Friday, July 19, 2002

A fine article on Front Page Magazine about the myth of second-class Arab citizens in Israel can be found here. It never ceases to amaze me how virtually all of Israel's critics ignore the fact of Arab citizenship in Israel, something that would never happen if a community of Jews had stayed in a foreign country. (Not that they had the option. All of the Arab countries Jew's were summarily kicked out after 1948. Israel took them in.)
Random Thought:
I hear a lot of people these days bemoaning the fact that the government has not yet required higher fuel efficiency in cars. I hear oodles about how it will help the enviroment, help the war on terrorism, and help save the squirrel from mean Old man Henry. Why is it though, that I have heard no defense of the current standard of fuel efficiency? What is the other side of the story that we are not getting? If anybody knows, please email me.
Fact: If you want to see Janet Reno dance because she, in your opinion, is a fox, you need help from a trained professional.

Thursday, July 18, 2002

No, No NO! The Department of State has got to go!
Why? Because the bureaucrats have gotten to the point where they think the public should serve them and their ideas instead of they serving the public. I don’t want to know how long the State Department has been thinking like this, but I think it is high time that we fire quite a bit of people from the State Department, just so we can shake up the culture, and hopefully introduce people who are not infected with the type of self-righteousness that the State Department is known for.

Oh my God. I never thought I'd see this. Is this just because of money? Or is it because of some ideology? Why?

Wednesday, July 17, 2002

The IRA says sorry for being a bunch of murderous, gloating, evil thugs that murdered children and civilians. The worst part of it is they call them "noncombatants", not "good people who were minding their own business when they got blown to pieces by one of our cowardly bombs." Here is the real kicker. They said "it was not our intention to injure or kill noncombatants". Oh, so I guess that all the bombings and shootings at subway stations, outside streets, and other places where people congregate were only meant to hurt the British military, despite the fact that there were bombings where there were no troops. Fuckers. If there is any justice in the world, the members of this organization would burn in Dante's hell.
Do you loathe the French? If so, here is your man.

Tuesday, July 16, 2002

More proof that China is not a great friend.
Frankly, it is my view that in the next few decades, China will be a potential threat to the U.S. Why? One reason is because China has still been selling WMD's to some very bad people. The fact that China is so willing to upgrade their military that they risk pissing off the biggest economic powerhouse in the world shows an attitude more in line with the Soviet Union than Britain. The Chinese have also showed this arrogance when one of their fighters’s jets crashed into one of our electronic planes, forcing the plane and the crew to disembark. Despite the fact that the plane was not over Chinese territory, the Chinese government was very condescending to the U.S., and tried to order (!) the US. This might be traced to a cultural level, as China has always had a concept of the "foreign barbarians" that was much in line with the Japanese concept of "gaijin", the foreign devil. This could be traced to an organizational trait, as Soviet Russia was also too big for their britches. As a supposed ally, this attitude is very disturbing, much like Saudi Arabia.
The other thing that worries me is the population and military of China. As everyone already knows, China has the biggest population in the world, and one of the biggest militaries in the world. In the military, the equipment is still very much under-par, with even less capabilities with the European Union. However, the EU is going down from a formerly high place, while China is going up in quality. I'm not an expert in military capabilities, but this still worries me. One thing that China has that offset's their equipment problem is their high population. The population is big enough so that only nuclear WMD's would pose a serious threat in terms of population reduction. Even this is not very dangerous for the Chinese government, as China historically has been willing to have tons of their own people killed during the course of war. Exhibit A is the horrendous loss of life among the Chinese during World War II. The only country that lost more was Russia, and that is certainly arguable. (Records tend to be not so helpful.) While the U.S. military is larger as of now, it might not stay that way.
However, it is also entirely probable that China will be out of the picture in 30 yearts.
India, a country that was formerly not very friendly with us, has tried to heighten it's status in the U.S. India has been doing this by highlighting the conflict in Kashmir as proof that the two countries are alike. We would do well to court India, since it has a population that easily rivals China, and combined with our (overwhelming) technologically superior army, would make an alliance that China will fear. Another factor might be that the addition of Western-style capitalism in China might liberalize the government, relations becoming very friendly in the future.
Of course, one thing will make italmost impossible for China to become a serious player. China is going to have a demographics problem the world has never seen. Due to its population, China has a law that only allows families to have one child. In China, there is very little work for old peasants, thus requiring children to support their parents in their old age. Having a female is very taxing financially, as females have to give a dowry to the parents of the husband, and females generally do not have many opportunities for work in China. Thus, whenever a female child is born, there is a strong incentive for the parents to kill the child at birth, and tell the state that the child was a miscarriage, thus getting another opportunity for a son. This results in there being a lot of males, but very few females for them to have. This is a sure-fire recipe for China to have some very serious problems, as they will be trying to keep the males happy, despite having no women at all. In any case, this will almost certainly mean a severe population loss in the two generations, thus making India the king of the population game.

Final Odds? 40% chance that China will become a serious problem, and a 60% chance that it won't.
Here is an important article about the Palestinians. Take note that one of the signers of the petition that was against suicide bombers was actually dead at the time it was created.
Link via Little Green Footballs.
Another atrocity has occured today. Include the dead and the wounded in your prayers, thoughts, and actions.
The funny, witty, and intelligent David of Iowa has linked to me. He runs a very-high quality blog, so check him out!

Monday, July 15, 2002

Why would anyone want to do this?
Like most of the pieces that are pro-palestinian, this one has a lot of problems. Allow this vile american repressor to point out some of the mistakes:
"However, Israel have started to launch a more ambitious campaign: the EU – the largest donor to the PA – is under constant pressure from Israel to cut its aid, which is used, inter alia, to pay the salaries of teachers and health workers. The tactics are always the same; Israel provides some documents presumably linking the PA to terror – any aid to the PA is, therefore, aid to terror ."
Yes it is. The facts are that the PA has not been very good in terms of actually, you know, governing the palestinians and giving them stuff. They have been shown to have been funding terror, in numerous reports by CNN, ABC News, Fox News, Jerusalem Post, The Wall Street Journal, and various other media sources. The author already admits the EU is the largest donor to the PA. The author also somewhat acknowledges that the PA is involved in terror. Using simple financial anaylsis, one must realize that by giving money to one part of an organization, one free's up money for other parts of an organization. As proof, let me cite one of the foot notes:
"The head of the EC’s delegation to Israel, Giancarlo Chevallard, told Ha’aretz that, at the meeting, the delegation saw evidence that Arafat is financing terrorism, but added Israel had not provided evidence that European financial aid, which is designated to pay the salaries of PA employees, is being used to finance terrorist attacks." Since I already disproved that argument, we must assume that this author is implying that it is ok for the EU to fund a terrorist organization. The author also tries to say that Isreali's are bad by the fact that "the army makes it clear that there is no intention to construct any civil administration that will take care of the basic daily needs of the two million Palestinians, such as food supplies, health services, garbage and sewage. "
The author has clearly neglects to mention the point that the fine Palestinians in this area have been a great source for terrorism. The author acts as though the Palesinians had done nothing at all to deserve it. The author, in short, does not expect the Palestinineans to own up for their own actions, namely their huge support of suicide bombings, their anti-semitism, their intentional killings of children, and numerous other crimes that even Amnesy Internation, no lover of Israel, condemned. For every choice, one must be prepared for the consequences.
And finally, this beauty of a quote:
"Before Oslo, also, there was a wave of horrible terror attacks. But at that time, after each such attack, the call was heard: get out of the territories! Then it was still understood that when people are left with no hope, there is no way to stop the madness of suicide bombing. It is not too late to get out of the territories."
Yes, it is all Israel's fault. What, did you expect her to actually look at the timeline of events? To realize that suicide bombings started after the peace talks? The intentional, deliberate, horrifying act of killing innocents at Passover?
We can see that Ms. Reinhart never objects to the suicide bombings. Indeed, it is clear she is supporting them by her inaction.
I would like to ask her some questions.

1.How is the non-intentional killing of Palestinians much more of an atrocity than the willfull act of murder by suicide bombers?
2.. Why do you never, in this piece, ask or suggest that the Palestinians stop the killings?
3. How does this depression of the palestinians excuse suicide bombings?
4. Why do you approve the murder of my people?



Thanks to Dawson as well for the link.
Last night, as you may well know, I was blogging. I read a particularly bad post for Alterman, and I let my emotions go. Giving in to the dark side, I sent one email to everyone on the blogging on my blogging adress list. Today, I go to my email, and have received some enlightenment. The first email I read called me an asshole for having the arrogance to email the blog world once(!) on my post. The guy, however, had unfortunatly hit "reply all", sending his email to everyone, not just me. I'll get to his stupidity in a moment.
I would like to take this moment to apologize to people who might have thought my action was tacky.
Be rest assured that I will take more care in the future. As for the shmuck who sent me the first email, I might post the contents of his email later online.
Normally, I would not do this, since it was meant to be private, but since the guy doesn't have the brains not to hit "reply all", I feel he has waived his right. Plus, the email itself was nasty. I would like to say one thing to the ass:
From Dilbert:
Everyone is a bully in cyberspace.

To everyone else in the blogging world, my thanks, and my humble apologies to anyone I might have pissed off, but was polite enough not to insult me about it.

P.S. Links in the side bar are coming soon.
P.S.S. Thank's to the people who sent me some well-thought, clearly written, and fair emails. Special thanks to those who emailed me support.
And a very special thanks to Unablogger. I love the cheesecake. Warning: For those who don't know, Unablogger is not for those who dislike to see women in various states of undress.

Sunday, July 14, 2002

What Alterman said Friday: "And here’s what looks like a really dumb, self-defeating idea out of Jerusalem, unless of course it was your plan to eliminate all possible leaders with whom you might one day be able to negotiate peace." (In reference to trying head of Fatah).
Let us review the facts:
Fatah, the leading faction in the PLO, has been the extreme faction that has been leading the intidada.
Fatah has been giving money to the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade.
Al-Asqa has been one of the leading suicide bombing groups during this spree of mass murders.
Marwan Barghouti, one of the lead officials of Fatah, has signed papers giving money to these groups along with Arafat.
Marwan is not by any frame of reference a "dove", even by Palestinian standards?
Bernard Spinoza, a great jewish thinker, once said that "Peace is not the abscence of war. Peace is an attitude of justice."
Why, Eric, do you consider it good to negotiate with murderors? Why do you want to negotiate with those who have a hatred of Jews that is not matched?
Why do you let your ideals blind yourself to the fact that negotiation has failed? The fact that suicide bombings started after the "peace process"?
What is it about monsters that make you want to think are good peace keepers?
Finnaly, why are you so willing to ignore the cries of the dead in your willingness for sympathy for the perpetrater?
Every man is solely responsible for their actions. That is the basis of morality. You cannot negotiate with a murderor. You should not negotiate with a murderer.
You must never try to sympathise with the murderer, for by doing this, you damn the victim. When the killing is accidental, than you can try. But any peace that ignores the intentional killing of innocents is one that is dishonest, and built upon lies. It is a peace to which I would rather die than sign.
Nat Hentoff writes another fantastic column that is absolutly right. I have a high opinion of Mr. Bush, but I am frankly frustrated beyond belief at how the administration is not trying to stop the horror in Sudan. To be fair, neither did the Clinton administration. However, this does not excuse Bush, or his officials. Maybe Bush has not been paying attention to this because of other concerns, but it is about time he did. It is his moral duty to pass that amendment ASAP.