 Click to bookmark this page!
- Contact Me - Include your email address
 Just in case you weren't sure...
Please sign the Ted Kennedy Resignation Petition!
Shameless Self-PromotionBuy this book (not just because it contains two of my op-eds):
Americans on Politics, Policy, and Pop Culture: The 101 Best Opinion Editorials From OpEds.com

An Interview With the G-Man:
My first (hopefully not last) experience in live radio, being interviewed by G. Gordon Liddy!
Perspective Joe
MarianiNumber
of people freed from totalitarian dictatorships
by precision use of American military force
under George W. Bush: 50
million in just two years
Number
of people freed from totalitarian dictatorships
by anti-American Bush-bashing
terrorist-appeasing whining elitists: Zero. Ever.
...The problem seems to
me to be the definition of "free speech".
Liberals define it as anything they want to say
or do that opposes America. I say "speech" ends
where "action" begins. Once you pick up a gun
for the enemy, throw a rock at a cop during a
"peace" march, send money to a terrorist
organisation, or travel to Baghdad to block an
American JDAM with your ass, you have crossed the line from free speech to costly action. ...
Saying the War on Terror is all about al-Qaeda is like saying we should have fought the Japanese Naval Air Force after Pearl Harbor. Not the Japanese Navy, not the Japanese Army, not the Empire of Japan -- just the Naval Air Force. ...Complaining about the "waste" when human embryos are destroyed instead of being used in medical experiments is a lot like going to a funeral and complaining about the waste of perfectly good meat. ...Blaming CO2 for climate change is like blaming smoke for the fire. CO2 is largely a following, not a leading, indicator of a rise in temperature. ...
Cavalier's First Theorem: Every time, Liberals will fight to protect the guilty and kill the innocent, while Conservatives will fight to protect the innocent and punish the guilty.
Cavalier's Second Theorem: Liberals are just Socialists who want to be loved... then again, Socialists are just Communists who lack the courage of their convictions.
Cavalier's Third Theorem: Any strongly moral, hawkish or pro-American statement by a Liberal will inevitably be followed by a "but."
Top News Headlines
Iraq
Blogs
The Messopotamian Iraq at a Glance Iraq the Model
Hammorabi Iraq & Iraqis Nabil's Blog Road of a Nation The Sun of Iraq
Healing Iraq
Iraqi Bloggers Central
The Truth About Iraq Liberating Iraq
Pictures from Iraq The Iraqi Holocaust: a collection
Iraq's Mass Graves
Mudville Gazette: News the media can't use
The Other Iraq: The Iraq you never hear about in the MSM
Michael Yon - Online Magazine Dispatches not filed from the Baghdad Hilton hot tub
 United States Central Command
Humor
Infamous Monsters of Filmland
Day by Day:
Chris Muir's witty comic strip with a political
bent
The Ultimate War Simulation: Why does this scenario seem so familiar?
What Kind of Liberal Are You? Save me the trouble
of figuring out what kind of idiot you
are
Blame
Bush Because Bush is to blame... for
everything
Sacred Cow Burgers Web Archive
Satirical Political Beliefs
Test
Communists for Kerry
Cooper's Protester Guide
Fellowship 9/11: Sauron never attacked Rohan, Saruman did! Yet a small group of elitists convinced Middle-earth to divert resources from the real war to attack Mordor for personal gain.
Analysis
When Democrats Attack Did prominent Democrats switch positions on Iraq just to attack President Bush for political gain? (See the updated list.)
Was Iraqi Freedom Justified? An honest, step-by-step analysis of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq that Congress voted into law shows that it was.
Saddam's Philanthropy of Terror Details of solid ties to organised international terrorism
How The Left Betrayed Iraq by Naseer Flayih Hasan
Did We Botch The
Occupation? No, not of Iraq: of Germany. Read the
media's take on how we "lost the peace" in 1946
and compare.
Debunking 8 Anti-War Myths About the Conflict in Iraq
Pictures from Hate
Bush/Hate America/Hate Capitalism/Hate
Israel/general wacko rallies - by
Zombie
Jihad Watch
2004 Election Links
Looosers: Sorry, Everybody!
Winners: You're Welcome, Everybody!
2008 ElectionPeace Through Strength PAC Duncan Hunter in 2008 official site
Click to join duncanhunterforpresident2008 at Yahoo! Groups
Useful Links
FamilyWishList Share your wish list with friends and family
Virtual Tourist Travel tips from real travelers
RemBot.com Appointment calendar with email/wireless notification
PriceGrabber.com Convenient comparison shopping
Reading
MaterialRightWingNews
The best right-wing news and commentary
GOP USA Commentary
Corner
Men's News Daily The New Media
OpinionEditorials.com a project of Frontiers of Freedom
ChronWatch SF Chronicle watchdog and conservative news
American Daily Analysis with political and social commentary
The Conservative Voice Conservative news and opinion
News By Us ...not news bias
IntellectualConservative.com Conservative and Libertarian Intellectual Philosophy and Politics
CommonConservative.com Practical conservatism for the common man
USASentinel Analysis, Commentary and Opinion on the Real World
PhillyFuture.org Philly news and blogs
Now ReadingThe Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism by F. A. Hayek

Articles Previously Published at
Useless-Knowledge.com
- When Good Liberals Go
Bad - 05/29/03 - How Stupid Do Democrats Think You
Are? - 05/31/03 - Who Are These 'Rich' Getting Tax
Cuts, Anyway? - 06/02/03 - How Can We Miss The Clintons If
They Won't Go Away? - 06/04/03 -
Whining of Mass Distraction: How
To Discredit A President -
06/05/03 - Liberal "Rules" for Arguing
- 06/10/03 - Liberalism: Curable or
Terminal? - 06/14/03 - Filibustering Judges: Hijacking
Presidential Powers? - 06/17/03 -
Is Hamas Exempt from the War on
Terror? - 06/22/03 - How Malleable Is The
Constitution? - 06/26/03 - Rejecting Our Biological and
Cultural Heritage - 06/30/03 - I Need Liberal Assistance,
Now! - 07/02/03 - Bring Them On -
07/03/03 - We Need You Arrogant Warmongering
Americans...Again - 07/09/03 - Much Ado About Nothing, Again
- 07/13/03 - Double Standard: Blindly Blame
Bush - 07/18/03 - Was WWII Also Unjustified?
- 07/20/03 - Clinton Backing Bush? Don't Bet On
It! - 07/24/03 - How To Be A Hypocritical
Liberal - 07/28/03 - The Clinton Legacy: In Answer to
Mr. Stensrud - 07/30/03 -What Is 'Good News' To
Liberals? - 08/02/03 - Bush's Big Blunder -
08/06/03 - The Meaning of Right - Why I
Supported the Iraq War -
08/10/03 - More Liberal "Rules" for
Arguing - 08/14/03 - You Can Have Cary Grant; I'll Take
John Wayne! - 08/19/03 - Where Is The ACLU When It's
Actually Needed? - 08/25/03 - Who's Afraid Of The Big Bad Ten
Commandments? - 08/28/03 - From The Weasels: Thanks For
Nothing - 08/30/03 - The Liberal
Superfriends - 09/02/03 - Liberal Superfriends 2: The
Sequel - 09/05/03 - Saddam and 9/11: Connect the
Dots - 09/08/03 - Throwing Away the Southern
Vote - 11/02/03 - Libya: The First Domino
Falls - 12/20/03 - Is the UN Playing Games with
American Politics? - 03/04/04
Blogs to Browse
Across the Pond
AlphaPatriot
Arts for Democracy
Betsy's Page
Bill Karl
Blonde Sagacity
Bull Moose Strikes Back
Common Sense & Wonder
Conservative Pleasure
Dangerous Logic
DowneastBlog
ElectionProjection
Everything I Know Is Wrong
Freedom of Thought
Sally Girl
Korla Pundit
LogiPundit.com
MarkLevinFan
Mark Nicodemo
Michelle Malkin
Moonbattery
My Arse From My Elbow
QandO Blog
RadioBS.net
Rebel Rouser
RightThinkingGirl
Sally Girl
Samantha Burns
Semi-Intelligent Thoughts
Sighed Effects
Sister Toldjah
Stark Truth
Take A Stand Against Liberals
The Resplendent Mango
The Right Society
The YNC
Tom's Common Sense
Tom DeLay
Tomfoolery of the Highest Order
Trying to Grok
TS Right Dominion
Violent Daydreams
Watcher of Weasels
Word Around the Net
WuzzaDem.com
|
|
|
 |
|
Saturday, May 21, 2005
Don't Underestimate the Terrorists
Don't Underestimate the Terrorists
The biggest mistake we can make in the War on Terror is to underestimate our enemies. As we watch terrorists in Iraq increasingly target civilians, so-called "soft targets," it's tempting to think they're doing so merely out of frustration or sheer rage. While individual, low-level terrorists may even be dull-witted enough to think that blowing up innocent men, women and children advances their cause -- to enslave the world under fundamentalist Islam -- those who pull their strings are anything but stupid.
As the terrorists in Iraq switched their main focus from American military personnel to civilians, the Iraqis began to transfer their ire from the Coalition government to their own officials. It was tempting to breath a small sigh of relief, if only for the lessening of both American casualties and anti-American feelings. Even now, most people continue to wonder why the terrorists are so stupid as to attack innocent Iraqi civilians. Don't they realise that they're just turning public opinion against themselves?
Of course they realise. At least, their leaders do.
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is anything but a stupid, mindless killer. In fact, he's a highly intelligent, extremely clever killer. He has been part of the terrorist movement in Iraq since before Saddam was removed from power, as Jordan's King Abdullah attested in a recent interview. "Since Zarqawi entered Iraq before the fall of the former regime we have been trying to have him deported back to Jordan for trial, but our efforts were in vain," Abdullah said. Zarqawi is a Jordanian, but Saddam apparently refused to turn him over to Jordan's government to answer for his attempted 1999 bombing of the Radisson Hotel in Amman. (Meanwhile, the Liberals still try to tell us that Saddam had no ties to international terrorism.) Zarqawi was sentenced to 15 years in prison, but has yet to serve his time.
Saddam sheltered Zarqawi when he fled to Iraq after Coalition forces destroyed his terrorist training camp in Afghanistan. Now he leads the terrorists working to destroy Iraq's fledgling democracy. Al-Qaeda has become so heavily invested in Iraq that beating the so-called "insurgency" there will strike a major blow to them. But is Zarqawi dumb enough to miss the fact that blowing up kids in Iraq's marketplaces is turning the populace not against each other, but against him and his terrorists?
In fact, he may be counting on it.
If Zarqawi and his merry band of thugs can drive the anti-terrorist feeling in Iraq to a fever pitch right before the next election, any candidate who promises to fight the terrorists will garner plenty of votes. A candidate perceived as capable of halting the attacks altogether would probably win in a landslide --even if that means making a deal with Zarqawi, instead of fighting him. Could the Iraqis be stampeded into accepting a candidate who's actually working with the terrorists?
We've already seen how an angry, panicked populace can be manipulated by terror and threats. The people of Spain voted for the candidate who promised to comply with al-Qaeda's demands to pull Spanish troops out of Iraq as part of his campaign. Although Jose Zapatero stood little chance of winning the 2004 election, the terrible terrorist attacks in Madrid helped bring him victory. Terror can be used to manipulate elections, even in a country with a history of democratic elections. How much easier will it be to push Iraqis into voting for a new strongman just to stop the attacks on Iraqi civilians? Is that what Zarqawi is trying to accomplish?
The most important job our forces in Iraq have over the next few months is counter-terrorist activities like Operation Matador, during which combined US forces killed over 125 terrorists and captured huge stockpiles of terrorist material. It is essential to break the back of the terrorists before Iraq falls under the sway of a new Saddam. If that happens, our efforts there will have been in vain.
Posted at Saturday, May 21, 2005 by CavalierX
 |  |  | skye May 26, 2005 12:21 PM PDT
zarqawi is reported wounded, perhaps dead. His replacement has already been named, oh well, just another soon-to-be dead or captured terrorist.
|  |
  |  |  | Mark May 27, 2005 07:29 PM PDT
Zarqawi is mostly irrelevant in Iraq and probably died many years ago.
Air Force Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said fighters associated with al-Qaeda and Zarqawi represent "a fairly small percentage of the total number of insurgents."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28876-2005Feb16.html
CIA review finds no evidence Saddam had ties to Islamic terrorists
WASHINGTON - A new CIA assessment undercuts the White House's claim that Saddam Hussein maintained ties to al-Qaida, saying there's no conclusive evidence that the regime harbored Osama bin Laden associate Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
http://www.aberdeennews.com/mld/aberdeennews/news/9836114.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp
|  |
  |  |  | JM May 27, 2005 08:52 PM PDT
Poor Mark. You really should read the news stotries you link to before you post them. At least read beyond the headlines, even though about 90% of it is pure speculation and repetition of faint hopes that Saddam was an innocent lamb. The story says:
[A U.S. official familiar with the new CIA assessment] said the report contained new details of al-Zarqawi 's prewar activities in Iraq, including the arrests in late 2002 or early 2003 of three of his "associates" by the regime.
"This was brought to Saddam's attention and he ordered one of them released," he said, providing no further details.
"What is indisputable is that Zarqawi was operating out of Baghdad and was involved in a lot of bad activities," he said, including ordering Foley's killing. |  |
  |  |  | skye May 28, 2005 11:28 AM PDT
*SIGH*
They will believe ANYTHING to hold on to the hope that zarqawi and al-queda had no ties with saddam of his former government.
|  |
  |  |  | JM May 28, 2005 12:31 PM PDT
Worse -- did you see the headline Mark here quoted? Liberals are trying to pretend that Saddam had no ties to ANY terrorist groups, because THAT -- not ties to al-Qaeda -- was one of the main reasons he was removed from power. Once again, they're trying to rewrite history. A brutal terror-supporting fascist tyrant was overthrown, and they DEFEND him. |  |
  |  |  | Mark July 31, 2005 12:06 PM PDT
WRONG AGAIN, YOU MORONS....
No Evidence Connecting Iraq to Al Qaeda, 9/11 Panel Says
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 16, 2004; 1:32 PM
There is "no credible evidence" that Saddam Hussein's government in Iraq collaborated with the al Qaeda terrorist network on any attacks on the United States, according to a new staff report released this morning by the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
Although Osama bin Laden briefly explored the idea of forging ties with Iraq in the mid-1990s, the terrorist leader was hostile to Hussein's secular government, and Iraq never responded to requests for help in providing training camps or weapons, the panel found in the first of two reports issued today.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46254-2004Jun16.html
|  |
  |  |  | Mark July 31, 2005 12:09 PM PDT
MORE INFO FOR CONSERVATIVE IDIOTS....
Newsweek Magazine said “Bush Administration officials also have acknowledged that their information about Zarqawi’s stay in Baghdad is sketchy at best …. Senior U.S. officials acknowledged to NEWSWEEK within days of Powell’s speech that it was ‘unknown’ whether Saddam’s government helped arrange Zarqawi’s hospital stay in Baghdad or whether Iraqi intelligence had any contacts with him while he was in Baghdad.”
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/unmovic/2003/0625distorted.htm
---------
U.S. officials acknowledge that some top captured Al Qaeda leaders, including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah, have told U.S. interrogators bin Laden vetoed a long-term relationship with Saddam because he did not want to be in the Iraqi leader’s debt.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/unmovic/2003/0625distorted.htm
The 911 Commission said this about al-Qaeda in Iraq: "Bin Ladin had in fact been sponsoring anti-Saddam Islamists in Iraqi Kurdistan, and sought to attract them into his Islamic army." See link.
Now, why would Saddam want to work with Osama?
http://911.gnu-designs.com/Chapter_2.4.html
|  |
  |  |  | JM July 31, 2005 10:11 PM PDT
Well, it's obvious you do not understand the difference between "Saddam had no ties to terrorists" and "Saddam did not directly participate in 9/11." For all their pretensions of intelligence and subtlety, Liberals really are like children to whom every little detail must be painstakingly explained. Quoting the WaPo's deliberate lie about the 9/11 Commission's report won't help you here, nor will statements from captured enemies outweigh years of investigations. Here, maybe some actual information about Saddam's ties to terrorism BEFORE 9/11 (when the media suddenly decided he didn't have them) might help you. Then again... probably not.
http://www.archive-news.net/Articles/SH040923.html |  |
  |  |  | Mark August 3, 2005 08:28 PM PDT
Both the CIA and the 9/11 Commission said Saddam and Osama were not linked in any meaningful way. Iraqi intelligence met with Saddam's people and decided not to collaborate. Why do you continue to lie? Hell, most Americans agree Bush lied us into war. Are they "liberals" too? Bush will go down in history like the same fanatics who hysterically yell "Clinton killed Foster!" LMFAO! |  |
  |  |  | JM August 4, 2005 04:47 AM PDT
Why do Liberals think that repeating the same lies after they've been refuted will make them come true? Why are they so locked into their fantasy world that not even shoving facts in their faces can make a dent in their fanatical devotion to the "Bush lied" insanity? Mark is just one sad example of a large minority of maniacs whose hatred of President Bush has warped any ability they ever had to think critically and use logic. |  |
|
|
|