On Monday, Chicago Mayor Daley blamed the Ft. Hood Jihad Massacre on AmericaÂ’s love of guns...

Yeah, Riiight...

Mayor Daley proves once again that Liberal politicians just can't grasp the fact that guns aren't the problem; evil people are. As far as it "not being a certain group"; apparently Islam engenders an inability in it's adherents to resist the evil guns siren call to use them against innocent's; especially those innocents of other faiths.

Guns are merely tools,they are neither good nor evil, whether they are used for good or ill depends solely on the user.

Are the gangbangers that inhabit a certain major mid-western city all sweetness and light, but just more drawn to the guns' evil siren call (which by the way are illegal to even possess in that city), or is it that they are criminals that misuse the tool, to the detriment of innocents?
Apparently Mayor Daley thinks the former, while all SENTIENT human beings (leading one to the obvious conclusion that Liberals aren't really sentient beings...I know --- a real shocker THAT is!) know it's the latter.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 09:31 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 219 words, total size 2 kb.

Roland Burris, the winner of Obama's vacated Senate seat lottery, stated that it's "Bush's fault" that Chicago didn't get the 2016 Olympics...

President Bush has been out of office for nine months, yet he's so diabolically eeeevil that everything that the Left doesn't like is still his fault...to the point where even the Obamamessiah couldn't do anything to correct it....Riiight.

The IOC must be composed of all racists, since they wouldn't swallow the Obamamessiah's crap sandwich!

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 09:15 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 86 words, total size 1 kb.

Sheik Mohamed al-Najimi of the Saudi Islamic Jurisprudence Academy told Saudi newspaper Shams that the prophet Mohammed banned alcohol for all uses...and since most bio-fuels are simply natural sugars converted to ethyl alcohol, it would be sinful for a Muslim to use. I wonder if the recent drastic drop in oil prices has anything to do with this opinion?

al-Najimi did stress that this was his opinion as a scholar and not to be considered a fatwa...YET. He stated that it is a topic meriting further study to finally determine.

Funny how when the tide turns against the Islamists, they always find some way to use their religion to obfuscate the issues involved....

H/T to Marina at the Rott

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 06:21 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 123 words, total size 1 kb.

For the last eight years we have been treated to a constant barrage of Bush-bashing. I'm glad that that is finally over, and I don't wish to respond to the Opposition in the same way....BUT, when a member of the Opposition is so blatantly stupid in public, I do feel it's incumbent on those of us who have not drunk the DemoCrapic Kool-Aid to point that stupidity out.

The latest data (July 200 indicates the entire population of the United States is just approaching 304 million. Those in the workforce represent less than half that number.... I know I was edumacated indoctrinated in a Publik Skool, but even I can see that Ms. Pelosi's statement has a little mathematical problem attached to it....500,000 workers a month Ms Pelosi?!? out of a workforce of approximately 140,000,000? If true, that means we would have an unemployment rate of over 20 percent in just four months...the worst year of the Great Depression we had an unemployment rate of just under 20%....I know we're have some economic troubles, but..

I just don't believe that we are headed that far that fast, and if we are, I have a question. Read below the fold if you are curious what the question is (rant alert), if not, just consider Ms. Pelosi's public statements and consider if you feel comfortable with her being third in the line of succession for the Presidency...

more...

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 06:36 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 448 words, total size 3 kb.

Bravo for Sheriff Judd!!!

As reported earlier this week, some dirt bag who got pulled over in a routine traffic stop in Florida ended up 'executing' the deputy who stopped him. The deputy was shot eight times, including once behind his right ear at close range. Another deputy was wounded and a police dog killed. A statewide manhunt ensued.
The low-life was found hiding in a wooded area with his gun. SWAT team officers fired and hit the guy 68 times.

Now here's the kicker: LOVE THIS!!!! Naturally, the media asked why they shot him 68 times.
Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd, told the Orlando Sentinel ...

'That's all the bullets we had.'

Good to see some old fashioned justice occur in this time of overzealous PC crap, and one less Goblin taken out of gene pool.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 07:53 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 143 words, total size 1 kb.

"To love what is corrupt is itself corrupting, not least because it inclines us to ignore, forget, forgive or excuse the corruption. And there's the rub for patriotism."

That is the warning that the Institute of Education has for those teachers wishing to instill any native pride of country in their students.
And as Old Limey goes, so goes our own Leftist "Education groups, calling for
"...requireing textbooks and other instructional resources to cast a positive light on homosexual ‘marriages,' cross-dressing, sex-change operations and every other facet of homosexual and bisexual lifestyles." in SB777, and SF examining the prospect of using a new "anti-war" textbook in the education of their local young skulls full of mush.

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary defines patriotism simply as "love for or devotion to one's country." The Left has tried to redefine the term to "whatever is any convenient argument for our side and against (the) Conservative pov."

Moral equivilence and multiculteralism is coming home to roost in our society, and soon there will BE no society for us to worry about.

Patriots, prepare to lock and load, the Tree of Liberty is getting mighty thirsty.

more...

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 04:48 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 199 words, total size 2 kb.

Without a doubt, the LAMEST pesidential ad EVER!:

H/T to the folks at Hot Air

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 06:54 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.

When I heard about this incident, I experienced a RCOB moment.

I heartily agree with Adml Lord Boyce, a former head of the Armed Forces, when he said "the women should be "named and shamed".

That anyone can be so dastardly as to treat veterans wounded in the defense of their country in such a manner is totally incomprehensible to me and, I believe, to any normally funtioning human being. How DARE they state that the amputee vets were "scaring the children" and they "didn't belong there" (at the pool).

I am heartily greatful that I wasn't present at the scene, because I would certainly be in jail right now, accused of battery with intent to do great bodily injury; and I would most assuredly be guilty as charged. That the Vets left without so much as a raised voice speaks volumes as to the quality of their charactor.

I know it doesn't mean diddly to them, but this is one "Colonial" that offers them a huge "Thank You for your Service" and all the best of luck in their future recovery.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 12:57 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 194 words, total size 1 kb.

It's been said that if you don't learn from history, your doomed to repeat it, so here's a little history lesson; If you don't know the answer make your best guess. Answer all the questions before looking at the answers. The answers are below the fold. No fair peeking!

Who said it?

1) "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

A. Karl Marx
B. Adolph Hitler
C. Joseph Stalin
D. None of the above



2) "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few...and to replace it with shared responsibility for
shared prosperity."

A. Lenin
B. Mussolini
C. Idi Amin
D. None of the Above



3) "(We)...can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."

A. Nikita Khrushev
B. Josef Goebbels
C. Boris Yeltsin
D. None of the above


4) "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own...in order to create this common ground."


A. Mao Tse Dung
B. Hugo Chavez
C. Kim Jong Il
D. None of the above

5) "I certainly think the free-market has failed."

A. Karl Marx
B. Lenin
C. Molotov
D. None of the above

6) "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."

A. Pinochet
B. Milosevic
C. Saddam Hussein
D. None of the above


Thanks for the test, Sis! more...

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 01:24 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 383 words, total size 2 kb.

Before you pull that lever next election just remember this statement made by the putative Dhimmicratic nominee. Sounds similar to the credo of a certain failed political system ("from each according to his ability; to each according to his need")...a political system that caused the deaths of over 100 MILLION people in the 20th century.

Ask yourself if we REALLY want to go down that road in our country. That credo of socialism/communism SOUNDS so good; after all, wouldn't it be really nice if everything could be equally shared by all?

Unfortunately, there is a thing known as human nature. People are by nature lazy, self-serving, and greedy. WHY should I work any harder than I absolutely need to if I can't realize any gain from my hard work? I work harder if it gains me more of those things that I need or enjoy; socialism says that no matter how hard I work, I get no more of anything than what any other member of the community receives. It matters not what quality my work is either, as long as it looks good enough to get by.

The history of the last century proves that only benign self-interest provides the most good for the greatest number of people.

Let Shillery languish on the ashheap of history alongside the other failed experiments of social history.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 05:20 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 233 words, total size 2 kb.

Stoopid Cartoon

But, we already knew that now, didn't we?

Posted by: LC Serena at 06:13 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 20 words, total size 1 kb.

From Statesman.com:

COMMENTARY: JOHN KELSO
Shut up and walk your lobster
Tuesday, June 13, 2006

No wonder people think this town is goofy. The Whole Foods Market chain headquartered here in Austin is thinking about stopping the sale of live lobsters because it could be cruel to the lobsters.

"We're reviewing the entire process literally from boat to plate to see if we can make some significant improvement in that whole supply process," Whole Foods spokeswoman Kate Lowery said.

One way Whole Foods could make some significant improvement would be to release all the lobsters into Town Lake. That way I could collect them and eat them.

Still, on Thursday the Whole Foods leadership will discuss whether to discontinue marketing live lobsters because the lobsters may not be getting humane treatment. At issue here is what people do with the lobsters when they take them home — that is, boil them and dip them in drawn butter. "It's ultimately how they're handled by the consumer after they go home that's a concern," Lowery said.

What are we supposed to do? Give them names like Larry the Lobster and take them for a walk?

Then there's the problem of the lobster's in-store living conditions. Whole Foods would like the lobsters to have an environment similar to their natural habitat.

"They like dark areas, and they like solitary," Lowery said. "You can imagine how they would go and kind of burrow into rocks, creating their own space." I think I went drinking once in a place like that in the Warehouse District.

Lowery added that at some point Whole Foods will also address the ticklish issue of selling live clams.

Are you concerned about clams' feelings? Have you ever had a conversation with a clam? Wait. Let me rephrase that. Have you ever had a conversation with a clam when you weren't on acid?

If the answer is yes, get a job at Whole Foods.

Another concern is the way children bother the lobsters by tapping on the lobster tank glass. I don't care about that. But I wish science could figure a way to put children on mute and vibrate, like with a cell phone. Now there's a concept that would sell.

Anyway, I went over to the Whole Foods store to see if the live lobsters are getting a bum deal in the seafood section. Actually, the lobsters are getting off easy. They're still kickin'. It's the tilapia and salmon that are getting screwed. The tilapia have been hacked to pieces, and the wild salmon have been mushed up with spinach and feta cheese and turned into burgers.

Ain't a vet in town could bring these salmon back. And you're telling me the lobsters have a bum deal?

One of the problems, said the guy working at the Whole Foods fish counter, is that they can't feed the lobsters in the tank. "When you eat, you then poop, and this creates a dirty tank," he said. Yeah, I've noticed that connection. Maybe Whole Foods could hand the lobsters some bum wad.

Another problem, the seafood counter guy said, is the way lobsters are transported to the store. "They're put in a box and wrapped tightly with wet newspaper over the lobster," he said.

So Whole Foods could pick up the lobster in a limo. At the prices they charge, they could afford it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

They are "concerned with what the customers buying lobsters do with them at home"?!?! I don't know just WHAT is in the water consumed in Austin, but I pray that it isn't spreading to other towns.....

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 06:38 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 614 words, total size 4 kb.

As the Devils Advocate(June 13,Kos post, it's Blogspot) point's out, Liberals never let a "good" meme go, it just gets slightly reworded and reused....

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 06:15 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 32 words, total size 1 kb.

We hear once again from the King of the Moonbats, Howard Dean. Seems that he's more willing to give the benefit of the doubt to Osama Bin Laden than to Karl Rove. Thank G-D that the Democrats still have Dean as the spokesman for their Party; as much as the Republicans have shown themselves to be disappointments to their base, Dean may be the only thing to allow the GOP have a second chance of straightening their act out.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 09:30 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 83 words, total size 1 kb.

If you really want to see an Ass in action...too bad that the Letterman is a Hoosier...musta been corrupted by his time in New York.

You were correct in one thing Dave...you ARE'NT smart enough to debate anything of meaningful consequence. O'Reilly is an pompous ass too, but at least he puts out a train of reasoning for his position, and welcomes a debate from those who disagree.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 12:16 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 72 words, total size 1 kb.

Here's an interesting disection of how the MSM can tell the truth, and still promote a lie by not telling the WHOLE truth.

Hattip to GM's Corner for the link

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 09:32 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 44 words, total size 1 kb.

Welcome to Pallywood! Seems that a large portion of those "horrible examples" of Israeli perfidy against the Paleoswinians we see on the MSM are really a product of great productions teams of the aforementioned "oppressed Palstinian Arabs misplaced Jordanians".

Thanks for the heads up Misha!

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 02:43 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 47 words, total size 1 kb.

Seems that some in the blogosphere believe that they are the one and only blogger that can use a certain name in their header. He also implied that I used the term Emigre to impugn his reputation. He states that my writing is dishonest and jingoistic. I consider the source and ignore the jibe as inconsequential.
Mamamontezz is much more incensed, as she built this blog, and considers it a slur against both of us.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 12:04 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 81 words, total size 1 kb.

I've heard some of the Moonbats on our shores decrying President Bush's stance towards Radical Islam; one of their main themes being "lets be more understanding and use the diplomatic,ala the nuanced European approach.

Well read here and see what has resulted from all that diplomacy and ask yourself if thats really the way we should go. The Dutch Reporter has his comments on the story and how it's playing out in the Netherlands also.

The Moonbats sound reasonable in their rhetoric, who wouldn't wish to utilize diplomacy over tough, nonnegotiatable stances, or in the most dire case,force of arms?

The one thing that the Moonbats have forgotten is, that for diplomacy to be effective, BOTH parties have to negotiate in good faith and stick with the terms that are negotiated. The Radical islamists, hell, even the "moderate" Islamists, have openly stated time and again that negotiation is merely a tool for furthur progress towards their ultimate goal of a total Muslim world.

In the West, most people look on religion as a part of life, if they even suscribe to a religion at all. Secularism is the norm for political life.
The heart of Islamic teaching is that religion is not just a part of life, but life is a tiny part of religion. Thus everything in life is dominated by this religion. As such, Islam is a system. It is a socio-political, socio-religious, socio-economical, educational, legislative, judicial, and militaristic system garbed in religious terminology.

In the Hadith, Mohammed was quoted as saying, "The sons of Adam are accountable for all lies with the exception of those spoken to reconcile two men that are quarreling, for a man to appease his wife, and in war, because war necessitates deception."

The Muslims of Islamic states, and many within the USA, have the tradition of a worldview that divides humanity into two opposing halves. Dar al-Islam, House of Islam, is the zone where Islam rules. The other side is the war zone that is called, Dar el Harb, House of War. This worldview dictates that war will continue between these two sections of humanity until the supremacy of Islam is fully established throughout the earth.

So here we have a religion that has a world view of being at war with any not of the faith, and it's founder STATING that deception in war is not only accepted, but NECESSITATED by the conditions of war. The Moonbats would have you believe that the war is a spiritual, not a physical, one.
But what does the Koran say?

So when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters, wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambushÂ…. (Koran 9:5)

The only punishment of those that wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is that they should be murdered, or crucified, or their hands and their feet should be cut-off on opposite sides, or they should be imprisonedÂ…. (Koran 5:33)

Yep! Sure sounds "Spiritual" to me! The moonbats would say that there are violent passages in the Bible as well, and they would be correct. The DIFFERENCE is that, at least since the Reformation, Christians have been more secularized and take the Bible for allegory, in practice, if not in professed belief.
(and no don't try to point to the "Troubles" in Ireland as an example that I'm incorrect, those were always political/socioeconomic troubles; divided by religeous lines, not over religion itself)
Muslims, on the other hand, have never had a reformation of their own, (hard to have religious questioning in a culture where the very act of asking if there was a different interpretation can result in you being killed as an apostate!)and take the Koran as the literal truth and way of living in all spheres of human life.
It is not a religion that encourages dissent or new interpretation easily. In fact, should Islam achieve it's general goal of world domination, the three major sects would take to continuing the conflict between themselves until only the "One, TRUE Islam" would remain. They only work together in reasonable harmony today because they perceive each of the other sects as only misguided, but redeemable, and needed in the fight against the Infidel.

Within Islam there is the principle of "Al Takeyya." The term means, "prevention". This principle permits Muslims to lie at their discretion whenever they interpret that it is expedient for the influence of Islam or their personal protection and well-being. They justify lying by using the following verse as a springboard for expanded applications of Al Takeyya.

"Let not the believers take the disbelievers for friends rather than believers. And whoever does this has no connection with Allah unless it is done to guard (Takeyya) yourselves against them, guarding carefully. And Allah cautions you against His retribution. And to Allah is the eventual coming."(Koran 3:27)

Imam Abu Hammid Ghazali says: "Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible." (Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, The Reliance of the Traveller, translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, amana publications, 1997, section r8.2, page 745)

Note that Al-Ghazali is one of the most famous and respected Muslim theologians of all time.

In other words, it is permitted to allow the Infidel to appear to be your friend
(you can negotiate "peace" treaties)
until the time is right and the strength is sufficient to attack and destroy him.
This would seem to negate the validity of any treaty that a Muslim might make.

Yes, even in the the Western world, a "trust but verify" attitude should be taken regarding any treaties between disagreeing nations, but the Western world doesn't have the tradition of using treaties as an instrument in the furthurance of war. Never forget that this is not so in the Muslim world.

For those that still insist that Islam is a religion of Peace, and it's only a "few" extremists that are engaged in this war, I would ask you to take note of something.

In Islam, if a deed,action, or sometimes even a personal opinion, is deemed unacceptable to Islam, a "Fatwa", or judgement will be issued against the offender(s) by the Imam of the sect that considers the offense unacceptable. In many cases, it is a sentence of death to be carried out against the offender(s) by any true believer that has the opportunity to do so.

Name ONE Islamic religious authority to have made a Fatwa against any group that has carried out anti-Western terrorist acts. Make it easier, name the ONE Islamic authority that has issued a Fatwa against those that planned and helped carry out 9/11....Surely such an act would merit some sort of a ruling to distance it from Islam? Remember, under Islamic creed, it is permissable to lie to engender peace, if there is no other way...Still no Fatwa, they won't even go so far as to lie to shield Islam. Tacit approval at least there?

Rather, follow the old Roman adage that "If you wish Peace, prepare for War".

Being adequatly prepared for war has stopped more wars from occurring than all the feel good rhetoric about Harmony among Nations and the Brotherhood of Man has ever done. It's sad that it is the way of the world, but it is the reality.

Ignoring that fact is "sticking your head in the sand", and yes, that last is for you, Wanda.

Update: Never underestimate the power of the Internet! It seems that the Spanish Islamic Commission announced today that they were going to issue a Fatwa against Osama Bin Ladin and recommend that Spanish Imams condemn terrorism in sermons in their Mosques on Friday.

I wonder if they read me? LOL

I was bothered by one little addendem in the article:
The Commission has also drawn up a document designed to 'thank the Spanish people and the government for their attitude towards Muslims' since last March 11, in particular for not taking 'disproportionate' measures similar to those which the Sept 11 attacks sparked in the U.S.

I do not believe that we took "disproportionate measures" here. I have to wonder if this isn't a litle "diplomatic bone" to allay some of the heat that has come down on Muslims in Spain in the last two weeks? Maybe I'm just too cynical, but I can't help remembering that it is an Islamic tenant that:"When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible." I would think that giving the impression of being allied against terrorism would be a "permissible goal", even as they continued to engage in it. Also falling under the "self-protection" lying exception also allowed Muslims.

Take it with a grain of salt, but it's still a positive step, if it's done in sincerity.
Trust, but verify. Moniter as we go.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 04:00 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 1551 words, total size 10 kb.

George Soros has come into the news again. It seems that one of his foundations donated $20,000 to Lynne Stewart's defense fund. A jury found Stewart guilty on five counts of defrauding the government, conspiracy, and providing support for terrorism. She faces sentencing on July 15, 2005; she may receive up to a 30 year prison sentence, which, at her age, may well be a life sentence.

I would defend that Mr. Soros's right to contribute to any cause he deems worthy, but I would ask you, gentle readers, to start investigating the causes that he does deem worthy, and take that into account when you learn that he is championing an issue or a political candidate. It just may be that it's not an issue or candidate that would serve your best interests as a free and independant citizen.

Update: Well it didn't take long to find another Soros story of "backing the wrong horse".
This time, he is applauding the Spaniards as having the correct approach to dealing with terrorism.

Let's see...The US gets hit and responds with tough actions, and hasn't been hit again, either here at home, or on foreign soil, and it seems at first look to be changing an entire region of the globe to a more democratic bent; Spain experiences a major terrorist attack and retreats to the homeland, and has experienced several terrorist events since....Seems to me that Mr. Soros is incorrect in his assertion that the US has just engendered more terrorists, but thats just my opinion. I prefer to deal with facts and results rather than feelings and "everyone knows memes" as Mr. soros does.

Just for curiosities sake, I wonder just how much Mr. Soros stands to lose if the countries of the ME really do go democratic? Is it monetary loss, or just the loss of his idiological compatriots?

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 09:28 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 317 words, total size 3 kb.