Gay Patriot Header Image

Is Pelosi Committing Treason?

David Hinz at RedState.com thinks possibly and provides the basis for our consideration.

Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution – “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”

While Pelosi sees it as an opportunity to embarrass the President, other world leaders see it as American Foreign policy.

So true, so true.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Share

51 Comments

  1. Well, is there a mens rea requirement for Treason? Is Air Pelosi giving aid and comfort to our country’s enemies? Absolutely. Is it possible she is too stupid to realize this is what she is doing? That is certainly possible.

    Like almost all politicians, Pelosi’s ego far outweighs her intellect. It is very likely she is oblivious to the damage she is inflicting on our country. Also, who knows what all that botox has done to her brain.

    Comment by V the K — April 12, 2007 @ 12:17 pm - April 12, 2007

  2. Article III, Section 3 is very clear as to what constitutes treason:

    (a) aid and comfort to US enemies
    (b) leading/assisting an insurrection within or outside the US
    (c) admitting to doing either A or B in a court of law or before 2 witnesses

    It is very hard to prove treason, which is why the last ones convicted were during the Cold War. However, she is certainly guilty of sedition, a lesser charge.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — April 12, 2007 @ 12:55 pm - April 12, 2007

  3. [...] Original post by GayPatriot [...]

    Pingback by Politics: 2008 HQ » Blog Archive » Is Pelosi Committing Treason? — April 12, 2007 @ 1:45 pm - April 12, 2007

  4. This is likely one blogger’s attempt to generate readership, nothing more.

    In the weeks upon months upon years of anti-Clinton rhetoric (that sadly struck an all-too-similar note), the less responsible members of the GOP merely angered and united Democrats with a heady mixture of constitutional misinterpretation, wishful thinking, idealogy, and an outsider’s lust for power. (The impeachment and unsuccessful conviction are a topic for another thread. Some of the criticism was certainly justified.) Democrats are baiting us and the kind of grasping that this kind of rhetoric implies only serves to give the Democrats what they want. My advice is to limit criticism to proven wrongdoing rather than speculation, whether generated by either deliberate motivation or by proxy.

    I advocate completely ignoring a certain fat, talentless, loud-mouthed harridan who is a member of the panel of a certain worthless daytime television program created by and for truly stupid women. While it is impossible to do the same with a high-ranking public official (particularly at a blog devoted to politics), I recommend that we not grant Pelosi a status that is undeserved with scurrilous charges that in these times constitute a compliment. Let’s not galvanize our opposition.

    Comment by HardHobbit — April 12, 2007 @ 1:58 pm - April 12, 2007

  5. Traitor? NancyP a traitor? I don’t think so and that might surprise many here… but was her “LargeCarbonFootprint” diplomacy a good idea? No.

    In foreign diplomacy, like war and natl security, we sort of need to speak with one voice. And that voice rightly rests in the WH… whether it’s W or Clinton or the rotten years of JimmineyCricketCarter’s “human rights” centrist agenda. Can a diplomatic mission of select members of Congress succeed in little incremental nibbles? Sure; that’s why the earlier GOP Congressional group –with the WH’s blessing– was ok. It’s why an earlier Feb 07 State Dept conference in Damascus on population, refugees and migration was ok.

    Those weren’t in opposition to the Prez.

    NancyP and TommieLantos’ junket to discredit the Prez was in opposition… “I’m just doing what the Iraq Study Group said America should do” was NancyP’s defense. How weak is that?

    Right. But how the Iraq Study Group gets implemented is for the Prez and his advisors to determine –when, how, who, where and (most importantly) for WHAT concession out of Syria if Assad is involved.

    NancyP isn’t a traitor in my book. The trip was a cheap political stunt to gain credibility for HER… just like JohnKerry in the campaign saying “I’ve spoken with world leaders and they tell me….” crap.

    Heck she botched up the earlier-nabbed “message” from Israeli govt officials to the point they had to discredit her and her statements. She’s bush-league and she doesn’t even know it.

    One voice in diplomacy. One leader on the war front. One strategy and one focus about what is in our natl interest.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — April 12, 2007 @ 2:44 pm - April 12, 2007

  6. reallt, really rotf. how does one commit treason against a traitor???

    Comment by markie — April 12, 2007 @ 3:21 pm - April 12, 2007

  7. The new repub campaign ’08 slogan:
    Treason!
    Treason!!
    Treason!!!!
    Treason!!!!!
    Pogrom our way to a better country!
    ———–
    You guys tried that in ‘06 and it failed miserably, but when you ain’t got nothin’ new you go back to the classics!

    Comment by keogh — April 12, 2007 @ 3:28 pm - April 12, 2007

  8. Does it matter what the facts are? If leftists don’t like the facts, they revise history until they can committ any crime they want, and feel justified in doing so.

    keogh – any idea what a “pogrom” is? Didn’t think so. So typical of a liberal to throw words out, which are in no way related to what’s going on!! Love it!!

    Comment by LesbianNeoCon — April 12, 2007 @ 3:43 pm - April 12, 2007

  9. MM, I disgree somewhat with this:

    ***NancyP isn’t a traitor in my book. The trip was a cheap political stunt to gain credibility for HER…***

    Though I do agree that was part of the ploy, it was mainly to undermine and “flip the bird” at the current administration, during war time. In doing this, she really flipped the nation off, and that inexcusable. She is a child who represents a childish political party. I would expect nothing less from “the left”.

    Comment by LesbianNeoCon — April 12, 2007 @ 4:00 pm - April 12, 2007

  10. pelosi was doing the appropriate thing. since bushco won’t talk to our enemies, despite what the bi-partisan Study group recommended, someone needed to step to the plate to do the real work.

    bush is a pathetic failure and if he won’t do his job, our other elected officials have the right and responsibility to step up and lead.

    Comment by rightiswrong — April 12, 2007 @ 5:26 pm - April 12, 2007

  11. yeah – we see how well that talk thing went with north korea (thanks jimmy carter) – and with germany (thanks neville chamberlain)

    Comment by sloop — April 12, 2007 @ 5:43 pm - April 12, 2007

  12. rightiswrong: life must be very hard for you to endure.

    Comment by Vince P — April 12, 2007 @ 6:02 pm - April 12, 2007

  13. Really? Shall we go back to Iran Contra then if we’re discussing who has committed treason?

    10: Bravo.

    Comment by Kevin — April 12, 2007 @ 6:05 pm - April 12, 2007

  14. So, as long as the Constitution is being ‘shredded’ to fit your purpose it is ok? As Speaker, she does not have the authority to create U.S. Foreign Policy. And, if some of you are so worried about Rep. Pelosi having to do the President’s job, who is going to do hers? I mean, she sure isn’t worrying about anything while on her vacation, is she?

    Comment by jon — April 12, 2007 @ 6:19 pm - April 12, 2007

  15. “Before I left for Iraq, I watched with regret as the House of Representatives voted to deny our troops the support necessary to carry out their new mission. Democratic leaders smiled and cheered as the last votes were counted. What were they celebrating? Defeat? Surrender? In Iraq, only our enemies were cheering. — John McCain, Apr 11, 2007″

    And Pelosi’s over there licking the boots of Assad – an evil man overseeing the assinations of Lebanese reformers as well as supporing Hamas and Hizbollah (and our enemies in Iraq).

    Perhaps if Sam Rayburn* had just gone to Germany or Italy, he could have made nice with Adolph and Benny and we could have avoided all the bother. Perhaps Rayburn could have gone shopping.

    * Yes, yes, he’s was a Democrat like FDR – just throwing out a name most people have heard of.

    Pelosi’s not a traitor – just an idiot. Equally bad in this case.

    Comment by Robert — April 12, 2007 @ 7:36 pm - April 12, 2007

  16. #10 – I can’t help but wonder what school you went to that obviously discouraged punctuation, spelling and proper capitalization.

    Just asking….

    I have no doubt they pumped up your self-esteem, though.

    Comment by Bruce (GayPatriot) — April 12, 2007 @ 7:49 pm - April 12, 2007

  17. Kevin writes: “bravo” for RIW’s tirade. Really? Bravo?

    RIW & Kevin, one of the points of the Iraq Study Group was to engage in dialogue with the terrorist supporting tyrants in the MiddleEast on a multilateral, bilateral basis… but guess who that “noble” bipartisan study group invested with the power to do that task?

    The House Speaker? no
    The Senate Democrat leader? no
    The Iraq Study group members? no
    Private sector business leaders? no
    Organized labor leaders? no
    College and university presidents? no
    SCOTUS and the federal courts? no and no
    the MSM? TimmieRussert? Jon Stewart? no, no and more no.

    The Prez, RIW. The Prez, Kevin. The Prez, markie.

    All of your attempt to argue, like NancyP did before her trip, that she’s just humbly and meekly following the Iraq Study Group recommendations… the study group wrote:

    “RECOMMENDATION 6: The New Diplomatic Offensive and the work of the Support Group should be carried out with urgency, and should be conducted by and organized at the level of foreign minister or above. The Secretary of State, if not the President, should lead the U.S.effort. That effort should be both bilateral and multilateral.”

    Sorry, Kevin, RIW, markie and the other apologists for NancyP’s mission of mis-steps… it’s the Iraq Study Group’s recommendation –both Democrats and GOPers– that the BEST ONE TO LEAD THAT EFFORT is the twice elected President of the US… Geo W Bush.

    You can’t listen selectively to the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group… on this point, they are very clear: It’s the Prez. One voice. One strategy. One leader.

    NancyP need not apply.

    Bravo? Really now? Isn’t that kind of setting your sights pretty low?

    BTW markie: You still haven’t completed that ho-mework… remember, define “neocon” for us beyond the DailyKos talking point slur level.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — April 12, 2007 @ 7:53 pm - April 12, 2007

  18. I would give her the distinction of being a “traitor”, that’s giving her too-much credit for the damage she’s doing….I would classify her as either “useful dupe” or “unwitting pawn”. I truly believe that she thinks and believes that she’s doing the right thing, but she’s intellectually and politically-incapable of realizing the magnitude of her mis-steps. Cries of “Traitor!!” just plays into the hands of the Dhimmicrats and their fellow-travelers on the PC Left who can’t distinguish between absurdity and peril.

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — April 12, 2007 @ 8:07 pm - April 12, 2007

  19. …..Make that I would not give her the distinction of being a “traitor”…

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — April 12, 2007 @ 8:09 pm - April 12, 2007

  20. “One voice. One strategy. One leader”

    What fascist country do you belong to?
    This is America people. There is not “one voice” and definitely not “one leader”
    And the “One strategy” is a joke too.

    I know it all kinks your shorts, but the dems have power now and Nancy P. is powerful. There is a long long LONG tradition of congressional visits, congressional advice, and congressional condemnation of presidential strategy.

    Your “One voice. One strategy. One leader” might look great on the bumper of a hummer but it sure aint reality.

    “One voice. One strategy. One leader”
    Ha!

    Comment by keogh — April 12, 2007 @ 9:49 pm - April 12, 2007

  21. #4 “Let’s not galvanize our opposition.”

    As if on cue:

    #13 “10: Bravo.”

    With all the chatter about the nature of the enemy and its penchant for martyrdom, I must admit I have no problem facilitating its ascendancy to the promised 72 virgins. But I draw the line at Nancy Pelosi. Martyrdom requires an accomplice. Whether that specifies an agent of death or an agent of status after death, Pelosi does not deserve a halo at the hands (and mouths) of a few supercilious Republicans. And she certainly doesn’t deserve a virgin — even if it’s an airline.

    Comment by HardHobbit — April 12, 2007 @ 10:05 pm - April 12, 2007

  22. The last time Pelosi was a virgin was when she was dating Moses.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — April 12, 2007 @ 10:16 pm - April 12, 2007

  23. Nancy Pelosi exposed a weakness of leadership on her part, since no one is talking about the policy but her trip. She wanted to go there and make a difference in the US foreign policy, which whether is her place or not, that entire purpose has been lost. The entire story has spun into attacks on her, she didn’t do anything meaningful for the country. She should have began a debate on the policy with the president, it would have been much more benefical to everyone. Even if someone agreed with what she did, I think she screwed up on getting any support for a change in that policy…so traitor no, just a really bad leadership showing this time.

    Comment by DarkEyedResolve — April 12, 2007 @ 11:23 pm - April 12, 2007

  24. pelosi was doing the appropriate thing. since bushco won’t talk to our enemies,

    You are aware that we cut ties with Syria only 2 years ago, right? The idea is to isolate and discourage Asad and not run over and lick his balls for a photo-op.

    So we should talk to them and they’ll love us, right? Warren Christopher went to Syria 22 times. They’re still a$$holes. Here’s a thought: perhaps the folks in Darfur should just sit down and talk things over with the guys killing them. That’ll work, right?

    someone needed to step to the plate to do the real work.

    Explain to me how that’s Pelosi’s job.

    our other elected officials have the right and responsibility to step up and lead.

    You’ll let us know as soon as they do that, right?

    Really? Shall we go back to Iran Contra then if we’re discussing who has committed treason?

    Yeah. Tell us who all was convicted of treason.

    I know it all kinks your shorts, but the dems have power now and Nancy P. is powerful.

    So we should see her actually doing work within her job discription, right? When is she going to start doing that? She has so much incredible, awesome power that all of her legislation sailed right through Congress and has been passed into law, right?

    Right. They can’t get any legislation done so they have to conduct show trials and felch terrorist dictator thugs.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — April 13, 2007 @ 3:08 am - April 13, 2007

  25. I know it all kinks your shorts, but the dems have power now and Nancy P. is powerful.

    I know it puts a knot in your tampon, but Bush was elected POTUS and CIC and not Nancy Pelosi. That means that he decides who is the Sec. State and it’s not Nancy Pelosi.

    She’s nothing more than Speaker of the House and can only carry out the duties associated with that position. She’s not in charge of foreign policy and, much to your chagrin, is not in charge of the military. Add to that, she clearly violated the Logan Act and her little junket can be ruled a felony. Suck on that.

    Do NOT doubt me.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — April 13, 2007 @ 5:08 am - April 13, 2007

  26. keogh writes: “What fascist country do you belong to?”

    Sorry keogh that you’ve taken another wrong tack on yet another issue and let your blind hatred for Bush get in the way of common sense. You really need to address this patterned reaction.

    Foreign policy of the US is the province of the Prez. It is not for Congressional staffers, members or junkets of members to be making foreign policy. Remember, politics and a healthy debate about foreign policy and American interests abroad is supposed to STOP at our shoreline.

    Pres Clinton often felt aggrieved when JimmineyCricketCarter would shoot off his mouth and jet into some crisis in order to work that CarterBlackMagic on foreign soil… and it usually led to more problems, not more resolutions. But then, that was the Carter touch… ala Iran, Egypt, SEAsia, Rhodesia, Uganda, El Salvador, Panama, Chile and countless other countries Carter helped de-stablize. Clinton need Carter’s “help”.

    The same can be said for NancyP, Lantos and Company in the trip of “great hope and good will” for Assad. The problem now is that she played into the hands of those MiddleEastern forces that seek to undercut, undermine, and thwart US actions in that region. We now have internl terrorists applauding NancyP’s efforts! How much more proof of the net value of her trip for our enemies do you need before you can write “mistake” on her forehead?

    How is that following the advice of the Iraq Study Group? They told her to let the Prez do it… he is doing it. She shouldn’t. It really can’t be any more simple… unless you’re trying to spin a partisan defense for an opportuntistic play by NancyP and her gang of miscreants.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — April 13, 2007 @ 8:39 am - April 13, 2007

  27. Treason? I just think Pelosi is dumb and corrupt, like Harry Reid.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — April 13, 2007 @ 11:26 am - April 13, 2007

  28. #22 Petah, you nappy-headed ho!

    Comment by HardHobbit — April 13, 2007 @ 12:00 pm - April 13, 2007

  29. #28 – HH, I just call ‘em like I see ‘em.

    And to quote Ms. Bernita Buttrell of “In Living Color” if I may: “But I ain’t one to gossip – so you didn’t hear it from me!”

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — April 13, 2007 @ 12:20 pm - April 13, 2007

  30. Yes, Nancy Pelosi is committing Treason… I read this last night

    Comment Successfully Posted

    =========================

    A new apex of cluelessness (if the story is accurate). Would they have invited Hitler to address Congress in 1942?

    “Egyptian Daily: Democrats Invite Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood Leader and Muslim Brotherhood MPs to Congress,” from the MEMRI Blog, with thanks to all who sent this in:

    The Egyptian opposition daily Al-Masryoon reported that high-level diplomatic sources said that Muslim Brotherhood General Guide Muhammad Mahdi ‘Akef, several members of his office, and Muslim Brotherhood MPs had been invited by U.S. Democrat congressmen to visit the U.S. next month and to speak to Congress

    Who is the Muslim Brotherhood?

    Muslim Brotherhood

    officially Jamiat al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun [Arab.,=Society of Muslim Brothers], religious and political organization founded (1928) in Egypt by Hasan al-Banna. Early opposed to secular tendencies in Islamic nations, the organization has sought to foster a return to the original precepts of the Qur’an. It grew rapidly, establishing an educational, economic, military, and political infrastructure. Threatened by its power, Egypt’s government twice banned (1948, 1954) the organization. It has since existed largely as a clandestine but militant group, marked by its rejection of Western influences. The Muslim Brotherhood remains strong in Egypt, Syria, Sudan, and other Arab countries and has resorted to acts of political violence. It was permitted to operate openly in Egypt in the late 1980s and early 90s after disavowing violence in the 1970s, but the government again moved against the group in the mid- and late 1990s. Members have been elected to Egypt’s parliament as independents. In Jordan the Muslim Brotherhood’s political arm, the Islamic Action Front, is an important opposition party. The Muslim Brotherhood has given rise to a number of more militant and violent organizations, such as Hamas, Gama’a al-Islamiya, and Islamic Jihad.

    [Vince adds: And Al Qaida. Qutb was a mentor for Al Qaida's founders]

    Comment by Vince P — April 13, 2007 @ 12:25 pm - April 13, 2007

  31. But Vince, will Katie Couric report this? Because if not, that means it’s not happening. (SARCASM)

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — April 13, 2007 @ 2:17 pm - April 13, 2007

  32. I’m sure Nancy seeing the eye doctor will put a stop to the following:

    According to the Kuwaiti daily Al Seyassah, quoting Western intelligence sources:
    Shiites militants arrested in Iraq acknowledged that chlorine-laden weapons had been delivered to them by Iranian Revolutionary Guards, very present within the militia of Moqtada Sadr in the suburbs of Sadr City. But other more worrying testimonies point out that similar weapons were delivered to Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank to be used against Israel in the event of a military strike against Iran

    That’s not all: for the past 2 months, the deliveries of mid and long range missiles (between 50 and 250 km) to Hezbollah has accelerated.
    These weapons are intended to be equipped with chemical warheads provided by Iran (this is currently experimented in Iraq in low dose) and bacteriological warheads provided by Syria.
    This armament is a replacement to Iranian continental missiles that the Israeli anti-missile batteries are likely to neutralize

    Comment by Vince P — April 13, 2007 @ 3:16 pm - April 13, 2007

  33. “and let your blind hatred for Bush get in the way of common sense”
    I am not the one spouting out catchy yet utterly false slogans like “One voice. One strategy. One leader” To type something like that, you truly must be catching the rightist madness that is floating around this blog.
    Another example is:
    “The problem now is that she played into the hands of those MiddleEastern forces”
    What a joke! 1st – Does Al Qaeda want the US out of Iraq? No. Does Al Qaeda want an end to hostilities, dialogue and a peaceful resolution to anything? No. They want war, escalation, the rhetoric to ramp up, fear to run wild, and paranoia to envelop everything we do.

    This is also known as the Bush WOT strategy which has become is a pleasant gift, wrapped in a pretty box and delivered to Bin Laden’s cave door.

    Comment by keogh — April 13, 2007 @ 5:36 pm - April 13, 2007

  34. keogh, or can I call you phelgm?

    What would your war stragety be?

    Comment by Vince P — April 13, 2007 @ 6:03 pm - April 13, 2007

  35. I am not the one spouting out catchy yet utterly false slogans like “One voice. One strategy. One leader”

    Nope.

    You’re the one shouting about how wonderful it was that Pelosi supports and gives her full cooperation to Assad, Hizbollah, and Hamas, their plans for Jewish genocide, and their constant anti-Jewish propaganda, like the lovely stories they were telling during her visit about how Jews kill Christian and Arab children to get their blood to make the Passover matzohs.

    Does Al Qaeda want an end to hostilities, dialogue and a peaceful resolution to anything? No. They want war, escalation, the rhetoric to ramp up, fear to run wild, and paranoia to envelop everything we do.

    Of course.

    But that is based on their belief that Americans are so terrified of war that we’ll do anything to get “peace”.

    The reason al-Qaeda is so desperately manipulating Democrats like you to get us out of Iraq is this, keogh; under the previous Democrat administration and mentality, which refused military action and believed in “dialogue” with radical terrorist groups, they could kill hundreds to thousands of people with just a few jihadists and a couple thousand dollars worth of explosives/guns/etc. — and in the process get whatever they wanted.

    Now, under an administration that IS willing to fight and WILL use our military against them, killing 3,000 Americans in Iraq has cost them upwards of 50,000 jihadists — and an immense sum of money, weapons, and so forth — and has cut off their access to money, supplies, communications, and free movement worldwide, to blow up whatever they want with impunity and have the worst consequences being a cruise missile attack on a deserted camp or an aspirin factory.

    Which do you think they prefer?

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — April 13, 2007 @ 6:38 pm - April 13, 2007

  36. NDT: Dont folks like phelgm absolutely infuriate you? They do me. We could win against the Jihad but not with these folks as long as they have any political influece.

    American traitors are the keystone to Jihadi success.

    Comment by Vince P — April 13, 2007 @ 7:14 pm - April 13, 2007

  37. London: The death of Europe?
    Commentary by Herbert London

    Ralph Peters, writing in the New York Post, contends that the Islamization of Europe is a fantasy that will not occur because the Europeans will undoubtedly rouse themselves and resist what many analysts, including Bernard Lewis and Bat Yor, argue is a virtual fait accompli.

    What Peters has suggested is that at some point people will fight to retain their democratic values against the inroads of Sharia. But suppose the will to resist has been destroyed. Suppose as well that Europe suffers from psychological fatigue. Suppose it cannot rouse itself from acquiesce.

    Job Cohen, the mayor of Amsterdam and one of the mainstays of the Dutch nation, demands that one accept “the conscious discrimination of women by certain groups of orthodox Muslims” since Holland needs a “new glue” to hold society together. In the name of social cohesion, the Dutch are invited to approve a practice most consider execrable.

    Reading the tea leaves of demography that infer the Islamic population is growing at a rate double that of native Europeans, many Europeans have decided to leave the continent. The number of emigrants leaving Germany and the Netherlands has surpassed the number of immigrants moving in. Today, Mohammed is the most popular name for new-born boys in Brussels, Amsterdam, Rotterdam and several other major European cities.

    So deep goes the sentiment of preemptive surrender that German author Henryk Broder tells of a German woman who said sometimes it is better to let yourself be raped than to risk serious injury resisting. Here in unalloyed form is the metaphor for Europe.

    Paul Belien, a journalist in Belgium, reports that many Europeans have not learned how to fight for their freedom. A whole generation merely took it for granted. It is a generation that is good at enjoying its freedom, but ignorant about its defense. In a sense rarely acknowledged, these people have already submitted to the dictates of Islam.

    Belien notes that those unwilling to fight hate those who do resist. As a consequence, America becomes a symbol for resistance to Islam, the bastion of resisters and the catalyst for anti-Americanism. This is a situation analogous to better red than dead, except now it is better green than dead.

    Needless to say, war is horrendous. Yet there are conditions worse than war. When moral sentiment decays and when people will not defend their own interests, the soul of mankind erodes.

    At the moment, Europe is at the precipice. A philosophical flirtation with relativism and nihilism has made Europe vulnerable to the ideology of jihadism. If there aren’t core values worthy of a defense, then there isn’t any reason for new immigrants to embrace them. If democracy, the rule of law and human rights haven’t any specific quality that make them superior to Sharia, there is no need to oppose the assault by the instructors of hate and theocratic dictatorship.

    The aggressive secularization in Europe, expunging Christian morality from law and the new continental constitution, goes hand and glove with the tacit acceptance of Islamic law. A vacuum has been created in Europe and it is being filled by an ideology and religion that uses Europe’s liberal views to promote an illiberal and intolerant belief system.

    It is instructive that if Europe wants to inject any life into this continental corpse, it hasn’t any choice but to follow the lead of its avowed target—the United States. The hopes and fears of the United States regarding Islam will either be the hopes and fears of Europe or we will see in our lifetime a Europe Islamized and returned to the dark ages.

    - Herbert London is president of the Hudson Institute, professor emeritus of New York University and a member of the editorial advisory board at Insight on the News. He is the author of Decade of Denial (Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books, 2001). Mr. London maintains a Web site, http://www.herblondon.org.

    Comment by Vince P — April 13, 2007 @ 9:08 pm - April 13, 2007

  38. #16…you’re pathetic… to quibble with the content of my statements is one thing; to denigrate my statements over capitalization demonstrates you cannot argue effectively.

    checkmate.

    Comment by rightiswrong — April 14, 2007 @ 10:16 am - April 14, 2007

  39. for the last time; this is a non-issue. there was a republican within pelosi’s trip. there was a republican delegation that met with assad days before pelosi’s trip and there was a republican delegation that met with assad days after pelosi’s trip. get the real facts, repubtards.

    Comment by rightiswrong — April 14, 2007 @ 10:20 am - April 14, 2007

  40. ummm dumb dumb, Speaker of the House Pelosi was the only one who lied and said PM Olmert was ready to prostrate himself and talk to the dictator Assad. I guess leftists aren’t worried about standing with Syrian thugs especially against Jews from Israel.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — April 14, 2007 @ 10:57 am - April 14, 2007

  41. Islamo fascits would be pleased with the USA if #1 the Jews went away. And America would help out in that regard. ie: Germany of the 40′s.
    #2 America wouid stop educating our young girls and for God’s sake put them in their place. #3 Eliminate this business of women being the same as men, voting, working, actually walking in front of men…that kind of stuff. I want to see Pelosi and her ilk “negotiate” with the Islamofascits.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — April 14, 2007 @ 11:02 am - April 14, 2007

  42. #38: Rightiswrong:

    You should have capitalized checkmate .

    Comment by Vince P — April 14, 2007 @ 12:33 pm - April 14, 2007

  43. #42 – Actually Vince, it would only be capitalized if it really WERE a checkmate, i.e. a posting that puts him in a secure position. But RIW is too busy screeching to know the difference.

    And RIW, if you could perhaps post something with a hint of substance rather than drive-by accusations, maybe we’d pay more attention to you. But I’m not holding my breath.

    CHECKMATE. (Copyright 2007 by Peter Huges. All rights reserved.)

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — April 14, 2007 @ 12:38 pm - April 14, 2007

  44. oh, peter, you poor little deluded twit. you have no clue about the world around you. it’s so sad to see lemmings like yourself headed for the cliff.

    Comment by rightiswrong — April 15, 2007 @ 4:34 pm - April 15, 2007

  45. #44 – RIW, you poor little Perenially Indignant Groupie (PIG), it is apparent that not only do YOU not have a clue about the world around you, but that you are deluding yourself by trying to envision it as you wish it to be.

    When the jihad comes, which side will you be on? Think about it.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — April 15, 2007 @ 7:05 pm - April 15, 2007

  46. For those from the lower case clan who dismiss Pelosi’s missteps in the MiddleEast as unimportant, non-issue, meaningless… I guess you have YET to read the press statements attributed to the al Qaeda’s leadership and other terrorist groups?

    Or does your blindhatred for Isreal and Bush trump your ability to read?

    One leader. One voice. One strategy. Scoop Jackson, the last reasonable Democrat to live, said “Like with foreign policy, there should be no politics in national security.”

    Sen Jackson was the last Democrat to be right about two things… but this century is young and we still MIGHT have a Democrat leader correct about something in this century.

    RIW, you couldn’t be more wrong about something so serious.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — April 16, 2007 @ 7:24 am - April 16, 2007

  47. and you, mm, are so completely deluded that you cannot see the forest for the trees. umm. there were two republican delegations that met with assad immediately before and immediately after pelosi’s trip. pelosi’s trip included a republican. why aren’t you calling out those filthy repubtards that went? HYPOCRITE. just like your president.

    Comment by rightiswrong — April 16, 2007 @ 10:01 am - April 16, 2007

  48. LOL….the reason is, rightiswrong, is that we’re not particularly concerned about those Republicans giving their full support to Assad’s despotism and Hizbollah/Hamas’s terrorism.

    Nancy Pelosi did both. She made it clear that she and the Democrat Party support both Assad’s despotic government and the terrorist groups with which he’s allied himself.

    Nancy Pelosi is used to manipulating people like you, rightiswrong; she knows that puppets like you will gladly support anything she does, even as she allies the Democrat Party with terrorist groups. It’s all about her getting power and fulfilling her hate agenda.

    The funny part was watching her pet Lantos at work — the token Jew kissing the feet of the most anti-Semitic groups and governments around, showing the world that Democrat Jews support organizations that advocate genocide of Jews.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — April 16, 2007 @ 12:39 pm - April 16, 2007

  49. Also, ND30, what the libtrolls don’t understand is that the accompanying GOP congressmen (who should NOT have gone in the first place) were either lower-echelon committee members or not even ranking members of either chamber. In short, they were flunkies.

    They were not anywhere near the level of importance as the Speaker. And yes, I will say it again – the GOP’ers who went are just as guilty. However, they were not in any position to dictate or create policy the same way the Speaker would. And that is what is most troublesome.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — April 16, 2007 @ 1:37 pm - April 16, 2007

  50. I’m still waiting for the news to report on DiFi’s conflict of interest scandal

    Comment by Vince P — April 16, 2007 @ 1:58 pm - April 16, 2007

  51. [Comment deleted for violating community terms of conduct.]

    Comment by markie — April 16, 2007 @ 4:58 pm - April 16, 2007

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.