Well it appears my purely speculative post about determining Governor Ehrlich’s Lt. Governor based on which url was available was just that…purely speculative. It turns out Governor Ehrlich has chosen Kristen Cox to be her running mate. From The Baltimore Sun.

Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. introduced Maryland Disabilities Secretary Kristen Cox, a legally blind former Washington lobbyist, as his pick for lieutenant governor this morning and said that her interest in empowering underserved communities would be an asset to his administration.

“She met the two-prong test: personal compatibility, philosophical compatibility,” Ehrlich said during a news conference at the City Dock in Annapolis.
….
“Let’s be honest, most politicians don’t step up and make disability a key part of their platform,” said Cox, 36. “… But this governor says, ‘You know what? These are people that can contribute, that can get back to the workforce, that can be productive if we give them some support.’”

I don’t think it turned out to be much of a surprise to many. Cox’s name had been mentioned numerous times to me and in the “mainstream” media over the past few weeks as the likely choice. Obviously her blindness will have an initial shock value, but I don’t think it will be as big a shock to the system as Michael Steele’s victory in 2002 as Lieutenant Governor was in the state of Maryland. I personally do not know much about Cox other than she has been an active player in the Disability arena, so it will be interesting to see how she progresses as a candidate. I missed the announcement this morning, so I haven’t yet actually heard her speak.

Meanwhile, in my absence, The Washington Post released the first poll since Doug Duncan dropped out and it shows O’Malley with an initial 16% lead over Ehrlich among likely voters.

MD GOVERNOR
Martin O’Malley (D) 55%
Bob Ehrlich (R) 39%

Among registered voters, it was a little closer, 51%-40%. Despite the deficit, Ehrlich does hold a pretty healthy approval rating 56%-41%, so it is somewhat interesting that he would be so far behind. Now that the running mates have been chosen on both sides, I think the next poll will be more telling. This poll was done June 19-25 among 902 registered voters (# of likely voters was not clear to me).

I should point out, someone did in fact purchased the http://www.ehrlichcox.com url since my post earlier this week. Hopefully it was someone in the Ehrlich campaign and not an O’Malley ally who could use it for nefarious purposes.

from Dave at the Hedgehog.

Well, this just proves to me how unthinking MD voters are. Is the city safer under O’Malley? No, it’s worse. Are the schools better? That is questionable. The economics are little better. More people have moved out…

let me remind you again….since O’Malley Baltimore is again the number one murder capital.

The three cities of 500,000 or more residents with the highest homicide rates were Baltimore, Detroit and Washington, D.C.

Baltimore’s murder rate among its 634,279 residents was 42.41 killings per 100,000 residents. Detroit, with 359 killings among its population of 914,353, had a murder rate of 39.26. Washington, with 195 homicides and a population of 553,523 had a murder rate of 35.23

(Highest)
BALTIMORE 42.41
DETROIT 39.26
WASHINGTON 35.23
PHILADELPHIA 25.40
MEMPHIS 20.84
(Other notable cities)
CHICAGO 15.51
LOS ANGELES 12.66
NEW YORK 6.66
(Lowest)
SAN JOSE 2.86
EL PASO 2.19

So since he did a crappy job as mayor, let’s make him Gov. What a bunch of unthinking lemmings some voters are. …….lets vote for the Democrat no matter what kind of job he did.

sorry, I could not verify the source, so I deleted the article.

I know that this has been around before but wouldn’t it be great to have him back as our President today? Really have to love this guy. God rest his soul. ….mikie
“Here’s my strategy on the Cold War:

We win, they lose.”

- Ronald Reagan

“The most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”
- Ronald Reagan

“The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant: It’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.”

- Ronald Reagan

“Of the four wars in my lifetime none came about because the U.S. Was too strong.”
- Ronald Reagan

“I have wondered at times about what the Ten Commandment’s would have looked like if Moses had run them through the U.S. Congress.”

- Ronald Reagan

“The taxpayer: That’s someone who works for the federal government but doesn’t have to take the civil service examination.”

- Ronald Reagan

“Government is like a baby: An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other.”

- Ronald Reagan

“If we ever forget that we’re one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under.”

- Ronald Reagan

“The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth is a government program.”
- Ronald Reagan

“I’ve laid down the law, though, to everyone from now on about anything that happens: no matter what time it is, wake me, even if it’s in the middle of a Cabinet meeting.”
- Ronald Reagan

“It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first.”

- Ronald Reagan

“Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”

- Ronald Reagan

“Politics is not a bad profession. If you succeed there are many rewards, if you disgrace yourself you can always write a book.”
_
Ronald Reagan

“No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women.

- Ronald Reagan

by Haider Ajina

The following is my translation of a headline and article from the Iraqi newspaper

Alsabah of June 27th.

‘Iraqi interior ministry confirms decline in terrorist actively and car bombs’.

‘Iraqi interior ministry announced some changes to the current security operation (Together Forward). In areas of repeated killings, they plan to increase checkpoints. General Abdul Azizi Mohamed, director of operations in the ministry, announced this in a press conference yesterday, and he added that terrorist activities of last week have declined compared to the week before. This is a result of the current joint security operation carried out by both the defense and interior ministry’s forces, which are in their 13th day of implementation. Car bombs in Baghdad last week have declined to three down from twelve the week before. Other bombs have declined to nine from twenty-four. General Mohamed reaffirmed his full support for the new national reconciliation plan (a two part 28 point plan put forward by Prime–Minister Al-Maliki on the 25th.) to reduce national tension since most armed groups are connected to a political block. The goal of the PM’s plan is to sap the violence and end terrorist activity. The current security plan is not limited by time and will be carried out until peace and security are achieved in Baghdad and surrounding areas’.

My comments;
The two prong approach (political negotiations & more security personnel) of the new Iraqi government is getting positive results. Speak softly and carry a big stick (famous Roosevelt policy) seems to be Al-Maliki’s approach. He has not been giving fiery speeches and calling for fighting; he has been talking about reconciliation and democratic negotiations. So far, four armed groups have expressed an interest in negotiations, through indirect contacts. This is the ‘speak softly’ part of the policy. Operation ‘Together forwards’ obviously is the ‘big stick’.

Only three out of eighteen provinces are experiencing terrorist violence, thus over 67% of the Iraqi people live in relatively peaceful areas. The three hot provinces are consuming most of the security resources and most of the media ink. The media obviously sees many more news worthy stories to tell in the three violent provinces than in the other Fifteen.

Let us keep in mind, the groups now elected to office in Iraq (while highly educated) have not had any experience in running a country, let alone a country emerging from over 30 years of brutal dictatorship and iron fist control. Government and law enforcement are being trained to respect the rule of law. They do this while dealing with a terrorist element and infrastructure, which has not been updated since the beginning of the Iran-Iraq war in the fall of 1980 (just over a year after Saddam became president).

Before Saddam became president in the summer of 1979 Iraq had a highly educated public and a high literacy rate (higher than Italy at the time). Education up to high school level was mandatory for all Iraqis male or female. The government helped families who needed their children to work instead of study, so the children could go to school. Health care was good and available at minimal cost. Private medicine was also available. Low unemployment and rapid infrastructure development went hand in hand then. While Baathist rule before Saddam was brutal, fascist and dictatorial, it was tolerated due to improved heath care, education, infrastructure and Job creation. It was also not as brutal as Saddam’s rule. Once Saddam took over in summer of 1979, all these benefits and programs were scrapped or suspended to start a war with Iran and build Saddam’s infrastructure of violence, war and grand palaces.

Speaking to the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, Turkey’s Prime Minister said that criticism of Islam is a crime against humanity:

STRASBOURG, 29 June 2006 — The incitement to hatred of Islam should be considered a crime against humanity, Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said in a speech before the Council of Europe in Strasbourg yesterday.

“Just as anti-Semitism is a crime against humanity, so should Islamophobia be regarded,” Erdogan said. Erdogan warned against the growing phobia against Islam and foreigners in the world in which “we Muslims feel increasingly under siege.”

Referring to the row over blasphemous cartoons that were originally printed in a Danish newspaper, he said freedom of expression should not be confused with the freedom to insult.

The row showed not only a “lack of respect for religious convictions,” but was also a sign of a “growing and dangerous polarization between the Western and Islamic world.” The Turkish prime minister called on Western countries to integrate the Muslims living among them to a much greater degree.

from LGF.

Freedom of speech means to criticize any idea, especially one that deals blowing up buildings. Let me remind you what needs to be criticized….

When it came time to write up the premarital agreement between Zakaria Amara and Nada Farooq, Ms. Farooq briefly considered adding a clause that would allow her to ask for a divorce.

“[And] if he ever refuses a clear opportunity to leave for jihad, then i want the choice of divorce,” she wrote in one of more than 6,000 Internet postings uncovered by The Globe and Mail.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – In a sharp rebuke of President George W. Bush’s tactics in the war on terrorism, the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday struck down as unlawful the military tribunal system set up to try Guantanamo prisoners.

By a 5-3 vote, the nation’s highest court declared that the tribunals, which Bush created right after the September 11 attacks, violated the Geneva Conventions and U.S. military rules.

“We conclude that the military commission convened to try (Salim Ahmed) Hamdan lacks power to proceed because its structure and procedures violate” the international agreement that covers treatment of prisoners of war, as well as the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the court majority.

The decision was a stinging blow for the administration in a case brought by Hamdan, who was Osama bin Laden’s driver in Afghanistan. Hamdan, one of about 450 foreign terrorism suspects at the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was captured in November 2001.
the link is here.

Since I am not a lawyer, I am not sure of it’s legality, and am not going to assume like some arrogant journalist. But I do know the ACLU is pro-terrorist and the liberal Democrats act like there is no war on. Thus, any decision that sides with this collection of defeatists and treasonists does not make me happy.

Bush And The Signing Statement

Posted by Curt

And here we go again. This time it’s brought to us by who else? None other then the New York Times along with the Democrat Arlen Specter:

Senators on the Judiciary Committee accused President Bush of an “unprecedented” and “astonishing” power grab on Tuesday for making use of a device that gave him the authority to revise or ignore more than 750 laws enacted since he became president.

By using what are known as signing statements, memorandums issued with legislation as he signs it, the president has reserved the right to not enforce any laws he thinks violate the Constitution or national security, or that impair foreign relations.

A lawyer for the White House said that Mr. Bush was only doing his duty to uphold the Constitution. But Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania and chairman of the Judiciary Committee, characterized the president’s actions as a declaration that he “will do as he pleases,” without regard to the laws passed by Congress.

“There’s a real issue here as to whether the president may, in effect, cherry-pick the provisions he likes and exclude the ones he doesn’t like,” Mr. Specter said at a hearing.

“Wouldn’t it be better, as a matter of comity,” he said, “for the president to have come to the Congress and said, ‘I’d like to have this in the bill; I’d like to have these exceptions in the bill,’ so that we could have considered that?”

[…]Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, said the expansion of executive power would be the “lasting legacy” of the Bush administration. “This new use of signing statements is a means to undermine and weaken the law,” she said.

What the president is saying, she added, is “Congress, what you do isn’t really important; I’m going to do what I want to do.”

Ms. Boardman said the president had inserted 110 statements, which senators said applied to 750 statutes, compared with 30 by President Jimmy Carter. The number has increased, she said, but only marginally, and only because national security concerns have increased since the attacks of Sept. 11 and more laws have been passed. She acknowledged that the increase might be construed as “a lack of good communication” with Congress.

But Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, said the committee was making too much of the statements. “It is precedented,” he said, “and it’s not new.”

Senator Feinstein says this is a “new use” of the signing statement, guess the fact that Presidents from Monroe and Jackson have used them all the way to Carter and Clinton, and in the same numbers, matters not:

The first president to issue a signing statement was James Monroe.[2] Until the 1980s, with some exceptions, signing statements were generally triumphal, rhetorical, or political proclamations and went mostly unannounced. Until Ronald Reagan became President, only 75 statements had been issued. Reagan and his successors George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton made 247 signing statements between them. As of 2006, George W. Bush, the current President, has issued over 100 signing statements containing more than 500 constitutional challenges. [3]

This study tells us some more in depth numbers:

A look at the Clinton record of the use of the presidential signing statement shows that Clinton used the constitutional signing statement less than his predecessor (105 to 146), but still more than the Reagan administration (105 to 71).

Plus it tells us that Clinton did in fact believe the same thing as Bush does, that the use of the signing statement to decline to enforce provisions of a statute that may be unconstitutional was his right:

And like the Bush administration, President Clinton in at least three separate instances asked the OLC to issue opinions either buttressing the president’s authority to decline to enforce provisions of a statute or to direct inferior officers on how to implement the terms of a constitutional signing statement, and in two additional cases, the OLC wrote highly expansive and detailed memorandum on the legal significance of the constitutionally-based signing statement.

Not only did Clinton believe it was part of his duties, he used them much the same way as President Bush now:

In using the constitutional signing statement, Clinton was similar to the Bush administration in issuing most in the area of foreign policy (52%), precisely where presidential power is at its zenith. But even where the power of the presidency is clearest, President Clinton was still willing to use the constitutional signing statement from the high profile to the mundane, often to achieve what could not be achieved after veto bargaining had taken place.

This Department of Justice memo stated in 1993 (who was in office then?) much the same thing, it is not a “new use”:

Many Presidents have used signing statements to make substantive legal, constitutional, or administrative pronouncements on the bill being signed. Although the recent practice of issuing signing statements to create “legislative history” remains controversial, the other uses of Presidential signing statements generally serve legitimate and defensible purposes.

[…]In each of the last three Administrations, the Department of Justice has advised the President that the Constitution provides him with the authority to decline to enforce a clearly unconstitutional law.(7) This advice is, we believe, consistent with the views of the Framers.(8) Moreover, four sitting Justices of the Supreme Court have joined in the opinion that the President may resist laws that encroach upon his powers by “disregard[ing] them when they are unconstitutional.” Freytag v. C.I.R., 111 S. Ct. 2631, 2653 (1991) (Scalia, J., joined by O’Connor, Kennedy and Souter, JJ., concurring in part and concurring in judgment).(9)

As far as why he doesn’t just veto a bill he feels may be unconstitutional:

The contrary view — that it is the President’s constitutional duty not to sign legislation that he believes is unconstitutional — has been advanced on occasion. For example, Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson advised President Washington in 1791 that the veto power “is the shield provided by the constitution to protect against the invasions of the legislature [of] 1. the rights of the Executive 2. of the Judiciary 3. of the states and state legislatures.” Opinion on the Constitutionality of the Bill for Establishing a National Bank (Feb. 15, 1791), reprinted in III The Founders’ Constitution 247 (Philip B. Kurland & Ralph Lerner eds. 1987). James Madison appears to have held a similar view and as President once vetoed a bill on constitutional grounds even though he supported it as a matter of policy. See Message to the House of Representatives (Mar. 3, 1817), in I James Richardson (ed.), Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 585 (1896) (while praising the bill’s “beneficial objects,” Madison wrote that he “ha[d] no option but to withhold [his] signature from it” because he thought it unconstitutional). Jefferson and Madison, however, did not in fact always act on this understanding of the President’s duties: in 1803 President Jefferson, with Secretary of State Madison’s agreement, signed legislation appropriating funds for the Louisiana Purchase even though Jefferson thought the purchase unconstitutional. See I William M. Goldsmith, The Growth of Presidential Power 438-50 (1974). In light of our constitutional history, we do not believe that the President is under any duty to veto legislation containing a constitutionally infirm provision, although of course it is entirely appropriate for the President to do so.

The memo also details the fact that the President is not supposed to be just a signing machine, that he is involved in the process of the legislation:

In support of the view that signing statements can be used to create a species of legislative history, it can be argued that the President as a matter both of constitutional right and of political reality plays a critical role in the legislative process. The Constitution prescribes that the President “shall from time to time . . . recommend to [Congress’s] Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.” U.S. Const., art. II, § 3, cl. 1. Moreover, before a bill is enacted into law, it must be presented to the President. “If he approve it he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated.” U.S. Const., art. I, § 7, cl. 2.(11) Plainly, the Constitution envisages that the President will be an important actor in the legislative process, whether in originating bills, in signing them into law, or in vetoing them. Furthermore, for much of American history the President has de facto been “a sort of prime minister or ‘third House of Congress.’ . . . [H]e is now expected to make detailed recommendations in the form of messages and proposed bills, to watch them closely in their tortuous progress on the floor and in committee in each house, and to use every honorable means within his power to persuade . . . Congress to give him what he wanted in the first place.” Clinton Rossiter, The American Presidency, 110 (2d ed. 1960). It may therefore be appropriate for the President, when signing legislation, to explain what his (and Congress’s) intention was in making the legislation law, particularly if the Administration has played a significant part in moving the legislation through Congress. And in fact several courts of appeals have relied on signing statements when construing legislation. See United States v. Story, 891 F.2d 988, 994 (2d Cir. 1989) (Newman, J.) (”though in some circumstances there is room for doubt as to the weight to be accorded a presidential signing statement in illuminating congressional intent, . . . President Reagan’s views are significant here because the Executive Branch participated in the negotiation of the compromise legislation.”); Berry v. Dep’t of Justice, 733 F.2d 1343, 1349-50 (9th Cir. 1984) (citing President Johnson’s signing statement on goals of Freedom of Information Act); Clifton D. Mayhew, Inc. v. Wirtz, 413 F.2d 658, 661-62 (4th Cir. 1969) (relying on President Truman’s description in signing statement of proper legal standard to be used in Portal-to-Portal Act).

So Clinton used it 105 times, Bush Sr. used it 146, Reagan used it 71, and Bush Jr. has used it 110 times.

None of these numbers are unusual, or rare.

Just another case of the NYT’s attempting to smear President Bush, no matter the facts. Just smear him.

UPDATE

Found this memo written in 1994 by Walter Dellinger, Assistant Attorney General, that has even more direct language:

The President has enhanced responsibility to resist unconstitutional provisions that encroach upon the constitutional powers of the Presidency. Where the President believes that an enactment unconstitutionally limits his powers, he has the authority to defend his office and decline to abide by it, unless he is convinced that the Court would disagree with his assessment. If the President does not challenge such provisions (i.e., by refusing to execute them), there often will be no occasion for judicial consideration of their constitutionality; a policy of consistent Presidential enforcement of statutes limiting his power thus would deny the Supreme Court the opportunity to review the limitations and thereby would allow for unconstitutional restrictions on the President’s authority.

[…]I]f resolution in the courts is unlikely and the President cannot look to a judicial determination, he must shoulder the responsibility of protecting the constitutional role of the presidency.

[…]The fact that a sitting President signed the statute in question does not change this analysis. The text of the Constitution offers no basis for distinguishing bills based on who signed them; there is no constitutional analogue to the principles of waiver and estoppel. Moreover, every President since Eisenhower has issued signing statements in which he stated that he would refuse to execute unconstitutional provisions.

[…]Finally, the Supreme Court recognized this practice in INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983): the Court stated that “it is not uncommon for Presidents to approve legislation containing parts which are objectionable on constitutional grounds” and then cited the example of President Franklin Roosevelt’s memorandum to Attorney General Jackson, in which he indicated his intention not to implement an unconstitutional provision in a statute that he had just signed. Id. at 942 n.13. These sources suggest that the President’s signing of a bill does not affect his authority to decline to enforce constitutionally objectionable provisions thereof.

And President Clinton’s Assistant Attorney General conclusion?

In accordance with these propositions, we do not believe that a President is limited to choosing between vetoing, for example, the Defense Appropriations Act and executing an unconstitutional provision in it. In our view, the President has the authority to sign legislation containing desirable elements while refusing to execute a constitutionally defective provision.

Here is the bill in which President Roosevelt used the signing statement:

One such instance came when President Roosevelt signed the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942. The Emergency Price Control Act was designed to help stabilize the economy during the height of the Second World War. Roosevelt objected to a section of the bill that was a “protectionist measure for farmers” in the United States. Roosevelt stated:

…there is nothing contained therein which can be construed as a limitation upon the existing powers of governmental agencies, such as the Commodity Credit Corporation to make sales of agricultural commodities in the normal conduct of their operations.

Roosevelt further demanded that the provision be removed and if the Congress did not remove it, he would treat it as a nullity.

But alas, this is all a “new use” by President Bush.
from Curt at Flopping Aces.

And remember Clinton also did data mining against the mafia. But it appears things are only bad if Bush is doing it. I also want to state my displeasure with the Republican Congress that is starting to sound like the Democrats.

How pathetic!

Israel arrests Hamas leaders

GAZA (Reuters) – Israel arrested dozens of Hamas cabinet ministers and lawmakers on Thursday in a move the Islamic group said aimed to topple its government, as the army pressed on with a Gaza offensive to free an abducted soldier.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other Group of Eight foreign ministers said in a joint statement that the arrests in the occupied West Bank raised “particular concerns.” They called on Israeli forces in Gaza to show restraint.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas asked the United Nations to intervene to secure the immediate release of the Hamas officials arrested by Israel, Alvaro de Soto, the U.N. special envoy for the Middle East peace process, told Reuters.
the link is here.

Does the article mention Hamas is a terrorist group? Nope, at the very end it mentions Hamas won’t reject violence, but that is as close to the truth as you get…..

journalism is dead.

John McIntyre notes that the New York Times seems to have badly miscalculated the political consequences of blowing yet another anti-terror program:

Politically, this is a clear winner for Bush and the GOP. The issue plays to Bush’s strengths and continues to paint the picture of the President as a stalwart fighter, protecting America’s safety while the left-wing press does their best to undermine as many successful anti-terror programs as possible.
The Times and the far left are so completely out of touch with where the country is on national security and terrorism issues they probably thought this disclosure would hurt Bush politically. They are clueless.

This gives rise to some advice for the Democrats:

[W]hile this is a huge win politically for Bush, it doesn’t have to be a loss for Democrats. This brewing scandal is a tailor-made opportunity for a Democrat to show his or her independence from the far-left, borderline anti-American media. Hillary Clinton would measurably improve her chances of becoming President if she walked down to the Senate floor and denounced the New York Times for harming American security.
It’s good advice, but the Democrats will never take it. I doubt that most of them can imagine a world in which they part company with the New York Times. I especially doubt that Hillary Clinton or any other Presidential contender be willing to cross not only the newspaper, but the party’s far-left base.

But they support the troops!

update:

Senate Asks for Leak Damage Assessment

Today, Senator Pat Roberts, Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, wrote to Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte, asking him to investigate and report on the damage done by the media’s “unauthorized disclosure of some of our most sensitive intelligence programs.” Roberts authorizes a broad inquiry, but directs Negroponte to report particularly on leaks regarding the Terrorist Surveillance Program and the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program. Click the image below to read the letter in its entirety:

from Powerline.

Remember, this is just the latest of leaks…….in a time of war. And the asses in the NYT admitted the program they outed has been successful. This however, does not keep them from leaking the information. Notice how they feel the privacy of their sources is more important then the privacy of the secrets of their country.

what arrogance…..

How is this not treason??

and here is how the lying media covered this scandal..

MSM Outlets Ignore or Cite Political Motives for the Criticism of the NY Times
Posted by Brent Baker on June 27, 2006 – 23:43.
The disgust of conservatives directed at the New York Times after the newspaper on Friday again undermined national security by taking the lead in exposing a program to monitor international financial transactions by terrorist operatives, hasn’t much disturbed the broadcast networks. While the cable news channels have been filled with coverage, especially after President Bush on Monday called the disclosure “disgraceful,” the CBS Evening News with Bob Schieffer hasn’t touched the controversy — though it has made time for stories on how at Wimbledon women are paid less prize money than men and on a left-wing (un-labeled) group’s efforts to raise the minimum wage — and other broadcast network coverage has questioned the administration’s motives.

On Monday night, NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell asserted that “today’s coordinated White House assault is more than simply shared frustration. Analysts say there is political upside as well.” On NBC’s Today, co-host David Gregory doubted the White House, wondering “whether we should be taking their word for it. That these are legal programs, inappropriate programs. Do you think the administration has earned the right, has any administration earned the right in this kind of war to protect that kind of secret?” Chris Matthews replied: “Well not this one.” On CBS’s Early Show, Harry Smith called the paper an “easy target” and suggested: “Is this just a way to attack the evil media or does he have a legitimate beef here?” Meanwhile, on Tuesday’s GMA, ABC’s Jessica Yellin featured New York Times reporter Eric Litchblau’s insistence that “we’re not trying to tilt the debate, we’re not trying to influence the debate one way or the other. We’re just trying to inform the public debate,” as well as a great zinger from radio talk show host Scott Hennen about how the Times has become “a terrorist tip sheet.”

but it gets even better…

Auletta of the New Yorker: NY Times News Coverage Not Liberal
Posted by Mark Finkelstein on June 27, 2006 – 20:12.
You’re having a first conversation with someone. Alright, maybe you don’t agree with him, but he seems rational. Then, out of the blue, he comes out with something so strange, so disconnected from reality, that you say to yourself ‘whoah! – who is this guy?’ And you go back and rethink everything else he had said in light of his suddenly-exposed madness.

That’s what is was like watching Chris Matthews’ interview of Ken Auletta on this evening’s Hardball. Alright, Auletta’s the media columnist of the New Yorker. So you have no illusions. This is a liberal. Even so, he seems so urbane, so calm, even reasonable. You could almost imagine having a drink and a conversation at sunset on the deck of one of those fancy Hampton houses you picture him visiting on weekends.

And then . . .

from Newsbusters.

if the NYT is not liberal, then I’m not white……what bizzaro world do they live in? This is how out of touch these people are with ordinary Americans.

The controversial Ethnic Studies Professor at the Univ. of Colorado who referred to those who perished in the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 as “Little Eichmans”, is to be dismissed by the University’s Interim Chancellor for academic misconduct.

Ward Churchill has displayed “a pattern of research misconduct committed over a period of time,” Interim Chancellor Philip DiStefano said.

Churchill’s attorney, David Lane, said Churchill will appeal through university channels, but does not think the school will reverse the firing.

“I can’t imagine that CU is going to suddenly decide the First Amendment deserves some respect,” Lane said, adding that a lawsuit would be filed if the firing is upheld. “I trust juries to make these decisions, not bureaucrats,” he said.

The tenured professor brought national attention upon himself with his hateful comments justifying the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon in 2001 by claiming that the victims brought the attacks upon themselves and were legitimate military targets. This led to his writings and other work to be scrutinized which in turn led to a charge from a Canadian professor who claimed that Churchill used some of her work in an unethical manner. Apparently an academic committee agreed and recommended dismissal.

In an essay written shortly after the 2001 attacks, Churchill described some of the victims in the World Trade Center as “little Eichmanns,” a reference to Holocaust architect Adolf Eichmann. The essay was largely ignored until January 2005, when it came to light before Churchill was to speak at Hamilton College in upstate New York.

The essay caused an outcry and launched a national debate, with Churchill held up alternatively as a pillar of free speech rights or a symptom of liberal academia run amok. University officials concluded he could not be dismissed because of First Amendment protections, but they did order an investigation into allegations of academic misconduct.

The school’s committee on research misconduct last month concluded Churchill “has committed serious, repeated, and deliberate research misconduct,” findings DiStefano agreed with.

Churchill used his presumed ethnic heritage as a Native American to attain his position at the Univ. of Colorado as an Ethnic Studies Professor. However, his ethnic heritage cannot be proven. He has produced a membership card for a legitimate Native American Tribe but the Tribal elders all claim that it was an honorary membership card and since has been recalled.

Churchill has used his reputation as an Ethnic Studies Professor and Native America to secure speaking engagements at other Universities and Colleges, an act which has further enraged the American public based on his comments after September 11th. The American people find it incomprehensible that he should be in a position to influence the thinking of young adults.

Republican Gov. Bill Owens, who has called for Churchill’s dismissal for months, praised DiStefano’s decision.

“If a university is a marketplace of ideas, then Mr. Churchill is the rotten fruit among hundreds of good apples. Hopefully, we can soon say good riddance to Ward Churchill once and for all,” Owens said. SOURCE

In the wake of these outrageous comments by Churchill, we’ve had numerous reports of teachers even on the high school and elementary school levels injecting their personal political beliefs into the classroom. I am glad that the Univ. of Colorado has decided to put an end to their relationship with Churchill. And I also find it difficult to believe that another institution would take a risk on this volatile individual. In other words, stick a fork in him… he’s done.

It is my personal belief that the tenure system breeds mediocrity and irresponsible behavior by teachers and should be abolished.

from Stop the ACLU

and only a few thusand to go. The truth is, our universities are still hostile to Republicans, the military, and Christians, and still a haven for radicals and America haters.

Forbes Magazine publisher Rich Karlgaard thinks people should remember exactly how radical and mean-spirited the party of Daily Kos really is: The ‘Screw Them’ Party.

Playing to his online audience of post-McGovernite neo-commies, Kos enjoys picking fights with Democratic centrists who have the temerity to put America’s security as a top priority.

Among those Democrats is Will Marshall, founder of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council. Marshall wants Dems to reclaim their Truman-J.F.K. heritage in foreign policy. He calls the Kos crowd “aging boomers out to relive the radical days of their youth.”

Marshall is right. The radicalism of the Kos crowd is real. And rooted in serious hate. On April 1, 2004, Kos wrote this about the brutal slayings of four U.S. citizens in Fallujah: “I feel nothing over the death of mercenaries … They are there to wage war for profit. Screw them.”

Remember that quote next time you read a puff piece on Kos. “Screw them.”

Democrats will never win as a “screw them” party. …

It would be one thing if the Kos crowd made its arguments from a Gandhi-esque moral high ground. But they don’t. Callousness and moonbat conspiracy mongering animates their foreign policy ideas. Jealousy rules in economics. Revenge will be the order of the day if these haters actually win. But I don’t think the Kos crowd will win. “Screw them” doesn’t sell in America. Never has. Never will.

from LGF.

what, polls are biased?????Playing With The Numbers – Gallup Poll Edition

Now I have pretty much stopped paying attention to Bush’s job approval ratings except to tabulate them, mostly because Bush is not running again. However, I had to comment on the latest poll from Gallup because the numbers reported by Gallup on the top line seem to contradict the partisan breakdown of the poll when one looks at the trend lines.

The top headline Gallup is peddling shows President Bush’ job approval dropping from 38% in a poll done between June 9-11 to 37% in a poll done June 23-25. Fair enough. But then check out the party trend line between the polls as reported by Gallup. Republicans INCREASED their approval of Bush from 77% between June 9-11 to 81% in the latest poll. Independents INCREASED their approval of Bush from 27% in the June 9-11 poll to 32% in this poll. Democrats also INCREASED their approval of Bush from 9% in the June 9-11 poll to 10% in this poll. Yet, despite every group increasing their approval of Bush, his overall approval rating went down. Hmmm…..

Now I realize this is still possible if Gallup decided to add many more Democrats to the poll and takeout Republicans and Independents, which would mean the calculated average overall could still go down. But it does show the folks at Gallup are willing to manipulate their demographic numbers enough to “hold Bush down” and prevent him from reaching 40%, which is probably their goal. Maybe one of our statisticians can do an analysis of these numbers to determine how dramatic Gallup changed the demographics in this case.

Since I am talking about Bush’s job approval, Bush did gain in the latest poll from ABC News-Washington Post, moving from 33% to 38%.

from Dave at the Hedgehog.

and here’s more bias and lies……The AP Conducts A “Scientific” Poll

Posted by Curt

Now this is quite funny. Seth Borenstein writes for the AP today about Gore’s movie. Take a look at the headline:

Scientists OK Gore’s Movie for Accuracy

Piqued your interest? Read further:

The nation’s top climate scientists are giving “An Inconvenient Truth,” Al Gore’s documentary on global warming, five stars for accuracy.

Your by now thinking “no way” right? Of course this is directed at those with common sense, not the leftists in the crowd.

So if your thinking “no way”, check the following couple paragraphs out:

The former vice president’s movie – replete with the prospect of a flooded New York City, an inundated Florida, more and nastier hurricanes, worsening droughts, retreating glaciers and disappearing ice sheets – mostly got the science right, said all 19 climate scientists who had seen the movie or read the book and answered questions from The Associated Press.

The AP contacted more than 100 top climate researchers by e-mail and phone for their opinion. Among those contacted were vocal skeptics of climate change theory. Most scientists had not seen the movie, which is in limited release, or read the book.

So let me get this straight. Out of 100 contacted, only 19 had seen the movie. And all 19 of them agreed with Gore.

That’s 19%…..19 freaking percent agreed with Gore, and he has the gall to write this article in such a way as to convey that ALL the top scientists back Gore.

How much you want to bet those 19 agreed with Gore before they saw the movie. Now how much you want to bet the other 81 didn’t want to see the movie because its fiction?

As Dafydd at Big Lizards said:

(While AP is quick to note that some of those they contacted were “vocal skeptics of climate change theory,” you may notice they oddly fail to mention how many of the 19 who responded to them were among those “skeptics.” At a guess, I’d have to say — zero?)

If you’re a climatologist — and even if you more or less support the IPCC position on global climate change — how likely would you be to seek out a showing somewhere of Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth? Most scientists I know cringe at such populist caricatures, even if they agree with the basic premise… especially if they agree.

Scientists tend to be irritated anyway by the depiction of science in movies, even so-called documentaries: everything from orbits that “decay,” to explosions that can be “outrun,” to a rotating space station that produces a gravitational-like force… directed along the axis of rotation.

But they’re even more skeptical of science when the subject is controversial within the scientific community (which anthropogenic global warming certainly is) — and in spades and doubled when the moviemaker is not himself a scientist but a politician with no formal training in any math or science beyond what he learned in high school (which, considering Algore’s GPA at St. Alban’s and at Harvard, was probably not very much).

What does Al Gore have to say to this?

“They are quite literally afraid to know the truth,” Gore said. “Because if you accept the truth of what the scientific community is saying, it gives you a moral imperative to start to rein in the 70 million tons of global warming pollution that human civilization is putting into the atmosphere every day.”

Yeah, that’s the reason Al.

UPDATE

Oh lookie, the Senate has issued a rebuttal:

The June 27, 2006 Associated Press (AP) article titled “Scientists OK Gore’s Movie for Accuracy” by Seth Borenstein raises some serious questions about AP’s bias and methodology.

AP chose to ignore the scores of scientists who have harshly criticized the science presented in former Vice President Al Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth.”

In the interest of full disclosure, the AP should release the names of the “more than 100 top climate researchers” they attempted to contact to review “An Inconvenient Truth.” AP should also name all 19 scientists who gave Gore “five stars for accuracy.” AP claims 19 scientists viewed Gore’s movie, but it only quotes five of them in its article. AP should also release the names of the so-called scientific “skeptics” they claim to have contacted.

The AP article quotes Robert Correll, the chairman of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment group. It appears from the article that Correll has a personal relationship with Gore, having viewed the film at a private screening at the invitation of the former Vice President. In addition, Correll’s reported links as an “affiliate” of a Washington, D.C.-based consulting firm that provides “expert testimony” in trials and his reported sponsorship by the left-leaning Packard Foundation, were not disclosed by AP. See http://www.junkscience.com/feb06.htm

[…]Here is a sampling of the views of some of the scientific critics of Gore:

Professor Bob Carter, of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University in Australia, on Gore’s film:

“Gore’s circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention.”

“The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science.” – Bob Carter as quoted in the Canadian Free Press, June 12, 2006

Richard S. Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT, wrote:

“A general characteristic of Mr. Gore’s approach is to assiduously ignore the fact that the earth and its climate are dynamic; they are always changing even without any external forcing. To treat all change as something to fear is bad enough; to do so in order to exploit that fear is much worse.” – Lindzen wrote in an op-ed in the June 26, 2006 Wall Street Journal

But hey, according to Seth, They ALL agree with Gore.

Sigh

UPDATE II

The Anchoress makes a very good point about the left dismissing Bush’s attempt at a tackling the problem:

But the fact remains that if Al Gore or Bill Clinton or whoever else is ringing the sky-is-falling alarm bells were serious about Global Warming…if they really, actually believed that it was real, that it was, as Clinton says, “the most urgent issue of our time, more urgent than terrorism…” then rather than ignore this program, they’d have applauded this effort between co-operating nations.

Instead, the story got sniffed at with disdain, was pronounced some sort of political manuever and then strangled to death from a lack of oxygen. Certain quarters are very good at suffocating stories that don’t fit memes.

So, you know…if the big boys of Global Warming aren’t really taking the issue seriously…if they find it so unserious as to allow the issue to be used as a political wedge or a rabble-rousing sound-bite, and that’s all…well, then I don’t have to take it seriously, either.
from Curt at Flopping Aces.

My two big issues is that the environmentalists do not care that Kyoto leaves out two of the biggest industrial nations, China, and India, and thus makes little sense environmentally.

Also, why do scientists not consider the variable output of our Sun when studying the warming and cooling of our earth?

Submitted by Brujo Blanco

The New York Times has set themselves up as judge and jury for the United States and it military. They have apparently decided that the Iraqi war is wrong and that they therefore must oppose that war. Their method of opposing this war is apparently to collect intelligence information and pass it on to the enemy through publication of classified information. If some Joe Sixpack had compromised the security of the USA the way the New York Times has he would have been buried in legal problems. What they have committed in divulging an operation to locate terrorists funds as indicated in the following links is an act of treason:

Lawmaker Wants Papers Probed Over Stories

The chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee urged the Bush administration on Sunday to seek criminal charges against newspapers that reported on a secret financial-monitoring program used to trace terrorists.

Rep. Peter King cited The New York Times in particular for publishing a story last week that the Treasury Department was working with the CIA to examine messages within a massive international database of money-transfer records.

King, R-N.Y., said he would write Attorney General Alberto Gonzales urging that the nation’s chief law enforcer “begin an investigation and prosecution of The New York Times _ the reporters, the editors and the publisher.”

“We’re at war, and for the Times to release information about secret operations and methods is treasonous,” King told The Associated Press.

A message left Sunday with Times spokeswoman Catherine Mathis was not immediately returned.

King’s action was not endorsed by the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, GOP Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania.

“On the basis of the newspaper article, I think it’s premature to call for a prosecution of the New York Times, just like I think it’s premature to say that the administration is entirely correct,” Specter told “Fox News Sunday.”

Stories about the money-monitoring program also appeared last week in The Wall Street Journal and Los Angeles Times. King said he thought investigators should examine those publications, but that the greater focus should be on The New York Times because the paper in December also disclosed a secret domestic wiretapping program.

He charged that the paper was “more concerned about a left-wing elitist agenda than it is about the security of the American people.”

When the paper chose to publish the story, it quoted the executive editor, Bill Keller, as saying editors had listened closely to the government’s arguments for withholding the information, but “remain convinced that the administration’s extraordinary access to this vast repository of international financial data, however carefully targeted use of it may be, is a matter of public interest.”

After the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Treasury officials obtained access to a vast database called Swift _ the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication. The Belgium-based database handles financial message traffic from thousands of financial institutions in more than 200 countries.

Democrats and civil libertarians are questioning whether the program violated privacy rights.

The service, which routes more than 11 million messages each day, mostly captures information on wire transfers and other methods of moving money in and out of the United States, but it does not execute those transfers.

The service generally does not detect private, individual transactions in the United States, such as withdrawals from an ATM or bank deposits. It is aimed mostly at international transfers.

Gonzales said last month that he believes journalists can be prosecuted for publishing classified information, citing an obligation to national security. He also said the government would not hesitate to track telephone calls made by reporters as part of a criminal leak investigation, but officials would not do so routinely and randomly.

In recent months, journalists have been called into court to testify as part of investigations into leaks, including the unauthorized disclosure of a CIA operative’s name.

He said the First Amendment right of a free press should not be absolute when it comes to national security.
the link is here.

Hopefully, there will be a follow through and investigation of this matter. Someone in a US Intelligence Agency has decided that classified information should be released to the public.

Keep in mind that when 9/11 happened all the liberals blamed it on GWB because he failed to “connect the dots.” Now that the dots are being connected the left is hammering him for doing so.

During World War II the republicans rallied behind a democrat president. The democrats need to return the favor and start thinking like Americans instead of just politicians.

John Murtha has totally lost it. Now he is alleging that the USA is more dangerous to world peace than North Korea or Iran.

Murtha says U.S. poses top threat to world peace
SOUTH FLORIDA SUN-SENTINEL

MIAMI — American presence in Iraq is more dangerous to world peace than nuclear threats from North Korea or Iran, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., said to an audience of more than 200 in North Miami Saturday afternoon. Murtha was the guest speaker at a town hall meeting organized by Rep. Kendrick B. Meek, D-Miami, at Florida International University’s Biscayne Bay Campus. Meek’s mother, former Rep. Carrie Meek, D-Miami, was also on the panel. War veterans, local mayors, university students and faculty were in the Mary Ann Wolfe Theatre to listen to the three panelists discuss the war in Iraq for an hour.

A former Marine and a prominent critic of the Bush administration’s policies in Iraq, Murtha reiterated his views that the war cannot be won militarily and needs political solutions. He said the more than 100,000 troops in Iraq should be pulled out immediately, and deployed to peripheral countries like Kuwait.
“We do not want permanent bases in Iraq,” Murtha told the audience. “We want as many Americans out of there as possible.”

Murtha also has publicly said that the shooting of 24 Iraqis in November at Haditha, a city in the Anbar province of western Iraq that has been plagued by insurgents, was wrongfully covered up. The killings, which sparked an investigation into the deadly encounter and another into whether they were the subject of a cover-up, could undermine U.S. efforts in Iraq more than the prison abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib in 2004, Murtha said. “(The United States) became the target when Abu Ghraib came along,” Murtha said.

the link is here.

I now wonder what Murtha really did in the Marines. Is he or was he ever a patriot? If the rest of the dems have any common sense they will stay away from him. I have no problem with people that disagree with me, however, this guy is beyond the pale. The liberals have talked about wrongheadedness in the past.

I have heard liberals claim that the US and Israel are responsible for the existence of terrorists. Terrorists, in their view, are just misunderstood. Their brand of moral equivalence is embodied in John Murtha.

Brujo Blanco

I want to add my two cents, I find it interesting how the lying MSM is NOT covering the corruption by the Democrats and Murtha.

Rep. John Murtha May Face Ethics Investigation
by Jim Kouri

One of the mysteries these days is the about-face of a supposed Democrat war hawk, Representative John Murtha of Pennsylvania. Considered a supporter of the Iraq conflict, the decorated former Marine suddenly came out with statements calling for the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq and that the war is not winnable. After the liberal media feasted on his sudden burst on the national scene, Murtha became the new lightning rod for the antiwar, anti-American movement. Recently, he said that the US military was worn out and unable to protect Americans should a security crisis emerge. And the media again jumped all over the Murtha comments. John Murtha replaced Wesley Clark and John Kerry as the left’s favorite veteran since they only love warriors opposed to war. Murtha is someone few Americans knew let alone cared about until he became the big thing in the media’s relentless goal of undermining “Bush’s war.”

Meanwhile, another Democrat, Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, a respected member of the US Senate and a former vice presidential candidate, returned from a fact-finding mission in Iraq. He told of the progress he had seen and wrote a column in the Wall Street Journal about his positive view of US operations in Iraq. Other than some radio talk shows, Senator Lieberman was all but ignored by the mainstream news media, preferring to run Murtha quotes or air Murtha soundbites.
the link is here.

Why is this not on the front pages of the MSM? Because he is a Democrat.

The media are liars and supporters of treasonist politicians.

‘Not it!’ More schools ban games at recess

Fourth grade students in Cincinnati, Ohio, play tag together at recess, but now some schools across the country are banning the game, saying it “progresses easily into slapping and hitting.” Some traditional childhood games are disappearing from school playgrounds because educators say they’re dangerous.

Elementary schools in Cheyenne, Wyo., and Spokane, Wash., banned tag at recess this year. Others, including a suburban Charleston, S.C., school, dumped contact sports such as soccer and touch football.

In other cities, including Wichita; San Jose, Calif.; Beaverton, Ore.; and Rancho Santa Fe., Calif., schools took similar actions earlier. The bans were passed in the name of safety, but some children’s health advocates say limiting exercise and free play can inhibit a child’s development.

the link is here.

This is a good reason to hate laywers, and those that are sue-happy. For if it was not for them, situations like this would not exist. And I guarantee you some of these lawyers are going to sue some fast food company because our kids are getting fatter because they can’t exercise.

….this is the stupidest thing I ever heard.

by Curt

Ray Robison’s latest article on the translated Iraqi Intelligence notebook is a doozy. It details how Saddam’s regime discussed creating Al-Qaeda training camps inside Iraq. Weird, I thought the left said there was never any ties between Saddam and Al-Qaeda?

Newly declassified documents captured by U.S. forces indicate that Saddam Hussein’s inner circle not only actively reached out to the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan and terror-based jihadists in the region, but also hosted discussions with a known Al Qaeda operative about creating jihad training “centers,” possibly in Baghdad.

Ray Robison, a former member of the CIA-directed Iraq Survey Group (ISG), supervised a group of linguists to analyze, archive and exploit the hundreds of captured documents and materials of Saddam’s regime.

[…]The relationship between the Taliban and Saddam appears to have been mediated by a Pakistani named Maulana Fazlur Rahman. Another document captured in Afghanistan and written by an Al Qaeda operative confirms the relationship between the Maulana and Saddam. The translation provided here includes an early 1999 meeting between the director of the IIS and the Maulana.

Another notebook entry records a meeting with Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, an Afghani Islamic Jihadist and leader of the Islamic Party in Afghanistan. Hekmatyar made news recently with the BBC article Afghan Rebel’s pledge to al-Qaeda that reports on a video statement from Hekmatyar in which he states he will fight alongside A Qaeda. In this translation, Hekmatyar makes specific requests for a “center” in Baghdad and/or Tajikistan.

A third meeting involves an Islamist representing Bangladesh that we believe to be Fazlur Rahman Khalil. Another page of the notebook indicates Khalil is coming or came to Iraq. Khalil is a Taliban/Al Qaeda associate who signed the 1998 fatwa from Usama bin Laden declaring war on the United States.

Translation:

Translation for ISGP-2003-0001412 follows (PDF):

Page 70, Left Side:

Saturday 3/20 at 11:45

Met with him Mr. MS4 (translator’s note: MS4 is the code name for the high ranking IIS official).

1. Intelligence and security cooperation.

2. Mr. MS4 informed him that the Iraqi president and Iraqi leadership are interested in him.

3. “We are ready to help you in any country and against your enemies”. (translator’s note: most probably this is MS4)

4. Fadlul Haq – The governor of Peshawar that was assassinated.

(translator’s note: points 5 and 6 are direct quotes from the Afghani)

5. “We are facing a vicious international plot against the Islamic Party and cannot find any country to help us at the time being”.

6. “Iran helped us at the beginning and we brought 2,000 fighters but things changed at the time being. Also the Russians called to help but we do not trust them. Moscow and Iran want the war to drag on.” (RR: this is probably the Taliban vs. Northern Alliance conflict). This is why he is coming to Baghdad for help. Asked Baghdad to help open a center in Tajikistan or in Baghdad and they will bring them (translator’s note: not clear what them refers to) in through Iran or Northern Iraq.

He asked for help in printing Afghani money in Baghdad or help in printing it in Moscow.

Page 69, Right Side:

Stinger missiles have a range of 5 kilometers. (translator’s note: there is only this one sentence on this page)

Page 69, Left Side:

Meeting of MS4 with 6951 on 4/10 at 8 p.m. in room 710.

He (6951) inquired about our relation with Usama (bin Laden).

(translator’s note: The Iraqi answer is not reported.).

He (6951) proposed to the Taliban to form a front with Iraq, Libya and Sudan.

He met some of them in Hajj (Translator’s note: Pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia, it is one of the five pillars of Islam) and he came to the conclusion that they do not know anything about Foreign Relations.

The Taliban defense minister is Abdul Razzak (unclear) Association of Muslim Clerics.

They openly claim that they are against America.

He said that he was ready to build relations between the Taliban and Iraq.

(translator’s note: meeting continues on both sides of page 68/76, with questions about Pakistani politics and the other Islamic parties.) The Iraqi official says, “I suggest that the parties come closer together because that means power to Islam against the American and Zionist policies”.

Page 39, Left Side:

Meeting with an Islamist leader from Bangladesh. He promises support to Iraq. He says: “Let them know that I made Bangladesh a second country to Mr. President and we have 125 million (people).” (RR: Although no name is given for this meeting, it is important to note Fazlur Rahman Khalil, noted for meeting with Iraqi officials in the previous article, signed the 1998 fatwa as “Fazlur Rahman, Amir of the Jihad Movement in Bangladesh”. This is a strong indication that this meeting is with Khalil or his representative.)

Page 27, Left side:

(translator’s note: contains notes with information on prior meetings recorded in the notebook.)

The mentioned person (Translator’s note: Fazlur Rahman) arrived to the country on 11/27/1999 and he was hosted in Al Rachid Hotel suite number 526. He will leave on 12/1/1999.

(translator’s comment: note No. 1 in a list of notes.)

He visited Iraq on the beginning of April 1999 and the ex-director of the intelligence, may God rest his soul, instructed him to mediate between the Taliban and the leader of the Afghani Islamic party, Hekmatyar following the request for mediation done by Hekmatyar to the leadership of Iraq during a visit when they met us on 3/19/1999.

End Translation

Analysis:

Because Arabic writing is right to left, the pages in this notebook go in reverse chronological order. The note on page 27 indicates that Hekmatyar met with the IIS on March 19, 1999. The translation of page 70 is dated March 20 and it refers to someone from the Islamic Party, which is Hekmatyar’s group. Therefore it makes sense that the meeting on page 70 is with Hekmatyar.

The note on page 27 also says the meeting was with the director if the IIS, so we believe MS4 is his code-name. It appears that Hekmatyar, a jihadist leader warring with the Taliban for control of Afghanistan at the time, asked Baghdad “to help open a center in Tajikistan or in Baghdad and they will bring them (translator’s note: not clear what them refers to) in through Iran or Northern Iraq.” There is a strong indication that this requested “center” is a jihadist training camp.

From a US Department of State report Patterns of Global Terrorism, 1996:

Gulbuddin Hekmatyar … maintained training and indoctrination facilities in Afghanistan, mainly for non-Afghans. They continue to provide logistic support and training facilities to Islamic extremists despite military losses in the past year. Individuals who trained in these camps were involved in insurgencies in … Tajikistan…

It looks very much like Hekmatyar, a long-time jihad leader and recently self-identified Al Qaeda associate, is asking the Saddam regime for a jihad training camp in Tajikistan and/or Baghdad.

He then proceeds to detail what we have learned through the notebook, specifically Saddam’s contacts with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.

Most interesting is the connection between Saddam and Maulana Rahman, who may very well have assisted in the planning and funding 9/11.

In this notebook, we see a Saddam Hussein actively seeking to expand his sphere of influence in a region at the heart of the world-wide Islamic jihad movement.

This now-public relationship between Maulana Fazlur Rahman and Saddam Hussein deserves great scrutiny.

As we researched the Maulana, a picture came into focus that our team was not looking to find: The Maulana is a senior leader of an affiliation of Pakistani groups supportive of Islamic jihad. These groups include the JUI and the Jamaat Islami (JI). The JUI provided direct support to both the planner and paymaster of the 9/11 attacks. The Pakistani government accused the JI of working with Al Qaeda. The Maulana mediated an intelligence pact between the IIS and the Taliban.

Clearly, this evidence indicates that the Maulana was in a position to procure assistance from Iraq for the 9/11 attacks.

Dr. Laurie Mylroie, an expert on Iraq, testified in front of the 9/11 commission in 2003:

After al Qaeda moved to Afghanistan, Iraqi intelligence became deeply involved with it, probably, with the full agreement of Usama bin Ladin. Al Qaeda provided the ideology, foot soldiers, and a cover for the terrorist attacks; Iraqi intelligence provided the direction, training, and expertise…

This notebook demonstrates that Islamic jihad leaders in Afghanistan were seeking IIS assistance and Saddam was giving them that assistance.

We now know that Saddam had many many contacts with terrorists. He helped train them, he helped fund them, and even offered to set up training camps for them.

Did his assistance to these groups help the 9/11 planners also?

from Flopping Aces

So who lied now?

And what is the media, Democrats and liberals doing, revealing our secrets to our enemy. When is someone going to put the treasonist NYT leakers in jail for espoinage?

And some Republicans should be Democrats.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is opening hearings this week into what has become the White House’s favorite tool for overriding Congress in the name of wartime national security.

“It’s a challenge to the plain language of the Constitution,” the committee’s chairman, Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa, said in an interview with The Associated Press. “I’m interested to hear from the administration just what research they’ve done to lead them to the conclusion that they can cherry-pick.”

……..if this is the kind of man Specter is, I think he is in the wrong party.

By Robert Farrow

“…every preacher that said slavery was a divine right was a Democrat. Every wound born by you Union soldiers is a souvenir of Democrat. Every man that lowered the flag was a Democrat. Recollect it!” Robert Ingersoll, Attorney General of Illinois campaign speech, 1890. (from Hugh Hewitt, If it’s Not Close, They Can’t Cheat.)

You are on the eve of a major battle to defend your city, your life, and your home from a hostile invader who wishes to kill you all, when suddenly the troops in your company or battalion start discussing retreating from the battle and negotiating with the enemy. They can’t be all bad, your soldiers say, even though they slaughtered tens of thousands in cities in the past, and it is probably our fault they hate us anyway.

Would you be worried? I bet you would, and I’m sure you would not want soldiers like this under your command. So why would you want your government run by people who think the same way? This is exactly how the modern Democratic party thinks, in a time of war no less. And it is difficult to think of a more suicidal policy for a country to pursue. Our nation is committing suicide, as surely if a gun was pointed to our collective heads, and how we vote may lead to our own deaths. It has already happened. Liberals in Britain and France helped kill millions. How? The appeasement of Hitler by liberals in Britain resulted in turning over Czechoslovakia, their first class weapons, and their first class military factories to Nazi Germany. It is a fact that without these extra tanks and tank production, Hitler’s invasion of France and then Russia would have been a quick failure and lead to a much shorter war. So indirectly, liberals have the deaths of millions on their hands. Britain rewarded Churchill’s heroic stance and eventual victory against Hitler by voting him out of office and placing the same liberal appeasing government back in power. Luckily, Hitler was already dead. But had the allies invaded earlier, there would be thousands dead instead of tens of millions.

Liberals showed again their complete inability to understand the nature of evil with their classification of Hiroshima as a war crime. The war was started because Japan was using our oil to commit genocide against our ally at the time, China. Wisely we cut off the flow of oil, and a war started. Japan had then killed more Chinese then Hitler killed jews. To allow this government to stay in place, to cut and run, would have killed millions more Chinese. And the argument that Japan was ready to surrender and the atomic bombing was not necessary is absolutely false. Even after the second bombing and the declaration of war by the USSR did not prevent an attempt by the military hard liners to prevent peace by taking over the government, and it was only the shock of the second atomic bomb that allowed the Emperor the unprecedented opportunity to talk and thus sue for peace. The fact that the atomic bomb was cited in the Emperor’s surrender speech to his people as rational for a loss of face is further proof. And to not drop the bomb, and invade, is even stupider, as a half million Americans and 2 million Japanese would have died. So the question I have for the Hate America First crowd is, are you stupid, or does millions of dead Chinese not matter to you?

The cut and run from Vietnam allowed the North Vietnamese to kill over a million Montagnard, South Vietnamese, and Cambodians in ethnic cleansing, forced labor camps, invasion, and just general murderous reprisals. This is the legacy of Jane Fonda and John Kerry. The fact that you might have performed bravely in combat for one or two years does not make up for the fact that your appeasement and defeatism for decades afterword empowered aggressors to continue to murder. And as stated before, the left also embraced Communism and Socialism, even though the two biggest Communist countries killed tens of millions of their own people. Any dictator’s favorite president, Carter was shocked when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, because the liberal Democratic Party does not have a clue.

Never really getting it, the appeasers are at it again. The new Quisling, Bin Laden’s new pen pal, the dishonorable Murtha attacked the president, asserting that the Commander –in-chief had no plan in Iraq, and that the war could not be won. Well, that does not make a lot of sense to me. If a war cannot be won, does it matter what the plan is? Do you think Bin Laden, the enemy of the United States, is happy with Murtha’s remark? Do you think Murtha encourages him? Liberals are forever wringing their hands wondering what they did to make the muslims hate them the way they do. Some think it is the invasion of Iraq and the support of Israel for this hatred. This is at least consistent, as liberals do not seem to care if they abandon another nation, and a Democracy at that, to their deaths as long as they don’t have to fight, not thinking that perhaps when the aggressor is done he might turn on them. Well here is some proof for pacifists and liberals that this Islamic world war we are in has little to do with Iraq or Israel, and that it isn’t going away anytime soon. Tours, Hattin, Constantinople, Las Navas de Toloso, Rhodes and Malta, or Lepanto, all happened before the creation of Israel. The 1982 Beruit bombings, the 1983 Marine Barracks, the 1985 Achille Lauro, 1986 Berlin Disco, 1988 Pam Am Flight 103, 1993 World Trade Center, 1996 Housing complex in Saudia Arabia, 1998 Kenya and Tanzania, USS Cole, 911, all happened before Iraq. And here is a list of the Islamic violence from just 1 month. Read it and tell me this is not an aggressor ideology and it is our fault they hate us. (Many involve Iraq, but many do not.) This is from the Religion of Peace.

4/30/06 Iraq Baghdad 3 2 Islamic terrorists kill three civilian contractors from Fiji.
4/30/06 Afghanistan Lashkargah 1 2 Religious extremists open fire on a civilian car, killing one occupant.
4/30/06 Iraq Ramadi 2 0 Two children are killed in an RPG attack by Muslim insurgents.
4/30/06 India Udhampur 13 0 Thirteen Hindus are kidnapped by Muslim extremists and brutally executed. Families are among the dead.
4/30/06 Philippines Surallah 1 7 A 13-year-old girl is killed by Moro Islamic Front terrorists, who attack a cargo truck carrying her family.
4/30/06 Iraq Baghdad 9 6 Sunni radicals plant a bomb inside a minibus, killing two civilians. Seven bodies are discovered elsewhere.
4/30/06 Afghanistan Kandahar 1 0 An Indian engineer is kidnapped and brutally decapitated by the Taliban.
4/29/06 Iraq Jurf al-Sakhar 2 0 Islamic radicals abduct a policeman and his brother, then dump their bodies by their house two hours later.
4/29/06 Iraq Basra 2 3 Two British contractors are killed by a Muslim terrorist bombing.
4/29/06 Afghanistan Baghran 3 1 Religious extremists fire a rocket at a police patrol, killing three and injuring another.
4/29/06 Iraq Baghdad 9 14 Nine Iraqis are killed in various terror attacks around the country.
4/29/06 Iraq Qaim 3 7 Three civilians are killed by a Fedayen suicide car bomber.
4/28/06 Iraq Diyala 9 18 Terrorists launch a series of assaults against police stations and checkpoints, killing at least nine.
4/28/06 India Kulgam 1 0 The Mujahideen kill a Communist Party activist inside his home.
4/27/06 India Pahalgam 0 20 Twenty people, including eight tourists, are injured when a Muslim radical tosses a grenade into a crowded bus stop.
4/27/06 India Awantipore 1 0 The Mujahideen gun down a policeman.
4/27/06 Iraq Baghdad 15 0 The sister of the country’s vice president is gunned down along with her bodyguard by Muslim terrorists as thirteen headless bodies are discovered elsewhere.
4/27/06 Iraq Nassiriya 4 1 Three Italian soldiers and one Romanian are killed when terrorists bomb their convoy.
4/26/06 Iraq Baghdad 24 22 Five bombs kill twelve civilians in various parts of the country. Jihadis also shoot a truck driver to death and murder eleven kidnapped men.
4/26/06 Jordan Irbid 1 0 A man kills his sister to restore ‘honor’ after seeing her picture on a friend’s mobile phone.
4/25/06 India Tral 0 24 Twelve schoolchildren are among twenty-four people injured when an Islamic radical hurls a grenade into a crowded market.
4/25/06 Thailand Pattani 1 0 Islamists gun down a Buddhist pig farmer.
4/25/06 Iraq Baqubah 4 0 Holy warriors gun down four civilians, including an 8-year-old girl.
4/25/06 Iraq Baghdad 2 5 Radical Sunnis plant a bomb on a minibus, killing at least two.
4/25/06 Pakistan Dattakhel 4 9 al-Qaeda militants attack a security patrol, killing four people, including a journalist.
4/25/06 Pakistan Quetta 4 2 An Aghan bombmaker connects the wrong wires, killing four members of his own family and injuring his 2nd wife and 13-year-old son.
4/25/06 Pakistan Shavai Kainari 1 0 Islamic militants kidnap and behead a taxi driver.
4/25/06 India Shopian 1 0 A bookseller succumbs to injuries suffered from an Islamic terror attack.
4/25/06 Thailand Narathiwat 1 0 A 45-year-old civilian is killed by Muslim terrorists while walking home.
4/25/06 India Arnora 2 0 Two bodyguards are killed by Muslim terrorists attempting to wipe out the family of a legislator.
4/25/06 Afghanistan Kabul 2 3 Religious extremists fire rockets into a city street, killing two civilians.
4/24/06 India Srinagar 1 25 One civilian was killed, and two dozen others wounded, when Muslim militants stage three grenade attacks on polling stations.
4/24/06 Iraq Baghdad 10 80 A string of Jihadi car bombings kill ten innocents and injure eighty.
4/24/06 Iraq Mosul 28 0 The bodies of twenty-eight young men are found bound and tortured in Mosul and in the capital.
4/24/06 Egypt Dahab 19 62 Three bombings at an Egyptian resort area leave at least nineteen victims dead and another sixty injured.
4/24/06 Pakistan Karwan Manza 1 0 The body of a government employee is found beheaded several days after being abducted by local Islamists.
4/23/06 India Pulwama 1 0 A civilian is abducted and murdered by the Mujahideen.
4/23/06 Thailand Narathiwat 1 1 Islamic militants gun down a civilian and seriously injure his wife in a drive-by attack.
4/23/06 Thailand Yala 1 0 A 27-year-old shopkeeper loses his life to Allah’s holy warriors while tending his business.
4/23/06 Afghanistan Kandahar 1 2 Taliban militants attack a road construction crew, killing a guard.
4/23/06 Iraq Baghdad 15 0 Jihadis use a rocket to take out seven civilians riding in a car. Eight bound bodies are found elsewhere.
4/23/06 Yemen Sana’a 7 13 A Muslim throws a grenade into a market, killing seven.
4/23/06 Algeria Skikda 10 8 Islamic fundamentalists slaughter ten people at a roadblock in a remote area.
4/23/06 Pakistan Dungan 1 2 Militant Islamists ambush a group of villagers, killing one.
4/23/06 Iraq Mahmudiya 2 7 A child is among two fatalities from an Islamist mortar attack. Seven other children are injured.
4/23/06 Pakistan Razmak 1 0 Islamists murder a security officer’s younger brother.
4/22/06 Afghanistan Gumbad 4 0 Four Canadian troops are killed by religious extremists, who detonated a bomb under their vehicle.
4/22/06 Iraq Hawija 2 0 Two civilians are gunned down by Sunni extremists.
4/22/06 Iraq Muqdadiya 13 15 Two people are killed in a market bombing, as eleven bodies are found in the capital.
4/21/06 Iraq Baghdad 8 0 The bodies of eight men, bound and executed, with signs of torture are found in two locations in the country.
4/21/06 Afghanistan Maiwand 6 0 Six policemen are killed at their post by Taliban extremists.
4/21/06 Iraq Baghdad 3 0 A baker and two bakery workers are murdered in two separate attacks by Islamic fundamentalists.
4/21/06 Iraq Baiji 6 0 In a heinous act, Islamic terrorists kidnap six off-duty policemen from and murder them.
4/21/06 India Kishtwar 1 0 A civilian is gunned down by the Mujahideen.
4/21/06 India Cherwan 1 0 The Mujahideen murders a civilian outside his village.
4/21/06 India Gool 2 0 Two transportation employees are shot to death on the job by Muslim radicals.
4/20/06 Pakistan Sarobi 7 22 al-Qaeda militants ambush a military convoy, killing seven Pakistani soldiers and injuring twenty-two.
4/20/06 Iraq Tal Afar 3 4 Three people, including a doctor in his clinic, are murdered by Islamists in two attacks.
4/20/06 Iraq Kirkuk 9 1 Nine people, including four security guards, are killed by Muslim terrorists in four separate attacks around the country.
4/20/06 India Bhaderwah 1 3 A Mujahideen grenade attack on a police station leaves one dead and three injured.
4/19/06 Thailand Narathiwat 3 17 Three people, including a female election volunteer are murdered in separate attacks by Thai Islamists attempting to disrupt elections.
4/19/06 Iraq Baqubah 3 1 Three university professors are gunned down by religious extremists.
4/19/06 Iraq Rashad 5 3 Sunni gunmen take out five civilians and injure three.
4/19/06 India Handwara 2 0 Two soldiers on leave are killed inside their home by the Mujahideen.
4/19/06 Iraq Baiji 5 4 Jihadis use a roadside car bomb to kill five civilians.
4/18/06 India Sildhar 2 0 The Hizb-ul-Mujahideen abduct two civilians from their homes and murder them in captivity.
4/18/06 Iraq Baghdad 7 20 Seven people are blown apart in a cafe when Islamic radicals place a bomb under a chair. At least twenty others are injured.
4/18/06 Thailand Yala 1 0 Islamists kill a 24-year-old man on his way to work by shooting him multiple times in the chest.
4/18/06 Iraq Baghdad 4 22 Four civilians are killed when Muslim terrorists detonate a roadside bomb.
4/18/06 Iraq Yusufiya 4 0 Islamic radicals kidnap, torture and kill four young men.
4/18/06 Pakistan Faisalabad 2 0 A Shia cleric and his driver are shot to death by radical Sunnis.
4/18/06 Pakistan Mirali 1 0 Islamists kidnap and behead a civilian.
4/18/06 Iraq Baghdad 19 0 Fourteen victims of execution are found in the same neighborhood, and five elsewhere, over the last two days.
4/17/06 Israel Tel Aviv 9 66 With the blessing of Hamas, Islamic Jihad sends a teenage suicide bomber into a restaurant and massacre at least nine innocents. More than sixty others are injured.
4/17/06 Iraq Baghdad 4 4 Four terror attacks leave four innocents dead, including a mosque guard and a shepherd
4/17/06 India Tral 1 4 Muslim militants attempt a political assassination, killing one and injuring four.
4/17/06 Ethiopia Gedo 3 30 Three people are killed when a Muslim radical hurls a grenade into a market.
4/17/06 Thailand Narathiwat 1 0 A 50-year-old man is gunned down by Muslim fanatics.
4/17/06 Pakistan Datakhel 1 0 al-Qaeda kills a local tribesman for supplying food to Americans.
4/17/06 Pakistan Madakhel 1 0 Islamic fundamentalists kidnap and behead a civilian.
4/16/06 Iraq Baghdad 4 6 Four ordinary Iraqis are blown apart by a terrorist car bombing near a mosque.
4/16/06 Ethiopia Jijiga 3 23 Islamists bomb a two bars and a church, killing three people and injuring two dozen.
4/16/06 Thailand Narathiwat 1 0 A 32-year-old civilian is gunned down by Muslim terrorists while riding a motorcycle.
4/16/06 Philippines North Cotabato 1 0 The Moro Islamic Front guns down a man in front of his wife inside a gamehall.
4/15/06 Chechnya Dargo 2 5 Jihadis use a landmine and small arms fire to ambush a security patrol.
4/15/06 Pakistan North Waziristan 1 0 al-Qaeda kidnap and behead a civilian – attaching a note to the body warning more of the same.
4/15/06 Yemen Sanaa 1 5 A guard is killed when radical Shiites attack a rival mosque.
4/15/06 Iraq Baghdad 7 26 Seven people are murdered in two bomb attacks by Islamic militants, including one in a restaurant.
4/15/06 Pakistan Ghulam Khan 1 1 Islamists plant a bomb at a bazaar, killing at least one shopper.
4/14/06 Iraq Basra 7 3 Ten employees of a construction company are handcuffed, blindfolded, then lined up against a wall and shot by Muslim extremists. Seven die.
4/14/06 India Srinagar 5 31 A series of deadly grenade attacks on civilians leave three women and two men dead.
4/14/06 Iraq Basra 2 4 A suicide bomber kills two Iraqi civilians.
4/14/06 Iraq Baqubah 4 5 Four people are killed by two mosque bombings.
4/14/06 Egypt Alexandria 1 3 Knife-wielding Islamists attack Christians gathered outside a church, stabbing four of them. A 78-year-old man dies.
4/14/06 Thailand Narathiwat 1 4 Militant Muslims hide in the bushes to surprise a civilian party with automatic weapons.
4/14/06 Afghanistan Khost 3 2 Three Afghan policemen are killed in a Taliban roadside bombing attack.
4/13/06 Iraq Fallujah 7 0 Terrorists kill five people in Fallujah and two truck drivers are gunned down near the capital.
4/13/06 Sudan Akobo 15 11 Four attacks by government-armed militias leave fifteen dead, including four children.
4/13/06 Chad Djawara 118 0 Janjaweed Arab terrorists rampage through four African villages over a 2-day period, hacking, stabbing and shooting more than a hundred people to death.
4/13/06 Iraq Baghdad 13 8 Thirteen people are killed when Muslim terrorists car bomb a crowded market.
4/12/06 Kabardino-Balk. Nalchik 1 0 Terrorists fire a grenade into an anti-Terrorism headquarters, killing a guard.
4/12/06 India Tral 1 1 A Mujahideen ambush against a vehicle leaves one dead.
4/12/06 Iraq Kirkuk 1 1 Terrorists attack a gas company executive and his wife, killing the woman.
4/12/06 Iraq Baghdad 15 9 Six separate Jihad attacks leave fifteen dead around the country, including truck drivers and oil workers.
4/12/06 Iraq Khalis 4 27 Two car bombs targeting vegetable markets leave four dead in Khalis and Tal Afar.
4/12/06 Iraq Howaydir 23 50 Radical Sunnis detonate a car bomb outside a Shiite mosque, blowing nearly two dozen people into bits. Another fifty are injured.
4/12/06 Pal. Auth. Jericho 1 0 An Arab man is tortured and killed by the al-Aqsa Brigade for selling property to a Jew.
4/11/06 Iraq Jurf al-Sahkar 4 0 Four Iraqi soldiers are abducted and beheaded by ‘Holy Warriors’.
4/11/06 Afghanistan Asadabad 7 34 The Taliban fire two rockets into a school, killing seven children between the ages of 7 and 10.
4/11/06 Pakistan Karachi 55 77 Fifty-five people attending a religious gathering in a city park are blown apart by two suicide bombers. Some seventy others are injured.
4/11/06 Iraq Baghdad 3 4 Islamic terrorists bomb a passenger bus, killing three civilians.
4/11/06 Iraq Kirkuk 1 0 A man is kidnapped, tortured and beheaded by Jihad extremists.
4/11/06 India Kangan 1 0 A civilian is abducted and murdered by the Mujahideen.
4/10/06 Afghanistan Badghis 5 0 Five Afghan humanitarian workers working for a Christian aid agency are slaughtered by Muslim extremists at their clinic.
4/10/06 Iraq Baghdad 3 0 Islamic radicals murder three members of the same family.
4/10/06 Iraq Baqubah 1 0 An Iranian woman is found shot through the head in a Sunni area.
4/10/06 Somalia Baidoa 6 3 Armed Muslims open fire on a food convoy, killing six humanitarian aid workers.
4/10/06 India Bijbehara 1 0 A forest worker is abducted and murdered by the Mujahideen.
4/10/06 Pakistan Dherdoni 2 0 Islamic terrorists murder a water tanker driver and his assistant.
4/9/06 Chechnya Sernovodsk 3 0 A policemen and two family members are massacred in a Jihad ambush on their vehicle.
4/9/06 India Challad 3 0 Three members of a family, including two brothers and a woman, are murdered by the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen.
4/8/06 Iraq Musayib 6 16 Suspected al-Qaeda car bombing kills six innocents near a Shia mosque.
4/8/06 Iraq Kirkuk 4 0 Four Iraqi soldiers are kidnapped, tortured and executed by Islamic militants.
4/8/06 Iraq Baghdad 2 0 Islamic terrorists place a bomb in the doorway of a home, killing two family members.
4/8/06 Afghanistan Heart 2 7 A suicide car bomber murders two Afghans and leaves seven injured.
4/7/06 Iraq Baghdad 85 164 At least eighty Shia worshippers are slaughtered when Sunni terrorists stage a triple suicide attack against a mosque.
4/7/06 Philippines Asturias 1 9 Abu Sayyaf terrorists are suspected in a drive-by that leaves a woman dead and children injured.
4/7/06 Iraq Kirkuk 1 0 Sunni terrorists murder a Shia tailor in his shop.
4/7/06 India Baradari 1 4 A Mujahideen bombing on a bus kills at least one civilian.
4/7/06 India Kashiyar 1 0 The Mujahideen abduct and behead a civilian.
4/7/06 India Parne 2 0 An elderly couple are murdered inside their home by Islamic radicals in a heinous attack.
4/7/06 Algeria Ouardhia 13 8 Thirteen Algerians are massacred by Islamic fundamentalists in an ambush on their vehicles.
4/6/06 Afghanistan Bagram 1 3 A rocket fired by Taliban extremists kills a civilian.
4/6/06 Iraq Baghdad 6 0 Six bodies are found bound and executed by police.
4/6/06 India Harhama 1 0 A 70-year-old man is shot to death by Muslim terrorists.
4/6/06 Iraq Najaf 13 39 ‘Iraqi Freedom Fighters’ bomb a Shia cemetery near a mosque, killing at least thirteen and injuring dozens more. The victims were mostly women and children.
4/5/06 Pakistan Miranshah 3 3 Three Pakistanis are killed in an Islamist rocket attack on their post.
4/5/06 Iraq Diwaniya 1 1 Terrorists kill a Polish translator and injure his nephew.
4/5/06 Iraq Baghdad 9 18 Two car bombs by Muslim terrorists kill three civilians and injure eighteen as six bodies are found elsewhere.
4/5/06 Afghanistan Ghanzi 1 0 The Taliban gun down a man as he is driving to work.
4/5/06 Afghanistan Nimroz 1 0 Religious extremists kill a government official.
4/4/06 Iraq Baghdad 10 28 Ten people are blown apart by a Sunni car bomb in a Shiite neighborhood. Nearly thirty others are injured.
4/4/06 India Tral 1 0 A policeman is abducted and killed by Islamic radicals.
4/4/06 India Baramulla 1 2 Militant Muslims kill a party activist and injure two women with automatic weapons.
4/4/06 Iraq Baghdad 2 3 Two children are killed when Islamic terrorists bomb their home. Their mother and brother are injured.
4/3/06 Iraq Baghdad 4 0 Sunni gunmen invade a Shia family’s home, line up two sisters, a brother and an uncle, then machine-gun them to death.
4/3/06 Thailand Yala 1 0 Islamists murder a 52-year old man.
4/3/06 Iraq Basra 6 0 A young child is among six victims of a drive-by shooting by Muslim terrorists at a market.
4/3/06 Iraq Baghdad 11 6 Terrorists use a car bomb to kill two civilians. Nine bodies are also found bound and tortured over the next 24 hours.
4/3/06 Pakistan Jandola 4 0 A man, his wife and two children are slaughtered by Islamic fundamentalists in a bomb blast.
4/3/06 Pakistan Dattakhel 5 1 Pro-Talibanis plant a landmine and detonate it under a civilian vehicle, killing at least five, including a mother and her son.
4/2/06 Thailand Pattani 1 0 Muslim extremists stalk and kill a 45-year-old man on the way to pick up his wife.
4/2/06 Pakistan Sararogha 1 0 Islamists murder a pro-government cleric.
4/2/06 India Lama Dhar 1 0 A teenager is killed in a grenade attack by the Mujahideen.
4/2/06 India Chadoora 1 0 The Mujahideen abduct and murder a university grad student.
4/2/06 India Sopore 1 0 Islamic militants assassinate a city councilman.
4/2/06 Philippines Lamitan 1 1 Suspected Abu Sayyaf terrorists gun down a policeman and seriously injure his son.
4/2/06 Afghanistan Nimroz 1 0 The Taliban stop a vehicle and force a Turkish engineer out. They then shoot him to death and burn his body.
4/2/06 Afghanistan Kandahar 5 3 Religious extremists ambush a police checkpoint, killing five officers.
4/2/06 Iraq Balad Ruz 2 3 Islamists kill two members of a family, including a 12-year-old girl, in a shooting ambush.
4/1/06 Pakistan Dattakhel 1 3 Local Taliban militants fire a rocket into a military camp, killing one Pakistani soldier.
4/1/06 Afghanistan Girishk 4 0 A religious extremist poses as a hitchhiker, then kills the four policemen who stop to help.
4/1/06 Iraq Tikrit 1 0 Fundamentalists bomb a music shop, killing at least one person.
4/1/06 India Gharat 1 0 The Mujahideen abduct and kill a civilian.
4/1/06 Iraq Youssifiyah 2 0 Muslims shoot down a U.S. helicopter, then drag the pilots’ bodies through the street shouting “Allah Akbar.”
4/1/06 Iraq Baghdad 15 1 Islamic terrorists kill fifteen innocents in five attacks, including three ice cream vendors and a butcher and his son.

And I guess we can ignore honor killings, female genital mutilation, stoning, and a denial of basic human rights by Islam because it is our fault, if you believe the liberals. Kerry, in his tenure at Congress voted against almost all of our major weapons programs. This would have meant, had Kerry had his way, the weapons we are using to WIN the war on terror would not have existed and more of our soldiers would be dead. And they dared to run on a slogan of A Stronger America. Nothing could be further from the truth. What is even worse is that millions of Americans believed it. Dean, Kerry, and the Liberal Democrats have a track record of appeasement, retreat, and defeat which has lead to the deaths of millions. The liberal media knows this, which is why they run screen for these failures by ignoring positive news in the war and the finding of WMD’s and instead drag up or make up any possible scandal involving Republicans for their front pages. Remember that Dean, the Chairman of the Democratic Party, stated that Saddam and Bin Laden should be tried in an international tribunal instead of here and that he was unable to answer if Bin Laden should be put to death because;

“I’ve resisted pronouncing a sentence before guilt is found. I still have this old-fashioned notion that people like Osama, who is very likely to be found guilty, we should do our best not to, in positions of executive power, not to prejudge jury trials.”

But this did not stop Murtha for repeatedly prejudging our old soldiers guilty of murder in Haditha. It appears terrorists and mass murders get more sympathy then US soldiers in the Democratic Party, which perhaps explains why Bin Clinton was repeatedly attacks by Bin Laden numerous times in his presidency but still repeatedly refuses to have him killed, and only allowed air strikes when he got caught screwing interns. One cannot help but wonder if 9-11 might have been prevented if Bill Clinton went on the offensive against Bin Laden, instead of treating it as a law enforcement matter. Kerry, just as clueless as he was in Vietnam, decided after 9-11 to retreat back away from the war on terror and treat terrorists again as a law enforcement problem.

“The President” Kerry claimed, “does not understand the war on terror. Fighting terror will involve the military now and then, but is primarily an intelligence and law enforcement operation…”

……might involve the military now and then???? Who does not understand the war on terror here? It appears the only thing the Democrats are effectively against is our own soldiers. And now We-Cannot-Win Murtha wants to be House Speaker. Why would anyone want a party of appeasers and defeatists in power in a time of war? It would be a self-fulfilling prophecy, and the cost would be our nation.

The terrorist, treasonist media loves to publish Iraq death counts, but I wonder what the death toll would be from pacifists, liberal appeasers and defeatists if the media ever removed their collective heads from their collective asses and covered that story? Well it would run over the tens of millions. Pacifists and the liberals have as much blood on their hands as the soldiers because pacifism and liberalism embolden dictators and aggressors and only leads to more people being killed. Bin Laden himself admitted this in an interview with John Miller in 1998 that the retreat from Somolia encouraged his attacks on America.

“We have seen in the last decade the decline of the American government and the weakness of the American Soldier, who is prepared to fight cold wars and unprepared to fight long wars. This was proven in Beirut when the Marines fled after two explosions. It also proves they can run in less then 24 hours, and this was repeated in Somolia in 1993.”

Now Murtha wants to prove it some more. General Giap also admitted he would have given up had it not been for the peace protesters in the United States. Jane Fonda and John Kerry only encouraged his attacks on the sovereign South Vietnam. The flood of boat people after the war showed just how popular the North Vietnam Communists that they favored was. (Now Somolia has instituted fundamentalist Islamic law, the kind of law where a women gets stoned if her uncle rapes her, and is now an Al-Qaeda base, which further proves my point that retreat encourages and helps the enemy.) But this won’t stop Murtha, Dean, and Kerry from wanting to continue retreating, giving in, empowering, and generally providing aid and comfort to the enemy. (Thank you again liberals for making our enemy stronger.) In papers found after his death, Hitler admits he would have attacked America when he was done with Russia. So why would radical Islam be any different if we followed the Democrats advice and retreated from Iraq?

Regardless of what the lying media tell you, the modern Democratic party is not moderate, but govern by radical liberals that has perverted the party of Roosevelt into the party of Chamberlain, the party of appeasement, and the party of defeatism. Why? Treason, stupidity, cowardice, it does not matter. Whatever the reason why they act the way they do, if you vote for the party of Kerry, Dean, Polosi, Mutha, and Gore, you, or your children’s children may wind up dead. A vote for the modern defeatist, appeasing Democratic party is a vote for national suicide. Until it resembles again the party of Roosevelt, a party that defends strong values, and strong economy, a strong military, and a strong country, the Democrats must be defeated in each and every election.

Your life may depend on it.

Subject: Lipstick in school

According to a news report, a certain private school in Washington recently was faced with a unique problem.

A number of 12-year-old girls were beginning to use lipstick and would put it on in the bathroom. That was fine, but after they put on their lipstick they would press their lips to the mirror leaving dozens of little lip prints. Every night the maintenance man would remove them and the next day the girls would put them back. Several memos were posted about this.

Finally the principal decided that something had to be done. She called all the girls to the bathroom and met them there with the maintenance man. She explained that all these lip prints were causing a major problem for the custodian who had to clean the mirrors every night.

To demonstrate how difficult it had been to clean the mirrors, she asked the maintenance man to show the girls how much effort was required. He took out a long-handled squeegee, dipped it in the toilet, and cleaned the mirror with it. Since then, there have been no lip prints on the mirror.

There are teachers, and then there are educators

SUBMITTED BY: Brujo Blanco

from Curt

Here we go again, the NYT’s believes itself to be the keeper of all secrets. They get to decide what is in the countries best interest, not our ELECTED leaders, but guys who get hired to write newpaper articles. The arrogance of these writers knows no bounds:

Under a secret Bush administration program initiated weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, counterterrorism officials have gained access to financial records from a vast international database and examined banking transactions involving thousands of Americans and others in the United States, according to government and industry officials.
The program is limited, government officials say, to tracing transactions of people suspected of having ties to Al Qaeda by reviewing records from the nerve center of the global banking industry, a Belgian cooperative that routes about $6 trillion daily between banks, brokerages, stock exchanges and other institutions. The records mostly involve wire transfers and other methods of moving money overseas and into and out of the United States. Most routine financial transactions confined to this country are not in the database. …

The program is grounded in part on the president’s emergency economic powers, Mr. Levey said, and multiple safeguards have been imposed to protect against any unwarranted searches of Americans’ records.

The program, however, is a significant departure from typical practice in how the government acquires Americans’ financial records. Treasury officials did not seek individual court-approved warrants or subpoenas to examine specific transactions, instead relying on broad administrative subpoenas for millions of records from the cooperative, known as Swift.

Everyone and their brother knows that you follow the money when you want to catch a criminal. It is never more true then when you want to catch a terrorist. They need LOTS of money to conduct their operations and it is just plain common sense that you follow the money. Just as NSA wiretap program, this operation targets only suspected Al-Qaeda terrorists, but this does not matter to the NYT’s:

The Bush administration has made no secret of its campaign to disrupt terrorist financing, and President Bush, Treasury officials and others have spoken publicly about those efforts. Administration officials, however, asked The New York Times not to publish this article, saying that disclosure of the Swift program could jeopardize its effectiveness. They also enlisted several current and former officials, both Democrat and Republican, to vouch for its value.

Bill Keller, the newspaper’s executive editor, said: “We have listened closely to the administration’s arguments for withholding this information, and given them the most serious and respectful consideration. We remain convinced that the administration’s extraordinary access to this vast repository of international financial data, however carefully targeted use of it may be, is a matter of public interest.”

Another example of a story by the liberal press to damage Bush. The NSA wiretap story didn’t do the job but did damage our intelligence gathering ability. This story won’t be any different. Most Americans understand the need to find these terrorists, but while the story wont damage Bush it will further damage our intelligence capabilities. You know, those capabilities that let us down prior to 9/11….if the left and the MSM has it’s way they will let us down once again, not because we didn’t try to fix it but because the left wouldn’t let us fix it.

Steve Spruiell sees this as just another attempt by the reporters to further their career:

According to the NYT’s own reporting, the program is legal. The program is helping us catch terrorists. The administration has briefed the appropriate members of Congress. The program has built-in safeguards to prevent abuse. And yet, with nothing more than a vague appeal to the “public interest” (which apparently is not outweighed in this case by the public’s interest in apprehending terrorists), the NYT disregards all that and publishes intimate, classified details about the program. Keller and his team really do believe they are above the law. When it comes to national security, it isn’t the government that should decide when secrecy is essential to a program’s effectiveness. It is the New York Times.

National security be damned.

There are Pulitzers to be won.

While the LA Times tells us that the Financial guru’s layed out a very strong case to keep this stuff quiet, but to hell with that:

Administration officials were concerned that news reports of the program would diminish its effectiveness and could harm overall national security.

“It’s a tough call; it was not a decision made lightly,” said Doyle McManus, the Los Angeles Times’ Washington bureau chief. “The key issue here is whether the government has shown that there are adequate safeguards in these programs to give American citizens confidence that information that should remain private is being protected.”

Treasury Department officials spent 90 minutes Thursday meeting with the newspaper’s reporters, stressing the legality of the program and urging the paper to not publish a story on the program, McManus said in a telephone interview.

“They were quite vigorous, they were quite energetic. They made a very strong case,” he said.

UPDATE

So I get home from work tonight and I read this:

Lichtblau, who co-wrote both stories with Times reporter James Risen, said that in each case the newspaper believed that the information it was reporting would not put anyone in harm’s way. “I think we came down on the same side in both questions,” he said of the two stories. “That this is not giving away information that is tangibly helping terrorists know what they don’t already know.”…

Lichtblau added that the reaction to the wiretapping story, which included both criticism and support for the paper, made it easier to go with this story. He noted that there had been no proof that the previous story had endangered national security.

“Our belief that it did not have any tangible impact has been borne out,” he said.

Wha-wha-wha-What! Not only do this idiots get to decide what should be classified and what isn’t, now they get to decide if any damage had been done to our national security for a previous leak.

Are these people for real?

How in the world would they know if our intelligence programs have been damaged? By leakers who have leaked to them in the past?

If so, we all know what side of the political spectrum those leakers come from. We also know they leaked that information to hurt Bush. No way in hell these leakers admit that their programs are now damaged since this would prove what a terrible deed they did.

But lets say they came to this conclusion ALL on their own…..what was their thought process? Did Eric Lichtblau, James Risen, Bill Keller, Josh Meyer, Greg Miller, Doyle McManus, and Dean Baquet all get in a circle jerk and say “hey Bill, you haven’t heard about the terrorists getting away with anything because of our leakage of the NSA wiretap program have you?” “Well no Greg, sure haven’t” “Guess that seals it, we were right to leak the program….didn’t affect anything”

I mean come on. A freakin 4th grader could see how wrong these people are…..

UPDATE II

These people are just too much. Check out this “analysis” by a AP writer:

A secret CIA-Treasury program to track financial records of millions of Americans is the latest installment in an expansion of executive authority in the name of fighting terrorism. The administration doesn’t apologize for President Bush’s aggressive take on presidential powers. Vice President Dick Cheney even boasts about it.

Oh really, did not Clinton approve of Echelon which greatly expanded his authority? And what exactly should Bush apologize for? Fighting this war as it should be fought?

Bush has made broad use of his powers, authorizing warrantless wiretaps, possibly collecting telephone records on millions of Americans, holding suspected terrorists overseas without legal protections and using up to 6,000 National Guard members to help patrol the border with Mexico.

Enemy combatants who engage in unlawful warfare are now supposed to have a lawyer assigned to them? No, they are held until the war is over…..Mindboggling the stupidity of these people.

[…]Americans may grow weary of surrendering individual rights if they decide terror-war thrusts intrude on their personal lives more directly, said pollster Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center. But that hasn’t happened yet.

“Now there’s still a forgiving attitude on the part of many people in the country,” Kohut said.

He said that forgiving attitude could only be reinforced by the news from Miami of the arrest of seven men in an alleged plot against the Sears Tower in Chicago — men Attorney General Alberto Gonzales called “homegrown terrorists.”

Oh, you think? These leftists want us to lose the ability to find and destroy these cells for no other reason then to say “big brother is coming after you man!”….wont matter if the terrorists would then be able to launch another attack on another major city in the United States.

What would they say then? Who would be to blame? Those who TRIED to find the terrorists or those who tied their hands behing their backs cough Gorelick cough.

UPDATE III

Macsmind has an update up that is quite interesting. It seems much of what this program did was contained in the Patriot Act which Congress voted on:

it seems that this isn’t such a BIG secret – a least not just a “Bush policy”. This now DISCLOSED program is in the PATRIOT ACT. Originally called the Financial Anti-Terrorism Act In October 17, 2001 bill passed in the House of Representatives: 412-1.

from Curt at Flopping Aces

and remember, most of this information is classified.

New York Times Publishes More Classified Info

I don’t even know what to say. The New York Times is a rogue agent, completely out of control: U.S. General in Iraq Outlines Troop Cuts.

WASHINGTON, June 24 — The top American commander in Iraq has drafted a plan that projects sharp reductions in the United States military presence there by the end of 2007, with the first cuts coming this September, American officials say.

According to a classified briefing at the Pentagon this week by the commander, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the number of American combat brigades in Iraq is projected to decrease to 5 or 6 from the current level of 14 by December 2007.
from LGF

EMAIL THE NYT’S AT LETTERS@NYTIMES.COM AND THE LA TIMES AT http://www.latimes.com/services/site/la-comment-oped,0,5293584.htmlstory if this angers you as much as me.

Some in the media has become the enemy!

update: I was suprised to read this from the Washington Post: (thanx Curt)

THE TREASURY Department’s just-disclosed program of searching records of overseas bank transfers may provoke outraged comparisons to the National Security Agency’s warrantless surveillance and data-mining of telephone call records. At least if news reports and government statements concerning the revelations are correct, however, this program is far less troubling. As with all revelations concerning the secretive Bush administration, you have to worry about what you don’t know. So far, however, it seems like exactly the sort of aggressive tactic the government should be taking in the war on terrorism.

so not all in the media are comitting treason, but many still are.

CAIR Complaining to FBI About Blogs

The Council on American-Islamic Relations has begun filing complaints with the FBI about comments on this blog and others (not front page posts). I know this because I’ve spoken with two different agents recently about LGF comments that were reported to the FBI by CAIR.

Just thought you might like to know too. The premier Islamist front group is starting to go after the blogosphere, using the tools provided by our own society.

CAIR, by the way, is being bankrolled by the United Arab Emirates: The CAIR-U.A.E. Connection.

An Arab nation with ties to 9-11 has pledged a major endowment to the Council on American-Islamic Relations, even as the Washington-based nonprofit group insists it receives no foreign support.

The United Arab Emirates recently announced on its official government website that it has set up an endowment serving as a source of income for CAIR. The amount of the funding is undisclosed, but sources say it will be enough to help CAIR finance the construction of a new $24 million office building and a planned $50 million public-relations campaign aimed at repairing Islam’s — and the UAE’s — image in America. …

CAIR — Washington’s biggest Muslim lobbying group — is quoted in the UAE statement, but has not released its own statement. It is not commenting publicly about the size of the endowment or other details.

But the UAE, which formally recognized the Taliban and acted as a launching point for the 9-11 hijackers, has already taken a nearly $1 million stake in CAIR’s existing headquarters near the U.S. Capitol. As first reported in the book, Infiltration, Dubai holds the deed to the building. The transaction took place in 2002, according to local property records.

Jeff Goldstein weighs in: Why, it’s because they CAIR!

When is the last time an LGF commenter was arrested for assaulting a Muslim, or, say, hijacking a jet airplane and flying it into a skyscraper?

If the FBI wants to try sniffing out hate speech, perhaps it should check out any number of mosques or Islamic centers funded by the Saudis. Because rumor has it Wahabbism isn’t exactly the most ecumenical platter of Islam on the buffet …
from LGF

I wonder why they would do this, Muslim nations have such a strong record of support for free speech!