Thursday, June 30, 2005


God Bless America.... and our American Heroes.... at Ground Zero, in the Oval Office, in the War Against Terror.... And God bless all who have fallen on 9/11 and while fighting to preserve freedom and democracy in America and to secure it in the Middle East..

A World Trade Center tower at point of attack by jihad terrorist hijackers using hijacked passenger-filled jet as a bomb.... on 9/11.

A World Trade Center tower on 9/11.... before it fell....

This is when President Bush told Americans "We're At War...."

The Iraq War is a continuation of both the Persian Gulf War, whose treaty Saddam Hussein signed in defeat---but violated its terms and conditions---and the War Against Terror that commenced on 9/11.

This is what the jihad terrorists' attacks looked like.... this is how they murdered thousands of innocent people.... We can't ever forget: this is what started the war and this is why we must stay the course and win the War Against Terror.

A Newsday cover quoting President Bush, after he let the country know we were, in fact, at war.... the first war of the 21st century.

This is why we are fighting terrorists in the Middle East---because they brought their jihad terrorism and mass murder to the U.S.A.... to New York City.... on 9/11/2001.

President George W. Bush put the Bush Doctrine into action and took the war to the terrorists.... where they live, teach hatred, and train for their cowardly suicide attacks and terrorist jihad against all who are not Muslim and of their extremist Islamo-Wahabist sect.

Better to take the battleground back to the Middle East than have to fight the battles on American soil....

Magazine cover showing President Bush with rescuers at Ground Zero, a few days after 9/11

President Bush holds high an American flag as he stands with rescue fireman at Ground Zero.... on top of rubble that was part of the twin towers that fell on 9/11.

Bull-horn in hand, President Bush declares to rescuers at Ground Zero: "Yes, I can hear you.... And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear from all of us soon!"

President George W. Bush consoles survivors and families of victims of 9/11 terrorists' attacks on World Trade Center towers.

9/11: Escape from the flaming inferno of a World Trade Center tower.... a sorrowful reminder of the evils of terrorist jihad.

A Cross raised at Ground Zero and blessed by Father Jordan....

President Bush at Ground Zero, holding high the American flag and telling the rescuers "You've Made Us Proud."

9/11: One of the World Trade Center towers that became towering infernos after cowardly terrorists' suicide attacks using hijacked passenger-filled jets as bombs.

This is one of the pictures the hard-left and their allied mainstream media do not want Americans reminded of as those leftists work 24/7/365 to undermine the War Against Terror, undermine our President in time of war, and engage in seditious political "fragging" and demoralizing of American troops who are fighting for security and freedom.... in Afghanistan, Iraq and here at home.

By engaging in subversive behaviors and propaganda, they incite the terrorists and place a bullseye target on the backs of our troops, our Allies' and the Iraqi people---placing their lives at far greater risk .

Why 9/11 is the day that binds.... Why President George W. Bush had to talk about it.... And why it should not be banned from public discussion....

Ever since President George W. Bush gave his address to the nation on Tuesday night, June 27, the Democrat hard-left and their allied mainstream media have had their panties in a wad over Bush's referring to 9/11 and the War Against Terror five or so times. They immediately launched into a fever-pitched screed for his "invoking 9/11 for political advantage," stepping all over and elbowing each other out of the way to get in front of mikes and videocams to exhort the new Democrat mantra.

The liberal hard-left wants to silence all speech and suppress all images and discussion of 9/11. They do not want the American public to get the connection between the jihad terrorists attacks on the United States on 9/11 and the greater "War Against Terror"---a war President George W. Bush immediately took bold action to identify and commence, by issuing his Military Order of 13 Nov. 2001.

The liberal hard-left and its allied mainstream media do not want you to see re-runs of the unprecedented horror and terror of 9/11. They don't want you to see images of President Bush standing beside a fireman atop rubble at Ground Zero---rubble from the collapsed twin towers of the World Trade Center--- and shouting through a bull-horn to the rescuers "Yes, I can hear you.... And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear from all of us soon!"

They do not want any recognition or credit to redown to Bush for his heroic courage, resolve and determined actions taken as a result of those attacks on America and to provide security for the American people---including the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq---both of which are parts of the greater War Against Terror. And they don't want you to see how much the American troops love and respect their Commander in Chief who continuously supports them and thanks them for all they do.

The hard-left and MSM have attacked Bush personally for and censored/suppressed showing of his address, after the fall of Iraq, to troops on an aircraft carrier---in the flight suit he wore to pilot the plane part of the way to the carrier and then wore as he stood below the ship's own banner they had put up to celebrate that their "mission" was "accomplished"---to thank the troops for their brave and successful service. They have tried to intimidate into silence any mention or showing of it and the warm welcome Bush received from his troops---as their Commander in Chief.

Every time Bush speaks of any of his or the military's successes, the left flies into an indignant rage and unleashes a collective knee-jerk shrill screed accusing him of "exploiting" 9/11 and the war "for political gains." Heaven forbid he and his troops should ever get credit for anything they have achieved.

After all, it makes Bush look good---and that is unacceptable to the hard-left. Because it makes them look like the weak and ineffectual politicians, bureaucrats and wimps they and the Clinton administration were for the eight years they swatted at gnats, lobbed million dollar missiles into a $10 tent and an aspirin factory, and allowed terrorism to fester and grow.

Read about it below and here, in this *****Five Star, must read article.
"The Day That Binds"

"The September 11 attacks were so important and so horrific that they never should be mentioned again. That at least seems to be the position of the Left and establishment media.

Images of the planes hitting the towers on that day have been all but banned from the public airwaves. And the president of the United States cannot mention 9/11 when explaining the stakes in a fight against jihadists supported by Osama bin Laden in Iraq without prompting howls of outrage.

Bush was absolutely justified in invoking repeatedly Sept. 11 and the fight against terrorism in his speech from Fort Bragg Tuesday night. Let's count the ways.

There never would have been an Iraq war without 9/11, which drastically reduced the country's tolerance for a hostile Arab who had sought weapons of mass destruction before and was likely to do so again.

Saddam's regime had a web of connections to Islamic extremists and terrorists, as explained by Andy McCarthy elsewhere on NRO.

Foreign jihadists are now pouring into Iraq to fight on behalf of Abu Zarqawi, who has explicitly allied himself with Osama bin Laden, the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks. The case for a connection between the Iraq war and the sort of terrorists who perpetrated 9/11 is — sadly — stronger than ever.

Bin Laden himself has, as Bush noted Tuesday night, called the Iraq war a crucial front in the war on terror. He has said that the war will end in “victory and glory or misery and humiliation.”

If we lose in Iraq, a Sunni rump state could emerge that would provide a haven for terrorists, the same way Afghanistan provided a haven for the 9/11 terrorists. If we fail in Iraq, it will be a blow to America's prestige.

One reason the terrorists struck on 9/11 is that they thought America was weak and making it bleed would prompt it to abandon its allies in the Middle East. The signal of weakness sent by a loss in Iraq wouldn't placate our enemies, but invite more attacks.

“The war on terror began in earnest on 9/11.” Supporters of a radical Islamic ideology struck American on 9/11. The war on terror is not a fight against a tactic...., but against that ideology. The appeal of an ideology ebbs and flows with perceptions of its success. Communism advanced in the third world after its victory in Vietnam. The Islamists would get a similar boost if they were to prevail in Iraq.....

Islamic extremists justifiably fear a Middle East that turns away from radicalism and anti-Americanism. Victory in Iraq will be a step toward that goal.

In short, not only was it defensible for Bush to talk of 9/11 Tuesday night, it would be impossible for him to make the case for the Iraq war without reference to it. The war on terror began in earnest on that day, and Iraq is properly understood as a front in that larger, necessary war.

WSJ Opinion Journal's roundup of Dems' response to Bush's comments about 9/11: Dems & MSM say "Forget About 9/11"

Below is somewhat of a Democrats & MSM "forget about 9/11" roundup that goes along the same lines of PelicanPost's article today about the Democrat hard-left's and its allied MSM's shrill screed of outrage every time President Bush or Republicans mention 9/11 and the terrorists' attacks against the U.S.---or connects them to the War Against Terror that those terrorist attacks caused Bush to declare and issue his Military Order of 13 Nov. 2005.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out. And, yeah.... Karl Rove got it right.... "Liberals" just can't help proving that they're "liberals" and political to the core.... now can they?

Read about the leftist responses to 9/11 comments by Bush Tuesday night, below or here:
The Dems' Response: Forget About 9/11 The New York Times answers President Bush's speech with a plaintive appeal to the Angry Left:
"No one wants a disaster in Iraq, and Mr. Bush's critics can put aside, at least temporarily, their anger at the administration for its hubris, its terrible planning and its inept conduct of the war in return for a frank discussion of where to go from here...."

The Washington Post quotes various Democratic officeholders, who likewise have nothing constructive to say:

"After the speech, Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) issued a biting statement saying that Bush's 'numerous references to September 11th did not provide a way forward in Iraq' but instead 'served to remind the American people that our most dangerous enemy, namely Osama bin Laden, is still on the loose....'"

The liberal group, a consistent opponent, declared in an e-mail yesterday: "Bush's speech tonight will be one of the major 'tipping point' moments since the war began, and we can help make sure that no one buys his 'stay the course' rhetoric."

Much of the criticism of the president's speech from the left has amounted to, as blogger Edward Morrissey puts it, "screaming every time 9/11 gets mentioned in connection with fighting terrorists." Even the Times, though straining to sound half reasonable, says that "we had hoped [Bush] would resist the temptation to raise the bloody flag of 9/11 over and over again to justify a war in a country that had nothing whatsoever to do with the terrorist attacks." Isn't this further evidence that Karl Rove got it exactly right?

But of course the liberation of Iraq had everything to do with 9/11. As Bush said last night:
"The terrorists can kill the innocent, but they cannot stop the advance of freedom. The only way our enemies can succeed is if we forget the lessons of September the 11th, if we abandon the Iraqi people to men like [Abu Musab al] Zarqawi, and if we yield the future of the Middle East to men like Bin Laden. For the sake of our nation's security, this will not happen on my watch."

Or, as Andrew Sullivan put it in March 2003:
"Rather than simply forestall crises, postpone them, avoid them or fob them off onto others, Bush is actually doing the hard thing. He's calling for real democracy in the Middle East. He's aiming to make the long-standing U.S. policy of regime change in Iraq a reality. He actually wants to defeat Islamist terrorism, rather than make excuses for tolerating its cancerous growth."

The Truth About Jihad Terrorism: Taking the truth to the American people....

This is another *****Five Star, must read column, the gist of which is included in excerpts below, or you can read it in full here. This is a discussion and forum that has long been needed and will finally occur on Sept. 21, 2005---just after the 4th anniversary of the jihad terrorists' attacks on the twin towers of the World Trade Center and on the Pentagon, on Sept. 11, 2001.

Links are provided below for those who want more information or want to attend the forum. Other good sources for information about the Middle East and terrorism are: Daniel Pipes, FrontPageMag and at the Jihad Watch link below.
"Taking the Truth about Jihad Terrorism to the People"

“The only person who matters is Allah — and the only question he will ask me is ‘How many infidels did you kill?’” These are the words of Marwan Abu Ubeida, the subject of a Time magazine piece entitled “Inside the Mind of an Iraqi Suicide Bomber.”

It is gratifying to see Time being willing to make this trip inside Marwan’s mind, since most mainstream media outlets have been singularly uninterested in the thought processes of jihad terrorists. But even Time doesn’t explore the implications of Marwan’s words. And this is no trivial omission: jihadists from Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi to Marwan Abu Ubeida have consistently made clear that today’s jihadists are working from mainstream traditions and numerous Qur’anic exhortations, and that by means of these traditions and teachings they are able to gain recruits among Muslims worldwide — as well as to hold the sympathy of others whom they do not recruit.

This explains why there has been no widespread, sustained, or sincere Muslim outcry against the jihad terrorist enterprise in general.... Yet.... media analysts do not want to face this. They think that by speaking about the Islamic roots of jihad violence they will undercut moderate Muslims. But in fact, no reform in Islam can ever take place without an acknowledgment of what needs to be reformed. The near-universal refusal to provide that acknowledgment is just one reason why that reform is virtually certain not to be forthcoming.

The contemporary problem of global Islamic terrorism will never be solved unless people are willing to speak forthrightly about the nature of the challenge we face and work to find positive solutions. Ignoring or distorting the true nature and source of the problem will only postpone the crisis, and make its ultimate resolution more difficult.

The media is failing the American public on this issue. But the truth will out.... One organization is taking the truth about jihad terrorism directly to the people: The People’s Truth Forum. On September 21 I will be participating in a symposium on terror, sponsored by the Forum, entitled, “The Radical Islamist Threat to World Peace and National Security.”

This symposium will challenge media bias head-on by exploring forthrightly such unexamined dogmas as the idea that regionalized economic conditions and American injustices are the real cause of terrorism, not any imperative derived from Islamic theology....

Other speakers include the renowned terrorism expert Harvey Kushner, author of Holy War on the Home Front; Brigitte Gabriel, a former anchor for world news in the Middle East and a prominent Arab-American journalist; and Judith Jacobson, vice-president of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME) and the coordinator of the Columbia University SPME chapter. This promises to be one of the few places in modern-day America where you will be able to hear the truth about what we're up against.

Get more information about how you can attend at
Mr. Spencer is director of Jihad Watch and author of Onward Muslim Soldiers: How Jihad Still Threatens America and the West (Regnery) and Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World's Fastest Growing Faith (Encounter); and editor of The Myth of Islamic Tolerance (Prometheus).

The 5-4 U.S. Supreme Courts' Battle to Eliminate Religion, while protecting public-funded anti-U.S/religion/life & pro-sexually deviant "speech"

This is a *****Five Star, absolute must read column by Ann Coulter that shows us what our public monies are going to fund---including disgusting anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-life, pro-deviancy vulgar sex displays and so-called works of art---in places such as the revisionist history Smithsonian and in support of National Education Association filth. Coulter also includes other outrageous speech that subverts this country and its leaders and gives aid and comfort to our terrorist enemies.

Excerpts of intro and ending of the piece are included below, but you can find the absolute must read "sampling of other speech that has been funded in whole or in part by taxpayers" here:
"Thou Shalt Not Commit Religion"

'To put the Supreme Court's recent ban on the Ten Commandments display in perspective, here is a small sampling of other speech that has been funded in whole or in part by taxpayers:...."
[The entire list is required reading! ....PelicanPost comment]

"....That's the America you live in! A country founded on a compact with God, forged from the idea that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights is now a country where taxpayers can be forced to subsidize "artistic" exhibits of aborted fetuses. But don't start thinking about putting up a Ten Commandments display. That's offensive!

I don't want to hear any jabberwocky from the Court TV amateurs about "the establishment of religion." (1) A Ten Commandments monument does not establish a religion. (2) The 1st Amendment prohibits Congress from making any law "respecting" an establishment of religion—meaning Congress cannot make a law establishing a religion, nor can it make a law prohibiting the states from establishing a religion. We've been through this a million times.

Now the Supreme Court is itching to ban the Pledge of Allegiance because of its offensive reference to one nation "under God." (Perhaps that "God" stuff could be replaced with a vulgar sexual reference.) But with the court’s looking like a geriatric ward these days, they don't want to alarm Americans right before a battle over the next Supreme Court nominee. Be alarmed. This is what it's about...."

FALLEN GENOCIDAL DICTATOR SADDAM HUSSEIN think he's the one who has been damaged here....

Looks as if The Sun takes exeption to the idea of a lawsuit against them by the briefs-only clad Butcher of Baghdad, Saddam Hussein....

If anyone, we're the ones who should be suing. It's "torture" to have the image of the mostly nude and grisly fallen genocidal dictator burned into our brains. It comes under the rubric of "crimes against humanity...."


This announcement comes on the heels of a federal court hearing yesterday afternoon in which the Judge gave journalists Judith Miller and Matthew Cooper one week to provide their testimony to the Grand Jury or go to jail for 120 days to 18 months. The two journalists were held in contempt of court in October, 2004. The judge also gave Time Magazine one week to projuce Matthew Cooper's notes or be fined $1,000/day for each day they refused to hand over the notes---perhaps, retroactively.

Apparently that was enough incentive to get Time's attention. News outlets are speculating that this will get Miller and Cooper off the hook. It should not. The journalists were subpoenaed to testify and refused---when they were required by federal law to do so. They should not be allowed to skate on their deliberate violation of federal law, for which they were held in contempt of court. No one is above the law---not even journalists for liberal elite MSM big-boyz, the New York Times and Time Magazine.

Read the breaking news below and here:
Breaking News: "Time Magazine to Hand Over Reporter Notes"

NEW YORK - Time Inc. said Thursday it would comply with a court order to deliver the notes of a reporter threatened with jail in the investigation of the leak of an undercover
CIA' officer's name.

U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan is threatening to jail Matthew Cooper of Time and Judith Miller of The New York Times for contempt for refusing to disclose their sources....

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear the reporters' appeal and the grand jury investigating the leak expires in October. The reporters, if in jail, would be freed at that time....

But it also said that despite its concerns, it will turn over the records to the special counsel investigating the leak...."


The new President-elect Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's underlings are trying to pull off a revisionist-history smoke and mirrors fraud on the world community to hide the fact that the newly-elected President of Iran was and is a terrorist---a radical Islamo-fundamentalist terrorist---in a country on the cusp of having nuclear weapons capability.

This is no small, ho-hum thing. It is a threat to the fledgling democracy in Iraq and to all American, Allied and Iraqi troops and police, as well as the Iraqi people---and to Israel. It is this situation that has emboldened Syria and other terrorist states in the Middle East, since they are allied with Iran.

Read below and here about the new terrorist leader of Iran and his efforts now to hide his involvement in the U.S. Embassy hostage-taking [kidnapping], imprisoning for 444 days and interrogating of 52 American citizens---while cowardly hand-wringing wimp-of-a-President Jimmy Carter dithered. He opted for "diplomacy," albeit with terrorists. It didn't work.
"Former U.S. Hostages Believe Iran's President One of Their Captors"

"A quarter-century after they were taken captive in Iran, five former American hostages say they got an unexpected reminder of their 444-day ordeal in the bearded face of Iran's new president-elect.

Watching coverage of Iran's presidential election on television dredged up 25-year-old memories that prompted four of the former hostages to exchange e-mails. And those four realized they shared the same conclusion - the firm belief that President-elect Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had been one of their Iranian captors.

"This is the guy. There's no question about it," said former hostage Chuck Scott, a retired Army colonel who lives in Jonesboro, Ga. "You could make him a blond and shave his whiskers, put him in a zoot suit and I'd still spot him."

Scott and former hostages David Roeder, William J. Daugherty and Don A. Sharer told The Associated Press on Wednesday they have no doubt Ahmadinejad, 49, was one of the hostage-takers. A fifth ex-hostage, Kevin Hermening, said he reached the same conclusion after looking at photos...."

Militant students seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran on Nov. 4, 1979, and held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days to protest Washington's refusal to hand over the U.S.-backed Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi for trial. The shah fled Iran earlier that year after he was overthrown by the Islamic Revolution...."

Wednesday, June 29, 2005


Er.... excuse me, are we still calling these OPEC guys "friends"....? There's gotta' be a better name for price-gougers....

Address to the nation by President Bush on the War Against Terror....

Millions of Americans tuned in to President George W. Bush's address to the nation and troops at Fort Bragg, NC, Tuesday night, 28 June 2005. In my opinion, he did what he needed to do and said what needed to be said---and did an outstanding job. You will find an excerpt below that tells Americans what is expected of them and why. If you want to read the entire address, you will find it here.

President George W. Bush:

"....We have more work to do, and there will be tough moments that test America’s resolve. We are fighting against men with blind hatred – and armed with lethal weapons – who are capable of any atrocity. They wear no uniform; they respect no laws of warfare or morality. They take innocent lives to create chaos for the cameras. They are trying to shake our will in Iraq – just as they tried to shake our will on September 11, 2001. They will fail.

The terrorists do not understand America. The American people do not falter under threat – and we will not allow our future to be determined by car bombers and assassins. America and our friends are in a conflict that demands much of us. It demands the courage of our fighting men and women … it demands the steadfastness of our allies … and it demands the perseverance of our citizens.

We accept these burdens – because we know what is at stake. We fight today, because Iraq now carries the hope of freedom in a vital region of the world – and the rise of democracy will be the ultimate triumph over radicalism and terror. And we fight today because terrorists want to attack our country and kill our citizens – and Iraq is where they are making their stand. So we will fight them there … we will fight them across the world – and we will stay in the fight until the fight is won...."

U.S. SENATOR JOHN McCAIN.... a leader of the bevy of 14 pidgeons who cut a deal, then collectively flapped their wings....


Was it something in the air? ....the water? ....the Kool-ade?

PEGGY NOONAN WANTS TO KNOW: What's wrong with them....? What's in the air and water in Washington....?

Readers, this is a *****Five Star, must read column by Peggy Noonan that is too good and too true to pass up. It begins and ends with the same question.... about politicians and their hubris.... about their self-promotion and incredible lack of modesty and class.

Politicos covered are Barak Obama, John McCain, Bill and Hillary Clinton, and Bill Frist---not necessarily in that order.

Believe me, Noonan nails what's wrong and why....." Be sure to read the whole thing.

You can find it here:
"Conceit of Government Why are our politicians so full of themselves?"

"What's wrong with them? That's what I'm thinking more and more as I watch the news from Washington....

What is in the air there in Washington, what is in the water?

What is wrong with them? This is not a rhetorical question. I think it is unspoken question No. 1 as Americans look at so many of the individuals in our government. What is wrong with them....?"

NEW POLL BY PEW RESEARCH CENTER shows anti-military press coverage weakens U.S. defenses....

This new poll just confirms what many Americans already knew. The liberal elite hard-left anti-war/military/troops mainstream media are achieving their desired result---weakening of this country's defenses and seriously damaging the image of the U.S. around the world. They have taken journalism and news and transformed it into anti-U.S. political propagandizing---at the expense of the security of the American people and our troops in battle.

The anti-military mainstream media are doing this in conjunction with hard-left Democrats, the ACLU, international organizations like the I.C.R.C. and Amnesty International, international globalists and financiers like multi-billionaire George Soros and his, and the International Freedom Center that is hijacking the 9/11 memorial and turning it into a bash-America forum. They are all aiding and abetting our terrorist enemies.

This same anti-military MSM, who vigorously defend their own free speech rights, are now en masse violating the free speech rights of journalist and author Ed Klein, who dared to write a book critical of Iron Matron Hillary Clinton. They are censoring, blackballing, silencing and shunning Klein---and they are, for the most part, getting away with doing so.

The PEW poll indicates the MSM are paying a price for their anti-American actions and anti-military propagandizing. Likeminded Democrat hard-left politicians paid the price of election defeats in 2002 and 2004 for their similar behaviors, yet their hate-speech and demogoguery of the Bush Administration and the U.S. Military have gotten worse instead of better.

No surprise then, that the MSM's ratings and/or subscriptions have plummeted in tandem with the hard-left Democrats' losses in the elections. It appears they have taken a joint slide down the slippery slope.... And you know how slippery slopes are.... sort of like elections.... they're real ornery things when you're trying to get back to the top....

More info below and here.
"Poll: Media Weakening U.S. Defenses"

"A new poll by the Pew Research Center shows that a rising number of Americans are now concerned that media criticism of the military is hurting the U.S.'s ability to defend itself. Nearly half - 47 percent - say that by criticizing the military so frequently, news organizations are weakening the nation's defenses....

More than two-thirds of Republicans - 67 percent - objected to the way the press covers the military, while only 36 percent of Democrats disapproved of the media's anti-military coverage.

The number of those now saying that the press is anti-military has increased dramatically since the 9/11 attacks, when only a little more than a third of those surveyed thought the press was too critical.

THIS IS THE ANTI-MILITARY SENATOR FROM NEW YORK who wants to block U.S. military recruiters from access to high schools....


Now accusing the U.S. military's recruiters of "racial and ethnic profiling," with absolutely no basis for same, Iron Matron Hillary Clinton has ganged up with 6 other hard-left Democrats to block recruiters from high schools and government databanks that include student information required for other federal government purposes---such as federal funding. Clinton and the other six Democrats are presuming for themselves the right to make American senior high and college students' decisions for them.

So, what's wrong with students of all races and ethnicities having an opportunity to do their patriotic duty and serve their country? What's wrong with their having access to the education and skills they will acquire? What's wrong with their having an opportunity to possibly become the Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff? What's wrong with their having the chance to help spread freedom and democracy to millions?

This is a huge reason why Hillary Clinton would be a dangerous person to occupy the position of Commander-in-Chief. One among many....

HILLARY CLINTON & 6 OTHER DEMS JOIN FORCES.... to prevent military recruiters' access to high school students

What could be more anti-military than obstructing the military's access to potential recruits---especially in time of war? It's quite obvious that while Iron Matron Hillary Clinton fakes out a move to the center for a potential run for the presidency, she is undermining the war effort now.

Yeah.... I know she went to Iraq. But, while there, she critized President Bush's handling of the war. And she has refused to say one word against Senator Dick Durbin's profane slander of the U.S. troops and interrogators at Guantanamo---which was also a slander of the Bush Administration and Dept. of Defense, as well as propaganda fodder for Al Jazeera and a prime recruiting tool for the terrorists. The cat must have her tongue.

I guess "centrist" has become one of those variable, comparative words---like "is" and "oral sex." Pretty soon, we'll need a new dictionary of fast-morphing words and definitions that might as well be written in watered-down silly putty or invisible ink. Sort of like the hard-left's version of the "living" U.S. Constitution---it means what they want it to mean.

The Iron Matron is screaming racial and ethnic profiling and objecting to a government database including such information---data that is collected daily in all public schools in this country, for many different purposes and by many different government agencies. Much of their federal funding is based upon such data.

And the Democrats are trying to sell the Iron Matron as intelligent? Dishonest and two-faced demogogue playing the race and ethnicity cards is more like it.

More of this anti-U.S. military insanity below or here.
"Hillary: Restrict Military Recruiters"

During his speech at Fort Bragg Tuesday night, President Bush urged young Americans to consider a career in the military, saying "there is no higher calling than service in our Armed Forces." But if Senator Hillary Clinton has her way, it's going to be even harder for the military to meet its recruitment goals.

In a statement posted to her official Senate web site, Clinton blasts the Pentagon for "infringing on the privacy of high school students" by trying to find out if any of them might be good candidates for voluntary military service.

In an apparent blast at the Armed Forces, Clinton declared: "It is critical that we do everything we can to make sure that our most sensitive personal information stays out of the wrong hands."

The Pentagon - "the wrong hands"?

Hillary said she wants to make it tougher for recruiters to find out which students might want to serve their country, by denying them access to information like Social Security numbers, ethnicities, birth dates, class schedules and grade point averages.

Along with six other Senate Democrats, Mrs. Clinton has written to Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, saying she is concerned that recruiters may be guilty of racial profiling. "We fail to see a legitimate need for the creation of a database containing such personal information and are concerned that it may be an inappropriate effort to profile students based on ethnicity and other personal factors," she complained."


Sounds like another grassy knoll or black-helicopter plot hatched by unhinged Democrats....

Smarting from the U.S. Congressional and Justice Department investigations into U.N. systemic institutional corruption and the U.S. House of Representatives-passed bill to withhold U.S. dues from the U.N. unless they reform, the United Nations is attempting to take it upon themselves to intrude on the War Powers of the President of the United States---to "investigate" "rumors" of "secret" U.S. military detainment prisons brought to their attention by anti-U.S./anti-war Amnesty International and other un-named NGOs.

This follows Secretary General of the U.N. Kofi Annan's declaring the Irac war "illegal," accusing the United States "war criminals," and interfering in and trying to influence the U.S. federal election in 2004---in an attempt to defeat President George W. Bush's bid for re-election.

It also follows Kofi Annan's, the U.N.'s, and Kojo Annan's not cooperating with the investigations related to the Oil-for-Food embezzlement, bribery and kickback program that was part of a larger attempt to align member nations to subvert the Persian Gulf War sanctions against Iraq and block the U.S. from going to war to enforce the Iraq War peace agreement and sanctions and remove Saddam Hussein from being a threat to the region and to U.S. security. Top officials at the U.N. were benefitting from all of that corruption and subterfuge---along with corrupt countries and contractors.

This current attempt at "investigation" of U.S. military detainment facilities plugs right into the recent coordinated false accusations of "torture" against American troops at Guantanamo's Camp Delta---made by hard-left Democrats, the ACLU, Amnesty International, the International Red Cross and the hard-left anti-U.S./U.S. military mainstream media. Just as they politically plugged into the Democrats' propaganda proliferation during election 2004.

Sounds as if new U.N. Envoy and long-time supporter of Kofi Annan, Bill Clinton---and his buddy and former White House staff member Erskine Bowles who has been working with him---have been making mischief and turning the U.N. into a Democrat playground and war machine like they did at the Clinton White House, with their full political use of its database and full exploitation of it for political fundraisers.

Bill Clinton and Kofi Annan are of one mind when it comes to wanting a world government. Plus, in addition to wanting to be the next Secretary General of the U.N., Clinton has recently stated that he wants to be the "world's president." All this at a time when the U.N. is rushing to expand its power with the Law of the Sea Treaty to put a world commission in charge of all international waters and levy a tax on the American people to support it. And also trying to expand the corrupt U.N. Security Council---to further dilute the power of the U.S.

The United Nations' power grabs and intrusion into the sovereignty of the United States and the President's war powers have to be stopped. Now. Readers, be sure to let your U.S. Congressmen and the White House know that this new U.N. political "investigation" of U.S. detainment facilities is unacceptable. You can use the links here in the sidebar at PelicanPost to do so.


Read on, below and here, and see for yourself the absurdity of the U.N.'s political actions designed to "investigate" in order to propagandize against and harass the United States and its military and undermine the Iraq War/War Against Terror.
"U.N. Searching for Secret U.S. Prisons"

"U.N. human rights experts have begun an investigation into U.S. detention facilities for terrorist suspects and allegations that there are secret prisons, one of the project leaders said Wednesday. Manfred Nowak, the U.N.'s special expert on torture, said some undeclared holding areas could include U.S. Navy ships in international waters. He said there were "serious" allegations to that effect from Amnesty International and other non-governmental human rights groups.

"I have heard these rumors and we have to follow them up," he told The Associated Press, urging Washington to cooperate with the investigation. Officials at the U.S. mission to the United Nations in Vienna refused to comment.

Nowak.... is one of several independent human rights experts appointed by the 53-nation U.N. Human Rights Commission, the United Nations' top rights watchdog.... also reports to the U.N. General Assembly, has great autonomy in deciding what to investigate and did not need to seek outside approval in launching the inquiry into U.S. detention practices and locations....

Jose Diaz, spokesman for Louise Arbour, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, - the U.N's rights chief - said Nowak had "great authority in investigating suspected abuses."
"Our long-standing position is that we encourage countries to cooperate with the special rapporteurs of the commission...."

Nowak said he and three fellow experts decided last week to launch the inquiry without waiting for assurances of U.S. cooperation after holding off for more than three years in hopes Washington would give members access to Guantanamo Bay and other facilities holding suspected terrorists. Nowak expressed disappointment at a lack of U.S. response....

Nowak said team members had begun interviewing former suspects held and subsequently released by U.S. authorities in efforts to establish conditions in the prisons and their exact locations...."

IT'S TIME TO STOP ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION [illegal alien flood] into U.S. & stop playing political games that threaten national security & the economy

Read about it below and here:
"Bush Encouraged Illegal Aliens, Congressman Says"

"The co-sponsor of legislation to make it more difficult for illegal aliens to find work in the United States said Tuesday that the Bush administration is encouraging the illegal entry by offering amnesty and is trying to cover up the proof of its actions.

U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) has consistently warned that the "Temporary Worker Program," proposed by President Bush in January, would, "encourage millions of people to come here illegally seeking his amnesty proposal." The White House denies that the program is the equivalent of amnesty, but Tancredo disagrees." It's amnesty," Tancredo said. "It's amnesty when you tell people they are not going to be punished for the violation of the law."

The Colorado Republican said there is now proof that the Bush administration recognized the proposal as amnesty for illegal aliens. He pointed to documents that the conservative legal advocacy group Judicial Watch obtained through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.

Shortly after the president's January 7 speech announcing the plan, Border Patrol intelligence officers began surveying aliens detained inside the southern U.S. border "for the purpose of collecting data concerning the issue of amnesty" as a motivation for illegally crossing into the U.S., according to the Border Patrol...."

Early results from the Border Patrol survey indicated that President Bush's proposal did, in fact, lure greater numbers of illegal immigrants to the United States..." "Approximately 45 percent of respondents ... crossed illegally based upon rumors of a Bush amnesty program."

According to a Judicial Watch analysis of the surveys released by the Department of Homeland Security, 63 percent "received Mexican government or media information supporting the notion of a Bush administration amnesty program." More than 60 percent of those surveyed had also previously entered the U.S. illegally, "some as many as six times." The government released approximately 850 of more than 1700 surveys conducted....

....three weeks after the scheduled six month survey was initiated, the Bush administration "abruptly shut it down." Tancredo believes the White House knew the survey results would undermine their claims about the Temporary Worker Program.... the American people know it and understand it," Tancredo said.... " They're going to understand a lot more about the problem when they see this report and the specifics of it and how they tried to cover it up...."

"We have, in the past, asked for a lot of documents. My office has more than once been stonewalled by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and their predecessor agencies." Tancredo has written Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, requesting an explanation."

The timing of the survey's start and early dismissal, and the DHS gag order and stonewalling of Judicial Watch's request suggest that the administration is playing politics with border security data," Tancredo wrote. "I hope that this is not the case."

Tancredo stressed that he is not opposed to the concept of a guest worker program, as long as it is designed to discourage illegal immigration...." "I have proposed a guest worker program. [But] it has nothing to do with amnesty, and it can't be implemented until you've secured your borders and until you have gone after employers and tried to stop the demand side..."

Tancredo is a cosponsor of the Illegal Immigration Enforcement and Social Security Protection Act (H.R. 98), which would make it more difficult for employers to accept fraudulent documentation from illegal aliens seeking work. "We can secure the border. We just choose not to. It can be done with the application of the military, if we need to," Tancredo said.... the other side is to go after employers, to make it impossible for them to hire people who are here illegally.

THE U.S. CONSTITUTION is better off being left "dead" [as is], rather than dismantled piece-by-piece and destroyed by hard-left Brutuses

This is a *****Five Star, must read column by Jonah Goldberg here, in which he refers to the originalist interpretation of the U.S. Constitution as being "dead" or fixed in content---to be interpreted and enforced as it is written---as opposed to being a "living document" to be manipulated like silly putty by judicial-activist judges with their Julius Caeser style rulings, thumbs up or thumbs down.

Another interpretation could be that those judicial activist judges who treat the Constitution as a manipulatable piece of silly putty are Brutuses, installed on the court by hard-left secular humanist Senate Democrat Brutuses to undermine and ultimately kill the Constitution, in order to establish as new judge-written law, by judicial fiat, the secular-humanist ideology and agendas of those Democrats---something they have been unable to do in the lawmaking process of the Congress [Senate & House of Representatives].

Problem with that is: [1] The Constitution does not give judges the power to make laws---they are doing so extra-Constitutionally. [2] The Constitution does not give any U.S. Senators the right to use filibusters, holds, character assassinations and litmus tests to block presidential nominees for federal judgships---in order to assure that only judicial-activist nominees are approved to become federal judges and justices.

To allow them to continue to do so, not only turns the original Constitution into a "living document" that can be manipulated, it turns that Constitution into something that can literally be dismantled and destroyed---piece by piece. Et tu Brute?

Read about it below and at the above link.
"Better Off Dead: A conservative Constitution."

"In Washington, conservatives and liberals are quietly loading up on drinking water, D batteries, and extra ammo, in preparation for the coming battle over judges.... This is a battle between the forces of life and death.... we are those who believe the only good constitution is a dead constitution.

We’ve all heard about how great living constitutions are.... Al Gore said in 2000, “I would look for justices of the Supreme Court who understand that our Constitution is a living and breathing document, that it was intended by our founders to be interpreted in the light of the constantly evolving experience of the American people....”

And there are good answers for what the Supreme Court should do when the Constitution is truly silent on an issue. For example: It should stay silent....

The case for dead constitutions is simple. They bind us to a set of rules for everybody. Recall the recent debate about the filibuster. The most powerful argument the Democrats could muster was that if you get rid of the traditional right of the minority in the Senate to bollix up the works, the Democrats will deny that right to Republicans the next time they’re in the majority (shudder).

The Constitution works on a similar principle, as does the rule of law. Political scientists call this “precommitment.” Having a set of rules with a fixed (i.e., dead, unliving, etc.) meaning ensures that future generations will be protected from judges or politicians who’d like to rule arbitrarily.... This is what Chesterton was getting at when he called tradition “democracy for the dead.” We all like to believe that we have some say about what this country will be like for our children and grandchildren.

A “living Constitution” denies us our voice in this regard because it basically holds that whatever decisions we make — including the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments — can be thrown out by any five dyspeptic justices on the Supreme Court. In other words, the justices who claim the Constitution is a wild card didn’t take their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution in good faith because they couldn’t know what they were swearing to.

“What distinguishes the rule of law from the dictatorship of a shifting Supreme Court majority,” Justice Scalia wrote this week, “is the absolutely indispensable requirement that judicial opinions be grounded in consistently applied principle. That is what prevents judges from ruling now this way, now that — thumbs up or thumbs down — as their personal preferences dictate.”

The reference to “thumbs up or thumbs down” is apt. Caesars ruled in such ways. Liberal defenders of the living constitution say all of this is hysteria by right wingers. We don’t need radicals who want to “turn back the clock.” Men with a “moderate” or “judicial” temperament and a “humane vision” make the best justices.

Yeah, well they make the best Caesars, too. That’s not an argument for turning back the clock and being ruled by five of them...."

Tuesday, June 28, 2005

So much for individual property rights.... Five Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court decided those rights are dispensible


This is the 5th Amendment that those 5 Justices of the Supreme Court ignored in their ruling:

[Bill of Rights Article the seventh] [Amendment V of U.S. Constitution]
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

In Kelo v. City of New London, Kelo was deprived of private party without benefit of originally intended Constitutional due process of law and equal treatment with all other private property owners. Kelo's private property was taken under the guise of "eminent domain" for the benefit of a new private owner for private use, not public use. The 5th Amendment's "public use" doesn't mean transferring private property from one private owner to another private owner to expand the tax revenue base. Government has legal means of raising revenue without violating the Constitutional private property rights of an individual citizen.

These 5 moonbat Supreme Court Justices have opened a Pandora's Box that will take years of other litigation and more money than most people have to put the lid back on. We need a Constitutional Amendment that requires all federal court judges and justices to strictly follow an originalist interpretation of the Constitution as it is written or be removed from the bench.

Nowhere does the Constitution give judges the right to create new law out of whole cloth according to their feelings, personal ideologies and agendas, changing societal norms and mores, or foreign and international law. The Constitution gives them absolutely no lawmaking powers.

When you watch the Senate Democrats use unconstitutional "filibusters" and "holds" on Presidential nominees for the federal courts, please understand that they are using these obstructionist manipulative tools to ensure that no nominees are approved who will not be liberal, secular-humanist judicial-activists and legislate from the bench. It is because of such judicial-activist judges---and Supreme Court Justices are judges---that Kelo got screwed. The same thing could now happen to any private property owner in this country.


This is amazingly quick action by U.S. Senator John Cornyn, R-TX, in response to the judicial activist 5-4 Supreme Court ruling last week in Kelo v. City of New London---a ruling that subverts individual property rights for the sake of business interests and local government greed---allowing government to use "eminent domain" as a vehicle to transfer private property to other private entities for other than "public use," in violation of the 5th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Cornyn has introduced a new bill [proposed new law] titled Protection of Homes, Small Businesses, and Private Property Act [law] of 2005. You will be able to follow the progress of this bill as it works its way through Congress by clicking on PelicanPost's Congressional Record link in our sidebar [margin]under Government Sources. This is a good link to keep up with what is going on in both the Senate and House of Representatives and what goes into the permanent record---including statements and other documents that Congress members enter into the record.

Read about it below and here.
"Outrage Lingers Over Property Rights Ruling"

Although the Supreme Court's Ten Commandments ruling dominated Monday's headlines, a property rights ruling handed down last week still has many Americans shaking their heads -- including some lawmakers, who plan to do something about it.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) has introduced a bill, the Protection of Homes, Small Businesses, and Private Property Act of 2005, in response to last week's 5-4 decision in Kelo v. City of New London . The Supreme Court ruled that the government may seize the home, small business or other private property of one citizen and transfer it to another private citizen -- if the transfer would boost the community's economic development and its tax base.

The Cornyn legislation, introduced Monday, would prohibit transfers of private property without the owner's consent if federal funds were used; and if the transfer was for purposes of economic development rather than public use...." It is appropriate for Congress to take action.... to restore the vital protections of the Fifth Amendment and to protect homes, small businesses, and other private property rights against unreasonable government use of the power of eminent domain," Cornyn said.

"This legislation would declare Congress's view that the power of eminent domain should be exercised only for 'public use,' as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment," Cornyn said. "Most importantly, the power of eminent domain should not be used simply to further private economic development." Cornyn's legislation would clarify that 'public use' shall not be construed to include economic development...."

Cornyn called the Supreme Court's June 23, 2005, ruling in Kelo v. City of New London an "alarming decision" that should prompt lawmakers to take action...." "In the aftermath of Kelo, we must take all necessary action to restore and strengthen the protections of the Fifth Amendment. I ask my colleagues to lend their support to this effort, by supporting the Protection of Homes, Small Businesses, and Private Property Act of 2005...."

Compliments of your City Council.... "Sorry, Charlie... we need the money."

Now you see it.... Now you don't.... Property deeds and rights are now as slippery as an eel in an oil slick. Sort of like greedy city governments and their high-roller business buddies....

Hat tip to Chris Muir of DayByDayCartoon.

RedState is posting the news and information about the FEC's 2-day hearing and Sen. Conrad Burns' support for the Online Freedom of Speech Act

RedState is the go-to blog for information about the two-day hearings of the FEC, beginning today, on the required regulation of internet political activity and how this will be accomplished. They have already had the public comment period that is done before hearings commence.

RedState's Mike Krempasky will be "testifying at the public hearings regarding the proposed rules governing political activity on the InterWeb" and may have video of the hearings available shortly, so you might want to check back for that.

They have also posted on U.S. Sen. Conrad Burns' "Dear Colleagues" letter in support of the Online Freedom of Speech Act and provided links to other coverage.

Good luck at the hearings Mike. Do us bloggers proud!

THE MAN BEHIND THE ANTI-AMERICAN, ANTI-WAR MOVEMENTS.... from the Vietnam War to the War Against Terror


This is the U. S. Senator who, along with Senator Fulbright, was behind Naval Officer John Forbes Kerry's address before the U.S. Congress during the Vietnam War---where Kerry defamed all American troops in the Vietnam War and branded them as "war criminals."

This is the U.S. Senator who helped the anti-war movement and bringing about peace without honor to end the Vietnam War and condemn over a million S. Vietnamese to death or forced subjugation to the Communist North Vietnamese Viet Kong.

This is the U.S Senator who is now leading the anti-war movement against President Bush and the War Against Terror, of which the Iraq War is the major war theater, and aiding and abetting the terrorists with his constant anti-U.S. propaganda drum roll.

Can you say "traitor?"



A NEW LOOK FOR AN AMERICAN TRAITOR.... this time without the Communist Viet Kong helmet




BIRDS OF A FEATHER.... Two anti-Vietnam War activists undermine two sitting American Presidents to end the Vietnam War and achieve a deadly peace


At the time of this picture, Naval Officer John Kerry and Senator Ted Kennedy were actively engaged in the anti-Vietnam War movement. Kerry was a co-founder of the Veterans Against the Vietnam War.

During the Vietnam War both of these characters undermined two sitting presidents in time of war---President Lyndon B. Johnson and President Richard M. Nixon. Now they both undermine sitting President George W. Bush and the War on Terrorism, which includes the Afghanistan War and the Iraq War.

Can you say "traitors?"



During Kerry's final year at Yale, he gave an anti-Vietnam War address---before entering that war as an Officer of the U.S. Navy. He served approximately 5 months of active duty in Vietnam, came back to the U.S. and, while still an Officer of the U.S. Navy Reserve, testified falsely before Congress against all American troops who fought and died in Vietnam---calling them "war criminals."

He also founded the Vietnam Veterans Against the War [V.V.A.W.] and met with Communist Vietnamese Viet Kong Officials in Paris on at least two occasions. Now he and his anti-Vietnam War co-conspirator, Senator Ted Kennedy, are now leading the hard-left's war against President George W. Bush and his Administration, the Dept. of Defense, the U.S. military and troops on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the War Against Terror---of which, the Iraq War is an integral part.

Senators John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Dick Durbin and et al are the major anti-war word-bomb throwers and propagandizers and their allied mainstream media fall all over themselves facilitating the spread of that propaganda. We can infer from their own words and actions that they are not with us Americans.... they are with the terrorists.

With 24/7/365 news media coverage, they do a lot more damage infinitely faster than in the late 1960s and early 1970s. It is clear they are hell-bent on doing just that.

HARD-LEFT DEMOCRATS propagandize and run interference to prejudice Americans against President Bush's address to the nation tonight

Hard-left Democrats have come out in force to run interference prior to President George W. Bush's address to the nation from Fort Bragg, NC tonight. Their pre-address interference includes their Vietnam Redux carping and deadly political "fragging" that puts a bullseye on the back of all American troops, Iraqi troops and police, and the Iraqi people. Perhaps also on each American here at home.

This is part of the hard-left's anti-war campaign to undermine a sitting President of the United States, the U.S. Military and troops on the ground in time of an unprecedented and heinously barbaric terrorist war against America, the Iraqi people and democracy---to which President Bush has responded with the War Against Terror, in his Military Order of November 13, 2001, following the 9/11 foreign terrorists' bombings of the Pentagon and the twin towers of the World Trade Center.

Along with others, hard-left anti-war zealots Sen. Ted Kennedy and Sen. John Kerry who, like Jane Fonda, were leaders in the anti-Vietnam War movement, are now sliming American troops and subverting the current war by using anti-Vietnam War rhetoric and propaganda. They are using words and phrases such as: "quagmire," "the war is a disaster," "we're losing the war," "American troops are torturing detainees," and "American troops are committing war crimes."

These anti-war zealots, their allied mainstream media, the ACLU, the United Nations Sec. General, some international NGOs and other globalists are leading the hard-left's war against the Bush Administration, Guantanamo's Camp Delta, the Iraq War, the War Against Terror and our troops. Their favorite word-bomb to throw is "quagmire"---a term they have used for every major military confrontation the U.S. has engaged in since the Korean War.

This is not the language of patriots or or anyone who wants to see the U.S., Allies and Iraqi troops win the War Against Terrorism and establish a free and democratic republic in the heart of the Middle East. In wars of our country's distant past, they would have been tried, convicted and executed as traitors.

Read about the pre-address propaganda and attempts to prejudice Americans and the world against the President's address and against the war, below and here.
"Liberals Offer Their Views on Iraq Before Bush's Speech"

"President Bush plans to address the nation on the situation in Iraq Tuesday night, but before he has a chance to speak, liberals are offering their own fix for what they see as a "quagmire" and a "disaster."

New TV and print ads produced by's political action committee are scheduled to run shortly before President Bush delivers his prime-time address to the nation on the one-year anniversary of self-rule in Iraq. Those ads will tell the American people, "We got into Iraq the wrong way - let's get out the right way."

Also on Tuesday, Sen. John F. Kerry, the Massachusetts Democrat who lost the election to President Bush, offered his views on what Bush should tell the American people...."

IRON MATRON HILLARY CLINTON ROARS.... and the mainstream media lie down and roll over

Kudos for Lou Dobbs of CNN, who was unbiased enough to break with CNN's up to now media blackout for Ed Klein and his new book, "The Truth About Hillary: What She Knew, When She Knew It, and How Far She'll Go to Become President."

The only other major media to interview Ed Klein about his book are Fox News Channel [1 interview with Sean Hannity, 3 interviews cancelled] and Sinclair Broadcasting's News Central. MSNBC cancelled. ABC, CBS, NBC, CNBC and liberal elite mainstream print media are all boycotting Klein and information about his book. But Tony Blankley, editorial page editor for Washington Times gave Klein's book and excellent, must read review.

I frankly am appalled at Fox News Channel's cancellations of Klein interviews. Their hypocrisy is glaring in light of the fact that they take such pride in presenting themselves as "fair and balanced." There is nothing fair or balanced about censorship and the blackballing of one author, when others are allowed to appear.

Plus, it is foolhardy to knuckle under to the politically correct idea that any woman in politics needs "protecting." When women enter the political arena to compete, they are fair game to be treated just like any other person in politics---male or female---and of any race or ethnicity. Preferential treatment is discrimination. Allowing Hillary Clinton to skate when it comes to answering the hard questions is preferential treatment. If she's an elected official in the public arena, the public has a right to answers from her and about her. Period.

Apparently the blackballing media have never heard of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause and the First Amendment freedom of speech provision---or the public's right to know. They are all damaging Ed Klein and blocking the American people from seeing anything their media elites deem to be negative to Hillary Clinton. And, if Iron Matron Hillary Clinton runs for President, you can expect to see more of this kind of blackballing censorship and control of the communicated word.

Too bad Hillary Clinton is too much of a coward and has so much to cover up for that she won't come out in person and answer all questions straightforwardly and honestly for the American people. If she is unable and unwilling to do so, she is neither qualified nor fit to be President of the United States. Hiding behind her minions and having others do her dirty work for her has been Clinton's modus operandi for years---as she did in hiring private investigator Anthony Pellicano to intimidate and silence Bill Clinton's extra-marital sex partners, sexual assault and rape victims, and whistleblower Linda Tripp.

Americans deserve better. So, how about it, Hillary Clinton? Let's have some straight answers right from Iron Matron Clinton's very own mouth. Are you up to it? Or, will you continue to hide, while directing others to intimidate, discriminate against, and silence your enemies?

Read about the Iron Matron here:
"Lou Dobbs Breaks Ban on Hillary Author"

"CNN's Lou Dobbs broke the self-imposed television embargo on the new biography of Hillary Clinton Monday night with an in depth interview with author Edward Klein. Describing Klein’s "The Truth About Hillary” as a "highly controversial and provocative book,” Dobbs challenged Klein on allegations he is reported to have made....

Klein noted some allegations, such as claims Bill raped Hillary, are not to be found in his book. He reminded Dobbs that some of the sensational items about Hillary simply could not be avoided.
"It's impossible to do a biography of Hillary without discussing” such matters, he said, referring to sex scandals that plagued the Clinton presidency. Today, Sen. Clinton is trying to remake her image, Klein suggested....

Dobbs also asked the bestselling author about efforts to keep him off TV. "A number of networks and broadcasts have cancelled your show. We thank you for being here. When do you appear again on television?" Klein responded, "Well, whenever the Clintons stop preventing me from appearing, since they've done a full court press with ABC, CBS, and NBC to keep me off."

Since his first appearance on Fox News early last week, Klein has been hit with a deluge of cancellations from most of the major television networks who had scheduled him. NewsMax reported Monday that Klein had been the victim of an organized censorship effort by the Clinton camp to keep him off major television shows.....

CNN host Howard Kurtz also reported this weekend that Sen. Clinton's office was actively trying to suppress the book by encouraging television shows not to give Klein air time.... In most cases, the effort has apparently worked. For example, Klein had been scheduled for MSNBC's "Scarborough Country" Monday night, but his appearance was abruptly cancelled earlier in the day.

In a thinly veiled dig at others who have succumbed to pressure to keep Klein off the air, Dobbs concluded his interview by noting: "We'll continue to have folks [on], irrespective of what the other folks are doing." Klein had been booked on nearly a dozen shows, besides Dobbs. But only the Fox News Channel and the Sinclair Broadcasting’s News Central kept their initial commitment – though Fox has since cancelled three scheduled appearances with the author...."

Monday, June 27, 2005

SCOTUS REFUSES TO HEAR CIA LEAK CASE APPEAL.... allowing lower federal appeals court ruling to stand. New bright orange outfits, anyone?

NEW YORK TIMES REPORTER JUDITH MILLER AND TIME MAGAZINE REPORTER MATT COOPER, who refused to disclose sources, have received a big shock from the U.S. Supreme Court who declined to hear their appeal---leaving the federal appeals court ruling intact. Now they get to face the music.... er.... jail.

BIG SUPREME COURT RULINGS TODAY.... and, perhaps, some retirement news. Watch for updates throughout the day....

Well, this is the last day of this term of the Supreme Court and a big day for big rulings.... and potential earthshattering news of one or two Supreme Court Justices stepping down. Vacant seats on the Supreme Court will probably touch off a political war that will put the War on Terrorism on page 16 and gasping for oxygen.

Developing.... Stay tuned for updates.


Two SCOTUS rulings related to Establishment Clause and separation of church and State:
[1] In the Kentucky case, there was a 5-4 split ruling that struck down 2 Ten Commandments displays in a courthouse---because they "promote a religious message."
[2] Another 5-4 split in a Texas case about a Ten Commandments monument, ruling that the 40 year old monument is "allowed on government land." Info from FNC and My Way News.

The New York Times' and Time Magazine's appeal of CIA leak case:
The SCOTUS refused to hear the NY Times' and Time Magazine's appeal. Time Magazine has issued a statement that it "is disappointed the Supreme Court declined to hear their arguments presented in their appeal," according to FNC.

Other rulings:
[1] Internet on-line file sharing services who encourage customers to illegally swap songs and movies may be sued, reversing a 9th Circuit ruling.
[2] Cable companies will not be compelled to share their cable lines with their competition.
[3] Police can't be sued for how they enforce restraining orders---based on appeal in a lawsuit of a Colorado woman who claimed police did not do enough to protect her three little daughters from being killed by her estranged husband [i.e. there was no constitutional right to police enforcement of restraining order.]

Retirement announcements:
No anticipated retirement announcements were made by any of the Supreme Court Justices on this last day of the SCOTUS' term.

My note: With regard to the Kentucky Ten Commandments ruling today, there is nothing in the Establishment Clause that even implies that all references to religion have to be removed from the public square. This is clearly a wrong interpretation with regard to separation of church and state and a spurious attack on religion and those of faith in this country---by secular-humanist judicial activists.

The same judicial-activist Justice who has admitted she bases some of her decisions on foreign and international law and prevailing international mores, Sandra Day O'Connor, was the swing vote in this 5-4 decision.

Under the U.S. Constitution and their sworn Oaths of Office, Justices are supposed to uphold the Constitution and interpret laws only in accordance with the Constitution of the United States. Justices' own personal, political and ideological opinions are not supposed to intrude into their decision-making process and rulings. To do so disenfranchises American voters and their elected Congressional members who are the only body with the Constitutional power to make new laws.

Excellent source of information on all of today's rulings at scotusblog! For more details on the cases for which rulings were issued today, go to Appealing.

ANDREW C. McCARTHY.... on why Karl Rove's prescient remarks about liberals' response to 9/11 were prophetic, as well as true....

Great *****Five Star, must read column by Andrew C. McCarthy here, in which he proves that Karl Rove's prescient remarks last week characterizing "liberals'" responses to 9/11 as pro-law enforcement and U.S. justice system protections for terrorists---remarks that got all suddenly-self-identified liberals' panties in a wad---were prophetic, as well as true.

Some excerpts below, complete piece at above link.
"Making Karl Rove a Prophet: While its apologists demand an apology, the Left attacks material-witness detentions."

"What the intrepid Norman Podhoretz so perspicuously calls "the War Against World War IV" continues apace. Its latest cause célèbre.... is material-witness detentions, the target sited by.... the American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights Watch, dutifully sketched by.... the New York Times...and timed.... to emerge just as our ears are ringing from the plaintive wails of prominent Democrats demanding an apology from Karl Rove for having the audacity to suggest that the Left does not take the terrorist threat seriously enough. (See Byron York's required reading here.)

The ACLU, HRW, and the Times are upset because dozens of people.... were detained after the 9/11 attacks as "material witnesses," and thus "thrust into a Kafkaesque world of indefinite detention without charges, secret evidence, and baseless accusations...." Some were held for weeks, and even months, and the majority were never even charged with a crime. Thus, the Times seethes, did "the Bush administration ... twist[] the American system of due process 'beyond recognition....'"

In point of fact, material-witness detentions have been with us for decades, pursuant to a duly enacted law (Section 3144 of Title 18, U.S. Code). They were used countless times prior to 9/11....

So here is the problem: You identify a large number of people who, at a minimum, have information that might be vital to protecting against terrorist attacks, and who might in fact be terrorists or at least facilitators..... you do not have sufficient evidence to charge them with a crime or to say conclusively either that they are not dangerous or that they will willingly tell you what they know rather than flee. What do you do? It would be irresponsible to do nothing....

Well, the law does not require you to do nothing. It permits the government to detain people for a brief time in order to compel their information, either in the grand jury or in other court proceedings.... the government may not sweep innocent people up and hold them in secret. While grand-jury proceedings are supposed to be kept secret from the Times, they are not kept secret from the court.

A prosecutor has to go to court and get a material-witness arrest warrant. This means the arrest does not happen unless the government satisfies a federal judge.... That's not all. The arrested witness, even though he is not being charged with a crime, is given the same kinds of protections that are afforded to actual defendants....

The ACLU, HRW, and the Times complain that many of the witnesses were held for weeks or more. But what they don't tell you is that this was done under court supervision, with regular status conferences so that judges could be apprised of when the grand jury testimony would take place and satisfy themselves that the witnesses' rights were not being abused. What they also don't tell you is that much of the delay in many cases was due to requests from the witnesses' own lawyers.... because lying to government agents during an investigation is a felony.... and lying to a federal grand jury is perjury — also a felony....

Yes, it may mean a few weeks of detention. That.... is a lot better than a few years of detention after a false statements conviction, or worse. It is always a grave matter to deprive an innocent person of his freedom. That is why it is not done lightly — and it most assuredly was not done lightly in the weeks and months after 9/11. To suggest otherwise is a slander.

So we were told last week, with much indignation, that everyone was on the same page after our nation was attacked — there were no "liberals" and "conservatives," only Americans standing shoulder-to-shoulder, demanding an aggressive response against our enemies.

But all the while, the ACLU, HRW, the Times, and rest of the Left's shock troops assiduously put the Justice Department on trial for every sensible maneuver, even those undertaken with the protection of counsel and exacting judicial oversight.

The Times, meanwhile, reports that "[a]ides to Senator Patrick J. Leahy, ranking Democrat on the judiciary committee, said he would introduce legislation aimed at limiting the government's ability to detain a material witness indefinitely."

What could that crazy Karl Rove have been thinking?


Quelle suprise!! The liberal elite mainstream media icon, The New York Times, is looking to change a few things---perhaps as a result of the shellacking they've been getting for their earned label as an arm of the hard-left and its propaganda machine.

Today's U.S. Supreme Court refusal to hear the CIA leak case appeal that involved NY Time's reporter Judith Miller, who refused to disclose her anonymous source, should add further impetus to their efforts to divest themselves of the liberal and biased image they have earned. Especially since Miller may well be on her way to jail. Big message being.... if you can't open-source and document it, don't print it.

Read about it below and here:
"Keller Says 'N.Y. Times' Must Look Beyond Its Urban, Liberal Base"

"In a lengthy memo published the newspaper's Web site, Bill Keller, executive editor of The New York Times, announced several new policies in response to a recent report by the paper's Credibility Committee. Among them is a fresh attempt to diversify the Times' staff and viewpoints, and not in the usual racial or gender ways, but in political, religious and cultural areas as well.

The aim, he wrote, is "to stretch beyond our predominantly urban, culturally liberal orientation, to cover the full range of our national conversation...."

A la Marie Antoinette, who said of poor & hungry French, "Let them eat cake..." Iron Matron Hillary Clinton says: "Let Klein be silenced and shunned"


HARD-LEFT HILLARY'S WAR MACHINE & ALLIED MSM continue war to violate Ed Klein's rights to equal treatment, access & free speech.

The "centrist" pretender Hillary Clinton has unleashed her hard-left war machine to do whatever it takes to limit the American people's access to any news whatsoever about Ed Klein's new bestseller book, "The Truth About Hillary: What She Knew, When She Knew It and How Far She'll Go to Become President."

By doing so, they and the double-standard MSM are violating Klein's rights and damaging him professionally and economically---big time. If he has any cajones, he will sue their penthouses, yachts, bonuses and butts off.

His next best-seller book should be titled: "Denial of Equal Access and Free Speech Rights by the Hillary Clinton & MSM War Machine." Or.... "Silenced, Shunned and Discriminated Against by Iron Matron Hillary Clinton and MSM Allies." If I had time, I'd write it myself....

More info below and here and you can get Klein's book here. There is also a very interesting article here citing examples of Google, whose Democratic CEO, Eric Schmidt is a supporter of and contributor to Sen. Hillary Clinton, also banning banner ads on Google advertising Ed Klein's and other's books that portray the Clintons and Nancy Pelosi in a negative light---while allowing banner ads attacking Tom DeLay to run.
"Hillary Pressures Networks to Cancel Klein"

"In what may be an unprecedented act of media censorship, several major TV and cable networks – including NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, Fox and CNN - have cancelled planned appearances of the author of the new, red hot book on Hillary Clinton.

Edward Klein's sizzling new biography "The Truth About Hillary: What She Knew, When She Knew It and How Far She'll Go to Become President" has caused a storm of controversy after Sen. Clinton lashed out at it. Her aide called the book "full of blatant and vicious fabrications contrived by someone who writes trash for cash."

Hillary's top aides and supporters have also launched a major effort to stop any discussion of the book over the TV airwaves. So far, their censorship effort has been a huge success in stopping Klein from appearing on television.

Though the celebrated author was scheduled to appear on more than a half dozen major TV network shows, all have cancelled except one, Fox's "Hannity & Colmes." However, conservative host Sean Hannity did reveal that he was under immense pressure to cancel the program. "I've had more political pressure than I've ever had in all my years in radio," Hannity said to Klein during a radio interview. " Do you know the number of requests I've had to cancel you and not have you on this program? I've never in the history of this program had more demands to cancel the guest."

Hannity did not identify the source of the "political pressure." Other hosts had similar experiences. Salem Radio Network's Mike Gallagher, syndicated nationwide, said he was deluged by emails opposing Klein's scheduled appearance and demanding he drop the author. Gallagher described the campaign as "very unnatural, like an orchestrated [effort]" and not from his listeners. But other networks, particularly television, have succumbed to the pressure....

Klein's original schedule had him appearing on several top-rated TV shows. But all of them have cancelled. Among the cancellations: "Extra;" MSNBC's "Hardball with Chris Matthews;" and CNN's Paula Zahn show. Several shows apparently expressed a keen interest in booking Klein until pressure from the Hillary camp stopped them, among them ABC's "Good Morning America," NBC's "Today" show, and CNN's "Aaron Brown."

Still more shows were expected to sign on after the book began hitting the bestseller lists. It has done just that, but Klein's publicist's phones are still not ringing. A source close to Klein's publisher, Sentinel, blames the censorship effort solely on the Clintons and their enormous power base. "A number of people who have booked me on TV and radio have already cancelled," Klein told Sean Hannity last week. " And the reason they've cancelled is because the publicity machine of the Clintons is hard at work."

On the day of his only Fox News appearance, Klein's book hit the #1 spot on Amazon's coveted bestseller list, as well as top positions at online sellers like Barnes & Noble. "Truth" has also been the biggest selling book in the history of NewsMax's online store....

The liberal censorship of Klein's book has aroused the ire of Rush Limbaugh. America's number one talk show host was the first media person to condemn the spineless cravenness of the so-called mainstream media.... "It's very rare that you see the media circle the wagons to defend a politician," he noted. "You just don't see it, other than with the Clintons."

The media blackout on Klein's book can only be chalked up to a political motive. Not only is his book near the top of the bestseller lists, but it's a major discussion subject on talk radio and in the blogosphere.... But the TV cancellations are raising questions about the unusual effort by the Clinton Spin Machine to stop this book...."

One reason LeBoutillier suspects the Hillary spin machine is out in full force is that Klein's book is not a conservative attack piece on her. "This is a book about Hillary's true character written by a journalist with solid mainstream credentials," he said. "This cannot be dismissed as a right wing attack on Hillary...."

Even the U.S. Congress got improved poll numbers in the new PEW Research Center poll.... Anybody know why??


This is a big surprise, in light of the obstructionist hard-left Senate Democrats' outrageous extra-Constitutional use of legislative filibusters to block the President's Executive Branch nominees to the federal courts and various top administrative positions in the Bush Administration. Cox, Brown, Pryor and Bolton come to mind.... to name only a few of the filibustered nominees.

And, as we know, President Bush's nominees are not pieces of legislation to be filibustered. We also know filibusters are not authorized at all in the Constitution, as part of either the Senate advice and consent process or the legislative process.

Neither are "holds" like those being used now by the obstructionist Democrats to block John Bolton's nomination. "Holds" are not even mentioned in the Senate Rules and Procedures, either. They are just a manipulative and obstructionist political tool that has been used so often it has simply become an unofficial practice.

When the American people see these types of partisan battles and hate-speech attacks going on in Congress, its amazing they can respond favorably to polls designed to rate the performance of Congress. But then, we know it all depends on the wording of the poll questions and many other variables.

In my opinion, polls should not be allowed to be released to the public without a list of all questions---verbatim---and the order in which they were asked, along with all data on demographics polled and response rates. Plus, information on how poll takers factor in the millions of cell phones to which they don't have access.