My arrogant opinions about politics, culture, science fiction, and whatever else I feel like talking about.

        Pamela has news of the discussion of "Freedom of Speech" issues at New York University.

        There was supposed a panel discussion, sponsored by the campus Objectivist club, which would be open to the public, and which would display the Muhammad cartoons.

        To help out the discussion, and illustrate the issues, the University decided to violate its own rules.  It told the students, one day before the meeting, that despite prior approval of the gathering, they couldn't both admit the public and display the cartoons.  Although campus Muslims had gone to the ticket office, obtained two hundred tickets, and then destroyed them, NYU refused to allow journalists and non-NYU guests into the largely empty hall.  There was lots of security, and a ban on most pictures.

        In further Muhammad cartoon idiocy, Borders and Walden Books won't carry an issue of a magazine that reprinted some of the cartoons.  A Border's spokesman said:

        "We absolutely respect our customers' right to choose what they wish to read and buy and we support the First Amendment," Bingham said.

        Yes, they respect their customers' right to buy, but they won't sell.

         Meanwhile, in Denmark, Muslims are suing Jyllands-Posten for "defamation."  Who or what is allegedly being defamed isn't clear from the story.  In the U.S. at least, they wouldn't have standing, not being the Prophet.

         Technorati tags: courage, cowardice, Danish Muhammad Cartoons, freedom of speech, hypocrisy, New York University, NYU, War with Islam.

Posted by: saintonge at 23:32 | link | comments
liberty, cowardice, danish muhammad cartoons, higher noneducation, courage, war with jihadism, stupidity springs eternal, and now for somthng compltly dif

Stuff I Don't Worry About

        Bird flu.  Glenn Reynolds is worried again.

        I'm not.  Bird flus have probably been around as long as human flu, that is, a very long time indeed.  If one of the strains was going to mutate into something that killed humans, it probably would have done so already.

        In fact, it seems to have done so in 1916-1918, and it required the very unusual conditions of WWI to bring that about.

        And I can't help remembering the swine flu scare of 1976, and the "heterosexual aid" panic of the early 1980s.  Neither happened, and neither was ever likely to happen, but various people pushed the scares for reasons that had nothing to do with medical plausibility.

        So my advice is: relax.  It's worth making some preparations to deal with pandemic airborne illnesses, if only as a precaution against biological warfare.  But its highly unlikely, absent biowar, that we'll ever need them.

        Technorati tags: AIDS, avian flu, public panic, Glenn Reynolds, swine flu.

Posted by: saintonge at 19:30 | link | comments
bird flu, aids, the sky is falling

Eugene Volokh Nails It

        From The New York Times:

        Dr. Mohammad Ayaz Niyazi, an Egyptian educated in Islamic law, who attended one of the gatherings today, said, "There have been serial attacks on the Islamic world recently, starting with insulting the Holy Koran Quran, insulting the prophet of Islam, and now converting to Christianity by an Afghan."

        As Volokh said: 

        Trying to prevent people from being killed for their religious beliefs is not an "assault against Islam."  It's defense against Islam, or to be precise against a certain strand of Islam that regrettably cannot be dismissed as just some unimportant lunatic fringe.

        Hat tip: the Blogfather.

        Technorati tags: Afghanistan, Eugene Volokh, Islam, Islamists, Abdul Rahman, War with Islam.

Posted by: saintonge at 12:13 | link | comments
islam, war with jihadism

Oh, by the Way

        Kaus caught the Dog Trainer engaging in falsification of a story.

        *YAWN*  So what else is new?

          Technorati tags:   Mickey Kaus, Los Angeles Dog Trainer, MSM.

Posted by: saintonge at 08:41 | link | comments
msm, dishonesty

Hi, All

        I've been spending the last few days forcing my way through the intellectual manure pile that is Mary Mapes's book Truth and Duty.  It's not even fun anymore, watching her make an idiot of herself in public, noting her many lies, or correcting her errors of fact and logic.  But I intend to check finish her nonsense before tommorow, when the book is due back at the library.

        So till I'm done, I'll just say that Mapes is a fool and a liar, and still doesn't understand her fundamental mistakes.  More when I finish her mess.

        Technorati tags: CBS, dishonesty, illogic, Mary Mapes, MSM, Dan Rather, Ra^thergate.

Posted by: saintonge at 08:30 | link | comments (1)
msm, inaccuracy, dishonesty, illogic, rathergate

Lucy's First Kill: A LUCY'S BLADE SNIPPET

                “Hang on a minute,” said William.  “Where’s the guide we were promised?”

                “That’s me,” said the woman.  William had forgotten she was there.  “I will ride pillion behind you.”

                He hadn’t noticed in the dark but his saddle had a lady’s pillion seat added.  Oh terrific, William thought.  Now he had to play nursemaid as well.  He had no faith at all in this mission.  He doubted whether they would get anywhere near the maniac who was killing whores.  It would be a miracle if they all made it back without someone falling off in the dark and breaking bones. 

                He put down his left arm to haul her up but she leapt lithely onto the horse, using his hand mainly to steady herself.  She sat sidesaddle with her feet down the left flank of the horse and her right arm about his waist.

                The postern into London was closed for the nightly curfew so they left the Tower by the east gate and made their way north across the fields to Whitechapel Street.  The road was lined with three and four story houses so they actually had to move away from London to find a route onto it.  William thought that the city would soon become unmanageably large if the Queen did not do something soon to stop ribbon development along its access roads.  Once on Whitechapel Street, it was a short ride down to Aldgate. 

                The gate was an imposing building that straddled the road.  In the centre was an arch blocked by heavy oak doors and a portcullis.  A sergeant of the watch came out to meet them.

                “The city is locked for the curfew,” he said.

                “I have a permit signed by Sir Francis Walsingham,” said William.  He showed it to the man who gazed at it doubtfully.  “Come on, come on, man.  We are in a hurry.”  William had a horrible feeling that maybe the man could not read too well.  This was the sort of stupid detail that wrecked too-elaborate plans.

                The girl slipped off the saddle beside him.  She went over to the sergeant and showed him something on her hand.  He straightened up immediately.  “Open the gates, look lively there.”

                “Thank you sergeant,” said Lucy.  Queen Elizabeth’s ring had worked its magic.  She bounced back to William’s horse.  He lowered his arm to help her back into the saddle.  The portcullis rose, oh so slowly. 

                The diamond nestled in a purse slung round her neck.  Liliith opened a window on the left side of Lucy’s vision and painted in a map of London.  A flashing white light showed her position and a purple arrow showed the direction of the monster.  It was still somewhere in north west London.

                ‘Ready, Lucy?’ thought Liliith.  ‘I will drop a gravitonic shield in front of your eyes now.  It will slow down light, increasing its frequency, so you will see heat.  You will see in the dark but it will look odd.’

                Liliith placed the shield.  ‘Well,’ she thought.  ‘Can you see?’

                ‘Yes,’ thought Lucy.  ‘But it’s really peculiar.  People’s faces and torches are bright white but the sky is black.  Everything else is in shades of grey.’

                ‘The hotter something is the brighter it is,’ said Liliith.

                ‘I know you have to disguise my voice, Liliith, but whatever you are doing to my throat is becoming painful.’

                ‘Sorry, Lucy.  I’ll relax the muscles a fraction and block any pain,’ thought Liliith.

                The way was finally clear and the party rode off at the trot.  It wasn’t possible to go any faster.  William diverted to avoid the body of a criminal hanging from the gate.  The body was well tarred to preserve it but even so there was always the fear that something would drop off as one passed underneath.  The streets were mostly dark but the riders carried torches with them.  They came to a fork in the road.  Lucy checked the arrow.  “Right, into Aldgate Street,” she said to William,

                They trotted passed the Leadenhall Market and down Corn Hill.  The sound of the horses’ hooves echoed between the buildings.  Lights appeared at some windows, so there were a few people curious about a party of mounted men, but mostly Londoners kept their head down and minded their own business.  Experience had taught them the benefit of that.  Past the Royal Exchange, the party reached Stocks Market, the heart of the city where five roads met.  The purple arrow still pointed to north west London.

                “Straight on,” urged Lucy.  “Go up Cheapside.”

                As they passed Milk Street the arrow swung abruptly to the right.  “Next right,” Lucy said, urgently, and the party turned north into Wood Street.  “Faster,” she urged.  The arrow swung right as they went up the street.  To the left was a prosperous area with guildhalls, the Saddlers, the Goldsmiths and the Haberdashers.  But to the right between Wood Street and Milk Street was a rookery of run down houses, some of them derelict and empty. 

                “We are very close,” said Lucy.  The arrow on her map swung quickly now.  Finally it swung due east.  He’s in the alley down there,” she said.

                “Dismount.  Follow me,” said William and led the charge into the alley.  It was pitch black and filled with debris.  At the other end it opened into a small square.  A dilapidated tavern occupied one side.  It spilled light onto the square from lanterns around its door.  William saw a body draped over a waterless fountain.  He reached it in four strides and turned it over.  It was a slattern.  She looked old but was probably in her twenties.  Too much wine and too little food had ruined her.  The woman’s throat was torn open.  Blood still pumped out.

                “He’s still here somewhere.  Look around,” William said loudly.

                “There, there,” said Walsingham’s woman.  William looked where she pointed.  At first he saw nothing but then a shadow detached itself from the general dark and slipped into a building.  The woman must have eyes like an owl.

                “After him,” William ordered his men.  “Not you,” he said to the girl.  “Fletcher you stay here and protect the woman while we go after the killer.  Follow me.”

                William drew his cutlass and led the way into the dilapidated building.  This was the sea dog way.  An officer never said ‘go there’, instead he said ‘follow me’.  The doorway opened straight onto some stairs.  William climbed, his men following.  Their weight caused the stairs to sway alarmingly.  At the top was a landing, with three doors running off.  William kicked in the first door.  It was rotten and collapsed easily.  William thrust in the torch – the room was empty except for some broken sticks of furniture. 

                He repeated the process with the second door.  This one took two kicks.  The torch showed the monster inside.  William got an impression of staring bulbous eyes and fanged teeth.  The monster held his hands up to block the light and William could see that his nails were as long as claws.  The torch seemed to bother the madman and he retreated back into the dark snarling.  The boatswain followed William in and they thrust their torches at the madman, forcing him back.  The man growled like a dog as more men with torches crowded the room.  “Right, let’s take him,” said William and raised his sword.

                The monster turned and ran straight at the wall, crashing through it.  The whole side of the rotten building came away in an explosion of breaking wood.  William hadn’t seen anything like it since a broadside of culverins blew in the hull of a caravel off Cadiz.

                “Down the stairs, after him,” William said.

                “Please sir, the stairs is gone,” said a seaman. 

                They were trapped.  William looked down, torch out to light the square below.  A pile of wood heaved and the monster got up, splinters cascading around him.  Fletcher rushed the lunatic and aimed a blow with his cutlass.  The monster caught the blade with his hand and, pulling it out of Fletcher’s grasp, broke it.  Fletcher had ‘bottle’ like a sea dog should.  He stood his ground and threw a punch at the monster.  It caught his wrist and pulled him in.  With a slash of his other hand the monster ripped open Fletcher’s throat.

                “What have we here?  A tasty morsel and no mistake,” Said the monster, advancing on the girl.

                “Run girl,” said William.  “For sweet Jesu sake, run.”

                The girl seemed paralysed by fear.  She just stood there making no attempt to escape.  William looked around frantically but he could see no quick way down.  The monster advanced on the girl with his arms open as if to embrace her.  She stepped into his arms and he bent his head down, fangs gleaming in the torchlight. 

                Then the girl blocked his arms with hers.  She kneed the monster in the groin so hard that his body went two feet in the air. 

                “Bloody hell,” said the boatswain.

                The girl jumped back to put distance between them and drew a dagger from her left side.  It must have been a trick of the light but her hands and the knife seemed to glow.  The monster advanced on her with slashing swings of his clawed hands.  She deflected each blow with her blade, leaping backwards every time to keep her distance. 

                Then she dodged a slash instead of parrying and, stepping into range of the monster, jammed her knife into his side.  He screamed and reversed the swing of his arm, backhanding her across the head and body.  She was thrown across the square, to crash into the tavern wall. 

                William moved to the edge looking for handholds down.  His boot crashed through the wooden floor.  He would have fallen if the boatswain had not hauled him back.

                “They must hear this in the tavern,” said William.  “Why don’t they come out and help her?”

                “Because they’re scared, cap’n, that’s why,” said the boatswain.

                “Look out, girl,” William said.  He watched in agony, frozen to the spot.

                The monster charged after her trying to pin her in against the wall.  Trapped, she would be helpless against his greater weight.  She didn’t give him time.  She threw herself off the wall right back at him.  They met in mid air.  She hit him twice in the body forcing him back.  Then when she had room, she spun and kicked him in the thigh so hard William could hear the impact.  The monster went down.

                He didn’t stay down but leapt up at her as if roped to a charging horse.  His swing was ill timed and he missed.  Again she stepped inside his reach.  He was slowing down so she had more time.  She brought her glowing knife around in a low swing that started behind her back.  It moved too fast to see and sliced into the monster’s groin.  She lifted him up in the air on the dagger’s point.  It cut deep into his body and he crashed down on his back, legs and arms twitching. 

                The girl just stood there, looking at him.

                William threw his torch down and climbed after it.  He had some nasty moments but made it to the ground with nothing worse than splinters.  Retrieving the torch he went over to the mortally wounded monster?  It was gutted from groin to chest.  The knife must have been driven in with the force of a kicking stallion.  William had seen wood splinters driven into bodies like this by culverin fire.  Never had he seen such damage inflicted by hand.  Only the handle of the knife protruded.  William went to pull it out. 

                “No, not yet,” the monster said.  “It’s in my heart.  When you pull it out I will die.”

                William recognised that voice.  He pushed the torch nearer the face.

                “Packenham?  Is it really you,” William said.

                “Yes it’s me.  Christopher Packenham, the handsome lady-killer.  Look what the Spanish bitch has made of me, Hawkins.  Look what she has done to me.  Now I kill women for real and drink their blood.”  The old arrogance had gone from the voice but it was definitely Packenham.  William did not know what to say.

                “She said she would make me strong.  She brought something through the mirror from the Otherworld.  It did make me strong and fast.  Remember that night in your cabin.  You were supposed to be asleep.  I hit you a sturdy clout did I not.”  Packenham chuckled. 

                He grabbed at William’s hand.  “Then the voices started, telling me to kill, giving me a taste for blood until I became this thing, this monster.”

                There was very little blood in Packenham.  The knife had released what there was but most of the body seemed empty.  Mayhap that was why he needed other peoples’.

                “That girl.  She fights like a Valkyre.  Who is she?  What is she?”

                “I don’t know Christopher.  She belongs to Walsingham,” said William.

                “Walsingham!  I was supposed to kill him and his niece Lucy Dennys.  Isabella was determined to have the girl killed.  She has a great grudge against her.  I went for them one night but a guard surprised me.  Later, all I could think of was blood, anybody’s blood.  I needed blood so badly I couldn’t make it as far as the Tower.”

                “How did you leave the ship?  And how did you get here so fast, Christopher?”

                “The mirror with the sea diamonds,” Packenham said.  “It opens doors to the otherworld.  We walked off the ship to London like moving through a door from one room to another.”

                He grasped William’s arm.  “Pull the knife and kill me.  But first give me a cross.  I will burn in hell for what I’ve done but let me die with a cross.”

                “Here sir” said Brownlow, passing William a silver cross.  A number of the men had climbed down and joined William while he was talking to Packenham.  William handed Packenham the cross and the monster gripped it hard.  Smoke curled from his fingers and his hand burst into flames.  William put a boot on Packenham’s chest and pulled the knife with both hands, until he got it free.  How had a little girl rammed the weapon in so deeply?

                Packenham’s body collapsed in on itself until only a pile of ash remained.  The night breeze blew it away leaving only the cross.  William picked it up and turned to the girl.  She still stood in the same place but her whole body was shaking.

                “Shock,” said the boatswain.  “I have seen young sailors do this after their first battle but never so bad.  She ain’t done this before, cap’n.  I think this is her first kill.”

                Carefully, William pulled the hood back.  Auburn hair tumbled out in the torchlight and two big brown eyes looked into infinity.  For a moment, when he looked into her eyes, he seemed to see sparkling light, like stars or diamonds glistening in the sunlight, but the effect soon faded.

                “Sweet Jesu,” William said.  “It’s Lucy Dennys.  Walsingham will have my balls for tennis over this.”  The girl did not seem to hear him.  She just stood and shook.  The boatswain looked at the silver cross in William’s hand and then at the girl.  William handed her the cross.  She clutched it to her bosom and dropped to her knees.  She was muttering something.  William bent to listen.

                “Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us,” Lucy said.  She was reciting The Lord’s Prayer.  William looked up at the boatswain who shrugged.  Whatever made Lucy Dennys able to crush demons was clearly quite different from the thing that had possessed Packenham.

                “I reckon this maid knew what waited us here better than we did.  What pluck it must have taken to come with us,” said the boatswain, admiringly.  “Do you think we could have taken down that demon without her?”

                “We can take anything,” said William, stoutly, but had his doubts.  “We would have suffered grievous hurt though.  You saw what it did to Fletcher.”

                Lady Dennys, Lady Dennys,” William said gently to the girl.  She just knelt and shook.  “Right let’s get her home.  Bring Fletcher’s body as well.  I want no evidence left.  This enterprise never happened.”

                William picked Lucy up and carried her to the horses.  Her mounted in the rear saddle and then he boatswain passed her up.  William placed her sidesaddle, in front of him where he could hold her as they rode.

                The sea dogs trotted back through the dark streets of Old London Town.  Lucy held close to William, her head on his chest.  She had not spoken since the fight, indeed she seemed to be unconscious, but he hoped she draw comfort inside his arms.  At least she had stopped shaking.  It was ironic, he thought, that he could only get a real lady into his arms when she was unconscious.  How his mother would laugh.

                William had seen the Lucy the beautiful woman, Lucy the great lady, Lucy the scholar, Lucy the fearless warrior, and finally Lucy the shaken little girl.  How many more Lucy’s were there?  “Who are you really, Lucy Dennys, what are you?”  William said to himself.

                She sat well in his arms.  William had known many women but never anyone like her.  He liked holding her.  He thought the man who possessed her would be the most fortunate of all men.  What sons she would give a man.  Wind lifted her auburn hair and it rustled against his arm.  What daughters too, he admitted.  Lucy’s children would be the terror of the world.  It was such a shame that she would be wasted on some chinless aristocratic milksop, who enjoyed high social status only because he once had an ancestor with fire in his belly.

                An idea formed and grew.  This was a new age where anything was possible.  A new aristocracy of the sea was rising that was more important than the old nobility of blood and land.  He, William Hawkins, was one of these new men.  Walsingham himself was descended from a commoner merchant who had done well through trade and had married a Dennys.  Old man Walsingham had bought respectability along with a manor house in Kent.  There were many manor houses for sale in Devon to a rising man with Spanish treasure in his pocket. 

                The horse broke stride as it skidded on something in the dark.  Lucy shuddered as if at an unpleasant memory then snuggled in closer to William’s chest.  He glanced down.  He wanted this girl so badly it hurt.  He wanted her more than anything in the world, as much as he had wanted the captaincy of a galleon.  Rest securely in my arms, milady, he thought.  I will win you and then you can rest there forever.

---

          Technorati tags: Baen books, books, fantasy, John Lambshead, Lucy's Blade, science fiction.

Posted by: saintonge at 17:02 | link | comments

Very Important Article

        John Fund writes about Rahmatullah Hashemi, and how he is a positive force for world peace in the eyes of Yale.

        Remember, Yale thinks a man who job was to justify torture and murder, especially of women and gays (who are SUPPOSEDLY  persecuted minorities, to be protected) is a force for peace and understanding.  That tells you everything you need to know about the Yale hate-America mindset.

        And this may be the last post of the day, I'm having computer problems. See y'all.

          Technorati tags: John Fund, Rahmatullah Hashemi, hypocrisy, politics, War with Islam, Yale University.

Posted by: saintonge at 13:46 | link | comments (2)
culture, hypocrisy, higher noneducation

They Fight Like Girls

        As Army Major Sharon T. Moore notes, terrorists fight like girls.
        If you know any soldiers in Iraq, tell them to point that out to the locals — the terrorists don't have the stones to fight like men.
        Nothing like using their own weaknesses against them.  And the bastards are definitely mysoginists.
          Technorati tags: psychological warfare, Iraq Campaign, terrorism.

Posted by: saintonge at 03:51 | link | comments (1)
terrorism

Some Interesting Statistics

        From RedState

George W. Bush . . .  . . 5187  (2001-2004)
Bill  Clinton . . . . . . . . . 4302  (1993-1996)
George H.W. Bush . . . . 6223  (1989-1992)
Ronald Reagan . . . . . .  9163  (1981-1984)

        And what are those numbers?  The number of military personnel who died during the first term of each of the listed Presidents.

        There's more of interest in the post, go read it all.

          Technorati tags: Bush Administration, Iraq Campaign, War with Islam.

Posted by: saintonge at 16:03 | link | comments
george w bush, war with jihadism

Ignorance continues

        Glenn points to one of Ian Traynor's Guardian blogposts by  that begins :

        Ever since the end of the cold war and the dissolution of the fixed ideological polarities that entrenched the east-west stand-off for two generations, there has been a curious merger of the hard left and the extreme right, particularly in Europe, in defence of the maverick, the authoritarian, and the plain brutal.

        "Curious?"  Where have you been, Mr. Traynor?  From the moment it first took power, in France during their Revolution, the "Left" has always been authoritarian.  Making people take orders is what the "Left" is all about, and always has been.  The political philosophy of Europe can be summed up 'Some people give orders, and the rest take them.'  The only real disputes have been over who gets to issue the orders, and what excuse the order givers use to conceal their motives (the real motive is always 'I enjoy shoving people around').

        The common thread linking these westerners' support for a varied cast of villains - from the Soviet-era authoritarianism of Lukashenko, to the mafia state created by Milosevic, to the fundamentalist theocracy and state-fuelled anti-semitism of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Iran - is not actually sympathy for the objects of their support.

        Rather, it is good old-fashioned European anti-Americanism. Operating on the principle of my enemy's enemy is my friend, it stands to reason that, if the Americans want Slobodan Milosevic or Ratko Mladic in jail, they must be doing something right.

        Well, that's an interesting distinction, but I have to wonder, why are Europeans anti-American.  Could it have something to do with the fact that we don't take orders?

        Still, it's an interesting post.  Read it all.

Posted by: saintonge at 10:49 | link | comments

Wow, There's Hope For Yale After All

       An editorial in the Yale Daily News, concerning Rahmatullah Hashemi displays actual elementary logic:

         Despite our own best efforts and those of The New York Times Magazine's Chip Brown, we have little idea of what Hashemi is doing at Yale, or of what he plans to do with a Yale education.  We have seen a generally positive response from his professors, and Hashemi told us that he wants to aid "thinking about change" in his home country -- and that he may write a book -- but he has been otherwise vague.  While we respect every student's right to privacy, we believe the extenuating circumstances of this case merit further discourse.

         The argument made by University officials -- that Hashemi adds an important perspective to the Yale community -- is typical of its admission of older or non-degree students, but that argument fails if he is unwilling to share his perspective.

        Gee, at least one student at Yale has learned to think occasionally.  Perhaps more will.

          Technorati tags: Aghanistan, Rahmatullah Hashemi, Taliban, sense, War with Islam, Yale University.

Posted by: saintonge at 09:39 | link | comments
politics, culture, leftists, higher noneducation, war with jihadism

Volokh on (Indirectly) Ginsburg

          I wrote expressing my disagreement with Ginsburg's view of constitutional interpretation here, and I added Justice Scalia's view here.  Now, Eugene Volokh chimes in, pointing out how certain explicit Constitutional norms are in conflict with "international law."  Following foreign constitutional practice will result in the erosion of the U.S. system of government.

          I would go further.  Most of the world has lived under dictatorship or monarchy, not under the democratic republicanism of the U.S.  Following foreign thought in interpreting the Constitution makes it likely we will end up a dictatorship as well.

          But then, people like Ginsburg are totalitarians, and want the Republic destroyed.

          Technorati tags: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, totalitarianism, Eugene Volokh, U.S. Constitution.

Posted by: saintonge at 06:23 | link | comments
constitution

Why Do So Many People Have a Negative View of Islam?

          In part, says Jack Kelly, because the MSM's transparent dishonesty on the subject fuels their suspicions:

          The truth is most politicians and journalists have been stretching the truth to distinguish between Muslim extremists and the religion of Islam itself.

          Consider how delicately the New York Times dealt with Mr. Taheri-azar [the terrorist who tried to kill Chapel Hill students by ramming them with a jeep].

          His assault was reported on page A-18, in a story which somehow never got around to mentioning that Mr. Taheri-azar is a Muslim.

          In Chapel Hill, university officials have refused to characterize Mr. Taheri-azar's assault as either a hate crime or an act of terror. When some students protested the attack, there was a counter protest.

          "By calling it religious violence, you are telling people that Muslims are violent," sophomore Johnathon Pourzal told the Durham Herald Sun.

          Gee, I wonder what would give people that idea?

          Read it all.

          Technorati tags: bias, dishonesty, Islam, MSM.

Posted by: saintonge at 05:46 | link | comments

Up For a Quiz?

         Patterico has two pieces from the Los Angeles Dog Trainer, one supposedly "straight news," the other opinion and analysis.  Your job is to attempt to guess which is which.

         I suggest you flip a coin.

          Technorati tags: bias, Los Angeles Dog Trainer, MSM, Patterico's Pontifications.

Posted by: saintonge at 05:05 | link | comments
msm, bias

We're Winning the Iraq Campaign

          See this Belmont Club post, which notes the way the rhetoric of the enemy, his supporters, and the "critics" is changing.

          Technorati tags: terrorism, Iraq campaign, War with Islam.

Posted by: saintonge at 03:51 | link | comments
iraq, terrorism, war with jihadism

Who's Lying?

           The leader of the Minnesota Senate, Dean Johnson, told some clergymen that he had assurances from the three state Supreme Court that they wouldn't overturn the state's law against same-sex marriage, so please stop pushing for a referendum amending the state Constitution.  The ministers, showing a shocking lack of trust, and a even more shocking presence of good sense, recorded the conversation, and gave it to the news media.

           And the Chief Justice has now publicly said that it didn't happen.  Johnson's story is that he actually only talked with one Justice, but that this Justice did assure him of his vote against imposing gay marriage on Minnesota.  'Didn't happen,' says the Chief Justice.

           Thanks, Johnson, you've just about guaranteed the amendment will be on the ballot after all.

          Technorati tags: Democrats, dishonesty, elections, gay rights, politics.

Posted by: saintonge at 03:14 | link | comments
politics, gays, democrats, elections, dishonesty, minnesota

In Other Europe News

               We have the question: are the Europeans idiots attempting appeasement, or Jew haters hoping Hamas will do their dirty work?

Posted by: saintonge at 01:58 | link | comments
europe, hypocrisy, jew hatred

Have You Ever Wondered What the Web Would Have Been Like in 1944?

          Lileks has discovered the answer.

          Hubba-Hubba.

Posted by: saintonge at 01:22 | link | comments
girls

News Flash!

          The Democrats do too have a positive message.  They've just decided not to tell you what it is.

          Another hat tip to Betsy Newmark, who also notes the Democrats lack of balls, and the fact that the Republicans aren't much better.

          Technorati tags: cowardice, Democrats, politics, Republicans, stupidity.

Posted by: saintonge at 01:08 | link | comments
politics, democrats, republicans, cowardice, not satire, stupidity springs eternal

A Rebutal to Justice Ginsburg

          I wrote about her opinion of how to interpret the Constitution here.  From Justice Scalia, via Jeff Jacoby:

          Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights declares that ''everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life" -- a sentiment no reasonable person would disagree with.  But six years ago, that provision was invoked to strike down a British law banning group sex.  A European court held that the conviction of a man who had been involved in a five-person orgy violated his right to respect for his private life.

          The problem with that ruling, Scalia said, isn't that sexual orgies are a social ill -- one might even argue that they ''ought to be encouraged."  The problem is that unelected judges had no business deciding that question.  In an open democratic society, it is the public that should be making such value judgments.  That is what elections and legislatures are for.

          Agreed.  Hat tip: Betsy Newmark.

Posted by: saintonge at 00:52 | link | comments

Do You Think USAmerica Sucks?

         According to Shannon Love, if you do, you vote Democratic.  And, by displaying your hatred of the U.S. at every opportunity, you help elect Republicans:

          The far (and perhaps not-so-far) Left want to have it both ways.  They wish to be able to say that America is basically a corrupt state, culture and society, responsible for most of the evil in the world, but on no account may anyone question their commitment to protecting that corrupt entity.  Riiiight.

         Thanks Democrats.  We Republicans appreciate it.  Keep up the good work.

        Technorati tags: Democrats, idiocy, Shannon Love, patriotism, Republicans, USAmerica.

Posted by: saintonge at 23:54 | link | comments

Yet More MSM Bias and Ignorance

          Documented here, in a story on "Operation Swarmer" and the press's reaction.

          Once, weren't reporters supposed to know something about what they reported on?  Or was that in an alternate universe?

          Technorati tags:bias, inaccuracy, ignorance, Iraq Campaign, MSM, terrorism, terrorists, War with Islam.

Posted by: saintonge at 23:24 | link | comments
iraq, terrorism, msm, bias, inaccuracy, ignorance, war with jihadism

News on the Sinister Jewish Conspiracy

          or I might have titled this "Harvard Openly Embraces Jew Hatred."

          David Duke and the Islamofascists are enthusiastic.

          And no, none of this is satire.

          Technorati tags: David Duke, Harvard, Islamofascism, Jew haters, Jew hatred.

Posted by: saintonge at 22:59 | link | comments
jew hatred, not satire

The LOS ANGELES DOG TRAINER Hits a New Low

          Which, given the Dog Trainer's history, is no mean feat.  A black conservative committed fraud (unless he didn't; he was accused, but no trial has taken place; on which, see below) because he's black and conservative.  Read about it here, where they aptly observe:

          The only consistencies at the Times are liberal bias, low standards, and intellectual laziness, not necessarily in that order.

          I also noticed that "innocent until proven guilty" appears to have no place at the Dog Trainer, when the accused is a black conservative Republican.  If we were talking about an accused bank robber with a history of violent felony convictions, the Dog Trainer would scrupulously refer to him as a "suspect" or alleged criminal.  But then, liberal hypocrisy only surprises me nowadays when it doesn't show up.

          Hat tip: Glenn.

          Technorati tags: bias, hypocrisy, Los Angeles Dog Trainer, MSM, Republicans.

Posted by: saintonge at 22:11 | link | comments
msm, bias, republicans, hypocrisy, leftists

What!?!?!?!

          Over at Instapundit, the Blogfather says:

          As for Keen's complaint that I fail to address the "crucial" question of "whether or not man is inherently good" -- well, that question could support a book, or a thousand books, on its own. And has. While I agree that it's an important (if, perhaps, difficult to resolve) topic,

          Uh, Glenn, have you ever read the newspapers?  If so, the answer to question is simple: "No."

          I'm shocked that anyone would need to have that pointed out.

Posted by: saintonge at 08:34 | link | comments
human nature, reality

Dishonesty? Confusion? Cowardice? — Or All Three?

          One of the strange features of modern politics is the way so many issues are lost in a muddle, or not addressed forthrightly because they're too scary, or simply lied about — although sometimes, I'm not sure which factors are at work.  I have two good examples available.

          At Newsday, there was an editorial on Friday by a James Klurfeld, Those War Drums Have a Familiar Beat.  Klurfeld writes:

          There is also an alarming sense of deja vu in this report when it comes to.  Combine the review's defense of preventive war - which it terms pre-emptive war, though there is an important difference - with the recent warning statement from Vice President Dick Cheney that we will not allow to have a nuclear weapon, and you can't help but feel that this administration is ready to go to war again, this time against Iran.  It was that same combination of a bellicose National Security Review and saber rattling from Cheney that set the stage for the invasion of Iraq.

          Back then, I was willing to give the administration the benefit of the doubt.  All the heavy rhetoric seemed to be part of an overall strategy to intimidate Saddam Hussein to give up his weapons of mass destruction.  The threat of force was necessary to convince Hussein to allow the weapons inspectors back into Iraq, I thought.

          On my old blog, I did a post about this subject once, titled Hold on, Bush DID Lie Us Into War!  It said, basically, that Bush lied by telling the truth.  The President said, repeatedly, that Saddam must get rid of all weapons of mass destruction, and prove he had done so to the UN, 'or else.' Saddam didn't prove it, and the 'or else' happened.  The lie was that liberals and Democrats had just come off of eight years of President Penis, who lied and bluffed as a matter of course, and they thought Bush was doing the same.

          This belief that Bush must be bluffing was what Klurfeld to support Bush in 2002.  Klurfeld displays further confusion when he writes:

          The administration had decided to invade and depose Hussein no matter what he did.

          No, I think Bush meant what he said.  If Saddam cooperated fully and stopped lying, he wouldn't be invaded.  There was very little chance of this, but Bush would have let Saddam's regime survive — but only if it had proved that it had complied with all UN resolutions on WMDs.

          My 'Bush lied' post was semi-tongue in cheek, but only semi.  The big questions regarding Saddam was 'Are we willing to let him have weapons of mass destruction?'  The liberals and Democrat's answer mostly was, 'Yes we are, if the alternative is war.'  Bush's answer, and mine, was 'No we aren't, even if it means war.'

          We now face a similar question with respect to Iran: 'Are we willing to allow Iran to have nuclear weapons?'  Klurfeld's answer isn't clear, but he does write:

          I'll take the president and the vice president at their word this time around.  They mean what they say.  They are ready to use force to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons, to use force preventively.  Damn the consequences.

          From this I infer that Klurfeld's answer is 'No, I'd rather have Iran acquire nuclear weapons than fight to stop them.'  As for the consequences, (Israel destroyed, the U.S. attacked, jihad encouraged), he just won't think about that.

          Another example of confusion, cowardice, and dishonesty is Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's speech: A decent Respect to the Opinions of [Human]kind:The Value of a Comparative Perspective in Constitutional Adjudication.  Ginsburg's idea, if that is quite the word I want, is that because the U.S. has learned things from other nations, because the Declaration of Independence makes reference to a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind, because the Supreme Court said, in an 1816 case, that sometimes foreign nations were deeply interested in the results of U.S. judicial cases,[and in] which the principles of the law and comity of nations often form an essential inquiry, and finally because many foreign nations that didn't used to have judicial review of constitutionality, the Supreme Court must decide cases in accordance with foreign legal and moral thought.

          Put that way, it sounds idiotic.  That's because it is idiotic.  Ginsburg's speech evades the fact that we accepted some things from the old world, and rejected others; that we did not ask foreigners if it was a good idea to declare independence, and establish the Republic when almost all countries were ruled by hereditary kings; that the fact that a foreign nation is deeply interested in an outcome does not give them control of that outcome, or we would never have become independent; and that the fact that some nations have adopted a few features of U.S. constitutional practice doesn't mean they have adopted all of them, or that, even if they did, they would be right.

          Ginsburg is either especially confused, or especially dishonest, when she sites the 1816 case, MARTIN Heir at law and devisee of [Lord] FAIRFAX v. HUNTER'S LESSEE, 14 U.S. 304 (1816).  An British peer, Lord Fairfax, had left some property he owned in Virginia to one Martin.  The Virginia legislature passed a bill seizing the property, and awarding it to a Mr. Hunter.  Lawsuits were filed, and the Virginia court of appeals ruled in favor of Hunter, based in part on their interpretation of the Treaty of Paris, which ended the Revolutionary War.  The U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Virginia Court, saying their interpretation of the treaty was incorrect.  The Virginia Court tried to claim that it could interpret a treat any way it wished.  The USSC replied that the U.S. Constitution, and the Judicial Act, gave the USSC appellate jurisdiction in all cases involving treaties, and the Virginia Court was therefore bound by the Supreme Court's decision.  At no time though, does the decision in Martin vs. Hunter's lessee refer that I can discover to the opinions of any foreign court.  So Ginsburg's citation is completely off the point.  In fact, the supremacy of the U.S. Constitution is explicitly affirmed.

          So also is Ginsburg's quotation of Chief Justice Taney off the point:

          No one, we presume, supposes that any change in public opinion or feeling . . . in the civilized nations of Europe or in this country, should induce the [U.S. Supreme Court] to give the words of the Constitution a more liberal construction . . . than they were intended to bear when the instrument was framed and adopted.

          The quote is from the Dred Scott decision, which violated the letter of the Constitution by requiring slavery in any territory.  It was obviously wrongly and dishonestly decided (the Congress had been deciding which territories would be free or slave since the 1780s, before there was a Constitution).  Further, as Ginsburg notes two paragraphs on in her speech, it was overturned by the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth amendments.  No one ever claimed that the Constitution can't be altered by amendment.

          Ginsburg goes on to say that the Courts can consult all sorts of materials, so why not foreign laws?  She tends to dodge the questions of which foreign laws, and what to do when such laws contradict U.S. practice.  For instance, she notes, in an affirmative action case, that she based her ruling in part on a treaty that the has never ratified!  There is no principle in her speech that I can discover except 'The Supreme Court can reach whatever result it wants, whenever it wants, especially if I like the outcome.'

          Oh well, the USAmerican people are waking up to this fraud.  The day may come when political discourse actually becomes somewhat honest again.

Posted by: saintonge at 08:06 | link | comments

Intense Confusion

          Ann Althouse is displaying some.

          Althouse posts about the argument that gay marriage will inevitably lead to polygamy, because the arguments for recognizing two men or two women as being married can be applied without change to three or more people.  Not so, she replies.  Althouse says there's a "principled basis" for distinguishing the polygamy and gay marriage.

          And what is this principled basis?  Her sense of fairness.   Apparently she has mistaken herself for all of humanity, past, present and future.  This is a common problem with liberals, most notoriously in theories of the  "general will."

          Althouse's argument, such as it is, goes like this:

          Legal marriage isn't just about love, it's an economic arrangement. . . . A gay person with a pension and a health insurance plan is incapable of extending those benefits to his (or her) partner. He (or she) can't file a joint tax return.  That's not fair. A polygamous marriage, however, puts a group of persons in a position to claim more economic benefits than the traditional heterosexual couple. That doesn't appeal to our sense of fairness. . . .

          But it's not all about love and who respects what. It's also about economics. And in that dimension, it's easy to distinguish polygamy.

          What Althouse is missing is the question "Why did 'society' grant married couples these benefits in the first place?"  Marriage is, as Althouse says, an economic arrangement, but it's about the economics of the survival of the species, in other words, it's about children.  Without children, the species dies.  Without enough children, the economy crumbles, and the retired die.  As Mark Steyn recently put it:

          Pre-9/11, I never paid much attention to demography.  A decade ago, I accepted the experts’ standard line that the Japanese economy had tanked because the joint was riddled with protectionism and cronyism.  But so what?  You could have said the same 30 years ago, when the place was booming, or 15 years ago, when we were bombarded with all those TV commercials warning that the yellow peril was annexing America.  The only real structural difference between Japan then and Japan now is that the yellow peril got a lot wrinklier: 14 percent of its population is under 15, as opposed to 21 percent in the United States, just under 30 percent in Iran, and 40 percent in Pakistan.  What happened in the 1990s was what Yamada Masahiro of Gakugei University calls the first “low-birth-rate recession.”

          Since gays will eventually retire, and be supported in part by the labor of the next generation, to which they are mostly not contributing, I find it somewhat fair that they pay more in taxes now to subsidize those who are raising the children that will be paying for their support.  I also find it somewhat fair that their pensions can't be passed on to another person, or that they can't extend insurance benefits to their partners.

          Of course, we don't have perfect fairness, as the law recognizes marriage among the sterile, as well as those deliberately remaining childless.  And one could argue that homosexual couples can adopt, and even have children if the couple is lesbian.  But then, polygamous familes also can give birth, and do.  There's also evidence that growing up in a "non-traditional" family frequently doesn't work out very well for the children.  So we really have to consider what living arrangements we wish to encourage.  Perhaps we should trim the tax and insurance benefits for the married, but vastly increase the deduction for children?  If we do that, though, there's a danger of increasing the number of single parent families, a very bad thing indeed.

          But as long as we wish to encourage the next generation to be raised by mixed-sex married couples, we have an argument based solely on fairness for not recognizing homosexual couples as legally married.

          Of course, all this ignores the real issue in the "gay marriage" debate: to what extent should society be run on tradition?  The extreme rationalist wants tradition ignored completely, and those who hate Western Civilization want traditional culture destroyed.  Both of these push for gay marriage, while those who respect religious and cultural tradition want to continue the ban on recognizing marriage as anything but a relationship between one man and one woman.  By the way, the desire to destroy tradition as a basis of social policy and culture is also why Aid to Families With Dependent Children was extended to women never married, something Congress never anticipated when it passed the original bill.  And most of the same people who push gay marriage will eventually push polygamy, just because it is anti-traditional.

          But even ignoring this, Althouse's argument fails on its own terms.

          Technorati tags: Ann Althouse, culture, demography, fairness, gay rights, social policy.

Posted by: saintonge at 06:30 | link | comments
culture, gays, the future, demographics, fairness, social policy

It's Back

          'Betsy's Page,' that is.  The following excerpts from the official police report allows us to figure out what happened.

          Friends of Betsy's blog first noticed that the blog was missing several days ago when they tried to make contact with her through the internet and couldn't connect with her, but, Betsy's husband, Craig, insisted that the blog was doing fine and would return home to the World Wide web as soon as she straightened out some technical problems with her caretaker, who goes by the name of "Blogger".  . . .

          According to several blogs who are close friends of the abducted blog, Betsy's blog was last seen visiting the "Democratic Underground", a local hangout for Democratic bloggers, which she frequents on a regular basis.  Although Betsy's blog is known to be a staunch Conservative, friends say she likes to keep herself entertained by watching the rowdy, disorderly and fractious atmosphere at the local Democratic clubs.  [Betsy's Page also spies on the Democrats for the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, but don't tell them that — St. O.]

          Several members of the "Daily Kos club" who frequent the Democratic Underground say they saw Betsy's blog at the Democratic Underground on the same day she was reported missing.  They say that Betsy's blog was having a few drinks and chatting with a shady character who happens to be named Sam.  Sam, whose last name is unknown, is a card carrying member of both the Democratic Underground and the Daily Kos, and is known to be suffering from a severe form of "Liberalism", which expresses itself in frequent outbursts at the Daily Kos comment section.

          Meanwhile, Blog Patrol paid a visit today to the NY jail cell of the notorious serial killer, "Son Of Sam" to find out if his father might be "Sam" the "Blog Poacher".

          "Son Of Sam" reportedly told Detectives at Blog Patrol that his father was a member of the Green Party and that his father wasn't even familiar with any of the Conservative or Liberal blogs.

          Authorities say that neither Sam Nunn, Sam Donaldson or Samuel Alito are suspected of being connected in any way with this horrendous crime.  Blog Patrol did question family members of the legendary entertainer, Sammy Davis Jr. to find out if Mr. Davis might be the kidnapper. However, after family members provided authorities with the proper alibi, namely that Mr. Davis has been dead for over a decade, Sammy's name was dropped from the list of suspects. . . .

          P.S. The latest reports indicate that Betsy's blog has been found and is undergoing a debriefing at the present moment.  If these reports hold out to be true, this blogpost may be found to be absolutely worthless - if it wasn't already worthless from the get go.

          Obviously, while Betsy's Page was chatting with "Sam," "Sam" managed to slip one of the notorious 'blog-rape' drugs into her drink.  Once stupefied, the evil Sam carried her off and had his way with her.

          This leaves the question of how a helpless blog like Betsy's Page was allowed into the Democratic Underground without her caretaker, 'Blogger.'  It turns out that Blogger, who works for a "search engine" named 'Google,'* somehow mistook Betsy's Page and several other blogs for canned meat, and decided to discard them.  When apprised of it's mistake, Blogger at first insisted it knew what it was doing.  Finally forced to take action by community pressure, Blogger looked for Betsy's Page and found her sitting dazed on the street, where the evil Sam had abandoned her.  After observing for several hours, Blogger worked up his courage and took poor Betsy's Page back to her parent, Mrs. Newmark.

          The conclusion I draw from this: if, like me, you are the parent of a blog, you want to hire someone other than Blogger to take care of it for you.

          (Google's official motto: "Don't be evil — unless it pays really well,")

          Technorati Tags: Betsy's Page, Blogger, blogs, Google, incompetence, Betsy Newmark, satire, weirdness.

Posted by: saintonge at 04:28 | link | comments (1)
satire, weirdness, incompetence

If I were al-Qaida

          The Democrats, some of them anyway, are complaining about the NSA's warrantless  surveillance of calls from overseas.

          If I were al-Qaida, and the Democrats get their way on this issue, I'd route all calls through the U.S.

          Want to place a call from Syria to Britain to set up a terrorist operation?  Call the U.S. from Syria, and have the U.S. recipient call Britain.  You could wire two phones together to do this easily.  As for the U.S., it wouldn't be able to listen to the information, or use it.  Their greatest enemy, suddenly cut off at the knees.

          Which is why this issue is a loser for the Democrats, and will help them to once again be the minority party after the November elections.  Thank you, Daily Kos and such, for hurting them so much.

          Technorati tags: Democrats, NSA intercepts, politics, Republicans, Sabotage of the War Effort, terrorism, War with Islam.

Posted by: saintonge at 09:51 | link | comments (1)
terrorism, democrats, foreign affairs, republicans, elections, nsa warrantless surveillance, war with jihadism

Our Thoroughly Unbiased MSM

          Jeff Goldstein catches them propagandizing in Spanish.

          Technorati tags: bias, MSM.

Posted by: saintonge at 08:33 | link | comments
msm, bias