re: "Bolton: Biden's Statement that Taliban Not Our Enemy Was No Gaffe"

Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs (" Evil is made possible by the sanction you give it. Withdraw your sanction. ") agreed with Amb. Bolton's characterization.

Money quote(s):

"The Taliban does not share Western values, goals, objectives. The Taliban's playbook is the qur'an and its stated aims.

The whole idea of a moderate Taliban or a moderate Islam is false"

Reasonable people can disagree whether or not there can be a moderate Islam.

(CAA believes in it on alternating days, himself.)

"Never mind their role in 9/11. Never mind their hosting al-Qaeda camps and working with al-Qaeda.

It amounts to surrender, to prostration before the jihadist enemy.

Now, we know old Joe is none too bright, but here Bolton explains: this was no gaffe."

And here's why:

"Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton said Tuesday that Joe Biden’s statement that the Taliban is not America's enemy in Afghanistan was not a gaffe, but instead the vice president was “articulating what the White House strategy is.” Biden made his remarks in a recent Newsweek interview, but the Obama administration is saying they were taken out of context

“I don’t think this is a gaffe by Joe Biden — I think he is articulating what the White House strategy is — I think they know exactly what they are trying to do,” Bolton told Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren. “They are trying to redefine the terrorist threat to be a limited group of al-Qaida people along the Afghan-Pakistan border.

“They are going to redefine Taliban away from that — they are going to ignore Taliban in the Arabian Peninsula, and al-Qaida in Iraq, and al-Qaida in North Africa,” Bolton said. “And they’re going to say it’s just that one little thing: We’ve killed Osama bin Laden — the war on terror is over.”"

Based upon my own sporadic observations regarding Vice Pres. Biden's tendency to "gaffe," I wouldn't urgently disagree with Amb. Bolton's assessment.

VP Biden sometimes says things that suggest he's regurgitating, in his own words, the substance of things about which he's been briefed. Specifically, I'm thinking about his remarks a few years ago about the H1N1 flu virus and air travel.

He seems to speak uncomfortable truths, as he understands them and based upon some frank and factual briefings (i.e., not for public distribution), and wholly without regard for the political, economic, or diplomatic fallout. Indeed, he says them without any apparent consciousness that there could be, even should be, such repercussions.

"Bolton said the Taliban treats anyone who does not agree with them horribly."

Word.

""It reminds me of Vietnam. Remember Sen. George Aiken, the Republican of Vermont? It was clear to him that we didn’t have the stamina to go on and actually win,” Bolton said. “So the George Aiken strategy: We’ll declare victory and get out — that is what the administration is going to do in the war on terror. Having redefined who the terrorists are and having said the Taliban is not our enemy, they’re going to say we have won and the war is over.""

And, if we'd put some of our HVT Taliban officials on the other side of a conference table, gotten them to publicly disavow Al Qaeda and UBL, and made it clear that if we ever had to come back to Afghanistan it would not be with gentle words and reconstruction budgets....

....all of that before we'd spent a decade nation-building and taking casualties, then this would have been a reasonable, if limited, outcome for our intervention there.

"The jihad against the U.S. will continue all over the world, not just in Afghanistan."

12/21

re: "Freedom vs Slavery: Ros-Lehtinen vs. Clinton"

Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs (" Evil is made possible by the sanction you give it. Withdraw your sanction. ") remarked on the chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Money quote(s):

"The UN is, at best, the collective negation of humanity. The reality is that it has become the headquarters of the modern universal caliphate, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. The American people are funding this supremacist monster. The backroom drama over this funding is heating up between Hillary Clinton and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.

Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen is trying to get Bill H.R. 282 passed in Congress to de-fund the parasitic world body"

The U.N. encompasses quite a bit of programmatic territory, some good, some not-so-good, some downright counter-productive.

"Ileana Ros-Lehtinen is one of the great unsung heroes in what is otherwise a cesspool of spineless, feckless political hacks. She is unmatched in her pursuit of freedom."

Rep. Ros-Lehtinen has been making her mark with her outspoken support of various foreign policy objectives for quite some time. And now she's in a position to really do something about them.

10/17

re: "Con Ed Says It Will Evict Ground Zero Mosqueteer For Non-Payment of Rent"

Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs ("Evil is made possible by the sanction you give it. Withdraw your sanction.") only asked the obvious questions.

Money quote(s):

"How does this guy continue to get a free pass? He expected infidel taxpayers to foot the bill. Clearly he was counting on that $5.5 million from the taxpayer 911 fund he requested, but didn't get :)

Here is the truth about the Ground Zero grifter, the story that the media never tells you. This lowlife has defaulted on two bank loans, hasn't paid his back taxes, was busted for prostitution. Gamal not only beats people up and threatens Muslims who speak out against the mosque, but he is also a tax cheat, owing a quarter of a million in taxes while defaulting on not one, but two bank loans. All this while being evicted from his Soho offices for non-payment of rent."

&

"What did this hustler do other than disrepect, offend and degrade millions of Americans with his 15-story triumphal mosque on Ground Zero?

Now Con Ed is planning to evict him for non-payment of rent. Go Con Ed! I will happily send my check off early to the electric company this month."

10/16

re: "Jihad in Manhattan"

Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs ("Evil is made possible by the sanction you give it. Withdraw your sanction.") shared an eye-opening essay:

"It is illuminating of Muslim attitudes and assumptions in New York City in the 1990s -- attitudes and assumptions that are likely to be only more, not less, prevalent today".

1/31

re: "Debunking the Biggest Lie: "Palestinian" "

Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs ("Evil is made possible by the sanction you give it. Withdraw your sanction.") shared a scholarly essay on the topic.

(Footnotes and everything!)

12/12

re: "Reconsidering Newt"

Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs ("Evil is made possible by the sanction you give it. Withdraw your sanction.") is giving former-Speaker Gingrich a second look.

Money quote(s):

"Newt turned me around when he spoke candidly about the invented "Palestinian" people. It's true, of course, but everyone is scared of the savages, so the big lie is advanced in order to keep the peace (when in fact, all it does is keep the war). I was enormously disappointed in the entire field dumping on Gingrich for telling the truth about the Muslims in Gaza and Jewish terrirtories of Judea and Samaria (known by the Arafat construct of "Palestinians"). Gingrich said what everyone knew, that the emperor has no clothes."

Since Arafat ordered the murder of at least one U.S. ambassador, I'm just not able to give a lot of credence to this invention.

"I pricked up my ears when, a few months back, Gingrich said that he would pursue the prosecutions of the unindicted co-conspirators (CAIR, MSA, MAS, ICNA, ISNA, etc.) named in the largest terrorist funding trial, the Holy Land Foundation conviction. Is it any wonder that these Muslim Brotherhood groups are quaking in their jackboots?"

If you haven't read it already, have a look at Exhibit Elbarasse Search 3. of the Holy Land Foundation trial (USA v. Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development). Scroll down to page 15 to get to the English translation, past all the Arabic.

1/2

re: "Muslims Texting Death Threats to Christians: "We want this country to be purely an Islamic state, so we must kill the infidels and destroy thei"

Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs ("Evil is made possible by the sanction you give it. Withdraw your sanction.") asked the what-comes-next question:

"Did you really believe that the Islamic north Sudan would allow the Christians and black secular Muslims to live in peace in the north after they (South Sudan) declared independence from the brutal oppression and genocide of jihad?"

Historically, one of the follow-on consequences from partition based upon ethnicity or religion has been ethnic cleansing in the rump successor-state. See the Balkans, Greece, and Turkey after World War I, Eastern Europe after World War II, and Pakistan after the partition with India.

That doesn't make it right or pretty, but it does make it unsurprising.

9/18

re: "Retired Navy Adm. James A. Lyons: Disarmed by Shariah"

Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs ("Evil is made possible by the sanction you give it. Withdraw your sanction.") relayed a blast from a crusty (in the finest sense of the word) old salt.

7/13

re: "Lawmakers sue President Obama over Libya"

Pamela Geller (who had a birthday this week) at Atlas Shrugs ("Evil is made possible by the sanction you give it. Withdraw your sanction.") isn't crazy about the plaintiffs, but likes the suit.

Money quote(s):

"Finally, elected officials are holding a runaway President to account. Does anyone know what the hell we hope to accomplish in Libya? What is Obama's endgame in Libya, aiding al qaeda? On May 20th, the 60th day of Obama's war in Libya, Obama was requird by law to get Congressional approval to continue his ops in Libya. The war he consulted no one about, the war he did not go to Congress on, the tyrant's war.

He is now engaged in four wars: Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and a secret war in Yemen, and his strategy in Afghanistan and Iraq has resulted in the highest US military casualty rates, year over year, since these engagements began (in July 2009, I called it -- Obama's Afghanistan strategy: target US military). He refuses to identify Islamic terror, jihad or religious motivation. His counter terror adviser, John Brennan, says, "jihad is a legitimate tennt of islam," so what exactly is Obama fighting in these four wars, and who is he fighting for?"

U.S. participation in the Libyan action has been troubling me as well, but I'm of a somewhat literalist turn of mind when it comes to things like the powers of government, including the presidency.

re: "(Video) Muslims Demand to use Catholic church in Cordoba as a Mosque"

Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs highlights one aspect of the salami-slicing strategy.

Money quote(s):

"The Muslims want Cordoba back. You knew that was coming. Based on that, the Christians should get the Hagia Sophia back, the Jews should get the Dome of the Rock back, and the Hindus should get back the tens of thousands of temples that were destroyed and turned into mosques. And that's just for starters.

Their premise of co-existence is a slap in the face. There is no peaceful co-existence in Muslim countries under Islamic law. Ethnic cleansing and the suppression and persecution of non-Muslims is commanded in the sharia. But they will use our freedoms to kill our freedoms."

This is an aspect of "what's mine is mine; what's yours is negotiable" diplomacy.

Old heads will recognize this from Soviet times; new heads are constantly astonished to learn that Putin's Russians still do this.

For many Americans, world history begins in 1776. Or 1624 (or 1607). Or 1492.

1492 was also the year that the Spanish completed (in January) the Reconquista, finally taking back the last of Spanish territory (Granada) that remained a Moorish possession. Of course, if you're of a "Moorish" disposition, you view that from a somewhat different perspective.

re: "Ending America: The Slaughter of Free Speech, Congress to "explore the need to limit some forms of freedom of speech" "

Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs ("Evil is made possible by the sanction you give it. Withdraw your sanction.") takes her (and your) freedom of speech seriously.

Money quote(s):

"The very idea that our legislators would restrict free speech and impose the sharia (blasphemy laws) as a response to inhuman barbarity is an act of sedition and treason. When did we ever shred America's golden, historic principles in submission to bloody savage totalitarianism? If America really understood what was happening here and was not psy-oped by an enemedia, they would take to the streets with pitchforks and torches."

Whoa. She had me at pitchforks and torches.

(Everyone always forgets the hayrakes.)

"The idea that this will threaten American troops is just another terror tactic. This is based on the assumption that they are fighting us because we are doing things they don't like. Actually they are fighting us because of imperatives within the Islamic faith. They will never like us unless we convert to Islam or submit to Islamic rule. If we stop doing things they dislike, where will we draw the line? How far will Sharia advance in the U.S., with Americans afraid to stop its advance for fear of offending Muslims and stirring them up to violence? This is incompatible with American freedom. We have to draw the line."

It helps if one takes into account what ones enemies claim they are doing, and why. Attributing some other set of motives (poverty, anti-colonialism, environmentalism) based upon ivory tower precepts generated in Western think tanks betrays some serious mirror-imaging cognitive bias.

"Limiting free speech won't stop the jihadis from killing people. It will have just the opposite effect, but serve as reinforcement of their murderous actions. More people will die. Many more." (Bold type in original. - CAA)

re: "OIC Demands Action Against Free Speech"

Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs understands that compromising on Constitutional principles will only encourage our enemies.

Money quote(s):

"Qur'an-burning is a stupid idea, of course, but is protected under the laws of free speech. The burning of books is wrong in principle: the antidote to bad speech is not censorship or book-burning, but more speech. Open discussion. Give-and-take. And the truth will out. There is no justification for burning books. If free men are to be free and not live under Islamic law (sharia), then this man can do this if he wants, and his freedom and rights should be protected. Islamic supremacists should not be allowed a victory for their violent intimidation -- if these people want to burn a book, they're free to do so.

If they had burned a Bible, no one would be threatening violence against them.

The Islamic warning that this will threaten American troops is just another terror tactic. This is based on the assumption that they are fighting us because we are doing things they don't like. Actually they are fighting us because of imperatives within the Islamic faith. They will never like us unless we convert to Islam or submit to Islamic rule. If we stop doing things they dislike, where will we draw the line? How far will Sharia advance in the U.S., with Americans afraid to stop its advance for fear of offending Muslims and stirring them up to violence? The Muslim Students Association is already pushing for halal cafeterias, segregated dorms, segregated gym facilities on campus. This is incompatible with American freedom. We have to draw the line.

I will tell you this, Islamic law (sharia) cannot, must not, and will not have its way over our free speech. That is worth fighting for, worth dying for."

re: "Whore not Hero: The Traitor Files -- Teddy Kennedy"

Pamela Geller at Atlus Shrugs ("Evil is made possible by the sanction you give it. Withdraw your sanction.") asks a serious question.

(Remember, the cover-up is nearly always a greater downfall, and more damaging, than the crime itself.)

Money quote(s):

"What I want to know is, why were these traitors protected? Teddy was the tip of the poisonous spear. Time after time, year after year, decade after decde, their treason is/was covered up. Was there not one decent man or woman with integrity? One?"

&

"The year after his Latin American tour, Kennedy entered the United States Senate. It is quite remarkable: the Kennedy that emerges from the FBI reports sounds like a right-winger's cartoon fantasy of the man. However bad you thought Ted Kennedy was, he was worse!"

Re: "A New Twist in Obama Birth Certificate Mystery"

Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs ("bringing you the news you will not hear from the mainstream media, providing original reportage, covering little-reported events of great import, and giving an unblinkingly honest examination of global affairs") has some speculative analysis on this subject.

Just some more "best guesses" by folks who don't know anything the rest of don't already know, but at least they aren't totally off-the-rails about it.

re: "Houston Muslim Girl Being Forced to Return to Mali for Forced Marriage and Clitorectomy"

Pamela at Atlas Shrugs ("the news you will not hear from the mainstream media, providing original reportage, covering little-reported events of great import, and giving an unblinkingly honest examination of global affairs") relates coverage of an asylum case.

Quote(s):

"The ABC affiliate in Houston aired this story last night, about a woman from Mali being pressured by her family to return home for an arranged marriage and clitorectomy. She may have to return home eventually when her student visa expires. Fortunately, she does have lawyers working pro bono to help her attain asylum, but it's clearly not a sure thing."

&

"She needs apostate asylum. If the US sends her home, she's as good as dead."

re: "Day 38 Iranian Revolutiion: Iraq Forces Storm Iranian Opposition Camp"

Pamela at Atlas Shrugs relayed some disturbing news about an attack on some GC "Protected Persons" in Iraq.

This touches on the honor of our country and our commitment to honoring the laws of war.