Jihadnews

Pretty Kitty

2008-03-21T11:52:00.001-05:00

Now isn't he a handsome kitty?

That Dang Global Warming

2008-03-21T11:47:00.001-05:00

This picture taken today is of our trampoline...it's gonna be a while - LOL

2008-03-21T11:46:00.001-05:00

This picture taken today is of the top pane of my dining room window. It looks very similar to the one below, but...we've had the snow removed from the house 4 times already!!!

2008-03-21T11:44:00.000-05:00

This picture taken this morning is the slide in our back yard!!!

Is Global Warming Coming...or What?????

2008-02-11T18:58:00.001-05:00

This is the view outside my dining room!!!!!.HELP!!

Video: The Truth About Anti-Semitism

2008-02-05T09:10:00.000-05:00

The truth about anti-semitism
Click the link above to view a gripping account of a

New Video - "The Path To The Final Solution"

Islam and Wife Beating

2007-12-29T14:11:00.000-05:00

Borrowed from Wikislam.com

Islamic Terror is Real

2007-12-22T08:50:00.000-05:00

Islamo-fascism and the Death of Feminism in America

2007-12-19T17:49:00.000-05:00

I wrote this in early November. It was published in our local paper, but today I decided to post it here:

In my lifetime I have witnessed the bravery of countless women who have risen to the challenge of ending the oppression of women worldwide. It is puzzling to me why at this time in our history when women in this country in particular have made tremendous gains in their own status, they have willingly stalled their work toward freedom for certain women; especially the violent oppression of the Women in Islam. To be sure, the overwhelming majority of Muslims practice their faith while living in democracies, following man-made laws and treating everyone with the dignity and respect due any human being. There are however, those that do not.

Islamo-fascism, a term originally used by moderate Muslims both in Iran and Algeria in the 1970’s (and still used today) to describe the efforts by radical Muslim (clerics) to thwart efforts toward equality, moderation, democracy and freedom of religion.

Islamo-fascists insist in a fundamental Islamic ideology where men and women are not equal; women are considered physically, emotionally, intellectually, spiritually and morally inferior to men. Public facilities therefore are separate (and often inferior) for women; a “gender apartheid” as many call it.

All democracies and laws of the land governing people are opposed by Islamo-facists because they are laws of man, not God. Islamo-fascists believe only God’s law (Sharia) is to be obeyed. They believe they are advancing women’s rights by “protecting” them from the kind of harassment and violence imposed by Americans and other western cultures.

Some Hollywood types have compared Islamo-facists with the Christian Right. Such a comparison is dreadfully uninformed. No where does Christ call us to beat, rape, mutilate the genitals, honor kill and especially remove the free will of women, homosexuals, Jews or any non-Christian. Christ called his disciples to do his work through prayer, alms-giving, good works and teaching (peaceful proselytizing). To be sure, there are people in our history and today who use the good name of Christ to advance a violent cause or to insist on adherence to a biblical teaching…we prosecute those people and fortunately they are rare. Islamo-facists ideology and their terror methods are not rare; they are pervasive.

It is very easy to look at the plight of Muslim women world wide through our privileged eyes and not respond out of “sensitivity” to the Muslim culture. If we do not work to ensure the universal application of the UN Declaration of Human Rights, we become trapped by the concept that all cultures are equal and cannot be criticized. Who loses? Women first, then the rest of the civilized world.

It is not imperialistic or disrespectful to condemn the violent oppression of the women of Islam. It is a moral imperative…especially for anyone, feminists in particular who say they care about women.

I believe that if we work together, the words of Maryam Rajavi, an Iranian “freedom fighter” will come true:

“I do believe that a woman’s emancipation begins the moment she breaks this spell and believes that rebellion and resistance against tyranny are her inalienable rights. It is from this moment that no power in the world can prevent the liberation of a woman who has decided to be free. “

In America, we know this liberation; let’s not withhold it from our Muslim sisters.

Excellent work by Spencer

2007-12-17T13:54:00.000-05:00

Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch has assembled a five-part video series refuting the "Islam is Peace" ad campaign.

When you open the page, part V in the series is automatically there. In order to view the other videos (all about 3 minutes) I had to right-click on the roman numeral and open the link in a new page.

Videos

You will notice I have included one of Robert's books in my reading list to the right of the page. I haven't included them all because I haven't read them all...but one day will attain that goal.
I just ordered "The Truth about Muhammed"

Wafa Sultan at Restoration Weekend

2007-12-16T14:45:00.000-05:00

Wafa Sultan at Restoration Weekend

I attended this event and spent some time with Wafa. This video is worth watching...if you can't link to it from the text above, search for the text on Google or Youtube.

Sliding anyone?

2007-12-16T14:37:00.001-05:00

Sunday, Dec. 16 2007 - Note the blue slide is barely visible and the seat of the swing is well under the snow.

Where's the deck?

2007-12-16T14:35:00.001-05:00

10:00 am Sunday Dec. 16, 2007...Snow is up to deck railing. Not visible is the snow 1/2 way up the first pane of the double hung window!.

Trampoline-time in Stowe, VT

2007-12-16T14:32:00.001-05:00

10:00 am Sunday December 16, 2007 - Note, the platform of the trampoline is approximately 40 inches off the ground.

I'm Back

2007-07-18T22:54:00.001-05:00

After several weeks off, I've decided to get back into blogging. During the past few weeks I've been reading and discovering there are people out there who know a lot more about the topics of interest to me than I do. I will frequently be linking to them, rather than having yet another voice out there. Of course you will still get my conclusions and opinions.

A Message From Iraq

2007-05-04T07:20:00.000-05:00

Click here to read the entire article from which the following excerpt is taken. It was in today's ediction of The Washington Post

It was written by Hoshy Zebari, foreign minister of Iraq.

DON'T ABANDON US

"Iraqis are standing up every day, and we persevere because there is no other option. We will not surrender our country to terrorists. They have failed to cripple the elected government, and they have failed to intimidate us into submission. Iraqis reject their vision of a future whose hallmarks are bloodshed and hatred.

Those calling for withdrawal may think it is the least painful option, but its benefits would be short-lived. The fate of the region and the world is linked with ours. Leaving a broken Iraq in the Middle East would offer international terrorism a haven and ensure a legacy of chaos for future generations. Furthermore, the sacrifices of all the young men and women who stood up here would have been in vain."

Offsets = Indulgences

2007-04-30T10:20:00.000-05:00

This image was borrowed from CCNet a great site set up by Benny Peiser (the scientist who debunked the "consensus theory" of human influence on global warming. An excerpt from the email I recieved today says it all...

"The worst of the carbon-offset programs resemble the Catholic Church’s sale of indulgences back before the Reformation. Instead of reducing their carbon footprints, people take private jets and stretch limos, and then think they can buy an indulgence to forgive their sins. This whole game is badly in need of a modern Martin Luther."

Denis Hayes, Bullitt Foundation, The New York Times, 29 April 2007

That Dang Global Warming

2007-04-13T07:33:00.000-05:00

This photo was taken at 8:30 this morning (EST) after we received yet another bunch of snow. I estimate we got 10-12 inches...ugh!

CONSENSUS THEORY DEBUNKED

2007-04-11T15:47:00.000-05:00

Benny Peiser debunks Naomi Oreskes' claim of SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS that humans are responsible for global warming. Any bold print is my addition.

Dr. Peiser's letter to the journal Science:

On December 3rd, only days before the start of the 10th Conference of Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP-10), Science Magazine published the results of a study by Naomi Oreskes (1): For the first time, empirical evidence was presented that appeared to show an unanimous, scientific consensus on the anthropogenic causes of recent global warming.

Oreskes claims to have analysed 928 abstracts she found listed on the ISI database using the keywords "climate change". However, a search on the ISI database using the keywords "climate change" for the years 1993 - 2003 reveals that almost 12,000 papers were published during the decade in question (2).

What happened to the countless research papers that show that global temperatures were similar or even higher during the Holocene Climate Optimum and the Medieval Warm Period when atmospheric CO2 levels were much lower than today; that solar variability is a key driver of recent climate change, and that climate modeling is highly uncertain?

These objections were put to Oreskes by science writer David Appell. On 15 December 2004,
she admitted that there was indeed a serious mistake in her Science essay. According to Oreskes, her study was not based on the keywords "climate change," but on "global climate
change" (3).

Her use of three keywords instead of two reduced the list of peer reviewed publications by
one order of magnitude (on the UK's ISI databank the keyword search "global climate
change" comes up with 1247 documents). Since the results looked questionable, I decided to
replicate the Oreskes study.

METHOD

I analysed all abstracts listed on the ISI databank for 1993 to 2003 using the same keywords ("global climate change") as the Oreskes study. Of the 1247 documents listed, only 1117 included abstracts (130 listed only titles, author(s)' details and keywords). The 1117 abstracts analysed were divided into the same six categories used by Oreskes (#1-6), plus two categories which I added (# 7, 8):

1. explicit endorsement of the consensus position
2. evaluation of impacts
3. mitigation proposals
4. methods
5. paleoclimate analysis
6. rejection of the consensus position.
7. natural factors of global climate change
8. unrelated to the question of recent global climate change

RESULTS

The results of my analysis contradict Oreskes' findings and essentially falsify her study:

Of all 1117 abstracts, only 13 (or 1%) explicitly endorse the 'consensus view'.

322 abstracts (or 29%) implicitly accept the 'consensus view' but mainly focus on impact
assessments of envisaged global climate change.

Less than 10% of the abstracts (89) focus on "mitigation".

67 abstracts mainly focus on methodological questions.

87 abstracts deal exclusively with paleo-climatological research unrelated to recent
climate change.

34 abstracts reject or doubt the view that human activities are the main drivers of the
"the observed warming over the last 50 years".

44 abstracts focus on natural factors of global climate change.

470 (or 42%) abstracts include the keywords "global climate change" but do not include any
direct or indirect link or reference to human activities, CO2 or greenhouse gas emissions,
let alone anthropogenic forcing of recent climate change.

DISCUSSION:

According to Oreskes, 75% of the 928 abstracts she analysed (i.e. 695) fell into these first three categories, "either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view". This claim is incorrect on two counts: My analysis shows that only 424 abstracts (or less than a third of the full data set) fall into these three categories.

It also shows that many abstracts on "evaluation of impact" and "mitigation" do not discuss which drivers are key to global climate change, instead often focusing exclusively on the possible effects of elevated CO2 levels on plant growth and vegetation.

Many do not include any implicit endorsement of the 'consensus view' but simply use certain assumptions as a basis for often hypothetical impact assessments or mitigation strategies. Quite a number of papers emphasise that natural factors play a major if not the key role in recent climate change (4). My analysis also shows that there are almost three times as many abstracts that are sceptical of the notion of anthropogenic climate change than those that explicitly endorse it (5, 6, 7). In fact, the explicit and implicit rejection of the 'consensus view' is not restricted to individual scientists. It also includes distinguished scientific organisations such as the American Association of Petroleum Geologists: "The earth's climate is constantly changing owing to natural variability in earth processes.

Natural climate variability over recent geological time is greater than reasonable estimates of potential human-induced greenhouse gas changes. Because no tool is available to test the supposition of human-induced climate change and the range of natural variability is so great, there is no discernible human influence on global climate at this time" (8)

This is not to deny that there is a majority of publications that, although they do not empirically test or confirm the view of anthropogenic climate change, go along with it by applying models based on its basic assumptions. Yet, it is beyond doubt that a sound and unbiased analysis of the full ISI databank will find hundreds of papers (many of which written by the world's leading experts in the field) that have raised serious reservations and outright rejection of the concept of a "scientific consensus on climate change". The truth is, that there is no such thing!

In light of the data presented above (evidence that can be easily verified), Science should withdraw Oresekes' study and its results in order to prevent any further damage to the integrity of science.

References
1. N. Oreskes (2004). The scientific consensus on climate change. Science, Vol 306, Issue
5702, 1686, 3 December 2004 (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/con
2. ISI Web of Science (http://www.webofscience.com/)
3. http://davidappell.com/archives/00000497.htm
4.) C. M. Ammann et al., for instance, claim to have detected evidence for "close ties
between solar variations and surface climate", Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-
Terrestrial Physics 65:2 (2003): 191-201. While G.C. Reid stresses: "The importance of
solar variability as a factor in climate change over the last few decades may have been
underestimated in recent studies." Solar forcing of global climate change since the mid-
17th century. Climate Change. 37 (2): 391-405
5) H.R. Linden (1996) The evolution of an energy contrarian. Annual Review of Energy and
the Environment, 21:31-67.
6) Russian scientists K. Kondratyev and C Varotsos criticise "the undoubtfully
overemphasised contribution of the greenhouse effect to the global climate change". K.
Kondratyev and C Varotsos (1996). Annual Review of Energy and the Environment. 21: 31-67
7) M.E. Fernau, W.J. Makofske, D.W. South (1993) Review and Impacts of climate change
uncertainties. Futures 25 (8): 850-863.
8) L.C. Gerhard and B.M. Hanson (2000) AAPG Bulletin 84 (4): 466-471
From: science_editors@aaas.org [mailto:science_editors@aaas.org]
Sent: 04 January 2005 11:07

What good is War?

2007-03-21T12:35:00.000-05:00

I found this image on another great blogsite mobyrebuttal.blogspot.com It kinda says it all. If you have a minute go take a look at her site. She has a great picture as you scroll down of the Clintons at the podium with the Bushes in the background and has asked readers to "caption it". The responses (mine included) are great.

Government Run Healthcare

2007-03-12T09:13:00.000-05:00

The New York Times article below describes quite well what we would be in for if we get the universal/government run healthcare the democrats are advocating. Actually I believe it would be worse since in general the military runs a pretty tight ship. I suspect the care recieved is actually better than what we are being led to believe with occasional mishaps like described in the article and the conditions at Walter Reed.

For War’s Gravely Injured, Challenge to Find Care
By DEBORAH SONTAG and LIZETTE ALVAREZ
Traumatic brain injury cases, the signature wound of the Iraq war, are leaving the military health care system scrambling.

Walter Reed Fiasco is Government Run Healthcare

2007-03-08T09:26:00.000-05:00

Let me begin by stating what occurs in civilian (and not government run) health care facilities i.e. Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center (DHMC) in New Hampshire. DHMC and other health care providers are required by the federal government to be Medicare Certified; otherwise they cannot provide services and receive payment for any Medicare or Medicaid patient.

In order to obtain/maintain this certification, DHMC must submit to accreditation surveys. This requires them to submit reports to the accrediting organization (most use the Joint Commission of Accreditation of Health Care Organizations = JCAHO) and host on site visits minimally every 3 years (some facilities are reviewed annually). If the accrediting organization finds deficiencies, the visits and required reporting occur more frequently.

This oversight means that the alleged conditions at Walter Reed would not occur in civilian (and not government run) facility. To my knowledge, there is not this high level of scrutiny in the military facilities as there is in civilian ones.

My rage is: If we really support our troops and veterans, why do we require them to receive care in facilities that lack oversight by an independent (and usually) non government entity? They have little or no choice and no one really knows what the quality of care is since they are not "accredited". It floors me to think of the number of legislators, reporters, actors, etc. that visited our injured soldiers at Walter Reed and no one noticed problems?

Also, the expense of operating two like facilities must be huge. For instance, rather than have all of the Vermont veterans travel to White River Junction to the VA hospital there, why not either have them go 20 minutes further to Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center and receive state of the art care; or care at their local (accredited) hospital if they so choose.

One of the lessons for me that I draw from the Walter Reed fiasco is this: Government run healthcare does not work. If we move to "universal healthcare" we all will receive the treatment/conditions that the troops at Walter Reed did; or worse.

The answer isn't renovated, bigger and better government facilities. It is allowing our veterans and troops to choose where they receive their care once stateside. And for our sake, let's learn from this and stop the move for government run healthcare!

Islamic Threat

2007-03-07T09:10:00.000-05:00

Carolyn Glick has an article up on the Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME) site that I recieved via email titled JIHAD'S CAMPUS COLLABORATORS (originally published in Jewish World Review on February 27, 2007).It's worth reading as she points out (again) the threat we face from Radical/Millitant Islam.

Global Warming-loco cooling

2007-03-06T14:44:00.000-05:00

Well, our vacation's over and we're back in Stowe...I've posted below some photos you all might find interesting...especially you global warming supporters. By the way have you heard that despite the recent concerns raised by the New York Times about the fate of the Maple Syrup Industry in Vermont due to global warming we've so far had a colder winter than last year?

It was -14 when I got out of bed and it's now warmed up to -7.

Global Warming-loco cooling

2007-03-06T14:43:00.000-05:00

This was our trampoline before we went to Florida - and after picture is posted below...these were taken approximately 10 days apart.

Global Warming-loco cooling

2007-03-06T14:42:00.000-05:00

This sunrise was outside our condo in Florida yesterday.

Global Warming-loco cooling

2007-03-06T14:40:00.000-05:00

This is our trampoline after we returned from Florida, taken today (March 6, 2007)

Global warming-loco-cooling

2007-03-06T14:37:00.000-05:00

Finally, this is the entry-way from the garage to the kitchen. When standing on dry ground (no snow), I cannot see in these windows from outside...they are level with my head. I am 5'6" tall and the snow is a minimum of 18 inches beyond that. Click on to enlarge.

This is POWERFUL

2007-02-26T08:14:00.000-05:00

The letter that follows was published in The Burlington Free Press today. Although I am not certain, I believe the author to be a former state Senator from Chittenden County. I also believe he is a Democrat. Whatever his political affiliation, he articulates well what I and many others have been meaning to say all along.

A son, a father and the Iraq war

Published: Monday, February 26, 2007
J. Dennis Delaney

My son Luc is a naval officer, a 1999 graduate of the United States Naval Academy and a recent recipient of a master's degree in mechanical engineering. He is married and the father of the sweetest daughter a grandfather ever fell in love with. To say that I am profoundly proud of my children would be a great understatement. At times I just sink back into the warmest contentment. Life could give no more.

Yet in all this bright sunshine of family happiness a dark cloud looms on the horizon: Luc tells us that he is at serious risk of being sent to Iraq. This threat, I think, gives me a firmer place to comment on the Iraq war.

With every fiber of my being I want the Iraq war finished. It is like a hair shirt I cannot pull off. The daily list of our young women and men killed in the fighting brings heartbreak, full and overflowing, to us all. I have always thought I could not bear the loss of a child, so I just don't know how the families of those killed in the war endure. I just don't.

Several weeks ago the New York Times published, as it does every day, the Names of the Dead in Iraq. Eight were on the list that day, all aged 25 and under. One was just 19.

On a straight horizontal line to the right of that list was the continuation of an article on the day's harsh violence in Baghdad. The story described the destruction of a family -- father, wife and three children-- "trapped in a burning car after a bomb exploded. The father, screaming for help, escaped. (B)ut two young children and an infant died with their mother in the fire." (New York Times, Dec. 27, 2006)

None of us can possibly imagine such stunning horror slamming into the life of an American family. The incident I just described was not an accident, it was war.

To those who say that the daily numbing chant of the names of our dead or the nameless Iraqis slaughtered, means that we must quit Iraq and do so immediately, I understand. But I see beyond. I see countless Iraqi innocents -- fathers, mothers, children -- killed, if not by war then by that country's own endemic sectarian violence.

What is happening in Iraq is a humanitarian disaster. Those are not just big words, those are real people. The Iraqis are no less sisters and brothers to us in Vermont than are Americans in Indiana, Montana or Maine. The time to argue about this war's reasons for being, or the lack of them, rests with the future, with history's clearer eye. The present demands, however, that we Americans not abandon the helpless.

It is easy to talk about courage, about generosity until it hurts, about responsibility for others, and about not quitting on those who need us. It is infinitely more difficult to belly up to the bar and make them real when the price is relentless anguish and more "Names of the Dead" writ large each day.

I remember the story about an American prisoner of war who, when offered release from a prison camp, said no, that it wasn't his turn. Is it our turn to abandon the innocent and helpless of Iraq? I say no.

If we Americans want to begin earning the respect of the Muslim world, then we should begin that long journey by showing them that Americans do not turn their backs on Muslims or anyone else in awful jeopardy. Like it or not, and I know that we don't, it is our time to stand tall once again.

J. Dennis Delaney lives in Charlotte.

EXTRA EXTRA

2007-02-23T13:59:00.000-05:00

PAUL BEAUDRY to appear on CPR Radio!!!

Monday February 26 at 3:30 pm.

Update

2007-02-23T13:57:00.000-05:00

I posted yesterday about the lone conservative talk radio host, Paul Beaudry’s plight of “someone” trying to get him off the air. I would like to clarify a statement I made regarding the threat of bodily injury. I spoke with Paul last evening and he clarified that it was a threat made to another person and passed on to him and not a direct threat to him. The threat was in effect “that he better not be seen out in public or he might get slapped”.

Be that as it may, it saddens me to think that there are people with so much hate and intolerance that they can’t even hear another voice without such violent intentions or actions, which brings me to another point of clarification. I mentioned yesterday that 2 tires on Paul’s vehicle were slashed. The analysis of Paul’s tires determined that they were punctured, not slashed. A slash would result in a flat tire and the vehicle rendered unable to be driven. A puncture with subsequent slow leak could result in internal pressure differences as the tire contacts the road. What would that cause…a blowout!! I estimate Paul’s daily commute to be about 60 miles. That’s a lot of time for a blowout to occur. Thankfully the punctures were discovered and Paul is safe.

Paul announced today that he received an email from the Bill O’Reilly show requesting he make an appearance this evening. At the close of the Paul’s show, it was not certain that he would be on O’Reilly Factor tonight, I plan to watch Bill anyway.

Also I mentioned that they would accept donations. I want to clarify that any monies received will be used to keep the show on the air. Unlike other talk shows that are paid to be aired by local stations, Paul’s show has to pay an hourly fee to the local stations to buy the one hour air time!!!

True North Radio
PO Box 652
Burlington, VT 05402

Conservative Danger Zone

2007-02-22T12:02:00.000-05:00

Outright Vermont Creating A Queer Youth Community Since 1989

The above organization was exposed for their attempts to infiltrate our Vermont schools by Paul Beaudry the lone conservative voice on talk radio over the past few months. Despite their alleged efforts to silence him, suport for his show in the 11-12 am (est) time slot is growing and remains number one.

Intolerate people have called his advertisers and some have stopped supporting him; others in true Vermont fashion will not be bulled. They have directly mailed his frequent callers, petitioning them to not support the show. Now, they've taken it to a higher level with threats of personal bodily injury and slashing his tires.

Paul announced on the show today that the police are now involved. He has also notified all the local news affiliates and Fox News via Bill O'Reilly of the threats and actions of the intolerant cowards. You may recall that Paul has appeared on The O'Reilly Factor a few times regarding the senseless sentencing of child predators here in Vermont (i.e. 60 days sentence for the man who repeatedly raped a young girl).

If anyone would like to support this effort to continue the lone conservative voice in Vermont, donations are accepted at:

True North Radio
P.O. Box 652
Burlington VT 05402-0652

Here we go!!!

2007-02-14T13:23:00.000-05:00

I received this picture in an email, so I can't take credit for it.

From SPME - Scholars for Peace in the Middle East

2007-02-14T07:46:00.000-05:00

As usual, Caroline Glick has again accurately described one of the most disturbing positions of the "left" (see below) and "progressive Zionists". To read the entire article click here.

Instead of accepting this paradigm-shattering truth, "progressive Zionists"
have chosen the path of radicalization. Rather than calling on the
Arabs to abandon jihad and accept Israel, they have turned to
criminalizing Israel for defending itself from the jihadist forces bent
on the wholesale slaughter of its citizens.

Book Review

2007-01-31T10:45:00.000-05:00

I received a free book because I suscribed to Newsmax. The book was "The Enemy at Home - The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11" by Dinesh D'Souza. I found it puzzling and difficult to accept many of the claims made in the book. Today's email from Frontpage Magazine is a review of this book by Robert Spencer. It is not only very well written, but explains why I found the claims in this book difficult to digest.

Pardon our Border Agents

2007-01-30T17:10:00.000-05:00

PLEASE client the link Pardon our Border Agents and sign the petition. It is absolutely egregious that these men were sentenced for doing their jobs. If we don't help them, they (all border agents) won't help us.

Too Good to Pass Up

2007-01-30T16:17:00.000-05:00

I found this on a website humor
and couldn't pass it up.

Support Our Troops

2007-01-26T12:20:00.000-05:00

Taken from the site thirdwavedave

THE NRSC PLEDGE

"If the United States Senate passes a resolution, non-binding or otherwise, that criticizes the commitment of additional troops to Iraq that General Petraeus has asked for and that the president has pledged, and if the Senate does so after the testimony of General Petraeus on January 23 that such a resolution will be an encouragement to the enemy, I will not contribute to any Republican senator who voted for the resolution. Further, if any Republican senator who votes for such a resolution is a candidate for re-election in 2008, I will not contribute to the National Republican Senatorial Committee unless the Chairman of that Committee, Senator Ensign, commits in writing that none of the funds of the NRSC will go to support the re-election of any senator supporting the non-binding resolution."

***If you agree with this pledge, sign the petition now and have your name and blog listed too. Many names--big and small--are on the list. Join the effort and let them know you're not going to be played for a sucker any longer.

Humans Cause Global Warming???

2007-01-25T17:40:00.000-05:00

Our local "news" paper recently opined that we must do something about global warming. My husband who holds a degree in Aeronautics and studied meteorology responded. It is too good to pass up, so it follows. {Note: The Democrat controlled Vermont legislature has made this their number one issue this session}

My Husband wrote...

The Stowe Reporter editorialized that even if global warming isn't happening we should do something about it. This is like saying "Even if the earth isn't flat we should act as if it is, less someone falls of the edge."

The Stowe Reporter repeats the claim that "almost all scientists agree that humans are causing global warming." This claim is repeated so often it is accepted as fact. Yet I have yet to hear of a poll of all scientists or even all scientists in relevant fields to prove this statement is true. Lacking such a poll there is no basis for claiming how many scientists do believe humans cause global warming.

The bases for this claim appears to be the fact that 2500 so called "scientists" participated in the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). I say "so called" because the UN is fundamentally a political organization not a scientific one. Every country was allowed at least one scientist on the panel. Some countries are not exactly world super powers in science. Therefore some of these "scientists" had their degrees in Pharmacology.

Then again it is irrelevant how many scientists believe in human caused global warming. Science is not advanced by the most popular theories, but by the correct ones.

Before Galileo, almost all scientists said the earth was the center of the universe. In 1904 virtually everyone thought that Newton's F=MA was as far as things went . Then in 1905 Einstein showed that F=MA was not enough, now E=MC² was needed. In the 1940's many aerodynamicists thought that the "sound barrier" was a real barrier that could not be "broken" (they thought that drag builds up infinitely at supersonic speeds). Chuck Yeager proved them wrong.

There are very many flaws in the global warming theory and a book could be written on these problems. In fact many excellent books have been written about the flaws in the theory, but not just books, a number of articles in peer review journals point out flaws. Do to lack of space I will discuss just a few of the flaws.

One of the claims made in the general press and in recent movies on global warming is that Antarctic ice core samples shows an increase in CO2 followed by an increase temperature, however as Dr Robert Carter points out, the increase in CO2 is preceded by the increase in temperature not the other way around, and the increase in temperature precedes the increase in CO2 by 100 to 1000 years. For this he cites: Mudelsee, M. 2001, "The phase relations among atmospheric CO2 content, temperature & global ice volume over the past 420 ka" Quaternary Science Reviews 20, 583-589.

Global warming theory claims that the poles will warm faster than the equator, yet 80% of the Antarctic has cooled and there has been no net increase in polar temperatures my sources for this are: Comiso, J. C. (2000): "Variability and trends in Antarctic surface temperatures from in situ and satellite infrared measurements." J. Climate 13, 1674-1696 and: Doran, P. D., Priscu, Et Al. (2002): "Antarctic climate cooling and terrestrial ecosystem response." Nature 415, 517-520.

This is very significant, because many claimed that warming at the poles would be proof positive that global warming was occurring, and because computer models known as General Circulation Models (GCMs) use the temperature trends at the poles in many of there calculations (Computer are only mathematical model run on computers. If the mathematics is wrong so is the whole model). If these GCM are totally wrong in one very significant aspect then they are totally invalid. This is because GCM are suppose to represent the real world.

In an article titled "New Little Ice Age Instead of Global Warming?" published in the Journal "energy and environment" Dr. Theodor Landscheidt predicts that the world will enter a cooling trend that will be coldest around 2030. He predicts that we will notice this cooling well before that.

He basis this on his and many others studies of solar activity. He also states that the IPCC estimates of human induced warming are way over stated. He points to a number of studies that shows flaws with GCMs. He cites too many studies to mention here.

Even if man made global warming is occurring it might make sense to "do something about it" if there was no cost to "doing something." However there is a cost. I have heard estimates from $500 billion to $1trillion per year for the United States to implement the Kyoto accords. That is real money.

Then again can Vermont even do anything? It is estimated that If California stopped producing all CO2 It would reduce world wide CO2 by .02%. Because Vermont has a population of about 1/100th the size of California it is fair to guess that if Vermont stopped producing CO2 it would represent about .0002% of the world wide total.

It is imposable to completely stop producing CO2 (we have to exhale) therefore realistically Vermont would have even less of an impact, yet the cost would be huge.
It makes no sense to attempt to stop something that might not be happening and that we can not stop anyway and will cost a fortune to try to stop.

Thank You Tom!!!

Milton Friedman Knew The Threat

2007-01-22T09:30:00.000-05:00

This from the Opinion Journal

"Milton Friedman @ Rest
Email from a Nobel Laureate.

Monday, January 22, 2007 12:01 a.m. EST

In July last year, the late Milton Friedman, Nobel laureate in economics in 1976, granted an interview to The Wall Street Journal. Today we publish material from a question-and-answer exchange he had by email--shortly after their meeting--with his interviewer, Tunku Varadarajan, the Journal's editorial features editor.

What is the biggest risk to the world economy: America's deficits? Energy insecurity? Environment? Terrorism? None of the above?

Friedman: Islamofascism, with terrorism as its weapon.

Milton Friedman died on Nov. 16, 2006, age 94. There is a memorial for him today at Stanford University. "

God rest is soul...

Why is Jimmy Carter so Oposed to Israel?

2007-01-18T09:28:00.000-05:00

Although I haven't read Jimmy Carter's book, I've read the reviews and heard the news of the exodus of his staff since the day it was released. I have more important things to do than read what is opined to be not only a rewrite of history, but blatantly anti-Israel/Jew.

It has puzzled me...why would a former president not only say the horrible things he has said about America and subsequent presidents in public on foreign soil, but why would he put such controversial language in print?

Today, some clarity came to me via my inbox. Below is an excerpt from a Frontpage Magazine article written by John Perazzo. The link to the full article follows.

"Some members of the Arab lobby in America are heavily financed with money from the Arab world. As Jacob Laksin recently detailed in FrontPageMagazine, for instance, the Atlanta-based Carter Center (founded by Jimmy Carter in 1982) has been a longtime recipient of Arab funding. Before his death in 2005, Saudi Arabia’s King Fahd made several large donations to the Center, including a 1993 gift of $7.6 million. As of 2005, the king’s nephew, Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal, had given at least $5 million to the Carter Center. In 2001 the United Arab Emirates (UAE) gave the Center $500,000. The previous year, ten of Osama bin Laden’s brothers had jointly pledged $1 million, as did Sultan Qaboos bin Said of Oman in 1998. The Saudi Fund for Development has been another major contributor, as has the Kuwait Fund for Arab Economic Development. And Morocco’s Prince Moulay Hicham Ben Abdallah has collaborated with the Carter Center on various initiatives."

Well, that explains everything!!!

Frontpage Article

Troop Restrictions

2007-01-11T08:57:00.000-05:00

"And there were too many restrictions on the troops we did have."

President Bush said these words early on in his speech last evening and quite frankly I was surprised that none of the pundits picked up on them.

Most people might infer that this refers to the Iraqi imposed restrictions on our troops from setting up checkpoints and restrictions on which cities/areas they can enter to ferret out the enemy.

I am hopeful it means more than that. As I have said all along, more troops on the ground will only be minimally helpful if the "rules of engagement" are not eased. I certainly hope the president will finally allow our troops to fight like they know how to fight, to engage preemptively when threatened and send a clear message "we intend to kill you before you kill us".

{We were without internet access for far too long - our DSL went down, but finally got back on last evening}

Celebrate

2007-01-02T10:03:00.000-05:00

Our long "inter"national NIGHTMARE is over - Kofi Anon is GONE (and Saddam too).

Happy New Year

2007-01-02T09:59:00.000-05:00

Click here for a fun video
Happy New Year

MERRY CHRISTMAS

2006-12-22T08:14:00.000-05:00

Taking a few days off for the holidays. Have safe and joy-filled celebrations.

CBS Arrogance - Insult to troops

2006-12-20T09:52:00.000-05:00

I happened to be awake in the middle of the night so turned on CBS news "Up to the Minute". Ret. Major Mike Lyon who is now a CBS Military Analyst was on giving his review of the war, where we go from here, etc.

Although he was somewhat fair in his analysis of what the situation is and the future will be when we defeat the enemy, his John Kerryesk arrogance (seems to be widely evident at CBS news) unfortunately had to come out when about 2/3 of the way through the video, he reports that our military will not look the same. Rather than recruit large numbers of boots on the ground, tankers, etc we will recruit "intelligent" people.

To see the video, click here. Text link is below

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=2283019n

A MODERATE TERRORIST GROUP???

2006-12-17T09:17:00.000-05:00

Thank God Robert Grenier is a former director of the Central Intelligence Agency’s counterintelligence center. In his tortured, twisted and seemingly ill-informed New York Times Op Ed Piece today (you may need to create an account to access it) he suggests “the only way of making the Lebanese government accountable is to encourage the progressive, moderating integration of Hezbollah into the political, social and military fabric of the state”.

When has a terrorist group ever had a “moderating” influence on anything they infiltrate or are integrated into? The only time/place that I can think of is the moderating (actually paralyzing) influence on media outlets worldwide. It is widely known among journalists that reporting the truth about what Hezbollah, Hamas and every other Islamo-fascist terror group is all about is a fatal error.

Recall that CNN admitted they didn’t tell the truth about the brutality of Sadam Hussein.

At the Restoration Weekend (you can access video and text of most of the sessions), Bernie Goldberg* pointed out that when the New York Times (and other print media) refused to publish the cartoon caricatures of Muhammad they wrote that they did so “out of respect for the religion” of Islam. The very next day they published pictures of the Virgin Mary covered in elephant dung. To have printed the cartoonish Muhammad would have resulted in actualization of the treats the Islamo-fascists made and likely the New York Times Building would no longer exist on the New York City landscape. Certainly no Christian made such a threat; we protested, we didn’t kill or destroy. Did the New York Times have less respect for the Christian religious image of the Virgin Mary? Yes, and they also knew we posed no threat.

This is the moderating influence the Islamo-fascists have. By tempering their image in western media they create a sympathetic populous that view them as the victim. This is how they are winning. This is partly why they are so dangerous. Fear and intimidation is their most powerful weapon. I implore our media to stand up to them!

Again I suggest my readers buy and read carefully Brigitte Gabriel's book "Because the Hate". You will have a metanoia of the mind after reading just a few pages.

* From the Restoration Weekend Bio: Bernard Goldberg winner of seven Emmys, reports for the critically acclaimed HBO program Real Sports, and has authored three books Bias, Arrogance, and 100 People who Are Screwing Up America -- And Al Franken is # 37.

Goldberg has reported extensively, both at HBO and CBS News, on the transformation of American Culture...

Who and How we Fight

2006-12-16T10:09:00.000-05:00

Are we fighting factions that will continue to fight even if the inevitable happens… that some day we will not be in Iraq?

Why haven’t the Iraqi civilians provided us with more “on the ground” intelligence?

These are questions I am thoughtfully pondering. I don’t necessarily have the answer…many thoughts, some answers. The warring Sunni and Shi’a factions of Islam are largely not peace-thinking people; they kill each other and they will kill anyone who threatens their ideology. They join together to fight the “west”, but similarly fight each other with the same vigor and brutality. {Begs the question, what is the ideology of each of these factions?}.

Followers of either sect might not be willing to blow themselves up or pick up an M-16, but they sure as hell aren’t ratting out the ones who do…the ones that are shooting at us; our enemy. Why aren’t these people; Iraqi civilians who say they want to live in peace providing us with the “on the ground” intelligence we need to kill the insurgents and win this war?

Certainly policing the area as we are currently executing this “war” is not working. The CSI-Baghdad method is an egregious war on our troops as we place them in the cross hairs of warring factions who wish to destroy each other; and us. Searching for perpetrators after the fact of an “insurgent” attack is an abomination of military and criminal justice; and belies the trust of the very people we are HOPING trust us. If we have the might and the will to fight, then for crying out loud we have the responsibility to use it – let’s get this done.

Any aggression toward our troops must be met with an overwhelming response up to and including leveling any town where we know the enemy is firing from or hiding. The rules of engagement for our side are paralyzing. It is absolutely imperative that the rules of engagement change and allow our troops to respond appropriately to the enemy on the ground... “If you feel threatened, shoot to kill”. With this approach, I believe we would soon begin to get solid intelligence from Iraqis who want to live (in peace?).

Scenario 1: An Iraqi mom with five children (or any “peaceful Iraqi) is living in a village and worshipping at the same mosque as a group of radical Islamic insurgents preparing to launch an attack on a passing US & Iraqi military group in two days. The Iraqi mom also knows that a similar attack occurred in an adjoining village two weeks prior. The response of our military was to send in troops to look for the perpetrators, collect crime scene evidence and file a report. What would this Iraqi mother do with the knowledge of an impending attack?

Scenario 2: Same scenario only the response of our military to the attack two weeks prior was an immediate bombing of the village until there was no life left. Given this scenario, what do you think the Iraqi mother would do with the information she had regarding the impending attack? It may not be that she would come forward, but she and several others would flee that village…fleeing civilians would be noticed; thus providing us with useful intelligence information.

The key to winning the war against Radical Islam is not necessarily always total military action, but intelligence followed by surgical strikes. We must insist by military force that moderate and peaceful Muslims (Shi’a or Sunni) come forward and take as much responsibility for their fate as our troops have; friendly persuasion has not worked.

The argument that innocent lives will be lost if we ramp up our military operations is simply not reasonable. To be sure there has been and will be some civilian life loss from our military operations. However, the longer we drag this on, the more innocents will be sacrificed. It isn’t our side that blows up restaurants, markets, cars, etc. It’s their own kind; the religious zealots who kill them.

In order for that to stop, the Iraqi civilians must take the responsibility and have a duty to provide us and subsequently the Iraqi troups and police with the Intel we need to win; or we all lose.

Jimmie and the Geriatrics

2006-12-12T18:38:00.000-05:00

Jimmie and the Geriatrics
It’s My Turn to Respond to the Iraq Study Group

Ayup, we’ve come of age. Used to be retired folk would sit in their rockers and reminisce ‘bout the yonder-years. Put a log on the fire and pet the cat. Sip their brandy, toke on a cigar (or not) and fill their kinfolk and whoever else was there with history, folklore and drama. Well, not much has happened ‘cept now the history, folklore and drama is gone global; and dangerous.

We cannot base our foreign policy or our war strategy on a bunch of ole folks who seemingly want one last word; one last chance to change their epitaph. Good grief. The Iraq Survey Geriatric Group is proof positive of why there are mandatory retirement ages in certain professions. With the exception of Thomas Jefferson, it should be true with all policy perpetrators in the US. You can’t pull the ole Victrola out of the attic and expect the waltzes to sound good enough to dance to. We live in a different time.

This is not an assault on the elderly (I fight daily for the rights of elderly and disabled citizens), most folk know when it’s time to give it up…and do. This is a realization that there is a time for everything. The time for war with radical Islam is now and it MUST be carried out as a modern/new age war by those who not only understand it, but are willing to execute it. We have been talking and rocking in our chairs too long. We are not dealing with an enemy the geriatrics faced in their time (unless you count the thousands of Muslims that joined Hitler’s army to annihilate the Jews and us). We are dealing with a sleeping; now awakening giant.

My mother describes the horrors WWII when the enemy would fill the belly of a soldier with water and then jumping on him; thus exploding his stomach and causing an excruciating death. Or pulling his fingernails off with pliers – ugh … as being the worst form of punishment/torture inflicted on us in WWII and she would be correct in those statements – dreadful (of course how bout the gas chambers?). There are now new methods of torture and terror. How about tying a child’s limb to one parent and another limb to the other parent then pulling the parent’s away thus splitting and killing the child – an innocent child, not a soldier – not to mention the parents who are forced to watch this evil act? Of course the beheading of Nicolas Berg and others wasn’t very “nice” either. It is a different enemy we face.

Actually we don’t face them. They won’t face us. They hide behind innocent women and children. They are evil scum. They know if they fought us (the Jews and all of western society) in hand to hand or battlefield combat, they would lose. They rely on western propagandists like Jimmie Baker and the Geriatrics, their periodic acts of terror and our sympathetic media to win.

Who in the hell found the geriatrics to instruct us…we, who have to digest their world view? Who is responsible for this? Why were the most talented thinkers and doers of our time not the ones to study the situation? Why are we even looking?...this is WAR.

SHAME, SHAME, SHAME.

Response to a comment

2006-12-09T09:43:00.000-05:00

A recent comment about my first post deserves a response. I can’t recall the entire quote, but during the ’04 campaign season Hillary Clinton screamed at a rally that she was sick and tired of every time someone questions this (Bush) administration they are accused of being unpatriotic. Well, I’m sick and tired of being accused of fear mongering and spewing hate speech when I point out a real threat to America and the world. The anonymous person who commented was concerned that I relied of some (note - not all) of Dr. Paul Williams work; totally ignoring that I referred to several others experts in that post.

Since that post, I have researched even further (to correct an erroneous statement regarding the power of suitcase nukes), and am now more convinced of the peril we face.

What is most concerning to me is the willingness of the anonymous commentator to ignore the issue, void of any intelligent counter debate and attack me. This is a trend I see all too frequently. If we can’t debate issue(s) intelligently, we will never know who are enemies are, we will never know how they operate and we will not be able to defeat them; whether it’s radical Islam or someone else.

In the end, I hope the anonymous person reads this because I want to thank him/her. It proves that we must come together to protect our right to not only free speech, but the many other freedoms we enjoy, here in the greatest country in the world. I also would like to thank him/her because it is so rewarding to be challenged.

halp me jon carry

2006-12-08T17:39:00.000-05:00

I have tried to make my settings so that "anyone" can comment - my blog site insists that commentors sign in, what an irritating glich - does anyone know how to reset it?

Life in Stowe, Vermont

2006-12-08T10:19:00.000-05:00

View from front porch 12/7/06

Life in Stowe, Vermont

2006-12-08T10:07:00.000-05:00

Deck Chairs - October 2006

Correction

2006-12-08T10:00:00.000-05:00

I Stand Corrected

In my first posting in stated that a suitcase nuke would yield up to 2 kilotons of power and that it would be about ½ the power of the bombs we dropped on Japan. I received that information from what I thought were very good sources. I was challenged in a chat room yesterday and inspired to do a bit more research. After searching for hours, I learned there is a lot of variability in thought on the size and power of a suitcase nuclear weapon.

What I concluded was that a suitcase nuke, likely due to its weight, would only pack a punch of up to 1 kiloton and would certainly not be ½ the power of the WWII nukes we dropped on Japan. Those yielded around 13-15 kilotons.

According to Armageddononline.org these would still yield a very powerful blast. They (and others) claim that the bomb that destroyed the Alfred R. Murrah building in Oklahoma City was a 0.002 kiloton bomb. A 1 kiloton bomb would inflict dreadful damage and kill thousands more than were killed on 9/11.

The power and destruction of a suitcase nuke is certainly a major concern. We must not let this happen in our cities. I implore every American to take notice and become informed; the media are not helping us…we must help our selves.

I visited defendamerica.mil website in my search for information. I didn’t find what I was looking for but I clicked on a link – a wealth of information about terrorists groups. In my naivety I expected to find about 15 or 20 groups. There are 43 pages of world-wide terror group names; most pages hold 20 names…only one person, from one group has to be successful to harm us.

United we must stand…

RADICAL ISLAM: Weapons We Know They Have

2006-12-07T07:39:00.000-05:00

RADICAL ISLAM: Weapons We Know They Have – What We Need to Do About It

The most powerful weapon RADICAL ISLAM has is terror and fear; they are masters at it. Their willingness to use any means available to eradicate the Jews and “the west” demonstrates their greatest weapon. Forcing parents (in Lebanon) to kill their infant child by securing one limb to one parent and another limb to the other parent and then pulling the parents apart as the child is torn in two (read Brigitte Gabriel’s “Because They Hate” for more telling information);who could ever inflict this evil? RADICAL ISLAM.

RADICAL ISLAM wants to dominate the world. RADICAL ISLAM insists we either convert to their “religion”, submit to Islamic law (I will never wear a burka-help me not have to do that), or be killed. I believe moderate and secular Muslims are more afraid of them than we are; because they know who they are.

We are not afraid and actively engaged in fighting to RADICAL ISLAM because our media is seemingly sympathetic to their cause and in agreement with the liberal left that if we only talk to them, we can all get along.

We can’t and we won’t talk. I don’t know any woman; liberal, moderate or conservative who would be willing to submit to wearing a burka, appearing in public only in the company of a man, never speaking unless spoken to, periodic and often routine rapes, etc. etc. etc. Talking will not change the practice of RADICAL ISLAM; they believe all these practices to be true, and sanctioned by Allah/God. Remember they want to dominate the world, and if we refuse to submit to their laws, they will kill us – they have already done it. Terror and fear is their most powerful weapon. I have two regrets in our stirring up the hornet’s nest of RADICAL ISLAM so they are fighting us on Iraqi soil. First, the innocent Iraqis who are slaughtered; caught in the crossfire and subjected to the evil acts and tactics of RADICAL ISLAM; they suffer greatly. You do not see our military sending suicide bombers, car bombers, improvised explosive devices etc. into civilian populations. That is what RADICAL ISLAM does. Second is since our media is increasingly sympathetic to the enemy and we hear only the tragedies that occur in Iraq, Americans are largely ignorant to the threat of RADICAL ISLAM. We have not experienced a direct attack on US soil since 9/11. Our leaders are to be commended for this, but we have become comfortable and complacent; even considerate to the enemy.

Second among their weaponry are their covert operations.

In the most insidious manner RADICAL ISLAM has infiltrated western government(s) world wide. I cannot believe the complacency of our own government as they (CIA/FBI) align themselves with CAIR (Council of American Islamic Relations) which is largely believed to be a front group for Hamas; the RADICAL ISLAMic group in Palestine. When we read about statements from Islamic groups following a horrific event somewhere in the world, the mainstream media often interviews someone from CAIR who purports a pseudo-peaceful message at the televised podium – but a very opposite message when addressing their “followers”. Rarely do we hear from a moderate or secular Cleric who has the voice of Islam that is real, and peaceful: a Cleric who would effectively condemn the motives and methods of RADICAL ISLAM. Certainly not because there aren’t any who would speak, some do; the media does not cover their statements.

RADICAL ISLAM has also succeeded in gaining the sympathy/complacency of many moderate and secular Muslim brethren who Stephen Emerson* refers to as cultural Muslims. Cultural Muslims would never carry out a suicide bomb or any other operation but wouldn’t necessarily stop someone who would. Certainly, there are Muslims who do not tolerate the Radical Arm of Islam, would never tolerate their behavior, would certainly rat them out, but for some reason we are not hearing from them. Why aren’t our opinion pages full of letters from these people?

The third weapon they have are the tangible explosive devices, internet hacking abilities, and yes…weapons of mass destruction that could be introduced to our food, water and air supplies. Most of these (suitcase nuclear weapons, dirty bombs, suicide bombs, various biological and chemical agents, etc) require intensive planning and coordination to deploy. The network of offenders both stateside and abroad, their financial transactions and communications are a significant area where we can effectively fight them. That is why this author was angered by the most recent egregious leaks of classified information-UGH. If we cannot effectively survey, observe and intercept their activities, we lose…we die. Where are the treason charges against these perpetrators?

The good news in all of this is we now have a growing albeit fledgling government intelligence gathering network of our own. It was cut off at the knees in recent years (lack of congressional appropriation), but fortunately our leaders have seen fit since 9/11 to get human intel on the ground, infiltrate known RADICAL ISLAMic groups and finally have federal government agencies talk to each other.

In this war against RADICAL ISLAM, we can’t afford to expend time/energy pointing fingers or assigning blame. We have to all be on the same page, reading the same paragraph, same line and not proofreading the politically incorrect language if we want to survive as a free world. I will be sadly disappointed if the newly elected Democrat congress does nothing but fight President Bush with incessant hearings, subpoenas, misguided allegations, etc. instead of fight the real enemy: RADICAL ISLAM

THINK … JUST THINK

*Stephen Emerson is an internationally recognized expert on terrorism and national security. He has authored many books (read them all –available on Amazon, etc) and is the Executive Director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism which is reported to be the nation’s largest archival data and intelligence on Islamic and Middle Eastern terrorist groups.

A site to visit

2006-12-05T08:02:00.000-05:00

Short & sweet today...I urge everyone to visit the website below for more information about what Radical Islam has in store for us. It is the site of the author Brigette Gabriel who I reference in the first line of my first blog entry at the bottom of this page.

www.americancongressfortruth

Why we love children

2006-12-03T10:25:00.000-05:00

This has been around alot...thanks to the original author who ever that may be

WHY WE LOVE CHILDREN

1. A kindergarten pupil told his teacher he'd found a cat, but it was dead:
"How do you know that the cat was dead?" she asked her pupil.
"Because I pissed in its ear and it didn't move," answered the child
innocently.
"You did WHAT ?" the teacher exclaimed in surprise.
"You know,"explained the boy, "I leaned over and went 'Pssst!' and it didn't
move."

2. A small boy is sent to bed by his father:
Five minutes later....."Da-ad...."
"What?"
"I'm thirsty. Can you bring drink of water?"
"No, You had your chance. Lights out."
Five minutes later: "Da-aaaad..! .."
"WHAT?"
"I'm THIRSTY. Can I have a drink of water??"
I told you NO! If you ask again, I'll have to spank you!!"
Five minutes later......"Daaaa-aaaad...."
"WHAT!"
"When you come in to spank me, can you bring a drink of water?"

3. An exasperated mother, whose son was always getting into mischief finally
asked him:
"How do you expect to get into Heaven?"
The boy thought it over and said, "Well, I'll run in and out and in and out
and keep slamming the door until St. Peter says, 'For Heaven's sake, Dylan,
come in or stay out!'"

4 One summer evening during a violent thunderstorm a mother was tucking her
son into bed:
She was about to turn off the light when he asked with a tremor in his
voice, "Mommy, will you sleep with me tonight?"
The mother smiled and gave him a reassuring hug. "I can't dear," she said.
"I have to sleep in Daddy's room."
A long silence was broken at last by his shaky little voice:
"The big sissy."

5. It was that time, during the Sunday morning service, for the children's
sermon:
All the children were invited to come forward.
One little girl was wearing a particularly pretty dress and, as she sat
down, the pastor leaned over and said, "That is a very pretty dress. Is i
your Easter Dress?"
The little girl replied, directly into the pastor's clip-on microphone,
"Yes, and my Mom says it's a bitch to iron."

6. When I was six months pregnant with my third child, my three year old
came into the room: I was just getting ready to get into the shower. She
said, "Mommy, you are getting fat!" I replied, "Yes, honey, remember Mommy
has a baby growing in her tummy."
"I know," she replied, but what's growing in your butt?"

7. A little boy was doing his math homework:
He said to himself, "Two plus five, that son of a bitch is seven.
Three plus six, that son of a bitch is nine...."
His mother heard what he was saying and gasped, "What are you doing?"
The little boy answered, "I'm doing my math homework, Mom."
"And this is how your teacher taught you to do it?" the mother asked.
"Yes," he answered.
Infuriated, the mother asked the teacher the next day, "What are you
teaching my son in math?"
The teacher replied, "Right now, we are learning addition."
The mother asked, "And are you teaching them to say two plus two, that son
of a bitch is four?"
After the teacher stopped laughing, she answered, "What I taught them was,
two plus two, THE SUM OF WHICH, is four."

8. One day the first grade teacher was reading the story of Chicken Little
to her class:
She came to the part of the story where Chicken Little tried to warn the
farmer. She read, ".... and so Chicken Little went up to the farmer and
said, "The sky is falling, the sky is falling!"
The teacher paused then asked the class, "And what do you think that farmer
said?"
One little girl raised her hand and said, "I think he said: 'Holy Shit! A
talking chicken!'"
The teacher was unable to teach for the next 10 minutes.

9. A certain little girl, when asked her name, would reply,
"I'm Mr. Sugarbrown's daughter."
Her mother told her this was wrong, she must say, "I'm Jane Sugarbrown."
The Vicar spoke to her in Sunday School, and said, Aren't you Mr
Sugarbrown's daughter?"
She replied, "I thought I was, but mother says I'm not."

10. A little girl asked her mother, "Can I go outside and play with the
boys?"
Her mother replied, "No, you can't play with the boys, they're too rough."
The little girl thought about it for a few moments and asked, "If I can find
a smooth one, can I play with him?"

11. A little girl goes to the barber shop with her father:
She stands next to the barber chair, while her dad gets his hair cut, eating
a snack cake.
The barber says to her, "Sweetheart, you're gonna get hair on your Twinkie."
She says, "Yes, I know, and I'm gonna get boobs too."

Now keep that smile on your face and Merry Christmas & Happy New Year!!

Why we Fight

2006-12-03T10:11:00.000-05:00

Follow the link below to see a terrific movie titled "Why we fight". It lasts 1hr 39min, but is worth the time.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4924034461280278026&hl=en

Why the Radical Islamic Threat, Threatens Moderate and/or Secular Muslims; and Us All

2006-12-02T11:22:00.000-05:00

Lebanese born Brigitte Gabriel in her new book “Because They Hate – A Survivor of Islamic Terror Warns America” describes perfectly how Islamic radicals take over a tolerant populace. Osama Bin Laden, Mugtada al-Sadr, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and many others profess death to America, death to the Zionist. We are at war with radical Islam.

One need only recall the eagerness of Muslim Jihadists to join Adolf Hitler’s army in WWII to recognize their historical hate of the Jews and the west. After a rather quiet period in the 50’s and 60’s, the radical terrorists are now fully engaged and at war with us and the Jews. Their skillful resolve to infiltrate tolerant western countries and governments is staggering. Unconfirmed statements by terrorist experts note that there are 200 cities in France where the police will not enter because they know they will be killed by the Muslim extremists. Recently Russian leaders expressed concern about the growing Muslim presence in their country (Russian women on average give birth to 1.3 children, Russian Muslim women give birth to 6-10 children) and have enacted measures to control Muslims

Moderate Muslims are largely silent when addressing the egregiously horrific activities of their radial brethren. It begs the question, are they in fear of retaliation, are they as perplexed as many of us are or are they simply not as moderate as we have been led to believe? And it brings the fear that perhaps they are speaking up but being silenced by the media, which tends to be sympathetic to Radical Islam.

I recently attended a 3-day conference on a multitude of national issues in Palm Beach Florida. There were national leaders, terrorism experts, legislators, media, political pundits, military personnel and many of us who are simply eager to learn more about the growing threat. During the panel discussion “The Homeland Imperiled” one of the audience members suggested there were 10 suitcase nuclear weapons that have been smuggled into this country for use in Osama Bin Laden’s “American Hiroshima”. He asked the panel for verification of this. Ret. General Paul Vallely, the moderator nodded with ascension that it was true. General Vallely in addition to his distinguished military career has served on US security assistance missions on civilian-military relations to Europe, Japan, Korea, Thailand, Indonesia, and Central America.

At lunch, I sat with Ret. General Bob Patterson. I asked the General whether he believed there were suitcase nukes in the country intended to harm us. He said it was highly likely and went on to describe what he did in active duty. He was charged with a program called “Special Services” which was a military group dedicated to look for nuclear weapons coming into this country. He admitted they intercepted a couple coming in through Louisiana. He shuttered to think of those they missed.

Paul Williams a terrorism expert and consultant to the FBI in a recent discussion described how al Qaeda obtained the nuclear weapons. They were sold to them by the Chechen Mafia, Russian Mafia and other black market dealers. He added that these sales had been verified by numerous weapons inspectors including Hans Blix.

According to Williams, in 1995 Dzokhar Dudayev, the leader of the Chechen Mafia offered to sell his collection of nuclear weapons to the United States in exchange for US recognition of Chechnya’s independence. The Clinton administration declined to purchase them; so they were sold to al Qaeda.

Although Osama bin Laden is incredibly patient and will not allow an attack to occur unless success is guaranteed, many experts believe he cannot keep these weapons forever. They require significant maintenance to ensure their potency. Mr. Williams suggests he had worked regularly with 20 nuclear scientists from the lab of Dr. A. Q. Kahn of Pakistan to maintain and modify the weapons. Dr. Kahn was hired by Pakistan to develop their nuclear weapon program.

Non-Muslims have cause to fear the carnage from a suitcase nuclear weapon. The ones we know about can yield about half the amount of power of the bombs we dropped on Japan. One or two detonated in any American city would be devastating; ten would be horrific.

The “moderate” Muslim community not only has to fear this carnage, but the wrath and ire of the non-Muslim Americans. When contemplating the response to the moderate and peaceful Muslim communities after 911, I quote Ret. General Thomas G. McInerney “if the American Hiroshima occurs, to be sure we will respond and there will not be a Mosque standing anywhere in the US and there will be no Muslim, radical or not who will not be in fear for their life from the peaceful and usually tolerant citizens in the United States”.

It is not if there is a planned “American Hiroshima”, but when. Why is this so under reported in America?

We Americans have must learn more about this growing threat and the press has a duty to inform us, not leak our secrets in this war.

(Suggested reading: recent publications by Stephen Emerson, Paul Williams, David Dastych and Hamid Mir to begin with)