It was nice to see the Hawkeyes bounce back from their miserable outing at East Lansing and get a nice win over a hot Purdue team at home last week. The Hawks had 5 players in double figures, a balance that seemed to work well as they man-handled Purdue.
With the last week of the Big Ten season approaching, Iowa has two huge games, essentially elimination games. First up is last place Penn St, a team Iowa throttled at home a month ago, but also a team that played No. 1 Ohio State close twice, nearly winning at State College, where the game will be played Wednesday night. After that they play arch-rival Illinois on Saturday, senior day for Mr. Haluska and Mike Henderson. Two very winnable, but dangerous games.
My take? I think the Hawks win their last two, no particular reason other then the fact that I think they are better then Penn St, and Illinois is depleted, and it's at CHA.
My predictions for final standings in the Big Ten, and the tourney matchups for the weekend of March 8-9-10-11:
W L
Ohio State 15 1
Wisconsin 13 3
Indiana 10 6
Iowa 10 6
Purdue 9 7
Illinois 9 7
Michigan State 8 8
Michigan 8 8
Minnesota 3 13
Northwestern 2 14
Penn St 1 15
The matchups would then be like this:
Thursday, at United Center, Chicago:
Michigan-Minnesota
Michigan St-Northwestern
Illinois-Penn State
Friday:
Mich-Minn winner vs Ohio State
Iowa-Purdue
MSU-NW winner vs Wisconsin
Ill-PSU winner vs Indiana
According to the local paper, no team that has finished in third or tied for third in the Big Ten (excepting teams on probation) has ever NOT made the NCAA tourney.
It all starts Wednesday. Go Hawks!
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
String him up...
Another American "Taliban", al Qaeda, or whatever else you would like to CALL IT.
Maldonado told FBI agents in Kenya that he went to Somalia to fight "jihad," or holy war, for a true Islamic government, according to the complaint.
"I would be fighting the Somali militia, and that turned into fighting the Ethiopians, and if Americans came, I would fight them, too," he is accused of telling the agents. He also told the agents he had "no problem" with killing Americans or with the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the complaint says.
Why waste money on this jihadist freak? Treason is a very reasonable charge here. And it shouldn't be hard to prove.
Maldonado told FBI agents in Kenya that he went to Somalia to fight "jihad," or holy war, for a true Islamic government, according to the complaint.
"I would be fighting the Somali militia, and that turned into fighting the Ethiopians, and if Americans came, I would fight them, too," he is accused of telling the agents. He also told the agents he had "no problem" with killing Americans or with the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the complaint says.
Why waste money on this jihadist freak? Treason is a very reasonable charge here. And it shouldn't be hard to prove.
If I didn't like his music so much...
God, how I wish Hollywood/celeb types would just shut their holes sometimes, rather then blurt out this IDIOCY:
Singer John Mellencamp on the ‘Charlie Rose Show’ said the removal of the Taliban after 9/11 was wrong, but further Mellencamp stated if the United States knew exactly where Osama bin Laden was it would be wrong to drop a bomb on OBL’s head.
Mellencamp: I think what would have been appropriate is exactly what we’re going to have to do right now.
Rose: What’s that?
Mellencamp: Talk to people.
Rose: Who do we go talk to? Do we call him up and say, “Osama, can we talk about this? We’re not real happy about this. Can we talk about it?”
Mellencamp then said we should talk to “the Muslims” and ask “where are we so far apart here?”
Later in the interview Mellencamp says he doesn’t know how he’d respond to the attack on Pearl Harbor in World War II because he doesn’t really know what happened. He says he’s read books, but he doesn’t know if history is always right.
Hey John, why don't you go over to Afghanistan and "talk" to those guys, preferably the guys who cut off Daniel Pearl's head, and see how interested they are in "talking" to you...
What an idiot.
Singer John Mellencamp on the ‘Charlie Rose Show’ said the removal of the Taliban after 9/11 was wrong, but further Mellencamp stated if the United States knew exactly where Osama bin Laden was it would be wrong to drop a bomb on OBL’s head.
Mellencamp: I think what would have been appropriate is exactly what we’re going to have to do right now.
Rose: What’s that?
Mellencamp: Talk to people.
Rose: Who do we go talk to? Do we call him up and say, “Osama, can we talk about this? We’re not real happy about this. Can we talk about it?”
Mellencamp then said we should talk to “the Muslims” and ask “where are we so far apart here?”
Later in the interview Mellencamp says he doesn’t know how he’d respond to the attack on Pearl Harbor in World War II because he doesn’t really know what happened. He says he’s read books, but he doesn’t know if history is always right.
Hey John, why don't you go over to Afghanistan and "talk" to those guys, preferably the guys who cut off Daniel Pearl's head, and see how interested they are in "talking" to you...
What an idiot.
Mosul troop right on target...
NAILS IT!
Big time. What an elequent letter this troop writes from my former home for a year. Thanks to Cal Thomas for bringing this letter to print, and for allowing Americans to see the honor of our military. God Bless them.
Big time. What an elequent letter this troop writes from my former home for a year. Thanks to Cal Thomas for bringing this letter to print, and for allowing Americans to see the honor of our military. God Bless them.
LET'S GIVE UP!
"A vote of disapproval will set the stage for additional Iraq legislation, which will be coming to the House floor," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said. She was one of 54 Democrats and 37 Republicans to speak on the issue during 11 hours of debate Tuesday.
No, it would set the stage for insurgents and al Qaeda to win the war, sensing bin Laden was right when he said Americans don't have the stomach for a fight.
This is what democrats are. This is what democrats do. Cut and run.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070214/D8N9JA3O2.html
No, it would set the stage for insurgents and al Qaeda to win the war, sensing bin Laden was right when he said Americans don't have the stomach for a fight.
This is what democrats are. This is what democrats do. Cut and run.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070214/D8N9JA3O2.html
This and that...
HappyValentines Day everyone...
Haven't talked about the Hawks for awhile. The team is playing much better. They currently sit at 6-5 in the Big Ten, 14-11 overall. Certainly not sterling, however, it should be obvious to eveyone they are playing much better as a team overall. There remaining schedule looks less then daunting, home games against Northwestern, Purdue, and Illinois, as well as road games against a bad PSU team and a slipping badly MSU team.
I think a 10-6 finish will get the team a bid to the NCAA's, providing they win at least their first round BTT game. That would put them at 19-13 overall, but a great finish overall (9-3 under this scenario) may get them in. Plus they would be 4th in the Big Ten. Go Hawks!
Haven't talked about the Hawks for awhile. The team is playing much better. They currently sit at 6-5 in the Big Ten, 14-11 overall. Certainly not sterling, however, it should be obvious to eveyone they are playing much better as a team overall. There remaining schedule looks less then daunting, home games against Northwestern, Purdue, and Illinois, as well as road games against a bad PSU team and a slipping badly MSU team.
I think a 10-6 finish will get the team a bid to the NCAA's, providing they win at least their first round BTT game. That would put them at 19-13 overall, but a great finish overall (9-3 under this scenario) may get them in. Plus they would be 4th in the Big Ten. Go Hawks!
Friday, February 2, 2007
How to win the War on Terrorism...
Excellent article from Human Events on how to win the "long" war.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=19228
Americans hear conflicting messages about how to think and talk about terrorism. As a result, the message of freedom and justice is often muted or muddled. Americans can do better. There are core ideas that should serve as a taproot for a consensus on how to understand and describe the enemy -- and ultimately how to defeat them. Specifically, we should:
Remember that winning the long war is all about winning the struggle of ideas. Such an effort requires (1) understanding the enemy, (2) delegitimizing its view of the world, (3) offering a credible alternative, and (4) demonstrating the will to prevail in the long war. Americans have a role to play in all four tasks. Using the right words and ideas can help to speed the course to victory.
Reject calls for appeasement. Believing that concessions will stem transnational terrorism would be a grave mistake. Osama bin Laden, for example, has promoted attacks by arguing that the West is a "paper tiger" with little stomach for prevailing in a long war. Appeasement would only reinforce this belief. One act of appeasement is the failure to call this conflict "war." Terrorists believe that they are at war with us. From their perspective, our failure to acknowledge this fact is an act of cowardice and weakness. Refusing to recognize that we are at war only encourages the enemy to be more warlike.
Acknowledge that there is no single enemy. Various terrorist networks pose different kinds of local, regional, and global threats. For instance, while al-Qaeda is the most well known of the terrorist groups, many different terrorist networks are at work around the world, including terrorist groups in the Indian subcontinent, which have carried out attacks in India and Pakistan, and Hezbollah, which has killed hundreds of Americans and struck in Europe and Latin America as well as in the Middle East. The distinct threats posed by different terrorist groups require a differentiated U.S. policy custom-made for each group, not a one-size-fits-all approach. Wars and words should be used to divide, weaken, and defeat terrorist groups.
Understand that poverty is not the "root cause" of terrorism. Many poor countries do not produce terrorists. In fact, many terrorists come from middle-class backgrounds and were indoctrinated and trained in Western Europe. Terrorists purport that violence is an appropriate way to solve societal ills. Discrediting that belief is the first and most essential task in addressing the root causes of terrorism. At the same time, the U.S. and its allies need to offer alternatives to terrorism that are real, credible, and achievable means of making people free, safe, and prosperous.
Accept that a Palestinian–Israeli peace deal will not defuse the terrorist threat. An enduring peace is clearly in the interest of all peoples in the Middle East, but terrorists are opposed to Israel's very existence as a sovereign state, not simply to making peace with it. Additionally, many use the conflict as an excuse to push their own political agendas or to condone escalating violence. Their arguments only obscure the reality that a Palestinian–Israeli accord will not stop transnational terrorism.
Acknowledge that elections alone will not bring freedom and democracy -- the long-term political antidotes to terrorism. Elections alone are not democracy; they are the promise of democracy. Achieving peace and freedom takes years of effort and commitment. As the U.S. has relearned from Iraq’s difficult transition to a democratic society, free and fair elections do not guarantee freedom from terrorist attacks. Democracy comes from building the institutions that foster a resilient civil society, including freedom from corruption, upholding human rights, protecting freedom of the press and religious practice, and ensuring equality of opportunity.
Avoid religious terminology that terrorists use to justify their actions. Terrorists use religious terminology to legitimize their inexcusable acts. For instance, they use the word "jihad," which is derived from the Arabic word jehada and literally means "to strive," to justify what they claim is a "holy war." Using "jihad" or any other religious term to describe terrorists and their actions only helps to legitimize an ideology that the war on terrorism seeks to defeat. Terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda advocate a totalitarian Islamic ideology that manipulates religious words and ideas but does not represent traditional Islam. Many terrorists have never received legitimate religious educations.
Remind audiences that many terrorist groups are revolutionary organizations that seek to impose their totalitarian ideology on Muslims, as well as non-Muslims, through violence. Although Osama bin Laden seeks to provoke a clash of civilizations, he also promotes a clash within Islamic civilization. Al-Qaeda has killed many thousands more Muslims than non-Muslims. Muslims have a major stake in defeating al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups because they are among the chief victims of its attacks and pay a heavy price when forced to live under terrorist regimes.
Not give up on moderate Muslims. Many Muslims reject terrorism, even in countries where the official rhetoric seems disturbingly warlike. Many Islamic scholars argue that terrorism -- the intentional murder of innocents to achieve political goals -- is completely illegitimate. In some cases, moderate voices receive little notice in Western media. In other instances, individuals are fearful to speak out too loudly because of the threat from terrorists and their supporters. The U.S. should encourage Muslim political, religious, and social leaders to denounce terrorism and cooperate in defeating terrorist groups.
Winning the war on terrorism will require understanding the enemy, delegitimizing its view of the world, offering a credible alternative, and demonstrating the will to prevail in the long war. Using the right words and ideas can help to speed the course to victory..
The point about Israel-Palestine is very succinct. There will never be peace there as long as groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, and of course, states like Iran, want to eliminate the Jewish state. It indeed is "the long war". The sooner Americans accept it, the sooner we can join together and unify as a country, rather then be torn apart.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=19228
Americans hear conflicting messages about how to think and talk about terrorism. As a result, the message of freedom and justice is often muted or muddled. Americans can do better. There are core ideas that should serve as a taproot for a consensus on how to understand and describe the enemy -- and ultimately how to defeat them. Specifically, we should:
Remember that winning the long war is all about winning the struggle of ideas. Such an effort requires (1) understanding the enemy, (2) delegitimizing its view of the world, (3) offering a credible alternative, and (4) demonstrating the will to prevail in the long war. Americans have a role to play in all four tasks. Using the right words and ideas can help to speed the course to victory.
Reject calls for appeasement. Believing that concessions will stem transnational terrorism would be a grave mistake. Osama bin Laden, for example, has promoted attacks by arguing that the West is a "paper tiger" with little stomach for prevailing in a long war. Appeasement would only reinforce this belief. One act of appeasement is the failure to call this conflict "war." Terrorists believe that they are at war with us. From their perspective, our failure to acknowledge this fact is an act of cowardice and weakness. Refusing to recognize that we are at war only encourages the enemy to be more warlike.
Acknowledge that there is no single enemy. Various terrorist networks pose different kinds of local, regional, and global threats. For instance, while al-Qaeda is the most well known of the terrorist groups, many different terrorist networks are at work around the world, including terrorist groups in the Indian subcontinent, which have carried out attacks in India and Pakistan, and Hezbollah, which has killed hundreds of Americans and struck in Europe and Latin America as well as in the Middle East. The distinct threats posed by different terrorist groups require a differentiated U.S. policy custom-made for each group, not a one-size-fits-all approach. Wars and words should be used to divide, weaken, and defeat terrorist groups.
Understand that poverty is not the "root cause" of terrorism. Many poor countries do not produce terrorists. In fact, many terrorists come from middle-class backgrounds and were indoctrinated and trained in Western Europe. Terrorists purport that violence is an appropriate way to solve societal ills. Discrediting that belief is the first and most essential task in addressing the root causes of terrorism. At the same time, the U.S. and its allies need to offer alternatives to terrorism that are real, credible, and achievable means of making people free, safe, and prosperous.
Accept that a Palestinian–Israeli peace deal will not defuse the terrorist threat. An enduring peace is clearly in the interest of all peoples in the Middle East, but terrorists are opposed to Israel's very existence as a sovereign state, not simply to making peace with it. Additionally, many use the conflict as an excuse to push their own political agendas or to condone escalating violence. Their arguments only obscure the reality that a Palestinian–Israeli accord will not stop transnational terrorism.
Acknowledge that elections alone will not bring freedom and democracy -- the long-term political antidotes to terrorism. Elections alone are not democracy; they are the promise of democracy. Achieving peace and freedom takes years of effort and commitment. As the U.S. has relearned from Iraq’s difficult transition to a democratic society, free and fair elections do not guarantee freedom from terrorist attacks. Democracy comes from building the institutions that foster a resilient civil society, including freedom from corruption, upholding human rights, protecting freedom of the press and religious practice, and ensuring equality of opportunity.
Avoid religious terminology that terrorists use to justify their actions. Terrorists use religious terminology to legitimize their inexcusable acts. For instance, they use the word "jihad," which is derived from the Arabic word jehada and literally means "to strive," to justify what they claim is a "holy war." Using "jihad" or any other religious term to describe terrorists and their actions only helps to legitimize an ideology that the war on terrorism seeks to defeat. Terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda advocate a totalitarian Islamic ideology that manipulates religious words and ideas but does not represent traditional Islam. Many terrorists have never received legitimate religious educations.
Remind audiences that many terrorist groups are revolutionary organizations that seek to impose their totalitarian ideology on Muslims, as well as non-Muslims, through violence. Although Osama bin Laden seeks to provoke a clash of civilizations, he also promotes a clash within Islamic civilization. Al-Qaeda has killed many thousands more Muslims than non-Muslims. Muslims have a major stake in defeating al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups because they are among the chief victims of its attacks and pay a heavy price when forced to live under terrorist regimes.
Not give up on moderate Muslims. Many Muslims reject terrorism, even in countries where the official rhetoric seems disturbingly warlike. Many Islamic scholars argue that terrorism -- the intentional murder of innocents to achieve political goals -- is completely illegitimate. In some cases, moderate voices receive little notice in Western media. In other instances, individuals are fearful to speak out too loudly because of the threat from terrorists and their supporters. The U.S. should encourage Muslim political, religious, and social leaders to denounce terrorism and cooperate in defeating terrorist groups.
Winning the war on terrorism will require understanding the enemy, delegitimizing its view of the world, offering a credible alternative, and demonstrating the will to prevail in the long war. Using the right words and ideas can help to speed the course to victory..
The point about Israel-Palestine is very succinct. There will never be peace there as long as groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, and of course, states like Iran, want to eliminate the Jewish state. It indeed is "the long war". The sooner Americans accept it, the sooner we can join together and unify as a country, rather then be torn apart.
Anti-troop screed, Washington Post style
Blogger William Arkin over at the Washington Post blog site has come under fire for an anti-troop screed, and then an answer a day later to his "critics". Sometimes, it's best to shut your mouth, lest the whole world sees what real ignorance lies beneath:
http://www.rightwingnews.com/cgi-bin/mt331/mt-tb.cgi/2833
"I'm sure the soldiers were expressing a majority opinion common amongst the ranks - that's why it is news - and I'm also sure no one in the military leadership or the administration put the soldiers up to expressing their views, nor steered NBC reporter Richard Engel to the story.
I'm all for everyone expressing their opinion, even those who wear the uniform of the United States Army. But I also hope that military commanders took the soldiers aside after the story and explained to them why it wasn't for them to disapprove of the American people."
LOL! He has it right that most troops feel this way. However, he apparently doesn't like it when the same troops putting their lives on the line for him to vomit his bilge, decide to say some things he doesn't agree with. HYPOCRITE!
Here is the followup blog the next day, consisting of him whining and apologizing for calling the troops mercs. He still gets a nice bash in on our military:
http://www.rightwingnews.com/cgi-bin/mt331/mt-tb.cgi/2839
These men and women are not fighting for money with little regard for the nation. The situation might be much worse than that: evidently far too many in uniform believe that they are the one true nation. They hide behind the constitution and the flag and then spew an anti-Democrat, anti-liberal, anti-journalism, anti-dissent, and anti-citizen message that reflects a certain contempt for the American people.
What I've heard ever since my article "The Troops Also Need to Support the American People" was published on Tuesday are a lot of people telling ME to shut up and be grateful for the sacrifices others are making.
....As the debate about the Iraq war demonstrates, war-making is a shared endeavor and the arrogant and intolerant few who think they are above the people seem to be those who are wearing the uniform."
Wow. Just wow. He doesn't like what the troops are saying because they disagree with him. So he attacks those same troops. If they agreed with him, this whole article would never have seen the blogosphere. What a loser.
http://www.rightwingnews.com/cgi-bin/mt331/mt-tb.cgi/2833
"I'm sure the soldiers were expressing a majority opinion common amongst the ranks - that's why it is news - and I'm also sure no one in the military leadership or the administration put the soldiers up to expressing their views, nor steered NBC reporter Richard Engel to the story.
I'm all for everyone expressing their opinion, even those who wear the uniform of the United States Army. But I also hope that military commanders took the soldiers aside after the story and explained to them why it wasn't for them to disapprove of the American people."
LOL! He has it right that most troops feel this way. However, he apparently doesn't like it when the same troops putting their lives on the line for him to vomit his bilge, decide to say some things he doesn't agree with. HYPOCRITE!
Here is the followup blog the next day, consisting of him whining and apologizing for calling the troops mercs. He still gets a nice bash in on our military:
http://www.rightwingnews.com/cgi-bin/mt331/mt-tb.cgi/2839
These men and women are not fighting for money with little regard for the nation. The situation might be much worse than that: evidently far too many in uniform believe that they are the one true nation. They hide behind the constitution and the flag and then spew an anti-Democrat, anti-liberal, anti-journalism, anti-dissent, and anti-citizen message that reflects a certain contempt for the American people.
What I've heard ever since my article "The Troops Also Need to Support the American People" was published on Tuesday are a lot of people telling ME to shut up and be grateful for the sacrifices others are making.
....As the debate about the Iraq war demonstrates, war-making is a shared endeavor and the arrogant and intolerant few who think they are above the people seem to be those who are wearing the uniform."
Wow. Just wow. He doesn't like what the troops are saying because they disagree with him. So he attacks those same troops. If they agreed with him, this whole article would never have seen the blogosphere. What a loser.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
