Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    March 2007
    S M T W T F S
     123
    45678910
    11121314151617
    18192021222324
    25262728293031
  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

  • Archives

Archive for March, 2007

Cat kneads dog

Posted by Richard on March 21, 2007

"The position of cats is highest when civilization is at its peak. The uses of the cow, the horse and the dog are obvious even to the illiterate, but one must be educated in the uses of a cat."

— Olivia Manning

One of the uses of a cat that I've certainly appreciated is kneading. The late Grizzly used to knead on me with a wonderful dedication, seriousness of purpose, and continuous big purr. God, how I miss him.

It never occurred to me that a dog might appreciate a cat's talent for kneading until Craig Ferguson played this video clip on tonight's Late Late Show. Note: Before the video begins playing, mute or turn down your speakers. The video seems to have been recorded while a shop vac or small jet engine was running nearby.

Hmm, I wonder if the PETA animal-rights types object to a cat being exploited by a dog, or if they only object to both being kept by humans. 

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Appeal for Courage

Posted by Richard on March 21, 2007

If you support victory instead of retreat and defeat, go to Gateway Pundit and read about Appeal for Courage. Then, if you're active duty military, Reserve, or National Guard, visit AppealForCourage.org and sign their appeal for redress:

An Appeal For Redress is an authorized means for active duty military to submit a grievance to Congress. It can be signed by Active Duty, Reserve, or National Guard military personnel.

It is authorized by DoD Directive 1325.6 and DoD Directive 7050.6.

The wording of the Appeal for Redress is:

As an American currently serving my nation in uniform, I respectfully urge my political leaders in Congress to fully support our mission in Iraq and halt any calls for retreat. I also respectfully urge my political leaders to actively oppose media efforts which embolden my enemy while demoralizing American support at home. The War in Iraq is a necessary and just effort to bring freedom to the Middle East and protect America from further attack.

[There's a clarification stating that "oppose media efforts" means oppose with words, not legislation.]

If you're a civilian, go there too, and check out the FAQ page for some things you can do to help. I can't find any way to contribute — maybe they don't need any funds, maybe they just haven't thought of it yet. But if you're so inclined, you might contribute to one of the organizations supporting this effort, such as Families United for Our Troops and Their Mission.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Animal-rights activists want cub killed

Posted by Richard on March 21, 2007

Back in 1994 at the Denver Zoo, a polar bear named Ulu gave birth to twins and promptly rejected them. The cubs were rescued by a zookeeper, put in incubators, and fed with eyedroppers. Klondike and SnowNamed Klondike and Snow, they were the first polar bears successfully hand-raised by humans. People around here went nuts over the adorable little critters, which were a marketer's dream. They gained national attention (including a PBS special), were celebrated in a video and a book, and made the zoo a boat-load of money. When the bears approached adulthood, due to space constraints (and perhaps loss of cuddliness), they were sent to Sea World, a move that caused great consternation locally, complete with petitions and protests.

I remember all the hype, adoration, and frenzy over Klondike and Snow. I don't remember anyone calling for them to be put to death. Not even animal-rights activists. 

Times have changed. Animal-rights activists today would rather see a polar bear die than be raised by humans. In Germany, some say Berlin zookeepers are violating animal-welfare laws by not killing little Knut:

Everyone loves Knut. The three-month-old polar bear born in one of Berlin's zoos has become a star in the German capital and has won hearts the world over. Indeed, the exact date of his first public appearance — likely to be made later this week — is the subject of almost as much anticipation as the details of Britney Spears Alcoholics Anonymous love affair. It's impossible not to love the little guy, right?

Well, not quite. Animal rights activists, as SPIEGEL reported Monday, aren't so enthralled with the polar bear baby. They are concerned that Knut, who is being raised by human hand after his mother rejected him, is in danger of losing touch with the bear necessities. Some would like to see him dead.

"Raising him by hand is not appropriate to the species but rather a blatant violation of animal welfare laws," animal rights activist Frank Albrecht told the mass circulation newspaper Bild, whose front page headline Monday read "Will Sweet Knut Be Killed by Injection?"

Berlin Zoo is allowing Knut to be raised in such a way that the bear will have a behavioral disorder for the rest of his life, Albrecht believes. "In actual fact, the zoo needs to kill the bear cub," he adds.

He's not alone. Wolfram Graf-Rudolf, director of the Aachen Zoo, told the newspaper, "I don't consider it appropriate for the species that the little polar bear is being raised on a bottle." The animal will be fixated on his keeper and not be a "real" polar bear, he says. However he feels it is now too late to put Knut out of his supposed misery. "The mistake has been made. One should have had the courage to put him to sleep much earlier."

Kill Knut because he's not a "real" polar bear? This is the PETA view of animals. Such people argue that animals have "rights" that forbid us from eating them, wearing them, riding them, putting them in zoos or circuses, having them as pets, or benefitting from them in any way whatsoever. Then they turn around and declare an animal worthless and unfit to live because dependence on humans has ruined its animal "purity" and "humanized" it. It's not love of animals that drives such people, it's hatred of humans.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 5 Comments »

The foolish and credulous among us

Posted by Richard on March 20, 2007

Four years into the struggle for a free, democratic Iraq, streets, plazas, and public places around the country were again filled by those who oppose that struggle (dwindling numbers of them, I'm happy to note). Gerard Van der Leun observed the demonstrators, and had trouble concealing his contempt:

Four years in. An inch of time. Four years in and the foolish and credulous among us yearn to get out. Their feelings require it. The power of their Holy Gospel of "Imagine" compels them. Their overflowing pools of compassion for the enslavers of women, the killers of homosexuals, the beheaders of reporters, and the incinerators of men and women working quietly at their desks, rise and flood their minds until their eyes flow with crocodile tears while their mouths emit slogans made of cardboard. They believe the world is run on wishes and that they will always have three more.

Four years into the most gentle war ever fought, a war fought on the cheap at every level, a war fought to avoid civilian harm rather than maximize it. Picnic on the grass at Shiloh. Walk the Western Front. Speak to the smoke of Dresden. Kneel down and peek into the ovens of Auschwitz. Sit on the stones near ground zero at Hiroshima and converse with the shadows singed into the wall. Listen to those ghost whisperers of war.

Four years in and the people of the Perfect World ramble through the avenues of Washington, stamping their feet and holding their breath, having their tantrums, and telling all who cannot avoid listening that "War is bad for children and other living things." They have flowers painted on their cheeks. For emphasis. Just in case you thought that war was good for children and other living things.

There were children and other living things on the planes that flew into the towers. They all went into the fire and the ash just the same. But they, now, are not important. Nor is the message their deaths still send us when we listen. That message is to be silenced. The rising brand new message is "All we are say-ing is give…." And it is always off-key.

Go. Read the rest. Please.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

What a difference a year makes

Posted by Richard on March 20, 2007

Michael Totten is doing some consulting work in Kurdistan, and he's produced a long report on the area, illustrated with lots of wonderful pictures. He reminds us that parts of Iraq are nothing like the chaos and hell that the MSM dwells on every day, and have in fact made remarkable progress in the past year or so:

Fourteen months ago I flew to Erbil, the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan, from Beirut, Lebanon, on the dubiously named Flying Carpet Airlines. Flying Carpet's entire fleet is one small noisy plane with propellers, cramped seats, and thin cabin pressure. Only nineteen passengers joined me on that once-a-week flight. Everyone but me was a Lebanese businessman. They were paranoid of me and of each other. What kind of crazy person books a flight to Iraq, even if it is to the safe and relatively prosperous Kurdistan region? I felt completely bereft of sense going to Iraq without a gun and without any bodyguards, and it took a week for my on-again off-again twitchiness to subside.

Last week I flew to Erbil from Vienna on Austrian Airlines to work for a few weeks as a private sector consultant with my colleague Patrick Lasswell. This time I didn't feel anything like a fool. Almost half the passengers were women. Children played on their seats and in the aisle with toys handed out by the crew. We watched an in-flight movie and ate the usual airline lunch fare served by an attractive long legged stewardess. The cabin erupted with applause when the wheels touched down on the runway. The pilot announced the weather (sunny and 60) in three languages and cheerfully told us all to have a great day. Have a great day may seem an odd thing to say to people who just arrived in Iraq, but this is Kurdistan. I did, indeed, have a great day.

Read the rest. Totten is far from a Pollyanna. He doubts that the Sunni and Shia Arabs will be able to live in peace (but he admits his predictions about the Middle East have been wrong before). Totten thinks that the Kurds, on the other hand, have a very bright future. His report certainly contains plenty of evidence to support optimism.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Dame Helen, the Queen, and the Beeb

Posted by Richard on March 19, 2007

Gerard Baker is U.S. Editor and Assistant Editor of The Times of London. While back in Britain recently, he happened upon a BBC interview with Oscar-winning actress Helen Mirren. The interviewer asked her about the difficulty of playing a character as "unsympathetic" as the Queen. To her credit, Mirren rejected the premise.

Baker was struck by this precisely because it was merely about an actress, not Iraq or politics, and he proceeded to unload on the Beeb most marvelously (emphasis added):

It betrayed an absolutely rock-solid assumption that the Queen is fundamentally unsympathetic, and that anyone who might still harbour some respect for the monarch – or indeed for that matter, the military or the Church, or the countryside or the joint stock company or any of the great English bequests to the world – must be some reactionary old buffer out in the sticks who has not had the benefit of the London media's cultural enlightenment.

More than that, the question – all fawning and fraternal and friendly – contained within it an assumption that, of course, every thoughtful person shares the same view.

You really do have to leave the country to appreciate fully how pernicious the BBC's grasp of the nation's cultural and political soul has become. The groupthink and assumptions implicit in almost everything broadcast by BBC News … lie like a suffocating blanket over the national consciousness.

This is the mindset that sees the effortless superiority, at every turn, of benign collectivism over selfish individualism, exploited worker over unscrupulous capitalist, enlightened European over brutish American, thoughtful atheist over dumb believer, persecuted Arab over callous Israeli; and that believes the West is the perpetrator of just about every ill that has ever befallen the world – from colonialism to global warming.

I'm often told, when I take on like this, that I'm ignoring the quality of BBC output. But I spent almost a decade in the employ of the BBC and I can say, without demeaning my gifted colleagues at The Times, that it has probably one of the highest concentrations of talent of any institution in the world. But that, of course, is the problem. It perpetuates its power by attracting and retaining an educated elite that is distinguished by its unstinting devotion to collectivist values. I've no doubt it does what it does very well. It is what it does I object to.

Bravo. In today's world of cable and satellite channels, lots of Americans who consider themselves educated and sophisticated speak of BBC News in glowing terms — admiring the Beeb even more than NPR or MacNeil-Lehrer. It's a sentiment not confined to those who are philosophically aligned with the collectivists at the Beeb, and it's something I don't understand. The Beeb reports on its own postmodernist alternate universe that bears little resemblance to the reality in which I reside. Their purpose is evil and the result is pernicious. Why should I admire them for doing it well?

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The camel caravan limit

Posted by Richard on March 19, 2007

Go to Little Green Footballs right this minute. Read about how German judges decided what rules should govern the participation of Muslim schoolgirls in school field trips.

Words fail me.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Eagles soared!

Posted by Richard on March 18, 2007

I haven't had the TV on since Friday, so this morning, I've been visiting various websites to find out what happened in Washington yesterday at the big anti-war march. What I learned made my heart swell and my eyes well. The anti-war turnout fell far short of expectations. The pro-troops, pro-victory Gathering of Eagles far outnumbered them! According to the National Park Service, GoE turned out 30,000:

Fox News reported today that the anti-war protesters had significantly less than they expected. However, they are erroneously reporting that the Eagles were there in "equal numbers". The truth is that we outnumbered them by at least three to one!

Consider…ANSWER had a year to plan their well-publicized event and were hoping for around 100,000. They actually drew about 5,000-10,000, according to various news reports today. The Gathering of Eagles, on the other hand, had about six weeks to plan an unprecedented response – and with no advertising, no publicity, no celebrity or political endorsement, no news coverage, and no big money, we had about 30,000 boots on the ground!

Go see the roundup by Michelle Malkin. She has a number of pictures, including a very moving and beautiful photo taken by Leslie Grainger, a college student who drove 12 hours to be there.

Next, visit Gates of Vienna for Baron Bodissey's marvelous account of his experiences among both the Eagles and the anti-war marchers, profusely illustrated. Don't miss his story of the disabled vet and the Gates of Vienna fan.

Then drop by Hot Air for Bryan's comments and links and a preview of Move America Forward's new ad. If you like it, make a contribution to help air it.

Want to see still more pictures? Michelle and the Hot Air staff have 273 of them waiting for you on Flickr. And Smash has posted a few photos and comments already, and promises more to come today. 

 

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The day the Americans leave Iraq

Posted by Richard on March 17, 2007

Abdallah Safialdeen, Hizbullah's representative in Iran, appeared on Iranian TV on March 4, 2007, and the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), which operates the MEMRI TV Monitor Project, has a video clip and transcript. Safialdeen was crowing about how Hizbullah's "victory" in Lebanon set the stage for U.S. withdrawal from the region and the end of Israel:

Do you know what an American withdrawal from Iraq will mean? It will mean that Israel will lose its support. It will mean that the Lebanese Hizbullah will not need a large-scale war in order to enter Palestine. Hizbullah will be able to simply walk into Palestine. Rest assured that the day the American forces leave Iraq, the Israelis will leave the region along with them. What was one of the reasons for Olmert's recent visit to America? He went there in order to say to the Democrats: "Don't say that the American army will leave Iraq, because this would mean the annihilation of the Zionist regime." This is because the annihilation of the Zionist regime has begun. Like some of our friends say, Palestine is no longer a problem for us, because the Americans will be forced to leave Iraq. With or without a war against Iran, they will be forced to do so. The moment they leave Iraq, you, the Muslims of the world, can walk into Palestine, because Israel will no longer exist.

Do all the Jews out there who are still liberal Democrats have any questions? 

HT: American Congress for Truth  

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

A Liberty Day treat

Posted by Richard on March 16, 2007

Happy Liberty Day! And James Madison's birthday! In honor of the occasion, Dana Hanley chose today for the inaugural Carnival of Principled Government. I intended to submit a post, but screwed up and missed the deadline. No matter — Dana was kind enough to include one of mine as an Editor's Choice. And there is no shortage of other intriguing links — I'll have to make some time later to check a number of them out. You should, too.

Bravo, Dana — this carnival is an astonishing first effort!

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 2 Comments »

Welcome to Bizarro World

Posted by Richard on March 16, 2007

Welcome to Bizarro World, where one of today's most ruthless butchers confesses/brags about his atrocities, and moonbats and media outlets everywhere denounce his captors, accuse them of crimes, joke about his terror plots, doubt his guilt, sympathize with his plight, and defend his humanity

Khalid Sheik Mohammed seemed to be especially proud of one particular atrocity:

"I decapitated with my blessed right hand the head of the American Jew, Daniel Pearl, in the city of Karachi, Pakistan," Mohammed is quoted as saying in a transcript of a military hearing at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, released by the Pentagon.

"For those who would like to confirm, there are pictures of me on the Internet holding his head," he added.

There are indeed. In fact, the video is readily available. Should you watch it? Jeff Jacoby addressed that difficult question at the time:

June 13, 2002 — The video of Daniel Pearl's beheading is searing and nightmarish, but the key to its power is not that it shows him dead. It is that it shows him alive. You look into his eyes, you hear his voice, you all but smell his fear as he tells the camera what his captors are forcing him to say.

"My name is Daniel Pearl. I'm a Jewish American from… Encino, California, USA. I come from, on my father's side, a family of Zionists. My father is Jewish. My mother is Jewish. I'm Jewish. My family follows Judaism. We've made numerous family visits to Israel…"

The three-minute video is a piece of Islamist pornography: A frightened Jew — even better, a frightened American Jew — confesses his Jewish roots and denounces US foreign policy. Then his head is cut off and brandished triumphantly as English words scroll up the screen: "And if our demands are not met, this scene shall be repeated again and again."

When CBS aired the first part of that video, Pearl's mother was outraged. Jacoby acknowledged the family's pain, but saw things differently:

Who cannot understand her fury and anguish? Whose heart doesn't go out to the devastated young widow, whose infant son will never know his father?

And yet this video, depraved and evil as it is, does something for Daniel Pearl that has been done for virtually none of Al Qaeda's other victims: It makes him real. It allows him to be seen as a flesh-and-blood human being, a guy with a face and a voice and a house in Encino. Countless Americans who never knew him in life will experience Pearl's death as a sickening kick in the gut. His murder is an atrocity they will take personally — because they will have seen it with their own eyes.

Islamist terrorists butchered more than 3,000 innocent men, women, and children last Sept. 11. And before them there had been more than a thousand other victims — in the Marine barracks in Beirut, on Pan Am 103, in the first World Trade Center attack in 1993, at the Khobar Towers barracks, in the embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, on board the USS Cole. Yet who, their families and friends excepted, knows what any of them looked like? Who remembers any of their names?

The Pearl family's ire is understandable. But I wonder if it isn't the loved ones of all the other victims who have the better reason to be angry.

There are times when no good purpose is served by publicizing a terrible image. The repeated broadcast of race car driver Dale Earnhardt's fatal crash last year was gratuitous. Nothing was gained by replaying, over and over, the beating of Rodney King.

But the beheading of Daniel Pearl is different. It conveys with a force no words can match the undiluted malignancy, the sheer evil, of the enemy we are fighting. Yes, it is a horror. Yes, it is barbaric. But we are at war with barbarians, and what they did to Pearl, they would gladly do to any one of us. This is no time to be covering our eyes.

I won't tell you that you should watch the video. It's pretty awful. Maybe you don't need to in order to fully appreciate who and what Khalid Sheik Mohammed is. But if you're one of those who feels sympathy for the man or worries about him being robbed of his humanity — well, I hope you do watch. So you can see that he wasn't robbed of his humanity — he rejected it.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Rejecting Gandhi’s way

Posted by Richard on March 15, 2007

Sen. Mitch McConnell isn't the only Republican displaying a bit of spine and spunk for a change. Former Senator, actor, and possible Presidential candidate Fred Thompson sat in for Paul Harvey this morning, and he commented on the anti-war group Code Pink, which is camped out on Rep. Nancy Pelosi's lawn demanding that she defund the troops in Iraq.

Code Pink's encampment features a giant statue of Gandhi, and the organization was founded on Gandhi's birthday. Thompson noted that prior to the toppling of Saddam, the anti-war movement distributed a poster that read, "What would Gandhi do?" NRO has the transcript:

And that's a pretty good question. At what point is it okay to fight dictators like Saddam or the al Qaeda terrorists who want to take his place?

It turns out that the answer, according to Gandhi, is NEVER. During World War II, Gandhi penned an open letter to the British people, urging them to surrender to the Nazis. Later, when the extent of the holocaust was known, he criticized Jews who had tried to escape or fight for their lives as they did in Warsaw and Treblinka. "The Jews should have offered themselves to the butcher's knife," he said. "They should have thrown themselves into the sea from cliffs." "Collective suicide," he told his biographer, "would have been heroism."

The so-called peace movement certainly has the right to make Gandhi's way their way, but their efforts to make collective suicide American foreign policy just won't cut it in this country. When American's think of heroism, we think of the young American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, risking their lives to prevent another Adolph Hitler or Saddam Hussein.

Gandhi probably wouldn't approve, but I can live with that.

I'm stunned by those quotes. I've never read all that much about Gandhi, but they don't entirely jibe with what I thought I knew about him. I certainly never deified the man, as many on the left have, but I also never suspected him of such vile thoughts.

Thank you, Fred Thompson, for clearly identifying Gandhi's way. All sane and decent people must forcefully reject it.

George Orwell, one of my favorite socialists, rejected Gandhi's way during World War II. I strongly recommend Orwell's essay, Pacifism and the War, which includes this (emphasis added):

Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help that of the other. … Mr Savage remarks that ‘according to this type of reasoning, a German or Japanese pacifist would be "objectively pro-British".' But of course he would be! That is why pacifist activities are not permitted in those countries (in both of them the penalty is, or can be, beheading) while both the Germans and the Japanese do all they can to encourage the spread of pacifism in British and American territories. The Germans even run a spurious ‘freedom' station which serves out pacifist propaganda indistinguishable from that of the P.P.U. They would stimulate pacifism in Russia as well if they could, but in that case they have tougher babies to deal with. In so far as it takes effect at all, pacifist propaganda can only be effective against those countries where a certain amount of freedom of speech is still permitted; in other words it is helpful to totalitarianism.

UPDATE (3/19/07): Orwell's 1949 Partisan Review essay, "Reflections on Gandhi," is available online at ReadPrint. Quite interesting.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Timetables are bad

Posted by Richard on March 15, 2007

At least on one issue, one Republican leader is showing a bit of spine and spunk. Sen. Mitch McConnell, speaking on the Senate floor yesterday, forcefully rejected the Reid Resolution (which calls for troop withdrawals to begin in 4 months, with all combat troops out of Iraq within a year). McConnell reminded the Democrats that they once rejected as foolish the course they now want to impose (emphasis added):

"This is the memo our enemies have been waiting for.

"Osama Bin Laden and his followers have repeatedly said that the U.S. does not have the stomach for a long fight with the terrorists. Passage of the Reid Joint Resolution will be the first concrete sign since Sept. 11, 2001, that he was right on target.

"Timetables are bad. But don't just take my word for it.

"Speaking at the National Press Club in 2005, my good friend the Majority Leader himself said this: ‘As for setting a timeline, as we learned in the Balkans, that's not a wise decision, because it only empowers those who don't want us there, and it doesn't work well to do that.'

"Six months after that, the Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Biden, said this: ‘A deadline for pulling out … will only encourage our enemies to wait us out' … it would be ‘a Lebanon in 1985. And God knows where it goes from there.' That was our friend, Joe Biden, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

"And three months later, Senator Clinton made the same point when she said, ‘I don't believe it's smart to set a date for withdrawal,' said Senator Clinton. ‘I don't think you should ever telegraph your intentions to the enemy so they can await you.' "That's the Majority Leader, Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, and a prominent Democrat presidential candidate.

"Surely Senators Reid, Biden, and Clinton have not changed their minds about who would benefit the most if we set a date certain for withdrawal. They know just as well as I do that this is what the terrorists have been waiting for – and just what our allies in Iraq, and the entire region of the world have feared.

"Setting a date certain for withdrawal will send a chill up the spine of every Iraqi who has dared to stand with America. Millions of good men and women have helped us in this fight. Since we arrived in Iraq, nearly 120,000 Iraqis have volunteered to serve in their army. More than 8,000 Iraqis have died in uniform to defend the fledgling Democracy over there. And recently, in Anbar province, we're told that roughly 1,000 Sunnis volunteered for the police force over a period of a couple weeks.

"These brave men and women, Mr. President, are watching what we do here: They know, as we do, that chaos will engulf Iraq and the rest of the region on that day. They know they and their families will likely face a firing squad soon after we leave. And the message we send them with this resolution is this: good luck. 

Thank you, Sen. McConnell, for reminding your colleagues that there are many, many lives at stake.

If the Democrats have their way on Iraq, not only will U.S. interests and the long-term prospects for world peace be severely damaged, but — just in case it matters to the self-styled humanitarians on the left — there will likely be a bloodbath in Iraq to rival what happened in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge.

Of course, the left pretty much tried to ignore that one, too.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Cashing in on carbon credit scam

Posted by Richard on March 15, 2007

It's long been obvious to me that the environmental fear-mongers are chiefly interested in power — their solution to every perceived problem, whether it's overpopulation, pollution, cooling, warming, or whatever, is always less freedom and more government compulsion. And it's been equally clear that many of them are hypocrites, lecturing us for not being green enough while they live in humongous mansions and jet to their second and third homes in their private Gulfstreams.

It turns out that some of them are also greedy money-grubbers using climate-change hysteria to enrich themselves (emphasis added):

The two cherub like choirboys singing loudest in the Holier Than Thou Global Warming Cathedral are Maurice Strong and Al Gore.

This duo has done more than anyone else to advance the alarmism of man-made global warming.

With little media monitoring, both Strong and Gore are cashing in on the lucrative cottage industry known as man-made global warming.

Strong is on the board of directors of the Chicago Climate Exchange, Wikipedia-described as "the world's first and North America's only legally binding greenhouse gas emission registry reduction system for emission sources and offset projects in North America and Brazil."

Gore buys his carbon off-sets from himself–the Generation Investment Management LLP, "an independent, private, owner-managed partnership established in 2004 with offices in London and Washington, D.C." of which he is both chairman and founding partner.

There's a fine compendium of information about Gore, Knight, and the GIM carbon credit scam at The Global Warming Hoax. Interest in Gore's carbon credit firm grew after the Tennessee Center for Policy Research discovered that Gore's 10,000-square-foot mansion near Nashville used $30,000 worth of electricity and natural gas in 2006. Here's a photoshop picture of the mansion (from FreakingNews.com; used with permission):

Al Gore's mansion, per FreakingNews.com

This isn't the first time Gore and Strong have cashed in on the environment. Back when Gore was Veep, he praised and promoted Molten Metal Technology Inc. (MMTI), which supposedly was developing innovative recycling technology. MMTI got over $30 million in DOE grants, and its stock soared to $35. The company was largely owned and run by Maurice Strong and several Gore associates. Just before news that the technology didn't exist and that the DOE was cutting off funding, Strong and his pals cashed out to the tune of $15 million.

Strong is a piece of work. A wealthy Canadian businessman, U.N. diplomat, and father of the Kyoto Protocol, he was lined up to become U.N. Secretary General before being implicated in the Oil for Food scandal. In 2002, Canadian papers carried a book excerpt profiling Strong and his desire to change the world:

He told Maclean's magazine in 1976 that he was "a socialist in ideology, a capitalist in methodology." He warns that if we don't heed his environmentalist warnings, the Earth will collapse into chaos.

Strong has always courted power – but not through any shabby election campaign. He was a Liberal candidate in the 1979 federal election, but pulled out a month before the vote.

How could a mere MP wield the kind of international control he had tasted in Stockholm? Journalist Elaine Dewar, who interviewed Strong, described why he loved the UN.

"He could raise his own money from whomever he liked, appoint anyone he wanted, control the agenda," wrote Dewar.

"He told me he had more unfettered power than a cabinet minister in Ottawa. He was right: He didn't have to run for re-election, yet he could profoundly affect lives."

Strong prefers power extracted from democracies, and kept from unenlightened voters. Most power-crazed men would stop at calling for a one world Earth Charter to replace the U.S. Constitution, or the UN Charter.

But in an interview with his own Earth Charter Commission, Strong said "the real goal of the Earth Charter is it will in fact become like the Ten Commandments. It will become a symbol of the aspirations and commitments of people everywhere." Sounds like Maurice was hanging out at his spirit ranch without his sunhat on.

In 1990, Strong told a reporter a fantasy scenario for the World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, Switzerland – where 1,000 diplomats, CEOs and politicians gather "to address global issues."

Strong, naturally, is on the board of the World Economic Forum. "What if a small group of these world leaders were to conclude the principal risk to the earth comes from the actions of the rich countries?…

In order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring this about?"

Strong may still want to bring down the rich Western industrial democracies. He and George Soros, with whom he's worked on both political goals and business ventures, are pouring money into the Chinese automobile industry, with the goal of flooding the U.S. market with cheap Chinese cars. Strong lives in China these days, and he wants to help China overtake the U.S. economically and become the world's dominant superpower. Never mind what that does to China's "carbon footprint." 

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Clinton chutzpah, continued

Posted by Richard on March 15, 2007

Today, Rush Limbaugh echoed practically everything I said in Clinton chutzpah, including the suggestion that Sen. Clinton pledge not to fire any U.S. Attorneys if elected President. He quoted extensively from today's excellent Wall Street Journal editorial, which argued that any inquiry into "the politicization of our prosecutorial system" should call Hillary and her good friend Web Hubbell as the star witnesses:

As everyone once knew but has tried to forget, Mr. Hubbell was a former partner of Mrs. Clinton at the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock who later went to jail for mail fraud and tax evasion. He was also Bill and Hillary Clinton's choice as Associate Attorney General in the Justice Department when Janet Reno, his nominal superior, simultaneously fired all 93 U.S. Attorneys in March 1993. Ms. Reno–or Mr. Hubbell–gave them 10 days to move out of their offices.

At the time, President Clinton presented the move as something perfectly ordinary: "All those people are routinely replaced," he told reporters, "and I have not done anything differently." In fact, the dismissals were unprecedented: Previous Presidents, including Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter, had both retained holdovers from the previous Administration and only replaced them gradually as their tenures expired. This allowed continuity of leadership within the U.S. Attorney offices during the transition.

The Journal noted the troubling connection to the Rostenkowski investigation that I mentioned, but they remembered another potential motive that I'd forgotten:

Also at the time, allegations concerning some of the Clintons' Whitewater dealings were coming to a head. By dismissing all 93 U.S. Attorneys at once, the Clintons conveniently cleared the decks to appoint "Friend of Bill" Paula Casey as the U.S. Attorney for Little Rock. Ms. Casey never did bring any big Whitewater indictments, and she rejected information from another FOB, David Hale, on the business practices of the Arkansas elite including Mr. Clinton. When it comes to "politicizing" Justice, in short, the Bush White House is full of amateurs compared to the Clintons.

And it may be this very amateurism that explains how the current Administration has managed to turn this routine issue of replacing Presidential appointees into a political fiasco. There was nothing wrong with replacing the eight Attorneys, all of whom serve at the President's pleasure. Prosecutors deserve supervision like any other executive branch appointees.

It's not just amateurism and ineptness. I saw Attorney General Gonzales being grilled by George Stephanopoulos, and I heard clips of him being hammered by Matt Lauer. Inept certainly describes his performance in both interviews, but there's a deeper problem, and it's endemic throughout the Republican leadership. When they're attacked by Democrats or especially the media, no matter how unfair or nasty or easily refuted the attack is, the Republicans' first impulse seems to be to cower and grovel. "Please don't hate me! I'm not a bad person, really I'm not!"

Today's Democrats are perpetually outraged. Today's Republicans are perpetually apologetic. 

The Journal went on to describe some of the background to the firings. It sounds like McKay of Washington state and Iglesias of New Mexico should have been sacked long ago. The less clear-cut cases — policy differences over the death penalty, disputed managerial skills, and the like — rate a shrug, followed by "It's the President's call."

When Democrats and the media started trying to make a fuss about these firings, Republicans should have been falling all over each other to call press conferences and get in front of microphones. They should have expressed outrage that Democrats would try to interfere with the President's prerogatives regarding these appointments. They should have been contemptuous of these absurd calls for investigations. They should have cried, "How dare you, Sen. Clinton!"

The current GOP leadership consists primarily of spineless wusses with a Rodney King approach to politics: "Can't we all just get along?" No, we can't. And nobody's going to stand by you if you won't stand up for yourselves.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »