The best words that John Mccain has ever spoken

These are the words of Senator John McCain from the Senate floor. Via his website:

“Mr. President, I rise in support of the release – the long-delayed release – of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s summarized, unclassified review of the so-called ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ that were employed by the previous administration to extract information from captured terrorists. It is a thorough and thoughtful study of practices that I believe not only failed their purpose – to secure actionable intelligence to prevent further attacks on the U.S. and our allies – but actually damaged our security interests, as well as our reputation as a force for good in the world.

“I believe the American people have a right – indeed, a responsibility – to know what was done in their name; how these practices did or did not serve our interests; and how they comported with our most important values.

“I commend Chairman Feinstein and her staff for their diligence in seeking a truthful accounting of policies I hope we will never resort to again. I thank them for persevering against persistent opposition from many members of the intelligence community, from officials in two administrations, and from some of our colleagues.

“The truth is sometimes a hard pill to swallow. It sometimes causes us difficulties at home and abroad. It is sometimes used by our enemies in attempts to hurt us. But the American people are entitled to it, nonetheless.

“They must know when the values that define our nation are intentionally disregarded by our security policies, even those policies that are conducted in secret. They must be able to make informed judgments about whether those policies and the personnel who supported them were justified in compromising our values; whether they served a greater good; or whether, as I believe, they stained our national honor, did much harm and little practical good.

“What were the policies? What was their purpose? Did they achieve it? Did they make us safer? Less safe? Or did they make no difference? What did they gain us? What did they cost us? The American people need the answers to these questions. Yes, some things must be kept from public disclosure to protect clandestine operations, sources and methods, but not the answers to these questions.

“By providing them, the Committee has empowered the American people to come to their own decisions about whether we should have employed such practices in the past and whether we should consider permitting them in the future. This report strengthens self-government and, ultimately, I believe, America’s security and stature in the world. I thank the Committee for that valuable public service.

“I have long believed some of these practices amounted to torture, as a reasonable person would define it, especially, but not only the practice of waterboarding, which is a mock execution and an exquisite form of torture. Its use was shameful and unnecessary; and, contrary to assertions made by some of its defenders and as the Committee’s report makes clear, it produced little useful intelligence to help us track down the perpetrators of 9/11 or prevent new attacks and atrocities.

“I know from personal experience that the abuse of prisoners will produce more bad than good intelligence. I know that victims of torture will offer intentionally misleading information if they think their captors will believe it. I know they will say whatever they think their torturers want them to say if they believe it will stop their suffering. Most of all, I know the use of torture compromises that which most distinguishes us from our enemies, our belief that all people, even captured enemies, possess basic human rights, which are protected by international conventions the U.S. not only joined, but for the most part authored.

“I know, too, that bad things happen in war. I know in war good people can feel obliged for good reasons to do things they would normally object to and recoil from.

“I understand the reasons that governed the decision to resort to these interrogation methods, and I know that those who approved them and those who used them were dedicated to securing justice for the victims of terrorist attacks and to protecting Americans from further harm. I know their responsibilities were grave and urgent, and the strain of their duty was onerous.

“I respect their dedication and appreciate their dilemma. But I dispute wholeheartedly that it was right for them to use these methods, which this report makes clear were neither in the best interests of justice nor our security nor the ideals we have sacrificed so much blood and treasure to defend.

“The knowledge of torture’s dubious efficacy and my moral objections to the abuse of prisoners motivated my sponsorship of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, which prohibits ‘cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment’ of captured combatants, whether they wear a nation’s uniform or not, and which passed the Senate by a vote of 90-9.

“Subsequently, I successfully offered amendments to the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which, among other things, prevented the attempt to weaken Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, and broadened definitions in the War Crimes Act to make the future use of waterboarding and other ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ punishable as war crimes.

“There was considerable misinformation disseminated then about what was and wasn’t achieved using these methods in an effort to discourage support for the legislation. There was a good amount of misinformation used in 2011 to credit the use of these methods with the death of Osama bin Laden. And there is, I fear, misinformation being used today to prevent the release of this report, disputing its findings and warning about the security consequences of their public disclosure.

“Will the report’s release cause outrage that leads to violence in some parts of the Muslim world? Yes, I suppose that’s possible, perhaps likely. Sadly, violence needs little incentive in some quarters of the world today. But that doesn’t mean we will be telling the world something it will be shocked to learn. The entire world already knows that we water-boarded prisoners. It knows we subjected prisoners to various other types of degrading treatment. It knows we used black sites, secret prisons. Those practices haven’t been a secret for a decade.

“Terrorists might use the report’s re-identification of the practices as an excuse to attack Americans, but they hardly need an excuse for that. That has been their life’s calling for a while now.

“What might come as a surprise, not just to our enemies, but to many Americans, is how little these practices did to aid our efforts to bring 9/11 culprits to justice and to find and prevent terrorist attacks today and tomorrow. That could be a real surprise, since it contradicts the many assurances provided by intelligence officials on the record and in private that enhanced interrogation techniques were indispensable in the war against terrorism. And I suspect the objection of those same officials to the release of this report is really focused on that disclosure – torture’s ineffectiveness – because we gave up much in the expectation that torture would make us safer. Too much.

“Obviously, we need intelligence to defeat our enemies, but we need reliable intelligence. Torture produces more misleading information than actionable intelligence. And what the advocates of harsh and cruel interrogation methods have never established is that we couldn’t have gathered as good or more reliable intelligence from using humane methods.

“The most important lead we got in the search for bin Laden came from using conventional interrogation methods. I think it is an insult to the many intelligence officers who have acquired good intelligence without hurting or degrading prisoners to assert we can’t win this war without such methods. Yes, we can and we will.

“But in the end, torture’s failure to serve its intended purpose isn’t the main reason to oppose its use. I have often said, and will always maintain, that this question isn’t about our enemies; it’s about us. It’s about who we were, who we are and who we aspire to be. It’s about how we represent ourselves to the world.

“We have made our way in this often dangerous and cruel world, not by just strictly pursuing our geopolitical interests, but by exemplifying our political values, and influencing other nations to embrace them. When we fight to defend our security we fight also for an idea, not for a tribe or a twisted interpretation of an ancient religion or for a king, but for an idea that all men are endowed by the Creator with inalienable rights. How much safer the world would be if all nations believed the same. How much more dangerous it can become when we forget it ourselves even momentarily.

“Our enemies act without conscience. We must not. This executive summary of the Committee’s report makes clear that acting without conscience isn’t necessary, it isn’t even helpful, in winning this strange and long war we’re fighting. We should be grateful to have that truth affirmed.

“Now, let us reassert the contrary proposition: that is it essential to our success in this war that we ask those who fight it for us to remember at all times that they are defending a sacred ideal of how nations should be governed and conduct their relations with others – even our enemies.

“Those of us who give them this duty are obliged by history, by our nation’s highest ideals and the many terrible sacrifices made to protect them, by our respect for human dignity to make clear we need not risk our national honor to prevail in this or any war. We need only remember in the worst of times, through the chaos and terror of war, when facing cruelty, suffering and loss, that we are always Americans, and different, stronger, and better than those who would destroy us.

“Thank you.”

God Bless Him for standing up for what is right.

(via Memeoradum)

Video: Art Thompson on Dangers of Arming ‘Moderate’ Muslims

(via JBS HQ)

If I were the US, I would tell Afghanistan’s Karzai, “Sign the agreement or we leave in 48 hours!”

Next year?!?! How about in 48 hours?

The Story:

KABUL, Afghanistan –The White House threatened to withdraw all U.S. troops from Afghanistan next year, after President Hamid Karzai refused to sign a new bilateral security agreement.

Over the weekend, officials in Afghanistan endorsed a security deal that would keep United Stations troops in the nation beyond next year, but President Hamid Karzai denied the request. He wants the U.S. to bring more security to the country first. NBC’s Richard Engel reports.

The two countries remain deadlocked over future military involvement after an unsuccessful working dinner between Ambassador Susan Rice and Karzai at his palace in Kabul on Monday night.

In a statement, the White House said Karzai had outlined new conditions for a deal “and indicated he is not prepared to sign the BSA promptly.”

“Ambassador Rice reiterated that, without a prompt signature, the U.S. would have no choice but to initiate planning for a post-2014 future in which there would be no U.S. or NATO troop presence in Afghanistan,” the statement said.

via US to Afghanistan’s Karzai: Sign security deal or we’ll pull out all troops next year – World News.

If I were the President and Susan Rice, I would simply tell Karzai that either he signs the agreement or our forces would be out of Afghanistan in 48 hours. However, before that, I would quite forcefully remind Karzai that the only reason he and his predecessor were even elected to power; was because the United States of America overran the Taliban by Military force and forced them to allow a democratically elected Government.

I would also tell him this; If we leave in 48 hours and your Government gets overran by the Taliban again and you happen to find yourselves under the Islāmic extremists again — do not call us, because the United States will NOT be coming back here at all. The United States came to Afghanistan to get Osama Bin Laden after 9/11 and in the process of that, defeated the Taliban. We got our man and our being here is now moot. Now, this idiot is playing hardball; well, I would play it right back; and tell him that either he signs or we leave — and he can deal with the fallout, we did our job as far as this writer is concerned. We really do not need to be there; but for the sake of a few kids, who we don’t want to see living under extreme Islāmic rule.

Next year… :roll: What is that going to do? Buy Karzai some time? I think it is time that we got tough with Karzai and tell him, “Either get with the program or we’re done with you and this Nation.”

Just my opinion.

Bombing victim speaks out about Muslims and Terrorism

Glad to see this. :)

The Video is here. I was going to post it here, but it is an auto start embed and those drive people crazy! So, go to the link to view it!

The Story:

A Boston Marathon bombing victim hospitalized for weeks after the blasts lashed out at the mother of the accused bombers, calling Zubeidat Tsarnaeva “vile” for her jihad-laced rants and denials.

Michelle L’Heureux, a 38-year-old John Hancock consultant, told the Herald yesterday it’s time to stop being “politically correct” and speak out — making her one of the first victims to stand up to the terror-talking Chechen family.

“I feel a little bit of hatred towards her. I think she is a vile person,” L’Heureux said of the mom. “If you don’t like our country, get out. It’s as simple as that.”

L’Heureux lost most of her left knee in the blasts, and 30 percent of her hearing in her left ear. Her left arm is riddled with shrapnel scars, and there’s a piece of metal still inside her leg. She was 8 feet away from the first blast on Boylston Street. She came to the city to see her boyfriend cross the finish lin

via Bombing victim calls suspects’ mom ‘vile’ | Boston Herald.

If only more liberal Democrats felt this way, maybe we would have actually won the war on terror. Instead, because of the Democrat’s almost allergic reaction to war and because of the bungled methods of the Bush Administration — we lost it and badly. Oh, and BTW, I have seen where people have blamed this guy here for the loss of the Afghan war.  Sorry, but that is bunch of flipping malarkey and I think the person that wrote that knows it; he is just looking to deflect the fact that Bush’s mishandling of the war in Afghanistan and the overselling of the war in Iraq.

Plus too, I believe we pulled out too early of Iraq and Afghanistan; we could have done it better, but we needed more time. But, when you have a war weary nation, what can you do?

Others: Weekly StandardThe Jawa Report and Instapundit

No, Sorry, Dick (head) Cheney, I do NOT trust you or your idiotic successor in the White House!

Ol’ Dick (head) Cheney says that we ought to just trust the Government.

The Video: (Via Think Progress)

Okay here is the little small problem with trusting Dick Cheney and his boss George W. Bush, they lied, as in like 935 times in a row, during their Presidency and Vice Presidency.

Prove it, you say? Sure.

Via The Center for Public Integrity, which is as follows:

The Center for Public Integrity was founded in 1989 by Charles Lewis. We are one of the country’s oldest and largest nonpartisan, nonprofit investigative news organizations. Our mission: To enhance democracy by revealing abuses of power, corruption and betrayal of trust by powerful public and private institutions, using the tools of investigative journalism.

Anyhow, here is why I don’t trust Neocons, nor do I trust Democratic Party liberals or Neo-leftists:

President Bush, for example, made 232 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and another 28 false statements about Iraq’s links to Al Qaeda. Secretary of State Powell had the second-highest total in the two-year period, with 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq’s links to Al Qaeda. Rumsfeld and Fleischer each made 109 false statements, followed by Wolfowitz (with 85), Rice (with 56), Cheney (with 48), and McClellan (with 14).

The massive database at the heart of this project juxtaposes what President Bush and these seven top officials were saying for public consumption against what was known, or should have been known, on a day-to-day basis. This fully searchable database includes the public statements, drawn from both primary sources (such as official transcripts) and secondary sources (chiefly major news organizations) over the two years beginning on September 11, 2001. It also interlaces relevant information from more than 25 government reports, books, articles, speeches, and interviews.

Consider, for example, these false public statements made in the run-up to war:

  • On August 26, 2002, in an address to the national convention of the Veteran of Foreign Wars, Cheney flatly declared: “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.” In fact, former CIA Director George Tenet later recalled, Cheney’s assertions went well beyond his agency’s assessments at the time. Another CIA official, referring to the same speech, told journalist Ron Suskind, “Our reaction was, ‘Where is he getting this stuff from?’ “
  • In the closing days of September 2002, with a congressional vote fast approaching on authorizing the use of military force in Iraq, Bush told the nation in his weekly radio address: “The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons, is rebuilding the facilities to make more and, according to the British government, could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order is given. . . . This regime is seeking a nuclear bomb, and with fissile material could build one within a year.” A few days later, similar findings were also included in a much-hurried National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction — an analysis that hadn’t been done in years, as the intelligence community had deemed it unnecessary and the White House hadn’t requested it.
  • In July 2002, Rumsfeld had a one-word answer for reporters who asked whether Iraq had relationships with Al Qaeda terrorists: “Sure.” In fact, an assessment issued that same month by the Defense Intelligence Agency (and confirmed weeks later by CIA Director Tenet) found an absence of “compelling evidence demonstrating direct cooperation between the government of Iraq and Al Qaeda.” What’s more, an earlier DIA assessment said that “the nature of the regime’s relationship with  Al Qaeda is unclear.”
  • On May 29, 2003, in an interview with Polish TV, President Bush declared: “We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories.” But as journalist Bob Woodward reported in State of Denial, days earlier a team of civilian experts dispatched to examine the two mobile labs found in Iraq had concluded in a field report that the labs were not for biological weapons. The team’s final report, completed the following month, concluded that the labs had probably been used to manufacture hydrogen for weather balloons.
  • On January 28, 2003, in his annual State of the Union address, Bush asserted: “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production.” Two weeks earlier, an analyst with the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research sent an email to colleagues in the intelligence community laying out why he believed the uranium-purchase agreement “probably is a hoax.”
  • On February 5, 2003, in an address to the United Nations Security Council, Powell said: “What we’re giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence. I will cite some examples, and these are from human sources.” As it turned out, however, two of the main human sources to which Powell referred had provided false information. One was an Iraqi con artist, code-named “Curveball,” whom American intelligence officials were dubious about and in fact had never even spoken to. The other was an Al Qaeda detainee, Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi, who had reportedly been sent to Eqypt by the CIA and tortured and who later recanted the information he had provided. Libi told the CIA in January 2004 that he had “decided he would fabricate any information interrogators wanted in order to gain better treatment and avoid being handed over to [a foreign government].”

The false statements dramatically increased in August 2002, with congressional consideration of a war resolution, then escalated through the mid-term elections and spiked even higher from January 2003 to the eve of the invasion.

It was during those critical weeks in early 2003 that the president delivered his State of the Union address and Powell delivered his memorable U.N. presentation. 

In addition to their patently false pronouncements, Bush and these seven top officials also made hundreds of other statements in the two years after 9/11 in which they implied that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or links to Al Qaeda. Other administration higher-ups, joined by Pentagon officials and Republican leaders in Congress, also routinely sounded false war alarms in the Washington echo chamber.

The cumulative effect of these false statements — amplified by thousands of news stories and broadcasts — was massive, with the media coverage creating an almost impenetrable din for several critical months in the run-up to war. Some journalists — indeed, even some entire news organizations — have since acknowledged that their coverage during those prewar months was far too deferential and uncritical. These mea culpas notwithstanding, much of the wall-to-wall media coverage provided additional, “independent” validation of the Bush administration’s false statements about Iraq.

The “ground truth” of the Iraq war itself eventually forced the president to backpedal, albeit grudgingly. In a 2004 appearance on NBC’s Meet the Press, for example, Bush acknowledged that no weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq. And on December 18, 2005, with his approval ratings on the decline, Bush told the nation in a Sunday-night address from the Oval Office: “It is true that Saddam Hussein had a history of pursuing and using weapons of mass destruction. It is true that he systematically concealed those programs, and blocked the work of U.N. weapons inspectors. It is true that many nations believed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. But much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong. As your president, I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq. Yet it was right to remove Saddam Hussein from power.”

Bush stopped short, however, of admitting error or poor judgment; instead, his administration repeatedly attributed the stark disparity between its prewar public statements and the actual “ground truth” regarding the threat posed by Iraq to poor intelligence from a Who’s Who of domestic agencies.

On the other hand, a growing number of critics, including a parade of former government officials, have publicly — and in some cases vociferously — accused the president and his inner circle of ignoring or distorting the available intelligence. In the end, these critics say, it was the calculated drumbeat of false information and public pronouncements that ultimately misled the American people and this nation’s allies on their way to war.

Bush and the top officials of his administration have so far largely avoided the harsh, sustained glare of formal scrutiny about their personal responsibility for the litany of repeated, false statements in the run-up to the war in Iraq. There has been no congressional investigation, for example, into what exactly was going on inside the Bush White House in that period. Congressional oversight has focused almost entirely on the quality of the U.S. government’s pre-war intelligence — not the judgment, public statements, or public accountability of its highest officials. And, of course, only four of the officials — Powell, Rice, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz — have testified before Congress about Iraq.

Short of such review, this project provides a heretofore unavailable framework for examining how the U.S. war in Iraq came to pass. Clearly, it calls into question the repeated assertions of Bush administration officials that they were the unwitting victims of bad intelligence.

Above all, the 935 false statements painstakingly presented here finally help to answer two all-too-familiar questions as they apply to Bush and his top advisers: What did they know, and when did they know it?

A video:

The real sick and sad part is this; the same people that are having a hissy fit on the right about this program existing under Obama, are the same ones who were perfectly fine with it existing under Bush. In other words, they trusted the program under Bush. like idiots. My question to that crowd is this; why do  you not trust Obama? Because he is black or because he is a Democratic Party liberal?

Anyone and I mean anyone, who puts their trust in this Government of ours, based upon partisanship is nothing more than a darned fool in my opinion. Both of these political parties are two sides of the same coin and that is corruption and big Government socialism. Both parties promote it, both parties contribute to it. Government hand outs are Government hand outs; whether it be in the forum of welfare or Government subsidies. It is big Government statist and it flies in the face of our Constitution and in the face of what this great Nation was founded upon.

Others: Prairie Weather

Quote of the Day

Over the past 10 years, there have been few days when the war in Iraq was absent from my thoughts. People often ask me whether I have regrets. It seems absurdly presumptuous to answer the question. I could have set myself on fire in protest on the White House lawn and the war would have proceeded without me. And yet … all of us who advocated for the war have had to do some reckoning. If the war achieved some positive gains, its unnecessary costs—in human life, in money, to the prestige and credibility of the U.S. government—are daunting and dismaying. If we’d found the WMD, it would have been different. If we’d kept better order in Iraq after the overthrow of Saddam, it would have been different. If more Iraqis had welcomed the invasion as we expected, it would have been different. If the case for the war had been argued in a less contrived and predetermined way, it would have been different.

But it wasn’t different. Those of us who were involved—in whatever way—bear the responsibility.

Taking Religion out of the Military?

I have mixed feelings about this one:

“Soldiers with minority religious beliefs and atheists often feel like second-class citizens when Christianity is seemingly officially endorsed by their own base,” American Atheists president David Silverman told Fox News. “We are very happy the Pentagon and the Army decided to do the right thing.” A military spokesman told Fox News the cross was literally dismantled and will be removed from the base to be in “compliance with Army regulations and to avoid any misconception of religious favoritism or disrespect.” “After a Christian prayer, the cross was removed from the roof of the chapel,” the spokesman said. “During the removal, the cross was dismantled; however the cross was reassembled and currently awaits transportation to a larger operational base.” The military told Fox News the cross will only be brought out during Christian services and will be designated as a “non-permanent religious symbol.” Silverman said a Christian chapel on an Army base in Afghanistan could have put American troops in danger. “It inflames this Muslim versus Christian mentality,” he said. “This is not a Muslim versus Christian war — but if the Army base has a large chapel on it that has been converted to Christian-only, it sends a message that could be interpreted as hostile to Islam.” An Army spokesman said all chapels must be religiously neutral. “The primary purpose of making a chapel a neutral, multi-use facility is to accommodate the free exercise of religion for all faith groups using it,” he said. “We take the spiritual fitness of our Soldiers seriously and encourage them to practice their faith and exercise their beliefs however they choose.” Retired Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, of the Family Research Council, told Fox News a Christian cleansing of the military is under way. “I don’t think you can categorize it any other way,” he said. “There is a strong effort, led partially by the Administration as well as by atheist groups to destroy the identity of who we are as a nation and that means robbing us of our history.” —- Military: Crosses Removed ‘Out of Respect for Other Faiths’ | FOX News & Commentary: Todd Starnes

On one hand, I would hate to think that having Christian symbols on a battle front could be putting our Military at risk. On the other hand, I would hate to see Christianity being removed from the Military entirely. However, we are in a Muslim Nation is Afghan region; one would think that the Military would want to be respectful of those people and their culture.

It is a mixed bag, and all the more reason why we really need to get out of that Country. Our mission is done there; we killed Osama and we need to leave. We do not want to make the same mistake the Russians made there. Besides all that, Al-Qaeda has moved into other regions and is much more a threat to other interests in other parts for the world now.

So, to this Independent, the quicker we leave, the better.

Video: Ft. Hood shooting NOT a terrorist attack says Obama Administration

First, the heart wrenching video: (H/T to HotAir.com)

The story via Stars and Stripes:

WASHINGTON — Victims of the Fort Hood shooting are rallying in a grassroots effort to get the rampage classified as an act of terrorism.

A coalition of 160 victims and family members released a video Thursday detailing what happened at the Texas military base on Nov. 5, 2009, and why they believe it was a terror attack.

In “The Truth About Fort Hood,” victims give testimonials about their experience and express their frustration at the government calling the incident “workplace violence.”

They point out that the accused shooter, Maj. Nidal Hasan, consulted by email with top al-Qaida leader Anwar al-Awlaki about whether an attack against American soldiers was justified to “protect our brothers.” Until his death in an airstrike in 2011, Yemen-based Awlaki was considered one of the United States’ top enemies.

The shooting for Hasan “was his jihad,” Staff Sgt. Alonzo Lunsford, who was shot five times that day, said in the video.

Another victim, Shawn Manning, said that the soldiers at the readiness center “were killed and wounded by a domestic enemy, someone who was there that day to kill soldiers to prevent them from deploying. If that’s not an act of war or an act of terrorism, I don’t know what is.”

“We’re working pretty hard for our guys right now to get them the recognition and compensation they deserve,” said Kathy Stalnaker, whose husband has severe post-traumatic stress disorder from the incident. “We want to keep it in front of the public.”

I very highly recommend that you go read the rest of that; because it is absolutely heartbreaking. Crying

My friends, allow me to rant for a second:

This above, if anything else — is why as a people must vote different on November 4, 2012. These brave people have put their damned asses on the line for us, to protect this Republic of ours and this is the thanks that they get from this Marxist President? This is an utter outrage and if there was any sort of justice in this Country, this President would be asked to resign his position and if he did not, impeachment proceedings would be started against him.

Now, I am not saying that our President is a Muslim, like some of the right argue. However, I will say this; at the very least he is empathic to the Islamic cause and does empathic with those who use violence to react to the United States invading their lands. I am not saying he agrees with their actions; but what I am saying is that the President feels that because we did invade their lands, that somehow their actions are justified —- or at the very LEAST the President empathizes with this position.

This is a very dangerous place for a President to be in. Even if we did invade their lands; the invasion of Afghanistan was totally justified, considering that Al-Qaeda hit our homeland on September 11, 2001. Whether our occupation of their lands was the cause, or whether they hit us, because of a Christian and Capitalistic society; the fact is, they attacked us first and we replied back with Military force.

I will say this; this attack here is one of the reasons why I believe that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld and the rest of them made a serious miscalculation about the war on terror. I do not think that the former President, Vice President and his staff realize just what they were uncorking, when they decided to fight the war on terror and just how far reaching it would be and what sort of blowback that they would encounter.

Furthermore, I do not believe that the former President calculated on people, who happened to be Muslim, in his own Military turning on their own Country for the sake of Jihad either. However, now, none of that matters; Bush and Cheney are gone and now we have a President, who will not even call terrorism for what it truly is. I say this as someone who rejects Wilsonian foreign policy, as someone who is not too keen on the idea of a continual war in he middle east for the sake on a so-called ally. I also say this, as unrepentant realist, who see things for what they really are and what they have become over the last three and a half years. Bush created this so-called “Arab Spring” mess and now we are into it deeply.

I also happen to believe that Bush and Co. made another fatal mistake of saying that the war that following 9/11 was not a religious war. It is, in fact, a religious war. It is war between civilized religions of peace; such as Christianity and Judaism and a savage, backward religion, which is quite fascist and intolerant towards those who dare criticize its so-called “prophet.” For those who would say that Christians do the same thing; I simply say to you, the last time I checked, I do not see Christians threatening to blowup buildings or anything for the sort —- for the mere offensive remarks about Jesus Christ or Jews blowing themselves up over insults to the Torah either. For those who point to Timothy McVeigh: He was not a Christian and he was not angry about insults to his religion either. He was a lone wolf crackpot who was angry at the Government. Big Difference! McVeigh might have also been suffering from post-traumatic stress syndrome as well, as he was a first gulf war Veteran.

I said all that up there to say this right here: This is why we have to vote different come November 4, 2012. Because we need a steely-eyed leader, who will look at this situation that we are in and make some serious decisions. Not decisions based on political correctness, not based upon popularity polls or any other of that silly stuff. But decisions made for the good of this Country and the future of this Republic of ours. Admittedly, some of those decisions will most likely will make me want to hide under the bed, see I am not that big on war. But, I will feel much better knowing that Mitt Romney, who I am voting for and praying does win — will be that person in charge.

I pray that the Lord God of the Heavens is merciful to this Nation once again and allows a man to be elected — who believes, what I and many of the people who read this blog —- believe. That America and this Republic are worthy of defending, against enemies; foreign and domestic. Who also sees what previous President’s have done, and what needs to be done, to finish the job —- with honor — once and for all.

Ooops: Joe Biden fibs on his vote on Iraq and Afghanistan

The Video:

Um, Oops. According to the Washington Free Beacon:

Vice President Joe Biden accused Rep. Paul Ryan of putting two wars on the “credit card,” and then suggested he voted against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

“By the way, they talk about this great recession like it fell out of the sky–like, ‘Oh my goodness, where did it come from?’” Biden said. “It came from this man voting to put two wars on a credit card, at the same time, put a prescription drug plan on the credit card, a trillion dollar tax cut for the very wealthy.”

“I was there, I voted against them,” Biden continued. “I said, no, we can’t afford that.”

Well, there is only one little problem with that:

Then Sen. Biden voted for the Afghanistan resolution on Sept. 14, 2001 which authorized “the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.”

And on Oct. 11, 2002, Biden voted for a resolution authorizing unilateral military action in Iraq, according to the Washington Post.

When I wrote my review, I was trying to be respectful of the man’s age; unlike some. However, when someone who is old tells a lie, just I do not respect that at all. Again, this is all that the Democrats have left; lies, scaremongering, class warfare and race warfare. Anymore, it pretty much comes with the territory of the left.

Others: MediaiteNaked DCBabalú BlogWeekly StandardWeasel ZippersJammie Wearing FoolsInstapundit and The PJ Tatler

Chart: Obama’s Spending versus Bush

It is an updated one, via InstaPundit. Show this to Democrats when they try to blame our budget problems on Bush’s wars. This will prove that they are, as always; full of crap.

Drop in voter registration in Ohio

Despite what has happened locally here and how I feel about it; I must continue on writing and blogging about what I consider to be important.

It seems that in Ohio, there has been a decline in voter registration, especially in Democratic Party strongholds. This is also signaling a national trend. Here is the Story and Video via Fox News Channel:

The Video:

The Story:

“Don’t boo, vote,” President Obama often says in his stump speech whenever crowds boo a Romney plan.

The off-hand call to vote may be by design. It comes amid a precipitous decline in Democratic voter registration in key swing states — nowhere more apparent than in Ohio.

Voter registration in the Buckeye State is down by 490,000 people from four years ago. Of that reduction, 44 percent is in Cleveland and surrounding Cuyahoga County, where Democrats outnumber Republicans more than two to one.

“I think what we’re seeing is a lot of spin and hype on the part of the Obama campaign to try to make it appear that they’re going to cruise to victory in Ohio,” Cuyahoga County Republican Chairman Rob Frost said. “It’s not just Cuyahoga County. Nearly 350,000 of those voters are the decrease in the rolls in the three largest counties, Cuyahoga, Hamilton and Franklin.”

Frost points out that those three counties all contain urban centers, where the largest Democrat vote traditionally has been.

Ohio is not alone. An August study by the left-leaning think tank Third Way showed that the Democratic voter registration decline in eight key swing states outnumbered the Republican decline by a 10-to-one ratio. In Florida, Democratic registration is down 4.9 percent, in Iowa down 9.5 percent. And in New Hampshire, it’s down down 19.7 percent.

“It’s understandable that enthusiasm is going to wane a little bit from that historic moment (in 2008),” says Michelle Diggles, the study co-author and senior policy adviser for Third Way. “You can only elect the first African-American president of this country once.

Of course, there are other reasons why people are just not happy anymore with the Democrats:

One Democratic Party consultant told Fox News that independents in Ohio may be leaning Democratic – an effect that may be tied to the bailout of Chrysler and GM. One of eight people in Ohio work in businesses directly tied to the auto industry. The state has been carpeted with Obama ads that point to his bailout of the industry and it’s managed bankruptcy.

I do not mean to toot my own horn; but in this case, I must. I predicted that stuff like this would happen on my old blog. When the bailouts happened, and when the healthcare bill was pushed through. The truth is Independents are simply running away from Obama. Another thing too that this report did not cover; is that some Democrats are simply not happy with the Obama Administration. This is for a number for reasons: The continuation of Bush’s polices on the war on terror and the war is one. The failure to close the prisons in Gitmo is another. The continuing of the war in Afghanistan is another. Also too, Ohio is also a union State and when Obama’s chief of staff at the time, said “F*** the big three!”, many in Ohio heard about that too. This all makes for a unpopular President.

Also too; the economy in Ohio, here in Michigan; and nationally, just plain sucks. There are many small businesses in Ohio, many of whom are faithful Democrats; and they are just looking at their bottom lines and are looking at this President and wondering, “What on earth are they doing to us?” To be fair, it is not all of Obama’s fault. The Federal Reserve with it’s QE1, QE2 and now QE3 is not helping the situation at all. When the fed prints more money, inflation happens, which drives the prices of everything up and this, in turn, hurts businesses. Which, in turn, hurts the economy. Bill Clinton learned this lesson early on, and made adjustments. Jimmy Carter and this President, did not. For that, they are paying a price at the polls.

I should also mention that this current foreign policy debacle in Libya, and Egypt and the rest of the Arab World is also weighing heavy on the minds of people as well. As it was in 1979, with the Iran hostage crisis. Now, Iran is being a problem again. Which is very ironic.

History has such a strange way of repeating itself.

Video: Michelle Malkin to White House: These optics suck White House!

A few questions from a Non-Wilsonian Conservative:

  1. Where was all this outrage when it was discovered that President George W. Bush invaded Iraq based upon bad information from Germany?
  2. Does Malkin realize that the entire “Arab Spring” was started, when Bush invaded Iraq? Best thing that people like her can say in response is, “Blame Bush, Blame Bush….” Well, in this case, his blame is due.

Now, do not misunderstand me here. This is a huge blunder by the White House, and the fallout is getting worse by the minute. I mean, now several Christian Colleges are now being threatened.  However, I believe to pin the blame entirely on the Obama Administration is cheap political theater really.

As for Romney, I believe the media is making hay over that issue, a bit too much. But, he did jump the gun too quickly, I believe.

Furthermore, as a Non-Wilsonian Conservative, I say the following:

  1. This is nothing more than living proof, that the United States of America needs to get the hell out of United Nations and order them out of this Country.
  2. This is living proof that the United States needs to close these idiotic embassies in these Countries that are not necessarily friendly to the United States, and stop having American forces, of any sort, in those Countries.
  3. This is proof that Islam is not a peaceful Religion or political philosophy, and as I wrote before, should be banned in the United States and those that practice it, should be given two choices; convert or leave.
  4. This, if anything, should be proof that, as noted for a long time, by Anti-Jihadi bloggers for years; that the attacks on 9/11 were a declaration of a Religious War between the Judeo-Christian values of the west and of the United States and the backward Islāmic values of the middle east. These attacks this week are a continuation of that War.  Now, if we do pull out, will that war stop? Most likely not. But, I believe that they will subside and the parties will begin fighting one another. Furthermore, if they attack the US on our soil, then we will have a legit excuse for War. Right now, we do not. We are in their lands.

In closing: I want it to be clear, this is not just a posting to knee-cap Michelle Malkin. But it is rather my personal take on what some on the right are saying about this whole thing. I realize it is an election year and all. But, we should not allow ourselves to be duped into blaming one person or President Administration for the events of the past week.

The truth is that what is happening now in the middle east is a result of many years of Wilsonian stupidity from many Presidential Administrations and an utter failure by many in Government that Islam is just incompatible with western values, constitutional freedoms and general social decency.

This is a very important lesson, and the quicker that those in our Government and Governments to come figure this out, the better things will be for this Country.

(via Urban Grounds)

The fallout continues

The fallout from the embassy attacks is continuing.

Some on the left now are even upset about it.

Video via Gateway Pundit:

Now there comes word, via one of the most liberal papers in the U.K., that the State Department actually knew that these attacks were coming, and did absolutely nothing:

The killings of the US ambassador to Libya and three of his staff were likely to have been the result of a serious and continuing security breach, The Independent can reveal.

American officials believe the attack was planned, but Chris Stevens had been back in the country only a short while and the details of his visit to Benghazi, where he and his staff died, were meant to be confidential.

The US administration is now facing a crisis in Libya. Sensitive documents have gone missing from the consulate in Benghazi and the supposedly secret location of the “safe house” in the city, where the staff had retreated, came under sustained mortar attack. Other such refuges across the country are no longer deemed “safe”.

Some of the missing papers from the consulate are said to list names of Libyans who are working with Americans, putting them potentially at risk from extremist groups, while some of the other documents are said to relate to oil contracts.

According to senior diplomatic sources, the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and “lockdown”, under which movement is severely restricted.

 — Read the rest at the U.K. Independent

Of course, the Obama Administration is in denial mode, via The Politico:

The Obama administration is flatly denying a blaring British newspaper report that the U.S. diplomats in Libya were killed as a result of a “continuing security breach,” and that “credible information” about possible attacks had been ignored.

A U.S. official told POLITICO: “There’s no intelligence indicating that the attack in Benghazi was premeditated.”

[…]

Shawn Turner, spokesman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, emailed: “This is absolutely wrong. We are not aware of any actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent.”

The guys over at Powerline are not buying it at all:

Of course, the Independent story didn’t say that the Obama administration had “actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent.” It said that “the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted,” but did nothing to step up security. The administration’s denial does not contradict the Independent’s statement, and the fact that the denial is phrased so narrowly suggests that the Independent’s report is, in fact, accurate.

[…]

So the Obama administration is already in cover-up mode. Note how willing administration spokesmen are to take absurd positions, secure in the knowledge that reporters will help them with their cover-up.

I can tell you this; the fallout from this is going to be great. I believe this little incident right here and the fact that embassy works were unguarded like this will be amplified during this election cycle and it might just cost Barack Obama the election. I realize Romney might not have handled the situation the greatest. But this here is nothing more than a dereliction of duty.

Sarah Palin over on Hannity weighed in as well:

For once, I actually agree with Sarah Palin. I also agree with the fact that this bogus movie was not the cause of these attacks. These attacks were pre-planned and this movie just happened to be out there and it was used, by these terrorists, as a cover for their actions. The sad fact folks is this, the United States of America and more broadly; The West is involved in a Religious War, between Christianity and Islam. The people over at Gates of Vienna, Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch, and Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs, and others have been covering this for a very long time. The sad truth is that those who point to these sites and just dismiss them as hatemongers are just willfully blind to the danger that Islam is for this Country. The Nation should have realized this after 9/11, but because we had a President who wanted to remain Islam-friendly; the truth was ignored.

Furthermore, as a Christian, allow me to say this; Islam is an intolerant Religion and should be totally outlawed in America. There are extremist Christians in America, there is no denying that. But the last time, I checked, they were not as well funded as these people are. (and before anybody mentions him, Timothy McVeigh was not a Christian! Nor was he well-funded…) This is not a Religion anyways, it is a political philosophy, intermingled with a fascist religion and should be eliminated from this Country. If you are offended at this, tough crap; because the facts are that there is no such thing as peaceful Muslim. There are Muslims who choose to fight Jihad, and there are those who refrain from it. Because of this, America will never be safe at all. Call me a bigot, call me a hater, call me an A-hole; I really do not care. But America is going to learn this lesson of what Islam really is, one way or another. It really is too bad that more people are going to have to die, before the United States Government gets a clue and finally wakes up to this threat.

As a compassionate human being, I hate to think that people would actually be so ate up with their religion that they would act in this manner. However, as a realist; I have to go with my gut feelings and with what I see and all I see is this that is happening.

The sick part is, the way this Nation is headed at the moment, we will most like be too darned broke to even deal with the situation much less even fight it. It is a depressing state of affairs, which is why I try to avoid writing about it, because it just makes me sad and depressed to watch it all happen.

There is my statement, quote me, if you wish. Please, just be aware of this here. Thanks.

My Thoughts on the situation in Egypt and Libya

I remember seeing this news breaking early this morning, before I finally drifted off to sleep. I remember thinking to myself, “oh crap…” and thinking, here we go again, another situation in the middle east.

At first, I heard it was over a lamely produced Movie trailer, which was produced by someone claiming to be a Israeli Jew — who might not even be a Jew after all; then I hear it might be a coordinated attack in retaliation over the number 2 of Al-Qaeda’s being killed.

Meanwhile, an couple of Americans are dead today. Their bodies being drug through the streets in some God-forsaken Country. What does our President do? Act like some aloof jackass, who cannot be bothered with the situation.  As for Romney, he takes advantage of the Situation and points out that this President’s foreign policy has been a utter failure. In response, the media tries to portray Mitt Romney as not ready for Prime time. A typical tactic that was used on John McCain as well.  Not to mention the fact that the media is coordinating to try to tear down Romney in this election.

I could sit here and yowl on about this shows that America and Judeo-Christian Values are under attack by Islam and Muslims.  However, I believe most of you, that read this blog already know this. Whatever the cause of these American Embassies being attacked, it is a tragic thing.

However, as a Non-Wilsonian Conservative, allow me to float this idea. Could this be a piece of living, in color, proof that the United States of America ought to just withdraw from these Countries and not have American Embassies in those Country? Perhaps that this is one of the signs that America needs to stop kowtowing down to the United Nations and stop trying to be the world’s policeman. Perhaps we should stop getting involved in the affairs of other Nations. Perhaps we should being to restrict our immigration polices more and stop allowing a free flow of Muslims into this Country.

Perhaps we as a Nation need to take a second look at the practice of Islam and how it is intolerant to other Religion and to criticism; and possibly pass laws banning the Religion in this Country, on grounds it is threat to Nation security.  After all, this attack happened one day after the 11 year anniversary of the terrorist attacks in NYC and at the Pentagon, and Shakesville, Pa.

Again, is it wrong to ask such questions? I am not hating on any religion of any sort. I am looking at the protection of our Republic and all I really know, is that foreign citizens have killed Americans working abroad; this is unacceptable and something needs to be done. However, with the current leadership in the White House, nothing will be done, at all. Yes, I know, Military has been dispatched;  at this point, that is nothing more than window dressing and buttocks covering by the White House. The truth is, that once again, leadership in the White House has failed us.

This is why we must vote differently, come November.

Mitt Romney pushes back against critics who say he is ignoring the war

This is another one of those stupid liberal and somewhat neoconservative attacks.

Via Fox News:

Mitt Romney continued to take flak from Democrats over the weekend for not mentioning war in his nomination acceptance speech.

But the Republican campaign was quick to point out what critics seemed to be ignoring – Romney spent the day before his convention speech visiting the American Legion conference in Indianapolis, where he talked exclusively about national security and America’s veterans. President Obama, by contrast, addressed that conference in the form of a three-minute video aired at the conference site.

“Now that was an invitation that President Obama declined,” Romney senior adviser Eric Fehrnstrom said in an interview Sunday. “Governor Romney thought it was a privilege to be speaking to people who had served so nobly.”

Though Romney did not mention the war in Afghanistan on Thursday night, he focused on that issue, as well as the veterans who are returning home, in his American Legion speech.

Hmmmmm… Perhaps it is the fact that Mitt Romney is mindful of stuff like this here?

Via Reuters:

(Reuters) – U.S. Forces in Afghanistan said on Sunday they have suspended training new recruits to the Afghan Local Police (ALP) amid a spike in the number of insider attacks which are damaging trust between Afghans and their allies.

The ALP is a militia, set up two years ago by U.S. Forces, in villages where the national police force — a separate body trained by NATO — is weak. The ALP has been beset by allegations of abuse and widespread corruption.

Rogue shootings have killed 45 NATO-led troops so far this year, 15 last month alone, despite the coalition taking steps to try prevent them, such as requiring foreign soldiers to carry loaded weapons at all times.

In a statement, U.S. Forces said they will temporarily suspend training of about 1,000 new ALP recruits while they re-vet members currently belonging to the 16,000-strong force.

“We believe this is a necessary step to validate our vetting process and ensure the quality indicative of Afghan Local Police,” it said.

Perhaps Mitt Romney is not wanting to be a President who continues to fight a war that simply cannot be won? Maybe Romney will call it a victory in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

We shall see on that, I hoping for the best on that subject. But I am preparing for the worst.

 

Iraq and Afghanistan: wars fought wrong

This is what happens when you piece-meal a war, this is what happens; when you leave a war to fester, while you invade another Country, based on bad information. More importantly, this is what happens when you elect warmongering Neoconservatives into power. This is what happens, when you fight “armchair general’s” wars.

You end up with dead people, who should not have to die to protect an empire; and you get religious strife within a Country.

In Afghanistan:

Via Detroit News:

Kabul, Afghanistan — A man in an Afghan police uniform shot and killed an international service member on Sunday, NATO said, raising the death toll to 10 in such attacks in the space of just two weeks.

The surge in violence by Afghan allies against their international partners has raised doubts about the ability of the two forces to work together at a key transition time. Afghan forces are expected to take over security for the country by the end of 2014, when the majority of international combat forces are scheduled to leave.

On the other side, a coalition airstrike killed dozens of Taliban militants, including one of their leaders, officials said.

Few details were immediately available about Sunday’s killing of a coalition member in southern Afghanistan. NATO said only that they and Afghan authorities were investigating. Afghan officials could not be reached for comment.

The Taliban have been actively recruiting members of the Afghan security forces, saying in a statement last week that they considered these turncoat attacks a major part of their strategy against international forces.

In Iraq:

Via The Detroit News:

Baghdad — A bomb struck the convoy of a senior Sunni cleric in western Baghdad on Sunday, killing four and critically wounding the anti-extremist Muslim leader, police said.

The attack highlights the threats faced by relatively moderate Sunni clerics whom the Shiite-led government needs to help rebuild the country and establish security. It follows a series of assaults in what is becoming an increasingly bloody month.

The blast in the capital’s Yarmouk neighborhood left Sheik Mahdi al-Sumaidaie badly hurt, a Sunni religious official said. The cleric had just finished leading prayers at a nearby mosque to mark the beginning of the Eid al-Fitr holiday, which follows the holy month of Ramadan.

Al-Sumaidaie has sided with the government against Sunni extremists. Earlier this year, he called for a unified religious authority to bridge the gap between Iraq’s Sunnis and Shiites. Insurgents often target Sunni clerics seen as working closely with the Shiite-led government.

Two police officers and a hospital official confirmed the attack. They said four of the cleric’s bodyguards were killed and three others were wounded.

All officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to release the information.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki condemned the attack. In a statement posted on his website, the Shiite leader said the attack was aimed at “spreading sedition and silencing any patriotic moderate voice.”

“Even as we condemn this ugly crime, we are confident that our people are aware of the evil goals of such schemes,” he said.

The invasion of the Sovereign Nation of Iraq was supposedly to bring peace and stability to that region. So much for that eh? The only thing that the invasion of Iraq did was destabilize and inspire more Muslims to become radicalized, and try to attack America and our allies.  As for Afghanistan, that war could have been fought quickly and efficiently; however, because the American people were looking for a scalp, after the events on 9/11 and Osama was well protected within Afghanistan and Pakistani ranks — President George W. Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq.

This left the Afghanistan War to fester and turn into what it is today —- a huge cluster fark.  This was a huge error on our part and one that will be stain on the United States of America for a very long time. This War was about as bad as Vietnam, if not worse. What made this worse than Vietnam,  is the fact that Vietnam was requested by the United Nations at the time.  The Military action in Iraq was requested by no one at all, and was based upon false premises and horrifically bad information by a dissident who defected to Germany.

Least anyone think that I have become anti-military or something silly like that; none of the above was the fault of the United States Military. The United States Military did their jobs most excellent, some of them giving their lives in service to their Country. For that they should be commended. However, the leadership, at the time; was the problem. That leadership started in the White House, and for that we, the American people — will be paying, for a very long time —- fiscally, spiritually, and the eyes of the World.  The United States of America, in the span of about eight years —went from being the World’s leader to the World’s bully in the eyes of the rest of the World.  The Neoconservative reaction to this, is “Who cares?”   But anyone who truly loves this Country, ought be very worried about that little problem.

The best thing we, as Americans can do, is hope and pray that none of the radical Muslims can get enough money and support to try and attack this Country again.  It is, truly — all we can do.

I will say this, the American people are about to make the same mistake again. Putting Mitt Romney, as the Republican for President of the United States; is about the stupidest thing that the Republican Party could have ever done. In light of the Bush era, that is. We are about to make the same mistakes again —- In Iran.  You watch and see.