New State Department lexicon forbids use of the words "jihad" or "jihadist"

This kind of crap makes me really miss the ruthless likes of Nixon and Kissinger. Don't we have ANY adults in government anymore?

Sounds like our government is following in the footsteps of western Europe. Pretty soon they'll be arresting any of us for using the words "muslim" and "jihad" in the same sentence or for protesting the islamization of our country. We'll be hauled before a court just like Bridgitte Bardot is in France. Can you believe that?

Semantics isn't going to get, Condy-Baby.

Nobody ever solved a problem who didn't know what it was to begin with.

Every day, I read another story which angers me. This whitewash of Islam, by our highest-ranking officials is unacceptable!

What is wrong with our leaders? Neville Chamberlain Syndrome?

The WHITE house...where the gutless roost. I'm almost ashamed at this point how little spine our elected leaders possess now and I have to wonder which is worse: ISLAMIC JIHADIST bravery or presidential cowardice to look our enemies in the eye.

This lady is a real piece of work.

And to think she would like to be V.P.

Maybe now we'll get some indictments and arrests of American lawmakers who slip up and accidentally use the naughty "J" word, like Susanne Winter in Austria, Frank VanHecke in Belgium, or Geert Wilders in The Netherlands.

Won't that be fun!

The great Peace is nearly upon us.

cumulusnine- If immigration continues, you can bet that will happen.

Condi thinks muslims are like Russians.

Radical Islam is not our most dangerous enemy, ... we are.

I cannot wait to find out what euphemism is to take the place of the "J" word! Nature abhors a vacuum, and something is going to have to be used in place of "jihad/jihadists", unless State Department documents are to be left blank, for want of a more politically correct word.

Hey, I know! Let's use murder and murderers!
Destruction/destroyers?
Defilement/defilers?
Blasphemy/blasphemers?
Hatred/haters?

Oh, the possibilities! Go, Condi, go!

Perhaps a President McCain will dispense with this PC semantics game BS altogether, call a jihadist a jihadist, and let the offended objectors PROVE that the Qur'an does not REALLY mean what a scholarly anaysis says it means.

But then, in a post-modern deconstructed universe, where moral and ethical truth cannot be known or defined -to presume otherwise is intolerably arrogant/medieval/oppressive- what hope is there for what's left of western civilization? All that remains is the will to power.

It boils down to a question of cojones...and divine intervention.

The Second Coming, by William Butler Yeats

TURNING and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

Icannot wait to find out what euphemism is to take the place of the "J" word! Nature abhors a vacuum, and something is going to have to be used in place of "jihad/jihadists", unless State Department documents are to be left blank, for want of a more politically correct word.

Hey, I know! Let's use murder and murderers!
Destruction/destroyers?
Defilement/defilers?
Blasphemy/blasphemers?
Hatred/haters?

Oh, the possibilities! Go, Condi, go!

Posted by: Abscedere

Clinton was already forshadowing some...I believe "stateless terrorists" was one. Something close to that anyway.

You can feel the PC oozing out of Condi Rice, quite a sight to behold.

The above poster is precisely correct, Islam isn't the threat, we are. Our seditious leaders are hanging their own people, and we have the nerve to critique China for their anti-democratic displacement of the indigenous people in Tibet, when we have our own anti-democratic governments that are displacing the indigenous people of entire continents !

We are being colonized by the 3rd world, and paying for it. There's really no words to describe it. We are witnessing the chess pieces being moved in order to create teh chaos, death and disunity.

Way to go Team Globalists !

Who is the Heshem Islam in the State Department?

Anyone got a name?

To all you voters today, remember that Hillary Clinton has a very close aide whose parents were/are scholars in saudi arabia.

eve yes, Pakistani that moved to Saudi ARabia and became a scholar there...which makes him Wahhabi, and her daughter is Clintons shadow.

The Hesham Islam at the state department appears to be Rice...

Ok Great no more Jihad or Jihadist They have to arrest all those advocates of Jihad speaking in Mosques.
It will clear the country of a lot of idiots.
Nobody is allowed to say Jihad,or Jihadist!!!Excuse me , where can we find the origin of Jihad ? in the Koran
who is using and spreading and teaching this word? the followers of the Koran

I agree with Mrs Rice. the word and the ones who uses it have to be declared illegal and get the hell out of here.
.

Condy Rice, the same Condy Rice who is McCain's most-touted running mate? Great.

Another compelling reason to support Alan Keyes in a third-party bid. The Republicans want to re-arrange the deck chairs on the Titanic, and the Democrats want to find another iceberg to run into.

Deliver us from evil and stupidity.

RSI

I would suggest looking into whether this site is now implicitly verbotten to any official of our Department of State, and/or executive branch.

But I bet she hasn't forbidden the phrase "those damn Jews."

No one gets it. Not even Jihadwatch readers. You are all in the dark. Everyone of you. I read your posts.

This is classic George W. Bush. Rice is an employee. She does what she is told. I'm not saying Dr. Rice disagrees with Bush.

But this is war against "terrorists." This has nothing to do with regimes like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria, Pakistan, the Palestinian Authority, etc. The problem is a "network of private extremists." This has nothing to do with the peaceful religion of Islam. Hasn't anyone been listening to your president?

This is all about a war Mr. Bush is waging against shadowy figures; "terrorists."

It is George W. Bush who said and has repeated over and over again, following the 911 atrocities:

"The terrorists practice a fringe form of Islamic extremism that has been rejected by Muslim scholars and the vast majority of Muslim clerics -- a fringe movement that perverts the peaceful teachings of Islam...... The terrorists are traitors to their own faith, trying, in effect, to hijack Islam itself. The enemy of America is not our many Muslim friends; it is not our many Arab friends. Our enemy is a radical network of terrorists...."

This is not a war against the global jihad but a war against terrorists.

Just where is this insane desire to protect and assist Islam coming from? Is it a disease, like the flu? Is it catchy? Why do so many people in power in the west seem to have this malady?
If they really like/love/respect/give high honor to Islam, then why don't they convert and be done with it. Maybe some of them have already converted and we just don't know about it. Are we to believe that Heshem Islam does not press his buddy Gordon England
in those directions? What is the meaning of Bush praying in a mosque, and hanging out with muslims?
Would real muslims ever allow a Christian to come into a mosque and pray to Jesus? To turn the mosque into a 'church', if even for a second, defiling it and pzzing off Allah? A mosque is a reflection of Mekka. A satellite Mekka. And these muslims in charge of the mosque where Bush prayed, allowed the filthiest kuffir alive, the killer of muslims, come into the mosque and pray. I don't see any way Allah could be happy with that...unless, as Allah knows, we are dealing with closet muslims in high places.
These people seem to be in contact with each other as they all seem to swerve in the same directions together. They are engaged in the magickal operation of word magick or word trickery. This is taqiyya. Now they wish to force their interpretation on us and make us comply. As far as the word jihad, they are a dollar short and a day late, that cats already out of the bag...

I'd like her to check out my "DEFEAT JIHAD" bumper sticker?

Perhaps I should send her one in the mail?

Correction: Id like her to check out my "DEFEAT JIHAD" bumper sticker! Exclamation point!

*

Lex, I've thought for awhile how Yeats' poem is prophetic of this 3rd wave of Islam. Islam being the "rough beast," of course.

1st wave: Battle of Tours, 732.

2nd wave: Battle of Vienna, September 11, 1683.

3rd wave: New York City, September 11, 2001.

Your attitudes have been noticed !

What is there to worry about, as long as we don't use the j word, it can't be happening.

How about, 'authorized quranic activities' instead?
No?

Okay then, 'non inner struggle related violence made compulsory by by god'?

Oh, really..........Condi needs to step down, NOW.

"This is not a war against the global jihad but a war against terrorists."

You dont get it Monk. Its a continuation of Islam's 1400 year war with the non Muslim world. Most likely the final phase.

Is she also going to threaten us with rats eating off our faces while we're alive so we'll love Big Brother?

This is not a war against the global jihad but a war against terrorists.

Posted by: monk at April 22, 2008 10:02 AM

Elric, I think monk is being sarcastic. The above is what Bush & Co say.

Of course it's global jihad, and I'll say that to anyone I please, Dr. Rice.

This is the kind of thing that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich warned about in the US State Department.
Career state department employees don't want to upset the tea cart, they would prefer to stay at static level and they end up reflecting more of an appeasment posture towards the Middle Eastern Islamic threats. Condeleeza Rice spends most of here time trying to keep a lid on anything that will reflect negatively on how the State Department really views the problems in the Middle East-- It's called diplomacy and that is pretty much what many bastions of the state department are about.

Speaking positively though, our US State Department is a much more effective tool in dealing with world problems than the United Nations is to us. There out reach programs that are a lot more effective than the UN is dealing with today on the free worlds behalf.

But I believe it is a mistake to try to suppress the term Jihad in the State departments lexicon.

It will be interesting to read or watch and see if State Department Deputy Spokesman Tom Casey uses the "jihad" term in any of his press briefings of which transcripts of them can be read or viewed here.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2008/

>>Just where is this insane desire to protect and assist Islam coming from? Is it a disease, like the flu? Is it catchy? Why do so many people in power in the west seem to have this malady? --duh swami.

The willful dhimmification of our "leaders" IS "insane." No, I don't think it's contagious, swami, obviously we're immune!

Why don't the Western dhimmis just embrace Naziism, too?

From Bill Warner, Jihad Statistics:

For an example of using statistics, look at the question: what is the real jihad, the jihad of inner, spiritual struggle or the jihad of war? Let’s turn to Bukhari (the Hadith) for the answer, as he repeatedly speaks of jihad. In Bukhari 97% of the jihad references are about war and 3% are about the inner struggle. So the statistical answer is that jihad is 97% war and 3% inner struggle.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=%7B6AA49466-2575-491F-B712-CEA90FCCCD0D%7D

Ofcourse, Condi ALWAYS knows bettrer:)-

Elric66, please. Pay very close attention to your president.

Don't we have ANY adults in government anymore?

Posted by: Bingo

No, and we won't until we decide that our own survival is worth more than whatever epitaph the world's historians will put on America's tombstone.

We have the BABY BOOM generation.
We have the Woodstock generation.
We have the generation that thinks all we need do is show the world we love them and they'll love us right back.

We'll get adults in government only when we decide to vote as adults who believe in our own country and its ideals instead of voting for the guy who promises more government handouts or the man or woman who promises "to repair America's reputation" around the world. We'll get adults in government when adults enter the voting booth.

Political correctness is making a strong comeback in the state department.

Forbidding the use of the terms "jihad" and "jihadist" by any State Department official to not offend Muslims amounts to appeasement.

Washington is beginning to look a lot like Brussels......everywhere you go.

Muslims have complained about John McCain use of the term "Islamic terrorism" and now they have found a sympathizer in Condi who is willing to appease Muslims in an effort to avoid associating Muslims with violent jihad.

Fact 1: Violent jihad is being preached in Mosques throughout the world.

Fact 2: The majority of terrorism around the world is committed by Muslims who are using jihad as a means to make the world Islamic and pursue sharia.

Call a spade a spade.

But Condi won't say it is so.

How pathetic. How spineless. Let us all hope that Condi won't be on McCain's VP ticket.

I always knew that the War on Terror was a misnomer that would degenerate into pandering, since the people running it are clueless, like Condhimmi Rice.
Speaking of clueless, my daughter's poly sci professor claimed that Kuwait is part of the UAE, and refused to budge after she tried to correct him. Those State Department people went to colleges with profs like that. Poly sigh...

Monk is accurate in stating that Bush is the "decider" but I think it's also accurate to point out that Presidents hire people for top positions that are to be "informed" and to "inform" them and "assist" them in making decisions.

So that said, of course Dubya is the "decider" but don't think for a moment that Rice doesn't have enormous influence with him in his decision making.

Will Muslims be insulted by a reference to other Muslims using the traditional primary meaning of jihad? Answer: probably. But that doesn't negate the traditional status of that meaning, or the influence of that traditional view in the Islamic world.

And so how do those Muslims who are insulted react? Do they go after those in their own community who are making them look bad or do they blame us for even pointing it out?

There's no point in even trying to separate those Muslims who are insulted by the facts from those who are committing acts of VIOLENT JIHAD. If they were really that insulted they would have spoken up against the jihadists decades ago. They would have crushed them. They would have stopped contributing to any Muslim charity with a "military" wing. Just because they can separate the two sides of their religion doesn't mean we should.

It appears Condi is following in the foot-steps of our British allies, no War on Terror, no reference to Islam, etc., etc., etc..

Monk,

Bush - or any President - formulates a particular foreign policy and puts the mandate into place...and, I might add, usually upon the recommendation of some State functionary. It left to the SOSUS along the various experts & functionaries within State on how that particular policy is to be implimented, ie., the working details.

Nature abhors a vacuum, and something is going to have to be used in place of "jihad/jihadists", unless State Department documents are to be left blank, for want of a more politically correct word.

There are several PC words already in State's thesaurus:

insurgents
rebels
separatists
terrorists

All of the above are all-inclusive. They can be applied in any area of the world where groups are fighting their government or one another.

dont' forget bbc's favourite, "militants"

'knowing your enemy' is lost on her, and many of our 'leaders'.

Ok, here is what she is suggesting - put our fingers in our ears so we cannot hear, shut our eyes, and rant 'lalalalalalala' loudly so we cannot hear, see, or speak about our enemies. That way they will go away... oops, they are not going away and in fact like that we do that.

Condi Rice - an ostrich with her head in the sand who wants us all to do the same as her. I suppose if someone told her that jihad was more than just terror and fear she might start crying. It would be too much to comprehend.

I declare the word tax(es) offensive and verbotten not to be used or recognized.

Well it seems about as effective as what they have just done. And the reality check of thugs with guns will also correct them in their Orwellian atempt at newspeak, just like if I ignored atempts to tax me.

Posted by: Sneakyzionistcrusader

"Dubya is the "decider" but don't think for a moment that Rice doesn't have enormous influence with him in his decision making."

Bush and Rice are soul-mates. Aren't they a perfect match?

Every day, I feel better about my non-Ivy League education. That Ms Rice actually holds a PhD from Stanford should depress the market for those doctors for some time.

She, like the execrable Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, would be nearly unemployable in the free market. In government, however, they are held up as exemplars of wisdom and achievement.

You folks don't understand what Islam is about...Islam is Peace.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZcCYg48KtI

MoorthyM:

Welcome to JW/DW. I have your book and bought one for a friend. It is seminal as a source for something he is writing. His name is Dagald Walker - I believe he may have contacted you.

CGW

Now if we could only get those, those, those... oh, you know them! If we could only get them to stop trying to, to... oh, what's the word? (Administrationhiemers) to stop trying to kill us!

From Lex:
But then, in a post-modern deconstructed universe, where moral and ethical truth cannot be known or defined -to presume otherwise is intolerably arrogant/medieval/oppressive- what hope is there for what's left of western civilization?

A good point and an ironic point now too, given this quote by the President as he greeted the Pope last Wednesday:

In a world where some no longer believe that we can distinguish between simple right and wrong, we need your message to reject this "dictatorship of relativism," and embrace a culture of justice and truth.

I think the analysis of State Department bureaucratic mentality given by http://www.eternityroad.info/index.php/weblog/screeds/14/ ">Francis W. Porretto remains accurate today, as does his conclusion:

Action takes many forms. In the world of geopolitics, the most perceptible form is the military kind: the exchange of fire as governments attempt to impose their wills upon one another. War is the ultimate negative-sum game. Even the victor is worse off after a war than before it. This is not to say that war must always be avoided; sometimes all the alternatives are worse. But war becomes ever more necessary to a nation whose professional representatives to foreign powers cannot bring themselves to do the job for which they were hired -- to champion their country's interests plainly, confidently, and fearlessly. To embrace any other agenda than that, whether out of habit, institutional inertia, or the promotion of personal or sectarian priorities above national ones, is to embrace failure itself, and thereby to create a vacuum into which bullets, bombs, and troops will rush.

A close friend of mine told me recently that some of my remarks, here and elsewhere, could be taken as curmudgeonly. I'm sure that's true, but it will be easier to maintain a consistently lighthearted outlook when our government adopts a consistently realistic one.

Link in my post above:

Francis W. Porretto

is

http://www.eternityroad.info/index.php/weblog/screeds/14/

There, that ought to cover it. One way or another.

Posted by: Miluimnik:

"You folks don't understand what Islam is about...Islam is Peace.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZcCYg48KtI"

Now I ask you Miluimnik, who is more savage? Who is more disgusting? These savages or the man in the White House that does his utmost to defend them? I want an honest answer from you.

On FNC last week (not this), Karl Rove dismissed the idea that Condi is interested in the VP job.

WALLACE: Now, I notice you didn't mention another name that's getting a lot of attention, Condoleezza rice. Do you think it would be a mistake for McCain to name somebody who is so closely tied to the Bush administration?

ROVE: Well, I don't think that question even needs to be asked. I had dinner with Condi, who is a close friend. And I said to her during the course of dinner -- I said, "I've got some friends in Congress who want to go out there and boost your name for vice president, and I've been holding them back and discouraging them from doing so," and she said, "Tell them no."

I mean, look. She has no interest in elective office. She wants to return to Stanford. She's got a couple interesting careers. And the only election that Condi Rice would like to participate in is the election for NFL commissioner, and that's not available.

On the term itself, if they think Islam is good and that Jihad is an integral part of Islam, then they not only have to dissociate Islam with terrorism and other supremacist activities - they also have to do the same for the term 'Jihad'. Which explains it.

Personally I don't think it's much worse than the 'Islam-is-peace' mantra doing the rounds.

wouldn't this be a 1st amendment issue?

Monk, at one point you were ignorant of muslims too. Admit it. Should our president and other leaders know what it is all about? Well, after 6-7 years you would think, yes! But, I encounter many who still do not and actually are apologetics and they come from our Universities, media, hollyweird, etc. And if you think that the others running for President, or our Congress - and I am including the Democrats - are any better than Bush - think again. They are worse. Do some searches on Obama and Hillary's ties to hamas, saudi funds, etc. It will make you sick. And the alternative to Bush was Kerry - a known terrorist. And **WAY** too many people voted for him.

Miluimnik, thank you for the video. It is just one more video to prove islam breeds psychopathic murderers. islam is the 'religion' that keeps on giving... me proof to show its violence that it breeds.

An infidel attempt to redefine Jihadist is as practical as a Jihadist attempt to redefine time.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/020750.php#comments

We're all idiots. We are behaving exactly as the muslims have trained us to.

Jihad is just a tactic. There can be no jihad if there are no muslims. I am afraid that the enemy, as usual, is not a concept or a tactic or an ideology. The enemy is real and it is human. The enemy is muslims.

Face it folks, we all know where this clash of civilizations is going. We are either going to begin deporting and all muslims and waging all out war on all muslim countries or we will all become muslims.

And the alternative to Bush was Kerry - a known terrorist. And **WAY** too many people voted for him.

But it was the people who voted against Kerry that one of the British tabloids called SO DUMB.

R_not, you wrote: "Monk, at one point you were ignorant of Muslims too. Admit it. Should our president and other leaders know what it is all about? Well, after 6-7 years you would think, yes! But, I encounter many who still do not and actually are apologetics and they come from our Universities, media, hollyweird, etc. And if you think that the others running for President, or our Congress - and I am including the Democrats - are any better than Bush - think again. They are worse. Do some searches on Obama and Hillary's ties to hamas, saudi funds, etc. It will make you sick. And the alternative to Bush was Kerry - a known terrorist. And **WAY** too many people voted for him."

R_not, I might admit to being agnostic on Islam.... perahaps.

After the September 11, 2001 Muslim terror atrocities on American soil, you can be sure I found some good scholars and authors and quick. Unlike President George W. Bush, I did not look to Hamza Yusuf to teach me about Islam.

With respect R_not, you are only exposing to the world your ignorance of this compromised and corrupt world leader. Bush is not ignorant because of carelessness. The Bush family and friends have longstanding and deep financial relations with our jihadist enemies. Bush is in bed with these killers and they are rolling around under the sheets.

Wake up please R_not. Do some research on this criminal in the White House. I don't use the word criminal lightly. This man is a disaster. He is the worst thing that happened to this once great nation, morally and spiritually. America has suffered immeasurably under the George W. Bush presidency. If I had my way, Mr. Bush would be arrested, tried and punished for treason. What is the punishment for treason? Please, do some research R_not. Then get back to me. Don't be an apologist for evil-doers and wicked men.

Posted by: Sneakyzionistcrusader

"Dubya is the "decider" but don't think for a moment that Rice doesn't have enormous influence with him in his decision making."

Bush and Rice are soul-mates. Aren't they a perfect match?

Posted by: monk

They are quite a match I must say. Today's leaders are treasonous worms.

Before Islam can be fought effectively and sensibly, the 5th column that has opened the doors to them need purged and that I don't see happening anytime soon. That's when things will get very very ugly, though absolutely necessary to the survival of western civilizations.

Not long ago, I read an article in the OpEd section of the Boston Glob(e)where the use of the word "Islamofascist" was assailed as a right wing Christian conspiracy meant to denigrate Islam. James Carroll, the writer, used the most erroneous of bases for his diatribe but alas, like most ultra-liberals, his arguments were easy to pull apart.

As usual, this unraveling bore the true face of the writer as someone who, "despite the facts, has already made up his mind."

Now Condi has banned the use of the term "Jihadi" or "Jihadist" because it supposedly denigrates peaceful Muslims. Much like Carroll, the State Department and Condi just do not get it. Whatever the facts are, they treat Islam as a true religion of peace. Nothing could be farther from the truth. One need only read the Koran in reverse chronological order and like Carroll's arguments, it just unravels to reveal its true nature.

This true nature is simply put: WORLD DOMINATION for power's sake alone. These politicos and liberals are just creating a terrible future for our child and our children's children. Can you say Dhimmitude?

The shallowness and superficiality of Washington thinking is shocking.

The world is not a dance of diplomats!

RS nails it when he says:

The argument, of course, is the old Streusand/Guirard claim that by using the word jihad, we're validating the jihadist claim to be waging jihad. Of course, it's ridiculous to think that the U.S. State Department carries any validating authority within the Islamic world to determine what is Islam and what isn't.

The jihaddis don't give a damn what we call them. In fact, the jihaddis themselves prefer that we not use the word jihad, as they have demonstrated on innumerable occasions, because it helps them to hide their identity and intentions.

=============

And HIDING is one of the keynote essentials of mohammedan culture!

Think about it. Hiding the women. Hiding their central shrines. Assasins. Concealed bomb belts. Mixing their fighters in among their civilians.

Concealment and hiding is an obsessive central component of their cultural style.

And it fits with their anti-rationalist world view that sees the universe as a mysterious product of the unpredictable and unknowable will of their damned allah.

They even think that trying to determine and assert the laws of nature is heretical as it implies a limitation on the will of allah!

Think about it!!! Mystery/Concealment -- Concealment/Mystery.

(No less a writer than Oswald Spengler acknnoledged and expanded on this in one of his books. I forget which. The mosque as the magical mysterious cave of Ali Baba -- or something like that. Think 1001 Nights.)

The suicide bomber simply acts out his own view of the universe, hidden, unknowable and fatally dangerous. He tries to magically become the threat, to relieve his terror of the threatening mysterious universe.

=============

So they don't want us to know who they are, and our air-head politicians don't want to acknowledge who they are.

They pretend they are "freedom fighters", and we pretend they are common criminals.

Both sides agree not to acknowledge reality.

Well, they're the ones in hiding. They hide, and we pretend that they're something that they're not -- and act accordingly.

So who do you figure wins in this deal.

What a war!

What stupidity!

Now I ask you Miluimnik, who is more savage? Who is more disgusting? These savages or the man in the White House that does his utmost to defend them? I want an honest answer from you.

Posted by: monk [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 22, 2008 11:41 AM

The Islamic President is more disgusting.....and we, the Post-American electorate are guilty of abject stupidity.

Today's leaders are treasonous worms.

Before Islam can be fought effectively and sensibly, the 5th column that has opened the doors to them need purged and that I don't see happening anytime soon. That's when things will get very very ugly, though absolutely necessary to the survival of western civilizations.

Posted by: Sneakyzionistcrusader

George W. Bush is the epitome of Cicero's discourse on "Treason." In case anyone has not seen it or heard it, I will not reproduce it for the site:

TREASON

A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor—he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men (The "Jews" are humiliating the Palestinians?). He rots the soul of a nation—he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city—he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared.......Cicero, 42 B.C.E.

monk wrote "With respect R_not, you are only exposing to the world your ignorance of this compromised and corrupt world leader. Bush is not ignorant because of carelessness. The Bush family and friends have longstanding and deep financial relations with our jihadist enemies. Bush is in bed with these killers and they are rolling around under the sheets"

Monk, I agree with you about Bush - so you are pushing against an open door. But, I do not agree with you that the Democrats are free of saudi money and if you have been paying attention - they endorse Obama and/or Hillary. And the one thing about the Democrats - they like hugging and kissing the thugs of communism and islam.

I prefer the Republicans over both the DNC runner ups. The only one with gonads to state Islamic terrorists - or even talk about it - has been McCain (or any of the others who didn't make it). And he did it despite muslims getting on his case about it. We have yet to hear anything from the two nut cases running against each other - Hillary and Obama. And rumor has it that as for getting between the sheets with saudis - Hillary is doing that - literally. Billyboyboob gets money not only from saudi arabia, but also the UAE and China and that goes into their private checking account that Hillary can draw upon without declaring it.

Without intelligent use of the word "Jihad," a word both accurate and useful (these qualities do not always coincide), a word that demands to be explained, and in that explanation -- the same kind of explanation that the word "dhimmi" calls for, Infidels will be forced to learn certain home truths about the meaning, and menace, of Islam.

By banning use of the word "Jihad," Rice makes much more difficult the intelligent dissemination of information about Islam, makes more difficult the task of seeing the war of self-defense in all of its dimensions, and furthermore, far from encouraging peace, defined as the absence of open warfare through military means, makes such open warfare through such means more likely, by preventing the United States, and other Infidel lands, from working to divide and demoralize the Camp of Islam, which can only take place, it is clear, once the conflict is understood, and that means once the most effective instruments of Jihad are grasped, and the monomaniacal emphasis on "terrorism" has come, as it must, to an end. For that emphasis has served to divert attention from the Money Weapon, campaigns of Da'wa, and most important of all, demographic conquest that, in Western Europe, proceeds without Infidel governments taking the kind of minimal measures that, at any other time in history, would long ago have been sensibly undertaken.

Whatever the peoples of the West may have lacked in the past -- cars and computers, say -- they did at least forthrightly, uninhibitedly, recognize the nature of Islam, its meaning, its menace. Rice wishes to prevent this, in order to curry favor with Arab states, and possibly in order to prevent having to begin the difficut work (but hardly too difficult) of figuring out the kinds of things that might best work to weaken the Camp of Islam. Those ways have all been set out here, over the past few years -- often in great detail. But Rice hasn't time in her datebook. She hasn't space in her brain, to consider how best, how most effectively, how at the least cost, without all the squandering (of men, money, materiel, morale both civiilan and military) that the Iraq folly continues to cause, to undo or hold in check the forces of Jihad.

She's in over her head, and not waving, but drowning.

Darcy: The willful dhimmification of our "leaders" IS "insane." No, I don't think it's contagious, swami, obviously we're immune!

Well I know I am immune and I am satisfied that you and most posters here are immune, but the local leftists and apologists around here all seem to be infected. The local papers website comments has about 85% infection rate. This requires special handling, sort of like working in an infirmary, but with mental patients. I have developed 'skills', along this line, and boy do they hate me..LOL.
When it comes to Islam, I have them out numbered.
One against the many, but the many fall easily because most know nothing about Islam beyond the newspaper, so I have them out gunned. That's when some of them break out the heavy artillery and shoot cannon balls with names on them, like, bigot, racist, Islamophobe, fear monger, hate monger. Haha, but they can't get by me, cause they ain't got enough talent or experience, and don't even know enough about Islam to adequately defend it. Some of these people are politically motivated and make it to office. These are the people I think infect each other...it is a form of mental illness...Mostly liberals and leftists seem to have it...

The entire beltway is rife with people doing business with the enemy (Islam) and they have been for years. Right, Left, it does not matter. Heck, Hamas endorsed Barak H. Obama yesterday! It never ends because money talks and BS walks.

Miluimnic has it correctly stated, the abject stupidity of this world and the masses will be the death of this once great nation and all of western civilization.

The definition of the term stupid is in the story of the man who repeatedly makes the same attempt over and over, each time failing with the same outcome, and tries it again, only to fail again, having expected a different outcome. Condi, Bush, Clinton, Obama, it matters not!

Monk, you are right about the treasonous. I don't know why the state of Massachusettes would vote in Kerry to the Senate who consorted with the enemy. And then all the absolute morons who voted for him for president.

As for the suggestion that our administration is treasonous - well, try again. If they didn't try to talk to these freaks the wails and grinding of teeth from the left would be deafening. Look at the left and their idol worship of Ahmadinejad, or Chavez and Castro. It is just sickening. Carter should have his visa taken away and given a time out to his house and told not to leave it. The hollyweirdos such as Penn, Glover, etc should be shunned, but instead are hailed as conquering heros.

Our administration is doing just fine. At least they are not giving the muslims, or Chinese, our latest nuclear technology as Clinton did to China.

I think you need to stop ranting and realize that your lefties are just as bad, if not worse, than the ones you are ranting about. Look at the left wing loons in the Universities - they let the muslim brotherhood and its ilk in and they are now brainwashing our children and young adults. I mean the left is so guilty of appeasement and political correctness that it will be the end of us.

I wonder....has Condhimmi Rice, or any other influential member/employee of the state department ever used the term "jihad" in any context, or at any time, during the past 7+ years? If not, then what is the big deal? She is just formalizing a long-standing, unwritten policy.

R_not, you wrote: "I do not agree with you that the Democrats are free of saudi money and if you have been paying attention - they endorse Obama and/or Hillary. And the one thing about the Democrats - they like hugging and kissing the thugs of communism and islam."

We have no disagreement. Only you are discoursing with a thirty-seven year registered (conservative) Republican. I expect leftist Democrats to hug and kiss arch-terrorist thugs and Holocaust deniers like Mahmoud Abbas. I do not expect conservative Republicans to hug and kiss them. I expect Godless Democrats to work to divide the Holy Land; to work tirelessly to appease our enemies by establishing a Palestinian jihadist state in Israel. I do not expect this from a self-professed Christian president and a Republican. Conservatives learn the painful lessons from our history so as not to repeat them; lessons like Neville Chamberlain and Munich, 1938. What has George W. Bush learned from history. Nothing! Only a fool ignores the lessons of history; a knave ignores these eternal truths.

R_not: "I prefer the Republicans over both the DNC runner ups. The only one with gonads to state Islamic terrorists - or even talk about it - has been McCain (or any of the others who didn't make it). And he did it despite muslims getting on his case about it. We have yet to hear anything from the two nut cases running against each other - Hillary and Obama."

Of the "evils" we will face in November, I grant you, John McCain looks to be the "lesser of the evils." I for one, am tired of voting for the lesser of the evils. How about you? Do you enjoy voting for evil?

Additionally, I have a higher threshold than most American voters, even Jewish voters. I've written John McCain. If McCain does not reverse Republican party policy of establishing a twenty third Muslim jihadist state in the Middle East; if he does not repudiate Bush's policy in support of ethnic cleansing of Jews from God-given Jewish land; if he does not abandon Republican party efforts to divide the land of Israel; if he does not change US policy aims relative to Israel; if McCain does not recognize the right of Israelis to live and build communities anywhere in the land of Israel, then I will not vote for John McCain in November.

You wrote: "And rumor has it that as for getting between the sheets with saudis - Hillary is doing that - literally. Billyboyboob gets money not only from saudi arabia, but also the UAE and China and that goes into their private checking account that Hillary can draw upon without declaring it."

Again, I am not a Democrat. I am a Republican. I expect better from the Party of Lincoln than corruption, treason and criminality. Don't you?

R_not,

You should have been with us at Tuft's University back in February at the Jebsen School for Counter-Terrorism Studies. They held a two-day seminar on terrorism and Africa.

Minuimnik and I almost threw up when one of their lefty "experts" blamed the proliferation of small weapons in Africa on the NRA....yes, that NRA!

Its this kind of rationalization, wrapped in do-gooder clothing that sways the opinions of the Condi Rices of the world. This is the swill they pour into the heads of mush called graduate students. Imagine all these future State Department workers who graduated from Tufts.

R_not wrote: "As for the suggestion that our administration is treasonous - well, try again. If they didn't try to talk to these freaks the wails and grinding of teeth from the left would be deafening. Look at the left and their idol worship of Ahmadinejad, or Chavez and Castro. It is just sickening. Carter should have his visa taken away and given a time out to his house and told not to leave it. The hollyweirdos such as Penn, Glover, etc should be shunned, but instead are hailed as conquering heros."

Carter is only carrying out Bush administration policy. Bush is only a step away from dialoguing with Hamas. This is called incrementalism. A few short years ago, it was against American law to talk to the Mahmoud Abbas' PLO. Now Bush regularly talks with these jihadist murderers; he plots Israel's annihilation with these killers. A few years back a "Palestinian" state was unthinkable. Bush made it a formal goal of U.S. policy.

What is the difference between Bush's "moderate" Fatah terrorists and Carters more honest Hamas terrorists except that Hamas terrorists are more forthright about their goals and aims? Again you are making judgment as to who are the lessor of the evils. I try not to do this anymore unless the greater evil were an Adolf Hitler. Then I would be forced to support the lessor evil.

Rice and Bush make me want to spew.

"Our administration is doing just fine."
-- from a posting above

The Bush Administration has had nearly seven years to educate itself, and then to help educate those whose duty it is to instruct and to protect, in the nature of Islam, and in the meaning, and instruments, and goals, of Jihad. It has failed completely to do so. In fact, it has chosen to squander men, money, materiel in Iraq, in a venture that, if it might conceivably be justified initially (and that justification depends on one's judgment in the Administration's presention of, and belief in, evidence concerning weapons, and on-going projects to produce weapons, of mass destruction, by the regime of Saddam Hussein, for that was the ?"argument presented to Congress, and that, and that alone (and not the idiotic bringing of "freedom" to "ordinary moms and dads" in Iraq, or any other such impossible and irrelevant nonsense that merely stood in the way of the icy exploitation of ethnic and, especially, sectarian fissures that, once openly on display with the removal of the iron hand of Saddam Hussein, could have led, and can still lead -- and indeed inevitably will lead, as soon as the Americans get out of the way -- to a situation that will demand the attention, and the volunteers, and the materiel, and above all the money, of both Iran and Saudi Arabia, and will necessarily cause difficulties within many Muslim countries, including Yemen, Bahrain, Pakistan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia (in the Eastern Province populated by Shi'a), well beyond the immediate and permanent problems that will remain in Iraq.

Having used up -- having squandered -- so much political capital in Iraq, the Administration has failed completely to deal with Iran, and if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, one can thank those who were so convinced that the Iraq Project made sense, though no one has yet been able to utter an articulate paragraph explainiing just how the stated desired outcome or goals of the Bush Administration in Iraq would help weaken the Camp of Islam or, for example, lessen the threat of the Money Weapon, Da'wa, and demographic conquest in the threatened lands of Western Europe. They haven't explained this, because they can't.

And the unpopularity of the Iraq War, and failure to explain the nature of Jihad, has made it domestically harder to obtain fro Congress the support necessary for domestic security measures that make sense, if explained by an administration that had a policy that made sense. But the Iraq policy does not make sense. It makes the very opposite of sense. American forces should leave Iraq, indeed should have started to leave by February or March 2004 (by that time Saddam Hussein had been captured, his sons killed, his chief collaborators captured or killed, and the country scoured for weapons and weapons projects).

But the Bush loyalists, incapable of independent analysis, and still so incapable, saw support for the idiotic Iraq War as a test of wills with those they deem "lefties" (or some such vulgarism). And so they continue to pour this nonsense into the ear of McCain, who if he does not come to understand that the American forces should leave Iraq not because the Total Belief-System of totalitarian Islam is not a great and universal menace, but precisely because it is, will undoubtedly lose the election, and at least one of his potential opponents apparently has views on Islam that rival those of Jimmy Carter, indeed is a Carter in posse waiting to become one in esse.

"Our administration is doing just fine."

"Our" administration could hardly be doing worse.

Condi Rice & Jaqui Smith.

Sisters in arms, sisters in ignorance & stupidity.

Perhaps I should write a song about it....?

There is no difference between the terrorist groups you mention.

I think that ALL of our 'leaders' should start cracking open Thomas Jefferson's koran and start reading it. It should be required reading.

But, it won't happen.

Until our leaders decide to declare who are enemy are instead of letting the media, the lefties, etc decide it for us and to name this war correctly.

I am as disappointed in Bush as you all are. But, he did indeed improve things after the Clinton administration fouled things up. It still is not perfect because the FBI, CIA, and even the Pentagon do not know who are enemies are since it has never been defined.

That is a capital "F" in foggy bottom!

You guys forget one thing:

The Bush-Condi team is on the way out. But if you think you've seen the worst you'll be in for a nasty surprise:

Chances are good that you will get a Muslim president, a Barrack Hussein, of a racist black church that is a front for the NOI.

If that happens, we might have to go into hiding: we'll become the enemy and Islam the only religion...

Am I missing something..?

Hugh wrote: "But the Bush loyalists, incapable of independent analysis, and still so incapable, saw support for the idiotic Iraq War as a test of wills with those they deem "lefties" (or some such vulgarism)...."

I hear this term "lefties" almost daily -- from a couple of local radio talk show hosts -- in the context of the war in Iraq. I thought the idea was localized. Apparently it is not.

sheik yer'mami, you wrote: "Chances are good that you will get a Muslim president, a Barrack Hussein, of a racist black church that is a front for the NOI.

If that happens, we might have to go into hiding: we'll become the enemy and Islam the only religion...

Am I missing something..?"

No. You aren't missing anything. If America does elect the Muslim candidate, the conservative movement will be sorely tested nation-wide; a movement which, despite its inadequacies, is relatively vibrant in comparison to what is left of the conservative movement throughout much of Europe.

My problem with the American conservative movement -- my side -- is that for seven long years it has been shamefully silent in the face of incredibly immoral war-time policies adopted and driven by George W. Bush. The notion that "the Democrats are worse," as a justification for silence is immoral and evil in and of itself in my opinion.

So, the next time there is a crime that the media reports that is perpitrated by a 'male' I would suggest ALL males to start complaining because the 'use' of the word 'insults' all of those innocent males that are not committing crimes.

I expect leftist Democrats to hug and kiss arch-terrorist thugs and Holocaust deniers like Mahmoud Abbas. I do not expect conservative Republicans to hug and kiss them. I expect Godless Democrats to work to divide the Holy Land; to work tirelessly to appease our enemies by establishing a Palestinian jihadist state in Israel. I do not expect this from a self-professed Christian president and a Republican. Conservatives learn the painful lessons from our history so as not to repeat them; lessons like Neville Chamberlain and Munich, 1938. What has George W. Bush learned from history. Nothing! Only a fool ignores the lessons of history; a knave ignores these eternal truths.

Posted by Monk:

Monk exactly right, we expect that nonsense from the left, but not from a republican that is supposed to be representing conservatives of his country, not the globe.

Rnot, it's pretty obvious the Bush admin is going well out of it's way to appease and support Islam, along with multi-cult policies, et al. Let the left whine and expose them, fight back...what you're advocating is letting the left whine and cry and then rewarding them for it.

Bush admin is doing just fine? "Contiguous Palestine" (Non-Contiguous Israel) Violating SErbias sovereign land with it's recognition for land theiving, bodypart selling, Al QAeda affiliated KLA Moffia Albania. Arming of Fatah. Support of Fatah. Student visas to middle east students higher than pre 911 levels. Al Qaeda re-constituted. Amnesty for millions. Souther flank unguarded. Immigration continuing. Qur'an 5:32 leaving out the 5:33. Rafah Crossing in Gaza. Al Eid dinners at the white house. Karen Hughes. Outreach programs for unindicted co-conspirators. Declared war on tactics. Sacrificing men for "stable" "democratic" Iraq, a fleshzobmie of a country. Billions of Jizya payments made to the Mohamamdan nations. Recognition of a corrupted and malevelant United Nations. Thawing relations with Syria, abandoning Lebanese anti syrian politicians. Blind eye to Iranian proxy wars.

Yes Bush and his cronies are doing just fine...

>MoorthyM:

>Welcome to JW/DW. I have your book and bought >one for a friend. It is seminal as a source for >something he is writing. His name is Dagald >Walker - I believe he may have contacted you.

>CGW

Thank you, CGW.

The second (revised) edition of the book is now available.

I feel particularly bad for Robert Spencer. For all the extraordinarily insightful and dedicated effort he has put in, now, we get this.

KUWAIT — Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice expressed concern on Tuesday that former president Jimmy Carter’s recent meeting with Hamas leader Khaled Meshal could confuse American efforts to broker a Palestinian-Israeli peace accord.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/world/middleeast/23gulf.html?hp

Maybe this vicious Jew-hater is a blessing in disguise?

PC at its worse.

Islam is the root, terorism and oppression is the fruits.

US Army engineer arrested on suspicion of spying for Israel

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1208870468046&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Spying against one's own country of citizenship is wrong. Even if it is for an ally, still it is wrong. It is a criminal offense. No doubt, the U.S. has withheld critical information from Israel about her enemies.

Nevertheless it is wrong to betray one's own country in ordinary times. Should the government become evil and despotic like the Third Reich, that is another matter.

It is wrong to betray one's own country.

condescending rice strikes again. Sheesh, she's annoying.

Does this mean Robert will have to change the name of this blog to badguyswatch.org??? Is it still okay to say badguys??

Does this mean Robert will have to change the name of this blog to badguyswatch.org??? Is it still okay to say badguys??

Heh. But hey, now... "Bad guys" wouldn't be gender-inclusive. And it implies a value judgement. So in the State Dept. lexicon, one would have to change "bad guys" to "persons perceived to be unpleasant."

Euphemisms have a way of getting rolling and not stopping. Pretty soon there are euphemisms for the euphemisms. Next thing you know they'll look for a kinder, more tactful word for "euphemism."

So they are reading The Daily Mail over there too ?
Those words.
You know, Those Words.
Sounds like muslin, but you cannot wear it.
Sounds like Jarhead, but they are not on our side.
Is that sheep you are eating ? No, its lamb.....
Those words, you know !!
One longs for a Torretian outbreak in the corridors of power, so that they will ring with those forbidden words, and that press conferences will be like trees laden with forbidden verbal fruit.
And yes, it is definitely past my bed-time.

Next terms on their banning list:

taqiyyah
kitman
naskh
bidah
rada
kufir

Wouldn't want the ignorant unwashed masses to learn a thing or two about The Noble Religion, The Religion of Peace, now would we?

CondiWatch.org / RiceWatch.org

Jihadists aren't the only ones we need to watch out for.

Regarding Bush, I have been as big a critic as any; and while he and his family have some ties to the Saudis, it would be a big mistake to think that he is the only top tier politician with those ties. It would also be a big mistake to think that only one political party or the other has those ties.

It's not about Bush or Rice, it's not about Democrats or Republicans. It's about money, influence, and corruption, and the problem is systemic at this point. Like Willy Sutton, top politicians have those ties because "that's where the money is". Even though, as Hugh has pointed out, the money is not there due to technical innovation, or hard work, or perseverence, on the part of those who have collected all that money. The money is there purely because of a fluke of geology.

Use the word. Say 'jihad'.

Every single time the subject comes up. Every time you reminisce about 9/11, the Bali Bombing, the Madrid bombing, the Bombay bombing, the London bombings, Beslan, the suicide murders by 'Palestinian' Arab Muslim jihadis inside Israel - don't just say 'the terror attack', say 'the jihadi assault' or 'the jihad bombing'.

Every time MUSLIM terrorists attack anyone, anywhere, and the topic comes up, at the water cooler, or the coffee urn, or the P & C (PTA) meeting, or the bus stop - say JIHAD. Say JIHADI. Say 'the Third Jihad' and then explain that by it you mean the Third Great Expansion of Islam (watch 'Islam: What the West Needs to Know', the historical section with the maps, and be prepared to offer a thumbnail summary).

Learn by heart, not only the Gettysburg Address, or the Declaration of Independence, but John Quincy Adams' lapidary paragraph describing Islam, from 1829, and recite it at every opportunity.

Hey - get a bunch of people together and try paying to get Adams' paragraph published, advertisement style, in your local paper - or put it up on a billboard. Print it out as a pamphlet! Tack it up on the back of the toilet doors, if you frequent a university campus. Make sure you put JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, ANTI-SLAVERY ACTIVIST, ANTI-GENOCIDE ACTIVIST in very large letters at the end.

"The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God.

"The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective.

"The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force".

You may, if you like, pair Mr Adams' exquisitely lucid summary, written in the early 19th century, with the equally to-the-point judgement of French left-wing sociologist Jacques Ellul, writing in the late 20th century, in his foreword to his friend Bat Yeor's book, 'The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam':

"There is so much talk nowadays of the 'tolerance' and fundamental 'pacifism' of Islam that IT IS NECESSARY TO RECALL ITS NATURE, WHICH IS FUNDAMENTALLY WARLIKE".

(Possibly 'pacifism', which is how it reads in the translation I have, should be retranslated into English as 'peacefulness').

Tag the quote thusly: "Jacques Ellul, French left-wing sociologist, best-known for having written 'The Technological Society'".

And, of course, every single person posting or reading here who hasn't already done so [mea culpa! mea culpa!] will have to acquire a jihadwatch sticker and a 'defeat Jihad!' bumpersticker.

You need hundreds of thousands -no, millions - of American, Canadian, Australian and British cars all proclaiming 'defeat Jihad!'

Question - those of you in the USA who have such stickers - while driving about, have you ever noticed anyone else proudly displaying one?

Regarding Bush, I have been as big a critic as any....

Posted by: special_guest

Special_guest, why am I reminded of "thou dost protest too much, methinks?"

I'm not sure what that means, monk.

That I protested against Bush too much over the past 7 years?

That I'm secretly a Bush supporter?

That my saying "It's not about Bush" is an attempt to cover-up the fact that the problem really is only about Bush, and that a year from now, our problems will be over and peace will be at hand under President Takeyourpick?

I don't know who is protesting too much, and what they're protesting against. Help me out here.

Monk,

Have been reading posts all day from work but could not post until now. I could not have said better. Am surprised how silly Americans can be. They just do not have a sense of priority. Americans will argue no end about Freedon-of-speech and 1st ammendment. Yet, elect one corrupt leader after another. Bill Clnton was a known womaniser. Bush, a known wahhabbi puppet. And now, are going to elect either his opportunistic, lying wife, who has no problem with adultry, or a sly Muslim. Am sure that if six months from now, Obama takes Shahada and spits at Americans (his preacher already does), Americans will be SHOCKED!
How can Americans elect Bush and not expect him to:
- Increase Saudi student's visas.
- Increase "Aid" to Saudi Arabia.
- Pledge billions to Palestinians.
- Give arms to Saudi Arabia.

Didn't Americans know that Bush Sr. started Gulf War I when Saddam got close to Saudi border and ended when Saudi Arabia was secured?
Didn't Americans know that Bush never held a honest job? No.. Givernorship is a political job, not an honest one.
Didn't Americans know that Bush went AWOL on duty?
Didn't Amricans know that Bush failed at all of his business ventures?
Didn't Americans know that Salim Bin-Laden was pumping money into Bush's fake businesses?
Didn't Americans know that Bush has an extended family in Riyadh??
Didn't Americans know that Bush "won" the election in his brother's state?
Didn't Americans know that they are handing over the keys to American treasury and Armed forces by electing him to the White House?
And have not even talked about Illegal Immigrants or Americans rejeting patriot, Tom Tancredo.
Come on Americans, how can a known thief not rob a bank, when he is made the CEO of a largest bank and the Commander-in-chief of the Armed forces? Do you see the BIG PICTURE?
Does the term "Fish starts to rot in the head" mean anything?
Well, to Monk it means and Monk sees tbe BIG PICTURE!

@Mackie

I went to the State Dept. link that you proved. I was looking for the words jihad and muslim in the spokesman reports when a window opened and asked that I answer a number of questions about the wonderful job they had done on the site. Ease of use and all that. I quickly answered the multitude choose questions and had a opportunity at the end to comment.

I stated the site was OK but had a question on why none of the statements by the SD spokesman did not have the work muslim or jihad in them.

Then asked them why they did not use these words to describe the enemy. I further explain that the enemy was not terrorist or terrorism because even the US Army uses these tactics. I explained that the teaching of Islam was the problem and that the most devout followers were the ones behind 9/11 and the 10,000+ attacks afterward.

I closed by pleading with them to wake up and help win the war. Who knows were this will go but it was an opportunity I could not resist.

I guess nothing should surprise me anymore.
I have lived to see the US turned into North Mexico.
I heard our President say that "Islam means peace" within days of 9-11.
Now the State Department is running defense for the enemies of our civilization.
But the cherry-on-top of this sh*t sundae is BHO being nominated for the POTUS.
WTH is wrong with the people of the USA?
One thing I can say is:
1.Nobody that speaks with a "Valley Girl" accent should be able to vote.
2. Nobody that has piercings in their face or tongue should be able to vote.
3.Nobody with massive tattoos (except military tats)should be able to vote.
4.Nobody that starts a sentence with "I feel..." about a candidate should be able to vote.
5.Please add to my list at your pleasure.

BTW, my list is tongue in cheek, my own dream.

"1.Nobody that speaks with a "Valley Girl" accent should be able to vote."

OOHHH MY GOSH!!

I suspect a little PC goes a long way in keeping an Enemy of My Enemy, My friend.

There is quite a bit of US hardware on Sunni Soil that even the Demoncrat's withdrawal plan needs use of.

The old divide and conquer. the Wedge in the Fissure.

The concept has paid dividends in Iraq. Iran's direct involvement is being exposed for what it is. Al Sadar is about to have his Hat handed to him. Hamma's told Carter to Stuff it. Made Carter out for a Lier.

The only trouble is, by the time the Media can no longer deny reality, the solution will be almost catastrophic. It just does not seem like a good idea to bend so low in a Closet filled with so many PC Brooms.

Jihad- The Inner Struggle- Dealing with Infidels

Jihad- The Outer Struggle- Dealing with Infidels.

The seem pretty much the same to me. Condi, I am Sure, went to School way longer than I did. So, there must be some deeply held difference between the two that I just cannot see.

Stephen Coughlin's thesis can still be downloaded at

http://www.strategycenter.net/docLib/20080107_Coughlin_ExtremistJihad.pdf

Anyone knowing anybody at State should send them a copy on CD.

The word jihad is used several times.

I personally recommend for starters:

APPENDIX D
THE CALIPHATE EXPLAINS VERSE 5:51 TO THE UMMAH
p.255

Time for Mr Wilders or a friend to get cracking on the sequel to 'Fitna' - entitled 'JIHAD'. It might need to be 20 min not 15.

5 min on the military jihad, 5 min on money jihad, 5 min on 'jihad of the pen/ tongue' (Muslim propaganda - footage of John Esposito or Tariq Ramadan at their slippery best); 5 min on the demographic jihad [note its 'sacral' model in the 'migration' from Mecca to Medina].

Make sure everyone knows about the phrase jihad fi sabil allah, and what it means in common Muslim parlance (as chanted, for example, by crowds of obviously aggressive, military-minded Muslim demonstrators in the streets of London and of New York, in the news videos in 'Islam: What the West Needs to Know').

The video on 'JIHAD' should be followed by another, called SHARIA (we all know what would be in that one!) and then...

JAHILIYYA.

JAHILIYYA would be 15 minutes devoted to a breakneck fastforward flickerfest showing the sorts of things that devout sharia-minded Muslims regard as 'darkness/ ignorance'. UNDHR, Declaration of Independence, Magna Carta. Michaelangelo's 'David' and 'Pieta'. Portraits of people like Milton or Voltaire or Spinoza; the great non-Muslim lawmakers and poltical and legal thinkers.

The classic Greek 'Charioteer'. The Rose Window of Notre Dame. Reblev's Trinity icon. Flamenca dancers; Hawaiian hula dancers; Indian Hindu temple dancers; Thai and Cambodian temple dancers; Japanese kabuki, Chinese opera; church bells; kendo drums; the shofar; a symphony orchestra; a choir singing the Ave Verum Corpus; a chant from the Rig Veda; Angkor Wat; Rembrandt's 'Jewish Bride', Raphael's 'Coronation of the Virgin', Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper and Mona Lisa; the Hubble space telescope; the 'Voyager' spacecraft'; Rodin's The Kiss; canoodling couples in the streets of Paris, NY, London, Rome, Moscow, wherever; bikini girls on the beach; a pas de deux from 'Swan Lake'; the Pyramids; the Parthenon; the Capitol; the House of Commons in session; the Swiss and Icelandic parliaments; the Globe Theatre in London...the list is endless.

SHOW people that what sharia-minded, jihad-minded pious Muslims regard as 'darkness', as 'trash', as 'ignorance', as only fit for oblivion, is ALL of the non-Muslim world's greatest sacred and secular art, dance, music, theatre, pure science and architecture, along with its political/ social/ intellectual monuments, tangible and intangible.

Begin with footage of the Muslim desecration of 'Joseph's Tomb'; end with the demolition of the Bamiyan Buddhas; state 'x 100 thousand Hindu sacred sites - DESTROYED'; 'x thousand Christian churches - DESTROYED'; 'X thousand Jewish synagogues - DESTROYED; 'x thousand Zoroastrian fire temples DESTROYED'.

Fade to black.

This proves, once again, the intellectual sloth and dishonesty of our elites. I am not surprised by this, given the history of Dr. Rice's views on Islam. She is, after all, a student of James Baker III, who is only surpassed in his bias in favor of the Arabs by Jimmy Carter.

joeblough -

your post above, about 'hiding' or deception as THE keynote of Islam - the system, the culture, the way it operates against us - is brilliant. Right on the money!

Agree totally.

It's not a coincidence that there was a huge fuss in France when France proposed to ban the hijab. It means a whole h*** of a lot more than 'modesty' or 'a woman's relationship to allah'.

It's THE symbol par excellence of the way Islam works, the kind of thing it is.

For the benefit of all newbies to this site who may read this, I offer the following link to an article, a classic of its kind, written by an American after some years of unpleasant contact with Islamic cultural reality, in Iraq. 'A civilisation of deception':

http://antiprotester.blogspot.com/2006/04/life-in-iraq-part-ii-civilization-of.html

As the perfect companion piece, I offer a link to someone's very intelligent reflections on what happens in the famous 'prisoner's dilemma' when it is repeated, over and over, between one player, and another player whose standard strategy is 'screw you!'.

Scroll down and read carefully once you hit the key phrases 'prisoner's dilemma' and 'tit for tat'; then read on, with care and attention.

http://www.ejectejecteject.com/archives/000157.html

Because 'western' society and its relatives, what Naipaul called 'the universal civilisation' - and it is very obvious when one looks at Israel, or at the lands of former christendom - are what this writer calls 'Tit for Tat' societies [but 'tit for tat' is NOT 'revenge', it is strict justice - read carefully!] whereas the Islamosphere is possibly THE ultimate embodiment of the 'screw the other guy' strategy.

By this guy's reading, both Israel and 'the West' will have to take off the gloves and punish the Islamosphere, good and hard, pretty soon, precisely as lawmakers in civilised societies punish the fraudulent and the violent.

If we don't see through the veil of lies in time; if we persist in 'forgiving' the unforgivable endlessly repeated against us; we are committing suicide.

If we don't see through the veil of lies in time; if we persist in 'forgiving' the unforgivable endlessly repeated against us; we are committing suicide.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at April 22, 2008 11:25 PM

Ms. PhD in Soviet History is not dumb. She knows which side of her bread is buttered. So what if Israel is sacrificed? Heck, Americans are getting butchered every day and no, the administration has no price to pay. Rice knows her boss is in wahhabbi pockets and eliminating references to "jihad" will make him and Riyadh happy. So what if Americans get killed? Why should rice not please her timid and corrupt boss?

CondiWatch.org / RiceWatch.org

Jihadists aren't the only ones we need to watch out for.

Posted by: champ at April 22, 2008 6:13 PM

Good! Now, some are getting somewhere. But, start at the top, after all, 'Fish srarts rotting in the head'. Never-the-less, a good start.

""I urge all Muslims to hurry to the battlefields of Jihad (holy war), especially in Iraq," Zawahiri said in the message, the second in a two-part series to answer about 100 questions put to him via online militant forums"

Above is from the mad doctor's latest spiel released today.

Note the word Jihad, Condi.

Condi is a whore of politics. Like Obama, Hilary and McCain, they suck at the teat of politics. They are not allowed individual thought. They are mandated to express these reprehensible views without any individual consideration, lest they be considered not of the fold. Orthodoxy reigns. Whether they are democrats or republicans, they have their orthodoxy to proclaim. The differences are minimal. Consider that.

CAIR probably let Condi know that Infidels shouldn't be tossing around Islamic Theological Terms; it inflames the religious sensibilities of all those peace-loving Muslims, you know....
== == == == ==

Soon she and her employers will be out of office.

The only problem is, there are no Real Leaders on the horizon. All I see are Ms. Scary, Mr. Absolutely Not, and the lesser of the weevils, Mr. Hold-Your-Nose-and-Vote.

PMK: Good observation about how Baby Boomers are horrible at governing the country.

the government should learn the definition of and then ban the words: Surrender and Submission...

With nonsense like this, this is why sites such as JW/DW and other anti-jihad websites are so very important. Thank-you Robert for what you do.

But, is it true?

"known wahhabbi puppet", Huh? Now he can be described that way. Who knew or published this 7 or even 5 years ago?

These rhetorical concessions take us down the slippery slope which leads to eventual dhimmification.

They work like the spider, always wrapping a little tiny piece of slime on you until finally you find yourself trapped in an inescapable coccoon.

And the unpopularity of the Iraq War

Hugh

I have a question, if this war is so unpopular, why is the military still exceeding their recruitment and reenlistment goals?

Dumbledoresarmy said

As the perfect companion piece, I offer a link to someone's very intelligent reflections on what happens in the famous 'prisoner's dilemma' when it is repeated, over and over, between one player, and another player whose standard strategy is 'screw you!'.

Thank you Dumbledoresarmy for posting a link to that piece. I have been a fan of game theory for decades, and a fan of the 'tit-for-tat' strategy for just as long. And the part about "Remnant" was interesting too, though I wouldn't have described the concept in the same way. Robert and Hugh definitely act in that capacity. Robert is a professional writer, he writes words, he gets paid for those words. What the words are is irrelevant in that sense. But in another sense, the fact that he makes a living from writing is irrelevant, and it is only the germs of ideas that he has planted in so many minds that is important. He has changed the world in ways that he and we cannot yet know. I believe one day we will be tested by events, and only then will we see the results of his toils. Going on 21 million web hits, I can only hope it is enough to nudge us off the less desireable fork of naivety, confusion, fear, and enraged retribution, and instead onto the path of calm and rational self-preservation.

If the war in Iraq (The Light Unto the Islamic Nations Project) is so popular, why is the military lowering its standards on who it will admit into the services, including criminals, child molesters, and those who have made previous "terrorist threats" (I wonder who these "youths" are, and why they want to join the military)? Of course, our current military is made up of the best men and women that our country has to offer, but the irrational and misguided effort to save the Iraqis from themselves even as they try to kill us (and each other) is only having a negative effect on efforts to recruit and retain the best soldiers. We need our soldiers protecting US and OUR freedom-based Constitution, not the Iraqis and their sharia-based constitution.

Special_guest

You did not address the reenlistment goals currently being exceeded.
Not all Iraqis are trying to kill us, just some are. I don’t like Sharia law for either Afghanistan or Iraq, as far as Afghanistan is concerned we should have forced an American type of constitution on them, just like we did to Japan after WW2, and possibly the same for Iraq.

I don’t see how removing a evil dictator can be construed as misguided and irrational, perhaps Hitler should have been allowed to stay in power, his people were Germans not Americans, so why did we care? Was it because he was attacking Europe, but then again they were not Americans, so why would we care. Removing Saddam is protecting American and its people

Putting our tail between our legs and running is not the solution to me, when the going gets difficult, the Democrats get going. I don’t care for that, I want an America that has some fortitude, the lack of which will only set a bad precedent for future conflicts. We don’t need anymore Jimmy Carters.

Only the future will tell if our efforts in Iraq will payoff, I am sure many Iraqis see what America really stands for and those seeds of freedom have been planted, but they need time to grow. Now I don’t kid myself into believing that all Iraqis will want this freedom, but some of them will.

Also the MSM is making sure that you and me don’t see the Iraqis that want us there, only on the alterative news sites can you find such.

Like here: http://www.michaelyon-online.com/

Now I usually will not post links like that here, only at LGF because good news about the Iraqi war is not well received by the readers who comment here.

Special_guest

I don’t see how the little girl in this picture is not worth fighting for, she will never know another existence if we don’t.

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage-ask3.tpl&product_id=59&category_id=7&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=62

Gaaagh! No! Not picture of cute little girl ... must ... resist ... temptation ... to ... save ... world ... must ... resist ... but ... but ... she is so cute ... must save her ... no ... must ... resist ...

Putting our tail between our legs and running is not the solution to me

If, after this much time, and after this many postings by this many people at JW/DW, you still want to claim that the only two choices we have are:

1) Staying in Iraq to save the cute little Iraqi girls and boys who are just like us and who want the same things we do and deep down share our Judaeo-Christian values (the Islamic thing is just a "phase" they're going through), no matter how much evidence to the contrary, and no matter how much it costs us in lives and money,

Or,

B) Putting our tail between our legs, and cut-and-running, and surrendering, and flip-flopping, and wimping out, and being yellow-bellied lilly-livered losers,

Then there's not much more to add, is there? But there's always LGF.

BurgerBoy said

I don’t see how removing a evil dictator can be construed as misguided and irrational, perhaps Hitler should have been allowed to stay in power, his people were Germans not Americans, so why did we care? Was it because he was attacking Europe, but then again they were not Americans, so why would we care.

Roosevelt was prevented from either joining the war against the Axis powers or even assisting the Allied powers (until finally passing the wimpy Lend-Lease Act), for exactly the reasons you give. Search the web for "America First Committee". The public and the Congress were strongly opposed to getting involved in "Roosevelt's War". We didn't enter WWII until we were attacked at Pearl Harbor.

Removing Saddam is protecting American and its people

There was a definite threat that Saddam would invade Saudi Arabia, our "strong ally" and "good friend", but there was no threat of Saddam invading the U.S.

Even if there was, he was removed from power several years ago. So why are we still there? Job done. Danger removed. Mission Accomplished. What are we doing there now?

perhaps Hitler should have been allowed to stay in power, his people were Germans not Americans, so why did we care?

My goodness. WWII was not the War to Liberate the Oppressed German People From Hitler. Remember this was back in the old days, when you didn't go to war to save your enemies, you went to war to kill (or at least incapacitate) them. I know, I know, it's an outdated and antiquated concept.

In the bright new future, our enemies will be lining up for the chance to have a 2-week limited war with us, followed by 5-10 years of unlimited financial aid to them. In the bright new future, everyone will want war. In the bright new future, war is good. Who could pass up such a deal?

"New State Department lexicon forbids use of the words "jihad" or "jihadist"

I think they have also outlaws other words: GOD, survival, immigration ban, common sense, truth ...all come to mind..

"Hugh, I have a question, if this war is so unpopular, why is the military still exceeding their recruitment and reenlistment goals?"
-- from a posting above

In writing that the American military is "still exceeding their recruitment and reenlistment goals" I assume that you are attempting to describe the catastrophic situation of the American military, in which 15,000 captains have chosen not to re-enlist, in which everyone is now promoted because of the absence of junior officers, where the recruiting age has been raised to 42 and the lack even of a high-school diploma now not a barrier to admission, and even conviction for non-violent offenses is not a bar. The effect on the regular army is worrisome to General Casey. Apparently it is not worrisome to you.

special guest:

"why are we still there? Job done. Danger removed. Mission Accomplished. What are we doing there now?"

I totally agree with you. After we dragged Saddam out of his hole this goose was cooked. It is the utmost folly to still sacrifice men, money and materiel, to engage in 'nation-building' and to try and save these savages from one another.

What the Bush administration is doing there is demoralizing in the extreme, and unforgivable.

Hugh

Thanks for the information

I agree, it wasn’t worrisome to me, when I wasn’t aware of it.

Special_guest

I’m sure there are many more than just my choices, so I make no such claim.

What I fear from a massive pullout is Iran and the Taliban filling the void we leave behind, I know nobody here wants that.

I also do like that fact that everyday hundreds of jihasist are being killed in Iraq, that to me may be worth the price of admission.

I assume that you are attempting to describe the catastrophic situation of the American military, in which 15,000 captains have chosen not to re-enlist..
~from a posting above

Caption per year losses and total number of captions. US Army
1992 / 4,568 total 32,393
1993 / 4,918 total 30,083
2000 / 2,690 total 21,348
2005 / 2,908 total 23,181
2007 / 2,737 total 24,732

There are 3,384 more Captions now than in 2000 on a steady rise through 2007, looks like a catastrophic situation indeed.

Now apparently when a Democrat is in office, they flee in record numbers.

With regard to lowering standards to compensate for these “losses”, claim.

From: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=46796
Dated July 20, 2007
“That’s just not the case,” Carr said. “Two-thirds of troops are drawn from the top half in math and verbal aptitude (tests); and 90 percent or more have a high school diploma, compared to about 80 percent of American youth. So, by any measure of the military, this is far above average.”

So apparently its not the military John Kerry claimed it was, they can spell.

BurgerBoy said

What I fear from a massive pullout is Iran and the Taliban filling the void we leave behind, I know nobody here wants that.

Clarity is what missing from our current strategy. To be clear and precise, I don't fear the Taliban (or take your pick of any other jihadi group) filling the void in Iraq. They may well do that, whether or not we stay there, due to the support they enjoy among the Iraqi people. The Iraqi people will decide that. To be clear and precise, I fear the influence of jihadis coming here, to the U.S. I fear both the attention-grabbing violent attacks, and the slow corruption of our political and educational systems (including the mass media) by stealthy and boring attacks (petrodollars, demographics, lawsuits to muzzle free speech, etc.). We've given the Iraqis their chance: we've overthrown the evil dictator who was oppressing them, we've helped them write a constitution, we've trained their army and their police, we've built them a new infrastructure, we've helped them have elections. We're done. If, after all that, they decide that their top priority is to reinvigorate the 1000+ year old intra-Islamic warfare, oh well. I'm not focused on Baghdad and Mosul and Kirkuk, I'm focused on New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago.

I also do like that fact that everyday hundreds of jihasist are being killed in Iraq, that to me may be worth the price of admission.

Again, to be clear and precise, I wish our goal was not to kill jihadis, I wish our goal was to protect U.S. citizens from being killed by jihadis. That may well involve killing many jihadis, but that is only one facet of our defense.

If the underlying assumptions of the Administration (which will surely be kept by the next Administration, whomever that includes) were true (Islam is inherently peaceful and unrelated to violent jihad, Islamic values are similar to Christian values, there are only a few radicals who have twisted Islam into something violent, the vast majority of Muslims do not approve of Islamically inspired violence and do not want to impose their beliefs on non-Muslims, etc.), it would make sense to have a small war to neutralize the few radicals who are oppressing the peaceful vast majority. But at this point in the Iraq War, those underlying assumptions would seem to have been proven false to any dispassionate observer. At the very least, those underlying assumptions can no longer be assumed to be true.

If, instead, the vast majority of Iraqis share the beliefs and long-term goals of the jihadis, then overthrowing one Islamic dictator and replacing him with another Islamic dictator doesn't seem to be a good value for the cost in lives and money. That price of admission has been very high, and it's only increasing each day.

If our goal were to maximize our defense from jihad while minimizing our costs, we could do much, much better than to spend trillions building new infrastructure and handing out candy to children in Iraq. If we really want to kill the maximum number of jihadis, then look not to Iraq. Look east, to Pakistan, to Iran. Look west, to Saudi Arabia, to Syria. Look.

Correction:

In my above statement when I say caption, I really mean captain.

Special_guest

I agree, this war could and can be run much more efficient, but I am afraid that is the pitfalls of war, no matter who is in charge, WW2 went nothing as planned, see history.

My reasoning is every jihadist eliminated in Iraq is one less jihadist that could kill an American or Israeli civilian at home or abroad. Less jihadist is just that, less to fight later, why give them time to regroup and why announce to the world when such and such is going to happen?

It has to be much simpler for a Islamic jihadist to enter Iraq then to come to America and if I remember correctly they are entering from Iran and from our good friends the Saudis, Syria, etc...
so yes, I say lets stay there and keep the killing of jihadist going.

The American constitution has endured for a few hundred years, I don’t believe sharia law is in any position to overtake it, but I will still fight to stop any advance anywhere.

I don’t think John McCain thinks Islam is the same as Christianity, although he may not say it in public.

BurgerBoy said

I agree, this war could and can be run much more efficient, but I am afraid that is the pitfalls of war, no matter who is in charge, WW2 went nothing as planned, see history.

The supply problems and mistakes (eg. USS Indianapolis) in WWII cannot compare to the fundamental lack of a clear goal or strategy in Iraq as part of the larger jihad.

The analogy would be that after Pearl Harbor, we declared war on Cuba, and increased financial and military aid to Germany and Japan in the hopes of winning their hearts and minds; we also encouraged Germans and Japanese (many of them soldiers and intelligence officers) to come live amongst us, unmonitored, in our cities. And daily, our government put out press releases explaining that there were only a few extremist Nazis who had twisted the peaceful words of Mein Kampf into something violent, and that the vast majority of Nazis were our allies in the war on blitzkreig.

It's gibberish. Insane gibberish.

Special_guest

If I am not mistaken the 101st airborne was told when going to the beaches of Normandy something like “give us 5 days of hard fighting and you will be relieved”, yet they were relieved 4-5 years later.

To suggest our military generals and army are fighting a war without any clear goals is patently absurd, these are men trained in the art of war, I trust they will get the job done, even if these goals and plans are not broadcast on CNN nightly for us and our enemies to see.

Remember the article about how we traced OBL cause he was using a sat phone that he promptly stopped using? In this war you and I knowing what’s happing next is not advantageous to our fighting forces, only our enemies.

So President Bush says Islam is the religion of peace, and daily our government puts out press releases that claim there is only a small minority of extremist and Islam is the religion of peace, yet the facts are he has commanded the invasion and occupation of 2 Islamic countries and possibly the elimination of a few hundred thousand jihadist. Besides the numerous trials relating to terrorism going on today. I wonder if Bush has not been playing mind games with everybody, but none the less, he has eliminated lots of terrorists that will never get to America to cause any havoc.

Now I remember back in the day, President Reagan was considered to be the devil incarnated, yet today even the democrats invoke his name while pandering to the masses, so we will see how Bush and Iraq are looked upon in the future, with 20/20 hindsight.

Now I certainly don’t excuse the rest of the bunkum that has come out of Washington, but that is always par for the course.

There are several PC words already in State's
thesaurus:

insurgents
rebels
separatists
terrorists

Posted by: PMK

dont' forget bbc's favourite, "militants"
Posted by: Sneakyzionistcrusader

Good observations. These terms appear to have been selected from a political science lexicon in which concepts of religion and its role in the shaping of history, both past and present, have been specifically excluded. Don't want to offend anyone's religious sensibilities after all.

(I apologize if someone else has referred to this in the long list of comments above and I somehow missed it.)

About a year ago a story briefly surfaced about Rice's executive assistant, an attractive young Pakistani woman, I believe it was, who was very influential in shaping Rice's views. Anyone else remember this story, and the name involved?

"known wahhabbi puppet", Huh? Now he can be described that way. Who knew or published this 7 or even 5 years ago?

Posted by: GA_boy at April 23, 2008 11:30 AM

GA_boy,

Here is some reading Americans should have done on Bush:

QUESTIONABLE TIES
Tracking bin Laden's money flow leads back to Midland, Texas
by Wayne Madsen
On September 24, President George W. Bush appeared at a press conference in the White House Rose Garden to announce a crackdown on the financial networks of terrorists and those who support them. “U.S. banks that have assets of these groups or individuals must freeze their accounts,” Bush declared. “And U.S. citizens or businesses are prohibited from doing business with them.”

But the president, who is now enjoying an astounding 92 percent approval rating, hasn’t always practiced what he is now preaching: Bush’s own businesses were once tied to financial figures in Saudi Arabia who currently support bin Laden.

In 1979, Bush’s first business, Arbusto Energy, obtained financing from James Bath, a Houstonian and close family friend. One of many investors, Bath gave Bush $50,000 for a 5 percent stake in Arbusto. At the time, Bath was the sole U.S. business representative for Salem bin Laden, head of the wealthy Saudi Arabian family and a brother (one of 17) to Osama bin Laden. It has long been suspected, but never proven, that the Arbusto money came directly from Salem bin Laden. In a statement issued shortly after the September 11 attacks, the White House vehemently denied the connection, insisting that Bath invested his own money, not Salem bin Laden’s, in Arbusto.

In conflicting statements, Bush at first denied ever knowing Bath, then acknowledged his stake in Arbusto and that he was aware Bath represented Saudi interests. In fact, Bath has extensive ties, both to the bin Laden family and major players in the scandal-ridden Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI) who have gone on to fund Osama bin Laden. BCCI defrauded depositors of $10 billion in the ’80s in what has been called the “largest bank fraud in world financial history” by former Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau. During the ’80s, BCCI also acted as a main conduit for laundering money intended for clandestine CIA activities, ranging from financial support to the Afghan mujahedin to paying intermediaries in the Iran-Contra affair.

When Salem bin Laden died in 1988, powerful Saudi Arabian banker and BCCI principal Khalid bin Mahfouz inherited his interests in Houston. Bath ran a business for bin Mahfouz in Houston and joined a partnership with bin Mahfouz and Gaith Pharaon, BCCI’s frontman in Houston’s Main Bank.

The Arbusto deal wasn’t the last time Bush looked to highly questionable sources to invest in his oil dealings. After several incarnations, Arbusto emerged in 1986 as Harken Energy Corporation. When Harken ran into trouble a year later, Saudi Sheik Abdullah Taha Bakhsh purchased a 17.6 percent stake in the company. Bakhsh was a business partner with Pharaon in Saudi Arabia; his banker there just happened to be bin Mahfouz.

Though Bush told the Wall Street Journal he had “no idea” BCCI was involved in Harken’s financial dealings, the network of connections between Bush and BCCI is so extensive that the Journal concluded their investigation of the matter in 1991 by stating: “The number of BCCI-connected people who had dealings with Harken—all since George W. Bush came on board—raises the question of whether they mask an effort to cozy up to a presidential son.” Or even the president: Bath finally came under investigation by the FBI in 1992 for his Saudi business relationships, accused of funneling Saudi money through Houston in order to influence the foreign policies of the Reagan and first Bush administrations.

Worst of all, bin Mahfouz allegedly has been financing the bin Laden terrorist network—making Bush a U.S. citizen who has done business with those who finance and support terrorists. According to USA Today, bin Mahfouz and other Saudis attempted to transfer $3 million to various bin Laden front operations in Saudi Arabia in 1999. ABC News reported the same year that Saudi officials stopped bin Mahfouz from contributing money directly to bin Laden. (Bin Mahfouz’s sister is also a wife of Osama bin Laden, a fact that former CIA Director James Woolsey revealed in 1998 Senate testimony.)

When President Bush announced he is hot on the trail of the money used over the years to finance terrorism, he must realize that trail ultimately leads not only to Saudi Arabia, but to some of the same financiers who originally helped propel him into the oil business and later the White House. The ties between bin Laden and the White House may be much closer than he is willing to acknowledge.

Wayne Madsen, an investigative journalist based in Washington, is the author of Genocide and Covert Operations in Africa 1993-1999.

Read it here: http://www.inthesetimes.com/issue/25/25/feature3.shtml

Also: Prince Bandar has formed close relationships with several American presidents, notably George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush, who gave him the affectionate and controversial nickname "Bandar Bush". [2]

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandar_bin_Sultan

Above are just two examples. To the curious mind, there is more. To the Americans, Bush is a 'war-president' and then, there is Dr Rice.

“facts are he has commanded the invasion and occupation of 2 Islamic countries and possibly the elimination of a few hundred thousand jihadist.”
Posted by: BurgerBoy

W’s STEADFASTNESS in the M.E. is his greatest triumph.

This PERSERVERANCE, against overwhelming pressure from political opponents (as well as from some “friends” who treacherously sold out both their President and their country) will be seen by history as his greatest success and his greatest gift to our eventual victory over Islam.

W’s failure to identify the enemy, or even provide the slightest opening for eventually doing so, is his greatest failure.

I find it astonishing how so many intelligent and well informed (about Islam) people cannot connect all the dots.

Islam is not some invincible monster that once established cannot be reversed. It will be defeated as all the other totalitarian ideologies have been defeated - victory on the battlefield is PART of this. Every military defeat the Jihadi’s suffer weakens their cause and their ability to recruit new blood and every Jihadi victory strengthens them. This is a basic law of war and it has not been repealed for this enemy, anymore than it was for those in the past, no matter how fanatically suicidal they were.

But battlefield victories alone, though quite necessary, will not win this war. The heart of the beast must be attacked to win. That will be done by exposing Muhammad, in great detail, for the entire world to see. “Education” is the key.

Hang in there BurgerBoy, not all who post here fail to see the big picture.

Kill the Jihadi – Educate the Muslim

Deus Vult!

Alert,

Right you are. For more information along a similar vein, check out the relationship of the Bush family to James Baker, Bush I's Secretary of State, the House of Saud, and Haliburton. Hint - the link is the law firm Baker-Botts. Baker-Botts, which has something like 600+ attorneys and in which Baker is the senior partner, is said to have three principal clients; (a) The Saudi royal family, (b) the Bush family, and (c) Haliburton. Check out where Cheney and Rumsfeld fit into this picture. No conflict of interest here!

Davegreybeard

I agree.

I think the difference in opinion is important, it creates a balance, my opinion is not the absolute truth, I may have rose colored glasses on.

How about some of these other posts?

Kinda weird that Bandar Bush would be in the pockets of Moslems, yet he has killed the most of them? Does that make even a little sense? Unless Moslems are paying him to kill Moslems.

Alert,

Right you are. For more information along a similar vein, check out the relationship of the Bush family to James Baker, Bush I's Secretary of State, the House of Saud, and Haliburton. Hint - the link is the law firm Baker-Botts. Baker-Botts, which has something like 600+ attorneys and in which Baker is the senior partner, is said to have three principal clients; (a) The Saudi royal family, (b) the Bush family, and (c) Haliburton. Check out where Cheney and Rumsfeld fit into this picture. No conflict of interest here!

Posted by: Eastview at April 24, 2008 3:19 PM

Eastview,

Absolutely! I was surprised to read that Dick Chaney was also a businessman and not much of a politician. By selecting Dick Chaney as his VP, Bush intentions were clearly on the mighty $ and not on the welfare of America or it's people. And then, there are voters like GA_boy who questions how were we to know 7 years fron jow. Well, there is a price to pay for ignorance and America is paying that price dearly. I for one am surprised that Americans elected such a corrupt man to the White House, essentially giving him total control over 'men and money', the two critical resources in a war. In the wrong hands, the two resources could be helping the enemy fight us, as we have seen the "aid" to Saudi Arabia, the "arms" to Saudi Arabia. So you see, it takes just one corrupt traitor to turn the tables on the whole country. Unfortunately, Americans are so thick, they cannot see the difference in a patriot like Tom Tancredo, or a traitor like Bush.
By electing Bush, America pretty much signed it's own suicide note.
Thanks, Eastview.

By electing Bush, America pretty much signed it's own suicide note. -posted above

Who are you going to believe that poster or your lying eyes? Not one attack since 9\11 yet we signed that suicide note. Sure we did.

I'm hearing from readers, wanting more information and a source to quote. Have you heard anything else on this? There doesn't seem to be anything in the counterterrorism sites, other than blogs.

Debbie Hamilton
Right Truth

I've quoted you and linked to you here: http://consul-at-arms.blogspot.com/2008/04/re-new-state-department-lexicon-forbids.html

"I for one am surprised that Americans elected such a corrupt man to the White House, essentially giving him total control over 'men and money', the two critical resources in a war. In the wrong hands, the two resources could be helping the enemy fight us, as we have seen the "aid" to Saudi Arabia, the "arms" to Saudi Arabia..."
Posted by: Alert

You're right about this, Alert. Many Americans are also appalled at this development. Although the information about Saudi influence in America has long been freely available for anyone willing to take the time to track it down and think about the implications, somehow it never became widely enough known to be able to get enough traction to affect Washington politics. It's too late now, though, for such information to be of any use, but it's still useful to keep in mind as background data for future elections.

My epiphany about these issues came when the Baker-Hamilton commission was formed to address issues of the conduct of the Iraq war. I knew about Cheney and Rumsfeld, but before I started digging did not realize how deeply Bush, Baker, Cheney and Rumsfeld were all in bed with each other and with the Saudis, or the Baker-Botts link. It's not an accident that something as self-evident to everyone here as Saudi duplicity on issues of human rights gets soft pedaled by our government, meaning the Bush administration.

Oh, and by the way, what ever became of the Baker-Hamilton report? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. It turned out to be a whitewash job intended to deflect criticism of Bush's handling of Iraq. But given that it was Baker heading it up, this was a completely predictable outcome.

BurgerBoy, it's true that there have been no suicide attacks on the scale of 9/11, and for this we are all very thankful. Generally I agree with most of the sentiments you express in your posts, and I believe in supporting our president, whoever he might be, through thick and thin. I also believe that citizens in a democracy have a responsibility to really think about the leaders we elect to power, and like many people I do my share of due diligence research. However, Bush is of a different caliber and character than previous presidents we have had. The conclusion I have reached is that Bush is president of the U.S. not because of any particular personal qualities he possesses that make him particularly fit for the job, but rather almost completely because of his family ties. Although I generally loathe most of the knee jerk opinions of the Left on social issues, I find it difficult to argue against their charge that the Bush presidency was bought and paid for corporate interests. I can't prove this in a court of law, of course, so it is only my opinion. I can wield a pen, however, in forums such as this. I also vote, and fortunately don't have to hire a lawyer to justify the vote I cast.

I don't have an objection to using our corporate might and the military capabilities it provides us if they serve a higher purpose that makes sense, and if they are employed along a political trajectory that shows promise of yielding not just short term tactical success, but long term strategic successes. Being able to hold off another 9/11 is a good thing, but it falls into the category of being a tactical success. It is the judgment of many on this forum that it is the lack of clear thinking about the nature of the adversary we are facing that is the principal failing of our current leaders, and this lack of clear thinking prevents formulation of a correct long term strategy.

“Being able to hold off another 9/11 is a good thing, but it falls into the category of being a tactical success. It is the judgment of many on this forum that it is the lack of clear thinking about the nature of the adversary we are facing that is the principal failing of our current leaders, and this lack of clear thinking prevents formulation of a correct long term strategy.”
Posted by: Eastview

DEAD ON Eastview.

Forget Halliburton and all the Saudi conspiracy theories - these are mind games FOOLS play.

“lack of clear thinking” (regarding Islam) is the principal failure here.

A correct long-term strategy would include a massive, worldwide, information campaign about Islam and the life of Muhammad. It would also provide an education in representative democracy and capitalism and illustrate the benefits that flow from these concepts.

A correct strategy would make clear the obvious and overwhelming advantages of freedom over Islam.

A correct long-term strategy would include a massive, worldwide, information campaign about Islam and the life of Muhammad. It would also provide an education in representative democracy and capitalism and illustrate the benefits that flow from these concepts.

A correct strategy would make clear the obvious and overwhelming advantages of freedom over Islam.

Posted by: Davegreybeard at April 25, 2008 4:14 AM

Davegreybeard,

Excellent point! That brings to the topic of this thread: New State Department lexicon forbids use of the words "jihad" or "jihadist".

It is precisely this "information campaign about Islam and the life of Muhammad" that the new State Department lexicon attacks, even before the campaign starts.. if you see the point. You see, State Dept. thinks deep, long and hard, to help the enemy, thanks to the corrupt inept president/commander-in-chief.

Who are you going to believe that poster or your lying eyes? Not one attack since 9\11 yet we signed that suicide note. Sure we did.

Posted by: BurgerBoy at April 24, 2008 9:01 PM

I believe Wafa Sultan: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52962

.. have you read this: http://69.55.11.240/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=218323

.. or this: http://www.meforum.org/article/916

As for no attacks after 9/11, don't you know about: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003160605_shooting29m1.html
or: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1589722/posts
Sorry Burger Boy, time to wake up and smell Jihad.

Alert,

We seem to pretty much agree on the problem and the solution, just not the cause.

You think the cause is corruption and willful malfeasance at the highest levels of our government, including President Bush. I believe the cause is “lack of clear thinking” on this issue and also a mindset that REFUSES to recognize the very unpleasant reality of Islam.

It really does not matter what the cause is and it is pointless to send much time discussing this issue. It is a distraction from addressing the real problem, which is the complete failure to name and define our enemy.

What is important is to focus on exposing Islam and Muhammad however we can and not waste to much time on the side issue of WHY our leaders have failed us in this regard.

Alert

I know about those and the one at LAX, I would classify those more as crimes committed by individuals not really a terrorist attack to me, I don’t care what their motives were.

Now if and when they start using bomb belts that will be different.

Because as it stands now the only difference between those examples and the ones Americans commit is the religious affiliation of the perpetrator.

In other words, would it make a difference if you were shot by a gangbanger or a robber other than a Moslem?

And in this same period of time Americans have shot and killed for more Americans then these few jihadist have, so I just don’t see it as such a big threat, when I look at the whole picture.

Please note, that I was wrong. I've seen the latest reports that DHS and NCTC and State all confirm.