AT HOME AND ABROAD, CHAVEZ FLOPPING - BIGTIME

CHAVEZ IS A FLOP:

• FIRST CAME THE SPAT WITH KING JUAN CARLOS.
• THEN CAME DEFEAT AT THE POLLS - WHEN HE TRIED TO RAM THROUGH A RAFT OF CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGES WHICH WOULD HAVE TURNED VENEZUALA INTO HIS OWN PRIVATE SOVIET UNION.
• NOW, FARC HAS THROWN A PIE IN HIS FACE:

IHT: Failure to free hostages a fresh defeat for Chávez

RIO DE JANEIRO: Last week, the Venezuelan president, Hugo Chávez, seemed on the verge of one of his biggest triumphs to date.

Now, amid renewed acrimony with the Colombian leader, Alvaro Uribe, he is staring at his second major political defeat in little more than a month.

Using his credibility as a former rebel leader, Chávez orchestrated a plan to release three hostages being held for years in the jungle by a Colombian guerrilla group, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, known as the FARC.

Bristling with confidence, he assembled his allies in Latin America, including a former Argentine president, Nestor Kirchner, to witness a breakthrough in the decades-old conflict between the Colombian government and the FARC.

The movie director Oliver Stone was part of a multinational group of observers that included diplomats from seven countries. Then on Monday, Chávez's showman moment seemed to turn from history-making success into his latest failure.

For reasons that remain unclear, the FARC refused for four days to give the exact location of the hostages to Venezuelan helicopter pilots. Chávez read a letter from the rebel group late Monday that said the promised security conditions had not been met.

"This is an important defeat for Hugo Chávez's regional agenda to promote his Bolivian revolution and utilize his contacts with armed groups to win political influence," said Román Ortiz, the director of security for the Ideas for Peace Foundation, a Bogotá research institute focused on Colombia's armed conflict.

THE EGOMANIAC MARXIST FLOPPED. I HOPE THAT HOLLYWOOD RED WITH THE BROWN-NOSE, OLIVER STONE, GOT IT ALL ON FILM!

CHAVEZ IS ALSO FLOPPING ON THE HOME-FRONT; BUSINESS WEEK/AP: Venezuelan inflation leads region

Venezuelan inflation soared to 22.5 percent in 2007, the highest official rate in Latin America, the Central Bank said Wednesday. Consumer price increases, Venezuela's highest since 2003, far exceeded the 12 percent annual goal announced at the beginning of 2007 by President Hugo Chavez's government.

• THIS IS WHAT SOCIALISM INEVITABLY DOES: RUINS THE ECONOMY.
• THE SAME THING HAPPENED TO MUGABE, AND WE PREDICTED THAT CHAVEZ WAS GOING TO MUGABE-IZE VENEZUELA.
• WELL, HE'S ON HIS WAY!

BUT THAT'S NOT ALL! NOT ONLY IS CHAVEZ EXPORTING MAYHEM AND IMPORTING INFLATIONS; HE'S EXPORTING ILLEGAL DRUGS TO SPAIN; EL UNIVERSAL: 80 percent of incoming cocaine in Spain goes trough Venezuela

Anti-narcotic intelligence services, such as the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) are on the alert because 80 percent of the cocaine arriving in Spain comes from Venezuela, reported Spanish daily newspaper La Razón on its Monday edition.

The ships loaded with illicit drugs that have been interdicted since 2003 passed through Venezuela.

This is the case of Poseidon, containing three tons of coca; Caridad C, containing an equal amount; White Sands, containing 3,100 kilograms, and most recently, Fabio Gallipolli, which was intercepted in Cape Verde waters.

Its storage area hid almost four tons, noted the newspaper quoting sources from the Spanish Organized Crime Information Center (CICO).

For its part, DEA claimed that the Venezuelan army sells weapons to the Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces (FARC), provides them with forged passports and even escorts air and sea cargos.

The same sources noted that the illicit drugs from Venezuela to Europe and Mexico increased about 500 percent under the government of President Hugo Chávez. According to La Razón, quoting Colombian intelligence sources, there are 117 clandestine airstrips in Venezuela for drug-related activities.

CHAVEZ: NARCO-TERRORIST/JIHADO-PHILIAC AND MARXIST.

THEY DON'T COME ANY WORSE.

QUESTION: IS MAYOR BLOOMBERG : MAYOR GIULIANI :: THE NEXT PRESIDENT : BUSH?

The question is, "Is Rudy to Bloomberg what Bush is to the next president?"

I mean, as mayor, Rudy did ALL the tough lifting and made ALL the tough challenging decisions which led to NYC's INCREDIBLE renaissance: he took on the Mob and cleaned up the fish market, the fruit market, the carting industry. He made the streets safe. He made the subways safe. He cut taxes and that helped grow the city's economy.

Bloomberg has done ZERO tough lifting and made NO CHALLENGING OR TOUGH DECISIONS. The toughest challenge Bloomie took on was fighting for a football stadium in midtown, and HE LOST, BIGTIME!

[I defy ANYONE to name two tough challenging and positive things Bloomberg fought for and won and which improved the quality of life for NY'ers.]

The fact is, city is fine now - EIGHT FREAKIN' YEARS AFTER RUDY because of the hard work Rudy did. Rudy did the tough stuff - and he had to fight the NY Lefties every step of the way!

Okay.

What does this have to do with Bush and the next president?

SIMPLE:

Maybe... maybe MAYBE... people feel that BUSH has done all the tough lifting, made all the hard decisions and fought all the tough fights - and KEPT US SAFE FOR THE SEVEN YEARS SINCE 9/11 - and that now we can opt for a president who is more like Bloomberg: an amiable and able fella who will more or less keep things goin' on the same path, BUT RUFFLE FEWER FEATHERS ALONG THE WAY.

This is what led to Bloomberg's success. He was Rudy-lite. He appeased Sharpton and all the other cranks, charlatans, and leeches - including the unions.

Maybe the electorate is looking for "a kinder and gentler Bush", one they don't expect will have to do any tough stuff - because Bush already has.

I think this is where the electorate is at ... right now.

They have Bush Fatigue, and they think we can afford to take a breather, a pause.

Sure, the Bhutto Assassination makes us uneasy, and increases the appeal of hawks like McCain and Rudy.

But between now and November, the troubled economy may be a whole lot more important to Americans than jihadoterror - or any foreign policy.

After all, Bush will keep us safe ON HIS WATCH - and that extends to 2009.

That's why I think for most Americans, foreign policy may be at best a subtle core issue for 2008 - and our continued success in Iraq will help drive the issue DOWN in importance.

And Americans may be developing a FALSE sense of security on the international scene, and too much anxiety on the domestic economic scene.

This will help the Dems.

We must not let people be lulled into a false sense of security about the threat of global jihad.

If we do, America will elect Obama or Hillary or Edwards - and that would be every bit as bad as re-electing Jimmy Carter.

MS-13 DESECRATES WAR MEMORIAL?

Hat-tip to The Amboy Times, where I found this article (emphases mine) about vandalism of a war memorial in *Connecticut:

Vandals deface Vietnam war memorial

by News Channel 8's Carolee Salerno
Posted Dec. 30, 2007
Updated 9:20 AM

New Haven (WTNH) _ Veterans are outraged that a war memorial in New Haven has been vandalized.

The Vietnam War Memorial at Long Wharf was spray painted with the threatening words "Kill whites MS 13."

Seeing this just crushed the veterans we spoke to. The names on that wall that are covered in paint, are the names of those who fought and died for this country in the Vietnam War. Tonight, police are investigating whether this is the work of a violent street gang, but the veterans we spoke to, say whoever they are, aren't as tough as they might think.

"This irks me. This hurts me deep to my heart," Vietnam Veteran Emery Linton Sr. said.

Linton looked in disgust at the graffiti covering New Haven County's Vietnam War Memorial at Long Wharf.

Linton, who served in the Army, fought in Vietnam from 1969 to 1972. He lost friends there and he says the mess, on a memorial to honor veterans who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country, is a slap in the face.

"People here respect these names. They gave their lives for everything, for the freedoms they have," Linton said.

Whoever did it sprayed "MS-13" all over the place. According to law enforcement, MS 13 is a violent international gang with roots in El Salvador. Members are involved in drug trafficking, weapons trafficking and even human trafficking and their presence is growing in the U-S. Just this summer, police in the Boston area did a big round-up of MS 13 gang members.

That said, New Haven police say there hasn't been any documented MS-13 activity so far in the city. But they are investigating this incident.

"I don't know who would want to do this," said Lori Grenfell, another veteran who is heart broken over the vandalism. "They have the right to say what they want to say. They can thank these guys for that right."

While it's unclear if these are true gang markings, Linton has a message for those responsible. "If it is a gang related thing and if you guys really think you're bad, join the service, get in the action and see what it's really like," Linton said.

It's unclear how much money it will cost to get rid of this paint, but members of the New Haven County Vietnam Veterans Group vow they will have it cleaned up.

In my view, desecrating any memorial to our veterans is one of the lowest kinds of acts, MS-13's doing or not.

*Correction, with a hat-tip to Raven.

British credit-card chief forced to quit after making Shi'ite joke

We read:

"A director of Barclaycard has left the company in disgrace after making a joke deemed offensive to Muslims. Marc Howells, 42, who earned 200,000 pounds a year, was addressing senior executives about the credit card company's quarterly figures when he tried to make them laugh with the quip. Mr Howells said: "The results were like Muslims - some were good, some were Shi'ite."

Some outraged colleagues forced embarrassed laughs while others were stunned into silence, but Mr Howells seemed unaware of causing any offence. His pun was later reported to senior management, however, and after some discussion he left the company last month before any disciplinary process could begin.

Source

Must not upset those delicate little Muslims. But Irish jokes still seem to be OK. I wonder why? The Irish have been known to blow people up too. Could it be that they are white and Christian?

Posted by John Ray

WHO ARE THESE DEMOCRATS?

Post below excerpted from Evan Sayet. See the original for links

Who is Barack Hussein Obama and why is he anything more than an afterthought in the Democrats' quest for power? The answer is, of course, that we have no idea. He hasn't even served one term in the United States Senate, a place where he is one of but one hundred voices. His legislative efforts as the junior Senator with no experience has equally been missing while on the campaign trail his great policy initiatives have been to utter meaningless words like "hope" and "change" always devoid of substance.

Who is Hillary Rodham Clinton that she should be the leading candidate for the Democrats' nomination in the fall? She's a one-term Senator, a carpetbagger who calculated that she would be a "lifelong Yankee fan" so long as she could get a stepping stone to personal power. Her claim to experience -- the fact that she was married to a president -- would be laughable except that, compared to Obama, she IS the more tested and learned. After all, at least she was sometimes within shouting distance when her narcissistic husband would orgasm with an intern. This -- again, one of one hundred, like Scott Baio sitting in on that game show -- junior Senator from a far-leftists East Coast state, has put forth few policy initiatives, seeing the Senate not as a job but as a necessary line on the resume before instantly jumping into the Presidential sweepstakes.

Who is John Edwards? He's a one-term Senator -- one in a hundred bodies to hide amongst as he accomplished nothing -- who began running for President in 2002 -- two years into his Senate term. His campaign is based on creating hatred for the boogeyman, "the rich," a group that only a very, very few belong to at the level of this man himself (can you say "self-hate"?).

In fact, of the three Democrats given a chance of winning the nomination, not one has served more than a single term, not one hasn't hidden amongst a hundred, as the junior senator from their state, and not one is saying anything of substance.

It's not like the Democrats don't have candidates with executive experience. Bill Richardson was a governor. It's not like they don't have Senators with more than a few years experience, there's the elder "statesman," Joe Biden. Yet these people are way back in the pack -- also rans -- to a bunch of Juniors. Why? Because the more the American people know about a Democrat the more they reject them as duplicitous and damaging. (Ever wonder why Hillary didn't run for Senate from her home state where they know her best?)

Posted by John Ray

MORE PROOF THAT ABBAS AND FATAH SHOULD NOT BE TRUSTED

FROM JIHAD WATCH:

(1) Abbas urges dialogue with Hamas just weeks after US pledges $555 million to strengthen him against jihad group

If you're surprised by this, call me. I've got a very nice deal I can make you on a lovely suspension bridge. "'Peace partner' ready to make nice with Hamas: Weeks after U.S. announced $555 million to bolster Abbas against terror group," by Aaron Klein for WorldNetDaily.com (thanks to Doug):

JERUSALEM – In a major policy speech today, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas urged dialogue with rival Hamas, calling for a "new page" to be started with the terror group.

EVERY PENNY WE GIVE FATAH SUPPORTS JIHADOTERROR.

(2) Fatah intel officer, policeman identified as killers of two Israeli soldiers

"[Ali] Dandis worked as a clerk at the Sharia courts in Hebron. Both are residents of the West Bank city, security officials said. They noted that Friday's attack was not the first time that Palestinian security officials or policemen were involved in terror attacks. Last month, Ido Zoldan was gunned down in the West Bank by Palestinian terrorists that turned out to be members of the PA security forces."

Act of war. Imagine the outrage if Israeli soldiers had killed two Fatah men under the same circumstances; indeed, there is an appalling double standard, but it also underscores the fact that the forces of any legitimate state are expected to conduct themselves with order and discipline. (Then again, it also begs the question: were they following orders?) Is "Palestine," in any form, at any point in time, to be exempt from that expectation? "'Killers were from Fatah, one was Palestinian police'," by Yaakov Katz for the Jerusalem Post:

As first published in The Jerusalem Post on Sunday , one of the terrorists who killed two Israeli hikers on Friday near Hebron is a policeman in the Palestinian National Security Force, and the other is a known Fatah operative and a close associate of the Palestinian Intelligence Service, the Shin Bet (Israel Security Service) revealed Tuesday night.

According to details of the murder of off-duty soldiers and nature enthusiasts David Rubin and Ahikam Amihai, the gunmen, Ali Dandis, 24, and Amar Taha, 26, surrendered on the day of the attack to the Palestinian security forces in Hebron out of fear that they would be caught by the IDF. They also handed over the weapons they captured from the hikers.

THEY SURRENDERED TO ABBAS BECAUSE THEY KNOW HE'LL PROTECT THEM THE WAY ARAFAT DID.

YET BUSH IS PLEDGING ABBAS $500MILLION AND IS GOING TO MEET WITH HIM - HAARTETZ: Olmert, Bush and Abbas to hold three-way summit in J'lem

The leaders of Israel, the Palestinian Authority and the United States are expected to hold a joint meeting during President George W. Bush's visit here next week, in an effort to accelerate negotiations on the conflict's core issues - borders, refugees, and Jerusalem.

Bush will visit Israel and the Palestinian Authority next Wednesday and Thursday as part of a regional tour that will cover seven states in nine days.

The main focus of the president's talks will be the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and the Iranian nuclear program.

THE REAL CORE ISSUE IS THAT THE ARABS WANT TO DESTROY ISRAEL. NEGOTIATIONS WON'T CHANGE THAT.

• BUSH AND CONDI AND THE EU ARE NUTS FOR PLEDGING ONE PENNY TO ABBAS AND FATAH.

• WE'D MIGHT AS WELL BE SENDING MONEY TO HAMAS AND BAKING A CAKE FOR OSAMA.

WE NEED TO CRUSH OUR ENEMIES, NOT APPEASE THEM.

BERNARD LEWIS TURNS OUT TO BE THE WRONG MAN FOR THE JOB

I used to think more highly of Prof. Bernard Lewis, but now, after reading some clearer revelations about him from both Diana West and Andrew Bostom, I realize that Lewis isn't being frank, or seems to be pulling his punches when he discusses the subject of Islamofascism. He seems to think that anti-Semitism in the mideast was brought over from Europe, without even considering that European colonization of the mideast only began several centuries after Islam first showed up in the 7th century.

Nobody who wants to win the war against terror should have to take anything Lewis says at face value.

Update: here's something he told the New York Sun a year and a half ago that I find flawed:

Mr. Lewis said a great deal of material exists - from Arabs, from Persians, and from Turks - that can form the basis for democracies in the region. He quoted from a 1786 letter to the king's court in France from the French ambassador to Istanbul explaining why the Ottoman Empire was slow in making decisions. The ambassador reported that unlike in France, where the king made a decision and that was it, "here the sultan has to consult" and so it "takes time to get things done."

Let me get this straight. The king of France didn't have a council to discuss many issues with? Actually, the problem here is that Lewis is ambiguously referring to king Louis XVI, who together with his queen, Marie Antoinette, ran an absolute dictatorship that led to the French Revolution and the subsequent overthrow of the terrible twosome for their crimes against the people of France. The way in which Lewis cites this, it's as though he were implying that ALL monarchs, whether in France or other parts of Europe, were total autocrats. Not so, and many of them did have councils. Of course, even with a council, there can still be corruption, and many of these political ruling councils, both in Europe AND the middle east, were as bad as the monarchs under whom they worked. This was certainly so even for the Ottoman empire, and whether or not things worked slowly under the Turkish sultan of the time, he and they were still a bad lot. Lewis is really blowing it by looking at all these details in such a superficial way.

And the Jeopardy answer is "Nuking Britain"

IAC caught the following article excerpt from The Sun (UK).

A fanatical Pakistani cleric told The Sun yesterday of his chilling dream to turn the world Muslim – by force if necessary... Qari Hifzur Rehamn, 60, spoke openly of imposing Islamic law’s stoning and beheading on Britain – as Pakistan was rocked by unrest over the assassination of Benazir Bhutto.

He warned: “We want Islamic law for all Pakistan and then the world... We would like to do this by preaching. But if not then we would use force.”

Rehamn, 60... is Imam of the town’s fundamentalist religious school or madrassa, where classes for kids as young as nine include Jihad or Holy War and barbaric punishments... His teachings are frightening enough. But his mosque lies in the shadow of the secret bunker where Pakistan produces nuclear weapons.

And when asked if it would be right to nuke British infidels, he laughed and answered: “Probably.”

I'm glad he could interrupt his giggling to answer the question.

Hat tips: Jawa and Larwyn.

Prerequisite for a Stable Pakistan: Eliminating the Islamists

Andy McCarthy notes that Western elitist wishful thinking that Pakistan can simply hold an election and suddenly achieve a stable democracy will not make it so--unless the Islamists are taken out first:

Then there is the real Pakistan: an enemy of the United States and the West.

The real Pakistan is a breeding ground of Islamic holy war where, for about half the population, the only thing more intolerable than Western democracy is the prospect of a faux democracy led by a woman — indeed, a product of feudal Pakistani privilege and secular Western breeding whose father, President Zulfiquar Ali Bhutto, had been branded as an enemy of Islam by influential Muslim clerics in the early 1970s.

The real Pakistan is a place where the intelligence services are salted with Islamic fundamentalists: jihadist sympathizers who, during the 1980s, steered hundreds of millions in U.S. aid for the anti-Soviet mujahideen to the most anti-Western Afghan fighters — warlords like Gilbuddin Hekmatyar whose Arab allies included bin Laden and Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, the stalwarts of today’s global jihad against America.

The real Pakistan is a place where the military, ineffective and half-hearted though it is in combating Islamic terror, is the thin line between today’s boiling pot and what tomorrow is more likely to be a jihadist nuclear power than a Western-style democracy.

In that real Pakistan, Benazir Bhutto’s murder is not shocking. There, it was a matter of when, not if.

It is the new way of warfare to proclaim that our quarrel is never with the heroic, struggling people of fill-in-the-blank country. No, we, of course, fight only the regime that oppresses them and frustrates their unquestionable desire for freedom and equality.

Pakistan just won’t cooperate with this noble narrative.

Whether we get round to admitting it or not, in Pakistan, our quarrel is with the people. Their struggle, literally, is jihad. For them, freedom would mean institutionalizing the tyranny of Islamic fundamentalism. They are the same people who, only a few weeks ago, tried to kill Benazir Bhutto on what was to be her triumphant return to prominence — the symbol, however dubious, of democracy’s promise. They are the same people who managed to kill her today. Today, no surfeit of Western media depicting angry lawyers railing about Musharraf — as if he were the problem — can camouflage that fact.

In Pakistan, it is the regime that propounds Western values, such as last year’s reform of oppressive, Sharia-based Hudood laws, which made rape virtually impossible to prosecute — a reform enacted despite furious fundamentalist rioting that was, shall we say, less well covered in the Western press. The regime, unreliable and at times infuriating, is our only friend. It is the only segment of Pakistani society capable of confronting militant Islam — though its vigor for doing so is too often sapped by its own share of jihadist sympathizers.

Yet, we’ve spent two months pining about its suppression of democracy — its instinct not further to empower the millions who hate us.

For the United States, the question is whether we learn nothing from repeated, inescapable lessons that placing democratization at the top of our foreign policy priorities is high-order folly.

The transformation from Islamic society to true democracy is a long-term project. It would take decades if it can happen at all. Meanwhile, our obsessive insistence on popular referenda is naturally strengthening — and legitimizing — the people who are popular: the jihadists. Popular elections have not reformed Hamas in Gaza or Hezbollah in Lebanon. Neither will they reform a place where Osama bin Laden wins popular opinion polls and where the would-be reformers are bombed and shot at until they die.

We don’t have the political will to fight the war on terror every place where jihadists work feverishly to kill Americans. And, given the refusal of the richest, most spendthrift government in American history to grow our military to an appropriate war footing, we may not have the resources to do it.

But we should at least stop fooling ourselves. Jihadists are not going to be wished away, rule-of-lawed into submission, or democratized out of existence. If you really want democracy and the rule of law in places like Pakistan, you need to kill the jihadists first. Or they’ll kill you, just like, today, they killed Benazir Bhutto.

Read the whole thing.

JOHN TIERNEY "QUOTES" A TEXT HE HASN'T READ

In an interesting column on weather hysteria, the New Duranty Times's columnist John Tierney predicts that "we" will react to severe weather in the coming year with Chicken-Little hysteria:

But there’s bound to be some weird weather somewhere, and we will react like the sailors in the Book of Jonah. When a storm hit their ship, they didn’t ascribe it to a seasonal weather pattern. They quickly identified the cause (Jonah’s sinfulness) and agreed to an appropriate policy response (throw Jonah overboard).

Today’s interpreters of the weather are what social scientists call availability entrepreneurs: the activists, journalists and publicity-savvy scientists who selectively monitor the globe looking for newsworthy evidence of a new form of sinfulness, burning fossil fuels.

If he means that the MSM will react with predictable hysteria, he's probably right. But he is completely wrong about the Book of Jonah. Go see for yourself. The incidents he describes are covered in just a few lines in the first chapter.

Here they are in the King James Version:

4: But the LORD sent out a great wind into the sea, and there was a mighty tempest in the sea, so that the ship was like to be broken.
5: Then the mariners were afraid, and cried every man unto his god, and cast forth the wares that were in the ship into the sea, to lighten it of them. But Jonah was gone down into the sides of the ship; and he lay, and was fast asleep.
6: So the shipmaster came to him, and said unto him, What meanest thou, O sleeper? arise, call upon thy God, if so be that God will think upon us, that we perish not.
7: And they said every one to his fellow, Come, and let us cast lots, that we may know for whose cause this evil is upon us. So they cast lots, and the lot fell upon Jonah.
8: Then said they unto him, Tell us, we pray thee, for whose cause this evil is upon us; What is thine occupation? and whence comest thou? what is thy country? and of what people art thou?
9: And he said unto them, I am an Hebrew; and I fear the LORD, the God of heaven, which hath made the sea and the dry land.
10: Then were the men exceedingly afraid, and said unto him, Why hast thou done this? For the men knew that he fled from the presence of the LORD, because he had told them.
11: Then said they unto him, What shall we do unto thee, that the sea may be calm unto us? for the sea wrought, and was tempestuous.
12: And he said unto them, Take me up, and cast me forth into the sea; so shall the sea be calm unto you: for I know that for my sake this great tempest is upon you.
13: Nevertheless the men rowed hard to bring it to the land; but they could not: for the sea wrought, and was tempestuous against them.
14: Wherefore they cried unto the LORD, and said, We beseech thee, O LORD, we beseech thee, let us not perish for this man's life, and lay not upon us innocent blood: for thou, O LORD, hast done as it pleased thee.
15: So they took up Jonah, and cast him forth into the sea: and the sea ceased from her raging.

Let's compare Tierney's version with the actual text.

Tierney says:

we will react like the sailors in the Book of Jonah. When a storm hit their ship, they didn’t ascribe it to a seasonal weather pattern. They quickly identified the cause (Jonah’s sinfulness) and agreed to an appropriate policy response (throw Jonah overboard).

The Bible says:

7: And they said every one to his fellow, Come, and let us cast lots, that we may know for whose cause this evil is upon us. So they cast lots, and the lot fell upon Jonah.

They didn't identify the cause as "Jonah's sinfulness;" they identified the cause as having something to do with Jonah.

8: Then said they unto him, Tell us, we pray thee, for whose cause this evil is upon us; What is thine occupation? and whence comest thou? what is thy country? and of what people art thou?
9: And he said unto them, I am an Hebrew; and I fear the LORD, the God of heaven, which hath made the sea and the dry land.
10: Then were the men exceedingly afraid, and said unto him, Why hast thou done this? For the men knew that he fled from the presence of the LORD, because he had told them.

Jonah told them that the storm had come about because "he fled from the presence of the LORD," they didn't identify his "sinfulness." And it was Jonah who told them what must be done:

12: And he said unto them, Take me up, and cast me forth into the sea; so shall the sea be calm unto you: for I know that for my sake this great tempest is upon you.

They resisted him:

13: Nevertheless the men rowed hard to bring it to the land; but they could not: for the sea wrought, and was tempestuous against them.
14: Wherefore they cried unto the LORD, and said, We beseech thee, O LORD, we beseech thee, let us not perish for this man's life, and lay not upon us innocent blood: for thou, O LORD, hast done as it pleased thee.

And it was only with great reluctance that they cast him into the sea.

15: So they took up Jonah, and cast him forth into the sea: and the sea ceased from her raging.

And it worked. Because another thing that Tierney's willful misreading of the text obscures, is that the mariners actually did determine the real cause of the storm, according to the Bible, and they did what Jonah knew needed to be done.

Although Tierney' s overall point is a good one, he muddles it up with a misreading of the text upon which he wishes to base his column.

It's a shame that the basic documents that are the foundation of our civilization are so unknown even to educated people.

ROMNEY FIGHTING BACK... HARD!

HOT AIR HAS THE LINK.

• I THINK THIS IS GRRRRRRRRRREAT!

• DON'T YOU WISH BUSH HAD FOUGHT BACK MORE?

• AGAINST THE PLAME-WILSON CROWD AND ON THE "BUSH LIED" FRONT AND ON SO MUCH ELSE?

• I WANT A PRESIDENT WHO NEVER STOPS FIGHTING FOR WHAT'S RIGHT.

MITT IS IT.

FIRST TEST FOR BUSH IN 2008: JIHADISTS MURDER US DIPLOMAT IN SUDAN

BBC: US diplomat dies in Sudan attack

US Embassy in Khartoum A US diplomat in Sudan has died of his injuries following a shooting in the capital, Khartoum, US officials say.

The diplomat's Sudanese driver was killed on the spot during the attack in the early hours of Tuesday.

Sudan's interior ministry said the embassy vehicle was fired on by gunmen in another car as it drove through a residential area of western Khartoum.

It is not yet clear whether the attack was politically motivated, as crime is fairly high in the city.

The victim was an officer with the US Agency for International Development.

Sudan's interior ministry said he was shot five times in the hand, shoulder and stomach.

The driver, identified as 40-year-old Abdel Rahman Abbas, was killed instantly, it said in a statement.

Investigation launched

In a statement, the US Embassy in Khartoum said: "This afternoon, the American officer succumbed to his injuries and passed away.

"We are working closely with local authorities to investigate the incident."

Sudan's police said they have launched a large-scale operation to try to hunt down the perpetrators.

The shooting happened the day after a joint African Union-United Nations force took over peacekeeping duties in Sudan's war-torn Darfur region.

Anti-Western and anti-US feelings are running high in Sudan, because of Western criticism of Khartoum's policies in Darfur, correspondents say.

I HOPE BUSH GOES KINETIC. SADLY, BECAUSE HE'S A LIBERAL WIMP AT HEART, HE PROBABLY WON'T DO A THING... EXCEPT OFFER CONDOLENCES...

WHILE THE WORLD IS AT WAR, THE SOCIALISTS BAN SMOKING IN CAFES

BBC: Paris and Berlin ban cafe smoking

German smoker Smoking has been banned in bars in the capitals of France and Germany but the laws will not be enforced immediately.

Eight German states, including Berlin, have ushered in 2008 declaring their pubs and restaurants smoke-free.

Almost a third of Germans smoke and the authorities in Berlin have decided not to enforce the restrictions actively for the first six months.

In France, a law forbidding smoking in public places has now been extended to bars, cafes and hotels.

... Restrictions on smoking also came into force in Portugal on Tuesday, but the rules were not as tight as in France or Germany.

Portuguese bars smaller than 100sq m (1,076sq ft) can still opt to allow smoking. Public buildings can still have smoking zones, provided they are clearly signposted and ventilated.

German restaurants and pubs have strongly resisted the bans, not only because of the potential loss of income but partly because of an earlier crackdown on smoking initiated by Adolf Hitler's Nazi regime.

• NO COINCIDENCE THERE: HITLER WAS A SOCIALIST JUST LIKE THE MAYORS PUSHING THIS BAN IN PARIS AND BERLIN.

• IN BERLIN THE MAYOR, KLAUS WOWEREIT, IS GERMANY'S NUMBER ONE SOCIALIST. AND A HOMOSEXUAL.
• IN PARIS IT'S BERTRAND DELANOE - ANOTHER HOMOSEXUAL SOCIALIST, WHO ALSO BUILDS ARTIFICAL BEACHES ON THE SEINE DURING THE SUMMER. (WHILE THE MUSLIM YOUTHS OF PARIS START INTIFADAS!)
  

[ASIDE: TWO NANNYSTATE PINK PINKOS, WHODDTHUNKIT POSSIBLE! COINCIDENCE!?]

• THESE TWO SOCIALISTS - LIKE 90% OF THE LEFT - ARE IN DENIAL ABOUT WW4.

• AND, THEY ARE NANNYSTATERS WHO THINK THE GOVERNMENT HAS THE RIGHT TO TELL YOU HOW TO LIVE.

• IN AUSTRALIA, THE NEW PM - RUDD, A SOCIALIST - IS NOW PUTTING MANDATORY FILTERS ON THE INTERNET THERE - JUST LIKE IN CHINA AND IN SYRIA.

• ALL THESE INFRINGEMENTS ARE - ACCORDING TO THE SOCIALISTS, "FOR THE COMMON GOOD."
• HITLER SAID THIS TOO; HE SAID FOR DAS VOLK.

EVIDENTLY, THE LEFT CAN CHANGE THEIR PITCH, BUT THEY CAN'T CHANGE THEIR TUNE.

• AND MEANWHILE, BETWEEN CREEPING SHARIA IN EUROPE AND GLOBAL JIHAD, THE WEST IS UNDER THREAT.
  
• AND THE LEFT PASSES SMOKING BANS AND CALL FOR MULTICULTURALISM AND ACCOMMODATION.
• WHICH IS FANCY LEFTIST JARGON FOR DHIMMITUDE AND SURRENDER.
  

WHICH IS WHY I HAVE ALWAYS SAID, TO DEFEAT THE JIHADISTS WE MUST FIRST DEFEAT THE LEFTISTS.

Why Fred? UPDATED: AND WHY NOT FRED!

Post below excerpted from BeldarBlog.

On every issue I care deeply about, Fred Thompson is a genuine, thoughtful conservative - without any major exceptions or doubtful areas that I have to forgive or ignore. And in the simplest possible words: I trust him because he's demonstrated that he has a real political spine.

Fred's my "Goldilocks candidate": On national defense and foreign policy generally, on taxes (and, in particular, income tax reform), on spending, on judicial appointments, on immigration, on increasing the size and capacities of the military, and on a host of other issues, he's "Just Right." And not only do his present views and positions match my own, but they've been consistent views throughout his career, so I don't have to worry that he'll be easily talked out of them through some rationalization in the name of "expediency."

Ironically, Thompson's political spine has been most evident in some of the very same episodes that his detractors will try to spin as grounds for conservative alarm. As a senator, Thompson cast lonely, politically unpopular votes grounded on a genuine understanding of and reverence for federalism, for example, that his political opponents have characterized as being "anti-tort reform." I could write for pages about all that, but let me boil it down to a sentence: Fred Thompson has far more in common with John Roberts (for whose SCOTUS confirmation he served as sherpa) than with John Edwards, and if you can't tell the difference, you ought not be voting in the GOP primaries anyway.

Even my biggest reservation about Thompson actually reflects well on his political spine: If simply getting elected and staying atop the polls were what Fred Thompson were all about, he'd be a much better candidate, but ultimately a much worse president. For better or worse, he's running his campaign the way he believes it should be run - meaning he wasn't stampeded into an early start, and there are definite limits to the indignities that he'll willingly suffer for the sake of retail campaigning. His abrupt refusal to participate in the recent "show of hands on global warming" in the televised Iowa debate, for example, was the act of a self-secure grown-up with a serious sense of statesmanship. Fred may be a good old boy, and indeed he's charming as heck, but he's just not a panderer.

Thompson has come a long way from a very humble start, so it's wrong to say that he's unambitious. But he does lack the overweening, compulsive degree of personal ambition that's characteristic of many presidential candidates in both parties. Too much ambition is a bad thing, and Hillary Clinton, in fact, is an example of pathological ambition - a trait she entirely shares with her husband (while utterly lacking his charm). But during the late summer and fall, prompted at least in part by Fred's critics among the pundit elites, I nevertheless wondered if Thompson had "enough" ambition. And indeed, if this were like 2000, in which a single, obvious GOP front-runner was cruising to the nomination with massive funding, and without serious missteps or questions about his candidacy, then the amount of fire in Fred's belly might be inadequate for him to secure the nomination.

But historically, Thompson has been a strong closer, and he's gotten sharper over the course of the fall. The GOP race - as evidenced by the remarkable Huckabee surge (which I am convinced will be followed with a Howard Dean-like collapse) - could not possibly be more wide open. I'm satisfied that Fred has plenty enough ambition to win the nomination in these particular circumstances. And at that point - when he's past the humiliating cattle-call debates and onto a national stage from which tedious retail politics become less key - I'm convinced that Thompson will rise ever more enthusiastically to the challenge, and that he can be at least as enthusiastic and effective a campaigner as Ronald Reagan was in 1976, 1980, and 1984.

Posted by John Ray

RELIAPUNDIT ADDS: THIS IS, MORE OR LESS, FROM THE COMMENT THREAD AT BELDAR:

We were attacked on 9/11/01.

Fred Thompsom left the Senate in 2002 - when every GOP vote in that body mattered.

He abandoned his post - during WAR-TIME, that is after 9/11.

To do what? A TV show.

If he had character he would have stayed in the Senate.

He is unfit to lead this nation during war-time.

FRED IS A NICE CONSERVATIVE CHAP, BUT MITT AND RUDY ARE THE TWO BEST GOP CANDIDATES: THEY HAVE WHAT IT TAKES TO LEAD AND MANAGE THIS NATION DURING WAR-TIME.

Some most interesting statistics -- Muslim Populations in European Cities

Marseilles - 25 percent (200,000 of 800,000)
Malmo - ~25 percent (67,000 of 270,000)
Amsterdam - 24 percent (180,000 of 750,000)
Stockholm - 20 percent (>155,000 of 771,038)
Brussels - ~20 percent (some say 33 percent)
Moscow - 16 percent-20 percent (2 million of 10-12 milllion)
London - 17 percent (1.3 million of 7.5 million)
Luton - 14.6 percent (26,963)
Birmingham 14.3 percent (139,771)
The Hague - 14.2 percent ( 67,896 of 475,580)
Utrecht - 13.2 percent (38,300 of 289,000)
Rotterdam - 13 percent (80,000 of 600,000)
Copenhagen - 12.6 percent (63,000 of 500,000)
Leicester - 11 percent (>30,000 of 280,000)
Aarhus - ~10 percent
Zaan district (Netherlands) - 8.8 percent
Paris - 7.38 percent (155,000 of 2.1 million)
Antwerp- 6.7 percent (>30,000 of >450,000)
Hamburg - 6.4 percent (>110,000 of 1.73 million)
Berlin - 5.9 percent (~200,000 of 3.40 million)

Source

You can't even escape them in Russia, it seems.

Posted by John Ray


RELIAPUNDIT ADDS:

• AND THE DANGEROUS FACT IS THAT THE MUSLIM POPULATION IN EACH OF THESE CITIES IS MOSTLY MADE UP OF PEOPLE WHO ARE COLONIZING FOR ISLAM, AND NOT ASSIMILATING.

• THEY ARE TROJAN HORSES FOR SHARIA.

THE REMEDY IS TO EXPEL OR JAIL ALL PEOPLE WHO ADVOCATE SHARIA - ON THE BASIS OF THE FACT THAT ADVOCATING SHARIA IS SEDITION.

PAKISTAN WILL ACCEPT OUTSIDE EXPERTS TO REVIEW THE BHUTTO ASSASSINATION

NYTIMES: In Reversal, Pakistan Welcomes Outside Help With Inquiry on Bhutto

WASHINGTON — Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States said Monday that his government would welcome outside experts to help investigate the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, reversing Pakistan’s earlier rejection of international help.

But the ambassador, Mahmud Ali Durrani, said his government would not endorse a separate inquiry modeled after one carried out by the United Nations after the assassination of Rafik Hariri, a former Lebanese prime minister, in 2005.

“Pakistan is open to international expertise, international support and international help because it’s in our interests,” Mr. Durrani said in a telephone interview. He added that details of any assistance still needed to be worked out.

• I BELIEVE A CAREFUL REVIEW WILL VINDICATE THE POLICE THEORY: SHE WAS KILLED BY THE BOMB FORCING HER HEAD AGAINST THE VEHICLE, AND NOT THE BULLETS.

• THE EFFORTS BY ANTI-MUSHARRAF/ANTI-AMERICAN FACTIONS TO CREATE EVEN GREATER INSTABILITY IN PAKISTAN - BY CREATING GREATER DISTRUST OF MUSHARRAF - WILL FAIL.

THESE FACTIONS INCLUDE THE PPP, SHARIF, AL QAEDA, AND THE MSM AND THE DEMOCRATS.

IN GAZA, THE NEW YEAR IS JUST LIKE THE LAST: FATAH AND HAMAS KILLING EACH OTHER

BBC:

Three die as Gaza factions clash

Map showing Gaza Three people have been killed and a number wounded as the rival Palestinian factions Fatah and Hamas clashed in the south of the Gaza Strip.

Three people were shot dead at a Fatah rally in the town of Khan Younis, at least one of them a Hamas policeman.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas earlier called for a "new page" to be opened in ties between Fatah and Hamas, which seized control of Gaza in June. However, a Hamas spokesman said Mr Abbas's speech offered nothing new.

YOU KNOW WHAT WOULD BE NEW?

IF THE PALESTINIANS STARTED TO BEHAVE LIE CIVILIZED PEOPLE.

AND IF THEY ADHERED TO OSLO OR THE ROADMAP.

• THEY PREFER THE KORAN AND THE PLO CHARTER.

HEY: YOU REAP WHAT YOU SOW.

UPDATE: IT'S WORSE:

At least five Palestinians were killed and around 40 wounded in armed clashes on Monday between Fatah loyalists and Hamas police in the south of the Islamist-ruled Gaza Strip, medical sources said.

A 12-year-old boy, two other civilians and a member of the Hamas police were killed in exchanges of gunfire during a rally east of the southern Gaza town of Khan Yunis, the sources said.

Hamas police spokesman Islam Shahwan told AFP that the rally marking 43 years since the founding of the secular Fatah movement had turned into a "gunbattle".

• IS THIS BUSH'S FAULT OR ISRAEL'S!? ER UM... NO.

• WHAT DOES THIS SAY ABOUT THE READINESS AND DESIRE OF PALESTINIANS FOR DEMOCRACY AND STATEHOOD!?

IT SAYS THAT IT WOULD BE DEADLY DUMB TO GIVE THEM A STATE.

IS THIS A PICTURE OF MONICA CARRYING BILL'S LOVE-CHILD?

And is she wearing the infamous blue dress?


















Nope. But it's what I imagined she'd look like.

LIVES WEBCAMS OF NYC 'S TIME'S SQUARE AND 2008

HERE.

BIRD FLU SPREADS

MIGHT 2008 BE THE YEAR IT BECOMES A PANDEMIC? MAYBE... HERE'S MORE BAD NEWS: IHT/AP:

Egyptian health officials reported the deaths Monday of two women from bird flu, bringing to 19 the number of the country's fatalities since the lethal H5N1 strain first appeared here last year.

The deaths, along with those of two other women just days ago, bring to four the number of women who died from the strain in a single week.

ORLANDO SENTINEL/AP:

LONDON - An outbreak of bird flu at a poultry farm in eastern England was confirmed Tuesday as H5N1 -- the same virulent strain that has killed scores of people around the world.

Bird flu's return to Britain -- weeks before the Christmas holidays -- is a yet another blow to Britain's farmers, already struggling after livestock herds were hit this year by foot-and-mouth and bluetongue.

Thousands of free-range turkeys, ducks and geese were being slaughtered at a farm in Redgrave in the county of Suffolk, about 80 miles northeast of London.

The source of the outbreak has not been identified but was closely related to the strains found in the Czech Republic and Germany earlier this year, acting Chief Veterinary Officer Fred Landeg said.

THE FACT THAT THIS FLU GOES FROM WILD BIRDS TO DOMESTICATED BIRDS, AND NOW TO HUMANS AND FROM HUMANS TO HUMANS MEANS IT CANNOT BE STOPPED.

IT'S ONLY A MATTER OF WHEN...

HILLARY IS CLUELESS ON PAKISTAN

THOM HOULAHAN VIA POWER LINE:

Sen. Clinton really didn't know that the upcoming elections were for individual seats in Pakistan's parliament. She actually believed that Bhutto, Nawaz and Musharraf would be facing off as individual candidates for leadership of the country in the upcoming elections.

Sen. Clinton didn't know that Nawaz Sharif isn't allowed to run for office in Pakistan because of a felony conviction. She didn't know that President Musharraf won't be on the ballot because he's already been elected.

Sen. Clinton, a candidate for the leadership of the free world, apparently doesn't know the first thing about the country referred to by some as "the most dangerous place on earth."

• HILLARY IS LESS QUALIFIED THAN KERRY WAS AND HE WAS UNFIT TO COMMAND.

• BTW: I HEARD HILLARY SAY THAT SHE WOULD NOT SUPPORT AID TO PAKSITAN.

• ESSENTIALLY SAYING THAT SHE WOULD PULL THE RUG OUT FROM UNDER OUR ALLIES FEET AT A TIME WHEN THEY NEED IT MOST.

SHE HAS NO BRAINS, NO MORALS, AND NO QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE PRESIDENCY.

A Happy New Year song...

Just cuz itz fun (Vaia Nick'n Nora's Nifty Knicknacks):