The British have a way with words

The Daily Mail ( UK National Paper) wrote this editorial about Obama on 1/6/2009. (for confirmation, Google "London Daily Mail Obama's Victory") Obama's Victory --

A British view

An editorial from the London Daily Mail

A victory for the hysterical Oprah Winfrey, the mad racist preacher Jeremiah Wright, the mainstream media who abandoned any sense of objectivity long ago, Europeans who despise America largely because they depend on her, comics who claim to be dangerous and fearless but would not dare attack genuinely powerful special interest groups.

A victory for Obama-worshippers everywhere. A victory for the cult of the cult. A man who has done little with his life but has written about his achievements as if he had found the cure for cancer in between winning a marathon and building a nuclear reactor with his teeth. Victory for style over substance, hyperbole over history, rabble-raising over reality. A victory for Hollywood , the most dysfunctional community in the world. Victory for Streisand, Spielberg, Soros and Sarandon. Victory for those who prefer welfare to will and interference to independence. For those who settle for group think and herd mentality rather than those who fight for individual initiative and the right to be out of step with meager political fashion. Victory for a man who is no friend of freedom. He and his people have already stated that media has to be controlled so as to be balanced, without realizing the extraordinary irony within that statement. Like most liberal zealots, the Obama worshippers constantly speak of Fox and Limbaugh, when the vast bulk of television stations and newspapers are drastically liberal and anti-conservative.

Senior Democrat Chuck Schumer said that just as pornography should be censored, so should talk radio. In other words, one of the few free and open means of popular expression may well be cornered and beaten by bullies who even in triumph cannot tolerate any criticism and opposition. A victory for those who believe the state is better qualified to raise children than the family, for those who prefer teachers' unions to teaching and for those who are naively convinced that if the West is sufficiently weak towards its enemies, war and terror will dissolve as quickly as the tears on the face of a leftist celebrity. A victory for social democracy even after most of Europe has come to the painful conclusion that social democracy leads to mediocrity, failure, unemployment, inflation, higher taxes and economic stagnation. A victory for intrusive lawyers, banal sentimentalists, social extremists and urban snobs.

Congratulations America !

Hat tip to Jimmy M

Yes. Children of all ages have got what they wanted.

It is to be seen if we want they have have got.

Where do we get such people as Susan Crawford?

That question used to be reserved for heroes. I now use it for Susan Crawford, a person so confused over the issues that she has decided not prosecute a terrorist because:

"We tortured [Mohammed al-]Qahtani," said Susan J. Crawford, in her first interview since being named convening authority of military commissions by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates in February 2007. "His treatment met the legal definition of torture. And that's why I did not refer the case" for prosecution.

Listen to these terrible things that were done to him.

....interrogating him with techniques that included sustained isolation, sleep deprivation, nudity and prolonged exposure to cold, leaving him in a "life-threatening condition."

I would love to have a chat with her. The first thing I would say is:

"Susan. Torture is having to decide whether you want to burn to death in an office building or jump to your death."

Where do we get these people? I pray that we find out and send them back. The country cannot afford them.

Link

I am sure the Obama adminsitration will find a place for her.

Will Smith does propaganda for Obama

Hollywood film star Will Smith has staked his claim to play Barack Obama in a movie about his rise to become US President and America’s first black leader."

Don't you think it would be better to wait and see what he does before a movie is made? Making a movie now strikes me as pure propaganda.

And it is in the same vein as this. Link

Obama is not going to take over the country.

The country is going to give itself to Obama.

And isn't that always a dictator's path to power?

Israel attacks UN enclave

I wonder why??

Link

Weapons found in Mosque.
Hat tip to Larry P.

Waxman wants to pass GW law....

Stuff you couldn't make up, yet it's true.

WASHINGTON – The chairman of a key House committee says he wants to pass a climate change bill before Memorial Day.

California Rep. Henry Waxman said Thursday the environment and U.S. economy depend on congressional action to confront the threat of climate change. Waxman, chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, spoke as he opened Congress' first hearing on climate legislation.

Link

That ranks right up there with Barney Frank telling us last July that Fannie and Freddie were okay on going...

These people have no shame....

Wicked: Coldest Temps In Over A Decade
First Day With A Low Colder Than -10 In Chicago Since 1999

Link

But if you want to find dumb in copious quantities.... visit the districts that elected this pair of know nothings... Now that is dumb.

In the meantime we have the following.

Here’s what you need to know: if an increase in carbon dioxide (CO2) is directly related, i.e. causes changes in the Earth’s temperature, there would be a direct correlation between the two. As CO2 rose, we would see a comparable rise in the Earth’s temperature. This correlation does not exist.

Global warming liars, however, insist that CO2 builds up on the atmosphere over a 50 to 250 year period, but this is untrue. “Every year around April, increased CO2 absorption by plants in the Northern Hemisphere starts reducing the CO2 in the atmosphere,” notes Ashworth, “and the reduction continues until around mid-to-late August when plants start to go dormant.”

If you want to see the chart that shows CO2 lagging temperature increases, go this source and then click on the "paper on CO2 written by" Robert Ashworth link.

And it shows a simple truth. If CO2 causes global warming, the build up would occur before the warming. It doesn't.

Game. Set. Match. And would the stupid people please leave the stands? The clean up crew needs to clean up the mess you have made before it kills us all.

Torture, Waterboarding and Intelligence

The Left is now going into a tizzy with the expectation that Obama will immediately close GITMO, and even a bigger tizzy over what is to be done the prisoners held there. A secondary issue is that Newsweek, of all places, has now started hedging around over torture, or at least the accuracy of the results of what they call torture.

An example of this is posted in Talk Left. The following is an expansion of a comment I published there this morning. The Newsweek article is here.

Definitions - Waterboarding, sleep deprivation, loud noise, temperature extremes and insulting cultural mores are not torture.

Waterboarding is rigorous interrogation that should not be routinely used, but reserved for situations where the expected results are important, and should be supervised at the highest levels.

I provide that so someone can't later claim I am for actual torture. Having defined that, I will say again that information obtained, either true or false is helpful, and that all information can be vetted for accuracy. And even then the results may not be 100% accurate.

Let me provide an example.
“Son, where did you and Bob go last night?”
“Oh, we went to the movie.”
“Was it good? What’d you see?”
“Marley.”

Now you, knowing that Marley is no longer being shown at any movie theaters know that you have been lied to. It also lends credence to the information that someone has given you that they saw Bob and your son cruising in an area that is known to be used for street dope sales.

Intelligence information does not always consist of, a la Jack Bauer, "The bomb is in a trash can at 24th and Main!" It requires careful putting together of a mosaic of information to reach a conclusion.

But we all make decisions based on partial information on many things. Most of them are not important, some are more so.

The Doctor says, “We need to do exploratory surgery. Now, we have had good results, but there is some hazard…” Should you decline or decide to accept the risk to allow an early diagnosis and treatment?

And if you want to really see an example, just read the warnings and side effects of various drugs.

The Plame affair, to return more closely to the issues of intelligence, is instructive. Wilson was sent to Niger to determine if the reports that Iraq had purchased uranium was true. He reported to the CIA that Iraq had not, but that the ex-PM of Niger had said that they had sought to do so. The CIA found that this information was useful because it confirmed other information.

Wilson later claimed that the purchasing documents were false, although he admitted that he may have misspoke to the Washington Post because he could not known that since he had not seen the document. And they were false, but of course that wasn’t the point, said point being lost in all the brouhaha over Mrs. Wilson’s name.

The “attempt” to was correct and confirmed that Saddam was determined to produce nuclear weapons. We now know that he had not yet done so, but we also know that he had plans in place and was working towards doing that as soon as sanctions were removed.

Senate Intelligence Committee report.

As UN Chief Inspector David Kay said, “….now believes that any weapons the Iraqis had were probably destroyed before 1998. "There were continuing clandestine activities but increasingly driven more by corruption than driven by purposeful directed weapons programmes," argued the 63-year-old former diplomat and sleuth.”

Guardian article.

How does the thought of a corrupt regime selling nuclear and biological weapons to al-Qaida sound?

But even prior to that comes the question, how should the prisoner be designated?
It is obvious to anyone, I believe; if the prisoner is a prisoner of war, then the GC rules apply. And if they fall into certain other categories the GC rules apply.
But these prisoners meet no category of the GC. They are not POW's. They are illegal combatants, terrorists, guerrillas. There is no nation state to return them to after hostilities cease. There is no army that they wear a uniform for. When you set them free they are apt to attack again.

Citing a memo prepared for him by his staff, Hunter proceeded to discuss some of the at least 10 detainees who have been released from Guantanamo Bay, or Gitmo, only to re-join the fight against the U.S. coalition bringing democracy to Afghanistan…….

One of the more notable cases involved Mohammed Ismail (search), one of two teens held at Gitmo until he was let go last year. He was recaptured four months later fighting American troops in Afghanistan. The memo notes that at the time of his capture Ismail was carrying a letter "confirming his status as a Taliban member in good standing."

"One of the most publicized cases, Mr. Ismail, was released to great fanfare at Guantanamo," Hunter said. Ismail "did a press conference at which he thanked the United States for educating him, because we teach them to read and write at Guantanamo."

Link to source.

It would be interesting to see what would have happened had the Bush administration designated these people POWs. Under GC rules they would be retained until hostilities ended, which in this undeclared war could be years and years.

If that had happened, would we now be seeing the Left claim they are not POWs and demand they have Combatant Status Review Tribunals to see if they should be released? (That is how the process works.)

Link to source.

I mention the above because until you decide that, you can go no further, unless you are of the opinion everyone is to be treated as a POW, except differently.

The "difference" is a requirement for a full up US type criminal justice trial with all the rules of evidence, etc.

The above, I believe, is a accurate statement of the beliefs of the Left.

The result of those beliefs, I believe, has now dawned on some of the media, as well as Obama and some of his staff. Said result is that guilty terrorists may well be set free to kill again. And that information obtained through rigorous interrogation is useful and is needed in what is a guerilla war.

So with Bush gone you are apt to see a good bit of twisting and turning as the realities of the world sinks in, and that the responsibility now rests with Obama. He will reap the success and he will reap the failures. So have all Presidents.

Bits and pieces and Dirty Harry and Bush and Monroe and Mathews

The Chosen one continues his march into the hearts of his countrymen, women and Chris Mathews. I read somewhere Chris will get to interview his idol. I am sure the questions will approach the intensity of a 14 year old boy interviewing Marilyn Monroe... leg tingle and all.

Hat tip to ellensplace.

Eastwood's latest movie, Dirty Harry on blood pressure medicine, continues to collect raves from the critics. The plot is familiar. Harry is a grump. Dummies bother Harry.
Harry kicks butt. Harry is tamed by wise and kind immigrants.......

Has Gollywood ever made a movie in which the immigrants are not wise, kind and hard working?

From the state of Washington, aka another place Democrats stole an election, Greg W sends a few jabs at lawyers. My personal favorite is this one.

ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?
WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam?

I just wandered by the kitchen TV and heard Bob Betchel, Democratic something or other, saying kind things about Bush. You know you are totally beat when someone like Betchel says nice things about you.

Bush's press conference yesterday was somewhat interesting. He actually made a few hard points and defended himself.. To damn bad he didn't do that over the past eight years. I found this bit especially funny.

I appreciate — I do appreciate working with you. My friends say, what is it like to deal with the press corps? I said, these are just people trying to do the best they possibly can.

Yes, W. The best to prove that you were criminal, stupid and otherwise bad.

And then this one, speaking of Hussein.

And then he’ll come back and go through the inauguration and then he’ll walk in the Oval Office, and there will be a moment when the responsibilities of the President land squarely on his shoulders.

Yes, and that scares the hell out of me.

And it is hard to dispute that Bush just doesn't understand why the Repubs are in serious shape.

Q — that you think the Republican Party needs to be more inclusive. Who needs to hear that message inside the Republican Party?

THE PRESIDENT: You see, I am concerned that, in the wake of the defeat, that the temptation will be to look inward and to say, well, here’s a litmus test you must adhere to.

This party will come back. But the party’s message has got to be that different points of view are included in the party.

That's fine, W. But McCain tried to out Democrat a Democrat and as the saying goes, "You can't out piss a skunk." People don't vote for Democrat A vs Democrat B in the General election. The primaries were over months before.

BTW - I read somewhere that Hussein will be sworn in as Barack Hussein Obama. So much for "don't insult him by using his middle name," eh? I wonder if it is possible for all those on McCain's side who counseled him to run off people who called him, "Hussein" understand how stupid they were and how badly they got beat.

And just one more, and this one made me ache all over.

THE PRESIDENT: Gotcha. I have often said that history will look back and determine that which could have been done better, or, you know, mistakes I made. Clearly putting a “Mission Accomplished” on a aircraft carrier was a mistake. It sent the wrong message. We were trying to say something differently, but nevertheless, it conveyed a different message. Obviously, some of my rhetoric has been a mistake.

No, W. What you should have said back then was, "I was saying thank you to the ship's crew for a successful job. And if you have a problem with that, to heck with you."

George, dear George. You are the President who will go down in history as proving that you cannot pet snakes.