About Me

Name: Cary Wesberry
Email: carywesberry@sbcglobal.net Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Media Retires Centcom Commander, Navy Admiral William Fallon

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Tuesday, March 11, 2008 6:03:55 PM
WASHINGTON — Navy Adm. William Fallon, the head of U.S. Central Command, which leads U.S. operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, is stepping down, Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced Tuesday.

Fallon claimed ongoing misperceptions about differences between his ideas and U.S. policy are making it too difficult for him to operate, Gates said, agreeing. He added that the differences are not extreme, but the misperception had become too great.

"I believe it was the right thing to do, even though I do not believe there are, in fact, significant differences between his views and administration policy," Gates said, noting that he accepted the request to retire with "reluctance and regret."

"I don't know whether he was misinterpreted or whether people attributed views to him that were not his views, but clearly there was a concern," Gates said.

The misperceptions relate to an article published last week in Esquire magazine that portrayed Fallon as opposed to President Bush's Iran policy. It described Fallon as a lone voice against taking military action to stop the Iranian nuclear program.

In a statement distributed by Centcom headquarters in Tampa, Fla., Fallon said he requested permission to step down because the article showed disrespect toward the president and caused embarrassment and distractions that were the result of misrepresentations of his views of Centcom missions.

"Recent press reports suggesting a disconnect between my views and the president's policy objectives have become a distraction at a critical time and hamper efforts in the Centcom region. And although I don't believe there have ever been any differences about the objectives of our policy in the Central Command area of responsibility, the simple perception that there is makes it difficult for me to effectively serve America's interests there," Fallon said.
 
 
 
Due to the media misinterpreting the words and beliefs of Adm. Fallon, he is now resigning.  I had thought our Commander in Chief, also known as the President of the United States, would be making those decisions.  Apparently not.  We're at war and the liberal idiot media can write one erroneous article and make changes in command structure.  If indeed that's the case, why don't we go ahead and just put General Katie Couric in charge of Centcom and be done with it?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Proof There's No God: Moses the Drug Abuser!

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Tuesday, March 11, 2008 3:43:04 AM
"What a long, strange trip it's been" may be known as a catchphrase conjured up by The Grateful Dead to describe their mind-expanding experience with psychedelic drugs in the 1960s. But a Hebrew University professor of psychology claims that it may also be an appropriate title for the journey experienced by Moses and the Israelites when they wandered in the desert for 40 years.
 
Writing in the British scholarly journal Time and Mind, Prof. Benny Shanon claims that Moses and the children of Israel were likely under the influence of natural psychedelics found in the Sinai Desert when cataclysmic events like the receiving of the Ten Commandments took place.

He writes that two naturally existing plants in Sinai have the same psychoactive components as one of the most powerful psychedelic substances in existence, the Amazonian brew Ayahuasca.

"One plant is Peganum harmala, harmal in Arabic, the other is acacia, shita (plural, shittim) in Hebrew; they contain betacarbolines and DMT, respectively," Shanon wrote in the study.

Shanon, who admitted that he had partaken of the Ayahuasca brew about 160 times while in the Amazon in 1991 and at later locations and times, wrote that he "experienced visions that had spiritual-religious connotations."

After extensive research into Biblical texts, he concluded that several key episodes in the life of Moses exhibited features that were prominent symptoms of the Ayahuasca experience.

"These episodes include Moses's first encounter with the Divine and the theophany at Mt. Sinai, traditionally regarded to be the most important event in all of Jewish history," he wrote.

Shanon, whose main focuses of research are the phenomenology of human consciousness and the philosophy of psychology, also wrote that the burning bush episode was likely the result of psychedelic hallucinations as well.

"In advanced forms of Ayahuasca inebriation," he wrote, "the seeing of light is accompanied by profound religious and spiritual feelings."

While in the Torah there are no indications of the use of the Peganum harmala, there is clear evidence that the second plant - acacia - was most valued, according to Shanon.

"From it were made the tabernacle and the ark in which the Mosaic Tablets of the Law were guarded. The acacia tree was also regarded as sacred by the ancient Egyptians," he wrote.

"In the Bible we discover clear indications that psychoactive plants were highly valued in ancient Israelite society.

Taken together, the botanical and anthropological data on the one hand, and the biblical descriptions as well as later Jewish hermeneutics on the other, are, I propose, suggestive of a biblical entheogenic connection," concluded Shanon.

"Admittedly, the smoking gun is not available to us. However, so many clues present themselves which, like the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, seem to cohere into an intriguing unified whole," wrote Shanon, adding that his research had been conducted in a way similar to that of an independent detective's investigation.
 
 
The man who conducted this terribly silly "research" himself was under the influence of hallucenogenic drugs more than 160 times, then tells us he conducted his research just as an independent investigator would... an independent investigator on dope that is.  Liberals will do absolutely anything to devalue God.  This time, Moses on dope.  I've seen it all now.  Afterall, if Moses was taking drugs an having hallucinations then no one need be responsible to a higher power for their behavior.  If Moses was on dope then why not give it to your kids too?  Maybe then we can all have our very own Burning Bush Revelation while holding hands and singing folk music.
 
Of all the idiotic and backwards "theories" attempting to disprove God this is truly the most retarded one I've seen in a long time; and I've seen it all from Evolution to space aliens.  It's the dope stupid!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Search for Anything but Islam to Explain Islamic Oppression of Women

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Tuesday, March 11, 2008 3:29:22 AM
The never-ending quest to find something, anything, anything but Islam, to explain Islamic violence, Islamic supremacism, and -- in particular here -- the oppression of women in Islam continues. This one is particularly egregious: it's all about oil, you see, which is why Texas oilmen all have their women in burqas. It was oil that led all this and more to be written into the Qur'an many centuries before oil was discovered in Arabia:

1. The Qur'an likens a woman to a field (tilth), to be used by a man as he wills: "Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth as ye will" (2:223).

2. The Qur'an also declares that a woman's testimony is worth half that of a man: "Get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her" (2:282).

3. It allows men to marry up to four wives, and have sex with slave girls also: "If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice" (4:3).

4. It rules that a son's inheritance should be twice the size of that of a daughter: "Allah (thus) directs you as regards your children's (inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females" (4:11).

5. Worst of all, the Qur’an tells husbands to beat their disobedient wives: "Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them" (4:34).

6. It allows for marriage to pre-pubescent girls, stipulating that Islamic divorce procedures “shall apply to those who have not yet menstruated” (65:4).

But it's all because of oil, you see, and that's why wife-beating and child marriage are legal in Texas also!
 
 
Read the entire post at Robert Spencer's Jihad Watch.  Truly delusional.  Before oil was known to exist as any kind of resource Islamists were torturing their women in the most horrible ways imaginable.  But who's keeping track of the facts, right?  Let's pretend none of that problematic nonsense exists and blame it all on oil.  Surely the appeasers can do better than that.  As Robert points-out so very well in his list re-printed above, there's a ton of reasons such a ridiculous assertation is flat-on-its-face false.  Islamists beat their women, stone them, and chop off their heads because of oil.  They might as well have blamed it on the Sun for all I care.  Islamo-fascists commit violence because for generations upon generations they are taught from the time they are babies to hate and murder in the name of Allah.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Harvard: America's 'Hub' for Sharia?" by Andrew Bostom

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Tuesday, March 11, 2008 3:15:11 AM
Right on the heels of Harvard’s capitulation to Sharia mores at its Quadrangle Recreational Athletic Center, the Harvard “academic” community indulged an ideologue with much grander aspirations for implementing Sharia, UCLA Professor of Law, Khaled Abou el Fadl.

My dear friend and colleague Hillel Stavis had the morbidly fascinating experience of witnessing this pseudo-academic fraud peddle his paltry wares March 5, 2008 at Harvard’s Divinity School, during a lecture entitled, non-sequitur, “Conceptualizing Islamic Theology: Sharia and Human Rights Doctrine”

Here are Hillel Stavis’ cogent first hand observations, in his own words:

Of all the evasions, obfuscations and diversions uttered by UCLA’s Professor of Law Khaled Abou el Fadl yesterday [ i.e., March 5, 2008] at the Harvard Divinity School, none was more revealing than his opening declaration that Sharia Law’s compatibility or incompatibility with human rights was wholly “vacuous” and “irrelevant”. None of the 60 or so, mostly Muslim attendees, seemed to have had a problem with this statement. The audience reaction, from both Mr. Fadl’s academic colleagues (among whom was Harvard’s Roy Mottahedeh, Gurney Professor of History, a specialist in Persian history) and students was more disturbing than the actual presentation.

Professor Mottahedeh lamented the fact that Muslims have spent too much time trying to reconcile Shari’ah with the UN Declaration of Human Rights, urging the world to supplement it with the Muslim version. Of course, the former is truly universal, the latter particularistic.

And so, a Harvard tenured professor would essentially replace one with the other in a kind of perfecting process.


Nearly 5-years ago now, I warned that El Fadl’s much ballyhooed reputation as a reformer was completely unjustified. Specifically, I noted his pattern of uniformed or deliberately deceitful presentation:

Recently El Fadl elucidated his "construction" of the tolerant tradition in Islam as part of an essay collection. He focused this presentation, appropriately, on two of the most obvious challenges to any such construction, i.e. jihad, and the poll tax (jizya) levied on non-Muslims under Islamic rule. El Fadl's arguments regarding both jihad and the jizya in this essay merit close scrutiny, as these institutions are integrated into the corpus of the Shari'a, or sacred Islamic law. I believe his omissions of evidence in this essay, combined with an excessive reliance on sacralized, whitewashed historiography, refutes the prevailing notion that El Fadl is engaged in a sincere effort to instill fundamental change in Islam.

El Fadl states categorically: “..Islamic tradition does not have a notion of holy war. Jihad simply means to strive hard or struggle in pursuit of a just cause...Holy war (al-harb al-muqaddasah) is not an expression used by the Qur'anic text or Muslim theologians. In Islamic theology war is never holy; it is either justified or not...” This contention cannot be supported on either theological-juridical, or historical grounds, and in fact contradicts the conclusion of an earlier essay by El Fadl.

El Fadl's discussion of jihad is rendered meaningless by a blatant historical negationism of both Muslim and non-Muslim sources. In his analysis of the poll tax (jizya), he relies exclusively upon the sacralized early Muslim historiography of this institution. El Fadl thus attempts to uphold the "virtuous" aspects of the jizya, omitting any reference to the consistent, intentionally humiliating character of its application…El Fadl's presentation excludes discussion of how the jizya was viewed by classical Muslim jurists. There was in fact a basic consensus among the four schools of Islamic jurisprudence regarding the intimate relationship between the institutions of jihad against the infidels, and jizya. El Fadl ignores these extensive writings, and instead asserts whimsically, "…there are various indicators that the poll tax is not a theologically mandated practice, but a functional solution that was adopted in response to a specific set of historical circumstances. Only an ahistorical reading of the text could conclude that it is an essential element in a divinely sanctioned program of subordinating the non-believer."

Another important aspect of the jizya that El Fadl ignores is the widely upheld, although not unanimous view of the classical schools of Islamic jurisprudence about the "humiliating" imposition and procurement of this tax. Here is a discussion of the ceremonial for collection of the jizya by the 13th century Shafi'i jurist an-Nawawi: "…The infidel who wishes to pay his poll tax must be treated with disdain by the collector: the collector remains seated and the infidel remains standing in front of him, his head bowed and his back bent. The infidel personally must place the money on the scales, while the collector holds him by the beard, and strikes him on both cheeks…"

El Fadl also fails to discuss how the "contract of the jizyah", or "dhimma" encompassed other obligatory and recommended obligations for the conquered non-Muslim "dhimmi" peoples. Collectively, these "obligations" formed the discriminatory system of dhimmitude imposed upon non-Muslims- Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Hindus, and Buddhists- subjugated by jihad. Some of the more prominent features of the system of dhimmitude include: the prohibition of arms for the vanquished non-Muslims (dhimmis), and of church bells; the restrictions concerning the building and restoration of churches and synagogues; the inequality between Muslims and non-Muslims with regard to overall taxation, and penal law; the refusal of dhimmi testimony by Muslim courts; the obligation for Jews and Christians to wear special clothes; and their overall humiliation and abasement.


And I concluded with this relevant assessment:

It should be abundantly clear that Professor El Fadl's disingenuous revisionism hardly qualifies as a sincere effort to promote a meaningful Islamic "Reformation". Intended or not, his whitewashed, "ahistorical" presentation is dangerous, and serves to justify alarming contemporary Muslim assessments of dhimmitude, and its appropriate application, even today! For example, Palestinian Authority (PA) Undersecretary for Awqaf [Religious Endowment], Sheik Yussef Salamah, representing the PA at a May 1999 "Inter-Cultural Conference," in Tehran, praised the 7th century system of Ahl Al-Dhimma (i.e, the system of dhimmitude), as the proper paradigm for relations between present day Muslims and Christians 58. Palestinian Authority employee, Sheik Muhammad Ibrahim Al-Madhi later reiterated these sentiments with regard to Jews during a Friday sermon broadcasted live on June 6, 2001 on PA TV, from the Sheik 'Ijlin Mosque in Gaza:"We welcome, as we did in the past, any Jew who wants to live in this land as a dhimmi, just as the Jews have lived in our countries, as dhimmis, and have earned appreciation, and some of them have even reached the positions of counselor or minister here and there. We welcome the Jews to live as dhimmis, but the rule in this land and in all the Muslim countries must be the rule of Allah."

One needs simply to contrast El Fadl's meager revisionist approach with the unequivocal statements of a Muslim academic such as Professor Bassam Tibi. Professor Tibi possesses the insight and courage to acknowledge that a meaningfully reformed Islam must embrace the pluralistic spirit of the Western Enlightenment:

“..In the context of religious tolerance-and I write this as a Muslim- there can be no place in Europe for Shari'a …Shari'a is at odds with the secular identity of Europe and is diametrically opposed to secular European constitutions formulated by the people… I hold out for the superiority of common sense over religious faith (i.e., absolute religious precepts); individual human rights (i.e., not collective human rights); secular democracy based on the separation of religion from politics; a universally accepted pluralism; and a mutually accepted secular tolerance. The acceptance of these values is the foundation of a civil society..”

Professor Tibi's comments underscore basic truths that apologists for the Shari'a such as El Fadl refuse to acknowledge. For example, the 1990 Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam maintains that the Shari'a has primacy over the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and includes the specific proclamation that God has made the umma (Islamic community) the best nation, whose role is to "guide" humanity. This statement captures the indelible influence of jihad ideology on the Shari'a, rendering sacred and permanent the notion of inequality between the community of Allah, and the infidels. Thus we can see clearly the differences between the Shari'a-inspired Cairo Declaration, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which does not refer to any religion or to the superiority of any group over another, while stressing the absolute equality of all human beings. Indeed a Senegalese jurist (and Muslim), Adama Dieng, (then serving as secretary-general to the Geneva-based International Commission of Jurists), courageously declared in 1992 that the Cairo Declaration introduced an intolerable discrimination against non-Muslims and women.


Subsequently, Daniel Pipes elaborated on El Fadl’s so-called “anti-Wahhabism,” which is negated by his continued apologetics for jihad terrorism, and open espousal of the implementation of Sharia in non-Muslim societies, as a leading pseudo-academic, cultural jihadist. Pipes highlighted, for example the fact that Sheikh Muhammad al-Ghazali (1917-96), an important 20th century Egyptian cleric, remains one of Abou El Fadl's chief intellectual influences. However, as I have noted, the “anti-Wahhabi” al-Ghazali, then an official of Al Azhar University, supported the July 1994 vigilante murder of secular Egyptian writer Farag Foda. Testifying on behalf of Farag Foda’s murderer, al-Ghazali stated, unabashedly, “A secularist represents a danger to society and the nation that must be eliminated. It is the duty of the government to kill him.”

Over fifty years ago (i.e., circa 1955), Gustave von Grunebaum (d. 1972), a major scholar of Islam, well prepared to make sound judgments on matters related to Islamic societies, issued this prescient warning based upon actually studying the writings of the Muslim ideologues of his day, including El Fadl’s ideological inspiration, Muhammad al-Ghazali. [Gustave von Grunebaum, Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 1955, Vol. 14, p. 202, (Book Review of Muhammad Al-Ghazzali’s, Our Beginning in Wisdom, 1953, translated by Ismail R. al-Faruqi)]:

The political constellation of the moment which is likely to continue for some not inconsiderable length of time has induced us to envisage ourselves in a world of an “either…or.” We concern ourselves with the compatibility or otherwise of Islam with communism and regardless of the conclusion in which we acquiesce, we are apt to overlook the fact that the Muslim circles most emphatically opposed to communism are at the same time potentially if not actually the most formidable stronghold of hostility to the West. Ghazzali’s tirade against American Democracy (pp. 60-62) with its warning “against the spreading American ways,” with its condemnation of “the domestic as well as foreign policy of America” as “actually a systematic violation of every virtue humanity has ever known” should make us aware that the Muslim “extremists” will be with the West not because of any recognized affinity but merely out of momentary political considerations. Ultimately, the self-conscious world of Islam would wish to consolidate into a power center strong enough to set itself up by the side of the Russian and the Western blocks, strong enough to determine for itself what its primary political concerns should be, and strong enough perhaps to be no longer compelled to westernize for the sake of survival. The hot-headed half-truths of Ghazzali must not delude us into considering absurd the aspiration of those who feel that for its revival Islam needs less rather than more gifts of the West.


At present, more than fifty years later, the distressingly stupid leaders of our universities remain oblivious to (or if ever aware, hostile to) von Grunebaum’s profound insights, allowing post-Edward Saidian pseudo-scholars like El Fadl and Mottahedeh, to blissfully pursue their university-supported efforts aimed at “peacefully” subverting the US to Islamic Law.

Let me state bluntly, and humorlessly, I have lost all patience with such fraudulent “presentations,” and their utterly ridiculous academic patina—they are pernicious.

Mr El Fadl, and his equally deficient Harvard host Roy Mottahedeh want nothing less than for our liberal democracy to willfully impose upon itself the Ur-Fascistic totalitarianism of Sharia. Only the most empty-headed buffoons, their minds melted away by ceaselessly and uncritically imbibing the cultural relativism that prevails in our “academy,” and “public discourse,” would even begin to entertain El Fadl’s premise. And yet there he was, at Harvard, no less, espousing such hideous ideas along with the dangerously ludicrous Mr. Mottahedeh, who endorsed them.
Hillel Stavis sent me this apposite closing observation shortly after hearing El Fadl’s lecture, and the equally inane commentary of his host, Mottahedeh:

Harvard seems to have heard Mr. Mottahedeh’s message recently when it accorded exclusionary rights to Muslims by banning men from one of its gyms at designated hours to accommodate Muslim women. Given the professor’s desired trajectory of Islamic “ethics”, we might even see the ultimate penalty for apostasy applied to those foolhardy students who decide to change their religion while at Harvard.
 
 
Andrew Bostom gives a disturbing insight into the conversion of our universities into centers for Islamic Law.  The administrators of these universities need to be exposed for aiding the fascistic overthrow of the American government, and then possibly prosecuted along with the "professors" who are directly engaged in this brainwashing.  They say the young are like sponges, soaking-up as much knowledge as possible in a short period of time.  The problem with a sponge is that it soaks-up everything; the clean right along with the dirty.  Many of these students are not just impressionable, due to their liberal upbringing they're often downright stupid.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Blood Cult That is Palestine Celebrates Murder

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Tuesday, March 11, 2008 12:37:16 AM
Eight young men, unarmed and in the relative security of their Jerusalem yeshiva, are gunned down in cold blood. In Gaza, thousands take to the streets to celebrate. Their government encourages them to do so.

How toxic is a society when the governing party suggests celebrating a massacre of teenaged boys?

The brutality of last Thursday's massacre at the Mercaz Harav Yeshiva exposes some ugly truths about the blood lust that has been fostered by leaders in Palestinian society and the unwillingness of most American Muslim political organizations and the mainstream media to confront it.

When the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) is accused of raising money for Hamas terrorism, the defendants and their allies say they merely sought to relieve Palestinian suffering. But the silence from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) and others shows their unwillingness to condemn the terrorist act and its glorification.

The best hope to alleviate the suffering of Palestinians is to stand against the cycle of violence, not to be complicit in its continuation. That requires a loud and persistent call from American Muslims for Hamas to stop deliberately inciting Israel. That incitement is not the biased perspective of those of us who oppose terrorism, but of former Hamas foreign minister Mahmoud Zahar:

Rockets against Sderot will cause mass migration, greatly disrupt daily lives and government administration and can make a much huger impact on the government.

No country would accept showers of incoming rocket fire without responding. Israel did just that February 27th, in an operation targeting Hamas terrorists that killed 120 people. Sadly, dozens of civilians also were killed.

This triggered no celebration in Israel and the operation ended within days.

Every life lost is a tragedy. But to pretend there's a moral equivalence between the attacks which set out to kill innocents versus those in which civilians are caught in the crossfire is a cruel joke that serves only to perpetuate the violence and keep any hope of peace. In its rocket barrages and in the yeshiva attack, civilians are the target.
 
 
The great evil that is Palestine backed by Hezbollah, Iran, and Syria will be addressed severely or Israel will cease to exist.  The Jews of Israel have no leadership and now it appears their army, one of the best fighting forces ever to walk the Earth, cannot help them either.  All the while the Palestinian animals murder Jews in the streets and hold celebrations of their murder.  Israeli leadership only shrugs at this and does as little as possible hoping not to incur more wrath from inhuman monsters.  When Palestinians rally in the streets to celebrate in joy the mass murder of Jews, the IDF should be surrounding them and deporting every one of the immediately.  The Palestinians who decide to fight the IDF in that operation should be executed on the spot.  Continuing to treat Palestinians as if they are actually people will only get us more dead Jews while Palestine and it's backers grow stronger.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Muslim Brotherhood Infests University of Toledo

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Tuesday, March 11, 2008 12:27:50 AM
It might only be the shores of Lake Erie, but the Muslim Brotherhood has established an invasion beachhead in Toledo. The most recent landing by the international Islamic extremist organization was last weekend when the Muslim American Society (MAS) – the ideological arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in the US, identified as such by the Department of Justice in a court filing back in December – held a conference at the University of Toledo. Perhaps it’s no coincidence that the Department of Homeland Security recently added Toledo to the list of high-risk terrorism areas.

Among the speakers were national MAS leaders Esam Omeish and Mahdi Bray, respectively the MAS president and head of their Virginia Commission on Immigration just weeks after his appointment. According to a September 28, 2007 article in the Washington Post, Omeish was forced out when a video surfaced of Omeish preaching holy war against Israel at a December 22, 2000, Jerusalem Day rally in Washington D.C., where he said:

...you have learned the way, that you have known that the jihad way is the way to liberate your land...and we shall do everything we can to help your cause.

 
Those Islamo-fascist terrorists just love our universities don't they?  Of course they do, and it should tell you something sinister about our universities.  They are locations which cater to fascists of all kinds, and revel in it with glee I might add.  Not only that, Jihadists can easily warp the minds of the anti-American liberals who typically attend our so-called "places of higher learning"; as if they needed to be warped any more than they already are.  As we've learned throughout history, a standard fascist strategy is to control education and convert as many as possible through repetitive propaganda turning out an army of evil little piggies as fast as they can graduate them.  Considering how stupid your average college graduate is these days, that's pretty damn fast.  Freedom of expression does not cover destroying your own country from the inside-out.  As a matter of fact, I'm sure that's not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution.  Pretty soon parents will have to start homeschooling all the way through their son's and daughter's PhD's.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"The Fat Lady Hasn't Sung" by John McCormack

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Tuesday, March 11, 2008 12:14:57 AM
It's nearly impossible for Hillary Clinton to win more pledged delegates than Barack Obama, but can she still win the nomination? Yes, she can. Here's what her path to victory might look like.

To reach a nominating majority of 2,025 delegates, Clinton would need to win about 540 of the 957 delegates still up for grabs. Of this total, 611 are pledged delegates--to be allocated in the 12 remaining state primaries and caucuses; 346 are still-neutral super-delegates--the party honchos who are seated at the convention but not elected by the voters and can back whomever they please. (I'm relying on the Real Clear Politics estimate of still-neutral super-delegates.) The more pledged delegates Clinton wins in the remaining contests, the fewer super-delegates she will need. For example, if she wins 51 percent of the remaining pledged delegates, she will need 66 percent of the remaining super-delegates.

But if Clinton is to have any hope of the super-delegates' going 3-to-2 in her favor, she will need an impressive win in the Pennsylvania primary on April 22. A 10-point margin of victory might do it--adding 200,000 votes or so to her total haul in the primaries, which would put her within striking distance of Obama's lead in the popular vote. If you include Florida, where both candidates were on the ballot but did not campaign because the state was stripped of its delegates for breaking party rules, Obama currently leads the popular vote by less than 300,000 votes. Depending on the results from Mississippi's March 11 primary, Clinton would need to gain about 100,000 to 200,000 votes throughout the May primaries in North Carolina, Indiana, West Virginia, Oregon, and Kentucky to pull ahead.

While the Democratic nominee will ultimately be determined by the convention delegates, winning the popular vote would give Clinton a compelling claim that super-delegates should ratify the will of the voters--an argument that would fall on friendly ears in a party still aggrieved that Al Gore lost the Electoral College in 2000 despite winning the popular vote. "Imagine a split in the popular vote and the Electoral College--only this time the Electoral College does not have the Constitution conferring upon it moral legitimacy," writes Jay Cost of Real Clear Politics. "Which count will people prefer?"


Hillary Clinton will not give-up the White House until the very end when someone else is made the nominee.  The column excerpted above is an interesting hypothetical showing how Hillary could indeed win the nomination.  Aside from Hillary's possibilities in the Democrat race, I also find the Democrat VP spot speculations interesting.  Would Obama ride shotgun if Hillary won the nomination and then asked him nicely in the way only Hillary can; with threats, money, and bribes?  Since I personally don't find B. Hussein Obama to be the man of character so many others seem to, I say yes.  He would take it if for no other reason than to plan ahead for 2012 or 2016.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

DEBKAfile: Turkey’s Army Chief Warns Pakistan’s Nuclear Arms Could Fall into Taliban Hands

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Monday, March 10, 2008 11:53:42 PM
Gen. Yasar Buyukanit, the Turkish chief of staff, said if President Pervez Musharraf lost his grip, Pakistan could fall into Taliban hands and a terrorist organization gain control of nuclear arms for the first time. The general was addressing an international terrorism conference in Ankara Monday, March 10. Sunday, the two parties in opposition to Musharraf forged a power-sharing alliance to govern Pakistan, vowing to evict him from the presidency. Islamist groups have also stepped up their attacks since the Feb. 18 general election.
 
 
 
A horrifying thought indeed, we're probably closer to that reality than any of us want to admit.  Musharraf won't last forever, and whatever apparatus replaces him will not be following in his footsteps.  The Pakistani people have made that very clear.  I can't say I would trade our operations in Afghanistan and Iraq for operations in Pakistan but when you factor in those nuclear weapons the stituation there certainly becomes a great deal more pressing.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Syria Steps-Up Armament

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Monday, March 10, 2008 2:35:45 PM
Russia factors heavily in this situation, reportedly extending weapons discounts and other benefits to Syria. A rather myopic move by a country that is battling its own jihadist insurgency. 

"Syria 'intensely' arming itself," by Aaron Klein for World Net Daily:


JERUSALEM – Syria is in the midst of "intensely" arming itself, placing into position rockets and missiles capable of striking the entire Jewish state, according to an assessment presented to the Knesset today by multiple Israeli security agencies.

The announcement follows a WND exclusive report last month quoting security officials stating Syria, aided by Russia and Iran, has been furiously acquiring rockets and missiles, including projectiles capable of hitting any point in Israel. The officials listed anti-tank, anti-aircraft and ballistic missiles as some of the arms procured by Syria.

Yesterday, Israel's Mossad and Israel Defense Forces Military Intelligence chiefs presented an annual security report to the Knesset warning of Syria's armament program.

The chiefs also warned of a possible flare-up at Israel's northern border with the Hezbollah terror group and said in their assessment Iran could cross the technological threshold enabling it to assemble a nuclear bomb by the end of next year.

The assessment came after Prime Minister Ehud Olmert announced last week negotiations between the Jewish state and Syria should be seriously considered it if would bring an end to Syrian-sponsored terrorism and Damascus' "involvement in the axis of evil."

The negotiations would aim for some sort of Israeli evacuation from the Golan Heights strategic, mountainous territory looking down on Israeli and Syrian population centers twice used by Damascus to launch ground invasions into the Jewish state.

Syria openly provides refuge to Palestinian terror leaders, including the chiefs of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and has been accused of shipping weapons to Hezbollah. Damascus is also accused of supporting the insurgency against U.S. troops in Iraq.

'Furious frenzy' to get Russian missiles

Olmert's announcement of Israel's willingness to negotiate followed a WND report in which Israeli and Jordanian security officials outlined Syria's recent armament.

A Jordanian security official said one of the main reasons Damascus did not retaliate after Israel carried out its Sept. 6 air strike inside Syria – which allegedly targeted a nascent nuclear facility – was because Syria's rocket infrastructure was not yet complete.

The official said that after the Israeli air strike, Syria picked up the pace of acquiring rockets and missiles, largely from Russia with Iranian backing, with the goal of completing its missile and rocket arsenal by the end of the year. The Jordanian official said Syria is aiming to possess the capacity to fire more than 100 rockets into Israel per hour for a sustained period of time.

"The Syrians have three main goals: to maximize their anti-tank, anti-aircraft and ballistic missile and rocket capabilities," explained the Jordanian official.

According to Israeli and Jordanian officials, Syria recently quietly struck a deal with Russia that allows Moscow to station submarines and war boats off Syrian ports. In exchange, Russia is supplying Syria with weaponry at lower costs, with some of the missiles and rockets being financed by Iran.
 
 
 
Iran's nuclear weapons program coming online, Syria's "intense" armament, Hezbollah shiftier than ever, Hamas raining rockets; what's a Jew to do?  When you see groups of terrorists such as those working to destroy Israel coming together in unity, it's time to start taking Israel's situation seriously.  With reports like the one above from WND and Jihad Watch coming out more and more regularly, I'm certainly glad we have a Naval battlegroup stationed in the Mediterranean today.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

DEBKAfile: Israel Places Lebanese, Syrian, Gaza Borders, its Cities and Highways on High Terror Alert

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Monday, March 10, 2008 12:53:51 PM
The annual intelligence report submitted to the Israeli government Sunday, March 9, predicted grave dangers to Israeli security in the coming year. However, even in the short term, DEBKAfile’s military and Middle East sources report the Israeli army, police and security forces are on guard for stormy events in the second half of March.

1. To bring reluctant Arab rulers to the Damascus Arab League summit on the 29th, Syria has quietly slipped the word that the contentious Lebanese issue will be left off the agenda. Deliberations would be confined to the Gaza crisis. The Saudis were therefore persuaded to accept the Syrian invitation on March 9 after several refusals.

Israeli intelligence has warned that in the interim Hamas and Jihad Islami would make every effort to ignite the Gaza front in order to unite the Arab rulers behind a dramatic Arab resolution in support of the Palestinian Islamists. This tactic would transfer the Gaza issue’s center of gravity from Cairo, which is brokering a Hamas-Israel ceasefire deal, to radical Damascus.

Egged on by Syria and Iran, Hamas keeps on stalling this track and raising its demands. Amos Gilead, security adviser in Israel’s defense ministry, who traveled to Cairo Sunday to try and break the deadlock, came back empty-handed. He said the coming summit was the key to progress and warned that the current slowdown in Palestinian rocket and missile attacks from Gaza in the last two days was extremely fragile. Hamas was poised to generate a flare-up at any time that it suited the book of Syria and Iran. Nevertheless, Israel has scaled down its anti-rocket operations in the Gaza Strip.

2. Most of all, the coming Arab League summit will for the first time host an Iranian head of state. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will be seated beside Syrian president Bashar Assad as guest of honor to parade the Tehran-Damascus axis’ pre-eminent role in Arab Middle East affairs, with Iran setting the pace.

This prospect has raised the military barometer across the region and injected a radical note in “moderate” Arab utterances.

Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak suddenly declared Monday, March 10, that Israel continues to be responsible for the Gaza Strip after its pull-out and its status in both Gaza and the West Bank is that of an occupation force. In an interview, he endorsed the Hamas line which called on Israel to halt military operations not only in Gaza but also on the West Bank.

The Lebanese impasse may have been left off the formal agenda, but it looms large over the Arab world as the key divisive element. Over the weekend, the US navy built up its deployment opposite the Lebanese coast with the USS Ross guided missile destroyer and the USS Philippine Sea cruiser.

Syria responded by placing its air and naval bases, where too Russian warships are docked, on a state of preparedness.

Israel’s new national intelligence report affirms that the United States’ declining role in the region has left a vacuum for radical elements to fill. Its authors, the chiefs of military intelligence, the Mossad, Shin Bet and the foreign ministry’s intelligence unit, warned of the heightened threat from missiles in the arsenals of a future nuclear-armed Iran (within two years) and Syrian. A Hizballah attack and a stronger Hamas were also in prospect.

In the coming two weeks, Syria, Iran, Hizballah and Hamas will be further tightening the military and terrorist loop around Israel – to the north, the south, and among Palestinians and Israeli Arabs, at the expense of Israel’s deterrent strength.

According to our military sources, Hizballah is completing its preparations for revenge on Israel, whom it accuses of killing its military commander Imad Mughniyeh last month. The latest estimate is that the Shiite terrorists will strike on the border and/or inside Israel, rather than hit overseas targets.

Israel’s prime minister Ehud Olmert steadily refuses to look these facts in the face and insists that Israel’s security situation has never been better.

Both he and foreign minister Tzipi Livni are still carefully treading the line drawn by US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, whose main preoccupation these days is to keep foreign crises at bay for the rest of the Bush presidency.

In Jerusalem last week, Rice confided that to achieve a lull in the cross-border violence in Gaza, even concessions to Hamas were acceptable. This stance, which Israel accepted, substantially enhanced the Islamists’ bargaining position.

 
Asinine: "Israel’s prime minister Ehud Olmert steadily refuses to look these facts in the face and insists that Israel’s security situation has never been better."  The Israeli Prime Minister is a complete fool and should be forceably removed from office immediately.  It is rare to find even throughout history a more suicidal and incompetent piece of human slime than Ehud Olmert.  His inaction borders on treason.  Instead of sitting on his fat rear-end in the Prime Minister's office he should be sitting on trial.  This man is an embarrassment to civilization and will surely destroy his own country if left in power.
 
The Jews of Israel need to rise up and take back their nation before it's too late.  If more time is allowed to pass before reasserting themselves, the possibility is high their position will be unrecoverable.  Not only do the Jews need to take back control of their own country, they very much need to take back control of their own foreign policy from the Bush Administration and Condi Rice who are repeatedly sacrificing Jews for the sake of lies in a peace process which is laughable; and that's on a good day.  If Israel keeps talking instead of acting there will soon be no more Israel and what's left of the Jews will again be scattered throughout the world having to make homes for themselves in whichever countries allow them to exist.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Olmert and Barak Deny Any Cease-Fire While Engaging in Dialogue With Hamas Behind the Backs of the People

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Monday, March 10, 2008 12:38:35 PM
Israel’s defense minister Ehud Barak Monday, March 10, sharply rebuffed reports of a truce deal with Hamas and the scaling back of military operations in the Gaza Strip. “There is no accord, nor is one close,” he stressed. “We will continue to fight until missile fire and terrorist attacks end and arms smuggling into Gaza is cut down. We are committed to these three goals.” 

Until these goals are attained, we will take any military steps we think fit. But it is no one-off operation. The tough challenges are still to come.”

The minister spoke during a tour of the Technology and Logistics Base at Tel Hashomer outside Tel Aviv.

Referring to the two-day slowdown of missile fire from Gaza, Barak said no one should complain if Sapir College and Ashkelon are free of Grad and Qassam missile fire. “The military will do everything necessary to complete its mission, even if it faces long and tough challenges.” He noted that all sorts of considerations affect military decisions, such as weather conditions and the accessibility of targets.

Asked to respond to the grim intelligence report of threats facing Israel in the year go come, which was submitted to the cabinet Sunday, Barak said: “Israel is still the strongest nation in the region.”

DEBKAfile’s military sources pose a couple of questions raised by the defense minister’s remarks:

1. Are they backed by prime minister Ehud Olmert? DEBKAfile’s political sources reply in the negative. The prime minister has developed his own two-track strategy: While publicly pledging a series of military knockout blows against Hamas, he is privately engaged in indirect dialogue with Hamas representatives and forcing the IDF to hold its fire. Barak is trying to correct the public’s low opinion of this performance.

2. He correctly stated that a ceasefire deal with Hamas is nowhere near but he did not explain that the delay is not the result of Israel’s tough bargaining position but because Hamas keeps on raising new demands. The latest, endorsed Monday by Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak, was that Israeli forces forego their counter-terror operations not only in Gaza, but on the West Bank too.

3. Israel is commonly accepted as the strongest nation in the region. However, the Olmert government’s military policies constantly transmit weak resolve and hesitancy. This was illustrated by its stop-go handling of the Palestinian missile escalation from Gaza. These tactics are eroding the IDF’s deterrent strength. If Israel concludes a ceasefire accord with Hamas from a position of weakness, the rockets and missiles will soon be flying again.
 
 
 
Good.  Israel should not stop operations until rocket fire, bombings, and assorted murders cease completely.  The Palestinians have long worn-out their welcome and should be punished severely for what they've done to Israel and its people.  No deals with Hamas will be honored regardless.  The Palestinians have yet to honor one accord with Israel and there's absolutely nothing to indicate they are going to start anytime soon, or ever. 
 
The real problem here is that Olmert is talking to Hamas behind the backs of the people, and no doubt against the wishes of the majority.  Olmert is as weak as they come and it's now obvious he does not have Israel's best interests at heart.  The man is a walking, talking disaster with a tie.  A good lynching if often required to restore faith in one's government; just a hint to the Jews of Israel.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Serbia's Ongoing Trial

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Sunday, March 09, 2008 9:25:44 PM
BELGRADE (Reuters) - Serbia faces renewed uncertainty on Monday under a caretaker government which will lead the country into its most important election since voters ended the era of the late autocrat Slobodan Milosevic

A deep division over the importance of Kosovo versus future European Union membership killed off the 10-month-old coalition of Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica on Saturday.

Parliament is due to be dissolved this week and a date set for an early parliamentary election, probably on May 11.

But Kostunica's fractured government will have to soldier on at reduced capacity until the nation chooses its fate.

"The election will be a referendum on whether Serbia takes a European path or becomes isolated, like Albania under (Stalinist dictator) Enver Hoxha," Defence Minister Dragan Sutanovac of the pro-Western Democratic Party told the daily Politika.

Kostunica dissolved the government after tacitly accusing his liberal coalition partners of giving up on Kosovo, the 90 percent Albanian majority province which seceded on February 17, with Western backing.

The election will be a close race between the Democrats and the nationalist Radicals, the strongest party.

Kostunica, whose party lies a distant third, quit after the Democrats and the G17 Plus party voted down a resolution that would have blocked Serbia's path to the European Union until the bloc stopped backing the independence of Kosovo.

Not all of the Union's 27 members have recognized Kosovo, but Brussels is deploying a supervisory mission that will monitor the territory's progress as an independent state.

President Boris Tadic, also the head of the Democrats, said attempts to divide Serbs into patriots and traitors over Kosovo would backfire at the polls. He suggested that Serbia, by joining the EU first, could block Kosovo from joining.

"Kosovo was recognised as independent by some 20 countries. It will not become independent if we continue to work on it," he said on a TV talk-show. "If we join the EU, then we can make sure that this outlaw state never becomes an EU member."
 
 
What a mess.  Parliament dissolved and the very real threat of a new Islamist state in Europe; backed by the United States no less.  Our State Department's Islamic outreach program is going to backfire on the civilized world sooner rather than later.  Supporting Kosovo is a mistke, just like supporting Palestine.  The very first thing the Islamists in Kosovo will do once their independence is gianed will be to start terrorist attacks on Serbia and anyone else considered an infidel.  Soon weapons will be pouring into the country from Iran and Syria.  I'm really beginning to dislike Condi Rice and the Bush Administration's foreign policy where supporting Islamic democracy is concerned.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Iranian Elections Show No Promise of Reform

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Sunday, March 09, 2008 9:16:42 PM
TEHRAN (al-Reuters) - Iranian students, who spearheaded a reform movement blunted by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's election in 2005, doubt that voting for a new parliament on Friday can promote real change.

Yasaman Nili, 23, who backed moderate former president Mohammad Khatami in previous elections, says she will vote from a sense of civic duty, not because she finds any of the contenders for the 290-seat parliament inspiring.

"I don't have a favorite candidate whom I know would change things for the better," the social science student told Reuters at her apartment in wealthy north Tehran.

"At the same time, things won't improve if everyone draws back from voting. If you decide to be indifferent, you have no right to object to problems," said Nili, who studies at Tehran's Alameh Tabatabai university.

The March 14 election will show whether Ahmadinejad's popularity has waned since he won power on promises of sharing Iran's oil wealth more fairly.

Ahmadinejad, criticized for his handling of an economy awash with petrodollars but struggling with double-digit inflation, has been accused of introducing tighter social restrictions and a crackdown on reformist students.

In the late 1990s, students formed a bastion of support for the social and political reforms promoted by Khatami but many students became disillusioned as reforms failed to materialize.

Moderates trying to make a comeback in next Friday's election complain that the odds are stacked against them because a hardline vetting body has barred some of their candidates.

Sitting on a sunny bench at Tehran University campus, graphics student Rezvan Talebzadeh said she would vote but doubted candidates would fulfil their campaign promises.

"I don't like any of the hopefuls, but I don't believe in being indifferent to what happens in my country," she said.

PARTY LABELS IRRELEVANT

Like many students in the Islamic state, where over half the population of 70 million is aged under 30, Talebzadeh cares more how lawmakers perform than how they are labeled.

"It's not important whether reformists or conservatives win. I will vote if I find a candidate with good plans, regardless of what party he belongs to," she said.

Parliament does not decide policy on major issues such as Iran's nuclear row with the West, but setbacks for Ahmadinejad's supporters in the assembly would signal disillusionment with his hardline agenda and could affect his prospects for re-election as president in 2009.

Maryam, an art student swathed in a black chador, did not think that casting her ballot would help combat the economic hardships she believes are suffocating personal freedom.

"My votes in the past did not change anything. We still suffer from cultural poverty," she said, making clear she felt people should opt for Islamic dress out of conviction.

"As time goes by, the economic conditions improve everywhere in the world except here."

Other students and activists echoed this loss of hope.

In 1999, students calling for change were at the centre of violent protests over the closure of a pro-reform newspaper, the worst unrest since the aftermath of the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

But activists say they lost hope, and became less active, after the Khatami era fell short of pledges to push through social and political change.

"The government is trying to encourage students to vote but there is little motive for them," said student activist Nariman Mostafavi. "Under Khatami ... many promises were never carried out. Students have lost their passion."

Iran's pro-democracy students have paid a heavy price in recent years and some of their leaders have fled the country or been put in jail by the clerical establishment.

JUST AN ILLUSION

Some, like a Tehran University student who gave his name only as Hadi, have no intention of voting.

"I don't know any of the candidates and I don't feel any need to get to know them," he said, lighting a cigarette.

"I've decided not to vote this time around. The promise of change in Iran is only an illusion."

Law student Reza Alavi said Ahmadinejad should be given more time to make his mark.

"Khatami ruled for eight years and he was given a chance to go all the way through with his policies. This government has done many good things for Iran. I will vote for Ahmadinejad to give him a fair chance."

Graduate student Mohsen, who also declined to give his family name, said it was worth voting if only to stave off more economic, social and political curbs.

"Students should vote. If I don't vote, others will and their choice could be much different from the kind of lawmakers I want to see in parliament," he said.

"I don't want to lose what little freedom we have won over the years and witness more hardships."

Student activist Ali Nikounesbati said some students would decide what to do based on this week's campaigning.

"Students have made no move to boycott the election, but the general atmosphere is cold," he said.
 
 
Cold indeed.  There can be little hope with the threat of being dragged from your home and stoned to death hangs heavily over all of Iran.  I'm surprised anyone leaves their house in that horrible country.  I reported recently on some poor fool who got thirty lashes for walking his dog in public.  Imagine what could happen if you accidently voted the wrong way.  Iran; second only to Saudi Arabia in its violent oppression of the citizenry.  Deplorable.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Venezuela and Colombia Embrace!

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Sunday, March 09, 2008 9:08:50 PM
CARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuela will immediately restore diplomacy with Colombia but ties are still fragile, the government said on Sunday, after this week's resolution of a regional dispute that had raised fears of war.

A Colombian raid on a Marxist guerrilla camp in Ecuador last week sparked the region's worst diplomatic crisis in years, with Venezuela and Ecuador sending troops to their borders with Colombia, their U.S.-backed neighbor.

Leftist Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez cut ties with Colombia but, following a handshake at a regional summit on Friday, promised to quickly withdraw the 10 army battalions he had sent to the border and normalize relations.

Colombia's March 1 raid on a Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, rebel camp killed over 20 fighters including the rebel's second in command, Raul Reyes.

The attack came just days after the FARC released four lawmakers they had held hostage for years in a deal negotiated by Chavez, who has good relations with the guerrillas.

The foreign ministry said on Sunday that Venezuela would send diplomats, including a soon-to-be-named new ambassador, back to Bogota immediately and was ready to receive Colombian diplomats "as soon as possible."

Despite all sides de-escalating the conflict in recent days, relations are still delicate between Colombia's pro-Washington government and left-wing nationalists in Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia.
 
 
Of course Hugo Chavez blames the United States for all this.  Heaven forbid we help Colombia kill terrorists in order to protect its people.  The Communist freaks of Venezuela, in my opinion, interfered in operations that were clearly none of their damned business.  Anything Chavez can do to stick his big fat blunted nose into a situation he will do.  As long as the cameras are on him he's happy, even if that means starting a war to do it.  I for one am sick of seeing that man's face on TV and in articles.  I can't believe I'm saying this, but Pat Robertson was right about him.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Obama's Yassir Man" by Texpat at The Lone Star Times

Posted by Cary Wesberry on Sunday, March 09, 2008 9:00:45 PM
Excerpts from Texpat's report at The Lone Star Times:

Police are looking for the editor of Afrique-Asie magazine, whose pro-Soviet line and support for certain Third World countries is said to have upset President Valery Giscard d’Estain, The Sunday Times of London reported.Egyptian-born Simon Malley, 47, his American wife Barbara and their three children reportedly have gone into hiding. They face expulsion for what officials describe as “political activities which do not correspond with, and even run contrary to, French interests in certain countries.”Afrique-Asie, which has a circulation of nearly 120,000 mostly in Africa and Latin America, is said to have received Soviet financial backing. Malley, a founder of the Egyptian Communist Party, arrived in France 11 years ago from the United States, where he worked for a Cairo newspaper.

So wrote the Washington Post on August 7, 1980, describing the travails of the Malley family, their grand adventures through the Leftist salons of Europe. Seventeen year old Robert Malley ended up in Switzerland with his family and returned to Paris with the election of the more friendly, socialist French President, Francois Mitterand.

Simon Malley, an Egytian-born Jew who rejected his faith and embraced Marxism, was the father of Robert and a crusader for the Palestinians and their terrorist leader, Yassir Arafat. As a frequent guest of the Malleys, Arafat was the beneficiary of much of Simon Malley’s writing and publishing efforts funded, according to the French government, by the communist Soviet Union.

Visiting the sins of the father upon the son would be an unfair burden were it not for the career chosen by young Robert. As National Security Council Director for Near East and South Asian Affairs during the Clinton administration and Special Assistant to the President for Arab-Israeli Affairs, Robert Malley was present during the talks at Camp David, which failed, causing great embarassment for the Clinton White House. Robert Malley is now a key adviser to the campaign of presidential candidate, Barack Obama.

Alone among the American and Israeli participants, Malley has publicly blamed the failure squarely upon Israel. A series of articles written with Palestinian adviser and cohort of Arafat, Hussein Agha, have sought to portray Israel as an imperialistic occupier of “colonies”, a word use he coined to describe disputed lands in the West Bank and Gaza.

 
 
Excellent reporting from writer Texpat at The Lone Star Times.  Well done Texpat; and well-written.  When The Lone Star Times is good, it's very good!  Hit the link directly above to read the entire report.  How many other Palestinian-loving-Communists does B. Hussein Obama have in his campaign?  Things that make you go "Oh my Dear God we're electing a terrorist appeasing nut-job to the Presidency!"
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12345678910…115116Next »