"ALL CAPS IN DEFENSE OF LIBERTY IS NO VICE."
Saturday, July 23, 2005
Friday, July 22, 2005
And the Left-wing wackos over at COMMON DREAMS are telling people to "resist!" Sheesh.
Double Sheesh: even Chuck Schumer is in favor of it! Which sort of illustrates the corner that the Democrats painted themselves into (because they have chosen to demagogue the GWOT, instead of backing Bush to the hilt, and NEUTRALIZING it as a partisan issue): on the rare occasions when they DO come out in favor of reasonable defensive measures against terror, they risk losing support of their Left-wing wacko base. Well, screw'em: it's a mess they deserve to be in!
The U.S. House of Representatives just voted to extend the Patriot Act.The majority of House Democrats (79%!) are living in 1968.
The roll call was a follows:
Republicans in favor = 214
(92%).Democrats in favor = 43 (21%).
Thursday, July 21, 2005
HOWARD: MOTIVES FOR TERRORIST ATTACKS ON LONDON SUPERCEDE IRAQ. BLAIR: "I AGREE 100% WITH THAT!" SO DO ALL SANE OBSERVERS
PRIME MIN. BLAIR: And I agree 100 percent with that.
This comes on the heels of China LOSING the UNOCAL bid. BUSH RULES!
The U.S. House of Representatives voted today on a number of W.O.T. resolutions. One such resolution essentially declared that detaining and then interrogating al-Qaeda vermin trash heaps, at Gitmo, was essential to the global war against terrorism. Yeah, of course, they used more diplomatic language, but that was the gist of the provision. And here’s how they voted:Republicans in favor: 223. Opposed: 4. Present: 2. Not voting: 1.Think about that for a moment. Nearly 60 percent of the Democrat House caucus voted against the status quo at Gitmo, and, by implication, against the ruthless prosecution of the war against Islamo-fascist terrorism. Astonishing. But not surprising. Harry Truman is rolling over in his grave. "
Democrats in favor: 81.Opposed: 119. Not voting: 2.
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
LIVINGSTONE - THE PINKO ANTI-SEMITIC MAYOR OF LONDON - BLAMES THE USA AND THE UK FOR THE 7/7 ATTACKS
Decades of British and American intervention in the oil-rich Middle East motivated the London bombers, Ken Livingstone has suggested. ... he argued that the attacks would not have happened had Western powers left Arab nations free to decide their own affairs after World War I. Instead, they had often supported unsavoury governments in the region. ... Mr Livingstone was asked on BBC Radio 4's Today programme what he thought had motivated the bombers. He replied: "I think you've just had 80 years of western intervention into predominantly Arab lands because of the western need for oil. "We've propped up unsavoury governments, we've overthrown ones we didn't consider sympathetic."
During the Cold War the USA had to align itself with some unsavory leaders; this was practical, and not unlike how FDR and Churchill used Stalin to defeat Hitler. Some unsavory Arab nations fell in that category. Let's examine them closely, though: Iraq, Syria, Egypt (until 1970), and Libya, were all "clients" of the USSR; (2) Iran was a "client" of the USA and the UK - AND IT WAS BETTER FOR IRANIANS UNDER THE SHAH; Algeria and Morocco and Tunisia and Ethiopia were more influenced by the French and the Italians and the Germans than either the USA or UK; Jordan was "NEUTRAL" - remember, it was the late King Hussein (a Hashemite descendent of Mohammed) who defeated Arafat and kicked him into Lebanon (without aid from either the USA or the UK!). AND FINALLY: In fact, the EU has largely been anti-Israel and pro-Arab since Munich in 1972 - which is 33 - YES THIRTY-THREE YEARS AGO! So nearly VERY ARAB ALIVE TODAY HAS EXPERIENCED A EUROPE AND A UK WHICH IS MUCH MORE PRO-ARAB THAN IT HAS EVER BEEN PRO-ISRAEL.
ALSO: much of the world's oil comes from outside the Arab world: Africa, Canada, Venezuela, Mexico, the North Sea nations and Russia produce as much as the Arabs do. The USA and the UK do NOT get most of their oil from Saudi Arabia. While Middle Eastern oil is vital to the West, it is equally vital to the ENTIRE WORLD. Leftists who contend that the West got rich by stealing resources or labor from the Third Word are NUTS. If that was truen, then Africa and Soiuth America would be rich NOW - soince colonialism died fifty years ago. BUT THE FACT ITS... that "Arabia" and Africa and South America have gotten POORER - just as Asia got richer. WHY IS THIS SO: Because Asia largely embraced freer trade and free markets (China did in 1979, and stopped being a poor basketcase as a result!). Socialism is what makes the Arab world poor. YUP: Baathism is nothiong more thasn Islamic Scoailism. Youi can look it up; just Google BAATHISM.
BUT THE MOST GLAROING ERROR RED KEN MAKES IS THIS: the Arabs - especially the jihadofascists - do not see the world in terms of oil-producers and oil-users, or divided into Western versus "oriental", but Islamic versus infidel. And to them there are two types of infidels: the dhimmi who pays tribute to Islam (and therefore may live, albeit as a second-class human) and the infidel who must be murdered. Arab jihadoterrorists actually go even further: they divide the world into the ummah and the others; the Ummah is the Arab/Islamic people - which transcends nation-states.
STILL NEED MORE PROOF? Well, the Buddhas of Bamiyan had NOTHING to do with Europe or Arabia. And the Hindhus slaughtered at the Ayodhya Temple in India had NOTHING to do with Europe or the West or oil or Israel. YOU SEE, the jihadists have goals that transcend the Middle East and London and NY and Israel. They want to re-establish the caliphate under Wahhabist sharia, and they will kill or convert anyone that gets in their way. THEN, they will exact a trubute/tax from the rest of the non-Muslim world.
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
Were they duped into spending 3 months in Pakistan, too!?!? NO. No effing way. These GENOCIDAL bombers were NOT DUPED into spending MONTHS in Pakistan. And they didn't go there "for the waters," either - (as Bogart/Rick so famously said in CASABLANCA.) They went their for Jihad, and Jihad means war against all infidels.
"The burden is on a nominee to the Supreme Court to prove that he is worthy, not on the Senate to prove that he is unworthy."
Sunday, July 17, 2005
Thank you. Thank you all very much. Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans, major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country. ... We have difficult work to do in Iraq. We're bringing order to parts of that country that remain dangerous. We're pursuing and finding leaders of the old regime who will be held to account for their crimes. ... We are helping to rebuild Iraq where the dictator built palaces for himself instead of hospitals and schools. And we will stand with the new leaders of Iraq as they establish a government of, by and for the Iraqi people. The transition from dictatorship to democracy will take time, but it is worth every effort. Our coalition will stay until our work is done and then we will leave and we will leave behind a free Iraq. The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001 and still goes on.
update: the leaker turned out to be an anti-Bushie working for Colin Powell at State: Richard Armitage, and he leaked the name to bolster the anti-Bush/anti-war Joe Plame, not to intimidate the Plame's or send a message to the intel' community to shut up.
9 - "'IRAQ IS A DIVERSION' BY DICK CLARKE" - Disgruntled bureaucrat, Dick Clarke claimed that Bush could have stopped 9/11 - and claimed that a "Presidential Daily Briefing" in August would prove this; however, the PDB contained NO ACTIONABLE INTEL. Clarke further claimed that Iraq was not involved in terror since 1993 - or cooperating with al Qaeda. BOTH WRONG! In fact, the Clinton Administration had proof of Saddam/al Qaeda operational cooperation, and we have discovered more proof at GITMO. BONUS BOGUS CLAIM: Clarke LIED when he testifed that stepped up counter-terror efforts were the reason the Millennium Attack failed.
10 - "HUMVEE-GATE" - An intellectually dishonest reporter for the Left-wing dominated MSM planted a question/questioner during a miltary townhall meeting Rumsfeld held in Kuwait. At the time the army had not yet reto-fitted armor on to all their 15,000 Humvees; it does take time. FACT: the Humvee was NEVER intended as an ARMORED PERSONNEL CARRIER; the Humvee is merely the "new" Jeep. FACT: The enemy always attempts to attack at your weak-points. For a limited amount of time, the Humvees were a weak point. We fixed that, and the enemy moved on to other soft-targets. That's the way war is; it was not a scandal - except in the minds of the Left/MSM. NOW: Retro-fitted/armored Humvees are having other problems.
Let me just say something about leaks in Washington. There are too many leaks of classified information in Washington. There's leaks at the executive branch; there's leaks in the legislative branch. There's just too many leaks. And if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of.
IF I WERE INCLINED TO HELP THE LEFT/MSM, I'D RECOMMEND THAT INSTEAD OF TRYING TO SMEAR BUSH WITH PHONY SCANDALS, THAT THE LEFT PROPOSE SOME COUNTER-POLICIES FOR THE GWOT AND THE ECONOMY AND ON OTHER DOMESTIC ISSUES. Not that it would work: The Left's policies are as bad as their phony scandals! Heh.
Some sophisticated explorers held captive by scary savages (they've offended somehow) are offered two forms of punishment: death or pungoo. (Pungoo is usually described as some horrifying and perverse sexual attack.) The captives - too proud to allow themselves to be sexually humiliated - stoutly choose death. The captors announce: "OKAY: DEATH BY PUNGOO!"***
Old jokes aside, Winston Churchill gave invaluable advice - which Abbas, and other world leaders who are wobbly in the face of terror should heed: "Refusing to fight an honorable battle may afford a temporary peace, but in the long run, it's a peace too costly." AND (to Parliament after Chamberlain returned from Munich with an agreement with Hitler): "You have been given the choice between war and dishonor. You have chosen dishonor, and you will have war!" Churchill was right - on both counts, and his words are as relevant today as they were then.
[*** I've also heard this joke told as, "Okay, death by...": "buufuu"; "unga-bunga"; "booda-booda"; and "chibi".]
ASIDE: the old joke goes for the Left and the GWOT, too: either we can have (a) a global war in which we are attacked by Jihadists, and we counter-attack, or (b) we can not counter-attack and have a global war in which we are attacked by Jihadists. The Left seems to want the latter - just like Abbas.