This is how they shake their little fists at the world

Even the little freedom-hating neo-nazi pillow biters are at it.

Reuters: British military graves vandalised in France

«The veterans' minister, Hamlaoui Mekachera, said he was outraged and expressed his solidarity with the families of those interred in the cemetery.

"He stresses the French people's unfailing gratitude towards the British and Commonwealth soldiers who came to fight by our side during the two World Wars and the respect owed to those soldiers who rest forever on our soil."

Hundreds of graves have been vandalised in France over the last year, but most of the attacks have been in the east of the country. Many targeted Jewish graves, but some Muslim and Christian graves were also defaced. Police blamed neo-Nazis.»

This is what they get "shaken" about, as opposed to getting a grip on the thug culture that socialiam has created.

Profiling	Même face, même race
6% of British muslims approve of the terrorist attacks (roughly 100,000 British citizens) and 25% condemn the attacks but understand the "motivation". Using the same pourcentages for the French population (the figure is certainly much higher than 6% in France) tells us that roughly 300,000 French muslims think the same way. Profiling is not racist. It's a mathematical necessity.	6% des musulmans britanniques approuvent les attaques terroristes (environ 100.000 citoyens britanniques). 25% condamnent les attaques mais en approuvent les "motivations". En appliquant les mêmes pourcentages à la population fwançaise (et il s'agit sans aucun doute de beaucoup plus de 6% en Fwance) on peut estimer à environ 300.000 le nombre de musulmans français qui pensent de la même manière. Le profiling n'a rien de raciste. C'est tout simplement une necessité mathématique.
UPDATE: French muslims: a ticking time bomb.	DERNIERES INFOS: Les musulmans français: une bombe à retardement.

France gets its wake-up call ...

Les islamo-fascistes nous ont déclaré la guerre
Alain Marsaud, député UMP, ancien magistrat antiterroriste, a remis un rapport au Premier ministre sur la lutte contre le terrorisme et parle des menaces qui planent sur notre avenir.

Le Figaro Magazine - Vous êtes l'auteur d'un rapport sur «L'Union européenne et la lutte contre le terrorisme». Après Madrid, Londres et Charm el-Cheikh, quelle sera la prochaine cible ?
Alain Marsaud - Il serait temps que les responsables politiques cessent de dire que tout le monde est gentil et que la société occidentale aurait perverti un certain nombre d'individus. Les attentats ne résultent pas de cela. Nous sommes en plein syndrome de Stockholm ! Or nous ne sommes pas ces «salauds» qui devraient «expier». Ce discours que j'entends jusque dans la bouche de certains chefs de gouvernement ne doit pas nous faire oublier que nous sommes dans une nouvelle guerre, déclarée par des islamo-fascistes réunis sous le label al-Qaida. Leur revendication n'est pas religieuse mais politique. Ils disent : «Nous allons mettre en place une société qui nous ressemble, tous autant que nous sommes», où, croyez-moi, la femme ne sera pas reine et où il ne nous sera pas facile d'aller à la messe le dimanche. Un pays d'Europe occidentale a tout à craindre, notamment s'il a une politique étrangère digne de ce nom.

Les victimes sont toujours les mêmes innocents. Les terroristes, eux, ont-ils changé, depuis les années 70 ?
On retrouve aujourd'hui le même mode d'action pseudo-révolutionnaire que dans les années 70. Ce qu'il y a de nouveau, ce sont les kamikazes et l'utilisation de moyens de destruction massifs : voitures piégées, etc. Les terroristes recherchent désormais le carnage maximal pour faire avancer leur cause. Le néo-islamisme a remplacé le néo-stalinisme et lui ressemble étrangement.

Al-Qaida n'a pas de hiérarchie pyramidale. Cela ne rend-il pas la lutte contre le terrorisme plus compliquée ?
Bien sûr. Ben Laden à la tête d'al-Qaida était beaucoup plus rassurant ! Al-Qaida est un label, franchisé et opportuniste, difficile à cerner. La guerre a lieu désormais au coeur de nos villes. Il va falloir réformer nos écoles de guerre...

Lutter efficacement contre le terrorisme ne consiste-t-il pas à lutter contre l'analphabétisme, la pauvreté et l'utilisation à mauvais escient de l'aide internationale ?
Si c'était le cas, nous aurions le même type de terrorisme avec les groupes révolutionnaires d'Amérique latine. Or ceux-là ne cherchent pas à étendre leur influence, tandis que Ben Laden - qui n'a, que je sache, aucun mandat des damnés de la terre pour mener son combat - s'efforce évidemment d'étendre son influence.

L'espace Schengen n'est-il pas une Europe ouverte au terrorisme aussi ?
Schengen a ouvert un espace à beaucoup de monde, et c'est bien. Mais cela l'a fermé, dans le même temps, aux juges et aux policiers.

Le terrorisme n'est-il pas l'échec de l'éducation publique dans les pays musulmans, remplacée par des écoles coraniques ?
La force de l'islam intégriste est d'avoir utilisé les carences des pays musulmans et du tiers-monde en termes de santé, d'éducation, etc. Les islamistes radicaux se sont infiltrés là où devrait être l'Etat.

A la télévision, un Pakistanais au passeport britannique se disait musulman d'abord, pakistanais ensuite et, enfin, britannique. Avez-vous le sentiment que les Britanniques et les Européens doivent avoir peur de leurs citoyens d'origine étrangère ? Et, dans le fond, avons-nous fait le nécessaire pour intégrer véritablement ces étrangers ? Ne les avons-nous pas au contraire délaissés ?
Il faut reconnaître que l'intégration des minorités, partout en Europe, est un échec, au point que certains Français d'origine étrangère se demandent un jour ou l'autre s'ils font véritablement partie de notre société. A cette interrogation, les islamistes radicaux répondent en leur proposant un nouveau passeport, celui de l'islam radical. Et c'est ce nouveau passeport que nous avons à gérer à Madrid, à Londres, et que nous aurons peut-être un jour à gérer à Paris.

Horn of Arabia

Some sheiks later gave [Army Staff Sgt. Dale L. Horn] five sheep and a postage stamp of land, fulfilling some of the requirements for sheikdom

writes the Associated Press's Antonio Castaneda (shookhran to Gregory and Hervé).

Others encouraged him to start looking for a second wife, which Horn's spouse back in Florida immediately vetoed.

Yankee-Bashing: "The brutal imagery by French schoolkids echo what they hear from their parents and teachers and see in the media"

On a regular basis, people in France — French citizens as well as foreigners — are informed of the usual blarney — that the French (and the Europeans) are wiser than everyone else, and more lucid than everyone else, and more humanistic than everyone else, and more pacifist than everyone else, and more tolerant than everyone else, and more reasonable than everyone else, especially les Américains.

• Everyday Meetings with Common Europeans

This is usually told in the following BUT language: "Granted, we may have flaws (indeed, we probably have many), BUT! in the final analysis, we're wise, lucid, etc, etc" — the corollary being "Granted, the Americans have many good points (indeed, they have much to teach us), BUT! in the final analysis, they are reactionary, greedy, treacherous, fanatical, clueless, sods."

What a BUT sentence does, offhand, is contrast two truths, but (and notice that here is that word again) the fact remains that the second part invalidates the first part. Imagine a lovers' quarrel: "I love you, Name, but (beat) you're a good-for-nothing jerk." Now invert this: "You're a good-for-nothing jerk, Name, but (beat) I love you." You don't have to be a graduate of the Actors Studio to realize that the tone of the first sentence will be different from (as in: slightly more bitter than) the second.

Of course, all politicians (of whatever country) who want to sound fair and wise do this all the time: "The opposing party/My distinguished colleague has some good ideas, BUT! what they fail/he fails to see…" That is to be expected in politics, with its active "duels", and is part of the show, so to speak. It's when this attitude becomes an automaticism in a population, and that its (passive, or at least non-duelling) members start to believe it unfailingly, that it becomes a problem…

After living for 10 years in France (and even longer in Europe), I have to say that it is the (very) rare conversation (on whatever subject — foreign policy, culture, any component part thereof, or anything else) where the basic content and message doesn't boil down to the following: When France or Europe is discussed, the negative part comes first and is invalidated by the positive message; when America, its allies, or capitalism is the subject, the positive aspect comes first, but is invalidated by the negative message. (You can check this out in some of the comments we receive, where the same outline returns again, and again, and again, and again…)

For instance, in the educational department, this becomes: granted, there may not be total objectivity in French schools, and sure we could do better, BUT: in the final analysis, this is nothing to worry about, and — snicker — aren't you silly to think otherwise. (The corollary: of course, people (Americans, other foreigners, or Frenchmen) can (and should) criticize the system, BUT if, in the final analysis, they do not laud it overall and realize how lucid and reasonable the French and their system obviously are, they are obviously blinded fanatics.)

Non, nos amis américains (our American friends): don't let anybody tell you (thanks to Joe) that, in the final analysis, European kids aren't getting a healthy education and a positive outlook on the world and an objective viewpoint of who (among Russia, China, Saddam's Iraq, Iran, Osama bin Laden, etc…) is the real enemy of humanity…

In his response to a post showing how today's pacifist language of forebearance has little changed from their predecessors' in the 1930s (and 1940s!) — "Hitler requires, not condemnation, but understanding" — one reader claimed that comparisons with Hitler were nonsense or exaggerated (deliberately misreading the post's true message) — and yet, as David Horsey points out, none of the thousands of French visitors to Carquefou (nor our reader) seemed to find the least problem with one French student's image of the axis of evil being Stalin, Hitler and… George W Bush.

As If Predictions Aren't Foolish Enough

Bloomberg:

Aug. 2 (Bloomberg) -- Crude oil dropped from a record on speculation that Saudi Arabia, the world's top exporter, will keep meeting demand for its oil after the death yesterday of King Fahd.

"The market has realized there isn't going to be much alteration to Saudi oil policy,'' said Christopher Bellew, a broker at Bache Financial Ltd. in London. Yesterday ``was a knee-jerk reaction.''

Then again, Auntie Beeb can alway seem to find the cloud in the silver lining:

Oil prices have hit new records after the death of Saudi Arabia's king and amid concerns over refineries and Iran.

Analysts said concerns over the Saudi succession, as well as US refinery outages and tensions over Iran's nuclear ambitions had upset the market.

Will They Blame Marv Albert?

From Expatica: "A rejected Congolese asylum seeker has prevented his deportation from Belgium for a second time by biting and injuring accompanying police officers."

As for the connection between an Amercan sportscaster and the Congolese, detainee - in all liklihood - in Belgium they would discipline the cops for trying to muzzle anyone.

If You Really Want to Fight Poverty in Africa, You Should Bring a Complete End to Development Aid and Have the NGOs Pull Out

If [Westerners] really want to fight poverty, they should completely halt development aid and give Africa the opportunity to ensure its own survival. Currently, Africa is like a child that immediately cries for its babysitter when something goes wrong. Africa should stand on its own two feet

says James Shikwati to Thilo Thielke (thanks to Hervé) as the Kenyan economics expert pleads, "For God's Sake, Please Stop the Aid!"

[Good intentions such as eliminating hunger and poverty] have been damaging our continent for the past 40 years. If the industrial nations really want to help the Africans, they should finally terminate this awful aid. The countries that have collected the most development aid are also the ones that are in the worst shape. Despite the billions that have poured in to Africa, the continent remains poor.

…Huge bureaucracies are financed [with the aid money], corruption and complacency are promoted, Africans are taught to be beggars and not to be independent. In addition, development aid weakens the local markets everywhere and dampens the spirit of entrepreneurship that we so desperately need. As absurd as it may sound: Development aid is one of the reasons for Africa's problems. If the West were to cancel these payments, normal Africans wouldn't even notice. Only the functionaries would be hard hit. Which is why they maintain that the world would stop turning without this development aid.

…Africa is always only portrayed as a continent of suffering, but most figures are vastly exaggerated. In the industrial nations, there's a sense that Africa would go under without development aid. But believe me, Africa existed before you Europeans came along. And we didn't do all that poorly either.

…Millions of dollars earmarked for the fight against AIDS are still stashed away in Kenyan bank accounts and have not been spent. Our politicians were overwhelmed with money, and they try to siphon off as much as possible. The late tyrant of the Central African Republic, Jean Bedel Bokassa, cynically summed it up by saying: "The French government pays for everything in our country. We ask the French for money. We get it, and then we waste it."

…There must be a change in mentality. We have to stop perceiving ourselves as beggars. These days, Africans only perceive themselves as victims. On the other hand, no one can really picture an African as a businessman. In order to change the current situation, it would be helpful if the aid organizations were to pull out.

The Diplomacy of Impotence

They didn’t listen, even long enough to learn from Clinton having been duped by the NorKs. Now the Iranians are going to resume refinement and hint at not enriching Uranium, but:

Reuters:

«The Islamic Republic issued a Sunday deadline for the EU to submit its plans for the economic and political incentives it would provide in return for Iran's indefinite suspension of uranium enrichment, nuclear fuel reprocessing and related activities.

But the British Foreign Office said the EU, represented by Britain, France and Germany, had informed Iran only that "full and detailed proposals" would be delivered in a week.

The conversion plant near the central city of Isfahan takes processed uranium ore, mined in Iran's central desert, and turns it into uranium hexafluoride gas. This gas can be pumped into centrifuges that spin at supersonic speed to enrich uranium. »

Even the New York Times, in all it’s wishful thinking, takes the statement at face value, and little else:

«The three powers are scheduled to offer Iran a package of economic, political and security, as well as technological incentives by Monday. But Iran had warned that no incentive could persuade it to quit its uranium enrichment program, even though it has voluntarily suspended the operation for now.

The Uranium Conversion Facility near the city of Isfahan turns uranium ore, known as yellowcake, into gas. The gas can later be fed into centrifuges and enriched to be used as fuel in nuclear plants or, if highly enriched, can be used for making nuclear weapons. Iran said it would keep the nuclear site in Natanz where the centrifuges are kept under suspension.»

Of course not. They’re just starting up their program again in order to NOT enrich Uranium!

Reuters again:

« The EU3 is due to offer Iran some economic and political incentives in return for an indefinite suspension of uranium enrichment, nuclear fuel reprocessing and related activities.

If Iran does not comply, the EU has threatened to back calls by the United States for the Islamic Republic to be reported to the United Nations Security Council and face possible sanctions.»

So it looks like the Iranians have the North Korean nuclear blackmail routine down pat. They’ve also found a willing punter in the “EU3” who will, at most, refer the whole thing to a UN dominated by tin pot governments in the General Assembly if they get a black eye.

It’s a good thing that they can give the Chechens, once and future Bosniacs, a “nuclear option”, eh?

Double Standards for Iraq Commentators

Behold a clear double standard for Iraq commentators

writes Michael Fumento.

If you attack U.S. war efforts, you may do so all you wish from the safety and comfort of American soil. Conversely, don’t even think about writing something positive unless you’ve spent time in Iraq – notwithstanding that your dispatches may be filed from the safety and comfort of a cozy hotel behind layers of concrete barriers and concertina wire.

Questions for the Cynics, the "Lucides", the Armchair Generals, and Other Know-It-Alls

‘‘And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them’’ -- President Clinton, Dec. 16, 1998

…the botched terror assessment [of Britain's intelligence agencies] raises a question for us, too: Which kind of intelligence failure is better — the kind that badly understates a threat, such as the one in London [three weeks before the London bombings of July 7, Britain’s Joint Terrorist Analysis Center advised policymakers that "at present there is not a group with both the current intent and the capability to attack the UK"], or the kind that overstates a threat, such as the insistent warnings before the invasion of Iraq that Saddam Hussein was armed with weapons of mass destruction?

asks Jeff Jacoby.

Of course no intelligence failure is desirable. But even in the best intelligence services, they are sometimes inevitable. Foresight will never be as sharp as hindsight. Only after the fact -- after the Underground blows up, after 9/11, after the stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons are nowhere to be found -- is it clear what the picture looks like once the ‘‘dots’’ are ‘‘connected.’’ Before the fact, it isn’t always clear that there are even any dots to search for, let alone what shape they might take or how reliable they might be.

So what kind of culture do we want intelligence agencies to foster among their operatives and analysts: one that tends to be overly focused on possible threats, or one that is more likely to downplay them? In general, would we rather take action to eliminate a danger that turns out to have been overstated -- or take no action, and then be stunned when the enemy strikes?

Surely the question answers itself. When the enemy is an international terrorist organization or a violent and dictatorial regime, preemption must trump reaction. Ousting the most brutal and homicidal tyrant in the Arab world, even if we then discover that he didn’t pose the WMD threat we had envisioned, beats watching Osama bin Laden’s acolytes steer jetliners into the World Trade Center. Bombing the Iraqi nuclear plant at Osirak, as Israel did in 1981, beats waiting until Iraq launches its first nuclear strike.

…most Americans understand that intelligence failures are not the same thing as lies. And the intelligence failures about Saddam Hussein['s] WMD capability did not begin under the incumbent President Bush. Back when his father was president, before the first Iraq war, the CIA badly underestimated the extent of Saddam’s quest for chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons.

Fortunately, Saddam was stupid enough to invade Kuwait. That triggered the Gulf War, in the course of which the world discovered just how deadly a WMD menace the Iraqi butcher had become.

Let the Revolution Pimp Your Ride

The death of France's multiculturalism	La mort du multiculturalisme à la fwançaise
'Europe means peace.' Bwahahaha!	'L'Europe signifie la paix.' Mouarf!
... et le coup de grâce était asséné par Yannick Noah et Zizi Empeste: Je suis métisse, un mélange de couleurs oh oh Oh métisse, je viens d’ici et d’ailleurs Marcher pieds-nus dans la ville, en sandales dans la jungle Tu sais le mélange est facile, il suffit d’être simple Je suis une éclipse, une rencontre insolite, Je suis fier d’être métisse, j’ai la chance de choisir Je suis métisse, un mélange de couleurs oh oh Oh métisse, qui viens d’ici et d’ailleurs Je suis métisse, un mélange de couleurs oh oh Oh métisse, je viens d’ici et d’ailleurs oh oh Si parfois je me perds au milieu des deux rives Si j’ai besoin de repères, mes racines me guident Un sentiment basique, un élan, une chance Une si belle mosaïque et dans mon coeur ça danse Je suis la preuve vivante que tous les humains sont les mêmes Je suis l’enfant d’Adam et Eve Je suis un rêve comme Ismaël en Israël Renie ta haine et fais sourire les anges Mélange le Gange et la Tamise Métisse des Indes et du Brésil On est métis comme Sade, Bob Marley Tu peux te marrer ou bien te barrer On peut en parler Multicolores, anti-connards et tous mes colocataires Caracolent en tête pour des idées D’un monde plus métissé Métisse, un mélange de couleurs oh oh Oh métisse, qui vient d’ici et d’ailleurs oh oh Je suis métisse, un mélange de couleurs oh oh Oh métisse, qui viens d’ici et d’ailleurs oh oh Je suis métisse Deux êtres différents qui se mélangent et ne font qu’un Je suis métisse Deux cultures, deux passés qui se rassemblent et ne font qu’un Je suis métisse Deux façons de penser qui se rassemblent pour ne faire qu’un Je suis métisse Pas besoin de voyager pour dire que je viens de loin Na na na na na na na na na oh oh Na na na na na na na na na oh oh Métisse Na na na na na na na na na oh oh Oh métisse na na na na na na na na na oh oh Je suis métisse, un mélange de couleurs oh oh Oh métisse, qui viens d’ici et d’ailleurs oh oh Je suis métisse, un mélange de couleurs oh oh Oh métisse, qui viens d’ici et d’ailleurs oh oh Je suis métisse, un mélange de couleurs oh oh Oh métisse, qui viens d’ici et d’ailleurs oh oh

Common sense	Frappé au coin du bon sens
Profiling.	Même face, même race.

Common sense	Frappé au coin du bon sens
Profiling.	Même face, même race.

The Terrorists' Strategy in Europe

Simply put, Old Europe's thinking today is that of 1930s, when the Oxford Union voted "under no circumstances [to] fight for King and Country," and British PM Neville Chamberlain believed appeasement should be the policy and "peace in our time" the goal

writes Pete du Pont.

Winston Churchill had the better understanding: "You ask what is our aim? I can answer that in one word, victory at all costs, victory in spite of terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory there is no survival." He was talking of Hitler and Nazi Germany, of course, but without victory there will be no survival against Islamic terrorism either.

Meanwhile, the terrorist network has changed its focus, making the fighting of the war more complex. An al Qaeda planning document found by Norwegian intelligence in 2003 laid out its revised strategy: spectacular attacks like those of 9/11 against the United States need to be supplemented by attacks on European nations so they will withdraw their support of the Afghan and Iraqi military operations in order to increase the burden on the United States.

University of Chicago professor Robert Pape's excellent New York Times piece of July 9th lays out its specifics: attack Britain, Poland, and Spain as the most vulnerable nations. "It is necessary to make the utmost use of the upcoming general election in Spain . . . we think the Spanish government could not tolerate more than two, maximum three, blows . . . then the victory of the Socialist Party is almost secured and the withdrawal of Spanish forces will be in the electoral program." They hoped that would put "huge pressure on the British presence that Tony Blair might not be able to withstand, and hence the domino tiles would fall quickly."

The terrorist strategy may have changed, but the objective remains the same. Al Qaeda understands that in the end the United States is what matters. The United Nations is irresolute and corrupt, and important European nations are indecisive and vulnerable. So drive the United States from the Middle East, establish control of all its nations, and then force the Western European nations to appease and accept an Islamic, theocratic global society.

Combating terrorism is thus the modern version of war--no huge armies, but nevertheless a real war--and winning this war is no less important to global freedom than winning the World War II and the Cold War.

Making Stupidity Noble...

...yet making it somehow seem serious and meaningful, but decidedly unfunny. They seem to be able to take the picque out of irony.

Austrian Museum Lets Naked People in Free

For example: here are three attempting eithier hip-hop or a synchronized proctology. making both painful.

The Crew of Columbia: Killed by Do-Gooders?

From the blog "Pardon My English": Enviromentalist-Wackoism and NASA caving-in linked to Columbia failure. In other words, NGO "pressure groups" killed seven Astronauts and Mission Specialists through their inability to accommodate and accept, pushed a policy that killed the crew of STS-107. Never mind the softly-softly language about "do this wherever you can" - wherever to these exterminating angels is everywhere, regardless of the risk. For example - how do hospitals function safely without latex?

«Before the environmentally friendly new insulation was used, about 40 of the spacecraft's 26,000 ceramic tiles would sustain damage in missions. However, Katnik reported that NASA engineers found 308 "hits" to Columbia after a 1997 flight. A "massive material loss on the side of the external tank" caused much of the damage, Katnik wrote in an article in Space Team Online. He called the damage "significant." One hundred thirty-two hits were bigger than 1 inch in diameter, and some slashes were as long as 15 inches.

"As recently as last September [2002], a retired engineering manager for Lockheed Martin, the contractor that assembles the tanks, told a conference in New Orleans that developing a new foam to meet environmental standards had 'been much more difficult than anticipated,'»

-The Philadelphia Inquirer

The Greenie notion of "success at all costs", wether that cost is sovereignty or people's lives needs to be re-evaluated. It's time to question their authority, and their "power without responsibility".

But to them, I'm sure they think that it's only their sentiment that counts.

"Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it"

Today is the birthday of Milton Friedman (1912- ), the American economist who has said that

A major source of objection to a free economy is precisely that group thinks they ought to want. Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.

Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it.

Governments never learn. Only people learn.

History suggests that capitalism is a necessary condition for political freedom. Clearly it is not a sufficient condition.

I am favor of cutting taxes under any circumstances and for any excuse, for any reason, whenever it's possible.

I'm in favor of legalizing drugs. According to my values system, if people want to kill themselves, they have every right to do so. Most of the harm that comes from drugs is because they are illegal.

Inflation is the one form of taxation that can be imposed without legislation.

Many people want the government to protect the consumer. A much more urgent problem is to protect the consumer from the government.

Hell hath no fury like a bureaucrat scorned.

Tool or Wind-up Toy?

Canada Free Press:
"Anti-American MP slams Defence Chief".

MP Carolyn Parrish is at it again:

Basically because he is, as she referred to him, a "testosterone-filled general". "I’m totally offended by him… We are also not a country that is going to easily throw away 100 years of peacekeeping reputation and noble reputation in the world by a testosterone-filled general, and I think somebody should put a clamp on his mouth."

Oh those NASTY NASTY GUNS! Why can't they just uninvent them so all the peaceful völk of the world... you know them, the ones that aren't white looking, can just live in peace, fly kites, play Cuban Jazz, and listen to the woodland creatures who pass on their superior wisdom to them... Her ilk have already dessicated the Canadian Armed Forces as it is for little more than their own emotional satisfaction.

What's left for them? Peacekeeping, which most of the time is an elaborate word for "mopping up" - it's also one of the only dignified tasks that can accomplished reasonably by an underfunded force which is demoralized by the likes of the self-absorbed former schoolmarm MP Carolyn Parrish. At least it gives her a way to act out her borderline behavior, so she won't abuse the neighborhood kids. Otherwise she could just stamp her feet and think she's insulting him by calling him "a man!"

«Parrish, a Liberal backbencher of no particular note for 11 years, hit the spotlight when her comment, "Damn Americans--I hate those bastards" was picked up by a boom microphone. Milking it for all it was worth, she appeared on the now defunct television show of alleged comedian Mike Bullard and played to the largely anti-American crowd. Parrish told the audience that her only regret was that her elderly mother was upset that she used the word, "bastards".

Parrish again appeared on television last year when she went on CBC’s "This Hour Has 22 Minutes" and stomped on a George Bush doll. Fearful Leader told her to apologize whereupon Parrish opined that she wouldn’t shed a tear if Paul Martin lost the next election and said that Martin’s advisors could go to hell. She was then dumped from the caucus and forced to sit as an independent.»

And just what was it that bugs her so much about Hillier?

«...the straight talking Hillier had said the obvious--the job of Canadian soldiers is to be able to kill people. Hillier also referred to terrorists (apologies to the CBC) as "murderers and scumbags".»

So she already played the "it's my football and I'm going home" game with her own party. All becuase of those icky boys playing war in a world where she seems to want Afghans to live in terror of gangsta-thug former Talibs. Quite frankly, I'd be all for her volunteering to wear a Burkha for the rest of her days in "solidarity" like the rest of the attention seeking fake empathy crowd.

As for the Liberal Party, she also seems to want back in now. In a political system where the parties so heavily control and manage their legislators, do you think this former apparachik could tax their patience again?