Don Singleton

Thursday, February 23, 2006

German court convicts man for insulting Islam

Yahoo! News reported A German court on Thursday convicted a businessman of insulting Islam by printing the word "Koran" on toilet paper and offering it to mosques

I did not realize that was against the law.

.... Manfred van H. printed out sheets of toilet paper bearing the word "Koran" shortly after a group of Muslims carried out a series of bomb attacks in London in July 2005. He sent the paper to German television stations, magazines and some 15 mosques. Prosecutors said that in an accompanying letter Manfred van H. called Islam's holy book a "cookbook for terrorists." He also offered his toilet paper for sale on the Internet at a price of 4 euros ($4.76) per roll, saying the proceeds would go toward a "memorial to all the victims of Islamic terrorism."

At that price I doubt if he is going to sell very many rolls.

The maximum sentence for insulting religious beliefs under the German criminal code is three years in prison.

Wednesday, February 22, 2006

Nude photo site wins injunction against Google

CNET News reported U.S. District Judge A. Howard Matz ruled Friday that Perfect 10, an adult-oriented Web site featuring "beautiful natural women" in the nude, has shown that Google image search probably infringes copyright law "by creating and displaying thumbnail copies of its photographs."

This is foolish. They need to include the necessary meta tags if they don't want Google to scan their site.

.... Perfect 10 sued Google for copyright infringement in November 2004, and then in August 2005, asked for an injunction to halt Google from allegedly copying, displaying and distributing more than 3,000 Perfect 10 photos. The photo publisher says it's plagued by copyright pirates who pay its $25.50 monthly fee and then reproduce its copyright images on sites that are indexed by Google and incorporated in its image search feature.

Then the copyright infringement is on the part of the websites that reproduce Perfect 10's images on their sites, and Google has no way of knowing where they came from.

Muslim Against Muslim

NYT reported In a direct challenge to the international uproar over cartoons lampooning the Prophet Muhammad, the Jordanian journalist Jihad Momani wrote: "What brings more prejudice against Islam, these caricatures or pictures of a hostage-taker slashing the throat of his victim in front of the cameras, or a suicide bomber who blows himself up during a wedding ceremony?"

That is a very good question. A similar question is "Which offends Muhammad more: the cartoons, or the fact that a number of people named Muhammad were on the planes in 9/11, or have been involved in other terrorist acts?

In Yemen, an editorial by Muhammad al-Assadi condemned the cartoons but also lamented the way many Muslims reacted. "Muslims had an opportunity to educate the world about the merits of the Prophet Muhammad and the peacefulness of the religion he had come with," Mr. Assadi wrote. He added, "Muslims know how to lose, better than how to use, opportunities."

Another very good point.

To illustrate their points, both editors published selections of the drawings — and for that they were arrested and threatened with prison.

That is sheer stupidity.

Vote Due on South Dakota Bill

NYT Lawmakers here are preparing to vote on a bill that would outlaw nearly all abortions in South Dakota, a measure that could become the most sweeping ban approved by any state in more than a decade, those on both sides of the abortion debate say.

This is really the big test. I feel sure that the Partial Birth Abortion Ban will be upheld, in fact I find it outrageous that O'Conner blocked it. But this bill will require Roe to be overturned, and I wonder if Alito has been on the court long enough to fee comfortable doing that.

If the bill passes a narrowly divided Senate in a vote expected on Wednesday, and is signed by Gov. Michael Rounds, a Republican who opposes abortion, advocates of abortion rights have pledged to challenge it in court immediately — and that is precisely what the bill's supporters have in mind.

Disputed Abortion Method

NYT reported The Supreme Court, at full strength with Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. on the bench for the first time, opened the next chapter in its long-running confrontation with abortion on Tuesday by agreeing to decide whether the first federal ban on a method of abortion is constitutional.

The "method" is partial birth abortion, delivering a baby half way, and then sucking its brains out before it finishes coming out of the mother, so they can say it died while still a "fetus".

Jane Hamsher reported There's No Such Thing As a Pro-Choice Republican (or Lieberman) — We knew it would happen sooner or later, and I guess it's going to be sooner: …

You must really be evil, to think that a person must support partial birth abortion before they are considered "Pro Choice"

Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Bush: Arab Co. Port Deal Should Proceed

Breitbart reported President Bush said Tuesday that the deal allowing an Arab company to take over six major U.S. seaports should go forward

That is a mistake. He should call for a 45 day review. If after that time it still looks like it should go through that is one thing, but he should not decline to even look at it.

and that he would veto any congressional effort to stop it.

I am happy he knows he has a veto pen, but he should use it on some of these huge spending bills with earmarks.

"After careful review by our government, I believe the transaction ought to go forward," Bush told reporters who had traveled with him on Air Force One to Washington. "I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company.

No one from Great Britain were on the planes on 9/11

I am trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to the people of the world, `We'll treat you fairly.'"

Monday, February 20, 2006

After Neoconservatism

Francis Fukuyama wrote in NYT As we approach the third anniversary of the onset of the Iraq war, it seems very unlikely that history will judge either the intervention itself or the ideas animating it kindly.

At least that is what the NYT is trying to get historians to think through its manipulation of the news.

By invading Iraq, the Bush administration created a self-fulfilling prophecy: Iraq has now replaced Afghanistan as a magnet, a training ground and an operational base for jihadist terrorists,

In Afganistan they had permanent training bases, in Iraq the training they are getting is trying to hide and not be found by the Americans AND the Iraqis seeking to kill them.

with plenty of American targets to shoot at.

But they find it a lot easier to shoot at innocent Iraqis, that don't have guns; the American soldiers shoot back.

The United States still has a chance of creating a Shiite-dominated democratic Iraq, but the new government will be very weak for years to come; the resulting power vacuum will invite outside influence from all of Iraq's neighbors, including Iran.

And they will be very good friends with America, that freed them, and we will offset the influence of countries they have fought wars against in the past.

There are clear benefits to the Iraqi people from the removal of Saddam Hussein's dictatorship,

Thanks to Bush's efforts.

and perhaps some positive spillover effects in Lebanon and Syria.

Again, thanks to Bush's efforts.

But it is very hard to see how these developments in themselves justify the blood and treasure that the United States has spent on the project to this point.

At least the Left Wing NYT hopes that is the way people will think.

Bin Laden Vows Never to Be Captured Alive

Yahoo! News Osama bin Laden vowed never to be captured alive

That is fine. A special place in Hell is reserved for him.

and said the U.S. military had become as "barbaric" as Saddam Hussein

Really? Which Kurdish towns have we wiped out with Mustard Gas? Where are the mass graves where we wiped out entire Shi'ite towns?

in an audiotape reposted on a militant Islamic Web site after first being broadcast last month. In the tape posted to the Web site Monday, bin Laden offered the United States a long-term truce

As long as we withdraw from Afganistan, Iraq, and the entire Muslim world.

but also said his al-Qaida terror network would soon launch a fresh attack on American soil. The tape was initially broadcast Jan. 19 on Al-Jazeera,

But they left out parts of it, like the parts that criticized Al-Jazerra as being too friendly to the West (which should give everyone an idea of how he would like the West treated.

the pan-Arab satellite channel. Islamic militant Web forums often repost messages from al-Qaida leaders to ensure sympathizers can see them. U.S. intelligence officials confirmed that last month's tape was of bin Laden — making it his first message in more than a year. "I have sworn to only live free. Even if I find bitter the taste of death, I don't want to die humiliated or deceived,"

He prefers to be the humiliator and the deceiver.

bin Laden said, in the 11-minute, 26-second tape.... Bin Laden also denied Bush administration assertions that it was better to fight terrorists in Iraq than on U.S. soil.

I agree with Bush. It is much better to fight them there than here.

Don't Punish the Palestinians

Bleeding Heart (and empty head) Jimmy Carter pleads in WaPo
The role of the prime minister was greatly strengthened while Abbas and Ahmed Qureia served in that position under Yasser Arafat, and Abbas has announced that he will not choose a prime minister who does not recognize Israel or adhere to the basic principles of the "road map." This could result in a stalemated process,

Since Hamas has said that they have no intention of recognizing Israel I suspect there will be a stalemated process.

but my conversations with representatives of both sides indicate that they wish to avoid such an imbroglio. The spokesman for Hamas claimed, "We want a peaceful unity government." If this is a truthful statement, it needs to be given a chance.

The fact that Hamas intends to destroy Israel should not affect that.

During this time of fluidity in the formation of the new government, it is important that Israel and the United States play positive roles. Any tacit or formal collusion between the two powers to disrupt the process by punishing the Palestinian people could be counterproductive and have devastating consequences.

Unfortunately, these steps are already underway and are well known throughout the Palestinian territories and the world. Israel moved yesterday to withhold funds (about $50 million per month) that the Palestinians earn from customs and tax revenue.

The Arab countries promised to give them a few million to make up for the loss.

Perhaps a greater aggravation by the Israelis is their decision to hinder movement of elected Hamas Palestinian Legislative Council members through any of more than a hundred Israeli checkpoints around and throughout the Palestinian territories.

Should they give them freedom to travel and bring bombs in diplomatic pouches to leave with Arabs in Israel so that they can kill Israelis?

This will present significant obstacles to a government's functioning effectively. Abbas informed me after the election that the Palestinian Authority was $900 million in debt and that he would be unable to meet payrolls during February. Knowing that Hamas would inherit a bankrupt government, U.S. officials have announced that all funding for the new government will be withheld, including what is needed to pay salaries for schoolteachers, nurses, social workers, police and maintenance personnel. So far they have not agreed to bypass the Hamas-led government and let humanitarian funds be channeled to Palestinians through United Nations agencies responsible for refugees, health and other human services.

I am happy they have not. If there is anything more dishonest than the Palestinian Authority it is the United Nations.

This common commitment to eviscerate the government of elected Hamas officials by punishing private citizens may accomplish this narrow purpose, but the likely results will be to alienate the already oppressed and innocent Palestinians, to incite violence, and to increase the domestic influence and international esteem of Hamas. It will certainly not be an inducement to Hamas or other militants to moderate their policies.

If Hamas wants to govern, it should do it, and not require either the US or Israel to give it money.

The election of Hamas candidates cannot adversely affect genuine peace talks, since such talks have been nonexistent for over five years. A negotiated agreement is the only path to a permanent two-state solution, providing peace for Israel and justice for the Palestinians. In fact, if Israel is willing to include the Palestinians in the process, Abbas can still play this unique negotiating role as the unchallenged leader of the PLO (not the government that includes Hamas).

Why should Israel talk with someone other than the "government" of a people that wants its own state?

It was under this umbrella and not the Palestinian Authority that Arafat negotiated with Israeli leaders to conclude the Oslo peace agreement.

And we all know how successful that was.

Abbas has sought peace talks with Israel since his election a year ago, and there is nothing to prevent direct talks with him, even if Hamas does not soon take the ultimately inevitable steps of renouncing violence and recognizing Israel's right to exist.

Sunday, February 19, 2006

Poll reveals 40pc of Muslims want sharia law in UK

Telegraph reported Four out of 10 British Muslims want sharia law introduced into parts of the country, a survey reveals today.

If they want to live under sharia law, they should just move to a Muslim country. They are living in Britain because they don't want to live under the conditiions that exist in Muslim countries, and a significant aspect of those conditions is sharia law. So it is obvious that 40% of British Muslims are insane. And if Britian adopts sharia law to placate those Muslims, then 100% of them would have to be insane.

The ICM opinion poll also indicates that a fifth have sympathy with the "feelings and motives" of the suicide bombers who attacked London last July 7, killing 52 people, although 99 per cent thought the bombers were wrong to carry out the atrocity. Overall, the findings depict a Muslim community becoming more radical and feeling more alienated from mainstream society,

If they want to live in a Muslim community, they should move to a Muslim country. If they want to be British, they should live among the British, and not in a Muslim "community".

even though 91 per cent still say they feel loyal to Britain.

Freedom to publish

Flemming Rose (culture editor of the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten) wrote in WaPo
I agree that the freedom to publish things doesn't mean you publish everything. Jyllands-Posten would not publish pornographic images or graphic details of dead bodies; swear words rarely make it into our pages. So we are not fundamentalists in our support for freedom of expression. But the cartoon story is different.

Those examples have to do with exercising restraint because of ethical standards and taste; call it editing. By contrast, I commissioned the cartoons in response to several incidents of self-censorship in Europe caused by widening fears and feelings of intimidation in dealing with issues related to Islam. And I still believe that this is a topic that we Europeans must confront, challenging moderate Muslims to speak out.

The Muslims certainly should not be allowed to think that they are a protected group, immune from being offended. I personally wish the media would not seek to offend any religion, yet I believe that frank discussions of religious topics should be not just permitted, but encouraged.

The idea wasn't to provoke gratuitously -- and we certainly didn't intend to trigger violent demonstrations throughout the Muslim world.

The 12 cartoons that were published should not have provoked those demonstrations. They were provoked by clerics that deliberately inflamed fellow Muslims, hoping to provoke violence, because they want to intimidate Europe into doing anything the Islamists want.

Our goal was simply to push back self-imposed limits on expression that seemed to be closing in tighter. At the end of September, a Danish standup comedian said in an interview with Jyllands-Posten that he had no problem urinating on the Bible in front of a camera, but he dared not do the same thing with the Koran.

And that is wrong. He should not do that to any holy book, but he should not fear physical attack if he did.

This was the culmination of a series of disturbing instances of self-censorship. Last September, a Danish children's writer had trouble finding an illustrator for a book about the life of Muhammad. Three people turned down the job for fear of consequences. The person who finally accepted insisted on anonymity, which in my book is a form of self-censorship.

There are also examples of 14th century art work which does depict Muhammad, and it did not provoke violence when it was made.

European translators of a critical book about Islam also did not want their names to appear on the book cover beside the name of the author, a Somalia-born Dutch politician who has herself been in hiding.

That is wrong. Any religiion that cannot tolerate a critical analysis is not a valid religion.

Around the same time, the Tate gallery in London withdrew an installation by the avant-garde artist John Latham depicting the Koran, Bible and Talmud torn to pieces. The museum explained that it did not want to stir things up after the London bombings.

I am happy they did not want to show that "art work", but I am unhappy that they probably would have been happy to display it, if it had just involved the Bible and Talmud (or Torah), and if the Koran had been left out.

(A few months earlier, to avoid offending Muslims, a museum in Goteborg, Sweden, had removed a painting with a sexual motif and a quotation from the Koran.)

Finally, at the end of September, Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen met with a group of imams, one of whom called on the prime minister to interfere with the press in order to get more positive coverage of Islam.

So, over two weeks we witnessed a half-dozen cases of self-censorship, pitting freedom of speech against the fear of confronting issues about Islam. This was a legitimate news story to cover, and Jyllands-Posten decided to do it by adopting the well-known journalistic principle: Show, don't tell. I wrote to members of the association of Danish cartoonists asking them "to draw Muhammad as you see him." We certainly did not ask them to make fun of the prophet. Twelve out of 25 active members responded.

We have a tradition of satire when dealing with the royal family and other public figures, and that was reflected in the cartoons. The cartoonists treated Islam the same way they treat Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism and other religions. And by treating Muslims in Denmark as equals they made a point: We are integrating you into the Danish tradition of satire because you are part of our society, not strangers. The cartoons are including, rather than excluding, Muslims.

Saturday, February 18, 2006

Another loony statement by Baldwin

Baldwin to mother ship. Come in mother ship.

Alec Baldwin wonders on The Huffington Post "Will They Go to Court?" So, I suppose the question is...what kind of civil trial will we see, or not see, between Cheney and Whittington?

Considering that when he left the hospital, Whittington said "We all assume certain risks in whatever we do, whatever activities we pursue. And regardless of how experienced, careful and dedicated we are, accidents do and will happen – and that’s what happened last Friday"
If he was even thinking about a lawsuit, he never would have gone on record saying it was just an accident.
and "My family and I are deeply sorry for all that vice president Cheney has had to go through this past week.
The Angry Left really went balistic with that statement.
Self-Blaming By the Victim If Cheney shooting victim Harry Whittington thinks he's doing the Veep any favors by apologizing to him and his family for what they "have had to go through this week," then his judgment is as poor as it was when he decided to go out in the woods with Dick Cheney to begin with.
Robert A. George Whittington sounds like an embarrassed samurai who has suddenly, uh, lost face. Ahem. Next: a reading from the recently-discovered deathbed letter of apology from Alexander Hamilton to Aaron Burr.
Desert Rat Democrat I'm Sorry You Shot Me, Mr. Cheney
We send our love and respect to them as they deal with situations that are much more serious than what we’ve had this week."

Whittington is certainly no stranger to a court room and to civil litigation. Will Cheney pay him off, preemptively? Will they go to court? I would imagine if a guy with a few beers in him
Cheney said he had ONE beer for lunch several hours earlier. And the land owner did not know there was any beer beign served.
shoots you in the face on a hunting trip, how could you turn down that opportunity? What would Cheney do about the whole secrecy thing then? I mean, this is the guy that sicced Enron on Gray Davis and the state of California to embarrass Davis,
Baldwin is trying to rewrite history here. Enron did not do what it did because Cheney wanted to embarrass Gray Davis. It did what it did to MAKE MONEY, and the fact that Davis was stupid enough to try to control prices from the consumer side of things, and yet wanted to prevent supply problems, and made longterm contracts at a too high price was not Cheney's fault. It was not even Enron's fault. Davis was an idiot.
trigger the recall and then watched Arnold Schwarzenegger become governor of California. (To this day, perhaps, still the low point in American political life.)
Is it a low point because Arnold is a Republican, or is it something else. Reagan was a Republican governor of Califronia.
Then Cheney covered it up.
How did Cheney cover it up. Did he do something to keep people from knowing Schwarzenegger is governor of California..

Friday, February 17, 2006

Gevoelig

Michelle Malkin blogged "Gevoelig" means "sensitive" in Dutch. Just watch the very cool animated cartoon here.

ROF, LMAO

Michelle is right, this is absolutely the funniest thing I have ever seen

Abuse Photos

New Abu Graib photos have surfaced Salon explains Why we're publishing the new Abu Ghraib photos - America -- and the world -- has the right to know what was done in our name.

And Salon hopes that people will not realize this is old news, and that the people who did this are already in prison. They just hope that it will make the Bush administration look bad, and they really don't care what happens to our forces in Iraq.

CNN showed some of them, and Michelle Malkin asked Why the Abu Ghraib photos, but not the Mohammed Cartoons?

but the real story is contained in Jawa Report's story Prisoner Abuse Photos from Iraq that MSM Won't Show You

The MSM may show the Abu Graib photos, because they help tear down America and reflect badly on the Bush Administration, and if they can't find something new, they will repeat stories from three years ago. But Jawa Report has a collection of photos showing how barbarians in Iraq treat innocent hostages it captures.

Will Apple Adopt Windows?

John Dvorak wrote The idea that Apple would ditch its own OS for Microsoft Windows came to me from Yakov Epstein, a professor of psychology at Rutgers University, who wrote to me convinced that the process had already begun. I was amused, but after mulling over various coincidences, I'm convinced he may be right.

I was surprised when they switched to the Intel Chip, but John makes a very good case for the possibility that Mac OS may be on its last legs, and that Apple may be switching to Windows, perhaps with a tweaked GUI.

This would be the most phenomenal turnabout in the history of desktop computing.

Iran Renames Danish Pastries

Yahoo! News
Iranians love Danish pastries, but when they look for the flaky dessert at the bakery they now have to ask for "Roses of the Prophet Muhammad." Bakeries across the capital were covering up their ads for Danish pastries Thursday after the confectioners' union ordered the name change in retaliation for caricatures of the Muslim prophet published in a Danish newspaper.

This reminds me of French Fries being renamed Freedom Fries. It is silly, but it is a lot more civilized than burning embasies.

"Given the insults by Danish newspapers against the prophet, as of now the name of Danish pastries will give way to 'Rose of Muhammad' pastries," the union said in its order.

Thursday, February 16, 2006

Blogging? Six tips on how to do it right

ZDNet reported

Tip #1: What's in a name? Search engine results.
The idea is to select a name that will bring searchers to your blog if they search on the name of your blog. While that might be ok, they are also going to be able to come in based on the words you post.
Tip #2: Read a bunch of blogs before you start.
Definitely a good idea.
Tip #3: Keep it simple. Keep it focused.
Tip #4: Demonstrate passion.
Tip #5: Show your authority.
Tip #6: Add comments.
In my opinion, a blog without comments or trackbacks is not a blog.

Weed out textbooks offensive to Muslims

Telegraph reports School textbooks should be reviewed for intolerant depictions of Islam and other faiths by experts overseen by the European Union and Islamic leaders, the European Parliament was told yesterday.

If that means eliminating offensive cartoons, then I agree. They do not belong in textbooks. But if it means removing historical accounts showing how barbaric Muslims used to be, and how many of them still are, then thanks but no thanks.

The call for a special committee to examine religious education in schools came from Hans-Gert Pöttering, the German Christian Democrat, who heads the largest group of MEPs. But the proposal was immediately condemned as "appeasement" by Charles Tannock, a British Conservative MEP.

Who was probably right.

Mr Pöttering, the head of the centre-Right, but largely federalist European People's Party, said the work of building bridges between Islam and the West had to "begin with young people".

Does this review apply to what is taught in Madrassas and other Muslim schools, or just what non-Muslim Europeans are taught?

Wednesday, February 15, 2006

An Arrogance of Power

David Ignatius wrote in WaPo There is a temptation that seeps into the souls of even the most righteous politicians and leads them to bend the rules, and eventually the truth, to suit the political needs of the moment. That arrogance of power is on display with the Bush administration. The most vivid example is the long delay in informing the country that Vice President Cheney had accidentally shot a man last Saturday while hunting in Texas.

The real Arrogance of Power is on the part of the media, thinking that the White House should have as its first priority informing the White House Press Corp anytime something embarrassing happens. These arrogant idiots think they should have been informed even before Cheney had the medical people traveling with him help the man that was shot, and certainly before Cheney visited him in the hospital. However if they had been informed before Cheney went to visit the man, they would have said he was just grandstanding, and wanting to turn it into a Photo Opportunity.

For a White House that informs us about the smallest bumps and scrapes suffered by the president and vice president, the lag is inexplicable.

Why? Injury to Potus or the VP might conceivably be of interest to the American People, since they are in charge of the Executive Branch of the government, but injury to a lawyer in Texas is not earthshaking news, even it his injury was the result of an accident involving the VP.

But let us assume the obvious: It was an attempt to delay and perhaps suppress embarrassing news.

Of course it was. And what is wrong with that.

We will never know whether the vice president's office would have announced the incident at all if the host of the hunting party, Katharine Armstrong, hadn't made her own decision Sunday morning to inform her local paper.

Reports are they discussed making it public, and decided Katharine Armstrong would handle it. But the press is not even willing to take their word about that. Is there any surprise that they did not see any reason to tell them more.

Nobody died at Armstrong Ranch, but this incident reminds me a bit of Sen. Edward Kennedy's delay in informing Massachusetts authorities about his role in the fatal automobile accident at Chappaquiddick in 1969.

There is a big difference. Not only was the man not pregnant, and at a time before Roe v Wade would have made an abortion legal, but Cheney made sure he got immediate medical attention, rather than leaving him to drown in a car, and he made sure the man was promptly flown to a hospital, and visited him there.

Congressional Probe of NSA Spying Is in Doubt

WaPo
reported Congress appeared ready to launch an investigation into the Bush administration's warrantless domestic surveillance program last week, but an all-out White House lobbying campaign has dramatically slowed the effort and may kill it, key Republican and Democratic sources said yesterday.

That is good. The program is necessary for our defense. It was weakened by the leak, and the leaker and NYT editors should be charged with treason, but exposing the program even more by hearings would hurt the country. It is important to the 2006 elections to show that Democrats are weak on defense, but there will be better ways to do that closer to the election.

The Senate intelligence committee is scheduled to vote tomorrow on a Democratic-sponsored motion to start an inquiry into the recently revealed program in which the National Security Agency eavesdrops on an undisclosed number of phone calls and e-mails involving U.S. residents without obtaining warrants from a secret court. Two committee Democrats said the panel -- made up of eight Republicans and seven Democrats -- was clearly leaning in favor of the motion last week but now is closely divided and possibly inclined against it.

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)