The Neo Con Blogger(TM)

Entire Louisiana Guard Now Mobilized

2008-08-30T20:07:00.000-05:00

In 05, his Majesty King Nagin would not allow the Guard in Orleans Parish with a round in the chamber. Now that Gov. Jindal has taken control of the situation, let's hope and pray what you see on the left does not happen again...

Lock and load, boys...protect the lives and property of law abiding citizens...round in the chamber...empty the clip...no bag limit!

Pray for all of TX, LA, AL, MS, AL...this hurricane will be nasty.

God Bless The Guard, Police, Fireman, Paramedics, Doctors and Nurses and all who stay and help those in need.

O'Bama-Kennedy '08

2008-02-05T23:30:00.000-05:00

Priceless! This made my day and had to post

A Fantasy Transcript for Mr. Fox - David Limbaugh

2007-03-05T20:03:00.000-05:00

This is a really good piece someone sent me...

No one should have to suffer the indignity of a moral lecture from Sen. John Kerry as did fellow Missourian Sam Fox at hearings before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on his nomination for Belgium ambassador.

Given Kerry's history of self-indulgence and hubris, it should come as no surprise that he would forget his proper role in the hearings -- as a senator considering the nominee's qualifications and fitness -- and turn the proceedings into an embarrassing spectacle about himself.Kerry was not about to forego this opportunity to transfer his unquenched hostility against the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth to Mr. Fox, who, it turns out, had donated $50,000 to that group during the 2004 presidential race.

Though Fox received "glowing tributes" from a number of senators, Kerry didn't even try to mask his anger. He said, "I assume that you believe that the truth in public life is important? Might I ask you what your opinion is with respect to the state of American politics as regards the politics of personal destruction?"

Unfortunately, perhaps because he didn't anticipate that Kerry would stoop so low as to turn his confirmation hearings into a public vendetta and therapy session, Fox conceded that all 527 groups, like the Swiftees, are "mean and destructive" and "smearing lies." But he justified his contribution on the grounds that both sides engage in negative campaigning and it would be political suicide for one side to quit doing it while the other continued.

Seeing an opening, Kerry asked, "So two wrongs make a right? Is that your judgment that you would bring to the ambassadorship?"

I sure hope that Fox, on reflection, doesn't truly believe that all 527s, especially the Swiftees, were issuing lies. Despite the distortions of the overtly biased mainstream media and the "conventional wisdom" decreed by the cultural elite that the Swiftees were completely discredited, the Swiftees were not exposed as liars.

Swiftee leader John O'Neill exhaustively demonstrated that it was Kerry, not the Swiftees, who was lying. Kerry was forced to change his stories a number of times during the ordeal, such as with the tall tale about his little excursion to Cambodia .

I know this is pure fantasy, but I wish Mr. Fox had said something like the following to Mr. Kerry:

"Sen. Kerry, I wholly reject your premise. While two wrongs don't make a right, I deny, sir, that the Swift Boat Veterans did anything wrong. In fact, Senator, I applaud them for their courageous and patriotic service in boldly publicizing facts about your service that were relevant to your fitness to serve as president and commander in chief. I will note, Senator, that despite endless opportunities, you never answered the group's plausible allegations against you, many of which were substantiated by multiple witnesses. While you later said you should have fought back harder, the obvious truth is that you chose not to fight back because you had no credible answers. Indeed, you refused to produce the one set of documents that could vindicate you if their contents conform to your version of history: your medical records. You have repeatedly broken promises to release them. There is only one possible explanation for that, sir, and it isn't in your favor."

"Your supporters speciously attempted to impeach the Swiftee's claims by saying that some of the witnesses weren't in your boat, knowing full well, sir, that they were in other boats in sufficiently close proximity to make them actual eye witnesses to the events they were describing."

"Senator, I cannot in good conscience apologize for having contributed to the Swiftees. I am proud of having done so. But for their exposure of your real record, you might well be commander in chief of our armed forces today. I shudder at that thought, not just because of your record of softness on defense, but your pattern of slandering our troops, yesterday and today, and disrespecting their sacrificial service."

"Sir, I find your misuse of these hearings to lash out at your political opponents, once again, where they are not present to respond, appalling and cowardly. And while you have the legal right to lecture me about the importance of 'truth in public life,' I find your audacity breathtaking, given your obvious lack of moral authority to do so."

"You, sir, are free to vote against my confirmation. And while I would be honored to serve as ambassador, I will not grovel for the position, nor will I consent to your revised version of history. You are free publicly to exorcise your personal demons, even on the public's time, but I will trust that most of your colleagues will base their vote on matters relevant to my fitness to serve. Thank you."

Posted by David Limbaugh at March 1, 2007 06:32 PM - All pages copyright David Limbaugh 1994-2

Great quote by Gen. Robert E. Lee

2007-03-04T23:22:00.000-05:00

submitted by email:

"It appears we have appointed our worst generals to command forces, and our most gifted and brilliant to edit newspapers! In fact, I discovered by reading newspapers that these editor/geniuses plainly saw all my strategic defects from the start, yet failed to inform me until it was too late.

Accordingly, I'm readily willing to yield my command to these obviously superior intellects, and I'll, in turn, do my best for the Cause by writing editorials - after the fact."

Robert E. Lee, 1863

Ronald Reagan's Last Words

2007-02-27T12:07:00.000-05:00

If you watched the memorial service for Ronald Reagan, you probably noticed that Bill and Hillary were both dozing off.

President Ronald Reagan, who never missed a chance for a good one-liner, raised his head out of his casket and said...

"I see the Clintons are finally sleeping together."

A cautious optimism on Iraq - Sen. Jon Kyl

2007-02-26T17:50:00.000-05:00

The Arizona Republic has an interesting article about Iraq. The third point in Sen. Kyl's assessment caught my atention the most - 'I left the Middle East with a growing concern over the pernicious role Iran plays in the region.' We've known this for some time now. Let's let our troops do somehting about it and kill these bastards by the bushell!

Cal Thomas - A Soldier's Letter From Mosul

2007-02-22T10:28:00.000-05:00

By Cal Thomas
With the House debating this week how much "non-binding" grief to lay on President Bush about Iraq , I e-mailed a soldier friend of mine for his impressions of the increasingly amplified protests.

Army Sgt. Daniel Dobson, 22, of Grand Rapids , Mich. , is on his second tour in Iraq . I asked him what he thinks of the growing opposition to the war. Writing from Mosul , he says he appreciates the freedom Americans have to protest, but adds: "The American military has shown a stone-cold professional veneer throughout the seething debate raging over Iraq . Beneath that veneer, however, is a fuming, visceral hatred. We feel as though we have been betrayed by Congress."
Sgt. Dobson believes the military is being hamstrung against an enemy with no reservations or restrictions:

"It is our overwhelming opinion that we have not been allowed to conduct the war to the fullest of our capability; neither do we feel that we should pull out because of a lack of 'results.' War is not a chemistry set with predetermined outcomes or complications. With a great army matched with an equally cunning enemy, we find ourselves in a difficult, but winnable fight. We do not seek results; rather, we seek total and unequivocal victory."

It's been a while since anyone spoke of "victory." Critics ask war supporters to define the word. Sgt. Dobson makes an effort: "That victory is close at hand. With nearly 80 percent of all terrorist and insurgent activity within 50 miles of Baghdad , the sheer thought of not taking out this stronghold is madness. If we can eliminate 80 percent of terrorist activity, the war is nearly won. To throw away a battle of this magnificent importance would be to waste the suffering and the sacrifice of American service members."
What of the effect on the troops from anti-war remarks on the streets and in Congress? Some assert it doesn't hurt troop morale. Sgt. Dobson disagrees:

"The question has been posed to me recently what congressional resolution hurts troop morale the most. No doubt we would be happy to come home tomorrow. But the thought is bittersweet. Most service members would tell you the same thing: there is no honor in retreat . and there is no honor in what the Democrats have proposed. It stings me to the core to think that Americans would rather sell their honor than fight for a cause. Those of us who fight for (peace) know all too well that peace has a very bloody price tag."

To make his point, he tells a story: "An army once marched on the great city of Rome . The emperor, fearing for the future of the Roman Empire , sent the Empire's greatest warrior to the camp of the general to negotiate the cessation of hostilities. After several hours with the general, he asked the warrior just how much he loved Rome . Without thinking, the warrior rose and walked to a fire and stuck his right hand in the flames until it was completely burned away. 'This,' the warrior said 'is how much all Romans love Rome .' The general, struck with fear, said that if all Romans should have the same spirit as this warrior, he could not afford war with Rome , and so retreated back to his homeland.

"I fear that when questioned of their love for country, many Americans would shy from the flames. It breaks our hearts to see our nation, which was more of a Union on Sept. 12, (2001) fall to such petty bickering. No longer are we (one) out of many, but have fallen from one into many. We on the front lines long to see the white-fisted, purple-faced, raging hatred for our enemies that we saw on the morning of the 12th. We long to see America seeking victory as much as we do."

Sgt. Dobson has another wish beyond the desire to come home and a successful ending to the conflict:
"We need to drop the politics and get back to what really matters: Our nation and its future. The question, therefore, lies in what will leave scars on our national spirit; a war in Iraq , or a war between Americans..."
To the recurring question about patriotism and policy, Sgt. Dobson replies: "I would never presume to call anyone's love for country into question. I ask the same of you. Truly our nation's honor is at stake, and we have been given the opportunity to put our hand to the flame. Should we now, in our moment of testing, shy from it? When asked how much we love our country, should we call retreat? No, we stand at a moment of great truth, let us now show our enemies just how much we love America and our way of life. Let us show them our love of country is as great as it ever was."

Stratfor Intelligence Report - Russia's Great Power Strategy

2007-02-15T10:14:00.000-05:00

Russia's Great-Power Strategy - By George Friedman

Most speeches at diplomatic gatherings aren't worth the time it takes to listen to them. On rare occasion, a speech is delivered that needs to be listened to carefully. Russian President Vladimir Putin gave such a speech over the weekend in Munich , at a meeting on international security. The speech did not break new ground; it repeated things that the Russians have been saying for quite a while. But the venue in which it was given and the confidence with which it was asserted signify a new point in Russian history. The Cold War has not returned, but Russia is now officially asserting itself as a great power, and behaving accordingly.

At Munich , Putin launched a systematic attack on the role the United States is playing in the world. He said: "One state, the United States , has overstepped its national borders in every way ... This is nourishing an arms race with the desire of countries to get nuclear weapons." In other words, the United States has gone beyond its legitimate reach and is therefore responsible for attempts by other countries -- an obvious reference to Iran -- to acquire nuclear weapons.

Russia for some time has been in confrontation with the United States over U.S. actions in the former Soviet Union (FSU). What the Russians perceive as an American attempt to create a pro-U.S. regime in Ukraine triggered the confrontation. But now, the issue goes beyond U.S. actions in the FSU. The Russians are arguing that the unipolar world -- meaning that the United States is the only global power and is surrounded by lesser, regional powers -- is itself unacceptable. In other words, the United States sees itself as the solution when it is, actually, the problem.

In his speech, Putin reached out to European states -- particularly Germany , pointing out that it has close, but blunt, relations with Russia . The Central Europeans showed themselves to be extremely wary about Putin's speech, recognizing it for what it was -- a new level of assertiveness from an historical enemy. Some German leaders appeared more understanding, however: Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier made no mention of Putin's speech in his own presentation to the conference, while Ruprecht Polenz, chairman of the Bundestag Foreign Affairs Committee, praised Putin's stance on Iran . He also noted that the U.S. plans to deploy an anti-missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic was cause for concern -- and not only to Russia .

Putin now clearly wants to escalate the confrontations with the United States and likely wants to build a coalition to limit American power. The gross imbalance of global power in the current system makes such coalition-building inevitable -- and it makes sense that the Russians should be taking the lead. The Europeans are risk-averse, and the Chinese do not have much at risk in their dealings with the United States at the moment. The Russians, however, have everything at risk. The United States is intruding in the FSU, and an ideological success for the Americans in Ukraine would leave the Russians permanently on the defensive.

The Russians need allies but are not likely to find them among other great-power states. Fortunately for Moscow , the U.S. obsession with Iraq creates alternative opportunities. First, the focus on Iraq prevents the Americans from countering Russia elsewhere. Second, it gives the Russians serious leverage against the United States -- for example, by shipping weapons to key players in the region. Finally, there are Middle Eastern states that seek great-power patronage. It is therefore no accident that Putin's next stop, following the Munich conference, was in Saudi Arabia . Having stabilized the situation in the former Soviet region, the Russians now are constructing their follow-on strategy, and that concerns the Middle East .

The Russian Interests - The Middle East is the pressure point to which the United States is most sensitive. Its military commitment in Iraq , the confrontation with Iran , the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and oil in the Arabian Peninsula create a situation such that pain in the region affects the United States intensely. Therefore, it makes sense for the Russians to use all available means of pressure in the Middle East in efforts to control U.S. behavior elsewhere, particularly in the former Soviet Union .

Like the Americans, the Russians also have direct interests in the Middle East . Energy is a primary one: Russia is not only a major exporter of energy supplies, it is currently the world's top oil producer. The Russians have a need to maintain robust energy prices, and working with the Iranians and Saudis in some way to achieve this is directly in line with Moscow 's interest. To be more specific, the Russians do not want the Saudis increasing oil production.

There are strategic interests in the Middle East as well. For example, the Russians are still bogged down in Chechnya . It is Moscow 's belief that if Chechnya were to secede from the Russian Federation , a precedent would be set that could lead to the dissolution of the Federation. Moscow will not allow this. The Russians consistently have claimed that the Chechen rebellion has been funded by "Wahhabis," by which they mean Saudis. Reaching an accommodation with the Saudis, therefore, would have not only economic, but also strategic, implications for the Russians.

On a broader level, the Russians retain important interests in the Caucasus and in Central Asia . In both cases, their needs intersect with forces originating in the Muslim world and trace, to some extent, back to the Middle East . If the Russian strategy is to reassert a sphere of influence in the former Soviet region, it follows that these regions must be secured. That, in turn, inevitably involves the Russians in the Middle East .

Therefore, even if Russia is not in a position to pursue some of the strategic goals that date back to the Soviet era and before -- such as control of the Bosporus and projection of naval power into the Mediterranean -- it nevertheless has a basic, ongoing interest in the region. Russia has a need both to limit American power and to achieve direct goals of its own. So it makes perfect sense for Putin to leave Munich and embark on a tour of Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf countries.

The Complexities - But the Russians also have a problem. The strategic interests of Middle Eastern states diverge, to say the least. The two main Islamic powers between the Levant and the Hindu Kush are Saudi Arabia and Iran . The Russians have things they want from each, but the Saudis and Iranians have dramatically different interests. Saudi Arabia -- an Arab and primarily Sunni kingdom -- is rich but militarily weak. The government's reliance on outside help for national defense generates intense opposition within the kingdom. Desert Storm, which established a basing arrangement for Western troops within Saudi Arabia , was one of the driving forces behind the creation of al Qaeda. Iran -- a predominantly Persian and Shiite power -- is not nearly as rich as Saudi Arabia but militarily much more powerful. Iran seeks to become the dominant power in the Persian Gulf -- out of both its need to defend itself against aggression, and for controlling and exploiting the oil wealth of the region.

Putting the split between Sunni and Shiite aside for the moment, there is tremendous geopolitical asymmetry between Saudi Arabia and Iran . Saudi Arabia wants to limit Iranian power, while keeping its own dependence on foreign powers at a minimum. That means that, though keeping energy prices high might make financial sense for the kingdom, the fact that high energy prices also strengthen the Iranians actually can be a more important consideration, depending on circumstances. There is some evidence that recent declines in oil prices are linked to decisions in Riyadh that are aimed at increasing production, reducing prices and hurting the Iranians.

This creates a problem for Russia . While Moscow has substantial room for maneuver, the fact is that lowered oil prices impact energy prices overall, and therefore hurt the Russians. The Saudis, moreover, need the Iranians blocked -- but without going so far as to permit foreign troops to be based in Saudi Arabia itself. In other words, they want to see the United States remain in Iraq , since the Americans serve as the perfect shield against the Iranians so long as they remain there. Putin's criticisms of the United States , as delivered in Munich , would have been applauded by Saudi Arabia prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq . But in 2007, the results of that invasion are exactly what the Saudis feared -- a collapsed Iraq and a relatively powerful Iran . The Saudis now need the Americans to stay put in the region.

The interests of Russia and Iran align more closely, but there are points of divergence there as well. Both benefit from having the United States tied up, militarily and politically, in wars, but Tehran would be delighted to see a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq that leaves a power vacuum for Iran to fill. The Russians would rather not see this outcome. First, they are quite happy to have the United States bogged down in Iraq and would prefer that to having the U.S. military freed for operations elsewhere. Second, they are interested in a relationship with Iran but are not eager to drive the United States and Saudi Arabia into closer relations. Third, the Russians do not want to see Iran become the dominant power in the region. They want to use Iran , but within certain manageable limits.

Russia has been supplying Iran with weapons. Of particular significance is the supply of surface-to-air missiles that would raise the cost of U.S. air operations against Iran . It is not clear whether the advanced S300PMU surface-to-air missile has yet been delivered, although there has been some discussion of this lately. If it were delivered, this would present significant challenges for U.S. air operation over Iran . The Russians would find this particularly advantageous, as the Iranians would absorb U.S. attentions and, as in Vietnam , the Russians would benefit from extended, fruitless commitments of U.S. military forces in regions not vital to Russia .

Meanwhile, there are energy matters: The Russians, as we have said, are interested in working with Iran to manage world oil prices. But at the same time, they would not be averse to a U.S. attack that takes Iran 's oil off the market, spikes prices and enriches Russia .

Finally, it must be remembered that behind this complex relationship with Iran , there historically has been animosity and rivalry between the two countries. The Caucasus has been their battleground. For the moment, with the collapse of the Soviet Union , there is a buffer there, but it is a buffer in which Russians and Iranians are already dueling. So long as both states are relatively weak, the buffer will maintain itself. But as they get stronger, the Caucasus will become a battleground again. When Russian and Iranian territories border each other, the two powers are rarely at peace. Indeed, Iran frequently needs outside help to contain the Russians.

A Complicated Strategy - In sum, the Russian position in the Middle East is at least as complex as the American one. Or perhaps even more so, since the Americans can leave and the Russians always will live on the doorstep of the Middle East . Historically, once the Russians start fishing in Middle Eastern waters, they find themselves in a greater trap than the Americans. The opening moves are easy. The duel between Saudi Arabia and Iran seems manageable. But as time goes on, Putin's Soviet predecessors learned, the Middle East is a graveyard of ambitions -- and not just American ambitions.Russia wants to contain U.S. power, and manipulating the situation in the Middle East certainly will cause the Americans substantial pain. But whatever short-term advantages the Russians may be able to find and exploit in the region, there is an order of complexity in Putin's maneuver that might transcend any advantage they gain from boxing the Americans in. In returning to "great power" status, Russia is using an obvious opening gambit. But being obvious does not make it optimal.

Contact UsAnalysis Comments - analysis@stratfor.comCustomer Service, Access, Account Issues - service@stratfor.com
Was this forwarded to you? Sign up to start receiving your own copy – it’s always thought-provoking, insightful and free.
Go to https://www.stratfor.com/subscriptions/free-weekly-intelligence-reports.php to register
Stratfor Premium: Full-Access, Complete Member Benefits
Has price kept you away? Try the flexibility of our monthly and quarterly subscription packages - at lower, more affordable rates -- available only through this special offer.
If recent events have caught you by surprise or the headlines find you searching for more understanding, then you are ready for Stratfor Premium, our signature intelligence service that will add exponentially to your perspective of how global events are shaping the future.
Gain access to the kind of intelligence tools used by large corporate clients at monthly or quarterly rates you can afford and with the flexibility you need.
Click here to find out more now!
Distribution and Reprints
This report may be distributed or republished with attribution to Strategic Forecasting, Inc. at www.stratfor.com. For media requests, partnership opportunities, or commercial distribution or republication, please contact pr@stratfor.com.
Newsletter Subscription
To unsubscribe from receiving this free intelligence report, please click here.

Men Ignoring Wives - Happy Valentines Day

2007-02-14T17:11:00.000-05:00

Look At This. Interesting.

I did not know that ignoring my wife was genetic. Now that this is known, it can be named and I can get some help from the government for treatment; especially if a Democrat wins in '08 and there is universal healthcare.

According to this article, this affliction is subconscious. So what is the name of this affliction? 'Reactance' is the clinical name. But that is not good enough. And I guess there should be a spectrum of reactance based on how much of a shrew you are married to.

Levels of Reactance on my scale would include identifiable behaviors as follows:

Naggus Interruptus: Pertaining to the cognitions of a wife that disturbs you while watching any sporting event, especially if your team is about to score with less than five seconds left in the game.

Bitchus Comorbidity: The coexistence of two or more personalities in a wife that manifest themselves in the same bitching tirade.

Parasitic Psychobabalry - NOS (Not Otherwise Specified): Having to do with a parasite, as in a parasitic infection; or acting like a parasite by taking nourishment from another parasitic source like Oprah, Dr. Phil, or Cosmopolitan wherein the affected person drones on and on about what an idiot you are, why you don't love her, and why your mother should die in the most expedient manner available with no traces or connection to your wife as the perp.

On a spectrum, with 1 being the lowest form of reactance to 10 being the highest end of the spectrum, then the scale could look something like this:

Happy Valentine's Day - Give Me The Remote - Your Flowers And Russel Stover's Gift Pack Are At The Front Door!

Jewish Group Blasts Mitt Romney for Choice to Hold Campaign Announcement at Henry Ford

2007-02-13T23:29:00.000-05:00

Click on the above link, This is a great post from a great site.

I am a massive supporter of Israel. But what is it with the Jewish left in this nation? As I posted on the Yid With A Lid site: 'OK - look, Henry Ford hated everyone, not just Jews. He hated Catholics, Socialists, Communists, most Protestants, Congressman, newspaper editors and reporters. He hated everyone! So to say that having the kick-off of a Presidential Campaign at the home of a dead person is like saying Atlanta is a racist city since there used to be slave owners in the South. I am as Pro-Israel, anti-defamation'ist as anyone else. When will this oversensitivty stop? Get over it. Romney is kicking off his run using a symbol of America's greatness. Get over it! Oy!

Air Force Three - Nancy Pelosi's New Ride!

2007-02-13T16:01:00.000-05:00

ABC, Apple-Polisher for Autocrats

2007-02-13T15:50:00.000-05:00

ABC, Apple-Polisher for Autocrats
by L. Brent Bozell IIIFebruary 7, 2007 (I love reading Brent Bozell - he has been a watchdog over the MSMfor the last twenty-five years. This is a great article)

Never try to say ABC anchor Diane Sawyer hasn’t been tough on oppressors. In one interview in 1998, she stared one in the face and said, “You’ve been compared to Saddam Hussein. Nero. To Torquemada, who was head of the Inquisition.”

Oh, forgive me. That wasn’t a dictator she was questioning. It was Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel investigating Bill Clinton’s lying under oath. This was a common practice for ABC at the time. Their website had an infamous instant poll asking if there was an “Ig-Nobel” prize, who should win it? The choices were Saddam, Slobodan Milosevic, Osama bin Laden and....Linda Tripp.

So how do ABC news anchors like Sawyer perform when they land “exclusive” interviews with actual dictators? The rings of international thugs are kissed for the privilege. Their obvious lack of respect for the concept of democracy is politely skimmed over. The real threat they pose to America is downplayed – or ignored.

Last fall, Diane Sawyer traveled to North Korea , and interviewed a general in the world’s harshest communist tyranny. She was an incredibly passive transmission belt, relating back to her American audience that the general insisted President Bush should be blamed for any nuclear weapons testing in North Korea , and added that "the General said to us, he does want peace. And he also said, again, reiterated, North Korea will not be the first to use a nuclear weapon." From there, Sawyer produced a very strange piece about regimented, yet refreshing North Korean school children, “a world away from the unruly individualism of any American school.” Proclaimed a student, no doubt surrounded by minders watching her every word: “We are the happiest children in the world!”

Last week ABC and Sawyer were at it again. Another continent, another ruthless anti-American dictator, but the same results. This time, Sawyer flew to Syria , following in the footsteps of Sen. John Kerry, who warmly announced a few weeks back that dictator Bashar Assad is ready to work with the United States . That was exactly Sawyer’s message, too, on the February 5 “Good Morning America .” Sawyer diplomatically awarded Assad the title of “President,” although no one elected him there. Dictatorship was handed down as the family business, but she called him “Your Excellency.”

She lamely suggested to Assad in the first day’s interview that “Americans would say they voted” in Iraq , that there’s a democracy. Assad shot back, “What is the benefit of democracy if you’re dead?” Sawyer didn’t challenge him, about say, his father Hafez Assad’s massacre at Hama of more than 10,000 people. She moved on instead to discuss gently how a peace process with America would work.

But the truly maddening part was Sawyer trying to take this dictator and turn him into a sympathetic human being. “You like video games?...Do you have an Ipod?” Obviously, she was slavishly toeing a PR line some Syrian functionary spoon-fed her. “You’re a country music fan. Faith Hill? Shania Twain?” Assad laughed and said, “Is it considered an ad?” Sawyer played along: “Yes, that’s true. They get free advertising.” Yippee!
The problem here is the free advertising ABC is handing the dictator of Syria . Can we imagine that if Hitler were alive and still ruling Germany with an iron fist, Sawyer would be asking him about his Ipod, too?
On the second day, February 6, Sawyer asked the more serious questions, about political prisoners in Syria , about Syria ’s role in assassinating Lebanese political leaders, its support for the terrorist groups Hezbollah and Hamas. But Sawyer had an odd tic throughout all of this, and it’s one that drives this writer mad. It was always “Americans say” or “human rights groups say” that Syria is unfree and supports terror, etc. Can’t the glorious fact-checkers at ABC News determine for themselves if Syria is oppressive? Or is an obsequious tone before dictators more important than giving American viewers the impression you have a firm grasp on hard facts?

Then, once again, after a few of those questions about democracy and terror, Sawyer went back to humanizing the Assads, not just the dictator, but the “elegant, athletic” dictator’s wife, Asma, the “31-year-old former career girl” who once lived in New York. What followed was a pathetic trail of ooze about the “amazing” work this woman is doing for women’s and children’s rights – in the middle of this dictatorship. We’re told the Assads “famously live in a modest home” and drive the kids to school, and bike together.

ABC famously forbids its reporters to wear flag pins, lest they be seen as tools of the U.S. government. But once again, in their frantic desperation to be “independent” of America , they look instead like enthusiastic apple-polishing tools for every dictatorial enemy America faces in the world.

Britney Spears vs. The Terrorists

2007-02-13T15:44:00.000-05:00

By Robert R. ReillyFriday, February 9, 2007; A19

In the spring of 2003, across a field of rubble in Baghdad , a young Iraqi journalist accosted me and demanded: "Why did you stop broadcasting substance and substitute music?" The year before the Broadcasting Board of Governors, the government entity in charge of radio broadcasting, had shut down the Voice of America's Arabic service, and it ended most of its Farsi service in 2003. Voice of America had been broadcasting features, discussions of issues and editorials reflecting U.S. policies. But now it filled 50 minutes of each hour on Arabic-language Radio Sawa and most of the time on Persian-language Radio Farda with Eminem, J. Lo and Britney Spears.

This change in format provoked other angry questions: Are Americans playing music because they are afraid to tell the truth? Do they not have a truth to tell? Or do they not consider us worth telling the truth to?
We did not fight communism with pop music. In fact, during the Cold War, America used its government media institutions to broadcast its ideas and beliefs. So why are we not refashioning those successful broadcast strategies and trying to spread our ideas in the Muslim world, the breeding ground of much of the world's terrorist threats?

Members of the Broadcasting Board of Governors (B BG ) have shared their answer: Radio Sawa's progenitor, media mogul Norman Pattiz, was still serving his Clinton-appointed term in 2002 when he told the New Yorker that "it was MTV that brought down the Berlin Wall." (Not Ronald Reagan, Lech Walesa or Vaclav Havel, of course.) President Bush's appointees did not improve the board's outlook. In October 2002, Ken Tomlinson, then the board's new chairman, approvingly quoted his son as saying Spears's music "represents the sounds of freedom." It seems that the board transformed the "war of ideas" into the battle of the bands.

So, is MTV winning the "war of ideas"? After years of the United States broadcasting Britney Spears to the Levant , the average radical mullah has not exactly succumbed to apoplexy or come to love democracy. A State Department inspector general's draft report on Radio Sawa (the final report was never issued) found that"it is difficult to ascertain Radio Sawa's impact in countering anti-American views and the biased state-run media of the Arab world." Or, as one expert panel assembled to assess its value concluded, "Radio Sawa failed to present America to its audience."

The B BG has achieved part of its objective in gaining large youth audiences in some areas of the Middle East, such as in Amman , Jordan , where it has an FM transmitter. But as the Jordanian journalist Jamil Nimri told me: "Radio Sawa is fun, but it's irrelevant." We do not teach civics to American teenagers by asking them to listen to pop music, so why should we expect Arabs and Persians to learn about America or democracy this way? The condescension implicit in this nearly all-music format is not lost on the audience that we should wish to influence the most -- those who think.

Some, of course, suspect that the United States is consciously attempting to subvert the morals of Arab youth. Undersecretary of State Karen Hughes told columnist Cal Thomas in December that our "view of freedom is sometimes seen as licentiousness. . . . And that is only exacerbated by the movies and the television and some of the music and the lyrics that they see exported from America ." Especially, Hughes might have added, since the B BG , on which she sits as an ex officio member, promotes this very image.
Becoming a caricature of ourselves is bad policy and bad public diplomacy. The job of U.S. international broadcasting is to present, before we are attacked, what much of the world saw only after Sept. 11 -- the sacrifice, bravery and piety of the American people -- as part of a complete picture. By presenting this aspect of our culture, we might even prevent the miscalculations of those who believe they should attack the United States or can do so with impunity because we are a weak, irreligious, morally corrupt country.

We need radio broadcasting in the "war of ideas," but it has to deal in ideas to be effective. The "MTV message" is something that commercial broadcasting can do and would do better than government-funded radio. Government broadcasting is needed when the United States must communicate a message to a key audience that that audience otherwise would not hear.

Music may have a role in this kind of broadcast mission, but only if it is part of a larger, idea-based strategy. Where are the ideas that will help us win this war, and why are they not being deployed by all available means to the places that most need to hear them? Isn't it time to change our tune?

The writer was the 25th director of the Voice of America and was senior adviser to the Iraqi Ministry of Information during Operation Iraqi Freedom.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020801679_pf.html

© 2007 The Washington Post Company

Congress Short on Military Experience

2007-02-13T15:15:00.000-05:00

f
Congress Short on Military Experience
Richmond Times - Dispatch February 06, 2007

As Congress debates the war in Iraq , the Senate and House are short on military experience. Only 130 of the 535 senators and representatives in the recently seated 110th Congress served on active duty or in the reserves of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines or Coast Guard.

It's the lowest number since World War II, when 196 veterans served on the Hill in 1945. The ranks of veterans in the House peaked at 317 in 1973. The Senate had 78 in 1977.

Since then, the roll call of veterans has become much shorter. Public discontent over the Vietnam War, plus elimination of the draft, meant fewer people entered the armed forces.
Since 9/11, Congress has been dealing with the gamut of military issues -- from funding equipment and more troops to boosting pay and benefits.

Organizations representing veterans and military personnel said they spend more time lobbying nonveterans -- both politicians and staff members -- than those who served. "The impact to us is we have to educate them on veterans' issues," said David Greineder, deputy national legislative director for AMVETS.

The lack of veterans in Congress has resulted in an insensitivity to the burdens placed on troops and their families by the war and frequent deployments, said Steve Strobridge, director of government relations for Military Officers Association of America.

Anna Nicole Smith Is Dead

2007-02-08T23:34:00.000-05:00

...and I don't care. Well, that is a bit harsh. But from what I know about this lady, which is not much, her life after being 'discovered' has been a train wreck. So, it seemed to me it was a matter of when this would happen and not why. The real tragedy here is that this lady's child will not have a mother, even a bad one. And with the money she was still trying to wrangle from her marriage to Moses, it seems this poor child might grow-up penniless.

ANS is a product of the minute-by-minute media that latches on to someone or some topic and won't let it go. Everything about ANS' life was made public, by her own choice and also by a media that wrote and pictrued everything about her life.

It's a sad end to a sad life, it seems. There will be another ANS to take the place of this beautiful and tragic figure the media and many in this nation could not get enough of. I only hope that the next ANS does not end like this.

Oh How The Brits Love Our Liberals

2007-02-08T10:07:00.000-05:00

Take a look at how the folks at the BBC view the upcoming election. Matt Frei, calling Her Thighness Hillary and Obama 'Superstars', prattles with a reverence once reserved for Royalty and religious icons. It's amazing to me how the left in England love the left over here. I guess that's so since the politics of Britain at this point in history has nothing to offer its own people but more taxes, more government, and a continued slide towards state-sanctioned cultural deviancy in the name of social progress.

The BBC article ends with this, 'The Windy City may have lost the Super Bowl but it is lucky to have two of the most intriguing candidates in the most open presidential election since 1928.'

It's too much hope to think that there is any way Frei would say the same of the two most intriguing conservative candidates, Rudy and Newt. I guess Atlanta and New York City just aren't on the list of cities the BBC would allow him to visit.

Bollocks

Poitical Jihad In The US

2007-02-07T07:38:00.000-05:00

Article By Cal Thomas:

In the race to the bottom for votes to win office, or to preserve themselves in office, it would be difficult to out-run Republicans as they pander to the Hispanic vote by refusing to control our southern border against an invasion by millions of illegal aliens. Democrats are trying and they may soon pass Republicans in their cynical pursuit of political power.

At the Democrats' "winter meeting" (they used to call it a "retreat," before that word conjured up negative implications about the war), a clergyman was asked to deliver the invocation. He was Husham Al-Husainy of the Karbalaa Islamic Education Center, a Shi'ite mosque in Dearborn , Mich.

According to a transcript published on the Website HotAir.com, Al-Husainy offered a prayer with anti-American and anti-Israel undertones: "We thank you G-d, to send us your messages through our father Abraham and Moses and Jesus and Mohammed. Through you, G-d, we unite. So guide us to the right path. The path of the people you bless, not the path of the people you doom. Help us G-d to liberate and fill this earth with justice and peace and love and equality. And help us to stop the war and violence, and oppression and occupation…"

To the untrained ear and uninformed mind, the first part sounds kind of ecumenical, a type of universalism and religious correctness, in which everybody's biblical or Koranic figures get equal billing, so as not to offend. But Muslims see all of these religious leaders as Muslim prophets. Their view is that Abraham, Moses and Jesus taught Islam and that the Jews and Christians perverted the Islamic faith and, according to some, deserve death for doing so.

Al-Husainy was engaging in something more dangerous than prayer. He proclaimed religious superiority and triumphalism. Surely Democrats do not subscribe to his not-so-subtle religious doublespeak, which places the United States and Israel among the people G-d "dooms." Neither do most Democrats believe that all of Israel is occupied and that "oppression and occupation" applies to the Jews who live there and must be evicted. So why invite a clergyman who leads them in such a prayer? It isn't that his background is unknown.

As blogger Debbie Schlussel has written, Al-Husainy led "almost daily protests" last summer "of thousands of Hezbollah supporters on the streets of Dearborn and Detroit , swarming with swastikas and anti-Semitic, anti-American signs. Later, I watched him … at an anti-Semitic rally of 3,000 Hezbollah supporters at Dearborn 's Bint Jebail Cultural Center . He was among several who delivered hate-filled, anti-American rhetoric. I watched him cheer others on when they called for the hastened destruction of the Jews and when they said Americans are 'diseased.'"

On the Website "Jihad Watch" (a good place to keep up with what the Islamofascists are planning for us), Robert Spencer writes, "…the West is facing a concerted effort by Islamic jihadists, the motives and goals of whom are largely ignored by the Western media, to destroy the West and bring it forcibly into the Islamic world — and to commit violence to that end even while their overall goal remains out of reach."

A clergyman who advocated white supremacy and the inferiority of all other faiths would never have been invited to offer the invocation at a DNC gathering. Yet Democrats got the equivalent of such a person in Al-Husainy.
Democrats have been trying to get back in the religion game since Republicans cornered most of the Evangelical Christian vote in the last several election cycles, but choosing Husham Al-Husainy as their instrument to put them in closer touch — if not with G-d, than with Muslim voters — is more outrageous and shameful than Sen. Joseph Biden's remarks about Barack Obama, and far more dangerous.

The Muslim vote went largely to Democrats in last year's election. In Virginia , Democrat James Webb received 92 percent of the Muslim vote, compared to Republican George Allen's 8 percent, according to the Muslim American Society and the Virginia Muslim Political Action Committee. Was inviting Al-Husainy to pray for the destruction of America and Israel payback to the Muslim community? If so, the price is too high and the potential consequences are too great.

Has politics come to this, that some politicians would sell out their own and other free countries for a voting bloc that contains elements committed to our destruction (Democrats), or pander to illegal immigrants who break our laws and then get Social Security checks (Republicans)? Have politicians no sham

Iran's Rocket's Red Glare!

2007-02-06T14:40:00.000-05:00

Click Here!

For all those detractors of our policy in the Mid East, how did you feel after reading that article? Safe, happy, reassured that Iran's intentions for nuclear power are peaceful?

Morons. Do any of the anti-Bush Mid East policy chuckle-heads think Iran is going to send a satellite into space with a North Korean missile? If you answer yes, then pack your bags and head to Canada.

If Iran launches an ICBM into space, you can bet your a**, your cowboy boots and your house cat that the trajectory is Latitude: 32° 4' 0 N, Longitude: 34° 46' 0 E.

Find a map and look up those coordinates.

Israeli Official: Foreign Sources Arming Hezbollah, Hamas at Alarming Rate

2007-02-06T14:19:00.000-05:00

What will the Isralei response be this time? I hope it is not the same response as this past summer. I hope this time the IDF moves faster and more quickly up to the border with Syria to cut-off any retreat or re-supply of the Hezzbollocks.

The 'disproportiniate' response this time should be the utter destruction of any standing building in Lebanon all the way up to Syria and into Syria. The IDF shold create a path of destruction - a killing swath from Gaza to the Turkish border.

So instead of buying food for their people, Hezbollah is buying rockets and guns. Read. 'There is a recorded 150 percent increase in the number of terror groups being guided by Hizbullah over the course of the first half of 2006.'

This will lead to another war. Lebannon is posied for Civil War. And that conflict wil spill into Israel. I hope the IDF and the Israeli's have the guts to strike first. Take out where they know Hezbollah is now, not after another rocket falls into another Israeli city.

Za, Za, Za (Go! Go! Go!) One more good link on Israel.

Run, Rudy, Run

2007-02-06T12:15:00.000-05:00

It's about time. I would vote for Guliani today. I would enter the country illegally, obtain another driver's license and vote for Rudy as many times as possible. There is no other Republican candidate that is worth a darn that is out there. None of them have any heart or leadership.

Rudy has it all...

I can't wait for the day when he gets in front of the press corp and tells it to go to hell...

I can't wait for a debate with any Democrat and Rudy says, 'Imanaged NYC, what have you ever done?'

And the debate about all the social issues crap can hang - abortion, gays, blah, blah, blah...let the Merovingian Do Nothings in Congress prattle away at tax payers expesne.

The only question that anyone needs to ask is: Who is going to make the nation safest? It ain't Her Thighness Hillary, Obama, or the rest of the Dems, nor is it McCain or any of the other Republicans.

Run, Rudy, Run. I'll vote for you as many times as it takes. And since I live in FL, I am collecting ballots as I type!

I Got A 40 - How Conservative - Liberal Are You?

2007-02-05T13:21:00.000-05:00

Political Quiz You all have probably seen this before. I took this quiz and I got a 40! Maybe I should run for office.

CBS - Completely Boring Superbowl

2007-02-05T11:57:00.000-05:00

A few months ago, I did a bit on the sport of Curling - how it's boring, very Canadian (hence, boring) and why it's a metaphor what is wrong with Olympic sports coverage. After watching the Super Bowl last night, I'd vote to watch Curling every day of the week and twice on Super Bowl Sunday.

Except for Colts fans and their new band-wagoneers, did anyone else fall asleep in the rain like I did? I can't blame CBS for the quality of the game, but I can blame CBS for its coverage. First, Jim Nantz - God love him! He is a great commentator for sports like golf, golf, golf and golf. Hey Jimmy, this is not Augusta National and Tiger is not trying to decide if a 7 iron or an 8 iron is going to carry him over the left fairway bunker before he makes his approach shot on the 9th hole. Professional football is about violence, coaching, team stuff...all the stuff that golf is not. I was having Madden withdrawl, seriously. So we cooked a turkey and I was waving the turkey legs at the screen and drawing yellow circles on the tv for every play. If you need a little Madden, click here. Next, Prince! There may not have been a wardrobe malfunction, but there was no mystery to what that dwarf was doing with his guitar behind the curtain...and anyone who says differently is in denial.

The commercials were a snore-fest too, except the Blockbuster hamsters using the mouse to order movies - pretty funny. Coke and some of the other sycophant dribblers lathered up the black history month thing which leads me to this question: why is it important that a black coach be in the Super Bowl? If the representation of ethnicity is the issue, and since 75% of the players on the field this day were black, why is race an issue for the head coaching spot? Mark this sport/group off the list and move on. Hockey and Curling - now there are two sports where the NAACP should spend time advancing the participation of Afro-Americans since we know that ice sports routinely and by design shut-out blacks from inclusion. Now that the glass ceiling has been pierced in the NFL, what's the next brass ring - assistant coaches? Hell, we could go down the ranks of all coaching positions until one day there is a dyslexic, ADA, 1/2 Puert0 Rican-1/2 Jap who coached and won a Super Bowl. See how stupid this whole 'let's be special by being different crap is?

I could care less that the coach who won last night is black. I only care that he is legal to work in the US.

And since the Saints were not in the SB, did it really matter?

Dick Morris - Cut The Funds To Iran

2007-02-02T14:15:00.000-05:00

Look at what Dick Morris thinks is one way to go after Iran:

The Iranian regime stands at the center of global terrorism and its nuclear ambitions must send a chill down our collective spine.

Bush is increasingly standing up to Iran with almost daily warnings and the deployment of a second carrier task force nearby. But the president's focus has been on Iranian involvement in Iraq and on its policy of shipping weapons, agents, provocateurs and possibly combatants into the war zone to harass and kill Americans. This emphasis is understandable given the dangers that face our troops in Iraq. Anything Bush can do to lessen the threats they face must be done.

Bush should continue and accelerate his efforts to destroy Iran's economy by cutting off investments to companies that invest there. Frank Gaffney's disinvestterrror.org campaign says that 87 state-administered pension funds in the United States have invested $188 billion in one of 500 publicly traded companies that "partner with terrorist-sponsoring states."
These 500 companies among them "have $73 billion invested in Iran, Syria, Libya, and North Korea."

Morris is exacly right. Iran should have been a bigger part of the 'de-financing' the GWOT. Some US companies are doing it:

Among these companies are: Alcatal SA, BNP Paribas, Hyundai, Linden Petroleum, Oil and Natural Gas Corp, Siemens AG, Statoil ASA, Stolt Nielsen, Technip Coflexip, and Total SA. UBS, which was once on the list, has divested itself of all such investments.

More is needed. Any US company that does business with Iran and NK should be fined a million a day until it is completely divested of any support of Iran.

January 30, 1933

2007-01-30T20:31:00.000-05:00

Anyone remember these two dung beetles?

Today, in 1933, Schikelgrubber became Chancellor of Germany. Twelve years into the Thousand Year Reich and some 80 million dead later, the world was rid of what Patton called, 'a paper hanging son of a bitch.'

Why did it take so long for this boil to be lanced? Because Europe did nothing. Britain, France, and even the Germans themselves did nothing to stop him. Numerous plots were hatched. Numerous plots failed, especially the one that Claus von Stauffenberg put in action in 1944 which was the closest to killing him.

There are men like Hitler that should not be allowed to live. Saddam Hussein was one of them. The Bush Administration should be given a special place in history for taking out this megalomaniac sob. The world is better off without SH. The US had the guts and resolve to allow the Iranian people to exact the justice justified to rid that country and the world of him. If the Europeans had the guts and resolve to do the same thing soon after 1933, how many people would still be alive today?

MLK, Tarleton State, and the ACLU

2007-01-30T17:11:00.000-05:00

Crush Liberalism and FNC did a good job breaking this down.

The students at Tarleton State University should be ashamed of themselves for what they did off-campus at a mock MLK celebration party. From what I read and saw, it's disgusting.

But here's the kicker...where is the ACLU in defending the free speech rights of these students to be idiots? Every time there is a speech issue which advances the ACLU agenda of anything anti-Bush, anti-US, etc., the ACLU is out banging its gong and suing anyone it can. But the silence of the ACLU in this case is deafening.

The ACLU will do nothing since it sees any defamatory speech against minorities as hate speech while it defends groups like NAMBLA and all of its other preferenced groups.

Watch and listen...these students will be crucified and the ACLU will do nothing. I hope that the students at least contact their local ACLU chapter for help if and when the PC Cops discipline, expel and ruin these kid's lives.

Fred Barnes Is Right On!

2007-01-30T14:10:00.000-05:00

Not This Time Don't give up when victory is at hand. by Fred Barnes 02/05/2007, Volume 012, Issue 20

No one knows the tragic story of America in Vietnam better than Jim Webb, first as a Marine, then as a writer. So the newly elected Democratic senator from Virginia--a fierce opponent of the war in Iraq --wants to keep Vietnam out of the debate over Iraq . "As much as possible, we need to keep this debate away from Vietnam ," Webb said last week. Iraq "is not a parallel situation." But Webb feared that many who supported the Vietnam war, and watched America abandon South Vietnam as it grew close to victory over the Communist forces of North Vietnam , might see similarities.

Indeed, they might, for certain parallels between Iraq and Vietnam are uncanny. A new general, David Petraeus, is taking over in Iraq with a credible new strategy, counterinsurgency. Four decades ago, General Creighton Abrams became the American commander in Vietnam , also with a new strategy. It called for taking and holding the villages and hamlets of South Vietnam . In a word, it was counterinsurgency, and it worked. Now in Iraq , Petraeus has as good a chance of success, starting with the pacification of Baghdad , as Abrams had. And the painful lesson of Vietnam applies in Iraq : Don't give up when victory is at hand.

Those in Congress who advocate retreat in Iraq refuse to acknowledge this lesson. And they may have their way, whatever Petraeus accomplishes. With their calls for troop withdrawals and fund cutoffs and their antiwar resolutions, they have put America on a slippery slope in Iraq . And we know where it leads: to defeat while victory remains quite possible. This happened in six descending steps in Vietnam, and today's coalition in Congress of antiwar Democrats and vacillating Republicans has started pushing us down that dangerous slope.

The first step is, when the war goes poorly, public support falls and politicians dramatically increase their criticism. In Vietnam , this occurred after the Tet offensive in 1968. In Iraq , it occurred gradually at first, then rapidly once violence and chaos in Baghdad flared over the last year.

Step two consists of growing criticism of the foreign government that America is supporting. In Vietnam , the target was the government of President Thieu. In Iraq , it's the elected government of Prime Minister Maliki. Senator Hillary Clinton, for instance, insists Maliki has failed to seek reconciliation between Shia and Sunnis--that is, a political solution. "I do not support cutting funding for American troops, but I do support cutting funding for Iraqi forces if the Iraqi government does not meet set conditions," she said two weeks ago.

The third step involves resolutions and threats. This week, the Senate will take up resolutions opposing the addition of 21,500 troops to Iraq , a buildup Petraeus says is indispensable to his plan to secure Baghdad . If resolutions fail to force President Bush to begin winding down the war, Senator Joe Biden promises the Senate will take stronger measures. In the Vietnam era, congressional critics passed limits on funding.

The fourth step--the one we're approaching now in Iraq --would put restrictions on troop deployments. In 1970, the Cooper-Church amendment sought to bar funding for any American troops in Cambodia , a sanctuary for invading forces from North Vietnam . Today, Hillary Clinton would put a cap on the number of American soldiers in Iraq . Webb, echoing many others in Congress, said withdrawals should begin "in short order."

Step five is the last resort of war opponents: a fund cutoff over the protests of the president. In Vietnam , it came in 1974, after American combat troops had been withdrawn, but with the United States still supporting and funding the South Vietnamese government. What's striking is how much the congressional majority then resembles today's antiwar coalition, mostly Democrats but with more than a handful of Republicans. True, only a minority in Congress favors a cutoff today, but that bloc could grow.

Step six: the collapse. In Southeast Asia, it led to the deaths of more than two million people in Vietnam and Cambodia after the Communist triumph. The members of Congress whose actions prompted the collapse expressed no shame or embarrassment for having betrayed allies. And practically no one held them accountable. Their perfidy was greeted with silence.

In Vietnam , the slide down the slippery slope seemed inevitable. But in Iraq , there's time to halt it. Bush can be expected to hold firm in his pursuit of victory in Iraq . If Petraeus achieves a breakthrough in pacifying Baghdad and then in controlling insurgent-dominated Anbar province, the war opponents must stand down. If they refuse to acknowledge success and cause a repeat of the Vietnam calamity, they should be held accountable. This time, self-inflicted defeat should not be met with silence.

Iran's Ahmadinejad is Winning

2007-01-30T13:33:00.000-05:00

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com (read the rest)

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is an evil man. But he is not a stupid man. Indeed, he is a smart and fastidious. He understands power and how to get it. And he understands that the purpose of a nation's foreign policy is to sell ideas and messages and to build coalitions that enable a state to achieve its national aims. Due to his understanding and his abilities, Ahmadinejad has achieved significant success in advancing his policy aims of defeating the United States , destroying the State of Israel, and acquiring nuclear weapons.

NO 'Sugar Coating here' written by a retired Sgt. Major -- 'On Your Hands'

2006-10-06T01:08:00.000-05:00

This was written by Sgt. Major JD Pendry (Ret.)

Direct Link http://www.geocities.com/jdpendry/OnYourHands.htm

Our God and soldiers we alike adore,
Ev’n at the brink of danger; not before;
After deliverance, both alike requited,
Our God’s forgotten, and our soldiers slighted. – Frances Quarles, 1632
_____________________________________________________________
On Your Hands
J. D. Pendry
Jimmy Carter, you’re the father of the Islamic Nazi movement. You threw the Shah under the bus, welcomed the Ayatollah home and then lacked the spine to confront the terrorists when they took our embassy and our people hostage. You’re the runner-in-chief.

Bill Clinton, you played ring around the Lewinsky while the terrorists were at war with us. You got us into a fight with them in Somalia, and then you ran from it. Your weak-willed responses emboldened the killers. Each time you failed to respond adequately they grew bolder, until 9/11.

John Kerry, dishonesty is your most prominent attribute. You lied about American Soldiers in Vietnam. Your military service, like your life, is more fiction than fact. You’ve accused our Soldiers of terrorizing women and children in Iraq. You called Iraq the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time, the same words you used to describe Vietnam. You’re a fake. You want to run from Iraq and abandon the Iraqis to murderers just as you did the Vietnamese. Iraq, like Vietnam is another war that you were for, before you were against it.

John Murtha, you said our military was broken. You said we can’t win militarily in Iraq. You accused United States Marines of cold-blooded murder without proof. And said we should redeploy to Okinawa. Okinawa John? And the Democrats call you their military expert. Are you sure you didn’t suffer a traumatic brain injury while you were off building your war hero resume? You’re a sad, pitiable, corrupt and washed up politician. You’re not a Marine sir. You wouldn’t amount to a pimple on a real Marines butt. You’re a phony and a disgrace. Run away John.

Dick Durbin, you accused our Soldiers at Guantanimo of being Nazis, tenders of Soviet style gulags and as bad as the regime of Pol Pot who murdered two million of his own people after your party abandoned South East Asia to the Communists. Now you want to abandon the Iraqis to the same fate. History was not a good teacher for you, was it? See Dick run.

Ted Kennedy, for days on end you held poster sized pictures from Abu Grhaib in front of any available television camera. Al Jazeera quoted you saying that Iraq’s torture chambers were open under new management. Did you see the news this week Teddy? The Islamic Nazis demonstrated real torture for you again. If you truly supported our troops, you’d show the world poster-sized pictures of that atrocity and demand the annihilation of the perpetrators of it. Your legislation stripping support from the South Vietnamese led to a communist victory there. You’re a bloated fool bent on repeating the same historical blunder that turned freedom-seeking people over to homicidal, genocidal maniacs. To paraphrase John Murtha, all while sitting on your wide, gin-soaked rear-end in Washington.

Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Carl Levine, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Russ Feingold, Hillary Clinton, Pat Leahy, Chuck Schumer et al ad nauseam. Every time you stand in front of television cameras and broadcast to the Islamic Nazis that we went to war because our President lied. That the war is wrong and our Soldiers are torturers. That we should leave Iraq, you give the Islamic butchers – the same ones that tortured and mutilated American Soldiers - cause to think that we’ll run away again and all they have to do is hang on a little longer.

American news media, the New York Times particularly. Each time you publish stories about national defense secrets and our intelligence gathering methods, you become one with the sub-human pieces of camel dung that torture and mutilate the bodies of American Soldiers. You can’t strike up the courage to publish cartoons, but you can help Al Qaeda destroy my country. Actually, you are more dangerous to us than Al Qaeda is. Think about that each time you face Mecca to admire your Pulitzer.

You are America’s axis of idiots. Your Collective Stupidity will destroy us. Self-serving politics and terrorist abetting news scoops are more important to you than our national security or the lives of innocent civilians and Soldiers. It bothers you that defending ourselves gets in the way of your elitist sport of politics and your ignorant editorializing. There is as much blood on your hands as is on the hands of murdering terrorists. Don’t ever doubt that. Your frolics will only serve to extend this war as they extended Vietnam. If you want our Soldiers home, as you claim, knock off the crap and try supporting your country ahead of supporting your silly political aims and aiding our enemies. Yes, I’m questioning your patriotism. Your loyalty ends with self. I’m also questioning why you’re stealing air that decent Americans could be breathing. You don’t deserve the protection of our men and women in uniform. You need to run away from this war – this country. Leave the war to the people who have the will to see it through and the country to people who are willing to defend it.

No Commander in Chief, you don’t get off the hook either. Our country has two enemies. Those who want to destroy us from the outside and those who attempt it from within. Your Soldiers are dealing with the outside force. It’s your obligation to support them by confronting the axis of idiots. America must hear it from you that these people are harming our country, abetting the enemy and endangering our safety. Well up a little anger please, and channel it toward the appropriate target. You must prosecute those who leak national security secrets to the media. You must prosecute those in the media who knowingly publish those secrets. Our Soldiers need you to confront the enemy that they cannot.

They need you to do it now.

Copyright © J.D. Pendry 2006

**********

JD’s weekly commentaries are copyrighted. You may forward them by email if unedited and forwarded in their entirety, which includes this notice and all information that follows. They may be printed. Commentaries can be republished in other formats and at other locations by permission only. You can Link to this article. JD’s Bio

**********
J. D. Pendry is author of The Three Meter Zone.

You may comment on articles at Misanthropundit – JD’s Townhall.com Soapbox or see them in the reader’s articles at RealClearPolitics.com
Direct Link http://www.geocities.com/jdpendry/Me.html

Al-Gebra Terrorists

2006-09-05T08:09:00.000-05:00

NEW YORK - A public school teacher was arrested today at John F. Kennedy International Airport as he attempted to board a flight while in possession of a ruler, a protractor, a set square, a slide rule, and a calculator.

At a morning press conference, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez said he believes the man is a member of the notorious Al-gebra movement.He did not identify the man, who has been charged by the FBI with carrying weapons of math instruction.

"Al-gebra is a problem for us", Gonzalez said."They desire solutions by means and extremes, and sometimes go off on tangents in a search of absolute value. They use secret code names like 'x' and 'y' and refer to themselves as 'unknowns', but we have determined they belong to a common denominator of the axis of medieval with coordinates in every country.
As the Greek philanderer Isosceles used to say, 'There are 3 sides to every triangle'."

When asked to comment on the arrest, President Bush said, "If God had wanted us to have better Weapons of Math Instruction, He would have given us more fingers and toes."
White House aides told reporters they could not recall a more intelligent or profound statement by the president.

End The Jewish Occupation of Arab land!

2006-08-24T07:56:00.000-05:00

C-SPAN Katrina Anniversary Special - Pandering At The 17th Street Canal

2006-08-21T13:13:00.000-05:00

Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) was on C-SPAN this morning and stated 'America is going to be shocked at what has not happend since Katrina.'

Gee, I wonder if America would be shocked at the amount of work that has been performed since Katrina. I am.

Mary is right, though. New Orleans is still a mess. It will take generations to get things back. Just like it took generations to get MS back to normal after Camille - which Mary conveniently neglects. Mary also neglected to mention any of the other parts of LA that are worse off than New Orleans like St.Tammany Parish. How come your love-in with C-SPAN was not filmed there?

And on and on this show went on...critics of the money, FEMA, Corps of Engineers, etc., Uhm...Mary...here's a question for you: Aren't you in charge of monitoring this as a rep. of the federal disaster relief efforts? When is this your fault? You are the GVT, you bleach blonde, idiot! You are the direct link to FEMA and the Corps of Engineers. Why can't you give specifics of an audit of what has been wasted in terms of gvt relief? I bet the answer to that is because you have no idea of what is going on. It's real simple to charge that this Administration is doing a poor job. It's easy to criticize, sweetheart, especially when you're sitting in front of rubble. But where is your audit? Where are the GAO numbers? Do they exist? I am sure they do. I know they do. There has been waste. There has been fraud. But until you can prove anything, do your job as an elected rep. from your state.

Here's are some other observations: A caller stated that 481Million went to St Bernard Parish. (For the record, the Corps of Engineer said that out of a total of 66K strucutres in that parish, 4 were liveable after the storm) - 72K per person in St Bernard Parish. So how much progress do you think can be achieved in less than a calendar year when one parsih was wiped off the map?

Since this was an open call session, callers were able to say anything. Most of the calls were from residents or ex-pats of the city. But at no time was anyone who was critical of Landrieu or the local response to Katrina allowed to speak his mind once the nature of the call was known. Any call that did not fit into the victim format of this anniversary special had his/her call cut short.

Why am I so focused on this? My Grandmother had four feet of water in her house for several days in Jefferson Parish. She, along with the help of my family, was able to get in contact with the right assistance groups within FEMA. She has been given checks from FEMA along with what was covered in her home owners policy...and 11 months later, her house is back to its original state. Was her house underwater for days like the poor souls on the wrong side of the 17th Street Canal? No. But what this does illustrate is the notion that the mechanics of relief do exist, they are functional and those that can help themselves, and thousands of those who can't, are getting relief in some form from the gvt.

And something else that no one mentioned in this show which I thought was reprehensible was the fact that none of the private agencies who are providing relief on a minute-by-minute basis were ever mentioned. There are hundreds of millions of dollars raised for relief. Catholic Charities alone has raised over 159 million and 95% of that has been earmarked for Katrina relief for the whole Gulf Coast.

The area of this show took place at the 17th Street Canal in Orleans Parish. This was one of several levee breaks that flooded the city (My Cousin has a house about 75 feet from the b-cast site) . And the pictures of this section of New Orleans are devastating. But as one caller said, 'I'm tired of hearing about New Orleans. Here in Mississippi (MS), things are much worse and you don't see anyone talking about MS.' God Bless that caller, she is dead-on right!

I'm tired of hearing about New Orleans too. MS is much, much worse than New Orleans. But as long as Landrieu continues to put cameras in Orleans Parish, the sympathy pimping and lack of accountability will continue.

Disgusting.

Farewell Marine - Sandra Lee & James Gilcher

2006-08-18T22:26:00.000-05:00

Another inspiring piece dedicated to Marines and all who pay the ultimate sacrifice for thdefense of this nation. Click here.

Jonbenet Ramsey Is Not News

2006-08-17T08:26:00.000-05:00

The Ramsey's are not news. This should not be on the air. I don't care about this twisted perv who confessed and was captured at his NAMBLA-Club Med love compound in Bangkok (that in itself is a crime since this SOB was guilty of child porn while a teacher and Bangkok is one of several places on the planet where you can pass kids around like a peace pipe). I don't care about his neighbors and how they 'feel' about what kind of person they think the alledged killer is. It's all tabloid crap that has no business on the air.

I did a post months ago that there should be a missing children's cable station and Greta Van Sustern should be its lead anchor. It's a great concept since it seems that there are millions of sickos that need their daily fix of 'electronic enquirer' crack. And since Israel and Hezbollah are not killing each other, it's back to the same 24/7 entertainment schtick.

Do yourself a favor, if when watching the news and a story of JBR comes on, turn the station.

Wictory Wednesday (Thursday Edition)

2006-08-17T08:00:00.000-05:00

This week, Wictory Wednesday present Thomas Kean for the US Senate for the state of New Jersey. Tom is a known conservative supporting sound economic and political policies that will keep America going in the right direction.

Much has been said about the "culture of corruption" that permeates both parties nationally as well as in New Jersey. Recently, the New Jersey Attorney General resigned over ethical violations. Kean is no stranger to the destruction a corrupt government causes and is committed to the cause of reform to clean up not only corrupt politicans, but wasteful bureaucratic spending and expansive government agencies.

Kean understands that funding education is essential but that it must come with accountability. Projects and organizations that are achieving results should be funded and expanded. Bureaucracies and programs that are failing students and parents should be defunded and discarded. Throwing money at a problem without taking the time to ensure results just wastes money and condemns American youth to second-class status in the global economy.

As a supporter of lower taxes, Kean understands that this must come with lower spending. While the economy is growing and reducing the impact that the budget deficit has on the economy, much greater gains would be made if wasteful spending never took place to begin with. Ending absurd taxes such as the marriage penalty and the ever-expansive alternative minumum tax would not shackle the middle class. The best way to create jobs is to keep the cost of running and expanding businesses economical.

Kean would be a solid voice for conservative values in the United States Senate where it seems to be needed the most. Please consider contributing to the Kean campaign.
____________________________________________________________________________________
This has been a production of the Wictory Wednesday blogburst. If you
would like to join Wictory Wednesday, please see this post or contact John Bambenek at jcb (dot) blog [at] gmail {dot} com. The following sites are members of the Wictory Wednesday team:

As If Flying With The French Was Bad Enough!

2006-08-16T20:17:00.000-05:00

from Human Events - Terrorists Win: Deodorant Banned from Airplanes by Ann Coulter
Posted Aug 16, 2006

Last week, British authorities arrested 24 members of a terrorist cell plotting to blow up about a dozen U.S.-bound planes simultaneously. As a result of those arrests, we learned:

1. Nothing being done by airport security since 9/11 would prevent a bomb from being brought onto an airplane; and

2. This terrorist plot -- like all other terrorist plots -- was stopped by ethnic profiling.

Last week marked the first official admission that everything government airport screeners have been doing until now is completely pointless -- unless you're an airport security guard with a thing for women's undergarments, in which case it's been highly effective.

As we now know, all the ingredients necessary to blow up an airplane can be carried in small liquid containers. Airport security has not even been looking for small liquid containers. Judging from my personal experience, they seem to have been focusing on finding explosive devices inside women's brassieres.

After five years of submissively complying with bag checks, shoe checks and underwire bra checks, Americans have now been informed that the hell we've been going through at the airports (but which the president and members of Congress do not go through because they refuse to fly commercial air) has been a useless Kabuki theater.

The procedures that have wasted millions of hours of time cannot keep the most basic bomb materials off an airplane. This is like locking your windows to prevent burglaries, while leaving the front door wide open.

Airport security has been using metal detectors to confiscate sharp objects that could be turned into make-shift weapons, which could then be used by terrorists to commandeer control of a plane and fly it into a building.

Except the terrorists can't do that because we've seen that trick before.

After 9/11, airline passengers will never allow a half-dozen terrorists to take control of a plane again. Indeed, on 9/11, passengers on Flight 93 prevented terrorists who had already been given control of the plane from flying it into a building after hearing what had happened to the first three hijacked planes.

To pull off a 9/11-style attack now, literally half the passengers on the plane would have to be terrorists. (At least the airport screeners wouldn't have to worry about confiscating a lot of deodorants.)

I think a planeful of Arabs would attract attention -- except from people who had recently completed a government training program teaching them not to notice anyone's appearance. Not even a group of liberal Democrats flying off to a Renaissance Weekend would stand for that.

The sole objective of airport security post-9/11 has been to accomplish the impossible -- remove all sharp objects from a plane -- in order to prevent an attack that won't ever happen again. (OK -- well, that and finding out what color of lingerie Ann Coulter prefers.)

The plan seems to be to make flying so unpleasant that terrorists -- like the people who write laws about airport security -- will refuse to fly commercial air. On that theory, we could also keep terrorists off planes by forcing passengers to undergo root canal surgery before boarding, making them stand on their heads for an hour, or enacting an "all Whoopi Goldberg in-flight movie" policy.

What stopped last week's terrorist attack was ethnic profiling. We don't know the details of the British intelligence work that nabbed the 24 Muslims because The New York Times has not been able to obtain that classified information and publish it on its front page yet. But it is a fact that you could not catch 24 Muslim terrorists by surveilling everyone in Britain equally.

Without the ethnic profiling going on outside of airports, no security procedure currently permissible inside airports would have prevented a terrorist attack that would have left thousands dead.

Airplanes, ports, bridges, subways and shopping malls cannot ever be sanitized against every type of attack that can be dreamed up by fanatics engaged in asymmetrical warfare. We have to target the fanatics themselves. Baby formula doesn't kill people. Islamic fascists kill people.

Ann Coulter is Legal Affairs Correspondent for HUMAN EVENTS and author of "Crimes and Misdemeanors," "Slander" and most recently of "How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)."

Religion Of Peace - Aaron's Response

2006-08-15T22:30:00.000-05:00

No...it' not NYC...it's the USA + Israel - Muslims = Peace

Get over to Aaron's Case for this and tons of other pics for your site.

Breast Implants Save Israeli Woman's Life?

2006-08-15T20:56:00.000-05:00

You have to see this post and this site. The quote on that site did not go far enough. What should be added is in italics to make the quote whole:

'Yet again, the Bush administration has sent our troops in without the equipment needed to protect themselves in battle. Why aren't these being issued to our women in combat? However, the French have not only added breast implants to its female troops, it has also made standard issue womans' reproductive organs to its male military personnel which is aligned directly with its politics and its record as a real fighting force.'

Passport photograph of girl's bare shoulders rejected 'as it may offend'

2006-08-15T13:06:00.000-05:00

Got this over at Political Correctness Watch (I'm a big fan of this site).

This is a pic a Brit Passport Office rejected. The reason: 'bare shoulders will offend Muslims'

Besides being crap on stilts (or paper), the real issue is that this photo was taken for a family vacation to France. The last time I checked, France was not a Muslim nation.

Maybe the British Home Office knows something we in the US don't.

Oh well, the British Passport Office thinks France is Muslim nation. These folks will just have to go to Blackpool for Holiday. Link to the Telegrpah for the original article.

Anyone for Terrorist Profiling?

2006-08-12T12:40:00.000-05:00

To ensure we Americans never offend anyone -- particularly fanatics intent on killing us -- law enforcement and security screeners are not allowed to "profile" people in public places or security checkpoints. However, they will continue to perform random searches of 80-year-old women, little kids, airline pilots with proper identification, Secret Service agents who are members of the President's security detail, 85-year-old congressmen with metal hips and even Medal of Honor recipients. But targeting Middle Eastern male Islamists between the ages 17 and 40
constitutes "ethnic profiling."

Let's pause a moment and review....

In 1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by: (a) A salesman from Utah (b) An construction worker (c) A college student on Spring Break (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 1972, 11 Israeli athletes were killed at the Munich Olympics by: (a) Your grandmother (b) A Midwest auto-parts dealer (c) A mom and her 6-year-old son visiting from Indiana (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 1979, the U.S. embassy in Iran was taken over by: (a) A bluegrass band (b) Dallas Cowboy fans (c) A tour group of 80-year-old women (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

During the 1980's numerous Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by: (a) A family on their way to Disney World (b) Jesse Ventura (c) A Boy Scout Troop (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 1983, the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by: (a) A pizza delivery boy (b) The UPS guy (c) Geraldo Rivera making up for a slow news day (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked, and a 70-year-old disabled American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard by: (a) A girls' choir (b) A hardware store owner (c) A secretary (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a U.S. Navy diver was murdered by: (a) A Marine officer with two weeks leave (b) A plumber going to visit his mom (c) A Catholic nun (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by: (a) A college-bound freshman (b) A cardiac surgeon on his way to Houston (c) A waitress (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 1993, the World Trade Center was bombed by: (a) A starving actress (b) A mom with a newborn (c) Twin six-year-old boys (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 1995, a plot to blow up U.S.-bound international flights over the Pacific was attempted by (a) Hawaiian school kids (b) An decorated Vietnam Veteran (c) Twin sisters on their way to Paducah (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 1998, the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by: (a) A local TV weatherman (b) A dad and his two sons on a ski trip (c) A widower going to visit his grandchildren (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 2000, 17 sailors died in an attack on the USS Cole (DDG 67) in Yemen by: (a) A child in a stroller (b) A high school class on their way to visit Washington, DC (c) Newlyweds on their way to Miami (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked -- two flown into the World Trade Centers, one into the Pentagon and one into the ground in rural Pennsylvania. They were hijacked by: (a) A retired police officer on a mission trip to Haiti (b) A
firefighter going to Maryland for training (c) An paramedic on his way to vacation in Hawaii (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 2002 the United States liberated Afghanistan from: (a) USAID relief workers (b) Jewish Pilgrims (c) Christian missionaries (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl and other Westerners were kidnapped and beheaded by: (a) The Peace Corp (b) Scottish clansmen (c) Cuban refugees (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 2002, more than 330 hostages n Beslan and 130 hostages in Moscow were murdered in sieges by: (a) Russian exchange students (b) The Red Guard (c) Church planters (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 2003 the United States liberated Iraq from "The Butcher of Baghdad," but most American military personnel were killed by: (a) Iraqi school-girls (b) Street vegetable venders (c) Women without burkas (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 2004, more than 200 Spanish civilians were murdered on trains by bombs in Madrid, detonated by: (a) Morning commuters (b) A three-year-old Chinese girl (c) Flamenco dancers (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 2005 more than 50 UK citizens were killed by bombs on trains in London, detonated by: (a) Rail workers (b) Those unable to hail taxis (c) Wheelchair-bound grandmothers (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 2005, there were hundreds of casualties, men, women and children, killed by bombs in Jerusalem, Riyadh and Amman. These innocent civilians were murdered by: (a) Construction workers (b) Farmers (c) Christian missionaries (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 2005, the city of Paris, and other European cities experienced an extended period of riots and destruction. The unrest was led by: (a) "Youth" (b) Soccer fans (c) Catholic nuns (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

Since the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom, more than 2,500 Americans have been murdered by terrorists. 35,000 Iraqi men, women and children have also been murdered by terrorists. Most of the combat and civilians casualties were the result of bombs
detonated in civilian population centers by: (a) Fruit vendors in Baghdad (b) Disgruntled transit union workers (c) Iraqi schoolteachers (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 2006, hundreds of Israeli civilians have been killed by rockets launched by: (a) the Salvation Army (b) remnants of the 'Jackson Five' (c) the cast of 'Friends' (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 2006, a plot to blow up 10 U.S.-bound planes from the U.K. was attempted by (a) members of the royal family (b) Japanese tourists (c) groupies of the band 'Cream' (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

Since 2001, the FBI reports that there are major terrorist cells still in U.S. urban centers. Several of these cells have been uncovered and cell members arrested. In every case, the terrorists cell members were: (a) Southern Baptists Conventioneers (b) Lutheran Youth Groups (c) Presbyterian Elders (d) Middle Eastern Islamist males between the ages of 17 and 40.

President George Bush said this week, "America is at war with Islamic fascists who will use any means to destroy those of us who love freedom, to hurt our nation." The Council on American-Islamic Relations issued an immediate objection to the President's reference to "Islamic fascists". Nihad Awad, executive director of CAIR protested, "We have to isolate these individuals because there is nothing in the Koran or the Islamic faith that encourages people to be cruel or to be vicious or to
be criminal. Muslims world wide know that for sure." In light of this objection, we are left to ponder why every Islamic leader in the U.S., and the world, does not publicly condemn every terror action being undertaken in the name of the god of Islam. Their silence is deafening...

Between 1970 and present, there were more than 60 other notable examples of terrorism perpetrated by Middle Eastern male Islamists between the ages 17 and 40, but we think you get the point. Singling out "Middle Eastern male Islamists between the ages 17 and 40" is not "ethnic profiling," it's "terrorist profiling" -- acting on prolific evidence.

Anyone for Terrorist Profiling?

Semper Vigilo, Paratus, et Fidelis! Mark Alexander Publisher, The Patriot

(Circulation of this e-mail is sponsored by The Patriot Post -- the most widely read conservative e-journal on the Internet. If you have not already joined the ranks of American Patriots receiving this highly acclaimed conservative digest of news,
policy and opinion, link to: http://PatriotPost.US/subscribe/atp and The Patriot will be delivered FREE by e-mail to your inbox each week. If you don't have Web access, send a blank e-mail to: subscribe@PatriotPost.US and you will be subscribed automatically.)

"Anyone for Terrorist Profiling?" is posted on the Internet at http://PatriotPost.US/alexander/edition.asp?id=341

http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/14/questioning-answers-lust-for-jihad/

Photo Fraud In Lebanon - Little Green Footballs

2006-08-11T15:04:00.000-05:00

http://www.aish.com/movies/PhotoFraud.asp

Please pass this to everyone you know...

The New 9/11 Is 8/10

2006-08-10T22:59:00.000-05:00

Thank God for the Brits. They did it. MI5 and probably our FBI and other groups foiled an even bigger attempt by terrorists to kill people on planes.

The Bush Admin has an opportunity to exploit this averted disaster to complete the unfinished secruity measures from the real disaster five years ago. Here is a short list I posted on another site that the Bushies should take care of immediately:

a) Send 200K National Guard to our southern border
b) Deport any non-American students from an Arab country (this includes Muslims from Asian countires, not just the Mid-east - undergrad, grad, med schools, etc)
c) Deport any non-American professors, Dr's, anyone who is not a US Citizen - see (b)
d) Freeze all assets of any Muslim-Friendly fund-raising group
e) Obtain search warrants for any and all Mosques in the US
f) Obtain Drivers License lists of all Muslim names, begin profiling, subpoenas, deportations - no DLs to non-US people
g) Stop all humanitarian aide to the PLO (Hammas)
h) Never invade Iraq (oops - already did that!)
i) Put 750K troops in Afghanistan and invade Pakistan
j) Profile at airports, profile everyone
k) freeze all assests of any Muslim-owned company in the US
l) Freeze all emmigration to US for a five year period
m) Deport all non-US felons in prisons to their country of origin, and their families
n) Shoot To Kill orders at the Border...(if you're being shot at, do you really want to try to cross into the US?)
o) Open up ANWR with an Executive Order (skip Congress) and drill, drill drill - open up LA and FL off shore drilling
p) Begin construction of an additional twenty refineries and an additional twenty Nuke plants in the US
q) Kick the UN out of the US, pull all aide to the UN
r) Pull all foreign aid for a five year period
s) Pull all remaining US troops from Europe/Germany (thanks for your help in the GWOT)
t) Begin collecting loans from all nations we gave money to
u) Reinstate the Draft

Come On, W...it's time to get serious about National Security!

Golda Meir Quote

2006-08-10T09:47:00.000-05:00

(sent by IDF Lt)

Ned Lamont - Another Disaster For The Democrats

2006-08-09T11:25:00.000-05:00

Left, Left, Left...The Party Marches (sung to the tune of a popular WWI song)

A win for Ned Lamont is a disaster for the Democrats or a boon for Republicans. Why? Moving left means losing. Whenever the Democrats move left, they lose elections. Even if the donkey braintrust states that a Lamont wins means playing to its base, historically, moving left means wins for Republicans. Thank God!

One bright spot for Republicans is if Lieberman can win in November as an Independent.

Also, Cynthia McKinney lost and lost big in her run-off in GA. And of course, it was the fault of voting machines and electoral irregularities that caused her shalacking at the polls. It's amazing however that the voting machines that supporters for Hank Johnson used seemed to work quite well!

Adios McKinney - Hello Unemployment Line!

Wictory Wednesday

2006-08-09T09:44:00.000-05:00

This week Wictory Wednesday presents Steve Laffey for the US Senate for Rhode Island. Steve is running against well-known *insert appropriate adjective here* Republican incumbent Senator Lincoln Chafee. The reasons to vote against Chafee are many, but as a rule, we should cast votes for something.

A vote cast for Laffey is a vote cast for fiscal restraint. Laffey understands that the federal government spends other people's money and that pork projects are an egregarious example of government waste and corruption. He also is against raiding the Social Security Trust fund (yeah, I know, it's a joke) and corporate welfare. It is a national disgrace that our tax system cannot be understood by even the enforcers of that system, the IRS, and that such a system is an oppression and shackle against the American family. He supports simplifying the system so that the average person doesn't need to hire a team of professionals to figure out what their "fair share" of taxes is.

Laffey is a strong economic growth candidate supporting policies that will keep the economy moving forward. He supports making the Bush tax cuts permanent and will work to introduce additional tax cuts. He understands that tax cuts also need to come with spending cuts. Laffey is an experienced politician who, as mayor, led his town from having a near junk-bond rating to financial solvency and has overseen some of the greatest economic renewal Cranston has seen in decades. The Club for Growth has endorsed his campaign recognizing that he will move the nation forward and avoid the recession-prone policies of the Democrats.

Please consider contributing or volunteering for Steve Laffey's campaign for the Senate.

Disproportinate Response

2006-08-08T10:47:00.000-05:00

editorial cartoons of the Israeli/Hezbollah mess...

more to come!

Tell It To The Marines

2006-08-07T19:19:00.000-05:00

(popular email floating on the internet - no attribution to a Marine as an author, but it's still a great read)

"Tell it to the Marines!" As Israel continues its systematic destruction of Hezbollah in Lebanon, the usual suspects are already looking to protect the terrorists from their just desserts.

UN kleptocrat Secretary General Kofi Annan is looking to the five permanent members of the Security Council (the US, Russia, China, France, and Great Britain) to take the lead in a peace-keeping mission to Lebanon, to separate the two warring sides. Stories like this make me wonder if Annan and his ilk are so stupid that they don't remember history, or so arrogant that they think we don't. Because I can't see a third explanation.

First up, it's a fool's errand. There is no "peace" to "keep." If anything, the situation would call for "peace-makers," a military force to go in and forcibly separate the two sides -- and that would indeed be insane. Peacekeepers are for enforcing a cease-fire or some other cessation of hostilities, and we are nowhere near that yet.

Secondly, the United States should have absolutely no interest in protecting Hezbollah. Far too many people tend to forget that as of September 10, 2001, Hezbollah had killed more Americans than any other terrorist group in the world.

Thirdly, any American contribution to such a force would most likely involve the Marine Corps. And to send them into that situation would be a terrible, terrible idea. In 1983, the United States sent forces into Lebanon in order to keep the peace after Israel, fed up with endless attacks by Hezbollah, attacked and devastated Lebanon. (Sound familiar?) And during that attempt at peace-keeping, Hezbollah sent a suicide bomber in a truck loaded with explosives into the US base in Beirut, killing 242 United States Marines.

The Marines have long memories. Their official motto may be "Semper Fidelis," but another term often associated with them is "no better friend, no worse enemy." Hezbollah earned its way on to the list of Marine enemies the old-fashioned way, and while events might have moved them down the list a little, not one damned thing has changed to move them off the Corps' shit list of folks who just need killing. To send them back into Lebanon to once again protect Hezbollah from the logical and just consequences of their actions would be a grave insult to the men and women of the Corps.

Don't get me wrong. I have absolutely no fear that, if ordered, the Corps would do exactly that if ordered to. The one defining element of the Corps, as stated above, is "Semper Fidelis" -- "always faithful." If ordered by their Commander In Chief to go into Beirut and protect Hezbollah from reaping the whirlwind they have sown, the Corps -- down to the last man and woman -- will salute, say "yes, sir," and march off and do just that. But that fierce loyalty to the Corps is a two-way street. We -- as a nation -- need to be worthy of that awesome faith and trust they bestow on us. As they protect us, we need to protect them. And part of that is respecting their history, their sacrifices, and not putting them in such a situation as defending those who slaughtered Marines by the scores barely two decades ago.

Finally, Hezbollah is not a state. It is a criminal, terrorist organization, and as such deserves no protection from the United NATIONS. Israel is taking out the world's garbage in Lebanon. Instead of trying to protect the filth, the world should be offering to at least hold the door.

Rumors Of War - Hezbollah is losing friends and influence at home

2006-08-07T18:59:00.000-05:00

Lee Smith - The Weekly Standard

Damascus: THE LEBANESE MEDIA are the best in the Arab Middle East, and perhaps the freest, not because of any noble principles but because they are so competitive. Every Lebanese media outlet represents a political interest, sometimes several political interests, and all the major political parties own TV stations. (In this regard, Hezbollah really is just like every other political party, though no one else does "martyr kitsch" like the Party of God.) And the people of Lebanon take their cue from the media. Insofar as rumors are also a medium, they, too, represent political interests. My friend Fawaz called last week from Lebanon with reports of a rumor.

"There are lots of stories going around Beirut that Hezbollah M.P. Mohammed Raad is dead," says Fawaz. "And get this--more than 500 Hezbollah fighters have been killed and are lying around area hospitals. That's a lot of virgins on call."

Whether or not such rumors are true, they indicate something about the state of affairs right now in Lebanon. There are many Lebanese imagining, fantasizing, hoping against hope that Hezbollah will be wiped from the face of the earth. Some are even joking about it.

"The new one," Fawaz says, "is that they're going to play the next World Cup in the Daheyh [the Shiite neighborhood]--the whole thing's been leveled nice and flat."

This narrative, including the morbid jokes at the expense of the heavily Shiite southern suburbs and the spectacular number of Hezbollah dead, runs against the current Western news narrative. It seems that U.S. and Western press outfits are determined to claim that the Israelis have driven all of Lebanon, Shiite or not, Islamist or not, pro-Hezbollah or not, into the waiting arms of the Islamic resistance. It is not clear why Western journalists believe this is so, though it seems to comport nicely with the idea that the Israelis are killing too many civilians--a cynical storyline, given that the Israelis are fighting against a militia and without the benefit of weapons capable of targeting only the bad guys.

And it is not just the press that believes what it finds convenient to believe. In his press conference with Tony Blair on July 28, President Bush maintained that Lebanese prime minister Fouad Siniora's government must be preserved--even though that government still includes Hezbollah. Indeed, insofar as Hassan Nasrallah singlehandedly took Lebanon to war, he is the de facto head of the Leban ese government. Washington should side instead with what you might call, for lack of a better term, the Lebanese government in exile in Beirut--moderate Sunnis, Christians, Druze, and a few Shia who would seem promising candidates to run their country after the war is over, except for the fact that they were incapable of keeping their country out of the war to begin with.

The White House says it wants to save the anti-Syria forces of the Cedar Revolution; however, the problem is no longer a strong Syria but a weak Lebanon. "How will the citizens of Lebanon deal with this heartbreak and shame," says Fawaz, "that their own leaders betrayed their country for 15 years under Syrian tutelage?"

The fact is that many Lebanese do not think that Siniora's government is worth much in this context. After all, Siniora is a Sunni, and all the Lebanese except for the Sunnis--Christians, Druze, and Shiites--believe that the Sunnis are cowards. Coastal Sunnis are merchants, and they do not fight, ever. They have proved incapable of disarming Hezbollah on their own. Moreover, like the Shiite militia that is now fighting to destroy Israel, Lebanon's Sunnis were raised from birth with the idea that Zionism is a historic crime. Even if these moderate Sunnis in favor with the White House wanted to do so, they could not conceivably take on a resistance group that seeks to liberate Jerusalem. It goes against everything they have been brought up to believe.

Even now, three weeks after it has been proven beyond a doubt that Hezbollah's arms are incapable of protecting one inch of Lebanese soil from the Zionists, there are still many Lebanese, including in the government, who credit Hezbollah with having driven Israeli forces from southern Lebanon in 2000. And thus the seeds of Lebanon's current crisis were sown in that willing self-deception of six years ago. The Lebanese could not then discern that Israeli politics all but forced then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak to withdraw from the South; nor could they imagine how the voting citizens of a liberal democracy would later compel its leadership to protect them at any cost. And if the Lebanese thought that an Islamist militia had beaten back the region's most powerful military, then they could hardly forecast, in spite of repeated warnings, that that "resistance" would end up reducing parts of their country to a soccer field.

Lee Smith, a Hudson Institute visiting fellow based in Beirut, is writing a book on Arab culture.
© Copyright 2006, News Corporation, Weekly Standard, All Rights Reserved.

Feeling Bad About The USA? Look At This!

2006-08-07T18:35:00.000-05:00

STS-114 Discovery July 26, 2006 - taken on Beach Road, Titusville, FL

What's The Point? Burka Picture Caption Contest

2006-08-04T12:24:00.000-05:00

There are so many possibilities for captions for this picture. Post your comments, sayings, opinions, etc. Here is what someone already said about this gem of photo-magic:

"What's the point of taking this picture? Is a good point..an interesting point. When I was in Saudi Arabia, I saw a young man and woman get off a plane (inbound from Europe) at the Jeddah Airport.. The young woman was dressed in the latest Paris fashions. The moment her foot hit the Tarmac, she was handed a Burhka and she put it on. So, these ladies could be dressed to the nines or have on Levis. Just a nonsensical point."

Let The Games Begin!

Naked Patriot - Alabama Man Busted for Waving Flag While Naked

2006-08-02T09:44:00.000-05:00

And where is the ACLU to defend the rights of the 'naked patriots' to parade au naturel on a highway waving an American Flag?

Certainly, if the ACLU says burning a flag is protected speech, then what can be more defensible than displaying your patriotism waving a flag, tackle out?

The Mind Of A Suicide Bomber

2006-08-02T08:45:00.000-05:00

The person who sent this to me said he drilled down thru Google, Yahoo, and Snopes and the worst I can say is that this appears to be true. It is not an urban legend. If it is found to be false, it will be removed. Still, it's a riveting read:

Pierre Rehov - Yahoo! Search Results
The psychology behind suicide bombings. By - Pierre Rehov, documentary filmmaker

On July 15, MSNBC's "Connected" program discussed the July 7th London attacks. One of the guests was Pierre Rehov, a French filmmaker who has filmed six documentaries on the intifada by going undercover in the Palestinian areas. Pierre's upcoming film, "Suicide Killers," is based on interviews that he conducted with the families of suicide bombers and would-be bombers in an attempt to find out why they do it. Pierre agreed to a request for a Q&A interview here about his work on the new film.

Q - What inspired you to produce "Suicide Killers," your seventh film?
A - I started working with victims of suicide attacks to make a film on PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) when I became fascinated with the personalities of those who had committed those crimes, as they were described again and again by their victims. Especially the fact that suicide bombers are all smiling one second before they blow themselves up.

Q - Why is this film especially important?
A - People don't understand the devastating culture behind this unbelievable phenomenon. My film is not politically correct because it addresses the real problem, showing the real face of Islam. It points the finger against a culture of hatred in which the uneducated are brainwashed to a level where their only solution in life becomes to kill themselves and kill others in the name of a God whose word, as transmitted by other men, has become their only certitude.

Q - What insights did you gain from making this film? What do you know that other experts do not know?
A - I came to the conclusion that we are facing a neurosis at the level of an entire civilization. Most neuroses have in common a dramatic event, generally linked to an unacceptable sexual behavior. In this case, we are talking of kids living all their lives in pure frustration, with no opportunity to experience sex, love, tenderness or even understanding from the opposite sex. The separation between men and women in Islam is absolute. So is contempt toward women, who are totally dominated by men. This leads to a situation of pure anxiety, in which normal behavior is not possible. It is no coincidence that suicide killers are mostly young men dominated subconsciously by an overwhelming libido that they not only cannot satisfy but are afraid of, as if it is the work of the devil. Since Islam describes heaven as a place where everything on Earth will finally be allowed, and promises 72 virgins to those frustrated kids, killing others and killing themselves to reach this redemption becomes their only solution.

Q - What was it like to interview would-be suicide bombers, their families and survivors of suicide bombings?
A - It was a fascinating and a terrifying experience. You are dealing with seemingly normal people with very nice manners who have their own logic, which to a certain extent can make sense since they are so convinced that what they say is true. It is like dealing with pure craziness, like interviewing people in an asylum, since what they say, is for them, the absolute truth. I hear a mother saying "Thank God, my son is dead." Her son had became a shaheed, a martyr, which for her was a greater source of pride than if he had became an engineer, a doctor or a winner of the Nobel Prize. This system of values works completely backwards since their interpretation of Islam worships death much more than life. You are facing people whose only dream, only achievement goal is to fulfill what they believe to be their destiny, namely to be a Shaheed or the family of a shaheed. They don't see the innocent being killed, they only see the impure that they have to destroy.

Q - You say suicide bombers experience a moment of absolute power, beyond punishment. Is death the ultimate power?
A - Not death as an end, but death as a door opener to the after life. They are seeking the reward that God has promised them. They work for God, the ultimate authority, above all human laws. They therefore experience this single delusional second of absolute power, where nothing bad can ever happen to them, since they become God's sword.

Q - Is there a suicide bomber personality profile? Describe the psychopathology.
A - Generally kids between 15 and 25 bearing a lot of complexes, generally inferiority complexes. They must have been fed with religion. They usually have a lack of developed personality. Usually they are impressionable idealists. In the western world they would easily have become drug addicts, but not criminals. Interestingly, they are not criminals since they don't see good and evil the same way that we do. If they had been raised in an Occidental culture, they would have hated violence. But they constantly battle against their own death anxiety. The only solution to this deep-seated pathology is to be willing to die and be rewarded in the afterlife in Paradise.

Q - Are suicide bombers principally motivated by religious conviction?
A - Yes, it is their only conviction. They don't act to gain a territory or to find freedom or even dignity. They only follow Allah, the supreme judge, and what He tells them to do.

Q - Do all Muslims interpret jihad and martyrdom in the same way?
A - All Muslim believers believe that, ultimately, Islam will prevail on earth. They believe this is the only true religion and there is no room, in their mind, for interpretation. The main difference between moderate Muslims and extremists is that moderate Muslims don't think they will see the absolute victory of Islam during their lifetime, therefore they respect other beliefs. The extremists believe that the fulfillment of the Prophecy of Islam and ruling the entire world as described in the Koran, is for today. Each victory of Bin Laden convinces 20 million moderate Muslims to become extremists.

Q - Describe the culture that manufactures suicide bombers.
A - Oppression, lack of freedom, brain washing, organized poverty, placing God in charge of daily life, total separation between men and women, forbidding sex, giving women no power whatsoever, and placing men in charge of family honor, which is mainly connected to their women's behavior.

Q - What socio-economic forces support the perpetuation of suicide bombings?
A - Muslim charity is usually a cover for supporting terrorist organizations. But one has also to look at countries like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran, which are also supporting the same organizations through different networks. The ironic thing in the case of Palestinian suicide bombers is that most of the money comes through financial support from the Occidental world, donated to a culture that utterly hates and rejects the West (mainly symbolized by Israel).

Q - Is there a financial support network for the families of the suicide bombers? If so, who is paying them and how does that affect the decision?
A - There used to be a financial incentive in the days of Saddam Hussein
($25,000 per family) and Yasser Arafat (smaller amounts), but these days are gone. It is a mistake to believe that these families would sacrifice their children for money. Although, the children themselves who are very attached to their families, might find in this financial support another reason to become suicide bombers. It is like buying a life insurance policy and then committing suicide.

Q - Why are so many suicide bombers young men?
A - As discussed above, libido is paramount. Also ego, because this is a sure way to become a hero. The shaheed are the cowboys or the firemen of Islam. Shaheed is a positively reinforced value in this culture. And what kid has never dreamed of becoming a cowboy or a fireman?

Q - What role does the U.N. play in the terrorist equation?
A - The U.N. is in the hands of Arab countries and third world or ex-communist countries. Their hands are tied. The U.N. has condemned Israel more than any other country in the world, including the regime of Castro, Idi Amin or Kaddahfi. By behaving this way, the U.N. leaves a door open by not openly condemning terrorist organizations. In addition, through UNRWA, the U.N. is directly tied to terror organizations such as Hamas, representing 65 percent of their apparatus in the so-called Palestinian refugee camps. As a support to Arab countries, the U.N. has maintained Palestinians in camps with the hope to "return" into Israel for more than 50 years, therefore making it impossible to settle those populations, which still live in deplorable conditions. Four hundred million dollars are spent every year, mainly financed by U.S. taxes, to support 23,000 employees of UNRWA, many of whom belong to terrorist organizations (see Congressman Eric Cantor on this subject, and in my film "Hostages of Hatred").

Q - You say that a suicide bomber is a 'stupid bomb and a smart bomb' simultaneously. Explain what you mean.
A - Unlike an electronic device, a suicide killer has until the last second the capacity to change his mind. In reality, he is nothing but a platform representing interests which are not his, but he doesn't know it.

Q - How can we put an end to the madness of suicide bombings and terrorism in general?
A - Stop being politically correct and stop believing that this culture is a victim of ours. Radical Islamism today is nothing but a new form of Nazism. Nobody was trying to justify or excuse Hitler in the 1930s. We had to defeat him in order to make peace one day with the German people.

Q - Are these men traveling outside their native areas in large numbers? Based on your research, would you predict that we are beginning to see a new wave of suicide bombings outside the Middle East?
A - Every successful terror attack is considered a victory by the radical Islamists. Everywhere Islam expands there is regional conflict. Right now, there are thousands of candidates for martyrdom lining up in training camps in Bosnia, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Inside Europe, hundreds of illegal mosques are preparing the next step of brain washing to lost young men who cannot find a satisfying identity in the Occidental world. Israel is much more prepared for this than the rest of the world will ever be. Yes, there will be more suicide killings in Europe and the U.S. Sadly, this is only the beginning.

Shattering

Disney Cancels Mel Gibson Holocaust Series

2006-08-02T08:29:00.000-05:00

From Newsmax : 'The ABC television network has pulled a miniseries about the Holocaust it was developing with Mel Gibson 's production company, the Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday, quoting an unidentified representative for the network. '

'An ABC representative told the paper, without elaborating, it has been two years and the network still has not seen a script, so the project is being pulled.'

'Gibson was arrested on suspicion of drunk driving early on Friday and was reported to have launched into a tirade against Jews, asking the arresting officer if he was a Jew and blaming the Jews for starting all wars. '

Yet, Disney retains two of the leading America haters in its Cavalcade of Hollywood lefties, Mr. Tom 'I Hate America' Hanks and Mr. Steven 'I Hate America' Spielberg who have projects pending, in the works, on storyboards, etc., with Disney.

What if Gibson was Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, or a Scientology weenie and got arrested and said those nasty things about Jews or any other group? I wonder if Disney would have pulled the plug?

Memorial Day Airshow - Jones Beach, NY

2006-08-02T08:02:00.000-05:00

We Will Not Capitulate - The Speech Olmert Should Give To The World

2006-08-01T11:59:00.000-05:00

(sent by IDF Lt and friend)

This speech is completely fictitious. It should not be. It should be given by Israeli PM, Olmert, at the UN, The Hague, NATO, The Vatican, and broadcast on Al Jazzera, and the rest of the Muslim speaking world. Here it is:

July 31, 2006 Ladies and gentlemen, leaders of the world. I, the Prime Minister of Israel, am speaking to you from Jerusalem in the face of the terrible pictures from Kfar Kana. Any human heart, wherever it is, must sicken and recoil at the sight of such pictures. There are no words of comfort that can mitigate the enormity of this tragedy. Still, I am looking you straight in the eye and telling you that the State of Israel will continue its military campaign in Lebanon.

The Israel Defense Forces will continue to attack targets from which missiles and Katyusha rockets are fired at hospitals, old age homes and kindergartens in Israel. I have instructed the security forces and the IDF to continue to hunt for the Katyusha stockpiles and launch sites from which these savages are bombarding the State of Israel.

We will not hesitate, we will not apologize and we will not back off. If they continue to launch missiles into Israel from Kfar Kana, we will continue to bomb Kfar Kana. Today, tomorrow and the day after tomorrow. Here, there and everywhere. The children of Kfar Kana could now be sleeping peacefully in their homes, unmolested, had the agents of the devil not taken over their land and turned the lives of our children into hell.

Ladies and gentlemen, itÂs time you understood: the Jewish state will no longer be trampled upon. We will no longer allow anyone to exploit population centers in order to bomb our citizens. No one will be able to hide anymore behind women and children in order to kill our women and children. This anarchy is over. You can condemn us, you can boycott us, you can stop visiting us and, if necessary, we will stop visiting you.

A Voice For Six Million Citizens
Today I am serving as the voice of six million bombarded Israeli citizens who serve as the voice of six million murdered Jews who were melted down to dust and ashes by savages in Europe. In both cases, those responsible for these evil acts were, and are, barbarians devoid of all humanity, who set themselves one simple goal: to wipe the Jewish race off the face of the earth, as Adolph Hitler said, or to wipe the State of Israel off the map, as Mahmoud Ahmedinjad proclaims.

And you - just as you did not take those words seriously then, you are ignoring them again now. And that, ladies and gentlemen, leaders of the world, will not happen again. Never again will we wait for bombs that never came to hit the gas chambers. Never again will we wait for salvation that never arrives. Now we have our own air force. The Jewish people are now capable of standing up to those who seek their destruction - those people will no longer be able to hide behind women and children. They will no longer be able to evade their responsibility.

Every place from which a Katyusha is fired into the State of Israel will be a legitimate target for us to attack. This must be stated clearly and publicly, once and for all. You are welcome to judge us, to ostracize us, to boycott us and to vilify us. But to kill us? Absolutely not.

Four months ago I was elected by hundreds of thousands of citizens to the office of Prime Minister of the government of Israel, on the basis of my plan for unilaterally withdrawing from 90 percent of the areas of Judea and Samaria, the birth place and cradle of the Jewish people; to end most of the occupation and to enable the Palestinian people to turn over a new leaf and to calm things down until conditions are ripe for attaining a permanent settlement between us.

The Prime Minister who preceded me, Ariel Sharon, made a full withdrawal from the Gaza Strip back to the international border, and gave the Palestinians there a chance to build a new reality for themselves. The Prime Minister who preceded him, Ehud Barak, ended the lengthy Israeli presence in Lebanon and pulled the IDF back to the international border, leaving the land of the cedars to flourish, develop and establish its democracy and its economy.

What did the State of Israel get in exchange for all of this? Did we win even one minute of quiet? Was our hand, outstretched in peace, met with a handshake of encouragement? Ehud Barak's peace initiative at Camp David let loose on us a wave of suicide bombers who smashed and blew to pieces over 1,000 citizens, men, women and children. I don't remember you being so enraged then. Maybe that happened because we did not allow TV close-ups of the dismembered body parts of the Israeli youngsters at the Dolphinarium? Or of the shattered lives of the people butchered while celebrating the Passover seder at the Park Hotel in Netanya? What can you do - that's the way we are. We don't wave body parts at the camera. We grieve quietly.

We do not dance on the roofs at the sight of the bodies of our enemy's children - we express genuine sorrow and regret. That is the monstrous behavior of our enemies. Now they have risen up against us. Tomorrow they will rise up against you. You are already familiar with the murderous taste of this terror. And you will taste more.

In A Loud And Clear Voice
And Ariel Sharon's withdrawal from Gaza. What did it get us? A barrage of Kassem missiles fired at peaceful settlements and the kidnapping of soldiers. Then too, I don't recall you reacting with such alarm. And for six years, the withdrawal from Lebanon has drawn the vituperation and crimes of a dangerous, extremist Iranian agent, who took over an entire country in the name of religious fanaticism and is trying to take Israel hostage on his way to Jerusalem - and from there to Paris and London.

An enormous terrorist infrastructure has been established by Iran on our border, threatening our citizens, growing stronger before our very eyes, awaiting the moment when the land of the Ayatollahs becomes a nuclear power in order to bring us to our knees. And make no mistake - we won't go down alone. You, the leaders of the free and enlightened world, will go down along with us.

So today, here and now, I am putting an end to this parade of hypocrisy. I don't recall such a wave of reaction in the face of the 100 citizens killed every single day in Iraq. Sunnis kill Shiites who kill Sunnis, and all of them kill Americans - and the world remains silent. And I am hard pressed to recall a similar reaction when the Russians destroyed entire villages and burned down large cities in order to repress the revolt in Chechnya. And when NATO bombed Kosovo for almost three months and crushed the civilian population - then you also kept silent. What is it about us, the Jews, the minority, the persecuted, that arouses this cosmic sense of justice in you? What do we have that all the others don't?

In a loud clear voice, looking you straight in the eye, I stand before you openly and I will not apologize. I will not capitulate. I will not whine. This is a battle for our freedom. For our humanity. For the right to lead normal lives within our recognized, legitimate borders. It is also your battle. I pray and I believe that now you will understand that. Because if you don't, you may regret it later, when it's too late.

Shema Israel

The Glory Of Israel

2006-07-31T09:37:00.000-05:00

(sent by email - veririfed by Sr IT Consultant, ex IDF Major)

The Middle East has been growing date palms for centuries. The average tree is about 18-20 feet tall and yields about 38 pounds of dates a year. Israeli date trees are now yielding 400 pounds/year and are short enough to be harvested from the ground or a short ladder. Israel the 100th smallest country, with less than 1/1000th of the world's population, can lay claim to the following:

The cell phone was developed in Israel by Israelis working in the Israeli branch of Motorola, which has its largest development center in Israel.
Most of the Windows NT and XP operating systems were developed by Microsoft-Israel. (this one is still being researched - most development probably took place in India, but Israel did have a part in XP development)
The Pentium MMX Chip technology was designed in Israel at Intel.
Both the Pentium-4 microprocessor and the Centrino processor were entirely designed, developed and produced in Israel.
The Pentium microprocessor in your computer was most likely made in Israel.
Voice mail technology was developed in Israel.
Both Microsoft and Cisco built their only R&D facilities outside the US in Israel.
The technology for the AOL Instant Messenger ICQ was developed in 1996 by four young Israelis.
Israel has the fourth largest air force in the world (after the U.S., Russia and China). In addition to a large variety of other aircraft, Israel's air force has an aerial arsenal of over 250 F-16's. This is the largest fleet of F-16 aircraft outside of the U. S.
Israel 's $100 billion economy is larger than all of its immediate neighbors combined .
Israel has the highest percentage in the world of home computers per capita.
According to industry officials, Israel designed the airline industry's most impenetrable flight security. US officials now look (finally) to Israel for advice on how to handle airborne security threats.
Israel has the highest ratio of university degrees to the population in the world.
Israel produces more scientific papers per capita than any other nation by a large margin - 109 per 10,000 people --as well as one of the highest per capita rates of patents filed.
In proportion to its population, Israel has the largest number of startup companies in the world. In absolute terms, Israel has the largest number of startup companies than any other country in the world, except the U.S. (3,500 companies mostly in hi-tech).
With more than 3,000 high-tech companies and startups, Israel has the highest concentration of hi-tech companies in the world -- apart from the Silicon Valley, U. S.
Israel is ranked #2 in the world for venture capital funds right behind the U. S.
Outside the United States and Canada, Israel has the largest number of NASDAQ listed companies.
Israel has the highest average living standards in the Middle East.
The per capita income in 2000 was over $17,500, exceeding that of the UK.
On a per capita basis, Israel has the largest number of biotech startups.
Twenty-four per cent of Israel's workforce holds university degrees, ranking third in the industrialized world, after the United States and Holland and 12 per cent hold advanced degrees.
Israel is the only liberal democracy in the Middle East.
In 1984 and 1991, Israel airlifted a total of 22,000 Ethiopian Jews (Operation Solomon) at Risk in Ethiopia, to safety in Israel.
When Golda Meir was elected Prime Minister of Israel in 969, she became the world's second elected female leader in modern times.
When the U. S. Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya was bombed in 1998, Israeli rescue teams were on the scene within a day -- and saved three victims from the rubble.
Israel has the third highest rate of entrepreneurship -- and the highest rate among women and among people over 55 - in the world.
Relative to its population, Israel is the largest immigrant-absorbing nation on earth. Immigrants come in search of democracy, religious freedom, and economic opportunity. (Hundreds of thousands from the former Soviet Union)
Israel was the first nation in the world to adopt the Kimberly process, an international standard that certifies diamonds as "conflict free."
Israel has the world's second highest per capita of new books.
Israel is the only country in the world that entered the 21st century with a net gain in its number of trees, made more remarkable because this was achieved in an area considered mainly desert.
Israel has more museums per capita than any other country.
Medicine... Israeli scientists developed the first fully computerized, no-radiation, diagnostic instrumentation for breast cancer.
An Israeli company developed a computerized system for ensuring proper administration of medications, thus removing human error from medical treatment. Every year in U. S. hospitals 7,000 patients die from treatment mistakes.
Israel's Given Imaging developed the first ingestible video camera, so small it fits inside a pill. Used to view the small intestine from the inside, cancer and digestive disorders.
Researchers in Israel developed a new device that directly helps the heart pump blood, an innovation with the potential to save lives among those with heart failure. The new device is synchronized with the camera helps doctors diagnose heart's mechanical operations through a sophisticated system of sensors.
Israel leads the world in the number of scientists and technicians in the workforce, with 145 per 10,000, as opposed to 85 in the U. S., over 70 in Japan, and less than 60 in Germany. With over 25% of its work force employed in technical professions. Israel places first in this category as well.
A new acne treatment developed in Israel , the Clear Light device, produces a high-intensity, ultraviolet-light-free, narrow-band blue light that causes acne bacteria to self-destruct - all without damaging surrounding skin or tissue.
An Israeli company was the first to develop and install a large-scale solar-powered and fully functional electricity generating plant, in southern California's Mojave desert.
All the above while engaged in regular wars with an implacable enemy that seeks its destruction, and an economy continuously under strain by having to spend more per capita on its own protection than any other county on earth.

AND THE FRENCH AMBASSADOR IN ENGLAND SAYS :"ISRAEL IS NOTHING BUT A S***** LITTLE COUNTRY" And what do Israel's neighbors produce and what have they achieved besides spreading terror, death and destruction? Nothing!

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: None

USS William Jefferson Clinton - CVS1

2006-07-29T07:55:00.000-05:00

(popular email going around the blogsphere)

The US Navy welcomed the latest member of its fleet today. Pictured above:USS William Jefferson Clinton CVS1set sail today from its home port of Vancouver, BC.

The ship is the first of its kind in the Navyand is a standing legacy to President Clintonand his foresight in military budget cuts.The ship is constructed nearly entirely fromrecycled aluminum and is completely solarpowered with a top speed of .5 knots. It boastsan arsenal comprised of one F14 Tomcat orF18 Hornet aircraft which, although theycannot be launched or captured on the 40 footflight deck, but it forms a very menacing presence.

As a standing order there are no firearms allowed on board.The 20 person crew is completely diversified and includes membersof all races, creeds, sex, and sexual orientation.

The ship's purpose is not defined so much as a unit of national defense - in factin times of conflict its orders are to remain in hiding in Canada,but will be used extensively for social experimentation and whateverworthless jobs the ex-commander-in-chief and his wife can think of.

General Characteristics, Clinton Class
Builder: Recycle Hawai'i, Kailua-Kona, Hawaii

Power Plant: Solar Cells, one big shaft
Length: overall: 40 feet (1219.2 centimeters)
Flight Deck Width: 30 feet (914.4 centimeters)
Beam: Secret No details (?? centimeters)
Displacement: Approx. 7,000 tons full loadSpeed: .5+ knots (1+ miles per hour)
Aircraft: One big one!
Cost: about $1 billion each Italeri - 05533

This information is from DOD - 2005 (unclassified)
Caveats: (none)

Patriot Post - The Conservative Journal of Record

2006-07-29T07:38:00.000-05:00

Take a look at this site and add it to your email distribution list.

I have never seen it on anyone elses blog and discovered it when one of its articles was sent to me in a distribution list.

You can sign-up for a three-times a week email, or just hit the site anytime to pick up its latest article. Anyone interested in leading conservative thought about Liberty and American values should subscribe to these emails.

Religion Of Peace - Pictures From London

2006-07-28T13:15:00.000-05:00

(sent to me by ex IDF buddy now living in US - verified by Snopes - funny how these pics never end up in the US MSM, nor are the Pro-Hezbollocks rallies in the US shown on TV)

See all the pictures at the link above.

Some Religion Of Peace

Operation Just Say Thanks

2006-07-27T16:10:00.000-05:00

Friends, thought that you might want to take a moment and participate.

If you go to the web site http://www.letssaythanks.com/ you can pick out a thank you card and Xerox will print it and it will be sent to a soldier that is currently serving in Iraq . You can't pick out who gets it, but it will go to some member of the armed services. It is FREE and it only takes a second. Wouldn't it be wonderful if the soldiers received a bunch of these? I sent mine, now you send one too!

PS: At the site, click home & you will see the cards available.

Thanks to my friend who knows what letters from home mean during times of war!

Za...Za...Za (Go, Go, Go)...Opps...Wait A Minute!

2006-07-27T15:48:00.000-05:00

Why in the name of God would the Israeli Cabinet slow down the offensive against Hezbollah?

Perhaps the Israeli Cabinet is confident that the IAF can conclude the destruction of Hezbollah within a few weeks, succumbing to internal political pressure from within it parties on a comprehensive strategy to deal with terror not involving a deeper push into Lebannon.

Nothing but the utter destruction of Hezbollah is the answer. And it seems that the Israeli Cabinet would rather deal with ending hostilities on a diplomatic level. The latest Stratfor intelligence report supports this assertion:

...it strikes us as exceedingly peculiar that Israel, a country with a heavy track record of fighting experience despite its youth, is so intent on promoting the idea that its defense and political figures are running in circles trying to revise their military strategy while Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah is brimming with confidence in his regular video appearances. It is simply not intelligent war strategy to expose your weaknesses in the midst of a major war campaign -- unless your objective is to spread disinformation to prepare for a larger surprise.

Which is exactly what I think the IDF is doing!

Shema Israel

The Difference Between Israel And Its Enemies

2006-07-25T12:14:00.000-05:00

Got this at American And Proud Of It!

Are You A Democrat, Republican or Southerner?

2006-07-22T13:06:00.000-05:00

(sent by email)

Are you a Democrat, Republican or Southerner?

Here is a little test that will help you decide. The answer can be found by posing the following question:

You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, an Islamic Terrorist with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, praises Allah, raises the knife, and charges at you. You are carrying a Glock cal 40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family. What do you do?

Democrat's Answer:
Well, that's not enough information to answer the question!
Does the man look poor or oppressed?
Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack?
Could we run away?
What does my wife think?
What about the kids?
Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock> the knife out of his hand? What does the law say about this situation?
Does the Glock have appropriate safety built into it?

Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children?
Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me?
Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me?
If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me?
Should I call 9-1-1?
Why is this street so deserted?
We need to raise taxes, have paint and weed day and make this happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior. This is all so confusing! I need to debate this with some friends for few days and try to come to a consensus.

Republican's Answer:
BANG!

Southerner's Answer:
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! Click..... (Sounds of reloading)
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! Click

Daughter: "Nice grouping, Daddy! Were those the Winchester Silver Tips or Hollow Points?"
Son: "Can I shoot the next one!"
Wife: "You ain't taking that to the Taxidermist!"

A Pilot & Soldier's Chance Meeting

2006-07-21T16:18:00.000-05:00

Click on this link to read an inspirational story all Vets will appreciate. Send it along to all you know.

Pacifists Versus Peace - Thomas Sowell

2006-07-21T15:32:00.000-05:00

http://www.NewsAndOpinion.com

One of the many failings of our educational system is that it sends out into the world people who cannot tell rhetoric from reality. They have learned no systematic way to analyze ideas, derive their implications and test those implications against hard facts.

"Peace" movements are among those who take advantage of this widespread inability to see beyond rhetoric to realities. Few people even seem interested in the actual track record of so-called "peace" movements — that is, whether such movements actually produce peace or war.

Take the Middle East. People are calling for a cease-fire in the interests of peace. But there have been more cease-fires in the Middle East than anywhere else. If cease-fires actually promoted peace, the Middle East would be the most peaceful region on the face of the earth instead of the most violent.

Was World War II ended by cease-fires or by annihilating much of Germany and Japan? Make no mistake about it, innocent civilians died in the process. Indeed, American prisoners of war died when we bombed Germany.

There is a reason why General Sherman said "war is hell" more than a century ago. But he helped end the Civil War with his devastating march through Georgia — not by cease fires or bowing to "world opinion" and there were no corrupt busybodies like the United Nations to demand replacing military force with diplomacy.

There was a time when it would have been suicidal to threaten, much less attack, a nation with much stronger military power because one of the dangers to the attacker would be the prospect of being annihilated.

"World opinion," the U.N. and "peace movements" have eliminated that deterrent. An aggressor today knows that if his aggression fails, he will still be protected from the full retaliatory power and fury of those he attacked because there will be hand-wringers demanding a cease fire, negotiations and concessions.

That has been a formula for never-ending attacks on Israel in the Middle East. The disastrous track record of that approach extends to other times and places — but who looks at track records?

Remember the Falkland Islands war, when Argentina sent troops into the Falklands to capture this little British colony in the South Atlantic?

Argentina had been claiming to be the rightful owner of those islands for more than a century. Why didn't it attack these little islands before? At no time did the British have enough troops there to defend them.

Before there were "peace" movements and the U.N., sending troops into those islands could easily have meant finding British troops or bombs in Buenos Aires. Now "world opinion" condemned the British just for sending armed forces into the South Atlantic to take back their islands.

Shamefully, our own government was one of those that opposed the British use of force. But fortunately British prime minister Margaret Thatcher ignored "world opinion" and took back the Falklands.

The most catastrophic result of "peace" movements was World War II. While Hitler was arming Germany to the teeth, "peace" movements in Britain were advocating that their own country disarm "as an example to others."

British Labor Party Members of Parliament voted consistently against military spending and British college students publicly pledged never to fight for their country. If "peace" movements brought peace, there would never have been World War II.

Not only did that war lead to tens of millions of deaths, it came dangerously close to a crushing victory for the Nazis in Europe and the Japanese empire in Asia. And we now know that the United States was on Hitler's timetable after that.

For the first two years of that war, the Western democracies lost virtually every battle, all over the world, because pre-war "peace" movements had left them with inadequate military equipment and much of it obsolete. The Nazis and the Japanese knew that. That is why they launched the war.

"Peace" movements don't bring peace but war.

The Ground War has Begun - Breaking Intel From Stratfor

2006-07-21T14:05:00.000-05:00

The ground war has begun. Several Israeli brigades now appear to be operating between the Lebanese border and the Litani River. According to reports, Hezbollah forces are dispersed in multiple bunker complexes and are launching rockets from these and other locations.

Hezbollah's strategy appears to be threefold. First, force Israel into costly attacks against prepared fortifications. Second, draw Israeli troops as deeply into Lebanon as possible, forcing them to fight on extended supply lines. Third, move into an Iraqi-style insurgency from which Israel -- out of fear of a resumption of rocket attacks -- cannot withdraw, but which the Israelis also cannot endure because of extended long-term casualties. This appears to have been a carefully planned strategy, built around a threat to Israeli cities that Israel can't afford. The war has begun at Hezbollah's time and choosing.

Israel is caught between three strategic imperatives. First, it must end the threat to Israeli cities, which must involve the destruction of Hezbollah's launch capabilities south of the Litani River. Second, it must try to destroy Hezbollah's infrastructure, which means it must move into the Bekaa Valley and as far as the southern suburbs of Beirut. Third, it must do so in such a way that it is not dragged into a long-term, unsustainable occupation against a capable insurgency.

The Israelis have by now thought the problem through. They don't like operational compromises -- preferring highly focused solutions at the center of gravity of an enemy. Hezbollah has tried to deny Israel a center of gravity and may have succeeded, forcing Israel into a compromise position. Repeated assaults against prepared positions are simply not something the Israelis can do, because they cannot afford casualties. They always have preferred mobile encirclement or attacks at the center of gravity of a defensive position. But at this moment, viewed from the outside, this is not an option.

An extended engagement in southern Lebanon is the least likely path, in our opinion.
More likely -- and this is a guess -- is a five-part strategy:
1. Insert airmobile and airborne forces north of the Litani to seal the rear of Hezbollah forces in southern Lebanon. Apply air power and engineering forces to reduce the fortifications, and infantry to attack forces not in fortified positions. Bottle them up, and systematically reduce the force with limited exposure to the attackers.
2. Secure roads along the eastern flank for an armored thrust deep into the Bekaa Valley to engage the main Hezbollah force and infrastructure there. This would involve a move from Qiryat Shimona north into the Bekaa, bypassing the Litani to the west, and would probably require sending airmobile and special forces to secure the high ground. It also would leave the right flank exposed to Syria.
3. Use air power and special forces to undermine Hezbollah capabilities in the southern Beirut area. The Israelis would consider a move into this area after roads through southern Lebanon are cleared and Bekaa relatively secured, moving into the area, only if absolutely necessary, on two axes of attack.
4. Having defeated Hezbollah in detail, withdraw under a political settlement shifting defense responsibility to the Lebanese government.
5. Do all of this while the United States is still able to provide top cover against diplomatic initiatives that will create an increasingly difficult international environment.

There can be many variations on this theme, but these elements are inevitable:
1. Hezbollah cannot be defeated without entering the Bekaa Valley, at the very least.
2. At some point, resistance in southern Lebanon must be dealt with, regardless of the cost.
3. Rocket attacks against northern Israel and even Tel Aviv must be accepted while the campaign unfolds.
4. The real challenge will come when Israel tries to withdraw.

No. 4 is the real challenge. Destruction of Hezbollah's infrastructure does not mean annihilation of the force. If Israel withdraws, Hezbollah or a successor organization will regroup. If Israel remains, it can wind up in the position the United States is in Iraq. This is exactly what Hezbollah wants. So, Israel can buy time, or Israel can occupy and pay the cost. One or the other.

Hezbollah has dealt Israel a difficult hand. It has thought through the battle problem as well as the political dimension carefully. Somewhere in this, there has been either an Israeli intelligence failure or a political failure to listen to intelligence. Hezbollah's capabilities have posed a problem for Israel that allowed Hezbollah to start a war at a time and in a way of its choosing. The inquest will come later in Israel. And Hezbollah will likely be shattered regardless of its planning. The correlation of forces does not favor it. But if it forces Israel not only to defeat its main force but also to occupy, Hezbollah will have achieved its goals.

Shema Israel

AM Random Thoughts

2006-07-20T08:47:00.000-05:00

From FNC: The U.N.'s human rights chief is looking into whether Israel's attacks on Lebanon and Gaza constitute war crimes. Louise Arbour called the "indiscriminate shelling" of cities and civilian sites unacceptable — and says the scale of the killings in the region "could engage the personal criminal responsibility of those involved."

Oh Yeah…prosecuted by whom, s***head? Why isn’t Bolton stomping on this guys guts? Why isn’t the UN investigating the crimes of the PLO since it’s now a legit, formally elected government, for the ‘crimes’ it has committed in just the last three weeks agaisnt innocent Israeli civilians. And while you're at it Frog-P****, why not investigate those Hezbollah fellas, too! I want to see Bolton pull a Khrushchev, take off his shoe, and bang it on the desk anytime some sheep pimp rag-head from any third world s*** hole says anything even remotely disparaging about the US, Israel and our allies. Pack your stuff and get the hell out of the UN. Good luck in Beirut, Louisa!

USA TODAY: The House, citing the nation's religious origins, voted Wednesday to protect the Pledge of Allegiance from federal judges who might try to stop schoolchildren and others from reciting it because of the phrase "under God." The legislation, a priority of social conservatives, passed 260-167.

167 Reps voted against this. Why? I want all 167 to get on TV and tell the nation why they voted against this resolution. And what about the people whom you represent? This is a campaign issue GRANDE for November. I swear to God that if my Rep voted against this, I would do everything in my power to make sure that SOB is tossed on out of the House of Reprehensible on his GD communist ear!

From FNC: Re: Evacuees form Beirut- "I'm getting angrier and angrier. The American government seems to have money for everything else except its citizens," said Joseph Rizzuto, a high school teacher in Queens, who was trying to get his daughter, Paola Rizzuto, 22, home. She was in Beirut with her boyfriend, Rafael Greenblatt, on a month long visit at the American University in Beirut.

How dare you slap the Marines and other civilians who got you out of that hell hole in the face - you sorry sack of ungrateful crap. Who is using the family brain cell in Queens? It ain’t you! When did you think that sending your daughter to the most violent section of land on the planet was a good idea? This clown reminds me of those criminal Holloway parents who allowed their 18 year old daughter to go out of the country to drink and make out with Dutch predators. Remember what happened - Mrs. Twitty Holloway got mad at the US for not helping them find their murdered daughter. So it’s the US’s fault and GWB in particular, that you’re an idiot, Mr Rizzuto? (God I hope you’re not related to Phil). Now I understand the whole mid-east situation. Thanks.

Understanding The Temper Of The Times - Cal Thomas

2006-07-20T07:45:00.000-05:00

Understanding the temper of the times
By Cal Thomas
Israel's enemies are all of the same piece by whatever name they call themselves. There are no "moderates," at least none who have the power to make peace. The idea of a "two-state solution" with a Palestinian state living alongside Israel was always a pipe dream concocted by secular Westerners. They accept a false doctrine that says the enemies of Israel (and America) can be placated by people they regard as "infidels."
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com

In chronicling the number of armed warriors who joined David at Hebron, there is this exquisite line: "All these men understood the temper of the times and knew the best course for Israel to take." (1 Chronicles 12:32, New Living Translation)

For roughly 4,000 years there has been "unrest" and war in the Middle East. It possibly began when the ancient Israelites drove out the Canaanites, Hittites, Hivites, Perizzites, Girgashites, Amorites and Jebusites. Modern Israel is attempting to drive out Hezbollah-ites, Hamas-ites, Islamic Jihad-ites and the rest.

Nothing has changed, except Israel may be in greater peril today than at any time in its modern history. That is because Israel, often under pressure from its "ally" the United States, has bought into the fiction that says giving Israel's declared enemies the land they demand will cause those enemies to suddenly beat their swords into ploughshares and study war no more. The more Israel gives, the more her enemies feel emboldened to take away. It's called appeasement and it never works.

When Israel pulled out of Gaza, I predicted terrorists would move in and begin firing rockets into Israeli towns. It doesn't take someone with the vision of a biblical prophet to forecast the obvious. The rockets hitting Israel from Lebanon are coming from territory previously occupied by the Israel Defense Forces, which the IDF had entered in response to earlier shelling. Too many, whether in Europe, the worthless U.N., or the U.S. State Department — even many Israelis — do not understand the temper of the times.

Israel's enemies are all of the same piece by whatever name they call themselves. There are no "moderates," at least none who have the power to make peace. The idea of a "two-state solution" with a Palestinian state living alongside Israel was always a pipe dream concocted by secular Westerners. They accept a false doctrine that says the enemies of Israel (and America) can be placated by people they regard as "infidels."

Hezbollah runs a television station in Lebanon. A visit to the Middle East Media Research Institute's Website (Memritv.org) found a number of interesting clips. Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah says, "We prefer death and martyrdom over American guarantees." Nasrallah survived an Israeli air strike on his headquarters in Southern Lebanon. He declared "all-out war" against Israel. There's a film for children that speaks of Jews turning into apes and pigs. Lebanese students at a Hezbollah TV symposium say, "we should fight the Jews and burn them like Hitler. Israel should be wiped off the map." The head of "Radio Islam" in Sweden said on Hezbollah TV, "The Muslims' war is with the Jews." In Europe, Islamic influence is growing due to the spinelessness of government leaders.

There is another danger and that is the fantasy that elections will produce leaders within Islamic fanaticism who will be committed to real democracy, pluralism and tolerance. Last Friday, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman wrote: "What we are seeing in Iraq, the Palestinian territories and Lebanon is an effort by Islamist parties to use elections to pursue their long-term aim of Islamizing the Arab-Muslim world. This is not a conflict about Palestinian or Lebanese prisoners in Israel. This is a power struggle within Lebanon, Palestine and Iraq over who will call the shots in their newly elected 'democratic' governments and whether they will be real democracies."

It's not only about "Islamizing" the Arab-Muslim world, but the entire world.

The turmoil in the Middle East will not stay in the Middle East. This is a world war and the first shots have already been fired in Europe and America. In an online story the London Daily Telegraph subsequently removed "for legal reasons," Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo warned that British Muslims could soon form a state within Britain. Dr. Sookhdeo, a former Muslim, said, "in a decade, you will see parts of English cities which are controlled by Muslim clerics and which follow, not the common law, but aspects of Muslim sharia law."

The latest upheaval in the Middle East may subside but the objectives of those whose aim is Israel's destruction will not. The enemies of Israel, Europe and America believe this is all-out war. The question is, do we understand the temper of the times?

The Reagan Myth

2006-07-19T08:12:00.000-05:00

The Gipper's record is being distorted to make President Bush look bad.
BY FRED BARNESMonday, July 17, 2006 12:01 a.m.

I was recently asked about President Bush's chances of a political resurgence. Might Mr. Bush be able to recover as strongly as President Reagan did from a slump in his second term in the 1980s? My response was, Reagan recovery? What Reagan recovery?

Though he continued his ultimately successful fight to win the Cold War, Reagan achieved nothing new--practically nothing--after the Iran-contra scandal broke in 1986. His presidency was crippled. The Republicans had lost the Senate. His nomination of Robert Bork to the Supreme Court in 1987 was defeated, partly because of feeble White House support. His veto of a transportation bill was overridden.

The question was innocent enough, but it reflected a broader pattern of misrepresentation of Ronald Reagan's record in the White House that has become not only widespread but widely accepted. Reagan was, I believe, one of the greatest presidents of the 20th century, but many of the things that both liberals and conservatives now credit to his presidency simply never were. And there's a political purpose behind this Reagan revisionism. He is cited mostly to criticize Mr. Bush and congressional Republicans for falling short of some mythical Reagan standard.

Liberals pretend the Reagan years--in contrast to the Bush years--were a golden idyll of collaboration between congressional Democrats and a not-so-conservative president. When Reagan died in 2004, John Kerry recalled having admired his political skills and liked him personally. "I had quite a few meetings with him," Mr. Kerry told reporters. "I met with Reagan a lot more than I've met with this president."

Of course, that wasn't Mr. Kerry's take on Reagan during his presidency: In 1988, he condemned the "moral darkness of the Reagan-Bush administration." A chief complaint of liberals and the media in those days was that Mr. Reagan was a "detached" president, not one easily accessible to Democratic members of Congress or anyone outside his inner circle of aides. But Reagan had to talk to Democrats on occasion since they controlled at least half of Congress. Mr. Bush rarely consults them for the simple reason that Republicans run all of Capitol Hill; so he talks frequently with Republican congressional leaders.

Liberals today talk about Reagan as if the hallmark of his administration was a lack of partisanship--again in contrast with Mr. Bush. Mr. Kerry noted in 2004 that Mr. Reagan "taught us that there is a big difference between strong beliefs and bitter partisanship." Mr. Bush, naturally, is the bitter partisan. Of course that's what liberals then thought of Reagan--and they were partially right: While never bitter, Reagan was in fact a partisan Republican.

On foreign policy, some liberals peddle the notion that Reagan wasn't the hardliner he might have seemed. Bill Keller, the executive editor of the New York Times, has argued that Reagan, having won the Cold War, was ready to rely on international organizations to police the world. Mr. Bush, on the other hand, is impugned as the enemy of the U.N. and multilateralism.

Reagan a moderate in foreign affairs? It strains credulity to imagine the president--who supported wars of national liberation in Nicaragua, Angola and Afghanistan, who bombed Libya to punish Gadhafi, who defiantly installed Pershing missiles in Europe, who invaded Grenada--as anything but a hardliner. He was a hawk for whom defeating the Soviet Union was the essential priority.

It's on foreign policy that liberals and conservatives find common cause. Patrick Buchanan, rehearsing the pieties of the political left, argues that Mr. Bush has turned the world against America. The "endless bellicosity" of Mr. Bush and his neoconservative advisers, he recently argued, "has produced nothing but ill will against us. This was surely not the way of the tough but gracious and genial Ronald Reagan."

Of all people, Mr. Buchanan ought to know better, having served as Reagan's communications director from 1984 to 1986. Reagan generated massive antiwar and anti-American demonstrations around the world, far larger and more numerous protests than those Mr. Bush has occasioned. He famously denounced the Soviet "evil empire" headed for "the ash-heap of history." He was treated by the press as a cowboy warmonger, just as Mr. Bush has been. Ill will? Reagan produced plenty--all in a noble cause.

Conservatives attack Mr. Bush most vehemently on excessive government spending, and there they have a point. He could have been more frugal, despite the exigent circumstances, especially in his first term. But it's also on the spending issue that the Reagan myth--Reagan as the relentless swashbuckler against spending--is most pronounced. He won an estimated $35 billion in spending cuts in 1981, his first year in office. After that, spending soared, so much so that his budget director David Stockman, who found himself on the losing end of spending arguments, wrote a White House memoir with the subtitle, "Why the Reagan Revolution Failed."

With Reagan in the White House, spending reached 23.5% of GDP in 1984, the peak year of the military buildup. Under Mr. Bush, the top spending year is 2005 at 20.1% of GDP, though it is expected to rise as high as 20.7% this year, driven upward by Iraq and hurricane relief.

Mr. Reagan was a small government conservative, but he found it impossible to govern that way. He made tradeoffs. He gave up the fight to curb domestic spending in exchange for congressional approval of increased defense spending. He cut taxes deeply but signed three smaller tax hikes. Rather than try to reform Social Security, he agreed to increase payroll taxes.
The myth would have it that Reagan was tireless in shrinking the size of government, a weak partisan always ready to deal with Democrats, and not the hardliner we thought he was. The opposite is true. Reagan compromised, as even the most conservative politicians often do, to save his political strength for what mattered most--defeating the Soviet empire and keeping taxes low. Today, the latter still remains imperative, and the former has been superseded by a faceless death cult. We can't understand George Bush if we distort the real Ronald Reagan.

Mr. Barnes is executive editor of the Weekly Standard and author of "Rebel in Chief" (Crown Forum, 2006). Copyright © 2006 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Israel's Imperfect Options - Stratfor Special Report

2006-07-19T08:07:00.000-05:00

We have been following developments in the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict closely for several days. At this writing, the air-rocket war continues to rage, but the Israeli ground offensive that we would have expected by now has not yet been launched. There is some speculation that it will not be launched -- that a combination of air operations and a diplomatic process will be sufficient, from Israel's point of view, to negate the need for a ground attack.

While the various processes grind their way along, it is time to review the situation.

The first point to bear in mind is that the crisis did not truly begin with the capture of two Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah. The kidnappings presented a serious problem for Israel, but could not, by themselves, define the geopolitical issue. That definition came when Hezbollah rockets struck Haifa, Israel's third-largest city, on July 13. There were also claims coming from Hezbollah, and confirmed by Israeli officials, that Hezbollah had missiles available that could reach Tel Aviv. Israel's population is concentrated in the Tel Aviv-Jerusalem corridor and in the Tel Aviv-Haifa corridor. In effect, Hezbollah had attained the ability to strike at the Israeli heartland. Hezbollah has been hitting the northern part of this heartland, as well as pounding Israel's northern frontier.

The capture of two soldiers posed a symbolic challenge to Israel, but the rocket attacks posed a direct geopolitical threat. Israel had substantial room for maneuver regarding the captured troops. The threat to the heartland, however, could not be evaded. To the extent possible, Israel had to stop the missile attacks. As important, it also had to eliminate Hezbollah's ability to resume such attacks. The Israelis can tolerate these strikes for a certain period of time, so long as the outcome is a final cessation. What was not an option for Israel was to engage in temporary solutions that would allow Hezbollah to attack the heartland regularly, at its discretion. Hezbollah has posed a problem that Israel cannot choose to ignore.

Israel's Imperfect Options
Israel has three tools at its disposal.

One is diplomacy. There is a general consensus, even among many in Lebanon and Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia, that Hezbollah's actions have been unreasonable and undesirable. It would not be too difficult, we would think, to create a circumstance in which the two Israeli soldiers are released, a cease-fire is declared and an international monitoring team inserted into the region. That is what the French, for example, have proposed, and what is being discussed now.

The problem with this option, from the Israeli point of view, is that it puts off a solution to the deeper problem posed by Hezbollah to a later day -- one that might not be so advantageous for Israel. Israel has a built-in distrust of international peacekeeping operations -- dating back to May 1967, when the United Nations, without consulting Israel, withdrew peacekeepers from Sinai at the behest of the Egyptians. This cultural bias against peacekeepers is reinforced by the fact that Hezbollah could rearm itself behind the peacekeeping shield. Whether the peacekeepers would conduct operations to prevent this -- in effect, carrying out counterinsurgency operations in Lebanon in support of Israel's goals -- is doubtful in the extreme. Instead, the presence of a peacekeeping force might facilitate a more substantial Hezbollah capability down the road. This is, at least, how the Israelis think of it, and their position therefore has been consistent: The outcome of this conflict must be the destruction of Hezbollah, or at least its offensive capability, for an extended period of time.

That leads to Israel's other two options, both of which would be carried out with military force.

The first step has been the Israeli air campaign. All modern military operations by advanced powers begin with air campaigns. Their purpose is to prepare the battlefield for land attack and, in some cases, to force a political settlement. In Kosovo, for example, air attacks alone were sufficient to convince the Yugoslav government to concede its control over Kosovo. In the case of Desert Storm, the air campaign came in preparation for a ground attack.

Air forces around the world like to make extravagant claims as to what air power can do; the Israeli air force is no exception. However, while an air campaign can severely hamper Hezbollah -- particularly by attacking launch sites and storage facilities, and generally making launches difficult -- the likelihood that air power can, by itself, eliminate the threat is unlikely.

To reiterate a key point, the nature of the threat is continual attacks on Israel's geopolitical heartland. Now, it is possible that Israeli air operations could force some sort of political settlement, but again, as with the diplomatic option, it is difficult to conceive of a political settlement that guarantees what Israel wants. Even a Hezbollah withdrawal from southern Lebanon, coupled with occupation of the area by the Lebanese army, does not solve the problem. This solution assumes that the Lebanese army has the will and ability to prevent Hezbollah's return. For this to work, the Lebanese army would have to agree to dismantle Hezbollah's infrastructure, and Hezbollah would have to agree to let them do so -- and Israel would have to place its faith in both Hezbollah and the Lebanese army and government. It is difficult to imagine a situation in which the Israelis can reach a satisfactory political settlement. The air campaign as a political tool suffers from the same defect as the diplomatic track: It is of value only if Israel is prepared to accept a solution that does not guarantee a complete end to the threat posed by Hezbollah -- and potentially might leave the Israelis in a worse position, militarily, down the road.

There is an additional political fact and problem. Obviously, any threat to a heartland generates a unique political response. In Israel, the Olmert government is heir to Ariel Sharon's quest for an imposed political settlement on the Palestinians. This is a strategy opposed from the right, by Benjamin Netanyahu of Likud, who argues that any settlement that leaves military options in the hands of the Palestinians is unsustainable. The Hezbollah issue is the Palestinian issue on steroids. If Olmert were to agree to any settlement that does not include dismantling Hezbollah's capabilities or that relies on a third party to police that dismantling, Netanyahu would attack hard -- and we suspect that enough of Olmert's coalition would defect to force a political crisis in Israel.There has been no attack from Netanyahu, however.

The Logic for a Ground Offensive
From this, we must conclude that the air campaign comes in preparation for what is Israel's third option: a ground offensive. If Israel's goal is the destruction of Hezbollah's ability to strike the Israeli heartland for an extended period of time, the only way to hope to achieve this is from the ground. Those conducting air operations can see only what can be seen from the air. And even if they can hit whatever they see, eliminating the threat requires a ground presence. Therefore, we continue to believe that logic and evidence argue for an Israeli invasion of southern Lebanon -- and that any possible diplomatic or political resolution, however tempting, ultimately could not satisfy Israel's security requirements.

When we say invasion, we do not mean occupation. Israel has had its fill of counterinsurgency operations in Lebanon. This would be a raid in force. A large force would push into Lebanon, with two missions: the destruction of Hezbollah as an army and the location and destruction of all heavy weaponry. This solution would not be permanent, but it would achieve two ends. First, it would mean that for Hezbollah or a successor organization to regroup would take years. Second, it would leave no third party shielding Hezbollah while it regrouped. This strategy gives Israel what it wants now and options in the future.

Three more Israeli battalions were mobilized today. The United States, which certainly knows Israel's intentions, is now extracting U.S. citizens from Beirut. Israeli aircraft are working over Hezbollah positions in the Bekaa Valley. The United States, Israel's patron, is clearly in favor of the destruction of Hezbollah and there is no broad-based opposition to an Israeli offensive internationally. It is a window of opportunity that Israel will not pass up. The very thing that makes diplomatic solutions possible also makes invasion, for the Israelis, attractive.

Our analysis therefore runs as follows:
1. Only an invasion on the ground can provide Israel with the solution it wants to the threat Hezbollah has posed.
2. A diplomatic or political settlement not only cannot guarantee this outcome, but it would make later Israeli responses to Hezbollah even more difficult. Israel has more room for maneuver internationally now than it will have later.
3. The internal politics of Israel will make it very difficult for Olmert to come out of this with a less-than-definitive outcome.
4. Israel will seek to deal with Hezbollah without undertaking counterinsurgency operations in the long term. This means attack, sterilization of the threat, and withdrawal.

There has been much speculation about diplomatic solutions, the possibility that there will not be an invasion, and so on. But when we ignore the rhetoric and look at the chessboard, it is difficult to see how this conflict ends without some action on the ground. When we examine the behavior of the Israelis, they are taking the steps that would be needed for an invasion. Obviously we could be wrong, and clearly the invasion has not come at the earliest possible moment, as we had predicted. Nevertheless, when we step through the logic, we keep coming out with the same answer: invasion.

Send questions or comments on this article to analysis@stratfor.com.

VINDICATION OF THE VIETNAM VETERAN

2006-07-17T10:07:00.000-05:00

Come see this post. The article was written by a conservative blogger.

Please pass this to all you know who proudly served in Viet Nam. As I posted in the comment section of that blog, I hope and pray that this nation honors and venerates those who serve today in the GWOT, unlike what many in this nation did to the veterans who served with honor and distinction in Viet Nam. When thirty years pass after the liberation of Iraq and Afghanistan, the only thing that should be said of anyone who served in the GWOT is that they did their duty, they served with honor, and many paid the ultimate sacrifice so that we can continue to be free.

Happy Bastille Day

2006-07-14T18:28:00.000-05:00

Click this link for a Bastille Day Celebration

http://www.footymax.com/zidane.htm

Want To Kill Castro? Build A Wal Mart At Gitmo

2006-07-12T09:00:00.000-05:00

If the US is going to shut down Gitmo and cave to pressure of America Haters here and abroad, then let’s improve the real value of that property by building a WalMart.

The Cubans are starving for commercial goods. They need everything a WalMart has to offer. And once Cubans begin to get a taste of commercialism, Castro’s Communism is extinguished as an idea and maybe he will too. Hey, if a WalMart is opened, Castro can be a greeter:
¿Recepción al centro comercial de Wal Mart, cómo puedo ayudarte? (Welcome to WalMart...how may I help you?)

Construction should begin the moment we release the first Tallywhacker back into the wild.

Calderon Ganando!

2006-07-06T21:42:00.000-05:00

Las Elecciones Mexicanas Encima!

El triunfo de los conservadores! Calderon Ganando!

Ahora, GWB no tendra que quiza besar el fondo de este hombre como el hizo con el zorro de Vicente Fox.

Y puede ser que apenas poder poner para arriba una cerca sin el gobierno en Mexico DF que se quejaban por ella.

Viva La Libertad En Mexico

Basic Translation For The Uneducated -
Calderon Won! GWB won't have to kiss his butt like he did with V Fox! And now we can build a fence without anyone in Mexico City going nuts!

Long Live Liberty in Mexico

Israeli forces take over abandoned settlements in northern Gaza

2006-07-06T12:55:00.000-05:00

Read. Now the IDF should seal the area, mine everything it can and leave. Or better yet, establish a forward operational post in re-occupied gaza.

Shema Israel!

Forgotten Sacrifice - John Duresky Washington Post

2006-07-05T11:05:00.000-05:00

Now that the 4th of July has passed and we all get back to our routines of life, take a moment to read the article at this link.

Democrats Equate Terrorists And You

2006-07-05T08:33:00.000-05:00

I don't get a chance to listen to Limbaugh as much as I would like. But a friend sent me this transcript from June 29 about what Nancy Pelosi had to say about the SC's Gitmo ruling.

RUSH: All right, Miss America, Nancy Pelosi, the minority leader in the House of Representatives has issued a statement on the Supreme Court, Guantanamo military commissions decision today, and I read from the statement now. I've not seen it, I don't know what this is going to say. I just literally ripped it off the printer and I don't want you to tell me, Snerdley, I want to read this and learn it with the audience as one. "House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today following the US Supreme Court decision that trying Guantanamo detainees before military commissions violates US law and the Geneva Conventions."

Quote: "Today the Supreme Court decision reaffirms the American ideal that all are entitled to the basic guarantees of our justice system. This is a triumph of the rule of law. The rights of due process are among our most cherished liberties and today's decision is a rebuke of the Bush administration's detainee policies and a reminder of our responsibility to protect both the American people and our constitutional rights. We cannot allow the values on which our country was the founded to become a casualty in the war on terrorism."

God.

The woman is deranged.

Do you realize she has just equated our enemy with you, the United States citizens? This is unbelievable. "All are entitled to the basic guarantees of our justice system. This is a triumph of rule of law." All are entitled? You know, actually, bring it on. Ted Kennedy just had a statement. I didn't read it. It was on television, but you knew we had a caller who called this today, the Democrats are going to step in it, they're going to paint a big bull's-eye on themselves. They're going to tell the American people, "This is great. This is good. Bush overstepped! The rule of law is what counts here, and these terrorists need to be given the full force and protection of the US Constitution."

If bin Laden is sick in the cave wherever he is, this is some of the best medicine he could get, seeing his allies in the United States Congress and the Senate on the Democratic side lining up against his enemy, lining up with him. This is absolutely stupid. This is just stupid. "Today's Supreme Court decision reaffirms the American ideal that all are entitled to the basic guarantees of our justice system. This is a triumph for the rule of law." Can you imagine FDR being faced with this or Abraham Lincoln? Baby. Okay. You know, Koko, I got an idea for you for the website. I want you to grab the 19 terrorists that flew the four airplanes on 9/11, and I want to you put their pictures up there, starting with Mohammed Atta and all these others, and then underneath those pictures I want that statement from Nancy Pelosi.

"Today's Supreme Court decision reaffirms the American ideal that all are entitled to the basic guarantees of our justice system. This is a triumph for the rule of law." Put Zarqawi's picture up there with them. Especially the first paragraph of her statement. I want this as big as you can make it. The 19 terrorists and these guys at Club Gitmo and all over are from the same family, and here is the Democrat minority leader in the House of Representatives standing up for them and their rights against the United States, her own government. Wow, this is... I mean, look, there's a part of me that loves this because these people are typecasting themselves.

They are identifying themselves. In a political sense, folks, this is fabulous, but there's much more than politics here. There is an actual war on terror; US national security is at stake here, preventing other terrorist attacks, like are happening all over the world, by the way, suicide bombers, homicide bombers, whatever you want to call them, these things are happening all over the world. We are not immune to this anymore, and these people like Nancy Pelosi want to... You know, this is Bill Clinton's war. This is how he was fighting it, and look where it got us. They call this George Bush's war on terrorism. This is Bill Clinton's war that Bush is having to fight because Clinton didn't take it on, and we're trying to clean up a bunch of messes after the passage of a bunch of years where nothing was done. Rule of law? For crying out loud, the rule of law? I mentioned that Andy McCarthy had a piece at National Review Online, and he wrote this piece before the decision of the Supreme Court came out today, and this is what he said. "Make no mistake: if this happens, the Supreme Court will have dictated that we now have a treaty with al Qaeda — which no President, no Senate, and no vote of the American people would ever countenance." That's a pretty good way of putting this.

The Supreme Court's just conferred the rights under the Geneva Convention to people that are not a party to it. They don't qualify, and the Supreme Court has basically just made a treaty with Al-Qaeda, the president didn't do it, the Senate didn't do it, and the American people certainly wouldn't vote for it, and yet the Supreme Court did it. This is what is meant by runaway courts, out of control courts. I gotta read to you what Mark Levin wrote on his blog, he's got a blog at National Review Online, about three days ago. He said, "I am getting a bad feeling about the outcome of the Hamdan decision relating to military commissions, which is about to be handed down by the Supreme Court. I hope I am wrong, but I fear since its 2004 Rasul and Hamdi decisions - granting unlawful enemy combatants detained at Guantanamo Bay the right to file habeas corpus petitions in civilian courts - the justices no longer feel limited by the Constitution or precedent and will intervene further in the executive's war-related policies. If so, it was predictable." And it has been predictable, and it's exactly what's happened. I don't care who it is, the commander-in-chief, the Supreme Court has just usurped commander-in-chief authority. Quick call before we go to the break, this is Steve in Dayton, Ohio. Hi, Steve, nice to have you with us.

And she could be the next speaker of the House

Two World Wars and One World Cup - Doo Dah, Doo Dah!

2006-07-04T21:31:00.000-05:00

Sing the title of this post to the tune of the Camptown Ladies.

The Brits did and it's one of the best 'get in your face/head' songs I have heard in years. In fact, I think it's so powerful, that when the Brits were singing it in spite of their embarassing departure from the World Cup, it got into the heads of the German players and Bosche press so much that Germany could not beat the Italians today.

...Two World Wars and One World Cup - Doo Dah...Doo Dah!

The Eyeties kicked some serious Uber Bums today.

Viva Italia!

July 4th Reflections

2006-07-03T13:12:00.000-05:00

(submitted by email)
We wish you a blessed and wonderful Fourth of July as we celebrate one of the most important holidays in the United States.We have many pages for your patriotic reflections, history to read, sing alongs with music, and more..much more... ENJOY!!

Patriotic Songs Songs with music and words so you can join in a family sing-a-long~

Johnny Cash Patriotic Songs His political statements in song, Ragged Old Flag...and more~

The Pledge of Allegiance by Red Skelton Red is going to explain the true meaning of each word. Listen to him speaking carefully, as it'll deeply touch your heart.~

John Wayne Talks about America He became the very embodiment of American values and patriotic pride. Listen, he will make you proud.~

The Declaration of Independence Have you ever wondered what happened to the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence? Find out here.~

The Pledge of Allegiance Facts about our Pledge of Allegiance~

She's a Grand Ole Flag Facts about our flag.~

Displaying Old Glory Do you know what days to display our flag and the proper rules for flying and handling the flag? ~

President Reagan's Remarks at the U.S. Ranger Monument Commemorating the 40th Anniversary of the D-Day Invasion,.Speech delivered at the U.S. Ranger Monument at Pointe du Hoc, France, veterans of the Normandy Invasion, and others, had assembled for the ceremony.

WWII Posters Honoring the New York Times

2006-07-03T09:29:00.000-05:00

von Braun Built Our Rockets - Klinsmann Can Build A Soccer Program

2006-06-23T11:48:00.001-05:00

The US is out of the World Cup. Two things need to happen:

A) Honor the US Caoch and celebrate the US Team getting this far in WC play
B) Fire Bruce Arena as the US Head Coach

No doubt Bruce Arena has lifted the US from being the door mat of international football. He needs to be honored for this herculean accomplishment. However, Arena needs to step down for obvious reasons especially since this latest showing in the WC was a disaster, save the spirited tie against Italy.

We need new blood. We need a new coach. We need a new direction in organization, tactics, and marketing.

The answer: A German!

Jurgen Klinsman is the answer. He is the most famous face in German Football. He has been a success in all levels of this game: the youth level programs, club play, national & international team play, and obviously the World Cup coach for Germany. And Klinsmann can do the same thing in the US with a von Braun like program.

Germany will cut Klinsman loose from Germany’s head coaching slot after this WC ends in July. And since he lives in the US and has family here, this is the best option available for the US to get back to the WC.

von Braun Built Our Rockets - Klinsmann Can Build Our Soccer Team

ACLU: Miami can't pull pro-Cuba books

2006-06-23T08:58:00.000-05:00

inspired by Stop The ACLU email

Click on this link.

Don't be shocked. I actually agree with the ACLU on this issue. Any Pro Castro books should be on the shelves of school libraries. As a form of propaganda, they are important tools to teach children what disinformation is.

On the other hand, do we trust the teachers of this nation to provide the other side of the story - the facts of Castro's subjugation of this nation, the torture, the murder, the social engineering, the gulags, etc as witnessed here at this site and here? (This is a disturbing site)

I trust the teachers in Broward County, especially the ones who are Cuban-Americans, to show what the glories of Communism are in Fidel's Workers Paradise to children.

So stock the books as high as possible. Lies like this can't stack up against the truth.

Iraq Debate Pits Uncertainty Against Anxiety

2006-06-22T22:35:00.000-05:00

Republicans think their strength is in setting a path for the future. The risk is that voters will look unhappily at how they got to the present.

By Ronald Brownstein, Times Staff Writer
June 16, 2006

WASHINGTON — The new Republican drive to focus attention on the Iraq war represents a high-stakes gamble: that doubts about the direction Democrats might set on national security exceed anxieties about the course charted by President Bush.

Through a series of high-profile efforts culminating Thursday with sustained House and Senate debates on the war, the White House and congressional Republicans are aiming to portray Democrats as too soft and too divided to steer the Iraq conflict to a successful conclusion.

But in the process, Republicans risk deepening their identification with a war that, surveys show, still sparks skepticism and concern among most Americans — even after the spike in public support that followed the killing of Abu Musab Zarqawi, the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq.

In Thursday's debates on Capitol Hill, Republicans argued that Democrats would withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq too quickly. But they also provided the opportunity for a succession of Democrats to argue that Bush would stay too long.

The political fallout from this escalating confrontation in November's midterm election may pivot on which three words voters find more troubling: "cut and run" or "stay the course."

Steven Kull, director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, said that although the debate illuminated divisions among Democrats, it also posed a clear political danger to Republicans.

"The Republicans have the potential of being seen as overreaching, of trying to stay in Iraq until we have it exactly the way we want it," Kull said.

The coordinated Republican push on Iraq, which included Bush's surprise visit to the country this week and a lengthy news conference after his return, highlights a core element of the GOP strategy for the fall's vote. Among Republican strategists, it is an article of faith that the party will fare better if it can shift the focus of voters from a backward-looking referendum on Bush's record to a forward-looking choice over the path America should follow.

Democratic candidates have been encouraging voters to use the election as a means of expressing discontent with the Bush administration's Iraq policy since the U.S. invasion more than three years ago. But Republicans want voters to ask which party they believe would be more likely to produce progress in Iraq in the months and years ahead.

"We think we can win that debate," said one senior GOP strategist familiar with White House thinking, who requested anonymity when discussing internal party deliberations. "We won it in 2004, and the Iraq war was not particularly popular then. It is better when we debate other people instead of debating events."

As part of this strategy, House GOP leaders offered a resolution Thursday asserting that U.S. interests would not be served by setting "an arbitrary date" for withdrawing troops from Iraq. The measure, due for a vote today, also expresses support for the Iraq war "as part of the global war on terror."

Senate Republican leaders, seeking to embarrass their Democratic colleagues, forced a vote on a resolution supporting the withdrawal of almost all U.S. troops by year's end — a plan Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) has said he expects to propose next week. The resolution failed, 93-6.

In pressing their case on Iraq, Republicans have argued that most Democrats want to precipitously withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq before the country is secured — a policy Republicans deride as "cutting and running."

Bush, at his news conference Wednesday, and GOP lawmakers, during Thursday's debates, argued that the key to success in Iraq was perseverance and determination.

"We know this: Our enemies are persistent and will stay the course," said Rep. Heather A. Wilson (R-N.M.). "So that is the choice we face as a nation … a choice between resolve and retreat."

Such pronouncements, GOP strategists say, taps into a traditional, if diluted, Bush strength — the sense among most voters that he provides strong leadership — as well as a traditional Democratic weakness — doubts about the party's toughness on national security.

Yet the Republican stress on "staying the course" allowed Democrats to maintain that Bush and his congressional supporters were promising Americans only an open-ended commitment in Iraq.

The core Democratic strategy in the House debate was to catalog the costs and disappointments of the war — Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) noted that the death toll for U.S. troops had reached 2,500 — and to charge that the Republican position guaranteed more of the same.

"Instead of staying the course, we need to chart a smarter course," Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) said. "It's not weakness or retreat to realize the administration offers us only an endless spend-and-bleed policy."

Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, declared: "Stand pat, stay put, status quo: That is the Republican policy."

The political danger for Republicans is that although public opinion has moved in Bush's direction since Zarqawi's death, polls show that most Americans remain disillusioned with the war. For instance, in an NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey released Thursday, 52% said the war had not been worth the cost, whereas 40% said it had.

Kull, of the University of Maryland, noted that past gains in public support for the war "have had a short half-life," receding as the violence in Iraq continued.

For Democrats, the polls show political danger if Republicans can succeed in portraying them as backing a policy of "retreat" that would leave Iraq in chaos. In recent surveys, Americans have divided almost evenly on whether the U.S. should withdraw its troops before Iraq is stabilized.

Carl Forti, communications director for the National Republican Congressional Committee, predicted that the principal political value for his party from this week's congressional debate would come from identifying Democrats with an antiwar position that he argued most Americans would reject.

Americans "understand we can't walk away," Forti said. "To have Democrats so far out to the left on this is almost more effective than anything we can say ourselves."

Some critics of the war raised the opposite charge against congressional Democrats, complaining that they had not identified the party with a clear alternative to Bush's Iraq policy.

House Democrats failed to offer a partywide alternative to the GOP resolution. And the Senate's vote suggested that the amendment Kerry is planning on U.S. troop withdrawal will attract scant support. Despite intensive internal negotiations, other Senate Democrats have not reached agreement on a more moderate alternative.

"As long as no one is going to have a clear stand on the war … [Democrats] are not going to maximize the political benefits from the troubles the president finds himself in," said Ivo H. Daalder, a war critic and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution think tank.

(Hat-Tip - Col US Army Ret)

Subject: Muslims, Terrorist and the USA: A Different Spin on Iraq

2006-06-21T08:28:00.000-05:00

(submitted by email - Ret US Army Col - this is going around the blogsphere, but it's a great read)
Please take the time to read the attached essay by Dr.Vernon Chong. It is without a doubt the most articulate and convincing writing I have read regarding the War in Iraq. If you have any doubts please open your mind to his essay and give a fair evaluation. It's also eerily applicable to other current issues (Iran's nuclear program, immigration, NAFTA's impact on American jobs, trade deficits, etc.). I had no idea who Dr. Chong is , or the source of these thoughts... so when I received them, I almost deleted them - as well-written as they are. But then I did a "Google search" on the Doctor and found him to be a retired Air Force Surgeon of all things and past Commander of Wilford Hall Medical Center in San Antonio. So he is real, is connected to Veterans affairs in California, and these are his thoughts. They are worth reading and thinking about!(the same Google search will direct you to some of his other thought-provoking writings.) If you would like to see who this fellow is, go to this Air Force web sight and look him up. http://www.af.mil/bios/alpha.asp?alpha=C

This WAR is for REAL! Dr. Vernon Chong, Major General, USAF, Retired

Tuesday, July 12, 2005 To get out of a difficulty, one usually must go through it. Our country is now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as we know it, that we have faced in your lifetime and mine (which includes WWII).

The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are very few of us who think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who realize what losing really means.

First, let's examine a few basics:

1. When did the threat to us start?
Many will say September 11, 2001. The answer as far as the United States is concerned is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the following attacks on us:

* Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979;
* Beirut, Lebanon Embassy 1983;
* Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983;
* Lockerbie, Scotland Pan-Am flight to New York 1988;
* First New York World Trade Center attack 1993;
* Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996;
* Nairobi, Kenya US Embassy 1998;
* Dares Salaam, Tanzania US Embassy 1998;
* Aden, Yemen USS Cole 2000;
* New York World Trade Center 2001;
* Pentagon 2001.

(Note that during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist attacks worldwide).

2.. Why were we attacked?
Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. The attacks happened during the administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2. We cannot fault either the Republicans or Democrats as there were
no provocations by any of the presidents or their immediate predecessors, Presidents Ford or Carter.
3. Who were the attackers?
In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims.
4. What is the Muslim population of the World?
25%.
5. Isn't the Muslim Religion peaceful?
Hopefully, but that is really not material. There is no doubt that the predominately Christian population of Germany was peaceful, but under the dictatorial leadership of Hitler (who was also Christian), that made no difference. You either went along with the administration or you were eliminated. There were 5 to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis for political reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests). (see http://www.nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm)

Thus, almost the same number of Christians were killed by the Nazis, as the six million holocaust Jews who were killed by them, and we seldom heard of anything other than the Jewish atrocities. Although Hitler kept the world
focused on the Jews, he had no hesitancy about killing anyone who got in his way of exterminating the Jews or of taking over the world - German, Christian or any others.

Same with the Muslim terrorists. They focus the world on the US, but kill all in the way -- their own people or the Spanish, French or anyone else. The point here is that just like the peaceful Germans were of no protection to anyone from the Nazis, no matter how many peaceful Muslims there may be, they are no protection for us from the terrorist Muslim leaders and what they are fanatically bent on doing -- by their own pronouncements -- killing all of us "infidels." I don't blame the peaceful Muslims. What would you do if the choice was shut up or die?

6. So who are we at war with?
There is no way we can honestly respond that it is anyone other than the Muslim terrorists. Trying to be politically correct and avoid verbalizing this conclusion can well be fatal. There is no way to win if you don't clearly recognize and articulate who you are fighting.

So with that background, now to the two major questions:

1. Can we lose this war?
2. What does losing really mean?

If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions:

We can definitely lose this war, and as anomalous as it may sound, the major reason we can lose is that so many of us simply do not fathom the answer to the second question - What does losing mean?

It would appear that a great many of us think that losing the war means hanging our heads, bringing the troops home and going on about our business, like post-Vietnam. This is as far from the truth as one can get.

What losing really means is:

We would no longer be the premier country in the world. The attacks will not subside, but rather will steadily increase. Remember, they want us dead, not just quiet. If they had just wanted us quiet, they would not have
produced an increasing series of attacks against us, over the past 18 years. The plan was, clearly, for terrorists to attack us until we were neutered and submissive to them.

We would, of course, have no future support from other nations, for fear of reprisals and for the reason that they would see; we are impotent and cannot help them.

They will pick off the other non-Muslim nations, one at a time. It will be increasingly easier for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It doesn't matter whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq. Spain did it because the Muslim terrorists bombed their train and told them to withdraw the troops. Anything else they want Spain to do will be done. Spain is finished.

The next will probably be France. Our one hope on France is that they might see the light and realize that if we don't win, they are finished too, in that they can't resist the Muslim terrorists without us. However, it may already be too late for France. France is already 20% Muslim and fading fast!

If we lose the war, our production, income, exports and way of life will all vanish as we know it. After losing, who would trade or deal with us if they were threatened by the Muslims. If we can't stop the Muslim terrorists, how
could anyone else?

The radical Muslims fully know what is riding on this war, and therefore are completely committed to winning, at any cost. We better know it too and be likewise committed to winning at any cost.

Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of losing? Simple. Until we recognize the costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put 100% of our thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to take that 100% effort to win.

So, how can we lose the war?

Again, the answer is simple. We can lose the war by "imploding." That is, defeating ourselves by refusing to recognize the enemy and their purpose, and really digging in and lending full support to the war effort. If we are
united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to be divided, there is no way that we can win!

Let me give you a few examples of how we simply don't comprehend the life and death seriousness of this situation.

President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation. Although all of the terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between 17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling. Does that sound like we are taking this thing seriously? This is war! For the duration, we are going to have to give up some of the civil rights we have become accustomed to. We had better be prepared to lose some of our civil rights temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently.

And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil rights during WWII, and immediately restored them after the victory and in fact added many more since then.

Do I blame President Bush or President Clinton before him?

No, I blame us for blithely assuming we can maintain all of our Political Correctness, and all of our civil rights during this conflict and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None of those words apply to war. Get them out of your head.

Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see us lose. I hasten to add that this isn't because they are disloyal. It is because they just don't recognize what losing means. Nevertheless, that conduct gives the impression to the enemy that we are divided and weakening.
It concerns our friends, and it does great damage to our cause.

Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the politicians and media regarding the treatment of some prisoners of war, perhaps exemplifies best what I am saying. We have recently had an issue, involving the treatment of a few Muslim prisoners of war, by a small group of our military police. These are the type prisoners who just a few months ago were throwing their own people off buildings, cutting off their hands, cutting out their tongues and otherwise murdering their own people just for disagreeing with Saddam Hussein.

And just a few years ago these same type prisoners chemically killed 400,000 of their own people for the same reason. They are also the same type of enemy fighters, who recently were burning Americans, and dragging their charred corpses through the streets of Iraq. And still more recently, the same type of enemy that was and is providing videos to all news sources internationally, of the beheading of American prisoners they held.

Compare this with some of our press and politicians, who for several days have thought and talked about nothing else but the "humiliating" of some Muslim prisoners -- not burning them, not dragging their charred corpses through the streets, not beheading them, but "humiliating" them.

Can this be for real?

The politicians and pundits have even talked of impeachment of the Secretary of Defense. If this doesn't show the complete lack of comprehension and understanding of the seriousness of the enemy we are fighting, the life and
death struggle we are in and the disastrous results of losing this war, nothing can.

To bring our country to a virtual political standstill over this prisoner issue makes us look like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned ? totally oblivious to what is going on in the real world. Neither we, nor any other country, can survive this internal strife. Again I say, this does not mean that some of our politicians or media people are disloyal. It simply means that they are absolutely oblivious to the magnitude, of the situation we are in and into which the Muslim terrorists have been pushing us, for many years.

Remember, the Muslim terrorists stated goal is to kill all infidels! That translates into ALL non-Muslims -- not just in the United States, but throughout the world. We are the last bastion of defense.

We have been criticized for many years as being 'arrogant.' That charge is valid in at least one respect. We are arrogant in that we believe that we are so good, powerful and smart, that we can win the hearts and minds of all
those who attack us, and that with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything bad in the world! We can't!

If we don't recognize this, our nation as we know it will not survive, and no other free country in the world will survive if we are defeated.

And finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, equal rights for anyone -- let alone everyone, equal status or any status for women, or that have been productive in one single way that contributes to the good of the world.

This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war or we will be equated in the history books to the self-inflicted fall of the Roman Empire. If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history books to be written or read.

If we don't win this war right now, keep a close eye on how the Muslims take over France in the next 5 years or less. They will continue to increase the Muslim population of France and continue to encroach little by little, on the established French traditions. The French will be fighting among themselves, over what should or should not be done, which will continue to weaken them and keep them from any united resolve. Doesn't that sound eerily familiar?

Democracies don't have their freedoms taken away from them by some external military force. Instead, they give their freedoms away, politically correct piece by politically correct piece.

And they are giving those freedoms away to those who have shown, worldwide that they abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or even to themselves, once they are in power.

They have universally shown that when they have taken over, they then start brutally killing each other over who will be the few who control the masses. Will we ever stop hearing from the politically correct, about the "peaceful
Muslims"?

I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said above. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. I hope now, after the election, the factions in our country will begin to focus on the critical situation we are in, and will unite to save our country. It is your future we are talking about! Do whatever you can to preserve it.

After reading the above, we all must do this not only for ourselves, but our children, our grandchildren, our country and the world. Whether Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal and that include the Politicians and media of our country and the free world!

Please forward this to any you feel may want, or NEED to read it. Our "leaders" in Congress ought to read it, too. There are those that find fault with our country, but it is obvious to anyone who truly thinks through this, that we must UNITE!

In God We Trust Slideshow

2006-06-20T18:17:00.000-05:00

Watch this slide show - link If this does not inspire you, nothing much can.

Wictory Wednesday Blogburst

2006-06-20T18:02:00.000-05:00

This week Wictory Wednesday presents Diana Irey for US Congress. Diana is running against ex-Marine Rep. John Murtha from Pennsylvania who needs no explanation as to why he should be replaced. This race began as what seemed to be an uneventful race against an incumbent who not only didn't expect competition, but is planning on making a run to become House Minority Leader.

Diana Irey served for ten years as commissioner of Washington County and served on a number of boards and commissions bring jobs and fiscal discipline to the local government. She supports not only lower taxes but lower government spending. While Murtha's campaign seems to revolve around nothing else but the Iraq War (albeit an important issues), Irey is approaching running for office with a variety of stances on issues including supporting victory in Iraq and treating soldiers with respect,
not as criminals.

Most importantly Diana is not a beltway bureaucrat and has served only in local offices until now. She will not only bring a local perspective to a seat that is held by an individual more concerned with his own national profile, she will support balanced budgets and intelligent policy-making to a Congress that has shown itself to be free with the money entrusted to it.

Please consider supporting the campaign of Diana Irey for the House of Representatives for the 12th District of Pennsylvania.

Joe Lieberman Switches To Republican Party

2006-06-20T12:14:00.000-05:00

No, this is not true. It's made up. But think about the title of this post this way: Democrats are targeting Lieberman for his support of some of GWB's initiatives, especially the GWOT. And if his party continues to go after him, he should come to the right side of the force.

Lieberman's 'closeness' to the current administrations initiatives is exactly what Congressman are supposed to do - work, collaborate, and debate in good-faith, the most important issues of the day. It's called statescraft and no one on the left or the right either possess this skill nor demonstrates it if it exists.

So Lieberman wants to work with Republicans. Good. How many of his buddies on the left can say the same thing? Newsmax has another take on Lieberman's closeness to GWB.

Huge Support For Ann Coulter

2006-06-20T08:25:00.000-05:00

From Newsmax.com:

Ann Coulter’s new book "Godless: The Church of Liberalism" has created a storm of controversy, but an online poll sponsored by NewsMax.com reveals that Americans overwhelmingly support Coulter and strongly disagree with her critics.

In the book – which shot to the top of Amazon.com’s list of best sellers the day after it was published and has debuted at the No. 1 spot on The New York Times nonfiction list – Coulter criticizes four New Jersey widows who pushed for an independent commission to investigate the 9/11 attacks that killed their husbands, and backed Democrat John Kerry for president in 2004.
"These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis,” Coulter wrote.

Hillary Clinton immediately lashed out at Coulter for what she called her "vicious, mean-spirited attack” on the widows and said the book should have been called "heartless.”

House Democrats from New York and Long Island signed a letter demanding an apology from Coulter, and two New Jersey Democrats sought to have the book banned in that state.

Ann Coulter’s new book "Godless: The Church of Liberalism" has created a storm of controversy, but an online poll sponsored by NewsMax.com reveals that Americans overwhelmingly support Coulter and strongly disagree with her critics.
In the book – which shot to the top of Amazon.com’s list of best sellers the day after it was published and has debuted at the No. 1 spot on The New York Times nonfiction list – Coulter criticizes four New Jersey widows who pushed for an independent commission to investigate the 9/11 attacks that killed their husbands, and backed Democrat John Kerry for president in 2004.
"These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis,” Coulter wrote.

Hillary Clinton immediately lashed out at Coulter for what she called her "vicious, mean-spirited attack” on the widows and said the book should have been called "heartless.”

House Democrats from New York and Long Island signed a letter demanding an apology from Coulter, and two New Jersey Democrats sought to have the book banned in that state.

Ann Coulter’s new book "Godless: The Church of Liberalism" has created a storm of controversy, but an online poll sponsored by NewsMax.com reveals that Americans overwhelmingly support Coulter and strongly disagree with her critics.
In the book – which shot to the top of Amazon.com’s list of best sellers the day after it was published and has debuted at the No. 1 spot on The New York Times nonfiction list – Coulter criticizes four New Jersey widows who pushed for an independent commission to investigate the 9/11 attacks that killed their husbands, and backed Democrat John Kerry for president in 2004.
Here are the poll questions and results:

1) Was Ann Coulter wrong in criticizing four 9/11 widows known as the "Jersey Girls”?
Wrong: 15 percent
Not wrong: 85 percent

2) What is your opinion of Ann Coulter?
Favorable: 87 percent
Unfavorable: 13 percent

3) Do you agree with Hillary Clinton that Ann’s book is "vicious” and "heartless”?
Yes, agree: 13 percent
No, don’t agree: 87 percent

4) Has the media coverage of Ann Coulter and her book been fair?
Fair: 18 percent
Not fair: 82 percent

5) Of the three, who would you trust for news and information?
Katie Couric: 10 percent
Ann Coulter: 86 percent
Al Franken: 4 percent

Question 4 is silly, actually. Saying the media is not fair begets the whole point of the book. Coulter's messages are simple - Don't whine, love America first, vote, practice your religion, leave everyone else alone, raise decent God fearing children, and call a spade a spade when you have to. Pretty simple axioms.

Read AC's book - it's a cracking good read.

A War That Isn't - Must Read Washington Times Editorial

2006-06-19T11:53:00.000-05:00

This is another fascinating piece you all have to read. Link.

Most of us probably missed this since it's in the Washington Times. This is another indictment about the media and its coverage of the war. Pass this along to all you know who support our troops.

Happy Birthday Queen Elizabeth

2006-06-15T15:31:00.000-05:00

The full text of the Queen's speech at the Mansion House lunch today - London England.

My Lord Mayor, I am most grateful to you for inviting Prince Philip and me to this lunch today to mark both my 80th birthday and the 85th birthday of Prince Philip last weekend.

"The Corporation’s generous hospitality is well-known, and I have no doubt that this is now even more the case thanks to the "Great British Menu" which I look forward to sampling shortly.

"Creating a good menu is a familiar dilemma for any host, but the solution of competitive cooking is a new concept to me - although I understand there are as yet no penalty shoot-outs.

"My Lord Mayor, as one gets older, birthdays seem to come round quicker; they are therefore less obviously excuses for wider celebration than personal moments to count one’s blessings.

"As Groucho Marx once said ‘Anyone can get old - all you have to do is to live long enough’.

"And there are in my view many other anniversaries this year which are more deserving of celebration.

"I hope you will permit me to single out two for mention: the Fiftieth Anniversary of The Duke of Edinburgh’s Award and the Thirtieth Anniversary of The Prince’s Trust.

"Both organisations in their different ways have changed - and continue to change - countless people’s lives for the better.

"This success has been the result of the imagination, energy and endless hard work of many dedicated people combined with the leadership and drive of The Duke of Edinburgh and The Prince of Wales.

"I am very happy to take this opportunity to draw attention to their achievement and to thank them both for all the support they give me each and every day.

"And as I count my blessings on my birthday I am aware of the value of the advice and encouragement that I am lucky enough to receive from every quarter - from my family, from my friends, from all of you.

"My Lord Mayor, I cannot do better than to use this wonderful occasion to express my heartfelt appreciation to the many, many thousands of people from this country and from overseas who have sent me letters, cards and messages of goodwill over the last couple of months.

"This has been truly overwhelming and I would like to thank you all for your kindness.

"I would now ask you to rise and drink a toast to ‘The Lord Mayor and the City of London Corporation’."

If only our US Reps and Senators spoke so well.

Joan Rivers had this to say about QEII in the 80s: 'I met the Queen. Oh yes. But the only pictures of her I saw were on British Stamps. So when she introduced herself, I licked the back of her head. She's all bald back there and just brushes her hair forward.' 'Can we talk?'

Happy Birthday Queen Elizabeth

GO/Flag Officers Conf on Iraq @ Ft. Carson, CO

2006-06-14T08:39:00.000-05:00

Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 5:33 PMTo: Subject: GO/Flag Officers Conf on Iraq @ Ft. Carson, CO (hat tip to Ret. Col US Army by email)

This is an amazing post. Please send this to all you know in the blogsphere. It's really worth reading! The press in the U. S. is rewriting their reporters stories and changing pictures to meet their own agenda!

Saturday, June 10, 2006Subject: Fort Carson General and Flag Officers Conference on Iraq, at Fort Carson, CO

Earlier this week I (a Rear Admiral) attended a retired general and flag officer conference at Fort Carson, Colorado. The conference was hosted by Major General Bob Mixon, Commanding General of Seventh Infantry Division, which calls Fort Carson its home.

Fort Carson is a huge installation located to the south of Colorado Springs; it’s becoming one of the larger Army installations in the country (26,000 soldiers) It is also the home post of the largest number of troopers who have served multiple tours in Afghanistan and Iraq and, regrettably, the largest number of troopers who have died in combat there over the past three years. There are Fort Carson units going to and returning from the combat area virtually on a monthly basis.

The conference was primarily organized to explain the modular brigade concept, and it featured a panel of officers who had either very recently returned from commands in the combat zone or were about to deploy there in the next two months. Three of the recent returnees were Colonel H.R. McMaster, Colonel Rick S., and Captain Walter Szpak.

McMaster is the commander of the 3rd Armored Calvary Regiment, the unit that, through very innovative and population-friendly tactics, rid the city of Tal Afar of insurgents. The mayor of Tal Afar came back to Carson two weeks ago to thank the troopers and their families personally for “freeing his people”. (You say you didn’t hear about that in the mainstream media?) McMaster is considered the foremost U.S. expert on modern insurgent warfare, has written a book on the subject which is widely circulated at the war colleges and staff colleges, and he was asked to testify before Congress when he returned from the 3rd ACR combat deployment. He is obviously one of the great combat leaders that has emerged from the war and is highly respected (some would say revered) by his troopers and his superiors alike.

Colonel S. is assigned to the 10th Special Forces Brigade and he headed up all of the 31 special forces A-teams that are integrated with the populace and the Iraqi Army and national police throughout the country. Many of these are the guys that you see occasionally on the news that have beards, dress in native regalia, usually speak Arabic and don’t like to have their identities revealed for fear of retribution on their families (thus the Colonel S.) Captain Szpak was the head of all the Army explosive ordnance teams in Iraq. He and his troops had the job of disarming all the improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and explosive formed projectiles (EFPs) that were discovered before they were detonated. They also traveled around the country training the combat forces in recognizing and avoiding these devices in time to prevent death and injury. IEDs and EFP s are responsible for the vast majority of casualties experienced by our forces.

Despite the objective of the conference (i.e., the modular brigade concept), it quickly devolved into a 3½ hour question and answer period between the panel and the 54 retired generals and admirals who attended. I wish I had a video of the whole session to share with you because the insights were especially eye opening and encouraging. I’ll try to summarize the high points as best I can.

· All returnees agreed that “we are clearly winning the fight against the insurgents but we are losing the public relations battle both in the war zone and in the States”. (I’ll go into more detail on each topic below.)
· All agreed that it will be necessary for us to have forces in Iraq for at least ten more years, though by no means in the numbers that are there now.
· They opined that 80% to 90% of the Iraqi people want to have us there and do not want us to leave before “the job is done”.
· The morale and combat capability of the troops is the highest that the senior officers have ever seen in the 20-30 years that each has served.
· The Iraqi armed forces and police are probably better trained right now than they were under Saddam, but our standards are much higher and they lack officer leadership.
· They don’t need more troops in the combat zone but they need considerably more Arab linguists and civil affairs experts.
· The IEDs and EFPs continue to be the principal problem that they face and they are becoming more sophisticated as time passes.

Public Affairs: We are losing the public affairs battle for a variety of reasons. First, in Iraq, the terrorists provide Al Jazeera with footage of their more spectacular attacks and they are on TV to the whole Arab world within minutes of the event. By contrast it takes four to six days for a story generated by Army Public Affairs to gain clearance by Combined Forces Command, two or three more days to get Pentagon clearance, and after all that, the public media may or may not run the story.

Second, the U.S. mainstream media (MSM) who send reporters to the combat zone do not like to have their people embedded with our troops. They claim that the reporters get “less objective” when they live with the soldiers and marines – they come to see the world through the eyes of the troops. As a consequence, a majority of the reporters stay in hotels in the “Green Zone” and send out native stringers to call in stories to them by cell phone which they later write up and file. No effort is made to verify any of these stories or the credibility of the stringers. The recent serious injuries to Bob Woodruff of ABC and Kimberly Dozier of CBS makes the likelihood of the use of local stringers even higher.

Third, the stories that are filed by reporters in the field very seldom reach the American public as written. An anecdote from Col. McMaster illustrates this dramatically. TIME magazine recently sent a reporter to spend six weeks with the 3rd ACR as they were in the battle of Tal Afar. When the battle was over, the reporter filed his story and also included close to 100 pictures that the accompanying photographer took. TIME published a cover story on the battle a week later, allegedly using the story sent in by their reporter. When the issue came out, the guts had been edited out of their reporter’s story and none of the pictures he submitted were used. Instead they showed a weeping child on the cover, taken from stock photos. When the reporter questioned why his story was eviscerated, his editors in New York responded that the story and pi ctures were “too heroic”. McMaster had read both and told me that the editors had completely changed the thrust and context of the material their reporter had submitted.

As a sidebar on the public affairs situation, Colonel Bob McRee, who was also on the panel and is bringing a Military Police Battalion to Iraq next month, invited the Colorado Springs Gazette to send a reporter with the battalion for six weeks to two months. He assured the Gazette, in writing one month ago, that he would provide full time bodyguards for the reporter, taking the manpower out of his own hide. The Gazette has yet to respond to his offer.

Ten More Years: The idea that we will have troops in Iraq for ten more years sounds rather grim, even though by contrast, President Clinton sent troops to Bosnia and Kosovo nearly ten years ago. And they’re still there with no end in sight. While Iraq is clearly a different situation right now, the panelists believe that within a few years at the most, it will become very much the same – a peace keeping, nation building function among factions that have hated one another for centuries. There is factionalism and there was bitter fighting in the Balkans before NATO intervened and with peace keepers, the panelists believe that Iraq will be a parallel situation. This, by the way, is why they all believe that linguists and civil affairs military personnel are so necessary for the future.

Colonel S. went out on a limb by suggesting that if most of the troops in Iraq were deployed home “tomorrow” he could have the entire country “pacified” and the terrorist situation brought under control with just one brigade of special forces. Since these guys are linguists, civil affairs experts, among many other skills and talents, he may not be too far wrong.

Iraqi Attitudes: The panelists agreed that the public affairs problem manifests itself most significantly in the American public belief that the people of Iraq want us out of their country which we are occupying. They have served in different parts of the country but each agreed that we are wanted and needed there. I refer you to the anecdote from Col. McMaster and the thousands of pictures available on the internet of the U.S. forces shown in very cordial relations with the locals. Of course, our media’s obsession with Abu Graib and, if the initial reports regarding the small group of Marines at Haditha prove to be true, then those attitudes will change somewhat. But as one of the panelists pointed out, the atrocities suffered under Saddam were much worse and much more common.

Morale and Capabilities: Two weeks ago, the local TV channels showed a 3rd ACR re-enlistment ceremony held at Ft. Carson and officiated by Colonel McMaster. Mind you, this unit has just returned from a one-year combat tour of hard and bloody fighting in Iraq and will likely return there again in eight to ten months. Of the 670 soldiers eligible for re-enlistment, 654 of them held up their right hands and signed on for another four years. Incredible!

The Army goal for re-enlistments for fiscal year 2006 was for 40,000 soldiers to extend their active duty commitments. With four months remaining in the fiscal year, they have already exceeded their goal of 40,000 and may have to go back to Congress for authorization to exceed their force structure manning limitations. Since Congress has been pontificating for the past couple of years that the Army is woefully under strength, that should not pose any difficulty.

Iraqi Forces: Every one of the returning commanders had experience in joint operations with the Iraqi soldiers – and in the case of some of them, with the local and national police. They are all are supportive of the quality of the forces, but culturally, they believe that we may be expecting too much from them as a pre-condition for handing over greater responsibility for area control. McMaster said that he worked with the army and the police at Tal Afar and was not the least bit reluctant to assign major responsibilities to them in the operations that were conducted.

Col. S.’s Green Berets, on the other hand, caught a national police lieutenant who was directing the emplacement of an IED by cell phone in order to disrupt a convoy – immediately after the lieutenant had been briefed on the convoy’s route. The good news in this situation was that they were able to reroute the convoy, safely, and track the lieutenant’s entire network through the use of the speed dial on his phone. Having terrorist infiltrators in both the army and the police force remains a problem. But by no means does that detract from the courage and determination of those who are loyal to the new Iraq.

Explosive Devices: The combined command in Iraq is becoming increasingly effective in countering the significant threat posed by the IEDs and EFPs. The frequency of attacks has decreased in large part through training to recognize the threat, the new technology (UAVs – unmanned aerial vehicles or drones, for example) which help to discover where the devices are emplaced, the infiltration of some of the terrorist cells, etc. However, the technology being used by the terrorists is also improving measurably. In the past six weeks, two bomb making sites were found, raided and the bad guys arrested. In both cases, the head bomb makers were master’s degree graduates (one in chemistry and one in physics) from American universities. That’s a lot of brain power to bring into the f ight, but we also have some pretty talented people in the military, industry and academia who are doing their best to even the odds.

Conclusion: This is more than I had intended to write on the subject – so what’s new a lot of you might say – but it is a subject that doesn’t get the proper balance from other sources, in my judgment at least. I trust the information that we received far more than anything that I have heard or seen in our usual news sources. The most disturbing thing that I heard was that our MSM is changing the stories filed by their own people on the scene because they sound “too heroic”.

The over riding opinion that I came away from the conference with is that we have incredibly talented and professional leaders who are facing up to the challenges and are making inexorable progress toward the goals of our nation. We’re fortunate to have courageous and valorous people on the combat front, even though there seems to be a serious dearth of these same types of people in Congress and the mainstream media.

Please pass this along to everyone you know in the blogsphere. This is the most significant analysis to date about the magnificent work our men and women are doing in Iraq.

Ann Coulter vs George Carlin - The Tonight Show With Jay Leno

2006-06-13T15:28:00.000-05:00

George Carlin and Ann Coulter will be on Jay Leno's Tonight Show Wednesday June 14 - Read

The first time I heard someone cuss besides my Father and Grandfather, who both worked in obscenities the way an artist works in oils or clay (thank you Bob Clark and Jean Shepherd for allowing me to lift this line from your short stories and movie, ‘A Christmas Story’ ‘In God We Trust, All Others Pay Cash’), was on Carlin’s FM & AM album. I also got my hands on ‘Occupation - Fool(e)’ and the ‘Seven Dirty Words You Can’t Say on TV’ which was the topic of considerable reflection and mimicry to the behest of my parents and teachers alike.

But over the years, as funny as Carlin is, he cusses in spades. He didn’t used to have to cuss to remain relevant or funny. In fact, if you listen to his albums from the seventies, he rarely used vulgar language which was the whole point of his stand as a counter-culture comic revolutionary – make fun of the establishment, be nice, be funny, and use their own language to make them look like idiots.

I saw Carlin’s last special on HBO. It was funny, mostly. But I could not get past the cuss words and his bent on anything anti-American. Now this differs from his days of commenting about the lunacy of the sixties and seventies, because I remember Carlin when the seven dirty words you can’t say on tv was the exception, not the norm and his take on America was still a good place even if we did stupid stuff.

Carlin 72– ‘I got fired from a gig in Vegas for saying S*** when the big game in town is called Craps! I’m sure there was some Texan in the Casino saying, ‘Ah S***, I Crapped’

Carlin 05 – ‘Where ideas are concerned, America can be counted on to do one of two things: take a good idea and run it completely into the ground, or take a bad idea and run it completely into the ground.’

Still, I think the cussing and anti-Americanism has made Carlin a parody of himself. The sixties and seventies are long gone, no matter how hard people want to bring it back (Christmas Wish List Item – if you were not born in the sixties, you can’t wear tye-dye clothes).

Putting Carlin and Coulter on the same show is like a smoking while pumping gas. I predict Coulter will not go out of her way to attack Carlin and focus her attention to Jay if she is the second guest - but you can guess she will defend herself if Carlin goes after her. If that happens, I think Carlin will do everything he can to make himself heard by trying to be relevant with quippy and snide comments about Coulter’s stand on anything.

I still think Carlin is one the best comic minds this country has ever produced just as much as I think Coulter is an icon of conservative chutzpah.

Let's Watch And See!

Think With The Wise And Talk To The Vulgar

2006-06-09T10:29:00.000-05:00

It’s infallible. The left can get away with saying anything it wants to. But when a conservative says something, it’s a scandal.

Should AC have called the NJ wives Harpies? Sure. The men and women in our Armed Forces, along with the Constitution, give us all the right to say to say what we want. There are limits to speech, however, (shouting fire in crowded theaters and all). But in the case of what AC used to describe the NJ gals, Harpy is right on.

And why not? For these gals to blame the President for what happened on 9/11 is not only patently stupid, it’s irresponsible and lazy when these same women have said nothing, absolutely nothing about the murderers who killed their husbands in the first place. And since they have openly placed thier views of politics squarely to the left, after we agree that these women should receive our sympathy for the loss of their husbands, then anything thye say is fair game - human shields no more!

AC could have called them lunatics. She could have called them insane. She could have called them un-patriotic. But Harpy is a pretty good choice from a historical context and here’s why.

Look at the picture of the Harpy. It’s a vulture with the head and breasts of a woman. According to the Greeks, Harpies were pretty nasty. Besides stealing the food from King Phineas after Zeus shackled him in front of a banquet table from which he could never eat as punishment for telling it like it is, the Harpies defiled the food to make it inedible. The Harpies were eventually sent flying off, but they were never killed. Thus, their continued existence was a way for the Greeks to explain to us mortals the nastiness of anyone who does something vile for time immortal.

In the context that Coulter thinks the NJ gals are spreading verbal disease with anti-war, anti-Bush Administration talk is right on when described as Harpies. I don’t see the outrage.

Now, should Coulter have said anything about the NJ gal’s marriages? I read her book and the context of her statement. Perhaps this crosses the line of decency. But en total, anyone who claims that GWB is responsible for 9/11 is allowed to be called anything by anyone. The folks who killed AMZ yesterday give us the privilege to do just that!

I finished reading AC's book last night. And there are far more instances of outrage the left could get upset about than going after the NJ gals. I loved this book. AC has a great sense of humor in pointing out the absurdity of the left by being absurd.

Coulter Thinks With The Wise And Talks To The Vulgar – Greek Proverb

No Martyr - No Virgins!

2006-06-08T09:24:00.000-05:00

Adios AMZ - your martyrdom was interrupted by the outstanding work of the United States, our allies, intel on the ground, and our friends in Jordan. Those 70 Virgins will have to wait for another soul the Marines, Seals, Special Ops, Army and Air Force send to heaven.

Killing AMZ won't end the violence. And we will never know, and should not know, just how this operation was performed. But you have to hand it to the perseverance, persistence, patience, planning and execution of taking this lowest form of human life off the planet.

Well Done!

Hey You, Browsing 'Godless' -- Buy The Book Or Get Out!

2006-06-08T09:04:00.000-05:00

By: Ann Coulter: The long-anticipated book "Godless: The Church of Liberalism" was finally released this week. If the New York Times reviews it at all, they'll only talk about the Ann Coulter action-figure doll, so I think I'll write my own review.

"Godless" begins with a murder at the Louvre and then takes readers on a roller-coaster ride through the Church of Liberalism in a desperate game of cat and mouse in which the hunter becomes the hunted – with a twist at the end you simply won't believe! It's a real page-turner – even the book-on-tape version and large-print edition! Who knew a book about politics could make such an ideal gift – especially with Father's Day just two weeks away!

The main problem with "Godless" is that I had to walk through the valley of darkness to find it. You will have to push past surly bookstore clerks, proceed past the weird people in the "self-help" section, and finally past the stacks and stacks of Hillary Clinton's memoirs. If all else fails, ask for the "hate speech" section of your local bookstore. Ironically, if you find "Godless" without asking for assistance, it's considered a minor miracle.

This is not a book about liberals. I stress this in anticipation of Alan Colmes hectoring the author to name names. (For people who resented being asked to "name names" during the 1950s, these liberals sure aren't shy about demanding that conservatives do the same today.)

It is a book about liberalism, our official state religion. Liberalism is a doctrine with a specific set of tenets that can be discussed, just like other religions.

The Christian religion, for example, frowns on lying and premarital sex. That is simply a fact about Christianity. This does not mean no Christian has ever lied or had premarital sex. Indeed, some Christians have committed murder, adultery, thievery, gluttony. That does not mean there's no such thing as Christianity any more than videotape of Rep. William Jefferson accepting cash bribes means there's no such thing as congressional ethics rules.

Similarly, the liberal religion supports abortion, but that doesn't mean every single liberal has had an abortion. We can rejoice that liberals do not always practice their religion.

"Godless" examines a set of beliefs known as "liberalism." It is the doctrine that prompts otherwise seemingly sane people to propose teaching children how to masturbate, allowing gays to marry, releasing murderers from prison and teaching children that they share a common ancestor with the earthworm. (They haven't yet found the common ancestor ... but like O.J., the search continues.)

The demand that their religion be discussed only with reference to specific individuals – who is godless? are you saying I'm godless? – is simply an attempt to prevent us from talking about their religion. This tactic didn't work with "Slander" or "Treason," and it's not going to work now.

It's not just that liberals ban Reform rabbis from saying brief prayers at high-school graduations and swoop down on courthouses and town squares across America to cart off Ten Commandments monuments. The liberal hostility to God-based religions has already been copiously documented by many others. "Godless" goes far beyond this well-established liberal hostility to real religions.

The thesis of "Godless" is: Liberalism is a religion. The liberal religion has its own cosmology, its own explanation for why we are here, its own gods, its own clergy. The basic tenet of liberalism is that nature is god and men are monkeys. (Except not as pure-hearted as actual monkeys, who don't pollute, make nukes or believe in God.)

Liberals deny, of course, that liberalism is a religion – otherwise, they'd lose their government funding. "Separation of church and state" means separation of your church from the state, but total unity between their church and the state.

Two months ago, the 9th Circuit held that a school can prohibit a student from exercising his First Amendment rights by wearing a T-shirt that said "Homosexuality Is Shameful."

Even the left's pretend-adoration of "free speech" (meaning: treason and pornography) must give way to speech that is contrary to the tenets of the church of liberalism on the sacred grounds of a government school.

How might the ACLU respond if a school attempted to ban a T-shirt that said something like "Creationism Is Shameful"? We'd never hear the end of warnings about the coming theocracy.

In fact, students are actually required to wear "Creationism Is Shameful" T-shirts in Dover, Pa., where – thanks to a lawsuit by the ACLU – the liberal clergy have declared Darwinism the only true church, immunized from argument. Ye shall put no other God before it. Not one.

Liberals believe in Darwinism as a matter of faith, despite the fact that, at this point, the only thing that can be said for certain about Darwinism is that it would take less time for 1) a single-celled organism to evolve into a human being through mutation and natural selection than for 2) Darwinists to admit they have no proof of 1).

If only Darwinism were true, someday we might evolve public schools with the ability to entertain opposable ideas about the creation of man.

Posted by redguy on June 7, 2006 09:09 PM to redstatesusa

Remembering D-Day June 6, 1944

2006-06-06T15:35:00.000-05:00

Remebering D-Day. One of the most important days in the last century. The day the allies set foot on Fortress Europe and began the liberation of millions from under the jackboot of Hitler. Here are some links to view:

American Expereince - D-Day
Normandy American Cemetery & Memorial
Military History on-line: D-Day
Lesser Known Facts About WWII (click 1944 for D-Day - it's a great read)

Gunnery Sgt. Carlos Hathcock - US Marine

2006-06-06T10:27:00.000-05:00

This is worth the view. Click here to see an amazing presentation about a great American.

New CNN Poll - Illegal Immigration Problem

2006-06-05T07:18:00.000-05:00

A recent CNN Poll stated, that when asked, 'What do you think about the illegal immigration situation?', 43% of the respondents said that we (the US) do have a problem.

The other 57% said, 'No Habla Ingles!'

I heard Carlos Mencia talk about illegal Mexicans approaching the US Border Patrol and giving away the poistions of non-Mexican illegals crossing into the US.

Mencia said, 'Yeah, Mexicans are not stupid. They are not going to ruin a good thing. They spotted these non-Mexican crossers and went right up the Border Patrol Agents and said, 'Senor, dey no speaka Spanish!'

Classic!

On A Hill Not So Far Away

2006-06-04T21:12:00.000-05:00

(hat tip to Ret Col. US Army)

...if better immigration reform (no, if we don't enforce laws that already exist), this could happen!

Why?

2006-06-02T08:51:00.000-05:00

Study Claims Hurricane's Power Depends on Pollution

2006-05-31T18:31:00.000-05:00

Read This -

Why don’t any of these research projects come from schools in the South? Why is the sky always falling above the Mason Dixon and west of the Mississippi? We’ve got some fine institutions of higher learning from TX to VA, but ya’ll don’t see any of our schools put out any of this Chicken Little stuff. Nope, our science folks are more concerned about stuff that matters like plant propagation and animals/livestock genetics like all the folks over at Vandy, Rice, and Emory. Look, if the boys and gals in God’s school in Gainesville, FL can possibly find a cure for AIDS by hooking up a monkey’s brain to a Sears’ Die Hard Battery, I’ve got two things to say: The Red is Positive and the Black is Negative.

What all these chicken-little sky-is-falling crappy gvt funded research projects don’t tell you is that nature itself pollutes the atmosphere at a much more devastating and more frequent rate than anything man can produce. Anyone remember Mt Pinatubo? When Mt. Pinatubo exploded in the Philippines way back when, more crap went into the atmosphere than the total amount of human made pollution ever since these propeller heads have been licking their index fingers and sticking them in the air – I remember scientists saying back then that there would be horrific consequences because of all the gas and ash pushed into the outer reaches of the atmosphere. What happened? Nothing. Nature adapted to Mt. Pinny’s eruption and we all went on with our lives (cost us a naval base and a pretty good AFB, though)

And why is it only Atlantic hurricanes are more powerful because we drive SUVs and use aerosol sprays? What about tornados? What abour tropical cyclones? Oh, those are not as powerful and are not linked to pollution even though there are more frickin people in China and the Pacific Rim than the US will ever have. And we all know that China and the rest of the nations of that region are paragons of being good custodians of the environment. You see how utterly senseless this kind of crap is?

Anyway, I wish these propeller heads would spend their time and my tax dollars on something worth-while like cancer research, bone marrow, kidney, heart, brain and birth-defects and autism research, which by the way is a hell of a lot more difficult that saying the water temperature of the Atlantic may or may not rise in one hundred years...what a way to stretch the grey matter. Why waste tax dollars on something people can’t see and don’t give a crap about? Hell, spend the few 100K and tell me why cats land on their feet when you throw them, Dr. Howard, Dr. Fine, Dr. Howard!

It’s fashionable in science to create controversy. It’s even better when you can spend someone else’s money when you do it. All in all, even if these fellas are right, this pseudo-science doo-doo will probably be used as another weapon to quilt-trip the crap out of any person or nation that has the ability to make a device that shoots paint out of a can. New legislation from the UN on its way!

Oh Blow Me!