Hiding Behind Skirts

A few things as an update to the last post. First, I see that Al-Zawahri's gang has expanded the international attack on Jews with an assault on an Australian synagogue.

Synagogue attack in Australia sparks fears of racial tension

Australian police have stepped up patrols of Jewish and Islamic sites, fearing racial tensions over the conflict in the Middle East had triggered an attack on a synagogue overnight.

Witnesses told police they saw a group of "Middle Eastern men" laughing and running down the street shortly after the synagogue in Parramatta, western Sydney was stoned late Sunday.

Blocks of concrete were also thrown at two cars parked on the property, smashing windows.

Leave it to the media to not point out the connection between this attack on Jews and al Qaeda's instructions to Muslims a few days prior.

Also today the media was wetting its collective pants over some civilian casualties in Qana, Lebanon. Odd how they don't seem to care so much when it's Israeli civilians being hit. I guess they take their orders from the UN, which also doesn't care about Israeli casualties.

In fact, it appears that Hizb'allah not only hides behind civilians, they like to set up operations right around UN posts...

The words of a Canadian United Nations observer written just days before he was killed in an Israeli bombing of a UN post in Lebanon are evidence Hezbollah was using the post as a "shield" to fire rockets into Israel, says a former UN commander in Bosnia.

Those words, written in an e-mail dated just nine days ago, offer a possible explanation as to why the post -- which according to UN officials was clearly marked and known to Israeli forces -- was hit by Israel on Tuesday night, said retired Maj.-Gen. Lewis MacKenzie yesterday.

The strike hit the UN observation post in the southern Lebanese village of El Khiam, killing Canadian Maj. Paeta Hess-von Kruedener and three others serving as unarmed UN military observers in the area.

Just last week, Maj. Hess-von Kruedener wrote an e-mail about his experiences after nine months in the area, words Maj.-Gen. MacKenzie said are an obvious allusion to Hezbollah tactics.

"What I can tell you is this," he wrote in an e-mail to CTV dated July 18. "We have on a daily basis had numerous occasions where our position has come under direct or indirect fire from both (Israeli) artillery and aerial bombing.

"The closest artillery has landed within 2 meters (sic) of our position and the closest 1000 lb aerial bomb has landed 100 meters (sic) from our patrol base. This has not been deliberate targeting, but rather due to tactical necessity."

Those words, particularly the last sentence, are not-so-veiled language indicating Israeli strikes were aimed at Hezbollah targets near the post, said Maj.-Gen. MacKenzie.

"What that means is, in plain English, 'We've got Hezbollah fighters running around in our positions, taking our positions here and then using us for shields and then engaging the (Israeli Defence Forces)," he said.

That would mean Hezbollah was purposely setting up near the UN post, he added. It's a tactic Maj.-Gen. MacKenzie, who was the first UN commander in Sarajevo during the Bosnia civil war, said he's seen in past international missions: Aside from UN posts, fighters would set up near hospitals, mosques and orphanages.

I'm sure Kofi is happy the mainstream media is covering his ass on this one.

Back to the issue of Hizb'allah hiding behind civilians. I honestly don't have much sympathy for those who were harmed in the Qana incident. Israel has made it clear that Hizb'allah is the target, that anywhere Hizb'allah is firing from is a primary target and that civilians should get out of the area. While it's no fun to have to abandon your home, if you allow terrorists to operate from your home, you should expect that there will be consequences.

The Lebanese made a deal with the devil a number of years ago. Hizb'allah was and is using Lebanon as a base for terror operations and the Lebanese people decided that they'd rather not put forth the sacrifice to rid their country of the Islamic terrorists. So they had a number of years of relative peace as Hizb'allah operated freely within Lebanon. Now, they pay the price for allowing the cancer to grow within their borders. To blame Israel for not wanting to be attacked is, alas, typical but insane. The Lebanese people were cowards against Hizb'allah and they are to blame for forcing Israel to fight Hizb'allah when it should have been the Lebanese fighting for their own sovereignty.

I think that the IDF public affairs group did an excellent job in explaining why the Qana incident is not something Israel should take heat for. Not only are there questions as to whether the Israeli attack caused the deaths

An IDF investigation has found that the building in Qana struck by the Air Force fell around eight hours after being hit by the IDF.

"The attack on the structure in the Qana village took place between midnight and one in the morning. The gap between the timing of the collapse of the building and the time of the strike on it is unclear," Brigadier General Amir Eshel, Head of the Air Force Headquarters told journalists at the Defense Ministry in Tel Aviv, following the incidents at Qana.

Eshel and the head of the IDF's Operational Branch, Major General Gadi Eisnkot said the structure was not being attacked when it collapsed, at around 8:00 in the morning.

The IDF believes that Hizbullah explosives in the building were behind the explosion that caused the collapse.

but the area was being used as a base for Hizb'allah rocket attacks on Israeli civilians. So whatever the actual cause of the collapse, the area was a valid target and the civilians had been previously warned to leave Hizb'allah areas. Here's is the text and images from the IDF press release (click on the arrow in the second image to launch the video clip):

IDF Response to Event in Qana Village

Sunday 30/07/2006 21:53


Following the incident that occurred this morning, Sunday 30/07/06, in Qana, the IDF reminds in response that the attack was conducted as a result of the continuation of rocket launchings against Israeli communities from the area attacked. All the villages in the area, including Qana, were warned in advance against staying in areas from which rockets are fired.

The IDF regrets injury caused to uninvolved citizens, although it is a direct result of Hezbollah's exploitation of the citizens of Lebanon as human shields.


Cities on which rockets were fired from Qana. Graphics: IDF Spokesperson

It must be remembered that 18 Israeli citizens have been killed so far as a result of rocket attacks, and hundreds have been injured. The responsibility for every injury caused to Lebanese citizens in these areas rests on the shoulders of the Hezbollah organization, which utilizes citizens as human shields, and on the shoulders of the government of Lebanon which fails to prevent this.

And finally, a VERY jealous Zhid salutes Lance Corporal Galen Wilson, USMC...GOOD SHOOTING, SOLDIER!

USMC sniper metes out swift death in Iraq
By ANTONIO CASTANEDA, Associated Press Writer
Sun Jul 30, 12:57 PM ET

He was 5 when he first fired an M-16, his father holding him to brace against the recoil. At 17 he enlisted in the Marine Corps, spurred by the memory of 9/11. Now, 21-year-old Galen Wilson has 20 confirmed kills in four months in Iraq — and another 40 shots that probably killed insurgents. One afternoon the lance corporal downed a man hauling a grenade launcher five-and-a-half football fields away.

Wilson is the designated marksman in a company of Marines based in downtown Ramadi, watching over what Marines call the most dangerous neighborhood in the most dangerous city in the world.

Here, Sunni Arab insurgents are intent on toppling the local government protected by Marines.

Wilson, 5-foot-6 with a soft face, is married and has two children and speaks in a deep, steady monotone.

After two tours in Iraq, his commanders in the 3rd Battalion, 8th Regiment call him a particularly mature Marine, always collected and given to an occasional wry grin.

His composure is regularly tested. Swaths of central and southern Ramadi, 70 miles west of Baghdad, are dominated by insurgents who regularly attack the provincial government headquarters that Marines protect.

During a large-scale attack on Easter Sunday, Wilson says, he spotted six gunmen on a rooftop about 400 yards away. In about 8 seconds he squeezed off five rounds — hitting five gunmen in the head. The sixth man dived off a 3-story building just as Wilson got him in his sights, and counts as a probable death.

"You could tell he didn't know where it was coming from. He just wanted to get away," Wilson said. Later that day, he said, he killed another insurgent.

Wilson says his skill helps save American troops and Iraqi civilians.

"It doesn't bother me. Obviously, me being a devout Catholic, it's a conflict of interest. Then again, God supported David when he killed Goliath," Wilson said. "I believe God supports what we do and I've never killed anyone who wasn't carrying a weapon."

He was raised in a desolate part of the Rocky Mountains outside Colorado Springs, "surrounded by national parks on three sides," he says. He regularly hunted before moving to Fort Lauderdale, Fla., as a teenager. His brother also serves in the military.

Guns have long been part of Wilson's life. His father was a sniper in the Navy SEALS. He remembers first firing a sniper rifle at age 6. By the time he enlisted he had already fired a .50-caliber machine gun.

"My father owned a weapons dealership, so I've been around exotic firearms all my life," said Wilson, who remembers practicing on pine cones and cans. "My dad would help me hold (an M-16), with the butt on his shoulder, and walk me through the steps of shooting."

Technically, Wilson is not a sniper — he's an infantryman who also patrols through the span of destroyed buildings that make up downtown Ramadi. But as his unit's designated marksman, he has a sniper rifle. In the heat of day or after midnight, he spends hours on rooftop posts, peering out onto rows of abandoned houses from behind piles of sandbags and bulletproof glass cracked by gunfire.

Sometimes individual gunmen attack, other times dozens. Once Wilson shot an insurgent who was "turkey peeking" — Marine slang for stealing glances at U.S. positions from behind a corner. Later, the distance was measured at 514 meters — 557 yards.

"I didn't doubt myself, if I was going to hit him. Maybe if I would have I would have missed," Wilson said.

The key to accuracy is composure and experience, Wilson says. "The hardest part is looking, quickly adjusting the distance (on a scope), and then getting a steady position for a shot before he gets a shot off. For me, it's toning everything out in my head. It's like hearing classical music playing in my head."

Though Wilson firmly supports the war, he used to wonder how his actions would be received back home.

"At first you definitely double-guess telling your wife, mom, and your friends that you've killed 20 people," Wilson said. "But over time you realize that if they support you ... maybe it'll make them feel that much safer at home."

He acknowledges that brutal acts of war linger in the mind.

"Some people, before they're about to kill someone, they think that — 'Hey, I'm about to kill someone.' That thought doesn't occur to me. It may sound cold, but they're just a target. Afterward, it's real. You think, 'Hey, I just killed someone,'" says Wilson.

Insurgents "have killed good Marines I've served with. That's how I sleep at night," he says. "Though I've killed over 20 people, how many lives would those 20 people have taken?"

Wilson plans to leave the Marines after his contract expires next year, and is thinking of joining a SWAT Team in Florida — possibly as a sniper.

A Zhid Promise

To recap what has been going on in the world...

The New York Times continues to engage in some of the most vile fifth column work in the history of columns. Not only has the Times been waging a war against President Bush (and the United States in general) since the 2000 election, they have gone back to their old ways of spinning Middle East news to make Arabs look like innocents being victimized by the evil, baby killing, land stealing Jews. I don't think I have to go over the anti-American activities of the Times (just do a Yahoo search on "New York Times treason" and you'll fine plenty of others who document how the Times has crossed the line into active undermining of national security in their attempt to undermine the presidency).

Ever since Hizb'allah's Islamic terrorists, in the ultimate casus belli for Israel, invaded the sovereign borders of Israel, murdered Israeli soldiers and abducted two survivors, the New York Times has been furiously spinning a story that most people thought couldn't be spun. Even the fucking French were behind Israel, stating that the Hizb'allah act of war was unacceptable and Israel's response was justified. Wait, even ARAB states were saying that at the beginning.

But no, the New York Times can't allow Islamic terrorists to be seen as the bad guys. So the spin machine went into overdrive at the Times and they began to selectively report the news. Every Israeli attack in Lebanon was covered with heavy breathing...Israeli artillery "rained down" on Lebanon, civilians were being "massacred" (all direct quotes from the Times) and the pages of the Times, especially the front page, were filled with pictures of destroyed Lebanese cities, wounded Lebanese, Lebanese coffins...

Meanwhile, even though Hizb'allah, who STARTED the war, had been firing rockets into Israel by the hundreds per day, not a SINGLE picture of Jewish Israeli casualties made it into the Times. The only Israeli casualties ever shown on the pages of the Times were Israeli arab casualties. Any coverage of the Hizb'allah attacks on Israel was brief, buried in other stories and reported on in clinical terms.

For example, in a story about the "devastation" caused by Israeli artillery, the Times slipped in this, as the only description of the carnage in Israel:

"The violence on Wednesday sprawled over both sides of the border. Two Israeli Arab brothers, ages 3 and 9, were killed as they played outside in Nazareth, the Galilee town where Jesus spent his boyhood, hit by one of roughly 120 rockets Hezbollah launched into Israel."

Clinical, factual, no charged words and brief. And it only talks about Arab casualties in Israeli! If you relied solely on the Times, you'd think that only Arabs are being harmed in this war. Here is the sentence that followed the above quote:

"Israeli weaponry rained down on Lebanon throughout the day and into the night, killing 63 people by nightfall, Lebanese authorities said. Most of the dead were said to be civilians; one Hezbollah fighter was killed, apparently in the Naqura firefight."

Notice the very charged language, the focus on describing the civilians harmed, the use of vague and ominous language to describe a never ending barrage?

This has been going on since the war started and this week was the worst. There were two attacks on Haifa around Wednesday/Thursday, massive rocket attacks on civilian centers that caused Jewish Israeli deaths and extensive damage. Did the Times lead with a story about this? No. The story was, again, buried elsewhere and there wasn't a SINGLE picture of the Jewish Israeli casualties.

This has a very significant effect. The truth is that most people, especially the Times' mouth breathing liberal base, are quite dull and unable to focus on much detail. They like pictures and remember pictures. If you put pictures of dead Lebanese in the paper and refuse to put pictures of Jewish Israeli casualties, it leads to people seeing the war as a one sided massacre. That's exactly what the Times wants.

The low point in the Times coverage was Friday, when they ran the following front page pictures (click to enlarge)



Let me point out that this was a day when they should have been showing pictures of Jewish Israeli casualties in Haifa. Instead, they showed a picture of Israeli soldiers crying over comrades lost in battle and right below that they put a picture of a dead Palestinian baby.

Could it get any more obvious? They are spinning this as the only Jewish Israeli casualties are military (implying that the noble Hizb'allah "fighters" are only going after military targets) while the Arab casualties are babies (implying that the Jews are baby killers).

In reality, of course, the opposite is true. It is the Arabs who target civilians while the Israelis have suffered military casualties because they refuse to indiscriminately attack the civilian centers that the Hizb'allah terrorists hide inside. If you want to see that the Arabs not only target Israeli civilian centers (the opposite of what Israel does) but also design their weapons to inflict massive destruction to civilians, see my other post here.

I think it's quite clear that the Times is working overtime to whitewash Islamic terror and paint the Israelis as the evildoers. It is particularly interesting that in today's Times, they hid an article about the Islamic terror attack in Seattle (more on this below) in the center of the paper and didn't even lead with a headline that identified the shooter as a Muslim who was out to kill Jews. There can be no doubt that the Times is an active arm of Islamic terror.

So we not only have the Times at work, we had Ayman Al-Zawahri of al Qaeda sending out this message:

Al Qaeda Calls on All Moslems To Attack Jews
20:34 Jul 27, '06 / 2 Av 5766


(IsraelNN.com) The Al Qaeda world-wide terrorist network has issued a call to Moslems throughout the world to join in an international war against Jews "until [our] religion prevails. We will attack everywhere," threatened Ayman Al Zawahri, second in command to Osama Bin Laden.

Speaking on Al Jazeera television, the terrorist leader asserted, "All the world is a battlefield open in front of us." He appeared in front of a picture of the burning World Trade Center towers which terrorists destroyed in 2001.

Curiously, the next day (Friday), we have this headline:

Seattle Jews recovering from attack


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hilary Leila Krieger, THE JERUSALEM POST Jul. 29, 2006

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Seattle Jewish community is in shock after a shooting spree at the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle left one dead and five wounded on Friday.

A man declared, "I'm a Muslim American; I'm angry at Israel," before opening fire, according to witnesses. He was soon apprehended by police and later identified as 30-year-old Naveed Afzal Haq, a US citizen of Pakistani origin.

Hmmm...a day after al Qaeda's number two states that muslims around the world should attack Jews around the world and a Muslim does exactly that in Seattle. And the Times can't even bother to make the connection.

The Times, and the liberal braintrust in general, has always excused Islamic terrorism as a justified and natural response to the "oppression" of muslims.

Well, what's good for the goose...

At this point, I, as a Jew, am feeling as oppressed as any Muslim ever could have felt. My people are being slaughtered around the world and the world remains silent, when they're not condemning us for trying to defend ourselves. The media ignore the suffering of my people and set the world against us. The Islamic terror group that killed thousands of Americans in 2001 has sent out orders to the Muslim world to kill me and my people. Within a day, the killing started in Seattle.

I don't make threats, but, as the cliche goes, I do make promises. And I promise this-I am a different type of Jew from the ones Islamic terror thinks exist in the United States.

I'm not going to sit around while you make your threats and then follow through on them. I'm not going to wait for the police to protect me. If I'm attacked, directly or indirectly, I will make those responsible pay a very heavy price.

I'm heavily armed, expert in the use of firearms and I will not hesitate, for even a split second, to shoot first if I believe I am threatened.

I think I respect the Islamic terrorists more than even the NY Times does. While they softpedal (or ignore) the threats of the likes of Al-Zawahri, I don't. I believe everything the Islamic terrorists say. I trust that if they say "Jews throughout the world are now our targets", they mean it. The NY Times? They think it's a bluff, a joke or, perhaps, a good idea.

So, since I can't call up Al-Zawahri to let him know that I have heard what he promised, I will have to use my blog. And this isn't just a response to the threat from Al-Zawahri. This is a response to all that Islamic terror and its liberal/left wing fifth column have done to declare war Jews.

Here's a small portion of what I have ready to defend myself (there's so many more weapons here, but only so much room in one picture). You'll see a nice short barrel pump 12 gauge shotgun with very lethal 1 3/8 ounce "Black Magic" slugs. I use this for bear defense in the woods, but I suspect that the 1 3/8 ounces of lead will take down a Jihadi with very little trouble. Then you'll see my trust M1 Garand, which I prefer to those pussy AK47s you like. A 30 06 round is far more powerful than those wimpy 7.62 x 39 rounds you'll be using. You'll also see an ammo tin of 7.62 x 54R ammo...I have several hundred rounds of that to fire through a Soviet rifle (not pictured). There's also a couple of handguns, one in 9mm, the other .357 magnum, both with hollow point ammo. And to top it off is the trusty Sig SHR 970 in 7mm Magnum (or 300 Winchester Magnum, depending on which barrel I choose). Long distance calling. And yes, that is my old IDF uniform. It's been 20 years since I wore that when my generation was in Lebanon and I don't think I fit it in anymore, but it seemed like an appropriate backdrop.



Just wanted to make sure you know I'm not bluffing. Threaten me and I'll take you seriously.

Muslims of the world: I am a Jew. Al-Zawahri has ordered you to kill me. Come and get me. Email me at vengefulzhid@yahoo.com if you need my address.

War has been declared.

You were saying, Devarich?*

New York Times and the rest of the liberal world: "WAAAAH! Disproportionate force is evil! It's wrong! It should be banished!"

From today's news (courtesy of the Jerusalem Post):

His [Mahmoud Komati, the deputy chief of the Hizbullah politburo] comments were the first time that a leader from the terror group has suggested it miscalculated the consequences of the July 12 cross-border raid that seized the two.
"The truth is - let me say this clearly - we didn't even expect (this) response.... that (Israel) would exploit this operation for this big war against us," said Komati.

He said Hizbullah had expected "the usual, limited response" from Israel.

In the past, he said, Israeli responses to Hizbullah actions included sending in commandos into Lebanon and kidnapping Hizbullah officials or briefly targeting specific Hizbullah strongholds in southern Lebanon.

He said his group had also anticipated negotiations to swap the soldiers with three Lebanese prisoners in Israeli jails, with Germany acting as a mediator as it has in past prisoner exchanges.

Gee, seems that by using "disproportionate force", Israel tripped up Hizb'allah. Note the words of Hizb'allah...they were counting on Israel not responding with strength as they apparently were only planning to kidnap soldiers to use as pawns. Instead, they kidnapped soldiers and opened up a can o' whup touchas, and now they've lost most of their infrastructure and will likely end up being pushed out of sourthern Lebanon (aka Hizb'allahland) by an international force that will be put there instead.

Had Israel followed the Times' advice, Hizb'allah would have won and Israel would have been further weakened. Remember this lesson.

It also appears that after about two weeks of fighting, Hizb'allah is starting to crumble...

Nasrallah said his organization was ready to discuss an end to the fighting, but the dignity and national interest of Lebanon was what he termed a "red line," a reference to the heavy Israeli bombing and ground assaults on the country, including repeated attacks on Hezbollah-dominated regions in south Beirut and the Bekaa valley near the Syrian border.

"There is no way that we can accept the imposition of any humiliating conditions on us, our people or our country ... especially after all these sacrifices. ... We are open to political discussions and solutions with flexibility, but the dignity and national interest (of Lebanon) is a red line,"

That, to me, sounds like the once "we'll never stop until Israel is wiped out" Hizb'allah leader is trying to cut his losses and escape with his terror organization still in some form of existence.

Long live disproportionate force!

*the title of this post is from a line in the movie Red Dawn. While I know that Red Dawn was a movie about rebels fighting off an invading army, I invoke the quote as a reference to the New York Times' collusion with Islamic terror. In the movie, the line is uttered to mock a Soviet adviser's advice regarding defeating the enemy, right after the enemy has humiliated the Soviets.

Getting Your Bearings

I'm copying a picture from Strategypage because I think it's a very important thing to focus on right now. We hear of "massacres" in Lebanon, yet the truth is that fewer than 300 people have been killed there. Given that there has been a week of heavy military action, I think any honest person would say that 300 casualties (and not all of those were civilian) in a conflict with extensive bombing in crowded urban areas is a very small number of casualties for that time period. If Israel really didn't give a shit about civilian casualties, Beirut would have been a smoldering pit and the casualties would have been in the 30,000 range.

But what is Israel facing? Israel is being hit with rockets and missiles aimed at urban centers and there has Hizb'allah not tried to avoid civilian casualties, they are SEEKING to hit civilian targets. To make matters more nefarious, look closely at the picture below, click on it to enlarge it, and then click on this link to the Strategypage site for a full powerpoint display. This is a picture of a car hit by a Hizb'allah rocket fired into Haifa, Israel.

You'll see that the Hizb'allah terrorists are loading their rockets with ball bearings and other shrapnel to increase the lethality of their rockets. These rockets are aimed at women and children and are designed to tear people apart. If it did that to a car hood, imagine what it would do if it hit near a group of people.

If anything, Israel is showing far too much moderation in its counterattack on Hizb'allah targets. Next time you hear someone complain about Israel massacring civilians, remember the picture below and think about how you would respond if your cities were being hit with these weapons.

Gun Control...

Do I even need to comment on this story?
Shouldn't the story have been titled "Gun owner stops knife wielding psychopath"?

8 Grocery Employees Stabbed in Tennessee
- By WOODY BAIRD, Associated Press Writer
Friday, July 21, 2006


(07-21) 16:39 PDT Memphis, Tenn. (AP) --


A knife-wielding grocery store employee attacked eight co-workers Friday, seriously injuring five before a witness pulled a gun and stopped him, police said.


The 21-year-old suspect, whose name was withheld pending charges, was arrested and then taken to a hospital after complaining of chest pains, Memphis Police Sgt. Vince Higgins said. The attack apparently stemmed from a work dispute, police said.


Five victims, one in critical condition, were admitted to the Regional Medical Center, the main trauma hospital for the Memphis area. Three others were less badly hurt and treated at another hospital.


The attacker, chasing one victim into the store's parking lot, was subdued by Chris Cope, manager of a financial services office in the same small shopping center, Higgins said.


Cope said he grabbed a 9mm semiautomatic pistol from his pickup truck when he saw the attacker chasing the victim "like something in a serial killer movie."


"When he turned around and saw my pistol, he threw the knife away, put his hands up and got on the ground," Cope told The Associated Press. "He saw my gun and that was pretty much it."


Police arrived within minutes and took the attacker into custody.


"He just kept saying, 'I'm insane. I wish I was never born' and that kind of stuff," Cope said.


The attack started in an employee area of the Schnucks supermarket on the outskirts of Memphis and no customers were involved, Higgins said.


Police said two large kitchen knives used in the attack were found at the scene.


Witness Frank Rector said the attacker held a knife high in a stabbing position as he chased a victim into the parking lot. The victim, Rector said, "was circling, trying to get away from him."


The ages of the victims were not immediately released. Higgins and a company spokeswoman said all the victims were employees of the store.


The spokeswoman said officials from the St. Louis-based company were on their way to the scene.


Higgins said police were pulling into the parking lot as Cope was confronting the attacker.


"We commend him," Higgins said. "But we don't encourage people to take that kind of risk. He could have been hurt."

The New NY Times Editorial Writer

From a story in today's NY Times:

Saddam Hussein’s defense lawyers on Thursday released a letter Mr. Hussein recently wrote in prison that tries to convince the American people that the United States should leave Iraq because President Bush misled them into a deadly quagmire.

The 5,000-word letter is a rambling treatise outlining what Mr. Hussein asserts are the false reasons the Bush administration used to justify the war in Iraq, from illicit weapons to links with Al Qaeda. Mr. Hussein said he had written it at the behest of Ramsey Clark, the former United States attorney general who serves on his defense team.

Mr. Hussein blames Iran and pro-Israel interests for helping lead the Americans into war. He invokes the specter of the Vietnam War and the spirit of Mao, saying the Chinese revolutionary is “laughing in his grave because his prediction has been fulfilled and America is a paper tiger.”

We now know who has been writing editorials for the Times for the past three years...

What An Intelligent Newspaper Editorial Looks Like

Word to the NY Times...try reading the Jerusalem Post if you want to see how to write a well reasoned, logical and insightful editorial. E.g., today's...


(emphasis, mine)

Give the IDF time


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE JERUSALEM POST Jul. 17, 2006

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At the cabinet meeting yesterday, following the missile attack that killed eight people in Haifa, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said, "This is a difficult morning for us all... This is the criminal war of Hizbullah against the nation and its residents. We have no intention of bending to these threats. They will fail. There is no time limit... Every nation in the world would respond like us."

Olmert and IDF Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Dan Halutz have both been clear that, while Israel has made substantial progress toward destroying Hizbullah and forcing Lebanon to take responsibility for its own territory, more time is necessary.

That time should be taken, regardless of the hypocritical lectures that are already pouring in from other countries, including from surprising quarters.

While the G8 in a statement yesterday correctly and commendably identified the current escalation as resulting "from efforts by extremist forces to destabilize the region," even US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who has been staunchly defending Israel and the need to "disable extremists," has also said, "There is a great concern on all sides about civilian casualties, there is a great concern about damage to civilian infrastructure."

Israel does not deserve such finger-wagging. Israel does not target civilians. Rather, it deserves praise for the extraordinary measures it takes to avoid civilian casualties. Would our critics, among whom Rice is the most mild, rather we bomb populated areas in Beirut - as Hizbullah-Iran is bombarding Israeli cities - than infrastructure targets?

Rice is absolutely right to strongly oppose imposing a cease-fire that would only set the stage for further conflict. And it is heartening that most Western nations are finally acknowledging that Israel has a right to self-defense.

The countries that are pressuring the US to pressure Israel, however, must choose. They cannot inwardly cheer as Israel pounds Hizbullah and support Israel's right to self-defense while, at the same time, claiming that most everything we do is "disproportionate." A right of self-defense can only exist in the real world. It is a not a theoretical construct that can be divorced from the difficulties of fighting terrorists who deliberately place their missiles in homes and their bunkers in cities. Nor can it ignore the phenomenon of a failed state that has turned over its borders to a vicious terrorist organization that acts as a proxy arm for foreign powers.

If a "right of self-defense" is defined so narrowly that it is impossible to implement, then it does not exist.

The Lebanese people are paying a terrible price for their government's support for Hizbullah. No one wishes this were so. Even now, however, Lebanese diplomats continue to defend Hizbullah's right to "resist" against "occupation" - as if Israel were sitting on a single centimeter of Lebanese land before Hizbullah's attack.

Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora now implies that his government will take Hizbullah's place in southern Lebanon. This declaration would obviously not have been made without the "disproportionate" air, sea, and land blockade Israel has imposed in response to Lebanon's act of war.

The problem, of course, is that Lebanon cannot be trusted to lift a finger against Hizbullah, which has ministers in its government, once Israel's military pressure has been lifted. Accordingly, there is near-unanimity in Israel, including among our citizens who are bearing the brunt of the missile attacks, that Israel must itself take whatever time is necessary to destroy Hizbullah and obtain concrete international guarantees for Lebanon's promises.

Israel should continue to state clearly that it will not end its operations nor be satisfied with anything less than permanently removing Hizbullah's threat to Israel.

As of Saturday night, this newspaper reported, senior diplomats believed Israel had a "72-hour window" to complete its military operations before the international community started demanding a cease-fire. These unnamed Israeli diplomats should not be speculating about a "window" that only exists if we decide to acquiesce to it, which we should not.

These same diplomats also seemed pleased that other nations were only calling for "restraint" rather than using harsher language. They should not be so easily satisfied.

Israel should be openly rejecting the right of other nations to lecture us about sensitivity toward civilian casualties when no other nation, under these circumstances, would take such extreme measures to avoid such casualties, and while Israelis are being killed, wounded, and confined to bomb shelters by missiles aimed deliberately to murder a maximum number of citizens.

Even A Vengeful Zhid Needs To Relax

Taking a break from fighting the left wing forces of evil of the Bay Area and a certain building in NY housing the New York Times, I decided to just relax today in the pool, have a beer or ten, listen to some baseball and not go for a bike ride (see my other site for pictures of my bike riding adventures).

It was a touch over 100 today, beautiful blue skies and dry, as usual. So to provide a bit of a change of pace for my readers, here are pictures from the pool today... As always, click for enlargements.

K31 Range Report

Given the recent events in the Middle East, I felt an urge to go to the range, smell cordite, feel the kick of a rifle, put holes in things, etc. So I took my two Swiss rifles, the SigArms SHR970 7mm magnum and the K31 7.5 rifle and headed out in the heat (it's about 100 here today).

The SHR970, as always, was a stellar performer. What more can I say than the thing is sub MOA consistently?

I was, however, very happily surprised at the performance of the K31. In case there is any confusion, at the present time I have two K31s. The first is one I bought months ago and have featured in prior posts. The more recent purchase was the one featured in a post this week, which will be presented to Affe when he arrives in California in a week or so. It was the first K31 that accompanied me to the range.

I had fired this rifle once or twice months ago, deemed it to be a fine shooter, and put it away in the gun cabinet, along with the Enfield, Mauser, M44 and Garand. It sat there for many lonely months, as I was more interested in firing the Garand.

Well let me tell you, if you don't have a K31, GET ONE.

The K31 is one of the sweetest rifles to shoot, a marvel of mass production and about as accurate a rifle as you're ever going to find this side of a custom made rifle.

Yes, it's 60 years old and had a tough life as a military rifle (though the military it served in tends to avoid combat). Still, it shoots very much like a modern, expensive bolt action rifle.

It's a straight pull, which makes for some really quick chambering of rounds, and it has a satisfying, solid feel. The trigger action is smooth, the sights simple and accurate and the kick strong enough to let you know the round isn't some bullshit .223 type modern caliber.

And did I say it was accurate? Let's go to the jpg...(click the picture to enlarge it)


There's my K31 with the used target (not the ugly fucker in the Times' front page, alas).

The K31 has a five round magazine and I was firing Swiss milsurp ammo through it. So this is not any special handload hocus pocus. Just a stock milsurp rifle (the only thing I've done is run a boresnake through it, once) and milsurp ammo.

From 100 yards, I put 14 out of 15 shots in the black (this is the peeled off shootnsee target, not the entire target...the one stray round is not included in this picture).

For an open sight rifle being fired with nothing more than a sandbag and a sling as shooting aids, I consider this performance amazing. The first five round magazine ended up on the right side, with one shot off the target.

The second five rounds are the ones to the left of the 10 spot, with the last round right above the 10.

The final five rounds are at the top above the 10, grouped in a size a bit larger than a quarter.

Jesus, this is a sweet rifle.

Like I said, if you don't have one yet, get one before they're too expensive.

Aim Surplus still has some. Don't wait.

Why "Land for Peace" Never Works

Since 2000, Israel has withdrawn from the security zone it established in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip. Israel was pushed into these moves by the likes of the United States' President Clinton and the liberal media, under the theory of "land for peace."

The theory went that if Israel were to give up certain parts of land it controlled, history would somehow vanish and the Arabs would provide peace in exchange for the land ceded.

Well, folks, today we see what land for peace actually provides.

Land for peace wipes out defensible space. Land for peace brings your enemies right onto your border. Land for peace allows a rocket to land in Tiberias or Safed or Haifa rather than into an unpopulated buffer zone.

Handing over land to an entity that continues to seek your destruction will not provide peace. As a slogan, land for peace sounds good. As a reality, it only strengthens the enemy.

Now we see that all of the "inaccurate" rockets that the NY Times was ignoring really are hitting Israel's population centers, killing and wounding civilians and destroying property.

It was clear to anyone who had his head outside of his ass that the Arab rocket attacks were the opening of a new threat and that if they weren't stopped immediately, the Arabs were going to refine their tactics, learn more about how to build, deploy and effectively fire the rockets and increase their lethality.

So to now say that Israel must not act out of proportion to the attacks it suffers is myopia, even blindness, of the worst order.

Acting in proportion is what allowed this problem to get to the flashpoint it has become.

If nothing else, let's learn a few lessons.

First, until the Arabs can show that they are ready for peace (which means that, at a minimum (a) they don't allow terrorist armies to occupy the southern reaches of their country or (b) terrorists are not allowed to act as a sovereign within a state or quasi state or (c) terrorist parties are not allowed to be a part of or run government or (d) media and education facilities preach peace and acceptance rather than destruction and hate), trading land for peace should mean that Israel create demilitarized zones around its borders, with those zones reaching as far as the range of the missiles and rockets that are in the hands of the terrorists. For each attack, more land is taken to ensure that the zone is effective. In this way, there will be peace, for Israel's civilian population, and the Arabs will have given up land as a consequence of their terror acts.

Second, there is no such thing as a harmless use of rockets or missiles. Likewise, the only proportional response to a terror attack is an overwhelming response.

Pull My Finger Anywhere But In San Francisco

Though the purpose of starting this blog was to rant about the left wing paradise of San Francisco, I've spent precious little time on that topic. I will try to correct that here.

To state the obvious, I live near San Francisco and work in that city. Many of the people I interact with on a daily basis are classic San Francisco libtards and I often have to hear the many slogans that these morons spit out.

It's all quite predictable if you've ever seen a Michael Moore movie, visited the MoreOn.org website, had a large portion of your brain removed or run across an extreme left winger.

Bush lies, no war for oil, Bush stole the election, blah blah blah.

One friend, the blogger formerly known as MidlifeinMarin, has recently gone back to complaining about the 2004 election. It's brain dead, tedious, predictable and hypocritical stuff.

One of their favorite claims is that the "right wing" Bush administration has robbed us of our civil liberties. Of course, these San Francisco retards wouldn't even be able to explain what a civil liberty is, but as a slogan it sounds good to them. It casts Bush as a thief and a dictator, which is all they care about doing.

So today, I decided to go through the San Francisco Police Code to see how the center of the progressive liberal universe stacks up in terms of protecting individual rights.

Well, readers, it was eye opening.

The number of things that San Francisco has criminalized or otherwise prohibited shames the Bush administration.

Let's go through some of the things that you can't do in the liberal shangri-la of San Francisco:

How about this-you can't play ball on a street in San Francisco.

SEC. 110. BALL PLAYING ON PUBLIC STREET PROHIBITED.
It shall be unlawful for any person to play at or participate in any game of ball on any public street or highway.
(Added by Ord. 1.075, App. 10/11/38)
Sec. 115.

If you wanted to have company in the toilet, that would make you a criminal...

SEC. 124.3. USE OF TOILET BY MORE THAN ONE PERSON PROHIBITED.
It shall be unlawful for more than one person over the age of thirteen (13) years old to
enter or remain in an automatic public toilet at one time, unless the person
using the automatic public toilet has a disability that causes the person to
require assistance, in which case the person's assistants may enter and remain
in an automatic public toilet with the disabled person. The Department of Public
Works shall post signs on all automatic public toilets notifying users of the
restrictions set forth in this section.

Speaking of toilets, if you want to fart, you better find another city, because San Francisco will throw you in jail for up to 30 days for passing gas in that fair city.

SEC. 405. DISTRIBUTING "KER CHEW" POWDERS PROHIBITED.
It shall be unlawful for any person to sell, give away or in any manner to distribute within the City and County of San Francisco any "ker chew powders," "stink balls," or similar substances designed to give offense to the senses.
(Added by Ord. 1.075, App. 10/11/38)
SEC. 406.
PENALTY.
Any person violating the provisions of Section 405 of this Article
shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof, shall be fined in
a sum not less than $10 nor more than $50, or by imprisonment in the County Jail
for a period not exceeding 30 days, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

Guess what else you can't do in San Francisco? If you want to throw a crumb from your sandwich to a bird, you may end up behind bars..

SEC. 486. FEEDING BIRDS AND WILD ANIMALS PROHIBITED.
It shall be unlawful for any person to feed or offer food to any bird or wild animal in or on any
sidewalk, street or highway of the City and County.

If, for whatever reason, you are into replicas of hypodermic needles, you better avoid San Francisco, because...

SEC. 4101. PROHIBITION OF SALE OF REPLICA HYPODERMIC NEEDLES OR SYRINGES.
It
shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to sell, or, for purposes
of sale, to exchange, give, loan, furnish, display, or market, or to utilize for
promoting the sale of any merchandise, any replica of facsimile hypodermic
needles or syringes in the City and County of San Francisco. The provisions of
this subsection shall not apply to any replica or facsimile hypodermic needle or
syringe which, because of its distinct color, exaggerated size, or other design
feature, cannot reasonably be perceived to be a real needle or syringe.
(Added by Ord. 136-93, App. 5/17/93)

What if you think that bicycle tires with a color other than black is something you'd like to manufacture? Get the hell out of San Francisco, because you are not welcome in the progressive city of freedom!

SEC. 4200A.2. STRICT LIABILITY.
Any manufacturer of a Color Tire shall be strictly liable in tort, without regard to fault or proof of defect, to any Person who seeks recovery for any direct or indirect costs incurred by that
Person in removing Graffiti caused by the Color Tire from property under that
Person's jurisdiction and control. If a Person prevails in an action against a
manufacturer of a Color Tire to recover costs related to the removal of Graffiti
caused by the Color Tire, that Person shall also recover all administrative
costs and attorney fees incurred in pursuit of the recovery.
(Added by Ord.
39-00, File No. 991827, App. 3/24/2000)

But, dear readers, here is my favorite San Francisco attack on civil liberties. Read this one carefully.

SEC. 716. NEWSRACKS ON SIDEWALKS.
No person shall sell, offer for sale, or keep or maintain any newspaper or news periodical in any newsrack located on any public sidewalk or street in such a manner as to expose to the public view any photograph, cartoon or drawing, contained within such publication,
displaying any of the following:
(1) The genitals, pubic hair, buttocks, natal cleft, perineum, anal region or pubic hair region of any person other than a child under the age of puberty;
(2) Any portion of the breast, at or below the areola thereof, of any female person, other than a child under the age of puberty.
(Added by Ord. 66-75, App. 3/7/75)

Did you catch that? The public display of a newspaper or magazine that features adult genitalia is forbidden, but the public display of such media that display children's genitalia is...ALLOWED. Let me repeat: In San Francisco, adult porn can not be displayed in public but kiddie porn can be.

So the next time some drooling liberal begins repeating those tired old slogans about Bush taking away our freedoms, ask if the person has ever taken a look at what the liberal cities of America prohibit. It's eye opening. And, of course, it will lead to the oh-so-predictable response of "well, that may be on the books, but it doesn't affect most people!"

And that's exactly what I say about the PATRIOT Act, wiretapping and the review of financial records. Plus, those programs actually have a worthwhile purpose.

Guaranteed to shut the libtards down in their tracks.

Affe's Got A Gun...

...and this Zhid better run.

To make a long story short, two years ago Affe did me a favor (of unspeakable description) and I offered to buy him a rifle as a thank you gift. Two years passed and I bought a lot of rifles for myself, but none for Affe. I told Affe that if he were to ever move out west from New York and could actually own a rifle, then I'd buy one for him, but since New York City's weapons possession laws were so draconian, it made no sense to buy one until such time as he moved.

Well, Affe is moving out west next week and I had to pay up. So I went to AIM Surplus , where I get most of my WWII era rifles, and found that they had Swiss K31s back in stock. I bought a very nice K31 from AIM about nine months ago (you can see pictures of it on this site) and told Affe how nice of a weapon it was. He wanted one, but a few months ago AIM ran out of them and word on the street was that no more would be available.

As things usually happen, where there is demand, there is supply (and higher prices). AIM has the K31's at about 50% higher prices than before, and they claim that they are some of the nicest K31s they've seen.

Affe's K31 arrived at my house today and while it's a very nice rifle, the one I bought nine months ago is quite a bit cleaner (and it came with an original issue sling). Affe's K31 has a few more dings and some discolored wood (it's a walnut, not a beech, stock) and the metal isn't as shiny, but it's still a very nice piece.

So without further ado, I introduce to the world Affe's first gun... (as always, click a picture to enlarge it)

Here is Affe's rifle sitting in my chair...



Here's a money shot, bolt open...




Another glam shot...



And this is one of the more interesting things about K31s. Most people who own these rifles know this, but for the rest of the world, this will be news. The Swiss soldiers who were issued the K31s wrote their names and addresses on a little slip of paper and fastened the buttplate over the paper. I assume that this was to have some form of identification in case the rifle were ever left at the side of the road and a passerby wanted to bail out the soldier by returning the rifle to his house before the Swiss military found out the putz had lost his weapon (as the serial numbers should have been plenty of id for intra military puposes). I removed the buttplate and this is what I found.



William Rickli of 45 Klybeck Street in Basel, Switzerland, your rifle is now in the hands of Affe.

Come to Allah Time

As we all know, Hizbollah terrorists invaded Israel today in yet another of their many acts of war. Others have covered this story in far greater detail and I won't go over the situation here, as it changes by the minute. I would like to make a few points.

The first is that the attack on Israel today, and the escalation of terror groups attacking Israel with ever more violent means, is exactly the type of incremental violence that eludes the grasp of the liberal media. They are so intent on having the victims turn the other cheek when the aggressors are Islamic terrorists that they end up encouraging this type of violence. They excuse rocket attacks as being inaccurate, they refuse to cover the constant yet relatively low casualty terror attacks, they whitewash the massive buildup in the strength of the terror army and condemn any pre-emptive action.

Well, when you do all that, and especially abhor pre-emption, the only thing that you can have is a horrible assault like today (or 9/11) in which the liberal media will then say "how can this have happened? Why weren't we prepared?"

They set it up and then they criticize those who they hamstrung.

But that's not really the point of this post. In a certain way, I don't see today's Hizbollah attack, or the Hamas attack a few weeks ago where Shalit was abducted, as a worsening of the situation.

First, I think a "let the dogs of war off their chains" scenario is the only one that will help to set things on a better course. Low level warfare is impotence and only leads to escalation.

Second, while I absolutely condemn Islamic terror attacks on civilians, the attacks on military targets and even the abductions of soldiers are the way that wars are supposed to be fought. I hope every Hamas and Hizbollah terrorist is killed in the prosecution of these attacks, but I would much rather see them focus their violence on the military than on civilians.

That's not me approving of the terror attacks, but I think it should be pointed out that the military is there to draw the fire from civilian targets and that is what is happening.

It's a real shame that Sharon is gone, as this is the situation that he handled best. I would like to wake up tomorrow morning to see a headline that the Presidential Palace in Damascus is a smoking pit in the ground and Israeli tanks are rolling towards Beirut with Nasrallah's severed head atop a turret.


UPDATE 7/13/06

And is on cue, the fucking moron editors at the New York Times have delivered an editorial that includes all the shithead points that I warned of above. It's a marvel of libtarded bedwetting, arguing that if Israel were to only temper its response and be "proportional" things would be fine. Yeah, cause we all see what decades of pulling punches has led to...the Islamic terrorists COUNT on Israel and the US pulling their respective punches and being "proportional", as that's the only way that they can survive and prosper. I really wish the NY Times editors would be the next victims of a terror attack. It's funny that they call for patience when dealing with terror but they scream bloody murder and demand immediate and overwhelming consequences for things like Abu Grahib...

Here's their editorial, a marvel of head in the sand nonsense and a case study in how to detach an argument from reality and the lessons of recent history.

July 13, 2006

Editorial

Israel’s Two-Front Battle

Kidnapping Israeli soldiers to use as bargaining chips for the release of Arab prisoners is horrible behavior for groups that claim international recognition and political legitimacy, as Hamas and Hezbollah do. The same applies to lobbing rockets over Israel’s borders in the hope that they might kill unsuspecting civilians. In response to such unacceptable provocations, Israeli forces are now engaged in major military operations in Gaza, to the south, and in Lebanon, to the north.

But even when acting justifiably in the face of aggression, Israel best serves its long-term security interests by acting wisely and proportionately. Its guiding principle must always be to focus military actions as narrowly as possible on those individuals, organizations and governments directly complicit in the attacks, while sparing the civilian populations that surround them.

That is, of course, far easier said than done. Military actions in inhabited areas cannot be fine-tuned. Yet surely the repeated lesson of recent history is that inflicting pain and humiliation on Arab civilians does not make them angry at the terrorists who provoked the violence. It makes them angrier at Israel.

It is too soon to judge how well Israel is hewing to this standard in Lebanon. The political context there is different from that in Gaza. Hezbollah, whose militia is to blame for the kidnappings and rocket fire, has deputies in Lebanon’s Parliament and ministers in its cabinet. But it is not the main party of government, as Hamas is in the Palestinian territories. And Lebanon, unlike Gaza and the West Bank, is a legally sovereign state. A great deal of international effort has been invested in trying to free it of foreign military and political meddling, and restore real content to its sovereignty.

Obviously, that effort has not been fully successful. Hezbollah’s role as an autonomous militia controlling the international border with Israel makes that painfully clear, and Israel cannot be expected to put up with it. But in responding, it needs to make careful distinctions between Hezbollah guerrillas and Lebanese civilians; calling the rockets an “act of war” by Lebanon’s government was not a good idea.

In Gaza, where Israeli operations have been going on for two weeks and seem to be expanding day by day, it is not too soon to question Israeli military strategy, as many Israelis themselves are now doing. Israel’s initial foray into the southern part of Gaza, after one of its soldiers was kidnapped near the border, was appropriate, as were the initial airstrikes on bridges, meant to impede the movements of the kidnappers.

But after these steps failed to produce their intended result, the operation seemed to lose its clear territorial and counterterrorist definition and began to take on a perverse momentum of its own. Israel should not back off its efforts to secure the release of its kidnapped soldier. But it needs to refocus its Gaza operations on that very specific goal.

The Return of Affe

Though our old friend Affe has not blogged in many months (maybe many years), he remains active in the resistance. I received an email from his Affeness this morning that I had to repost here.

I had been thinking about the topic Affe wrote on over the past few days, as I noticed the media, particularly the NY Times, spinning away on the recent battle in Israel along the Gaza border.

What I was thinking about was how the Times would always qualify descriptions of Palestinian terror missile attacks with "inaccurate" or "rarely causing any harm". Why I found this particularly interesting, and offensive, is that they didn't qualify Israeli defensive actions, such as air to ground missile firings or artillery fire into Gaza, in the same manner.

Anyone who has spent time around heavy military munitions knows that an artillery barrage or an air to ground missile attack will result in massive casualties if it is done with the intent of inflicting casualties.

For example, Israel has fired thousands of artillery rounds into Gaza in the past few months. If Israel were really out for blood (as it should be), there should have been tens of thousands of Palestinian Arab casualties. Ditto with the air attacks.

Or with the recent re-entry to Gaza...A few dozen Palestinian casualties, at most. Had Israel really want to inflict damage, as the Palestinian Arab terrorists do with each Qassam they launch, there would have been thousands of casualties.

I know that there is a left wing, pro Arab, anti-Israel bias in the media and I am not all that surprised by the Times' coverage. I don't like it, but it's not much of a shock.

What I am surprised at is how they care so little about covering up their hypocrisy.

For example, they whined, and whined loud and long, after 9/11 about how the government should have known the attacks were being planned, how there should have been coordination in the intelligence services, how this should have been prevented, etc.

Yet they mercilessly attack all of the programs that President Bush implemented to ensure that we don't get surprised again and when those programs are shown to work, such as with the recent discovery of the plot to attack tunnels leading into New York City, there is deafening silence from the Times. Those plots don't get stopped without the programs that the Times whines about being illegal or violations of civil liberties or "in the public interest" (and thus worthy of having their cover blown).

With regard to the situation in Israel, the Times is being dishonest by downplaying the threat of the Palestinian terror missile attacks. Those missiles are being refined, made more powerful and there are reports that crude chemical warheads are being developed for them.

This is a near identical run up to 9/11, and the Times, instead of clearly stating that the missiles are a dangerous introduction and must be stopped before they are refined to the point of being able to cause mass casualties, is burying its head in its pro-Arab sand.

So with that, Affe's brilliant email:

Finish the following sentence on the NYTIMES front page, and describe the topic:

"When explaining their persistence in firing crude, inaccurate __________, ____________ rely on the emotion of the conflict rather than the logic of ___________."

A. "reporters/editors/journalism"; Topic: Bush's Lies.

B. "babykilling Hellfire missiles/jackbooted Israeli stormtroopers/genocidal war against a defenceless Arab populace"; Topic: Sharon's Lies.

C. "rockets/Palestinians/warfare"; Topic: Palestinian astroshaheed training program threatened by Israeli invasion.

D. "illegal satellite-guided munitions/bloodthirsty Marine occupiers who should simultaneously be hated as tools of the Bush administration and pitied as cogs in his rascist war machine/ the Geneva Conventions which they violate every second by their mere existence"; Topic: BUSH'S LIES !! YEAGH !!!

A July 4th Zhid Mt Bike Ride

I usually post my cycling pictures at the Zhid's sister site, but today I mixed up the sites and was too lazy to upload them again. So as a break from the politics, here's some pictures from my ride today on Mt. Diablo. I won't provide much commentary, other than to say that the washed out portions of the trail (chronicled on my cycling site) have been repaired. As always, click on the pics for enlargements.

This is from the top of the ride looking down on the area that I live. Notice all of the open space, something you'd never seen in libtarded, left wing, Democrat controlled, and environment destroying OAKLAND.



On the way up...



This looked to be a purple poppy. I thought they were always orange..



Another view from the top. I ride from the bottom of that valley up to this point, a 2500 or so ft ascent. I go VERY slow. So slow, that the flies constantly buzz me on the trail, making me believe that the phrase "slow as shit" has added meaning for me.



Looking down towards my house...



This was very cool...some sort of bird of prey, a hawk or similar, was drifting on the thermal currents from the mountain. I was watching him fly below me...I finally got a picture of him at my level.



An interesting rock. See, e.g., paint drying.



Just part of the trail at the top.



This is a view of the trailhead that I start from, looking up to the top of the mountain, where I usually end up.

America, Fuck Yeah!

The Arabs refer to the re-establishment of Israel as a state in 1948 as the "nabka", which means "the disaster". American liberals have not yet adopted the word "nabka" for the July 4 Independence Day holiday, but the sentiment remains the same.

While we real Americans remember all that has been sacrificed for this great country and we fly our flags with pride, remember that flying the flag not only honors the country but it also pisses off the liberals.

That's why I fly TWO flags!


And in honor of the day, a few words from Team America...(some retards don't understand how to use Youtube links, so here's the instructions: CLICK ON THE ARROW IN THE CENTER OF THE IMAGE. Geezuz).

First Amendment, Meet The Second Amendment

I haven't had a chance to weigh in on the latest New York Times terror attack on the United States, but the Independence Day holiday seems like an appropriate time to make a few observations.

The terror attack I'm speaking of is the Times' publication of information regarding a secret United States program to track financial transactions. The Times claims that even though they could find nothing illegal about the program, and had been asked by the government to not publish the details they obtained, there was a "public interest" involved that required the Times to publish the information.

This, of course, is utter bullshit. If the program violated no laws, then the only reason that the program would be public interest would be if the perceived public was most interested in harming the United States, and President Bush, during a war. That clearly requires a New York Times editor's perspective.

We should all be clear that the New York Times is at war with President Bush. I subscribe to the Times and have seen the paper sink deeper into Bush Derangement Syndrome over the years, and it's now to the point that the Times would sacrifice the safety of this country in order to further its agenda to harm the President.

What possible good can come from the disclosure of the secret financial transactions tracking program? Since the program is not illegal, there are no legal rights being protected by disclosing its existence. Furthermore, if the program violates no laws, even if there are privacy interests at stake, those privacy interests are clearly not legal rights, so I fail to see the story. I'm desperately trying to understand what public interest is served by publishing details of a program that can only help terrorists.

At the very least, the publication of the story achieves nothing positive. In all likelihood, the publication helps terrorists to avoid being tracked. Even if it's only one terrorist who evades what would otherwise have led to his capture, that's far more harm than any of the good that came from the story.

As we've seen the Times, and other liberal media and political sources, argue in the past about things that they don't like (such as firearms), saving even one life is worth the denial of certain rights.

Isn't this the logic behind the so-called assault weapons ban, the ban on high capacity magazines for weapons, the limitation of number of firearms that can be purchased in a certain time period, the banning of .50 caliber rifles? Didn't the liberals say that the suspension of the rights to those items was a fair price to pay to save even one life or, in the case of the .50 caliber rifles, prevent terrorist attacks?

So if that's the case, why isn't a program that violates no laws, but does have a good probability of interfering with terrorist infrastructure, subject to the same media and political protection?

Why is it ok to deny a person the right to a firearm but not ok to allow the government to monitor financial transactions in a legal data gathering operation?

The justification that really got to me was the following, from the NY Times:

"We understand that honorable people may disagree with any of these choices to publish or not to publish. But making those decisions is the responsibility that falls to editors, a corollary to the great gift of our independence. It is not a responsibility we take lightly. And it is not one we can surrender to the government."

Last I checked, the New York Times was not elected, was not subject to checks and balances of other branches of the media or government (in fact, they claim that they have an unfettered right under the first amendment) and certainly had no obligation to put national security above their own interests, whether they are profit or a political agenda against an administration.

For the New York Times to say that their right to publish stories disclosing the facts of secret and legal anti-terrorist programs is superior to the right of the government to engage in these programs without public disclosure is far more frightening than any of the alleged civil rights attacks that the Bush administration has been accused of perpetrating.

Given a choice between having the government decide on national security interests and the media decide on such matters, I'll take the government 10 times out of 10, whether it's a Democrat or Republican in charge.

The media seem to think that the first amendment means that the media is not subject to the laws of this country and bears no responsibility for harming the interests of the people. Instapundit did a very nice job of showing where the Times got the first amendment wrong, here:

A deeper error is Keller's characterization of freedom of the press as an institutional privilege, an error that is a manifestation of the hubris that has marked the NYT of late. Keller writes: "It's an unusual and powerful thing, this freedom that our founders gave to the press. . . . The power that has been given us is not something to be taken lightly."

The founders gave freedom of the press to the people, they didn't give freedom to the press. Keller positions himself as some sort of Constitutional High Priest, when in fact the "freedom of the press" the Framers described was also called "freedom in the use of the press." It's the freedom to publish, a freedom that belongs to everyone in equal portions, not a special privilege for the media industry. (A bit more on this topic can be found here.)

Characterizing the freedom this way, of course, makes much of Keller's piece look like, well, just what it is -- arrogant and selfjustificationy posturing. To quote Keller: "Forgive me, I know this is pretty elementary stuff but it's the kind of elementary context that sometimes gets lost in the heat of strong disagreements."

Or institutional self-importance. As Hugh Hewitt observes, at the conclusion to a much lengthier critique: "He doesn't have any defense other than his position as editor of a once great newspaper."

And the Constitution does not permit titles of nobility.

That's an excellent analysis.

And it gets me to the title of this post. I have always believed that part of the importance of the right to bear arms granted by the second amendment (and yes, of course I believe that it is an individual right, as all of the rights in the Bill of Rights are) was to ensure that the government never was in a position to act against the best interests of those it served.

These days, though, I think that the founders were far more perceptive than anyone gave them credit for and realized, after drafting the first amendment, that the second amendment was necessary to protect against possible abuses of the first amendment BY THE MEDIA.

I'm certainly not advocating that someone put Bill Keller, James Risen or Eric Lichtblau in the sights of a 7mm Magnum sniper rifle, but if there's another terror attack on the United States and there's even a bit of a connection between that attack and the stories that the Times has published, I can see why someone would think that it was time for the press to pay a price for its complicity.

And since this story seemed to be overshadowed by the financial transactions story, in this week's "Escapes" section of the NY Times, Peter T. Kilborn wrote a story that was a thinly veiled bit of intel for terrorists looking to hit Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld (and their families) while they were at their vacation homes. The story went so far as to provide the names of Cheney's and Rumsfeld's homes, identify their locations and the layout of the house and grounds, give away security details such as the presence of a camera in a birdhouse, the road that Cheney and Rumsfeld travel on to reach the houses and, this was really sinking low, the restaurants that the Cheneys and Rumsfelds frequent.

I'm sure that the Times will claim that this is all public knowledge, that anyone could observe these facts by visiting the town (I'm not going to name the town or provide the details that the Times gave out). All true, but if someone with an eye towards terrorism were to go to those towns to gather the information, they could be identified or have their cover blown. Giving away the details that the Times published just made the life of a terrorist a bit easier.

What possibly could have been the reason to publish the details of where Cheney and Rumsfeld vacation? If, as the Times claims, the Bush administration is so hated by Americans, the vacation destinations of administration officials would be of no interest whatsoever. To me, the Times was thumbing its nose at the administration and hiding behind the first amendment to endanger the lives of the Cheney and Rumsfeld families.

If public interest is really such an overwhelming objective, I wonder whether anyone is compiling a list of addresses for the likes of Keller, Risen, Lichtblau and Kilborn, because, well, you know, some people may want to know where they live and be able to find a place that's about 100 yards away from those places to dial in a scope and a load...