Palestinian Authority while supporting Hamas and its apologists in Turkey.
There is no "smart power" in that.
Mahmoud Abbas Opposes Lifting the Gaza Blockade
Mahmoud Abbas being the president of the Palestinian Authority who fears Hamas gaining weapons otherwise. Egypt supports the blockade for the same reason. Will all the useful idiots, including the one in the White House, supporting Hamas take notice? Do not hold your breath waiting.
The big question here is, with the political leadership in Palestine in favor of the blockade as an ati-terrorist action, why is Barack Obama urging an end to the blockade? In doing so, he is takig the most extreme Palestinian position on the issue--one the Authority president does not even share.
The million dollar question: is Obama motivated by a hatred of Israel or is he just such an amateur at foreign policy, he has no idea what the proper course of action is? What he is doing now is standing in opposition to Israel, Egypt, and the Palestinian Authority while supporting Hamas and its apologists in Turkey.
There is no "smart power" in that.
The big question here is, with the political leadership in Palestine in favor of the blockade as an ati-terrorist action, why is Barack Obama urging an end to the blockade? In doing so, he is takig the most extreme Palestinian position on the issue--one the Authority president does not even share.
The million dollar question: is Obama motivated by a hatred of Israel or is he just such an amateur at foreign policy, he has no idea what the proper course of action is? What he is doing now is standing in opposition to Israel, Egypt, and the Palestinian Authority while supporting Hamas and its apologists in Turkey.
There is no "smart power" in that.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
The Anti-Israel Crowd Does Not Have Its Facts Straight
It never ceases to amaze me how, as Benjamin Netanyahu said, israel is forever guilty until proved guilty. The big problem is those who cannot differentiate between truth and propaganda. have a gander at Monkey Muck's effort, which manages to tie in Christian conspiracies, the myth Gaza is starving for lack of humanitarian aid, and the heroic efforts of jihadis to put Israel in its proper place.
I will be honest, I do not have a whole lot of sympathy for the Palestinian Authority. Yassir Arafat got the best peace deal he was ever going to get back in 2000 when Ehud Barak was willing to give up the farm. Arafat would have gotten a Palestinian state and a divided Jerusalem. Instead, he walked away and chose intifada. That is the heart of the naval blockade--Israel does not want weapons heading into Gaza because they will be used to kill Israeli citizens.
Two years`ago, Gaza started a war with Israel. that is why you have a naval blockade and members of the Obama administration, the most anti-Israel ever, supporting Israel's right to defend itself.
It is a complete fabrication that Palestinians arestarving. Hamas is refusing new shipments of aid because they do not have anywhere to put the stuff. Israel allows for overland shipments of humanitarian aid. Such aid has bee arriving for the Palestinians for over sixty years from the United Nations--aid which is largely paid for by United States. The naval blockade is not straggling anyone. It is keeping weapons out of the hands of terrorists who kill civilian men, women, and children without conscience.
Members of the "humanitarian flotilla have ties to Global jihad and were carryig enough weapons for small army. If you would like to see photos of the arsenal, here you go.
Here is the real kicker--this is not just an Israeli naval blockade. The Egyptians are also taking part. The Egyptians have the same problem with Palestinian terrorism perpetrated by Hamas. So forget any claims of right wing Christians supporting Israel to egg on the Armageddon or racist Jews. These are Arabs and Muslims who think keeping weapons out of Gaza is a good idea.
So forget the lies about the people of Gaza starving in the streets. It is not happening. But thanks to the naval blockade, the murder of Israeli civilians is not happening, either. You would think those who claim to never support massacres would applaud that. Perhaps they would if they ever got the facts straight.
I will be honest, I do not have a whole lot of sympathy for the Palestinian Authority. Yassir Arafat got the best peace deal he was ever going to get back in 2000 when Ehud Barak was willing to give up the farm. Arafat would have gotten a Palestinian state and a divided Jerusalem. Instead, he walked away and chose intifada. That is the heart of the naval blockade--Israel does not want weapons heading into Gaza because they will be used to kill Israeli citizens.
Two years`ago, Gaza started a war with Israel. that is why you have a naval blockade and members of the Obama administration, the most anti-Israel ever, supporting Israel's right to defend itself.
It is a complete fabrication that Palestinians arestarving. Hamas is refusing new shipments of aid because they do not have anywhere to put the stuff. Israel allows for overland shipments of humanitarian aid. Such aid has bee arriving for the Palestinians for over sixty years from the United Nations--aid which is largely paid for by United States. The naval blockade is not straggling anyone. It is keeping weapons out of the hands of terrorists who kill civilian men, women, and children without conscience.
Members of the "humanitarian flotilla have ties to Global jihad and were carryig enough weapons for small army. If you would like to see photos of the arsenal, here you go.
Here is the real kicker--this is not just an Israeli naval blockade. The Egyptians are also taking part. The Egyptians have the same problem with Palestinian terrorism perpetrated by Hamas. So forget any claims of right wing Christians supporting Israel to egg on the Armageddon or racist Jews. These are Arabs and Muslims who think keeping weapons out of Gaza is a good idea.
So forget the lies about the people of Gaza starving in the streets. It is not happening. But thanks to the naval blockade, the murder of Israeli civilians is not happening, either. You would think those who claim to never support massacres would applaud that. Perhaps they would if they ever got the facts straight.
The Anti-Israel Crowd Does Not Have Its Facts Straight
It never ceases to amaze me how, as Benjamin Netanyahu said, israel is forever guilty until proved guilty. The big problem is those who cannot differentiate between truth and propaganda. have a gander at Monkey Muck's effort, which manages to tie in Christian conspiracies, the myth Gaza is starving for lack of humanitarian aid, and the heroic efforts of jihadis to put Israel in its proper place.
I will be honest, I do not have a whole lot of sympathy for the Palestinian Authority. Yassir Arafat got the best peace deal he was ever going to get back in 2000 when Ehud Barak was willing to give up the farm. Arafat would have gotten a Palestinian state and a divided Jerusalem. Instead, he walked away and chose intifada. That is the heart of the naval blockade--Israel does not want weapons heading into Gaza because they will be used to kill Israeli citizens.
Two years`ago, Gaza started a war with Israel. that is why you have a naval blockade and members of the Obama administration, the most anti-Israel ever, supporting Israel's right to defend itself.
It is a complete fabrication that Palestinians arestarving. Hamas is refusing new shipments of aid because they do not have anywhere to put the stuff. Israel allows for overland shipments of humanitarian aid. Such aid has bee arriving for the Palestinians for over sixty years from the United Nations--aid which is largely paid for by United States. The naval blockade is not straggling anyone. It is keeping weapons out of the hands of terrorists who kill civilian men, women, and children without conscience.
Members of the "humanitarian flotilla have ties to Global jihad and were carryig enough weapons for small army. If you would like to see photos of the arsenal, here you go.
Here is the real kicker--this is not just an Israeli naval blockade. The Egyptians are also taking part. The Egyptians have the same problem with Palestinian terrorism perpetrated by Hamas. So forget any claims of right wing Christians supporting Israel to egg on the Armageddon or racist Jews. These are Arabs and Muslims who think keeping weapons out of Gaza is a good idea.
So forget the lies about the people of Gaza starving in the streets. It is not happening. But thanks to the naval blockade, the murder of Israeli civilians is not happening, either. You would think those who claim to never support massacres would applaud that. Perhaps they would if they ever got the facts straight.
I will be honest, I do not have a whole lot of sympathy for the Palestinian Authority. Yassir Arafat got the best peace deal he was ever going to get back in 2000 when Ehud Barak was willing to give up the farm. Arafat would have gotten a Palestinian state and a divided Jerusalem. Instead, he walked away and chose intifada. That is the heart of the naval blockade--Israel does not want weapons heading into Gaza because they will be used to kill Israeli citizens.
Two years`ago, Gaza started a war with Israel. that is why you have a naval blockade and members of the Obama administration, the most anti-Israel ever, supporting Israel's right to defend itself.
It is a complete fabrication that Palestinians arestarving. Hamas is refusing new shipments of aid because they do not have anywhere to put the stuff. Israel allows for overland shipments of humanitarian aid. Such aid has bee arriving for the Palestinians for over sixty years from the United Nations--aid which is largely paid for by United States. The naval blockade is not straggling anyone. It is keeping weapons out of the hands of terrorists who kill civilian men, women, and children without conscience.
Members of the "humanitarian flotilla have ties to Global jihad and were carryig enough weapons for small army. If you would like to see photos of the arsenal, here you go.
Here is the real kicker--this is not just an Israeli naval blockade. The Egyptians are also taking part. The Egyptians have the same problem with Palestinian terrorism perpetrated by Hamas. So forget any claims of right wing Christians supporting Israel to egg on the Armageddon or racist Jews. These are Arabs and Muslims who think keeping weapons out of Gaza is a good idea.
So forget the lies about the people of Gaza starving in the streets. It is not happening. But thanks to the naval blockade, the murder of Israeli civilians is not happening, either. You would think those who claim to never support massacres would applaud that. Perhaps they would if they ever got the facts straight.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Tropical Storm Agatha Uncovers Sinkholes in Guatemala
Tropical Storm Agatha Uncovers Sinkholes in Guatemala
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Olympic Mascots...From Hell
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

