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

August 03, 2006

Danish Protest Video

Here is the video of the Danish protest rally, which I mentioned in my July 21st post from Copenhagen. Sorry it's only seven seconds long, my CF disk was getting full, but you get the gist of it.

The yellow flag is none other than the flag of Hezbollah, an organization that has killed countless innocent Israelis, a good number of innocent Americans, and wouldn't lose sleep if it killed a few Danes either.

In the foreground you see the edge of a black banner. I forgot what it said, probably something about the Jews. Anyway, I was about to turn around and go into the internet cafe, when the teenager who was holding one end of the banner saw me and asked if I wanted to hold it for a while. I said nej, of course.

Interestingly, among the 100 or so people there, the dude on stage was the only one who appeared muslim. The rest were typical eurotrash hippies, either real young or old Deadhead types.

We generally avoided any political discussions in our interactions with the Danes and Swedes during our trip, and the Scandinavians we met were stereotypically polite so the "war" subject never came up. The only anti-American thing I saw during the ten days was that someone had smashed the front window of the American food store on Gamla Stan in Stockholm. The damage was taped up, and the store remained open.

My aunt and uncle, being Jutlanders, are pro-Danish and therefore pro-DANCON (i.e. Iraq.)

Posted by annika, Aug. 3, 2006 | TrackBack (0)
Rubric: annik-dotes


"...The rest were typical eurotrash hippies, either real young or old Deadhead types."

I'll just never understand the live-for-protest crowd. For all their cries of freedom, they sure know how to choose the most repressive, freedom destroying groups to cheer on.

Posted by: ElMondoHummus on Aug. 3, 2006

They only value their own freedoms, ElMondo, no one else's as evidenced by their perpetual protests of the vigilant defense of others' freedoms. That's why they admire people like Castro, Mao, etc. They lived the dream.

Posted by: Tuning Spork on Aug. 3, 2006

you are an asshole

Posted by: adolf on Aug. 3, 2006

Takes one to know one adolf. My guess is that you know all of them.

Posted by: Casca on Aug. 3, 2006

Don't call me names, Adolf. Prove me wrong.

Posted by: Tuning Spork on Aug. 3, 2006

Prove you wrong, Spork? You're blithering about people who you know nothing about, marching in a protest that has nothing to do with Mao or Castro. Perhaps that's what you're relying upon: the impossibility of proving all those negatives. That doesn't mean you don't come off a jackass, though.

Posted by: John Swansboro on Aug. 4, 2006


The same sort of people who admire Castro and Mao are the same type of people who support semi-humans such as Hamas and Hezz. The great thing about the Left is its willingness to embrace history's great butchers. The European Left is especially amoral and fanatically anti-semtic aside from being totally ignorant of basic economics.

Anyway, go away and play the with kids on Koz. The adults play here.

Posted by: Blu on Aug. 4, 2006

Yes, Blu, and the same sort of people who refer to others as "semi-human" are the same type who enslaved millions on plantations and reservations, and sent millions more to the gas chambers. Very adult of you not to have a clue about such things.

Posted by: John Swansboro on Aug. 4, 2006

Gas chambers? Are you fucking kidding me you obtuse fucking moron. The groups being supported by the ignorant fools in this video are every bit as vile as Hitler and in fact teach their own children the same philosophy described in Mein Kampf. So, yes they are semi-human. Civilized, fully-human people, don't teach their children to hate and to spend their pathetic, nasty, brutish lives committed to "cleansing" the planet of one particular group of people. So, with all due respect, fuck off. Go play with your Islamo-Nazis friends and come up with a list about how "the Jews" are destroying the world. You and your ilk are contemptible fools. So, I repeat, go away.

Posted by: Blu on Aug. 4, 2006

Blu, baby,

Cool your jets fella. All he is saying is that Spork and you tend to paint with a very red brush anyone who would dare to parse the differences between the subtle but profound oppression of the PAlestinians by the Jews with the overt and dramatic bomb lobing and parking by Hezz and Hamas. None have clean hands. True some are died in the wool "wipe Israel off the mapers" and others, who in fact might give their lives trying to kill Jews, are not in fact believers that Israel must go. (There are also thousnads of Jews who's mantra is "kill the fucking arabs and get them off our god given land.") They are fighters who have come to the conclusion that violence is the only cure for violence. I don't necessarily agree with their strategy but neither will I confuse them with Stalin or Adolf. TO do this is to condemn the the entire conflict to insolubility and 100 years of killing and mayhem. If you were correct how could so many Israeli's be in favor of a cease fire and an end to the bloodshed?

If civilized fully-human people don't teach their children what are we to do with fundamentalist christians all over america? They teach the jews are going to hell and that they will all be destroyed in the second coming, right? True, they are not shooting Jews at the slurpy dispenser but if someone else was they would not stop them.
Blu, I think you tend to simplify the conflict in the ME to some very basic emotions and teachings that do not do justice to the complexity of the reality. Do you know many Israeli's? Or Palestinians? It does help to talk to them. If the opposition to America's policies and principals was portrayed to the world as the Idaho militias and Facist skin head gangs do you think the picture would be an accurate one? I may be wrong but I think to some degree the ME violence is being run by the equivalent of these folks and the rest of the fighters have different agendas. You, Blu, do not see on a daily basic the 5 satillite networks of the Arab world portraying the conflict with such a anti-western bias. SOme of it is just a matter of how much time is spent on each sides crimes, and how many of whose bodies are depicted in pieces scattered on the street. It can make decent people reach for a gun. Just as you would reach if you thought there was no other answer, and you are a good man, right Blu?

Posted by: Strawman on Aug. 4, 2006

Golly, Blu, you appear to take it rather personally when, by virtue of one act--for I know nothing else about you, and am not prepared to write you off yet as the typical knot-headed winger--your motives are impugned, and you're lumped in with all manner of nastiness. Any yet, with an obliviousness that's quite impressive, you insist on continuing to engage in the same.

Look, I'm going to type this slowly, in hope that it'll sink in: the vast majority of the people at this rally, and others like it across Europe, were not advocating islamo-fascism, nor supporting the destruction of Israel. Hell, I'd wager that the guy--apparently the only guy--holding the Hizb flag has, if anything other than that it's a striking banner, only solidarity with displaced and now bombed-out peoples. One can condemn all the needless carnage of innocent Lebanese, and perceive that this war is ridiculously counter-productive--because it creates more radicalism than it can ever hope to extirpate--without siding with the islamo-fascists, or Mao, or Castro, or whatever it was you were blithering about earlier.

You shit on people so indiscrimately--people you don't know at protests you didn't attend for causes you don't understand--that it's little wonder you shit your pants sometimes in the process. I'd bet you're one of those who deigns to call a Jewish-American who'd protest this folly in Lebanon, anti-semitic and anti-american. Yeah, perhaps I should write you off...but it's too funny to watch you go all wingnut on me.

Posted by: John Swansboro on Aug. 4, 2006

That's people that kill themselves jumping into heards of sheep. A big problem in Queensland.

Posted by: Strawman on Aug. 4, 2006

Oh, and what Strawman said, very well and thoroughly, I might add. The problems in the middle east are difficult enough without creating bogey-men out of those who are not in any way your enemy. Sure, they may disagree with you, and they may even think the american president is a retard, but at the end of the day, they want to live in freedom, not under sharia law or a communistic dictator, and they want as little mayhem as possible, seeing that in this instance it's the course towards one day solving those problems.

Posted by: John Swansboro on Aug. 4, 2006

Blu is absolutely correct. I know not everything is pure black and white but in some instances things are as simple as they seem. Israel bends over backwords to do the honorable thing and fight the fair fight when necessary. I can't remember an instance of a renegade Israeli straping on a bomb and walking into a Palestinian restaraunt or store, even though it happens to Israel time and time again. When territory is given and used against Israel, instead of carpet bombing those folks into history they build a wall and try to contain the problem.

Now Hez uses Lebonese neighborhoods and civilians as sheilds, and instead of aiming at tanks and other Israeli military targets, shoots for innocent citizens. Comparing any of these groups, the PLO, Humas or Hez to Israel is apples to oranges.

These European countries certainly have a demented perspective. (And I suspect most of these cats aren't as utterly stupid as the protesters Annika saw) Once dominant and empirical (no longer politically correct) most are fractions of their former selves, leaving the U.S. and Jewish state as the new menace. Many have been defended by us since WW2 and chose to squander their extra loot on too many Social Programs, thus the endemic brain rot. (Admittedly just a great theory, and have I told you Europe is a wonderful place to visit?)

If Israel ever gets pushed into the sea it will be because not enough people recognize the difference in good and evil. Enough muddling already.

Posted by: Mike C. on Aug. 4, 2006


I know many, many Jews. (And, I exchange posts with you.) I know fewer Arabs. This issue, however, does not come down to race for me. (Remember, I'm a conservative. Liberals are the ones forever caught up with race and putting people into groups.) It is, however, about whose values prevail and whose values one should support. When I read your post, all I see is the typical moral relativism of the Left. It's alway "yeah, but...." Well, I call BS. There is no moral equivalence between the state of Israel and Hamas, Hezz, etc. You may be more articulate than John, but your analysis and amorality regarding this subject are no different. BTW, the comparison of American fundamentalist Christians with Islamic savages is so inane as to deserve no comment. There is no bigger supporter of Israel than American Christians.

John, how many Jews have to be killed; how many rockets must fired into Israel; how many soilders must be kidnapped; how many suicide bombs that kill innocents; how much anti-semitism must be tolerated - how much must Israel put up with before she is allowed to clean out the trash that is Hez/Hamas? It is my hope that every last one these terroists meet his virgins in Paradise. It will be a great day when these people are killed to the last man.

"but at the end of the day, they want to live in freedom, not under sharia law or a communistic dictator, and they want as little mayhem as possible"

What a stunning bit sophistry. John, you are way out your pay grade in this debate. Freedom? What a joke. Your side supported the enemies of freedom for nearly the entire 20th century and continue in the 21st. Rallies such as those in the video only provide aid, comfort, and propoganda tools to the biggest threat to freedom the world currently faces.

Posted by: Blu on Aug. 4, 2006

Mike C,

Not to put too fine a point on it but a jewish fanatic did go go into a famous Mosque and did shoot the place up killing 12 or so people at prayer about 5 years ago. But no, I'm not making moral equivalences just informing. SOunds bad when you say "people at prayer" doesn't it? I could have said Islamists who wish for Israel's demise. Is there an actual difference? One would be the way a paper in Cairo might write it up and the other how Blu would if he worked for the International Herald Tribune. Each reporter would be describing the same event. Each recaptulation would be read in the respective venues of each paper and the readers of each paper would identify the other as biased.

Posted by: Strawman on Aug. 4, 2006

In Israel a person who went into a Mosque and killed innocents would become well-acquainted with a prison. In any number of Islamic countries (and most certainly in are areas controlled by Hiz and Hamas), the man who shot innocent Jews praying would be hailed as a hero....not to put to fine a point on it.

You see, Straw, there is civilization, democracy, and all that good Western stuff and then there is Islamic barbarism. It really is that simple. Now choose a side and stop blabbering about "respective venues" and other such nonsense.

Posted by: Blu on Aug. 4, 2006

"I can't remember an instance of a renegade Israeli straping on a bomb and walking into a Palestinian restaraunt or store, even though it happens to Israel time and time again."

I knew that would get me in trouble with you Straw but the fact is I couldn't recall such an event because it simply doesn't occur on the regular basis it does on the non Israeli side. There's alot of other points I could be called on but I am grasping the big picture, that Israel goes out of their way to try and appease these groups- to no avail.

I will agree about journalism bias and naturally I believe more in the conservative view although trying to understand the other side is a hobby, and somewhat futile it seems. (My brain may be too small)

Posted by: Mike C. on Aug. 5, 2006


I wish it were that easy, but, alas, it is not. My overiding sympathy's, are, of course, with the Jews, but I cannot then excuse all that is done in the name of being the better choice. Sixteen lebanese family members crouching against the poorly reinforced walls of their apartment house do not deserive to die because gunmen in Lebanon are cheered for killing jews and gunmen in Israel go to prison, maybe. There are plenty of wanton acts committed by jewish zelots against Palastinians thay go unpunished, but on the whole you are correct, Israel is a country of laws and decency and must prevail. But you should stop calling those who wish the violence to end, who also precieve Israel as an opressor nation, anti-semites. Mel Gibson is an anti-semite, Louis Farrakand is an anti-semite,Martin Borman was a anti-semite, Charles Lindberg was an anti-semite as was Nixon, Nitche, and many others. John Swansboro is not nor are the 20 somethings that find the carnage unbareable and who may not have your clever view of the larger picture of evil and its goals. They just don't like Israel and its policies. Its politics Blu, not anti-semetism.

Posted by: Strawman on Aug. 5, 2006

This reminds me of the ancient battle at Pelusium where the Egyptians pretty much surrendered instantaneously because the Persians put a plethora of cats on the battlefield and the Egyptians were terrified of killing their gods incarnate.

The punishment for killing a cat, even accidentally, was death in ancient Egyptian law.

For reasons unknown to me, most of Western Civilization has fallen prey to the same superstitious nonsense. Rather than idolizing cats, “civilian” has become the new icon.

All the Islamists have to do is convince the world that Israel and others are targeting the Sacred Civilian. Like the Persians, they will hide behind the cats (civilians) and expect everyone to consider them sacred.

It’s a load of bullshit. There are no sacred cat gods. There are no sacred civilians. If a locality doesn’t want rocket launchers in their schools, hospital parking lots, or daycare centers, then the people should evict them. If the police, military, or anyone else is unwilling or unable to deal with it, then the entire population must be pretty much complicit.

The UN and Lebanese gov't have had 6 years to disarm the goddamn Hezbos along their border. They didn't do shit, so now they better get out of Israel's way.

"because it creates more radicalism than it can ever hope to extirpate"

The Religion of Peace has made it clear to us and the Israelis that "You better not fight back against us, because then we’ll get REALLY mad."

I’m afraid it’s going to take two or three more 9/11-style attacks before the majority of people in the West get their head out of their collective asses and realize that this problem is not going to get better, and it’s never going to go away on its own.

They don’t want us to radicalize them? Bullshit. It’s about time we let them know not to radicalize US.

Posted by: reagan80 on Aug. 5, 2006

Well said, R80. I am so sick of listening to all this "civilian" nonsense. When you allow militants to hide rockets in your house, your schools, and your places of worship, you are no longer a civilian. The issue of not evicting terrorist/barbarians is an epidemic in the Islamic world. They refuse to call each other out. Even Muslims in Western countries are reluctant to say anything negative about the butchery commited in their collective names. And if they do happen be "saddened" by terrorist activities, get ready for the obligatory "but Israel" statement. No, the civilian line is just another excuse used by a people who are too cowardly to go through their own reformation. In the end, they will either fight against Islamo-fascism or they will be casualties war. They have a choice.

Oh, and Straw, read the Left-wing, moonbat blogs that these dipshit 20somethings post on - an overwhelming number are anti-semites. It is amazing that in the 21st century we are still dealing with this crap. And it especially ironic that the same people who will whine and cry about the strawman of racism in this country won't raise their voices about a real case of race-based hate.

Posted by: Blu on Aug. 5, 2006


I'll take a look.

But, both you and Raygun are deeply disturbed individuals. If you think that the civilians who are the shields of the Hez are deserving of what they get because they don't "evict" the fighters and their material. This is really stupid. The Israeli's are having a tough time making headway against this crowd but you think a widow, her mother and 4 kids should evict them or face the consequences. SOmetimes you two are absolutely comical.

Posted by: Strawman on Aug. 6, 2006


Do you really want to create a foreign policy or develop a worldview based on some anecdotal sob story? We are not the "dumb" ones in this debate. Thank God the American people don't trust foreign policy to people like you. Your people wanted to appease Hitler, thought the Communists were just misunderstood, and don't seem to understand the evil of Islamo-fascim. All these things have something in common, Straw: They have to be wiped out and that means killing the bad guys.

Posted by: Blu on Aug. 6, 2006


"My" people were the first to fight Hitler in Spain while your government dithered and listened to people who held rallys at Madison Square Garden with Lindberg and Father Coughlin demanding we not fight the good, noble, white, Germans who only wanted respect and a few properties that were taken from them anyway.

I don't understand Stalin's non-agression pact except to hope it was a delaying tactic that gave the SOviets time to prepare for a war he knew was enevitable. The English just had their heads up their ass.

And, of course, let us not forget it was the Soviet's who actually dealt the Germans the blow from which thay never recovered.

Posted by: Strawman on Aug. 7, 2006


Strawman is referring to the Communist Lincoln Brigade FYI.

He also forgot to mention the part of the Molotov-Ribbentrop deal where Stalin got first dibs on the eastern half of Poland while Hitler got the western half, plus the annexation of other Baltic states.

However, he was right about the Soviets getting ready, before the German invasion, to defeat Hitler....and everyone else in Western Europe. Whether or not Hitler provoked him, Stalin was going to attempt to conquer Europe anyway.

It's also puzzling to me as to why he would praise the Soviets for replacing the giant Fascist douche in Eastern Europe with their own geopolitical turd sandwich for over 40 years.

Posted by: reagan80 on Aug. 7, 2006

Actually, there is plenty of evidence that Stalin was completely surprised by the Nazi invasion, and in fact the Soviets were terribly unprepared for it. They did recover, and the story of how the Russians fought back ineptly at first, and then with overwhelming success is absolutely fascinating.

Posted by: annika on Aug. 7, 2006

You're right, Annika.

I know that they were unprepared initially, but I'm sure you'd agree that the Soviets had their own little Machiavellian scheme in the works to eventually screw over the Germans. It was just that Hitler was in a better position to backstab Stalin first.

Stalin was counting on the Germans being tied up in the Western front for a couple years, so that he could modernize and build-up his forces. He was hoping that the Germans and their enemies would've been caught up in a stalemate, thus weakening both sides.

Once Stalin felt ready, he would have tried rolling over the Germans, and if successful, probably wouldn't have stopped until he reached Gibraltar.

Unfortunately for Stalin, he must've purged all of the war planners' that had "blitzkrieg" in their vocabulary.

Posted by: reagan80 on Aug. 7, 2006

Hey Ray,

That's quite a story. I am not usually the one to ask for sources but that view of Stalin is so out there in the ozone that I wish you would tell me whose research it is.

And Ray, to say that you find the state of Europe equally disagreable (swaping Hitler for Stalin) after the war than before convinces me you are brain dead.

Also, Ray i knew members of the Lincoln Brigade and they were fighting facisim not promoting any other agenda. They were brave valiant men, volunteers every one of them, convinced Hitler had to be stopped, long before Americans took their heads out of the sand.

Annie, as I said, I hoped Stalin was stalling for time but I really haven't read that much on it. However the story of their recovery and the relocation of their factories east of the Urals is compelling.

Posted by: Strawman on Aug. 7, 2006

Whatever. You can be an apologist for the Soviets all you want. I just want you to know that Stalin was instrumental in the rise of the Nazis.

By ordering the German Communist Party to not ally with the Social Democrats, he ensured a Nazi electoral victory. They even collaborated with Nazis against their Social Democrat opponents.

Stalin foolishly believed that the Nazis were weak, and that their regime would collapse. After the collapse, the "revolution" would begin, or so he thought.

Not only that, but the Soviets provided the fuel that the Germans used in their tanks during the invasion of France, and in their bombers over London. Stalin was an enabler of the Nazi conquest of Europe to (jack)boot.

Posted by: reagan80 on Aug. 7, 2006

I recommend the classic The 900 Days about the early days of the Eastern Front, and the Seige of Leningrad, by Salisbury. I'm sure it's still in print.

While Stalin may have been caught off guard by Hitler at first, Hitler had no fucking idea what a T-34 or a KV-1 was. He learned though!

Posted by: annika on Aug. 7, 2006


Yes, the 900 Days. I started it and it sat on my bedside table for quite some time. I should pick it up again.

Again, Raygun, what are you quoting? I may be ill informed, but I never heard these allagations. Please inform.

Posted by: Strawman on Aug. 8, 2006

Wikipedia would be a start.

I could draw my conclusions about Stalin's pre-war designs from the first half of this section: ( http://tinyurl.com/nuoks )

For info regarding Stalin's working relationship with the German Communists(KDP), it is in the next-to-last paragraph in this section here.... ( http://tinyurl.com/rxqrd )

...and here in the last paragraph: ( http://tinyurl.com/s5hqh )

You can find the part about Soviet fuel in the second paragraph here: ( http://tinyurl.com/fm5jw )

Posted by: reagan80 on Aug. 8, 2006


I have been perusing some of this material and much of it is dubious. I think you are too ready to rely on what may be faulty scholorship when it supports the wish you have about Stalin's motives and your rabid dislike of Communism. I don't really know but from what I'm reading there is much in dispute.

Conventional theory states that Stalin prepared the Soviet Army for international war because he knew he would have to free Europe of Fascism, and the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact was nothing more than the way to suspend the war with Nazism - exactly for the purpose to have time for preparations that Suvorov's researches exposed.

Posted by: Strawman on Aug. 9, 2006

"....your rabid dislike of Communism."

You nailed it right there. Our paleo-con associate, Chris Roach, reaffirms why: ( http://tinyurl.com/qm7hl )

"His anti-Semitism surely originated from the long years of struggle with Trotsky and his supporters,. What was originally political hate gradually became a feeling of racial hatred against all Jews, without exception." -Svetlana Allilueva, Stalin's daughter

I will never understand why you have such a soft spot for the guy, especially if you're Jewish.

McCarthyism and the execution of the Rosenbergs pale in comparison to the "Doctors' Plot" show trials. Stalin killed more Communist Jews than Roy Cohn. ( http://tinyurl.com/rlhcg )

It was a good thing, for Soviet Jews, that Stalin died when he did. ( http://tinyurl.com/h2nzy )

If Trotsky would've had Google back in the day, I bet he would never have subscribed to Marx's BS in the first place. ( http://tinyurl.com/s7dqc )

Posted by: reagan80 on Aug. 9, 2006


I have no soft spot for Stalin, but you should not confuse communism and the SOviet union with Stalin. Just as the history of germany is not encapsulated in the life and times of Adolf Hitler. And, tanks got, America will not be judged by our current piece of lying sack-o-shit president. Although he is an embarassement of gigantic proportions and reflects badly on the people of this country at least we can say more people voted against him than for and that democracy works in strange and deceitful ways.

Posted by: Strawman on Aug. 9, 2006

".....but you should not confuse communism and the SOviet union with Stalin."

The first link (Roach's) on my previous post should've dispelled that view.

Anyway, I'm not that big of a fan of Bush anymore, but not for the same reasons as you.

You didn't like Clinton because he wasn't liberal enough. Bush, it seems ever more obvious, is the Third Wayer Clinton only pretended to be. He is hardly a conservative on the important issues.

And by "important", I don't mean social and cultural issues. I consider those tertiary priorities.

Posted by: reagan80 on Aug. 9, 2006