May 112010

Thanks Bitterend !

This Land is Your land...from Mexifornia to all your islands

Bordering on Insanity

If you cross the North Korean border illegally you get 12 years hard labor.

If you cross the Iranian border illegally you are detained indefinitely.

If you cross the Afghan border illegally, you get shot.

If you cross the Saudi Arabian border illegally you will be jailed.

If you cross the Chinese border illegally you may never be heard from again.

If you cross the Venezuelan border illegally you will be branded a spy and your fate will be sealed.

If you cross the Cuban border illegally you will be thrown into political prison to rot.

If you cross the U.S. border illegally you get:

* a job,
* a drivers license,
* social security card,
* welfare,
* food stamps,
* credit cards,
* subsidized rent or a loan to buy a house,
* free education,
* free health care,
* a lobbyist in washington
* billions of dollars worth of public documents printed in your language
* the right to carry your country’s flag while you protest that you don’t get enough respect
* and, in many instances, you can vote.

May 112010

News Real

President Obama delivered a truly bizarre commencement speech at the traditionally all-black Hampton University on Mother’s Day. The overall speech was standard graduation day fare with a perfectly fine upbeat message. Go forth and contribute! However, the president somehow managed to insert two disturbing paragraphs, which effectively negated the speech’s positive message. They clanged jarringly in direct opposition to the main theme of the speech, revealing the paranoid thought processes of him and his inner circle. The first of these two paragraphs basically warned of the dangers of computers and the Internet. The second warned of the dangers of cable television and talk radio. He seems to believe a highly open and competitive marketplace of ideas is a new danger that, from his perspective, is an unfortunate distraction that must be overcome. These are distinctly undemocratic ideas and instincts.

The most remarkable of his comments was the following:

And with Ipods and Ipads; and Xboxes and Playstations—-none of which I know how to work—information becomes a distraction, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than a means of emancipation. So all of this is not only putting pressure on you; it’s putting new pressure on our country and our democracy”.

Again Say What?!

I don’t think Hugo or Fidel could have said it any better.

Does our president even know what Ipods or Playstations are? Remember when candidate McCain was hammered for his admission he did not use e-mail? He was considered a technological dinosaur. What can one call a 48-year-old president who brags about technological ignorance? Ipods, Ipads, Xboxes, and Playstations are computers. They are forms of technology that have a variety of uses, from game playing and music to information storage and delivery. Along with traditional laptop and desktop computers they allow for remarkable access to unlimited amounts of information, the fundamental basis for an articulate democracy. Obama is specifically saying these are anti-empowerment tools and explicitly states are dangers to our freedom that we must struggle with to overcome. How does a president think this way?

Later on in the speech, he hammers home this theme further with his familiar anti-cable/talk radio lament:

“With so many voices clamoring for attention on blogs, and on cable, and on talk radio, it can be difficult, at times, to sift through it all; to know what to believe, to know who is telling the truth and who’s not. Let’s face it; even some of the craziest claims can gain traction. I have had some experience in that regard”.

Again Say What?!

I assume he meant his birth certificate attacks, but not his claims about Obamacare.

There is an obvious sense from the president that these are unfortunate developments. He seems to long for the good old days when Walter Cronkite’s view of the Tet Offensive could go unchallenged. Or that Dan Rather’s “fake but accurate” portrayal of George W. Bush’s military service would just be accepted at his word. I am sure he also wishes that he could just assert Obamacare will insure more people and cost less without all those clamoring voices disagreeing with him.

You see, when you are smarter than the rest of the world, as he clearly is, ignorant portrayers of inaccurate information are simply dangers to your freedom. One wonders what he would like to do to correct the situation. The Obama FCC’s desire to “regulate the Internet” should be something to worry about.

May 112010

Obviously, McCain thinks those of us who have fought this issue for many years have forgotten his Shamnesty & how he fought us all the way. Take some Pepto before you listen to this…He sucks but that’s JUST my opinion…

May 112010

This video or group may contain content that is inappropriate for some users, as flagged by YouTube’s user community.By clicking you are agreeing that all videos or groups flagged by the YouTube community will be viewable by this account. Must be 18

May 112010

islam in europe

In a replay of the Marxist vs. Islamist Mujahideen war in Afghanistan, a Communist demonstration in Brussels last Saturday (May 8th, 2010), marking the 65th anniversary of the Red Army victory over Nazi Germany, was disturbed by Muslims shouting the shahada. (h/t le blog laiciste)
This article was translated by the Islam in Europe blog –

~ can’t make out what everybody’s shouting. If you can, feel free to post in the comments.

Who were those Muslims?

'Abu Imran' recently made headlines when he allegedly turned to Abu Muhammad Al-Maqdisi for guidance.


An individual who described himself as belonging to a group of Muslims agitating for the implementation of the shari’a in Belgium wrote to the senior salafi jihadi sheikh Abu Muhammad Al-Maqdisi with a request for guidance. Al-Maqdisi, who lives in Jordan, is best known as the mentor of Abu Mus’ab Al-Zarqawi; more recently he has provided guidance to the Islamic Emirate of the Caucasus,[1] salafi jihadis in Nigeria,[2] and probably to Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb as well.[3] In his reply, Al-Maqdisi told the Belgian Muslims to support the active jihads by providing funding, men, or however else they could, but counseled against carrying out attacks in Belgium as long as they are incapable of mounting a sustained conflict.

The author of the letter signed his name as “Abu Imran” (written in Latin characters). There is in fact an Abu Imran who is known in Belgium as a leader in the group called sharia4belgium which has begun recently to draw some attention. Their website[4] is currently not working, but videos of this Abu Imran can still be seen on the sharia4belgium YouTube channel.[5] British Islamist Anjem Choudary, head of the Islam 4 UK organization, recently recorded a video in support of sharia4belgium.[6] It cannot be definitively confirmed that this Abu Imran is the one who wrote Al-Maqdisi, but it is definitely a possibility worth investigating.

On April 21, Belgian media reported (NL) that the state had yet to start an investigation into Sharia4Belgium’s activities. Justice Minister Stefaan De Clerck (CD&V) told the parliament that he’s working on it urgently.

Radical Belgian Muslims Turn to Jihadist Cleric Abu Muhammad Al-Maqdisi for Guidance

May 112010

WASHINGTON – The failed bombing in New York’s Times Square is a possible signal that militant leaders in Pakistan have shifted their focus to targets in the U.S. and other Western countries instead of sticking to their home base, according to U.S. counterterrorism officials.

The attack, they also warned, could be only the first by terrorist groups that seek to avoid detection by using simpler methods that are more independently planned. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the case publicly.

U.S. investigators and intelligence agencies are trying to establish whether accused bomber Faisal Shahzad was trained or recruited for the Times Square operation by any Pakistan-based terrorist organization, including the Pakistani Taliban. Shahzad, a U.S. citizen of Pakistani descent, spent five months in Pakistan before returning to the United States in February and preparing his attack.

Shahzad has told investigators that he trained in the lawless tribal areas of Waziristan, where both al-Qaida and the Pakistani Taliban operate. He was arrested aboard an Emirates Airlines jet in New York just minutes before it was scheduled to take off for Dubai.

A senior military official told The Associated Press that investigators believe Shahzad had bomb-making training in Pakistan, sponsored in part by elements of the Pakistani Taliban.

If those suspicions prove correct, it suggests that groups based in Pakistan, including the Taliban along the Afghan border, may be taking on a more global approach after years of focusing attacks largely on government or coalition forces in their region.

That focus could stem from the Taliban’s continued close association with senior al-Qaida leaders, who are believed to be hiding in the lawless regions on the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan, said one former Obama administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is continuing.

This former official said the Pakistan Taliban may be another potential al-Qaida affiliate that wants the U.S. out of Afghanistan and the Pakistan Army out of their villages. After months of intensified attacks from drone aircraft, mainly by the CIA in a classified program, Taliban leaders may be more intent on going after the U.S.

Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said the alleged bomber’s possible links to the Pakistani Taliban will not change the U.S. approach to Pakistan or support for Pakistan’s step-by-step approach to confronting internal terrorism threats.

“We are in the passenger seat, they are behind the wheel,” Morrell said. “They are the ones who are going to determine the direction, the pace, the speed of their operations.”

Morrell said he had no information on whether the suspect trained at a terrorist camp in North Waziristan, a sanctuary for militants who attack U.S. forces in Afghanistan. He said the possible link would not increase pressure to deal with North Waziristan more quickly.

“There is a recognition on everybody’s part that all the terrorist safe havens in Pakistan must be dealt with,” Morrell said.

Juan Zarate, President George W. Bush’s former deputy national security adviser, agreed that the Times Square attack may mark a new chapter in the terrorist threat. “The model may be shifting here, in part because they may have made a calculus that it’s much more difficult to have a big ticket attack, and secondly, they may have moved to a model of disruption rather than destruction,” he said.

He added that the sloppiness of the attack has raised questions, as U.S. officials work to unravel Shahzad’s possible ties to terrorist organizations in Pakistan.

“If he was trained, he was trained pretty poorly,” said Zarate, who is now a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

He said it may be, in part, be a reflection of the pressure that the U.S. and the Pakistani military has put on the militant cells in Pakistan. It may suggest the poorer quality of training available or the lack of higher quality recruits that they’ve been able to attract.

“Maybe they’re weren’t quite sure about this guy, so they gave him a little bit of training and, kind of threw spaghetti at the wall,” said Zarate.

May 112010

Hat Tip Blackie SM

Big Government pariahs are watching the elections of 2010 intently. By electing solid constitutionalists en masse (at both the State and federal levels) this year, Tea Partiers could literally ignite a modern revolution–a revolution of freedom…

The Tea Party in Utah flexed its muscle over the weekend and booted longtime establishment Republican senator, Bob Bennett, from office. Hooray! (Now, Arizona, please do America a favor and show John McCain the door!) Unfortunately, Tea Party activists were unsuccessful in Indiana, as longtime establishment Republican, Dan Coats, defeated the principled patriot, John Hostettler. Boo!

Predictably, mainstream Republican spokesmen are lamenting Bennett’s ouster, saying Bennett was a true conservative, touting an 80% ranking in the American Conservative Union (ACU) index. However, the ACU index is completely irrelevant to the true measure of a congressman’s fidelity to constitutional government. The index that people should pay attention to is the Freedom Index (formerly called the Conservative Index) at The New American magazine. This index is far and away more accurate in determining a congressman or senator’s fidelity to limited government. In this index, Bennett’s latest rating was a pathetic 50.

Bennett needed to go; the good people of Utah did America a great favor by showing him the door. I trust and pray that this is an indication of how the November elections will fare. I would have been extremely optimistic that this might be the case, except for the miserable election results recorded in Indiana. Dan Coats is merely another establishment neocon in the similitude of Bob Bennett.

In the 105th Congress, Coats’ final rating was a dismal 55 in The New American’s index. On the other hand, John Hostettler’s last ranking stood at 85. Hostettler deserved the enthusiastic support of Tea Partiers throughout Indiana. It is tragic that he lost to someone such as the neocon, Dan Coats. Therefore, what was gained in Utah was lost in Indiana.

And this is going to be the danger for the Tea Party movement this year: If Tea Party activists do not truly understand the issues of limited government, or if they are fooled by establishment politicians, or if they fail to materialize at the polls on election day, all that will happen is one Big Government neocon will be replaced with another Big Government neocon. And, as Sonny and Cher used to sing, “The Beat Goes On.”

JUST read on…

May 112010

Hat Tip Blackie SM

One of the many fashionable notions that have caught on among some of the intelligentsia is that old people have “a duty to die,” rather than become a burden to others.

Pro Life Democrat Rep. Bart Stupak pauses while he announces his support for health care bill after he received an Executive Order from U.S. President Barack Obama claiming no money from passage of the health care bill will be used for abortion, while on Capitol Hill in Washington, in this March 21, 2010 file photo. Stupak, a Michigan Democrat who raised anti-abortion concerns about President Barack Obama's healthcare overhaul but later voted to pass it, has decided not to seek re-election this year, Democratic sources said on April 9, 2010. REUTERS/Larry Downing/Files

This is more than just an idea discussed around a seminar table. Already the government-run medical system in Britain is restricting what medications or treatments it will authorize for the elderly. Moreover, it seems almost certain that similar attempts to contain runaway costs will lead to similar policies when American medical care is taken over by the government.

Make no mistake about it, letting old people die is a lot cheaper than spending the kind of money required to keep them alive and well. If a government-run medical system is going to save any serious amount of money, it is almost certain to do so by sacrificing the elderly.

Michelle Malkin

There was a time– fortunately, now long past– when some desperately poor societies had to abandon old people to their fate, because there was just not enough margin for everyone to survive. Sometimes the elderly themselves would simply go off from their family and community to face their fate alone.

But is that where we are today?

Talk about “a duty to die” made me think back to my early childhood in the South, during the Great Depression of the 1930s. One day, I was told that an older lady– a relative of ours– was going to come and stay with us for a while, and I was told how to be polite and considerate towards her.