Judicious Asininity

This is the Archive Page. Click Here for Main Page

Tue Aug 31, 2004

Back at You Mickey Moore

Childish Party of Sullen Losers

After portraying the Democrats as a party of 'victims' who seem to feel that the mere presence of a Democrat in the Whitehouse would cure all ills, Johah Goldberg then takes a closer look and finds other unsavory traits among the loyal Donkeys:

But whatever the reason, the Democrats seemed to have convinced themselves that their party was not only the vessel for ideals, but the ideal itself — in much the same way black nationalists and feminists talk about how if they could simply get their people in charge the Promised Land would, ipso facto, immanentize. So we heard, day after day after day, that all problems would be solved with a Democrat in office. Health care, a roaring economy, whatever: These things simply depended upon the physical presence of a Democrat in the Oval Office.

Indeed, such childishness has been the hallmark of the Democrats for more than a year.
But perhaps the epitome of liberal childishness came last night when Michael Moore flashed the "L" — for loser — symbol at John McCain when McCain was making a serious point about the hard, grown-up choices Bush faced. Like, whatever.

Watching the Democrats does indeed give one the impression of spoiled brats, sullenly pouting, ate up with self-induced hatred of anyone without the crimson 'D' to denote a loyal party minion, doing their best to ensure that the entire country suffers unless they get their way. Contrast this to the opposition. Goldberg helps us out here:
Read more »

Last night's speeches reflected a very different party. Yes, yes, on the issues, of course, there are differences (though not as many as I would like). But also in outlook. For all of the whines from the anti-Bush crowd about how misleading it is to have McCain, Giuliani, Schwarzenegger, and other moderates speaking for the party at the convention, one thing they communicated fairly is the party's maturity. Yes, to varying degrees on various issues, these guys are "squishes" by conservative standards. But they understand that the Republican party has to be an imperfect vessel for many points of view, because that is the nature of political parties. The man in the White House always sets the agenda for his party well before and more thoroughly than he sets it for the country. So, if you feel you are to Bush's right on many issues — as I do — you feel that the party has gone too soft. If you find yourself to the left of Bush you think the party is too hard. But a grown-up has to ask, What are my choices in the realm of the possible, where there is no Lost City of Atlantis or French Army just over the horizon ready to come to the aid of any nation led by a Democrat? And in that realm, the choice is fairly obvious.

McCain and Giuliani's endorsements of Bush Monday night reflected that more than anything else. George W. Bush is the best option available in the range of possible options given the fact that we are at war. John Kerry is the best option for those who are in denial about the fact that we are at war.

Take a look outside the convention and witness the sullen freak show on exhibit for all to see. It should become patently obvious in record time exactly who these 'protestors' represent and exactly what state of mind most of them are in. Goldberg used as good a word as any to describe it: childishness. Perhaps 'petulant' could be thrown in, 'brat' quickly comes to mind, and surely, certainly to anyone who has watched the DNC over the few years of Bush's presidency, 'obstructionist' fits to a tee. These people, whether Democrats, anarchists, communists, athiests, anti-antis, peaceniks, whatever, clearly represent the state of mind we have all seen since the election of 2000. These are people, a party of people, lead by the blind. Blind loyalty to party, blind hatred, and blindness induced by their own maladies. For a fact, these are people who cannot even lead themselves effectively, much less lead the greatest nation on earth against a mortal enemy. Yeah, Goldberg nails it, Bush is certainly the best option available to all Americans. Hopefully a majority will understand this despite the best efforts of the Hollywood propaganda machine of the Democratic party.

« Collapse

Radical Islam is still waging war across the world

Timely reminders that there is still a lot to be done in the War on Terror

Suicide bombers kill at least 15 in Israel. The sooner the security fence is finished, the better. Hamas leaders can expect a lot of attention from the Israeli armed forces.

A Moscow car bomb kills 8 people.

Chechen's bombed two Russian passenger jets last week.

Back in Iraq, Ansar al-Sunna, a Islamic terrorist orgamization, claimed credit for murdering 12 Nepalese hostages.

We need to remember that the terrorists want to commit similar atrocities in the US. I suspect the only reason we haven't seen more attacks since 9/11 is that they are trying to figure out how to top 9/11. Anything less than a few thousand dead Americans would be an anticlimax for them.

Kerry/Edwards Needs 'Two Americas'

Giuliani Gets in a Good One

Rudy's classic from last nights speech:

My point about John Kerry being inconsistent is best described in his own words when he said, “I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.”

Maybe this explains John Edwards’ need for two Americas - - one where John Kerry can vote for
something and another where he can vote against the same thing.

No doubt, this was a great moment among many from Giuliana and McCain.
Command Post has the complete text, go see.

Mon Aug 30, 2004

Kerry's Policy on Iran's nuclear weapons program

It boils down to relying on the United Nations Security Council

This is Kerry's policy on Iran and its nuclear weapons program:

Prevent Iran From Developing Nuclear Weapons. A nuclear armed Iran is an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States and our allies in the region. While we have been preoccupied in Iraq, Iran has reportedly been moving ahead with its nuclear program. We can no longer sit on the sidelines and leave the negotiations to the Europeans.

So far, so good.

It is critical that we work with our allies to resolve these issues and lead a global effort to prevent Iran from obtaining the technology necessary to build nuclear weapons.

Isn't that exactly what the Bush administration has been doing? It isn't working very well. Our Russian allies have been supplying nuclear technology and will shortly supply a second reactor to Iran.

Iran claims that its nuclear program is only to meet its domestic energy needs. John Kerry's proposal would call their bluff by organizing a group of states to offer Iran the nuclear fuel they need for peaceful purposes and take back the spent fuel so they cannot divert it to build a weapon.

Nice carrot. Iran can accept the offer and get the fuel. But when it fails to return the spent fuel down the track you have a problem. No stick?

If Iran does not accept this offer, their true motivations will be clear.

As if they aren't clear already. Hmmm, an energy rich country that has overt and covert nuclear programs, a ballistic missile program, and leaders that openly threaten a nuclear attack on Israel and Kerry still thinks we need to find their true motivation.

Under the current circumstances, John Kerry believes we should support the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) efforts to discern the full extent of Iran's nuclear program, while pushing Iran to agree to a verifiable and permanent suspension of its enrichment and reprocessing programs. If this process fails, we must lead the effort to ensure that the IAEA takes this issue to the Security Council for action.

Oh, whoop-de-doo. We're going to take the issue to the UNSC. Will that be before or after the mad mullahs launch a first strike on Israel? Or ship a container nuke to Baltimore?

Perhaps one of Mr. Kerry's high profile National Security advisors should explain how badly that sort of an approach worked with North Korea. Or Iraq.

The UNSC has no stick of its own. It gets a stick if, and only if, the US takes unilateral action in its name.

Sun Aug 29, 2004

High Drama at the Men's Marathon

Nutcase attacks lead runner

The men's marathon was run in much cooler conditions than the women's a week ago; 75°F is a LOT cooler than 95°F. Even so, the race had many similarities. The long climb that destroyed Paula Radcliffe, the world record holder, also put paid to the medal chances of Paul Tergat, the men's world record holder. Being taller is not good on uphill courses.

Vanderlei Lima took a page from Mizuki Noguchi's playbook and broke away from the field on the long uphill stretch. His 45 second break held until Cornelius Horan rushed across the course and pushed Lima into the crowd. Lima was rescued but lost precious seconds, besides having his concentration and composure destroyed. Despite that, he continued running strongly until he was overtaken by Italian Stefano Baldini (gold) and the Eritrean born American, Mebrahtom Keflezighi (silver). Lima hung on for the bronze swooping into the stadium with his arms held like wings.

Would Lima have won but for Horan? I doubt it but we'll never know.

At least the civilized world can breathe a sigh of relief that Horan's attack was the worst that the Athens Olympics experienced.

Bush praises Kerry's war service

And cuts the ground from under the Democrats

I caught Bush on Larry King discussing Kerry's and his service. I don't have the transcript, but he made the following points: Kerry's service was more courageous than his own because Kerry put himself in harm's way. However, if Bush's unit had been called to go to Vietnam, he would have gone.

This leaves the Democrats in a bind. They have been calling the Swiftvets a front for the Bush campaign, yet Bush has praised Kerry's service compared to his own and called for an end to 527 ad campaigns. So Bush has made it difficult for them to continue their main line of attack on the Swiftvets. If they can't attack the presumed messenger they will have to attack the Swiftvet's message. That is, as they say in the cricket world, a sticky wicket.

Of course, one may say this is just a cynical political ploy on Bush's part. Maybe so, but Kerry's attempt to match Bush's CIC credentials with his own 4 months of Vietnam service 35 years ago was a bad mistake. If Kerry's service had been entirely honorable and if his post-war activities had not offended so many veterans, he might have gotten away with his focus on Vietnam. Instead, he opened himself up to attacks on all fronts.

Bush's respect for Kerry's service calls to mind Mark Anthony's homage to Julius Caesar.

ANTONY: Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears;
I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.
The evil that men do lives after them;
The good is oft interred with their bones;
So let it be with Caesar. The noble Brutus
Hath told you Caesar was ambitious:
If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
And grievously hath Caesar answer'd it.
Here, under leave of Brutus and the rest--
For Brutus is an honourable man;
So are they all, all honourable men--
Come I to speak in Caesar's funeral.
He was my friend, faithful and just to me:
But Brutus says he was ambitious;
And Brutus is an honourable man.

Yes, Kerry is an honorable man, but everything he said after Vietnam and some of the things he did in Vietnam undercut that image. Simply by honoring Kerry's service, Bush helps discredit it.

All this shows that it is a helluva a lot easier to take the high road when your opponent takes the low road.

Loyalty to Country Comes First

That Means Saying 'No' to John Kerry's Liberal Plan for Defense

Former NYC mayor Ed Koch puts this election into perspective:

"I've never before supported a Republican for president," Koch told me last week. "But I'm doing so this time because of the one issue that trumps everything else: international terrorism. In my judgment, the Democratic Party just doesn't have the stomach to stand up to the terrorists. But Bush is a fighter."

If Zell Miller and Ed Koch are willing to stand up to their party and cross over to the other side in this election we should expect that there are quite a few less vocal but still determined Democrats who see the most important issue of the election as does Hizhonor:

How much of his party does Koch speak for? We won't know for sure until Election Day, when exit polls help gauge how many Democrats crossed party lines to support Bush. But Koch knows he's not the only Democrat to regard the war against militant Islam as the most critical issue of the campaign. And he doesn't think he was the only one dismayed by what he saw at the Democratic convention in July.

From Michael Moore's seat of honor next to Jimmy Carter, to the thunderous applause that greeted Howard Dean, to the 9 out of 10 delegates who want to pull the plug on Iraq, the convention exposed the radical antiwar mindset that dominates the Democratic Party leadership.

But hasn't Kerry pledged to stay in Iraq and to go after the terrorists? "That's what he says to appeal to moderates and conservatives during the campaign," Koch replies. But the party activists who nominated him would compel him to back down once he was in office. The people now running the Democratic Party want no part of the war, and "when the chips are down, Kerry will do what they want."

John Kerry will do as he is told by his Democratic masters. In the case of the War on Terror, that will not require him to abdicate any strongly held beliefs in our right to self defense. Instead, it will put him on a path we have seen him take consistently since he advocated for the cause of the Communists of North Viet Nam. He is among friends and like-minds when in the company of the current Democratic leadership and the Hollywood elite, which by the way, represents the heartland of America according to the all-seeing senator from Taxachusetts.

It bears repeating: This is a faithful Democrat talking. And it is as a faithful Democrat that Koch so sharply resists his party's left wing. ("The radicals don't like me," he once wrote. "And they have good reason, because I despise them.") Though he calls himself a "liberal with sanity," he governed the largest city in America as a decided centrist. Twice he was reelected in massive landslides. New Yorkers came to trust Koch's instincts and judgment because they resonated so closely with their own.

And what those instincts and common sense tell Koch today is that nothing matters more than beating back the threat from Islamic terrorists. "I want a president who is willing to go after them before they have a chance to kill us," he says. "Party affiliation is an important consideration," but it's not more important than winning the war.

Like they say, 'Dying ain't much of a living'. Likewise, surrender ain't much of a victory when dealing with terrorist organizations and the war they intend to win. A vote for Kerry is a vote against survival and common sense. Surely, even in these confusing times, even with the deluge of Democratic propaganda out there, Ed Koch and Zell Miller are not the only sensible Democrats who see the real danger we face and understand what must be done. Common sense dictates what we need to do to win this war and John Kerry's views are about as far from the reality of common sense as they can get. Thus, it should be an easy choice just as Mayor Koch suggests: Fight or Surrender, Win or Negotiate with and trust the word of those who will do and say anything to win. That's easy enough, if your feet are planted on the soil of the real world instead of the quicksand of liberal delusion so favored by John Kerry and friends.

Fri Aug 27, 2004

Kerry's Dangerous Secret

It's Not What He Did Then, It's What He Believes Now

Having watched Kerry's Senate testimony from 1971 on C-Span last night it was once again made apparent exactly what makes Kerry and his kind so dangerous. His views reflected the belief that the North Vietnamese could be trusted to do what they said, that they were honorable, and that all we had to do was negotiate with them in good faith and they would reciprocate in kind. Well, that view was disproven then, it has been disproved since, and it continues to be disproved today. Examples of Kerry's kind of liberal wisdom abound and include Carter and Clinton trying to 'negotiate' with Kim of North Korea while they were being played for suckers in a game of nuclear blackmail and Saddam stringing the U.N. along for a decade knowing that all he had to do was mouth a few words for their desperate ears. These same people still refuse to admit just how wrong their judgement was and continues to be. The U.N. is one of Kerry's favorite organizations and he has often called for greater 'multilateralism. Well, the U.N.'s record when dealing with ruthless people is near a perfect failure and it continues to be gamed time and again. Case in point, the recent article pointing out the failure of U.N. 'sanctions' to halt the flow of money to terror organizations. Perhaps they forgot to say please? More likely, they have a bigger problem that is very similar to the dangerous secret that John Kerry does not want to share with the rest of us. Stanley Kurtz lays out John Kerry's and the current Democratic party's worst nightmare:

Read more »

The Swift-boat controversy is not an ancient molehill turned into a mountain. It's how we're stumbling toward a debate that the Democrats don't want to have — but that everyone knows exists anyway. The real issue here is Kerry's views on war and foreign policy. Kerry is a McGovernite — a long-time member in good standing of his party's dovish wing. Kerry has hidden that fact, but now the truth is slipping out. When Kerry tried to transform his original radicalism into a hawkish parable, those who knew him better rebelled. The ensuing mess has forced the story of who John Kerry is, and always has been, into the public's focus. Whatever secrets his journals and military files may hold, the secret of John Kerry's actual views on war and foreign policy is the more dangerous one — for him, and for us.

That is where we find ourselves today in this election. While history has proven people like John Kerry and his liberal, peacenik, socialist, and enlightened friends wrong repeatedly, they doggedly hang on to their erroneous beliefs. Jimmy Carter is the perfect living example of the Democratic views that have left them and us disappointed so many times over the years. John Kerry is from the exact same mold and will, if elected, thrill us with further acts that demonstrate just have far from the real world he is.
Dale Franks from QandO lays out the results of Kerry's love affair with Vietnamese communists while commenting on Daniel Henninger's article:

One of the things that the Left never did, except for a very few people like Joan Baez, was to admit that they were completely duped by the whole commie line of BS about being champions of democracy, and the VC being an indigenous movement that was all about self-determination for the people of South Vietnam.

That was all a sham, and once the VC had served their purpose, the North Vietnamese government gutted them, disbanded the VC, and bumped off any troublesome VC leaders who weren't completely willing to knuckle under.

And of course, the aftermath: a hundred thousand Vietnamese dying in "reeducation" camps, hundreds of thousands of "boat people", many of whom dies trying to leave the new workers' and peasants' paradise, the murder of 1/4 of Cambodia's population under the Khmer Rouge, the whole sad, sorry detritus of defeat.

The response of the Left was denial.

Yes, the left still refuses to admit the mistakes they have and continue to make. John Kerry fervently believed then, and still believes now that people and governments like the North Vietnamese can be trusted if we simply treat them with respect. This view is one that is far removed from the reality most people instinctively understand. Kerry not only refuses to admit the error of his ways, he is attempting to avoid the issue of his true views altogether because he knows that most Americans are not going to buy those old, tired, and disproved ideals now. That must not continue. If the Swift Vets manage to bring the truth about Kerry into the light of day we will all be forever in their debt. These men have braved the dastardly Democratic machine that gives no quarter to its domestic foes who dare to disagree with it. Contrast this unyielding position with the position we have seen them take on such matters as terrorism, North Korea and Iran's rogue nuclear ambitions, the current atrocities being committed in the Sudan, and Saddam's decade long scam game. Kerry and his kind are suckers for any scam the world's worst people care to use because they desperately seek to find that one time, just once, that they will be proven right. This just goes to show how far removed common sense can be from intelligence in some people. John Kerry is one such person and we, as a nation, cannot afford to entrust our national survival to someone who still, after all these years, fails to understand a very basic concept from the real world we live in. Some people cannot be trusted. That is a fact. Unless of course, you are a John Kerry liberal. For them, the real world is an unknown place. We have seen the results of policies that Kerry and his liberal friends have tried. Those results, those failures, should be a sufficient reminder to all of us that we simply cannot risk a liberal peacenik in the Whitehouse, especially at this point in time, if ever. Hopefully, the Swift Vets will succeed in unmasking the liberal chameleon who is trying his best to disguise his real self. The Bush administration would be wise to follow suit and attack Kerry for what he is, was, and will be if elected. If they do, they will win this election. If they fail, we all lose and will pay the price.

« Collapse

War Criminal or Liar?

The Latter Seems a Certainty

Oliver North weighs in on the Kerry controversy:

John, did you think they would forget? When Tim Russert asked about your claim that you and others in Vietnam committed "atrocities," instead of standing by your sworn testimony, you confessed that your words "were a bit over the top." Does that mean you lied under oath? Or does it mean you are a war criminal? You can't have this one both ways, John. Either way, you're not fit to be a prison guard at Abu Ghraib, much less commander in chief.

Even Jane Fonda apologized. Will you, John?

Ouch.

Hitting Kerry/Edwards where it hurts

Doctors should take a page out of the Swiftvet's playbook

John Edwards made an estimated $40 million as a trial lawyer. He specialized in cerebral palsy cases, successfully arguing that "mistakes" made by medical professionals during child-birth caused cerebral palsy. His career is pretty well summed up by this New York Times hit-piece published while Edwards was still running against Kerry for the Democrat presidential candidacy.

There's plenty of material for them to use. I found these quotes on the AMA web-site:

Obstetricians and trauma surgeons in Western North Carolina are seeing increases in their professional liability insurance rates as high as 50-100 percent, according to Dr. Hal Lawrence, director of the Mountain Area Health Education Center's Women's Health Center. (Ashville Citizen-Times, Feb. 8, 2003)

"If we remain in North Carolina we will likely be forced to make the decision to limit procedures which carry high risks (but also are often life-saving)," said K. Stuart Lee, M.D. of Eastern Neurosurgical and Spine Associates Inc. Dr. Lee's practice saw their medical liability premiums increase 116 percent last year. (The News and Observer, Jan. 26, 2003)

Women's Care, P.A., the largest independent Ob-gyn physician group in North Carolina, saw its medical liability insurance premiums increase 30 percent in 2003 for almost three times less coverage. One of its obstetricians will soon stop delivering babies, and others are considering following his example, according to the group's corporate director.

Dr. William Hurd, chairman of the department of obstetrics and gynecology at the Wright State University School of Medicine, said the liability crisis already is driving young doctors out of the Dayton area. "In the last two years, not a single one of our (Ob-gyn) residents has set up a practice in Dayton, or even Ohio," Hurd said. (Dayton Daily News, Aug. 28, 2002)

Insurance premiums got so high for Dr. Brian Bachelder of Mount Gilead that he stopped delivering babies in 2003. Because he was the only obstetrician in Morrow County, women there now travel at least a half-hour to Marion. (Columbus Dispatch, February 16, 2004)

Dr. Albert E. Payne, 51-year-old obstetrician-gynecologist, is facing a premium increase from $26,500 in 2001 to $120,000. "My medical office will probably have to close this year. I have been in solo private practice in Akron for the past 20 years. I never had a malpractice lawsuit judgment against me. I love what I do. Two dozen Ob-gyns in my area have closed their practices in the past two years. If my sad prediction is correct, after next year, there will be none left." (Columbus Dispatch, January 5, 2004)

Fremont physician Dr. Jonathon Diller, 49, a family practice physician, has delivered more than 1,000 babies in the past 21 years. He said he will soon stop. "It will be a sad day when I deliver my last baby," he said. He paid $15,000 for liability insurance in 2001; $27,000 in 2002, and $43,000 in 2003. (The News-Messenger, March 5, 2003)

Dr. Frank Komorowski, 58, of Bellevue, stopped delivering babies after 20 years when he found out Dec. 26, 2002, that his liability insurance was tripling to more than $180,000. Komorowski-the only obstetrician in Bellevue-figured it would end up costing him nearly 11 months of his salary to pay the premium increase in addition to taxes and other expenses. (The News-Messenger, March 5, 2003)

Now imagine these professionals lined up like the Swiftvets and delivering those statements. The ad could finish by pointing out how Edwards earned his fortune, how his biggest contributors are trial lawyers, and how he and Kerry have voted against tort reform.

Point of Law points to a WSJ fisking of the Kerry/Edwards proposals on medical malpractice awards.

Thu Aug 26, 2004

Depending on the Useless for Defense

UN Anti-terror Measures Ineffective. Surprised?

Just in case anyone still believes that the United Nations and its useless sanctions can protect the world against murderous terrorists, think again:

U.N. measures aimed at crippling al Qaeda have had little impact on the threat of terrorism and need to be tightened, a panel of outside experts reported on Thursday.

No nation has ever reported blocking an arms sale or barring passage to anyone on the U.N. list of individuals or groups with suspected ties to Osama bin Laden or his al Qaeda network, the experts said in a report to the U.N. Security Council, which put the measures in place.

Just 19 states have recorded the presence within their borders of any person or organization linked to al Qaeda, although the number of countries in which al Qaeda is active is almost certainly higher, they said.

And although 34 nations have reported freezing the assets of people or organizations believed to have ties to al Qaeda under the U.N. sanctions scheme, "in some cases it has been hard to tell what this means," the panel said. "It is not clear from all reports of asset freezing, for example, what those assets are, their value, or who owns them."

Based on al Qaeda's continuing high level of activity and reports filed to date by 130 of the 191 U.N. member-states, "it would appear that the sanctions regime imposed by the Security Council has had a limited impact," the monitoring panel concluded.

Now do you remember why Bush decided to take action against regimes that cater to terrorism? It was and remains because the United Nations is virtually useless in such matters. Don't believe me, ask the citizens of the Sudan, Viet Nam, North Korea ..................
And just think, some people still insist that we seek permission to defend ourselves from the likes of socialist wonderlands like France and Germany and Kofi's mob at the gutless, meandering, indecisive, corrupt, crippled, crooked and useless United Nations. Brilliant.

There he goes again

Kerry calls for Rumsfeld to resign over Abu Ghraib

Kerry defenders wonder why Vietnam veterans are so upset with John F. Kerry's testimony before the senate in 1971. Here's how the Swift Vets report his testimony:

John Kerry's lies about the activities of the Swift boats were part of a larger pattern of deception. As a leader of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), Kerry testified before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on April 22, 1971, telling the Senators and a national audience that American troops "...had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam..." and accused the U.S. military of committing war crimes "on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command."

CNN reports that:

Kerry said the Schlesinger report, which was released Tuesday, "said specifically that Secretary Rumsfeld set the climate in which these kinds of abuses were able to take place," he said.
...
"But what is missing from all these reports is accountability from the senior civilian leaders in the Pentagon and in the White House," Kerry said in a written statement.

Once again, Kerry is blaming the complete chain of command for abuses, alleged or real, that occurred on their watch. How can he expect to be trusted as commander-in-chief by those he would command?

Wed Aug 25, 2004

What Bush Needs to Do

Plain Talk and Walk the Walk

Shawn Macomber offers some advice to Bush that reflects my own previously stated views:

What Bush does need to do is turn back the clock. He needs to reconnect with the inner rock that we saw for about a year after September 11; the part of him that said simple things like "You're either with us or with the terrorists," and "Dead or alive, it doesn't matter to me." Black and white. The President should leave the shades of gray in Crawford. We haven't seen the stripped-down version of Bush in a long time, and it has hurt his relationship with the American people.

Yeah, and imagine the screeching from 'the left' and the current Democratic dream team if Bush were to do what he needs to do. There would be mass liberal gnashing of teeth and squalls that make the current Swift Boat controversy seem tame by comparison. Still, and despite the screams of 'politicizing 9/11' from the loyal opposition, Bush needs to remind America that we are at war, we were attacked, and we continue to do as he said after 9/11, ensure that the terrorists hear all of us. After all, these are things that need doing even as liberals, Europeans, and the U.N. fail to comprehend the necessity to take substantial and decisive action NOW against terrorist threats. A majority of Americans clearly understand the nature of the enemy we face and will react accordingly to Bush telling it like it is. Forget the nuance, forget the spin. Lay it out and let Americans decide where they stand on the matter of survival. If the liberals scream, so be it. They'll scream because they understand that such plain talk is impossible for them, they will squall because their fervently held beliefs are once again under attack, and they will screech because they know Americans will understand the necessity to fight when our survival is threatened by fanatics.

Should he touch on taxes? The economy? Social Security reform? Bring 'em on. But at the end of the day the most basic pitch Bush needs to make is that the society that makes all of that possible must survive. What a contrast that will make with all the violence and chaos likely to be fomented by the liberal hordes outside. The contrast will be sharp and absolute, but only if Bush decides to make it so.

And that, is just the way it is.

Coincidences

These two are not very likely

Fox News reports that two Russian airliners crashed almost simultaneously. There is a slim chance that both crashes were accidental, rather than the result of terrorism. That's about as slim as the chance there is no connection between where Scott Peterson went fishing and where his dead wife and son washed up. In the first case, Putin's post-Soviet government might not want to admit the obvious; in the latter, a smart lawyer may convince a gullible jury it was mere chance that placed Scott in the same area as the bodies.

Googling some of the stars of Kerry's The New Soldier

Kerry's Winter Soldiers

Steve Gilbert at The American Thinker researched Joe Bangert, one of Kerry's VVAW friends. It didn't take much work to find some of the other VVAW soldiers whose testimony appeared in Kerry's The New Soldier.

Steve Noetzel Sp/4 5th Special Forces Group Augmentation May '63-May '64

He's active in the Kerry campaign. In his own words,

Paul put me at the ironing board to sell buttons, etc. and to sign up veterans for Kerry.

I bet he isn't telling them about his contribution to The New Soldier where he claims South Vietnamese guards threw VC prisoners out of US helicopters over the Mekong Delta.

Read more »

Wade R. Sanders Lt. Coastal Division 13 "Black Cat Division" NAVFORV May '68-May '69

He's a big fan of John Kerry's. He wrote a gushing piece about Kerry on Military.Com:

From January 2nd through February 4th, I was on the road with the presidential campaign of Senator John Kerry. I saw the seeds of the comeback sown, and I watched as the momentum accelerated until it took on a life of its own. The comeback was energized by an unprecedented mobilization of veterans from across the United States.

In The New Soldier he reported that his unit had seen two unarmed individuals jumping a creek about 200yds away. He claimed his immediate superior back at HQ responded:

Regardless of communication problem of sector, good judgment indicates that personnel should have been taken under fire.

John Beitzel Sgt. (E-5) 4/21 11 th Brigade Americal Division Jan. '69-Jan. '70

He is still involved with the peace movement, as this anti-war blog documents. He is rooting for Kerry, according to this interview:

Jan, John, Jon and Stosh have two things in common: They are all veterans or former combatants who served in the US military and they also want to see Democratic presidential contender Senator John Kerry sitting in the White House in 2005.
...
"The group was mostly made of blue-collar families, working class, more likely to be drafted, not officers," underlined John Beitzel, 54. "Some people were upset that he wasn't radical enough, too moderate because he was going to run for office."

In his congressional testimony in support of Kerry he said:

We were ordered to go out on a patrol, a regular patrol that we go out on all the time -- during a cease fire. We were very perturbed at this because we wanted to take the time off to write letters home. In one incident, we were working with another company and our battalion was nearby. Both companies were on the same radio frequency. Over the radio, the other company told us to pass on to the higher command that they had a body count of thirteen. So we passed it on up. . . . Then later, one of our platoons went into the village and they said, "We can confirm the body count of that company." They said, "There's nine women, three children and one baby."

Scott Camil Sgt. 1 st Bn. 4th Marine Reg. 1 st Marine Div. Mar. '66-Nov. '67

He is apparently the originator of the VVAW plot to assassinate members of congress, according to another Pat at this blog comment:

Camil's proposal became known as the Phoenix plan, in mockery of a US military plan in Vietnam, under which village leaders and others sympathetic to the communists were being executed. The "Phoenix" notion was that Vietnam would rise from the ashes, transformed after the elimination of the communist sympathizers. The VVAW's Phoenix plan was to assassinate "the most hard-core conservative members of Congress, as well as any powerful, intractable opponents of the anti-war movement."

John Upton, a member of the VVAW steering committee, says that at first the plan was laughed down, but Camil was insistent and he had supporters. "Especially when we moved over to 77th Terrace, a lot of people were convinced this was the way to do it." (Italics in original).

In The New Soldier he says:

I spoke to all fourteen of the representatives from the state of Florida. And when I said things like, "Senator Gurney, the Vietnamese government doesn't represent the Vietnamese people," he said, "So what? The American government doesn't represent the American people."

Camil is still around rooting for his former comrade.

Camil, 57, was one of the so-called "Gainesville Eight" - anti-war activists who, in a 1973 federal trial in Gainesville, were found not guilty of conspiring to violently disrupt the 1972 Republican National Convention in Miami. Camil has lived here since before the trial, and long has been active in Veterans for Peace.

Although he has no official connection to the Kerry campaign, Camil - who until the March 9 Democratic primary supported Rep. Dennis Kucinich - said, "I am heading up Veterans for Kerry."

I don't see any support for that claim on the John Kerry website. I suspect Scott Camil is one vet that Kerry wants to stay clear of.

« Collapse

Here's another missing Kerry record

His SAT score

Travelling Shoes is not impressed by Senator John Kerry's smarts:

This man is an idiot. I know all the media people like to talk about how intelligent and nuanced and subtle he is, but he's not.

He's a buffoon, a blithering, dithering, straddling buffoon; someone who puts his mouth in gear before he starts his brain; someone who thinks he's way smarter than he actually is.

Meanwhile, Kerry's supporters continue to spread the "Bush is an idiot" meme. Could it be that Kerry's SAT score is lower than Bush's 1206? That might explain why the nuanced Senator's SAT score is proving so elusive.

Tue Aug 24, 2004

Whatever happened to Bergergate and Plamegate?

Drowned out by Swiftgate

It now seems likely that a Democrat operative dropped the dime on Sandy Berger just before the Democrat's convention. The proof is that the story of Berger's pilfering classified documents has been displaced by later events, starting with the convention. If you're a Democrat strategist, that would count as good news.

Plamegate was created by the media swallowing Ambassador Joseph Wilson's lies hook, line and sinker. It seemed to be a story that would reflect badly on the administration. Now, Joe Wilson has been discredited and the fact that his wife recommended him for his mission to Niger is widely known. So it is probably good new for the Democrats that this heroic couple is no longer making headlines.

Of course, the bad news is very bad. The Kerry campaign has been thrown off message by the Swift Vets attacks on Kerry's service and his anti-war activities. Bush can play the statesman and condemn the ads by all 527s, knowing full well that the Democrat-leaning 527s are outspending the Republican-leaning 527s ten to one. (If Bush really was a statesman instead of a politician he would have vetoed McCain-Feingold).

The Kerry camp has already had to concede on the Christmas in Cambodia lie, and may be backing away from the first Purple Heart. As Nixon discovered, once you start conceding points to your opponents you will have a difficult time regaining the initiative.

The Swift Vets have been able to leverage their miniscule resources by gaining widespread media exposure backed up by making their ads available on the Internet. They attacked Kerry where he thought he was strongest and converted it to a debilitating weakness. By contrast, the Democrat 527's have wasted their resources attacking Bush on national security in a time of war. This may be a dirty election but the dirt is sticking where it belongs; on the side that started fighting dirty. There is a certain poetic justice in that.

Mon Aug 23, 2004

Read all about it

John Kerry's seventies anti-war book, "The New Soldier" is now available online in PDF format

Check out Slings and Arrows for the links.

Here's a snippet from John Kerry's epilogue:

We will not quickly join those who march on Veterans' Day waving small flags, calling to memory those thousands who died for the "greater glory of the United States." We will not accept the rhetoric. We will not readily join the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars-in fact, we will find it hard to join anything at all and when we do, we will demand relevancy such as other organizations have recently been unable to provide. We will not take solace from the creation of monuments or the naming of parks after a select few of the thousands of dead Americans and Vietnamese. We will not uphold traditions which decorously memorialize that which was base and grim.

It is from these things the New Soldier is asking America to turn. We are asking America to turn from false glory, hollow victory, fabricated foreign threats, fear which threatens us as a nation, shallow pride which feeds off fear, and mostly from the promises which have proven so deceiving these past ten years.

Little wonder Kerry got a frosty reaction when he gave a campaign speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

Sun Aug 22, 2004

The Left Was Wrong about Viet Nam

Kerry the 'War Hero' Proves It

Iron Bear over at Who Will Tend the Fires takes a look at the Viet Nam war era and comes up with this gem:

And like a knife that twists in the hand to cut the wielder, the very fact of Kerry making his service a campaign focus sends new cracks rippling through the carnival mirror: every defense of Kerry's service and war hero stature highlights the dichotomy of the same political movement that vehemently condemned the Vietnam War now virulently defending it. That's a dichotomy that can't bear critical examination - if Kerry is a war hero and fit for the Executive Office solely on that, then the conclusion might be drawn that the Left's condemnation of that war and its veterans was wrong...

Supremely ironic if the man who rode to a Senate career via throwing his medals over a wall and affiliating himself with Vietnam Veterans Against the War is ultimately and indirectly responsible for discrediting the popular conception of the war that he helped to foster... ? And for causing hard examination of a movement that he once exemplified.

There is a word for the undercurrent behind the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign, and it's not "Smear Campaign".

The word is "Vindication", and I would imagine that it smells pretty sweet.

Yes indeed, the Swift Boat Vets are seeking vindication. These are men who were cursed and spat upon by Kerry's friends in various leftist protest organizations. These are men who saw Kerry, still active in the Navy reserves, accusing them of war crimes, throwing his medals away, and traipsing around with Marxist enlightened people like Jane Fonda. No wonder they are speaking out louder now that Kerry stands a chance of becoming the commander in chief of all our armed forces. The Swift Vet's have made their position on Kerry clear for years, but now they have been forced by events to bring their views to centerstage. They have no choice, their consciences force them to defend their country from a man they see as a traitor, not only to his country, but to his beloved band of brothers.

The marathon

The premier event of the Olympics

I rushed home from my recovery bike ride this morning, recovering from a 20 mile training run yesterday, to watch the women's marathon. This had to be the toughest Olympics marathon ever. The course made Boston look like child's play. It crushed the World record (2:15:25) holder, Paula Radcliffe, who dropped out after leading for the first half of the race. It was a very emotional moment as she suddenly stopped, struggled to get started again, and then broke down in tears. Mizuki Noguchi took the lead going up the hills, putting in surges that broke the lead pack apart. She held on to win by 12 secs in 2:26:20 from the Kenyan Catherine Ndereba. America's Deena Kastor ran a very smart race to finish third.

They always tell us to start slow and finish strong, but most inexperienced marathoners start fast, buoyed on by the crowd and adrenaline, and run out of gas (hit the wall) around mile 20. Kaster used the first 10K to warm up and get into the race and she was able to move up from 18th to 3rd in the second half of the race.

The current marathon distance (26 mi., 385 yds.) was set for the 1908 London Olympics so that the course could start at Windsor Castle and end in front of the Royal Box. It's at a royal whim that we poor marathoners have to run an extra 1.2 miles; the first Olympic marathons were 25 miles (40K).

The men race next Sunday. A lot of them will likely have difficult beating Noguchi's time. I can't wait to watch it.

Sat Aug 21, 2004

Rewarding Dirty Deeds

Just How Low Can They Go?

While Kerry and his followers squall that Bush is 'hiding behind' soft money groups and allowing them to do the dirty work for his campaign, once again, them old inconvenient facts tend to show another picture:

A quick look at the top politically active 527 groups tells us why. The top two 527 committees in terms of fundraising are Media Fund and America Coming Together, which have raised a combined total of $55,032,938. Both of those groups, of course, are dedicated to defeating Mr. Bush in November. Numbers three and four on the list, the Service Employees International Union and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, have raised $30,310,503. Not surprisingly, the Service Employees send 89 percent of their contributions to Democrats, while the American Federation donates 98 percent. Moveon.org, a venomous anti-Bush group that once briefly displayed an ad comparing Bush to Hitler, comes in at number five, with receipts totaling $9,086,102. Then there is the New Democrat Network, which has raised $7,172,693. Finally, at number seven, is the Club for Growth, a group founded to elect fiscal conservatives. But it only raised $4,818,063, a tiny fraction of the amount that the other groups are using to pummel Mr. Bush.

While it should be no surprise that the Democratic party machine is not averse to hypocrisy, double dealing, and out right lies, the sheer gall of current Kerry supporters has risen to a level that makes Bill Clinton appear pious in comparison. Surely, contrary to the beliefs of current Democratic party strategists, the American people are not dumb enough to be taken in by such scams as are being perpetrated on a daily basis by the powers that be within the Donkey herd.
Read more »

In fact, American voters should be outraged at the conduct that we have seen over the past 3 years from the likes of McAulliffe, Daschle, Kennedy, and other Democratic leaders. Their conduct, their words, and their win at all costs tactics are a slap in the face of every decent American. The utter lack of morals, absence of truth, and despicable tactics on exhibit for all to see should be aptly rewarded in November. This is a party that truly needs a serious wake up call. That call will come with a resounding defeat in the presidential election and another Congressional drubbing like that seen in the mid-term election. America, send the bums packing. Show your contempt for a party that tried to drive the country into a deep recession by obstructing all economic stimulus proposals by the Bush administration. Fire the scum bags that continue to play games in the face of a deadly terrorist threat. Sack the scammers who obstruct the democratic process by blocking judicial nominations, filibustering important issues that need urgent attention, and in general, tie their success to our failure. It should be obvious that the current Democratic leadership has done everything in its power to make the Bush administration's job as hard as possible in such important areas as national security and the economy. Despite the hardships that such failure would place on all of us, Democrats have embraced strategies that actively seek to undermine our own best interests. Democrats need an attitude adjustment, a serious wake-call, and a complete overhaul of their leadership who clearly put their own quest for power above the national interest. Send them packing, send a strong message that you do not appreciate being played for a sucker. Tell them in no uncertain terms that the party's desire for power should never, ever, conflict with what is best for America. Failing to do so will reward the conduct we have seen over the past few years from the Democratic party. That would be a low down dirty shame and ensure that the current tactics continue into the foreseeable future. Given the dangerous state of the real world we face every day, that would be a serious mistake.

« Collapse

Fri Aug 20, 2004

Kerry Preaches to Tarheels

Once Again, Facts Get in the Way

Kerry was in North Carolina today and preached the 'job loss' sermon for the faithful:

"I'm running for president of the United States because I know in my heart -- and this does not have a Democratic or Republican label, it's an American value -- we know how to put people to work, and we know what to do ... to be fair," the Democratic presidential nominee told a town hall meeting in Charlotte.

He focused his comments on job losses, taking aim squarely at Bush's economic policies. Over the past four years North Carolina has lost about 160,000 jobs, with manufacturing employment down more than 20 percent.

But then, dagnabit, the old nemesis raised its ugly head and dared to invoke the unspeakable among Kerry's loyal minions, the truth:

North Carolina's unemployment rate for July was 5.0 percent, the lowest level since April 2001.

North Carolina gained 8,200 jobs in July, marking the seventh straight month of job increases. The state beats the national average of 5.5 percent unemployment and continues to outpace the national job growth rate.

"Our hard work is making a difference," said Gov. Mike Easley. "This is why we rank among the top states in the nation in job creation this year. Our investment in a skilled workforce over the past three years is paying off.

"When other states cut investments in education, job training and economic development, North Carolina invested more. That is the reason we are outpacing the rest of the nation."

The man just can't seem to catch a break.

Swift Vets open a second front in their campaign against Kerry

The Kerry camp isn't going to like the second Swift Vets ad

Powerline Blog previews the second Ad (the site is having trouble responding to demand):

HINDROCKET adds: This ad is absolutely devastating. It intersperses shots of Kerry testifying before a Senate committee on alleged atrocities in Vietnam with live appearances by veterans who describe the devastating effects of Kerry's sellout of his fellow servicemen. One of the vets says that Kerry gave the North Vietnamese for free what he and other POWs endured torture rather than fabricate--confessions of atrocities. Absolutely devastating.

The timing is brilliant. Just as the MSM lumbers to Kerry's defence on his Vietnam service, they hit him with a broadside on his post Vietnam activities. Worse yet (for Kerry, that is), the damage is self-inflicted.

It always seemed to me that Kerry was walking a tight-rope between his heroic service in Vietnam and his anti-war activities when he returned to the US. Now he has to walk that tight-rope under hostile fire. He's going to take some hits.

Mr. O'Neill is one smart trial lawyer, as Beldar notes. He's building his case against Kerry step-by-step before a jury of 300 million people. Watch out, Mr. Kerry.

The NYT is getting desperate

The Swift Boat vets and the blogosphere are getting to the Gray Lady

In Rugby, we used to say "Play the ball, not the man". Rugby, of course, is a game for thugs played by gentleman while soccer is a game for gentlemen played by thugs. The Swift Boat vets are playing Rugby while the Dems and NYT are playing soccer. They are going after the men behind the Swift Boat ad rather than the substance of their claims.

The Swift Vets story has made it to the NYT with a "six degrees of separation" smear attack on their backers. The blogosphere has responded in force. Check out John Cole of Balloon Juice:

Of the top ten [527's], nine are decidedly pro-Democrat and anti-Bush, while the tenth, the Club for Growth, is really pro-Conservative (and not necessarily pro-Bush), and has actually run ads against Republicans who they do not believe advocate appropriate tax and spending policies.

A quick tally shows that the Democratic party and John Kerry have at their disposal a sum near $195, 186, 845.00

And no, I did not put any commas in the wrong place. That is one hundred ninety five million, one hundred eighty-six thousand, eight hundred forty-five dollars and zero cents.

As of August 15th, the Swift Vets have total receipts of $158,750. Quit giggling.

Captain Ed at Captain's Quarters

After studiuously ignoring the raging controversy, the New York Times finally reported on it on the same day that Kerry "came out swinging," in the words of another media outlet, charging his fellow combat veterans Republican stooges. How ... convenient for Kerry that the Times had written an article that fits his campaign strategy so very well

and Patterico of Patterico's Pontifications:

The article then spends an incredible amount of space detailing this "web of connections," which boils down to this: John O'Neill, a successful lawyer in Houston, knows some influential Republicans in Texas. He even knows people, including current and former law partners, who know George Bush and Karl Rove. Wow.
Full disclosure time: I feel an ethical obligation to reveal my "web of connections" to Democrats. I share an office with someone whose friend is married to Democrat California Attorney General Bill Lockyer. No kidding. The grandmother of one of my best friends is an ardent Democrat who knows Hillary Clinton. I have good friends, colleagues, and former employers who have contributed thousands to John Kerry. I am married to a Democrat, and her entire family is 100% Democrats. At least one of her family members thinks George W. Bush is one of the most evil men alive.

And is it any surprise that GWB played Rugby while JFK played soccer?

Kerry may have backed himself into a nasty corner

Bush's response to Kerry on the Swift Vets ad

By asking Bush to condemn the ads Kerry risks Bush asking him to release all his military records so the people can determine who is telling the truth about Kerry's Vietnam service. I suspect the Kerry camp does not want to release those records. But Bush released all his records, so it would be reasonable to expect Kerry to release his.

Stay posted. This story isn't going away.

Thu Aug 19, 2004

Third Time unlucky?

Here's hoping al-Sadr finds that out and soon

Iranian puppet and rabble rouser Muqtada al-Sadr has rejected the terms of the latest ceasefire. Time to finish him off. This will be the biggest test yet of the new Iraqi government. Do they have the will to destroy al-Sadr once and for all?

Failure to do it now will lead to even bigger problems down the track, just as failure to clean out Fallujah turned out to be a stupid move.

According to Fox News,

The aide spoke from inside the shrine where about 3,000 of al-Sadr's fighters and supporters are holed up.

Time to clean up the whole rats' nest and blame it on the Iranians. After all, al Sadr is Iran's man in Iraq.

Bringing It On to Kerry

When There is No Defense.....Run

Kerry continues to bob, weave, and run away from legitimate charges by former veterans who have first hand knowledge about his short time in Viet Nam. Such evasion carries risk but it would seem that the greater risk lies in confronting his accusers head on. This "scaredycat" conduct does not sit well with some people:

Back in January, John Kerry challenged his opponents to "Bring it on!". Well, now it's being brought, and the hero from Massachusetts is running or cover behind a wall of name-calling toadies and their vitriolic comrades in the national media. Such behavior only lends credibility to Commander O'Neill's assertions and those of all the other swift boat vets who are taking on the whole Democrat political machine at the expense of being labeled crackpots, right-wing fanatics and worse.

If Mr. Kerry has a problem with what they're saying, or my own
characterizations of him, all he has to do is prove us wrong. Just speak up and lay your cards on the table, Senator. Until you do that, I won't hesitate to call you what I think you are, and you can count on your former "brothers in arms" expressing their contempt for you to anyone who will listen.

While it would be easy to see the wisdom of not wasting time defending against baseless charges, Kerry's lack of defense against the Swift Boat Vets and their documented and sworn allegations leads to an entirely different and much uglier conclusion. The truth is something best avoided by John Kerry.

Wed Aug 18, 2004

Do Democrats believe in UFOs?

Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico gives credence to Roswell UFO theories

According to the Chicago Sun-Times:

Now Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, who chaired the recent Democratic convention in Boston, says in his foreword to a new book, The Roswell Dig Diaries, that ''the mystery surrounding this crash has never been adequately explained -- not by independent investigators, and not by the U.S. government."

Mr. Richardson, Bill Clinton's Energy Secretary, seems to be unaware of the Skyhook program that was the cause of many UFO sightings.

Records we'd like to see

But the MSM could care less about them

We're still waiting to see:

All of Kerry's military records
His wife's tax returns

His sealed divorce papers

Normally, we shouldn't be interested in these records, but now there are serious questions about his service and his campaign finance. His divorce papers should be kept private, but they have become fair game for the media, at least when a Republican is involved.

The MSM is developing something of a credibility gap. Reporters pored over Bush's military records, looking for dirt, while ignoring the context. They did this despite Bush never making his Air National Guard service a key entry in his resume. The newspapers spent acres of front page real estate on the fiction that Bush was AWOL from the Air National Guard, but failed to correct the record with equal prominence when the AWOL story was proven false.

Now that Kerry's military service has been called into question, the MSM has shied away from running any of the claims and counter-claims to ground. They should be screaming for all of Kerry's records and going to town on them. That's what reporters are supposed to do, and we know they'd do it in a flash if there was any chance it would damage Bush. But all they have done so far is spin for Kerry.

Unfortunately, for the MSM, it is now obvious that it has abandoned any pretense of being even-handed. The public is catching on and will rightly treat the MSM with skepticism.

Tue Aug 17, 2004

What the Islamists want

It won't go down very well with most Westerners

I found this link promoting a Rally for Islam in London[istan] in the comments of a Norwegian blog discussion about banning Islam in America. These nice chaps don't seem to have a very high opinion of our assorted religious beliefs:

Nevertheless we can conclude that the purpose of the Rally has been achieved. In this era of the global media phenomenon the call for Christians, socialists, Jews, Sikhs and Hindus etc… to leave their false beliefs and to embrace Islam as a perfect, just and divine alternative reached not only those in the UK but people as far and as wide as India, Russia and the USA.

They seem to think Islam is the way to go:

Muslims believe that Islam is a superior ideology able to resolve all of the many problems which mankind faces today, from the economic to the social, from international relations to the ecological.

Hmmm, so it is not just a religion but a complete ideology. And it has plans for us:

Allah (SWT) says in the Qur’an that: ‘He is the One who sent His messenger with the guidance and the Deen of truth, in order for it to be dominant over all other religions/ways of life…’ and the Messenger Muhammad (saw) said that ‘Verily, Allah folded the earth for me, so much so that I saw its East and its West: The authority of my Ummah will reach the whole of it’ hence it is a fundamental belief of every Muslim that Islam will one day dominate the world, including Britain, it is just a matter of time. Today we call for the people to embrace Islam and change the law and order themselves – tomorrow an Islamic State may forcefully remove all obstacles in the way of the implementation of Islamic law, as part of its foreign policy. The choice is ours. However we should have no doubt that the two camps of Islam and Kufr (non-Muslim camp) will not always exist – rather eventually there can only be one camp i.e. Al-Islam. That is the wish of Allah (SWT) and the ultimate objective of Muslims on this Earth, in order to please Allah (SWT).

And we may be in for a few surprises when they achieve their objective and impose an Islamic state on us:

If the Shari’ah was indeed implemented in Britain let us have no doubts that Britain would look very different to what it does today:-

Economically: The sale of alcohol or pork would be prohibited, gambling would be outlawed. The currency would change from paper money to the use of Gold as standard, thereby eradicating inflation. Stocks and shares would be prohibited as would insurance, interest based transactions and the current company structures - all of this would be replaced with a unique economic system encouraging distribution of wealth, banning exploitation and hoarding and ensuring transactions are done where the goods are tangible, the services specified and the companies are real. Man would be the trustee of God’s wealth on Earth promoting investment of it to please God – as in Jihad to conquer other lands to spread the law and order of Islam.

My bold. Hey, I thought all those nice Muslim clerics on TV were telling us Jihad was a personal, spiritual quest.

Go read the whole thing. You'll be especially pleased with their approach to education. Here's a teaser:

There would be compulsory Islamic education for all with Arabic being the national language so that the people can properly read and understand the Qur’an. False ideas such as evolution and the equality of religions and corrupt subjects such as music, drama and art would not be taught.

I suppose that rules out movies. Better go tell all those Hollywood lefties who are not supporting our war on radical Islam that they'll be out a job come Shari’ah law.

Mon Aug 16, 2004

W on coalitions

He zings the French and Kerry

I caught some of Larry King's interview with the President and first lady on Sunday. I got a laugh from this exchange (my highlight):

G. BUSH: ... I think we have an obligation to lead. And we will lead, and we will continue to work with others in a vast coalition.

This debate on coalitions is a very interesting debate. Sometimes I think they're basically saying that there is no such thing as a coalition unless the French are involved. But the truth of the matter is, the French are involved in Afghanistan, and the French have been involved in Haiti. The French government just didn't agree with the decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power. And, therefore, there was a difference of opinion on that issue.

But I will argue that Saddam Hussein out of power has made the world a better place and a safer place.

KING: Even without weapons of mass destruction?

G. BUSH: Well, we thought we'd find stockpiles. The whole world thought we'd find stockpiles, including, evidently, the French government, which voted in the United Nations Security Council to say to Saddam: Disclose, disarm, or face serious consequences.

That crack would have made Kerry and Chirac squirm.

Sun Aug 15, 2004

Damning with faint praise

Hitchens is fairly kind to Kerry

Outside the Beltway notes that the NYT Sunday Book Review has an essay by Christopher Hitchens titled Taking the Measure of John Kerry. Hitchens concludes:

He still gives, to me at any rate, the impression of someone who sincerely wishes that this were not a time of war. When critical votes on the question come up, Kerry always looks like a dog being washed. John McCain was not like this, when a president he despised felt it necessary to go into Kosovo. We are looking at a man who would make, or would have made, a perfectly decent peacetime president.

If you'd call a latter day Jimmy Carter a decent president on domestic policy, then you might allow that Kerry could live up to that standard.

One Kerry quote amused me. Hitchens writes:

The Boston Globe writers capture a moment of sheer, abject incoherence, at a Democratic candidates' debate in Baltimore last September:

''If we hadn't voted the way we voted, we would not have been able to have a chance of going to the United Nations and stopping the president, in effect, who already had the votes and who was obviously asking serious questions about whether or not the Congress was going to be there to enforce the effort to create a threat.''

And all smart people know how to laugh at President Bush for having problems with articulation.

I do not think Kerry is going to do well in the debates. His instincts are to qualify and prevaricate, and these instincts will lead him astray.

Sat Aug 14, 2004

You've almost got to feel sorry for Kerry

He's caught between a rock and a hard place - no wonder he flip-flops

Kerry's Senate record matched his post-Vietnam service on behalf of the anti-war movement. He voted against weapons systems, intelligence funding, and military spending, as Newsmax documents. He also voted against the first Gulf War, although there is some

Judicious Search

Asinine Stats

Most Popular Entries

Archives

Syndicate RSS

News Links

Contact Form

Your Email

Subject

Message