The C-Square
CRY HAVOC! UNLEASH THE WAR PIGS! ....AMERICA! Who's On Your Six?
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
H and S 4thLAR Training in Republic of South Africa
Sunday, September 11, 2011
Friday, August 19, 2011
Died today: "Marc Wilson" 1996-2011
Monday, May 16, 2011
2nd annual Lance Corporal Kane benefit run
Via the Cherryhill Fire Dept News: A tribute to LCpl Jeremy Kane.Hook and Ladder 44 welcomes new member
| Mayor Platt making opening remarks |
| Runners lined up on Kresson Road lead by our nations Colors |
![]() |
| Chief Giorgio with the Kane Family |
| Mrs. Kane with members of 4th LAR |
![]() |
| A copy of 4th LAR Shield that is on 2 windows on Ladder Company 44. Above the shield - Lance Cooral Jeremy Kane - USMC Below the shield - Riding With Us |
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Welcome to a Facebook Page about Fox Company, 4th Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion. Join Facebook to start connecting with Fox Company, 4th Light ...
Tuesday, February 01, 2011
Thursday, January 27, 2011
What is this war about?
Sgt. David Smith, HM2 Xin Qi and Lance Cpl. Jeremy Kane died in a Jan. 23, 2010 suicide bombing in Afghanistan’s Helmand province while guarding a bazaar with the 3rd Platoon, Bravo Company, 4th Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion.
Will Conservative Media Elites Defend Lars Hedegaard?
Posted By Andrew G. Bostom On January 10, 2011 @ 8:15 am In Uncategorized | 28 Comments
This past Friday I received a plaintive appeal on behalf of my colleague, Danish journalist and historian Lars Hedegaard — President of the Danish Free Press Society and The International Free Press Society (IFPS [1]). My response to the appeal is included at the end of this essay as a succinct guide to Islamically perplexed, high-profile U.S. conservative media elites who, until now, have entirely ignored the burgeoning crisis epitomized by Lars Hedegaard’s current plight. It is well past time for these self-anointed champions of free speech to weigh-in publicly and offer a robust defense of my colleague –and theirs.
Whom am I addressing in conservative media, specifically? All of the best-known and “highest-rated” (as they are constantly reminding us, at any rate) radio and television personalities: Mr. No Spin [2], what say you? Dittos to you, Rush [3]. Don’t continue to be a mute mime clown on this matter, Glenn [4]. You’re not ringing in support of freedom of speech, Sean [5], and I’ll indeed bite you if you don’t open your loud — but highly intelligent — mouth in support of Hedegaard, Mark [6].
As for the conservative or “center-right” print/online media icons — the editorial boards of the National Review [7], Weekly Standard [8], and Wall Street Journal [9] – your continued silence is craven and hypocritical, not golden.
Here is the crux of Mr. Hedegaard’s case, and some background. As the IFPS appeal notes:
Those who have been following the Danish cartoon crisis and several subsequent attempts by radical Muslims to kill and bomb Danes and Danish institutions may be excused for believing that Denmark is in the forefront of the battle for free speech. And indeed it used to be that way. No longer. For the past year the Danish public prosecutor has been waging a lawfare offensive against outspoken critics of Islam and Muslim practices.
On December 3 following a Kafka-esque [10] prosecution in Denmark, Member of Parliament (MP) Jesper Langballe was convicted [1] and indeed confessed [10] to the “crime” of so-called “hate speech” — or as the judge in the lower court of Randers characterized it, “racial discrimination” — for having called attention to honor killings in Muslim families.
Lars Hedegaard’s prosecution is next. He is slated to stand trial in the lower court of Frederiksberg on January 24, 2011. Mr. Hedegaard’s apparent “crime” was to draw attention to the extensive (and disproportionate) number of family rapes in areas dominated by Muslim culture. As the IFPS appeal further notes:
This well-documented fact has brought him an indictment [11] under the Danish penal code’s “racism” clause: Article 266b [12]. Both MP Langballe and Lars Hedegaard have long ago emphasized that they did not intend to accuse all Muslims or even the majority of Muslims of such crimes. This has made no impression on the public prosecutor.
In late September 2010 Lars Hedegaard recalled that at the inaugural assembly of the Danish Free Press Society (the mother organization of the IFPS) in March 2005 he observed:
Present attempts to crush freedom of expression come from several actors: national governments, supranational organizations such as the EU and the UN, and, not least, Islam. And not only from so-called “Islamists” or “terrorists” or “Islamic radicals.” They are inherent in the very core of Mohammedan ideology.
Hedegaard’s September 2010 statement continued, laying out the IFPS’s — and his own — Weltanschauung, and real world activities, for which he is now, incredibly, being prosecuted:
That has been our position all along. We have made no bones about the fact that we consider Islam — as it is presently being preached by all influential clerics and ideologues — a deadly threat to all our freedoms among which are freedom of expression. For this consistent stance we have been vilified and called every name in the book, but we will not budge.
I’m aware that some of my friends think that Islam can be reformed, domesticated, and civilized. I welcome that day, but must relate to the fact that it hasn’t happened yet — though Muslims have had 1,400 years to complete the project.
So the International Free Press Society has decided to live in the real world. And the real world demands robust defense of free speech, repeal of all blasphemy and hate-speech laws, and unwavering support of everyone who is being bullied and threatened by adherents of the caliphate. All this we have done to the best of our ability and with a fair degree of success. Whenever the likes of Geert Wilders, Kurt Westergaard, Robert Redeker, Gregorius Nekschot and so many others have come under threat, we have been the first to give them a platform and stand by them through thick and thin.
Just a few days ago, the Free Press Society received a mail from Gregorius Nekschot thanking us for the fact that after many years of harassment, the Dutch prosecutor has dropped the criminal charges against him for drawing offensive pictures. Nekschot is in no doubt that the solidarity shown by the IFPS has been instrumental in securing this happy outcome.
The January 7 IFPS statement concluded with this clarion warning, and appeal, which all U.S. media conservative elites should heed. Simply put, unabashedly supporting Lars Hedegaard is required to defend our most fundamental Western freedom — freedom of speech:
We fear that the public prosecutor intends to stifle open debate on Islam and Muslim culture. And we fear that he is doing so with the tacit approval of the governing parties, which first signaled their intention to remove the racism clause from the penal code but have recently recanted.
If the authorities succeed in silencing such critics as Jesper Langballe and Lars Hedegaard, who will dare speak out?
We must put a stop to these attempts to undermine free speech if we wish to preserve Denmark as a free country. And where Denmark — that former beacon of free speech — goes, the rest of the West may follow.
What follows is my own response to the IFPS appeal on behalf of Lars Hedegaard—a potential guide for Islamically perplexed U.S. conservative media elites:
The prosecution of Lars Hedegaard is a doubly obscene violation of the very foundations of Western freedom and the rule of law. By apparent illegal design, it a priori deliberately ignores the factual content of Mr. Hedegaard’s presentation — critical to his defense –while championing, exclusively, mendacious, bowdlerized portrayals of living Islamic doctrines — rooted in the Sharia, or Islamic “law” — and their historical consequences, past as prologue to the present.
Denying Mr. Hedegaard’s fundamental Western right to a full rational, evidence-based self-defense — including a critical examination of Islam — is nothing less than a complete capitulation to Islamic blasphemy law. The independent existence of objective universal truths is not acknowledged by normative Islamic doctrine. Thus, antithetical to Western conceptions, Islamic religio-political doctrine does not recognize individual liberties, even as an abstraction.
Is this now Denmark’s “standard” as well?
Notwithstanding Denmark’s denial of Mr. Hedegaard’s right to a fair defense, a collective wealth of unambiguous evidence [13] — readily available — reveals the breathtaking shallowness and intellectual dishonesty of this prosecution: objective, erudite analyses of the Sharia by leading Western scholars of Islam; the acknowledgment of Sharia’s global “resurgence,” even by postmodern, “anti-colonial” (i.e., against Western colonialism, not Islamic jihad colonialism!) academic apologists for Islam, combined with an abundance of recent polling data from Muslim nations, and Muslim immigrant communities in the West confirming the ongoing, widespread adherence to the Sharia’s tenets; the plaintive warnings and admonitions of contemporary Muslim intellectuals — freethinkers and believers alike — about the incompatibility of Sharia with modern, Western-derived conceptions of universal human rights; and the overt promulgation of traditional, Sharia-based Muslim legal systems as an integrated whole (i.e., extending well beyond mere “family law aspects” of the Sharia), by authoritative, mainstream international, European, and North American Islamic religio-political organizations.
Finally, has Denmark voluntarily abandoned modern human rights ideals — a unique product of centuries of the West’s agonizing, self-critical struggles — and retrogressed to the era of Beaumarchais’ Marriage of Figaro, written at the close of the 18th century? The text included this freedom of speech monologue in Act V, Scene 3:
I cobble together a verse comedy about the customs of the harem, assuming that, as a Spanish writer, I can say what I like about Mohammed without drawing hostile fire. Next thing, some envoy from God knows where turns up and complains that in my play I have offended the Ottoman empire, Persia, a large slice of the Indian peninsula, the whole of Egypt, and the kingdoms of Barca [Ethiopia], Tripoli, Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco. And so my play sinks without trace, all to placate a bunch of Muslim princes, not one of whom, as far as I know, can read but who beat the living daylights out of us and say we are “Christian dogs.” Since they can’t stop a man thinking, they take it out on his hide instead.
Article printed from Pajamas Media: http://pajamasmedia.com
URL to article: http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/will-conservative-media-elites-defend-lars-hedegaard/
URLs in this post:
[1] IFPS: http://www.internationalfreepresssociety.org/2010/12/the-scandal-of-danish-justice/
[2] Mr. No Spin: http://www.billoreilly.com/pg/jsp/billsbooks/tnsz.jsp
[3] Rush: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/today.guest.html
[4] Glenn: http://www.glennbeck.com/
[5] Sean: http://www.amazon.com/Let-Freedom-Ring-Winning-Liberalism/dp/0060735651/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1294503004&sr=1-3
[6] Mark: http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Tyranny-Conservative-Mark-Levin/dp/1416562877/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1294503188&sr=1-1
[7] National Review: http://www.nationalreview.com/
[8] Weekly Standard: http://www.weeklystandard.com/
[9] Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/public/page/news-opinion-commentary.html
[10] Kafka-esque: http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2010/12/12/beyond-orwell-islamo-realism-as-hate-speech-in-denmark/
[11] indictment: http://www.internationalfreepresssociety.org/2010/09/4087/
[12] 266b: http://www.legal-project.org/blog/2010/12/i-confess-too
[13] unambiguous evidence: http://pajamasmedia.com../../../../../blog/see-no-sharia/?singlepage=true
Copyright © 2011 Pajamas Media. All rights reserved.
Dude POTUS cluesless to the real world: Era of Big Yankee Gov't Is Here Now so stick'em Up...peasants
Sarah Palin:The President’s State of the Union address boiled down to this message: “The era of big government is here as long as I am, so help me pay for it.” He dubbed it a “Winning The Future” speech, but the title’s acronym seemed more accurate than much of the content.
Americans are growing impatient with a White House that still just doesn’t get it. The President proves he doesn’t understand that the biggest challenge facing our economy is today’s runaway debt when he states we want to make sure “we don’t get buried under a mountain a debt.” That’s the problem! We are buried under Mt. McKinley-sized debt. It’s at the heart of what is crippling our economy and taking our jobs. This is the concern that should be on every leader’s mind. Our country’s future is at stake, and we’re rapidly reaching a crisis point. Our government is spending too much, borrowing too much, and growing too much. Debt is stifling our private sector growth, and millions of Americans are desperately looking for work.
So, what was the President’s response? At a time when we need quick, decisive, and meaningful action to stop our looming debt crisis, President Obama gave us what politicians have for years: promises that more federal government “investment” (read: more government spending) is the solution.
He couched his proposals to grow government and increase spending in the language of “national greatness.” This seems to be the Obama administration’s version of American exceptionalism – an “exceptionally big government,” in which a centralized government declares that we shall be great and innovative and competitive, not by individual initiative, but by government decree. Where once he used words like “hope” and “change,” the President may now talk about “innovation” and “competition”; but the audacity of his recycled rhetoric no longer inspires hope.
Real leadership is more than just words; it’s deeds. The President’s deeds don’t lend confidence that we can trust his words spoken last night.
In the past, he promised us he’d make job creation his number one priority, while also cutting the deficit, eliminating waste, easing foreclosures in the housing markets, and making “tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development.” What did we get? A record $1.5 trillion deficit, an 84% increase in federal spending, a trillion dollar stimulus that stimulated nothing but more Tea Party activism, 9+% unemployment (or 17% percent if you include those who have stopped looking for work or settled for part time jobs), 2.9 million home foreclosures last year, and a moratorium on offshore drilling that has led to more unemployment and $100 dollar a barrel oil.
The President glossed over the most important issue he needed to address last night: spending. He touched on deficit reduction, but his proposals amount to merely a quarter of the cuts in discretionary spending proposed by his own Deficit Reduction Commission, not to mention the $2.5 trillion in cuts over ten years suggested by the Republican Study Committee. And while we appreciate hearing the same President who gave us the trillion dollar Stimulus Package boondoggle finally concede that we need to cut earmarks, keep in mind that earmarks are a $16 billion drop in the $1.5 trillion ocean that is the federal deficit. Budget cuts won’t be popular, but they are vitally necessary or we will soon be a bankrupt country. It’s the responsibility of a leader to make sure the American people fully understand this.
As it is, the American people should fully understand that when the President talks about increased “investments” he’s talking about increased government spending. Cut away the rhetoric and you’ll also see that the White House’s real message on economic reform wasn’t one of substantial spending cuts, but of tax increases. When the President talks about simplifying the tax code, he’s made it clear that he’s not looking to cut your taxes; he’s looking for additional tax revenue from you. The tax “simplification” suggested by the President’s Deficit Reduction Commission would end up raising taxes by $1 trillion over the next decade. So, instead of bringing spending down in line with revenue, the President wants to raise our taxes to pay for his massive spending increases. It’s tax and spend in reverse: spend first, tax later.
And the Obama administration has a lot of half-baked ideas on where to spend our hard-earned money in pursuit of “national greatness.” These “investments,” as the President calls them, include everything from solar shingles to high speed trains. As we struggle to service our unsustainable debt, the only thing these “investments” will get us is a bullet train to bankruptcy.
With credit ratings agency Moody’s warning us that the federal government must reverse the rapid growth of national debt or face losing our triple-A rating, keep in mind that a nation doesn’t look so “great” when its credit rating is in tatters.
Of course, it’s nice to give a speech calling for “investment” and “competition” in order to reach greatness. It’s quite another thing to advocate and implement policies that truly encourage such things. Growing the federal government is not the answer.
Take education for example. It’s easy to declare the need for better education, but will throwing even more money at the issue really help? As the Cato Institute’s Michael Tanner notes, “the federal government has increased education spending by 188 percent in real terms since 1970 without seeing any substantial improvement in test scores.” If you want “innovation” and “competition,” then support school choice initiatives and less federal control over our state and local districts.
When it comes to energy issues, we heard more vague promises last night as the President’s rhetoric suggested an all-of-the-above solution to meeting our country’s energy needs. But again, his actions point in a different direction. He offers a vision of a future powered by what he refers to as “clean energy,” but how we will get there from here remains a mystery. In the meantime, he continues to stymie the responsible development of our own abundant conventional energy resources – the stuff we actually use right now to fuel our economy. His continued hostility towards domestic drilling means hundreds of thousands of well-paying jobs will not be created and millions of Americans will end up paying more at the pump. It also means we’ll continue to transfer hundreds of billions of U.S. dollars to foreign regimes that don’t have America’s interests at heart.
On the crucial issue of entitlement reform, the President offered nothing. This is shocking, because as he himself explained back in April 2009, “if we want to get serious about fiscal discipline…we will have to get serious about entitlement reform.” Even though the Medicare Trust Fund will run out of funds a mere six years from now, and the Social Security Trust Fund is filled mainly with IOUs, the President opted to kick the can down the road yet again. And once again, he was disingenuous when he suggested that meaningful reform would automatically expose people’s Social Security savings to a possible stock market crash. As Rep. Paul Ryan showed in his proposed Roadmap, and others have explained, it’s possible to come up with meaningful reform proposals that tackle projected shortfalls and offer workers more options to invest our own savings while still guaranteeing invested funds so they won’t fall victim to sudden swings in the stock market.
And what about that crucial issue confronting so many Americans who are struggling today – the lack of jobs? The President came to office promising that his massive, multi-trillion dollar spending programs would keep unemployment below 8%; but the lack of meaningful, pro-free market reforms in yesterday’s speech means his legacy will almost certainly be four years of above 8% unemployment, regardless of how much he increases federal spending (or perhaps I should say because of how much he’s increased it).
Perhaps the most nonsensical bit of double-speak we heard last night was when the President said that hitting job-creators with a tax increase isn’t “punishing their success. It’s about promoting America’s success.” But government taking more money from the small business entrepreneurs who create up to 70% of all jobs in this country is not “promoting America’s success.” It’s a disincentive that will result in less job creation. It is, in fact, punishing the success of the very people who created the innovation that the President has supposedly been praising.
Despite the flowery rhetoric, the President doesn’t seem to understand that individuals make America great, not the federal government. American greatness lies in the courage and hard work of individual innovators and entrepreneurs. America is an exceptional nation in part because we have historically been a country that rewards and affirms individual initiative and offers people the freedom to invest and create as they see fit – not as a government bureaucrat does. Yes, government can play an appropriate role in our free market by ensuring a level playing field to encourage honest competition without picking winners and losers. But by and large, government should get out of the way. Unfortunately, under President Obama’s leadership, government growth is in our way, and his “big government greatness” will not help matters.
Consider what his “big government greatness” really amounts to. It’s basically a corporatist agenda – it’s the collaboration between big government and the big businesses that have powerful friends in D.C. and can afford to hire big lobbyists. This collaboration works in a manner that distorts and corrupts true free market capitalism. This isn’t just old-fashioned big government liberalism; this is crony capitalism on steroids. In the interests of big business, we’re “investing” in technologies and industries that venture capitalists tell us are non-starters, but which will provide lucrative returns for some corporate interests who have major investments in these areas. In the interests of big government, we’re not reducing the size of our bloated government or cutting spending, we’re told the President will freeze it – at unsustainable, historic levels! In practice, this means that public sector employees (big government’s staunchest defenders) may not lose jobs, but millions of Americans in the private sector face lay offs because the ever-expanding government has squeezed out and crippled our economy under the weight of unsustainable debt.
Ronald Reagan said, “You can’t be for big government, big taxes, and big bureaucracy and still be for the little guy.” President Obama’s proposals last night stick the little guy with the bill, while big government and its big corporate partners prosper. The plain truth is our country simply cannot afford Barack Obama’s dream of an “exceptionally big government” that may help the big guys, but sticks it to the rest of us.
- Sarah Palin
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
A Remembrance Ceremony B4LAR
Sgt. David Smith, HM2 Xin Qi and Lance Cpl. Jeremy Kane died in a Jan. 23, 2010 suicide bombing in Afghanistan’s Helmand province while guarding a bazaar with the 3rd Platoon, Bravo Company, 4th Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion. A year after their deaths, the community still feels the loss.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Prepping the Battlefield--sweet judy--the Republicans act like John Boyd Never Lived...
This kind of political BS should have been Look Ma' No Brains stuff...So help me if the GOP blows this one, with a 70% backing from the people....bro' you need to look for another job.
Examiner columnist Hugh Hewitt: "House Speaker John Boehner needs to start talking now about the 'selective shutdown' of the federal government that is ahead if the president refuses to listen to the verdict of the voters rendered decisively in November." If confrontation and the threat of a government shutdown are all but inevitable, then Republicans must begin now defining what that means for the public. House Republicans must, according to Hewitt, "reassure Americans and especially senior citizens [in advance] that they have provided the Senate with the bills necessary to fund Social Security, Medicare and defense, but that the president is holding these appropriations hostage in order to defend Obamacare, the bureaucrats at EPA and the left-wing broadcasters at NPR." In other words, key functions of government can be maintained even as Republicans deliver what voters demanded in November.


