Paul Schnee

In Defense Of Christopher Hitchens

2011-12-16T09:44:00.000-08:00

On December 15th., Christopher Hitchens, a man of towering intelligence died well before his time.

Since then an article by Mr. Benjamin Kerstein of Tel Aviv, which on the face of it is devastating and accuses Hitchens of anti-Semitism, has been recucitated and even referred to and approved of by such luminaries as Caroline Glick. Unlike Mr. Kerstein or Ms. Glick I am disinclined to attribute Hitchens' stern criticisms of Jewish Orthodoxy and the state of Israel to anti-Semitism.

He was, of course, a devout and self-described anti-theist and saw all religions as a form of numbing mind-control and even as a form of ingratiation in the ways they sold salvation. He was noted for saying that he considered the notion of a god and an afterlife as a gruesome fairy tale blaming such beliefs for most of mankind's misfortunes. If the question is did he harbor any deliberate and calculated ill will towards Jews or Israel of the sort that would result in their extinction I would have to say that the answer is absolutely not and his statement that, "organized religion is violent, irrational, intolerant, allied to racism, tribalism and bigotry, invested in ignorance and hostile to free inquiry, contemptuous of women and coercive towards children" may be taken as proof that he was opposed to organized religion but should not be interpreted as being anti-Semitic.

There is no doubt that Hitchens was an iconoclast, a polemicist, the enemy of cant and a champion of freedom. Orthodoxy whether it was in the form of Judaism or any other religion was anathema to him. He was an equal opportunity sceptic whose reason forced him to rely on verifiable evidence rather than appeals to "faith" or texts that were old, unreliable, often contradictory and an amalgam of fact, fantasy and allegory. He found circumcision to be a barbaric practice and the undue emphasis placed on female sexuality by all of the so-called Abrahamic faiths to be of a highly repressive nature. He once wrote that our most precious possession is the mind and that it was not well trained, or well served, by assuming that which it must prove. In this regard Hitchens was his own most faithful disciple.

Like myself, Hitchens was half Jewish but not in the way he was raised. In his case he was brought up as a Methodist while in my case it was as a Roman Catholic. Both of us attended British boarding schools for our numerous sins. Many people would argue that there is no such category as half Jewish in much the same way as they would argue that one cannot be half pregnant. Nevertheless, in this case it really depends upon the laws to which one subscribes. According to Judaic Law I would not be considered Jewish since it was my mother who was Catholic but according to the Nuremburg Laws this nice distinction, had I been alive at the time, would not have saved me from the gas chambers. Hitchens' mother was Jewish so his appointment at the gas chambers would have been just slightly ahead of my own.

I must confess to a great admiration of Hitchens' keen and unusally high intelligence which gave him such perceptive and illuminating insights. These gifts coupled with his unassailable erudition and his mastery of the English language produced an unsurpassed lucidity not given to lesser mortals. The first time I read his work I felt like someone who had somewhow wandered into the MET, not knowing anything about opera, just as Pavarotti started to sing the first stanza of Nessun Dorma. One would realize at once that one was in the presence of a sparkling and an inimitable brilliance. The first time I heard Hitchens' sonorous voice I was enchanted. The first time I saw him in a debate I quivered for his opponent and understood how Mister Toad felt when he first saw a motor car.

Hitchens never shied away from a fight particularly one that he had started. He possessed a fiercly independent mind unrestricted by any hide-bound ideology. Like Alexander Pope he was of no sect and sworn to no master. This often made him the one discordant note in an otherwise harmonious chorus.

When the Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa against Salman Rushdie, a writer of fiction, it was an outraged Hitchens who sprang to Rushdie's defense while so many of his colleagues either criticised Rushdie or stood on the sidelines leaning against each other striking attitudes. The fatwa was a subornation of murder for payment for the high crime of writing a novel based on the life of Mohammed!

Another instance of Hitchens' intellectual independence and ability to challenge his own assumptions was when immediately after 9/11 he began to reassess his opinions coming to support the war in Iraq thereby incurring the undying wrath of many of his left-wing friends, but he had detected a whiff of sulfur which he knew had not only deranged all of our calculations but which had also exposed the relentless march of Islamic totalitarianism hitherto unacknowledged in the corridors of power or by the mass media of which he was a part and which then unleashed their hostility towards him.

With Hitchens' death we have lost a towering intellect and one of the most brilliant exponents of rationalism and humanism in our time. Let that be his legacy rather than accusations of anti-semitism based on his atheism and anti-theism which thundered against the pious purveyors of the supernatural, the harmful credulity of superstition and the frauds who indulge in the ritualistic buffooneries of organized religion.

Jonathan Swift once noted, "When a true genius appears in this world you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in a confederacy against him." Like Swift, Christopher Hitchens is now in a place "where savage indignation can no longer lacerate his heart" but I, for one, feel greatly deprived and will sorely miss his company on the ramparts.

Israel's Root of Title

2011-08-25T15:12:00.001-07:00

Unable to defeat Israel on the battlefield or intimidate her by decades of terror her Muslim tormentors have anxiously turned to a different strategy. In defiance of the mountains of historical and archeological facts, they have embarked on a strenuous effort to turn history upside down and wage a campaign to prove that Israel and the Jews have no legal right to the Land of Israel and that it should always have been a land over which Islamic supremacists hold dominion. Their insatiable appetite for historical revision, bolstered by an American president who conveniently suffers from historical amnesia, has led them into the realm of Lawfare where if you torture the facts long enough eventually the facts will tell you anything you wish to hear.

However, as Howard Grief pointed out in his essay, "Legal Rights and Title of Sovereignty of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel and Palestine under International Law", before the Arab Palestinians' romp of fantasy can be realized they need to disprove the legitimacy of the Balfour Declaration of 1917, the Mandates System established and governed by Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations contained in the Treaty of Versailles and all the other peace treaties made with the Central Powers i.e. Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey.

The Covenant was the idea of president Woodrow Wilson and contained his program of Fourteen Points of January 8th. 1918 while Article 22 which established the Mandates System, was largely the work of Jan Christian Smuts who formulated the details in a memorandum that became known as the Smuts Resolution, officially endorsed by the Council of Ten on January 30th, 1919 in which Palestine, as envisaged in the Balfour Declaration, was named as one of the mandated states to be created.

The official creation of the country took place at the San Remo Peace Conference (1920) where the Balfour Declaration was adopted by the Supreme Council of the Principal Allied Powers as the basis for the future "administration" of Palestine which would henceforth be recognized as the Jewish National Home. It was the Mandate System which gave binding legal effect to the aspirations contained in the Balfour Declaration.

Grief goes on to say that the moment of birth of Jewish legal rights and title of sovereignty thus took place at the same time Palestine was created a "mandated" state since it was created for NO other reason than to "reconstitute" the ancient Jewish state of Judea in fulfillment of the Balfour Declaration and the general provisions of Article 22 of the League Covenant. This meant that Palestine from the start was legally a Jewish state that was, in theory, to be guided towards independence by a Mandatory or Trustee, also acting as Tutor ( this turned out to be Great Britain) and who would take the necessary political, administrative and economic measures to establish the Jewish National Home.

The details for the planned independent Jewish state were set forth in three basic documents which may be termed the founding documents of mandated Palestine and the modern Jewish state of Israel that arose from them. These were: the San Remo Resolution of April 15th. 1920, the Franco-British Boundary Convention of December 23rd. 1920 and the Mandate for Palestine conferred on Britain by the Principal Allied Powers and confirmed by the League of Nations on July 24th. 1922. These founding documents were supplemented by the Anglo-American Convention of December 3rd., 1924 respecting the Mandate for Palestine. It is of supreme importance to realize that these documents are the source of Jewish legal rights and title of sovereignty over Palestine and the Land of Israel under international law. Therefore, it is impossible to "occupy" territory you already own regardless of the mistakes made by successive Israeli governments during the intervening years and, alas, there have been plenty of them but none significant enough to have revoked their root of title or legal sovereignty.

No matter how long or how often they repeat their lies the Arab Palestinians simply have no case. As for the so-called two-state solution being proposed in the United Nations, the European Union, Russia, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and the Oval Office they are a stark reminder of Goethe's observation that there is nothing so frightful as ignorance in action.

The Mandate System , in addition to all of its declared rights and obligations, survived the League of Nations and its legal force has been affirmed a number of times by the Intenationl Court of Justice. It is impossible to question Israel's legitimacy as a nation state without bringing into question the legitimacy of the other mandated states namely Iraq, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon.

For 63 years Israel has been an embattled outpost of western values surrounded by genocidal enemies whose undiminished goal is her extinction. She is on the front lines against the relentless march of Islamic totalitarianism which threatens to provide us all with a one-way ticket back to the 7th. century. On that journey we would be treated to all the brutality, all the cruelty and all the barbarism enshrined in Islam's title deed namely the Koran itself. We must go where the evidence leads. The annihilation of Israel would be a vital step in the eventual establishment of an Islamic caliphate in the region comprised of Iran, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, and Egypt. As Israel goes so surely will go the rest of us; so for her own survival, as well as for our own, Israel must proclaim her right as she was given that right and defend that right whenever it is challenged by those who ignore history and are careless with the facts.

A History Lesson for Piers Morgan

2011-03-21T23:02:00.000-07:00

Last week Piers Morgan, who has replaced Larry King on CNN, interviewed Israel's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. While it is good for Truth to speak to Power it is always discouraging to listen to someone who is supposed to be informed display by his line of questioning that he has, at a minimum, been completely hoodwinked by the Palestinian Myth Machine which couches its narrative as a peaceful people wrongfully dispossed of their historic birthright and shamefully treated by hostile occupiers. This is the narrative that has gained currency in our State Department, in the chancelleries of Europe, and certainly throughout the Arab world. Nothing could be farther from the truth yet it is passed around more frequently than the bong at Oliver Stone's house. This is in spite of the identical Al Queda, Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah, Palestinian Authority rhetoric of hatred and incitement to violence that is beamed towards Israel and the West on a weekly basis culminating in the sort of brutal murders of a peaceful and slumbering Jewish family as witnessed in Itamar last week. It is this kind of wanton butchery that over decades has come to define Palestinian society. Instead of demanding an end to it the international community, a rhetorical beguiler of one's intelligence if ever there was one, gets excited about the future construction of 1600 homes to be built on vacant land 1.2 miles from the Knesset.

Piers Morgan began with the confident assumption that the Palestinians have a case. That was his first mistake. Netanyahu should have immediately given him a history lesson starting with the historical fact that Jerusalem has been the Jewish capital of Israel for 3,000 years and 2,000 of those (count them) before the unfortunate advent of Islam. It has NEVER been the capital of any other people. It is mentioned in the Bible almost 600 times. It is not mentioned in the Koran even once. Regardless of how often or how loudly they claim title to it the claims of Islam are entirely spurious and are devoid of historical evidence and contrary to international law particularly as detailed in the San Remo Agreement of 1922.

Morgan made the point that Israel must make some significant "concession" in order to make peace. However, there are a couple of things wrong with that assertion: 1)by making any concessions in the first place Israel has sent the wrong message, namely that the Palestinians actually have a case and that Israel took something from them which was rightlfully theirs to begin with & 2) the Palestinian have never responded to concessions. They simply pocketed them, increased the ante, never kept their word but always made good on their threats and did so with America and the so-called international community looking on with approval much of the time.

Morgan went on to say that Israel is one of the more "calm" places in the Middle East today but failed to relate this to the fact that it is a democracy with liberal democratic values extended to its Arab and Jewish citizens alike and not an oppressive theocratic state that subjugates women, hangs homosexuals and persecutes non-muslim minorities. Yet, a 23rd. Islamic state where Jews would be forbidden is what Morgan seems to think would be able to live side by side in peace and harmony with Israel, the world's only Jewish nation.

He managed to bring up the "awful conditions" of the Palestinian refugees in Gaza and asked Netanyahu if he would like to live there. Old Piers must have been very loosely educated. Everyone knows that 10 years after the worst war in history, with over 40 million deaths and millions of refugees, all of the refugee camps in Europe had been closed and everyone had been resettled. Why is this not the case 63 years after 5 Arab armies attacked Israel in 1948 and what happened to almost 900,000 Jewish refugees who were kicked out of their homes in Arab countries in the years after the Arab armies were defeated? To answer the first question, it is obvious that the Palestinian refugees are kept in place by their cynical leaders to pull at the heart strings of the West and its "useful idiots" in order to generate money and sympathy for their fake cause. To answer the second question, the Jewish refugees were all absorbed by Israel and went on to lead active and productive lives. Persecuted, murdered, banished and robbed of their property there wasn't a suicide bomber amongst them!

Some of the questions Morgan should have asked, or at least wondered about out loud, was what exactly has happend to the billions of dollars in aid that has been sent to the Palestinians and why hasn't that been used to help their own people? Why doesn't the place look like Beverly Hills and why don't most of their people have graduate degrees? Where has the money gone? What have they been doing with it? Why is it when their Arab brothers have access to billions and billions of petro-dollars they treat the so-called Palestinians as red-headed step children? Why do they need money from the West? Why do we get the sinking feeling that the Arab Palestinians are just used as tactical pawns in the strategic goal of annihlating Israel? Why is it that Israel, with no natural resources and surrounded for 63 years by genocidal enemies whose undiminished goal is her extinction, is now an economic and entrepreneurial power house with arable land converted from pure desert? Sixty five percent of the PA's income is derived from international aid and when Yasser Arafat was around a good deal of that ended up in his own bank account. What does Mahmoud Abbas's bank account look like these days?

Morgan made the point that there was a huge disparity between the conditions in Gaza, Judea, Samaria and Israel and characterized this disparity as a case of "them" and "us". However, the "them" is not the PA and the "us" is not the Israelis. The real "them" is the Arab Palestinians and the real "us" is their leaders whose hatred of Israel and Jews is inspired by the kind religious fanatacism which cannot be assuaged by negotiations, concessions, sanctions, threats or gifts of land. Gaza proves that "land for peace" does not work.

As for Morgan's question to Prime Minister Netanyhu about whether he would like to live in Gaza, why would he want to live in an area where Jews are prohibited and where the population voted to have Hamas, an internationally recognized group of terrorist killers, govern their affairs? Before the interview Piers should have read the Hamas Charter. He would have discovered that it is one of the most unambiguous documents of hatred ever produced. In it he would have read their boast that the destruction of Israel would be Hamas' contribution to the eventual establishment of an Islamic caliphate. Why exactly would Netanyhu want to live there? Netanyahu should have asked if Piers would like to live in Sderot or Ashkelon where, until recently, he would have been treated to the daily arrival of rockets raining down on him from Gaza.

Behind each of Piers Morgan's questions was the inference that there is a moral equivalency between those who wish to destroy the state of Israel and those who are determined to defend her. Thus he reveals that he has missed the point of this interminable conflict. The world's industrialised nations pander to the Arabs in order to ensure an uninterrupted flow of oil upon which their economic lives depend and thereby Israel's security and even her existence become subordinated to this consideration. Furthermore, Israel is an embattled outpost of western values. She is on the front line of the relentless march of Islamic totalitarianism. She stands in the breach in the defense of western democracies as the largest and most important target of the vicious and unending religious hatred which Islam can muster and which, by the way, is not solely reserved for Israel. There is nothing Israel has done, can do or alter to mollify Islam. Stranded in a state of developmental immaturity Islam steals from history believing that the creation of a new past will justify its right to change the future in its favor.

One hopes that Piers Morgan's illusions are due to misinformation rather than the corrupt and pervasive bias against Israel with which the mainstream media is stained and infected, in which case Prime Minister Netanyhau should have taught him a much needed history lesson. Israel's prime minister need not have answered each question as if its basic premise was valid; instead he should have dispelled the illusions of Piers Morgan while educating the audience who needed to hear the truth. Truth, of course, is a rare commodity in the Middle East and is only exceeded in its rarity by the absence of journalistic due diligence on the part of Piers Morgan when he prepared his questions for the prime minister.

Watch the video here.

Mubarak's Out But Who's in?

2011-02-23T13:51:00.000-08:00

Sunlight, said Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, is the best disinfectant. Obviously, not enough of it has been shed in order for our Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, to conclude that the Muslim Brotherhood is a subversive organization, and the parent of Al Queda and Hamas, which has sponsored or encouraged every Islamic terrorist attack made against America and the West since it was created in 1928. The Muslim Brotherhood has worked in fits and starts, to be sure, as its power has waxed or waned but the goal of establishing a global Islamic caliphate under the gruesome supervision and hideous application of Sharia law has never dimmed for an instant. It is as patient as it is well organized as it is lethal. It collaborated with Nazi Germany during World War II. It assassinated one Egyptian president in the 1940s, fomented revolution against another in the 1950s, murdered President Sadat in 1981 for making peace with Israel and is directly linked to the terrorist plotters of 9/11. It has never ceased to spread its tentacles over the globe. So fraternal are its instincts that it now operates in more than 80 countries.

Mr. Clapper wishes us to believe that the Muslim Brotherhood is a benign organization which has "eschewed violence" and now is so overcome with liberal democratic values that we should not be suspicious or afraid. However, the evidence forces us to believe the exact opposite. The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), The Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), The Muslim Student Association (MSA) and a host of others are all fronts of the Muslim Brotherhood which seeks to establish relations and influence in our local, state and federal governments, in our law enforcement and intelligence communities, in our military, in our prisons, in the media, in our schools and in our universities.

The creed of the Muslim Brotherhood clearly states: "God is our objective; the Koran is our law; the Prophet is our leader; jihad is our way; and death for the sake of Allah is the highest of our aspirations." Perhaps if Director Clapper labored deep into the night and applied some arcane cipher he could discover this really means: "Oh, what a friend we have in Jesus", but somehow I doubt it. Even the most amateur code-breaker would never mistake "jihad" for croquet or "death for the sake of Allah..." for, "Tennis anyone?"

In 2008 the Holy Land Foundation, a front group for the Muslim Brotherhood, was convicted of raising money for the terrorist group Hamas, yet one more wholly owned subsidiary of the The Muslim Brotherhood. Its leaders were given life sentences for funneling $12 million to Hamas. During the trial documents revealed a strategy paper which stated:

"The Ikhwan (Arabic for Muslim Brotherhood) must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions."

It went on to say that this process requires a "mastery of the art of 'coalitions', the art of 'absorption' and the principles of 'cooperation'." In other words the scheme is to ingratiate and insinuate themselves into our society by appearing to be in favor of pluralism, democratic values, common fellowship all the time gaining trust and acceptance only to sucker punch us when the time is right. The Muslim Brotherhood is black with menace. Their hatred of America and the West is doctrinally inspired and is entirely due to religious fanaticism. Let that be realized. All of their front organizations are deliberately designed to hide the wolf in sheep's clothing.

It is fair to say the the Muslim Brotherhood knows just as much about its goals, aspirations and intentions as Director Clapper so why would he appear before Congress and make such disingenuous statements that mischaracterize the true nature of the Muslim Brotherhood? With the enormous amount of information and sensitive intelligence at his disposal how could he fail to see the true nature of the threat we face? For the answer one need look no farther than the Oval Office. Between President Obama and Director Clapper it is not necessary to distinguish who is the organ-grinder and who is the monkey. Director Clapper is just one more pawn in Barack Obama's steadfast devotion to the cultural Marxism of political correctness who is duly dispatched to anesthetize us against the relentless march of Islamic totalitarianism disguising its dark underside and blunting its jagged edges in order to make it appear less menacing to us.

This has been a steady objective of Obama's administration which from the start has been a moving curtain of lies. Americans thought they had elected a president who would safeguard America's security and defend her interests. Instead they woke up with a Muslim inclined political Pinocchio who actually prefers America's enemies to her friends. The Wikileaks revelations show the fundamentally dishonest nature of Obama's relations towards Israel and how he sought to convince the Israelis that concessions about settlements and Jerusalem would have to be made in order to mollify the Arab world so that their support against Iran could be obtained. However, the Arab world was desperately trying to get Obama to move against Iran regardless of the situation between Israel and the Palestinians. The Arabs hate Israel but they are terrified of Iran.

Obama also demonstrated his ideological preferences when he appointed Israel-bashing Samantha Power as Director of Multilateral Affairs for the National Security Council and when he attempted to appoint anti-Israel Charles Freeman as Chairman of The National Intelligence Council. His first interview as president of the United States was given to Al Aribiya an Arab television station in Dubai. His first phone call as president was made to Mahmood Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority and a man who arranged the financing for the murderous attack on Israel's atheletes during the Munich Olympics and whose doctoral thesis was about Holocaust denial. One of his first presidential decisions was to order that captured terrorists be read Miranda rights. One of the first orders he signed was to close Guantanamo. He attempted to try the mastermind of 9/11 and self-confessed butcher of Daniel Pearl, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, in a civil court in New York and accord him every Constitutional protection. Last July he gave approval to the PLO to fly their flag over its Mission in Washington DC and upgraded its status to that of a delegation which gives PA officials diplomatic immunity and the status that is attached to it. Abbas pocketed this concession but still failed to arrest terrorists or end the incitement of violence and hatred towards Jews. Despite receiving between $600 million and $1 billion in American aid during the last two years the PA has not altered its behaviour proving that U.S. aid and concessions do not help to moderate the PA or act as incentives for moderation.

Yet Obama persists in feeding the dog that bites us. During the riots by Iranians in the streets of Tehran after Ahmedinejad stole the election in 2009 the leader of the free world, Barack Hussein Obama, could only bring himself to say that it would be unwise for America to interfere. Not one utterance of moral support or a clarion call for liberty passed his lips. Subsequently over 4,000 Iranians fled to Turkey and more than 150 were executed according to Amnesty International. Unlike Ahmedinejad, who threatens to destroy America and wipe Israel off the face of the map, President Mubarak who had been an ally of America and maintained a cold peace with Israel for over 30 years was unceremoniously dumped and told he "must go now" for the sake of a peaceful transition to democracy. In the meantime, the charming anti-American cadre of subversives and FOO (Friends of Obama), Rashid Khalidi, Bill Ayres, Bernardine Dohrn, and Code Pink's Jodie Evans have been travelling to Egypt and Gaza meeting with the Muslim Brotherhood and terrorist killers, trying to organize a second flotilla to break the naval blockade of Gaza and visiting the White House to report to their master.

Our friends, a diminishing band, are now beginning to think that being America's ally is much more dangerous than being America's enemy. Since coming to power Obama has alienated Great Britain, betrayed Poland and Czechoslovakia and intrigued against Israel. A few days ago the people who were demonstrating in Tahrir Square and some 81 million other Egyptians, who were being cheered on by the Obama administration and the western media, woke up to find Mubarak gone and the Egyptian military in charge. This does not a Jeffersonian democracy make. History teaches us that in this kind of situation it is usually the group which is the most cohesive and best organized that eventually grabs power. It is Egypt's misfortune that this is the Muslim Brotherhood. It is likely that by using democratic means they will, as their surrogate Hamas has done in Gaza, treat Egyptians to one man, one vote, one time. It will be easy to vote them in and almost impossible to vote them out and that is when it will dawn on the western democracies that Obama's pro Muslim, anti-colonial ideology and hatred of American exceptionalism is no substitute for a foreign policy.

Islamophobia or Islamonausea?

2011-02-04T15:45:00.000-08:00

On December 15th. 2010 the Los Angeles City Council passed a resolution supporting “any legislation that would oppose Islamophobia and random acts of violence against Muslims.” This is at a time when there are over 35,000 gang members on the streets of Los Angeles, when the school system is in distress and when there is a budget deficit of over $200 million. Rahm Emanuel once famously said that a crisis should never be allowed to go to waste, but the Los Angeles City Council is wasting its time addressing a crisis that does not exist. An epidemic of anti-Muslim sentiment might well have been expected in America shortly after 9/11. It didn’t happen then and it’s not happening now.

The FBI statistics for 2009 and the LA County Hate Crime Report published by the Anti-Defamation League both show that 4% of religious hate crimes in Los Angeles County are committed against Muslims as opposed to 3% against Protestants, 9% against other Christians, 13% against Scientologists and, wait for it, 65% against Jews. The ADL’s report is compiled using official crime statistics as well as information provided to and evaluated by ADL’s professional staff, by law enforcement officers, by community leaders and by victims.

The term “Islamophobia” implies that Americans and, in the specific case of this resolution, Angelenos have an irrational fear of Islam. Considering the attacks against us on 9/11 and the ones in Bali, Madrid, London, Glasgow’s airport and Mumbai were all carried out by Muslim terrorists there is nothing in the least phobic about the public’s attitude toward radical Islam. The shoe-bomber, the underwear-bomber, the Times Square bomber and Major Hasan at Fort Hood in Texas were all devotees of Islam. However, it is resolutions of this sort along with the insistence on the part of our president that Islam has played a vital and important role in American life, when the facts prove the opposite, that lead to an increased feeling of Islamonausea.

In America, when Muslim taxi drivers are excused from carrying blind passengers with seeing-eye dogs because the animal is an abomination to them, when Muslim check-out operators in supermarkets are excused from handling liquor or ham, when a Muslim father kills his daughter for becoming too westernized, when a Muslim husband almost decapitates his wife for seeking a divorce and when an American judge refuses to prosecute a Muslim husband for beating his wife because the beating falls within the rubric of Sharia law, our distaste for and suspicion of this retrograde ideology increases by leaps and bounds.

We already have laws that would punish “random acts of violence” as well as hate-crimes. When one considers this unnecessary and pandering resolution one starts to question the source of election funds. Add to this concern the real possibility of the United Nations actually thinking about a resolution to ban any criticism of Islam and our sense that there is an enormous effort underway to institutionalize Islamic totalitarianism, together with the violence and terror it always engenders, becomes even more acute. It is highly discouraging that the Los Angeles City Council would sink to the level of this enterprise. By this anxious act of political correctness the City Council have aligned themselves with a sickening ideology that subjugates women, gleefully hangs homosexuals, and persecutes non-Muslim minorities throughout the world. Thus they become hypocrites to their own values. Their resolution is so nonsensical that it slanders nonsense.

Passing this resolution reinforces the entirely false impression that we are involved in a clash between civilizations when, in fact, we are involved in a clash between barbarism and civilization. It’s best not to get the two confused.

*************************************************************************

The resolution text:

WHEREAS, any official position of the City of Los Angeles with respect to legislation, rules, regulations or policies proposed to or pending before a local, state or federal governmental body or agency must have first been adopted in the form of a Resolution by the City Council with the concurrence of the Mayor; and

WHEREAS, the City of Los Angeles Human Relations Commission, Los Angeles Police Department, the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office, Los Angeles Unified School District, Los Angeles County Human Relations Commission and various civic and religious stakeholders have worked to resolve various levels of conflict impacting residents of our City; and

WHEREAS, the City of Los Angeles facilitates access to local government by empowering communities with the knowledge and skills to participate effectively. Los Angeles is comprised of diverse populations that are easily overlooked without proper attention: 47% of the City is foreign-born, speaks 224 languages, and affiliates with 600 religious sects; and
WHEREAS, the City of Los Angeles has historically opposed hate crimes and random acts of violence in previous actions of the council such as the Jewish Federation Alliance in 2008 (CF:08-0100-S1), The Beith David Educational Center Temple in Tarzana (CF:06-0010-S23) in 2006, The Hate Crimes Report (CF:03-2746) of 2002, Shadow Hills Burning Cross Incident (CF:99-0010-S39) in 1999; Hate Crime Destruction at the Go For Broke Monument in Little Tokyo (CF:04-001-S17) in 2004 ,the LAUSD Racial and Ethnic strife in the San Fernando Valley and South Los Angeles (CF:05-0731) in 2005; and

WHEREAS, the concept of religious pluralism is used to describe the significance of interfaith dialogue between members of different religious groups with the goal of minimizing conflicts between the different groups; and

WHEREAS, the City of Los Angeles’ commitment to pluralism and to the free exercise of religion are the cornerstone of American values that have helped produce one of the most ethnically and religiously diverse and vibrant cities in the world; and

WHEREAS, there has been a marked nationwide increase in acts of violence, discrimination and hostility directed at Muslim Americans on the basis of their religious identity including here in Southern California; and

WHEREAS, this rise in anti-Muslim sentiment, commonly called Islamophobia, has contributed to opposition to the lawful construction and expansion of religious centers across the United States, including in Tennessee, Wisconsin, Illinois, Connecticut and California; and

WHEREAS, more than two dozen mosques across America have been the targets of vandalism, arson and other hateful acts in the past two years. In addition, hate crimes and incidents have increased tremendously in recent months and have led to hostile environments for many Muslim Americans; and

WHEREAS, The City of Los Angeles has a history of opposing various degrees of discrimination and supporting the rights to religious liberty and equal protection and recognizing that when those rights are threatened for some they are weakened for all; and

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, with the concurrence of the Mayor, that by the adoption of this Resolution, the City of Los Angeles hereby includes in its 2011-2012 State and Federal Legislative Program, support and sponsorship of any legislation which would OPPOSE Islamophobia and repudiate random acts of violence against Muslim Americans.

Obama, A Houdini In Reverse

2010-11-03T14:06:00.000-07:00

After the election of 2008 gave Barack Obama a super-majority in both houses of Congress he has proved to be something of a Houdini in reverse. From an ovewhelming position of safety he has quickly escaped to one of danger.

He sought to redefine America on a secular scale that is opposite to the Founding Fathers. His socialist model that one can constantly increase the size of government by reducing the tax base and producing more people who depend on the government has been thoroughly rejected by the electorate let alone the economy.

Obama's policies have been repudiated as have his feints at portraying himself as someone who cherishes American values and supports America's allies. It did not take Obama long to make Americans realise that they had elected someone who was at odds with American Exceptionalism and who had a crater sized chip on his shoulder about the country he was supposed to lead.

It's hard for a determined ideologue to learn his lesson and that is why he will now attempt to do by regulation what will now be impossible to accomplish by legislation. Although his policies have been repudiated by American voters and his self-proclaimed legislative achievements have been discredited he will continue whistling past the graveyard off key and as out of tune as ever.

During the last 21 months Americans have come to understand Milton Friedman's observation that if the Democrats were in charge of the Sahara Desert in 5 years there would be shortage of sand. The Democrats have more solutions than there are problems and as they look out upon their devastation wrought by this election they can see that their biggest problem is Barack Obama himself, the wrong man in the wrong job in the wrong country at the wrong time.

To Burn, or Not to Burn: that Is the question!

2010-09-12T12:22:00.000-07:00

Last week we were treated to yet another lecture by our Lecturer-in-Chief, Barack Hussein Obama. This time he was animated by the scheduled burning of the Koran by an insignificant pastor in Florida. No allusions to the First Amendment were made such as he gave when he endorsed the construction of the Cordoba Mosque in New York. Nevertheless, he prevailed upon Pastor Jones to reconsider his decision. It would be encouraging to many of us if he applied the same standards to those who are determined to build the Cordoba Mosque but impregnable logic, let alone consistency, are always absent whenever Obama panders to his Muslim pets which is something he never seems to tire of doing. Even someone as sober as General Petraeus chimed in with: " Were the actual burning to take place, the safety of our soldiers and civilians would be put in jeopardy and accomplishment of our mission made more difficult."

Neither the president nor the general explained what put us all in jeopardy prior to 9/11. This, of course, would be the constant call for jihad laced throughout the Muslim title deed, the Koran itself. So far, Muslims have not required any book burnings or cartoons to set them off on a violent rampage flying aircraft into our buildings, bombing our embassies, and murdering Dutch film makers. Compromising our First Amendment rights in order to avoid Muslim violence and retribution should not be contemplated for an instant. They will attack us at any time and use any excuse as they demonstrate their devotion and obedience to their doctrinal instructions. Let that be understood especiallly by those who are charged with safeguarding our national security and winning our wars.

No violence was demonstrated towards Muslims living in America after 9/11 when it might well have been expected nor were the flags of Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria, or most of the Arab/Muslim countries that constantly vote against us in the United Nations, burned nor were their mosques desecrated, their embassies attacked, or their people killed. These are the prerogatives reserved for the "religion of peace" whenever it perceives a real or imagined insult. The rest of us are expected to indulge their hair-trigger sensitivity and accomodate demands for special consideration not available to non-Muslim citizens and at the expense of our freedoms and our safety.

Burning the Koran does not accomplish anything and, no doubt, in the minds of some liberals it could even contribute to global warming! It might even upset the 65 or so Muslims who mean us no harm. So, let's have the decency not to burn the Koran but let's also have the decency not to burn the American flag either.

The Cordoba Mosque

2010-09-07T21:58:00.000-07:00

A fine example of the intellectual and Constitutional confusion that exists about the proposed construction of a mosque at Ground Zero appeared in the August 3rd. edition of the Jewish Journal. It reported that Mr. Jeremy Ben-Ami, the president and founder of of "J Street" a left-wing Jewish advocacy group funded in part by George Soros, had remarked: "The principle at stake goes to the heart of American democracy and the value we place on the freedom of religion." Of course, nothing could be farther from the truth. There are already more than a hundred mosques in and around New York and literally thousands more throughout the United States. Building another one so close to Ground Zero is hardly necessary in order to reaffirm "American democracy" or to guarantee "freedom of religion". These were long ago enshrined in the Constitution of the United States and have been well demonstrated in every aspect of the American experiment for over two centuries. This is about Islamic triumphalism. The original Cordoba Mosque was built as a symbol of Islamic dominance over conquered Spain. The one now proposed, and its ground-breaking ceremony to take place on the 10th. anniversary of the deadly attack of 9/11, is nothing more than a celebration of that attack's success.

It is also a good example of one-way multiculturalism, the sacred cow of "enlightened" progressives who worship before the altar of political-correctness, which is more concerned with the prerogatives of the Islamists who wish to kill us than it is about about the sensitivities of the 9/11 families, or the dagger plunged into the heart of our republic by the horrific crime of 9/11, or the relentless march of Islamic totalitarianism that now threatens to engulf us all. A good deal of the usual claptrap about "tolerance" has been served up to us by the intellectually fossilized members of the left-wing and its fulsome liberal glitterati. A complete lack of reciprocity from the Muslim world is not something which animates them. No churches or synagogues can be built in Saudi Arabia where the mere possession of the Bible is a criminal offense. The idea that they are cozying up to a group of fascists whose religion encourages them to subjugate women, hang homosexuals, and persecute non-Muslim minorities is lost on them as is Thomas Mann's warning that "Tolerance is a crime when applied to evil".

A letter published on the internet by Mr. Ben-Ami and his supporters stated: "We agree with you that some victims of 9/11 are entitled to “irrational” feelings as a result of their loss,” but being less tolerant will not help us heal, and it is not wise for America to alienate millions of its own citizens, let alone the hundreds of millions of Muslims in countries that Americans visit around the world. Remember, there were Muslim victims on 9/11, too, Muslims that worked in the World Trade Center, or were part of the rescue crews that bravely entered the buildings that day.” This is an extraordinarily bizarre statement even for Mr. Ben-Ami to publish and one that would make Edgar Allan Poe tear up his "Tales of Mystery and Imagination" and start all over again. Why is he so concerned about America alienating hundreds of millions of Muslims when the 9/11 Commission Report clearly stated that the Islamic terrorists had been at war with us for decades but we had not been at war with them? Before George W. Bush was president, before 9/11, before the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq there were over 15 (count them) deadly attacks on American diplomatic and military installations throughout the world each one carried out by Muslim terrorists, not the Red Cross just incase it had escaped Mr. Ben-Ami's attention, and where exactly were all the Muslims rushing to our aid on 9/11? I, for one, did not see any but what I did see were videos of Muslims in various Middle Eastern countries dancing in the streets celebrating our misfortune. Precisely, who is alienating whom?

Even the President of the United States, Professor Obama, with his air of Harvard hauteur, lectured us about our First Amendment rights and how they must be rigorously applied to those seeking to build this insult to the victims of 9/11, their families, and every faithful American. This lecture was his atttempt to gain the moral high ground as the sands of decency shifted beneath his feet while he pandered to his Muslim pets. It was revealing to hear President Obama affirm the rights of a religious group to build on their private property although curiously he does not extend this right to Jews building in Jerusalem! There is no Constitutional issue here and the efforts of those to smear the opponents of the Cordoba Mosque as bigots and Islamaphobes are as tiresome as they are predictable. Quite simply, the reason this mosque should not be built is the same as why people should not walk down the street disporting their underwear on their heads; it lacks a sense of propriety and respect for the sensibilities of one's neighbors.

There are, however, more compelling reasons against the Cordoba Mosque's construction. Imam Rauf is far from the "moderate" cleric that he is alleged to be by his followers. If he was a "moderate" he would never have considered proposing such an affront to our country in the first place. If he wants to build bridges instead of burning them why will he not accept Governor Patterson's offer of an alternative site? Why is he unwilling to tell us which countries and organizations are supplying the finance for this temple of religious intolerance? In an interview shortly after 9/11 Imam Rauf said that while he did not condone the 9/11 attack, American foreign policy was an accessory to 9/11 and that Osama bin Laden was, in some ways, a creation of the United States....translation: America had it coming. What excuse does he have for his "religion of peace" for the attacks by Islamic terrorists in 2002 in Bali which killed over 200 people and injured 240, or the attack in Madrid in 2004 that killed another 200 and injured over 1800, or the one in 2005 in London that killed 52 and injured 700, or the attack in Mumbai in 2008 that killed over 180 people and injured 300? Why, when asked, did he not condemn Hamas? "I'm not a politician", he responded, another shield behind which Islamic fascists hide as they reject western values.

A good deal more attention ought to be paid to what clerics like Imam Rauf say to their Muslim brethren as opposed to what they say to America and the West. It would soon be discovered that they have turned duplicity into an art form while they rely on our general ignorance of Islam, and the vicious doctrines laced throughout the Koran, in order to induce the kind of narcotic serenity that makes some of us incapable of appreciating our mortal danger.

Imam Rauf, and his wife Daisy Kahn, have been mouthing the usual platitudes about "mutual understanding", "building bridges", and "inter-faith dialogue" along with accusations of bigotry and Islamaphobia. This is the default mode of a fascist ideology with a hair-trigger sensitivity which is always deployed to gain disproportionate concessions as it proceeds with its insinuation of sharia law. A phobia is an irrational fear of one thing or another, but there is nothing irrational about our fear and suspicion of Islam since so many of us are aware of its miserable track record and are actually able to connect the obvious dots between Islam, jihad, sharia law, and the mosques which support and encourage what is not so much a religion as a totalitarian ideology that has spread its cancer to every corner of the globe. The Koran contains over 4000 verses of hatred towards non-muslims and over 60% of the Koran tells Muslims to hate the infidels and to avoid any association with them. Their holy book, their title deed, the Koran itself is dedicated to hatred towards non-believers. No other religion in the world has a document which shares this distinction but we are always asked to ignore it and to accept that this is not the true nature of Islam. Their constant protestation that theirs is a "religion of peace" is so nonsensical that it slanders nonsense.

Seventy percent of Americans do not want this grotesque monument to Islamic supremacism built where it would overshadow that hallowed ground, that stricken field, that graveyard of our murdered countrymen who were slaughtered one awful September morning. If build it they must then let them build it elsewhere and without trying to insult our intelligence by trying to fool us into thinking that it is an act of contrition symbolizing universal outreach and the brotherhood of man, two concepts which are as alien to them just as their undiminished ambition of a global caliphate, under the gruesome apparatus of sharia law, is to the rest of us.

Farrakhan Blames Jews For Woes of All Black Americans

2010-08-03T09:37:00.000-07:00

In June, Louis Farrakhan sent a three page letter to sixteen leaders of prominent Jewish organizations. Amongst other things he charged Jews with complicity in the trans-Atlantic slave trade and thereby demonstrated his undiminished capacity for realizing hallucinations if not his insatiable appetite for historical revision.

If he is really bound and determined to draw attention to the activities of Jewish people during the 18th. and 19th. centuries he might have mentioned that in many British North American colonies Jews were forbidden to vote or run for political office. Also, he conveniently omits the enthusiastic participation of black East African communities (where Barack Obama's ancestors lived) in the slave trade for financial profit.

Whenever Mr. Farrakhan is on a romp of fantasy, which is 98% of the time the other 2% being devoted to shaving and visiting his tailor and The Very Silly Tie Shop, he always manages to add to his list of complaints even more grievances which, quite frankly, are not really his own. Since the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ( legislation, by the way, brought about in part by the overwhelming support and activities of the Jewish community) America has spent 46 years and hundreds of billions of dollars trying to create a level playing field. This goes conveniently unnoticed, as well as unappreciated, by Mr. Farrakhan because it contradicts his accusations of prejudice and inequality without which his own existence would be threadbare if not entirely pointless.

If Mr. Farrakhan wanted to be taken seriously in his request for a "sensible and intelligent dialogue" he would not have accepted the 1996 "Al-Gaddafi International Prize for Human Rights" founded by the Libyan dictator, Muammar Al-Gaddafi, whose hands are stained and drenched with the blood of countless victims. Any conversation with Mr. Farrakhan, or Colonel Gadaffi for that matter, about justice or human rights is bound to subtract from the entire sum of knowledge on those subjects.

"On what basis do you charge me and us as being anti-semitic...?", Mr. Farrakhan plaintively and disingenuously asks. Let me count the ways. A cursory reading of Mr. Farrakhan's speeches reveal that they are laced with anti-semitic remarks. His speeches readily available on YOUTUBE contain references to "satanic Jews". No less a personage than Barack Obama, in one of the Democratic debates with Hillary Clinton, moderated by Tim Riussert in 2008, said: "...I have been very clear in my denunciation of Minister Farrakhan's anti-semitic comments. I think they are unacceptable and reprehensible..." The list is endless. Many of the anti-semitic remarks and condemnation of Jews are on video for everyone to see, but like every ingratiating cult leader throughout history Mr. Farrakhan seeks to exclude evidence he dislikes. Chutzpah is an old Yiddish word but then so, of course, is schmuck!

Oliver Stoned

2010-07-31T18:10:00.001-07:00

In a recent interview published in London's Sunday Times, Oliver Stone declared his intention to make a documentary putting Hitler "in context". I suspect this effort will probably illustrate just how frequently the bong is passed around Mr. Stone's house as did his film "JFK" which was riddled with invention and dramatic license of the most misleading kind stretching the 'willing suspension of disbelief' to the breaking point.

I do so hope that we are not going to be treated to an examination of the part that the "appeasers" in Britain and Europe played in the march towards the outbreak of World War II as if this was not already well known. The motives, activities, sympathies, and personalities of the "Cliveden Set" and their camp followers are all public knowledge today and there is little that Mr. Stone can add, other than his fanciful interpretation, that would enhance our understanding of that time in history. If, on the other hand, he made a film about the "appeasers' of today, then he might find himself, along with many of the Hollywood gliteratti, in one of the leading roles.

When Hitler passed the Nuremberg Laws in 1935 he codified what had already become the institutionalized persecution of the Jews that resulted in the annihilation of some 6 million innocent souls. The plot to exterminate the Jews was well underway before the outbreak of World War II. When Hitler invaded the Soviet Union in June of 1941 he betrayed his erstwhile ally with whom he had previously concluded a cynical "non-agression pact" which eliminated, for that moment, the spectre of a war on two fronts while he concentrated on invading Poland with Russian help instead of Russian interference. It was during Operation Barbarossa ( the code name for the invasion of Russia) that the Nazi Einsatzgruppen, a paramilitary group of SS lovelies, went about the summary execution of Russian civilians some of whom were communists, some of whom were Jewish, and some of whom were Jewish communists. For Hitler it was a distinction without a difference but a necessity to be accomplished with enthusiasm and a good deal of relish.

It is difficult to grasp the point Mr. Stone is making when he says that Hitler killed more Russians than Jews. Most of us learned this in high school and hardly need Mr. Stone to draw our attention to this gruesome fact. If, however, he is suggesting that our outrage at the institutionalized slaughter of 6 million Jews should be less than our outrage at the death of 25 or 30 million Russians who were killed by their former ally then he must believe that we suffer from the same kind of moral relativism with which he is afflicted. This is a prism which distorts everything that comes into view much like Mr. Stone's camera lens.

The tiresome and loathsome canard that the so-called Israel Lobby has an undue, unhealthy, and overwhelming influence on American foreign policy is one of the standard accusations of stealth anti-semites who seek to cloak their anti-semitism by portraying themselves as merely being against America's policies towards Israel. It's a sham, of course, but one that has managed to gain some traction with the publication of books like Walt and Mearsheimer's "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" which can now be purchased on Amazon.com at a discount of 34%. A discount of 75% would be a more accurate reflection of the book's true value.

The idea that the so-called media Jews, to whom Mr. Stone refers, control or enhance Israel's position in the world is the sort of flight of fancy to which we have become accustomed from Mr. Stone. Clearly he is not a subscriber to the New York Times. He must not watch the news programs on NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, or MSNBC, where many of the senior executives are Jewish. Nor have the efforts of the exalted Rahm Emanuel or David Axelrod done anything to to make Israel more secure or prosperous. We can leave aside, for the moment, that they haven't done that for America either!

Considering the position of Israel today as she is surrounded by genocidal enemies whose undiminished goal is her extinction, considering the plight of Jews who have been expelled from Arab countries, considering the rise of anti-semitism in Europe, considering that many of our universities and institutions are being subverted by the massive infusion of Arab petro-dollars, considering the historical opposition to Israel in our State Department, and considering the hostile attitude of the Obama administration towards Israel it does not seem as if all of Mr. Stone's vaunted claims of excessive Jewish influence amount to very much.

We cannot take Mr Stone "out" of context any more than we can put him "in" context since he lives so much of his life in an alternate universe where up is down and down is up and context is absent. The safest place for Mr. Stone is in a straight-jacket with his bong safely out of reach. In the meantime, I'm very much afraid that Mr. Stone is about to prove, yet again, that winning an Oscar is not sufficient proof that one has a firm grasp of reality.

Islam = Totalitarianism

2010-05-16T10:52:00.000-07:00

There are many reasons why Winston Churchill is considered a genius among men but one reason, often overlooked, was his assessment of Islam written in his book, "The River War" published in 1899 when Churchill was but twenty five years of age. It may also account for why Barack Obama had Churchill's bust removed from its honored place in the oval office:

" How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy.

The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it.

No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome."

By sole virtue of its doctrinal exhortations to conquest by unrelenting violence Islam has always been in the unenviable position of trying to make the irrational rational, the indefensible defensible, and the reprehensible acceptable. For Muslims this necessarily induces the sort of mental gymnastics capable of transforming Mohammed, known to history as a vicious homicidal maniac, serial pedophile, and fantast extraordinaire, into an object of veneration while repeating their constant and hollow mantra that Islam is a "religion of peace." This simple but tragic flaw has not yet dawned on most Muslims.

Below I have posted an excellent article by Janet Levy which appeared recently in the "American Thinker". She encapsulates, in a clear and insightful way, not only the true nature and mission of Islam but also shows how our leaders, still drunk on political correctness and one-way multiculturalism, seek to anesthetize us against all of its destructive and murderous intentions which are a logical extension of the poison laced throughout the Muslim title deed, namely the Koran itself.

************************************************************************************

THE NARRATIVE OF DEFEAT by Janet Levy:

It is now life-threatening to criticize or mock Islam in the United States of America. The creators of South Park, Viacom, and anyone associated with the production of a recent episode portraying Mohammed in a bear suit would have potentially risked life and limb if they had broadcast the original cartoon sketch. In a manner eerily reminiscent of the Danish cartoon jihad, a Brooklyn-based Muslim group called Revolution Muslim posted a threat to South Park creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker for their "outright insult" to the prophet. "We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid, and they will probably end up like Theo van Gogh for airing this show," read the post.

Theo Van Gogh was the Dutch filmmaker who was murdered by a Dutch-Moroccan Muslim for producing the film Submission, critical of the treatment of women in Islam. Like Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Geert Wilders, and targeted infidels before them, life would have been reduced to an unending fielding of threats and the heavily guarded jockeying between safe houses for those associated with South Park if the episode had aired unaltered. The incident underscores the unceasing efforts by Islam to silence opposition and criticism in order to advance the establishment of a worldwide caliphate under Shari'ah law.

Despite incidents like these, we in the West continue to react to Islam as if it were merely another variety of religious faith. Descriptions of Islam as a "religion of peace" and as "one of the three Abrahamic faiths" proliferate, obfuscating the need for further study and shielding the immutable, intolerant, militant, murderous doctrine from discovery.

Although it's been almost nine years since 9/11, the level of knowledge and understanding of Islam is staggeringly low among the general population, let alone those sworn to protect us -- our military and intelligence services. At a time when the Western world should be intimately familiar with the concepts of jihad and dhimmitude, as well as the provisos of Shari'ah law, we are lulled back to sleep with platitudes of peaceful coexistence and shamed with charges of "Islamophobia" if we question the motives, demands, or practices of adherents to the Muslim faith. Quite illogically -- given the sequence of events from 9/11 forward -- the very act of exhibiting fear or suspicion of Muslims is dubbed a "phobia" -- an irrational fear. This, after nineteen Muslims hijacked planes and flew them into buildings, exacting massive carnage in the name of their god, and afterward, their coreligionists feted the deed.

The carnage has continued nonstop since then in other countries. In 2002, Muslim jihadists set off three bombs in Bali, killing over 200 people and wounding 240. In 2004, Islamic practitioners orchestrated a series of coordinated attacks against Madrid's commuter train system, claiming 200 lives and injuring 1,800. The following year, suicide attacks in London's public transportation system during the morning rush hour resulted in 52 deaths and 700 wounded. In 2008, Muslim terrorists held India's most populous city hostage for three days with a string of more than ten shootings and bombings at a hospital, cinema, college, and Jewish center that left 175 dead and over 300 injured. These are just a few examples among hundreds of recent attacks by Muslims worldwide.

Yet we in America shrink from charges of Islamophobia and fail to acknowledge our righteous apprehension of unthinkable acts of evil in the name of a vengeful and certainly not peaceful god. We allow ourselves to be censured and plead guilty as charged of Islamophobia for scrutinizing the activities of Muslims and placing blame on the canons of Islam. The joy and celebration from Muslims across the world following the mass slaughter and destruction of 9/11 should have put us over the edge and strengthened our resolve to eradicate followers of this deadly belief system. Instead, we exhibit suicidal insanity in our failure and unwillingness to connect the dots of Islam, jihad, and Shari'ah. We dither, apologize to the enemy, and shrink from rightful condemnations of their holy books, their religious practices, and their legal code. No other religion on earth exists with a holy book dominated by hatred toward non-believers. The Islamic trilogy -- the Koran, the Sira (or biography of Mohammed), and the Hadith (the words and deeds of Mohammed) -- requires jihad, the killing of infidels, as the highest form of devotion to Allah.

Islam is a theo-political-legal doctrine whose primary focus is not on the "goodness" of Muslims, but on others -- evildoers who do not share the Islamic belief system. Certainly the Old and New Testaments offer their fair share of brutal passages, but the practices described within those passages haven't been in evidence for centuries. The brutal practices contained within Shari'ah law are practiced today throughout the Muslim and non-Muslim worlds, even in the United States. Christians suffer through confession and acts of repentance for untoward acts that hurt others. Christians aspire to exemplary kindness and service to their fellow man for the privilege of escaping a hellfire-filled afterlife. Jihadists are awarded a guaranteed place in heaven and the promise of great reward for the holy act of murdering those who don't believe. While Jews practice "tikkun olam" -- repairing the world -- and perform "mitzvoth," or good deeds, devout Muslims pray to Allah for inanimate objects like rocks and trees to alert them to the presence of dastardly Jews. They pray, "O Muslim there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him." Muslim world leaders and clerics routinely call for the death of non-Muslims. Has anyone ever heard a Western prime minister, president, rabbi, or priest call for the annihilation of a country or for the destruction of practitioners of other religions?

The Koran contains over four thousand verses of enmity toward non-believers. Over 63% of the Koran instructs Muslims to hate and avoid any association with non-Muslims. It teaches that non-Muslims should be held in contempt, killed, beheaded, humiliated, raped, enslaved, converted, or forced to pay the jizya or dhimmi tax. Eighty-five percent of the Sira -- the biography of Mohammed, the ideal man or moral icon for Muslims -- has to do with his battles against kuffars, or non-believers. This is a far cry from "Jesus died for your sins." Islamic teachings laud and require lying and deception, "taquiya," to advance the "ummah," or Islamic community. While Jews and Christians honor the Golden Rule, turn the other cheek and practice tolerance and inclusiveness, Muslims learn how to fight the Dar al-Harb, the infidel world of war, and practice the artistry of duplicity not only with impunity, but also with the highest praises from their god.

Let's not lull ourselves into complacency by citing that out of 1.57 billion Muslims worldwide, many are secular or have little knowledge of Islam. Although this may be true, that still leaves, conservatively, 10% to 15% (upwards of 235 million) of devout Muslims or jihadists who fit the description of submissive and intimidated, witting or unwitting enablers. As Mark Steyn astutely observed in America Alone, a "dominant minority" is the sole requirement for global jihad to take hold. In Mumbai, the carnage wreaked was caused by just ten people over three days. Nineteen hijackers were able to commandeer four passenger planes and murder three thousand Americans on 9/11. It doesn't take huge numbers to institute evil. In Nazi Germany, Hitler didn't win popular support in the country, but he pushed through his genocidal agenda as a passive, fearful populace looked on.

In our free society with a tradition of openly criticizing everything, even the sacred, it has now somehow become unacceptable to criticize Islam and the heinous actions of many of its practitioners. Yet it is perfectly acceptable to criticize Christianity, Judaism, or any other religion, for that matter. In 1989, "Piss Christ," an offensive photograph of a plastic crucifix submerged in a container of urine, was prominently displayed at a museum and won a U.S. government-funded award. While members of Congress and clerics condemned the sculpture in the media, the most egregious responses were from a museum patron who attempted to dislodge the photograph from the museum wall and a pair of teenagers who attacked it with a hammer. By comparison, in 2005, when editorial cartoons depicting Mohammed were published in a Danish newspaper, the Muslim world erupted into violence that claimed over one hundred lives and destroyed property worldwide, including four Danish embassies. Instead of reinforcing the Western value of free expression and severely punishing the actions of destructive Muslims, Westerners apologized for giving offense, censored the display of the cartoons, and cautiously monitored any future examination or critique of Islam. Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna said, "It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated; to impose its law on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet." The work of the Muslim Brotherhood in America is "a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah's religion is made victorious over all other religions."

It is now five minutes to midnight in the global jihad that endeavors to destroy us and establish a worldwide caliphate under Shari'ah law. Instead of standing our ground and asserting the supremacy of our values, our fear and submissiveness have taken root to hasten our defeat. Will we wake up and face the enemy head-on before it is too late and all is lost?

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/05/the_narrative_of_defeat.html at May 09, 2010

Obama's Policy of Appeasement

2010-04-12T20:30:00.000-07:00

By announcing his intention to remove words such as "Islamic extremism" and "Jihad" from the central document outlining U.S. national security strategy Obama has produced yet another vomit inducing policy that weakens our ability to win the war against the relentless march of Islamic totalitarianism. Indeed, in spite of his rhetoric to the contrary, it demonstrates that Obama has no intention of fighting that war let alone winning it. It takes a high place on the altar of counter-productive measures taken by Obama which constitute his administration's " National Security Hall of Shame". These include, but are not limited to, reading captured terrorists Miranda rights, renaming the "War on Terror" as a "Global Overseas Contingency Operation", closing Guantanamo, attempting to try KSM and his chums in a civil court in New York, using major international forums to criticise and apologise for America, cancelling strategic missile deployments in Poland, taking a sledge hammer to the vital strategic alliance the United States has with Israel, and most shockingly announcing that the United States will not retaliate with nuclear weapons against an enemy that inflicts a biological or chemical attack upon America. In every instance he has telegraphed his lack of resolve to our enemies who have long since taken his measure and who are making their plans confident that Obama will only rattle America's sabre but never cast aside its scabbard. They must be positively apoplectic with glee.

The idea that our enemy is limited to a few crazy isolated individuals like Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein is a fatal mistake. Obama is not alone in trying to make us believe that no truly Islamic movement can be responsible for terrorism because "Islam is peace" and that a few nut jobs have hijacked a so-called "great religion". The reluctance, or inability, of our leaders to identify the real nature of the threat brings us closer and closer to defeat with each day that passes. Yet they know full well that Iran and Syria are active state sponsors of terrorism, they know that Iran is aggressively pursuing her nuclear ambitiions and that Saudi Arabia produces legions of terrorist infected with the viral strain of wahabism. These facts all point to the inescapable conclusion that if America is to be safe then these states must be stopped in their tracks. If we took overwhelming military action to end these threats once and for all it would be far more effective than anything we have done thus far. So, why don't we do it? Well, Obama and his supporters all believe that most of the world's problems are the fault of America. Therefore, we must make amends. We must lavish aid on those who seek our ruin, redress grievances, thereby legitimising them in many cases, we must endlessly apologise for our existence, we must engage in lots and lots of talks, we must bend over backwards behaving like pimps for a one-way multiculturalism subverting ourselves from within. In short, we behave like a ruling society on the run capable of every fatuitly pursuing policies that are harmful to us, promoting people that are anti-American, flattering despots, and playing into the hands of tyrants all to demonstrate our sophistication and lack of stuffiness. America, these people believe, does not deserve its power and influence because it is morally incapable of using it to good effect. This is why the debilitating "Just War Theory" has been forced upon our military and is now being taught in all of our war colleges. Following its precepts lead us to fight police actions with some sort of truce being the goal rather than the enemy's unconditional surrender.

As Elan Journo points out in his book "Winning the Unwinnable War" a good example of this occured in Iraq. The Iraquis were NOT completely defeated. Instead they were encouraged to believe that their former tribalism and devotion to Islam constituted proper foundations for a new government. This was a huge mistake because it allows the unfettered application of Islamic ideology which is retrograde, medieval and barbaric. Japan, on the other hand, was only receptive to a new political ideal and a new form of government after they had suffered a devastating defeat. History teaches us that peace is usually achieved after one side has inflicted a crushing defeat on the other. It is the solemn and most important duty of any American president to keep America safe and protect American lives. This is done by acting in the objective self-interests of the nation and not by trying to get our enemies to like us. It's best not to get the two confused. In this regard Obama is an abject and dangerous failure.

Destroying America

2010-03-22T20:38:00.000-07:00

Far more Americans are opposed to the health care bill passed by the Democrats last night than voted for Obama in 2008. Yet the Democrats, who see themselves as the champions of the people, have decided to ignore their constituency and show them that they alone know what is best but those in Congress and the Senate have happily exempted themselves from participating in Obamacare, a socialist usurpation of American freedom, which they have deemed good enough for the rest of us and for which we should be duly grateful. Thus has government outgrown the consent of the governed and come November, and again in 2012, they will discover just how grateful we are when we rescue our country and restore the rule of law by voting vast numbers of them out of office.

The greedy appetites of the left-wing liberals have been excited by this monstrous piece of legislation because it spreads the power and influence of government over every aspect of our national life and our personal affairs. It intrudes into what should be private matters and at the same time will lead to rationed care, sloppy medicine, demoralised health care workers, less innovation, lower standards, higher taxes, unsustainable debt, business closures, fewer job opportunities, a massive new bureaucracy plodding along and weighed down by government inefficiency, and the eventual destruction of the health insurance industry. If this awful bill was about health care reform and only health care reform it could not possibly have extended to 2,700 pages and we would not have been treated to the disgusting spectacle of the ugly process involving back-room deals, closed-door conspiracies, outright bribery, and political pay-offs. It would have included tort reform, portability of health insurance and the ability to purchase it across state lines. It's the biggest and most unvarnished power grab in the last 70 years and a ruinous scam of incalculable proportions. Soon we will be paying more in interest on the national debt than we are spending on national security. The imposition of a national sales tax is not far off. Our way of life is about to be drastically changed and not for the better. The entire process has been an embarrassing national disgrace and typifies the duplicity and arrogance which is the modus operandi of Obama and his Chicago minions.

This is an historical bill alright, historically unhealthy for all Americans. Of course, we could reduce the enormous cost of it a bit if the Ivy League gave refunds for its defective alumni.

University of California at Irvine and the Muslim Student Union

2010-02-27T18:59:00.000-08:00

On February 8th. Israel's Ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, was invited to speak on the campus of UCI. His speech was disrupted by eight UCI students and three students from the University of California at Riverside. All of the students were removed by the police and no charges have been filed.

Over many years the administration of UCI has failed in its duty to assure that the campus of UCI did not become one of America's institutions of higher learning where anti-semitic expression is commonplace. The Muslim Student Union is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Muslim Brotherhood who are the comrades-in-arms of Hamas, a brutal terrorist organisation. The MSU has a long history of disruptive behaviour, anti-semitic hate-speech, student intimidation, and fund raising for Hamas. There is a studied nastiness born of a consuming hatred that stains and infects everything they do. By failing to speak out against the MSU and exercise their right of "free speech" the UCI administration has given implicit support to organisations that are dedicated to war and whose undiminished goal is our eventual ruin. All of the MSU's efforts are part of a co-ordinated global jihad that uses double standards to demonize and deligitimize the state of Israel while infiltrating academia and government institutions in the West counting on subversion to accomplish what overt Islamic radicalism may not. Ideals of "academic freedom" and the right of "freedom of speech" should not be perverted by UCI to enhance these goals which are inimical to the national interest and are not the purpose of an American university. Chancellor Drake and his administration have become what the Soviets used to call "useful idiots". It is time for urgent action to put an end to their manipulation by the most radical and destructive elements of a retrograde religion dedicated to the baleful domination of a global caliphate supervised by the stern application of the intolerant, vengeful and odious apparatus of Sharia Law. My e-mail to Chancellor Drake follows:

Dear Chancellor Drake,

The orchestrated abuse aimed at Israel's Ambassador Oren and the planned disruption of his speech at UCI last Monday evening by members of the Muslim Student Union was the culmination of UCI's pathetic lack of resolve to discipline the MSU for their constant, and often ugly, violations of UCI policies, rules, and standards. This poltroonery has led the MSU to the confident assumption that they can act with impunity even to the extent of breaking the laws of the United States as they did last May when George Galloway, M.P. held a fundraising event for Hamas sponsored by the MSU on the campus of UCI. Now, in the words of that exemplar of sedition, Jeremiah Wright, "the chickens have come home to roost" but considering the MSU's long list of prior serious infractions, which have gone unpunished, why would we expect anything else?

After many years of bully-boy and thuggish tactics by the MSU, that would have been heartily admired and even envied by Hitler's brown-shirts, your administration's response can only be characterised by paraphrasing Winston Churchill when he turned on the Treasury Bench in 1936 and damned it for going on in strange paradox decided only to be undecided, resolved to be irresolute, adamant for drift, solid for fluidity, all-powerful to be impotent. Constant heckling restricts free speech and abuse is not an argument. It is clear, even to the most impartial observer, that the MSU is all for free speech just so long as they are the ones doing the talking. When obvious and egregious violations have occured, justifying inaction against a group of hate-mongers by taking refuge in the protection of "free speech" and "academic freedom" gives the solid impression that you have joined forces with the irreconcilable wing of Islam that seeks to give us all a one-way ticket back to the 7th. century. Many of us believe that on that journey we would be treated to all the cruelty, all the brutality, and all the barbarism contained in Islam's title deed namely the Koran itself. Nothing in the recent disgusting behaviour of the MSU alters that view.

The mind is our most precious possession and it is not well trained or well served by assuming that which it must prove. The massive, well oiled, and efficient contraption of distortion, The Palestinian Myth Machine, selling all of its fantastic absurdities and fictitous claims on behalf of a fake cause and a fake people, has had an undue influence on members of the MSU who have become lazy intellectual guttersnipes by allowing it to fashion their opinions instead of taking the trouble to do their own academic due diligence. Thus they are reduced to bumper-sticker slogans and sound-bite protests whose arguments hang by the rotten thread of prejudice masquerading as opinion.

You and your administration now have an opportunity to redeem yourselves by immediately suspending the MSU as well as the eight UCI students who were removed for disrupting the proceedings. The kind of rabble rousing jew-hate fests organised by the MSU that take place every year with the likes of Amir-Abdel Malik-Ali and Muhammed al-Asi spouting their diatribes, obvious lies, and incoherent reasoning should now be prohibited. They are directly linked to their political masters, the Muslim Brotherhood and their agents of terror, Hamas. To expect us to believe that the MSU stands alone is to suggest that we are possessed of an imbecile credulity that would make an African witch-doctor positively green with envy. These hate-mongering extravaganzas of anti-semitic propaganda are devoid of educational content and never lead to anything that could be remotely described as reliable or informative intellectual discourse. Any atttempt to bestow some sort of academic relevance upon them is entirely bogus. Why you continue to tolerate the intolerant, as well as the intolerable, and why fat ladies wear Bermuda shorts remains, for me, two of life's more enduring mysteries.

Something that is not an enduring mystery, however, is the Hamas Charter. It ranks as one of the most unambiguous declarations of hate ever produced. Read it. There you will find Hamas' boast that their destruction of Israel will be their proud contribution to the eventual establishment of a global caliphate. So much for the "religion of peace" and please do not accuse me of suffering from Islamaphobia. If anything, I am suffering from Islamanausea which sickens as it surfeits.

Thus far, your cold reluctance to take strong and effective action against the MSU for persistent violations not only of UCI policy but also of common decency has strengthened their conviction to keep their minds hermetically sealed against truth and reason. Better to remain ignorant than to suffer the indignity of being proved wrong by Jews and infidels.

Furthermore, by not countering the false accusations as well as the obvious and vicious lies regulalrly disseminated by the MSU about Israel and Jewish people you co-operate with evil and in a real way become evil yourself. This is one of the most pernicious effects of political correctness since you lose any sense of probity and your standing to resist anything is thus eroded and destroyed. There was a good reason why in his "INFERNO" Dante saved the most scorching parts of Hell for those who, faced with a moral dilemma, tried to remain impartial. It is a pity the "INFERNO" is just fiction otherwise it would be comforting to know that when you and many members of your administration finally die the rest of us would be in no doubt as to your exact whereabouts.

*************************************************************************************

Tiger

2010-02-20T18:35:00.000-08:00

Yesterday, Tiger made an excruciatingly awkward apology on a deeply private matter. Tiger Woods is the greatest golfer the world has ever seen. Most of us have lived long enough to know that the combination of extraordinary talent, fame, and wealth can produce a powerful aphrodisiac. Nevertheless, we were surprised to learn that Tiger's number of championships may have been exceeded by his number of mistresses.

Now it is time for him to gather his family, board his ocean going yacht, weigh anchor, and sail off into the sunset for a while and think upon what George Will said about how many more home runs Babe Ruth would have scored if he had gone to bed earlier and more often with Mrs. Ruth!

The Same Opinion Still

2010-01-28T12:05:00.000-08:00

In 1923 Winston Churchill started publishing his six volume account of the First World War. It was called "The World Crisis". If one was in a library and saw these volumes without realising the subject matter one could be forgiven for thinking that, due to the title, one was looking at a biography of Obama. The sheer bulk of the work would soon banish the thought but after Obama's performance last night it would still linger.

"A man convinced against his will,
Is of the same opinion still."

Mr. Obama is a stubborn man chained to his left-wing, liberal, ideology who refuses to admit that all of his problems are as a direct result of his bad policies which are increasingly being rejected by the electorate in large numbers and even by many of those who voted for him.

These problems will not be solved by the sops he threw at us last night during a speech punctuated with bursts of anger which he was unable to convincingly sustain. His newly found passion for fiscal restraint, his pandering to the middle class with tax credits, his aggressive stand on national security, his support of drilling off shore, and his claim to be the champion of American interests and prerogatives, were delivered with as much conviction as a chimpanzee reciting Shakespeare. Telling us things that are just not so and making false declarations about his intentions have become vintage Obama. In his constant effort to appear to be all things to all people he is swiftly becoming nothing to anyone except a huge obstacle to recovery and the main threat to our national security.

Significant defeats in New Jersey, Virginia, and Massachusetts have done nothing to dim Obama's desire to move America much farther to the left than anyone imagined prior to his election. It took a unique combination of perverse left-wing ideology, bad policies, and campaign bungling for the Democrats to lose the senate seat in Massachusetts considerd by the Kennedys as something of an entitlement if not an actual heirloom, yet Obama still forges ahead in defiance of the facts believing that opposition to his destructive policies is entirely due to our woeful lack of understanding and his failure to explain them to us. At least, for the moment, he no longer thinks that those who disagree with him do so because he is black or half black or half white for that matter.

So far, Obama's stewardship proves that attending Harvard is not sufficient proof of brilliance. His administration confuses activity with achievement. It has become their habit and illustrates their preference for style over substance. Obama looks good and sounds good but, on closer examination, his policies are actually counter-productive much like Obama himself. It is all part of his moving curtain of lies on everything from the economy to health care reform to so-called global warming and to our national security. Obama is a political wrecking ball swinging violently out of control landing here, there, and everywhere, but seldom on the proper target.

Nothing he has done, from his extreme left-wing appointments to his administration to the stimulus bill to the omnibus bill to his world apology tours on our behalf to "mirandizing" captured enemy combatants to prosecuting CIA officers for doing their duty to exposing our intelligence methods to trying KSM in New York, really accrues to the benefit or the security of America and only makes sense when you realise he is determined to radically transform our country into something few people want and did not realise they were getting when they foolishly cast their vote for him. Furthermore, giving himself an "A" when anything goes right and George Bush an "F" when anything goes wrong is becoming tiresome. He is still unable to admit that it was the sub-prime mortgage crisis, the policies for which were all put in place by the Clinton administration, that led to the financial collapse in September of 2008. The mess he claims to have inherited was caused by Democrats in Congress. President Bush and the Republicans tried to rein in the excesses but were obstructed by Dodd, Obama, Frank, Pelosi, Walters, Boxer, et al but Obama still tries to make us believe that it was all the fault of greedy conspiratorial bankers and Republicans. He just can't draw a line without smudging it.

With all of its financial inaccuracies, false premises, misleading conclusions, misrepresented facts, a crass and inaccurate criticism of the Supreme Court and synthetic declarations of "hope" Obama's speech was hardly a model of impregnable logic. It was a fundamentally dishonest monologue given by a man seduced by his own public relations and for many of us just one more blow upon a wound.

SOS to The Religion of Peace!!!

2010-01-18T17:26:00.000-08:00

ATTENTION, JUDGE RICHARD GOLDSTONE & THE U.N. HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL:

As of last Friday Israel’s relief efforts to Haiti included the following: A field hospital, the only hospital in operation, with 40 doctors, 25 nurses, paramedics, a pharmacy, a children's ward, a radiology department, an intensive care unit, an emergency room, two operating rooms, a surgical department, an internal medicine department and a maternity ward. The hospital can treat approximately 500 patients each day, and in addition will perform preliminary surgeries. Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, one of the richest countries in the world, has sent a message of condolence to Haitian President René Préval. Some Arab countries have “pledged” help, such as $1 million pledged from both Kuwait and Morocco. This is less than two Hollywood movie stars, Sandra Bullock and Angelina Jolie, have already donated. In the meantime, the United Arab Emirates says it will “shortly” send a plane with humanitarian assistance. Qatar, with the third largest gas reserves and the second highest GDP per capita in the world, has dispatched 50 metric tons of aid to the hundreds of thousands of homeless and injured Haitians. Doubtless some organizations will be able to get Israel's humanitarian efforts classified as a war crime. Norway could come in handy here since along with most of the countries that subscribe to the "religion of peace" it seems too busy supporting unsubstantiated charges against Israel to be bothered doing anything to help. Who wants to talk about a disproportionate response now?

The Law of Averages

2009-12-29T20:26:00.000-08:00

The fact that Mr. Abdulmutallab is resting comfortably in Federal custody and planning his defense with his lawyer instead of being interrogated at Guantanamo by military intelligence is just one reason why Obama's approach to the war on terror is likely to cost thousands of Americans their lives. Abdulmutallab is a terrorist not an ordinary criminal. There is no presumption of innocence here. If he had been successful he would have killed over 250 people at a stroke. If he is found guilty in a civil court he faces a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment. Considering the enormity of the intended catastrophe, accidentally averted, a 20 year prison sentence and scorched genitals hardly seems punishment enough. Now that he has been read Miranda rights and has legal counsel at his disposal his use as an intelligence asset is severly compromised. Obama's main concern is not our safety, the swift and effective gathering of intelligence, or the firm treatment of terrorist prisoners but the desire not to appear to be doing anything useful that would resemble the Bush Administration and so alienate his left-wing base. For this meagre and cynical political consideration the rest of us are put in lethal jeopardy. This is nothing new in the world of Obama. Under his regime both our Justice Department and our intelligence services have become politicized. Thus does clarity become obscured. Without clarity there can be no understanding and without understanding no objective or rational decisions can be made. Why does it so often look as if the president and his men seem more interested in avoiding blame than they are in really protecting the American public from harm? We are not being well served. What grade do you suppose Obama would give himself now?

Today, his handlers trotted out Obama to make yet another teleprompter speech in the confident but vain hope that this one, unlike the others, would actually mean something. This reminds me of the cult which used to believe that if three monkeys tapped away on a typewriter long enough eventually one of them would type out the Ten Commandments. They too were disappointed. One keeps hoping for a Mark Twain or an H.L. Mencken to appear and ridicule the whole dreadful performance but we are left listening to Obama paying lip service to urgent matters affecting our security droning on about "systemic failures" and reluctantly trying to summon up some kind of martial vigor in attempt to fool himself, dellude the public, and impress our enemies all of whom remain impervious to his apologies and anxious acts of appeasement.

Talking about monkeys, Janet Napolitano must go. Her statement on Sunday about how well the system worked when a terrorist was permitted to board a flight bound for America with explosives hidden in his underpants is proof positive that any conversation with her about Homeland Security is bound to subtract from the total sum of knowledge on the subject. She is hopelessly out of her depth and her early appointment to such an important position demonstrated Obama's inability to take the war on terror seriously. It sent a dreadful message of weakness to terrorists everywhere who, no doubt, have been celebrating and taking advantage of Obama's studied myopia ever since.

What makes Napolitano's reaction to this incident even worse is that Abdulmutallab's own father went to our embassy in Abuja, Nigeria in mid November, met with members of the C.I.A., and told them of his son's suspected radicalization and his likely disappearance to Yemen for training. That was the instant when Abdulmutallab should have been placed near the top of the "no-fly" list and any visa in his possesssion revoked. Much as Obama and Napolitano would like to blame this failure on George Bush it just can't be done. They own every part of this enormous scandal if for no other reason than they are unwilling to call the war on terror and terrorist attacks exactly that. If you are unwilling to identify your enemies how can you prevail against them? Their intellectual dishonesty almost got over 250 people incinerated. We were lucky this time but until this administration is prepared to tell itself the truth about this war, abandon political correctness, formulate a global strategy against terror and stop treating it as a matter for the police, then we might as well prepare ourselves for one almighty terrorist attack that will dwarf 9/11 in its devastation and in its consequences. If Obama belatedly decides he wants to do his sworn duty then he should close down all radical websites, all Islamic para military training camps, any organisations raising funds for terrorist groups under whatever innocuous guise, keep Guantanamo open, have KSM's trial there, make life extraordinarily difficult for those who aid terrorists, and start profiling and discriminating against the Islamic totalitarian ideology that threatens to destroy our culture and our country. All of this will be difficult for Obama since he has shown us that he is really an arab/muslim inclined politician who bows to muslim potentates and has friends like Rashid Khalidi and whose declarations about Islam's contribution to American society always seek to make fair foul and foul fair.

As for the woebegone Janet Napolitano, before she is subjected to the pole-axing which she so richly deserves, she ought to implement a procedure whereby passengers with more than one hyphen in their names, making them too long to fit onto the side of a bus, should be stopped from boarding flights bound for the United States. This isn't so much racial profiling as it is a recognition of the law of averages which now stares us so regularly and so sternly in the face.

Global Warming or Hot Air?

2009-12-19T17:33:00.000-08:00

When many of the supplicants, on the way to their devotions at the Global Warming summit in Copenhagen, were delayed by a heavy snow storm it struck several of us as being hilariously ironic. The faithful who made it all the way to freezing Denmark were able to hear Barack Obama declare : "The time for talk is over....". This is an old liberal tactic. If you can't prove your point then just end the discussion. There would be a benefit to this, of course, if talking ceased in the White House thereby drastically reducing the amount of C02 constantly belching forth from its portals and polluting the atmosphere on an hourly basis. Within days the carbon footprint of the United States would shrink to the extent that the only thing we would have to worry about would be how to control the amount of toxic air spewing indiscriminately from Hugo Chavez. Resolving this one vexed issue could well be the subject of many more inconclusive summits or the task of just one strategically aimed cruise missile. But I digress.

The "Climategate" e-mails leaked from the University of East Anglia, one of the high temples of global warming research, revealed that, like all cults, the scientists there excluded, altered, and hid evidence which failed to lead to the their desired conclusions and their political agenda of imposing climate reparations on the West. This huge scandal is only the tip of the iceberg and it isn't melting due to any global warming. We should remember that science is not a matter of opinion. Empirical evidence is always required and in the case of global warming it is in very short supply. Plentiful, however, is talk about the benefits of the massive transfer of wealth from richer nations to poorer ones, urgings of population control despite a worldwide decrease of 50% in birth rates since 1979 (except amongst muslims), the increasing perception that people are pollutants, and that in order to avoid a swiftly approaching apocalypse we should tax and legislate ourselves into extinction for the purpose of gratifying those who enjoy seeing themselves portrayed as the most enlightened of saviours and who only pursue and support policies they are confident show them in that spectacular light.

Global warming has never been any more than a hypothesis yet it has become an article of faith whose devotees, as we have always suspected and recently seen, use their perverted data in much the same way as a drunk uses a lampost for support rather than illumination. It is becoming increasingly clear that for purely geopolitical purposes, for the subordination of national sovereignty, for the restriction of personal freedoms, and for the advancement of totalitarian ideology, the only extra heat being generated on planet earth is coming from some scientists cooking the books.

"First, do no harm!" Say what, Hippocrates?!

2009-11-28T11:33:00.000-08:00

In attempting to describe Richard Wagner's music to a friend, Mark Twain told him it was better than it sounds! The same claim cannot be made for Obama's grotesque attempt at health care reform. Do you suppose that buried somewhere in the 2047 pages of Obama's health care bill (the Constitution has 17 pages by comparison) there is a provision for mandatory pscychiatric help for all of the congressmen and senators who voted for this cynical power-grab and patently fraudulent legislation which will tether generations of Americans yet unborn to crippling debt, higher taxes, and rationed care?

Nothing in this monstrous concoction addresses the three essential elements that would entitle it to be called a reform bill: 1) the ability to buy health insurance across state lines, 2) insurance portability, & 3) tort reform. Without making these urgent reforms the substance of this intrusive bill becomes much less to do with health care, or beneficial reform of any description, and much more to do with spreading the government's tentacles over every aspect of our national life. If it is supposed to save us so much money why are our taxes going to be raised in order to pay for it? If it is so beneficial why do members of Congress exempt themselves from enjoying all of the benefits they are so keen for the rest of us to have? Is there any country in the world groaning beneath the weight of socialised medicine where efficiency has increased, costs have been reduced, patient care is the prime consideration, or where the best and the brightest are lining up to become doctors? Name one.

With a population of some 60 million the United Kingdom has a National Health Service with 1.4 million employees and is the third largest employer in the world right behind the Indian Railway and the Chinese Red Army! What sort of a bureaucratic behemoth will be required to administer a national health service in the United States with a population in excess of 300 million souls? Obamacare is an effort to create a permanent Democratic majority disguised as the utopian liberal ideal of universal health care coverage and a felicitous march towards progress. At its core, however, the proposed system really contains something of a cunning but anxious two-for-one aspect. The vastly enlarged bureaucracy will vote for the Democrats to whom they owe the drudgery of their employment and the recipients will vote for the Democrats to whom they owe their dismal dependence. Thus one long stroll in the burgeoning and increasingly creaky government perambulator is assured at the tax-payer's expense. This is a power-grab, pure and simple. It is more power than good men should want or bad men should have. Like His Fraudulency, Obama, it only succeeds in making a bad situation much worse. It is not what the doctor ordered and, along with Obama and his half-baked remedies, it should be pole-axed.

Crossing The Line

2009-11-28T00:04:00.000-08:00

Now let me get this straight. Attorney General Holder, playing Sancho Panza to Obama's Don Quixote, is going to transfer the terrorist leader Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the self-confessed master-mind of 9/11 and the murderer of journalist Daniel Pearl, from Guatanamo to New York City for trial in a civilian court and accord him all the protections of U.S. law. This is a joke, right? Well, no it's not although you may be forgiven for thinking so. What is wrong with having the trial in Guantanamo? It is remote, it is highly secure, it endangers no one, and it has its own well equipped and expensive court room with a bullet proof dock for the protection of the prisoners. In short, it is perfect. New York on the other hand is well, in America. The jail where the terrorists will be held is a few blocks from the court. It, together with the court, all the employees of the courthouse, all of the extra security personnel and the citizens of New York, will be in real, constant, lethal, and unnecessary danger during the trial. This is one of the most irresponsible decisions taken by Obama and along with reading captured terrorists Miranda rights, deciding to close Guantanamo and transport terrorists to U.S. soil for trial and imprisonment, divulging CIA interrogation methods, and the intended prosecution of our intelligence officers, crosses the line and amounts to the reckless endangerment of American citizens and the city which suffered the greatest loses of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Doing the opposite of what should be done has become a disturbing pattern in the Obama administration.

What exactly is the point of taking such an extraordinary risk while incurring such an enormous and unnecessary expense, $78 million to be precise? It is, of course, the unshakable belief of the left-wing liberals and their fellow travellers that terrorist attacks are matters which come under the jurisdiction of law enforcement and not the U.S. military. This awful miscalculation is what led to the 9/11 attacks in the first place. The terrorists who committed the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 were tried and convicted in a civilian court. The minute terrorists are provided with lawyers they become useless as a source of intelligence. During the trial our intelligence means and methods were compromised by motions of discovery filed by lawyers for the accused. The same feast of information will now be available to defense lawyers if these killers are tried in a civilian court. How this strengthens our national security escapes me but by playing politics with the legal system it shows the administration's left wing supporters at home and abroad that Obama is not President Bush, more is the pity. The lengthy proceedings are likely to devolve into an opportuntity for Islamic propaganda and grandstanding of the most disgusting kind. They will provide a forum for public relations that would be unavailable to the terrorists if they were tried before a military tribunal. If these two anxious clerks, Obama and Holder, are determined to accord unlawful combatants full constitutional protections, something that has never been done in our entire history, then this could take place at Guantanamo without exposing the entire city of New York to the real possibility of another terrorist attack.

When objections to these proceedings were raised both Obama and Holder noted how impressed the international community would be to see American justice at work and how pleased the American public would be when the terrorists were finally convicted and duly sentenced. It did not occur to either of them that such predictions about the trial's outcome, a clairvoyance that so far the administration has not been able to display with regard to the economy, were highly prejudicial and gave the whole matter an air of opera bouffe unlikely to impress the so-called international community with the concept that American justice is blind. Furthermore, Khalid Sheik Mohammed and his al-Qaeda pals already proudly declared their guilt and asked to be executed over a year ago. Justice delayed is indeed justice denied. There is something dreadfully wrong when our highest officials are more interested in the rights of terrorists than they are in protecting the American public. The legal process has become politicized. We are not being well served. Eric Holder should be dismissed from office, Barack Obama should be impeached, and KSM and his conspirators should be executed.

This pathetic episode is not only an affront to the families of all those who were murdered on 9/11 but also another clear indication that Barack Obama has no interest in waging the war on terror in an effective way let alone actually winning it, but we understood that months ago when he decided to call it a "global overseas contingency". America will be in mortal peril until this political pantaloon is removed from office. We cannot depend on his leadership to keep us safe but we can rely on the dedication of our military, our intelligence services, and those of us who, to paraphrase Voltaire, look forward to the day when the last Islamic terrorist is strangled with the bowels of the last mullah.

Et tu, Goldstone?!!

2009-10-25T23:19:00.000-07:00

If Judge Goldstone wanted to be the Secretary General of the United Nations he should have just applied for the job instead of collaborating with the UN Human Rights Commission investigation and producing a report about the conflict in Gaza which showed everything was true except the facts.

During some of the time the good judge was conducting his investigation Hamas rockets were still exploding in Israel despite Israel's unilateral cease-fire in January. Doubtless this escaped Judge Goldstone's notice since he was too busy cloaking his assassin's dagger beneath judicial robes. This practice of legitimizing evil is not unfamiliar to Goldstone since in 1978 he was appointed as a standing judge to the Transvaal Supreme Court by the Minister of Justice, Jimmy Kruger, the Himmler of apartheid. After the demise of apartheid the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was established. According to its Legal Enquiry, 1978 was a time when "a climate of state lawlessness prevailed." The TRC also investigated how the apartheid judiciary buttressed, "aided" and "abetted" the crime of apartheid. The question becomes not what Judge Goldstone was doing running around with the entirely worthless UN Human Rights Commission but why he isn't still serving time in jail for providing Prime Minister Botha with the aura of deceptive legitimacy that permitted him to go on arresting, torturing, and murdering blacks.

Judge Goldstone is no champion of justice as his miserable performance on the South African bench clearly shows but he has managed to fool the gullible international community into believing otherwise. Goldstones's tenure as a judge was marked by the most horrifying, viscious, sadistic, and brutal application of apartheid. During the various states of emergency between 1985 and 1989 Judge Goldstone masked these violations of human rights under the rule of law permitting his political masters to persecute and murder with impunity. By posing as an exemplar of legal rectitude while subverting and perverting the most basic standards of justice he became a willing accomplice in crimes against humanity. Judges were tried and convicted at Nuremberg for exactly this but somehow Goldstone has managed to evade all responsibility for his crimes and to persuade the ridiculous UN Human Rights Council that he is fit to investigate and sit in judgement upon others. Thus he has become the envy of all charlatans, the imposter's imposter. Fortunately due to closer scrutiny and the glare of publicity, these imposters are becoming more easy to recognise but very often not, alas, before it is too late. Currently, we have one sitting in the Oval Office.

In his book "History Upside Down" David Meir-Levi relates how Ho Chi Minh's chief strategist, General Giap, met with Yasser Arafat and his lieutenants and told them that they, like the North Vitenamese, needed to redefine the terms of their struggle. Giap's counsel was simple but profound says Meir-Levi: the PLO needed to to work in a way that concealed its real goals, permitted strategic deception, and gave the appearance of moderation: "Stop talking about annihilating Israel and instead turn your terror war into a struggle for human rights. Then you will have the American people eating out of your hand." Meir-Levi goes on: " At the same time that he was getting advice from General Giap, Arafat was also being tutored by Muhammad Yazid, who had been minister of information in two Algerian wartime governments (1958-1962).
' Wipe out the argument that Israel is a small state whose existence is threatened by Arab states, or the reduction of the Palestinian problem to a question of refugees; instead, present the Palestinian struggle as a struggle for liberation like the others. Wipe out the impression...that in the struggle between the Palestinians and the Zionists, the Zionist is the underdog. Now it is the arab who is oppressed and victimized in his existence because he is not only facing the Zionists but also world imperialism.' "

These highly effective strategies have since been augmented by the Palestinian Myth Machine, an enormous but well oiled and efficient contraption. It beams its disinformation to an audience possessed of the sort of imbecile credulity that would make an African witch-doctor positively green with envy. This explains why after over five years of some 7000 unprovoked rocket attacks upon its civilian population Israel is demonized when she finally has the gall to defend herself. It also explains why the frame of reference for the Goldstone report was designed to excuse the agressor, namely Hamas, and blame the attacked, namely Israel. Thus the UN Human Rights Commission, with its frail grasp of reality, proceeded from conclusion to facts instead of the other way around and displayed all the dismal aspects of a kangaroo court. However, it does not explain why Judge Goldstone used his time on the Commission as an opportunity to catch up on some sleep.

Someone who did not need to catch up on some sleep was Colonel Kemp of the British army. Here is his testimony given before the UN Human Rights Council:

"I am the former commander of the British forces in Afghanistan. I served with NATO and the United Nations; commanded troops in Northern Ireland, Bosnia and Macedonia; and participated in the Gulf War. I spent considerable time in Iraq since the 2003 invasion, and worked on international terrorism for the UK Government’s Joint Intelligence Committee.

Mr. President, based on my knowledge and experience, I can say this: During Operation Cast Lead, the Israeli Defence Forces did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.Israel did so while facing an enemy that deliberately positioned its military capability behind the human shield of the civilian population. Hamas, like Hizballah, are expert at driving the media agenda. Both will always have people ready to give interviews condemning Israeli forces for war crimes. They are adept at staging and distorting incidents. The IDF faces a challenge that we British do not have to face to the same extent. It is the automatic, Pavlovian presumption by many in the international media, and international human rights groups, that the IDF are in the wrong, that they are abusing human rights.The truth is that the IDF took extraordinary measures to give Gaza civilians notice of targeted areas, dropping over 2 million leaflets, and making over 100,000 phone calls.

Many missions that could have taken out Hamas military capability were aborted to prevent civilian casualties. During the conflict, the IDF allowed huge amounts of humanitarian aid into Gaza. To deliver aid virtually into your enemy's hands is, to the military tactician, normally quite unthinkable. But the IDF took on those risks. Despite all of this, of course innocent civilians were killed. War is chaos and full of mistakes. There have been mistakes by the British, American and other forces in Afghanistan and in Iraq, many of which can be put down to human error. But mistakes are not war crimes. More than anything, the civilian casualties were a consequence of Hamas’ way of fighting. Hamas deliberately tried to sacrifice their own civilians. Mr. President, Israel had no choice apart from defending its people, to stop Hamas from attacking them with rockets. And I say this again: the IDF did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare. Thank you, Mr. President."

No, thank you Colonel Kemp for your illuminating but mostly ignored testimony. Nevertheless, while you were at it you should have advised Judge Goldstone that contrary to what he may believe there are no celestial virgins awaiting assassins of Israel. However, if he persists in his efforts he might very well be next year's unembarrassed and not entirely startled recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. Alas, there is a recent precedent.

Watch the full address here:

For What?!!

2009-10-25T22:38:00.000-07:00

A few weeks ago when I read that Obama had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize I could not have been more shocked than if I had read we were now at war with Switzerland. Stunned, incredulous, and rubbing my eyes as I picked myself up off the floor where I had keeled over in a fit of laughter I realised at once that the the process for Obama's consideration must have started before his inauguration. The Obama public relations minions work quickly but since when did the Nobel committee use affirmative action standards in assessing prospective recipients? Obama's policy in the Middle East reveals that his administration has become not only the graveyard for peace and justice in the region but also the incubator of the next great conflict there. His cancellation of missile sites in Poland and Czechoslovakia, his reduction of our missile defense system, his reluctance to commit the required number of troops for success in Afghanistan, his constant apology tours on behalf of the United States, his woeful historical amnesia, his predeliction for historical revision, and his sycophancy towards Islam, all demonstrate that he is the greatest risk to world peace that we have and surely must have been awarded the wrong prize. The Benedict Arnold Award with oakleaf & cluster would have been far more appropriate. Since Yasser Arafat, Jimmy Carter, and Al Gore were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize it has become a badge of shame proudly worn by murdering pedophiliac terrorists, old venal buffoons, and egregious imposters making a gross mockery of its original intent and insulting those really deserving of it. When thinking of the Nobel Peace Prize committee we should keep in mind that the same country that gave us Alfred Nobel also gave us Vidkun Quisling.

Obama told us that he was "humbled" when he was notified about winning the Nobel Peace Prize, but he should have said "embarrassed". It's as if a soldier was awarded the Victoria Cross just for showing up on the parade ground with his rifle. Naturally, the soldier would have the integrity to decline it for fear of insulting all the previous worthy recipients. You see, in order to be considered for the VC one actually has to have demonstrated courage above and beyond the call of duty in the face of enemy fire. Inscribed on the Victoria Cross are but two words: "For Valour". One wonders what will be inscribed on Obama's award, perhaps: "For What?"

Many of us are curious if any of these people came in second or if they were even deemed worthy of consideration at all:

1. Chinese Human Rights Activist Hu Jia - imprisoned for campaigning for human rights in the PRC
2. Wei Jingsheng, who spent 17 years in Chinese prisons for urging reforms of China's communist system (Not to mention the symbolic value of awarding a Chinese dissident on the 20th Anniversary of the Tianenmen Square Massacre.)
3. Greg Mortenson, founder of the Central Asia Institute has built nearly 80 schools, especially for girls, in remote areas of northern Pakistan and Afghanistan over the past 15 years
4. Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad, a philosophy professor in Jordan who risks his life by advocating interfaith dialogue between Jews and Muslims
5. Afghan human rights activist Sima Samar. She currently leads the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission and serves as the U.N. special envoy to Darfur.

What on earth is going on in Europe? With the premature release from prison in Scotland of the convicted, murdering, terrorist, al-Megrahi and now this latest homage to an articulate incompetent by the Nobel committee it's easy to see that Europe's judgement and moral compass are spinning out of control. Clearly none of the committee members who decided where the next Olympics should be held were on the committee that decided who should receive the Nobel Peace Prize, what a pity. As Mr. Hertzberg of "The New Yorker" wryly noted, at least at the Olympics the judges wait until after the race to give you the gold medal!

A Speech Too Far

2009-09-24T18:03:00.000-07:00

I heard a leader today. I heard the leader of an embattled outpost of western values and the staunch guardian of Judeo/Christian ethics, draw a line in the sand contrasting the harsh differences between those who would destroy the only democracy in the Middle East and those who would preserve it intact. I should have been listening to Barack Obama but it was Benjamin Netanyahu who brandished the torch of truth, justice, and freedom. As he did so, he held the leaders of Iran accountable for their continual lies, hatred, and unremitting violence, and condemned those who seek to bestow any kind of legitimacy upon the genocidal Ahmedinejad and his determined, murdering, collaborators and proxies throughout the Middle East and the world.

Yesterday in stark contrast, Barack Obama, the supposed leader of the free world and commander-in-chief of the greatest military power the world has ever seen, gave a speech that showed it is more dangerous to be a friend of the United States than it is to be her enemy. As he betrayed Israel and acted as the legal counsel for the so-called Palestinians by promoting his plan that encourages them not to make any concessions, and by using his talent of expanding the least amount of thought into the greatest number of words, he demonstrated the truth of Gerald Warner's observation in the London Daily Telegraph that if Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda still wish to destroy America they had better hurry up before Barack Obama does it first.

Addressing the United Nations, an increasingly corrupt and spineless group of beggar nations that continually vote against the United States with the one hand while the other is always outstretched for more American aid, Obama displayed why he is the greatest security risk we have to which our entire history affords no parallel. His speech was virtually a reprise of the miserable one he gave in Cairo a few months ago but it contained even more historical inaccuracies and dangerous nonsense from which the inevitable wrong conclusions and decisions flow like the cascading waters of Niagra Falls.

Clearly Obama has not had the good sense to fire his speech writer otherwise one assumes, not altogether with confidence, that he would not have lectured us with these preposterous notions: "In an era when our destiny is shared, power is no longer a zero-sum game. No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation. No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed. No balance of power among nations will hold. The traditional division between nations of the south and north makes no sense in an interconnected world nor do alignments rooted in the cleavages of a long "Cold War." Obama and his speech writer inhabit the same alternate universe where history is denied, truth is replaced with distortion, wishful thinking is preferred to reality, and where activity is confused with achievement.

As a devotee of "soft power", except where Israel is concerned, of course, Obama displayed his belief that the United States is no longer the world's pre-eminent force, that he no longer intends to maintain our dominance, and has deliberately set us on a course of decline making us just one country among many. As this speech and his speech in Cairo so plainly show, Obama thinks that all the world's problems are the fault of America and the West and that amends must now be made and that he has been ordained and duly dispatched to make them. The downright evil represented by Islamic terrorists, Iran, and North Korea is all America's fault. His faith is placed in the entirely corrupt United Nations and farcical international courts, whose goal of a one-world government with a flag nobody salutes and an anthem nobody sings is much closer to his heart than American exceptionalism which, in fact, is anathema to him and his retinue of camp-followers. Unfortunately for Obama's vision, the founding principles and ideals on which the United Nations was built have been crushed by the realities that Obama maintains do not or should not exist.

As for "No balance of power among nations will hold", where on earth did he come up with that penetrating insight? For over three hundred years England maintained the balance of power in Europe by forming alliances with its weaker states against the most powerful one. This helped her frustrate the ambitions of Phillip II of Spain, Louis XIV of France, and Napoleon Bonaparte. It allowed her build an empire and together with her mastery of steam, coal, and iron, gave her manufacturing pre-eminence accounting for over 50% of the world's industrial production by 1870! Some balances of power work after all. Imagine that.

The absurdity of " No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation..." is so obtuse that it turns history and current reality on its head. He ignores the ambitions of Iran, North Korea, Russia, and China but he does so because it is America to whom he really refers. In Berlin, in Cairo, and in front of the United Nations he indulged in an orgy of self-abasement producing a litany of indictments against the United States setting forth his belief that our sins are so enormous that we lack the moral authority to justify our power and dominance. The only way, he has convinced himself, to regain this moral high ground, and coincidentally help his domestic agenda, is by unilateral strategic retreat. This is why our missile deployments promised to Poland and Czechoslovakia have been cancelled; it is why our own missile defenses have been reduced and it is why he is unwilling to do what our military commanders in Afghanistan have advised is required for victory; it is why he does not support regime change for Iran but only for Israel; it is why his policies are a triumph of one-way multiculturalism over diplomacy that, so far, have produced nothing in the way of concessions from our enemies or help from our friends. It is why he is the arch appeaser of our time. It is why he is a disaster.

He flatters and panders to the Islamic serpent; our financial aid is sent to our enemies in Gaza and elsewhere in the Middle East; favors are dispensed to anti-Americans in South America and all over the world, but for our own citizens there are crippling debts, higher taxes, lax immigration policies, prosecution of CIA officers charged with the interrogation of those who killed three thousand of our people; reckless endangerment of our security by transferring terrorist prisoners to our soil; the attempted abridgement of free speech; the deliberate and willful destruction of a free market economy and the middle class; the exportation of talent and entrprenneurship; the importation of Mexican poverty and for our allies, who would stand on either hand with us, the cold shoulder of indifference and neglect.

None of this is inevitable. As it has been done, much of it can be undone. In order to do so the American voter will have to come to the sinking realisation that Barack Obama is a charming liar at odds with American exceptionalism; that he has abandoned the idea that America has a special role to play or that our values and institutions should be adopted by those countries that do not yet enjoy them and that his utopian notions imply that democracies should seek no alliances against dictators. They need to understand Obama is the victim of an ideology where everyone is equal; where there are no leaders; where there is no good, no evil, just a static government imposed lackluster conformity masquerading as equality, thus ensuring that when the conflict comes America, thanks to his ideology and his policies, will be so constrained that she will not be the nation to emerge victorious. In the meantime, while Obama knows it is not possible to keep the balloon rising without the usual infusion of hot air the rest of us should recall the lines from Hamlet "...that one may smile and smile and be a villain."

Goodnight Jimmy!

2009-09-20T22:41:00.000-07:00

A few days ago on ABC the parsimonious Jimmy Carter confirmed just how tenuous his grip on reality has become with each passing year when he told Brian Williams ".....an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he's African-American” and “that African-Americans are not qualified to lead this great country.......”

This is an enormous and dreadful slander against the majority of Americans.The animosity towards Obama is because of his constant deceit and awful, destructive, policies not because of the pigmentation of his skin or the woeful circumstances of his paternity about which most Americans are indifferent. Many of those who voted for Obama are now coming out of the ether and are opposing his policies. They stand aghast at his fiscal profligacy and in disbelief at his appointees from those with the most radical if not disgraceful records of anti-American activities to tax cheats and anti-semites, his internationalism that is an assault on the Declaration of Independence, his weakening of our military readiness, and his attempts through Cap & Trade and Health Care Reform to spread the tentacles of government over every aspect of our national life. Is this because they have just discovered that he is black? When more than 94% of black voters cast their vote for Obama were they demonstrating racist tendencies by voting with such racial solidarity or had they been so hypnotised by his nebulous appeals for "Hope" and "Change" that their reason had been overcome by their imagination? What say you, Jimmy?

Jimmy Carter presided over interest rates that exceeded 19%, an unempoyment rate of 7.5%, an inflation rate of 13.5%, a hostage crisis in Iran that lasted for 440 days, a botched rescue attempt and a failed foreign policy towards Iran and the Middle East from which we still suffer today. No wonder he is a darling of the Islamofascists. He is the most discredited and weakest president we have had since the end of World War II although he may not enjoy that distinction for much longer. Most of his pronouncements are an instant sedative but like some old actor he suddenly comes to life whenever he feels the glow of the spotlight upon him. His constant and anxious need to latch onto some cause or phenomenon in order to give himself some relevance upon the national or world stage is becoming increasingly embarrasssing particularly since he has become a "useful idiot" for the enemies of America. His reputation is beyond all redemption. "Ambition creeps as well as soars", wrote Burke. It's time for Jimmy to creep back home and read a good book. This, of course, would not be one of his own.

Boycott Israel?!!!

2009-08-23T19:33:00.000-07:00

On Thursday the 20th. August, The Los Angeles Times published a thoroughly treacherous article by Neve Gordon the author of "Israel's Occupation" and a professor of politics at Ben-Gurion University in Beersheba, Israel. The substance of this piece of drivel, which would have made Benedict Arnold and Vidkun Quisling positively green with envy, was devoted to strong recommendations that the rest of the world boycott his own country since he is convinced that Israel is an apartheid state and therefore deserves to be punished and be brow-beaten into accepting the suicidal two-state-solution. My unpublished letter to the L.A. Times follows:

Dear Sirs,

Mr. Gordon's assertion that Israel is an apartheid state fails to acknowledge that it is not Jews who are unwilling to live amongst Arabs but it is Arabs who are unwilling to live amongst Jews. He would know this if he had ever tried to visit Saudi Arabia or any of the 22 muslim countries in which, by the way, the mere possession of even a Christian bible is a criminal offense, women are executed for infidelity, honor killings are sanctioned, female genital mutilation is performed, homosexuals are hanged, and the teaching of genocidal hatred of Jews and the West is high on the curriculum of every madrass. Even more disgusting than Mr. Gordon's proposals is the regularity and apparent relish with which these actions are accomplished. Try boycotting that rather than a country which accords its Arab and muslim citizens full civil liberties.

If anything keeps Mr. Gordon awake at night it should be the thought of his children being slaughtered by the jew-hating, homicidal, guttersnipes of Hamas, Hizbollah, and the PLO whose undiminished goal is the destruction of Israel. All of his recommendations would ensure that his children, far from living in a non-apartheid state, would not be living at all and he would be left choking in a pool of his own blood. Having read Mr. Gordon's article there may be something to be said for the latter.The solution is not the creation of a 23rd. muslim state, which will attack Israel & vote against America in the U.N., but rather the crushing defeat of Islamic totalitarianism.

PanAm Flight 103

2009-08-23T10:21:00.000-07:00

The outrageous, repulsive, and sickening decision of the Scottish government to release al-Megrahi from prison where he was serving a 27 year sentence for his part in the murder of 270 people on PanAm Flight 103 has plunged a dagger into the heart of those who fight against terrorists. Barack Obama has described this gross miscarriage of justice and wanton subversion of the rule of law as a "mistake".

Tame condemnations of monstrous injustice have become so commonplace from Obama that one is left wondering what he would call his decision, made the day after he took the oath of office when he swore to protect us from all enemies foreign and domestic, to suspend terrorist court proceedings against al-Nashiri who organised and directed the attack against the USS Cole in October of 2000 that murdered 17 U.S. sailors. I suspect we will have to wait eight more years for justice to be done as well as for Obama's answer. In the meantime, shame reigns supreme in the Scottish government, in 10 Downing Street, and has become a permanent fixture in the Oval Office.

Interview with Larry Greenfield (Part 2 of 2)

2009-08-20T12:15:00.000-07:00

This is the second of a 2-part dialogue between myself and Larry Greenfield, Vice-President of the Claremont Institute.

Click the play button below to listen to the interview or click here.

Thanks for listening. Feedback is welcome.

See Also:
- Interview with Larry Greenfield (Part 1 of 2)

Interview with Larry Greenfield (Part 1 of 2)

2009-08-13T14:02:00.000-07:00

I was interviewed by Larry Greenfield, Vice President of the Claremont Institute, for RedCounty.com.

Click the play button below to listen to the first part of the interview or click here.

Thanks for listening. Feedback is welcome.

Democracy's Reluctant Champion

2009-06-24T20:38:00.000-07:00

It has been noted that in his "INFERNO" Dante wisely reserved the most scalding corners of Hell for those who, in a moral dilemma, tried to remain impartial. If Barack Obama had been a character in Dante's Divine Comedy we would have known exactly where to find him. You will recall that when Russia invaded Georgia, during our election, the best Obama could do was to issue a statement saying "both sides should show restraint" thus drawing a moral equivalency between the attacker and the attacked. The inability to distinguish between the arsonist and the fire-fighter is a hallmark of the appeaser. Those of us who are unable to remain impartial between the fire and the fire department believe that a firm and immediate statement of moral support saying that the United States, as a beacon of freedom and democracy, stands with the Iranian people in their desire for fair elections, civil liberties, and the rule of law, should have been issued at once. This would not have smeared their protests with the "taint" of Americanism which so concerns the reluctant champions of democracy. Such a declaration of solidarity may seem a bit like stating the obvious but it is akin to "Give me liberty or give me death". It has the salutory effect of stiffening the spine and focusing attention on overthrowing tyranny.

Iran is a mullahocracy, an enemy of its own people, supported in all its malevolent forms by the odious apparatus of the Republican Guard who, thus far, have not required America as an excuse to hang homosexuals, stone women for infidelity, execute dissenters, or otherwise abridge the most basic concepts of justice and freedom. Sixty percent of Iran's population are under the age of thirty. Unlike their enslaved counterparts in North Korea they have been exposed to the internet, satellite broadcasts from the West, and news from family living in democracies. They like what they see and hear. Due to their courage Iran will never be the same again. The repressive regime has been wounded. Iran's fate will play out in the streets, but the sight of an American president holding aloft America's torch of liberty would not have gone amiss. However, this is best accomplished when that torch is not buried somewhere in the oval office underneath dog-eared copies of "Das Kapital" and Saul Alinsky's "Rules For Radicals".

It seems that Barack Obama will go to almost any lengths to avoid doing anything that President Bush would have done regardless of how appropriate it may be. Thus he displays a cold reluctance to support the protesters in Iran and to take advantage of the foreign policy opportunities their brave protests have afforded. In the alternate universe inhabited by Obama, reading captured terrorists Miranda rights, bringing them to our shores for trial in civilian courts, and granting them constitutional protections will make our enemies stop hateing us, but timely and strong support for those trying to establish democracy in the face of ruthlesss oppression is far too dangerous. Since democracy gave us Barack Obama perhaps the Iranian dissenters are now wondering if it makes any sense pursuing it after all!

Knock It Off, Dave!

2009-06-12T20:53:00.000-07:00

However dumb David Letterman considers Sarah Palin to be, I think it is safe to say that she is not so bumb as to have sat in the United Trinity Church for 20 years, mind you, listening to the poisonous ravings of Jeremiah Wright without concluding she was listening to a tenth rate rabble rousing demagogue, a racist, a bigot, a hate-monger, an anti-semite, an America-hater, and a marxist. She would have stood up, spoken up, and walked out unlike Barack Obama who sat there transfixed approvingly attuned to a message that resonated within him.

A Case Of Historical Amnesia

2009-06-09T23:03:00.000-07:00

Some men are born to commit shameful acts. The speech given in Cairo by Barack Obama was just one such act in a career of shameful acts. It revealed that the curtain of moving lies which is the Obama administration has not only become the burial ground for real justice and peace in the Middle East but also the incubator for the next dreadful conflict there.

Islamic totalitarianism and terror are absolute evils with which there can be no compromise. Yet Obama's confidence in his flabby and lethal policies grows with every step he takes away from reality reaching complete conviction in the editorials of the New York Times, the resolutions of the corrupt United Nations and the assent of the timid European Union.

As Obama stood in Cairo beaming his wisdom towards us and as he delivered his speech in which, for the comfort of his audience, he had re-written the history of the region, America's role there, and the accomplishments of Islam, he displayed his particular faculty for realising halluciniations. He shares this faculty with a sycophantic, uncritical, mass media that serves as his microphone. He, and they, insist on telling us things that are just not so: Islam is a tolerant and peaceful religion and that it paved the way for Europe's renaissance!! I think not. The list of distortions kept getting longer and longer. As in the case of Jeremiah Wright, and recently with Judge Sonya Sotomayor, we are told that we did not hear what we heard, did not see what we saw, did not read what we read, and that everything has been taken out of context. Well, here's some context for you Barry: Since the establishment of Israel in 1948 she has rarely known a moment of peace. Israel's enemies hate her because she exists not because of settlements in the West Bank or anywhere else. In their view they are merely carrying out Mohammed's exhortations, contained in the Koran, to kill and destroy the Jews. Any pretext that comes to hand will do and a completely fabricated cause such as the alleged misfortunes of the so-called Palestinians will do nicely. This has led them to an orgy of violence and murder inflicitng untold suffering throughout the world despite the fact that from 70 A.D., when the Romans banished the Jews from their lands where they had lived for thousands of years, through 400 years of occupation by the Ottoman Empire until the end of the British Mandate in 1947 there was never, not once, a Palestinian country, state, region, currency, government, president, parliament, king, capital city, or border. The so-called Palestinians simply have no case but their concocted claims of dislocation have been advanced as arguments for statehood. It's an enormous hoax. After World War II the camps containing millions of refugees had disappeared within 10 years. It is a glaring example of the cynical manipulation involved when after 6 decades there are still Palestinian refugee camps. With the billions of dollars that have been given to them in aid, the camps could easily have been eradicated long ago, but they are used to evoke the world's sympathy for their cause and incite hatred against Israel. Used properly, had they not been embezzled by the thieving leaders of the PLO, and Iran's proxies Hamas and Hizbollah, these funds would long since have allowed the so-called Palestinians to live civilized and productive lives had they chosen so to do. In contrast, the approximate number of 750,000 Jewish refugees who were dispossessed and expelled from Arab countries, due to a combination of arab nationalism and anti-semitism, escaped to Israel and elsewhere and there isn't a suicide bomber in sight! Strange, is it not?

It is clear that Obama was on a romp of fantasy. I nearly collapsed on the floor with laughter when he described Islam as a tolerant religion. This would explain why the the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem conspired with Adolf Hitler and the Nazis to annihilate jews in the Middle East. Islam is not a creed; it's a cancer. Surely Obama must be living in an alternate universe. Doubtless he also believes that "All Star Wrestling" is real and that the Flat Earth Society might be on to something.

When Obama solemnly intoned that his foremost responsibility was to protect the security of the American people I could barely contain myself. A cursory examination of his policies, from closing Guantanamo to bringing terrorists to our shores for trial in American courts, reveals that he is the greatest security risk we have! As often happens in his speeches this one was laced with the most egregious historical inaccuracies, misinterpretations, as well as misleading and incomplete references, displaying that he suffers from an advanced case of historical amnesia when it comes to the reasons for Israel's existence. His reasoning, which leads him to false comparisons between the aftermath of the holocaust and the establishment of Israel, so-called Palestinian refugees and slavery in the United States, and apartheid in South Africa, bears no visible means of support and would be enough to make Edgar Allan Poe tear up his "Tales Of Mystery And Imagination" and start all over again. There wasn't one meagre strand of worn out thread that connected his premise to his conclusions. He must have been very loosely educated at Harvard or he is being very badly advised now. I suspect it's a bit of both.

In articles on my blog, prior to his election, I said that the Middle East was where Obama would betray not only American interests but also the state of Israel and so it has now come to pass. Nothing could be more clear. He is an Arab/Muslim inclined politician who is setting in motion the exact circumstances for a massive conflict in the region. It's not that Obama et al are unable to recognise our enemies it's that they actually prefer them to our friends and so the existence of Israel and her territorial integrity are being subordinated to the uninterrupted flow of oil to all of the world's industrialized nations. It is also possible that a Faustian bargain may have been struck between the Arabian Muslim sheiks on one hand and Obama and the liberal left-wing elites in America, whereby the sheiks will provide all the financing from their trillions of petro-dollars in order to allow the Democrats to pursue permanent majorities provided they act in accordance with the desires of Islam and against the vital interests of the United States. Neither Anti-Semitism nor the alleged pursuit of peace alone can fully explain the policies and the political appointments of the Obama administration. Such foul treachery can only be explained when one realizes that they have been seduced by the real possibility of permanent power and preferment thereby proving Lord Acton's dictum that "power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

What, one might ask, is the excuse for the complicity of the European Union in all of this? Well, their governments are intimidated by their rapidly expanding Muslim populations and the tendency of Muslims to use violence and murder against those who raise their voices in protest. The European press has long since succumbed to self-censorship due to intimidation by Muslim violence. These two factors combined produce policies of appeasement that could lead to eventual defeat and surrender, but it gets worse. The Arabs, awash in petro-dollars, have been busy, for decades, buying influence everywhere corrupting and corroding everyone they touch. The Europeans too need Arab oil and don't forget the sheer weight of demographics is in the Muslims' favor. They are ferocious breeders. Within 4 years the ancient European cities of Antwerp, Amsterdam, Brussels, and Rotterdam will have Muslim populations in excess of 50%. At the current rate of immigration and births, France will be a Muslim country by the year 2040. These are not encouraging numbers and suggest that Islamic totalitarianism could prevail without firing a single shot. Considering their history, however, it is unlikely that any of this will be resolved without bloodshed and lots of it. Ever since the 17th. century when they were defeated at the gates of Vienna by the king of Poland, who led a Christian army, the Muslims have cherished the thought of reconquering everything they lost in Europe.

For years, fatuous and traitorous European liberals and Islamic fascists have been in an unholy alliance. On the face of it, it would appear that their interests would have been inimical to one another. However, they shared common goals: the dislocation of Europe from American influence, the withdrawal of American support from Israel, the demonization of Israel as an apartheid state committing war crimes, and an increase of Muslim immigrants to Europe. To varying degrees each goal has been reached and some even surpassed. Unbelievably, they have even been assisted from time to time by American presidents and politicians eager to demonstrate all the confidence of their inability.

The brilliant and always perceptive Caroline Glick of the Jerusalem Post has written: "More disturbing than Mitchell's positions are his marching orders from Obama. Unlike previous presidential envoys who have come to Israel every few weeks and then disappeared when reality proved stronger than their peace fantasies, Obama has ordered Mitchell to cast reality to the seven winds and set up a permanent forward command post in Jerusalem directly subordinate to the White House.

To fulfill his writ, Mitchell has appointed four deputies - all known for their open sympathy for the Palestinians and their hostility to the Netanyahu government. They are Mara Rudman, of the George Soros-financed Center for American Progress; Lt.-Gen. Keith Dayton, who is now building a Fatah army in Jordan which he recently reportedly acknowledged will turn its American-financed guns on Israel within a few short years if Israel refuses to establish a Jew-free Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria; Fred Hoff, one of the greatest champions of a US-Syrian rapprochement and of an Israeli surrender of the Golan Heights; and David Hale, the architect of the current US policy of rebuilding the Hizbullah-infested Lebanese army. Hale will be permanently stationed in Jerusalem in a large office suite that will house Mitchell's operation.

Aside from overseeing his deputies, Mitchell has also been charged with leading a new administration program aimed at undermining Israel's ability to make independent military and intelligence decisions. Back in 2008, when Obama's National Security Adviser Gen. Jim Jones served as then-secretary of state Condoleezza Rice's special adviser on Israeli-Palestinian security issues, he authored a report calling for the US to assess what Israel's "real" security interests in Judea and Samaria are and to limit US support to Israel to filling those necessarily minimal interests. Jones's report, which rejected all Israeli claims in Judea and Samaria and underplayed the strategic significance of Palestinian rejection of Israel's right to exist, was viewed as deeply hostile toward Israel, and the Olmert government prevailed on the Bush administration to set it aside.

This is not the case today, however. Obama shares Jones's view that Israel's perception of its security needs is exaggerated. As he made clear in his speeches last week at Cairo and Buchenwald, Obama thinks that Israel suffers from a Holocaust-induced paranoia that causes it to wrongly believe that Arabs and Iranians wish to wipe it off the map. In Obama's view, Israel's fears can be dealt with, and a Middle East peace can be wrought through a US takeover of both Israel's security assessments and its military and intelligence operations and policies."

With friends like these Israel hardly needs enemies. Let us have some clarity. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East and an outpost of western values that has been under relentless attack since her inception. Yet she is the one who is being bullied into making even more self-destructive concessions to appease genocidal scum who never keep their word but always make good on their threats and whose undiminished goal is still the extinction of Israel. Recklessly, one hopes not willfully, Obama and all the chancelleries of Europe have simply failed to diagnose the nature of the threat. Thus all of their remedies are doomed to failure. The real nature of the threat is the unremitting march of Islamic totalitarianism that seeks to give us a one-way ticket back to the 7th. century. On that journey we will be treated to all of the cruelty, all of the brutality, and all of the barbarism contained in their title deed, the Koran itself. The goal of Islamic domination under the supervision of Sharia law has never been abandoned. Grasp that and you will understand why Obama's pandering to the Islamic world and his policies in the Middle East are tragically flawed portending Armageddon.

When power-hungry, frightened, weak, but determined mediocrities bring their pre-conceived ideas and prejudices to resolve an intractable problem, it is usually the reputation of the problem that remains intact.

Israel is being pressured to sacrifice something of vital strategic importance, namely land, for something that can be revoked within fifteen seconds, namely peace. If Iran is allowed to realise her nuclear ambitions, as now seems likely, and if Syria is not stopped from pursuing nuclear proliferation, how does Israel's sacrifice of land contribute to stability in the region? Obama and his stooges have left this unexplained. The answer, of course, is that such a sacrifice would be a prescription for national suicide. Obama's policies are not policies at all. They are a disease.

Therefore, let the word go forth upon the wings of honest and determined purpose that Israel will tolerate no bullying, will defend her existence, will resist all attempts to have a suicidal two-state solution imposed upon her, will protect her people, and will guard her ancient land, with all her might and all the power she can muster against the hate and remorseless tyranny that have tormented her so unjustly for so long.

"What stronger breast-plate than a heart untainted!
Thrice is he arm'd that hath his quarrel just,
And he but naked,though lock'd up in steel,
Whose conscience with injustice is corrupted."

--

Doonesbury, An Anti-Semite?!!

2009-06-01T14:36:00.000-07:00

To the Los Angeles Times:

Dear Sirs,

I was mortified at the anti-semitic Doonesbury cartoon in yesterday's L.A. Times. If such an insulting cartoon about muslims had appeared in your newspaper your building would most likely be ablaze at this very moment since burning buildings is the default mode of the so-called "religion of peace". Clearly, Mr. Trudeau has succumbed to the strain of living with Jane Pauley. I do not know if you pay him per cartoon or per insult, but either way you might think about asking for a refund for yourself and an apology for the rest of us.

Here Comes The Judge

2009-05-28T16:17:00.000-07:00

Whenever we are told about a nominee's "compelling" and "attractive" story it's as if a public relations campaign has already been put in place to innoculate us against any possible disapproval of the candidate and to distract us from paying too much attention to the judicial record. Nobody expected Obama to nominate someone who has respect for the original intent of the Constitution. "Empathy" is best left as the province of marriage counsellors. It is "Equal Protection Under The Law" with which we should be concerned not "Empathy Under The Law".

Judge Sotomayor's record is well known and displays, along with her public statements, a tendency, a desire, and even a conscious preference to legislate from the bench. Her "empathy", a code word for judicial activism, her lack of racial impartiality, and her doubtful intellectual rigor as an unbiased jurist, should disqualify her from having breakfast with Justice Antonin Scalia let alone from sitting beside him on the Supreme Court. It won't, of course. The glowing editorials have been prepared, the fawning magazine articles are in place, the tame morning show hosts have their sycophantic confections topped with the sweetest of icing at the ready, and doubtless the divine Oprah is about to dispense her benediction. The fix is in courtesy of the ringmaster himself, His Fraudulency Barack Obama.

As he attempts to plant his size 13 shoes on the moral high ground translating that position into power and advantage, he resorts to the political correctness that infects and corrodes everything he touches by proferring us a bullying mediocre jurist and strident product of affirmative action who already occupies a position above her competence. This is just another cynical effort in pandering tokenism, by Obama and his goons, to pull the wool over our eyes while trying to make us feel "empathy" for the nominee. Nice try. Next!

A Disgrace To Her Office

2009-05-16T17:56:00.000-07:00

It is probably safe to say that the CIA would be unlikely to brief members of the Select Committee On Intelligence about things they did not intend to do. So, Nancy Pelosi needs to spend the next few days trying to remember what she was told and when it was told to her. The official CIA memos with their accompanying time lines will doubtless prove useful to her as well as the rest of us. When they were briefed both John McCain and Jane Harman expressed their objections to enhanced interrogation techniques. Nancy Pelosi, however, seems to have used her time on the Intelligence Committee as an opportunity to catch up on some sleep. In the meantime, her four different versions of what she was told about enhanced interrogations stretches our credulity tighter than the skin on her face and anyone who has seen her on television recently will realise just how tightly that skin is really stretched. Perhaps if she was subjected to some enhanced interrogation herself it might jog her recollection of events. Her memory was not so poor, however, as to be able to accuse the CIA of misleading the Congress of the United States. This was vicious, extremely unwise, and also dangerous. Surprisingly, the uninspiring and woebegone Leon Panetta sprang to the defense of the now demoralised agency he leads from behind and released memos contradicting Mrs. Pelosi's hysterical and unfounded accusations.

The issue is much more grave than how Nancy Pelosi's, selective memory, botox injections, and extensive plastic surgery, permit her to lie to us with a straight face. Her shrill posturing comes on the heels of an administration that has shown a disturbing and capricious willingness to release classified information except, of course, the information that would show how enhanced interrogations actually provided actionable intelligence. This, combined with Mrs. Pelosi's statements, reveals an attempt by the administration to discredit President Bush, Vice-President Cheney, and former high government officials who swiftly acted to protect our national security interests immediately after 9/11. It is part of a continuous program to make the Obama presidency look successful by trying to make the Bush presidency look like an unmitigated failure. This program, which now seems to be the only one ever likely to make the Obama presidency look successful, has assumed a greater urgency since former Vice-President Cheney started to speak out about how Obama's policies on national security have made us much less secure and therefore more vulnerable to attack.

If the Democrats have any integrity at all they will put a stop, at once, to the Obama administration playing partisan politics with the safety of the nation and they will pole-ax Nancy Pelosi before she costs not only the lives of some of our intelligence agents but also the last, few, meagre, strands of credibility the Democrats have left when it comes to protecting our national security.

Political Expediency Triumphs Over Integrity

2009-04-28T23:22:00.001-07:00

When Arlen Specter announced today that he had become a Democrat I was shocked. I thought he had done that years ago. With a grade of 44.47 from the American Conservative Union firmly under his sagging belt he is exposed as never having been a conservative let alone a Republican. The man is an imposter and now belongs to a party whose entire leadership is laced with the most egregious kind. He will feel quite at home there and will be welcomed with open arms. They can recognise a toady who has both feet firmly planted on the ladder of preferment when they see one. After all, for them, it's just like looking in the mirror.

Now Specter can take his seat in the front pew of the vast, decrepit, cathedral of "Blame & Apologise For America First" where well fed traitors lurk in the shadows. Some requirements of being a member of the congregation are to be able to speak out of both sides of your mouth at the same time, to betray & estrange our allies, to insult & diminish your country when travelling overseas, to encourage our enemies by releasing classified information about terrorist interrogations because soothing your conscience is more important than defending Americans, to place seemingly gold-plated chains around the ankles of all Americans trying to convince them that the government can do everything so much better than free markets when you know it can not, legitimise over 12 million illegal aliens and give them welfare benefits, because they will eventually vote for you, while over 8% of Americans are unemployed, & drown the country in an ocean of debt that will still be unpaid three generations from now. Arlen Specter will not have trouble with any of these requirements. In fact he may be over-qualified.

Specter is the best example of a politician who runs as a Republican but governs as a Democrat and why the Republican party has lost so many of its most devoted conservative supporters. As such the Republican party is better off without him. The senator can drone on about how his party has moved to the right and how he feels idealogically adrift within it, but we all know that his defection is entirely due to his correct calculation that he would be defeated in the 2010 Republican primary election in Pennsylvania. Specter's approving vote on the "stimulus bill" was the last straw for most Republicans who thought that voting for a bill he could not possibly have read that would grossly increase government debt, inevitably expand government bureaucracies, and spread the tentacles of government over every aspect of our national life, was a dreadful idea. At the time he justified this miserable vote by saying he was trying to avoid the kind of financial collapse that happened in 1929, but we now know that it was a substantial downpayment to those who would soon become his political masters, assure his political career, and guarantee his seniority on government committees. Thus does a weasel survive and prosper.

Rarely has such a grotesque venality been on such prominent display. The sooner the light goes out of that old turnip the better, although we can be grateful to him for something that hitherto was thought impossible. He's managed to make Barack Obama look as if he has scruples. Thanks Arlen, and don't let the door hit you in your false teeth or your false allegiance on the way out.

Overseas Contingency What?!!

2009-04-07T16:58:00.000-07:00

When word reached Osama bin Laden and the rest of his muslim terrorist pals that the government of the United States was now calling the "War on Terror" the "Overseas Contingency Operation" they must have laughed their socks off assuming they weren't waiting for them to be delivered by the Taliban laundry service located four caves to the left and three miles up the Khyber Pass where any self-respecting terrorist worthy of his Katyusha rocket goes to have his caftan sponged and pressed. It's a tradition, don't you know?

Many of us here were doubled up with laughter too but we were not bent over quite as far as Obama was last week as he supinely bowed down in front of a duplicitous, madrass funding, white robed despot of a Saudi oil king, in an obsequious and disgusting display of deference at the G2 meeting in London while earlier in the week his bulky wife found it inappropriate to curtsy to Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth.

Our laughter at the change in nomenclature ceased when we realised that this was a strong indication that since Obama is now unable to tell himself the truth and call the War on Terror what it is, he has now effectively abandoned any intention of winning it in spite of his rhetoric to the contrary. Mentally he has already surrendered while at the same time he makes the customary teleprompter speeches and goes through the motions of protecting us from harm. Two of Obama's cabinet appointments demonstrate that he no longer takes the War on Terror seriously.

Janet Napolitano, who as governor of Arizona talked tough but did nothing when it came to border control and the apalling violence on her state's border, last month told the German magazine "Der Spiegel" that as Secretary of State for Homeland Security she eschews the word "terrorism" in favor of the term "man caused-disaster". It is, she has decided, not as bellicose, more accomodating, and less likely to incite terrorism sorry, I mean man-caused disasters. Napolitano's very existence is an example of a man-caused disaster. She imperils us all.

Then there is pitiful Leon Panetta, Obama's Director of the CIA. Have him grow a mustache, give him a trilby and a trenchcoat and we have, in an instant, our very own version of Inspector Clouseau. Panetta, more than anyone else in the Clinton administration, was responsible for the disastrous appointment of John Deutch as Director of the CIA in 1995. Panetta has almost zero credentials in the area of intelligence and is as far removed from a professional spy-master as it is possible to be, but we are told he is a competent manager. Thus all of his Ts will be crossed and all of his Is will be dotted but he will lead a risk averse CIA that will produce little in the way of actionable intelligence as he demoralizes the brave men and women of our intelligence community. He is woefully inadequate. Any conversation with Janet Napolitano about our domestic security or with Leon Panetta about the gathering and analysis of intelligence is bound to subtract from the entire sum of human knowledge on those subjects. We are not being well served. Every moment they hold office we are in greater danger. Our enemies must be ecstatic.

If Obama's feeble terminology and his appointments of worthless and flabby appeasers to lead two of our most important security agencies have not alerted our enemies to his weakness and lack of real resolve to defeat them, then his recent statement in Turkey that "we are not nor ever will be at war with Islam" must have had them falling over themselves with glee. The 9/11 Commission Report clearly stated that although the islamic terrorists had been at war with us for decades we had not been at war with them. Since 9/11 it has slowly dawned on us that before George W. Bush became president, before the 9/11 attacks, before the war in Afghanistan, before the war in Iraq, during Democratic and Republican administrations alike, there were over 14 attacks on U.S. military bases, military personnel, embassies, airlines, and civilians. All of them, without exception, were carried out by fundamentalist islamic terrorists. All of them were part of a co-ordinated unrelenting islamic jihad against America and the West. It is a catastrophic mistake to think of them as isolated incidents unrelated to each other. There may be moderate muslims although we seldom hear from them, but there is no such thing as moderate Islam. That is why we never see the mullahs and other muslim leaders attempting to put their own house in order. The sooner we tell ourselves the truth about that single fact the better off we will be.

It is our national tragedy that sitting in the Oval Office we now have an arab/muslim inclined politician who is incapable of recognising those who wish to annihilate us even when they keep announcing their intention to do so. Who does Mr. Obama think has been attacking us for all these years, the Red Cross? Why does he think that going to an islamic country and announcing that America is not a christian country or a jewish country but a nation of citizens is somehow going to mollify their animosity towards us? This is pandering of the worst kind and an insult to our national heritage. He was not elected president to travel the world apologising for us and lie about the essential characteristics of our republic in what will turn out to be a futile attempt to coddle and appease those whose undiminished goal is the destruction of the United States and her allies. Clearly he has exchanged Teddy Roosevelt's big stick for Neville Chamberlain's umbrella. This should not come as a surprise to us. If Obama and the Democrats can't stand up to Fox News and are terrified of Rush Limbaugh how can we expect them to stand up to terrorists? Well, frankly we can't. They are practioners of "soft power". This stems from the firm belief that all of the world's problems are the fault of the United States and that she must make amends. Hence their ardent pursuit of diplomacy, the dispensation of aid, the redressing of alleged grievances, thus legitimizing them and causing more terror, and talking, lots and lots of talking.

Every law enforcement agency in this country confidently assumes that it is engaged in a "war on crime". If Barack Obama has his way this will soon be called a "national domestic operation" lest the criminals get upset.

Let us have an end to this nonsense. Let us call the "War on Terror" exactly that. Let us recognise our enemies, their goals, and the means at their disposal to achieve those goals. Let us frustrate their ambitions. Let us dispense with any ideas about a proportional response. Let us organise for victory. Let us eliminate the threat. Nowhere in the war manuals of Sun Tzu or von Clauswitz will you read the suggestion that you should love your enemies. What you will read is the categorical imperative that you kill and crush and defeat your enemies and keep doing so until they have had enough of it.

We should be alarmed but not surprised as Barack Obama continues his life-long habit of confusing activity with achievement. Thus do small men cast big shadows.

Just How Dumb Does Obama Think We Are?

2009-03-28T10:21:00.000-07:00

If anyone ever wondered what the application of Saul 'Red' Alinsky's "Rules For Radicals" would look like they would need to look no further than the Obama administration in action.

The recession is being used to advance Obama's long held core beliefs as well as the hitherto unfulfilled agenda of the left wing liberals in Congress. This crisis has been a positive boon to them. It is hard to grasp, but almost none of Obama's proposals are designed to actually work and when they fail their failure will be used as an excuse to nationalise our banks as well as other sectors of our economy. This is manipulation in its most cynical and dishonest form, but it is exactly what Saul Alinsky taught and what Obama, his faithful disciple, learned so well. Even Obama's recommended reduction in the tax deduction for charitable giving reflects his fundamental belief that only the government can or should help the poor. He wants to keep the impoverished directly dependent on the government and the Democratic Party for their welfare and thus make sure they vote for liberals in droves. If government spending was all it took be successful then Sweden would be the most prosperous country in the world and the Soviet Union would have won the Cold War. Even Obama is smart enough to know that when you are in a hole you should stop digging, but his real agenda is not to rescue our economy but rather to transform it into something unimaginable to the vast majority of the American people namely a massive, flabby, socialist, welfare, state where government dependency is the order of the day and central planning rules. Mr. Obama thinks that we are all too dumb to notice his stealth radicalism and the creeping socialism it engenders. He relies on his teleprompter prose and bland affability to disguise his subversion and his betrayal of our democracy.

While Turbo-Tax Tim Geithner has been busy with plans to turn the U.S. Treasury into an ATM for the corrupt United Nations, his proposal to expand the powers of the government to take over any corporation it deems necessary is just one example of the biggest power grabs in the history of the United States. This is more power than good men should want or bad men should have.

Socialism is now on its aggressive and soul-destroying march with all of its well proven pernicious consequences in tow, but it is slightly tempored by Churchill's observation that anyone who is not a socialist at twenty has no heart and anyone who is not a conservative at forty has no brains. Barack Obama is forty seven.

Obama-Excrementally Challenged

2009-03-18T10:40:00.000-07:00

At the end of February Paul Harvey, the veteran broadcaster, died at the age of 90. He was an American classic.

One of his humorous remarks was: "White House occupants come and go. They are just like diapers. They should be changed often and for the same reason."

Since Obama's inauguration the wisdom of Harvey's witticism becomes more apparent with every day that passes for this diaper is already bursting at the seams.

Double Standards?

2009-03-17T11:40:00.000-07:00

Last week His Fraudulency, Obama, overturned the existing ban on using federal funds to destroy human embryos to do stem cell research -- calling it, as you would only expect from an Obama spokesman, "sound scientific practice....instead of dogma in developing federal policy."

I look forward to the day when we can apply these same standards to Global Warming.

Comrade Obama

2009-03-02T21:03:00.001-08:00

If a man continually shouted "Fire!!" in a crowded theatre panicking its occupants, causing a stampede for the exits resulting in many injuries and deaths he would be arrested and prosecuted, but this is exactly what our mortician-in-chief, Barack Obama, has been doing with impunity ever since he took office. So far, he and his administration have proved to be fundamentally dishonest not only in their shrill and exaggerated description of our national condition but also in how they have described and characterised the remedies they intend to apply in order to save us.

The salient fact is that the "stimulus" bill and the "omnibus" bill and almost everything else coming out of the White House is a cover for the massive expansion of government moving us closer and much faster to the model of a European socialist country and he is using fear, exaggeration, and the ensuing panic to accomplish it. His extreme socialist agenda is much more dear to his heart than rescuing our economy. Understand that and you will be able to grasp why the thugocracy at ACORN, an organisation that is currently under 14 federal indictments for voter fraud in the last election, was going to be rewarded with around $4 billion in earmarks in the "stimulus" bill and why our airports have only been awarded $1 billion for improvements. Understand that and you will be able to grasp that his policies defy common sense and attempt to contradict the laws of economics let alone past fiscal experience and practice. Nevertheless, he is forging ahead with them and will keep doing so until we are in so much pain he will be able to get us to approve anything he wants or so he thinks. It is a tragedy that Obama is not going to veto a $410 billion bill with over 9000 earmarks and uphold one of his most frequent campaign promises. With the help of a servile mass media he has perfected Hitler's "Big Lie" theory into an art form. Comrade Barack Pinocchio Obama promised to reduce the federal budget deficit, but his spending proposals will literally double the entire national debt by 2014 and triple it by 2019. Now there's CHANGE you can believe in and you had better believe in it because it is going to ruin us all. Our children's grandchildren will not even get close to retiring this debt. His proposals will derange the relationship between the citizen and the state. His policies, such as they are, are wrong because they are unsustainable. Churchill once described socialism as standing in a bucket full of water and trying to pull it up over your head. It simply does not work. Along with political correctness, in all of its destructive forms, socialism merely succeeds in reducing us to connoisseurs of mediocrity.

Our ship of state was taking on water long before Comrade Obama took office and so he likes to remind us that he inherited a mess beyond all imagining and for which, of course, he is not responsible. However, he fails to point out that the catalyst of our current woes, the sub-prime mortgage crisis, was started by the Clinton administration when it imposed affirmative action standards on lending practices. For this, we have to thank Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Ted Kennedy, Joe Biden, and the woebegone Harry Reid. These are the ones Obama can thank for his inheritance. Frankly, they should all be in jail. Using Bush as a scapegoat is getting boring particularly when federal revenues actually reached all-time highs during his tenure. Anyone for tax cuts?! Anyone? Anyone at all?

During the election Joe Biden, our current vice-windbag-in-chief, told us that it was patriotic for us to pay more in taxes. One hopes that he did not come to this conclusion without the benefit of alcohol. Come to think of it, one hopes he didn't get to look the way he does without the benefit of alcohol either. Anyway, here's some news for you Joe, I've always paid my taxes but I would feel just as proud and just as patriotic for half the money.

In a financial debacle the ship of state requires not an inexperienced midshipman and marxist idealogue at the helm, but a captain of war. We don't have one. Even FDR, for all of his terrible miscalculations, wanted to save capitalism. Comrade Obama wants to destroy it. During the election and since the inauguration, global investors have been assessing Obama's agenda and the signals he has been telegraphing from atop his poop deck. Each new ridiculous cabinet appointment, each speech, each new proposal, each new political stunt in a career based on political stunts, has been digested to determine whether he would fulfill his solemn campaign promise to govern as a bipartisan moderate or assume the role of a big-government, far left radical and extremist. Well, the verdict is now in. We are suffering from the Obama Effect. The Dow has plunged to 6500 points evaporating over 30% in total market wealth. To be sure, the stock market is not the "economy" but it is its barometer. Since Obama won the election the barometer's needle has been spinning out of control as it witnessed the worst January in history and the worst February since 1933, that's 76 years for Timothy Geithner who seems to have trouble with his calculations.

Clearly Obama is making a bad situation much worse. The recession that started in 2007, the financial shocks, and the explosion of the housing bubble, have all been taken into consideration for some time now. The stock market, by its very nature, looks forwards not backwards. Its performance is based on its assessment of where the economy is going. The Dow is more concerned with what lies in the future under Comrade Obama than with what happened under President Bush. It understands when a politician is far more interested in the redistribution of wealth than in the creation of it. Now, the stock market is not perfect but it tends to be the most immediate barometer of current and future economic realities. It is becoming more and more clear that Obama himself is inflicting new wounds upon the national and global economies for he has set upon the most radical upheaval of the relationship between government and the economy in the history of any democracy and is responsible for the first crisis of globalisation. Worse still, he uses beguiling rhetoric to dupe his audience and to camouflage the enormous disparity between what he says and the aspirations ostensibly entertained. In short, there is a complete disconnect between his words and his deeds. He is an articulate incompetent. He is a liar, a fake, an imposter, and the most egregious of mountebanks.

One is left with the ardent hope that some day very soon, after having replaced the bust of Winston Churchill in the Oval Office for one of Vladimir Lenin and while wandering along a corridor absorbed in reading his favorite book, "Das Capital", for the twentieth time, Obama will fall down one of the White House elevator shafts never to be seen or heard of again. Meanwhile, we are left with the sinking realisation that Comrade Obama, commissar Biden, the entire cabinet and its apparatchiks, are all noxious toads perched upon the nostrils of the great American eagle. If left unchecked, during the next two years, they will do to this great country what it took the Roman Empire a hundred years of enjoyable decadence to accomplish. That should please George Soros, David Geffen, the divine Oprah, and other members of the fulsome glitterati, but I suspect Warren Buffett, now poorer by about $25 billion, is having second thoughts. Well, you can't pick winners all the time, Warren, but you've still got over $40 billion left! Don't blow it on supporting Comrade Obama in 2012. By that time he will have gone down as the worst president we have ever had if, in the meantime and as a result of his policies, he doesn't go down as the last one.

The Arrogance Of A Moribund Political Dynasty

2009-02-04T09:31:00.000-08:00

"We think it unwise to shed too much light upon magic", Queen Victoria was said to have remarked when being urged by ministers of the Crown to appear more regularly in public. If only Caroline Kennedy had heeded Her Majesty's advice she would not have been exposed as someone who is incapable of expressing her thoughts in the form of a compound sentence without it being interspersed with innumerable "you knows" and all too frequent "ums". What, one wonders, is Tina Fey going to do with this rich harvest of inarticulate expression ripe for parody? I, for one, can hardly wait.

To the jaundiced eye the Kennedy mystique has always borne the signs of external direction as if there was some master version from which large dollops of confection could be scooped up and vigorously applied as necessary, particularly when it is required to disguise the Kennedy sense of entitlement and its accompanying arrogance.

At last, the master version is turning yellow. The manuscript is fading as its endless pages split and curl upwards disfiguring the print making it, in parts, illegible. In Caroline's case one realises now why her books were co-authored. Unlike her father she didn't have the brilliant Ted Sorensen to write everything for her, but that didn't stop her from trying to revive the political fortunes of her clan which, thankfully, have sunk surprisingly low in spite of all the deferential adulation which they consider to be their rightful due. However, it is not all entirely their fault. Over the years, the Kennedy worshipers have diligently seen to it that myth has been piled upon myth; criminality forgiven; outrageous behaviour dismissed; sheer incompetence excused; and the most awful venality ignored. And so do they progress.

Anyone acquainted with the Kennedys is well aware that the legendary image of them so assiduously propigated and cultivated throughout the years, and sanctified by blood so monstrously spilled, bears little relation to reality. With successive generations of Kennedys the gap between the two has been steadily widening to the point where it is now a positive chasm. Thus, when the light was shed upon Caroline it proved that old Queen Victoria was right after all. In an instant the magic fled along with her determined smile. Doubtless her sense of entitlement remains intact although righteously unfulfilled in her unseemly pursuit of an unearned appointment to the Senate of the United States.

60 MINUTES Becomes Part Of The Palestinian Myth Machine

2009-01-31T18:34:00.000-08:00

Last Sunday's 60 MINUTE report by Bob Simon ignored not only the historical context of the problems in Israel, a country that has been under constant attack since its creation in 1948 and is surrounded by arab countries that seek its ruin, but also the more than 5000 rockets fired by Hamas, a terrorist organisation, into Israel during the last six years. These attacks went unanswered by Israel until recently and when finally Israel did respond it did all that it could to avoid civilian casualties in spite of Hamas's cowardly policy of using their own civilian population as human shields. It seems the only thing Hamas likes better than jewish casualties is palestinian ones so they can arouse, manipulate, & influence the sympathy of the so-called international community, an increasingly spineless group seemingly intent on legitimizing a completely fabricated cause.

The accusation that Israel is an apartheid state is entirely scurrilous. Is Mr. Simon aware of the countless and constant palestinian acts of terror against Israel? Does Israel not have the right to defend herself? Did he not notice how the palestinians and much of the muslim world rejoiced in the streets when we were attacked on 9/11? Why does Mr. Simon not ask what Hamas is doing with the over $200 million in aid we have sent them in the last 12 months? "Why are we sending it?", he should ask. Better still, why does he not broadcast a segment inquiring what has happened to all the aid money that the disgraceful pedophile, Yasser Arafat, embezzeled during his tenure as chairman of the PLO? Mr. Simmon, it seems, is unable to distinguish between the attacker and the attacked. To paraphrase the late William F. Buckley, to attempt to establish a moral equivalency between those who wish to destroy Israel and Israel herself is to say that the man who pushes an old lady in front of an approaching bus and the man who pushes an old lady out of the way of an approaching bus are just two men who like pushing old ladies around!

Mr. Simon did himself and us a disservice when he abandoned his journalistic ethics, if indeed they exist any more, by acting as such an obvious and supine apologist for Hamas and the so-called Palestinian Authority which, by the way, is just the terrorist PLO masquerading as a government incase he hasn't noticed. Instead of informing us he sought to prejudice us against the state of Israel that longs to live in peace. After all this time Mr. Simon still fails to grasp that if tomorrow the terrorists put down their weapons, the next day there would be no more fighting. However, if tomorrow Israel put down her weapons, the next day there would be no more Israel. Grasp that and you have grasped the essence of this conflict. Iran and her proxies Hamas, Hezbollah, and the PLO, wish to destroy Israel. We must take them at their word but we should do all we can to help Israel frustrate their evil, genocidal, ambitions for their ambitions are limited only by their current lack of a nuclear weapon. The inability to distiguish between the fire and the fire department is one of the first signs of an appeaser. Shame on you Bob. MSNBC awaits or perhps you should just hand in your credentials and join the Obama administration. Most of your pals are already there.

Hail To The Chief

2009-01-20T16:04:00.000-08:00

On the morning of September 11th. 2001 when we were attacked by muslim terrorists it was America's good fortune to have George W. Bush as President of the United States for he realised at once that a dagger had been plunged into the very heart of our republic and immediately began to plan a devastating response, something for which the devotees of islamic terror had neither expected nor prepared.

During the years that followed, while many of those who today have just assumed high national office bolted and ran for cover after voting their assent to what had been decided, President Bush held our torch aloft often alone and always at great political and personal cost. He was criticised, vilified, satirised, mocked, and lampooned but he never wavered. He was deaf to the howling of the ferocious mob. He did his duty. He led when the hypocrites, the faithless, and the timid, deserted the nation and its soldiers in the field of battle. He kept the faith. He kept the honor of the Oval Office. He kept us safe.

"When the goodman mends his armor,
And trims his helmet's plume;
When the goodwife's shuttle merrily
Goes flashing through the loom;
With weeping and with laughter
Still is the story told,
How well Horatius kept the bridge
In the brave days of old."

Hail to the Chief.

**************************************

Who Benefits?

2008-11-12T17:30:00.000-08:00

Surveying the current financial crisis it is difficult to know at whom one should be the most angry. Democrats, of course, suffer from no such difficulty. At the beginning of the crisis they mounted their high horse, an animal they always seem to have close at hand, and rode it down Wall Street firing their shots at bankers, lenders, insurance companies, and almost everyone else who came into their sights. However, if they had taken more accurate aim they would have blasted themselves right out of the saddle and straight back into the Potomac where they could float down the river and into the sea with the rest of Washington's refuse.

If our politicians had the real interests of the country at heart then there would have been neither pork nor earmarks in the $700 billion rescue package. Is there still wonder that the approval rating of Congress is in the single digits? Do we really expect our bloated representatives to implement policies of fiscal probity? With all the political posturing and accusations flying around what makes us think that we do not now have government of the people, by the lobbyists, for the lobbyists?

Our current woes have long been in the making. They started with the Carter administration, with the Community Reinvestment Act, and gained momentum over the years with threats from the Clinton Justice Department and gangster tactics from ACORN, all to force lenders to lend where third parties wanted them to lend thereby going where angels feared to tread. Eventually greed took over. Greed on the part of borrowers whose financial circumstances and credit history made them eligible only for sub-prime loans that were risky for both them and their lenders; greed on the part of the lenders themselves who realised that misguided government regulation had provided a market to be exploited; and last, but by no means least, greed on the part of the politicians who expected the millions of votes of sub-prime borrowers who had now been granted the American dream of home-ownership by government bullying as opposed to earning it by personal thrift and responsibility. It is not possible to bring affirmative action standards to lending practices without courting the kind of disaster from which we are now suffering.

The architects of this disaster Barney Frank, Christopher Dodd, Maxine Waters, et al, are all on video-taped Congressional hearings intoning against Republican requests for more regulation in the cases of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as far back as 2004. However, they take absolutely no responsibility for their actions preferring to blame President Bush, Republican deregulation, corruption on Wall Street, and just about anything else that will deflect attention from their own egregious venality, stupidity, and guilt. Since hypocrisy is the lingua franca of Capitol Hill we can not expect them to relinquish office out of shame. It is the People who should give them the Order Of The Boot for they have conspired against their country casting wisdom and caution aside all for partisan political gain and personal advancement while ushering in the greatest national financial crisis in over 70 years. We have been betrayed. During his country's greatest crisis in its entire history Leo Amery, in 1940, turned on Chamberlain's Treasury Bench, and speaking for Great Britain, he lashed them with the words of Oliver Cromwell who had bellowed them at the Rump Parliament almost three centuries before: "You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God,go!" Who will speak for America now, Barack Obama? Somehow, I think not. That would be a CHANGE for which there is but a dismal HOPE.

According to the latest conventional wisdom, touted by the mainstream media, Mr. Obama has labored and brought forth a team of brilliant economists to resolve our economic difficulties. However, it is not brilliance but the formulation and execution of the correct policies which will be our salvation. Central Planning has long been dead as an economic theory but it is still alive and well in the liberal psyche. The Democrats are expert at exploiting crises to expand the scope of government into finance and industry and now it looks as if we are getting close to nationalising the domestic automobile companies as well. No crisis should be let go to waste. Thus all forms of government dependency are multiplied and we move closer and closer to the kind of failed socialist state that existed in Great Britain prior to the election of Margaret Thatcher. If the Democrats and their fellow travellers think that their recent electoral success is a wholesale endorsement of all their policies, past and present, at every level of government, then they are basking in a false sense of confidence and superiority that will surely lead to their ruin but not, alas, before they ruin America in the process. Let us hope that we will not be like India. As she began to emerge from decades of poverty and economic inactivity due to the failure of central planning, one member of the government was heard to say: "It was India's curse to have been blessed with so many brilliant economists."

To avoid this epitaph all the brilliant members of Mr. Obama's Treasury should be treated to a copy of "David Copperfield" written by Charles Dickens in about 1850. There, they will discover the perpetually impecunious Mr. Micawber and should heed his sound observation that surpasses most of the fiscal prognostications heard around Capitol Hill these days: "Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds, nineteen shillings and sixpence, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds and sixpence, result misery."

The Illusion of Hope Triumphs

2008-11-04T13:45:00.000-08:00

Tonight, with the election of Barack Hussein Obama, a man whose name can actually be written in arabic without having to ponder the correct spelling, America suffered a grievous blow. This vote was an unprecedented act of national political suicide and a vengeful self-inflicted wound that has cut to the very core of our democratic constitutional republic. In the meantime, this one-teleprompter-speech-wonder can make all the customary and reassuring declarations he wants but as this national tragedy unfolds the people will not discover who has been elected until after he enters the Oval Office.

To paraphrase Melanie Phillips of the British journal, The Spectator: a Marxist radical who all his life has been mentored by, sat at the feet of, worshiped with, befriended, endorsed the philosophy of, funded and been in turn funded, politically promoted and supported by a nexus comprising black power anti-white racists, jew-haters, revolutionary Marxists, unrepentant former terrorists, subversives, and a convicted Chicago fraud artist and influence peddler, is now the President Elect of the United States.

The rout of our democracy by a combination of Marxist ideologues and arab cash is now well underway. Our republic is about to be subverted from within. Obama will preside over the greatest expansion of the federal government since the New Deal tilting it farther to the extreme left and towards the model of a failed european socialist state with all the concomitant dependence on government welfare. The current financial crisis will be used as an excuse for government to spread its tentacles over every aspect of our national life. He has already displayed a disturbing inclination towards suppressing criticism which will continue with the imposition of the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" on broadcasters. His tax policies and the financing required for his universal health-care program, if unaltered, will plunge us into a depression. His party of ideologue obstructionists will prohibit off-shore drilling. He will give amnesty to millions of illegal aliens who will produce little, swell our welfare rolls but thereafter vote for him in droves. His misplaced concern for the welfare of imprisoned terrorists and his desire to weaken our domestic intelligence services will imperil us all. He will sell the very soul of our country, and the security of our allies, to those who seek our ruin in return for promises of amity and the incentive of further negotiations. As this flabby, crowd-pleasing, appeaser, leads us into the long dark shadow of the gallows he will behave like some dithering old nanny, accustomed to the best of households, urging hooligans of extreme vulgarity to behave themselves. They will take no notice for they have already taken his measure. As a result we will likely lose an entire American city to an act of terror and face the real possibility of a nuclear war in the Middle East.

The electorate has cast its historic vote more in protest against George W. Bush than in favor of Barack Obama. It is a vote cast out of pure emotion and not one cast using any analytical thought or intellectual rigor. It is a national disgrace committed with the enthusiastic connivance of a sycophantic media. To repeat what was said under slightly different circumstances, it is the most disgusting political event since Caligula appointed his horse to the Roman senate.

"We are pressed but not crushed, perplexed but not in despair, persecuted but not abandoned, struck down, but not destroyed." II Corinthians 4:8-9.

A Political Trojan Horse

2008-10-23T21:56:00.000-07:00

With an unpopular president, an unpopular war, an economy in turmoil, the unprecedented, unenquiring, support and sycophantic adulation of a supine media, Senator Obama should be galloping down Pennsylvania Avenue about to demand the keys to the White House. As it is, he limps to victory. This suggests that the Democrats, win or lose, have backed the wrong horse. It also suggests just how much the electorate are distrustful of him. There is ample reason for their distrust and it strikes at the very core of why he is viewed by so many as the Stealth Candidate. Wrapped up tightly in the banner of the Democratic party, moving from the extreme left and closer to the center on every issue, now wearing a flag pin in his lapel, and covering his heart with his hand when the national anthem is sung, trying to distance himself from his dangerous, shameful, intimate, long-term, associations and collaborations with Bill Ayres, Jeremiah Wright, Father Pflagler, Louis Farrakhan, Rashid Khalidi, and ACORN, a motley crew of traitors, terrorists, radicals, and Marxists, if ever there was one, he has attempted to disguise himself as a traditional old-style Democrat and champion of the people as he campaigns to get himself robed in purple and scramble into the imperial box. The only way he can get elected is to divert any focus away from his radical agenda and his precious axis of scumbags and to appear as if he is the very embodiment of American values thus seeming more presidential, more reassuring, much more electable. It's a trap but thus far, thanks to his own obfuscations and a deplorable lack of scrutiny by the mainstream media, his charade has been quite successful. To suggest that Obama actually embraces the centrist policies he has been touting since his nomination is to believe that he has undergone a conversion only exceeded in its miraculous quality by that of St. Paul's on the road to Damascus.

Whenever the subject of Obama's associations is raised we are told that we should concentrate on the issues and that questions about his associations are irrelevant, are too "personal", and that he is being subjected to guilt by association. The liberals get offended when inquiries are made and questions are raised about these associations, but it is indeed a severe disappointment that Obama himself is not more offended by Wright and Ayres. The reason these dreadful associations are of vital relevance, however, is because they have informed his judgement and his judgement has led him to formulate policies which he will seek to implement if elected. What, may I ask, is more relevant than that? His guilt is one of active collaboration and alliance not merely one of close association.

Due to these collaborations it is highly unlikely that Obama could obtain the necessary clearance for a position in his own Secret Service security detail. Pending such clearance though he wishes to be President of the United States.

Jeremiah Wright is a ranting racist loon whose rhetorical flatulence (a condition from which Obama himself is by no means immune) extolling the virtues of Marxist based and racist black liberation theology, almost sank Obama's campaign. Obama called this man his mentor and with his family sat quietly in the pews of his church listening to Wright's anti-American and anti-Christian vitriol for over 17 years. Obama donated money to the United Trinity Church. He was married by Wright. His children were baptised by Wright. The title of one of his dismal books, "The Audacity of Hope", is taken from one of Wright's so-called sermons. This is much more than an "association". Barack Obama, for all those years, had been listening to a message which resonated within him and that is why he didn't stand up, speak up, and walk out. He dumped Wright only when Wright became a political embarrassment, but you can bet Wright's phone number is still in Obama's rolodex if not on his speed dial.

Around 1969 Bill Ayres became a leading member of the Weather Underground, a domestic terrorist group that declared war on the government of the United States. He has admitted to bombing New York City Police headquarters in 1970, the Capitol Building in 1971 and the Pentagon in 1972. In 1970 Ayres and Dohrn went "underground" when a nail bomb that their pals were assembling exploded in a Greenwich Village townhouse killing three of their terrorist chums and prematurely dispatching them to a well deserved grave. In 1980 Ayres and Dohrn, by then a married couple, surrendered to authorities. Ayres escaped prosecution when it was discovered that the evidence against him was obtained by the FBI using illegal wire-taps. On hearing of his good fortune he mockingly remarked: "Guilty as hell, free as a bird, America's a great country!" His wife Bernardine Dohrn, a member of the terrorist group, served time in jail for failing to testify against ex Weather Underground member, Susan Rosenberg, involved in the robbery of a Brink's armored car during which two police officers were killed. Rosenberg was convicted in 1984 and after serving 16 years of a 58 year sentence she was pardoned by Bill Clinton on his way out of the Oval Office, thanks for that one Bill. Later Dohrn earned a law degree, but being a convicted felon she was prohibited from actually practising law. Nevertheless, she did get a job at the Chicago law firm of Sidley Austin where Michelle Robinson, Obama's future wife, was a law associate and it was through that firm that Dohrn hired Barack Obama as an intern during one of his vacations from Harvard Law School. This is how Barack and Michelle Obama first met.

Ayers is currently a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, College of Education. His interests include teaching for social justice urban educational reform, narrative and interpretive research, children in trouble with the law, and related issues.
He began his career in primary education while an undergraduate, teaching at the Children’s Community School (CCS), a project founded by a group of students and based on the Summerhill method of education. After leaving the underground, he earned an M.Ed from Bank Street College in Early Childhood Education (1984), an M.Ed from Teachers College, Columbia University in Early Childhood Education (1987) and an Ed.D from Teachers College, Columbia University in Curriculum and Instruction (1987).
He has edited and written many books and articles on education theory, policy and practice, and has appeared on many panels and symposia. Thus does he progress, fawned over by the glitterati, unmolested by the authorities, tolerated and admired as a mere gadfly by the Democratic Chicago politicians because he serves their voter base, and safe from the criminal prosecution he escaped on a legal technicality.

Consider this: if Timothy McVeigh, the domestic terrorist and Oklahoma City bomber, had been incompetent; had used fewer explosives and had not been caught, convicted, and executed, he might well, at this very moment, be a professor at the University of Illinois getting ready to cast his vote for Barack Obama. We will never know what a fine dedicated educator and pillar of the community we lost when McVeigh was strapped to the gurney and duly dispatched to the bowels of Hell where, no doubt, he confidently awaits the arrival of Bill Ayres and his gruesome wife.

As Dick Morris has already pointed out, Obama was clearly dissembling ( i.e. lying ) when he told us that Ayers is "just a guy who lives in my neighborhood." Ayres hosted a "get to know the candidate" soiree for Obama in his living room prior to Obama's election to the Illinois senate. In 1997 Obama praised Ayers's book, " A Kind and Just Parent: Children of the Juvenile Court", in the Chicago Tribune. Obama sat on two boards with Ayers, the Woods Foundation Board and the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge(CAC). They have given speeches together at various functions in Chicago. After Walter Annenberg's foundation offered several hundred million dollars to American public schools in the mid 90s, William Ayres applied for $50 million for Chicago. The purpose of this application was to secure funds to " raise political consciousness " in Chicago's public schools. The trustees of Walter Annenberg's foundation would have been mortified if they had known exactly how their money was going to be wasted, but Ayers and Obama are addicted to foundation money and can't wait to bestow their largesse on their self-serving, useless, projects. After the grant was awarded Ayres's group chose Obama to distribute the money. Between 1995 and 1999 Obama distributed $50 million and raised another $60 million from other civic groups to augment it. In doing so, he was following Ayers's admonition to grant the funds to "external" organisations like American Community Organisations for Reform Now (ACORN) to pair with schools and conduct programs to radicalize the students and politicize them. Reading, mathematics, and science, achievement tests counted for little in the Chicago Annenberg Challenge grants, but the schools' success in preaching a radical political agenda to hapless students determined how much money they received. How lovely and so progressive and just what the children need to know. This intimate collaboration with Ayers led to the only executive or administrative experience in Obama's life and Obama saw to it that ACORN received over $200,000.00 from the CAC. Recently Obama gave over $800,000.00 from his campaign funds to subsidize ACORN's activities but he tried to disguise the donation when he gave it to a subsidiary of ACORN. ACORN is under investigation in 13 states for voter registration fraud and has already been convicted of it elsewhere. Five of their employees in Washington state are currently serving prison terms. Obama is on record as promising ACORN a role in crafting his policy agenda.

Rashid Khalidi is the Edward Said Professor of Arab Studies at Columbia University and Director of the Middle East Institute of Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs. He was born in the United States of a Palestinian father and a Lebanese mother. His wife, Mona, is the former President of the Arab American Action Network which received a grant of $75,000.00 from the Woods Foundation when Obama was on its board. Rashid Khalidi did work for WAFA, the Palestinian news agency, in the 1980s and later served as an advisor to the Palestinian delegation during the Madrid Conference of 1991. He refers to the foundation of Israel as a "catastrophe". He was a strong supporter of the PLO when it was officially designated as a terrorist organization and has written many articles of an anti-Israel nature and is very critical of America's support of Israel. When he was leaving the Chicago area Obama made one of the presentations in praise of Khalidi at a farewell dinner in 2003.The dinner was a celebration of the Chicago area Palestinian community and Obama's remarks alluded to the numerous dinners that he had enjoyed in the home of the Khalidis. Addressing the mostly Palestinian American crowd Khalidi lavished praise on Obama and assured them: "You will not have a better Senator under any circumstances". Khalidi, as well as the late, unlameneted, Edward Said, were intimates of the embezzling, murdering, terrorist, and avid molester of young boys, Yasser Arafat.

Tony Rezko, a Syrian immigrant and Chicago property developer, was recently convicted on 16 of the 24 fraud and bribery charges against him. Attired in his orange jump suit he currently awaits sentencing. His dealings with Barack Obama go back to 1990 when Rezko offered Obama a job and his donations to Obama started in 1995 when Obama declared his candidacy for the Illinois state senate.

Rezko built part of his fortune by exploiting the black community that Obama would come to serve in the state senate, and by milking government programs meant to benefit black-owned businesses. But Obama took Rezko's money even after the businessman was sued by the city of Chicago for failing to heat his low-income apartments, and even after Rezko was caught using a black business partner to obtain a minority set-aside for a fast-food franchise at O'Hare Airport. Obama seems to have derived some material benefit from his friendship with Rezko. During his first year in the U.S. Senate, flush with the book advance for "The Audacity of Hope," Obama and his wife decided to trade up from a condo to a bigger, more secure home in Kenwood, a South Side neighborhood of turreted, balconied piles. They found a $1.65 million house with four fireplaces, a wine cellar and a black wrought-iron fence, just the sort of place suitable for a champion of the people dedicated to "change". The doctor who lived there also owned the vacant lot next door and, although the properties were listed separately, wanted to sell both at the same time. Despite their new income, the Obamas could not have afforded both parcels. The Obamas closed on their house in June 2005. On the same day, Rezko's wife, Rita, purchased the vacant lot for $625,000. They later sold a portion of the lot to the Obamas, for $104,500, so the family could expand its yard. The Rezkos then paid $14,000 to build a fence along the property line. As long as Rezko was only under investigation, Obama was willing to do business with him. But then Rezko committed the fixer's biggest sin: He got indicted and got his name in the papers. After that, the friendship cooled. Obama has donated $157,835 in Rezko-linked contributions to charity and has called the real estate deal "boneheaded", but he still lives in that house and he still has the position and the power Rezko helped him attain.

There is a disturbing pattern here. Obama consistently funneled money from the foundations of which he was either Chairman or a board member to radical, left-wing, political causes that would support him and would increase his voter base. When he was not doing that he was arranging to give a million dollars of public money to the hospital where his wife worked and then, coincidentally, the hospital increased her sinecure salary by 160%. At that rate it would take less than five years for the entire million dollars to end up as part of Michelle Obama's compensation and she still thinks America is a "mean country". Obama's accredited mentor was Jeremiah Wright a racist loon and an admirer of another racist loon, Fr. Pflagler, and an admirer of another racist loon, Louis Farrakhan. Bill Ayres, the man who gave Obama the only executive job he ever had in his life and with whom he hobnobbed in the parlors of the Chicago elite is a disgusting, unapologetic, domestic terrorist. Rashid Khalidi, a proud admirer of the PLO in all its grisly forms, an associate of Yasser Arafat, and a contributor to Obama's campaign fund is someone who Obama describes as having "challenged my assumptions". Ah, great minds think alike. Tony Rezko, Obama's biggest donor in Chicago, is on his way to the sandstone Hilton and we haven't even scratched the surface of Obama's Marxist mentor in Hawaii, Frank Marshall Davis, or Obama's reverence for Saul "Red" Alinsky.

As a disciple of Saul "Red" Alinsky, Obama has followed his master's modus operandi with cunning and the fervor of a true believer. In Rules for Radicals, Alinsky outlined his strategy of organizing when he wrote:

"There's another reason for working inside the system. Dostoevski said that taking a new step is what people fear most. Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution....."

Alinsky codified and wrote a clear set of rules for community organizing. His rules for radicals are now used as key tactics to learn in the training of new community organizers. Alinsky was a critic of mainstream liberalism which he considered passive and ineffective. In Rules for Radicals, he argued that the most effective means are whatever will achieve the desired ends, and that an intermediate end for radicals should be democracy because of its relative ease to work within to achieve other ends of social justice.

If you can now recognize at last his clear preference for America-haters and venal influence peddlers then, at a stroke, you have grasped the pure essence and core beliefs of Barack Obama. They are not the beliefs or the principles on which America was founded. They are diametrically opposed to every American value and every fine hope of what America aspires to be. Barack Obama is the most synthetically manufactured and stage-managed candidate of our time. He may have been born in Hawaii and he may be an American citizen, but he is not what he represents himself to be on any level. He is not one of us. He is an imposter and that is why we oppose him with every fibre of our being; that is why he deserves our enmity; that is why he is a clear and present danger to our constitutional republic; that is why we will never cease to fight against him; that is why he is a political Trojan horse; and that is why his candidacy is the greatest fraud in modern American political history.

Obama complains that he would be another three points ahead in the polls if it was not for Fox News, but where would he be without the annointment and uncritical adulation of CBS, NBS, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, and, what has become the most dishonest newspaper in the entire country, The New York Times? Real journalism would demand a curiosity and intellectual interest in really finding out about this awful man instead of intentionally giving him a pass. The media's lack of impartiality and failure to investigate this political Pinocchio is a gross dereliction of their duty and a national disgrace. It would help to shed some light into the mind and ideology of Barack Obama who has a very serious habit of keeping his true ideology a very closely guarded secret, especially from the very people he is asking to vote for him. Alas, the mainstream media has no interest in providing this sort of illumination.

You can send him money from George Soros, MoveOn.org, Warren Buffett, David Geffen, Oprah Winfrey, and God alone knows from how many muslim countries that seek our ruin. ACORN can stuff the ballot boxes for him. You can bathe him, powder him, dress him up in designer suits and put him in front of a teleprompter to make the most vacuous platitude ridden speeches, delivered with a condescending air of Harvard hauteur, that could not have been more enthusiastically received if he had been using Esperanto, but he is still the same old go-along-to-get-along party hack and toady from the corrupt, Mayor Daly, Chicago political machine. If it's "Change" you want why would you pick someone like that? Nevertheless, served up on a silver platter he is, but it is garnished with the flimsiest of condiments that are rotten to the core. With a gathering resentment we become aware that we are the targets of an enormous confidence trick involving the cynical manipulation of racial guilt and utopian ideals along with the pervasive suggestion that we are all victims in need of government rescue. As the resentment turns into anger and as the facade is gradually peeled away we find ourselves staring at the same old marxist, left-wing, tottering edifice duly shored up by the faded, destructive, doctrinaire, liberalism, that has failed so often in the past.

If John McCain fails to win the presidency he will have been defeated not by Barack Obama but by Dow Jones and a craven, sychophantic, and blatantly biased, media. Our financial crisis has pushed the election from the front page diverting the attention of the electorate away from the defining issue of our time and the one on which Obama will betray us all: radical, fundamentalist, islamic, terror. This is why they no longer seem concerned with the imposter or the party that cast the most cynical vote in recent history when they voted to withdraw funding from our troops in Iraq while those troops were still in mortal danger thereby demonstrating that they preferred partisan politcal victory over national security. We used to have a name for people like that. We used to call them traitors. Where is the outrage?!!

Joe The Plumber

2008-10-19T14:58:00.000-07:00

Has anyone noticed how many guard dogs in the Fourth Estate, who were uninterested in examining Obama's collaborations with Bill Ayres, Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko et al, have engaged in a frenzied investigation of Joe The Plumber's bona fides? I knew we could depend on them to protect the public from disinformation by their searching questions and penetrating insight: Is his name really Joe; Is he really a plumber; does he owe any back taxes; does he have a business license; can he spell "plumber" in capital letters? Surely he must be a member of the Klu Klux Klan or, worse still, a member of the Republican Party. This warrants the full glare of public scrutiny and perhaps even a Congressional investigation. The public needs to know!

All poor Joe did was to ask Obama a simple but tough question, something the mainstream media hasn't been able to do for two years. The answer given by Obama revealed that, as many of us have been saying from the start, he is a doctrinaire left-wing socialist with marxist roots who is more interested in the redistribution of wealth than he is in the creation of it. This inadvertant revelation and untimely confession has sparked off a firestorm within Obama's campaign which, with the aid of their devotees in the media, is trying to discredit someone who they think should be part of their base but is unimpressed with hyperbole and the hypnotized, adoring, mob. They feel betrayed and even thwarted.

Profits offend Obama unless of course they flow to him via crooked land deals and political contributions from his convicted Syrian pal and influence peddler, Tony Rezko, or directly from the royalties of his two dismal books in which case, no doubt, "spreading the money around" would seem too much like excessive socialist indulgence.

Shame On You, Colin

2008-10-19T09:55:00.000-07:00

In tones as confident, as hushed, and as serious, as the ones he used when stating the case for war in Iraq, Colin Powell finally endorsed Barack Obama this morning.

Listening to him trying to justify his position one felt the same way as one might as if one had just heard St. Peter making a favorable reference to Lucifer. But it was not St. Peter to whom we were listening, it was Judas Iscariot. It profits a man not to gain the whole world and suffer the loss of his own soul, but for a job in the Obama administration, oh dear. When Powell described Obama as a patriotic American dedicated to the welfare of the country he showed that he is just one of many who have fallen prey to the biggest political public relations hoax of the last hundred years. Just as in "Alice In Wonderland", we have passed through the looking glass where black is white and white is black.

Powell mentioned Obama's intellectual vigor but conveniently said nothing about the candidate's intellectual rigor, let alone his intellectual honesty. He described Obama as a "transformational figure". Doubtless this is due to Obama's ability to transform fantasy into fiction into policy initiatives...abracadabra and hey presto! Powell did not explain how electing the foremost liberal in the U.S. Senate and the third most liberal in the U.S. Senate would be good for the welfare of the country. Perhaps he meant he thinks it would be good for those who are on welfare in this country. It's not quite the same thing, of course.

He went on to imply that McCain's choice of Sarah Palin was a cynical one, but what could have been more cynical than Obama's choice of Biden? At a stroke, Obama secured himself against any possible assassination attempt. With the exception of Bosnia, Biden has been wrong on almost every foreign policy issue since his election to the Senate 36 years ago. He brings an entirely new meaning to the term "artificial intelligence" and whenever he speaks he proves the wisdom of the adage that silence is indeed golden.

Throughout Powell's interview one had the faint sense that John McCain was paying for Powell's resignation as Secretary of State and that there was still a simmering resentment not only towards the Bush Administration but also towards his own weakness in the conduct of our foreign affairs. One could not help detecting his air of bitterness thinly disguised as it may have been by his air of gravitas.

Although disappointing, Powell's endorsement of Obama comes as no real surprise but Henry Kissinger's endorsement of John McCain more than makes up for it.

The Fourth Estate

2008-09-13T15:24:00.000-07:00

If Barack Obama had received the same level of intense scrutiny from the Press during the last nineteen months that Sarah Palin has received during the last two weeks he would have been run out of town on a rail and consigned to the political graveyard where all teleprompter Pinocchios deserve to be interred. Never has there been a presidential candidate less qualified, less experienced, less adequate, with so many bad ideas, and deeply troubling long-term associations, been proferred by a major political party and so mindlessly and so obsequiously annointed by the liberal media.

Whenever a Republican woman or a black Republican is appointed to high national office the Democrats immediately realise that their self-appointed status as champions of the people has suffered a devastating blow. It robs them of this threadbare legitimacy and exposes them as posturing advocates of enlightened social progress. They, and their supporters in the liberal press, recognise that Sarah Palin is not only a mortal threat to them in this election but also in many more elections to come, hence the unprecedented level of hostility towards her.

The late Malcolm Muggeridge, himself an extraordinarily accomplished journalist and writer, once noted that journalists are like sharks following an ocean liner feeding off the waste it discharges and hoping for someone to fall overboard, from time to time, in order to provide a positive feast. He went on to say that in order to be successful as a journalist one has to make one's way to the front page or the television screen the ways to which are often paved with bad intentions. We have had ample evidence of this in recent months. Chris Matthews telling us that when he heard Obama's speech on race relations in America it made his leg tingle, is one of the most egregious examples of sycophancy one can imagine. One wonders what his reaction would have been after hearing Martin Luther King's "I Have A Dream" speech, or after reading The Sermon On The Mount, Lincoln's second inaugural address, the speeches of Edmund Burke, or almost any of Churchill's wartime speeches. Doubtless his entire body would be convulsed in a mass of tingles to the extent that he would be unable to sit still long enough to be able to appear on our televisions. The sooner he reads these genuine leg-tingling speeches then the better. Instead of being an objective journalist he has become, along with most of his colleagues, an eager and supine apologist for the Democrats and their weakest of presidential nominees.

Obama's trajectory is now heading south. It is due to the unsustainability of his cult of personality based on a biography that simply does not exist. It is due to the sinking realisation that the emperor is naked after all and that the self-idolatry,the lofty, meaningless, speeches, and the air of Harvard hauteur, have become something of a parody. The southbound trajectory should be due to a rigorous examination of his policies and his resume by the Press, but this is not to be expected since such a procedure is best accomplished when not on one's knees or in a prostrate position. They have become lickspittles.

The mere application of printer's ink on paper does not denote Press anymore than the application of paint on canvass denotes art. We must beware the motives of those who seek to influence rather than to inform us. Stanley Baldwin, a British Prime Minister in the 1930s, had it right when he said that the Press seeks power but power without responsibility which, of course, has always been the prerogative of the whore.

Vice Presidential Picks

2008-09-10T13:52:00.000-07:00

The day Obama announced his choice of Joe Biden for vice president he simultaneously displayed his weakness as a presidential nominee. After 36 years on Capitol Hill, Biden knows all the back alleys in Congress even as he often gets dreadfully lost going down a blind one. After 143 days of attendance, since his election in 2004, Obama can barely find his way to the floor of the Senate but pending his ability to navigate the halls of Congress he wishes to be President Of The United States.

The day McCain announced his choice of Sarah Palin for vice president he put the proverbial cat amongst the pidgeons creating much discomfort within the Democratic party by revealing that left wing, liberals, are all for gender equality until Republicans demonstrate that they are prepared to do more than just talk about it.

Congratulations, Sarah.

Equal Pay For Women

2008-09-09T21:43:00.000-07:00

About six weeks ago I saw Diane Sawyer interviewing Barack Husssein Obama. As she leaned forward with her brow furrowed and an expression of earnestness and intensity on her face, as if she was trying to solve the puzzle of Fermat's Last Theorem , I heard her ask him about his position on equal pay for women. He could not, it seemed, have been more pleased with this question and he went on to dilate about how this was, of course, something near and dear to his heart, an article of faith almost. As the camera pulled back to show these two so portentously engaged I could not help noticing the size of Obama's shoes. They looked as if they were made by the John Brown shipyard on Clydebank and came with a set of oars. With his weight properly distributed, using just the right amount of torque, with the wind at his back and aided by copious amounts of his own hot air, he might be able to use them to walk on water; something that so many, already in his thrall, confidently assume he does with regularity and with a good deal of ease. His shoes are large, but not nearly as large as his pretensions or the inflated ego that feeds them.

As reoprted on the "LOFT" blog on the GOPUSA website a recent report by CNSNews.com stated: " While Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has vowed to make pay equity for women a top priority if elected president, an analysis of his Senate staff shows that women are outnumbered and out-paid by men. That is in contrast to Republican presidential candidate John McCain's Senate office, where women, for the most part, out-rank and are paid more than men.........on average, women working in Obama's senate office were paid at least $6,000.00 below the average man working for the Illinois senator." CNSNews.com also points out that "of five people in Obama's Senate office who were paid $100,000.00 or more on an annual basis only one, Obama's administrative manager, was a woman."

By contrast, women outnumbered men on McCain's Senate payroll by 30 to 16. The women were paid an average of $3,000.00 more than the men. It appears then, that as an employer, Obama has no problems doing exactly what he is speaking against. His audicity of hope is that he hopes this part of his record, as with so much else of it, is hidden from public scrutiny.

Towards the end of a speech given in New Mexico Obama said, 'I want my daughters to grow up in an America where they have opportunities that are even greater than their mother had, or their grandmothers, or their great grandmothers; an America where our daughters truly have the same opportunities as our sons.'

Well, here's some advice for Obama's daughters: don't go to work for your dad."

Stop Islam In Its Tracks

2008-09-04T18:13:00.000-07:00

It is clear that World War III is now upon us. Unfortunately, most of us do not realize it. This is for two reasons. Our leaders are terrified to bring it to our attention and the very idea that a group of people could have such a virulent and unending hatred towards us is, for some, just too fantastic and just too horrible to believe. They can not absorb the reality of it or its implications because they are so frightful. We keep being told that Islam is a religion of peace. It is, of course, nothing of the sort as it painfully demonstrates to us time after time.

Anyone who has endured the boredom of reading the Koran is able to grasp its message without inducing too much intellectual stress. The message, since the 7th. century, has been one of constant, unrelenting, and pitiless jihad against non-muslims. It urges global dominance under the supervision of sharia law. This goal is to be pursued relentlessly until it is accomplished. Understand that and you have grasped the very nature of the issue. You can not debate these people into submission nor can you engage them in negotiation. It is not possible to have agreements with people who seek your conversion or death. We do not need to waste any time asking what muslims mean by their hateful declarations. They mean exactly what they say. This should be brought to the world's attention by the media but they have been intimidated, by the violence they have witnessed, into self-censorship. Governments have become afraid of their muslim populations. These two factors combined produce the most dangerous policies of appeasement and, left unchecked, will result in our eventual defeat and surrender.

If any of the leaders of the western powers had bothered to struggle through Hitler's leaden prose of Mein Kampf, long before the outbreak of war in 1939, and had taken its message at face value they would have seen at once what the Fuhrer had in store for them. Churchill read it. Chamberlain and Baldwin did not.

In the very near future, in every western european nation, in every land that subscribes to the Judeo/Christian ethic there will have to be an enormous exertion of the national will if the tide is to be turned and catastrophe is to be averted. Before it is too late our countrymen must awaken to the awful threat of this poisonous, primitive, retrograde, religion with the worst sort of cruelty and barbarism enshrined in its title deeds.

Winston Churchill, on May 19th. 1940, at the end of his first broadcast as Prime Minister to the British people and at the outset of the mighty battle, said: " Centuries ago words were written to be a call and a spur to the faithful servants of Truth and Justice: 'Arm your-selves, and be ye men of valor, and be in readiness for the conflict; for it is better for us to perish in battle than to look upon the outrage of our nation and our altar. As the Will of God is in Heaven, even so let it be.' "

As the legions of ancient Rome arrayed themselves in their formations upon the plain of battle and as they advanced resolute and with perfect discipline towards the enemy, up went that terrible cry heard by all those who had suffered humiliating defeat at their hands so often and so completely; up it went as it spread from rank to rank, from legion to legion, and turned into a deafening, thunderous, roar: "Woe to the vanquished!" We must act now while we have the power and might, before it is too late, before it becomes our epitaph.

A Faustain Bargain

2008-09-04T18:04:00.000-07:00

In July, in what must be one of the most counter-produdctive deals ever crafted in the middle east, Israel exchanged 5 imprisoned terrorists with the terrorist group, Hezbollah, in return for the bodies of 2 Israeli soldiers who had been kidnapped before the 2006 war in Lebanon. Among those released was Sami Kuntar who broke into the home of a family in northern Israel, took the father and his four year-old daughter hostage, killed the father in front of the daughter and then used his rifle butt to crush the girl's head. Upon his release Kuntar was treated to a parade and Al-jazeera threw him a birthday party.The Lebanese government closed its offices and declared a national day of celebration. This is an outrage that endangers freedom everywhere, yet I have not heard much in the way of a denounciation coming from world leaders or the press.

Why Prime Minister Olmert and the Israeli government think this was a worthwhile exchange and why fat ladies wear Bermuda shorts will remain, for me, two of life's more enduring mysteries. It does, however, demonstrate two things: 1) Olmert is unfit for office and should be pole-axed, & 2) Some of Israel's leaders are so worn out by the constant strife that they do not seem to realize that they encourage more kidnapping and killings by agreeing to completely worthless negotiations of this sort. Their performance has been shameful. It signals a woeful lack of resolve to those who seek their ruin.

It is believed that about one third of all muslims, or approximately 300 million of them, favor the terrorist cause. Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, at their zenith, could not even muster this kind of support for their goal of world domination. Radical, fundamental, Islamic, terror, is an absolute evil with which there can be no compromise. We can either win this war or we can lose it. We should prepare ourselves for even more sacrifice because losing it is not an option unless, of course, Barack Obama becomes the next president of the United States.

Rekindling the Cold War

2008-09-04T17:41:00.000-07:00

For those of you who were enthralled by Obama's speech in Berlin declaring his world citizenship and desire to live in a global village you will by now, I'm sure, have detected the flaw. As Vladimir Putin fell from his dusted off Soviet version of a Barcalounger and rolled around the floor of his dacha in paroxyms of laughter Obama, enjoying his Kumbaya moment, said nothing that discouraged old Vladimir from putting the finishing touches to his invasion of Georgia. Putin couldn't care less about the Democratic "feel good" candidate's empty rhetoric advocating global harmony or his list of all the walls Obama thinks should come tumbling down. During the last few days we have seen Putin and his Kremlin lackeys and henchmen act with cold-hearted brutality towards a peaceful neighbor. He has asserted Russian power in the most blood-thirsty way and proved, what we have known for some time but were afraid to admit because admitting it would have required we do something about it, that he is a continental tyrant. Obama's first response was to say that both sides should "show restraint." Russia was, and is, clearly the aggressor. However, Obama's statement suggests a moral equivalency between the invader and the invaded. The inability to distinguish between the fire department and the fire is just one hallmark of the appeaser.

Letting Russia have her own way in eastern Europe was a bad idea at Yalta and it's a bad idea now. Finland, Hungary, and Czechosolvakia all know to their cost how, unchecked, Russia treats her neighbors. Now it's Georgia's turn. If we are to put a stop to these adventures then our Secretay of State should meet with Putin and quietly but forcefully tell him the following: "Look here Vladimir, old boy, you have 48 hours to get out of Georgia, shake hands, and pay to repair all the damage you've caused. We are now in Defence Condition 2, we have Nimitz Class carrier battle groups steaming towards the Black Sea, the Barents Sea, and the Bering Sea. We may not be able to put too many boots on the ground, old chap, but we can put planes in the air and plenty of them. We will put NATO on full alert, call for an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council, and call Congress back from its vacation for an emergency session. In an effort to deter future aggression we will expand NATO by allowing the Ukraine to become a member. Now, clear out, there's a good fellow, and if you try this again prepare for Armageddon. Alternatively, you could just wait and see if Obama becomes president and then you'll be able to do whatever you want."

Backwards Christian Soldiers

2008-09-04T17:32:00.000-07:00

An unpublished letter to the Los Angeles Times:

Dear Sirs,

Any self-respecting journalists who were unfortunate enough to see the recent interview of Jeremiah Wright by Bill Moyers must, by now, have relinquished their credentials. The offices in your building where some of them used to congregate must now surely be empty since they have hurriedly made off to take up worthier professions where they are unlikely to be so embarrassed or to become objects of so much derision.

Moyers's critical faculties, which have been diminishing with every succeeding year, certainly deserted him that night. He turned in a performance so supine in it's lines of inquiry that it could hardly have failed to make the bowels of Larry King, the supreme pitcher of inquisitive soft-balls, shrivel into oblivion.

Mark Twain and George Bernard Shaw became comic in order to be serious. Bill Moyers is so full of seriousness, portenousness, and pretension, that he has become comic. Sitting with his brow furrowed and his hand supporting his chin, leaning forward in all earnestness, and with a voice so calming, reassuring, and sympathetic, he went on to ask Wright how he felt about the thirty second "incendiary" sound bites that have landed him in so much trouble. The tone of his question implied that somehow the length of the sound bites automatically invalidated their content. We can be grateful to Moyers for one thing though. He played much more of the clips than we had previously seen thereby revealing that they were not taken out of context at all and we were not mistaken in our original assessment of them. We saw, yet again, Wright gyrating around his pulpit wearing outfits that he could only have purchased from The Very Silly Robe Shop, spewing his sermons of hate filled lies, and rousing his hapless congregation in the form of a miniature Nuremberg rally into a frenzy of gleeful and adoring approbation. He is clearly enjoying himself and, as we have seen this week, never misses an opportunity to repeat his performance. He is a scourge to his friends and a gift to his enemies. It's showtime and it keeps the money rolling in, well hallelujah brother.

The most grievous insult to our intelligence was when Wright gave the impression that the words we so clearly heard did not mean what they mean and that they were taken out of context. If only we had heard the sermons in full we would understand his message. Perhaps if we apply some arcane cipher to his sermons they can be decoded to reveal the words of, "Oh, What A Friend We Have In Jesus". Somehow I doubt it. Clearly Wright believes that, like his congregation, most of us possess the kind of imbecile credulity that would make a witch doctor positively green with envy.

Moyers never challenged Wright when he repeated Obama's words, from his florid, in parts disingenuous, and much praised Philadelphia speech, that America can not afford to ignore the issues of race at this time. Ignore? For the last forty years and for as many trillions of dollars we have attempted to level the playing field in order to atone for and to expurgate America's original sin of slavery along with its pernicious consequences. Wright is a hoarder of grievances and, frankly, grievances that are not really his own. He is what Juan Williams describes as one of those black leaders who orchestrate support for themselves by manipulating black people into seeing themselves as victims thereby creating a black "culture of failure". Cynically, and like all charlatans, they expect a cavalcade of congratulation for saving their community from the ills that they themselves have engendered. Sadly, and all too often, they get it along with a sickening amount of obeisance and adulation much, of course, to their unending approval.

Christians are told that they will die in the flesh to be reborn in the spirit. Jeremiah Wright has been born in the flesh only to be transported to a million dollar pile in Tinley Park, a predominently white and affluent suburb of Chicago, duly paid for by his parishoners. There is little, it seems, that appeals to him in a gospel of renunciation. Can so assiduous an accumulator of treasures on earth really applaud the sentiment that the poor are blessed? The meek shall inherit the earth but not a 10,400 sq.ft. mansion. Let's all be quite clear about that one, brother.

As for the woeful Bill Moyers, he failed in his duty to inform by acting as an apologist for his subject rather than as an objective journalist. One could see that he enjoyed pandering so obsequiously to a tenth rate demagogue, but this should come as no surprise to us since he was once the press secretary to Lyndon Johnson. Those were the days when his shimmering vacuity shone unassailed, but not as incandescently as it does when he is in quest of the holy Peabody Award.

Hamas endorses Obama!

2008-09-04T17:21:00.000-07:00

On Sunday April 13th. John Batchelor and Aaron Klein of WABC Radio interviewed Ahmed Yousef the chief political advisor to the Prime Minister of Hamas. During this interview Yousef said, "We like Mr. Obama and we hope he will win the election." He went on to say that Senator Obama has a vision to change America.

That this endorsement comes out of the mouth of someone whose belly is still full of the warm blood of his terror group's most recent innocent victims must be disquieting to the Obama campaign if not to the candidate himself. I am astonished that there has not been greater and more widespread condemnation of this kind of support from all quarters. Can you imagine the uproar and outrage if Joseph Goebbels had announced that the Third Reich preferred to do business with a British government led by Neville Chamberlain as opposed to one led by Winston Churchill? Of course that is exactly what they preferred but they would never have been so stupid as to say so, at least not in public.

Certainly one can not blame Obama for the stream of scumbags and killers who rush to endorse his candidacy. However, one must ask why this is so.

One can only conclude that Hamas and their Iranian masters look forward to doing business with an Obama administration in much the same way as an armed robber looks forward to doing business with the bank teller as opposed to the bank's security police. Although Obama was critical of Jimmy Carter's upcoming visit with Hamas, Mr. Yousef was undisturbed saying that Hamas understands American politics and that during an election season everyone wants to be seen as a friend of Israel but hopes that Democrats would change American policies once they enter the White House. Thus, while seeking their support he acccuses Obama and the Democrats of speaking out of both sides of their mouth, heaven forbid. He called Carter "this noble man" who "did an excellent job as President". Doubtless this is an appraisal with which Jimmy Carter heartily agrees, but to those who know that Carter is one of the most discredited presidents of all time it is proof that our enemies have accurately divined from whom they can garner the most support, from whom they can obtain the most concessions, and upon whom they can rely to betray American interests.

Obama's negligible accomplishments

2008-09-04T10:05:00.000-07:00

I wrote this on March 17th. just before Obama delivered what many consider, quite erroneously in my view, to be his epochal speech on race relations in America.

Dear Sirs,

Due to Senator Obama's negligible accomplishments as a State Senator and as a U.S. Senator, and given the fact that he is a product of the old Chicago Democratic political machine that has as much interest in "change" as a chimpanzee has in donning a bowler hat or pair of breeches, I am impelled to ask the same question as Cassius, but for much worthier reasons: "Upon what meat doth this our Caesar feed, that he is grown so great?"

The answer, I believe, can be found not in the seductive, soothing, evangelical, rhetoric of hope that he dispenses as he wafts across the country on a magic carpet made up of his own hot air but in the media's unbridled enthusiasm for a candidate who, like many American voters well before him, at last has detected a whiff of sulphur emanating from Capitol Hill and wishes to remedy the stench by applying large & extravagant doses of perfume redolent of his personal cologne. The media and so many of their liberal, left-wing, fellow travellers glimpse in him a Kennedyesque figure before whose altar they are desperate to kneel in dutiful adoration and supplication. Almost anyone who speaks well, who is possessed of a youthful vigor, who is personable, who is irreverent towards the status quo, and who appeals to ideas of fair play, will do. They are a court in search of a king. However, what is his record exactly and for what does he really stand? Where does this "Daniel come to judgement" intend to lead us?

For a start he is known to have the most liberal voting record in the Senate in the most recent years for which records are available. Hillary Clinton has the distinction of being number 16th. in that category. A cursory reading of Obama's speeches reveals that he supports racial preference, a one-way multiculturalism, and weak immigration policies. He has the most feeble grasp of the realities of foreign policy and worst of all he has revealed himself to be an anti-American American who, in his heart, dreams of transferring power from an American constitutional republic to some kind of unaccountable world government and international law. Pending the full realization of this dream he wishes to be President of the United States. In an article in the New York Post columnist Amir Taheri noted that in an important symbolic move designed to signal an end of the special relationship between America and Israel, Obama became the first major presidential candidate in 25 years not to commit himself to transfering the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. He is a glaring internationalist, a statist, a thinly disguised party hack masquerading as an agent of change, and an egregious imposter that must be exposed to and rejected by the American electorate.

For one brief shining moment we were led to believe that the good senator had bestraddled the chasm of racial politics; that he had abandoned, jettisoned, and disavowed the politics of grievance and division that are the stock in trade of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson; that he had embraced Dr. King's hope that all people be judged by the content of their character, and then came along the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. As Wright pirouetted around his pulpit spewing his vitriolic sermons of awful hate laced with historical inaccuracies, arguments flawed by moral relativism, syllogistic reasoning, and downright lies he simultaneously torpedoed Obama's candidacy. For Obama to ask us to believe that after a twenty year intimate relationship with Wright that he was unaware of, had completely missed, and had never heard any of Wright's fanataical ravings is to suggest that he is possessed of the kind of gulliblity which fraud artists and confidence tricksters eagerly seek to exploit. What on earth is he going to miss when faced with the cold and stern faced men who control Iran, Syria, North Korea, and Russia? We just can not afford to find out.

There is a hesitancy, an uneasiness, a reluctance, even, in Obama's manner to really oppose, castigate, and distance himself entirely once and for all from Wright's disgusting message and ridiculous antics. He may not have heard any of Wright's sermons but he must have heard of them. What did Obama know and when did he know it? He pauses. He has his campaign release a statement of disavowal. He appears on television to repudiate his support of Wright but there is a hollow ring to it. Clearly, he believes he needs the votes and the support of Wright's congregation and similar congregations throughout the country. These, no doubt, are the same people who think All Star Wrestling is real. Would it not have been better for him to have taken the high road, to have used his self awarded moral authority explaining to those whose votes he seeks that being a minority in America no longer makes you noble or a victim and it does not entitle you to anything? Had he done so he would have increased and widened his appeal more than he could have imagined. His credibility is now in shreds. His claim of having transcended race and being a post-racial candidate is an utter illusion and a sham. He has now taken an exalted place in the temple of disappointment beside all the other tenth rate demagogues who have rationalized the coarse dark underside of racism hoping that time and hysterical media adulation would blur its jagged edges. " All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to stand by and do nothing."

Senator Obama is as close to a european socialist as it is possible to get. The socialist model of government has already been tried and failed spectacularly on almost every level. Both he and Mrs. Clinton are products and beneficiaries of everything they seek to negate. They are doctrinaire left-wing liberal Democrats with few differences between them. This is why their public differences have been reduced to which of their respective aides "mistakenly" insulted which candidate and thereafter had to resign. This may amuse and titilate but it fails to inform. It is admirable that both candidates laud equal rights and equal opportunity, but every policy they pursue seeks to ensure equal results. Therein lies the rub. There is just no such thing as a free lunch. Anything you think any government is going to do for you is going to cost a lot more than if you did it for yourself. Wait until you discover how much free health care will cost you. Obama wishes to raise taxes, spend and regulate. If he could he would have arrested Benjamin Franklin for flying a kite without a license. He is more interested in redistributing wealth than in creating it. He and his party do these things so as to appeal to the lowest possible instincts of the voter hoping to increase their voter base. " A rising tide will raise all ships", they'll tell you but in the end, as we have seen in europe, there are just too many people strolling around the decks and not enough people in the engine room stoking the fuel. Eventually, the ship of state grinds to a halt floating along only to founder on a sand dune or worse still a barrier reef.

Senator Obama has always opposed the Iraq war. He likes to put it around that this was a stroke of brilliant political prescience on his part and that subsequent events have fully vindicated his position. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Given the information we had from the intelligence services of Russia, Britain, & France, as well as the boastings from Saddam himself and the knowledge that Saddam had used WMDs against the Kurds and the Iranians we had to act as we did. We did not have the luxury of doing otherwise. Obama's votes have exposed him as a gutless poltroon incapable of distiguishing between the fire department and the fire. In December of 1776 Thomas Paine wrote: " These are the times that try men's souls: The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it NOW, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more generous the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly:--'Tis dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to set a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed, if so celestial an article as Freedom should not be highly rated." These words come thundering down through the ages to indict and condemn charlatans like Barak Obama. He may be as smart as whip but he's as dumb as a post. He is educated but not learned. He is affable but lacks sincerity. He speaks well but he has no integrity. Obama has lived his life in a long peace bought and paid for by the sacrifices of others. Never has he heard the "trumpet's war-note proud , the trampling and the hum". He would replace the West Point motto of "Duty, Honor, Country" with "Duck & Cover". The most sacred duty of the President Of The United States is to protect the security of the nation and its people. Senator Obama can not be trusted with it. I rest my case.