America at war, a ruthless enemy breathing down our necks, troops in harms way, a massive mortgage crisis, and what is at the top of our agenda? THE GREAT AMERICAN TOILET BUST. I really don't know what's creepier, a US Senator hanging out in public bathrooms making weird sexual come-on's, or the fact that we actually have cops hanging out in public bathroom stalls playing footsies with such creeps. YUCK!
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
French President Nicolas Sarkozy warned that Iran could be bombed if diplomatic progress is not made to halt the progress of the Iranian nuclear bomb program. Iranian President Ahmadinejad responded by describing Sarkozy as inexperienced and confused: "He (Sarkozy) only recently came to power and wants to find a place for himself in the world. He is still inexperienced, meaning that maybe he does not really understand the meaning of his own words. I think what he said is for the consumption of his inner circles. For us, it is of no political value."
Meanwhile, taking his que from Democrats, Ahamadinejad descried US forces on the verge of collapse, a collapse that will leave a large power vacuum in the region which he openly declared Iran will fill: "The political power of the occupiers is collapsing rapidly, soon, we will see a huge power vacuum in the region. Of course, we are prepared to fill the gap..."
President Bush responded today by describing Iran is a bad apple...and much worse: "Either the forces of extremism succeed or the forces of freedom succeed," he said. "Either our enemies advance their interests in Iraq, or we advance our interests. The most important and immediate way to counter the ambitions of al Qaida, Iran and other forces of instability and terror is to win the fight in Iraq."
"Iran is sending arms to the Taliban in Afghanistan to be used to attack American and NATO troops," Bush said. "Iran has arrested visiting American scholars who have committed no crimes and impose no threat to their regime. And Iran's active pursuit of technology that could lead to nuclear weapons threatens to put a region already known for instability and violence under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust. Iran's actions threaten the security of nations everywhere."
Thomas: England is Vanishing
Monday, August 27, 2007
There was "considerable alarm" over the above strip at the highest echelons of The Washington Post Co. According to sources, the strips were shown to Muslim staffers at The Washington Post to gauge their reaction, and they responded "emotionally" to the depiction of a woman dressed in traditional Muslim garb and espousing conservative Islamic views. WP Writers Group comics editor Amy Lago said that she didn't want to "offend" Muslims with a mild sex joke. See the entire strip here. It's nice to know that the Washington Post maintains a blatant double standard whereby offending conservative Christians and Jews is A-OK, but even a mild negative reference to Islam requires censorship and red-alerts. Amy Logo wins the Whoosy of the day award.
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
So I caught Christiane Amanpour’s ‘God’s Warriors’ on CNN. Tonight was “Jewish Warrior” night and it was one of the most pathetic pieces of biased ‘journalism” that I have ever witnessed, with the possible exception of the kind of stuff you will find on Al Jazeera on a bad day. Amanpour seemed extremely desperate to prove a moral equivalency between a few hundred Israeli kooks who live on the far fringes of Israeli society, and the international Muslim Jihad of the 9/11 sort. She delved into every incident of “Jews-behaving-badly” since the beginning of time. It was such a stretch that at one point I literally burst out in laughing. At other points I truly felt embarrassed for pour Amanpour. With all of the “bad Jews” incidents cited over the decades, it amounted to the equivalent of about 30 seconds of the International Muslim Jihad. I suspect that she will try to pull the same moral equivalency stunt on “Christian Warriors” in the next few episodes of this sorry TV epic.
Amanpour repeatedly referred to the disputed territories of the West Bank as “OCCUPIED TERRITORY,” with an authoritative tone, and she did so every few minuets throughout the entire show; it was like reliving the pathetic journalism of the 1970's. Of course, she did not specify who the territory was occupied from. A little history lesson going back a few hundred years: The Turks controlled the area until 1917, then the British until 1948, Then the Jordanians until 1967, then Israel. Jordan renounced its claim to the territory in the late 1980’s. The land was never controlled by any “Palestinian” entity…ever. Thus, for a journalist to call it “OCCUPIED TERRITORY” is about as biased as another journalist calling it “LIBERATED TERRITORY.” The accurate, none biased term for any non-biased journalist would be “DISPUTED TERRITORY.” Anything else is simply an editorial statement masquerading as journalism. And that’s all you really need to know about Christiane Amanpour and her latest atrocious attempt as journalism.
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Saturday, August 18, 2007
I received an e-mail from a young reader of our site, a student at Seton Hall asking if I would post some of his articles from time to time. Unfortunately Mr. Guariglia, I rarely post entire articles on Neocon Express, hence the word "express". I will, however be happy to refer readers to your work. I found a few very good articles by you at World Threats.com, and I encourage folks to take a look. I wish Mr. Guariglia all the best in his work, he is up and coming and has a bright future ahead of him.
Big Satan:Again, it never ceases to amaze me when my liberal friends ignore the words of a madman because to take them seriously would contradict their world view; Especially my Jewish liberal friends who seem to criminally blind themselves to reality. They easily work themselves up into a hysterical rage at the mere mention of the words "George Bush", but can't seem to develop the slightest concern when it comes to the antics of the Iranian President who is marching towards a nuclear bomb, threatens to destroy Israel, and does so openly.
Iran's Revolutionary Guards: We Will 'Punch' U.S.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
With growing tension in the region, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns and Bank of Israel Governor Stanley Fischer concluded negotiations over a $30 Billion dollar US defense package for Israel. This opens the way for a $20 billion dollars sale of military equipment to Saudi Arabia and other US allies in the Gulf Region, without protest from Israel. The US continues to guarantee Israel's technological "qualitative edge" in the region. This is all bad news for Iran but good news for US interests in the region. It is also good news for US defense contractors who are frequently demonized by ignorant hoards, but serve a critical roll in our national defense and economy.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Why my liberal friends fail to see with clarity what the leaders of our enemies say openly and without reservation, is a mystery to me. Do they want to live under a totalitarian, religiously fanatic dictatorship? Or is it that they disbelieve the intentions of our enemies? Or perhaps it's all a question of willfully blinding ones self to reality in the desperate hope that it will all go away and that the age of aquariums will be upon us again?
Iran's President Ahmedinejad today (August 14, 2007) at the Iranian Embassy in Kabul:
"There is no truth on earth but monotheism and following tenets of Islam and there is no way for salvation of mankind but rule of Islam over mankind...the world is on verge of a great upheaval and the umma at this juncture shoulder a heavy responsibility that is introducing genuine Islam as it is....nations today have no haven but religion...all of us have the duty to resist the enemy by closing our ranks....Islam belongs to all generations and Muslims should get ready for the global mission of Islam."
Don't take my word for it, I admit that I am not entirely "open minded" because I've already made up my mind on the nature and seriousness of this threat. But at least, take the words of our enemies at face value. Is that too much to ask of my liberal friends?
Monday, August 06, 2007
The plane was first tested in 2006 and was derived from the reverse engineered components of US combat aircraft.
"The airplane, Azarakhsh, was made by Iranian experts, and it has already reached the industrial production stage," the television quoted Iran's defense minister, Mostafa Mohammad Najjar, as saying. Just lovely.
One would think that when two foreign, young Middle Eastern men named Ahmed Mohamed, and Yousef Megahed were pulled over yesterday in South Carolina and found to be in possession of chemicals, fuses, igniters and explosive materials, that would be enough to trigger a massive media scramble to demand the facts. Instead, the story has been 'disapeared' and it's pretty difficult to get the details other than confirmation that the two are "in custody". Hmmmmmm.... Six words: Ticking bomb, Jack Bauer, Water Boarding.
I tend to agree with Cramer's general analysis, although I think he's way overly hysterical on the matter. A bad situation does not mean an apocalypse. Many (like myself) have taken a hit in real estate in the past year and in the stock market in the past few days. Credit is indeed more difficult to come by and home builders will suffer in the short term here. Bust the larger picture still seems good, and all indications are of a cyclical nature and not a fundamental flaw that is going to bring on "the apocalypse" as he puts it. Good lord!
Sunday, August 05, 2007
I was able to pop in to a theater this weekend to check out The Bourne Ultimatum. Simply put, it is everything we have come to expect from this cool franchise that makes James Bond seem very, very old. A fast paced, interesting, hold-on-to-your-seat thriller in a real-world setting with fascinating twists and methods.... So generally speaking, I give the Bourne Ultimatum a strong thumbs up for sheer entertainment. I do have a few areas of criticism:
* In too many scenes the camera was so tight in on the action that the effects began to lose impact. I certainly enjoy that shaky, hand-held extreme-close-up style of camera work sporadically throughout the film, but it backfires when an overdose is delivered, almost triggering a migraine for the average viewer (maybe it's my age).
* I could do without the preachy doses of political correctness where the general message is that our guys are just as bad as the terrorists, and that our methods are morally equivalent to the terrorists. Fortunately, the PC was countered from time to time with comments like "we saved 5,000 Londoners using this tactic last month." That did help counter some of the PC crap and put things in the proper perspective, but I hope that the creators of this fascinating, complex character will try to avoid preachy messages in the future Bourne adventures, or at least balance the politics out a bit more.
But once again, the Bourne Ultimatum is fun and well worth the ticket price. Go see it if you have a chance.
Saturday, August 04, 2007
My opinion: Some Islamic radicals engage in physical terrorism, others put on a suit and tie and engage in judicial terrorism, it's really the other side of the same coin. Judicial terrorism is characterized by the systematic and predatory use of civil lawsuits, usually filed without any serious expectation of winning, but undertaken as a means to bankrupt, distract, intimidate, demoralize and most of all, to silence political opponents. The use of predatory lawsuits is just one more tool in the terrorist arsenal and has become a mainstay of radical Islamist organizations who exploit our freedoms and institutions in an effort to destroy these very same freedoms. In that sense, there are similarities to the 9/11 terrorists, who also exploited our system to achieve a political objective through an act that created fear and intimidation. One of the most prolific users of this form of intimidation is the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR:
To counter this growing threat of judicial terrorism, many Americans who are concerned with 1)Islamic radicalism and 2) the preservation of freedom, are establishing organizations and beginning to raise money to take the legal battle to the enemy; to go on the offence. One of those organizations seem highly promising and I encourage folks to contribute. The Middle East Forum 'Legal Project' is establishing a network of donors, pro-bono lawyers, researchers, and analysts to participate in this effort. An Advisory Board is being formed that, among other functions, will review and approve applications for assistance from researchers and analysts. The Legal Project will deploy a variety of tactics, including:
* Briefings by legal experts on how to avoid libelous statements.
* Consultations with libel lawyers before publishing on certain topics.
* Assistance to researchers and analysts who have been unjustly sued.
* Assistance to researchers and analysts to defend themselves against defamation.
I would encourage prospective donors, lawyers, researchers and analysts to contact the Forum at LegalProject@MEForum.org for further details.
YAF to CAIR lawsuit threat: "Go to hell and take your 72 virgins with you"
Friday, August 03, 2007
In a campaign event in Iowa, Presidential candidate Tom Tancredo (R-CO), announced that he wants it to be known in advance that if a US city is nuked by Islamic terrorists, Mecca (Islams holiest site) will be nuked in retaliation. This in order to attempt to create as much deterrence as possible from such an attack on the US happening to begin with. (audio)
The US State Department immediately went ballistic, sending out spokesman Tom Casey to express the Departments "disgust" according to USA Today:
"It is absolutely outrageous and reprehensible for anyone to suggest attacks on holy sites, whether they are Muslim, Christian, Jewish or those of any other religion. Those who wish to hold office can speak for themselves and whoever is elected in 2008 and comes into office in 2009 will then be in a position to talk about what they intend or plan to do," I personally find the State Departments statement far more disturbing than Tancredo's statement. Is it really the job of unelected government bureaucrats, in a democracy, to pontificate on, or attempt to silence candidates for President in a heated political campaign? Although Tancredo is not my favorite candidate, he certainly has the right, indeed the obligation, to openly express his views on critical issues such as the war on terror so that US voters can make up their own minds (before the election) without unsolicited commentary from an unelected and unaccountable (to the electorate) bureaucrat on a government salary.
As for the Tancredo statement itself; There is simply nothing illegitimate about a candidate discussing the need for an effective deterrence against a nuclear terror attack on a US city. Tancredo did not "suggest attacks on holy sites" out of the clear blue sky as the State Department Spokesman suggests in his rather hysterical statement. And what I find most remarkable about Mr. Casey's response was the idea that US presidential candidates should shut up on foreign policy and: "whoever is elected in 2008 and comes into office in 2009 will then be in a position to talk about what they intend or plan to do." REALLY Mr. Casey? The American people don't need to hear the views of the candidates BEFORE they vote them into office? And this is from the Department that is supposed to promote Democracy around the world.
Oakland Cops Link Muslim Group to Editor's Murder
Thursday, August 02, 2007
This is the kind of story that will make any human being sick. Black Muslim refugees from Sudan, seeking asylum in Israel were intercepted by Egyptian troops on the Israel-Egyptian border fence, shooting two and beating two to death in front of horrified Israeli soldiers. Israeli soldiers reached across the fence, grabbed one of the refugees and tried to pull him to safety to the Israeli side, but the Egyptian soldiers grabbed the man from the other side, engaged in a brief tug-of-war, and pulled the man back to the Egyptian side of the fence, then proceeded to beat and stone the refugee to death. All of this was caught on tape. The irony of Black Muslims seeking safety in Israel from their Muslim Arab "brothers" is telling indeed.
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
Department of Homeland Security: “No Indication that Terror involved in Minneapolis Bridge Collapse”
First: My thoughts and prayers for the victims
The "always helpful" Department of Homeland Security made everyone feel at ease over the Minneapolis bridge collapse. Moments after the collapse, for no apparent reason, the DHS declared that "there is no indication that the Minneapolis bridge collapse was caused by an act of terrorism." Really? Why rush out with such a bizzar statement before any real indications as to the cause is revealed? Does DHS, moments after the collapse, have any indication that this WAS NOT the result of a terrorist act? As usual, DHS seems awfully quick to hide under their desks, put their heads in the sand and declare terrorists to be innocent before any facts are in. How about just waiting for the facts Mr. Chertoff?
Side note: Undoubtedly, as with 9/11, the nutcase troofers and Rosey O'Donnald will blame Bush for instigating the structural collapse in order to justify attacking Iran.
New Al Qaeda Web Ad Threatens 'Big Surprise'