Thursday, December 31, 2009

Harman can't understand how someone who expresses radical and violent ideologies turns into a terrorist

"Democrats are joining a chorus led by [President] Obama in declaring the government's intelligence procedures in need of repair. Among them, Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., said that when the government gets tipped to trouble as it did before a Nigerian man boarded a Detroit-bound jet with explosives, "someone's hair should be on fire." - Source, the AP

Unfortunately, it is due to the scattered-brain policies of people like Jane Harman and Barack Obama that we are in this sorry state of affairs right now.

On Dec. 15, Jane Harman presided over a hearing of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Intelligence, which addressed the following question: "Violent extremism: How people are moved from constitutionally-protected thought to acts of terrorism?"

The wording of that question, in and of itself, should raise eye-brows:

Here's what Rep. Harman said during her opening remarks at the hearing. [In attendance at the hearing, were also several members of the ACLU, who, of course, share a large part of the responsibility for our country's security woes.]:
Since early 2007, we've held a serious of careful hearings to understand how someone with radical views, which are protected by our constitution - let me say that again, 'radical views which are protected by our constitution' - becomes willing to engage in violent behavior, and in some cases to seek to inflict maximum harm on a maximum number of innocent civilians.... I hope our witnesses [from the ACLU] can help us to separate the intellectual process of committing to a political agenda, protected by the first amendment, from the operational process of moving from non-violence to violence... "
Later in the day, MSNBC anchor, Andrea Mitchell, had the following exchange with Rep. Harman:

MITCHELL: Let's talk about some of these extremists and the use of social networking. Talk about what you've learned through your examination about the way the new technologies - not just email now, but all kinds of other social networking - is helping to recruit some of these young people from our own country.

HARMAN: Well let me be clear, Andrea. We're not talking about holding extreme views. Holding extreme views is protected by the first amendment to our constitution. And, being with people who hold extreme views is also protected. It's violent behavior that is the problem. And we're trying to understand how someone who holds extreme views... transitions into a terrorist and where to intervene - again, consistent with our laws and our values. So, we held another hearing today with the head of the Arab American Institute, the ACLU and a couple of scholars to try to understand better what's happening....
So, according to Harman, Obama and the rest of the gang, "holding extreme views is protected by the first amendment to our constitution. And, being with people who hold extreme views is also protected." Nonetheless, Harman is having difficulty understanding "how someone who holds extreme views transitions into a terrorist."

A conundrum, indeed......

Other News: Cardiologists sue Sebelius over medicare cuts - Payment cuts will deny critical care for millions of heart patients - A harbinger of even greater horrors to come under ObamaCare?

Related: California's rationing of mammogram screening, a prelude to ObamaCare?

Wednesday, December 30, 2009

Rush Limbaugh Rushed to Hospital in Honolulu

Update: From Mr. Limbaugh's website:

"Rush was admitted to a Honolulu hospital today [Wednesday] and is resting comfortably after suffering chest pains. Rush appreciates your prayers and well wishes. He will keep you updated via and on Thursday's radio program."

Earlier Report - A Honolulu television station is reporting that conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh was taken to a hospital with chest pains:

KITV reported Wednesday that paramedics responded to a call at 2:41 p.m. from the Kahala Hotel and Resort where Limbaugh is vacationing.

The station, citing unnamed sources, said paramedics treated Limbaugh and took him to The Queen's Medical Center in serious condition.

Queen's spokesman N. Makana Shook says the hospital is unable to comment on the report.
Hope you have a speedy recovery, Rush! Wishing you a Happy New Year and the best of health!

If you would like to send some words of cheer to Rush, you can send him an email message via the Queens Medical Center. Queen's Volunteers will deliver your email to Mr. Limbaugh, as they do for all patients, free of charge.

According to the hospital's website, emails received before 12:00 pm on weekdays, are delivered to the patient on that day. Emails received after 12:00 pm, or on a weekend or holiday, will be delivered on the next business day.

I assume that emails received by the hospital before 12:00 pm on Thursday will be delivered to Mr. Limbaugh the same day [before New Years eve].

To send your your email greetings to Rush, click here. [I don't know his room number or which floor he's on.]

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Obama's authoritarian regime crushing dissent

Earlier this month, the Justice Department ordered Christopher Coates and J. Christian Adams, two government lawyers who filed a complaint against the New Black Panther Party for intimidating voters in last year’s presidential election, not to cooperate with a nonpartisan civil rights commission investigating how the Obama Administration handled the case.

From Judicial Watch:
Prosecutors filed a civil complaint... against members of the radical... group for bullying voters... during the 2008 presidential election.

But the case was abruptly killed by a top Justice Department official just as a federal judge was preparing to punish the Black Panthers for ignoring the charges and refusing to appear in court.

[In early December], the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights subpoenaed at least two Justice Department lawyers - J. Christian Adams and Christopher Coates [who signed off on the complaint against the Black Panther Party members] - and sought documents from the agency to explain why the complaint was dropped... But a top Justice Department official ordered the government attorneys’ silence in a letter... [saying the commission] does not have the authority to enforce subpoenas - only to make referrals and recommendations to the Justice Department...

A member of the Civil Rights Commission challenged the gag order, pointing out that his panel is duly authorized by statute to review and report on enforcement activities of the Justice Department and similar government agencies. The commission’s job, he reminds, is to serve as a watchdog of federal and state enforcement agencies. That is why Congress has instructed all agencies to comply fully with the commission’s request, he said...

[But apparently], the Obama Administration... doesn’t want the details of this heated case and apparent coverup to be made public... Yet another promise of unprecedented transparency has been broken by the commander-in-chief.
And now we learn that Mr. Coates has been relieved of his duties at DoJ as a result of his insubordinate and mutinous behavior:
In the Obama administration, try to apply the civil rights laws equally and you're gone. That was the experience of the justice department attorney who pressed charges against a group of Black Panthers that were intimidating voters in a Pennsylvania polling place. (Story is here.)

Christopher Coates, the department's veteran voting rights section chief, has been "detailed" (duties unknown) for 18 months to the U.S. Attorney's office in South Carolina. The department is trying to pass off the transfer as having nothing to do with his enforcement of the voting rights act against the Black Panthers; the effort is utterly unconvincing...

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights sought to investigate the dismissal, but has been rebuffed by Obama's justice department.

This is serious stuff. The message is clear to career administrators: Try to enforce the law in a fair and impartial way, and you're gone...
Moral of the story: Do not cross Obama, or else!

But even more astonishing than the gag order and the dismissal of Christopher Coates is how Obama manages to get away with all of this!

Well, maybe not so astonishing, considering he's got the mainstream media covering for him...

But here's another interesting tidbit from The Foundry:
Under 42 U.S.C. § 1975, the subpoena power of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights is limited to within 100 miles of where a witness “is found or resides or is domiciled or transacts business.” Living and working in Charleston, South Carolina may very conveniently move Coates outside the subpoena range of the Civil Rights Commission...
Hmmm, wiliness, craftiness and crookedness, all bundled up into one neat, totalitarian package!

Former intelligence officer under President Carter says 'Obama's latest intelligence failure is worthy of Jimmy Carter'

Excerpted from an article written by James Corum, a Lieutenant Colonel in the US Army Reserve who served as an Intelligence officer under former President Jimmy Carter:
The latest grand intelligence failure of the Obama administration – setting up a system so flawed that last week it allowed a Muslim terrorist with a bomb aboard a US passenger jet – reminds me of the incredible level of stupidity I first experienced as a young Army Intelligence officer under President Jimmy Carter.

Immediately after his election [in 1976, Carter] appointed a cabinet packed with hard-core liberals and instituted a series of Leftist foreign and military policies... [Additionally], a very Left-wing US Congress pushed through policies that gutted the CIA’s ability to collect intelligence...

One of the typical “reforms” of the Carter era was a rule forbidding Military Intelligence from holding any files on Americans overseas who were associated with terrorist groups...

I was stationed with the US Army in Europe at the time and did some work supporting the counterintelligence effort.... In the late 1970s Army Counterintelligence had some files on individuals, including American citizens, who had close connections to European terrorist groups...

The order came that all files that mentioned the names of American citizens had to be disposed of and that keeping such files would incur criminal prosecution for violating their privacy rights...

Luckily, I was working closely with some European police agencies who also thought it was a good idea to monitor Americans associated with violent groups. So I disposed of the files by turning them over to a European police force, one that gave us regular access to their files on terrorists. The Carter orders were followed – but we still had full access to vital information.

This solution was just a little victory for the forces of Western civilization versus the Carter administration, but I still feel good about it. Unfortunately, it seems our Intelligence people could not find a way around the policies of Janet Napolitano, the Homeland Security Secretary, who insists that Muslims must not be profiled and that words like “jihadi” and “radical Islam” are inappropriate.

Today, officers of the US military and civilian intelligence agencies are contending with bad leadership and bad policies that exceed even the awful level of the Carter era... The near disaster last weekend is a direct result of the anti-intelligence Carter mindset that has been revived in the Obama administration.
This just in, from the Washington Times: 'Awlaki personally blessed Detroit attack':
The Nigerian accused of trying to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner had his suicide mission personally blessed in Yemen by Anwar al-Awlaki, the same Muslim imam suspected of radicalizing the Fort Hood shooting suspect, a U.S. intelligence source has told The Washington Times...

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab..., the bombing suspect has boasted of his jihad training during interrogation by the FBI and has said it included final exhortations by Mr. al-Awlaki...

"It was Awlaki who indoctrinated him," the official said. "He was told, 'You are going to be the tip of the spear of the Muslim nation'."...

In his FBI interrogation, according to the U.S. intelligence official, Mr. Abdulmutallab spoke of being in a room in Yemen receiving Muslim blessings and prayers from Mr. al-Awlaki, along with a number of other men "all covered up in white martyrs' garments," and known only by code names and "abu" honorifics...
You got to wonder how the Washington Post recently managed to arrange an interview with Alwaki through an intermediary - a journalist who apparently has access to Muslim extremists - and yet US intelligence can't nab this fellow.

Obama may want to consider assimilating the Washington Post staff into the intelligence community... Or, perhaps he would prefer that the Liberal mainstream media not spy on a foreign and sovereign entity.....

Report: Iran seeking to smuggle uranium from Kazakhstan

From the AP:
Diplomats are concerned about an intelligence report that says Iran is trying to import 1,350 tons of purified uranium ore from Kazakhstan in violation of U.N. Security Council sanctions...

A summary of the report obtained by the AP on Tuesday said the deal could be completed within weeks. It said Tehran was willing to pay $450 million, or close to 315 million euros, for the shipment...
Related news: Former CIA Operative: Since Obama's coronation, terrorists have been emboldened - Video

Underwear bomber was apparently unaware that Obama's sister is half Indonesian - Video

Ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Dan Burton, calls on Janet Napolitano to resign: "Saying 'the system worked', undermines the confidence of Americans"

Monday, December 28, 2009

Kurt Haskell talks with Fox News about the airline passenger who may have had a bomb inside his carry-on bag

As I noted previously, Kurt Haskell - a passenger who was on board Northwest Airline flight 253 on Friday - claims that after the flight had landed, a bomb-sniffing dog was sent in to check the bags, and that something was detected in a passenger’s carry-on bag.

Mr. Haskell retold the story to Fox News anchor, Gregg Jarret on Monday. The following is an excerpt from the interview:
JARRETT: Fast forward... The plane lands safely, although, obviously, given the terror attack or the attempted terror attack, a great deal of commotion. And then you see someone else being arrested other then Mutallab?

HASKELL: I wouldn't use the word arrested. What I saw was, bomb sniffing dogs were brought in. One of them made a reaction to one of the carry-on bags of a different Indian gentleman, who I would say was around age thirty. They immediately escorted him to an interrogation room where he was held for about an hour. At which point he came out with handcuffs and was taken away. Subsequent comments made by the FBI alarmed me a little more. They immediately moved us to a different room and said: "The room you're in now is not safe. Read between the lines. I'm sure you're smart people and can figure out why you're being moved." Now, to me that says one thing, 'there was a bomb'. But, you know, I don't have any verification of that specifically....
Apparently, the Obama administration is in full damage control mode and is not telling us the complete story.

Video below. Haskell talks about the bomb sniffing dogs approximately 3 minutes and 12 seconds into the video:

Related Posts:

Newport couple: A passenger on Northwest flight 253 had a bomb inside his carry-on bag

Latest Update: AbdulMutallab's passport surfaces

Passenger Reportedly Taped Terror Attack

Patricia and Charlie Keepman from Oconomowoc, Wisconsin were sitting about 20 rows behind Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian man who tried to bomb Northwest Airline flight 253 on Christmas Day:

They said another passenger sitting in front of them had videotaped the moment Abdulmutallab set fire to explosives that authorities believe were sewn into his underwear.

"This person actually was videotaping it," Mr Keepman said.

Mrs Keepman told 620WTMJ's "Wisconsin's Morning News: "He sat up and videotaped the entire thing, very calmly."

"We do know that the FBI is looking for him intensely," she said. "Since then, we've heard nothing about it."
As I noted previously, a passenger on flight 253 [Kurt Haskell, from Newport MI] claims he saw an Indian man trying to get Mr. Abdulmutallab on board the plane without a passport. Haskell also reported that after the flight had landed, the FBI arrested a different Indian man after a bomb sniffing dog detected a bomb in his carry on bag.

Question: Is the Obama administration engaging in damage control by concealing the facts? Hopefully, we'll find out in due time.

Update: Mrs. Keepman says that the man was videotaping from "the very beginning of the airplane ride."

Keepman interview - AUDIO

Update: Kurt Haskell tells Fox News about the airline passenger who may have had a bomb inside his carry-on bag

Latest Update: AbdulMutallab's passport surfaces

Obama Official who admitted Moving Terrorists to U.S. Prison Would Increase Risk, suddenly and mysteriously, tenders resignation

Philip Carter, the former deputy assistant undersecretary for detainee affairs at the DoD and chief architect of the plan to move detainees of Guantanamo Bay to the Thomson Correctional Center in Illinois, recently conceded to Rep. Don Manzullo (R-Ill.) that there would be an increased security risk to northwest Illinois if the detainees were relocated there. However, shortly after expressing his candid views on the matter, Carter resigned from the DoD.

“Mr. Carter agreed with me there would be an increased security risk to northwest Illinois," Manzullo, who represents the Illinois district containing the Thomson Correctional Center, told reporters last week. "But [Mr. Carter] had no way of estimating the extent of this threat. He said, however, he was confident that federal and local law enforcement officials could ‘manage the risk'."
Manzullo said he did not understand how the administration could concede that there would be a threat but be unable to elaborate on how the threat would be handled. “I was shocked,” he told reporters, “because if there was no way to measure the threat, then how could it be ‘managed?’

Manzullo said Carter also allegedly agreed to send other Defense Department officials to further brief Manzullo, but the congressman said he had difficulty getting the administration to offer him any information.

“He (Carter) advised he would make available others at DoD for further briefings,” Manzullo said. “I sought more information from DoD, only to discover that Mr. Carter had immediately resigned a few days after he briefed me.”...

Carter, who resigned Friday, Nov. 20, did not issue a statement, but a spokesman for the Department of Defense told that Carter resigned for family and personal reasons.

Manzullo said there were several ways to interpret the departure. “I don’t know what that means. You know, one conclusion is that he said too much. The other conclusion is what he said was improper. The third conclusion is that his resignation had nothing to do with what he said.”

“Our take on it is the person who was the most candid with us is no longer available...” Manzullo said.

Sunday, December 27, 2009

Newport couple: A passenger on Northwest flight 253 had a bomb inside his carry-on bag

Editor's note: This story was recounted by a couple who claim they were on board Northwest Airlines Flight 253. I can not confirm the veracity of this story. It may or may not be true:

Kurt and Lori Haskell, who were allegedly on board Northwest Airlines Flight 253 and sat seven rows behind Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian terrorist who tried to ignite an incendiary device on the plane, claim that after the flight had landed, a bomb-sniffing dog was sent in to check the bags, and that something was detected in another passenger’s carry-on bag.

The New Port MI. couple also claim that an Indian man tried to help Mr. Abdulmutallab board the plane without a passport. Source - Monroe News

Bear in mind, that even if Mr. Abdulmutallab managed to board the plane in Amsterdam without a passport, it does not negate the fact that he was issued a US visa and that the TSDB refused to include him in their 'no fly' list, undoubtedly a byproduct of Obama's politically correct and inept policies.

Kurt Haskell also talked with about the incident and had a little bit more to say:

FBI also arrested a different Indian man while we were held in customs after a bomb sniffing dog detected a bomb in his carry on bag and he was searched after we landed...

While we were in customs..., an FBI agent said to us "You are being moved to another area because this area is not safe. Read between the lines. Some of you saw what just happened."(The arrest of the other Indian man). I am not sure why this hasn't made it into any news story, but I stood about 15-20 feet away from the other Indian man when he was cuffed and arrested after his search.

What also didn't make the news is that we were held on the plane for 20 minutes AFTER IT LANDED!. A bomb could have gone off then. This wasn't too smart of security to not let us off the plane immediately.
I haven't the foggiest notion if this story is true or not, or if what security personnel found inside the passenger's carry on baggage was indeed a bomb, but if both of these things are true, it would mean the Obama administration is playing damage control and is not telling us the complete story. However, I reiterate once again that this story may be a total fabrication, or the couple might have misconstrued what had they had seen. We'll find out the truth in due time.

Latest Update: AbdulMutallab's passport surfaces

Update - December 29: Kurt Haskell tells Fox News about the airline passenger who may have had a bomb inside his carry-on bag

Obama orders probe into his politically correct and inept policies

President Obama, whose politically-correct policies enabled Nidal Hussein to continue to work as an army Psychiatrist at Fort Hood despite all the red flags that should have been raised about him and whose self-destructive policies also enabled a Nigerian terrorist to obtain a US visa and to avoid being placed on a T.S.D.B no-fly list, has now ordered a probe into how the Nigerian terrorist managed to board a Northwest airline flight on Friday.

But of course, this [laughable] gesture is disingenuous at best. For indeed, just several weeks ago, shortly after Obama had ordered a probe into the events that led to the Fort Hood massacre, Louay Safi, a radical Islamic official was invited to address the troops at Fort Hood.

In a 2003 publication, "Peace and the Limits of War," Safi wrote, "The war against the apostates [non-believers of Islam] is carried out not to force them to accept Islam, but to enforce the Islamic law and maintain order."...Mr. Safi also wrote that "it is up to the Muslim leadership to assess the situation and weigh the circumstances as well as the capacity of the Muslim community before deciding the appropriate type of jihad..."

Others, citing the following tidbit from the Washington Post, have also noted how Obama, last month, "stonewalled" the Fort Hood investigation, [even though he himself had disingenuously ordered a probe into the massacre]:

The first public congressional hearing on the Fort Hood attack will not include testimony from any current federal law enforcement, military or intelligence officials because the Obama administration “declined to provide any” such witnesses, according to a Senate committee source. {Although, one can argue that Obama was simply trying to protect the very people assigned to execute his inept policies and who may or may not share his politically correct sentiments.}
Clearly, Mr. Obama is incapable of defending the US against the threat of terror because he believes that waging a war against terror is akin to waging a war against Islam. Consequently, in a memo sent from the Defense Department's office of security to Pentagon staffers several months ago, members were told, "this administration prefers to avoid using the term 'Long War' or 'Global War on Terror'. Please use 'Overseas Contingency Operation'."

As long as Obama refuses to acknowledge the threat of radical Islam and its offspring: terrorism - the US will continue to remain in dire straits.

Sad, but true, nevertheless....

Update: Newport couple: A passenger on Northwest flight 253 had a bomb inside his carry-on bag

Another Nigerian held at US airport, Officials: Second incident 'a non-threat'?! - Abdulmutallab refused British visa in May, Qaeda warned of attack

From the Wall Street Journal:
A man who was "acting belligerently" on a Detroit-bound Northwest Airlines flight Sunday is not a terror threat and only became disruptive because he had fallen ill and refused to leave the aircraft's bathroom, according to a U.S. official.

The man was subdued by the flight crew and detained by law enforcement authorities upon landing after the incident bore strikingly similar markings to the attempt two days ago by a passenger to light an explosive aboard another Northwest flight. Both planes originated in Amsterdam, and both men were Nigerian, according to the U.S. official.

The unidentified man made several trips to the bathroom prior to the plane's descent, officials said, ultimately raising suspicions among flight staff. When he did not answer questions while in a lavatory about an hour before landing, flight staff contacted authorities and asked to have law enforcement authorities meet the plane upon landing...

But according to the U.S. official, the Federal Bureau of Investigation now considers the second incident "a non-threat."

"The guy was ill on the flight and insisted on staying in the bathroom when asked to take his seat," the official said.
A "non-threat"? Just a coincidence? Or White House damage control? Hmmm...

Fox News' anchor remains a bit skeptical:

Some pertinent information about Friday's incident [via the Daily Mail]:

Al Qaeda had warned of a terror attack four days before the incident, posting a video online from Yemen saying: 'We are carrying a bomb to hit the enemy.'

Authorities said Abdulmutallab was refused a new British visa in May while it emerged that the terrorist's own father had warned the U.S. that his son might have been radicalised. But of course, our own politically-correct administration would never tolerate that kind of prejudice and thus, issued a visa to the terrorist in an effort to raise the hopes of the indigent terrorist community.

Abdulmutallab, who, as I noted previously, belongs to one of Nigeria's richest families, was on a U.S. watchlist and there were reports that he might have previously 'crossed the radar' of the Security Service on the edge of another anti-terror inquiry. It was not considered threatening enough to have warranted placing him under surveillance.

A faulty fuse is believed to be all that prevented the terrorist from causing a catastrophe...

Rep. Pete Hoekstra told Fox News today that the Obama administration is downplaying the threat of terrorism by insisting on calling terrorism a man-made disaster, instead of using the term 'terrorism' - VIDEO

It should be noted, however, that in a memo sent from the Defense Department's office of security to Pentagon staffers several months ago, members were told, "this administration prefers to avoid using the term 'Long War' or 'Global War on Terror'. Please use 'Overseas Contingency Operation'." The term 'Man-made disater', as quoted by Mr. Hoekstra, would perhaps be better suited to describe the detrimental effect the Obama administration is having on US and Global security...

Also see previous post: Airplane attacker was listed in terror database, Vigilant passengers save 278 lives - and the future of the Obama Presidency

Saturday, December 26, 2009

Airplane attacker was listed in terror database, Vigilant passengers save 278 lives - and the future of the Obama Presidency

From the Washington Post:

A Nigerian man [Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab] charged Saturday with attempting to blow up a U.S. airliner on Christmas Day was listed in a U.S. terrorism database after his father told State Department officials that he was worried about his son's radical beliefs and extremist connections, officials said.

Abdulmutallab's... name was added to a catch-all terrorism-related database last month, when his father, a Nigerian banker, reported concerns about his son's "radicalization and associations" to the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria, a senior administration official said...

The [latest bombing attempt] reignited a partisan debate within Washington over whether the Obama administration was doing enough to guard against terrorist attacks in the wake of shootings last month at Fort Hood, Tex., and other incidents...

The suspect allegedly told FBI agents after his arrest that he had received training and explosive materials from al-Qaeda-linked terrorists in Yemen, a claim that U.S. law enforcement officials were still attempting to verify Saturday.

Administration officials acknowledged Saturday that Abdulmutallab's name was added in November to the Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment, or TIDE, which contains the names of more than a half-million individuals and is maintained by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence at the National Counterterrorism Center...

A TIDE record on Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was created in November 2009," the second administration official said, but "there was insufficient information available on the subject at that time to include him in the TSDB or its 'no fly' or 'selectee' lists."

Several top Republicans criticized the administration's approach to counterterrorism, saying the government had failed to piece together warning signs in recent cases, including the slayings of 13 people at Fort Hood, allegedly by a Muslim soldier. "I think the administration is finally recognizing that they got this terrorism thing all wrong," said Rep. Pete Hoekstra (Mich.), the ranking Republican on the House intelligence committee and a state gubernatorial candidate. "I think we came very, very close to losing that plane last night."

After being briefed by federal authorities, Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) said Abdulmutallab did not undergo body scans that might have helped detect the explosive material when he went through security at airports in Nigeria and Amsterdam...
The President owes a big "Thank You" to the heroic passengers who, in subduing the bomber, saved the lives of their fellow passengers, and consequently saved the Obama Presidency - even while the administration continues to pursue its perilous, politically correct and inept policies.

Read the full article

Update: Mr. Abdulmutallab's father was reportedly surprised to learn that his son had been issued a US visa even after he had reported his concerns to US authorities.

Mr. Abdulmutallab reportedly comes from a wealthy Nigerian family. His father was the former chief of the United Bank for Africa and First Bank of Nigeria, two of the nation's biggest banks. But despite all of this, the President will undoubtedly continue to assert what he asserted shortly after 9/11, namely, that these terrorist attacks grow "out of a climate of poverty, ignorance, helplessness and despair", and that "we will have to devote far more attention to the monumental task of raising the hopes" of these destitute, impoverished and helpless individuals.... - Including the 5 indigent and penniless students from Washington DC who traveled to Pakistan to engage in terrorist activities. [Pakistani police are now trying to determine whether the 5 poverty-stricken students were planning, among other things, to attack a complex that houses nuclear power facilities.]

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

Health care monstrosity - by law - could have been postponed and possibly blocked?

On January 18, 2007, the Senate Ethics Reform bill was brought to a vote by Sen. Harry Reid. The aforementioned legislation requires, among other things, that Senators who submit earmark requests on a bill be identified as the sponsor of their requests on a publicly accessible congressional website at least 48 hours before the item comes to a vote [Tile V (Sec. 521)]. The bill passed 96 to 2 and was signed into law by President George W. Bush in September of 2007.

Sen. John Cornyn cited the aforementioned legislation while discussing the pending health care reform bill in a blog-post on Wednesday:
I raised a Point of Order on the Senate floor along with Senator Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, today regarding the possible violation of Senate rules in refusing to disclose a list of the earmarks included in the Reid health care bill and the names of the Senators who requested each earmark.

Senate Rule #44, created by the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 [the Ethics Reform bill], requires bill sponsors to publicly disclose earmarks. Senate Democratic Leadership continues to refuse to do this. The motion was rejected on near party line basis. We’ve found that Leader Reid has not complied with his own public disclosure rules...
Here's what the Ethics reform bill states[PDF file page 26]:
1. (a) It shall not be in order to vote on a motion to proceed to consider a bill... unless the chairman of the committee of jurisdiction or the Majority Leader or his or her designee certifies - (1) that each congressionally directed spending item, limited tax benefit, and limited tariff benefit, if any, in the bill... has been identified through lists, charts, or other similar means including the name of each Senator who submitted a request to the committee for each item so identified; and (2) that the information in clause (1) has been available on a publicly accessible congressional website in a searchable format at least 48 hours before such vote.
Question: Have all the requested earmarks - tied to the health care bill - and the names of the senators who requested these earmarks, been identified through lists, charts etc.? Has all this information been available on a publicly accessible congressional website in a searchable format at least 48 hours before the senate is to vote on the bill [Thursday]?

Case in point: The senate bill contains a $100 million earmark for an unnamed health care facility. No one could ascertain who the intended recipient of the earmark was until Sen. Christopher Dodd - who is currently facing a difficult re-election campaign - told the AP that he had requested the earmark for construction of a hospital tied to the University of Connecticut.

Who knows what other hidden earmarks are lurking within this 2000 page health care monstrosity!

Nevertheless, it would stand to reason that if any additional earmarks - and names of the senators who sought out these earmarks - have not been identified both on lists, charts etc. and on a publicly accessible congressional website [in a searchable format] as of Tuesday, Dec. 22, a senate vote on the health care bill, by law, can not proceed [on Thursday].

Unless all of the above has been confirmed and verified, Republican lawmakers should not, and can not allow this vote to proceed. It is incumbent upon them to see to it that the rule of law is upheld - or they will have been derelict in their duty to both their constituents and the American people.

Is it too late to call off this vote?

For the latest update as of January 12, 2009, click here.

Pentagon spending bill includes Inouye earmarks

From the AP:
A new defense appropriations bill includes several targeted spending provisions championed by U.S. Sen. Daniel Inouye that will benefit companies whose officers have contributed to his re-election campaigns.

The 2010 defense appropriations act signed into law Monday by President Barack Obama contains 34 earmarks sponsored or co-sponsored by the Hawaii Democrat worth almost $180 million...

Inouye and his staff have repeatedly refused to explain the justification behind earmarks slated for companies that have donated to his campaigns, or why the firms need taxpayer money to proceed with their projects.

Like virtually all earmarks, none of Inouye's were included in the Pentagon budget submitted by the White House earlier this year...
Read the full article

Bob Nelson votes against DeMint's 'cash for cloture' Amendment and then votes in favor of it when he realizes Dems already have the votes to kill it

Above image from Red State
The image may look a bit akward; the very top part [the yeas and the nays] was spliced to the rest of the image due to space constraint. But go to the PDF file and examine the roll call closely, and you'll see that Nelson changed his vote. Also, there are two Senator Nelsons, hence, Bob Nelson's home state is listed next to his name. Bill Nelson from Florida voted 'yea' - and only voted once - heh.

From Red State:
The Senate of the United States just voted to table Jim DeMint’s proposed amendment that would prevent cash for cloture compromises.

As you will recall, Ben Nelson was bribed by Harry Reid to vote for the health care bill via targeted earmarks that will only benefit Nebraska.

DeMint asked for the Senate to suspend its rules to consider his amendment, which would prohibit such deals in the future.

Ben Nelson voted against Jim DeMint’s amendment, but when he realized the Democrats already had the votes to kill it, he raced back up to the clerk and changed his vote so the final record shows Nelson sided with DeMint.

Unfortunately for Ben Nelson, I have obtained the actual factual roll call sheet.

You can see it in PDF here.

Go to page two and find Nelson’s name. See the swiggly line through the mark on the left side? That’s the clerk noting that he switched his vote once the other Democrats defeated DeMint’s amendment.

California's rationing of mammogram screening, a prelude to ObamaCare?

Related Video: Dick Morris tell Fox News there's no such thing as a moderate Democrat. Toward the end of the interview he warns of the inherent danger of having an independent Medicare Advisory Board - Click here to watch the [informative] video.

CBO Rebuts Democratic Claims on Medicare; Sen. Sessions accuses Dems of manipulating CBO data

From Business Week:
The Congressional Budget Office challenged claims by health-care overhaul proponents that Medicare savings in Senate legislation would help finance expanded coverage and postpone the bankruptcy of the medical program for the elderly.

The nonpartisan agency said the $246 billion it projected the legislation would save Medicare can’t both finance new programs and help pay future expenses for elderly covered under the federal program.

Nor could those savings be used to extend the solvency of Medicare, set to run out of money in 2017, the budget office said in a letter to Senate Republicans.

“What we’ve seen is a colossal manipulation” by Democrats “of the accounting scores of CBO” and the independent actuary of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, said Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions, the Republican who requested the analysis from CBO. He called the letter “a potential game-changer.”

The estimated Medicare savings in the legislation overstate “the improvement in the government’s fiscal position,” the CBO said in the letter.
Read the full article

Sen. Sessions talked with Fox News today about the Democrats' accounting scheme. Video below:

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Libtalker Ed Schultz: Mandatory Health Care Insurance is a form of Socialism

"This mandate is one of the most un-American things that the Senate, I think, has ever done... Forcing people.. to buy health care..., that's not liberty. It's not reform. It's restriction. It's a restriction of freedom. That's not Democratic... I think the mandate is very dangerous... The mandate is a form - and it pains me to say this - it is a form of socialism."
MSNBC host, Ed Schultz - Dec. 21, 2009

Related News:
Ensign, DeMint to Force Vote on Health Care Bill Unconstitutionality
Top SC prosecutor, others probing health care deal
Reid Bill Says Future Congresses Cannot Repeal Parts of Reid Bill

Gitmo unlikely to be closed until 2011 at the earliest

From the New York Times:
Rebuffed this month by skeptical lawmakers when it sought finances to buy a prison in rural Illinois, the Obama administration is struggling to come up with the money to replace the Guantánamo Bay prison.

As a result, officials now believe that they are unlikely to close the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and transfer its population of terrorism suspects until 2011 at the earliest — a far slower timeline for achieving one of President Obama’s signature national security policies than they had previously hinted...

The administration appeared to take a major step forward last week when [Obama] directed subordinates to move “as expeditiously as possible” to acquire the Thomson Correctional Center, a nearly vacant maximum-security Illinois prison, and to retrofit it to receive Guantánamo detainees.

But in interviews this week, officials estimated that it could take 8 to 10 months to install new fencing, towers etc. before any transfers take place. Such construction cannot begin until the federal government buys the prison from the State of Illinois.

The federal Bureau of Prisons does not have enough money to pay Illinois for the center... The White House... floated the idea of adding about $200 million for the project to the military spending bill for the 2010 fiscal year..., but Democratic leaders refused to include the politically charged measure in the legislation....

Frustrated by the difficulties in obtaining financing from Congress, administration officials had discussed invoking a little-known statute that would allow the president to declare a national emergency and then use military funds allocated for other construction projects to buy and retrofit the Illinois prison.
"A national emergency"! Obama wants to play nice with the terrorists and he has the gall to call this a national emergency! Congress should declare a national emergency to prevent Obama and his cronies from bringing the terrorists here! Incredible!
That statute, however, has never been used for a project quite like this one. Fearing that lawmakers would be angered by such a move and could respond by erasing the statute, the administration decided not to invoke it...

[It is also] not clear that Congress will be willing to approve money enabling the transfer of Guantánamo detainees to domestic soil — especially as the 2010 midterm election campaign heats up, with the likelihood that Republicans will pick up seats...
Read the full article.

Rep. Stupak: White House Pressuring Me to Keep Quiet on Abortion Language in Senate Health Bill

From CNS News:
Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) said the White House and the Democratic leadership in the House of Representatives have been pressuring him not to speak out on the "compromise" abortion language in the Senate version of the health care bill.

“They think I shouldn’t be expressing my views on this bill until they get a chance to try to sell me the language,” Stupak told in an
interview on Tuesday. “Well, I don’t need anyone to sell me the language. I can read it. I’ve seen it. I’ve worked with it. I know what it says. I don’t need to have a conference with the White House. I have the legislation in front of me here.”...

The current version of the Senate bill contains
so-called “compromise” language crafted by Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.). This language does not bar taxpayer funding of health plans that cover abortion, but does create a firewall to supposedly keep federal money from being used to pay for abortions. Over the weekend, Stupak issued a statement calling the proposed Senate language "unacceptable."

"A review of the Senate language indicates a dramatic shift in federal policy that would allow the federal government to subsidize insurance policies with abortion coverage," said the statement.

In his interview with on Tuesday, Stupak said that the White House "asked me just to hold off for awhile and not to say anything about this language.

Stupak said he is not alone in being pressured from the White House and the House Democratic leadership – other pro-life Democratic colleagues apparently are, as well. But they plan to hold firm, he said...

When asked if he has the votes he needs to stop the bill if, in its final version, it does not include the language of his amendment or nearly identical language, Stupak did not answer directly.

“Well, if all the issues are resolved and we’re down to the pro-life view or, I should say, no public funding for abortion, there’s at least 10 to 12 members who have said, repeatedly, unless this language is fixed and current law is maintained, and no public funding for abortion," said Stupak. "There’s 10 or 12 of us, and they only passed the bill by 3 votes, so they’re going to be short 8 to 9, maybe 6 to 8 votes. So they [Democrats] do not have the votes to pass it in the House.”...
Read full article - Video below:

Top SC prosecutor, others probing health care deal

From the AP:
The top prosecutors in seven states are probing the constitutionality of a political deal that cut a funding break for Nebraska in order to pass a federal health care reform bill, South Carolina's attorney general said Tuesday.

Attorney General Henry McMaster said he and his counterparts in Alabama, Colorado, Michigan, North Dakota, Texas and Washington state—all Republicans—are jointly taking a look at the deal they've dubbed the "Nebraska compromise."

"The Nebraska compromise, which permanently exempts Nebraska from paying Medicaid costs that Texas and all other 49 states must pay, may violate the United States Constitution—as well as other provisions of federal law," Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said.

McMaster's move comes at the request of Republican U.S. Sens. Lindsey Graham and Jim DeMint of South Carolina...

Along with Texas, officials in Washington, Alabama, Colorado and Michigan confirmed they were working with McMaster.
Read the full article.

Hopefully, the prosecutors will also probe the constitutionality of a specific clause in the senate health care bill that barrs future Congresses from amending or repealing portions of the bill.

Good luck with the probing, gentlemen!

Obama offers Iran some tasty carrots and shelves the sticks

From Reuters:
A "bunker buster" bomb with more than 10 times the explosive power of its predecessor is to be put into service by the United States next December, six months later than previously scheduled, the Defense Department told Reuters on Friday.

The deployment's timing may help shape new calculations in long standoffs with Iran and North Korea over their nuclear programs, much of which are believed to be underground to avoid detection and enhance their chances of surviving an attack.

The precision-guided, 30,000-pound Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or MOP, is designed to destroy potential targets such as deeply buried facilities that are beyond the reach of existing penetrating bombs...

"Funding delays and enhancements to the planned test schedule have pushed the capability availability date to December 2010," Tara Rigler, a Pentagon spokeswoman, said in an email.
The Pentagon's announcement gives Iran additional time to develop nuclear weapons without having to worry about an imminent military strike against its nuclear facilities.

Debka notes that the moratorium on the bunker busters and a recent announcement by the head of the Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. John Kerry, saying he "needs time to consider" a proposed punitive measure put forth by Congress which would penalize firms that sell gasoline to Iran [and the insurance companies underwriting these sales], is an indication that Obama has chosen the "carrot" approach over the stick approach, hoping to lure the Iranian regime into making concessions by appeasing it.

Of course, this is merely a theory and nothing more. But clearly the bunker buster delay will only serve to embolden the Iranian regime in its quest to develop nuclear weapons.

Good luck with the soft approach, Mr. President, and make sure those carrots are sufficiently tantalizing, and pleasing to the Iranian palate. The Iranians are quite finicky about the quality of carrots they eat and the kinds of appeasement they are willing to ingest.

In a related development, Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, says tough U.N. sanctions against North Korea are successfully putting pressure on North Korea to halt its nuclear program.

Rice told the Associated Press on Tuesday that North Korea is indicating in various ways that it is feeling the pressure of sanctions and perhaps responding to it. She declined to elaborate.

Meanwhile, the AP is reporting that "the flight plan for an aircraft [recently] seized in Thailand with a load of illicit North Korean arms and ammunition shows that the mysterious plane was headed to Iran...", which seems to confirm Susan Rice's assertion, namely, that North Korea is REALLY "feeling the pressure of sanctions." Ahem.....
Thai authorities, acting on a U.S. tip, impounded the... cargo plane... uncovering 35 tons of weapons, reportedly including explosives, rocket-propelled grenades and components for surface-to-air missiles. The plane's papers described its cargo as oil-drilling machinery for delivery to Sri Lanka...
Ah, the good ol', time-tested carrot approach. Diplomacy at its best!

Obama exempts INTERPOL from search and seizure on US soil

From The Obama File:

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288), and in order to extend the appropriate privileges, exemptions, and immunities to the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), it is hereby ordered that Executive Order 12425 of June 16, 1983, as amended, is further amended by deleting from the first sentence the words "except those provided by Section 2(c), Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6 of that Act" and the semicolon that immediately precedes them.

Here’s the text of 2(c), which this EO now has applying to INTERPOL:

(c) Property and assets of international organizations, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from search, unless such immunity be expressly waived, and from confiscation. The archives of international organizations shall be inviolable.

An INTERPOL branch in the US now cannot be searched, it’s files are not subject to legal subpoena nor discovery. If any branch of government wants to keep documents out of the hands of the court system, just hand them over to INTERPOL until the smoke clears. INTERPOL will now be able to maintain files on US citizens....

Does INTERPOL have a file on Obama — on his associations?
Heh, The Obama File is wondering whether INTERPOL has a file on Obama. Cute.

Tricky Reid slipped unrepealable provision in bill AFTER it was passed by the Finance Committee

With regards to the language in the senate health care bill that fascistically barrs future Congresses from amending or repealing the subsection pertaining to the Medicare Advisory Board [see previous post] - a Senate aide tells the Weekly Standard that it appears that Harry Reid slipped in the provision AFTER it had already been passed by the Finance Committee.
The Independent Advisory Board for Medicare was under jurisdiction of Finance Cmte. After looking at the legislative language for the Finance bill, I cannot find similar language as is included on Page 1020 of the new Reid bill in relation to Medicare advisory Board.
How cunning and deceitful. He just slipped it in there AFTER it had already been passed by the Finance Committee....

Monday, December 21, 2009

Reid Bill Says Future Congresses Cannot Repeal Parts of Reid Bill

From the Weekly Standard:
Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) pointed out some rather astounding language in the Senate health care bill during floor remarks tonight. First, he noted that there are a number of changes to Senate rules in the bill--and it's supposed to take a 2/3 vote to change the rules. And then he pointed out that the Reid bill declares on page 1020 that the Independent Medicare Advisory Board cannot be repealed by future Congresses:
Sen. DeMint: There's one provision that I found particularly troubling and it's under section c, titled "limitations on changes to this subsection."

And I quote -- "It shall not be in order in the senate or the house of representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection."

This is not legislation, it's not law. This is a rule change. It's a pretty big deal. We will be passing a new law and at the same time creating a Senate rule that makes it out of order to amend or even repeal the law.

I'm not even sure that it's constitutional, but if it is, it most certainly is a senate rule. I don't see why the majority party wouldn't put this in every bill. If you like your law, you most certainly would want it to have force for future senates...

This goes to the fundamental purpose of Senate rules: to prevent a tyrannical majority from trampling the rights of the minority or of future co-congresses.
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D - Oregon), the Presiding Officer, offers a weak response in defense of Harry Reid. But of course I'm not an expert in constitutional law, and I'm also a little bit too tired to think this one out right now. You be the judge:

DeMint's full remarks in the video below. Feel free to fast forward the video if necessary:

Also see the recent update: Tricky Reid slipped unrepealable provision in bill AFTER it was passed by the Finance Committee

News To Peruse













Sunday, December 20, 2009

Christopher Dodd, beneficiary of $100 million earmark in health care bill

On Sunday it was revealed that the Senate health care bill contained several hidden earmarks benefiting the home states of both Sen. Max Baucus, a key figure in crafting the bill and Sen. Bill Nelson, who recently reversed himself and decided to support the bill. However, also included in the health care bill was a $100 million earmark for an unnamed health care facility.

The Republican Senate website raised the questions: Who inserted the earmark into the bill and who was the intended recipient of that money?

The AP has the answer:
A $100 million item for construction of a university hospital was inserted in the Senate health care bill at the request of Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., who faces a difficult re-election campaign, his office said Sunday night.

The legislation leaves it up to the Health and Human Services Department to decide where the money should be spent, although spokesman Bryan DeAngelis said Dodd hopes to claim it for the University of Connecticut...

Dodd has played a key role in development of the health care bill in the Senate...

Dodd, who is chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, is seeking a new term in 2010, but polls so far show him in a tight race.
Apparently, Sen. Dodd decided to disclose this information to save face before others had a chance to find out who was behind the hidden earmark. But of course, the fact that Mr. Dodd inserted a $100 million earmark for his own political benefit still does not reflect too kindly on him, despite his [forced] admission.

Also troubling is the following sentence in the AP article: "The legislation leaves it up to the Health and Human Services Department to decide where the money should be spent, although spokesman Bryan DeAngelis said Dodd hopes to claim it for the University of Connecticut."

Are we supposed to believe that Sen. Dodd inserted this earmark into the bill, merely hoping to claim it for the University of Connecticut, without knowing for certain that he would be the beneficiary of the money? Please! [It should also be noted that Sen. Dodd and his cronies were very specific in stipulating who is to be the beneficiary of this money: "Such facility shall be affiliated with an academic health center at a public research university in the United States that contains a State’s sole public academic medical and dental school.” In other words, in a state where there is only one public medical and dental school.]

Nevertheless, now that Sen. Dodd has confessed to the crime, the HSS, in all likelihood, will be forced to give the money to a different medical facility - in an order to save face and to avoid being labeled an accessory to the crime....

The moral of the story?

Sometimes crime pays, and sometimes it doesn't....

Thursday, December 17, 2009

What's New?




Incredible! Is there another President in American history that would have permitted this heterosexual-bashing moron to be the "School Safe Czar"?! Even if Obama were to fire Mr. Jennings today, the mere fact that he let him remain in office this long is grounds for impeachment. While it's true that Obama did not violate any constitutional laws by keeping him in office, he did, however, violate the very basic fundamental tenets of both morality and decency. I can't help but wonder why millions of parents of school children across the country still support Barack Obama and why they are not the least bit fazed by any of this. After reading all that has been documented about Jennings in the blogosphere, can there be any lingering doubts as to whether Obama is the most radical US President ever to be elected?



Wednesday, December 16, 2009

US troops heading to the battle field without extensive training

From the AP:
In a Dec. 10 letter to the Pentagon's top leaders, Rep. Ike Skelton, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, and Rep. Solomon Ortiz, who heads the subcommittee on military readiness, said they are "greatly troubled" by what they learned as the Obama White House begins escalating the U.S. presence in Afghanistan...

The lawmakers said they were told troops are being taken straight from boot camp and being sent to Afghanistan and Iraq without extensive training at stateside bases.

"Is this a common practice now"? Skelton and Solomon ask. "And will the upcoming surge into Afghanistan exacerbate this situation?"...
Unfortunately, the answer to that question is a resounding "yes".

The President's plan is to deploy 30,000 US soldiers to Afghanistan by next summer and to begin withdrawing the troops 18 months later. [Although the United States' second in command in Afghanistan, Gen. David Rodriguez says it could take until November 2110 before the U.S. is able to deploy all 30,000 troops.] It goes without saying that when you're dealing with such a short timetable for success, there really isn't ample time for extensive training. A couple of quick lessons on how to use a compass, flashlight and a Swiss army knife, and off to the battlefield the troops shall go...

Of course, I'm not really concerned about any of this. For, indeed, our commander-in-chief recently told soldiers at the US Naval Air Station in Jacksonville Florida that, “While I will never hesitate to use force to protect the American people or our vital interests, I also promise you this, 'I will never rush the solemn decision of sending you into harm’s way'.”

Obviously the President - who clearly possesses a profound sense of empathy and compassion for his fellow man - believes the troops do not need extensive training and that a few months in boot camp is sufficient. For indeed, he would never, ever send our troops into harms way...

Monday, December 14, 2009

CIA eyes new threat: Climate Change

Just in case you thought the Obama administration was incapable of confronting modern-day, 21st century threats, here's a little piece of news that may put your mind at ease. Ahem:
Global warming is now officially considered a threat to U.S. national security.

For the first time, Pentagon planners in 2010 will include climate change among the security threats identified in the Quadrennial Defense Review, the Congress-mandated report that updates Pentagon priorities every four years.

The reference to climate change follows the establishment in October of a new Center for the Study of Climate Change at the Central Intelligence Agency...

The drafters of the Quadrennial Defense Review were instructed by Congress to accept the assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the international body established by the United Nations and the World Meteorological Organization to gather and report world climate data...

Analysts at the National Intelligence Council are trying to develop a set of early warning signs that could suggest where the next famine might arise or which countries are in most danger of being destabilized as a result of dramatic climate changes...."
Finally, after 8 years of dithering by the previous administration, we have a president who is willing to take on America's real enemy: The Weather Insurgency.....

Tuesday, December 8, 2009

Cheney: Obama is more radical than I thought

Former Vice President, Dick Cheney, sat down for an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity on Monday. Mr. Cheney criticized the Obama administration's decision to try 9/11 mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in New York City. He also criticized Obama's approach to the war in Afghanistan.

Here's a couple of small excerpts from the interview:
HANNITY: You said that.. the President is looking far more radical than you expected... I was criticized a lot [during the campaign] because I was warning of the president's radical associations. How radical do you view him now? How radical do you view his opinions?

CHENEY: I saw him when he got elected as a liberal Democrat, but conventional, in the sense of sort of falling within the parameters of the national Democratic Party. I think he's demonstrated pretty conclusively now during his first year in office that he's more radical than that, that he's farther outside the parameters, if you will, of what we've traditionally had in Democratic presidents in years past.
On trying KSM in a civilian court in New York City:
HANNITY: Do you think that part of this is to put our CIA on trial? To put you on trial? To put President Bush on trial? Or maybe if it's not designed to do that, ultimately, will that happen?

CHENEY: Uh... I don't know. I don't know whether that's a motive for them or not. Um..., it could be. It could be that Holder expects to be able to use this to go back and sort of review in depth the Bush/Cheney administration policies in terms of what we did to prevent attacks against the United States. I think that's a loser for them. I think the vast majority of the American people appreciate the fact that we had good, tough policies, we had great people carrying them out, and we succeeded.
Click here to watch the aforementioned part of interview [part two].

Click here to watch part one of the interview where Cheney discusses the President's mishandling of the war in Afghanistan.

Radical Islamic official invited to speak at Fort Hood, one month after horrific attack

In the wake of the Fort Hood massacre, you would think the Obama administration would do everything in its power to correct the policies and egregious mistakes that brought about the carnage. But apparently, the administration has chosen to tread the same crooked and politically correct path that led to the attack in the first place. For indeed, only one month after the horrific shooting spree, a radical Islamic official, with terrorist ties, was invited to speak to the soldiers at Fort Hood:

From Erick Stakelbeck - CBN News:
The U.S. military is facing criticism for bringing a controversial Islamic speaker to Fort Hood.

The criticism comes just one month after a radical Muslim's shooting spree at the fort that killed 13 soldiers.

Dr. Louay Safi lectured on Islam last week to U.S. troops about to deploy to Afghanistan. He is a top official for the Islamic Society of North America, or ISNA.

In 2007, the group was named as an un-indicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism financing trial in U.S. history. Evidence introduced at that trial showed that ISNA is closely tied to the Muslim Brotherhood. The brotherhood is a global Islamic jihadist movement that laid the foundation for groups like al Qaeda and Hamas.

Dr. Safi has also worked for a Saudi-funded organization called the International Institute of Islamic Thought. The group has been on the radar screen of federal investigators for years.

But Safi's radical ties don't end there.

In 1995, he was recorded on an FBI wiretap talking to convicted Palestinian terrorist Sami al-Arian.

So how was Safi chosen to lecture at Fort Hood? A spokesman for the Army base told CBN News that "Safi was one of the faculty members during a seminar about Islam for the Army's 135th expeditionary unit. He said speakers are invited based on learning objectives, audience experience, and availability. The spokesman added that "organizers of the seminar were not aware of Safi's alleged association, but have had no issues or concerns over his presentations nor has any unit raised any."
Ironically, US officials issued similar statements concerning a slew of emails that Nidal Hussein had sent to his spiritual mentor, radical Islamic Imam, Anwar al-Awlaki. Some of the emails included discussions of when jihad is considered "appropriate," and if it is acceptable for innocent people to die in suicide attacks. In one particular email, Hasan told Awlaki that he couldn't wait to join him in the discussions they would be having over non-alcoholic wine in the afterlife.

But, apparently Hasan's emails did not raise any red flags with US officials, because - as one intelligence official explained - "they were consistent with the topic of Hasan's academic research and involved merely a bit of social chatter and some religious discourse."

In 2002, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Denver rescinded an arrest warrant for Anwar al-Awlaki, despite the fact that authorities suspected him of being involved in terrorist activities in the US. Whether that decision was also based on political correctness or not remains unclear. [You can read ABC's initial report on the matter here and the follow up report here]

With regards to Louay Safi, Andrew McCarthy notes as follows:
In a 2003 publication, "Peace and the Limits of War," Safi wrote, "The war against the apostates [non-believers of Islam] is carried out not to force them to accept Islam, but to enforce the Islamic law and maintain order."...

He also wrote "It is up to the Muslim leadership to assess the situation and weigh the circumstances as well as the capacity of the Muslim community before deciding the appropriate type of jihad. At one stage, Muslims may find that jihad, through persuasion or peaceful resistance is the best and most effective method to achieve just peace." [ACM: Implicitly, this concedes there is a time for violent jihad, too.]
Ironically - as Erick Stakelbeck notes - Louay Safi also spoke at a prayer breakfast for President Obama during his inauguration last year.

Nevertheless, by inviting Mr. Safi to speak at Fort Hood, the Obama administration has shown that it has no intention of amending the inane policies that led to the recent carnage. Quite the contrary, the administration is clearly breaking its promise to rectify the situation and is stubbornly adhering to its crooked, politically correct and inept policies. And in doing so, Obama and his cronies are dragging all of us down the path of self-destruction.

Monday, December 7, 2009

School Children Celebrate Obama's Election: "It's A Brand New Day!"

"Barack Runs, so our children can fly!" - Jan., 22, 2009:

[I couldn't quite make out what the boy - at 2 minutes and 9 seconds into the video - was screaming. Sounds a bit strange.]

In another video - filmed shortly after the President delivered his "Back to School Speech" in September - children from the same elementary school say "thank you" to Obama. The teacher also asks one of the students if the President "is like a hero to" her. At about 1 minute and 59 seconds into the video, the children say "Thank You" to Obama while holding a photo with the words, "Extreme Loyalty...." inscribed on the top. Ahem......

Video: "Thank You President Obama" - 'Extreme Loyalty!':

Sunday, December 6, 2009

Obama: I think I had a fake ID

President Obama hosted a reception in the White House for the recipients of this year's Kennedy Center Honors Awards.

Film legend Mel Brooks was among the recipients who were honored for their contribution to the arts.

Of Brooks, the president said:

"I was telling him that I went to see Blazing Saddles when I was ten. He pointed out that, I think, according to the ratings I should not have been allowed in the theater. That's true," Obama said, adding, "I think I had a fake ID. [pause] But the statute of limitations has passed."........

Global Cooling and the inevitable Ice Age, a result of Man-Made Emissions: Time Magazine - 1974

Excerpted from a Time Magazine article - June 24,1974:
When meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing... The weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age...

Man, too, may be somewhat responsible for the cooling trend. The University of Wisconsin's Reid A. Bryson and other climatologists suggest that dust and other particles released into the atmosphere as a result of farming and fuel burning may be blocking more and more sunlight from reaching and heating the surface of the earth. [The exact opposite of what the Global Warming wackos are saying now.]

Whatever the cause of the cooling trend, its effects could be extremely serious, if not catastrophic. Scientists figure that only a 1% decrease in the amount of sunlight hitting the earth's surface could tip the climatic balance, and cool the planet enough to send it sliding down the road to another ice age within only a few hundred years...
From Newsweek - April 28, 1975:
A study released last month by two NOAA scientists notes that the amount of sunshine reaching the ground in the continental U.S. diminished by 1.3% between 1964 and 1972.

To the layman, the relatively small changes in temperature and sunshine can be highly misleading. Reid Bryson of the University of Wisconsin points out that the Earth’s average temperature during the great Ice Ages was only about seven degrees lower than during its warmest eras – and that the present decline has taken the planet about a sixth of the way toward the Ice Age average...

Scientists see few signs that government leaders anywhere are even prepared to take the simple measures of stockpiling food etc. The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.
The 'Now And Futures' website chronicles various Global Cooling headlines from the 1890's- 1930s, the 1970's, and the present - plus, various Global Warming headlines from the 1930s-1960s, the 1990's through 2006:
GLOBAL COOLING: 1890s-1930s:

The Times, February 24, 1895:

"Geologists Think the World May Be Frozen Up Again"
Fears of a "second glacial period" brought on by increases in northern glaciers and the severity of Scandinavia's climate.

New York Times, October 7, 1912
"Prof. Schmidt Warns Us of an Encroaching Ice Age"

Los Angeles Times, June 28, 1923
"The possibility of another Ice Age already having started ... is admitted by men of first rank in the scientific world, men specially qualified to speak."

Chicago Tribune, August 9, 1923
"Scientist says Arctic ice will wipe out Canada."

Time Magazine, September 10, 1923
"The discoveries of changes in the sun's heat and the southward advance of glaciers in recent years have given rise to conjectures of the possible advent of a new ice age."

New York Times, September 18, 1924
"MacMillan Reports Signs of New Ice Age"

GLOBAL WARMING: 1930s-1960s:

New York Times, March 27, 1933
"America in Longest Warm Spell Since 1776; Temperature Line Records a 25-Year Rise"

Time Magazine, January 2, 1939
"Gaffers who claim that winters were harder when they were boys are quite right.... weather men have no doubt that the world at least for the time being is growing warmer."

Time Magazine, 1951
Noted that permafrost in Russia was receding northward at 100 yards per year.

New York Times, 1952
Reported global warming studies citing the "trump card" as melting glaciers. All the great ice sheets stated to be in retreat.

U.S. News and World Report, January 18, 1954
"[W]inters are getting milder, summers drier. Glaciers are receding, deserts growing."


Time Magazine, June 24, 1974
"Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age."

Christian Science Monitor, August 27, 1974
"Warning: Earth's Climate is Changing Faster than Even Experts Expect"
Reported that "glaciers have begun to advance"; "growing seasons in England and Scandinavia are getting shorter"; and "the North Atlantic is cooling down about as fast as an ocean can cool".

Science News, March 1, 1975
"The cooling since 1940 has been large enough and consistent enough that it will not soon be reversed, and we are unlikely to quickly regain the 'very extraordinary period of warmth' that preceded it."

Newsweek, April 28, 1975
"The Cooling World"
"There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production – with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now."

International Wildlife, July-August, 1975
"But the sense of the discoveries is that there is no reason why the ice age should not start in earnest in our lifetime."

New York Times, May 21, 1975
"Scientists Ponder Why World's Climate is Changing; A Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable"


Earth in the Balance, Al Gore, 1992
"About 10 million residents of Bangladesh will lose their homes and means of sustenance because of the rising sea level due to global warming, in the next few decades."

Time Magazine, April 19, 2001
"[S]cientists no longer doubt that global warming is happening, and almost nobody questions the fact that humans are at least partly responsible."

New York Times, December 27, 2005
"Past Hot Times Hold Few Reasons to Relax About New Warming"

The Daily Telegraph, February 2, 2006
"Billions will die, says Lovelock, who tells us that he is not usually a gloomy type. Human civilization will be reduced to a 'broken rabble ruled by brutal warlords,' and the plague-ridden remainder of the species will flee the cracked and broken earth to the Arctic, the last temperate spot where a few breeding couples will survive."


RIA Novisty(Russian News & Information Agency), February 8, 2007
Instead of professed global warming, the Earth will be facing a slow decrease in temperatures in 2012-2015. The gradually falling amounts of solar energy, expected to reach their bottom level by 2040, will inevitably lead to a deep freeze around 2055-2060. This period of global freeze will last some 50 years, after which the temperatures will go up again."
Quoting Habibullo Abdusamatov, head of the space research laboratory at the St. Petersburg-based Pulkovo Observatory. Full article at

Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics 95, 115-121 (2007)
"Multi-scale analysis of global temperature changes and trend of a drop in temperature in the next 20 years"
Bizarre quotes from various Global Warming, environmental wackos:

“No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits.... Climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
Christine Stewart - former Canadian Minister of the Environment

"We've got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy."
Tim Wirth - President of the UN Foundation

"It doesn't matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.... You are what the media define you to be. [Ultimately], Greenpeace became a myth and fund generating machine."
Paul Watson - co-founder of Greenpeace - Forbes, Nov. 1991

"I believe it is appropriate to have an 'over-representation' of the facts on how dangerous [Global Warming] is, as a predicate for opening up the audience."
Al Gore

“Rather than seeing [climate] models as describing literal truth, we ought to see them as "convenient fictions" which try to provide something useful.”
Dr. David Frame - Climate Modeler, Oxford University

"Convenient fictions?"

"An incovenient truth?"