Allowing Qaddafi To Visit Sends The Wrong Message--Especially To Americans*

*Video courtesy of Fox News.

Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi is coming for a visit to Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. And as the characteristically intelligent Rabbi Shmuley Boteach demonstrates, the current administration's maddeningly obsequious invitation to one of the world's most accomplished former sponsors of terrorism is incredibly shameful.

Granted, it should be said that the good Rabbi has a personal stake in the matter as Qaddafi is moving in next door in preparation for a speech at the perennially tolerant U.N., the master of the Islamic socialism and international terrorism of decades past arrogantly removing a fence and many beautiful trees in the process. And yet so many neighbors have even greater cause for complaint, especially when considering that many of the victims of Pan Am 103--the flight wherein 270 lives were destroyed by terrorist Abdelbaset Ali Mohamed Al Megrahi, a Libyan intelligence officer recently released prematurely from prison to a hero's welcome in Tripoli simply because he is dying from terminal prostate cancer--came from this very neighborhood.

With some soberness, it should be noted that Rabbi Shmuley is correct in suggesting that Secretary of State Clinton ought to permit Qaddafi to pitch his tent on her own lawn, or at least on that of the U.N.--after all, such a selfless act would certainly do much in giving currency to the idea that predictably dismissive politicians actually appreciate the real cost of such an ill-conceived visit. But perhaps the best course of action posited is ultimately to deny his visa altogether and let him stay in his own blighted country to consider the consequences of pursuing peace mostly out of a gnawing sense of political self-preservation.

To be sure, while President Bush normalized relations with Libya and President Obama has continued with that theme--though with an appalling penchant for inappropriate appeasement for those who wield unbridled authoritarianism to retain power--Americans rightly expect continuing progress in Libya towards an open society that respects human life. Or at the very least, they demand such simple reverence while visitors tread on American soil.

To ignore such a reasonable demand sends the wrong message--that both wholesale appeasement for historically brutal regimes and sneering political agendas unreservedly designed for self-preening are of greater significance than the lives of American citizens.

The Left Continues Swinging At The CIA*

*Video courtesy of AP/YouTube.

Talk about crippling our intelligence gathering agencies with an inferiority complex. President Obama has candidly indicated to the CIA that getting tough with terrorists will get them nothing but stern recriminations and endless prosecutions. And that is to say nothing of a general finger wagging in plain sight of the American people.

To the point, our leader has shifted interrogation duty for suspected terrorists from the CIA to the FBI, while partisan tool Attorney General Eric Holder is jeopardizing future intelligence gathering capacities with the nearly limitless nonsense of fretting over the legality of previously approved interrogation techniques--an issue examined carefully and exhaustively by the previous administration while being derided by outraged liberals as an attempt to push the very cusp of the law's expansive boundaries.

Forget that stripping the CIA of its bread and butter to favor the more problematic of two troubled organizations defies both a reasonable commitment to keeping our government within its wisely appointed bounds and common sense. Or that conducting a very public vilification of our nation's special servants is an extremely disagreeable and unnecessary attempt to hinder those who must take controversial risks to protect our country, both now and in the future. Clearly, it seems that President Obama is shoving aside the brave sacrifices of individual patriots in favor of a lumbering, incompetent government bureaucracy. Again.

To be sure, American intelligence has had its share of mistakes, miscalculations, and downright messes well out of proportion to its seemingly elite members. But President Obama should not simply conclude that an organization mandated to fight crimes against the nation--a policing action by definition--can replace the one currently facing the heavy and at times uncomfortable action of waging a brutal war against terrorists. Such is the purview of the CIA--despite ex-officer Robert Baer's idealized memory to the contrary--an agency more or less well equipped to do such lifting, or at least it is so as far as winning the war of ideas is concerned.

To maintain otherwise is to pretend that suspected terrorists are due the same rights as American citizens protected under the Constitution; that prosecution in civil courts is always desirable to that of military trials; and that the War on Terror is nothing more than politicized semantics, an overblown fear tactic utilized in garnering Republican votes, or oil, or whatever the Left has sanctimoniously deemed to be The Devil Himself on any particular day.

And this is a mistake, as the immediate and lasting consequences of softening the public perception of current circumstances does nothing to protect innocent lives--in fact, it endangers them as never before and promotes the further encroachment of a supposedly protective government.

Significantly, interrogation involves trickery, lies, and extreme forms of mental anguish by definition--and this is what forces nasty individuals bent on bloodshed to give up critical secrets without our operatives needlessly resorting to outright physical torture. Americans should not be squeamish about these facts, and neither should they be pulled into the current administration's overly dramatic canard that all of this amounts to some sort of revelation concerning new and unusually barbaric tactics. In fact, all of this is just old, mundane methodology that has been proven effective at the complementary goals of both making terrorists talk and safeguarding the nation's future.

IN OTHER NEWS: David Hedrick--a disabled U.S. Marine--gives Congressman Brian Baird a well deserved piece of his patriotic mind, especially over the egregiously inappropriate "brown shirt" label so obnoxiously shot off onto town hall protesters by the latter.

It seems the only embarrassment here is that other like minded individuals did not speak up sooner, as it will take a tremendous and consistent groundswell of opposition from citizens to topple the monumental hubris of the Obama administration over healthcare reform.

Iranian Defiance Redux*

*Image courtesy of AP Photo/Vahid Salemi.

The West should not be fooled by Iran's sudden commitment to transparency in its nuclear program, no matter how encouraging such an unexpected development seems.

Granted, recent actions by this terrible regime appear to demonstrate positive progress towards genuine cooperation with reasonable international requests for inspection. But these are really just diplomatic delays designed to placate the growing concerns of occidental powers over that nation's ambitious tyranny.

Take, for example, the report that Iran is prepared to allow inspections of its supposedly peaceful nuclear program "without preconditions." Of course, this same rhetoric has been trotted out before, and the results have not been encouraging. And not coincidentally, it should also be noted that Iran is being pressured by a September deadline that is presumably enforceable with harsh economic sanctions should Ahmadinejad fail to comply--a veritable fait accompi at this point.

But Iran is also gambling on the continuation of a pathetically limp American response as President Obama remains overwhelmingly engaged in a punishing domestic debate over healthcare reform. Or at the very least, the regime is relying on squabbling in the U.N. as allies interested in their ideology or overabundance of oil ensnare any sanctions in weeks or even months of international bickering. Both scenarios are equally likely. And when all is said and done, all Ahmadinejad really needs is time for further development, a gift he will likely receive with little serious opposition in gross counterpoint to what is actually conceived for his militarized nuclear program--namely, the threat of absolute annihilation for Israel and the benefits accrued from becoming the unarguable savior for the extremists populating so much of the Muslim world at present.

Remarkably, this dramatic and dishonest reinvention of Iran's political stance comes just as the murderer of Neda Soltan is identified as Abbas Kargar Javid, a Basij militia member fleeing the scene after absurdly claiming that he only meant to shoot Soltan in the leg. Significantly, Iranian leaders are acutely aware of Western anger over their brutal and unconscionable crackdown on freedom seeking citizens. And they also know that undeniable government involvement in Soltan's death--a fact vehemently denied previously--could potentially galvanize both Iranian and American voices in harshly condemning months of wanton deceit and bloodshed.

Consequently, to avoid the utter abrogation of his government's agenda, Ahmadinejad has shrewdly offered a potential international victory to President Obama just as he needs a win most, while at the same time maintaining much of his own political power on the world stage for the critical near future. And regrettably, some period of time--likely not more than a few dozen months--harnessed with both religiously sanctioned authoritarian rule and interminable international apathy is all that he really requires to achieve nuclear weaponization and an intractable place among the major world powers.

So in the end, it seems that Iran's unmitigated embarrassment for lack of control over ten weeks of protest has been masterfully converted into a subtle power play by one of the Middle East's worst demagogues. And thus the pressing need for President Obama himself to reject this specious offer of transparency out of hand and to supply unqualified condemnation for the murder and torture of so many innocent Iranians at the hands of Ahmadinejad.

IN OTHER NEWS: European anti-Semitism unabashedly continues with an article written by freelance journalist Donald Bostrom published in Sweden. Therein, he claims to have witnessed IDF soldiers harvesting organs from Palestinians killed in clashes with Israel, a patently evil and inflammatory claim with roots as far back as the 1990s.

Of course, Bostrom also possesses no evidence--just his own devotion to bigotry and the excruciatingly small idea that Jews are responsible for all that is wrong in the world. But these facts also shouldn't stop much of Europe from embracing such claims; in fact, such anti-Semitism remains highly fashionable in that part of the world, regardless of their many vaunted claims to widespread cultural enlightenment.

The Defeat Of Obamacare (A Primer For The White House)*

*Image courtesy of AP Photo/Gerald Herbert.

If the recent town hall meetings are any indication, the White House was clearly not prepared for the fury Americans have vented over the soon to be defeated healthcare reform legislation currently being contested in virtually every venue available to the public. Why else the "unexpectedly personal moment" of President Obama's while attacking private insurance companies to convince town hall participants that he couldn't possibly pull the plug on grandma?

But lest we forget the President's true aims here, not every bureaucrat has a grandmother measuring out her final days under the agonies of modern healthcare. And not every government decision-maker living on the tax-payer's dime is as fantastic a smooth talker as our elected leader.

Yet the polls--for whatever they are worth--offer a partial explanation for much of the anger poured out over this audacious, government-sponsored repudiation of the individual's worth. Tellingly, a Gallup Poll produced this summer indicates that 40% of Americans view themselves as conservative, 35% as moderate, and only 21% as liberal. And that makes this a center-right nation, regardless of any vague notion of change voters hoped to extract from a new and decidedly different Chief Executive.

As the astute Michael Barone posits on the issue, the disparity many Americans are sensing right now comes down to the difference between membership in the party leading the reform push and actually believing both heart and soul in an extreme liberal agenda. And unfortunately for a very far left leadership set, the party does not always keep the faith.

Perhaps this is why Sarah Palin can cut so very deeply with her remark on the chilling "death panels" proposed as a funded option for the elderly every few years, a model reportedly suggested to inform these gentle souls as to what their scant options are under single-payer healthcare--a particular part of the legislation that has thankfully been nixed as a precursor to final irrelevancy for the work as a whole.

Without a doubt, the legislation itself is an unmistakable wish list of liberal ideology that grinds against the basic sentiments of most Americans. And while the majority of citizens want to see all of their neighbors have access to adequate insurance and healthcare options irrespective of pre-existing conditions, the price to both our characteristic American individuality and national pocketbook is just too much.

Mercifully, the public or single-payer option is quickly evaporating as those close to the push for this irrational healthcare reform have switched their focus to non-profit insurance cooperatives. And while this option has its own negative consequences--including the possibility of a subtle government buyout on the way to public insurance in the future--it appears to be a less egregious alternative at present than the economic ruin and aggression against the individual of the current plan that is being talked up like so much golden utopia. But such are the victories afforded frustrated voters when elected representatives lack the courage to speak loud enough to be heard over the beat of socialism's drums.

Now the only thing left is to note just how much longer President Obama and his team of arrogant academics are willing to push for this societal shake down. To be sure, they remain inexorably committed, but the longer this absurd debate continues, the more those usually disinclined to voice their opinion on such matters will become staunch opponents of the White House and its laundry list of unacceptable freedoms.

And that is a mess the President will be cleaning up for some time to come.

UPDATE: The White House's obnoxious fishy e-mails project appears to be shut down, hopefully due to the understandable outrage of American citizens. However, further complaints can and should be sent via the condescendingly named "Health Insurance Reform Reality Check" website using the "Contact Us" button.

As with the former avenue for dissent, this one ought to be brimming with all sorts of democratic ideas and suggestions for healthcare reform--whether or not President Obama wants to hear about it.

IN OTHER NEWS: In a bold condemnation of Khomenei's role in Iran's rigged election and post-election crackdown on protesters, an unprecedented appeal has been sent to the Assembly of Experts to investigate the torture and rape allegations slowly filtering out of that country's demonic prison system and to condemn the mass trial of dissenters currently under way.

And while this is a courageous action likely to be ignored--and regrettably so--it should do some good in heartening those still fighting for their own rights of freedom in Iran, even if the West remains damnably silent.

Obamacare On Life Support*

*Image courtesy of AP Photo/Jae C. Hong.

The insidious healthcare reform being crammed down American throats by the Obama administration has become a dramatically divisive issue in recent days. But this should not be surprising given the scramble by the White House to quell reasonable debate on the issue by maligning protesters. But the resulting sense of uneasiness in Americans only undergirds the argument that the lengthy legislation itself heaps bureaucratic disdain on the individual and his inalienable liberties--after all, if just selling the reform requires that the individual be treated like a disposable statistic, the reform itself will likely do that and much more.

And while few politicians or citizens have actually slogged through this behemoth of dense prose steeped in soft socialistic principles--at the very least, the idea being that an engorged government can decide better than any individual how life ought to be lived, or that distant bureaucrats can care better for patients than immediate medical professionals and family members--the affixed political endorsements or lack thereof by many prominent national organizations is very telling.

For example, the National Association of Pharmaceutical Representatives has admitted the tremendous windfall they stand to reap should the reform pass. The thinking here--and it is likely correct--is that treatment under the new healthcare program will simply mean more medication and less surgery, therapy, and rehabilitation, whether or not this is the best course for patients. Moreover, much of the bill comes down to saved money and quite possibly whatever minimal care the government can get away with using a single-payer system--after all, successful business management is often about cutting unnecessary expenditures, and under the esteemed weight of healthcare reform, many current supporters will undoubtedly be shocked at just what is deemed extraneous to good care when the government is allotting the coinage.

On the other hand, sensing the negative impact this reform will have on Medicare and ailing seniors across the nation, the American Association of Retired Persons has refused to endorse the pending legislation--a course completely opposite the one claimed by President Obama in his recent town hall speech--while the considerable power wielded by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has been skillfully employed in crafting a noteworthy ad campaign strongly protesting this bait and switch foisted upon Americans by the White House.

More importantly, public outcry has been considerable and frustrated. And no wonder, as grassroots efforts have been mocked as ignorant mob actions while an immediately pressing healthcare crisis is itself manufactured by President Obama as a raison d'etre for such unprecedented reforms. Add to this the shrill complaint of liberal hag Nancy Pelosi and Obama henchman Steny Hoyer that voices of dissent are "simply un-American" and one begins to understand that reasonably concerned Americans are being viciously set up for a catastrophic fall.

And that is the real issue here. Americans rightly expect the majority to be given appropriate and timely legislative action according to their desires and the rule of law, while it is also understood that the minority is to receive just consideration of their viewpoint and protection for the same. Significantly, President Obama and his apologists have grossly perverted this fundamental model of democratic governance by trampling on the majority and demanding the triumph of minority ideals and notions of equality--a socialist action in spirit, if not the letter.

Yet very clearly, Americans overwhelmingly oppose healthcare reform in its current state as proposed by President Obama. But the White House isn't listening, and this is why dissent has been so adamantly vociferous. By crushing honest debate with baseless accusations of ignorance on the part of town hall protesters and by applying such an unsparing blitzkrieg of political pressure on individual dissent, the current administration has shown that it will always place its own power and that of a swelling government above the rights of the people, person by person if necessary.

But Americans will not forgive or forget such low behavior easily--a sobering thought considering that voter backlash could very well promote conservative ideals well beyond the ambitious liberal agenda of President Obama in the months and years to come, no matter how the healthcare debate is ultimately concluded.

IN OTHER NEWS: Despite a glowing report on Pakistan's status as a viable nation since Taliban butcher Baitullah Mehsud was unceremoniously sent to his eternal damnation--granted, a development that is worthy of genuine plaudits for the Obama administration, or at least for those piloting the UAVs--this struggling country remains a nearly lawless region in the control of terrorists hell-bent upon the destruction of civilization and the undeniable blessings it bestows.

Case in point, a clever report by Professor Shaun Gregory of Bradford University in the United Kingdom documents three attempts by terrorist groups to knock out Pakistani nuclear sites, the most serious being in 2008 by Taliban suicide bombers that destroyed entry points to an armament complex at a major nuclear facility. This chain of nearly unknown disasters demonstrates a terrifying lack of information sharing by media outlets when it comes to such serious security breaches. And it also means that Pakistan is far from being a stable nation honest about its feebleness in the face of bloody extremists.

Unfortunately, this indicates a very prolonged struggle for Pakistan indeed, as no nation can adequately push back or even destroy the ubiquitous threat of terrorism until it has admitted just how destructive it really is to those critical elements basic to advanced societies across the sweep of history--life, prosperity, and freedom.

Pakistan's Bleak Future*

*Image courtesy of AP Photo/Alexandre Meneghini.

A recent, chilling report describes how Pakistani police refused to protect Christians and their homes in the city of Gojra from militant supporters of Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, a violent Islamic group with links to Al Qaeda.

Maintaining that the pages of a Koran had been destroyed, these murderers went to work by gas bombing homes and shooting innocents. Reportedly, eight were killed in the fires--four of them women and at least one a child--and two others shot. Locals insist that the number of casualties is actually in the dozens. And they also vehemently deny that any Koran was destroyed or otherwise defiled by the three boys at the root of this story, though no one is arguing that local clerics callously demanded their deaths.

Is it any wonder that so many doubt that Islam is truly a religion of peace or even reason when such bloodshed is not wholeheartedly condemned? Surely, the vast majority of Muslims do not condone such extreme violence, hatred, and murder, but their characteristic silence does little to convince Western minds of their commitment to genuine peace and tolerance--inside or outside of Pakistan.

But as mentioned before in these pages, Pakistan is virtually finished as a civilized country capable of supplying anything of value to the world. Clearly, citizens there will have to make tremendous sacrifices if they wish give their children a nation free of oppression and terror. And they must also willingly decide to defend their own minority groups if they wish the West to believe that they are serious about the victory of moderate religious influence over extremism.

IN OTHER NEWS: The furor over President Obama's list of dissenters grows as details of his healthcare reform plan continue to unfold. And at least one legal expert has posited that such a list is likely illegal according to the Privacy Act of 1974, while the ACLU has registered its own dismay at this shameless browbeating of Americans.

A brief and basic synopsis of how citizen's information can be handled legally by the government according to the Privacy Act of 1974 can be found here.

Institutionalized Tyranny*

*Image courtesy of AP Photo/Gerald Herbert.

The White House recently unveiled a plan allowing Americans to report on their neighbors, family, and friends should they offend President Obama by speaking out against his disastrous healthcare plan. Quite simply, well-meaning citizens can have offending "chain emails or [. . .] casual conversation" turned in for careful scrutinization by our loving leader's band of faithful disciples.

The Soviets would likely be very proud. Certainly, the NKVD would be.

Given this development, is there any question that the Obama administration will carelessly trample the rights of the individual for the sake of their vision of a socialized future? Interestingly enough, such an ambition is becoming increasingly more difficult to argue against as average Americans are starting to discern the real price of dissent under our current leadership.

Reasonable American citizens concerned with this brazen attempt at limiting free speech may self-report their own hopefully offensive material via flag@whitehouse.gov (the idea being to overflow their inbox) or even sign the petition against tax-funded abortion at the American Center for Law and Justice.

IN OTHER NEWS: The Supreme Court will add Sonia Sotomayor as an Associate Justice on Saturday. Significantly, 31 Republican senators voted in protest against her record of race-based legislation from the bench, while 9 Republican senators bought the laughable line that she is a misunderstood mainstream judge.

Whatever the case may be, President Obama's history of liberal activism and social engineering will become a legacy far outliving his presidency with Sotomayor carrying on the good fight for years to come.

The Baffling Paradox Of Jewish Anti-Semitism*

*Image courtesy of AP Photo/Dan Balilty.

Anti-Semitism as expressed by the American Jewish community itself has become quite popular of late, though why this troubling phenomenon has achieved any acceptance defies easy description. And why Jewish and non-Jewish critics alike are not speaking out to a greater degree in condemning these acts is also problematic.

Take, for example, the perennially obnoxious comedienne Roseanne Barr and her photo shoot for "Heeb Magazine," an irreverent rag backed by nihilistic film director Steven Spielberg that apparently challenges traditional Jewishness through a popular culture approach. In the latest witty issue, Barr dresses up as a domestic Hitler--complete with iconic mustache and swastika armband--as she eats burnt gingerbread cookies representing the Jews ruthlessly murdered during the Holocaust by the Nazi regime. Notably, Barr is herself Jewish, as is Spielberg. And this somehow makes such a tasteless exercise in gross insensitivity amusing.

Another despicable individual of note is Professor William Robinson--also Jewish--at University of California, Santa Barbara. This academic pillar sent his sociology students a series of pictures equating Holocaust victims with Palestinian casualties of recent Israeli military operations in Gaza, though with no explanation provided to give any historical context whatsoever. As just one example from this rare piece of scholarship, Jews waiting in line to be gassed are directly compared to Palestinians standing at an Israeli security checkpoint, as if the two were unarguably analogous.

At least two of Robinson's Jewish students dropped the course--others are also presumably disturbed, but not enough to protest by withdrawing--and contacted the Simon Wiesenthal Center to make a video reading of Robinson's bizarre introduction to the material he humorlessly entitled "Parallel Images of Nazis and Israelis."

Ultimately, any legitimate group in society has the right to create some humor at their own expense, even if others tempt widespread condemnation for the same. But groups stooping to the same level of racism and genocidal hatred that historical enemies have utilized to murder innocents of their own kind is also horribly wrong.

Why are bigots such as Barr and Robinson tolerated? Perhaps it is an attempt to show the world that Jews are not really different from any other religious or cultural group. Or maybe that the Holocaust and ongoing anti-Semitism are regrettable but understandable aspects of strained relations with the rest of the world as Jews continue with their inexplicable habits of living. Or even that Jewish remembrance of atrocities is a juvenile and petty bid for the undeserved benefits of victimhood. Yet, all of these are vicious and dangerous lies that do in fact risk Jewish lives both here in America and abroad--and that much is obvious to reasonable individuals.

Clearly, criticism of this kind is not to say that such irresponsible behavior automatically guarantees another Holocaust. Or at least it is not to put direct blame on such choices. But these troubling events do erode the basic respect owed to any legitimate member group of society--in this case, a historically innovative contributor well out of proportion to its numbers--and dismisses one of the worst catastrophes in human history as a mere annoyance, a galling footnote repeatedly brought up that should serve only as a point of derision rather than profound contemplation.

And in the end, behavior like that isn't anywhere close to being funny or smart.

IN OTHER NEWS: Iran's murderous regime forces over 100 election protesters to court for crimes against clerical rule just days before Ahmadinejad's installment for a second term, claiming that many defendants were tools of antagonistic foreign states.

It has been reported that confessions have been offered by some individuals, though these were undoubtedly forced. And there also seems to be an inability on the part of defendants to obtain lawyers. Those fortunate enough to do so often find them locked out of the courtroom.

Additionally, three American tourists hiking near the Iranian border have been detained, though there is little substantive information regarding their captivity. Barring their release, occidental observers will likely know very little about what they are suffering at any point in the foreseeable future.

And there is no word yet as to whether or not President Obama will stand up and condemn these obvious abuses of human rights, but such an event seems extremely doubtful--after all, to date he has done virtually nothing to stop the shedding of innocent blood in Iran.