Soviet Underground Submarine Base (Part 3)

Soviet Underground Submarine Base (Part 2)

Soviet Underground Submarine Base (Part 1)

Damn stupid bills!

And I thought all that was on the house!

Comedy Central did censure South Park

I am too lazy at the moment to provide a link, but it was reported that CC officials acknowledge censuring South Park out of fear of Muslim reaction. Isn't it great to be an American!

OSU librarian slapped with “sexual harassment” charge for recommending conservative books for freshmen

Officials at the Ohio State University are investigating an OSU Mansfield librarian for “sexual harassment” after he recommended four conservative books for a freshman reading program. ADF has demanded that OSU cease its frivolous investigation, yet the university is pressing forward, claiming that it takes the charges “seriously.”

“Universities are one of the most hostile places for Christians and conservatives in America,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel David French, who heads ADF’s Center for Academic Freedom. “It is shameful that OSU would investigate a Christian librarian for simply recommending books that are at odds with the prevailing politics of the university.”

Scott Savage, who serves as a reference librarian for the university, suggested four best-selling conservative books for freshman reading in his role as a member of OSU Mansfield’s First Year Reading Experience Committee. The four books he suggested were The Marketing of Evil by David Kupelian, The Professors by David Horowitz, Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis by Bat Ye’or, and It Takes a Family by Senator Rick Santorum. Savage made the recommendations after other committee members had suggested a series of books with a left-wing perspective, by authors such as Jimmy Carter and Maria Shriver.

Savage was put under “investigation” by OSU’s Office of Human Resources after three professors filed a complaint of discrimination and harassment against him, saying that the book suggestions made them feel “unsafe.” The complaint came after the OSU Mansfield faculty voted without dissent to file charges against Savage. The faculty later voted to allow the individual professors to file charges.

On March 28, ADF sent OSU officials a letter informing them of Savage’s constitutional rights. A copy of the letter can be read at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/OSUMansfieldletter.pdf. The university so far has declined to stop the investigation, saying in its response that it takes “any allegation of sexual harassment seriously.”

“The OSU Mansfield faculty is attempting to label a librarian as a ‘sexual harasser’ because they disagree with his book suggestions,” said French. “It is astonishing that an entire faculty would vote to launch a sexual harassment investigation because a librarian offered book suggestions in a committee whose purpose was to solicit such suggestions.”

ADF is a legal alliance defending the right to hear and speak the Truth through strategy, training, funding, and litigation.

49ers Mascot: Is he Gay?

The San Francisco 49ers mascot, Sourdough Sam (that is right fucking Sourdough), has been with the team since the late 1990s. Besides being a left-wing nut (favorite actor is Robin Williams), his appearence leaves a lot to be desired. Let's face it, Sam is about two spritzers away from heading down to the your local gay bar and finding himself a young buck. Not only that, but his nicknames are Sammy, Samster, Sammiester, and Samarama. What the fuck? How can a mascot strike fear into the hearts of an opposing team with names like that. I know I for one would be fearful of the Samster.

I officially place all the blame on the horrible seasons the 49ers have had on this gay mascot. His gayness has rubbed off on the 49ers and he must go!

Overheard in DC

Museum of Natural History information desk:

Two women: "Where here can we find the baby Panda?"
Information Clerk: "You have to go to the zoo to see the pandas. This is the Museum of Natural History."
Two women: "Oh? The zoo?"

Democrat Opposition to a black page in the Senate

Back in 1965, after the civil rights bills of 64 and 65, New York Republican Senator Jacob K. Javits requested that a New York kid become the first black to be a Senate page. Democratic Southern Senators were outraged by this plan, but Republican minority leader Everett Dirksen quietly informed them that if they denied the black youth the job, Javits would make a floor speech about the situation. The kid was quietly approved and the Senate's age-old color line was finally broken.

South Park and Muhammed

On July 4, 2001, Comedy Central did air a South Park show which despicted Muhammed.

South Park Censored?

Short note on the lastest South Park show. Yes, Comedy Central did censored it. After watching the re-air I thought it a nice touch to censor Mohammed; yet, show Jesus pooping on Bush, the American Flag, and a bunch of other people. I can deal with the pooping Jesus, but if that is ok then it is all ok. What is the deal with the one religion bad the other ok stuff? I understand the issue with the cartoons, but if you are going to censor that, then censor the other as well. Sure depictions of Jesus and depictions of Mohammed are not the same because of the intrinsic belief. However, I'd say pooping Jesus is a bit contrary to Christianity.

Update: It's clearly censorship, but it's not government censorship. Comedy Central is within their rights to show or not show whatever they wish, and others have the right to criticize their judgement. No one's accusing Comedy Central of violating anyone's rights, just have having poor judgement.

In this case, and assuming that CC did in fact censor the episode, CC has allowed a depiction of Jesus literally being defecated on, but an image of Mohammed just standing there was unacceptable. The obvious conclusion is that their censorship was not motivated by some highminded desire to avoid offending people, but was instead coerced by a fear of violent consequences from offending Muslims.

Does the fact that violence is being rewarded strike you as a problem? It does to me.

Fuck Allah!

The hijackers ... jerked the plane violently to the left and right during the struggle. They tried to cut off the oxygen as passengers banged on the cockpit door. In the end, as the passengers were either in the cockpit or moments from entering it, the hijackers turned the plane upside down -- and crashed it.

"Allah is the greatest!" one screamed nine times as the plane went down. The recording then went dead.

No one, no matter how hard they try, will convince me to accept that most Muslims aren't anything more than thugs and monsters. They are all to blame because indifference, to me, is the epitome of evil. Each, in their own way, gave into a culture of terrorist menality.

There is a useful quote about indifference that I would like to use: "When they came for the socialists I did not speak out because I was not a socialist. When they came for the homosexuals I did not speak out because I was not a homosexual. When they came for the Jews I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. When they came for me there was no one left to speak for me." This sums up a society that allows horrible teachings and actions to go on without good people lifting a finger to prevent them. In truth, they are not good people because indifference to pain and suffering turns them into something else.

Terrorism must be outlawed by all cililized nations -- not explained or rationalized, but fought and eradicated. Nothing can, nothing will justify the murder of innocent people and helpless children.

I will end by noting that everyday I remember 9/11, I will always remember the victims, even as I struggle to invent a thousand and one reasons to hope that the world will someday be without terrorism.

Some Songs to celebrate Passover

Who let the Jews out?

Jib Jab Matzah Video

Matzo Man

Another Reason Why McCain will not be Presidnet and is an a-s

[Speaking to the AFL-CIO's Building and Construction Trades Department, McCain took] questions, including a pointed one on his immigration plan.

McCain responded by saying immigrants were taking jobs nobody else wanted. He offered anybody in the crowd $50 an hour to pick lettuce in Arizona.

Shouts of protest rose from the crowd, with some accepting McCain's job offer.

"I'll take it!" one man shouted.

McCain insisted none of them would do such menial labor for a complete season. "You can't do it, my friends."

How can this assertion of his possibly be right? Fifty dollars an hour is $100,000 per year. I suspect the lettuce-picking season is shorter than a year, but it's still $50,000 per six months, assuming a 40 hour/week pace. It's possible that no-one in that particular crowd would think this is a good deal; among other things, they already had jobs that likely pay pretty well, and perhaps most of them were older and not terribly fit (McCain saw the crowd and I didn't). But surely there must be some substantial number of current American citizens who would be quite willing to engage even in highly strenuous physical labor for an annualized wage of $100,000 per year, no? Even if 99% of all Americans would be unwilling or unable to do the job, the remaining 1% should be plenty to fill those hypothetical jobs.

Now perhaps Sen. McCain should have just chosen a lower number; maybe his claim would have been plausible at that number, though I'm not sure. But it seems odd that he would choose a number that is so clearly out of place for his argument — that he would seemingly deliberately engage in such pretty patent overstatement.

Update: The "jobs Americans won't do" meme is shocking in many ways. It's false, bad economics, and (I think) racist. What's even more surprising is the way the use of the term breaks through party lines. You have Bush, McCain, and Moran throwing it around, while you have others arguing fiercely against it and the ideas that underlie it. There's something different going on here than normal party politics. I hope it shakes the parties up and realigns them to some extent.

I don't understand why anyone wouldn't want to hire these upstanding young men and women

Future Voters...Maybe, but lots of future criminals and people who will drive down wages.

Best Biking Trail in DC

The Capital Cresent Trail is a great place to go walk, jog, run, or bike. Peaceful place with nice views of the water and right in the middle of a wonderful wooded area.

F.Y.I.

I have been hearing and, yes, reading about the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) during discussions about boarder security and illegal immigrates. I want to point out that there is no INS! It was reorganized by the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and is currently called the U.S. Bureau of Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE).

The best 1st Round Picks in 49er history

1. WR Jerry Rice, 1985: The 49ers traded up to get him after winning Super Bowl XIX the season before, and he became the greatest receiver in history while extending the 49ers dynasty until the end of the 1990s. Never have the Niners gotten more value for their placement in the first round of the draft, where they were able to pluck Rice with the No. 16 overall pick.

2. DT Leo Nomellini, 1950: The very first draft choice in the team’s NFL history, “The Lion” became a 10-time Pro Bowler who now resides in the Hall of Fame as one of the greatest 49ers ever.

3. DB Ronnie Lott, 1981: Perhaps the greatest safety ever to play the game, the nine-time Pro Bowler starred at three secondary positions for the 49ers on his way to the Hall of Fame.

4. HB Hugh McElhenny, 1952: The five-time Pro Bowler earned a place in the Hall of Fame after establishing himself as one of the greatest multiple threats of his era.

5. CB Jimmy Johnson, 1961: The five-time Pro Bowler was one of greatest cornerbacks of his era and also made it to the Hall of Fame. Is second to Lott among 49ers' career interception leaders, and was second on team in receiving in 1962 before locking in as a full-time corner.

6. QB John Brodie, 1957: 1970 NFL MVP led the 49ers to three consecutive NFC West championships and ranks second in team history with 31,548 passing yards.

7. QB Y.A. Tittle, 1951: Went to three Pro Bowls with the 49ers before completing a Hall of Fame career with the New York Giants.

8. RB Ken Willard, 1965: Four-time Pro Bowler led 49ers in rushing seven consecutive seasons and ranks third in team history with 5,930 yards and 45 touchdowns rushing.

9. DT Bryant Young, 1994: Four-time All-Pro still going strong with team after 12 seasons as one of greatest defensive tackles of his era.

10. DE Cedrick Hardman, 1970: Two-time Pro Bowler is team’s all-time leader with 112.5 quarterback sacks.

11. C Forrest Blue, 1968: Made it to Pro Bowl in four consecutive seasons, starting for the NFC in three of them.

12. DT Dana Stubblefield, 1993: Three-time Pro Bowler was NFL defensive player of the year in 1997 and had a second effective stint with team in the twilight of his career.

Gospel of Judas and its implication for Christianity

The Judas Gospel has been reported as if it should be shocking to believe for Christians. Yet Chrisitans, and Catholics in particular, should be well aware that the early history of the Church consisted in large part of refuting and expelling heretics of one stripe or another and, in turn, developing doctrine more fully and precisely in response to these attacks. Most of Christology was developed in response to the Arian heresy (a belief that Jesus was lesser than G-d). Much of the free will doctrine was developed in response to the Pelagians (original sin for non-Catholics).

I think this story may be a bigger problem for Protestants than Catholics. Catholics believe that the Bible has authority and is what the Church says it is because the Church posesses teaching authority and is endowed with inerrancy (belief that the Bible is without error) when speaking authoritatively on matters of faith and morals. So when the Church says Tom has two natures in one person, or that there is a Trinity, or that the Gospel of Thomas is heretical while the Gospel of Mark is not, Catholics can (and must) believe it. Catholics need to believe in errancy because the fountain of their faith is Christ and they believe he left the Church as his voice on earth.

But what of Protestants and the Gospel of Judas. How can they believe the Counsel of Nicea and the other early counsels that defined doctrine (including the doctrine of which texts are inspired or not)? The Bible did not come down from heaven, ready-made, and in codified form. Numerous texts floated around the early Christian Church. They were only fully codified some 300 years later, where numerous gnostic texts in particular were expelled. It's true the Gnostics thought they were Christians, but the Church said they weren't after an ecumenical (general) council (meeting of bishops). I'll explain what I mean this way -- my girlfriend believes in the Bible because she believes in the Church, therefore she must believe that excommunication was meaningful as well (as a result the Judas revelation has no impact on her religion because the Gospel was expelled centuries ago).

The real question remains: what of Protestants who have no theological basis for believing as Catholics do? Who tells them what to do about the Judas Gospel (I am not saying Catholics are told, more to the point that they take a leap of faith that many do not)? In the end, it seems, they must decide for themselves.

Jews for Alla?

This has got to be a joke website. Pretty funny before and after pictures on it.

Pope Bendict and "reciprocity"

Pope Benidict XVI has recently taken a harder line stand against Muslims than his predecessor John Paul II. Benidict feels there is an "imbalance" in the way Muslim countries treat minority religions as opposed to the way Western countries treat Muslims. The new Pope wants equal treatment of Christians in Muslim countries where they can practice freely without the heavy hand of an abusive state. Here is the article laying out the "reciprocity" policy:

There is, however, one intriguing area of contrast: Islam. To put it bluntly, Benedict is more of a hawk, pursuing a kind of interaction with Muslims one might call "tough love."

The new climate has in part been driven by widely publicized incidents of anti-Christian backlash in the Islamic world, most dramatically the Feb. 5 slaying of Italian missionary Fr. Andrea Santoro in Trabzon, Turkey, a small hamlet on the country's Black Sea coast. A 16-year-old Turk entered St. Mary's Church in Trabzon and pumped two bullets into Santoro's lungs and heart, shouting Allah akbar, "Allah is great." He later said he had been agitated by the controversy surrounding the Danish cartoons.

Though the teenager's father told reporters his son is psychologically disturbed, most senior figures in the Vatican, where the Santoro murder made a deep impression, saw it as part of a rising tide of anti-Christian sentiment in fundamentalist Islamic circles. That impression was underscored by the recent death sentence for Abdul Rahman, a Christian convert from Islam in Afghanistan.

In his March 23 session with cardinals, much conversation turned on Islam, and there was general agreement with Benedict's policy of a more muscular challenge on what Catholics call "reciprocity." In essence, it means that if Muslim immigrants can claim the benefit of religious liberty in the West, then Christian minorities ought to get the same treatment in majority Muslim nations.

To take the most notorious example, if the Saudis can spend $65 million to build the largest mosque in Europe in Rome, in the shadows of the Vatican, then Christians ought to be able to build churches in Saudi Arabia. Or, if that's not possible, Christians should at least be able to import Bibles, and the Capuchin priests who serve the Arabian peninsula ought to be able to set foot off the oil industry compounds or embassy grounds in Saudi Arabia without fear of harassment by the mutawa, the religious police. The bishop in charge of the Catholic church in that part of the world recently described the situation in Saudi Arabia as "reminiscent of the catacombs."

It's the kind of imbalance that has long stuck in the craw of many senior figures in the Catholic Church, but these complaints were largely suppressed in the John Paul years as part of the pope's Islamic Ostpolitik. John Paul, who met with Muslims more than 60 times over the course of his papacy, and who during a 2001 trip to Damascus became the first pope to enter a mosque, believed in reaching out to Islamic moderates and avoiding confrontational talk.

Benedict XVI clearly wants good relations with Islam, and chose to meet with a group of Muslim leaders during his August trip to Cologne, Germany. Yet he will not purse that relationship at the expense of what he considers to be the truth.

No doubt, Benedict intends this tougher line as a stimulus to Islamic leaders to take seriously the challenge of expressing their faith in a multi-cultural, pluralistic world. Whether it's received that way, or whether it simply reinforces the conviction of many jihadists about an eternal struggle with the Christian West, remains to be seen.

I certainly agree that Christians ought to be allowed to worship freely in Islamic countries, but I can't buy Benedict's notion of "reciprocity." This idea seems to suggest that the religious freedom extended to Muslims in the west ought somehow to be contingent on the behavior of the governments of Muslim countries towards their religious minorities.

This is a dangerous and irrational idea. We are not negotiating trade deals here. We are talking about rights based on principles of individual liberty that we consider part of a just society. Religious freedom is not a concession in a negotiation, as Benedict would have it. It is something we value in our society for its own sake. To imply - as Benedict seems to - that if the Saudis, for example, do not grant religious freedom to Christians we should restrict the freedom of Muslims is to miss this criticial point.

UPDATE: Just to be clear, I think the Pope's notion of reciprocity is an attempt to secure religious freedom for Catholics in Muslim lands. The Church seeks to preserve freedom of religion as a politcal right so that it may go about its mission and that its members may practice the faith. I do not disagree with this end, but I just don't agree with the fundamental implications for such a policy. What do you do when Muslims tell the Pope to shove it? He cannot very well ask them to not practice their religion in Western countries.

Could one compare Islam to Communism?

I would say, "yes." The only thing Islam lacks is a Stalin, other than that it is an equal opportunity murderer. One edge it has over Communism is it's longevity, give them time, as if they haven't had plenty, and the comparisons will continue to blur. It's interesting that many Soviet citizens held Stalin blameless for their situation as many Muslims remain yoked and faithful to a religion that subjugates all to doctrine.

Braves Notes

Blaine Boyer was sent down to Richmond and Joey Devine was called up. Boyer clearly wasn't ready after his injury and Devine was great in Spring Training. There's a good chance Devine will be the closer at the end of the season.

Alan Dershowitz's response to the "Jewish Lobby" Paper

Much has been written about the Stephen Walk and John Mearsheimer "Lobby" paper. To summarize, it depicts old sterotypes of Jews often seen on hateful websites. Alan Dershowitz debunks the Walk and Mearsheimer paper and offers a challenge to them. I ask anyone who enjoys the entertainment value of my blog to please read the "Lobby" paper and Dershowitz's response.