In a new Jihad Watch videoblog at Hot Air, a shimmering, glittering Spencer discusses Keith Ellison's insinuation that the Bush Administration staged 9/11 in order to seize dictatorial powers.
In a new Jihad Watch videoblog at Hot Air, a shimmering, glittering Spencer discusses Keith Ellison's insinuation that the Bush Administration staged 9/11 in order to seize dictatorial powers.
How come Nancy Pelosi not wearing Hijab when Ellison was taking oath on quran? Looking at this photo and I see a Dhimmi Nancy, a true slave of muslim.
Yes, what is a good moslem boy like Keith doing in the presence of all that uncovered meat?
Hey Islamsforlosers, as a constituent of Keith Ellison, Terrorist-MI, tell me how your muslim rep. explains his Democratic party stances like abortion and homosexual rights. Does this mean for "infidels only?"
He certainly chose the appropriate party affiliation if his goal is to destroy this country. Although he could run the campaign for an open border GOP loser.
Ellison is another Muslim hustler. My hunch is that he's a Jew-hater, as are the CAIR frauds. Ellison is Farrakhan-lite. CAIR, Flying Imams, Ellison, etc. are not capable of logic or plain speaking honesty because of their belief-system. Their minds become clouded by deception and self-deception. He cannot see that that the comparison is absurd. He probably believes exactly what he said and is engaging in deception when he says he didn't mean what he said re 911.
Since we have a picture of Rep. Ellison swearing on Jefferson's Qur'an I'd like to forward a history lesson which many of us know already, but could be useful for other jihadwatchers. This hits home with me especially since my family recently took a long trip up the East Coast to visit historic sites among other things. We stood on the deck of the USS Constitution, the oldest commissioned war ship in the world. It was built to address the problem of Islamic piracy in the Mediterranean Sea. That is the same topic of this forwarded note.
==========================================
Subject: History Lesson about Muslims in the world & U.S. past
"And now for the rest of the story"
===================================
I've posted a copy of this email since it illustrates how long running the long-running problem our United States have had with Islamic ideology. The United States have fought Islamic jihadism in the past, but we tend to forget things like this since the nation has always been more concerned with future progress rather than past injuries. We're truly 'different' than most nations in this aspect.
But we've been here before and we'll be here again and again until we a) name the enemy b) resolve to overcome it.
The belief system Islam is the root cause and enemy of our civilization, but it's neither impossible to overcome nor unchangeable. It's an inflexible and limiting belief system and both of these traits make it extremely vulnerable. To beat it, we must recognize it, name it, and face it head on. We've fought destructive ideologies in the past -- European Fascism and Communism in the last century. Islam is similar to both of these ideologies in its agenda, worldly ambitions and methods of operation. We've taken on more lethal examples of the Dark Nature of Man and destroyed them as a threat. We need to take the time to do the same with Islam at this point in History.
Millions for Defense but not a Dime for Tribute.
Some things should never go out of style.
"Lacking the ability to protect its merchant ships in the Mediterranean, the new America government tried to appease the Muslim slavers by agreeing to pay tribute and ransoms in order to retrieve seized American ships and buy the freedom of enslaved sailors". A_Plague_on_Both_Houses
You know your history. In fact, the US Navy was born because of all this. Jefferson had great reservations about naval power, thought it incompatible with his ideas of an agrarian Republic, but saw things differently because of Muslim behavior to Unbelievers from America. (You are right that 1/5 the US Federal revenue (2 mil) was being paid to Morocco, Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli as jizya for safe passage of US ships in the Mediterranean or ransom for hostages held by Muslims.)
Boys, as young as 9 or 10 years old, were often mutilated to create eunuchs who would bring higher prices in the slave markets of the Middle East. . . . It was estimated that only a small number of the boys subjected to the mutilation survived after the surgery.(castration>
Please note that castration is not the same thing as eunuchization. Castration is merely the removal of the testicles. In the old days in Europe it was done to preserve the beautiful treble voices of boy choir singers. Women were not allowed to sing in choirs, so castrati were used to sing the higher voices. Both Church prelates and secular rulers had choirs with castrati. The papal choir was the last, with some of its members living into the 1920's. At least one of them made recordings. Castrati were still capable of sex, and in the 18th c. decadent aristocratic ladies prized them as lovers, since there was no danger of becoming pregnant.
Castration was relatively simple and not very dangerous; after young male animals were routinely castrated. But eunuchization involved cutting off the penis as well -- one could hardly put a mere castrato in charge of the harem! -- and was thus a much more serious business with much greater likelihood of infection and death. The Chinese inserted a silver tube in the urethra to keep the skin from growing over it when the wound healed. If the moslem slavers did not take this precaution, it's little wonder that the survival rate was low.
Note: a recent book, Six Frigates, by Ian W. Toll, tells the story of the building of these ships and their actions against the Barbary pirates. Well worth reading.
ebonystone - thanks for the further clarification between eunuchization and castration.
As long as we are talking about The US battles with Barbary muslims here is a little know treaty.
Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the United States and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary
Authored by American diplomat Joel Barlow in 1796, the following treaty was sent to the floor of the Senate, June 7, 1797, where it was read aloud in its entirety and unanimously approved. John Adams, having seen the treaty, signed it and proudly proclaimed it to the Nation.
Here is the very interesting Article 11:
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
That went out of law a long time ago, but it relects American govs attitude at the time.
Note the denial of Christianity as a founding principal.
What an incredible piece of history that I never knew (thanks to my touchee-feelee public school education) Regarding Jefferson and this:
Adams argued in favor of paying tribute as the cheapest way to get American commerce in the Mediterranean moving again. Jefferson was opposed. He believed there would be no end to the demands for tribute and wanted matters settled "through the medium of war." He proposed a league of trading nations to force an end to Muslim piracy.
It's fairly obvious that Jefferson, who I am a huge fan of, would be herald today as a paranoid war monger by the political (leftist) elites. He would be chastized by the biased media and villified by opposing parties. But it became increasingly obvious to me that after reading that history just now, that Jefferson read that Koran word for word, and understood it's meaning. I think the Koran should be required reading for every American. Maybe, just maybe if that were the case, people would wake up to reality, and stop blindly following the lead of the mainstream media in this country.
Regarding Ellison: The people of the 5th Congressional District of Minnesota are idiots for electing this guy. Just plain stupid! Here's hoping his term is as short as it can possibly be. But something tells me that if Mr. Ellison brings back the Government goodies, his "oppressed" constituancy will continue to pull the lever under his name!
Oiz
Christianity was, indeed, a founding principle. The Declaration of Independence's date is noted "Anno Domini" or, in the YEAR OF OUR LORD--that's the birth of Jesus Christ for those of you in Minneapolis. That is the date that separates all time. To say that Christianity was not a founding principle is erroneous.
Bottom line: America was not founded on Islamic ideals, nor has Islam contributed to the success of this nation, period.
Ellison and Pelosi...Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dummer. Two toads that should be recalled from their congressional seats for behavior unbecoming of the U.S.
Since Ellison enlightened us with what he thinks about Bush, could Ellison now enlighten us on why Thailand is being attacked by muslims since that have not done anything to support America, or the war on terror.
Thank you Plague.
As I have said before, Muslims have no place in American government as their alliegance is always to Islam first and their host country second. I see a paradox here, as how is it that Mr Ellison can claim he is an American first while being a Muslim? From the Koran he can't and that is enough for me to say, "Stop all Muslim immmigration now!" Having a Muslim in a high political position only serves to further blur the line between "separation of church and state". Islam as a religion and as a societial edict are one in the same, they cannot be separated at all. When one is a Muslim one is also bound by Sharia and that set of laws is totally incompatible with Western dogma. They cannot co-exsist together. The people of Minnesota have, unfortunately made their bed with sheets of Jihad and that will be their downfall. I pity them as they know not what they have wrought. Mr. Ellison should be thrown out of office now, before things get worse.
"Islamophobes of the world, Unite!"
OregonJake - the swearing-in of Ellison on Jefferson's Qur'an is what prompted me to write a two-page essay constrasting Islamic Law with principles found in the US Constitution. I've sent this by mail and email to about fifty persons in total, half of them in Washington DC.
Here it is if you'd like to read it:
http://a-plague-on-both-houses.blogspot.com/2007/06/one-cannot-serve-two-masters.html
Any infidel government that takes measures to protect and defend against Islamic terror is 'assuming dictatorial powers'-, and since infidel governments are illegitimate anyway, they need to be conquered by violent jihad.
The footsoldiers of the Musulman, the lefty looney's, are working from within as useful idiots....
The Caliphate is on the way!
Mohammedan convert Keith Ellison - a DISGRACE to the United States. Swearing in on the koran - what a disgrace.
You stupid, ignorant, Minnesotans.
Virgil Goode of Virginia - KEEP SPEAKING OUT AGAINST ELECTING MOHAMMEDANS!
Capitalisticgig sez: To say that Christianity was not a founding principle is erroneous.
I guess you will have to take that up with John Adams and the Senate of 1797. It was they who wrote , and approved the treaty, and what is stated in it.
Here is a link to the entire treaty for anyone who is interested:
www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/treaty_tripoli.html
Ellison and Pelosi look as if they are ready to high five each other...
Islam teaches first degree murder. Those who aid and abet islam are aiding and abetting the perpetrating of first murder and as such are accessories.
That includes Ellison(the Taqiyya Mockingbird), Pelosi, that black dame seen here (I don't know her name and actually don't want to), and possibly Bush and Cheney.
A Plague on both houses,
A wonderful piece you wrote, thank you. I have just acquired my own copy of the Koran (Pickthall translation) and I have to say, everything I have heard from Spencer, Ali, Phares, Pipes, Shoebat, Ye'or and others is exactly right! The Koran is a frightening piece of propaganda in that there are very few "kind" passages in it. Everything is about how Allah needs to be feared, how anyone other than Muslims is to be treated as a pariah and that if you are of the "unbelievers" then death is your reward. Women are chattel, children are to be made as slaves and death is preferable to life as a non-Muslim. This is a sick, perverted "religion" that has no place in the modern world. Oh, but Islam would say, "Your koran is just a interpretation, not a true translation as it is not in Arabic" One would think that if Islam really wanted to sway me to their side they would do everything they could to give me their words in a language I understand. But no, this is but one way that Islam can keep control over their "converts" and tell them what they (imams) want them to hear, which is not necessarily the truth. Any religion worth anything will gladly tell anyone who asks what their foundation is. Not Islam, however.
Islam is evil, plain and simple. Anybody who believes otherwise is no friend of mine, the USA or the community of man.
"Islamophobes of the world, Unite!"
"Stop Muslim immigration now!"
Keith needs a straightjacket.
The Un-Holy Trinity (pictured above).
I have little affection for either Keith Ellison or George Bush. And it should be noted that both Ellison and Bush have taken an oath to defend the US Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
As for Ellison, this site has made the most important points and made them well. Ellison's associations with various proponents of Islamic supremacism clearly put him in a conflict of interest, shall we say, between his religion and the Constitution. I agree with the author, Mr. Spencer, that this fellow, to stay true to his oath (in the Western sense of the word) should repudiate all connection to all apologists for Islam and terrorist organizations along with their supporters. I must also say that the shouts of "Allahu Akbar" cause a curious reaction in me, one of intensified alertness and readiness - even eagerness- for action, but not fear. Concern, perhaps. An intensified determination to speak up publicly. But most certainly no desire to let those cries go unchallenged. If one is truly a believer, then God's greatness is manifest. For humans this a matter of personal humility, contemplation and conscience, not external crowing, compulsion and bullying. Mr. Ellison's comfort with such hee-hawing does not speak well of his character, in my view.
As for Bush and company, I find it singularly curious that an administration so inept in prosecuting a war, or even in clearly naming the enemy, could have orchestrated an attack of the magnitude of the 9/11 attacks. George Bush isn't Adolf Hitler (Erwin Rommel, Heinz Guderian, Sergeant Schultz, etc.), but he isn't off the hook either, not by a long shot. Hitler had a number of backers, German industrialists, the Krupps, the Farbens, the Flicks, Bayers and von Thyssens, who all found it convenient to overlook the Nazi rhetoric in favor of the anticipated financial return to be enjoyed under a Nazi regime. After all, the Nazis were simply clowns, weren't they? Clowns that surely could be controlled...But these industrialists found that they had sold their souls to the devil. Or maybe they KNEW they were selling their souls to the devil and just thought that the price was fair.
There are some uncomfortable parallels between US industrial interests and their relations to the Saudis. From the 1970s onwards, the US government in response to Saudi overtures, represented by American lobbyists, opened the doors to Saudi influence and investment. George H. W. Bush was one of the principle architects of that arrangement. The West developed a more "even-handed" approach to Palestinian-Israeli question, oil prices were controlled, gratuitously increasing pumping fees thereby increasing profits for the oil companies and their Saudi masters, but not so much as to actually discourage oil consumption.By the time peak oil is attained and oil truly becomes unaffordable, millions of religious fanatics will have been transported to the West, effectively colonizing these lands and subjecting them to a new Dark Age.
The Halliburtons and the Carlyle Groups are all enjoying their sole-sourced contracts, having made their own deal with the devil. Whether George "Dubyai" Bush is more a symptom of this moral disease than a cause is irrelevant: he took an oath, on a Bible, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic and he's coming up well short of the mark. But then again, it runs in the family. His grandfather, Prescott Bush, founding partner of Brown Brothers Harriman, plead no contest for violations of the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1942 for his connections through the Union Banking Corporation with the aforementioned Fritz von Thyssen, who was Hitler's erstwhile financial "angel." It seems that Prescott Bush was of a flexible mind when initiating such contact in the first place and in no hurry to divest himself of it as his country and civilization itself was put at risk by these same forces. One wonders if this accommodating trait was handed down through the generations.
Dwight Eisenhower, perhaps the last honest Republican president and himself a military man, warned the American people about the dangers of the military-industrial complex. Just as he had the foresight to document the barbarities of the Nazi death camps, against the time when deniers would dispute that such things could ever happen, he likely recognized from Nazi Germany's example how the nexus of money and government could develop influence independent of and even counter to the true interests of the people. Think about it. Democracies are only as solid as the willingness of their citizens to stand up and participate. But that willingness goes beyond the so-called Left-Right divide and goes far beyond surfing the internet. It means active citizenship, just like in your old Civics course, remember? Know your elected representatives and make sure they know you. Let thme know you're watching and won't shut up.
As for Mr. Bush, well Mr. Bush may be no Hitler. But he sure ain't no Eisenhower either.
HE's trying, despite his stupidity...UNlike ellison the race-baiting street hustler bucking for farrakhans old job and doing the exact absolute opposite of upholding our Constitution.
The two aren't even remotely close to comparison...AT ALL.
A Plague On Both Houses and Frank! What interesting info! That is some heavy stuff! Thankyou!
This picture makes me sick! I watched them, and Ellison says, how do I do this,? Nancy tells him how to sware on the quearan! ("I'll show him!"!)
It was sickening to watch! It had never been done and you could tell. Don't even know if it was done right or if it can be done! How did Polosi become such a know it all about the queran?!
All this being fianaced by CAIR-how sweet it is!
Ellison backed by CAIR! This is a nightmare to our forefathers! Is this that path to peace Condi?
As we all know too the muslims can change and say and do anything they want at any time. Taqiyya!
I just noticed this..."anomaly".
Knowing islam like most of us do (well enough to know it's the cancerous parasitic plague of the human race) anyone else notice this?
No, not the fake-assed grins that are obvious.
His LEFT hand is on that cult script called the koran. Nothing like placing the ass-wiper hand on your own religious cult text, eh?...lol
All this bull I believe has something to do with taking out the studies of Dwight Eisenhower in school and replacing it with global warming! Not even a fact and they want global warming! I want Eisenhower to STAY my kids need to learn about this country not propaganda run a muck!
One more thing my mother is so proud she rode in Eisenhowers car!
Chatillon:
Bush is too dim-witted by far to be evil; it is his naivete that makes him a problem for America in world affairs. I am thus inclined to take exception to any insinuations to the contrary.
You may be interested in knowing that President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed a Friendship Treaty with Saudi Arabia in 1934 which left Saudi Arabia open to US involvement with it. It is America that has been making overtures to Saudi Arabia and this was never kept a secret. The US government treated this region as though it were any other undeveloped region (and, yes, it made a big mistake in doing that). US foreign policy of constructive engagement here was doomed to failure from the get-go which all of us here know by now (but convincing the US State Department of that is another matter).
Thus we can see that there is no US government/industrialist/Saudi Arabia "conspiracy" going on. Just a mistaken belief by important US officials that Islamic countries can be dealt with as reliable associates of America. Western European governments made exactly the same mistake over the past 4 decades through the Euro-Arab Dialogues as they invested hundreds of billions into these countries (see Bat Ye'or's book titled "Eurabia").
The US govenrment is finding out that it has painted itself into a nasty corner regarding Saudi Arabia and the Muslim world, but we'll see how long it takes to get US officials to admit this. Meanwhile, we are probably going to be stuck with Bush backing FATAH and other such foreign policy idiocies.
The tragicomic aspect of Ellison's p.r. snowjob with "swearing-in on the Jefferson Koran" is: that no one in the MSM had a clue about WHY Thomas Jefferson had a copy.
What ever happened to journalistic curosity?
They had their "the Muslim must be good" paradigm, and twisted and suppressed all facts to fit it.
Shameless blindness.
Chatillon:
Thanks for the Bush family background. More proof that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. As far as the grand-apple is concerned though, its been clear for years now that 43 is in way over his head, as pythagoras says. Never thought I'd be able to say I could do a better job than the sitting President, but there it is. And I have lots of company!
The only reason Jefferson NEEDED a koran was to study the ways of ones enemy...after all, his term was the first to deal with islamofascist terrorists
("...to the shores of tripoli..."-barbary pirates)...and he knew as we do, the only effective solution to such animals...
slaughter the slaughterers
Pythagoras:
Yes you're quite right. US interests in Saudi Arabia started in the 1930s when Standard Oil was granted permission to explore for oil there. Saudi Arabian oil fields were developed by an American oil company and American investors but eventually these interests were bought out by the Saudis sometime early in the 1980s, such that the Saudis are now the sole owners of the oil resources there. Recognizing their new strength and perhaps figuring in their own mind that turnabout was fair play, it was from that time hence that Saudi influence truly began to insinuate its way into American policy, particularly given the help of Bush the Elder, James Baker and James Bath.
I cannot agree with you that Young Bush is simply dim-witted. He was smart enough, when as the hapless owner of Arbusto Energy, he accepted bail-out money from Saudi sources. He is therefore at least smart enough to know which side his bread is buttered on. from the Saudis point of view, they were grooming the scion of an influential American family. Maybe there were some debts accrued, later to be cashed in.For instance would it not account for Dubyai's dogged and otherwise inexplicable defence of the Dubai/US portlands management deal?
Otto von Bismark I think it was who noted that Army officers could be categorized effectively with a matrix: smart-stupid/industrious-lazy. The stupid-lazy officers madeup the bulk of the officer cadre. Smart-industrious officers made the best staff officers. Smart-lazy officers made the best commanders, perhaps on the basis that it's usually best to do nothing but it's necessary to know when that rule must be broken. As for stupid-industrious, well such individuals were to be driven out of the corps, their capacity for wreaking havoc was too great.
If Mr. Bush is in fact dim-witted, he falls into this last category. His ill-conceived actions in Iraq have wasted men, materiel and money, running a play from the playbook authored by the Program for a New American Century (PNAC). For all that, he and his cronies didn't have a clue of what they were getting into and they certainly don't have a clue of how to get out of it now. And yet the borders are not secure. And airport security remains porous. And more Saudi "students" find their way into US schools. All of this on his watch, while he is prosecuting "a war like no other." Well that part is correct. This war is like no other in US history, due to this Commander-in-Chief's combined aggressive pursuit of poor decisions and near indifference to real homeland security issues(not to mention disaster relief) all of which is in danger of making him appear to be complicit with the enemy.
Nice legacy, eh? But not surprising. If you lie with the dogs, you wake up with fleas.
The big grin on Pelosi's face says everything. I think Ellison can look forward to a very bright carer in the Congress among his Democratic collegues. It looks like Pelosi can't wait to put him on some important Congressional committe to pass judgement on legislation before it goes to the floor for a vote.
No doubt hell be viewed as the resident expert on Islamic affairs, where Democrates can get the real truth about Islam when considering government policy.
As screwed up as the Republicans are, I think we'd be better off with them in control.
Nancy's grin has reconverted me to the Republican party.
considering the left's bought & paid for (their own admission) by one man, georgie "the capo" soros, I'm inclined to, reluctantly, consider them by far the lesser of the evils...but they're going to have to do a lot better than this BS accommodating the counterparts that hate their guts, some so bad (like ellison) they'd rather have us lose than to have their eeeeevil target win.
Let's see what happens from their slumber party tonight...*yawn*...
I'm not an American, but read a reasonable amount about what goes in the US. It does not seem to me that the US Gov/elites have the best interest of the US at heart. Why else would they refuse to secure the border? Why else would they refuse to deal with illegals? Why else would they perversely refuse to name Islam as the enemy? Why else would they perpetuate the myth that Islam is a religion of peace? Why else would they refuse to profile passengers? Why else do they refuse to uphold the Constitution? Why do they expand massively the role of Gov? Why in the case of TWA 800 where the accounts of around 250 eyewitnesses rejected? Why do they not like Jihadwatch? etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.
Why then are these same people so widely defended as though they are pargons of virtue, when fingered re 911? Especially when there are so many anomolies re 911?
Now...I do not know who caused 911, and am hard nosed re evidence, but am satisfied the planes did not drop the Twin Towers and WTC7. The construction drawings of the Twin Towers are now available on the web and to be frank, they were extremely/massively strong buildings from bottom to top. There is no way they could collapse they way they did simply by a plane going into them.
Then...why was there no painstaking investigation to discover what caused the collapses? Why was there such swift and massive destruction of evidence at the crime scene? Why did the collapses have virtually all the hallmarks of planned demolition?
If the planes did not drop them, then there is more to their destruction than the official story tells.
answer: political correctness, the age-old absolute opposite of common sense, backed up by brownshirt ideologues, some of whom have made it to elected office recently.
case-in-point: apart from the main topic twit above, here's conflict-of-interest #1 (the trips to the middle east in violation of the Logan Act now make sense)...
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/6/30/104915.shtml?s=lh
It used to be called outright treason/aiding and abetting the enemy, now it's called "freedom of speech", thanks to political correctness.
I should add that I think the history piece above by 'plague-on-both-their-houses' is great and should be trumpeted from the house tops.
I personally think that Ellison should be tried for high treason, but that is just my personal opinion.
And should he get run over by a bus or train or truck, though I abhor the loss of life, somehow I would not be so sad in this case.
All of my life I have been a democrat. Since the Israel-Hizb'allah war in 2006, I have been reconsidering my political views. The election of Ellison is cause for great shame in a once great political party, which has been hijacked by left-wing nuts, much as the GOP has been hijacked by right-wing neo-con nuts. Are there only nuts out there?
But since Ellison is so keen to make comparisons, why not ask him what he thought of Hitler's personal relationship to the grand-mufti of Jerusalem at that time. Watch that islamic "peace-loving" representative stammer and stutter...
Here we have a muslim representative in congress and all you guys can do is blame Bush. Chatilon,
it's wonderful how you can generalize an epic war, assymetrical at that, and dismiss our government as less than adequate at any given venture. Well, you're not American and I can assure you that unlike many countries in this world (probably including yours) the American people including our soldiers will fight to eradicate islamic jihad no matter what it's called. And I would personally follow GW into battle before I would ever follow the likes of you. But thanks for your attempt at intelligent supposition anyway.
Chatillon:
A massive armed conflict between the western democratic powers and Islam is a foregone conclusion. It is going to happen sooner or later and I think you know that. Consider the US invasion of Iraq a dry run for what lies ahead. Because that is what it will end up being. Thus I do not consider the Iraq War to be the lost cause that you do. Americans had no recent experiences in the Middle east. Now they know what they will have to face and defeat and before this experience they didn't. Part of life is dealing with things we don't want to deal with.
I am utterly unconvinced that Bush Jr. is a mastermind of any sort. But nice try.
As far as I am concerned Bush and Cheney have the right to be doing business with the Middle east in commercial matters and there are no laws against doing so (even if there ought to be!). Certainly everyone else has been doing that.