Maggie's FarmWe are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for. |
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Categories
QuicksearchLinks
Blog Administration |
Friday, May 24. 2013Friday morning links The London Terror Attack Was More Than 'Unforgivable' - Britain has been in denial about the Islamist threat. Time to face it down. Were there no men on the street to defend the lad? Woolwich attack: Watch shocking video of terrorists charging at police car in attempt to kill WPC These people are paid more from Welfare than the murdered soldier made Presbyterian youths riot in Sweden Portland, Ore., rejects adding fluoride to water supply Obama Administration Supports Fracking and Natural Gas, Despite Environmental Opposition The Secret Donors Behind the Center for American Progress and Other Think Tanks The least business-friendly states in the US It Begins… Communist Indoctrination Included in Common Core Literature for First Graders Steyn: The Autocrat Accountants - Once government is ensnared in every aspect of life, a bureaucracy grows increasingly capricious. A Growing Fear in France - As political and financial crises deepen in Western Europe, French Jewry is facing a familiar test France’s Outrageous Double Standard on Hezbollah and Terrorism Saudi Arabia/United States: Strange Bedfellows in the Middle East Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
"The least business-friendly states in the US"
#45 - Connecticut #50 - California Once again, Bird Dog, our two great native states find common ground. Despite the fact that both states' names start with the letter 'C' and are composed of 10 to 11 letters, a claim no other state can make, it's simply remarkable how many similarities there are. And this article is just one more piece of proof. Long live, CT and CA! Sister states forever! "Britain has been in denial about the Islamist threat."
And let's not forget Sweden, a story which was on zero major news sites this morning, despite four days of rioting and burning by Muslim immigrants. Doc, Tim Blair in Oz complains about the disrespect shown to these two sterling boys, Major Hasan, and others here:
http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/nobodys_listening/ I concur; it's disgraceful! I wonder how the sheeple feel now about giving away their right to self defense and relying on hobbled and muzzled sheep dogs to protect them from the wolves. Who let that happen?
Perhaps next time David Gilmor’s son, who has amply displayed his contempt for Britain and its military, can help the Muslims express their vibrant, multicultural disappointment with the lack of proper jizya in England.
The residents of London—I dare not call them subjects or citizens—did in response to bloody murder exactly what they have been conditioned to do by thousands of anti-English laws, riots, and demonstrations which have taken place for decades. They are the people they have been waiting for. "No one's interested in something you didn't do."
Last night a span of I-5 bridge over the Skagit river collapsed (maybe after an oversized truck damaged it.) with few vehicles going into the drink, probably nobody killed or badly injured. The Hand of God keeping people safe. Now What? Will the major disruption to traffic and rebuilding be a plus or minus to the west coast economy? The bridge had a C- grading so will they replace the whole thing or just the one of 3-4 sections that broke? I'm guessing it would be around $200 mil to replace the broken section. As Jerry noted, it had been determined that the bridge was in need of repair/replacement.
So where in the world was some of that $780 billion in 'stimulus money' that our immaculate president promised would fix all the deficient bridges in the country? DOT statement was "15 million to replace the broken span with a temporary."
Now the hew and cry about how we wouldn't be here if they had spent the mainantance money. Never mind that, unless they had replaced the span with a non overhead structure, it still would have taken out the "maintained" bridge too. Just to the east is a new bridge on old highway 99, completed in the last 5 years. That bridge took 3-4 years because protestors and lawsuits held up work so the fish didn't get bothered. I think it came in only 2x over original cost budget. This is a blatant attempt to use this "crisis" to lobby for more tax money for bridges. The bridge was not unsafe and it did not fail because it should have been replaced. It failed simply because it was heavily loaded and then a major support component was destroyed by the truck impact. This design, like so much of what humans build, depends upon all of the components bearing weight/force/moment in predictable ways. Once any component is bent or twisted it can no longer support the weight and the entire structure collapses. This bridge was old and but that had nothing to do with the failure. If the bridge had just been built and was in perfect shape the same accident would have resulted in the same failure. The problem was the high and heavy load not simply that the bridge was old.
This won't stop those who want to spend you money. Notice how quickly the store pivoted from an accident to the fact that thousands of our bridges are old and should be replaced. Not to dissimilar from how the tradgey of Sandy Hook was pivoted to anti-2nd amendment propaganda. Here is the question the government needs to answer: What happened to the billions and billions (perhaps trillions) in the highway fund? It was earmarked for highways and bridges but was spent on other things and a lot of it was spent building highways to nowhere in the states of influential congressmen. So if this accident in any way relates to lack of maintenance shouldn't some congressmen go to jail??? Were there no men on the street to defend the lad?
Crazed Moslems with bloody machetes waited twenty minutes for the cops to arrive and to shoot them and… no one told the other soldiers in the nearby barracks; no one ran over the bloody murders with a car; no mob attacked the bloody murders; no one who knew martial arts attacked the bloody murderers; no one stopped shopping and fled screaming. Human nature is not what you what it thought it. I would guess that the strict laws disarming the British populace might have had something to do with the lack of men willing to try to subue the terrorists...but the actions of the Bristish courts (locking up the victims) towards anyone who attempts to defend themselves is probably more relevant!
Were there no men on the street to defend the lad?
Don't be a moron. Why did the police come with guns? For self defense, which they needed to use. And they unlike a private citizen won't be prosecuted for defending life. The question is, why responsible men, and women, aren't legally permitted to carry firearms for self defense and defense of others when the police are so obviously inept? Two heavily armed murderous assailants eager for confrontation and the men, who are forcibly disarmed, actively aggressed against. I realize you aren't one of them, but often the people who make this lament are the very people who support ensuring the men have no effective means to stop the killers, especially that moron police chief Charles Ramsey. Keep in mind the trained and organized police did not confront these men until those with guns arrived. See that's the thing. Brute physical force is enough to keep a crowd away; backed up with a machete it's enough to keep a crowd away and make them listen to your insane rants and take pictures of you posturing. If you don't have the physical force (or guile and initiative) to resist it, you're next to helpless.
That's why they used to call the Colt Single Action Army revolver the "Peacemaker", sometimes the "Equalizer". A pipsqueak becomes at least the equal of a behemoth with a big knife. Harlan Ellison's formative moment came when Kitty Genovese was raped and murdered while her neighbors waited for police. Who will be formed by these events, and to what end.
Were there no men on the street to defend the lad?
First news reports claimed the police showed up at the murder scene within "moments "but were unarmed and chose to wait 20 minutes for the armed officers to show up. I don't know if this claim was subsequently confirmed since I haven't read any of the follow-up reports. The way I see it, out of tradition the British are determined to keep a stiff upper lip even if it's detached from the rest of their bodies. (Note that's one of Doc's singular "their"s. +1 for the Doc.) Mark Durie has an article regarding Woolwich killings.
His book is a must read if you want to educate yourself regarding Islam Re: Islamist Threat
I am struggling with how a liberal (in the classical sense) society and government defends itself against this kind of threat. Freedom of religion is a basic principle of our society, yet are we supposed allow to a "religion" with a basic tenet that non-believers must be killed and that it is appropriate to lie in defense of the religion? Can we condemn all practitioners of that religion - or the religion itself - when the vast majority are peaceful? If you can, then what about religious freedom? Further, this is wholly different from a political difference which at some level is addressable by reason and compromise (which while it has it's unsatisfactory effects - witness the erosion of our own liberal society - can be remediated with reason, experience, and political action) because it is not borne from reason but religion. Also, this is not a new phenomena. The battle against Islamists has been a thread for over a thousand years. While the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful, there is a significant minority that follow the violent strains of that religion. It appears to me there may be too many (especially in Europe) to treat them on an individual basis and that something must be done on a much larger scale or whatever vestiges of Western Civilization that still remain will be forever lost. It also occurs to me that that sort of retribution is counter to said principles and in following that path will also destroy our liberal societies. Just a few thoughts... "Freedom of religion is a basic principle of our society"
Another myth that will lead to our own undoing. What cannot be infringed upon is our right to freely associate, nor can Government favor one association over another. We, as individuals, are still responsible for our own actions. Claiming any and every association as a "religion" should not provide some additional protections (license) to act as savages. "While the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful" Only if by "peaceful" you mean "not violent against others". Islam (to those of us of a certain age who recall when observations about any culture/group were allowed) is a rather violent ideology when taken literally, and it seems that it is indeed taken so - at least over the past couple of centuries. As enshrined in our Constitution, the actual tenet is the Federal Govt. can not establish a religion nor prohibit the free exercise of the religion you choose. Everything else has been added since the founding. I agree with you that we can't sanction any behavior because somebody says he's exercising his religion but certainly his religious freedom ends at the point that hiss religious exercise impinges on somebody else.
The percent of Muslims who support violent Islamists I've heard is 10% world wide. For the sake of argument, let's say it's 20%. That probably means somewhere north of 60% are not and the rest aren't sure. Even 10% is significant. I know some very peaceful Muslims so I know they exist (though the part about their sanction to lie to non believers does give me pause). In any event, my question still stands. What is the response that Western Civilization (what is left of it) should give? Intolerance of the Muslims? I think that would do damage to us (who else would we feel free to discriminate against?). At the same time, I don't think that countering individuals is going to be effective enough - especially in Europe. "Were there no men on the street to defend the lad? "
No. Just males. re Were there no men on the street to defend the lad?
Wretch had a great CS Lewis quote at Belmont Club that pertained to this. "And all the time — such is the tragi-comedy of our situation — we continue to clamor for those very qualities we are rendering impossible. You can hardly open a periodical without coming across the statement that what our civilization needs is more “drive”, or dynamism, or self-sacrifice, or “creativity”. In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful." Islam is a religion of terror. It is what they teach and what they believe in. In every country where the muslims have a majority all non-believers are killed, driven out or at best treated worse then 2nd class citizens. There are a couple dozen countries around the world today where Islam is at war with non-Islam. Of course not every muslim is a terrorists or is plottingf to kill you. But unlike every other religion and every other culture even the moderate muslims will not speak up against what is going on, will not move to stop it in countries where non-muslims are oppressed and will not really disagree with the beliefs and actions of terrorists because after all doesn't allah say that non-muslims who will not convert should be killed? It is impossible for a strong muslim culture to coexist with non-muslims. The only viable coexistence with muslims is if they are weak and confined to their backward (12 century) countries where they can behead an occasional infidel and sell 9 year old girls to men for wives. I am sorry to have to say that what we are seeing is the tip of the iceberg and short of a massive attack that bombs muslim countries back into the stone age that world wide war is the only possible result. If they get nuclear weapons they will use them. Israel is ground zero, Europe is the 2nd target and the U.S. is vying with Europe for 2nd place as a target. It will happen unless we realize that WW III has already begun and take it seriously. It is just a natter of time and logistics. I also predict that when a nuclear cloud is rising over Tel Aviv, or Paris or London or New York City that those in the media will still be looking for a way to deny it is Islam and somehow claim it is a few bad people maybe even criminals.
Flouride: Local take is here:
http://maxredline.typepad.com/maxredline/waters/ Fracking: Regardless, I'm sure the administration will find many, many ways to impede and place barnacles on the Wheel of Progress. Secret Donors? They have good and excellent reasons for keeping them secret. Steyn: Government sets parasites to work on the body politic. Jews: The canaries in the coal mines--and the miners pay no attention to them. Or to who/what is killing them. Re: Common Core Literacy Training. Thank you very much for this video. It says it all ! Also, there was a wonderful video in which a psychologist was interviewed regarding the impact of this curriculum on tomorrow's citizens. She can be seen here--this is the best examination and explanation of this evil I have seen. Please do go to the link posted today and then click here for the professional opinion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_652428&feature=iv&src_vid=rGph7QHzmo8&v=DdPz7Eg18jU Nice to see young women thinking well and doing diligent research! "While the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful"
But then again, in the last century the vast majority of Germans, even Nazis, were peaceful to the extent that they didn't personally criss-cross Europe to invade other countries and they didn't actively participate in running the extermination camps. What we're seeing in Europe is a slow-motion World War III. It doesn't involve buzz bombs, but the low tech weapons wielded in this skirmish of civilizations---knives, Korans, high fertility rates---are much more effective. The European "lobsters" are in extremely hot water. They just don't realize it yet. By the time they do, it will be too late. I couldn't agree more with you Coop. It's the same to varying degrees in a growing number of places. Demographics are destiny and it's pretty clear what the direction is at the moment.
One thing we can do here is clarify the 14th Amendment or repeal it. It was designed to grant citizenship to slaves and it did that pretty well. Now it's time has come. |
Tracked: May 26, 10:00
Tracked: May 26, 11:01