KEEP TELLING YOURSELF THAT HEALTHCARE IS OUR BIGGEST PROBLEM

"Al-Qaeda proclaimed a religious rationale to justify the WMD attacks it was planning. In June 2002, a Kuwaiti-born cleric named Suleiman Abu Ghaith posted a statement on the Internet saying that "al-Qaeda has the right to kill 4 million Americans" in retaliation for U.S. attacks against Muslims. And in May 2003, at the same time Saudi operatives of al-Qaeda were trying to buy three Russian nuclear bombs, a cleric named Nasir al-Fahd issued a fatwa titled "A Treatise on the Legal Status of Using Weapons of Mass Destruction Against Infidels." Interrogations of al-Qaeda operatives confirmed that the planning was serious. Al-Qaeda didn't yet have the materials for a WMD attack, but it wanted them.

Most chilling of all was Zawahiri's decision in March 2003 to cancel a cyanide attack in the New York subway system. He told the plotters to stand down because "we have something better in mind." What did that mean? More than four years later, we still don't know.

After 2004, the WMD trail went cold, according to Mowatt-Larssen. Many intelligence analysts have concluded that al-Qaeda doesn't have nuclear capability today. Mowatt-Larssen argues that a more honest answer is: We don't know."

Do read the whole thing. All of the signs have pointed to this and as time goes by, the signs become more pronounced - those with the means are making alliances with those with the motive and this country is in the cross-hairs.

You need to ask yourself who you want in charge as we approach the dark days ahead. I'll vote for the candidate who will kill Muslim terrorists - as many and as quickly as possible.

I keep hearing "And your little dog, too............" followed by that hideous Hillary laugh.

Man arrested for airport al-Qaida joke

BOSTON, Oct. 1 (UPI) -- A Washington taxi driver faces a criminal charge because he joked about being a member of al-Qaida to an airline worker in Boston.

Ermiyaf A. Asfaw, an Ethiopian national, was returning to Washington from a visit to his girlfriend Saturday when an Air-Tran check-in employee asked him about stickers on his luggage from Dubai. He told her he had been in the United Arab Emirates.

"No. I'm al-Qaida. I'm with them, and I'm here to blow things up," he said when she asked if it had been a trip for business or pleasure.

Asfaw has been charged with making a false bomb threat. A judge set bail Monday at $1,500.

"This airport is not going to tolerate this type of behavior," said Phil Orlandella, a spokesman for the Massachusetts Port Authority. "This type of action is completely dumb."

Well, I guess the authorities didn't find the joke very funny. Frankly, neither do I. I think that a good punishment would be to permanantly deport his humorous Ethiopian ass.

We already have enough people in this country already that think that 9-11 was a joke.

Burma: Thousands dead in massacre of the monks dumped in the jungle

Where is the international outrage? When is the worthless UN going to do something other than issue worthless platitudes.....and have they even done that?

There's a lot of talk of peace these days on the part of the left, but when Buddhist monks, some of the most peaceful people on Earth, are being slaughtered by the hundreds and citizens by the thousands there's nothing but silence. There's a lot of talk about the "global village", but when there's an opportunity to really DO something to save innocent lives, there is nothing but paralysis.

It's still another clear example of hypocrisy in its most pathetic form.

Iraq violent death rates 'plunge'

Isn't his good news and why is it not being heralded as such? Oh yeah, the template is that we've already lost......

Poll: Most Israelis support using nukes

Approximately 72 percent of Israelis support the use of nuclear weapons in certain circumstances, according to a Canadian survey released recently.

The survey - conducted jointly at the end of July by the Simons Foundation and Angus Reid Strategies - was answered by adults in six countries and showed that 37% of Israelis believed the use of nuclear weapons to prevent a war would be justified, while 35% believed the weapons could be justifiably used during a war.

In addition, the survey found that Israel had the lowest public support for
destroying nuclear weapons out of all the countries questioned.

Israel also had the highest percentage in favor of the country using its "power and influence in a way that serves its own interests" - approximately 55% - as opposed to "coordinat[ing] with other countries to do what's best for the world as a whole."

Nearly 72% also agreed that "nuclear weapons place Israel in a unique position, so it is not in our interest to participate in treaties that would reduce or eliminate our purported nuclear arsenal."

About three-quarters of Israelis also said they would feel safer if they knew for certain that Israel had nuclear weapons. Israel has thus far maintained its policy of nuclear ambiguity.

The organizers of the study suggested that Israel accorded greater importance to the nuclear form of defense due to the Iranian threat, Army Radio reported.

The study spanned a sample of 1,000 adults in Britain, France, Italy, Germany and the US along with
Israel.

A refeshing moment of clarity from the Israelis, while in this country we invite the Iranian madman to speak at a major university and many on the American left laud him and dine with him. I fear a great price will be paid for our refusal to see the obvious and to call evil by its name.

IMAGINE WHIRLED PEAS

While I was sitting on the plane the other day, I saw this kid in his early 20s boarding. You know the type; rumpled clothes, long hair going in a multitude of directions, little glasses and a look on his face that clearly said "I'm an intellectual, and I don't give a rat's ass what knuckle-draggers such as you think of me". In another words, not unlike me in my early 20s, and that's the whole point.

He had a guitar case (of course) and on it were stickers that seemed to commemorate every thought or belief he ever had, original or not. The one that caught my eye was one that said END WAR. Actually, I see these types and their stickers and buttons all of the time, and I find them increasingly annoying. The fact that the people who sport them maintain an air of intellectual superiority while being spectacularly clueless is maddening.

The fact is, more that 3 decades ago people of my generation wanted the war to end in Southeast Asia. Hell, "End The War" seemed to be the most effective animator of my generation and it was central to our culture. Unfortunately, we were just as clueless as this young man on the airplane as to the consequences of our actions

Proponents of the war warned us that a pull-out would result in a bloodbath and the entire region would fall to the Communists. The intellectuals of the day were highly critical of our "illegal" actions in Cambodia. Well, the young people of the day, the press and the intellectuals got their way and we left Southeast Asia to their own devices. After our departure, North and South Vietnam were reunited as a Communist country and those who were fighting with us for their freedom, if they were not fortunate enough to escape, were killed. It's estimated that 2 million people were exterminated in Cambodia. 2 million people. Was this the "peace" we sought? Even now, many of my generation are quite self-congratulatory about the way "we" ended the war in Vietnam. As for the millions who were killed as a result of our quest for "peace"....well, we just don't talk about that.

From that time until the present, Vietnam has provided the enemies of this country with a blueprint of how to defeat the most powerful nation on Earth in asymmetrical conflict; keep drawing blood, even in small quantities and wait for us to accept defeat in the name of "peace.

As for the bohemian intellectual sticker people and button wearers, they have their blueprint too; oppose ANY war, regardless of the cause, and pressure the government to accept defeat in the name of "peace".

Our enemies, from within and without have learned well while we have learned nothing.

Ah, the Religion of PEACE and HARMONY.....

We do use books that call Jews 'apes' admits head of Islamic school

The principal of an Islamic school has admitted that it uses textbooks which describe Jews as "apes" and Christians as "pigs" and has refused to withdraw them.

Dr Sumaya Alyusuf confirmed that the offending books exist after former teacher Colin Cook, 57, alleged that children as young as five are taught from racist materials at the King Fahd Academy in Acton.

And the school in question is not in Saudi Arabia....it's in London (or Londonistan, if you will).

So when are we going to admit that Islam is less a religion and more a facist political cult? They continue to use the western concepts of freedom and liberty in order to inflict their repressive and racist ideologies upon their benevolent hosts. All the while, we delude ourselves into believing that we are "embracing diversity" when, in fact, we are writing the final chapter in the history of western culture.

Iranian Reveals Plan to Expand Role in Iraq

BAGHDAD, Jan. 28 — Iran’s ambassador to Baghdad outlined an ambitious plan on Sunday to greatly expand its economic and military ties with Iraq — including an Iranian national bank branch in the heart of the capital — just as the Bush Administration has been warning the Iranians to stop meddling in Iraqi affairs.

Iran’s plan, as outlined by the ambassador, carries the potential to bring Iran into further conflict here with the United States, which has detained a number of Iranian operatives in recent weeks and says it has proof of Iranian complicity in attacks on American and Iraqi forces.

The ambassador, Hassan Kazemi Qumi, said Iran was prepared to offer Iraq government forces training, equipment and advisers for what he called “the security fight.” In the economic area, Mr. Qumi said, Iran was ready to assume major responsibility for Iraq reconstruction, an area of failure on the part of the United States since American-led forces overthrew Saddam Hussein nearly four years ago.

“We have experience of reconstruction after war,” Mr. Qumi said, referring to the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s. “We are ready to transfer this experience in terms of reconstruction to the Iraqis.”

Yeah, right. They just want to "help" the Iraqis reconstruct. If you're not living in fairyland, I think that it's clear that Iran's interest in Iraq clearly lies in the failure of Iraqi democracy and by extension the failure of the Bush Doctrine.

It's funny how their ends seem to coincide with those of many Democrats.

Ah yes, I am sure there is some degree of satisfaction being felt in some leftist circles - "Bush gets a well-deserved poke in the eye!" Seeing the U.S. as the house divided that those on the left have so so assiduously tried to portray, Iran not only rejects our call to stop meddling in the affairs of Iraq, but they announce plans to step up the process. They have effectively slapped President Bush, and by extension, the U.S., in the face and dared us to do anything about it. Far from being reticent about being overly hostile to the world's remaining superpower, (that, it so happens, occupies the country right next door) they ratchet up the hostility.

So thanks, Nancy Pelosi, John Murtha, Ted Kennedy, and all of the rest of the old and new drinkers of the leftist koolade - including the media. Special thanks should go to former President Jimmy Carter and "Would-Be President" (thank God) John Kerry for some of the most shameful behavior and remarks during the "debate" over Iraq. You have sought to torpedo every chance of victory at every turn and in those cases when victory was achieved despite your efforts, you spun it as failure. In doing so, you have disgraced your country and seriously jeapordized its very future.

Did you not realize that the virual promise of capitulation you made prior to the elections would embolden our enemy and almost ensure failure? I think you realized exactly that. I think that your hatred of George W. Bush outweighs all other matters and shoves the concept of "the common good" from your field of vision. If you are not traitors, then you are so obsessed with regaining your power and so intoxicated with Bush-hatred that your actions and words are indistinguishable from treason.

PEACE: WHAT IS IT GOOD FOR?
Absolutely Nothing!

I hear a lot of the word "peace" lately, and I hear it in the context that if we would just choose peace that we would have it, if we would just "end the war", we would usher in a time of peace. And the so-called "intellectuals" who embrace this warmed-over 60s pap have the temerity to call people like me "simplistic".

For us, it's not a choice between war and peace, it's a choice between survival and oblivion. Peace means many different things to many different people and that difference determines whose civilization lives, and whose dies. If you don't believe that the situation is at least that dire, then I'm afraid that you have not been paying attention.

To the Islamists, peace means the destruction of the United States as well as Israel and the imposition of global Islamic law. The means to that end is war and that is a choice that they have made. Don't take my word for it, take theirs. Exactly how does one make peace with people whose goal in life is the destruction of your way of life? Are we prepared to give up all we hold dear for peace, or should we think that the central theme around which they have built their life is somehow, negotiable?

Perhaps appeasement is your chosen avenue toward peace. If so, you may not realize that this was the road most traveled up to the morning of 9/11/01 at which time a massive detour sign was erected. It was written in Arabic and began "Allah Akbar". These signs have been erected all over the world since the 1970s and are still being erected on a daily basis. They are written in blood so that their meaning is unmistakable, yet you seem unwilling or incapable of heeding them.

The fact is that peace does not spring from the loins of pacifism and it is not achieved through appeasement. The world is a dangerous place where the unscrupulous prey upon the scrupulous and the unprincipled feast upon the principled and the only way to maintain honor as well as safety is through strength. The one and only reason that this country has enjoyed relative peace and safety within our shores is the terrible price that awaited anyone who dared disturb that peace or threaten our safety. Now that our peace and safety has been disturbed, the price must be paid and those who propose that we discount that price threaten not only our short-term safety but that of generations to come.

Choosing peace when your opponent has clearly and vociferously chosen war is a strategy for fools and unworthy of a great nation. Choose peace if you will, but don't be surprised if you get something far more terrible than war in the bargain.

RHETORICAL FLATULENCE

An apparent gas leak in Lower Manhattan has caused justifiable concern. As teams of people who do such things spring into action in an effort to correct the situation, Mayor Bloomberg hastens to reassure the public:

Bloomberg also said there was no indication the air was unsafe to breathe. "It may just be an unpleasant smell."

"We are waiting for the gas to pass," the mayor said.

Perhaps "dissipate" would have been a better choice of words, no?

ROOM TEMPERATURE

Saddam finally received what the likes of Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Chairman Mao and Arafat managed to avoid - temporal justice for crimes committed against humanity. He was hanged as the execrable criminal that he was, reportedly clutching the Quran, though from all accounts he was not a particularly religious man. He was more of a secular mass-murderer rather than the much more common religious variety. In the end, I guess the Quran unites murderers of all stripes.

UPDATE: Victor Davis Hanson offers his inimitable perspective:

One of the most depressing sights of the entire Saddam postmortem were the clips shown ad nauseam of all the dignitaries, diplomats, and obsequious reporters who in years past trekked to Baghdad to flatter or to pay homage to this creepy mass murderer. Watching a younger Kofi Annan, Lindberg like, pump Saddam's hand, smiling and offering blandishments was sickening. Surely the world can learn from this sordid spectacle, and not repeat the same mistake with Ahmadinejad and Assad. Their demise will come soon enough, and only the clips and outtakes of the appeasers will remain.

It is getting so that the cheap anti-American rhetoric from Europe and the Middle East about our purported complicity in killing a mass murderer should be worn as a badge of honor. We caught him, turned him over for a transparent trial, and ensured he would never murder again. So the question remains: where is the true morality-building this killer's bunkers, selling him weapons, taking his oil-or putting him in a noose?

Nothing was more evident of the moral impoverishment of the Palestinians than their collective lamentation over the fate of this mass killer of the Kurds and Arabs. We gave the Palestinian Authority hundreds of millions of dollars for housing, schools, and security and they hate us; Saddam gave them a few thousand dollars as bounty for suicide murderers and they loved him.

That says it all.

Indeed it does. Theirs is a "culture" hopelessly mired in a dark and violent past where blood lust and violence are the currency and killers such as Saddam are revered as heroes. They have created a "win win" situation in their minds whereas even in abject defeat, they achieve glorious martyrdom.

MERRY CHRISTMAS

I just wanted to take a moment to wish everyone a very Merry Christmas. No, not happy holidays, Merry Christmas. Have you noticed that "Merry Christmas" is becoming something of a symbol of rebellion? Indeed, there seems to be a backlash, and more and more people are using the phrase "Merry Christmas" with an subtle underlying attitude that whispers "take your happy holidays and shove it". A very good thing, indeed. Let's face it, if you are offended by someone wishing you Merry Christmas, you have issues that need to be addressed by you, not by those around you.

In short, if you want tolerance, try practicing some yourself.

As a side note, I haven't been blogging nearly as much as I should or would I have liked. It's been a fairly rough time and next week looks busy in the extreme. I promise that more blogging will be in the offing as we close out '06 and prepare for '07.

Again, Merry Christmas!

NOW THIS IS INTERESTING
Wishful thinking perhaps, but any progress is welcome.

Captain Ed had a very interesting post that indicates that maybe, just maybe, Iraqis are beginning to realize the opportunity that has been laid before them:

It appears that events have begun to pick up pace in Iraq. First a broad agreement seems to have coalesced around revenue sharing for Iraq's oil production, and now it looks like Nouri al-Maliki might be getting the heave as Prime Minister:

Major partners in Iraq's governing coalition are in behind-the-scenes talks to oust Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki amid discontent over his failure to quell raging violence, according to lawmakers involved. The talks are aimed at forming a new parliamentary bloc that would seek to replace the current government and that would likely exclude supporters of the radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who is a vehement opponent of the U.S. military presence.

The new alliance would be led by senior Shiite politician Abdul-Aziz
al-Hakim, who met withPresident Bush last week. Al-Hakim, however, was not expected to be the next prime minister because he prefers the role of powerbroker, staying above the grinding day-to-day running of the country.

Back in March, the thinking was that by allowing a Sadr ally to form the government, it might encourage Sadr to end his efforts to gain power through violence. That has obviously failed, and failed badly. As I wrote earlier today, it torpedoed the efforts to get the Sunni and Ba'athist insurgents to end their campaigns, and Sadr has only gotten worse ever since.

Maliki needs to go, and go soon. Engaging Sadr doesn't work, and the US should return to our previous policy of targeting him and his Mahdi army lieutenants if they refuse to disarm. Thanks to Maliki, he has infiltrated the Interior ministry, so he will present a difficult opponent if he chooses to fight it out. However, Sadr makes a better power broker than a general, as he has proven several times now. Without Maliki running interference, he will be more exposed than ever.

And guess who has apparently given his blessing to the change? Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. We have not heard much from the widely respected Shi'ite cleric since Sadr's star rose, but it looks like he's coming out of his de facto retirement from national politics.

The Iraqis have tired of the lack of progress even more than we have. It looks like they have formed a coalition of groups large enough to shut down Maliki and Sadr in the National Assembly, which means that even the Shi'ites have had enough. Keep an eye on this over the next few days.

Maybe all of this "pull out of Iraq" prattle that has been going on may well be incentivizing the Iraqis to get their act together and recognize those who stand in the way of progress. A lot of people have a lot to lose if we pull out of Iraq and the Iraqis are at the top of that list.

It is said that "The gallows doth wonderfully concentrate the mind" and perhaps the Iraqis have seen the shadow of their gallows.

IRANIAN WEAPONS ARM IRAQI MILITIA

I guess our pen pal, Ahmadinejad, forgot to mention this in his most recent missive to us "noble Americans".

Let's see, we have Syria actively destabilizing Lebanon and, more than likely, giving aid and comfort to the Iraqi "insurgents. We now have Iran arming the Iraqi militia who are killing American troops, not to mention massive numbers of Iraqis. And there are those who honestly feel that that same Iran and Syria should be "engaged" to assist in quelling the violence in Iraq?

It's clear that we are fighting a proxy war with both Iran and Syria in Iraq. In view of the fact that both of these countries have been both facilitators and havens for terrorism, calling Iraq the major front in the "War on Terror" is not a misnomer.

To leave Iraq at this time would send a signal that would reverberate not only throughout the Middle East, but the world at large. I still hold out hope reason will prevail and even the Nancy Pelosis and Harry Reids who now control Congress will see the folly of their premature exit strategy, better known as capitulation.

Africa Faces Growing Obesity Problem

So, does this signal the end of world hunger? Alas, probably not. It is however, a headline that caught my eye.

PEACE WITH MUSLIMS REQUIRES "LETTING GO" OF SOME OF THOSE CHRISTIAN BELIEFS
No, this is not a parody, it's all too real

If Christians were so "Christian" we could live peacefully, or so says some all-knowing theologian speaking in, of all places, Tennessee:

To live peacefully with Muslims and Jews, Christians must put aside the notion that their faith requires the creation of a Christian kingdom on Earth, a Lipscomb University theologian told an interfaith gathering at the university.

"We are not going to get very far in our relationship with Jews or Muslims if we do not let go of this idea," Lipscomb professor Lee Camp said at Tuesday's conference.
The unusual gathering of several dozen clergy and lay people was devoted to
resolving religious conflict in Nashville and around the world.

"We need to forsake the Christendom model," Camp said. "The most basic Christian commitment … is that we say we believe in the Lordship of Jesus. But, if we claim that, how can a Muslim or Jew trust us, if we say Jesus is the Lord of all Lords?"

So, we can only achieve harmony with Muslims if we first "forsake the Christendom model"? A better example of western civilization in full retreat I cannot imagine. Were it not so depressing, it would be hilarious.

But if that weren't enough, there is still more; you should also bone up on your Islam:

For Kahled Sakalla, a spokesman for the Islamic Center of Nashville, some of the answers lie in better education about Islam in the non-Muslim world.

Sorry Kahled, the problem isn't our limited knowledge of Islam, it's the unlimited capacity for violence and mehem in the name of your faith. With apologies to Shakespeare, the fault dear Kahled, lies not in your stars, but in yourselves.

The level of guile that we are constantly presented with is breathtaking. Islam has been the main source of bloodshed for the past quarter-century, and they can't even admit it much less stop it. Islamic countries openly foment and finance terrorist activities toward the West, while their leaders spew forth the vilest anti-Semitism and overt calls for the destruction of Israel. They do all of this while claiming "victimhood" and "intolerance" and American leftists and the media are more than happy to play the part of useful idiots.

UPDATE: A reader had brought to my attention a follow-up article in which Dr Camp disputes how his comments were taken, and in fairness, I feel compelled to bring this to your attention.

As I told the reader, while I think that Dr. Camp's clarification somewhat softens some of his rather extreme quotes from the conference, I still disagree with his basic thrust.

YOU HAVE MAIL!
Ahmadinejad Pens Letter to "Noble Americans"

And guess what? It sounds lake it was written by Howard Dean, though much more polite. Read the whole thing here, if you wish.

The sad truth is that countries such as Iran and Syria (not to mention al Qaeda) have mastered the art of manipulating our willing media. We have reached the point where bin Laden, Ahmadinejad, Assad and a whole host of dangerously bad actors are sharing talking points and goals with many Democrats as evidenced by this letter. I can just see members of the Democrat leadership reading this letter thinking "you know, he has a point", all the while with visions of negotiated peace with tyrants dancing in their heads.

BAD CHOICES, WORSE CHOICES

Iran is building nukes and anyone who believes Iranian statements to the contrary is gullible in the extreme. Russia is selling Iran defensive missile systems, presumably to protect those areas which need the highest degree of protection – those areas where the nuclear development is taking place. Syria, on the other hand, is brazenly assassinating anti-Syrian Lebanese politicians in a naked attempt to re-occupy and eventually annex Lebanon, a sovereign state and fledgling democracy.

Some will owe this situation to our actions in Iraq, but they would be wrong. Iran has been a rogue state since the revolution that began its “great step backward” in 1979 and it is a culture that has been politically devolving ever since. Now they seem to be a leadership hopelessly mired in medieval attitudes and animosities on the fast track to arming themselves with the most terrible and destructive weapons known to man. Syria, on the other hand, has long been a belligerent state, financing, arming and generally facilitating civil unrest throughout the Middle East. Relations between Syria and the West have fluctuated between warm and cold through the years, but I think this is more a result of doing what is necessary to maintain their influence rather than any form of developing moderation.

Often, there are no good choices and bad choices – instead, we are confronted with bad choices and worse choices, but choose we must. History is rife with examples choices between lesser of evils and those examples have taught us that not choosing is often the worst choice of all.

Post 9/11, it became clear that, in the global war against “radical Islam” (a term I find somewhat redundant), we had but two choices – forcibly confront Islam from without or attempt to moderate Islam’s medieval, violent tenets with freedom and democracy from within. We chose the latter option in the hope that self-moderation would follow civilizational development in a region that has remained stagnant for centuries. Since Iraq had spent more than a decade thumbing its collective nose at the U.S. and numerous U.N. resolutions, threatening its neighbors and lusting after (and developing) WMDs, it was targeted for regime change. This was a daunting challenge, to be sure, but a far preferable starting point than the former.

The United States is in Iraq trying to promote a fragile democracy while Iran and Syria are doing everything on their power to negate our efforts, including the wholesale murder of Iraqi civilians and sending fighters into Iraq to attack U.S. troops. A functioning, free democracy in the heart of the Middle East is terrifying to the despotic regimes that have defined Middle Eastern politics for decades, or rather, centuries. The depots in question will stop at nothing to see that the Iraqi experiment ends in failure, lest they lose control of their own populace. Much as Poland’s defiance of the Soviet Union spelled the beginning of the end of Soviet domination in Eastern Europe, a liberal democracy in the heart of the Middle East could portend profound changes, for the better, in the political landscape of the region and Iran and Syria may well be the first recipients (or in their eyes, victims) of that change.

The Iraq war has not been an easy one, though enormously more successful and costing far fewer U.S. lives than its early critics had predicted. Nonetheless, the military action that was once enjoyed enormous support has become an unpopular albatross due to our inability to wrap it up in a tidy package in under three years. The fault lies not in our military prowess, but rather in the short attention span of our populace exacerbated by a full-court press by the MSM. The Islamofacists are not going away and the actions of Iran and Syria as well as their subsequent disregard of “World opinion” thereof clearly shows that they have been emboldened rather than chastised. They smell blood in the water in the form of weakness and fatigue on the part of the west.

Thanks to the never-ending concentration on the negative and complete disregard of the positive emanating from a collection of Democrat politicians and “peace advocate” throwbacks and amplified by the media, our nation’s resolve has been all but vanquished. With those Democrats now controlling the Congress and Senate, retreat is quickly moving from possibility to probability. This development elicits glee not only from Democrats, but from Iran, Syria and a host of other terrorist thugs who have been patiently waiting for America’s dogs of war to be transformed into the puppies of appeasement.

Is this really what the American people want? Do we want to watch Iraq descend into chaos and civil war as those brave Iraqi citizens who embraced democracy are the first to be slaughtered? Would not even the most vehement Bush-Haters among us agree that even a semi-progressive democracy in Iraq is not only far preferable to an aggressive tyranny, but is also conducive to spreading throughout the region? Do we really feel that three years is too long to invade, conquer, rebuild, reform and leave a functioning, free state, particularly when surrounding states (Iran, Syria) actively aid and abet our opposition? Does our loyalty to and support for those who seek freedom and democracy have an expiration date?

If your answers to these questions are “yes”, your vision is sadly obscured by the lens of partisan politics. The “war is not the answer” attitude has been superceded by those who clearly state their goals (destruction of Israel, global Islamic domination, etc.) and on a daily basis demonstrate that they will literally stop at nothing in order to achieve them. Those who feel that negotiation is the answer choose to ignore the fact that submission to Islam is non-negotiable.

There is still time for the Democrats, et al to step back from the precipice of ignominy and stand with the democrats of Iraq. There is still time to show that the United States is the greatest friend to those who choose freedom and self-determination over tyranny and despotism and the greatest foe to those who oppose it. I would like to think that the sober reality of leadership will erode the rhetoric of the campaign and those who championed the “cut and run” strategy will reconsider in view of its disastrous implications.

The clock is ticking.

Airport Arrest Turns Up Nuclear Info

A man was arrested at Detroit Metropolitan Airport after officials say they found him carrying more than $78,000 in cash and a laptop computer containing information about nuclear materials and cyanide.

Sisayehiticha Dinssa, an unemployed U.S. citizen, was arrested Tuesday after a dog caught the scent of narcotics on cash he was carrying, according to an affidavit filed in court.

When agents asked him if he had any cash to declare, he said he had $18,000, authorities said. But when agents checked his luggage, they found an additional $59,000. When they scrolled through his laptop, they said they found the mysterious files.

Hmmm, $78,000 in cash and a laptop containing info on nuclear materials and cyanide. Call me paranoid, but try as I will, I cannot come up with any logical explanation - aside from the obvious. By the way, the unemployed man in question lives in Dallas, had just just arrived from Nigeria by way of Amstrerdam and was on his way to Phoenix.

I seem to notice these obscure stories ever so often. For instance, there was this one in September about some dude trying to board an aircraft with a knife hidden in a carved-out book. He was bound for Yemen and, of course, he had no idea how the knife got there.

And these are just the things we hear about.