« September 2006 | Main | November 2006 »

October 31, 2006

Technical Problem

Sometime yesterday, for no reason I can fathom, I began having a problem posting comments in the thread from my last post, The Democrats And Taxes.

Every time I attempted to reply to a comment, I received a mostly blank error page with the following at the top:

Wrong, wrong, totally wrong. We have no page called (none), and we never did. So http://hardastarboard.mu.nu/archives/2006/10/the_democrats_a.php must have screwed everything up. They deserve an atomic wedgie for that.

This seems to be the sort of error message one gets at mu.nu., LOL. Not being, by any means, a computer wizard, I have no idea what this is about nor how to go about correcting it, though I'm more than positive it has something to do with something I either did or overlooked.

However, I'm hoping that whatever it was, it only applies to that post.

I do intend to get to the bottom of it and in so doing reply to a great comment forthwith. If anybody out there is more technically familiar with the workings of mu.nu and Moveable Type and can shed some light on what could have caused this and how I can correct it, I would greatly appreciate it.

**** I just attempted a test comment on this post and received the same error message. Hmmmmm.

Posted by Seth at 02:18 AM | Comments (12) |

October 29, 2006

The Democrats And Taxes

According to such cartoon characters as Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats, should they manage to get enough of their fellow travellers elected so as to have a majority in the House of Representatives, with Pelosi expected to become Speaker of the House (well, Halloween is almost upon us, so what's a good scare among friends?), one of the first priorities of the Democrats will be to stamp out the Bush tax cuts and roll back our taxes to 1990s levels.

If I were an enemy of the state, I would utterly destroy my hands applauding this ambition. Unfortunately, I am a patriot who loves America, to say nothing of the fact that I am also an American who lives and pays taxes here, so I must convey the blatant fact that I am not a fan of this intended tax increase.

I understand the Democrats' need to tax me into the ground. Well, not exactly understand it, per se, but I realize that the Democrats have a serious problem with their fellow Americans being able to keep some of the money they earn and are fixated on the concept of raising taxes whenever the opportunity presents itself.

Some people are into sky diving, some people collect butterflies, some people are passionate stamp collectors, some people love archery, some tennis, some throwing rocks at passing cars, some surfing porn websites, some collecting sea shells, some climbing trees, others mountains.... Democrats are into raising taxes. It's what they do, just as sucking blood is what mosquitos do, or what leeches do.

It's not their fault, it's simply who they are.

They particularly like to tax those who are successful, like the rich and like large, prosperous corporations, and are very much like Robin Hood -- they take from the rich, and give to the poor. It makes them feel good -- hell, it makes them feel great -- stripping a big company of its investment capital plunges them into ecstasy.

Back in the 1980s, during the Reagan Administration, the greatest President in my lifetime stopped the bloodsucking practice of penalizing American business for its success, allowing it to keep its investment capital in order to put it to work, and lo and behold, despite the Democrats' criticism of what they fondly referred to as Reaganomics, our economy exploded into a dynamo of successful professionals, low unemployment, newly created millionaires and prosperous companies.

This trend continued through the Bush 1 Administration, but then, alas and alack, American voters sent Bill Clinton, a Democrat, off to the White House.

Keeping to the sacred tradition of Democrats, he raised taxes, as usual targeting the rich.

Before the end of his second term (he was actually reelected, go figure!), we were plunged into recession. The unemployment rate soared, businesses struggling to stay afloat transferred record amounts of their production to outsourced labor pools and after Algore, Clinton's Veep, lost the 2000 presidential election to George W. Bush, the newly elected President engendered massive tax cuts.

Naturally the Democrats, dismayed that Americans were being permitted to keep more of their earnings, mounted yet another of their innumerable bumper-sticker friendly campaigns -- "The Republicans have given tax cuts to the rich, screwing the poor as always!"

That was worth, at the very least, a good chuckle, since every American taxpayer was entitled to the cuts. The Democrats somehow managed, once realizing that they really couldn't produce any low income working folks who were being either neglected or recieving the fid, cited poor people on welfare and other premature social security venues who weren't benefiting from the tax cuts, the fact that these people didn't pay any income tax to begin with notwithstanding... they actually forced the government to give something "back" to these noncontributors as well.

Meanwhile, the tax cuts enabled corporate America and smaller business people to use the "surplus" equity to expand existing business and create new enterprises.

The result has been a major rebound in our economy and a serious decrease in the unemployment rate that is still adjusting downward. America is again flourishing!

But let's not be too confident, friends, okay? We still haven't had this year's elections, so we don't actually know where we stand.

We're pretty confident about holding a Republican majority in the Senate, but there has been a lot of negative conjecture regarding the House majority after 7 November. Personally, I believe we'll hold our majority there, as well, though we'll have a few less seats.


Should the Democrats gain a majority in the House Of Representatives, they will raise taxes, and you can bet your bottom dollar, assuming you still have one, that the late 1990s recession will return even more quickly than it went away.

Of course, the Democrats will find a way to blame Bush....

Posted by Seth at 04:27 PM | Comments (29) |

Haiku, Indeed

I received this email awhile ago, another one o' them there forwards, and thought it was kinda' cute, so I thought I'd share it:

In Japan, they have replaced the impersonal and unhelpful Microsoft
error messages with Haiku poetry messages. Haiku poetry has strict
construction rules -each poem has only 17 syllables; 5 syllables in
the first line, 7 in the second, 5 in the third. They are used to
communicate a timeless message, often achieving a
wistful, yearning and powerful insight through extreme brevity.
Here are 16 [sic] error messages from Japan:

The Web site you seek
Cannot be located, but
Countless more exist.


Chaos reigns within.
Reflect, repent, and reboot.
Order shall return.


Program aborting:
Close all that you have worked on.
You ask far too much.


Windows NT crashed.
I am the Blue Screen of Death.
No one hears your screams.


Yesterday it worked.
Today it is not working.
Windows is like that.


Your file was so big.
It might be very useful.
But now it is gone.


Stay the patient course.
Of little worth is your ire.
The network is down.


A crash reduces
Your expensive computer
To a simple stone.


Three things are certain:
Death, taxes and lost data.
Guess which has occurred.


You step in the stream,
But the water has moved on.
This page is not here.


Out of memory.
We wish to hold the whole sky,
But we never will.


Having been erased,
The document you're seeking
Must now be retyped.


Serious error.
All shortcuts have disappeared.
Screen. Mind. Both are blank.

H/T Brenda

Posted by Seth at 10:49 AM | Comments (10) |

October 26, 2006

NewsMax's 10 Good Reasons...

... to vote GOP come 7 November.

13 days and counting....

Posted by Seth at 01:04 PM | Comments (14) |

October 24, 2006

4 A.M. Relaxation And Thoughts On Israel

So I'm just sort of kicking back at 0400 hours, playing with my new Firefox download -- I haven't yet(after what, 10 months?) figured out how to adjust my blog clock to the east coast, so the time of this post will appear as a zillion hours or so earlier.

I have my MusicMatch library running some Bangles through my great Logitech speakers, stuff like September Gurls and my all time favorite song by that awesome group, Return Post.

I'm thinking about the present situation in Israel -- the Hamas rejects and Fatah squaring off to blow each other away, both sides arming up. Okay, so this isn't as unusual among Arab Muslims as it might be among normal, 21st Century human beings -- we discuss, they destroy. Western diplomacy consists mostly of a bunch of over-educated assholes sitting around a table engaged in two-faced, multisyllabic dialogue, but at least they usually come to some sort of agreement that preserves the peace. Arabic diplomacy is just a bit different: It usually means a lot of explosions and hot lead flying in many directions, and lots of people "expiring". The diplomats that most effectively get their points across are those that kill the most diplomats on the opposite side of whatever disagreement happens to be on the table are considered the best diplomats, even though they, personally, don't have to wax anybody.

The flotsam that lives to butcher innocent women and children are the true warriors of Islam.

The very idea that the Bush Administration wants these people to have a sovereign state is beyond me, but GWB is the President, so I suppose he must know what he's doing. Excuse me, I have to go to the head....

I think I'll let a great blog I recently discovered and blogrolled called Morning Coffee give us an update.

Meanwhile, the combatively challenged Prime Minister Olmert has agreed to bring a "hardliner" onto his team in order to avoid a slide into ruin for his own ill conceived Kadima party, one Avigdor Lieberman, and thank G-d for him, and his Israel Beiteinu Party. Lieberman's own point of view as to how to get things done is fractionally different than the politically correct Ehud Olmert's, maybe a mere 180 degrees, at most. Not too much. Did I say "thank G-d for him"?

My own model scenario would be for Fatah and Hamas to kill each other off in the civil war that seems to be brewing between the two corrupt terrorist factions that are the sum total of the so-called "Palestinian" entity, leaving a few necessarily reasonable Arabs who might be willing to assimillate themselves into the Israeli population and allow the Jewish State to get on with living in peace and prosperity, but that's probably too much to hope for....

Posted by Seth at 11:59 PM | Comments (11) |

Don't Ask....

I just downloaded Firefox and made it my primary browser, and while surfing around ran into this tidbit.

Mmmmmm, hot buttered popcorn!

Download courtesy of the illustrious Gayle.

Posted by Seth at 11:38 PM | Comments (2) |

Cudos To Andy Borowitz

Today's Andy Borowitz OpEd in Jewish World Review is funnnnnyyyy!

Posted by Seth at 08:13 AM | Comments (3) |

Democrats And Racism

I ran across this 4 year old article recently and thought it a good "share".

As on so many other issues, the hypocrats Democrats say whatever they have to say to get votes, no matter how shameful the lies or the manipulations.

The black vote has long been one of their mainstays, which is really pitiful as they have proven, decade after decade, that they are the worst enemy of black Americans, the very party that holds them back while blaming the Republicans, whose intent is to give them real equality and real equal market share in America and the American Dream. Considering their track record, the very fact that blacks continue to vote Democrat probably confirms in their eyes that blacks are exactly what the Democrats think they are. After all, when you run such a transparent scam on the bulk of a major voting block for so many years and they continue to allow you to lead them around by the nose, how smart can they be, right?

Of course, the Democrats have their own black perpetuators of racism, such as the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, who depend on playing the race card to earn their miserable livings by helping to keep their fellow blacks from waking up and smelling the proverbial coffee. These two individuals are the real "tokens" or "Uncle Toms", as they sell out their own for their white masters in the Democratic Party in order to perpetuate their own careers.

The OpEd is here.

Posted by Seth at 04:15 AM | Comments (7) |

October 22, 2006

When You Get To The Polls....

....on 7 November, before you think about casting any votes to the left, it might be good to consider what the Democrats have in store for us should they win themselves a majority in Congress.

Gayle, at My Republican Blog, has posted a partial summary of Nancy Pelosi's voting record and a link to same in its entirety -- Pelosi's voting record reflects perfectly the agendas of today's Democratic Party, and with a majority vote would be able to make many of their agendas a reality.

Unlike so many of our Republicans on the Hill, the Democrats don't believe in compromise: The first chance they get, it will be "my way or the highway" as they begin slamming out bills that will do great harm to our national security, our economy, our already broken education system and the criminal justice system, not to mention, of course, various "adjustments" to social issue legalities that would go against what most Americans endorse. They have already laid out their plans to impeach the President based on their dubious charges regarding his conducting of the War On Terror.

Many elections in the past have been less significant in terms of combined major impact, but this upcoming election comes at a time when the wrong policies generated from the Hill can do the most long-term harm to this country.

Please give Gayle's linked post and the link within a good read....

Posted by Seth at 09:19 AM | Comments (9) |

October 21, 2006

As If There Weren't Enough....

.... to be concerned about, we now have the North American Security and Prosperity Partnership looming on a horizon of uncertainty.

The stated goals of this entity are to "enhance security, prosperity and opportunity" for the North American community. Hmmm.

According to the Welch Report,

The CFR Task Force calls for the “creation by 2010 of a North American community to enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity. We propose a community based on the principle affirmed in the March, 2005 Joint Statement of the three leaders (of the three nations) that ‘our security and prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary.’ Its boundaries will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within the movement of people, products and capital will be legal, orderly, and safe.”

To those ends, the CFR report called for establishment of a common security border perimeter around North America by 2010, along with free movement of people, commerce and capital to be facilitated by the establishment of a North American Border Pass that would replace a U.S. passport for travel between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. Also envisioned by the CFR task force include a North American Court, a North American inter-parliamentary group, A North American Executive Commission, a North American Military Defense Command, a North American Customs Office and a North American Development Bank.

The task force report is important to the debate over the official Security and Prosperity Partnership because the language used in the CFR task force report and SPP documents, so far, have proven to be nearly identical. Clearly the CFR task force report is being used as the blue print to establish the North American Union.

CFR is the U.S. Committee on Foreign Relations.

That doesn't sound like there is a whole lot of remaining room in the deal for any picayunes, like, perhaps, U.S. sovereignty, does it? It sounds more like that economic failure across the Atlantic, there, the one they call the European Union. In fact, the only difference I can see is the number of countries involved.

The name Security and Prosperity Partnership is employed, obviously, because North American Union would be a whole lot less palatable to Americans who have already seen what such a compromise of national political determination and sovereignty has done for to the countries of Europe.

I had known about this for some time, at least peripherally, but only seen a few brief articles on it -- the entire project has thus far excluded the media and Congress, has been a "private" project of President Bush and the leaders of Mexico and Canada. Yesterday, while following a link on an unrelated matter, courtesy of informed and astute commenter Civil Truth, I ran across the above link at the same site and that clinched it, I felt the need to look at it more closely.

What we are looking at here is a plan, to be fully executed in less than half a decade, to incorporate the United States, Canada and Mexico in the same way the EU has incorporated the nations of Europe. If you read the "myths" dispelling page of the SPP website, also linked above, you'll find the same sort of bland, you-American-voters-are -stupid-people-so-believe-this language the administration used to try to convince us that amnesty for criminal aliens would be the best thing that could ever possibly happen to the American people.

This plan would place yours and my freedoms in the hands of Canadian socialism and Mexican whatever it is they have down there that doesn't work. Billions of dollars of our tax money would be invested in Mexico to try to fix their failed economy that doesn't work only because they have a corrupt government that is only interested in the richest of the rich and couldn't care less about the common man, and because their citizens, at least those who aren't wealthy enough to buy them, don't enjoy the rights we do here in America. Politicians of that same government would have a say in our lives and our rights.

To date, Congress has passed no specific legislation to authorize the activities of the SPP, nor to funds it is spending. Congress has had no official involvement in the process and has no oversight.

Congressman Tom Tancredo, (R-Colo) has demanded that the Bush Administration fully disclose the activities of the SPP working groups, including revealing the names of the members of those groups. No answers to his demands have yet been received from the Bush Administration, though the activity continues to move forward. NAFTA Super Highway Quietly, the Bush Administration is working to advance a plan to build super highways through the heart of the United States to transport goods from Mexico and Canada. The highways are part of the original North American Free Trade Agreement, (NAFTA). The plan is now being advanced through an operation called “North America’s SuperCorridor Coalition, Inc” (NASCO). Since being exposed to the general public, NASCO is now denying it is building the highways, but plans go forward.

Beginning at the southern tip of Mexico, passing through Laredo, TX, the highway heads to an “inland port” in Kansas City, where a “Sentry System” will electronically inspect the cargos, before they head East or West, or continue on North through Duluth, Minnesota and into Canada.

The Super Transnational System includes multiple lanes for cars and trucks. Speed limits will be relaxed as well as safety inspections for vehicles from Mexico and Canada. Trucks will be allowed to carry extra tonnage and be extra long. A Railway system will travel up the center of the highway.

Several such highways are contemplated. Environmental impact studies have already been completed. In Texas, efforts are already underway as 584,000 acres have been targets for takings through Eminent Domain.

Emphasis mine.

An OpEd at Renew America observes,

Recently, Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Ernesto Derbez Baustista floated a "trial balloon" during a speech at the University of Texas, ominously revealing a possible answer. According to Baustista, Mexico and the United States should eventually become "integrated," thus forming what can only be construed as the hub of a "North American Union," no doubt eventually including Canada as well.

President Bush has indicated a disturbing sympathy towards such thinking, refusing to characterize Mexican immigrants as "illegal." In contrast, he implies illegality by the "Minutemen" who now protect the border, having described them as "vigilantes."

Conversely, he discusses the actions of the "undocumented immigrants" as "pursuing their dreams," seemingly indifferent to the fact that Americans will be forced to shoulder the burden of fulfilling those dreams, ultimately at the expense of their own.

In a Canadian perspective, from Global Research,

If the existing system were being respected, why would the planning and implementation be so secretive, and government statements not supported by facts? And if it’s for our benefit, why aren’t politicians, who love to show how much they are achieving for their constituents, promoting it in glowing terms? DeWeese concludes, "The United States is the most unique nation on earth. We were created out of a radical idea that free people, with their freedoms protected by the government would be happy and prosper beyond imagination. The idea worked. Now, the Bush Administration is ignoring this historic fact to “harmonize” us with Canada and especially Mexico, which is not a free country; has no [right of] property and has just proved its unworthiness of conducting free and fair elections. At risk are our culture, our wealth, and the once proud American way of life."

Further citing the same sort of stealth among Canadian officials,

Government Secrecy: Canadian officials silent

Organizers of the event in Canada were the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, an elite club of Canada’s richest CEOs, and the Canada West Foundation, a very right-wing and pro-SPP think-tank based in the Alberta oil patch.

We Canadians have been encountering total stonewalling from our own government on the subject. Even recent and current Prime Ministers, who know perfectly well what is going on, have refused to discuss it. And because they have not permitted the issue to arise during any recent election, there is certainly no mandate from the Canadian public to negotiate an agreement to terminate the country.

Stockwell Day, a former leader in the Conservative (or as it was then called, Alliance) party, and now Minister of Public Safety in the Conservative federal government, was an active participant in Banff. His office is flatly refusing to answer questions from journalists.

This was disclosed by the founder of the citizen watchdog group Council of Canadians, Maude Barlow, who has pointed out that it’s the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) which lobbies the government and continually pushes the notion that because the economies of the two countries are already partly integrated, Canadian “domestic laws are essentially redundant.” (Ref. 12). Her concern is that the idea of redundancy of our laws will be extended to the government itself, and that because its government is seen as redundant, Canada itself will be made to disappear.

Now, while I am not a fan of Canada's political make-up, I will be the first to say that they are an ethical bunch who look out for their citizens' interests.

Mexico, on the other hand... well, the same way I don't believe in giving amnesty to people whose very presence on our soil has been a violation of our laws, I wouldn't even consider giving a government that encouraged its citizens to sneak into our country illegally, just to shed themselves of people they had no interest in helping themselves, a seat at the table where laws and rights in this country are concerned. If the Mexican government has no respect for American laws, who in their right minds would want them to have a say in making laws for us?

And make no mistake, the only way a North American Union could play out would be, in order to consummate a smooth flow of inter-union commerce and security proceedures, if laws in all three member states were adjusted to be on the same page.

We're definitely running out of time here....

How's that for something else to be concerned about?

Posted by Seth at 10:55 AM | Comments (16) |

Another One From My Favorite Democrat...

... Of course, Ed Koch is the kind of Democrat that once comprised that party before the liberals bought it.

This OpEd is titled The Pope, Islamics and Me.

As I have repeatedly written, take Islamic radicals at their word -- they want to convert us or kill us. They are killing one another, Shia against Sunni and Sunni against Shia. Often before decapitating their enemies in the ongoing civil and religious strife in Baghdad, they torture their victims, according to The Times, by drilling holes in their bodies and heads so death is slow and cruel until the merciful bullet is fired into the victim's head.

Can any independent state threatened with acts of terror, unless it changes its policies, domestic or foreign, ever submit to their demands and expect to protect its citizens from new demands? Has appeasement ever worked?

There are those in every Western democracy who are losing their resolve, their willingness to standup to the Islamic terrorists. U.S. Senator Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin) deplores the use of the term "Islamic fascists," sometimes used by the White House. The terrorism we face is worldwide and has an Islamist goal -- the restoration of the caliphate, one Islamic state including Spain, North Africa, the Middle East to the Far East, including Indonesia. Take them at their word. The words of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, now dead and heretofore leader of Iraq's insurrection and terror, are, "Killing the infidel is our religion, slaughtering them is our religion, until they convert to Islam or pay us tribute."

Feingold, who definitely is not the same sort of sane, realistic, old style Democrat as is Hizzonor, needs to wake up and then start giving wake-up calls to the rest of those neuveau Democrats, sooner rather than later.

Yeah, I know, "Fat Chance".

Posted by Seth at 03:54 AM | Comments (5) |

October 20, 2006

Shame On The Bush Administration!

Most of us, I assume, are at least conversant with the affair involving (former) Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, two brave and dedicated U.S. Government sentinels of both Law Enforcement and Homeland Security who were screwed over, big time, by our government for doing their job.

A spot-on article about the incident appeared in The New American on 18 September.

The piece opens thus:

While the Bush administration seeks amnesty for illegal aliens and grants immunity to a Mexican drug smuggler, it has thrown the book at two courageous Border Patrol agents.

These two men pursued a drug dealer who was also illegally on our side of the border and attempted to apprehend him. Shots were fired. According to the agents, they did not believe the criminal had been hit, as he was able to run back into Mexico and hop into a waiting van.

A vehicle the foreign criminal had abandoned in the course of the pursuit yielded 800 pounds of freshly smuggled-in marijuana. This evidence is ironclad proof that they were not pursuing an innocent man -- of course, even had he not been smuggling drugs, he was still in this country illegally.

The result of the incident was that the Bush Administration turned on its own officers like a rabid Doberman, arresting them as criminals and prosecuting them as such, so that now each may face as many as 20 years in prison.

The drug trafficker, on the other hand, was brought back to the United States, an honored guest of Homeland Security and DOJ, for free medical treatment for a gunshot wound he allegedly sustained in the hind quarters while fleeing the federal agents. He was granted immunity for testifying against them and is in the process of suing you, me and every other U.S. taxpayer over the incident. This same scumbag has since been busted for the same offense, in the same area, and was still not prosecuted because the Bush Administration is so grateful to him for condemning its own courageous and loyal agents.

I voted for George Bush both times, and have said in the past that I would vote for him again if he could run a third time, but this filthy, disgraceful incident changes my mind completely -- it has significantly lowered my respect for both the President and his administration.

What does this say to Ramos and Compeans' fellow Border Patrol agents, or for that matter to Law Enforcement and National Security operatives throughout the United States? That they don't have the support of their President nor of his appointees?

These men should never have been prosecuted, nor should the trafficante have been pardoned.

For their 15-minute pursuit of Aldrete-Davila on February 17, 2005, and for a couple of split-second decisions they made during that suspenseful chase, agents Ramos and Compean have lost a combined 15-year record of sterling service in the Border Patrol (10 years for Ramos, five for Compean). Even more, that 15-minute pursuit in the line of duty may cost each of them 20 years in prison, possibly alongside dangerous criminals they have apprehended.

Adding terror on top of calamity, both agents and their families have been subjected to death threats. In fact, according to the smuggler Aldrete-Davila, some of his drug-cartel associates from Mexico planned a "hunting party" to track down and execute Ramos and Compean. Both of these law enforcement officers have young school-age and preschool-age children. Agent Compean's wife, Claudia, is pregnant with their third child.
Incredibly, while agents Ramos and Compean and their families face economic ruin, emotional devastation, and real physical danger, as a result of that 15-minute chase, Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila — an admitted felon and drug smuggler — has not only gotten off scot-free, he stands to become a rich man, courtesy of the U.S. taxpayers. In a seemingly unbelievable turn of events, agents for the U.S. Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security contacted the smuggler in Mexico and offered him complete immunity if he would testify that Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean had violated his civil rights.

The two Border Patrol officers were arrested in SWAT-style raids on their homes and taken away in handcuffs in front of their families. By way of contrast, Aldrete-Davila, in exchange for agreeing to testify against the agents, was given free medical treatment in the United States, then escorted back to Mexico and released. He was also coached in his testimony by U.S. government officials, then brought back to the United States and trotted out as the star witness against Ramos and Compean.

In the meantime, during his release, Aldrete-Davila was arrested again with another drug load in the same El Paso sector where Ramos and Compean had previously intercepted him. Nevertheless, he was allowed to testify against the two agents and then was released again! He may have made many more successful drug runs into the United States since then. But he may be able to retire soon in the style of his drug-lord bosses. With encouragement and help from U.S. officials, he is suing the Border Patrol for $5 million

All emphasis mine.

I won't even comment on the crud-sucking bitch of a judge who is doing everything in her power to railroad these two good men into prison -- the fact that she was put on the bench by GWB while he was governor of Texas only reinforces my ire at the Administration.

My misgivings about George Bush's loyalty to his people might be alleviated if he gets up on his hind legs like a true leader and pardons these two men, restoring them to their former jobs with all retroactives. From the aspect of politics -- which are never far from the surface these days -- a pardon and reinstatement of Compean and Ramos would almost certainly have a powerful positive effect for Republicans in the fast approaching elections.

I am not alone in this way of thinking, there's an Ogre out there who feels about the same, along with a Raven and a very Big Dog.

Posted by Seth at 01:41 PM | Comments (8) |

October 18, 2006

Some Old Music I'm Listening To

So I've been sitting here at my Inspiron in the wee hours, doing a little work and doing a little blogging, and listening to a playlist I put together at MusicMatch beforehand to listen to as we speak.

1970s stuff.

Somewhere in the 1980s, I lost my "zeal" for contemporary music. I enjoyed a lot of the material of the early 1980s, when groups like Bow Wow Wow, Berlin, Depeche Mode, OMD, and folks like Martha Davis got going, but then things got boring, and progressed into the 1990s with what I think of as Birdbrain Pop and Loud, Obscene, Aimless Rock. Though, I did find diverse, semi-sane and enjoyable musicians like Malcolm McLaren a pleasure to listen to.

What I hear on the radio today keeps me from turning on the radio. I have a great collection of Classical music, which is my favorite, my top composers being Mozart, Handel, Vivaldi, Bach, Borodin, Smetana and Ives, my favorite operas Carmen (sung by the awesome Maria Ewing), Don Rodrigo and La Traviata. Needless to say, I listen to a lot of Classical music.

I also love good Zydeco, good Jazz(both acoustic and electronic), Dixieland, Folk {J. Collins, J. Baez, Leonard Cohen( majorly!), ancient Dylan, P, P & M, Woody and Arlo, Marmalade in their folk efforts, such as Fight Say The Mighty, Paul & Art, Al Stewart}; late 1960s/early 70s Soul/ R&B, 1960s Rock, Rat Pack era and instrumental music of those times, and my all-time favorite music, second to Classical, late 60s-all 70s progressive (techna) Rock, such as Yes, ELP, Pink Floyd, Renaissance, Focus, Triumvirat, early Genesis, Starcastle, Druid, etc.

Back on track, over the last few hours, I've been listening to my two all time favorite female vocalists, the late, great Maggie Reilly, doing solo tracks like Every Time We Touch and Moonlight Shadow and some of her collaborations with Mike Oldfield, and the fabulously breathtaking vocals of Annie Haslam, who's alive and well and, despite her British origins, living in Pennsylvania. She was the singer in Renaissance, which ties with Focus and Yes as my favorite Rock music of all time. Among the Renaissance songs I've got in this playlist are Mother Russia, Ocean Gypsy, Northern Lights, Vultures Fly High, Can You Understand (Do You Understand), Trip To The Fair and the full album side track, Song Of Scheherazade. Annie sings easily in 5 octaves and, had she wished to go that route, could easily have been an opera superstar. Renaissance was more into a sort of Orchestral Folk than what most people perceive as Rock.

Yes tracks include Side 1 of Tales From Topographic Oceans (a double album prior to CDs), a 20ish minute track called The Revealing Science Of G-d: Dance Of The Dawn, To Be Over, Soon, Oh Soon The Light from The Gates Of Delirium, Survival, Parallels, Wonderous Stories and Awaken, the latter, about 16 minutes long, featuring some powerful church organ contributions by the mega-great keyboard genius Rick Wakeman.

I have on the playlist Triumvirat's entire Illusions On A Double Dimple LP, at the moment Lucky Girl is playing from that, and from Focus, Eruption, Bennie Helder, Focus II, Focus III and Sylvia, a wonderful and mellow guitar work by Jan Ackerman(Focus was a Dutch group. They broke up when Ackerman left to pursue a career of lute recitals and recordings, which he is still doing well in to this day).

And the end of my playlist, when it arrives, will consist of the entire Moody Blues, Live At Red Rocks collection.

Breathe deep the gathering gloom,
watch lights fade from every room
Bedsitter people sit back and lament
Another day's useless energy spent...

Cold hearted orb that rules the night
removes the colors from our sight
Red is grey, and yellow white
but we decide which is right

and which is an illusion... -- the poetry you hear recited during Moody Blues songs is written and recited by their drummer, Graeme Edge.

The ProgRock thing appeared during the 1970s, basically, in between the Rock of the 1960s and the lesser Rock of the 1980s, and incorporated Classical structure with both Folk and Rock. The music was awesome. Young people of today who venture out of the BS being played now and go to, say, a Yes concert (Yes, they're still around and they still sell out stadiums, etc, after 38 years in business, outlasting even Led Zeppelin) usually end up being enthralled by the music and becoming fans. I was at their Classic Yes concert at the Shoreline Amphitheatre about 3 years ago and the place was packed. The concert was spectacular!

Oh, yes, also on the playlist is the original recording of Yes keyboardist Rick Wakeman's solo Journey To the Centre Of The Earth. And I have included some Asia, which consists of members of Yes, UK/ Buggles, ELP and King Crimson, another of my favorite groups.

This is all some seriously good listening. Anyone who hasn't been exposed to this genre of Rock is missing some music worth hearing.

Even the most anti-Rock person on earth would love, for example Eruption by Focus -- it's more Classical/ chant/ ultra-mellow than anything one would expect from a Rock group, and is one of my favorite all-time musical compositions. It is 23 minutes and 30 seconds long, and beautiful.

Well, there's my taste in music. I'm pretty much what they call eclectic, though I do have a couple of preferences, as mentioned above. I can also get right into John Mayall's Blues Breakers, the Jefferson Airplane, Paul Butterfield, Hot Tuna, the Jethro Tull, the Allman Brothers, Cream, out-of-Cream Eric Clapton, CSNY, Led Zeppelin, Creedence Clearwater Revival, Santana, Jimi Hendrix, a whole passel of C & W, which I came to appreciate during my weeks on the beach when I was working offshore(oil rigs/ tug boats) out of Nawlins in the late 1970s -- drinkin', effin' an' fightin', as it were, LOL.

Well, the only conclusion to a post like this would probably be,

"Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends, Ladies and Gentlemen, Emerson, Lake and Palmer!"

Posted by Seth at 11:33 PM | Comments (8) |

From The Ridiculous To The More Ridiculous

You know, the more our society "evolves" in the course of my lifetime, the more I want to ask Luke and Leia to take me to a galaxy far, far away and strand me there.

When I was growing up, things in general worked just fine. Kids were allowed to be kids -- we climbed big trees, we played touch football and other contact sports in school yards with concrete ground, we played dodgeball, stickball, climbed high ropes in the school gym, played tag, etc... Sometimes we fell down and skinned a knee, got a bloody nose because we weren't quick enough to get out of the way of a ball or even got a sprain during a tangle or pile-up over a ball with opponents.

Fine, we learned that a lot of stuff you do contains some element of risk. We also learned how to use our competitive instincts. And we learned the value of team integrity.

Some of us "sucked" at certain things. Some kids were clumsy, some kids were not athletically inclined, some kids were out of shape, some kids were.... Well, you get the picture, not everybody was a superstar, not everybody could compete handily or keep up with everybody else, let alone with the leaders of the pack.

So many of us worked harder at those things we wanted to be able to do, but in which we fell short. We learned the values of determination, of tenacity, of focused effort, of striving to attain goals.

We brought the fruits of these valuable lessons we learned with us into adult life, into the marketplace, and they helped us to succeed, to be independent.

Today, the liberals who control the public education system reject all of the above. They say that children can get hurt playing competitive sports. They say that losing games or simply not having the natural talents some of the other kids have for athletics will harm the "self esteem" of these children.

Interestingly enough, peer pressure seemed to work very well back in my youth -- if "Tubby" couldn't move fast enough out there in left field and let too many balls go by, he got "the works". He got help from some of the other kids, he received short shrift re his "self esteem", he was ridiculed and cajoled, and eventually he got tired of it and cut down on the pudding and candy bars, put more effort into going after those pop-ups and grounders and became an asset to whichever team he was playing on. His self esteem soared. He went on to become an engineer with a six figure income, a great novelist or an assistant administrative director of the FBI.

Today, the kid whose self esteem is protected like the crown jewels by keeping him from being embarrassed in front of his peers rather than tossed into the arena and compelled to compete faces an adulthood as a noodle.

Having put my two cents into that particular issue, I refer you to the excellent post that set me to embarking on this particular tangent, over at GM's Corner.

Posted by Seth at 09:44 PM | Comments (2) |

The Pen Has Lived Up To Its Billing...

... of being mightier than the sword -- or at least, given our more modern scribe-gear, and visual media, the keyboard and videocam have.

Daniel Pipes makes an excellent point.

Soldiers, sailors, and airmen once determined the outcome of warfare, but no longer. Today, television producers, columnists, preachers, and politicians have the pivotal role in deciding how well the West fights. This shift has deep implications.

This is true. Look at Iraq, for example: We're winning the war there, but we're losing it at home, thousands of miles away from the battlefield, thanks entirely to our liberal media and scads of lying left wing politicians, both of which cadres place priority on an anti-Bush agenda over the safety of Americans or eventual total victory for our military.

This looks to be a rerun of Vietnam -- not the "quagmire" the left referred to, but the ultimate loss of a war, on "paper", that we are winning in real life.

The nature of the enemy is of course different than those we faced in pre-Vietnam wars, both that which we face in Iraq and that which we face in the rest of the many elements of the Global War On Terror. Actually, "GWOT" is PC, we are actually at war, despite the sheeplike murmurings of spineless politicians and the blatherings of partisan media, with Islam.

Today we fight against terrorists who employ guerilla warfare, albeit in its most vile possibilities -- to us, collateral damage is the accidental killing of noncombatants. To the enemy, the murder of innocents is the primary strategy and the percentage of military casualties inflicted is as far below the number of civilian deaths as the latter number is less than the former in the course of our operations.

Thus, typically, the American political left blames the Bush administration for the civilian casualty numbers caused by the enemy and spins it so "Bush's criminal war in Iraq has killed X number of innocent Iraqis". They make the President out to be responsible for the acts of terrorists, many of whom are not even from Iraq and are there to prevent democracy from succeeding in that country.

And since the liberal media rules the roost in America, all too many Americans who trust them to deliver the truth are instead fed this disinformation and believe it.

What Carl von Clausewitz called war's "center of gravity" has shifted from force of arms to the hearts and minds of citizens. Do Iranians accept the consequences of nuclear weapons? Do Iraqis welcome coalition troops as liberators? Do Palestinians willingly sacrifice their lives in suicide bombings? Do Europeans and Canadians want a credible military force? Do Americans see Islamism presenting a lethal danger?

Non-Western strategists recognize the primacy of politics and focus on it. A string of triumphs — Algeria in 1962, Vietnam in 1975, and Afghanistan in 1989 — all relied on eroding political will. Al-Qaeda's number two, Ayman al-Zawahiri, codified this idea in a letter in July 2005, observing that more than half of the Islamists' battle "is taking place in the battlefield of the media."

Read the rest of the OpEd here.

Posted by Seth at 07:18 PM | Comments (2) |

Another Institution Closing Its Doors....

.... this one in the Rock genre, CBGBs, the dingy, internationally reknowned club on Bowery that's been around since the early 1970s and... well, read about it here.


Posted by Seth at 05:05 PM |

October 17, 2006

Ya' Gotta Read....

... this one by Dennis Prager!

Posted by Seth at 04:45 AM | Comments (2) |

Screwing Israel (and ourselves)

Israel is our only true friend and ally in the Middle East.

Their Arab neighbors, even those that profess friendship with the United States, are at best false friends -- they regard us as a high roller in the purchase of their oil and as a country they would not want to go to war with, at least not overtly; they export terrorism while denouncing it for diplomatic purposes, oppose our doctrine at the United Nations when the opportunities present themselves and quietly await the expected Islamic victory over us that will place us at the mercy of Sharia Law -- if that ever occurs, we will see how quickly the mask of friendship and even human respect drops from their faces as we are conquered, 7th Century style.

When Israel became a sovereign state 58 years ago, these Arab nations created "the Palestinians" and sicced those miserable, directionless people on the Jews who had "intruded" in their midst, feeding what was to become a terrorist machine disguised as an oppressively colonized underdog, pandering to the sympathies of misguided leftist intellectuals throughout the world. The goal of this propaganda was to gain support in their ambition to wipe Israel off the face of the map or, as the late Egyptian president Gamel Nasser vowed and failed to do, "push them into the sea".

The Arab countries tried invading Israel on more than one occasion, only to find that this tiny new country of exponentially inferior numbers was able to defeat them in short order -- it only took the Jews 6 days to hand them their collective touchases in 1967, and less than a month to repeat the performance in 1973 when Egypt and Syria, calling themselves the United Arab Republic, stormed the small state in a surprise invasion on the holiest of holidays, when the IDF (Israeli Defense Force) was at its least vigilant and most vulnerable.

Before and since, Israel has been under constant attack at home by terrorist organizations, and abroad by numerous countries at the United Nations (spit!), who have sided with Israel's enemies because of their oil, and as such considered the very existence of Israel to be an inconvenience at best.

Israel's only true friend in the world has been the United States. We have helped them financially and militarily, and we have been their primary trading partner for intelligence. To the latter end, they have been an indispensable asset in the Middle East. Back in the Cold War days, for example, whom do you think gave us a then state-of-the-art Soviet MiG-23 to dissect?

I know, I know, alright, already! Enough backgroundy stuff! Press on! Oy vey, enough is enough! C'mon!


The Israelis have, from the beginning, bent over backwards to make the bastardly Palestinians a part of their country, to give them equal rights and privileges as Israeli citizens -- and all they have received in return has been terrorism. Innocent citizens murdered by bomb, bullet and knife.

Whenever the Israelis have retaliated for a terrorist act, the propaganda forces of the left have condemned them for their actions -- it is a one way street, the Palestinians can butcher Jews to their hearts' content, but as soon as the Jews fight back, even a little bit, it is Naziesque brutality.

Over the last few decades, pressure from the U.N. combined with a genuine wish to see peace in the Middle East have prompted American Presidents and Secretaries of State to take it upon themselves to attempt to broker said peace.

Problem 1: Muslims are not on the same page as the rest of civilization, they are still living in the more barbaric times of the 7th Century and their religious doctrine mandates that they remain there. Their religion encourages lying to infidels to the point of signing on to treaties they have no intention of honoring, and therefore such agreements, for them, are matters of temporary convenience to be laughed off.

Problem 2: No matter how many times this fact is manifest, western politicians and diplomats simply cannot grasp it, their sensibilities are so programmed by their own environments that they truly believe that their logic will work when applied to Muslims.

As a result, every peace accord engendered by the United States has depended upon the "good faith" of both sides and the Israelis, an honorable people whose Jewish beliefs command that they honor their agreements, have always done so while the Palestinians have not. They will watch, smiling, as the Israelis release terrorists from prison and cede territory, honoring no part of an agreement, and the terrorism will continue, the Arabs laughing mirthfully at the stupidity of American politicians, who continually make the same mistake no matter how many times they get burned.

Actually, they don't get burned -- Israel does. At each American mediated agreement, Israel surrenders more of its security and more Jews resultantly die.

... And no matter how often this happens, our stupid, naive, idiot Presidents and secretaries of state keep on repeating their murderous error as though passing on a tradition. Clinton and Albright, now Bush and Rice.

Now, to be clear, I know they mean well, but as long as they refuse to get the obvious message that the Arabs involved are making fools of them, this idiocy will continue.

I recently had an email exchange with a very well informed Israeli who seemed, and I can't say I blame him, to have developed a certain amount of hostility towards the Bush Administration over its newest plan, which is to pour massive monetary backing into Hamas' opposition -- Fatah, the party of Arafat, to try and oust the terrorist group through peaceful means -- he has a very good point: We should have learned from the late, unlamented Arafat what happens when you give money to the Palestinians -- whatever their leaders don't deposit in their personal numbered accounts finances terrorism.

Okay --

Now, as I pointed out to my new Israeli acquaintance, I cannot fault the United States entirely here -- the Israelis have been pretty damn stupid in their voting choices over the years, especially in recent ones; electing entirely too liberal leadership and allowing a spineless piece of schmutz like Olmert to remain at the top of their government at this point in time does not speak well for the intelligence of the Knesset, nor of the rank and file Israeli citizen.

Problem 3: America's benign relationship with the Jewish State has been slowly deteriorating, thanks both to the influence of leftist organizations and the failure of the Olmert government to respond adequately to this situation.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's speech at the American Task Force for Palestine's inaugural dinner in Washington on Wednesday evening was but the latest sign that America's alliance with Israel is weakening. Rice's statement that "there could be no greater legacy for America than to help to bring into being a Palestinian state," just about says it all. The secretary of state of a president who was once friendlier to Israel than any of his predecessors now claims that the establishment of a state for a people who have distinguished themselves as the most overtly pro-jihad, terrorist society in the world, would be the greatest thing American could ever do.


The Democratic Party's sharp turn leftward in recent years has been a major factor in weakening the US-Israel alliance. The ideological transformation of the party is the fruit of a collaborative effort by leading financiers, radical-leftist ideologues and political activists. Together these forces built organizations that dictate the party's agenda; finance the campaigns of politicians who embrace this agenda; and work to defeat conservative Republicans and Democrats who disagree with their agenda.

MoveOn.org is the most influential organization of this type established in recent years. Its principal financiers are American Jewish billionaires George Soros and Peter Lewis.

To continue excerpting from the GAMLA article,

After Hamas's electoral victory in January, American Friends of Peace Now, Israel Policy Forum and Brit Tzedek v'Shalom came together in an ad-hoc coalition to shield the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority from Congressional sanctions. Together they worked to sink the Palestinian Anti-Terror Act, which enjoyed overwhelming support in the Congress and the Senate and was backed by AIPAC. The legislation was designed to update US policy toward the PA in the wake of Hamas's ascendance to power. The bill called for the immediate cessation not only of direct US aid to the PA but also for the cut-off of US assistance to nongovernmental and UN organizations operating in the PA that had connections to terrorist organizations. The bill defined the PA as a terrorist sanctuary and consequently would have barred the entry of PA officials to and the operation of PA offices in the US, and placed travel restrictions on PA and PLO representatives to the UN. The bill also would have prohibited US officials from having any contacts with officials from Hamas, the Aksa Martyrs Brigades, Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

The bill was approved by an enormous majority in the House of Representatives. Yet, due to the lobbying efforts of this group of Jewish leftists, the Senate version was greatly watered down, and included a presidential waiver that rendered the bill more or less declaratory. Since there was little common ground between the two versions of the bill, the Palestinian Anti-Terror Act was scuttled.

So, where y'at, Ehud?

To its discredit, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's government took no steps to stymie the coalition's machinations against the Palestinian Anti-Terror Act. Indeed, since 2003, Israel's governments have gone out of their way to applaud these groups. Olmert's now infamous speech in June 2005 where he said, "We are tired of fighting, we are tired of being courageous, we are tired of winning, we are tired of defeating our enemies," was made at the Israel Policy Forum's annual dinner.

Above emphasis mine.

What's really needed here is strong Israeli leadership of a kind that can sit down with Bush and Rice and tell it like it is, and firmly decline the one-way "peace" proposals the terrorist bastards Palestinians love so much.

Israel's enemies are certainly our enemies in the Global War On Terror. Had Ehud Olmert been worth even a tiny particle of feces, he would never have gone along with the ceasefire proposed jointly by the Bush Administration and the French (quadruple spit!). He would have said, "Thanks, but no thanks" and continued to make war until the IDF had decimated Hezbollah root and branch.

Israel's alliance with the US is based on the fact that most Americans support Israel. American support for Israel finds its roots in foundations as diverse as religion, politics, morality, security, culture and economics. While the alliance is visibly weakened, its foundations remain solid. To rebuild American political support for Israel and to enhance the US-Israel alliance, it is imperative that Israel be capable of understanding the nature of this support. This understanding begins by making distinctions between our many friends and our foes and acting on these distinctions. Not all of our friends are Jews and not all Jews are our friends.

Well put, GAMLA....

Read the entire linked article, it's definitely right on point.

Posted by Seth at 12:57 AM | Comments (21) |

October 13, 2006

Well Said!

The following comes from an email I received today that puts the War on Terror in perfect perspective.

While I don't agree with the author on his references to any difference between the ultimate beliefs of so-called peaceful Muslims, for that see "6." in his narrative below, (if there were indeed such a thing, they would take the risk of speaking out for the sake of their families, their children and their fellow "peaceful" Muslims, declaring their solidarity with civilized society and their belief in liberty -- if those who have emigrated to the west don't cherish liberty and peaceful coexistence, and don't respect the rights of others to worship according to their own beliefs, they don't belong in our midst, period) and of those committing acts of violence, the rest of his commentary is right on the money.

Please note, however, that my sole reason for posting this emailed commentary is purely because I agree with the focus of the author's opinion re the theme of his message -- not as a source of statistical reference.

This is written by Major General Vernon Chong, MD, USAF Retired. He's a highly decorated Air Force Pilot, Flight Surgeon, past Commander of Wilford Hall Medical Center in San Antonio and Command Surgeon at the Headquarters of the U.S. European Command in Stuttgart, Germany. So he is real, is well-connected to Veterans' affairs, and these are his thoughts. They are worth reading and thinking about! Do a Google search on him and you'll see some of his other though-provoking writings.

This WAR is for REAL!
by MG Vernon Chong, USAFR

To get out of a difficulty, one usually must go through it. Our country is now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as we know it, that we have faced in your lifetime and mine
(which includes WWII).

The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are very few of us who think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who realize what losing really means.

First, let's examine a few basics:

1. When did the threat to us start?
Many will say September 11, 2001. The answer as far as the United States is concerned is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the following attacks on us:

* Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979;
* Beirut, Lebanon Embassy 1983;
* Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983;
* Lockerbie, Scotland Pan-Am flight to New York 1988;
* First New York World Trade Center attack 1993;
* Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996;
* Nairobi, Kenya US Embassy 1998;
* Dares Salaam, Tanzania US Embassy 1998;
* Aden, Yemen USS Cole 2000;
* New York World Trade Center 2001;
* Pentagon 2001.
(Note that during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist attacks worldwide).

2. Why were we attacked?
Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. The attacks happened during the administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2. We cannot fault either the Republicans or Democrats* as there were no provocations by any of the presidents or their immediate predecessors, Presidents Ford or Carter.

3. Who were the attackers?
In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims.

4. What is the Muslim population of the World? 25%.

5. Isn't the Muslim Religion peaceful?
Hopefully, but that is really not material. There is no doubt that the predominately Christian population of Germany was peaceful, but under the dictatorial leadership of Hitler (who was also Christian), that made no difference. You either went along with the administration or you were eliminated. There were 5 to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis for political reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests). (see http://www.naz is.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm)

Thus, almost the same number of Christians were killed by the Nazis, as the six million holocaust Jews who were killed by them, and we seldom heard of anything other than the Jewish atrocities. Although Hitler kept the world focused on the Jews, he had no hesitancy about killing anyone who got in his way of exterminating the Jews or of taking over the world - German, Christian or any others.

Same with the Muslim terrorists. They focus the world on the US, but kill all in the way -- their own people or the Spanish, French or anyone else. The point here is that just like the peaceful Germans were of no protection to anyone from the Nazis, no matter how many peaceful Muslims there may be, they are no protection for us from the terrorist Muslim leaders and wh at they are fanatically bent on doing -- by their own pronouncements -- killing all of us "infidels." I don't blame the peaceful Muslims. What would you do if the choice was shut up or die?

6. So who are we at war with?
There is no way we can honestly respond that it is anyone other than the Muslim terrorists. Trying to be politically correct and avoid verbalizing this conclusion can well be fatal. There is no way to win if you don't clearly recognize and articulate who you are fighting.

So with that background, now to the two major questions:

1. Can we lose this war?
2. What does losing really mean?

If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions.

We can definitely lose this war, and as anomalous as it may sound, the major reason we can lose is that so many of us simply do not fathom the answer to the second question - What does losing mean?

It would appear that a great many of us think that losing the war means hanging our heads, bringing the troops home and going on about our business, like post Vietnam. This is as far from the truth as one can get. What losing really means is:

We would no longer be the premier country in the world. The attacks will not subside, but rather will steadily increase. Remember, they want us dead, not just quiet. If they had just wanted us quiet, they would not have produced an increasing series of attacks against us, over the past 18 years. The plan was clearly, for terrorists to attack us until we were neutered and submissive to them. We would, of course, have no future support from other nations, for fear of reprisals and for the reason that they would see we are impotent and cannot help them.

They will pick off the other non-Muslim nations, one at a time. It will be increasingly easier for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It doesn't matter whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq. Spain did it because the Muslim terrorists bombed their train and told them to withdraw the troops. Anything else they want Spain to do will be done. Spain is finished.

The next will probably be France. Our one hope on France is that they might see the light and realize that if we don't win, they are finished, too, in that they can't resist the Muslim terrorists without us. However, it may already be too late for France. France is already 20% Muslim and fading fast!

If we lose the war, our production, income, exports and way of life will all vanish as we know it. After losing, who would trade or deal with us, if they were threatened by the Muslims?

If we can't stop the Muslims, how could anyone else?

The Muslims fully know what is riding on this war, and therefore are completely committed to winning, at any cost. We better know it too and be likewise committed to winning at any cost.

Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of losing? Simple. Until we recognize the costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put 100% of our thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to take that 100% effort to win.

So, how can we lose the war?

Again, the answer is simple. We can lose the war by "imploding." That is, defeating ourselves by refusing to recognize the enemy and their purpose, and really digging in and lending full support to the war effort. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to be divided, there is no way that we can win!

Let me give you a few examples of how we simply don't comprehend the life and death seriousness of this situation.

President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation. Although all of the terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between 17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling. Does that sound like we are taking this thing seriously? This is war! For the duration, we are going to have to give up some of the civil rights we have become accustomed to. We had better be prepared to lose some of our civil rights temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently.

And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil rights during WWII, and immediately restored them after the victory and in fact added many more since then.

Do I blame President Bush or President Clinton before him?

No, I blame us for blithely assuming we can maintain all of our Political Correctness, and all of our civil rights during this conflict and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None of those words apply to war. Get them out of your head.

Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see us lose. I hasten to add that this isn't because they are disloyal. It is because they just don't recognize what losing means. Nevertheless, that conduct gives the impression to the enemy that we are divided and weakening. It concerns our friends, and it does great damage to our cause.

Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the politicians and media regarding the treatment of some prisoners of war, perhaps exemplifies best what I am saying. We have recently had an issue, involving the treatment of a few Muslim prisoners of war, by a small group of our military police. These are the type prisoners who just a few months ago were throwing their own people off buildings, cutting off their hands, cutting out their tongues and otherwise murdering their own people just for disagreeing with Saddam Hussein.

And just a few years ago these same type prisoners chemically killed 400,000 of their own people for the same reason. They are also the same type enemy fighters, who recently were burning Americans, and dragging their charred corpses through the streets of Iraq. And still more recently, the same type enemy that was and is providing videos to all news sources internationally, of the beheading of Americ an prisoners they held.

Compare this with some of our press and politicians, who for several days have thought and talked about nothing else but the "humiliating" of some Muslim prisoners -- not burning them, not dragging their charred corpses through the streets, not beheading them, but "humiliating" them.

Can this be for real?

The politicians and pundits have even talked of impeachment of the Secretary of Defense. If this doesn't show the complete lack of comprehension and understanding of the seriousness of the enemy we are fighting, the life and death struggle we are in and the disastrous results of losing this war, nothing can.

To bring our country to a virtual political standstill over this prisoner issue makes us look like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned -- totally oblivious to what is going on in the real world. Neither we, nor any other country, can survive this internal strife. Again I say, this does not mean that some of our politicians or media people are disloyal. It simply means that they are absolutely oblivious to the magnitude, of the situation we are in and into which the Muslim terrorists have been pushing us, for many years.

Remember, the Muslim terrorists' stated goal is to kill all infidels! That translates into ALL non-Muslims -- not just in the United States, but throughout the world.

We are the last bastion of defense.

We have been criticized for many years as being 'arrogant.' That charge is valid in at least one respect; we are arrogant in that we believe that we are so good, powerful an d smart, that we can win the hearts and minds of all those who attack us, and that with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything bad in the world!

We can't!

If we don't recognize this, our nation as we know it will not survive, and no other free country in the world will survive if we are defeated.

And finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, equal rights for anyone -- let alone everyone, equal status or any status for women, or that have been productive in one single way that contributes to the good of the world.

This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war or we will be equated in the history books to the self-infli cted fall of the Roman Empire. If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history books to be written or read.

If we don't win this war right now, keep a close eye on how the Muslims take over France in the next 5 years or less. They will continue to increase the Muslim population of France and continue to encroach little by little, on the established French traditions. The French will be fighting among themselves, over what should or should not be done, which will continue to weaken them and keep them from any united resolve. Doesn't that sound eerily familiar?

Democracies don't have their freedoms taken away from them by some external military force. Instead, they give their freedoms away, politically correct piece by politically correct piece.

And they are giving those freedoms away to those who have shown, worldwide, that they abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or even to themselves, once they are in power.

They have universally shown that when they have taken over, they then start brutally killing each other over who will be the few who control the masses. Will we ever stop hearing from the politically correct, about the "peaceful Muslims"?

I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said above. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. I hope now after the election, the factions in our country will begin to focus on the critical situation we are in, and will unite to save our country. It is your future we are talking about! Do whatever you can to preserve it.

Well said, General!

* I don't entirely agree with the author's assertion that no fault could be laid at the feet of any Democrats for "certain attacks".

Hat Tip, Brenda.


Mustang, of Social Sense, added this insightful, spot-on comment that, due to its length, he was reluctant to add in the comment thread, though it would have been more than welcome therein:

As I commented, a few days ago at Social Sense, there are all kinds of ways to unite the American people – which I agree is necessary IF we intend to win the war on terror. But unlike previous world conflicts, our current challenges include the following: (1) An administration that pursues political expediency, which ultimately gives aid and comfort to the enemy of America, and (2) A myriad of mixed messages that cancel each other out, adding to the confusion of our general population

The White House, in an attempt to avoid any accusation that the war on terror is a "holy war," seeks to placate the Muslim world. According to Mr. Bush, we are fighting "terrorists," as if they are somehow separate and distinct from Islam. Nothing could be more confusing, or further from the truth. Mr. Bush has not united Americans – and in the minds of many citizens, there is no clear distinction about "who" our enemy is.

Democrats, using the conflict to further their own political agenda and career path, demand the implementation of a "cut and run" policy that curries favor with the anti-war crowd, those who support isolationist policies, and the enemy themselves. Concurrently, the liberal media, by commission and omission, have set about to whitewash the enemy, the threat they pose to the security of the United States, and the conflict as it reveals itself on foreign shore. Continual harping upon the "failed policies" of the Bush Administration only encourages the Jihadists, not unlike the war in Vietnam.

Conservatives demand a forceful and final resolution to the problem, which is Islam. Since many Americans are not convinced that the enemy of freedom is Islam, conservative chatter confuses them. Note: I believe that a firm solution is within our grasp, but no one is seriously considering it. I believe that there is ample justification for a war on terror, but that there can be no successful half-measures; we are either engaged to win, or we are destined to lose. I believe most Americans are waiting for a leader to stand up, point at someone, and tell us, "THAT is the enemy, and WE are going to kill him."

Personally, I believe that the "worst thing" happens every single day; Catholic priests beheaded, Christian children crucified, and bombs exploding at the rate of several times a day. But if America is subject to nuclear, chemical, or biological attacks – all of which is entirely possible, will WE allow politicians to continue to play the blame game, or will someone get pissed off enough to begin acting like this is a real war and we're damn well going to win it?

Finally, we are in a national crisis and it's time we started acting like it. We have not adequately addressed the threat of a North Korea who is now, or will soon be in a position to sell atomic weapons to Jihadist Iranians. Political posturing is not the pathway to success in any conflict – and unless this changes, and soon, then I think we are likely to continue winning the battles, but lose the war. As for me personally, I think Mr. Bush is part of the problem, and even more worrisome, I do not see anyone waiting in the wings to inspire confidence as his successor.

This comment is also posted at Social Sense.

Posted by Seth at 10:54 AM | Comments (19) |

Defining The Beliefs Of Liberals

You want to read the most complete and spot-on commentary you're likely to run across regarding the hypocrisy beliefs of "our friends" the liberals? Go over and pay a call on Atheling2 at The Pugil Stick.

Posted by Seth at 12:05 AM | Comments (10) |

October 12, 2006

MM on the MSM

Talk about timing, it had suddenly occurred to me that I'd been neglecting to comment on one of the prime reasons I originally started blogging, that being the disappointment known as the MSM (mainstream media), and just when I was contemplating a post on those blackguards, along came the venerable Michelle Malkin with an OpEd that is far better than any effort I might have produced.

Posted by Seth at 11:32 PM | Comments (2) |

Omaha Steaks

I recently received an introductory shipment from Omaha Steaks -- it was a highly discounted assortment of stuff intended -- successfully in my case, I might add -- to promote their products. They now have a new customer.

I received fillet mignons, top sirloins, Italian style meatballs (pre-cooked), potatoes au gratin, burgers, boneless pork loin chops, gourmet hot dogs and stuffed soles.

First off, though, I gave the soles to a friend who isn't as anal about seafood as I am; I have a thing about only eating locally -- wherever I happen to be -- caught fish {the exceptions being salmon in various forms, mussels and clams}. Everything has been excellent.

I had a couple of friends over and barbecued the top sirloins and the filets over mesquite and they were awesome, especially with the burgundy, olive oil and shaved garlic marinade I used. The hot dogs were fat and contained no fillers to speak of, also something I'll order again and the potatoes au gratin were an excellent side dish. The two pork chops I've inhaled so far were another thing I'll order again.

Moving on to the meatballs, there were two 1 lb. packages in the shipment -- the first pound went to meatball subs I made with marinara sauce. The remaining 16 oz went into last night's dinner, and munchies for the next couple or so days >>>> I made a pound and a half of spaghetti and a garlicky red sauce containing a generous quantity of ground mild Italian sausage, added the meatballs, swamped it in shredded mozzarella and baked it. Mmmmmm!!!! I ate part of it last night and accompanied it with my own garlic bread and about half a bottle of 2 year old Bell'agio chiante (a dollop of that went into the sauce before the fact). A feast!

So, yeah, though they're just a bit on the pricey side, I'd go with Omaha Steaks anytime. Prior to receiving the promotional deal and with it a catalog of all their products, I had no idea how many different items they sell, but there are a lot. In fact, before they sent me the offer for the promo deal, I thought they only sold steaks....

Anyway, I just thought I'd give a brief review of a good thing, as promised in an earlier comment thread.

Posted by Seth at 10:51 PM | Comments (8) |

October 09, 2006

Islam And Reality

My last post referred to the stoning of a young Muslim schoolgirl in France by other children because she was having a snack during the day instead of fasting for Ramadan. There was an indication that she may have had a medical condition that, according to the laws of Islam, qualifies for exception to the impositions of the fast. According to an Islamic authority in France, students aren’t adequately taught Islamic law in French schools and therefore might not have realized that the girl was exempt.

Oh, okay, fine. The schools in that western country are at fault for not including more thorough Islamic instruction in their schools, otherwise those little monsters would have realized they shouldn’t have stoned her. Boy, is that ever a relief, knowing the French are to blame for an oversight(man, how I hate taking sides with the French!), and not the children who did the stoning, their parents for raising them to stone other children for religious infractions nor, of course, the tenets of Islam, thank Allah!

I’m glad we got that bit straightened out, now it all makes perfect sense.

Funnily enough, when I was a school kid in New York, we weren’t taught the fine points of Christianity or Judaism in school; for that, we attended classes at our churches and synagogues, ie Sunday School or Hebrew School. Those Muslims are so special, they even feel the non-Muslim taxpayer should be required to pay for their child’s Islamic education.

Then again, Islam neither respects nor condones the existence of any other religions, nor does it respect the sovereignty of any non-Islamic nations, nor the right of those nations to allow freedom of non-Islamic worship or even exist under any but Sharia law, so they see nothing wrong with emigrating to a non-Islamic country and, rather than respecting that country’s beliefs and customs, demand that the country change to suit their Islamic beliefs.

In some circles, that might be called chutzpah.

But that’s not the sum total of what I’m posting about here, merely yet another chapter in the story of Islam’s modern day western migration.

I won’t even go into 9/11, the bombings in recent years in England and Spain or the aborted airplane bombing plot brought to light even more recently. No, forget those. They were the work of organized Islamic terrorist groups.

Instead, let’s look at the “small stuff”. The rioting in France several months ago, wherein Muslims burned hundreds of other people’s cars, committed untold property damage and assaulted people who had never borne them any ill will. The demonstrations on which we’ve seen photos, in which people held signs bearing such legends as “Behead those who insult Islam” and “Europe, your holocaust is coming”, worldwide rioting, property destruction and violence over a few cartoons of Mohammed and Muslims’ debacle over the Pope’s recent speech.

And the Muslim-on-Muslim stoning of that poor little girl by children who could only have been responding to their upbringings by parents who would undoubtedly have endorsed their "proper" Islamic actions.

The only response Muslims ever have to anything they feel insults their religion or its sick, twisted founder, Mohammed the Pedophile, is insane violence. Destruction, murder, threats of beheading….

Yet, despite these repeated occurrences, in their uniformity, intensity of violence and the disproportionately picayune events that provoke them, our western media and our western politicians continue to accept Islam as “the religion of peace” and make accommodations accordingly, welcoming this abomination into our midst and extending it significantly more respect than they accord our own customs and religions.

An American public school will suspend or even expel your child for attempting to spread a Judeo-Christian message among his or her fellow pupils under the auspices of liberals’ exaggerated “Separation of Church and State” bull droppings, yet will have no qualms about requiring the same pupils to take classes on Islamic scripture or religious customs, or to participate in simulations of Ramadan, act out the Pilgrimage of Haj or recite the Five Pillars of Islam, all on the overwhelmingly Judeo-Christian taxpayer’s dime.

Under the dubious “merits” of political correctness and multiculturalism, a couple more liberal contributions to the current state of affairs, Muslims are somehow a protected species – terrorism is merely the work of “radical extremists” and their violent, homicidal, destructive, mindless riots are invariably the fault of whichever western government and society happens to be hosting the perpetrators.

Organizations like CAIR {Council on American-Islamic Relations}, which is nothing more than a propaganda and litigation instrument for the Islamic infiltration of the United States, wage their campaigns to silence dissent and smother the truth as a way of running interference for the U.S. front of the global jihad now in progress, always right on top of any truth that rears its head that might in any way expose the invasive intentions of Islam for America, and they are backed up by leftist organizations like the ACLU, which was founded with an eye toward transforming this country into a totalitarian enterprise. Ironically enough, should the Islamic revolution succeed, the Marxists of the ACLU would be given short shrift by the Muslims with whom they have allied themselves – they are, after all, infidels like the rest of us and as such have less than no standing as human beings within the framework of Muslim beliefs.

And thanks almost entirely to the hacks that comprise today’s liberal dominated media and to politicians for whom being politically correct in order to gain votes is the order of the day, the majority of Americans are kept completely in the dark while Islam gradually establishes a powerful market share in the west.

Witness goings-on in France. Look at the way British society labors vigorously to accommodate Muslims by changing their traditions. What’s really disheartening and not a little frightening, is the fact that while the French, past masters of surrender and certainly not any kind of ally of America for over two centuries, resist change until they’ve been hammered enough by applied Islam, the British, historically a nation of great backbone, strength and fighting spirit, have been giving in to the demands of Islam before any Muslims even venture any. Britain has long been one of our truest allies.

“What—” as they say, “—‘sup with that?”

To cut to the chase, Islam is not the peaceful religion its marketing folks have apparently convinced the media and the leaders of the free world that it is. Islam is totally incompatible with the west, it is a religion based upon slavery and murder. It is a 7th Century cult that treats its women like dog doo and mutilates or butchers anyone who doesn’t go with the program. Its mandate is a planet dominated by Muslims.

Once this goal has been reached, the violence will not be completed – the next phase will be its various sects warring upon each other, the same horrors enacted until one sect – Sunni, Shiite, whichever – rules the roost. The various sects of Islam are already, and have long been, killing each other off and will do so even more vigorously once all infidels have been eliminated from the equation – converted, killed or enslaved as dhimmis.

Britain and France have about run out of time – the only way they will still be free countries ten years from now will be to employ brutally extreme corrective measures that will be fought by all but the most hardened hearts. The United States still has time to exercise options that, while in many ways distasteful, could save the republic.

Our leaders, those folks whom we have elected to defend us, need to wake up really fast……

Posted by Seth at 07:24 PM | Comments (24) |

Is This Really What We Need In The West?

Here is yet another example of the consequences of allowing animals who observe a barbaric, "theology"-based culture from the dark ages to immigrate to, live and multiply in civilized countries among civilized people.

Major Hat Tip to Always On Watch

Posted by Seth at 03:46 PM | Comments (6) |

Chickens Come Home To Roost

While this situation is pretty screwed up, I find it more than a little amusing, as I always do when I see businesses of any size finding illegal practices, whether for "cost efficiency" or corner cutting purposes, coming back to bite them on the derriere.

Illegal immigrants who worked at Café Express in Houston and two other cities in Texas have sued the chain and Houston law firm Boyar & Miller P.C. for negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud and other allegations related to the filing of employment certification paperwork.

According to the lawsuit, filed in Dallas Country District Court, Boyar & Miller and Café Express, a unit of Wendy's International Inc., missed a 2001 deadline to file paperwork that could have allowed the illegal immigrants to become U.S. citizens. Wendy's was also named in the suit.

First, the Wendy's subsidiary had criminal aliens working on their payroll before some dimwit politicians tampered with our immigration laws to begin with, setting a filing deadline to grant legal status to illegal immigrants -- basically trespassers, if you want to get technical -- based on employer sponsorship.

Second, they subtracted money from these criminal aliens' paychecks every week to cover the necessary representation by an American law firm.

Third, the law firm screwed the pooch by failing to file the documentation they were required by their clients to file by the deadline.

Fourth, even after the legal eagles missed the deadline, their paychecks continued to be debited for the representation they weren't receiving.

Fifth, the Wendy's unit, Cafe Express, took what they saw to be their only recourse and fired the criminal aliens involved.

My own feelings are mixed, here:

A) I don't believe that people who aren't even in this country, let alone working, legally should be entitled to sue in our courts, but,

B) Seeing as Cafe Express, and by extension Wendy's, had these illegals on their payroll prior to any sponsorship filing legislation, knowing that doing so violated federal law, and

C) Failed to meet obligations for which they'd been taking these peoples' money every week,

I believe that both Cafe Express and Wendy's should get it up the kazoo, big time -- there need to be both heavy monetary penalties and the folks who knowingly hired the criminal aliens need to go to jail, but at the same time I see no reason to allow the aliens involved to sue in our court system. I believe the law firm that shirked their obligations needs to pay some kind of price for failing to discharge duties for which they were, while not producing, continuing to accept fees, and that the criminal aliens involved need to be sent packing. After all, at the end of the day, the fact remains that they knew up front that they were here illegally.

Basically, that whole sorry lot needs a good, solid slapping down.

It will be both interesting and, to me, highly entertaining to see how this mess develops....

Posted by Seth at 01:59 PM |

Briefly, On NK, Nukes and Diplomacy

I rarely have anything to say about this topic, because I perceive only profound stupidity in the entire quagmire of so-called "diplomatic relations" between Kim Jong Il and the rest of the world.

Here we have a tinpot communist dictator who starves his people and contributes absolutely nothing to the rest of the world other than malevolence and blackmail-based demands for aid he wouldn't need if he didn't isolate his country from the rest of the world in order to run his pitiful little "kingdom" unimpeded.

Here we have a whole bunch of stupid diplomats and politicians, including our own, who continue this idiotic pavane with that insane little shit, who has already demonstrated that he's about as contemptuous of diplomatic overtures as are most Arab leaders, only potentially more dangerous than most of those -- here's an Asian Ahmadmanjihad who doesn't even bother to employ pseudo-theological motives in his reasoning, he actually hasn't a leg to stand on in support of his maniacy. He just yips and yaps like an attention starved chihuahua, and all the great powers of the world and all the world's media shower him with the attention he craves, plead with him almost to the point of licking his backside, to accept bribes to stand down his nuclear weapons programs.

Here we have his latest nuke test, and the U.S. proposing sanctions in the event the little shit doesn't want to re-enter talks already proven a useless waste of time.

I don't generally waste bandwidth blogging about this situation because it's simply too assinine to bother. We, and at least five other countries that could be injured by the irresponsible whims of Kim Jong Illness, could more than handily wipe him off the face of the earth once and for all, eliminating the problem, and use the freed-up diplomatic assets to address issues that require infinitely more consideration involving nations whose very existences are of far more import to the rest of the world.

Posted by Seth at 12:36 PM | Comments (10) |

October 05, 2006

R Is For Repatriation

In the comment thread of my previous post, we were introduced to blogger Mark Alexander. I went over to his site and did some reading, and he is most definitely spot-on. His site, A New Dark Age Is Dawning, will be the newest addition to my blogroll.

In his latest post, he both defines the threat posed by Islam and suggests what is probably the only solution, though the lemming-like forces of political correctness would no doubt fight its implementation tooth and nail.

The post is here.

Posted by Seth at 11:32 AM | Comments (4) |

October 04, 2006

I Hate To Be A Pessimist, But....

… as events have unfolded since 11 September 2001, while I still look at a bottle as half full rather than half empty, I cannot apply the same attitude toward the most likely state of things in America a few short years from now, if not sooner.

You’d have to be pretty damned optimistic to doubt that there is WMD in the hands of Islamic terrorists, and further, to think that there is enough aggregate humanity in that community to provoke even a second’s hesitation to use said weapons when they feel the time is most advantageous to do so.

The United States and Israel would be the primary targets, that’s a given. Israel has the edge there, even most of their liberals, because of the Jewish State’s short and violent history, know that the War on Terror is not a game and that security is a serious, vital and yes, as often as not invasive business in many ways. As such, the Israeli government approaches security seriously and is less impeded by idiots playing politics with human lives than our own government is here in the U.S. We’re surrounded by two oceans, Canada and Mexico, they’re surrounded by countries whose strictly adhered-to religion endorses wiping Israel off the map.

The U.S. has more border and coast to secure against illegal entry and a whole hell of a lot more land area to patrol. We have cities with multimillion population figures like New York and Los Angeles that would give a nuclear terrorist more bang for the radiation buck and at the same time be extremely easy to disappear into and within which to maintain operational security while preparing a horrendous tragedy.

Islamic terrorists are patient people, they have world class strategists among their leadership and their veritable legions of foot soldiers are people who crave death in the course of an act of murdering non-Muslims, as dying in the course of pursuing jihad is what they believe to be their path to eternal paradise. Their scriptures compel them to kill, convert or subject nonbelievers. There is no place anywhere on top of this earth that is exempt, the holy war will not be over until Islam rules the entire planet. They have no interest in compromise, respect no treaties or other agreements with non-Muslims and are brutally single minded in their resolve. They care nothing about killing fellow Muslims in the course of their terrorism, no collateral damage of any kind is of any consequence in planning their operations. Their religion permits them to violate its commandments in order to blend in among the “infidel” enemy – us.

Europe, shockingly enough including England, is well into a phased surrender to Islam, so there would be little strategic sense in wasting a perfectly good suitcase nuke on that quarter, but thanks to the love of liberty and the independent spirit of most right-thinking Americans, the United States is a strong pocket of resistance on top of being the epitome of everything Islam considers incompatible with its very existence.

We are the prime target for any nuclear terrorist attack. Count on it.

The left apparently believes that we can go to a street fight with a book of Queensbury Rules in our back pocket and return with no broken bones, if we return at all. They are evidently incapable of perceiving that at the end of the day, no brilliant diplomacy, no nice gestures, no compromise, no appeasement, no humane, moral or in any way decent concessions will earn us anything other than contempt and more vigorous and ruthless attacks from this implacable, malevolent enemy.

The Democrats labor under the impression that, for purely political reasons, they can oppose the Bush Administration’s attempts to protect the nation against terrorism at every turn with an end toward making the President fail and still see America come out of the deal with a whole skin.

While Bush is waging war to protect America and Americans, the Democrats are waging war against Bush.

They spin high tech eavesdropping on known suspected terrorists and terrorist connections into the NSA listening in on Rhoda’s arrangements for her son Irving’s Bar Mitzvah, Joe’s organizing of the Friday night card game and booze fest with Tony, Alfie and Moose and Janet’s personal conversation with her gynecologist, and protest these invasions of privacy.

They spin the Bush Administration’s monitoring terrorist financing bank accounts as “spying on” the money little Tommy has deposited in savings from his paper route or the balance Jimmy and Jane maintain in checking to keep their household finances on point.

They spin the Bush Administration’s radiation monitoring of suspect Muslim mosques as ethnic or religious discrimination…. Despite the fact that storing a nuke in a mosque is completely acceptable in Islam, as the stored contraband item will be used to murder infidels.

They…. Well, that’s not actually the subject of this post, it’s just getting my usual digressions out of the way in advance while also setting the stage….

…. For what I’m actually posting about, and that is a scenario of sorts that I’m about 250% sure will manifest itself in years to come – and I’m not necessarily talking a decade, or half a decade.

So, let’s get started.

The Democrats have a majority on the Hill and a Democrat sits in the Oval Office.

A suitcase nuke goes off in downtown Manhattan in the middle of a business day. Bye- bye NYSE, COMEX, NASDAQ, etc, the Federal Reserve and some of the world’s largest banks, the U.N. (bummer, heh) and at least five million human beings. The radiation takes care of folks in Brooklyn, the Bronx, Queens and Staten Island, as well as Nassau and Suffolk counties over a day’s time, Westchester and Putnam Counties, to add a few more million.

The blow to our economy is incalculable. The death toll is beyond reason.

You think some Arabic 7-11 owners being beaten up after 9/11 was pretty bad, huh? There will be shootings and hangings and so forth, Americans will go berserk. There will be unrest, all directed toward Muslim communities.

The so-called “peaceful” Muslims, the ones who had previously kept their traps shut, rather than protest the terrorist act, will riot, demonstrate and protest the “racism” they are encountering. There will be pandemonium, firefights on the streets and tons of National Guard activity.

The government will be in a position where the only logical action will be declaring martial law, but they won’t do so because they are Democrats and that would infringe on citizens’ “rights”.

A second nuke detonates in L.A., followed by a third in Chicago. Now our markets have ceased to exist to all intents and purposes, we no longer have an economy and millions more are dead. Rioting and looting have become the norm.

The Democrat President and the left hand side of Congress blame former President George W. Bush for not conducting adequate surveillance and monitoring operations, the same ones they themselves had deep-sixed, and all the former Bush bashers agree.

Meanwhile, the pandemonium continues.

And another suitcase nuke goes off in Baltimore….

Posted by Seth at 05:03 PM | Comments (34) |

October 02, 2006

Democrats -- The "Brown Party"

In a very well written post, Thespis at Thespis Journal talks about another lefty member of Congress, Ohio's "The Dishonorable" Sherrod Brown, and his blatant self exposure as a bald-faced liar.

I mean it when I say that Democrats have a recent years' record of voting irresponsibly, because a) they don't take the trouble to learn exactly who and what they're voting for, b) they are profoundly gullible, or c) they prefer to be represented in Congress or have in the White House adulterers, cheats, liars, traitors, whores and pimps.

Hell, if you contributed enough to Bill Clinton's campaign, you were permitted to punch notches in the Lincoln Bedroom. On the streets a structure that affords that sort of arrangement is called a "trick pad".

Posted by Seth at 03:24 PM | Comments (4) |

October 01, 2006

Hizzoner Speaks

Yeah, he's a Democrat, but he's right up there in my esteem with former Republican mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani as one of the two best mayors of Gotham in my lifetime -- Ed Koch, who stands behind President Bush's leadership in the Global War On Terror and even voted for Dubya in the 2004 election -- I guess he never saw any merit in joining the angry left in their attacks on the President or in their dedication to bringing down the greatest country in the world, ostensibly because unlike most of that crowd over there on the left, he is a patriot.

He has penned a new OpEd about a guest sermon he gave at a Rosh Hashanah(Jewish New Year) service eight days ago, worth the read for sure.

In a fatuous editorial, The Times lectured the Pope. It stated: "A doctrinal conservative, his greatest fear appears to be the loss of a uniform Catholic identity, not exactly the best jumping-off point for tolerance or interfaith dialogue. The world listens carefully to the words of any pope. And it is tragic and dangerous when one sows pain, either deliberately or carelessly. He needs to offer a deep and persuasive apology, demonstrating that words can also heal."

What wrong did the Pope commit? Quoting a 14th-century emperor? Condemning violence as a religious tactic and urging a dialogue? We should be applauding the Pope for his bravery and supporting his call for dialogue. Has The Times ever acknowledged that we are now engaged in a war with Islamic terrorists worldwide who have clearly stated that their desire is to convert or kill the infidels who they believe we are?

To Truncate,

Now let's turn to the United Nations and what took place when Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez addressed the General Assembly. He vilified President Bush, referring to him as "the devil," and stated that he could still smell the scent of sulfur on the speaker's podium from President Bush's earlier address to the Assembly. He mockingly crossed himself for protection and went on at length with his vilification of President Bush and the United States.

What offended me even more than Chavez's ludicrous remarks were the responses of the U.N. delegates. No one stood up and told Chavez that he was out of order and demanded that he stop or sit down. They should have told him he was a disgrace to the U.N. Instead they are reported to have applauded this monster and laughed with him, instead of at him. The Times reported: "So while there was official outrage over Mr. Chavez calling Mr. Bush 'the devil,' there was also a lot of applause and giggling, from dignitaries including the president of the General Assembly herself, Haya Rashed al-Khalifa of Bahrain, who was caught chuckling from her seat on the dais behind Mr. Chavez."

Where was the official outrage, and why was Chavez not rebuked while he held the platform? Many of the countries whose delegates were amused by his vitriol receive their sustenance from the U.S. We feed their people and provide much of their medical care. Many expect the U.S. to protect them from attacks from other countries, and some of them are even formal allies. Yet none of them walked out to show solidarity with us. The two nations not in the chamber when Chavez took the dais were the U.S. and Israel. We should forever remember the craven behavior of those who stayed and cheered.

Hizzoner speaks his mind....

Read the entire column here.

Posted by Seth at 03:19 PM | Comments (16) |