2400+ Iraqi war dead
World War II
The battle of Okinawa (April 1-July 2) - 50,000 American 200,000 Japanese dead
To retake the Philippians from the Japanese - 60,000 dead
Iwo Jima- 6821 American dead estimated 20,000+ Japanese dead.
D-Day- Omaha Beach- 3,000 people in 12 hours.
The Vietnam war. - 50,000 (20/day)
According to the worst war numbers I can find-- from, of all places, a site called antiwar.com -- total dead in the Iraq war on the American side is 2743. Dead from combat: 2235.
What I can't find anywhere are the numbers of the dead in Afghanistan. I did a search, and all I got were Iraq body count sites. I needed to ask a military expert I'm friends with, and he estimates between 350-500, although he thinks it might be even lower than 350. Essentially, it is lower than any war the US has ever fought.
Now, I have a question. People say nothing about the dead in Afghanistan. They do not honor the fallen in Iraq, but carp about the body count. Yet, we have sacrificed less blood in this entire war than in any major battle in World War II.
We lost more men on D-Day- June 6th, 1944- than in the ENTIRE 9/12/01- 10/9/06 timeframe. We lost more people on September 11th than in the whole war.
Why is it that the American dead in Iraq is worth more than the American dead in any other battle? Why is it that protestors crying out about simple numbers care more for Americans than for Iraqis? Why are Iraqis not worth dying for? What makes the Iraqi people LESS special?
Iraqis are so "useless" to the body counters that I've only seen "Iraqi civilians dead" counted... when they count terrorists killed. Are Iraqi civilians really considered the moral equivalent of the terrorists who kill them?
Every human life is precious, every one is special. American soldiers volunteer to be in harm's way. Even a man like Casey Sheehan, son of Cindy Sheehan, believed this, and deliberately stated that he fought for Iraqis.
The US shed blood for Philippinos, Japanese, German Jews, Soviets. Why not Iraqis?
For every one US soldier who has died, approximately 1,000 Iraqis died during Saddam's reign. Are they not worth it?
Even if the most wild, borderline psychotic numbers about Iraqi civilians dead are accurate, [50,000, from http://www.iraqbodycount.net/], taking into account that Saddam killed 80,000 people per year, we have still saved 190,000 civilians. Are they not worth it?
If you truly hate the war, and you cite the body count, what are you saying? Are you saying that Iraqis aren't equal to our men and women? Are you pleading a humanitarian cause for soldiers who volunteered to go into harm's way instead of civilians who get killed by dictators or terrorists?
The lives of our soldiers are not to be thrown away lightly. But to devalue what they fight for, to dismiss the Iraqis being defended, you devalue them. They're in the field to defend the Iraqi people.
People who cite the death toll say they do it to support the troops, but there are troops who want to stay and finish the job. Do they support them? Do these people truly and honestly support and honor THEM?
No honor is given them by throwing Molotov cocktails at police officers to protest the war.
Or by trying to set fire to buildings to "support the troops."
Or by rewriting what our soldiers say.
May I ask, for those of you who cite the death toll as a starting point to rally against the war, why?
I would submit that those people do not give a tinker's damn about the soldiers, but they feel that reducing soldiers to numbers would be good for emotional shock value. Could it be possible that they do not actually belittle the lives of the Iraqis saved, but also the lives of the soldiers lost? After all, how much could a a soldiers death be worth if the lives of 1,000 Iraq civilians just barely equal his life? Isn't his death worthless because the people he died for are all but worthless?
And could it be that these people, so eager to "bring the troops home," care nothing for the dead in Afghanistan? They don't even count in the news cycles. By this math of the human life, as calculated above, does this mean that soldiers who die in Iraq are worth more than those who die in Afghanistan? In which case, how much must an American soldier be worth in Afghani lives?
I would submit that the dead are worth more than their weight in gold, and that the people they've died for are worth just as much. I would also suggest that the protesters who hurl the body count out like so many cold and callous numbers do not care what happens, as long as their agendas are secured.
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Uranium, Wilson, Niger, and Iraq.
I came across an odd little fact recently. Several, to tell the truth. Most of them having to do with Joe Wilson, the person who tried to speak "Truth to power" at the Bush administration.
You may remember this little problem a while back. The story goes like this: Joe Wilson, Ambassador to Iraq during the Iraq war (1991), expert in the Middle East, is sent by Dick Cheney's office to go to Niger to find out whether or not Saddam has tried to procure Uranium from them. Wilson reports that there was no such attempt. After that, the evil Bushhitler administration sandbags Wilson, and blows the cover of his secret agent wife, Valerie Plame, because the evil Bush administration must cover their asses about their lies.
Um…problem.
Where to start…how about with the fact that Joe Wilson was NEVER an Ambassador. Look up in a Lexus Nexus search through the NYTimes for Wilson during 1991. His title was NOT Ambassador, it was "Deputy Chief of Mission." The Times described him as being more like a building superintendent, making sure the janitorial staff was fully stocked. He's such a Middle East expert, he speaks NONE of the languages.
Dick Cheney's office hadn't heard of Joe Wilson when he popped up claiming to have proof that Bush lied, kids died. In fact, no one was entirely certain why Joe Wilson, who was unemployed before being sent to Niger, was sent in the first place. He speaks none of the local languages, has zero skills in terms of investigation or spy skills. Basically, it became a matter of "Who sent this schlub?"
Enter the wife.
On his approved papers for Wilson's trip to Niger, there's one name that sticks out on the forms—the name of Valerie Plame, his wife, a CIA desk jockey. Her name was blown by someone named "Scooter" Libby— an underling in the VPs office, who claimed he didn't know what her ranking was. He had heard the name of Plame all over the beltway, so he naturally assumed that Valerie's CIA employment record wasn't a secret. Scooter made the assumption that Wilson's trip to Africa was a make-work project by Plame in an attempt to get the husband out of the house for a while, and said as much.
Valerie Plame's status with the CIA is "classified." However, that's the status of everyone down to and including the janitorial staff. She is not a covert agent. She took the bus to Langley every morning. Any idiot with a bus pass getting off at the next stop would know who she works for. Then again, most covert agents who don't want to be noticed also tend to shy away from Vanity Fair photospreads, like Ms. Plame.
Almost two and a half years later, the most they could get on "Scooter" was purgery—which, in a federal court, is defined as being interrogated one day, and give a slightly different answer to the same question when you're asked two years later.
Did I miss anything…oh, yes, the crucial, all important part—the uranium from Niger. The most important part is, "Was Wilson right?"
Wilson's finding were covered in the proof that Saddam was going for nukes. In fact, Wilson was too stupid to realize what he was saying.
Reading Wilson's report, you notice that all Saddam's agents in Niger were doing was to "increase trade with Niger," and "increase exports from Niger." After a simple AOL search, I looked up what DOES Niger export? I found SESRTCIC
Guess what the major export of Niger is?
Guess what industry employs over HALF of Niger's population and income?
One guess is all you need.
Uranium.
There's also a nice little book written by the head of Saddam's nuclear program from the late 1990s called "Saddam's Bomb Maker." It's remaindered now, but you should be able to find it in any Edward R. Hamilton bookstore.
Add this to the fact that they've been hauling out Uranium from Iraq by the ton [previous post], and I wonder exactly what Wilson will be doing with his spare time.
I hope a jail sentence.
I came across an odd little fact recently. Several, to tell the truth. Most of them having to do with Joe Wilson, the person who tried to speak "Truth to power" at the Bush administration.
You may remember this little problem a while back. The story goes like this: Joe Wilson, Ambassador to Iraq during the Iraq war (1991), expert in the Middle East, is sent by Dick Cheney's office to go to Niger to find out whether or not Saddam has tried to procure Uranium from them. Wilson reports that there was no such attempt. After that, the evil Bushhitler administration sandbags Wilson, and blows the cover of his secret agent wife, Valerie Plame, because the evil Bush administration must cover their asses about their lies.
Um…problem.
Where to start…how about with the fact that Joe Wilson was NEVER an Ambassador. Look up in a Lexus Nexus search through the NYTimes for Wilson during 1991. His title was NOT Ambassador, it was "Deputy Chief of Mission." The Times described him as being more like a building superintendent, making sure the janitorial staff was fully stocked. He's such a Middle East expert, he speaks NONE of the languages.
Dick Cheney's office hadn't heard of Joe Wilson when he popped up claiming to have proof that Bush lied, kids died. In fact, no one was entirely certain why Joe Wilson, who was unemployed before being sent to Niger, was sent in the first place. He speaks none of the local languages, has zero skills in terms of investigation or spy skills. Basically, it became a matter of "Who sent this schlub?"
Enter the wife.
On his approved papers for Wilson's trip to Niger, there's one name that sticks out on the forms—the name of Valerie Plame, his wife, a CIA desk jockey. Her name was blown by someone named "Scooter" Libby— an underling in the VPs office, who claimed he didn't know what her ranking was. He had heard the name of Plame all over the beltway, so he naturally assumed that Valerie's CIA employment record wasn't a secret. Scooter made the assumption that Wilson's trip to Africa was a make-work project by Plame in an attempt to get the husband out of the house for a while, and said as much.
Valerie Plame's status with the CIA is "classified." However, that's the status of everyone down to and including the janitorial staff. She is not a covert agent. She took the bus to Langley every morning. Any idiot with a bus pass getting off at the next stop would know who she works for. Then again, most covert agents who don't want to be noticed also tend to shy away from Vanity Fair photospreads, like Ms. Plame.
Almost two and a half years later, the most they could get on "Scooter" was purgery—which, in a federal court, is defined as being interrogated one day, and give a slightly different answer to the same question when you're asked two years later.
Did I miss anything…oh, yes, the crucial, all important part—the uranium from Niger. The most important part is, "Was Wilson right?"
Wilson's finding were covered in the proof that Saddam was going for nukes. In fact, Wilson was too stupid to realize what he was saying.
Reading Wilson's report, you notice that all Saddam's agents in Niger were doing was to "increase trade with Niger," and "increase exports from Niger." After a simple AOL search, I looked up what DOES Niger export? I found SESRTCIC
Guess what the major export of Niger is?
Guess what industry employs over HALF of Niger's population and income?
One guess is all you need.
Uranium.
There's also a nice little book written by the head of Saddam's nuclear program from the late 1990s called "Saddam's Bomb Maker." It's remaindered now, but you should be able to find it in any Edward R. Hamilton bookstore.
Add this to the fact that they've been hauling out Uranium from Iraq by the ton [previous post], and I wonder exactly what Wilson will be doing with his spare time.
I hope a jail sentence.
Sunday, October 08, 2006
Iraq WMDs-- for those who asked.
For those of you who've asked about one of the WMDs mentioned in my last column, I suggest reading the below. I found this while going through my old email.
For those of you who've asked about one of the WMDs mentioned in my last column, I suggest reading the below. I found this while going through my old email.
U.S. HAULED TONS OF URANIUM FROM IRAQ
July 8, 2004 -- The United States secretly shipped nearly two tons of low-enriched uranium which could be used for making dirty bombs out of Iraq last month, officials revealed.
In addition to the uranium, approximately 1,000 highly radioactive items were transferred last month from Iraq to an undisclosed U.S. Energy Department laboratory for analysis.
The airlift ended on June 23, five days before the United States transferred sovereignty to Iraq's new interim government.
U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham called the secret airlift "a major achievement" in an attempt to "keep potentially dangerous nuclear material out of the hands of terrorists."
But U.N. officials squawked at the removal, saying the International Atomic Energy Agency never OK'd the move.
"The American authorities just informed us of their intention to remove the materials, but they never sought authorization from us," an IAEA official said.
However, U.S. nuclear authorities said yesterday they had Iraqi approval and didn't need U.N. authorization. Post Wire Services
A really short history of Terrorism against US
Category: News and Politics
For those people who seem to think that Al-Qaida is the only people on the planet who want to kill us (and who think that Osama, himself, personally, is the mastermind and key to every plot on the planet), I suggest a brief bit of history.
November 1979: Muslim extremists (Iranian variety) seized the U.S. embassy in Iran and held 52 American hostages for 444 days, following Democrat Jimmy Carter's masterful foreign policy granting Islamic fanaticism its first real foothold in the Middle East. Six months later, Saddam Hussein takes over Iraq, confident that Carter will be just as active against him.
1982: Muslim extremists (mostly Hezbollah) began a nearly decade-long habit of taking Americans and Europeans hostage in Lebanon, killing William Buckley and holding Terry Anderson for 6 1/2 years.
April 1983: Muslim extremists (Islamic Jihad or Hezbollah) bombed the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, killing 16 Americans.
October 1983: Muslim extremists (Hezbollah) blew up the U.S. Marine barracks at the Beirut airport, killing 241 Marines.
December 1983: Muslim extremists (al-Dawa) blew up the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait, killing five and injuring 80.
September 1984: Muslim extremists (Hezbollah) exploded a truck bomb at the U.S. Embassy annex in Beirut, killing 24 people, including two U.S. servicemen.
December 1984: Muslim extremists (Hezbollah) hijacked a Kuwait Airways airplane, landed in Iran and demanded the release of the 17 members of al-Dawa who had been arrested for the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait, killing two Americans before the siege was over.
June 14, 1985: Muslim extremists (Hezbollah-- is anyone else detecting a theme?) hijacked TWA Flight 847 out of Athens, diverting it to Beirut, taking the passengers hostage in return for the release of the Kuwait 17 as well as another 700 prisoners held by Israel. When their demands were not met, the Muslims shot U.S. Navy diver Robert Dean Stethem and dumped his body on the tarmac.
October 1985: Muslim extremists (Palestine Liberation Front backed by Libya) seized an Italian cruise ship, the Achille Lauro, killing 69-year-old American Leon Klinghoffer by shooting him and then tossing his body overboard. The Italians let them get away, and they were later captured by American forces, and again let go by the Italians.
December 1985: Muslim extremists (backed by Libya) bombed airports in Rome and Vienna, killing 20 people, including five Americans.
April 1986: Muslim extremists (backed by Libya) bombed a discotheque frequented by U.S. servicemen in West Berlin, injuring hundreds and killing two, including a U.S. soldier.
December 1988: Muslim extremists (backed by Libya) bombed Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing all 259 on board and 11 on the ground.
(Then came an amazing pause in Muslim extremists' war on America when we won the Cold War, and thus depriving Islamic terrorists of their Soviet sponsors. Taking out terror sponsors, whether it's the Soviet Union or Iraq, slows them down, what a thought!)
February 1993: Muslim extremists (al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya, with involvement of friendly rival al-Qaida) set off a bomb in the basement of the World Trade Center, killing six and wounding more than 1,000.
Spring 1993: Muslim extremists (al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya, the Sudanese Islamic Front and at least one member of Hamas) plot to blow up the Lincoln and Holland tunnels, the U.N. complex, and the FBI's lower Manhattan headquarters.
November 1995: Muslim extremists (possibly Iranian "Party of God"-- which translates as Hezbollah) explode a car bomb at U.S. military headquarters in Saudi Arabia, killing five U.S. military servicemen.
June 1996: Muslim extremists (13 Saudis and a Lebanese member of Hezbollah, with al-Qaida) explode a truck bomb outside the Khobar Towers military complex, killing 19 American servicemen and injuring hundreds.
August 1998: Muslim extremists (al-Qaida) explode truck bombs at U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 and injuring thousands.
October 2000: Muslim extremists (al-Qaida) blow up the U.S. Navy destroyer USS Cole, killing 17 U.S. sailors.
Sept. 11, 2001
Category: News and Politics
For those people who seem to think that Al-Qaida is the only people on the planet who want to kill us (and who think that Osama, himself, personally, is the mastermind and key to every plot on the planet), I suggest a brief bit of history.
November 1979: Muslim extremists (Iranian variety) seized the U.S. embassy in Iran and held 52 American hostages for 444 days, following Democrat Jimmy Carter's masterful foreign policy granting Islamic fanaticism its first real foothold in the Middle East. Six months later, Saddam Hussein takes over Iraq, confident that Carter will be just as active against him.
1982: Muslim extremists (mostly Hezbollah) began a nearly decade-long habit of taking Americans and Europeans hostage in Lebanon, killing William Buckley and holding Terry Anderson for 6 1/2 years.
April 1983: Muslim extremists (Islamic Jihad or Hezbollah) bombed the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, killing 16 Americans.
October 1983: Muslim extremists (Hezbollah) blew up the U.S. Marine barracks at the Beirut airport, killing 241 Marines.
December 1983: Muslim extremists (al-Dawa) blew up the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait, killing five and injuring 80.
September 1984: Muslim extremists (Hezbollah) exploded a truck bomb at the U.S. Embassy annex in Beirut, killing 24 people, including two U.S. servicemen.
December 1984: Muslim extremists (Hezbollah) hijacked a Kuwait Airways airplane, landed in Iran and demanded the release of the 17 members of al-Dawa who had been arrested for the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait, killing two Americans before the siege was over.
June 14, 1985: Muslim extremists (Hezbollah-- is anyone else detecting a theme?) hijacked TWA Flight 847 out of Athens, diverting it to Beirut, taking the passengers hostage in return for the release of the Kuwait 17 as well as another 700 prisoners held by Israel. When their demands were not met, the Muslims shot U.S. Navy diver Robert Dean Stethem and dumped his body on the tarmac.
October 1985: Muslim extremists (Palestine Liberation Front backed by Libya) seized an Italian cruise ship, the Achille Lauro, killing 69-year-old American Leon Klinghoffer by shooting him and then tossing his body overboard. The Italians let them get away, and they were later captured by American forces, and again let go by the Italians.
December 1985: Muslim extremists (backed by Libya) bombed airports in Rome and Vienna, killing 20 people, including five Americans.
April 1986: Muslim extremists (backed by Libya) bombed a discotheque frequented by U.S. servicemen in West Berlin, injuring hundreds and killing two, including a U.S. soldier.
December 1988: Muslim extremists (backed by Libya) bombed Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing all 259 on board and 11 on the ground.
(Then came an amazing pause in Muslim extremists' war on America when we won the Cold War, and thus depriving Islamic terrorists of their Soviet sponsors. Taking out terror sponsors, whether it's the Soviet Union or Iraq, slows them down, what a thought!)
February 1993: Muslim extremists (al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya, with involvement of friendly rival al-Qaida) set off a bomb in the basement of the World Trade Center, killing six and wounding more than 1,000.
Spring 1993: Muslim extremists (al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya, the Sudanese Islamic Front and at least one member of Hamas) plot to blow up the Lincoln and Holland tunnels, the U.N. complex, and the FBI's lower Manhattan headquarters.
November 1995: Muslim extremists (possibly Iranian "Party of God"-- which translates as Hezbollah) explode a car bomb at U.S. military headquarters in Saudi Arabia, killing five U.S. military servicemen.
June 1996: Muslim extremists (13 Saudis and a Lebanese member of Hezbollah, with al-Qaida) explode a truck bomb outside the Khobar Towers military complex, killing 19 American servicemen and injuring hundreds.
August 1998: Muslim extremists (al-Qaida) explode truck bombs at U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 and injuring thousands.
October 2000: Muslim extremists (al-Qaida) blow up the U.S. Navy destroyer USS Cole, killing 17 U.S. sailors.
Sept. 11, 2001
Some Things Never Change, Do they?
(The following can be footnoted in David Dalin’s The Myth of Hitlers Pope, Ralph McInerny’s The Defamation of Pius XII, or Roy Schoeman’s Salvation is from the Jews)
Ann Coulter noted recently the intriguing diary entries of British jihadist Zeeshan Siddique, on April 10th of 2005. Siddique was captured that April in Pakistan by that country's security forces. His diary is a sort of Plan-a-Jihad journal, which included his commentary on the Popes death, "Allah will throw him in hell."
This is, of course, after Islamists tried to kill John Paul II (a plot with pointman Ramzi Yousef, World Trade Center bomber from the first attack, and backed by a certain Osama bin Laden). Question: what did the Pope ever do to these people?
The answer lies with the main problems with the Middle East.And believe it or not, the problems with the Middle East started a while ago. You may not believe that if you’re part of the left crowd, but its true.
Whatever do I mean by that? Do I mean, as Bernard Lewis does in his What Went Wrong? that the Middle East never grew out of the Ottoman Empire mentality that they rule the world? That’s certainly part of it, and I wouldn’t even presume to question the scholarship of a man like Lewis.It is, in fact, far worse than anyone supposes. The trouble with the Middle East, in part, can be traced to the Nazis.
No, I am not being allegorical, but literal. You may have heard of the myth of Hitler’s Pope (Which happens to be a very nice book by Rabbi David Dalin, btw), that Eugenio Pacelli, aka Pius XII, worked with, for, or around Hitler in support of the final solution of the Holocaust. Daily readers (all four of them) know my opinion on that subject,. This, of course, is a myth started by former Nazi Rolf Hoccuth, and perpetuated by liars tramps and thieves like John Cornwell, James Carroll, Gary Wills, Susan Zuccolti, Evan Katz (who was sentenced to jail for his lies), and an ever growing list of liberal Catholics who’d like to see the Catholic Church swing from the nearest tree (thats crucifixion, not hanging).
What you never hear about is what Rabbi Dalin labels Hitler’s Mufti. To be more precise, he is properly called the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini. Al-Husseini was installed by the English, who are themselves not known for being very pro-Semetic. Remember, in the 1920s, as a prize of World War I, Palestine was a mandate of Britain, they ran it and everything in it. Hajj al-Husseini was the recognized leader of the Palestinians, and in April 1920 led a rampage against local Jews, wounding 211, and killing five. The British convicted him, but ignored the whole incident and made him Grand Mufti two years later.
Al-Husseini called for an anti-Jewish jihad in Palestine during the 1930s, saying "Murder the Jews! Murder them all!," starting riots in 1929 and 1936-1939. He would later move his rhetorical style to Berlin radio, stating in one “Kill the Jews, Kill them with your hands, kill them with your teeth! This is well pleasing to Allah!” (reminiscent of Eduardo Chianelli’s exhortation in the film Gunga Din: Kill for the Love of Kali! Kill for the love of killing! KILL! KILL! KILL!)
Al-Husseini’s connection with Hitler begins in 1937, when he sent emissaries to Berlin, first lending support, then suggesting collaboration. In this he was a little slow. When the German anti-Jewish laws went into effect in 1934, the Islamic world sent them congratulations. Husseini would become friends with Adolf Eichmann (the banal evil that engineered the Holocaust logistically), and pushed for the extermination of Jews as soon as possible.
It is not surprising that Eichmann was also sent to meet with the Irgun, one of the lead armed Zionist groups, the Nazis wanted Jews out of Germany, and Irgun was happy to catch them in Israel. However, al-Husseini had no problem with Jews coming to Palestine, as long as they would die. He was also sent to Iraq to do a pro-Nazi rally there, but was tossed out (more on Iraq later).SS chief Heinrich Himmler took Husseini on tours of the death camps, and the mufti pushed for greater diligence in running the gas chambers. Eichmann’s deputy Dieter Wisliceny mentioned that the mufti played a role in the decision to exterminate the European Jews. At the Nuremburg trials, he stated that the mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler one of Eichmann’s best friendsHe also had a Muslim clerical school in Dresden, where Muslims could be trained in Nazism, and introduce it to the Middle East. In exchange for this service, Husseini went into Bosnia to recruit Muslims for the SS, who wore specially marked fezzes with the swastika on them. You can also see photos of Husseini in Bosnia inspecting the SS troops (see: Shoeman, 258. If you want to see more research on Muslim/Arab Nazis, hit the Yad vashem archives , or the Simon Wiesenthal Center. The Muslim SS Hanjar (sword) unit massacred about 90% of Bosnia’s Jews.
Husseini made it to Egypt after the war, hiding there until the day that bastard died in 1974.So what? Why does Mufti al-Husseini matter today? What’s he to do with the Middle East? Well, lets start with the fact that the grand mufti imported Nazi experts to train young Palestinians in guerilla tactics, the start of a group we know as the Palestinian Liberation Organization.During the Six Day War in 1967, Israelis found Egyptian prisoners carrying issues of Hitler’s “Mein Kampf”. Ironically, it had been translated into Arabic by a man known as el-Hadjaka former Nazi propagandist Lius Heiden. Mein Kampf would be republished by Yassir Arafat’s Palestinian Authority in 2001 and was an instant bestseller throughout the Middle Eastin 1999, it was sixth on the bestseller list in Palestine (and this is before the reprint). By the way, did I mention that Schindler’s List is banned?
And the legacy of al-Husseini lives on today, in the form of his nephew, Abd al-Rahman abd al-Bauf Arafat al-Qud al-Husseini. Yes, I know, if you blink you miss the key word, Arafat. Yes, THAT Arafat.Then there’s the Grand Mufti’s grandson, Skeikh Ekrima Sabri, the CURRENT Mufti of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. He said “The figure of 6 million Jews killed during the Holocaust is exaggerated. It was a lot less. It’s not my fault if Hitler hated the Jews. Anyway, they hate them just about everywhere.” Funny, Pope John Paul II never visited the Temple Mount, but he DID visit the Wailing Wall, which is right next door.
Anyway, remember how I mentioned that pro-Nazi rally that got Husseini tossed out of Iraq? One of those rally members was a man named Khayrallah Tulfah. After the war, he lived with his nephew, and in the main room of his house he had an idolized portrait of Hitler on the wall. This nephew would grow up to be one mean and nasty fellow, in fact, one of his mistresses noted that he would look himself in the mirror and state “I am Saddam Hussein. Heil Hilter!”
And let us not forget Gamal Nasser, who helped the Nazis in Egypt during the war, and who later led the Six Day War against Israel. He even adopted the slogan “One folk, One party, One leader.” Sigg Heil! His successor, Anwar Sadat, also had ties to the Reich. SS General Oskar Dirlewanger, who crushed the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, was Nasser’s personal bodyguard.
Johannes von Leers, Goebbels main man, was put in charge of Egypt’s Ministry of Information in 1955. Gestapo man Hans Becher went on to become a police instructor in Egypt. Second Lieutenant Wilhelm Boerner, a guard at Mauthausen concentration camp trained members of the Palestine Liberation Front.And lets not forget that the Socialist nationalist party of Syria had a Furher and their banner donned the swastika as well.So, the next time someone calls bin Laden and co Islamofascists, theres a reason for it.
(The following can be footnoted in David Dalin’s The Myth of Hitlers Pope, Ralph McInerny’s The Defamation of Pius XII, or Roy Schoeman’s Salvation is from the Jews)
Ann Coulter noted recently the intriguing diary entries of British jihadist Zeeshan Siddique, on April 10th of 2005. Siddique was captured that April in Pakistan by that country's security forces. His diary is a sort of Plan-a-Jihad journal, which included his commentary on the Popes death, "Allah will throw him in hell."
This is, of course, after Islamists tried to kill John Paul II (a plot with pointman Ramzi Yousef, World Trade Center bomber from the first attack, and backed by a certain Osama bin Laden). Question: what did the Pope ever do to these people?
The answer lies with the main problems with the Middle East.And believe it or not, the problems with the Middle East started a while ago. You may not believe that if you’re part of the left crowd, but its true.
Whatever do I mean by that? Do I mean, as Bernard Lewis does in his What Went Wrong? that the Middle East never grew out of the Ottoman Empire mentality that they rule the world? That’s certainly part of it, and I wouldn’t even presume to question the scholarship of a man like Lewis.It is, in fact, far worse than anyone supposes. The trouble with the Middle East, in part, can be traced to the Nazis.
No, I am not being allegorical, but literal. You may have heard of the myth of Hitler’s Pope (Which happens to be a very nice book by Rabbi David Dalin, btw), that Eugenio Pacelli, aka Pius XII, worked with, for, or around Hitler in support of the final solution of the Holocaust. Daily readers (all four of them) know my opinion on that subject,. This, of course, is a myth started by former Nazi Rolf Hoccuth, and perpetuated by liars tramps and thieves like John Cornwell, James Carroll, Gary Wills, Susan Zuccolti, Evan Katz (who was sentenced to jail for his lies), and an ever growing list of liberal Catholics who’d like to see the Catholic Church swing from the nearest tree (thats crucifixion, not hanging).
What you never hear about is what Rabbi Dalin labels Hitler’s Mufti. To be more precise, he is properly called the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini. Al-Husseini was installed by the English, who are themselves not known for being very pro-Semetic. Remember, in the 1920s, as a prize of World War I, Palestine was a mandate of Britain, they ran it and everything in it. Hajj al-Husseini was the recognized leader of the Palestinians, and in April 1920 led a rampage against local Jews, wounding 211, and killing five. The British convicted him, but ignored the whole incident and made him Grand Mufti two years later.
Al-Husseini called for an anti-Jewish jihad in Palestine during the 1930s, saying "Murder the Jews! Murder them all!," starting riots in 1929 and 1936-1939. He would later move his rhetorical style to Berlin radio, stating in one “Kill the Jews, Kill them with your hands, kill them with your teeth! This is well pleasing to Allah!” (reminiscent of Eduardo Chianelli’s exhortation in the film Gunga Din: Kill for the Love of Kali! Kill for the love of killing! KILL! KILL! KILL!)
Al-Husseini’s connection with Hitler begins in 1937, when he sent emissaries to Berlin, first lending support, then suggesting collaboration. In this he was a little slow. When the German anti-Jewish laws went into effect in 1934, the Islamic world sent them congratulations. Husseini would become friends with Adolf Eichmann (the banal evil that engineered the Holocaust logistically), and pushed for the extermination of Jews as soon as possible.
It is not surprising that Eichmann was also sent to meet with the Irgun, one of the lead armed Zionist groups, the Nazis wanted Jews out of Germany, and Irgun was happy to catch them in Israel. However, al-Husseini had no problem with Jews coming to Palestine, as long as they would die. He was also sent to Iraq to do a pro-Nazi rally there, but was tossed out (more on Iraq later).SS chief Heinrich Himmler took Husseini on tours of the death camps, and the mufti pushed for greater diligence in running the gas chambers. Eichmann’s deputy Dieter Wisliceny mentioned that the mufti played a role in the decision to exterminate the European Jews. At the Nuremburg trials, he stated that the mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler one of Eichmann’s best friendsHe also had a Muslim clerical school in Dresden, where Muslims could be trained in Nazism, and introduce it to the Middle East. In exchange for this service, Husseini went into Bosnia to recruit Muslims for the SS, who wore specially marked fezzes with the swastika on them. You can also see photos of Husseini in Bosnia inspecting the SS troops (see: Shoeman, 258. If you want to see more research on Muslim/Arab Nazis, hit the Yad vashem archives , or the Simon Wiesenthal Center. The Muslim SS Hanjar (sword) unit massacred about 90% of Bosnia’s Jews.
Husseini made it to Egypt after the war, hiding there until the day that bastard died in 1974.So what? Why does Mufti al-Husseini matter today? What’s he to do with the Middle East? Well, lets start with the fact that the grand mufti imported Nazi experts to train young Palestinians in guerilla tactics, the start of a group we know as the Palestinian Liberation Organization.During the Six Day War in 1967, Israelis found Egyptian prisoners carrying issues of Hitler’s “Mein Kampf”. Ironically, it had been translated into Arabic by a man known as el-Hadjaka former Nazi propagandist Lius Heiden. Mein Kampf would be republished by Yassir Arafat’s Palestinian Authority in 2001 and was an instant bestseller throughout the Middle Eastin 1999, it was sixth on the bestseller list in Palestine (and this is before the reprint). By the way, did I mention that Schindler’s List is banned?
And the legacy of al-Husseini lives on today, in the form of his nephew, Abd al-Rahman abd al-Bauf Arafat al-Qud al-Husseini. Yes, I know, if you blink you miss the key word, Arafat. Yes, THAT Arafat.Then there’s the Grand Mufti’s grandson, Skeikh Ekrima Sabri, the CURRENT Mufti of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. He said “The figure of 6 million Jews killed during the Holocaust is exaggerated. It was a lot less. It’s not my fault if Hitler hated the Jews. Anyway, they hate them just about everywhere.” Funny, Pope John Paul II never visited the Temple Mount, but he DID visit the Wailing Wall, which is right next door.
Anyway, remember how I mentioned that pro-Nazi rally that got Husseini tossed out of Iraq? One of those rally members was a man named Khayrallah Tulfah. After the war, he lived with his nephew, and in the main room of his house he had an idolized portrait of Hitler on the wall. This nephew would grow up to be one mean and nasty fellow, in fact, one of his mistresses noted that he would look himself in the mirror and state “I am Saddam Hussein. Heil Hilter!”
And let us not forget Gamal Nasser, who helped the Nazis in Egypt during the war, and who later led the Six Day War against Israel. He even adopted the slogan “One folk, One party, One leader.” Sigg Heil! His successor, Anwar Sadat, also had ties to the Reich. SS General Oskar Dirlewanger, who crushed the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, was Nasser’s personal bodyguard.
Johannes von Leers, Goebbels main man, was put in charge of Egypt’s Ministry of Information in 1955. Gestapo man Hans Becher went on to become a police instructor in Egypt. Second Lieutenant Wilhelm Boerner, a guard at Mauthausen concentration camp trained members of the Palestine Liberation Front.And lets not forget that the Socialist nationalist party of Syria had a Furher and their banner donned the swastika as well.So, the next time someone calls bin Laden and co Islamofascists, theres a reason for it.
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Politically Incorrect fact of the day Category
Politically Incorrect fact of the day, #1: Stem cells.
Stem cells work. They are used to cure actual diseases RIGHT THIS MOMENT. I mean that, literally. In a May 2005 article in Citizen Magazine, you can see the list of things that stem cells cure. It cures cirrhosis of the liver, paralysis, inernal organs, luekemia. Two women, years before Christopher Reeve died, were cured using stem cells...
However, it only works with ADULT stem cells. Embryonic stem cells only help embryos turn into children. Embryonic stem cell research only helps people who'd like to see fewer children in the world.
ADULT STEMS CELLS Repairs spinal cord injuries with nasal and sinus stem cells-- in fully formed adult.
They reverse type 1 diabetes (at the moment, just in mice) with adult spleen cells. I'd like the FDA to approve THAT before my father dies from diabetes. (You hear me, FDA?)
Crohn's disease, a rather nasty virus, can be put into remission with the patient's own blood stem cells. Lupus can be put into remission in a similar fashion.
Umbilical cord blood, from a fully developed and BORN child, treats sickle cell anemia and puts leukemia into remission.
Stem cells from adult bone marrow can repair heart muscles in cases of congestive heart failure. Skeletal muscle cells restore weak heart muscles. Bone marrow cells heal bone fractures.
Ocular SURFACE cells [ie: epidermal cells from the eye, for you CSI fans] restores sight to the blind. Even stems cells using muscles from the armpit heal urinary incontinence.
Diseases cured by adult stem cells: 80 and counting.
People cured by embronic stem cells: zero, and counting.
People killed by the embryonic stem cell research, 1.3 million children aborted per year since Roe. Vs. Wade. And counting.
And now you know why embronic stem cells require federal funding: if it were a real cure, a true solution to anything, it would be funded by every medical research company on the planet. As it is, governments are the only people stupid enough to even consider it.
Politically Incorrect fact of the day, #1: Stem cells.
Stem cells work. They are used to cure actual diseases RIGHT THIS MOMENT. I mean that, literally. In a May 2005 article in Citizen Magazine, you can see the list of things that stem cells cure. It cures cirrhosis of the liver, paralysis, inernal organs, luekemia. Two women, years before Christopher Reeve died, were cured using stem cells...
However, it only works with ADULT stem cells. Embryonic stem cells only help embryos turn into children. Embryonic stem cell research only helps people who'd like to see fewer children in the world.
ADULT STEMS CELLS Repairs spinal cord injuries with nasal and sinus stem cells-- in fully formed adult.
They reverse type 1 diabetes (at the moment, just in mice) with adult spleen cells. I'd like the FDA to approve THAT before my father dies from diabetes. (You hear me, FDA?)
Crohn's disease, a rather nasty virus, can be put into remission with the patient's own blood stem cells. Lupus can be put into remission in a similar fashion.
Umbilical cord blood, from a fully developed and BORN child, treats sickle cell anemia and puts leukemia into remission.
Stem cells from adult bone marrow can repair heart muscles in cases of congestive heart failure. Skeletal muscle cells restore weak heart muscles. Bone marrow cells heal bone fractures.
Ocular SURFACE cells [ie: epidermal cells from the eye, for you CSI fans] restores sight to the blind. Even stems cells using muscles from the armpit heal urinary incontinence.
Diseases cured by adult stem cells: 80 and counting.
People cured by embronic stem cells: zero, and counting.
People killed by the embryonic stem cell research, 1.3 million children aborted per year since Roe. Vs. Wade. And counting.
And now you know why embronic stem cells require federal funding: if it were a real cure, a true solution to anything, it would be funded by every medical research company on the planet. As it is, governments are the only people stupid enough to even consider it.
Friday, July 14, 2006
Treasonous, slimy behavior. It’s something I would expect out of Cold War communist spies like Alger Hiss, or Harry Hopkins. This is the sort of thing I expect out of the French, or the United Nations.
But then there’s the New York Times. Since 2002, their stock has dropped 55%, and is there any wonder given their behavior?
In December, 2001, the terror-funding Holy Land Foundation was tipped off by "a veteran New York Times foreign correspondent …that the FBI was about to raid its office … endangering the lives of federal agents." He was nice enough to tip them off on the day before. I can just see the amount of paper shredded and burned now, can’t you?
That same month, Times reporter Philip Shenon blew a Dec. 14, 2001, raid of the Global Relief Foundation. The much vaunted Patrick Fitzgerald, the man who’s been sent to prosecute on the Valeria Plame affair, said in an Aug. 7, 2002, "It has been conclusively established that Global Relief Foundation learned of the search from reporter Philip Shenon of The New York Times," U.S. attorney wrote letter to the Times' legal department.
And what do my wondering eyes note? The Global Relief Foundation (GRF) was designated a terror-financing organization in October 2002 by the Treasury Department, which reported that GRF "has connections to, has provided support for, and has provided assistance to Usama Bin Ladin, the al Qaida Network, and other known terrorist groups."
The Muslim charity had "received funding from individuals associated with al Qaida. GRF officials have had extensive contacts with a close associate of Usama Bin Ladin, who has been convicted in a U.S. court for his role in the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania." Moreover, the Treasury Department said, "GRF members have dealt with officials of the Taliban, while the Taliban was subject to international sanctions."
Those would be Clinton sanctions, mind you. It’s not just a Bush problem.
Shenon's then-colleague, Judith Miller, had placed a similar call to another Muslim terrorist-front financier, the Holy Land Foundation, a few weeks before Shenon's call to the GRF. She was supposedly asking for "comment" on an impending freeze of their assets. According to Fitzgerald in court papers, Miller allegedly also warned them that "government action was imminent." The FBI raided the Holy Land Foundation's offices the day after Miller's article was published in the Times.
The Times' reporters -- surprise, surprise -- refuse to cooperate with investigators trying to identify the leakers. The government is appealing a ruling protecting the loose-lipped reporters' phone records.
And that’s just one incident. Let’s get even more recent, shall we?
Last year, the Times revealed a top secret program tracking phone calls connected to numbers found in 9/11 architect Khalid Shaikh Mohammed's cell phone. That would be a list we would like to follow up on, don’t you think?
We're in a battle for our survival and we don't even know who the enemy is half the time. As Liberals constantly remind us, Islam is a "Religion of Peace." One very promising method of distinguishing the "Religion of Peace" Muslims from the "Slit Their Throats" Muslims is by following the al-Qaida money trail. But now we've lost that ability — thanks to The New York Times.
In the latest of a long list of formerly top-secret government anti-terrorism operations that have been revealed by the Times, last week the paper printed the details of a government program tracking terrorists' financial transactions that has already led to the capture of major terrorists and their handmaidens in the U.S. It’s called the SWIFT program. Basically, follow the money.
And then they released an article on June 22nd, saying
The blabbermouths who have just blown the cover on this program don't seem to care that they've sabotaged a successful counterterrorism tool:
Now all their careful efforts have been destroyed by Bush-deranged reporters who fashion themselves the true protectors of America. Here's editor Bill Keller,the newspaper's executive editor, explaning why he ignored the Bush administration's argument for keeping the legal program secret: "We have listened closely to the administration's arguments for withholding this information, and given them the most serious and respectful consideration. We remain convinced that the administration's extraordinary access to this vast repository of international financial data, however carefully targeted use of it may be, is a matter of public interest."
Did I miss something? These yoyos knew it was a national security SECRET. They used the words “A secret Bush administration program.” But because it’s of public interest, it has to be broadcasted from the halls of Montezuma to the caves of Afghanistan?
But then, suddenly, the Times blinked and apparently thought, “Wait a moment, maybe we could be shot for treason for doing this.” And then started backpedadling like mad.
New York Times ombudsman Byron Calame's belated defense of the Times' expose of the monitoring of the SWIFT banking program contained this revealing passage:
Hmm. What was that headline over Lichtblau's story again? Oh, yeah: "Bank Data Sifted in Secret by U.S. to block terror." Meanwhile, finance regulators and top government officials in Belgium (who apparently aren't among the "hundreds, if not thousands" who knew about the program) have ordered a probe into SWIFT, which is regulated by the Belgian central bank and answers to Belgian law. Bush-undermining Eurowheedlers are launching a debate in parliament over the program next week, and a private human rights lobbying group has filed formal complaints against the SWIFT banking consortium in 32 countries.
Former September 11 Commission co-chairman Thomas Kean, who was briefed on the terrorist-finance tracking program and asked Times executive editor Bill Keller not to disclose it, called it “a good program, one that was legal, one that was not violating anybody’s civil liberties, and something the U.S. government should be doing to make us safer.” When asked whether publication of details about the program did any damage, Kean answered, “I think it’s over. Terrorists read the newspapers. Once the program became known, then obviously the terrorists were not going to use these methods any more.” And by the way, the other co-chairman of the 9/11 Commission, Democrat Lee Hamilton, also asked the Times not to publish.
To quote one particular constitutional lawyer,
So, the Times has no problem splattering national security secrets all over the place. NSA secrets, no problem. Money trails, no problem.
WMDs found in Iraq—whoa, hold up there now, let’s not be hasty.
On December 01, 2005, I noted a few items found in Iraq. I elaborated on the material found.
1.8 tons of partially enriched uranium.
Stockpiles of RDX.
1,500 barrels of miscellaneous bioweapons and chemical crap you really don't want in you backyard, or even the same hemisphere--
VX nerve gas [for full visual effects, see the film "The Rock"].
Henta virus-- a hemorragic virus that's airborn [think airborn Ebola, you have an idea].
Anthrax... I don't think I need to explain anthrax, I hope.
In June, 2004, the United Nations weapons inspectors confirmed not merely that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, but that he smuggled them out of his country, before, during and after the war.
The UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) briefed the Security Council on Saddam's dismantling of missile and WMD sites before and during the war. UNMOVIC executive chairman Demetrius Perricos detailed not only the export of thousands of tons of missile components, nuclear reactor vessels and fermenters for chemical and biological warheads, but also the discovery of many (but not most) of these items - with UN inspection tags still on them -- as far afield as Jordan, Turkey and even Holland.
And somehow, Syria doesn’t rate a mention on this list. Curious, that. Iraq's western neighbor Syria has its own Baath Party, just like Saddam's, and refused even the thought of an UNMOVIC inspection. Israeli intelligence reported the large-scale smuggling of Saddam's WMD program across the Syrian border since at least two months before the war.
This should have been the biggest news story of 2004. Yet you haven't heard about it, have you?
Even Canada's former Prime Minister Paul Martin -- a socialist and no friend of America—addressed a group of 700 university researchers and business leaders in Montreal in May of 2004. Martin stated terrorists acquired WMDs from Saddam. “The fact is that there is now, we know well, a proliferation of nuclear weapons, and that many weapons that Saddam Huseein had, we don't know where they are…. [T]errorists have access to all of them,” the Canadian premier warned.
In April 26th, 2004, Jordanian intelligence broke up an al Qaeda conspiracy to detonate a large chemical device in the capital city of Amman. Directed by al Qaeda terrorist leader Abu al-Zarqawi – now deceased-- the plotters sought to use a massive explosion to spread a “toxic cloud”, meant to wipe out the U.S. embassy, the Jordanian prime minister's office, the Jordanian intelligence headquarters, and at least 20,000 civilians (and only 3,000 died on 9/11). Over twenty tons of chemical weapons were seized from the conspirators, who were just days away from carrying out their plot.
Where does twenty tons of nerve gas and sarin came from? Wal -Mart? In a July 2003 interview with Larry King, even Bill Clinton said “it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there [was]…a substantial amount of biological and chemical material unaccounted for” in Iraq. Every intelligence agency in the world -- French, British, German, Russian, Czech, you name it -- agreed before the war; Jordanian intelligence can certainly confirm their opinion today.”
At current count, the United States has found 500 chemical weapons in Iraq since 2003. Including the mustard gas, sarin nerve agent, etc. And not only that, there is evidence that there’s even more out there.
So, just to recap: according to the NYTimes, US government programs that can get civilians, army officers, cops, and FBI agents killed are okay to be broadcast to the general public. Anything that can help terrorists get away with murder, escape detection and prosecution, is also safe to be broadcasted to the world at large. However, doing anything that could be construed as supporting the work of any non-terrorist—like the UNMOVIC, the USArmy, the FBI, the treasury department, etc, is supposed to be buried.
Got that?
Links:
Michelle Malkin · June 24, 2006 10:07 PM
The Editors on Leaks on National Review Online
A syndicated column
Terrorist tiping times
Stephen Spruiell
The NYTimes has in-house produced video showcasing Licthblau as he "reveals a secret Bush administration program to access to financial records."
ABP:
Bryan Preston:
Patterico:
More Michelle Malkin [http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_27266841.shtml]
Jeff Goldstein:
GOP Senators speak out on the dangers of classifed leaks. A House GOP resolution is in the works. Howard Kurtz plays the violin for the NYTimes/LATimes. Hugh Hewitt's not having it.
The Los Angeles Times thumbs its nose and national security:
Contact info:
Send a letter to the editor by e-mailing letters@nytimes.com or faxing (212)556-3622.
Snail mail:
Letters to the EditorThe New York Times229 West 43rd StreetNew York, NY 10036
But then there’s the New York Times. Since 2002, their stock has dropped 55%, and is there any wonder given their behavior?
In December, 2001, the terror-funding Holy Land Foundation was tipped off by "a veteran New York Times foreign correspondent …that the FBI was about to raid its office … endangering the lives of federal agents." He was nice enough to tip them off on the day before. I can just see the amount of paper shredded and burned now, can’t you?
That same month, Times reporter Philip Shenon blew a Dec. 14, 2001, raid of the Global Relief Foundation. The much vaunted Patrick Fitzgerald, the man who’s been sent to prosecute on the Valeria Plame affair, said in an Aug. 7, 2002, "It has been conclusively established that Global Relief Foundation learned of the search from reporter Philip Shenon of The New York Times," U.S. attorney wrote letter to the Times' legal department.
And what do my wondering eyes note? The Global Relief Foundation (GRF) was designated a terror-financing organization in October 2002 by the Treasury Department, which reported that GRF "has connections to, has provided support for, and has provided assistance to Usama Bin Ladin, the al Qaida Network, and other known terrorist groups."
The Muslim charity had "received funding from individuals associated with al Qaida. GRF officials have had extensive contacts with a close associate of Usama Bin Ladin, who has been convicted in a U.S. court for his role in the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania." Moreover, the Treasury Department said, "GRF members have dealt with officials of the Taliban, while the Taliban was subject to international sanctions."
Those would be Clinton sanctions, mind you. It’s not just a Bush problem.
Shenon's then-colleague, Judith Miller, had placed a similar call to another Muslim terrorist-front financier, the Holy Land Foundation, a few weeks before Shenon's call to the GRF. She was supposedly asking for "comment" on an impending freeze of their assets. According to Fitzgerald in court papers, Miller allegedly also warned them that "government action was imminent." The FBI raided the Holy Land Foundation's offices the day after Miller's article was published in the Times.
The Times' reporters -- surprise, surprise -- refuse to cooperate with investigators trying to identify the leakers. The government is appealing a ruling protecting the loose-lipped reporters' phone records.
And that’s just one incident. Let’s get even more recent, shall we?
Last year, the Times revealed a top secret program tracking phone calls connected to numbers found in 9/11 architect Khalid Shaikh Mohammed's cell phone. That would be a list we would like to follow up on, don’t you think?
We're in a battle for our survival and we don't even know who the enemy is half the time. As Liberals constantly remind us, Islam is a "Religion of Peace." One very promising method of distinguishing the "Religion of Peace" Muslims from the "Slit Their Throats" Muslims is by following the al-Qaida money trail. But now we've lost that ability — thanks to The New York Times.
In the latest of a long list of formerly top-secret government anti-terrorism operations that have been revealed by the Times, last week the paper printed the details of a government program tracking terrorists' financial transactions that has already led to the capture of major terrorists and their handmaidens in the U.S. It’s called the SWIFT program. Basically, follow the money.
And then they released an article on June 22nd, saying
“Under a secret Bush administration program initiated weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, counterterrorism officials have gained access to financial records from a vast international database and examined banking transactions involving thousands of Americans and others in the United States, according to government and industry officials.
The program is limited, government officials say, to tracing transactions of people suspected of having ties to Al Qaeda by reviewing records from the nerve center of the global banking industry, a Belgian cooperative that routes about $6 trillion daily between banks, brokerages, stock exchanges and other institutions. The records mostly involve wire transfers and other methods of moving money overseas and into and out of the United States. Most routine financial transactions confined to this country are not in the database.
Viewed by the Bush administration as a vital tool, the program has played a hidden role in domestic and foreign terrorism investigations since 2001 and helped in the capture of the most wanted Qaeda figure in Southeast Asia, the officials said.”
The blabbermouths who have just blown the cover on this program don't seem to care that they've sabotaged a successful counterterrorism tool:
“[The program] has provided clues to money trails and ties between possible terrorists and groups financing them, the officials said. In some instances, they said, the program has pointed them to new suspects, while in others it has buttressed cases already under investigation.
Among the successes was the capture of a Qaeda operative, Riduan Isamuddin, better known as Hambali, believed to be the mastermind of the 2002 bombing of a Bali resort, several officials said. The Swift data identified a previously unknown figure in Southeast Asia who had financial dealings with a person suspected of being a member of Al Qaeda; that link helped locate Hambali in Thailand in 2003, they said.
In the United States, the program has provided financial data in investigations into possible domestic terrorist cells as well as inquiries of Islamic charities with suspected of having links to extremists, the officials said.
The data also helped identify a Brooklyn man who was convicted on terrorism-related charges last year, the officials said. The man, Uzair Paracha, who worked at a New York import business, aided a Qaeda operative in Pakistan by agreeing to launder $200,000 through a Karachi bank, prosecutors said.
In terrorism prosecutions, intelligence officials have been careful to "sanitize," or hide the origins of evidence collected through the program to keep it secret, officials said.”
Now all their careful efforts have been destroyed by Bush-deranged reporters who fashion themselves the true protectors of America. Here's editor Bill Keller,the newspaper's executive editor, explaning why he ignored the Bush administration's argument for keeping the legal program secret: "We have listened closely to the administration's arguments for withholding this information, and given them the most serious and respectful consideration. We remain convinced that the administration's extraordinary access to this vast repository of international financial data, however carefully targeted use of it may be, is a matter of public interest."
Did I miss something? These yoyos knew it was a national security SECRET. They used the words “A secret Bush administration program.” But because it’s of public interest, it has to be broadcasted from the halls of Montezuma to the caves of Afghanistan?
But then, suddenly, the Times blinked and apparently thought, “Wait a moment, maybe we could be shot for treason for doing this.” And then started backpedadling like mad.
New York Times ombudsman Byron Calame's belated defense of the Times' expose of the monitoring of the SWIFT banking program contained this revealing passage:
"There was a significant question as to how secret the (monitoring of the SWIFT banking program) was after five years. 'Hundreds, if not thousands, of people know about this,' (Executive Editor Bill) Keller claimed he was told by an official who talked to him on condition of anonymity."
"Hundreds, if not thousands, of people" have known about the program before the Times blabbed about it. Well, there's a scoop. So, why wasn't this reported in the original story and reflected in the original, front-page headline?
There was no printed follow-up from lapdog Calame about Keller's assertion, which goes a good bit further than the claim by Times' apologists Richard Clarke and Roger Cressey.
That mind-reading duo wrote in a Times op-ed that terrorists already assumed their financial transactions were being monitored. Calame curiously neglected to note that Keller's claim contradicted both the tone and facts presented in the Times' initial coverage by reporters Lichtblau and Risen. Which is just as well, since Lichtblau himself is now contradicting his own story, too. On CNN's "Reliable Sources," facing withering criticism from talk radio host Hugh Hewitt, Lichtblau blustered: "When you have senior Treasury Department officials going before Congress, publicly talking about how they are tracing and cutting off money to terrorists, weeks and weeks before our story ran. USA Today, the biggest circulation in the country, the lead story on their front page four days before our story ran was the terrorists know their money is being traced, and they are moving it into -- outside of the banking system into unconventional means. It is by no means a secret." (emphasis added).
Hmm. What was that headline over Lichtblau's story again? Oh, yeah: "Bank Data Sifted in Secret by U.S. to block terror." Meanwhile, finance regulators and top government officials in Belgium (who apparently aren't among the "hundreds, if not thousands" who knew about the program) have ordered a probe into SWIFT, which is regulated by the Belgian central bank and answers to Belgian law. Bush-undermining Eurowheedlers are launching a debate in parliament over the program next week, and a private human rights lobbying group has filed formal complaints against the SWIFT banking consortium in 32 countries.
Former September 11 Commission co-chairman Thomas Kean, who was briefed on the terrorist-finance tracking program and asked Times executive editor Bill Keller not to disclose it, called it “a good program, one that was legal, one that was not violating anybody’s civil liberties, and something the U.S. government should be doing to make us safer.” When asked whether publication of details about the program did any damage, Kean answered, “I think it’s over. Terrorists read the newspapers. Once the program became known, then obviously the terrorists were not going to use these methods any more.” And by the way, the other co-chairman of the 9/11 Commission, Democrat Lee Hamilton, also asked the Times not to publish.
To quote one particular constitutional lawyer,
“Freedom of the press means the government generally cannot place a prior restraint on speech before publication.
But freedom of the press does not mean the government cannot prosecute reporters and editors for treason — or for any other crime. The First Amendment does not mean Times editor Bill Keller could kidnap a child and issue his ransom demands from The New York Times editorial page. He could not order a contract killing on the op-ed page. Nor can he take out a contract killing on Americans with a Page One story on a secret government program being used to track terrorists who are trying to kill Americans.
What if, instead of passing information from the government's secret nuclear program at Los Alamos directly to Soviet agents, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg had printed those same secrets in a newsletter? Would they have skated away scot-free instead of being tried for espionage and sent to the death chamber?
Ezra Pound, Mildred Gillars ("Axis Sally") and Iva Toguri D'Aquino ("Tokyo Rose") were all charged with treason for radio broadcasts intended to demoralize the troops during World War II. Their broadcasts were sort of like Janeane Garofalo and Randi Rhodes on Air America Radio — except Tokyo Rose was actually witty, and Axis Sally is said to have used a fact-checker.
Tokyo Rose was convicted of treason for a single remark she made on air: "Orphans of the Pacific, you really are orphans now. How will you get home now that your ships are sunk?" For that statement alone, D'Aquino spent six years in prison and was fined $10,000 (more than $80,000 in today's dollars).
Axis Sally was convicted of treason for broadcasts from Germany and sentenced to 12 years in prison. Pound avoided a treason trial for his radio broadcasts by getting himself committed to an insane asylum instead (which I take it is Randi Rhodes' "Plan B" in the event that she ever acquires enough listeners to be charged with treason).
There was no evidence that in any of these cases the treasonable broadcasts ever put a single American life in danger. The law on treason doesn't require it.
The federal statute on treason, 18 USC 2381, provides in relevant part: "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States ... adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000."
Thanks to The New York Times, the easiest job in the world right now is: "Head of Counterintelligence — Al-Qaida." You just have to read The New York Times over morning coffee, and you're done by 10 a.m.”
So, the Times has no problem splattering national security secrets all over the place. NSA secrets, no problem. Money trails, no problem.
WMDs found in Iraq—whoa, hold up there now, let’s not be hasty.
On December 01, 2005, I noted a few items found in Iraq. I elaborated on the material found.
1.8 tons of partially enriched uranium.
Stockpiles of RDX.
1,500 barrels of miscellaneous bioweapons and chemical crap you really don't want in you backyard, or even the same hemisphere--
VX nerve gas [for full visual effects, see the film "The Rock"].
Henta virus-- a hemorragic virus that's airborn [think airborn Ebola, you have an idea].
Anthrax... I don't think I need to explain anthrax, I hope.
In June, 2004, the United Nations weapons inspectors confirmed not merely that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, but that he smuggled them out of his country, before, during and after the war.
The UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) briefed the Security Council on Saddam's dismantling of missile and WMD sites before and during the war. UNMOVIC executive chairman Demetrius Perricos detailed not only the export of thousands of tons of missile components, nuclear reactor vessels and fermenters for chemical and biological warheads, but also the discovery of many (but not most) of these items - with UN inspection tags still on them -- as far afield as Jordan, Turkey and even Holland.
And somehow, Syria doesn’t rate a mention on this list. Curious, that. Iraq's western neighbor Syria has its own Baath Party, just like Saddam's, and refused even the thought of an UNMOVIC inspection. Israeli intelligence reported the large-scale smuggling of Saddam's WMD program across the Syrian border since at least two months before the war.
This should have been the biggest news story of 2004. Yet you haven't heard about it, have you?
Even Canada's former Prime Minister Paul Martin -- a socialist and no friend of America—addressed a group of 700 university researchers and business leaders in Montreal in May of 2004. Martin stated terrorists acquired WMDs from Saddam. “The fact is that there is now, we know well, a proliferation of nuclear weapons, and that many weapons that Saddam Huseein had, we don't know where they are…. [T]errorists have access to all of them,” the Canadian premier warned.
In April 26th, 2004, Jordanian intelligence broke up an al Qaeda conspiracy to detonate a large chemical device in the capital city of Amman. Directed by al Qaeda terrorist leader Abu al-Zarqawi – now deceased-- the plotters sought to use a massive explosion to spread a “toxic cloud”, meant to wipe out the U.S. embassy, the Jordanian prime minister's office, the Jordanian intelligence headquarters, and at least 20,000 civilians (and only 3,000 died on 9/11). Over twenty tons of chemical weapons were seized from the conspirators, who were just days away from carrying out their plot.
Where does twenty tons of nerve gas and sarin came from? Wal -Mart? In a July 2003 interview with Larry King, even Bill Clinton said “it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there [was]…a substantial amount of biological and chemical material unaccounted for” in Iraq. Every intelligence agency in the world -- French, British, German, Russian, Czech, you name it -- agreed before the war; Jordanian intelligence can certainly confirm their opinion today.”
At current count, the United States has found 500 chemical weapons in Iraq since 2003. Including the mustard gas, sarin nerve agent, etc. And not only that, there is evidence that there’s even more out there.
So, just to recap: according to the NYTimes, US government programs that can get civilians, army officers, cops, and FBI agents killed are okay to be broadcast to the general public. Anything that can help terrorists get away with murder, escape detection and prosecution, is also safe to be broadcasted to the world at large. However, doing anything that could be construed as supporting the work of any non-terrorist—like the UNMOVIC, the USArmy, the FBI, the treasury department, etc, is supposed to be buried.
Got that?
Links:
Michelle Malkin · June 24, 2006 10:07 PM
The Editors on Leaks on National Review Online
A syndicated column
Terrorist tiping times
Stephen Spruiell
The NYTimes has in-house produced video showcasing Licthblau as he "reveals a secret Bush administration program to access to financial records."
ABP:
Bryan Preston:
Patterico:
More Michelle Malkin [http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_27266841.shtml]
Jeff Goldstein:
GOP Senators speak out on the dangers of classifed leaks. A House GOP resolution is in the works. Howard Kurtz plays the violin for the NYTimes/LATimes. Hugh Hewitt's not having it.
The Los Angeles Times thumbs its nose and national security:
Contact info:
Send a letter to the editor by e-mailing letters@nytimes.com or faxing (212)556-3622.
Snail mail:
Letters to the EditorThe New York Times229 West 43rd StreetNew York, NY 10036
Tuesday, May 02, 2006
Are terrorists the biggest threat to this country? Seriously, are they? Some days I'm not so certain. Lets say they all die tomorrow, what next? Business as usual? Let me tell you what the problem with that is.
Do you remember Vioxx, the arthritis drug that supposedly killed their patients? Liberals and trial lawyers (redundant, I know) wanted the drug company's head on a stick. Okay, understandable. However, if you asked the arthritis sufferers if they would rather take their chances, and they said yes, Liberals would still be against Vioxx and the drug company.
However, this is also the party that supports Jack Kavorkian, and your right to off yourself. Why is that? Aren't they against Vioxx because it's deadly? No, because big pharmaceutics companies ("Big Druggie"?) would be making money, and we can't have that, can we?
But if your aged mother or grandmother is going to die, then who profits? Not the drug company-- the government doesn't have to pay their social security anymore, and the death tax should take care of anything the decedent left behind.
Liberal legislation in Ohio has made your physician assisted suicide covered under medicare, but not your heart transplant. If you don't believe me, look up Mark W. Smith's "Culture of Death," a book that even Dean Koontz said terrified him.
So, Liberals are pro-choice for abortion, drugs, even whether you live or die.
But only if you choose from the options THEY give you. You can't smoke a pack a day and die of lung cancer, or eat red meat and die from a heart attack. You can't volunteer to die in the military.
To die their way, you have to file for it and sign your own death warrant on a sheet of paper saying you consent to having your doctor kill you.
Either that, or you stroke out and let your adulterous husband and his new wife pull your feeding tube.
Or you can get an STD with political protection. Any other virus as deadly as AIDS would get you locked away in a biohazard cell at the Centers for Disease Control. With AIDS, well, 85% of AIDS victims are gay, so we have to keep that disease a secret, and give it political protection. So, screw your brains out, get and STD and die. NOW, Planned Parenthood, and everyone else have given you that protection, that right, and defends your right to literally screw yourself to death (as I mentioned here).
You have to die the way they want you to die, and live the way they want you to live.
Though, as I mentioned, I think they'd much rather prefer you died.
Do you remember Vioxx, the arthritis drug that supposedly killed their patients? Liberals and trial lawyers (redundant, I know) wanted the drug company's head on a stick. Okay, understandable. However, if you asked the arthritis sufferers if they would rather take their chances, and they said yes, Liberals would still be against Vioxx and the drug company.
However, this is also the party that supports Jack Kavorkian, and your right to off yourself. Why is that? Aren't they against Vioxx because it's deadly? No, because big pharmaceutics companies ("Big Druggie"?) would be making money, and we can't have that, can we?
But if your aged mother or grandmother is going to die, then who profits? Not the drug company-- the government doesn't have to pay their social security anymore, and the death tax should take care of anything the decedent left behind.
Liberal legislation in Ohio has made your physician assisted suicide covered under medicare, but not your heart transplant. If you don't believe me, look up Mark W. Smith's "Culture of Death," a book that even Dean Koontz said terrified him.
So, Liberals are pro-choice for abortion, drugs, even whether you live or die.
But only if you choose from the options THEY give you. You can't smoke a pack a day and die of lung cancer, or eat red meat and die from a heart attack. You can't volunteer to die in the military.
To die their way, you have to file for it and sign your own death warrant on a sheet of paper saying you consent to having your doctor kill you.
Either that, or you stroke out and let your adulterous husband and his new wife pull your feeding tube.
Or you can get an STD with political protection. Any other virus as deadly as AIDS would get you locked away in a biohazard cell at the Centers for Disease Control. With AIDS, well, 85% of AIDS victims are gay, so we have to keep that disease a secret, and give it political protection. So, screw your brains out, get and STD and die. NOW, Planned Parenthood, and everyone else have given you that protection, that right, and defends your right to literally screw yourself to death (as I mentioned here).
You have to die the way they want you to die, and live the way they want you to live.
Though, as I mentioned, I think they'd much rather prefer you died.
Monday, May 01, 2006
You might be a liberal if…
Rioters are merely misunderstood.
You moved to Canada in 2005.
You cry over dead seals on your way to a "pro-choice" rally.
Protesting IS your job.
You were so mad at Pat Robertson for demanding the assassination of Hugo Chavez, you spilled latte all over your kill Bush t-shirt.
You noticed no irony in that last statement.
You think SUV's will kill you before Al-Qaeda.
You think the biggest threat to the world is the United States.
Releasing animals from laboratory tests is the right thing to do…
…and you're planning to release animals held in a biohazard level 5 lab.
Osama bin Laden was a threat in 1998, and one day in September, 2001.
Stalin wasn't evil, his economic plan was flawed.
If a big business makes money, they must be corrupt.
Cindy Sheehan isn't anti-Semitic, she just thinks the Iraq war was in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
The President's name is Al Gore…
…and the name of "that man" in the Whitehouse is "Bushitler."
Anyone who makes more money than you do deserves to have his money taken…um, "redistributed."
The only true litmus test for a Supreme Court justice is abortion.
…and that a SCOTUS nominee can pass this test only by performing a partial birth abortion, preferably on 60 minutes.
Wal-Mart is the biggest threat to civilization as we know it.
Any money sent to the military can be better spent anywhere else, including the ACLU.
Your favorite Batman villain is Poison Ivy, because she's almost as pro-environmental as you are.
Sean Hannity's radio show going national on September 10th, 2001 MUST have been a signal to Halliburton's crony Dick Chaney to fly the remote controlled airplanes into the 9-11 targets…
…or a signal to Mossad.
…or to the JOOOS in general.
You know that the army corps of engineers condemned the levies in New Orleans ten years ago, and you know that the money to be spent on the dam was pocketed by the local government, and you know that the Governor did nothing for evacuation before Hurricane Katrina hit, and you STILL think everything is Bush's fault.
Rioters are merely misunderstood.
You moved to Canada in 2005.
You cry over dead seals on your way to a "pro-choice" rally.
Protesting IS your job.
You were so mad at Pat Robertson for demanding the assassination of Hugo Chavez, you spilled latte all over your kill Bush t-shirt.
You noticed no irony in that last statement.
You think SUV's will kill you before Al-Qaeda.
You think the biggest threat to the world is the United States.
Releasing animals from laboratory tests is the right thing to do…
…and you're planning to release animals held in a biohazard level 5 lab.
Osama bin Laden was a threat in 1998, and one day in September, 2001.
Stalin wasn't evil, his economic plan was flawed.
If a big business makes money, they must be corrupt.
Cindy Sheehan isn't anti-Semitic, she just thinks the Iraq war was in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
The President's name is Al Gore…
…and the name of "that man" in the Whitehouse is "Bushitler."
Anyone who makes more money than you do deserves to have his money taken…um, "redistributed."
The only true litmus test for a Supreme Court justice is abortion.
…and that a SCOTUS nominee can pass this test only by performing a partial birth abortion, preferably on 60 minutes.
Wal-Mart is the biggest threat to civilization as we know it.
Any money sent to the military can be better spent anywhere else, including the ACLU.
Your favorite Batman villain is Poison Ivy, because she's almost as pro-environmental as you are.
Sean Hannity's radio show going national on September 10th, 2001 MUST have been a signal to Halliburton's crony Dick Chaney to fly the remote controlled airplanes into the 9-11 targets…
…or a signal to Mossad.
…or to the JOOOS in general.
You know that the army corps of engineers condemned the levies in New Orleans ten years ago, and you know that the money to be spent on the dam was pocketed by the local government, and you know that the Governor did nothing for evacuation before Hurricane Katrina hit, and you STILL think everything is Bush's fault.
Monday, January 23, 2006
On the Supreme Court: a letter to the Democrats on the Committee
Sens. Durbin, Kennedy, Feinstein, Biden,
To begin with, what is a Federalist? Do you know? A Federalist is one who believes that the Supreme court has a very narrow focus, that being to follow the Constitution. Does that mean every Federalist is a mindless republican who thinks and decides rulings the same way? I'm sorry, but that is not the case. Not even Justices Thomas and Scalia agree on everything the same way, and they are both considered to be the Rightest of the Right on the court.
Second, Federalists are not necessarily on the Right. Indeed, there are several democrats who are federalists and who disagree with several Court decisions that were decidedly non-Federalist, even if they agree with the conclusions..
Third: Roe Vs. Wade is not the biggest item on any Federalist agenda, or vast Federalist conspiracy theory. Sorry, it really isn't. Do they agree with the ruling, technically, no, but this does not even make any of them anti-Abortion. How can I say that? If you go back to item the second, you notice that democratic federalists can disagree with a court decision, even if they agree with the conclusions: Roe is one of them. Leftist Federalists think that Roe vs. Wade is bad law, logically inconsistent, making up precedence in the constitution that isn't there. Does that mean they are pro-life? Not at all, this just means that the topic of abortion should be left up to the legislative branch and not the judicial. To elaborate: The United States is the ONLY country on the planet that did not have a vote on abortion, it was simply ordained by the court.
Fourth: no one in their correct mind says that Roe. Vs. Wade is decided law. Why? Because Roe is challenged constantly, every year, at least once a year. Brown vs. Board of Education is settled law because no challenges have come to that ruling for over fifty years. Roe will be challenged for the foreseeable future, and asking any justice to decide on it in session is calling for him to have an opinion on a case that may come before his court. You know that it's wrong for any justice to have his mind made up on a case before it appears, and asking anyone to decide is merely a way of trying to nullify a candidate. Any justice candidate who can't talk around those questions doesn't deserve to be on the Supreme Court. By the way, the federalist has all sorts of wide-ranging hobbies and interests, including restoring power to the states, embracing the framers' ideals, and curbing federal and judicial power. The idea that all federalists are single-mindedly planning the demise of Roe is mistaken. As Harvard law professor and former Clintonista Laurence Tribe reminds us, Roe can be nicely hollowed out without ever being expressly reversed. They've largely moved on. So should you.
There are also several items which made come to you in time, but to save everyone the bother, several obvious items you may have missed. To begin with, Federalists are not you. They are not Michael Moore fans teeming with hate and rage ready to rip apart anyone who disagrees with them. Federalists will not erupt into a hissing, spitting parody of Bill O'Reilly and then try to strangle you with his bow tie on C-SPAN-- thankfully, few people wear bow ties anymore, so you're probably safe. Federalists, like John Roberts, love their families and do not devote their lives to systematically holding back women, persecuting minorities, and stealing wheelchairs from the disabled-- that we leave in the capable hands of terrorists. Attempts to tar the federalist as having dedicated his career to raging misogyny or racism will likely backfire. Most of them have better things to do.
Federalists do not believe in "fairness": While they don't seek to promote the interests of white men, big businesses, and the unborn; he is also wholly unconcerned about "giving a fair shake to the little guy." They simply don't accept the proposition that the courts exist to elevate the interests of the little guy above everyone else. This is a defensible constitutional theory that you might consider debating with a federalist . You may want to ask him pointed questions about the responsibility of the courts when the elected branches of government fail—as they have done on occasion—to protect minorities. You may want to press him on the possibility that the courts should do more than mechanically apply the law as written. Such a conversation might prove enlightening for the American people. But asserting that federalists are inherently not fair or honest, no matter how many times you say it, remains reductive and untrue.
Federalists are human beings. They have hearts, although they may not be able to cough one out onto the Senate floor on demand. Federalists also believe that the heart is not an organ relevant to deciding cases. They believe that the law is the only thing relevant to deciding cases. Nevertheless, federalists do cry. Their spouses cry. But you should not use these hearings to prick them. They will bleed. Just as if you tickle them, they will laugh. Oh … and if you wrong them, they will revenge.
Technically, conservative judges do not "apply the law" while liberal jurists "make it up." As I said, there are democratic federalists. However, that does not matter when the Leftist "we make it up" judges get all the publicity. This is a bad move for you democrats. Conservatives judges read the statutes, study the precedent, and then mechanically deduce what the law is, without regard to their personal preferences. You may want to probe whether there are indeed "moral judgments" at the heart of their decisions. And if you suspect that all judges inevitably make such moral judgments, you might seek to uncover from where such moral judgments come. When your inquiry proves fruitless (i.e., you are stonewalled), you may wish to turn to other sources to refute the notion that nothing in a person's history or ideology is reflected in his (or her) moral judgments.
Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate judiciary committee, not all federalists are grumpy or hotheaded. Federalists have a view of the Constitution and the allocation of government powers that largely differs from yours. The Court interprets the law, it does not MAKE the law. And remember that Supreme Court workers universally name Clarence Thomas as the kindest and warmest justice on the current court. That is irrelevant to how he decides cases, and you should think on that when asking about the next nominees you look at.
Sens. Durbin, Kennedy, Feinstein, Biden,
To begin with, what is a Federalist? Do you know? A Federalist is one who believes that the Supreme court has a very narrow focus, that being to follow the Constitution. Does that mean every Federalist is a mindless republican who thinks and decides rulings the same way? I'm sorry, but that is not the case. Not even Justices Thomas and Scalia agree on everything the same way, and they are both considered to be the Rightest of the Right on the court.
Second, Federalists are not necessarily on the Right. Indeed, there are several democrats who are federalists and who disagree with several Court decisions that were decidedly non-Federalist, even if they agree with the conclusions..
Third: Roe Vs. Wade is not the biggest item on any Federalist agenda, or vast Federalist conspiracy theory. Sorry, it really isn't. Do they agree with the ruling, technically, no, but this does not even make any of them anti-Abortion. How can I say that? If you go back to item the second, you notice that democratic federalists can disagree with a court decision, even if they agree with the conclusions: Roe is one of them. Leftist Federalists think that Roe vs. Wade is bad law, logically inconsistent, making up precedence in the constitution that isn't there. Does that mean they are pro-life? Not at all, this just means that the topic of abortion should be left up to the legislative branch and not the judicial. To elaborate: The United States is the ONLY country on the planet that did not have a vote on abortion, it was simply ordained by the court.
Fourth: no one in their correct mind says that Roe. Vs. Wade is decided law. Why? Because Roe is challenged constantly, every year, at least once a year. Brown vs. Board of Education is settled law because no challenges have come to that ruling for over fifty years. Roe will be challenged for the foreseeable future, and asking any justice to decide on it in session is calling for him to have an opinion on a case that may come before his court. You know that it's wrong for any justice to have his mind made up on a case before it appears, and asking anyone to decide is merely a way of trying to nullify a candidate. Any justice candidate who can't talk around those questions doesn't deserve to be on the Supreme Court. By the way, the federalist has all sorts of wide-ranging hobbies and interests, including restoring power to the states, embracing the framers' ideals, and curbing federal and judicial power. The idea that all federalists are single-mindedly planning the demise of Roe is mistaken. As Harvard law professor and former Clintonista Laurence Tribe reminds us, Roe can be nicely hollowed out without ever being expressly reversed. They've largely moved on. So should you.
There are also several items which made come to you in time, but to save everyone the bother, several obvious items you may have missed. To begin with, Federalists are not you. They are not Michael Moore fans teeming with hate and rage ready to rip apart anyone who disagrees with them. Federalists will not erupt into a hissing, spitting parody of Bill O'Reilly and then try to strangle you with his bow tie on C-SPAN-- thankfully, few people wear bow ties anymore, so you're probably safe. Federalists, like John Roberts, love their families and do not devote their lives to systematically holding back women, persecuting minorities, and stealing wheelchairs from the disabled-- that we leave in the capable hands of terrorists. Attempts to tar the federalist as having dedicated his career to raging misogyny or racism will likely backfire. Most of them have better things to do.
Federalists do not believe in "fairness": While they don't seek to promote the interests of white men, big businesses, and the unborn; he is also wholly unconcerned about "giving a fair shake to the little guy." They simply don't accept the proposition that the courts exist to elevate the interests of the little guy above everyone else. This is a defensible constitutional theory that you might consider debating with a federalist . You may want to ask him pointed questions about the responsibility of the courts when the elected branches of government fail—as they have done on occasion—to protect minorities. You may want to press him on the possibility that the courts should do more than mechanically apply the law as written. Such a conversation might prove enlightening for the American people. But asserting that federalists are inherently not fair or honest, no matter how many times you say it, remains reductive and untrue.
Federalists are human beings. They have hearts, although they may not be able to cough one out onto the Senate floor on demand. Federalists also believe that the heart is not an organ relevant to deciding cases. They believe that the law is the only thing relevant to deciding cases. Nevertheless, federalists do cry. Their spouses cry. But you should not use these hearings to prick them. They will bleed. Just as if you tickle them, they will laugh. Oh … and if you wrong them, they will revenge.
Technically, conservative judges do not "apply the law" while liberal jurists "make it up." As I said, there are democratic federalists. However, that does not matter when the Leftist "we make it up" judges get all the publicity. This is a bad move for you democrats. Conservatives judges read the statutes, study the precedent, and then mechanically deduce what the law is, without regard to their personal preferences. You may want to probe whether there are indeed "moral judgments" at the heart of their decisions. And if you suspect that all judges inevitably make such moral judgments, you might seek to uncover from where such moral judgments come. When your inquiry proves fruitless (i.e., you are stonewalled), you may wish to turn to other sources to refute the notion that nothing in a person's history or ideology is reflected in his (or her) moral judgments.
Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate judiciary committee, not all federalists are grumpy or hotheaded. Federalists have a view of the Constitution and the allocation of government powers that largely differs from yours. The Court interprets the law, it does not MAKE the law. And remember that Supreme Court workers universally name Clarence Thomas as the kindest and warmest justice on the current court. That is irrelevant to how he decides cases, and you should think on that when asking about the next nominees you look at.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)