MacDILL AIR FORCE BASE, Fla. — The Obama administration plans to bolster the American military presence in the Persian Gulf after it withdraws the remaining troops from Iraq this year, according to officials and diplomats. That repositioning could include new combat forces in Kuwait able to respond to a collapse of security in Iraq or a military confrontation with Iran.
The plans, under discussion for months, gained new urgency after President Obama’s announcement this month that the last American soldiers would be brought home from Iraq by the end of December. Ending the eight-year war was a central pledge of his presidential campaign, but American military officers and diplomats, as well as officials of several countries in the region, worry that the withdrawal could leave instability or worse in its wake.
After unsuccessfully pressing both the Obama administration and the Iraqi government to permit as many as 20,000 American troops to remain in Iraq beyond 2011, the Pentagon is now drawing up an alternative.
In addition to negotiations over maintaining a ground combat presence in Kuwait, the United States is considering sending more naval warships through international waters in the region.
With an eye on the threat of a belligerent Iran, the administration is also seeking to expand military ties with the six nations in the Gulf Cooperation Council — Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Oman. While the United States has close bilateral military relationships with each, the administration and the military are trying to foster a new “security architecture” for the Persian Gulf that would integrate air and naval patrols and missile defense.
The size of the standby American combat force to be based in Kuwait remains the subject of negotiations, with an answer expected in coming days. Officers at the Central Command headquarters here declined to discuss specifics of the proposals, but it was clear that successful deployment plans from past decades could be incorporated into plans for a post-Iraq footprint in the region.
In short, this will keep the Saudis happy and Iran at bay. Which will keep gas prices down and oil flowing out of that region. Obama might be a green energy guy and all, but he is no fool. He knows how far off all that technology is, so he’s covering his bases here.
Some on the right might rattle their chains about this one; I will not. I know what he is doing here, and it’s a very smart move. I commend him for it.
For those of you who do not like the idea of posting what Pamela has to say; I have two things to say —- first, as Herman Cain would say, “I does not care.” Also, I would say to those who would have a problem with me posting this video, I would politely ask you to go see Helen Waite and ask for directions.
Just a little taste of what you are going to read:
An opening statement is not evidence, merely a preview of the case the prosecution will mount in coming weeks based on testimony, forensics, wiretaps, documents and a plethora of photos. The crux of it: That parents and 18-year-old brother planned and executed the murders from outrage over the intolerable, the defiance of daughters and the alliance with them of a woman treated for years as a burden and a slave.
A disgrace and shame to their family, though, for behaviour unbecoming to Afghan [Muslim] females — the boyfriends and the disobedience, the brazen disrespect for traditions and refusal to wear the hijab — violations of decorum so grievous that they needed to be killed, eliminated, to purify family honour, their “treachery’’ insupportable.
Mass murder committed, a court heard Thursday, by the mother and father and brother of the sisters, homicides staged to look like an accident during a family vacation, with Zainab at the wheel, on one of her furtive joyrides.
Mohammad Shafia, Tooba Mohammad Yahya and their son Hamed Mohammed Shafia have all pleaded not guilty to four counts each of first-degree murder. Their jury trial began here Thursday with a 90-minute opening statement from Crown Attorney Laurie Lacelle that left observers in the courtroom stunned over details finally revealed and allegations of a diabolical plot that defy imagination.
From a wiretapped conversation Shafia had with Tooba and Hamed, 20 days after the bodies were discovered, Shafia in a fury recalling the revealing cellphone pictures of Zainab and Shahar: “Curse God on both of them. Is that what a daughter should be? Would a daughter be such a whore? May the devil s–t on their graves.”
And later, not long before the trio was arrested in Montreal, Shafia tells Hamed, as Lacelle quoted from another wiretap transcript: “Even if they hoist me up on to the gallows, nothing is more dear to me than my honour.”
To his wife, Shafia allegedly assured that the right actions had been taken: “I say to myself, you did well. Were they to come back to life, I would do it again. No Tooba, they messed up. There was no other way. They were treacherous. They betrayed us immensely. There can be no betrayal worse than this. They committed treason on themselves. They betrayed humankind. They betrayed Islam. They betrayed our religion. They betrayed everything.”
From the sisters, there appears no words were left behind. But Rona wrote in her diary, the Crown told the jury, what she was thinking, fearing, in the weeks, even years, before her death, anxieties she also shared with siblings overseas when she was able to get out of the house and make phone calls.
This was the murder weapon:
This was the family:
These are the people who did it:
All in the name of Islam.
Now you tell me that Islam is a Religion of peace? I call you a liar.
In July, Panetta urged Iraqi leaders to, “Dammit, make a decision” about the U.S. troop extension. In August, he told reporters that, “My view is that they finally did say, ‘Yes.'” On Oct. 17, he was still pushing for the extension and said, “At the present time I’m not discouraged because we’re still in negotiations with the Iraqis.”
Sullivan was one of 40 conservative foreign policy professionals who wrote to Obama in September to warn that even a residual force of 4,000 troops would “leave the country more vulnerable to internal and external threats, thus imperiling the hard-fought gains in security and governance made in recent years at significant cost to the United States.”
She said that the administration’s negotiating strategy was flawed for a number of reasons: it failed to take into account Iraqi politics, failed to reach out to a broad enough group of Iraqi political leaders, and sent contradictory messages on the troop extension throughout the process.
“From the beginning, the talks unfolded in a way where they largely driven by domestic political concerns, both in Washington and Baghdad. Both sides let politics drive the process, rather than security concerns,” said Sullivan.
As recently as August, Maliki’s office was discussing allowing 8,000 to 20,000 U.S. troops to remain until next year, Iraqi Ambassador Samir Sumaida’ie said in an interview with The Cable. He told us that there was widespread support in Iraq for such an extension, but the Obama administration was demanding that immunity for U.S. troops be endorsed by the Iraqi Council of Representatives, which was never really possible.
Administration sources and Hill staffers also tell The Cable that the demand that the troop immunity go through the Council of Representatives was a decision made by the State Department lawyers and there were other options available to the administration, such as putting the remaining troops on the embassy’s diplomatic rolls, which would automatically give them immunity.
“An obvious fix for troop immunity is to put them all on the diplomatic list; that’s done by notification to the Iraqi foreign ministry,” said one former senior Hill staffer. “If State says that this requires a treaty or a specific agreement by the Iraqi parliament as opposed to a statement by the Iraqi foreign ministry, it has its head up its ass.”
The main Iraqi opposition party Iraqiya, led by former U.S. ally and former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, decided to tie that vote to two non-related issues. It said they would not vote for the troop extension unless Maliki agreed give them control of a high-level policy council and let them choose the minister of defense from their ranks. Maliki wasn’t about to do either.
“It was clear from the beginning that Maliki wasn’t going to make a move without the support of the other parties behind him,” Sullivan explained, adding that the Obama administration focused on Maliki and neglected other actors, such as Allawi. “There was a misunderstanding of how negotiations were unfolding in Iraq. The negotiations got started in earnest far too late.”
“The actions don’t match the words here,” said Sullivan. “It’s in the administration’s interest to make this look not like they failed to reach an agreement and that they fulfilled a campaign promise. But it was very clear that Panetta and [former Defense Secretary Robert] Gates wanted an agreement.”
So what’s the consequence of the failed negotiations? One consequence could be a security vacuum in Iraq that will be filled by Iran.
“It’s particularly troubling because having some sort of presence there would have really facilitated our policy vis-a-vis the Iranians and what’s going on in Syria. The Iranian influence is going up in Iraq,” said Andrew Tabler, senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “It makes it harder for us to play our cards, and that’s a real setback. We’ve spent a lot of blood and treasure in Iraq. And these days, stability in that region is not what it used to be.”
So there you have it folks, when Iraq goes to pot and Iran fills that leadership vacuum and starts war with the Saudi’s; and your gas goes over 10 dollars a gallon — you will know who to blame. Let me give you hint, it will not be Bush.
Of course, this points to a President and President Administration that is much in over its head and is clueless of how to deal with the Middle East. Something that we bloggers, who rejected the Democratic Party utopian vision of “Hope and Change” said in 2008, when that floppy eared jack ass mounted the pulpit outside the White House and proceeded to royally butcher the oath of office. We knew it then and we know it now. We will also know it come 2012, when that socialist piece of human excrement leaves the oval office for the last time; when he is totally defeated by someone who actually knows how to be a leader.
The Obama administration has decided to withdraw all U.S. forces from Iraq by the end of the year after failing to reach an agreement with the Iraqi government that would have left several thousand troops there for special operations and training.
President Obama and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki spoke Friday morning to cement that agreement in a scheduled telephone call.
The two leaders also agreed to continue informally discussing the need for and the terms of a U.S. military presence in Iraq into next year, people familiar with the agreement said. As a result, the only U.S. military presence that will remain in Iraq after the end of the year will be the roughly 150 troops needed to protect the large U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad and its thousands of American diplomats and other personnel, as well as provide training related to new military sales and other tasks.
“The rest of our troops in Iraq will come home at the end of the year,” Obama said Friday at the White House. “After nearly nine years, America’s war in Iraq will be over.”
I have some very mixed feelings on this little news story. In fact, my entire basis for returning to writing since my childhood days; as I was very good in English in school – and for my foray into the world of political blogging in the first place — was this subject right here —- Iraq.
As my about me page does say, I was not always a blogger on the right. I still do not consider myself a “Republican,” although I do find myself voting for them now, more than I do Democrats. This is because the Democrats are on the wrong side of the argument, polices that the Democrats have tried have failed miserably, as bloggers as myself predicted that they would. However, when I came into this thing called “blogging,” I was not in the camp of the Conservative thought. I came into this thing called blogging with fierce anger at President George W. Bush.
I was right then about George W. Bush and I still feel that I am; however, I am a bit more educated into what the motivating forces were behind the invasion of Iraq and I no longer believe the idiotic nonsense peddled by the far left about Bush and the invasion of Iraq. Put simply, we invaded Iraq, based upon some very bad intelligence from Germany. There was not plan to lie to the American people, so that we could invade Iraq to please Israel, which is what the far left believes in this Country. Which is a talking point that is rooted in fallacy and in an Anti-Jewish and Anti-Israel bias that exists on the far left and in some quarters of the far right as well.
The main underlining factor in the decision to go into Iraq was a foreign policy stance that I feel is one of the worst ever conceived by man — Wilsonian foreign policy. I believed that the day I pressed the “Create Blog” button over on blogger.com to create my first blog originally called “The Populist Moderate” and I still believe that today. Although, at the time, I did not know what it was called, I just knew something was not right and I felt the need to speak out about it.
AllahPundit over at HotAir.com notes some very interesting ramifications over this decision by the President’s decision to pull our troops out of Iraq. The political angle is that Obama actually wants to be reelected in 2012. Not that this will help him at all; the liberal left still will not vote again for him, because the economy is still in the proverbial toilet. I said back in 2010 that we were just making it a little harder for Iran to invade and overthrow Iraq; and it appears that I was at least partially correct. Like AllahPundit said, with this new terrorist plot being uncovered against an official of the Saudi Government, it looks like Iraq might be the new battleground for a proxy war between Iran and the Saudi Government.
Overall, it essentially looks as if Obama decided that if he could not get what he wanted from the Iraqi Government; that he essentially said, “Screw them, and let them deal with their own problems.” Which at first glance, might be a good thing, but when you really look at it, it does not look good at all. All the world would need right now is a horrible war between the Saudis and the Iranians. You think the gas shortage of the 1970’s was bad; you wait until the Saudis and Iranians go to war! We will all be driving bikes everywhere. Gas and other such fuels will become luxury items quick. The only people that are most likely breathing a sigh of relief are the Syrians, who are most likely glad that this proxy war will not be fought in their backyards.
So my bottom line is this: While this might be a minor victory for the liberal left; in the long run, this is going to be major pain various places, including our wallets in the very long run.
Former Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, for instance, is a hugely pro-American politician who believes Iraq’s security forces will be incapable of protecting the country without sustained foreign assistance. But in a recent interview, he refused to endorse a U.S. troop extension and instead indicated that they should leave.
“We have serious security problems in this country and serious political problems,” he said in an interview late last month at his heavily guarded compound in Baghdad. “Keeping Americans in Iraq longer isn’t the answer to the problems of Iraq. It may be an answer to the problems of the U.S., but it’s definitely not the solution to the problems of my country.”
Welcome to Post-Iraq Middle East; it is going to be an interesting next few years. 😯
FBI and DEA agents have disrupted a plot to commit a “significant terrorist act in the United States” tied to Iran, federal officials told ABC News today.
The officials said the plot included the assassination of the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the United States, Adel Al-Jubeir, with a bomb and subsequent bomb attacks on the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Washington, D.C. Bombings of the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Buenos Aires, Argentina, were also discussed, according to the U.S. officials.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said in an announcement today that the plan was “conceived, sponsored and was directed from Iran” by a faction of the government and called it a “flagrant” violation of U.S. and international law.
“The U.S. is committed to holding Iran accountable for its actions,” Holder said. He said the White House will be meeting with federal agencies before announcing “further action” in regards to Iran.
FBI Director Robert Mueller said the arrest of a suspect in the plot shows the U.S. will “bring the full weight of [the] law to bear on those responsible” and that “any attempts on American soil will not be tolerated.”
The stunning allegations come against a backdrop of longstanding tensions between Iran and the United States and Saudi Arabia. In the last year, Saudi Arabia has attempted to build an anti-Iran alliance to push back against perceived aggression by Iran in the region.
This basically proves my point; that Bush did not do enough after 9/11. If Bush had acted like a real President and not like a wet rag after 9/11, we would not have this sort of troubles. Although, I will admit; I have sneaky feeling that this might spark some sort of Military action. Although, I do not believe it will be of the scale and scope of the War in Iraq.
If true, would that not be an act of war? We’re presently using drones in Pakistan and Yemen against al-Qaeda terrorist networks for plotting similar attacks, thanks to the AUMF from October 2001, even though we’re nominally allied with both nations. If the government of Iran plotted attacks on American targets, that should require a response from the US, should it not — or do we send a signal that even attacks from actual nation-states fall under the rubric of law enforcement?
If we’re charging an official of the Iranian government with complicity or worse in this plot, then it ceases to be a law enforcement issue and becomes a military and political issue instead. This isn’t a case of espionage but of sabotage or worse, which would be an act of war by anyone’s definition. If we’re not willing to respond in kind, we then send a signal to hostile nation-states around the world that attacks on the US are low-risk, high-reward affairs — and we’d better get ready for an avalanche of them.
There are some who would say, “Oh, he is just being a Neoconservative!” That might be so, but he is being a Neoconservative, who happens to be right. Ron Paul and ilk are just dead wrong. when it comes to Iran, Islam and the war on terror. They might have a point on Nation Building; but on this sort of thing, Ron Paul and his mindless followers are simply wrong.
Al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Yemen has confirmed the deaths of American-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, the young American propagandist killed alongside him in a U.S. drone strike late last month.
Al-Qaeda has also criticized the Obama administration for killing U.S. citizens, saying doing so “contradicts” American law.
“Where are what they keep talking about regarding freedom, justice, human rights and respect of freedoms?!” the statement says, according to a translation by SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors jihadist Web sites.
The Obama administration has spoken in broad terms about its authority to use military and paramilitary force against al-Qaeda and associated forces, and al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula would find itself hard-pressed to claim the moral high ground in the debate over the killing of Awlaki and Khan.
This is not Chutzpah, this is just blind arrogance.
Just think, the people that did this here:
Which caused this to happen:
they also did this:
…and they want to lecture us about “freedom, justice, human rights and respect of freedoms”… 😡
My friends, this goes well beyond some Yiddish word for arrogance, gall, or nerve. This backward thinking is shared by the liberal left in this Country. In case anyone that happens to read this blog has forgotten, Al-Qaeda killed 2,977 of our citizens and injured over 6,000 of our citizens. This was an act of war and should have been treated more so, than it was by President Bush. What happened that day was on par with Pearl Harbor and should have resulted in the internment of all Arab citizens in this Country. What that day should have resulted in, was the suspending of the United States Constitution and an change to the first amendment by executive order; outlawing Islam in America forever, as a political philosophy and not a valid religion and the closing of all Mosques in this Country. What happened on that day; should have resulted in the deporting off all Muslims out of the United States forever and Arabs be given a choice, either embrace an American religion or leave. However, because of the weakness of Bush or a desire to please all, President George W. Bush chose the easiest path possible.
My friends, 9/11 is a living testament to the fact that Multiculturalism does not, in fact work. It is a lesson that the Far-Right people’s party in Switzerland is learning now, before it is too late. America did not learn that lesson on 9/11; we simply went after just one group, instead of the entire flock of them. This was the great mistake of America and is one that America will have live with for the rest of its existence. If you think, that Muslims will not attack America again, you a very highly mistaken. September 11, 2001 was the opening salvo in a war that will continue until the day that America realizes that Islam and its followers are not friends of America and will eventually destroy us from within, if we allow it.
Debbie shares their letter to a Berkley professor:
I have to say that I am disappointed. Not only was you class one of my favorite’s at UCB, but I even talked up your blog to Josh in prison, and frequently pointed people to it before our arrest.
You say you “heard” that Josh Fattal is an Israeli. Where did you hear this patently false information? Josh is Jewish, not Israeli. People have also said that I, a corn-fed boy from rural Minnesota, am Jewish.
Sarah too. We are not. . . .
Why do people assume that because Josh is Jewish, he is Israeli . . .? Josh is NOT Israeli. Josh’s father is Israeli. Josh is American. . . .
The US engages in “imperialist feminism”. . . . The US government has been on a path of destruction in the Middle East for the past 60-70 years. . . .
Iran arrested the wrong people and they knew it all along. Neither our guards nor our investigators would go so far as to call us spies. None of us are spies. We are the opposite of spies. I have studied Arabic (which I speak fluently) and have spent years in the Arab world with the purpose of exposing injustice, especially but not exclusively the injustices of the US government. Before our arrest, I published a piece in the Nation about a previously unknown US backed death squad titled “Iraq’s New Death Squad” and another in Mother Jones magazine called “Sheikh Down” about US military corruption and use of militias in Iraq. Check these out if you need some evidence of our integrity. . . .
I insist that you correct your factual errors. Josh is not Israeli. Josh is a Jew and Josh is an anti-Zionist.
The voices of nuanced analysis are sadly few, especially in this county [DS: sic]. You have been one of those voices to me. . . .
Holy cats! We let those haters out of Iran? My goodness. Should have let them rot in prison. 😡
Last week, an Iranian Naval Commander threatened to deploy ships off the U.S. coast as a provocative show of force.
Now it looks like Iran might actually be serious.
A new map that allegedly shows the expected path of the Iranian Naval expedition to the U.S has leaked online from an Iranian website, according to MEMRI.
The unprecedented route for the Islamic Republic would take Iranian ships through the Suez Canal and into the warm waters of the Caribbean, a total nautical distance of approximately 9000 miles. According to MEMRI, Iranian media sources claim:
“In this new and feasible mission, the ships of the navy of the Iranian Army will sail west, towards the Strait of Gibraltar, after they enter the Mediterranean. Subsequently, they will enter the Atlantic Ocean, and from there they must traverse the long distance to their destination off Cuba, in the Gulf of Mexico, and Central and South America.”
MEMRI pulled a second map from the Iranian website that had no accompanying description, but showed a number of western countries in different colors, including the U.S., Cuba, Venezuela, Panama, Ecuador and Brazil. See Below:
The Iranian regime has already established close ties to Venezuela and Cuba, but the inclusion of the other Central and South American countries remains unclear, according to MEMRI.
In addition, an unconfirmed report in an Italian newspaper in September claimed Hezbollah– a terrorist proxy of Iran– has opened up a base in Cuba. This allegation was repeated by Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann just last week.
Whether Iran launches this aggressive naval action or not, the Ayatollahs are clearly looking for ways to agitate the United States and complicate international efforts to contain the number one global sponsor of terrorism.
You can read the full report and detailed analysis on the Iranian maps here.
Remember that Iranian Pastor I wrote about? Well, it seems Iran is really trying hard to kill this guy:
Christian Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani will be put to death for several charges of rape and extortion, charges that differ greatly from his original sentence of apostasy, Iran’s semi-official Fars News agency reported Friday.
Gholomali Rezvani, the deputy governor of Gilan province, where Nadarkhani was tried and convicted, accused Western media of twisting the real story, referring to him as a “rapist.” A previous report from the news agency claimed he had committed several violent crimes, including repeated rape and extortion.
“His crime is not, as some claim, converting others to Christianity,” Rezvani told Fars. “He is guilty of security-related crimes.”
In a translated Iranian Supreme Court brief from 2010, however, the charge of apostasy is the only charge leveled against Nadarkhani.
“Mr. Youcef Nadarkhani, son of Byrom, 32-years old, married, born in Rasht in the state of Gilan is convicted of turning his back on Islam, the greatest religion the prophesy of Mohammad at the age of 19,” reads the brief.
Iran raised the prospect on Tuesday of sending military ships close to the United States’ Atlantic coast, in what would be a major escalation of tensions between the long-standing adversaries.
“Like the arrogant powers that are present near our marine borders, we will also have a powerful presence close to American marine borders,” the head of the Navy, Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari said, according to the official IRNA news agency.
Speaking at a ceremony marking the 31st anniversary of the start of the 1980-1988 war with Iraq, Sayyari gave no details of when such a deployment could happen or the number or type of vessels to be used.
The declaration comes just weeks after Turkey said it would host a NATO early warning radar system which will help spot missile threats from outside Europe, including potentially from Iran. The decision has angered Tehran which had enjoyed close relations with Ankara.
And it comes a few months after Iran sent warships through the Suez canal, after the fall of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, the first time the Islamic Republic had deployed navy vessels in the Mediterranean.
The United States and Israel have not ruled out military action against Iran if diplomacy fails to stop it getting nuclear weapons. Tehran denies it is developing nuclear arms saying its atomic program is for purely peaceful purposes.
Iran has dismissed the threats, warning that it will respond by hitting U.S. interests in the Gulf and Israel if any such attack happened.
There is a big part of me that wants to believe that this is nothing more than saber rattling.
How stupid do they really believe that the people of Israel really are? This stupid, I guess:
Palestinian officials are rolling out the welcome mat for Jews to come to a new Palestinian state.
Trying to tamp down a controversy over whether a Palestinian state would be Jew-free, Mahmoud Habbash, the Palestinian minister of religious affairs, said a future state would be open to people of all religions, including Jews.
“The future Palestinian state will be open to all its citizens, regardless of their religion,” Habbash said, according to USA Today. “We want a civil state, which in it live all the faiths, Muslim, Christian and Jews also if they agree, (and) accept to be Palestinian citizens.”
Maen Areikat, the Palestine Liberation Organization’s ambassador to the United States, told POLITICO that his comments earlier this week which some interpreted as meaning Jews would not be welcome were misconstrued.
The Israeli Navy (INF) has decided to boost its presence and patrols near Israel’s maritime border with Egypt due to a viable terror threat in the area.
Israeli security sources told the Associated Press on Monday that two additional warships have been dispatched to Israel’s Red Sea border with Egypt. Another source stressed that the operation was routine, telling Reuters that “two naval craft have been sent to the Red Sea. This is not unusual.”
On Monday, IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen Benny Gantz ordered that deployment across the entire southern sector be bolstered, especially in the area near the Israel-Egypt border, following intelligence indicating an imminent threat
Some would brush this off as routine. But then, there’s this:
Meanwhile, Iran‘s Press TV reported Monday that Tehran has decided to dispatch the 15th fleet to the Red Sea once more.
Iran’s Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari told the state-run agency that the Islamic Republic is planning to send its 15th fleet to the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, adding that the fleet’s main operational objective will be to patrol the high seas and thwart pirate raids.
The Islamic Republic’s 15th fleet is comprised of a submarine and a several warships.
Sayyari noted that Iran’s Navy plans to have “an active presence in the high seas in line with the guidelines of Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei with the purpose of serving the country’s interests.
“The presence of Iran’s army in the high seas will convey the message of peace and friendship to all countries,” he said.
The stage would be being set here for a battle; I would hope not, but you never know, when it comes to these two Countries. What worries me is this; Iran has diplomatic ties with Russia. If Putin gets involved in this, Russia would turn against Israel. This would fulfill Biblical prophecy.
I believe that it is about time that we that truly believe that the fight for America is a real one; need to take stock of who is truly in this battle and who was in it, just when it was fashionable. Because to me, it truly seems that some of the bloggers, who were truly in this battle; like say back in 2003, were in it for purely political reasons and now that the spotlight of truth is being turned on one of the GOP’s own, some people are beginning to let their true colors show.
The sad thing is this; it seems to me that the battle that is going on is boiling down to the Jewish faction of the GOP versus the non-Jewish faction of the GOP. It seems that the non-Jewish faction of the GOP seems to believe that radical Islam is no longer a threat to America, as it once was and the Jewish faction of the GOP does see radical Islam as a real threat to this great Republic of ours and the freedoms that we, as Americans, enjoy.
It also saddens me that Ace has seemed to take a stance against Religion in general. Just look at the comments in the posts that I linked to on his blog. Some of the comments over there are borderline Anti-Semite and furthermore, most of them are anti-Christian. As a libertarian-minded Conservative, I believe in a man’s right to freedom of speech and I believe in a man’s right to a freedom from a Religion if he so chooses. However, as a Christian; I find the using of a blog, like Ace’s, to mock, degrade and deride Religion, especially Judaism and the Christian Faith to be most offensive. Yes, I know that Ace is not making the comments himself; but he is allowing the nasty stuff to be said. Therefore, he must support it.
As for Pamela Geller; yes, I do support her fully. I defended her against Charles Johnson’s fascist nonsense. When he tried to tell her that she could not edit her own blog and I will now defend her against the Anti-Semitic fascists; who seem to have softened their stance on the threat of Islamofascism to America.
Therefore, to you Mr. Ace — I bid you adieu. You sir, have joined the ranks of the fascists who now have turned their backs on the Jewish community, the Christian Community, and against freedom. There is no compromise sir. Either you are for or against we who stand for liberty — and it appears that you have taking the side of the Chuckles Johnson or the “Anything that looks even remotely anti-Muslim is evil” side.
In a new video which recently surfaced online, the Taliban appears to brutally and systematically execute 16 unarmed Pakistani policemen in what the terror group called a revenge killing.
The video of the massacre, which reportedly took place in early June, was posted online last week and confirmed by the Pakistani army today. It shows the policemen — who are not in uniform — standing in a line before a Taliban member who appears to be lecturing them. The man, who appears to act as the militants’ commander, accuses the policemen of executing six children in a previous operation and claims their imminent deaths are revenge, according to a summary posted with the video.
Several Taliban members then open fire on the group until all the policemen have fallen. A wailing cry is heard in the background after the initial volley. After reloading, a single fighter walks over each body and shoots them once more in the head.
But yet, President Barack Obama wants to try and negotiate with these monsters.
My friends, consider this hallow warning from someone who sat through hours of footage on 9/11 and almost ended up in the psych ward because of it:
IF WE DO NOT SUCCEED ON THE WAR ON TERRORISM, THIS COULD BE A SCENE IN AMERICA VERY SOON!
Dismiss me as an alarmist if you wish; I could not care less. But this is coming to America, if we fall down on the war on terrorism!
America must be protected; Israel must be protected, Liberty and Freedom are at stake! Radical Islam is a threat! Do not believe the lie of the Liberal-controlled, financed, and organized media — which is supplanted by the Government! The liberal media is in bed with the radical and no-so-radical Muslims!
Remember this Video and Blog Posting come November 2012.
We need a President who will stand tall in the face of these bastards and not blink. Bush did it; and paid for it, with his Presidency — but he did not waver for a second. Mistakes were made, that is very true. However, in the end, we won in Iraq and we can win here too. We just have to not give up.
This is not a game, this is not fake; Ron Paul and his racist, Anti-Semitic friends, who hate Israel and everything related to it are the ENEMY! They must be kept out of the White House, at all costs! They are friends with these people! Consider me a soldier in that battle too.
In the Name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth and of in the Name of the Lord GOD Jehovah — Master and Saviour of this World and KING of Kings and LORD of Lords of this World and in the great, wonderful, world to come:
This game has to end, and the continuation of a Peace Process that only encourages relentless Israeli occupation exacerbates the situation. It’s time for a dramatic shift in the Israeli/Palestinian dynamic which places costs where they belong, on the occupier. Whether this will be born out diplomatic initiatives at the United Nations, non-violent popular uprising, or Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions is still unclear. Perhaps it’s all of the above.
What we know for sure is that Washington’s insistence on a failed status quo has only proved costly for Palestinians and beneficial for Israel. Palestinians should not be subjected, or subject themselves, to engaging Israel in an arena they are cornered into and disadvantaged in, but rather should choose to meet them in an arena where the the playing field is fair or to their advantage. Increasingly, this is anywhere in the world outside of Washington.
Any new Palestinian strategy must put reversing this “cost-free occupation” dynamic at its center. Israel will only end its occupation when pressured to do so and it must be made to realise that it is more costly to maintain the occupation than end it.
Translation? We have to fire more missile bombs into Israel and sponsor more acts of terror in America to get them to support our cause!
It’s an opinion piece I do realize that; but I am also smart enough to know that these jokers are not honest brokers and never have been, ever.
As anyone knows, who has read my blog at all; I have been a critic of the Zionists abroad and in America. But let me tell you this; if anyone who reads this blog thinks that I support that sort of nonsense up there —- you are very highly mistaken.
The entire modus operandi of this idiot I quoted above and those who think like him; is not for the preservation of the Palestinian state, whatever that is — it is for the destruction of the Jewish state and of the entire Jewish race. It is also for the destruction of Israel’s allies in the west; namely America. It is the mentality of al-Qaeda, who attacked us on 9/11 and most Muslims.
So, while I might hurl my fair share of criticisms at the Zionist movement. I will never ever agree with the mindset quoted above, ever.
(CNSNews.com) – At a congressional hearing on Muslim radicalization in U.S. prisons, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) said that investigators needed to analyze Christian militants in America because they too might try to “bring down the country.”
In an exchange with witness Patrick Dunleavy, the former deputy inspector of the criminal intelligence unit, New York Department of Correctional Services, Rep. Jackson Lee mentioned the case of a man who blew up an abortion clinic and proposed that this perhaps was an attempt to undermine U.S. law that allows a woman to procure an abortion.
Rep. Lee then said, “As we look to be informational, we should include an analysis of how Christian militants or others might bring down the country. We have to look broadly, do we not?”
Dunleavy answered: “I don’t know that Christian militants have foreign country backing or foreign country financing.”
Lee then said, “I don’t think that’s the issue. The issue is whether or not their intent is to undermine the laws of this nation. And I think it is clear that that is the case. So it’s not — your distinction is not answering the question.
This proves it right here; that liberals equate small time lone wolf criminals to foreign funded Muslim terrorists. I see the point she is making; and it is a stupid one, there is no comparison.
While we’re on the subject, why don’t we investigate terrorist Negros that would like to see our so-called “White Controlled Government overthrown, like these people here:
or maybe as to the funding of this man here:
This is what we ought to be investigating in this Country, is how things like this were funded by Liberals in this Country.
We as Americans are supposed to be sane, rational people. We are told that not all blacks feel this way. We, as Conservatives, who reject the idea of “group thought” or collectivism, are not supposed to believe that all blacks feel this way. However, when you have a liberal senator comparing the actions of a few extremists to the actions of a globally funded group of Muslim terrorists; one must ask, where do her loyalties lie? One must ask, does she agree with the militant Negros like the ones in the video above? Who, by the way, agree with Al-Qaeda terrorists, — that America should be destroyed.
It is questions like this, which I ask on this blog. There is a battle for the soul of America; these are two of the groups, which wish to overthrow the power structure in this Country. This is why I blog, this is why I write, to fight against this liberal, idiotic mentality; because I do not wish to see my Country overran by those who wish to destroy her from within.
It is a fight that I will continue to battle till my dying days.
Please note: While I have always respected our Military and always will; and I do believe in the Reagan mantra of “Peace through Strength.” I have always and will always questioned the legality the so-called Patriot Act. -Pat
If Americans needed another reminder of why the Democratic Party is absolutely worthless, they got it during last week’s Patriot Act extension debate when Senate Majority leader Harry Reid again behaved exactly like the Bush-era Republicans he once vigorously opposed. In 2005, Reid bragged to fellow Democrats, “We killed the Patriot Act.” Today, Reid says that anyone who opposes the Patriot Act might be responsible for the killing of Americans. Dick Cheney now hears an echo and Americans deserve congressional hearings—as to whether Harry Reid is a sociopath, mere liar, or both.
But while Democrats stand pat for Bush Republicanism, the GOP now debates the extent to which it will remain the party of Dubya. Tea Party favorites like Senators Rand Paul and Mike Lee and Congressmen Ron Paul, Justin Amash, Allen West and others, all voted against the Patriot Act. To varying degrees, each of these GOP representatives questioned the act’s effectiveness and legality. But unfortunately, most Republicans still won’t ask any questions.
The “War on Terror” that defined and preoccupied Republicans during the Bush era brought with it not only massive government growth and debt, but an unprecedented expansion of extra-constitutional state power, symbolized most famously by the Patriot Act. In the name of national security, government officials could begin wiretapping phones, hacking into email accounts, prying into business records and spying on citizens—all without a warrant and at government officials’ own discretion. Defenders say the Patriot Act did what needed to be done after 9/11. Critics say it did away with the 4th amendment.
Let us say both have a point, and that for arguments sake, both Harry Reid and Dick Cheney are correct in arguing that it is sometimes necessary to surrender our liberties for increased security. Is this still true a decade after 9/11? Will it be true two decades after 9/11? How about three? Have the actions of Osama Bin Laden and his fellow terrorists forever altered our Bill of Rights?
Allegedly, the default position for conservatives is to distrust the government and defer to the Constitution. Concerning the Patriot Act, too many conservatives blindly trust the government at the expense of the Constitution. This type of thinking mirrors the logic of the Left, in which the constitutionality of a big government program like Obamacare is considered irrelevant due to the severity of the problem at hand. The liberal healthcare ends justify the unconstitutional means. This characteristic mentality of the Left is exactly how most of the Right approaches the Patriot Act—though it is an outright rejection of what most conservatives of any generation have held most dear.
Think about it. Conservatives get upset about many things on a regular basis—ACORN corruption, NPR funding, demanding that French fries be renamed “Freedom Fries.” At any given time there is always some new and outrageous rightwing distaste of the week.
But most of these controversies are a speck on a gnat’s ass compared to the damage done to the Constitution by the Patriot Act. For genuine constitutional conservatives, something like NPR funding is undoubtedly wrong but ultimately trivial and peripheral—while the protection of the Bill of Rights is crucial and integral. If George Washington or Thomas Jefferson were alive today, are we to believe that they would be more outraged that: A. The federal government helps fund public radio. B. The federal government snoops on citizens without restraint. Those who answered A. truly don’t understand the mindset of the men who founded this country.
A Republican critic of mine once asked me during a radio broadcast “Jack, can you show me where any American has been harmed due to the Patriot Act?” I replied, “Can you show me where any American has been harmed by Wikileaks?” The caller said he couldn’t, but stated that he believed private individuals shouldn’t haven’t access to private government documents. The gentleman was basically saying that whether or not Wikileaks has hurt anyone to date is irrelevant—the whistleblower outfit shouldn’t be trusted with such power to begin with. I argue the same is true of the federal government. So did the Founding Fathers. That’s why they wrote the 4th amendment.
The entire reason we have a written charter like the Constitution is to specify the enumerated powers that define the hard parameters of our federal government. Among those powers is national defense and security. But much of what we call “defense” is anything but. Similarly, a total police state could undoubtedly provide much better security, though few Americans would desire a country so void of liberty. After all, most Americans can barely tolerate the way the federal government handles air travel these days.
When Ronald Reagan said there was nothing closer to eternal life on this earth than a government program he could have easily been describing the Patriot Act. When Barry Goldwater said that “extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice” he could have easily been describing the minority of Republicans who now at least question the Patriot Act. When James Madison wrote, “Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other,” he could have easily been describing our current state of perpetual war that now gives seemingly permanent life to the Patriot Act.
If the “War on Terror” is a perpetual war—as so many politicians readily contend—have we now permanently given up our liberties? If terrorists really do “hate us for our freedoms” is the best method of defeating them to permanently surrender our historic freedoms? And if so, who is really winning the War on Terror? Us or the terrorists?
By the very nature of their philosophy, conservatives are supposed to question their government. And given the very nature of our Constitution, this is precisely how the Founders would expect any true patriot to act.
—- Jack Hunter began his punditry career in the late 1990’s when a friend and popular alternative rock disc jockey agreed to let Jack air his political views during the afternoon drive on 96 Wave (96.1 WAVF) in Charleston, South Carolina.
Creating the moniker the “Southern Avenger,” which was borrowed from popular 90’s conservative talk radio host Ken “The Black Avenger” Hamblin, Jack assumed an anonymous super hero/ pro-wrestler persona, and entertained FM rock audiences with his antics and conservative political views until his departure from 96 Wave in 2007.
In 2007, Jack began working for WTMA 1250 AM talk radio in Charleston and began writing a column for the Charleston City Paper, that city’s premiere alternative weekly. Jack also began producing his popular video podcasts around this time, and today his You Tube Channel has received over two million views. Today, you can find Jack’s videos and columns as part of “TAC TV” at The American Conservative magazine (www.amconmag.com).
Jack is a frequent guest host for The Mike Church Show on Sirius/XM’s Patriot channel and is a frequent guest on “The Savage Nation” with nationally syndicated talk radio host Michael Savage. His writing has appeared at The American Spectator, Lewrockwell.com, CampaignforLiberty.com and in Young American Revolution, the official magazine of the youth activist organization Young Americans for Liberty, to which he is also a contributing editor. Jack also assisted Sen. Rand Paul with his book The Tea Party Goes to Washington, released by Center Street in February, 2011.
(CNN) — Al Qaeda released a statement on jihadist forums Friday confirming the death of its leader, Osama bin Laden, according to SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors Islamist websites.
The development comes days after U.S. troops killed bin Laden in a raid on a compound in the Pakistani city of Abbottabad.
The statement, translated by SITE, lauded the late militant, threatened to take action against the United States, and urged Pakistanis to “rise up and revolt.”
Bin Laden’s death will serve as a “curse that chases the Americans and their agents, and goes after them inside and outside their countries,” the message said.
“Soon — with help from Allah — their happiness will turn into sorrow, and their blood will be mixed with their tears,” it said.
The statement said al Qaeda will “continue on the path of jihad, the path walked upon by our leaders … without hesitation or reluctance.”
“We will not deviate from that or change until Allah judges between us and between our enemy with truth. Indeed, He is the best of all judges. Nothing will harm us after that, until we see either victory and success and conquest and empowerment, or we die trying.”
It said that Americans “will never enjoy security until our people in Palestine enjoy it.”
Which brings me to another thought; anyone ever notice how muddled Al-Qaeda’s message is? First Al-Qaeda says they are angry at us for having an air force base in Saudi Arabia. Then, Al-Qaeda says that they are after us because of the Israeli-Palestine conflict. Ron Paul always says that Al-Qaeda hates us, because America occupies the Arabs land. The Neo-Cons say Al-Qaeda hates us, because of capitalism and our Christianity. Someone, somewhere needs to make up their minds — or at least get on the same page!
The other thought and question here is this; is this the statement from a terrorist organization that is in its last gasps of existence or is this an organization that is now energized and is going to step up its threats against the United States? That is the question that many people in the United States Government intelligence agencies are trying to figure out, I suppose. For the United States sake, I hope like hell that they have their most experienced men on the job. Because like we found out on September 11, 2001; The United States cannot afford to be wrong anymore. We blew it on 9/11, we blew it with Iraq — we are now active involved in the war on terror — whether Paleo-Conservatives want to admit it or not, we are in this fight now. It matters not, whether foriegn policy or whatever created it; we are in it now, and if we do not fight it, the right way and not like the Bush fought it, before 9/11 —- more Americans will be in danger, period, end of story. Anyone who say anything different than this; is living in an alternative reality. It pains me greatly to have to even write this, but, I must; America, in this dangerous new 21 century, post 9/11 world we live in — just cannot afford to be lead by Conservative politicians who live inside their own heads and who still believe in a utopian, isolationist, foriegn policy doctrine.
Back when I was younger, there was a saying around and that was, “Time to get real…” and yes, my friends; it is well beyond the time to get real in the world of foriegn policy. This is not December 6, 1941 anymore, this not even 1957; this is 2011 and this stuff is very real — and hardcore Isolationism, is not going to cut it anymore.
As you see above, I am an “America First” type of blogger and yes, I believe that I am a Paleo-Conservative. But I am not disconnected from reality. The reality is that the Republic of the United States of America does need defending from crazy people like Al-Qaeda. I do not believe in unjustified wars. But I do believe we should take great care in protecting the Republic and the people in that Republic. Anyone that says anything other than this; is just being irresponsible — and America just cannot afford to be irresponsible anymore. 2,976 people died because we were irresponsible once; let us not make that mistake again —- for their sakes.
Peace through strength, not Domination of the World by military might —- and certainly not irresponsibility through hardcore isolationism —- that my friends, is what America’s foriegn policy stance should be.
In an interview with Steve Kroft for this Sunday’s “60 Minutes” conducted today, President Obama said he won’t release post-mortem images of Osama bin Laden taken to prove his death.
“It is important to make sure that very graphic photos of somebody who was shot in the head are not floating around as an incitement to additional violence or as a propaganda tool,” said the president.
“We don’t trot out this stuff as trophies,” Mr. Obama added. “The fact of the matter is, this is somebody who was deserving of the justice that he received.”
The president said he had discussed the issue with his intelligence team, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and that they agree with the decision. White House press secretary Jay Carney said Wednesday that Mr. Obama made the decision today.
In explaining his choice not to release the photo, Mr. Obama said that “we don’t need to spike the football.” He said that “given the graphic nature of the photo it would create a national security risk.”
The president told Kroft he saw the photos following the raid on the compound and knew that bin Laden had been killed.
“We discussed this internally,” he said. “Keep in mind, we are absolutely certain that this was him. We’ve done DNA sampling and testing. And so there is no doubt that we killed Osama bin Laden.”
When Kroft noted that there are people in Pakistan and elsewhere who believe bin Laden is still alive, the president said “we we monitoring worldwide reaction.”
“There is no doubt that Osama bin Laden is dead,” he said. “Certainly there is no doubt among al Qaeda members that he is dead. So we don’t think that a photograph in and of itself is going to make any difference.”
“There are going to be some folks who deny it,” he added. “The fact of the matter is, you will not see bin Laden walking on this earth again.”
You all know my feelings on this; it is either one of the two; either one, the Government is lying about this or two, The President, along with Hillary Clinton and the rest of them are internationalist Democrats who would dare put the feelings of the international Muslim and domestic Muslim community, over those who died on 9/11 and their families; and the American people in general. Either way, it is an act of cowardice on the President’s part and it will cost the election of 2012. Because if you do not prove your word; how can you expect people to trust you?
Of course, the State-run and controlled media, as shown above, just laps this up and basically trusts the Government, as does many of the left-wing and many of the right-wing blogs out there. I do not choose to do such a foolish thing. I did not trust this Government, when Neo-Conservative Bush was in charge and I really do not trust this Government, when Neo-Liberal and internationalist Democrats like Barack Obama are running it — and neither should you.
My mistrust of this Government is not on a partisan basis; this is based on knowledge and in this case —- knowledge is power.
Coffin-draped caskets of American soldiers, on the other hand? Why, INFORMATION MUST BE FREE!*
He’s right. The left about went ape over the fact that their media could not take pictures of returning dead service-members coffins from Iraq; but the Democratic Party and Neo-Liberal President is afraid to offend the Muslims? Just where do his loyalties lie with? It sure is not America.
As someone who was drawn to the world of Blogging, by the Government’s and by default, the George W. Bush Administration’s handling of “The War on Terror and the war in Iraq —– I am highly suspicious of this whole thing.
They say, Osama is dead. I have my doubts. Until I see a bloody corpse picture; I remain a skeptic.
I just do not trust this Government at all. I did not trust it, when George W. Bush was running it and I really do not trust it, now that Barack Obama is running it.