From “The Hill”

Hastert tells President Bush FBI raid was unconstitutional
By Patrick O’Connor

House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) told President Bush yesterday that he is concerned the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) raid on Rep. William Jefferson’s (D-La.) congressional office over the weekend was a direct violation of the Constitution.

The rest of the article, as do many others, goes on to say something went of the tracks constitiutionally.

What I haven’t seen, but then this is America and the era of the mass media who seems to rarely check facts anymore, is a reference to any part of the Constitution that states, directly, or even indirectly implies, that the Congress is exempt from any action, decsision or regulation of the other two branches of the Federal Government.

There is a reference to the Speech and Debate Clause here:

In the Speaker’s lengthy statement, Hastert complained that the seizure of legislative papers, no matter how innocuous, was a violation of the “the principles of Separation of Powers, the independence of the Legislative Branch, and the protections afforded by the Speech and Debate clause of the Constitution.”

In Article 1, Section 6 of the Consititution of the United States, it does say members of the Congress can’t be arrested, but to leave it at this would fall unde the “partial truth” rule, which I once heard a wise man say: “A partial truth is a whole lie.” Read on for why this applies.

My presumed applicable extract from the Constitution that is being referenced (since Denny Hasert won’t say exactly what part he’s discussing:

“..be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House,…”

The history behind why this Spech and Debate clause exists, with freedom from arrest precedes even American history, with some good logic. From FindLaw.com:

Privilege of Speech or Debate

Members .–This clause represents ”the culmination of a long struggle for parliamentary supremacy. Behind these simple phrases lies a history of conflict between the Commons and the Tudor and Stuart monarchs during which successive monarchs utilized the criminal and civil law to suppress and intimidate critical legislators. Since the Glorious Revolution in Britain, and throughout United States history, the privilege has been recognized as an important protection of the independence and integrity of the legislature.” 380 So Justice Harlan explained the significance of the speech-and-debate clause, the ancestry of which traces back to a clause in the English Bill of Rights of 1689 381 and the history of which traces back almost to the beginning of the development of Parliament as an independent force. 382 ”In the American governmental structure the clause serves the additional function of reinforcing the separation of powers so deliberately established by the Founders.” 383 ”The immunities of the Speech or Debate Clause were not written into the Constitution simply for the personal or private benefit of Members of Congress, but to protect the integrity of the legislative process by insuring the independence of individual legislators.” 384

The protection of this clause is not limited to words spoken in debate. ”Committee reports, resolutions, and the act of voting are equally covered, as are ‘things generally done in a session of the House by one of its members in relation to the business before it.”’ 385 Thus, so long as legislators are ”acting in the sphere of legitimate legislative activity,” they are ”protected not only from the consequence of litigation’s results but also from the burden of defending themselves.” 386 But the scope of the meaning of ”legislative activity” has its limits. ”The heart of the clause is speech or debate in either House, and insofar as the clause is construed to reach other matters, they must be an integral part of the deliberative and communicative processes by which Members participate in committee and House proceedings with respect to the consideration and passage or rejection of proposed legislation or with respect to other matters which the Constitution places within the jurisdiction of either House.” 387 Immunity from civil suit, both in law and equity, and from criminal action based on the performance of legislative duties flows from a determination that a challenged act is within the definition of legislative activity, but the Court in the more recent cases appears to have narrowed the concept somewhat.

There is more, but I think that quotation covers much of the issue.

Now, I’m not a lawyer, but I thankfully am a graduate of a school system before the NEA got their hooks into it, so I can still read and know a few big words. Taking the entire Article 1, Section 6 of the Constitution and reading it gives an entirely new spin to this discussion, one in which I would say was the definitive one:

Section 6.

The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

This section clearly says Congress people will still be allowed to attend Congressional sessions if they have committed minor crimes, read: misdemeanors. Felony charges are not exempted, which, taking bribes would constitute. And even at that, it only applies during the time of the sessions, and the travel too and from. When Congress is in recess, they are, under this section, subject to having to be just plain old citizens from a law enforcement standpoint.

From FindLaw on this Article:

Privilege From Arrest

This clause is practically obsolete. It applies only to arrests in civil suits, which were still common in this country at the time the Constitution was adopted. 376 It does not apply to service of process in either civil 377 or criminal cases. 378 Nor does it apply to arrest in any criminal case. The phrase ”treason, felony or breach of the peace” is interpreted to withdraw all criminal offenses from the operation of the privilege. 379

The Congress is protected, when it comes right down to it, just as we are. They are free to debate, but they still cannot commit felonious acts, nor acts of treason (do you hear that, Congressman Murtha?). Not above any law, but it just clearly laid out a protection of allowing them to speak during sessions of Congress. Once the final gavel drops, they are subject to be accountable for their actions, as any of us would be.

From a pratical standpoint, Congress is specifically given the duty and responsibility of passing laws. The Executive branch is then obligated to enfoce them. If the Executive Branch had the ability to pass laws, then also enforce them, it would be a completely different debate, but our Founding fathers wisely did not give the Executive Branch the abillity to put laws in place. All the Justice Department and the FBI did was to hold a citizen accountable for the breaking of a law, which was passed by Congress. How can this come close to the issues for the reasons the Speech and Debate was written in the first place?

Hey, Representative Jefferson: Who passed the law against bribing of Federal officials? It sure is tough playing by your own rules, isn’t it? That comes back to my single most important lesson from War College: It’s allways dangerous to set a precedent, for you never know when you will have to live by it yourself.

Note: In the writing of this post, or in the story that has drawn so much ire from Congressional representatives, NO ACTUAL CONGRESSMEN WERE ARRESTED, nor were any harmed, except for their feelings getting hurt.

Oh, yeah, I was in my wallet last night and realized I have “Legislative Papers” of my own…..

I may be worng, for like a good chilled wine, there may be temperature specifications, besides physical ones, that define what really qualifies as “legislative papers.”

Thanks to Mudville Gazette for the Open Post.

A long time ago (now) in my universe which seems so far away (removed by 20+ years), I recevied training in Soviet Doctrine. The instructors were very knowledgeable regarding the attachment of Soviet political officers to virtually every unit, and how the indoctrination into Communist Party thought took primacy over tactical training.

With our somewhat justified arrogance, we felt quite superior in our ability to train for the fight first and then there were some other details to be discussed. I read the news these days, and see we have become much like those we won a major war against, the war to save people from the subjugation under socialist totalitarian rule.

Not to say there are not some issues that needed to be addressed, but somewhere along the line, we have forgotten that most everyone who has served, or is serving in the US Military, are good and decent people with fine moral compasses that work well. We also seem to have forgotten that bad things happen, but the normal condition is good, and the very abnormal conditions don’t show up very often in our society, and therefore within our Military as a whole.

The society of “me” has taken over and the team mentality has been left for professional sports it seems, if you do see any evidence of it reported. In actuality, that isn’t the truth, for major natural, and not so natural disasters in this country and even outside of our borders, show that Americans can roll up their sleeves and collectively get their hands dirty to “git ‘r done.”

The MSM/HBM would have you believe otherwise, not by telling you that teamwork has died, but negelecting to ever report it often, possibly hoping you’ll forget and then filter your other decisions through data points of what is being reported.

Back at the ranch the purpose of this post:

Because of an incident, or which little reality has been sorted out just yet, in the manner in which any of us, being in the boots of the Marines and Corpsman, would certainly want to be, the Marines (and I’ll predict the Army will soon “follow in their wake”) will all get “core values” training.

My response: Great. Just. Flippin. Great. Great idea: Lets stop everything we are doing, and tell those who had nothing to do with this, that they need to be mindful of a set of standards that has been successfully serving them for years. No doubt, some handsome checks will be written to some egghead, never wore a uniform types, to pull from pop current cultural info just what it is Marines need to know about how to react in battle, or around civilians. Just what’s needed: Pile more money on people to create a “cirriculum” to be presented (no doubt with a strong warning to do it by reading it exactly), so the Marines can then tell the people of the nation “we told them!”

Hey! Note to Generals: You’re supposed to lead, not react. Marines in an ambush are to react. Get a clue and tell the world your Marines are already the most well versed warriors, in terms of how to handle a war where the enemy has no flag, no uniform, uses actual civilians as ablative shielding and “PR” fodder, has been known to purposely set up multiple IEDs to continue attacks, etc, etc, etc, in the entire world, if not the best versed in all of the history of mankind in conflict….Don’t shield murderers, but don’t you dare fry the innocents just to keep the public opinion polls up for the war and the President.

So, to wrap up, back to the Soviets. They had their brain washing sessions and had to toe the party line. The consequences were not just being passed over for the next promotion, but they could be far more terminal. There are a variety of issues in the past decade that have caused us to halt when one person, or small unit, goes “off the reservation,” be in in dating realtionships, community “get togethers,” sexual encounters, or just because someone got their feeling hurt over a word they didn’t like, and use up valuable man hours that could be used to train warfighters to be even better.

What a message we send to the troops in the field? Maybe something like this:

Generals of Marines: “We will not have you embarassing us!”

Troops in the Open: “What did we do now?”

GOMs: “Well, we know it wasn’t you directly, but…(note the “but” – “disregard everything I said before “but” but) if one did it, then one more of you may do it and we want to make sure you understand not to do that.”

TsIO: “It wasn’t us, it was a few guys somewhere else.”

GOMs: “Not to worry, we can’t afford another publicity attack like this again, so, this is an order: Sit down, listen to the training we are sending out. report up the chain of command attendance, and if some don’t receive training on the appointed day, follow up and report completion of training to all hands. Make service record entries to document attendance. And, in case it wasn’t clear, we do mean this is ‘All Hands’ training, with NO EXCEPTIONS!”

TsIO: “Aye, aye, sir!”

The more I think about it, the more I realize this is becoming a very lawyer-like approach to damage control, and more like the way civilians, private sector businesses handle things: Give the employee a book/manual/seminar. Write down they went. If they do anything to violate that, hands have been washed in advance, and management can declare: “It wasn’t my fault!” It helps in keeping law suits away in the civilian sector….

I personally was involved in one such follow up, whcih I intend to blog about during the anniversary of the time frame when it occured. Suffice it to say I travlled the entire East Coast fleet, to include chasing some ships as far as the Red Sea, just to be able to file reports saying “that will never happen again” when it was one ship that failed and killed people in an exercise. It was a fairly costly trip for four of us, not to mention the four jobs that had to be covered by others for a period of almost three months.

We have become, in this case, our former enemy. I guess I’ll continue to wonder at what is causing us to continue to adopt the methods and procedures of failure….

The solution: Get the general and flag officers to let the American people know, and the President, that it will be handled properly, in accordance with the UCMJ, and that our military is well equipped to do the right thing. Oh, yeah, people with stars on their collars: Act like you believe in abd trust your people. It was you who trained them….

Note to the more refined readers: One “label” above was picked for the symbolism, not by accident…

Fianl note to BGCol Karpinski: Shut up and shit down. You’re not in the loop or the game. You failed, take it like and officer who was given great responibility. Many have been in your shoes, so quit whining.

Thanks to Mudville Gazette for the Open Post.

A friend emailed me this link to a video of a baseball play that now has been recorded as one of the top 100 plays made….but…it’s not really about baseball.

In Apr, 1976, Rick Monday made a play that saved a flag from being burned on the field. Enjoy the clip with Rick telling the story this year of that incident 30 years ago.

An open letter to all of the members of Congress

Dear Congress People;

I think I once learned I was one of those “We the People” in some document about this country. I may be wrong, but I’m going on that premise, so please bear with me.

I believe you are also some of those people and that would mean all of use are working within the game rules of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitiution of the United States (as modified by the Bill of Rights and other ratified amendments).

What’s the big deal about the FBI searching one of your offices? Most all of you are lawyers, so I think there should be more of you that understand the rule of law better than us “little people” who aren’t popular enough to have been sent to do the business of a Nation, and at this point in history, the best one there is. So, when there is a crime being committed in your very midst, why shouldn’t a judge use his judgement, when he is presented the case, in authorizing a search where there is the reasonable cause to believe the evidence is there?

Unless you have become completely detached from reality, it certainly seems most everyone in the country seems to not want criminals in their presense, most particulalry when they are actively participating in such activity.

we (us little people) have heard some of you, very emotionally, complain that you thought the President (several of them by the way) was acting as thought they were above the law. While I haven’t heard it said, it seems to me that someone who would claim there was some sort of illegal activity that interefered with the authority of one branch of the Government by another branch, it almost sounds to me like there is something to hide. You make laws that require the common person to have some of their data retained and then chide those who complain with statements like “If you’re not doing anything wrong, what do you have to hide?”

I’d ask that question of you (collectively). If there’s nothing wrong being done, then there would not have been an opportunity to have this discussion in the first place. By grandstanding about this issue of law maker’s offices being searched being bad, you aren’t really building a lot of confidence in me that all is right in your world.

My humble advice: Act like you are part of the “we the People” like the rest of us. That means if you are doing something wrong, face it and the consequences that follow.

Oh, and better yet: Follow the very laws of the land that you craft and send forward for the President’s signature. Big hint here: It keeps you from having to face ugly consequences.

I’ll trust you a lot more if you begin doing that and I suspect your approval ratings, which are kinda tanked right now, will get much, much better.

I feel pretty embarassed to be giving such common sense advice to people of your exeperience and education, but the current events make me think you’ve lost your common sense.

Thanks for letting me share, but I feel better thanking a bunch of dead men, who had real character and foresight, for seeing the freedom of expression was a vital thing for a healthy society. It was them who gave the rights to me, not you.

While listening to Bill Bennet’s talk show enroute work this morning, he said this:

“You remain an alien to your culture if your history is denied.”

I believe he said that was said by someone named Kolkowski, but I might be mistaken.

It certainly rings true. Consider that fact the school boards all around the country are busy purging non-“PC” text books from use.

Consider how politicians and other public figures can stand before us in person and in the media and make blod faced lies about history, for the education system has long since ceased teaching history in favor of other subjects.

If you don’t have a clue as to what’s being talked about, then they can say anything. Thanks, NEA, for the dumbimg down of the American youth. ANd BTW, NEA members, don’t complain about the workload caused by standardized testing, which controls the flow of federal funds to you, for you willingly accepted less from the students, so as to not hurt their feelings, and now the tests are just a logical consequence of trying to hold you accountable for earning your paycheck now…

The MSM seems stuck on a diet of fear, which has the ability to cause readers to pay more attention, and therefore more attention is also paid to the advertizing. Once those things are connected, then the MSM can show the potential advertizers just how much more they can make, so they should pay for more/larger ads….

New Orleans. A Cat 5 storm headed in. People stranded and then isolated. Cries that the government didn’t protect them, feed them, or even care about them as bands of criminals roved about, doing what they do with impunity. I know, you know all that, because CNN/seeBS/NBC, etc told you all about the horrors.

Then, strangely enough, the stories of the bands of criminals is debunked, and reported, but in muted stories from the MSM.

So, if you’re interested in how much more wrong the media was, in their reporting of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina coming to the Gulf Coast, get a cup of coffe, find a comfortable chair and get ready to see the record set straight.

Lou Dolinar lays it out over at Real Clear Politics in the post Katrina: What the Media Missed.”

Maybe it’s more aptly titled: “Katrina: What They Wouldn’t Report for Fear of Losing Their Grip on Your Aversion to Fear.”

I hope you have taken (or will take) the time to read that the greatest rescue in history was affected by members of the regualrly belittled federal government, as well as hard working people locally, particularly the first responders. They deserve acknowledgement, yet I suspect that won’t happen in the open press, for someone might raise the question: “Why didn’t you tell us this before?”

H/T: Castle Argghhh!

I picked this up from Little Green Footballs this morning.

It seems a man named Jessie MacBeth has done an interview regarding his time in Iraq as a Ranger. The interview is done in three parts over on YouTube and are quite interesting to listen to, if only to hear a clear echo of testimony from the 1970’s by a man named John Kerry.

As far as looking at details that provide indications as to the supporting facts, Uncle Jimbo, with his tag team partner, Matt lend their life experience of many years of Army life (with much time spent in the Special Operations world between them) and…they think the dude is a fake. They and their cxommenters point out dramatic irregularities with the photo Jessie has on the net. It seems many uniform infractions are noted, and that, wouldn’t be allowed in one of those official pictures.

Me? Well, I’m a Navy guy who went to an Amry school. I will say I spent time playing agressor against the Army ROTC guys, at the urging omy my Army ROTC classmates, who did go to Ranger School during summer time. From the stories they told, and having spent four years with these men, Jessie sure doesn’t seem to be the type that would have lasted in such training, let alone a Ranger field unit.

I found it strange that Jessie never seemed to digress into a worl of what most civilians would consider a strange language, full of acroynms and codewords. There are at least four “dialects” spoken, with the uniquness a relation to the service branch, and then there is also “Chief” or “Sargent” subdialects, but I digress. Jessie used the term “hooah” once in the early part of the interview, and, as I reflect on that, it didn’t seem like more than a word to him. I’d have thought a Ranger would use it as though it was a natural part of his vocabulary, with a noticable “accent” to it. Throughout the rest of the speaking, he spoke English that just about anyone could follow, except for his stutter. I think his stuttering would have also been a major problem with him getting into any unit where rapid and consise communications demark the difference between life and death.

Lisening to him talk, I heard:

• The war was based on lies;
• The war was for oil;
• Our country has become the terrorists;
• Our men had killed, in cold blood, Iraqi civilians “I didn’t keep count, but at least 200 by my hand;”
• He loved his country;
• He would fight for this country, but not for the President;
• The only fighting he would do was to get George Bush out of office.

Pardon me, but aren’t almost all of those sentiments/statements the same ones used by John Kerry in the early 70s? The model is even the same, where a service member claims the military is commiting genocide, and he even was a part of it. He needs a great lawyer, if his statements are true, for he is what we would call a serial murderer, and, if he had bothered to spent a few moments reading history, specifically the reports of the Nuremburg Trials, he would know that following orders of your superiors is no defense at all for your immoral actions.

Jessie seemed pretty calm when discussing the entire issue. I have a good friend who is working thru PTSD from his days as a Marine in Vietnam. He still tells me, even within his group therapy, it is difficult to discuss many things that happened back then, and he is a strong man. Jessie seems to be a wallflower, and not really affected by the brutality of killing 200 people himslef, let alone the many others he claims to have witnessed in the building the Air Force bombed.

The bottom line to me: His story is superficial to the point I’d say he may never have been in the service, but if he was, he was an administrative or logisitcs worker, far, far from the front. In addition, he doesn’t have the demeanor of ex-service personnel.

I think this young man got handed a script, prepared by anti-war activists, and he memorized it. I think he got sold down the river and the blogosphere will soon have cross-examined enough of Jessie’s life to proclaim this is just one more hoax in a series.

Update 5/23/2006: As Jim Neighbors would have said….”SURPRISE!, SURPRISE!, SURPRISE!!!!” It seems Jessie’s Army service record is not found in the US ARMY records. The many of “An Army of Davids” chimed in well within 24 hours and ferreted out the truth based on their discrete knowledge. BZ!

On the other hand, the interview didn’t have to be around long in this counrty, only long enough to get loose, like a bad case of the swine flu. I’m sure many people in the rest of the world have downloaded the three parts from YouTube and they are making their rounds to whip up anti-US opinion.

All we need now is Dan Rather to come back to comment on how the Jessie MacBeth videos were fake, but accurate…

Just what do Shannon Falkner and those illegally in this country have in common?

Shannon Falkner, back in the early 80s, applied to attend The Citadel in Charleston, SC and was accepted. That doesn’t sound bad, particularly with a strong academic record. In case you’re not away, which is a crucial puzzle piece for this analysis, back then, The Citadel was a male only school. Shannon, being a name that could imply either gender, is a woman. She had “forgotten” to fill out the gender block on the application form, and, just when you think your assumptions won’t bite you, the board reviewing records obviously didn’t frame the fact that a potential cadet would specifically mislead them.

Subsequently, the acceptance, was recinded, once Shannon and her lawyers got a national media audience as soon as the acceptance letter was received. They really intended all of this as a specific assault on a system. I’ll leave the complimentary debate on this part of the issue out now, for it’s not really material to the intended discussion.

Once the acceptance was withdrawn, the court battles began, and the federal courts ruled Shannon was to be allowed to matriculate into The Citadel. This part of the process took about two school years.

Once The Citadel was ordered to accept her, more maneuvering began. All “knobs” receive, one day one, as almost one of the very first things, a paid for haircut. It should be more proeprly be called a hair removal, that is only about 98% successful. Boy, does it feel strange to rub your hand over your almost bare scalp, but this was an accepted part of the entry procedure, which had a greater meaning in the grand scheme of things. With all males, people complained, but, you still lost your hair.

One of the more public “debates” that followed was the demand that Shannon’s hair not be cut,because it would be humiliating for a woman to have this happen. The end result, was she wouldn’t get the full cut, like all the men did. There were several other issues, and I was stationed in VA at the time, so I couldn’t keep up with the many other issues. The net result was Shannon’s lawyers got her several “concessions” as to how she would be given the experience of “Knob Year.”

Why was there the push for a women to get into The Citadel? The arguments revolved around “the good old boys club” professional fraternity, with the entry path coming via the all male institution. The lawyers wanted to know why should women be deprived of the experience of The Citadel system, the gave this advantage? Not a bad discussion to consider at all.

Now, begin assembling the puzzle: Shannon and her legal team demanded a female be given the system experience, so they could later be considered a part of the “club,” yet they also, having won the right to get a foot in the door, began telling the 100+ year old system, which must have been successful, for Ms. Falkner wanted it, just how that experience would be given to Shannon. That’s the rub. Her very presense, under these imposed changes, automatically altered the very system she desired to experience. How could she get it, being partially isolated from her fellow “knobs,” and still having hair, while the men did not?

Consider this with the illegal aliens, who came to this country because there is economic opportunity, and many freedoms not regualrly seen in other countries, particularly their own, yet they begin to demand just how they will accept their acceptance.

We value the power of the vote in this country and we argue and debate and say bad words to each other on various issues, but we, in some cases grudgingly, accept the results of a duly held election/vote.

Here’s my suggestion to the illegal aliens: You came here to get what you could not get at home. You were drawn here, because the American experience, while not the first republic style of democracy in history, it has evolved much further and has made us, a country of immigrants, able to not do what didn’t work and to adopt and refine what did/does from other cultures and history. If you have an idea on how to do it better, get it on a ballot, convince us it’s a better way and we’ll all vote on it, or let our elected representatives know how we feel, and therefore get them to vote in our stead.

Oh, you say you can’t vote if you’re not a citizen? Yes, that’s right. You know how to fix that, too. Get to the authorities and begin the process to become one, legally, and then join the debate, and exercise your vote.

The mass riots in the streets to helpt decide the outcome of such significant issues doesn’t work well where you came from so I ask why you’d want to try doing it the less effective way once more? If you really like to influence governments in the manner of large crowds, go home and do it there.

Once more, I remind the illegals that you came here because iwe have been a nation to “borrow” the good things of many other societies, while rejecting the bad, so, take a chance, try it the American way…you might just find you like it a lot better.

From the great poster and former blogger, Fjordman, a regular commenter on Litte Green Footballs in the comments for this article “Muslim Groups will march with Illegals”:

I am always working on several posts at the same time, now including one called “Another American Century or Another American Civil War?” You Americans need to understand just how much is at stake here. We are in the early stages of a world war with Islam, Muslims are working to get nuclear weapons and are openly calling for the physical destruction of the West. Your enemies are watching the way you are handling the illegal situation, and they are not impressed. Do you think the North Koreans or the Iranians are scared of a country that allows itself to be intimidated and held hostage by a bunch of Mexicans who shouldn’t even be in the country in the first place? When you’re a supwerpower, the line of separation between domestic and foreign policy hardly exists. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union was impressed by the way Ronald Reagan handled the blackmail by the air trafic controllers. He simply fired them. This signalled to your enemies abroad that you were not going to give into black mail anywhere.

What is at stake here is your credibility as a superpower. In the longer run, it could be your physical security from nuclear attacks, perhaps even your very survival as a coherent nation state.

DO NOT give in to Mexican intimidation. Build the fence, and deport the illegals. Yes, ALL of them. No amnesty.

We are facing decades of what could potentially become the deadliest war in human history, where the very survival of Western civilization and perhaps human civilization in general hangs in the balance. We cannot win this without you. You are the indispensible nation, and if you break down, the rest of the planet is basically screwed.

Fjordman also has some thought provoking info at the Gates of Vienna blog. He has been reporting on the spreading problems Eurabia is seeing from the massive immigration without assimilation. Here is one of his recent posts: “New Oslo Peace Process”.

He may be our Paul Revere for this time in history. Are we willing to consider his analysis?

Update 4/29/2006: Daily there is more international news, not reported by the MSM with any detail, on what lies ahead. I submit our “tolerance” of the “religion of peace” is doing nothing more than bringing on a world conflict, which, but all written history, begun as the followers of Mohammed spread their religion/politics across the middle east, into the Indian subcontinent, and then to Europe within about the time frame of one century. The fighting that has taken the lines of battle back and forth since then is what we are still engaged in. With the addition of nuclear weaponry, modern telecommunications and international travel by air, the battle lines are no longer measurabel on a map. Fjordman has it half right in his coming article, but I am rapidly coming to tne belief that the coming American Civil War (stay tuned for the Battle of the Illegal Immigrants on May 1, 2006) is merely a cover stroy for the coming global war on all things not Islamic. See this story on “Judgement Day”, not brought to you by President Bush and his cabal of right wing Biblical friends, but another president that is quickly having his name become a household word…it’s not going to be pretty and the size of our amred forces will not be large enough to take it on as we are now. The draft will be for more than just the sons of Republicans, but for all those who do not desire to live in slavery to the thoughts of a 7th century epileptic.

Dear sirs:

A caller to a radio talk show today reminded me of a man from history that should be your role model. The problem is, you all have now gotten out, and can’t pull this off. Sucks to miss the opportunity to rush through a salinet and tear up the rear of the enemy, does it?

Sorry, I digress, so to my point, three words: GENERAL Billy Mitchell.