Let me draw your attention to a brilliant column by Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff in today’s Washington Post.
Since Sept. 11, a conspiracy-minded fringe has claimed that American officials plotted the destruction. But when scholars such as Zbigniew Brzezinski accuse our leaders of falsely depicting or hyping a “war on terror” to promote a “culture of fear,” it’s clear that historical revisionism has gone mainstream.
We are at war with a distinct global movement and ideology whose members seek to advance their totalitarian aims through terrorism. Brzezinski is deeply mistaken to mock the notion that we are at war and to suggest that we should adopt “more muted reactions” to acts of terrorism.
Why anyone is surprised is beyond me. Brzezinski’s boss is none other than our foremost traitorous and anti-Semitic ex-President, Jimmy Carter.
A sensible strategy against al-Qaeda and others in its ideological terror network begins with recognizing the scope of the threat they pose. Al-Qaeda and its ilk have a world vision that is comparable to that of historical totalitarian ideologues but adapted to the 21st-century global network.
Is this actually a war? Well, the short answer comes from our enemies. Osama bin Laden’s fatwa of Feb. 23, 1998, was a declaration of war, a self-serving accusation that America had somehow declared war on Islam, followed by a “ruling” to “kill the Americans and their allies — civilians and military . . . in any country where it is possible to do it.”
Simply put, our foes have declared their intent to make war, have demonstrated a capability to prosecute war and have laid on us the horrific consequences commensurate with war.
This globalized war has theaters from traditional battlefields in Afghanistan and Iraq to the streets and alleys of cities where al-Qaeda-trained killers lurk. Moreover, this war cannot be won by arms alone; “soft” power matters. In these ways, our current struggle resembles the Cold War. As with the Cold War, we must respond globally. As with the Cold War, ideas matter as much as armaments. And as with the Cold War, this war requires our patience and resolve.
Perhaps the rhetoric of war makes Brzezinski and others uncomfortable. But history teaches that the false comfort of complacency is a dangerous indulgence in the face of a determined enemy.
Chertoff gets it.
More importantly, Bin Ladin gets it. The Islamists plotting American murders on a daily basis do too.
So should you.
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
Yes, eveyone seems to get it that is right of the center line. It just seems that the center line is so broad and includes so many that they need another jolt before they wake-up.
Sharia law will rule the world if we let the (la la la) left take over the only force that can defeat Islamofascism militarily.
Freedom vs. Sharia is Good vs. Evil and we’d better get ready for the worst and hope for the best.
Get ready for the worst…, because in this fight the U.S.A is going to be alone, and if she falters we are doomed. And Pelosi, Hillary, Obama and their ilk will falter.
I´ll still hope for the best.
Why should he still “get” anything? He should have been hunted down and eliminated years ago.
Bush is the best ally bin Laden could ever have had. Bin laden fully intended for the US to get bogged down in a guerrilla war in a Muslim country so that the mighty superpower could be bled of manpower and treasure until it became critically weakened. But he erred in thinking that country would be Afghanistan. Imagine his delight that Bush would see fit to get bogged down in insurgencies in not one but two Muslim countries. And even seriously consider starting a war with a third Muslim country. The icing on the cake is that Bush took care of the hated secularist, Saddam and if he attacks, Iran, well, they’re just the despised Shia anyway.
Ian: So what’s your plan genious?
Other than criticize Bush for trying to defend the country… do you have a magical fence that will contain these folks so they can have thier land in peace but not use it to attack the rest of the world?
Bin laden fully intended for the US to get bogged down in a guerrilla war in a Muslim country so that the mighty superpower could be bled of manpower and treasure until it became critically weakened.
Well, actually, no.
Because we’re neither low on cash or short on person-power.
What we are short on is will to fight — mainly because power-obsessed Democrats like yourself, Ian, see nothing wrong with openly sabotaging our troops so that they fail in the belief that that will enable Dems to leap to political power.
Bin Laden knows his best allies are America’s Democrats — spoiled, selfish, power-hungry people who so underestimate his threat to the United States that they will gladly sacrifice our defenses for their own political gain. He knows that the reason he was able to do what he did unmolested in Afghanistan for years was because the Democrat Party absolutely lacked the will to attack him — and even when they did, it was after three weeks of dithering, a cruise-missile attack launched against camps that had been evacuated weeks prior.
Bin Laden learned from Vietnam, more so than Afghanistan, and from the feeble responses to his bombings of the WTC, Khobar Towers, the African embassies, and the USS Cole, that Americans are weak and have no stomach to fight.
During the Carter administration, when the Cold War (remember that?) was still the overarching concern of the foreign-policy establishment, Brzezinski was considered a “hawk.” For example, he advocated unconditional support of the Shah in 1978-1979. He was also outspoken in his support of Poland’s Solidarity movement, and of course he was ultimately vindicated during the collapse of the Soviet bloc in 1989-1991.
Incidentally, he served the Reagan Administration in several capacities, and also supported George H.W. Bush against Michael Dukakis for President. Betcha didn’t know that.
vaara-of-the-lower-case-clan-
His support of GHWB is irrelevant. Anyone associated with the pacisfist/traitor Carter should be labeled as such.
I thought libs thought the world was gray, not black and white??
Bush is the best ally bin Laden could ever have had.
The rest of us remember that a certain lord BJ let bin Laden go on multiple occasions.
Speaking of a “culture of fear”, who is it that fearmongers global warming? Who is it that told us:
Etc. etc. etc.???
“libs thought the world was gray, not black and white?”
Which is exactly why I posted that information about Brzezinski. How is his support of GHWB, and his work for the Reagan Administration, and his support of the Shah irrelevant? Yes, he worked for Carter — but in some respects he was directly opposed to Carter’s policies. And it’s hardly fair to associate Brzezinski with policy statements made by Carter long after the Carter presidency ended.
The issue is whether Brzezinski is a traitor. You might say he is, based on his latest writings. On the other hand, he was clearly right about the Soviet Union, and Solidarity, and the dangers posed by the Islamic revolution in Iran.
So maybe, just maybe, he’s right now too.
“Because we’re neither low on cash or short on person-power.”
SecDef Gates’ recent decision to extend tours of duty in Iraq from 12 to 15 months has surely solved the latter problem, anyway.
We need to increase the size of the services. They were cut in half during the Clinton years. “Peace dividend” remember?
Look, leftists just don’t view this as a war. Simple. They view it as a way for the Bush Administration or the government to take away their rights. The right for medical marri, school lunches, voting rights for criminals, having Academy Awards on time, blowing thru airport security like Patrick Kennedy, etc. It is leftists who propose Bush partnered with Bin Laden. That Jews knew the towers were going to come down. That we didn’t have to go to war, but we did anyway because….because higher oil prices would result. It all makes sense. To a leftist who hates their own country. And they dishonor those that have fallen.
This is from a review of a book about Copperheads:
the actions of the Copperheads materially damaged the ability of the Lincoln administration to prosecute the war. Weber persuasively refutes the view of earlier historians such as the late Frank Klement, who argued that what Lincoln called the Copperhead “fire in the rear” was mostly “a fairy tale,” a “figment of Republican imagination,” made up of “lies, conjecture and political malignancy.” The fact is that Peace Democrats actively interfered with recruiting and encouraged desertion. Indeed, they generated so much opposition to conscription that the Army was forced to divert resources from the battlefield to the hotbeds of Copperhead activity in order to maintain order. Many Copperheads actively supported the Confederate cause, materially as well as rhetorically.
In the long run, the Democratic party was badly hurt by the Copperheads. Their actions radically politicized Union soldiers, turning into stalwart Republicans many who had strongly supported the Democratic party’s opposition to emancipation as a goal of the war. As the Democrats were reminded for many years after the war, the Copperheads had made a powerful enemy of the Union veterans.
The fact is that many Union soldiers came to despise the Copperheads more than they disdained the Rebels. In the words of an assistant surgeon of an Iowa regiment, “it is a common saying here that if we are whipped, it will be by Northern votes, not by Southern bullets. The army regard the result of the late [fall 1862] elections as at least prolonging the war.”
Weber quotes the response of a group of Indiana soldiers to letters from Copperhead “friends” back home:
Your letter shows you to be a cowardly traitor. No traitor can be my friend; if you cannot renounce your allegiance to the Copperhead scoundrels and own your allegiance to the Government which has always protected you, you are my enemy, and I wish you were in the ranks of my open, avowed, and manly enemies, that I might put a ball through your black heart, and send your soul to the Arch Rebel himself.
Will Ian please tell Al Qaida that the war is over.
Al-Qaeda‘planning big British attack’Dipesh Gadher
AL-QAEDA leaders in Iraq are planning the first “large-scale” terrorist attacks on Britain and other western targets with the help of supporters in Iran, according to a leaked intelligence report.
Spy chiefs warn that one operative had said he was planning an attack on “a par with Hiroshima and Nagasaki” in an attempt to “shake the Roman throne”, a reference to the West.
Another plot could be timed to coincide with Tony Blair stepping down as prime minister, an event described by Al-Qaeda planners as a “change in the head of the company”.
The report, produced earlier this month and seen by The Sunday Times, appears to provide evidence that Al-Qaeda is active in Iran and has ambitions far beyond the improvised attacks it has been waging against British and American soldiers in Iraq.
There is no evidence of a formal relationship between Al-Qaeda, a Sunni group, and the Shi’ite regime of President Mah-moud Ahmadinejad, but experts suggest that Iran’s leaders may be turning a blind eye to the terrorist organisation’s activities.
The intelligence report also makes it clear that senior Al-Qaeda figures in the region have been in recent contact with operatives in Britain.
It follows revelations last year that up to 150 Britons had travelled to Iraq to fight as part of Al-Qaeda’s “foreign legion”. A number are thought to have returned to the UK, after receiving terrorist training, to form sleeper cells.
The report was compiled by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC) – based at MI5’s London headquarters – and provides a quarterly review of the international terror threat to Britain. It draws a distinction between Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda’s core leadership, who are thought to be hiding on the Afghan-Pakistan border, and affiliated organisations elsewhere.
The document states: “While networks linked to AQ [Al-Qaeda] Core pose the greatest threat to the UK, the intelligence during this quarter has highlighted the potential threat from other areas, particularly AQI [Al-Qaeda in Iraq].”
The report continues: “Recent reporting has described AQI’s Kurdish network in Iran planning what we believe may be a large-scale attack against a western target.
“A member of this network is reportedly involved in an operation which he believes requires AQ Core authorisation. He claims the operation will be on ‘a par with Hiroshima and Naga-saki’ and will ‘shake the Roman throne’. We assess that this operation is most likely to be a large-scale, mass casualty attack against the West.”
The report says there is “no indication” this attack would specifically target Britain, “although we are aware that AQI . . . networks are active in the UK”.
Analysts believe the reference to Hiroshima and Naga-saki, where more than 200,000 people died in nuclear attacks on Japan at the end of the second world war, is unlikely to be a literal boast.
“It could be just a reference to a huge explosion,” said a counter-terrorist source. “They [Al-Qaeda] have got to do something soon that is radical otherwise they start losing credibility.”
Despite aspiring to a nuclear capability, Al-Qaeda is not thought to have acquired weapons grade material. However, several plots involving “dirty bombs” – conventional explosive devices surrounded by radioactive material – have been foiled.
Last year Al-Qaeda’s leader in Iraq called on nuclear scientists to apply their knowledge of biological and radiological weapons to “the field of jihad”.
Details of a separate plot to attack Britain, “ideally” before Blair steps down this summer, were contained in a letter written by Abdul al-Hadi al-Iraqi, an Iraqi Kurd and senior Al-Qaeda commander.
According to the JTAC document, Hadi “stressed the need to take care to ensure that the attack was successful and on a large scale”. The plan was to be relayed to an Iran-based Al-Qaeda facilitator.
It all makes sense. To a leftist who hates their own country. And they dishonor those that have fallen.
And then there’s Sudan where we absolutely MUST devote all of our energy and military forces. To which I say that if Iraq was better off under Saddam Hussein, the Sudanese, Darfurians or whatever are far better off now. Why should we go off on a real “police action” just because the UN is totally inept?
According to Nancy we must act
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rGD6FhenyU
Slightly off-topic, but a hoot nonetheless:
HOW TO START EACH DAY WITH A POSITIVE OUTLOOK:
1. Open a new file in your computer.
2. Name it “Hillary Rodham Clinton”
3. Send it to the trash.
4. Empty the trash.
5. Your PC will ask you, “Do you really want to get rid of “Hillary Rodham Clinton?”
6. Firmly Click “Yes.”
7. Feel better.
PS: Next week we’ll do Nancy Pelosi.
Regards,
Peter H.
If the Dhimmicrats were really serious and focused on the WOT and the situation in Iraq, you would expect them to have it at the top of their agenda, no?
Well, if that is so, how come the Dems are skipping all military briefings by Gen. Petraeus?
I have a few theories:
1. The Dhimmicrats are not supportive of the troops and of the “surge” plan which appears to be working; or
2. They think they know better than the generals out in the field; or
3. They are traitors, pure and simple. They would rather jeopardize our safety and that of the free world than risk giving their approval to the President.
Scribes, Pharisees and hypocrites all.
Regards,
Peter H.
lest we forget, we have set ourselves up for decades of hatred by most others in the world. we started a war on iraq with NO good reason. bushco’s policies have ensured the muslim world’s hate of the western world.
we’ve played into bin laden’s hands. bushco could have eliminated bin laden, but outsourced the job to afghan warlords. bushco’s legacy will forever be cemented with his disastrous policies.
bushco’s policies have ensured the muslim world’s hate of the western world.
Right.
And the 1993 WTC bombing, the Khobar Towers bombing, the East African embassy bombings, the USS Cole bombing, the millenium terrorism plots, and even 9/11 itself, the planning for and execution of which all started years before Bush was even in office, all were just playful reminders of how much the Muslim world loved us.
The difference now is that we are fighting back. And, like bullies the world over, the Muslims are running away, whining and crying about how awful we are.
Meanwhile, the Democrats like rightiswrong, who don’t want to admit that the terrorists they spent years caving into and meeting their every demand were still blowing up our ships, our citizens, and our service personnel, are whining and crying how bad it is that the Muslim bullies are upset.
ND30, I don’t give a Rosie O’Donnell rear end about what the rest of the world thinks about us. Who died and made them arbiters of democracy?
If we focused more on doing the job nobody else wants to do, i.e. weed out terrorists, and less on worldwide popularity, we’d be in a much safer place now.
Regards,
Peter H.
LOL….Peter, I totally agree with you. I thought my post made that clear — that chasing after Muslim “love” got us nowhere.
And if people want to know why the UN and European leftists are so horribly upset at us for the Iraq war, keep in mind that we put an end to literally BILLIONS of dollars in oil bribes from Saddam being paid to them.
rightiswrong: spare me the “Oh the rest of the world hates us” routine. It’s nothing new.
Here’s Mark Twain’s response to the same nonsense.
European Anti-Americanism and European sycophant outrage about “America’s poor image” is nothing new as evidenced by this exchange from 1898 between an American ex-pat in Paris and Mark Twain. The context is the Spanish-American War.
A Word Of Encouragement For Our Blushing Exiles
[Extract from a long and heated letter from a Voluntary Exile, Member of the American Colony, Paris.]
And so you are ashamed. I am trying to think out what it can have been that has produced this large attitude of mind and this fine flow of sarcasm. Apparently you are ashamed to look Europe in the face; ashamed of the American name; temporarily ashamed of your nationality. By the light of remarks made to me by an American here in Vienna, I judge that you are ashamed because:
1. We are meddling where we have no business and no right; meddling with the private family matters of a sister nation; intruding upon her sacred right to do as she pleases with her own, unquestioned by anybody.
2. We are doing this under a sham humanitarian pretext.
3. Doing it in order to filch Cuba, the formal and distinct disclaimer in the ultimatum being very, very thin humbug, and easily detectable by you and virtuous Europe.
4. And finally you are ashamed of all this because it is new, and base, and brutal, and dishonest; and because Europe, having had no previous experience of such things, is horrified by it and can never respect us nor associate with us any more.
Brutal, base, dishonest? We? Land Thieves? Shedders of innocent blood? We? Traitors to our official word? We? Are we going to lose Europe’s respect because of this new and dreadful conduct? Russia’s, for instance? Is she lying stretched out on her back in Manchuria, with her head among her Siberian prisons and her feet in Port Arthur, trying to read over the fairy tales she told Lord Salisbury, and not able to do it for crying because we are maneuvering to treacherously smouch Cuba from feeble Spain, and because we are ungently shedding innocent Spanish blood?
Is it France’s respect that we are going to lose? Is our unchivalric conduct troubling a nation which exists to-day because a brave young girl saved it when its poltroons had lost it – a nation which deserted her as one man when her day of peril came? Is our treacherous assault upon a weak people distressing a nation which contributed Bartholomew’s Day to human history? Is our ruthless spirit offending the sensibilities of the nation which gave us the Reign of Terror to read about? Is our unmanly intrusion into the private affairs of a sister nation shocking the feelings of the people who sent Maximilian to Mexico? Are our shabby and pusillanimous ways outraging the fastidious people who have sent an innocent man (Dreyfus) to a living hell, taken to their embraces the slimy guilty one, and submitted to indignities Emile Zola – the manliest man in France?
Is it Spain’s respect that we are going to lose? Is she sitting sadly conning her great history and contrasting it with our meddling, cruel, perfidious one – our shameful history of foreign robberies, humanitarian shams, and annihilations of weak and unoffending nations? Is she remembering with pride how she sent Columbus home in chains; how she sent half of the harmless West Indians into slavery and the rest to the grave, leaving not one alive; how she robbed and slaughtered the Inca’s gentle race, then beguiled the Inca into her power with fair promises and burned him at the stake; how she drenched the New World in blood, and earned and got the name of The Nation With The Bloody Footprint; how she drove all the Jews out of Spain in a day, allowing them to sell their property, but forbidding them to carry any money out of the country; how she roasted heretics by the thousands and thousands in her public squares, generation after generation, her kings and her priests looking on as at a holiday show; how her Holy Inquisition imported hell into the earth; how she was the first to institute it and the last to give it up – and then only under compulsion; how, with a spirit unmodified by time, she still tortures her prisoners to-day; how, with her ancient passion for pain and blood unchanged, she still crowds the arena with ladies and gentlemen and priests to see with delight a bull harried and persecuted and a gored horse dragging his entrails on the ground; and how, with this incredible character surviving all attempts to civilize it, her Duke of Alva rises again in the person of General Weyler – to-day the most idolized personage in Spain – and we see a hundred thousand women and children shut up in pens and pitilessly starved to death?
Are we indeed going to lose Spain’s respect? Is there no way to avoid this calamity – or this compliment? Are we going to lose her respect because we have made a promise in our ultimatum which she thinks we shall break? And meantime is she trying to recall some promise of her own which she has kept?
Is the Professional Official Fibber of Europe really troubled with our morals? Dear Parisian friend, are you taking seriously the daily remark of the newspaper and the orater about “this noble nation with an illustrious history”? That is mere kindness, mere charity for a people in temporary hard luck. The newspaper and the orator do not mean it. They wink when they say it.
And so you are ashamed. Do not be ashamed; there is no occasion for it.
[Mark Twain. Written in 1898, first published in 1923 – Ed.]
Since when are the Europeans the gold standard. You want 0-3% growth. And 6-10% unemployment, go to Europe. I prefer America and our 3-5% growth and 4% unemployment. We aren’t perfect. It has always puzzled me, with such a rotten attitude about America around the world, why do so many millions still want to come here. They can stay home…I’d be fine with it.
#20 – You can’t have high growth and low unemployment without immigration, unless you’d prefer wage and price inflation.
***lest we forget, we have set ourselves up for decades of hatred by most others in the world…***
rightiswrong – are you serious??? You really think the hatred just began when GWB became president??? HAHAHAHAHA!!! You really DO have your head up where the sun don’t shine, don’t you!!?? That’s so typical of “the left” – to stand on it’s head and tell the rest of us that WE’RE upside down!! LOVE IT!!!
The video here is not good for the future
Vince P – what video?
ooops
here
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=25229&only&rss
Well, of course, my place of employment has blocked that video! I’ll have to catch it at home. Thanks for posting it, Vince.
Anyone see this?
http://www.nypost.com/seven/04242007/news/worldnews/white_flag_harry_furor_worldnews_geoff_earle__post_correspondent.htm
#32 – Sure did, LNC. Both Drudge and Michelle Malkin had links to this letter. HOO-RAH!
Regards,
Peter H.
Regards,
Peter H.
Dems are always demanding the resignation of Bush admin officials. Any self-respecting American (democrats need not apply) should demand Reid and his kennel keeper, Pelosi, along with her other poodle, Murtha, all be replaced. They pander to their beloved lunatic leftist fringe (which, at this point, is the intellectually and morally bankrupt base of the democrat party). As a result, they have turned themselves into shameless traitors, and loyal friends to the Islamists (who are more than happy to exploit the useless idiots).
Not so fast, LNC; they do have their uses.
Pelosi demonstrates that Democrats support terrorist groups and the governments who support them.
Reid demonstrates that the Democrats believe in surrender.
Murtha demonstrates that the Democrats believe in bribery — both in his involvement with Abscam and in his behavior of porking up appropriations bills to buy votes.
And, thanks to the 2006 election, they are getting what ultimately is most devastating to their party — the chance to demonstrate these things in public and open view.
And there’s always this:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/04242007/postopinion/editorials/reids_bloody_hands_editorials_.htm
With our current strategy, I don’t think that Iraq will become a stable ally in the mid east who is our trusted ally against terror and will likely continue to be an enemy of Israel for at least the next 5-10 years.
Further, I would wager that if any rightist were truly honest, he/she would admit that the above stated goals are not possible.
Unfortunately conservatives have placed their egos and their pride on the line while blindly embracing the strategies of the Bush Admin.
No, it is not national interest that keeps us in Iraq, doing the same things over and over.
Its the vanity of the American conservative.
this war is lost. we’re spending $2billion a WEEK for more death and destruction. we will never win this war as we let it snowball into a civil war. what right do we have to be there? none. it’s long past the time to leave. we entrusted bushco to go to war at last resort, and facts show, unfortunately for all the repugs here, that there was no good reason to go into iraq. it’s a complete and utter and disastrous failure, and there’s no hope, ZERO HOPE, of it turning around. the surge has been an abysmal failure. we must leave now for there to be any semblance of peace there within a decade. we will forever be remembered for an invasion and occupation that has festered into sectarian civil war. generations of wanna-be bin ladens are pledging support to destroy the infidels, all because of bushco’s horrendous decisions.
bushco has engaged in war profiteering with their no-bid contracts to cronies. karma is coming for them; time is running out. bushco’s failed legacy is cemented in the sands of iraq and by floating down the bloody tigris.
Looks like 401K has been cutting-and-pasting his Kosby talking points again. To quote the Scarecrow, “if he only had a brain…”
Regards,
Peter H.
rightiswrong: DiFi got to prophet too.
test
I give up. I try to post a comment longer than a sentence or two and it won’t post.
Oh.. did they implement a meandering bullshit detector?
Perhaps more of the public would be behind this if members and branches of our government weren’t lying to us left, right and center about what we’re doing, why we’re there and what we can really accomplish. Today’s testimony on Pat Tillman’s death and Jessica Lynch’s story have just added to this. Why are conservatives so surprised that there is so much Bush hatred by liberals (and apparently, a growing number of conservatives). This guy and the people surrounding him lie to us whenever they say hello.
#43: Obviously not, you’re still commenting. And there’s so much news with more corrupt GOP Congressmen being investigated. Like Renzi and Doolittle.
Like I care or have anyting to do with that.
With our current strategy, I don’t think that Iraq will become a stable ally in the mid east who is our trusted ally against terror and will likely continue to be an enemy of Israel for at least the next 5-10 years.
Why do you care, keogh?
After all, your party just demonstrated, thanks to Nancy Pelosi, its support for and alliance with Hamas, Hizbollah, and Syria — two groups and a country whose stated goals are to use terrorism to eliminate Israel, commit genocide of Jews, and kill Americans.
And as for you, rightiswrong, you still are trying to spin the lie that terrorists never hated or attacked the United States prior to the Bush administration — which is utter bull.
How well the war is going is shown by the desperation of the Democrats — Pelosi pleading with Hamas, Hizbollah, and Syria to increase attacks on US troops and terrorist activity, and Reid desperately trying to withdraw troops to ensure the failure of the US enterprise. Both of these individuals are so twisted that they are deliberately encouraging other countries to attack our armed forces and are trying to render them defenseless in order to hold on to political power.
http://www.boycottliberalism.com/Commentary/Corruption.htm
just to remind folks of the corruption in the Democrat party. The listing above doesn’t include Pelosi’s not filling out proper disclosure forms that has not been prosecuted yet. Reid’s shady real estate deals. McKinney smacking a cop. Diane Feinsteins funneling BILLIONS in defense dept contracts to her husband that has not been prosecuted yet. Conyers labor law violations swept under the rug. What was the promise? The most ethical Congress in history. Where’s the media? Let’s get a snapshot of the first 100 days of corruption. hehe
Most of the MSM is like Ian. They are pure Democrat shills who will never criticize corruption in their own party. As long as a Democrat does it, it’s okay. Mark Foley sends inappropriate text message to underage pages and he’s the epitome of evil. Gerry Studds molests an underage page and he’s a hero. The shady deals of Feinstein, GReed, Cold Cash Jefferson, Alan Mollohan, and John Murtha are way, way more corrupt than anything Tom DeLay ever did, but Ian, good little shill that he is, will stand by them no matter how many bribes they take, no matter how many underlings they molest, no matter how many millions they funnel to their friends and relatives, no matter how many junkets they take with lobbyists, no matter how much “access” Barney Frank sells in exchange for party donations. And so will the media. Corruption just doesn’t matter when Democrats do it. Right Ian?
* pin drop *
#47:
Wrong again. I am fully supportive of any legitimate investigations of corruption on both sides of the aisle. I think for example, Jefferson is a crook and indeed liberals and progressives placed their full support behind his primary opposition. The voters thought otherwise. But, let the chips fall where they may. Considering that Bush stacked the USA deck, the corruption of Renzi and Doolittle must be so egregious that even hand-picked Bush crony USA’s can’t ignore it.
Bwahaha.. Democratic corruption.. “so be it”.
#4: I don’t get paid the big bucks for my plan for the region, but I’ve outlined it here before. At the time no one was much interested. If you really care, I suspect you’ll look it up.
#5: NDT, just be honest and admit that the claim that “what we are short on is will to fight” simply betrays an astounding and elitist hatred towards the majority of Americans who have turned so strongly against this disastrous Iraq occupation. Trying to blame the Dems is dishonest because frankly, Democrats in office have for the most part been all too timid to object to Bush’s folly. It’s the American people who have virtually dragged Democratic politicians into standing up to Bushco with regard to Iraq. Face it, it’s the American majority whom you detest so much.
#5:
With nine troops killed the other day in just one attack, we may be short of man-power sooner than you think.
Ian’s attitude in a nutshell. As long as they can get away with it, he’s cool with corruption in his own party.
Ian, during the War of Northern Aggression, Union President Lincoln often chided Democrats who were trying hard to weaken Union resolve, undercut the troops, defeat the Union generals and –it got so bad– that he was forced to seize and close down newspapers owned by radical anti-war, Democrat agitators and break up “protests” that had turned to rioting and looting. Your team hasn’t come very far in 140+ years.
While on a tour of fallen Richmond, Lincoln wrote to his personal aide, John Hay, “God give me the patience to deal with our patriotic Democrat bretheren who see fit to destroy this Nation for mere political reward.”
I think W could gain a great comfort if he adopted Lincoln’s prayer. 140+ years later, it still fits.
#55 Mich Matt, thanks man. That’s amazing. As a history buff I’m always struck by how most things aren’t new, they are re runs of history.
With our horrible education system in America, we have a generation of ian’s now who know nothing of history. They are clueless of who Chamberlain is as a matter of fact.
#53 ian when those 9 brave Americans were killed by one bomb the other day what was your initial reaction? Were you happy or sad? Be honest.
#51, you called my bluff. I really dont care.
NDT, just be honest and admit that the claim that “what we are short on is will to fight” simply betrays an astounding and elitist hatred towards the majority of Americans who have turned so strongly against this disastrous Iraq occupation.
It’s rather hard for me to hate people who have been so thoroughly lied to and misled.
Dems covered up Saddam’s horrific human rights abuses, including widespread genocide.
Dems covered up Saddam’s continued weapons-building and use of WMDs against his own people.
Dems covered up the rampant bribe-taking among the UN and European governments, in which it was openly admitted that Saddam was paying them to block any action against him at the UN.
Dems covered up that members of their own party, endorsed by their own leadership, were sending hundreds of thousands of dollars to Iraq for insurgents to use to purchase IEDs.
Dems are now taking the time to fly halfway across the world to endorse and support, in person, terrorist groups like Hizbollah and Hamas and the governments that support them — but can’t be bothered to attend briefings by the top general leading our primary efforts against them, or if they do, claiming they won’t believe a word the general says.
Do you really think the American people supported leaving a dictator in power who was imprisoning, torturing, and murdering people by the millions just for the crime of being of the wrong religious faith or political beliefs, who was paying the UN and European governments billions of dollars in contracts and kickbacks to overlook it, and who was in possession of nuclear and other weapons knowledge and equipment so dangerous that merely posting the information about it on the Internets was, according to Dems, a grave threat to national security?
Do you really think the American people support your party’s sending money to buy weapons to kill our troops, giving your public endorsement and support to the people who are doing it and facilitating it, and then trying to legislatively prevent our troops from fighting and defending themselves?
I am fully supportive of any legitimate investigations of corruption on both sides of the aisle.
But of course, any investigation that finds a Democrat guilty is illegitimate.
And besides, we’re dealing with a puppet here like Ian, who, despite his whining and crying that Nancy Pelosi was right, that anyone who commits campaign finance fraud is not fit to be in Congress and should immediately resign, screams and cries about how she shouldn’t have to follow her own rules when she is caught doing it.
Counter-Jihad political developments in Europe:
(SIAD is an Anti-Islamic Political party in Denmark)
SIAD and a few other like minded groups are getting organised in Denmark. According to the SIAD Danish blog, a new alliance is being formed out of similar groups with one common theme. The counter-jihad movement.
Anti-jihad Danmark (SIAD, Nationale Danskere, I Media, Frit DK og Frie Danske Nationalister) are organising their first demonstration in Aalborg in Northern Jutland on the 12th of May. The theme of the demo will concentrate on less control of citizens and more control over the gangs that run free in that area in particular, and Denmark in general.
Despite the somewhat nationalistic names that some of these groups have, they are committed to fighting anything undemocratic. As Anders Gravers [the leader of SIAD] puts it, “all the ‘isms’.” Communism, Nazism, Fascism and Islamism.
#61:
Not at all. Bring on legitimate investigations of both Dems and Repubs. Unfortunately, your Dear Leader decided that the Justice Department would be turned into just another arm of Rove’s political machine and travesties like those in Wisconsin would be used to influence elections. I have no doubt that you support such corruptions of our institutions because you would prefer a one-party authoritarian state just so long as it was your party in power. Fortunately for the rest of us, last November’s election may have derailed those plans.
I see shill-boy’s deflector shields are at maximum. I note that when Democrats are corrupt, he vaguely calls for investigations of everybody. When Republicans are corrupt, he just calls for blood.
So, that leaves me a little unconvinced of his sincerity. That and his refusal to address the corruption of his Dear Speaker, and his response to Air Pelosi seating the uber-corrupt Cold Cash Jefferson on the Homeland Security committee with a shrug and a “so be it.” And his refusal to acknowledge DiFi or John Murtha’s funneling defense contracts to their cronies at all, while screeching that “BushCo” should be prosecuted for allegedly doing the same thing.
When it’s Republicans, he looks for blood. When it’s Democrats, he looks for excuses.
#64: If there are valid criminal cases to be made against Dems, those cases ought to be made. They would have been especially easy of course if Bushco had got away with installing its own pliant cronies as USA’s across the country. But now, any cases those political operatives bring will be suspect as well they should be. You have your Dear Leader to thank for that.
“They would have been especially easy of course if Bushco had got away with installing its own pliant cronies as USA’s across the country.”
How, IgnoAndNaus? Last time I checked, states actually had the right to vote in their own officeholders. Or is this one more of your deluded rants you cannot back up?
Try again.
Regards,
Peter H.
#66: You know, I can understand someone being extraordinarily ignorant about political current events. What I can’t understand is someone who is not only extraordinarily ignorant on such matters but who also gleefully broadcasts that ignorance using the most pompous and obnoxious tone possible.
#63: Thank you for demonstrating the obvious, Ian.
As I thought, when confronted with evidence of Pelosi’s crimes and corruption, as well as a reminder that she said that anyone who commits campaign finance fraud is unfit and should resign from Congress and you agreed, you claim that it’s all a Karl Rove plant.
Again, as I stated: you consider any investigation that finds a Democrat guilty to be illegitimate.
“What I can’t understand is someone who is not only extraordinarily ignorant on such matters but who also gleefully broadcasts that ignorance using the most pompous and obnoxious tone possible.”
Been staring in the mirror again, huh? Please. You can do better than that, especially given your stellar (COUGH) track record.
Try again…again.
Regards,
Peter H.
#68: Keeping digging that hole. Meanwhile, you might want to look into who actually appoints USA’s.
Oh, you were referring to US ATTORNEYS. Silly me, I thought you were logically following VdaK’s conclusion about Dem office holders – that they were accountable to those who put them in office, like VOTERS as I pointed out.
Well, it serves me right for believing that you were actually following a discussion thread instead of inserting yet another lib tactic of argument (i.e. changing the subject) as you spin and spin away. Mea culpa.
Regards,
Peter H.
The September 12th mentality on this blog gets more and more amusing, if not sad.
Feel free to continue, as your party does, denying the existence of terrorism, jimmy.
After all, we had Clintonista Richard Clark before Congress arguing that the first WTC attack, the Khobar Towers bombing, the African embassy bombings, and the USS Cole bombing didn’t really count, since “less than 50 Americans died”.
The writing is so persuasive. Did you ever think of applying for a position as speech writer at the White House or for a Star Trek convention?
And sean, have you ever thought about hiring yourself out to the DNC as a professional bootlicker? Or do you do that in real life?
Try again.
Regards,
Peter H.