[Gregory S. McNeal]
"The US military is on track to see lowest number of monthly fatalities in Iraq since the war began in March, 2003. In February 2004 the US lost 20 soldiers in the 29 day period. This month the US has lost 21 soldiers in the 31 day period."
Gateway pundit has the story here
AP and HuffingtonPost miss the point aggregating the data for 2007, rather than looking to the clear trend lines post-surge.
Monday, December 31, 2007
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Bill Clinton Making Threats...
Warning of Threats, Clinton Sells Clinton
Ex-President Emphasizes Wife's Experience
By Anne E. Kornblut and Alec MacGillis
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, December 30, 2007; A01
The following has been pulled from the above article because I peed myself laughing as I read it and just had to share it with the rest of you.
NASHUA, N.H. -- Former president Bill Clinton yesterday delivered in stark terms a version of his wife's central campaign message: that her experience in Washington better prepares her to "deal with the unexpected." (gee I thought she got that from being married to serial sex abuser)
"You have to have a leader who is strong and commanding and convincing enough . . . to deal with the unexpected," he said. "There is a better than 50 percent chance that sometime in the first year or 18 months of the next presidency, something will happen that is not being discussed in this campaign. President Bush never talked about Osama bin Laden and didn't foresee Hurricane Katrina. And if you're not ready for that, then everything else you do can be undermined. You need a president that you trust to deal with something that we will not discuss in this campaign. . . . And I think, on this score, she's the best of all." (Why? what has she shown that qualifies her to deal with anything other than Bills philandering? Has she done anything in her ONE Term as a Senator to show leadership? What legislation has she authored that has been enacted? What achievements has she accomplished in her ONE Term that has given her any experience in conducting the war on terror, in negotiating with a hostile Russia or China? We know she knows how to take money from the Chinese how is she supposed to be trusted to deal firmly with them?)
"How we meet those challenges will determine whether our grandchildren will even be here 50 years from now at a meeting like this listening to the next generation's presidential candidates," Clinton said in Plymouth. He did not elaborate on what he meant by the prospect of the audience members' grandchildren not being there in 50 years. (so if we don't elect Hillary what will we all be dead or our children won't be voting in a caucus why? What consequences other than preserving our freedoms would we suffer if we don't elect a socialist President?)
Hillary Clinton caused a slight stir on the trail several months ago when she argued at a house party in New Hampshire that she would be better prepared to respond to Republican tactics if there were a terrorist attack sometime during the general election campaign. (she's worried about dealing with the Republicans if were attacked NOT THE TERRORISTS her first reaction is spin controlling the Republicans. Gee makes you feel real safe don't it.)
"It's a horrible prospect to ask yourself, 'What if? What if?' "Clinton told voters in Concord. "But, if certain things happen between now and the election, particularly with respect to terrorism, that will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again, no matter how badly they have mishandled it, no matter how much more dangerous they have made the world." She added that she would be the best Democratic candidate "to deal with that." (What kind of DELUDED Egotistical Hate America Bitch thinks in these terms. Every thought is how to deal politically with OUR country internally for HER political advantage if the ENEMY attacks US. Notice how it is our FAULT if we are attacked the REPUBLICANS have made the world more dangerous. It's NOT the Self Exploding Islamic Terrorist who is responsible, It's the evil Tax cutting anti-socialist health care REPUBLICANS that are going to cause your kids to die when their school buses blow up)
At the VFW hall in Nashua, Clinton spent much of the 45-minute speech talking about the achievements of his own administration, and took several of his characteristic detours into the depths of policy detail, on the fine points of improving energy efficiency in buildings, expanding biofuels and reducing medical paperwork. But he made sure to veer back relatively quickly to his case for Hillary Clinton, describing her work in child advocacy before 1992 and her role in expanding health care and assisting in diplomatic ventures abroad while in the White House. (yeah the Wonderful Clinton years, Attack after Attack by Islamic terrorists both inside and outside this country that were never reacted too, unless you want to count the burning alive of the Branch Divideons oh that's right they weren't Islamic so that doesn't count. I guess neither does the wonderful handling of N Korea as he allowed them to get the Nuclear Bomb. Maybe she was involved in transferring the responsibility for making sure our enemies didn't get any weapons technology from the Security arm at State to the Commerce Dept under Ron Brown, But that's OK China won't really shoot those missiles at us with our own guidance systems in them. Yes the accomplishments of the Clinton Joint Presidency are so wonderful we need to repeat them all)
But several of those in attendance said the speech had served a purpose, nonetheless, reminding them just how much they admire the Clintons and how important it is that the Clintons win back the White House. "It reinforces, it really does," said Betty Maddocks, a retired nurse from Nashua who was so excited about Clinton's election in 1992 that she and her husband went to Washington for a week for the inauguration. "The world loves Bill Clinton." (God save us from those that worship a Disbarred Serial Rapist)
In an interview Saturday, former Iowa governor Tom Vilsack, a prominent Clinton ally in the state, said there was no doubt that the former president was still helping to sway undecided voters. "I was just with him for two days, and I can't tell you how many people came up to me after his talk to say, 'I didn't realize Hillary had done so many things in her life,' " he said. "He basically persuaded them to become Hillary Clinton supporters." (PT Barnum was right, there's one born every minute)
Clinton
Ex-President Emphasizes Wife's Experience
By Anne E. Kornblut and Alec MacGillis
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, December 30, 2007; A01
The following has been pulled from the above article because I peed myself laughing as I read it and just had to share it with the rest of you.
NASHUA, N.H. -- Former president Bill Clinton yesterday delivered in stark terms a version of his wife's central campaign message: that her experience in Washington better prepares her to "deal with the unexpected." (gee I thought she got that from being married to serial sex abuser)
"You have to have a leader who is strong and commanding and convincing enough . . . to deal with the unexpected," he said. "There is a better than 50 percent chance that sometime in the first year or 18 months of the next presidency, something will happen that is not being discussed in this campaign. President Bush never talked about Osama bin Laden and didn't foresee Hurricane Katrina. And if you're not ready for that, then everything else you do can be undermined. You need a president that you trust to deal with something that we will not discuss in this campaign. . . . And I think, on this score, she's the best of all." (Why? what has she shown that qualifies her to deal with anything other than Bills philandering? Has she done anything in her ONE Term as a Senator to show leadership? What legislation has she authored that has been enacted? What achievements has she accomplished in her ONE Term that has given her any experience in conducting the war on terror, in negotiating with a hostile Russia or China? We know she knows how to take money from the Chinese how is she supposed to be trusted to deal firmly with them?)
"How we meet those challenges will determine whether our grandchildren will even be here 50 years from now at a meeting like this listening to the next generation's presidential candidates," Clinton said in Plymouth. He did not elaborate on what he meant by the prospect of the audience members' grandchildren not being there in 50 years. (so if we don't elect Hillary what will we all be dead or our children won't be voting in a caucus why? What consequences other than preserving our freedoms would we suffer if we don't elect a socialist President?)
Hillary Clinton caused a slight stir on the trail several months ago when she argued at a house party in New Hampshire that she would be better prepared to respond to Republican tactics if there were a terrorist attack sometime during the general election campaign. (she's worried about dealing with the Republicans if were attacked NOT THE TERRORISTS her first reaction is spin controlling the Republicans. Gee makes you feel real safe don't it.)
"It's a horrible prospect to ask yourself, 'What if? What if?' "Clinton told voters in Concord. "But, if certain things happen between now and the election, particularly with respect to terrorism, that will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again, no matter how badly they have mishandled it, no matter how much more dangerous they have made the world." She added that she would be the best Democratic candidate "to deal with that." (What kind of DELUDED Egotistical Hate America Bitch thinks in these terms. Every thought is how to deal politically with OUR country internally for HER political advantage if the ENEMY attacks US. Notice how it is our FAULT if we are attacked the REPUBLICANS have made the world more dangerous. It's NOT the Self Exploding Islamic Terrorist who is responsible, It's the evil Tax cutting anti-socialist health care REPUBLICANS that are going to cause your kids to die when their school buses blow up)
At the VFW hall in Nashua, Clinton spent much of the 45-minute speech talking about the achievements of his own administration, and took several of his characteristic detours into the depths of policy detail, on the fine points of improving energy efficiency in buildings, expanding biofuels and reducing medical paperwork. But he made sure to veer back relatively quickly to his case for Hillary Clinton, describing her work in child advocacy before 1992 and her role in expanding health care and assisting in diplomatic ventures abroad while in the White House. (yeah the Wonderful Clinton years, Attack after Attack by Islamic terrorists both inside and outside this country that were never reacted too, unless you want to count the burning alive of the Branch Divideons oh that's right they weren't Islamic so that doesn't count. I guess neither does the wonderful handling of N Korea as he allowed them to get the Nuclear Bomb. Maybe she was involved in transferring the responsibility for making sure our enemies didn't get any weapons technology from the Security arm at State to the Commerce Dept under Ron Brown, But that's OK China won't really shoot those missiles at us with our own guidance systems in them. Yes the accomplishments of the Clinton Joint Presidency are so wonderful we need to repeat them all)
But several of those in attendance said the speech had served a purpose, nonetheless, reminding them just how much they admire the Clintons and how important it is that the Clintons win back the White House. "It reinforces, it really does," said Betty Maddocks, a retired nurse from Nashua who was so excited about Clinton's election in 1992 that she and her husband went to Washington for a week for the inauguration. "The world loves Bill Clinton." (God save us from those that worship a Disbarred Serial Rapist)
In an interview Saturday, former Iowa governor Tom Vilsack, a prominent Clinton ally in the state, said there was no doubt that the former president was still helping to sway undecided voters. "I was just with him for two days, and I can't tell you how many people came up to me after his talk to say, 'I didn't realize Hillary had done so many things in her life,' " he said. "He basically persuaded them to become Hillary Clinton supporters." (PT Barnum was right, there's one born every minute)
Clinton
Saturday, December 29, 2007
Letter to the Troops
Letter to the Troops
General David Petraeus
Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, Coast Guardsmen, and Civilians of Multi-National Force-Iraq:
As 2007 draws to a close, you should look back with pride on what you, your fellow troopers, our Iraqi partners, and Iraqi Coalition civilians have achieved in 2007. A year ago, Iraq was racked by horrific violence and on the brink of civil war. Now, levels of violence and civilians and military casualties are significantly reduced and hope has been rekindled in many Iraqi communities. To be sure, the progress is reversible and there is much more to be done. Nonetheless, the hard-fought accomplishments of 2007 have been substantial, and I want to thank each of you for the contributions you made to them.
In response to the challenges that faced Iraq a year ago, we and our Iraqi partners adopted a new approach. We increased our focus on securing the Iraqi people and, in some cases, delayed transition of tasks to Iraqi forces. Additional U.S. and Georgian forces were deployed to theater, the tours of U.S. unites were extended, and Iraqi forces conducted a surge of their own, generating well over 100,000 more Iraqi police and soldiers during the year so that they, too, had additional forces to execute the new approach. In places like Ramadi, Baqubah, Arab Jabour, and Baghdad, you and our Iraqi brothers fought--often house by house, block by block, and neighborhood by neighborhood--to wrest sanctuaries away from Al Qaeda-Iraq, to disrupt extremist militia elements, and to rid the streets of mafia-like criminals. Having cleared areas, you worked with Iraqis to retain them--establishing outposts in the areas we were securing, developing Iraqi Security Forces, and empowering locals to help our efforts. This approach has not been easy. It has required steadfastness in the conduct of tough offensive operations, creative solutions to the myriad problems on the ground, and persistence over the course of many months and during countless trying situations. Through it all, you have proven equal to every task, continually demonstrating an impressive ability to conduct combat and stability operations in an exceedingly complex environment.
Your accomplishments have given the Iraqi people new confidence and prompted many citizens to reject terror and confront those who practice it. As the months passed in 2007, in fact, the tribal awakening that began in Al Anbar Province spread to other parts of the country. Emboldened by improving security and tired of indiscriminate violence, extremist ideology, oppressive practices, and criminal activity, Iraqis increasingly rejected Al Qaeda-Iraq and rogue militia elements. Over time, the desire of Iraqis to contribute to their own security has manifested itself in citizens volunteering for the police, the Army, and concerned local citizen programs. It has been reflected in citizens providing information that has helped us find far more than double the number of arms and weapons caches we found last year. And it has been apparent in Iraqi communities now supporting their local security forces.
As a result of your hard work and that of our Iraqi comrades-in-arms--and with the support of the local populace in many areas--we have seen significant improvements in the security situation. The number of attacks per week is down some 60 percent from a peak in June of this year to a level last seen consistently in the early summer of 2005. With fewer attacks, we are also seeing significantly reduced loss of life. The number of civilian deaths is down by some 75 percent since its height a year ago, dropping to a level not seen since the beginning of 2006. And the number of Coalition losses is down substantially as well. We remain mindful that the past year's progress has been purchased through the sacrifice and selfless service of all those involved and that the new Iraq must still contend with innumerable enemies and obstacles. Al Qaeda-Iraq has been significantly degraded, but it remains capable of horrific bombings. Militia extremists have been disrupted, but they retain influence in many areas. Criminals have been apprehended, but far too many still roam Iraqi streets and intimidate local citizens and Iraqi officials. We and our Iraqi partners will have to deal with each of these challenges in the New Year to keep the situation headed in the right direction.
While the progress in a number of areas is fragile, the security improvements have significantly changed the situation in many parts of Iraq. It is now imperative that we take advantage of these improvements by looking beyond the security arena and helping Iraqi military and political leaders as they develop solutions in other areas as well, solutions they can sustain over time. At the tactical level, this means an increasing focus on helping not just Iraqi Security Forces--with whom we must partner in all that we do--but also helping Iraqi governmental organizations as they endeavor to restore basic services, to create employment opportunities, to revitalize local markets, to refurbish schools, to spur local economic activity, and to keep locals involved in contributing to local security. We will have to do all of this, of course, while continuing to draw down our forces, thinning our presence, and gradually handing over responsibilities to our Iraqi partners. Meanwhile, at the national level, we will focus on helping the Iraqi Government integrate local volunteers into the Iraqi Security Forces and other employment, develop greater ministerial capacity and capability, aid displaced persons as they return, and, most importantly, take the all-important political and economic actions needed to exploit the opportunity provided by the gains in the security arena.
The pace of progress on important political actions to this point has been slower than Iraqi leaders had hoped. Still, there have been some important steps taken in recent months. Iraq's leaders reached agreement on the Declaration of Principles for Friendship and Cooperation with the United States, which lays the groundwork for an enduring relationship between our nations. The United Nations Security Council approved Iraq's request for a final renewal of the resolution that authorizes the Coalition to operate in Iraq. Iraq's leaders passed an important Pension Law that not only extends retirement benefits to Iraqis previously left out but also represents the first of what we hope will be additional measures fostering national reconciliation. And Iraq's leaders have debated at length a second reconciliation-related measure, the Accountability and Justice Bill (the de-Ba'athification Reform Law), as well as the 2008 National Budget, both which likely will be brought up for a vote in early 2008. Even so, all Iraqi participants recognize that much more must be done politically to put their country on an irreversible trajectory to national reconciliation and sustainable economic development. We will, needless to say, work closely with our Embassy teammates to support the Iraq Government as it strives to take advantage of the improved security environment by pursing political and economic progress.
The New Year will bring many changes. Substantial force rotations and adjustments already underway will continue. One Army brigade combat team and a Marine Expeditionary Unit have already redeployed without replacement. In the coming months, four additional brigades and two Marine battalions will follow suit. Throughout that time, we will continue to adapt to the security situation as it evolves. And in the midst of all the changes, we and our Iraqi partners will strive to maintain the momentum, to press the fight, and to pursue Iraq's enemies relentlessly. Solutions to many of the tough problems will continue to be found at your level, together with local Iraqi leaders and with your Iraqi Security Force partners, in company and battalion areas of operation and in individual neighborhoods an towns. As you and your Iraqi partners turn concepts into reality, additional progress will emerge slowly and fitfully. Over time, we will gradually see fewer bad days and accumulate more good days, good weeks, and good months.
The way ahead will not be easy. Inevitably, there will be more tough days and tough weeks. Unforeseen challenges will emerge. And success will require continued hard work, commitment, and initiative from all involved. As we look to the future, however, we should remember how far we have come in the past year. Thanks to the tireless efforts and courageous actions of the Iraqi people, Iraq's political and military leaders, the Iraqi Security Forces, and each of you, a great deal has been achieved in 2007. Thus, as we enter a new year, we and our Iraqi partners will have important accomplishments and a newfound sense of hope on which we can build.
As always, all or your leaders, our fellow citizens back home, and I deeply appreciate the dedication, professionalism, commitment, and courage you display on a daily basis. It remains the greatest of honors to serve with each of you in this critical endeavor.
Sincerely,
David H. Petraeus
General David Petraeus
Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, Coast Guardsmen, and Civilians of Multi-National Force-Iraq:
As 2007 draws to a close, you should look back with pride on what you, your fellow troopers, our Iraqi partners, and Iraqi Coalition civilians have achieved in 2007. A year ago, Iraq was racked by horrific violence and on the brink of civil war. Now, levels of violence and civilians and military casualties are significantly reduced and hope has been rekindled in many Iraqi communities. To be sure, the progress is reversible and there is much more to be done. Nonetheless, the hard-fought accomplishments of 2007 have been substantial, and I want to thank each of you for the contributions you made to them.
In response to the challenges that faced Iraq a year ago, we and our Iraqi partners adopted a new approach. We increased our focus on securing the Iraqi people and, in some cases, delayed transition of tasks to Iraqi forces. Additional U.S. and Georgian forces were deployed to theater, the tours of U.S. unites were extended, and Iraqi forces conducted a surge of their own, generating well over 100,000 more Iraqi police and soldiers during the year so that they, too, had additional forces to execute the new approach. In places like Ramadi, Baqubah, Arab Jabour, and Baghdad, you and our Iraqi brothers fought--often house by house, block by block, and neighborhood by neighborhood--to wrest sanctuaries away from Al Qaeda-Iraq, to disrupt extremist militia elements, and to rid the streets of mafia-like criminals. Having cleared areas, you worked with Iraqis to retain them--establishing outposts in the areas we were securing, developing Iraqi Security Forces, and empowering locals to help our efforts. This approach has not been easy. It has required steadfastness in the conduct of tough offensive operations, creative solutions to the myriad problems on the ground, and persistence over the course of many months and during countless trying situations. Through it all, you have proven equal to every task, continually demonstrating an impressive ability to conduct combat and stability operations in an exceedingly complex environment.
Your accomplishments have given the Iraqi people new confidence and prompted many citizens to reject terror and confront those who practice it. As the months passed in 2007, in fact, the tribal awakening that began in Al Anbar Province spread to other parts of the country. Emboldened by improving security and tired of indiscriminate violence, extremist ideology, oppressive practices, and criminal activity, Iraqis increasingly rejected Al Qaeda-Iraq and rogue militia elements. Over time, the desire of Iraqis to contribute to their own security has manifested itself in citizens volunteering for the police, the Army, and concerned local citizen programs. It has been reflected in citizens providing information that has helped us find far more than double the number of arms and weapons caches we found last year. And it has been apparent in Iraqi communities now supporting their local security forces.
As a result of your hard work and that of our Iraqi comrades-in-arms--and with the support of the local populace in many areas--we have seen significant improvements in the security situation. The number of attacks per week is down some 60 percent from a peak in June of this year to a level last seen consistently in the early summer of 2005. With fewer attacks, we are also seeing significantly reduced loss of life. The number of civilian deaths is down by some 75 percent since its height a year ago, dropping to a level not seen since the beginning of 2006. And the number of Coalition losses is down substantially as well. We remain mindful that the past year's progress has been purchased through the sacrifice and selfless service of all those involved and that the new Iraq must still contend with innumerable enemies and obstacles. Al Qaeda-Iraq has been significantly degraded, but it remains capable of horrific bombings. Militia extremists have been disrupted, but they retain influence in many areas. Criminals have been apprehended, but far too many still roam Iraqi streets and intimidate local citizens and Iraqi officials. We and our Iraqi partners will have to deal with each of these challenges in the New Year to keep the situation headed in the right direction.
While the progress in a number of areas is fragile, the security improvements have significantly changed the situation in many parts of Iraq. It is now imperative that we take advantage of these improvements by looking beyond the security arena and helping Iraqi military and political leaders as they develop solutions in other areas as well, solutions they can sustain over time. At the tactical level, this means an increasing focus on helping not just Iraqi Security Forces--with whom we must partner in all that we do--but also helping Iraqi governmental organizations as they endeavor to restore basic services, to create employment opportunities, to revitalize local markets, to refurbish schools, to spur local economic activity, and to keep locals involved in contributing to local security. We will have to do all of this, of course, while continuing to draw down our forces, thinning our presence, and gradually handing over responsibilities to our Iraqi partners. Meanwhile, at the national level, we will focus on helping the Iraqi Government integrate local volunteers into the Iraqi Security Forces and other employment, develop greater ministerial capacity and capability, aid displaced persons as they return, and, most importantly, take the all-important political and economic actions needed to exploit the opportunity provided by the gains in the security arena.
The pace of progress on important political actions to this point has been slower than Iraqi leaders had hoped. Still, there have been some important steps taken in recent months. Iraq's leaders reached agreement on the Declaration of Principles for Friendship and Cooperation with the United States, which lays the groundwork for an enduring relationship between our nations. The United Nations Security Council approved Iraq's request for a final renewal of the resolution that authorizes the Coalition to operate in Iraq. Iraq's leaders passed an important Pension Law that not only extends retirement benefits to Iraqis previously left out but also represents the first of what we hope will be additional measures fostering national reconciliation. And Iraq's leaders have debated at length a second reconciliation-related measure, the Accountability and Justice Bill (the de-Ba'athification Reform Law), as well as the 2008 National Budget, both which likely will be brought up for a vote in early 2008. Even so, all Iraqi participants recognize that much more must be done politically to put their country on an irreversible trajectory to national reconciliation and sustainable economic development. We will, needless to say, work closely with our Embassy teammates to support the Iraq Government as it strives to take advantage of the improved security environment by pursing political and economic progress.
The New Year will bring many changes. Substantial force rotations and adjustments already underway will continue. One Army brigade combat team and a Marine Expeditionary Unit have already redeployed without replacement. In the coming months, four additional brigades and two Marine battalions will follow suit. Throughout that time, we will continue to adapt to the security situation as it evolves. And in the midst of all the changes, we and our Iraqi partners will strive to maintain the momentum, to press the fight, and to pursue Iraq's enemies relentlessly. Solutions to many of the tough problems will continue to be found at your level, together with local Iraqi leaders and with your Iraqi Security Force partners, in company and battalion areas of operation and in individual neighborhoods an towns. As you and your Iraqi partners turn concepts into reality, additional progress will emerge slowly and fitfully. Over time, we will gradually see fewer bad days and accumulate more good days, good weeks, and good months.
The way ahead will not be easy. Inevitably, there will be more tough days and tough weeks. Unforeseen challenges will emerge. And success will require continued hard work, commitment, and initiative from all involved. As we look to the future, however, we should remember how far we have come in the past year. Thanks to the tireless efforts and courageous actions of the Iraqi people, Iraq's political and military leaders, the Iraqi Security Forces, and each of you, a great deal has been achieved in 2007. Thus, as we enter a new year, we and our Iraqi partners will have important accomplishments and a newfound sense of hope on which we can build.
As always, all or your leaders, our fellow citizens back home, and I deeply appreciate the dedication, professionalism, commitment, and courage you display on a daily basis. It remains the greatest of honors to serve with each of you in this critical endeavor.
Sincerely,
David H. Petraeus
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Why I'm Endorsing Rudy
As I examine the candidates that are running for President, I find that there is not one candidate that has all the qualities that I would want. That leaves me to choose who out of the three Republicans is worthy of my support.
Thompson definitely is the most conservative. He is also the only candidate that has actually put forth in writings actual policies that he would implement and after reading those policies I found them to be sound and reasonable. However Thompson's laid back demeanor has not translated well in selling either his policies or himself.
Romney is a different kettle of fish. A very successful business man, as well as a politician. His company is strong enough to acquire Clear Channel Broadcasting for 93Billion. His reputation for fairness and honesty is impeccable, and I find the fact that he is a Mormon as a positive not a negative. Say anything you want about the Mormons they definitely instill a personal discipline in there followers and I feel that and faith is a plus. However watching the debates I find his demeanor to Clintonesque. There was one question that he answered that it reminded me of "what the meaning of Is is", and I can't except that.
That brings us to RUDY. Rudy definitely has some negatives. A man who's personal life is a mess which the press loves to have field day with. It's funny how they can be aghast at Rudy's affairs, but not bat an eye at the fact that Bill Clinton is a serial rapist. At least Giuliani married his mistress. Now lets look at the accomplishments.
In 1981, Giuliani was named Associate Attorney General in the Reagan administration, the third-highest position in the Department of Justice. As Associate Attorney General, Giuliani supervised the U.S. Attorney Offices' federal law enforcement agencies, the Department of Corrections, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and the United States Marshals Service.
In a well-publicized 1982 case, Giuliani testified in defense of the federal government's "detention posture" regarding the internment of over 2,000 Haitian asylum-seekers who had entered the country illegally. The U.S. government disputed the assertion that most of the detainees had fled their country due to political persecution, alleging instead that they were "economic migrants." (gee where have we heard that recently) In defense of the government's position, Giuliani stated at one point that political repression under President Jean-Claude Duvalier (the infamous "Baby Doc") no longer existed. After meeting personally with Duvalier, Giuliani testified that "political repression, at least in general, does not exist" in Haiti under Duvalier's regime.
So he can, contrary to what the Press will tell you, take a strong stand against ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.
In 1983, Giuliani was appointed U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. It was in this position that he first gained national prominence by prosecuting numerous high-profile cases, resulting in the convictions of Wall Street figures Ivan Boesky and Michael Milken for insider trading. He also focused on prosecuting drug dealers, organized crime, and corruption in government. He amassed a record of 4,152 convictions and 25 reversals. As a federal prosecutor, Giuliani was credited with bringing the "perp walk," parading of suspects in front of the previously alerted media, into common use as a prosecutorial tool. After Giuliani "patented the perp walk", the tool was used by increasing numbers of prosecutors nationwide.
In the Mafia Commission Trial (February 25, 1985–November 19, 1986), Giuliani indicted eleven organized crime figures, including the heads of New York's so-called "Five Families", under the RICO Act on charges including extortion, labor racketeering, and murder for hire. Time magazine called this "Case of Cases" possibly "the most significant assault on the infrastructure of organized crime since the high command of the Chicago Mafia was swept away in 1943", and quoted Giuliani's stated intention: "Our approach...is to wipe out the five families." Eight defendants were found guilty on all counts and subsequently sentenced on January 13, 1987 to hundreds of years of prison time.
The Mafia prosecutions make him perfect for dealing with this country's INTERNAL terrorist problem, and make no mistake we have a huge one.
Law enforcement
In his first term as mayor, Giuliani, in conjunction with New York City Police Department Commissioner Bill Bratton, adopted an aggressive enforcement-deterrent strategy based on James Q. Wilson's Broken Windows approach. This involved crackdowns on relatively minor offenses such as graffiti, turnstile jumping, and aggressive "squeegeemen", on the theory that this would send a message that order would be maintained. Giuliani and Bratton also instituted CompStat, a comparative statistical approach to mapping crime geographically and in terms of emerging criminal patterns, as well as charting officer performance by quantifying criminal apprehensions. Critics of the system assert that it creates an environment in which police officials are encouraged to underreport or otherwise manipulate crime data. The CompStat initiative won the 1996 Innovations in Government Award from the Kennedy School of Government.
During Giuliani's administration, crime rates dropped in New York City, which Giuliani's presidential campaign website has credited to his leadership. The extent to which his policies deserve the credit is disputed, however. A small nationwide drop in crime preceded Giuliani's election, and critics say that he may have been the beneficiary of a trend already in progress. (bullshit) Additional contributing factors to the overall decline in crime during the 1990s were federal funding of an additional 7,000 police officers and an overall improvement in the national economy. (so in other words they are trying to give Bill Clinton credit for Rudy's success) Changing demographics was a key factor contributing to crime rate reductions, which were similar across the country during this time. Because the crime index is based on the FBI crime index, which is self-reported by police departments, some have alleged that crimes were shifted into categories that the FBI doesn't collect. (yeah tell that to the merchants of Times Square or the people who actually live in NY)
Giuliani's supporters cite studies concluding that New York's drop in crime rate in the '90s and '00s exceeds all national figures and therefore should be linked with a local dynamic that was not present as such anywhere else in the country: what University of California sociologist Frank Zimring calls "the most focused form of policing in history". In his book The Great American Crime Decline, Zimring states argues that "up to half of New York’s crime drop in the 1990s, and virtually 100 percent of its continuing crime decline since 2000, has resulted from policing."
It comes down to two things for me, one of them Romney said, he said "look at the enemies this country now faces and ask yourself, who do you want across the table negotiating with them? That's who you should vote for President" My immediate response was Rudy.
The second reason is I was raised by Cops. I am the first in 3 generations that's not a cop. I look at Rudy and I see a Cop. And unlike those on the left I like that.
Oh and here is an Extra tidbit:
The Giuliani administration advocated the privatization of failing public schools and increasing school choice through a voucher-based system.
Thompson definitely is the most conservative. He is also the only candidate that has actually put forth in writings actual policies that he would implement and after reading those policies I found them to be sound and reasonable. However Thompson's laid back demeanor has not translated well in selling either his policies or himself.
Romney is a different kettle of fish. A very successful business man, as well as a politician. His company is strong enough to acquire Clear Channel Broadcasting for 93Billion. His reputation for fairness and honesty is impeccable, and I find the fact that he is a Mormon as a positive not a negative. Say anything you want about the Mormons they definitely instill a personal discipline in there followers and I feel that and faith is a plus. However watching the debates I find his demeanor to Clintonesque. There was one question that he answered that it reminded me of "what the meaning of Is is", and I can't except that.
That brings us to RUDY. Rudy definitely has some negatives. A man who's personal life is a mess which the press loves to have field day with. It's funny how they can be aghast at Rudy's affairs, but not bat an eye at the fact that Bill Clinton is a serial rapist. At least Giuliani married his mistress. Now lets look at the accomplishments.
In 1981, Giuliani was named Associate Attorney General in the Reagan administration, the third-highest position in the Department of Justice. As Associate Attorney General, Giuliani supervised the U.S. Attorney Offices' federal law enforcement agencies, the Department of Corrections, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and the United States Marshals Service.
In a well-publicized 1982 case, Giuliani testified in defense of the federal government's "detention posture" regarding the internment of over 2,000 Haitian asylum-seekers who had entered the country illegally. The U.S. government disputed the assertion that most of the detainees had fled their country due to political persecution, alleging instead that they were "economic migrants." (gee where have we heard that recently) In defense of the government's position, Giuliani stated at one point that political repression under President Jean-Claude Duvalier (the infamous "Baby Doc") no longer existed. After meeting personally with Duvalier, Giuliani testified that "political repression, at least in general, does not exist" in Haiti under Duvalier's regime.
So he can, contrary to what the Press will tell you, take a strong stand against ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.
In 1983, Giuliani was appointed U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. It was in this position that he first gained national prominence by prosecuting numerous high-profile cases, resulting in the convictions of Wall Street figures Ivan Boesky and Michael Milken for insider trading. He also focused on prosecuting drug dealers, organized crime, and corruption in government. He amassed a record of 4,152 convictions and 25 reversals. As a federal prosecutor, Giuliani was credited with bringing the "perp walk," parading of suspects in front of the previously alerted media, into common use as a prosecutorial tool. After Giuliani "patented the perp walk", the tool was used by increasing numbers of prosecutors nationwide.
In the Mafia Commission Trial (February 25, 1985–November 19, 1986), Giuliani indicted eleven organized crime figures, including the heads of New York's so-called "Five Families", under the RICO Act on charges including extortion, labor racketeering, and murder for hire. Time magazine called this "Case of Cases" possibly "the most significant assault on the infrastructure of organized crime since the high command of the Chicago Mafia was swept away in 1943", and quoted Giuliani's stated intention: "Our approach...is to wipe out the five families." Eight defendants were found guilty on all counts and subsequently sentenced on January 13, 1987 to hundreds of years of prison time.
The Mafia prosecutions make him perfect for dealing with this country's INTERNAL terrorist problem, and make no mistake we have a huge one.
Law enforcement
In his first term as mayor, Giuliani, in conjunction with New York City Police Department Commissioner Bill Bratton, adopted an aggressive enforcement-deterrent strategy based on James Q. Wilson's Broken Windows approach. This involved crackdowns on relatively minor offenses such as graffiti, turnstile jumping, and aggressive "squeegeemen", on the theory that this would send a message that order would be maintained. Giuliani and Bratton also instituted CompStat, a comparative statistical approach to mapping crime geographically and in terms of emerging criminal patterns, as well as charting officer performance by quantifying criminal apprehensions. Critics of the system assert that it creates an environment in which police officials are encouraged to underreport or otherwise manipulate crime data. The CompStat initiative won the 1996 Innovations in Government Award from the Kennedy School of Government.
During Giuliani's administration, crime rates dropped in New York City, which Giuliani's presidential campaign website has credited to his leadership. The extent to which his policies deserve the credit is disputed, however. A small nationwide drop in crime preceded Giuliani's election, and critics say that he may have been the beneficiary of a trend already in progress. (bullshit) Additional contributing factors to the overall decline in crime during the 1990s were federal funding of an additional 7,000 police officers and an overall improvement in the national economy. (so in other words they are trying to give Bill Clinton credit for Rudy's success) Changing demographics was a key factor contributing to crime rate reductions, which were similar across the country during this time. Because the crime index is based on the FBI crime index, which is self-reported by police departments, some have alleged that crimes were shifted into categories that the FBI doesn't collect. (yeah tell that to the merchants of Times Square or the people who actually live in NY)
Giuliani's supporters cite studies concluding that New York's drop in crime rate in the '90s and '00s exceeds all national figures and therefore should be linked with a local dynamic that was not present as such anywhere else in the country: what University of California sociologist Frank Zimring calls "the most focused form of policing in history". In his book The Great American Crime Decline, Zimring states argues that "up to half of New York’s crime drop in the 1990s, and virtually 100 percent of its continuing crime decline since 2000, has resulted from policing."
It comes down to two things for me, one of them Romney said, he said "look at the enemies this country now faces and ask yourself, who do you want across the table negotiating with them? That's who you should vote for President" My immediate response was Rudy.
The second reason is I was raised by Cops. I am the first in 3 generations that's not a cop. I look at Rudy and I see a Cop. And unlike those on the left I like that.
Oh and here is an Extra tidbit:
The Giuliani administration advocated the privatization of failing public schools and increasing school choice through a voucher-based system.
Giuliani
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Cruise missile sub
Cruise missile sub
The Navy this month completed its fourth conversion of a U.S. nuclear ballistic missile submarine into an extremely powerful, conventionally armed cruise missile launcher and covert transporter of U.S. special operations force.
The last converted missile sub the USS Georgia is now being readied for deployment around the world at its home port of Kings Bay, Ga., said skipper, Cmdr. Rodney E. Hutton.
The conversion of the nuclear missile submarines into Tomahawk-firing submarines is one element of a new Pentagon strategy of building up forces to be ready to counter any emerging threat from China.
Cmdr. Hutton said the Georgia will operate in the Pacific, as well as other oceans and can swap out its entire crew at Guam, a major strategic U.S. military hub in the Pacific.
In a telephone interview from the submarine, Cmdr. Hutton said the new Tomahawk submarines are "extraordinary force multipliers." Two of the submarines, each equipped with 154 long-range cruise missiles, can provide the same firepower as all the Tomahawk-firing ships in the 2003 Operation Enduring Freedom, as the Iraq invasion is called.
"I see the SSGN becoming one of premier platforms for any conflict today or in the future," said Cmdr. Hutton, using the Navy's term for nuclear-powered guided-missile submarines.
The Navy this month completed its fourth conversion of a U.S. nuclear ballistic missile submarine into an extremely powerful, conventionally armed cruise missile launcher and covert transporter of U.S. special operations force.
The last converted missile sub the USS Georgia is now being readied for deployment around the world at its home port of Kings Bay, Ga., said skipper, Cmdr. Rodney E. Hutton.
The conversion of the nuclear missile submarines into Tomahawk-firing submarines is one element of a new Pentagon strategy of building up forces to be ready to counter any emerging threat from China.
Cmdr. Hutton said the Georgia will operate in the Pacific, as well as other oceans and can swap out its entire crew at Guam, a major strategic U.S. military hub in the Pacific.
In a telephone interview from the submarine, Cmdr. Hutton said the new Tomahawk submarines are "extraordinary force multipliers." Two of the submarines, each equipped with 154 long-range cruise missiles, can provide the same firepower as all the Tomahawk-firing ships in the 2003 Operation Enduring Freedom, as the Iraq invasion is called.
"I see the SSGN becoming one of premier platforms for any conflict today or in the future," said Cmdr. Hutton, using the Navy's term for nuclear-powered guided-missile submarines.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Sherman telegraphed to President Lincoln, "I beg to present you as a Christmas gift the City of Savannah,
Sherman Captures Savannah (1864)
In the spring of 1864, William Tecumseh Sherman succeeded Ulysses S. Grant as Union commander in the western theater of the American Civil War. Following his soldiers' successful capture of Atlanta, Georgia, Sherman set out on his highly controversial "March to the Sea." The General and his 62,000 men marched from Atlanta to Savannah, and their scorched earth policy left a path of destruction in their wake. What were “Sherman's Neckties” and how did they factor into his strategy of “total war”? More...
Free content provided by The Free Dictionary
Sherman has always been a Hero of mine. Grant may have gotten the credit, but it was Sherman that won the war. His tactics and his campaign is what ripped the heart out of the South.
Christmas
In the spring of 1864, William Tecumseh Sherman succeeded Ulysses S. Grant as Union commander in the western theater of the American Civil War. Following his soldiers' successful capture of Atlanta, Georgia, Sherman set out on his highly controversial "March to the Sea." The General and his 62,000 men marched from Atlanta to Savannah, and their scorched earth policy left a path of destruction in their wake. What were “Sherman's Neckties” and how did they factor into his strategy of “total war”? More...
Free content provided by The Free Dictionary
Sherman has always been a Hero of mine. Grant may have gotten the credit, but it was Sherman that won the war. His tactics and his campaign is what ripped the heart out of the South.
Christmas
Friday, December 21, 2007
Friday Morning Compilation or Food for Thought
How Do Nations Die? (CM)
Mark Steyn writes:
Not by war or conquest, but by a thousand trivial concessions, until one day you wake up and you don't need to sign a formal instrument of surrender because you did it piecemeal.
More here.
NIE Fallout (CM)
Rafael L. Bardaji, who directs one of the best think tanks in Europe, writes:
By considering Iran’s nuclear programme to have been halted, the NIE has called an end to a great number of things. First and foremost is George W. Bush’s policy of suffocating the Teheran regime by exercising greater political pressure and imposing stricter sanctions. ….
Second, the NIE has stripped the White House of its main reason for pushing for further sanctions on the UN Security Council. If securing these sanctions was always going to be a tricky matter, now the balance has clearly swung in favour of those who advocate a more conciliatory approach to Teheran. Very soon the Russians will authorise the delivery of fissionable material for the Busher reactor and nobody will be able to firmly oppose them.
Third, the NIE has blown away the incipient intra-European consensus regarding policy towards Iran. Whilst London and Paris had remained united in their belief that it was necessary to continue punishing the Ayatollah regime in economic, financial and technological terms, Germany, the European country that has the strongest trade links with the Islamic Republic, has never been that enthusiastic about imposing further sanctions.
More here.
Can We Rely on the NIE? (CM)
Former French intelligence operative Claude Moniquet makes these points:
· U.S. intelligence services have so far failed to predict the nuclearization of a single foreign nation.
· They foresaw neither the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 nor the collapse of the Soviet Union two years later.
· In Afghanistan, during the 1980s, while other friendly services, among them the French, urged the CIA to support more "moderate" tribal chiefs in the fight against the Red Army, the agency relied on the enlightened advice of its Saudi friends and supported the most extreme Islamists. U.S. troops are fighting and dying today for that blunder.
· The report's most controversial conclusion -- that Iran ceased its covert nuclear program -- is based on the absurd distinction between military and civilian. Iran itself admits -- no, boasts -- that it continues enriching uranium as part of its "civilian" program. But such enrichment can have only a military purpose.
· With this sleight of hand, though, the intelligence services effectively sabotaged the Bush administration's efforts to steer its allies toward a tougher position on Iran. · Paris in particular won't be amused about what appears almost like a betrayal. President Nicolas Sarkozy took a great political risk when he turned around French foreign policy and became Europe's leading opponent of a nuclear Iran. He even warned of a possible armed conflict with Iran -- not the most popular thing to do in France.
· The agencies say in the report that they don't "know" whether Tehran is considering equipping itself with nuclear arms. …With their multibillion-dollar budget, one might certainly expect the agencies to "know" these sorts of things.
· What everybody "knows" -- and not only those in the intelligence community -- is that Tehran has made it pretty clear that it wants nuclear arms and that it has very concrete plans for their deployment: to erase Israel from the map. Everybody also "knows" that nuclear arms would make the Islamic Republic almost untouchable, turning it into a regional superpower that could dictate its will on the Gulf states -- the world's suppliers of oil and gas. And everybody "knows" that this is an unacceptable prospect for the Gulf countries, practically forcing them to get the bomb as well. Over time the Middle East, not a very stable region, would become completely nuclearized.
More in this Wall Street Journal op-ed.
Mark Steyn writes:
Not by war or conquest, but by a thousand trivial concessions, until one day you wake up and you don't need to sign a formal instrument of surrender because you did it piecemeal.
More here.
NIE Fallout (CM)
Rafael L. Bardaji, who directs one of the best think tanks in Europe, writes:
By considering Iran’s nuclear programme to have been halted, the NIE has called an end to a great number of things. First and foremost is George W. Bush’s policy of suffocating the Teheran regime by exercising greater political pressure and imposing stricter sanctions. ….
Second, the NIE has stripped the White House of its main reason for pushing for further sanctions on the UN Security Council. If securing these sanctions was always going to be a tricky matter, now the balance has clearly swung in favour of those who advocate a more conciliatory approach to Teheran. Very soon the Russians will authorise the delivery of fissionable material for the Busher reactor and nobody will be able to firmly oppose them.
Third, the NIE has blown away the incipient intra-European consensus regarding policy towards Iran. Whilst London and Paris had remained united in their belief that it was necessary to continue punishing the Ayatollah regime in economic, financial and technological terms, Germany, the European country that has the strongest trade links with the Islamic Republic, has never been that enthusiastic about imposing further sanctions.
More here.
Can We Rely on the NIE? (CM)
Former French intelligence operative Claude Moniquet makes these points:
· U.S. intelligence services have so far failed to predict the nuclearization of a single foreign nation.
· They foresaw neither the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 nor the collapse of the Soviet Union two years later.
· In Afghanistan, during the 1980s, while other friendly services, among them the French, urged the CIA to support more "moderate" tribal chiefs in the fight against the Red Army, the agency relied on the enlightened advice of its Saudi friends and supported the most extreme Islamists. U.S. troops are fighting and dying today for that blunder.
· The report's most controversial conclusion -- that Iran ceased its covert nuclear program -- is based on the absurd distinction between military and civilian. Iran itself admits -- no, boasts -- that it continues enriching uranium as part of its "civilian" program. But such enrichment can have only a military purpose.
· With this sleight of hand, though, the intelligence services effectively sabotaged the Bush administration's efforts to steer its allies toward a tougher position on Iran. · Paris in particular won't be amused about what appears almost like a betrayal. President Nicolas Sarkozy took a great political risk when he turned around French foreign policy and became Europe's leading opponent of a nuclear Iran. He even warned of a possible armed conflict with Iran -- not the most popular thing to do in France.
· The agencies say in the report that they don't "know" whether Tehran is considering equipping itself with nuclear arms. …With their multibillion-dollar budget, one might certainly expect the agencies to "know" these sorts of things.
· What everybody "knows" -- and not only those in the intelligence community -- is that Tehran has made it pretty clear that it wants nuclear arms and that it has very concrete plans for their deployment: to erase Israel from the map. Everybody also "knows" that nuclear arms would make the Islamic Republic almost untouchable, turning it into a regional superpower that could dictate its will on the Gulf states -- the world's suppliers of oil and gas. And everybody "knows" that this is an unacceptable prospect for the Gulf countries, practically forcing them to get the bomb as well. Over time the Middle East, not a very stable region, would become completely nuclearized.
More in this Wall Street Journal op-ed.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
The Huckabee Family....
I'm Sorry but Someone better hide the key to the Kitchen...LOL The Republican version of the Carter Family.....
Monday, December 17, 2007
Merry Christmas Iran, From Russia with Love...
Russia Makes 1st Nuke Shipment to Iran
MOSCOW (AP) - Russia has made its first shipment of nuclear fuel to Iran's Bushehr plant, which is at the center of the international tensions over Tehran's nuclear program, the Foreign Ministry said Monday.
Iran contends the nuclear power plant operation in Bushehr is strictly for civilian purposes, but the project concerns the United States and others who fear Tehran could use it to advance efforts to build nuclear weapons.
Construction at Bushehr had been frequently delayed. Officials said the delays were due to payment disputes, but many observers suggested Russia also was unhappy with Iran's resistance to international pressure to make its nuclear program more open and to assure the international community that it was not developing nuclear arms.
"All fuel that will be delivered will be under the control and guarantees of the International Atomic Energy Agency for the whole time it stays on Iranian territory," the Foreign Ministry said in a statement. "Moreover, the Iranian side gave additional written guarantees that the fuel will be used only for the Bushehr nuclear power plant."
Read the rest
MOSCOW (AP) - Russia has made its first shipment of nuclear fuel to Iran's Bushehr plant, which is at the center of the international tensions over Tehran's nuclear program, the Foreign Ministry said Monday.
Iran contends the nuclear power plant operation in Bushehr is strictly for civilian purposes, but the project concerns the United States and others who fear Tehran could use it to advance efforts to build nuclear weapons.
Construction at Bushehr had been frequently delayed. Officials said the delays were due to payment disputes, but many observers suggested Russia also was unhappy with Iran's resistance to international pressure to make its nuclear program more open and to assure the international community that it was not developing nuclear arms.
"All fuel that will be delivered will be under the control and guarantees of the International Atomic Energy Agency for the whole time it stays on Iranian territory," the Foreign Ministry said in a statement. "Moreover, the Iranian side gave additional written guarantees that the fuel will be used only for the Bushehr nuclear power plant."
Read the rest
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Hillary taking Donations from TERRORISTS
Tamil Tigers for Hillary
No doubt once she's reached for comment, if anyone bothers to question her about it, she'll say she had no idea her campaign was accepting money from a member of a known terrorist organization.
Curious how the major newspapers and television outlets have no interest in this story.
Reader Larwyn tipped me to this site detailing LTTE activities.
If you think the Tamil Tigers are some innocuous group, well, think again.
The name Ramanathan Ranjan is also listed here as having donated to NJ Democrat Congressman Rush Holt.
Posted on Saturday, December 15, 2007 at 04:01PM by JammieWearingFool
Democrats
Hillary
No doubt once she's reached for comment, if anyone bothers to question her about it, she'll say she had no idea her campaign was accepting money from a member of a known terrorist organization.
Curious how the major newspapers and television outlets have no interest in this story.
On December 4, 2007, we reported that members of the terrorist organization Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), more commonly known as the Tamil Tigers, were arrested in New York for their plot to use stolen credit card numbers and other methods to steal $250,000 in New York “and tens of millions from ATMs worldwide.”
One of the men arrested worked three jobs at Newark Airport as a security agent and baggage handler with complete security clearance. The Tamil Tigers are well known for their use and “perfection” of terrorists’ “suicide belts” and vests, and the use of females as suicide bombers as illustrated in our report published earlier this month.
Further investigation conducted by this investigator of Tamil Tiger activity in the U.S. confirmed published reports that at least one well-known supporter of that terrorist organization, 56 year-old New Jersey resident Ramanathan Ranjan is actively soliciting funds for New York Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton
Ranjan, of New Brunswick, NJ was identified as an approved recipient for funds solicited by Pat Pathmakumar through her e-mail campaign containing “Tamils for Clinton” in the subject line. A fundraising event this week in New Jersey at The State Theater in New Brunswick, advertised on Clinton’s web site, offered potential donors tickets ranging from $100 - $2,300, depending upon seat selection. Although the referral list has been removed from the site, the Northeast Intelligence Network was able to secure a list of referrals that included the names of both Ranjan and Pathmakumar.
Notably, Ranjan was an organizer of “LTTE Heroes Day,” an event that praised and eulogized LTTE terrorists and homicide bombers on December 2, 2006. That event was held in the auditorium at the south Brunswick Middle School in New Brunswick, New Jersey. According to reports of the event, the terror group’s flag was raised as those in attendance sang the LTTE anthem.
Reader Larwyn tipped me to this site detailing LTTE activities.
New Jersey residents have expressed the fear, that LTTE or the Tamil Tigers could flush supporters with millions of dollars, to buy influence over the next possible President of the United States of America by infiltrating into democratic fund raising machine.
An email distributed by a female activist, Pat Pathmakumar for the group under the name "Tamils for Clinton" has appealed to contribute for the Clinton fund by sending checks to her or a man named Ram Ranjan, a man who organized the LTTE Heroes day meeting in New Jersey last year. Ranjan has publicly admitted he raised funds for LTTE front, the Tamil Rehabilitation Organization (TRO).
The terrorist group, that introduced innovative methods like suicide jackets to many terrorist groups in the world, is listed as a foreign terrorist group by the State Department and the US Federal police , the FBI has alleged that the group had offered to them millions of dollars as bribes to lift the ban. The group is alleged to be using bribes to buy influence in India, Malaysia and Sri Lanka. The money is being earned mostly by fraudulent business, credit card scams, drug running, voluntary fund raising and extortions of the Tamil Diaspora, according to a recent report of the Jane's Defense weekly.
According to the Clinton website, a leading LTTE activist, who came to live in New Jersey in 1994, called Ram Ranjan is one of the fund raisers of the Clinton campaign. Several others who are connected with him are also listed among the fund raisers.
If you think the Tamil Tigers are some innocuous group, well, think again.
The Tamil Tigers have conducted a long, violent struggle -- including the use of suicide bombings -- against the Sri Lankan government to establish a separate Tamil state. The State Department labeled the Tamil Tigers as a foreign terrorist organization in 1997. The paramilitary organization cannot legally raise money or buy sensitive military equipment in the United States. But experts said the Sri Lankan rebels have skirted the ban by seeking out arms in other countries.
The name Ramanathan Ranjan is also listed here as having donated to NJ Democrat Congressman Rush Holt.
Posted on Saturday, December 15, 2007 at 04:01PM by JammieWearingFool
Democrats
Hillary
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Subtleties
Ahmadinejad Acknowledges Nuclear-Weapons Program [Steve Schippert]
Again, in the race to arrive at the assessed halt of the Iranian nuclear-weapons program, lost in the dust-up is the necessary accompanying acknowledgment that it did exist. Now, even Ahmadinejad is hoping no one will notice. Please. Notice.
Words are being chosen carefully. However, arriving at the position of supporting the assessment of the cessation of a nuclear weapons program — and exploiting such for diplomatic advantage — carries with it a more-than-implied acknowledgement of its existence.
We Americans seem to be addicted to nuance. We love to argue ourselves into inaction and, at times, self-loathing. Be careful here. This is an addiction easily and readily fed by our enemies. Witness Iranian broadcasting cited within the same article.
An eagerness to criticize the administration of an opposing party often clouds the fact that the opposing party is actually formed from the same nation's people. Such careless domestic criticism — of which Pelosi's on the NIE and CIA interrogations was timid in comparison — aids an enemy who has been killing us since 1979 and is responsible for 10 percent of all U.S. casualties in Iraq to date, just from their EFP's alone. This does not include U.S. deaths by Iranian-made, -supplied, and -fielded mortars, RPG's, and shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles . . . or AK-47's and ammo.
Make no mistake, a government that leads its public in chants of "Death to America" is an enemy. Make no mistake, a government that sends its special forces into Iraq to kill our soldiers is an enemy.
Not a lot of room for nuance there. At all. Shake the addiction. Please.
Iran
Again, in the race to arrive at the assessed halt of the Iranian nuclear-weapons program, lost in the dust-up is the necessary accompanying acknowledgment that it did exist. Now, even Ahmadinejad is hoping no one will notice. Please. Notice.
TEHRAN — The government of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sought Tuesday to gain a diplomatic edge abroad and a political windfall at home following the release of a U.S. intelligence estimate concluding that Tehran had halted a secret nuclear weapons program four years ago.
Iranian officials openly gloated Tuesday, demanding that Washington apologize for accusing them of pursuing weapons of mass destruction.
Words are being chosen carefully. However, arriving at the position of supporting the assessment of the cessation of a nuclear weapons program — and exploiting such for diplomatic advantage — carries with it a more-than-implied acknowledgement of its existence.
We Americans seem to be addicted to nuance. We love to argue ourselves into inaction and, at times, self-loathing. Be careful here. This is an addiction easily and readily fed by our enemies. Witness Iranian broadcasting cited within the same article.
Despite the report's more nuanced conclusions about Tehran's nuclear program, which noted that Iran could still enrich enough uranium to create a bomb between 2009 and 2015, observers sympathetic to Iran argued that it exonerated Tehran and would turn the diplomatic momentum against the U.S.
Iran's state-controlled radio and television channels Tuesday flooded airwaves with reports about the intelligence estimate, quoting leading Democrats such as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi calling for a new approach to Iran. "The report acknowledged that it was becoming clear that Iran's plan is peaceful," a news reader announced.
An eagerness to criticize the administration of an opposing party often clouds the fact that the opposing party is actually formed from the same nation's people. Such careless domestic criticism — of which Pelosi's on the NIE and CIA interrogations was timid in comparison — aids an enemy who has been killing us since 1979 and is responsible for 10 percent of all U.S. casualties in Iraq to date, just from their EFP's alone. This does not include U.S. deaths by Iranian-made, -supplied, and -fielded mortars, RPG's, and shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles . . . or AK-47's and ammo.
Make no mistake, a government that leads its public in chants of "Death to America" is an enemy. Make no mistake, a government that sends its special forces into Iraq to kill our soldiers is an enemy.
Not a lot of room for nuance there. At all. Shake the addiction. Please.
Iran
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
A Recommended Read
America’s Security: The Genesis of a Problem
by George Shadroui
26 April 2005
After the Vietnam War, a dovish Congress spent almost a quarter century undermining, mismanaging and debunking our military and our intelligence capabilities.
The release several weeks ago of the Weapons of Mass Destruction panel report underscored several realities that were not unexpected but were still disturbing.
In one conclusion, the panel reported: “Our collection agencies are often unable to gather intelligence on the very things we care most about….Across the board, the intelligence community knows disturbingly little about the nuclear programs of many of the world most dangerous actors.”
On page five of the executive summary, the panel states: “Current intelligence in support of military and other action is necessary, of course. But we also need an Intelligence Community with strategic capabilities: it must be equipped to develop long-term plans for penetrating today’s difficult targets, and to identify political and social trends shaping the threats that lie over the horizon.”
The report continues, reporting that the Intelligence Community: “is reluctant to use human and technical collection methods; it is behind the curve in applying cutting-edge technologies; and it has not adapted its personnel practices and incentives structures to fit the needs of a new job market.”
In short, our Intelligence Community has failed to follow many of the most basic precepts of strategic planning. Day to day demands apparently prevent analysts from doing long-term and strategic analysis. Bureaucratic rivalries and jealousies have prevented cooperation at the highest levels, and entrenched status quo thinking has proven an obstacle to better results even in the face of pressing national emergencies.
Continue Reading
by George Shadroui
26 April 2005
After the Vietnam War, a dovish Congress spent almost a quarter century undermining, mismanaging and debunking our military and our intelligence capabilities.
The release several weeks ago of the Weapons of Mass Destruction panel report underscored several realities that were not unexpected but were still disturbing.
In one conclusion, the panel reported: “Our collection agencies are often unable to gather intelligence on the very things we care most about….Across the board, the intelligence community knows disturbingly little about the nuclear programs of many of the world most dangerous actors.”
On page five of the executive summary, the panel states: “Current intelligence in support of military and other action is necessary, of course. But we also need an Intelligence Community with strategic capabilities: it must be equipped to develop long-term plans for penetrating today’s difficult targets, and to identify political and social trends shaping the threats that lie over the horizon.”
The report continues, reporting that the Intelligence Community: “is reluctant to use human and technical collection methods; it is behind the curve in applying cutting-edge technologies; and it has not adapted its personnel practices and incentives structures to fit the needs of a new job market.”
In short, our Intelligence Community has failed to follow many of the most basic precepts of strategic planning. Day to day demands apparently prevent analysts from doing long-term and strategic analysis. Bureaucratic rivalries and jealousies have prevented cooperation at the highest levels, and entrenched status quo thinking has proven an obstacle to better results even in the face of pressing national emergencies.
Continue Reading
The Last Nail in the Coffin of American Industry
US Senate Panel Approves Bill To Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions
By Deborah Tate
Washington
06 December 2007
Tate report - Download (mp3) 503k
Listen to Tate report
A U.S. Senate committee has passed landmark legislation aimed at combating global warming by limiting carbon dioxide emissions. The vote was timed to coincide with the U.N. conference on climate change taking place in Bali, Indonesia. VOA's Deborah Tate reports from Capitol Hill.
The bill would set caps on U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from electric utility, transportation and manufacturing industries beginning in 2012 with the goal of cutting emissions 60 percent by 2050. It would create an incentive system that would give credits to industries that cut pollution. Industries that failed to reduce emissions would be forced to buy credits from others.
The Democratic-led Senate Environment and Public Works Committee voted 11 to eight, largely along party lines, to send the measure to the full Senate for what supporters hope will be action early next year.
"We are facing a crisis that will hit our children and our grandchildren the hardest if we do not act now. Not to act would be wrong, cowardly, and irresponsible," said Senator Barbara Boxer, a California Democrat, chairwoman of the committee.
Senator Boxer, who is expected to travel to Bali as part of a U.S. congressional delegation next week, said committee approval of the bill sends a signal to the rest of the world that the United States is serious about reducing global warming.
But many Republicans oppose the legislation, saying it would increase energy costs and lead to job losses. They argue the measure does not ensure that other nations, particularly China and India, will cut emissions.
"China's emission will continue to accelerate as it builds coal plants and imports jobs from the United States. This will be enormously expensive to households within seven years as electricity prices skyrocket by 35 to 65 percent," said Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma, the top Republican on the committee.
But co-sponsor Republican Senator John Warner of Virginia, who broke with many in his party to support the measure, offered a different view: "If we do not act, China and India will hide behind America's skirts of inaction and take no steps of their own. Therefore we simply have to lead," he said.
The House of Representatives has yet to draft its own version of the legislation.
Democrats
By Deborah Tate
Washington
06 December 2007
Tate report - Download (mp3) 503k
Listen to Tate report
A U.S. Senate committee has passed landmark legislation aimed at combating global warming by limiting carbon dioxide emissions. The vote was timed to coincide with the U.N. conference on climate change taking place in Bali, Indonesia. VOA's Deborah Tate reports from Capitol Hill.
The bill would set caps on U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from electric utility, transportation and manufacturing industries beginning in 2012 with the goal of cutting emissions 60 percent by 2050. It would create an incentive system that would give credits to industries that cut pollution. Industries that failed to reduce emissions would be forced to buy credits from others.
The Democratic-led Senate Environment and Public Works Committee voted 11 to eight, largely along party lines, to send the measure to the full Senate for what supporters hope will be action early next year.
"We are facing a crisis that will hit our children and our grandchildren the hardest if we do not act now. Not to act would be wrong, cowardly, and irresponsible," said Senator Barbara Boxer, a California Democrat, chairwoman of the committee.
Senator Boxer, who is expected to travel to Bali as part of a U.S. congressional delegation next week, said committee approval of the bill sends a signal to the rest of the world that the United States is serious about reducing global warming.
But many Republicans oppose the legislation, saying it would increase energy costs and lead to job losses. They argue the measure does not ensure that other nations, particularly China and India, will cut emissions.
"China's emission will continue to accelerate as it builds coal plants and imports jobs from the United States. This will be enormously expensive to households within seven years as electricity prices skyrocket by 35 to 65 percent," said Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma, the top Republican on the committee.
But co-sponsor Republican Senator John Warner of Virginia, who broke with many in his party to support the measure, offered a different view: "If we do not act, China and India will hide behind America's skirts of inaction and take no steps of their own. Therefore we simply have to lead," he said.
The House of Representatives has yet to draft its own version of the legislation.
Democrats
Tuesday, December 04, 2007
Koch: Guess who's afraid of Iran?
Ed Koch a Democrat who gets IT
The Israel-Palestine peace meeting in Annapolis, Maryland was a success in at least one respect. It brought together every Arab state involved, including Saudi Arabia and Syria.
According to many Middle East experts, the coming together of Arab nations at the request of President Bush indicates that Arabs are in such fear of Iran and its efforts to dominate the region that they are willing to cooperate with the United States more than ever before.
In a New York Times op-ed article, author Michael B. Oren writes: "…participants in the conference were above all motivated by their fear of a radical and relentlessly aggressive Iran." He went on to point to "the success of the Iranian proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas in Lebanon and Gaza, as well as the expansion of Iranian influence westward into the Iraqi vacuum."
That analysis reinforces my belief that the United States could get these same Arab states to recognize that they must help us in Iraq or suffer the consequences of an ultimate Iranian victory when we leave. "Helping us" means sending troops, spending money and apprehending and deterring terrorists in their countries who are seeking jihad – holy war – against the U.S. in Iraq and elsewhere. The U.S. has refused to make the threat of leaving Iraq dependent on the offers of help from these Arab countries in the region who have more to lose than we do by our withdrawal of military forces from Iraq. This is the moment for President Bush to deliver such an ultimatum to our Arab regional allies.
Read the Rest
Iran
The Israel-Palestine peace meeting in Annapolis, Maryland was a success in at least one respect. It brought together every Arab state involved, including Saudi Arabia and Syria.
According to many Middle East experts, the coming together of Arab nations at the request of President Bush indicates that Arabs are in such fear of Iran and its efforts to dominate the region that they are willing to cooperate with the United States more than ever before.
In a New York Times op-ed article, author Michael B. Oren writes: "…participants in the conference were above all motivated by their fear of a radical and relentlessly aggressive Iran." He went on to point to "the success of the Iranian proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas in Lebanon and Gaza, as well as the expansion of Iranian influence westward into the Iraqi vacuum."
That analysis reinforces my belief that the United States could get these same Arab states to recognize that they must help us in Iraq or suffer the consequences of an ultimate Iranian victory when we leave. "Helping us" means sending troops, spending money and apprehending and deterring terrorists in their countries who are seeking jihad – holy war – against the U.S. in Iraq and elsewhere. The U.S. has refused to make the threat of leaving Iraq dependent on the offers of help from these Arab countries in the region who have more to lose than we do by our withdrawal of military forces from Iraq. This is the moment for President Bush to deliver such an ultimatum to our Arab regional allies.
Read the Rest
Iran
Sunday, December 02, 2007
Saturday, December 01, 2007
Always Good News From Syria Right Nancy....
Syria’s Bio-Warfare Threat: an interview with Dr. Jill Dekker
by Jerry Gordon New English Review (Dec. 2007)
Introduction
When news leaked out of the September 6th Israeli Air Force and commando raid on a Syrian Nuclear facility followed by revelations about the deaths of dozens of Iranians and Syrians in a Chemical warfare missile accident in July the world was jarred. Recently, it was revealed that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) had aided Syria in its chemical warfare programs. I noted in a recent interview with former US UN Ambassador John Bolton his early concerns about the Syrian Bio Warfare threat. Questions arose, specifically about the size, nature and danger of the Syrian bio-warfare military programs. For answers and professional views on how extensive the Syrian bio-warfare threat is, we turned to Dr. Jill Dekker, a consultant to the NATO Defense Establishment in bio-warfare and counter terrorism. Dr. Dekker is also a member of the board of advisors of the Intelligence Summit.
Dr. Dekker’s answers give a foreboding picture of how large and refined the Syrian bio-warfare programs are and how little Western Intelligence knows about how the programs were developed. The potential exists for a significant WMD threat in the Middle East and the West, especially, against America. Syria is a proxy ally of Iran, North Korea (DPRK) and terror groups such as Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Hamas. Thus, the supply of bio-weapons and delivery platforms that could results in mass casualties makes it a real and present danger.
We were pleased that Dr. Dekker took time out from her professional work to answer questions about the Syrian bio-warfare establishment and WMD threat. (Continue reading this article)
Posted by Jerry Gordon @ 6:54 pm ET
by Jerry Gordon New English Review (Dec. 2007)
Introduction
When news leaked out of the September 6th Israeli Air Force and commando raid on a Syrian Nuclear facility followed by revelations about the deaths of dozens of Iranians and Syrians in a Chemical warfare missile accident in July the world was jarred. Recently, it was revealed that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) had aided Syria in its chemical warfare programs. I noted in a recent interview with former US UN Ambassador John Bolton his early concerns about the Syrian Bio Warfare threat. Questions arose, specifically about the size, nature and danger of the Syrian bio-warfare military programs. For answers and professional views on how extensive the Syrian bio-warfare threat is, we turned to Dr. Jill Dekker, a consultant to the NATO Defense Establishment in bio-warfare and counter terrorism. Dr. Dekker is also a member of the board of advisors of the Intelligence Summit.
Dr. Dekker’s answers give a foreboding picture of how large and refined the Syrian bio-warfare programs are and how little Western Intelligence knows about how the programs were developed. The potential exists for a significant WMD threat in the Middle East and the West, especially, against America. Syria is a proxy ally of Iran, North Korea (DPRK) and terror groups such as Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Hamas. Thus, the supply of bio-weapons and delivery platforms that could results in mass casualties makes it a real and present danger.
We were pleased that Dr. Dekker took time out from her professional work to answer questions about the Syrian bio-warfare establishment and WMD threat. (Continue reading this article)
Posted by Jerry Gordon @ 6:54 pm ET
Syria
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)