The Free Congress Foundation's News on Demand service has a two-minute statement by Jihad Watch director Robert Spencer on the most important issue facing American voters in the election of 2004. Listen to an mp3 or Real Audio here.
The Free Congress Foundation's News on Demand service has a two-minute statement by Jihad Watch director Robert Spencer on the most important issue facing American voters in the election of 2004. Listen to an mp3 or Real Audio here.
So much wisdom in so few soundbites!
Someone said wisdom cannot be acwuired by the reading of books.It is like beauty, one is either born with it or not.
Robert was lucky at birth!
Everyone:
Please,please watch Stolen honour.
Almost brought tears to my eyes. God help America if they selct this man!
Test
Test
While John Kerry says wrong war, wrong place, wrong time and complains and criticizes our troops. Here's what a soldier on the front lines in Iraq has to say.From the New York Post.
TERROR TAKES A STAND
By RALPH PETERS
October 27, 2004 -- SOLDIERS don't beg. But an old friend of mine who's still in uniform came close the other day. He badly wanted me to write another column before Election Day stressing that our troops are winning in Iraq.
He's an Army veteran of three wars. Now he's working to help Iraq become a democratic model for the Middle East. And he's worried.
Not about terrorists or insurgents. He's afraid John Kerry will be elected president.
"Kerry's rhetoric is giving the bad guys a thread to hang on," he wrote. "They're hoping we lose our nerve. They're more concerned with the U.S. elections than with the Iraqi ones."
My pal has been involved in every phase of our Iraq operations — dating back to Desert Storm. And he's convinced that the terrorists have risked everything to create as much carnage as they can before Nov. 2. Our troops are killing them left and right. The terrorists are desperate. They can't sustain this tempo of attacks much longer.
But Sen. Kerry insists that we're losing — giving our enemies hope that we'll pull out. No matter what else John Kerry may say, the terrorists only hear his criticisms of our president and our war.
Let's review what's actually happening in Iraq.
The terrorist stronghold of Fallujah is increasingly isolated. Night after night, precision weapons and raids by special-operations forces kill international terrorist leaders. Terrified, the local troublemakers are trying to play the negotiations card. They know the U.S. Marines are coming back. And this time the Leathernecks won't be stopped short. Allah's butchers are praying that they can bring down our president before terror's citadel falls.
Meanwhile, the Iraqi people have been revolted by the terrorists' barbarities. They may not want U.S. troops in their streets forever, but they do not want to be ruled by fanatical murderers. Kidnapping aid workers and lopping off heads on videotape horrifies decent Muslims. The slaughter of 50 unarmed Iraqi recruits did not win hearts and minds.
Every day, Iraqis are more engaged in defending their own country. Elections are still on track. The suicide bombings continue, but they haven't deterred Iraq's new government. Nor have they been able to stop the Coalition and Iraq's expanding forces from cleaning out one terrorist rat's nest after another.
Muqtada al-Sadr is quiet as a mouse. Najaf is being rebuilt. Two-thirds of Iraq's provinces are quiet. We never see any headlines about our Kurdish allies in northern Iraq — because they're building a successful modern society in the Middle East. Good-news stories aren't welcome in our undeniably pro-Democratic media.
Even the French are uncharacteristically subdued. The serpents of the Seine thought they'd seduced the terrorists with a few anti-American apples. Instead, they've found that they can't even free two kidnapped French journalists.
After their own recent terrorist debacle, the Russians repented their criticism of the Bush administration. The Spanish, too, discovered that appeasement doesn't work any better for them than for the French — an Islamist plot to blow up justice-ministry buildings was recently uncovered. And there's more to come.
Terror's appetite is only whetted by weakness.
Of course, the United Nations is still doing everything it can to undercut President Bush. Embarrassed by Oil-for-Food corruption revelations, the U.N. would like to get back to the good old days of the Clinton administration, which winked at outright U.N. criminality.
The terrorists are pulling out all the stops to shed blood in Iraq this week. While the media makes every mortar round sound like the end of the world, the encouraging news is that the terrorists haven't been able to do more. They can harass convoys and murder civilians — but they haven't budged our troops or the new Iraqi government.
Of course, the terrorists aren't suddenly going to quit if President Bush wins at the polls — but his re-election would be a terrible psychological blow to them. They know how high the stakes are in Iraq.
The struggle isn't just about the fate of one country, but about the future of the entire Middle East. If freedom and the rule of law get even a 51 percent victory in Iraq, it's the beginning of the end for the terrorists and the vicious regimes that bred them.
Al Qaeda and its affiliates are rapidly using up the human capital they've accumulated over decades. The casualties in Iraq are overwhelmingly on the terrorist side. Extremist leaders have paid a particularly heavy price. But they won't stop fighting because they can't. The terrorists have to win in Iraq. They have to defeat America.
The astonishing thing is that so many of our fellow Americans don't get it. The terrorists aren't committing their shrinking reserves because the outcome's a trivial matter. They recognize the magnitude of what we're helping the Iraqi people achieve.
This is the big one. The fate of a civilization hangs in the balance. And all we hear from one presidential contender is that it's the "wrong war, at the wrong time."
It is. For the terrorists.
Ralph Peters is the author of "Beyond Baghdad: Postmodern War and Peace."
If there are Any soldiers, anywhere, reading this, but particularly in Iraq or Afghanistan, please add your two cents now!
People like KeithJoy will automatically discount the letter printed above as some form of political hype, since the person writing it was not identified.
Very good, Mr. Spencer.
Have you tried getting published in the MSM?
Daniel Pipes managed to get published in Canada's Globe and Mail the other day.
It is very troubling to me that we must always discuss Islam within what is, essentially, a closed community. The articles that Mr. Spencer gets published are almost like Samizdat in that they do not reach beyond the closed community out to the greater public.
When Mr. Spencer gets regularly published in the New York Times and debates about Islam such as those that take place on Front Page Magazine take place in the New York Times then I know that the battle against Islamism will not be lost. But at the moment, that battle is ours to lose. We could win it almost instantly if we ever started honestly acknowledging what we are fighting and took decisive steps. Yet I fear we will not do anything until we become truly frightened, when the battle is almost lost, and then we will have to suffer terribly. And this battle may not take place for decades, maybe even hundreds of years from now.
"The Americans will always do the right thing... After they've exhausted all the alternatives."
- Winston Churchill
Thanks, Admiral.
What's the MSM?
Best
RS
Sorry, Mr. Spencer.
MSM = mainstream media
Admiral,
I've been published in the Dallas Morning News, the New York Post, and Canada's National Post. Generally I don't put much effort into getting into the "MSM," since I know I can get published easily in other outlets. But you're right: ultimately it must be done.
Best
RS
Mr Bush and Mr Kerry are globalists. Mr Bush was born into his connections and Mr Kerry married his wealthiest connection and then curried favor with others.
Both men have serious conflicts of business interests that give them strong biases which would pervert US foreign policy.
The US Constitution, which neither candidate understands nor intends to defend, prohibits using the US military to topple foreign dictators, to invade sovereign nations that have NOT attacked us and to "manage" the natural resources (oil) of other nations.
We need to go back to the founding document of our nation and use it to face the future. To do otherwise is un-American.
Please vote for Michael Peroutka.
Of course it's political hype, exactly as anyone would expect at a mainly-political website.
My neighbor is a COLONEL in the US ARMY reserves, and has already served a year in Iraq. There's a sign in his front yard that says: "Kerry-Edwards '04"
Three houses down is an Annapolis grad, Vietnam vet, retired Captian from the US Navy. And he has the same sign in his yard.
You see, friends, one can always provide anecdotal information. Some people are fooled; some are not. I am a former US Marine, and when I look at the records of recent presidents, I find that of Bush lacking. Just consider: 241 dead Marines under Reagan in Lebanon, 170-or-so killed in Gulf War One (a.k.a. The War To Protect The Jihad Regime of Saudi Arabia) and 10,000 dead from "Gulf War Mystery Disease", 19 dead Rangers sent to Somalia by Bush Sr., none killed in battles started by Clinton, and now 1100 killed by Dumbya. (I'm not counting those killed in the NECESSARY war in Afghanistan.)
***
The war on terror is important; it really is the most imporatant thing facing us now. The question should be, "Do we want a leader that takes the facts at face value and uses all of our resources to target KNOWN terrorists, or do we want a leader that makes up his mind before examining the facts and intelligence reports?"
Bush failed us on 9-11, plain and simple. He was fixated on vacations, tax cuts, and SDI. Asscroft was chasing his pornography/marijuana fetish. No, we don't need a return to Sept 10, 2001 policy. We need a return to Dec 31, 2000 policy; when intelligence was used and followed-up on and investigated to the end, where all leads were followed and examined. The result on this non-"faith based" approach was the successful thwarting of at least three known terror attacks planned for US back then.
Bush tried to catch Bin Laden "on the cheap" and let him slip away. The simple fact is, this administration was focused on Iraq from the beginning and used 9-11 as an excuse to invade. Now we can't do jacksh*t about Saudi and Iran, but we've wasted so much in Iraq? 13,000 troops in Afghanistan and 135,000 in Iraq? Come on, people. You're being had.
We should have focused on Afghanistan and finished the job (i.e. catch of kill Bin Laden) there first.
1100 men have been killed in Iraq, and so many thousands have had limbs blown off. And you just don't care. The 9-11 commission has determined that there was no link between Saddam and Al-qaeda, and you still don't care. Iraq will be a Shi'ite theocracy exactly like Iran, and you don't care.
"Please,please watch Stolen honour."
The difference between Dub and Kerry is that Dub was ALL FOR the Vietnam War, real gung-ho. But he was too chickensh*t scared to go.
John Kerry WENT and FOUGHT IN COMBAT and KILLED COMMIES, but realized that it was wasting so many American lives. Kerry became the spokesman and leader of an organization of combat veterans that all agreed that the war was a waste.
There are 59,000 names on the Vietnam Wall in DC. If not for Kerry and people like him, there would probably be 100,000 or more.
Snotty, rich-boy cowards like Bush, Quayle, Kemp, DeLay, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, and the rest of the coward draftdodging party WOULDN'T GO. Kerry went, and learned the truth FIRST hand.
And the communists to this day are very grateful for him, Keith. Just as many islamics will be if he is elected.
kj
There are Democrats in the military there were military members who voted for Cilton are they the majorty NO!!
I know miltay members like the guy kelly on fox and have had many conversations and he defended Cliton many times? did his boses agree HELL NO!!
the Militay is made up of many from all over America so to say that they are all Repb. or Dems. is wrong are they brave mostly are there some who have not been tested and unimformed Yes again!!
I love our military are they all Saints again Hell No?
There have been some who have killed their own babys and even raped women here in the states again they come from all over America and Are mosly Good People The Military I know who are ative are behind Bush by more than 76% and that says something!!
Cause they get this fight!!
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/10/26/223708.shtml
Reprinted from NewsMax.com
Tuesday, Oct. 26, 2004 10:33 p.m. EDT
February 2003 U.N. Report: Saddam Moving Explosives From Al-Qaqaa
The United Nations nuclear watchdog group first reported that Saddam Hussein had begun moving stockpiles of explosives from his Al-Qaqaa nuclear weapons facility a month before the U.S. invaded Iraq.
The February 2003 report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), first reported Tuesday by the Fox News Channel, severely undermines claims by the New York Times, CBS News and the Kerry campaign that the Al-Qaqaa explosives went missing only after the U.S. gained control of the facility. Fox correspondent Bret Baier detailed the chronology of events at Al-Qaqaa for "Special Report with Brit Hume":
• "In January 2003, inspectors with the International Atomic Energy Agency went to the Al-Qaqaa storage facility, tagging and sealing the large stockpile of powerful conventional explosives, HMX and RDX.
• "In February 2003, IEAE chief Mohamed ElBaradei reported to the United Nations Security Council that some explosives had been removed from Al-Qaqaa - 377 tons remained.
• "On March 8, 2003, IEAE inspectors made their last check of the facility before the war. The IAEA said that included a spot check on some - but not all - of the sealed explosives.
• "The war started March 19. After the Army's 3rd Division moved through here on their way to Baghdad, the first U.S. troops stopped in to Al-Qaqaa on April 9.
• "A Reuters camera crew embedded with the scouts from the 101st Airborne Division arrived at the storage facility, did a quick search noting a number of bunkers filled with explosives - but nothing marked by the IAEA.
• "On April 10, the Second Brigade of the 101st arrived there and spent the night. An NBC crew was with them. A cursory search was conducted. Again, nothing marked or tagged by the IAEA was spotted. The Second Brigade left the next day, pushing forward to Baghdad.
• "U.S. weapons inspectors, the Iraq Survey Group, arrived at the site on May 27, conducting a full search of the 32 bunkers - and they did not find any of the IAEA-marked explosives."
Baier's report continued:
"If one large truck contains ten tons, U.S. commanders say it's highly unlikely that insurgents managed to take 38 truckloads worth of explosives out of the facility in that time.
"The roads were filled with convoys pushing to Baghdad, clogged with supplies and communications lines stretching all the way back to Kuwait - all being watched closely by unmanned aerial vehicles like the Jointstars and the Predators to protect the troops' rear flank and to spot unusual activity.
"Defense Secretary Rumsfeld - asked about the missing explosives in a radio interview today - said the specifics are under investigation by the Iraq Survey Group. But he chose to point out that Saddam Hussein moved many weapons and explosives before the war."
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/10/26/90949.shtml
NBC News: Explosives Were Gone When U.S. Troops Arrived
Susan Jones, CNSNews.com
Tuesday, Oct. 26, 2004
NBC News reported Monday night that 380 tons of missing explosives were already gone when U.S. troops arrived at the Al-Qaqaa weapons installation in April 2003 – one day after Saddam's government was toppled.
NBC should know. It had a reporter embedded with the U.S. troops when they arrived at Al-Qaqaa in April 2003. While the Kerry campaign blasted the Bush administration for "stunning incompetence" on Monday, many Bush supporters questioned the timing of the New York Times' report Monday about the missing explosives, just eight days before the presidential election.
NBC News correspondent Jim Miklaszewski suggested a political motive as well: In his report on the missing explosives Monday night, he quoted one official as saying, "Recent disagreements between the administration and the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency makes this announcement appear highly political."
According to the Times, the IAEA said it had warned the Bush administration about the need to secure the Al-Qaqaa facility before and after the war.
AGAIN SHAME ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE COUNTRY!!AND SLAMING THOSE IN THE FEILD!
YES I'M THE ONE WHO STOOD AND ACUSED FROMER GEN.ZINNI OF Sedition the same as what Kerry did in 1971!! for those of you who don't know that is one step away from treason!!
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength,Wisdom,Sight and Courage to stay the course to to Victory to Defeat the Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Open the Eyes of the World to their Threat And give them Strength to Stand and Fght them Amen
Snotty, rich-boy cowards like Bush, Quayle, Kemp, DeLay, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, and the rest of the coward draftdodging party WOULDN'T GO. Kerry went, and learned the truth FIRST hand.
Posted by: kj at October 27, 2004 11:29 AM
YEA Then ran away after 3 scrahes!!!
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
GOD BLESS THE USA AND HER FIGHTING FORCES AND ALL WHO FIGHT WITH HER GIVE THEM STRENGTH,WISDOM,SIGHT AND COURAGE TO STAY THE COURSE TO VICTORY TO DEFEAT THE ISLAMIC TERRORIST AND ALL WHO SUPPORT THEM AMEN
PS then meet with the same commies in Paris 3 times?? CALLED Sedition ONE STEP AWAY FROM TREASON!!!
My daughter just recently finished her four year stint in the Air Force. During those four years I met and spoke with several men and women in the service as you might imagine. Some had served in the first Gulf War and others were sent to Iraq or surrounding countries during this conflict. My daughter kept up with her bootcamp buddies and some of those folks went to the Middle East.
From this limited sample I’ve come to believe the US military to be more or less split along the same lines as the civilian population as far as candidates goes. Of those only a few that I have spoken to have cared much for how this war is being carried out. The lack of training, supplies, coordination, and troop rotation are complaints even from Bush supporters.
My daughter didn't sign back up for a variety of reasons, perhaps the biggest being health. My relief as a father was great but at the same time I worry about the retention in the military which has become a real issue.
Slanderous rants about either candidate neither impress me nor sway me anymore than they do any thinking person. You can stir up people’s emotions by hitting the right buttons but their emotions will wane and they’ll soon use their heads again. People can see for themselves the incongruous nature of what they are being told is happening in Iraq by the administration and what is being played out on the evening news, etc . It’s up to each of us to decide how much that matters to us vs. whatever mud is being slung by either side.
Don't surrender any rights that you now possess, they will not be so easily restored. Vote your conscience. But whatever you do ... vote.
f.g.
Mr. Spencer:
Uh-oh. By not knowing what MSM means you've just revealed to Charles that you're not doing enough reading at LGF.
Hope that works out OK! :-)
CGW
Dear CeeGeeDub:
Charles knows I love him, and LGF, even when time constrains me from reading it all!
Best
R
Do we really know what is going on at all.
Bush and the neo cons have created a fledgling
Islamic theocracy in Iraq.. already. Read article 7 of the Iraqi Interim Constitution. Shari'a is the law of the land, and the basis for the constitution.. just like Iran.
The petroleum complex,like Carlyle group requires a stable centralized government with which to negotiate and deal, only a Shi'i (Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq) can provide such stability and security ala Iran and it's SCIRI.
Saudi Arabia no longer has the threat of Saddam, and no longer has infidel soldiers on it's "sacred territory", they moved from Prince Sultan Air Base and King Khalid Military Center to Iraq.
OBL was the Wahhabi emmissary to the Shi'i, forging an alliance twixt the two called Taliban (followers of the Shi'i first Imam and saint Ali ibn Abu Talib).
Iran was a tacit supporter of the invasion, as the invasion got rid of Saddam, who was a real enemy and threat (The Iraq Iran 8 year war) and they now have reclaimed control of the Shatt al Arab.
Osama certaily wants Bush in office and said so, after the Madrid bombing
This is what Imad Khadduri,( a former Iraqi nuclear scientist with the Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission from 1968-1998. He is author of the book Iraq's Nuclear Mirage} said October 7th on Democracy Now
SourceInterview with Imad Khadduri
It looks like Americans and in particular Bush's conservative base has been conned.
Especially since Bush is butt buddies with the Saudis and his family is partners in the Carlyle Group, partners with the Saudis that is. Along with Cheney, Haliburton, Kissinger Associates, even Madeline Albright.
It's all a con game..
Kerry has blamed the Saudis for sponsoring Terrorism (and they have),but he is also supported by the Iranian mullahcracy, then again despite the public noise and threats, the neo cons and Bush and even Israel have been collaborating and negotiating with the Iranians.
Anyone read about the Chalibi, Alawi, Israeli, Iranian negotiations deals and exchanges of information? It's all over the media, outside of the US that is.
From this limited sample I’ve come to believe the US military to be more or less split along the same lines as the civilian population as far as candidates goes.
An actual survey of military personnel showed that 87% support Bush and Nadar only 13% support Kerry. So the military is not split between the candidates. Kerry is not favored for CIC.Democrats attempted to have military votes thrown out in 2000 because they concluded most military personnel supported Bush.However I do agree that whoever your candidate it is important to vote.
Giaour says even the Israelis have been "collaborating and negotiating" with the Iranians.
Strange considering the Iranians wouldn't even let one of their judokas risk losing to an Israeli at the Athens Olympics.
Cite the source. (To say the least, I'm very skeptical about this one.)