Another Victory in the War on Terror

May 7, 2007 at 4:58 pm (christianity, conservative, global jihad, GOP, islamo fascist, politics, religion, terror, Uncategorized, war on terror)

Egypt arrests leading Muslim Brotherhood members
   

Leading members of Egypt‘s outlawed Muslim Brotherhood group including two parliamentary deputies have been arrested by Egyptian security forces, an Egyptian Interior Ministry official confirmed to Xinhua on Monday.

A total of 11 Muslim Brotherhood members were arrested on Sunday during a secret meeting held in Minufiya governorate, 65 km north of Cairo, with the two People’s Assembly members identified as Sabri Amer and Ragab Abu Zeid, according to the Interior Ministry official.

The Egyptian authority has arrested more than 300 Brotherhood members since December 2006 after Brotherhood students carried out a military-like parade in Cairo.

Having been charged of terrorism and money laundering, some 40 leading members of the Muslim Brotherhood group were tried at a military court on Thursday, according to local media.

Officially banned in 1954 for its attempt to set up an Islamic government, Egypt’s biggest Islamic opposition group the Muslim Brotherhood won 88 seats in the 454-member lower house of parliament after its members ran as independents in 2005 legislative elections.

An Egyptian constitutional amendments adopted by a national referendum in late March prohibited the forming of any political party on a religious bases.

Source: Xinhua

Advertisements

Permalink Leave a Comment

More Insanity From The Left

May 3, 2007 at 5:34 pm (christianity, clinton, conservative, conyers, edwards, Feinstein, global jihad, hillary, islamo fascist, kucinich, liberal, matsui, McDermott, murtha, pelosi, politics, religion, sanchez, sanders, Uncategorized, war on terror, waters, waxman, woolsey)

GANESH UEIKE, secretary of the West Bastar Divisional Committee of the Communist Party of India (Maoist), seems a gentle, rather academic, man, who does not suit his green combat fatigues or clenched-fist “red salute”. He shuffles dog-eared bits of paper from a shabby file in his knapsack and writes down the questions he is asked. He answers them in slogans that he gives every appearance of believing. He wants to “liberate India from the clutches of feudalism and imperialism”.

The rare interview took place last month, in a thatched shelter in a clearing in the Bastar forest in southern Chhattisgarh. The spot was some seven hours’ walk from the nearest road, and there had been a day-and-a-half’s wait for such a “big leader” to emerge from a hideout even deeper in the jungle. His party, he said, was facing renewed suppression, because “the resources of finance capitalism are facing sluggishness in their development, and are looking for new routes,” such as the mineral riches of this forest.

Mr Ueike did not mention that, just a few hours beforehand, at the edge of the forest, in a place called Errabore, his comrades had fought back. Several hundred had mounted a co-ordinated attack on a police station, a paramilitary base and a relief camp for displaced people. They killed more than 30 of the camp’s residents, mostly by hacking them to death with axes. The scholarly Mr Ueike did boast that his army relied on “low-tech weapons”.
 

This was the latest battle in a year-long civil war in Dantewada district, in which more than 350 people have been killed, and nearly 50,000 moved into camps such as the one at Errabore. It is a remote, sparsely populated, under-developed region bordering three neighbouring states, and nine hours’ drive from Chhattisgarh’s capital, Raipur. It is here that India’s widespread Maoist rebellion is most intense.

On August 15th, in his National Day speech in Delhi, India’s prime minister, Manmohan Singh, linked Naxalism with terrorism (Islamic) as the two big threats to India’s internal security.

Permalink Leave a Comment

Dirty Dianne

May 2, 2007 at 2:45 pm (christianity, clinton, conservative, conyers, edwards, Feinstein, global jihad, hillary, islamo fascist, kucinich, liberal, matsui, McDermott, murtha, pelosi, politics, religion, sanchez, sanders, Uncategorized, war on terror, waters, waxman, woolsey)

Anyone who knows much about real power in Congress knows that almost every member of the House and Senate lusts after a seat on the Appropriations Committee and hopes one day to achieve the status of Cardinal. The Cardinals, of course, are the folks who chair the various Appropriations Committee subcommittees and literally control the billions of dollars that pass through their hands.

California Sen.  Dianne Feinstein (D) chairs the Senate Rules Committee, but she’s also a Cardinal. She is currently chairwoman of the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies subcommittee, but until last year was for six years the top Democrat on the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies (or “Milcon”) sub-committee, where she may have directed more than $1 billion to companies controlled by her husband.

She may be on the way to morphing from a respected senior Democrat into another poster child for congressional corruption.

The problems stem from her subcommittee activities from 2001 to late 2005, when she quit. During that period the public record suggests she knowingly took part in decisions that eventually put millions of dollars into her husband’s pocket — the classic conflict of interest that exploited her position and power to channel money to her husband’s companies.

In other words, it appears Sen. Feinstein was up to her ears in the same sort of shenanigans that landed California Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R) in the slammer. Indeed, it may be that the primary difference between the two is basically that Cunningham was a minor leaguer and a lot dumber than his state’s senior senator.

Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for Responsible Ethics in Washington, or CREW, usually focuses on the ethical lapses of Republicans and conservatives, but even she is appalled at the way Sen. Feinstein has abused her position. Sloan told a California reporter earlier this month that while”there are a number of members of Congress with conflicts of interest … because of the amount of money involved, Feinstein’s conflict of interest is an order of magnitude greater than those conflicts.”

And the director of the Project on Government Oversight who examined the evidence of wrongdoing assembled by California writer Peter Byrne told him that “the paper trail showing Senator Feinstein’s conflict of interest is irrefutable.”

It may be irrefutable, but she almost got away without anyone even knowing what she was up to. Her colleagues on the subcommittee, for example, had no reason even to suspect that she knew what companies might benefit from her decisions because that information is routinely withheld to avoid favoritism. What they didn’t know was that her chief legal adviser, who also happened to be a business partner of her husband’s and the vice chairman of one of the companies involved, was secretly forwarding her lists of projects and appropriation requests that were coming before the committee and in which she and her husband had an interest — information that has only come to light recently as a result of the efforts of several California investigative reporters.

This adviser insists — apparently with a straight face — that he provided the information to Feinstein’s chief of staff so that she could recuse herself in cases where there might be a conflict. He says that he assumes she did so. The public record, however, indicates that she went right ahead and fought for these same projects.

During this period the two companies, URS of San Francisco and the Perini Corporation of Framingham, Mass., were controlled by Feinstein’s husband, Richard C. Blum, and were awarded a combined total of over $1.5 billion in government business thanks in large measure to her subcommittee. That’s a lot of money even here in Washington.
Interestingly, she left the subcommittee in late 2005 at about the same time her husband sold his stake in both companies. Their combined net worth increased that year with the sale of the two companies by some 25 percent, to more than $40 million.

In spite of the blatant appearance of corruption, no major publication has picked up on the story, the Senate Ethics Committee has reportedly let her slip by, and she is now chairing the Senate Rules Committee, which puts her in charge of making sure her colleagues act ethically and avoid the sorts of conflicts of interest with which she is personally and so obviously familiar.

Permalink Leave a Comment

Response to Tenet

May 1, 2007 at 8:06 pm (christianity, clinton, conservative, conyers, edwards, global jihad, hillary, islamo fascist, kucinich, liberal, matsui, McDermott, murtha, pelosi, politics, religion, sanchez, sanders, Uncategorized, war on terror, waters, waxman, woolsey)

Why do the Iraq naysayers never confront the counterfactual scenario of their dreams? If we had left Saddam in place, the sanctions would have disintegrated in short order — Security Council members France, Russia and China were bought and paid for in Oil-for-Food bribes. Once the sanctions had collapsed, Saddam would have been right back in business — his WMD programs ready to be up and running again (to the extent they were not running already) as he sat there with about $20 billion in Oil-for-Food profits and an ongoing relationship with al Qaeda (among many other jihadist groups).If you want to say we shouldn’t have gone to Iraq, and should have anticipated the present chaos there, fair enough. But at least have the honesty to say you’d prefer the alternative: A Saddam Hussein, emboldened from having faced down the United States and its sanctions, loaded with money, arming with WMDs, and coddling jihadists.

Permalink Leave a Comment

Saddam Al Quaeda Connection

April 28, 2007 at 3:50 pm (christianity, clinton, conservative, conyers, edwards, global jihad, hillary, islamo fascist, kucinich, liberal, matsui, McDermott, murtha, pelosi, politics, religion, sanchez, sanders, Uncategorized, war on terror, waters, waxman, woolsey)

The al-Qaeda leader who is thought to have devised the plan for the July 7 suicide bombings in London and an array of terrorist plots against Britain has been captured by the Americans.

Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi, a former major in Saddam Hussein’s army, was apprehended as he tried to enter Iraq from Iran and was transferred this week to the “high-value detainee programme” at Guantanamo Bay.

Abd al-Hadi was taken into CIA custody last year, it emerged from US intelligence sources yesterday, in a move which suggests that he was interrogated for months in a “ghost prison” before being transferred to the internment camp in Cuba.

Abd al-Hadi, 45, was regarded as one of al-Qaeda’s most experienced, most intelligent and most ruthless commanders. Senior counter-terrorism sources told The Times that he was the man who, in 2003, identified Britain as the key battleground for exporting al-Qaeda’s holy war to Europe.

function pictureGalleryPopup(pubUrl,articleId) { var newWin = window.open(pubUrl+’template/2.0-0/element/pictureGalleryPopup.jsp?id=’+articleId+’&&offset=0&&sectionName=WorldIraq’,’mywindow’,’menubar=0,resizable=0,width=615,height=655′); }

Permalink Leave a Comment

Outlaw TP ?????

April 24, 2007 at 3:46 pm (christianity, clinton, conservative, conyers, edwards, global jihad, hillary, islamo fascist, kucinich, liberal, matsui, McDermott, murtha, pelosi, politics, religion, sanchez, sanders, Uncategorized, war on terror, waters, waxman, woolsey)

“I don’t want to rob any law-abiding American of his or her God-given rights, but I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where 2 to 3 could be required. “…

Sheryl Crow

If you outlaw toilet paper, only outlaws will have toilet paper!!

Permalink Leave a Comment

Letter to a COWARD!!!

April 21, 2007 at 2:21 pm (christianity, clinton, conservative, conyers, edwards, global jihad, hillary, islamo fascist, kucinich, liberal, matsui, McDermott, murtha, pelosi, politics, religion, sanchez, sanders, Uncategorized, war on terror, waters, waxman, woolsey)

I am a former NYC Firefighter and former U.S. Marine. I have also been a Reservist in the U.S. Coast Guard for 17 years. I worked at the morgue sites going through bodies and body parts for 8 months following 9/11. As a result of the prolonged trauma of that type of work, I was disabled by the FDNY. I would like to make a statement regarding Mr. Reid’s irresponsible comments as follows:

Mr. Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader (D),

I cannot adequately explain my disappointment at the comments made by you today; “The war is lost”. It is inconceivable that someone in your position could be so irresponsible and ignorant of the fallout from those words.

With our troops overseas, on the front lines, putting themselves between your family and the terrorist extremists, you have cheered on the enemy and surely the video tape of your comments will be found at every terrorist camp and referenced by every terrorist group for the eternity of mankind. Your words have “tangibly” aided and given comfort to the enemy, in that such a high political figure in the Government of our great Country has conceded defeat to terrorism. You are a disgrace to every American, irregardless of political belief or religious background.

Your comments would have demoralized a less disciplined military. Fortunately, the military men and women on the battlefields far from home, protecting you and your families interests, are not cowards or quitters (as you are). We don’t train our military that way. Thank God you did not hold such a high office during other difficult and defining moments in the history of our country.

You have given the enemy reason to rejoice, reason to continue the fight and reason to step up their violence not just in Iraq, but all over the world. You have given the enemy “hope”. You have pointed them to light at the end of the tunnel. Congratulations.

For several years Saddam Hussein stood there ignoring U.N. resolutions, pushing his finger forward in his jacket pocket as if to say “stick-em up”. We responded to the “threat” and it turns out that we didn’t find a gun in his pocket. He was a murderer that placed no value on human life. The world is a better place without him.

On September 11, 2001, another group of people showed the world that they place no value on human life. If these terrorists had it their way, we would all be dead. Terrorists do not want to “rule” us or “enslave” us. They want to kill us. All of us. For no reason. Sound familiar? Ask a Holocaust survivor what that feels like.

Iraq could be described as decent people who have suffered under an evil regime. We are trying to help them. You have single handedly undermined that effort. You have also unwittingly caused severe damage to the Democratic party, for surely there are innumerable Democrats that have served, and do serve, in the military, and there are millions of Democrats that don’t believe in quitting or surrendering to evil. In your position as a spokesperson for Democrats, your party will suffer in 2008 for your irresponsible and ignorant comments.

For any person that believes America puts its nose where it doesn’t belong, or that we violate human rights, the litmus test for me, is when people stop trying to “kill” themselves to immigrate here. That’s when I will start questioning what kind of country I’m living in. Even after all the wars, the dropping of bombs, etc, we can’t accommodate the influx of immigration into our great Country. The “proof” stands before you. This is the greatest Country in the world and people from every walk of life and every background, race, creed, color and sex know it and want to be here in this country.

Mr. Reid, I don’t know what you were thinking. Please resign.

Sincerely,

J.

Permalink Leave a Comment

Now, Demotards Want Profiling??

April 19, 2007 at 3:55 pm (christianity, clinton, conservative, conyers, edwards, global jihad, hillary, islamo fascist, kucinich, liberal, matsui, McDermott, murtha, pelosi, politics, religion, sanchez, sanders, Uncategorized, war on terror, waters, waxman, woolsey)

Responding to the Virginia Tech massacre.

MEREDITH VIERA: Is there a profile for someone who would do something like this? 

WOLF BLITZER:  It seems like the classic profile. 

PSYCHOTHERAPIST CARYN STARK:  He’s a loner which fits the profile.

CHRIS MATTHEWS:  What do you do when you have a kid that looks like a profile who might go on a rampage?

BRIAN WILLIAMS: The classic profile of a loner that exhibited trouble, isn’t that a trend now that deserves more resources?

HELEN MORRISON:  We see the typical profile of a mass murderer!

Yet, the TSA is not allowed to profile airline passengers.

Permalink Leave a Comment

Texas Donks Vote Against Limited Spending

March 27, 2007 at 2:32 pm (clinton, conservative, conyers, edwards, global jihad, hillary, islamo fascist, kucinich, liberal, matsui, McDermott, murtha, pelosi, politics, religion, sanchez, sanders, Uncategorized, war on terror, waters, waxman, woolsey)

 

43 Democrats Vote Against Limiting Spending
and Giving Money Back to the Taxpayers of Texas

Austin – Today, the Republican Party of Texas released official documentation which shows forty-three of the most liberal Democrats in the Texas House Representatives voted against passing the “calendar rule” which is passed every legislative session prior to the budget being debated on the house floor. This rule disallows any new spending initiatives outside the proposed budget as passed out of the House Appropriations committee without cutting a program somewhere else.

“Yet again ‘Do Nothing’ Jim Dunnam and his shrinking band of liberal pranksters have attempted to hijack the legislative process for their liberal agenda.  Conservatives prevailed and Jim Dunnam failed and that is a victory for all Texas taxpayers,” said Hans Klingler, Spokesman for the Texas GOP.

By a overwhelming majority, the Texas House of Representatives passed the calendar rule on the house budget bill, House Bill 1.  Sometimes called the “dollar in/dollar out” rule this bill precludes new spending without cutting the budget somewhere to pay for it.  It has been passed by every legislature over the last twenty-two years.

“We must control spending and make cutting taxes our number one priority.  This rule makes it harder for liberals like ‘Do Nothing’ Jim Dunnam to come up with more spending ideas instead of giving money back to the taxpayers of this state,” Klingler went on to say.

House Bill 1 will now make its way to the floor of the Texas House in the coming days where it will be debated for final passage.

Permalink Leave a Comment

The Global Warming Scam

February 6, 2007 at 4:18 pm (christianity, clinton, conservative, conyers, edwards, hillary, kucinich, matsui, McDermott, murtha, pelosi, politics, religion, sanchez, sanders, Uncategorized, waters, woolsey)

Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?

Monday, February 5, 2007

Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn’t exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was the first Canadian Ph.D. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition. Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and was a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg. For some reason (actually for many), the World is not listening. Here is why.

What would happen if tomorrow we were told that, after all, the Earth is flat? It would probably be the most important piece of news in the media and would generate a lot of debate. So why is it that when scientists who have studied the Global Warming phenomenon for years say that humans are not the cause nobody listens? Why does no one acknowledge that the Emperor has no clothes on?

Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification. For example, Environment Canada brags about spending $3.7 billion in the last five years dealing with climate change almost all on propaganda trying to defend an indefensible scientific position while at the same time closing weather stations and failing to meet legislated pollution targets.

No sensible person seeks conflict, especially with governments, but if we don’t pursue the truth, we are lost as individuals and as a society. That is why I insist on saying that there is no evidence that we are, or could ever cause global climate change. And, recently, Yuri A. Izrael, Vice President of the United Nations sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confirmed this statement. So how has the world come to believe that something is wrong?

Maybe for the same reason we believed, 30 years ago, that global cooling was the biggest threat: a matter of faith. “It is a cold fact: the Global Cooling presents humankind with the most important social, political, and adaptive challenge we have had to deal with for ten thousand years. Your stake in the decisions we make concerning it is of ultimate importance; the survival of ourselves, our children, our species,” wrote Lowell Ponte in 1976.

I was as opposed to the threats of impending doom global cooling engendered as I am to the threats made about Global Warming. Let me stress I am not denying the phenomenon has occurred. The world has warmed since 1680, the nadir of a cool period called the Little Ice Age (LIA) that has generally continued to the present. These climate changes are well within natural variability and explained quite easily by changes in the sun. But there is nothing unusual going on.

Since I obtained my doctorate in climatology from the University of London, Queen Mary College, England my career has spanned two climate cycles. Temperatures declined from 1940 to 1980 and in the early 1970’s global cooling became the consensus. This proves that consensus is not a scientific fact. By the 1990’s temperatures appeared to have reversed and Global Warming became the consensus. It appears I’ll witness another cycle before retiring, as the major mechanisms and the global temperature trends now indicate a cooling.

No doubt passive acceptance yields less stress, fewer personal attacks and makes career progress easier. What I have experienced in my personal life during the last years makes me understand why most people choose not to speak out; job security and fear of reprisals. Even in University, where free speech and challenge to prevailing wisdoms are supposedly encouraged, academics remain silent.

I once received a three page letter that my lawyer defined as libellous, from an academic colleague, saying I had no right to say what I was saying, especially in public lectures. Sadly, my experience is that universities are the most dogmatic and oppressive places in our society. This becomes progressively worse as they receive more and more funding from governments that demand a particular viewpoint.

In another instance, I was accused by Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki of being paid by oil companies. That is a lie. Apparently he thinks if the fossil fuel companies pay you have an agenda. So if Greenpeace, Sierra Club or governments pay there is no agenda and only truth and enlightenment?

Personal attacks are difficult and shouldn’t occur in a debate in a civilized society. I can only consider them from what they imply. They usually indicate a person or group is losing the debate. In this case, they also indicate how political the entire Global Warming debate has become. Both underline the lack of or even contradictory nature of the evidence.

I am not alone in this journey against the prevalent myth. Several well-known names have also raised their voices. Michael Crichton, the scientist, writer and filmmaker is one of them. In his latest book, “State of Fear” he takes time to explain, often in surprising detail, the flawed science behind Global Warming and other imagined environmental crises.

Another cry in the wildenerness is Richard Lindzen’s. He is an atmospheric physicist and a professor of meteorology at MIT, renowned for his research in dynamic meteorology – especially atmospheric waves. He is also a member of the National Academy of Sciences and has held positions at the University of Chicago, Harvard University and MIT. Linzen frequently speaks out against the notion that significant Global Warming is caused by humans. Yet nobody seems to listen.

I think it may be because most people don’t understand the scientific method which Thomas Kuhn so skilfully and briefly set out in his book “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.” A scientist makes certain assumptions and then produces a theory which is only as valid as the assumptions. The theory of Global Warming assumes that CO2 is an atmospheric greenhouse gas and as it increases temperatures rise. It was then theorized that since humans were producing more CO2 than before, the temperature would inevitably rise. The theory was accepted before testing had started, and effectively became a law.

As Lindzen said many years ago: “the consensus was reached before the research had even begun.” Now, any scientist who dares to question the prevailing wisdom is marginalized and called a sceptic, when in fact they are simply being good scientists. This has reached frightening levels with these scientists now being called climate change denier with all the holocaust connotations of that word. The normal scientific method is effectively being thwarted.

Meanwhile, politicians are being listened to, even though most of them have no knowledge or understanding of science, especially the science of climate and climate change. Hence, they are in no position to question a policy on climate change when it threatens the entire planet. Moreover, using fear and creating hysteria makes it very difficult to make calm rational decisions about issues needing attention.

Until you have challenged the prevailing wisdom you have no idea how nasty people can be. Until you have re-examined any issue in an attempt to find out all the information, you cannot know how much misinformation exists in the supposed age of information.

I was greatly influenced several years ago by Aaron Wildavsky’s book “Yes, but is it true?” The author taught political science at a New York University and realized how science was being influenced by and apparently misused by politics. He gave his graduate students an assignment to pursue the science behind a policy generated by a highly publicised environmental concern. To his and their surprise they found there was little scientific evidence, consensus and justification for the policy. You only realize the extent to which Wildavsky’s findings occur when you ask the question he posed. Wildavsky’s students did it in the safety of academia and with the excuse that it was an assignment. I have learned it is a difficult question to ask in the real world, however I firmly believe it is the most important question to ask if we are to advance in the right direction.

Permalink Leave a Comment

Next page »