I’ve got Israel fever…the cure?

Let me start by saying I have a lot of sympathy for the people of Lebanon. In my opinion the country of Lebanon has for the most part been an innocent bystander in the Arab-Israeli conflict, sending only token forces if any in the great battles against Israel. In many ways Lebanon is similar to Israel, a very fragile and small country. And it has been hijacked by some brutal people (Iran via Hizbollah) in the name of regaining Palestine. Only recently have they ousted Syrian secret police only to have the power vacuum filled literally by Israeli bombs and Hizbollah. I share the sentiment of the (warning this links to an Israeli website which is designed to burn the eyeballs of all peace and justice loving individuals) Lebanese PM when he says, “I Hope the (Lebanese) army will be the only military entity to be recognized by all residents of southern Lebanon ,” Amen, brother, and good luck with that.

I go on the record to say that the attack on Beirut by Israel was totally unfair, and Lebanese civilians surely suffered the most of this conflict. I don’t think, however, Israel was unprovoked as Scottie implies. 10 men an invasion, when rockets are being shot into Israel, as they had been LONG before Israel set foot in Lebanon?

Can the U.N. enforce sanctions on a non-state like Hezbollah? Can Amnesty International report on them? Well, here’s what the most recentreport said,

“The evidence strongly suggests that the extensive destruction of power and water plants, as well as the transport infrastructure vital for food and other humanitarian relief, was deliberate and an integral part of a military strategy,” Gilmore said in a press release.”

That transport infrastructure was “roads and bridges”.

Meanwhile, from the same report,

“During the four week war Hezbollah fired 3,900 rockets at Israeli towns and cities with the aim of inflicting maximum civilian casualties.

The Israeli government says that 44 Israeli civilians were killed in the bombardments and 1,400 wounded. AI has not issued a report accusing Hezbollah of war crimes. “There’s a fine line between being harmless and being incompetant. AI wants to make Israel accountable for it’s aggression that is understandable. But not to condemn Hezbollah for having bad equipment and missing targets is basically having a double standard, since Hezbollah’s goal was to maximize Israeli casualties. Then of course I have to put up a youtube clip.
Now, maybe this isn’t legit, but hey, it’s YouTube.
Posted at 09:43 pm by Johnny B


Seal the Border NOW!!

If you read Wonkette, you’ll probably have gotten a good laugh out of this already:

Just a few months ago, the absolute greatest threat to American Freedom was a guy slipping across the southern border to pick lettuce for a few bucks an hour so that the U.S. agriculture industry could continue to operate. (Remember, no ag industry means no massive federal farming subsidies!)

Actually, that wasnt the real issue. Mexican migrants made the news only when they had the audacity to rally for the right to legally do menial jobs in the USA.

Then some other things happened, all forgotten now, and suddenly Mexico was no longer a big deal. Theres a civil war about to break out South of the Border, and yet the liberal mainstream media doesnt seem to care.

Leave it to the Christian Grassroots Conservative movement to finally put the spotlight back on the real problem (besides Iran and France and Frank Rich). We are, of course, speaking of the Islamic Terrorists crossing the border dressed as Mexicans.

CNS News reported Monday:

The chief law enforcement officers of several Texas counties along the southern U.S. border warn that Arabic-speaking individuals are learning Spanish and integrating into Mexican culture before paying smugglers to sneak them into the United States. The Texas Sheriffs Border Coalition believes those individuals are likely terrorists and that drug cartels and some members of the Mexican military are helping them get across the border.

(CNS News is the wonderfully hysterical website run by L. Brent Bozell III, who has dedicated his life to revealing the horrific fraud known as the Main Stream Media which is three words now, because truth wants to be free.)

While the terrorists may be evil and cunning, they also seem to be retards. The Mexi-terrorists made a crucial misstep that got the attention of Texas sheriffs deputies working the border region, because the alleged terrorists have allegedly been leaving Iranian (or Arab) military uniforms and badges along the Rio Grande.

Jesus! Really? Is it time to start calling tortillas Freedom Pancakes?

Anyway, regardless of what your boss tells you to believe this week and El Presidente says Latin American immigrants deserve the chance to come here and do all the dirty jobs white kids wont do just try to imagine Washington before the Latino Invasion.

Yeah, were talking about the only Mexican food being Taco Bell and some dubious place in Alexandria selling Tex Mex food, which is about as Mexican as Frito-Lay. Were talking about no Latino markets selling delicious items you simply could not buy in D.C. even a dozen years ago. We are talking about the nannies who care for all the neglected children of the lobbyists and the members of Congress and the Senate the Latino immigrants who say te quiero to the children who will never hear I love you in English, because their parents are heartless criminals.

Texas Sheriffs Say Terrorists Entering US from Mexico [CNS News]

Hard-Line Immigration Stance Angers Some Business Groups [Wall Street Journal]

Posted at 09:46 am by DC Offline

Posted by BP @ 08/24/2006 11:53 AM PDT
If you want to put the spotlight on the REAL problem; it’s Mexico’s lack of ability to function without siphoning money out of the USA.

Cameron rebuilding

A good article on Cameron, without the irritating commentary about how horrible America is:

The Boudreauxs are growing weary of the name Katrina, particularly the media’s coverage of New Orleans. Regina says, “You hear all these celebrities with Katrina this and Katrina that. They have a Katrina fund and all this stuff. I think our governor almost forgot us.”

“She’s beginning to wake up to the facts over there,” J.C. says. “We do exist. But we didn’t holler enough. We just sucked it up and went back on back to work. People in New Orleans there squawked and howled.”

Posted at 08:39 pm by Johnny B

amazing interview with candid Brit

For a very candid interview with a British member of Parliament, George Galloway, in which he agrues positions with a SKY NEWS anchor woman :

He echoes my exact sentiments on Israel’s Lebanon campaign and tangentially discusses how Israel can achieve peace, and that is by letting justice occur by seeing Israel evacuate the OT, all of them, The West Bank, East Jerusalem, get the IDF out of the Gaza, and return the Golan Heights to Syria, and return Sheba Farms to Lebanon.

Please view :


Posted at 06:26 pm by Scottie

Posted by Johnny @ 08/23/2006 08:25 AM PDT

There is a short list of people I will dismiss with ad hominem attack, and Galloway is one of them. He considered the defeat of the Soviet Union the biggest catastrophe of his life. It is one thing to criticize American and Israeli aggression while ignoring Soviet and/or Arab aggression, which I find happens a lot on this site, it is quite another to celebrate the victory of opposing aggressors, as Galloway often does. He also profited from the oil for food program, no surprise there. He is certainly clever and this girl (and our American senators) were no match for him linguistically. “The best defense is to offend”.
What say you about the Avivim massacre of school children? Media creation or justifiable freedom fighting? Last I checked George Washington didn’t blow up British schoolchildren.

Posted by Scottie @ 08/23/2006 05:00 PM PDT
look at the numbers on both sides if you are going to quote numbers ….

i dont care one bit if this guy in other situations has said some questionable things, i will tell you he said the right things in this interview; in my opinion he could have said more

read the annual reports of amnesty, human rights watch, btselem, physicians for human rights – israel, public committee agaist torture and see how they portray the treatment of palestinians by israel. then after this, offer a reply, if you can

when you say “the best defense is to offend” you are effectively dismissing any arguments made, regardless of their merits

i’ll ignore the current israeli actions against the palestinians :

1183 dead lebanese civilians
970,000 lebanese refugees

116 idf soldiers killed (in battles started by their country)
42 dead israeli civilians

and for what ? 2 allegedly “kidnapped” israeli soldiers , who happened to be “kidnapped” while on the lebanese side of lebanon (AKA captured)

the complete devastation of lebanese infrastructure
the deliberate bombing of the UN compound in the south (if you say otherwise i will flood you with relevant data)

there ARE thousands of prisoners rotting in israeli jails, many without any charge, both palestinian and lebanese, and you expect the other parties to simply accept the status quo as acceptable, given the sheer volume of UN resolutions israel defies.

i do realize the atrocities committed against israel, and will not downplay them at all

however, the data point to more damning conclusions of israel than the other groups involved in this current conflict, and historic conflicts as well

if you want me to quote numbers on both sides since the 2nd intifada , i will ( i know them off the top of my head) but they again point to damning conclusions about israel

israel has had 39 years to comply with UN 242, and it would come into compliance when it releases the Golan back to Syria, dismantles settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, releases the Sheba Farms area captured in the 18year occupation of lebanon

galloway was right : no justice , no peace, and he was also correct in saying that major media outlets place more value on israeli blood than they do palestinian and lebanese blood

and i couldnt care less what he said about russia and communism ; that was then this is now

he could have been a moron his whole entire life, but what he said in this clip has a moral and factual basis, and i applaud his courage

Posted by BP @ 08/23/2006 05:47 PM PDT
I’m sorry, Scottie…I’m sure you have good points, but to dismiss as irrelevant someone’s past and motives is a little chickenshit.

If I got on here and started pointing out how well Donald Rumsfeld handled a press conference (and he has had some good moments), you would spend 2000 words telling me how evil he is and how much he has gained from the evil American military-industrial complex, and would dismiss any of his claims as irrelevant as such.

Also, I’ve missed a lot of media coverage over the last couple of weeks, but from what I have seen, I have not seen ONE that granted more value to Israel over Lebanese lives. I HAVE however continuously seen very favorable coverage on the humanitarian efforts of Hezbollah.

Posted by BP @ 08/23/2006 07:14 PM PDT
BTW did Johnny quote any numbers?

Posted by Johnny @ 08/23/2006 08:07 PM PDT
For mathematicians everything comes down to numbers.

Posted by Eric (my real name) @ 08/23/2006 11:20 PM PDT
I think the questions may be:

1. Did Galloway make any valid points in this interview?
2. What were they?
3. Should we adjust our thinking because of them?

Then again, we probably shouldn’t consider any of these questions since he is undoubtedly a communist.

We all know the little red bastards have no good points to make.

Posted by BP @ 08/24/2006 11:51 AM PDT

And to answer your question:

1) No
2) N/A
3) No

He did manhandle his interviewer, though, which I thought was impressive…and that’s the main reason the interview has been tossed around as much as it has.

He was rude and he was obnoxious and could have made the same points (that we’ve all heard before) without being an asshole…but of course Sky News is a Murdock company isn’t it? So Lord knows he can’t just answer her questions, because those Right Wing Nuts never ask questions without an obvious motive behind them.

Posted by Name @ 08/26/2006 06:59 AM PDT
some of the responses to my response are quite ridiculous.

first of all, i consider arguments on a basis of their validity. galloway made valid arguments. you can deny that he did, but you are not indicating how his arguments are invalid, to your line of thinking. my point is : make a counter-argument with supporting data, but do not dismiss by slander.

number 2, math people dont always look at numbers johnny b. your response there is a red herring, a nice little distraction from the content.

third, concerning the chickenshit status of my dismissing galloway’s past :

you missed my point entirely dude
so again, i’ll make it, and hope you have a clear head when you read it this time, not blinded by your own political biases :

if you disagree with someone who believes in socialism for purely ideological reasons, that’s fine, but that does not mean the socialist isn’t aware of issues pertaining to the middle east and justice. even if you disagree with galloway’s past stances on OTHER issues, that does not address his arguments about media bias in reporting on israel which is real, that does not address the distortions which abound on the israel-hezbollah war, that does not address the fundamental forces which led to the conflict, namely 40 years of injustice in the OT, and 24 years of injustice in lebanon.

i think it is chickenshit to only rely on galloway’s stances on past issues which are unrelated, and not deal with what he said.

the majority of people in the world, not the propagandized masses in the US but the world, do believe that israel is a terrorist state. this is one point he made. now, from a logical standpoint, if you disagree with this comment, then dammit make a counter-argument with supporting evidence.

to be precise, no johnny b did not quote a number , but he did quite an incident.

do you think i cant quote deir yassin, jenin, shatila and sabra, rafah, hebron and the squatters, and many other incidents which portray israel in a negative light ? for each innocent israeli life taken by palestinian miltant groups there are around 7-8 innocent palestinians slaughtered by the idf and/or illegal israeli settlers (who never get prosecuted either)

if you read amnesty reports or human rights watch reports or btselem reports or public committee against torture reports or physicians for human rights – israel reports, you would see the almost identical conclusions being reached by the mainstream human rights groups which field their own autonomous research staffs, and reach virtually the same set of conclusions.

i guess all these groups are anti-semitic as well ….

let me include some famous quotations that show the institutional treatment of palestinians historically :


Where do we go from Here?

A vacuum in Lebanon, and Hezbollah fills it – Africa & Middle East – International Herald Tribune

I’ve been struggling for a couple of days with Scottie’s questions. This column will not completely answer his questions :), but it will give my thoughts about moving forward.

For more, visit DC Offline.

The article above really opened my eyes about the situation in the Middle East and helped me put the pieces together for the first time. My developing thoughts are below for your comments.

There is a stated aim of Bin Laden as well as a concerted effort that we are seeing right now with Iran’s outstretched arm to the citizens of Lebanon through Hezbollah to recreate a Muslim Caliphate in the Middle East, free of Western influence and a world power in its own right.

There does seem to be a fight over which branch of Islam will own this Caliphate, once it emerges – the Shi’ite branch from Iran (and already we are seeing a Shia Crescent develop from Iran through Syria and down through Lebanon via Hezbollah), or a Sunni branch from Al Qaeda.

America has just helped this enterprise along, however unknowingly, by deposing Saddam Hussein (a pain-in-the-ass, but an avowed secularist who saw himself as the second coming of Hammurabi) and opening the door to a Shia vs. Sunni Civil War in Iraq.

It is no longer a question of whether this Civil War will happen – it is only a question of who will influence the outcome: The United States on the side of a secular outcome regardless of the brand of Islam OR Iran toward a definitive Shi’ite state under its direct influence if we vacate our position there as some statesmen (I use that term with some levity) here in the States are now advocating.

As should be apparent, I am no Bush fan. His policies have been so disastrous to our image and to the Region itself, it will take decades to recover – IF we can navigate the months ahead successfully. But the counterpoint to his Middle East policy is NOT to leave our position there right now. The certain occupant of that power vacuum would be Ahmedinejad and the Shi’ite influence from Iran with their bloated oil treasury buying influence and good will the exact way they are doing through Hezbollah in Lebanon right now.

The pattern is obvious and will be repeated in Iraq to win the cultural victory and repair all the infrastructure we have destroyed and have been, up to this point, unable to properly restore. Just read the above article to see the real effects of this on the ground in Lebanon and translate that to Iraq if we leave right now.

The correct counterpoint to the Bush policy in the Middle East is a change in strategy. A real battle to win “the hearts and minds” of the Iraqi people. Terence Daly notes: “This is scoffed at by many conservatives as the equivalent of sitting around a campfire singing “Kumbaya.” But in fact it is a sophisticated, multifaceted, even ruthless struggle to wrest control of a population from cunning and often brutal foes. We must be ready and able to kill insurgents – lots of them – but as a means, not an end.”

We were led to Iraq with false intelligence, false links to Al Qaeda, false motives, even false expectations and budget projections – but the question of “Should we have gone in there or not?” is no longer important. Rather, the question of “What do we do now?” is of paramount importance given the stakes of those we are playing this game against. They have already gamed out their strategy several moves ahead of us. Will we stop reacting to events as they take place, define victory and form a strategy to win, or continue to try to figure out how to retreat as quickly as we can from a war we never should have entered into in the first place?

Posted at 05:51 am by DC Offline

Posted by BP @ 08/22/2006 01:52 PM PDT
First I can’t see what’s so eye-opening about the article to which you refer. Hezbollah has always positioned itself as being the only humanitarian hope for its followers and the Lebanese people…however… granted this indeed strengthens their position to say the least.

I do think it’s important whether we went in for the right reasons or not, but I strongly agree that it’s AT LEAST as important to determine what we do now.

You’ll find very few (intelligent) people who don’t think it’s important to understand their enemy, and equally important to not make any more…but you’ll find many unintelligent people who believe that if we just “stop the killing” all of the problems will go away.

While we’re fixing the issues that need to be fixed (and there are many) from the “propoganda” and public relations battle, I still believe we’re going to have to continue killing a lot of terrorists. So Terence’s comments and most of Eric’s, I am in agreement with.

Posted by Johnny @ 08/22/2006 04:13 PM PDT
Interesting post. A big factor why the US didn’t take Baghdad in ’91, if I’m not mistaken. Oh, and of course the U.N.

Posted by Scottie @ 08/22/2006 06:48 PM PDT
All right, I officially give up on getting input from bloggers on this site concerning why they thought we went into Iraq.

While I certainly agree that the big issue now is the next course of action in Iraq (which should be full withdrawal), but if we do not learn from our government’s previous deceits, then we will not be able to understand their future moves.

I was not trying to re-live the mistakes of the Iraq engagement, but rather trying to lure responses so that I could offer another facet to the issue that will be relevant in the upcoming war with Iran.

The best laid plans of mice and man gang aft agley …

I will not bring the issue up again unless asked, but I will tell you all that the real reason behind the Iraq invasion and occupation hasn’t been exposed to the US public, and it will be the same reason that ignites a bigger conflict in Iran, and the real reason is not what you think … NOT Oil, NOT Israel, NOT Geo-Political strategy, NOT keeping the Middle East nuclear free (LOL with Israel having many already)


Posted by Eric (my real name) @ 08/22/2006 09:51 PM PDT
So what is your thought on the “Real Reason”? I’m dying over here!!

My thoughts on the reason always go back to an article I read in FP magazine back before 9/11 talking about how, if we could only topple Iraq and replace it with a sympathetic democratic regime, we could refashion that entire region in our own image. That article was based on a paper that Wolfowitz and Co. had put together for Bush I that had been (wisely) shelved at that time.

I think they used 9/11 as their excuse to go over there and try this experiment out. It’s been widely reported that right after 9/11 Bush was focusing his staff on Saddam, but was forced to go to Afghanistan after the facts wouldn’t line up for Iraq.

Of course, the fact that congressional elections were looming didn’t hurt either. First time in recent memory the President’s ticket actually GAINED seats in an off-year election?

Posted by Scottie @ 08/23/2006 05:01 PM PDT
in regards to johnny, the UN mandate did not allow US forces to topple Saddam in ’91

Posted by Scottie @ 08/23/2006 05:10 PM PDT
eric, if you wanna know the real reason, email me at sorrell67@cox.net and i will give you some hints, but i don’t want to simply state it, as it is better for one to make their own conclusions, given an exposure to a sufficient amount of credible data.

i will tell you that the real reason we invaded and occupied iraq will be the exact same reason the US will lie its way into a war with iran, sooner than later.

chavez’s venezuela will be next, for the same reason, because he made the same existential threat to the US implicitly (of course the CIA might be used for him like it was used in ’53 against the democractically appointed Mossadegh)

so if there is still interest, email me and i’ll point you in the right direction

Posted by BP @ 08/23/2006 05:51 PM PDT
So are we talking trading oil for Euros, etc., instead of Dollars…if so…that big secret is already out. “Confessions of an Economic Hitman” is already on the reading list.

Your 2008 Ohio State Buckeyes!

Read this story if you want to laugh (or cry) at Ohio Judges. Two kids set up deer decoys in the middle of the road to watch cars swerve. That’s pretty kewl. But get this, the judge is suspending the sentencing until football season is over. I mean, who’s going to be quarterback if this kid is in jail? Somebody should call up Jim Tressel so he can offer these boys a scholarship to join the rest of the criminals and thugs on his team.

Posted at 10:07 pm by Johnny B

Bush’s unchecked Executive power v. the Founding principles of the U.S.


Unclaimed Territory – by Glenn Greenwald: Bush’s unchecked Executive power v. the Founding principles of the U.S.

I recently found this blog by Glenn Greenwald. Glenn is the author of the New York Times Best-Selling book, How Would A Patriot Act?, a critique of the Bush administration’s use of executive power, released May, 2006.

For all you Federalists out there – and I know there are plenty, since I love the Federalist Papers with a passion myself – this article is perhaps the best critique of the Bush Administration’s aggregation of unchecked Executive Power that I have read.

Just as Nixon famously said, “If the President does it, that means it’s not illegal.”

Glenn writes, “The Administration is expressly claiming that the President does have the right to violate laws of Congress because his executive power is absolute and thus cannot be restricted by anything. And rather than applying this theory of unchecked executive power to a single case (as the Reagan Administration did in Iran-contra), the Bush Administration has arrogated unto itself this monarchical power as a general proposition, applicable to each and every issue which can be said to relate, however generally, to this undeclared “war” against terrorism.”