Saturday, September 08, 2007

A CFG 6-pack of the Good Stuff for 2008


Brownback

Romney

Thompson

Taxes

+


+

Spending



+

Free Trade

+

+

+

Entitlement Reform



+

Regulation

+

+

+

School Choice

+

+

+

Political Free Speech

+



Tort Reform

+

+



McCain

Giuliani

Huckabee

Taxes


+


Spending

+

+


Free Trade

+


+

Entitlement Reform




Regulation


+


School Choice

+

+


Political Free Speech




Tort Reform



+






































































A disclaimer: I am supporting Fred Thompson. My "+ sign" table is based upon Club for Growth 'White Papers' on these 6 candidates. I do not desire to post a negative attack against any of these 6. As you can see, every one of them managed to get at least a couple of + signs.
The Republican Party has moved away from the small government values of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan (entitlement reform) Fred Thompson is the only 1 out of these 6 that gets a + sign on this issue.

Thursday, September 06, 2007

Playing the Religion Card in Politics



Over at the Iraq the Model web site Mohammed has written an excellent report about Maliki's visit to Sistani to discuss the latest security and political developments in Iraq. Mohammed thinks this is a very bad move on Maliki's part.

The people remain the most important item in the equation as they are the ones who have the actual power to decide the long-term strategic choices with their votes.
In Iraq the experience with the rule of Islamists has certainly reduced the numbers of people who support the idea of Islamic rule and a there's a growing number of people who now began to question the idea about Islam being the solution.

So, there will be a great long battle between the two ideas; between Islamic rule and the separation between religion and the state--the current problem is that the people are divided into two, almost equal, groups in this respect. This means none of the two can prevail at this stage but at the same time the performance of the government made mostly of Islamists will no doubt lead to a steady decrease in its popularity.

Islamists have failed to offer a chance for a better life whether when they were in the opposition or when they got to rule the country. I think that's why they try to sell the idea of death instead of life; they failed to offer a better life so they picked up the slogan of death and "martyrdom" to promise a better life, but in an imaginary heaven; not in real life.

This strategy, in some time that cannot be specified right now, will mark the beginning of actual death but it will the death of political Islamist movements and maybe Iraq, the country where people have the right to make a choice, will become a grave for political Islam.
It will take more than one round of elections to declare them dead but I see that time is not on the Islamists' side.

The war is going to be long because it's a war of ideas—the conflict is not going to be a localized one and will have different forms because I believe the whole world is concerned and will take part in one way or another.

Identifying and supporting the true moderates would be a fair weapon to use in this war and I think American and the rest of the free world will keep trying to support positive reforms towards a better life to defeat the ideology of death.


I agree completely with Mohammed on his assessment of the war. I am encouraged by the progress in western Iraq where tribal sheikhs instead of Muslim clerics have led the charge against AQI. I am also encouraged by the Lebanese army progress in regaining control of their country from radical Islamists.

Too many people get too hung up on the Sunni and Shia divide amongst Muslims. It is a lot more complicated than that, but what I really think is that the more important divide is between people who want an improvement in their lives, and they do not buy in to the politics of some religious zealots that do not deliver for them.

Saturday, September 01, 2007

Setting the Record Straight

A while back I was visiting RedState, and somebody provided this LINK and I remembered to bookmark it. I get discouraged a lot of times when I am reading other poster’s comments, and I click over to this link to get a perspective I will never get from reading anything from the MSM. As an aside, another source of great information about Iraq is now being provided by Jeff .

I’ve read the text of a speech Pres. Bush gave at an American Legion forum in Reno, NV, and also a previous speech he gave at a VFW forum in Kansas City, MO. To the American Legion audience Pres. Bush spelled out the situation between the US and the radical extremists we are fighting today. To the VFW audience Pres. Bush recalled the situation between the US and Japan in 1945.

Of course the MSM reported on these speeches, but they always fail to report in the central message and points that President Bush makes. They always seem to threadjack their reports over this or that quibble they have with his speeches. It is frustrating to me that the President has some important things to say to the country, and he does not have the speaking skills to do it.

Known Facts Today


The Violent Islamic Radicalism That Inspires Extremists In The Middle East Has Two Main Strains. Allowing these forces of radicalism to drive America out of the Middle East could result in disaster for the region's people, danger to our friends and allies, and a direct threat to American peace and security.

  1. The First Strain Is Sunni Extremism, Embodied By Al Qaeda And Its Terrorist Allies. These extremists hope to impose their dark vision across the Middle East by raising up a violent and radical caliphate that spans from Spain to Indonesia. They kill fellow Muslims in places like Algeria, Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia in an attempt to undermine their governments. And they kill Americans because they know we stand in their way – they attacked U.S. Embassies in Africa in 1998, attacked the USS Cole in 2000, killed nearly 3,000 people on 9/11, and plot to attack us again.

  1. The Second Strain Is Shia Extremism, Supported And Embodied By Iran's Government. Iran is the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism, and the United States is working with friends and allies around the world to confront the danger presented by actions of Iran's government. Iran's leaders threaten the security of nations everywhere by:
    • Actively pursuing technology that could be used to develop nuclear weapons;
    • Arresting visiting American scholars who have committed no crimes and pose no threat to their regime;
    • Backing Hezbollah terrorists who are trying to undermine the democratic government of Lebanon;
    • Funding the terrorist groups Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, which murder the innocent, target Israel, and destabilize the Palestinian territories;
    • Sending arms to the Taliban in Afghanistan, which can be used to attack American and NATO troops and Afghan civilians; and
    • Sending arms to extremists in Iraq that are used against Coalition and Iraqi troops, and Iraqi civilians.

These Two Dangerous Strains Of Extremism Vying For Control Of The Middle East Have Now Closed In On Iraq In An Effort To Bring Down Its Young Democracy

Sunni Extremists, Led By Al Qaeda, Are Staging Sensational Attacks On Innocent Men, Women, And Children In Iraq In An Attempt To Stoke Sectarian Violence. These violent extremists' ranks include foreign fighters from a variety of countries in the region who travel to Iraq through Syria. Their operatives have killed those seeking to build a new future for the Iraqi people, and their operations seek to create images of chaos and carnage to break the will of the American people. Their targets include everyone they consider infidels – including Christians, Jews, Yezidis, Shia, and even fellow Sunnis who do not share their radical distortion of Islam.

Shia Extremists, Backed By Iran, Are Training Iraqis To Carry Out Attacks On Our Forces, The Iraqi Government, And The Iraqi People. Members of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Qods Force are supplying extremist groups with funding and weapons, including sophisticated improvised explosive devices (IEDs). With the assistance of Hezbollah, they have provided training for violent forces active inside Iraq.

  • The Attacks On Our Bases And Our Troops Using Iranian-Supplied Munitions Have Increased In The Last Few Months – Despite Pledges By Iran To Help Stabilize The Security Situation In Iraq. Recently, Coalition forces seized 240-millimeter rockets that had been manufactured in Iran this year and provided to Iraqi extremist groups by Iranian agents.
  • The Iranian Regime Must Halt These Actions At Once. Some say Iran's leaders are not aware of what members of their own regime are doing. Others say Iran's leaders are actively seeking to provoke the West. Either way, Iranian leaders bear the responsibility for aiding attacks against Coalition forces and the murder of innocent Iraqis.

The Momentum Is On Now Our Side In Iraq – Our New Strategy Is Seizing The Initiative From Our Enemy, And Giving It To The Iraqi People

Our New Strategy Is Showing Results In Better Security.

  • Sectarian violence has sharply decreased in Baghdad.
  • Since January, we have killed or captured an average of more than 1,500 al Qaeda terrorists and other enemies of Iraq's elected government each month
  • Al Qaeda is being displaced from former strongholds in Baghdad, Anbar, and Diyala provinces.
  • We have conducted operations against Iranian Qods Force agents whose group supplies lethal munitions to extremist groups.
  • We have targeted Iranian-backed Shia militants and their supply networks – and Prime Minister Maliki has courageously committed to pursue them.

Our New Strategy Is Resulting In Encouraging Developments At The Local Level, And As Iraqis Take Control Over Their Lives At The Local Level, They Will Demand More Action From Their National Leaders In Baghdad. In the cities and neighborhoods where they live, Iraqis are increasingly reaching accommodations with each other, with the Coalition, and with the government in Baghdad. This reconciliation is coming from the bottom up; it is having an impact in the fight against the enemy; and it is building a solid foundation for a democratic Iraq.

  • In Anbar – The Province That Had Been Called "Lost" To The Enemy – Increasing Numbers Of Local Sunnis Have Turned Against Al Qaeda. Local sheikhs have joined with American forces to drive the terrorists out of the capital city of Ramadi, and elsewhere, residents are providing critical intelligence, and tribesmen have joined the Iraqi police and security forces.
  • Many Iraqis Who Once Felt Marginalized Are Rejoining The Political Process. Virtually every city and town in the province now has a mayor and a municipal council, and local officials are forming ties with the central government in Baghdad because these Sunni leaders now see a role for their people in the new Iraq. In an encouraging sign, the central government is beginning to respond with funding for vital services and reconstruction, and with increased security forces.
  • In Other Provinces, There Are Also Signs Of Bottom Up Progress. For example, in Diyala province, the city of Baqubah re-opened six of its banks, providing residents with capital for the local economy. And in Ninewa province, local officials have established a commission to investigate corruption, with a local judge empowered to pursue charges of fraud and racketeering.

Iraq's Government Still Has More Work To Do To Meet Many Of Its Legislative Benchmarks, But It Is Also Important To Note That Many Of The Goals Behind These Benchmarks Are Being Achieved Without Legislation. For example, the national government is already sharing oil revenues with provinces – despite the fact that no formal law has been passed.

Known Facts in 1945

At the outset of World War II there were only two democracies in the Far East -- Australia and New Zealand. Today most of the nations in Asia are free, and its democracies reflect the diversity of the region. Some of these nations have constitutional monarchies, some have parliaments, and some have presidents. Some are Christian, some are Muslim, some are Hindu, and some are Buddhist. Yet for all the differences, the free nations of Asia all share one thing in common: Their governments derive their authority from the consent of the governed, and they desire to live in peace with their neighbors.

Along the way to this freer and more hopeful Asia, there were a lot of doubters. Many times in the decades that followed World War II, American policy in Asia was dismissed as hopeless and naive. And when we listen to criticism of the difficult work our generation is undertaking in the Middle East today, we can hear the echoes of the same arguments made about the Far East years ago.

In the aftermath of Japan's surrender, many thought it naive to help the Japanese transform themselves into a democracy. Then as now, the critics argued that some people were simply not fit for freedom.

Some said Japanese culture was inherently incompatible with democracy. Joseph Grew, a former United States ambassador to Japan who served as Harry Truman's Under Secretary of State, told the President flatly that -- and I quote -- "democracy in Japan would never work." He wasn't alone in that belief. A lot of Americans believed that -- and so did the Japanese -- a lot of Japanese believed the same thing: democracy simply wouldn't work.

Others critics said that Americans were imposing their ideals on the Japanese. For example, Japan's Vice Prime Minister asserted that allowing Japanese women to vote would "retard the progress of Japanese politics."

It's interesting what General MacArthur wrote in his memoirs. He wrote, "There was much criticism of my support for the enfranchisement of women. Many Americans, as well as many other so-called experts, expressed the view that Japanese women were too steeped in the tradition of subservience to their husbands to act with any degree of political independence." That's what General MacArthur observed. In the end, Japanese women were given the vote; 39 women won parliamentary seats in Japan's first free election. Today, Japan's minister of defense is a woman, and just last month, a record number of women were elected to Japan's Upper House. Other critics argued that democracy -- (applause.)

There are other critics, believe it or not, that argue that democracy could not succeed in Japan because the national religion -- Shinto -- was too fanatical and rooted in the Emperor. Senator Richard Russell denounced the Japanese faith, and said that if we did not put the Emperor on trial, "any steps we may take to create democracy are doomed to failure." The State Department's man in Tokyo put it bluntly: "The Emperor system must disappear if Japan is ever really to be democratic."

Those who said Shinto was incompatible with democracy were mistaken, and fortunately, Americans and Japanese leaders recognized it at the time, because instead of suppressing the Shinto faith, American authorities worked with the Japanese to institute religious freedom for all faiths. Instead of abolishing the imperial throne, Americans and Japanese worked together to find a place for the Emperor in the democratic political system.

And the result of all these steps was that every Japanese citizen gained freedom of religion, and the Emperor remained on his throne and Japanese democracy grew stronger because it embraced a cherished part of Japanese culture. And today, in defiance of the critics and the doubters and the skeptics, Japan retains its religions and cultural traditions, and stands as one of the world's great free societies.

You know, the experts sometimes get it wrong. An interesting observation, one historian put it -- he said, "Had these erstwhile experts" -- he was talking about people criticizing the efforts to help Japan realize the blessings of a free society -- he said, "Had these erstwhile experts had their way, the very notion of inducing a democratic revolution would have died of ridicule at an early stage."

Instead, I think it's important to look at what happened. A democratic Japan has brought peace and prosperity to its people. Its foreign trade and investment have helped jump-start the economies of others in the region. The alliance between our two nations is the lynchpin for freedom and stability throughout the Pacific. And I want you to listen carefully to this final point: Japan has transformed from America's enemy in the ideological struggle of the 20th century to one of America's strongest allies in the ideological struggle of the 21st century.

Friday, August 24, 2007

Faces of the Enemy...We Must Never Forget







We are coming up quickly on the 6th anniversary of the most horrific attack 4 pilots ever made against the USA. It is sad, and it is mind-boggling how so many Americans have forgotten how they felt on September 11, 2001. Today so many opinions seem to assert that America is to blame. They think what happened is just a reaction to how wrong America has been in what America is doing in the world. These opinions could not be more wrong-headed and more misguided. Our enemy is not just reacting to what a country or a political party is doing. They are acting on their own agenda. They want to destroy the West, and conquer the world. They want to establish a global caliphate. We cannot simply ignore them. We cannot let them win power in a country, any country. The investment that the Democratic Party has made in defeat for the US in Iraq is just so wrong. First they have tried to make the case that the US military surge is not working. Facts have not been on their side. Now they are trying to make the case that the government of Iraq is no good, and must be replaced. I don't know what will happen with the government of Iraq, but I know the politicians in Washington D.C. have no business replacing this government. It is up to the people of Iraq. It bothers me when Sen. Levin stirs this pot, because if America will not be their friend an ally, then Iraq might turn to Iran and Syria to be their friend. I think this would be a poor choice for them, but I resent Sen. Levin threatening to withdraw all US support from them.
We need to remember who the enemy is. We must never forget.

Monday, August 20, 2007

THE 50 MOST POWERFUL PEOPLE IN D.C. …HUH!?

I ran across this article on the internet.

In Washington, you are either a person with power or a person who acts like he has power. How do you tell the contenders from the pretenders? We canvassed the city’s top think tankers, congressional aides, and political journalists to find out. Herewith, the 50 men and women who make it all happen (but not anyone named Bush or Cheney)
By Raha Naddaf and Greg Veis


So I have listed 15 of the 50 most powerful people in D.C. who I have never heard of. Is it just me? Without cheating and using Google or reading the article, do you know who these people are, and why they are considered so powerful? I try to keep up by visiting RedState and NRO, but this list makes me feel like I am not worthy.

Oh by the way, in case you don’t read the article, they had 2 people listed who I have heard of, and would never consider for a list like this: Andrew Sullivan and Tom Toles.


6. HOWARD KOHR & BILL NOVELLI
15. MARK PENN
24. DAVID RUBENSTEIN
29. ALEX CASTELLANOS
31. DANIEL SNYDER
33. STEVE ELMENDORF
37. SIMON ROSENBERG
38. TOMMY JACOMO
40. MICHAEL HAUSFELD
42. MASON LECKY
43. JAMES A. JOHNSON
45. ISABELLE GOETZ
47. SUSAN MCCUE
49. NANCY JACOBSON

Sunday, August 19, 2007

Champagne for Everyone!




Contrary to the title, this is really a rather depressing story about the fear and loathing currently taking over in Europe. Paul Belien of the Brussels Journal blog wrote this article
about a decision by the mayor of Brussels to deny a permit to demonstrate.

Freddy Thielemans, the Mayor of Brussels, prohibited a demonstration against the Islamization of Europe, planned to be held next September 11 in front of the European Parliament buildings. Mayor Thielemans is worried that the demonstration will upset the large immigrant population of Brussels. Over half the inhabitants of the Brussels region are of foreign origin, many of them from Morocco. According to the mayor there is a real danger of violence between demonstrators and Muslims living in the neighbourhood. The latter might not tolerate native Europeans protesting against their continent becoming Eurabia.

Thielemans is a member of the Parti Socialiste (PS), a Belgian party which caters for the Muslim population. The PS is the largest party in Brussels, holding 17 of the 47 seats in the city council. 10 of the 17 PS-councillors are Muslims. The PS governs Brussels in a coalition with the Christian-Democrats, who have 11 councillors, of whom 2 are Muslims and 3 are immigrants from Sub-Saharan Africa. Only 13 of the 28 councillors in the governing coalition of the city are native Belgians. Thielemans is the most conspicuous of these. He is an atheist who is fond of Muslims, not because he respects religious people, but because he hates Christians. On 2 April 2005 the Brussels mayor was attending an official cocktail party with the mayor of Angoulême (France), when the news of the death of Pope John Paul II reached him. On hearing the news he ordered “Champagne for everyone!” His French colleague walked out in disgust.

Last Spring, the Danish group Stop Islamiseringen af Danmark (SIAD), the British group Stop the Islamisation of Europe (SIOE) and the German group Pax Europa, whose logo includes the flag of the multiculturalist EU, decided to organize a protest march against the introduction of Sharia laws in Europe. The organizers want the march to take place on 9/11 in the streets of Brussels and to end in front of the EU Parliament. There, the victims of Sept. 11, 2001, will be commemorated with one minute of silence.

Up until last week the Belgian press had made no mention of the march. Last Thursday, however, Mayor Thielemans banned the demonstration. A local joke has it that the mayor cannot allow a demonstration on his 63rd birthday (Thielemans was born on Sept. 11, 1944) because he fears that if the pope dies on his birthday it will cost him a fortune to offer “champagne for everyone.” That would be no big deal in a city where the many Muslims do not drink alcohol, but with 20,000 non-Islamic visitors in town the mayor might bankrupt himself on champagne.

The Danish-British-German organizers can lodge an appeal against the mayor’s prohibition with the Belgian Council of State. The CoS may rule that the demonstration must be allowed to take place. Meanwhile an online petition, which everyone is invited to sign, asks the mayor to reconsider his decision. Thielemans’ ban has turned the anti-Sharia demonstration into a huge publicity stunt, even if only a few people show up. Meanwhile, Thielemans’ decision has showed the world that Brussels, a city which does not allow peaceful Europeans to demonstrate and make their wishes known to the European authorities in town, is unworthy of being Europe’s capital.


It saddens and disgusts me how sick and twisted the atheist/socialist movement in Europe have become. There no longer is any connection between liberals, in an 18th century classical liberal meaning of the term, and these lefties. Mark Steyn and others have been saying for quite a while that Europe is lost. Something has got to change, or, I fear, they are correct.

Saturday, August 18, 2007

Changing of the Guard...7 Open Seats









Right now there are 7 open seats up for grabs in House 2008 elections. Maybe there will be more open seats between now and then. I do not think this is such a bad thing. If the House had term limits similar to POTUS, only make it 12 instead of 8, I would be happy. I hope the GOP will hold the seats in CA, IL, MS, and OH. I really hope the GOP can pick up seats in CO and ME.

From the left side of the blogosphere I read the top 20 list targeted Dem seats:
Nick Lampson, Texas
Tim Mahoney, Florida
Jerry McNerney, California
Zack Space, Ohio
Baron Hill, Indiana
Chris Carney, Pennsylvania
Patrick Murphy, Pennsylvania
Nancy Boyda, Kansas
Joe Sestak, Pennsylvania
Brad Ellsworth, Indiana
Heath Shuler, North Carolina
Ciro Rodriguez, Texas
Steve Kagen, Wisconsin
Jim Marshall, Georgia
Joe Donnelly, Indiana
John Barrow, Georgia
Jason Altmire, Pennsylvania
John Hall, New York
Kirsten Gillibrand, New York
Stephanie Herseth, South Dakota

Three of these 20 are in my home state, IN. I think it will be more difficult to unseat Hill and Donnelly than Ellsworth. If some good fiscal conservative Club for Growth type candidates can be recruited they can win those seats back. I don't know enough about the other 17 on the list except they are mostly newly elected in 2006.
The Club for Growth is supporting an opponent, Andrew Harris, to Wayne Gilchrist in MD. Hopefully they can repeat their success of last year when they helped elect Tim Wahlberg.

Wednesday, August 15, 2007

GOP Rockers... a future POTUS?






OK, the late Lee Atwater, political adviser to George H. W. Bush, and Karl Rove, political advisor to George W. Bush are not going to be POTUS. But why should political advisers have all the fun? Mike Huckabee is a rocker, and he is running for POTUS. He has his own rock n roll band, Capitol Offense.

Maybe there is a new bloc of voters for GOP candidates to court. Then if this is a consideration, let's get a famous rocker. Let's go with Ted Nugent! Think about how Ted would have a lock on the voters who are hunters, outdoorsmen, and 2nd amendment proponents. The men and women serving in the armed services and their families would strongly support Ted. Talk about "new tone". Can you imagine Ted Nugent making nice with all of his political enemies? I don't think so. Somebody, please, explain to me how Mike Huckabee has any more of a shot at being POTUS than rocker Ted Nugent.

Sunday, August 12, 2007

Red States' House members LOVE PORK TOO!



State Grade
Nebraska 71
Utah 59
Idaho 49
Georgia 47
South Carolina 46
Tennessee 44
Colorado 41
Delaware 40
Arizona 38
Nevada 37
Wisconsin 37
Minnesota 36
Texas 36
Indiana 33
Florida 31
New Mexico 31
Oklahoma 27
Missouri 25
North Carolina 25
Ohio 22
Michigan 21
Iowa 20
Illinois 19
Virginia 19
California 18
Louisiana 15
Pennsylvania 13
Wyoming 10
New Jersey 9
Oregon 8
Alaska 6
Washington 5
Kentucky 4
Maryland 4
New York 4
Arkansas 3
Massachusetts 3
Mississippi 3
Alabama 2
Connecticut 2
Kansas 2
North Dakota 2
South Dakota 2
Maine 1
New Hampshire 1
Rhode Island 1
West Virginia 1
Hawaii 0
Montana 0
Vermont 0

When I used the CFG 2007 RePORK Card to get a state by state tally on the spending I thought all of the states on the bottom would be blue states. Boy, was I mistaken. I thought New York and California would be way down. I did not expect to find Alabama, Kansas, and Montana beneath them. I thought wrong. There are still a lot of big spenders in the House, and they are from red states as well as blue states.

Saturday, August 11, 2007

House GOP-Porkbusters&Porkers



The Club for Growth has released a "2007 Repork Card"

The Club for Growth has compiled a RePORK Card of all members' votes on all 50 anti-pork amendments (see below). "Taxpayers have a right to know which congressmen stand up for them and which stand up for the special interests," said Club for Growth President Pat Toomey. "Unfortunately, the Club for Growth RePORK Card shows that most congressmen care more about lining their buddies' pockets than they care about protecting American taxpayers."


It is a good read at their website. I decided to make a picture based on their report that shows the 7 states with Reps who scored 100%, and the 14 states with Reps who scored 0%. Three states, Arizona, California, and New Jersey, have a mix of both 100% and 0% Reps. So look with pride or look with shame. It all depends where you live, and whether you see CongressCritters™ 'bringing home the bacon' or 'lining their buddies' pockets'.

Wednesday, August 08, 2007

"Calling things by their name." - Ayaan Hirsi Ali



After watching this video the thought came to me that maybe Ayaan Hirsi Ali has been lurking here at Redsate. When she spoke about the former jihadist she knew who told her how much they laughed and loved when people said the terrorists were simply the response to the terrible government foreign policy. This reminded me of a recent post by my frieend gamecock. It sometimes does seem like there are so many people doing for free what America's enemies would gladly pay for.

Tuesday, August 07, 2007



From this website http://www.yehhumnaheen.org/english/index.html is the following statement

Yeh Hum Naheen has become a truly unprecedented musical movement. Featuring the vocal talents of some of Pakistans biggest music artists, including Haroon, Ali Haider, Ali Zafar, Shufqat, Strings, Shuja Haider and Hadiqa Kiani, uniting to sing out the message the world needs to hear.

Written by Ali Moeen, Pakistans foremost lyricist, with music composed by Shuja Haider, its the central message of the song that has compelled so many people to become involved. It is a message of reconciliation, a message of peace and a message of truth. Capturing the imagination of people across the board, Yeh Hum Naheen has given a voice to the silent majority, those in the Muslim world who have for too long been mis-represented. These are the people who although not appearing on our television screens are saddened and shocked at the high-jacking of Islam by terrorists, and want to stand up and shout “This is Not Us”. The song is the brainchild of Waseem Mahmood, author and media consultant, who took inspiration for the project from his children. They were tired at the way a minority of misguided young people were vehemently putting forward a message of radicalization and terrorism which was at odds with what the majority of Muslims believe. It is time to re-address the imbalance, and from the smallest child to the oldest person, Yeh Hum Naheen seeks to give a voice to the voiceless.


It does have that 1980's 'we are the world' feel to it. I and many other people have not been happy about never seeing anything like this. Silence has existed among many Muslims for so long. I just hope that this is for real.

Monday, August 06, 2007

Sharia Chic! NYC Stop This Madness!



There is a new PUBLIC school that will be opening its doors for the first time ever this September. The name of this school is Khalil Gibran International Academy. There was an article in the NY Post

Activists with ties to the principal of the city's controversial new Arabic-themed school are hawking T- shirts that glorify Palestinian terror, The Post has learned.


Way back in May 1 of this year Alicia Colon wrote her opinion of this new public school.

When I met him a while ago in The New York Sun's offices, Chancellor Joel Klein seemed to be in command of his senses. And Mayor Bloomberg did not become a successful billionaire without having some smarts. So whose insane idea was it to have an Arabic public school in Brooklyn open this September? Are they out of their minds? Have they learned nothing from the Netherlands about the danger of pandering to multiculturalism?

When I first heard of this proposed school, I thought it was a joke. But then I read Daniel Pipes's column about this disguised "madrassa" and discovered who the major principals were. Now I can't dispel this feeling of disbelief and outrage. This proposal is utter madness, considering that five years after September 11, ground zero is still a hole in the ground and we're bending over backwards to appease those sympathetic to individuals who would destroy us again. Smart, really smart.

How delighted Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda must have been to hear the news — that New York City, the site of the worst terrorist attack in our history, is bowing down in homage to accommodate and perhaps groom future radicals. The principal designate, Dhabah Almontaser, is virulently anti-Bush — a typical academic — but she is now undergoing a public relations makeover to soften her radical image. I suggest that New Yorkers research her hostile speeches and then do everything possible to put an end to this disastrously ill-conceived school.

Daniel Pipes was too conservative in asking his readers to send e-mails to the Chancellor at JKlein@schools.nyc.gov. I say break out the torches and surround City Hall to stop this monstrosity.


I can't say it any better than Alicia Colon did. It pains me that a NYC mayor would even want to be remotely associated with an "Intifada NYC' tee shirt marketing plan. I can not even imagine Mayor Rudy supporting this. The citizens of NYC, many of whom had friends and family members murdered on 9-11, must stand up and put this madness down.

Saturday, August 04, 2007

The Senate did the right thing

Early Saturday morning Sen. Kit Bond (R-Mo.) said,
“In a time of a heightened threat, the Senate did the right thing and acted to give our law enforcement the tools they need to combat terrorism. It is now up to the House to act. It is critical to our national security – to keep our country safe – that we update this 30-year old law before we leave for August recess.”


I posted this earlier where I expressed my doubts about Congress getting this done. I really am glad that I was wrong. In an article from CQ Today,
A House Democratic aide said the House was expected to clear the Senate Republican legislation, with most Republicans and some Democrats expected to vote for it.

The bill is intended to eliminate hitches in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA (PL 95-51) that have contributed to the gap and address limitations on surveillance created by a recent court ruling.


I hope the House Democratic aide is correct. The bill passed with bi-partisan support in the US Senate. Diane Feinstein joined 15 Democrats in voting YES with all of the Republicans voting YES. The Senate Roll Call is here.

Friday, August 03, 2007

It's Time To Get Out Now!




Now is the time to soberly and reflectively consider the situation. This experiment with a democratic republic has failed. Enemy combatants stream across the nation's borders. The lawmakers are taking an August vacation while soldiers fight and die every day. The country is terribly split, and the lawmakers in the nation's capitol are unable to make laws on improving the economy. The nation's infrastructure needs repairs. Many in the country do not trust the police to be honest and trustworthy especially national law enforcement. Most liberal and progressive thinking people should realize how hopeless it is. Really they should just leave the USA NOW!

Thursday, August 02, 2007

The Really Scary Part of Obama's Speech


Senator Obama gave a speech August 1st on the GWOT. There has been much discussion about his remarks that as POTUS he would invade Pakistan and withdraw financial aid to Pakistan if it feels Pakistan is failing to stop terrorists. I really wish, which is why I am posting this blog, that attention could be paid to the really scary part of his speech IMO.

Here is the part that had my alarm bells going off:

"No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient. That is not who we are. And it is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists. The FISA court works. The separation of powers works. Our Constitution works. We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers, and that justice is not arbitrary.

This Administration acts like violating civil liberties is the way to enhance our security. It is not. There are no short-cuts to protecting America, and that is why the fifth part of my strategy is doing the hard and patient work to secure a more resilient homeland.

Too often this Administration's approach to homeland security has been to scatter money around and avoid hard choices, or to scare Americans without telling them what to be scared of, or what to do. A Department set up to make Americans feel safer didn't even show up when bodies drifted through the streets in New Orleans. That's not acceptable.

My Administration will take an approach to homeland security guided by risk."


To me that sounds like Senator Obama truly believes the US Constitution IS a suicide pact. FISA works? No violating the civil liberties of terrorists? WTF? To me this 5th part of his strategy is indeed the most scary part of all.

Wednesday, August 01, 2007

Bernard Lewis Explains Terrorists' History





Bernard Lewis was honored at AEI as the recipient of the Irving Krystol award for 2007.
On March 20th he gave a lecture upon accepting the award. The lecture was about history from the perspective of Osama Bin Laden, and how he sees historical events much differently than we in the West see them.

He divides the history into periods in relation to events of the Muslims. The first period is when Islam began to spread in the beginning.

Bernard Lewis:
The declaration of war begins at the very beginning of Islam. There are certain letters purported to have been written by the Prophet Muhammad to the Christian Byzantine emperor, the emperor of Persia, and various other rulers, saying, "I have now brought God's final message. Your time has passed. Your beliefs are superseded. Accept my mission and my faith or resign or submit--you are finished." The authenticity of these prophetic letters is doubted, but the message is clear and authentic in the sense that it does represent the long dominant view of the Islamic world.


The second period is the second attempt to conquer the world by Mongol tartars who had been converted to Islams and Turks.

Bernard Lewis:
That was not the end of the matter. In the meantime the Islamic world, having failed the first time, was bracing for the second attack, this time conducted not by Arabs and Moors but by Turks and Tartars. In the mid-thirteenth century the Mongol conquerors of Russia were converted to Islam. The Turks, who had already conquered Anatolia, advanced into Europe and in 1453 they captured the ancient Christian citadel of Constantinople. They conquered a large part of the Balkans, and for a while ruled half of Hungary. Twice they reached as far as Vienna, to which they laid siege in 1529 and again in 1683. Barbary corsairs from North Africa--well-known to historians of the United States--were raiding Western Europe. They went to Iceland--the uttermost limit--and to several places in Western Europe, including notably a raid on Baltimore (the original one, in Ireland) in 1631. In a contemporary document, we have a list of 107 captives who were taken from Baltimore to Algiers, including a man called Cheney.


Osama Bin Laden credits himself as the leader of the third attempt to conquer the world.

Bernard Lewis:
Osama bin Laden, in some very interesting proclamations and declarations, has this to say about the war in Afghanistan which, you will remember, led to the defeat and retreat of the Red Army and the collapse of the Soviet Union. We tend to see that as a Western victory, more specifically an American victory, in the Cold War against the Soviets. For Osama bin Laden, it was nothing of the kind. It is a Muslim victory in a jihad. If one looks at what happened in Afghanistan and what followed, this is, I think one must say, a not implausible interpretation.

As Osama bin Laden saw it, Islam had reached the ultimate humiliation in this long struggle after World War I, when the last of the great Muslim empires--the Ottoman Empire--was broken up and most of its territories divided between the victorious allies; when the caliphate was suppressed and abolished, and the last caliph driven into exile. This seemed to be the lowest point in Muslim history. From there they went upwards.

In his perception, the millennial struggle between the true believers and the unbelievers had gone through successive phases, in which the latter were led by the various imperial European powers that had succeeded the Romans in the leadership of the world of the infidels--the Christian Byzantine Empire, the Holy Roman Empire, the British and French and Russian empires. In this final phase, he says, the world of the infidels was divided and disputed between two rival superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union. In his perception, the Muslims have met, defeated, and destroyed the more dangerous and the more deadly of the two infidel superpowers. Dealing with the soft, pampered and effeminate Americans would be an easy matter.

This belief was confirmed in the 1990s when we saw one attack after another on American bases and installations with virtually no effective response of any kind--only angry words and expensive missiles dispatched to remote and uninhabited places. The lessons of Vietnam and Beirut were confirmed by Mogadishu. "Hit them, and they'll run." This was the perceived sequence leading up to 9/11. That attack was clearly intended to be the completion of the first sequence and the beginning of the new one, taking the war into the heart of the enemy camp.


He concludes this lecture with question "Is third time charm for Islam? He also appraises like a couple of prize fighters the advantages of Islam vs West. The advantages for the terrorists are strengths in conviction, fervor, and demographics.
The advantages for the West are the appeal of modern knowledge and freedom in its Western interpretation of freedom. I have always appreciated history, and I like the way Bernard Lewis presented. Lessons can be learned from history to keep from making the same mistakes over and over again.

Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Are You Talkin' to Me Senator Biden?



One of the CNN You-Tube questions came from Jered Townsend from Clio, Michigan. the YouTube citizen questioner began. "To all the candidates, tell me your position on gun control, as myself and other Americans really want to know if our babies are safe." Townsend then pulled out his Bushmaster AR-15. "This is my 'baby,' purchased under the 1994 gun ban. Please tell me your views. Thank you."

Senator Biden chose to give a snide and smirky reply. Biden questioned the sanity of Jared, and then took one final jibe at Jared when he said
"I hope he doesn't come looking for me."


While Senator Biden thought he was being cute, and saying what the liberals want to hear, he never did answer the question posed to him. He never did tell his position on gun control. He just smirked his way right past the question.

H/T Michelle Malkin

Monday, July 30, 2007

Democrat Rules Shut Her Out



Tonight House votes intended to allow a chance for Heather's fix FISA to be brought up fell short on 2 different procedural votes. On one vote the only Dem to vote with her was Cong. Barrow. On the other vote Cong Lampson and Cong Taylor joined Cong Barrow.
She needs many more votes with her to succeed. Apparently most Democrats believe that gathering intelligence from foreign enemies is a partisan issue. All but one of the Democrats think that a 'Wild & Scenic' National Park in CN is more important than quickly gathering intelligence on our foreign enemies. Words fail me

Fox News Video

Saturday, July 28, 2007

Why didn't you do something?!



The conventional wisdom is that the 9/11 attacks were not thwarted because we had a collossal failure by the intelligence community. There has been a lot of hand wringing and finger wagging about a failure to 'connect the dots.' A 9/11 Commission wrote a report about these problems, and how ironic that one the members of this Commission, Jamie Gorelick, had been the architect of the legal wall constructed to stop cooperation and information sharing between CIA and FBI agents. Well, here we go again. The Director of National Intelligence wants Congress to write new law to replace the antiquated 1978 FISA law. I am at a loss of words to understand how gathering intelligence about enemies to the US can be a partisan issue. Those enemies who want to kill us do not give a big whoop whether the Democratic Party or Republican Party has the White House or the Congress. Moderate Republican, Heather Wilson is the sponsor of a bill in the House intended to fix FISA law. Will her bill come to a final vote before the August recess?
I have my doubts.

Here is an open letter from Heather about this issue.

Dear Friends,

Not too long ago, we had a briefing in the Intelligence Committee that made me so angry that, when it was over, I had to go back to my office and close my door for a bit to cool off and think.

We have a problem. It is a problem created because our foreign intelligence laws have not kept pace with changes in technology. And the failure of the Congress to act and fix the law is putting Americans at risk.

I have been in the forefront of trying to modernize our foreign intelligence laws while protecting American civil liberties since early last year.

America spies on our enemies and in the war on terrorism, intelligence is the first line of defense. We try to discover the plans and intentions of our enemies so that we can identify them and stop them before they strike.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Law was written in 1978 and intended to protect the civil liberties of Americans. The law requires a warrant to collect intelligence off a wire in the United States. When the law was written, almost all international calls were over the air – bounced off satellites. Over the air or "radio" communications did not require a warrant, but there are procedures in place to mask or destroy information about Americans if our intelligence agencies inadvertently collect a U.S. call. In 1978, almost all local calls were over a wire. Now, because of changes in technology, the situation is completely reversed. Almost all long haul communications are over wires or fiber optic cables and most local calls are over the air.

The problem is that our intelligence agencies are forced to go to a judge and prove they have probable cause to get a warrant to listen to foreigners in foreign countries if the conversation is collected off a wire in the United States. Think about that. We are doing everything we can, taking tremendous risks to listen to some terrorist talking to another terrorist in the tribal areas of Pakistan and we can’t try to snag that communication off a wire in the US without a warrant.

This is not how the law was intended to work and it needs to be fixed.

So, I’ve been working on getting it fixed. When quiet conversations with my Democratic colleagues didn’t spur them to make the political decision to act, we started increasing the public pressure at hearings, press conferences and with motions to recommit and previous question votes. I have been meeting with my colleagues who are not on the intelligence committee and explaining to them why this matters and enlisting them in the fight.

There are some indications this week that our campaign is having an impact and we may be forcing the issue and getting it addressed.

Yesterday, we got another push in a letter from the Director of National Intelligence, Mike McConnell. He is a low key guy not prone to hyperbole or grandstanding. He is a career military officer and intelligence professional. Read his letter and you’ll see what I mean.

We have to fix FISA.

Wish you were here,




I hope I'm wrong, and the congresscritters™ in a brief moment of sanity, come to their senses and pass this much needed legislation.

Friday, July 27, 2007

Speaking abroad without bashing the USA





Last month Fred Thompson spoke to the Policy Exchange in London. I recommend you read the entire text, and one aspect of this speech that really caught my attention is that Fred did not apologize for any perceived wrongs committed by the US. Fred did not criticize the US for making mistakes and causing problems instead of dealing with problems in the world. What a refreshing difference there is between Fred and, oh take your pick, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Jimmy Carter, John Kerry, et al. He was well received by these Brits because instead of pandering to their perceptions of the US he spoke about the problems that the US, UK, and the West must be ready to deal with. I won't cut and paste all of it, but here is just a sampling of the good parts.

In the long progress of the world toward liberty, it was not by chance that this lowly province of the Roman Empire became a great teacher of democracy and the model of self-government. And it wasn’t just luck that turned a troublesome British colony into the inspiration for all those who seek freedom. There is a reason why Britain and America were thrown together as partners in this world. The things that unite the American and British peoples? They don’t change with the names of leaders or with the passing of years.

It was Harold MacMillan who best summed up the shared experiences of British and American leaders in the last century. In his later years, Lord Stockton was asked what he considered the greatest challenge in all his years as a statesman. And in that English way, he put it in a word: “Events, my dear boy, events.”

We must conclude that the greatest test of leadership – in your country or mine, in this time or any other – can be simply stated. We must shape events, and not be left at their mercy. And in all things, to protect ourselves and to assure the peace, the great democracies of the world must stick together. We must be willing to make tough decisions today in order to avert bigger problems tomorrow. We must be prepared to meet threats before threats become tragedies.

Changes in leadership on both sides of the Atlantic will give us new opportunities. Often in the history of nations, leaders rise to meet the times. These times require those with the wisdom and courage to see past the next election cycle.

Many in Europe simply have a different view from that of the United States as to the threat of radical Islamic fundamentalism. They think that the threat is overblown. That despite September 11th, and July 7th and other attacks in Europe and elsewhere, America is the main target and therefore the problem is basically an American one. The fact that no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq at a particular point in time resolves the matter for them. Also, they see no meaningful connection between terrorist groups and countries like Iran.

Admittedly, even some in America think that the threat is overblown, and that if we had not gone into Iraq, we’d have no terrorism problem.

However, most Americans feel differently. We understand that the Western world is in an international struggle with jihadists who see this struggle as part of a conflict that has gone on for centuries, and who won’t give up until Western countries are brought to their knees. I agree with this view. I believe that the forces of civilization must work together with common purpose to defeat the terrorists who for their own twisted purposes have murdered thousands, and who are trying to acquire technology to murder millions more.

When terrorists in their video performances pledge more and bigger attacks to come, against targets in both Europe and America, these are not to be shrugged off as idle boasts. They must be taken at their word.

When the president of Iran shares his nightmare visions before cheering crowds, those are not just the fanatic’s version of an empty applause line. The only safe assumption is that he means it. If we know anything from modern history, it is that when fanatical tyrants pledge to “wipe out” an entire nation, we should listen. We must gather our alliance, and do all in our power to make sure that such men do not gain the capability to carry out their evil ambitions.


It seems that the 2008 contest for POTUS has taken off earlier than ever before, and lately there have been a slew of blogs that are critical of a candidate's style, wife, son, dog, etc etc. I just thought I would post about a speech given to an audience that can't vote in the next election. A lot of people have been especially critical of Fred lately because he has not officially announced that he is running for POTUS. Does anybody want to talk about the substance of his speech to the Political Exchange in London? Can anyone remember that there really are important things in this world that actually do trump style. Just wonderin'.