Obama gets schooled on terror: Cheney bests him in speech duel — by sticking to the facts

from The New York Daily News
by Michael Goodwin
May 24, 2009

It was a tale of two speeches. One was clear, direct and powerful. Barack Obama gave the other speech.

It would have been heresy to write those words any other time, so commanding has President Obama been with the spoken word. But the real Mission Impossible was to imagine that wheezy old Dick Cheney would be the speaker to best Obama.

Yet that happened last week, and I predict it won't be a fluke. From here on out, results will increasingly trump the sensation of Obama's high-toned lectures every time.

Especially if they are as dreary as last Thursday's, which was so disingenuous and self-reverential as to be one of the low moments of his presidency. Besides not being able to clearly lay out his plan for Guantanamo detainees, Obama never mentioned what will happen to others we capture in Iraq and Afghanistan. Perhaps we will take no more prisoners?

Meanwhile, the occasion showed that Cheney, the darkest of dark horses, is emerging as a fact checker in exile. With Democrats holding all Washington power, the ex-veep's willingness to challenge Obama's narrative of the war on terror is a poor substitute for an institutional check-and-balance, but it's all we have.

In that sense, Cheney's ability to outduel Obama could mark a turning point in the debate on this and other critical issues. His TKO over the President recalls the three most important things in real estate: Location, location, location.

The key to Cheney's powerful performance: Facts, facts, facts.

Cheney, whose wife jokes that calling him Darth Vader "humanizes" him, coughed his way through a 40-minute defense of the Bush administration's anti-terror strategy. He glossed over huge lapses, such as the flawed intelligence leading to the invasion of Iraq, but used to great effect the most compelling fact - no successful attacks on America since 9/11.

In a contrast-and-compare sequence, he challenged Obama's approach, including the release of the so-called torture memos and talk of prosecuting Bush officials.

"To the very end of our administration, we kept Al Qaeda terrorists busy with other problems," Cheney said. "We focused on getting their secrets, instead of sharing ours with them. And on our watch, they never hit this country again. After the most lethal and devastating terrorist attack ever, seven and a half years without a repeat is not a record to be rebuked and scorned, much less criminalized. It is a record to be continued until the danger has passed."

For his part, Obama sounded like a put-upon plaintiff arguing a Supreme Court case. The heavy symbolism of his setting, the National Archives in front of an original copy of the Constitution, added to the worrisome impression he is lost in the legal and political weeds.

Ironically, his criticism that Bush took his eye off the ball to invade Iraq has a corollary in Obama's fixation on interrogation techniques. He is missing the larger point.

After conceding terrorism presents unique challenges, Obama argued "the decisions that were made over the last eight years established an ad hoc legal approach for fighting terrorism that was neither effective nor sustainable - a framework that failed to rely on our legal traditions and time-tested institutions; that failed to use our values as a compass."

Whoa Nellie - are the terrorists going to hit us again or not? That's what people want to know, not whether a bunch of lawyers think we're being too tough on them.

Unfortunately, Obama was less than reassuring, saying: "Neither I nor anyone else standing here today can say that there will not be another terrorist attack that takes American lives."

That's a fact, of course, but it's also a fact that he's been warned his policies will make it more likely we will be hit again.

It's a warning he dismisses at America's peril.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Obama: "Upholding values will shield US from terror" - Yeah, like Al Qaeda cares

If there is a terror attack on the United States while Obama is President, not only will the blood be on his hands, but the American People will never forgive him. They are hearing all this patty-cake chatter from him, and those that voted for him continue to slobber all over themselves.

However, even his own supporters will disown him after the first attack. They understand the difference between the way Bush handled the war on terror, and they see that per Obama's direction there is no war on terror.

When 9/11 happened, there was no Guantanamo Bay or Abu Graib yet to incite the terrorists. Maybe he should review his history.

So what "values were we straying from that undermined the rule of law, alienated us from our allies, energized our adversaries and endangered our national security and the lives of our troops?"
Rees

from Breitbart.com
May 22,2009

President Barack Obama Friday warned America risked its security when it compromised its values, seeking support for his bid to sketch a new legal framework for anti-terror policies.

Obama used the backdrop of the US Naval Academy graduation ceremony to argue that founding US ideals must guide the future battle against terrorism, a day after trying to quell raging debate over Guantanamo Bay in a major speech.

"We uphold our fundamental principles and values not just because we choose to, but because we swear to -- not because they feel good, but because they help keep us safe," Obama told 30,000 graduating navy cadets and family members.

"When America strays from our values, it not only undermines the rule of law, it alienates us from our allies, it energizes our adversaries and it endangers our national security and the lives of our troops."

Obama told the graduates they would face a "full spectrum of threats" from 18th century-style piracy to cyber terrorism.

"As long as I am your commander-in-chief, I will only send you into harm's way when it is absolutely necessary," Obama said, in an apparent veiled criticism of the Bush administration war in Iraq, which the president has argued was unnecessary.

Earlier, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba, which Obama has ordered shut by next January, had to be closed because it had become a "taint" on the image of the United States.

"The truth is, it's probably one of the finest prisons in the world today. But it has a taint," Gates told NBC television's "Today" program during a visit to New York.

"The name itself is a condemnation. What the president was saying is, this will be an advertisement for Al-Qaeda as long as it's open," he said.

But McCain was critical of Obama's speech on Thursday, accusing him of making an announcement with great fanfare in January that he would close the camp, without planning properly what to do with the inmates.

"Frankly, the president's speech, where he said he was going to consult with Congress -- that's not a policy," McCain told Fox.

Obama on Thursday vowed no retreat on closing Guantanamo Bay, branding the prison a "mess" and charging that Bush-era anti-terror tactics were rooted in fear and ideology.

He also raised the prospect of holding the most dangerous Al-Qaeda detainees indefinitely in US "super-max" jails, in a speech designed to recapture the initiative in a row over his national security policies.

Obama took on critics on the right who believe "anything goes" in the fight against terrorism, and rebuked allies on the left who he said believed that in all cases transparency should triumph over national security.

Moments later, former vice president Dick Cheney hit back with his own speech at the American Enterprise Institute think tank, vehemently justifying the Bush approach, including harsh CIA interrogations derided by critics as torture and setting up Guantanamo outside the US legal framework.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Ahmadinejad Calls For Eradication of Israel

Would this be the same Ahmadinejad that Obama wants to have direct talks with? It is? Gee, Barry, do you still want to go through with it? I guess you probably do. Lately, you seem to be surrounding yourself with some fine individuals.
Rees

Delegates walk out on Ahmadinejad at Geneva

from The Jerusalem Post
By JPOST.COM STAFF, TOVAH LAZAROFF AND AP
April 20, 2009

As Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called for the eradication of Israel in his address to the United Nations anti-racism conference whichopened its week long event in Geneva on Monday, delegates walked out, hecklers wearing clown-wigs shouted 'racist' towards him and were escorted uot by security personnel and his speech was continually interrupted.

"Governments must be encouraged and supported in their fights at eradicating this barbaric racism. Efforts must be made to put an end to Zionism," he said in the rambling speech he gave at the podium.

As he spoke, some 23 EU delegates were seen walking out the room when Ahmadinejad said Israel was created on the "pretext of Jewish suffering" from World War II.

Ahmadinejad began his speech by pointing the finger at the United States, Europe and Israel and said they were destabilizing the entire world. "Those in authority at the time set off two world wars," Ahmadinejad said, in an accusation directed at Western powers. He went on to accuse those powers of "killing hundred of millions of people and causing mass destruction" also in Africa and Asia.

"Those who won [the Second World War], considered that the world was with them," he said, and "set up laws that were oppressive and trampling."

A member of the United Union of Jewish Students shouts and holds up a sign saying 'This is a circus, a racist can't fight racism' during the speech of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the UN Racism conference at the United Headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland, Monday.

Ahmadinejad then went on to criticize the UN: "The Security Council set up after World War II, let's analyze it. The veto vote - is that equality? Is that justice? Is that equality amongst human beings?" he asked, "Or rather is it arrogance and humiliation? The Security Council must be the most important body for decision-making in order to promote peace. If a law is based on force, how can we secure peace and justice? The seeking of power and arrogance means racism, injustice and occupation."

At this point the Iranian president's speech moved to the subject of Israel and the Palestinians.

"As was the case after World War II, armies occupied other territories and people were transferred from territories. In reality, under the pretext of compensating for the evil done in the name of xenophobia, they in fact set up the most violent xenophobes, in Palestine."

"The Security Council made it possible for that illegitimate government to be set up. For 60 years, this government was supported by the world. Many Western countries say they are fighting racism; but in fact support it with occupation, bombings and crimes such as those committed in Gaza. These countries support the criminals," Ahmadinejad said.

Just as Ahmadinejad took the podium at the opening of the international anti-racism conference in Geneva on Monday, two men in multi-colored clown wigs stood up from both sides of the conference hall and tried to reach the podium. One of the men threw a soft red object at Ahmadinejad.

He was immediately escorted out of the hall by security personnel. In his opening remarks, Ahmadinejad called the man "ignorant."

Calls from the balcony were heard throughout the speech.

Still, the majority of the delegates greeted the Iranian president with a round of applause. [absolutely disgusting - my comments]

Ahmadinejad also blamed Israel for America's invasion of Iraq, which he said benefited Israeli arms sales.

He spoke to the UN assembly on the eve of Holocaust Memorial Day, which commemorates the slaughter of six million Jews by the Nazis during World War II.

Later, at a question-and-answer session with reporters, Ahmadinejad protected the views he presented in his speech.

The protesters wanted to prevent the crowd from hearing "all points of view," he said, and were hurting the "freedom of information" and "freedom of speech."

France's ambassador to the UN, Jean Baptiste Mattéi, told the France 24 TV network "We don't want to repeat what happened in Durban… it's not against the conference, but we cannot share the views expressed by Ahmadinejad. We wanted to make this clear."
Click to read the article and comments

Katz reminds Rahm Emanuel he's Jewish

Rahm Emanuel is anti-Jewish and anti-Israel. He is a traitor to his family roots. He is a vertically challenged, spoiled little brat with a bad case of 'little man's syndrome'.
Rees

The Jerusalem Post
By MATTHEW WAGNER
Apr 20, 2009
Photo: AP

National Union chairman Ya'acov "Ketzele" Katz sent a letter to White House chief-of-staff Rahm Emanuel last week admonishing him not to forget his Jewish and Israeli origins.

Katz claims that in a private meeting with the unnamed leader, Emanuel said, "In the next four years, there will be a peace agreement with the Palestinians on the basis of two states for two peoples, and it does not matter to us who is the prime minister."
In the letter, a Hebrew version of which was provided to The Jerusalem Post by Katz's parliamentary aide, Katz wrote: "For many Israelis, this report is a cause for worry because it reveals a condescending attitude toward our prime minister and Israeli public opinion. This is an attitude that Israel does not expect from a real friend such as the US, and all the more so from an Israeli Jew who has succeeded in being appointed White House chief-of-staff."

Katz went on to compare Emanuel to the biblical Esther, who ended up at using her influence with Persian King Ahashverosh to intervene on behalf of the Jews of the Persian Empire.

"For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance for the Jews will arise from another place, but you and your father's family will perish. And who knows but that you have come to royal position for such a time as this?" Katz wrote, quoting from the Book of Esther (4:14).

Katz was hinting that Emanuel should use his influence to protect Israeli interests, which, he believes, are best served by preventing the creation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

In November, Emanuel said US President Barack Obama did not need his influence to "orientate his policy toward Israel."
Click to read the rest of the article and comments

This is 2009, not 1984

This is an incredible article. I posted the first couple of paragraphs and would encourage everyone to click on the link to read the rest of the article. It's worth your time.
Rees

from America's Right
By Rick Saunders & Jeff Schreiber
Monday, April 20, 2009

Report: FBI was actively monitoring Tax Day Tea Party protests

Yesterday, White House adviser David Axelrod suggested that the "TEA Party" phenomenon which started sweeping the country last week was an "unhealthy" reaction to tough economic times.

Given the leftist pedigree Axelrod flaunts, that statement should come as no surprise, if not an outright compliment to the many concerned Americans who took time off from work to voice their opinions. Regardless of how taken, it only further underscores the fundamental intellectual hostility toward America and Americans who love their country and Constitution recently demonstrated by folks like Axelrod, DHS Commandante Janet Napolitano and, of course, The Chosen One himself.
Click to read the rest of the article and comments

Must Watch!! - We Will Not Be Bullied Into Socialism

White House is "not at all" afraid of the NRA - according to David Axelrod

Hey Axelrod, stop with the "95% received tax cuts" BS, because that's exactly what it is. Obama's policies are going to triple the debt, your numbers, not the CBO's. Maybe you sure review the graph they issued. You do know how to interpret a graph don't you?

Axelrod says the Tea Party movement could be 'unhealthy' - Oh, it all makes sense now. You're the one that actually wrote the DHS report basically labeling everyone who disagrees with Obama as Rightwing Extremists!
Rees

Axelrod: TEA movement could be 'unhealthy'

WASHINGTON, April 19 (UPI) -- The so-called "TEA Party" movement against taxes could become an "unhealthy" reaction to gloomy U.S. economic conditions, a White House adviser said.

In an appearance Sunday on CBS's "Face the Nation" program, Senior White House Adviser David Axelrod said the Taxed Enough Already rallies across the nation last week should not have been directed at President Barack Obama's administration.

"The thing that bewilders me is that this president just cut taxes for 95 percent of the American people," Axelrod argued. "I think the tea bags should be directed elsewhere because he certainly understands the burden that people face."

He said the TEA Party events, which were organized by the conservative group FreedomWorks, comes from a dissatisfaction with the economy that "can mutate into something that's unhealthy."

In the interview, Axelrod also addressed a proposed ban on assault-style weapons. He said now is not the time for Congress to tackle the controversial issue. [In other words, they are going to outlaw them, just not right now - my comment]

"The question is: Is there the consensus and the ability, given the rules of Congress and the realities of Congress, to move that in the midst of everything else that we have to do. Is that something that you want to embark on now?" he said.

He also said the White House is "not at all" afraid of the National Rifle Association.

"The White House is interested in pursuing policies that we can enact quickly to deal with the issue of violence in this country, to deal with the issue of violence on the border. That means tightening enforcement," Axelrod said.
Click to read the article

Obama Cancels Netanyahu Visit - Rahm Emanuel laying down the law to Israel

from theage.com.au
Jason Koutsoukis
April 18, 2009

CAN Israel still call the United States its best international friend? Apparently not, if you believe the tone of the local media.

Watching the drama unfold inside Israel, the increasingly tense dialogue between US President Barack Obama and new Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is taking on all the trappings of a duel.

Almost every day brings news of another sore point between the two countries, a source of yet further inflammation of their once warm relations.

One could be forgiven for thinking that the more immediate threat to Israel's national security lay across the Atlantic rather than from closer to home.

It is bad enough that President Obama uses almost every opportunity he can to set the parameters of a final peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. Now US officials are openly using Israeli anxiety over Iran's fledging nuclear program as a bargaining chip to force Israel's hand on giving up control of the West Bank Palestinian territory.

No less a figure than White House chief-of-staff Rahm Emanuel — whose father fought with the militant Zionist group the Irgun, and whose appointment had provided such reassurance to Israeli officials — was quoted this week laying down the law to Israel.

If Israel wants US help to defuse the Iranian threat, Mr Emanuel was reported to have told Jewish leaders in Washington, then get ready to start evacuating settlements in the West Bank.

Talkback radio blazed with fury across the country the same day, as Israelis protested that no US official had the right to tell them where to live.

Then on Thursday came the news that Mr Netanyahu's planned first meeting with President Obama in Washington next month had been called off.

Mr Netanyahu had hoped to capitalise on his attendance at the annual American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference in Washington to visit the White House.

But Administration officials informed Mr Netanyahu's office that the President would not be "in town".

Washington sources added that the Obama Administration would not be continuing the tradition that had developed during the Bush years of hosting Israeli prime ministers whenever they showed up in town, sometimes with just a phone call's notice.

It might have been no more than coincidence, but yesterday Israeli defence officials told the liberal daily Haaretz that Israel's $US15 billion ($A21 billion) purchase of 75 US-made F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jets was now under review due to "the unexpected high cost and disagreements with the manufacturer".

Contrary to initial expectations, President Obama has wasted no time becoming fully engaged in the Middle East peace process, despite the magnitude of his domestic political agenda. While Mr Netanyahu has refused to endorse a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict agreed to by his predecessor, President Obama has made it abundantly clear that the US will accept nothing less than Israel living side by side with a sovereign Palestinian state.

Mr Obama is also demanding a freeze on Jewish settlement expansion in the West Bank, and has dropped the Bush administration's opposition to Hamas being part of a future Palestinian Authority government.

According to prominent Israeli political commentator Maya Bengal, who writes for the country's second-largest selling newspaper Maariv, the holiday is over.

"As Passover comes to an end, so comes to an end, it seems, the days of grace granted to the Netanyahu Government by the American Administration," says the commentator.

Tel Aviv barman Meir Avraham, 30, says he can feel on the street the tensions being played out between the US and Israel.

"This is one of the the main things that the people are talking about at the moment," says Mr Avraham, who recently returned to Israel after several months in Townsville.

All Israelis, says Mr Avraham, understand the vital nature of the relationship between Israel and the US. "If we lose America, then we are alone," he says. "So we must listen to what America wants. But really I think this is more about the little brother testing the limits of the big brother."
Click to read the rest of the article and comments

Ahmadinejad thanks ElBaradei - for holding off UN while Iran finished Nuclear Program

Well, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad didn't actually thank ElBaradei directly, at least as far as I know. However, he probably should thank Mohamed ElBaradei and the IAEA, because without their help and incompetence, Iran may not have gotten this far.
Rees

"No one will dare attack Iranian nation"

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told his nation on Saturday that "no country in the region threatens Iran," just hours after The London Times published a report claiming that Israel was preparing to attack targets in Iran within hours of receiving a green light from the government in Jerusalem.

Speaking during a ceremony in Iran's Army Day, Ahmadinejad said Iran was one of the strongest countries in the region and that "the gall to threaten the Iranian nation was quashed forever."

"The Iranian nation is ready to become more involved in maintaining order and security based on justice in many regions of the world," Ahmadinejad said.

His speech on Saturday was much more toned down than Army Day speeches from previous years; in 2006 Ahmadinejad warned that Iran's army will "cut off the hand of whoever dares attack it." In 2007 he said "the resistance of the Iranian people will bring down world powers."

The parade of military equipment on Saturday was also more modest than in previous years. While announcements prior to the parade said 140 jets will fly in formation, only several dozen helicopters dotted the skies of Iran on Saturday. An official explained that weather conditions prevented the jet air maneuvers from taking place.

Shihab and Khader missiles, which are usually driven atop their launching vehicles in the streets of Teheran, were also missing.

But Zilzal missiles, armored personnel carriers, unmanned aircraft and even small submarines surrounded by marching soldiers in diving masks. The forces passed before a stage where Ahmadinejad and top brass were sitting.
Click to read the article and comments

Israel ready to bomb Iran's nuclear sites

from TimesOnline
by Sheera Frenkel
April 18, 2009

The Israeli military is preparing itself to launch a massive aerial assault on Iran's nuclear facilities within days of being given the go-ahead by its new government.

Among the steps taken to ready Israeli forces for what would be a risky raid requiring pinpoint aerial strikes are the acquisition of three Airborne Warning and Control (AWAC) aircraft and regional missions to simulate the attack.

Two nationwide civil defence drills will help to prepare the public for the retaliation that Israel could face.

“Israel wants to know that if its forces were given the green light they could strike at Iran in a matter of days, even hours. They are making preparations on every level for this eventuality. The message to Iran is that the threat is not just words,” one senior defence official told The Times.

Officials believe that Israel could be required to hit more than a dozen targets, including moving convoys. The sites include Natanz, where thousands of centrifuges produce enriched uranium; Esfahan, where 250 tonnes of gas is stored in tunnels; and Arak, where a heavy water reactor produces plutonium.

The distance from Israel to at least one of the sites is more than 870 miles, a distance that the Israeli force practised covering in a training exercise last year that involved F15 and F16 jets, helicopters and refuelling tankers.

The possible Israeli strike on Iran has drawn comparisons to its attack on the Osirak nuclear facility near Baghdad in 1981. That strike, which destroyed the facility in under 100 seconds, was completed without Israeli losses and checked Iraqi ambitions for a nuclear weapons programme.

“We would not make the threat [against Iran] without the force to back it. There has been a recent move, a number of on-the-ground preparations, that indicate Israel's willingness to act,” said another official from Israel's intelligence community.

He added that it was unlikely that Israel would carry out the attack without receiving at least tacit approval from America, which has struck a more reconciliatory tone in dealing with Iran under its new administration.

An Israeli attack on Iran would entail flying over Jordanian and Iraqi airspace, where US forces have a strong presence.

Ephraim Kam, the deputy director of the Institute for National Security Studies, said it was unlikely that the Americans would approve an attack.

“The American defence establishment is unsure that the operation will be successful. And the results of the operation would only delay Iran's programme by two to four years,” he said.

A visit by President Obama to Israel in June is expected to coincide with the national elections in Iran — timing that would allow the US Administration to re-evaluate diplomatic resolutions with Iran before hearing the Israeli position.

“Many of the leaks or statements made by Israeli leaders and military commanders are meant for deterrence. The message is that if [the international community] is unable to solve the problem they need to take into account that we will solve it our way,” Mr Kam said.

Among recent preparations by the airforce was the Israeli attack of a weapons convoy in Sudan bound for militants in the Gaza Strip.

“Sudan was practice for the Israeli forces on a long-range attack,” Ronen Bergman, the author of The Secret War with Iran, said. “They wanted to see how they handled the transfer of information, hitting a moving target ... In that sense it was a rehearsal.”

Israel has made public its intention to hold the largest-ever nationwide drill next month.

Colonel Hilik Sofer told Haaretz, a daily Israeli newspaper, that the drill would “train for a reality in which during war missiles can fall on any part of the country without warning ... We want the citizens to understand that war can happen tomorrow morning”.

Israel will conduct an exercise with US forces to test the ability of Arrow, its US-funded missile defence system. The exercise would test whether the system could intercept missiles launched at Israel.

“Israel has made it clear that it will not tolerate the threat of a nuclear Iran. According to Israeli Intelligence they will have the bomb within two years ... Once they have a bomb it will be too late, and Israel will have no choice to strike — with or without America,” an official from the Israeli Defence Ministry said.
click to read the article and comments

Obama To Change Statue of Liberty!

Tea Parties were about the Graph!

"Self Explanatory"

US Navy "Steller Daggers" Video

Closing Velocity always has the most incredible missle launch videos.
Rees

from Closing Velocity
by John McKittrick
April 17, 2009

Video: US Navy "Stellar Daggers" Missile Defense Test

New video from last month's first ever double intercept of a short-range ballistic missile and a cruise missile by the Aegis destroyer USS Benfold off the coast of Los Angeles:



Click to go to Closing Velocity to view more

Obama Entertains at Summit of the Americas

Photo captures Obama 'entertaining' at the Summit of the Americas.

Hugo Chavez could be heard in the background muttering something to the effect that, "Obama has 'the same stench' as Bush."
Rees







Here's some video history regarding the 'stench' comment.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Look Who's Talking
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis Political Humor

Obama Is An Enemy of The State - how else can you explain this decision?

Inexcusable Lapse
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Posted Friday, April 17, 2009

War On Terror: Imagine a president of the United States, within his first hundred days, revealing secrets that help terrorists kill. The secret memos on enhanced interrogation, now made public, do exactly that.

Read More: Global War On Terror

We are told by President Obama's senior adviser David Axelrod that the president agonized for four weeks over the "weighty decision" to make public memoranda detailing the specifics of the CIA's tough interrogation of high-value terrorist detainees such as 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammad.

For most other presidents, it would have taken maybe four minutes, required little soul-searching and resulted in the opposite choice.

What on earth could the president have been thinking in revealing the nuts and bolts of how we extract information from al-Qaida operatives to prevent the success of their terrorist operations?

What could have possessed him to make public the steps our interrogators go through, the limits of pain and discomfort they (but not the prisoners) know they will not exceed, and the analytical classification and specific purpose of each of the various techniques?

These top secrets will arm Islamist jihadists with knowledge that will be invaluable to them. Future terrorist detainees will now know, for instance, that their interrogations are under continual video surveillance to make sure no lasting medical or psychological consequences result from the techniques used. Will they now teach themselves to fake such ill effects?

Terrorists will know that when they are placed in a tiny container in "cramped confinement" it will last only "up to two hours," as a declassified memo from the Justice Department to the CIA noted. They will know that "stress positions" are used "only to induce temporary muscle fatigue" not "severe physical pain."

They will now know that when subjected to "water dousing" they need not have the slightest fear of hypothermia, because every precaution is taken to keep the temperature of both the room and the water itself far above freezing.

They will know sleep deprivation inflicted by the interrogators seldom exceeds 96 hours, and they'll know the specifics and purposes behind the relatively mild technique of "dietary manipulation."

What the president has given to our enemies is a treasure chest of defensive weapons. Within the caves of the mountainous Pakistan/Afghanistan border, Islamofascist plotters must wonder how self-destructively corrupt their American adversaries have to be to allow such materials to land in their hands.

The piece of information that may be of most value to terrorists is the government's assessment that waterboarding was "the most traumatic of the enhanced interrogation techniques" and implicitly the most effective.

Terrorist groups around the world will now know that waterboarding was "authorized for, at most, one 30-day period, during which the technique can actually be applied on no more than five days" with "no more than two sessions in any 24-hour period."

Each session lasted no more than two hours, consisting of, at most, six applications of water for 10 seconds each time, for a total of no longer than 12 minutes per each 24-hour period. Presumably the issue is academic since the Obama administration has officially prohibited waterboarding.

There is no more valuable tool for subjects of interrogation than to know what they will be subjected to. How in good conscience could our president have given this gift to those trying to destroy us?
Click to read the article and comments

Obama to Punish Israel if it Attacks Iran?

from Jihad Watch
April 17, 2009

Obama Administration drawing up contingency plans to punish Israel if it attacks Iran?

Unconscionable, but plausible in light of the steps Obama has already taken. "US Weighing Punishing Israel if it Attacks Iran," from China Confidential, April 17 (thanks to Banafsheh Zand-Bonazzi):

Having taken military action against Iran off the table, the Obama administration is considering ways of punishing Israel if it attacks Iran to end its nuclear arms program (and prevent a second Holocaust).

In other words, having failed to contain Iran, the United States is concentrating on restraining Israel.

Administration contingency plans include condemnation of Israel, support for a United Nations Security Council resolution that could include sanctions on Israel, and suspending or seriously cutting military aid to the Jewish State.

One of President Obama's closest foreign policy advisers, National Security Council member Samantha Power, is a proponent of ending military aid to Israel in order to force it to negotiate with Iran's Palestinian Islamist proxy, Hamas, and withdraw from all lands taken during the Six-Day War of June 1967. Power also advocates shifting aid to a Palestinian state. Overall, she views Israel as a liability and a historic mistake, in line with the European left position (and that of old-line, right-of-center, American isolationists and anti-Semites). Her antidemocratic admirers in the Democratic Party's (Hillary-hating) left wing agree and are eager for an opportunity to paint Israel as a Jewish North Korea (although they actually have more sympathy for North Korea than for Israel).

The big question is how the Obama administration would react if Iran retaliated against Israel indirectly as well as directly--by making good on its repeated threats to attack U.S. forces in the Middle East and shut down the strategic, 29 mile-wide Strait of Hormuz, through which an estimated 20% of the world's crude oil is transported by tanker ships. Would the U.S. fight back with real ferocity or respond in a limited way while blaming Israel for preemptively attacking Iran and appealing to "the Muslim world" for "understanding?"

One wonders how the Apologizer-in-Chief would react.

Indeed. Read it all.
Click to read the article and comments

Montana Gun Law Aimed At Asserting Aovereignty

2nd Amendment, Montana style
from Don Surber.com
April 17, 2009

Montana: You will take our Montana-made guns when you pry them from our cold dead Montanan fingers.

Montana’s legislature exempted Montana-made guns from federal gun laws, a move which underscores a state’s right to legislate commerce that occurs totally and exclusively within its own borders.

Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer immediately, saying, “It’s a gun bill, but it’s another way of demonstrating the sovereignty of the state of Montana.”

He also said: “I like big guns, I like little guns, I like pistols, I like rifles, and I would like to buy a gun that’s made in Montana.”

The Montana Shooting Sports Association, which drafted the bill, has said it will raise the money to pay for any legal costs, the AP reported.

The story is here.

God bless Montana
Click to read the article and comments

Jesus Missing From Obama's Georgetown Speech

It's not only missing from his speech, it's missing from his personal life.
Rees

White House asked university to cover symbol
Click to read the article and over 2,500 Comments
from NBC News Washington
By JIM IOVINO
April 16, 2009

Amidst all of the American flags and presidential seals, there was something missing when President Barack Obama gave an economic speech at Georgetown University this week -- Jesus.

The White House asked Georgetown to cover a monogram symbolizing Jesus' name in Gaston Hall, which Obama used for his speech, according to CNSNews.com.

The gold "IHS" monogram inscribed on a pediment in the hall was covered over by a piece of black-painted plywood, and remained covered over the next day, CNSNews.com reported.

The Washington Times' Belief Blog asked the university about the presidential request:

Julie Bataille from the university's press office e-mailed me that the White House had asked that all university signage and symbols behind the stage in Gaston Hall be covered.

"The White House wanted a simple backdrop of flags and pipe and drape for the speech, consistent with what they've done for other policy speeches," she wrote. "Frankly, the pipe and drape wasn't high enough by itself to fully cover the IHS and cross above the GU seal and it seemed most respectful to have them covered so as not to be seen out of context."

While the "IHS" directly behind where Obama spoke was covered over, CNSNews.com said the monogram was still visible in 26 other places in the hall during his speech. Those areas just weren't as prominent.

The Belief Blog talked with the Rev. Thomas Reese, a senior fellow at the Woodstock Institute at Georgetown University, who said he didn't think "this is motivated by theology, but by communications strategy."

The blog also talked with Catholic University spokesman Victor Nakas, who felt a bit more strongly on the subject:

I can’t imagine, as the bishops’ university and the national university of the Catholic Church, that we would ever cover up our religious art or signage for any reason," Mr. Nakas wrote. "Our Catholic faith is integral to our identity as an institution of higher education."
Click to read the article and over 2,500 Comments

Navy 3, Pirates 0

BIG SISTER IS WATCHING YOU!