Cnn National Security Debate: Candidates fall short

 Wolf Blitzer asked good questions and persevered with follow ups without overt gotcha questions. On the down side, he went to breaks promising to return to the question and get a broader response, then asked a new question after the break.  I wonder whether someone higher up was dictating that behavior or Wolf was being loose with his rhetoric. 

    The major difference between this debate and the AFA debate last Saturday is that the entire debate was devoted to national security issues.  Better late than never.

    I readily admit my opposition to Huntsman, Perry, Paul & Romney, but even a stopped clock is right twide every 24 hours.  Huntsman said that we need to find a balance between security and liberty and that the state and federal governments must cooperate against terrorists. I do not view security against terror attacks and liberty as antagonists. I see the former as a necessary foundation for the latter.  Citizens of states and members of organizations inimical to America should not expect perfect privacy nor should their contacts and close associates.

    When the CIA find names, addresses, phone numbers and email addresses on documents in terrorist training camps, or in the possession of captured terrorists, exploiting that information with surveillance, wire taps & intercepts  is not an assault on or threat to liberty, it is essential to national security. That is why I support maintaining and strengthening the Patriot Act. 

    In the most recent bomb plot case, the FBI declined to get involved, leaving the case to the locals. I doubt that FBI participation would have made a major difference, but I don't have all the facts. What would have happened if the NYC PD shared their attitude about the suspect and dropped the investigation?

    Huntsman stated the obvious: that sanctions against Iran & Syria won't work because of Chinese & Russian opposition. He is right about that.  I am firmly convinced that sanctions would fail even if they had global support & cooperation in their enforcement.

    At the end of the debate, Huntsman said named China as the major unrecognized foreign  threat and unemployment & debt as domestic threats stemming from a lack of leadership. He is right about that but events and trends in Latin America, particularly alliance with Iran and Hezbollah also require attention.

    Huntsman favored foresight over hindsight, saying that history will tell the outcome of the "Arab spring". He seemed to be critical of President Obama's neglect of the Green Revolution in Iran and intervention in Libya.  He implied that we should be more deliberate. I say, that when two Islamic enemies of ours fight each other, we should be spectators, not in the corner of either.

    Huntsman said that terrorism is permanent, meaning that it poses a continuing threat for the long term. Of course, he was stating the obvious.  We need to look beyond the burning trees to the burning forest;    bring on the bulldozers,  

    He said that the deficit hampers growth, which is true. Unfortunately, growth is the only way out of the deficit.  Wasteful spending must be stopped.

     Asked about the efficacy of drone attacks in Pakistan in defeating al-Qaeda, Huntsman said that Washington is dysfunctional, that we need a Washington that works and should bring our troops home from Afghanistan. He restated the obvious about Pakistan without proposing a solution. Of course, there is no solution, short of the ultimate solution. which nobody is willing to implement.

    Paul called the Patriot Act "unpatriotic", that it exchanges liberty for security.  Paul wants to know what we'd do if a terrorist looked like Tim McVeigh.  That straw man argument must be refuted. Tim's partner had a Filipino wife; their test bombs did not work until after the partner visited his wife and presumably met with al-Qaeda bomb makers to get technical advice.  The infamous "third terrorist" was described as looking like an Iraqi. 

    How many of the recent terrorists were not Muslims and either Asiatic or Arabian?  Yes, they are recruiting Caucasians, but those terrorists all have one thing in common. They are Muslims.  Profiling is not the answer.  Pat downs are not the answer. Body scanners are not the answer. Identify Muslims and exclude them from mass transit terminals & vehicles.  If you want to prevent terrorism, get the Muslims out of here, away from us.   We need a candidate and nominee who will abandon pc and state the obvious truth.  Islamic terrorism is a function  of Islamic doctrine; texts & teachings, not age, race, gender or national origin.  Allah said that he would "cast terror". Allah said that he "cast terror". Allah said that believers are only those who "fight in his cause", "killing others and being killed".  Moe said that he was made victorious with terror. Muslims get Brownie Points for "any step" taken to "injure or enrage" disbelievers.  What part of that do the candidates not comprehend?  Has any of them read the Qur'an & hadith?  Terrorism is an act of worship! If you need to obtain a clue, read the confession of Khalid Sheik Mohammed & associates.

    Paul said that he would not participate in an Israeli attack on Iran's nuke project, that we need to get out of Israel's way, mentioning their supposed possession of nuclear armed missiles.  Who will be the first to explore the ramifications of that last bit?  Green light, anyone?  That begged for a follow up question,

`   Paul referred to the Iraq & Afghanistan as needless and unnecessary wars.  When a nation sponsors an attack that kills 3000 and does billions of dollars in property damage, retaliation is necessary to deter further attacks. Exterminating the principals who dispatched  the attackers and their support network is necessary to prevent further attacks.   Retaliating against Afghanistan & Iraq was necessary but insufficient.  Peace and security will not be established without the total elimination of the root cause of terrorism: Allah's word and those who believe it.  Unfortunately for those who love to chant "racist, bigot, Nazi, hater, Islamophobe", there is ample evidence to substantiate my statement of objective factual reality.  If you doubt this, obtain a clue from Allah's perfected, immutable word: 8:12, 39,  57, 60 , 65, 9:5,29, 38, 39, 111, 120, 123, 33:26, 27, 59:2, 13, 61:10-12 & Sahih Bukhari 4.52.220 from whence issue war & terror. Reasonable and rational readers will click those links and scroll down to the successive ayat; bigots will not.  I can point a fool to wisdom but I can't make him read. 

    Perry would privatize the TSA and strengthen the Patriot act. Not without a super majority of Conservatives in both houses! He says that we should remain involved with foreign aid, but not write blank checks, apparently feeling heat for suggestions of zero sum foreign aid budgets. He wants to use every possible sanction against Iran, including cutting off the central bank.  The problem is that sanctions do not work. Iran will have enough fissile material to produce a bomb within one year. Sanctions take months to implement, running us out of time without accomplishing anything.

    Romney wants a slower drawdown in Afghanistan instead of a precipitous withdrawal. He wants to drag them toward modernity. He wants to prevent Afghanistan from reverting to a launching pad for terrorism.  If we stay, they bleed us to death in a war of attrition, exploiting domestic impatience.  If we leave, they return to status quo ante.  We are in this bind because Shrub needed to nuke Afghanistan but invaded instead. Romney appears to be oblivious to the fact that nothing can be accomplished while the population and government of Afghanistan remain Islamic.

    Romney cites failed leadership; how about failure to submit a budget?  He says that cutting men and material weakens our defense. Kind of obvious, ain't it? 
    Bachmann says that terrorists should not be Mirandized and that Obama has turned interrogation over to the ACLU.  She calls Pakistan the "epicenter of terrorism" and unstable, mentioning that there are fifteen vulnerable nuclear weapons sites.  She would continue aid but wants more return on investment; no "blank check".

    Bachmann opposes amnesty for illegal aliens and the Dream Act. She favors visas for highly skilled technicians.She agrees with Gingrich on the urgent necessity of energy independence so that we can overcome the threat of oil cut off from Iran. She says that Obama's failed policy of appeasement has changed the course of history. She declares Iran's promise to eradicate Israel to be real, not an idle threat.

    Bachman said that Obama is giving away our victory in Iraq.  She lists al-Shebab as an emerging threat already manifesting in her state. .  .

     Cain. wants to keep and improve the Patriot Act and agreed with Santorum on profiling. He would privatize the TSA. He wants to use every means possible to identify terrorists.  How do you determine which skunk will spray or which snake will bite?  You avoid all of them, don't you?  What common association did all the recent attackers share? 

    Cain's response when asked about helping Israel neutralize Iran's nuclear bomb program was that he would join the attack if Israel had good intelligence on the locations of the facilities, a good plan, good chance of success and definition of victory. He opposes precipitous withdrawal from Afghanistan.  He wants clear goals before sending foreign aid, emphasizing priority, efficiency and results.

    Cain says that we know that terrorists have entered from Mexico, so we must secure the border for real. . He says we need to reform the naturalization process and allow states to enforce immigration laws.   Cain won't support a no fly zone over Syria. He lists EMP and cyber attacks among the emerging threats  to be contended with.

    Gingrich emphasized the difference between domestic crime and terrorism, which is war. He would strengthen, not eliminate the Patriot Act. In the matter of Pakistan taking offense at our elimination of bin Ladin, Gingrich said that we should be furious about Pakistan's hiding him.  He said that hot pursuit should be allowed, there should be no sanctuaries.  He would overhaul the CIA.  He said that Pakistan should help us or get out of the way. 

    Europe won't back us on sanctioning Iran because they are dependent on Iranian oil. Gingrich would have us increase domestic production enough to replace Iran's European exports in the case of a boycott.  He would bomb their nuclear program only as a last resort if regime change was an assured outcome. 

    Gingrich mentioned Chili's social security system as a model for entitlement reform using guaranteed private accounts. Will taking  stand on the third rail wreck his candidacy, go unnoticed or serve as a springboard to the White House? 

    Gingrich wants to issue a green card to every foreign student  who graduates in math & science.  Did he consider the fact that many of them are Muslims who come from areas where hatred of the U.S.A. is rampant?  He should be more selective. He would the selective service board system as a model for picking the illegal aliens who should be allowed to stay on a path to citizenship. He mentioned community and church membership as criteria for selection.  He might as well stand between lanes on an expressway, he will surely be hit by both sides on this one. 

       `Santorum  irritated me by  proceeding Islam with "radical", wasting a word when time is critical. the "debate" parallel press conference format does not afford time for wasted words.  "Radical" implies the existence of a :moderate", harmless normative Islam, which does not exist and never will.  The enemy is Islam, not "radical Islam". He mentioned the time and patience factor, that they will wait us out; that Obama is proving them right.  He said that Obama is playing politics with his policy in Afghanistan. That's stating the obvious.

    Santorum supports profiling at airports. Who needs it? Excluding all Muslims from all mass transit vehicles & terminals is the simple solution which would not subject the general public to unnecessary harassment, indignity and delay.   .

    Santorum favors continuing foreign aid, particularly for development.  I agree with Santorum that Obama has poisoned the well of compromise, but I disagree that both sides should compromise more.  Appeasing and yielding to Socialists must come to an end.  Our economy needs a cure, not more poison.

Tell the UN to do something about Iran

The Israel Project has a new petition demanding enforcement of Security Council Resolution 1696. The petition is short, simple, well written and meritorious. Lets rise up in unison and push this one over the top. We must send an unmistakable message to Ban Ki-moon. I urge you to sign the petition and forward it to everyone you can hope to influence.

It becomes increasingly obvious that if effective sanctions are not imposed. Israel will be compelled to take effective action. Why not make a last ditch effort to make a military attack unnecessary?

To: The Honorable Secretary-General of the United Nations

Dear Secretary-General,

We, the undersigned, feel that a nuclear-armed Iran is a threat to Israel, the United States and the entire Western world. Iran must be stopped now before it develops a nuclear bomb.

Iran restarted its nuclear fuel research program and is now enriching uranium needed to create a nuclear bomb. Iran rebuffed the UN's offer of incentives to suspend enrichment and has rejected UN Security Council Resolution 1696, which requires the immediate suspension of all enrichment-related activities and strict monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Iran's president Ahmadinejad is a religious extremist who has declared that Israel should be wiped off the map in a religious war with the infidel West, which will be led by Iran and the rest of the Muslim world.

As the world's leading state sponsor of international terrorism, Iran is likely to sell or give nuclear weapons to terror groups like Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Hamas. These groups have terrorist cells throughout Europe and the US.

We demand that the UN enforce its own Resolution 1696. Iran must immediately and unconditionally:

• Stop enriching uranium
  
  
• Open all of its facilities to monitoring by the IAEA
  
  
• Stop funding terrorist groups including Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Hamas
  
  
• Recognize the right of Israel to exist peacefully within its internationally-recognized borders. It is time for the UN to take a stand against Iran and its nuclear ambitions

Signed,

Click here to sign the petition

Ad Hoc Cmte: Iranian Submission

Outline for the Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards Consultations

An additional mechanism, the Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards was created by the Human Rights Council in 2006 to fill gaps in CERD, and to provide new normative standards aimed at combating all forms of contemporary aspects of racism.

The committee's mission is to write new international legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam. They solicited suggestions from the member nations to get the process started.

The Iranian submission begins on page 12 of the pdf. and ends on page 17. Although capturing the attitude & meaning of the document through excerpts is not satisfactory, I will not reproduce the entire five page submission here. You can click through to the pdf file and enter 12 in the page window to go directly to the full text of the submission.

The pdf is a scanned document, requiring the use of ocr to cull excerpts. Unfortunately, the printer which created the document needs a head cleaning, and the plate on which it was scanned is dusty, so that ocr was extremely difficult. I have therefore run the spelling checker on the excerpts, they may deviate slightly from the original, but care has been taken to avoid changing the meaning of the text. [Emphasis added.]

The Iranian submission is not novel, it rehashes malicious malarkey from previous resolutions. The following documents were referenced in the text.

• General Assembly resolution 62/154 on combating defamation of religions
• General Assembly resolution 55/23 on Dialogue Among Civilizations
• security Council resolution 1624(2005)
• UDHR
• ICCPR
• International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights
• DDPA
• Special Rapport on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance (AIHRC/6/6)

They are off to a fast start in their Introduction, asserting that Islamophobia is a growing trend, becoming pervasive and often officially condoned.

The growing trend of defamation of religions is arising from the following factors: the conflation of race, culture and religion, concept of clash of civilizations and religions, all these provides fertile soil for the defamation of religions.
And also on the fight against terrorism, based on defense of national identity and security, it is reduced to religious
dimension.

Note the clause which I emphasized. Who is it that conflates race with religion? If you can't answer that question, re-read the initial post in this series :
Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards, paying close attention to the quote from the report of the African Regional Conference in preparation for the Durban Review.

Unfortunately, insults and intolerance against Islam are being provided intellectual justification by Western scholars
and political lobbies who espouse anti-Islamic agendas, hence lending support to ideological violence against
Muslims. Sophisticated slogans are used to provoke systematic insults against Islam. This phenomenon reflects
the Islarnophobia which afflicts segments of western society.

This paragraph inverts cause and effect. We developed anti-Islamic agendas precisely because of Islam's anti-Christian & anti-western doctrines, agendas & actions. Our accurate descriptions of Islamic doctrines & practices are labled insults and intolerance. Accurate and well documented descriptions of Islamic sanctification & mandate of genocidal conquest and terrorism are labled "insults" and "intolerance".
The last paragraph of the introduction is severely overloaded by implicit reference to the documents listed and linked above.

Lack of action to prevent the reprinting of blasphemous caricatures, and indifference in airing the inflammatory documentary against the holy Quran will be perceived as manifestation of insincerity towards the principles and objectives of various efforts within the United Nations system aiming at promoting understanding and respect among cultures and civilizations. [Links added.]

It should now be clear to you that the Iranian agenda includes criminalizing criticism of Islam, specifically the Danish Cartoons and Geert Wilders' Fitna.

The cartoons depict Muhammad as a terrorist, which, by his own admission, he was. He never threw a bomb, because explosives were invented after he died. he used the primitive weaponry available in the seventh century to terrorize his victims with ruthless slaughter. If you do not comprehend this fact, open your Qur'an to 33:26, 59:2 & 59:13 and read them carefully.

Fitna demonstrates the obvious connection between Islamic doctrine enshrined in the Qur'an. This fact is documented in another blog post. It is extremely unlikely that anyone else will reveal to you the source of Islam's intense determination to criminalize criticism of itself. I will: It comes from Islamic law, codified in Reliance of the Traveller. Book O, which treats of "Justice", includes an outline of the conditions imposed upon dhimmis, who were "people of the book" subjugated by Muslims under a "treaty of protection". Chapter 11.10 lists five acts which violate the treaty of protection and subject the dhimmi to immediate execution. Here is the fifth item in that list.

-5- or mentions something impermissible about Allah, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), or Islam.

The perceptive reader will want to know what is impermissible to mention. O8.7 lists 20 items which entail apostasy, and describes the list as nearly endless. Here are a few relevant items from that list.

-1- to prostrate to an idol, whether sarcastically, out of mere contrariness, or in actual conviction, like that of someone who believes the Creator to be something that has originated in time. Like idols in this respect are the sun or moon, and like prostration is bowing to other than Allah, if one intends reverence towards it like the reverence due to Allah;

-2- to intend to commit unbelief, even if in the future. And like this intention is hesitating whether to do so or not: one thereby immediately commits unbelief;

-3- to speak words that imply unbelief such as ``Allah is the third of three,'' or ``I am Allah''-unless one's tongue has run away with one, or one is quoting another, or is one of the friends of Allah Most High (wali, def: w33) in a spiritually intoxicated state of total oblivion (A: friend of Allah or not, someone totally oblivious is as if insane, and is not held legally responsible (dis: k13.1(O:) ) ), for these latter do not entail unbelief;

-4- to revile Allah or His messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace);

-5- to deny the existence of Allah, His beginingless eternality, His endless eternality, or to deny any of His attributes which the consensus of Muslims ascribes to Him (dis: v1);

-6- to be sarcastic about Allah's name, His command, His interdiction, His promise, or His threat;

-7- to deny any verse of the Koran or anything which by scholarly consensus (def: b7) belongs to it, or to add a verse that does belong to it;

-14- to deny the obligatory character of something which by the consensus of Muslims (ijma`, def: B7) is part of Islam, when it is well known as such, like the prayer (salat) or even one rak'a from one of the five obligatory prayers, if there is no excuse (def: u2.4);

-15- to hold that any of Allah's messengers or prophets are liars, or to deny their being sent;

(n: `Ala' al-din' Abidin adds the following:

-16- to revile the religion of Islam;

-17- to believe that things in themselves or by their own nature have any causal influence independent of the will of Allah;

-18- to deny the existence of angels or jinn (def: w22), or the heavens;

-19- to be sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law;

-20- or to deny that Allah intended the Prophet's message (Allah bless him and give him peace) to be the religion followed by the entire world (dis: w4.3-4) (al-Hadiyya al-`Ala'iyya (y4), 423-24). )

By now you must be wondering about the penalty. Islamic law has that covered, too.

O8.1

When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.

O8.2

In such a case, it is obligatory for the caliph (A: or his representive) to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed.

Islamic law is clear on its face: any criticism of Allah or his Messenger gets you killed. The Ad Hoc Committee On Complementary Standards is only the latest tool developed in pursuit of that objective.

Under the heading of "Legal Aspects", Iran describes the cartoons & Fitna as "inconsistent with the spirit of the UN Charter" and various resolutions.

The elimination of discrimination and the protection against Intolerance is in part a matter of legal protection.

They jabber on with quotes about universal freedom, equality and dignity, without finding anything relevant to the matter at hand. The next paragraph is mired in excrement.

Crucially, according to- article 20, paragraph.2 of the ICCPR, " any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law" This provision represents a clear limitation to-the night to fee speech which according to article 19 of the ICCPR carries with it special duties and responsibilities.

The cartoons do not advocate hatred, nor do they incite discrimination, hostility or violence. The same is true of Fitna. Few will perceive the irony in Islam's specious assertion: it is their own scripture, tradition & jurisprudence which advocates hatred and incites violence. If Article 20 were to be enforced, the Qur'an, hadith & Shari'ah would be banned as incitement to violence!

The committee on civil and Political Rights in its general comment 11 provided that these required prohibitions are fully compatible with the right to freedom of expression as contained in Article 19, the exercise of which carries with it special duties and responsibilities. This is clear indication that human rights instruments recognize provisions against incitement to religions hatred as being a completely legitimate- safeguard against the abuse of the right to free speech.

Iran is asserting that accurately describing Allah's genocidal Jihad imperatives which are found in Surahs Al-Anfal & At-Taubah and confirmed in Sahih Bukhari's Books of Jihad, Khumus & Expedition and codified in Reliance of the Traveller Book O, Chapter 9, Paragraphs 8 & 9 must be legally prohibited as "incitement to religious hatred". Islamic obedience to those imperatives has resulted in 270*10⁶ premature deaths in the last 1400 years but we must be prevented, by judicial penalties, from mentioning it.

Identifying the enemy and describing his doctrines is characterized as an abuse of free speech. This is nothing less than the aggressor's program for depriving us of the ability to defend ourselves against his aggression.

The last section of the submission is under the heading of Programme of Action.

In sum, the right to freedom of expression should be exercised with the responsibilities and limitations as prescribed by law. The international community should initiate a global dialogue to promote a culture of tolerance and peace based on respect for human rights and cultural diversity and urges states, NGOs, religious bodies and media to support and promote such a dialogue. Developing the human rights language to address emerging issues such as defamation of religions was an important step forward that is of interest not only to Muslims but to all the internatioual community.

Our freedom of expression must not include mention of Islam's aggressive doctrines & practices: conquest, genocide & terrorism. A culture of tolerance and peace means being led, dumb like sheep, to the slaughter.

Islamic Republic of Iran urges the Ad hoc Committee on the elaboration of complementary standards to call upon the States to stop the publication of blasphemous caricatures, Elms and media as well as the campaigns for anti-Islamic regulations to take all possible legal and administrative measures to prevent continuation of these deliberate offensive acts, which impinge greatly on the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion of the followers of Islam.

They want to add wording to ICERD to criminalize every criticism of Islam. How in Hell does anything we write or say impinge on the liberty of Muslims? Why must they be allowed to continue in the arrogant assumption that they have a divine right and mission to kill, enslave, rape, pillage & plunder us?

De-Nuke Iran!

De-nuke Iran! The declaration reads:

We, the undersigned, declare that the American government and all free nations must act with speed, determination, and muscle to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran. Now. By any means necessary. Before it's too late.

4200 have endorsed the declaration. I am one of them. Will you join us?

The Mullahs who run Iran believe that, by initiating Armageddon, they will provoke the appearance of their messiah, the Mahdi, who will finish their Islamic world conquest. When they obtain a nuke, they will use it. We must not let that happen!

Consider the consequences of a 10KT blast on any Jewish city. Consider the consequences on any American city. Consider the consequences of an EMP attack. Let Iran obtain the bomb and one or more of those evils is a guaranteed certainty. It will happen!

The banner at DeNukeIran.com says "Stand up, speak out, be counted, raise Hell, De-Nuke Iran before it's too late." Click the link above and sign the declaration. Follow up by copying this blog post, paste it into an email and send it to your family, friends and associates with an exhortation to follow suit.
This campaign won't succeed unless we make it succeed; lets do it!

From Farce to Force, the West Finally Dictates Terms and Conditions to Iran

AT LAAST, the west has FINALLY opened its mouth and is showing its teeth to the pencil-necked president of Iran and his ayatollah buddies. If you haven't caught the news flash yet, you can find it here on the Debka File.

In short, that diplomatic meeting in Geneva a few days ago that Iran scoffed at, well apparently the west actually meant it this time because they are finally backing it up with very real force. The United States, Britain and France are currently engaging in Operation Brimstone in the Persian Gulf which is an exercise to rehearse the enforcement of a naval blockade of petrol-related shipping in and out of Iran. And it's about time!

With the US State Department telling Iran that it can choose either "cooperation or confrontation," it looks like Iran will no longer be able to plot its own devious, defiant quest to get the bomb, all the while thumbing its nose at the world. Iran has two weeks to comply.

After that, Iran's economy will be quickly and directly affected; their shipping for the most part will be halted by the western allied powers. They will no longer have the option to simply continue on their belligerent way, for they will be forced one way or another to certain terms and conditions.

This will be a textbook example of how to deal with the power-hungry Islamic supremacist ideology which both Sunni's and Iran's Shiite's adhere to and spread. This will be a lesson for Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, Al-Qaeda and every Islamic-empire-thinking Muslim on the planet. Because there are only a few ways that this can play out and Iran loses in all of them.

First scenario, the economic difficulties in Iran could prove to be enough for the Iranian population to finally rise up and overthrow the tyranny of Sharia Law and its Islamic leaders. Look for Ahmadineijad to be dragged through the streets or exile himself to the protection of Hezbollah's wing. In this case the people of Iran win, the Islamic Revolution, or the current leadership in Iran, loses and all other proponents of Islamic supremacy also lose because the writing will be on the wall.

Second possible scenario sees Iran's maniacal president actually confronting the military of the US, Britian and France. Iran would really lose in this case. They would be pounded mercilessly, all of it well-deserved, and some fifty years of relative progress would lie in rubbles. And again, other Muslim power-seekers would be losers as well.

Thirdly, Iran's moronic president would foolishly order Hezbollah and Hamas, and possibly Syria, to attack Israel; or launch some attacks itself apart from its proxies. This scenario would result in Iran's getting pounded back to the stone age. Very bad for Iran. Hezbollah and Hamas would also be annhilated, both of whom richly deserve such a reward.

Fourthly, Iran would actually appear to agree to concessions to save its own skin and then sit back and hope Barak Obama is elected President of the United States. Of course Ahmadineijad is wise enough to know that he can easily manipulate the rookie and wanna-be do-gooder Obama, so he is likely to play this card. But politically, the strong hand which Bush would finally be applying to Iran would be finally seen as an effective, perhaps the only effective, option on how to deal with Iran, and Republican nominee John McCain could benefit greatly by this in November's election.

But no matter which way it plays out, one lesson will be evidently clear to all: you deal with Islamic supremacism with power and strength. They will walk all over you every single time unless physically prevented from doing so. Do not expect that the Muslim supremacist will show you the same respect as a human that you might grant him because he has completely different values than you do and will exploit your kindness as weakness. Don't give him that opportunity. (For those who missed the related post, Confronting Evil right here on Right Hooks, the link to that is here.)

So though this show of strength by the United States and friends is about four years too late, Mr. Ahmadineijad will finally find out who is the power and who is the pretender. The farce that has been his belligerent defiance will finally be met with the force his own actions have summoned.

Quagmire Alert! - Dead End Left Does It Again

What ever happened to We The People? How does a circus court in California get to establish a law? I thought that is what elected representatives did. While homosexuals from all over the country are likely racing to the state to pretend to get married, most people are enraged at the audacity and arrogance of the foolish judges who have greatly overstepped their bounds and we have all simply HAD ENOUGH.

Once again, we see liberal philosophy, spin, agenda, and (lack-of-) values on shining display. This week's lesson is on How to Subvert Democracy and the Will of the People. No longer does the term, We The People, apply to this country; it is now evident that the more appropriate term should be, We the People and the Baboon We Are Chained To. Have you ever tried to get anything accomplished or go where you wanted to with a baboon tied to your arm?

We have example after example of the futility of the left's philosophy, the blindness of their causes, the lethality of their mindless policies and, frankly, the core of their ideologies which attack the very foundations of American social order. Hey, can we finally all wake up now? The sixties are over. The hippie, far-left, socialist, free-love, free-drugs, relativist, anti-establishment ideas that were the basis of all this 'free-thinking' and liberality just can no longer be accepted as viable in the grown-up world. It just doesn't work. Probably because it is not based on reality, but on fantasy and Utopian pipe dreams.

But a man MARRYING a man; or a woman MARRYING a woman? This is simply unreal. Bob Hellam, a razor-sharp truth-tender, explains the situation so very well in his recent letter to his county clerk in California. I will share the entire letter, sparing the specific names and places:

Dear Mr. [County Clerk]:

I could not reach you by telephone a few days ago, so I thought I would write a letter instead.

Government cannot create reality. A law or a court decision or a constitutional amendment that declared a circle to be square, or that attempted to repeal the law of gravity, or that stipulated that words would mean exactly what any given judge determined that they mean, would have no real validity. Hence, the millennia-old understanding of what marriage is cannot be invalidated by judicial fiat. There is no such thing as same-sex “marriage,” even if the State of California maintains that such a thing does exist.

Those who have argued that the California Supreme Court had no right to legislate on marriage, and that the Governor’s office also has no such right, make a convincing argument. Now is the time to stand for truth, even if it requires courage.

Please be courageous. Support the will of the people of California, and the people of [this] County, even if it means contradicting the opinion of the California Supreme Court and the Governor. The responsibility for maintaining the integrity of marriage records in our county is yours, not theirs.

Please do not allow same-sex “marriage” in [this] County.

Sincerely,

Robert Hellam

Mr. Hellam sees the truth, and says so quite plainly and elegantly; but such is apparently not clear to the baboon. Has it ever been more obvious to people who are not baboons that our culture and society is racing down a dead end road, toward a cataclysmic crash if we allow the baboon any more time at the wheel? The fact that they have led us into a social quagmire has never been more crystal clear.

Baboon policies demanded that we build no more oil refineries. Then they demanded that we not drill for oil off shore. Then they demanded that we not drill in Alaska. Where have their policies gotten us?

Baboons yelled and screamed that we not take out Sadaam Hussein himself when he invaded Kuwait in the early 1990's, whining that we should only expel him from Kuwait, and now look where we are. What, did they think he would go away? Was he going to change his colors or start being a nice guy to his neighbors? Baboons are nothing if not totally naieve.

But their solution was the oil-for-food program to be directed by the United Nations. Yeah, that sure went well, didn't it? Guys in the UN on the take. France on the take. Sadaam kicking weapons inspectors out. Sadaam violating cease-fire agreements that he made with General Schwartzkopf to prevent his annihilation. And the whole time, the baboon looks the other way. See no evil.

Now baboons are grumbling and complaining about how evil our own soldiers are, while at the same time trying to give American citizenship rights to our ENEMIES who are prisoners in Guantanamo. You know, people who have killed Americans and seek her overthrow...terrorists not killed in battle. Yes, the baboon is more concerned about the life of a murderer than he is about the life of a US soldier, an innocent unborn child, a redwood, or a baby seal.

It seems that every baboon, liberal policy has death at the end. Death for the unborns, death for our soldiers, death for our families (how do Adam and Steve produce children, by the way?), death to our values, death for our culture, death for Israel. The only people who the baboon doesn't want to die are the violent, aggressive and murdering cultures like [insert your favorite terrorist group here] who seek the overthrow of our country and of western society.

Are they willing to confront Iran? Of course not, Iran is not bad. Now, a few days after Iran uses its nuclear bombs on Israel or America, the baboons might awake from their slumber enough to say, 'Hey, that was wrong,' (and then blame conservatives, of course) but not long enough to keep them focussed on a sustained response. But, you see, it should never come to having to initiate a response; not since Germany and World War II, it shouldn't. The time to prevent a bellicose Iran from executing the Second Holocaust is NOW; yet the baboon resists this course of action at every turn. (He must be too busy performing all those homosexual 'marriages.')

There is no way that our society can or will survive any more of the lunacies arriving from a godless, ridiculous left-wing ideology. It is suicidal to our country, to our culture, and it has got to stop. We have got to stop it. They have led us into a despicable, perverted cultural quagmire. If our forefathers were here, they certainly would rebel against the liberal's fast track to hell that they are steering us toward.

It's time to yank back the wheel from the out-of-control left-wing baboon; no matter what it takes.