Islam The Religion of Peace

Here's a great website to go and check out. It has a list of Islamic terrorist attacks carried out over the past 12 months.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/default.htm#attacks

And for those of you who would say "Of course there are so many attacks it's all because we're in Iraq. So it's all about Iraq."

Here's their answer:
"Yep, It's All About Iraq and...
India and the Sudan and Algeria and Afghanistan and New York and Pakistan and Israel and Russia and Chechnya and the Philippines and Indonesia and Nigeria and Thailand and Spain and Egypt and Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia and Ingushetia and Dagestan and Britain and Turkey and Kabardino-Balkaria and Morocco and Yemen and Lebanon and France and Uzbekistan and Gaza and Tunisia and Kosovo and Bosnia and Mauritania and Kenya and Eritrea and Syria and Somalia and California and Kuwait and Virginia and Ethiopia and Iran and Jordan and United Arab Emirates and Louisiana and Texas and Tanzania and Sri Lanka and Pennsylvania and Belgium and Denmark and East Timor and Qatar and Maryland and the Netherlands and Scotland and...

...and pretty much wherever Muslims believe their religion tells them to:

"Fight and slay the Unbelievers wherever ye find them. Seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war."
Qur'an, Sura 9:5

Is There Anything We Can't Blame Bush For?

Apparently not. Earlier this week four individuals were taken hostage by the heretofore unknown terrorist group “The Swords of Righteousness Brigade”, all four belonged to a anti-war group called the "Christian Peacemaker Teams", a group that blames American foreign policy for 9/11, who served as human shields earlier in the war and who ran an "Adopt-a-Detainee" program for terrorist suspects held at Gitmo, and this group places the blame at the feet of President Bush.

Here's a little snipet from their official statement:

"We are angry because what has happened to our teammates is the result of the actions of the U.S. and U.K. governments due to the illegal attack on Iraq and the continuing occupation and oppression of its people. Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT) has worked for the rights of Iraqi prisoners who have been illegally detained and abused by the U.S. government. We were the first people to publicly denounce the torture of Iraqi people at the hands of U.S. forces, long before the western media admitted what was happening at Abu Ghraib. We are some of the few internationals left in Iraq who are telling the truth about what is happening to the Iraqi people We hope that we can continue to do this work and we pray for the speedy release of our beloved teammates."

So it seems to me that the terrorists should love the CPT people and yet it appears they don't. Hmmm...go figure.

California public schools need change

My local paper (a silicon valley neighborhood rag) has a new education column written by a teacher and principle with 32 years experience. I'm sure most think that makes him an expert and worth listening to. Not me as his maiden column confirmed he's part of the problem with our public schools. The column was titled Report cards are overrated as an indicator of progress. You can guess the rest....Unbelievable...I wrote a response letter which the paper printed this week, it's title Indicator of progress falls back on schools.

Al-Jazeera, can we either blow it up or put them under surveillance?

Most reports in Iraq just hang out in the big cities waiting to report on the latest insurgent or terrorist bombing. There are very few venturing outside of a few cities to see what's going on around the country. There is apparently nothing good happening in Iraq. But worse than the regular MSM is Al-Jazeera who serves these vile criminals. It's amazing how quickly following an incident that Al-Jazeera will air the propaganda from the perpetrators. It's also ironic that the most recent kidnap victims are peace activists. As Glock26 commented "maybe they'll be able to hug their way of it".

I assume that the only reason not to bomb Al-Jazeera's operations into the nether world is to put their offices and people under surveillance! Another thing that ticks me off... the MSM (and of course the AP piece I link above) feels compelled to put total U.S. military deaths in each new story of this type...why? What's the point other than to editorialize within a news story. And for Christ sake why don't they also give the total number of innocent fellow Muslims the terrorists and insurgents kill in each of these incidents? Why? Isn't that also a very telling statistic? But of course they won't because that doesn't serve their agenda and bias.

They can't stand good news

The MSM editors are not happy. They are surely grumpy that there is any good news that can in any way be linked to the Bush Administration. While they did their best to lie about the post Thanksgiving holiday shopping results when another good financial story follows so closely it's hard for them to continue the negativity. But don't worry, few are making this good Consumer Confidence news a top story and many will manage to add negativity in moronic fashion. Take CNN for example. They report the good new home sales news, but then add "Most real estate economists have said that those readings all suggest the housing market has peaked", really which experts? Are they the experts who have been saying this for the last 2-3 years? Or "There were some signs of cooling in new home prices in the report." but then they site that in the West and Northeast (which probably is about half the total market) are up 40%, the South (in spite of hurricanes) was up 1.9%, and only the Midwest had a drop of 9.5%. Then CNN uses the famous "some" when they say "Some question whether the latest report isn't either an anomaly or even an example of sampling error." These are the same "some" who just can't stand that there is good news, they desperately want news under a Republican administration to be bad to the point of disbelief...good god, America hater's just leave the country would you!

Biased, politicizing naysayers on Iraq in the minority!

On Taranto's WSJ Opinion Journal blog today the first post is about some polling that finds the general public still bullish on the ability to succeed in Iraq. It's interesting that a poll by the Pew Research Center found that a majority of the public (of course the largest group represented in the poll) and those who carry out the Iraqi mission (the military) believe efforts to establish a stable democracy will succeed. The lopsided opposite view comes from groups (what Pew calls opinion leaders) that are known to be liberal and anti-Bush (so anti-America-succeeds at anything while under Dubya's watch).

Democrat's New Iraq Plan or Bandwagon?

Have you noticed all the Democrat politicians or liberal pundits who are talking about training Iraqi security forces to take over so that we can reduce US military in Iraq? I know this was what the Bush administration was talking about long ago. Suddenly though the MSM covers this revelation by liberals as if they have a new plan for Iraq. The QandO Blog has a nice summary of the strategy our President had as far back as August 2003. It's funny, I immediately thought of the Fedex commercial set in a business meeting, the boss says "we have to cut costs people, ideas?"....a dork says they could sign up for Fedex online shipping, blah, blah....silence, then the boss says the same thing but making hand gestures and all the sheep in the room compliment the idea. Too funny, check out the new but stolen great idea ad!

Lonely Cindy

Apparently Cindy Sheehan has a book? And clearly the book singing this weekend was a big hit!

Update: Oh, my mistake.....Cindy and her book are very popular!

Holiday Retail Sales - who wants you to feel bad, feel good?

Clearly the MSM doesn't want you to feel good about the economy. Many economic indicators show we have a strong economy. Sure, there are always price fluctuations (oil, gas, homes, etc.) but employment, the big economic indicators and the markets are in great shape. The MSM likes to do stories that would make you believe otherwise. You will see stories about the house price bubble, or big companies with multi-thousand person layoffs, and so on. They don't give the perspective of the overall economic picture...they like to focus on just a small dent in an otherwise cherry classic automobile! The post Thanksgiving holiday shopping picture is no exception. Most of the stories below take what are in fact positive results (22% increase for the weekend total retail take according to the National Retail Federation, NRF) and spin it to sound ok or even bad. Amazing because most even quote the NRF figure with words like "dramatic" to describe the increase over last year. So why are the headlines or commentary always framed in a negative way?

Negative Spin

ABC calls it a modest start

CBS quotes economist who says a lot of hype but luke warm

NBC says spending modest, AP says the same thing

Positive Spin

Reuters (go figure) says Robust!

Mixed, admit the postive but temper it!

USA Today, some crazy, some keep it simple

NPR audio clip "so far, no drop in Holiday Shopping

Rapid Fire Blogging

misleading headline "Vatican gay document prompts criticism", after all when 2 gay groups criticize you it's not as if it's real criticism, it's more like a badge of honor!

How you define "More than a dozen"? Gee, is that 13, 14, oh maybe as many as 15!...what a joke and what a non-story that some idiots are at the roadside near Bush's ranch again!

Bush ranch update: and now they're arrested. Funny that Vietnam era loon Daniel Ellsberg boasts that this is his 70th arrest in various protests since Vietnam. He surely believes in every case his side was bolstered by his sign holding, sitting and arrest. It doesn't take a genius to know that these protesters have an adverse affect on the side of the argument they sit on. Most don't identify with people who do this, most think they're fringe hippy wannabees. Most wonder why they don't do something more concrete for their cause (run for office, get signatures for a ballet initiative, etc.) instead just mugging for a photo opp.

And yet another Liberal gets schooled by a Conservative!

The presidential pardoning of a Turkey each year is idiotic...we should change this tradition to the president goes on a turkey hunt using a high end 12 gauge over-under shotgun that would then be auctioned off for charity after the pres bagged his bird. Some would have us eat tofu!

The anti-business climate continues in Santa Cruz where a group is trying to make the minimum wage for any worker within the city limits $9.25 an hour. By comparison the kid at the Baskin Robbin's ice cream parlor is San Jose would make the state minimum of $6.75. So in S.Cruz a kid scooping ice cream could make just under $20k a year. This is of course not a good move since you pay too much for zero skilled jobs making them attractive for grown ups! The jobs that high school kids can do well shouldn't be attractive for people who should be trying to move upstream!

It's about time and can we do this at all our borders!

Tom Cruise not only knows the history of psychiatry but apparently is also an expert in obstetrics!

Cool Xmas gift #2 & #3

While I'm not a "gamer" I did recently buy a large HDTV and like most who have done so I crave more high def content. Both MSFT's new Xbox 360 and Sony's PS3 will bring to HDTV what are already pretty amazing graphics and animation. The Xbox 360 is out now, in the $400 range if you can find one that isn't bundled with games. And I say buy one! I also say buy the PS3 when is available here which is likely March 2006, it's only money! I say give the Xbox 360 to your kid or friend when you get the PS3, the reason...I want the Sony to blow away the Xbox in the market. Turns out this is likely since, unbeknownst to me and likely you, Sony has one the war so far with 90 million PlayStations sold since its introduction versus 25 million for the Xbox. But the real reason I want Sony to win is I want to see HD DVD's on the market sooner and not later. Its Betamax vs. VHS all over again! Sony developed an HD DVD standard called Blu-ray and they put a Blu-ray player in the PS3. The first stand alone Sony Blu-ray DVD players are said to retail for $1k or more so given the PS3 will be about $350 your getting a HD DVD player for free. I predict Sony, whose scars from loosing the Betamax battle still linger, lower the PS2 price to the $100 range so as to keep some buyers from buying the Xbox 360 now. They have already said they will sell the PS3 at a loss just for the purpose of getting millions of Blu-ray players in the market so that movie studios are compelled to produce HD content in that format. I hope they win, not because I love Sony, but because they can drive high def DVD content into the market faster than the rival standard called HD-DVD.

Cool Xmas gift #1

How about a 1Gb MP3 player so small the ear bud connector is longer than the player itself. Well here it is, the mobiBLU DAH-1500i available at Walmart for $129. It's less than 1" in each dimension and weighs 0.63 ounces....oh it has an AM/FM tuner as well!!!!

It's good to be the king

Oracle chief Larry Ellison settled a law suit brought against him because of a $900M gain (that's gain!) he realized just shortly before ORCL went down considerably in 2001. Without admitting any wrong doing he agreed to pay $100M to a charity (of his choice). Pretty nice since I would think a charitable donation is deductible even if a law suit (not a government order) required you to make the donation. Then today it was decided he also needed to pay the legal fees involved in the suit, so an additional $22M. In case you were worried about how poor Larry would come up with the $122M, don't fret he has 5 yrs and various places to draw from (that we know about).

1. Direct shares of ORCL held 1,300,00,000 shares...that's billion! At today's price that's $16B
2. Cash from sales of ORCL stock for just 2004, $1.1B
3. Extremely large Bay Area home (that looks something like the Royal Palace in Tokyo) with lakes and traditional Japanese wood boats), approx. $50M
4. Various large and small business jets, fighter jets, misc. planes $300M
5. Various sail and motor yachts, and frequent participant in trying to own the worlds largest private yacht (or really ship)....approx. $500M

You get the idea...this is like a parking ticket!

The word on the "Arab street"

From Mark Steyn of the U.K.'s Daily Telegraph today....I especially like:

Happily for Mr Zarqawi, no matter how desperate the head-hackers get, the Western defeatists can always top them. A Democrat Congressman, Jack Murtha, has called for immediate US withdrawal from Iraq. He's a Vietnam veteran, so naturally the media are insisting that his views warrant special deference, military experience in a war America lost being the only military experience the Democrats and the press value these days. Hence, the demand for the President to come up with an "exit strategy".

In war, there are usually only two exit strategies: victory or defeat. The latter's easier. Just say, whoa, we're the world's pre-eminent power but we can't handle an unprecedently low level of casualties, so if you don't mind we'd just as soon get off at the next stop.

Demonstrating the will to lose as clearly as America did in Vietnam wasn't such a smart move, but since the media can't seem to get beyond this ancient jungle war it may be worth underlining the principal difference: Osama is not Ho Chi Minh, and al-Qa'eda are not the Viet Cong. If you exit, they'll follow. And Americans will die - in foreign embassies, barracks, warships, as they did through the Nineties, and eventually on the streets of US cities, too.

Saudi's and a chicken shit US bureaucrat

From Littlegreenfootballs....you gotta watch the entire video!

Obama-fo-fama-fee-fy-fo-foma

The Democrats put yet another military, national security and global policy expert out there who "called for" (is that like demanding or suggesting? :)) troop reduction in Iraq. Maybe they think he's an appropriate new torch bearer for not finishing the job in Iraq (and not finishing the job on a time table...that's always a nice touch) because of Obama's first name Barrack (def: A building or group of buildings used to house military personnel.).

Do your homework!

I have, for the most part, never just believe something I hear or read. Sure, if the source is known to me then the face value of the information in question is considerable. Unfortunately I believe most people are easily impressed by credentials, and position, and so no further back up is required. This free pass extends to the media as well. Most will see something on tv, read it in a paper or a book, and truth is assumed. I believe it is critical we teach our children to question, inquire, probe and challenge things. There is a logical approach to determining the validity of something and it is called deduction. Deduction can be defined as reasoning from the general to specific and "induction" as reasoning from the specific to the general. To present an argument using induction is often easier.

For example, your doctor tells you the dark spot on your skin is nothing to worry about. The conclusion here is that the dark spot is in fact not a problem. Is that reasonable? NO, it's not! While this example might seem like it moves from general to specific it is in fact induction and flawed. In induction the premises of a conclusion (or argument) if true make the truth of the conclusion probable. In this case the premise is the person that said the spot is not a problem is a doctor so it is probable his opinion is correct. But, since this dark spot could be a serious health issue (the conclusion matters) deduction should be applied. In deduction the truth of the premises are thought to guarantee the conclusion. Applying deduction you would want to know things like: Is your doctor an oncologist or dermatologist? Has the spot changed color over time? Has the spot grown or changed shape over time? At this point I would still call this case inductive, but what would flip it to deductive, all on it's own, would be lab results from a biopsy of the spot.

So, why do most people just take the word of their doctor, auto mechanic, building contractor, or a politician? Of course the ramifications of being wrong must be considered and when the stakes aren't high induction is perfectly suited. However, the stakes are not always obvious when the topic is political and the source is a politician.

Let's look at another example. The Democrats come up with their own Small Business Index and this month they use it to say that the small business outlook is the worst it has been in 8 yrs. Many will read this and assume it is so. The result could be hundreds or thousands who read it decide to not buy that franchise they were considering, or not to start their dream to open a restaurant. Others may think this is systemic to the entire economy so they will pass on that new car or tv purchase. It could, in fact, have a tremendous effect by paralyzing individuals whose participation in the economy is in fact what makes it bad or good. So if we do a little homework, we can try to achieve a deductive conclusion on the state of the small business outlook. My attempt at that started with a good blogger source on the topic The Entrepreneurial Mind. But, you should do your own homework until induction supports a conclusion, or better yet deduction makes it a guarantee. As an aside...why does a political party need their own business index? Purely to slant the conclusion since its out of their field of expertise!

Democrats loose at patriotism and politics

Democrats in the House have been playing a loosing battle. I truly question the patriotism of those that would at every opportunity feed the press fabricated POLITICAL propaganda that attempts to invalidate, undermine, and lesson public resolve on finishing the job in Iraq. Not to mention implying severe character issues with our comander and cheif. The Democrats tomfoolery puts our military at greater risk and affects individual soldiers will. No evidence has ever been presented to support the claim that Bush, or his administration, lied or inflating pre-war intelligence. In fact 3 separate bipartisan reviews concluded that the intelligence was just faulty. In fact one review found some of the intelligence the White House held back promoted the case for war. So, not only is all this lying by Democrats at a time of war unpatriotic it is POLITICALLY MOTIVATED.

Then moron John Murtha opens his stupid mouth to suggest we cut and run from Iraq...even with some set time frame or the "as soon as possible" phrase this is idiotic. Please one of you brain damaged liberals explain to me the logic behind Bush wanting to keep troops there any longer than necessary!

The stupid suggestion by Murtha was pounced on by the GOP leadership who forced an immediate vote in the House on the idea. The big mouth Democrats were made to put up or shut up and they largely shut up with a vote of 403 to 3. Three Democrats, Jose Serrano of New York, Robert Wexler of Florida and Cynthia McKinney of Georgia, voted for withdrawal. Was this political? Of course it was....you leftist fools just got schooled!

Note the AP story called the vote "hastily arranged by the GOP", no bias there....guess the AP doesn't think an immediate pull-out of Iraq would be hasty!!!!

Media uses senile source for attack on Bush

I started my first professional job one year after Stansfield Turner retired as the Director of the CIA in 1981. He apparently likes to be called Admiral Turner...well, while I think Turner had an impressive career, much of it in the military, however when you leave the Navy in 1977 it's probably a good idea to stop using the moniker in 2005! So here comes ITV, the largest commercial television network in the UK. They need (because they hadn't done one in several hours) to run an anti-Bush piece. So they're happy to enlist the 82 year old Admiral that retired from a position to have a clue about what a president thinks 24 years ago. ITV of course doesn't question that, they believe this is a solidly researched piece, which says:

The former spymaster claims President Bush is not telling the truth when he says that torture is not a method used by the US. Speaking of Bush's claims that the US does not use torture, Admiral Turner, who ran the CIA from 1977 to 1981, said: "I do not believe him".

On Dick Cheney he said "I'm embarrassed the United States has a vice president for torture. "He condones torture, what else is he?".

Gee, so I guess having run the CIA 24 years ago gives you the ability to read minds (a common skill among the no-facts liberals) since the suggestion is that this is in fact true based on our geriatric Admiral's belief? Ya, nice vetting of this story! Grandpa also apparently is up to speed on the other leak of the day of supposed "black sites"...I suppose the Admiral knew back in the 1970's that someday we would need these in Afghanistan and Pakistan so he setup them up. How else would he know and speak about these unless it's true?

Ok, I don't know if sailer boy is senile (and sorry to my dad for all the old guy jokes) but I'm pretty sure that since Turner has been no friend of the Bush Whitehouse he has no inside track. And if there is someone still alive in the CIA he knows and they're leaking evidence of Bush and Cheney condoning anything that is really considered torture of prisoners that communication would be a crime. So should some prosecutor have a talk with the Admiral?

Hypocrite squared!

The word hypocrite just isn't strong enough to describe liberals these days. So I think level of hypocrisy obtained when the standard hypocrite label is multiplied by itself is an appropriate description of the moonbats among us. There are so many examples, daily, of the hypocrite^2 and most have a similar root cause. Liberals can't stand freedom of speech when that speech is in direct opposition to their superior enlightened position, and especially when that speech is heard by millions. It's amazing that both ends of the liberal spectrum, from spike inserting tree huggers to your Prius driver, partake in the hypocrite^2 free speech ridiculousness. The various from-another-planet political waste of time that went on in my neighboring San Francisco recently has presented a nice example. Bill O'Reilly should be fired for his exercising free speech! Funny how liberals can (without evidence...oh wait, well I have no evidence but I just know if we had the real Bush NGuard memos it would be true) can make outlandish claims about Bush and his administration with vitriol and profanity and there is no outrage. You can ask for an apology when it might be over the top, but a topical talk/tv hosts job is in fact to use their speech to ask tough questions, to offer up their and differing opinions, to enable a good (and for ratings) and interesting debate. Just as long as everyone likes vanilla!

Iraq is the new abortion issue!

I have never understood why the subject of abortion is so polarizing. If you all think that ones position on abortion is so pivotal to ones entire being then I have a suggestion for you. Ask every family member, friend, co-worker, boss, etc. their position on it and immediately eject those whose stand is opposite yours from you life! After all isn't it the central barometer on a persons entire belief system? The point is that something goes non-linear in people when the abortion subject comes up. All reason, consideration of intelligent argument, even civility go out the window.

The same phenomenon is surely happening with the subject of Iraq. And like abortion frankly most with extreme views on both sides are hypocrites, wrong and damaging our country all for their stubborn ideology. Today's WSJ piece Why We Went to War makes my point with the larger view of both why going was still correct ("To believe that an untouched Saddam five years hence wouldn't have been back in the WMD game is fatuous beyond description.") and why we must finish the job ('The theory that democracies don't attack other democracies is as strong as such notions get, and what the world most needs now is a new, large Islamic democracy. A democracy, however "imperfect," is less likely than an authoritarian state to detonate a nuclear device in someone else's territory.")

Those who now call for a timeline for withdrawal, or more idiotic an immediate pull-out, are clearly suffering from this affliction. The worst part is they are playing partisan politics with our national security and our military who are in harms way. This is in my opinion tantamount to treasonous behavior.

AIDING & ABETTING

That's the exact title of this article in the New York Post today written by John McCain...if you don't have a subscription here you go:

By JOHN McCAIN
IRAQ is today in the throes of another critical moment in its post-Saddam history. There is both great hope and great difficulty, with a new constitution and an ongoing insurgency, with parliamentary elections in a month and violence plaguing many areas.

At home, the American people wish to see us succeed in helping bring freedom and democracy to the Iraqi people, but express increased uncertainty among the way forward. Now is the last time we should send a message that withdrawing troops is more important than achieving success.

Unfortunately, the Senate considered two amendments this week — one of which was approved with 79 votes — that did just that. In the version that passed, 2006 is designated as "a period of significant transition to full sovereignty . . . thereby creating the conditions for the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq."

These words are likely to be examined closely in Iraq, by both friends and enemies. They suggest that the Senate has its priorities upside down, and I voted to reject them. Anyone reading the amendment gets the sense that the Senate's foremost objective is the draw-down of American troops. What it should have said is that America's first goal in Iraq is not to withdraw troops, but to win the war. All other policy decisions we make should support, and be subordinate to, the successful completion of our mission.

If that means we can draw down our troop levels and win in Iraq in 2006, that would be a wonderful outcome. But if success requires an increase in American troop levels in 2006, then we must increase our numbers there.

Morality, national security and the honor our fallen deserve all compel us to see our mission in Iraq through to victory.

But the amendment suggests a different priority. It signals that withdrawal, not victory, is foremost in Congress' mind, and suggests that we are more interested in exit than victory. A date is not an exit strategy. To suggest that it is only encourages our enemies, by indicating that the end to American intervention is near. It alienates our friends, who fear an insurgent victory, and tempts undecideds to join the anti-government ranks.

And it suggests to the American people that, no matter what, 2006 is the date for withdrawal. As much as I hope 2006 is the landmark year that the amendment's supporters envision, should it not be so, messages like these will have unrealistically raised expectations once again. That can only cost domestic support for America's role in this conflict, a war we must win.

The sponsors may disagree with my interpretation of their words, saying that 2006 is merely a target, that their legislation is not binding and that it included caveats. But look at the initial response to the Senate's words: a front page Washington Post story titled "Senate Presses for Concrete Steps Toward Drawdown of Troops in Iraq."

Think about this for a moment. Imagine Iraqis, working for the new government, considering whether to join the police force, or debating whether or not to take up arms. What will they think when they read that the Senate is pressing for steps toward draw-down?

Are they more or less likely to side with a government whose No. 1 partner hints at leaving? The Senate has responded to the millions who braved bombs and threats to vote, who put their faith and trust in America and their government, by suggesting that our No. 1 priority is to bring our people home.

We have told insurgents that their violence does grind us down, that their horrific acts might be successful. But these are precisely the wrong messages. Our exit strategy in Iraq is not the withdrawal of our troops, it is victory.

Americans may not have been of one mind when it came to the decision to topple Saddam Hussein. But, though some disagreed, I believe that nearly all now wish us to prevail. Because the stakes there are so high — higher even than those in Vietnam — our friends and our enemies need to hear one message: America is committed to success, and we will win this war.

Sen. McCain (R, Az.) is one of only 19 U.S. senators — including just 13 Republicans — to have voted against a Senate resolution Tuesday pushing for an eventual draw-down of U.S. troops from Iraq.

What's That You Say?

What's That You Say?
Here's the headline from an article that appeared in yesterday's Chicago Tribune:

IRAQ IN TRANSITION IN JORDAN
Alleged bomber cites war for role in attacks

Excuse me, Iraq is now in transition in Jordan? How did that work out?
Well the real crux of the story is that the four suicide bombers wanted revenge for their family members who were killed in the battle of Fallujah.

So in this we see how twisted, evil, and mostly illogical our enemy is. These idiots want revenge against the US for it's role in Iraq so they travel to Jordan to blow up a bunch of innocent wedding attendee's who just happen to Palestinian Muslims. Nice. They also killed four Palestinian Authority officials, notably Bashir Nafeh, head of military intelligence on the West Bank.

So who takes the credit for this bombing? None other than Abu Musab al-Zarqawi the head of al-Qaeda in Iraq, who is himself, a Jordanian. Who sites as one of the reasons for his terrorist actions the treatment of Palestinians in Isreal.

Well now it all makes perfect sense to me.

In God We Trust

In 1967 when I was in first grade we said the pledge of allegiance before we sat in our desks for the first time each morning. That same act was being played out at thousands of schools, government offices and business around the country every morning. At some point that ritual lost favor and that’s unfortunate. We all may not believe in a God, and for those that do not the same God, but God is not just a part of our country's founding history. It is a core foundation of our founding. The notion that we are united by a creator, by something more noble than us, a God. This is fundamental to the spirit and the principles our founding fathers signed their names to in 1776. The Declaration of Independence isn’t a long document and so each word has more power. At the start of the document our founding fathers make the point that their “equal station” exists by the “Laws of Nature and of Nature's God” and that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” This declaration was really the “kiss off” letter to the King of Great Britain and yet the importance of God and the inference that no man is God was clear.

A few quotes from some of our Founding Fathers:

“The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave.” John Adams, Rights of the Colonists, 1772

“I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth-that God governs in the affairs of men.” Benjamin Franklin, To Colleagues at the Constitutional Convention

“And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever.” Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, Query 18, 1781

“But where says some is the King of America? I'll tell you Friend, he reigns above, and doth not make havoc of mankind like the Royal Brute of Britain...let it be brought forth placed on the divine law, the word of God; let a crown be placed thereon, by which the world may know, that so far as we approve of monarchy, that in America THE LAW IS KING.” Thomas Paine, Common Sense, 1776

So, fast forward to today…and we have this misguided God-hater Michael Newdow who led the effort to ban reciting the pledge of allegiance in public schools at it again. This time it’s the words “In God We Trust” on our currency. Where would it end? The cleansing of the reference to a God, to a creator, would be an acid wash over the very spirit that makes us great and attracts those that come to partake in that greatness.

Sunday Morning Coffee

The White House rips Kennedy: "It is regrettable that Senator Kennedy has chosen Veteran's Day to continue leveling baseless and false attacks that send the wrong signal to our troops and our enemy during a time of war. It is also regrettable that Senator Kennedy has found more time to say negative things about President Bush then he ever did about Saddam Hussein."

Terror hits home, Muslim's start to denounce it!

Hugh rips one of the celebrity pundits I love to hate, Rob Reiner

Insane professors will corrupt our college students

Torture Works

I like John McCain, mostly. And while I respect his Vietnam experience it doesn't make him the definitive oracle on whether various interrogation techniques work or not. McCain's proposed amendment to ban "stressful" interrogation techniques will in the end (as the WSJ editorial board said) make capture by the US not such an intimidating event. I have no doubt if you got a list of interrogation techniques that McCain approved of, then told them to Kennedy, Durbin, Boxer, etc. as techniques that Karl Rove suggests, they would unanimously call them torture. This is a case where people have already made up there mind...with no real research or a thoughtful analysis. It's clear to me that if we capture a bad guy, give him tea and crumpets and ask him to give up his compadres our success rate will be close to zero. However, if we make things uncomfortable, and break them down mentally there's no question the success rate will be better than the twinkie approach.

I suspect most cream puff liberals are you willing to sacrifice their family, their town or yours by insisting we employ a soft approach to interrogation. To them the notion of being righteous is more important than the discomfort of a bad guy here and there. Sorry, not me, break out the cattle prod.

Iraq is not Vietnam

Pretty much since the war in Iraq started the Liberal Left has wallowed joyously in the idea that this new war is somehow tied to the Vietnam War. They still believe that the protests of the 60’s somehow ended the Vietnam War, despite the fact that the war ended long after the protesters had gone home. In fact, the protests basically ended when the threat of the draft ended (go figure). The one thing the people on the left conveniently forget is the millions of people who were killed as a direct result of America pulling out of that war. God forbid we make that mistake again. If we were to instigate an immediate pullout of Iraq like the lunatic left would like us to do, there is no doubt that the result would be the same.

I’m not the smartest kid on the block but I do know enough to study history, as does my good friend Michael Medved and he put together this extremely important comparison of the Vietnam and Iraq Wars:

With all the misguided attempts to compare our current struggle in Iraq with America's most disastrous prior war, it's crucial for informed citizens to understand the profound contrasts and distinctions between Vietnam and Iraq - and to simultaneously come to terms with the one great and essential similarity.

Herewith, a quick list of the nine essential differences between the two wars - along with the single crucial resemblance.
DIFFERENCES
1.THE ENEMY-In Vietnam, we faced more than a rag-tag guerilla band: we confronted one of the world's most formidable military machines in the nation of North Vietnam, with more than a million men under arms. What's more, these troops and their officers had been hardened by some thirty years of fighting-first against the Japanese, then against the French, and finally against the South Vietnamese and the Americans. Ho Che Minh, dictator of North Vietnam, provided a potent symbol with a clearly articulated Communist agenda. In Iraq, on the other hand, we fight no nation, no organized army, no visible or unifying leader, but a collection of shadowy terrorist bands. These gangs occupy no territory, have announced no coherent program for the future, and command no economic or territorial base to replenish their cadres. They can certainly do damage to Americans and to the troops of democratic Iraq, but they can in no sense suggest a credible alternative-hence their very limited popular support.

2.THE ENEMY'S ALLIES-During the Vietnam struggle, the North Vietnamese and their guerilla allies in the south, the Viet Cong, received virtually unlimited support from two of the three most powerful nations on earth: the Soviet Union and Communist China. The two Communist superpowers disagreed on many issues, but they united in support of their Vietnamese colleagues - providing anti-aircraft surface-to-air (SAM) missile batteries, MIG jet fighters, artillery, ordnance, military vehicles, small arms, cash, food, encouragement and diplomatic support. The Iraqi insurgents, on the other hand, receive support from no government on earth. It's true that radical segments of Arab public opinion may wish for the insurgents to bloody the U.S., but none of the Islamic governments have in any way backed the insurgency; even Syria, which definitely could do more to stop the flow of men and weapons across its border, delivers ritualistic and official condemnation of the bloody, murderous terrorists (many of them non-Iraqis) who slaughter women and children, along with American fighting men.

3.OUR ARMY--Easily the most controversial aspect of the Vietnam war - and the main spur to the anti-war movement - involved the draft of literally millions of young Americans during the '60's and '70's. While a small majority of those who actually fought "in country" in Indochina turned out to be volunteers, the involuntary nature of the draft gave rise to the "Hell No, We Won't Go Slogan," to burned draft cards, flights to Canada, and numberless fantasies of martyrdom. In our current struggle, our highly-professional and expertly trained military includes no draftees whatever. Everyone fighting in Iraq - including National Guardsmen and reservists- at one time or another enlisted voluntarily in the military. Cindy Sheehan notwithstanding, all those who sign up for the U.S. military are clever enough to understand the very real possibility that at one point you might be required to use your expensive training in actual combat.

4.CASUALTY RATES - The human cost of the war in Iraq is genuinely horrifying, with more than 1,800 of our finest young people making the ultimate sacrifice. This carnage can hardly compare, however, to Vietnam - in which 58,000 Americans gave their lives for their country. The Iraq War has been going on for two and a half years - with a killed-in-action rate of approximately 800 per year. In Vietnam, the years of principal American I involvement (1965-72) saw deaths that averaged nearly 8,000 per year - in other words, a casualty rate some 10 TIMES as high. In fact, the differential is even greater in terms of the impact on the nation: in 1970, the census showed the U.S. population at 203 million; today, it stands above 290 million. In terms of a percentage of our total population, the death rate in Vietnam exceeded the death rate in Iraq by a ratio of 14 to 1. Even if the U.S. continued to struggle in Iraq for four more years with the current rate of killing (a worst case scenario our policy makers will move heaven and earth to avoid), the deaths will total some 5,000-less than a single year of Vietnam, and less than 10% of the total losses in that war. To keep casualty figures in perspective, it's important to remember that the combined human cost of Afghanistan and Iraq, after nearly three years of overall struggle, still involves fewer deaths than on a single dark day of recent history: September 11, 2001.

5.THE MEDIA - On the surface, the mainstream media (TV networks, newsmagazines, prestige newspapers) seem to offer the same perspective on two very different wars: emphasizing bad news, and downplaying every sing of progress. The difference in media coverage remains profound, however, since the emergence of new media (talk radio, Fox News, the Internet and the blogosphere) have changed the media landscape completely. When Walter Cronkite of CBS announced his disillusionment with the war in a special broadcast in 1968, no prominent media voices rose to contradict him: the public had to choose between believing "Uncle Walter" (the Most Trusted Man in America, according to polls) or Lyndon Johnson. Today, we enjoy far more diverse sources of information, and persuasive (sometimes raucous) voices on the right arise immediately to contradict all the TV network distortions and to provide perspective and balance.

6.POLITICS - Despite recent polls suggesting an Iraq-related decline in the President's popularity, the balance of power in Washington bears no resemblance to the situation in the Vietnam era. In the '60's and '70?s, the Democrats remained the dominant party in the nation, enjoying uninterrupted control of both houses of Congress during both decades, despite two terms of the Nixon presidency. By 1970, that dominant party, the Democrats, had turned radically, overwhelmingly against the war, with "peace candidate" George McGovern nominated for president in 1972. Today, by contrast, the Republicans maintain control of both houses of Congress (and the majority of state governorships) and Republicans remain almost unanimously behind Bush. In the most recent Gallup poll, the President's "approval rating" among self-described Republicans reached a reassuring 88%. It's Democrats - not Republicans - who show their divisions, with the "Move On"-Michael Moore-Howard Dean wing of the party favoring immediate withdrawal, while the Joe Lieberman-Joe Biden-Hillary Clinton mainstream seems to understand the importance of finishing our work in Iraq. During Vietnam, a long series of majority Congressional votes (including the infamous McGovern-Hatfield Senate resolution cutting off our military) served to undermine the U.S. war effort. In Iraq, no comparable "surrender" resolution has drawn even 20% of either house of Congress.

7.SCANDAL - In the last analysis, it wasn't public opinion turning against the war that doomed our Vietnam policy: it was, rather, the self-destruction of the Nixon administration in the most devastating scandal in U.S. political history. After a triumphant re-election in 1972, both Vice President Agnew and President Nixon resigned their offices leaving a fatally weak chief executive (Gerald Ford) who had never even run for national office. In the Watergate-stained election of 1974, the Democrats added crushing weight to their already lop-sided majorities (gaining 49 seats in the House, 5 in the Senate) and preventing President Ford from re-supplying our South Vietnamese allies when the North broke its agreements under the Paris Accords and launched a massive invasion. Without the Watergate scandal, driving Nixon from office and temporarily emasculating the Republican Party, our government almost surely would have maintained the commitments made to resist Northern aggression. However seriously one takes the currently hysterical Democratic efforts to magnify the controversy surrounding the public identification of CIA desk-jockey Valerie Plame, no sane observer believes that the scandal will follow the Watergate example and lead to the resignation or impeachment of President Bush.

8.THE PAST -For millions of Vietnamese, the war against the United States represented the culmination of several centuries of struggle against colonialism and foreign domination, and followed by a mere twenty years their successful efforts to throw off the yoke of bumbling French imperialism. Iraq has experienced no comparable history of colonialism: for nearly 400 years (1533-1916) it functioned as part of the (Islamic) Ottoman Empire. The period of British "protectorate" lasted a mere sixteen years (from World War I occupation in 1916 to independence under Prime Minister Nuri-el Said in 1932), with only a brief English re-occupation (1941-45) during the height of World War II. Under thirty years of Saddam Hussein's dictatorship, Iraq drew some support from the west but functioned for the most part as a military and economic client of the Soviet Union. Unlike Vietnam, where Communists could claim that they represented a nationalist reaction to French (and then American) colonialism, the population of Iraq maintains clear memories of the rabidly anti-American Hussein regime which brought about the nation's economic and cultural ruin.

9.THE STAKE - The best argument of the peace movement during the Vietnam war involved its insistence that even American defeat would bring little pain to most Americans. The anti-war forces argued (with considerable persuasiveness) that the Vietnamese only wanted to control Vietnam: they would never send their minions to invade California or Florida. America might lose prestige, might sacrifice credibility, to give up ground to the Soviets in the titanic and fateful Cold War struggle, but no one expected that our citizens here at home would sleep less soundly in their beds if the U.S. cleared out of Vietnam, on the other side of the world from our homeland. Today, however, we don't have to tax our imaginations to visualize Middle Eastern enemies invading our shores and massacring American civilians: we already experienced that nightmare on September 11, with Islamic fanatics killing more of us in that one day than the Iraqi insurgents have managed to kill in two and a half years. America's stake in defeating a ruthless enemy in Iraq isn't abstract or nebulous: it's real, immediate, urgent and palpable. Anti-war extremists may downplay the every day dangers of Islamic terrorism, but most Americans understand that it still represents a significant menace to both our lives and our way of life.

And this recognition brings me to the one great SIMILARITY in the two wars. In both conflicts, the American people understand the horrific dangers of unilateral, precipitous, unconditional withdrawal. By 1972, most voters had developed deep doubts about the struggle in Vietnam and yet when George McGovern gave them the chance to vote for immediate withdrawal (under the campaign slogan, "Come Home, America!"), a received an unprecedented shellacking. McGovern, the "Peace Candidate," lost 49 of 50 states, carrying only Massachusetts and the District of Columbia, carrying a feeble 38% of the popular vote and trailing Richard Nixon by an astonishing 23%. The general public might not like the Vietnam war, with its truly appalling casualty figures, but they liked the option of ignominious surrender even less.
Today, a very similar mood prevails throughout most of the United States. Our citizens worry about the war, and long for our troops to come home, but only a very small percentage (about 20%, according to most polls) want us to run up the white flag, abandon our Iraqi allies, and strangle an infant democracy in its cradle. It took nearly ten bitter years (from the major U.S. escalation in the summer of '65 to the final North Vietnamese victory of April, 1975) of devastating sacrifice and nearly ceaseless protest before our exhausted nation felt ready to abandon the cause to which we had committed ourselves in Vietnam. With that time table in mind, even with the vastly lower casualty rates from Iraq, it would take us till 2013 before we betrayed our current efforts to establish democratic values in the heart of the Middle East. Long before that grim eventuality, we will see a constitutional republic (imperfect, like virtually all nation states) operating in place of the kleptocratic, genocidal dictatorship of Saddam Hussein, and contributing significantly to the safety and security of all Americans.

Who is the liar?

Edward "don't let him drive you home" Kennedy and his moonbat wacko friends that's who! Bush finally comes out swinging on the constant charge that the administration manipulated intelligence to make the go to war case. Kennedy wasted no time saying yet again in response to Bush's speech today. If you, or someone you know, doesn't have the facts showing who the real liars are on this issue here's the best summary you'll find on the topic! Who is lying about Iraq?

Update: Monday, Nov. 14.....I guess the WSJ liked Norman Podhoretz's piece that I linked to above as they put it in today journal!

Now hold on just a darn minute!

I thought global warming was man made? I thought the idea of cyclic warming or weather patterns that produce extreme weather was just a myth promoted by the planet hating oil companies, and money grubbing land developers who have no respect for the spotted owl or the Karner blue caterpillar! Or is this University of Florida study just another scheme by Karl Rove?

We honor all who have, and do, serve!

Thank God for the courage, passion and love of country by those who have served our country. And for those who serve today, a special thank you in a time where some who think they're enlightened are truly blind to how we protect our families, our way of life and our country.

And yet more French bashing

Well, aside from the French this is also continued bashing of the media. Apparently media types who ignore "we report, you decide" and believe "we decide for you" is a global cancer. You gotta love the cojones of this French TV boss who just comes out and says he trying to control the political landscape. The examples of liberals (domestic and foreign) who attempt to subvert the people from deciding on appropriate political change at the expense of life, liberty and economy is endless.

Take that you Bâtards français

To snub our noses at the French, who have been so critical of us in recent years, Chicago proposes an ordinance to ban foie gras! Take that you snobby elitist lovers of cream, butter, cheese and goose livers! Oh, wait....my mistake....this is the work of folks like Farm Sanctuary who are ok with us cutting the head off of the goose to get its liver, they just want us to treat the fowl with a country club lifestyle before doing so...IDIOTS!

French acquiescence

While I was encouraged when I heard France was going to immediately deport what the press calls "detained" people involved in the violence and destruction. But, that all changed when France suspended eight officers for what is very likely just tough and proper on the street, in the middle of a riot, police handling of thugs participating...oh, oops...I mean the beating of a "young man" in Paris.

Side note....the F'ing press takes illegals involved in burning cars and buildings and potentially put people in danger who have been arrested and call them "detained" people! They take an adult who is on the street, in the middle of the riot, probably resisting or throwing something at the police who is taken into custody by force....and call is "the beating of a young man". And note how the press says the "unrest eases"! Are you kidding me....482 cars burned compared to 617 the previous night is an easing? If this was happening in the US there's is zero chances that would be given a label that sounded like progress.

This feels to me like Spain's acquiescence to the terrorist train bombings!

It's Time For A Third Party!

Bush has been a disappointment with, quite frankly, most of his actions not being those we would associate with the traditional notion of what being a Republican is suppose to be. And now the GOP leadership has completed their transition, with their caving on arctic drilling, to redefining the current day Republican party for what it is...Democrat! At this point what we have are Democrats who call themselves Republicans and leftist radicals who call themselves Democrats. It's time we had a third party who is ACTUALLY conservative and puts a stop to the namby-pamby politics as usual and kid glove treatment to every environmental, socialist, miss guided wacko!

Update: My daily driver gets (not kidding) 9 mpg on average so I feel the price of gas in a big way. Do we live in a socialist economy? What the hell are those two faced hypocrite senators (namely Boxer) asking oil company execs about "huge" profits and bonuses for? Are they not businesses? Did they break any law (like price gouging)? If not, shut the hell up...roughly a 10% profit isn't HUGE or WINDFALL for a well run company and their bonuses are set by the board you morons. I think it was Boxer who put up display showing the executive bonuses next to something like the average US household income. WHAT? Ok, lets look at all the income of every f'ing senator and house member and ask why they don't give it all back to help those only making $23k a year pay their heating oil bill this winter?

John Howard is the MAN!

Hat tip to my dad who got an email with this story from a friend about Australia's tough and appropriate stance with Muslims who aren't going to fly right! The government is saying that Australia is a secular state and that “If those are not your values, if you want a country which has Sharia law or a theocratic state, then Australia is not for you,”...see the story here on of all places the Daily Times in Pakistan back in August! Did you ever hear about this? A search on Google for this story using (australia, muslim, sharia, canberra) had ZERO hits...found it via Yahoo though....how did this get ignored? Why the hell can't we send the exact same message? BECAUSE WE LIVE IN A COUNTRY WITH LIBERALS, THE ACLU, BERKELEY, BARBARA BOXER, blah, blah, blah...ARGH!!!!!

Scientology, a wack job cult religion!

I admit I pay a little attention to popular culture. Tom Cruise or someone with a few degrees of separation seems to be in the news constantly and therefore constantly reminds me of Scientology. What is surprising is how few people seem to know what a complete wack job cult religion Scientology is. I suppose it might speak to the power if its well known star power members and the medias fear of pissing them off. You might have seen, or heard about, Tom Cruise's appearance on NBC's today show where he went off on Matt Lauer..."you don't know the history of Psychiatry, I know the history of Psychiatry". Cruise contends the use of any drugs in Psychiatry is quackery and that any mental affliction being a chemical imbalance you can fix with drugs utterly false. Frankly there is no measured proof of that, true enough...however the use of medication has worked for millions even if as a placebo. But that's not my topic...why Tom thinks he knows the history of Psychiatry and the bizarre story that the members of Scientology believe is. More tomorrow when I complete the story.

The rest of the bizarre story: In giving my version of what Scientology is I'm not attempting to be accurate on dates, timeline, or being blow by blow accurate. Those details are not important as evidence that the entire existence of Scientology is one man's creation with no proof for what it purports to be true. Sure, you could make a similar claim about many religions but I think the actual history of any religion can make its own case and Scientology's case is non-existent!

I did all of my homework online, and got a lot out of the comprehensive site on the topic called Operation Clambake, Undressing the Church of Scientology since 1996. The site also gives links to those who don't agree which is refreshing. I'm going to be brief in making my case since. Like I said, the gory details of when L. Ron Hubbard did this or that, or his actual words, or how much it costs to get something from the church don't matter...the overall story is what is truly shocking to me...shocking that people would be so gullible, so easily conned!

In the 1950's L. Ron Hubbard (LRH) talked about creating a church as a better way to make millions as opposed to writing for a living. LRH creates a method of regression therapy from other existing psychotherapy methods that exist. Why regress someone? That's coming. He writes about this regression therapy method in a book called Dianetics. LRH, wanting to of course make more dough takes his own advice and creates the tax loophole religion called the Church of Scientology (COS). Again being brief, and only focusing on the bizarre.

Ok, a brief side editorial. Frankly one really bizarre, bad, or evil characteristic about a person, an organization, a group is enough to completely right them off. Not every time, but lets take an example. Lets say there is a religion that is clean cut, promotes doing good and having what are obviously to most high moral standards, they try to spread there message to others. Then lets say you find out that they absolutely disallow members to celebrate someone's birthday! To the point where you could be ostracized or removed for participating in a cake and candles willingly. They believe God dislikes birthdays! Why, well they believe if the bible doesn't mention something God dislikes it. They believe if the bible has a story about evil doers doing something common (like say celebrating something) that's God's way of saying he dislikes that something even though by itself that something isn't inherently evil. This religion is the Jehovah's Witnesses. Again, I'm being general here...don't go correcting me on this...the fact is the point I'm making is on track! But I digress!

Back to COS, the church has a story of how we got here on earth and why some of us are bad, or evil, or not at peace and so on. The church claims you need to go thru auditing (what they call the psychotherapy they employ). They are trying to help you reach some spiritual truth, to cleanse your being all of which is done over a period of time thru "levels" members progress through...largely triggered by your paying for this progression! And fees have been reported from thousands to hundreds of thousands per level. Paying is required while the church claims it isn't, plenty who have left the church have provided evidence and experience that you must pay to play....doesn't sound like a friendly, we-just-want-to-help-people religion does it?

Ok, now for the good part. After you have reached an "advanced" level and at this point your for the most part brainwashed into thinking this church and the people in it are so enlightened. You are told the big secret! That man got to earth millions of years ago because an alien named Xenu gathered up criminal and over populated beings of this galaxy and dropped them on earth. He put them next to volcanoes and then detonated hydrogen bombs (as if a alien millions of years ago would use an explosive technique we use today!). The COS believes in reincarnation and since some of these beings would survive the bombs Xenu employed psychiatrists of his time to re-program the minds of the living and dead so as to not know their origin. According to COS they programmed the notion of the historic religions (Catholicism, Buddhism, Judaism, etc.) practiced on earth and thus they are false. These psychiatrists and Xenu were evil! COS says that the souls of all these murdered beings infest the body of everyone today. They call these souls "body thetans" and at advanced levels in COS a member of the church "audits out" the body thetans telepathically. The COS and its members believe all our bad thoughts, our miss-steps, unhappiness, etc. is due to these body thetans. Given the COS believes we are all descendents from murdered beings brainwashed by evil psychiatrists is why Tom Cruise thinks he knows the history of psychiatry!

The COS easily fits the definition of a cult. It is very telling that the COS has gone to great efforts to try and stop those spreading these details about the church. It is also telling that they do not tell their members about Xenu, and these basic premises of the church, until they have spent a long period of time and money with the church. Having this element of secrecy and a lack of trust to all members of the COS says it all. There are lots of other details about the COS, but I think this bizarre central tenet on how we got on this planet is all I need to label this a wack job cult religion.

Don't Judge A Book By Its Cover

I can't believe that I agree with one of the NBA's most hoodlum looking tattoo ladened player Allen Iverson. I agree with his response to the NBA's commissioner's (Stern) new dress code that tries to help with the image (a mostly accurate one I might add) which is that the players are largely aloof, rebellious, prone to violence or criminal behavior. The do-rags, baggy pants, bling, etc. are sending a message my son won't be allowed to admire or follow. Iverson's response to Stern's new dress code which amounts to wearing sport coat attire (no hats or sun glasses) when representing the team or league was "You can put a murderer in a suit and he's still a murderer." Well I agree....while I don't blame Stern for this business decision a sport coat won't change what's in the hears and minds of these players who while making millions pretend they're still just like the homey's they left behind. There's more to values, your moral code, your respect for others and the law then what you wear....but I guess it's a start.

A real CIA leak

I noted in my post last Friday of non-stories that we might have secrete prisons somewhere wasn't the story but that finding and punishing the leakers was....well it looks like that is in fact what will happen...this should be interesting. A nice round up on this on PowerLine...check it out.

Islamic Scourge

For quite some time now many conservatives have called for profiling Muslim followers of Islam (Muhammad). Aside from the words in the Koran (Quran or Alcoran) themselves the world wide evidence of evil, hatred and desire to target the innocent that has played out over the past several years is undeniable. And while the socialist and weak immigration situation along with hypocritical treatment of immigrants have setup the situation in France the fact remains that Islam is at the root of this as well. To that point Michel Gurfinkiel, the editor of the Paris based journal Valeurs Actuelles via the New York Sun asks:

How ethnic is the present violence in France? Liberal commentators, both in France and abroad, tend to say that poverty and unemployment, rather than race or religion, are the driving force behind the riots. Mr. Villepin himself tends to share this view, at least in part. He said yesterday on TV that he is earmarking enormous credits for housing rehabilitation, education, and state-supported jobs in the areas where the unrest has developed. But the fact remains that only ethnic youths are rioting, that most of them explicitly pledge allegiance to Islam and such Muslim heroes as Osama bin Laden, that the Islamic motto - Allahu Akbar - is usually their war cry, and that they submit only to archconservative or radical imams.

The fact also remains, according to many witnesses, that the rioters torch only "white" cars, meaning white owned cars, and spare "Islamic" or "black" ones. One way to discriminate between them is to look for ethnic signs like a sticker with Koranic verses or a picture of the Kaaba in Mekka or a stylized map of Africa. Further evidence of the animating influence in the riots lies with the French rap music to which the perpetrators listen. Such music obsessively describes White France as a sexual prey.

Update: To contrast another viewpoint check out this Blogger in France. I disagree with his hypothesis of this being similar to both the racial and Viet Nam riots and protests of the 60's and 70's. The participants in those examples were not galvanized by a hateful religious doctrine. We also didn't have examples of protests in other parts of the world with a tie in like religion. And of course there is the glaring difference in the hatred, violence and pure evil of today's examples that have the Islamic link that didn't exist even on a small scale in the 60's and 70's.

Update: And yet another viewpoint more to my thinking again that my dad shot my way via the Washington Times.

President Kerry?

In Taranto's WSJ blog he used a quote from a speech he made at Tufts University to point out his obvious elitism, Kerry said "All politics is a reaction to felt needs. You need to get people to feel the need. Our job is to make sure the right felt need is taken into consideration." The Daily Collegian quotes Kerry several times in their story (linked above) and while I don't think Bush has done a great job its scary to think Kerry could have become president. Kerry relieves his almost presidency like a 40 yr old who still re-lives that game winning touchdown pass he dropped in high school.

Kerry began by highlighting the strong points of the presidential election in 2004 and stated a strong confidence in winning the Senate elections in 2006. "I won 10 million more votes than any Democratic presidential nominee ever," he said in regards to the 2004 presidential election versus current President George W. Bush.

And it was sad to read this next bit from the article:

He was met with applause when he mentioned, "It's a sad time for our country," in reference to President Bush's policies.

Applause? Proof that being on a university campus has nothing to do with your intellect and also an example one of the most disgusting characteristics of liberals....they rejoice in the idea that something under the watch of a republican may (may since I'm not sure why this time is universally sad for our country) not be going well. Was this applause for American's killed in Iraq? For a Whitehouse staffer being indicted? For Cindy Sheehan's hair style? For rent-a-mob socialist and communist protesters in South America?

Kerry hopes a Democratic majority in the U.S. Senate will help the country to "make sense of the despair and frustration" the nation now has.

What? Gee, how about one of you no-life-experience-as-of-yet all knowing students ask Mr. Kerry exactly what despair and frustration he's talking about? I think he's talking about the Democrat base who still can't accept that Bush won! The Democrats can't win people over with their ideas or an actual platform that's different...so they will keep telling you that you have despair (not me), that it's a sad time for our country (why?), that our economy isn't strong (lie), that deadly and costly anomalous weather is Republican caused global warming (hahaha), that just like Bush knew Iraq had no more WMD's he also alone knew New Orleans was below sea level (since apparently the locals don't)!

Angry, Disaffected, Wanting Respect and Jobs? WRONG

CNN and many others of the MSM will tell you that the war (yep, I think that's an accurate description) spreading throughout France for nearly 2 weeks is just "youths" who are disaffected, wanting respect and jobs and so have become angry. This is the biggest kid glove treatment I have ever seen. Firstly what a joke France is. Let's look at the facts. Since Oct. 27 a large number of African immigrants (likely 2nd generation immigrants) who are Muslim have been at war with France (France meaning those who aren't African immigrants who are Muslim and their property). 4700, and counting, cars have been burned. 274 towns and now possibly neighboring countries are effected.

The French, while constantly stepping up the number of police involved have: had meetings! used rubber bullets, not used military, having more meetings, thought about curfews, making insignificant arrests. We have only heard of 1 death, but there are numerous injured in critical condition including a 12 month old girl who was just ridding on a bus that was destroyed by these insurgent terrorists in a rock throwing attack. This is a war, and one that would be dealt with here very differently. This is also why personal gun ownership is useful!

Now I know why France (aside from its participation in oil-for-food kick back money to Saddam) didn't want us to go to Iraq. To them, dealing with combatants, terrorists, hateful wild mobs is not possible...they cannot see how you can actually win. The evidence of their ineptitude to deal with an enemy combatant is playing out for all to see. France and other EU countries had better stop the kid glove descriptions and more importantly the treatment of these criminals else they could see what even the MSM will call a war. The Muslim religion, by its history and modern day example, is not a religion of peace and an Islamic cancer plays a role in what's happening in France. Taranto of the WSJ has a good piece in his blog today called The French Conflagration making that case.

CI?A

Victoria Toensing, a former chief counsel for the Senate Intelligence Committee and former deputy assistant attorney general in the Reagan administration, has a great summary of the Plame issue in this weekend WSJ. I agree with her assessment that "The CIA conduct in this matter is either a brilliant covert action against the White House or inept intelligence tradecraft. It is up to Congress to decide which." It's short, to the point and sounds right to me.

Fake Summit Protest

Just watch how much coverage the protestors in Argentina get as Bush visits the Summit of the America's. It's apparently well known that many protest organizers parachute in from all over the world to make sure they have a nice turnout and have good photo opps. Not only does the outside renta-mob organizers make this fake but you see no real message, no gripe or coherent call for action related to Bush, or the US anyway. Take for example Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez who led thousands of protestors saying Bush a "fascist" and a "terrorist." Also leading protests was Evo Morales, the Socialist, and Indian, front-runner in the Bolivian presidential election set for next month. And Argentina's Adolfo Perez Esquivel, a human rights activist and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1980. The leftist crowd wore t-shirts saying "Stop Bush," or had portraits of Che Guevara and Fidel Castro. Examples of great freedom loving men. A few sporting the portrait of Osama bin Laden were also spotted. This was reported by Agencia EFE.

The US press, I'm sure, will use many of the images from Argentina in countless stories where the story will also include words like "at a time when Bush's poll numbers are at an all time low....". And they will call it anti-free trade and globalization protests and they will show an abundance of anti-Bush visuals. Unlikely they will show Guevara, Castro or bin Laden supporters were in force!

Who let these women out of the house?

We are use to hearing vitriolic fatuity from the man-women of the Senate (and you know who they are), and now the women (or so they claim to be) of the House are joining the Borg of the Senate. From today's WSJ blog by Taranto we see a collection of white man hating skirts shows us their brilliance with their reasoning behind their lack of support for Alito's nomination as a justice on the SCOTUS. Ok, put on your thinking cap...listen real carefully...you know like when your listening to a scientist or something you have to really concentrate to understand them.

Rep. Hilda Solis (D-Calif.) said she was disappointed that President Bush nominated a white male to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. "The president has failed to nominate a woman or a Latino," Solis said, a decision that constituted "a betrayal of the legacy of the trailblazing Justice Sandra Day O'Connor."

Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) said Alito would not represent all Americans.
"Who will Judge Alito represent? He will represent white males who can afford to keep their wives at home while they work," Woolsey charged.

YES! Don't you love it...I'm not sure if Solis is insulting Sandra Day O'Connor or Latino's! Sandra is Latino? Or Latino men understand women better than other men? Or Latino men are in fact just like women? Hahahahaha

And Woosley apparently doesn't represent all Americans since as Taranto points out she's a white divorced women so she leaves a lot of her disctrict in divorce happy CA unrepresented...not to mention that apparently stay at home moms/wives are appropriately represented by even those she cares little for.

This kills me!

The Right Stuff

In today's WSJ Review & Outlook section the Terror's Mouthpiece gives an example of what I think is a systemic issue in the Democratic party, namely aiding and abetting the enemy! You see, Rumsfeld (who of course is hated by the press and Dems to the point of foaming at the mouth) is looking to have Dorrance Smith confirmed as the new assistant secretary of defense for public affairs. But this is opposed by Sen. Carl Levin (D., Mich.) because Levin claims Smith was unfair in asking tough questions about the US media and the government of Qatar (the money sponsor) and their relationship with terrorist friendly al-Jazeera in a piece he wrote for the WSJ in April. The questions Smith raises and the kind of action one who raises them would likely take as part of the defense department is exactly the kind of people we want in these jobs. As far as I'm concerned to criticize these questions, to not join in wanting the answers, to not want to stop the networks from being al-Jazeera's and the terrorist pawn, is treasonous. Those on the left however want you to see our chopper shot down and its wounded pilot shot in the head. They believe it will help you hate Bush. Making this about Bush is treasonous as you help our enemy in their cause. This is not about one man! Bush didn't create radical Muslim Islamic inhuman blood thirsty sick fu**'s who cut the heads off of little catholic school girls (ya, how much of that story did you here in the MSM?). You're either with us or you're with them!

Update: Joe Biden apparently agrees with me that many Dems are less than patriotic. A few days ago, along with other meanderings, he told a small heavily Democratic crowd that Democrats have become elitist. He noted that some Democrats have questioned why he wears an American flag on his lapel. “We’ve become disconnected from where we grew up,” Biden said. “The Republicans, because of our distance, they have convinced a lot of people we ain’t one of them.”

Non-Stories, Wrong Focus

Pretty Much Any Story On Alito's Rulings as a judge! Go check them for yourself on FindLaw, I did! The fact of the matter is you'll be hard pressed to find any personal bias in his rulings. He applies the law fairly even when it might not align with his own feelings and has done a great job keeping States rights as opposed to Federal control in check...and he has done so even when higher courts including SCOTUS have not. Most stories on Alito will say he voted for against some polarizing topic (like abortion), but in fact he voted for or against the right of a state to legislate something or the validity of a law they already put in place. You will also see stories that he was overturned on this or that ruling by a higher court or SCOTUS. Yep, and guess what all the judges on those courts who were in the minority on those decisions voted wtih Alito.

Bush's Approval Rating: Who cares? How does it matter? If I was polled I would say I'm not satisfied with the job he's doing too...doesn't mean I'm suddenly a Democrat or would vote that way in any election!

Ex-FEMA Chief's Emails: Give me a break!..this guy maybe (maybe since I don't know) shouldn't have had that job but are you going to tell me that everyone on the planet who uses email daily won't have joking and sarcastic emails during a crisis? And are you also going to tell me that every single member of the press or Dem politicians who appear on TV doesn't worry about or spend time on how they look...WHO CARES!!!!!

Google Founders Buy A Jet!: Good for them...Why is this a story deserving WSJ or Drudgereport front and center status? If me and my pal were worth $20B combined we would own an F'ing fleet of aircraft, the story should be why don't these guys buy more stuff!

Andy Rooney says nothing wrong with the word negro this morning on the Imus radio show. He also said he had a problem using African American and that there was nothing wrong with the word negro. Well I have to agree. The United Negro College Fund still uses it. Some don't like my use of the word black. Well I will refrain from both words when the United Negro College Fund and the Congressional Black Caucus stop using them. What we call people who are black is made even more a joke by how many blacks use every supposed racial slur and stereotype when they address each other...sorry, ok for us but not for you doesn't fly. Further bringing down the black position of what's right and wrong is the "sambo", "uncle tom" and Oreo cookie pelting of the black Maryland Lt. Gov Micheal Steele who is running for Senate. This hypocritical behaivor by other blacks which is again hardly covered by the MSM and not emphatically denounced by the Democratic party's is telling.

Royals Visit to the US: Yawn...have you listened to Charles? The dude is wack!

Valerie Plame: At least the story focus is wrong..should be her, her husband and the inappropriate use of her husband by the CIA to do anything remotely like intelligence work and then his talking about it.

CIA secret jails: Again wrong focus...if they exist we should applaud it then the story should be to nail the asses who leaked it.

Riots in Paris: Hardly covered for the first week of nightly riots...gee not really much of a story eh? Sounds like a few thousands cars have been torched...don't know how many buildings or how many people hurt....but look thru the coverage and see how hard it is to find that those being bad are MUSLIM!!!!!!

My favorite Democrat

Zell Miller has a great column today in the Atlanta Journal Constitution on the Valerie Plame/Joe Wilson monkeyshine! Read it!

Black Leaders Not Acting Too White!

I have never been a fan of the supposed black leaders of our generation (Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Kweisi Mfume, Julian Bond, the entire Congressional Black Caucus, etc.) as I believe they promote separatism and an entitlement attitude among their followers. Their power and continued relevance relies on their keeping blacks brainwashed and not taking responsibility for their lot in life. The sad thing is that there are signs their efforts continue to work. Case in point, North Carolina black high school students who may purposely do poorly in school so as to not be labeled acting "too white". In this case a local from the African-American Research Institute at UNC-Chapel Hill named William Darity continues the it's-not-your-fault approach by saying that while the "too white" stigma plays a roll the real problem is "due to the school context and because of a pattern of exclusion of vast numbers of black kids from the most challenging curriculum,”. Hey Willie...I got news for you....if a kid acts dumb in school he won't get into the challening classes.....as long as blacks listen to this kind of idiocy they will think of themselves as separate from the broader American population (Taranto).

The Clare Luce Democrats

A must read on the frothing at the mouth Democrats doing their best to rewrite history in the WSJ today titled "The Clare Luce Democrats". I'm surprised so many on the left are willing to increase their exposure to the ill-fated Kerry strategy of "I voted for it before I voted against it". According to dimwits like Harry Reid an alien ship has provided him with a mind reading device which he used on Dubya and thus learned that of all who saw the intelligence on Iraq Dubya alone knew it to be false....ok I made the alien part of up, but apparently he has read the younger Bush's mind! Also see the comments section of my post below titled Significant in his own mind where reader Splash Two (aka Marty) has compiled a nice list of the Bush is a liar club members who before the war said Saddam had WMD but now say Bush knew he didn't.

French inaction!

You gotta love the French...after six nights of riots in largely Muslim north African immigrant communities in the north-east suburbs of Paris the government officials are having a meeting (French Hold Crisis Talks On Riots)! And there is no report of details coming out of the meeting! Could you imagine this going on for 6 nights in even the most screwed up city in the US? Not much in the way of criticism for the lack of action or resolution to this on the part of the French though. Well, except this little bit "Unemployment and social problems are rife in many of France's poorer suburban areas. "...oh my, you mean everyone in France isn't eating foie gras washed down with a nice burgandy?

Significant in his own mind!

I know many label Jimmy Carter as one of the worst presidents in recent history but I'm just glad no globally significant challenges came up during his term to screw up. I have also seen some claim he was very intelligent but his actions and words since leaving office clearly make that a complete falsehood! Of course the MSM takes every opportunity to put him on the air or quote his soft southern farm boy delivery of very serious claims based on no facts whatsoever. So today Carter is hitting the usual MSM fluff shows to both hock is latest waste of paper (see the WSJ's Bret Stephens review) and to throw out unchallenged claims about Bush and Whitehouse wrong doing. I caught Carter's interview by NBC's Katy Clueless Couric this morning where he states that claims of WMD were "manipulated, at least" and that the attack on Iraq was a long-term plan starting with Bush senior. Amazing...he apparently has wire taps and bugs that have captured evidence of the conspiracy plotted by the two Bush's. NOT! You won't find Carter going on a show where a REAL reporter could ask him any of a hundred challenging questions that would illustrate his politically motivated fabrications!

Update: Just like most who claim Bush lied they supported the idea before they were against it! "Saddam's Probably Got WMDs and Bush is Lying if He Agrees With Me"

A Return To Therapy

I have not blogged in a long time. Why, I'm not totally sure...but I decided to start again for probably one of the reasons that I stopped...I'm just really pissed off. I get so in infuriated with political correctness run amuck, the MSM and the lefts delusional obsession with trying to take down the Bush administration at the expense of our way of life, our military and our security. It's not uncommon for me and several of my fellow conservative cohorts to speculate that a civil war may come our way again some day....as you can see my last post which was back in June posed the question! The good news is that my side does own, and will use, guns and lots of them. We also believe in real torture of our prisoners as opposed to the fake underwear on the head kind. Its a forgone conclusion most of the military would fall on our side and pretty much 100% of the private companies involved in the military machine and heavy industry in general would supply us. Hey, this form of therapy is working after all....sheesh..this war will be as easy for us as it is to fit an entire Cindy Sheehan support vigil into a Toyota Prius!

Update: speaking of Cindy Sheehan, don't you just love the reporters and news outlets who report that some think Sheehan should run against Hillary....of course the "some" is the few dozen people that have no life and show up to her staged events here and there...please, please, let her run for ANYTHING..that would be entertaining!