Saturday, May 31, 2008

Count every vote

Well, they did and decided that voters in Michigan and Florida were worth only 1/2 a regular vote - not 2/3, but a 1/2.

"How can you call yourselves Democrats if you don't count the vote?" one man in the audience shouted before being escorted out by security. "This is not the Democratic Party!"

The sticking point was Michigan, where Obama's name was not on the ballot.

Clinton's camp insisted Obama shouldn't get any pledged delegates in Michigan since he chose not to put his name on the ballot, and she should get 73 pledged delegates with 55 uncommitted. Obama's team insisted the only fair solution was to split the pledged delegates in half between the two campaigns, with 64 each.

The committee agreed on a compromise offered by the Michigan Democratic Party that would split the difference, allowing Clinton to take 69 delegates and Obama 59. Each delegate would get half a vote at the convention in Denver this summer, according to the deal.

The deal passed 19-8. Thirteen members of the committee supported Clinton, so she wasn't even able to keep her supporters together.

The committee also unanimously agreed to seat the Florida delegation based on the outcome of the January primary, with 105 pledged delegates for Clinton and 67 for Obama, but with each delegate getting half a vote as a penalty.

Disenfranchising is one word that comes to mind. Not counting every vote is another idea.


Negotiation and Voting - Best Example Why It is Naive and Dangerous

There are many Obamessiah followers who support him because he wants to talk, not fight. With Obama, you would get someone who would listen and discuss rather than someone who will war and kill.

The problem is, discussion is not always up to you and sometimes, silly rabbit, in your naivete, you place millions at risk and you do not have that right.

Iran on Saturday reiterated that it will not discuss halting uranium enrichment ahead of the arrival of a top international envoy expected to propose new incentives aimed at encouraging Iran to do so.

"The issue of suspension cannot be discussed any more, we have passed this point and it is not relevant. Iran's position is clear on this point," government spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham told reporters.

THEY REFUSE TO DISCUSS it. So what then? They refuse. So you find yourself in a position of arguing for something that is foolish and stupid and quite one-sided. You argue for isolation, on your part. No one else is talking about negotiation - it failed.

So what then? Go to the UN? And what will they do? Be very careful because the next words out of your mouth turn you into a spokesman for the Bush administration because that has been their policy.

The US policy is and has been: pursue a two-track policy of the UN and using sanctions against Iran for its failure to halt uranium enrichment, while also holding out offers of economic and other incentives if it stops such work.

So voting for Obama isn't because you believe negotiation is always best, it isn't and this example shows how it isn't up to you. Voting for him is not because he has experience - he only has a few years more than you or I. It isn't because you want him to stop spending trillions of dollars and increasing the debt - because a .7% tax on our GDP to erase world poverty would surely increase the debt especially with the increase of trillions in federal spending for health care. It can't be because he wants to save the environment, for in his haste to save the environment he will starve the poor at home and abroad (and not because we do not produce enough, but because the poor will not be able to afford to eat).

Just so we are clear - not because of experience, not because he will cut the debt, not because negotiation under all conditions. I am quickly running out of rational reasons.

In the end you will say - just because, or because he isn't Bush. Think about that and what you just said - you told me it doesn't need logic or reason, you acted purely on emotion, driven by gut feeling and passion. You are also probably quite harsh on people who embrace their Bibles or believe Jesus is the greatest philosopher for those nuts on the right, driven by ........... ? You however are very different for you are driven by the right kind of passion and emotion.

Yep. So saith Hitler and Mussolini. Same pod.


Same thing again - Global Warming and new laws

There have been previous posts that dealt with the answer, but here we go again ...

Democrats seek support for global warming bill
May 31, 2008 12:24 EDT
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The head of the Senate's environment committee is trying to get support for global warming legislation.In the Democrats' weekly radio address, California Senator Barbara Boxer is promoting a bill that would reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by two-thirds over the next 42 years.

She disputes industry claims that those kinds of limits could hurt the economy, saying the bill "will create millions of new jobs and put us on the path to energy independence."

She also appeals to the Bush administration "to help us, not fight us."

But President Bush opposes legislation that mandates greenhouse gas limits. And some Senate Republicans say it would put a large economic burden on industries like electric utilities, which would pass on costs to consumers.The Senate is scheduled to begin considering the bill on Monday.


Laws prohibiting drilling or the establishment of electric power plants have crippled this country. We saw the effects in the late 90s in California with energy (and the rise of Arnold). Laws preventing things, demanding things - do impact price you very foolish woman.

In 25 years we can reduce emissions by 30% if we: spur technology, support industry, support and provide tax incentives to modernize and cut back. The greed factor will set in and business wil cut emission to save money AND YOU WON'T NEED TO MANDATE ANYTHING AND THE PRICE WILL BE MUCH LOWER, helping you out - there will not be a need for Senate hearings on prices.


AP, Sept 2005 - Katrina - Aid offered

Aid offered by over 50 countries in the wake of Katrina.

I have been pretty blunt what I think of stupid left-wing fools in previous posts, and they are a big part of this mess as well.

What the American people donated in cash and aid was over a billion dollars. The federal government provided billions more. The state of Louisiana SHOULD have provided hundreds of millions more PLUS insurance companies paid out billions more.

Many many billions. Now, for a moment, think of the costs of buildings and property in Louisiana.

In addition to the billions, hundreds of homes were built for free due to charity or other sources. Every person affected received a $2,000 credit card for immediate need, received a place to stay - either on the ships docked in the harbors or a mobile home provided rent free. Then you have extra needs and FEMA added hundreds of millions more for long term rehabilitation to the area.

The issue I have is - where is the city? where is the state? It is not, just so we are all on the same page - the responsibility of the federal government to fix everything.

Apparently they were no where to be found, but it is much easier to blame Bush for everything than to acccept responsibility and place blame where it must be placed to remedy ther wrongs.

The haste with which the left attacked, the media whores and their portrayal of a failure indicating a collapse of our system led to some of the following aid offers.

The thing to remember - we have more resources available in the United States than anywhere in the world, or for that matter - the world combined, in many areas. yet, the constant media whoring on this issue creates the image in the world that the US cannot help or save itself, which is wholly inaccurate.

The left never considers what it has done to hurt our image in the world. It just feels.


The Associated Press
AP Online


Many nations have offered the United States aid in dealing with the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, including an agreement by European governments to release 2 million barrels of oil per day from strategic reserves.

Other offers include:

_ AFGHANISTAN: $100,000.

_ ARGENTINA: Six disaster relief and rescue coordinators.

_ AUSTRALIA: $8 million to American Red Cross.

_ AUSTRIA: Water pumps, plastic sheets, cots; An Austrian Red Cross team is in Houston to set up a communication network.

_ BAHAMAS: $50,000 for U.S. victims and additional aid to Bahamian citizens in stricken areas.

_ BANGLADESH: $1 million.

_ BELGIUM: Medical, logistics, civil engineering and diving teams, pumps, generators.

_ BRAZIL: Willing to contribute but awaiting specific request from United States.

_ BRITAIN: 500,000 ready-to-eat meals; medical experts, search-and-rescue gear, marine engineers, high-volume pumps.

_ CANADA: three navy ships, a coast guard vessel, several Sea King helicopters and about 1,000 personnel, including navy divers to help clear waterways and inspect damaged levees.

_ CHILE: Plans to contact U.S. authorities to see what is needed.

_ CHINA: $5 million to aid survivors. Says it will help with medical treatment and epidemic prevention if necessary.

_ COLOMBIA: Offers rescue and paramedic teams.

_ CUBA: Offers 1,100 doctors.

_ CZECH REPUBLIC: Rescue teams, field hospital and pumps and water processing equipment, as well as transport planes.

_ DENMARK: Water purification units.

_ DOMINICA: Police to help patrol disaster zone.

_ DOMINICAN REPUBLIC: Offers rescue workers, doctors and nurses.

_ EL SALVADOR: 100 army troops, including medical personnel and engineers.

_ FINLAND: A search-and-rescue team.

_ FRANCE: Flying in 300 tents, 980 cots; 60 generators, three water purification units; 30 water pumps. Offering aircraft and two ships with helicopters, disaster unit with 20 soldiers, civil defense detachment of 35 people.

_ GERMANY: 40,000 meals; 30,000 more coming. Offering medical supplies, vaccination teams, water purification equipment, medical evacuation aircraft and crisis management experts.

_ GREECE: Two cruise ships to help house homeless, as well as relief supplies and rescue crews.

_ GUATEMALA: 80 specialists from army, health and interior departments.

_ HONDURAS: 134-member medical and rescue brigade. Mayor of capital, Tegucigalpa, offers a similar group. _ INDIA: $5 million to American Red Cross. Offering medical teams with experience in waterborne diseases and to set up community water purification plants.

_ INDONESIA: Medical team of 45 doctors and 155 other staff and 10,000 blankets.

_ IRAN: Offers to dispatch unspecified aid through its Red Crescent agency if needed.

_ ISRAEL: Sending medical team. Offering hundreds of doctors, trauma experts and other medical staff as well as field hospital.

_ ITALY: 300 cots, 300 blankets, 600 sheets, a water pump, six life rafts, 11,200 chlorine tablets, first-aid kits; baby food.

_ JAPAN: $1 million in aid and offers to send tents, blankets, power generators and portable water tanks.

_ KOSOVO: $500,000.

_ KUWAIT: $500 million worth of oil and other aid.

_ LATVIA: A disaster relief team, financial aid, blankets, bottled water.

_ LITHUANIA: Rescue teams, meals, building materials.

_ LUXEMBOURG: two jeeps, 1,000 cots, 2,000 blankets.

_ MEXICO: Navy ship carrying food, amphibious vehicles, helicopters and medical team to arrive Wednesday. Fifteen army vehicles carrying food, health brigades, water-treatment plants and mobile kitchens with capacity to feed 7,000 people a day heading to U.S. border. Government sets up bank accounts to collect donations and donates $1 million. Offer comes from search-and-rescue group called "topos" _ "moles" _ organized by youths digging through collapsed buildings after Mexico City's 1985 earthquake.

_ THE NETHERLANDS: A frigate with water, medicine, helicopters and beds to arrive Wednesday. Three giant water pumps have been offered, as well as expertise in dike and water engineering, and forensic ID help.

_ NEW ZEALAND: $1.4 million. Government has also offered to send an urban search and rescue team, a disaster victim identification team or recovery personnel.

_ NICARAGUA: Flooding and sanitation experts.

_ NORWAY: Navy divers, 10,000 blankets and unspecified financial aid.

_ ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES: $25,000 to American Red Cross.

_ PAKISTAN: Doctors and paramedics.

_ PANAMA: 120,000 pounds of bananas for hurricane victims.

_ PERU: 80 to 100 doctors with expertise in tropical diseases and disasters. But President Alejandro Toledo said Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld requested Peru instead send medical supplies and canned foods. Peru will try to comply.

_ THE PHILIPPINES: Philippines Red Cross donating $25,000. Government offers 25-man relief team.

_ PORTUGAL: Lending 2 percent of its strategic oil reserve, equivalent to 500,000 barrels of oil.

_ QATAR: $100 million in humanitarian assistance.

_ ROMANIA: Two teams of medical experts.

_ RUSSIA: Three transport planes with generators, food, tents, blankets, drinking water and medical supplies.

_ SAUDI ARABIA: Offers to increase oil production to replace shortfalls caused by Katrina.

_ SINGAPORE: Three CH-47 transport helicopters and 38 soldiers in training unit at Grand Prairie, Texas, to Fort Polk, La., to work with Texas Army National Guard in disaster relief operations, including resupply and airlift missions.

_ SLOVAKIA: Water purification gear, cots, water.

_ SLOVENIA: Cots, bedding, first-aid kits.

_ SOUTH KOREA: $30 million in government and civilian assistance and sending search team and relief supplies.

_ SPAIN: Firefighters and equipment, medical staff, search-and-rescue expertise, tents, cots, blankets, water treatment units, heating equipment, meals, water, generators.

_ SRI LANKA: $25,000 to American Red Cross.

_ SWEDEN: First-aid kits, blankets, meals, generators, plastic sheeting, 2 water purification units and instructors; aircraft ready for immediate deployment.

_ SWITZERLAND: Blankets, 50 tons of aid supplies, two logistic experts from the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, two doctors and two water specialists.

_ TAIWAN: $2 million.

_ THAILAND: At least 60 doctors and nurses along with supplies of rice.

_ TRINIDAD: Local Red Cross sending 10-15 relief workers.

_ URUGUAY: Two mobile water purification units and two tons of powdered milk.

_ VENEZUELA: Offers 1 million barrels of gasoline, $5 million in cash, water purification plants, rescue volunteers and more than 50 tons of canned food and water. Government's Citgo Petroleum Corp. pledges $1 million.

_ UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: Tents, clothing, food and other aid.

Copyright 2005, AP News All Rights Reserved

(This article is not easy to find. I had to pay for the complete list and if I did not still have the original, would never know it ever existed.)


Excellent Idea or a Sign of Problems to Come

Most people will never face the issue of stalking, but think about what if someone were to stalk you - it is not fun, it is not cute, it is not amusing, and it does not make you feel important or famous. It can be terrifying, not so much for you as for your family - all the what 'ifs'. With that in mind, a new bill to require anyone who is convicted of certain crimes to be connected to a GPS device to be tracked from space.

An interesting idea or the first step toward a more intrusive police state.


Time Magazine and the Fritzl family

A good article in Time about the problems and obstacles the Fritzl family (exlcuding the monster who will, we can all hope, die soon) will face.

We should all consider what they experience each day, what we take for granted, and the suffering they have endured to now be free.



We have a federalist system, otherwise known as 'federalism', and in a federalist system, power is shared by written declaration (or a constitution in our case) between a central government (federal), and regional (state) or subdivisions of regional (county/city). All must consent to the other intruding upon their areas of control. In a federalist system, in many cases, it begins at the bottom and works up, but for issues only the federal can control - invasions, treaties, war.

If you do not like how our system works, changes to it will result in modifications that may give us a Thailand, Russia, China ... we cannot maintain our system and culture of government and change it.

In the event of an earthquake in California, the responsibility begins as follows. The process moving up the chain of need/responsibility will occur pretty quickly, but it begins first with - where was the earthquake. So we will say Los Angeles.

City government is primarily responsible, but, if it is too great for the city, the county gets involved. Quickly the county would call for state intervention. That brings everyone from the police, fire department, to the national guard to bear on the event. It releases emergency funding from the state. Then responsibility moved from state to federal and it begins with FEMA and then moves to congressional/executive.

You should really all understand this because failure to understand this role is a failure to understand our system of government is not based on top down but bottom up. The mayor of Los Angeles MUST CALL the COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS who will contact the GOVERNOR who will call for federal aid - FEMA who will in conjunction with other federal offices (including legislative/executive) take action. The president cannot impose himself in the first minutes as that violates our Constitution. The president MUST WAIT to be called upon AND HE CANNOT BE CALLED UPON every time you have an emergency. Expecting that the executive or legislative branch intervene every time dismantles our system of government and installs a government you do not wish to have for it is closer to a state run totalitarian government than a democratic government.

The Civil War included the argument that state's had rights - the state has the right and OBLIGATION to serve its citizens. This is one issue that was considered in Dred Scott. The debate is quite old and we have generally agreed it is up to the state to respond to disasters FIRST before it moves up the ladder to federal offices.

Trust me - you do not want the federal government jumping in three minutes after the earthquake. Ironic - liberals are terrified of government intrusion into their lives yet want big government to tell everyone to leave them alone. You cannot have it both ways - let the government in and it doesn't leave entirely. It leaves behind its DNA and the next time, more DNA, until at some point, it reconstitutes itself in its entirety within the state and you have no choice.

For people who are petrified the government is listening and violating all the laws created by man over the last 100 years, it is odd they have faith that a law will get the government out when the emergency is finished. Ironic and odd.


Friday, May 30, 2008

What you get when you believe negotiation is the answer

Sir Hugh Orde, the chief of the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI), said that Britain should consider negotiations with Al Qaeda in an effort to end its terrorist activities.


This is the worst thing anyone could do. This man must be shut up immediately and every living person who knew him must disappear.

What he suggests is the culmination of the most dangerous ideas said aloud.

He is daft.


NY Times - Really Worry About Your Privacy

There are lots of things to worry about - incompetent people with no experience winning a party's nomination, but one thing way down on the list is the issue of government spying on you.

Honestly, do you really think that highly of yourself. I am sure your parents told you that you are one in a million, your girlfriend/boyfriend/wife/husband / 'good friend' told you, that you are one in a million - and now you really do believe that you are all that and a bag of chips. Sorry to rain on your parade - you're not. I really wish I didn't have to burst your bubble, but no one cares if you disappear off the earth tomorrow - except your family and friends.

The world will survive. You are not so important our government would spare a second spying on you, even if you have a bordello in your apartment, sell some pot or cocaine, or look at pornography - no one in the bloody government cares (well, the local law enforcement might - it is therefore wise to never break the law).

If you want to worry about your privacy - as I have stated before - worry about private enterprise.


More of whats his name and his messianic followers

Listening to these mindless twits is more annoying than listening to Bush speak.

For eight long years I have listened to the whining - he isn't qualified, he was too rich, he never served, he was a drunk, used cocaine, got tickets ... and then we get Kerry who is the single richest person in the entire US government, and the left dropped that complaint from their arsenal. Then we get Obama and suddenly Obama having been in federal government less than three years and served in a very insignificant role in the state legislature - he is qualified. His drug use suddenly washes away the purported claims about Bush, because Obama has admitted it. The wealth issue still plagues Bush except Obama and his wife make over a million a year. No wonder Obama told students to go into public service.

It is amazing that the left now believes Obama qualified. He has no experience doing anything and he offers nothing substantive and what he has offered adds up to trillions we will have to pay, not to mention a weakened America.

The left is delusional in their messianic fervor.

All we need are a few more wars, more pollution and lots of hate.

The Obamessiah train is roaring down the tracks and it is amazing that people, who think they are bright, sign on without a clue.



Oil prices to be probed by US regulator CFTC
By James Quinn, Wall Street Correspondent

America's leading commodities regulator has launched an unprecedented investigation into possible market manipulation in the US crude oil market amid record prices which continue to cripple various parts of the global economy.


The development adds fuel to the view that the recent surge in oil prices - which hit record highs of $135.14 a barrel last week - has been largely the work of speculators in the energy markets rather than any actual increase in demand.


The FSA yesterday signed an agreement with the CFTC, and with ICE Futures Europe - which runs the leading European energy exchange from London - to agree to share surveillance information for crude oil trading, including data on contracts based on West Texas Intermediate (WTI) oil that are traded in London.


About time.

What this means is, individuals who have intentionally set out to raise the price of oil for whatever reason, will be found out.

Across the globe, cooperation into the trading and markets in oil ... will reveal all, eventually.

This group will accomplish more than all the feckless Senate hearings intended to embarrass Bush and achieve no benefit for the American people. NOW we will see what happens. Whatever they find, we should stand behind - if oil companies or hedge fund managers, investors - whoever is behind it, find them, and seize their wealth, throw them into prison, and hang 'em after a hearing - good ol' Iranian style.


May 30 (Bloomberg) -- Anyone wondering why Americans show no signs of abandoning their vehicles as gasoline fetches almost $4 gallon can find the answer in Europe, where the price of petrol hasn't been that low in at least six years.


Again, what is the issue here people - that our gas price is cheaper than in Europe. So we should appreciate it being cheaper. Come on, stop with the ignorant commentary. Seriously. All this sort of gibberish does is show how utterly ignorant Americans really are.

The other $8 per gallon on their fuel is TAX. Government tax. If you removed the heavy taxation on fuel in Europe, it would be the same. They FUND their society with fuel taxes. Geesh. Get a clue.


John Kerry and Scott McClellan

Kerry: On September 11, we were at peace

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) believes that on September 11 "we were basically at peace."
Asked to clarify his remarks, specifically asking about the attacks on the U.S.S. Cole during Barack Obama campaign conference call, Kerry said, "well, we hadn't declared war," The Hill's Sam Youngman reports.

Asked if al Qaeda was a threat at the time, the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee said, "well yes, obviously they were a threat. But, fundamentally we were not at war at that point in time."
Kerry also called John McCain "out of step with history and facts."


Maybe he was at peace. maybe he was thinking of his own life - at peace with Theresa. At peace - perhaps he had reconciled himself to the fact he would run in 2004 and was at peace with that decision. But as for the US at peace - what a clumsy, foolish, moronic, idiot.

1993 - attack on the World Trade Center

1994-1998 - Attacks on US embassy's and government personnel from Saudi Arabia to Africa to Pakistan and Afghanistan where bin Laden went in to hiding. Bin Laden declared war on the US long before 2001 and he made it public, and said it many times.

The USS Cole.

By 2001, the United States had been under attack for years by bin Laden and his band of evil doers.

Kerry was so clueless, and remains clueless.


Dangerous fool.


DNC Uses McClellan to Attack McCain

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) is asking "Where was John McCain" while the White House was spreading war propaganda, as former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan has alleged.

A new DNC web ad shows McClellan accusing the White House of spreading propaganda leading up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, then shows McCain speaking in 2002 in support of the invasion.

What is curious about this is - when Scott McClellan was the spokesman, no one believed him anyway. In fact, he was the least sought after person in the White House - NO ONE BELIEVED A WORD HE SAID ... now suddenly the Democrats believe every word he has 'written'.



Their Dream - Our Nightmare

Al-Qaeda's terrifying vision of a devastated America in the wake of a nuclear attack

11:12am on 30.05.08

Washington is laid to waste. The Capitol is a blackened, smoking ruin. The White House has been razed. Countless thousands are dead.

This is the apocalyptic scene terrorists hope to create if they ever get their hands on a nuclear bomb.

The computer-generated image below was posted on an Islamic extremists' website yesterday.


Iraq - Protests in the Street over US Long Term Security

It is important to understand the connection between issues and events. Whether domestically or internationally. Here is one such example.

say Marines handed out Christian coins

(AP Photo/Karim Kadim)

Iraqi demonstrators shouts slogans in the Shiite enclave of Sadr City as they hold placards of radical anti-U.S. cleric Muqtada al Sadr, in Baghdad, Iraq, on Friday, May 30, 2008. Tens of thousands of Shiites took to the streets Friday in Baghdad and other cities to protest plans for a long-term security agreement with the United States.

A US Marine handed out coins promoting Christianity to Muslims in the former insurgent stronghold of Fallujah, outraged Sunni officials said Friday. The US military responded quickly, removing a trooper from duty pending an investigation.

Tens of thousands of Shiites, meanwhile, took to the streets in Baghdad and other cities to protest plans for a long-term security agreement with the United States.

The rallies after Friday prayer services were the first to follow a call by anti-U.S. cleric Muqtada al-Sadr for weekly protests against the deal, which could lead to a long-term American troop presence.

The outcry could sharply heighten tensions over the proposal. The deal is supposed to be finished by July and replace the current UN mandate overseeing U.S.-led troops in Iraq.

What we learn from the above is:
a) purportedly a US marine handed out Christian coins
b) it has upset Muslims
c) they are protesting US plans for a long term security policy with Iraq.
d) The US actions in Iraq are under UN mandate

Ok, So George Monibot - you cannot arrest John Bolton because the US actions in Iraq are under UN mandate. Consequently, nothing the UN does is a violation of international law as it defines what international law is. Silly idiots, leave grown-up matters to grown-ups.

The coin - incidental and not very important, but for the fourth point; they are protesting long term security arrangements.

Now - who is protesting these arrangements. The Obamessiah followers will not even try to read more deeply, but we will, and it is no coincidence that the following story appeared and the protests began.

slams US policy in Middle East
May 30, 2008 7:47 AM

Photo/Claudio Bresciani, Scanpix)

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki meets the press at the first annual review of the International Compact with Iraq, at Upplands Vasby, Sweden, Thursday May 29, 2008. Mottaki said his country believes American voters want changes to U.S. President George W. Bush's foreign policy and that the campaign for November's election proves it. He told reporters that most Americans are looking for changes and that the three remaining candidates are trying to present new ideas to the public to win votes.

Iran's foreign minister said Friday that failed US policies in the Middle East were fueling hatred and resentment, and he called for a change in American foreign policy after the presidential election.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Manouchehr Mottaki accused the Bush administration of wasting American taxpayers' money on policies that he said only serve to weaken U.S. influence in the region.

What can we learn?

That the protests are sparked by Iran. That is clear from several points made in the articles, but also from the fact that it is the Shiites who are protesting, not the Sunni, although the Sunni sheihk was upset about the coin (that is true - he is not referenced in the clip above, but is in the story you may visit using the link), it is also more than likely true the AP stuck him in there to try to give a sense that everyone was upset - which is NOT true.


Help her move

Only if she promises to take that equally as stupid boyfriend with her. Then again - Alec Baldwin promised he would move - he didn't. Barbra Streisand promised she would move - didn't. That's the difference - they lie, and then pretend they never said it when they are cornfronted by their lie OR they say it was just a burst of emotion and they never meant it.

Words have meaning.

SUSAN SARANDON, who appeared in three films last year and won kudos for her TV movie "Bernard and Doris," is still not a contented soul. She says if John McCain gets elected, she will move to Italy or Canada. She adds, "It's critical time, but I have faith in the American people."


Fritzl Family - New Identities

Josef Fritzl's entire family to get new identities

By Andreas Sam and Caroline Gammell

Last Updated: 9:53PM BST 29/05/2008

Every member of Josef Fritzl's family will be given a new identity by the Austrian authorities.

His daughter Elisabeth, who was held captive in a secret cellar for 24 years and bore her father six children, her six adult siblings and mother Rosemarie will all receive new papers.

The new identities are being arranged by Amstetten city council after the family decided not to talk to the media or give interviews about their prolonged ordeal.

Their lawyer Christoph Herbst said: "There have been many offers for interviews but the decision not to go public is final.

"The doctors treating the family are adamant that they need to rest, recover and go on with their therapy rather than be exposed in the public."

Following a series of violent incidents involving reporters and photographers trying to get to the family, hospital authorities have complained that the Fritzls have been "imprisoned for the second time" as they are not allowed to leave the clinic due to the presence of the international press.

Elisabeth Fritzl's six adult siblings, aged 37 to 50, have also been pressured by international media and are understood to be considering a change of identity to avoid public scrutiny.

Past Posts:

Daughter of Austrian 'Horror Dad' Josef Fritzl Reportedly Wakes From Coma

Felix Fritzl was thrilled to discover McDonald’s was REAL – after being taken on a secret trip there. The six-year-old – freed from incest dad Josef Fritzl’s dungeon – was told ads he saw on TV for the burger giant were fiction.

Elisabeth Fritzl thanked the public in a handwritten note, for their support.

A wish-list scrawled in a child's hand yesterday revealed the slow steps towards recovery being made by the freed [children].

In the wake of the Josef Frizl incest scandal that has rocked Austria, the public has been drawn into a veritable vortex of self-recrimination, denial, defensiveness, utter helplessness, and anger at way in which the spectacle has unfolded—shocking even the most callous observers of criminal endeavors.


More on an Impoverished Culture - Galloway

Whether it is direct anti-Americanism or anti-Western Civilization, or indirect (as in the case of the Obamaessiah followers), the result is and will be the same - cultural arrogance they say, yet it is that same attitude that compels people like: British MP George Galloway to express admiration for Saddam Hussein and Gamal Abd Al-Nasser and to refer to Bush and Blair as "Dogs".

We live on two different planets.

A man who expresses admiration for one of the worst mass murderers of the last fifty years, is a man who deserves ignominy.

He took Saddam's money, he was bought, and paid for by the butcher of Baghdad - and he cannot admit wrong, or he would have to face his conscience, and that he cannot do. he must therefore live in a world of denial, the rest of his miserable wretched life.

[I do not suggest, connote, or imply that anyone need like Bush or Blair, rather the point is that a man who expresses admiration for the butcher of Baghdad - a man who, when history finishes counting, will be found to have sent 2 million Muslims to their deaths - that man is a worthless human being.]


Thursday, May 29, 2008

Culturally Impoverished

The last, very long post, dealt with the failings, in my opinion, of whats his name - to thoroughly explicate why he and so many others do not like America, think so little of America that they would place America subservient to the UN, would take an entire book. I think I began the process in the very long post, but so to have many others, long before me.

The point of this is, sometimes we have great ideas, or really smart ideas, phrases, thoughts, expressions ... and we lose them in time. We can't remember the argument as well weeks later. That is the point of many of these posts, to allow review. What isn't seen are the labels that allow searches to be done on words, or in my case, many words, adjectives, labels, phrases. It is easier than printing off articles and filing them in a cabinet, as I am very, very, very slow at filing and I end up with piles (think several feet) of articles with no means of finding what I need at any given moment.
End Sidebar

The long post about whats his name is about him, but it is also about an ideology that permeates a small subsection of a larger portion of the American populace. This ideology is deadly to almost everything that America was and is, and could ever be. The plan or goal is to dismantle everything they believe is a hindrance to the fulfillment of their happiness (to find out what makes them happy - read the long post on whats his name), or to the happiness of mankind. The problem is not that they are unhappy, nor that some things would thrill them, if changed. Rather, it is their failure to understand the most basic of economics, international politics, diplomacy, and human behavior, and instead to believe that all human behavior can be modified by the carrot and no stick, or where a stick is needed, the world will naturally agree on a stick.

America is wealthy, not because the poor were robbed, nor because the world was raped. America is wealthy because of our ingenuity, and entrepreneurial spirit, supported and encouraged by our political and economic system. No other country, and no other people have that combination, and you cannot simply transplant our attitudes and beliefs onto another people and suddenly they will prosper (no more than you can impose our democratic system on a Middle Eastern country). Yet, a large subsection of Obamessiah followers do believe that there is no difference between what we have, and how we have achieved it, and any other country or people, culture on earth. That but for the luck of ... they would be where we are.

What these messianic followers believe is that America is full of bad things, corrupted and vile, we shoot each other, car jackings, rapes, robberies - and all because the perpetrator is poor and young, and we should provide them with educational opportunities not jail. That our jails are already too full and we, a crime ridden society, are terrified of each other because we live with guns and fear, and each (guns and hate) perpetuates the cycle of hate in our cities where the poor have no hope and respond accordingly.

The messianic followers look at the more civilized countries, where they do not have guns and people do not die in shootouts on the freeways, or in shootouts with the police, and they dream to themselves: if only we transplanted that culture and its laws on guns onto the American system!! I suppose, right after we impose our democratic system on Middle Eastern countries - using that same dream state argument!

Well, we would hear - other countries like the UK, FR, CA, and GR, have less gun violence and a more civilized and tolerant culture. We would believe all this nonsense, if the messianic followers could convince us, and they do try - from early grade school through college, they are trying! Persistent they are.

Then comes this story from Canada - Calgary, the gateway to the West (in Canada) - a booming city.

National Post, May 29, 2008.
(I have no link to the original story as the source I get some news bits from are not free and thus do not have links but the links below are as complete as possible.)

Five Dead in Calgary Home.
Original Link. One more Link. Another Link. Another. Video.

Three adults and two children aged 4 and 6 were STABBED to death. The
only living person in the house - a one year old found crying and unharmed. The rest of the family had been slaughtered. The initial inspectors/police on the scene have gone into counseling.

That's the thing about violence ... no guns needed. They will slaughter without them, entire families, children, mothers, fathers. No matter.

Rwanda - of the million butchered, most were killed with the machete. One does not need a gun to kill every living person in a village. What retards. Knives are so much easier and quieter. Just ask OJ.

Just think - what if the Tutsi had been armed. The Useless. Nations. would not have been needed - not that they did anything but watch.


Sorry Mr. Obama, you do not measure up

The vote this year for president will determine which side on several issues we reside on. What we feel and believe when it comes to the nations of the world and US policy, whatever we believe US actions intrinsically bad/wrong/harmful, or whether the war on terror is and should be a police action. How we vote says a great deal about how we feel about this country and what we believe the American role in the world should be, or even whether we believe in the American system, or find our loyalty affixed to internationalist policies.

How we vote says a lot, but so does our outlook on America. If you believe that America commits and has committed terrible crimes, was and is racist, was and is greed-centered where we focus on accumulation of wealth at the expense of the poor, if you believe that we have had all we have dumped on us by virtue of luck, if you believe our leaders are intrinsically bad and malicious, always attempting to subvert the rule of law for their benefit, if you think this, then your vote will be for Obama. It also says how misguided and misinformed, poorly educated, and ignorant you are of the country that has given you everything and received only the whines of children who want more, not because they do not have, but because they do have, and expect more.

Senator, you have played up every negative aspect in our history, from race to greed to wealth - you have sown the division and played the most divisive campaign since Clinton and Bush. It may help you get votes, but it hurts America Senator, and you do not understand that for all your want in winning the election. You have been blinded Senator, by ambition.

If you believe that America has all we have because of luck, sheer fortune of where we landed - you will vote for Obama, and you are wrong. If you believe that the United States is deeply racist and has been - you will vote for Obama, and you would be wrong. If you believe that there is no difference between 'us' and 'them' whoever them might be - you will vote for Obama, and you would be wrong. If you believe that pursuing wealth, going to medical or law school and succeeding, starting businesses and making money - if you believe that is wrong - you will vote for Obama, and you would be wrong. If you feel the US has insulted the world and alienated friends - you will vote for Obama and you would be wrong. If you feel there is no difference between Guantanamo and prison camps in Germany, you will vote for Obama - and you would be wrong. If you believe the United States does not do enough to help other countries and the poor around the world - you will vote for Obama, and you would be wrong. If you do not feel we are doing enough at home to educate children, feed the poor, and help the underprivileged - you will vote for Obama, and you would be wrong. If you believe the idea of change is more important than substantive discussion on proposed policies, you will vote for Obama, and you would be very foolish. If you believe the answer to our economic woes is to cut the military and put more money in to education, you will vote for Obama, and you would be wrong. If you do not believe the top 12% of income earners pay enough taxes, you will vote for Obama, and you would be wrong. If you believe we should tax the rich more, you will vote for Obama and you would be deficient in economics, and very wrong. If you believe we should negotiate with Iran and North Korea without any conditions - you will vote for Obama, and you would be dead wrong. If you think we can negotiate with our enemies and suddenly they will see the error of their ways, or we can just stop doing something and the enemy will go away and leave us alone - you will vote for Obama and you would be dead wrong. If you believe that all troops should be taken out of Iraq, you will of course vote for Obama, and you would, again, be dead wrong. If you believe troops should be taken out of Afghanistan, you will vote for Obama, and even he doesn't say that, but you would be dead wrong, again. If you believe Bush LIED about Iraq, you will vote for Obama, and you would, foolishly, be wrong again. If you believe we must cooperate more with the UN and international bodies - you will vote for Obama, and you would be wrong yet again for the hundredth time.

All of the above are views held by Obama and or by some or most of his supporters. With the exception of withdrawing troops from Afghanistan, Obama's position has been laid out reasonably clear above. It is a choice in November - to believe America is spoiled and selfish, that its leaders are corrupted, and we are no better morally or ethically than the rest of the world - you must vote for Obama.

Yet in voting for him, you would demonstrate a failure in knowledge of American history, our system. You would demonstrate that you have failed to understand the difference between good and evil unless it happens to be Bush and then you clearly understand evil. You would demonstrate a failure to appreciate American history and for that matter, world history in the foolish positions concerning the world and the US. You believe that but for luck, any nation situated on our soil would do as well, that there is nothing peculiar or unique about the people who have resided on our soil for the last two hundred years, other than that they are all killers or thieves, who stole the land and enslaved people to grow their wealth.

You have a distorted perception of reality and what is most unfortunate is you would destroy the greatest quality of America in your wistful march down emotional lane. Review all the statements above concerning Obama's position - they all involve emotion and feeling - not logic or reason.

There are people who would say America is greater than the whole of one incompetent man - but not when this incompetent man wants to sell the US to the UN, tax the GDP, impose a multi-trillion dollar health plan on us that cannot and would not work, yet once embarked upon, we could not simply throw it away after spending $7 trillion to get it. We would be stuck with a failed medical system before it was implemented and we would all suffer. Don't expect those of us who recognize this disaster to smile and forgive you for being so stupid and naive. Too much is at risk. You bankrupt the country and institute a failed medical system that lowers our standard of living and places us on par with Great Britain. Unable to maintain our military strength, the enemies of freedom that you do not believe exist, will encroach on the US and its allies and we will not be able to stop them because you would have eliminated much of the military budget for the health system.

But no, you would argue we will simply negotiate and that will spare us trillions in military expenditures, to prop up a failed tiered medical system. Yes, and when the enemy does not wish to negotiate unless it is our surrender - what then oh foolish one. Well, I suppose you would suggest we turn to the UN, that body that Obama would reinvigorate. Surely he would, with a huge hundred billion dollar revenue spree courtesy of the US taxpayers with a tax on our GDP. Except NEVER in the history of the UN has it ever saved anyone from anything or anyone. Never, not once. Never. So relying upon the new found friends at the UN, would result in their suggesting we accept the conditions of surrender, although they won't call them surrender - they will use a much more diplomatic term - Conditions of Understanding. Yes, a nice euphemism for surrender, but you won't care, because in your heart you hate America in its present form anyway. It's evil ... oops, there is that word you don't like unless it describes Bush, so we'll change it to - unworthy, bad, wrong, unethical.

Under Obama the US would have surrendered small bits of our sovereignty, dismantled our military, slashed the military budget, and embraced a boondoggle of a medical system, and a hundreds of billions of dollars tax on the American people to provide funding to the UN, to improve and reinvigorate the UN.

We would lose absolute control over our economy and political system, stuck with a failed medical system that zaps trillions each year, forced to accept and pay a .7% tax on our GDP to save the world, and no one would be able to help us when the enemy stands at our door waving a few nukes at us, especially after Obama eliminates all US nuclear weapons to make the world safer, we would be faced with nuclear oblivion, or rather, millions of Americans would face it, probably not you because you would be too busy trying to surrender.

Realizing at that time what many of us realize now, and apologizing, will not save us, nor will the apology be accepted. The country is of greater importance than whether or not 1% or 10% feel better about themselves. History and hundreds of millions of Americans today, and in the decades that follow are more important than what we want on this day.

Of course much of this is premised on the fact we have an unrelenting enemy who does not believe in negotiation or surrender. That is where we are at odds - if you believe in the delusional ravings of Obama; you do not accept that anyone on planet earth is an unrelenting enemy that cannot be pacified by giving up Israel or abandoning our principles.

It shows a shortsighted view of history, a failure to understand Islam, and a generally naive view of the world, but what else can you expect from people who are animated by emotion and feelings.

Mr. Obama, you have been found lacking in the character necessary to be President of the United States. Please understand the reason why at least 50% of the American people will not and can not vote for you.


Wednesday, May 28, 2008

OPEC says OIL should be $60-70 a barrel.

A source at Opec said its 13 members were uncomfortable with the current price of crude, which last week hit a record $135 a barrel.

Based on present supply and demand, he said it should be fetching $60-$70 a barrel.


[Also, according to Senator Nelson, Democrat from Florida, about a Senate hearing in which an oil executive told the Senate panel that oil should be at or around $55 a barrel based on supply and demand, coupled with OPEC telling us it should be at $60-70, we can take away from that a max of $70 a barrel ... so why is it $130]

There is no need for gas to be $4 a gallon. None. we don't need to spend $130 to fill up a min-van/people mover/caravan. None. We can conserve and will, using new technologies as we had already begun to do before oil flew up to $130 a barrel.

Speculators are to blame for a huge portion - not US demand.
Re-regulate this area - make it impossible to bet on prices for oil or manipulate the market in this way. Investigate individuals and groups who are betting on the markets and find out who and how much to determine if it is purposefully caused and created.

And let's not jump out of our skin when the price falls four fold to fall in line with $60-70 a barrel. Our technology will still advance the use of new resources, it already had been.

It is amazing that we believe oil companies are greedy bastards (they are) and these greedy bastards want all the money they can get for the next ten years until oil drys up and they have no money and their companies collapse, because they weren't smart enough to be really greedy and plan ahead - which would involve other fuel sources.

I tend to believe they are really greedy and were already planning ahead.


George Monibot and John Bolton - Another useless frenchman.

Il est tout a fait arrogant dans ses suppositions, mais beaucoup comme un Francais. Il ne peut pas etre escompte pour habiter a la maison avec sa mere, ni pour son affection pour le fromage. Pourtant Monbiot veut faire une declaration et un lieu John Bolton en etat d'arrestation par un particulier.

Vous faire comprend l'inutilite absolue de ses actions, pourtant pour le liberal est parti, les actions ne doivent rien accomplissent si longtemps comme vous, vous sentez mieux.

George Monbiot, a journalist and activist, was planning to arrest John Bolton, former US ambassador to the UN because Monbiot believes Bolton is a 'war criminal' responsible for the Iraq war.

What a fool. He should instead focus on Mitterand for France's direct role in the genocide of Rwanda, all but proven in a court and widely accepted, even by lefties like Monbiot. He should try to arrest Mitterand for decades of arming Saddam, who in turn used the weapons to murder nearly a million Iraqis. Monbiot should arrest Mitterand for his role in arming Saddam with a nuclear reactor. But he isn't. He is instead focusing on something that is foolishness defined.

Vous devriez avoir honte M. Monbiot. Deshonorer sur la France pour leurs violations de droit international. Deshonorer sur la France pour armer de Saddam et aidant dans son meurtre d'un million d'Iraqis et de centaines d'Americains qui ont engage ses forces arreter l'abat. Deshonorer sur le M. Monbiot de monde - perhaps vous devez faire une prise de citoyens sur l'UN. Cela serait un point que j'applaudirais.

(I will never claim to be able to write well in French, but I can do it far better than Monbiot can think.)


Someone with some sense

Czech President Klaus ready to debate Gore on climate change

Posted on : 2008-05-27 Author : DPA News Category : Environment

Washington - Czech President Vaclav Klaus said Tuesday he is ready to debate Al Gore about global warming, as he presented the English version of his latest book that argues environmentalism poses a threat to basic human freedoms. "I many times tried to talk to have a public exchange of views with him, and he's not too much willing to make such a conversation," Klaus said. "So I'm ready to do it."

Klaus was speaking a the National Press Building in Washington to present his new book, Blue Planet in Green Shackles - What Is Endangered: Climate or Freedom?, before meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney Wednesday.

"My answer is it is our freedom and, I might add, and our prosperity," he said.

Gore a former US vice president who has become a leading international voice in the cause against global warming, was co-winner of this year's Nobel Peace Prize. Gore's effort was highlighted by his Oscar winning documentary film An Inconvenient Truth.

Klaus, an economist, said he opposed the "climate alarmism" perpetuated by environmentalism trying to impose their ideals, comparing it to the decades of communist rule he experienced growing up in Soviet-dominated Czechoslovakia.

"Like their (communist) predecessors, they will be certain that they have the right to sacrifice man and his freedom to make their idea reality," he said.

"In the past, it was in the name of the Marxists or of the proletariat - this time, in the name of the planet," he added.

Klaus said a free market should be used to address environmental concerns and said he opposed as unrealistic regulations or greenhouse gas capping systems designed to reduce the impact of climate change.

"It could be even true that we are now at a stage where mere facts, reason and truths are powerless in the face of the global warming propaganda," he said.

Klaus alleged that the global warming was being championed by scientists and other environmentalists whose careers and funding requires selling the public on global warming.
"It is in the hands of climatologists and other related scientists who are highly motivated to look in one direction only," Klaus said.


Whatever issues we have, whatever ails the earth, if anything, can and will be fixed by the free market system - by private industry investing in technology and developing through R&D new sources of technology and fuel - we have been to the moon, through space - we can fix the smokestacks of the world, BUT not through treaty or laws or forced adherence to a stupid naive cause, but to something greater - the ingenuity of the private sector, most in the United States.


NYT - Liar Liar Pants on Fire, Why does No One Read Your Paper? Let me count the reasons ...

... because you lie.

... because if we wanted ranting and ravings from the looney left we would not go to the flagship of all newspapers, we would go to the mothership of all loons -

The NY Times posted an editorial on May 26, 2008 that contained the following:

President Bush opposes a new G.I. Bill of Rights. He worries that if the traditional path to college for service members since World War II is improved and expanded for the post-9/11 generation, too many people will take it. He is wrong, but at least he is consistent. Having saddled the military with a botched, unwinnable war, having squandered soldiers’ lives and failed them in so many ways, the commander in chief now resists giving the troops a chance at better futures out of uniform. He does this on the ground that the bill is too generous and may discourage re-enlistment, further weakening the military he has done so much to break. So lavish with other people’s sacrifices, so reckless in pouring the national treasure into the sandy pit of Iraq, Mr. Bush remains as cheap as ever when it comes to helping people at home.

You are liars and purveyors of manipulation and distortions. I often wonder whether you understand that what you write is a lie or whether you believe it to your core despite the facts to the contrary. Why do people not buy your paper, why are they dropping you like flies - its isn't the internet, for that explains only 16% of your drop over the last year ... the other 8% cannot be accounted for, but I would suggest it is easy to follow - 8% can't stand your blatant bias.

It would make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside to believe that Bush would deprive the servicemen and women of access to funds to pay for college in order to keep them trapped in the army. So John Kerry of you.

I will have to inform the dozen or more students I have and have had and tell them they aren't getting more money - well, as it is, I believe the amount is over $35,000 to be used within 10 years. I suppose, from your outburst that Bush must want to abolish the program and eliminate that funding! He must be for the NY Times to publish an editorial attacking the president. Must. ?? Yes?

What if I wanted to embarrass the president so I wrote a bill in which the soldiers funds $35,000 are not held by the soldier in the event of his death, and instead transferred to a general fund that congress can access. After all, the military secures its funding from congress and congress must reauthorize the bill, but so much money and congress likes to control funding so ... attach a rider to a bill that deprives veterans of transferability of funds, and then attach the bill as a rider to another bill - send it to the president who will veto it. NOT because it increases moneys to veterans, but rather because they lose control of the funds in the event of death or other incidents ... so he veto's it, and then the NY Times screams about how he doesn't care about the military. Isn't that such a neat and cozy image.

Except it isn't true and I would expect the editorial board at the NY Times to be able to grapple with complex thoughts and ideas. Apparently not.

The president has proposed a whole slew of ideas and bills for the military and veterans. The chief issue members of the armed services raised was the ability to transfer the funds from service member to spouse and child. The president sent that initiative to the congress to debate. Further, proposals to provide better funding for those members who remain in the military. unlike the NY Times that despises our military, the president would like to provide them with greater benefits for serving their country. This is what the NY Times finds so appalling - to trap them in the cycle of death and army. That is unfortunately how the NY Times regards those men and women who serve in our armed forces - like Kerry, trapped by Bush.

And the Democrats picked up on this, attached the bill for payments to another the Democrats wanted passed and the president vetoed it. Nothing to do with veterans. This administration has repeatedly increased funding for hospitals, medicines, therapy, and other benefits for our veterans despite the lies to the contrary. The veto had nothing to do with the GI Bill and you, at the NY Times, should be deeply ashamed, although I fear you have no conscience to enable shame.

The NY Times has done nothing but attack the president personally - a whole series of ad hominem attacks in the editorial, but it has to be doesn't it? One of the remaining vestiges Bush holds is the mantle of national security and the military. Strip that away and you will have disembodied the man from the office. So, the NY Times has become the hatchet man for the Democratic party and this editorial is proof.


Bad Ideas and then REALLY BAD IDEAS

Every adult in Britain should be forced to carry 'carbon ration cards', say MPs

By David Derbyshire
27th May 2008

Every adult should be forced to use a 'carbon ration card' when they pay for petrol, airline tickets or household energy, MPs say.

The influential Environmental Audit Committee says a personal carbon trading scheme is the best and fairest way of cutting Britain's CO2 emissions without penalising the poor.
Under the scheme, everyone would be given an annual carbon allowance to use when buying oil, gas, electricity and flights.


Tuesday, May 27, 2008


Apparently the Obamessiah has backtracked a little from his earliest position of no preconditions to negotiating -

Obama announced that, if elected, he wouldn't ask Iran to comply with UN resolutions as a precondition for direct talks with Ahmadinejad: "Preconditions, as it applies to a country like Iran, for example, was a term of art. Because this administration has been very clear that it will not have direct negotiations with Iran until Iran has met preconditions that are essentially what Iran views, and many other observers would view, as the subject of the negotiations; for example, their nuclear program."

Amir Taheri has a very good article in the NY Post. Pay attention to the part where members of the majlis were dismayed by Amindinejad ... until Obama stepped in and recklessly set back diplomatic efforts to get Iran to stop nuclear production.

Irresponsible and Reckless.



The Congressional Donkey Hearings and Gitmo

If you have read the papers over the last few weeks, you undoubtedly have stumbled upon several pages pertaining to congressional hearings held on the victims of Gitmo.

Now comes another story -


Mark Goldblatt teaches at SUNY/FIT.

May 12, 2008 -- ABDULLAH Saleh al-Ajmi was a Kuwaiti soldier who deserted to fight with the Taliban in Afghanistan after the United States invaded that country in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Coalition forces captured him in the Tora Bora region - believed to be the hideout of Osama bin Laden - designated him an "enemy combatant" and shipped him out to the US prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

There he remained until Nov. 3, 2005 - when, despite substantial evidence of his terrorist ties and a history of aggressive behavior at Gitmo, he was sent back to Kuwait.


Innocent people held unjustly, and with the weight of lawyers and the ACLU - with the legal system behind him, Abdullah was released. All a misunderstanding his lawyers had said. He was not fighting, just on his way to see family and friends and caught up, fearful and stuck in a hell hole.

He was freed and went back to Kuwait, then in to Syria, and secreted into Iraq where he blew himself up and killed seven innocent people.

He is finally being held to account for the crimes he committed and the innocents he killed, that is one of those things about Islam and Christinaity you can't escape - judgment, BUT the lawyers and friends who pushed for his release are also guilty of the crimes he committed, for they were warned, but in their haste to free the unjustly accused from the evil US, they ignored evidence and he murdered seven people.

The entire legal process was a farce, and the lawyers and judges who freed him are responsible for the lives of all seven people murdered. They have to answer to a higher judge, and I don't believe He will be interested in excuses word games excuses.


A TRULY 'Inconvenient Truth'

Success in Iraq.

This columnist (Ralph Peters, NYPost) has it right.

Sadr: Hides in Iran as his Iraq minions lose.

May 20, 2008 -- DO we still have troops in Iraq? Is there still a conflict over there?
If you rely on the so-called mainstream media, you may have difficulty answering those questions these days. As Iraqi and Coalition forces pile up one success after another, Iraq has magically vanished from the headlines.

Want a real "inconvenient truth?" Progress in Iraq is powerful and accelerating.
But that fact isn't helpful to elite media commissars and cadres determined to decide the presidential race over our heads. How dare our troops win? Even worse, Iraqi troops are winning. Daily.

You won't see that above the fold in The New York Times. And forget the Obama-intoxicated news networks - they've adopted his story line that the clock stopped back in 2003.
To be fair to the quit-Iraq-and-save-the-terrorists media, they have covered a few recent stories from Iraq:

* When a rogue US soldier used a Koran for target practice, journalists pulled out all the stops to turn it into "Abu Ghraib, The Sequel."
Unforgivably, the Army handled the situation well. The "atrocity" didn't get the traction the whorespondents hoped for.

* When a battered, bleeding al Qaeda managed to set off a few bombs targeting Sunni Arabs who'd turned against terror, that, too, received delighted media play.

* As long as Baghdad-based journalists could hope that the joint US-Iraqi move into Sadr City would end disastrously, we were treated to a brief flurry of headlines.

* A few weeks back, we heard about another Iraqi company - 100 or so men - who declined to fight. The story was just delicious, as far as the media were concerned.

Then tragedy struck: As in Basra the month before, absent-without-leave (and hiding in Iran) Muqtada al Sadr quit under pressure from Iraqi and US troops. The missile and mortar attacks on the Green Zone stopped. There's peace in the streets.

Today, Iraqi soldiers, not militia thugs, patrol the lanes of Sadr City, where waste has replaced roadside bombs as the greatest danger to careless footsteps. US advisers and troops support the effort, but Iraq's government has taken another giant step forward in establishing law and order.
My fellow Americans, have you read or seen a single interview with any of the millions of Iraqis in Sadr City or Basra who are thrilled that the gangster militias are gone from their neighborhoods?

Didn't think so. The basic mission of the American media between now and November is to convince you, the voter, that Iraq's still a hopeless mess.

Meanwhile, they've performed yet another amazing magic trick - making Kurdistan disappear.
Remember the Kurds? Our allies in northern Iraq? When last sighted, they were living in peace and building a robust economy with regular elections, burgeoning universities and municipal services that worked.

After Israel, the most livable, decent place in the greater Middle East is Iraqi Kurdistan. Wouldn't want that news getting out.

If the Kurds would only start slaughtering their neighbors and bombing Coalition troops, they might get some attention. Unfortunately, there are no US or allied combat units in Kurdistan for Kurds to bomb. They weren't needed. And (benighted people that they are) the Kurds are pro-American - despite the virulent anti-Kurdish prejudices prevalent in our Saudi-smooching State Department.

Developments just keep getting grimmer for the fan base in the media. Iraq's Sunni Arabs, who had supported al Qaeda and homegrown insurgents, now support their government and welcome US troops. And, in southern Iraq, the Iranians lost their bid for control to Iraq's government.

Bury those stories on Page 36.

Our troops deserve better. The Iraqis deserve better. You deserve better. The forces of freedom are winning.

Here in the Land of the Free, of course, freedom of the press means the freedom to boycott good news from Iraq. But the truth does have a way of coming out.

The surge worked. Incontestably. Iraqis grew disenchanted with extremism. Our military performed magnificently. More and more Iraqis have stepped up to fight for their own country. The Iraqi economy's taking off. And, for all its faults, the Iraqi legislature has accomplished far more than our own lobbyist-run Congress over the last 18 months.

When Iraq seemed destined to become a huge American embarrassment, our media couldn't get enough of it. Now that Iraq looks like a success in the making, there's a virtual news blackout.
Of course, the front pages need copy. So you can read all you want about the heroic efforts of the

Chinese People's Army in the wake of the earthquake.

Tells you all you really need to know about our media: American soldiers bad, Red Chinese troops good.

Is Jane Fonda on her way to the earthquake zone yet?


Pretty disgraceful on our part. Ignorant and disgraceful. Deceitful, ignorant, and disgraceful.

They KNOW it is getting better and do not blast it on every page, because that would invalidate much of their attack on everything not anti-US.

Harry 'the surge has failed (before the troops all arrived)' Reid should apologize. Pelosi should apologize. In fact, the Democratic party should, in unison - apologize, and then resign, followed by the retardicans who should resign on principle of their being wholly incompetent.

And now the UN has come out with a cautious statement that Iran may well be hiding nuclear materials and its nuclear program is not peaceful - more soap in the mouth for the Democrats.


Now the Communists Want Obama

I do not go looking for crap on him, it just falls out of the sky. There is more than we know, but when those who want him elected, refuse to see or tell the story ... well, it gets pushed to the back.

Does it matter that a group called the Decembrists endorsed Obama, included in one of their songs the words "Barack Obama. Alas, Barack Obama. His prophetic luminescence, it will shatter the putrescence and complacency of the bourgeoisie. …" And alas, not to miss the point on the Decembrists - a group of military who were opposed to Czar Nicholas in 1825.

This group, according to a video on Youtube, start their concerts off with the Soviet national anthem.

And we see them hugging and cuddling Barack.

Does it matter? Of course not, unless it does.


Make Mine Freedom - 1948

American Form of Government

Who's on First? Certainly isn't the Euro.