Thursday, 6 July 2006
You are from the Midwest. You are culturally deprived, so you would not understand it anyway.
Some may reply to the following, that it is an isolated incident and a trivial sum, then rant hysterically about how much the War in Iraq costs and how THAT is destroying the US economy, which funds could be far better used to improve our educational system
I submit that it is, not trivial, but an example of the same type of mentality that now controls our educational system, and is to a large part one of the reasons why, after funding for Public Education has tripled, the results have been a decrease
in the quality and effectiveness of our Public School Systems.
And people wonder why our children cannot seem to learn to read, write and do simple math?
Actually they can
but it seems to be more possible if they are in private schools or home schooled,
If you wonder why that is, read the following and reflect.
The NEA has been more patronizing than patron to the towns and villages of Middle America. An example: in 1969 NEA grantee George Plimpton, editor of the American Literary Anthology/2, confounded observers by paying $1,500 for a poem by Aram Saroyan consisting of the single misspelled word, "lighght."
When an assistant to an Iowa congressman asked Plimpton what Saroyan's poem meant, the editor replied, "You are from the Midwest. You are culturally deprived, so you would not understand it anyway."(54) We are subsidizing superciliousness; taxpayers are mulcted and then mocked, and if they complain, it is "good old-fashioned American small town hysteria,"(55) in one NEA staffer's phrase.
PS this brilliant work of Art also received a $750 Grant from the National Endowment for the Arts.
I am going to use the NEA website as a source for that claim.
Aram Saroyan's seven-letter poem - lighght - for which a federally funded effort indirectly paid $750 - was among those selected for the anthology.
Originally I meant to use "Why Johnny Can't Read" as a title for this, but the quote I ended up using illustrates the demarcation between Red State Flyover Land and Blue State Beltway arrogance so much more effectively.
"Share the link lovin Thursday and Happy Birthday Ziggy!" at Liberal Common Sense
Bacon Break ? Midweek Water Balloon Fest OTB at TMH's Bacon Bits
Please Bear With Me at Sed Vitae
Dear God, Strike me blind. Thanks! Plus Open Trackback Thursday at Mental Rhinorrhea
Open Trackback Time at customerservant.com
Another OTA Weekend at The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns
THE LETTER OF SOLIDARITY WITH ORIANA FALLACI
I signed this petition at the 1800 level, as I write this there are : 2640 Signatures.
That IMO is rather pathetic, If you agree with the philisophy as stated. Sign and PASS IT ON.
If you only sign to have your name on the same petition as LECH WAŁĘSA?
do it for that reason.
THE LETTER OF SOLIDARITY WITH ORIANA FALLACI
Judge Armando Grasso of Bergamo acknowledged a suit against Oriana Fallaci filed by the president of Muslim Union of Italy. On June 6th the trial against a journalist and a publicist over insult of Islam by statements made in her book "The force of reason" will start. We want to express our concern about the decision made by the judge of Bergamo, since such practices can lead to restrictions of freedom of speech in the realm of European democracy with human rights being its largest achievement.
We believe that freedom of speech is a universal value and should not fall within political, cultural or religious interests. Oriana Fallaci has been fighting for the freedom of expression in her work as a journalist throughout her whole life. As we intend to protect the freedom of speech we want to express our solidarity with Oriana Fallaci. Being aware of contentiousness of her latest statements, we still stand against the trial which is infringing the freedom of expression.
So far, the letter was signed by: KS. ADAM BONIECKI, ZBIGNIEW BUJAK, PROF. JANUSZ DEGLER, RED. KAMIL DURCZOK, WŁADYSŁAW FRASYNIUK, PROF. BRONISŁAW GEREMEK, PROF. MARIA JANION, RED. KATARZYNA KOLENDA-ZALESKA, BOGDAN LIS, PROF. STEFAN MELLER, PRIME MINISTER TADEUSZ MAZOWIECKI, ADAM MICHNIK, PROF. JAN MIODEK, RED. PIOTR NAJSZTUB, JANUSZ ONYSZKIEWICZ PH.D., RED. JUSTYNA POCHANKE, PROF. ADAM ROTFELD, PROF. BARBARA SKARGA, PROF. MAGDALENA SRODA, PRESIDENT LECH WAŁĘSA.
If you are serious? You may want to buy both of Fallaci's latest books, read them and pass them on as well.
I did.The Force of Reason
and The Rage and The Pride
Wednesday, 5 July 2006
Why Does Treason Never Prosper?
Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason? Why if it prosper, none dare call it treason.Ovid John Harington
They say that Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results. The Democratic Party is stuck in a temporal loop it seems doing the same thing over and over again, expecting the same results long after their time has passed,.
But do not
impugn their Patriotism!
Well except for Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks,in a refreshing display of honesty, she revealed that she has not the slightest idea what patriotism is, does not understand why anyone one values it and has none herself.
Lead singer, Natalie Maines recently said, ?The entire country may disagree with me, but I don?t understand the necessity for patriotism. Why do you have to be patriotic? About what? This is our land? Why? You can like where you live and like your life, but as for loving the whole country?I don?t see why people care about patriotism.?
It is a Sign of the Times that our language fails. We are witnessing today actions which do not fit the traditional definition of Treason.
In law, treason is the crime of disloyalty to one's nation or state. A person who betrays the nation of their citizenship and/or reneges on an oath of loyalty and in some way willfully cooperates with an enemy, is considered to be a traitor. Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as: "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aided or involved by such an endeavor
Want the other side to win.
Have a grudge against their own Country.
Are being blackmailed or tricked into betraying their own Country.
Sold out the Country for their own benefit.
Some examples are:
Walter Duranty who received a Pulitzer for his articles covering up Stalin's Genocide, because?
"The deaths of a few tens of millions of peasants are of no consequence when compared with the Future Victory of the Revolution"
Benedict Arnold who felt he was not given his due from his own countrymen, note he was until he betrayed his Country one of the Greatest TRUE Heros of the Revolution.
Lastly all the folks who fell prey to the tricks of the KGB and other foreign intelligence operations.
Or just wanted the money.
Today we have those working feverishly, giving aid and comfort to the enemy, but
in truth the aid and comfort to the enemy is a secondary effect.
They have no interest in the other side winning and except for the fact that the public keeps electing Republican, no real grudge against America.
They are not being blackmailed.
What they are doing is, anything it takes to bring down their political opponents here
no matter how much damage it does to America elsewhere.
It is to be blunt partisan politics of the blackest nature.
They care nothing about the damage they do to America, nor the aid they render to its enemies as long as their actions increase the probability they may regain power.
Since power is money, they are close to my last example of Traitors.
Those who "just wanted the money"
But don't impugn their patriotism, most do not rise to the level of honesty that Natalie Maines exhibits.
And if they win the Presidency, control of Congress,then no matter how much harm they will have done to this Country,
None dare call it Treason.
Russia: What Now
By Peter Zeihan
For the past two weeks, the Kremlin has been issuing a flood of seemingly contradictory statements through officials such as Gazprom CEO Alexei Miller, deputy presidential administration heads Vladislav Surkov and Igor Sechin, Deputy Prime Ministers Dmitry Medvedev and Sergei Ivanov, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and even President Vladimir Putin.
One day, Miller seemed to obliquely threaten European natural gas supplies; the next, Gazprom granted the Ukrainians another three months of exports at less than half European market rates. On another day, Lavrov proposed sharply limiting discussion at the upcoming Group of Eight (G-8) summit in St. Petersburg to preclude topics, such as Chechnya, that the Russians find uncomfortable; this was followed by a statement from Lavrov's office declaring no topic taboo. On another front, Ivanov waxed philosophic about the might of the Russian military and warned of Western encroachment, while Surkov noted that Russia would never modernize without robust and friendly relations with the West. At one point, the Russians could be seen aggressively lobbying for Iran's right to a full civilian nuclear program, and then just as empathically noting their concerns about nuclear proliferation.
These statements and others like them not only seem disjointed -- they are disjointed. These disconnects are the public symptoms of an underlying and systemic problem. Briefly stated, Russia -- after 25 years of the Andropov doctrine -- finds itself in a deepening crisis, with no immediate or effective solutions apparent.
The issues with which Russia grapples are multifaceted -- and they have only grown in scale since they were first recognized by the leaders of Andropov's generation.
Demographically, the country is in terrible shape: The population is growing simultaneously older, smaller and more sickly. The number of Muslims is growing, while the number of ethnic Russians is declining. Nearly all of the economic growth that has occurred since the 1998 financial crisis has stemmed from either an artificially weak currency or rising energy prices, and there are echoes of the Soviet financial overextension after the 1973 and 1981 oil price booms. NATO and the European Union -- once rather distant concerns -- now occupy the entire western horizon, and they are steadily extending their reach into a Ukraine whose future is now in play.
More recently, another set of concerns -- encapsulated in the START treaty -- have cropped up as well. The treaty, which took force in 1991 and obliges the United States and Russia to maintain no more than 6,000 nuclear warheads apiece, expires in 2009, and the United States is not exactly anxious to renew it. Among American defense planners, there is a belief that the vast majority of the Russian nuclear defense program is nearing the end of its reliable lifecycle, and that replacing the entire fleet would be well beyond Russia's financial capacity. From the U.S. point of view, there is no reason to subject itself to a new treaty that would limit U.S. options, particularly when the Russia of today is far less able to support an arms race than the Soviet Union of yesteryear.
With all of that, it is becoming clear to leaders in Moscow that something must be done if Russia is to withstand these external and internal threats. The government is casting about for a strategy, but modern Russian history offers no successful models from which to work.
The Andropov Doctrine
Modern Russian history, of course, dates from before the fall of the Soviet Union -- beginning with Yuri Andropov's rise to power in November 1982. As someone who was in charge of the KGB, in a state where information was tightly compartmentalized, Andropov came into office knowing something that did not become apparent to the rest of the world for years: Not only was the Soviet Union losing the Cold War, but it was dangerously close to economic collapse. The West had long since surpassed the Soviets in every measure that mattered -- from economic output to worker productivity to military reach. In time, Andropov was convinced, Moscow would fall -- barring a massive change in course.
Andropov's plan was to secure money, managerial skills and non-military technologies from the West in order to refashion a more functional Soviet Union. But the Soviets had nothing significant to trade. They did not have the cash, they lacked goods that the West wanted, and Andropov had no intention of trading away Soviet military technology (which, even 15 years after the Cold War ended, still gives its U.S. counterpart a good run for the money). In the end, Andropov knew that the Soviet Union had only one thing the West wanted: geopolitical space. So space was what he gave.
It was what subsequent leaders -- Gorbachev, Yeltsin, and Putin after them -- gave as well. The one common thread uniting Russian leaders over the past quarter-century has been this: the belief that without a fundamental remake, Russia would not survive. And the only way to gain the tools necessary for that remake was to give up influence. Consequently, everything from Cuba to Namibia to Poland to Afghanistan to Vietnam was surrendered, set free or otherwise abandoned -- all in hopes that Russia could buy enough time, technology or cash to make the critical difference.
This was the strategy for nearly 25 years, until the loss of Ukraine in the Orange Revolution
raised the specter of Russian dissolution. The Russians stepped away from the Andropov doctrine, abandoned the implicit bargain within it, reformed the government under the leadership of pragmatists loyal to Putin, and began pushing back against American and Western pressure.
It has not gone altogether well.
While the Russians have hardly lost their talent for confrontation when the need arises, the confrontations they have initiated have been countered. The Russians are attempting to push back against the rise of American influence in their region with any means possible, with the goal of distracting and deflecting American attention. But there is an element of self-restraint as well: The pragmatic leaders
now in power realize full well that if the Kremlin pushes too hard, the very tools they use to preserve their influence will trigger reactions from the United States and others that will only compound the pressure.
In the past seven months, Moscow has temporarily shut off natural gas supplies
in an attempt to force Western European powers to assist Russia in reining in portions of its near-abroad that Moscow viewed as rebellious. The response from the Europeans, however, has been to begin exploring ways of weaning themselves from Russian energy supplies -- something that was never contemplated during Cold War-era Red Army maneuvers. Meanwhile, Moscow has attempted to engage China in an alliance that would counterbalance the United States, and China has taken advantage of this overture to extend its own reach
deep into Central Asia. Meanwhile, the Russians have tried using arms sales and diplomacy to complicate U.S. efforts in the Middle East. However, they have found themselves being used as a negotiation tool by the Iranians, only to be discarded. In sum, Russia's weight does not count for nearly as much as it once did.
Watching the Kremlin these days, one has a sense that there is an intense argument under way among a group of old acquaintances -- all of them fully aware of the circumstances they face. This probably isn't far from the truth. Putin has cobbled the current government together by co-opting factions among the siloviki, reformers and oligarchs who would be beholden to him -- all of whom recognize the strengths and weaknesses of the ideologies of their predecessors.
For the first time in decades, those calling the shots in the Kremlin not only agree on the nature of Russia's problems and are not really arguing amongst themselves, but they also are no longer willing to subject their country to the false comfort of policies driven by ideology, national chauvinism or reformist idealism. This is the most unified and pragmatic government Moscow has known in a generation. But it is a unified and pragmatic government that is grasping at straws.
Russia's leaders all believe that the path the Soviet Union traveled led to failure, and thus they are committed to the logic, rationale and conclusions of the Andropov doctrine. Nevertheless, they also are all realistic and intelligent enough to recognize that this doctrine, too, has failed their country.
And so the Putin government is wrestling with a fundamental question: What now?
With no good options available -- and all of the bad ones having been tried in some manner already -- there is a proliferation of reactive, short-term policies. Everyone who has some authority is experimenting on the margins of policy. Medvedev tinkers with Ukrainian energy policy, while Ivanov rattles the nuclear saber -- and Putin tries to make the two seems like opposite sides of the same coin while preparing for the G-8 talks. Kremlin officials are trying to coordinate, and there is little internal hostility -- but in the end, no one dares push hard on any front for fear of a strong reaction that would only make matters worse. The strategy, or lack thereof, generates immense caution.
Human nature, of course, plays a part. No one wants to be personally responsible for a policy that might result in a national setback; thus, government officials seek full buy-in from their peers. And it is impossible to get full backing from a group of intelligent men who all recognize the history and risks involved. Just because one knows that the long-term penalty of inaction is death does not mean there is no hesitancy about trying experimental cures.
But experimental cures are practically all that is left for Russia. Wielding energy supplies as a weapon will not buy Moscow greater power; that can achieve short-term goals, but only at the cost of long-term influence as customers turn to other solutions. And while a partnership with China is attractive by some measures, the Chinese want Russian energy supplies and military technology without the politico-military baggage that would come with a formal alliance. Moscow retains the capacity to generate endless headaches for Western, and particularly American, policymakers, but the costs of such actions are high and -- even considering the weakness
of the current administration in Washington -- only rarely worth the consequences.
All of this leaves three possibilities for the pragmatists. One is for Putin's team to ignore history and everything they know to be true and play geopolitical Russian roulette. In other words, they can push for confrontation with the West and pray that the counterstrikes are not too horrible. The second is to do nothing -- fearing the consequences of all actions too much to take any -- or continue with the recent trend of rhetorical spasms. Under this "strategy," the Russian government would succumb to the problems foreseen by Andropov a generation ago.
The third possibility is a leadership displacement. Just as Putin displaced Russia's oligarchs, reformers and siloviki because he felt their ideas would not translate into success for Russia, those power groups feel the same way about the Putin government. The option, then, is for one of these groups to somehow displace the current government and attempt to remake Russia yet again. Several caveats apply: It would have to be a group cohesive enough to take and hold power, committed enough to a defining ideology to ignore any deficiencies of that ideology, and either trusted or feared enough by the population to be allowed to wield power.
Russia's oligarchs are neither united nor trusted, and historically have placed self-interest far above national interests. The reformers, while united, are clearly not trusted by the populace as a whole, and the idealism of the group that implemented the disastrous shock therapy in the early 1990s is long gone.
The siloviki, however, are broadly cohesive and populist, and they have not allowed economics or politics to get in the way of their nationalism or ideological opposition to capitalism and the United States. Moreover, they have little fear of using the military club when the natives -- or the neighbors -- get restless.
Assuming Russia does not become paralyzed by fear, it appears destined to return to a model in which the nationalists, military and intelligence apparatuses call the shots -- a sort of Soviet Union with a Russian ethnic base. If this is the case, the only question remaining is: Who will lead the transformation?
With every passing day, Putin seems less fit for the role.
Send questions or comments on this article to firstname.lastname@example.org
Distribution and Reprints
This report may be distributed or republished with attribution to Strategic Forecasting, Inc. at www.stratfor.com
Do you have a friend or acquaintance that would benefit from the consistent actionable intelligence of the FREE STRATFOR Weekly Geopolitical Intelligence Report?
Send them to www.stratfor.com/subscriptions/free-weekly-intelligence-reports.php
to sign up and begin receiving the Stratfor Weekly every Tuesday for FREE!
Monday, 3 July 2006
The Open Trackback Alliance XXXIII
For your listening pleasure while you browse
"Der er et yndigt land" (There Is A Lovely Land)
Words by: Adam Gottlob Oehlenschlager
Music by: Hans Ernst Kr?yer
"Derer et yndigt land" was first performed for a large gathering of Danes in 1844, and became popular quickly with the Danish people. It was adopted later that year by the Danish government as a national anthem, but not the sole national anthem. This anthem is on equal status with "Kong Christian",which is both the national and royal anthem.
When the Danish anthem is usually performed or sung, the first verse is played in its entirety, then it is followed by the last four lines of the last verse. (This is true whether the lyrics are sung or not
Recentlty I have been posting music to Illustrate the Diversity of America, this week I have a different motive to express Solidarity with DENMARK
I maintain my Support of Denmark, and will later today, post links to and my thoughts about a Danish Editorial "We are being pissed upon by Per Nyholm "
I think I shall title my Post, "There is no "But" in "Freedom of Speech".
When I first started upon my journey through the blogverse I created a Statement of Purpose
Now upon reading it, one can realize that I did not hold to every detail of that original statement, but from it's basic premise, I have never swayed, in my belief that the Blogs are in fact the Committees of Correspondence of the Second American Revolution.
And that it is a Revolution of Information, no longer can we afford and allow elite gateways to control what we can see, hear and discuss.
For I believe that those bloggers who find their way, here and in particular from the Blogs associated with Sam.
HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY.
Some of us are more Serious, some of us are more lighthearted and some post the common ordinary things that make one smile and recall that Life without the simple things to treasure is meaningless.
And it is important that all have a platform from which to speak.
As I understand this process you can link to this post and trackback to this post on ANY subject or post you think important. It is open. I will repeat this every Monday.
The Committees of Correspondence welcomes your intelligent comments. And also welcomes you to join the
OPEN TRACKBACK ALLIANCE
This week I also have shortened my usual introduction for a more inportant message.
In it's struggle for Freedom of Speech.
Sign the Petition NOW!
JEG opstille hos Danmark!
44545 Total Signatures 1:12 AM CST 22 June 26, 2006 We can do better pass the word~!
From Agora a call to Support the Manifesto online
by signing another Petition, why not sign both?MANIFESTO: Together facing the new totalitarianism
Created by Mark Jefferson on March 1st, 2006 at 5:42 pm AST
After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, the world now faces a new totalitarian global threat: Islamism.
We, writers, journalists, intellectuals, call for resistance to religious totalitarianism and for the promotion of freedom, equal opportunity and secular values for all. "
Blogs that Trackback to this Post:
Here?s a lil First Amendment message for the ACLU from the Supremes from third world county
Behave Like An Angel, Be A Sex Slave For The Devil from right linx
Y'al come back now, Y'heah? ;-)
Friday, 30 June 2006
Now THESE Are Protests
Nearly 500 anti-government protests in Iran in past month
London, Jun. 28 – There have been some 480 anti-government protests
in Iran since in the Iranian calendar month ending June 21,according to a tally provided to Iran Focus by Iranian dissidents.
Students were the most politically active group in the past month, having organised at least 136 demonstrations, sit-ins, gatherings, and strikes.
Workers took part in some 60 protests.
Among the month’s major protests was a 100,000-strong anti-government rally
by ethnic Azeris in the city of Tabriz against the publication of an insulting cartoon in the official daily Iran.
Subsequently, thousands took part in often violent anti-government demonstrations
in the towns of Orumieh, Zanjan, Marand, Naqadeh and Ardebil. At least nine people were killed by government forces in the course of clashes with the protestors.
Several hundred people were arrested
during a major demonstration by Iranian women on June 12.
There were also several demonstrations by students in four of Tehran’s universities.
Dissidents accuse the government of imposing an atmosphere of repression in Iran in order to terrorise citizens and dissuade them from taking part in protests.
At least five women and two 18-year-olds were executed in Iran in the past month alone.
Now just compare that with my previous post about the Seething Arab and Turkish Street.
Not much to compare is it.
Oh and have you heard anything about the protests in Iran?
Streets of Seething ??
Hat Tip LGF The Arab Street is raging.
Cairo has a population of 16 MILLIONAnd so is the Turkish Street.
CAIRO, Egypt - Several thousand protesters at one of Cairo’s main mosques called Friday for holy war against Israel to help the Palestinians in their conflict with the Jewish state.
More than 3,000 people packed Al-Azhar Mosque, the most prominent institution in the Sunni Arab world, for prayers and a demonstration organized by the Egyptian government’s top rival, the Muslim Brotherhood.
“Rulers of Arab countries, start holy war! God is great!” men shouted, their voices ringing through the rafters of the 1,000-year-old building.
ISTANBUL, Turkey - Thousands of angry Turks burned an Israeli flag Friday and chanted “Murderer Israel, Get out of Palestine!” to protest Israel’s offensive into the Gaza Strip.
Hundreds of women, wearing black chadors or covering their heads with Islamic-style head scarves, carried Palestinian flags and banners which read: “Israel is burning Palestine.”
Police said about 5,000 people participated in the protest outside Istanbul’s Bayazid Mosque.
Istanbul has a population of 11.3 MILLION
Can someone tell me what's wrong with this picture and WHERE
the phrase "Strets are seething" comes from?
Because to me it looks more like the Arab and Turkish Streets yawned.
To compare it with the City I live in, if there were a demonstration in front of City Hall of about 50 people, I don't think the local paper would headline a story, "City Streets Seething".
Besides in that part of the world, how much would it cost to throw up a 3 to 5 thousand person demonstration anyway?
Do these events sound like an outpouring of popular condemnation?
Wednesday, 28 June 2006
The Elephant That Cried
by Dr. Chordate
The herd of elephants walked lazily about the jungle enjoying a fine, warm day. After an excellent lunch of bananas, they all lay down on some soft grass to take naps.
All except one young elephant that did not feel tired enough to sleep. Since he had no one to play with‹all the other young elephants were asleep‹he just wandered around for awhile smelling the flowers, looking into hollow trees, and chasing butterflies. And getting bored.
The young elephant sat down to try to think of something more exciting to do. Suddenly, he had a splendid idea! He would play a funny trick on all the other elephants and get a good laugh.
Quietly, he crept back to where the elephants lay sleeping. Then, in his loudest voice, he cried,
All of the other elephants awoke from their sleep, and with rather amazing speed and agility, jumped high into the snake-infested banana trees where they clung to the branches with all their might. For nothing‹absolutely nothing‹terrifies an elephant like a mouse.
The young elephant laughed and laughed until he thought his belly would split open. He rolled on the ground holding his sides and gasping for breath.
When the other elephants finally saw that the young elephant had tricked them‹for there was no mouse‹they climbed down from the banana trees. Since elephants are rather friendly creatures, they soon forgave the young elephant. They they decided to go down to the river for a drink of water.
The young elephant followed them, congratulating himself on his clever trick. So proud of himself he was that he began to look for another chance to play the same trick.
When all the other elephants had lined up on the bank of the river drinking water, the young elephant came up behind them, and, in his loudest voice, he cried,
Without thinking, all of the elephants jumped into the crocodile-infested river, crouching down low in the water so that only the tips of their trunks showed and they could still breathe. For nothing‹absolutely nothing‹terrifies an elephant like a mouse.
The young elephant laughed and laughed until he thought his belly would split open. He rolled on the ground holding his sides and gasping for breath.
At last the other elephants stuck their heads out of the water and saw that the young elephant had tricked them again. For there was no mouse. They blew the water out of their trunks and climbed out of the river. And since elephants are rather friendly and good-natured creatures, they soon forgave the young elephant. Then they decided to go back into the jungle to look for more bananas to eat.
The young elephant followed them. He had never had so much fun in his life, and he looked for another chance to play the same trick.
Suddenly, the young elephant heard a noise behind him. When he turned to look at what made the noise, what did he see?
A real mouse!
The young elephant ran to catch up with the others.
he cried in his loudest voice.
But this time the other elephants did not jump and they did not run. ?He is just trying to trick us again,? they said among themselves. ?But we will not fall for that trick this time.?
?No, it is a real mouse!?
cried the young elephant.
?It really is a mouse this time!?
But the other elephants did not believe him. They just went on eating their bananas until . . . more
So what is the real story behind this tale?
I ran across it while mulling over the Hysteria of the Muslim world about their oft repeated World Zionist plot. It seemed to me more like an elephant afraid of a mouse.
There are 1.4 Billion Muslims in the world and 13.3 MILLION Jews?
What's wrong with this picture?
But Dan, you may say, look what is happening in Gaza as we speak. The State of Israel is demolishing the Palestinian State.
There are two words here that count, State. Israel withdrew from Gaza, a Palestinian State was formed and it committed deliberate Acts of War against Israel, and there are consequences for such actions.
Yes it might appear that Israel vastly out powers the Palestinians. But aren't we forgetting Syria who helped the Palestinians, seize, dismember and occupy Lebanon for so many years?
We are also forgetting Iraq's former support and aid for terrorism.
We are forgetting Iran's present support with arms, explosives, etc.
The surrounding Arab Nations have used the Palestinians for over 50 years to rally their own people against a common enemy Israel and divert them from the injustices that they themselves live under.
See the terrified elephant cowering on a stool while the mice runs around and around it.
Some people use the phrase "paper tiger" as an aspersion of disdain, They are not even "paper elephants."
OPERATION USO CARE PACKAGE
This just hit my inbox. Give it some consideration.
OPERATION USO CARE PACKAGE;
Volume 3, Issue 1, January-June 2006
This Independence Day, help support those who protect our freedom. Sponsor a USO Care Package for a service member deployed overseas!
USO Sends 800,000th Care Package to Troops Serving Overseas!
The USO is proud to announce the delivery of the 800,000th USO Care Package, sent overseas in April. Operation USO Care Package continues to thrive thanks to the generous support of corporations, organizations, and the American public. Thousands of USO Care Packages are assembled and delivered every month to our brave men and women serving our country overseas.
The USO would like to extend a special thanks to the following corporate sponsors who have donated products, services, and their time to Operation USO Care Package.
AIM Healthcare Services Inc., AVON, AT&T, BAE Systems North America, Inc., Brown Printing Company, Celestial Seasonings, Columbia River Records, Hollywood Video, LJB Piper, LLC, Reader's Digest, Trail's End, Underwater Kinetics, The USAF Band, Vision IV (Sun Spots), Viking Athletic Booster, WM Wrigley Jr. Co.
Stuffing Party Snippets
Special thanks to individuals from Citibank, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Cisco Systems, Countrywide Financial, and Marriott as well as Mickey Jones, Sherri Saum, James Avery, Brian Littrell, and Leann Tweeden for volunteering at stuffing parties from January through May of 2006. Operation USO Care Package would not be what it is without your support!
Below, over 100 volunteers from Citibank gathered in Dallas, Texas to stuff
more than 5,200 USO Care Packages in February.
Below, Representative Kay Granger (R-TX) joins 100 USO volunteers to stuff almost
2,500 USO Care Packages at a stuffing party on Capitol Hill in March. In addition to
Congressmen and Senators, celebrity guests at this stuffing party included Sherri
Saum, James Avery, Brian Littrell, and Leann Tweeden.
Thanks from the Troops
Operation USO Care Package received the following emails from troops serving overseas...
"My troops and I just received a box of USO Care Packages two days ago
and it's really nice to see support from the states. It's tough over here,
but we really enjoy mail (especially goody bags) from the states. Our
packages had a card saying our packages were sponsored by the 'Big
Show' and I thought, 'Man, those guys are awesome.'"
--379 Expeditionary Communications Squadron
"I have just returned from my R&R leave and I want to "Thank You" for the
superb support your organization gives to us troops. Your smiling faces,
warm greetings, fresh refreshments, and care packages are without a doubt
a genuine sign of the sacrifices your volunteers give to keep the USO in
an active state."
--HHC SUST BDE, 101ST ABN
"Thanks to the USO for the supply care package. As you can see from
the enclosed picture everything comes in handy. We are deployed to Al Dhafra Air Base
in the United Arab Emirates. We are all USAF personnel from the 380th Air
Expeditionary Wing base Fire Dept."
Special Thanks to our 4 Star Sponsors!
Operation USO Care Package
PO BOX 8069
Topeka, Kansas 66608
Tuesday, 27 June 2006
They Really Are Clowns
When I read Michelle Malkin's A BUNCH OF ANTI-WAR CLOWNS
, the sign in one of the photos cracked me up!
Why? Because Pruning hooks are one of the first historical examples of dual use military/civilian technology?
They are Saxon WAR AXES!
To tell you the truth, I would much rather go into battle with a pruning hook, than a spear any day.
Yes, let us beat our spears into something that makes an even better weapon, and if we want to clear some Brush on the side they will work for that too.
Newer | Latest | Older