HILLARY AND OBAMA ON SHORT LIST TO REPLACE FIDEL

WHY NOT, THEIR POLICIES ARE THE SAME.

Barack and Che

Yaacov Ben Moshe got into a bit of a skirmish with an Obama Houston campaign worker on a blog after this photo went public:

You will want to read it all, particularly the part where he takes apart the campaign worker's lame argument limb by limb. But Yaacov really summed up for me the whole problem with Obama's dalliance with Che as "Socialist Symbolism" (I hope he will forgive me for quoting him liberally here--I just didn't know where to "cut"...):

The quixotic, demented, anti-logical dueling contradictions I identified in Susan’s rant, combined with that craving for change is the very kind abandonment of reason brought Che and Castro to power in Cuba, Hitler in Germany and Lenin in Russia. The swelling ranks of impressionable young people and immature older people who, like this hapless Susan, seem capable of believing the most outrageous calumny about their own country while, at the same time, remaining blind to far more egregious short comings on the part of almost any other country (other than Israel, of course) is ominous in its own right.

It is unsettling that the Obama campaign, notably through his wife Michelle Obama, is pandering to and encouraging the ecstatic urge for change in a recent speech (HT Sister Toldjah) Mrs. Obama said in a recent speech at UCLA, “Barack is the only man who can “heal” this nation and “fix our souls””

My reading of history tells me that when a government undertakes to “fix” peoples souls, as nice as that sounds, it will ultimately mean that if you don’t care to have your soul fixed in that particular way, they are going to wind up doing something very unpleasant (maybe even fatal)to your property, your freedoms and, your life.

As Jeff Jacoby wrote in the Boston Globe:

With Che at his side, Castro toppled Fulgencio Batista in January 1959. "As soon as they had seized power," notes "The Black Book of Communism," a magisterial survey of communist crime in the 20th century, "they began to conduct mass executions inside the two main prisons, La Cabana and Santa Clara." As chief prosecutor of the new regime, Che oversaw the bloodbath, ordering hundreds of executions in the first months of 1959. Those he killed, "The Black Book" records, included "former comrades-in-arms who refused to abandon their democratic beliefs."

Like totalitarians of every stripe, Che didn't scruple at the death of innocents. "Quit the dallying!" he ordered Jose Vilasuso, a conscientious government lawyer who was seeking evidence against several prisoners. "Your job is a very simple one. Judicial evidence is an archaic and secondary bourgeois detail. This is a revolution! We execute from evolutionary conviction."

Che fixed their souls all right- by setting them free from their bodies. This is the thanks that naïve change-seekers can expect from true revolutionaries like Che to whom they find themselves romantically drawn. Let me be clear, I think that Barack and Michelle Obama are more like Susan than they are like Fidel and Che. They are essentially good people who are either too emotionally involved in their desire to advance their joint career through the false promise of socialism or so convinced that they have "a mission" that they find it possible to ignore the moral and intellectual bankruptcy and cultural danger of their ideology.

And then there are the nameless, faceless campaign functionaries, flaks and Public Relations experts- let’s look in detail at what they published as the Obama campaign’s official statement on the Che flags. It has become axiomatic in political campaigns that it is a big mistake, especially in primary elections, to give too accurate a picture of who you are and what you believe in. This statement is a masterpiece of obfuscation and hypocrisy.

The first thing I notice is that it never actually mentions the name "Che Guevara". This is a sure sign that there is something indirect and manipulative going on. We are in for a "Marketing Momnet".

It begins with a reasonably forthright first sentence: “This is a volunteer office that is not in any way controlled by the Obama campaign” a valid disclaimer. Any organization that is growing and changing as rapidly as the Obama campaign has got to have a few loose cannons. There is no way that the core leadership can keep a watch on everything.

The next sentence is not so direct. It is a loosely joined succession of phrases. These phrases, owing to the looseness of the connections, clack and bump against each other leaving us to wonder wha the real bond is between them. I am going to have to take it one fragment at a time.

The first phrase is “We were disappointed to see this picture” My initial reaction is that I find it shocking that all they can muster is “disappointment”. Knowing who Che Guevara was, what he stood for and the bloody murder he committed, if I were Barack Obama I might have felt something more like outrage or horror- but that is just me. How disappointed are they? What kind of disappointment is it?

The next two phrases are even more shocking. “…because it is both offensive to many Cuban-Americans-- and Americans of all backgrounds” So, we see where the word “disappointment “ comes from, it has nothing to do with being repelled by Che’s bloody record or dismayed by his totalitarian association. No, it is nothing so moral and judgmental. They are disappointed because it offensive to Cuban-Americans and others.

Incredibly, they are far more concerned about the “offence” caused than they are about the meaning of the flag as a symbol. Unspoken here, but clearly identifiable are two senses in which the Obama campaign apparently considers giving offense more notable and worse than the moral implications of his presence in the volunteer office. First, of all it giving offense to identifiable voting blocs (Cuban-Americans vote!) is politically counter-productive. When, as the Obama campaign seems to, you believe (we know Mrs. Obama does) that you have the power to “heal” and “save”, engaging in honest and direct debate that might drive votes away is a sin against your sacred (however mistaken) mission.

The other reason “the offense” is a greater concern for them than the substance of the matter is that in the multicultural, morally relative world of the left and the Democrats it is a greater sin to be “insensitive” to the feelings of revolutionaries and malcontents than it is to ignore and enable injustice and even murder.

They go on to say that it the flag does not reflect Obama's views and that "Barack Obama has been very clear in putting forward a Cuba policy that is based on one principle: freedom for the Cuban people" It's funny how bland and non-committal that “freedom for the Cuban people” sounds. What does that mean exactly? To me, it has the same ring of ominous irony of, say, calling a repressive Communist totalitarian state “The People’s Republic of Whateverstan”.

It doesn’t specify what kind of freedom they’re talking about. Presumably, they are trying to be sufficiently general to avoid offending anyone else. Incredibly, this champion of change for America, this campaign that wishes to sell us on wholesale change for America (the nation that needs change the least of all the countries of the world) comes up short on suggesting any particular change for Cuba (an internationally acknowledged economic and social basket case). Cuba needs more of what we have here – in a hurry. Democracy and free markets would be a huge improvement for that country. Does the Obama campaign suggest any thing like that? No, he certainly would not want to offend the people who put him into this fix with that banner of Che, and they are not so much in favor of democracy or free markets. The whole thing is weasely, multicultural, morally relativistic and marketing oriented- not at all statesmanlike.

Edmund Burke warned us about this three hundred years ago. “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” From this one instance, it looks to me that Obama is very much in favor of doing nothing about evil. He can’t bring himself to call it “evil”. As I said above he seems like a very nice and pleasant man. If all the evil in the world were done only by evil people, though, things would be a lot less complicated than they are.

The real danger that the tone and direction of the Obama candidacy brings home to me is that once “Change” becomes the ultimate goal, the strongest, most ruthless candidate of change will often look like the best one and the well-intentioned, emotionally labile dummies of the liberal left (as the example of Susan Rainsberger shows) will be powerless to see what he is up to- let alone stop him. That blood thirsty criminal is not Barack Obama but he might well be hanging a Che Guevara flag up in a "volunteer" office somewhere and waiting for his chance. So, Mr Obama's people have not really addressed the key flag issue at all. They have only given us a flaccid denial of approval- not a categorical condemnation and that makes the Che flag a rather large red flag for me.

When you take this argument, along with the one posted earlier about Obama's very troubling foreign policy team, the recent remarks of his wife, and the fact that he has people pretending to faint at many of his campaign events, I am getting the picture of someone whose lust for power knows no scruples; a man who would do perhaps more damage to my country than even Hillary could. And I never thought I would see that day.

I am really starting to get the "willies" about this guy. Kerry and Gore were buffoons. This guy is all smiles on the outside, but you get the feeling he is a take no prisoners kind of guy on the inside. Or worse, a "take many prisoners" guy. As in 'political'.

Sort of like... Che.

Obama, the anti-Semite?

And you thought that he was just another Marxist; I give you the presumptive nominee of Hamas the Democrat Party:

No one has done a better job than Ed Lasky of exposing the extent to which some of Barack Obama's foreign policy advisers are anti-Israel, not to mention dangerously misguided about the Middle East. Here, Lasky and Robert Baehr discuss various attempts to explain away aspects of this problem. Readers will agree, I think, that these efforts are exceedingly lame.

One Obama adviser who's especially difficult to explain away is Samantha Power, about whom I've written here, here, and here. Power, whose views are virulently anti-Israel and none too warm towards American Jews, is no fringe or passive member of the Obama team. Power left a position at Harvard to work for Obama for a year after his election to the U.S. Senate and is now identified as a "senior foreign policy advisor." She is actively involved in the Obama campaign. And, tellingly, Lasky and Baehr say it was Obama who sought out Power, not the other way around.

Perhaps Obama can explain which of Powers' views (as documented by Lasky and Baehr) make her so attractive to him. Is it her view that the Jewish lobby pushed us into war with Iraq (a view that even Walt and Mearsheimer are no longer willing to defend)? Is it her view of Israelis as war criminals whose tactics the U.S. mimics to its detriment in Iraq? Is it her outrage at the way Israel treated the U.N.'s faux peacekeepers in South Lebanon, the ones who stood by while Hezbollah gained a dominant position and used it to commit aggression against Israel? Perhaps it's simply he willingness to embrace virtually every slander of Israel that can be dredged from the fever swamp, and the hatred of that State this willingness reflects.

Ali Abunimah, a well-known Chicago-based activist for Palestinian causes, says that Obama has apologized to him for not being more up-front in his support for these causes, and has expressed the hope that this will change once the constraints of running for office are out of the way. With key advisers like Power in the wings, Obama looks like a good bet to make due on his audacious hope should Americans be foolish enough to elect him president.

LOTTSA INTEREST IN THE PAKISTAN ELECTIONS FROM OVERSEAS

OVERNIGHT HITS TO THIS BLOG -
MOST TO CHECK OUT NEWS OF MUSHARRAF'S LOSS.




















CLICK TO ENLARGE

UK Daily Express: "GLOBAL WARMING? IT'S THE COLDEST WINTER IN DECADES"

Note that the "Express" story below is about winter ice while the Greenies have been gloating about summer ice. Nonetheless, if all the summer loss is replaced in winter the Greenies have only got theory to hang their hats on.

Also note that -- according to paleoclimate research -- the earth never loses its polar ice, not even during eras of extreme global warming. So the whole Greenie gloat is sensationalism, not science.

Note thirdly that the article below is from the mass media but the truth behind it can be seen from the scientific graphs below -- the first of which shows the extent of the antarctic sea ice right now -- which is SUMMER in the Antarctic. Instead of being minimal, the area of ice is greater now than it has ever been in the period graphed.



(Bigger version of the graph here)

The same thing is even clearer in the Anomaly graph ("anomaly" means "deviation from average"):



(Bigger version of the graph here)

And it's not only the Antarctic. The graph below is of the Arctic anomaly. Look at the tail end of it and you will see that after the big melt of 2007, the ice area has popped back up to normal



(Bigger version of the graph here)

The "Express" article:

New evidence has cast doubt on claims that the world's ice-caps are melting, it emerged last night. Satellite data shows that concerns over the levels of sea ice may have been premature. It was feared that the polar caps were vanishing because of the effects of global warming. But figures from the respected US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show that almost all the "lost" ice has come back. Ice levels which had shrunk from 13million sq km in January 2007 to just four million in October, are almost back to their original levels. Figures show that there is nearly a third more ice in Antarctica than is usual for the time of year.

The data flies in the face of many current thinkers and will be seized on by climate change sceptics who deny that the world is undergoing global warming.

A photograph of polar bears clinging on to a melting iceberg has become one of the most enduring images in the campaign against climate change. It was used by former US Vice President Al Gore during his Inconvenient Truth lectures about mankind's impact on the world. But scientists say the northern hemisphere has endured its coldest winter in decades. They add that snow cover across the area is at its greatest since 1966.

The one exception is Western Europe, which has - until the weekend when temperatures plunged to as low as -10C in some places - been basking in unseasonably warm weather. The UK has reported one of its warmest winters on record. However, vast swathes of the world have suffered chaos because of some of the heaviest snowfalls in decades. Central and southern China, the USA and Canada were hit hard by snowstorms.

Even the Middle East saw snow, with Jerusalem, Damascus, Amman and northern Saudi Arabia reporting the heaviest falls in years and below-zero temperatures. Meanwhile, in Afghanistan snow and freezing weather killed 120 people.

In Britain the balmy February weather came to an abrupt halt at the weekend as temperatures plunged to -10C in central England. Experts believe that this month could end up as one of the coldest Februaries in Britain in the past 10 years.

The freezing night-time conditions look set to stay around -8C until at least the middle of the week. A Met Office spokesman explained: "There has been little or no cloud cover across England and Wales. So there is a capacity for a fair bit of heat to be able to escape at night. "It has been warmer in Scotland but that's because it has been cloudy there. "Until the weekend the temperatures were in the 14s and 15s, and we will see a return to that later this week, though it will look grey and overcast when the clouds return." But he added that there was little chance of snow. He said: "When the rain comes it will get warmer."

Source

Posted by John Ray. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and for a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM

Some more Obama-ology

Hunger For Change Is The Highest Form Of Patriotism?

I am not really sure that what the wife of a presidential candidate says is all that important but as The Obamassiah himself says, words matter. Here's what his wife says:

For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change.

Not once during her adult life has Michele Obama "really" been proud of America? Not of the fact that it won the Cold War and liberated tens of millions from totalitarian rule? What about sending billions to ease the plight of millions of AIDS sufferers in Africa? What about the nation's selflessness in stopping genocide in the Balkans when it had no immediate security interest in the region? What about our ability to produce hundreds of thousands of brave men and women who will risk life and limb to liberate two countries from despotic regimes right out of the Dark Ages? Doesn't the Herculean Tsunami Relief effort generate a flicker of national pride?

The list could go on ad infinitum. But she's proud now because her empty suit of a husband may become the presidential nominee of the Democratic Party by saying 'hope' and `change' more than anyone else? The audacity of stupidity.

Sources here and here

*****************

ELSEWHERE





Obama the Messiah: It was inevitable. There is now a blog following references to Barack Obama as something more than an ordinary politician. See here


The real Barack Obama: "The effects of 'political correctness' are prevalent in the 2008 elections and very well may result in electing a person whose true agenda and even the facts of his childhood are kept from the public because anyone expressing the true nature of his views and life would be subjected to unbearable tirades and attacks upon their own character for bringing these facts to light. To touch on the issue of Barack Obama's Muslim childhood and intended Black agenda as president would subject his opponent, media political pundits, and the general public to shrieks of racism and worse. Truth is on the chopping block -- but so is our country's future"


Tax delusions: "Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both propose to 'turn the economy around' in a novel way -- by raising tax rates on small businesses, working couples and stockholders in general, including retirees. Of course, their plans are also meant to raise revenue for their various hundreds of billions in new spending -- but the move would fall flat on that front, too."


Posted by John Ray. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and for a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM

Overworked Students?

This article in U.S. News & World Report suggests that American high-school students are having a rough time keeping up with academic requirements and suffering stress as a result. Excerpt:

Earning a high school diploma this spring is going to take just a little more effort for students in Maine. This is the first year that all public high schools in the Pine Tree State are requiring seniors to complete a college application to graduate. It's an effort aimed at boosting the number of students who attend two- and four-year colleges in the state with the lowest college degree attainment rate in New England. Already the requirement has caused some anxiety among parents of students with disabilities and other parents who are worried that applying to college could lead their kids away from home.

Another, more immediate worry for these high school students and their families: Is it one task too much? While Maine is the only state to pass such legislation requiring students to apply to college (admittedly, not the most onerous assignment), many high schools across the country are making students complete similar—and often more time-consuming—extracurricular projects in order to get their diploma. These tasks are intended to boost the teenagers' learning experiences, but they also raise the question of how much work students can handle.

Some education consultants do say that such additional requirements, particularly capstone projects at competitive high schools, make it harder for students to distinguish themselves from their peers when applying to selective colleges.... There is also a danger that struggling students will feel overwhelmed by the additional work and drop out.

On the other hand, we have the following, also from U.S. News & World Report, in a different article:

Two million minutes is the estimated time that students spend in high school. It is also the title of a new documentary film that suggests American students squander too much of that time. While their peers in China and India study longer hours to sharpen their math and science skills, top students from one of the best high schools in the U.S. are playing video games and watching Grey's Anatomy during a group study session...

...American teenagers' attitudes toward academics differ sharply from those of their peers in India and China, who seem more motivated and focused. Take, for example, 17-year-old Apoorva Uppala, who attends Saturday tutoring sessions to prepare for her university entrance exams. She wants to become an engineer, which she calls "the safest" profession in India. In Shanghai, Jin Ruizhang, 17, preps for international math tournaments. He is already the top math student at his school and hopes to get into a prestigious university offering an advanced math program.

As an educator of some thirty-five years, I can sum up very quickly what's wrong with educational practices today: (1) the concept of an integrated core curriculum, including basal readers in elementary schools, has been abandoned in favor of worshipping at the copying machine; and (2) educators' jockey to use special projects as public-relations tools and as the means to getting a positive evaluation from an overseeing administrator. Both of those mistakes also lead to disciplinary problems in the classroom, in effect making enemies of students and teachers.

In some of the most prestigious schools all over the United States, students are subjected to all sorts of activities at the expense of learning the three r's. Furthermore, many dedicated high-school students see the basic flaw and opine, "Teachers don't really care about us learning any more." Compounding the problem is the fact that schools are trying to be all things to all people, to meet all the students' educational needs--from the gifted and talent to the mentally retarded.

It never ceases to amaze me that the spartan one-room-schoolhouse education of the 18th and 19th Centuries led to the rise of some of the greatest minds and inventors in history, including various political leaders and inventors such as Thomas A. Edison and Henry Ford. The old McGuffey Readers and the Blue-Backed Speller, plain as they were, worked; effective use of those textbooks, along with many parents' emphasis on their children "getting their lessons," inspired students to go beyond what was taught in the classroom! Back then, without all the bells and whistle and "experts," many students managed to learn what they needed to know--in part, because their self-esteem was not the primary concern of parents and educators.

Is it any wonder, therefore, that the homeschool movement, which harkens back to the idea of a core curriculum emphasizing the three r's, keeps catching on?

FATAH CRUMBLES, AND DISORDER OVER LEBANON

Barry Rubin talks about how Fatah is already falling apart, practically splitting into several different factions, and also about the radical disorder over Lebanon.

A VICTORY FOR CONSERVATISM!!

Andy Harris wins in the Republican primary race in Maryland against the incumbent, U.S. Rep. Wayne Gilchrest who was a liberal/moderate Republican. This is exactly what it is all about. You fight for the more conservative candidate during the primaries so we have good choices come election time.

I urge all of you Conservative Republicans who live in Harris's district in Maryland to not only vote for Harris but to get out there and make your voice heard and campaign for him.

Also, when I did a search on Wayne Gilchrest on this blog, guess what post came up? That says it all about him needing to be defeated in the primary. Every once in awhile we win one!!

AMTRAK INCREASING SECURITY

CNN:

Amtrak passengers will be subjected to random screening of their carry-on bags as part of a new security initiative that will include armed officers and bomb-sniffing dogs patrolling platforms and trains, an Amtrak spokeswoman said Monday.
art.train.jpg

Amtrak passengers board their trains November 21 at South Station in Boston, Massachusetts.

Details of the new effort, which were first reported by The Associated Press, will be announced Tuesday, the spokeswoman, Tracey Connell, said.

Unlike airlines, Amtrak has had few visible changes to security since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, but in recent years trains have been the targets of terrorism.

In 2004, bombings of commuter trains in Madrid, Spain, killed 191 people. A series of bombings in London in 2005, most of them on subway trains, killed 52 people. And security experts have long pointed out the vulnerabilities associated with rail travel and the difficulty in securing trains.

Amtrak chief executive Alex Kummant told AP the new measures are not a response to a "new or different specific threat," but rather, he said, "just the correct step to take."

Amtrak plans to roll out the new "mobile security teams" on the Northeast Corridor between Washington and Boston, Massachusetts, its most heavily used route, before expanding them throughout the country.

'BOUT TIME: LONDON AND ATOCHA WERE TRAIN ATTACKS.

PAKISTAN ELECTION RESULTS BAD FOR MUSHARRAF AND USA

*******UPDATED: SEE BELOW

IHT:

Pakistanis deal election defeat to Musharraf
By Carlotta Gall and Jane Perlez
Tuesday, February 19, 2008

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan: Pakistanis dealt a crushing defeat to President Pervez Musharraf in parliamentary elections Monday, in what government and opposition politicians said was a firm rejection of his policies since 2001 and those of his close ally, the United States.

Almost all the leading figures in the Pakistan Muslim League-Q, the party that has governed for the last five years under Musharraf, lost their seats, including the leader of the party, Chaudhry Shujaat Hussein, the former speaker of parliament, Chaudhry Amir Hussein, and six ministers.

Though official results would not be announced until Tuesday, early returns indicated that the vote would usher in a prime minister from one of the opposition parties, and opened the prospect of a parliament that would move to undo many of Musharraf's policies and that may even try to remove him.

The early edge went to the opposition Pakistan Peoples Party, which seemed to benefit from a strong wave of sympathy in reaction to the assassination of its leader, Benazir Bhutto, eight weeks ago, and may be in a position to form the next government.

AMERICA AND MUSHARRAF HATERS SUSPECTED THERE WOULD BE FRAUD BY MUSHARRAF TO MAKE SURE HE WON. BUT THAT OBVIOUSLY WASN'T THE CASE - ALTHOUGH THERE WAS FRAUD ACCORDING TO SOME:

A leading lawmaker of the co-governing Social Democratic Party reported widespread election fraud in Pakistan, the daily Mitteldeutsche Zeitung newspaper said in a report to hit the newsstands on Tuesday.

"The question is not if the election was manipulated but what the scope of it was," said Sebastian Edathy who had been accredited by the Pakistani government as an election monitor.

"One cannot speak of real democracy. All of it, is far away from being a fair process," the chairman of the Germany-South Asian parliamentary group added.

Edathy pointed out that 20 million additional ballot papers were in circulation, compared to the actual number of eligible voters.

OTHER NEWS SOURCES AND NOTED PAKISTANI PERSONAGES CLAIM THAT THE FRAUD WAS IN FCAT RAMPANT AND ON THE PART OF THE PPP - REDIFF (INDIA): PPP rigged polls massively: Benazir's niece

February 18, 2008 18:50 IST

Slain Pakistani leader Benazir Bhutto's [Images] niece Fatima Bhutto has accused her aunt's party of carrying out massive rigging in some polling stations of Larkana in Sindh province.

Fatima, the daughter of late Mir Murtaza Bhutto � brother of Benazir, forced the closure of voting for around two hours at a polling station in Larkana over the alleged rigging by Pakistan People's Party (PPP).

Waving the voters' list, Fatima claimed that most of the names did not have their national identity card numbers on the list and this was nothing but "plain rigging".

The Sindh province is the stronghold of PPP, which is expected to sweep the polls.

Fatima claimed the PPP was trying to ride on a wave of sympathy following the killing of Benazir and was not following election rules.

• SEEMS TO ME LIKE MUSHARRAF HAS BEEN HAD.
• AND ANTI-USA/ANTI-WEST/PRO-TALIBAN FORCES HAVE WON.

I FEAR THAT, AT BEST, THIS IS GONNA END UP LIKE THE PALESTINIAN ELECTION WHICH BROUGHT HAMAS INTO POWER.

UPDATE: PROOF SHARIF IS BAD HERE. EXCERPT:

Nawaz Sharif tried to impose Islamic law on Pakistan in 1998 while he was prime minister. There were reports that he repeatedly met with Osama Bin Laden. He was charged with corruption and was chased out of Pakistan.

This past year he came back to give it another shot.

UPDATE: PROOF BENAZIR WAS BAD AND HER FAMILY'S PPP IS BAD HERE AND HERE AND HERE. AND HERE. AND HERE. (YOU GET THE IDEA! BTW: SOME OF THESE LINKS ARE TO COMMENTS BY BENAZIR'S NIECE - WHO KNEW HOW CORRUPT HER AUNT WAS!)

PEOPLE WHO CLAIM SHARIF AND THE PPP ARE BENIGN ARE EITHER DUPES, COWARDS OR AGENTS OF THE ISLAMO-THUGS.

More here at POWER LINE.

SHOULD WE QUESTION OBAMA'S PATRIOTISM? YES

HERE'S WHY.

MORE HERE - WITH VIDEO OF MICHELE "I'VE HATED AMERICA MY WHOLE LIFE" OBAMA.

OBAMA ERASED A PAGE FROM HIS WEBSITE WHICH PROVED HE IS UNFIT TO BE COMMANDER IN CHIEF

THE AMERICAN THINKER:

... "Escalation is not the answer", has disappeared from the official Obama website...

As I said more than a month ago, while some have proposed escalating this war by adding thousands of more troops, there is little reason to believe that this will achieve these results either. It's not clear that these troop levels are sustainable for a significant period of time, and according to our commanders on the ground, adding American forces will only relieve the Iraqis from doing more on their own. Moreover, without a coherent strategy or better cooperation from the Iraqis, we would only be putting more of our soldiers in the crossfire of a civil war.

There is no military solution to this war. Our troops can help suppress the violence, but they cannot solve its root causes. And all the troops in the world won't be able to force Shia, Sunni, and Kurd to sit down at a table, resolve their differences, and forge a lasting peace. In fact, adding more troops will only push this political settlement further and further into the future, as it tells the Iraqis that no matter how much of a mess they make, the American military will always be there to clean it up.

That is why I believe we must begin a phased redeployment of American troops to signal to the government and people of Iraq, and others who have a stake in stabilizing the country - that ours is not an open-ended commitment. They must step up. The status quo cannot hold.

• WE KNOW WHY THIS "DISAPPEARED" FROM OBAMA' WEBSITE:
• EVERYTHING OBAMA SAYS IN THIS EXCERPT IS WRONG;
• IN FACT, SO SO SO SO SOOOOOOOO WRONG IT CALLS INTO QUESTION OBAMA'S ABILITY TO MAKE THESE KINDS OF DECISIONS SHOULD HE BE ELECTED.
• THAT'S WHY HE MADE IT DISAPPEAR.
  

BECAUSE PROVES HE IS UNFIT TO BE COMMANDER IN CHIEF.

Clinical psychiatrist: modern liberalism is a mental disorder

Dr. Lyle Rossiter's new book makes a compelling case that liberalism really is a mental disorder.

"Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded... Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave."

While political activists on the other side of the spectrum have made similar observations, Rossiter boasts professional credentials and a life virtually free of activism and links to "the vast right-wing conspiracy."

For more than 35 years he has diagnosed and treated more than 1,500 patients as a board-certified clinical psychiatrist and examined more than 2,700 civil and criminal cases as a board-certified forensic psychiatrist. He received his medical and psychiatric training at the University of Chicago.

Rossiter says the kind of liberalism being displayed by the two major candidates for the Democratic Party presidential nomination can only be understood as a psychological disorder.

"A social scientist who understands human nature will not dismiss the vital roles of free choice, voluntary cooperation and moral integrity – as liberals do," he says. "A political leader who understands human nature will not ignore individual differences in talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic, and then try to impose economic and social equality on the population – as liberals do. And a legislator who understands human nature will not create an environment of rules which over-regulates and over-taxes the nation's citizens, corrupts their character and reduces them to wards of the state – as liberals do."

Dr. Rossiter says the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings of inferiority in the population by:

* creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization;
* satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation;
* augmenting primitive feelings of envy;
* rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him to the will of the government.

"The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind," he says. "When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious."

Amazon: The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness

MOST RECENT MUSLIMS IN THE WEST ARE NOT IMMIGRANTS; THEY'RE COLONISTS

TUNDRA TABLOID OFFERS THE LATEST PROOF:

Moroccan Minister for Moroccan Communities Abroad, Mohammed Ameur, says that his fellow Moroccan nationals in the Netherlands belong to the 17th province of Morocco. I assume that the Moroccan state has 16 provinces, with the Netherlands becoming the 17th.

Moroccan migrants in Europe need to work harder to preserve their language and culture. But his statement has rubbed Dutch politicians the wrong way. It's beginning to take on the appearance of a trend. While European immigration ministers emphasise the need for migrants to integrate - and preferably even assimilate - politicians from their countries of origin underline the need for migrants to preserve their cultural identity.

Last week, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdoğan sparked an outcry when he said that assimilation was no less than a crime against humanity. The Moroccan minister appears to have taken a page from his book.

Classes

In the French language magazine Aujourd'hui le Maroc, Minister Ameur recently revealed Morocco's new migrants policy. "The Moroccan community abroad", he argued, should be regarded as our country's 17th province." The spearhead of the new policy is to ensure that more children of Moroccan descent take classes in Moroccan culture and in Arabic.

Older assimilated Muslims in the West - in the UK, in France, and in Denmark and elsewhere ARE NOT THE PROBLEM. The problem is their radicalized children and the foreign governments and mosque financing radical mosques in the West. These young folks and their handlers DON'T WANT THEM TO ASSIMILATE.

Proving that they've become - for all intents and purposes - a colony, a beachhead for the establishment of Eurabia, a Muslim-dominated Europe.

Many of these kids - these "youths" - these racaille --- THESE ISLAMO-SCUM - are born in the West and recognized as citizens automatically and this means they cannot be deported.

But they should be dealt with very sharply if they are caught undermining secular law and advocating sharia: they should be charged with treason and convicted and jailed for life - AND THEN OFFERED VOLUNTARY PERMANENT EXILE TO ANY COUNTRY THEY LIKE - (one with sharia, I hope!).

Allowing them to fester and their hideous ideology to grow is the beginning of the end of a Western European civilization and the beginning of sharia.

They are multiplying faster than non-Muslim Europeans and left unchanged these demographics and their aggressive thuggery will force Europe to become Turkey --- which was Byzantium and the center of the West, once upon a time...

Fainting for the Plagiarizing "Messiah"

Remember the Rudy Giuliani phone calls from his wife? Or the Biden campaign when he stepped down because he was caught plagiarizing speeches?

Well Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you Barack Obama; apparently there have been a lot of fainting people at Obama events. Let's just say it has been outside of the range of "probability". Each time Obama stops his rallies and cares for the poor unfortunate souls. This is something right out of "Leap of Faith" or some similar tent revival. Faked illnesses, healing, the whole nine yards. Welcome to the Obama campaign.

Check out the video here, and then tell me this is coincidence.

Scott Johnson comments:

Jim Vicevich and James Taranto have compiled an impressive roster of fainting spells generated by Obama's campaign appearances. Vicevich and Taranto raise a question of fakery; Taranto also cites Larry David's likening of the phenomenon to Sinatra's bobby soxers. I think David is close. In the context of Obama's messianic appeal, the phenomenon seems to represent the return of Sister Flute from the gospel shows of yore. Gospel performers such as Sam Cooke and the Soul Stirrers routinely sought to elicit the appearance of Sister Flute in their audience. Describing the Stirrers at work, Daniel Wolff explains:

Five men in crisp white suits stand shoulder to shoulder, ready to go to work. In front of them is a single microphone. Their white suits and white shirts and white-tipped shoes shine so brightly that you can barely see their faces, but even so and even at a distance, the four men in the back are clearly older. They stand in a semi-circle, like a crescent moon, with the fifth--the youngster--in the middle.

The work they're about to do is very precise: they are going to try to bring the divine spirit down into this room. And the measurement of their success is equally precise. Out beyond the microphone sits a congregation of eager people dressed nearly as sharply as the men on stage. Amongst them--amongst the extended families, the grandparents, the fidgety children, the adolescents eyeing each other from pew to pew--there are women of a certain age who go by the generic name of Sister Flute. If the men in the white suits do their job right, Sister Flute will start to moan. She may stand where she is and wave one hand in the air, or rock her head back till her broad brimmed Sunday hat threatens to drop off. And if the men are truly successful, if they shout the house, Sister Flute's moans will turn to shrieks. Her legs will stiffen, and the heels of her best shoes will start to drum the floor, and, as the spirit gathers, she may collapse, or throw herself into the arms of the deacons, all the time shouting the praises of an almighty and present God.

As Peter Guralnick reports in his biography of Cooke, "Nearer to Thee" and "Be With Me, Jesus" were the "sticks" with which Cooke and the Stirrers summoned the appearance of Sister Flute. Quoting Stirrer S.R. Crain, Guralnick adds that the congregation would form a line in front of the Stirrers "to keep Sister Flute off of us. Because she came for us, she meant it, she wasn't playing. She just wanted to [touch] that boy. Everybody loved that boy."

But it's not just the fainting that is the problem; Barack is an empty suit, speaking empty platitudes, and no substance whatsoever to an audience of people who mostly want to "feel" and to do very little thinking. Mark Steyn has a great column up about Obama this week, including this:

... The Bush assassination fantasies are concocted by his political opponents and at least arise from his acts – invading the world; slaughtering 14 million Iraqi civilians; shredding the Constitution. By contrast, the Obama assassination porn is written by his worshipers and testifies to one of the most palpable features of the senator's campaign – its faintly ersatz quality, its determination to appropriate Camelot and every other mythic narrative.

A few days ago, a local news team went to shoot some film at Obama's Houston campaign headquarters. Behind the desks of the perky gals answering the phones were posters of Che Guevara and Cuban flags. Do Obama's volunteers even know who Che is? Apart from being a really cool guy on posters and T-shirts, like James Dean or Bart Simpson. I doubt it. They're pseudo-revolutionaries. Very few people in America want a real revolution: Life is great, this is a terrific country, with unparalleled economic opportunities.

To be sure, it's a tougher break if you have the misfortune to be the victim of one of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society programs or a decrepit inner-city grade school with a higher per-student budget than the wealthiest parts of Switzerland. But even so, to be born a U.S. citizen is, as Cecil Rhodes once said of England, to win first prize in the lottery of life.

Not even Obama supporters want real revolution: Ask the many peoples around the world for whom revolution means not a lame-o Sixties poster above your desk but the carnage and horror of the day before yesterday. ...

Charles Krauthammer adds:

ABC's Jake Tapper notes the "Helter-Skelter cultish qualities" of "Obama worshipers," what Joel Stein of the Los Angeles Times calls "the Cult of Obama." Obama's Super Tuesday victory speech was a classic of the genre. Its effect was electric, eliciting a rhythmic fervor in the audience -- to such rhetorical nonsense as "We are the ones we've been waiting for. (Cheers, applause.) We are the change that we seek."

That was too much for Time's Joe Klein. "There was something just a wee bit creepy about the mass messianism ... ," he wrote. "The message is becoming dangerously self-referential. The Obama campaign all too often is about how wonderful the Obama campaign is."

You might dismiss The New York Times' Paul Krugman's complaint that "the Obama campaign seems dangerously close to becoming a cult of personality" as hyperbole. Until you hear Chris Matthews, who no longer has the excuse of youth, react to Obama's Potomac primary victory speech with "My, I felt this thrill going up my leg." When his MSNBC co-hosts tried to bail him out, he refused to recant. Not surprising for an acolyte who said that Obama "comes along, and he seems to have the answers. This is the New Testament."

I've seen only one similar national swoon. As a teenager growing up in Canada, I witnessed a charismatic law professor go from obscurity to justice minister to prime minister, carried on a wave of what was called Trudeaumania.

But even there the object of his countrymen's unrestrained affections was no blank slate. Pierre Trudeau was already a serious intellectual who had written and thought and lectured long about the nature and future of his country.

Obama has an astonishingly empty paper trail. He's going around issuing promissory notes on the future that he can't possibly redeem. Promises to heal the world with negotiations with the likes of Iran's President Ahmadinejad. Promises to transcend the conundrums of entitlement reform that require real and painful trade-offs and that have eluded solution for a generation. Promises to fund his other promises by a rapid withdrawal from an unpopular war -- with the hope, I suppose, that the (presumed) resulting increase in American prestige would compensate for the chaos to follow.

Democrats are worried that the Obama spell will break between the time of his nomination and the time of the election, and deny them the White House. My guess is that he can maintain the spell just past Inauguration Day. After which will come the awakening. It will be rude.

Did I mention plagiarism? Yes, "the messiah" is guilty of that as well:

Obama Plagiarized a 2006 Speech?

Hmmm. We'll see. If it turns out to be true, then what?

Could it be?

A crack in the messianic aura of the Great and Dear Leader, the Messiah of America, the Blessed Star of Illinois, the Healer of Eternity?

How is this possible? He descended from the right hand of the Father, after all, and one thousand cranes descended from Heaven to place his infant body wrapped in swaddling clothes in a manger. This we all know.

This is not possible. This could never happen.

It's Bush's fault. And Rove's.

In short, what we have in Barack Obama is a latter-day Jonas Nightingale, playing to a brain-dead culture numbed by daily doses of Brittney, OJ, and Oprah. Cheerleading provided free of charge by Matthews and Olberman and the rest of the so-called "unbiased" media. In another four years, if we are still alive to see it, my feeling is that people will understand all too well just what destruction this media monster hath wrought.

I hope I'm wrong about that; personally, I would prefer to that the American people actually snap out of their collective trance before November. Call me selfish, but I kind of like getting in to see the doctor when I need one instead of when the government tells me I can.

"BONEHEAD" OBAMA DEFEND'S HIS REZKO LAND DEAL

BLOOMBERG:

The couple who sold Barack Obama his Chicago home said the Illinois senator's $1.65 million bid ``was the best offer'' and they didn't cut their asking price because a campaign donor bought their adjacent land, according to e-mails between Obama's presidential campaign and the seller.

The Illinois senator has said he made a ``boneheaded'' move in involving contributor Antoin ``Tony'' Rezko, a Chicago businessman, in the purchase of the property on June 15, 2005.

Rezko's wife, Rita, also an Obama donor, bought the adjoining plot in Hyde Park from the couple, Fredric Wondisford and Sally Radovick, for the $625,000 asking price, the same day that Obama bought the house for $300,000 less than the asking price. Antoin Rezko was under federal investigation at the time.

Rezko was indicted on unrelated fraud charges 16 months later, in October 2006.

OBAMA'S DEFENSE: "I AM NOT A CROOK; I AM A BONEHEAD."

Incidentally: By using what many might construe as a RACIST term - "bonehead" - Obama inadvertently proves he in NOT African-American by temperament, but a Kenyan-American of ARAB descent. "Bonehead" is a term often used to describe white power racists.
Probably Obama just meant to warn us HE IS DUMB AND HAS POOR JUDGMENT.

Sheesh: what a freakin' IDIOTIC defense for someone running to be POTUS!

UPDATED Danger: You're in a Gun Free Zone

UPDATE: I have made a number of revisions to my original post for clarity's sake--DT

When I finally received my concealed carry license, after months of classes, range practice, background checks, etc, it was a proud moment for me. My State determined that I was responsible enough to be permitted to use deadly force in self-defense, and to not be a danger to others. It doesn't sound like that big of a deal, but to me it was. In a way it was certification that "this guy can be trusted." And of course that carries a lot of responsibility with it.

I did not go through all of this so that I could advertise my being a "dangerous dude", or to play supercop or be some kind of cowboy; I did the work because there are people worth protecting--like my wife and my family and close friends I might be with in any given situation. And I did it because there are legions of home invaders, street thugs, terrorists, and psychos out there swimming in the "ocean" that is our society. Every now and then a person can be in the wrong place at the wrong time. And if I am ever unlucky enough to be one of those people, I want to be in a position to change the situation. I hope I never have to pull that trigger, excluding the range. But if I do, it won't be because I want to be some hero; it will be because I value my life and the lives of those close to me.

Bob Wier, writing in The American Thinker, alludes to the obvious: gun free zones may be among the most dangerous places for deranged killers in the country--especially in case of the psycho wannabes, whose only aim before they die is to get their names in the papers:

That's right: another maniac, with guns bristling all over him, walked into a "gun-free zone" and began picking off human beings as if they were ducks in a shooting gallery. There were only a few minutes left in the ocean sciences class being held in the large lecture hall of the school when a tall, thin man, dressed in black, stepped out from behind a curtain on the stage. Witnesses said he looked around, almost as though he was relishing the thought of what he was about to do, pulled out a shotgun and began the slaughter.

While scores of students were screaming and ducking for cover, the creature with the guns was certain he would get no resistance from his helpless targets. Since the killer knew it was a building in which guns were prohibited by law, and, since he intended to take his own worthless life anyway, all he needed to do was disregard the law and calmly walk up to the cowering figures and press the trigger. Before he was finished, 5 students were dead and at least 15 were wounded, many of them critically. When his blood lust ended, the murderer, Stephen P. Kazmierczak, 27, shot himself to death with one of the 2 pistols he also brought with him. One sane person in that room with a firearm could have saved those lives. On the other hand, if it had not been designated a gun-free zone, it's unlikely that the coward would have chosen the place to act out his homicidal rage. I've heard all the reasons given by gun control advocates about the need to keep guns off the streets. Yet, the slogan that keeps resounding in my mind is: "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."

The Second Amendment to the Constitution declares a well-regulated militia as "being necessary to the security of a free State" and prohibits infringement of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms." Even though some politicians have twisted that venerable document until it looks like Turkish taffy, it seems to me that our Founding Fathers believed that people had a right to protect themselves.

How many more massacres are we going to endure before we realize that we are giving malcontents a license to hunt humans when we broadcast the message that, "Everyone in this building, campus, church or city council meeting is unarmed?" Why not go even further and just say: "Those of you suffering from a deep seated, burning passion to kill, will be able to satisfy your hate-filled existence by entering these premises with the weapons of your choice. We can guarantee you plenty of free shots and no return fire."

Imagine the following scenario: You and your family are among about 50 other patrons eating dinner at a local restaurant. During the course of the evening, you happen to look up and see a man with a long topcoat enter the place; his hand concealed in one of the pockets. No one else seems to notice, but you have a gut feeling that he's dangerous. Although you've had training with firearms, you, like almost everyone else walking around unprotected, don't have a license to carry. If that man suddenly were to pull a gun, he'd have total control over that crowd. You and your family would continue living, only if the gunman decided not to aim his weapon in your direction.

Is that any way for a free people to live?

You tell me...

Here is the big problem I have: for gun owners who have been authorized by their State as being responsible enough citizens to carry a concealed weapon; being citizens who just want to follow the law and exist in a decent society, it is especially important to follow the laws and to use particularly good judgment.

But then I think of the so-called "Gun Free Zones"... the problem with the Gun Free Zones is that--barring a metal detector at every entrance/exit--there is no way to insure that any building or place is gun free. In both the Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois incidents, the shooter that went on the rampage was in a "Gun Free Zone". Meaning that your typical licensed gunholder could not bring their guns into the area either, lest they lose that license and pay an enormous fine. The State views these individuals as being stable enough to carry a gun around everywhere else in society. But somehow, I suddenly am not judged to be sane enough to use that same even-handed judgment when I am in a classroom? All because some utopian academics have made themselves "feel" safer by declaring their facility to be "gun free"?

Unfortunately, all of the recent American gun "massacres" in recent memory occurred in a gun free zone. Hello?? Is there anyone out there paying attention?

Now I would never advocate breaking State laws. But to pretend that it does not give me pause for the State to prohibit me from carrying my licensed weapon in precisely in the situation when I am most likely to need it--considering the entire reason I went through the arduous licensing process in the first place--would simply be dishonest on my part. If some psycho happens into a venue I happen to inhabit and proceeds to start mowing down innocents, that is precisely the time when I want to be (and morally speaking, should be...) packing.

These Gun Free Zone laws pose a huge moral dilemma for me, because I ardently believe that the Constitution does guarantee me the right to defend myself against a deadly attack, in any situation. The Second Amendment states that I can keep and bear arms. This is one dilemma, in my opinion, in which the State ought not to be siding with clueless PC utopians, but rather the "real world" sheepdogs out here that want to protect our homes and families from potential killers. What good are laws if they do not permit responsible citizens to keep ourselves from being offed by some psycho or terrorist?

Is it so much to ask of a free people to permit citizens whom the State has deemed responsible enough to carry a loaded weapon to be able to carry that weapon anywhere? (the only exception that I believe to be valid is the overriding need to protect Presidential candidates or Presidents, criminal trials, etc...)

How many more will be slaughtered in "Gun Free Zones" before the people finally wake up that they are part of the problem itself, rather than a solution?

FRENCH FINALLY ARREST "PARIS INTIFADA" LEADERS

BBC:

French police have arrested more than 30 people in raids on housing estates near Paris, targeting the suspected ringleaders of riots last November.

Some 1,000 police took part in the pre-dawn sweep in and around Villiers-le-Bel, some 20km (12 miles) north of the capital, officials said.

The 2007 riots began in Paris's mainly immigrant suburbs after two teenagers died in a crash with a police car.

More than 100 policemen were injured at the time, some seriously.

• THIS IS BETTER LATE THAN NEVER.

• THE DANISH "POLITI" SHOULD BE DOING THIS NOW - INSTEAD OF STANDING AROUND WITH THEIR HANDS IN THEIR POCKETS WATCHING PRIVATE PROPERTY BURN.

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA JUNIOR: ARAB-AMERICAN

Kenneth Lamb (via Director Blue):

Mr. Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother's side. He is 43.75% Arabic, and 6.25% African Negro from his father's side.

...The question no one wants to answer - particularly Mr. Obama and his supporters, is, "Why do you think he has an Arabic name? Why does his father have an Arabic name? Why does every ancestor on his father's side have an Arabic name?"

The answer is obvious: They have Arabic names because his father's side of the family tree is Arabic.

Need proof? Research the Kenyan records for yourself. You will find that his father was officially classified as "Arab African" by the Kenyan government.

The greatest accomplishment of Obama's career has been convincing African-Americans - the descendants of slaves - that he is one of them, even 50% one of them, when he has NOTHING in common with a single one of them.

FACT: Obama is a Kenyan-America - of chiefly Muslim Arab origins.

If this is NO BIG DEAL, then why doesn't Obama tell the truth about it?

SHARI'A MONEY BONDS IN BRITAIN

Well, it looks like Daniel Pipes may be right: Britain is continuing its slow walk towards the Islamic brink by issuing Shari'a bonds (via LGF):

A new sharia law controversy erupted last night over Government plans to issue special "Islamic bonds" to pay for Gordon Brown's public-spending programme by raising money from the Middle East.

Britain is to become the first Western nation to issue bonds approved by Muslim clerics in line with sharia law, which bans conventional loans involving interest payments as "sinful".

The scheme would mark one of the most significant economic advances of sharia law in the non-Muslim world.

It will lead to the ownership of Government buildings and other assets currently belonging to British taxpayers being switched wholesale to wealthy Middle-Eastern businessmen and banks.

The Government sees sharia-compliant bonds as a way of tapping Middle-East money and building bridges with the Muslim community.

But critics say the scheme would waste money and could undermine Britain's financial and legal systems.

Senior Conservative MP Edward Leigh, chairman of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, said: "I am concerned about the signal this would send – it could be the thin end of the wedge.

"British Common Law must be supreme and should apply to everyone."

A spokesman for the National Secular Society said: "There are lots of different ways to arrange financing.

"Constructing financial instruments to be sharia-compliant seems to me to involve a lot of unnecessary complication, which will serve only to make a lot of lawyers very rich."

And Islamic clerics too, I'm afraid.

8th Night the Danish Intifada -- 20 Towns Hit By Fires

Gateway: 8th Night of Rioting in Denmark-- 20 Towns Hit By Fires (Video)

The 8th night of torchings took place in Denmark last night. Several schools and hundreds of cars have been torched. ITN reported:

A total of 20 towns were hit by fires on Sunday night, with around 29 people arrested - most of them for arson or attempted arson.

In two cases the fires were so strong that blocks of flats had to be evacuated.

Bands of young people have vandalised or set fire to hundreds of cars and a number of schools in the past week, however the situation was said to have been improving over the weekend.

Police said they could give no reason for the behaviour, but said unusually mild weather and the closure of schools for a winter break might have contributed. [!?!?!?!?!?!?!? UNREAL! This is pure denial - SEE BELOW - Reliapundit.]

Social workers believe an alleged plot to kill a Danish cartoonist for his drawing two years ago of the Prophet Mohammad may have fuelled the riots. Fifteen Danish newspapers reprinted his drawing on Wednesday in protest against the alleged murder plot.

If it was only the weather coinciding with a school break then why aren't blond Lutherans or red-headed atheists rioting?!

It's the JIHAD, stupid.

As in the UK and France and Spain and Italy - and ALL over Europe: the native-born (EU citizen) children of more assimilated Muslims are the vanguard of unrest/INTIFADAS; they are less assimilated BY CHOICE: they want enclaves with sharia; they are more radicalized than their parents.

Those who deny the religious/ideological element of these intifadas are in denial.

Go to Gateway; watch the video; use the links...