Tuesday - December 11, 2012

hark comrades, glorious allies to gather for freedom and smite newest foe. who’s next?

This front page greeted us this morning.

I’ve already done my rant on the subject, maybe too often.  It’s one of those non rocket science events where this sort of thing was expected.

So this is all there is for this post. 

It’s nice that us and our most glorious former empires are not going to set boots on the ground. Of course, we can afford it. Money no problem.
Just take it from the public who always have plenty of spare cash to toss at various foreign adventures. It’s all for democracy so nobody will mind.

Posted by peiper     on 12/11/2012 at 05:49 AM   
Filed Under: • FREEDOM • Insanity • International • UK • USA •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - November 29, 2012

a bit of dark humor?

H/T New Jersey Yank who sent this, among other things.

The joke prompted me to look for a cartoon to go with it and darn if I didn’t find one quick.

Here’s the gag.  (hmmm. just thought about. Taint funny )

A Navy destroyer stops four Mexicans in a row boat rowing towards California. The Captain gets on the loud-hailer and shouts, “Ahoy, small craft. Where are you headed?”

One of the Mexicans puts down his oar, stands up, and shouts, “We are invading the United States of America!”

The entire crew of the destroyer doubled over in laughter. When the Captain is finally able to catch his breath, he gets back on the loud-hailer and asks, “Just the four of you?”

The same Mexican stands up again and shouts, “No, we’re the last four.  The rest are already there!”

When Hubert Humphrey was running for President, and one evening he was on the news with an old grizzled Indian Chief from out West somewhere. The Chief was talking with Hubert about his life, and one of the things the old Chief said was: “Be careful with your immigration policy. We got careless with ours!”

Posted by peiper     on 11/29/2012 at 04:30 AM   
Filed Under: • Illegal-Aliens and Immigration • USA •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - November 14, 2012

one of the penalties of being a member of the european union. time to leave?

Take serious note of this article, and be thankful if you’re reading this in America.
This is the typical kind of crap that the Brits have to put up with on an almost daily basis.

If anyone in the USA of any political party should ever seriously suggest that the USA should join a union of some kind with Europe, the kind of treaty or document the Brits signed onto, anything that in any way might bond or tie us to anything even remotely similar, than I would hope that some patriotic American would grab a gun and kill whoever suggested the tie. And to be on the certain side of things, kill the family as well to send a message that it would never be tolerated.  Not ever.  And don’t smugly kid yourselves that nobody in the USA thinks along the lines the jerks here do.  We have em okay. 
They think the euros are way civilized what with the death penalty banned and all, and would welcome courts and the same system that operate the European Court of Human Rights.

I have said this a few times and I’ll keep saying it cos I know it to be true.  There are agencies of the EU that actively fund things in the USA, usually to do with their version of what civil and human rights ought to be. They actively support and have funded anti death penalty groups in the states that still have it. That should bother you. It should piss you off. 

Take a good look and read the court’s take on this case.  Piss ant libtards.  Why are they still breathing?

Take a look at this. 

Illegal immigrant and failed asylum seeker handed £24,000 by Human Rights judges after ‘British law failed to protect her from slavery’ ( $37,248 )

An investigation by police officers found she was NOT a victim of slavery and was a criminal

A British judge also cast doubt on her credibility and described her story as ‘implausible’

By Steve Doughty

A failed asylum-seeker was handed thousands of pounds in compensation yesterday by European judges who claimed British law had failed to protect her from being treated as a slave.

The Ugandan came to Britain illegally on a false passport, became a care worker and was free to leave the house where she worked, the European Court of Human Rights heard.

Police investigating the 33-year-old’s case decided she was a criminal and a British judge cast doubt on her credibility, describing her story as ‘implausible’.

But the Strasbourg judges ruled that the woman, whose identity they shielded, suffered a breach of her rights as there was no UK law at the time specifically banning slavery. They ordered the Government to pay her £23,500, made up of £7,000 in compensation and £16,500 in expenses and costs.

The judgment marks another case in which Britain has been told that Acts of Parliament and common law have been inadequate to meet European demands.

Since then, the 2009 Coroners and Justice Act has been passed which specifically outlaws slavery.

However, Prime Minister David Cameron remains at odds with Strasbourg over the human rights judges’ demand that Britain allows convicted prisoners to vote.

The woman in the slavery case – identified only as CN – came to this country in 2002 on a false passport and visa provided by her uncle, identified only as PS.

He set her up as a care worker for an Iraqi couple in Leeds and £1,600 a month was paid for the work.

But, the woman alleged, the money was given to her uncle and she was never paid more than £20 or £40 when she was given an afternoon off each month.

She did not complain until 2006, four years later, when she collapsed in a bank and was treated in hospital after it was discovered she was HIV positive.

CN was given a flat by her local council, but her application for asylum, on the grounds she had fled sexual and physical violence in Uganda, failed.

Police investigations ended in 2009 following two inquiries into the woman’s complaints that she was held as a slave. A report from the Metropolitan Police Human Trafficking Team noted that she had been refused legitimate entry into Britain and had come in with a false passport and forged visa.

The woman had been paid through her relative ‘in order to hide from the authorities the fact that the victim did not have a national insurance number’.

The report went on: ‘If money was paid to her, then she would have had to pay tax and her false identity would have come to the notice of the tax office. This would then lead to her arrest and eviction from the UK.

‘There is no evidence to show that this female is a victim of slavery or forced labour. She willingly worked and was paid but she chose that the money should go to her uncle to conceal being in the UK. It is basically a situation that one criminal, her uncle, has taken all the proceeds of their crime.’

The British judge who heard CN’s asylum appeal ‘expressed serious concerns about the applicant’s credibility and found much of her account to be implausible’, the Strasbourg court heard.

But the European judges said that, because police investigated the complaints, they could not have been considered implausible. They insisted that the woman’s complaints were credible.

The court added that the inquiry should not have been carried out by a police unit dealing with human trafficking rather than slavery.

Britain was also obliged to prosecute any act aimed at enforcing slavery. The country’s law was ‘inadequate’ for the purpose, the European judges declared.

source

Posted by peiper     on 11/14/2012 at 01:40 PM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • EUro-peons • Illegal-Aliens and Immigration • International • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • UK • USA •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - November 11, 2012

Arizona, no jail time for muzzy turds who padlock girl for just talking to a boy

And this is in ARIZONA? 

The state in the United States of America?  That Arizona?  WTF?!

Yeah right.  These vermin wanna immigrate to the USA to become like us. Sure.  We all believe that. In a pig’s eye.
Where’s the justice for the teen treated like this?  Has Sharia law been accepted by the voters of AZ?  When did it fuckin happen?

In case you missed it, about a week ago in the same kind of situation, that is, a girl looked at boy. Just looked.
Her parents burned her with acid, she died a day later. They kept her from medical treatment, which might not have saved her anyway, and she might not have wanted to live.  Story was in the Mail but can’t find it now. Just pointing out that these animals are NOT redeemable.

I have often said that the one thing that will delay their eventual takeover of America, is our size and population. But maybe I was optimistic.
I think perhaps I belong to that group of ppl of like age, who are grateful to be too old to live long enough to see what’s left of our country’s eventual takeover by non-Americans and American enablers of the enemies both foreign and domestic.  Cos if something like this can actually happen in one of our states, my god, the home of Goldwater, if this happens there, there is NO HOPE!

WE ARE DOOMED!  (well, not exactly we but your great grandkids are)

I found the following but can’t recall where. And while jihad isn’t the subject of this post, this fits anyway because it’s all part and parcel of the rop.

The term “Islamofascism” implies that the rest of Islam is OK. But all Muslims - scholars, imams or lay people, will let you know that there is just one Islam, and it is guided by the koran. Finished. Period. Jihad is central to for the believer to achieve paradise. Its in the koran. Period. No Muslim will betray a Jihadi. Period.

Should these lice learn English well enough, and should they become citizens, they will VOTE!
Is that really what you want America?

Arizona:

Muslim family that beat teenage girl and padlocked her to a bed for talking to a boy spared jail time

Of course. To have put them in jail would have been “Islamophobic.”

“Iraqis spared jail time in Arizona for abusing female relative,” by David Schwartz for Reuters, November 7 (thanks to Pedro):

Members of an Iraqi family in Arizona who beat a teenage relative and padlocked her to a bed after she violated their traditional values by chatting to a male friend were spared jail time in a plea deal approved by a county judge on Tuesday.

In exchange for a guilty plea, Yusra Farhan, 51, was sentenced to two years probation on a charge of unlawful imprisonment of her daughter, 19-year-old Aiya Altameemi, at the family’s Phoenix home in February, court officials said.

The young woman’s father, Mohammed Altameemi, also received two years probation for disorderly conduct, and her 18-year-old sister, Tabarak Altameemi, received an identical sentence for assault, officials said.

Prosecutors said the incident started when Aiya was spotted leaving her high school with a young man. The father and younger daughter Tabarak confronted the young woman.

Police said Mohammed Altameemi became angry and took her home, striking her several times. Mother Farhan and daughter Tabarak also admitted to tying her to a bed with a rope around her waist that was secured with a padlock and beat her, according to court records.

Farhan told police she hit her daughter because she “was speaking to a male subject and her Iraq culture states a female is not allowed to be having contact with males because females are not allowed to have boyfriends,” court records said.

Aiya told school officials about the incident two days later and explained that “her family is trying to protect her and they want her to be a virgin for an arranged marriage,” according to court documents.

A county attorney spokesman declined comment on the sentence. Attorneys for the young woman’s family members could not be reached for comment.

This is the latest high-profile violence case in Arizona involving an Iraqi immigrant. In April 2011, Faleh Hassan Almaleki received 34 1/2 years in prison for running down his 20-year-old daughter in a Phoenix parking lot in what was described as an “honor killing.”

The [Hamas-linked] Council on American-Islamic Relations in Washington, D.C., has said such cases are isolated instances that occur sporadically and are widely chastised by the American Muslim community.

Of course! But they have done nothing to try to keep these “isolated instances” from happening again.

jihad watch

Posted by peiper     on 11/11/2012 at 05:01 AM   
Filed Under: • muslims • USA •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - November 08, 2012

a brit view of the election lost. a worthy read.

There are a couple of people I follow and like a lot over here and no surprise they are conservatives. One of them is named Richard Littlejohn, and I am sharing his comments with you here.  I have not included everything he wrote. I have included a few comments from ppl who do not like him, or Republicans or too many Americans unless they favors the left. Cos that is where these idiots live. On the left. Always. Just want you to see this for yourselves. 

Forget ‘hope and change’- this was a victory for fear and loathing
By Richard Littlejohn
Mitt Romney was right about one thing. He was secretly taped back in May telling fund-raisers that half the country would support Barack Obama because they depend on the government for all or part of their income.
Romney correctly identified America’s burgeoning entitlement culture as a major obstacle to a Republican winning back the White House.
‘There are 47 per cent of the people who will vote for the President no matter what, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe they are entitled to healthcare, to food, to housing, to you name it.’
Striking an almost defeatist note, he concluded: ‘I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their own lives.’
Romney’s leaked remarks caused a predictable storm of confected outrage, but his analysis was bang on the money. Just as Gordon Brown cynically constructed a client state in Britain to maximise Labour’s electoral advantage, so the Democrats deliberately drain the public purse to feed their supporters’ insatiable appetite for handouts.
When 47 per cent of the electorate depends to a greater or lesser degree on government largesse, the Democrats have only to target another four or five per cent of voters to secure a Striking an almost defeatist note, he concluded: ‘I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their own lives.’
Obama’s campaign this time was based on fear and loathing.
Romney was portrayed as a ruthless predatory capitalist, hell-bent on grinding ordinary Americans into the dust, sending their jobs abroad and denying them even rudimentary healthcare provision.
One advert showed Romney pushing an old lady in a wheelchair over a cliff. Another even accused him of causing a former employee’s wife to die of cancer. It was garbage, but it was effective.

With minorities flocking to Obama and America’s demographics shifting, can a middle-aged white man ever get elected again?

Meanwhile, the devastation visited upon parts of the North East remains every bit as awful as Katrina inflicted on New Orleans in 2005, and the clean-up just as patchy and poorly co-ordinated.
With minorities flocking to Obama and America’s demographics shifting, can a middle-aged white man ever get elected again?
(Mind you, Obama’s campaign featured so many white, middle-aged male celebrities that some of his rallies looked like TV adverts for erectile dysfunction medication.)
Obama’s victory wasn’t entirely down to minority support, though. The swing states which took him over the line are predominantly white, which suggests whites are equally comfortable with the idea of sucking on the government teat.

The worry is that the drift from a dynamic ‘can-do’ nation to a dependent ‘something for nothing’ society continues to stifle economic recovery. The world needs America’s red-in-tooth-and-claw capitalism to fuel global growth.
What’s of equal concern is that under Obama, as in Britain, rampant hostility to private enterprise and ‘the rich’ has flourished.
That probably cost Romney the presidency.
my money is on the Republican candidate in 2016 being Cuban-American senator Marco Rubio.
I watched Rubio electrify a Tea Party rally in Florida 18 months ago. He’s the most impressive young politician on either side of the Atlantic.
He could win and win big. But only if enough of his fellow Americans are prepared to start asking what they can do for their country, not what their country can do for them.

And below are a few examples of the typical response to this article.
The left is very much alive here. Sadly.

You are speaking out your bottom, Littlejohn. 47% of the population voted against Romney because they didn’t want to be crushed under the boot of rich men who would rather see them destitute, homeless or even dead in order to protect their wealth.  - ShadyAidy, Kimberley, 8/11/2012 0:32

y..a..w..n....The President of the United States is probably swivelling in HIS Oval office and some irrelevant non-entities are desperately frothing in the mouth. What a laugh. *where’s the pop corn? - Chinedu, London, United Kingdom, 8/11/2012 0:34

What a load of rubbish. U.S.A. is a two party state that elects its President by dint of how much money is spent on campaigning. Some D.M. journalists seem to forget that the world has moved on from the dark Victorian era and we now, the western world, live as socialist countrys. - Scargil, Cha Am, 8/11/2012 0:29

And those are just three of hundreds, not all but mostly in like manner. It does tend to piss one off big time.  Worse however are the posters who seem to believe they are experts on things American, having of course read all the lefty training manuals. It’s sort of like jumping on a bandwagon as well.  Bashing America is the done thing. Gotta be real cool ya know. And there’s nothin’ cooler then spouting off about America, even if you’ve never lived there. Heck, they even pick at us for what we call football. Any excuse will do.
Screw the bastards! Wish I could think of something with more wit, but I lack that ability.

LITTLEJOHN UNEDITED

Posted by peiper     on 11/08/2012 at 10:08 AM   
Filed Under: • Politics • UK • USA •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - November 05, 2012

WAITING FOR AMERICA …. today will tell if enough ppl have woken up

The photo scan below is of our morning paper yesterday, and is only one half of the entire center spread.

IT’S EARLY HOURS AT THE MOMENT IN SOME PLACES.  IT’S MY HOPE THAT BY LEAVING THIS UP AND RUNNING FOR AWHILE, SOME OF YOU WILL SHARE IT WITH OTHERS WHO WON’T HAVE SEEN IT AND WOULD NOT BE AWARE OF IT. THANK YOU.

When Mr Obama promised ‘change’ in 2008, what it turned out he meant was redistribution of income to the have-nots by milking the success of the haves.

By Simon Heffer
The Mail

America has an enviable choice when it goes to the polls tomorrow. The contest between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney isn’t just between a Democrat and a Republican: It is between two entirely different visions of the future of the world’s greatest power.

The choice is stark. It is between continuing a journey towards European-style statism and welfarism, which is what Obama is offering if he is re-elected, or reducing the size of the state and encouraging enterprise and individual responsibility, which is at the core of Mr Romney’s programme.

It is also a choice between more social liberalism – such as homosexual marriage – or reverting to a conservatism rooted in Christianity and traditional family values.

This experiment in socialism and welfarism has brought him severe criticism, because it has done nothing to boost employment, growth or stability. The failure of this experiment – in a country that became great on the back of individualism and enterprise – has deeply motivated the Republicans.

Any British politician who voiced the right-wing opinions of someone like the 1940s and 1950s novelist Ayn Rand (who inspired Mr Ryan and who observed that ‘the difference between a welfare state and a totalitarian state is a matter of time’) would be hounded out of public life.

The Democrats have sought to do this to Mr Ryan, but his ideas of wealth creation and individualism have millions of supporters still in America.
Those are the people he and Mr Romney are urging to turn out to vote tomorrow.

Because of the clear alternatives, it is one of the most crucial elections in America’s history.

If only we, in Britain, could hope for such a dramatic choice when we next go to the polls.

Source for all this, The Daily Mail.

Posted by peiper     on 11/05/2012 at 05:36 AM   
Filed Under: • Politics • USA •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - November 03, 2012

the deep divisions in American society

Romney, who wants to shrink the U.S. government, is on record as wanting to cut back the Federal Emergency Management Agency… which is the very department now responsible for post-Sandy recovery.
The vast majority of Americans can see that when a major catastrophe strikes, only central government can deal with the problems.
But the truth is that when this hurricane crisis has passed and this election is over, the deep divisions in American society will persist, with incalculable consequences for the nation.
I have a profound faith in the American genius. But unless the people and politicians of this great country can learn to find common purpose on big issues, its future will be blighted by their frighteningly divisive hatreds.

And so ends an article by Max Hastings in yesterday’s Daily Mail.
Now then, Hastings is a conservative writer and a well known historian. Which doesn’t mean you will like everything he has to say. And he had a heck of a lot to say. 

As he did here.

Forget the storm. The real dangers facing America are hatred, division and a collapsing political system

By Max Hastings

An astonishing number of Americans, almost all living in the vast middle of the country, really do believe God takes a hand in their politics, just as they are sure He frowns on Muslims, gays, socialists, gun control supporters and most folks on the east and west coasts (foremost among them the citizens of that sink of liberal iniquity, New York City).

But it is unnecessary to be an evangelical Christian to see that the devastating storm may have fractionally tilted this exceptionally close election to the advantage of Barack Obama.  The spectacle of him being presidential, touring flood-stricken New Jersey and co-ordinating relief and recovery efforts, should boost the Democrats.  But the fact that such a random event could prove to be a crucial factor in who occupies the White House for the next four years emphasises the profound divisions in this country.

For more than ten years, Democrats and Republicans have glared at and abused each other across a yawning chasm.
Last Saturday, I was in Chicago’s old Hilton Hotel for the first time since I reported the bitter and violent Democratic Convention of 1968, when Vietnam war protesters battled with Mayor Richard Daley’s cops on the streets outside, and clouds of tear gas drifted into the lobby. That was also the year when assassins’ bullets killed John F Kennedy’s brother Bobby and civil rights leader Martin Luther King.

Yet, although I vividly recall the passions and turbulence, nobody then suggested that the very process of democracy was imperiled.
The truth is that Americans have always taken pride in their system and its separation of powers between the Presidency, Congress and Supreme Court. Now, however, serious and thoughtful people argue that the constitution created in 1776 is cracking open at the seams.

A conservative-dominated Supreme Court routinely delivers judgments which seem partisan and occasionally even whimsical. For example, few justices display sympathy for even the mildest gun controls — though domestic shootings are a plague. Indeed, recent massacres in Wisconsin and Colorado did not prompt restrictions on weapons, but, instead, new rules in some colleges which allow students to carry guns on campus ‘for self-protection’.

Historically, the Supreme Court’s justices have been forces for national unity — for instance, on the issue of civil rights. Yet today their collective wisdom is being questioned as never before.

National unity.? Oh right.  I forgot.  Like the forced busing.  Yeah, that one sure brought us all together singing we are the world.

Even more serious is the situation in Congress.
Traditionally, the U.S. government is carried on through relentless horse-trading between the White House and the two parties on Capitol Hill — a process of which President Lyndon Johnson was a master in the 1960s. In recent years, though, bargaining has broken down.
Both parties, and especially the Republicans, behave in a way that sees them reflexively oppose anything proposed by the other. Such stonewalling has inevitably hampered action to curb the huge fiscal deficit.

For their part, most Democrats reject cuts in a welfare system that has become almost as unaffordable as Britain’s.

The Republicans, meanwhile, scorned a proposal for a bipartisan committee to address the deficit. They reject all tax increases and ignore the blatant unfairness of Mitt Romney paying just 14 per cent last year on millions earned from his investments, while most middle-class Americans pay more than double that rate.

At the same time, the poor and middle-class in America have seen their incomes shrink in recent years while the rich have become colossally richer. Official statistics show wealth divisions at a historic high.

Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz says: ‘Inequality in our society has become so extreme that it is adversely affecting our economy...it is no longer just a moral issue.’

This is a reality I was contemplating in Chicago this week as I looked at the glittering palaces of wealth that crowd the downtown skyline while, at the same time, beggars haunt Michigan Avenue.

This is not the only social problem.

There is a lot more at the link.  You will find some very interesting arguments among the many comments following the article.

What you’re reading is one man’s professional take on the state of America, and presented to his readership here in the UK. He may anger some but keep in mind, for all the time he has spent in the USA on his travels and on assignments, he still belongs to a foreign culture not used to American ways.  Most of these folks, not the left but many conservatives and others who have no link to either side, simply do not understand why in the face of mass killings, we don’t push for stiffer gun control.  They just don’t understand and I doubt there’s any way we can answer the questions that would make it clear.  And that’s just one issue of quite a few.  I gave up long ago but many still bring the subject up.

Then there’s another thing we read here and that’s New Orleans.  We read that large parts of the city and indeed the state are still in abysmal shape.  N.O.?  Still in bad shape?  I have no idea and only am made aware of it because ppl here are saying it.  But I haven’t checked the accuracy of that.  Maybe I should just so I can be informed.  Kind of embarrassing being asked about something in the USA by someone here, and me not knowing what the heck they’re talking about.

The other damn thing I keep hearing and have to scratch the old head over, is that America has a serious problem with, wait for it,
Obesity.  Say what?
Now why that should be a concern to anyone here is quite beyond my understanding.  I should think their number one concern would be street crime, knife attacks and brutal beatings by an out of control criminal class that is growing, and especially in light of the fact that thousands are being let out of jail who are very dangerous ppl.  But no. Obesity in the USA.  WTF?

Okay, here’s the LINK to the entire editorial.

Posted by peiper     on 11/03/2012 at 04:40 AM   
Filed Under: • Editorials • USA •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - October 27, 2012

politics usa ….

This is just a small portion of an article I found at The Wall St. Journal.

I used to read the hard copy version some time ago.  Don’t know what brought me to them tonight, but I stumbled on more than looked for this subject. Started reading and found it hard to stop, and so I thought some of you may find it of interest as well.

Personally, even without the author of this piece (Michael J. Totten) pointing this out to me, I got the feeling that both Romney and Obama were being, well, can I say delusional?
Romney thinks we would ever be in any position to do what he suggests?  Oh come on.  Does he drink or smoke things he shouldn’t?  No?  Then he should know better.

As for Obama, well I think everything that could be said has been said already but I’ll add this. He is not just delusional if he really believes what he is quoted as here.  He has slanted things and twisted them out of all truthful shape.  Even when I got no further than his line about attitudes about Americans changing, I knew at that point the man is full of beans.  Unless perhaps and it is always possible, that ONE person changed his mind about America and so Obama took that as meaning all of them did.  Stupid.  He says we “stood with them” but in fact I took all that guff he was spouting at the time as, sucking up to islamists.

So enough of what I think.  I posted this for the readership, here’s a part and catch the link for all of it.

WSJ for more

Mr. Romney said it first, early in the debate: “We’re going to have to put in place a very comprehensive and robust strategy to help the world of Islam . . . reject this violent extremism.” Later Mr. Obama spoke as though this objective is already on its way to being accomplished: “When Tunisians began to protest,” he said, “this nation, me, my administration, stood with them earlier than just about any other country. In Egypt, we stood on the side of democracy. In Libya, we stood on the side of the people. And as a consequence, there is no doubt that attitudes about Americans have changed.”

The Middle East desperately needs economic development, better education, the rule of law and gender equality, as Mr. Romney says. And Mr. Obama was right to take the side of citizens against dictators—especially in Libya, where Moammar Gadhafi ran one of the most thoroughly repressive police states in the world, and in Syria, where Bashar Assad has turned the country he inherited into a prison spattered with blood. But both presidential candidates are kidding themselves if they think anti-Americanism and the appeal of radical Islam will vanish any time soon.

First, it’s simply not true that attitudes toward Americans have changed in the region. I’ve spent a lot of time in Tunisia and Egypt, both before and after the revolutions, and have yet to meet or interview a single person whose opinion of Americans has changed an iota.

Second, pace Mr. Romney, promoting better education, the rule of law and gender equality won’t reduce the appeal of radical Islam. Egyptians voted for Islamist parties by a two-to-one margin. Two-thirds of those votes went to the Muslim Brotherhood, and the other third went to the totalitarian Salafists, the ideological brethren of Osama bin Laden. These people are not even remotely interested in the rule of law, better education or gender equality. They want Islamic law, Islamic education and gender apartheid. They will resist Mr. Romney’s pressure for a more liberal alternative and denounce him as a meddling imperialist just for bringing it up.

Anti-Americanism has been a default political position in the Arab world for decades. Radical Islam is the principal vehicle through which it’s expressed at the moment, but anti-Americanism specifically, and anti-Western “imperialism” generally, likewise lie at the molten core of secular Arab nationalism of every variety. The Islamists hate the U.S. because it’s liberal and decadent. (The riots in September over a ludicrous Internet video ought to make that abundantly clear.) And both Islamists and secularists hate the U.S. because it’s a superpower.

Posted by peiper     on 10/27/2012 at 02:10 PM   
Filed Under: • Politics • USA •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - October 25, 2012

an obama voter woo-hoo should this whatever it is even be voting?

Oh wow. take a look at this. And it votes too.

This is funny, you can also see the entire clip this comes from at the site.

Another one of those unplanned posts that just screamed, SHARE!!!

H/T http://www.mrctv.org/

Posted by peiper     on 10/25/2012 at 09:05 AM   
Filed Under: • Humor • Politics • Stoopid-People • USA •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - October 22, 2012

girl 12 shoots intruder …. cops take the creep to hospt. should have dumped in a ditch somewhere

H/T RichK
Rich posted the link in comments but I didn’t have time yesterday. Worth the wait.

Happy things turned out well for the young girl. 
Bet the media won’t be very interested in a story about a kid who managed to save the day because she had a loaded weapon and was ready to use it.

No kid should ever have to be in this position. Especially a young girl alone. Or any female. Of any age. Her mom should have trained her better though, so that she’d feel more comfortable shooting some creep in their home. Anyway, this is just another good reason why we will ALWAYS have guns in homes in the USA.  Don’t quite understand why the cops took the time to send the vermin to a hosp. ??? So what if he died?  What loss to society? And judging by his size, I kinda doubt that he was starving and looking for food. Yeah right. There’d be food in the bathroom the girl was hiding in. Sure. That’s where ppl always store grub.
I hope now her mom trains her that one shot is never enough.  Aren’t we supposed to keep firing til the clip was empty?  Seems I read that someplace. ??

Here’s a 911 clip. No way to embed.

YOUNG GIRL SHOOTS INTRUDER

Kendra St. Clair, 12, said she was just doing what she had to when she shot a home intruder Wednesday in Durant.

Posted by peiper     on 10/22/2012 at 04:21 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT • USA •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - October 20, 2012

Drones were circling above U.S. consulate during Libya attack, no rescue mounted. why not?

Good gosh it’s even worse then I originally thought.

I’m seeing this now for the first time. In fact I am getting ready to close for the night and made one last pass in mail and found this.

Here’s what one Brit has to say on the subject and it shames me I can’t seem to come up with words. I know Drew could.
Take a look.

Having failed to protect his people he then decides to trample on the memories of these poor men in order to hang onto power. If the media do not do their job and bring him to book then Obama will continue to prevaricate until after the election.This man is reprehensible he has no scruples or conscience.

- Sandy, Sheffield,

And here’s what that’s about.

Drones were circling above U.S. consulate during Libya attack but officials decided NOT to mount a rescue mission

U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens repeatedly pleaded with the State Department for additional security personnel
Republicans say the Obama administration denied the request for political reasons
The White House says it had no role in procuring security detail for Stevens

By Hayley Peterson and Jill Reilly

American drones were in the skies above the U.S. consulate in Benghazi as the deadly attack that killed ambassador Christopher Stevens unfolded, it has been revealed.

Defense department officials considered sending troops in to rescue the ambassador and staff, according to CBS News, but ultimately decided not to .

They would haven been able to watch the attack on-screen as it unfolded.

The revalations came a day after it emerged that U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens repeatedly pleaded with the State Department to ramp up his security team in Libya—requests that the Pentagon ultimately denied—in the weeks, days and hours leading up to the terrorist attack that killed him and three other Americans, newly released cables have revealed.

Stevens, who was killed in the 11 September attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, warned the State Department of a ‘security vacuum’ in Libya ‘that is being exploited by independent actors’ in one cable that described rapidly deteriorating security conditions.

‘Islamic extremists are able to attack the Red Cross with impunity,’ he wrote. ‘What we have seen are not random crimes of opportunity but rather targeted discriminate attacks.’

Stevens said the attackers would not be deterred ‘until authorities are at least as capable.’

Just hours before his death, he sent the Pentagon a cable describing ‘expanding Islamist influence in Dema,’ a town east of Benghazi, and said he was seeing a ‘troubling increase in violence and Islamist influence.’

Stevens recapped a meeting in which the commander of Benghazi’s Supreme Security Council told him there is ‘growing frustration with police and security forces.’

The cables were released by Republican Rep. Darrell Issa of California, the chairman of the U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which is investigating the security matters surrounding Stevens’ death and questioning whether the State Department could have prevented the deadly attack.

Less than three weeks ahead of the presidential election, Republicans are using the cables to attack President Obama on his foreign policy, despite the State Department’s claim that it was solely responsible for the decisions to deny Stevens’ requests for more security in Libya.

‘These critical foreign policy decisions are not made by low or mid-level career officials—they are typically made through a structured and well-reasoned process that includes the National Security Council and the White House,’ Issa wrote in a letter to Obama on Friday.

SEE AND READ MORE HERE AT THE SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 10/20/2012 at 03:37 PM   
Filed Under: • muslims • Terrorists • USA •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

i find this very hard to believe but …. in today’s world? see what you make of it.

H/T RadicalIslam.org

Have we now come to this?  Sure looks like it.

Lately and late at night I have been engrossed in a series of books by a guy with the improbable name of Harry Turtledove.  These are books with like 500 to 650 pages and I can’t seem to read them fast enough. 

It all started when one of our bmews readers left a comment and suggested I read a book by this author called Guns For The South, and I have now read four or five and went to AMZN today and ordered the next grouping and when those are read I’ll order more.

So far in my reading adventure, I have not come across one single muslim. Course not.  The stories take place in a saner America.  Well, somewhat saner.
North and South at war for the third time, happily the South wins the first two but in this last book of this particular trilogy, things are not looking at all well for the South.

General George Armstrong Custer (he doesn’t die at Little Big Horn) in command of the First Army, defies the war department orders on how tanks are to be used.  (called barrels by the North and tanks by the South) It’s WW1 and the USA is allied with Germany; England and France are allied with the Confederacy, and there is stalemate and trench warfare and poison gas and .... those trenches are being dug in North America not Europe.  The USA has invaded and occupied Canada.  The descriptions of warfare on the ground and in the air are chilling and thrilling and I am not so much reading this as I am actually viewing it all.

Anyway, Gen. Custer on his own authority and for the first time in military history, gathers together by devious means, a large number of barrels (tanks) for a mass and concentrated attack to achieve a breakout and breakthrough destroying the defensive trenches of the CSA. They are rolling over everything in their path.  While all this is going on, we are also introduced to a host of characters and get to know many quite well.  Even some of the Northern folks are entirely likable.  And some come to bad ends in battle or other ways. 
The CSA of course also has tanks but not as many as the north and, after they crush the Marxist inspired Red revolution which is made up of mostly black folks who are tired (who can blame them?) of oppression, and white socialists.  But like all movements and revolutions it’s pretty damn violent, and with large numbers of blacks arming themselves and making another front but behind CSA lines, well you can see the Stars and Bars has a fight on it’s hands.
Oh yeah, the South has occupied Washington (DC) for three years now and is being driven out under heavy bombardment.
So enmeshed in all of this exciting stuff I’m lost in another world and find make believe preferable to the real world of muslims and the pc libtard left. I think I want an America that probably never really existed.

But here we are anyway, and although the world I describe above has tons of inequities and the usual gripes about camp life, there would have been none of this crap. At least, I haven’t seen it so far.  And no muzzies.

Army Bows to Islamists, Sacks Lt. Colonel

by: Meira Svirsky

Lieutenant Colonel Matthew Dooley’s career has been effectively destroyed by General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, various complicit members of the Pentagon and the military and, most of all, political correctness on the part of the U.S. government.

Col. Dooley, who was awarded the Bronze Star, the fourth-highest combat decoration, is a West Point graduate and highly rated armor officer who served in Iraq, Germany, Bosnia and Kuwait. He was, until recently, the instructor of a course to fellow officers on the dangers of radical Islam at the Joint Forces Staff College (part of the National Defense University).

His downfall came at the hands of 57 Islamic groups who began complaining a year ago that the U.S. military and intelligence counter-terrorism training instructors and materials were anti-Islam.

Included the group of complainers was both CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) and ISNA (Islamic Society of North America). Both CAIR and ISNA were named as unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Terror Funding Trial, largest ever terror-funding trial in U.S. history. Both are listed by the Muslim Brotherhood—whose publicized doctrine is to destroy American from within—as two of it “working organizations.”

As a direct result of the complaints by the Islamic groups, the U.S. government instituted broad, sweeping reviews and eventual purges of its counter-terrorism training materials. Islamic groups were allowed into the FBI and other institutions to approved or disapprove the materials. The Pentagon complied with the review, as did all of the branches of U.S. armed forces.

At that time, the Pentagon found no fault in any of its courses or instructors. Col. Dooley’s course, which he began teaching in 2010, had been taught the same way since 2004. All the material for the course was approved by the university. In his evaluations from last year, Col. Dooley was referred to as a superb officer.

Yet changes were being made. RepresentativesDooley in combat from the government, including John Brennon, the chief counter terrorism advisor, instituted new terminology in the “War on Terror.” No longer were Al Qaeda fighters called “Islamic extremists;” they became simply “extremists.” Gone was any mention of the ideology driving their “extremism.”

The Islamic groups also demanded that employees who promoted (in their opinion) “biased” training about these “extremists” be “effectively disciplined.”

However, Col. Dooley’s course was not singled out until close to six months later when one of his students lodged a complaint to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta. It was then that Col. Dooley’s course was suspended. Ironically, the complaint was not even about Col. Dooley, but about a guest lecturer he had brought in.

The guest lecturer had been talking about “what if” scenarios, a common way the military strategizes: Envision a potential scenario and figure out how to deal with it.

In this case, the guest lecturer asked what would happen if Islamic extremists gained control of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and began destroying U.S. cities. How should the U.S. respond?

see all of it here

How should the U.S. respond?

Apologize and promise to convert?
Not funny. Not meant to be either but with the wusses running the show .....

Posted by peiper     on 10/20/2012 at 10:55 AM   
Filed Under: • muslims • Politically Correct B.S. • USA •  
• Comments (12) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - October 12, 2012

Americans, OMG

Woman Forced To Share House With Squatter

No, this is not a story from the UK.

Some woman bought a house in Detroit, had to move out of it for about a year while repairs were made, and then found a professional squatter (aka “community organizer” wink wink nudge nudge) living there when she got back. Detroit won’t throw the squatter out ASAP, not without a hearing and all the legal delays involved. So the homeowner and her daughter, having nowhere else to live, are forced to share their domicile with some possibly crazy violent street person. Or worse.

Here is the link.

My post is that the comments, made pretty much exclusively by Americans, run about 8 out of 10 along the lines of “Shoot the bitch.”

In America, we think of squatters as slow motion home invaders, so we apply the same solution to both problems.

And if I made a comment on that page, I’d even volunteer to buy the ammo.

They must be so aghast in the UK. We’re just so barbaric over here.

You’re damn right.

Posted by Drew458     on 10/12/2012 at 06:08 AM   
Filed Under: • UK • USA •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - September 30, 2012

‘I have struck a city — a real city — and they call it Chicago, It is inhabited by

Last year sometime, I posted an angry rant with regard to the treatment given my wife by agents of the KGB, working for customs and immigration at LAX.
Stone faced, unhelpful, arrogant and petty in the extreme.  Most regulars of BMEWS know the story so I won’t go into all of it again.  For those who don’t know, perhaps with some help from Drew we can find a link to my original post and include a link here to that old post.  If that’s possible.  ??
I tried and failed to find it. ??  I am hopeless at this sometimes.

Well anyway, I came across an article in the Daily Mail a few days ago and didn’t get a chance to post it and so I am doing it now.
I guess Chicago immigration can be a bit of a challenge too.

Next year we have to return to the states for a short time and do something about a few items in storage, and see to legal matters.
Neither of us are looking forward to it, and the wife especially is really tired of being treated as though she’s a potential threat or trying to sneak into the USA illegally.  Good grief, she collects SS after having been gainfully employed for 39 or 40 years.  So I really well understand the writer’s frustration with what he faced in Chicago.  After what we went thru 2wice bmews, as in twice, I am not even upset in the least by his comments and the desire at first, to just say the hell with it and turn around and go home.  Oh how I wanted to do that, but couldn’t.  I was already home. It was my wife who discovered that her home of some 40 years wasn’t home anymore.  And before anyone suggests dual citizenship, HA!  Check out the rules on that baby.  They make it impossible.
If you don’t feel like surfing through a lot of print, then simply pick up a phone and call immigration and ask about that and how to qualify. Listen to what they tell ya. 

So then .... here’s the article that started me off on another rant.

Why has friendly, beautiful Chicago got the second city blues?

By Martin Samuel

Chicago is feeling a little left out. America’s second city wonders why it attracts a fraction of the millions who visit New York, Los Angeles, Miami or Las Vegas.

It has a memorable skyline, great architecture and one of the world’s finest art galleries. It has a musical heritage second to none and superb restaurants. The lake is gorgeous.

Yet in 2010, while New York received 9.7 million visitors from abroad, Chicago entertained just 1.1 million, scraping into America’s top ten tourist destinations in last place. So where are all the people? Here’s a clue: maybe they’re at the airport.

Those arriving in Chicago on Monday this week took two hours to be processed at O’Hare. Regular visitors in the queue acknowledged this as standard. They reckon the country has no money for Homeland Security.

So we waited, in a soulless, low-ceilinged hall, with no mobile telephone signal to contact the outside world, until the single customs official on duty could be bothered to let us through. At one stage she went away and we were left staring at empty booths.

It was almost like a social experiment. How long could they humiliate people this way before there was a riot? Three hours, four hours? Maybe six? And this line was only for visitors. Passengers in transit and United States nationals had their own territory. They weren’t moving too fast, either.

It wasn’t as if ten planes had arrived simultaneously. This was a lone flight from London plus the residue of another from the east. And by the end of this voyage into tedium, most had decided that (a) America was skint and its politics bankrupt; (b) America was rude, inhospitable and had no respect for humanity; (c) they weren’t coming back, if they could help it.

Which is a pity, because Chicago is a fantastic city, one of the greatest in the world. The people are friendly, the urban landscape quite beautiful. I want to implore you to go.

But would I return? I’m not sure. I certainly wouldn’t change planes there because I don’t enjoy being treated like dirt.

And there is the irony. How can a city that wants to promote itself to the world, and a country that wants to promote its ideas and culture around the globe, allow this to be the first experience of any visitor?

How can it greet you, not with a smile, but the brusque suspicion that you are here to blow the place up? There is no courtesy on entry, none of the eagerness to please that is found beyond.

It is the same at the embassy. Those who have obtained an American visa will know the drill by now. The appointment, the wait, the inconvenience — no electronic devices, even electronic key fobs, allowed on the premises, and nowhere to store them — and then the incredible rudeness of the staff. It is a horrid, dehumanising experience.

Nobody who has been through it would think fondly of Chicago, of any American city, or American democracy. It smacks of what outsiders see as the worst of America: bullying arrogance and a refusal to engage in a civilised manner. Nobody smiles, nobody treats you nicely.

And then you get here and it couldn’t be more different.

Went to the White Sox game on Monday. Fantastic. The following night the local tourist board had invited a friend to dinner at a restaurant called Q. I tagged along.

The hospitality was insane. Tours of the kitchen, stuff on the house, try this, try that. We had the ‘competition ribs’, so called because they had won prizes.

They looked like something out of The Flintstones. The competition seemed to be who could get near finishing them without keeling over.

And all the time I was thinking that, if I’d had the option, I would have turned around and flown home without setting foot in the place.

It should be the easiest sell in the world, Chicago. They should be watching tumbleweed blow past at the tourist board, left with nothing to do, as visitors stampede to the Art Institute (260,000 works including Edward Hopper’s Nighthawks, considered the most recognisable painting by an American artist) or absorb Chicago’s history on the architectural tour.

‘I have struck a city — a real city — and they call it Chicago,’ wrote Rudyard Kipling. ‘Having seen it, I urgently desire never to see it again. It is inhabited by savages.’

He was wrong. Chicago isn’t inhabited by savages.

For some reason, though, its government is happy to let you think that way.

MARTIN SAMUEL

(c) they weren’t coming back if they could help it.
My wife’s thoughts exactly and I don’t fault her.  Twice she was taken on her own to an interrogation room where she was questioned at length and the fact that she was married all these years to an American meant squat. That she has a bank account in Ca., meant squat.  Why should she want to return once we get our other things in order?

Posted by peiper     on 09/30/2012 at 12:04 PM   
Filed Under: • Government • Homeland-Security • Illegal-Aliens and Immigration • Jack Booted Thugs • USA •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner