What To Do With Your Old G.I. Joe Action Figures
Labels: MR

Labels: MR
Labels: Saudi Arabia
At 6:01 p.m. on April 4, 1968, a shot rang out. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who had been standing on the balcony of his room at the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, TN, now lay sprawled on the balcony's floor. A gaping wound covered a large portion of his jaw and neck. A great man who had spent thirteen years of his life dedicating himself to nonviolent protest had been felled by a sniper's bullet. In an earlier post, I directed your attention to the incredibly disturbing footage of Pakistani village authorities brutally whipping a teenage girl before a throng of men, because she violated Sharia norms by being seen in public with her father in law. The footage is disturbing on many levels, not the least of which is the fact that the whole spectacle has a pornographic smell to it, one that makes clear how much of Sharia law is driven by Muslims’ deep fear of female sexuality — but that’s a rumination for another day.
What I want to talk about is whether this could ever happen here. Certainly Muslims want it to happen here. Their oft stated goal is a Sharia-compliant world, with every nation having as its one and only law Sharia law. Given this goal, and given the Islamists’ willingness to steal planes and acquire bombs and lust after anthrax, it’s more than just a hypothetical possibility.
But I don’t think we need to worry right now about Sharia appearing in the West courtesy of a mushroom shaped cloud or virulent bacteria. The more immediate concern is the fact that, through political correctness, the Western world is already reading itself to deal with creeping sharia law.
Leading the way, as always, is England, which is allowing sharia courts, even though there is every indication that this will trap Muslim women in a British sharia hell; routinely banning pigs from public discourse (Oh Piglet, Piglet, wherefore art though Piglet?); slavishly redesigning innocuous packaging to avoid ruffling Muslim sensibilities (ice cream, anybody?); protecting men from being charged with dangerous traffic violations so they can speed from one wife to another; etc. The list is endless.
In America, we periodically hear stories about accommodations for Muslims who don’t want to drive people carrying alcohol (as if it could leap out of the bottle spontaneously and attack the driver); about Muslims refusing to share public university prayer spaces; about Muslims demanding special foot baths at public universities (and weren’t those high tech “required” foot baths a popular item in the vast Saudi Arabian desert in the 7th Century); or about Muslim women insisting that their driver’s license show nothing more than their eyes, rather than conceding that, if they want to practice the extreme Islamic tradition of a hijab, maybe driving is not an option.
On the whole, we in America are a solicitous people and, with our pluralist religious history, we’re willing to make reasonable accommodations. Generally, we like it that people are able to live religious lives — as long as they don’t impinge on our own lives. What’s different about the Muslim demands is the impingement that goes with them — you may not drive in our publicly licensed taxis unless you change your behavior; you may not worship in this public space unless you worship our way; you must abandon the commonly accepted public safety feature of a photo ID card so our women can be anonymous; and so on and so forth.
Each of these Islamic incursions on the public space has resulted in a hoo-ha (otherwise we wouldn’t know about them), and most, when they become known, have been reversed. The fact remains, however, that there cumulative effect from these sharia attacks on our culture that is akin to water dripping on rock. One drop has no effect. Two drops, no effect. A thousand drops, no effect. But you get enough drops and the shape of the rock — in this case, the shape of the American body social and politic — begins to change and to conform to the water’s ceaseless demands.
I have an Irish friend who firmly believes that America’s deep rooted sense of liberty cannot be so easily drip-dropped away, whether the drops fall from the Sharia cadre or from the statists in the Obama administration. He believes that a deep, long-lived history focused on individualism and independence will rebel. I wonder.
I’d like to think that, if I were that teenage girl about to get flogged, I’d fight and fight and fight. I’d be hurt anyway, but at least I wouldn’t just yield to barbarity. But even if I fought, even if I waved the flag of independence, and humanism, and freedom, would it matter if everyone stood around me and stared, as those men in the crowd watching the beating stand and stare. I’d be willing to bet that, in that crowd, many were true believers, and many were men whose stomachs churned at the horror, but who said nothing, because they were trained to accept. Whatever their reason, they stood and they stared.
Labels: Shari'a Law
Labels: MR


Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,
Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.
Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
Psalm 2
Obama Scraps 'Global War on Terror' for 'Overseas Contingency Operation' Wednesday, March 25, 2009
In a memo sent this week from the Defense Department's office of security to Pentagon staffers, members were told, "this administration prefers to avoid using the term 'Long War' or 'Global War on Terror' [GWOT.] Please use 'Overseas Contingency Operation.'"
vs.
US Can’t Fight “Terror” Alone, Obama Tells Europe [ Friday, 03 April 2009 ]
United States President Barack Obama warned Europe on Friday that it should not expect the U.S. to carry the burden of fighting a campaign against global terrorism, stemming fromAfghanistan, alone,
Labels: Christine, India, terrorists
Concerns that Muslim extremist groups might retaliate against civilians in the city's Jewish community if Israel were to attack Iran's nuclear facilities prompted the NYPD to put together a response plan that includes deploying extra officers, including heavily armed Hercules Teams, to synagogues, Jewish community centers and Israeli diplomatic offices.HIZBALLAH HAS ATTACKED JEWISH SITES OVERSEAS BEFORE:
The nation's largest police department revealed for the first time this week that it took similar precautions in 2008 after senior Hizbullah terrorist Imad Mughniyeh was killed in a car bombing in Syria. The group blamed Israel for Mughniyeh's death.
"Just in case there was some kind of retaliation in New York, we had an operational plan that was implemented within hours of knowing he was hit," Mitch Silber, a top NYPD intelligence analyst, said Friday at a briefing about security measures for Pessah.
There have been no specific threats reported against the city for the holiday, which starts at sundown Wednesday. But officials say the NYPD, since sharpening its focus on anti-terrorism after the September 11, 2001, attacks, has kept a constant eye on militant groups like Hizbullah for signs they might attack the largest Jewish population outside of Israel.
Hoping to get a better understanding of terror tactics, the department sent a three-member Intelligence Division team headed by Assistant Commissioner Lawrence Sanchez to Argentina in 2008 to confer with authorities about two notorious attacks there.REMEMBER: HIZBALLAH IS A RELIGIOUS PARTY IN LEBANON WITH MP'S WHO HAVE RECENTLY MET WITH LABOUR MP'S FROM GREAT BRITAIN!
The first was the deadly 1992 bombing of the Israeli Embassy, which came after Israel assassinated a Hizbullah leader. The other was a 1994 community center bombing, purportedly organized by Mughniyeh, that occurred after Israel aptured a Hizbullah leader in Lebanon.
The detectives were struck by how the attacks occurred on the other side of the globe within weeks of possible provocation a quick turnaround that suggested reconnaissance on South America's largest Jewish community had been done much earlier in anticipation it would come in handy later.
The NYPD believes similar surveillance might have already occurred in New York.
Times co. threatens to shut down Globe
The New York Times Co. has threatened to shut the Boston Globe unless the newspaper's unions swiftly agree to $20 million in concessions, union leaders said.
Executives from the Times Co. and Globe made the demands Thursday morning in an approximately 90- minute meeting with leaders of the newspaper's 13 unions, union officials said. The possible concessions include pay cuts, the end of pension contributions by the company and the elimination of lifetime job guarantees now enjoyed by some veteran employees, said Daniel Totten, president of the Boston Newspaper Guild, the Globe's biggest union, which represents more than 700 editorial, advertising and business office employees.
The concessions will be negotiated individually with each of the unions, said Totten and Ralph Giallanella, secretary-treasurer of the Teamsters Local 259, which represents about 200 drivers who deliver the newspaper.
You mean that newspapers can hang tough times on the unions, but GM can't?
Well, aren't these mgrs at fault then as well?
Look, no matter what we feel about how the editorial policies have infiltrated what hard news is reported, and how, these are two great newspapers caught in a position not unlike buggy whip manufacturers in 1901.
Printed newspapers AS WE KNEW THEM are over.
The economic structure which paid line workers at GM, Ford and Chrysler nearly $100,000 a year and valued their labor at over $70/hour is over. Have the unions got that message yet? I don't like it either to tell you the truth, but it is compulsory to recognize reality.
The incredible salaries which CEO's and boards paid to themselves at 200-1000 times hourly workers weekly take are dead. Have they got that message yet? If not be prepared to get Geithnerized as the govt moves to take power because you abuse freedom with greed. Don't mistake our support for principals of the Constitution for belief in naked AVARICE.
Ideas that driving up stock prices are as beneficial in and of themselves as MAKING THINGS FOR A PROFIT SHOULD BE DEAD, but I don't believe that message has penetrated, and lies perhaps as the great unutterable scare fact many are avoiding.INCLUDING BY OBAMA, and even Warren Buffett.
Efforts to sustain the policies which lead to the disasters EXPOSED by the credit-mortgage-margarita blender securities default fiasco will cause another deeper crash as confidence is crushed for a generation.
I hope the printers union and the Times and Globe Board understand what needs to be done to create something NEW which can live, NOT prolong what must die.
Should President Obama have the power to shut down domestic Internet traffic during a state of emergency?
Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) think so.
Should President Obama have the power to shut down domestic Internet traffic during a state of emergency?
Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) think so. On Wednesday they introduced a bill to establish the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor—an arm of the executive branch that would have vast power to monitor and control Internet traffic to protect against threats to critical cyber infrastructure. That broad power is rattling some civil libertarians.
The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any "critical" information network "in the interest of national security." The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.
The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce "access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access." This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.
let your "representatives" know how you feel.
Note that Rockefeller thinks it would have been better if the Internet was never invented! See video below of his fear mongering:
Since I started the List of things that Offend Muslims over two years ago, it has grown exponentially. About twice a week a new story is added to the List and sometimes i have trouble keeping up with all the outrage. So here's a few that I haven't had time to include recently.
The Clash of Civilizations, Secular, Assimilation, etc... What better way for the Islamists to control the dhimmis than to limit their thought process?
Bowing before elders un-Islamic, says Deoband edict
Italy: Muslims try to blow up 14-century fresco
ISLAMIC PROTEST -- Visitors to the magnificent church of St. Petronio in Bologna are now searched by Italian police before entering because in addition to protests by Muslims offended by a depiction of Mohammed in a 14th-century fresco, there have been unsuccessful attempts to blow the painting up.
Cinema and theatre are “against Sharia” because they distract people from work and weaken their efforts in achieving progress, said Saudi Arabia’s Grand Mufti Shaikh Abdul Aziz Alu Al Sheikh during a conference on leisure, visual arts and literature attended by students at King Saud University.
“Theatrical performance, whether it is a cinema or a song, would generally make an impression that is against Sharia. People need only those (art forms) that are useful to them to change their way of life (in an Islamic manner),” he decreed.
Saudi men arrested for seeking female writer's autograph
Saudi Arabia's religious police detained two male novelists for questioning last week after they attempted to get the autograph of a female writer at a book fair in Riyadh, according to local media reports.
Saudi Arabia- A blitz by the Commission for Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice (the religious police, or muttawa), who early in the morning of March 30 raided a famous hotel in Riyadh and took away the actors and production staff for a television series.
All this in just a few weeks.
Labels: MR

Labels: the Obama administration
I will just bet. Look when you see people making, FOR INSTANCE the CEO of a major multinational business machine (MFD) corporation making $13-15 million/year, that's obscene..but what will you limit it to and how...AND WHO MADE YOU THE ABROGATOR OF PAY? Not the founding fathers, and I think, not the american people.The bankers struggled to make themselves clear to the president of the United States.
Arrayed around a long mahogany table in the White House state dining room last week, the CEOs of the most powerful financial institutions in the world offered several explanations for paying high salaries to their employees - and, by extension, to themselves.
"These are complicated companies," one CEO said. Offered another: "We're competing for talent on an international market."
But President Barack Obama wasn't in a mood to hear them out. He stopped the conversation, and offered a blunt reminder of the public's reaction to such explanations. "Be careful how you make those statements, gentlemen. The public isn't buying that."
"My administration," the president added, "is the only thing between you and the pitchforks."
The fresh details of the meeting - some never before revealed - come from an account provided to POLITICO by one of the participants. A second source inside the meeting confirmed the details, and two other sources familiar with the meeting offered additional information.
The accounts demonstrate that despite the public comments on both sides that the meeting was cordial, the tone in the room was in fact one of mutual wariness. The titans of finance - men used to being the most powerful man in almost any room - sized up a new president who made clear in ways big and small that he expected them to change their ways.
There were signs from the outset that this was a business event, not a social gathering. At each place around the table sat a single glass of water. No ice. For those who finished their glass, no refills were offered. There was no group photograph taken of the CEOs with the president, which typically happens at ceremonial White House gatherings, but not at serious strategy sessions.
"The only way they could have sent a more Spartan message is if they had served bread along with the water," says a person who attended the meeting. "The signal from Obama's body language and demeanor was, 'I'm the president, and you're not.'"
According to the accounts of sources inside the room, President Obama told the CEOs exactly what he expects from them, and pushed back forcefully when they attempted to defend Wall Street's legendarily high paying ways.
From the White House, there were five principal attendees: Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, who arrived a few minutes late, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Council of Economic Advisers chair Christina Romer, Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett and director of the National Economic Council Larry Summers. Uncharacteristically, Summers said almost nothing, and it appeared to one participant as if he had been told to remain silent.
To break the ice, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon offered Geithner a fake check for $25 billion, the amount of TARP money that the company has accepted. Although many of those in the room laughed, Geithner didn't keep the check.The President entered the room a few minutes later, and made a lap of the table shaking hands and saying hello to the CEOs, several of whom he called by name.
Taking his seat at the table, the president said, "So let's get to it." He spoke for several minutes without notes, giving an overview of the economic situation as he saw it. But the first comment that made an impression on several attendees was on Wall Street salaries and bonuses.
The president spoke of public outrage over the high flying executive lifestyle. "The anger gentlemen, is real," Obama said. He urged pay reform and said rewards must be proportional and balanced, and tied to the health and success of the company.
FINE
The president described the financial system as still "fragile," and asked for cooperation from the CEOs. But he also told them he wouldn't shy away from regulatory reform. Obama wrapped up his remarks and threw the conversation open to the table, saying "So, who'd like to talk?"
JPMorgan's Dimon spoke first. He began by complimenting the president on the economic team he'd assembled. (KISS ASS BALONEY..remember JP MORGAN HAS A SYCOPHANT CRETIN AT THE HELM) And he said his industry needs to explain more directly to the American people that the economic recovery plans are already working. Dimon also insisted that he'd like to give the government's TARP money back as soon as practical, and asked the president to "streamline" that process.
But Obama didn't like that idea - arguing that the system still needs government capital.
Everyone getting the picture? ...maybe he has less of clue overseas, but there is no doubt he believes he should have the power to change America, and change it AWAY from what the founding brothers envisioned, and into an Alinsky-esque social paradise of gray design, and dulled ambitions, and neutered, discouraged entrepreneurs, whose ultimate goal is EQUAL OUTCOME. Just add sandbags to those top line ballets, so that others have their possibilities EQUALIZEDThe president offered an analogy: "this is like a patient who's on antibiotics," he said. "Maybe the patient starts feeling better after a couple of days, but you don't stop taking the medicine until you've finished the bottle." Returning the money too early, the president argued could send a bad signal.
Several CEOs disagreed, arguing instead that returning TARP money was their patriotic duty, that they didn't need it anymore, and that publicity surrounding the return would send a positive signal of confidence to the markets.
Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis cracked a joke at the expense of his peers who'd lavished praise on the administration: "Mr. President," he said, "I'm not going to suck up to Geithner and Summers like the other CEOs here have." Lewis also urged the president not to paint all the banks with the same broad brush.
The president argued that's not what the White House was doing. Indeed, earlier the same week, Obama said at a nationally televised news conference, "The rest of us can't afford to demonize every investor or entrepreneur who seeks to make a profit,"
As the meeting wound down after nearly an hour and a half, the CEOs hustled out to live television positions on the White House grounds, where many gave interviews to CNBC.
It had been a landmark day in the history of American capitalism. Unbeknownst to the financial executives, General Motors CEO Rick Wagoner was also on Pennsylvania Avenue that day, meeting with Obama's auto bailout task force. Although the finance CEOs got a meeting with the president, Wagoner saw only Obama's senior advisor Steven Rattner at the Treasury Department. During the meeting, Rattner demanded Wagoner's resignation.
It had been a tough day for CEOs in the nation's capital.
In this country…since the present government has been established the point has been settled by uniform, pointed and multiplied precedents, offices of every kind, and given by every power, have been daily and hourly declined and resigned from the Declaration of Independence to this moment….If we are made in some degree for others, yet in a greater are we made for ourselves. It were contrary to feeling and indeed ridiculous to suppose that a man had less right in himself than one of his neighbors or indeed all of them put together. This would be slavery and not that liberty which the Bill of Rights has made inviolable and for the preservation of which our government has been charged. Nothing could so completely divest us of that liberty as the establishment of the opinion that the state has a perpetual right to the services of all its members. This to men of certain ways of thinking would be to annihilate the blessing of existence; to contradict the giver of life who gave it for happiness and not for wretchedness, and certainly to such it were better that they had never been born….*Had he pursued the thought further, Jefferson might have concluded that neither the state nor society nor “others” had any right or claim to the services of any of its members. Had he done that, and in deference to his incomparable stature as a political thinker and child of the Enlightenment, Jefferson would have attained the heights of Aristotle and his philosophical heir.
I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake ofIt is as simple as that.
another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.

Labels: MR