Thursday, April 30, 2009

In this case, it's man-made climate change

Joseph_Goebbels If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.

The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

Joseph Goebbels, Third Reich Propaganda Minister

Things just get curiouser and curiouser

From newsmax.com:

Obama Declines Iran Offer of al-Qaida Members

Tuesday, April 28, 2009 10:33 AM
By: Kenneth R. Timmerman
When Iranian government official Ahmad Samavati arrived in Washington, D.C., in February at the head of a five-man negotiating team, he thought he had an offer the Obama administration couldn’t refuse.

The Iranian regime was going to turn over scores of top al-Qaida operatives, including some on the FBI’s “Most Wanted Terrorists” list.

To Samavati’s surprise, the State Department officials he met declined the offer. “They told him they did not want any al-Qaida people. They told him they didn’t want them in the United States,” an Iranian source familiar with the negotiations told Newsmax.

The decline, and the very fact that the Iranian regime sent Samavati to Washington in the first place, shows the profound policy shift that has occurred in both Tehran and Washington since Barack Obama became president.

But Washington seems to be going in one direction and Tehran in another.

In the annual report on terrorism it released last April, the State Department blasted Iran for its unwillingness to cooperate in arresting, rendering, or controlling al-Qaida members operating from its territory.

“Iran has repeatedly resisted numerous calls to transfer custody of its AQ [al-Qaida] detainees to their countries of origin or third countries for interrogation or trial. Iran also continued to fail to control the activities of some AQ members who fled to Iran following the fall of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan,” the report stated.

Obama’s determination to shift gears on Iran is no secret.

He announced his intention to negotiate with the regime during the presidential campaign, and he has repeated that determination many times since taking office.

But no one at Foggy Bottom will comment on why the State Department refused the Iranian offer in February, despite numerous phone messages and e-mails entreaties.

To piece together this story, which goes beyond the public policy statements from the administration, Newsmax has sought out Iranians with personal knowledge of the secret negotiations, including some who work closely with the Iranian government and current and former U.S. officials in the military and intelligence community.

Persian-language Web sites also have detailed leaks from Tehran.

At the time Samavati came to Washington, the State Department was still in the throes of a “policy review” concerning Iran.

So on one level, his offer was premature. But beyond that, the Obama administration, like the Bush administration before it, may be simply too disorganized to coordinate a government-wide response to such a forward-leaning proposal, a source close to the negotiations suggested.

“Hillary Clinton is very much against these negotiations,” another source familiar with the U.S.-Iran talks told Newsmax.

“In Tehran, they don’t understand this,” said a third source who recently returned from Iran after discussing the Iranian and American proposals. “When the ruling factions actually agree on a policy, they put the whole government apparatus behind it.”

Tehran now believes that the al-Qaida operatives it is sheltering in Iran have become a liability. Some, such as al-Qaida military chief Saif al-Adel and Ahmed Mughassil, who has been indicted for the 1996 bombing of a U.S. military barracks in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, figure on the FBI’s Most Wanted List of terrorists and have American blood on their hands.

Other more low-level operatives have married into Iranian families in Tehran and have become a security challenge for the regime, a source knowledgeable of the U.S.-Iran negotiations told Newsmax.

“The Iranians want to get rid of the al-Qaida people who are now in Iran,” the source added. “That is absolutely clear. They have been training and providing support to al-Qaida operatives, but now find they have become an embarrassment.”

Al-Qaida’s second-in-command, Ayman al-Zawahiri, has been a liaison for the Iranian intelligence minister, the Revolutionary Guards, and Osama bin Laden since the early 1990s, when they were together in the Sudan.

Newsmax has received numerous reports over the past four years from former Iranian intelligence officers who claim that since the 9/11 attacks al-Zawahiri spends most of his time in Iran.

And yet, in a video posted last week on radical Islamist Web sites, al-Zawahiri warns the United States against any rapprochement with the Tehran regime.

"The more you cooperate with Iran, the more hatred you will generate from Muslims,” al-Zawahiri says in the video.

Even before 9/11, the Iranian government was careful to give the impression in the West that it was at war with radical Sunni Muslim groups, even as it trained terrorists from those groups in secret camps in Iran, according to former Iranian intelligence officers who were personally involved in the training.

The most celebrated case of this was Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq until he was killed during an American military raid in 2006.

Al-Zarqawi declared war against Iraqi Shiites; and yet, he and his group, initially known as Ansar al Islam, were funded, trained, and equipped by the Iranian regime, which inserted them into Iraq in 2002.

Asked whether the U.S. intelligence community would like to see al-Qaida terrorists such as Saif al-Adel rendered to the United States, a U.S. intelligence official responded without ambiguity: “The U.S. intelligence community would very much like to see them taken off the streets. After all, they’re hardened terrorists.”

The type of al-Qaida operatives now being sheltered in Iran “have knowledge of the terrorist group’s current activities,” and thus have current intelligence value to the United States, the official added.

But such a desire on the part of U.S. intelligence officers who are still engaged in fighting a global war against radical Islamic terrorist groups flies in the face of the oft-expressed desire of President Obama to shut down the Guantanamo Bay prison, where such terrorists would undoubtedly wind up.

“If you’re talking about individuals against whom there are no criminal charges, then it gets complicated,” former CIA Director R. James Woolsey told Newsmax. “If you close down Gitmo, where are you going to keep them?”

Woolsey said he could see no reason why the Obama administration wouldn’t take terrorists who are facing U.S. criminal charges. “To me, it would be extremely unwise not to take them out of circulation.”

The lack of criminal charges was the reason used by the Clinton administration to reject a 1996 offer by the government of Sudan to render Osama bin Laden to the United States, Woolsey recalled.

The Iranian government helped evacuate hundreds of al-Qaida terrorists and their families from Afghanistan in the weeks and months after the 9/11 attacks, establishing a “rat line” using fixed-wing aircraft, helicopters, and hundreds of four-wheel drive vehicles, according to U.S. intelligence reports.

Since then, the regime has sheltered these and other al-Qaida members at safe houses in and around Tehran and provided them military training, equipment, and “hajj” passports so they can travel to the annual Muslim pilgrimage in Mecca.

The National Security Agency intercepted a communication from al-Qaida military chief, Saif al-Adel, giving the orders to an al-Qaida cell in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia to launch the deadly attacks on May 12, 2003 that killed more than 90 people.

When the Bush administration realized that al-Adel was in an Iranian government safe house at the time he gave the order for the terrorist attacks, they cut off back-channel negotiations with Iran then being conducted by U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad.

In January, Undersecretary of State Stuart A. Levy released a report laying out the extensive support the Iranian government has provided top al-Qaida members, including Saad bin Laden, the Saudi terrorist’s eldest son and heir apparent.

For more on this, read "Top al-Qaida Operatives Worked Closely with Iran — U.S. Treasury."

Just hours after the Treasury announcement, outgoing Director of National Intelligence Adm. Mike McConnell told reporters that the younger bin Laden had left Iran in September and was now in Pakistan.

But a former Iranian intelligence officer who maintains access to the Iranian intelligence community recently showed Newsmax photographs of Saad bin Laden and a wheelchair-bound aide, which he claimed had been taken at a safe house in the Tehran area this March.

Some sources believe the regime is sheltering Osama bin Laden himself, as Newsmax reported recently. For more on this, read "Did Bin Laden Find Safe Haven in Iran?"

The State Department has not responded to repeated requests for comment on this story.

“The State Department’s lack of response is worrisome, especially since the president has said we’re going to Afghanistan to get al-Qaida,” said retired Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney, now a Fox News contributor. “It would be of great interest, for example, to know of any relationship between the Iranian nuclear program and al-Qaida.”

Gun control

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Strike a blow for Sarah

sarah%20palinSupporters of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin have established a trust fund to help defray legal bills she’s run up having to defend against frivolous and malicious lawsuits brought by political enemies.

At last report, Gov. Palin’s legal bills have topped $500,000, thanks to vindictive liberals and socialists who want to punish her for challenging Comrade Obama and Chief Clown Joe Biden.

This is where my $250 in Social Security stimulus (read “pork”) will go when it shows up in my bank account.

Here’s the link to the site.

Gore lied. Big surprise.

From the Gateway Pundit:

Apparently, the snake oil salesman was not honest when he was questioned by Rep. Marsha Blackburn in Congress on Friday.

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) asked Gore if he stood to benefit financially from cap-and-trade legislation, which would force companies to reduce carbon emissions.
Gore responded:

But every penny that I have made, I have put right into a non-profit, the Alliance for Climate Protection, to spread awareness about why we have to take on this challenge. And Congresswoman, if you're, if you believe the reason I have been working on this issue for 30 years is because of greed, you don't know me.
Obviously, she does.
Gore was lying.
He's already made millions and will make even more if cap and trade legislation is passed.
Green Hell Blog reported, via Free Republic:
When Tennessee Rep. Marsha Blackburn confronted Al Gore with his profiteering from global warming legislation at today’s House Energy and Environment Subcommittee hearing on the Waxman-Markey climate bill, Al Gore said that every penny he ever made from his business activities went into non-profit efforts.
That is a flat-out lie, according to this March 6, 2008 Bloomberg report that indicates that Al Gore invested $35 million of his own money in various for-profit endeavors.
Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore left the White House seven years ago with less than $2 million in assets, including a Virginia home and the family farm in Tennessee. Now he’s making enough to put $35 million in hedge funds and other private partnerships.
Gore invested the money with Capricorn Investment Group LLC, a Palo Alto, California, firm that selects the private funds for clients and invests in makers of environmentally friendly products, according to a Feb. 1 securities filing. Capricorn was founded by billionaire Jeffrey Skoll, former president of EBay Inc. and an executive producer of Gore’s Oscar-winning documentary film on global warming.
Kudos to Rep. Blackburn for asking one of the “10 Questions for Al Gore” and exposing Gore as the fundamentally dishonest operator that he is.

Don't expect Gore's green cheerleaders in the media to report on this.

Monday, April 27, 2009

Aww, Barack, you shouldn't have. Really.

I got a letter from Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, on Saturday telling me I'm part of the pork.

It was one of those twice-folded single-sheet things that you tear the perforated strips off of the sides and lift the top flap to open.

Here's what Michael had to say:

Good news! The economic recovery bill that President Obama signed into law in February 2009 provides for a one-time payment of $250 to Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) beneficiaries.

You should receive your one-time payment by late May 2009.

I just checked my bank account and it's not there yet.

Now, I just need to figure out how to put it to the best use. Here are some possibilities that come to mind:

  • But a new gun.
  • Stock up on ammo.
  • Buy a quarter-ounce of gold.
  • Donate it to the National Rifle Association.
  • Give it to the Republican National Committee.
  • Donate it to help pay Sarah Palin's legal bills from responding to specious, harassing lawsuits.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Happy Earth Day

Eagle_Earth_Logo_300px

Global warming, particularly the notion that human activities are causing climate change, is bogus.

No, there's nothing wrong with behaving in an ecologically responsible manner, but letting this idiotic notion drive the national agenda is insane.

Go to www.globalarminghoax.com and see how this ridiculous eco-religion stacks up against the facts.

Saturday, April 18, 2009

Too good not to share

obama-dumb-and-dumber

The delusional president and the strutting Clown of Venezuela

obamachavez

Obama greets Chavez. Sorta reminds you of Chamberlain and Mussolini, doesn't it?Chamberlain,_Mussolini,_Ciano

And we know how that turned out.

More evidence

This was posted Thursday on a Baylor University sports fans forum.

I can't vouch for its accuracy, but it has the ring of truth to it. Also, did anyone else notice that Capt. Phillips did not include Obama in his list of people to thank for his rescue?

Subject: The real story of Obama's Decision Making with the hostages.
Subject: AH, now it comes out
Having spoken to some SEAL pals here in Virginia Beach yesterday and asking why this thing dragged out for 4 days, I got the following:
1. BHO wouldn't authorize the DEVGRU/NSWC SEAL teams to the scene for 36 hours going against OSC (on scene commander) recommendation.
2. Once they arrived, BHO imposed restrictions on their ROE that they couldn't do anything unless the hostage's life was in "imminent" danger
3. The first time the hostage jumped, the SEALS had the raggies all sighted in, but could not fire due to ROE restriction
4. When the navy RIB came under fire as it approached with supplies, no fire was returned due to ROE restrictions. As the raggies were shooting at the RIB, they were exposed and the SEALS had them all dialed in.
5. BHO specifically denied two rescue plans developed by the Bainbridge CPN and SEAL teams
6. Bainbridge CPN and SEAL team CDR finally decide they have the OpArea and OSC authority to solely determine risk to hostage. 4 hours later, 3 dead raggies
7. BHO immediately claims credit for his "daring and decisive" behaviour. As usual with him, it's BS.
So per our last email thread, I'm downgrading Oohbaby's performace to D-. Only reason it's not an F is that the hostage survived.
Read the following accurate account.
Philips’ first leap into the warm, dark water of the Indian Ocean hadn’t worked out as well. With the Bainbridge in range and a rescue by his country’s Navy possible, Philips threw himself off of his
lifeboat prison, enabling Navy shooters onboard the destroyer a clear shot at his captors — and none was taken.
The guidance from National Command Authority — the president of the United States,
Barack Obama — had been clear: a peaceful solution was the only acceptable outcome to this standoff unless the hostage’s life was in clear, extreme danger.
The next day, a small Navy boat approaching the floating raft was fired on by the Somali pirates — and again no fire was returned and no pirates killed. This was again due to the cautious stance assumed by Navy personnel thanks to the combination of a lack of clear guidance from Washington and a mandate from the commander in chief’s staff not to act until Obama, a man with no background of dealing with such issues and no track record of decisiveness, decided that any outcome other than a “peaceful solution” would be acceptable.
After taking fire from the Somali kidnappers again Saturday night, the onscenecommander decided he’d had enough.
Keeping his authority to act in the case of a clear and present danger to the hostage’s life and having heard nothing from Washington since yet another request to mount a rescue operation
had been denied the day before, the Navy officer — unnamed in all media reports to date — decided the AK47 one captor had leveled at Philips’ back was a threat to the hostage’s life and ordered the
NSWC team to take their shots.
Three rounds downrange later, all three brigands became enemy KIA and Philips was safe.
There is upside, downside, and spinside to the series of events over the last week that culminated in yesterday’s dramatic rescue of an American hostage.
Almost immediately following word of the rescue, the Obama administration and its supporters claimed victory against pirates in the Indian Ocean and [1] declared that the dramatic end to the standoff put paid to questions of the inexperienced president’s toughness and decisiveness.
Despite the Obama administration’s (and its sycophants’) attempt to spin yesterday’s success as a result of bold, decisive leadership by the inexperienced president, the reality is nothing of the sort.
What should have been a standoff lasting only hours — as long as it took the USS Bainbridge and its team of NSWC operators to steam to the location — became an embarrassing four day and counting
standoff between a ragtag handful of criminals with rifles and a U.S. Navy warship.

Sarah in Evansville, Ind.

Contrast this with a president who loves abortion, including the hideous partial birth abortion process:

Friday, April 17, 2009

Learning who we can trust

The coverage of Wednesday's Tax Day Tea Parties tells us a lot about who in the media we can trust to be objective and who has become the American version of Pravda.

The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette ignored the event to the extent that their main front page art was an AP photo of a painting being rescued from the earthquake rubble in Italy. Other dominant p-1 art was a 2-column AP photo of the French Navy seizing a pirate skiff and a 3-column local photo of a pile of drawers (no humans in sight) accompanying an absolutely riveting story about the Pulaski County coroner wanting his own morgue. The closest thing to demonstration coverage they gave readers on p-1 was a tiny picture at the top of the page teasing a story about Afghan women rallying against marital rape.

I'm proud to say the Jonesboro Sun had an accurate account of the local tea party with a 3-column headline and photo placed above the fold on page 1.

I'm also pleased to notice that my former paper, The Indianapolis Star, gave the Indianapolis event prominent coverage on page 1. Ditto, the Lafayette (Ind.) Journal & Courier.

Readers of the Chicago Sun Times and Tribune and the New York Times weren't so well served. No page 1 coverage of tea parties.

And then there's the quality of the coverage. Here again, Michael Wilkey of the Sun got it right. His story is an unbiased, concise account of what happened.

Any journalist worthy of the title understands that when you cover an emotionally charged public event like this, your credibility is on the line. The people who are there will read or view your efforts and compare your report with what they saw and heard. If you spin it to suit your own views, or even if you just miss the point, they will know and they will never trust you again.

That's what happened with CNN's Susan Roesgen at a Chicago Tea Party in what is the most egregious example of journalistic malpractice I've seen in a long, long time. Her biography on the CNN web site claims she graduated from the University of Montana with highest honors. The university apparently doesn't teach journalistic ethics and objectivity.

How hard is it to just stick a microphone in front of a protester and let him state his point of view? What kind of loon thinks it's a reporter's job to lecture the person being interviewed? What kind of news organization would tolerate this kind of unprofessional behavior?

In a rational world, Susan Roesgen would return to her office and find herself fired with all of the stuff from her desk in a cardboard box.

But then maybe CNN really stands for Crazy News Network.

Check out Jon Stewart's thoughts on Roesgen's and CNN's work covering the flood in Fargo, N.D.

 

Who would think the day would come when Comedy Central has better news judgment than CNN?

Stephen Kruiser at the Van Nuys Tea Party

Check out his blog at www.stephenkruiser.com

Time to be patriotic, high rollers!

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Jonesboro Tea Party

jonesboro tea 01 jonesboro tea 02

 

I went to the Jonesboro Tea Party last evening with our BMW rider friend Deb (that's her with the bumper sticker).

Maria doesn't go to political stuff because it would represent a conflict of interest for a newspaper editor. I, on the other hand, am no longer hampered by that consideration since I'm retired.

The Jonesboro affair was better attended than the one in Paragould - bigger city, bigger turnout. I estimated the crowd at 300-400. It was also more structured with more speakers, most of whom made their points concisely and eloquently.

The exception was an older guy who spoke first and got off on a rambling tangent about the "green" movement as it affects our economics and lifestyles. While his points about making better use of our coal and oil resources were well taken, I thought his ridicule of wind turbines was ill-informed and ill-considered, since the German wind turbine firm Nordex is building its U.S. manufacturing plant right here in Jonesboro. Insulting what will soon be a major employer and huge economic force in the region is hardly good judgment.

And, he missed the basic underlying point that human-influenced global warming is a hideous lie, based on repeatedly discredited junk science, that is being used by the Obama crowd and other moonbats to drive their agenda. Developing alternative energy sources is the right thing to do because it's a step forward, not because the uninformed think the planet will turn tropical if we don't.

Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Rightwing Extremists!

The Department of Homeland Security released a report the other day that expressed grave concerns over "rightwing extremists."

Here's a passage from the report:

(U//LES) Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool. Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use. Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment. From the 2008 election timeframe to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers.

I spent an hour or so with about 200 of these dangerous radicals in downtown Paragould, Ark. as they tried to whip passersby into a frenzy of racist and political rage.

Here is the face of terroristic rightwing extremism in the American heartland:

tea02 tea01 tea03 tea04 tea05 tea06 tea07

Yes, Janet Napolitano's Department of Homeland Security needs to keep a watchful eye on these dangerous revolutionaries who actually believe in the Constitution, and especially that seditious 10th Amendment, not to mention all of that bilge about free speech and the right to peaceful assembly.

With any luck at all, these people will be in concentration camps by winter.

(And if you can't tell this is heavy sarcasm, you're a brain-damaged moonbat.)

Now we understand the choice...

bo walk

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

President Hubris

Hubris (/hjuːbrɪs/) (ancient Greek ὕβρις) is a term used in modern ObamaEnglish to indicate overweening pride, superciliousness, or arrogance, often resulting in fatal retribution or nemesis. In ancient Greece, hubris referred to actions which, intentionally or not, shamed and humiliated the victim, and frequently the perpetrator as well. It was most evident in the public and private actions of the powerful and rich. The word was also used to describe actions of those who challenged the gods or their laws, especially in Greek tragedy.

Hubris, though not specifically defined, was a legal term and was considered a crime in classical Athens. It was also considered the greatest sin of the ancient Greek world.

The meaning was eventually further generalized in its modern English usage to apply to any outrageous act or exhibition of pride or disregard for basic moral laws. Such an act may be referred to as an "act of hubris," or the person committing the act may be said to be hubristic.

Don't mess with Texas

Obama's handlers hand-picked the crowd, issued digital cameras

This is from moonbattery.com:

Stung by the contempt in which their figurehead is rightly held by the military, Comrade Obama's handlers set to work trying to prove that even the leftist punk who denounced our troops in Afghanistan as "just air-raiding villages and killing civilians" can be made to appear as if he is loved by our protectors in arms.

Macsmind received an email from sergeant who was present at Obama's pre-announced "surprise" visit to Camp Victory:

"We were pre-screened, asked by officials "Who voted for Obama?", and then those who raised their hands were shuffled to the front of the receiving line. They even handed out digital cameras and asked them to hold them up."
Take a look at the picture at AP and notice all the cameras are the same models? Coincidence? I think not.

Via Hot Air:

obamaphonysuprisevisittoiraq.jpg

Maybe Obama should get some help staging phony photo ops from his friends out in Hollyweird. But this farcical event was authentic enough to pass for real in the mainstream media.

Homeland Security goes political

Michelle Malkin is one of my faves. She is on top of every issue and isn't afraid to call it like she sees it. Here is today's post on michellemalkin.com:

By Michelle Malkin  •  April 14, 2009 12:01 AM

Yesterday, Roger Hedgecock and the Liberty Papers posted an unclassified DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis report titled:

Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.

The “report” (PDF file here) was one of the most embarrassingly shoddy pieces of propaganda I’d ever read out of DHS. I couldn’t believe it was real.

I spent the day chasing down DHS spokespeople, who have been tied up preparing for a very important homeland security event later today: The First Lady is coming to visit their Washington office. Priorities, you know.

Well, the press office got back to me and verified that the document is indeed for real.

They were very defensive — preemptively so — in asserting that it was not a politicized document and that DHS had done reports on “leftwing extremism” in the past. I have covered DHS for many years and am quite familiar with past assessments they and the FBI have done on animal rights terrorists and environmental terrorists. But those past reports have always been very specific in identifying the exact groups, causes, and targets of domestic terrorism, i.e., the ALF, ELF, and Stop Huntingdon wackos who have engaged in physical harassment, arson, vandalism, and worse against pharmaceutical companies, farms, labs, and university researchers.

By contrast, the piece of crap report issued on April 7 is a sweeping indictment of conservatives. And the intent is clear. As the two spokespeople I talked with on the phone today made clear: They both pinpointed the recent “economic downturn” and the “general state of the economy” for stoking “rightwing extremism.” One of the spokespeople said he was told that the report has been in the works for a year. My b.s. detector went off the chart, and yours will, too, if you read through the entire report — which asserts with no evidence that an unquantified “resurgence in rightwing extremist recruitment and radicalizations activity” is due to home foreclosures, job losses, and…the historical presidential election.

In Obama land, there are no coincidences. It is no coincidence that this report echoes Tea Party-bashing left-wing blogs (check this one out comparing the Tea Party movement to the Weather Underground!) and demonizes the very Americans who will be protesting in the thousands on Wednesday for the nationwide Tax Day Tea Party.

From the report, p.2:

Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

From the report. p. 3:

(U//LES) Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool. Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use. Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment. From the 2008 election timeframe to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers.

(U) Exploiting Economic Downturn

(U//FOUO) Rightwing extremist chatter on the Internet continues to focus on the economy, the perceived loss of U.S. jobs in the manufacturing and construction sectors, and home foreclosures. Anti-Semitic extremists attribute these losses to a deliberate conspiracy conducted by a cabal of Jewish “financial elites.” These “accusatory” tactics are employed to draw new recruits into rightwing extremist groups and further radicalize those already subscribing to extremist beliefs. DHS/I&A assesses this trend is likely to accelerate if the economy is perceived to worsen.

From the report, p. 5:

(U//FOUO) Over the past five years, various rightwing extremists, including militias and white supremacists, have adopted the immigration issue as a call to action, rallying point,
and recruiting tool. Debates over appropriate immigration levels and enforcement policy generally fall within the realm of protected political speech under the First Amendment, but in some cases, anti-immigration or strident pro-enforcement fervor has been directed against specific groups and has the potential to turn violent.

And echoing the anti-military bigotry last seen in that disgusting Penn State University training video, there’s this on p. 7:

(U) Disgruntled Military Veterans

(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.

There’s no hackneyed left-wing stereotype of conservatives left behind in this DHS intelligence and analysis assessment. I asked both DHS spokespeople to tell me who, specifically, the report was accusing of “rightwing extremist chatter” and which “antigovernment” groups are being monitored as “extremists.” They say they’ll get back to me.

In the meantime, be aware of this from the report, p. 8:

(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A will be working with its state and local partners over the next several months to ascertain with greater regional specificity the rise in rightwing extremist activity in the United States, with a particular emphasis on the political, economic, and social factors that drive rightwing extremist radicalization.

Better make a few last-minute signs for the Tea Party. Obama’s DHS is watching:

Honk if you’re a radicalized rightwing extremist!

Guilty of rightwing extremist chatter

Anti-government, pro-freedom: Sue me

Monday, April 13, 2009

Tea time

teaparty The Jonesboro, Ark. Tea Party will be from 6 to 8 p.m. Wednesday at the Craighead County Courthouse.

I'll be there.

Why Samson Obama missed his brother's inauguration

From The News of the World:

By Gloria De Piero, 11/04/2009

AMERICAN president Barack Obama's half brother was REFUSED a image visa to enter the UK after being accused of an attempted sex attack on a young girl in Berkshire.

The News of the World can reveal that Kenya-based Samson Obama tried to get into Britain on his way to Washington for his family's big day, the historic inauguration in January.

But eagle-eyed immigration officials at East Midlands Airport, using the latest biometric tests, discovered he was linked to an incident here last November. The hi-tech database revealed that Samson - who manages a mobile phone shop just outside Nairobi - was the same man arrested by British police after he approached a group of young girls, including a 13 year-old, and allegedly tried to sexually assault one of them.

BIG DAY: Obama is sworn in

BIG DAY: Obama is sworn in

He then followed them into a cafe where he became aggressive and was asked to leave by the owner. That's when police were called and Samson was arrested.

He supplied officers with his mother's address in Bracknell but gave them a false ID, claiming to be Henry Aloo, believed to be a genuine asylum seeker.

Mum Kezia, 67, has lived in Bracknell for six years. She married the US president's father Barack Obama Snr in Kenya when she was a teenager.

Following Samson's arrest he was fingerprinted but not charged, then left the country. However, all his details were stored on the Home Office's new database of prints and biometric details. And that's what finally pinpointed Samson's link to the world's most powerful leader - as he tried to slip back into Britain to visit relatives en route to the swearing-in ceremony.

This was obviously an extremely sensitive issue when it was flashed up by the database

The White House was informed and a Home Office source told the News of the World: "This was obviously an extremely sensitive issue when it was flashed up by the database.

"But the system is designed to flag up people who have come to the attention of the police in the UK and are then trying to return."

It is thought that Samson - one of the President's 11 half brothers and sisters by his father who had four partners - managed to travel on to Washington by boarding a connecting flight to the US from East Midlands.

FAMILY MAN: President Obama with brother in younger days

FAMILY MAN: President Obama with brother in younger days

He was able to do so despite not having a UK visa because he remained in transit and never left the airport. A stewardess from nearby Nottingham told her local newspaper how she met him on his flight to America. Dawn Stewart, of Sherwood, described how Samson told her his nickname was Abo and said he was on his way to the US capital for the presidential swearing-in.

She recalled: "I asked him how he feels being the brother of the next president and he said, 'I can't tell you the depth of excitement we feel.'

"I asked what Barack was like as a teenager and he said he was always charismatic and calm."

The flight attendant said Samson claimed he had never travelled before and proudly showed her a headed letter from his half-brother requesting his three-week visa to the USA.

Last night a Home Office spokesman confirmed Samson Obama was refused a visa after immigration officers noticed one of the documents he supplied with his visa application was false. That led to further inquiries.

A UK Border Agency spokesman said: "We consider all visa applications based on their merits. We will oppose the entry of individuals to the UK where we believe their presence is not conducive to the public good.

"The UK's border controls are among the toughest in the world. All visa applicants are fingerprinted and checked against watchlists. Using this hi-tech system we have detected more than 5,600 attempts to use false identities since December 2007.

"Our officers in 135 countries are working with law enforcement agencies and airlines to clamp down on forged passports and visas."

Sunday, April 12, 2009

Capt. Phillips rescued from pirates

seal_us_navy_seals_insignia

Like I said, Navy Seals.

The ignorance and naiveté of the media types in covering the sniper action is stunning.

They’re acting like a 25 meter shot for a trained sniper is a huge deal. As the FOX guy outside the captain’s home just pointed out, these guys can hit an apple at 1,000 yards. Making a shot like this is like a layup, he said, regardless of the pitching and rolling of the USS Bainbridge and the lifeboat.

This is, of course, not meant to diminish the importance of today’s events, just to put things into the proper perspective.

Saturday, April 11, 2009

Turning the American eagle into a chicken

Posted by Warner Todd Huston on Saturday, April 11, 2009 6:06:43 AM

As Obama bows in supplication before a Saudi King then tries to spin his way out of his own actions, America is being humiliated by whelps at sea. He was just leaning, we're told, not bowing. It was because the Saudi King is short or so goes the White House spin. But the Queen of England is even shorter than the Saudi King and there was no royal navel gazing from Obama in England! Obama failed that test, indeed.

To be sure, Barack Obama is being tested just like Joe Biden said he would. But those testing him are not the sort of big state actors that Biden imagined would task the new president. They are low-tech, low-rent, unorganized pirates, not heads of state of great and dangerous nations. And this fact, that it is mere pirates testing him, is an even bigger slap in the face than it would be if it were a powerful nation or two testing President Obama.

And worse, these skinny, underfed, unorganized and ill-equipped pirates are making a fool of what is ostensibly the most powerful man in the world. And it is about to get worse if Obama allows the U.S. Navy to stand idly by as more pirates come to the scene of the standoff to float in solidarity with the four fellows holding captain Philips in that disabled power boat.

Obama has already allowed the Navy to miss one opportunity to end this standoff. Captain Richard Phillips made an escape attempt by jumping overboard and trying to make a swim for the U.S. Navy ship floating nearby. This was an ideal time for the Navy to blast the boat to pieces while the captain was in the water. The Navy could then have scooped up all five with ease. But instead, the Navy sat and did nothing as the pirates jumped into the water and dragged the captain back aboard.

Now reports have it that another pirate ship is headed to the scene to aid their four stranded comrades. Word also has it that they have other hostages in the ship with them. As it stands right now, the U.S. Navy has one hostage under its watchful eye. But soon it may have dozens to worry about.

If Obama does not task the Navy to end this situation before more pirate ships filled with more hostages get to the scene, it will be a tangle impossible to end without the loss of many hostage's lives. The French already ended one such stand off and it did cost the life of one hostage, though others were freed. But end it they did, nonetheless.

But isn’t that the worst part of it? While Obama idly sits at the picnic table watching his kids play in the White House yard the French Navy has acted. Here we have what is supposed to be the most powerful man in the world doing nothing while the French... THE FRENCH... use proper military force against these criminal pirates.

Obama is being tested from the most unlikely of sources. He is failing that test and showing the world that his "America Sucks" tour of Europe was not mere glad-handing boilerplate. Obama is proving that he means to defang the most powerful nation in the world. Obama apparently intends to hobble the United States of America. If this is not the case, he'd better step up to the plate and end this pirate outrage quickly.

Gerald Warner at telegraph.co.uk

President Barack Obama has recently completed the most successful foreign policy tour since Napoleon's retreat from Moscow. You name it, he blew it. What was his big deal economic programme that he was determined to drive through the G20 summit? Another massive stimulus package, globally funded and co-ordinated. Did he achieve it? Not so as you'd notice.
Barack Obama in Prague
Barack Obama in Prague on his astonishingly successful tour

Barack is not the first New World ingenue to discover that European leaders will load him with praise, struggle sycophantically to be photographed with him and outdo him in Utopian rhetoric. But when it comes to the critical moment of opening their wallets - suddenly it is flag-day in Aberdeen. Okay, put the G20 down to inexperience, beginner's nerves, what you will.

On to Nato and the next big objective: to persuade the same European evasion experts that America, Britain and Canada should no longer bear the brunt of the Afghan struggle virtually unassisted. The Old World sucked through its teeth, said that was asking a lot - but, seeing it was Barack, to whom they could refuse nothing, they would graciously accede to his wishes.

So The One retired triumphant, having secured a massive contribution of 5,000 extra troops - all of them non-combatant, of course - which must really have put the wind up the Taliban, at the prospect of 5,000 more infidel cooks and bottle-washers swarming into the less hazardous regions of Afghanistan.

Then came the dramatic bit, the authentic West Wing script, with the President wakened in the middle of the night in Prague to be told that Kim Jong-il had just launched a Taepodong-2 missile. America had Aegis destroyers tracking the missile and could have shot it down. But Uncle Sam had a sterner reprisal in store for l'il ole Kim (as Dame Edna might call him): a multi-megaton strike of Obama hot air.

"Rules must be binding," declared Obama, referring to the fact that Kim had just breached UN Resolutions 1695 and 1718. "Violations must be punished." (Sounds ominous.) "Words must mean something." (Why, Barack? They never did before, for you - as a cursory glance at your many speeches will show.)

President Pantywaist is hopping mad and he has a strategy to cut Kim down to size: he is going to slice $1.4bn off America's missile defence programme, presumably on the calculation that Kim would feel it unsporting to hit a sitting duck, so that will spoil his fun.

Watch out, France and Co, there is a new surrender monkey on the block and, over the next four years, he will spectacularly sell out the interests of the West with every kind of liberal-delusionist initiative on nuclear disarmament and sitting down to negotiate with any power freak who wants to buy time to get a good ICBM fix on San Francisco, or wherever. If you thought the world was a tad unsafe with Dubya around, just wait until President Pantywaist gets into his stride.

Friday, April 10, 2009

Barry and the Pirates

This was posted today over at www.americanthinker.com:

By Lance Fairchok

It is the stuff of movies, a high seas drama, where for the first time in 200 years, pirates attack an American vessel, the Maersk Alabama. In the best traditions of America's merchant seamen, its brave crew fights back and regains control of the ship. To ensure the safety of his crew from the pirates, and at great personal risk, the noble Captain offers himself as hostage. The freighter is filled with humanitarian relief for Kenya, not weapons, cars, electronics, or luxuries. Luckily, an American warship, the USS Bainbridge was nearby. It is a moment for leadership and resolve, where America asserts her might and dignity, where she takes the lead against lawless marauders, and our President stands up full of pride and righteous anger and says.... Well, what he said was, exactly, nothing.

Oh, his administration mumbled, made half-hearted condemnations, and pandered a bit. John Kerry called for hearings, Hillary Clinton voiced her "concern" and cackled uproariously about the situation during a press conference with the Moroccan Ambassador, whose country ironically was once a pirate power that seized American ships and enslaved our crews in the late 1700s. Hillary botched the details, but did decisively state: "We think the world must come together to end the scourge of piracy."

There was a measured and nuanced press conference by a State Department spokesperson, Robert Wood, as Secretary of State Clinton was otherwise engaged. "Our militaries - the U.S. military and the militaries of other countries are cooperating, trying to see what we can do to prevent these types of piracy acts from happening. But, this is going to take time. We are all working very closely to try to do what we can." He further stated: "We've been trying to provide support for the transitional government there (in Somalia); we've encouraged others to do so...but this is a question for the entire international community to deal with..."

This is what we have come to. Unilateral action, even if it is as clear cut as defending US interests against pirates, must be avoided. Murderous Jihadist terrorists get civil rights and government lawyers while US taxpayers pick up the bill. Pirates, who board US shipping and threaten American seamen, get treated like simple criminals that do not warrant so much as a mention by the President. One would have thought it was a no-brainer for the Manchurian President, a populist win-win to paint Obama as a decisive leader, a chance to inspire confidence that he was up to the challenge. It was a chance to warn aggressors, pirates or otherwise, away from international shipping. It was also a chance, now squandered, to reassure friend and foe alike that America had not lost her nerve or reneged on her exceptional role as a world leader.

But no, it's all just a distraction from the greater work of wealth redistribution, "social justice," and remaking America into the utopian vision of a narcissistic socialist academic with a nice speaking voice. No pompous speeches and meandering lectures this time, the implications of piracy on trade and sovereignty are beyond Obama.

When asked by a reporter about the Maersk Alabama during a White House event, President Obama responded to the question with: "Guys, we're talking about housing right now," translated as "don't bother me with trivialities." Obama has no clue what is required of a world leader and his advisors less so. A mere three months into its first term, the Obama administration is turning out to be just the embarrassment and bumbling disaster, we feared it would be.

I've already noticed people taking Obama stickers off their cars. They can only pad the polls so long. Pirates are easy, what's going to happen if we are attacked again, or Iran, Pakistan, or North Korea use a nuke?

Wednesday, April 8, 2009

26 Democrat Senators break ranks to block Obama's cap-and-tax lunacy

I found this bit of encouraging news over at www.americanthinker.com. I'm gratified to note that both of Arkansas's Democrat senators - Lincoln and Pryor - along with both Indiana senators - Democrat Bayh and Republican Lugar - came out on the right side of this issue and refused to be stampeded by the "global warming" bullshit at the expense of the U.S. economy.

By Raymond Richman and Howard Richman

In a procedural vote on April 1, 2009, 26 Democratic Senators joined all of the Republicans in defeating, for now, a climate change bill that would have allowed fast-tracking of President Obama's cap-and-tax proposal so that it could be passed as part of the current Federal budget. (Click here to see how your Senator voted.) Senator Lamar Alexander called this "the biggest vote of the year."

The bill that would have passed would probably have resembled the Waxman-Markey discussion draft of The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, a bill proposal designed to combat global warming by encouraging the use of "renewable" energy sources (nuclear energy providers need not apply). So it is possible to look closely at the Waxman-Markey draft to see what the Senate rejected.

The draft is full of subsidies, while at the same time providing that electric utilities impose energy and efficiency standards on their customers to achieve one percent reduction of carbon emissions in 2012 increasing to 15 percent in 2020. (If renewable energy is going to be so plentiful and cheap, why does it require tremendous subsidies and command and control methods to achieve its goals?) But the worst part of the bill by far is its plan to auction rights to emit carbon dioxide in order to fight global warming, as noted in the bill's summary:

Global Warming Pollution Reduction Program. The draft establishes a market-based program for reducing global warming pollution from electric utilities, oil companies, large industrial sources, and other covered entities that collectively are responsible for 85% of U.S. global warming emissions. Under this program, covered entities must have tradable federal permits, called "allowances," for each ton of pollution emitted into the atmosphere. Entities that emit less than 25,000 tons per year of CO2 equivalent are not covered by this program. The program reduces the number of available allowances issued each year to ensure that aggregate emissions from the covered entities are reduced by 3% below 2005 levels in 2012, 20% below 2005 levels in 2020, 42% below 2005 levels in 2030, and 83% below 2005 levels in 2050.

According to the Waxman-Markey draft, the bill "will create millions of new clean energy jobs, save consumers hundreds of billions of dollars in energy costs, enhance America's energy independence, and cut global warming pollution." None of this is true. This bill orders electric utilities to substitute expensive solar and wind power for inexpensive coal, oil, and natural gas. It would cause a loss of jobs in coal mining, oil drilling, and natural gas drilling. It would cost consumers higher prices for not only energy but for almost everything else they buy. As for enhancing America's energy independence, a bigger and faster contribution would be made by permitting offshore oil drilling, by encouraging drilling in Alaska, or by overriding Senator Harry Reid's opposition to developing a nuclear waste storage facility in Nevada.

Environmentalists are willing to let the BRIC countries (Brazil, India and China) postpone for decades meeting environmental standards because doing so would stifle their growth, but they want us unilaterally to immediately cut back on using carbon fuels, falsely claiming this will help our economy.

The worst effects of the bill would be upon United States competitiveness in international trade, thus chasing American manufacturing jobs to Brazil, India and China. In a new book just published by the Peterson Institute for International Economics, the authors pointed out that any climate bill would drive up the cost of American products, making them less competitive in U.S. and world markets, unless it includes border provisions, such as export subsidies and import duties. 

The draft does contain weak provisions to keep American jobs from moving overseas, but those provisions entirely depend upon bureaucratic discretion. Here is the relevant part of the summary:

Ensuring Domestic Competitiveness. To ensure that U.S. manufacturers are not put at a disadvantage relative to overseas competitors, the draft authorizes companies in certain industrial sectors to receive "rebates" to compensate for additional costs incurred under the program. Sectors that use large amounts of energy, and produce commodities that are traded globally, would be eligible for the rebates. If the President finds that the rebate provisions do not sufficiently correct competitive imbalances, the President is directed to establish a "border adjustment" program. Under that program, foreign manufacturers and importers would be required to pay for and hold special allowances to "cover" the carbon contained in U.S.-bound products.

Don't expect much help for U.S. manufacturers from this provision. Rebates and border adjustments would violate WTO rules. Our leaders have complied, even while those WTO rules produced huge trade deficits, costing us about seven million good paying manufacturing jobs. Foreign governments continue to exploit huge holes in the WTO rules, as through currency manipulations, while the United States government does nothing. The chances of the United States government violating WTO rules in order to stand up for American industry are very low.

The bill clearly imposes huge costs upon the American economy in a rush to combat global warming, but the earth is actually cooling at present. The bill's supporters are ignoring an alternative to the carbon dioxide theory, cosmoclimatology, which holds that changes in cosmic ray influx cause global temperature changes. Cosmic rays cause ionization that forms low level clouds which reflect the sun's heat back into space, resulting in lower temperatures. Sunspots fit into this theory because solar activity blocks out cosmic rays, leading to temporary periods of warming. For a recent summary of the sound evidence behind this theory, see Danish scientist Henrik Svensmark's 2007 paper.

Cosmoclimatology theory explains the extreme warmth of the second half of the 20th Century as resulting from unusually high solar activity, and the cooling period since 1998 as a result of reduced solar activity. Unlike the carbon dioxide theory, it explains the close correspondence between the earth's greenhouse ages and ice ages with the movements of the solar system through the spiral arms of the galaxy. It even explains the fact that Antarctic temperatures show temperature trends opposite from those observed in the northern hemisphere. (The white Antarctic ice reflects more light back into space when there is no cloud cover, while the Northern hemisphere reflects more light back into space when there is cloud cover.)

Cosmoclimatology is a fairly new branch of science. As scientists continue to gather data, they should be able to determine the amount of global warming that is left over for the carbon dioxide theory to explain. Meanwhile, with global temperatures declining as a result of lower sunspot activity, we may even be heading into a mini-ice age, like the one that occurred from 1645-1715, when sunspots were extremely scarce.

With the earth cooling at present, the pressing question is not whether Washington saves the planet from global warming. The pressing question is whether Washington destroys the American economy. Thirty-one Democratic senators just voted to do so. The fact that 26 Democratic Senators crossed party lines to vote against quick passage of cap-and-tax is a very good sign for America's economic future.