Pakistan's president has confirmed that "a close relative" of al-Qaeda number two Ayman al-Zawahiri was killed in a US air strike in Pakistan last month. Pervez Musharraf also confirmed for the first time that Zawahiri had been expected to be at the house targeted by the US, a military spokesman says. "Five foreigners were killed in the US attack," Gen Musharraf told tribal leaders in north-western Pakistan, the Associated Press news agency reports. "One of them was a close relative of Ayman al-Zawahri and the other man was wanted by the US and had a US$5 million (4.19 million euro) reward on his head."I think we will get Zawahiri and Binladen and Zarqawi very soon. Just a feeling... WHY?! I dunno.. it's just that the more and more other militaries start to take over regular old protection duties from us, (as NATO and theIraqis are doing in Afghanistan and Iraq, respectively) it means we can devote EVEN MORE resources to the hunt, and EVEN MORE IMPORTANTLY, it means we will get more and "mo' better" intel from locals. And when these murderous scumbags lose the locals (whose silence protects them): THEY ARE DEAD. Or soon will be. Faster please...
Shortly after the raid, unconfirmed intelligence reports said three high-ranking al-Qaeda members were among those killed in the raid on a village in the Bajaur Agency region on the border with Afghanistan. They named Egyptian bomb expert Midhat Mursi - information on whose whereabouts carries a $5m US bounty. They also named Abdul Rehman al-Misri al-Maghribi, the son-in-law of Zawahiri and reputed head of the al-Qaeda's media operations. The third person named was Abu Obaidah al-Misri, al-Qaeda's head of operations in Kunar province, just over the border in eastern Afghanistan. US officials have refused to comment on the attack.
"ALL CAPS IN DEFENSE OF LIBERTY IS NO VICE."
Saturday, February 11, 2006
... it has seemed commonsensical to me that, if the president has an inherent power under the Constitution, that a statute passed by Congress can't override that power. And Carter's Attorney General knew that at the time FISA was passed and, surely, after 9/11, the president's powers would not have decreased since 1978.
Friday, February 10, 2006
Well, as I said, I read the articles and just saw Pillar on CNN, and get this: Pillar agreed with clips from Bush and Cheney in which they argued that the USA intel and foreign intel "OVERWHLEMINGLY" concluded that Saddam had WMD stockpiles.
Pillar also greed that the Silberman-Robb Commisssion Report was entirely accurate when they asserted that there had been ABSOLUTLEY NO coercion put on ANY intel analyst to change or alter or spin their opinions; not ONE IOTA.
Pillar claims it was a subtle "politicization." of the intel. THOSE ARE WEASEL WORDS. I wonder if he - like another former CIA analyst Michael Scheuer and Cindy Sheehan - believes we went to war for Israel's securtity, and not ours!? It wouldn't surprise me.
HERE'S THE FRIGGIN BOTTOM-LINE: Saddam had done nothing - as in ZERO, NADA, ZILCH, BUPKUS - to earn the benefit of the doubt. In fact, Saddam had done TONS OF STUFF which made REASONABLE people ALL OVER THE WORLD consider him totally untrustworthy - HENCE, "THE FULL AND FINAL OPPORTUNITY" TO COME CLEAN; AKA: UNSCR#1441. Saddam did NOT come clean. Kay and Duelfer BOTH concluded Saddam WAS IN VIOLATION OF UNSCR#1441. Therefore war was the only answer.
Pillar, retired after 28 years at the CIA, was an influential behind-the-scenes player and was considered the agency's leading counterterrorism analyst.In all his years as CHIEF OF THE MIDDLE EAST COUNTER-TERRORISM DESK, did the CIA prevent any terrorist attacks on us!? Or did the CIA allow us to get attacked OVER AND OVER AGAIN! Beirut. The embassies. Khobar. The USS Cole. In other words: Pillar's desk was UTTERLY INCOMPETENT at it's assigned duties, and I for one would never EVER put any value on his opinion on ANYTHING. Pillar is a loser and liar and a weasel. A DISGRUNTLED weasel at that.
And here's the BIGGEST thing WRONG WITH PILLAR: he is NOT a decision maker; he is a service provider. In our DEMOCRACY the ELECTED leaders MAKE POLICY. This seems to upset Pillar - and most LEFTIES: they've always preferred the "POLITBURO" approach to public policy, in which "career bureaucrats" - UNELECTED AND UNACCOUNTABLE INSIDERS, (like other disgruntled WHINERS: Larry Wilkerson and Richard Clarke and Rand Beers) - make policy. And that is un-democratic and bad. Here's EXACTLY what this anti-democratic AS--OLE Pillar recommends (from his FA article):
The community needs to remain in the executive branch but be given greater independence and a greater ability to communicate with those other constituencies (fettered only by security considerations, rather than by policy agendas). An appropriate model is the Federal Reserve, which is structured as a quasi-autonomous body overseen by a board of governors with long fixed terms.He WANTS A QUASI-AUTONOMOUS SPY AGENCY!? Sheesh. He is EXACTLY WRONG. The people in the CIA need MORE accountability - (because of their countless, nearly constant FAILURES) - not less accountability.
BOTTOM-LINE: Bush was re-elected. And that means that as far as the way we went to war: THE CASE IS CLOSED. Lefties are wasting their time if they think this issue can have any traction or value. It's like arguing about whether FDR knew about the Pearl Harbor attack BEFORE it happened and ALLOWED it to happen to galvanize support for the war. A stupid waste of time.
RIGHT NOW.... we are in a similar situation with Iran: our intelligence services - and that of MOST of the world - indicate that the Iranians are trying to build nuclear weapons. All we know for sure is that they LIED about their nuclear research activities FOR 18 YEARS! And that makes them as trustworthy as Saddam.
And given what's at stake, we cannot afford to err on the side of caution. WE MUST PRE-EMPTIVELY DESTROY IRAN'S NUCLEAR ASSETS AND THEIR OFFENSIVE MILTARY ASSETS. Even if it turns out that Iran has no nuke weapons program. The cost of doing nothing and being wrong is far FAR greater.
Bush has said as much. Bush has said OVER AND OVER again that he will NOT give tyrants the benefit of the doubt. Jerks like Pillar want to. That's why we shouldn't listen to them. That, and the fact that they're NOT elected, and NOT accountable.
UPDATE: BTW, you'd think Pillar never heard of the friggin 1998 Iraq Regime Change Policy Act. Signed by Clinton. Sheesh. I mean to read Pillar, you'd NEVER think that getting rid of Saddam was the friggin offical policy of the USA ever since Democrat Clinton was POTUS. You'd think - from reading Pillar - that it was an idea hatched in Texas by Rove and Cheney and Wolfowitz (while on the phone with their Zionist boss Arik Sharon and their other boss the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia and their other bosses at Halliburton).
And to read Pillar, you'd never know that JUST IN ORER TO GET INSPECTORS BACK IN, Bush had to amass 500,000 troops in the region (on land and on ships). And you'd think the inspectors were NOT meeting with any delays or deciet or obfuscation. And you'd think that Saddam's "full and final" report was full and final. And you'd think that it was the inspectors jobs to play "DETECTIVE" and not merely audit the factuality of the "full and final report."
IN SHORT, WHAT PILLAR HAS DEMONSTRATED MOST IN THIS ARTICLE IS WHY THE CIA HAS BEEN AN ABJECT FAILURE FOR THE LAST FEW DECADES. WITH MEN LIKE HIM RUNNING THE SHOW, IT'S A MIRACLE WE WON THE COLD WAR! (And probably we woulda lost that one too, if not for Casey and Reagan!)
UPDATE: (MORE on moron Pillar HERE from WEEKLY STANDARD hat tip NRO.)
UPDATE #3: Three days later and POWERLINE posts a comment which reiterates exactly what I've written here. More proof that TAB scoops the big boys BIGTIME - just about everyday.
Thursday, February 09, 2006
Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday he would invite Hamas leaders to Moscow, opening a crack in a wall of U.S.-led opposition to dealing with the Palestinian election winner until it recognized Israel. ...If Putin does deal with an unchanged Hamas, then we should annouce support for an independent Chechen state. ARE YOU LISTENING AMBASSADOR BOLTON?!
At a meeting in London on January 30, Quartet representatives [the official backers of the "Roadmap For Peace"] said the Palestinians risked losing international aid if Hamas did not renounce violence and recognize Israel. Hamas has rejected the demand.
... U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said in Washington that the Bush administration had "contacted the Russian government about what their intentions are. ... If there are any contacts between the Russian government and Hamas, we would expect that they would send that very clear message, both in public and private, that is contained in the Quartet statement." A State Department official said Russia had not revealed Putin's plan to invite Hamas leaders at the Quartet meeting.
In a NutshellAND FROM MY PET JAWA:
posted by Erik @ 5:45 PM
One can't put it much more concisely than Jane Biran:One wonders if the Prophet Muhammad would approve of rioting, grievous bodily harm and arson.
If the answer is yes, then a depiction of his followers as violent is justified. If no, then some of his followers are causing offense to him on a daily basis.
Abu Ghraib and Cartoon Jihad
Ladies and gentleman, I am proud to call Dr. Leopold Stotch a good friend:there are many people in America and elsewhere in the West are making statements about how the media should self-censor and not publish the Danish cartoons that have sparked several days of Muslim rioting. That’s fine, and their argument isn’t completely without merit.Posted by Dr. Rusty Shackleford
However, it seems to me that these same people are precisely those who said that censoring the Abu Ghraib prison photos would be an unacceptable restriction on freedom of speech and a betrayal of the media’s allegiance to the truth.
...the GOP election message is: 'All we've got is fear and we're going to keep playing the fear card."
I think it is REASONABLE to be afraid of the terrorists who:
fly jets into skyscrapers; bomb Israeli pizzerias and Muslim weddings and funerals; riot and burn embassies over CARTOONS; blow up bars in Bali; behead charity workers; torch train-cars of Hindu pilgrims; destroy 1000 year old Buddhist monuments and behead Thai Buddhists; murder Russian school-children; condemn rape-victims to hanging; dress up their children as genocidal suicide bombers; deny the Holocaust; bomb subways in London and trains in Madrid; murder filmmakers; put fatwas on novelists; and generally try to establish tyranny and theocratic totalitarianism through intimidation and terror that KNOWS NO BOUNDS, AND ADHERES TO NO CONVENTIONS OF WAR.On the other hand the list of things the Left is afraid of IS TOTALLY UN-FOUNDED, IF NOT - INSANE! The Left says:
"Man-made" global warming is the biggest threat we face; we're running out of oil and other natural resources; federal bureaucrats deliberately withheld hurricane rescue services to New Orleanians; the NSA is illegally intercepting all of everyone's international phone calls - (all 200+ BILLION yearly minutes worth!); the FBI is intimidating librarians; the pharmaceutical companies, Wal Mart and the oil companies are ripping us off BIGTIME - we have to regulate them more!; that off-shore oil-drilling and oil-drilling in ANWR would be desecrations of the environment; that the Bush Tax Cuts are destroying our economy - (and that Bush has the worst jobs record since Hoover - it's the worst economy since Hoover); that abortion will become illegal and unconstitutional if you vote GOP; and that the GOP will take away your right to have a living-will (even though ALL the Bush's have one!); Bush and the GOP are trying make America into a Christain version of the Iranian religious state.The list of unreasonable fear-mongering by the Left goes back in time too. Remember these "golden oldies":
Reagan would start WW3; there will be mass global starvation; we're going to run out of oil; NAFTA will ruin our economy; Bobby Kennedy's ol' boss Joe McCarthy was evil personified and Alger Hiss and the Rosenbergs were innocent; "ending welfare as we know it" will put millions of people on the streets; the Reagan tax cuts will ruin the economy; that Afghanistan was going to be a QUAGMIRE - (we weren't supposed to defeat the Afghanis since the USSR couldn't); we weren't going to be able to defeat Saddam - because the strategy was wrong - we went in too fast and our supply lines were too strung out.And so on. EVERY ONE - as in "EVERY FRIGGIN SOLITARY ONE" - of these Democrat/Left charges were wrong. WRONG! As if that wasn't bad enough: There's a whole 'nother humongous list of things the Left said we SHOULDN'T worry about that turned out wrong, too; here's a smidgen:
Don't worry - the Domino Theory is wrong; don't worry if we take away some of your 2nd Amendment rights - gun control will lower crime; don't worry if we take away some of your 1st Amendment rights - we will take BIG MONEY out of electoral politics; don't worry - bi-lingual education and multi-culturalism won't dis-integrate our assimilated society.AGAIN: wrong every time.
The Democrats and the Left have been IRRATIONALLY fear-mongering for 50 years - they've been TRUMPING UP phoney fears like the true demoagogues they are. YUP: The Left are FEAR-MONGERERS who pedddle PHONEY/TRUMPED UP FEARS (and their "solutions - socialism/dhimmitude/appeasement/disarmament) would actually make our REAL problems WORSE!
BOTTOM-LINE: History has PROVEN that the Left have been wrong every single time. FACT: ALL the things the Left tells us we should be afraid of are nothing but BOGEYMEN!
And when they attack Bush and the war on terror, they are wrong again.
MY ADVICE: if the Left is against it, then you should be for it. If they fear it, then it must be good. The Left has been 180 degrees wrong on just about every issue for the last century. And I see NO signs of that record improving.
OH... there's one other thing (besides jihadoterror) that I am very VERY afraid of: today's Democrats ever taking over the House or the Senate, or the White House. God forbid. Please.
"The number of annual deaths from cancer has fallen for the first time in more than 70 years, researchers announced today."
According to government officials familiar with the program, the presiding FISA judges insisted that information obtained through NSA surveillance not form the basis for obtaining a warrant and that, instead, independently gathered information provide the justification for FISA monitoring in such cases.
Twice in the past four years, a top Justice Department lawyer warned the presiding judge of a secret surveillance court that information overheard in President Bush's eavesdropping program may have been improperly used to obtain wiretap warrants in the court, according to two sources with knowledge of those events.Sheesh. Only twice!? I was hoping that this intercept program would've yielded more!
BUT WHY SHOULD THE JUDGE BE PREVENTING US FROM USING MILITARY INTEL TO ARREST THE ENEMY?! DIDN'T WE TEAR DOWN "THE WALL" BETWEEN LAW ENFORCEMENT INTEL AND NATIONAL SECURITY INTEL!?
IOW: Why should al Qaeda's jihadoterrorists get a "pass" from our criminal justice system just because we find them through a MILITARY signint program?! THIS IS LUDICROUS!
The two heads of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court were the only judges in the country briefed by the administration on Bush's program. The president's secret order, issued sometime after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, allows the National Security Agency to monitor telephone calls and e-mails between people in the United States and contacts overseas.THEREFORE, THE ARTICLE IS ALSO CONFIRMING THAT TWO - YES TWO (2!) FISA JUDGES WERE KEPT INFORMED OF THE NSA INTERCEPT PROGRAM! When you add it all up, you MUST conclude that in many ways the "ABOVE TOP SECRET" NSA intercept program had MORE OVERSIGHT and MORE "checks and balances" than other FISA surveillance.
This NSA program had TWO (2) FISA JUDGES and EIGHT (8) Congressman kept informed EVERY 45 DAYS. Regular old vanilla FISA surveillance warrants ONLY need one (1) FISA judge to approve it (and they can use it un-rerapproved for 90 days) - and Congressmen NEVER EVER SEE THEM!
It's time to MOVE ON! If the Dems don't it will blow up in their faces: Americans want to be protected from attacks; we don't want jihadoterrorists protected by lawyers.
The most important issue in the eyes of Muslims is that Islamic values, the Islamic identity, and I think in this particular sense the protest reflect what I call a state of mind that senses internal and external danger. It's a besieged state of mind. You are attacking us continuously. This is part of you're [sic: your] war against us, against our Islamic identity....
We need to deepen the cultural, intellectual and social links between Muslim societies and Western societies. And also the war on terror -- the war on terror has done a great deal of damage to the image of the West in the eyes of the Muslim. Because [as] I suggested earlier, in the eyes of Muslim majorities, the war on terror is really a war against Islam and Muslims.
And the question is, how do you link Muslim societies with Christian societies? How do you deepen the links? How do you connect with Muslim societies? And fortunately, the cartoon controversy does not help matters. It exacerbates an already raging fire between the Muslim world and the Christian world.
ANSWER: Muslims. So called "radical Muslims."
Gerges - long an apologist for islamofascists - gets it EXACTLY WRONG. This war was declared by the INTOLERANT islamofascists ON THE WEST, and not the other way around. WE ARE JUSTY FRIGGIN FIGHTING BACK!
Religious freedom for all religions is guaranteed in the West, and NOT in all Islamic nations. Harassment of other faiths is routine in Islamic nations; in fact, it is against the law to practice another faith in Saudi Arabia. The islamofascists are the ones trying to enforce their fanatical religious beliefs on us, and not the other way around.
The West would be happy to have Muslims praying 5 times a day in mosques all over our nations if we didn't have to worry that the mosques were really jihadoterrorist clubs planning terror against us!
Today, much of the West is fed up with jihadoterror and the outrageous hypocrisy of apologists for jihadoterror - folks like Gerges (a tenured professor at Sarah Lawrence College in NY). Our tolerance got us into this mess: For way too long we tolerated the intolerance of Muslims. We are sick and tired of hypocrites like Gerges and Abu Laban (one of the 2 Danish imams who trumped up this whole Cartoon Intifada) who berate the West for intolerance while accepting it in Muslim nations - and in Islam itself.
Most Muslims NEVER condemned a single beheading or kidnapping which was done in the name of Islam; when jihadoterrorists beheaded someone on behalf of their faith, or MURDER DOZENS AT WEDDINGS OR FUNERALS, we never heard these apologists say that the jihadoterrorists had slandered Islam. But then, when NON-Muslims publish a few mild CARTOONS, Muslims go on a friggin rampage! Over friggin CARTOONS! And the apologists blame us!
People in the West can ONLY conclude that the rampaging Muslims are absofrigginlutley INSANE - or are jihadoterrorists! And professors who wear suits and appear on CNN should say so, and not argue that we in the West are not tolerant enough, or understanding enough, or that we haven't reached out enough!
LOOKIT: the enemy is attacking us - using violence and intimidation against us because of THEIR xenophobia, not ours.
When Muslim apologists for terror - like Gerges and Abu Laban - go on TV and accuse US OF XENOPHOBIA - when we are merely sticking up for OUR UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND OUR FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION and just beginning our counter-attack... why, why, why... IT'S ABSOFRIGGINLUTELY OUTFRIGGINRAGEOUS!
Then again, we should expect this kind of horrifying behavior towards us by some muslims (and also we should expect the amoral defenses of it by other Muslims). After all, we are mere "kafirs", and they are people whose religion says it's sometimes necessary to murder your own daughter to restore "honor" to your family.
The ensuing protests by locals and Pakistanis seemingly put Musharraf in a tight spot: he says he wants to cooperate as much as possible, but says he mustn't be seen as surrendering sovereignity to the USA - (by allowing us into his airspace, or by land over the Afghan-Pakistan border - even when we are in hot-pursuit of the enemy).
Failed regions - are like failed states: they are havens for terrorists. The jihadoterrorists fill the vacuum and assert their own sick tryannical form of authority within the otherwise government-less region.
I think we can CLARIFY this situation by publicly announcing a bold new policy: the USA will no longer recognize the international borders of lawless regions PERIOD. (A lawless region is any zone where the statutory authority with legal jurisdiction isn't enforcing the law.) In the case of Waziristan, the statutory authority is Pakistan, but in fact the Pakistani government has very little control of anything in Waziristan.
My propsoal says to Pakistan; "If you cannot enforce control over the "tribal regions" like Waziristan, you FORFEIT sovereignity over it, and we are free to attack it - at will."
The principle here is simple: If a government cannot rule a region by its own laws, then the protections of international law don't apply to that region. Lawless regions become fair game; it becomes OPEN SEASON on lawless regions and on semi-failed states.
This should also be applied to Somalia, and Gaza and the West Bank - and many other semi-failed/lawless states. We should put all of the semi-failed states and lawless regions (like Waziristan/Pakistan) ON NOTICE: enforce the laws or you will be attacked at a time of our choosing - however we choose.
As the situation now exists, these semi-failed states play a double-game - they claim statehood and yet fail to enforce lawfullness. And this is BS. As I said above: If the Pakistani government doesn't or can't control Waziristan, then Waziristan is de facto NOT part of Pakistan, but is de facto a lawless zone - one that can be attacked at will. Ditto Gaza and the West Bank.
We must get "semi-failed states" which "semi-help us" (states like Pakistan) to ante-up - BIGTIME. This proposal puts them on notice - BIGTIME. Help us... or else. Or else we will operate as we wiosh in your lawless zones - including assassinating the enemy with missiles, or by undertaking secret special operations on the ground.
NOTE: If the USA can assassinate al Qaeda in Waziristan without UN censure -as we recently did - then Israel can certainly do the same to the jihadoterrorists on its right border. But Kofi Anan doesn't think this is Israel's right. NOT SURPRISING: This is just another in a long line of anti-Semitic statements from Kofi, who is nothing but a useless, corrupt, incompetent anti-Semite.]
UPDATE: Let's put YEMEN on the list of semi-failed states! NOW!!
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
Syrian ex-VP, Muslim Brothers team up in bid to topple AssadAssad will fall soon. But before that happens, expect Assad and Iran to get their assorted jihadostooges to create as much havoc as possible - even attempt to ignite an all out Arab-Israeli war. (More HERE from the Arab, GULF DAILY NEWS.)
Former Syrian Vice President Abdel-Halim Khaddam and the exiled leader of the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood agreed on Wednesday to join forces to topple President Bashar al-Assad.An Iranian Website, close to the Revolutionary Guard, reported that the Syrian republican guard, the elite security force that ensure the stability of regime, was placed on high alert and all leaves were cancelled, following Khaddam's recent statements against Assad's rule.
A source at Khaddam's office said the former official held talks with Ali Bayanouni, head of the Sunni Islamist group, in Brussels on Tuesday and Wednesday. "There was agreement on a joint vision to save Syria from the crisis that the regime has placed it in," the source told Reuters in Beirut by telephone. "It was also agreed to contact other opposition leaders inside and outside Syria to come up with a joint plan of action."
The sculpture sits in church of San Pietro in Vincoli on the Esquiline in Rome.
Though it falsely depicts the Jews' greatest prophet (who God spoke with DIRECTLY) as having horns, (a mistake by the artist based on a mistranslation of the Hebrew word for "rays of light" coming from the head of Moses), and though this false depiction may have contributed to the long-held racist myth once believed by many Gentiles that Jews had horns and were satanic, this sculpture has never ever been the object of organized scorn by Jews, nor has it ever been defaced. Jews have never ever even demanded it be altered or taken off of display.
Perhaps Jews were content knowing that this glaring mistake (on this otherwise beautiful sculpture) merely exposes the ignorance of many people regarding the Bible. We see it as a TEACHING moment, as they say.
What is it about so many Muslims that makes them react with violence all the time? I believe it is partly a result of the vehement misogyny, and the polygamy and endogamy which are practiced by Muslims - especially in Arab Muslim nations. After all, if someone is raised to believe that it's okay to murder one's daughter or sister or female cousin in order to restore "honor" to the family, (and that "rape-as-punshment" is okay), then one can certainly do all manner of evil to infidels. Even for disrespectful CARTOONS!
Iran to hang teenage girl attacked by rapists -- Sat. 07 Jan 2006 -- Iran Focus --This sickness should NOT be tolerated by THE FREE WORLD. We ended slavery; we MUST end these awful practices against women. Religion is no excuse for - nor can fanatical belief in any religion justify - slavery or murder or rape. [BTW: The Leftie-dove group AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL/USA is also calling attention to the horrific injustice of this rape victim being sentenced to death. Hat tip NRO.]
Tehran, Iran, Jan. 07 â€“ An Iranian court has sentenced a teenage rape victim to death by hanging after she weepingly confessed that she had unintentionally killed a man who had tried to rape both her and her niece.
A national knife amnesty has been announced by Home Secretary Charles Clarke in a bid to halt the rise in crimes involving the weapons. Mr Clarke said the project, to allow people to hand in weapons without fear of prosecution, would run for five weeks this summer, starting on 24 May. Police forces throughout England, Scotland and Wales will be involved. ...The Brits recently enacted extremely restrictive gun-ownership laws, and as a result.... violent crime WENT UP! So NOW they're gonna have very restrictive knife-ownership laws! Sheesh! How stupid. If they really want to lower violent crime they should UNrestrict gun-ownership and make sure crooks'n hoodlums know that if they try to pull something on the average citizen, they might vry well get SHOT DEAD! THAT WILL LOWER CRIME. It has in the USA.
The announcement of the latest drive comes nearly a month after the high-profile killing of City lawyer Thomas ap Rhys Pryce, who was stabbed to death in North London on his way home from a night out. Home Office figures released in 26 January showed violent crime in England and Wales rose 4% between July and September last year.
The Home Office says the amnesty is part of a wide range of actions being taken to tackle knife crime, including toughening the law on carrying blades. Other proposals include raising the age at which people can legally purchase knives from 16 to 18 and giving teachers power to search pupils for knives at school.
This photo was appropriated by Abu Laban, given a new title and a new context. Appropriation iand re-contextualization is a standard way of making art, and has been since early in the last century.
Therefore, the real artist, the REAL CREATOR of this image was ABU LABAN! He is the blasphemer.
Maybe the Danes should deport him the Saudi Arabia where he can be PROPERLY punished: by beheading! After all Abu Laban is a Muslim himself - one who claims to believe in sharia. He would be getting his just desserts. Deliciously ironic dessert it is, too!
[ASIDE: Amir Taheri, in the WSJ, proves that depicting Mohammed has NOT always been considered a crime to Muslims.]
I'd like to do a post on how the Muslim reaction to the cartoons - which were an unreasonable attack to their faith - is really normal and to be expected.
After all, when the Taliban - (devoutly religious Muslims, they say) - destroyed the 500 foot tall, 1000 year old WORLD CULTURAL SITE WITH TNT in March of 2001, it was also an attack on Buddhism itself.
I think the comparison would be helpful. Thanks. (Sarcasm off.)
 "... listen to what the President said on June 9, 2005: “Law enforcement officers need a federal judge’s permission to wiretap a foreign terrorist’s phone, a federal judge’s permission to track his calls, or a federal judge’s permission to search his property. Officers must meet strict standards to use any of these tools. And these standards are fully consistent with the Constitution of the U.S.” Now that the public knows about the domestic spying program, he has had to change course. He has looked around for arguments to cloak his actions. And all of them are completely threadbare. "
 "The Attorney General knew ... about the NSA program when he sought the Senate’s approval for his nomination to be Attorney General. He wanted the Senate and the American people to think that the President had not acted on the extreme legal theory that the President has the power as Commander in Chief to disobey the criminal laws of this country. But he had. The Attorney General had some explaining to do, and he didn’t do it yesterday. Instead he parsed words, arguing that what he said was truthful because he didn’t believe that the President’s actions violated the law."
AG Gonzales correctly maintains that the program is LEGAL, and therefore his answer to the Feingold question during his confrimation hearing IS ENTIRELY TRUTHFUL!
Again, it comes down to whether or not you accept the fact that we are really at war, (a fact made UNDENIABLE by the fact that the 2001 AUMF clearly states we are at war! Well, it's undeniable to everyone except those afflicted with BDS, evidently). Bush has NO MORE violated the criminal law by ordering the NSA (part of the DoD) to intercept enemy communications, then soldiers who kill al Qaeda have committed murder. SURE: If a soldier were to shoot an innocent, non-threatening US person in the USA, then he'd be A MURDERER. But the soldiers - and law enforcement officers - who kill al Qaeda in the course of their duly assigned duties are not murderers. The rules of war are different than the rules which govern criminal conduct in peacetime.
 "... this administration reacts to anyone who questions this illegal program by saying that those of us who demand the truth and stand up for our rights and freedoms have a pre-9/11 view of the world. In fact, the President has a pre-1776 view of the world. "
And let's remember that FISA is merely a statutary law, NOT an amendment to the constitution! The war powers Bush claims to have, have been claimed by nearly every president since Washington, and certainly by EVERY war-time president. These powers have been repeatedly UPHELD by every court which has ruled on them - including SCOTUS and the FISCR. If Bush is a "King George" than so were Truman and FDR and Wilson and Lincoln and Adams and Washington.
I think Bush is like those presidents and that Feingold, and the leakers and the NYTIMES are BENEDICT ARNOLDS. The extraordinary POTUS/CiC war-time powers Bush has utilized since 9/11 PALE in comparison to what FDR did, but you'll never hear a Leftie say FDR should have been IMPEACHED, do you!?!
[Aside: Remember, assuming a "BENEDICT ARNOLD position" is NOT a novel thing for Leftie Dems DURING WAR-TIME. Remember Genghis Kerry's "Winter Soldier" testimony to the Senate in 1971?! He was a traitor too!]
 "The Attorney General yesterday was unable to give me one example of a President who, since 1978 when FISA was passed, has authorized warrantless wiretaps outside of FISA."
 The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was passed in 1978 to create a secret court, made up of judges who develop national security expertise, to issue warrants for surveillance of terrorists and spies. These are the judges from whom the Bush Administration has obtained thousands of warrants since 9/11. The Administration has almost never had a warrant request rejected by those judges. They have used the FISA Court thousands of times, but at the same time they assert that FISA is an “old law” or “out of date” and they can’t comply with it. Clearly they can and do comply with it – except when they don’t. Then they just arbitrarily decide to go around these judges, and around the law.
 "I asked the Attorney General about this, he could point me to no court – not the Supreme Court or any other court – that has considered whether, after FISA was enacted, the President nonetheless had the authority to bypass it and authorize warrantless wiretaps. Not one court. The Administration’s effort to find support for what it has done in snippets of other court decisions would be laughable if this issue were not so serious."
In fact, I'd argue that these decisions taken together constitute a "SUPER-DUPER PRECEDENT" if you ask me! (Heh.) Therefore, even though it is true that no court has SPECIFICALLY ruled on this matter, the precedents are clear - STARE DECISIS is clear.
 "Finally, the president has tried to claim that informing a handful of congressional leaders, the so-called Gang of Eight, somehow excuses breaking the law. Of course, several of these members said they weren’t given the full story. And all of them were prohibited from discussing what they were told. So the fact that they were informed under these extraordinary circumstances does not constitute congressional oversight, and it most certainly does not constitute congressional approval of the program. Indeed, it doesn’t even comply with the National Security Act, which requires the entire memberships of the House and Senate Intelligence Committee to be “fully and currently informed of the intelligence activities of the United States.”
UPDATE: ANKLE BITING PUNDITS has more on the hearings. More on the difference between law enforcement surveillance and war-time sigint HERE, (hat tip LAURA INGRAHAM). ANOTHER FISKING HERE AT CONFEDERATE YANKEE.
I think these Fiskings are importnt: Rants like Feingold's may very well become the Dem/Left's mantra this fall - if we don't dispense with it now.
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
French police have arrested two suspects wanted in connection with the 2004 Madrid train bombings, a Paris radio station said. France Info radio said two Egyptians were arrested in the Paris region earlier on Tuesday, suspected of having helped another Egyptian, now in prison in Italy, whom Spain suspected of being involved in the Madrid bombings.Did a newspaper in SPAIN ever print any tasteless anti-Muslim cartoons? Oh, no?!?! Then I guess IT AIN'T ABOUT THE CARTOONS, STUPID!
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has accepted an invitation to visit Cuba from President Fidel Castro, in gratitude for Cuba's support of Iran's nuclear program, the official Granma newspaper said on Tuesday.Paranoid, anto-American, racist, socialist tyrants stick together.
The Legal Arguments
In Limelight at Wiretap Hearing: 2 Laws, but Which Should Rule?
It is the sort of problem that judges confront every day. One law forbids a certain activity. The other may allow it. Which one counts?
And they further assert that the since constitution TRUMPS both laws, these laws MUST EITHER be read in a way which is consistent with the constitution or they must be ruled un-constitutional and null and void. Since these laws are other wise okay in other respects (and since Bush is using FISA warrants in other areas), the Bush Adminstration argues that FISA and ther AUMF must be interpreted in a way which is both constituional and which is in agreement with other statutes (FISA must be read in a way which allows agreement with the AUMF and vice-versa). THIS IS HOW STANDARD CONSTITUIONALITY IS CONSTRUCTED.
This interpretation of the AUMF and FISA is consistent with EVERY SINGLE COURT WHICH HAS EVER RULED ON THE ISSUE of whether the POTUS has the constitutional authoirty to order intercepts of enemy communications - INCLUDING THE SCOTUS (Keith 1972), THE FISCR (obviously a post-FISA ruling), AND SEVERAL FEDERAL DISTRICT COURTS (also in post-FISA rulings). This is NOT a novel or contemporary interpreation of the POTUS war powers. Presidents Washington, Adams, Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, and Truman ALL did it. As they should have!
Surveillance of the enemy, and interecepting enemy communications has ALWAYS been considered "an essential incident to waging war" and a power of the POTUS as CiC. SCOTUS upheld this power once again in HAMDI - a decision written by centrist O'Connor. The SCOTUS ruled that the POTUS can declare US citizens enemy combatants, and detan them. This power is GREATER than the power to intercept the international calls of al Qaeda with US persons in the USA. It is ludicrous to argue that the POTUS doesn't have the lesser power, when the Supreme Court - and all other precedent - grants him the greater.
Therefore, the Congress does NOT have to - nor should it - spell out in any AUMF that it ALSO is authorizing the POTUS to detain enemy combatants or to intercept enemy communications. IT IS A GIVEN.
So the Bush Administration's interpretation of the AUMF - (that it statutorily mandates the POTUS to intercept al Qaeda communications) - is the only LOGICAL one, and the only legal one BASED ON SCOTUS STARE DECISIS.
In fact, when taken along-side the 1972 SCOTUS Keith decision, the FISCR decision, the FISC decision, and other federal district court decisons regarding al Qaeda - (all of which have links in this post) - I'd argue that it's s "SUPER-DUPER PRECEDENT!"
What is more, it is LUDICROUS to assert - as the Leftie Dems do (and as Specter seems to!) - that intercepting al Qaeda's calls to the USA (or from the USA) is NOT part of the war we are now egenaged in. The enemy can and will attack us here; they SAY they will, and they have already tried numerous times SINCE 9/11.
This is an enemy whose attacks on us are NOT limited to battlefields overseas. We MUST fight them here if we are to defeat them and if we are going to prevent attacks such as 9/11 - OR WORSE. The POTUS as CiC has the authority to wage this war as it must be waged - according to the AUMF, and the constitution - and this is SETTLED LAW. (More settled than even Roe v. Wade!)
(A previous post is HERE.) (NOTE: This post has been updated to deflect arguments offered by Dr. Steven Taylor of excellent POLIBLOGGER. Check out his counter-argument in the comments section!)
The key issue at stake in the battle over the 12 Danish cartoons of the Muslim prophet Muhammad is this: Will the West stand up for its customs and mores, including freedom of speech, or will Muslims impose their way of life on the West? Ultimately, there is no compromise: Westerners will either retain their civilization, including the right to insult and blaspheme, or not.I think Pipes is wrong - or at least FRAMED the conflict incorrectly. This is NOT a battle between two civilzations, each trying to impose its peculiar customs and mores on the other, each feeling its customs and mores are under assault by the other.
This is a shallow, culturally relativist argument which misses the key point - and the histroical perspective.
This clash is between people (who happen to live in the West) who live in societies in which humans have regained their natural, inalienable INNATE, UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS, and people who live under tyranny - ALIENATED from their basic, universal human rights. People who live in a tyrannical culture ruled by a totalitarian ideology. An ideology which DEMANDS that women be treated as sub-human chattel, in which polygamy and FORCED consanguinous marriage are the norm. In which "honor-killings" and "rape as punishment" are perfectly acceptable.
We do not seek to "impose" our peculiar culture on them; we seek to LIBERATE them - our brothers and sisters - from this archaic form of tyrannical totalitarianism. They may seek to make us Muslim - or dhimmis, but what they're really doing is seeking to drag us back in time 1000 years - back to a time of tyranny and serfdom, back to a time when we were denied our innate human rights by other types of tyrants.
Well, we didn't win the revolution against the King of England (and defend it in WW2 and the Cold War) only to become the slaves of other kings - or the slaves of politburos, or of caliphs! We will NOT be dragged back in time.
As Bush has said many times, "Freedom is not America's give to the world; it's God's gift to each human."
The Islamofascists seek to deny EVERYONE their human rights - not just us "westerners" but even their own people. They want to take away everyone's PERSONAL autonomy, our PERSONAL sovereignity. To do so they have threatened our nation and the free world with terror. They're using terror to intimidate us into relinquishing our human rights. If we surrender them we don't become less "Western" - we become less free. We become slaves. And wiuth the USA out of the way, it would become easier for them to impose their tyrannical ideology on everyone else.
Just as being a slave in not merely having a bad job, so too is being attacked by Islamofascism NOT merely about being a non-Muslim. It's about being free - and wanting to stay free. And wanting to help make all people EVERYWHERE free. As they should be.
And it's not merely an battle for an abstract ideal, "freedom." There's a HUGE and very real bonus which comes with being free. Being free is not just right and good in-and-of itself; it's also the only way to create PROSPERITY - because prosperity is a by-product of liberty.
THEREFORE, our struggle to liberate our brothers and sisters who are still living under tyrannical totalitarian ideologies isn't merely a clash between morally equivalent ideologies or cultures. And when we win, it won't MERELY make them free. It will also empower each and every one of them to become more prosperous and to live longer, healthier, richer lives.
And they deserve that opportunity as much as they deserve their inalienable and universal human rights - and they deserve all that as much as you and me. We all do. That's what Coretta and Martin fought for!
(MORE HERE ON PIPES FROM POWERLINE.)
An international team of scientists says it has found a "lost world" in the Indonesian jungle that is home to dozens of new animal and plant species. ... "It's as close to the Garden of Eden as you're going to find on Earth," said Bruce Beehler, co-leader of the group. ... "It's beautiful, untouched, unpopulated forest; there's no evidence of human impact or presence" said Dr Bruce Beehler, of Conservation International.
One of the team's most remarkable discoveries was a honeyeater bird with a bright orange patch on its face - the first new bird species to be sighted on the island of New Guinea in more than 60 years.
I'll tell you why: These Leftie enviromentalist/conservationists don't feel that EXTINCTION and CLIMATE CHANGE are a part of nature - that they're NATURAL. They feel that if stinking humans weren't messing the whole planet up then the whole planet would be Paradise. As in, "get your stinking paws out of here you damned dirty human!"
Well, they're wrong extinction,; climate change; predation are all a part of nature - and so are we!
Monday, February 06, 2006
Iraqi Shi'ite Muslim leader Moqtada al-Sadr met Syrian leaders [IN DAMASCUS] on Monday and said the United States and Israel were trying to spread strife among Arab countries.This should surprise NO ONE: al Sadr is a jihadoterrorist - and NOW: obviously shilling for Tehran and Assad. WE SHOULD HAVE KILLED HIM AFTER HE MURDERED THE LEADING MODERATE MULLAH YEARS AGO!
Sadr, who led two anti-U.S. uprisings in Iraq, expressed support for Syria, which is facing western pressure over its alleged support for rebels in Iraq and the killing of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri.
MORE HERE, from KUWAIT NEWS. Excerpt:
Al-Sadr would meet president Bashar Al-Assad to discuss the political and security aspects of life in Iraq within the overall political process and formation of the Iraqi government.NO DOUBT: a meeting arranged by al Sadr's handlers in Tehran.
Baghdad - Iraqi police have arrested the fourth-rankin
g figure in al-Qaida in Iraq, state television said, while officials are investigating whether the group's leader, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, had fled to neighbouring Iran.
The brief report on Iraqiya television yesterday identified the suspect as Mohammed Rabei, also known as Abu Dhar, and said he was No 4 in the al-Qaida. It gave no further details.
Meanwhile, a senior Iraqi security officer said the Iraqi government has been receiving information that al-Zarqawi may have moved to neighboring Iran after hot pursuit by US and Iraqi forces in western Iraq.
As is FOCUS - who seems to have confirmed it with the iraqi government.
WELL, WELL, WELL: Zarqawi in Iran... and al Sadr in Damascus. Hmmm: Persian and Arab; Allawite, Shia and Sunni jihadoterrorists all cooperating. A true transnational/state-sponsored axis of evil.
WHAT COULD THIS INDICATE? It's simple: I expect things to heat up MORE AND MORE as we put more pressure on Syria and Iran, and(I have been blogging since September of last year) to heat things up they will mostly use their jihadoterrorist stooges - Zarqawi, al Sadr, and even more "spontaneous" gloabl intifadas. Stay tuned... things are JUST BEGINNING to heat up...
I posted on coal-to-oil conversion in September of last year.
SO: ample DOMESTIC sources for oil are here - and more importantly - SO ARE THE RESOURCES NEEDED TO DEVELOP THEM: (1) We got the oil-shale and the coal here - (enough to supply the whole planet for a thousand years!); and we got the MONEY to invest in the technology and production.
So.... DO WE NEED GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT?! NO. We just need the price of oil to stay higher than $35/barrel, and we need the government to stay out of the way!
Dear Senator Obama:
I would like to apologize to you for assuming that your private assurances to me regarding your desire to cooperate in our efforts to negotiate bipartisan lobbying reform legislation were sincere. When you approached me and insisted that despite your leadership’s preference to use the issue to gain a political advantage in the 2006 elections, you were personally committed to achieving a result that would reflect credit on the entire Senate and offer the country a better example of political leadership, I concluded your professed concern for the institution and the public interest was genuine and admirable.
Thank you for disabusing me of such notions with your letter to me dated February 2, 2006, which explained your decision to withdraw from our bipartisan discussions.
I’m embarrassed to admit that after all these years in politics I failed to interpret your previous assurances as typical rhetorical gloss routinely used in politics to make self-interested partisan posturing appear more noble.
Again, sorry for the confusion, but please be assured I won’t make the same mistake again. [...]
As I noted, I initially believed you shared that goal. But I understand how important the opportunity to lead your party’s effort to exploit this issue must seem to a freshman Senator, and I hold no hard feelings over your earlier disingenuousness.
Again, I have been around long enough to appreciate that in politics the public interest isn’t always a priority for every one of us. Good luck to you, Senator.
Sincerely, John McCain United States Senate
Here's further proof he's not just ignorant, but that he's an immoral phony:After graduating from Harvard Law, the then utterly unknown Obama was contacted by a bright aggressive literary agent who thought he might have a story to tell. They signed a contract. The agent sold his book.
After his pretty convention speech in 2004 - (and before he was elected to the Senate)- he unilaterally broke this contract in order to sign with another bigger agent (who he was introduced to by Clinton, they say!). He eventually "settled" with his first agent.
My little story proves Obama has no scruples or loyalty.Obama MIGHT have repaid his first agent's efforts with loyalty, and proffeered her the opportunity to gain from his new-found fame. Instead, he bailed-out as soon as a better thing came along. THIS IS A SIGN OF BAD CHARACTER. And now John McCain's story further confirms my point. CASE CLOSED.
AUSTRIA. WHY?! Did they confuse the Danish embassy with the Austrian embassy? Nope. It's because the Austrians hold the EU presidency right now.
Iran and Syria - (along with Syria infiltrated Beirut) site of the other major embassy attacks - have trumped up the Danish September cartoons into an intifada in order to attemot intimidate the UN and the EU into going wobbly on sanctions against Syria and Iran.
SO... maybe we should do MORE than just throw sanctions on them?
BTW: Iran also cut official relations with Denmark.
Relatives of hundreds of passengers killed when a ferry sank in the Red Sea on Friday have attacked the offices of the ship's owners. A crowd broke into Al-Salam Maritime's offices in Safaga, Egypt, and began throwing the contents onto the street. Family members also tried to storm a hospital in the town of Hurghada after it displayed photographs of bodies recovered from the sea.They attacked the office of the ferry company AND A FRIGGIN HOPSITAL!? Sheesh.
Grief is understandable. I feel sorry for them. BUT WHY DID IT TURN VIOLENT? Could it be they have a culture of violence? I think it's a safe bet. After all - according to them - their culture is first and foremost MUSLIM. Maybe there's a connection between this their basic creed and their propensity for rage and violence? Maybe their basic beliefs - which exalt misogyny, xenophobia and genocide (and permits "honor-killing" and rape-as-punishment) - gives them a diathesis for all types of dehumanizing violence?
CHALLENGE TO THE DEMS: INTRODUCE A RESOLUTION EXPLICITLY BANNING THE POTUS FROM UTILIZING ALL TOOLS WHICH ARE NECESSARILY INCIDENTAL TO WAGING WAR
I OFFER IT UP AS A CHALLENGE. After all, Bush is arguing - correctly I believe - that it is the long established "law of the land" that when Congress authorizes the use of force it also tacitly authorizes the POTUS - as CiC - to use ALL the tools which are necessarily incidental to waging that war effectively - like gathering sigint and detaining enemy combatants. (The SCOTUS and several other courts have CONSISTENTLY ruled this way for DECADES!)
THEREFORE, if the Democrats don't want the POTUS - as CiC - to also have the authority to use ALL the tools which are necessarily incidental to waging war, then they MUST specifically amend the 2001 AUMF to specifically ban surveillance of the enemy in the USA without a FISA warrant - and even take away the president's authority to designate anyone an enemy combatant, while they're at it - if they want to.
IMHO: This would play out exactly like when Duncan Black introduced the MURTHA RESOLUTION (calling for IMMEDIATE "redeployment" of our troops OUT OF IRAQ) - which of course went down to ignominous defeat, as it should have.
Do the Democrats FEAR that a resolution banning the POTUS from gathering sigint of the enemy would lose? YES THEY DO; THEY KNOW IT WOULD LOSE BIGTIME.
And, after we all watch the Democrats in Congress squirm over having to choose between their Left-wing base and doing the right thing - we could ALL MOVE ON.
BTW: I've been watching MOST of the Gonzales, and I come away feeling VERY impressed with him and even more impressed with the president's case. Combining the arguments of the 1972 SCOTUS Keith decision, the FISCR decision, the enemy combatant decision, the precedents of Wilson aduting WW1, and FDR during WW2, and of Clinton - and appealing to BOTH the "safety valve" within FISA - (US CODE TITLE 59, 1809, a, 1), and the AUMF - makes it an absofrigginlutely iron-clad case.
MORE ON THE HEARINGS HERE.
NOW, the NYTIMES sides with the islamothugs, claiming that the cartoons were unduly provocative and that Islamic reaction is understandable and logical.
BUT WHEN ANTI-CHRISTIAN ART WAS DISPLAYED IN NYC (in 1999), AND CHRISTIANS COMPLAINED (INLCUDING GIULIANI), THE NYTIMES BERATED THEM AND EVEN COMPARED THE COMPLAINERS TO NAZIS!
This is another in what seems like a never-ending stream of instances in which the NYTIMES takes the PRO side of a debate when it's anti-American or anti-Judeo-Christan, and then argues the exact other side - the CON side - when it supports America or Judeo-Christian values. There can be only one explanation for this: the NYTIMES is FUNDAMENTALLY anti-American and anti-Judeo-Christian.
(Another example comes quicly to mind, today: the NYTIMES supported the overly broad ECHELON surveillance program when Clinton was president, but are now against the targeted jihadoterrorist surveillance program authorized by Bush. Leave other examples in the comments section.)
The Newsbuster post has links and quotes. RTWT.
UPDATE: MORE MSM HYPOCRISY HERE - from MY PET JAWA. The culprit? CNN, of course!
Leftists aid and abet the enemy in other ways, too - as when the ACLU sues to get convicted/admitted jihadoterrorist off the hook and free to attack again, or plan other attacks.
NOW, ZAPATERO HAS DEFINITELY put Spain in the wrong side. With all Western countries publicly defending free speech and condemning the barbaric acts of violence after the publication of the Danish cartoons, Zapatero and Erdogan write an open letter that has been published in today's International Herald Tribune ... you won't find a single line of clear and specific condemnation for the death threats, embassy burnings, etc [in this letter]. There isn't any aknowledgement whatsoever of previous acts of violence in the name of Islam prior to the Danish cartoons, which is specially egregious considering Zapatero is the Prime Minister of a country where 192 people were killed in the name of Islam (at least apparently) almost 2 years ago. Way before any cartoon "provoked" any reaction.There are many reasons why the Left supports the enemy. One is BDS. Another is their loathng of Western Civilization which they blame for the phantom of man-made global-warming, sexual repression and widespread societal sexual dysfunction - (see Marcuse), and the poverty of the Third World. Each of these assertions is demonstrably FALSE, yet these doesn't stop Leftists from BELIVING in them - there faith in Leftism enables them to suspend logic and ignore reality. The lack of falsifiability of most of their arguments doesn't phase them a bit. And they do this inspite of the very obvious fact that our enemy threatens them as muich as anybody. WHY DO THEY DO THIS!?
the left is not motivated by a "subconscious yearning" for America's defeat, but quite self-consciously announces the defeat of America as its primary goal.
Thus a leftist author like William Blum does not think his books are being unfairly used by Usama Bin Laden to provide an ex-post-facto apologia for mass murder. Rather, my impression is that the William Blums in our country are quite confident that they have recruited the Usama Bin Ladens of the world to their banner, and believe that after Al Qaeda, Hamas, and Hezbollah have contributed their small part to defeating the Beast, they will return peacefully to their caves to smoke kif while the William Blums, Barbra Streisands, and Cynthia McKinneys take the reins of power.
Unlike Cindy Sheehan, Hugo Chavez, and William Blum, on the other hand, the mass/mainstream/antique media apparatchiks must of course conceal the fact that they have enlisted in the leftist project; thus they give the appearance of merely subconsciously yearning for America's defeat.
The stupidity and blindness of the world view of the fellow travelers, useful idiots, and willing dupes are indeed astonishing.
The irony is that the efforts of those that the left hates are precisely what will, God willing, prevent the left from tasting the bitter sadness of discovering that they did not recruit the tyrants to their causes, but were used by the tyrants who would surely, coming to victory, grind them in the same infernal machine they applied to all their other victims.
WHY IS THIS!? Well, - and this is my second point - the Leftist creed valorizes the rule by an elite, and this has always made them susceptible to falling vitim to the "cult of personality" - and the "benevolent dictator syndrome": Lenin; Hitler (YES: HE WAS A SOCIALIST!); Stalin; Mao; Fidel; Che; Allende; Ho Chiu Minh; Pol Pot; Mugabe; Chavez, etc. The Left IDOLIZED EACH OF THESE TYRANTS. Their diathesis for worshipping tyrants also makes them prone to demonizing their foes. In this light, we see why the Left demonized Nixon and Reagan, and now Bush. What the left fails to understand is the extent to which Leftist tyrannies were defeated by the VALUES of these men (and not their personalities!); the victories of these men were fueled by their belief in liberty and freedom for all humanity, and their knowledge that properity is a by-product of this liberty, and their confidence that democracy is the most effective form of government to promote a free and properous nation.
These VALUES, and not merely the sheer force of our president's will, are what will propel us to our ultimate victory. A victory which will not only defeat the enemy, but finally consign Leftism to the dustbin of history - where it belongs!
If Iran gets nukes, they will use them (on their enemies - which includes US, or merely to enable them to act with EVEN MORE impunity than they already do - and they ALREADY act with terrible impunity as proven by the FACT that they've violated the NPT for 18 years, thumbed their noses at the IAEA and the UN, and have OPENLY aided and abetted international jihadoterrorism).
The costs Iran using a bomb - (or of giving one to their jihadoterrorist stooges to use!) - will be much much much MUCH greater than the costs of us destroying their nuke capability, their navy, their air force and their entire missile system.
It's that simple. Failing to act NOW would be like surrendering to jihadoterrorism. The clock is ticking...
Sunday, February 05, 2006
At least six people were killed on Friday when gunmen opened fire at a Christian home on a mainly Muslim island in the southern Philippines, an army general said. ... three men, two women and an eight-month-old infant were killed in the attack. Six others, three of them children, survived the shooting with minor injuries. "We don't know the motive for the shooting," Aleo said.The motive for the attack is simple: they must've been cartoonists. Oh they weren't cartoonists!? Oh. Er, um... then I guess "IT'S NOT THE CARTOONS, STUPID!"
An Italian Catholic priest has been shot dead outside his church in north-east Turkey. Police in the Black Sea port of Trabzon said they were searching for a teenage boy seen fleeing from the scene of the attack on Sunday. ... Turkish broadcaster NTV identified the priest as Andrea Santore and said he died from a single shot to the chest.Turkey has seen regular protests in recent days over the Danish caricatures of Muhammad.I wonder if this priest was a cartoonist or if just read cartoons? Or if he EVEN read cartoons!? IOW: "IT AIN'T ABOUT THE CARTOONS, STUPID!"
What wasn't funnelled into jihadoterrorism went into "Swiss" banks - much of for Arafat's "wife" Suha. THIS DEGREE OF THIEVERY BY THE ISLAMOTHUGS ISN'T SURPRISING: those who would commit genocide will of course also steal.PA attorney general says billions may have been stolen from Palestinian coffers - The Palestinian attorney general on Sunday said a corruption investigation has concluded that senior officials in the Palestinian Authority may have stolen billions of dollars of public funds.
...Al-Meghani, who took office last September, said he planned to unveil the results of his investigation in December but delayed the announcement at the request of PA Chairman [and Fatah chairman] Mahmoud Abbas. ...Fatah was trounced in last month's legislative election, in large part because of voter anger over years of corruption.
This news comes at a time when the Palestanis claim that their "government" is broke. Maybe instead of committing genocide against Jews, Hamas should track down the Muslim theives and recover the money!
... there have been enough similar episodes to make clear that self-censorship is at stake here:the fatwa against Salman Rushdie,Bill Clinton, the former US president, and German Muslim leaders have also likened the cartoons to historical anti-Semitism. But this is cant.
the murder of Mr Rushdie's Japanese translator and his Norwegian editor,
the murder of Theo van Gogh in the Netherlands in 2004,
the insistence on anonymity of all translators of the Dutch politician Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and so on.
The worst threats and most unruly demonstrations did not object to any demeaning "message" in the cartoons.
They objected to the sacrilege of depicting Mohammed at all.
This is not a demand for respect or fair treatment. It is a demand that non-Muslims live by Muslim religious rules.
I feel certain that we would destroy Islam before we would accept that. Before we would even accept dhimmitude. Even if that meant that every so-called "moderate Muslim" nation had to fall into the hands of the fanatics along the way. So be it; they've been hostage to jihadoterrorism for too long, anyhow - to the point where we can't trust them... to the point where they side with the fanatics and aganst us as often as not. (Like Libya for instance - Kaddafy recalled his ambassador to Denmark. In return, we should bounce his untrustworthy ass back out in snactions-land.)
NOPE: we should draw the line here and now. If the fanatics thought this would make it LESS likely we would tighten the noose around Iran's and Syria's necks they're mistaken, This just steels our resolve. And when those regimes topple, then the fanatics - who organized the Cartoon Intifada as they did the Paris Intifada - will have no state sponsors, and they'll be completely isolated, in desperate need of funding, and much easier to wipe out.
"ALL YOUR words, pictures, cartoons, images, representations, ideas, books, thoughts ARE BELONG TO US."
[In case you don't remember: "THE fast-food chain, Burger King, is withdrawing its ice-cream cones after the lid of the dessert offended a Muslim. The man claimed the design resembled the Arabic inscription for Allah, and branded it sacrilegious, threatening a 'jihad.]