The Samaritan Report

A Newsletter for Those Who Actually Give a Damn; As Chomsky Said: “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.” Keep THAT In Mind.

Chris Muir's Day By Day

Monday, July 31, 2006

Women's Rights on Hold

Even I thought it was just a fact, until LGF made me think for a moment. At first, I was thinking, "okay, so six Jewish people were shot, one was pregnant, one died."

The fact that they were women seemed like a mere add-on to me.
Then, the more I thought about it, the more I realized: why aren't the Women's Rights advocate groups and such up in arms?
Oh, right...probably because the shooter's victims were Jewish.
Figures - those discriminatory "Women's Rights" bitches!

It's all coming out,
- The Samaritan

More on Lebanon's Shoulders

Captain Ed of Captain's Quarters reacted to Lebanese Prime Minister Fuoad Siniora's near-endorsement of Hezbollah via asserting that such statements cause Lebanon to share some of the blame with the terrorist organization, effectively finally claiming that Lebanon is no longer innocent in this bloody havoc.

Amongst his many dissertations, Ed writes the following:
"We already know that Lebanon has ultimate responsibility for acts carried out by militias it tolerates on its land, but the assumption was that Saniora didn't disband Hezbollah out of inability. Statements such as these make it appear that Saniora didn't want to disband Hezbollah under any circumstances. That makes Saniora more overtly responsible for the act of war, and it frees Israel to target Lebanese military assets on a much broader basis.
Israel won't do that, and for good reasons, even if Saniora deserves it. Ehud Olmert can beat Hezbollah by making it clear to the Lebanese that supporting the terrorists come at too high a price. Once they get the message, Lebanon has to have enough capability left to eject Hezbollah and strip them of their weapons. If Israel crushes the Lebanese army, Hezbollah will not only never get disarmed, but they may just conduct a coup and take over Beirut altogether.
It's a tough balancing act. However, if Saniora continues to salute Hassan Nasrallah and his terrorists, the Israelis will discount Saniora altogether and conclude that he wants to be part of the problem and not the solution. At that point, the Lebanese may find a much wider war on their hands."

It's a good thing that sane people like Ed exist in the blogosphere, much less the world.
- The Samaritan

Where Soldiers Cross That Line...

It is my opinion that ORACULATIONS blogger Howard had the right idea in mind when commenting on the following:
"MOSUL, Iraq – Soldiers from 3rd Platoon, Company C, 2nd Battalion, 1st Infantry Regiment, 172nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team visited an orphanage in Mosul, Iraq July 10, bringing gifts for the children.
BAGHDAD, Iraq - The 4th Infantry Division’s Infrastructure Coordination Element, donated about $2 million worth of excavating and clean-up equipment to essential services departments from the Rasheed and Karradah Districts in Baghdad Sunday."

The title to his blogpost, which includes the link for the above stories, states: "Tons of stuff the MSM is afraid to show you..."
And the sad part is...Howard's exactly right.

[MSM is blogger shorthand for Mainstream Media, which R. Limbaugh prefers to call the "Drive-By Media."]

Hollywood on a High

Between Lohan and Gibson, Hollywood's on a spiral headed South.

First, Lohan calls her bosses "cunts," according to this source. This after she knowingly lied to them about her recent lackluster work performance, citing dehydration when they were well aware she was at nightclubs.

Thatagirl, Linsday - blame the symptom and not the disease!
You're not dehydrated, your IQ's just lacking.

Second, Gibson gets drunk, speedy, and subsequently arrested. This would not have been so bad had the report, as collected by TMZ, had not stated:
"TMZ has learned that Mel Gibson went on a rampage when he was arrested Friday on suspicion of drunk driving, hurling religious epithets. TMZ has also learned that the Los Angeles County Sheriff's department had the initial report doctored to keep the real story under wraps.
TMZ has
four pages of the original report prepared by the arresting officer in the case, L.A. County Sheriff's Deputy James Mee. According to the report, Gibson became agitated after he was stopped on Pacific Coast Highway and told he was to be detained for drunk driving Friday morning in Malibu. The actor began swearing uncontrollably. Gibson repeatedly said, "My life is f****d." Law enforcement sources say the deputy, worried that Gibson might become violent, told the actor that he was supposed to cuff him but would not, as long as Gibson cooperated. As the two stood next to the hood of the patrol car, the deputy asked Gibson to get inside. Deputy Mee then walked over to the passenger door and opened it. The report says Gibson then said, "I'm not going to get in your car," and bolted to his car. The deputy quickly subdued Gibson, cuffed him and put him inside the patrol car.
TMZ has learned that Deputy Mee audiotaped the entire exchange between himself and Gibson, from the time of the traffic stop to the time Gibson was put in the patrol car, and that the tape fully corroborates the written report.
Once inside the car, a source directly connected with the case says Gibson began banging himself against the seat. The report says Gibson told the deputy, "You mother f****r. I'm going to f*** you." The report also says "Gibson almost continually [sic] threatened me saying he 'owns Malibu' and will spend all of his money to 'get even' with me."
The report says Gibson then launched into a barrage of anti-Semitic statements: "F*****g Jews... The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world." Gibson then asked the deputy, "Are you a Jew?"
The deputy became alarmed as Gibson's tirade escalated, and called ahead for a sergeant to meet them when they arrived at the station. When they arrived, a sergeant began videotaping Gibson, who noticed the camera and then said, "What the f*** do you think you're doing?"
A law enforcement source says Gibson then noticed another female sergeant and yelled, "What do you think you're looking at, sugar tits?"
We're told Gibson took two blood alcohol tests, which were videotaped, and continued saying how "f****d" he was and how he was going to "f***" Deputy Mee.
Gibson was put in a cell with handcuffs on. He said he needed to urinate, and after a few minutes tried manipulating his hands to unzip his pants. Sources say Deputy Mee thought Gibson was going to urinate on the floor of the booking cell and asked someone to take Gibson to the bathroom.
After leaving the bathroom, Gibson then demanded to make a phone call. He was taken to a pay phone and, when he didn't get a dial tone, we're told Gibson threw the receiver against the phone. Deputy Mee then warned Gibson that if he damaged the phone he could be charged with felony vandalism. We're told Gibson was then asked, and refused, to sign the necessary paperwork and was thrown in a detox cell.
Deputy Mee then wrote an eight-page report detailing Gibson's rampage and comments. Sources say the sergeant on duty felt it was too "inflammatory." A lieutenant and captain then got involved and calls were made to Sheriff's headquarters. Sources say Mee was told Gibson's comments would incite a lot of "Jewish hatred," that the situation in Israel was "way too inflammatory." It was mentioned several times that Gibson, who wrote, directed, and produced 2004's "The Passion of the Christ," had incited "anti-Jewish sentiment" and "For a drunk driving arrest, is this really worth all that?"
We're told Deputy Mee was then ordered to write another report, leaving out the incendiary comments and conduct. Sources say Deputy Mee was told the sanitized report would eventually end up in the media and that he could write a supplemental report that contained the redacted information -- a report that would be locked in the watch commander's safe.
Initially, a Sheriff's official told TMZ the arrest occurred "without incident." On Friday night, Sheriff's spokesman Steve Whitmore told TMZ: "The L.A. County Sheriff's Department investigation into the arrest of Mr. Gibson on suspicion of driving under the influence will be complete and will contain every factual piece of evidence. Nothing will be sanitized. There was absolutely no favoritism shown to this suspect or any other. When this file is presented to the Los Angeles County District Attorney, it will contain everything. Nothing will be left out."
On Saturday, Gibson released the following statement:
"After drinking alcohol on Thursday night, I did a number of things that were very wrong and for which I am ashamed. I drove a car when I should not have, and was stopped by the LA County Sheriffs. The arresting officer was just doing his job and I feel fortunate that I was apprehended before I caused injury to any other person. I acted like a person completely out of control when I was arrested, and said things that I do not believe to be true and which are despicable. I am deeply ashamed of everything I said. Also, I take this opportunity to apologize to the deputies involved for my belligerent behavior. They have always been there for me in my community and indeed probably saved me from myself. I disgraced myself and my family with my behavior and for that I am truly sorry. I have battled with the disease of alcoholism for all of my adult life and profoundly regret my horrific relapse. I apologize for any behavior unbecoming of me in my inebriated state and have already taken necessary steps to ensure my return to health."

I'm beginning to think that the Southpark portrayal of Mel Gibson in "The Passion of the Jew" [episode 804, aired March 31, 2004] was at least somewhat accurate, if not obviously so. Adding fuel to my fire and insult to his injury, I'd like to point out that I too've noticed something missing from his "apology": where's his sincere regret that he made those anti-semitic statements? The least he could do is apologize explicitly for those!

Back for More,
- The Samaritan

Thursday, July 27, 2006

U.N's. UNICEF Reveals its True [Hezbollah] Colors

I'm sure most of you have heard about Kofi's "big mistake" - that of hastily claiming that the deaths of four U.N. officials at the hands of the IDF was deliberate.

But slowly, gradually, the news leaked out, and I'd like to indicate the gradually revealed news from five websites:

Little Green Footballs-
Revealed that "Kofi Annan could have ordered Peacekeeper to leave."
Sports an audio interview with a retired Canadian general who revealed his dead colleague's confession.
Found that Canadian Prime Minister told off Annan in his own way.
Shares revealing UNIFIL Press Releases and subsequent criticism from Herald Sun's Bolt.
Gives a link to Claudia Rosett's article detailing U.N. biases.
Hints that UNICEF hasn't yet gotten the hint.
Condemns the U.N. for its [lack of] response to Hezbollah attacks and Israeli heroism.

Duane Patterson, the Radio Blogger, questions U.N. neutrality.

Glenn Reynold of Instapundit shows how some press incl. The New York Sun and the National Review are seeing the light in this issue of the U.N.'s "disproportionate response."

Ed Lasky details every UNICEF misstep along the way at The American Thinker.

Michelle Malkin tracks the story in her July 26 11:26 AM & 2:38 PM and July 27 4:54 AM & 12:12 PM posts.

I hope all of this information provides enough detail, while I rant on my own:
Tim Witcher recently posted an article on yahoo with the following lede:
"The UN Security Council passed a statement expressing shock at Israel's attack on a UN observer post in Lebanon which killed four peacekeepers but making no condemnation."

There are two things in this article that've got me riled. First:
The statement said "The Security Council is deeply concerned about safety and security of UN personnel and in this regard stresses that Israel and all concerned parties must comply fully with their obligations, international humanitarian law related to the protection of UN and its associated personnel."
There's absolutely no acknowledgement that it was really Hezbollah that put the U.N. personnel at risk. This is, first and foremost, a total denial of the facts.

Second is what apparently appears to be Witcher's own phrase:
France has proposed calling a meeting of UN Security Council foreign ministers next week to discuss a plan to end the conflict in Lebanon, unleashed by Israel on July 12 after two Israeli soldiers were kidnapped by the Hezbollah group.
This is what really threw me outta my chair. The phrase "unleashed by Israel." Clearly, Witcher forgot that Hezbollah has been launching the occasional missile into Israel during the Fall of lat year! And second, the kidnapping, followed by the immediate launching of Katyusha rockets into Israel before the IDF made even one move, should have been labeled the War's start!

Where the Left Stands

Two people from the Left side of things have caught my (and others') attention:

Andrew Sullivan decided to be an ignoramus - in other words, his usual self - when it comes to the protection and survival of the State of Israel. If he had been following the news properly, he would not have written on his blog:
There will come a time when the destruction of Southern Lebanon and the inability to remove Hezbollah by force will demand either re-occupation of Southern Lebanon by Israel, or an international force. Time is running out for the former option. Given our other urgent task in the Middle East - finding a way to prevent Iraq descending into all-out civil war - involving allies in the fight against Hezbollah is increasingly vital. A cease-fire is needed, sooner rather than later.
- The Daily Dish (The bolding in the last sentence is mine).
Now, how could Sullivan have possible erred in this statement, one might ask? True, it sounds quite reasonable - and mostly it is. Nevertheless, having not factored in the recent history of Hezbollah activity, Sullivan ignored the most important reason a cease-fire shouldn't be called.

Cindy Sheehan's doing her stuff again. I can't for the life of me understand why people still choose to take her seriously. According to Breitbart, Cindy "purchased a 5-acre plot in Crawford with some of the insurance money she received after her son was killed in Iraq" and is quoted saying "I can't think of a better way to use Casey's insurance money than for peace, and I am sure that Casey approves.", buying a five acre ranch is equivalent to spending her dead son's insurance money on peace? If I were an objective reported I'd ask her where she gets her delusions.

Unity over Diversity,
- The Samaritan

Reviews from the Jewish World

I figured that in the middle of this Israel-Lebanon chaos I should finally get to listening to what Republican-oriented Jews had to say. So, I started my subscription to the Jewish World Review, and today's articles seem a bit typified yet quite well-informed in some cases.

Concering the ones I present to you:
Max Boot explains why every event in the Arab world shouldn't be spun into anti-Bush propaganda, James Lileks points to the many political "peaceniks" around the world who are throwing their support behind the many anti-Israel entities, Dick Morris tells us why the Democrats are useless when it comes to defending Israel, Cal Thomas wonders why we cannot take a stronger stance against Iran-backed Hezbollah and co., and Ann Coulter, in the midst of her Democrat-bashing, unleashes a "highlight reel" that I believe is a MUST-SEE for everybody.

These are great reads for any pro-Israel American Jew/Jewish American.

- The Samaritan

An Accuracy Revealed

There is a certain difference between the military tactics of the Hezbollah and the IDF. This can be demonstrated in three steps:

First: view Michelle Malkin's July 27 "IT'S A GNAT! IT'S A FLY!" post, particularly a cartoon near the end of that entry depicting a "soldier of Palestine" and a "soldier of Israel" pointing their machien guns at each other. One notices a crib behind the Israeli and a crib in front of the Palestinian. This demonstrates the common[ly proved] argument that Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah and other terrorist groups, represented by the "soldier of Palestine," use civilians as human shields, whereas the IDf protects Israelis less capable of protecting themselves.
The first thing one wonders [most objectively] is whether this depiction is accurate. Allow me to briefly support the cartoon with the following two links...

Second: consider this [true] story...
Every War Has Its Heroes
It's only the day after he was killed and a legend is already growing around the heroism of Major Ro'i Klein, the Golani commander who
died in the ambush and fierce battle that took place in Bint Jbeil that took the lives of nine soldiers.
Several members of his battalion confirm the story -- a grenade was lobbed in the midst of the unit under his command. Klein, who was 31 years old, married with two children, made a quick decision and jumped, throwing his body onto the grenade, losing his life, and saving the lives of all of his soldiers.
The word "hero" is sometimes used too lightly, but I think this qualifies.

- An Unsealed Room

Third: consider the introduction of an Arutz Sheva article:
Hizbullah refused to allow civilians to leave their village and used mosques in their ambush on IDF soldiers at Bint Jbeil Wednesday. Names of the nine fallen soldiers were released. Morale is high.
Hizbullah stored ammunition and weapons in mosques, knowing that the IDF does not attack religious sites. Civilians were not allowed to leave so that Hizbullah could use them as cover. IDF officers said they ordered pilots not to strafe Bint Jbeil in order to spare civilian casualties.

- Israel National News

Just ask French major general Alain Pellegrini.

The Samaritan

Monday, July 24, 2006

Dare to Dispute Tax Breaks?

Hello again!

From the same source at which I found the basis for my previous two posts ( is the post that follows. I am wondering if anyone is willing to dare dispute the claims in this.

Lower tax rates grow the economy and generate more tax revenue.
Higher tax
rates kill growth.
From an email from the conservative, Christian Family
Research Council:
Taxes Cut, Deficit--not Sky--Falls
Liberals wrung their
hands when President Bush first proposed tax cuts back
in 2001. It would
ruin the economy and balloon the deficit, they wailed. Now, we
are seeing
the deficit falling rapidly. This year's deficit of $296 billion is
percent lower than projected just last February. That's a $127 billion
decline from that February forecast. Revenues have increased, accounting for
percent of the deficit reduction. This is an historic moment and
President Bush
is right to call attention to the success of his pro-growth
FRC supported those tax cuts, especially the
pro-family portions of the tax
package. Now we see that they are working to
the benefit of all Americans. It's
not only a victory for President Bush,
it's also vindication for Ronald Reagan.
When he first proposed massive tax
cuts in 1980, Reagan was criticized for
"voodoo economics." Later, liberal
pundits blamed President Reagan for the
deepening recession that began on
Carter's watch. But, as Reagan's tax cuts
began to work, and America
rebounded, he smilingly said: "You'll notice they
don't call it Reaganomics
any more." Thank you, President Bush, for staying the

This worked
for Presidents Kennedy, Reagan, Clinton, and G W Bush.
God made human beings
to be success-motivated. When we can keep more of
what we earn, we earn
more, create more, and produce more. It's human nature...
that's economic
conservatism at its finest.
More from our President...
Together, these
tax cuts left nearly $1.1
trillion in the hands of American workers and
families and small business
owners, and they used this money to help fuel an
economic resurgence that's now
in its 18th straight quarter of growth. The
tax cuts we passed work.
Last year, our economy grew at 3.5
percent, and in the first quarter of
this year, it grew at an annual rate of
5.6 percent. Over the past three years,
our economy has grown by more than
$1.3 trillion, an amount that is larger than
the size of the entire Canadian
or South Korean economy.
news analysis of how the biased liberal media twists the good economic
finally from the Great Rush Limbaugh --
Bush Tax Cut Worked Better
Expected May 12, 2006 RUSH: (Wall Street Journal) "The Federal government
ran a monthly budget surplus of $118.85 billion in April as tax receipts
came in
stronger than the same period last year." In fact... (AP) "A flood
of income tax
payments pushed up government receipts to the second-highest
level in history in
April, giving the country a sizable surplus for the
In its monthly accounting of the government's books, the Treasury
Department said Wednesday that revenue for the month totaled $315.1 billion
Americans filed their tax returns by the April deadline. The gusher of
revenue pushed total receipts up by 13.4% from April 2005."
Now, a
question. How can this happen? How can this happen when we had tax
cuts? How
can it possibly happen when we have had tax cuts, ladies and
Well, it happens because of the way we've always told you it happens:
cuts produce more revenue because they create more jobs equaling more
taxpayers, and more taxpayers contribute more tax revenue while the
tax payment per person comes down.
It works every time it is
tried, if the top rate that you are reducing is
not too low. You reach a
point where you are not going to raise revenue if your
tax rate is zero.
There is a formula for this. It obviously works, especially
with capital
gains coming down to 15%. So this leads me to another question.
What do
liberals hate more than our president? Now, I'll give you a hint: it is
word. I'll give you another hint: it begins with "R." No, it is not Rush. It
is not me. It has seven letters. Liberals hate more than our president, one
It begins with "R", and has seven letters. Don't bother figuring it
I'll tell you. What liberals hate more than our president and me is
R-E-A-L-I-T-Y. The tax cuts worked, and according to today's media, the Wall
Street Journal and others, they worked better than advertised. Yet, only 15
Democrats in the house broke ranks with Pelosi and supported the extension
these tax cuts! Only three in the Senate! Only three Democrats broke
ranks and
supported the extension. Despite the evidence, the liberal rally
cries the tax
warfare cry. "Tax cuts favor the rich."
Line: Cut tax rates and grow the economy. It works every time it has

So...any takers?

The Samaritan

Homeland Security Intrigue

The following looked so intriguing to me, I don't know what to make of it:

NYT reports that the inspector general found in the Homeland Security Database
that as of January, Indiana had 50 percent more listed potential terrorists
target sites than New York and more than twice as many as California. So?
Indiana is a loyal Republican state. "The database is used by the Homeland
Security Department to help divvy up the hundreds of millions of dollars in
antiterrorism grants each year, including the program announced in May that cut
money to New York City and Washington by 40 percent"

So, if anyone has any reaction(s) to it, please do post a Comment. ;-)

The Samaritan

The New Kind Of Copyright: A Discussion

In response to a New York Times article by Robert S. Boynton, the following conversation ensued on an online forum:

Copyright, like patent, is merely an extension of Capitalism. Monopoly is the goal of any Capital business, becoming the sole supplier of some need or want so as to receive the greatest possible price while paying the lowest possible cost for any product or service. With Copyright and Patent now taking the place of Adam Smith's "conspiracies against the common good", Capitalism has merely come full circle.

It appears to me that Copyrights and Patents were originally intended to a assure the individuals received the benefits of their creative efforts, during their own lifetimes. I have no problem with that for natural, biological individuals. However, the 1886 US Supreme Court ruling in a railbed dispute titled Santa Clara County vs. Southern Pacific Railroad created a new, potentially imortal sort of individual. The ruling held that a private corporation was a "natural person" entitled to all the rights and privileges of a human being. I see this new law as the first step in establishing eternal Copyrights and Patents for the benefit of Corporations. It is time for a Constitutional Amendment limiting “personhood“ to individual biological entities, and specifically excluding groups and “collectives” [and a corporation is a collective, just as much as a “Gulag” is] from that definition.

Actually, The Constitution tells us that the purpose of what we call patents and copyrights was NOT to secure wealth for the creators but rather, and here I quote, "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;". Notice the purpose was to PROMOTE the free exchange of ideas by providing access to all, in order that discovery and expression may spread. Compare this 'limited time' clause with 99 year copyrights and 17 year patents on such idiocies as 'one button push purchasing in web pages' as was claimed by and granted until a successful challenge just five years ago. Disgusting misuse is inevitable with Scalia's so-called Judicial Philosophy that 'money is speech' and that inevitablilty is due to the nature of Capitalism and its goal of monopolism.

No collective entity of any sort should be allowed to own a patent or copyright. Such ownership should be limited to biological individuals. Further, the length of time patents and copyrights are in force should be tied to the life span of the original owner/filer. When he expires, the patent/copyright should expire, not one moment sooner nor later. In other words, when the originator of a patent/copyright dies, it should immediately become part of the “Public Domain.”

Nothing is helped by giving ONE person the power currently given the Corporation. Nothing changes but how many hands hold the reins.

How is it a free market when the gov't chooses to regulate everything for smaller businesses? It is only a free market when ALL the citizens have a hand in shaping the economy, not just the 20% above the Gaussian income cutoff who own 85% of EVERYTHING. It is in government that we have 'equal value' at least ostensibly, and it is from there that we can influence and regulate the worst of capitalism.

And that is what Communitarianism and Co-ops are all about. (Please go back and checkout the links I posted earlier.) Moreover they are tried and extremely practical solutions. Our government is controlled by Corporate “Persons,” not biological persons.

The persons who have given Bush his 170 Million dollar lead over Kerry (12 : 1) are REAL persons, who merely profit from the Corporation. Thus it is SINGLE PERSONS who corrupt the system, by virtue of holdings. That, then, is the real target. HOLDINGS!

Such holdings probably not even have been possible without the legal fiction of “corporate personhood.”

Doesn't matter HOW they got it. The fact that they are able and willing to buy an election PROVES that the corruption is personal rather than institutional.

Time to have full public campaign financing, with preference voting to kill off the 'third party votes waste your vote' effect.

Personally, I don't think I know enough to butt into this conversation with my own opinions, so I'm wondering: what is your position on this and why?

Unity Over Diversity

- The Samaritan

Sunday, July 23, 2006

Not A CAIR In the Mideast

After some research of my own on the Council for American-Islamic Relations, spurred by frequent radio reports of its activity, I have been led to believe that perhaps CAIR is not suggestive enough as to its true nature. CAIR had, of course, according to anti-CAIR director Andrew Whitehead, "called on President Bush to demand of Israel that the Israelis allow the US to evacuate American citizens from Lebanon." In his response to CAIR's own press release, Whitehead does make two very good points:

1. "Why didn’t CAIR call for a cease fire by the Islamic terrorists of Hezbollah, Hamas, and the other assorted Muslim terrorist groups? Why is the cease-fire call only applicable to Israel?"

2. " Additionally, CAIR called on the US State Department to issue an advisory to U.S. citizens in the Israeli armed forces that they risk violating the Neutrality Act by taking part in attacks on a friendly nation...We remind our readers that Americans have traditionally volunteered to serve in allied countries during time of war when the US was neutral. The famous “Eagle Squadron” of WWII, along with the “Flying Tigers” are two examples that precede volunteering for the Israeli armed forces. Would CAIR like to tell any brave veteran “Eagles” or “Flying Tigers” that they violated the Neutrality Act?"

Thus these two points, as I mentioned previously, are well-put and perfectly elicited.
To view Whitehead's statement in full click here. CAIR's statement is here.

Once again, Unity over Diversity.
- The Samaritan

Friday, July 21, 2006

G8 Comes Up Short

It isn't just me.

For a change, I'll have to agree with the LATimes.

This year's G8 Summit was a major flop.

What bugs me most is not the blatant ignorance of poverty (and yes that's a big issue).

What bugs me most is the fact that nothing was done.

This year's G8 is joining the U.N. on my 2006 Shit-List.

Make no mistake.

I can understand that President Bush needs some down time.

But the motto must hold: Business Before Pleasure!

Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Let Israel Fight!

At least one LA Times writer/contributor has put forth the common notion that the G8 Summit was unjustly focused on the Israel-Lebanon War rather than on poverty.
It's an okay argument. Yeah, I think poverty is important too.
But there's something missing. Something the LATimes-minded people do not get. Something they fail to grasp and succeed ignoring.
It is the following:
1- Hezbollah, founded as an organization that, like Hamas, has dedicated itself to the destruction of Israel, has garnered vocal support from Syria and fiscal support from Iran, whose support could be a ruse to defocus us from its nuclear policy.
2- As of 2000, Israel ended its occupation of southern Lebanon. Hezbollah used this opportunity to practically take over that region of the country and partially dominate the nation's legislature (with 20% Parliamentary representation). Hezbollah, thus, practically runs Lebanon.
Together, these facts demonstrate that Israel should have finished off Hezbollah when it had the chance. The removal of Israeli forces from Lebanon in 2000 could actually have helped exacerbate the most recent Intifada, as it showed a sign of weakness on Israel's part.
It is thus my opinion that instead of calling off the fighting, the world should let Israel drive Lebanon back into the stone age where it belongs. Believe it or not, there exists Arabs who actually want peace with Israel. They are called Palestinians, but for now they are cruelly subjugated by Hamas that, as a terrorist organization, neglects its constituents but manages to blame all of this neglect on Israel.
In America and Israel, ideals are great things to be attained.
In much of the Arab world, ideals are solely corruptible.

Monday, July 17, 2006

For And Against

There's no better way to say this than with total honesty...

Throughout my teenage years, I've known only one man as President:
George Bush.

Thus, I've had the pleasure and displeasure of knowing his good and bad sides. Let me share this revelation...

Bush is a sore spot in both American and International politics. Even I, the Assertivist, cannot make up my mind about him. But there are two issues that nag me constantly...

At the 2006 G8 Summit in Russia, the world witnesses something startling yet expected - at first, Bush was the only leader to have a clear-minded view of the current Mideast crisis.

It goes like this: screw Hezbollah.
And the other leaders...had no clue.
They were like the U.S.'s Democratic stance on the issue.

Bush is 100% pro-Israel. Without Bush, America might've been joining the rest of the world in the falsities of Arab-enforced anti-Semitism.

But with Bush, America and the world's doing the right thing...cracking the whip on Hezbollah.

Internationally, or at least with Israel, Bush is my man.
But on the home front, Bush is anything but.

He's the Business Whore of America.

Yes, it's true. Bush and his Administration, for example, have funded the anti-American group known only as La Razza with six-figure numbers. Bush may be the Jews' Boy (a feat for which I'm proud of him, personally), but he also wants to bow to Hitler-ish orators whose only desire is to destroy the Southwestern states by annexing them to Mexico.

That's why I'm leaving California - to go to Atlanta, Georgia. Yeah, right!

Police the Border, Flood the TIMES

In his Sunday, July 16 Current article "Police the border, flood the courts," LA Criminal Bar Assn. past president Charles L. Lindner does everything but take his readers through the correct chain of thought.

In this article, quite basically, Lindner hypothesizes that illegal immigrant legislation and attempted border control would flood the courts and cause much debt.

This could not be farther from the truth. And it couldn't be closer to a lie.

Lindner first begins to fall way short by supposing that all immirants discovered to be illegal must go through the criminal justice system.

Not so. Usually, they'd get deported.

Lindner almost saves himself with the quote "the goverment prosecuted one criminal case for every 100 immigrants apprehended."

What he really means is, for every 100 illegal immigrants, at least one is discovered to have a felony charge against it for a crime other than being an illegal alien. Usually it involves Social Security theft or child endangerment. The other 99 are deported.

But Lindner makes his second mistake when he assumes that increase security 'round the border would increase the percentage of apprehended illegal aliens who are sent through the criminal justice system.

It is not even a matter of percentages. It is a matter of absolutes.

With tightened border security (and punishment for the hiring of illegal alien workers), the total number of illegal aliens would drop.

That means the 1 in 100 would stay the same (if not decrease) but that there would be far fewer illegal aliens with whom to contend.

Personally, I would prefer that Lindney not flood the Times with his nonsense.

New Angle

As I currently live in Los Angeles, I am able to witness firsthand the lies and distortions of the LATimes. I will focus on these distortions as well as other world events (from my POV of course) in upcoming posts.

Starting ASAP.