Saturday, January 13, 2007

UFOs over Iran - Exclusive Photos!


The American Thinker takes note of a report of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) over Iran. This exclusive photo was received from a confidential source -- okay, it was either Reuters or CBS, I can't remember which -- and is seen on this site first.


"It's the craziest thing, but I think I recognize those flying objects!"


Hat tip: Larwyn

Also see:
Ace of Spades, Auspundits, BetBender, Gateway Pundit, Jawa Report, Kamangir, Regime Change Iran

Thursday, January 11, 2007

Don't question the Sellouts' Patriotism!


The New York Times had a succinct reaction to President Bush's speech: "President Bush told Americans last night that failure in Iraq would be a disaster. The disaster is Mr. Bush’s war, and he has already failed."


In an interview with National Public Radio Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) called the Iraq strategy, "the worst foreign policy blunder" in American history.


Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) noted, "American servicemen have been there for four years, longer than World War II." Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) offered a similar sentiment on NPR several days ago.


Their interviewers suffered from temporary amnesia. They failed to mention that World War II ended abruptly with a pair of nuclear explosions after millions had died, including hundreds of thousands of Americans.


This morning's Dallas Morning News had a slightly different take: "No patriot can hope for [President Bush] to fail. There is far too much at stake for America and the world."


Well, Morning News, this posse of crack military experts -- including the Times, Pelosi, and Kennedy -- have already pre-judged the strategy. And they believe it's a "disaster." By doing so, they continue to root for America's failure.


Leading up to 9/11, we followed the Democratic gameplan for dealing with Islamofascism. It didn't work.


No Democrat has articulated a coherent plan for dealing with the aftermath of a pullout from Iraq. A nuclear Iran. Or a resurgent Syria. Where are the Democrats' plans?


And the mainstream media studiously ignores the rise of religious totalitarianism.


George W. Bush is the only political figure standing resolutely against these extremists.


George W. Bush remembers 9/11. The Democrats have already forgotten; they've washed away that memory in a craven grab at political power. And, no, they don't support the troops.


As Carter's cowardice against the Ayatollah in 1979 emboldened the rise of religious extremists; as Clinton's cut-and-run tactics in Mogadishu inspired Osama bin Laden; so too will the Democrats' "redeployment" inspire a new generation of unrest.

You'd think the Democrats would have learned by now: appeasement and surrender don't work against suicidal extremists. Killing them, however, appears to solve the problem.


Iran's Ahmadinejad is either insane or deadly serious about the return of the Mahdi. In either case, he's a madman with nukes.


I have never been as disgusted with an American political party as I am with today's crop of Democrats.

Weeks ago, Pelosi and Reid were among those calling for a surge. Now that the President is for it, they're against it.


Today's Democratic leadership are not patriots. They are craven partisans. If this crew were in charge during World War II, we'd be living in the world that Philip K. Dick described in Man in the High Castle.


The results of leaving the Middle East in tatters will be devastating. We are entering the nuclear age of terrorism. Failing to act now will leave our children and grandchildren with a catastrophic legacy. And we'll have the party of sellouts -- and the likes of the New York Times -- to thank for the fallout. And when I refer to 'fallout', I mean it literally.

Don't miss:
A Blog for All, Anchoress, Blue Crab Boulevard, Captain's Quarters, Don Surber
Hang Right Politics, Hugh Hewitt, OTB, Samantha Burns
STACLU, Wizbang

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Peters and Crittenden assemble the puzzle pieces


President Bush patiently explained tonight why Iraq is crucial to the future of America. The Democrats, on the other hand, insist that there's nothing much at stake in the Middle East.

Fortunately, Ralph Peters and Jules Crittenden have assembled the puzzle pieces. Writing in The New York Post, Peters describes the little-publicized U.S. smackdown of Al Qaeda in Somalia (hat tip: Powerline):

We'll get you. No matter how long it takes, we'll get you. That's the message our special-operations forces just sent to al Qaeda fugitives in Somalia -


and everywhere else...


...With AC-130 gunships pounding terrorist hide-outs and training sites in the badlands near the Kenyan border, we may have nailed senior al Qaeda figures involved in bombing our embassies in Nairobi and Dar Es Salaam. At the very least, we killed some really bad hombres...


As always, terrorist propagandists will claim that only innocent civilians suffered, and media sympathizers will echo their nonsense. Fortunately, though, most pro-terrorist journalists and "human-rights advocates" are preoccupied just now with the awful mistreatment of poor, misunderstood Saddam Hussein...


...Our special-ops forces are getting their revenge: After Army Rangers and Delta Force troops won a hands-down victory in the streets of Mogadishu back in 1993, President Bill Clinton sold them out (as the Pelosi-Reid Democrats threaten to do to our soldiers in Iraq on a greater scale). Now they're killing al Qaeda fanatics and their local allies with the full support of a new Somali government...


...I can guarantee two things to Post readers: First, Somalia and the world are better off with the Islamists on the run and living in terror themselves, and, second, our special operations forces - from all of the services - are greater heroes than the history books or Hollywood films will ever be able to capture...

You've got to love Peters. That final line is one you'll never read in the New York Times.


With the arrival of the USS Ramage guided missile destroyer, there were five major warships off Somalia: the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower aircraft carrier, the USS Bunker Hill and USS Anzio guided missile cruisers, and the USS Ashland amphibious landing ship.

The Ashland might be used as a brig should any Al Qaeda be captured alive. Let's hope not. That might result in the unpleasant, nerve-wracking sight of Ted Kennedy and Cindy Sheehan joining hands outside Guantanamo while singing Kumbaya.

And Jules Crittenden, who's been on such a roll of late you might as well call him butter, assembles the final puzzle pieces. He puts it in terms so simple, even Dennis Kucinich* should be able to understand the basic concepts:

The ISG correctly recognized that the attitudes of Iran and Syria are key to achieving stability and peace in Iraq... We need to talk to Iran, most immediately. The conversation starts like this:


The Mahdi Army is engaged and destroyed. Without mercy, without ceasefire, without deals this time. Moqtada al-Sadr may be smart enough not to create a convenient provocation. That's OK. He is the criminal head of an armed criminal force. We create the provocation. He may be killed, or if it is deemed inadvisable to martyr him like his old man, he can be thrown into Saddam's old cell.


"Iran. We are speaking to you... Do you hear us?"


The aircraft carrier group Eisenhower has been diverted to Somalia, but that is temporary. Soon the carrier group Stennis will join Eisenhower in the Persian Gulf. Two decks, two fleets. ... So many aircraft, so many cruise missiles.


"Iran, we have more that we would like to say to you... Do you hear us?"


If Iran proves to be hard of hearing, we can increase the volume. Perhaps with attention to Iran's oil-production infrastructure.


"Iran. Do you understand what we are saying to you?"


It is important to speak to people in a language that they understand.

The ISG called for a phased withdrawal from Iraq. Agreed. This is an important goal. The ISG's has-beens, as they called themselves, just forgot to mention Phase One. The victory part...

As always, read the whole thing.


Hat tip: Larwyn

Oven-baked good readin', just like Mama used to make:
A Blog for All, Anchoress, Blue Crab Boulevarrd, Don Surber, Hugh Hewitt, OTB, Sister Toldjah, STACLU, Wizbang

* And be sure not to miss Hugh Hewitt's sublime roast of Dennis Kucinich. The only things missing were Jeffrey Ross, Abe Vigoda, and some cigars.

Tuesday, January 09, 2007

Critical Pages are Missing from the Democratic Website


Jules Crittenden performs an admirable service as he's found, organized, and linked to all of the Democratic position papers on Iraq and the War on Terror. They're just a... click... away...

Wait. Just. A. Second. Something's wrong. Jules' links aren't working.

Tell you what. Let's go to the official Democratic website. We're certainly going to be able to find the Democrats' plans for the future of Iraq, the war on terror, and the combatting the rise of global "Islamofascism."

I'll just search for democratic plans for Iraq...


Hmmm. No results found. Okay, I'll search for the Democrats' strategy for fighting the war on terror...


Odd - still no results. How about just one word: Islamofascism, which is the word that the President and others have used to describe Islamic radicals who believe in governing countries through strict interpretation of religious law.


Nada. What the heck is going on? Okay, last try: the Democrats plans for the future of Iraq.


Eeesh.

This must be a software bug on the Democratic website. Their search function doesn't appear to work. It just has to be a bug. No modern political party could screech and whine about Iraq; advocate for retreat and appeasement; and then have virtually no strategy whatsoever for dealing with the aftermath of a pullout.

Or for combatting the global rise of Islamofascism.

Or offering a strategy for the war on terror.

Right? I mean, c'mon, seriously? Hey, I'm serious here!



Hat tip: Larwyn

Also don't miss:
Anchoress, BlogCritics, Moderate Voice, Muara Teweh, Right State, Peace & Freedom, Rick Moran, Sister Toldjah and Sister Toldjah again, Wizbang

Monday, January 08, 2007

My Newspaper: buh bye, legacy media!



The Fedex truck pulled up this morning.


They dropped off my newspaper replacement. It's a very specialized printer called NewsPrinter.


You plug it in and then attach the USB jack to your computer.


Then watch your computer monitor.


A really cool application automatically starts and it interviews you. It asks just a few questions. What time each morning do you want your newspaper printed? How many pages? And do you want to preview an on-screen copy?


If you're okay with the layout, you quit. Elapsed time since Fedex arrived? About four minutes. When you wake up in the morning, your newspaper is already printed and waiting for you at the printer. And it's up-to-the-minute.


The software can even tell where you're located, so the Local section will default to your area.


Want to change the defaults? The software can actually step you through an easy configuration. Need coverage of your favorite football or baseball team? Just choose the team's logo from the list. The neatest thing about NewsPrinter? You can completely customize every aspect of the newspaper down to the tiniest detail.


Getting older? You can completely adjust the size of the typeface and headlines.


So who makes money from NewsPrinter? How's the business-model work? I'm not really sure, but the printer manufacturer didn't charge me for the printer. I pay for paper (of course) and special inkjet cartridges, the price of which I'll admit are slightly inflated.


The content is provided by blogging networks and, I think, the McClatchy news service. The news service has a partnership with the printer manufacturer and gets a cut of NewsPrinter ink cartridges.


I have two words for legacy media and the New York Times, specifically.

Buh. Bye.


Also see:
American Thinker: Thomas Lifson likens Time Magazine to the Titannic in Moving the Deck Chairs.

Author's note: I'm aware of emerging technologies like digital paper. I just don't think these are quite mature enough to replace the hardcopy newspaper quite yet. Maybe someday.

Sunday, January 07, 2007

The Democrats' First 100 Hours, Part I: Surrender


Gateway Pundit offers a translation of Nancy Pelosi's demands that the United States surrender in Iraq:

...Not content with mass murder and genocide in Southeast Asia after America's cessation of aid behind a democratic Congress in the 1970's... ...Speaker Pelosi paved the way this morning for the next killing fields... This time in Iraq.


Nancy Pelosi announced today that Democrats do not intend to fund the war in Iraq if they decide it is not worth it. If this sounds familiar, Democrats did the same thing years ago in Southeast Asia...

And Jules Crittenden describes the inevitable outcome of such a foolish plan.

[The Democratic Option is:] Pull out. Achieve short-term gratification for those who believe our absence from Iraq will solve our problems. Watch Iraq descend into further violence. Watch a nuclear-armed Iran come to dominate Iraq and the world's richest oil fields.


...Maybe we'll be restored to our national senses, as we were a decade after Vietnam, when we woke up and realized we never really had the luxury of disengaging from the fight... This time, it will be harder... The only good side to this is the army gets to rest. Don't count on the Democratic Congress to refit or build it up, or to do anything but dither when we need to use it again.


...I predict a dark age, in which brutal second-rate powers such as Russia, China, Iran and North Korea do what they choose to whom they choose without restraint. An age of modern warlords, with no over-arching, feared power to keep them in check. We can watch the sick man that is Europe slowly succumb. We can watch small free nations try to fend for themselves. We can await the inevitable nuclear crisis.


Does that sound at all medieval or apocalyptic? It is. Don't think we can't go back to that... Does it sound overly melodramatic and alarmist? If so, you're a fool with no understanding of history...


Wait! You're saying that brilliant media personalities like Rosie O'Donnell and Joy Behar are uneducated buffoons who have never read a history book in their lives? Do tell.

And the Democrats' House Intelligence Chairman, Silvestre Reyes, doesn't know the difference between Sunni and Shia?


Well, what could possibly go wrong with the Democratic strategy of retreat as Iran's mullahs prepare for the arrival of the Mahdi?


I could think of a couple of things, but maybe I'm just a pessimist who's read too much history.


Oven-baked good readin', just like Mama used to make:
Hang Right Politics, Rick Moran, Riehl World View, RWN, STACLU