June 24, 2006
Norm Mineta was fine in his office until 9/11. Then he instituted the "search everybody at the airports" rules that wasted valuable resources in identifying possible terrorists. Mineta is the reason the average air traveler - who in no way fits the profile of an Islamofascist terrorist - has to be pulled out of line and searched. STUPID PC BULLSH*T!
And why? Because when he was a kid his family, which is of Japanese descent, was interned during WWII. So because he was still smarting from that experience, he made sure that we avoided any appearance of ethnic profiling. Rich Lowry of National Review wrote about this ridiculous policy back in 2002:
Asked on 60 Minutes if a 70-year-old white woman from Vero Beach should receive the same level of scrutiny as a Muslim from Jersey City, Mineta said, "Basically, I would hope so." Asked if he could imagine any set of circumstances that would justify ethnic and racial profiling, Mineta said "absolutely not."I can think of a justification for focusing on Arab men aged 25-40. All of the terrorists have been Arab men aged 25-40! Any 70-year old ladies? Umm, NO! Duh.
Bush has replaced so many other cabinet members in the last five years, yet he kept this guy hanging around. Mineta should have been shown the door years ago.
Unfortunately, this policy - his legacy - is still in place. Hopefully, his replacement can make some changes. But I'm not holding my breath.
June 22, 2006
The Left can try to spin this as a non-story on the fact that the 500 chemical weapons found were manufactured prior to Gulf War I all they want. Saddam Hussein claimed that he destroyed them. He didn't. Iraq had WMDs.
The Left can try to spin this as a non-story on the fact that they were found in a state considered not ready to use. They could have been made "ready to use" with minimal effort. They could have been given to terrorists who could have used them to kill innocent Americans (or innocent Europeans, Asians, etc). Saddam claimed he had no such weapons. He did. Iraq had WMDs.
The Left can try to spin this as a non-story on the fact that the 500 weapons represent a much smaller amount of WMDs than the U.S. claimed it had - a claim that everybody else who had access to the intelligence made including the U.N., France, Germany, Bill Clinton, Madeline Albright, Tom Daschle, Nancy Pelosi, Al Gore, Ted Kennedy and John F. Kerry. The 500 weapons containing traces of chemical weapons (specifically, sarin and mustard gas) had sufficient capacity to cause the deaths of thousands if not tens of thousands of people. Saddam claimed he had no such weapons. He did. Iraq had WMDs.
The bottom line here is that Bush didn't lie. SADDAM LIED. And now he is out of power and the Iraqi people are living in freedom and self-determination. And the United States (and every other target of Islamofascist terrorism) is safer.
So, those of you moonbats who've been beating this mantra into the ground have two choices:
1) STFU about "No WMDs", or
2) keep barking this idiocy and prove to the rest of the world how deranged and blind to reality you are.
June 20, 2006
"One day, our grandchildren may ask us what we did when Islamic fascism threatened the free world. Some of us will say we were preoccupied with fighting that threat wherever possible; others will be able to say they fought carbon dioxide emissions. One of us will look bad."
And there's no doubt in my mind who it will be.
June 16, 2006
Among it's provisions:
- Praise for U.S. Troops
- Affirmation that Iraq is part of the GWOT
- Establishing arbitrary withdrawal dates are not in the national interest
In other words, victory is the goal and we are committed to the mission. NO "CUT AND RUN"! Every member of Congress is now on record heading into the November elections. We'll be checking back to see how CT's five voted. [UPDATE: As expected, it went along party lines - Simmons (CT2), Shays (CT4), Johnson (CT5): Yea, Larson (CT1) & DeLauro (CT3): Nay. I'm actually surprise that Shays had the grapes to buck his gold-coast, country club Liberal constituency on this one. END UPDATE]
How do ya like them apples, moonbats?
Related: Run Away, Run Away
June 15, 2006
Wow, looks like at this rate Allah is going to have round up some more virgins right quick!
June 08, 2006
Enjoy your 72 skanks, asshole. In Hell!
- graphic from HotAir.com -
I just want to hear one single Liberal/Democrat blogger admit this is a big psychological blow to the terrorists and a major boost to the free Iraqi people. And maybe...just maybe...offer their congratulations to coalition troops for this successful operation.
Anyone? Didn't think so.
Found one! AJ in DC over at AmericaBlog. Good for him.
Expect the official Dem spin to follow one of three courses:
1) It don't mean nuthin'. We're still no more successful in Iraq with Al-Zarqawi dead (denial)
2) Sure, Al-Zarqawi's dead, but how many innocent Iraqis have died in the process. All this means is that there'll be another Al-Zarqawi to take his place (sour grapes)
3) And the most likely, considering what these people are all about: "Retreat and Defeat!" as expressed so eloquently at Democrats.com this morning:
"This is a great opportunity for Democrats. We can now insist that we declare victory in Iraq and bring our troops home."If we had followed Ol' John "cut and run" Murtha's advise, we would have left without killing Al-Zarqawi, who would be continuing to terrorize the people and the new democratically elected government of Iraq right now. There's work that still needs to be done. These people JUST.DON'T.GET.IT.
Hugh Hewitt has a great round-up.
NRO's Media Blog has the quotes from the media on this event: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. Freaking Quislings at the BBC are the worst!
Doesn't Look So Defiant Now, Does He?
I swear the first thing I thought of this morning was the lyrics to "America...F*ck Yeah!" from the "Team America: World Police" movie.
I was debating whether or not to post them, but Vinnie beat me to it. Scroll down (NSFW).
June 05, 2006
The Pentagon has decided to omit from new detainee policies a key tenet of the Geneva Convention that explicitly bans "humiliating and degrading treatment," according to knowledgeable military officials, a step that would mark a further, potentially permanent, shift away from strict adherence to international human rights standards.This goes back to the idiocy that was part of the whole Abu Graib story.
Typical that such "outrage" would come from a group of people that despise the brave men and women serving in our military and hurl insults at them as they lay suffering from wounds at Walter Reed Army Hospital. But when it comes to terrorists, don't you taunt them! Don't you humiliate them!!
Here's a clue, you Liberal pussies: When you are detaining enemy combatants who tried to kill Americans and would try again if they were released, hurting their widdow feewings is on the table. That is not torture. We have an enemy that follows NO rules. They lurk in the shadows. They pretend to be just like us. They use our trusting natures against us. And worst of all, they target and murder the innocent.
These are the kind of people that will kidnap someone who never did anything to them and cut off their heads in front of a video camera, for crissakes.
And we're supposed to get squeamish at the idea of making them stand around naked or wear panties on their heads? Please. We live in a new world, and it's a brutal one.
When Liberals get all indignant over the treatment of these murderers they remind voters exactly why they can't be trusted to deal with them.
116 queries taking 0.0549 seconds, 246 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.