When you decided to allow journalists to photograph the coffins of returning service members at Dover, you broke down a barrier that should have been left intact.
Since the dawn of time, human societies have had taboos. They exist for a reason. They exist because some things simply ought to be unthinkable, and nothing short of a total ban will prevent some people from pushing the envelope.
The media have contended, over and over, that the photographing of coffins and dead bodies and wounded soldiers or Marines thrashing about in agony are necessary to help the American people understand the cost of war. Evidently, the availability of graphic war movies depicting fountains of blood and oozing gore are insufficient visual aids.
The Associated Press took all of one hour to balance the newsworthiness of graphic photos of a fellow human being’s last moments against the wishes of Lance Corporal Joshua M. Bernard’s grieving family. In the end, compassion and human decency gave way to the profit incentive. Of course, the AP will claim they were motivated by elevated concerns that the American public, despite being exposed to violent and graphic footage on TV, cable, and at the movie theater on a daily basis, are too stupid to comprehend that explosions often result in shredded body parts, blood, agonizing pain, and death.
If that makes no sense to you, you’re not alone.
So if we buy into the notion that we need to see the results of violent episodes to truly understand their consequences, does this mean the media will now begin showing graphic footage of rape victims who have been beaten or tortured or cut to shreds by their attackers?
I tend to believe that Obama and the head of the Military are regretting their decision to allow photos of the war dead. Then again, maybe not. As we all know, liberals do hate our Military. Did not always used to be like that. There was a time when Democrats were the hawks and the Conservatives were the peace lovers. That all changed after 1964; with the rise of the “New Conservative” movement or Neo-Con as it sometimes badly called.
Somewhere, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush, and possibly Dick Cheney are smiling.
Although, many people do not know this or do not want to hear it. But much of the financing for 9/11 came out of the UAE.
Anyhow, there’s this:
The United Arab Emirates has seized a ship carrying North Korean-manufactured munitions, detonators, explosives and rocket-propelled grenades bound for Iran in violation of United Nations sanctions, diplomats said.
The UAE two weeks ago notified the UN Security Council of the seizure, according to the diplomats, who spoke on condition they aren’t named because the communication hasn’t been made public. They said the ship, owned by an Australian subsidiary of a French company and sailing under a Bahamian flag, was carrying 10 containers of arms disguised as oil equipment.
The council committee that monitors enforcement of UN sanctions against North Korea wrote letters to Iran and the government in Pyongyang asking for explanations of the violation, and one to the UAE expressing appreciation for the cooperation, the envoys said. No response has been received and the UAE has unloaded the cargo, they said.
The UAE and Iranian missions to the UN didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment. The Financial Times reported the weapons seizure earlier today.
This is what happens when you do the whole “Carrot and Stick” approach to countries like North Korea and Iran. They simply find ways to go around you. I really believe that the United Nations really needs to rethink their strategy with Iran. Because it is obvious to this Conservative writer, that Iran has no intention of abiding by the rules. I am not saying that it is time for war with Iran; not at all. At least not with our Country leading the charge. Because, in case anyone has not noticed, We are a bit occupied ourselves. I believe some of the other countries in that region need to step up and put a stop to this nonsense, once and for all.
Now this brings up all kinds of questions. How did the UAE find out? Did we know? Did we tell them? Inquiring minds want to know. Also how does this affect our global tyrant outreach project? Clenched? Unclenched? Hmmm
Those are some good questions. I would also like to know, who tipped off the Financial Times people? I also wonder, what will our feckless fearless leader’s next move will be? Because you know good and well that the Liberal base is not going to approve of him going into Iran or North Korea; even if Obama ordered a small support group to go in and assist any other countries that wanted to invade either Country, the base would totally turn on him. I mean, hell, the left is desperately wanting to pull us out of Afghanistan and Iraq; before the job is even done. They have been trying to do that for years. Do you think they would just sit idly by and allow President Obama to take us into another Military conflict? I do not think so. I mean, “Hope and Change” can only get a man so far. Especially when it comes to the very far left. I mean, they’re already calling Obama a fascist in some quarters of the left as it is already.
Either way this is going to be a very interesting development and it will be interesting to see how Obama handles the situation and it will be interesting to see how the far socialist/liberal Left reacts to Obama’s actions. I also would like to see what the Liberal Media’s reaction will be to this story and to how Obama reacts to it as well; will they be just as critical to Obama as they were Bush? or will they continue to give Obama the “free ride” that they have given him so far? It should be very interesting.
I posted this, because I happen to agree with Jack’s stance on progressive policy on economics. But because I am “Fair and Balanced”, I will tell you, what others will not about the “Paleo-Conservative” or the “Taft” wing of the Republican Party as it is called by some. If it were left to these guys; such as Jack Hunter and his two hero-like personalities like Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul —- America would have never went to war with Germany, at all. Hitler would have allowed to exterminate the Jews. Something that I am told Pat Buchanan has said that he wished happened, when he was around some friends once; which goes back to the old school catholic hatred of the Jews and their religion. Further more, most people of the Paleo-Conservative strand believe that Abraham Lincoln was a traitor. Not only to the White Man; but also to the South for the way he conducted the Civil War. Which Jack claims was not about race. (Wink Wink) But rather about Centralized Government.
So, while Jack might be correct about his thesis on the economic policy; his association with the bigoted “Old Right” is to be noted and for this, I feel, his credentials are marred.
I really did not want to post about this; as I have made my opinions clear on this before.
I believe that this whole release of documents, ensuing investigation and so forth are being done to placate the far left, in response to the President’s dropping poll numbers and because he is losing the war on the health-care front. In words, he is going to drop the Public Option and he is trying to throw some “red meat” to his liberal base.
The question is, will it work? I highly doubt it, there are two things that far lefty liberals want and that is health-care for all and Dick Cheney in Jail. (and Bush too, if they could get it…) Obama is trying to give them one; and not the other. That strategy, I feel, will not work. That is because liberals want both of these things and not just one or the other. Making the far left choose between the two; will only cause the far left progressives to turn against Obama.
Again, this is just another promise, in a long list of promises, that he has broken.
Remember when he said this?
What a difference six month makes! Talk about throwing the C.I.A., who is keeping America safe, along with the Armed Forces; under the bus!
The Obama White House is behind a cynical, coldly calculated political effort to erase the meaning of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks from the American psyche and convert Sept. 11 into a day of leftist celebration and statist idolatry.
This effort to reshape the American psyche has nothing to do with healing the nation and everything to do with easing the nation along in the ongoing radical transformation of America that President Obama promised during last year’s election campaign. The president signed into law a measure in April that designated Sept. 11 as a National Day of Service, but it’s not likely many lawmakers thought this meant that day was going to be turned into a celebration of ethanol, carbon emission controls, and radical community organizing.
The plan is to turn a “day of fear” that helps Republicans into a day of activism called the National Day of Service that helps the left. In other words, nihilistic liberals are planning to drain 9/11 of all meaning.
A coalition including the unsavory left-wing pressure group Color of Change and about 60 far-left, environmentalist, labor, and corporate shakedown groups participated in the call. Groups on the call included: ACORN, AFL-CIO, Apollo Alliance, Community Action Partnership, Deep South Center for Environmental Justice, 80 Million Strong for Young American Jobs, Friends of the Earth, Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, Mobilize.org, National Black Police Association, National Coalition on Black Civic Participation, National Council of Negro Women, National Wildlife Federation, RainbowPUSH Coalition, Urban League, and Young Democrats of America.
Of course, the annual commemoration of the 2001 terrorist attacks belongs to the entire nation, but President Obama and the activist left don’t see it that way. They view the nationwide remembrance of the murder of 3,000 Americans by Islamic totalitarians as an obstacle to winning over the hearts and minds of the American people.
Unreal, just farking unreal. The left will stop at nothing to mar the Memory of those who were killed at the hands of terrorists. Maybe it is because the left sympathizes with terrorists.
Be sure an sign up for the 2,996 project. I have. My memorial will post on September 11’th. I finished it a few weeks ago, the post is set to drop on September 11’th at 7:00a.m. EST. It will be a barn burner, I assure you on that. We must, as Conservatives; be the one’s to keep the real meaning of September 11’th alive. Do not allow the Liberals to steal this one from America.
Update: AllahPundit isn’t buying it. Big Surprise there! 🙄 This is the same guy who’s got it bad for Megan McCain. Shocka! 😛
Update #2: Pamela Geller is NOT happy about this at all. 😮
Special Groups acting on orders from Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) were behind Wednesday’s indirect fire attacks against government targets, Azzaman reports.
The newspaper says security sources in Baghdad revealed that a Special Group led by a person named Haji Mehdi al-Kinani was responsible for firing rockets and mortars at the Green Zone and other government targets yesterday. The group reportedly operates from the Hay Ur district in northeastern Baghdad.
Now this does not surprise me at all. Iran has always wanted to see disunity in Iraq. They have much to gain from it. It would not surprise me to see a invasion of that Country from Iran, once our forces leave. Although, considering what is happening in Iran right now internally, I do not think that it will be anytime soon.
Prime Minister Nourai al-Maliki announced that there would be new measures to improve security following last Wednesday’s tragic bombings. “We defeated the terrorists, and Ramadan is a great chance to eliminate them once and for all”, Maliki said. He described the purpose behind the attacks as “They target the government which represents the political process and national unity, which they hate”. Here Maliki is clearly referring to some Shiite parties that attacked him over his active non-sectarian approach and increasingly stronger relations with Sunni Arab powers.
It can be seen from Maliki’s words that he is determined to move forward with building his diverse political alliance and ignoring the calls for rebuilding the Shiite alliance (UIA). There has been pressure from Iran and Najaf to reconstitute the UIA to enter the elections as one great mass.
[…..]
In tandem, Baghdad is exploring the possibility of signing regional security protocols with its neighbors. MP Abbas Bayati, member of the parliament’s defense and security committee said Iraq seeks to establish protocols that enable the sharing of intelligence and mutual tracking of terror cells. Bayati named Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran, Jordan and Turkey as the countries with which Iraq seeks to establish security protocols. Through these protocols, the government will most likely try to facilitate the exchange of wanted individuals suspected of leading or financing militant groups in Iraq.
Meanwhile, foreign minister Hoshyar Zibari was a little more pessimistic about the situation and expected “greater security breaches in the future”. However, he echoed Maliki’s call for strict measures to contain the security breach.
“We must all refrain from making useless statements. We must expose the facts that stand behind the setbacks in security. This was a clear and dangerous setback, and so security preparations must match the magnitude of challenges” Zibari told reporters. Another source quoted him as saying that he does not “rule out the possibility of collusion between security forces and terrorists to deliver the car bombs to those sensitive locations.”
Some would dismiss this as political posturing, but one must realize, that there is a bitter struggle for one group to be the majority in Iraq. It will be a long hard battle for equality. This is well beyond the scope of the American forces; this is something the Iraqi’s must do themselves. One cannot establish a true Government at the end of a gun. It most be done by diplomacy.
What I do know is this; that it will be a long hard process, there will be failures; but the Iraqi’s must not lose faith. I wish them well. May God be with them.
Thou Shalt Not Kill—perhaps the most famous moral commandment in the western world. And yet Judeo-Christian religious leaders have also created a doctrine that can justify killing—commonly known as Just War Doctrine. What sort of military action does Just War Doctrine permit and what sort does it proscribe? Is America’s campaign against terrorism a just war?
WASHINGTON POST: The Justice Department recently questioned military defense attorneys at Guantanamo Bay about whether photographs of CIA personnel, including covert officers, were unlawfully provided to detainees charged with organizing the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to sources familiar with the investigation.
Investigators are looking into allegations that laws protecting classified information were breached when three lawyers showed their clients the photographs, the sources said. The lawyers were apparently attempting to identify CIA officers and contractors involved in the agency’s interrogation of al-Qaeda suspects in facilities outside the United States, where the agency employed harsh techniques.
If detainees at the U.S. military prison in Cuba are tried, either in federal court or by a military commission, defense lawyers are expected to attempt to call CIA personnel to testify.
The photos were taken by researchers hired by the John Adams Project, a joint effort of the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, to support military counsel at Guantanamo Bay, according to the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the inquiry. It was unclear whether the Justice Department is also examining those organizations.
Both groups have long said that they will zealously investigate the CIA’s interrogation program at “black sites” worldwide as part of the defense of their clients. But government investigators are now looking into whether the defense team went too far by allegedly showing the detainees the photos of CIA officers, in some cases surreptitiously taken outside their homes.
That’s what I asked Joshua Dratel, Chair of the John Adams Project Advisory Committee and a prominent defense lawyer who has represented numerous terror suspects before. Speaking this morning after the news broke that the Department of Justice is investigating military defense lawyers representing terror suspects, Dratel said he couldn’t talk about the specifics of the investigation. But he explained that even if defense lawyers had shown photos of people who might have interrogated their clients, that wouldn’t be breaking the law as long as they didn’t get those photos from the government, or know they were classified or deemed “protected” information by the government or a court.
“There are no court rules or rules in the military commissions that would prohibit showing detainees photos “as long as you obtained them from an unclassified source, and they weren’t otherwise covered by a protective order,” said Dratel.
In general, lawyers cannot show their clients information that is classified. And like anyone else, they can’t intentionally reveal the identity of a covert CIA agent knowing that the agent is or recently was playing a covert role with the CIA. It’s not clear if any lawyers showed their clients photos of interrogators who were acting covertly, but it’s also unclear how an official questioning a terror suspect on behalf of the CIA would be covert.
In any event, defense lawyers are troubled that the Justice Department decided to leak news of the investigation to reporters. The Washington Post and The New York Times both reported the story this morning.
“It’s unfortunate that someone in a position to know better decided to go public with this and attempt to smear people in a way that they can’t do legally,” Dratel said. “The investigation is something that’s extraordariny not only for the fact that it’s occurring, but for how it’s occurring, with people being confronted by law enforcement,” said Dratel.
Government agents reportedly approached three lawyers from the Judge Advocates General’s Corps two weeks ago and informed the military lawyers of their right to remain silent, then asked whether they’d shown their clients photos of CIA officials.
“Normally, when a prosecutor wants to subpoena a lawyer, they have to get permission and jump through a lot of hoops,” said Dratel. “I see this as heavy-handed.”
It also could be a way to intimidate the lawyers from aggressively defending their clients. Yesterday, American Civil Liberties Union president Anthony Romero vigorously defended the defense lawyers, who are receiving assistance from the ACLU through the John Adams Project, which has organized private attorneys to assist the military lawyers in defending terror suspects.
“Identifying who tortured our clients and what they did to them and when is an essential part of defending their interests in these sham proceedings,” Romero told The Times.
Sham proceedings. Spoken like a true communist. To the far left, the war on terror is a sham; that is because the liberals sympathize with the terrorists. Because of their hatred of this country and its capitalistic system, and by the way, that argument will not hold up in a court of law. The CIA people who identities are supposed to be protected, are that way for a reason, and these guys are blowing the whistle on them. I mean, the left threw a fit about Valerie Plame. But this is perfectly okay? Can you say double standard?
Of course, seeing that we have a liberal President and a Liberal Federal Prosecutor, nothing will become of it. Watch and see.
BAGHDAD — Insurgents struck at the heart of the Iraqi government on Wednesday in huge and coordinated bombings that exposed a new vulnerability after Americans ceded control for security here on June 30. Nearby American soldiers stood by helplessly — despite the needs of hundreds of wounded — waiting for a request for help from Iraqi officials that apparently never came.
A wave of bombings targeted symbols of government, the Foreign and Finance Ministries in central Baghdad, lending an air of siege to the capital. Dozens were killed and hundreds were wounded in the apparently coordinated attacks.
“As much as we want to come, we have to wait to be asked now,” said an American officer who arrived at one blast site almost three hours later and who spoke in return for anonymity because he was not authorized to brief reporters. At one blast site, American soldiers snapped pictures of the devastation before ducking out of the streets.
After weeks of escalating violence in Iraq, powerful truck bombs killed at least 95 people and wounded nearly 600 people at the Foreign and Finance Ministries in central Baghdad, assaults on symbols of government that lent an air of siege to the capital. The bombs crippled the downtown area, closed highways and two main bridges over the Tigris River and clogged hospitals with wounded.
The bombings, the worst since American forces handed over security responsibilities to Iraq at the end of June, shook the Iraqi government’s confidence that it was ready and able to secure the nation.
Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki called for a reassessment of his security measures, calling the attacks “a vengeful response” to his recent, optimistic order to remove blast walls from the streets of Baghdad.
A Defense Ministry spokesman, Maj. Gen. Mohammed al-Askari, was quoted by Reuters as telling American and Iraqi military officers: “We must face the facts. We must admit our mistakes, just as we celebrate our victories.”
And Baghdad’s security spokesman, Maj. Gen. Qassim al-Moussawi, told Iraqiya state television, according to Reuters, that attacks were “a security breach for which Iraqi forces must take most of the blame.”
The explosions, one close to the heavily fortified Green Zone and the other less than three miles away, sent plumes of smoke billowing over the capital, ripped a gaping hole in a compound wall and set cars ablaze, trapping drivers inside.
“The whole thing is just so disgusting,” the United States ambassador, Christopher R. Hill, said as he read reports from his staff about the extent of the damage while on an official visit to the northern city of Kirkuk. “They’re just psychopathic.”
Around 11 a.m., the two truck bombs struck the Foreign Ministry and the Finance Ministry within three minutes, officials said, sending white smoke into the sky. The second, more powerful blast was so intense that parts of a main highway near the Finance Ministry collapsed, the rubble littered with shrapnel and splotches of blood. It shattered windows inside the nearby Green Zone and shook houses in many parts of the city. At least 60 people were killed at the Foreign Ministry and at least 35 at the Finance Ministry.
At roughly the same time, attacks in other parts of the city, including three roadside bombs and some mortar and rocket fire, left 13 people wounded, Iraqi officials said.
Of course, the Liberal New York Times had to make sure that this quote was in there; Seeing they are the Anti-Military Paper that they are:
Though no one took credit for the attacks, Iraqis doled out blame both to their government, now fully responsible for security, and to the United States for coming to Iraq in the first place.
“This country is finished,” said one resident, Jamil Jaber, 45, whose five-room home behind the Foreign Ministry had been flattened, crushing a 4-month-old infant. “It’s just robbery and killing.” He cursed the United States and former President George W. Bush.
Oh, Of course, It is Bush’s fault because some idiot rag-head terrorist sets off a fucking bomb in the city of Baghdad. What a fucking ingrate! we should have just nuked that fucking Country into the damned stone age, instead of sending 4000+ of our troops into the Country to basically die; and for what? So some asshole Iraqi can blame us for their problems? What an asshole! That is if it is not a fake quote, which would not surprise me at all.
Here’s the deal folks; War is fucking hell, shit happens, people die. Get used to it! Saddam’s not in power anymore, and the people there are free. That idiot Iraqi sounds like most African-American Liberals; they want to blame someone else, namely White People, for their own damn problems. I suppose some Liberal might try and say that this is happening because we are in that Country in the first place. That is bullshit and most liberals know it.; We have all but left the damn country and the Iraqi Government is now running the show. Hence the Government taking forever to get on the scene.
One other thing I notice is, that most other Bloggers, Conservative and liberal are just not talking about this anymore. I think it is because of the healthcare debate; most people just are not thinking about Iraq. I am not one of these and I hope like hell, that President Obama does not pull us out, before the mission is over. We, as a Nation, cannot afford to make the mistake that we made in Vietnam. We made it before and had a black mark on us for years. We cannot do it again, it will be our shame, if we do.
Countdown to screechy liberals screaming at Obama for us to leave in 5…..4…..3….2…
Baitullah Mehsud, the main leader of Pakistan’s fearsome Taliban movement, was killed Wednesday in a C.I.A. drone missile strike, two Taliban fighters said Friday, though American and Pakistani officials could not confirm the reports.
Mr. Mehsud has been considered Pakistan’s public enemy No. 1 and was blamed for the assassination of the former prime minister Benazir Bhutto and scores of suicide bombings, including the truck bomb that exploded at the entrance to the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad, leaving more than 50 people dead last September.
If confirmed, Mr. Mehsud’s death could be a significant blow to the militant networks inside Pakistan that in recent years have posed a direct challenge to the authority of the state, increasingly destabilizing the country.
But analysts and current and former Pakistani officials here warned that Mr. Mehsud’s death did not necessarily mean less violence for Pakistan, or that the Taliban movement in Pakistan would disappear, though for the time being its reach and unity could be diminished as Mr. Mehsud’s followers choose another leader.
“This is a major setback for the Taliban in Pakistan,” said Mahmood Shah, a former security chief in the tribal region. “He was the leader. The successors are all non-entities.”
Baitullah Mehsud, the feared leader of the Pakistan Taliban, is believed to have been killed during the Aug. 5 airstrike in South Waziristan.
Faqir Mohammed, the deputy leader of the Movement of the Taliban in Pakistan and the commander of the Bajaur Taliban, told Sky News that Baitullah was killed in a strike that also killed Baitullah’s second wife.
An aide to Baitullah identified as Kafayatullah, as well as another unidentified Taliban leader in South Waziristan, also said that Baitullah had been killed in the attack.
“I confirm that Baitullah Mehsud and his wife died in the American missile attack in South Waziristan,” Kafayatullah told the Associated Press late last night.
Baitullah was said to have been buried near the village of Nardusai. “Some who had reportedly seen his body said that it had been half-destroyed by the blast,” the BBC stated.
Pakistan’s Interior Minister, Rehman Malik, said intelligence believes that Baitullah was killed in Wednesday’s strike but the government wants to confirm the reports. US intelligence officials also believe that Baitullah was killed.
Reports indicate Baitullah was visiting a compound owned by Ikramuddin Mehsud, Baitullah’s father-in-law, in the village of Zanghra in the mountains near Baitullah’s home town of Makeen. The airstrike also reportedly killed one Baitullah’s two brothers and seven of Baitullah’s bodyguards.
US intelligence sources contacted by The Long War Journal last evening had initially believed Baitullah survived the attack.
Countdown to limp wrist liberals and “Old Right” Conservatives saying, “We got him, can we leave now?” In 5…..4….3…2…. I mean, these are the ones who say that Our troops are battlefield terrorists. So, this would not be a big surprise.
Anyhow, this is a good hit and it will only help in our continuing battle against the terrorists in Afghanistan.
California attorney Orly Taitz, who has filed a number of lawsuits demanding proof of Barack Obama’s eligibility to serve as president, has released a copy of what purports to be a Kenyan certification of birth and has filed a new motion in U.S. District Court for its authentication.
The document lists Obama’s parents as Barack Hussein Obama and Stanley Ann Obama, formerly Stanley Ann Dunham, the birth date as Aug. 4, 1961, and the hospital of birth as Coast General Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.
No doctor is listed. But the alleged certificate bears the signature of the deputy registrar of Coast Province, Joshua Simon Couya. It was allegedly issued as a certified copy of the original in February 1964.
WND was able to obtain other birth certificates from Kenya for purposes of comparison, and the form of the documents appear to be identical.
Last week, a counterfeit document purporting to be Obama’s Kenyan birth certificate made the rounds of the Internet, but was quickly determined to be fraudulent. The new document released by Taitz bears none of the obvious traits of a hoax.
Taitz told WND that the document came from an anonymous source who doesn’t want his name known because “he’s afraid for his life.”
Taitz’s motion, filed yesterday in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, requests the purported evidence of Obama’s birth – both the alleged birth certificate and foreign records not yet obtained – be preserved from destruction, asks for permission to legally request documents from Kenya and seeks a subpoena for deposition from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
“I filed the motion with the court asking for expedited discovery, which would allow me to start subpoenas and depositions even before Obama and the government responds,” Taitz told WND. “I am asking the judge to give me the power to subpoena the documents from the Kenyan embassy and to require a deposition from Hillary Clinton so they will be forced to authenticate [the birth certificate].
“I’m forcing the issue, where Obama will have to respond,” she said.
“Before, they said, ‘You don’t have anything backing your claims,'” Taitz explained. “Now I have something. In fact, I have posted on the Internet more than Obama has. My birth certificate actually has signatures.”
Of course, already the terrorist supporters and Liberal traitors to America are already discounting this story. These are same ones who stabbed supporters of Israel in the back. So, this is not much of surprise.The funny thing is, these America and Israel hating, Terrorist loving bastards try to spin this into some sort of opposition to Nazi Fascism; when in reality they are the ones who are the Jew haters and Islamic terrorist sympathizers.Update: While I still have my issues with Charles Johnson, I publically retract this statement. I was had. Fuck Orally Tates the damn Zionist twit.
You see, liberals know how this man was elected. By Islamic and terrorist sympathizers abroad. It has been documented how there was no credit card verification system in place and one could add an address from anywhere and get away with it. In fact, the Federal Election Commission’s server is so slow, that it is impossible to go through the names of any of the candidates to check for fraud. Is this just consequential or is it by design? Those are the facts that I and many other America-loving patriots want to know.
Until we get these questions are answered. There will be no stop in the quest to find out the truth. Is President Barack Hussein Obama really a citizen of the Unite States of America? Until he releases the ORIGINAL, not a copy, but the ORIGINAL long form birth certificate. Real, clear thinking Americans, like me, will have assume that he is not.
– The design is identical, down to the seal at the top and the classifications (”Christian name,” etc) used for identifying the baby.
– The “registrar” on the Bomford document is G.F. Lavender. On the Taitz document, it’s E.F. Lavender.
– The “district registrar” on the Bomford document is J.H. Miller. On the Taitz document, it’s M.H. Miller.
– The number of the book is identical on both documents: Book 44B, Page 5733.
What’s more likely — that two Kenyan bureaucrats shared last names with two Australian bureaucrats, and that the numbers on both certificates were identical? Or that someone used this document, available online for anyone who wanted to look, to forge the Obama “certificate?”
Here’s the document:
As of right now, Orly Tate is discredited in my eyes. She ought to be stripped of her legal license for passing off phony documents as real ones. I will never ever make another posting about this subject again; unless I see some prove positive that Obama is not a United States Citizen. Shame on Joe Farah and his ilk for passing off stupid forgeries and Zionist propaganda as truth.
If you would have told me, a year ago, that I would be praising Hillary Clinton for something she said; I would have asked you what kind drugs you were on and to share some of it with me! (I kid about the drugs, but this still is a very good story.)
First the Video:
Quote:
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday that Iran will never achieve its goal of obtaining a nuclear weapon, declaring to Tehran: “Your pursuit is futile.”
“What we want to do is to send a message to whoever is making these decisions, that if you’re pursuing nuclear weapons for the purpose of intimidating, of projecting your power, we’re not going to let that happen,” Clinton said.
“First, we’re going to do everything we can to prevent you from ever getting a nuclear weapon. But your pursuit is futile, because we will never let Iran — nuclear-armed, not nuclear-armed — it is something that we view with great concern, and that’s why we’re doing everything we can to prevent that from ever happening. … We believe, as a matter of policy, it is unacceptable for Iran to have nuclear weapons.”
As a security summit in Thailand earlier this week, Clinton raised the possibility of a “defense umbrella” over the Middle East to protect other nations from a nuclear-armed Iran, marking the first time a senior administration official has publicly broached the prospect of the Persian nation succeeding in building a nuclear weapon.
Clinton said the Obama administration might still engage with Iran’s regime, even though she thinks the people there “deserve better than what they’re getting.”
The only question that I might have is this; Does President Obama agree with this position? Another concern that I have is that this could be a signal of War drums beating. I am sure that the Secretary knows, that our forces are still fighting in Afghanistan and that we do still have forces in Iraq and that the job there is still not entirely done yet.
However, I do commend Secretary Clinton for her tough stance towards Iran’s terrible President and Islamic Oligarchy.
I just hope that President Obama agrees with Secretary Clinton and does not try and back-peddle that stance and play the role of terrorist appeaser. If he does, it would mean the total discrediting of Secretary Clinton and further more of America’s leadership role in the World.
Update: No Quarter, who is a Pro-Hillary liberal Blogger; links in. Hey, we might not agree on politics. But I’ll any kind of linkie love that I can get! 😛 😀
In other words, negotiating with Iran at this time would indeed betray the protesters, but we’ve done this before and want to do it again now.
Fair enough, perhaps. Our experiences with the Soviet Union and China do establish that we have at times negotiated with repressive regimes. But it doesn’t follow that we should negotiate with Iran at this time.
In any event, this much is certain: our negotiations with the Soviet Union and China did not cause either power to eschew nuclear weapons. Indeed, to my knowledge negotiations have never induced any nation that was aggressively pursuing nukes to change its mind. That kind of persuasion takes a massive show of force (Libya and arguably Iraq) or regime change.
Thus, while the administration may have its own motives for negotiating with Iran, there is no reason for Israel to believe that such negotiations will protect Israel’s interest (potentially a life-and-death one) in preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Clinton’s case that Israel should rely on U.S. attempts to pursuade Iran not to go nuclear, rather than taking matters into its own hands by attacking Iran, is not a powerful one.
This comes via the Jawa Report, this is incredibly heart-wrenching to watch:
It quite to hard to watch, when you have douche nozzles like this running their potholes; before we know all of the facts:
Money Quote:
“Nobody in the military is defending this guy, he is an apparent deserter, reports are indeed that he abandoned his buddies, abandoned his post and walked off…On that video he is collaborating with the enemy.
“… if he walked away from his post and his buddies in wartime, I don’t care how hard it sounds, as far as I’m concerned the Taliban can save us a lot of legal hassles and a lot of legal bills.”
You see my problem with this is, we do not know all the facts about this, and already we have idiot Fox News persons calling the guy a deserter. That’s B.S…. Sorry, just the way that I feel.
Boy it’s good to know that we have Ralph out there supervising patrols and making sure there are no breaks in contact i.e. people lagging behind. Hey dipshit, the fact that we have a term like “break in contact” means that it happens. Who the hell is Ralph to call this kid a liar from a TV studio in the US. The first thing we all should do in the absence of solid info, is to give the kid a freakin’ break. He deserves the benefit of the doubt and for jackasses like Peters to start calling him a liar based on a completely inaccurate concept is pathetic.
He may turn out to be a deserter, or an idiot, or a drunk or just screwed in the head and if so there will be plenty of time to call him names. Heck Ralph they may even kill the incompetent liar. But for the time being it would be nice if all the arm chair mouth pieces sat down and had a nice cup of STFU!
Hizb ut-Tahrir is a global Sunni network with reported ties to confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Al Qaeda in Iraq’s onetime leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. It has operated discreetly in the U.S. for decades.
Now, it is coming out of the shadows and openly hosting a July 19 conference entitled, “The Fall of Capitalism and the Rise of Islam,” at a posh Hilton hotel in a suburb of Chicago.
Hizb ut-Tahrir insists that it does not engage in terrorism, and it is not recognized by the State Department as a known terror group.
But some terrorism experts say it may be even more dangerous than many groups that are on the terror list.
“Hizb ut-Tahrir is one of the oldest, largest indoctrinating organizations for the ideology known as jihadism,” Walid Phares, director of the Future of Terrorism Project at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told FOXNews.com.
Phares said that Hizb ut-Tahrir, rather than training members to carry out terrorist acts like Al Qaeda, focuses instead on indoctrinating youths between ages of 9 and 18 to absorb the ideology that calls for the formation of an empire — or “khilafah” — that will rule according to Islamic law and condones any means to achieve it, including militant jihad.
Liberals want us to believe that Muslims are our friends. Which is utter B.S.; Islam teaches their people to hate us Americans and our way of life. We as freedom loving Americans need to take a stand against this nonsense and expose it for what it truly is and that is a training ground for Terrorism.
This sounds just about right for that Administration:
“Extraordinary and inappropriate” secrecy about a warrantless eavesdropping program undermined its effectiveness as a terrorism-fighting tool, government watchdogs have concluded in the first examination of one of the most contentious episodes of the Bush administration.
A report by inspectors general from five intelligence agencies said the administration’s tight control over who learned of the program also contributed to flawed legal arguments that nearly prompted mass resignations in the Justice Department five years ago.
The program “may have” contributed to successful counterterrorism efforts, some intelligence officials told the investigators. But too few CIA personnel knew of the highly classified program to use it for intelligence work, the report stated, while at the FBI, the program “played a limited role,” with “most . . . leads . . . determined not to have any connection to terrorism.”
The surveillance program, which intercepted domestic communications linked to people with suspected ties to al-Qaeda, was one of the Bush administration’s most secretive and, eventually, controversial intelligence efforts. After the New York Times disclosed its existence in December 2005, the program became a symbol of the administration’s expansive view of executive authority, especially regarding national security.
“The surveillance program was overly secret and its importance overblown,” concluded Gregory Nojeim, senior counsel of the privacy advocacy organization Center for Democracy and Technology, after reading the report.
The release yesterday of the inspectors general’s summary findings renewed questions about the effectiveness of congressional oversight of intelligence activities, after a week of back-and-forth between House members and the CIA over an unrelated classified program that has been squashed by the new administration. The IGs reported that lawmakers received 49 briefings on the surveillance program between October 2001 and January 2007.
Yeah, I know there is supposed to be some screwball liberal narrative here; somewhere anyhow. I think more than anything at all. This little story shows, if anything at all, the blatant incompetence, and the ineptitude of the previous administration. In layman’s terms; if anything, our previous President was an overzealous screwball. Granted, the program did work, but the insistence on keeping it so damn secret, caused it not to work; as it was supposed to.
Some libertarian leftist slams me on a blog, that brought 40 whole readers over here… 🙄
Anyhow… here’s what the Anarchist wrote:
looks like Lew Rockwell’s strategy of printing non-anarchist essays snagged a state-lover. When Lew showed his true nature, anti-state, this person thought he was being anti-American. Hey, Pat. I love my country, but I hate your government. And so does Lew. When you’re ready to stop pointing guns at people over every little thing, we can talk. But I’m not going to close comments on my blog, like you did on yours. Afraid of a little debate, eh?
3 years ago, when I first started blogging; I would have ripped this person a new one. But seeing that I am a bit more refined than this guy. I will simple answer the questions.
No, I am not a Statist.
If you so hate this Government; which is an extension of this country; so much, why don’t you leave? Nothing is keeping you here.
I will stop pointing Guns at people, when people like the Islamic Terrorists, (I know, Islamic, Terrorist = Redundancy) that you lefties just love to death, stop trying to kill people.
The whole problem with you lefty anarchists is this, you love chaos, and that chaos is used to forum a vacuum; which is quickly filled by big Government. Which I totally despise. Kinda like I despise the Socialism of your Democratic Cousins. (Again, Democrats, Socialism = Redundancy)
The problem with the puritan stance on the Libertarian foreign policy is that it is rooted in flawed thinking and conspiracy theory. Hence the reason that Ron Paul looked like a damn buffoon. He is absolutely right on Iran and So are you. I give you that; but Afghanistan is another story. Those bastards that flew those planes into the trade centers were not Jews, Not Christians, not anything, but Muslims, Islamic men. Terrorists? The whole damn religion is a religion of war.
The whole idea, that according to the Libertarian idea of foreign policy is that if we are attacked, we should just sit and take it and not do nothing; is idiotic at best. Hence the reason I am not involved in that party, in a formal manner. I agree with the principles of free enterprise and capitalism. But that party loses me, when they beginning to speak of the federal Government in conspiratorial terms. I just do not believe that the Government is smart enough to do anything, like they believe that it does; much less keep it a secret.
Also, let me say another thing. Libertarians; especially those of the Libertarian left or anarchists is this. They hate our Country and it’s form of lawful Government. In the name of so-called freedom, they commit acts of, yes, terrorism. To further their political agenda. Kind of like Bill Ayers. Yes, that is correct, I said it. Al-Aqaeda and the Libertarian left have much in common. They both hate our Country and our values system, our freedom and our Capitalist system. It was this same attitude that was on the mind of those who flew those planes into the trade centers. It is a sad thing to say, but it is the truth.
Admittedly, there have been times, when the Federal Government has overstepped it’s bounds. I have blogged about many instances where this has happened. That is why you have Conservatives and Right-libertarians, like myself, who have blogs, like me, that throw up the red flag and bring this sort of nonsense to the attention of the American people. This causes the Government, like in recent times to go, “Ooops! Our Bad!” and make changes to correct those mistakes. This is why people like me believe that big Government is BAD GOVERNMENT! Because of it’s tendency to make very stupid and sometimes horrific mistakes. Case in point; Waco, Ruby Ridge, and so on….
In fact, anyone that has read this blog, more than just coming and read one entry knows; that I am totally anti-centralized Government. In fact, I, like many of my Southern Paleo-Conservatives believe that Abraham Lincoln was a traitor. Not because he freed the slaves; but because he introduced a centralized form of Government. Not to mention the form of barbarism or as it called today; Terrorism that he inflicted on the south, in a war; that was not even fought remotely fair.
Having said all that……. I did answer his accusations of me not wanting a debate. I do close comments here after 10 days. Because I hate getting comments about something that I wrote like, a year ago and have go back and see what they heck they are talking about. Running a blog is all about being current and fresh. Not about harping on the past. Hence the reason they automatically close. I think he wants a blog fight or a argument. I just don’t desire to debate people that I disagree with; it doesn’t change a damn thing. All it does is cause problems, and I just do not need it, nor want it.
This is a video of David Wood and Nabeel Qureshi asking questions at Arabfest, Dearborn. The date is June 21st, 2009. There was a booth at the festival which had a banner titled “Islam: Got Questions? Get Answers.” From their table, we picked up a pamphlet claiming that Islam promotes peace. We noticed that it was full of poor logic and errors, so we decided to make a video refuting it. We went to the booth that gave us the pamphlet to give them the opportunity to defend their claims. Security, however, stepped in and forced us to turn off our camera.
We left the booth, received advice from police, and found out that the actions of the security guards were illegal. We went back to the booth to record a potential answer again. Realizing that the Muslims present had no answer, we left.
When we came outside, we were asked some questions by two young men, who had been sent by security to entrap us. While we responded to them, festival security started assaulting us, as you will see in this video. The conclusion of this video is a mob of festival security attacking our cameras, pushing us back, kicking our legs, and lying to the police.
We ask you, is it a coincidence that the city with the highest percentage of Muslims in the United States is the city where Christianity is not allowed to be represented (let alone preached) on a public sidewalk? Is it coincidence that in this city, people will say “No way!” when we say “This is the United States of America”?
Is this what will happen when Islam takes over the United States?
You see Ladies and Gents, THIS is what celebrating diversity does to you. It gets you attacked by Islamic terrorist THUGS! Rick Warren and his purpose driven life, “Let’s love everyone and not judge”, kind of Christianity is just that; it celebrates diversity. Islam, a religion of peace….. What a lie! 😡 This is why, if I ever was going to film, I would go armed. Any security person who approached me and tried to hurt me, would be killed.
This is no big surprise; however it is news worthy:
A document filed in federal court this week by the Justice Department offers new evidence that former vice president Richard B. Cheney helped steer the Bush administration’s public response to the disclosure of Valerie Plame Wilson’s employment by the CIA and that he was at the center of many related administration deliberations.
The administration’s discussion of Wilson’s link to the CIA was meant to undermine criticism by her husband of administration allegations that Iraq attempted to acquire uranium, a matter that her husband had probed for the CIA, according to testimony presented in a 2007 trial.
A list of at least seven related conversations involving Cheney appears in a new court filing approved by Obama appointees at the Justice Department. In the filing, the officials argue that the substance of what Cheney told special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald in 2004 must remain secret.
I would suppose that there are those will be shocked to the learn this or excuse it saying that we were at war. This writer is not among them. I have long argued on this Blog and in my previous incarnation as a “Left of center” Blogger the following; that the Bush Administration knew that they were over their hands, that there were no weapons of mass destruction.
My political criticism is not limited by party lines nor by any sort of partisanship. Just as much as I criticize President Barack Obama for his socialist polices and lefty liberal nonsense; I also criticized George W. Bush’s Wilsonian, Neo-Conservative and quite frankly, Christian Theocratic Foreign Policy. Unlike other bloggers in the Conservative Blogsophere; my criticism is not limited by party loyalty or blinded by partisanship. That is a different between a Independent Conservative, like myself and the Republican establishment Bloggers and those taking their talking points from Irving Kristol and John Podhoretz.
The real knee slapper is this here:
The Obama administration has since agreed that the material should not be disclosed. A Justice Department lawyer at one point last month argued that vice presidents and other White House officials will decline to be interviewed in the future if they know their remarks might “get on ‘The Daily Show’ ” or be used as fodder for political enemies.
Ha! Forget National Security, we cannot let John Stewart get ahold of the stuff; Them Liberals might laugh at us! 😆 Now that is funny. 😀
(Update: Corrected rather silly grammar error… “We might laugh at us?” Good Lord; Must learn to not blog until I’ve drank my lot of coffee.)
Obama administration officials, fearing a battle with Congress that could stall plans to close the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, are crafting language for an executive order that would reassert presidential authority to incarcerate terrorism suspects indefinitely, according to three senior government officials with knowledge of White House deliberations.
Such an order would embrace claims by former president George W. Bush that certain people can be detained without trial for long periods under the laws of war. Obama advisers are concerned that an order, which would bypass Congress, could place the president on weaker footing before the courts and anger key supporters, the officials said.
After months of internal debate over how to close the military facility in Cuba, White House officials are increasingly worried that reaching quick agreement with Congress on a new detention system may be impossible. Several officials said there is concern in the White House that the administration may not be able to close the prison by the president’s January deadline.
White House spokesman Ben LaBolt said that there is no executive order and that the administration has not decided whether to issue one. But one administration official suggested that the White House is already trying to build support for an order.
“Civil liberties groups have encouraged the administration, that if a prolonged detention system were to be sought, to do it through executive order,” the official said. Such an order could be rescinded and would not block later efforts to write legislation, but civil liberties groups generally oppose long-term detention, arguing that detainees should be prosecuted or released.
The Justice Department has declined to comment on the prospects for a long-term detention system while internal reviews of Guantanamo detainees’ cases are underway. One task force, which is assessing detainee policy, is expected to complete its work by July 21.
In a May speech, President Obama broached the need for a system of long-term detention and suggested that it would include congressional and judicial oversight. “We must recognize that these detention policies cannot be unbounded. They can’t be based simply on what I or the executive branch decide alone,” he said.
Shall we start calling him President George W. Obama? It sure sounds like it. When the Conservatives AND Liberals are calling this plan a disaster; something is dreadfully wrong.
Not long ago, some libertarians were hailing Keith Olbermann because he attacked George W. Bush (correctly) and his wars. Today, we do not see Olbermann complaining about these wars, now that his people are in the White House. Unfortunately, we libertarians are learning a hard lesson once again; the Left is not anti-war. Instead, the Left is against war when leftists believe that wars consume too many resources that could be used in the government’s war against peaceful, private exachange. However, we see that today, Obama’s government is engaged in war both at home and abroad. Olbermann is a big supporter (as is Michael Moore).
Bill, that’s because Olbermann is kind of green when it comes to politics. The dude is a sportscaster for Christ’s sake. What do you expect?
Has Olbermann uttered one word against Obama’s war?
Well, if you consider the heavy sighing and hand wringing that he’s now doing; as a word against the Obama Administration and the war that now belongs to them. Yes, He has. But seriously; Olbermann is quite the partisan. To her credit, Rachel Maddow is not. But Keith? Oh Yes, quite partisan. To his credit, Olbermann did his fair share of screaming about Bush Administration’s Wilsonian foreign policies. But now that the Obama Administration is in there. It’s a whole other ball game at MSNBC HQ. I mean, Tucker Carlson even left. What does that tell you?
In the ongoing debate between President Obama and former Vice President Dick Cheney on torture, former CIA terrorism expert Michael Scheuer points out how both leaders’ refusal to address U.S. interventionism as the primary catalyst for terrorism makes us all “less safe.”
on the morning of Thursday, April 10, 2003, Donald Rumsfeld’s Pentagon prepared a top-secret briefing for George W. Bush. This document, known as the Worldwide Intelligence Update, was a daily digest of critical military intelligence so classified that it circulated among only a handful of Pentagon leaders and the president; Rumsfeld himself often delivered it, by hand, to the White House. The briefing’s cover sheet generally featured triumphant, color images from the previous days’ war efforts: On this particular morning, it showed the statue of Saddam Hussein being pulled down in Firdos Square, a grateful Iraqi child kissing an American soldier, and jubilant crowds thronging the streets of newly liberated Baghdad. And above these images, and just below the headline secretary of defense, was a quote that may have raised some eyebrows. It came from the Bible, from the book of Psalms: “Behold, the eye of the Lord is on those who fear Him…To deliver their soul from death.”
[…..]
Referring to Bush and Cheney, Rumsfeld said, “I wanted them to have fun.”
But at the end of the ceremony, the president could be seen climbing into his sedan, wearing an expression that one could interpret any number of ways: guilt, disappointment, self-loathing, a general sadness. Not “fun,” however.
From beginning to end, the Rumsfeld experience was never that.
