Startling, I know, but that was an exact quote from French Prime Minister, Dominique de Villepin, regarding the French riots. First, to recap the damage caused from the French riots:

Unrest has continued among mainly Arab and African communities on rundown housing estates for 17 nights since the accidental deaths of two teenagers on 27 October, who were reportedly trying to hide from police.

About 8,400 vehicles have been burnt nationwide along with dozens of public buildings including schools and gyms, according to a tally released by the French state news agency AFP on Sunday.

Dozens of people including residents, police and firefighters have been injured, while one firefighter received serious facial injuries from a petrol bomb and a disabled woman suffered serious burns when a bus was set alight.

The death of a 61-year-old man in a street assault has been connected by some to the riots.

Police have arrested 2,652 people, the youngest of them aged 10, and 592 were remanded in custody.

Now, De Villepin’s comments in context (emphasis added):

Amanpour: You know, many people, after hurricane Katrina struck the United States said, that it exposed the poverty and racism that exist in the United States. Many people in France said that … around the world said it. Many people also said that the riots in the ghettos if you like… in the suburbs …

De Villepin: I am not sure you can call them riots. It’s very different from the situation you have known in 1992 in L.A. for example. You had at that time 54 people that died, and you had 2,000 people wounded. In France during the 2 weeks period of unrest, nobody died in France. So, I think you can’t compare this social unrest with any kind of riots.

Amanpour: What do you call it then?

De Villepin: Social unrest, you have to understand also, there were no guns in the streets. No adults; mostly young people between 12 and 20 … so it is very special movement.

Totally clueless. So now we’re softening up the wording in order to describe rioters as partakers in “social unrest”? What a joke. Redefining and recharacterizing things as De Villepin did with what was obviously mass rioting is part of what I call the slow erosion of the definition of right and wrong. By redefining and recharacterizing things like, for example, rioting, to make it sound like if it was just a typical mundane example of social unrest, De Villepin is effectively diluting the meaning of ’social unrest’ by his very denial that this was rioting. ‘Social unrest’ can mean many things. For example, there was social unrest in San Francisco around the time that Mayor Gavin Newsom decided to invent a law that allowed gay marriage. But you didn’t see any rioting out of it.

Social unrest can include rioting and sometimes it doesn’t. And when we’re talking about the massive amounts of damage done in France - not just to property but people as well, characterizing it as merely ’social unrest’ just doesn’t cut it. It’s just a way for De Villepin to excuse the idiots who couldn’t control their desire to rip apart a beautiful country (which it is, even though I have big issues with their government) because of their displeasure with French policy towards Muslims and it’s also a slick attempt at downplaying what happened because he wants people to forget how lamely the French gov’t responded to this ’social unrest’ - by making it sound like it was not that big of a deal to begin with. It was just “social unrest” and a “special movement.”

We know better.

Read more comments about this at Atlas Shrugs’ blog.

RELATED:
“The Word ‘Riot’ Is A Bit Too Strong” For The French

Cross-posted at SisterToldjah

five card draw poker linked with fun roulette online...
le casino gratuites sans dépot linked with le casino gratuites sans dépot...
holdem poker spielregeln linked with texas holdem online spielen...
poker bonus party poker bonus no deposit bonus poker linked with check cash advance loan check cash advance...
Holistic supplement for atarax. linked with Holistic supplement for atarax....
advance cash faxing no 1000 advance cash faxing no no faxing savings account cash advance linked with gagner au casino en ligne...
bonus sans depot casino770 linked with hour in loan one payday faxless hour loan one payday...
giocare a poker linked with poker casino online...
poker en ligne patrick bruel linked with descargar juego de poker...
approval canadian card credit online online credit card approval linked with bank card credit...
chase credit card home page linked with card citibank credit online...
www.pacific-poker.com pacific poker www.pacificpoker linked with poker en ligne francais...
poker 5 draw linked with poker on line in italiano...
jeux de casino pc linked with all slots casino...
play free baccarat linked with jeu de casino en ligne...
eurobet poker linked with poker texano on line...
high stakes poker video linked with reglas de poquer...
guide poker en ligne linked with jeu poker mac...
apply card credit uk linked with card consolidation counseling credit debt texas credit card counseling debt consolidation card consolidation counseling credit debt...
bardseyeview linked with A Shakespearean parallel on the doomed French.
Flopping Aces linked with What Riots?

After expressing our frustration last night upon learning the news of Gov. Schwarzenegger’s latest appointment, we might’ve missed the bigger picture.

More importantly, we didn’t follow our own advice: Politics is a game, and it needs to be played. The SacBee’s Dan Weintraub suggests “the governor’s decision to hire Susan Kennedy as his chief of staff is a smart move.”

Weintraub explains the “strategery” we were asking about:

The former Democratic Party operative and aide to Dianne Feinstein and Gray Davis is driven, dogged, and smart, knows the Capitol inside and out and presumably wouldn’t be taking the job unless she were dedicated to Schwarzenegger’s success. The fact that she is a Democrat simply furthers — and emphasizes — what has been an ongoing trend with Schwarzenegger hiring people with whom he feels comfortable, regardless of their ideology. This administration has already been the most bipartisan, in terms of personnel and appointments, of any in recent times, despite significant spin to the contrary.

Right-wingers who are gnashing their teeth at the moment need to remember that, except on economic issues, Schwarzenegger has never been a conservative. He supports abortion rights and gay rights, and takes environmental advice from a real Kennedy: RFK Jr. His most important adviser, meanwhile, has always been his wife, Maria Shriver, a Democrat and Kennedy family member.

That’s not going to change no matter who is on his staff. And on economic issues, Susan Kennedy of late has been sounding a lot more like Milton Friedman than like her former bosses. She is a Democrat who believes her party has lost its way in always looking first to government regulators rather than individual initiative and free markets to solve problems. Sounds like a perfect fit for Schwarzenegger to me.

The early speculation is that hiring Kennedy will hurt Schwarzenegger with Republican voters. I don’t buy it. Most voters will never know who is in the governor’s inner circle. And virtually all voters will judge Schwarzenegger on his results, not on his choice of advisers. If Kennedy helps Schwarzenegger accomplish the goals he has set for his administration, she will help him get reelected.

We appreciate Weintraub’s optimism. And perhaps he’s right on.

However, we shall continue to worry about what compromises and concessions it’ll take for Gov. Schwarzenegger to “work” with the Democrats in Sacramento.

As we’ve seen before, they can’t be trusted.

RELATED:
Read more about Arnold

Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator linked with Documents Reveal More About Alito's Views

Is there any wonder why the overwhelming majority of Hollywood is liberal? They can afford to be.

Reuters reports:

She traded Hollywood for motherhood and did not star in a movie this year, but Julia Roberts still ranks as Hollywood’s highest-paid actress at $20 million a film, according to an annual power list.

The Hollywood Reporter, an entertainment paper on Wednesday published its annual list of the top-earning actresses, putting Nicole Kidman just behind Roberts at No. 2.

Kidman commands an estimated $16 million to $17 million per movie, the Reporter said.

The No. 3 and No. 4 spots were held by Reese Witherspoon, currently starring in Oscar hopeful “Walk the Line,” and Drew Barrymore, both of whom take in $15 million a movie.
. . .

Three actresses, Renee Zellweger, Angelina Jolie and Cameron Diaz, all had salaries estimated between $10 million and $15 million per film, the No. 5, 6 and 7 positions on the list.

Jodie Foster, who starred in the recent thriller “Flight Plan,” returned to the list for the first time since 2002 at No. 8 with an asking price from $10 million to $12 million.

Charlize Theron made her debut in the No. 9 spot at a flat $10 million, and the No. 10 position belonged to Jennifer Aniston, who was said to make $9 million a movie.

And why is wealth only considered bad when you’re a Republican?

Hollywood, thy name is hypocrisy.

“The United States has no intention of determining the precise form of Iraq’s new government. That choice belongs to the Iraqi people. Yet, we will ensure that one brutal dictator is not replaced by another. All Iraqis must have a voice in the new government, and all citizens must have their rights protected.

Rebuilding Iraq will require a sustained commitment from many nations, including our own: we will remain in Iraq as long as necessary, and not a day more.”

– President George W. Bush
February 26, 2003

The following document articulates the broad strategy the President set forth in 2003 and provides an update on our progress as well as the challenges remaining.

November 30, 2005
National Strategy for Victory in Iraq
Full PDF Document (386KB)

Table of Contents
(continue reading post »)

This morning, President Bush delivered a speech that focused on winning instead of timetables for troop withdrawals and delivered his most detailed breakdown of who we’re fighting while briefly outlining what subjects he’ll be addressing in future speeches.

One of the things that President Bush talked about was the “National Strategy for Victory in Iraq.” Here’s the link for the National Strategy for Victory in Iraq. It’s significant because it talks in great detail about all the considerations that will define victory in Iraq.

“OUR ENEMIES AND THEIR GOALS”

• The enemy in Iraq is a combination of rejectionists, Saddamists, and terrorists affiliated with or inspired by Al Qaida. These three groups share a common opposition to the elected Iraqi government and to the presence of Coalition forces, but otherwise have separate and to some extent incompatible goals.
• Rejectionists are the largest group. They are largely Sunni Arabs who have not embraced the shift from Saddam Hussein’s Iraq to a democratically governed state. Not all Sunni Arabs fall into this category. But those that do are against a new Iraq in which they are no longer the privileged elite. Most of these rejectionists opposed the new constitution, but many in their ranks are recognizing that opting out of the democratic process has hurt their interests.
• We judge that over time many in this group will increasingly support a democratic Iraq provided that the federal government protects minority rights and the legitimate interests of all communities.
• Saddamists and former regime loyalists harbor dreams of reestablishing a Ba’athist dictatorship and have played a lead role in fomenting wider sentiment against the Iraqi government and the Coalition.
• We judge that few from this group can be won over to support a democratic Iraq, but that this group can be marginalized to the point where it can and will be defeated by Iraqi forces.
• Terrorists affiliated with or inspired by Al Qaida make up the smallest enemy group but are the most lethal and pose the most immediate threat because (1) they are responsible for the most dramatic atrocities, which kill the most people and function as a recruiting tool for further terrorism and (2) they espouse the extreme goals of Osama Bin Laden, chaos in Iraq which will allow them to establish a base for toppling Iraq’s neighbors and launching attacks outside the region and against the U.S. homeland.
• The terrorists have identified Iraq as central to their global aspirations. For that reason, terrorists and extremists from all parts of the Middle East and North Africa have found their way to Iraq and made common cause with indigenous religious extremists and former members of Saddam’s regime. This group cannot be won over and must be defeated, killed or captured, through sustained counterterrorism operations.
• There are other elements that threaten the democratic process in Iraq, including criminals and Shi’a religious extremists, but we judge that such elements can be handled by Iraqi forces alone and/or assimilated into the political process in the short term.

In short, the President is giving the Senate the detailed report that they demanded in the Warner amendment and then some.
(continue reading post »)

free adult video chat linked with free adult video chat...
Donkey Stomp linked with Kerry's Exit Strategy
Freedom Folks linked with Giant Cranium Syndrome Strikes Again
The Bay Area Is Talking linked with "Complete Victory" in Iraq

World Net Daily

Teachers at a Georgia elementary school reportedly were told to nix any religious pins and refrain from referring to a party as a “Christmas” party, while the local district has censored certain religious Christmas songs from its “winter” program.

The Alliance Defense Fund, a religious-liberties law group, wrote a letter to the district yesterday informing the Jackson County School System in Jefferson, Ga., that it stands on shaky constitutional ground due to its actions.

“Frankly, it’s ridiculous that we’re even discussing whether it’s OK to say ‘Merry Christmas.’ I’m sure just about everyone would rather have a merry Christmas than a meaningless winter holiday,” said ADF senior legal counsel David Cortman in a statement.

Cortman penned the letter to the chairman of the board of education and the superintendent of the school district. According to ADF, the letter was written on behalf of a teacher in the after-school program at Benton Elementary School.

The district has reportedly prohibited teachers from wearing “any pins, angels, crosses, clothing” that contain any religious connotation or affiliation, referring to any party as a “Christmas” party, or displaying a Bible in their rooms. ADF says the district has also removed certain religious Christmas songs from a “winter” concert and censored the word “God” from another song.

“Jackson County school officials are attempting to prohibit teachers from expressing any religious aspect of Christmas,” Cortman stated in the letter. “Classroom decorations may no longer include nativity scenes and angels. Jackson County has gone so far as to prohibit the common greeting ‘Merry Christmas,’ and also now refers to the Christmas break as ‘Winter Break.’”

Says the attorney: “Many school districts aren’t trying to be difficult; they simply don’t know the facts about the law. The fear, disinformation and intimidation that the ACLU and other groups like them have promoted over the years with regard to religious expression on public property at Christmastime have led to such misconceptions. ADF desires to educate schools, teachers, and students on the truth about what the law really says.”

The Alliance Defense Fund has set up a site devoted to letting people and schools know their rights in religious expression during Christmas. Know Your Rights!

Support Christmas: Sign the Petition

Cross-Posted at Stop The ACLU

All Things Conservative linked with Sign Petition to Support Christmas
Homemade Sin linked with My Very Last Nerve.....
Sister Toldjah linked with Another censoring of Christmas

Merry Christmas, People Of California,

I offer you my sincerest holiday wishes. I have read your Christmas wish lists carefully, and this year, you are all getting what you deserve.

To my Republican friends who supported me so wholeheartedly in the November Special Election (you know who you are), I give you my new Chief of Staff, Susan Kennedy, Democrat, former Gov. Gray Davis top aide.

To my former Democrat rivals and their buddies in the unions who kicked my ass to Mars, I give you my new Chief of Staff, Susan Kennedy, Democrat, former Gov. Gray Davis top aide.

To the People of California who said they wanted reform but left me twisting in the wind in November, I give you my new Chief of Staff, Susan Kennedy, Democrat, former Gov. Gray Davis top aide.

Just to help you all feel better, know that she will have broad powers to hire and fire my executive staff, and other undisclosed latitude she expressed to me as a condition of accepting the job.

Sincerely,

The Governator

RELATED:
Gov. Schwarzenegger: Post-Election Trauma?

Cross-posted at the SactoDan BLOG.

Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator linked with Schwarzenegger names Dem chief of staff

In a move sure to please both traditionalists and Christians, House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert wants the Capitol Holiday Tree to be called the Capitol Christmas Tree. If that happens, expect the ACLU to file for a TRO to prevent that. Just kidding. Sorta.

If it’s a spruce tree adorned with 10,000 lights and 5,000 ornaments displayed on the Capitol grounds in December, it’s a Christmas tree and that’s what it should be called, says House Speaker Dennis Hastert. Hastert, (R-IL), in a letter to the Architect of the Capitol, recommended that the annual Capitol Holiday Tree, as it has been called the past several years, be renamed the Capitol Christmas Tree. “I strongly urge that we return to this tradition and join the White House, countless other public institutions and millions of American families in celebrating the holiday season with a Christmas tree,” Hastert wrote to Architect Alan Hantman.

Speaker Hastert, I couldn’t agree more. It’s time to stop worrying about the PC way of doing things and just call a Christmas tree a Christmas tree. While this seems like a trivial matter to some, it’s a big deal to those of us who are Christians.

• Excluding Christian symbols at this time of year is offensive to me personally and to Christians nationwide.
• Excluding Christian symbols this time of year is offensive because we notice an even stronger hostility from the crowd that’s always preaching tolerance to us.
• Excluding Christian symbols this time of year robs us of the right to openly celebrate the birth of our Savior Jesus Christ, for whom this day is named.

This is exactly the type of thing that the First Amendment was written to protect. After all, the First Amendment doesn’t just prohibit Congress from making a law that sanctions a state-run church. It also prohibits that same Congress, or any branch of government, from making laws, whether by judicial fiat or act of Congress, that prevents the free exercise of religion.

As with anything that’s been around a long time, enlightened people will eventually turn what’s good and right upside down. That’s the case here. Before anyone says anything, please spare me the various Supreme Court rulings over the years that limit what can and can’t be displayed in public. Just this summer, a judicial activist voted in the majority to ban a display of the Ten Commandments in Kentucky and in the majority to permit the Ten Commandments to be displayed in front of a Texas courthouse.

Unlike Nancy Pelosi, I don’t consider the rulings of the Supreme Court as though they were “spoken from the mouth of God” as she said this summer. Yes, it’s the law of the land until we get jurists on SCOTUS who’ll interpret the Constitution instead of rewriting it. That’s why Christian conservatives and traditionalists make such a big deal of getting strict constructionists on the courts. We’re tired of being treated like second class citizens by the judiciary.

It’s time for the secularists and ACLU types to recognize Christians as being protected by the First Amendment, too. After all, it wasn’t written to protect just secularists.

RELATED:

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRing

No Latte – No Peace!

As I read about the union activists who marched outside a Manhattan Starbucks recently, I wondered what kind of moron would demand a guaranteed 30-hour workweek and health benefits to pour coffee.

I soon found out.

They call themselves Wobblies and their stated goals are neither work nor benefits. No, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) want to end capitalism. To accomplish this, they pledge to destroy private business ownership and control all industry throughout the world and abolish the wage system. If you don’t believe me you can review their information for yourself.

When I read about their goals, I wondered why the National Labor Relations Board would even consider their complaint – let alone schedule a hearing for next February.

As destructive as unions have been toward public schools, the auto industry, and Hollywood, I have decided to do something about it. From this day forward, I will boycott Starbucks.

Union members insist that, as Americans, they are somehow entitled to an artificially inflated income that hurts other families. There’s a reason that most Americans rule out pouring coffee as a career choice. If Starbucks refuses to provide you with the lifestyle you seek, maybe you should find something more meaningful to do with your life. I’ve read that New Orleans has inexpensive housing and many job openings right now – far above what Starbucks will pay. There’s a saying that when the going gets tough the tough get going. If you’re not tough yet, maybe a few cold and hungry nights will light a fire in your soul.

You will find more information about the Starbucks strike here. In the meantime, I will find other non-union coffee houses until Starbucks exterminates their present union infestations. I urge you to do the same.

Cross-posted at ex-Liberal in Hollywood

The Christian Peacemaker Team is an anti-war, “getting in the way of injustice” group that attempts “nonviolent alternatives to war”, who traveled to Iraq in a fact-finding mission against the US liberation, gathering evidence of war atrocities. They define their work in Iraq as:

“A Baghdad-based presence since October 2002. Team members accompanied the Iraqi people through the U.S.-led 2003 war and continue during the post-war occupation to expose abusive acts by U.S. Armed Forces and support Iraqis committed to nonviolent resistance.”

A scripture on their website reads:

John 15:13 No one has greater love has any man than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.

The “friends” they claim to be laying down their lives for are Iraqis “victimized” by the United States liberation. However, this also puts the CPT in the uncomfortable position of aligning themselves with terrorists and insurgents who seek to drive the US in defeat from Iraq and who continue to murder innocent Iraqi civilians.

In an odd (or perhaps just) twist of fate, four anti-war Christian Peacemakers Team activists were abducted in Iraq by a terrorist group on Tuesday while investigating human rights abuses by the USA. The four are made up of 2 Canadians, one American and one Brit. The CPT official statement includes:

We are angry because what has happened to our teammates is the result of the actions of the U.S. and U.K. governments due to the illegal attack on Iraq and the continuing occupation and oppression of its people. Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT) has worked for the rights of Iraqi prisoners who have been illegally detained and abused by the U.S. government. We were the first people to publicly denounce the torture of Iraqi people at the hands of U.S. forces, long before the western media admitted what was happening at Abu Ghraib. We are some of the few internationals left in Iraq who are telling the truth about what is happening to the Iraqi people We hope that we can continue to do this work and we pray for the speedy release of our beloved teammates.

The reality of the situation is lost on pacifists. Terrorists DO NOT respond to “nonviolent alternatives to war”, rather, they exist for just the opposite. There are no planting of olive trees that will appeal to or appease terrorists. Then when pacifists are victimized by warmongering thugs, they blame the people who seek to bring freedom to their plight, and to the people they are trying to help, yet hinder.

This pacifistic group epitomizes the problem and irony of the anti-war evil-America movement. In March 2004, the CPT instituted its Adopt a Detainee Campaign . In it, supposed Iraqis captured by the Multinational Force in Iraq and by the new Iraqi Forces were adopted by loving, non-violent citizens of the US and abroad. The adopter wrote letters of support to their adoptee terrorist and to the US government on behalf of their “human rights.” What were these detainees incarcerated for? Murdering Iraqi civilians and coalition troops.

Some detainees have been released. And…. how’s that working for you, Christian Peacemaker Team?

Cross-posted at Amy’s Blog

Flopping Aces linked with You Reap What You Sow