6 posts tagged “national security”
Hans Gruen has posted a proposed version of a fictional 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution. The theme of Gruen’s Amendment is to declare Islam (I prefer Mohammedanism) NOT a religion and instead a political ideology.
Frankly I agree with Gruen’s assessment (particularly radical Islamism); however I fear the American public is not convinced Mohammedanism is more a political ideology than a religion.
One of Gruen’s commenters noted that a call for an Amendment to outlaw Mohammedanism has been thought upon already. There is even a petition going around the Internet to outlaw Mohammedanism. I am going to seek out and sign this petition; however I am fairly certain (at this point) that the lack of Jihad education in America will find this Amendment repugnant.
A grassroots movement in America needs to be started (something like Gabriel's - Act! For America - has began) to spread the word about the ideology of Mohammedanism as opposed to the religious practice of Mohammedanism.
I think a better possibility is to enact an Amendment to the Constitution declaring America a nation with a Judeo-Christian heritage without establishing any particular Jewish sect (Orthodox, Conservative or Reformed) or Christian Denominations (Variations of Protestantism, Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox etc.) as a State religion.
This would simultaneously deal with Secular Humanism war on Christianity and radical Islam.
Dear God in Heaven how can this be? Foreigners are becoming flight students in flight schools without the properly mandated documentation. Are Government bureaucracies so turf minded that they can be so moronic to allow this to happen?
JRH 3/1/08 (Hat tip to Act for America)
NAFTA is becoming a cause that is full of irony. It is actually an issue that many Republican Conservatives have decried and now the two Democrats fighting for their nomination are condemning.
NAFTA is something that actually divided Conservatives before it became a ratified treaty between Canada, USA and Mexico. Some Conservative supported NAFTA because of the implication open markets and free trade. Other Conservatives deplored NAFTA because they perceived it a threat to National Sovereignty and National Security (and this was long before the Islamist terrorist escalation of 9/11).
Here is where the fringe Left and the Conservative Right find agreement on dumping or renegotiating NAFTA though for different reasons.
The Democrats decry NAFTA because big corporations have taken advantage of the treaty to move operating plants to foreign nations, particularly Mexico. In Mexico the labor is cheaper.
The Conservatives that join the Leftists in decrying NAFTA assert they were correct all along. Since 9/11 NAFTA has become a cause in which America’s National Security has big holes in it. And the fringe Right Conservatives fear the Conspiracy Theory of the North American Union (NAU) which has mysteriously been in talks without particulars officially made public. The fringe Right believe a movement toward a NAU will terminate the U.S. Constitution and muddle the rights and privileges of American citizens. Since there is no actual smoking gun proof of the fringe Right that fear is still labeled in the realm of Conspiracy Theory.
Because of the big Primaries coming up in Texas and Ohio NAFTA is getting a lot of play from the remaining Democrat nominees for President.
Read the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) analysis of NAFTA and the current elections. (Yeah I know the CFR is supposed to figure into the Conspiracy Theory of the New World Order; nonetheless they are still a decent source of information.)
It looks like some of the king’s (Clinton) horses and men are getting pushed further and further from the wall. Maybe Humpty Dumpty (Clinton) will take a great fall. The screws are turning on Sandy Berger.
Background HERE.
When 9/11 occurred, only the Neocons had a plan to address terrorism. The Clinton strategy was immersed in treating Islamofascist terrorists as international criminals rather than enemy combatants determined to alter America’s way of life.
Neocons influenced President Bush to take down Islamofascist regimes to introduce democracy as a way of politically combating the seed bed of terrorism. Ironically there has been more success with this in Afghanistan than in Iraq. I say ironic because Afghanistan's people are steeped in the violent ideology of Wahhabi and Taliban interpretations of Mohammedanism. That populist is the epitome of a fundamentalist Mohammedan.
Iraq though Mohammedan; faced a quarter century of Baathist-Socialist Mohammedanism. Old Saddam Hussein attempted to enforce a degree of secularism into the Mohammedanism of Iraq. The Shi’ites hated him for it. It is in Iraq that America currently faces the greatest challenges concerning the introduction of democracy. Radical Mohammedans have flocked to Iraq to fight American soldiers as if it was a Jihad against an invading Crusader army.
This is unfortunate because America's desire was to build a democratic rule of law under the aegis of a stable government. Iraq is so divided by Radical Mohammedanism from foreign Sunnis and Iran influenced Shi’ites, I am of the opinion that Western Democracy will not take hold as the rule of law in Iraq.
Thus there is the appearance that the Neocon strategy of transformation in the Middle East is a failed strategy. Since it was the Neocon baby, it is the Neocons that are the stigma and scapegoats of a failed nation building strategy.
Something to consider: who had a better or even an alternative plan? Answer: NO ONE!
Neocon strategists have developed another plan. I have not heard a person who identifies himself as a Neocon say the nation building democracy plan is currently a failure. There is a certain amount of political hubris as there is with all political ideologies. Do not think for a minute that Left Wing thinking is devoid of hubris. After all Left Wing utopianism is alive and strong even after the collapse of the Communist Soviet Union as a failed structure for governing people. That also is hubris.
In America the Left Wing plan for the War on Terrorism in Iraq is to cut-n-run enabling the appearance of victory to Islamofascism and radical Mohammedanism. That strategy will only allow the continued growth and eventual domination of the radical reactionary interpretations of Mohammed, the Quran, the Hadiths, the Sunna and Sharia Law and so on. The concept of a moderate Mohammedanism is shrinking daily in the Mohammedan dominated nations and Mohammedan minorities in Western lands. Clearly the cut-n-run strategy is will mess up the global future of Western Civilization.
The Neocons and (smart) Conservatives are calling for a “troop surge” to alter strategy to confront terrorists with a more root out the rodent vermin goal. Then extricate American troops. If democracy latches on in Iraq or Afghanistan, it will be a Mohammedan cultural version. Civil Rights and Liberty as we know will not exist in a Mohammedan democracy; however a better rule of law may develop that goes after radical terrorists in ways that only a Mohammedan can comprehend.
Or despotism may win the day because medieval thought patterns may be too entrenched in Mohammedan culture until a moderate transformation (hopefully) over takes the radical. Then America will back to the old fashioned client States. The Client States will receive American support for existence as long as they quell the radicals in their nation. Both versions may not be amenable to American and Western National Interests.
President Bush has assigned General Patraeus to replace General Abizaid as the Commander land troops in Iraq. He will employ the NEW military strategy and we will see where the chips fall. If the Democratic Congress interferes with Patraeus, the new strategy will certainly fail. Let us think long term and not short term. The short term will result in long term anguish for America and the West. The Short term will embolden current minority Mohammedans to embrace its radical nature, placing the so-called moderate on the shelf of insignificance.
Sandy Berger: This is a man that worked as National Security Advisor to President Slick Willie Clinton. As National Security Advisor, Berger was obviously privy to Classified Documents and Classified knowledge undertaken under the direction of the Clinton Administration.
Sandy Berger at the request of and request of Slick Willie acquired post Clinton Administration access to Classified Documents at the National Archive. Berger destroyed the Classified Documents he selected. This is act is heinous enough, however it happened on MORE than one occasion. Berger went FOUR times to the National Archives before he was caught destroying sensitive documents probably relating to Clinton information on words or actions taken that would not find favorable light.
This smacks of a HUGE conspiracy! Berger takes the fall. Slick Willie again escapes from a tarnished link to illegality. AND Senator Hillary Clinton thus gets a coat of Teflon in which no scum of impropriety sticks.
Here is the Real Clear Politics analysis of Berger’s acts of treason.
