I'm shocked. 60 minutes runs Good News story

I'm shocked I tell ya shocked. I click over to see what 60 Minutes is running, and they have this story about a former Mujahideen jihadist, Nasir Abas. This dude from Indonesia. Excerpts from this story:

(CBS) It's not often you get a chance to talk to someone who was a key player inside a terrorist organization for twenty years, but 60 Minutes correspondent Bob Simon did just that when he interviewed Nasir Abas, one of the most valuable members of a terrorist group ever to change sides and work for the authorities. Abas is from Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation. And he was a top commander in Jemaah Islamiyah, al Qaeda's franchise operation in Southeast Asia.

Like so many terrorists around the world, he learned his trade in Afghanistan. Hundreds of militants from Southeast Asia traveled there in the 1980's to defend Islam against the Soviet occupiers. They trained as Mujahideen in a rugged camp, which Abas calls a military academy.

Abas graduated with honors in artillery and ended up giving weapons training to scores of young men from Southeast Asia.

Nasir Abas had become a very serious player in the movement. He established a military camp for Jemaah Islamiyah, where he trained hundreds of young believers to become fighters. He was promoted to be one of the four regional commanders.

But then in 2000, well before his arrest, something happened which would make Abas question everything he believed in: a fatwa, a religious edict, was issued by Osama bin Laden.

"It should be understood that killing Americans and Jews anywhere found are the highest act of worship and the highest form of good deeds in the eyes of Allah," Simon quotes bin Laden.

Abas and his fellow commanders were ordered to read the fatwa to their men and make sure they carried it out. The others obeyed, but Abas refused. It was his moment of truth. He firmly believed that jihad was to be fought only on the battlefield in defense of Islam; he had always been taught that the killing of civilians had nothing to do with holy war and that it was forbidden.

The fatwa justified killing non-Muslim civilians everywhere.

Abas stopped participating in the violent activities of Jemaah Islamiyah and started withdrawing from the organization that had been his life. He has provided a wealth of information, helping the Indonesian authorities unravel the inner workings Jemaah Islamiyah.

According to Sidney Jones of the International Crisis Group, who has been tracking Jemaah Islamiyah for the last ten years, Nasir Abas has been a huge resource.

Asked how valuable Abas has been to police, Jones said, "I think he's been invaluable. I think he understands the network of jihadists in Indonesia in a way that nobody who's outside that network could possibly ever hope to understand."

The man who lived his life in the shadows, as an insider in a secret organization, will now tell you that what’s most important is to bring things into the light of day, and that the most important weapon is education.

"Yes. We need to educate people. We need to give more explanation. Yeah, about what was is right, what is wrong," Abas says.

"And this is what you're trying to do?" Simon asks.

Says Abas, "Yeah. This is what I’m saying, that this is my new jihad."

The only problem with the way CBS presented this story has to do with what they chose to emphasize. CBS just had to make the emphasis of the story about how Indonesia captures terrorists and holds trials in public to convict them instead of holding them indefinitely like the US does at Gitmo. Sorry CBS that is not the important part of this story.

The good news is this dude used REASON in his thought processes. Just because Osama says something doesn't mean you have to believe it. It is good news to me when a person from the world's most populous Muslim nation can refuse to follow a command from a Muslim leader. The conventional wisdom is that Islam is such a top-down structurally based system that nobody can question what the leaders say. This guy is an example of somebody who did question a command, and refused to follow it. Ayaan Hirsi Ali is another example of somebody who is brought up in this Islamist way of life, and then turns away later on. Although Hirsi Ali turned away to a larger extent than this dude I think they are similar. Abas and Hirsi Ali both believe education is the most important weapon.

Never Again. Clinton should not occupy WH

On March 25, 1997, President Alija Izetbegovic (at microphone) of Bosnia and Herzegovina receives the International Democracy Award at a ceremony at the United Nations. Allen Weinstein (left) President and CEO of the Center for Democracy made the presentation; centre background is Ambassador Bill Richardson, Permanent Representative of the United States to the United Nations.

The Republican candidates’ event at the Reagan Library was painful for me to watch because of the dumb questions that they were asked. One of the dumbest questions was ‘Should Bill Clinton occupy the White House again?’ But it got me to thinking about looking back again to the time when Clinton occupied the White House. I wanted to look back at those years from a foreign entanglements POV instead of intern/bimbo-eruption POV. I let Google be my friend, and I learned a little about Clinton and foreign policy.

Where is the country that Bill Clinton, a former president of the United States, feels ideologically most at home? Believe it or not, the country Bill Clinton so admires is the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Here is what Clinton said at a meeting on the margins of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

“Iran today is, in a sense, the only country where progressive ideas enjoy a vast constituency. It is there that the ideas that I subscribe to are defended by a majority.”

And here is what Clinton had to say in an interview with Charlie Rose:

“Iran is the only country in the world that has now had six elections since the first election of President Khatami (in 1997). (It is) the only one with elections, including the United States, including Israel, including you name it, where the liberals, or the progressives, have won two-thirds to 70 percent of the vote in six elections: Two for president; two for the Parliament, the Majlis; two for the mayoralties. In every single election, the guys I identify with got two-thirds to 70 percent of the vote. There is no other country in the world I can say that about, certainly not my own.”

During Clinton’s Presidency the US fought wars against Serbians. The wars resulted in the establishment of a new country, Bosnia, and the creation of a new UN area of Serbia, Kosovo. I have heard some that think we should do to Iraq what we did in the Balkans. What we did in Bosnia is we threw out a Serbian ruthless butcher, Milosovich. We backed an Islamic fundamentalist strong man, Alija Izetbegovic. Here is an excerpt from one a book he wrote:

"... the Islamic movement may, or rather should, begin by seizing power as soon as it possesses a good measure of moral and numerical strength, allowing it not only to overthrow the non-Islamic power, but also to establish the new Islamic power."

Alija Izetbegovic, leader of the Bosnian Muslim faction backed by the US and NATO during Bosnia’s civil war. And the book he wrote, and from which all the lines quoted above were taken, is entitled "Islamic Declaration". (This is sometimes translated, "Islamic Manifesto").

Upon his death what the US State Dept. said about the man:

"President Izetbegovic's personal courage helped the Bosnian people endure one of Europe's greatest tragedies since World War II. His determined leadership was instrumental in Bosnia and Herzegovina remaining a unified multiethnic country."

What Iranian Foreign Ministry said about the man:

"…the late president's serious attempts to defend the identity and territorial integrity of his homeland as well as the unity among the residents and various ethnic races of the country."

The State Department's reference to "Bosnia and Herzegovina remaining a unified multiethnic country" has one problem: Bosnia was never a country. It was an administrative unit within the internationally recognized state of Yugoslavia. Rather than protecting the multiethnic state of Yugoslavia, Izetbegovic’s fundamentalists fought to secede with the aim of creating an Islamist republic on this piece of Yugoslav territory. This was opposed by virtually all the Serbs and probably most Muslims. But it was backed by the US, Iran, Saudi Arabia and other Islamist states.

Despite the hype in the Western media, Izetbegovic was not fighting to affirm (let alone reaffirm!) some supposed Bosnian nationhood. Rather, he called for:
"…the implementation of Islam in all fields of individuals' personal lives, in family and in society, by renewal of the Islamic religious thought and creating a uniform Muslim community from Morocco to Indonesia. ..."

In other words, the Islamist takeover of Bosnia was intended as a step towards the creation of a unified Muslim world-state. Quite the opposite of preserving the nonexistent 'Bosnian nation'! And yet the fiction of a Bosnian nation, threatened by supposed Serb secessionists (the Serbs were in fact the people who didn't want to secede from Yugoslavia) was sold to ordinary people in the West.


Professor Cees Wiebes, a senior lecturer in the Department of International Relations at Amsterdam University, caused a storm with his book Intelligence and the War in Bosnia 1992-1995.

One of the most sensational sections of the book - and the bit which grabbed the headlines ('temporarily' says Wiebes) when it first came out in 2002 - details the role of the Clinton administration in giving the 'green light' to Iran to arm the Bosnian Muslims. Wiebes catalogues how, from 1992 to January 1996, there was an influx of Iranian weapons and advisers into Bosnia. He describes how Iran, and other Muslim states, helped to bring Mujihadeen fighters into Bosnia to fight with the Muslims against the Serbs, 'holy warriors' from Afghanistan, Chechnya, Yemen and Algeria, some of whom had suspected links with Osama bin Laden's training camps in Afghanistan. And all of this took place under the watchful eye of a Clintonian policy of 'no instruction' - that is, that US officials should do nothing to prevent such movements into Bosnia; that, in fact, they should covertly give them the 'green light'.

Yet this is also the bit of the book that seems to have won Wiebes few friends. He says that some of his findings and conclusions, especially on the arming of the Bosnian Muslims, have been ignored. 'If you do not have a black and white picture of the Bosnian war, then something is apparently wrong with you', he says. 'I found there was much sympathy for the Bosnian Muslims, especially among journalists; and sometimes I think there is an inclination to silence things that do not fit with their view of the war.'

I am not an apologists for Milosevich and his cronies, and I’m glad he’s dead and his followers aren’t continuing the mass murders they started. I just think a more moderate solution was available than the backing an islamist to fill in the power vacuum the Milosovich departure created. This solution that Clinton used is akin today to the US backing al Sadr to fill the power vacuum the Saddam departure created in Iraq.

Back to Clinton and the country that he feels most ideologically at home with Iran…But who are “the guys” Clinton identifies with?

There is, of course, President Muhammad Khatami who, speaking at a conference of provincial governors last week, called for the whole world to convert to Islam.

“Human beings understand different affairs within the global framework that they live in,” he said. “But when we say that Islam belongs to all times and places, it is implied that the very essence of Islam is such that despite changes (in time and place) it is always valid.”

Perhaps another one of his kind of guys is Omar M. Ahmad.

Omar M. Ahmad, chairman of the board of CAIR speaking before a packed crowd at the Flamingo Palace banquet hall in Fremont, California on July 4, 1998.

“Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”

When I look now at the efforts by the Democratic Congress to end the war after learning how Clinton operated, then I am more resolved than ever that a Clinton should not occupy the White House again.

Never again.

A single question pop quiz

Let me first say that I believe this is not just a trivial pursuit of history. I think the answer to this question is important for one to understand why the United States finds itself now on the road it is on. So without further ado the pop quiz is:

Who is the first foreign government to declare war on the United States of America, and why did they do it?

I will provide the answer in reply to this post. I will first wait and see if anybody wants to take a shot at the answer.

Islamic terrorists started attacking US in the ‘70’s

Some people think the attacks by Al Qaida in NYC, D.C., and Shanksville, PA are the start of this war. Some people think the attacks on US embassies in Africa, and the attack off the Yemen coast on the USS Cole during the Clinton presidency are the start of this war. Some people think the attack on a marine barracks in Beirut during the Reagan presidency is the start of this war. I think the war started in the late ‘70’s. Christopher Hitchens wrote an article recently about this. There is also more interesting historical background information here.

In the late ‘70’s American shipping became even more subject than before to the depredations of those who controlled the Strait of Gibraltar. The United States had therefore to decide not just upon a question of national honor but upon whether it would stand or fall by free navigation of the seas. The United States is faced with corrupt regimes, on the one hand, and Islamic militants, on the other—or indeed a collusion between them.

Of course I’m talking about July 4, 1776 being the start of attacks and war by Muslim terrorists on America. It was debated by our Founding Fathers as they wrote the US Constitution. More excerpts from Hitch:

“However that may be, it is certain that the Barbary question had considerable influence on the debate that ratified the United States Constitution in the succeeding years. Many a delegate, urging his home state to endorse the new document, argued that only a strong federal union could repel the Algerian threat. In The Federalist No. 24, Alexander Hamilton argued that without a “federal navy . . . of respectable weight . . . the genius of American Merchants and Navigators would be stifled and lost.” In No. 41, James Madison insisted that only union could guard America’s maritime capacity from “the rapacious demands of pirates and barbarians.” John Jay, in his letters, took a “bring-it-on” approach; he believed that “Algerian Corsairs and the Pirates of Tunis and Tripoli” would compel the feeble American states to unite, since “the more we are ill-treated abroad the more we shall unite and consolidate at home.” The eventual Constitution, which provides for an army only at two-year renewable intervals, imposes no such limitation on the navy.”

There were many Americans—John Adams among them—who made the case that it was better policy to pay the tribute. It was cheaper than the loss of trade, for one thing, and a battle against the pirates would be “too rugged for our people to bear.” Putting the matter starkly, Adams said: “We ought not to fight them at all unless we determine to fight them forever.”

Some of the stuff coming out in these debates between Massachusetts politicians vs Virginia politicians are much like the debates we hear today. John Adams as the POTUS went along with paying the ‘protection money’, and when Jefferson became POTUS foreign policy changed. Jefferson and Adams had been confronted with the Muslim terrorists as envoys meeting with Tripoli’s ambassador to London in March, 1785. Here’s how Hitch describes the encounter:

When they inquired by what right the Barbary states preyed upon American shipping, enslaving both crews and passengers, America’s two foremost envoys were informed that “it was written in the Koran, that all Nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon whoever they could find and to make Slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.” (It is worth noting that the United States played no part in the Crusades, or in the Catholic reconquista of Andalusia.)

Ambassador Abd Al-Rahman did not fail to mention the size of his own commission, if America chose to pay the protection money demanded as an alternative to piracy.

At one point, Jefferson hoped that John Paul Jones, naval hero of the Revolution, might assume command of a squadron that would strike fear into the Barbary pirates. While ambassador in Paris, Jefferson had secured Jones a commission with Empress Catherine of Russia, who used him in the Black Sea to harry the Ottomans, the ultimate authority over Barbary. But Jones died before realizing his dream of going to the source and attacking Constantinople. The task of ordering war fell to Jefferson.

I believe—because of the encounter with the insufferable Abd Al-Rahman and because of his long engagement with Jones—that Jefferson had long sought a pretext for war. His problem was his own party and the clause in the Constitution that gave Congress the power to declare war. With not atypical subtlety, Jefferson took a shortcut through this thicket in 1801 and sent the navy to North Africa on patrol, as it were, with instructions to enforce existing treaties and punish infractions of them. Our third president did not inform Congress of his authorization of this mission until the fleet was too far away to recall.

Heh. I think Hitch is spot on with his accounting of the history. We know the US fought well, and the USMC were especially daring during the Barbary Coast Wars.

Francis Scott Key composed a patriotic song to mark the occasion. As I learned from Joshua London’s excellent book, the original verses ran (in part):

In conflict resistless each toil they endur’d,

Till their foes shrunk dismay’d from the war’s desolation:

And pale beamed the Crescent, its splendor obscur’d

By the light of the star-bangled flag of our nation.

Where each flaming star gleamed a meteor of war,

And the turban’d head bowed to the terrible glare.

Then mixt with the olive the laurel shall wave

And form a bright wreath for the brow of the brave.

Another Virginian, James Madison, was POTUS when the Barbary Coast Wars came to a close.

The Barbary states sought to exploit Anglo-American hostilities by resuming their depredations and renewing their demands for blood money. So in 1815, after a brief interval of recovery from the war with Britain, President Madison asked Congress for permission to dispatch Decatur once again to North Africa, seeking a permanent settling of accounts. This time, the main offender was the dey of Algiers, Omar Pasha, who saw his fleet splintered and his grand harbor filled with heavily armed American ships. Algiers had to pay compensation, release all hostages, and promise not to offend again. President Madison’s words on this occasion could scarcely be bettered: “It is a settled policy of America, that as peace is better than war, war is better than tribute.

If only people would remember Madison’s words. They hold true today just as much as they held true when we became a nation.

Nancy does 'South Pacific' number in Syria

South Pacific Happy Talk Lyrics

Talk about a star looking like a toy
Peeking through de branches of a tree,
Talk about a girl, talk about a boy,
Counting all de ripples on de sea
Happy talk, keep talking happy talk,
Talk about things you'd like to do
You gotta have a dream,
if you don't have a dream,
How you gonna have a dream come true?

This morning I stumbled on to an interesting conversation between Ayaan Hirsi Ali & Philip Gourevitch
One of the most intersting topics in this conversation is about liberal betrayal.

GOUREVITCH: I gather you’ve been called an “Enlightenment fundamentalist” by critics and that you regard that as a sort of badge of honor. But when I hear the phrase, it seems that what you’re really saying is that there is a problem with decadence or hollowness in the West and there is a failure to stand up for the ideas of the Enlightenment, to embrace them, to not to take them for granted but to understand that the struggle continues. Is that accurate?

HIRSI ALI: My criticism of the West, especially of liberals, is that they do take freedom for granted. People who are born after the Second World War in Western Europe haven’t seen war; they haven’t seen conflict. They’ve been born into the middle of freedom and into the conviction of their parents to live with the hollowness that freedom brings. Freedom does not bring happiness always. Freedom brings with it a lot of doubt and a lot of depression. People come from areas where freedom wasn’t always there. They have lost the instincts to recognize that there can be such a thing as an enemy or a threat to freedom. That’s what I’m witnessing in Europe: the European elite simply doesn’t know what’s going on. The whole pacifist ideology—in itself religious-like—that’s been spread is that violence should never be used under any circumstances and we should talk and talk and talk. Even when your opponent tells you, “I don’t want to talk to you. I want to destroy you.” The European elite says, “Please let’s talk. Let’s talk about the fact that you want to destroy me.”

GOUREVITCH: I was told that Theo Van Gogh’s last words were “Can we talk about this?” as the man shot him and was starting to stab him.

HIRSI ALI: I think that’s no laughing matter and it shows that humans are capable of reaching such a high level of civilization and such a high level of morality. It’s admirable. But when there is an enemy who says, “I’m going to destroy you,” whether you’re admirable or not, you have to make sure that you don’t get destroyed.

GOUREVITCH: You’re saying it’s not only a level of civilization but also a level of unreality.

HIRSI ALI: To some it’s been a level of unreality—that idea that after the Second World War, we are not going to have another war ever, which is a good thing. It’s a good point to start with. But that works only if the entire human race thinks and believes that.

Nancy and her fellow travelers have got the same mindset as the European Elites that Hirsi Ali speaks about. I still think there are a lot of Americans who know better. People have experienced events in their lives in a barroom or a back alley where they knew that 'happy talk'
was not going to work. The problem is they suffer from BDS, and they can not allow themselves to accept that what Kenny Rogers sang is sometimes the truth

'Sometimes you gotta fight when youre a man.'

Harry and Nancy's are terrorists best friend

The announcement by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has been reported in Iran with glowing happiness. Besides the Iranian Fars News Agency the Mehr News group in Teheran has an article mentioning Harry and nancy by name. Their take is :

"But it appears likely the U.S. will be forced to leave Iraq in a far more humiliating way than the Soviet Union left Afghanistan."

If only people with BDS could take off their blinders, and see who is siding with the Democratic Congressional leaders. It is not just Iran that is 'proud to be a Democrat', but there are other terrorists who are also also very happy with the Democrat contenders for POTUS. Excerpts of an article from WorldNetDaily:

"We see Hillary (Clinton) and other candidates are competing on who will withdraw from Iraq and who is guilty of supporting the Iraqi invasion. This is a moment of glory for the revolutionary movements in the Arab world in general and for the Iraqi resistance movement specifically," said Abu Jihad, one of the overall leaders of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror organization.

I think democrats will do good if they will withdraw as soon as they are in power."

Abu Nasser Aziz, the deputy commander of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in the northern West Bank, told WND last night's Democrat primary debate proved "the invasion of Iraq was judged by Allah to be a failure. America needs to stop letting its foreign policy be dictated by the Zionists and the Zionist lobby. The Democrats understand this point and want to prevent this scenario."

Abu Aziz said it was "very good" there are "voices like Hillary and others who are now attacking the Iraq invasion."

Abu Muhammad, a leader of the Islamic Jihad terrorist group in northern West Bank city of Telkerem, said he believes both the Democrats and Republicans are controlled by Israel but said he thinks the Democrats are better for his group's interests.

"They will keep supporting Israel, but, yes, I think the Democrats are preferred and have a bigger chance of withdrawing from Iraq and making deals with Iran and Syria."

So there you have it Harry and Nancy and the Democrats running for POTUS have made new friends with Abu Muhammad of Islamic Jihad, Abu Aziz and Abu Jihad of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, and the major newspapers in Iran. They can't vote, but maybe they can find other ways to support their new friends, Harry and Nancy.

I hope NOT.

Who is more French?

Who is more French? Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid? General David Petraeus and Admiral William Fallon?

Once upon a time over 200 years ago there were people living in a new world. They had left the old world to get away from religious persecution. They wanted the liberty of practicing their faith in their own manner of choosing. The old world empire they sailed away from decided that these misfits were going to have to pay high taxes and bow down to their authority to rule over them like masters rule over slaves. Folks in this new who grew tired of this tyranny became known as patriots, and folks who enjoyed living underneath the powerful empire became known as loyalists. The patriots got organized and revolted in a war against the empire. Here was a rag-tag untrained group of armed men in war against one of the most powerful military forces in the world. In addition they were fighting some of their own people who were loyalists.

They could not have won this war had it not been for the support of France. France did not pick the side that had the best chance of winning, and France did not have a written timetable for when they would begin exiting their military out of this war. According to a written account by George Woodbridge of the battle of Yorktown:

"The strategy of the campaign was Rochambeau’s; the French fleet was there as a result of his arrangements; the tactics of the battle were his; the American army was present because he had lent money to Washington; in total naval and military participants the French outnumbered the Americans between three and four to one. Yorktown was Rochambeau’s victory.”

Now let us flash forward to the present day. There are people living in the old world, the cradle of civilization. The folks who grew tired of living under the tyranny of a mad man, and in the shadow of an Islamic Republic are patriots. The folks who want to live underneath the powerful Islamic terrorist empire are loyalists. The patriots got organized and created their own sovereign government. Here is a rag-tag untrained group of armed men fighting against an Islamic empire of trained terrorists. In addition they are fighting some of their own people who are loyalists.

We are now at a critical moment. Is the USA going to support Iraq the same way that France supported us in the American Revolution? Is General David Petraeus a modern day Comte de Rochambeau? Is Admiral William Fallon a modern day Comte de Grasse? Nancy Pelosi took a spring break vacation trip to the middle east. She talked with rulers in the area who support the Islamic terrorist empire and reassured them that she and the Congress have a different foreign policy approach than President Bush. She left them feeling much more comfortable than before she arrived. Now, they are relieved to know they can withstand pressure to isolate them. All they need to do is wait out another 18 months until Nancy and her party take control of the White House in 2009.

GOP select celebrity & style instead of record

The voters in GOP primaries and caucuses vote for a POTUS candidate because of the celebrity and style instead of the record. For the last 50 years the GOP candidate for POTUS is either a famous General, former vice-president, movie/TV/radio personality, Senate majority leader, or son of a former President. Ok, I left 2 out. Senator Goldwater was an exception from this type of celebrity. However he was a movement conservative with STYLE. Gerald Ford was selected to replace Agnew who resigned, and then assumed the Presidency after Nixon resigned. Ford then had the celebrity of incumbency. This is the reason that a Brownback, Hunter, Tancredo, Romney, Huckabee, or Tommy Thompson is NOT going to be the GOP candidate. The GOP candidate is going to be a movie/TV/radio personality, famous Mayor in 9/11 aftermath, famous Vietnam POW, or former Speaker of the House.

Actually the voters in Democratic primaries and caucuses are more likely vote for POTUS because of record. They also have chosen for celebrity and style. A charismatic son of former ambassador JFK, and 2 former vice-presidents in Mondale and Gore are the ones they selected for celebrity and Style. LBJ also became President by JFK assassination and in '64 by incumbency. The ones that they selected because of record instead of celebrity and style are Senator Stevenson, Senator McGovern, Governor Carter, Governor Dukakis, and Governor Clinton.

In 2008 I think both the GOP and the Democratic candidate for POTUS will be selected on the basis of celebrity and style over record. On some days I worry that Gov Huckabee is not joking when he suggests a Paris Hilton or American Idol POTUS candidate.

George W is unhappy with Congress

George wrote his friend William Fitzhugh a letter so he could get off his chest how exasperating it is to try to wage a war that is managed by Congress. I put the good parts in bold type:

Dear Sir: A few days ago brought me the honor of your favor of the 7th. Instt. from Marlbro. Your other letter of Jany. the 20th. came duly to hand, for both I thank you; without offering an apology for suffering the latter to remain unacknowledged till this time; because I am satisfied you will attribute my silence to any cause rather than disrespect, and to none sooner than the true one, viz., the load of business which continually presses upon me.

It was with sincere concern I heard of the injury you sustained in your property at the Mouth of Patuxent; but it is only adding another specimen to the catalogue of British clemency, and boasted generosity.

The accession of Maryland to the confederation, and the relinquishment of the claim of Virginia to the Lands West of Ohio, are events which are exceedingly pleasing to me, but I am not sufficiently acquainted with the powers of Civil government, under the present Constitutions of the several States, to determine how far they are able to obtain Men for the War, or for three years, by coercion, nor am I enough acquainted with the abilities of them, to declare what Sums they ought to have given to Soldiers under this description in preference to a draft of Men for a short term; this however I am decided in, that the latter is the most expensive, and least effectual mode that ever was devised to carry on a War, which is like to become a War of finance. and that no funds within our reach can support it long. I speak upon the best ground when I assert this, because no day, nor hour arrives without bringing with it some evidence in support of the truth of the observation. To this cause also the prolongation of the War; the wretched State of our finances, and every capital misfortune that has befallen us may be traced.

I as little scruple to add that, unless the powers of Congress are made competent to all the purposes of War we are doing no more than wasting our time, and spending our treasure to very little purpose for it is impossible to apply the strength and resources of this Country while one State complies with, another rejects, and the majority of them changes or mutilates the requisitions of that Body. Hence the willing States are capitally injured if not ruined. Hence proceed distrust, jealously, and dissatisfaction; and the impossibility of either projecting or executing (with certainty) any plan whatsoever. Hence proceed all those delays, which to people at a distance, and unacquainted with circumstances, are altogether unaccountable. And hence it is we incur useless expence, because we do not bring our force, and means, into operation at the same time, some being exhausted, before others are obtained.

We wait with much sollicitude advices from the Southern Army; our last accts. from that quarter were less gloomy than the former, but not less equivocal and distressing. I have heard nothing from General Greene since the 28th. of Feby., nor of him (with precision) since the 2d. Instt. Matters were so critically circumstanced at that time, as to add pain to impatience. Equally ignorant, and equally anxious am I, with respect to the French Fleet under the Command of the Chevalier Des Touches. No acct. of whom have I received (but vague ones through the channel of Rivingtons Paper) since he left New port. At Yorktown in Virginia there was no intelligence of him on the 15th.

I have heard nothing from General Thompson since his release from captivity, and as his joining the Army will depend upon his promotion, and his promotion on Congress, the time of it is uncertain; but that your Son may be relieved from his present anxiety, suspence, and all possible censure I will, with much pleasure, receive him into my family as an extra Aid till Thompson arrives. In the mean while, his rank may be ascertained and his Commission procured.

Mrs. Washington makes a tender of her Compliments to Mrs. Fitzhugh, to which please to add those of Dr. Sir, Yr. etc.

This letter was written 226 years ago. We have a new George W, CINC. Have we for the same learned any lessons from history. This George W is facing a Congress that is exasperating him
in similar ways as that George W.

My Case for an '08 Thompson/Thompson ticket

The upper Mississippi valley region of the USA has for many years been strategic area of electoral votes.here is a table of the states and their electoral votes from 1960-2004:

Minnesota 10EV
Wisconsin 10EV
Iowa 7EV
Illinois 21EV
Missouri 11EV
Kentucky 8EV
Tennessee 11EV
Arkansas 6EV

Total Electoral Votes=84 (2008)

1960 4D 4R (59-43)
1964 8D (95-0)
1968 1D 6R 1I (10-79-6)
1972 8R (0-92)
1976 6D 2R (58-34)
1980 1D 7R (10-81)
1984 1D 7R (10-80)
1988 3D 5R (29-61)
1992 8D (86-0)
1996 8D (86-0)
2000 4D 4R (50-36)
2004 3D 5R (40-43-1)

I want to especially call to your attention that in the 90's the Democrats had a President and Vice-President who were from this region. There are many independent voters in this region who swing in the center between the Democrats and the GOP.

We have an opportunity in 2008 for the Republicans to put 2 people from this region on the ticket. Coincidentally they both have the same last name:
Fred Thompson - Tennessee
Tommy Thompson - Wisconsin

I hope the Republican Party will give this strategy some serious consideration. I know there will be some who think because they both have the same last name that this is a joke. I am not joking. I want Republicans to win, and I think they need to get a majority of votes from this part
of the country to do it.

Honore vs Obama

What if the election for President of the United States came down to a choice between 2 African Americans, General Russel Honore and Senator Barack Obama? They are both tall, dark, and of mixed racial heritage. For me, the things that these two men have in common come to a quick end. I don't think the election would even be close. I'm talking '72 Nixon vs McGovern rout that Honore would do to Obama.

In one corner you have a man who waxes poetic in his speeches. Senator Obama:

"if you sense, as I sense, that the time is now to shake off our slumber, and slough off our fear,"

"In the face of despair, you believe there can be hope,"

In the other corner you have a man does not waste words and does not suffer fools in his speeches. General Honore:

"You are stuck on stupid. I'm not going to answer that question."

"I'm totally unconfused about our mission,"

"Better is harder."

"I'd rather be in the middle of the game, playing hard with little hope of winning than to be an observer."

There is an excellent article on the American Thinker website that compares and contrasts these two men.
Personally if it came down to a choice between these two for POTUS I would not hesitate to vote for General Honore.

Compare Texas 1836 to Iraq 2006

I recently read an article that made me think of comparisons between a fledgling new Republic of Texas in 1836 and a fledgling new Republic of Iraq in 2006. In both cases these republics are supported by volunteers from the USA. Heroic men like Davy Crockett and Jim Bowie volunteered to fight to defend the right of Texans to live free and independent of a former tyrant. Heroic men like David Petraeus and Lt Gen. Odierno volunteered to fight to defend the right of Iraqis to live free and independent of a former tyrant.

From the Alamo, Colonel Travis wrote to his countrymen the following:

Fellow citizens and compatriots: I am besieged by a thousand or more of the Mexicans under Santa Anna--I have sustained a continual bombardment and cannonade for 24 hours and have not lost a man--the enemy has demanded a surrender at discretion, otherwise, the garrison is to be put to the sword, if the fort is taken--I have answered the demands with a cannon shot, and our flag still waves proudly from the wall --
I shall never surrender or retreat.

Then, I call on you in the name of liberty, of patriotism and of everything dear to the American character, to come to our aid, with all dispatch. The enemy is receiving reinforcements daily and will no doubt increase to three or four thousand in four or five days. If this call is neglected, I am determined to sustain myself as long as possible and die like a soldier who never forgets what is due to his own honor and that of his country--Victory or Death.

Now as I understand the letter was dispatched to the small settlement of Washington-on-the-Brazos. The aid with all dispatch did not arrive and the Mexicans with overwhelming force defeated the 80 Texans at the Alamo.

Now I worry today if General Petraeus writes a similar letter to a larger settlement of Washington DC what will the Democratically controlled Congress do? If I am to believe a recently passed non-binding resolution that was passed in the House and had 56 aye votes in the Senate then they are no more help for General Petraeus than the help that Colonel Travis received. Some people would say that while the Democratic party has the majority of seats in the House there are a lot of new members of the House who are Blue Dog Conservative Democrats. My reply to those people is every member of the House Democratic party voted aye to the resolution opposing sending additional reinforcement to General Petraeus. I think that there are many similarities, and I think we need to 'remember the Alamo' when we vote in 2008.

Democratoc House Circus is back

Yes the circus is back in town now that the Democrats are in control of Congress. So we grab our box of popcorn and beverage sit back and tune into C-SPAN to watch the show. Do we listen to the speeches about a new day dawning for bipartisanship partnership and get something done instead of do-nothing? Well it is entertaining to compare the words versus the actions. The actions so far have been anything but bipartisan. These actions include new House rules that are intended to jam through legislation. Pelosi decreed that none of the early legislation would go through the normal committee process, hoping to keep her party in lockstep to enact key agenda items and boost her own and the party's national image. This means no debate and vote in committees, no amendments allowed, no closed session for discussion of classified information, and limited time for debate on the floor. Apparently some of the new committee chairmen like Charlie Rangel are not happy with Nancy's decree. It is going to be entertaining to watch the Charlie & Nancy show. Another fact to watch as this process unfolds is the vote tally for these bills that are getting jammed through. If there are less than 291 aye votes in the House then there are an insufficient number to override a veto. Of the 4 bills that so far have passed 2 of them have more than 291 ayes and 2 of them do not. I think President Bush has also been watching this tally since indications are that the 2 with insufficient votes to override a veto will be vetoed by President Bush if they reach his desk.
There is also a more sobering less entertaining aspect to this Democratic House. Instead of acts of commission I am referring to acts of omission. Watch to see issues where no action by the House is taken. For example the House can refuse to send a Bill through to fund the war. A President can not use a veto pen unless there is a Bill to veto. The same thing can later be applied to taking no action to extend tax cuts. One fact that will be difficult for the Democrats to spin is that they take ownership now for anything that is done or left undone in the Congress. Just blaming President Bush and the GOP will not fly when you are the ones in the cockpit of the Democratic Congress.

Iran The Model ... not

Iran held a midterm election recently. YAWN. The structure of Iran clearly shows that there are no free choices of candidates for the people to vote for. The grand ayatollah, supreme leader, has control of the military and the courts. A Guardian Council selects the candidates who the electorate may choose between. They know this dictatorship is the only way for them to remain in power. Similar efforts are underway in other countries throughout the world to put the mullahs in charge. It is not just a problem for these countries. It is a big problem for Israel and its biggest supporter the USA.

There is a strategy these mullahs have adopted from a menace of the past Adolph Hitler. The strategy is to brainwash through propaganda the citizenry to believe that all of their problems and misfortunes and hardships are because of the JOOOOOOOOOS. Makes it easier to keep control when people are angry and blame somebody else for all their problems.

An Iraqi blogger has a good appraisal of this situation. The money quote from his blog entry “if dictatorship remained in power, political Islam would've kept growing stronger but if I accept it as a transitional element in an inevitable stage and allow it to practice governance then performance will be the judge and the decision of the people through elections will then decide who deserves the next chance.”

One inconvenient truth that all of the antiwar folks ignore is that while Saddam was not into Islamic extremism when he took power in 1978 he most definitely was into it after we defeated him in 1991. After that he had the Iraq’s flag changed to include Islam inscription. I hope we can succeed in Iraq to secure the country from the radical extremists who want to build another theocratic dictatorship like Iran in Iraq.

Remembering our fallen

This week I read accounts about red-haired lady from California , a young man from central Ohio , and another young man from Illinois . Their lives were cut short when a roadside bomb exploded near the truck they were riding in in Ramadi, Iraq on Wednesday 12/13/06. I have the utmost sympathy and prayers for the families and friends of these soldiers. I also have the utmost gratitude and appreciation for their service and sacrifice to the USA.

I don't know what happens next with respect to course change in Iraq. I hope and pray that President Bush will stand up and fight against the defeatists. Please Mr. President, don't let the ultimate sacrifice of soldiers like these be in vain.

My words on this subject are not so great. Michael Marks has written a poem that says it best for me at this time.

A Soldier's Christmas
By Michael Marks

The embers glowed softly, and in their dim light,
I gazed round the room and I cherished the sight;
My wife was asleep, her head on my chest,
My daughter beside me, angelic in rest.

Outside the snow fell, a blanket of white,
Transforming the yard to a winter delight;
The sparkling lights in the tree, I believe,
Completed the magic that was Christmas Eve.

My eyelids were heavy, my breathing was deep,
Secure and surrounded by love I would sleep
In perfect contentment or so it would seem,
So I slumbered, perhaps I started to dream.

The sound wasn't loud, and it wasn't too near,
But I opened my eye when it tickled my ear;
Perhaps just a cough, I didn't quite know,
Then the sure sound of footsteps outside in the snow.

My soul gave a tremble, I struggled to hear,
And I crept to the door just to see who was near;
Standing out in the cold and the dark of the night,
A lone figure stood, his face weary and tight.

A soldier, I puzzled, some twenty years old,
Perhaps a Marine, huddled here in the cold;
Alone in the dark, he looked up and smiled,
Standing watch over me, and my wife and my child.

"What are you doing?" I asked without fear,
"Come in this moment, it's freezing out here!
Put down your pack, brush the snow from your sleeve,
You should be at home on a cold Christmas Eve!"

For barely a moment I saw his eyes shift
Away from the cold and the snow blown in drifts
To the window that danced with a warm fire's light,
Then he sighed and he said "It's really all right,
I'm out here by choice. I'm here every night.

"It's my duty to stand at the front of the line
That separates you from the darkest of times;
No one had to ask or beg or implore me,
I'm proud to stand here like my fathers before me.

"My Gramps died at 'Pearl' on a day in December,"
Then he sighed, "That's a Christmas 'Gram' always remembers;
My dad stood his watch in the jungles of 'Nam,
And now it is my turn and so, here I am.

"I've not seen my own son in more than a while,
But my wife sends me pictures, he's sure got her smile;"
Then he bent and he carefully pulled from his bag,
The red white and blue ... an American flag.

"I can live through the cold and the being alone
Away from my family, my house and my home;
I can stand at my post through the rain and the sleet,
I can sleep in a foxhole with little to eat.

"I can carry the weight of killing another
Or lay down my life with my sisters and brothers
Who stand at the front against any and all,
To insure for all time that this flag will not fall.

"So go back inside," he said, "harbor no fright,
Your family is waiting and I'll be all right."

"But isn't there something I can do, at the least
Give you money," I asked, "or prepare you a feast?
It seems all too little for all that you've done,
For being away from your wife and your son."

Then his eye welled a tear that held no regret,
"Just tell us you love us, and never forget
To fight for our rights back at home while we're gone,
To stand your own watch, no matter how long.

"For when we come home, either standing or dead,
To know you remember we fought and we bled
Is payment enough, and with that we will trust
That we mattered to you as you mattered to us."

Michael Marks
December 7th, 2000

Jay Garner talks to Darth Vader in Iraq

So it's early Monday Morning and I am trying to get enough coffee drank to wake me up. I've C-SPAN turned on a few minutes before the Washington Journal program begins, and Brian Lamb is interviewing former Iraq administrator Jay Garner. The transcript of this interview can be found here
I hear Brian ask Jay

LAMB: What’s the Darth Vader story?

My eyebrows are raised as I turn to listen to this. I am not sure if I just heard Brian speaking about our Vice President or what.

GARNER: Darth Vader?

Malcolm MacPherson, who you may or may not know, Malcolm writes for ”Time,” and he’s written several books. He was over there, and I asked him one day, I said, ”Hey, you want to go with me?” And he said, ”Sure.”

So, we went down to Al Hillah. And in Al Hillah, I had a team down there under a retired brigadier general named Buck Walters, a great guy.

And so, we were down there looking at things, and Buck says, ”Hey, Jay. Before you go back, I need to take you to talk to Darth Vader, because he wants to talk to you.”

And I said, ”Who’s that?” And he said, ”Well, he’s a pretty powerful player we got here. He runs things, and I need you to talk to him.” I said, ”OK.”

I said, ”Why do you call him Darth Vader?” He said, ”You’ll understand that when you see him.”

So, we go to the mosque and walk in, and the lesser clerics bring us, and they bring us in the room to sit down. And then Darth Vader comes in.

Now, this guy’s about the size of Shaquille O’Neal. I mean, he’s a huge man. He’s got his big, black turban on.

And he shakes my hand and just - a big old hand just wraps up around my hand. And he says, ”Please sit down.”

And so, I sat down, and he said, ”I’m glad you came to see me.” He said, ”Do you have any questions?” I said, ”Yes, sir, I do.”

I'm not going to put any more of the transcript out on this diary. I highly recommend that you read it for yourself. I am not going to call Jay a liar. Time magazine could call him out on it if he lied. What I really think though is that this Darth Vader said some of the best stuff that I have heard from anyone with respect to rebuilding Iraq. I wish that Jay had told President Bush about this meeting. The Darth Vader dude went off the deep end a little at the end. Still it is one awesome story.

A Connecticutt Yankee in King Arthur’s Court

A Connecticutt Yankee in King Arthur’s Court

Lately I have been thinking a lot about where US Presidents come from. I refer to both their birthplace and their political philosophy. I used Google and came up with this site. It revealed to me that President George W. Bush is the only US President who was born in Connecticutt.

There are some especially here at RS that prefer to associate President Bush with Texas. There is a wish, a strong desire I also have for this cowboy CINC to lead the way the Texans lead here . Unfortunately, this President does not have the breeding and genes of those Texans. I will accept that living in Texas for so many years maybe some of this spirit could have rubbed off onto President Bush.

Connecticutt reminds me of a wonderful Mark Twain novel . This satire while a work of fiction is very much a reminder of the real problems that humanity faces. The novel reminds me of the similarities between the good intentions. One section of analysis of Mark Twain’s work that especially seems apropos to President Bush is this”

“Training v. Nature: A theme central to all of Twain's satires is the question of the power of training against an inherent human nature. On most levels, Hank Morgan believes that training and influence determine the good or bad outcome of a society; his project of civilization is based on the belief that he can train the English people to think and thus, live differently. But he is at a loss to explain why, despite training, people revert to foolish and destructive practices.. Even after giving them a new world of technological and economic improvement, Hank finds that this is insufficient to keep them from abandoning his system for the Church's favor.”

If you replace Hank Morgan with President George W. Bush, and English with Iraqi I think you have described the current circumstance that we have in Iraq.

I searched some more with Google about historical rankings of US Presidents . The number 1 is Abraham Lincoln, the only President born in Kentucky. Therefore being the only one from any particular state can sometimes work out quite well for us. Nobody knows the future, but if the 2008 election is between Obama and McCain we will have elected either the first President from Hawaii, (Obama), or the first president born in the Panama Canal zone, (McCain). There is still 2 years to go, and hopefully some better choices for the US between now and then.

A 9-10-01 State of Mind

In recent days when I surf the web at Lucianne or Red State I feel like the majority of the topics of discussion are 9-10-01 types of things. There is a lot of talk about Walmart and JonBenet Ramsey. There are new developments in Iran and Syria that I haven't seen enough disccusion about. On July 24, 2006 an article was published pooh-poohing people for being islamophobes. Thankfully today another article appeared, and it does an excellent job of 'fisking' the other article. One of the money quotes from the fisking article follows:

"Mr. Walker's essay belongs to that large and growing genre of fiction, the political fairytale. The aim of such works is not to put its readers to sleep, but to soothe them into acquiescence. This it does in two ways. First, it tells people what they want to hear--the threat of radical Islam is overstated by irresponsible purveyors of hysteria. Second, it flatters their moral vanity: you, Dear Reader, are a good liberal and know that there is no political problem that cannot be solved by good will and a willingness to negotiate and see the other chap's point of view.
But wait: What is the other chap's point of view? I have always admired this frank observation by Hussein Massawi, a former Hezbollah leader: "We are not fighting so that you will offer us something, We are fighting to eliminate you." Point noted. "

I hope that we do not get complacent and lose our focus on what is really important. It is an election year, and there will be all kinds of attempts by the msm to frame the news that we get in the hopes getting the election results the msm wants. Please let's not be lulled to sleep. Now, especially now we need to remain focussed.

Who Do You Trust?

The people who are supporting the nominee Ned Lamont have made their feelings known with the pictures. Am I the only person who thinks that this is way outside the bound of decency? I do not live in Connecticutt. I do not have a dog in this fight. If the people of Connecticutt truly approve of the demonizing that is done to their Senator, then I am speechless. I do not know what I can say.

Bodyguard of Lies

BODYGUARD OF LIES

The recent front page stories of the NY Times, LA Times, Wall St Journal remind me of this book that I read a while back. The author published this book in 1975, 30 years after WWII. It is a very fine book, and I hightly recommend it. However, it would have been terrible if it had been written in 1944. That is my outrage with today's crop of news journalists. Today the newspapers in the USA do not have an ounce of respect for the US government. They are more interested in high-5 ing each other about their Pulitzer prizes than they are in showing any respect for the country that they live in that affords them the opportunities and benefits that they so richly do NOT deserve. If somebody writes an article or a book 30 years after the war with the jihadists is over that describes the deceptions etc, then I do not have any problem with that writer whatsoever. However if that writer is putting his article in a newspaper while we are still fighting then I have a lot of problems with that. I do not have a solution in mind that I think is really going to change anything. I do not expect these newspapers to shame themselves into showing any respect. I do not expect to see the US government come down on these newspapers like a ton of bricks. I do have a faint glimmer of hope that the patriots in the USA who still have respect for this country will simply stop advertising in these papers and buying these papers. If the financial markets come down on these newspapers like a ton of bricks, then that will be more effective than any nonbinding resolution from the Congress or statement from the White House.

President Reagan's unfinished business

President Reagan's unfinished business

I highly recommend reading this article of a speech President Reagan gave after he had left office. Almost 15 years later it is just as accurate if not even more so than when he delivered it. Everyone likes to talk about term limits or abolishing the Electoral College. Some people like to talk about new campaign finance reform regulations. All of this talk is a smokescreen pile of hooey. What we really need is a Constitutional amendment that calls for the U.S. Congress to balanced budget spending limits. What we need is a BRAC like program to take politics out of the equation and create Congressional districts from computer models that reflect populations. Don't allow the computer models to take party affiliation, religious affiliation, or ethnic affiliation into consideration. Just make the districts equal to groups of people who live next to each other. President Reagan is my personal hero and most favorite President. It is very unfortunate for the USA that he was not able to live to see the changes made. Sadly I do not see anyone in the current crop of politicians to grab this baton and run with it.

My Vote Counts

My Vote Counts

Well, it’s time for mid term elections again. Once again I feel like Charlie Brown preparing to kick the ball that Lucy is holding in place. I can rationalize my vote decision and once again fall flat on my back when the “Lucy” politician pulls the ball back. Or I can vote for the outsider. I read all kinds of article where people opine that we need to vote for the lesser of 2 evils. I understand what they are selling, and I am not buying it anymore. I don’t claim to be the sharpest tool on the shelf, but I have found a pretty good road map here. These are bought and paid for by Soros. I do not vote for them. I also look at this , this , this , this , and this site for information about any additional politicians who are not listed on the first web site. I hope that I can be a better person than my liberal acquaintances if the conservatives are removed from power. I do not understand a mindset that puts party politics ahead of love of country. There are liberals who simply are opposed to everything that conservatives do. There is not even a consideration about what is being done. All of the energy and hate is just about who is doing it. For that reason I do not want to whine about any hypocrisy. If they do think and act in a matter that is a benefit to my country while their guy is in power, then I am OK with that type of hypocrisy. Happy Easter and God Bless America.

Immigration or 'Wetback Go Home'

Immigration or Wetbacks Go Home

Let’s talk about it already. Lately there is so much hyperventilating and bloviating on this topic. If we could bottle up the bilge and bile we would solve our energy problems. Let me try to sort out the truth and the bullshit.

1. The problem with these people is a national security problem worse than what happened on September 11, 2001.

This is bullshit. These people are not coming to the United States because they are terrorists. The terrorists do not come from this sociological set of folks. These people are just looking to live a better life.

2. The problem with these people is a national economy problem. Our economy depends on these people doing jobs for less money than anybody. We can’t afford to lose the cheap labor.

There is some truth in that the problem is about the economy instead of national security. However, there can be an immigration plan implemented to allow people to legally immigrate to America. If businesses can implement plans to safeguard bank accounts for people, then I am sure the businesses can implement plans to safeguard jobs for people.

3: The problem with these people is that we need to build a wall on the border to keep them out. We need to put a gate in this wall to allow guest workers to pass through it.

This is bullshit. Building a wall is one gigantic waste of taxpayer money. A wall will not stop people. Requiring employers to safeguard jobs will stop people. If they can not make any more money until they are documented then it will slow down the number of people sneaking into the country. I don’t like the idea of guest worker because of the problems it causes with loyalty and patriotism. Let’s say they don’t want to immigrate to America because they are still loyal and patriotic to their country. Fine. Stay home and make your country a better country. If there is one thing this country does not need it is any more people living here that have no loyalty or patriotic national pride for the USA.

4. The problem with these people is that there are already over 11 million of them that are in the USA. We can not round up this many people and deport them.

This is true, but so what!! We don’t need to hunt them down, round them up, and ship them out of here. They got here and they will find a way out of here. We have history of ‘Trail of Tears’ marches that we absolutely do not need to repeat.

These are my opinions. I love immigrants. I want my country to run an immigration program like an efficient business. Right now this country runs the immigration program horribly. Then we have “reformers” politicians that want to make every person who tries to get a legal immigration visa feel like a chump. America, we can do better.

Madrassa USA

Madrassa USA

It’s getting real interesting lately in the news. There is a lot of hate speech against President Bush. I wonder if anyone sees the irony of haters using the same tactics to promote their hatred that arabs use in their madrassas.
Here is a report about an arab madrassa in Virginia. Islamic Saudi Academy is located in Fairfax County's old Mt. Vernon High School, named for George Washington's home but now owned by Saudis. The Washington Post recently reported on ISA. Although reporters were not allowed to attend classes they did manage to interview some students. Several students of different ages, all of whom asked not to be identified, said that in Islamic studies, they are taught that it is better to shun and even to dislike Christians, Jews and Shiite Muslims.
Some teachers "focus more on hatred" said one teenager, who recited by memory the signs of the coming Day of Judgment [when Jesus will return to lead Muslims in killing all Jews, according to Islam]. "They teach students that whatever is kuffar [non-Muslim], it is okay for you" to hurt or steal from that person.
Here is a report about a public high school in Colorada. Controversy over a high school teacher's comparison of President Bush to Adolf Hitler erupted into a day of turmoil Thursday — with a student protest, a threatened lawsuit and dueling talk shows.
At the center of the storm was Overland High School teacher Jay Bennish, whose lecture in a world geography class last month also included harsh words about capitalism, U.S. foreign policy and the invasion of Iraq.

Let me paraphrase… Several Colorado student, all of whom asked not to be identified, said that in high school teacher Bennish’s classroom, they are taught that it is better to shun and even to dislike Republicans.

Jay Bennish “focuses more on hatred” said Sean Allen, who tape recorded the teacher’s rant about the President State of the Union speech. He teaches students that whatever is Republican, it is okay for you to hurt or steal from that person.

Teach! Don’t Preach! or Free Speech!

I hope that enough wise people in the USA listen and read carefully news as we get more and more wrapped up in upcoming elections for 2006 and 2008.

The world is a global village

The world is a global village

It is interesting to read news articles from around the world, and discover similar patterns of human behavior by different countries, cultures, and societies. For example, in September of 2005 a newspaper in Denmark published cartoons that muslims think are offensive. In October of 2005 a US board approved a business deal that involved US port terminal management by a British company selling their business to a United Arab Emirate company. The interesting similarity is that in both of these cases widespread protests and hysteria did not happen for 4 or 5 months! I think politics are the engine that drives and manufacture all of this protest and hysteria.

I have read news analysis that suggests Osama Bin Laden became incensed when McDonald’s brought their restaurant franchise to Saudi Arabia. There are a lot of news articles where US politicians are incensed about foreigners from arab countries doing business in the USA. And the difference in Bin Laden and Hillary Clinton is……..

I do not agree with my president on everything. I hope that the road he has been leading us down, ie bringing democracy to the arab world, does not lead us off of a cliff. I worry that Mark Steyn is right, and we will have a new world global village that is muslim. Time will tell.

Not Seeing the Forest for the Trees

Mark Steyn
for one makes a very compelling analysis how 'Stuck on Stupid' western liberal progressive people have become. Here are just a couple of excerpts...
"There are many trouble spots around the world, but as a general rule, it's easy to make an educated guess at one of the participants: Muslims vs. Jews in "Palestine," Muslims vs. Hindus in Kashmir, Muslims vs. Christians in Africa, Muslims vs. Buddhists in Thailand, Muslims vs. Russians in the Caucasus, Muslims vs. backpacking tourists in Bali. Like the environmentalists, these guys think globally but act locally."

"The jihad has held out a long time against very tough enemies. If you're not shy about taking on the Israelis, the Russians, the Indians and the Nigerians, why wouldn't you fancy your chances against the Belgians and Danes and New Zealanders?

"So the jihadists are for the most part doing no more than giving us a prod in the rear as we sleepwalk to the cliff. When I say "sleepwalk," it's not because we're a blasé culture. On the contrary, one of the clearest signs of our decline is the way we expend so much energy worrying about the wrong things. If you've read Jared Diamond's bestselling book "Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed," you'll know it goes into a lot of detail about Easter Island going belly up because they chopped down all their trees. Apparently that's why they're not a G-8 member or on the U.N. Security Council. Same with the Greenlanders and the Mayans and Diamond's other curious choices of "societies." Indeed, as the author sees it, pretty much every society collapses because it chops down its trees.

Poor old Diamond can't see the forest because of his obsession with the trees. (Russia's collapsing even as it's undergoing reforestation.) One way "societies choose to fail or succeed" is by choosing what to worry about."

Jonah Goldberg
for another example of how 'Stuck on Stupid' the US political wonks have become. Please God, save America from all of the misguided reformers. Here is an excerpt...

"There’s an ancient cliché in Washington that the real crime isn’t what’s illegal but what’s legal. Campaign-finance “reform” is usually the most fertile soil for this cliché. Politicians complain that focusing on enforcement of existing laws misses the “big picture.” The whole “system” is corrupt.

And they are largely correct. Not just on campaign finance, but in terms of corporate involvement in politics across the board. The problem is that liberals and others wearing the “reformer” label consistently offer the wrong remedy for the right diagnosis. They want more regulation, more oversight, more government. This has it backwards.

If you think someone is hugging you too hard, what do you do? You push him away. You don’t hug him back. And yet, it is considered the height of enlightened policymaking to say that, in answer to corporate America’s bear hug, Washington should hug back twice as hard.

If you want to know why business takes such an interest in Washington, the answer can be found in your low-flow toilet, in the warning labels adorning your cars, in your 8 zillion page tax returns. It can be found while you wait on hold trying to get a human to answer your questions about your health insurance. And the answer is most certainly somewhere in your box of cereal, made with grains subsidized by Uncle Sam and coated in sugar that has no business being grown in the United States of America. Corporations meddle in Washington because Washington meddles with them.

It is simply naive to believe that a businessman will have no interest in politics when politicians have taken a great interest in him. And it is grotesquely unfair to assume that businesspeople are corrupt simply because they want to support politicians less inclined to hurt them.

Microsoft CEO Bill Gates used to brag that he barely spent a dime on lobbying — “I live in the other Washington,” he liked to say. But the very moment that government — federal and state — tried to tear apart his company, Gates abandoned his view that the New Economy could ignore the Old Politics. Now D.C. is awash in Microsoft lobbyists. Wal-Mart is only now learning the same lesson. If you don’t get in the game, you might be regulated out of it.

Of course, not all businesses that support politicians of either party are doing it out of self-protection. Some are merely rent-seeking opportunists. Some are both. Sugar growers, for example, have ripped off taxpayers and consumers to the tune of billions. If government stopped protecting the industry from competition, it would mostly disappear and stop gouging us at the same time.

Liberals think Republicans are living up to their principles when they get cozy with fat cats. The reality is that Republicans betray their principles when they give fat cats a reason to come to Washington to begin with."