Cassandra
May 22, 2009 Political
Cassandra was a mythical figure in Greek mythology- a favored priestess of the god Apollo, she resided in the city of Troy, in the temple of Apollo, where she could foretell the future to all who requested an audience. She fell out of favor with the god Apollo, because she would not submit to his amorous advances.
When that happened, Apollo cursed her , that she could foretell the future, but that no one would believe her ever again. As it happened, the Greeks had a little spat with the Trojans, recounted in the Iliad, by the Greek author Homer, and in this fight, which supposedly lasted twenty years, Cassandra made prediction after prediction, but no one believed.
At the end of the war, after twenty years had passed, the Greeks were tired, and resorted to trickery. They built a giant horse, into which went their best warriors, hidden. The rest of the armada pretended to sail away, and the trojans, awakening and seeing the giant horse, and no Greeks, came to the conclusion that they had won, and the horse was an offering to the Gods, or the Trojans (it’s unclear really who was the true intended recipient), and a peaceful offering.
Over Cassandra’s vocal protests that this horse meant doom for all Trojans, the horse was wheeled into the Walled city of Troy, and at night, during the celebrating, the hidden Greeks slipped out and, with the other Greeks who had come back under cover of darkness, killed all within Troy, or so it is written.
Former vice President Dick Cheney is the Cassandra of today’s world- he talks of terrorism (and yes, Virginia, it IS still called terrorism) that came to our shores and of terrorism that still yearns to make us very dead. He speaks from experience, experience that Skinny B and his posse DO NOT HAVE in dealing with terrorists, as evidenced by the rampant backpedaling B has had to do in the Gitmo “closings”.
“Nine-eleven caused everyone to take a serious second look at threats that had been gathering for a while, and enemies whose plans were getting bolder and more sophisticated. Throughout the 90s, America had responded to these attacks, if at all, on an ad hoc basis. The first attack on the World Trade Center was treated as a law enforcement problem, with everything handled after the fact – crime scene, arrests, indictments, convictions, prison sentences, case closed.
That’s how it seemed from a law enforcement perspective, at least – but for the terrorists the case was not closed. For them, it was another offensive strike in their ongoing war against the United States. And it turned their minds to even harder strikes with higher casualties. Nine-eleven made necessary a shift of policy, aimed at a clear strategic threat – what the Congress called “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.” From that moment forward, instead of merely preparing to round up the suspects and count up the victims after the next attack, we were determined to prevent attacks in the first place.” Weekly Standard
As counterpoint to Skinny B’s watery speech, in which he prevaricated about the terror situation, and preferred his favorite childish tactic, which was pointing to the Bush administration twenty- eight times either by name or by implication, Dick Cheney didn’t truly criticize the present administration, instead, plainly making the case of why our vigilance can not be relaxed.
“Everyone expected a follow-on attack, and our job was to stop it. We didn’t know what was coming next, but everything we did know in that autumn of 2001 looked bad. This was the world in which al-Qaeda was seeking nuclear technology, and A. Q. Khan was selling nuclear technology on the black market. We had the anthrax attack from an unknown source. We had the training camps of Afghanistan, and dictators like Saddam Hussein with known ties to Mideast terrorists.
These are just a few of the problems we had on our hands. And foremost on our minds was the prospect of the very worst coming to pass – a 9/11 with nuclear weapons.” Weekly Standard
It is no accident that Dick Cheney’s popularity is growing as more and more people are becoming uneasy with this know- nothing poseur in the White House, and his crew of blame-the-victim liberals spending all their time trying to minimize any reference to terror. Calling something a “man caused disaster” will not make the deaths any less horrible, and deleting the term “terrorist”, or “enemy combatant” from our vocabulary will not cause them to either like us more, or kill us less.
“So we’re left to draw one of two conclusions – and here is the great dividing line in our current debate over national security. You can look at the facts and conclude that the comprehensive strategy has worked, and therefore needs to be continued as vigilantly as ever. Or you can look at the same set of facts and conclude that 9/11 was a one-off event – coordinated, devastating, but also unique and not sufficient to justify a sustained wartime effort. Whichever conclusion you arrive at, it will shape your entire view of the last seven years, and of the policies necessary to protect America for years to come.
The key to any strategy is accurate intelligence, and skilled professionals to get that information in time to use it. In seeking to guard this nation against the threat of catastrophic violence, our Administration gave intelligence officers the tools and lawful authority they needed to gain vital information. We didn’t invent that authority. It is drawn from Article Two of the Constitution. And it was given specificity by the Congress after 9/11, in a Joint Resolution authorizing “all necessary and appropriate force” to protect the American people.” Weekly Standard
If you note the first sentence in that second paragraph, you will begin to see the problem we now have vis-a-vis this current administration, as all the Liberal socialists there seem hell- bent on castrating our intelligence services, beginning with the Speaker of the House, but not limited to her alone.
Perhaps, if everyone listened to Dick Cheney a little more, and Skinny B a little less, then the similarity between Cheney and Cassandra would end at having the same first letter in their names, rather than their shared voices in the wilderness.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: cheney, gitmo, Pelosi, terrorists, truth
As Terror Looms, Obama Defends Gitmo Closing
May 22, 2009 Political
Four people were arrested today for attempting to reign terror in New York. The media described them as a home grown terrorist group but, in reality, the group of men were Muslim converts who wanted to bomb Jewish synagogues and shoot at military aircraft. They might have been here but their terror was not home grown. It was grown from the seeds of hatred sewn in the Middle East.
While this news was fresh, Obama was giving a speech defending his decision to close Gitmo. In that speech he did not rule out bringing some of the terrorists at Gitmo to the United States. The Won stated that he would not bring those who were a danger to us into the country which tells me he means those who would not be in jail. How could the ones in jail be a danger?
Obama said that some of them would be brought here and placed in Super Max prisons while they awaited trial. That might work out well if they are convicted of crimes but what happens if they are found not guilty? Other countries are not willing to take them and we will not be able to put them back in jail so what will we do with them? Just because they are found not guilty does not mean they are not a threat.
If we are forced to let these people loose in America then they should be placed in the neighborhoods of the Democrats who want them released. Obama should be required to take a few of them in at the White House and let them around his daughters with no Secret Service protection. That is what he is proposing happen to the rest of us because if they are released they will certainly be living near our children and we don’t have law enforcement guarding us.
Obama has no plan. He did not think through this process and he figured that all he had to do was smile and say “hope and change” and other countries would take these people. He, as stated by his Press Secretary, made a hasty decision and now he is trying to figure out how to make it happen. He is finding out that it is not very easy to get rid of the people at Gitmo or Bush would have done so.
It was interesting listening to him because he blamed everything on George Bush and then said that Gitmo was used as a recruiting tool for the terrorists and that we are less safe because of the place.
Right, and the fact that we have not been attacked since 9/11 is proof that we are less safe.
The terrorists captured today by the FBI claim they were motivated by our actions in Afghanistan. Obama has increased the number of troops in that country so it is safe to say his actions made them want to wage jihad.
Is it safe to say that Obama is a recruiting tool for the terrorists?
America became less safe when Obama took office. The events in New York show that the threat is still out there and we will be attacked again. It is only a matter of time.
Keep this in mind folks because when it happens Obama will not be able to claim it was Bush’s fault though I have no doubt he will try.
The best news of the day is that Dick Cheney gave a speech at the same time Obama did (Obama evidently changed his to coincide with Cheney’s – probably and effort to take the spotlight from Cheney) and Cheney laid it all on the line and schooled the youngster.
Sources:
WCBSTV
New York Daily News
NBC New York
Daily Mail UK
Al-Reuters
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Bag and Tag
May 11, 2009 Political
Barama has vowed to close Gitmo, the place outside of the United States where we have kept the terrorists that we managed to pick up on the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq. These people were not haphazardly picked up for the heck of it, yanked off of their streets for “walking while Arab”- no, they were detained for actively fighting against the U.S., and were deemed to have intel that might help keep the U.S. safe. These are not impulsive decisions, decided on the spur of the moment, but considered case by case, since the room available at Gitmo is finite.
For years these people have been sequestered at Gitmo, and now the Resident has decided that we must let them go, or put them in U.S. prisons, neither of which is a good idea on its own, although if you are going to put them in prisons, they should be released into the general population, so that the prison population can show these people the error of their ways.
If, however, the decision is reached to allow these people to go back to their country of origin, they should be tagged with GPS transmitters, so we know where they are at all times. Perhaps then we could track them back to their terror cells and begin to clean up this extremist mess we have now.
It has been proved that many of these Arab terrorists revert to their old ways when they go back, and some have been re- caught, or killed on the battlefield when they were returned.
I know the argument that no country wants them, or if they are returned to their home country, that they will be tortured or killed- does anybody really care? If you play with the big boys, be prepared to play for keeps. These are people who want to die- I say, why not? This way, we will clear out Gitmo, keep track of these people, and if they are killed by their home country, oh well.
This is a problem of Barama’s own making- he should not have opened his big mouth until he had a plan, but now he is being told by both Republican and Democrat lawmakers that these terrorists should not be put into prisons in their states, so his options are limited.
Some of the liberals are saying that some of these detainees are completely innocent- who truly believes this? Really? That is an assumption, and we all know what happens when you assume. These liberal idiots are even saying that we should admit these people into the U.S. and give them welfare, so they can get used to life in the United States. Great, as long as they can live in Georgie Soros’ home, or next door to Pelosi- they can exchange waterboarding techniques.
I personally do not care about the detainees welfare- at all. Their lives are so far down my list of concerns, that they don’t even make page 23. I do care about the security of these United States, and I am more than willing to tag these POS terrorists, and release them back into the thick of things just to see where they go.
I do know one thing- the CIA needs no handcuffs on its ability to find and kill these terrorists, and Barama has now taken some of our abilities off of the table in a misguided and idiotic attempt to make the terrorists like us. What a canard- does ANYBODY without dementia believe this is a good idea?
If this is what our Pretender-in-Chief has in mind for prisoners, then I recommend a no prisoners policy- just make sure these people can’t harm us ever again.
There is one sure way to do that, and it’ll save us space in our prisons and be able to close Gitmo- just shoot them all. If you don’t have the guts to do that, then you had better re-think the Gitmo option, because doing nothing is not an option we have the luxury of considering.
Kind and fuzzy is not going to cut it either.
Come on- pick an option- grow some stones and quit looking at your tele- prompter- think for yourself, but by God, think of the safety of this country before you open your mouth and sound like an idiot.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: gitmo, GPS, liberal idiocy, terrorists
Where Does The Money Go?
May 5, 2009 Political
Where did the last war appropriations go?
The Democrats are asking for 94.2 BILLION dollars in emergency funds. Most of the money will go for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which begs the question; What happened to all the money that they already appropriated for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Obama asked for a lot of money (83.4 BILLION) to finish out the year and indicated that this is what was needed and now we are being told they need even more?
Were not these the same Democrats who has seizures every time George Bush asked for more money for the wars? I was under the impression that the sainted won knew what he wanted and that he would be drawing down our efforts and now we see that they want even more money. This is not right and it will only add to our deficit.
Don’t get me wrong, if the troops need the money then they should get it but who is running this show and why do they need so much more after they received a great deal only a few weeks ago?
Did the Democrats use it to pay off their buddies who oppose the war? Are they spending it on ACORN? Where did the money go?
Never let a crisis like the ginned up Swine Flu crisis go to waste
Of course they have 2 BILLION dollars thrown in there to combat the flu. I told you that this Swine Flu was another crisis they could not let go to waste. They are going to pass it on to the drug companies and the researchers. They hyped up this thing and now they are taking advantage of it.
They should submit the flu request as a separate item. This is the same old DC, wrap it all into one and pass it. Don’t let the crisis go to waste.
How much does it cost to close a prison
Then there is 80 MILLION dollars to close Gitmo. Why in the name of all that is holy do they need that kind of money? The place has an operating budget and Obama wants to get rid of the terrorist scum living there. I know he is having difficulty finding them homes and he is reverting to the Bush policies that he bashed so often but why does he need this money?
It cannot be that tough to close down the prison once the criminals are gone. Once you ship them off to the people who are going to give them homes (everyone loves Obama so that should be no problem) then all they have to do is close the place down. Pack stuff up and bring our troops home.
Why was this not included when he decided to close the place? Did they just figure out it would cost something to do that or did they just figure that Gitmo would be a good place to launder money?
This seems fishy to me. I would not be surprised if Obama is using the money to build the terrorists their own little community in the US so they will have a place to go.
These people keep on spending and the bill is going to come due. The Chinese are not buying much of our debt and the piper will want to be paid.
Economic collapse awaits with hyperinflation that will make Carter look like a financial genius.
This article indicates Obama’s request for the 80 MILLION was denied but the story discusses even more spending on things like the Pakistan economy…
Source:
Breitbart
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: flu crisis, gitmo, Obama, spending bills, taxes, war funding
War Deaths Increase Under Obama
May 3, 2009 Political
April was the deadliest month in seven months as US fatalities in Iraq rose to 18. When George Bush was president the monthly war dead totals were plastered all over the MSM until they drastically decreased. At that time the MSM ignored the totals because the facts could have been viewed as favorable and hurt their chances of getting Obama elected.
Since Obama has been in office the credit for good developments has been given to him even if he opposed the act or had nothing to do with it. Bad things, on the other hand, are blamed on George W. Bush.
Well, Bush has been out of office for over 100 days now and that means Obama is responsible for what is happening in Iraq. In April the death toll for US troops rose to 18 and that rise is Obama’s fault. He has been parading around apologizing for America and placing the blame for the world’s woes on the US rather than where it belongs. He has demonstrated that he is weak, popular, but weak, and the leaders of other countries recognize that. Our enemies recognize that and they will exploit it.
Obama, like many of his ilk, fails to recognize the greatness of America and the fact that without America many countries would have ceased to exist or would be part of another right now. Instead, he apologizes and shows the people who would like to rid the world of us that we are led by a weakling who would rather kiss an ass than kick it.
The uptick in deaths is all on Obama. He has been ambiguous in his plans and he has shown the world that he does not have the will to fight when necessary.
I know, the libs will tell me that Obama was decisive with regard to the Somali pirates who were sent to Allah with a bullet to the brain. The pundits said that Obama showed he was large and in charge and that he was ready to be the Commander in Chief. Right. The military made sure the restrictive conditions that were placed on them were used to their advantage.
The left must have misunderstood what Obama said about the issue. His teleprompter puts it this way:
Wait a minute now; you misunderstood. I didn’t authorize ATTACKS on the pirates. I authorized A TAX on the pirates.
Let’s see if the MSM looks at the uptick in deaths as an Obama issue or if they ignore it. Since they tend to ignore the negative and accentuate the positive I have a feeling where this will end up.
Then again, they might just be a bit too busy worrying about Obama’s decision to possibly reopen military tribunals at Gitmo.
It sure sucks for him to have to do things Bush did. I guess he is finding out that things are a little different on the inside and that it is easy to talk a wonderful game but carrying through is another story. Talk is cheap.
I wonder if the ACLU will get its panties in a wad over this since the Sainted Won (a fellow Socialist) is at the helm.
Others:
Stop the ACLU
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: combat deaths, gitmo, Iraq, Obama, terror