Saturday, May 20, 2006


Eurabia
Dances
For Her
Muslim
Friend

Iraqi Parliament
Approves Cabinent


This is good news. They have a government. Now, let us see if they can learn to govern themselves humanely, or if they stumble and fall into a Jihadi morass:


BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraq's parliament approved a national unity government Saturday, achieving a goal Washington hopes will reduce violence so U.S. forces can eventually go home. But as the legislators met, a series of attacks killed at least 27 people and wounded dozens.

In a show of hands, the 275-member parliament approved each of the 39 Cabinet ministers proposed by incoming Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The new Shiite Muslim, Sunni Arab and Kurdish ministers then took their oaths of office during the nationally televised session in Baghdad's heavily fortified Green Zone.

The installation, coming after months of political wrangling following Dec. 15 parliamentary elections, completed a democratic process that began after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime in the 2003 U.S.-led invasion.

Friday, May 19, 2006


Pope Benedict
And
The Jews


A blast from CUANAS past. This is a post I did on Benedict, shortly after he was made Pope:


Much has been said in the past 24 about the New Pope and his relationship to the Jews. The media is making a big deal out of the fact that he was a member of the Hitler Youth. The truth is, all German children were enrolled in the Hitler Youth. The Popes father was an ACTIVE ANTI-NAZI, which caused him to have to pack up and move on several occasions.

The Popes whole family was anti-Nazi.

The media is bringing up this Hitler Youth stuff because the media does not like the fact that the Pope is a Christian. They would rather that he be a mushy New Age hypocrite like themselves.Too bad for the media.

The Pope, Mr. Ratzinger, is actually one of the best Christian friends the Jews have ever had. I am surprised to find how much his ideas dovetail with my very own.

Here is an excerpt from a very long paper, entitled The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures In The Christian Bible, much of it written by The Pope, Cardinal Ratzinger himself:


Personally, Paul continued to be proud of his Jewish origin (Rm 11:1). Referring to the time preceding his conversion, he says: “I advanced in Judaism beyond many among my people of the same age, for I was far more zealous for the traditions of my ancestors” (Ga 1:14). Having become an apostle of Christ, he says of his adversaries:

“Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they descendants of Abraham? So am I” (2 Co 11:22). Still, he can relativise all these advantages by saying: “These I have come to regard as loss because of Christ” (Ph 3:7).

Nonetheless, he continues to think and reason like a Jew. His thought is visibly permeated by Jewish ideas. In his writings, as was mentioned above, we find not only continual references to the Old Testament, but many traces of Jewish traditions as well. Furthermore, Paul often uses rabbinic techniques of exegesis and argumentation (cf. I. D. 3, no. 14).

Paul's ties to Judaism are also seen in his moral teaching. In spite of his opposition to the pretentions of those who kept the Law, he himself includes a precept of the Law, Lv 19:18 (“You shall love your neighbour as yourself”) to sum up the whole of the moral life. 332 Summing up the Law in one precept is typically Jewish, as the well-known anecdote about Rabbi Hillel and Rabbi Shammai, Jesus' contemporaries, demonstrates. 333

The resistance mounted by the majority of Jews to the Christian preaching produced in Paul's heart “great sorrow and unceasing anguish” (Rm 9:2), clear evidence of his great affection for them. He said that he himself was willing to accept on their behalf the greatest and most inconceivable sacrifice, to be branded “accursed”, separated from Christ (9:3). His afflictions and suffering forced him to search for a solution: in three lengthy chapters (Rm 9-11), he goes to the heart of the problem, or rather the mystery, of Israel's place in God's plan, in the light of Christ and of the Scriptures, without giving up until he is able to conclude: “and so all Israel will be saved” (Rm 11:26). These three chapters in the Letter to the Romans constitute the most profound reflection in the whole of the New Testament on Jews who do not believe in Jesus. Paul expressed there his most mature reflections.

The solution he proposed is based on the Scriptures which, in certain places, promised salvation only to a “remnant” of Israel. 334 In this phase of salvation history then, there is only a “remnant” of Israelites who believe in Christ Jesus, but this situation is not definitive. Paul observes that, from now on, the presence of the “remnant” proves that God has not “rejected his people” (11:1).

This people continues to be “holy”, that is, in close relationship with God. It is holy because it comes from a holy root, the ancestors, and because their “first fruits” have been blessed (11:16). Paul does not make it clear whether by “first fruits” he means Israel's ancestors, or the “remnant” sanctified by faith and baptism. He exploits the agricultural metaphor of the tree when he speaks of branches being cut off and grafted (11:17-24). It is understood that the cut off branches are Israelites who have refused to believe in Christ Jesus and that those grafted on are Gentile Christians. To these — as we have already noted — Paul preaches humility:

“It is not you that support the root, but the root that supports you” (11:18). To the branches that have been cut off, Paul opens up a positive perspective: “God has the power to graft them on again” (11:23); this would be easier than in the case of the Gentiles, since it is “their own olive tree” (11:24). In the final analysis, God's plan for Israel is entirely positive: “their stumbling means riches for the world”, “how much more will their full inclusion mean?” (11:12). They are assured of a covenant of mercy by God (11:27,31).


I've been called a heretic for saying such things. Well, now I have the Pope to back me up. I absolutely agree with the Pope on this. Always have. My heart tells me this is true, and this is why I call the Jews, My Brothers in the Faith.

I believe the choice of Cardinal Ratzinger as Pope could very well be a hinge upon which history will turn. He is exactly the Pope needed to counter the problems our world is facing today.


Todays Commentary:

There is one other very important thing to note which Paul writes, in the passage Benedict quotes here. It is a warning:

... they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. 21For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.22Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off.

--- Romans 11: 20-22

Taking into account, the post below, about Iran passing a law to force Jews to wear yellow insignias (as they were also forced to do by the Germans, in the days leading up to the Holocaust), it is wise for any believer to understand the curse that is leveled at those of us who would be "arrogant" toward the Jews.

Believe me, to ignore them in their time of peril is even worse than arrogance.

The Christian Church, the Body of Christ, stands ready to suffer the consequences if we remain silent.

You have been warned.


Iran Eyes
Badges For
Jews
And Christians


For anyone having problems figuring out whether Ahamdinejad is the new Hitler (for instance, my reason-challenged relatives in Europe), well, here you go:


Human rights groups are raising alarms over a new law passed by the Iranian parliament that would require the country's Jews and Christians to wear coloured badges to identify them and other religious minorities as non-Muslims.

"This is reminiscent of the Holocaust," said Rabbi Marvin Hier, the dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles. "Iran is moving closer and closer to the ideology of the Nazis."

Iranian expatriates living in Canada yesterday confirmed reports that the Iranian parliament, called the Islamic Majlis, passed a law this week setting a dress code for all Iranians, requiring them to wear almost identical "standard Islamic garments."

The law, which must still be approved by Iran's "Supreme Guide" Ali Khamenehi before being put into effect, also establishes special insignia to be worn by non-Muslims.

Iran's roughly 25,000 Jews would have to sew a yellow strip of cloth on the front of their clothes, while Christians would wear red badges and Zoroastrians would be forced to wear blue cloth.


Ok, so Ahmadinejad is a Holocaust denier, who, at the same time, uses all the methods and rhetoric of Hitler.

Still having trouble figuring it out?

Thursday, May 18, 2006


Seattle
Post-Intelligencer:
9/11 Was
An Inside Job


The Seattle Post-Intelligencer (I think the name means they are post-intelligent, just like post-modern means the period after the modern period) published an article claiming that the World Trade Center towers collapsed as the result of carefully placed demolition explosives.

Now, let us be clear, there is no reason for the Post-Intelligencer to publish such a thing unless they believe it has some legitimacy. If they were to publish such a thing without truly believing it, then we can conclude that part of thier agenda is to fill the minds of American citizens with anti-American conspiratorial drivel.

If the Post-Intelligencer wants to fill the minds of average American with such ideas, then the Post-Intelligencer is committing treason in spirit, if not legally.

Here's an excerpt from the Post-Intelligencer article:


In the months after 9/11 all of the surviving New York City Fire Department personnel who were on the scene were interviewed. Those oral histories were recorded and withheld from the public until Aug. 15, 2005. Only after losing in court three times did the city of New York finally release them. All 503 are now posted on The New York Times Web site.
Why did the city fight so hard to keep them from the public?


It turns out those oral histories reveal details about what was happening in the World Trade Center buildings that are completely inconsistent with the tale told by the commission. Dozens of firefighters and medics reported hearing, seeing and feeling explosives going off in the buildings that collapsed. Why were there explosives, very powerful explosives by all accounts, going off in the buildings? More disturbing, why was the pattern of those explosives identical in some important ways with the pattern used in a planned implosion (or controlled demolition of a building)?

In spite of Connelly’s faith in what commission members say, the report seems to be an obvious cover-up. The question that we all need to ask is: What is the commission covering up? Was 9/11, in fact, an inside job?


Last week I was in a bookstore in Wisconsin, checking out current events books in between meetings, and some middle-aged guy sidled up to me and carefully began explaining to me the same theory that is proposed here by the Post-Intelligencer. Nearby, there was a younger man sitting and reading a novel. The younger man began looking up and listening to our conversation with interest.

I let the middle-aged guy drone on for a second, so that his theory would be clear. He made the claim that demolition experts across the country had concluded that the towers could not have fallen the way they did, unless explosives had been carefully place throughout the buildings. He said the fire could not have been hot enough.

I would have let this insanity all go if we hadn't had an audience, but the idea that even one person is exposed to such bullshit, and may believe it, is not tolerable to me, so I pointed out to the guy that the architect who designed the building had said that his first reaction upon having seen that a commercial airliner had flown into the trade center was that the jet fuel fire would heat up and melt the metal which was the structure of the building.

The architect himself knew exactly what would happen.

Of course, Mr. Conspiracy Man got very angry with me, and a little scene ensued. I was ready to ask him who he thought was behind the whole thing; the Jews? But, alas, I thought better of it. And, I simply ambled over to the Lit section and bought a Milan Kundera book instead.

Meanwhile, doesn't it seem as if our whole fucking world is losing its mind.

What is going on here?

Wednesday, May 17, 2006

Iran Rejects
European
Nuclear Reactor Offer


Well, gee, at least they tried:


TEHRAN, Iran - Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Wednesday rejected a possible European offer for incentives, including a light-water nuclear reactor, in return for allaying fears about his country's nuclear program by giving up uranium enrichment.

Do you think you are dealing with a 4-year-old child to whom you can give some walnuts and chocolates and get gold from him?" Ahmadinejad told thousands of people in a speech in central Iran.


Maybe Europe can offer to give him a nuclear bomb next time. Just not a very big one.

He might accept that.

Give it a try, Europe.

Tuesday, May 16, 2006

Power Is A Beast
Does Bush Have Any Authority Left?
Could He Order An Attack On Iran?


As we all know, Bush's approval ratings are in the toilet, and about to be flushed.

How bad is it?

Well, Tom Van Dyke of The Reform Club puts it all in perspective:


Poll Gives Bush His Worst Marks Yet

So sayeth the NYT headline. OK, though a bit ho-hum. Another day, another drop in the polls. Down to 31%. Buried in the last paragraph, I mean the last, folks, are some other interesting approval ratings: Al Gore, 28%. And in the next-to-last, John Kerry, 26. 28, 26.

Y tu mamá también. Thank God Dubya stole those elections.

Over in the UK, where he just won another term while promising to quit before it's over (how perverse!), Tony Blair is at 26%, too. And I can't even imagine how low the heinous, corrupt Chirac regime has slipped, especially among those who got their Citroens all burned up in the recent, um, civil unrest.

The Battleaxis of Evil, Hillary Clinton, who says little and does nothing of value, only has an approval rating of 34%, and all-around good guy centrist John McCain is at 35. There's a pattern here.

In this day and age of 24/7 bad news here in the western world, all things considered like the (un)popularity of his previous crap opponents, his political ally in another country, and senators who have no real responsibility, Dubya is lookin' pretty danged good.


Well, maybe.

And, one must keep in mind that the Bush approval rating polls, themselves, are bullshit. They are being conducted by "AP-Ipsos" which means they are the polls of a French company that is used for nothing, in the American media, other than polling on Bush's approval rating.

Here's a link to a previous CUANAS article explaining just who AP-Ipsos is.

But now, let's go in a different direction with this.

I don't doubt that Bush's real approval rating is extremely low. The man's duel agenda of making war and, at the same time, granting citizenship to illegal aliens smacks of cognitive dissonance at a level the world has rarely seen.

So, if Bush's approval ratings are truly in the low 30's, then what does that mean for his agenda?

What do you think would happen if Bush decided to bomb Iran at this point? You know, what if he decided to use his dwindling authority to order a major military attack, on the foundation of his 31% approval rating?

Would he be able to get the military to do it?

That might sound like a crazy question, but think about it, at a certain point, an unpopular President wouldn't have any authority at all. What is that point?

And, where does he lost his authority first?

It seems to me he first loses his authority in Congress, and then gradually the military would follow. I don't think even the military can afford to follow the orders of a President if he has no support.

The military is not an entity unto itself. It is interlocked in the whole political world.

Political power is a beast that a strong man learns how to ride. It is not a force which resides in the heart of an individual. Bush is not policially powerful within himself. He does have some personal charisma, based on personality, and ideology, which allows him to control political power, but he does not carry the power within himself.

So, does Bush have the authority to pull off an attack on Iran at this point? And, at what point would he lose such authority?

Sunday, May 14, 2006







The Angriest Dog
In The World
(Click on cartoon to view)

The dog who is so angry he cannot move. He cannot eat. He cannot sleep. He can just barely growl. Bound so tightly with tension and anger, he approaches the state of rigor mortis."

Back on February 21, 2006, I came to the end of my rope with our current situation with regards to Iran. I realized that we were absolutely played out with the UN and the EU, and any effort to try to use diplomacy. I always knew diplomacy would not work, but I expected the diplomacy card to have been played in such a way that events would prove that it wasn't working. Instead, we have been played.

So, on February 21 of this year, I wrote the following post, entitled Perched On The Edge Of An Abyss:


My sense tells me that if we don't do something about Iran very, very soon, we are in deep shit.

I have been writing here for the last couple of months that it seems that it will take a major terrorist attack (more than 10,000 dead) in the West before we will wake up.

I have been hoping that the Cartoon Jihad would do the job of waking us up. I really thought that a worldwide Muslim temper tantrum, over something so incredibly stupid, would cause people in the West to come to terms with who our enemy is.

I am a big nobody, but I am trying as hard as I can to get the word out. But, a couple hundred thousand hits does little to change the world. The pundits in the media read our blogs. They know what is going on, but they believe moderation is called for.

People like Hugh Hewitt are a sweet poison to Western Civilization. Urging caution at a time like this is merely adminstering soothing ether.

We are in the foxhole of history right now. The last thing we need is sleep.

Alas, it seems that maybe only five percent of us have woken up. Maybe a bit more, but not much.


I also wrote this on that day:


Dennis Prager is one of my favorite people. I have learned so much from him over the years. It is safe to say that without him I would not be blogging today.This week he has a very important column on why the American news media will not publish the Mohammed Cartoons.

Good commentary, very necessary and true.

BUT,(you knew that was coming, didn't you?)

It occurred to me that Mr. Prager hasn't published the cartoons either. So, here it is, my call out to Dennis Prager:

You have a website. Publish the cartoons.

I'm going to be very honest here. I am tired of doing the heavy lifting for the media. Writing this blog wears on me.

Of course, there are many bloggers who are doing what we are doing here at IBA, so it's not like I am alone in this, but, at the same time, I am not an editor, publisher, or political commentator (that, I'm sure, doesn't come as a shock to any of you who read my crap on a daily basis), I am a sales guy in the media world. That's my job, not this blog.

And yet, it is people like me who have to do this work because the American media refuses to do so.

This is said in all sincerity, Mr. Prager. We need some help.

What is happening to our nation when sales guys, policemen, housewives, and marketing people are left to do the work of disseminating the most important truths of our time?

Now, the fact of the matter is, Dennis Prager is on our side. So, why do I call him out? Well, because he needs to step up and put his whole self where his mouth is, just like all of us bloggers have done.

It's time to step up, my friends.


You could say, that I have been thoroughly disgusted and fed up ever since that day. You could say that I have been chewing my sour cud ever since that day. You could say I have a permanent purple vein exploding off my forehead ever since that day. You could say I am the angriest dog in the world right about now, and you would be absolutely fucking correct.

I am poisoned with paralyzed patience. I am atrophied with apocalyptic apathy. I am solidified in stunned silence. I sit like the anti-Buddhi beneath a Bodhi tree aflame.

Ever since that day, February 21, 2006 I have had to drag myself to my computer, and choke down the news of the day. I have had to shiver and shake as I write. I have had to go for long walks, and bathe myself in the middling light of television sitcoms in order to make myself forget the events of the day. I don't even remember what it was that set me off specifically. I just know that I felt like the bottom dropped out of our world. I felt like we were all alone. We who care about Western Civilization were left without a leadership. We're to fend for ourselves without a government, without a formal agreement. Apparently, with no representation though we are endlessly taxed.

Well, it seems that I am not alone in feeling like this. For the longest time, I thought it was just me. I didn't want to mention it, because if it is just a personal depression that I am going though, then why bring other down. However, Wretchard from Belmont Club has noticed this phenomena in other people. He believe it has, in fact, spread across the blogosphere; from the right to the left of the political spectrum.

Here is his explanation:


My own hunch is that in the last two or three months there's been a change in the tone of the blogosphere. Nothing definite, simply a change in atmosphere in proportion to the degree of abstract tendencies of the blogger. Authors who trafficked in ideas and concepts have altered the most. Some have paused to take stock, pleading disgust or confusion; still others have returned to writing as seemingly different persons; others seem to be suffering a kind of nervous breakdown, obsessed with hatred for one or more public figures or inventing new words and finding conspiracies in everything they see.

The least affected are authors who are largely descriptive. For example Michael Totten's review of Arabs in Israel is one of those blogposts which describes what it sees even when it finds apparent contradictions.

My own theory is that all the old divisions so sharply erected between September 11, 2001 and April, 2003 have been slowly eroded by the uncertainties of the world. The Left and the Right have seen their champions turn out to be all too human, and are confounded. Issues which are a wedge on both sides of the spectrum -- like immigration or Darfur -- have scattered interest groups around like balls after a billiard break. New issues like the resurgence of a hostile Russia, the spread of Marxism in Latin America -- even the malicious buffoonery of the Iranian President -- are crowding at the fringes of the now comforting world of the War on Terror.

The old play is ending and yet the new one has not yet begun. And this bothers abstract intellectuals far more than it does the men in the field. A soldier can write with perfect conviction that "the world was a slightly better place every time I pulled the trigger" because he lives in a world of specificity, but the agonized thinker can find no such comfort in cold abstractions; abstractions now in need of repair under the weight of experience.

The need to keep mental furniture in order is the curse of the abstract thinker. A recent visitor from the Philippines told me -- not in so many words, but clearly enough -- about how the famous old Communists of the 1970s and 80s had all gone essentially crazy. Not clinically. But they were all of them gnawing at the ends of old plots, editing unread journals, scheming from miserable academic departments; haunting the peripheries of political life. He described this in quiet tones as we sat at some seaside saloon, a grey mist and rain having fallen over the bay; the perfect time he said "for Godzilla to come popping out of the water". And of course there was a better chance of Godzilla actually materializing than that those dusty old Commies should ever succeed at what they were doing. They knew it and that was the madness. It was better, I thought, to keep watching and have another beer.


Yes, I guess I have been sitting here waiting for Godzilla to come popping out of the water. But, the problem is, while it wouldn't have seemed likely to those old Commies back in 1970's Phillipines, it does seem likely today, given the situation we are facing vis a vis Ahmadinejad.

Next pitcher's on me.

Reds In Green Clothing:
The Environmentalists
Want To Destroy America


China is going into business with Cuba, drilling for oil off the coast of Florida. The United States is not drilling for oil in that region because of environmentalists who object to every move we make:


Cuba is exploring and potentially developing these oil fields, estimated by the U.S. Geological Survey to possess more oil than the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge, and Cuba is partnering with China and other countries, such as Spain, France, and Canada.


Terrye, from YARGB, comments:


Honest to God, just what did the environmentalist think would happen? We do not control the world, there are plenty of countries out there who could care less about the dolphins and the whales and the ice shelf.


Pure and simple, the environmentalist movement, is simply the Communist movement in green clothing. Their agenda is to bring down the United States. That is why the same people who object to every American move to increase its energy capacity (because of "concern for the environment") will, at the same time, suppor Cuba.