...it's not dark yet, but it's gettin' there...

December 22, 2005

The M-Word

Mark Steyn:

These days, whenever something goofy turns up on the news, chances are it involves some fellow called Mohammed. A plane flies into the World Trade Center? Mohammed Atta. A gunman shoots up the El Al counter at Los Angeles airport? Hesham Mohamed Hedayet. A sniper starts killing gas-station customers around Washington, DC? John Allen Muhammed. A guy fatally stabs a Dutch movie director? Mohammed Bouyeri. A terrorist slaughters dozens in Bali? Noordin Mohamed. A British subject from Hounslow, West London, self-detonates in a Tel Aviv bar? Asif Mohammed Hanif. A gang rapist preys on the women of Sydney? Mohammed Skaf.

Maybe all these Mohammeds are victims of Australian white racists and American white racists and Dutch white racists and Israeli white racists and Balinese white racists and Beslan schoolgirl white racists. But the eagerness of the Aussie and British and Canadian and European media, week in, week out, to attribute each outbreak of an apparently universal phenomenon to strictly local factors is starting to look pathological. "Violence and racism are bad," but so is self-delusion.

Via Shelly.

For more background on Sydney's problem, see The Rise Of Middle Eastern Crime In Australia.

Via A Western Heart.

Posted by annika, Dec. 22, 2005 | TrackBack (0)
Rubric: annikapunditry


Abdel Rahman al-Rashed, a Saudi journalist in London said this:

“It is a certain fact that not all Muslims are terrorists,” he writes, “but it is equally certain, and exceptionally painful, that almost all terrorists are Muslims. ... We cannot clear our names unless we own up to the shameful fact that terrorism has become an Islamic enterprise; an almost exclusive monopoly, implemented by Muslim men and women.”

Posted by: Jake on Dec. 22, 2005

It's almost comical listening to the Left make excuses for the world's Mohameds--no matter how obvious the culpability while simultaneously being willing to blame GWB and Right for everything from hurricanes to the cost of gas.

Posted by: Blu on Dec. 22, 2005


After almost 50 years of holding the reins of America, the Democratic Party has become the dissident minority. The transformation of the former Blue Dog Democrats of the South to Republicans has changed the fate of the party dramatically.

Literally overnight, The Contract with America and Newt Gingrich changed the course of America. Those who once held ALL the gavels now hold NONE.

Can you blame them for being frustrated? Their ideas, or lack of them, have brought them low, and they refuse to believe that is is they who have caused their own demise, thus, it is necessary to blame someone else.

The only place they can turn is to George W. Bush.

They are desperate; if they lose the elections in 2006 and 2008, they will indeed become the PERMANENT minority.

It is frightening to them, and they assume the stance of desperate losers. But the real losers are the people of America who are harmed by their obstructionism and foul tactics.

Posted by: shelly on Dec. 22, 2005

While not every Italian is a member of the Mafia it is a certainty that every member of the Mafia is an Italian. Wanna bomb Sicily?

You folks are simpletons of the most dangerous type: those that believe their own bullshit and are willing to burn the sacred texts of their culture to kindle the bonfires to incinerate their enemies. What's left when the fire is out?

The extent that we protect the sanctity of our liberties in times of stress is inversely proportional to our understanding and committment to the ideas that make our liberty possible.

Yours is the kind of thinking that has led time and again to the rise to power of the fellows that promise order and timely trains.

Shelly, still wish Judge Luttig was on the short list? The egrigious crimes of this administration will not even be suffered by those professing allegience. Or how about the "breathaking inanity" of GWB's beliefe that ID be taught in schools as just another theory?
He is rapidly becoming the Chuck Wepner of politics.

Your wagon is tied to a team of madmen dashing towad the rim of the canyon and you don't have the sense to even look for the keys to you handcuffs.

Good riddence to bad garbage.

Posted by: Strawman on Dec. 22, 2005

The distinction, though, Strawman is that nobody would argue with your clever little statement about Italians and the mafia. It is self-evident and only a fool would argue differently. In the case of Muslims and terroism, there are many, many fools despite the self evident fact of Abdel Rahman al-Rashed's statement. And as far as I know, the Italians never flew any planes into our buildings---(didn't you know it was those evil Jews who did that?)---nor have they committed themselves to wiping out Western Civilization. So, I feel confident that there is no need to bomb Siciliy. However, if any new intelligence shows up that directly links the Italians to 9-11 then I'm certain that we will have Sicily in our cross-hairs.

God, you're an idiot.

Posted by: Blu on Dec. 22, 2005


"Yours is the kind of thinking that has led time and again to the rise to power of the fellows that promise order and timely trains."

No, your thinking consisting of ignoring threats or refuse to face reality that has caused the wars and millions of deaths.

Europe and FDR ignored the threat of Germany's growing military in the 1930s. They refused to disarm Germany and even refused to arm to act as a deterrent to Germany and Japan. Thus Germany and Japan felt they could easily conquer the world. This failure of a Democrat who thinks exactly as you do resulted in WWII that caused 60 million deaths.

When Clinton took office, Al Qaida was a gleam in Bin Laden's eye. He had initial successes against the US because of Clinton's cowardice and refusal to face reality. 6 attacks later with Clinton still ignoring the threat resulting in Al Qaida becoming a world-wide, well-funded organization.

Because Clinton thought just as you do, Al Qaida has killed thousands and thousands of innocent people around the world.

Democrats are only good at causing millions of people to die.

Posted by: Jake on Dec. 22, 2005


Your gratuitous swipe at me drew no blood whatsoever. I never supported Luttig; I was always for Janice Rogers Brown (still am) and for several others not nominated, The Ediths, Collins, and of course Sam Alito.

This war will not be decided in the courts. All the courts can do is delay and obfuscate the real issues. This war is being fought in the trenches, and we are so fortunate to have real men and women in those trenches, taking out the assholes one at a time. Were it only that you were in one of the trenches getting their skills applied to you on an up close and personal basis.

The ACLU files suits and our boys and girls, the real ones, face the faceless enemy every day, every week, every month, 24/7.

People like you are so concerned with their loss of power since the Southern Democrats finally admitted they were Republicans, that they cannot fathom losing the control of America. You root for us to lose, and rejoice when we have a setback.

Take a good look at yourself, Mac. Do you really want America to win, or do you just want Bush to lose?

I thought so.

In the immortal words of Bart Simpson, "Suck my shorts".

Posted by: shelly on Dec. 22, 2005

Strawman's mental masturbation about civil liberties tends to neglect the fact that civil liberties are meaningless when you are (ahem) dead.

Good post, Annika. More please.

Posted by: Mark on Dec. 23, 2005

Stawdog Must hate that goose stepping monster FDR who suspened civil liberties in WW2 or that Horrible Nazi scumbag Lincoln who did so during the civil war.
Oh, BTW, ID is indeed simply a theory just as easy to prove as it is to disprove, so what pray tell would be so bad about teaching children that there exists such a theory which some people ascribe to?
Only a radical extremist would call it a Breathtaking Inanity.

Posted by: Kyle N on Dec. 23, 2005


Just too dumb for words. Please give me the easy proof for ID?

In six weeks of trial not one of the blowhard ID supporters could answer a single question concerning their attempts to prove ID. Not one experiment was attemted which could have an outcome that would support the "theory". It is not, you dolt, a theory. A theory has a hypothesis that can be put to a test, tested again and again. If the results match with statistical significance then we have some information about how the natural world works. We can then teach that description of the natural world since it will help those seeking the truth get closer tot their goal. Not truth, just a better undestanding of the natural world.

Tell me where ID fits into this picture and rises above "breathless inanity"? And how GWB also rises above this descriprion.


You give me little room to sit when you tell me my options are only Bush loosing and America winning but that is like you give me my options and tell me I'm wrong . Your total vision of this struggle with the radical and hateful elememts of Moslem world, is simplistic and viewed through the yellow tinted lenses of DIck the dick President Chainy's glasses.

I have never denied the struggle and the threat, although I don't preceive it as less pervasive. Yes 911 was a viscous thing, as has been all the bombings around the world over the last decade. Absolutly heinous acts of cowardliness. It is so easy for the RW to impune liberals as those who want AMerica to loose, or aren't supporting our troops, or doing things to give the enemy comfort but alas, it is not true, it is just the shrill debating posture of the side whoses only tool is a hammer and has a view of all problems as nails.

You see SHelly, we disagree over tactics and stratagy and the definition of the enemy not whether or not there is an enemy. We disagree over the powers of the presidency and the value of what America can loose pursuing this enemy. We disagree over the motives of the men who are running this country and their honesty.

You think raising a democracy is worth the new foreigh policy paradigm of "regime change" becoming acceptable. I don't. Was Saddam a bad man, sure. But talk like that is childish. Is killing 30,000 Iraqi's good? Is creating the playing field for a decades long internicine religious struggle in Iraq a good thing? Will a reasonable democratic government eventually be in controll of this country and the right of all the people and women protected? I doubt it. Will the establishment of this government lower the possibility of committed Islamic jihadists attacking America? Of course not. So whats the point?

You think that whether Iraq and Saddam had anything to do with 911 and AL Quiada it was imperative that we retaliate and that Iraq was a good place to do it. I don't. I think it resulted in the deaths of far too many Americans and Iraqi's and was not an oppropriate place to confront the soldiers of Al Quiada, Yes, many Jihadists have joined the fray but SHelly, there are a billion followers of Islam on this planet, we cannot hope to eradicate those willing to become mujahadeem(sp). What we can do is create more or fewer of them by our policies. COnquering Iraq, IMHO, did more harm than good in this regard. True, those who come to Iraq to fight may be killed, and that's not a bad thing, but I think millions more are radicalized and will fight some day some where else. All in all a net gain for their side.

I have a short day today and cannot get into all things we see differently but rest easy fella, I don't wish harm to come to this country or our troops.

Have a nice holiday.

Posted by: Strawman on Dec. 23, 2005

Sure you do. You're just too intellectually dishonest to publicly admit your treason. After the first revolution we ran most of you people out of this country. That's why Canada is so confused.

Posted by: Casca on Dec. 23, 2005

Sorry this doesn't have anything to do with the post, but...Merry Christmas Annika! :) Hope you and yours have a wonderful one!!

Posted by: Amy Bo Bamy on Dec. 23, 2005


why do you bother to put digit to key. (thankfully for you it doesn't take an opposable thumb to type) You are smug, angry and ignorant (I also wouldn't be surprised to discover you have stature issues) and with each key stroke you offer a new iteration. You are an arm-chair warrior who has sent no one packing except other peoples' sons and daughters with ill conceived policy, bad intelligence, and a cowards heart but hey, so has George Bush, our "breathlessly inane" commander. Remember Casca, the man to distrust is the one attempting to convince you of his honesty. The same is true of warriors.

Posted by: Strawman on Dec. 23, 2005


You wrote the following: "A theory has a hypothesis that can be put to a test, tested again and again." In other words, others can take the proposed hypothesis and in testing it can come up with the same (i.e. repeatlable) results.

Please send me a link showing where the hypothesis of evolution has been repeatedly tested time and again in a controlled setting thus proving the theory. I suspect that I'll be waiting...and waiting....and waiting.

I'm not here to say evolution is absolutely not true, but those who believe it as 100% truth would be better served by showing some scientific humility. There are far too many gaps in the theory. While you may not believe in ID, the main intellectual force behind the movement, Phillip Johnson, pokes all sorts of holes in evolutionary theory as do a number of other competent intellectuals.

Posted by: Blu on Dec. 23, 2005


Do you feel that adding a pejorative name to every person with whom you disagree adds anything to the argument?

You don't know a damn thing about any of us, but I know that Casca is a man who has been in harm's way and who has a son who is headed that way. What the Hell have you done that gives you some moral superiority over those of us who have been doing positive things our entire lives?

I for one, am getting tired of your treasonous tripe and this is the last I shall bother responding to your inanity. Why don't you join someother blog where the people think the same as do you, and you can find some reinforcement for your feelings? No one around here really agrees with anything you say, nor do we believe that you have any intellectual honesty whatsoever.

I earnestly impore others who share my thoughts to join me.

To quote one of my heros, Darryl F. Zanuck, "Include me out".

Posted by: shelly on Dec. 23, 2005


It is a fools gambit to suggest that scientists think there are no holes in such a complex theory and that it is 100% complete. That there are no holes in a theory as far reaching and complex as "evolution", is not surprising. It has many facets and covers an entire spectrum of natural science. To poke holes is not hard. ALL evolutionary biologists believe the fossil record and genetic data is incomplete and the effects and influence of various forces are hotly debated. No competent scientist ever says something as dull witted as "100% explanation". Only folks like you who start an aguments by putting words in someones mouth. It is quite another thing after poking a hole to come up with a cogent alternative. ID is not it. As a non scientist judge put it, the arguments for ID were "breathlessly inane" and patently motivated by relious belief. He said that because competent intellectuals as you call them could put NOTHING on the table that made a bit of sense as an alternative. Evlolution is universally accepted as the best explanation availabe and it has the automotive equivalent of a door misfitting by 2 mm on a Benz 600SL as "holes" in it.

If Newton could have recorded the changes to the rate time pieces record at differing velocieties he would have had seen a falacy in his theory of gravity. He would review his data, review his experiments, rethink his premises, devise new experiments, collect new data and on and on.

But, if after all that he settled on the HOG conclusion, he would have been the first to tell you there is no test for god's hand and you are going to believe it on faith or not at all. Blu, the HOG theory may be what you need to sleep at night but don't go calling it science or insisting it be taught to my kids. I am, as are my kids, able to sleep as they wait for the holes to be filled or a new theory devised to explain them. You on the other hand seem to have the intelectual acuity of the Mayan farmer who worshiped the priest who could predict the seasons and told him when to plant his crops. Cave dwellers couldn't explain fire either. If it pleases you that god is the answer to the difficult questions of our existance so be it, just keep it to yourself. Please don't involve my school system with the promulgation of your primative desire for answers to everything instantly. I saw a good tee shit the other day. it said "Fine, I evolved, you didn't"

Posted by: strawman on Dec. 23, 2005

Who said I believed in ID? I didn't. Nor did I suggest that it ought to be taught in science class. (Perhaps, you had me confused with another person.) I just asked for some perspective from those on the other side. By the way, have you even read any of the arguments presented by ID? If you have, then good for you. But, I doubt it. To describe these people as inane is just plain silly. I'd love to you debate Phillip Johnson and demonstrate just how "inane" he is. Unfortunately for you, name-calling doesn't win many points in a debate. Interestingly, despite the arrogance of the evolutionsists, there are very few who are willing to debate Johnson. Reason: he makes them look silly on stage. Now, don't misundertand me, winning a debate doesn't make a person right. (See Kerry v. Bush) It is ironic, though, that the evolutionsists are afraid to stand toe-to-toe with him.

Have you ever noticed that you have a tendency of over-reaching when you debate? And if you feel really threatned you like to bust out the ad hominem fallacy. Please, Strawman, engage in reasoned debate. Writing that I have the "intelectual acuity of the Mayan farmer" is not exactly the sort of argument that's going to persuade anybody. (Although, I am impressed with your willingness to denigrate a "conquered" people.)

Bit of trivia for ya Strawdude, I have two graduate degrees, which I suspect is two more than you have. So, your bitter and presumptuous rants about my intellect amuse me. I've spent years in and around higher education. So, I've come across my share of know-nothing blow-hards, who can do little more than parrot the words and ideas of other, better minds. Generally, these types undermine themselves.

So, keep it up Strawdude.

Posted by: Blu on Dec. 23, 2005


The name calling and death wishes always start with Casca. When people tell me my kind should be dispensed with I get a bit testy. I am sorry I get baited into replying in kind. I do not claim moral superiority but rather I claim that I will kill others with great difficulity and rue the day I must. Men like Casca and yourself seem to me to be far too complacent with the entire process of killing and far too assured that their government knows best. Putting ones self in harms way in the cause of destroying the freedom of others or subverting the will of another nation, or enacting the deceits of our current administration is not going to get me to salute. It does get my sympathies. Whatever Casca did or whatever his son will do they did of their own free will with their eyes if not their brains open. Nobody twisted their arm and no Iraqi seriously threatened America. This was a soverign nation of 15 million peole, run by a dictator no worse than many we have installed or supported elswhere, that did not need to be destroyed to be given "freedom". There were other choices and You wish to ignore them and engage in the purile rhetoric of GWB. What ever happened to patience, planning, intellegence and subversion? Why does America think only with guns? We are men and have an obligation to moral standards, ethical treatment of our fellow man, and decency toward all, be they christian, jew, moslem or other. The political agendas of the lying scum running our country demand that we do something other than follow orders. You may call it treason I call it something else.

I have no illusions as to what people around here think but what is the point of sharing my thoughts with a group that shares my thoughts? Pretty boring, right? I have in fact heard many things around here that have given me food for thought and I argue vociferously against many who find the whole idea of the conflict wth radical Islam an abberation. It is not, as I said to you before, we differ less than you think about this matter.

Posted by: strawman on Dec. 23, 2005

I win a big pot on two pair (Q9) against a guy in Houston named Mohammad--nickname "Mo"--who sucks a sa Hold 'em Player, but supposedly plays a decent Omaha game.

What does this prove? Nothing, really, other than the fact that this guy is one of the biggest Donkey players in the Houston club scene and when he shows up I know I'll be leaving up.

Posted by: Roach on Dec. 23, 2005

That's a damn good thing to know Roach.

Shit Shelly, it's damn sweet of you to defend my honor, but there's no ground to be gained with the likes of straw. Truly, I'm sorry for deceiving him into thinking that anyone reads his bile.

As for the rest of you folks, Merry Christmas, and the blessings of the season to you all.

Posted by: Casca on Dec. 23, 2005

Well, back from work so I will now destroy Strawmans straw arguments.
You see jerk, ID can be proved just as much as it can be disproved, that is to say not at all. In fact ID does not go against the big bang, or evolution or anything else in science it merely says "It seems that an intelligence is as believable as randomness"
Now, I am all for teaching children the TRUTH, and it is the TRUTH, that some people, in fact even some scientists believe this. So, that is what should be taught, that here is the accepted scientific theories, and some people think that randomness is not enough to explain it.
If you disagree with this then YOU are an extremist and a censor.
Furthermore, if you say that ID should not be taught because in your opinion it could NOT be true, then you are essentially saying that there COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE A GOD, and science simply cannot make that claim. Also, you would be in violation of the free excercise clause since that would not be neutral in regard to religion.
See, its all really simple if your mind is not dumbed down with extreme left wing hatred.

Posted by: Kyle N on Dec. 23, 2005

Merry Christmas, Happy Chanukah to all of you.

But I once again implore you, "Include me out" was a wise thought from a great man.

There is a time for everything, and it is time to enjoy our lives and what blessings we have, because thousands of our sons and daughters are on guard in the blowing sands of Iraq eating MRE's tonight so that we can be free from attack by these murderous fanatics.

So join me in a prayer please, for each and every one of them, that they soon return and have the satisfaction of having established a democracy in the center of the most chaotic part of the world that will surely change history for the better.

God Bless all of our fighting men and women, and God Bless George W. Bush, and may God continue to Bless The United States of America.

Posted by: shelly on Dec. 24, 2005


Please spare me. Your post does nothng but prove onece again that those who support ID do so based on their deep seated regligious beliefs and nothing more. Read a little by Stephen J. Gould on this matter. He is far better at explaining the falacies of your construction than I am. Also, read the New Yorker article about the PA trial (about two weeks ago) and you will clearly see the disparity between the reasonable sounding statements of the ID proponents and their real agenda. A blight on our school system is what people like yourself would inflict if your all to reasonable but religious arguments were allowed to prevail.

Posted by: Strawman on Dec. 24, 2005