End of Issue #21


Any Questions?


Editorial and Rants

More voter fraud by the Democrats.  If Manny Golddigger mentions this, I'll give everyone a million dollars.

N.J. Judge Orders List of Adult Deaths

November 6, 2005 - From: usatoday.com

TRENTON, N.J. (AP) -- A judge concerned about the potential for voter fraud in Tuesday's election has ordered the state to compile the names of all adult New Jersey residents who have died since 1985.

State Superior Court Judge Linda R. Feinberg made the ruling Friday after learning that the official responsible for tracking deaths had failed to do so because he didn't know it was his responsibility.

The case stemmed from Republican complaints that an estimated 13,000 people who apparently have died remain on voter registration lists, including 4,755 people who reportedly voted in last November's election.

The state registrar of vital statistics is required to provide counties with an annual list of all people over age 18 who have died, so the counties can remove those names from voter registration lists.

State officials say the annual lists of deaths from 1985 to 2003 are available, but last year's list remains incomplete and unverified.  Deputy Attorney General Melissa Racsa said Joseph Komosinski, the registrar since 2003, "was unaware that this was one of his obligations."

Feinberg ordered the office to turn over whatever information it had from 2004.

She said the lists must be distributed by Monday to all of the state's 21 counties and both major political parties.  She also ordered election workers to check the names of those who cast absentee and provisional ballots against the names of deceased residents.

"It is truly alarming," Feinberg said of concerns that people might have used dead people's names to illegally vote.


Interesting post from a Lebanese political blog.

Fixing Lebanon Before Fighting the Arab Cause

Friday, October 28, 2005 - From: lebop.blogspot.com

I am really tired of Westerners (yesterday, on this blog it was a Canadian - CANADIAN!) chastizing me about not being Arab enough, not fighting Israel enough, not pushing for the Arab cause enough.

What in the world is that?  [Sorry for this storm of emotion, but I believe blogs are the place to publicly display righteous indignation.]

Who in the world is a Canadian to tell me such things?  Because he thinks I should be fighting for the Arab cause, I need to: live without electricity; live under constant bombardment; live with terrorism; live without running water; live in constant fear of violence from all around (remember, pan-Arabists love to fight each other, too).

I'm supposed to listen to people with high speed internet, free healthcare, flower gardens around every house, high salaries, free access to travel practically anywhere without a visa?

I can't even use Skype or Vonage because the connection speed in this country is so slow.

I won't even get into the racism of it all.  "Arabs" are supposed to fight Israel.  That's part of the defintion.  If you have a problem with the term Arab, that means you're Maronite - which according to Leftists means that you are evil.

Well, sorry guys, but there are plenty of leftwing, anti-Israeli parties that don't subscribe to traditional pan-Arabism.  The Syrian National Socialist Party believes that the peoples of Cyprus, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, parts of Iraq, and a sliver of Egypt are all one entity.  All those other guys in Saudi and Morocco are totally different people that have nothing to do with "us."

However, you deem the Syrian National Socialists - who take pride in their acts of terror which include the assassination of one President and the attempted assassination of another - in with everyone else because they hate Jews more than the others.  Their symbol is a flying swastika, which proves that they hate Joooooos.

But to continue on the racism line: the Maronite attack comes because Maronites are Christians who allegedly aspire to be European.  However, Kurds never get blamed for their alliance with Israel.  Is it because they are Muslims?  Or is it because human rights advocates love to discourse about the poor Kurds to show how brutish, thuggish, and depraved Arabs are for beating up those lovely Kurds who should be given their own nation carved out of Iraq, Syria, Iran, and Turkey?

Kurds identify themselves as being different.  They speak a different language.  They feel like they are oppressed in their current situations.  Why not allow them to have their own country, right?

Maronites identify themselves as being different.  They have a different religion.  They feel like living in a non-plural society under the helm of Syria oppresses them.  Why not allow them to assert their relationship with Israel if they want to?  They aren't even asking for a country.  (And note that I'm using "they.")

And I don't understand why it is so difficult for people to acknowledge the possibility that Lebanon isn't just an Arab country.  We're a Mediterranean country with Jews, Iranians, Greeks, Turks, Turkmen, Armenians, the descendents of crusaders, Italians, Syrians, Arabs, and even the descendents of Russians living amongst us.  To claim that we are simply "Arab" is to disenfranchise a huge segment of the population, let alone history.  It undermines the pluralism of the Ottoman Empire and ingenious systems the people living in this region came up with to work problems out amongst themselves in coordination with the Ottomans, French, British, Russians, and others.

Why are Canadians and foreign leftists adding to the racist propaganda in the Middle East?  Why are they giving credence to fighting a war with Israel?

We don't need any more war here.  Let Canada and France and The Netherlands fight a war with Israel if they feel so strongly about it.

Oh, but war is against human rights, so no white person should ever do that.  Leave that to the slightly colored folks with big noses and claim that you would be oppressing Middle Eastern culture if you stopped wars in the Middle East.  The liberal white people will set the battle lines through international agreements and centuries old lines, but let the savage Jews, Muslims, and tainted oriental Christians fight for rights.  The leftwing will support the weaker power, the rightwing will overwhelmingly support the stronger power.

That's the fallacy of the Western leftwing.  None of its arguments on foreign policy are coherent.

At least the rightwing is honest about what they are doing.  They specifically state that they want democracy because they believe it will prevent terrorism.  They say they want democracy because they believe it will be beneficial to Israel.  And you can't make the oil argument or self-interest argument about Lebanon because there isn't anything but mountains, water, agricultural land, and people here.

The leftwing response is, "Well, you shouldn't want democracy if it hurts Syria which is waging the eternal war with Israel.  Hezbollah is a wonderful party because it wants to destroy Israel.  Islamic terror isn't all that bad because the people are merely expressing their oppression and reasserting their power in the eternal Foucauldian battle."

Don't tell me who I should be fighting.  Don't tell me that I should be racist against Jews.  Don't tell me what is good for me.  How the hell do you know?

My life would be a hell of a lot better if I had high speed internet, decent electricity, and full political enfranchisement.  Israel isn't stopping that.  Syria and their Lebanese cronies did.  Fighting Israel does very little for me.

If you want to fight Israel, put your body where your words are.  Go fight Israel, but don't do it from my land or I will fight you.  However, if you are doing anything to increase my upload and download connections, working to end Lebanese governmental corruption, and trying to fully rip Syrian security agents and their agenda of terror from my land, then let me take you by the hand.


Another one of Manny Golddigger's heros, who is also a hypocrite and an asshole.  Shocking!

The Branding of the World's Top Intellectual: Noam Chomsky

November 19, 2005 - From: techcentralstation.com

By Peter Schweizer

Editor's note: In light of news that a British poll identified Noam Chomsky as the world's leading intellectual, we thought it would be a valuable exercise to run this excerpt from Peter Schweizer's new book Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy (Doubleday $22.95).

Note from the Author: Whereas readers of The Prospect found the top public intellectual in Chomsky, I found a poster child for modern-day capitalism and, because of his anti-capitalist views, a complete hypocrite.

One of the most persistent themes in Chomsky's work has been class warfare.  He has frequently lashed out against the "massive use of tax havens to shift the burden to the general population and away from the rich" and criticized the concentration of wealth in "trusts" by the wealthiest one percent.  The American tax code is rigged with "complicated devices for ensuring that the poor -- like eighty percent of the population -- pay off the rich."

But trusts can't be all bad.  After all, Chomsky, with a net worth north of $2,000,000, decided to create one for himself.  A few years back he went to Boston's venerable white-shoe law firm, Palmer and Dodge, and with the help of a tax attorney specializing in "income-tax planning" set up an irrevocable trust to protect his assets from Uncle Sam.  He named his tax attorney (every socialist radical needs one!) and a daughter as trustees.  To the Diane Chomsky Irrevocable Trust (named for another daughter) he has assigned the copyright of several of his books, including multiple international editions.

Chomsky favors the estate tax and massive income redistribution -- just not the redistribution of his income.  No reason to let radical politics get in the way of sound estate planning.

When I challenged Chomsky about his trust, he suddenly started to sound very bourgeois: "I don't apologize for putting aside money for my children and grandchildren," he wrote in one email.  Chomsky offered no explanation for why he condemns others who are equally proud of their provision for their children and who try to protect their assets from Uncle Sam.  Although he did say that the tax shelter is okay because he and his family are "trying to help suffering people."

Indeed, Chomsky is rich precisely because he has been such an enormously successful capitalist.  Despite the anti-profit rhetoric, like any other corporate capitalist he has turned himself into a brand name.  As John Lloyd puts it, writing critically in the lefty New Statesman, Chomsky is among those "open to being 'commodified' -- that is, to being simply one of the many wares of a capitalist media market place, in a way that the badly paid and overworked writers and journalists for the revolutionary parties could rarely be."

Chomsky's business works something like this.  He gives speeches on college campuses around the country at $12,000 a pop, often dozens of times a year.

Can't go and hear him in person?  No problem: you can go online and download clips from earlier speeches-for a fee.  You can hear Chomsky talk for one minute about "Property Rights"; it will cost you seventy-nine cents.  You can also by a CD with clips from previous speeches for $12.99.

But books are Chomsky's mainstay, and on the international market he has become a publishing phenomenon.  The Chomsky brand means instant sales.

As publicist Dana O'Hare of Pluto Press explains: "All we have to do is put Chomsky's name on a book and it sells out immediately!"

Putting his name on a book should not be confused with writing a book, because his most recent volumes are mainly transcriptions of speeches, or interviews that he has conducted over the years, put between covers and sold to the general public.  You might call it multi-level marketing for radicals.  Chomsky has admitted as much: "If you look at the things I write -- articles for Z Magazine, or books for South End Press, or whatever -- they are mostly based on talks and meetings and that kind of thing.  But I'm kind of a parasite.  I mean, I'm living off the activism of others.  I'm happy to do it."

Chomsky's marketing efforts shortly after September 11 give new meaning to the term "war profiteer."  In the days after the tragedy, he raised his speaking fee from $9,000 to $12,000 because he was suddenly in greater demand.  He also cashed in by producing another instant book.  Seven Stories Press, a small publisher, pulled together interviews conducted via email that Chomsky gave in the three weeks following the attack on the Twin Towers and rushed the book to press.  His controversial views were hot, particularly overseas.  By early December 2001, they had sold the foreign rights in nineteen different languages.  The book made the bestseller list in the United States, Canada, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, and New Zealand.  It is safe to assume that he netted hundreds of thousands of dollars from this book alone.

Over the years, Chomsky has been particularly critical of private property rights, which he considers simply a tool of the rich, of no benefit to ordinary people.  "When property rights are granted to power and privilege, it can be expected to be harmful to most," Chomsky wrote on a discussion board for the Washington Post.  Intellectual property rights are equally despicable.  According to Chomsky, for example, drug companies who have spent hundreds of millions of dollars developing drugs shouldn't have ownership rights to patents.  Intellectual property rights, he argues, "have to do with protectionism."

Protectionism is a bad thing -- especially when it relates to other people.  But when it comes to Chomsky's own published work, this advocate of open intellectual property suddenly becomes very selfish.  It would not be advisable to download the audio from one of his speeches without paying the fee, warns his record company, Alternative Tentacles.  (Did Andrei Sakharov have a licensing agreement with a record company?)  And when it comes to his articles, you'd better keep your hands off.  Go to the official Noam Chomsky website and the warning is clear: "Material on this site is copyrighted by Noam Chomsky and/or Noam Chomsky and his collaborators.  No material on this site may be reprinted or posted on other web sites without writte permission."  However, the website does give you the opportunity to "sublicense" the material if you are interested.

Radicals used to think of their ideas as weapons; Chomsky sees them as a licensing opportunity.

Chomsky has even gone the extra mile to protect the copyright to some of his material by transferring ownership to his children.  Profits from those works will thus be taxed at his children's lower rate.  He also extends the length of time that the family is able to hold onto the copyright and protect his intellectual assets.

In October 2002, radicals gathered in Philadelphia for a benefit entitled "Noam Chomsky: Media and Democracy."  Sponsored by the Greater Philadelphia Democratic Left, for a fee of $15 you could attend the speech and hear the great man ruminate on the evils of capitalism.  For another $35, you could attend a post-talk reception and he would speak directly with you.

During the speech, Chomsky told the assembled crowd, "A democracy requires a free, independent, and inquiring media."  After the speech, Deborah Bolling, a writer for the lefty Philadelphia City Paper, tried to get an interview with Chomsky.  She was turned away.  To talk to Chomsky, she was told, this "free, independent, and inquiring" reporter needed to pay $35 to get into the private reception.

Corporate America is one of Chomsky's demons.  It's hard to find anything positive he might say about American business.  He paints an ominous vision of America suffering under the "unaccountable and deadly rule of corporations."  He has called corporations "private tyrannies" and declared that they are "just as totalitarian as Bolshevism and fascism."  Capitalism, in his words, is a "grotesque catastrophe."

But a funny thing happened on the way to the retirement portfolio.

Chomsky, for all of his moral dudgeon against American corporations, finds that they make a pretty good investment.  When he made investment decisions for his retirement plan at MIT, he chose not to go with a money market fund, or even a government bond fund.  Instead, he threw the money into blue chips and invested in the TIAA-CREF stock fund.  A look at the stock fund portfolio quickly reveals that it invests in all sorts of businesses that Chomsky says he finds abhorrent: oil companies, military contractors, pharmaceuticals, you name it.

When I asked Chomsky about his investment portfolio he reverted to a "what else can I do" defense: "Should I live in a cabin in Montana?" he asked.  It was a clever rhetorical dodge.  Chomsky was declaring that there is simply no way to avoid getting involved in the stock market short of complete withdrawal from the capitalist system.  He certainly knows better.  There are many alternative funds these days that allow you to invest your money in "green" or "socially responsible" enterprises.  They just don't yield the maximum available return.


This can't be good.

Iran: 5000 Fanatic Muslim Clerics To US Mosques

November 24, 2005 - From: postchronicle.com

By J. Grant Swank, Jr.

Mosques in America need more clerics.  The solution?  Send hard-line, fanatic clerics to the United States.  Fill in the blanks: the US sleeper cells are getting more murder-hungry clerics by which to instruct neighborhood Muslims in how to rise up and take over America.

They are already taking over the Netherlands by threatening that country with murder in the streets.  Therefore, according to recent press reports, the citizens won't speak anything negative about Islam for fear of being murdered.  It's called "self-censorship" there.  With that the Muslims can overtake a society.

In Pakistan Muslim males are kidnapping Hindu women from their houses.  They force the Hindu females to "convert" to Islam.  If others in the family report these crimes, they are in danger of being killed.  Therefore, there are some families escaping wholesale to Canada, India and elsewhere.  In other words, Muslims can overtake a society by kidnapping young Hindu girls for Islam.

Fill in the blanks regarding this request from American mosques for Iranian cleric increase: It is the Iranian leadership that has declared that "execution of suicide and missile attacks (must be) aimed at 29 sensitive sites."  Further: It is the goal of Islamic international killers to "wipe Israel off the world map."

How better to serve the Koran's Allah than to plant subversives throughout this republic by which to do in America while elsewhere other Muslim murderers global are doing in Israel and so forth, the latter being "29 sensitive sites?"

According to BBC Persian and Persian service of IRNA, these disciples of Allah are in league with "hard-line ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi who has let it be known that 'the Iranians living in the US need 5000 Islamic clerics for their religious services.'"

This particular spokesman for Allah has requested the Iranian authorities to finance the clerics' training.  Training in what? In fulfilling the killing passage of the Koran, of course.

"This hard-line ayatollah is known as the founder of the Shiite version of Taliban in Iran."

Do the American political liberals thereby understand that they are in support of such sleeper cell instructors when they call for US troops to leave New Iraq immediately?  Do they not realize that US troops returning to American shores would keep on their uniforms to fight cleric-trained Muslim killers in our own cities and villages?

Do not the entrenched Democrats, particularly those who hate US President George W. Bush, understand that by bucking Mr. Bush at every freedom spread they are cooperating with the Iranian hard-line trained mosque leadership in the United States?

Do not the Cindy Sheehan disciples know that by their wailing on behalf of anti-New Iraq, these same American citizens are undercutting their futures as American citizens.  There will no American citizens but Muslim American citizens once the Islamics have establish Iran world rule, killing off all infidels (non-Muslims).

While Muslim murderers global send their sleeper cell slayers to America under the guise of International students, why not then add to these "pupils" the mosque clerics who swell the numbers?

Is it not the aim of every zealot Muslim to destroy western civilization by eliminating it from the planet?  Then how better to see the start of the program through than via the religious clerics in mosque pulpits?


What a bunch of assholes.  Never trust a Eurosavage to do a man's work.

Afghan Posting "Too Dangerous" for Dutch Army

November 20, 2005 - From: timesonline.co.uk

By Michael Smith

BRITAIN could be forced to increase the number of troops it sends to Afghanistan next spring because Dutch MPs think it is "too dangerous" to deploy their own soldiers there.

The Netherlands, which already has about 625 troops in Afghanistan, was due to provide a further force of 1,000 to be based in Uruzgan province, which stretches from the centre towards the south of the country.

But a report by the Dutch military intelligence and security service has warned of the extreme danger of operating in the area, which sources close to the country's cabinet said "can't be ignored".

A Dutch withdrawal would place more of the burden on the British, who are taking over command of Nato operations next May.

British forces were originally due to provide the vast bulk of the new force in southern Afghanistan.  That fell apart when plans for an early withdrawal from Iraq were shelved, forcing the British to co-opt Australian and Canadian forces as well as the Dutch.

Afghan security officials have confirmed eyewitness accounts of Arab and Chechen terrorists linked to Al-Qaeda offering money to Afghans in the south to kill or kidnap the officials or foreigners.

There have also been reports that Taliban and Al-Qaeda terrorists are being trained by "Arab jihadis" in techniques developed against US and British troops in Iraq.

The American force currently operating in southern Afghanistan has sought to combine nation-building -- focused on two provincial reconstruction teams based in Kandahar and at Lashkar Gah, in Helmand province -- with highly aggressive counter-terrorist operations.

Concern that these operations were too hostile, negating the positive effects of the reconstruction teams, has been expressed by Afghanistan's president Hamid Karzai.  There have been demands within Nato, in particular from France and Germany, for the force to concentrate on nation-building.

The Dutch intelligence report highlights the serious contradiction inherent in concentrating on nation- building in an area where Taliban and Al-Qaeda forces remain active.

The British-led operation in the south, spearheaded by 3 Battalion, the Parachute Regiment, will be part of an expansion of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) to cover the whole of Afghanistan.

It coincides with Britain's assumption of command of ISAF when the Allied Rapid Reaction Corps, led by Major-General David Richards, moves into Kabul.  Normally based at Rheindahlen in Germany, the multinational force is 1,300 strong, including approximately 300 British troops.

About 90 American troops have been killed in southern Afghanistan in the past year amid a sharp increase in violence.

Sources at 16 Air Assault Brigade, which will provide a command element for the British paratroopers, said they are prepared for "robust and aggressive" operations against terrorists and will be backed up by 10 Apache attack helicopters and six RAF Harrier ground attack aircraft.

British defence sources admitted that while the Nato troops might not necessarily go hunting down Al-Qaeda or Taliban forces, a role American forces will retain, they will have to be "extremely robust", particularly if they intend to destroy the poppy crop.  Afghanistan grows more than 90% of the world's production.

General Sir Mike Walker, chief of defence staff, said in a recent interview with The Sunday Times that eradicating the narcotics industry was by far the biggest problem the coalition faced.

"The truth of the matter is that until alternative livelihoods are available . . . you're not going to make a great deal of progress," Walker said.

Police seized two tons of opium loaded into five Toyota Land Cruisers after a gun battle with drug traffickers in southern Afghanistan that killed one policeman and wounded two others, officials said yesterday.  A Portuguese peacekeeper was killed and three others wounded when their vehicle hit a landmine on a road near Kabul.