Fool Me Thrice...

Its time to start firing people! The latest incident of passive Bush hating that went largerly under reported is the 3rd by the same broadcasting company in 2 years. CNN is building an infamous reputation for little "gliches" during Bush Admnistration Officials speeches airing live on there network.

The first you will remember was when they began airng President Bush's speech too early and the viewers saw him practicing instead of his actual speech. The link is below...

CNN Airs Bush Speech Too Early

The next was the mysterious and large X over Dick Cheny's face during a speech he gave about Iraq War critics.

Black X Over Cheney's Face

The third and most recent being the leaving on of an anchors Mic during a live Bush speech

CNN Anchors Mic Left On During Bush Speech

And last but certainly not least there was this post election photo of George and Laura that ended up with an extremely ugly caption on it post Nov. 04

CNN Puts Bias Caption On George and Laura Picture

One time I saw probably a mistake, twice, I say could have been on purpose, but these are professionals, three times or four times, somebody's arse needs to be fired. As an aside I wonder if these three incidents have any commonality in personel. Like the same technicians being on duty while they happened? Hmmm, I wonder? Even if these were all honest mistakes, what does that say about the quality of employees working at CNN? I wonder how many little gliches we could find during the Clintoon's 8 years in office? My guess would be none.

That is just CNN though. There have also been a few more from other news angencies. Malkin did a piece on this a while back. The link is below

Demonizing Condi

Miss England Has the Answer!

"Stop Stereotyping Muslims". Hammasa Kohistani is the first Muslim woman to be crowned Miss England and will represent England in the Miss World Pagent. Kohistani sees this as a"sugar coating" for Muslims who feel otherwise alienated. The Miss World and Miss Universe Pagents have sparked outrage in the Muslim community in past years over the scant clothing and non-adherance to muslim traditions concering womens dress. Ms. Kohistani does not seem to be worried about this however and sights Muslim stereotyping as a major concern in her community and in Britain as a whole.

She said: "The attitude towards Muslims has got worse over the year. Also the Muslims' attitude to British people has got worse."

"Even moderate Muslims are turning to terrorism to prove themselves. They think they might as well support it because they are stereotyped anyway. It will take a long time for communities to start mixing in more."

Miss England also went on to forward the idea that when the British Government asked Muslim leaders to handle the problem (of terrorism) better within their own communities, they were actually causing more terrorism.

Miss Kohistani said: "Tony Blair addressed Muslims in particular, telling them that they need to sort out the problem within. That was a huge stereotype of the Islamic community. Even the more moderate Muslims have been stereotyped negatively and feel they have to take actions to prove themselves."

By actions, she means terrorist violence, not actions that would prove the PM Blair wrong. Miss Kohistani is only one woman and only a model at that. But if her feelings are correct and I dare say they are, it illustrates a serious problem within the British and probably the world muslim community at large. Islamic Terrorism is a real issue, not something that white, western governments made up to oppress Arab people. There is deep seeded mistrust among westerners toward Muslims and their religion and who can blame them? Nearly 100% of Terrorists are Muslims and they act from a religous piety that justifies the killing of innocents in the name of Islam. Miss Kohistani is correct when she says it will take a long time. It will take a long time and a lot of effort on the part of good, peaceful moderate muslims to show not only Britain that they are not all bad people and that Islam is not a religon of death and mayhem, but the entire world. Turning to violence and terror to "prove themsleves", will only further alienate them and prove the point of those who would keep those divisions alive. It is a cop-out to imply that the West's fear of Muslims and their religon is a justification for more violence, whether based on pride or just sheer stupidity. I echo PM Blair in pleading with the Muslim community to stand up and fight the extremist fringes of their religon, denounce their actions publicly and often and begin on a road to establishing themsleves as peaceful people again. As I have heard military people say on more than one occasion, "You can't put the sh*t back in the goose, you just have to clean up the mess and move on". Truer words were never spoken!
___________________________________________
UPDATE: 1:30pm PST

U.S. Muslims Warn of Threat From Within - Makes my original point and thank God Muslim leaders somewhere are getting it finally!

Weird Website Wednesday

Good mid-week to you all! This weeks entry is dear to me as I just love this kind of stuff. So click away, then sit back and enjoy, "The Webpage of Useless Information"

Spike Lee Is An Idiot

I saw this posted on Newsbusters today. On Un-Real Time with Bill(I'm a lying sac of monkey sh*t)Mahr, Spike Lee again raised the possibility that the Levee in New Orleans was destroyed by the federal government on purpose. When confronted with the fact that there is absolutely no evidence to support his claim Lee avoided the issue with ridiculous statements like the below:

"Let me ask you a question: Do you think that election in 2000 was fair? You don't think that was rigged." “If they can rig an election, they can do anything!”

AND

“Because nobody saw, because nobody saw means, can it happen? Let me ask you a question: With the history of this country, you ever heard of 'Tuskegee experiment’? Answer! Answer!”

AND

“Presidents have been assassinated. So why is that so far-fetched?”

Honestly I am surprised he didn't bring up the Bush planned 9/11 theory too for good measure. I think Spike ought to lay off that white mans crack he's been smokin'.

When he had previously been informed that time travel was not possible either Lee retorted, "They can make a cartoon about a talking, yellow Sea Sponge. So why is it so far fetched."

And when confronted with the idea that in no way was Michael Jackson's nose real, Lee angrily replied, "Let me ask you a question, do you think Michael Moore has an eating disorder? You don't think Michael Moore has an eating disorder?"

The world may never know Spike, the world... may never know!

The whole transcript is here, Tucker Carlson made Lee look like an idiot in this piece. Carlson's statement is below to which Lee had no answer at all...

Carlson: “I was in New Orleans right after the hurricane in the ninth ward. And while I didn't hear anybody say the levee was blown up by the federal government, I did interview a bunch of people who were stuck there who said they believed this was part of the conspiracy to rid New Orleans of black people. They honestly believed that. I didn’t argue with them, I just listened to what they said and I felt bad for them. So as you sit here -- who is someone who is rich and has option -- and are watched by people who are poor and have no options, it seems to me it's your responsibility, your obligation to tell them the truth and you know the truth, which is the federal government did not blow up the levees so don’t feed the paranoia and the crazies.”

Spike Lee's arguments and his claims were juvenille and exceedingly stupid and he should be ashamed.

Lerch Revives the UUUUUAAAAGGHHHH argument

...as the reason he lost the 2004 election. John Kerry is back and he's mad as heck! He conceded the election and bowed out gracefully so as not to appear a complete loser like his globally warm compatriot Al Gore. But now right on cue for the November mid-terms the man who voted for himself before 2/3 of the country voted against him brings you "Ohio Republicans cheated me out of the Presidency".

So let's review, if you are a democrat your choices for President in 2008 are:

Hillary Clinton

John Kerry

Al Gore

and maybe a few others who have absolutely no chance. I almost feel sorry for you. I mean it would be one thing if we were talking about Al Franken or Jeneane Giraffalo but these are your candidates for president, the three stooges! The 3 horsemen of the moral apocalypse. Oh well, "no soup for you" then!!

The Border Patrol Inquisition

This is absolutely outrageous and someone within our government should make it right. A definite must read for anyone who cares about border security in America...

"BE A BORDER Patrol agent: Do your job, go to prison. That's how the job must look to agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean."

read more | digg story

What Part Of The War On Terrorism Do They Support?

Ann Coulter hits it on the nose again. You can say what you want about her, but the fact is she tells it like it is and pulls no politically correct punches.

"This year's Democratic plan for the future is another inane sound bite designed to trick American voters into trusting them with national security...

read more | digg story

Friday Funnies

More Proof that we are being Jerked Around by Russia

I have posted about it before and today once again the Russian's have proved that contrary to their prior statments condeming Iran's Nuclear programs, they actually support them and have a large financial interest in seeing them succeed. The below article entitled,

Russia Rejects Sanctions Against Iran

illustrates the problem that the US and Britan, along with other countries who believe Iran is a threat, have in stopping its' arms progams by peaceful means. The following is from Sergei Ivanov who undoubtedly speaks for Putin as well,

"I believe that the question is not so serious at the moment for the U.N. Security Council or the group of six to consider any introduction of sanctions. Russia stands for further political and diplomatic efforts to settle the issue."

So now by saying this the Russians are essentialy voiding their agreement to impose sanctions in the event that Iran misses the Aug 31st deadline. My guess is that China will soon follow suit.
I have linked below to some older news stories that have the russians saying everything from "Iran should not have Nuclear weapons", to the above which implies at the very least a niave attitude and at worst a total complicity in forwarding Iran's aspirations for Nuclear weapons.

"Our Iranian Partners Must Give Up Developement of Nuclear Cycle Technology" - 08/05

"Russia Convinced that Iran is NOT Trying to Develope Nuclear Arms" - 02/05

"Putin Offers Iranian President Continued Nuclear Cooperation" - 06/05

"Putin Urges Iran to Accept EU Proposal to halt Enrichment" - 04/06

"Putin favors Iran abandoning Nuclear Reseach" - 06/06

"Putin Tells Iran It Has A Right to Develop Nukes If It Does Not Threaten Other Nations" - 06/06

"Putin Defends Iran Nuke Program" - 02/06

"Putin Urges Iran To Accept Proposals to Stop Enrichment" - 07/06

I do not know what you all think, but in your Uncle Tim's opinion Vlad does a better version of the old Potomic two step than even the trickiest of tricky dicks

For more on Uncle Tim's posting on Iran see

"This is Scary"

"Iraq Should Have Been Second"

"Bishop to Knight 3"

"Six Power Package of Perks or Penalties"

Target: Mt. Soledad Memorial - ACLU keeps the wrecking ball on call

The ACLU today filed a federal lawsuit in its latest attempt to drive all reference to faith from the public square. In what is a smart PR move on the ACLU's part, they've brought a group called the Jewish War Veterans on as a plaintiff along with local residents. So what was once a case that pitted a lone rabid atheist gadfly against

read more | digg story

Morning After What...Exactly?

Feds ease restrictions on morning after pill "Plan B"

You just have got to love the federal government. If it makes a buck or saves a buck, they be right behind it nearly everytime. Personally I agree with both sides of the argument. The left says it will significantly reduce the amount of unwanted prenancies and the right says it will increase promiscuity. Both are good points, however the FDA saying it is safe does not comfort me in any way...Can anyone say VIOXX? Additionally, there is a decent chance that many people who were afraid to have sex before for fear of becoming pregnant, will now sans consequences, become far more promiscuous than before. Meaning a greater number of people will be having unprotected sex. So lets do the math. If the above is true and it is also true that Plan B is only 89% effective, then it would seem to me that there is a chance that unwanted pregnancy may rise just on sheer volume alone. Not to mention the "unprotected part, cuz you know nobody likes to wear protection if they don't have to. That could raise the number of STD's as well.

At Uncle Tim's we take issue with the idea that there should be an "out" that inconsequncial to begin with. Sex is not something to be taken lightly. What this does is give every irresponsible man or woman with a libido a license to boff anyone they please without having any reason to think first. Sex belongs between a man and a woman who love one another, and only in the context of a life long relationship. I know many of you will disagree with me, but I also know that many of you have had bad experinces from bringing sex into a relationship before it belongs there. Or that many of you have at least experienced guilt or just felt not ok after giving yourself to someone who is not suppose to have you. That is because when God made us man and woman and when he said "the two shall become one flesh", he meant it. Sex and love making are meant to be a physical affirmation of that statement between two people who plan to spend their lives together. Not that it has to be any more or less solemn or any less wild and fun. But it does come with responsibility. Responsibility to yourself, to your own body, to the person with whom you plan to do it. This pill is not the problem, the need for this pill at all is the problem. Our insistence on letting it be as easy to buy as a stick of gum only further lets slip the morality of America.

Compiled MSM Fakery

Hat Tip to Six Meat for the heads up. This is an awesome compilation of all the fake news the MSM has been busted on these last months. Hope you enjoy, and don't forget to vote for it on you tube. Vote Here

Weird Website Wednesday (on Thursday)

Sorry for the lack of posting, I am dealing with some family matters that have my mind otherwise occupied at the moment. Here is you Wed. post, hope you enjoy!

This one is called "Stinky Meat"

Why Iraq should have been second

Iran Says Ready for Serious Talks

If you have been paying any attention at all to the Nuclear stand-off with Iran you have probably heard President Bush say more than once that "Iran is not Iraq" or some such thing. Mostly in response to people who wonder why the same pre-emptive stance of the Bush doctrine has not been applied in Iran as well as Iraq. Well, that may be the administration's line but I have a different theory. It has to do with many other factors including that we are already in Iraq and have over 100,000 boots on the ground a mere stones throw away from Iran's considerable arsenal. Now I am sure that none of you would debate with me that Iran is and was at the time we invaded Iraq a greater threat both at home and in the greater middle east than Saddam Hussein. But for those of you who are not sure let me explain.

#1. The terror group Hezbollah makes its home in Iran and is financed solely by Iran according to all reliable intelligence. Hezbollah is the second greatest killer of American citizens accepting Al Quaeda in the world today. It has branches in many countries (including ours) and is nearly the sole source of terror against Israel and western interests in that region.
#2 Iran's army, unlike Iraq's had been flourishing and growing in power, number and capability since the Iran v Iraq war. It is (accepting Israel) the sole power in Central Asia boasting a formidable stock of missles and other semi-advanced weaponry and a human force in the hundreds of thousands.
#3 We had known at high levels prior to the invasion of Iraq that Iran had been carrying on a clandestine Nuclear program since the late 90's, something that as we now know Iraq had neither the money, nor the capability to do as of 2003.

Now, given that information, (and I am certain I missed some things) shouldn't Iran have been our first target in the war on Terror? Iraq would have kept as noted by our military ease in running over their army in two weeks time. As of today however we find ourselves unable to act on Iran because we went into Iraq first. Now an intelligent person could surmize that the larger purpose of going into Iraq was to establish a friendly government and a military presence in close proximity to hostile countries like Iran and Syria. Whether for the purpose of leverage or pre-emption we obviously wanted to be there. What we did not count on was the world's (and our own countries) reaction to a prolonged fight in Iraq. Nor did we plan for or count on there being a prolonged fight in Iraq. Thusly, as things stand today our hands are tied with regard to Iran to a certain extent because it has become obvious that the world and some of our own citizens will not tolerate another pre-emptive war without a major crystal clear justification, short of an Iranian attack on our soil. Not to mention the fact that a pre-emptive attack would bring an almost immediate response apon the closest US target, our soldiers stationed in Iraq. So we sit mired in the bureaucracy of the United Nations, not able to do what we really should do which is to nuke Iran's programs back into the 7th century. In addition we are subject to the whims of hostile powers on the Security council in China and Russia who have deep financial interests in seeing Iran's program survive or even succeed and thus will veto any resolution that suggests strong action. Now I am no conspiracy theorist nor am I against military action or my President, but I have to wonder why in light of all these facts, Iraq was not second?

Why Israel will beat Hezbollah - IDF Hotties

I am a happily taken and satisfied man so things like this do not really interest me. But this guy definitely has a point. Hat Tip http://plancksconstant.org for the great link.

read more | digg story

Summer Poll Results

Yes, folks with the 22nd of August apon us and Maqmood's threats still hanging in the air I thought it appropriate to deliver to you the results of our latest poll here at Uncle Tim's. The question was, "Which is a greater threat to our civil liberties?" Though it was close down the stretch you all overwellminly chose "Ted Kennedy's Breath" as the greatest threat to our civil liberties

Another Candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize

Dr. Azzam Tamimi...What, never heard of him before? Well, that could be because you are not a psycho facist terrorist or a news hound like us. Either way you should know this name as he has some very interesting and disturbing things to say about these difficult days and the struggles that Muslims find themselves in currently. Dr. Tamimi for instance believes that it is just to die for one's faith. Not too radical an idea eh? I mean faith is something that many Christians have died for over the ages right? The problem is that he draws no distinction between dying for your faith and murdering innocent people in the process. He says in fact, that he was prepared to be a suicide bomber if the opportunity arose. He said that sacrificing himself for Palestine was a noble cause. "It is the straight way to pleasing my God and I would do it if I had the opportunity." The good doctor believes that murdering people in the process of commiting suicide is the "straight path" to God, and contrastly believes that evil would be to "rub shoulders with Bush and Blair" most likely in protest to negotiating with the west to find some middle ground.

The cause of terrorism reminds me of a person currently in my life, not by choice but by consequence. Her existence revolves around keeping attention on her plight, and focus of the cause on other mostly innocent parties around her. The queer thing about her is that in order for things to be "ok" some drama has to exist. If none exists, she will make some out of thin air in order to keep her world nominal and accomplish the above. Most of the time the source of the drama is some action taken in haste for immediate gain or some other such thing. Similarly, the terrorist must always have an enemy to justify its existence. Whether it be Israel, the US, Britan ,etc... there will never be any peace because in order to survive they need war and tension. Contrary to what some believe, when left alone and to their own devices they will still vilanize anyone in their path that does not agree absolutely and enable there activities. That is why "taking the fight to the terrorists", as George Bush is so fond of saying, is important. Put simply, they will not stop if we do. They will only move purposely into another stage of drama and strife and in order to justify it will find fault in even the best circumstances.

So is this guy Tamimi a radical Islamic cleric from Pakistan or Iran? Is he a militant fighting US occupation in Iraq? No this guy is your next door neighbor, this guy is your daughter's friends father. He is a british citizen with three children and a wife living in the suburbs of North West London. So take careful note of Dr. Tamimi, just one more in a line of martys and insane Muslims bent on killing you, your family and anyone else that gets in the way of his "cause". He is not alone and he and his ilke are not going away anytime soon.

Ray Davies must have been Israeli

Do it again! should be the theme song for the Israel/Palestinian conflict. Just the futility of another war ended without resolution to anyones liking and another conflict inside a conflict that leaves Israel looking worse than it did before. Still facing THIS yet again from an enemy that has nothing if not infinite patience, Before the ink is even dry on the cease fire agreement. Put simply we should have let Israel finish the job and if Iran or Syria got involved then damn the torpedos!

I have learned this life lesson from dealing with my ex-wife over the last few years and trying to placate her, to keep a reasonable peace between us for the sake of the kids (innocents). What I learned is this: You cannot deal rationally with an irrational person or entity and expect fairness or justice in return. Your attempts at being fair and agreeable will only be percieved as weakness and exploited in the end. That selfish or morally vacuous personalities will seek after their own self interests, forsaking all other points of view, valid or not even if they have to lie, cheat, etc... to get there. They are not concerned with the effect their actions will have on those directly or indirectly involved in their conflict and will always claim victory and shift blame in every circumstance. The only way to deal with this type of person or country for that matter is to stand fast and face them, not giving any ground and always fighting to win. There may be times when you are considered unpopular and it may hurt more than a little, but if I know anything at all, I know that justice will prevail in the end.

I wonder if Olmert has ever been divorced?
_____________________________________________________
Update: I found another appropriate pic at Barking Moonbats so I had to include it...

Friday Funnies

Senator Joseph Lieberman - I Conn.

Has a nice ring to it!

Yesterday leaders from the Democratic Party threatened to strip Lieberman of his Dem Status should he continue on his current path and defeat Ned Lamont in November. This is from an article titled "Dems angst escalates"...

“I think there’s a lot of concern,” said a senior Democratic aide who has discussed the subject with colleagues. “I think the first step is if the Lieberman thing turns into a side show and hurts our message and ability to take back the Senate, and the White House and the [National Republican Senatorial Committee] manipulate him, there are going to be a lot of unhappy people in our caucus.”

At issue in this race is Lieberman's support for the Iraq war and President Bush's war on terrorism. The Senator is strongly against a timetable for Iraq withdrawl and advocates many of the same techniques for apprehending members or terror organizations that have drawn sharp critisizm from many on the far left of the Democratic party. He does have some support from moderates who state that a win for Lieberman is still a win for Democrats. This includes also asking other senators and the DNC to spend their campaign dollars elsewhere, the article said. As of 8/16 Lieberman had a 12 point lead over Lamont and advocates on both sides of the aisle believe this is due to a groundswell of support from republicans in order to thwart what would be an agressive anti-war Senator in Lamont.

Here at Uncle Tim's we say "Lieberman in 06", and get a big kick out of this statement:

“Lieberman’s tone and message has shocked a lot of people,” said a second senior Democratic aide who has discussed the issue with other Senate Democrats. “He’s way off message for us and right in line with the White House.”

I know he has a very liberal record on other issues, butwhat's that they say about the enemy of my enemy? Go, Go Joe!!