BluegrassBulletin.com

Secret Plan Exposed: USA On Hunt To Kill Al Qaeda Leader, Obama Stops It

We were attacked, we declared war on the attackers, we armed our forces to eliminate the threat, Obama has stopped it.

Obama Officials Side With Saudis To Kill Release Of Info Tying Them To 9/11 Terrorists

An article appearing in the New York Times has exposed a very tricky legal problem for the Obama administration which ran on at least one plank of making government more transparent.  It appears that Obama justice department lawyers are siding with the Saudi Royal family in seeking to keep secret, and in fact obtaining a court order for the destruction of, numerous documents which victims and survivors of 9/11 are claiming show a link between the Saudi's and terrorist organizations.

Documents gathered by lawyers for the families of Sept. 11 victims provide new evidence of extensive financial support for Al Qaeda and other extremist groups by members of the Saudi royal family, but the material may never find its way into court because of legal and diplomatic obstacles.

The case has put the Obama administration in the middle of a political and legal dispute, with the Justice Department siding with the Saudis in court last month in seeking to kill further legal action. Adding to the intrigue, classified American intelligence documents related to Saudi finances were leaked anonymously to lawyers for the families. The Justice Department had the lawyers’ copies destroyed and now wants to prevent a judge from even looking at the material.

Internal Treasury Department documents obtained by the lawyers under the Freedom of Information Act, for instance, said that a prominent Saudi charity, the International Islamic Relief Organization, heavily supported by members of the Saudi royal family, showed “support for terrorist organizations” at least through 2006.

A self-described Qaeda operative in Bosnia said in an interview with lawyers in the lawsuit that another charity largely controlled by members of the royal family, the Saudi High Commission for Aid to Bosnia, provided money and supplies to the terrorist group in the 1990s and hired militant operatives like himself. [NYTIMES]

In Chicago style mob politics one is expected to kiss the ring of "The Godfather" and then keep his own mouth shut and help shut the mouth of anyone else who would "rat out" the family. 

Looks like Obama learned his lessons well.

Is The Flight 93 National Memorial In Pennsylvania A Tribute To Islam?

It used to be that when the government decided it wanted your land, it would seize it, unless that seizure was unlawful.  Now it appears that about 1500 acres of land in Pennsylvania is about to be seized, despite the fact that the law which established the project for the Flight 93 National Memorial in Pennsylvania requires that the land could only be used if the landowners agreed to it.

The federal government issued an ultimatum yesterday to people who own land designated for the Flight 93 memorial in Western Pennsylvania: They have one week to reach an agreement on the sale of their land or the government will initiate proceedings to seize it. [Philly.com]

Some have argued that the planned design for the memorial is a tribute to Islam.  Examining the design and other factors they have concluded that it bears a striking resemblance to a Mirhab and the broken crescent of Islamic symbolism.

For a short video presentation on the subject see below:

{h/t stoptheaclu.com]

Gitmo Detainees Now Vacationing In Bermuda Claim Innocence

Watching FoxNews this morning I saw an interview with a handful of former Gitmo detainees who are now staying in a resort hotel in Bermuda.  They were dressed in casual western clothes, wearing brand new sneakers and leisurely strolling about like tourists with scraggly beards.

On camera, through and interpreter, they laughed when asked if they were connected with Al Qaida or the Taliban.  "No, No" was their chuckled and dismissive answer.  They deflected any suggestion that they were enemies of America.  They were innocent and wrongfully accused.

Not so says the military.  These guys were trained at a terrorist camp in the use of an AK-47 and are "connected", so to speak.

In a somewhat related story, the prisoners at San Quentin claim that they are innocent and were wrongfully convicted by a biased jury, a political hack of a judge and sold down the river by their incompetent lawyers.  They want a paid vacation to an Island too with press attention, new Nike shoes and free drink tickets for the Tiki bar.

Stay tuned.  We are barely 5 months into our new national nightmare.

Appease For Applause: Obama Doesn't Get It

EDITORIAL:

I'm sure today that many will dissect Obama's speech in Cairo and find reasons to applaud his efforts to extend and olive branch to those who are holding swords over our outstretched necks.  I'm equally sure that others will dissect his speech to find specific phrases they can endlessly repeat to ridicule the president.

I want to take a wider view, to gather in the entire perspective of what he has done.  Here is how I see it.

First, as Obama surely knows having grown up on three continents in a family which had long Muslim roots,  that Muslims do not see the world the same way Christians or Jews see the world.  The Muslim faith calls for war against any non-Muslim.  The dictates of their faith specifically say that Muslims have only three choices when it comes to non-Muslims, either convert them, kill them or keep a few alive to become slaves.

These are not my opinions, these are facts.  This is the context of the Muslim world into which Obama stepped in order to deliver his speech.  He had to know this.  That is why despite the fact his audience was hand picked, they still gasped when he suggested that they become more tolerant.

Christians are much more charitable.  In fact, it is only because of our Christian beginnings as a nation that religious freedom exists in the world.  Our tolerance of other faiths is a uniquely Christian attribute.  Muslims do not share that core value.  Their religion teaches intolerance and justifies murder as a tool of that intolerance.

Therefore Obama's speech, his offering of the olive branch, appeals to his Christian countrymen,  back home in a nation founded upon Christian principles.  To the Muslim world intent upon converting, killing or enslaving all non-believers (infidels) Obama was showing weakness, vulnerability and provided them with an opening.

Reaching out to the Muslim world and asking them to accept our version of "peaceful co-existence" would require them to abandon their faith.  Their devotion to their faith would never permit this, and so Obama's speech is likely to have no beneficial effects whatsoever.

He chose to ignore the real life example of how this approach has failed in the past.  He should have asked our greatest ally in the world, Great Britain, about the consequences of the Muslim invasion.  And he should have to look no further than the last two democratic presidents to see how the radical Muslims of the world have reacted when America comes to a knife fight armed with an olive branch. Jimmy Carter learned and so did Bill Clinton.  The radicals acted during Carter's administration, they plotted without fear during Clinton's.

America would be well served to remember that it was upon our continent that our forefathers gave birth to this new nation not only fleeing here to escape religious intolerance in Europe, but coming here to evangelize as Christian missionaries to a savage world.

It would be one thing for Obama to have gone to Cairo and made a bold statement that continued murders in furtherance of the Muslim faith will not be tolerated by the United States, and that based upon their religious creed the world will never trust a Muslim nation to possess weapons of mass destruction.  It would be one thing for our president to show strength and say that until the Muslim nations of the world could demonstrate a real and determined policy of religious tolerance within their borders that the world will never trust them to encroach upon any lands where liberty reigns supreme.

Instead, and though he stood erect, he bowed before the Koran, he bowed before Muhammad, and he telegraphed to those hell bent on destroying us, that based upon his special relationship with their religion, America will unclench its fist in the face of threatened harm.

Obama's speech has made the world a more dangerous place, make no mistake about it. 

Ralph Peters For NY Post: How To Solve Gitmo Problem, Kill Them All

EDITORIAL:

It was Memorial Day and threatening rain but a friend who had just purchased a new single shot target rifle wanted to sight it in.  So with clouds building on the horizon we put his new target rifle on the sand bags and before the first drops had fallen, we had it zeroed in at 200 yards.

Sitting through the next hour in a rainstorm on the porch of our hunting cabin talk turned to many things.  Because it was Memorial Day we also talked about war.

In that discussion we both agreed that the brutal side of war doesn't sit very well with people back home.  We talked about the horror faced by brave young soldiers in the heat of long battles with no sleep, where rifle shots and mortars and bombs were raining down all around for days on end. 

We talked about the hellish side of war where so many young men saw their buddies die, had to deal with hundreds of dead and mutilated bodies and we acknowledged the life changing experience infused into the psyche of thousands of brave Americans who in time of war had to kill human beings themselves.

We then talked about today's war, where political sensitivities back home had the potential to cause deadly hesitations on the battlefield which would have been unimaginable during WW II.  And we talked about our cowardly enemies who used women, mentally handicapped people and kids to launch suicide bomb attacks on military and civilians alike.

Our conversation also turned to Gitmo and how a modern day battlefield decision to imprison, rather than kill, had America bogged down in a quagmire over what to do with these enemies. 

The Obama crowd, it seems, would rather our military be used like a police force that goes out, makes arrests and then brings prisoners back to the United States where they are then given the right to avoid the traditional penalties of war in a courtroom.  If they lose their legal battles then, in the worst case, they end up spending a little time in jail. 

This attitude about the role of our military, we realized, was a significant break from the historic job our military has been required to perform in all other prior wars.  Before now they were expected to kill our enemies, not merely arrest them.

Then this morning I saw this article in the New York Post by Ralph Peters.  He could have been sitting there with us in the rain yesterday, but instead, with similar thoughts going through his head, he must have been at his word processor.

WE made one great mistake regarding Guantanamo: No terrorist should have made it that far. All but a handful of those grotesquely romanticized prisoners should have been killed on the battlefield.

The few kept alive for their intelligence value should have been interrogated secretly, then executed.

Terrorists don't have legal rights or human rights. By committing or abetting acts of terror against the innocent, they place themselves outside of humanity's borders. They must be hunted as man-killing animals.

And, as a side benefit, dead terrorists don't pose legal quandaries.

Peters' article may seem shocking, but his view of the situation is more in keeping, it would seem, with the mindset of the warrior, rather than the politician.  War is about killing people and destroying things.  And while wars are often started by politicians, they are fought by soldiers.

We would do well to remember what William Tecumseh Sherman said a long time ago:

"War is cruelty, and the crueler it is, the sooner it will be over."

Parades, flags and speeches are nice, but no more fitting tribute to those who have given their lives in defense of liberty could ever be given than to win wars quickly.  

Director Of Homeland Security Doesn't Think Border Jumping Is A Crime: WRONG!

Okay, forget the image of an impoverished family from Mexico merely seeking work and a way to feed their starving children by crossing our southern border in the middle of the night and in the middle of nowhere.  That's the bleeding heart view of what is going on.

Now focus on the same breach of border security only this time being exploited by a terrorist armed with a weapon of mass destruction.  There's no airport security screening in the desert, nobody to make them take their shoes off before entering and no dog to sniff their bags.

Our Department of Homeland Security is supposed to be focused on protecting us from illegals entering our country and former Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano is the Department Director, a cabinet level position.

Here's what she said over the weekend to Larry King:

What we have to do is target the real evil-doers in this business, the employers who consistently hire illegal labor, the human traffickers who are exploiting human misery.

And yes, when we find illegal workers, yes, appropriate action, some of which is criminal, most of that is civil, because crossing the border is not a crime per se. It is civil. But anyway, going after those as well. [MICHELLE MALKIN]

Well that's just great.  Our director of Homeland Security has defined returning veterans as potential terrorists but thinks improper entry by aliens is not a crime.

GEEZ! Can't we please get somebody in that office who at least knows the law?

8 USC Sec. 1325

(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection;
      misrepresentation and concealment of facts
      Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States
    at any time or place other than as designated by immigration
    officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration
    officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United
    States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the
    willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first
    commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or
    imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent
    commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or
    imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
    (b) Improper time or place; civil penalties
      Any alien who is apprehended while entering (or attempting to
    enter) the United States at a time or place other than as
    designated by immigration officers shall be subject to a civil
    penalty of -
        (1) at least $50 and not more than $250 for each such entry (or
      attempted entry); or
        (2) twice the amount specified in paragraph (1) in the case of
      an alien who has been previously subject to a civil penalty under
      this subsection.
    Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not
    in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be
    imposed.

Don't you feel safer now, knowing that Janet is watching out for us?

Release Of CIA Memos: Invitation To Another September 11?

A New York Post editorial carrying the banner headline "Tone Deaf On Terror" takes a look at the Obama decision to release CIA memos on enhanced interrogation techniques and concludes that the action has weakened our national security much like pre-September 11, 2001.

Al Qaeda kidnaps Americans, tortures them, then decapitates them on TV.

We deprive captives of sleep, push them into walls and put harmless caterpillars that we say are poisonous in their cells.

Then we're the ones who are condemned as the worst human-rights violators on the planet.

The White House insisted Obama "thought very long and hard" about releasing the memos as he tried to balance "the impact on national security" with "his belief in transparency."

Sad to say, national security lost out.

The editorial then goes on to quote from former intelligence officials who opine that Obama has returned us to the weak security position we held prior to the attack on the World Trade Centers, The Pentagon and the foiled attempt on the White House.  They conclude with this tongue in cheek assessment:

As National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair tellingly noted, the memos were written as the CIA was trying to prevent a repeat of 9/11 -- a task at which the Bush administration notably succeeded.

Still, he added, "those methods, read on a bright, sunny, safe day in April 2009, appear graphic and disturbing."

There you go: The dark post-9/11 days are gone and everything is "bright, sunny [and] safe." America no longer needs such techniques because there is no more threat, no more terrorism.

Sorry if I dripped too much sarcasm on your computer screen.  But rather that than blood from an explosion.

US Flagged Ship Hijacked By Pirates

STORY AT THIS LINK

Speaker Of The House (Third In Line Of Succession To Presidency) On Illegal Immigration

She is out of touch with the majority of Americans, out of step with the law and out of her element anywhere but San Francisco.  Nancy Pelosi says enforcing illegal immigration laws is "Un-American"