Intermarkets' Privacy Policy
Support


Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
CBD:
cbd at cutjibnewsletter.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com


Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Jon Ekdahl 2026
Jay Guevara 2025
Jim Sunk New Dawn 2025
Jewells45 2025
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups





















« Shock: Washington Post Accurately Labels Liberal Sources Quoted In Article | Main | Watchin' The Internet Detectives »
July 26, 2005

Theo Van Gogh Eulogized By Blog

Peaktalk has a nice reminder that Van Gogh wasn't just a victim of Islamist lunacy, but a passionate and interesting person.

His killer -- the guy who told his grieving family he had no remorse whatsoever, nor any sympathy for them -- was sentenced to life without parole, which is a difficult trick. Hard to get that kind of sentence in Holland.

Roger L. Simon notes that Hollywood still is entirely ignoring the butchering of one of their own. Not even a mention of the killer's sentencing in the town's industry-paper, Variety.

But I'm sure everyone is talking about Jane Fonda's Peace Bus, fueled by vegetable oil.

I don't think these are bad people. Terrorists and terroristy-sympathizers are of course monsters; but terrorist-deniers are just... well, addled.

There is simply no room in their worldview for vicious terrorists that must be hunted down and killed like the animals they are. They oppose violence, particularly violence committed "in their name," and so they must deny the existence of any evil that would make that brutish step necessary.

As they say, when the only tool you have is a hammer, all the world looks like the nail.

And on the other hand: when you have expressly denied the need for hammers, and when you sing Kumbaya songs all day about how great it would be if all hammers were beaten into plowshares, then nothing in the world looks like a nail, and anything displaying nail-like qualities must be studiously ignored and driven out of your mind as quickly as possible.

Thanks for the links to Traffic Non-Santa.


posted by Ace at 12:47 PM
Comments



But I'm sure everyone is talking about Jane Fonda's Peace Bus, fueled by vegetable oil.
As I mentioned over at QandO blog she's gonna' try to emulate brother Peter's 60's movie. It will be titled "Gr-easy Rider."
Posted by: tomscott on July 26, 2005 12:56 PM

I'm not Fonda "Wesson Jane".

Posted by: Jack M. on July 26, 2005 01:03 PM

Why, exactly, is Fonda going on a bus tour to oppose the Iraq war now? In the months leading up the invasion and a few months after, I might understand, but now, what's done is done. Does she want us to leave and put Saddam back in power?

Posted by: Jason on July 26, 2005 01:04 PM

The Crisco Kid?

Posted by: Phinn on July 26, 2005 01:14 PM

I think she's having trouble selling her books, her looks, and her acting talent. This is just a publicity stunt.

Posted by: rabidfox on July 26, 2005 01:20 PM

I can't believe at her age and with her money she is still trying to resurrect that dead career of hers. What's next? A Playboy pictorial?

Posted by: on July 26, 2005 01:35 PM

Allright, everybody get out your "Peter, Paul & Mary Songbook" and sing along:

If I had a haa-mmer,
I'd hammer in the mo-o-rning!
I'd hammer in the evening!
All over this la-and!

Posted by: Enas Yorl on July 26, 2005 02:42 PM

how great it would be if all hammers were beaten into plowshares

Uh, what would you use for the very last one?

Posted by: Jane Fonda's Cock on July 26, 2005 03:14 PM

JFC, you'd have to use some solid, heavy, blunt, non-hammery sort of, um, thing. Howard Dean's head maybe?

Posted by: Enas Yorl on July 26, 2005 05:45 PM

"Does she want us to leave and put Saddam back in power?"

That's just a rhetorical question, right? Of *course* that's what she wants. Saddam, the Sunnis, Zarqawi - they're the Real People, maaan. Talabani and Jaafari and the rest of them? Western stooges. Probably heroin smugglers, too.

/"hey," they're thinking, "it worked last time ..."

Posted by: Knemon on July 26, 2005 10:57 PM

"I don't think these are bad people. Terrorists and terroristy-sympathizers are of course monsters; but terrorist-deniers are just... well, addled."

There's not much difference between a terrorist sympathizer and denier in my book.

Posted by: Redhand on July 27, 2005 12:02 AM

I don't think these are bad people. Terrorists and terroristy-sympathizers are of course monsters; but terrorist-deniers are just... well, addled.

George Orwell said: "Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help out that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, 'he that is not with me is against me.'

Posted by: 72 VIRGINS on July 27, 2005 04:23 PM

the curious silence of my Hollywood colleagues about the assassination (for his art) of their fellow filmmaker Theo Van Gogh by an Islamist psychokiller.

What is curious about it? Liberals are all scared shitless of Moslems and wouldn't touch it w/ Karl Rove's dick. Basically, Liberals are cowards and scared of their own shadows, so they compensate by talking tough about people and things they know won't bite them back, like Christians. But when it comes to Islam their abject cowardice becomes obvious.

And they really do have reason to fear. Islam has made it abundantly clear that they will kill anyone who may be a threat to their domination of the earth. The difference between Liberals and conservatives is that there are many conservatives who continue to speak and write the truth about Islam, while cowardly Liberals continue to hide from it.

Posted by: 72 VIRGINS on July 27, 2005 05:47 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?








Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]
Top Headlines
This is the dumbest AI bullslop I've seen in a while: the CIA can use "quantum magnetometry" to track an individual man's heartbeat from twelve miles away
I wouldn't click on it, it's not interesting, it's just stupid clickslop. I just want to share my annoyance with you.
Oil prices plunge on bizarre realization that Eric Swalwell may actually be straight. A rapey molester, allegedly, but a straight one.
Classic Rock Mystery Click
This is super-obscure and I only barely remember it. Given that, I'll give you the hint that it's by the Red Rocker.
And I guess you think you've got it made
Oh, but then, you never were afraid
Of anything that you've left behind
Oh, but it's alright with me now
'Cause I'll get back up somehow
And with a little luck, yes, I'm bound to win

Now twenty people will tell me it's not obscure, it was huge in their hometown and played at their prom. That's how it usually goes. When I linked Donnie Iris's "Love is Like a Rock," everyone said they knew that one and that his other song (which I didn't know at all) Ah Leah! was huge in their area.
You know we "joke" about the GOPe just "conserving" leftist things?
David French just posted:

Populists ask what conservativism has ever conserved?
Well its about to conserve birthright citizenship!
Posted by: 18-1

I couldn't hate this queen of the cuck-chair more if it paid seven figures and came with a corner office.
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: CBD and Sefton talk birthright citizenship, the 14th Amendment and SCOTUS, no boots in Iran, Artemis II and refocusing NASA, the NBA's hatred of everything non-woke, and more!
In more marketing for Project Hail Mary, scientists say they've found the biosigns indicating life growing on an alien planet. It's not proof, just signatures of chemicals that are produced by biological metabolism, and it could be nothing, but scientists think it's a strong sign that this planet is inhabited by something.
In a paper published in the Astrophysical Journal Letters, a team of scientists announced the detection of dimethyl sulfide (along with a similar detection of dimethyl disulfide) in the atmosphere of an exoplanet called K2-18b. This is actually the second detection of dimethyl sulfide made on this planet, following a tentative detection in 2023.
Tons of chemicals are detected in the atmospheres of celestial objects every day. But dimethyl sulfide is different, because on Earth, it's only produced by living organisms.
"It is a shock to the system," Nikku Madhusudhan, first author on the paper, told the New York Times. "We spent an enormous amount of time just trying to get rid of the signal."

He means they tried to prove the signal was caused by things other than dimethyl sulfide but they could not.
Artemis moon shot a go, scheduled for 6:24 Eastern time tonight
Great marketing arranged by Amazon to promote Project Hail Mary. Okay not really but it does work out that way.
What? Skeleton of the most famous Musketeer, D'Artagnan, possibly discovered in Dutch church closet.
Dumas picked four names of real musketeers out of a history book, D'Artagnan, Athos, Aramis, and Porthos. So there was an actual D'Artagnan, though he made most of the story up. (Or, you know, all of it.)*
Charles de Batz de Castelmore, known as d'Artagnan, the famous musketeer of Kings Louis XIII and Louis XIV, spent his life in the service of the French crown.
The Gascon nobleman inspired Alexandre Dumas's hero in "The Three Musketeers" in the 19th century, a character now known worldwide thanks to the novel and numerous film adaptations.
D'Artagnan was killed during the siege of Maastricht in 1673, and there is a statue honoring the musketeer in the city. His final resting place has remained a mystery ever since.

A lot of Dumas's stories are based on bits of real history. The plot of the >Three Musketeers, about trying to recover lost diamonds from the queen's necklace, was cribbed from the then-almost-contemporaneous Affair of the Queen's Necklace. And the Man in the Iron Mask is based on real accounts of a prisoner forced to wear a mask (though I think it was a velvet mask).
* Oh, I should mention, Dumas says all this, about finding the names in an old book, in the prologue to his novel. But authors lie a lot. They frequently present fictions as based on historic fact. The twist is, he was actually telling the truth here. At least about these four musketeers having actually existed and served under Louis XIV.
Fun fact: You know the beginning of A Fistful of Dollars where the local gunslingers make fun of Clint Eastwood's donkey and Eastwood demands they apologize to the donkey? That's lifted from The Three Musketeers. Rochefort mocks D'Artagnan's old, brokedown farm horse and D'Artagnan is incensed.
A commenter asked which should be read first, The Hobbit of LOTR?
Easy, no question -- read The Hobbit first. It's actually the start of the story and comes first chronologically. It sets up some major characters and major pieces in play in LOTR.
Also, the Hobbit is Beginner-Friendly, which LOTR isn't. The Hobbit really is a delightful book, and a fast read. It's chatty, it's casual, it's exciting, and it's funny. In that dry cheeky British humor way. I love that the narrator is constantly making little asides and commentary, like he's just sitting next to you telling you this story as it occurs to him.
LOTR is a very long story. Fifteen hundred pages or so. The Hobbit is relatively short and very punchy and easy to read. If you don't like The Hobbit, you can skip out on LOTR. If you do like it, you'll be primed to read LOTR.
Oh, I should say: The Hobbit is written as if it's for children, but one of those smart children's stories that are also for adults. Don't worry, there's also real fighting and violence and horror in it, too.
LOTR is written for adults. (It's said that Tolkien wrote both for his children, but LOTR was written 17 years later, when his children were adults.) Some might not like The Hobbit due to its sometimes frivolous tone. Me, I love it. I find it constantly amusing. Both are really good but there is a starkly different tone to both. LOTR is epic, grand, and serious, about a world war, The Hobbit is light and breezy, and about a heist. Though a heist that culminates in a war for the spoils.
The Hobbit Challenge: Read two more chapters. I didn't have much time. Bilbo got the ring.
I noticed a continuity problem. Maybe. Now, as of the time of The Hobbit, it was unknown that this magic ring was in fact a Ring of Power, and it was doubly unknown that it was the Ring of Power, the Master Ring that controlled the others.
But the narrator -- who we will learn in LOTR was none of than Bilbo himself, who wrote the book as "There and Back Again" -- says this about Gollum's ring:
"But who knows how Gollum had come by that present [the Ring], ages ago in the old days when such rings were still at large in the world? Perhaps even the Master who ruled them could not have said."
In another passage, the ring is identified as a "ring of power."
I don't know, I always thought there was a distinction between mere magic rings and the Rings of Power created by Sauron. But this suggests that Bilbo knew this was a ring of power created by Sauron.
Now I don't remember when Bilbo wrote the Hobbit. In the movie, he shows Frodo the book in Rivendell, and I guess he wrote it after he left the Shire. I guess he might have added in the part about the ring being a ring of power created by "the Master" after Gandalf appraised him of his research into the ring.
I never noticed this before. I know Tolkien re-wrote this chapter while he was writing LOTR to make the ring important from the start. And also to make Gollum more sinister and evil, and also to remove the part where Gollum actually offers Bilbo the ring as a "present" -- Bilbo had already found it on his own, but Gollum was wiling to give it away, which obviously is not something the rewritten Gollum would ever do.
But I had no memory of the ring being suggested to be The Ring so early in the tale.
Finish the job, Mr. President!
Melanie Phillips lays out the case for the total destruction of the Iranian government and armed forces. [CBD]
Recent Comments
Methos: "If you were to ask a 20 something "tire" what a "R ..."

Eeyore: "It'd take at least 2 six packs to want to hit that ..."

Skip: "Screaming for Diversity is leaning to Cultural Mar ..."

Auspex: "Dude just can't shut the hell up. Posted by: tcn ..."

Field Marshal Zhukov: "Wagram,NC is hideous ..."

Nova Local: "Christianity (at least in the Catholic form) has f ..."

Bob Chipeska: "The entire E. Jean Carroll is pure comedy to me. T ..."

ChristyBlinkyTheGreat: "The Meagain Markle pose of basically, "LOok at me! ..."

mikeski: "Some NOOD is talking a leak. ..."

Blonde Morticia's Phone: " Hannity is just Conservatism Lite. Low-cal, very ..."

Formerly Virginian[/i] [/b]: ""We make men without chests and expect of them vir ..."

FenelonSpoke: "I think she's looks fine except the botoxed lips a ..."

Bloggers in Arms
Some Humorous Asides
Archives