PDA

View Full Version : Shop Talk


spare_change
12-01-2007, 11:03 PM
Howard loses re-election bid, Bush suffers?

Australia’s prime minister John Howard lost his bid for a fifth term last week to the Labor Party’s Kevin Rudd, and America’s MSM wasted no time in painting his loss as a blow to George Bush. They assume that Rudd’s platform is proof that Australia no longer wants to be America’s ally because Rudd plans to pull Australia’s troops out of Iraq and ratify the Kyoto global-warming treaty.

As usual, it takes some serious reading between the lines printed in the New York Times’ poison ink to get to the real story. In fact, Australia’s involvement in Iraq played almost no role in the election. For starters, Australia has so few combat troops in Iraq that one jumbo jet could fly them all out, so it is unlikely that their withdrawal will have any serious impact on our operations. Second, Australia intends to maintain its 1,000-plus troops in Afghanistan, so it is unlikely Rudd’s new government will completely reject being a partner in the war against Jihadistan.

It’s most likely that Howard lost the election after 12 years in office because the citizenry was simply ready for a change. That happens in democracies—compare the rejections of Churchill and De Gaulle after they won WWII, as well as Thatcher after the Cold War. Furthermore, Rudd made clear that he has no intention of changing the nature of his country’s relationship with the U.S. He even went as far as to recognize “our great friend and ally, the United States,” in his victory speech. We’re sorry to burst the Times’ bubble, but that’s hardly a blow to George W. Bush.

Warfront with Jihadistan: Saudi insurgency

Documents recovered during recent Coalition raids in Iraq have proved what most senior U.S. military leaders have known for four years: Our “ally” Saudi Arabia is providing more foreign suicide bombers, and vastly more money, to the insurgency than anyone else in the region. This is not surprising, as the Saudis are awash in oil money and in brainwashed young men raised in the medieval Wahabbi branch of Sunni Islam. While Iran continues to provide invaluable technical support, intelligence support, and weaponry to various Shi’ite groups in Iraq, al-Qa’ida continues to rely on suicide bombings as its only reliable means of reaching the evening news and depends on foreign Sunni fighters to carry out those suicide attacks.

This isn’t the first time Saudi Arabia has been a source of terrorist mischief. In the past the Saudis have openly provided money for Palestinian attacks on Israel, even holding televised fundraisers to subsidize the families of suicide bombers. The Saudis deliberately impeded the FBI’s investigation of the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing. And of course, 15 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 were Saudi subjects. While Shi’ite Iran remains the number-one sponsor of terrorism worldwide, we should not forget that Saudi Arabia’s Wahabbi sect remains the driving force behind al-Qa’ida, the enemy in the global war on terror.

This week’s ‘Alpha Jackass’ award

“Even though I approved of Afghanistan and opposed Iraq from the beginning, I still resent that I was not asked or given the opportunity to support those soldiers.” —Bill Clinton this week in Iowa

“I supported the President when he asked the Congress for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.” —Bill Clinton in May 2003

And just for good measure: “I can support an action against Saddam Hussein because I think it’s in the long-term interests of our national security.” —Hillary Clinton in September 2002

Furthermore, Bill signed the Iraq Liberation Act in 1998, making it the official policy of the United States “to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq, and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace the regime.”

Wedding procession hijinks

This week Iraqi soldiers at a checkpoint stopped a two-car wedding procession, but this was no ordinary wedding. The soldiers became suspicious when the two-car procession at first refused to stop. On top of that, all the participants were men, except for the bride. Upon further inspection, the bride, dressed in a white gown and carrying a yellow-flower bouquet, appeared to need a shave. In fact, the “bride” and another man were on the wanted-terrorists list and were attempting a getaway. (We in our humble shop are wondering how they decided who would dress in the gown.) The Iraqi soldiers had a good laugh as they insisted the bride undress to prove his femininity. The unhappy couple is currently on their honeymoon under guard at Al Taji military base.

Profiles of valor: Army Staff Sgt. Ketterer

Army Staff Sgt. Clarence Ketterer was serving as a Squad Leader with the 1st Battalion, 125th Infantry Regiment of the Michigan Army National Guard stationed in Habbaniyah, Iraq. During a patrol, Ketterer’s team came upon Iraqi soldiers whose vehicle had been hit by a suicide bomber and were under fire from insurgents. Ketterer quickly left the shelter of his vehicle to help evacuate the wounded soldiers while coordinating a counter-attack against the enemy. While assisting the wounded soldiers into an ambulance, Ketterer returned fire with his weapon and led the ambulance to safety. For the Iraqi lives that he saved that day, Ketterer was awarded the Bronze Star with combat “V” for valor. Ketterer is currently a senior at Central Michigan University and is a campus Company Executive Officer for the ROTC.

Cotties
12-02-2007, 12:38 AM
Howard loses re-election bid, Bush suffers?

Australia’s prime minister John Howard lost his bid for a fifth term last week to the Labor Party’s Kevin Rudd, and America’s MSM wasted no time in painting his loss as a blow to George Bush. They assume that Rudd’s platform is proof that Australia no longer wants to be America’s ally because Rudd plans to pull Australia’s troops out of Iraq and ratify the Kyoto global-warming treaty.

As usual, it takes some serious reading between the lines printed in the New York Times’ poison ink to get to the real story. In fact, Australia’s involvement in Iraq played almost no role in the election. For starters, Australia has so few combat troops in Iraq that one jumbo jet could fly them all out, so it is unlikely that their withdrawal will have any serious impact on our operations. Second, Australia intends to maintain its 1,000-plus troops in Afghanistan, so it is unlikely Rudd’s new government will completely reject being a partner in the war against Jihadistan.

It’s most likely that Howard lost the election after 12 years in office because the citizenry was simply ready for a change. That happens in democracies—compare the rejections of Churchill and De Gaulle after they won WWII, as well as Thatcher after the Cold War. Furthermore, Rudd made clear that he has no intention of changing the nature of his country’s relationship with the U.S. He even went as far as to recognize “our great friend and ally, the United States,” in his victory speech. We’re sorry to burst the Times’ bubble, but that’s hardly a blow to George W. Bush.

.The election was about work place rights and agreements..This was the theme that won the election.

Yes change is always healthy but the party that got in has tremendous financial support from the unions and now we have several former union bosses in charge of running the country. The Howard government has done wonders with the economy and has been supported by big business. Basically people feel secure in their jobs finally and don't want to see the minimum wage drop or lose any other workplace rights in which big business is pushing for. Troops were a very small part the political equation.

spare_change
12-02-2007, 03:59 PM
Around the nation: Unreasonable search

The Boston Globe reports that local police will begin a program of searching homes for guns with the intent to empower parents afraid to confront unruly teenagers. No doubt
that fear will vanish after the kid’s room has been searched. No warrant will be required, because a search can be done only with the homeowner’s permission. The police will go in groups of three, dressed in civilian clothes so as to not draw attention in the neighborhood (so please, don’t tell anybody about this program by, for example, publishing details in the newspaper). If a firearm is found, no weapons charges will be brought unless the gun is linked to a shooting.

Now, we’re all for helping parents out of a tough spot—after all, our governments are all about making sure parents have control over their kids, right? However, we are puzzled as to why a firearm found in a home could result in a criminal charge. What next, criminal charges for exercising free speech or religious practices in the home? Maybe the Supremes will answer that question for us this summer since they have decided to take up the 2nd Amendment case in Washington, DC. Plus, the ACLU is concerned that people may be intimidated into granting permission. A similar program in St. Louis had 98 percent granting consent. We have to say that we’re concerned to find ourselves in agreement with the ACLU, but maybe we can find a 12-step program for help. While the goals may be laudable, it seems just about every aspect of this plan is troubling.

’Non Compos Mentis’: Zero tolerance

Two students were suspended for ten days this week at Lee’s Summit West High School in Kansas City, Missouri, for allegedly using racial slurs. The students, one of whom is nearly an Eagle Scout, did not use the dreaded (dead and buried) “n-word,” nor did they say anything that was derogatory or racially offensive. Rather a group of students were having a conversation about what knots to use when tying drum equipment when the other “n-word” came up—“noose.” A black student overheard the conversation and told a teacher that he was offended. Clearly, these boys did nothing wrong. This ridiculous incident is yet another example of the “tolerance” of liberals’ beloved political correctness run amok. In reality—unfamiliar territory for liberals—political correctness, which is designed to undermine people’s rights to liberty and freedom of speech, is coming dangerously close to muting all conversation lest it be misconstrued as offensive. We can only imagine the next forbidden n-word.

Village Academic Curriculum: Fighting Sioux

In 2005, the University of North Dakota’s 70-year-old “Fighting Sioux” mascot landed the school on a list of those violating National Collegiate Athletic Association rules by displaying Native American names or images on team items at certain NCAA events. The NCAA claimed that “the time has come to retire Native American imagery in college sports.” Ironically, the NCAA’s headquarters are in Indianapolis, Indiana. In 2006, after the NCAA rejected a subsequent appeal by the university, the school sued them and in a settlement last month, the school has three years to negotiate an agreement with two Sioux tribes. If an agreement cannot be reached by 2011, the university will be forced to find a new mascot. As for the Sioux Indians, they don’t seem prepared to smoke a peace pipe with the school over the “Fighting Sioux” mascot.

Faith and Family: More ‘brotherly love’

Convictions last about as long as campaigns for outgoing Philadelphia Mayor John Street. Despite being elected in 1999 on a platform of pro-family values stemming from his Seventh-day Adventist Christian Faith, Street recently officiated at a same-sex “wedding” for long-time political aid Micah Mahjoubian and his partner, Ryan Bunch. “Micah is my friend,” justified Street. “He has been in my campaign and has been in my administration for eight years... and if this is something he would like for me to do, then I’d like to do it for him.” Trying to keep the back door of escape open, however, Street argued that, given the fact that Pennsylvania does not recognize same-sex marriages or civil unions, the ceremony was symbolic only.

Nevertheless, Diane Gramley, president of the American Family Association of Pennsylvania (AFA-PA), noted, “Even though [Street] is insisting [that] the ceremony is not marriage, homosexual activists are viewing it as a political statement and a giant step forward in their quest for so-called ‘marriage equality’.” With re-election no longer a concern for Street, however, moral standards once highly regarded quickly give way to political favors—regardless of the consequences.

Frontiers of Junk Science: Warming and AIDS

As the over-estimated hurricane season whimpered to a close once again, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released its fourth and final report of the year on global warming. Investor’s Business Daily sums it up: “It is a ‘consensus’ in that it started with a foregone conclusion—that man-made pollution is dooming the planet—and gathered in any and all opinions that supported it. The report incredibly warns that the 630,000 cubic miles of the Greenland ice sheet will virtually disappear in the near future, raising sea levels by almost 30 feet, and the Amazon rain forest will become a dry savannah. There will be widespread species extinction, as up to three-fifths of wildlife will die out. The Great Barrier Reef will die. And, oh yeah, winter sports in the Alps will be a thing of the past.” Notably, a survey of American members of the IPCC revealed decidedly less than consensus on the cause of warming, or even its possible benefits.

As for the UN, its top AIDS scientists announced this week that their estimates on AIDS cases worldwide was off by 17 percent—33 million versus the earlier 40 million. The World Health Organization puts the number at 25 million. Helen Epstein, author of The Invisible Cure: Africa, the West, and the Fight Against AIDS, said, “There was a tendency toward alarmism, and that fit perhaps a certain fundraising agenda.” Now insert global warming into that sentence. If the UN can be that far off on AIDS, might they also be off on the climate?

And last...

Speaking of overdoing it with the eco-theology of global warming, 154 explorers set out for Antarctica to witness the phenomenon of melting ice caused by American SUVs. Instead, they witnessed the fact that ice is increasing in Antarctica, namely by running into an iceberg with their boat, which then sank. It gets better. The polar express, a 38-year-old ship named the MV Explorer, had a history of inspection problems and was owned by one Bruce Poon Tip, a follower, friend and supporter of the populist potentate of eco-theology, Al Gore. Meanwhile, The New York Times is worried: “While the rescue [of all 154 passengers] may have been a success, the consequences for the Antarctic’s fragile environment of having a submerged ship estimated to be holding 48,000 gallons of marine diesel fuel sitting off its coast are unclear.” Indeed, thanks to Al’s buddy, at the bottom of the ocean lies a carbon footprint nearly as big as Gore’s.

Annie
12-02-2007, 04:51 PM
Around the nation: Unreasonable search

The Boston Globe reports that local police will begin a program of searching homes for guns with the intent to empower parents afraid to confront unruly teenagers. No doubt that fear will vanish after the kid’s room has been searched. No warrant will be required, because a search can be done only with the homeowner’s permission. The police will go in groups of three, dressed in civilian clothes so as to not draw attention in the neighborhood (so please, don’t tell anybody about this program by, for example, publishing details in the newspaper). If a firearm is found, no weapons charges will be brought unless the gun is linked to a shooting.

Now, we’re all for helping parents out of a tough spot—after all, our governments are all about making sure parents have control over their kids, right? However, we are puzzled as to why a firearm found in a home could result in a criminal charge. What next, criminal charges for exercising free speech or religious practices in the home? Maybe the Supremes will answer that question for us this summer since they have decided to take up the 2nd Amendment case in Washington, DC. Plus, the ACLU is concerned that people may be intimidated into granting permission. A similar program in St. Louis had 98 percent granting consent. We have to say that we’re concerned to find ourselves in agreement with the ACLU, but maybe we can find a 12-step program for help. While the goals may be laudable, it seems just about every aspect of this plan is troubling.

If the intent is to search the room of an unruly minor, do you think he or she has a firearms permit or license? I'm sure he/she took the time to register it.....

spare_change
12-02-2007, 06:47 PM
If the intent is to search the room of an unruly minor, do you think he or she has a firearms permit or license? I'm sure he/she took the time to register it.....


By definition, at least to my knowledge, a minor can't own a weapon, so the presumption would be that since it isn't registered to the parent, it must be illegal.

I'm guessing that's the logic.

Annie
12-02-2007, 07:08 PM
By definition, at least to my knowledge, a minor can't own a weapon, so the presumption would be that since it isn't registered to the parent, it must be illegal.

I'm guessing that's the logic. Right... but your recent post questions....

"Now, we’re all for helping parents out of a tough spot—after all, our governments are all about making sure parents have control over their kids, right? However, we are puzzled as to why a firearm found in a home could result in a criminal charge."

spare_change
12-02-2007, 10:23 PM
Right... but your recent post questions....



Oh, don't misunderstand --- I didn't say I agree with the editorial writer. In fact, I adamantly disagree.