Tag Archives: War On Terror

Supreme Court Hands Another Win To The Enemy

June 13, 2008 Ross

There is not a better example of Judicial abuse then what the five liberal justices on the Supreme Court did today. They ignored precedent.

With this court, precedents are fine as long as it meets their liberal agenda, which includes the notion that the U.S. Constitution is a rough draft of the way things should be. And decisions like the one today serve to refine or update it.

The Justices have just made American citizens unsafe in a time that we are at war.

Never in the history of American jurisprudence have we given full Constitutional rights to terrorists captured anywhere in the world who commit atrocities on civilians.

They overstepped their bounds in the separation of powers. The executive branch is responsible for conducting all aspects of war, not the judiciary. They cast a pall over our entire military and the brave men and women wearing the uniform and fighting to protect us and kill the enemy. They insulted the surviving families of those who gave their life for the very same constitution that this court is abusing. And they may as well have spat on the graves of those who gave the full measure with this decision.

It is our soldiers, our citizens, that deserve the protection of our Constitution, NOT the terrorists that want to kill us.

The media and their buds on the left report this decision as a loss for Bush. It reveals to all just who they are at war with, and it isn’t al Qaeda. This isn’t a loss for Bush. This is a loss for America.

Hear it all put into context by Mark Levin in this 10 minute audio clip. H/T NewsBusters.

Immigration, Politics, War On Terror

Sneaky Amnesty Tricks, Version 3

May 20, 2008 Ross

Those Democrats and RINO’s are at it again. This time making an Iraq Supplemental Bill also an immigration slash amnesty bill with a guest worker program that is not needed, because there already is one called an H-2B visa. The other nifty thing it does, you know, in support of the troops in Iraq, is to create more corporate welfare for agriculture in the United States. If this isn’t the definition of useless politicians I don’t know what is.

The measure, called the Emergency Agriculture Relief Act, was added to the War Supplemental bill in a 17-12 vote last Thursday.

Known as the AgJob amendment, the Feinstein-Craig measure revived instantaneously the controversy that caused conservatives to lash out at the White House and Congress last summer.

The measure would grant temporary legal status to 1.35 million illegal immigrants and their families currently working in the agricultural field. The legislation was passed out of committee at the request of agribusiness interests who have been insisting that they need illegal aliens to harvest crops and run horse shows. The legislation is nothing less than “comprehensive immigration reform” on a smaller scale.

Your senators need to be told to not pass that bill with this amendment and corporate welfare in it. As it is right now, there is no money for Iraq. Only for immigrants and BIG AG. This shows how and why the left likes the military. The troops are useful in loading up their support bills with political pork and social engineering projects. Yeah, we love our troops.

Sorry I don’t have a bill number yet, but you know as much as I do and enough to inform your senator about. Get on it because it is expected to be voted on this week, maybe even tomorrow.

Update: The bill is H.R.2642. War Supplemental Bill Tests Different Approaches of Byrd and Obey

2008 Election, Iran, Media, Politics, Uncategorized, War On Terror

Obama The Pot, Bush The Kettle

May 16, 2008 Ross

Not satisfied that he has made a big enough fool of himself over Bush’s speech to the Israeli Knesset by behaving like HE was the focus of the speech and not the appeasers of 1939 or today, the presidential wannabe and Democrat front-runner Barack Obama is now accusing the President of “dishonest, divisive” attacks, all in the context of that speech. And Democrats are circling the wagons around him.

Obama has now become the pot calling the kettle black. How presidential? The fact that there was no attack on Obama personally or Democrats as a party isn’t going to prevent Obama to flat-out lie to the dumb masses about it. The media doesn’t think Bush was talking about Obama. Just Obama and democrats think this is the case.

The president referred to the leader of Iran, who has called for the destruction of the U.S. ally, and then said some seem to believe that we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals – comments Obama and Democrats said were directed at them.

After lying about Bush’s motivations for that speech, he continues . . .

“They aren’t telling you the truth. They are trying to fool you and scare you because they can’t win a foreign policy debate on the merits,” said Obama. “But it’s not going to work. Not this time, not this year.”

I thought Obama was done with debating? That’s what he told Hillary Clinton a few weeks ago. And someone should tell Barack that Bush is not running. McCain would be the best one to debate with. Or for a real challenge, Sean Hannity. But I digress. . . Who is ‘they?’ And what lies have ‘they’ said? Obama did not say either who was lying or what the lie was. And who is the ‘you’ in ‘fool you .. scare you?’ I don’t think the Knesset felt like Bush was trying to fool them or scare them. They know, more than he, what it is like to have to live with missiles and suicide bombers ruining your day.

So the one who is lying and dividing here is Sen. Barack Obama by taking this speech and telling us that it was directed at him and his party, and that it was done to divide the country. Is this Commander In Chief material?

Obama The Negotiator Has Lots Of Company

May 16, 2008 Ross

So why would Sen. Barack Obama think that President Bush was talking about him? Well, other than to make himself a victim again and rouse up the lemmings. Please find below a short list of some prominent democrats on the subject of negotiating with terrorists or terrorist states. H/T to Kathryn Jean Lopez . . .

The president could have been speaking of any number of Democrats. Say, Jimmy Carter, who in April, 2008 said: “Through more official consultations with these outlawed leaders [Hamas and Syria], it may yet be possible to revive and expedite the stalemated peace talks between Israel and its neighbors. In the Middle East, as in Nepal, the path to peace lies in negotiation, not in isolation.”

Or Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, freelance diplomat, who in December 2007 said: “the road to Damascus is a road to peace.”

Or, perhaps he meant Speaker Pelosi in April 2007: “I believe in dialogue. As my colleagues have said over and over again, unless you communicate, you cannot understand each other. You cannot reach agreement.”

Or maybe he meant recent Obama endorser and former North Carolina senator John Edwards, who, according to his own press release in February of last year, believes “the U.S. should step up our diplomatic efforts by engaging in direct talks with all the nations in the region, including Iran and Syria.”

Or Bill Richardson, who has said, about meeting with Iran and Syria: “They’re bad folks … But you don’t have peace talks with your friends.”

It could have been about Congressman Henry Waxman, who in April said: “A Democratic administration would go back and try to open that possibility up for discussions [with Iran] of a grand bargain of one sort or another … Democrats would certainly have seen that as a missed opportunity.”

Or Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich: “I can go to Syria. I can go to Iran and work to craft a path towards peace. And I will … How can you change peopled minds if you don’t meet with them?”

Or former Democratic presidential candidates and senators Chris Dodd and John Kerry, who met with Syria’s al-Assad and said: “As senior Democrats on the Foreign Relations Committee, we felt it was important to make clear that while we believe in resuming dialogue, our message is no different: Syria can and should play a more constructive role in the region … We concluded that our conversation was worthwhile, and that … resuming direct dialogue with Syria should be pursued.”

Or the former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, from April 10: “[Diplomats] can deliver some pretty tough messages … You don’t begin with a president of the country, but you do need to talk to your enemy.”

Those democrats.

2008 Election, Politics, War On Terror

Obama And Democrats Demand That The Shoe Fits

May 15, 2008 Ross

President Bush addressed the Israeli Knesset today as part of his Middle East tour that included Israel’s 60th birthday. In his address, Bush recounts Israel’s history and WWII. Pointing out how, in history, there were (as there always are) some people who thought Hitler could be talked to and negotiated with. With history behind him, Bush points out how that kind of thinking was just as wrong then as it is in dealing with the Islamofascists of today, otherwise called the ‘war on terror.’

From the transcript, in speaking about the war on terror, here is what Bush said. Look for a reference to Democrats or Obama.

This struggle is waged with the technology of the 21st century, but at its core it is an ancient battle between good and evil. The killers claim the mantle of Islam, but they are not religious men. No one who prays to the God of Abraham could strap a suicide vest to an innocent child, or blow up guiltless guests at a Passover Seder, or fly planes into office buildings filled with unsuspecting workers. In truth, the men who carry out these savage acts serve no higher goal than their own desire for power. They accept no God before themselves. And they reserve a special hatred for the most ardent defenders of liberty, including Americans and Israelis.

And that is why the founding charter of Hamas calls for the “elimination” of Israel. And that is why the followers of Hezbollah chant “Death to Israel, Death to America!” That is why Osama bin Laden teaches that “the killing of Jews and Americans is one of the biggest duties.” And that is why the President of Iran dreams of returning the Middle East to the Middle Ages and calls for Israel to be wiped off the map.

There are good and decent people who cannot fathom the darkness in these men and try to explain away their words. It’s natural, but it is deadly wrong. As witnesses to evil in the past, we carry a solemn responsibility to take these words seriously. Jews and Americans have seen the consequences of disregarding the words of leaders who espouse hatred. And that is a mistake the world must not repeat in the 21st century.

Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: “Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.” We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history. (Applause.)

OK fine. So what does the left do with that statement? They are making an issue out of whole cloth with this, accusing Bush of attacking Obama. Aside from the fact that Bush was talking about Israel and all its enemies, Democrats are circling the wagons around Barack Obama as though protecting him from an ‘unprecedented attack.’ These democrats and the Obama campaign are jumping up and down screaming, YES, the shoe fits just fine, yet they don’t like it.

What is most interesting is that Obama is showing his thin-skin, his amateur and naive approach to world war and peace, and his downright arrogance that anyone who articulates what amounts to his policy beliefs is attacking him. As opposed to suggesting that McCain is ‘loosing his bearings’ I guess. That’s different. What it is, is an attempt to condition you to believe that articulating a policy position is an attack, irregardless of the fact that no names were, or even have to be, given.

afterthought: The last para is the one that is giving Obama and Co. the heartburn, but the preceding para sets up the last one. Does this mean they will demand an apology for being referred to as ‘good and decent’ people?

Pensacola, Politics, Uncategorized, War On Terror

Progressive News, Truth Deficit Disorder

April 14, 2008 Ross

Given the circumstances days before Gen. David Petraeus’s progress report to Congress, where House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) laid down a pre-condition that there better not be any good news, no sugar coating in his report, especially regarding recent fighting in Basra, I was pleasantly surprised to see some unanimity in the reporting of the conclusions of his appearance before Congress. With one exception, the ‘premier’ outlet for progressive news, GoLeftTV.

GoLeftTV says the story was ‘Petraeus’s admission that we are not making headway in Iraq.’ This is about 180 degrees from what I heard of the two days Petraeus spent on Capital Hill. I heard Gen. Petraeus say that much progress has been made in the last year and since his last report to Congress. Pressed for an answer as to when our troops can come home, he said that we have not turned that corner yet, we’re not at the point yet where we can see the light at the end of the tunnel. The bottle of champagne is pushed to ‘the back of the refrigerator.’ But, there is every expectation that the end game is achievable if we and the Iraqi government keep at it, and every expectation it will be an utter failure if we were to leave prematurely.

To settle this dichotomy from what I saw and what Farron Cousins saw, I sought to get the left’s perspective on the Petraeus report. I did what any good liberal would do. I watched PBS’s NewsHour program Saturday night where Mark Shields and David Brooks were on the panel with Jim Lehrer discussing news of the week, including the Patreaus testimony as relates to the war in Iraq. They were honest enough to interpret the Petraeus testimony exactly the same as everyone else. Everyone else except GoLeftTV, the progressive news source. It was good to see that I had seen the same testimony as David Brooks and Mark Shields.

GoLeftTV decided instead to report that we are not making any progress in Iraq, and, Bush lied. According to Farron Cousins, Bush’s description of progress was contradictory to the message carried by Gen. Petraeus. This interpretation is patently deceptive and dishonest and proves that truth deficit disorder is not limited to the Clintons as this video will attest. The Petraeus analysis, thankfully, is the first minute and a half.

Media, War On Terror

Progress In Iraq Ignored

March 27, 2008 Ross

The fact that most of the news nowadays is about the economy, if not about the Democratic primary race and not about Iraq is not news. I mean, ever since the surge started showing positive results, news in Iraq is limited to a death toll tally or IED and mortar count. What is happening in Iraq that is also being ignored surrounds the current fighting going on in Muqtada al-Sadr territory against his militias in Basra. The news here is that the Iraqi army is the military doing the fighting there, not U.S. Basra was turned over to Iraq for full security control last December, and what we are seeing is Iraq taking care of business. And, Iraq’s Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is personally overseeing operations against al-Sadr’s militias and supporters. al-Maliki says

“We have made up our minds to enter this battle and we will continue until the end. No retreat,” al-Maliki said in a speech broadcast on Iraqi state TV.

So where are the headlines like Iraq Taking On Security Responsibilities?

Politics, Uncategorized, War On Terror

Trailer Park Lawmakers Don't Ask Questions

March 26, 2008 Ross

Things just keep getting curiouser and curiouser. Today it is Democratic Reps. Jim McDermott of Washington, who earned the moniker ‘Baghdad Jim’, David Bonior of Michigan and Mike Thompson of California, going on an all expenses paid junket to Iraq in October of 2002 to meet with Saddam Hussein over a year before the war began. And not one of them knew that the trip was financed by Saddam Hussein.

Are we to think that these three anti-war Democrats did not know who was paying for the trip, since they were not? ‘Plausible deniability’ dictates not to be so curious as to inquire who is picking up the tab. Take the free ride to Saddam’s palace. Take the opportunity to accuse the President of lying to the American people. And let’s not forget, all the free propaganda material Saddam can use.

I’m reminded of the words of James Carville, then attack dog and political adviser to President Clinton, when Clinton Inc. was smearing Paula Jones as ‘trailer park trash.’ Of Paula Jones, he said something like ‘that’s what you get when you drag a dollar bill through a trailer park.’ The analogy fits when applied to these three, Baghdad Jim McDermott, David Bonior and Mike Thompson. Drag a dollar through their office and they’re yours. They’ve apparently been conditioned to not ask questions.

Of the lawmakers . . .

None was charged and Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd said investigators “have no information whatsoever” any of them knew the trip was underwritten by Saddam.

That’s one issue. Then there’s what they said while in Baghdad. Baghdad Jim told ABC, from Baghdad, that “the president of the United States will lie to the American people in order to get us into this war.” But wait, there’s more! He said this on Iraqi TV . . .

“We are three veterans of the Vietnam War who came over here because we don’t want war. We assert from here that we do not want the United States to wage war on any peace-loving countries. As members of Congress, we would like diplomatic efforts to continue so as not to launch any aggression. We will visit children’s hospitals to see the negative impact of the sanctions imposed on Iraq. We hope that peace will prevail throughout the world.”

Media, Politics, Uncategorized, War On Terror

Five Years, 7,000

March 23, 2008 Ross

Nothing but heroic courage and selfless sacrifice to celebrate today. Not the fact that the total war casualties reached 4000. Seems like only yesterday that the media was all pumped up for the 500th. Then the 1000th.

Militarily, this war has proven to be the most successful war, especially considering the global scale of the enemy, in history. Actually, the total casualties is 7,000. The first 3,000 were unarmed civilians.

One can only imagine how much lower the count would have been, and how much closer to being able to leave Iraq we would have been if the other half of the country did not choose to abandon the war in mid-stream.

Flashback to this time last year, when Gen. Petraeus wrote a ‘Letter To The Iraqi People.’ This was when the planned surge operation was about to begin. It looks like the Iraqi people took him at his word because the Iraqi people have done and are doing what he asked of them even to this day. They are turning in the insurgents and isolating them from their neighborhoods so they can be taken out. And its a good thing. Unfortunately, the left would rather abandon the Iraqi people for political expediency. Doesn’t it make sense to finish the job now instead of letting Iraq regress into a safe house/country for terrorists where we’ll have to go back and start all over, only this time with a much more dug in, armed and deadly enemy? If casualty numbers are of any concern to the Left, then they know the best option is to finish this one out and not leave, only to return to start from scratch.

related link: Iraq: The Real Story by Oliver North

Politics, Uncategorized, War On Terror

Democrats Secure Win For Terrorists

March 10, 2008 Ross 1 Comment

A sensational title? Sure, but it is also the truth when it comes to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and House Democrats letting expire the parts of the Protect America Act that deal with internet and cell communications. This is the same bill that the Senate passed in a bi-partisan vote of 68-29. The consequence? For a little more than three weeks now (Feb 16, 2008) the government has to operate by the 1978 standards of the FISA act. This means, they can not listen in on communications from terrorists in Pakistan to terrorists in Afghanistan. It is taking a tool out of the toolbox in fighting the war on terror. The House democrats seem more concerned with librarians than the terrorists that want us dead.

The Protect America Act amended the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that was passed in 1978 to protect people inside the United States from being monitored by U.S. intelligence without a warrant proving they were agents of a foreign government.

This point is crucial: FISA was never meant to apply to foreigners outside the United States communicating with other foreigners outside the United States.

To be fair to Nancy Pelosi and House Democrats, they may only appear to be aligned with terrorists in an ‘unintended consequences’ kind of way. To believe Nancy Pelosi does not know of the ‘unintended consequences’ as relates to the enemy requires a suspension of dis-belief. That being the case though, it shows they don’t take alQaeda seriously. So who else benefits from this bill being kept on hold? Trial lawyers. Trial lawyers have dozens of cases against phone companies who are providing help to the government, at the government’s request, in tracking down terrorists, not librarians. And, included in this bill are provisions for granting companies immunity in cases where they provide intelligence at the government’s request. This, of course, is being portrayed by the left as the government listening in on your pizza order delivery call and Big Brother must be stopped. So, the title could also be Democrats Secure Win For Trial Lawyers, a major source of campaign contributions to the Democratic party. Politically, Robet Novak nails it . . .

The recess by House Democrats amounts to a judgment that losing the generous support of trial lawyers, the Democratic Party’s most important financial base, would be more dangerous than losing the anti-terrorist issue to Republicans.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) sites support in the Senate . . .

At one point during the debate, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., who helped pass the Senate version, declared that without these measures our intelligence will be “degraded.” Similarly, the Director of National Intelligence said without this legislation, we lack the necessary tools to intercept communications between foreign nationals.

Which ever way you look at the inaction by House democrats, the losers are the same, the American people.

Statement from The White House

The Lunch Counter