Saturday, November 20, 2004

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry

What is a "restricted edition"? Restricted to whom? How can a newspaper be "restricted." It seems a contradiction in terms.

Permit me to add that I have been following your blog for some time and find it outstanding. Permit me to congratulate you on a job well-done.

ttonn (ip:12.65.6.47) 20 November 2004 - 15:25 uur

Restricted to paying customers. That's how the paid online edition of De Telegraaf is usually called. It looks exactly like the printed thing and can be viewed at http://telegraaf-i.telegraaf.nl You need to have a Dutch land line or cell phone to be able to read any articles, or to get a subscription to the printed newspaper. (They don't do home delivery in the USA ;-)) You can also use Minitix, which is a local digital payment method. http://kiosk.telegraaf.nl/abonnement/?skey=&qty=1&type=pg.inet.los

De Telegraaf has a free website as well which contains some articles from the newspaper, but not all. This site will often contain very recent news too (from the Dutch wire service ANP), some of which will never make it into the printed edition or the online 'restricted edition'. It's at a different address, http://www.telegraaf.nl I guess you could call this the unrestricted edition.

Thanks for the compliments :)

Arjan Dasselaar (ip:82.161.93.35) 20 November 2004 - 15:43 uur

Does not Dutch law have some means to punish these hoodlums? And the girl also for inciting violence?

It seems a typical school-house issue but there are deeper issues such as silencing free speech. The Dutch must strike the right balance here. Tough position to be in.

Of course you could be here in the US where in Seattle they have discovered a cell training Moslem children how to shoot or stab other school children--pretty grim. The young are so easily manipulated by those they perceive as good.

Michael in SC (ip:68.209.214.4) 20 November 2004 - 21:39 uur

And no one will! Get use to it. If this doesn't convience you what will?
************************
What a glaring double standard. The Arab world is enraged over the shooting of a wounded, apparently unarmed Iraqi insurgent by a uniformed US soldier.

There is no similar outrage for Margaret Hassan. Is it because she was an Anglo, a woman, or because she was killed by a Muslim?

The video of the soldier shooting is proof, we are told, of America’s evil. And the kidnapping, torture and murder of Mrs. Hassan is then proof of what- that America is evil! Muslims wouldn’t do that unless evil America forced their hand.

Bombing children, defiling mosques, kidnapping civilians, executing poor workers and cleaning women point blank: these are not discussed, broadcast with frequency, or the source of much anger. Videos where a masked man shakes a bloody head while the curtains flutter do not evoke such fury. Why? The identity of the victim or the perpetrator?

All tactics of the insurgents are excused. Hide among civilians. Justified. Wear civilian clothes. Justified. Shoot from the holy mosque. Justified. Feign death to draw soldiers in (the way one marine died the day before the incident). Justified. Wave a white flag as a ploy. Justified. Booby trap dead bodies. Justified. That’s just Fallujah.

Moving outward- Deliberately killing Iraqi civilians daily. Justified. Bombing churches. Justified. Bombing cafes. Justified. Using schools as arsenals. Justified. Attacking the police. Just fine.

The rules of war don’t apply to the insurgents, only the Americans. And if one horrible act occurs at the hands of one American soldier, the world howls.

The insurgents’ constant inhumane tactics are acceptable. The American rules of engagement prohibited shooting unarmed combatants: this prohibition was followed by thousands of soldiers, thousands of times. After the shootout at the mosque in which the man was wounded, a call went to headquarters to send a medical team out to pick him up. Its American policy that wounded fighters are given good medical attention. Many are being treated now. A wounded American soldier found by the enemy fighters would be tortured to death after being paraded on al-Jazeera. And that would be fine.

The last war in which Arab militaries fought was the Iran/Iraq war and executions were systematic. That was fine.---Jane Novak

http://armiesofliberation.com/archives/2004/11/18/a-glaring-double-standard/

Michael in SC (ip:68.209.214.4) 20 November 2004 - 21:59 uur

And if one horrible act occurs at the hands of one American soldier, the world howls.

Whoa. Did I miss something? "Horrible" act? What? When?

...nope, all I've heard lately was a young Marine double-tapping a Fallujah insurgent to prevent the bast*ard from setting off a belt-bomb and blowing up his squad.

Other then that act of heroism, I wasn't aware of any "horrible acts".

Geez. I really, really have to start paying attention.

brandon davis (ip:24.10.60.253) 20 November 2004 - 4:49 uur

I was attacked once by five Moroccan youths for being white. IMO, Moroccan criminals cause quite a lot of problems, but Dutch politicians are still too PC to say it.

Expat Dutch (ip:129.252.75.210) 20 November 2004 - 0:43 uur

Comment