Monthly Archive for September, 2004
I might even venture into a redesign next month…
I still have no idea how to get the spacing right, the other items appear to only have half of a line break between the category and the content. Again, any help is appreciated.
I finished cutting my Blogroll over to blogrolling.com. The font isn’t matching up to the rest of my sidebar, but I think I can fix that with some custom tags or a change to my CSS file. Anyone have any suggestions? I should probably ask Robb. But if anyone else who’s good with .Text, or whatever Scott’s calling it now, has any pointers, I’ll take them.
I’m in the middle of cutting over to a blogrolling.com blogroll. While I’m doing it, you will see my Blogroll and Blogrolling Test categories over on the left. That’s just an extra link for you guys during the cutover. I’ve wanted to do this for awhile, but I had to figure out how to add a custom .ascx file with the appropriate code into .Text. And since I’m a newbie programmer, it just didn’t jump out at me and say, “Hey, over here!” but I finally figured it out and I seem to have it working, so bear with me while I get all my links into the blogrolling.com list.
you’re a Democrat and you have to bring Jesse Jackson on because you’re losing black voters:
The Pew Research Center said Tuesday its latest poll showed 73 percent of blacks supporting Kerry compared to 12 percent supporting President Bush. In 2000, Al Gore won 90 percent of the black vote.
Man, it must suck when you’re doing your best to scare black people into voting for you, and they’re still deserting you in droves.
On an unrelated note, I get real satisfaction using an NPR link against Kerry, hehe.
UPDATE: Rob has another one…
Who is the “speaker“ in the following passage?
“We must recognise that there is no indication that Saddam Hussein has any intention of relenting,” the speaker warned his audience. “So we have an obligation of enormous consequence, an obligation to guarantee that Saddam Hussein cannot ignore the United Nations.
“He cannot be permitted to go unobserved and unimpeded toward his horrific objective of amassing a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction.
“This is not a matter about which there should be any debate whatsoever in the Security Council, or, certainly, in this nation.
“I believe that the United Nations must take, and should authorise immediately, whatever steps are necessary to force him to relent – and that the United States should support and participate in those steps.”
The speaker continued: “While we should always see to take significant international actions on a multilateral rather than unilateral basis whenever that is possible, if in the final analysis we face what we truly believe to be a grave threat to the well-being of our nation or the entire world and it cannot be removed peacefully we must have the courage to do what we believe is right and wise.”
He went on: “I submit that the old adage ‘pay now or pay later’ applies perfectly in this situation.”
The speaker noted that only small quantities of biological weapons would be needed to murder thousands of civilians in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. “These could be delivered by ballistic missile”, he warned, “but they also could be delivered by much more pedestrian means; aerosol applicators on commercial trucks easily could suffice.”
Tony Blair? Good guess, but no. Bush, Cheney? No. That was a speech given by John Kerry on the floor of the Senate on November 9, 1997, right after Saddam had kicked out the weapons inspectors. Of course, there was a Democrat in the White House at the time…
While reading the op-ed pages in today’s WaPo, I came across a piece by David Ignatius who gives us some insight into a new book about the war on terror.
Looking at the gruesome images of beheadings and suicide bombings in Iraq, it’s easy to think that the Islamic holy warriors are winning. But a new book by a distinguished French Arabist named Gilles Kepel argues the opposite case. For all the mayhem the jihadists have caused, he contends, their movement is failing.
He goes on to make a number of specific points to back up this assertion.
“The principal goal of terrorism — to seize power in Muslim countries through mobilization of populations galvanized by jihad’s sheer audacity — has not been realized,” Kepel writes. In fact, bin Laden’s followers are losing ground: The Taliban regime in Afghanistan has been toppled; the fence-sitting semi-Islamist regime in Saudi Arabia has taken sides more strongly with the West; Islamists in Sudan and Libya are in retreat; and the plight of the Palestinians has never been more dire. And Baghdad, the traditional seat of the Muslim caliphs, is under foreign occupation. Not what you would call a successful jihad.
A perfect example of how the jihadists’ efforts have backfired, argues Kepel, was last month’s kidnapping of two French journalists in Iraq. The kidnappers announced that they would release their hostages only if the French government reversed its new policy banning Muslim women from wearing headscarves in French public schools. “They imagined that they would mobilize Muslims with this demand, but French Muslims were aghast and denounced the kidnappers,” Kepel explained to a Washington audience. He noted that French Muslims took to the streets to protest against the kidnappers and to proclaim their French citizenship.
That is very true. I usually don’t have much nice to say about the French, but I applaud their resolve on that issue.
Perhaps it takes an outsider — a Frenchman, even — to help Americans see the war on terrorism in perspective. Saturated in terrorism alerts and images of violence from Iraq, Americans may miss the essential fact that the terrorists are losing. And because we see this as a war against America, rather than one within Islam, we may miss the real dynamics.
Of course, if you listen to John Kerry, he will tell you the exact opposite. Kerry even knows more about what’s happening on the ground in Iraq than Allawi. You do know he’s just a Bush “puppet” don’t you?
Simona Pari and Simona Torretta, two Italian aid workers, and five other hostages were released today, following a release of hostages yesterday.
Two different groups claimed responsibility for the abductions, demanding the withdrawal of Italian troops from the country or the release of Iraqi female prisoners. The same two groups later put out Web statements saying the two Italians had been killed, but the Italian government said the claims were not credible.
News of the release came after a Muslim leader from Italy met with an influential Muslim association in Baghdad on Tuesday to press for their freedom, though it was not immediately known if there was a connection. The two women, both 29-year-olds, had been working on school and water projects in Iraq.
The Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Rai al-Aam had reported Tuesday that they could be released by Friday in return for a $1 million ransom. But Al-Arabiya TV, citing unidentified sources involved in the negotiations, said no ransom was paid.
I am certainly glad that they are free, and that Italy did not capitulate to the demands of the terrorists.
UPDATE: There have been rumors that the Italian government paid a one million dollar ransom for their release, but the Italian government is denying it.