Wednesday, April 29, 2009


Here's a little gem that reinforces my claim of hypocrisy leveled against folks like Dan who are oh-so concerned about the moral dilemma of harsh interrogation techniques applied against uncooperative terrorist detainees believed to have actionable intel regarding plots to murder our own people or allies. I believe this concern to be totally fraudulent particularly when considering what actually occurs during the termination of a pregnancy. The same people who wring their hands over the discomfort of a sadistic terrorist have no problem defending the "choice" that results in the dismemberment of an infant. To support such a heinous procedure gives weight to the opinion that concern for a detainee's comfort is little more than a ruse to disguise the desire to further attack the Bush administration for the crime of having legally won the 2000 election. Just as they didn't care about winning the war, or more accurately, losing it if it would reflect badly on Bush, they now have no care for the consequences that war crimes investigations would have on our security, the ability to gather intelligence or the ability to protect our people. Their regard for the moral highground is a lie.

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Can't Let Go

This torture debate still holds my attention. The comments in opposition to my opinion on the subject reflect what I consider to be misguided by some, and completely dishonest by others. Those are the two possibilities I'll recognize because "stupid" is only alternative. So for this post, I'm going to offer a number of opinion pieces that keep the issue in its proper perspective.

Kyle-Anne Shiver
Rob Miller
Lee Cary
Thomas Sowell
Lorie Byrd
Debra J. Saunders

These are just a few examples of serious and open-eyed opinion on the subject. Of the many angles covered in these pieces, the most salient I believe is dispelling the notion that we are somehow immoral in our use of enhanced techniques, whether they are labelled as "torture" or not. None of the articles insist that we are perfect or mistake free, but that we are striving to do our best to protect our people and for that we need not apologize nor beg the approval of either the world, or self-serving Bush-haters here at home, disguised as people who care about the high road.

Monday, April 27, 2009

Clarification on Torture

Just to keep things on track, should anyone wish to add to this discussion, or perhaps to refine and clarify my position.

1) I do not condone abusing fellow human beings for the sake of inflicting harm. If we are at war, we inflict harm in battle and do so with the notion that we are defending some principle or ideal, mostly dealing with the lives of our people or allies. This makes the harm we do justified as well as necessary. Thus, to protect lives, we inflict harm on those who threaten those lives. It is a form of self-defense.

2) I do not condone abusing captives taken in battle for the sake of causing them further harm. However, since I consider the enemy equivalent to any other criminal or scumbag, I don't believe we are required to make their incarceration perfectly comfortable. They've done wrong or we wouldn't be fighting them. Therefor they deserve food, shelter and medical care, but not life on their terms.

3) Though I cannot control how other people define "torture", I do not have to accept every definition for the sake of arguing this issue. Thus far, it appears the harshest form of enhanced interrogation technique is what is known as waterboarding. Nonetheless, I will from this point call anything that causes the least bit of discomfort "torture" so as to get past this dubious point of contention. I'm tired of arguing with people who I don't believe are sincere in their stated concerns for the "victims of torture" or how it makes us look to the world to use these techniques or if they feel ashamed that their government ever uses these techniques. So, its all torture. Their incarceration, even if justified by their having shot to death civilians, then members of our military who sought to stop them, along with their constant insistence that they hope to kill us all, even their incarceration is torture. There. Satisfied?

4) I believe there are times when we, as the good guys of a Christian nation (yeah, Barry, we're still mostly a Christian nation, you fraud) are totally justified in the use of some forms of torture in order to save the lives of our people, our troops or our allies.

5) I believe that despite the liklihood of exceptions (because there always are), our government does not employ enhanced interrogation techniques without just cause or without the firm belief of a professional experienced in the field that actionable intel can be aquired from a given suspect by doing so, and that nothing will be gained unless those techniques are employed.

6) I believe that in these cases we are not only justified, but that our position morally is not affected in the least, because I believe that we do not enter into these situations by choice, but do so out of necessity.

7) I believe that the situation, together with the uncooperative nature of a given suspect forces our hand and thus any guilt for using enhanced techniques is totally on the suspect.

8) I believe that for the party of nuance to not see how one could engage in violent behavior, inflict pain and distress upon another human being and still retain the moral high-ground exposes them as fraudulent in their position and merely looking to cast the opposing party in the worst possible light.

9) I believe any life lost due to the concern for the comfort of a terrorist believed by the experts to have actionable intel is on the shoulders of those who acted to strip our government of their use. They are complicit in such deaths.

10) I believe that the biggest mistake was when the first lefty decided to try to use "torture" as a means to discredit George W. Bush and his administration. To put our country in a position where it has to state publicly its position on the use of enhanced techniques has put us in greater harm, as it has eliminated another reason for bad guys to fear us. It doesn't matter whether we use the techniques or not. It doesn't matter if we would ever use techniques that would then make us the most savage nation in the history of mankind. What matters is how the bad guys view us. What matters is what they think we're capable of doing. Thanks to the left, we are once again viewed as paper tigers, unwilling to do what is necessary to defend ourselves.

Before the left saw this as a way to get Bush, our enemies could only hope that we were too nice to be brutal. But they couldn't know for sure. Before the left once again put their lust for power before the good of the nation, the world, if it was to insist on an honest assessment of who we are, would have had to weigh our known good works against our known failures and then decide if we were likely to do the worst in interrogations of terrorists. Those who mean no harm would have no reason to believe we'd just up and attack them. Those who mean no good would never be sure that we wouldn't stop at any line of ethics in defending against their evil. Now they believe there is a line we won't cross and that will again embolden them as our flight from Mogadishu has done.

But here's the thing. Some day, someone from our side will be an evildoer himself and engage in the worst types of torture for all the wrong reasons. No law will prevent it. Or some day, someone from our side will be in a position that more closely resembles the "ticking bomb" scenario the left likes to mock as never likely, and that person will have his hands tied and civilians will die who could have been saved.

Or some day, someone from our side will be in a position that more closely resembles the "ticking bomb" scenario the left likes to mock as never likely, and he will, on behalf of those in danger, see his duty and ignore the law, use whatever technique gets the intel necessary, save lives and have his own freedom taken from him. Like David taking food for the priests to feed his starving troops, I believe God, if not the psuedo-sanctimonious left, will not judge that person harshly, knowing that what he did was righteous.

UPDATE to clarify my clarification:

11) I do not believe in the use of enhanced methods for the purpose of "fishing" or "treasure hunting". I'm confident that more often than not, our pros can tell when a suspect is a pawn and when one is a real source of intel. Only the latter would qualify for the use of enhanced techniques.

12) I'm constantly told by some that enhanced methods don't work, yet never told what the alternatives are or what intel has been had by their use. Other than simply asking politely what a suspect can tell us that would help us defeat his own people, only bribery comes to mind as possibly having any positive results. While I'm sure Dan, ER, Jim and Marty wouldn't mind having their taxes raised in order to provide funds for this purpose, can we expect to succeed with a people who don't believe it's sinful to lie to an infidel? Can we expect it to work with those for whom their faith is so strong that they would remain steadfast no matter what? What are examples of "nice" methods and how and with whom have they worked?

Friday, April 24, 2009

Torturous Torture Debate

I present here two articles describing two different notions of torture. This one I got from, and this one through the racist and poorly written

The subject of torture, more specifically, the U.S. torture of detainees and prisoners at Gitmo and elsewhere, has gotten new life with the release of memos that detail the enhanced interrogation techniques our people have been using. Of course, as indicated by Dick Cheney, those who are lamenting our "crimes against humanity" (*gack*) chose not to supply info regarding the effectiveness of using those techniques. Many have advised on the wisdom, rather, the lack thereof, of releasing these memos, but such advice was ignored. Now, or enemies know how to better prepare themselves in the event of capture.

But what is glaringly obvious is that this "horror" at the thought of a Kalid Sheik Muhammed being waterboarded is a fraud. Those who whine about "war crimes" perpetrated at the order of George W. Bush aren't concerned at all about the techniques themselves. I have yet to hear of anyone who will take the time to define what constitutes torture, but will only say that what our people have been doing is torture. No doubt those same people will be aghast at the suffering of our enemies as they endure the agony of abdominal distress while laughing uproariously at what our lefty chuckleheads consider torture.

No, it's not about torture per se. It's about using whatever possible to attack the Bush administration. They won't be satisfied until he pays for fairly and legally winning two elections against two equally buffoonish Democratic candidates. The shock and dismay they so fraudulently display at the thought of some Arab losing sleep or living with the heat dialed down is only to generate negative emotion in support of their quest to punish Bush & Co.

Now for those who insist on trying to make us believe they're concerned with our standing in the world, that we must take the high road, the moral high ground, I accuse these people of dishonesty as well. MY concern is for the safety of our people and our allies. I have little concern for those who would seek to cause us harm. Like anyone else with a brain, and a heart and sense of Christian goodwill to all, I'd prefer our enemies would prefer our friendship rather than our deaths. I'd much rather we have the means and ability to cause them to lay down their hatred once and for all and join the brotherhood of man. I believe we should do all we can to promote that paradigm shift in their hearts.

But while that's yet to be discovered and while they continue in their hatred, I will part company with those who think the lives of our people are of less importance than the comfort of those we have incarcerated. I would suffer not one simple scratch on another American or American ally at the hands of our enemies and if they have to weather some inconvenience in their living conditions at Gitmo, if they have to endure a freakin' swirly for every question unanswered, then so be it. Our techniques do not rise to the level of torture.

So the release of these memos have accomplished two things. It shows our enemies that we won't engage in activities that most people could endure with a little spine, and it shows that we haven't been engaging in the level of savagery that they do routinely. Now there is no reason to fear us at all. Now there's no point in taking prisoners at all. They won't talk. They've no fear to encourage it. Our troops can now just kill everyone they suspect of being at war with them.

It would have been far better for the lefties to just shut the hell up, protest if they must quietly through channels, instead of publicly for the world to see. It would be better if our enemies fear we are capable of worse than they could invent themselves, because we keep everything on the table, at our disposal should we decide to employ any of it, than for them to think we have limitations for which they can prepare. We don't have to employ true torture. Our enemies only have to believe we will. Then the world can judge us if they so choose, but we can stand tall when they are unable to prove that we are actually using real torture.

Of course that's all moot now, thanks to those who are more concerned with political points and world opinion than the protection of America and her allies. Their false piety has put us at risk.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

From Yet Another Email

This article says a lot about the true nature of those who support the "Day of Silence" that some schools offer these days. I'd be shocked (not really) to know that anyone would have a problem with anything Ms. Higgins has said in her article. She's obviously a victim of bullying and harassment.

I have long insisted that lies, distortions, & exaggerations have been used liberally by the homosexual activists to further their agenda. Obviously that is not news to Ms. Higgins, who reprints a few directed at her. And I have presented evidence to support my premise, and do so again here.

I'd like to believe that even with extemists on both sides of the issue (though most extremists on my side aren't really extreme at all), a compromise of sorts should be workable. However, I don't see how a true situation of reluctant contentment will ever come about when one side (that would be the other side I oppose) bases every inch of their journey on falsehoods and faulty reasoning.

In any case, the real bullying is coming from the other side. Preaching the Word, pointing out the obvious, none of that is hate or bigotry or discrimination. But should anyone dare publicly voice their opinion regarding homosexuality, and it does not align with the current politically correct (*gack!*) and pro-homosexual position, that person gets the treatment described in Ms. Higgins' article, the treatment inflicted upon Miss California by the geeky Peres Hilton, the treatment received by that old woman who's cross was viciously slapped out of her hand by tantrum-throwing activists and countless other hateful outbursts against those who disagree.

All I can say at this point is that there would be far less acrimony if these pathetic souls would hold their Day of Silence every day of the year.

Friday, April 17, 2009

From Another Email I Received

Too late for this year, but the general theme is for all time. Just as we must not end our speaking out with the end of the last Tea Party, we must not wait for the next Day of Silence, or the next "Gay Pride" Parade, or the next state to fall prey to the wrong-headed beliefs of the few over the will of its people, we must stand firmly for righteousness and reason and speak truth in the face of the lies of the activist.

I present this video, perhaps a bit dramatic, perhaps not. Notice how it also rightly speaks to any who are caught up in any sexual temptation, for it's really all the same. And as I pointed out a couple of posts down, this vid also refers to the tactics of the activist and how this Day of Silence is just another one of them. It's just another promotional event disguised as something else, at the expense of our kids.

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Is The Party Over?

I hope not. Yesterday witnessed an outpouring of sentiment from across political ideologies. People gathered in groups of thousands as well as smaller groups all over the country to protest the direction of our nation. They came together to proclaim their weariness of the same old same old and demanded REAL change, not the faux change of a Democratic presidential campaign. Strike that. Of ANY political campaign.

Conservatives were unhappy with the spending of a Republican controlled Congress. They further steamed at the stimulus and bailout policies of GW Bush. Now, with Barry's "I can spend way more than Bush" versions, even people on the left are cranky, with many thinking, "Yeah, I wanted bigger government, but this is nuts!"

And the lefty media, pundits and bloggers don't get it, calling it insanity, a right-wing "astro-turf" movement, a FoxNews stunt. Some, like Keith Olberman, referred to it as a "tea bagging" party, which is some type of homosexual reference. (Maybe Dan can enlighten us on it's meaning. He knows all about them. I'm sure it's a perfectly acceptable activity.) What idiots. Talk about phobias. They have either no clue, are scared out of their minds, or they're lying to their listeners about what's going on to demonize, marginalize and minimize those who are fed up. My money's on the lying. It's what they do.

But I digress. What I really want to say is that I hope the party isn't over. I hope that this event was actually the beginning of real involvement of the populace into the goings on of our government, and more hopefully, on all levels. We need to constantly be in touch with our representatives and let them know what we think and feel and want. We also need to be in touch with as many levels of party organizations as we can, so that they will find and support candidates that reflect what we think, feel and want.

If we do nothing more, if we fail to keep the heat on after getting their attention with this nationwide demonstration of discontent, I can guarantee everyone that absolutely nothing will change. In fact, I have no doubt that the most common thought in the intelligence-free minds of our current governmental leaders, is that this was just a tantrum by the American people, that it was mostly "right-wing extremists", and that in a week, the heat will have died down and they can get back to destroying America. Don't let it happen. Dog 'em like there's no tomorrow, because the tomorrow they're working to provide is gonna suck out loud. Make the party last until the message is perfectly understood.

Sunday, April 12, 2009

Monday, April 06, 2009

From An Email I Received

From an email I received.

This is just the type of underhanded, sneaky crap that really riles me about government in general, and liberal politics in particular. I hadn't heard anything about this and likely wouldn't have had I not been getting newsletters from this source. Everything about this agenda is against basic American priniciples, and how they seek to implement their self-serving and perverted view of the world is the worst example of it. Why backdoor it if it isn't both controversial and widely opposed? The answer is simple. It's because they realize that they lack the support and agreement of their fellow Americans, so going through normal protocols won't help them. So, because they care more for how they satisfy themselves sexually than they do their country, the welfare of children or anything else, they sneak it in when no one's paying attention, or find willing judges to over rule the will of the people.

I offer the email because the author covers several bases, but not nearly all as regards the underhandedness and out and out lying that is at the heart of the pro-homosex movement. Share it with friends. Encourage everyone who doesn't think with their crotch to stand up for decency, and more than that, defend a kid's right to be free of the influence of those who DO think with their crotches. They have it tough enough as it is without being exposed to such things on purpose.

And while you're at it, encourage those who support the National Day of Silence to really go for it and shut the hell up every day.

Medal of Honor

Over at Mark's blog, Casting Pearls Before Swine, he had a post about a Medal of Honor winner. In the comments section, we were remarking how difficult it is to think of any others and came up with only two, Audie Murphy and Alvin York. He then directed me to a blog devoted to listing them called simply, Medal of Honor Recipients. I now present it here under Places of Interest. Everyone should have a link to it.