A Snarl From The Den….....

Thanks to that adorable Group Captain over at A Letter From The Olde Countrie, MommaBear found one of the most egregious examples of totally obnoxious behavior on the part of certain males [ H. Sapiens(?) ] she has ever seen. All three parts of this reportage, starting at the bottom, must be read to understand MommaBear’s outrage.

He has a long complicated name and uses the same template as Dodgeblog. Who is he? Why, it’s Pejmanpundit, that’s who! Never managed to get him in the perma-blog either; oh well.

A Frown From The Editor’s Desk….....

No sooner does the Editor step away from her desk for just a moment to tend to other duties than the inhabitants of both blogs get into all sorts of mischief. Marty must have snuck over from Darker Than Dark to egg Andrew into putting up that absurd post below referencing that awful song about Lagwolf. Although common practice is to let posts stand on their own, this was too egregious to let pass without approbation. Any future episodes of this type of behavio(u)r will be dealt with by much harsher measures!

As it is Sunday and I have been way too serious on the blog this week, I offer you the Lagwolf song. Dating from my days as a regular on Gameranger, it is a nice little ditty, mocking yours truly. Might I suggest one listens to it while viewing the Marty Dodge Hate Page?

A Growl With A Smile From The Den….....

MommaBear actually found something to smile about prowling the blogs !!

Most times, H. Sapiens(?) demonstrates with vigor all its worst attributes; however, in this instance, the best is showing in great style. At Yourish she found something that deserves everyone’s full support to the best of ability! Since all the ‘allegedly elite’ support those pathetic, puerile, palestinian terrorists, but deny any support to the humanitarian efforts for life in Israel, there is a program to let you change that a bit, found here.

Here’s where the ‘growl’ comes in…if you don’t help with this effort, you should forevermore keep silent with your gripes at those miserable ‘spouters’ who carry on about the ‘poor palestinians’ but never talk about the damage being done to the Israelis. Both groups are more than worthy of support.

The “Special Relationship” is the subject of a survey on YouGov.com. I got the link via Iain Murray and encourage all of you to go take it. The questions about Euro attitudes towards the US are most useful.

Someone named Yardbird (good band, btw) has taken me to task over my “atheistic fundamentalism” comment below. It was clear from what he wrote that I did not explain my definition of the term. So here goes:

Atheist fundamentalists are those who strive to wipe out any public display of relgious belief and by extension attempt to convince others of the futility of belief in god. The type of people who find a town that is 100% Christian populace with an Xmas display up, yet force them to take it down. The type of person (like any other type of fundamentalist) who does not believe in the adage: “live and let live.”

I personally don’t like fundamentalists of any sort, as they seem to be blinded about the world around them. Most importantly they wish to spread their view of how to live in the world amoungst the rest of the populace, in some cases by any means necessary, including force.

Yardbird, from what you wrote you are not what I describe. You have a perfectly resonable view of it all (Well calling anyone who believes in a god(s) “mentally ill” is a tad ott, but not unreasonable as such.). I doubt it is your sole goal in life to convince the rest of the world of the futility of religion. Am I wrong?

Some pleasant weekend reading for all of you dear readers. MEMRI sets out to expose a book written about “Blood Libel” by the Syrian Defence minister. It was no doubt written for the express purpose of justifying genocide against the Jews. For those who wish further reading those nice people at the Aztlan movement have published the completely fake but much read Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Trying to get through this turgid crap takes a bit of stamina.

Thanks to Charlie for this:

Answer: Princess Diana’s death

Question: How come?

Answer: An English princess with an Egyptian boyfriend crashes in a French tunnel, riding in a German car with a Dutch engine, driven by a Belgian who was pissed on Scottish whiskey, followed closely by Italian Paparazzi on Japanese motorcycles, treated by an American doctor using Brazilian medicines!

And this is sent to you by an Israeli, using Bill Gates’ technology which he stole from the Taiwanese.

Oh boy, Tapped has issued a challenge to us on this stupid bleat by Cal Thomas. Was this guy drunk when he wrote it? This ranks up there with the famous Falwell/Robertson (gays, abortionists & libertines were at fault) reasoning behind 9/11 as well as lefties like Chomsky. Claiming that ”...the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco has inflicted on this nation what many will conclude is a greater injury than that caused by the terrorists,” is just pathetic. I am hoping that he will be roundly condemned by sensible people on both sides.

Say what you want about the 9th CCA Judges, but comparing them to Al Queda? I am sure that if this get widely reported it will deliver more people into the hands of the pinhead who brought this irrelevant case in the first place. I surely would not wanted be associated with such statements.

The column continues in a hysterical vein with this pronouncement, which in itself is contradictory.

“I predict this ruling will not stand, even if the U.S. Supreme Court upholds it. If upheld on appeal, it will turn millions of Americans into lawbreakers, because they’ll continue to say the Pledge of Allegiance, just as many continue to pray before school athletic contests in violation of court prohibitions.”

If no one has been prosecuted for praying before a sporting event (which is surely covered by the 1st Amendment) why would anyone be prosecuted for sneaking “under God” in the Pledge under their breath. I, as a Deist, drop Jesus Christ from any prayer I might make, so why can’t Christians just sneak in “under God”. I am sure there are people who say Allah, Jehovah, Creator, et al instead of God when they say the pledge. Why must this be legislated? It is not as if this were part of the original pledge, it was added in 1954 as a two-fingered salute to the Soviet Union.

Instead of concentrating on a major victory that is the voucher win, Christians are bleating on about two words in the Pledge that I am sure people will leave in if they want to do. Surely, it is a better idea to make sure that the voucher program works and thus allow parents who are religious (or want their children to have a decent education) to send their children where they want them to go. If parents are allowed to send their children where they want, they will be able to send them to school that mentions God ad nauseum. Come on people, pick your battles and savour your victories.

Of course I suspect the reason many Christians are jumping on this Pledge row bandwagon is so that they can continue repeating the un-truth that the US is a Christian country. The US was founded on Deistic principles and not Christian ones. The US is deist country and not a Christian one, and yes, there is a big difference. This was done to make sure that the US was welcoming to all faiths, not just one brand of Protestanism or Catholicism. It is in this spirit that the US must make a great effort in retaining its deistic outlook. Any effort to try to make the US seem to be a specifically Christian nation is a major mistake and goes against the spirit of the ideals of the founding fathers. This would also play into the hands of our enemies of the Islamic bent who claims actions against them are a new form of Christian Crusade. Al Queda are our enemy because they are murderous terrorists, not because they are Muslims.

NB: Atheist fundamentalism is as bad as any other fundamentalism, it should be treated as a form of religion, imo.

Cheers to Glenn for pointing me to the Tapped article on this idiocy.

For more on this: Tom has his bit to say.

Entwhistle, the Who’s Bassist, has sadly died of a heart attack. What is really sad is this happened right before a tour by the Who, which would surely be their final one. Another irony, Entwhistle never went in for the “sdr&r” lifestyle yet snuffed it before Daltrey and Townsend. It will be interesting whether the Who draft in someone else to complete the tour. If they do, might I suggest John Paul Jones of Led Zeppelin?

Metal saves the day and prevents violence!

Got accosted by a seriously agitated bloke today. Seems someone he knows got her bag knicked, and he thought I had done it. The guy would not take no for an answer and would not let me pass. He was going to hit me sooner or later. That was until I asked him if the bird whose bag it was listened to Yngwie Malmsteen. I took the disc out and showed it to him. He wanted to know if there was any make-up in the bag. He actually stopped, a bit bemused, then looked at my bag and realised it was black. To his credit he was very apologetic after he manhandled me. The guy is lucky he didn’t get his head kicked in; I was in a nasty mood and I was hungry.

Dinner was with Frank Sensenbrenner (a contributor to this blog). After we left the restaurant, we got yelled at by a mess of people in a car. It is not a full moon, but the aftermath of one. I think my assailant, however mistakened, shoulld thank his luck it was not a full moon. American Werewolf in London anyone?

A serious aside: Because the guy was in a nice suit and tie, I didn’t fight back, merely resisted his shoves. Prejudice or good judge of character? Was I a fool to be so trusting?

Cue Camera 1:

Focus on guest star Maarten Schenk, stage centre.

Maarten: LIVE FROM BRUSSELS, ITS A BLOG!

Fade to black.

Some leftie pinhead has his knickers in a twist because the US Pledge of Allegiance offends him. His child does not even have to say the bloody thing. What a complete jackarse! I hope the US gov’t charges him for all the wasted monies when he loses in the Supreme Court. This guy is wasting valuable court time and public money over one word in a Pledge that most people quite like to say to re-affirm their faith in their country. If it indeed gets banned, “God” advocates can just say it under their breath.

The PofA is a bit of a quirky Americanism, but it’s one that seems to be popular in the post-9/11 scenario. The only people mildly miffed about it are radical atheists who seem to take their seperation of church and state way too seriously. (Think radical feminists and phallic symbols for a good comparison.) The fact a court actually allowed this fool’s case to stand shows how silly the law has gotten in the US. Just like the anti-smoking advocates that I speak to below, these are people who are trying to help others who don’t want to be helped!

I suspect the Supreme Court in the US is going to overthrow this ruling and retain the status quo. If you care to read anything else about this whole stink, many a blogger have given their thoughts on the matter; the best linkfest can be found chez Glenn.

I agree with Glenn that this is much ado about nothing. A ruling by the Supreme Court either way will not matter one jot to me.

My anti-anti-smoking rant seems have caused a bit of a stir on the ole’ blog. At last count it has 6 comments, some taking exception with my comparison between curry-houses and cigarette smoking.

Forcing private businesses to sucumb to the needs of the minority of their customers is anti-freedom. Restaurant and bar owners are not dumb; if there is enough call for non-smoking areas or the whole place “smoke-free”, they will change their business accordingly. If you don’t like a smoky bar, don’t go there. It is very simple. Why must the cudgel of the state be used to change the behaviour of a private business? If there were sufficient call for no-smoking bars and restaurants they would have existed before government stepped in. In the case of many of these “minority” bans, the state is almost the last resort of the scoundrel.

Private businesses should be able to run their businesses as they see fit. If you do not like that business then quite simply do not use its services. Why should cigarette-allergic people and statists force their beliefs on the majority who disagree? This is surely tyranny of the minority.

Oh yes, and the old argument that it’s for bar staff is total rubbish. Have you ever seen a member of bar staff that does not smoke? I certainly haven’t. What is rather ironic is, that in places where smoking in bars is banned, you find employees out back puffing away to get their fix.

Goldstein, over at the usually good and frequently excellent AirStripOne, has written some damning praise of the European Movement. He claims that if they were half-way decent at their job, with all the money they get from the EU, the sceptic movement would be stuffed.

” The European Movement has succesfully stifled new and original thought among the pro-Europeans for almost twenty years now.”

I would have to agree with EG on this one. After meeting some of their representatives a few years ago, I have taken to calling them the European (Bowel) Movement.

The fall of evil capitalism imminent? Nope, just the imminent fall of companies who commit fraud on a massive scale. George Trefgarne tries (in vain, no doubt) to preempt left wing bleating about the latest of collapses. Surely it was not a good sign that Worldcom had Andersen as their “auditors”?

There is one bit of good news from the collapse of Worldcom; at least people in the US will no longer be harrassed by cold-calling Worldcom salesmen when they are trying to eat dinner! [ ed. – wanna bet ?! ]

Antoine Clarke has laid into Brian over his rant against Randians. This fairly long retort to Brian’s more absurd assertions is most informative. Tip: to truly understand the post one must have one’s copies of Altlas Shrugged and Fountainhead to hand.

The Truth Laid Bear has yet another chart on blogging. This time he lists who out of us are the biggest link sluts. Dodgeblog is not doing too badly, but it is surprising to how few links some of my favourite sites make.

Louder Fenn welcomes the Supreme Court (US) ruling that allows Jehovah’s Witnesses to make bloody nuisances of themselves all over the US. (Or in LF words “witness their faith.”.) He takes Glenn to task for being “dismissive” about the ruling.

Alas, in this case two great tenets come into conflict. Does one have rights over one’s property? Do JW have a first amendment right to invade an individual’s property, uninvited, to harass its owners about their faith? What JWs do is rude and obnoxious; their altruistic belief is irrelevant to all but them. Do JWs have the right, for instance, to ignore someone who posts “no trespassers” or “no door-to-door”, as they often do? Surely they are merely salesmen for their belief?

I agree that JWs have the right to stand on the public way and preach to their hearts content. The issue is whether they can go onto my land and harass me. It is irrelevant that the person is trying to “save my soul”, they have no right to harass me in my own home. The entire prospect of “saving my soul” is paternalistic, patronising, and offensive beyond belief. Of course, this is a matter of theological belief, for those of us who are deists/Gnostics; it impossible for someone to bring you closer to god. Faith is between you and your god, period.

The mayor of London, he of congestion charges and patronising paternalism, has got himself in a bit of muddle. It seems that he was at a party late one night, got a bit ratty, and allegedly got into a bit of ruck with a fellow guest. He has also been accused of manhandling his girlfriend (aka partner). After repeated denials that have come a cropper, he was forced to go before the London Assembly and account for his actions. Reports are slowly emerging about what was said, and no doubt the Evening Standard (a bugbear of the mayor’s) will be in full flow about his statements.

Nowhere near as dodgy as the former mayor of DC’s crack-fueled antics, but nonetheless good for a laugh.

Anti-smoking winge in the comments sections on War Now!, in response to a great article on cigars and pcism..

“Sorry to rain on your picnic, but some of us are very allergic to cigarette smoke. As in migraines, nausea, and itchy eyes the minute a cig is lighted within 50 feet. Not to mention the stink, which sticks to clothes and hair. Why should I incur extra cleaning bills because you want to smoke?
The ban on smoking in most public places is what allows me to have a life. Your right to throw a punch ends just before my nose. Your right to smoke also ends just before my nose. If the cigarette companies would design cigarettes that no one but the smoker can smell, that would solve the problem. Until that day, the rest of us have a right to enjoy the air also.”

Yehudit

My response:

If you don’t like cigarette smoke, then…wait for it:... stay the hell away from cigarrette smokers! Because you can’t take cigarette smoke, the rest of us can’t enjoy a puff, is that it? You may pleased to have a ban on smoking in public places, but some of us think bars/pubs with no smoke in them lack ambiance. I refuse to go to any non-smoking restaurant or bar. I don’t smoke cigarettes, but that is a matter of principle.

I am highly allergic to Indian food, and even the smell of it makes me want to barf. What do I do? I don’t go to Indian restaurants and cover my nose when I go by them. Do I think all Indian restuarants in the UK should be closed because of my afflication, no? Why? Because people have the right to curries if they wish, and I have no right to deny them that right..

BTW, I know quite a few people who like the smell of pipe and cigar smoke and not cigarettes. I smoke cigars often, about 3 a week. I find them relaxing, inspiring, and, because I have a dodgy eye, good for me. And yes, I have had this theory acknowledged by my eye doctor. It dialates my pupils so that my eye (cornea) does not hurt.

So to put it bluntly. Piss off a leftie, smoke a cigar!

A Snicker From The Editor’s Desk….....

Leave it to Ted Turner to foul things up even on this blog: Andrew had tried to insert a link about Ted’s latest gaffe; guess what: the linkage got fouled by blogger. Check the Comments section for the correct link to the full article.

Andrew Sullivan has taken a break from obsessing about the Priest Pedophile scandal to launch a survey about his excellent site. Alas, as in many such polls, the political affiliation question does not list libertarian. It is yet another example of the tired and irrelevant “linear” view of politics.

The survey is here. It is disappointing to see such an intelligent person allow himself to be associated with this type of inaccurate question. I would encourage all libertarians who read his site to email him and complain about this error.

A more accurate political inclination survey is the World’s Smallest Political Quiz.

Yet another example of a bad political quiz can be found here.

On a lighter note, Katzman pointed me to an amusing post about Scotland and UFOs. The comments are the best bit of the whole thing, Joe lists a small sample of them on his blog. The post on Slashdot has over 500 comments so far; go over and take a look.

Ted Turner has been praised by Hamas for his support of so-called “Martyrdom Operations.”

“In an article posted on the Hamas website, Al-Rantisi wrote: ”...Why did you not [endorse what] Ted Turner, the founder of CNN network, said when he showed understanding for the martyrdom operations being carried out by Palestinians against the Zionist military machine… Your friend Uri Avneri, of the Zionist Peace Now bloc, was more balanced than you; this raises many question marks regarding the goals of this accursed communique…”

Here is rest of the Comments are off for this post

Jim “Anglosphere” Bennett has posted another one of his pieces over at UPI. In the latest he writes that he thinks the Echelon spy project should be outted by the US/UK governments. He believes this would end much of the protest about the program.

Are there parallels between the way New Labour operates and the Third Reich? Robert Harris seems to think so. And, as he says in the piece, the suggestion is not as absurd as it seems if one really thinks about it.

A regular reader has sent me this email in regards to my response to a post by Brian on Samizdata.

It seems to me that between, particularly you, Perry, David and (very)
few others, you are starting to enunciate a cohesive libertarian
philosophy not too far removed from a plan of action. It is as though
you are moving toward a plan of action. Interestingly enough, I can see
that the libertarian philosophy is less prone to concerted action, but
surely proseletizing and enlarging the group into the mainstream, as you
say of the Tories, etc., is a must. That is, unless you are just a
group of people who enjoy standing on the sidelines kibitzing. As you
know that is a particular type. I, for one, think that you people,
those whom I know, are rather people who are sufficiently smitten with
the libertarian ideal and realistic enough to translate it for others
that you could make serious inroads into the already waning entitlement
syndrome which for too long dictated the course of our governments and
individual’s thoughts and actions.

Up with responsibility for self and others!

Down with blaming other people and other things!

Carpe diem.

Mater

Chas of Sardonic has a new addition to his family. Go over and congratulate the man; it’s a daughter!

Thanks to Kathy for pointing out this bit of good news in the world of the blog.