Palmetto Pundit

Where's the Heat?

2008-03-19T23:28:00.005-04:00

Insanity has, I think, been best defined as doing the same things over and over again and expecting different results. Who gets the credit for being the first to say it is, I suppose, a debate for a different day, but I think it bears repeating here. The debate may be over as the global warming community loves to say, but the data stubbornly refuses to live up to the hype:

· Some 3,000 scientific robots that are plying the ocean have sent home a puzzling message. These diving instruments suggest that the oceans have not warmed up at all over the past four or five years. That could mean global warming has taken a breather. Or it could mean scientists aren't quite understanding what their robots are telling them.
This is puzzling in part because here on the surface of the Earth, the years since 2003 have been some of the hottest on record. But Josh Willis at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory says the oceans are what really matter when it comes to global warming.
In fact, 80 percent to 90 percent of global warming involves heating up ocean waters. They hold much more heat than the atmosphere can. So Willis has been studying the ocean with a fleet of robotic instruments called the Argo system. The buoys can dive 3,000 feet down and measure ocean temperature. Since the system was fully deployed in 2003, it has recorded no warming of the global oceans.
"There has been a very slight cooling, but not anything really significant," Willis says. So the buildup of heat on Earth may be on a brief hiatus. "Global warming doesn't mean every year will be warmer than the last. And it may be that we are in a period of less rapid warming."

It seems the harder scientists try to prove that global warming is an undebatable scientific fact, the more reality rears it's ugly head and renders the "facts" inconclusive. The article concludes:

Trenberth and Willis agree that a few mild years have no effect on the long-term trend of global warming. But they say there are still things to learn about how our planet copes with the heat.

I find it more than a little odd that Trenbeth and Willis are in agreement that " a few mild years have no effect on the long-term trend of global warming". If that's the case, would it not also stand to reason that a few warmer than normal years do little to prove the earth is even warming at all. Maybe chasing windmills pays better than using common sense

Update: AJ Strata's takedown is here. He also makes the case that the data shows were are heading into a cooling, not a warming period due to lower than normal solar/sunspot activity.

Technorati Tags: Global Warming, Science

Glenn Greenwald's Crazy Logic

2008-03-10T22:34:00.005-04:00

Glenn Greenwald chimes in today regarding the Eliot Spitzer prostituion scandal:

Regarding all of the breathless moralizing from all sides over the "reprehensible," outrageous crimes of Eliot Spitzer:
are there actually many people left who care if an adult who isn't
their spouse hires prostitutes? Are there really people left who think
that doing so should be a crime, that adults who hire other consenting
adults for sex should be convicted and go to prison?
Just as was true for moral crusaders David Vitter and Larry Craig,
there is unquestionably a healthy chunk of hypocrisy in Spitzer's case,
given that, as Attorney General, he previously prosecuted -- quite aggressively and publicly
-- several citizens for the "crime" of operating an adult prostitution
business. That hypocrisy precludes me from having any real personal
sympathy for Spitzer, and no reasonable person could defend him from
charges of rank hypocrisy. And he should be treated no differently --
no better and no worse -- than the average citizen whom law enforcement
catches hiring prostitutes.

But how can his alleged behavior -- paying another adult roughly $1,000
per hour to travel from New York to Washington to meet him for sex --
possibly justify resignation, let alone criminal prosecution,
conviction and imprisonment? Independent of the issue of his hypocrisy
-- which is an issue meriting attention and political criticism but not
criminal prosecution -- what possible business is it of anyone's, let
alone the state's, what he or anyone else does in their private lives
with other consenting adults?

Well Glenn, it becomes everyone's business and most certainly not a private matter when the subject in question is the Governor of the State of New York and the activity in question is illegal. Three clicks after typing in the search term "ny law" in Google brings this interesting tidbit:

§ 230.00 Prostitution.
A person is guilty of prostitution when such person engages or agrees
or offers to engage in sexual conduct with another person in return for a fee.
Prostitution is a class B Misdemeanor.

That's New York Penal Code, Part 3, Title M, Article 230 if I'm reading that correctly. I suppose Glenn can make the argument that prostitution should not be illegal and if Gov. Spitzer is found guilty of such, that it doesn't warrant his removal from office if the point of his rant is to ignore the facts.

Given Gov. Spitzer's history of prosecuting the same types of crimes against the citizens of New York while Attorney General, I agree the hypocrisy stinks to high heaven, but if that's all he sees as a problem in this case, then a reality check is definitely in order.

While it may not matter to Greenwald that the Governor of New York has been tied to a prostitution ring, I suspect many of the citizens who elected him would beg to differ and would choose to hold him to a slightly higher standard.

Update: Dan Riehl is a bit more, shall we say, blunt. Heh.

Technorati Tags: Glenn Greenwald, Eliot Spitzer, Prostitution, New York

Math Problem?

2008-03-06T23:46:00.005-05:00

Jonathan Alter in Newsweek today (via Memeorandum):

Hillary Clinton won big victories Tuesday night in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island. But she's now even further behind in the race for the Democratic nomination. How could that be? Math. It's relentless.

To beat Barack Obama among pledged delegates, Clinton now needs even bigger margins in the 12 remaining primaries than she needed when I ran the numbers on Monday—an average of 23 points, which is more than double what she received in Ohio.

Superdelegates won't help Clinton if she cannot erase Obama's lead among pledged delegates, which now stands at roughly 134. Caucus results from Texas aren't complete, but Clinton will probably net about 10 delegates out of March 4. That's 10 down, 134 to go. Good luck.

Luck has nothing to do with it. Sure, the math might be a problem for a typical, garden variety candidate, but this is the Clinton machine were talking about, is it not? This thing is going to the convention for a floor fight. Between now and then, the "machine" will make plenty of offers that can't be refused. Look for a lot of arm ~~breaking~~ twisting between now and the convention.

Tags: Hillary Clinton, Delegates, Delegate Math, Democrat Party, Floor Fight, Primaries

No Regrets

2008-03-04T20:11:00.007-05:00

It's been a little over a year since I last posted, so I'm not real sure what to say or where to start. I'm sure most of the visitors I had have long since given up coming by here, and I don't blame them- There hasn't been a whole lot to see. If no one reads this now, that's ok too. This one's for Dad.

Not long after my last post, on April 30, 2007, my father passed away. The neck and back surgeries that were supposed to repair the damage he suffered in a fall one afternoon in his backyard, actually caused additional damage from which he was never able to recover. When he died, a big part of me died as well.

He used to love reading Palmetto Pundit. Maybe it's because I was his son and that's what he was supposed to do, or maybe there were other reasons. I'm not sure exactly why, but he really liked it and seemed to get a real kick out of it. To me, it was just a way to express my opinion without getting my teeth kicked in--keyboard therapy, if you will. To him, reading what I had written was something he loved to do.

I could look at my site meter each day and see that he'd been traipsing around. I could always count on having at least one visitor each day and his was always the one that meant the most. Sometimes he was afraid I 'd gone a bit too far, and upon reflection, I suspect he may have been right. He never failed to tell me he had read my latest post and really enjoyed it and that meant more to me than he would ever know.

In the months before he died, he was highly medicated in an attempt to alleviate pain and much of what he said was hard to understand, but one thing I specifically remember is him asking me to print out my blog posts and bring them to him to read. I never did because I thought he was in too much pain to read them. I now realize that I entirely missed the point. He didn't want to read them, he wanted me to read them to him. I never told him that I had stopped blogging when he went into the hospital, but looking back I really wish I would have printed a bunch of old posts and taken them to him.

He died and I quit. It's as simple as that. My dad's motto was "Never, Never, Never Give Up!", but I did just that- I gave up. I never changed my political views or my opinions, I just stopped caring and stopped blogging. That's the last thing my father would have wanted or expected from me.

As my father lay dying, I held his hand, leaned over and whispered in his ear three words--No Regrets, Dad. And just then he was gone, and I've not been the same since. I'm working through it, but it's still very much a work in progress.

I started thinking about what I said to him a few days ago, and asked myself honestly if I had any regrets, and I did. Chief among those regrets was my decision to stop writing and stop blogging. It's not because I feel I have anything earth shattering to say or any particular talent in this area, but because my father would have wanted me to continue. I think as much as he enjoyed reading my posts, he also realized that no matter who else read them it was good therapy for his son. He knew that writing made me happy and in turn that made him happy. Once again, I suspect he was right.

Although I don't know exactly how much I'll be writing, I will continue writing and posting here. It may not always be political or relevant to the news of the day, (as is probably obvious from this post on Super Tuesday II) but I'll write nonetheless. Even if no one else reads it, I know I'll always have at least one visitor. No regrets.

Tags:

An Update on My Father

2007-02-09T21:34:00.002-05:00

I thought I would pop back in the ‘sphere for a few moments to give everyone an update on what’s been going on. I’m sorry I haven’t been able to respond individually to all of the kind and thoughtful well wishes I’ve received via comments and email over the past couple of months, but I can assure you that each and every one has touched my heart and has not gone unnoticed.

As of today, it has been 101 days since my father was admitted into the hospital for neck and back surgery. The surgeries appear to have been successful in repairing the damage, but his recovery has been a different story altogether. I can now say that I’ve seen the real damage and suffering that can be caused by Parkinson’s disease. I wish I couldn’t.

I imagine most people primarily think of tremors and unnatural movements when they think of Parkinson’s disease, but the true effects of the disease unfortunately run much deeper. In my father’s case, it has done everything in its power to fight his recovery.

Fortunately, my father has the determination of ten men and the fight of an angry pit bull, and that is the reason I believe he is still alive. He has a large plaque with the words “Never, Never, Never Give Up!” in his room and he lives up to it every day.

Since his move from the hospital into a rehab facility a week and a half ago, he has made some significant progress. His physical and occupational therapists have commented they cannot believe someone in such poor shape can put forth such an incredible effort. Obviously, they had never met my father.

He still has a long way to go and a full recovery is still uncertain, but there has been some real reason for optimism for the first time in quite a while. For that I am truly thankful.

Your continued prayers would be greatly appreciated and your kindness and compassion has been a godsend. Thanks for caring, and as always, thanks for stopping by. It means more to me than you’ll ever know.

An Explanation For My Absence

2006-11-14T22:41:00.000-05:00

I've had a number of good folks from the blogosphere asking where I've been lately, and I suppose a long overdue explanation is in order. I will attempt to explain it here while at the same time preserving the privacy of my family as much as possible:

My father has Parkinson's disease and a good while back he fell in his backyard while trying to do some yard work. The initial diagnosis was a "deep bruise" that would likely heal on its own. You know, the old garden variety, take two aspirin and call me in the morning type injury.

The initial diagnosis was, to put it mildly, a complete misdiagnosis.

My father actually fractured a vertabrae in his lower back and has also required extensive surgery to rebuild and fuse together the bones with metal in his neck. Please forgive me for my inability to explain the medical terminology involved, but the doctors described it as "building a cage" around his neck not only to repair and stabilize it, but also to help protect it from further injury.

As you might imagine, having Parkinson's Disease presents a whole multitude of challenges. The best way I can describe the challenge is to compare it to the part of Newton's first law that states, "An object in motion tends to stay in motion". The doctors had to figure out how to work around his dyskinesia not only to get a good picture on an MRI, but also how to control it enough to safely work near his spinal cord. In other words, they had to figure out how to make an object in constant motion become an object at complete rest for at least long enough to make a proper diagnosis and perform the surgeries required to correct the problem. It appears they have been largely successful to this point.

Although the major surgeries are over now, the recovery appears to be far from over. We have been assured that he will recover, but it will take a multitude of baby steps instead of giant leaps.

As of right now, he is still in the hospital and I am devoting my spare time to being with him and helping him as much as I possibly can. There will also be a period of pretty intense physical therapy, the timeframe of which I am uncertain.

Ironically, my father was scheduled to undergo Deep Brain Stimulation surgery to help control his Parkinson's symptoms on October 31st, but fell and injured himself before he could have the surgery. The fall turned out to not only be ironic, but also an unexpected blessing at the same time.

The fall not only revealed that he had chronic osteoporosis that no doubt contributed to the severity of the neck and back injuries, but it also made the doctors aware of a problem they had not previously known existed. If the surgery had been done without this knowledge, he could have been paralyzed or worse by the very surgery that was intended to improve his life. So I guess in the final analysis, my father's fall was a blessing although it sure hasn't felt like it for the better part of the last couple of months.

As to whether I will be coming back, the simple answer is I don't know, but I certainly hope so. Right now, my family needs every spare minute I have and I intend to give it to them.

As things improve, I hope to get back in the game and offer an opinion or two from time to time. For now, my father and the doctors working to help him could use all of the prayer the good folks of the blogosphere can muster. If I could ask only one thing of my visitors, that would be it. I've seen the blogosphere work wonders and prayer work miracles and we could use a little of both right now.

I can't thank you enough for your concern and I hope this very belated explanation helps to clear things up a bit. As always, thanks for stopping by!

Rules of Engagement? Are You Kidding Me?

2006-09-13T17:22:00.000-04:00

Below is a screenshot of the front page of this morning’s New York Post that got E. D. Hill’s blood boiling on Fox and Friends this morning; followed shortly thereafter by my own:

The author of the accompanying story, Ian Bishop, provides background as to what the fuss is all about:

WASHINGTON - Taliban terror leaders who had gathered for a funeral - and were secretly being watched by an eye-in-the-sky American drone - dodged assassination because U.S. rules of engagement bar attacks in cemeteries, according to a shocking report.

U.S. intelligence officers in Afghanistan are still fuming about the recent lost opportunity for an easy kill of Taliban honchos packed in tight formation for the burial, NBC News reported.

The unmanned airplane, circling undetected high overhead, fed a continuous satellite feed of the juicy target to officers on the ground.
"We were so excited. I came rushing in with the picture," one U.S. Army officer told NBC.

But that excitement quickly turned to gut-wrenching frustration because the rules of engagement on the ground in Afghanistan blocked the U.S. from mounting a missile or bomb strike in a cemetery, according to the report.
[Emphasis Mine]

We are fighting an enemy who looks upon our buildings and sees tombstones, yet someone in our military chain of command sees our enemy gathered en masse in a cemetery and all they see is a stop sign? I’m at a total loss for words!

Apparently the military is not denying the authenticity of the photo, but is questioning unauthorized release.
Might I suggest they also question the idiocy of these rules of engagement while they’re at it?

Tags: Afghanistan, War on Terror, Military, Taliban, Drones, Rules of Engagement

The Chirping Rubble

2006-08-29T01:33:00.000-04:00

Yes, I know, it's been awhile. I haven't updated or posted this blog for over a month because frankly, I haven't been able to muster the energy or the desire to continue wading through the cesspool some still affectionately refer to as "politics".

On one side you have a group of folks who have sold their souls and their consciences to the far left of their party and would suck sewage through a drinking straw so long as doing so would cost "evil Bush" a percentage point or two in popularity. For God's sake, we are a nation at war for our very survival and their most pressing need is picking out drapes and furniture to adorn their offices when they regain power.

On the other side you have a group of folks who have spines made of Jello and seem hellbent on letting the minority party get away with it. I've been having a hard time figuring out which is worse: The party of Bush haters or the party that is enabling them.

Don't get me wrong, there are a few honorable civil servants on both sides of the aisle, but it has gotten to the point that I'm not sure whether I could pay my water bill if I had $10 from each of them.

I align myself with the Republican party first and foremost because they are the most willing to defend this nation from our enemies, but even that no longer seems to be set in stone.

You would think using the world's finest and best equipped fighting force to eliminate those who want to kill us would be a no-brainer whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, but defending America no longer unites us; it divides us.

Today's politicians find a way to continue funding our war efforts then seemingly spend the rest of the time figuring out a way to undercut our ability to win it.

It's all about holding onto power or regaining it. I'm not real sure how useful that power will be if we wake up tommorrow with one of our major cities obliterated because our elected officials are more worried about November than they are September. The threat to our nation is real and it is right now.

I found myself watching the Inside 9/11 series on The National Geographic Channel yesterday and found myself completely caught off guard by one segment in particular: I call it The Chirping Rubble. I'm not real sure if that is the best way to describe it, but those are the words that have been running through my head like a freight train all day and is what led me to write this today. I wonder if our elected officials in Washington have heard the sound of the chirping rubble?

For those who didn't see it, I suppose an explanation is in order:

Near the end of the episode dealing with the eventual collapse of both towers of The World Trade Center, there was a scene showing rescue workers sifting through the rubble looking for survivors. It was eerily silent except for the chirping of what sounded like hundreds of beepers coming from beneath the rubble. They were the emergency locators worn by police officers, firefighters, and first responders who were running up the stairs in an effort to send everyone else down.

Each and every chirp marked the location of one selfless hero who made the ultimate sacrifice for their fellow man. I don't know how many chirps there were, but it sounded like hundreds and was deafening to me.

I honestly didn't think there was anything else that happened on 9/11 that could affect me more profoundly or make the wounds of that day any deeper than they already were, but I was wrong. The chirping made the sacrifice of each of those brave souls more real than ever before. I couldn't sleep thinking of the impact it must have had on the rescue workers trying desparately to locate them and hoping beyond hope they were still alive.

Many of the best and bravest America had to offer seemed to be calling out to them from beneath an insurmountable mass of twisted steel and broken glass and yet there was very little that could be done to reach them in any sort of timely fashion. I can't imagine a more hopeless feeling, and yet I can't remember a more tireless effort in the face of such impossible circumstances.

The chirping served as a reminder that no matter who wishes us ill, there will always be those among us who will face any foe, stare down any threat, and yes, pay any price so that we all may remain free. The debris may have appeared insurmountable, but the chirping is what left the lasting impression on me.

From now on, when I hear crickets chirping on a warm summer evening, I will be reminded of the selfless sacrifice made by those who gave all for their fellow man that day and those who stand ready and are doing the same today.

It's high time for politicians of all stripes to stop focusing all of their energies on regaining power and winning elections and start focusing on defending this great nation from all enemies foreign and domestic. Listen to the chirping rubble and sacrifice your pride for the good of the country!

Preacher of Suicide Bombing Can't Stand Explosions!

2006-07-21T07:44:00.000-04:00

(Via Memeorandum)

Omar Bakri, the exiled hate monger known for his enthusiastic support of suicide bombing, is apparently afraid of....Bombs!:

EXILED preacher of hate Omar Bakri has begged the Royal Navy to rescue him from war-torn Beirut.

The Muslim cleric who fled Britain last year, tried to board a ship full of women and children yesterday but was turned away.

He also wrote to the British embassy asking to be allowed back on “humanitarian grounds”.

In an email to officials, dole scrounger Bakri pleaded: “The current situation in Beirut left me without any choice but to appeal to you to grant me a visit visa to see my children for one month.”

But his bid to sneak on one of our ships was blocked at harbour gates by sharp-eyed officials.

Bakri, 46, left his family in Edmonton, North London, last August and went to Lebanon after a Sun campaign to kick him out.

Charles Clarke, then Home Secretary, banned him from returning here.

The mad mullah, who hailed terrorists as “magnificent” martyrs, bought a £150,000 bolthole in the exclusive Doha district of Beirut.

In March he boasted: “When I left England I bought a one-way ticket out. I never want to see the place again.”

But cowardly Bakri changed his tune as soon as bombs started dropping.

The spineless coward was singing a different tune in February '04 (HT: Jihad Watch):

A FANATICAL pal of evil cleric Abu Hamza had told British children as young as ten they must “kill and be killed” for Islam.

Muslim extremist Omar Bakri — speaking in London’s East End — said suicide bombers were assured a place in paradise.

Bakri described such bombings as “self-sacrifice operations”.

An example would be to crash a plane on to 10 Downing Street or the White House, he told a cheering audience of Muslims, including around ten young children.

In one outburst he raged: “You must fight for the way of Allah, for the sake of Allah, to kill first and to be killed.” [Emphasis mine]

Unless, of course, you are Omar Bakri!

House Supports Israel 410-8, But for How Long?

2006-07-20T22:58:00.000-04:00

(Via AP)

WASHINGTON - The House, displaying a foreign affairs solidarity lacking on issues like Iraq, voted overwhelmingly Thursday to support Israel in its confrontation with Hezbollah guerrillas.

The resolution, which was passed on a 410-8 vote, also condemns enemies of the Jewish state.

House Republican leader John Boehner cited Israel's "unique relationship" with the United States as a reason for his colleagues to swiftly go on record supporting Israel in the latest flare-up of violence in the Mideast.

Little of the political divisiveness in Congress on other national security issues was evident as lawmakers embraced the Bush administration's position.

While it is nice to see such a strong show of support for Israel, I can't help but wonder how deep the support really is. How many of these representatives will end up one day making the claim that they were "mislead" into supporting this resolution and how long will it take for them to do it?

I realize the question is a bit on the pessimistic side, but recent history-- at least on the Senate side-- proves the question is not far-fetched.

Even though the resolution was non-binding, I believe the future behavior of the 410 who voted yea will not only reveal Israel's true friends, but also those who still view events in the Middle East as nothing more than a political game.

Keep a sharp eye out!

It's About Time!

2006-07-15T00:18:00.000-04:00

I've had modem problems for the last couple of days and have been unable to post on the Middle East conflict between Israel and Hezbollah. I have determined that maybe that isn't such a bad thing. These problems have allowed me to sit back and try to digest all of the information without having to worry about what to say about it. That said, I've decided to simply say what I think without worrying about linkage or what other sources are saying about the situation.

There are a lot of people out there who feel the need to sort out all of the scenarios and what if's and analyze cause and effect regarding Israel's response. I'm not going to do that here, but I will say that I stand by Israel and her right to defend herself and quite frankly I believe the current response is right on the money and long overdue.

Israel's course of action may not be the one the rest of the world would have preferred Israel take, and may in fact lead to further instability in the region, but I believe it is the only course of action Israel has left. They've had enough and have vowed to stop it. Who are we to offer advice to Israel on the proper course of action when we aren't the ones who have to live with it on a daily basis? We are fighting Islamic extremism in the Middle East so that we don't have to fight it here, but Israel doesn't have that choice because it has always been on their doorstep.

They're under the constant threat of terrorist attack and have been continually asked to stand down when attacks occur. Is it really fair to expect them to continue standing down? That's not what we did after 9/11! We took the fight those who did it and have taken an oath to never forget and to fight until the threat has been eliminated. It strikes me as ridiculous for people to expect Israel to sit back and temper their response so as not to inflame the situation. That's not what we did and it was not what we were expected to do!

Everyone has a breaking point and I think Israel has finally reached theirs. They have tried to "do the right thing" according to the world's standards for far too long in my opinion. They've had enough and are now sending a message that world opinion doesn't amount to a hill of beans when survival is on the line. They have vowed to take out Hezbollah once and for all just as we vowed to take out Al Qaeda, and I say Godspeed!

I don't know what will happen in the end, but I do know that good cannot triumph over if it isn't in the fight. Whether we like it or not, Israel is in the fight now and I have a feeling they're in it to stay.

Far be it from me to tell them they don't belong in it!

Missile Snipers?

2006-07-07T07:39:00.000-04:00

Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough present an interesting theory regarding missile defense in this morning's Inside the Ring:

We have no evidence that the U.S. was able to sabotage North Korea's Taepodong-2 missile, which malfunctioned 42 seconds into launch on Tuesday and crashed.

But we do note that special operations forces (SOF) are playing an increasing role, overt and covert, in the world under Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's rule. We also note that one of the reasons that SOF procured the powerful .50- caliber Barrett's sniper rifle was to have the capability to disable ballistic missiles. It's a scenario for missile defense you won't see in any literature from the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency: insert a commando behind the lines, who positions himself within shooting range of the launchpad.

"One of the original reasons for procuring the .50-caliber sniper system was to disable missiles," a SOF source says. "A round pumped in prior to launch, or during to cover the noise, in the right place would cause a catastrophic malfunction."

If we assume, for the sake of discussion, that this scenario goes beyond mere assumption and is actually the reality; then what is commonly referred to as our missile defense system is only one link in the chain. The mere possibility that this is the case goes a long way toward easing my mind.

Of course, it would make perfect sense for the first line of our missile defense system to start at the launch pad and work backwards. I'm no expert, but I believe it would be far easier to take it out or disable it while it is sitting on the pad than to rely on hitting a moving target.

Even if this scenario doesn't exactly square with reality, I think it is still clear that at least one level of redundancy is in play here. It simply wouldn't have made much sense to rely solely on a system that has not been proven to be fully reliable as our sole means of defense against a threat that is this serious.

North Korean Missile Was Aimed at Hawaii

2006-07-07T01:14:00.000-04:00

If there's still anyone making light of the recent failures and apparent ineptness displayed by the North Koreans in their recent missile tests, they may want to consider sobering up in a hurry:

TOKYO (Reuters) - A North Korean missile launched on Wednesday was aimed at an area of the ocean close to Hawaii, a Japanese newspaper reported on Friday.

Experts estimated the Taepodong-2 ballistic missile to have a range of up to 6,000 km, putting Alaska within its reach. Wednesday's launch apparently failed shortly after take-off and the missile landed in the sea between the Korean peninsula and Japan, a few hundred kilometres from the launch pad.

But data from U.S. and Japanese Aegis radar-equipped destroyers and surveillance aircraft on the missile's angle of take-off and altitude indicated that it was heading for waters near Hawaii, the Sankei Shimbun reported, citing multiple sources in the United States and Japan.

North Korea may have targeted Hawaii to show the United States that it was capable of landing a missile there, or because it is home to the headquarters of the U.S. Pacific fleet, the paper said.

An alternative explanation might be that a missile could accidentally hit land if fired towards Alaska, the report said.

I'm not putting a lot of stock in the alternative explanation. I'm not necessarily implying that Kim Jong-Il intended to hit Hawaii, but I'm convinced he wanted to get close, if for no other reason than to prove that he could. He needs to know if our missile defense system can stop him and whether or not we are willing to use it.

Fortunately, the missile failed this time and he didn't get the answer he was looking for. However, it is worth noting that the United States experienced numerous failures of Redstone, Atlas, and Saturn V rockets before we finally orbited the earth and eventually landed on the moon.

The difference in the determination of a madman and that of a sane one can be razor thin regarless of whether the goal is good or evil. We can't bet on continued failure: If they light another candle, we must send the message that we are willing, ready, and able to extinguish it.

It Ain't A Hunger Strike If You Don't Go Hungry!!!

2006-07-04T23:22:00.000-04:00

(Via Brietbart)

Star Hollywood actor-activists including Sean Penn and Susan Sarandon and anti-war campaigners led by bereaved mother Cindy Sheehan plan to launch a hunger strike, demanding the immediate return of US troops from Iraq.

As Americans get set to fire up barbeques in patriotic celebration of US Independence Day on July 4, anti-war protestors planned to savour a last meal outside the White House, before embarking on a 'Troops Home Fast' at midnight.

"We've marched, held vigils, lobbied Congress, camped out at Bush's ranch, we've even gone to jail, now it's time to do more," said Sheehan, who emerged as an anti-war icon after losing her 24-year-old son Casey in Iraq.

The hunger strike was the latest bid by the US anti-war movement to grab hold of American public opinion, after numerous marches, vigils and political campaigns.
[Emphasis mine]

There is one more thing they could do: Get a clue and come to the realization that the decison isn't up to them; it's up to the terrorists! When the enemy is defeated, they'll come home.

Of course, I realize good old-fashioned logic is not a factor when it comes to the Sheehan brigade and here's proof:

The hunger strike will see at least four activists, Sheehan, veteran comedian and peace campaigner Dick Gregory, former army colonel Ann Wright and environmental campaigner Diane Wilson launch serious, long-term fasts.

"I don't know how long I can fast, but I am making this open-ended," said Wilson.

Other supporters, including Penn, Sarandon, novelist Alice Walker and actor Danny Glover will join a 'rolling" fast, a relay in which 2,700 activists pledge to refuse food for at least 24 hours, and then hand over to a comrade.
[Emphasis, once again, mine]

Are you kidding me? A rolling fast? This is the brilliant idea that's going to change hearts and minds? The idea of a fast is to starve, not take shifts! Where's the sacrifice?

If they can't devote more than 24 hours at a time to their cause, why in the world would they expect anyone to give a rat's rear end about what they're trying to accomplish?

How 'bout a little "rolling" patriotism for a change?

The Islamophobia Misnomer

2006-07-02T23:46:00.000-04:00

Dave Ursillo Jr. has written an excellent essay entitled "One Simple Word" at SevenStripes.com. The topic, in short, is the misuse of the word Islamophobia and if I hadn't finished the entire essay in one sitting, I would have sworn it was penned by Bill Whittle.

Here's a sample:

Even before the dust settled at Ground Zero in New York City, I adamantly believed that the religion of Islam would persevere over the marginal sect of radicals who now threatened to destroy both the religion itself and the free world. Sensible Americans agreed with the commonly held notion that Islam was a peaceful religion. We all remembered that some years earlier, a radical Christian cult viciously struck at the heart of America in Oklahoma City. If the psychotic, hate-filled, murderous Timothy McVeigh did not speak for all Christians, then likewise, Osama bin Laden did not speak for all Muslims. Today, however, I adamantly believe that Islam has arrived at a deciding crossroads, at which the fate of the entire religion and its 1.4 billion followers will be decided. And, it’s all thanks to the fabrication of one simple word that misleads, deceives and divides: Islamophobia. [...]

The dimwits who actively exploit the term actually use it to refer to individuals who call any aspect of Islam or Muslims into question, or even the subsequent attitude which results from experience of, or caution towards, Islamic extremism. Simply put, ‘Islamophobia’ is a misnomer attributed to rational and reasonable criticism of (a) the religion of Islam and/or (b) any other particular facet of the religion or its believers, or used foolishly as a reference to a reasonable, cautious state of mind or set of actions that attempt to deal with radical Islam and/or fundamentalist Muslims. Much like the phrase ‘racial profiling,’ a distorted reference to ‘deductive reasoning,’ ‘Islamophobia’ is simply any act of rational criticism or justified cautiousness. [...]

Read the whole thing.

Thank You, Mike!!

2006-07-02T22:23:00.000-04:00

I would like to take a moment to thank Mike of Mike's America for filling in for me while I've been on vacation the past few days. Mike has really done an outstanding job and the posting has been nothing short of superb. It has been a pleasure to have him aboard knowing that the 'ol blog has been in his capable hands the past few days.

I've been told several times over the past few days that I couldn't have made a better choice than Mike for guest blogger, and I have to say that I couldn't agree more. It's truly been an honor to have him here. If he isn't already in your blogroll, make sure you add him. You'll be glad you did!

Thank You, Mike, for a job very well done!

(On a somewhat unrelated note, I am still "officially" on vacation and posting may be light for the next couple of days. Even though I'm reluctantly back on the mainland and am no longer at the mercy of dial-up, I still have a busy couple of days to go before I'm back up to full speed. Today is my 39th birthday, so between birthday stuff with family and friends and Independence Day plans, there probably won't be a lot of time for blogging. I should be back up to speed by the end of the week.)

Another Ann Coulter Home Run: Liberal Treason!

2006-07-02T12:48:00.000-04:00

Another good one from Ann Coulter. She begins:

When is The New York Times going to get around to uncovering an al-Qaida secret program?

In the latest of a long list of formerly top-secret government anti-terrorism operations that have been revealed by the Times, last week the paper printed the details of a government program tracking terrorists' financial transactions that has already led to the capture of major terrorists and their handmaidens in the U.S.

In response, the Bush administration is sounding very cross — and doing nothing. Bush wouldn't want to get the press mad at him! Yeah, let's keep the media on our good side like they are now. Otherwise, they might do something crazy — like leak a classified government program monitoring terrorist financing.

National Review has boldly called for the revocation of the Times' White House press pass! If the Times starts publishing troop movements, National Review will go whole hog and demand that the paper's water cooler privileges be revoked. Then there's always the "nuclear option": disinviting Maureen Dowd from the next White House Correspondents' Dinner.

Meanwhile, the one congressman who has called for any sort of criminal investigation is being treated like a nut. Don't get me wrong: Congressman Peter King is nuttier than squirrel droppings — but he's right on this.
...
Maybe treason ended during the Vietnam War when Jane Fonda sat laughing and clapping on a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun used to shoot down American pilots. She came home and resumed her work as a big movie star without the slightest fear of facing any sort of legal sanction.
...
Thanks to The New York Times, the easiest job in the world right now is: "Head of Counterintelligence — Al-Qaida." You just have to read The New York Times over morning coffee, and you're done by 10 a.m.

Read it all here.

Supreme Court Hamdan Case Update

2006-06-30T13:56:00.000-04:00

More than 24 hours since the Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld decision by the Supreme Court of the United States and more analysis is coming out to clarify the good, the bad and the ugly.

I did a quick turn around various sites looking for new material. But I have yet to find anything new that Flopping Aces hasn't already excerpted and linked to. Few bloggers have the capacity to read and synthesize the amount of material Flopping Aces handles on a story like this.

A couple of quick points: I think that much of the concern on the right about this decision may be overblown. And of course the cheering on the left is out in orbit even more than usual.

Congress will address the issue and make whatever corrections are necessary. Meanwhile, we have another fault line forming for the November political battle. There are two sides here. One, those who realize we are at war and we must do all within our power to win and two, those who are less concerned with the threat of terrorism than they are with the protection of the civil liberties of those who commit atrocities outside the bounds of all legality and decent society.

Which side are you on?

The Hamdan decision exposes those fault lines, but also offers a dangerous precedent: that of the Supreme Court inserting itself into the Constitutional prerogative primarily of the President but also of the Legislature to manage national security issues in a time of war.

Both Justices Thomas and Scalia (pictured right) in their dissents spoke to the danger of that problem. Of special concern is that the Supreme Court would revise U.S. law on the basis of International treaties and extend protection to terrorists who have never been covered by the Geneva Conventions.

However, the opinion of Richard Samp of the Washington Legal Foundation cited at SCOTUSblog seeks to allay many of those fears. We shall see.

Dennis Byrne at Real Clear Politics also debunks the left wing glee and points out what this decision does and does not do. But Dennis, like many of us, is mystified about the decisions position on Geneva Convention protections.

Lastly, Ronald A. Cass, Chairman of the Center for the Rule of Law, Dean Emeritus of Boston University School of Law weighs in with one of the best short essays on the subject.

I encourage each of you to read the entire text yourself. Simple excerpts do not do the piece justice, but here's a sample anyway:

Liberty may have been the traditional casualty of war, but common sense is its new colleague. The Supreme Court, trying hard on the anniversary of last term's Kelo decision to find a suitable sequel, performed a rare triple loop in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. It found jurisdiction in the face of a statute directly taking jurisdiction away from the Court. It second-guessed the President on the need for particular security features in trials of suspected al Qaeda terrorists. And it gave hope to One-World-ers by leaning on international common law to interpret U.S. federal law. If that weren't enough, the (left, lefter, and far left) turns were executed in the course of giving a court victory to Osama bin Laden's driver. What a perfect way to end the term!

The case challenged the Bush Administration's plan to use military tribunals to try Guantanamo detainees as enemy combatants who are neither within the criminal law and due process protections of the U.S. Constitution nor within the protections afforded prisoners of war by the Geneva Conventions. The Administration has been assiduously trying to prevent al Qaeda terrorists from learning what it knows and doesn't know about their operations - an effort opposed by The New York Times, the left side of the Democratic Party, and most of France. Its plans for trial by military commission and its detention at Guantanamo of al Qaeda suspects captured outside the United States are part and parcel of that effort.

The five-justice majority of the Supreme Court that decided the Hamdan case yesterday showed great interest in demonstrating their commitment to upholding constitutional protections and protecting international human rights, both admirable instincts in many settings. They showed less appreciation for the fact that Americans are threatened, and thousands of innocent Americans were killed by brutal thugs - the sort who behead civilians, film it as sport, and post the video on the Internet. And the justices showed no appreciation for the fact that Congress and the President might well know more than they do about the security needs of the United States.
...
The President may not have made perfect choices on the procedures used for these trials. He may not have perfectly balanced concerns over fair process with concerns over national security. But the President, not the Court, has expertise on this subject. Justice Breyer's concurrence says that Congress didn't give the President a blank check to fight the war on terror. But the Constitution also doesn't give the justices a blank check to write the law. It especially doesn't give them a check drawn on a foreign bank.
Yesterday's decision may bring a smile to the faces of Bush-bashers. It should be as fleeting as the smiles with which developers greeted the justices' creativity in Kelo. Let's hope it's as easily corrected.

Read the rest. There will be a quiz on this material!

Secretary Rice to Russian Foreign Minister: Stop Whining About Your Diplomats in Iraq

2006-06-30T12:41:00.000-04:00

Ooops! The Russians left open the microphone at a closed session of G-8 Foreign Ministers in Moscow yesterday just in time to catch U.S. Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice give the Russian foreign minister an earful about complaints that security for Russian personnel in Iraq in the wake of four murdered diplomats was not good enough.

From the Washington Times:

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, speaking unknowingly into an open microphone, chastised her Russian counterpart yesterday for bemoaning the killing of five Russian diplomats in Iraq, saying it was wrong to focus on the deaths of diplomats when so many others are dying there.
"The implication that by somehow declaring that diplomats need to be protected, it will get better, I think is simply not right," Miss Rice said during a closed luncheon as the foreign ministers from the Group of Eight leading industrialized countries negotiated their meeting's final statement.
The Russians, who chair the G-8 this year, fed out audio from part of the luncheon discussion, apparently by mistake.
The testy exchange came when Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who hosted his colleagues, tried to insert in the text a sentence urging the Iraqi government to make efforts to protect foreign embassies in Baghdad.
"It implies they are not being taken and you know on a fairly daily basis we lose soldiers, and I think it would be offensive to suggest that these efforts are not being made," Miss Rice said. "We are making those efforts, and we are making them at quite a sacrifice."
Mr. Lavrov said the sentence was "not intended to criticize anyone" and was "just a statement of fact."
"The Iraqi Interior Ministry should pay more attention to the safety of foreign missions. If you feel uncomfortable about it, maybe we should make it shorter, saying there is a need for improved security for diplomatic missions," he suggested to Miss Rice.
She interrupted him with some asperity.
"Sergey, there is a need for improvement of security in Iraq period. The problem isn't diplomatic missions. The problem is journalists and civilian contractors and, yes, diplomats as well," she said.
"I understand that in the wake of the brutal murder of your diplomats that it is a sensitive time, but I think that we can't imply that this is an isolated problem or that it isn't being addressed," the secretary said.
The final statement "strongly condemned the barbarian killings" of the Russian diplomats, who were kidnapped by al Qaeda fighters, and said that "this tragic event underlines the importance of improving security for all in Iraq."
The verbal spat between Miss Rice and Mr. Lavrov, which lasted for most of the Iraq discussion, provided a rare glimpse of the atmosphere during their meetings and of behind-the-scenes diplomacy.
The secretary also disagreed with text calling on the Iraqis to "achieve national accord," saying they are already doing it.
Mr. Lavrov objected to a U.S.-proposed sentence about an "international compact" that would provide economic support to Iraq, telling Miss Rice that the concept had not been entirely fleshed out yet.
In both cases, Miss Rice won the argument, as reflected in the official statement.
The two ministers clashed even in public when Miss Rice repeated U.S. criticism of some of Russian President Vladimir Putin's domestic policies during a press conference. Mr. Putin will host heads of state and government from the G-8 countries in St. Petersburg from July 15 to 17. ....

Good job Condi! You go girl!

Kerry Can't See the Light. But Lie He Can

2006-06-29T22:59:00.000-04:00

Brit Hume's Political Grapevine had this nugget:

'Sneaking Into St. Louis'?

In a fundraising e-mail to supporters two days ago, Massachusetts Democratic Senator John Kerry wrote that President Bush would be "sneaking into St. Louis" to raise money for Missouri Republican Senator Jim Talent.

In fact, the president arrived in broad daylight aboard Air Force One for yesterday's publicly scheduled 6 p.m. fundraiser, which received television coverage.

So how did Kerry respond today? By again accusing the Republican party of "sneaking President Bush" into Missouri, "under cover of darkness." In yet another fundraising e-mail, Kerry asks potential donors to make the GOP "pay a price" for the president's "under the radar" travel.

Gee Kerry... Lot of daylight left at 6 p.m. in late June last time I checked.

And Bush is not exactly "sneaking" in Missouri. His speech is even posted on the White House web site.

Maybe Kerry's just been out in the sun too long. He's starting to act as goofy as Jack Murtha. But then he did say on the Senate floor: "So I ask my fellow Senators, are we really that frightened of somebody's willingness to go out and be stupid? In the United States of America, you have a right to be stupid."

P.S. Make sure to see the last item in the grapevine: "The American left is blaming a new culprit in the country's turn towards the Republican Party in recent years — air conditioning." You can bet that as soon as the left succeeds in getting global warming controls in place they'll ban air conditioning in the South.

Also posted at Mike's America.

Correcting a Bad Supreme Court Decision

2006-06-29T14:51:00.000-04:00

It's still early innings in the wake of the Supreme Court Decision overturning the establishment of military tribunals to deal with Al Queda scum held at Camp Gitmo. But let's lay the groundwork for fuller analysis with a few points:

If you are inclined to decipher legalese, Here is the Supreme Court decision, in PDF format for Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld.
Senator's Kyl (R-AZ) and Graham (R-SC), both members of the Senate Judiciary Committee released the following statement regarding a legislative action to allow military tribunals.
Andrew McCarthy, who prosecuted terrorists from the 1993 World Trade Center bombing weighs in before the decision with concerns for our ability to deal effectively with terrorists. And if you want a good summation of the problem the decision creates, this is it.

The question is: will Congress now act to enable military tribunals in the way that they have been constructed by the Bush Administration prior to this ruling? Or, will Congress now open up the Pandora's box of permitting terrorists the full Constitutional rights of the same citizens they sought to kill?

The Supreme Court's 5-3 decision (Robert's had to recuse himself as he ruled AGAINST the suit in a lower court) reminds us all of the importance of appointing sound judicial nominees, as President Bush promised: "In the mold of Scalia or Thomas." Both Scalia and Thomas entered dissenting opinions in this case and were joined in much of their dissent by Justice Alito.

There can be few better motivations for conservatives this fall than winning the battle for Congress and assuring that future judicial nominees meet the Scalia/Thomas standard and act to protect the American people from the foolishness of those who do not realize what is at stake in the war in which we currently find ourselves.

Posted also at Mike's America.

It's In "Public Interest" To Know Who Leaks Secrets

2006-06-28T14:10:00.000-04:00

UPDATE: Privacy International: "filed simultaneous complaints with Data Protection and Privacy regulators in 33 countries concerning recent revelations of secret disclosures of millions of records from the banking giant SWIFT to U.S. intelligence agencies....The issue was first brought to light on Friday June 23rd 2006, when the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times published details of the private arrangement between SWIFT and the United States Government."

NY Times Disclosure No Big Deal?

Seems the left is busy today trying to pooh-pooh the idea that the NY Time's front page splash revealing the perfectly legal program to monitor terror funding is nothing new. In an attempt to derail criticism of the NY Times, they cite a Boston Globe (a paper which is owned by the New York Times) story which describes how various elements of monitoring terror funding have been long known. Of course that defense is tantamount to an admission that the NY Times apparently decided to recycle old news in another naked attempt to stir up fears of civil liberties being violated by the Bush Administration.

And as usual, it's a disingenuous argument. Adding new layers to information on sources and methods that is already too public merely makes the awareness of our enemies all the more keen.

Our "Public Interest": The Right to Know Who Leaks.

The New York Times seeks to elevate itself above our elected political leadership who has the responsibility to keep us safe and wage war against our enemies claiming that there exists a "public interest" in this matter.

But what about the public interest in knowing what motivates those who leak national security secrets and the motives of those who brazenly publish them. Would it not be in the public interest to examine those motives? Doesn't the public have a right to know if there are people in this country actively undermining our efforts to be effective in waging the war on terror?

As an answer to all those who think this story, is nothing new or not damaging, I recommend the letter from outgoing Treasury Secretary John Snow. From the Department of the Treasury web site:

Mr. Bill Keller, Managing Editor
The New York Times
229 West 43rd Street
New York, NY 10036

Dear Mr. Keller:

The New York Times' decision to disclose the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program, a robust and classified effort to map terrorist networks through the use of financial data, was irresponsible and harmful to the security of Americans and freedom-loving people worldwide. In choosing to expose this program, despite repeated pleas from high-level officials on both sides of the aisle, including myself, the Times undermined a highly successful counter-terrorism program and alerted terrorists to the methods and sources used to track their money trails.

Your charge that our efforts to convince The New York Times not to publish were "half-hearted" is incorrect and offensive. Nothing could be further from the truth. Over the past two months, Treasury has engaged in a vigorous dialogue with the Times - from the reporters writing the story to the D.C. Bureau Chief and all the way up to you. It should also be noted that the co-chairmen of the bipartisan 9-11 Commission, Governor Tom Kean and Congressman Lee Hamilton, met in person or placed calls to the very highest levels of the Times urging the paper not to publish the story. Members of Congress, senior U.S. Government officials and well-respected legal authorities from both sides of the aisle also asked the paper not to publish or supported the legality and validity of the program.

Indeed, I invited you to my office for the explicit purpose of talking you out of publishing this story. And there was nothing "half-hearted" about that effort. I told you about the true value of the program in defeating terrorism and sought to impress upon you the harm that would occur from its disclosure. I stressed that the program is grounded on solid legal footing, had many built-in safeguards, and has been extremely valuable in the war against terror. Additionally, Treasury Under Secretary Stuart Levey met with the reporters and your senior editors to answer countless questions, laying out the legal framework and diligently outlining the multiple safeguards and protections that are in place.

You have defended your decision to compromise this program by asserting that "terror financiers know" our methods for tracking their funds and have already moved to other methods to send money. The fact that your editors believe themselves to be qualified to assess how terrorists are moving money betrays a breathtaking arrogance and a deep misunderstanding of this program and how it works. While terrorists are relying more heavily than before on cumbersome methods to move money, such as cash couriers, we have continued to see them using the formal financial system, which has made this particular program incredibly valuable.

Lastly, justifying this disclosure by citing the "public interest" in knowing information about this program means the paper has given itself free license to expose any covert activity that it happens to learn of - even those that are legally grounded, responsibly administered, independently overseen, and highly effective. Indeed, you have done so here.

What you've seemed to overlook is that it is also a matter of public interest that we use all means available - lawfully and responsibly - to help protect the American people from the deadly threats of terrorists. I am deeply disappointed in the New York Times.

Sincerely,

John W. Snow, Secretary
U.S. Department of the Treasury

Also posted at Mike's America

New Al Queda Times: All the News That's Fit for Jihad

2006-06-27T14:42:00.000-04:00

This graphic from the always funny People's Cube has been making the rounds:

Here's an interesting take on the issue from Virginia Buckingham in the Boston Herald:

Prosecute The New York Times and censure Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.)? I have a better idea: Sit back and watch them self-destruct.

War and the Times: Related articles, multimedia & images The Good WarTimes an unworthy first line of defense

Murtha and The New York Times have done more to aid the fight for Republicans to retain their House and Senate majorities in the last couple of days than Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman could possibly do all year.

But no one, not even the guys who are so devoted to the GOP that they wear elephants on their ties, should be cheering.

What has been lost by Murtha’s rantings and the Times’ irresponsibility can never be regained by electoral victory in the fall. But nor will they regain what they have lost by their own words and actions - the moral high ground.

Let’s start with the Times.

We are less safe today from terrorist attack than we were before the Times disclosed the existence of the National Security Agency’s terrorist surveillance program.

We are more in danger today because The New York Times and other outlets disclosed that American intelligence has access to foreign banking transactions.

Combined, these two programs gave American officials tools they did not have before Sept. 11 to track and disrupt terrorist plots before thousands die.

By the Times’ own admission, the “penetration” into international banking networks helped track down the Bali bombers.

How many more innocent young lives were saved, as a result, from a similar fate in other discos in other terrorist strongholds or, as possible, in a nightclub in New York?

Before the Times revealed the two security programs, literally in black and white, al-Qaeda and its allies did not know, could no know for sure, how best to avoid detection.

They know now.

Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), no Bush administration-toadie he, said it best: “Nobody elected The New York Times to do anything. The New York Times is putting its own arrogant, elitist, left-wing agenda before the interests of the American people. The time has come for the American people to realize and The New York Times to realize we’re at war and they can’t be just on their own deciding what to declassify, what to release.”

But they did exactly that, in violation of the law. Yet, prosecuting them will allow publisher Bill Keller and his Democratic defenders to change the subject from their disregard for American safety to their stewardship of the First Amendment. The Bush administration ought to keep this escape hatch firmly closed.

And Murtha?

The damage done by this self-proclaimed and much acclaimed moral authority on the Iraq war is far less quantifiable.

Did Murtha bring a smile to al-Qaeda leaders’ faces when they read his remarks over the weekend that America has “become the enemy” in Iraq?

What must Kim Jong-Il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad think of America’s seriousness when a Democratic leader says with a straight face that our nation “is more dangerous to world peace than nuclear threats from North Korea or Iran?”

I’ve no doubt most Americans respect Murtha’s valor in Vietnam.

Surely many respect yet disagree with his position on immediate troop withdrawal.

But Americans are united on this: We’re not infallible, but we are not part of the axis of evil. America is the greatest country on Earth.

A political party and its advocates in the media who forget that will be reminded this November.

Enjoy the show.

Also posted at Mike's America.

Multiculturalism: A Left Wing Suicide Pact

2006-06-26T15:15:00.000-04:00

In an effort to understand the sad reality of homegrown Jihad Johnnies, Cox and Forkum published the above cartoon as part of an excellent post on the suicidal side-effects of multiculturalism.

C&F asks:

What motivates a person to wage war against their own country and sympathize with the likes of Osama bin Laden? Part of the answer lies in the spread of multiculturalist ideas. These citizens have been taught by our intellectuals to hate their home countries, and that hate is fertile ground for Islamism.

C&F goes on to cite a February commentary by Keith Windschuttle : The Adversary Culture. Here's a short clip:.

Cultural relativism claims there are no absolute standards for assessing human culture. Hence all cultures should be regarded as equal, though different.
...
The moral rationale of cultural relativism is a plea for tolerance and respect of other cultures, no matter how uncomfortable we might be with their beliefs and practices. However, there is one culture conspicuous by its absence from all this. The plea for acceptance and open-mindedness does not extend to Western culture itself, whose history is regarded as little more than a crime against the rest of humanity. The West cannot judge other cultures but must condemn its own.
Since the 1960s, academic historians on the left have worked to generate a widespread cynicism about the nature of Western democracies, with the aim of questioning their legitimacy and undermining their ability to command loyalty. ...
The anti-Westernism of which I am speaking is not only about the past but has as much to say about current affairs.
The aftermath to the assaults on New York and Washington on September 11 2001 provided a stark illustration of its values. Within days of the terrorist assault, a number of influential Western intellectuals, including Noam Chomsky, Susan Sontag and youthful counterparts such as Naomi Klein of the anti-globalisation protest movement, responded in ways that, morally and symbolically, were no different to the celebrations of the crowds on the streets of Palestine and Islamabad who cheered as they watched the towers of the World Trade Centre come crashing down. Stripped of its obligatory jargon, their argument was straightforward: America deserved what it got.
...
Enclosed by a mindset of cultural relativism, most Westerners are loath to censure Muslims who go on violent rampages, burn down embassies and threaten death to their fellow citizens. Many of us regard this as somehow understandable, even acceptable, since we have no right to judge another religion and culture. ...
Their real aim is not religious respect but cultural change in the West. They want to prevent criticism of its Muslim minority and accord that group special privilege not available to the faithful of other religions. Instead of them changing to integrate into our way of life, they want to force us to change to accept their way of life.

Well said. There are countless other examples describing the danger of multiculturalism. In the recent debate on immigration, the goal of political elites was to "assimilate" immigrants to become Americanized. Yet, as was pointed out in the Mike's America study on immigration and assimilation, multiculturalism discourages assimilation and deepens the racial and ethnic animosity that pits groups of people against one another.

The most striking evidence of this was the study cited by Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies in a 1997 piece titled "Will Americanization Work in America?:"

Sociologist Ruben Rumbaut has studied students in San Diego who are children of immigrants or who immigrated themselves at a very young age. He first surveyed them in 1992, when the students were in the eighth and ninth grades; three years later the same students were surveyed again.
In terms of ethnic self-identification, the change was dramatic. Three years of high school caused these students to see themselves as significantly less American; there was a 50 percent drop in the proportion (already small) of those who considered themselves simply "American," a 30 percent drop in the proportion of those considering themselves hyphenated Americans, and a 52 percent increase in the proportion of those describing themselves exclusively by national origin.
Among the American-born students, the percentage who identified themselves solely by their parents' native country doubled, to one-third. As Rumbaut points out, the results "point to the rapid growth of a reactive ethnic consciousness. Change over time, thus, has not been toward assimilative mainstream identities, but rather a return to and a valorization of the immigrant identity."

In a nutshell: multiculturalism encourages the "balkanization" of American society, dividing it into groups with separate identities and fostering grievances that pit one group against another. This is also the troubling ethos of the Democrat Party, a variant of which was clearly expressed in the presidential campaign of John Edwards and his Two America's speech.

The result is that segments of our society have been encouraged not to aspire to the great opportunity offered by the American dream, but to stew in their victimhood with grievances which are now validated by multiculturalism. Ultimately, those who sip that flavor of Kool-Aide have only to take a short step from that level of hate and delusion to potential violence.

Restoring Sanity: One Step at a Time

While multiculturalism remains entrenched in the education system and agencies of cultural transmission in both the news media and Hollywood, there is reason to hope that recent inroads exposing the dangers are taking hold. Whether it's on college campuses or in high schools, there is no longer a free pass given to every teacher who attempts to push this flawed ideological perspective.

It's a long road of course, and one that requires a significant attention to the lessons of history which show how damaging multiculturalism AND it's kissing cousin, moral relevance in education can be.

For more, see Midnight Blue's interesting take on "How do you say "Cheesesteak" in Flemmish?"

Posted also at Mike's America.

Bill Keller is a Moron!

2006-06-25T23:56:00.000-04:00

I realize that I left Mike at the helm and I am supposed to be on vacation, but I had to jump in and comment on the lame CYA attempt by executive editor Bill Keller in the New York Times today.

I found the following passage particularly pathetic:

Some of the incoming mail quotes the angry words of conservative bloggers and TV or radio pundits who say that drawing attention to the government's anti-terror measures is unpatriotic and dangerous. (I could ask, if that's the case, why they are drawing so much attention to the story themselves by yelling about it on the airwaves and the Internet.)
[Emphasis mine]

Why are we drawing so much attention to the story? Because he published it after being informed that doing so would threaten our National security. It boils my blood that this idiot tries to shift the blame to others before he even finishes the second paragraph. How stupid does he think we are?

Here's a scoop for you Bill: If you had kept your trap shut, we wouldn't even be having this discussion now! What a moron!

Don Surber nails it here.

Greetings From Mike's America!

2006-06-24T23:30:00.000-04:00

The Palmetto Pundit asked if I would stand in while he vacations at the shore this week. Since I vacation at the shore year round, it's no great sacrifice for me to share with PP's readers a taste of Mike's America.

Why Mike's America ?

The idea for doing a blog came to me during the 2004 Presidential election. I was one of those people sending out emails with news and information about the campaign to friends and family. So, taking the next step and putting it all in a blog which affords a range of text, audio and visual possibilities in an easy to reference web page seemed a natural.

The name, Mike's America came after reflection on the class warfare tactics of the Democrats, most especially that of the Democrats Vice Presidential candidate, John Edwards. In his famous "Two Americas" stump speech (which you may read here)he enunciated the politics of dividing our society, creating envy in the so-called "have-nots" and seeking to punish the "haves" or the successful people in our society whose initiative and drive are the engine which pulls the whole train down the track.

Mike's America is dedicated to the unity of our country, not it's division. And that unity is ever more necessary as we face what truly are life and death issues on a daily basis. Since the awful atrocities of September 11th we have had two national elections in this country where the issues of security, freedom, peace, justice have been front and center along with economic progress and societal fairness.

The voters have spoken in increasing numbers for a unified plan to address that host of concerns. That is the ethos of Mike's America: "Better, Safer, Stronger and Free."

Mike's Experience: A Front Row Seat to History

I formed many of my political views through long experience since my early years as a child. Even in the 4th grade I was politically active. When the teacher asked for students to bring in campaign literature from the presidential campaigns, I volunteered to bring in Nixon pamphlets. Of course they, along with the Humphrey literature, mostly wound up in the wastepaper basket with funny faces painted over the candidate photos. Proving that many Americans, and especially at an early age pay little serious attention to politics.

In college, I had the good fortune to find one of the rare political science professors who was a Republican and also had the distinction of working on campaigns and in the political structure at the state and national level. With his encouragement I worked in my first statewide campaign in Ohio to get a constitutional amendment on the ballot that would eliminate the partisan gerrymandering of election districts. We suceeded in getting the amendment on the ballot, but it was defeated.

I was also encouraged to start a College Republican Club at Ohio Wesleyan, and after doing so, took club members to the election night celebrations for President Reagan's election in 1980 in Columbus, Ohio. It was that celebratory evening where my group and myself (far right in photo at right) met Congressman John Ashbrook , an early founder of the Conservative movement along with Goldwater, Buckley and Reagan (Ashbrook bio here).

Meeting the "Right" People

After graduation, I worked on Congressman Ashbrook's statewide campaign for United States Senate. Unfortunately, he died suddenly during the campaign. But it gave me the opportunity to meet many of the great conservatives like Phyllis Schlafly and later, William F. Buckley, Jr.

In 1984 I was active once again organizing campaign activities on behalf of President Reagan. I founded a student group at Bowling Green State University that at the time had the largest number of new student voters registered on behalf of his re-election campaign. We were rewarded by a visit by President Reagan. It would be his first campus election event.

The atmosphere on campus that September day was electric. It seemed the usual liberal sniveling that often is highlighted by the press at events such as this was totally absent. Perhaps it was the fleet of five helicopters, including Marine One, the President's own, landing outside Anderson Arena that really got the crowd excited. Students of history may wish to read the speech President Reagan delivered for a flavor of the times. Notice in the question and answer session that followed how one student asked if our involvement in Central America might become "another Vietnam." Some things never change.

The event was so successful, that the Reagan-Bush campaign soon scheduled similar events across the country.

Three weeks later, President Reagan returned to the area again. This time, it was onboard the Ferdinand Magellan, or Car One, a railroad car built especially for use by the President of the United States. I took the following photo at the nighttime scene lit by torchlight. It's too bad they don't do events like this anymore. Buses just don't seem to have the same magic.

Working in the White House

After I completed my postgraduate studies at Columbia University in 1988 (focusing on national security topics under the direction of former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski) I was anxious to play a role in the upcoming presidential campaign. And why not witness the art of presidential politics from a viewpoint inside the White House. So I accepted an internship in the White House Political Office.

The story of my time there was published in the Carolina Morning News, and I reprinted that story along with reflections of President Reagan sent in by other bloggers during the Mike's America celebration of the 25th Anniversary of the first Reagan Inaugural this past January.

Palmetto Pundit also joined that celebration by linking with his description of President Reagan as " not only [] the greatest president of the 20th Century, but also one of the greatest Americans to have ever lived. " You'll get no argument from me Palmetto.

It was at the White House that I was also privileged to witness the arrival of one of the greatest British leaders that ever lived: Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, on her last state visit to see President Reagan, her partner in so much good work, before he left office. I took the following photo on the White House lawn, November 16, 1988. (the program cover may be viewed here)

After leaving the White House with the change of administration, I went to work for the United States Environmental Protection Agency. It was a marked change from the "can do" White House to a federal bureaucracy where the usual attitude was "can't do."

In 1996, I was disappointed that no place could be found for me with the Dole/Kemp campaign and decided to leave Washington for Hilton Head Island, South Carolina. Considering how badly Dole/Kemp did that November (thanks in great part to the interference once again of Ross Perot) it was fortunate I did not sacrifice the many months that would have been required only to be defeated.

Since then, I have used my writing talents, such as they are, to continue supporting conservative candidates and causes from my perch here on the edge of the Atlantic, yet deep in the heart of the New South.

New York Times Leaks Another National Security Secret

2006-06-23T09:20:00.000-04:00

The media arm of Al Qaeda has once again disclosed a classified terrorist surveillance tool vital to our National Security:

The Bush administration and The New York Times are again at odds over national security, this time with new reports of a broad government effort to track global financial transfers.

The newspaper, which in December broke news of an effort by the National Security Agency to monitor Americans' telephone calls and e- mails, declined a White House request not to publish a story about the government's inspection of monies flowing in and out of the country.

The Los Angeles Times also reported on the issue Thursday night on its Web site, against the Bush administration's wishes. The Wall Street Journal said it received no request to hold its report of the surveillance.

Administration officials were concerned that news reports of the program would diminish its effectiveness and could harm overall national security. [...]

In its story, The New York Times said it carefully weighed the administration's arguments for withholding the information and gave them "the most serious and respectful consideration."

"We remain convinced that the administration's extraordinary access to this vast repository of international financial data, however carefully targeted use it may be, is a matter of public interest," said Bill Keller, the Times' executive editor. [...]

I suppose survival isn't a matter of public interest in the eyes of the New York Times? Apparently, there was more "serious and respectful consideration" given to exactly when the press room should be alerted to run with the story than to any National Security concerns cited by the administration.

If and when the next terrorist attack occurs that may have been prevented by one of the classified programs revealed by The New York Times, what will they say of the public interest then?

Feds Arrest 7 in Miami Terror Plot Targeting Chicago's Sears Tower; Other Buildings

2006-06-23T08:12:00.000-04:00

(Via Fox News)

MIAMI — Seven people were arrested in connection with the early stages of a plot to attack the tallest U.S. skyscraper — Chicago's Sears Tower — and other buildings in the U.S., including the FBI office here, a federal law enforcement official said.

As part of the raids tied to the arrests Thursday, FBI agents swarmed a warehouse in Miami's Liberty City area, using a blowtorch to take off a metal door. One neighbor said the suspects had been sleeping in the warehouse while running what seemed to be a "military boot camp."

The official told The Associated Press the alleged plotters were mainly Americans with no apparent ties to Al Qaeda or other foreign terrorist organizations. He spoke on condition of anonymity so as not to pre-empt news conferences planned for Friday in Washington and Miami.

Thank God this plot was thwarted in the planning and discussion stages. Fox and Friends is reporting that 5 of the 7 suspects are American.

Although very little information has been disclosed, these bloggers (via Memeorandum) have been on top of the story and may provide additional insight and analysis:

Riehl World View, Terrorism Unveiled, A Blog For All, Security Watchtower, Hugh Hewitt, Freedom Watch,Cold Fury, Gateway Pundit, Confederate Yankee, protein wisdom, Ace of SpadesHQ, Patterico, California Conservative ,Captain Ed, Atlas Shrugs

The moonbat version of what this all means can be found in this thread at Democratic Underground. Among the popular theories are voter intimidation, a set up, and a typical election year ploy.

Iran Weakening?

2006-06-23T01:27:00.000-04:00

Former Mossad Director Efraim Halevy notices signs that Iran's opposition to nuclear negotiation may be weakening, despite the over-the-top rhetoric of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:

Jerusalem, Israel -- Former Mossad Director Efraim Halevy told NewsMax in an exclusive interview in Jerusalem that he is seeing signs the leadership in Iran may be weakening in its opposition to the Western offer of nuclear negotiations.

Despite repeated claims by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that Iran will "never give up" its uranium enrichment program, Halevy said that Iran's supreme leader and his entourage have been measuring the economic and strategic damage that would result from serious international sanctions on Iran.

"They are beginning to realize that the array of sanctions and other measures that will be imposed on them if they refuse poses a formidable threat to them," Halevy said.

While Ahmadinejad is clearly the most visible and vocal of the Iranian leadership, Halevy notes the decision is not his alone:

It's not just in Ahmadinejad's hands. It's in the hands of the leadership. He's part of that, but he doesn't control it. It depends on how the leadership assesses the threats pointed at them if they don't accept the offer of negotiations.

While I certainly hope this is true, I don't see any evidence that Ahmadinejad is the only psycho in the scenario. If they're all as crazy as he is, we're looking a moot point square in the face.

There is also the very real possibility that the Iranians are stalling in the hope that they reach the point of no return and produce an operational nuclear weapon before negotiations can take place. That is a bargaining tool we can't afford for them to have, and the evidence
suggests they may be very close.

Soldier's Burden

2006-06-22T23:14:00.000-04:00

I've never seen it illustrated better!

Please Welcome Guest Blogger Mike of Mike's America!

2006-06-22T18:45:00.000-04:00

I've asked Mike of Mike's America if he would guest blog for me while my family and I are on vacation and he has kindly agreed to do so. While we both reside on the same side of the political aisle, I believe you will find his writing style and his take on the issues to be interesting, thought-provoking and immensely enjoyable.

While I merely discuss politics, he has actually experienced politics first hand having worked as a White House Intern under President Reagan and for the Environmental Protection Agency during the first Bush Administration.

Mike is a fellow South Carolina blogger from Hilton Head Island and has been a great friend to this blog for quite some time. It is indeed an honor to have him in the wheelhouse while I'm away. Welcome Aboard, Mike!

WMD Found In Iraq, More Likely To Be Uncovered!

2006-06-22T01:05:00.000-04:00

(Via Memeorandum)

Fox News reports Hundreds of WMD's Found In Iraq:

WASHINGTON — The United States has found 500 chemical weapons in Iraq since 2003, and more weapons of mass destruction are likely to be uncovered, two Republican lawmakers said Wednesday.

"We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons," Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., said in a quickly called press conference late Wednesday afternoon.

Reading from a declassified portion of a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit, Santorum said: "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."

I highly suspect that this is merely the tip of the iceberg. Large portions of the report have yet to be declassified and may contain a wealth of additional information.

Let's hope additional declassification of the report occurs and we can finally put this contentious issue to bed once and for all. I've always maintained the weapons were either yet to be discovered or had been moved into another country, most likely Syria.

Additional declassification of the report may also reveal exactly why the Bush Administration decided to back away from the WMD claim and cite faulty intelligence as a reason they were not found. While the intelligence may have indeed been lacking, I've never been of the opinion that all of it was wrong. There's more to the story and I'd be willing to bet the answer is somewhere in the report.

There's no doubt Saddam had, and in fact used WMD in the past. So the question is not if he had them, but where they went. Hopefully we'll find out more that may finally answer these questions.

Of course the argument will be that these weapons aren't relevant because they were manufactured pre-1991, but that misses the entire point. If nothing else, this disclosure proves that Saddam never met the terms of the 1991cease-fire agreement which "included a demand that Iraq unconditionally accept the destruction and elimi-nation of all of its WMD, and that it unconditionally undertake not to use, develop or acquire any items relevant to WMD."

If you are of the mindset, which I am not, that the sole reason for invading Iraq was the threat of WMD, then the invasion has now been proven to have been justified based on WMD alone. Saddam could have stopped it at any time by simply meeting the terms of the cease-fire he agreed to in 1991.

The bottom line is this: It doesn't really matter whether the weapons that have been found since 2003 are still functional or when they were produced. What matters is that they were never eliminated in the first place.

Bodies of Missing Soldiers Reportedly Found

2006-06-20T12:48:00.000-04:00

(Via Memeorandum)

BAGHDAD, July 20 -- Two U.S. soldiers missing since an attack on a checkpoint last week have been found dead near a power plant in Yusifiyah, south of Baghdad, according to U.S. officials, and Iraqi officials say the soldiers had been tortured.

Maj. Gen. Abdul Aziz Muhammed-Jassim, head of operations at the Iraqi Ministry of Defense, said the soldiers had been "barbarically" killed. U.S. officials would not confirm or deny that the men, who were identified Monday as Pfc. Kristian Menchaca, 23, of Houston and Pfc. Thomas L. Tucker, 25, of Madras, Ore., had been tortured by their captors.

"Coalition forces have in fact recovered what we believe to be the remains of our two soldiers," said Maj. Gen. William B. Caldwell IV, spokesman for U.S. forces in Iraq, at a Baghdad news conference.

The identification of the bodies has not been officially confirmed by the military pending notification of the families. Via Dan Riehl, Blogs of War hopes the families were notified prior to the release of information by the Iraqis and the media.

They apparently weren’t according to Michelle Malkin via
Allah. What a shame!

Michelle also notes that this will be used to bolster the -and-run brigade’s agenda.

I wonder when the “cut-and-run brigade” will come to the realization that troop withdrawal will not end the cycle of violence, but relocate it to our very doorsteps?

My thoughts and prayers are with the souls of these brave men and the families they leave behind.

Tags: Iraq, War On Terror, Terrorism, Military, Missing Soldiers

America Thanks You!

2006-06-16T22:17:00.000-04:00

I received a link to this excellent pro-military video by Move America Forward in my Inbox yesterday:

Congratulations to our troops on a job well done!!

It Doesn’t Have to be Grim to be a Milestone!

2006-06-16T14:36:00.000-04:00

Here we go again! Another milestone:

WASHINGTON - American deaths since the invasion of Iraq have reached 2,500, marking a grim milestone in the wake of recent events that President Bush hopes will reverse the war's unpopularity at home.

The latest death was announced as Congress was launching a symbolic election-year debate over the war, with Republicans rallying against calls by some Democrats to set a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops.

The Pentagon provided no details on the nature of the 2,500th death. Nevertheless, reaching the new marker underscored the continuing violence in Iraq just after an upbeat Bush returned from a surprise visit to Baghdad determined that the tide was beginning to turn.

It seems these “grim” milestones aren’t occurring frequently enough to suit the media. If memory serves, the “marker” used to be 1,000. I suppose the wait for 3,000 was too excruciating for the media to bear, so I guess 500 is now the new 1,000.

Despite the doom and gloom rhetoric and the defeatist attitude expressed in the excerpt above, this “grim” milestone actually says more about our success than it does our failure.

The 2,500 figure is astounding not because it is so high, but because it is so incredibly low. When this figure is actually compared to historical data of similar length conflicts, the most obvious conclusion should be how well and how safely it has been executed. While every death is indeed tragic, the facts show this as being one of our finest achievements, not one of our biggest failures.

It’s a shame the media refuses to note the historical comparisons and fails to acknowledge the damage their slanted coverage of this war has caused. By choosing to ignore or under report the numerous success stories, they have actually given encouragement to our enemies and have, in all likelihood, contributed to the death toll they so love to trumpet.

It is because of this mindset that they also miss other significant milestones such as this:

BAGRAM AIRFIELD, Afghanistan -- The Republic of Korea Medical Clinic located here will celebrate the benchmark of 200,000 Afghan National patients served since the clinic’s inception at a ceremony June 15, at 10:30 a.m.

The Korean Ambassador to Afghanistan, Young Bang Yoo, will deliver the keynote address for the ceremony.

In addition, Lt. Col. Joon Pil Moon, clinic commander; and Col. Kim Soon Ku, ROK Army Engineer commander, will be available for interviews following the event. Media are also invited to tour the facility following the ceremony.

The Korean Medical Clinic was established on November 2, 2002, and is currently in its ninth rotation in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. The purpose of the clinic is to assist local Afghan civilians with basic medical treatment as well as minor and major surgical procedures.

News media interested in witnessing this historic event should arrive at the front gate of Bagram Airfield at 9:30 a.m. for escort onto the base.

[Emphasis mine]

I’d be curious to find out how many members of the media even bothered to show up at Bagram and document this milestone.

My guess is that seating was plentiful because reporting good news such as this does nothing to further their agenda and would only serve to prop up the good guys.

Update 6-17: Mike informed me the links were not working. They have been repaired now. Thanks, Mike!

Tags: Politics, Media, Media Bias, Military, Iraq, Afghanistan, War On Terror

It’s All In The Last Line

2006-06-15T16:48:00.000-04:00

(Via Breitbart)

An English translation of the document found in the safe-house of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has been released. Below are some excerpts I found particularly interesting:

The situation and conditions of the resistance in Iraq have reached a point that requires a review of the events and of the work being done inside Iraq. Such a study is needed in order to show the best means to accomplish the required goals, especially that the forces of the National Guard have succeeded in forming an enormous shield protecting the American forces and have reduced substantially the losses that were solely suffered by the American forces. This is in addition to the role, played by the Shi'a (the leadership and masses) by supporting the occupation, working to defeat the resistance and by informing on its elements.

As an overall picture, time has been an element in affecting negatively the forces of the occupying countries, due to the losses they sustain economically in human lives, which are increasing with time. However, here in Iraq, time is now beginning to be of service to the American forces and harmful to the resistance […]

In general and despite the current bleak situation, we think that the best suggestions in order to get out of this crisis is to entangle the American forces into another war against another country or with another of our enemy force, that is to try and inflame the situation between American and Iraq or between America and the Shi'a in general […]

The question remains, how to draw the Americans into fighting a war against Iran? It is not known whether American is serious in its animosity towards Iraq, because of the big support Iran is offering to America in its war in Afghanistan and in Iraq. Hence, it is necessary first to exaggerate the Iranian danger and to convince America and the west in general, of the real danger coming from Iran, […]

Everyone is talking about the tone of defeat expressed in the document and the obvious desire to draw the Americans into a war with someone else, namely Iran. However, it seems very little attention has been paid to the closing line of the document, which I believe says it all:

Let us hope for success and for God's help.

Where’s the normal confidence and cockiness to which we’ve become so accustomed? In the past, we would read something along the lines of- “We will be victorious and the infidel will be destroyed because it is God’s will!” Now the swagger has been replaced by- “God, are you there? Please help us!!!”

The author of this is begging for mercy and is unsure whether his “god” is listening or if he even exists. Where’s the faith? What’s this “hoping for success” garbage?

Before, victory was assured! Now they’re not even sure they can run fast enough to live another ten minutes.

It’s all in the last line.

Tags: Politics, Al Qaeda, al-Qaida Text Of Safe-house Document, Safe-house Document, Terrorism, Insurgency, War+On+Terror, Zarqawi

There's Gold In That Thar Rubble!

2006-06-15T11:58:00.000-04:00

HT: Assorted Babble

It looks like U.S. Special Forces hit the gold mine in more ways than one with last week’s strike on the safe house of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi:

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Iraq's national security adviser said Thursday a "huge treasure" of documents and computer records was seized after the raid on terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's hideout, giving the Iraqi government the upper hand in its fight against al-Qaida in Iraq.

National Security Adviser Mouwafak al-Rubaie also said he believed the security situation in the country would improve enough to allow a large number of U.S.-led forces to leave Iraq by the end of this year, and a majority to depart by the end of next year. "And maybe the last soldier will leave Iraq by mid-2008," he said.

Al-Rubaie said a laptop, flashdrive and other documents were found in the debris after the airstrike that killed the al-Qaida in Iraq leader last week outside Baqouba, and more information has been uncovered in raids of other insurgent hideouts since then.
He called it a "huge treasure ... a huge amount of information."

When asked how he could be sure the information was authentic, al-Rubaie said "there is nothing more authentic than finding a thumbdrive in his pocket."

"We believe that this is the beginning of the end of al-Qaida in Iraq," al-Rubaie said, adding that the documents showed al-Qaida is in "pretty bad shape," politically and in terms of training, weapons and media.

"Now we have the upper hand," he said at a news conference in Baghdad. "We feel that we know their locations, the names of their leaders, their whereabouts, their movements, through the documents we found during the last few days."
[Emphasis mine]

So Iraq is indeed a quagmire! A quagmire for Al Qaeda, that is!

There’s no telling what information is on the flashdrive, the laptop, or any of the other documents found in the safe house debris, but I think it is a safe bet that it is huge considering the choice of words and phrasing by Iraq’s National Security Advisor Mouwafak al-Rubaie. One simply doesn’t go out on a limb that large unless they are certain it won’t break.

This mighty, insurmountable “insurgency” largely created and propped up by the mainstream media, appears to be anything but mighty and insurmountable. If anything, it appears to be hanging on by a thread. While it is probably a safe bet that some level of violence will continue in the region, it appears that it will become more and more disorganized and will further taper off as time goes on.

Notice that Mouwafak al-Rubaie is not mincing words here. He is a high-ranking Iraqi official who has actually seen the evidence and is proclaiming that Al Qaeda is all but finished in Iraq.

This begs the following questions:

Exactly how long will it take for John Kerry to claim he was taken out of context yesterday?

When will the rest of the hardcore anti-war Democrats figure out they’re on the losing end of history yet again?

If they do figure it out, will it really matter now?

Talk about painting yourself into a corner!

Tags: Politics, Iraq, War+On+Terror, Zarqawi, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, Al Qaeda, al-Qaida,

Shed No Tears Over Final Moments of Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi

2006-06-10T12:55:00.000-04:00

(Via Memeorandum)

BAGHDAD, Iraq - U.S. officials have altered their account of the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, saying he was alive and partly conscious after bombs destroyed his hideout, and an Iraqi man raised fresh questions Saturday about the events surrounding the end of Iraq's most-wanted militant.

The man, who lived near the scene of the bombing, claimed in an interview with AP Television News to have seen U.S. soldiers beating an injured man resembling al-Zarqawi until blood flowed from the man's nose.

If this is true, which I doubt, then I hope he got the teetotal crap beaten out of him. I hope he tried to roll off the stretcher in an attempt to escape, and they finished him off to ensure he didn't.

Can anyone make a plausible argument that restraining this thug by any and all means necessary, would not have been warranted? I, for one, am not going to shed a single tear over the final moments of a thug who's claim to fame was videotaping beheadings and planning suicide bombings he was too cowardly to carry out himself.

Whatever he got was much less than he deserved.

Tags: Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi, Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi, Terrorism, Zarqawi, War on Terror, Iraq, Politics

A Touching Tribute to Our Troops!

2006-06-09T22:04:00.000-04:00

Mike of Mike's America has posted the link to a flash tribute to our men and women in uniform who sacrifice everything to keep us free and spread the dream of freedom around the world. I watched it, composed myself, then left Mike the only comment I could muster at the time:

I am moved beyond words! I'll link it this evening after work.

I still am and here's the link.

If a picture is truly worth a thousand words then this is worth no less than a million.

Watch it and you'll understand what I mean.

Tags: Troops, Military, Iraq, Afghanistan, War on Terror

Video Slideshow: Zarqawi Bites the Dust!

2006-06-09T00:18:00.000-04:00

(Via Rightwinged.com, Michelle Malkin)

Allahpundit provides video of the air strike that took out Zarqawi:

Looks like Zarqawi finally found out what happens when the weapon doesn't jam. Of course if you're the target and the lesson comes courtesy of the U.S. Military, you're most likely way too dead to benefit from it.

Tags: Al-Zarqawi, Zarqawi, Terrorism, Iraq, War On Terror, Military, Air Strike, Al Qaeda, al-Qaeda, Video

Zarqawi Dead!

2006-06-08T07:53:00.000-04:00

One more godless thug has been thrown onto the ash heap of history!
This is not a rumor:

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, al-Qaida's leader in
Iraq who led a bloody campaign of suicide bombings and kidnappings, has been killed in an airstrike, U.S. and Iraqi officials said Thursday. It was a major victory in the U.S.-led war in Iraq and the broader war on terror.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said al-Zarqawi was killed along with seven aides Wednesday evening in a remote area 30 miles northeast of Baghdad in the volatile province of Diyala, just east of the provincial capital of Baqouba, al-Maliki said.

Loud applause broke out among the reporters and soldiers as al-Maliki, flanked by U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and U.S. Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, told a news conference that "al-Zarqawi was eliminated."

The news came amid more reports of violence in Iraq, with two bombs striking a market and a police patrol in Baghdad, killing at least 19 and wounding more than 40.

The announcement about al-Zarqawi's death came six days after he issued an audiotape on the Internet, railing against Shiites in Iraq and saying militias were raping women and killing Sunnis and the community must fight back.

Others Blogging: Everyone with a blog and a working modem!

Check out Michelle Malkin, Iraq the Model, and Counterterrorism Blog for starters.

Tags: Zarqawi, War On Terror, Terrorism, Iraq, Politics

All The Way to the Hangar, Mr. President!

2006-06-08T00:28:00.000-04:00

Although there are a lot of critical issues in the headlines that are worthy of discussion and analysis, I've found my life occupied by more pressing issues and responsibilities of late.

I've also found the usual political catfighting to be a little more than I can stomach lately given the various other demands on my time. As regular readers of this blog know, I don't have the stamina of a Michelle Malkin or a Glenn Reynolds, so when the rhetoric gets too pathetic, I stop and regroup.

I can't let the week pass by, however, without remembering President Ronald Reagan who died two years ago June 5th. My friend in blogdom, John in Carolina, reminded me of the following exchange (subscription required) between President Reagan and former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger that has long been one of my favorites:

One of Cap Weinberger's favorite stories about Ronald Reagan concerned the American conflict with Libya over the Gulf of Sidra in August 1981. Weinberger and the military brass were sitting down with the president as the U. S. Navy moved toward the region. There were fears of combat in the skies.

Weinberger asked the president what the orders would be if the Libyans fired on U. S. aircraft and returned to Tripoli. "What about hot pursuit? How far can we go?"

"All the way to the hangar," Reagan responded.

President Ronald W. Reagan sure had a way with words and an ability to communicate exactly what was on his mind while leaving little room for misinterpretation. "All the way to the hangar" pretty much summed up his intentions in six words and there was little doubt exactly what those six words meant.

I think those six words can also be used to describe the man as well. Everything he did was "All the way to the hangar". It really didn't matter whether someone agreed with him or not, they knew exactly where he stood and exactly what he planned to do about it.

The death of President Reagan, while merciful for both himself and his family, left a hole in my heart that to this day remains unfilled. I've often said that I just felt better knowing that he was still around, and I truly meant it.

I always held out hope that if things got too bad, the Gipper would give Nancy a tip of the Stetson, saddle up his favorite horse, throw the spurs to her, and ride full gallop to Washington to straighten things out.

Of course I knew better, but it sure put my mind at ease to think of him in this way instead of dwelling on the dreadful disease that slowly consumed him. I'll always believe that although his mind left him, his heart never did.

It is my belief that true greatness and conviction comes from the heart. For my money, no one who ever lived had a bigger heart or loftier goals than did Ronald Wilson Reagan and it is my doubt that anyone ever will.

He indeed gave his all and took it all the way to the hangar. It is a lofty goal to which we all should aspire.

Tags: Politics, Ronald Reagan

FDA Still Fighting (And Losing) The Battle of the Bulge

2006-06-03T23:50:00.000-04:00

(Via The Washington Times)

Well, it looks like the Food and Drug Administration is no longer satisfied with letting the consumer know what is in the food we eat; they now want restaurants to control what and how much of it we eat when we dine out:

The federal government wants smaller portion sizes at restaurants and nutritional information listed on menus.

As Americans eat more food away from home, the Food and Drug Administration said yesterday the nation's 900,000 restaurants needed to take the lead in cutting fat and the agency laid out ways to help people manage their intake of calories.

How stupid does the FDA think we are? I have a little extra around the middle and I know exactly how it got there: I've eaten more calories than I've burned off! I also know how to lose weight: I have to burn more calories than I take in!

It really doesn't matter what the FDA does to try to force people to lose weight; it simply won't work without personal responsiblility. It is now, and always will be, up to each individual to change their own habits and do those things which lead to weight loss and better health.

Smaller portions may provide a healthier bottom line for restraurants, but they won't lead to healthier waistlines. We will eat until we are full! The real trick is learning exactly when that is.

Tags: Politics, FDA, Food and Drug Administration, Weight Loss, Nutrition

Run, Al, Run!!!

2006-05-31T21:53:00.000-04:00

(Via Guardian Unlimited)

Al Gore has made his sharpest attack yet on the George Bush presidency, describing the current US administration as "a renegade band of rightwing extremists".

In an interview with the Guardian today, the former vice-president calls himself a "recovering politician", but launches into the political fray more explicitly than he has previously done during his high-profile campaigning on the threat of global warming.

Denying that his politics have shifted to the left since he lost the court battle for the 2000 election, Mr Gore says: "If you have a renegade band of rightwing extremists who get hold of power, the whole thing goes to the right."

But he claims he does not "expect to be a candidate" for president again, while refusing explicitly to rule out another run. Asked if any event could change his mind, he says: "Not that I can see."

So, the conductor of the End of Civilization Express and self-appointed leader of the Leftwing Junk Science Coalition (LWJSC, if you prefer acronyms) is calling the administration "a renegade band of rightwing extremists"?

Ouch! That's gonna leave a mark! [Heavy snark intended]

I wonder how much jet fuel Al burned traveling to the "Hay Festival" to promote "An Inconvenient Truth" and make these stunning observations? I think it's a safe bet he didn't walk on water or paddle a canoe to get over there.

He runs around preaching the end of civilization within 10 years and that it's all our fault, yet he's doing more than the average American to contribute to his so-called crisis.

Run, Al! I'm begging you! You can run as a renegade leftwing extremist on the hypocrisy platform.

Tags: Politics, Al Gore, An Inconvenient Truth, Hypocrisy, Environmental Extremism, Global Warming, Guardian Hay Literary Festival, Hay Festival

Always Remember...

2006-05-29T23:54:00.000-04:00

I have no illusions about what little I can add now to the silent testimony of those who gave their lives willingly for their country. Words are even more feeble on this Memorial Day, for the sight before us is that of a strong and good nation that stands in silence and remembers those who were loved and who, in return, loved their countrymen enough to die for them.

Yet, we must try to honor them -- not for their sakes alone, but for our own. And if words cannot repay the debt we owe these men, surely with our actions we must strive to keep faith with them and with the vision that led them to battle and to final sacrifice.- Ronald Reagan, May 31, 1982

Tags: Memorial Day, Armed Forces, Military

Carter Backs Bush on Immigration

2006-05-25T09:15:00.000-04:00

(Via Yahoo News)

ATLANTA - Former president Carter, a Democrat and frequent critic of President Bush, sees eye-to-eye with him on immigration.

Carter on Wednesday called the Republican president's commitment to immigration reform "quite admirable," saying he agrees with Bush's support of a system that would eventually grant citizenship to some illegals. [....]

The law should secure the nation's borders while "at the same time treating those who are here with respect and giving them some hope for the future," Carter said.

If I could tell the president one thing right now, it would be this:

When the same fellow that trashes you at a funeral starts praising you regarding your stance on immigration, it's time to do a 180. The warning signs don't get any clearer nor the flags any redder than this.

Tags: Politics, Bush, Jimmy Carter, Immigration, Amnesty, Illegal Immigration

Katrina Response Not Exactly As Advertised

2006-05-23T23:46:00.000-04:00

Lou Dolinar has the scoop on what the mainstream media missed in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina:

Remember the dozens, maybe hundreds, of rapes, murders, stabbings and deaths resulting from official neglect at the Superdome after Hurricane Katrina? The ones that never happened, as even the national media later admitted?

Sure, we all remember the original reporting, if not the back-pedaling.

Here's another one: Do you remember the dramatic TV footage of National Guard helicopters landing at the Superdome as soon as Katrina passed, dropping off tens of thousands saved from certain death? The corpsmen running with stretchers, in an echo of M*A*S*H, carrying the survivors to ambulances and the medical center? About how the operation, which also included the Coast Guard, regular military units, and local first responders, continued for more than a week?
Click Here

Me neither. Except that it did happen, and got at best an occasional, parenthetical mention in the national media. The National Guard had its headquarters for Katrina, not just a few peacekeeping troops, in what the media portrayed as the pit of Hell. Hell was one of the safest places to be in New Orleans, smelly as it was. The situation was always under control, not surprisingly because the people in control were always there. [....]

In the end, the media timeline was exactly backwards. The bulk of all rescues took place on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, and began tapering off on Thursday, officials say. Their account is buttressed by a Washington Post poll of survivors, which indicates that 75 percent of the survivors who had been trapped and rescued were picked by Thursday, and virtually all were picked up by the end of the week.

In other words, by the time the clichéd "long-awaited help" arrived, in the form of a visually-stimulating cigar being chomped by a cussing Lt. General Russel L. Honore, the worst was over. The majority of trapped survivors were out of the direst straits and awaiting evacuation. [....]

I had always suspected the media was not providing the complete picture, and instead cherry picked the worst possible situations to highlight in the bulk of their coverage of the tragedy.

Dolinar doesn't gloss over the fact that there was indeed a fair share of mistakes made by various individuals and agencies, but he points out that these failures were a smaller part of the larger picture than we were led to believe.

Dolinar provides a lengthy, detailed, and well-sourced analysis that paints a much more complete picture of what he says the media missed, or as I prefer to say, chose to ignore.

Tags: Politics, Katrina, Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans, National Guard, Coast Guard, What the Media Missed, Lou Dolinar, Real Clear Politics

Mort Nails It!

2006-05-23T22:37:00.000-04:00

(Via Pasadena Star-News)

Mort Kondracke hits this one out of the park:

ENOUGH already! It's harmful enough that ideological conflict and partisan politics are preventing this country from solving its long-term challenges on health care, fiscal policy and energy. Now it's threatening our national survival.

I do not exaggerate. Bush-hatred has reached such intensity that CIA officers and other bureaucrats are leaking major secrets about anti-terrorism policy and communications intelligence that undermine our ability to fight Islamic extremism.

Would newspapers in the midst of World War II have printed the fact that the United States had broken German and Japanese codes, enabling the enemy to secure its communications? Or revealed how and where Nazi spies were being interrogated? Nowadays, newspapers win Pulitzer Prizes for such disclosures. In Congress and in much of the media, the immediate reaction to news that the National Security Agency was intercepting international terrorist communications was not to say, "Good work - and how can we help?" Rather, it was to scream about a "domestic spying" scandal, as though Richard Nixon were back in the White House and tapping the telephone of Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean. [....]

If the administration believes, as officials often have said, that the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is obsolete in the age of super-computers and terrorism, it ought to work with Congress to rewrite the law. Skirting it won't work anymore. But the fundamental problem infecting much of Congress, the media and the political class - especially those left of center - is that they are consumed with loathing for President Bush and all his works and are prepared to do anything to undermine him, even if it makes the country less safe.

This is the rare exception in which I can only add one word to the discussion:

Bingo!!!

Read the whole thing.

Tags: Mort Kondracke, Politics, Bush, NSA, National Security, Wiretapping

UN Panel Wants To Axe Guantanamo

2006-05-19T23:29:00.000-04:00

(Via New York Times)

GENEVA, May 19 — A United Nations panel on torture called on the United States today to close the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba and expressed concern over reports of secret detention centers and of a practice of sending terror suspects to countries with poor human rights records.

The panel's report came on the same day as American military officers detailed an hourlong melee that occurred after a group of inmates at the detention center tried to commit suicide on Thursday, and other inmates there attacked guards trying to prevent one of the men from hanging himself.

Operations at the prison, opened to hold Al Qaeda, Taliban and other terror suspects after the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, have attracted criticism from several nations, and the United States has said it plans to close the facility but cannot yet do so.

Let it be known that I am hereby assembling a panel to exert pressure on United Nations to immediately cease all operations.

Their history of ignoring human rights abuses and torture in every corner of the world except where the United States is involved and their penchant for propping up and showering blessings upon every tinhorn dictator known to man, can no longer be tolerated.

Their profiteering and money laundering under the not-so watchful eye and ever helpful hands of Secretary-General Kofi Annan is also a subject of grave concern. Their torture of the United States of America must not be allowed to continue and their base at Turtle Bay must be shut down as quickly as possible in order to prevent any further abuse.

I'm confident that the panel we assemble here will have just as much influence as the panel to shut down the TERRORIST prison in Guantanamo Bay.

Volunteers to serve on the panel may submit their applications through the comment section or Trackback URL of this post.

Let's shut down the terrorist facility at Turtle Bay, not the one at Guantanamo Bay!

Tags: Politics, United Nations, New York Times, U.N. Panel Backs Closing Guantanamo, Guantanamo Bay, UN, Terrorism, War on Terror

Was it Really Necessary to Vote on This !

2006-05-19T22:05:00.000-04:00

(Via The Washington Post)

After an emotional debate fraught with symbolism, the Senate yesterday voted to make English the "national language" of the United States, declaring that no one has a right to federal communications or services in a language other than English except for those already guaranteed by law.

The measure, approved 63 to 34, directs the government to "preserve and enhance" the role of English, without altering current laws that require some government documents and services be provided in other languages. Opponents, however, said it could negate executive orders, regulations, civil service guidances and other multilingual ordinances not officially sanctioned by acts of Congress.

We've been speaking English in the United States of America for roughly 230 years. I speak it with a pronounced southern twang; my brother-in-law speaks it with a Cape Cod twist, but I think it is safe to say that we both consider the language we speak to be English. Granted, neither dialect is exactly the Kang's Anglish, [southern for King's English] but nevertheless it is English.

So if our national language is not English, then I wonder why it was used as the predominant language of discusion in the Senate debate on this most critical of issues? Did they draw slips of paper from a hat to decide which language to use before voting on whether or not English is the "official" language of the United States? Nope! They debated the issue using the English language and have in every Senate session in this country's history. Why? Because it is our official language. It is an absolute embarrassment to me that the United States Senate feels the need to vote on whether to call English our "national" or our "official" language.

This debate is nothing more than one of the many laces on the political football being tossed back and forth in the name of so-called "immigration reform". Well, the last time I checked, America didn't have a problem attracting people. Our problem is keeping track of the ones already here and stopping the flood that keeps flowing across our borders.

Stop making concessions and compromises that aren't needed and start taking action to stop the flow of illegals into our country. Make them earn the right to come here, and yes, make them learn our language.

That language is English. Now shut up and deal with it!

Tags: Politics, Immigration, Illegal Immigration, Immigration Reform, Washington Post, Senate Votes English As 'National Language', Bush, Senate, S.2611, S.AMDT.4064

President Bush Addresses Immigration Reform

2006-05-16T01:06:00.000-04:00

I was unable to watch President Bush's Address to the Nation on Immigration Reform live, but have just finished reading the transcript. My initial impression is that if the address was intended to quell the public outcry over border security and illegal immigration, it largely missed the mark.

For what it's worth, here's my analysis. Unless otherwise noted, all emphasis is mine:

Once here, illegal immigrants live in the shadows of our society. Many use forged documents to get jobs, and that makes it difficult for employers to verify that the workers they hire are legal. Illegal immigration puts pressure on public schools and hospitals, it strains state and local budgets, and brings crime to our communities. These are real problems. Yet we must remember that the vast majority of illegal immigrants are decent people who work hard, support their families, practice their faith, and lead responsible lives. They are a part of American life, but they are beyond the reach and protection of American law.

When I hear a statement such as this, I can't help but think that most Muslims who are illegally in America are hard working, law abiding citizens but it only took 19 who weren't to make September 11 not just another day on the calendar, but a day that will always be remembered as one of the darkest days in our country's history. It doesn't really matter what most of them do, it only matters what some are capable of doing.

We're a nation of laws, and we must enforce our laws. We're also a nation of immigrants, and we must uphold that tradition, which has strengthened our country in so many ways. These are not contradictory goals. America can be a lawful society and a welcoming society at the same time. We will fix the problems created by illegal immigration, and we will deliver a system that is secure, orderly, and fair. So I support comprehensive immigration reform that will accomplish five clear objectives.

It is true we are a nation of immigrants- legal immigrants. We should reward those who legally follow the process to become American citizens, but we should also take drastic steps to rid ourselves of those who don't respect the process. Anything less is disrespectful to our nation and also to those who love America enough to do it the right way. We don't just need to fix the problems created by illegal immigration, we need to make a concerted effort to stamp it out altogether.

First, the United States must secure its borders. This is a basic responsibility of a sovereign nation. It is also an urgent requirement of our national security. Our objective is straightforward: The border should be open to trade and lawful immigration, and shut to illegal immigrants, as well as criminals, drug dealers, and terrorists.

The American people have known this for decades, please tell me the Federal Government is not just now figuring this out.

Tonight I'm calling on Congress to provide funding for dramatic improvements in manpower and technology at the border. By the end of 2008, we'll increase the number of Border Patrol officers by an additional 6,000. When these new agents are deployed, we'll have more than doubled the size of the Border Patrol during my presidency.

At the same time, we're launching the most technologically advanced border security initiative in American history. We will construct high-tech fences in urban corridors, and build new patrol roads and barriers in rural areas. We'll employ motion sensors, infrared cameras, and unmanned aerial vehicles to prevent illegal crossings. America has the best technology in the world, and we will ensure that the Border Patrol has the technology they need to do their job and secure our border.

This is the bright spot of the entire speech in my opinion, but will only remain so if it actually gets done and is utilized effectively. If past history is an accurate predictor of future events, then I'm not entirely optimistic. We'll see.

Training thousands of new Border Patrol agents and bringing the most advanced technology to the border will take time. Yet the need to secure our border is urgent. So I'm announcing several immediate steps to strengthen border enforcement during this period of transition:

One way to help during this transition is to use the National Guard. So, in coordination with governors, up to 6,000 Guard members will be deployed to our southern border. The Border Patrol will remain in the lead. The Guard will assist the Border Patrol by operating surveillance systems, analyzing intelligence, installing fences and vehicle barriers, building patrol roads, and providing training. Guard units will not be involved in direct law enforcement activities -- that duty will be done by the Border Patrol. This initial commitment of Guard members would last for a period of one year. After that, the number of Guard forces will be reduced as new Border Patrol agents and new technologies come online. It is important for Americans to know that we have enough Guard forces to win the war on terror, to respond to natural disasters, and to help secure our border.

The United States is not going to militarize the southern border.

I'm not entirely sure that this makes any sense. Positioning National Guard units along the border with no real authority to enforce the law sounds like a waste of resources to me. We shouldn't have troops constucting the barriers, they should be locked and loaded in defense of them. The only way to send a clear message is to militarize the border. This sounds like an attempt to appease Vicente Fox and I couldn't care less what he thinks.

For many years, the government did not have enough space in our detention facilities to hold them [illegal immigrants] while the legal process unfolded. So most were released back into our society and asked to return for a court date. When the date arrived, the vast majority did not show up. This practice, called "catch and release," is unacceptable, and we will end it.

I certainly hope so!

I believe that illegal immigrants who have roots in our country and want to stay should have to pay a meaningful penalty for breaking the law, to pay their taxes, to learn English, and to work in a job for a number of years. People who meet these conditions should be able to apply for citizenship, but approval would not be automatic, and they will have to wait in line behind those who played by the rules and followed the law. What I've just described is not amnesty, it is a way for those who have broken the law to pay their debt to society, and demonstrate the character that makes a good citizen.

I respectfully disagree, Mr. President. It is amnesty because they are not being deported for breaking the law. They are being given a second chance to become a good citizen when their first act upon entering America was to break its laws.

Send them back to their country of origin and make them go through the "process" and reenter the country legally if they want to become a citizen. This is the only true way to separate the wheat from the chaff. If they are truly honest, they will do it the right way, but that requires that they start over from their home country, not from their desired destination.

Now, I have no doubt in my mind that the President is absolutely sincere about everything he has proposed this evening and I am not questionining his character in any way by offering my disagreement. I am, however, questioning his judgement on this particular issue.

The American people have spoken and have said in a loud and unified voice that our borders must be secured and illegal immigration must be stopped. They are demanding real action and real solutions to these problems, not middle of the road policies that do nothing to permanently solve the problem.

Our survival as a sovereign nation depends on it!

Tags: Bush, Politics, Immigration, Border, Mexico

Saddam Ready To Die

2006-05-14T17:36:00.000-04:00

(Via Times Online)

THE former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein has resigned himself to being sent to the gallows. “I am ready to die,” he told his lawyer and confidante in an interview in his Baghdad prison. “I am not scared of execution.”

Saddam is expected to return to court tomorrow for the resumption of a chaotic trial on charges of genocide and crimes against humanity that has lasted almost seven months.

“I do not attend this trial to spare my life,” he said. “I attend it to defend Iraq.”

Saddam, who refuses all visits from his family, was talking to Bushra Khalil, a Lebanese lawyer in her forties who is now the only woman he meets. In their meetings Saddam often prefers to talk to her about poetry or international relations rather than the minutiae of the defence case.

Khalil told The Sunday Times of an intimate five-hour interview conducted with Saddam in his prison within the past few weeks.

He confided that he had no fear of death and seemed to have accepted his fate. “I took the decision to die the day I tried to assassinate Abdel Karim Qasim,” he said, referring to a botched coup against a former leader that forced him to flee the country in 1959. In Iraq, hanging is the customary form of capital punishment.

Well, it looks like Saddam and I have something in common after all! He's ready to die and I'm ready for him to be dead.

I do find it ironic that he accepted death as his fate the day of the failed assassination attempt on Abdel Karim Qasim and he faced it by fleeing Iraq.

I suppose since fleeing now will only take him as far as a set of steel bars or a concrete wall, he can now put on a brave face. How courageous!

It's not like he has a lot of choice in the matter now!

Tags: Saddam Hussein, Iraq, Politics, Execution, Hanging

Here's an Inconvenient Truth, Al!

2006-05-10T20:21:00.000-04:00

(Via Richmond Times-Dispatch)

According to University of Virginia researchers:

Global warming by itself cannot be blamed for the increase in severe Atlantic hurricanes, University of Virginia climate researchers report.

"It is too simplistic to only implicate sea-surface temperatures in the dramatic increase in the number of major hurricanes," said the study's lead author, Patrick J. Michaels.

Warm water fuels tropical cyclones. Some hurricane researchers have related warming in the Atlantic basin with greater hurricane severity, pointing to greenhouse-induced atmosphere warming as the cause for the ocean heating.

But hurricanes' ultimate strength is not directly linked to the underlying water temperatures, the Virginia scientists said.

So what is the main reason for the increase in severity of Atlantic hurricanes? The lead author of the study, Patrick J. Michaels, offers the following explanation:

"We should have had 28 Category 3 storms from the warming" between 1995 and 2005, Michaels said. "Instead we had 42." By comparison, 16 such storms developed between 1982 and 1994.

Michaels believes the increase in hurricane activity beginning in the 1990s is related mainly to variation in the North Atlantic's temperature patterns, not temperature change itself.

"The pattern can appear whether it's cool or whether it's warm," he said.

While expanding the 83-degree zone ought to produce more severe hurricanes, Michaels said, that expansion would also place the storms farther north in the Atlantic, "where there are very few things to hit."

"In the future we may expect to see more major hurricanes," Michaels said, "but we don't expect the ones that do form to be any stronger than the ones that we have seen in the past."

So, there is evidence that shows that "global warming" is not the source of all the worlds problems or the topic in which we should all be the most concerned.

Of course, I'm not saying that global warming doesn't exist. In fact, I am more convinced than ever that it does exist and is caused by the combined output of carbon dioxide (hot air) from the mouths of Al Gore and countless other doomsayers each and every time they open their mouths to speak.

So now you know!

Tag: Global Warming,
Hurricanes, University of Virginia, Environmental Science, Climatology, Al Gore, An Inconvenient Truth, Environmental+Extremism, Weather, Climate Change

Surveillance in Wartime is Nothing New

2006-05-09T23:02:00.000-04:00

This is interesting:

IN A BOLD AND CONTROVERSIAL DECISION, the president authorized a program for the surveillance of communications within the United States, seeking to prevent acts of domestic sabotage and espionage. In so doing, he ignored a statute that possibly forbade such activity, even though high-profile federal judges had affirmed the statute's validity. The president sought statutory amendments allowing this surveillance but, when no such legislation was forthcoming, he continued the program nonetheless. And when Congress demanded that he disclose details of the surveillance program, the attorney general said, in no uncertain terms, that it would get nothing of the sort.

A casual observer would probably come to the conclusion that the above paragraph is the beginning of an article about what our friends in the media gleefully refer to as "President Bush's Domestic Surveillance Program". They would be wrong:

In short, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt charted a bold course in defending the nation's security in 1940, when he did all of these things.

Those who are questioning President Bush's decision to authorize such surveillance in the interest of our national security would do well to read this entire article.

There are times when a sitting president finds himself facing dire circumstances that require a course of action that might ruffle a few feathers here and there, but in the end, the decision to follow that course of action may save countless lives. Defending America from enemies that have proven they will kill us, qualifies as a dire circumstance in my book.

Roosevelt, a Democrat, found it necessary in World War II and that "controversial" decision probably saved lives. President Bush has found it necessary now and should not have to worry about naysayers from either party who are making a political issue out of the defense of this nation.

When you get right down to it, the world is much smaller today than it was then and our oceans no longer provide a defense against, or a warning of, an approaching threat. In a sense, the decision by President Bush to authorize the warrantless surveillance, is more critical now than it was in the days of FDR. There is simply too little time to jump through hoops and beg the permission of a court to wiretap a phone with a suspected terrorist on one end of the line. In this day and age, one minute ago might still be too late.

I'm not one who would ordinarily support government haphazardly intervening in the lives of ordinary citizens, but if the goal of that intervention is to stop a terrorist before he can complete his mission, they can wiretap my phone for all I care.

I'm not excluding the Republicans who have jumped on the NSA probe bandwagon by any stretch, but it seems ironic to me that many of the so-called party of FDR will jump in front of the nearest microphone and claim the president has acted egregiously and irresponsibly by wiretapping American citizens. They conveniently leave out the part about a suspected terrorist being on the other end of the line, and if they have any knowledge of history prior to the 1960's, then they should know full well that surveillance during wartime is not a new concept- it was practically perfected by one of their very own.

That is, if they'll still claim him.

Tags: Politics, Bush, NSA, Wiretapping, FDR

The Rundown on Iran

2006-05-09T21:07:00.000-04:00

I've posted on the threat posed by Iran here in the past, and I've found the best place to begin any post on the subject is to start at Assorted Babble.

Suzie has really done an exhaustive amount of research into Iran and its nuclear ambitions and maintains an encyclopedic listing of links and posts on the topic. She has also included a listing of links, 24 in all, to every post she has compiled on Iran since January 6.

If you are worried about Iran and the threat they pose to the world, click here and start scrolling. If you're not worried about the threat posed by Iran, click the link anyway because it's high time you started.

Tags: Iran, Nuclear Weapons

UPDATE: Atwar Bahjat Beheading Video A Hoax

2006-05-08T22:00:00.000-04:00

(Via The Jawa Report and Mudville Gazette)

Dr. Rusty Shackleford [GRAPHIC IMAGES WARNING] has confirmed that the video reported yesterday to be that of the brutal murder of Iraqi journalist, Atwar Bahjat, is in fact the execution of a Nepalese man by the Army of Ansar al-Sunna in Iraq from August of 2004.

Dr. Shackleford expains:

A gruesome beheading video delivered to the Sunday Times purporting to be of slain journalist Atwar Bahjat is a hoax. On Sunday, May 7th, the Times reported that they had received a low-quality video of Atwar Bahjat being slowly beheaded. That video is now being circulated on the internet as the "Atwar Bahjat" beheading video.

The Jawa Report can reveal that the Times and Halal Jabar, the author of the article, are victims of a hoax. The video actually shows the gruesome murder of a Nepalese man by the Army of Ansar al-Sunna in Iraq from August of 2004. The man was one of 12 victims executed by the terrorist organization--the other 11 were shot.

As Dr. Rusty Shackleford and Greyhawk both make clear it the above linked posts, the fact that the video was not that of Atwar Bahjat does not discount the fact that Ms. Bahjat was cruelly and violently executed.

Although Ms. Bahjat was not beheaded as previously reported, the video should still serve as a chilling reminder of the gruesome tactics employed by this most heinous of enemies. The threat remains as real as ever.

Tags: Atwar Bahjat, Murder, Terrorism, War on Terror, Iraq

The Murder of Atwar Bahjat

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

Greyhawk at Mudville Gazette posts the graphic details of the murder of Iraqi journalist Atwar Bahjat.

Although the brutal murder occurred on February 22, video footage captured on what is believed to have been a mobile phone, shows that the murder was much more gruesome and barbaric than earlier reported.

Greyhawk posted this excerpt from TimesOnline with a graphic content warning that should be heeded here as well:

Two men drove up in a pick-up truck, asking for her. She appealed to a small crowd that had gathered around her crew but nobody was willing to help her. It was reported at the time that she had been shot dead with her cameraman and sound man.

We now know that it was not that swift for Bahjat. First she was stripped to the waist, a humiliation for any woman but particularly so for a pious Muslim who concealed her hair, arms and legs from men other than her father and brother.

Then her arms were bound behind her back. A golden locket in the shape of Iraq that became her glittering trademark in front of the television cameras must have been removed at some point — it is nowhere to be seen in the grainy film, which was made by someone who pointed a mobile phone at her as she lay on a patch of earth in mortal terror.

By the time filming begins, the condemned woman has been blindfolded with a white bandage.

It is stained with blood that trickles from a wound on the left side of her head. She is moaning, although whether from the pain of what has already been done to her or from the fear of what is about to be inflicted is unclear.

Just as Bahjat bore witness to countless atrocities that she covered for her television station, Al-Arabiya, during Iraq’s descent into sectarian conflict, so the recording of her execution embodies the depths of the country’s depravity after three years of war.

A large man dressed in military fatigues, boots and cap approaches from behind and covers her mouth with his left hand. In his right hand, he clutches a large knife with a black handle and an 8in blade. He proceeds to cut her throat from the middle, slicing from side to side.

Her cries — “Ah, ah, ah” — can be heard above the “Allahu akbar” (God is greatest) intoned by the holder of the mobile phone.

Even then, there is no quick release for Bahjat. Her executioner suddenly stands up, his job only half done. A second man in a dark T-shirt and camouflage trousers places his right khaki boot on her abdomen and pushes down hard eight times, forcing a rush of blood from her wounds as she moves her head from right to left.

Only now does the executioner return to finish the task. He hacks off her head and drops it to the ground, then picks it up again and perches it on her bare chest so that it faces the film-maker in a grotesque parody of one of her pieces to camera.

The voice of one of the Arab world’s most highly regarded and outspoken journalists has been silenced. She was 30.

Greyhawk adds:

Other gruesome details from a family friend: She had nine drill holes in her right arm and 10 in her left, he said. The drill had also been applied to her legs, her navel and her right eye.

Greyhawk provides additional background and details that should serve as a reminder of the truly barbaric nature of these thugs the mainstream media refers politely to as "insurgents".

The true face of the enemy is commonly hidden by such innocuous terms in an effort to paint America and its coalition partners as the true enemy in this conflict. This is truly a battle of good vs. evil; unquestionably and undeniably evil.

This should not be confused with colateral damage inflicted by a legitimate military foe following time-honored rules of engagement. This was nothing more than a cold, calculated, and barbaric murder of an innocent civilian by an enemy that uses religion as the justification for their actions.

One simply cannot turn a blind eye to the evil that exists in other lands and react with astonishment the day it appears in your own backyard. This evil must be recognized and defeated before it gets to that point.

Jeff Goldstein puts it this way:

What is important is that, as Greyhawk notes in the introduction to his post, this type of showy brutality “is typical of the work of Islamic terrorists,” and is useful for those who wish a “bit of insight into the nature of the enemy in this global war.”

Our own media feels the need to shield us from such brutality, even as they report daily on the US and Iraqi death count—or seemed almost to fetishize the torture photos from Abu Ghraib.

But presuming to protect us from the nature of our enemy, like many of the MSM’s other actions in framing the war on terror, is irresponsible—and either presumptuously paternalistic, or cynically calculating.

True, there is a fine line between “war porn” and the dissemination of information. But we nevertheless have the right to know who it is we are fighting. Because knowing just might have an impact on how we, as a country, feel about the necessity of carrying out the fight—and how far we are willing to go to see our enemy vanquished.

Are you awake yet?

Tags: Atwar Bahjat, Murder, Terrorism, War on Terror, Iraq,

It's a Long Way To November

2006-05-07T00:03:00.000-04:00

From The Washington Post today:

Democratic leaders, increasingly confident they will seize control of the House in November, are laying plans for a legislative blitz during their first week in power that would raise the minimum wage, roll back parts of the Republican prescription drug law, implement homeland security measures and reinstate lapsed budget deficit controls.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) said in an interview last week that a Democratic House would launch a series of investigations of the Bush administration, beginning with the White House's first-term energy task force and probably including the use of intelligence in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. Pelosi denied Republican allegations that a Democratic House would move quickly to impeach President Bush. But, she said of the planned investigations, "You never know where it leads to."

In recent days, Democratic confidence has been buoyed by a series of polls indicating that not only is Bush growing increasingly unpopular, so are Republicans in Congress. An Associated Press-Ipsos poll released Friday found that 33 percent of the public approves of Bush's job performance, the lowest rating of his presidency. And only 25 percent approves of the job Congress is doing, a figure comparable to congressional approval ratings before the 1994 elections that swept Republicans to power.

The AP-Ipsos poll found that 51 percent of Americans say they want Democrats rather than Republicans to control Congress. Only 34 percent favor Republican control.

"We have to be ready to win," Pelosi said, "and we have to tell [voters] what we will do when we win."

[Emphasis mine]

I hate to burst Minority Leader Pelosi's bubble, but you have to tell the voters what you will do before you win. That is apparently a concept the Democratic Party fails to embrace, or even recognize, for that matter.

It's curious to me that a body whose overall approval (25 percent) is lower than the President (33 percent) can make claims of ineffectiveness on the part of the President. I can't find a link to the transcript, but this is the same point driven home by Tom Bevan of Real Clear Politics while on Bill Bennett's Morning in America radio program last week.

While the AP/Ipsos poll also shows if the election were held today 51 percent of Americans favor Democratic control of Congress and 34 percent favor Republican Control, the election isn't being held today and a lot of things can change between now and November either way. History has proven it.

I'm not discounting the fact that a lot of conservatives, including myself, are concerned about the direction the GOP has been heading, but if the only position the Democrats can articulate is the guarantee that regaining control will bring about a series of investigations of the Bush Administration, they will quickly find out they are on a road to nowhere. It's familiar territory for the Democrats to be sure, but its territory that offers no change in scenery. Voters want "What will you do?” not "Who will you screw?".

UPDATE: Welcome Right Wing News and Real Clear Politics readers! To reach the Palmetto Pundit home page, click here. Thanks for stopping by!

Tags: Politics, Polls, AP/Ipsos, Bush, Washington Post, Elections, House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi

Porter Goss Resigns-Speculation Flies

2006-05-06T23:47:00.000-04:00

(Via New York Daily News)

WASHINGTON - CIA Director Porter Goss abruptly resigned yesterday amid allegations that he and a top aide may have attended Watergate poker parties where bribes and prostitutes were provided to a corrupt congressman.

Kyle (Dusty) Foggo, the No. 3 official at the CIA, could soon be indicted in a widening FBI investigation of the parties thrown by defense contractor Brent Wilkes, named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the bribery conviction of former Rep. Randall (Duke) Cunningham, law enforcement sources said.

A CIA spokeswoman said Foggo went to the lavish weekly hospitality-suite parties at the Watergate and Westin Grand hotels but "just for poker."

Intelligence and law enforcement sources said solid evidence had yet to emerge that Goss also went to the parties, but Goss and Foggo share a fondness for poker and expensive cigars, and the FBI investigation was continuing.

[Emphasis mine]

So, Goss abruptly resigns yesterday and today a laundry list of reasons why has emerged, yet the only thing that has been substantiated so far is that Goss likes to smoke cigars and play poker. The headline screams "CIA boss Goss is cooked", all based on hints and wild speculation.

I'm not claiming whether I believe Goss is guilty or innocent because I don't know the facts. Come to think of it, neither do Richard Sisk and James Gordon Meek, the authors of the article. I have no problem with someone reporting on the buzz around Washington, but it should be reported as such. To headline the article to imply that Goss is already guilty of what is merely speculation is akin to pronouncing the sentence before the trial begins.

So Goss is guilty by association he likes to play poker and smoke cigars? I'm not playing that game.

MacRanger is exactly right when he points out the whole Goss resignation is nothing more than "mission accomplished:

Goss didn't come in to be a "uniter", or necessarily a "divider" but specifically to be a "Fox among the chickens" and "stir things up".

He did. Under his tenure things did get stired up and the rogues who saw the light at the end of the tunnel and realized it was the "Goss Express" did what rats do. They vacate. But his stirring up did get a major result accomplished.

Point of clarity that will be coming out in the days and weeks to come, Mary (Loose Lips) McCarthy wasn't just "a" leaker - she was in fact the Queen Bee leaker from which all the little worker bees delivered their 'honey'.

So do you get it now? Goss killed the Queen - mission accompished.

MacRanger also makes another salient point:

Dang....I like cigars and absolutely love poker......hmmmm, can't remember the hookers tho...

I suppose this means MacRanger is guilty as well, at least according to the rules set forth by Sisk and Meek. After all, he does have at least two things in common with Goss and Foggo. What more information could possibly be required?

Tags: Politics,Porter Goss, CIA, Resignation, Bush

Like Father, Like Son?

2006-05-04T23:40:00.000-04:00

(Via Drudge Report citing Roll Call)

It appears that car crash cover-ups by Democratic Congressmen named Kennedy may, in fact, be hereditary:

Police labor union officials asked acting Chief Christopher McGaffin this afternoon to allow a Capitol Police officer to complete his investigation into an early-morning car crash involving Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.), son of Sen. Ted Kennedy.

ROLL CALL reports: According to a letter sent by Officer Greg Baird, acting chairman of the USCP FOP, the wreck took place at approximately 2:45 a.m. Thursday when Kennedy's car, operating with its running lights turned off, narrowly missed colliding with a Capitol Police cruiser and smashed into a security barricade at First and C streets Southeast.

“The driver exited the vehicle and he was observed to be staggering,” Baird’s letter states. Officers approached the driver, who “declared to them he was a Congressman and was late to a vote. The House had adjourned nearly three hours before this incident. It was Congressman Patrick J. Kennedy from Rhode Island.”

Baird wrote that Capitol Police Patrol Division units, who are trained in driving under the influence cases, were not allowed to perform basic field sobriety tests on the Congressman. Instead, two sergeants, who also responded to the accident, proceeded to confer with the Capitol Police watch commander on duty and then “ordered all of the Patrol Division Units to leave the scene and that they were taking over.”

Rep. Kennedy has issued a statement which has a familiar ring to it:

"I was involved in a traffic accident last night at First and C Street SE near the U.S. Capitol," Kennedy said in a written statement released by his office. "I consumed no alcohol prior to the incident. I will fully cooperate with the Capitol Police in whatever investigation they choose to undertake."

[Emphasis mine]

While it's not my intention to imply a similarity between this automobile accident and Chappaquiddick, the similarity of the statements following the accidents are striking to say the least.

Tags: Patrick Kennedy, Capitol Police, DUI, Politics

Moussaoui Gets Life, Deserved Death

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

(Via Washington Post)

Al-Qaeda conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui will spend the rest of his life in a maximum security prison for his role in the Sept. 11 attacks after a federal jury rejected the government's four-year quest to secure his execution for the deadliest terrorist strike on U.S. soil.

After weeks of listening to harrowing testimony from 9/11 family members, hearing heartbreaking emergency calls and watching painful footage of victims jumping to their deaths, the anonymous jury of nine men and three women methodically deliberated for 41 hours over seven days before reaching its verdict yesterday.

If there was ever a case to be made for military tribunals this would be it. This is precisely the reason that terrorists captured on the battlefield should not be afforded the protections of our legal system.

This man deserved to die for his actions, even if his death would have made him a martyr for Al Qaeda. This verdict sends a message of weakness that serves only to embolden terrorists and challenges them to "roll the dice", knowing full well that if they are captured and go to trial, they have a better than average chance of gaming the system to their advantage.

Terrorists who conspire to do us harm should not be tried by a jury; they should face a swift execution without the option of the method or the timeframe in which it is carried out. If they want to plead their case, let them plead it with their maker.

I'm not a bit surprised by the verdict, but I don't think I've ever been more disgusted! He conspired in the murder of over 3,000 innocent people, and what does he receive as punishment? He gets to keep breathing!!

Unbelievable!!

More: Allahpundit at Hot Air has much more including a roundup of reactions in the blogosphere.

Tags: Terrorism, Moussaoui,Al Qaeda,9-11, Trial, Verdict

May 1st Was Civil Rights Day In Cuba?

2006-05-03T22:37:00.000-04:00

Mike's America picked up on something that I completely missed on Monday:

With Fidel Castro presiding, the General Secretary of Cuba's Workers Confederation, Pedro Ross Leal expressed support for demonstrations in the United States in defense of the civil rights of immigrants in that country. He made a direct reference to the mass "Day Without Immigrants" work stoppage being staged across the US on Monday.

Since when did Castro and his minions become supporters of civil rights and the freedom to demonstrate? It must be the dawning of a "New Day in Cuba"!

I'll bet the mainstream media is kicking themselves over this missed opportunity!

I can see the headlines now:

The Softer Side of Fidel, The New Face of Communism, The Compassionate Communism of Fidel Castro,, blah!, blah!, blah!

Mike sums it up brilliantly:

It's an easy cheap shot to take. It's not like Cuba has to worry about any illegals from the U.S. breaking into Cuba!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't seem to recall an instance when a makeshift raft enroute between Cuba and Miami has been found to be pointing southward.

I guess there really is no limit to the depths at which the communist propaganda of Cuba will sink. Don't you find it pathetically ironic that the citizens of Cuba can't openly protest Pedro Ross Leal's defense of the "rights" of illegal immigrants in a foreign country to demonstrate, without running the considerable risk of becoming the target of tommorrow's target practice? I certainly do!

Tags: Immigration, Illegal Immigration, May Day, Cuba, Pedro Ross Leal,
Fidel Castro, Communism, Politics

Restraint or Overwhelming Force?

2006-05-03T12:39:00.000-04:00

Shelby Steele makes the case for pulling out all the stops:

There is something rather odd in the way America has come to fight its wars since World War II.

For one thing, it is now unimaginable that we would use anything approaching the full measure of our military power (the nuclear option aside) in the wars we fight. And this seems only reasonable given the relative weakness of our Third World enemies in Vietnam and in the Middle East. But the fact is that we lost in Vietnam, and today, despite our vast power, we are only slogging along--if admirably--in Iraq against a hit-and-run insurgency that cannot stop us even as we seem unable to stop it. Yet no one--including, very likely, the insurgents themselves--believes that America lacks the raw power to defeat this insurgency if it wants to. So clearly it is America that determines the scale of this war. It is America, in fact, that fights so as to make a little room for an insurgency.

Certainly since Vietnam, America has increasingly practiced a policy of minimalism and restraint in war. And now this unacknowledged policy, which always makes a space for the enemy, has us in another long and rather passionless war against a weak enemy.

Rush spoke about this piece at length on his radio program today, and I think one would do well to read the entire piece before making any snap judgements.

I think the key point he makes is that we are the world's superior fighting force and we should be applying the lessons learned in World War II instead of the restraint that has become, more or less, the rule post-Vietnam.

We'll win regardless, but his point that we often exercise too much restraint as opposed to using the overwhelming force of which we are capable, I think is a fair observation to make: We can win this war as decisively or as methodically as we wish, the choice is ours!

Tags: Iraq, Terrorism, War on Terror, Military, Politics

Zarqawi Experiencing Empty Nest Syndrome

2006-05-02T23:38:00.000-04:00

Strategy Page tells us why:

Without much fanfare or publicity, American and British commandoes have taken apart al Qaeda's operation in Iraq. About the only non-Iraqi al Qaeda leader left in Iraq is military leader Abu Musab al Zarqawi, a Jordanian. In the last few months, American commandoes nearly caught Zarqawi at least three times. On April 16th and 25th, raids killed and captured over twenty al Qaeda members. Interrogations of the captured men indicated that Zarqawi was in the area. Also captured, before it showed up on an al Qaeda web site, was a video of Zarqawi, holding an American M249 light machinegun. Several of these have been lost, usually from vehicles hit by roadside bombs, and abandoned by their crews. In the video, Zarqawi pleaded for Iraqi Sunni Arabs to support him and not, as more and more Sunni Arabs are doing, the democratically elected government.

This reminds me of something the late, great, Southern humorist Lewis Grizzard once said: "Mama always told me to wear clean underwear; You never know when you might be in a wreck."

Whether Zarqawi is prepared or not, his death or capture appears to be approaching at a rapid pace. He'd do well to stock up!

Tags: Zarqawi, Al Qaeda, Terrorism, Iraq, War on Terror

Hey Protestors! Wrap This Around Your Maypole!

2006-05-02T01:10:00.000-04:00

I haven't said much about today's pro-illegal imigration ralies. I can assure it's not due to a lack of interest on my part. To the contrary, I'm so disgusted by the whole thing and by the obvious lack of concern on the part of our elected officials from both parties, that it will be a minor miracle if I'm able to string together two coherent sentences on the subject. Now that you've been warned, here's my take in a fairly substantial nutshell:

I don't appreciate people from anywhere coming into my country and making demands for rights they are not entitled to. You have to earn the right to become an American! This is not something you are entitled to simply because you found someone to rewrite the national anthem in Spanish and you are physically able to yell while holding up a sign.

If you want to live under our flag, you'd better learn how to fly it correctly. Do not fly it upside down, beneath the Mexican flag, or burn it in protest, and expect me to give a rats rear end about the rights you say you are entitled to. Don't trash my country and expect me to welcome you with open arms. It doesn't work that way now, and as far as I'm concerned, it never will!!

The type of individual who would skip work or school to protest against America as a means to influence others that they should be allowed to illegally stay in America, are exactly the type of non-productive, ungrateful members of society who should be automatically deported from America.

That pretty much covers it! It may be more over the top than you are used to from me, but I meant every last word of it.

In the coming days, it will be interesting to see whether these events actually lived up to all the hype and struck the huge blow to our economy that their communist sympathizing organizers hoped they would. My guess? Not a bang, but a wimper.

On a related note, John Hawkins posts the text of a letter sent out today to Julie Myers, head of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement:

Dear Ms. Myers,

As you are aware, pro-illegal immigration rallies are taking place throughout the United States today. Those organizing the rallies have encouraged illegal aliens to refrain from going to work as a sign of protest.

Too often, we presume that fault lies with the illegal migrant worker, but we need to recognize that the employer broke the law by hiring the illegal alien. We believe the Federal government has an obligation to enforce the nation's immigration laws and must actively investigate any and all instances where it is apparent industries have knowingly and willingly hired those who entered this country illegally.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) should pursue the multiple reports in the news media today regarding companies which have been forced to halt operations because large numbers of their employees appear to be in the United States illegally and are participating in the protest rallies.

ICE has an obligation to use this public information to enforce immigration laws. We respectfully request that you look into this matter and report back to us on your findings.

Thank you for your immediate consideration to this important matter.

Sincerely,

Jack Kingston
Member of Congress

Marsha Blackburn
Member of Congress

To paraphrase John's response to the letter; if a business employs so many illegal immigrants that it had to shut it's doors today, ICE should probably be looking into it.

Then again, if ICE had been effectively doing it's job all along, there wouldn't have been nearly as many illegals available to protest today, now would there?

Tags: Illegal Immigration, Immigration, Mexico, Borders, National Security, Amnesty, Politics, Homeland Security

Who Said That?

2006-04-30T22:12:00.000-04:00

Mark Steyn in the Chicago Sun-Times:

John Kerry announced this week's John Kerry Iraq Policy of the Week the other day: "Iraqi politicians should be told that they have until May 15 to deal with these intransigent issues and at last put together an effective unity government or we will immediately withdraw our military."

With a sulky pout perhaps? With hands on hips and a full flip of the hair?

Did he get that from Churchill? "We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, at least until May 15, when I have a windsurfing engagement off Nantucket."

Actually, no. He got it from Thomas Jefferson. "This is not the first time in American history when patriotism has been distorted to deflect criticism and mislead the nation," warned Sen. Kerry, placing his courage in the broader historical context. "No wonder Thomas Jefferson himself said: 'Dissent is the greatest form of patriotism.' "

Close enough. According to the Jefferson Library: "There are a number of quotes that we do not find in Thomas Jefferson's correspondence or other writings; in such cases, Jefferson should not be cited as the source. Among the most common of these spurious Jefferson quotes are: 'Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.' "

So, Mr. “I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.”, misquoted Thomas Jefferson? I, for one, am not a bit surprised. After all, he misquotes himself all the time.

Tags: Politics, John Kerry, Thomas+Jefferson, Misquotes

Rush Makes A Deal

2006-04-28T23:44:00.000-04:00

(Via Palm Beach Post)

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — Rush Limbaugh was arrested Friday on a prescription fraud charge after reaching a deal with prosecutors that will see the single count dismissed if he continues treatment and doesn't violate the law, Limbaugh's attorney said.

The subject of a three-year investigation, Limbaugh surrendered to authorities on a warrant charging him with fraud to conceal information to obtain prescriptions, said Teri Barbera, a spokeswoman for the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office.

The 55-year-old conservative radio commentator came into the jail at about 4 p.m. with his attorney Roy Black and left an hour later after being photographed and fingerprinted. He posted $3,000 bail, Barbera said.

"He just kind of came in and he left," Barbera said.

Black said his client and prosecutors reached a settlement on a charge of doctor shopping that will be filed Monday by the Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office. According to the warrant, sometime between February and August 2003, Limbaugh withheld information from a medical practitioner from whom he sought to obtain a controlled substance or a prescription that he also had received medications from another physician.

Under the terms of the deal, called a pretrial diversion, Limbaugh will be cleared of the charge and a trial won't take place if he continues drug treatment with the same doctor he has seen for the past 2 1/2 years and refrains from violating any laws, Black said.

As a formality, Limbaugh entered a plea of not guilty on the charge, said the commentator's spokesman Tony Knight.

Limbaugh has maintained his innocence throughout the investigation.

Of course, Brian Skoloff of the Associated Press and the author of this piece, can't stop with just the facts of the case, he dredges the bottom of the pond and makes the hypocrite argument:

But before his own problems became public, Limbaugh had decried drug use and abuse and mocked President Clinton for saying he had not inhaled when he tried marijuana. He often made the case that drug crimes deserve punishment.

"Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. ... And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up," Limbaugh said on his short-lived television show on Oct. 5, 1995.

During the same show, he commented that the statistics that show blacks go to prison more often than whites for the same drug offenses only illustrate that "too many whites are getting away with drug use."

I'll concede the point that drug abuse is in fact drug abuse whether or not the drug is prescription or illegal. But whether it be Rush Limbaugh or Harry Reid, I would tend to have more sympathy for someone acquiring prescription painkillers to treat pain than I would a drug addict acquiring drugs solely for the purpose of getting high. I'm not condoning either, I'm just saying that I can make that distinction.

As far as the deal goes, he continues to receive the same treatment with the same doctor who has been treating him for the last couple of years, he still pleads not guilty, pays a $30,000 fine to offset court costs, and in 18 months the slate is wiped clean. Or as commenter Scott at Outside the Beltway noted:

If the prosecutor had any case at all, he would not be cutting a deal. This is clearly a face-saving measure for the benefit of the prosecutor, whose prosecution was politically motivated to begin with.

Rush won.

In short, he gets his life back and puts an unfortunate episode in his life behind him.

Tags: Politics, Rush Limbaugh, Talk Radio, Oxycontin

A Friday Funny!

2006-04-28T09:24:00.000-04:00

Basil has posted a transcript of the latest Glenn and Helen show, their exclusive interview with Osama bin Laden. You may want to keep and eye on those puppies, although I'm not quite sure whether Evil Glenn or Osama bin Laden is the bigger threat. If they conspire it could get very ugly. Indeed.

BREAKING!: I checked just before posting and the professor knows. In the professor's own words:

DANG. SOMEBODY'S ALREADY GOTTEN HOLD of our next podcast.

Looks like someone needs to contain the leaks coming out of Knoxville as well as Washington. HEH!

Tags:Humor, Evil Glenn, Puppies,Blenders, Filthy Lies

A New Cartoon Debacle, A Totally Opposite Response

2006-04-28T00:03:00.000-04:00

(HT Hot Air)

WorldNetDaily broke this story yesterday:

A Catholic activist organization has written to Oregon's governor and state lawmakers to protest a University of Oregon student newspaper for having published cartoons showing Jesus Christ naked and with an erection.

In its March edition, the Insurgent, an "alternative" student paper on the Eugene, Ore., campus printed 12 hand-drawn cartoons of Jesus as a response to rival paper the Commentator having published the controversial cartoons of Muhammad originally published in Europe that sparked Muslim riots worldwide. The Insurgent claimed it published the drawings to "provoke dialogue."

William Donohue, president of the Catholic League, said the university's president, Dave Frohnmayer, had been unresponsive to complaints about the drawings, so he had written to the governor, every state legislators and the chancellor of the Oregon University System, among others.

"The March edition of the Insurgent ... was one of the most obscene assaults on Christianity I have ever seen," Donohue said in a statement. "To make sure that the persons I wrote to understand how vile this attack was, I sent a photocopy of the two most offensive graphics: one was a depiction of a naked Jesus on the cross with an erection; the other, titled 'Resurrection,' showed a naked Jesus kissing another naked man, both sporting erections."

Notice the Catholic League didn't say they "We're going to start a holy war, burn everything that can possibly be set on fire, and threaten to behead those who depict our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in such a vulgar and offensive fashion."

Nope. They wrote to Oregon's governor and state lawmakers to express their displeasure in hopes that they would take action on the matter. I wonder if the publishers of "The Insurgent" have the intellectual capacity to note the difference in the two responses.

Am I outraged? Am I offended? Absolutely and unequivocally YES!!!

What would Jesus have his followers do in retaliation? He would have us pray for them!

These misguided college students may have thought that by publishing these cartoons they were "provoking dialogue", but actually all they have done is offend scores of people, Christians and non-Christians alike. You don't have to be particularly religious to be offended by a drawing of any religious figure depicted with an erect penis. There is a vast difference between making a political statement and simply being vile and offensive.

Maybe they thought Christians would react in the same way that Muslim extremists reacted during the Jyllands-Posten cartoon debacle, but they won't. By failing to accurately predict the reaction, and by printing opposing cartoons much more offensive than the ones they are being compared to, the only thing they have really done is shine a spotlight on their own stupidity.

They have exercised their freedom of speech by posting these images. I hope they also understand that freedom of speech means they will not be protected from the onslaught of opposition they will most assuredly face as a result. There won't be any beheadings or burning buildings, but if I were them I might prepare for a significant round of tongue lashing.

For the record, I don't find the Mohammed cartoons and the Jesus cartoons to be even remotely comparable in the dialogue they would provoke, so I'm going to exercise my freedom of speech by not reposting them here.

Tags: University of Oregon,The Insurgent, Jesus Cartoons, Jyllands-Posten, Religion

Something You Should Worry About

2006-04-26T11:47:00.000-04:00

(HT- Assorted Babble)

A couple of days ago, I wrote this post referencing Mark Steyn’s column “Nothing to Fear but the Climate Change Alarmists” in Sunday’s Chicago Sun-Times. In that post I remarked that I had better things to worry about than melting icebergs, such as nukes in the hands of a madman, terrorists with dirty bombs, etc.

Suzie at Assorted Babble has compiled a well-researched post regarding the capabilities and intentions of the Iranian nuclear program, and I think it’s safe to say it has nothing to do with producing electricity. If you truly want something productive and likely imminent to worry about, it gets no more imminent than this.

As Mark Steyn noted in the above referenced column, the trailer of the new Al Gore move “An Inconvenient Truth” states- “If you love your planet—If you love your children—you have to see this movie”. I would contend “If you love your planet—If you love your children—don’t turn a blind eye to the threat posed by madmen who either posses or are developing nuclear weapons. If you think a melting iceberg is the worlds biggest problem, think again!

We no longer live in a world where someone can climb to the top of the steeple in the Old North Church with a couple of lanterns and look out over the ocean to spot approaching threats. In today’s world, that threat can walk into a business meeting or a shopping mall with a briefcase and kill large numbers of people in the blink of an eye.
This is not fear mongering, it is the new reality and it is a reality we need to wake up to rapidly.

There is also much more to worry about regarding nuclear weapons than the conventional uses most people normally associated with them. For example, how many of you know what the acronym EMP stands for? I know I didn’t until a short time ago.

EMP is shorthand for “electromagnetic pulse”, and Suzie points out that Iran is either developing it or already has it based on her research. According to Suzie, this is how it would work:

This electromagnetic blanket does not kill people—it kills electrons. In short, it stops every form of electricity instantly and for months, maybe years. Here’s how it could be used against America in warfare.

A fake satellite crossing over America at the height of 280 miles suddenly explodes over the Great Plains of the U.S., releasing several pounds of enriched plutonium, blanketing the U.S. with gamma rays. Instantly, in one-billionth of a second, all electrical power is cut off instantly.

No lights, no refrigeration will work in our home. Every ounce of food you have will rot in your freezer. Your car won’t work b/c it starts with electricity. Trucks won’t work, meaning transportation bringing you everything you use will stop. All machinery stops. The radio and the television stations will go off the air. Planes that are in flight will crash b/c their electronic systems will fail. The missile systems will fail to function. We will cease to be a superpower in one billionth of a second.] I can relate to a part of this with hurricanes taking away our power for 10 days and other times without power for longer than a day. It was total chaos.

[The President cannot communicate w/his military people in the field b/c the phones will not work. America’s refineries will shut down. There will be no gas and no oil. The gas at the service stations can’t be used b/c those pumps get the gas out of the ground w/ electricity. Computers won’t work, meaning city, state, and government offices will be shut down. There will be a nationwide food and gas shortage within a few days.

This is not new, it has been talked about for 20 years. Only now, rogue states have the ability to put this weapon to use, and it will happen unless Iran and the “axis of evil” are stopped.] I will have to continue this with more very important and interesting information in another post. Note: Our government says Iran can do this and North Korea an ally of Iran has this ability too.

One more thing - [The Congressional Reports read: "Even primitive Scud missiles could be used for this purpose (electronic blankets). Top U.S. Intel officials reminded members of Congress that there is a glut of these missiles on the world market. They are currently being bought and sold for about $100,000 apiece."] One other note: [In one second, we would be living in the nineteenth century.]

While commenter ABF points out that the “military has figured out a way to somewhat defend against it”, how can we be absolutely sure that we are 100 percent protected? After all, few people really thought about the possibility of terrorists crashing civilian airliners into buildings prior to 9/11, yet it happened and we were stunned.

It is time for the environmental extremists, isolationists, and anti-war crowd to answer a tough question:

Can we afford to sit back and do nothing in the midst of a gathering threat and if these threats materialize will you be able to live with the consequences of your stated positions?

I believe we all want clean air and water, want to do what we can to reduce pollution to the extent possible, and want live in peace and harmony with one another, but can anyone actually make a persuasive argument that turning back the clock on 200+ years of progress and pretending the rest of the world doesn’t have a profound effect on us will accomplish those goals?

I’m not saying that I know whether or not the threats will ever fully materialize. What I am saying is, Are you prepared to deal with the consequences if they do?

One thing everyone should agree on is that our oceans no longer offer us protection from outside forces that wish us harm. Regardless of who is in power in Washington, these threats aren’t going away and must be dealt with and sometimes, like it or not, dealing with threats requires the use of force. We can defend ourselves or we can capitulate, but we can’t do both.

Tags: Politics, Iran, Nuclear Weapons, Electromagnetic Pulse, EMP

Tony Snow To Be Introduced As Press Secretary Tommorrow

2006-04-25T23:15:00.000-04:00

Fox News is reporting that according to its sources, Tony Snow will be named as President Bush's new Press Secretary tommorrow morning:

WASHINGTON — Tony Snow will be named new White House press secretary on Wednesday morning, FOX News has learned. Snow is expected to be at the White House for the announcement. He has been mulling the offer for the last several days.

Long before the announcement, oddsmakers were banking on Snow, host of FOX News Talk's "The Tony Snow Show," to be tapped for the highly visible White House post.

I'm shocked, shocked I tell you! Not shocked that he would be President Bush's top choice for the job- heck, he would have been my choice if the decision were mine- but shocked that Snow is willing to accept the job.

I don't know what Fox News and his radio show are paying him, but even if it were peanuts I would think it would be a heap more rewarding than having to put up with the whiny Washington press corps on a daily basis.

That said, I believe Tony Snow is the right man for the job. He has the presence and the courage to chew up talking points with as much ease as most of us chew our mashed potatoes. He knows the facts and will not be rattled by the likes of Helen Thomas and David Gregory. If the administration gives Snow enough leeway, I think we'll see him hitting a lot of hanging curveballs into the cheapseats.

The press corps knows they will be dealing with someone who will respond to questions with class and dignity, but they also know that he is someone who can make them look extremely foolish without being harsh and while remaining in complete control. He will control the press corps, they won't control him. They know this, and my bet is they don't like it one little bit. These daily press briefings may finally become required daily viewing.

Personally, I wouldn't have the job and I wouldn't have to give up nearly as much to take it as Snow apparently has. If Snow is accepting this job out of a sense of duty, and a desire to serve his country, then my already huge admiration for him has increased ten fold.

In other news, I believe the third paragraph of this post has officially satisfied my "worn out cliche" quota for the week. I'm sure glad I got that behind me- and it's only Tuesday!

Tags: Politics, Tony Snow,Fox News Press Secretary, Bush

Feeling Bad Never Felt So Good

2006-04-23T23:16:00.000-04:00

Mark Steyn has a column today in the Chicago Sun-Times in which he discusses the misplaced fears of the climate change crowd in a way that only he can:

Do you worry? You look like you do. Worrying is the way the responsible citizen of an advanced society demonstrates his virtue: He feels good by feeling bad.

But what to worry about? Iranian nukes? Nah, that's just some racket cooked up by the Christian fundamentalist Bush and his Zionist buddies to give Halliburton a pretext to take over the Persian carpet industry. Worrying about nukes is so '80s. "They make me want to throw up. . . . They make me feel sick to my stomach," wrote the British novelist Martin Amis, who couldn't stop thinking about them 20 years ago...

So what should we worry about? How about -- stop me if you've heard this one before -- "climate change"? That's the subject of Al Gore's new movie, ''An Inconvenient Truth.'' Like the trailer says: "If you love your planet -- if you love your children -- you have to see this movie." Even if you were planning to kill your children because you don't want them to live in a nuclear wasteland, see this movie. The mullahs won't get a chance to nuke us because, thanks to rising sea levels, Tehran will be under water...

Here's an inconvenient truth for "An Inconvenient Truth": Remember what they used to call "climate change"? "Global warming." And what did they call it before that? "Global cooling." That was the big worry in the '70s: the forthcoming ice age. Back then, Lowell Ponte had a huge best seller called The Cooling: Has the new ice age already begun? Can we survive?

So what do these eternally pessimistic environmentalists do when they can't make up their minds exactly what to worry about? They use the generic term "climate change" to cover all the bases and convince people to worry about everything under the sun instead of living their lives and dealing with more urgent issues that are likely to affect them long before the "global winter" or "global summer", or whatever the heck they're calling it now.

I suppose one is entitled to worry about penguins suddenly being forced to wear sunscreen on their long march across the desert that just yesterday was Antarctica, but I have better things to do with my time and much more urgent problems to worry about. My gut tells me that a mad man with a nuke or a terrorist with a death wish and a dirty bomb is a much more urgent threat than a melting iceberg. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

Tags: Politics,Global Warming, Environmentalists, Mark Steyn

The Time to Worry is Now, Mr. Negroponte!

2006-04-21T08:34:00.000-04:00

(Via Breitbart)

US intelligence chief John Negroponte said Iran's resumption of uranium enrichment is
"troublesome" but the country is still years away from having enough fissile material to make a nuclear weapon.

Negroponte expressed concern both about Iran's claim to have resumed uranium enrichment with a cascade of 164 centrifuges in Natanz and extreme statements made by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

"The developments in Iran -- clearly they're troublesome," he said in response to questions after a speech to the National Press Club.

"By the same token, our assessment at the moment is that even though we believe that
Iran is determined to acquire or obtain a nuclear weapon, that we believe that it is still a number of years off before they are likely to have enough fissile material to assemble into, or to put into a nuclear weapon; perhaps into the next decade," he said.

"So I think it's important that this issue be kept in perspective," he said.

Well, I feel sooo much better now! I guess we can all relax until they get one put together.

Here's a little perspective, Mr. Negroponte: There's a maniac in Iran who wants to wipe Israel off the map and kill all infidel through any means available. He's not thinking perspective; he's thinking, "How quickly?

The time to be worried about this started around 1980. Now is not the time to keep this in perspective, now is the time to figure out what to do about it. We need to be losing sleep over this right now!! The one who gets to the finish line first, wins!

How's that for a little perspective?

I realize I may be overreacting or taking his words out of context, but I don't like hearing the words "perspective" and "nuclear" in the same quote by someone who's job title has the word "intelligence" in it.

Tags: Politics, Negroponte, Iran, Nuclear, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,

Some Notes and Advice on Objectionable Blog Content

2006-04-20T10:58:00.000-04:00

UPDATE 4/25/06: Some links and information have been removed from this post for reasons that I am not at liberty to discuss. Full disclosure, while regretable, is not possible at this time. Thank you in advance for understanding.

Suzie at Assorted Babble and many other bloggers have been working on an effort with Stacy Harp of Active Christian Media, to track down child porn websites and get them shut down.

One site in particular is (site information removed by author) which promotes homosexual activity between adults and underage children. Suzie pointed out that what she saw there left her speechless and sick to her stomach. The blog has been flagged for objectionable content by many bloggers(including myself), but Blogger apparently is not particularly concerned about it. Complaints seem to have fallen on deaf ears and that is shameful, to say the least.

The effort to get the blog removed appeared to have worked initially, but it reappeared later with graphic photos after everyone trying to get it shut down had put up links on their blogs so that others could easily flag it. It is suggested that you do not link this blog and if you have already linked it, delink it immediately.

Whoever the scumbag is that is running this blog is in my estimation either trying to create links to his blog in an underhanded way so that it will attract more viewers or knows that he is in trouble and is wanting to try to bring down as many people as he can along with him, regardless of whether the links were intended to shut the blog down or not.

Links and browser cache tracks are potential poison, even to those who are doing it for good, because they don't reflect the intent of the viewer they just record a visit.
If I can offer one piece of advice to anyone involved in this type of effort, it is this:

Clear your cache and delink any objectionable site immediately! Make sure you are on record as to what your intentions are when you report the site. The authorities to whom you report need to know that you saw this against your will or that you are a part of an effort to get it shut down, and that is why you are reporting it. Unless you are known without a doubt by the proper authorities to be in an effort to get the site shut down, do not under any circumstances point your browser back to that site!!! Do not allow them to suck you in to their crime!! You do not want to have a visit history to an illegal site anywhere on your hard drive. Once can be considered accidental; a history of visits can land you in court with little more than your word as your defense. If you use Blogger, you need to look no further than Betsy's Page to realize how quickly your blog, and all the evidence of your good intentions can disappear.

As far as Blogger is concerned, they have responded to requests to remove this blog in about the same way as they did Betsy Newmark when her blog disappeared: They've done absolutely nothing!

Google and Blogger have created a less than stellar track record for themselves lately, but ignoring this problem, for me crosses the line.

Check out Assorted Babble for all of the information on how to file complaints and what you can do to help in this effort. She has done a fantastic job, along with many others, in keeping the heat on these predators and those that are giving them a voice. Start at the top and scroll down the page for the complete history. Add a link to her in your blogroll , thank her for her efforts, and tell others about the effort to eliminate blogs that promote illegal activity.

Tags: Blogger, Pedophiles, Pornography

Are You a Christian or a Liberal?

2006-04-18T22:38:00.000-04:00

Doug Giles answers the question in his April 16 (republished) column in Townhall:

Can a Christian be a liberal? Short answer: no. There is no way a Christian can buy into neo-liberal ideology and be faithful to the bigger-than-Dallas teachings of the scripture and expect to continue enjoying his hard-won religious liberties.
For the "Christian" to lean politically to the left means that he must blow off huge chunks of the Bible and replace the scripture with the make-believe notions of postmodernism's malleable "Christ." Only after torturing the scripture can the Christian then fit liberalism into his supposed relationship with God...

Giles goes on to point out 5 examples of how a vote for the liberal ticket equates to a vote to end the very religious liberties you claim to espouse. Take the first point, for example:

...Thanks to the aggressive and ludicrous liberal lug nuts' anti-Christian agenda, your vote for a liberal Christian is a vote for:
1. Christianity to be scrubbed from government and whatever turf the government owns. Thanks to the liberals, the Ten Commandments have about as much acceptance in our government and their properties as Rush Limbaugh would at Al Franken's family reunion. The Judeo-Christian principles that formed the rock-solid foundation of this great American Experiment are now aggressively and consistently attacked by the lascivious left.
If . . . if . . . the secularists continue to stay behind the wheel of this American bus, you can kiss all semblance of Christianity good-bye in this heretofore God-graced government. Saint, you might as well say farewell to our government's recognizing Christmas and adios to Good Friday if you're going to vote the liberal ticket. If the secularists have it their way, Easter will be behind your keister, and you can kiss the Cross good-night as an acceptable public symbol that represents your faith and our nation's recognition of Christ's atoning work.

It would be extremely difficult for a true Christian to make a compelling argument that would prove any of these points to be in error. A true Christian would not cast a vote that would lead to his inability to practice Christianity without having to hide it under a bushel.

I'm sick and tired of Christians getting the shaft and politicians using the name of God only as a political bargaining chip and vote getting tactic. Christians aren't merely a bloc of voters, they are Americans whose freedom to practice their religion is just as important as an atheist's freedom not to.

It's refreshing for this Christian to read someone with the guts to tell it like it is without mincing words or being politically correct. Good on ya, Mr. Giles!

UPDATE: California Conservative also agrees with Mr. Giles, but says it much better. It's the post I wish I'd written.

Tags: Politics, Christianity, Religion, Jesus Christ, Holy Bible

Hannity and Levin Tag Team Alec Baldwin- Hilarity Ensues!

2006-03-27T21:10:00.000-05:00

I caught the tail end of Sean Hannity discussing his radio encounter with Alec Baldwin last night while on the way home from work this afternoon. Unfortunately, I missed the beginning of the segment and was only able to gather that Alec Baldwin is a total buffoon; a fact of which I was already well aware. Fortunately, NewsMax has posted a partial transcript of the smackdown.

Here's a snippet:

HANNITY: Are you the guy that said of our vice president, while we're at war, while we're leading troops in harm's way - are you the reckless, third-rate Hollywood actor who said that Dick Cheney is a terrorist? Are you the guy . . .
BALDWIN: Yes I am.
HANNITY: ... who said to stone Henry Hyde to death? Are you the guy who said our president is a CIA mass murderer? I wanted you to come on the program and defend that, you gutless coward.
BALDWIN: At first I thought this was a joke. But you can hear all the acid venom spewing hatred. It is Sean Hannity. [END EXCERPT]
The exchange got even hotter when Mark Levin joined in.
LEVIN: We've only just begun - are you 40 or 50 pounds overweight now?
WHITMAN: Oh, C'mon now . . . .
HANNITY: Once and for all you need to be challenged. You want to call our vice president a terrorist - fine. You want to talk about stoning people to death, say it on my program. If you want to be irresponsible and call our president a mass murderer while he's at war leading troops in harm's way ...
BALDWIN: And what are you gonna do about it, Sean Hannity?
HANNITY: You don't have the courage to answer questions.
BALDWIN: And what are you gonna do? And what are you going to do about it, Sean Hannity. If I come on your program, what are you going to do?
LEVIN: He's going to show that you have a two digit IQ - that's what he's gonna do.
BALWIN: What are you going to do?
LEVIN: I just told you - you've got a two digit IQ.

According to the NewsMax account, Baldwin left the studio shortly thereafter. Typical Alec Baldwin if you ask me. He spouts his nonsensical, incoherent, and disgusting rhetoric with a bullhorn right up until the precise moment that he is called to defend it, then runs into the woods with his tail between his legs like a coon dog that just treed a skunk. What a coward!

Be sure to read the whole thing.

Tags: Politics, Alec Baldwin, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, WABC, Brian Whitman,

Amazing Tornado Survival Story!

2006-03-23T22:09:00.000-05:00

HT: Rightwinged.com

(Via Kansas City Star)

FORDLAND, Mo. — Matt Suter can’t get the tornado out of his head — or his ears.

Every time a late-night freight train thunders past, Suter wakes up and remembers the vicious twister that pulled him from his home March 12 and landed him in a pasture — a quarter-mile away.

Suter’s harrowing encounter has brought him sudden fame, with national media exposure. One tornado expert said he knew of no one who traveled as far as Suter did in a tornado and lived to tell about it.

“It’s a pretty awkward record to have,” the 19-year-old senior at Fordland High School said.

The soft-spoken Suter did not court attention about his experience, which was not reported publicly until a week after it happened...
“The window busted, and the door got sucked out,” Suter said. “I looked at my grandmother, and the walls were like Jell-O. The trailer was rocking back and forth. I jumped between the coffee table and couch, and I remember the trailer tipping.”

His grandmother, Linda Kelley, said Suter had hollered at her in the trailer, and when she came into the kitchen “I turned around to look at where he was, and that whole end of the trailer was just gone.”

A large heavy glass lamp struck Suter on the top of his head, knocking him unconscious, he said.

When he came to, Suter found himself in a soft, grassy pasture. Last week a global positioning satellite device used by National Weather Service meteorologist Dave Gaede measured the distance at 1,307 feet from the trailer site.

I suppose everyone wants to have their 15 minutes of fame, but Suter's claim to fame is that he has been thrown further by a tornado and lived to tell about it than anyone else in recorded history. I'm sure he's probably thinking there must be an easier way. I know I would!

Read the whole thing.

Update: Commenter Axe at Rightwinged.com nails it by pointing out that Suter will never lose the "I've got it bad" argument: "Junior, what do you mean it's too hard? I've run home barefoot down a gravel road after being thrown a quarter mile by a tornado--don't tell me it's too hard."

Tags: Matt Suter, Current Events, Severe Weather, Tornadoes,

Bar Patrons Being Arrested For Being Drunk?

2006-03-23T11:24:00.000-05:00

(Via Reuters)

SAN ANTONIO, Texas (Reuters) - Texas has begun sending undercover agents into bars to arrest drinkers for being drunk, a spokeswoman for the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission said on Wednesday.

The first sting operation was conducted recently in a Dallas suburb where agents infiltrated 36 bars and arrested 30 people for public intoxication, said the commission's Carolyn Beck.

Being in a bar does not exempt one from the state laws against public drunkenness, Beck said.

The goal, she said, was to detain drunks before they leave a bar and go do something dangerous like drive a car.

"We feel that the only way we're going to get at the drunk driving problem and the problem of people hurting each other while drunk is by crackdowns like this," she said.
"There are a lot of dangerous and stupid things people do when they're intoxicated, other than get behind the wheel of a car," Beck said. "People walk out into traffic and get run over, people jump off of balconies trying to reach a swimming pool and miss."
She said the sting operations would continue throughout the state.

While I applaud the goal of keeping drunk drivers off the streets, this seems about as ridiculous as them going into a church and snatching worshipers out of their pews for listening to the sermon.

I’m no advocate for public drunkenness or drunk driving by any means, but I think they’re missing the point. The patrons of these establishments are more than likely there to drink alcohol, so finding a drunk inside shouldn’t be much of a problem. Inside the bar is where I want them to be. The threat to the general population begins when they leave.

Here’s a better idea: Assign an officer to a random bar parking lot in an unmarked vehicle and have the officer sit there and wait on the drunks to come to him. Trust me, they will!
A lot of bars hire folks they like to call “bouncers”. They’re job is to card people on the way in and throw (and I mean throw in the literal sense) unruly patrons out of the same door. Those are the ones you’re looking for in the sting operation anyway, and by doing it this way you can save a whole lot of effort. I’d also be willing to bet if you tipped the bouncer, they’d probably even put them in the car for you.

As for the polite drunks, stop them on the way to their cars and give them an opportunity to take a Breathalyzer test before getting into their vehicle. If they refuse, make them walk home, call a cab, or risk being arrested as soon as their car moves. If they have a designated driver with them and that person is driving, then you’ve still accomplished what you’ve set out to do: Keeping drunk drivers off the road!

I just think it’s a bit silly to go into a bar on a sting operation to find drunks. As long as they’re inside the establishment, they’re not driving and they’re not officially in public no matter how you twist the definition. They are in an enclosed bar that is in public, but as long as they’re inside, they’re not bothering the rest of us.

Nail them when they leave to go to their cars or roam the streets, not while they’re inside and not threatening the rest of us.

And by the way, if the problem were as bad as the picture painted here (which it may in fact be), another solution would be to make bars and alcohol illegal. Of course they won’t do that because they would lose the huge chunk of tax revenue that alcohol and alcohol related businesses generate and if they know history, they will also know that making alcohol illegal won’t solve the problem either. It will, however, practically ensure they will cease to generate revenue from it and that’s a risk they’re not willing to take.

By running sting operations, they are punishing lawful business owners by making a scene inside the very establishments they generate revenue from. It really doesn’t matter whether one agrees with the morality of the business in question or not. As long as the business is being operated legally, they should not be subjected to tactics that will surely have an effect on their bottom line. The punishment should fall on those who lack personal responsibility and pose a true threat to our safety.

Tags: Politics, Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission,
Drunks, Sting Operations, Drunk Driving, Public Drunkenness

BREAKING: U.S. and Iraqi Forces Launch Massive Air Assault in Countryside North of Baghdad

2006-03-16T21:32:00.000-05:00

HT: Stop the ACLU via Drudge

Stop the ACLU is following the latest developments of Operation Swarmer, the most massive military air assault in three years:

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- In a well-publicized show of force, U.S. and Iraqi forces swept into the countryside north of the capital in 50 helicopters Thursday looking for insurgents in what the American military called its "largest air assault" in nearly three years.

There was no bombing or firing from the air in the offensive northeast of Samarra, a town 60 miles north of Baghdad, the U.S. military said. All 50 aircraft were helicopters - Black Hawks, Apaches and Chinooks - used to ferry in and provide cover for the 1,450 Iraqi and U.S. troops.

The military said the assault - Operation Swarmer - aimed to clear "a suspected insurgent operating area" and would continue over several days.

Residents in the area of the assault reported a heavy U.S. and Iraqi troop presence and said large explosions could be heard in the distance. American forces routinely blow up structures they suspect as insurgent safe-houses or weapons depots. It was not known if they met any resistance, but the military reported detaining 41 people.

Dr. Rusty Shackleford posts the following Department of Defense press release:

Iraqi and coalition forces today launched the largest air assault operation since the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom in southern Salah Ad Din province to clear a suspected insurgent operating area northeast of Samarra, military officials reported.
"Operation Swarmer" began this morning with soldiers from the Iraqi army's 1st Brigade, 4th Division; the U.S. Army 101st Airborne Division's 3rd Brigade Combat Team; and the 101st Combat Aviation Brigade conducting a combined air and ground assault to isolate the objective area, officials said.

Attack and assault aircraft provided aerial weapons support for the operation and also delivered troops from the Iraqi army's 4th Division; the "Rakkasans" from 1st and 3rd Battalions, 187th Infantry Regiment, of the U.S. Army; and the "Hunters" from 2nd Squadron, 9th Cavalry Regiment, U.S. Army, to "multiple objectives" according to a Multinational Force Iraq statement. Forces from Iraq's 2nd Commando Brigade then completed a ground infiltration to secure numerous structures in the area, officials said.

More than 1,500 Iraqi and coalition troops, more than 200 tactical vehicles, and more than 50 aircraft participated in the operation, according to the MNF-I statement.

Initial reports from the objective area indicate that a number of enemy weapons caches -- containing artillery shells, explosives, materials for making homemade bombs, and military uniforms -- have been captured.

The operation is expected to continue for several days as a thorough search of the objective area is conducted, officials said.

Operation Swarmer follows closely the completion of a combined Iraqi and coalition operation west of Samarra in early March that yielded substantial enemy weapons and equipment caches.

The name Swarmer, the MNF-I statement explained, was derived from the name given to the largest peacetime airborne maneuvers ever conducted, in spring 1950 in North Carolina. Soon after this exercise, the 187th Infantry was selected to deploy to Korea as an airborne regimental combat team to provide Gen. Douglas MacArthur with an airborne capability.

Personally, I believe the use of overwhelming force to root out these terrorist cells is long overdue and I hope we'll see more of it in the days ahead. While it's noble to do everything possible to limit civilian casualties to the extent possible, I also think it's important to pull out all the stops and show these thugs exactly who they're dealing with.

Tags: Iraq, War on Terror, Terrorism, Operation Swarmer, Samarra

Update 3/17: In the interest of full disclosure, the timestamp does not match the time this post actually went live. I composed the post and attempted to publish at the noted time, but apparently Blogger was having some server issues and it errored without publishing. I suppose it goes without saying that the story is no longer "Breaking" as the post title indicates. It went live this morning around 7:45AM without modification, but I felt that a time change would be inappropriate considering these were my thoughts last night and not this morning. I normally send TrackBacks to sources I cite, and they were not sent for the same reasons mentioned above. If you happen to see a link from your site that doesn't have a TrackBack associated with it and you normally see one, this is the reason for it. Much thanks, as always for stopping by.

Al Qaeda's Last Warning

2006-03-13T01:06:00.000-05:00

I received this information via Jay at Stop the ACLU. I am not in a position to make an assesment as to the validity or authenticity of the threat, but I do feel the American people should, at the very least, be aware of it. I, along with many others, am wondering why the mainstream media has not seen fit to report on this.

From Memri.org:

There Will Be Two Operations in the U.S.

"Despite the fact that the New York, Washington, Madrid, and London expeditions have been carried out a few years back. The search for clues on how they were conducted in such a successful manner is still going on and reports upon reports are still being written about them. However, the next expedition might not find someone who can provide analysis for. The top intellects, strategists, and analysts, will be totally clueless as to how to explain what occurred. Let me also inform you that we are talking about two operations, not one. The scale of one of them is larger than the other but both are large and significant. However, we will start with the smaller, and temporarily put the larger on hold to see how serious the Americans are about their lives. Should you value your own life and security, accept Muslims' demands, but if you shall prefer death (over giving in to Muslims' demands). Then, we, by the grace of Allah, are the best in bringing it (death) to your door steps.

Bush and His Clan are Incapable of Protecting You

"Do not put your hopes on Bush and his clan, they are incapable of protecting you, and if they think they are, let them foil or stop the two upcoming operations, and punish those who are responsible for them. But if they could not identify and foil the devastating events coming your way, you must ask yourselves: How long will we continue allowing ourselves to be slaughtered with full advance knowledge of our fate?

"Let me now inform you why we opted to inform you about the two operations and your inability to stop them before they are carried out. The reason is simple; you cannot uncover or stop them except by letting them be carried out. Furthermore, the best you could do would be to accelerate the day of carrying out the operations. In other words, if we schedule the operation to take place tomorrow, the best you could do is to make it happen today.

"The operations are ready to go, we are just waiting for orders from the commander in chief, Osama Ben Laden (may Allah preserve him). He will decide whether to strike or to hold. We swear by Allah that there are so many tricks and tactical maneuvers that will make your heads spin, by the grace of Allah. You will be brought to your knees, but not until you lose more loved ones and experience significant destruction.
"Now is the time to wake up and dust off this state of complacency and ineffectiveness to save yourselves and your loved ones from catastrophes sure to come your way. Remove war mongers from positions of power and throw them in prisons, where they belong. Rid yourselves of 'the Jewish pests' that brought nothing to you but adversity and loss of lives and wealth. They have deceived you for many years, it is time now you turn the table on them and make an example out of them.

"This is the last warning you will receive from us. Consequently, if you ignore it, we regret to inform you that we will carry out devastating operations against the States of America and we will not show mercy whatsoever, you would have brought destruction to yourselves. Do not ever forget, you have rejected the truce which was offered to you by Muslims; you have supported the thieves of the white house and blessed their adventures. Therefore, you get nothing from us short of similar treatment; for only blood for blood.
"May Allah facilitate a way for us to spill the blood of the occupiers and cut off the heads of the aggressors. Allah has full power and control over all of His affairs, but most mankind knows not.

Again, I can't vouch for its authenticity, but one would think this would have created a blip on someone's radar screen.

Tags: Al Qaeda, Al Qaeda's Last Warning, Terror, Terrorism,
War on Terror

Update on "An Open Letter To Hollywood"

2006-03-13T00:34:00.000-05:00

On Monday, March 6th, I wrote a post that referenced "An Open Letter to Hollywood" by Father Jonathan Morris, a Fox News contributor and blogger. His blog can be found here.

Father Jonathan posted an update yesterday on the overwhelming and positive public reaction to the letter:

In less than 48 hours, my inbox was bogged down with more than 1,900 e-mails. 1,823 of these (see, I read your e-mails!) were oozing with praise. The praise was not for me — it was for the principles we share.

I was one of those 1,900 e-mails and I can personally verify that not only does he read the e-mails, he replies to them. The reply I received was a sincere and refreshing departure from the all to common auto-generated replies that have become the norm these days.

He also points to this Nielsen study that shows, at the very least, that the major Hollywood studios are aware of the declining sales figures and know the types of films that generate the largest audience:

Hollywood movie ticket sales around the world dropped by 7.9 percent last year to 23 billion dollars, with the US box office accounting for nearly 40 percent of the haul, a study showed.

Movie ticket receipts in North America dipped by six percent in 2005 to nine billion dollars, according to a study by the ratings statistics firm Nielsen Entertainment/NRG that comes as movie-goers increasingly stay out of cinemas...

Most movie-goers in 2005 went out to catch family films, with movies rated PG-13, meaning that children under 13 must be accompanied by an adult, accounting for 85 percent of the most watched films in 2005.

Father Jonathan concludes with this point:

Our principle won out: Moviemakers have a responsibility to society. Making movies that reflect the values of Americans, instead of the values of the very sick sub-culture of Hollywood, will send people to theaters and also line moviemakers’ pockets with gold. This admission from Hollywood studios is democracy at work.

I agree with his point that moviemakers have a responsibility to society and can't argue that his letter struck a nerve. Our principles have won out, and if Hollywood still viewed themselves strictly as a business, this would be enough to affect the desired change. The problem is that Hollywood wants to change the culture and the business end of the industry has taken a backseat to this agenda.

My concern is that Hollywood won't take their responsibility to society seriously until their very survival depends on it. They would much rather continue pushing their agenda than admit their views are not those of mainstream America. There is no doubt in my mind that the entertainment industry believes mainstream America simply hasn't become "enlightened" yet, and when they do the sales figures will take care of themselves. This, of course, reflects their own ignorance of the America that exists outside of Los Angeles and New York.

I do believe Hollywood will eventually get the message. It won't be because it is the right thing to do, it will be because it is the only option left to ensure their survival. They don't have to reinvent the wheel, they simply have to make a product people will buy.

Tags: Hollywood, Movies, Entertainment, Culture, Film

Celebrating A Year In the 'Sphere

2006-03-09T23:43:00.000-05:00

One year ago today, I created and wrote my first post for Palmetto Pundit. It actually had a different name for the first couple of weeks, but I finally settled on Palmetto Pundit. My first post was a rant about Social Security and it was awful. Of course, Harvey of Bad Example says the first post should be bad, so I guess I passed an early first test even though I didn't know it.

There’s a story behind my entry into the blogosphere that I would like to share with you. I’ll let you be the judge as to whether it is interesting or not:

On March 9, 2005, I stayed home from work to take care of my 21-month-old daughter, when she was sick. The virus she had made her weak and she slept a lot, so I decided I could either watch soaps or surf the Internet. I chose to surf the Internet and happened to find Blogger. I had heard of blogs and was somewhat aware of their significance, but I knew very little about them. When I saw the word “Free”, I decided to give it a try. So, whether you enjoy Palmetto Pundit or hate it with a passion, you can blame my daughter. If I hadn’t had all that free time I probably would have never started blogging.

My entry into the blogosphere certainly hasn’t changed the world, but it has changed my life. I’ve always loved writing and blogging has given me the opportunity to do it without keeping up with a bunch of spiral notebooks or word documents. I could now rant or comment on practically anything, click publish, and I was part of the discussion. It has given me the opportunity to get things off my chest that have often gone unsaid and been a great stress reliever. I now have my own personal Wayback machine that allows me to go back in time and see what was on my mind on a particular day. Is there anything cooler than that?

Here are 12 Things I’ve learned about blogging this year:

1. Some of my best friends are those I’ve never personally met. They are the ones who stop by regularly, drop me an email to let me know when I get something wrong and check on me to make sure I’m ok when I don’t post as often as usual. Bloggers are some of the nicest, most considerate people in the world and they genuinely care about other bloggers.

2. I have relatively few loyal readers and return visitors, but I wouldn’t trade one of them for a huge list of occasional readers. Loyal readers are more precious than gold.

3. It’s ok to give your opinion, but it’s also ok if no one cares or agrees with it.

4. If no one is reading your blog, don’t take it personally. There’s probably a blog out there somewhere that you aren’t reading either.

5. There are millions of blogs out there, so if one of the big fish links you just once, you’re ahead of the curve. Don’t expect it to become a regular occurrence because it probably won’t.

6. Shouting Glenn Reynolds name from the 50-yard line of Neyland Stadium will not cause an Instalanche, but it just might get you arrested. Besides, he probably won’t be able to hear you over his blender anyway. Don’t blog for the professor, blog for yourself.

7. If you aren’t doing it for yourself, your lack of passion will be obvious.

8. If you write with passion and no one reads it, it doesn’t matter. Someday when you look back on what you wrote, you’ll still be proud of it and will appreciate the effort you put into it. It is a snapshot of your thoughts from that particular day; so make sure you get it right. It will matter to you regardless of whether it mattered to anyone else.

9. Don’t post just for the sake of posting. If you don’t have anything to say, don’t say it. You had a life before blogging, and you should still have one now.

10. I have run ads on my blog for over a year and have yet to make one red cent from them. I doubt I ever will. Money is great and I’ll take all I can get, but that’s not why I blog. If it were, I would have quit the first week.

11. Your blog is about what you think. Decide your position on each issue before you read someone else’s take on it. Don’t follow the herd to get recognition, follow the herd because you belong to the herd. I doesn't make you wrong to be outside the majority, it makes you honest. Be true to yourself first.

12. Always provide a link to another person’s work when you cite it, even if you are criticizing it. If you forget, correct the mistake and apologize immediately. Update your post to reflect the mistake. The author will appreciate your efforts to make things right and your readers will respect you for it as well.

This isn't an exhaustive list to be certain, but they are some of things I've found to be extremely important. Actually, number 6 was intended as a joke but the last sentence really is true.

I would also like to offer my thanks and gratitude to a number of folks who have helped me along the way:

Jay at Stop the ACLU: He was one of the first to ever leave a comment on my blog and offered a lot of early support. We started blogging within months of each other and even though his blog has become wildly successful and influential, he still finds the time to drop by from time to time and leave a comment or say hello. Thank you, Jay for recognizing the value of upstart blogs and taking the time to pay attention to mine. It has meant more to me than you’ll ever know.

TranSient: He also was one of the very first people to visit my blog and it is an absolute rarity that I don’t find his tracks in my referral logs. He’s also a Clemson fan, so I know he had a decent upbringing. Although we’ve never met, I consider him to be a true friend.

John in Carolina: John is one of the most gracious and thoughtful bloggers I’ve ever come across. He has personally thanked me for every link I’ve ever given him. I’m not talking about providing a return link as a goodwill gesture either. He actually composes an eloquent, well thought out e-mail and deposits it in my inbox without fail. He is truly a class act. You won’t find a ton of links in his sidebar; they’re all in his posts. He is a pure blogger who obviously does it because he loves it.

Michelle Malkin: Not only is she the best blogger in the business, she also taught me a valuable lesson about humility and she probably doesn’t even know it. When my blog was about 10 days old, she linked one of my posts and my hit counter went through the roof. Being new to blogging, I thought I was hot stuff, but when the post moved off of her front page, my hits dropped like a rock. This taught me that you have to be true to yourself and blog because you love it, not because you crave attention. What you attempt to add to the discussion with your own style and originality is much more important than the number on your sitemeter. You alone are responsible for driving yourself to be the best you can be, and while recognition is a great feeling, it is not what determines your long-term success. It is a lesson that has been invaluable to me ever since and one I was glad to get early on.

Mike’s America: Mike is also a South Carolina blogger (Hilton Head Island) who has been a good friend to this blog. He is a frequent visitor who leaves a ton of comments on my posts and has added a lot to the discussion here. He asked for my input and included me in his recent tribute to Ronald Reagan and I was truly honored that he asked me to be a part of it.

Joshua Gross: He runs The Body Politic , and is a frequent visitor of this blog. He always finds a way to include me in his weekly roundup and I am extremely grateful for the additional exposure he gives to Palmetto Pundit every week.

These are just a few of the folks who have made an impression on me during the past year. Everyone in my blogroll deserves a mention because I consider them to be valuable sources of information and all have made an impression on me in some way during the past year.

Ironically, this is also my 300th post. Not a lot, but 300 more than I ever dreamed I would write.

Thanks for reading and here’s to another year!

Tags: Blogging, Blogiversary, Blog Birthday, Blog, Anniversary

Sheehan Arrested...Again!

2006-03-07T22:54:00.000-05:00

Mike's America notes the arrest yesterday of Cindy Sheehan in New York. As disturbing as it is to watch the continuing antics of the former media darling anti-war protester, it is not nearly as disturbing as this photo:

Mike points to the photo as evidence that "Muther Sheewitch" is not on a hunger strike. I agree based on the evidence, but I'll withhold further comment on the photo, being quite gifted in the girth department myself. It's that whole pot calling the kettle black thing, if you know what I mean.

I can, however, say I told you so. This woman absolutely defies logic! I've never in my life seen someone so desperate to extend their 15 minutes of fame that they would go to such outrageous lengths just to remain in the spotlight. I was right when I said she would rapidly become a non-story, but I totally misjudged what her reaction would be when it finally happened. I honestly thought she would have figured it out by now.

Note to Ms. Sheehan: If the only way you can continue to receive press coverage is by getting arrested and the only newsworthy photographs of you reveal abs that more closely resemble a pony keg than a six pack, then you should really consider the reality that your 15 minutes are officially over.

This is not a hint or a warning sign: It is a fully cocked, open palmed, five fingered, slap in the face. The press now considers you a laughingstock. They didn't publish this picture by accident, they did it on purpose. Give it up and seek professional help. It's over!

See also: Gina Cobb and Chickenhawk Express.

Tags: Cindy Sheehan, arrest, Iraq

An Open Letter to Hollywoood

2006-03-06T21:56:00.000-05:00

I stumbled across this while on the Fox News website today. It was written by Father Jonathan Morris and is entitled "An Open Letter to Hollywood". In the letter he points out a concept that should be obvious to anyone in the business of making money, but apparently is too tough for the Hollywood crowd to comprehend. That concept is simply to give the customer what they want.

Here's a sample:

Dear Hollywood,

I’m writing on behalf of all Americans. It’s been a while since you’ve been in touch with us. You haven’t called, you haven’t written, but you keep sending films. Just thought I would drop you a line...

But I do have one question. What’s your idea of “good film?"

These were your favorite films this year, along with their ranking in box-office ticket sales, and number of Oscar nominations:

• Brokeback Mountain: 27th place, 8 nominations
• Crash: 49th place, 6 nominations
• Good Night, and Good Luck: 90th place, 6 nominations
• Memoirs of a Geisha: 45th place, 6 nominations

I didn’t want to see any of them, and I haven’t seen any of them. And judging by the numbers, neither did anybody else. These “masterpieces” were playing to mostly empty theaters for most of their theater run.

"March of the Penguins," nominated in the Best Documentary category, actually grossed more money than any of the Best Picture nominees...

Some will object: "Hollywood is just entertainment." I respond: "If that’s so, this year it entertained very few." Others will object: "Hollywood is just a business." I respond: "Not a good one, at least not this year." Still others will chime in: "We’re just reflecting what’s already out there." I respond: "You’re great people, but remember, you live in a subculture that has been sick for a very long time — lots of demons. Change the angles of your mirrors, and see new realities. Then let them shine."

Anyway, Hollywood, if you’re still reading, keep this in mind. Your overall box-office receipts have been falling steadily over the last three years, and two-thirds of all films still lose money. Something has to change. There are lots of ideas out there. Some make money. Some don’t. Leave Hollywood and Malibu for a while and get back in touch. Write to us. Call us. Visit us. Ask us what would be a reflection of what We The People really think and what we’ll pay to see.

God bless, Father Jonathan

You really owe it to yourself to read the whole thing. The difference between what Hollywood thinks is great cinema and what America thinks is great cinema are on opposite ends of the spectrum and Father Jonathan hammers the point home using the facts.

The real question is:

Will Hollywood listen?

Tags: Oscars, Academy Awards, Movies, Entertainment, Hollywood

Light Blogging

2006-03-04T20:33:00.000-05:00

Blogging has been light lately. I've had too much to do and too little time to do it for most of the week, so blogging has had to take a back seat for a few days. Will be back soon. Thanks for stopping by.

A Manifesto Against Islamism

2006-03-01T22:18:00.000-05:00

From 12 brave intellectuals at the Jyllands-Posten

MANIFESTO: Together facing the new totalitarianism

After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, the world now faces a new totalitarian global threat: Islamism.

We, writers, journalists, intellectuals, call for resistance to religious totalitarianism and for the promotion of freedom, equal opportunity and secular values for all.

The recent events, which occurred after the publication of drawings of Muhammed in European newspapers, have revealed the necessity of the struggle for these universal values. This struggle will not be won by arms, but in the ideological field. It is not a clash of civilisations nor an antagonism of West and East that we are witnessing, but a global struggle that confronts democrats and theocrats.

Like all totalitarianisms, Islamism is nurtured by fears and frustrations. The hate preachers bet on these feelings in order to form battalions destined to impose a liberticidal and unegalitarian world. But we clearly and firmly state: nothing, not even despair, justifies the choice of obscurantism, totalitarianism and hatred. Islamism is a reactionary ideology which kills equality, freedom and secularism wherever it is present. Its success can only lead to a world of domination: man’s domination of woman, the Islamists’ domination of all the others. To counter this, we must assure universal rights to oppressed or discriminated people.

We reject cultural relativism, which consists in accepting that men and women of Muslim culture should be deprived of the right to equality, freedom and secular values in the name of respect for cultures and traditions. We refuse to renounce our critical spirit out of fear of being accused of “Islamophobia”, an unfortunate concept which confuses criticism of Islam as a religion with stigmatisation of its believers.

We plead for the universality of freedom of expression, so that a critical spirit may be exercised on all continents, against all abuses and all dogmas.

We appeal to democrats and free spirits of all countries that our century should be one of Enlightenment, not of obscurantism.

12 signatures

Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Chahla Chafiq
Caroline Fourest
Bernard-Henri Lévy
Irshad Manji
Mehdi Mozaffari
Maryam Namazie
Taslima Nasreen
Salman Rushdie
Antoine Sfeir
Philippe Val
Ibn Warraq

HT: Stop The ACLU, Michelle Malkin
Graphic Credit: Junkyard Blog

I am in agreement with Jay about the wording of the manifesto. I too believe the use of the word secular is not intended to imply the elimination of religion, but the freedom to exercise the religion of your choice or the choice to not be religious at all. The point of the manifesto, in my humble opinion, is to respect the rights and opinions of others regardless of whether you agree with them or not. It is about refusing to tolerate intolerance!

Add my name to the list.

Stop the ACLU notes these folks who are already on board:

Rusty Shackleford
Atlas Shrugs
Vince Autmorire
Tim Blair
Bryan Preston
Captain’s Quarters
Small Town Veteran
A Tic In The Mind’s Eye
Anti Idiotarian Rottweiller
No-Pasaran
Eureka Iron Works
Wizbang
Bad Hair Blog
Protein Wisdom
Gateway Pundit
Bright and Early
Sister Toldjah
LomaAlta
Blue Star Chronicles

If you want your name added, leave a comment or TrackBack to Stop the ACLU's post here. If you would like me to post your name here as well, I'll be glad to add it. Just send a Trackback or post a comment on this post. I'll continue to check the post at Stop the ACLU and if I get any names he doesn't already have listed, I'll notify him. As Jay pointed out, the list needs as wide a distribution as possible.

Update: Blue Star Chronicles has an extensive link round up as well.

Tags: A Manifesto Against Islamism, Islamism, Jyllands-Posten, Totalitarianism, Cultural Relativism

Bush's Falling Approval Numbers

2006-02-28T08:14:00.000-05:00

This from CBS News:

(CBS) The latest CBS News poll finds President Bush's approval rating has fallen to an all-time low of 34 percent, while pessimism about the Iraq war has risen to a new high.

Americans are also overwhelmingly opposed to the Bush-backed deal giving a Dubai-owned company operational control over six major U.S. ports. Seven in 10 Americans, including 58 percent of Republicans, say they're opposed to the agreement.

If I hear the usual speculation about how The White House is trying to "figure out the reason" for the falling numbers, I think I'll blow a gasket. The reason has never been more obvious:
When a majority of people on both sides of the political spectrum have been asking the question "What were they thinking?" for the past month, they should have a pretty good clue as to what the problem is.

Don Surber has more.

Update: Poll results skewed in favor of Democrats. No Big surprise here. We are talking about a CBS poll and they do have a history of oversampling Democrats and Independents and undersampling Republicans. Even the weighted sample fails to correct enough. Newsbusters has the numbers here.

The poll, which most likely was meant to portray a Bush popularity nosedive, actually does no such thing. If anything, the numbers have remained fairly consistent. That doesn't change my view that the administration has blown it lately, but the actual numbers don't support the notion that the country has dramatically shifted its views.

Tags: Bush, Politics, Polls, Approval rating

Don Knotts 1924-2006

2006-02-26T16:53:00.000-05:00

This is sad:

LOS ANGELES -- Don Knotts, who kept generations of TV audiences laughing as bumbling Deputy Barney Fife on "The Andy Griffith Show" and would-be swinger landlord Ralph Furley on "Three's Company," has died. He was 81.

Knotts died Friday night of pulmonary and respiratory complications at the University of California, Los Angeles Medical Center, said Sherwin Bash, his friend and manager.

Griffith, who had visited Knotts in the hospital before his death, said his longtime friend had a brilliant comedic mind and wrote some of the show's best scenes.

"Don was a small man ... but everything else about him was large: his mind, his expressions," Griffith told The Associated Press on Saturday. "Don was special. There's nobody like him.

"I loved him very much," Griffith added. "We had a long and wonderful life together."

I grew up on reruns of "The Andy Griffith Show" and have probably seen every episode at least 20 times. It is my opinon that the show was, and always will be, the best show ever broadcast on network television. The life lessons and wholesome values of the show have stood the test of time.

Don Knotts portrayal of Deputy Barney Fife was a major factor in the success of the show. His comedic timing and quirky mannerisms stole practically every scene he was in. As many times as I've seen each episode, I laugh hysterically every time as though I've never seen it.

The closest comparison to a modern day Barney Fife I can think of, for those who've never experienced "The Andy Griffith Show", is Michael Richards portrayal of Kramer on "Seinfeld". Sure, there would have probably been a "Seinfeld" without Kramer, but it wouldn't have been nearly the hit it was without Kramer. I think the same can be said for the "Andy Griffith Show": It just wouldn't have been the same without Don Knotts.

When an iconic figure dies, there is never a shortage of personal stories regarding the person who has died, and ironically, my Don Knotts story occurred just yesterday and I thought I would share it here. I've never met Don Knotts, so my story isn't particularly noteworthy, but in hindsight it is sadly ironic.

I sometimes mind the shop owned by some friends of mine so they can run errands, take a Saturday off, etc. and I just happened to be there yesterday. The business has a client waiting area with a monitor hooked up to a DVD player and my friend has tons of DVD collections of TV shows, cartoons, and other videos to entertain waiting clients.

Yesterday I decided to play the first season of "The Andy Griffith Show", as I do a lot of the time when I'm there. A client walked in with his son and his son decided to sit in the lobby and watch TV with me while he waited for his Dad. The boy is only about 9 or 10 years old, yet he really seemed to like the show.

We were watching the episode(I think it was the 2nd or 3rd episode)when Andy(Andy Griffith)and Barney(Don Knotts) are helping the state police track down an escaped convict. In the episode, Barney sets up a road block and in the process winds up doing pat down searches on the town mayor and his own mother--just to be on the safe side.

In the end, the convict tries to escape across the lake in Andy's boat, but has to swim back because the boat has a hole in the bottom of it and starts sinking. Andy allowed the convict to take the boat on purpose, knowing what would happen when he got to the middle of the lake, The state police, on the other hand, thought he was just standing around allowing him to get away.

The moral of the story: Never discount the value of local knowledge and expertise.

The state police thought the local sheriff and his deputy were just bumbling idiots, but in the end realized their local knowledge and unorthodox methods were invaluable in the capture of the suspect.

The 9 year old boy sat there and watched the whole episode with me and really got into it. He also asked a lot of questions. In one scene, Andy and Barney were in the Sheriff's Office and he asked me "How old is this show?". I told him that it was filmed in the early 1960's, which didn't seem to help. When I told him the show originally aired even before I was alive, I think he started to connect the dots somewhat. "That is an old show!", he responded. I'm not quite 40, but I suppose in his eyes, if I qualify as "old", the show qualifies as ancient.

The ironic part of this story came with the next question the boy asked me: "Are those two men still alive?". I told him they were, but they were both getting pretty old and sadly, I didn't know how much longer they would be around.

Later that afternoon I heard on the radio that Don Knotts had died and I thought of that boy in the shop. He's too young to appreciate the impact that shows like "The Andy Griffith Show" and the characters played by Andy Griffith, Don Knotts, and others on the show have had on so many people over the years. Each show taught a valuable lesson about life that could be applied
to our own lives even if we didn't realize it at the time.

Hopefully he'll come back in again. If he does, I'll pop the disc back in and let the show do it's magic. Over time, he'll have fewer questions about the characters, but it will surely answer a lot of questions about life.

May you rest in peace, Don!

UPDATE

Others Blogging:

James Joyner offers his thoughts along with a ton of information.

Joe Gandelman provides background information on Knotts and a personal note. They have ventriloquism in common.

The Sundries Shack offers some personal thoughts.

Don Surber, from Don Knotts home state of West Virginia, offers his tribute including video clips.

Ann Althouse has more.

Nothing from Glenn Reynolds, but he has been busy plugging this which looks to be quite interesting.

Tags: don knotts, barney fife, the andy griffith show

Photo Fair Use Claim: TV Screen Shot

Warning Signs Or Much Ado About Nothing?

2006-02-24T13:22:00.000-05:00

Strategy Page notes the following:

Before any major military operation, there are always tell tale signs. With all the talk about Israel or the United States bombing Iran's nuclear weapons program, it would be wise to check for the signs before taking the pundit prattle too seriously.

Ten warning signs are listed that can offer clues that a military operation may be imminent. But...

These warning signs are no secret, and intelligence officers regularly run down their check lists. As a result, nations will sometimes stage a false alert by deliberately performing many of the items on someone's check list, with no intention of following through.

Useful information to have handy when the speculation starts flying, or should I say, continues to intensify.

Tags: Iran, Military, Nuclear Weapons, Nuclear, Politics, Israel, Security, War

Standing Firm On Port Sale

2006-02-23T23:17:00.000-05:00

As I posted earlier, I have serious concerns regarding the sale of certain operations of six of our major U.S. ports to DP World. There's been quite a blogswarm of criticism directed toward those who haven't immediately retreated from their staunch opposition to the deal and gotten in lockstep with the administration on this deal.

It has been said by many, including the administration, that there is no security risk involved and that we should all just relax and trust that everything will be just fine. Well, that pill would be much easier to swallow if the ports were secure now, but alas only around 10% of the 9 million containers that arrive by ship in this country every year are even inspected. I'm sorry, but 10% just doesn't give me a warm and fuzzy feeling.

Given the above, I feel that I'm pretty much within my rights to question this deal. I have serious reservations about handing control of any part of our port operations, whether it be the loading and off-loading of cargo or control over the janitorial contract, to any Arab shipping company, ally or not, without first knowing something of the vetting process used to select it. Some may call this view bigoted or Islamophobic, but I prefer to call it a refusal to throw caution to the wind. It is the lesson many of us learned in the wake of 9/11; the old rules no longer apply.

It is simply not enough for those of us who question this deal to be told that our security will not be threatened, we also need to know more about how the conclusion was reached.

It matters not to me which link in the chain DP World happens to be. What really matters is whether the link occupied by DP World weakens it. The company may never pose a security threat to the United States, but in this post 9/11 world I think it is an absolute necessity to be certain.

Michelle Malkin notes there are many retreating politicians, pundits, and bloggers on this issue in her post "Postgate and the Rubber Stampers". She can count me among those who are still standing firm.

She also points to this post by Rusty Shackleford who brilliantly notes the difference between allies and friends. It is a must read!

Tags: Ports, UAE, United Arab Emirates, Dubai, Terrorism, Security, DP World, Port Security

Great News For Day-by-Day Fans!

2006-02-21T23:31:00.000-05:00

I'm a huge fan of the political cartoon Day-by-Day by Chris Muir. Most right-leaning blogs either link to the cartoon in their sidebar or display the full cartoon prominently on their page.

Unfortunately, a lot of us who use Blogger and other platforms have been limited in our display options because they don't support PHP parsing. Tempus Fugit provided a vertical option that could be displayed in blogs that support PHP parsing, but that still left some of us with only the horizontal option which couldn't be displayed properly using our chosen templates. That is until now!

Basil, who runs a little blog called basil's blog came up with a solution. He figured out a way to display Day By Day using Javascript and CSS that will fit neatly within most sidebars. The real genius of the solution is that it only requires a simple copy and paste of the code to the spot in your template where you would like it to appear. He submitted the code for approval by Chris Muir and has received his blessing to release it.

He has posted the code here and also as an Alliance blog tip. While you're there, check out all of the blog tips posted by Basil and Phin. They cover everything from etiquitte tips to spam proofing your e-mail address and are a valuable source of useful information.

Additionally, I would like to thank Basil for allowing me the opportunity to participate in code testing here for the last couple of days. I got to see firsthand not only the effort it took to write the code (it looks rather daunting), but also the determination he had to keep tweaking until it was just right. He's done a great service for Day by Day fans everywhere. Be sure to stop by and give him a big thumbs up.

Thanks, Basil!

Tags: Blogging, Blog Tips, Day by Day,Day by Day Cartoon, Blogger, Vertical Script, Basil's Blog

I Beg To Disagree

2006-02-20T23:46:00.000-05:00

It is no secret to readers of this blog that I support, by and large, the policies of the president, especially as they relate to the War on Terror. My readers also know that I have not been afraid to voice my disagreement when the situation warrants. With that in mind, I'd like to draw your attention to this excerpt from an AP article today:

MILWAUKEE - Saying the nation is on the verge of technological breakthroughs that would "startle" most Americans,
President Bush on Monday outlined his energy proposals to help wean the country off foreign oil.

Less than half the crude oil used by refineries is produced in the United States, while 60 percent comes from foreign nations, Bush said during the first stop on a two-day trip to talk about energy.

Some of these foreign suppliers have "unstable" governments that have fundamental differences with America, he said.

"It creates a national security issue and we're held hostage for energy by foreign nations that may not like us," Bush said.

While I support the idea of developing alternative sources of energy, I have a problem with the last statement in particular. It has been repeated so often by Democrats and Republicans alike, that it has become a catch phrase and an excuse for what is a government created problem.

The government to which I am referring is not a foreign government, it is our own. We are not being held hostage for energy by foreign nations, but by the willingness of our own government to cave in to the wishes of extremists.

The simple fact is we don't have to depend on foreign sources of energy, we can produce everything we need right here. We have the technology, the expertise, and the supply under our soil and along our coastlines to power this nation without outside assistance for the foreseeable future. What we don't have are politicians with the backbone to tell agenda driven environmentalists to take a hike.

We can produce, refine, and burn fuel more cleanly and more efficiently and with less environmental impact than ever before and we should be taking advantage of the technology available right now to do just that.

Of all the problems frequently discussed regarding the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the one most frequently ignored is one of the most crucial: We have put ourselves in a situation where a severe blow from just one major hurricane can effectively cripple the entire nation's fuel supply. That is not a position in which a great nation should ever find itself in. It is, in fact, inexcusable.

The obvious solution is to spread our refining and drilling capacity throughout the country, not confine it to a particular region. Yet, that is exactly what politicians have done to appease environmentalists and buy votes. Few seem to question the science behind the doomsday scenarios predicted by these extremists, yet when is the last time you saw one of them walk from New York to San Francisco or from Miami to Seattle to attend the conferences in which they preach these views? The answer is never. They depend on energy just as much as the rest of us do, and their opinions and agendas should carry no more weight.

So, the problem I have is not exploring alternative sources of energy. I believe it should be done because we are a nation born of exploration. We are a nation from its inception that has been in constant search of a better way of doing things. We have always found a better way and we will continue to do so. We will find alternative sources of energy and these sources will be readily available when they are needed. America is not in the failure business, it is in the solution business.

The real problem is the excuse. The excuse that we can't do better with what we have now when we could do better if we were allowed to. The excuse that we are too dependent on foreign oil when we are actually too dependent on special interest groups to eliminate the need for foreign oil. The excuse that we must explore alternative sources of fuel out of fear instead of progress.

The American people drive this economy, an economy fueled by our toil, our sweat, and our innovation. Given that, is it really asking too much to expect our elected officials, regardless of political stripe, to stand up and admit the true reason for our dependence on foreign oil instead of offering the same old excuse that shifts the blame on us? I don't think it is and I think we should.

Tags: Bush, Energy, Oil, Alternative Fuels, Politics

Bin Laden Tape Reposted On Islamic Web Site

2006-02-20T12:39:00.000-05:00

A militant Isalmic website has reposted the audiotape originally aired by Al Jazeera on January 19. Although there is no new information in the audiotape, The Associated Press finds the following to be of particular significance:

CAIRO, Egypt -Osama bin Laden vowed never to be captured alive and said the U.S. military had become as "barbaric" as Saddam Hussein in an audiotape reposted on a militant Islamic Web site after first being broadcast last month...

"I have sworn to only live free. Even if I find bitter the taste of death, I don't want to die humiliated or deceived," bin Laden said, in the 11-minute, 26-second tape.

This is probably the only time in history you will hear me say that I agree with Osama Bin Laden. I'd much rather see him dead than alive as well. You have to look no further than the Saddam Hussein trial for an indication of what happens when you let these thugs live. I'm sure Ramsey Clark is probably chomping at the bit for the opportunity to represent him.

Although it is pure speculation on my part, I believe Bin Laden was sending a message to the faithful that the noose is tightening and they need to be prepared to assume leadership of Al Qaeda in short order. We are close and he knows it.

There is also the possibility that Bin Laden may already be dead and the re-release is an effort to to keep the faithful vigilant. If Bin Laden still holds as much significance to the movement as he once did, and his survival or the appearance of his survival, is the glue that holds the operation together, then it would only make sense for the remaining Al Qaeda power structure to keep the ruse going as long as possible.

Additionally, we can't assume that when Bin Laden is captured or killed we will know about it immediately. There are many reasons to maintain secrecy, at least in the short term. It may be valuable to maintain the illusion in order to better follow up on intelligence leads. Information regarding a sudden change at the top could lead to a drastic change in the behavior patterns of those being pursued.

There has also been an assumption by the media and many on the left that the War on Terror ends with the capture of Bin Laden, but that has never been the case. Bin Laden is merely one piece of the puzzle. He is an important piece to be sure, but the threat does not end with him. If news of Bin Laden's death or capture leads to an erosion of American will to finish the job, then we've really not accomplished anything.

Again, this is all speculation on my part, but I think a cursory analysis, even by the untrained, can reveal clues as to the long term prospects of Al Qaeda. From where I'm sitting, the prospects appear just as bleak now as they did in January, if not more so.

Tags: Bin Laden, Osama Bin Laden, Terrorism, War on Terror, Current Affairs, Bin Laden Tape

Alec Baldwin: Unhinged!

2006-02-17T23:10:00.000-05:00

Alec Baldwin has a post at The Huffington Post that reminds me of the famous quip attributed to the late Groucho Marx: "He may look like an idiot and talk like and idiot, but don't let that fool you. He really is an idiot."

Here's a sample:

So, I suppose the question is...what kind of civil trial will we see, or not see, between Cheney and Whittington? Whittington is certainly no stranger to a court room and to civil litigation. Will Cheney pay him off, preemptively? Will they go to court? I would imagine if a guy with a few beers in him shoots you in the face on a hunting trip, how could you turn down that opportunity?...

Cheney's the guy who told Libby to out Valerie Plame. The rumor I heard is that someone yelled, "Look out! Shooter!" and Cheney thought he said Scooter and fired in that general direction.

Cheney is a terrorist. He terrorizes our enemies abroad and innocent citizens here at home indiscriminately. Who ever thought Harry Whittington would be the answer to America's prayers. Finally, someone who might get that lying, thieving Cheney into a courtroom to answer some direct questions.

(Emphasis mine)

I usually blockquote only the amount needed to make my point, but this moron left so little to work with that a visit to the actual post reveals little additional information. Don't bother! I can't find one verifiable fact in the entire post. Wait a minute! He did imply that Whittington had been in a court room. I'm sure that can probably be checked out, but I seriously doubt Baldwin went to the trouble.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for freedom of speech. Freedom to your own facts, however, is another issue entirely. It would be one thing if he were just making bad jokes, but this man is deadly serious. It's the condition Michelle Malkin refers to as: UNHINGED!

I won't go to the trouble to pick apart the post any further because Baldwin could end up reading this and I'm afraid facts would just confuse him. I will, however, demonstate how easy it is for someone like Baldwin to pretend to be a blogger. I just need a subject....I've got it!.. I'll use Alec Baldwin as my subject. Ready, Alec?

Here we go:

When Baldwin was young, he had a job as a busboy at famous New York City disco Studio 54. He claims he had to quit the job because seeing all of the sex going on around him "was making me too horny." It has since been revealed that he was fired from that job for stealing condoms.

He was married to actress Kim Basinger from 1993 to 2002. They were the subject of much media attention for the bitter divorce and custody fight for their daughter and accusations, later proven, that Baldwin was an abusive husband and had a heroin addiction, which many believed hurt his career in addition to allegations of him having anger management problems. He still struggles with his heroine addiction and is currently in treatment. His doctor states that Alec has a tendency to speak in incomplete and incoherrent sentences and often picks his nose with a roach clip. It has been revealed to us by an unnamed source that Mr. Baldwin also served time for bank robbery, but was later released due to evidence coming to light proving that his IQ was too low to actually pull off the robbery in which he was charged.

Baldwin was widely criticized for his appearance on Late Night with Conan O'Brien on December 11th, 1998, eight days before President Bill Clinton was impeached. In a skit that Baldwin later referred to as a "parody", he said that "if we were in another country, ... We would stone Henry Hyde to death and we would go to their homes and we’d kill their wives and their children. We would kill their families." [1] Baldwin later apologized to Hyde for his remarks. NBC has promised never to re-air the show. Baldwin has since gone on many similar tirades and has threatened to move to another country. He's still here, proving that he is full of empty rhetoric and a lack of courage for his convictions. He's all talk and no action, yet thinks he should be taken seriously.

I suppose I broke Alec's rule by linking my source, but I found it to be surprisingly easy to make up my own facts which I added in bold. I can't prove any of it, but you should just take my word for it because in Alec's world, facts don't matter. I should point out that the last section, while not in the original text, is undeniably true.

I wonder if Alec would like his newly updated biographical information? Maybe we'll find out, maybe we won't, but one thing's for certain: There's more truth in it than in what he wrote.

UPDATE: Alec has allies. Check out the comment thread.

Tags: Alec Baldwin, Cheney, Whittington, Unhinged

Port Sale A Threat To National And Economic Security

2006-02-17T14:16:00.000-05:00

While the majority of the mainstream media has been focused on the non-story of Vice President Cheney's hunting incident, this has gone largely unnoticed:

WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration on Thursday rebuffed criticism about potential security risks of a $6.8 billion sale that gives a company in the United Arab Emirates control over significant operations at six major American ports.
Lawmakers asked the White House to reconsider its earlier approval of the deal.

The sale to state-owned Dubai Ports World was "rigorously reviewed" by a U.S. committee that considers security threats when foreign companies seek to buy or invest in American industry, National Security Council spokesman Frederick Jones said.

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, run by the Treasury Department, reviewed an assessment from U.S. intelligence agencies. The committee's 12 members agreed unanimously the sale did not present any problems, the department said.

"We wanted to look at this one quite closely because it relates to ports," Stewart Baker, an assistant secretary in the Homeland Security Department, told The Associated Press. "It is important to focus on this partner as opposed to just what part of the world they come from. We came to the conclusion that the transaction should not be halted."

I'm not expert in this field, but on its face the sale presents an enormous threat to our security. The company is a "state-owned" company, and while the UAE has cooperated in our efforts in the War on Terror, there is a troubling past that can't be overlooked:

There are several 9-11 connections to the United Arab Emirates. Many of the hijackers entered the U.S. via UAE, much of the attack's planning was done there, and the FBI says money for the operation was transferred to the hijackers primarily through the UAE's banking system.

The above referenced World Net Daily article also notes this from The Washington Times:

"Do we really want our major ports in the hands of an Arab country where al-Qaida recruits, travels and wires money?

"We should be improving port security in an age of terrorism, not outsourcing decisions to the highest bidder. The ports are thought to be the country's weakest homeland-security link, with good reason. Only a fraction of the nation's maritime cargoes are inspected. …

"President Bush should overrule the committee to reject this deal. If that doesn't happen, Congress should take action. The country's ports should not be owned by foreign governments; much less governments whose territories are favored by al-Qaida."

It should be noted that this sale not only has national security implications, but economic implications as well. These ports are essential for the import and export of goods and services, so it is in our economic interest as well as our national security interest to control their activity.

We are already dependent on foreign sources of oil to keep our economy running, we can't afford to give any foreign interest the ability to control the flow of our goods and services. Not only would this foreign interest be able to bring threats into this country through our port system, they would also be able to largely control the timing and delivery of essential goods and services. I don't believe I am out of line when I say that this has the potential to become the worst political calculation in our nation's history. I pray that I am wrong.

President Bush has the authority to kill this deal, and in the interest of our national and economic security, he should do so without batting an eyelash.

Tags : Politics, Ports, National Security, Homeland Security, Dubai Ports World, Economy, Committee on Foreign Investment, Bush, Terrorism, Outsourcing

It's Time to Move On

2006-02-17T08:23:00.000-05:00

This from AP:

SARITA, Texas (AP) - The sheriff's department closed its investigation Thursday into Dick Cheney's accidental shooting of a hunting partner and said no charges will be filed.

The Kenedy County Sheriff's Department issued a report that largely supports the vice president's account of the weekend accident that wounded 78-year-old lawyer Harry Whittington.

Whittington, interviewed in the hospital, assured investigators no one was drinking when the accident occurred and everyone was wearing bright orange safety gear, according to the report.

Sheriff's dispatcher Diana Mata, speaking for the department, said the case is closed and no charges will be filed. She said Sheriff Ramon Salinas would have no comment on the report.

Since Mr. Whittington seems to be determined to continue living and the Sheriff's Office has all but confirmed that the accidental shooting was just that: An accidental shooting, I think the mainstream media can end their death watch and criminal conspiracy posturing while they still have an opportunity to avoid further embarassment. They probably won't, but I thought I'd throw it out there anyway.

Tags: Cheney, Whittington, Press Corps

Posting Nonexistent Today! Gee, Thanks Microsoft!

2006-02-16T23:35:00.000-05:00

I would be interested to know if anyone had the trouble with Windows Automatic Updates that I experienced very early this morning:

I had automatic updates run in the background while I finished my post last night and then everything went haywire. When the download finished, I selected restart for the updates to take effect and when I did, XP crashed and wouldn't even allow me back via using safe mode. It went through a continuous boot/fail process until I forced it to shut down. The computer guy at work ran a disk repair utility on it and told me that apparently something in the updated cause a key file to become corrupted. He was able to recover it, but I'd be curious to know if anyone else had the same problem.

Anyway, I'm too tired and it's too late to post today. Be back hopefully tomorrow.

This Is CNN

2006-02-16T01:00:00.000-05:00

Offensive:

Perfectly fine:

Any Questions?

Tags: Media Bias, CNN, Abu Ghraib, Jyllands-Posten, Cartoons, Mohammed, Islam