Tuesday, May 29, 2007

Gary on Immigration and Soldiers

The Good And The Bad
This past Memorial Day weekend in Washington D.C. provided many images of patriotic remembrance for all the fallen heroes of our nation. Thousands of motor cyclists poured into town as part of the annual “Rolling Thunder” event to honor the dead and missing. Driving back into D.C. after a trip to Quantico Marine base, my wife and I were surprised and moved to see every overpass jammed with Americans waving flags to greet the long line of patriotic cyclists heading into the city. At church later in the morning we heard from retired Lt. Col. Brian Birdwell, a member of our congregation who was grievously wounded at the Pentagon on 9/11, suffering 3rd degree burns over the great majority of his body. But today, after 30 reconstructive surgeries, he is a strong voice for love of America and for the sacrifice at the Cross.

But there were disgusting signs, too, of the “rot” that has spread from some of America’s cultural elites into the general population. Filmmaker Michael Moore and loud mouth Rosie O’Donnell aren’t the only ones who have a hard time distinguishing the good guys from the murderers we are battling. In Orcas Island, Washington vandals twice burned American flags decorating veterans’ graves, the second time replacing them with hand drawn swastikas. Get it? America is Hitler’s Germany – an analogy that is routinely made and defended on leftwing websites. The Washington Post ran a front page story highlighting the dissenters and quoting a young woman, a 20-year-old congressional intern no less, who imparted the “wisdom” that she had a hard time seeing U.S. soldiers in Iraq as “heroes.” She admired them and didn’t want them to die, the Post assured us, but she added, “I guess I don’t see the people in Iraq as villains.”

So, how can a 20-year-old congressional intern, the “crème de la crème,” be this stupid? Many of the people of Iraq are not villains – they are fighting alongside us. But has this young woman not seen or heard of the beheadings, the massacres, the suicide bombers killing women and children, the dismembering of bodies – the raw unmitigated evil of the death-loving movement we are facing? I am so glad the young intern doesn’t actually want U.S soldiers to die, but many will to keep this clueless young woman safe and free to utter such nonsense.

Bad And Getting Worse
As more information becomes available about the massive immigration reform bill currently pending in the United States Senate, it is increasingly obvious that this is a bad solution to our immigration mess. Moreover, it's unlikely to get better as the amendment process goes forward, simply because those favoring border security and enforcement lack the votes to improve the bill in any meaningful way. As proof, an amendment was offered in the Senate last week by a moderate Republican aimed at ending the practice of “sanctuary cities,” where liberal enclaves refuse to enforce federal immigration laws by explicitly prohibit local law enforcement officers from inquiring about the legal status of individuals they stop or arrest. This is not a minor issue, and the failure to deport criminal aliens is costing Americans dearly.

More importantly, however, this would have been a useful tool in combating terrorism, including the very recent plot to massacre our soldiers at Fort Dix, New Jersey. Believe it or not, the three Duka brothers involved in that plot, who had been here illegally for more than 20 years, had scores of arrests and police citations -- 75 in total. And yet not once did local New Jersey police take the time to inquire about their immigration status and report them to federal immigration officials. We’ve seen this before: Two of the 9/11 hijackers, including Mohammed Atta, were stopped for local traffic violations in the months prior to that attack.

For those insisting that this “grand compromise” contains serious enforcement provisions, the amendment to end sanctuary policies was a perfect opportunity to demonstrate their commitment to a skeptical public. As today’s Washington Times notes in its editorial, “With all the talk we’ve heard for close to six years from politicians on the right and left about the importance of being able to ‘connect the dots’ in order to thwart terrorist attacks, [this] amendment should have passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.” However, the amendment to strengthen the hand of local law enforcement in defending our homeland was defeated on a largely party-line vote of 48-to-49. As they like to say in Washington, “Politics is the art of the possible,” and some times compromise is necessary. But last week’s vote in the Senate was an unconscionable compromise, undermining our security in a time of war.

The Beginning of the End

We need to nuke Iran, now. I am serious. But not the kind of nukes you are thinking about. I am talking about EMP (electromagnetic pulse) which is a type of nuclear warfare which can literally send a country back to the Stone Age with one bomb. You see, when you detonate a nuclear weapon a pulse of energy is sent out which burns out all electronic components, rendering things like computers, missiles, and power grinds useless. When you detonate a nuclear bomb high enough in the atmosphere above a target no one is killed by the blast and an entire country can be blanketed with EMP from a single attack. To permanently get rid of the threat that Iran poses, I recommend using this type of attack. Instead of trying to build nuclear bombs themselves, the entire nation will be coping with things like trying to get enough food to eat, and bring the electrical grid back online.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

First, very few Iranian will be killed and Iran will no longer be a threat to anyone. Second, it is critically important that the United States appears strong before the Russians and Chinese go any further in threatening our national interests. Both of these countries have become decidedly hostile to the US in the last few years and it is mainly because they perceive our country as being "bogged down" in Iraq, unable to defend our critical interests around the world. In a single blow, the US can knock out Iran totally from the world picture and also remind our enemies that we can and will fight. This type of spoiling attack will free our hands in Iraq as well, since no one in the Middle East will mess with the United States after we started throwing a few nukes around. One nuke costs a couple of million dollars, invading Iraq (and inevitably Iran) costs billions, so you do the math. The "inconceivable idea" of using nukes shouldn't be inconceivable at all; it is a weapon in our arsenal that should be used from time to time so as to remind people around the world that the United States will enforce Pax Americana (world peace through US military strength). Eventually the US should deploy space satellites that can destroy aggressors and killers within minutes of our decision to do so. The physical key to the next military revolution will be attack systems permanently deployed in near space that can (on order) destroy the vehicles, aircraft, missiles, and ships of any aggressor anywhere on the planet the moment a hostile actor violates or even threatens the territory of another state or entity--or uses military means to disrupt the internal rule of law in his own state. These space satellites could create a true Pax Americana and we could even collect defense taxes from states that benefit from our actions to partially fund and maintain the system. Whether we eventually choose laser, hypervelocity or yet-to-be-determined attack systems, it is easy to visualize a US Peace Force watching and waiting above the skies, prepared to open fire the moment an armored vehicle from an aggressor state enters a universally defined demilitarized buffer imposed on all states. The least hostile military action would bring down a rain of fire from the heavens, destroying an attacker's military inventory, whether he has deployed it, hidden it, or simply left it behind in garrison. This could be the world's first disarmament program that works. This is our choice: shall we dominate the Earth for the good of humankind? Will we protect our citizens? Or will we continue to defend the rights of monsters? If we are willing to fight for the future, to act in confidence and justice, we may create something akin to a golden age--so long the stuff of myth--for humanity. We will never be able to prevent every violent act, but we may be able to eliminate traditional wars, mass violence, and the use of weapons of mass destruction. If we have the courage, we can serve mankind. If we prove cowards, the future may make the dying twentieth century look like a paradise.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Relations between the United States and Russia have plunged to an all-time low. Under President Vladimir Putin, Russia has begun a major campaign of psychological and cyber warfare against the West in general and the United States in particular. Assassinations of people in both the US and UK (including using nuclear agents causing death) have occurred and Putin's KGB background is serving him well in other various plots as well. Flush with oil revenues (which the West stupidly gives him), Putin has decided to move against the United States specifically, calling us "Nazis" last month during a worldwide address. Relations with Europe have also plunged to new lows, especially with Germany and the United Kingdom. Also, Russia under Putin had declared economic warfare against Poland, cyber war against EU member state and NATO country Estonia, threatened both Czech and Poland for even thinking about letting defensive US missiles into their countries, working against the EU in regards to Kosovo and Serbia, disrupting oil and gas sales to pro-Western countries like Georgia and Ukraine, and stepped up a massive spying campaign in the US, seeking to steal military and economic secrets from that country.

Why is Putin trying to derail relations with the West? No one is sure but part of his overall plan is making Russia financially sound and the massive increase in oil and gas prices around the world has significantly lifted his country's monetary problems. The vast oil and gas fields in Russia have created a sound base for economic growth, which was the main reason why Reagan got the Saudis back in the 80s to lower world oil prices (it eventually bankrupted the Soviets). This reason still applies today and we should seek to lower the amount of money flowing from the West into hostile hands like Russia and the Middle East.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

An expert on Russian intelligence was shot and critically wounded in front of his home in suburban Washington, D.C., just days after he charged that the Russian government was behind the death of former KGB agent Alexander Litvinenko. Paul Joyal, who works for a Washington-based government consulting firm, was shot on March 1 by two men in his driveway. The shooting raises suspicions of Russian involvement, given that critics of Russian President Vladimir Putin: journalists, politicians, and others at times end up suffering violent deaths.

Days earlier he had said on "Dateline NBC" that "a message has been communicated to anyone who wants to speak out against the Kremlin: If you do, no matter who you are, where you are, we will find you, and we will silence you in the most horrible way possible." Joyal was an acquaintance of Litvinenko, who died a lingering and painful death from effects of poisonous polonium-210. Litvinenko died in a British hospital last November. Before succumbing to the effects of polonium-210, a rare radioactive isotope produced almost exclusively in Russia, Litvinenko made a shocking accusation: He stated that Putin ordered his death to silence him.

Moscow fired off an adamant denial. Why would the Russian leader do such a thing, the Kremlin argued. After all, Litvinenko had exiled himself to Britain after being released from a Russian prison. Since Putin took office, 13 journalists have been murdered in Russia after defying him. Almost all of those deaths happened under strange circumstances, and no prosecutions have resulted. Other victims include a banker, a potential president of the Ukraine, and an oil executive, all of whom were considered enemies of President Putin for one reason or another. For Putin, this decline of basic human rights is not a problem. He has called the breakup of the Soviet Union "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century."

Now Estonia has called on its NATO allies for support against the Russian cyber-attack on their nation, in retaliation Poland is blocking all Russian deals with the European Union, and England is demanding the export of the assassin who killed Litvinenko; but Russia is refusing. I am sure that if he was questioned and threatened to pay for his crime that he would reveal his KGB background, and that Putin directly ordered the murder of Litvinenko.

A carrier battlegroup or two always calms down a critical situation. Just knowing that massive warship with 100 top-rated airplanes with the worlds best fighter pilots is sitting off your shores makes murderous leaders think twice. Look at Moammar Gadhafi and the Gulf of Sidra crisis. In 1981 Gadhafi tried to annex a large portion of the Mediterranean Sea, claiming it as Libyan territorial waters and calling it the "line of death"; crossing over it would invite a military response. The US and many European nations disagreed however, citing the global Freedom of Navigation Act (a 12 mile limit of claims to the sea by nations). The USS Nimitz (a large aircraft carrier) was sent to the region and Gadhafi decided to attack. When his forces were utterly destroyed Gadhafi calmed down and revoked his "line of death". Under threat of US retaliation, Gadhafi has since reversed his bellicose threats in the 1980s and recently gave up all nuclear weapons materials his country had been working on for the last 30 years. Massive firepower always intimidates and most radical leaders like Gadhafi and Kim Jong-Il want to survive another day to torment their citizenry. The best thing we can do for our allies in the long-term is to be resolute and so strong that they value their alliance with us all the more. Remember, the utter destruction of Carthage brought centuries of local peace for the Roman Empire, while the later empire's attempts to appease barbarians consistently failed.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

*Congress has transitioned--without realizing it--from a proactive legislative body that shaped the country to a reactive body that struggles to catch up with the dynamism of our culture, economy, society, and technology.

*Give Americans a cause, or provoke them, and they will fight. But they want to win and preferably win big. Aroused, Americans are bloody-minded. It is another myth that Americans don't like body counts--they insist on knowing the score, and it had better be in their favor. Our national weakness is not cowardice, but impatience.

*History will declare that a significant portion of the blame for the suffering and loss of September 11, 2001, lies with the former President Clinton, who, despite his personal revisionism, disgraced himself and failed our nation. As terrorists successfully bombed a US barracks in Saudi Arabia, two of our embassies in Africa, and one of our warships, the Clinton administration barely pretended to retaliate, encouraging gloating murderers to ever more daring attacks. Cowardice is never a good strategy, and one's enemies do not simply disappear. We must stand up to foreign threats wherever they arise, promptly, and with ferocious resolve.

*Calls for multiculturalism are perhaps the greatest threat to democracy in the United States since the Civil War. The US is a unified culture with multiple roots and cannot function as a democracy otherwise. When voters begin to perceive themselves as Tibetans or Animists first, the melting-pot process that has served democracy so well reverses itself and a centrifugal effect comes into play. Proponents of multiculturalism and linguistic relativism in the West are unwittingly supporting re-tribalization. Although apt to picture themselves as the true champions of democracy, they are its mortal enemies. Democracy along ethnic lines brings you Yugoslavia. Democracy along religious lines brings you Nigeria. Democracy in a collapsing economy brings you Algeria. Democracy under all three conditions brings you the former Soviet Union.

*Clooney to Bush: stop the war in Darfur. As if Bush had any real power over that situation. Maybe Mr. Clooney should criticize the Chinese for the genocide occurring there. Communist China is supporting the murderous central government in Khartoum for oil investment rights in that huge desert country which is located south of Egypt.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

*Most civil wars begin with the actions of a small fraction of the population (less than 1 percent actually).

*The so-called Greenhouse Theory is absurd, and here is why. CO2 changes do not account for the highly variable climate changes we know the Earth has recently had, including the Roman Warming, the Dark Ages, the Medieval Warming, and the Little Ice Age. It also does not explain recent temperature changes: most of the current warming occurred before 1940, before their was much human-generated CO2 in the air. After 1940, temperatures declined until 1975 or so, despite a huge surge in industrial CO2 in that period.

*Evil wage-cutting corporate leaders are not only outsourcing US jobs: they are allowing low-wage illegal immigrants into this country. We need to begin classic populist measures: term limits, initiatives and referendums at the national level, and uncompromising cultural warfare against media and political elites. Thee media and elites wholesale abandonment of patriotism and core middle-class values show them who they really are: enemies of the people of the United States.


Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Saturday, May 26, 2007

Russia, Islam, and the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve

For Memorial Day

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

From Russia Without Love
Vladimir Putin has criticized U.S. plans to deploy a missile shield in Eastern Europe, saying Russia will take “appropriate measures” to counter it, Reuters reports. “These systems will monitor Russian territory as far as the Ural mountains if we don’t come out with a response,” the Russian president told his Czech counterpart, Vaclav Klaus, at a Kremlin meeting. “We will not get hysterical about this. We will just take appropriate measures.” On April 24th, Yury Baluyevsky, the chief of the Russian armed forces’ General Staff, had warned: “If we see that these installations pose a threat to Russia’s national security, they will be targeted by our forces. What measures we are going to use - strategic, nuclear or other - is a technical issue.”

The Russian Foreign Ministry has said that a Russian national was killed during rioting in Tallinn sparked by the Estonian government’s removal of a Soviet World War II memorial, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reports. Estonian officials said earlier that a man was stabbed to death on April 26th, when the rioting erupted. Police in Tallinn say they have detained about 600 people who were involved in the unrest. Russia’s Foreign Ministry accused Estonian law-enforcement agencies of using “excessive force” against protesters. The Federation Council, the upper house of Russia’s parliament, has unanimously passed a resolution calling on the Kremlin to sever diplomatic relations with and impose economic sanctions on Estonia, the Times of London reports. The resolution refers to Estonian officials as “provincial neo-Nazis.” Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves, meanwhile, called those involved in rioting in Tallinn and other Estonian cities “criminals” who “were not united by nationality but by the wish to riot, demolish and rob.” Shops and bars in Tallinn’s historic city center were vandalized and looted during the unrest.

Who Wins: It's What You Want To Believe That Counts
The U.S. Congress, now controlled by the Democratic Party, is insisting that American troops be withdrawn from Iraq if the Iraqi government does not meet specific goals. Many Democratic politicians say the war is lost. How that loss is defined appears linked to the level of violence in Iraq, American casualties, and who is causing the violence. It's been known, since shortly after Saddam was driven out of power in 2003, that his followers had a "Plan B" that involved a sustained terror campaign. It was believed that this would eventually drive the Americans out (based on the Vietnam experience), and allow the Sunni Arab minority to regain power. This is an eerie repeat of the Vietnam experience, where the South Vietnamese rebels were crushed in the late 1960s, at the same time the many American politicians (mainly Democrats) were saying the war was lost. South Vietnam eventually fell to a conventional invasion from North Vietnam in 1975, as the guerillas in the south never recovered.

The Iraqi Sunni Arabs are talking about history repeating itself. But there's a nasty catch. The Sunni Arab terror campaign has made the Sunni Arabs even more hated than they were in 2003. If the American troops left, the retribution from the much more numerous Kurdish and Shia Arab troops would be a disaster for the remaining Sunni Arabs of Iraq. Over have of them have already fled the country. But the hardcore who are still carrying on the fight, believing that neighboring Sunni Arab nations (especially Saudi Arabia) would rather invade, than see the Sunni Arabs driven out of Iraq. Saudi Arabia has said, publicly and privately (via diplomatic channels) that they would not invade. The main reason for this is Iran, which would be compelled to support the Shia majority that now runs Iraq. Now the Sunni Arabs could call on the United States to come back and help keep the Iranians out of Iraq, but American voters are pretty fed up with Middle Eastern politics at this point.

These realities don't play well in American politics. Democrats don't want to admit there is any reason to keep American troops in the Persian Gulf. The reality of the continued Sunni Arab resistance to a democratic government in Iraq never caught on with the Western mass media, although troops in Iraq realize pretty quick what's happening. Thus winning in Iraq is complicated not by what is happening there, but by what a lot of different groups outside of Iraq want to believe is happening.

Strategic Petroleum Reserve Storage Sites
Emergency crude oil is stored in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in salt caverns. Created deep within the massive salt deposits that underlie most of the Texas and Louisiana coastline, the caverns offer the best security and are the most affordable means of storage, costing up to 10 times less than aboveground tanks and 20 times less than hard rock mines. Storage locations along the Gulf Coast were selected because they provide the most flexible means for connecting to the Nation's commercial oil transport network. Strategic Reserve oil can be distributed through interstate pipelines to nearly half of the Nation's oil refineries or loaded into ships or barges for transport to other refineries. Strategic Petroleum Reserve caverns range in size from 6 to 35 million barrels in capacity; a typical cavern holds 10 million barrels and cylindrical in shape with a diameter of 200 feet and a height of 2,000 feet. One storage cavern is large enough for Chicago's Sears Tower to fit inside with room to spare. The Reserve contains 62 of these huge underground caverns.

How the SPR Storage Sites Were Created
Salt caverns along the Gulf Coast have been used for storage for many years by the petrochemical industry. When the U.S. Government decided to create the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in the mid-1970s, it acquired previously created salt caverns to store the first 250 million barrels of crude oil. This was the most rapid way to begin securing an emergency supply of crude oil following the oil shocks of the 1970s. To stockpile oil beyond the first 250 million barrels, the Department of Energy created additional caverns. Salt caverns are carved out of underground salt domes by a process called "solution mining." Essentially, the process involves drilling a well into a salt formation, then injecting massive amounts of fresh water. The water dissolves the salt. In creating the SPR caverns, the dissolved salt was removed as brine and either reinjected into disposal wells or more commonly, piped several miles offshore into the Gulf of Mexico. By carefully controlling the freshwater injection process, salt caverns of very precise dimensions can be created. For every barrel of crude oil to be stored in the SPR's salt caverns, it took 7 barrels of water to create the storage space.

Besides being the lowest cost way to store oil for long periods of time, the use of deep salt caverns is also one of the most environmentally secure. At depths ranging from 2000 to 4000 feet, the salt walls of the storage caverns are "self-healing." The extreme geologic pressures make the salt walls rock hard, and should any cracks develop in the walls, they would be almost instantly closed. An added benefit of deep salt cavern storage is the natural temperature difference between the top of the caverns and the bottom – a distance of around 2,000 feet. The temperature differential keeps the crude oil continuously circulating in the caverns, maintaining the oil at a consistent quality. The fact that oil floats on water is the underlying mechanism used to move oil in and out of the SPR caverns. To withdraw crude oil, fresh water is pumped into the bottom of a cavern. The water displaces the crude oil to the surface. After the oil is removed from the SPR caverns, pipelines send it to various terminals and refineries around the nation.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Liberals, Muslims, and Reform (by Gary)

The Liberal Inquisition
There is tension in the air in Washington these days. Sure, there are major policy disputes between the executive and legislative branches of government and contentious issues like the war and immigration reform. But there is a siege mentality developing too – a sense of “gotcha” politics and intimidation. Liberals in Congress have launched at least 36 investigations against the administration. But this week, there was a chilling exchange in the House Judiciary Committee that went totally unnoticed.

During her testimony, Monica Goodling, the former Justice Department White House liaison, was grilled by a member of the majority party about the fact that she earned her law degree from – gasp! -- Regent University, a Christian university founded by Pat Robertson. Goodling was grilled about why she chose to attend Regent Law School; did she ever discuss religion with others at the Justice Department; did she use religion as a criteria in hiring decisions; and “Are there an inordinate number of people from Regent University Law School that were hired by the Department of Justice while you were there?” Evidently, being Christian makes one suspect in the fevered brows of the liberal inquisitors of the House Judiciary Committee. While the media ignored this example of religious bigotry, I can guarantee you it would have been front page news if a conservative member of Congress had initiated a similar line of questions against a witness who had attended Yeshiva or Howard University.

I’m happy to report that some members spoke up against this “inquisition.” We thank fighters like Reps. Mike Pence, Randy Forbes, Steve King, and Louie Gohmert for speaking out during the hearing against this incredible attack on Christians in government. It’s a brave new world here in Washington, my friends, where the criminalization of politics, thought and faith appears to be underway. Just consider that the first bill brought up for a vote in the new Senate was an attempt to gag grassroots organizations. The House has already passed a so-called “hate crimes” bill – a blatant assault on religious freedom – and there’s talk about reintroducing the Fairness Doctrine to gag conservative media.

The “Reform” People Don’t Want
Reform is a great buzz word in Washington. After all, who can be opposed to reform? There’s education reform, tax reform, health care reform, campaign finance reform, lobbying reform and ethics reform. In fact, reform is so popular it even sparked its own political movement. Remember the Reform Party? But, it seems there is one kind of reform that the American people are not too keen about -- comprehensive immigration reform.

A new poll of likely voters conducted by Rasmussen Reports found that only 26% supported the Senate’s immigration reform bill, while 48% opposed it, and 26% had no opinion. And while polling data on immigration reform can be contradictory, one thing is clear: Americans want the border secured, and they are tired of politicians telling them that they must fix a broken system with another massive reform plan. Of course, that begs two questions: Who broke the system? And why is it broken? This is the third time in 40 years that we are overhauling our immigration system. Is there a common thread to the failures of the previous “reforms”? Yes! In each of the previous attempts, the liberal Congresses failed to include serious enforcement provisions. It was Ted Kennedy who spearheaded the 1986 amnesty, and it’s Ted Kennedy who is championing this “reform” deal today. Do you see a pattern here? To put it bluntly, the American people have zero confidence in Congress’ ability to fix the problem with yet another “reform” plan. What they want done is border security and workplace enforcement first and immigration “reform” later. But this plan doesn’t do that.

The Heritage Foundation has produced a four-page memo outlining the 10 worst provisions of the bill, which amounts to a massive and immediate amnesty with false security triggers. The Z visas, which legalize illegal aliens, are to be issued immediately after enactment of the legislation – not after more border patrol agents are hired or hundreds of miles of new fencing has been built. Background checks have to be completed in 24 hours – a good idea IF our broken immigration system can do it. Fugitive aliens currently facing deportation orders would be allowed to apply for a Z visa and not have to leave the country. Aliens who follow our laws and leave as ordered cannot apply for the new visa. In other words, those who follow the law are punished, and those who ignore it are rewarded. And get this – members of the vicious South American MS-13 gang can stay too, so long as they sign a statement renouncing their gang membership. These are violent thugs, not Boy Scouts! Illegal aliens with Z visas would be eligible for in-state college tuition rates, while legal aliens with student visas would not. And illegal aliens would also get access to taxpayer-funded legal services, a provision that could potentially cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Amazingly, nothing in the bill actually requires illegal aliens to become citizens. The Z visas can be renewed for the life of the holder. As the Heritage Foundation noted, “This would be the country’s first permanent temporary visa.” But it is a gross failure on the part of our government not to insist on assimilation.

It’s hard to imagine why any conservative would support this bill. The Republican House leader evidently doesn’t like it, and today the Washington Times reported that the Senate’s second ranking Republican, Minority Whip Trent Lott, warned President Bush that he may have to veto it because the liberals control Congress and they are likely to make this bad bill worse. Unfortunately, there are plenty of ways Ted Kennedy could make it even worse!

Poll Raises Questions
A new poll of the attitudes and beliefs of American Muslims is disturbing – even to members of the American Muslim community – and should be raising serious questions among U.S. policymakers. The poll was conducted by the well respected Pew Research Center, and surveyed over 1,000 U.S. Muslims on a variety of topics. Here are some key findings: Only 26% of U.S. Muslims believe the war on terror is a sincere effort to reduce terrorism. Just 12% support the decision to invade Iraq, and only 35% believe we made the right decision in using military force in Afghanistan. I realize the American public is generally divided on Iraq, but a majority of American Muslims are conflicted about going after our attackers in Afghanistan. That disconnect is troubling, but there is a reason: Only 40% of U.S. Muslims believe that Arab men carried out the September 11th attacks! That figure led Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, chairman of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, to remark, “They’re in denial, refusing to take moral responsibility, and the radicals will feed on this.”

And speaking of radical, while 58% of American Muslims said they had a “very unfavorable” opinion of Al Qaeda, 27% said they did not know, and five percent actually expressed a favorable opinion of Al Qaeda! Even more disturbing is the evidence that Muslim youth are becoming radicalized. Muslims under 30 overwhelmingly identify as Muslims first and Americans second, and are twice as likely than their elders to believe that homicide bombings can be justified, with 26% of Muslim youth in America believing such acts are justifiable. Now, if anything, these polls generally understate the problem. How many people will actually admit to a total stranger that they support what is essentially a war crime?

As you know, Congress is in the middle of a major debate on the overhauling of our immigration laws for the third time in 40 years. Perhaps these shocking poll numbers will shock some sense into the debate. Now would be an ideal time to consider what can be done to prevent the immigration of radical Islamists into America. How can we keep Saudi money from financing Islamic fanaticism here in America? Unfortunately, in all the talk about guest workers and Z visas, I have yet to hear any serious discussion of how our immigration laws can be effectively utilized to protect our homeland in the war against Islamofascism.

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Russia, Turkey, and Jimmy Carter

Russia the Bully
In Estonia, the removal of a Soviet World War II memorial statute set off nearly a week of rioting by members of the Russian (22 percent) minority. The rest of the population is Finnish, not Slavic (and called Estonians). Most of the Slavic Russians were imported to help keep the ethnic Estonians under control. The Russians were long seen as oppressors and occupiers, not liberators. Locals called the statue, "The Unknown Rapist" in memory of the behavior of Russian soldiers when they took control of the country in 1940 and 1944. In between, Estonia was occupied by (and cooperated with) Nazi Germany. Russia has cut off fuel supplies in protest, and Estonia, a member of NATO, is calling on its allies to pressure Russia into backing off. Russia is a major supplier of natural gas to Western Europe, and cutting off those supplies to former parts of the Soviet Union, as a way to pressure them into following Russian orders, makes Western European nations nervous. There are efforts underway, which Russia opposes, to build a gas pipeline across the Caspian Sea and Turkey, to move natural gas from Central Asia to Europe.

F-16 Fever In the Eastern Mediterranean
Turkey is buying another thirty U.S. F-16D fighters, for about $49 million each. This includes ground equipment, technical services, training, and some spare parts. Turkey already has about 230 F-16s in service, and the new buy is partly in response to its ancient rival, Greece, buying 30 more F-16s. Turkey is also spending $1.1 billion upgrading many of its existing F-16s. The 16 ton aircraft is one of the most popular fighters in service (with 24 nations). The F-16 entered service in 1978, and over 4,000 have been built. It's replacement is the F-35.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

The Soviet Union Lives
The Soviet Union lives on in Central Asia. The former parts of the defunct Soviet Union are still run by Soviet era bureaucrats, with the aid of an effective secret police and state control of major industries. While there is some democratic opposition in Kyrgyzstan, these groups have not been able to gain any traction. The Islamic radicals aren't doing very well either, especially in light of the recent losses (several hundred exiled Islamic radicals) in Pakistan, at the hands of angry local tribes. Media censorship, including blocking news sites on the Internet, is on the increase. The dictators are taking help from wherever they can get it, continuing the old Cold War game of playing the major powers off against each other. In this case, the U.S., Russia, the European Union, China and India are all in play. Indian troops help train Uzbek soldiers, while everyone pitches deal to get oil and gas out of Central Asia via pipelines. The Uzbeks have agreed to send half of their natural gas to China, while Kazakhstan will keep shipping most of its oil out via Russia. Because Central Asia is, literally, in the middle of nowhere for the mass media, what goes on there is largely ignored. On the plus side, there's no messy terrorism or rebellions going on. On the minus side, there's not much personal freedom or economic growth either. So, in a way, the Soviet Union lives on, at the corner of no and where.

Carter’s Delusions
Former President Jimmy Carter has done it again. First, he wrote a disgusting and historically inaccurate book in which he viciously attacked Israel, our only reliable ally in the Middle East. He unbelievably compared democratic Israel, which gives full rights to its Muslim citizens, to the despicable apartheid regime that prevailed in South Africa for years. Carter’s book encouraged Israel’s enemies and America’s enemies. If Carter was looking for a nation in the Middle East that treats some citizens based on religion or race as second class, it is puzzling why he didn’t notice places like Saudi Arabia, where Christians and Jews can’t even be buried because it would “defile” the “holy” Muslim soil. Perhaps his reluctance to be critical of the Saudis has something to do with the grants coming from the Middle East to his Carter Center in Atlanta.

Over the weekend, Carter once again demonstrated why he left office with the lowest approval rating of any modern day president. He harshly attacked President Bush and then went after America’s other ally, Prime Minister Tony Blair of Great Britain. For standing with the United States, Carter called Blair, “Abominable. Loyal, blind, apparently subservient.” He added that Blair’s support for our efforts in Iraq, “have been a major tragedy for the world.”

The real tragedy is that President Carter is still taken seriously. In less than a year, he has managed to condemn stalwart American allies, while continuing to urge us to “make nice” with the likes of Syria and Iran. He has lost what little credibility he had left.

Turkey in Turmoil
A major political crisis is brewing in Turkey. On April 27th, the Turkish General Staff issued a demarche to the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) in the wake of the Turkish parliament’s first round of voting in the presidential election, in which the AKP’s candidate, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, had stood uncontested. The Turkish military’s statement, posted on its website, warned that “it should not be forgotten that the Turkish armed forces are a side in this debate and are a staunch defender of secularism” and cautioned that "when necessary, it will display its attitudes and actions very clearly.”

The Turkish military’s warning touched off a fierce national debate over the country’s future political direction, complete with large-scale pro-secularism protests in a number of Turkish cities. The AKP has responded with an attempt to defuse (or at least delay) the crisis, pushing the presidential elections forward to July 22nd, the same date as national parliamentary elections. However, it has also attempted to tilt the political playing field in its favor, putting forth a parliamentary measure that – if approved by current president Ahmet Necdet Sezer – would allow the direct election to the presidency by popular vote. For their part, Turkey’s various opposition parties are beginning to organize in a bid to oust the AKP from power.

Sending China a Message
South Korea is spending $850 million to build a naval base on Jeju island, which is 90 kilometers south of the South Korean coast. The base will provide piers and other facilities for up to twenty ships and submarines. The island is astride the vital straights separating South Korea and Japan. Through these waters, most of South Koreas maritime trade moves. The new naval base will make it easier to protect that traffic. The new base also makes it easier for South Korean warships to get to small islands in the area that are claimed by South Korea, Japan and China. The new base will be ready for use in seven years. Jeju island is also a major vacation spot for South Koreans.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

"I didn't even consider stopping running for President." John Edwards after finding out his wifes breast cancer is back, it has spread throughout her body, and it's incurable. Okay, so your wife is going to die a horrible death from bone and lymph cancer you and you didn't even CONSIDER ending your run for President? Not even once? Riiight. Any normal person would have thought of that instantly, therefor Edwards isn't normal and I am not ever going to vote for him. He is weird, and stupid, and lies far too easily. Be gone with you!

"And I must admit I can't imagine anything more awful than polygamy." Mitt Romney trying to encourage people his Mormon faith is normal. Okay, so trying to tell the people who may vote for you that you are a good guy who wouldn't endorse polygamy while in office is one thing but saying that polygamy is so bad that "I can't imagine anything more awful" is ludicrious. I can think of alot of things worse than polygamy you doofus! Murder, slavery, molestation, genocide, and some wars. Wake up dummy and stop saying stupid clueless things.

"I'm not going to get into a name-calling match with someone who has a 9% approval ratings," Senator from Nevada Harry Reid said. He then called Cheney the "Administration's chief attack dog." I guess that government leaders do not have to talk to other government leaders if their approval ratings fall below a certain number? Harry Reid is an ass and statements like this (coming from the senior Democrat in the Senate) only confirm how out of touch the Demoncrats really are. We as the American people expect these guys to work together, not call each other names and inflict governmental paralysis because they don't like the other guy! Get to work, Reid!

"Second thing is, we're going to shove it down his throat," Senator Joe Biden of Delaware said about the bill Congress passed that President Bush will be forced to sign. I would like to shove things down Biden's throat, a shovel being one of them. This bigoted looney leftist has done more damage to America than most other leaders in US history. Hopefully he will depart the earth very soon, giving all of us a repreive from his vindictive rantings.

Friday, May 18, 2007

From Gary

Have They No Shame?
I got a call from one of the major networks yesterday asking if I would go on the evening news to comment on the impact Jerry Falwell’s death will have on the 2008 election. I turned the opportunity down because it seemed crass to me. The man’s family is in mourning and all some of our media elites want to do is discuss how his death will play out at the polls. And speaking of crass, over at ABC, news anchor Charlie Gibson refused to allow Falwell’s passing to be the lead story because, as he explained, that would “venerate the subject to an extent that I didn’t think belonged there. He was a controversial figure.”

But that is minor compared to the outright hatred that has been on display at leftwing web sites and media outlets. From the Democratic Underground to the Daily Kos, self-described leftists and so-called “progressives” have celebrated the news of Rev. Falwell’s death. In San Francisco, a group danced on a “mock-up” of his grave. Outspoken atheist Christopher Hitchens told CNN’s Anderson Cooper, “I think it’s a pity there isn’t a hell for him to go to.” Radical homosexual rights groups spewed their hatred at the news, with many blaming Rev. Falwell for the AIDS epidemic, rather than the unsafe practices still prevalent in their community. For folks who pride themselves on “tolerance,” they should be ashamed.

Jerry Falwell had more decency, forgiveness and tolerance than all these leftwing haters put together. If he were alive today, he would shake his head at their bile, but he would look for ways to reach out to them with the Good News of salvation. Many of Jerry’s political enemies, such as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson – even pornographer Larry Flynt – issued statements testifying to Falwell’s good nature and the warm friendship they enjoyed with him. And, as someone honored to call Jerry Falwell a friend, I’m not surprised at all.

Not “Fair” At All
For years conservatives have been painfully aware of the liberal bias in “big media.” On the three big networks ABC, CBS and NBC, the bias permeates everything from news shows to the entertainment programming of sit-coms and dramas. On cable, CNN and MSNBC are not just anti-conservative, their coverage of international issues consistently undermines the interests of our nation. But in recent years the liberal “monopoly” has been broken. Conservative talk radio has been an incredible success, while Christian radio has grown and cable alternatives like FOX News have taken off, too. The left-wing agenda no longer has a free-ride – it has competition.

But don’t celebrate too soon because the “tolerant” Left appears to be ready to use its new power in Congress to launch an attack on conservative media. The American Spectator, a conservative magazine, quotes an aide to Speaker Nancy Pelosi saying, “Conservative radio is a huge threat and political advantage for [conservatives] and we have to find a way to limit it.” That “way” may be to revive the so-called “Fairness Doctrine,” which would require equal time for the leftwing worldview on every conservative radio show. The article goes on to suggest that the staff of Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) is investigating Salem Radio, the largest Christian radio network. And Rush Limbaugh apparently has a target on his back, too. The Spectator quotes sources saying, “We can’t shut him up, but we want to make life a bit more difficult.”

Ironic isn’t it? The Left always presents itself as the tolerant defender of rights. It defends the right of Islamofascist imams to spout anti-American invective; it rallies to the banner of the local atheist, who insists his rights are violated if he sees a Christmas tree; it hyperventilates if a prisoner at “Gitmo” doesn’t have his own ACLU lawyer and a government provided Koran. But when it comes to conservatives, the Left doesn’t hesitate to figure out how to use the power of big government to “make life more difficult.” With your help, American Values will fight with every resource we have to stop Pelosi and company from regulating conservative news alternatives.

Move On Folks – Nothing to Worry About
Last week the New York Times could not ignore the alleged plot by the “New Jersey Six” to attack Fort Dix and kill as many U.S. soldiers as they could. The story was right in the New York Times’ “neighborhood,” so it had to be front page news. Readers were told how the men hated the U.S., shouted “Allah Akbar” during their terrorist training sessions and wanted to defend Islam.

But now a week has gone by and the same Times is once again writing leftwing drivel. Its focus today was how the arrest had made things difficult for several local mosques, although just how it made things difficult was never explained. The reporter made this mouth-dropping assertion: “It is unclear what role, if any, religion played in the attack Mr. Shnewer (one of the accused) and the five other men are charged with planning.”

All six men are Muslim. They were prepared to die for Allah. They chanted the same rallying cry as the 9/11 hijackers. Yet the New York Times now feigns ignorance about the role their faith played in the murderous plot.

The New York Times historically has not been shy about pointing out the dangers inherent in what they perceive as religious fundamentalism. Editorially and in columns they have routinely attacked Christian conservatives, as well as conservative Jews. And I have no doubt that if six Christians were arrested for plotting to attack the U.S. military, while shouting “All power to Jesus,” the New York Times would have no problem condemning Christian conservatives everywhere for their “intolerance.” But when Muslim extremists are arrested the Times quickly loses its anti-fundamentalist fervor and warns us all to not jump to conclusions about the role radical Islam played in a plot by self-described Muslims to kill in the name of Allah. Maybe some folks at the Times have “their head in the sand” about Muslim extremism because they fear losing their heads if they report the obvious truth.

Friday, May 11, 2007

Global Warming and the Luddites

My boss is a liberal who lives in Boulder, Colorado. Of course I am a strong conservative so our political discussions become pretty heated. For example, yesterday he said that because Fox News is owned by a conservative that the government should make all media objective; anyone having an agenda should not be allowed to report the news. I have to chuckle at this as it is usually liberals who scream about freedom of the press, unless it is conservative press like Fox News. They want the US government to ban ideas and philosophies that they don't like to hear. Sounds pretty totalitarian to me. My boss (Curt) is a Obama supporter, despises Hillary, and really rooted for Senator Joe Biden of Delaware before that moron shot himself in the foot early on in the presidential campaign by saying that fellow nominee Barack Obama was a “clean”, “articulate”, and “bright” Negro. What a doofus! Curt also said that everything bad that happens in this country is Bush's fault. I find this sort of thinking strange mainly because Clinton could do no wrong in Democrat eyes but everything bad happening now is Bush's fault. Riiight. I have realized years ago that you cannot have a well-reasoned conversation with Democrat true-believers. They are not interested in the facts, just their feelings and what their group-think pals are saying. Look at "man-made global warming"; a giant ponzi scheme and pseudo-science at best and a huge totalitarian leftist global power grab (so said by Vaclav Havel) at worst. But let's take a closer look at the details. CO2 emissions are supposedly the primary reason for global warming, but these so-called scientists are skewing the truth. Here is the data:

SUN: Our star has entered a active solar cycle that started 30 years ago, causing at least 60% of global warming. A giant space shield could easily moderate solar energy emissions and could easily be converted to a massive solar powered generator, yet NASA refuses to think in large terms like this and are instead wedded to the Space Shuttle program.

ICE AGE: The Earth has an Ice Age Cycle, which covers most of the planet every 100,000 years or so and according to ecological evidence is way overdue for another cycle. We need to be more worried about global cooling than global warming.

VOLCANOES: Okay, so volcanoes produce massive amounts of CO2, some dumping ten times as much in a single week than humanity does in an entire year. The average volcano makes around 70 billion tons of CO2, while humans produce about 7 billion tons per year. Globally the planet produces 700 billion tons of CO2 per year through normal processes: decaying vegetable matter, animal farts, etc. So if humans produce 7 billion tons of CO2 (a total change of 1% of 700 billion) then it would make sense that something producing ten times that amount would be far more damaging than what humans do, right? Think about it: volcanic activity varies and is currently is in an up-swing period (see chart below).

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

So would it make sense that if just one or two extra volcanoes, producing 140 billion tons of CO2, would do far more damage and probably kill us all compared to what humans do? I think so. The evidence is in the math, folks. Don't be fooled by hyperbole.

Here is a map of the volcanic areas of California.

Here is a map of the largest volcanic islands on planet Earth.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

GLOBAL COOLING: In the 1970s climatologists and computers models predicted global cooling. It made all the news and during that time the winters were especially brutal. So which is it? Heck, even a single asteroid strike on our planet could plunge us into a global winter so I am totally skeptical, as is Bjorn Lomborg who wrote the "Skeptical Environmentalist". Lomborg was at the fore-front of the green movement until he decided to do his research objectively and found that all the scare-mongering Cassandras' were only in it for the money that governments would throw at "the problem".

UN: The United Nations report a few months ago stated that in the next 100 years the temperature would rise between 2 and 6 degrees, and oceans would rise at most 6 to 12 feet. The public ho-hummed the figures but encouraged by environmental radicals, the UN revised their numbers to much more scary figures. They have lost all credibility in this area and are dupes of the new left trying to take over the planet and create an anti-capitalist utopia. Even scientists are now saying that we should commit global genocide to reduce the planetary population to "sustainable levels" of 1 billion people. This would of course mean killing off more than five billion people. I find this sort of thinking shocking and scary as hell. Anyone seeking to eliminate the majority of the Earth's population should be tried for int icing genocide and tried as a criminal against humanity. Apparently, saving the whales is more important than saving 5.5 billion people. Paul Watson, founder and president of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and famous for militant intervention to stop whalers, now warns mankind is “acting like a virus” and is harming Mother Earth. Watson’s May 4 editorial asked the question “The Beginning of the End for Life as We Know it on Planet Earth?” Then he left no doubt about the answer. “We are killing our host the planet Earth,” he claimed and called for a population drop to less than 1 billion. Here is the rest of the article.

Overall I find this whole global warming scare ludicrous. The people endorsing it are anti-scientific Luddites that are more interested in "saving the planet" than helping their fellow man. Interestingly, these people are also for open borders in the United States. How does this make sense? They are morons, pure and simple, and dangerous totalitarians too boot.

Divided We Fall by Gary

Divided We Fall
It’s been more than a week since President Bush vetoed the war funding bill passed by the Democrat majority on Capitol Hill, and today House Democrats are going to vote on legislation that would only fund the war for two more months, with another vote on additional funding in July. This piecemeal approach is no way to fight and win a war. It sends the message to our enemies, our allies and our soldiers that America is not fully committed to victory, and in two months time Congress could completely change its mind and vote to cut off the funds. Congress should either fund the war or defund the war. Give our soldiers the support they need to win or get them out. Don’t just string them along.

But, as usual, there is a story behind the story. The reason Congress can’t get its act together is due to the deep divisions within the Democrat majority on Capitol Hill. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, exit polling from 2006 did not find that retreat from Iraq was the main issue that drove voters to the polls. Yet that is what the leadership of the party believes because the radical Left now dominates the party of Truman and JFK. Just consider this recent headline from the New York Times: “Antiwar Group Uses New Clout To Influence Democrats on Iraq.” The Times article outlines how the radical antiwar Left, led by groups such as George Soros’ MoveOn.Org, is calling the shots on Capitol Hill. Here’s an excerpt:

“Every morning, representatives from a cluster of antiwar groups gather for a conference call with Democratic leadership staff members in the House and the Senate. Shortly after, in a cramped meeting room here, they convene for a call with organizers across the country. They hash out plans for rallies. They sketch out talking points for ‘rapid response’ news conferences. They discuss polls they have conducted in several dozen crucial congressional districts and states across the country. …Behind the scenes, an elaborate political operation, organized by a coalition of antiwar groups and fine-tuned to wrestle members of Congress into place one by one, has helped nudge the debate forward.”

Did you get that, my friends? “Every morning” the congressional leadership calls in to get its marching orders from the radical Left. To reinforce the point, the Times further notes that MoveOn.Org recently sent a letter to the Democrat leadership demanding that any war funding bill include a timeline for retreat or “the unity Democrats have enjoyed … will immediately disappear.” That unity is already showing signs of stress as Capitol Hill sources are buzzing about a recent shouting match between House Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-WI), who is prone to using colorful language, and antiwar liberal Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH).

However, Republicans, too, are showing signs of stress. Several reports this morning indicate that a cadre of House moderates went to the White House Wednesday for a private meeting with President Bush. Their message: Iraq is hurting our reelection. Fear can make people do strange things. At a time when courage is needed most these members of Congress are behaving like craven politicians – not the statesmen and leaders America desperately needs. We are at war. And some things, like victory for your country, are more important than the next election. If they think a difficult war is hurting their reelection prospects, I can guarantee them that a defeated U.S. military leaving Iraq under fire won’t help them either.

Thursday, May 10, 2007

From Gary

More Thoughts on Jersey Jihadists
If past patterns hold, in a few days the story of the six men arrested in New Jersey on charges of plotting a massacre of U.S. troops at Fort Dix will drop out of the news. It shouldn’t. Here are two lessons the plot holds for big media, left wing politicians and Americans ready to “cut and run” from the struggle against Islamofascism.

Lesson One: Our best defense against domestic enemies already in the U.S. is an involved citizenry. The plot was uncovered because an unnamed store clerk became suspicious of the contents of a tape the men dropped off that they wanted to convert to a DVD. The clerk’s vigilance went against the grain of political correctness. He risked being laughed at. He could have been sued for “racial profiling.” The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has already filed suit against airline passengers who were concerned about the suspicious behavior of six imams on their flight. But when legislation came before the House of Representatives to protect citizens who do come forward from lawsuits like CAIR’s, 121 liberals voted against it. We should tell groups like CAIR to “take a hike” and make it clear we want our citizens to err on the side of vigilance.

Lesson Two: We can and will continue to have the debate about whether Islam is a “religion of peace” or not. But here’s the bottom line: self-described Islamists are at war with us. They have killed us and are planning to kill more of us in the name of their faith. I welcome every Muslim who wants to join us and fight these thugs – I hope many of them will. But, in the meantime, we have to clear the cob webs out of our head and get on with the business of defeating these murderers. How were these six men radicalized? What mosque did they attend and what was being taught there?

This is simply the latest in a string of incidents: March 2006, Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, an Iranian student at UNC tries to turn a rented SUV into a weapon of mass destruction by driving into a crowd of students. He later told the court that he was “thankful for the opportunity to spread the will of Allah.” July 2006, Naveed Afzal Haq opens fire on a Jewish community center in Seattle, killing one and wounding several others because, “I want these Jews to get out.” August 2006, Omeed Aziz Popal targets San Francisco pedestrians with his SUV, killing one and sending 18 more to the hospital. February 2007, Sulejmen Talovic, an 18 year-old Bosnian Muslim, opens fire at a shopping mall in Salt Lake City, killing five.

Oh, and one more thing: At least three of the men arrested in the plot to attack Fort Dix were in the U.S. illegally! Ironically under a lot of the “amnesty light” immigration proposals being pushed by Senate Democrat Leader Harry Reid, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and yes, even the White House, they could have become citizens. We’ve got to stop the lunacy! Fox News reports today that federal investigators are trying to determine how the three Duka brothers, half of the “Fort Dix Six,” got into this country. There is speculation that they may have been smuggled across the border. Two years ago, FBI Director Robert Mueller testified before Congress that illegal aliens from Middle Eastern countries were coming into the U.S. with false identities. Any debate on immigration “reform” must make U.S. national security its top priority by first securing our borders. Then we should start seriously considering ways to keep Saudi-funded Wahabbism and radical Islamists out of the country.

Sunday, May 06, 2007

Europe and Jessica Lynch

Old Europe, New Europe
Our relationships with the old states of Western Europe is over, and good riddance! We need to forego the siren call of that decrepit continent, and ignore its dried out dugs. America has better opportunities for strategic alliances with other, rising nations, than Germany and France. The primary intellectual goal of Western European societies for the past half century has been to prove that the United States is as cruel and corrupt as they themselves have been. When your heritage is genocide, wars of aggression, or cowardly surrender, the record of the United States can be hard to bear. No continent has exported as much misery and slaughter as Europe has done, and the chances are better than fair that Europe is only catching its breath after the calamities it inflicted upon itself in the last century. And Europe has hypnotized us by making us believe that that continent has continued power and importance.

France and Germany are Europe's starkest problems. They wish to lead, but lack the vision, power, and generosity required to build enduring alliances. Germany and France are sick inside, having gobbled up immigrant populations they are unwilling and unable to digest. For all their fabulous criticism of American society (where their calendar stopped around 1954), the extent of racism and bigotry in continental Europe rivals that of a long gone American South and threatens to exceed it. With a blighted economy, stifling laws, a welfare mentality, and a shriveled, incompetent military that is no more than an employment agency for uniformed bureaucrats, Germany, like France, is in decline. And states in decline never make good allies--they consume resources and energy, while giving little or nothing in return. And it will take 1,000 years for Germany to pay for the sins of killing the Jews, gays, poles, etc during WW2. Also, we as Americans has made a terrible mistake about France, allowing that bankrupt, savage colonizer a seat on the Security Council of the new United Nations. Since the end of WW2, France has continually dispatched mercenary thugs to Africa to murder blacks in the name of liberte, egalite, et fraternite.

Behind all the America scolding and empty swagger Europe is uncertain of its future. And afraid. And when Europe is uncertain and afraid, its impoverished immigrants and neighbors had best start worrying. The real trouble with Europeans is that they have a dark side. If its racist populations feel sufficiently threatened by the Muslim millions within their divided societies and by terror exported from the Islamic heartlands, Europe may respond with a cruelty unimaginable to us today. After all, Europe is the continent that mastered ethnic cleansing and genocide after a thousand years of practice. The real question is how much longer the self-destructive streak shared by France and the Germans will continue to plague the rest of that bloodstained continent. Although Western Europe will pull through its current malaise, it offers us little beyond unstable alliances and devious trading partners. Nor will we be able to expand our influence in Europe, new or old. We passed our high-water mark on that continent over a decade ago.

No country is more important to and intertwined with our present and future than Mexico. Yet who among us knows anything about the Mexican Revolution, a long and terrible struggle that prefigured the other great rebellions of the twentieth century? Which continental European state has the potential of Brazil? Yet we play closer attention to the Netherlands. Latin America has entered a period of decisive change for the better, but we show more interest in France--that vicious child among nations--than we do in all the states between the Rio Grande and Tierra del Feugo. The only mutually beneficial strategic alliances we could build for the twenty-first century all lie to the south. The Republic of South Africa is methodically constructing a postmodern empire--similar in many ways to that of the United States--that will make it the greatest native power the continent has ever seen. Our response? We treat that rising nation as Togo with vineyards.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Since the end of the Cold War, every conflict in which the United States has been involved has been to some degree a legacy of Europe's colonial era--including the liberation of that Frankenstein's monster of a state, Iraq. We are cleaning up the messes left by Paris, Berlin, and even London, while Europeans chide us self-righteously.

One of the worst mistakes people make today is to assume that, since Europe is so piously anti-military and "soft" today, it will remain so tomorrow. Violence towards other cultures is deeply--ineradicably--embedded in the European branches of monotheist civilization. It is only a matter of time when the violence will re-emerge, what form it will take, and whether that violence will prove antithetical to US values and interests.

Europe does not, will not, and cannot assimilate immigrant communities from other countries. Americans would be foolish not to recognize that Europe is far more volatile than those endless, soporific pronouncements from Brussels would have it.

Europe has turned inward before and it remained to through much of the Middle Ages, only to look outward with a vengeance during its five-hundred-year colonial phase. If we examine history objectively, Europe has been the least consistent, least predictable sub-region of the world, full of nasty surprises for everyone else. Europe is historically manic-depressive. Contrary to popular wisdom, Europe is far less steady and dependable than the United States. While Europeans view themselves as the masters of the arts and civilization, their historic behavior has more closely resembled that of today's soccer hooligans. We Americans may find
ourselves in the unexpected position of confronting the Europe of tomorrow as we try to restrain its barbarities toward Muslims.

Given the right threat, Europe--or key parts of Europe--may prove every bit as ferocious as in past centuries. Certainly, it is hard to imagine this today. But it is always difficult to foresee the sudden changes that keep human history so painfully interesting. Europe has been as great a danger to the world as the Middle East is today--and most of the earth's population would call it a greater one.

Because of European intervention, Africa continues to suffer recurrent bouts of bloodshed because of the colonial legacy of dysfunctional borders that either force tribes together that do not want to be together, or divide tribes and peoples between multiple states, although they believe they belong together. The European-drawn map of Africa simply does not work as designed, and the old colonial powers left these borders intact as a curse; meanwhile, Africa's independent, artificial states are struggling to function the way Western models insists they should. Now, painfully, Africans are trying to create chances, against daunting odds. Not every country will survive, and we must expect a great deal of turmoil as this region attempts to fix itself after being massively damaged by external forces.

The coddling of dictators by Leftist Europe is also a travesty. In their eyes, the human rights of one dictator are more important than the human rights of millions of citizens he oppresses. The sorry truth is that Europeans love to cry over corpses, but won't lift a finger to prevent the killing in the first place. They shake their heads over the Holocaust, though their parents were happy enough to pack the local Jews off to Auschwitz. The French grudgingly accept that their intellectuals defending Stalin long after evidence of his crimes came to light, but they avoid the issue of how many of their thinkers and artists admired Hitler and profited from the Occupation (French cafes and cabarets boomed under the Nazis). And what there ever an African dictator the French didn't adore? The Dutch criticize America's military as trigger-happy, but their own troops didn't fire a shot in defense of the Muslims of Srebrenica, who they had been tasked to protect and whose slaughter was the worst single massacre on European soil since the end of the Second World War. Today, Europeans dismiss their historical guilt towards Jews by insisting that Israel is as bad as Nazi Germany--a Big Lie worthy of Hitler and Goebbels--while cheering on Israel's genocidal enemies.

No one should doubt that Americans are the greatest force for good in human history.

Jessica Lynch: Coward and Left-Wing Patsy
Well, former Private 1st class Jessica Lynch has decided to help the Democratic Congress wage an all-out war against our own military. In Democrat-sponsored morale-busting efforts last week, Lynch the former hostage taken by Iraqi forces during the first year of the occupation of Iraq, spewed out a series of ugly attacks against the US military, and several US generals in particular. She actually testified that she didn't fire her sidearm in defense of her fellow troopers, making her a coward in my eyes. Apparently her gun jammed but maybe it was because she didn't maintain it properly? Guns just don't randomly jam. Think of it; you are under heavy enemy attack, your fellow soldiers are dying all around you, and you don't fire a shot......unbelievable. And yet she felt as if telling this to the Congressional Hearing and the entire world would make her some sort of herione. To speak the truth is apparently far more important than winning a war. Riiiight. She blamed the media and the military of lying for their own gain. On April 24, 2007, Ms. Lynch said before the congressional committee that “the bottom line is the American people are capable of determining their own ideas of heroes, and they don’t need to be told elaborate tales”.

Earlier in the day, Pat Tillman's brother Kevin also testified; both he and Jessica Lynch talked about misinformation and hype relating to the battlefield and how the military lied and twisted reality for propaganda purposes. She also met with the Tillman family and compared her incident in Iraq to Pat Tillman's in Afghanistan saying that "Our stories are similar". She began her testimony by noting for the record that her appearance was not politically motivated. Right.....

Here a more devastating article (on the American Thinker blog) on how the media and elites are waging war against the US military (click here)

Strategic Petroleum Reserve Sites
Ever wonder exactly where the strategic reserve of US petroleum is? Well here is a map of a few of them:

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket