Changing Times, a chilling video by Bryan Preston presented by Hot Air Films reminds us of that horrible day in September, 2001 and what the New York Times is doing to us all by continuing to undermine the administration's efforts to fight this 'War on Terror'.

Tony Snow, the White House Press Secretary said on June 26, 2006, to the White House press corps, "The New York Times ought to think about somebody’s right to live."

He continued, "The New York Times and other news organizations ought to think long and hard about whether a public’s right to know, in some cases, might overwrite somebody’s right to live, and whether, in fact, the publications of these could place in jeopardy the safety of fellow Americans."

After yesterdays decision by the Supreme Court that blocks Guantanamo Bay detainees from being tried in military tribunals, many Democrats are cheering as many on the right stand perplexed to how the Supreme court could even hear this complaint, not to mention the ridiculous decision they handed down.

The court claims that Military tribunals violate U.S. military law and the Geneva conventions. When did al-Qaeda sign the Geneva convention? I must have missed that.

The Madness of Hamdan

For decades presidents of both parties have failed to take action as the attacks on our way of life have grown ever more outrageous. Presidential passivity makes the perpetrators bolder and more dangerous. It also atrophies our capacity to change course and take effective action.

No, I’m not talking about terrorists this time. I have the federal courts in mind. The Supreme Court issued a decision yesterday in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld which may have finally superceded Roe v. Wade as the most arrogant and unprincipled judicial assertion of power since Hammurabi promulgated his code.

The Court had no authority to hear the case, both because a statute clearly deprived it of jurisdiction and because the case presented questions no court is competent to address. If the Court was going to ignore these trifling impediments and decide the case anyway it should have issued a laugh track instead of an opinion. The case was utterly without merit.

Nonetheless the Court issued an opinion, a number of them in fact. Five Justices agreed that the President of the United States does not have the power to constitute military tribunals for the purpose of trying terrorists for violating the laws of war.

The irony here is exquisite.

Article III of the Constitution leaves the definition of the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction up to Congress. In the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (DTA) Congress very clearly gave the Circuit Court for the District of Columbia Circuit exclusive jurisdiction over Hamdan’s habeas corpus petition. After the effective date of that statute the Supreme Court had no more authority to decide Hamdan’s case than the Arizona Liquor Control Board or the World Court in The Hague.

And yet five Justices have the temerity to use that case as a vehicle for pronouncing that the President is acting beyond his proper authority. Forget the old joke about the parricidal orphan; we have a new definition of chutzpah.

Justice Stevens writing for the Court goes through all kinds of gyrations trying to get around the clear language of section. He breaks out all the tools of statutory analysis including legislative history and uses them to construct a long convoluted argument which is entirely beside the point. Those tools are for discerning meaning where the legislature has been obscure. When Congress makes itself perfectly clear, those tools are useless, and the DTA is perfectly clear.

Read more from The American Thinker

Bush refuses to abandon tribunals

US President George Bush has refused to rule out military tribunals for inmates at Guantanamo Bay detention centre.

Republican senators immediately began planning how to win congressional approval for new tribunals.

5 Wrong Justices

By putting on hold military commissions to try terrorists for war crimes, five Supreme Court justices have made the legal system part of the problem, rather than part of the solution to the challenges of the war on terrorism. They tossed aside centuries of American history, judicial decisions of long standing, and a December 2005 law ordering them not to interfere with the military trials.

As commander in chief, President Bush has the authority to decide on wartime tactics and strategies. Presidents Washington, Jackson, Lincoln and FDR settled on military commissions, sometimes with congressional approval and sometimes without, as the best tool to punish and deter enemy war crimes. Bush used them to solve a difficult tension: how to try terrorists fairly without blowing intelligence sources and methods.

More@
BUSH ON HAMDAN RULING
The decision is actually a huge political gift to President Bush.
The Postmortem On The Geneva 'Jihadist' Convention

Is this Hama's new plan? Pull Israel into a war that Hama can use to validate their stance against the recognition of Israel. As innocent people fall, as comes with war, Hama will have the ammunition to claim retaliation for the atrocities inflicted on the Palestinian people. Allowing the cycle to continue to spin out of control in the middle east.

Gaza militants say fired chemical-tipped warhead

GAZA (Reuters) - A spokesman for gunmen in the Gaza Strip said they had fired a rocket tipped with a chemical warhead at Israel early on Thursday.

The Israeli army had no immediate comment on the claim by the spokesman from the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, an armed wing of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah movement.

The group had recently claimed to possess about 20 biological warheads for the makeshift rockets commonly fired from Gaza at Israeli towns. This was the first time the group had claimed firing such a rocket.

"The al-Aqsa Brigades have fired one rocket with a chemical warhead" at southern Israel, Abu Qusai, a spokesman for the group, said in Gaza.

An Israeli military spokeswoman said the army had not detected that any such rocket was fired, nor was there any report of such a weapon hitting Israel.

More @
Israeli Offensive into Gaza Widens
Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade Fires Chemical Weapon into Israel

Israel turned up the pressure on the Palestinian militants today for the release of Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier being held captive, by bombing an Hamas training camp in Gaza and sending warplanes over the house of Syrian President Bashar Assad, who has been sheltering and protecting two Hamas leaders.
Israel’s interior minister says it was Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal who ordered the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit.

Vital Perspective continues live-blogging.

Israel Sends Ground Forces Into Gaza

Israel launched on Wednesday its first ground offensive in the Gaza Strip since leaving the territory last year, stepping up pressure on Palestinian militants to release an abducted soldier.

Tanks and infantry, backed by assault helicopters and artillery, set up an observation post at a disused airport outside the southern town of Rafah as masked gunmen waited behind barricades and in alleyways for battle to begin.

Threatening "extreme steps" if Corporal Gilad Shalit was not freed, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said the operation would continue "over the coming days."

Launching the offensive three days after Shalit was captured in Israel by gunmen in a cross-border raid, Israeli aircraft struck at three bridges in what the army said was an attempt to prevent militants from moving the captive.

A helicopter attack on Gaza's only power plant sent flames shooting into the sky and cut off electricity to much of the coastal territory, where 1.4 million Palestinians live. Engineers said repairs could take six months.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas called the bombardment of civilian infrastructure "collective punishment and a crime against humanity."

Olmert said Israel had "no intention of recapturing" the Gaza Strip.

Israel arrests Hamas minister.

Israeli soldiers arrested a member of the Hamas-led Palestinian government early on Thursday in the West Bank city of Ramallah, Palestinian security officials said.

The arrest of Labour Minister Mohammed Barghouthi came amid an Israeli army incursion into the
Gaza Strip to try to release a soldier kidnapped during a cross-border raid by Hamas and other militants on Sunday.

An Israeli army spokeswoman said troops had carried out an operation in Ramallah but declined to give details.

More @
Peretz Gives Order For Stage Two Of Gaza Incursion
Israel Stepping Up It’s Gaza Campaign

Israeli planes have attack a bridge in Gaza City which may be an indication the start of a military operation has begun.

Israeli military officials said a limited operation has been authorized for southern Gaza, after Palestinian militants tunneled under the border and attacked an Israeli army post at a Gaza crossing, killing two soldiers and abducting a third.

The Palestinians offered to release the soldier if Israel released all women and minors jailed in Israel. Israel has rejected the militants' demands.

Palestinian militants claim the soldier is safe and in good health.

Israeli troops get ready for Gaza offensive

Israeli armored forces prepared for a threatened offensive into the Gaza Strip on Wednesday after mediators said hope of recovering a kidnapped soldier through talks was almost gone.

Israeli aircraft fired missiles at one of the main bridges linking the north and south of the Gaza Strip, sending a clear warning to militants. The army said it wanted to prevent the kidnappers from moving the soldier.

Palestinian security forces said Israeli tanks had edged toward the territory.

"Time is fast running out," Israeli Defense Minister Amir Peretz said in a speech on Tuesday night.

Israel has threatened to launch an offensive into Gaza following the abduction of Corporal Gilad Shalit in a cross-border raid on Sunday by three Palestinian factions, including the armed wing of the governing Hamas Islamist group.

Palestinian security forces claim Israeli tanks were massing near the Israeli village of Nahal Oz, a main Israeli staging area just outside Gaza.

UPDATE: (16:49) - IAF planes hit power stations in Gaza City, knocking out electricity.

Vital Perspective is live-blogging.

"Negotiating with America does not have any benefit for us and we do not need such negotiations," claims Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Speaking about the Nuclear dispute with the West, Khamenei said: "We will not negotiate with anybody our certain right to reach and use nuclear technology."

The White House is dismissing these comments from Iran as Press Secretary Tony Snow said, The U.S. does not regard Khamenei's remarks as an official response from the Iranian government to the U.S. incentive package offered several weeks ago to Iran.

Iran's Khamenei Maintains Right to Develop Nuclear Technology

Iran will maintain its right to develop nuclear technology in the face of pressure from the U.S. and its allies to suspend a uranium enrichment program, the country's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said today.

``We will not negotiate with anyone over our undeniable right to access and use nuclear technology,'' the state-run Fars news agency cited Khamenei as saying during a meeting today with visiting Senegalese President Aboulaye Wade.

Iran sees ``no use for us to negotiate with the U.S.,'' Khamenei said. Should the international community acknowledge Iran's nuclear rights, he said, ``we are ready to negotiate over supervision controls and guarantees to the world. The ground for such talks is now available.''

The U.S. and European Union are offering Iran technology and trade incentives in exchange for the Islamic Republic halting its uranium enrichment program. The U.S. suspects Iran's drive to develop the nuclear fuel is a precursor to building a weapon, in contravention of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, to which it is a signatory. Iran says the fuel is needed for electricity generation.

Iran was not given a deadline to respond to the offer, however President Bush said that Iran has "weeks, not months'' to decide whether to suspend its enrichment activities to avoid United Nations Security Council action.

Talk about flip flopping. Who's running this country... Khamenei or Ahmadinejad?

There appears to be a lot of anger still brewing with regard to the New York Times latest printing of yet another leaked U.S. national security program. Many calling for the prosecution of the Times.


Bush berates newspaper after its latest exposure

National Review Online
Stop the Leaks

Every passing week, it becomes more apparent that disgruntled leftists in the intelligence community and antiwar crusaders in the mainstream media, annealed in their disdain for the Bush administration, are undermining our ability to win the War on Terror. Their latest body blow to the war effort is the exposure, principally by the New York Times, of the Treasury Department’s top-secret program to monitor terror funding.

President Bush, who said on Monday morning that the exposure “does great harm to the United States of America,” must demand that the New York Times pay a price for its costly, arrogant defiance. The administration should withdraw the newspaper’s White House press credentials because this privilege has been so egregiously abused, and an aggressive investigation should be undertaken to identify and prosecute, at a minimum, the government officials who have leaked national-defense information.

Real Clear Politics
The New York Times at War With America

Why do they hate us? No, I'm not talking about Islamofascist terrorists. We know why they hate us: because we have freedom of speech and freedom of religion, because we refuse to treat women as second-class citizens, because we do not kill homosexuals, because we are a free society.

No, the "they" I'm referring to are the editors of The New York Times. And do they hate us? Well, that may be stretching it. But at the least they have gotten into the habit of acting in reckless disregard of our safety.

Why do they hate us? Why does the Times print stories that put America more at risk of attack? They say that these surveillance programs are subject to abuse, but give no reason to believe that this concern is anything but theoretical. We have a press that is at war with an administration, while our country is at war against merciless enemies. The Times is acting like an adolescent kicking the shins of its parents, hoping to make them hurt while confident of remaining safe under their roof. But how safe will we remain when our protection depends on the Times?

Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
Let’s Be Polite to the Ones Trying to Murder Us

LC & IB Ace, for reasons unknown to anybody but himself, has had enough of the “hate speech crap”:

No more veiled or not so velied threats of violence against reporters, liberals, etc.

His blog, his rules.

As to myself, I’m sorry if I can’t find it in myself to claim the moral “high” ground here. You see, when journaljizzmers decide, deliberately and after having thought about it for a while, to place the lives of myself and, more importantly, my wife and children in greater danger than they were before, I’m having a hard time not taking it personally.

No, I don’t give a flying fuck about their motives. I couldn’t give less of a shit about their pissing and bleating about “public interest” if I spent 12 years at Indifference University getting a doctorate in caring less, all I care about is the fact that their treasonous actions placed the lives of myself and my loved ones in greater jeopardy.

If you’re a journaljizzmer working for one of those rags, just keep it a secret if you’re around me, m’kay?

Because if I find out that you are, I’m going to jam my fist so far down your throats that I can pull your livers out.

And I will.

California Conservative
NY Times Continues Terrorist Support

It has become increasingly clear that multiple members, if not most, of the leftist mainstream media no longer care about either the fate of the American people at the hands of terrorists or the survival of the United States. The latest example is that of the New York Times publishing yet another article that stabs our country and its people in the back, by publishing classified information regarding the tracking of radical Islamic terrorists’ international banking activities.

Expose the Left
Snow: NY Times ‘Ought To Think’ About Somebody’s ‘Right’ To Live (VIDEO)

Q We’re told the Vice President is going to make similar comments at his appearance today. With the President and the Vice President, in essence, going after The New York Times today, are they trying to create a chilling effect on media outlets that might cover stories of this nature?

MR. SNOW: I don’t think so, no. No, I don’t think so. It’s a very good question. No, if The New York Times decides that it is going to try to assume responsibility for determining which classified secrets remain classified and which don’t, it ought to accept some of the obligations of that responsibility; it ought to be able to take the heat, as well. So the administration certainly is going to lay out its concerns and what it may mean for the safety of the American people and the integrity of the process of developing intelligence that can permit us to track down terrorists and prevent them from killing again.

That’s what this is all about. It’s about what we can do in a time of war. Traditionally in this country in a time of war, members of the press have acknowledged that the Commander-in-Chief, in the exercise of his powers, sometimes has to do things secretly in order to protect the public. This is a highly unusual departure. It’s interesting, The Times, talking about this being a—this program having been a departure from previous banking efforts. This is also a departure from long-standing traditions here in the United States.

So it is—it’s not designed to have a chilling effect. I think what it’s—if The New York Times wants a spirited debate about it, it’s got it. But, certainly, nobody is going to deny First Amendment rights. But The New York Times and other news organizations ought to think long and hard about whether a public’s right to know, in some cases, might overwrite somebody’s right to live, and whether, in fact, the publications of these could place in jeopardy the safety of fellow Americans.

American troops in Iraq are more dangerous to world peace than nuclear threats from North Korea or Iran, said Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa.. Speaking at a town hall meeting at Biscayne Bay Campus in Florida, Murtha said, "We do not want permanent bases in Iraq, we want as many Americans out of there as possible."

He continues ranting on with his baseless claims that the Iraq war cannot be won militarily. He said, the more than 100,000 troops in Iraq should be pulled out immediately, and re-deployed to countries like Kuwait.

Sens. John Kerry of Massachusetts and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin want all troops out in one years time. That all sounds great to Democrats, but that proposal was put on the Senate floor for a vote on Thursday and was soundly defeated by a 86-13 vote.

U.S. can't 'redeploy' its way out of Iraq
By Mark Steyn Sun-Times Columnist

Last week John Kerry revealed his plan to "redeploy" U.S. forces from Iraq. This plan is different from fellow Defeaticrat Jack Murtha's plan to "redeploy" U.S. forces from Iraq to Okinawa, which Congressman Murtha seems to think is in the general neighborhood of Iraq. Iraq's in the Middle East, Okinawa's in the Far East: C'mon, how far can it be to get from the Far to the Middle? After all, the distance between the farthest fringe of the kook left and the center of the Democratic Party seems to be closing up every week.

Anyway, Sen. Kerry doesn't want to waste time "redeploying" to Okinawa. When America "redeploys," it's not going to take a connecting flight via Japan and risk its luggage getting "redeployed" to Bratislava. No, sir, in John Kerry's America, we "redeploy" nonstop, straight back to Main Street in time for the Redeployment Day parade.

You gotta hand it to these guys: "Redeployment" is ingenious. I'll bet the focus-group consultants were delirious: "surrender," "lose,","scram," "scuttle ignominiously," "head for the hills" all polled poorly, but "redeploy" surveyed well with all parts of the base, except the base in Okinawa, where they preferred "sayonara" -- that's "redeploy" in any language. The Defeaticrats have a clear message for the American people. Read da ploy: No new quagmires.

This is the most artful example of Leftspeak since they came up with "undocumented immigrant." In fact, if it catches on, I'll bet millions of fine upstanding members of the Undocumented-American community now start referring to themselves as Redeployed Mexicans.

The only teensy-weensy problem is this: If America ever adopts the Kerry plan, the Murtha plan or some variation thereof, does anyone think al-Jazeera, the BBC, Le Monde, Der Spiegel et al will be using the word "redeploy" in their headlines? Or will they use a word closer to what's actually going on?

In a sense, the Democrats have already psychologically redeployed. Last week they unveiled their "New Direction for America." It's a six-point plan, two of whose points are "Cut College Costs" and "Ensure Dignified Retirement." On the first point, it's true the education system remains a problem: Many hardworking Americans are trapped in low-paying dead-end jobs as U.S. congressmen because an inadequate education left them with the impression Okinawa's in the United Arab Emirates. On the second point, I'm all in favor of a "dignified retirement": Why not try it on Kerry as a pilot program? As for the other four points, none has anything to say about national security or foreign policy.

The Defeaticrats' "New Direction for America" foresees a future for this country as a kind of Lesser France. That would be problematic enough: The dependency culture favored by the Dems has mired much of Europe in permanent double-digit unemployment, a moribund economy and unsustainable social programs. Presumably, Nancy Pelosi and Co. would respond by saying that their pledge to "give America a raise" -- i.e., increase the minimum wage -- shows that their party is in tune with real people's real needs rather than a lot of foreign adventuring that's got nothing to do with how real people really lead their really real lives. Sorry, it doesn't work like that. Not even the Democrats can redeploy from the whole planet.

Meanwhile Dean Touts Democrats’ Plan

The New York Times Shows Bush Who's The Boss

ThePeoplesCube.com
The Bush administration and The New York Times are again at odds over national security, this time with new exposures of the administration's immoral attempts to protect imperialist America from heroic Islamic freedom fighters.

In today's issue the fearless NYT showed the world how the militaristic US government was co-opting major capitalist financial institutions to track global financial transfers.

The message this sends is clear - give up, George Bush! Protecting America is a useless task when you face the glorious destructive force of progressive media! America must be destroyed! It is a historical inevitability whose time has come!


SCROLL DOWN FOR UPDATES

Heather Mac Donald calls The New York Times "A National Security Threat."

BY NOW IT'S UNDENIABLE: The New York Times is a national security threat. So drunk is it on its own power and so antagonistic to the Bush administration that it will expose every classified antiterror program it finds out about, no matter how legal the program, how carefully crafted to safeguard civil liberties, or how vital to protecting American lives.

Now that the Times has blown the cover on this terror-tracking initiative, sophisticated terrorists will figure out how to evade it, according to the Treasury's top counterterrorism official, Stuart Levey, speaking to the Wall Street Journal. The lifeblood of international terrorism--cash--will once again flow undetected.

Clarice Feldman says "It’s Fish or Cut Bait Time, Mr. Attorney General"

In March, Gabriel Schoenfeld wrote a brilliant piece in Commentary in which he argued that the New York Times revelations about the NSA program warranted prosecution under Section 798 of Title 18, the so-called Comint statute. In the article he details the history and language of the Act and its 1950 amendment and argues that the language is unambiguous and certainly covers the paper’s disclosures of the NSA program, which substantially harmed our counter terrorism activities.

Schoenfeld argued in March:

“What the New York Times has done is nothing less than to compromise the centerpiece of our defensive efforts in the war on terrorism. If information about the NSA program had been quietly conveyed to an al-Qaeda operative on a microdot, or on paper with invisible ink, there can be no doubt that the episode would have been treated by the government as a cut-and-dried case of espionage.

If Schoenfeld is wrong, and the Act is insufficient to prosecute these breaches of security by the leakers and the publishers, than the Attorney General should have proposed new legislation. He hasn’t. Therefore, I assume Schoenfeld’s point is correct: the Act is adequate to proceed.

So, what’s keeping the Attorney General from acting to halt this bleeding of critical information to our enemies?

Frankly, if he doesn’t act soon, Attorney General Gonzales should be removed and replaced by someone with the will to Act . Failing to Act is simply emboldening further those who apparently think the war on the war on terror is more important than what our elected officials consider critical to the war on terror’s success

The peoples outrage toward the NY Times must be kept on the front burner. This blatant, irresponsible behavior has to be stopped. Stop your subscriptions, boycott advertisers or contact the Attorney General with calls for prosecution, whatever we can do, we must do.

UPDATE: (6-25-2006) New York Times Publishes More Classified Information.
U.S. General in Iraq Outlines Troop Cuts

The top American commander in Iraq has drafted a plan that projects sharp reductions in the United States military presence there by the end of 2007, with the first cuts coming this September, American officials say.

According to a classified briefing at the Pentagon this week by the commander, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the number of American combat brigades in Iraq is projected to decrease to 5 or 6 from the current level of 14 by December 2007.

Under the plan, the first reductions would involve two combat brigades that would rotate out of Iraq in September without being replaced. Military officials do not typically characterize reductions by total troop numbers, but rather by brigades. Combat brigades, which generally have about 3,500 troops, do not make up the bulk of the 127,000-member American force in Iraq, and other kinds of units would not be pulled out as quickly.

General Casey's briefing has remained a closely held secret, and it was described by American officials who agreed to discuss the details only on condition of anonymity. Word of the plan comes after a week in which the American troop presence in Iraq was stridently debated in Congress, with Democratic initiatives to force troop withdrawals defeated in the Senate.

As the Washington-based nonprofit group CAIR insists it receives no financial support from foreign countries, the United Arab Emirates with ties to September 11, has pledged a multi million dollar endowment to the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

The CAIR-U.A.E. Connection

The United Arab Emirates recently announced on its official government website that it has set up an endowment serving as a source of income for CAIR. The amount of the funding is undisclosed, but sources say it will be enough to help CAIR finance the construction of a new $24 million office building and a planned $50 million public-relations campaign aimed at repairing Islam's -- and the UAE's -- image in America.

CAIR -- Washington's biggest Muslim lobbying group -- is quoted in the UAE statement, but has not released its own statement. It is not commenting publicly about the size of the endowment or other details.

But the UAE, which formally recognized the Taliban and acted as a launching point for the 9-11 hijackers, has already taken a nearly $1 million stake in CAIR's existing headquarters near the U.S. Capitol. As first reported in the book, Infiltration, Dubai holds the deed to the building. The transaction took place in 2002, according to local property records.

Sheikh Hamdan bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Deputy Ruler of Dubai and UAE Minister of Finance and Industry okays setting up endowment in US

"The endowment will serve as a source of income and will further allow us to reinvigorate our media campaign projecting Islam and its principles of tolerance, which is based on promotion of peace, co-existence and dialogue among various religions and cultures,” said Nihad Awad, Executive Director of CAIR, following a meeting here on Saturday between Sheikh Hamdan and representatives of the North American organisation.

UAE Official Web Site

Ayman al-Zawahiri's new video released paid tribute to the slain Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in a video speech, glorifying him as a martyr despite the rocky relationship that the terrorist leader in Iraq had with the al-Qaeda.

Al-Zarqawi was "a soldier, a hero, an imam and the prince of martyrs," al-Zawahri said, adding his death "has defined the struggle between the crusaders and Islam in Iraq."

Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri Elegizes Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in a Video Speech

Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri is featured in a video issued by as-Sahab, an al-Qaeda media production company, elegizing Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Emir of al-Qaeda in Iraq, who was killed by a U.S. air strike on June 8, 2006. Zawahiri accepts that Zarqawi has died, but impresses upon the Mujahideen in Iraq that jihad must continue and the Islamic Caliphate established. He also voices his contempt for Zalmay Khalilzad, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, who he calls: “one of Wolfowitz’s boys ,” and Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki for being the first to announce Zarqawi’s death, stating that such represents the sum of the features of conflict between the “Crusade and Islam” in Iraq”. This concept of Muslims purportedly abandoning their religion and kowtowing to an America that seeks to “pervert” Islam, not only in Iraq, but Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, for desire of power, is repeated through the duration of the speech.

Speaking directly of Zarqawi, Zawahiri states: “Yes, Abu Mus’ab was killed, Allah have mercy on him, but he had to die, because every soul must taste death, and every human being was born to die”. He then juxtaposes him to U.S. President George W. Bush, extolling the emir for his fearlessness and dying as a “martyr,” and comparing these perceived facets of his character with a craven and “greedy” American leader. Further, Zawahiri issues a warning to Bush, stating: “Yes, Bush, we take revenge for every one of us who is killed, with Allah’s help and power. Do you remember, Bush, the oath sworn by the Mujahid lion of Islam Usama bin Ladin, may Allah protect him, that America shall not dream of security until we truly experience it in Palestine and all lands of Islam? So try - futilely - to dream of security”.

Zawahri hailed Zarqawi as a martyr and attacked Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, saying, "he traded the name of Islam to get to the seat of power." He also ripped into the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad, calling him an "Afghan infidel."

Zawahri then took a moment to addressed the American people, saying Bush was lying when he said the United States would "Win" by killing Osama bin Laden, Taliban chief Mullah Omar and other al-Qaeda leaders and Taliban figures.

"He is hiding from you the real disaster you're facing," he said.

"You're not facing figures or organizations but you're facing the Muslim nation which is flowing with the spirit of jihad."

U.S. counterterrorism officials say there is no reason to doubt the authenticity of the videotape.

The Trader Times has done it again. The New York Times reported on a LEGAL, yet secret U.S. counter terrorism program where the U.S. had access to an international database which they used to track financial transactions of al-Qaeda members and other potential terrorist. This program went into effect weeks after the September 11 attacks and has been vital to the U.S. in tracking methods and means to how the terrorist move money within their network.

Bank Data Is Sifted by U.S. in Secret to Block Terror

NY Times (June 22, 2006) - Under a secret Bush administration program initiated weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, counterterrorism officials have gained access to financial records from a vast international database and examined banking transactions involving thousands of Americans and others in the United States, according to government and industry officials.

The program is limited, government officials say, to tracing transactions of people suspected of having ties to Al Qaeda by reviewing records from the nerve center of the global banking industry, a Belgian cooperative that routes about $6 trillion daily between banks, brokerages, stock exchanges and other institutions. The records mostly involve wire transfers and other methods of moving money overseas and into and out of the United States. Most routine financial transactions confined to this country are not in the database.

Viewed by the Bush administration as a vital tool, the program has played a hidden role in domestic and foreign terrorism investigations since 2001 and helped in the capture of the most wanted Qaeda figure in Southeast Asia, the officials said.

The program, run out of the Central Intelligence Agency and overseen by the Treasury Department, "has provided us with a unique and powerful window into the operations of terrorist networks and is, without doubt, a legal and proper use of our authorities," Stuart Levey, an under secretary at the Treasury Department, said in an interview on Thursday.

Officials described the Swift program as the biggest and most far-reaching of several secret efforts to trace terrorist financing. Much more limited agreements with other companies have provided access to A.T.M. transactions, credit card purchases and Western Union wire payments, the officials said.

Nearly 20 current and former government officials and industry executives discussed aspects of the Swift operation with The New York Times on condition of anonymity because the program remains classified. Some of those officials expressed reservations about the program, saying that what they viewed as an urgent, temporary measure had become permanent nearly five years later without specific Congressional approval or formal authorization.

These current and former government officials and industry executives who shot off their mouths, on condition of anonymity, should be tracked down and locked up as traders to the U.S..

Stuart Levey, an undersecretary at the Treasury Department, said the program "has provided us with a unique and powerful window into the operations of terrorist networks." However the Trader Times obviously feels it's more important to let the terrorist know what we are doing and how we are doing it, then to capture them.

Officials also claimed the data provided by this program also helped identify Uzair Paracha, a Brooklyn man who was convicted on terrorism-related charges in 2005.

We are reminded today by Emperor Darth Misha I, of the great quote by Ann Coulter, some time ago when she said, that her only regret about Timothy McVeigh was that he didn’t park outside the offices of the New York Times.

My sentiments exactly.

More@
NYTIMES BLABBERMOUTHS STRIKE AGAIN

Dammit. These people don't know when to stop. The anonymous leak-addicted NYTimes tag team of Eric Lichtblau and James Risen is at it again. Their front-page, splashy piece posted on the web tonight and top-linked on Drudge:

Whose side are they on?

Call me crazy, but since the program is legal and since the administration argues it has helped stop terror attacks, isn’t the weight of the public’s interest in this story on the side of keeping the program under wraps so that it can continue to stop terrorists?

The 'Bush Spied Privacy Died' Hysterics At The NYT Are Back

Well that didn't take long. The dynamic duo who blew the cover of the NSA surveillance program designed to monitor who is co-operating with al-Qaeda, is back in full force. Eric Lichtblau and James Risen of the inimitable New York Times, the newspaper for the misinformed, are on the war path again. The NYT declined a White House request last night not to publish a story about the Government's legal inspection of monies flowing in and out of the country post 9/11.

Michelle Malkin Updates with: MESSAGES FOR THE BLABBERMOUTHS

This cartoon by Atlanta Journal-Political cartoonist Mike Luckovich says it all. According to liberals, the United States and Al Qaeda are morally equivalent.


Just another example of the left’s blatantly absurd moral equivalency scheme. How disgusting a people. This is why liberals are no longer taken serious.
They just don't get it!
Share your feelings. Vote Here.

In an interview which aired on Iranian TV on June 8, 2006, Mohsen Rezai, the Iranian Expediency Council Secretary said, "America seems so big, but in fact is like a paper tiger - even the slightest tremor could easily make it crumple and disappear. That's why America's strength depends upon maintaining its hegemony."

He goes on to say, The U.S. is "Facing Serious Military Difficulties."
"They cannot conduct a ground offensive against Iran, and even if they wish to conduct an aerial attack, it is not clear whether this would be effective. Iranian technology is locally made, and Iran could quickly transfer the Natanz site to some desert, so that even if the entire world invades Iran, they might not find it. If Iran goes underground following a couple of American bombs... If Iran goes underground with its nuclear activities, the entire world will curse America, and say: 'What have you done? You have made the region unsafe, and achieved nothing.'"

"The American Empire is Hovering Between Life and Death" he claims, "If America loses some of the countries it has subjugated and plundered, there will be chaos in America."

See Video or Read Full Transcript
(Courtesy of Memri)

It sounds like the Liberal left's message has gotten to the Iranians. I'm sure it's getting to all our enemies too.

(Hat Tip: California Conservative)

Your Freedom to…

Your freedom to hate the US Military,
Your freedom to vilify those prosecuting the
Global War on Terror,
Your freedom to burn Old Glory, our standard,
the banner of freedom,
Your freedom to key my truck because you
hate my showing pride in my service,
Your freedom to be born and later carelessly
take the life of the unborn,
Your freedom to feel guilt for your own success
because others are not,
Your freedom to stand in awe of this great country…
This is your freedom, paid for by 480,000 servicemembers being honored at the WWII Memorial in Washington D.C. Each star represents 100 souls and the memorial has 4,800 stars.

Will you continue to disrespect this man, someone’s Dad, someone’s GrandPa, someone who truly knows what freedom means? Can you take for granted, with all you have today, the freedom this man’s brothers in arms sacrificed? Are you so bent on being right that you have forgotten the fact that previous governments and regimes would snuff an inconsequential person such as yourself without a care? Has the value of freedom paid by so many been lost on you, ’cause you forgot? Do you not see that freedom is costly, requires commitment and sacrifice, and cannot be taken lightly?

Freedom is earned. It is blood, sweat, tears, and long periods of time alone in foreign lands and at home. It is a path not all take. It is the families left behind that continue to pay the day to day sacrifices for freedom.

Your freedom must be cherished, because you have been given the greatest gift.

God Speed to all before me. God Bless those left behind.

In his new book, "In Mortal Danger: The Battle for America's Border and Security," Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo. exposes what he calls a concerted effort by the Mexican Mafia and drug cartels to extend their corruptive influence in U.S. urban areas mostly dominated by illegal aliens.

Tancredo says drug "gangs buy local businesses, politicians, power and police departments" in order to continue there control of the market.

Mexican drug cartels take over U.S. cities

Mexican drug cartels operating in cities in the U.S. are buying up legitimate businesses to launder money and using some of the proceeds to win local mayoral and city council seats for politicians who can shape the policies and personnel decisions of their police forces, according to Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., who has led the fight to secure the U.S.-Mexico border and enforce the nation's immigration laws.

Tancredo says some of these small cities have become hostile and dangerous places for legitimate law enforcement officials.

"The Tijuana-based Felix drug cartel and the Juarez-based Fuentes cartel began buying legitimate business in small towns in Los Angeles County in the early 1990s," he writes in his new book published by WND Books. "They purchased restaurants, used-car lots, auto-body shops and other small businesses. One of their purposes was to use these businesses for money-laundering operations.

Once established in their community, these cartel-financed business owners ran for city council and other local offices. Over time, they were able to buy votes and influence in an effort to take over the management of the town. They wanted to create a comfort zone from which they could operate without interference from local law enforcement."

Tancredo, the chairman of the House Immigration Reform Caucus, now a powerful force within Congress for opposing amnesty plans for illegal aliens and for promoting tougher border security measures, points, as an example, to the L.A. County city of Bell Gardens – where corrupt elected officials under the influence of drug lords actually tried to shut down the police department.

"City officials who would not cooperate with the Mexican-born city manager were forced out of office," he writes. "Eventually, the L.A. County attorney's office moved in, and the city manager was prosecuted on charges of corruption. Unfortunately, Bell Gardens was only the tip of the iceberg. Other Los Angeles suburbs – including Huntington Park, Lynwood and Southgate – became targets for the cartels."

In fact, similar efforts to undermine law and order by Mexican criminal gangs are under way, Tancredo says, in Texas, Arizona and elsewhere.

"The corruption spreading from south of the border is not confined to Southern California," he writes. "In Cameron County, Texas, the former sheriff and several other officials were recently convicted of receiving drug-smuggling bribes. In Douglas, Ariz. – where the international border runs down the middle of the town and divides it from its sister city of Agua Prieta, Mexico – the mayor's brother was discovered to have a tunnel from one of his rental properties going into Mexico."

Tancredo reports he has had confidential briefings with top officials in big-city law enforcement who say there are entire cities under the virtual control of Mexican criminal street gangs and their associated businesses, in some cases, making it dangerous for county, state and national law enforcement officers to venture in and rendering any interdepartmental cooperation impossible.

Tancredo says "America is following in the tragic footsteps of Rome."

Cox & Forkum Editorial Cartoons.

The Korean Central News Agency is reporting today that Korea, in a ruling party report, threatened to “mercilessly wipe out” US forces in the event of war.

North Korea is reportedly preparing to test-fire it's most advanced, Taepodong 2 long range missile, despite strong protests from the United States and Japan.

N Korea threatens to ‘wipe out’ US

SEOUL: North Korea: A missile launch by North Korea would inflame a region already tense over the North’s continuing nuclear weapons development. The North is believed to be planning a test of its most advanced missile yet, the Taepodong 2, which could reach parts of the United States with a light payload.

The US expects North Korea to renew its moratorium on long-range missile tests and return to six-party talks aimed at ending its nuclear ambitions, the White House said on Sunday. Reports of an imminent North Korean missile test has drawn warnings from the US, Japan and South Korea, but Japanese officials were quoted as saying Sunday that a test was unlikely.

Japan warned North Korea of “a harsh response” from Tokyo and Washington if it went ahead with the launch of a long-range missile.

The Japanese daily Sankei Shimbun reported that North Koreans had been instructed to raise the national flag and watch television in anticipation of a "message to the people."

UPDATE: Rice warns N. Korea against missile test

"It would be a very serious matter and, indeed, a provocative act should North Korea decide to launch that missile," Rice said amid indications that the North Koreans could launch an intercontinental ballistic missile at any moment.

UPDATE: Australia warns N Korea on missile test

QUENTIN DEMPSTER: Suspicions are growing that North Korea is about to launch a long-range missile. The United States and Japan have told Pyongyang that severe consequences would follow a test firing. Canberra has also been quick to react: the North Korean ambassador to Australia was called in to hear warnings that North Korea was making a grave mistake. North East Asia correspondent Shane McLeod reports from Tokyo.