USA Mega

Lottery Places

The time is now 11:38 pm

You last visited
June 5, 2026, 12:00 pm

All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Home › Blogs › konane's Blog

konane's Blog

Page 551 of 587

Clintonistas assail ABC's "The Path to 9/11"

Wow, the Clintonistas are having a cow over airing of a docudrama about what lead up to 9-11 and want it censored.  Bet they had a party when they watched Fahren-hype 9-11 which is a compilation of conspiracy theories, the majority of which have been debunked especially how a plane hitting each of the twin towers brought them down.  There's even been a documentary on PBS which explains the physics of why.

Anyway back to the howling......  Seems what's fair for a seated President should be just fine for a has-been bunch of residents whose actions clearly precipitated 9-11. 

Just perhaps the ABC docudrama strikes too close to the heart of the truth damage control has been done to bury.  Big Grin

Next section in Clinton's own voice AND TRANSCRIPT OF HIS WORDS .... has been voice printed and verified and there exists a video of the speech too ... he explains not extraditing bin Laden when offered by the Sudan.  If he took bin Laden into custody 9-11 wouldn't have happened on American soil and history would be on a different track right now.

 

Clinton admitted that he turned down the Sudanese offer during a February 2002 speech to the Long Island Association. The address was audiotaped by NewsMax.com and videotaped by the LIA.
However, the LIA had declined to make a copy of their video available until the 9/11 Commission requested it last month. Meanwhile, the Clinton audio soundfile    http://www.newsmax.com/clinton2.mp3
has been available on NewsMax.com since August 2002.

TRANSCRIPT:

Ex-President Clinton's Remarks on Osama bin Laden
Delivered to the Long Island Association's Annual Luncheon
Crest Hollow Country Club, Woodbury, NY
Feb. 15, 2002

Question from LIA President Matthew Crosson:

CROSSON: In hindsight, would you have handled the issue of terrorism, and al-Qaeda specifically, in a different way during your administration?

CLINTON: Well, it's interesting now, you know, that I would be asked that question because, at the time, a lot of people thought I was too obsessed with Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda.

And when I bombed his training camp and tried to kill him and his high command in 1998 after the African embassy bombings, some people criticized me for doing it. We just barely missed him by a couple of hours.

I think whoever told us he was going to be there told somebody who told him that our missiles might be there. I think we were ratted out.

We also bombed a chemical facility in Sudan where we were criticized, even in this country, for overreaching. But in the trial in New York City of the al-Qaeda people who bombed the African embassy, they testified in the trial that the Sudanese facility was, in fact, a part of their attempt to stockpile chemical weapons.

So we tried to be quite aggressive with them. We got - uh - well, Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan.

And we'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again.

They released him. At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America.

So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have. But they thought it was a hot potato and they didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan.

We then put a lot of sanctions on the Afghan government and - but they inter-married, Mullah Omar and bin Laden. So that essentially the Taliban didn't care what we did to them.

Now, if you look back - in the hindsight of history, everybody's got 20/20 vision - the real issue is should we have attacked the al-Qaeda network in 1999 or in 2000 in Afghanistan.

Here's the problem. Before September 11 we would have had no support for it - no allied support and no basing rights. So we actually trained to do this. I actually trained people to do this. We trained people.

But in order to do it, we would have had to take them in on attack helicopters 900 miles from the nearest boat - maybe illegally violating the airspace of people if they wouldn't give us approval. And we would have had to do a refueling stop.

And we would have had to make the decision in advance that's the reverse of what President Bush made - and I agreed with what he did. They basically decided - this may be frustrating to you now that we don't have bin Laden. But the president had to decide after Sept. 11, which am I going to do first? Just go after bin Laden or get rid of the Taliban?

He decided to get rid of the Taliban. I personally agree with that decision, even though it may or may not have delayed the capture of bin Laden. Why?

Because, first of all the Taliban was the most reactionary government on earth and there was an inherent value in getting rid of them.

Secondly, they supported terrorism and we'd send a good signal to governments that if you support terrorism and they attack us in America, we will hold you responsible.

Thirdly, it enabled our soldiers and Marines and others to operate more safely in-country as they look for bin Laden and the other senior leadership, because if we'd have had to have gone in there to just sort of clean out one area, try to establish a base camp and operate.

So for all those reasons the military recommended against it. There was a high probability that it wouldn't succeed.

Now I had one other option. I could have bombed or sent more missiles in. As far as we knew he never went back to his training camp. So the only place bin Laden ever went that we knew was occasionally he went to Khandahar where he always spent the night in a compound that had 200 women and children.

So I could have, on any given night, ordered an attack that I knew would kill 200 women and children that had less than a 50 percent chance of getting him.

Now, after he murdered 3,100 of our people and others who came to our country seeking their livelihood you may say, "Well, Mr. President, you should have killed those 200 women and children."

But at the time we didn't think he had the capacity to do that. And no one thought that I should do that. Although I take full responsibility for it. You need to know that those are the two options I had. And there was less than a 50/50 chance that the intelligence was right that on this particular night he was in Afghanistan.

Now, we did do a lot of things. We tried to get the Pakistanis to go get him. They could have done it and they wouldn't. They changed governments at the time from Mr. Sharif to President Musharraf. And we tried to get others to do it. We had a standing contract between the CIA and some groups in Afghanistan authorizing them and paying them if they should be successful in arresting and/or killing him.

So I tried hard to - I always thought this guy was a big problem. And apparently the options I had were the options that the President and Vice President Cheney and Secretary Powell and all the people that were involved in the Gulf War thought that they had, too, during the first eight months that they were there - until Sept. 11 changed everything.

But I did the best I could with it and I do not believe, based on what options were available to me, that I could have done much more than I did. Obviously, I wish I'd been successful. I tried a lot of different ways to get bin Laden 'cause I always thought he was a very dangerous man. He's smart, he's bold and committed.

But I think it's very important that the Bush administration do what they're doing to keep the soldiers over there to keep chasing him. But I know - like I said - I know it might be frustrating to you. But it's still better for bin Laden to worry every day more about whether he's going to see the sun come up in the morning than whether he's going to drop a bomb, another bomb somewhere in the U.S. or in Europe or on some other innocent civilians. (END OF TRANSCRIPT)

"Clinton Administration Officials Assail ABC's 'The Path to 9/11'

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 7, 2006; A09

 

Top officials of the Clinton administration have launched a preemptive strike against an ABC-TV "docudrama," slated to air Sunday and Monday, that they say includes made-up scenes depicting them as undermining attempts to kill Osama bin Laden.

Former secretary of state Madeleine K. Albright called one scene involving her "false and defamatory." Former national security adviser Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger said the film "flagrantly misrepresents my personal actions." And former White House aide Bruce R. Lindsey, who now heads the William J. Clinton Foundation, said: "It is unconscionable to mislead the American public about one of the most horrendous tragedies our country has ever known."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/06/AR2006090601819_pf.html
Entry #555

Photo link Ground Zero 9-13-01

"These photos were taken at Ground Zero, the World Trade Center site in New York, on September 13, 2001.

They were taken by someone named "Ed" who was allowed into the area by a member of the emergency response crew, at a time when all civilians -- including most journalists -- were forbidden to enter the area. As a result, these photos are just about the only close-ups ever taken of the World Trade Center site so soon after the 9/11 attacks."
Entry #554

....Sets Aside Work on Immigration

If this is correct it is probably one of their smartest moves this year.  They also need to realize the momentum is NOT going to go quietly away after elections either.  Polls show around 67% of Americans want the border sealed and something done about immigration so it's far from over.... way too many grassroots organizations busy which likely explains their "change of heart."

G.O.P. Sets Aside Work on Immigration
By CARL HULSE and RACHEL L. SWARNS

WASHINGTON, Sept. 4 — As they prepare for a critical pre-election legislative stretch, Congressional Republican leaders have all but abandoned a broad overhaul of immigration laws and instead will concentrate on national security issues they believe play to their political strength.

With Congress reconvening Tuesday after an August break, Republicans in the House and Senate say they will focus on Pentagon and domestic security spending bills, port security legislation and measures that would authorize the administration’s terror surveillance program and create military tribunals to try terror suspects.

“We Republicans believe that we have no choice in the war against terror and the only way to do it is to continue to take them head-on whether it is in Iraq or elsewhere,” said Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the majority leader.

A final decision on what do about immigration policy awaits a meeting this week of senior Republicans. But key lawmakers and aides who set the Congressional agenda say they now believe it would be politically risky to try to advance an immigration measure that would showcase party divisions and need to be completed in the 19 days Congress is scheduled to meet before breaking for the election."...............

 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/05/us/05cong.html?ei=5065&en=3ccbb58ef1f8582b&ex=1158033600&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print

Entry #553

Great article ...

He makes a very valid point about the left press in the US, that they don't take Islamafascist demands seriously, so what if they demand we convert ... no big deal. 

However, once you convert to Islam you can never go back to your former status under penalty of death.   

Yes, our own leftie moonbats are making decisions for us without having a fragment of a clue as to the path they're committing us to by making nice-nice negotiating with Islamafascists. 

Would you want someone without a brain making life impacting decisions for your life?  I don't because they don't have enough information and don't take seriously obvious facts which have been in place since the 7th century .... convert, be enslaved or die.

 

 

"Why abduct us? We cede our values for free

September 3, 2006

BY MARK STEYN SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST

Source Chicago Sun Times

 

 


Did you see that video of the two Fox journalists announcing they'd converted to Islam? The larger problem, it seems to me, is that much of the rest of the Western media have also converted to Islam, and there seems to be no way to get them to convert back to journalism.

 

Consider, for example, the bizarre behavior of Reuters, the once globally respected news agency now reduced to putting out laughably inept terrorist propaganda. A few days ago, it made a big hoo-ha about the Israelis intentionally firing a missile at its press vehicle and wounding its cameraman Fadel Shana. Shana was posed in an artful sprawl in a blood-spattered shirt. But it had ridden up and underneath his undershirt was spotlessly white, like a summer-stock Julius Caesar revealing the boxers under his toga. What's stunning is not that almost all Western media organizations reporting from the Middle East are reliant on local staff overwhelmingly sympathetic to one side in the conflict -- that's been known for some time -- but the amateurish level of fakery that head office is willing to go along with.

Down at the other end of the news business, meanwhile, one finds items like this snippet from the Sydney Morning Herald:

"A 16-year-old girl was tailed by a car full of men before being dragged inside and assaulted in Sydney's west last night, police say . . .

"The three men involved in the attack were described to police as having dark 'mullet-style' haircuts."

Three men with "mullet-style" hair, huh? Not much to go on there. Bit of a head scratcher. But, as it turned out, the indefatigable Sydney Morning Herald typist had faithfully copied out every salient detail of the police report except one. Here's the statement the coppers themselves issued:

"Police are seeking three men described as being of Middle Eastern/Mediterranean appearance, with dark 'mullet-style' hair cuts."

That additional detail narrows it down a bit, wouldn't you say? The only reason I know that is because the Aussie Internet maestro Tim Blair grew curious about the epidemic of incidents committed by men of no known appearance and decided to look into it. One can understand the agonies the politically correct multicultural journalist must go through, distressed at the thought that an infelicitous phrasing might perpetuate unfortunate stereotypes of young Muslim males. But, even so, it's quite a leap to omit the most pertinent fact and leave the impression the Sydney constabulary are combing the city for mullets. The Boston Globe's Jeff Jacoby wrote the other day about how American children's books are "sacrificing truth on the altar of political correctness." But there seems to be quite a lot of that in the grown-up comics, too. And, as I've said before, it's never a good idea to put reality up for grabs. There may come a time when you need it.

It's striking how, for all this alleged multiculti sensitivity, we're mostly entirely insensitive to other cultures: We find it all but impossible to imagine how differently they view the world. Go back to that video in which Fox's Steve Centanni and Olaf Wiig announced their conversion to Islam. The moment the men were released, the Western media and their colleagues wrote off the scene as a stunt, a cunning ruse, of no more consequence than yelling "Behind you! He's got a gun!" and then kicking your distracted kidnapper in the teeth. Indeed, a few Web sites seemed to see the Islamic conversion routine as a useful get-out-of-jail-free card.

Don't bet on it. In my forthcoming book, I devote a few pages to a thriller I read as a boy -- an old potboiler by Sherlock Holmes' creator, Arthur Conan Doyle. In 1895 Sir Arthur had taken his sick wife to Egypt for her health, and, not wishing to waste the local color, produced a slim novel called The Tragedy of the Korosko, about a party of Anglo-American-French tourists taken hostage by the Mahdists, the jihadi of the day. Much of the story finds the characters in the same predicament as Centanni and Wiig: The kidnappers are offering them a choice between Islam or death. Conan Doyle's Britons and Americans and Europeans were men and women of the modern world even then:

"None of them, except perhaps Miss Adams and Mrs. Belmont, had any deep religious convictions. All of them were children of this world, and some of them disagreed with everything which that symbol upon the earth represented."

"That symbol" is the cross. Yet in the end, even as men with no religious convictions, they cannot bring themselves to submit to Islam, for they understand it to be not just a denial of Christ but in some sense a denial of themselves, too. So they stall and delay and bog down the imam in a lot of technical questions until eventually he wises up and they're condemned to death.

One hundred ten years later, for the Fox journalists and the Western media who reported their release, what's the big deal? Wear robes, change your name to Khaled, go on camera and drop Allah's name hither and yon: If that's your ticket out, seize it. Everyone'll know it's just a sham.

But that's not how the al-Jazeera audience sees it. If you're a Muslim, the video is anything but meaningless. Not even the dumbest jihadist believes these infidels are suddenly true believers. Rather, it confirms the central truth Osama and the mullahs have been peddling -- that the West is weak, that there's nothing -- no core, no bedrock -- nothing it's not willing to trade. In his new book The Conservative Soul, attempting to reconcile his sexual temperament and his alleged political one, Time magazine's gay Tory Andrew Sullivan enthuses, "By letting go, we become. By giving up, we gain. And we learn how to live -- now, which is the only time that matters." That's almost a literal restatement of Faust's bargain with the devil:

"When to the moment I shall say
'Linger awhile! so fair thou art!'
Then mayst thou fetter me straightway
Then to the abyss will I depart!"

In other words, if Faust becomes so enthralled by "the moment" that he wants to live in it forever, the devil will have him for all eternity. In the Muslim world, they watch the Centanni/Wiig video and see men so in love with the present, the now, that they will do or say anything to live in the moment. And they draw their own conclusions -- that these men are easier to force into the car than that 16-year-old girl in Sydney was. It doesn't matter how "understandable" Centanni and Wiig's actions are to us, what the target audience understands is quite different: that there is nothing we're willing to die for. And, to the Islamist mind, a society with nothing to die for is already dead.

© Mark Steyn, 2006

http://www.suntimes.com/output/steyn/cst-edt-steyn03.html#

Entry #552

Convert or Else

Found this on Powerline.  Hey at least Nazi-spawn-Islamafascists are telling the truth for a change .... Islam ruling the entire world.

"Al Qaeda Says: Convert or Else!

 

Al Qaeda has released a new video, with an introduction by Zawahiri, that stars an American formerly known as Adam Yehiye Gadahn. Gadahn, who has been featured in al Qaeda videos before, urges all Americans to avoid the wrath of al Qaeda by converting to Islam.

Gadahn39.jpg

Al Qaeda's public relations efforts have always been a little clumsy, in part, I think, because the terrorists follow Western media so closely. Their videos tend to echo Democratic Party talking points--the famous bin Laden effort just before the 2002 Presidential election was straight out of Michael Moore--and it's understandable that, based on what they see in American media, they expect the American people to be persuaded.

This time, Gadahn's message is conversion: "..................

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/015179.php

Entry #551

Miller Beer Funding Illegals Marches

From NumbersUSA.org email

Miller Beer Phone Numbers

____________________

Milwaukee: 414.931.2000
Miller corporate headquarters) [takes you to a recording; callers should press "0" to talk to operator>

Eden, NC: 336.627.2100
(Miller regional brewery)

Trenton, OH: 513.896.9200
(regional brewery) [get recorded list of departments {e.g., plant mgr., brewing, etc.}

Albany, GA: 229.420.5000
(regional brewery) [takes you to a recording; callers should press "0" to talk to operator>

Ft. Worth, TX: 817.551.3300
(regional brewery) [press "1" to get list of departments>

Irwindale, CA: 626.969.6811
(regional brewery) [get recorded list of departments>

Chippewa Falls, WI: 715.723.5558/888.534.6437
(LEINIES) (Leinenkugel brewery ["Leinie's Lodge">)

THE MILLER STORY


The Chicago Tribune seems to have broken the story this morning.

The background is that the illegal-alien marchers last spring discovered that Miller had given a small campaign contribution to a fellow Wisconsin resident, Rep. Sensenbrenner, who was the father of the H.R. 4437 enforcement bill that the marchers were protesting.

The marchers called for a nationwide Hispanic boycott of Miller beer.

Miller immediately caved and said their corporation is against H.R. 4437.

Now, it seems that Miller thinks it has more to gain from illegal alien supporters than from the majority of Americans who want illegal immigration ended (and unrewarded). Just read the Tribune story. You'll be amazed.

Why this immigrant rights march is brought to you by Miller

By Oscar Avila
Tribune staff reporter
Published September 1, 2006

Marchers had to duck into fast-food restaurants for water when they first took to Chicago's streets in support of illegal immigrants five months ago. At the next two marches, family-owned grocery stores offered free bottled water from trucks emblazoned with their names.

This time, as demonstrators march from Chinatown to House Speaker Dennis Hastert's (R-Ill.) Batavia office this weekend, they will have Miller Brewing Co., as a sponsor. The brewer has paid more than $30,000 for a planning convention, materials and newspaper ads publicizing the event.

The support of a major corporation for a controversial political cause shows how fierce the competition has become to woo the growing market of Latino consumers.

For Miller, the march offered a special chance to catch up. This spring the brewer drew the ire of pro-immigrant forces over contributions to U.S. Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), who sponsored legislation that would crack down on illegal immigrants. That prompted a short-lived boycott by some Latino groups.

Now, march advertisements feature not just the organizing committee's trademark blue globe but Miller's logo and a Spanish translation of its "Live Responsibly" slogan, a company effort to build goodwill among Latinos.

But this march is no Cinco de Mayo parade. The politically charged event will promote a controversial plan to end deportations and offer legal status for all 11 million to 12 million undocumented immigrants. That creates potential pitfalls for any businesses lending support, experts say.

At the same time business sponsorships have forced activists to confront whispers that they are commercializing their movement when they accept much-needed donations.

"We would love to have 20 corporate logos. It doesn't mean we are selling the movement out," said Jorge Mujica, a member of the March 10 Committee. "The principles and demands remain the same. They are helping out this movement and we are happy with that."

Labor unions remain the movement's backbone with four major unions bringing at least 600 marchers on buses from throughout Chicago. Religious groups have been key too. Some marchers will bed down in churches and a mosque.

But businesses have become vital to this weekend's Immigrant Workers Justice Walk, which will cover 45 miles to Hastert's district office. Hundreds of marchers plan to cover the entire span from Friday through Monday, and organizers need food and water for them.

Sometimes political and commercial messages are mingled.

At a July march, Chicago-based food producer V&V Supremo printed signs with its logo that urged "Moratorium Now, Legalization Yes."

Jimenez Market, an area chain, had its sign on display as workers passed out more than 5,000 bottles of water and other supplies worth nearly $17,000. Co-owner Jose Perez acknowledged it is good publicity but stressed that "we are supporting our people. Without them, our business would go downhill."

This weekend, the Los Comales restaurant plans to donate 500 tortas, Mexican sandwiches filled with steak, ham and other toppings. The Laredo Bakery is donating bread while other restaurants are donating water, fruit and other supplies, organizers said.

Those businesses are natural allies--"part of the same brotherhood," as one marketer put it.

But the presence of Miller at a welcoming reception the day before the Aug. 12-13 planning convention raised eyebrows.

The convention brought together labor unions, anti-war groups, immigrant service organizations and even socialist political candidates.

Hours before bashing NAFTA and U.S. foreign policy, participants at the Aug. 11 reception mingled with the Miller Girls, the company's public relations ambassadors, amid a display of Miller logos.

That Miller was involved in the first place is one measure of the growing power of immigrants. After the boycott announcement, the company approached march organizers to try to find common ground, and agreed to back the march organizers' efforts.

Miller is also bankrolling informational ads in Voces Migrantes, or Migrant Voices, a community newspaper in Chicago, and has promised scholarships for area Latinos.

Mathew Romero, the company's local market development manager, said Miller felt it was important to speak out against Sensenbrenner's legislation, though his campaign was one of many the company supported.

Romero noted that company founder Frederick Miller was a German immigrant and many current executives are foreign nationals. Miller is now part of London-based SABMiller.

Romero said he wasn't worried that some opponents of illegal immigration would be upset at the company's support of "the free movement of people, labor, goods and services."

"As long as you are stacking facts against facts, they are free to make their own decisions. We will stand by our positions," he said.

George San Jose, president of the San Jose Group, a Chicago-based marketing company specializing in the Hispanic market, said he understands why companies chase Hispanic purchasing power, which tops $700 billion annually in the U.S. Brewers, he said, have been especially aggressive.

But San Jose would advise clients that there are better ways.

"A company sponsoring one of the two sides of the immigration debate is no different than a company sponsoring groups for or against abortion [rights>. It's one of those heated political debates that companies should stay clear of," he said.

At the request of march organizers, media executive Robert Armband sent e-mails to thousands of business contacts, asking if they would consider helping the March 10 Committee.

"It certainly is an opportunity to reach the masses, but it might not be the right vehicle to come out as a sponsor," said Armband, publisher and chief executive of La Raza, a Chicago newspaper.

March organizers say they have not made any full-fledged sales pitches to major corporations and are having internal discussions about whether they should make a real push. That can be a tough decision, according to march organizer Gabe Gonzalez.

Gonzalez said he represents those in the movement--maybe half the total, he thinks -- who don't even consider themselves capitalists. Many have been involved with labor campaigns targeting specific companies.

March organizers shot down a suggestion that they approach Coca-Cola, for example, because of what they perceive as the company's labor abuses in the developing world, a cause celebre among liberal activists.

Although immigrant activists see legalization as an issue of social justice, Gonzalez said corporations might back the idea as a way to protect their bottom line. Whatever the motivations, Gonzalez said he would cooperate with almost any company willing to back the cause.

"That's the nature of politics. You form coalitions based on mutual self-interest," Gonzalez said. "So will we work with corporations? We will work with anyone who will work with us."

Entry #550

Now it's "Migration Accord"

Interesting spin on terms .... shoving amnesty in every orifice is now being PC sanitized as ...."securing a migration accord with the U.S.  Notice the word migration.

Also interesting how that loving, benevolent, peaceful, socialist faction saying they're going to ignore election results and have plans to create a parallel government and rule from the streets."

Seems we've already had a flashing neon preview of that exact mindset during the immigration rallies last spring.

Washington is attempting to sell us a blivet all wrapped up with a pretty bow on top. 

"Mexican Lawmakers Block Fox's Speech

By JULIE WATSON
Associated Press Writer

<excerpt>

MEXICO CITY (AP) -- Vicente Fox was forced to forego the last state-of-the-nation address of his presidency Friday after leftist lawmakers stormed the stage of Congress to protest disputed July 2 elections.".......

.........."The standoff came six days before the top electoral court must declare a president-elect or annul the July 2 vote and order a new election. So far, rulings have favored ruling party candidate Felipe Calderon, who was ahead by about 240,000 votes in the official count.

Lopez Obrador has already said he won't recognize the electoral court's decision, and he plans to create a parallel government and rule from the streets."..........

 

.........."Fox, a former Coca-Cola executive, ushered in economic stability and brought inflation to record lows, but he has been unable to secure a migration accord with the U.S. or significantly reduce poverty. "


http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MEXICO_ELECTIONS?SITE=7219&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-09-01-20-56-59

Entry #549

Cat care article for you cat lovers

This came in email and although I haven't had cats for years due to allergies feel this article presents some good advice for people who do have cats.

When I did have cats, remember being cautioned by vets to feed food which DO NOT CONTAIN SOY FLOUR OR MEAL because soy contains too much magnesium for cats and can lead to serious urinary tract problems, which if not corrected can lead to a painful death.

Also a friend who still has a cat puts an opened clean garbage bag in the litter box then pours fresh litter into that.  They then fold the bag down the sides and tuck it under the litter pan.  That facilitates easy litter removal at change time where litter pans don't have to be scrubbed every time prior to refilling.  Clean litter ... happy cat.

"FELINE INAPPROPRIATE URINATION

FELINE INAPPROPRIATE URINATION:

The term 'inappropriate urination' is relatively self-explanatory.  It refers to cats who urinate on surfaces and in places that are not considered appropriate by their owners.  Basically, except for the few indoor cats that use household toilets, it is only considered appropriate for cats to urinate in a litter box.  Urinating on the couch, bed, wall, rugs, and ceramic tile, or in the bath tub, laundry basket, or kitchen sink is just not appropriate!

Inappropriate urination is, unfortunately, too common.  All of us have known of cats with this unwanted habit.  Many of the cats are labeled as lost causes and either pushed out the door to become outside cats or given up to animal shelters.  But the vast majority of these cats can be helped.  With a little detective work, the underlying cause can be found.  Once the cause is uncovered, appropriate treatment strategies can be implemented and the cats can be taught to reuse their litter boxes.

Consider inappropriate urination a message from the cat.  Something is wrong and the cat is letting you know.  The cat is not 'acting out', but asking for help.  I have yet to meet a cat that did not, as a kitten, use a litter box.  I have taken in feral cats and kittens ranging in age from one day to many years, and each and everyone have used a litter box.  Even the youngest, motherless kitten will rapidly grasp the use of a litter box when placed in one.  This is because cats have a natural affinity for sandy substrates.  They want to dig in soil before they eliminate.  They do not naturally choose flat, smooth, or cloth-like surfaces. 

So if cats naturally use a litter box, and then decide to stop, something must have gone wrong.  The cats are not spiteful, angry, or mean; something has gone awry.  The list of problems that can push a cat out of the litter box and towards inappropriate urination is a long and potentially complicated one.  The list can be divided into management, medical, and behavioral causes. 

Medical reasons include any illness or disease that causes the cat to be in pain or increases urine production.  So a bladder infection, with accompanying urinary tract pain, can certainly cause the cat to associate the box with the pain and lead to urination outside of the box.  Other causes of pain might include bladder stones, inflammation, or tumors, as well as arthritis, muscle disease, or spinal cord pain that interferes with movement in and out of the box.  All painful incidences associated with the box may result in failure to use it.  Additional medical causes would include cognitive diseases that impair the mental abilities of older cats.  A final category of medical illnesses include all those that lead to increased urine production, such as kidney disease, diabetes, and thyroid problems.  The greater the urine production, the more often the cat must urinate.  This upsets the cat's routine and soils the box more rapidly than expected, ultimately causing the cat to abandon the box.

Every single cat that inappropriately urinates should be examined by a veterinarian as soon as possible.  Illnesses need to be caught early in order for appropriate therapy to work and to prevent the inappropriate urination from becoming habit.  Cats are known to hide disease.  Inappropriate urination may be the cat's only notice to you that the he is sick.  Heed the warning and rule out medical causes before blaming the cat for 'bad behavior'.

Another major cause of inappropriate urination is poor litter box management which results in cats having an aversion to the box, the litter, or the location.  These cats may then develop a preference for a different location or surface.  Owners often have boxes that are too small, too few, too dirty, left in incorrect places, or filled with litter which feels or smells bad to the cat.  No cat likes a small, dirty, noisy box.  Your cat's inappropriate urination may be the cat's method of telling you this.  When purchasing, placing, and filling litter boxes, think of the cat's needs before your own. 

Different cats have different needs.  Some cats need boxes with low sides or high sides, or ones that are open-sided or covered with a lid.  Some have aversions to scented litter, or clumping litter, or unscented litter, or the chemicals in the plastic box.  So buying the smallest, covered box for a 15 pound cat will not work.  Neither will buying the deepest, self-cleaning box for a timid, 1.5 pound kitten.  And putting a box down two flights of stairs may invite trouble from a 19 year old arthritic cat.  While we are on the subject of boxes, litters, and locations, I can pretty well guarantee that you can cause inappropriate urination by putting a litter box next to a washing machine that hits the spin cycle just at the cat tries to use the box.  A litter pan near a washing machine or dryer is an invitation for disaster.

To prevent litter box aversion, make sure your cat likes her box.  Identify your cat's needs and meet them.  Trial and error may be needed to find the appropriate mix of box, litter, and location; but it's worth the effort in the long run.  Litter type, depth, and fragrance are all variables that can be adjusted.  So try different types of litter, including clumping and non-clumping, scented and non-scented, and litters made of wheat or paper.  Also, experiment with covered and uncovered boxes, self-cleaning litter trays, and round or rectangular pans. 

Purchase multiple boxes for multi-cat households.  The rule of thumb is one box per cat, plus one extra box.  So a household with four cats need five boxes, preferably in separate locations.  This may sound excessive, but it is much easier to manage the boxes than a cat urinating on the pillows!  If may even be necessary to have different types of boxes and different litters for the different cats.

Lack of litter cleanliness is a significant cause of inappropriate urination.  Cats do NOT like dirty litter boxes.  Their noses work much better than human noses, so they can detect unpleasant odors that people ignore.  Some cats are so offended by dirty litter that they will even avoid boxes used by other cats.  Some will try to keep their bodies out of the box and urinate over the edge.  Some will gingerly step in the box and then urinate out of it, or urinate just next to the box.  These cats are telling you very clearly that they do not like the litter in the box.  They are attempting to use the pan, but are just too repulsed by the litter to use it appropriately.  If the situation is not remedied rapidly, these cats may soon avoid the entire litter box.

Heeding the cat's pleas can help prevent inappropriate urination.  The litter pans must be as clean as possible.  Daily scooping should be considered the minimum requirement.  It is actually wiser to scoop boxes as often as they are used, even if this is two, three, or four times a day.  I realize that everyone knows of an owner that only cleans boxes once per week and the cats are just fine.  Do not assume this will work for your cat and do not get comfortable with this system.  At any time an individual cat may react to a filthy litter pan by choosing to urinate outside of the box.  It is easier to prevent the problem with frequent cleanings than to attempt to remedy it.

Plastic litter boxes also hold odors, so boxes should be dumped and washed out weekly.  Use a mild detergent, rinse thoroughly, and then dry the box before refilling.  The pans may even need to be replaced periodically, as it is impossible to get rid of the accumulated odors that eventually permeate the plastic.  Actually, this is a good reason to avoid saving old litter boxes from previous cats for new arrivals.  The new cat can still detect the odors from the old cat and may refuse to use the old box.  So, the second rule of thumb is that new cats should always get new litter boxes. 

Litter box aversion can be prevented with proper planning.  Start off correctly by purchasing fine, unscented litter and placing it one to two inches deep in a clean box.  Most cats like large, uncovered boxes, as the odors are not trapped in the box and the cat can see out of the box.  Place the box in a quiet area that is separated from the food area and away from machinery.  Pick quiet, easy-to-access locations.  Avoid damp, dank spots (wet basements) that hold odors and keep the litter moist.  Avoid litter box liners, if possible, as many cats dislike them.  Keep the box clean and dry, change litter as needed, and make sure that all the cats have easy access to all the boxes.

If all litter box management issues and medical issues are handled, and a cat demonstrates inappropriate urination, behavioral causes need to be explored.  It this is the case, it is important to seek help quickly.  The longer the problem continues, the more difficult it is to treat and the longer the problem takes to resolve.  Cats will rapidly develop preferences for inappropriate places because the surface and location are more pleasing than the litter pan.  The problem then becomes more difficult to solve, as the cat now has both a behavioral issue and a preference for the wrong spot.

Behavioral issues are as varied as cats.  Often the detective work involves an in-depth knowledge of cat behavior.  Owners may not be able to identify the problem and may need help from outside sources.  Pet behaviorists, veterinarians, and board-certified veterinary behaviorists can be of great help.  They may interview owners, examine the cat, and even visit the house to uncover the root of the problem.  A common example of behavioral issues would be a cat that is too frightened to use the box because other cats terrorize her both in and out of the box.  Another example is a cat that suddenly becomes territorial when he sees a stray cat outside.  The indoor cat cannot reach the outdoor cat to claim his territory, so he urinates near the door.  Other cats have been known to stop using their boxes when antique furniture or old carpets stained with urine from previous animals are brought into the house.  Others are upset by new pets, new adults, or new babies.  Some are reacting to tension or fighting within the household.  The list goes on and on.

Treatment relates to the specific cause and can be a simple as adding additional litter boxes, closing the blinds so a cat cannot see outside, or getting rid of old, soiled furniture and carpets.  Others standard 'fixes' include using enzyme cleaners to clean up any accidents and remove odors.  In addition, it is helpful to cover inappropriate areas with plastic carpet runners, sheets of plastic, tin foil, or other items with textures that the cats find unappealing.  Make sure to close doors to keep cats away from rooms and furniture they wish to use as litter box.  Cover the bases of plants with tinfoil or wire mesh to keep out curious cats.  The use of soothing pheromones, such as Feliway, may also be helpful for cats suffering from anxiety.  Some cats also respond positively to special litter attracting agents made from soil and herbs.  Finally, some cats need anti-anxiety medications available from veterinarians.

Punishment should not be used.  Hitting, screaming, and rubbing the cat's nose on the soiled areas is ineffective and inhumane.  These actions will increase the cat's anxiety, teach it to run from you, and most likely make the problem worse.  The cat will not connect your behaviors with his actions and simply learn to avoid you, along with the litter box.  In addition, your behavior may increase the cat's nervousness and create additional troubles.  If your cat is urinating inappropriately, seek creative management solutions, not punishments.

A similar, but different problem involves cats that spray.  The issue with these cats is not the use of the litter box, but urine marking.  Cats that spray inappropriately deposit small drops of urine in a specific area.  Usually they are standing when they do this and back up to a spot, wiggle their tail, and release small amounts of urine on vertical surfaces.  Cats that spray are communicating with other cats.  They may be announcing their presence, making or keeping their territories, or looking for a mate.  Most cats that spray are un-neutered males.  A few are un-spayed females, spayed females, and neutered males.

Because spraying is a territorial sign, the incidence of this behavior goes up in multi-cat households or houses with feral cats roaming the yard.  Cats also spray if they think their territory is invaded, so a new cat, baby, roommate, furniture, or even carpeting may trigger spraying.  Illness, lack of appropriate exercise, isolation, and inactivity may also lead to spraying.

Treatment for spraying is similar to that for inappropriate urination, with one notable exception.  Since hormonal influences drive intact male cats to spray, any intact male cat that sprays should be neutered immediately.  The sooner this is done, the sooner the problem will resolve.  Since indoor cats are typically neutered, this should not be a problem for most owners.  Other treatments include separating the cat from the preferred spraying area, covering the area with plastic or tinfoil, and the use of pheromones or medications to ease anxiety. 

Territorial issues can be helped by reducing an indoor cat's ability to see outdoor cats and by increasing the space allotted to interior territories.  Obviously, you cannot make a house bigger.  But you can increase the space each cat calls his  own.  Make room vertically by clearing off shelves and adding cat furniture that allows the cat to climb up.  Add horizontal hiding places with boxes, a few open drawers or closets, and cat furniture.  Anything that allows the cat to move into more areas will decrease pressure to defend the territory and may reduce spraying.

The bottom line is that a variety of environmental, behavioral, and medical causes can lead to inappropriate urination and/or spraying.  It is up to the owner to take immediate action to uncover the cause, eliminate it, and take appropriate steps to get the cat back into the box.  This may take time, consultation with professionals, changes in household management, and considerable effort.  The good news is that the vast majority of cats can be helped.

Sincerely,


Dr. Jane Leon  "
Entry #548

"Fair Tax News

Fair Tax Book  (live link)
____________
[Emphasis added mine] 

"FAIRTAX NEWS

Neal Boortz

"Sometime in the next few weeks those in charge of the Republican campaign this Fall will be deciding whether or not to make the FairTax a prominent part of the campaign agenda.  In the meantime, the FairTax continues to draw much attention both inside the Beltway and in newspaper and magazine editorials, columns and stories.

My search engine spat out an article  http://www.atlantaprogressivenews.com/news/0083.html  that appeared on an Internet site called "Atlanta Progressive News" this morning.  This article was typical of the tactic that Democrats have chosen to use to combat this tax reform idea.  That tactic?  Lies.  Simple as that.

This is perhaps my biggest surprise since co-authoring The FairTax Book with Congressman John Linder.  In order to critique the FairTax plan opponents find it absolutely necessary to either re-write H.R. 25 and then criticize the FairTax Bill as they have re-written it (the approach used by the president's tax reform commission) or they just simply flat-out lie about the FairTax without first going through their re-write process.

Here's a paragraph from the article"

"Linder's extremist plan would create a disproportionate burden on the poor to finance government, while letting the rich pay only a tiny fraction of their wealth, and possibly bankrupting the federal government."

OK ... let's see.  "A disproportionate burden on the poor"?  Even the tax reform commission said that the FairTax was the only tax reform idea out there that completely un-taxed the poor in this country.  Isn't that odd?  The president's tax reform commission said the FairTax completely un-taxes the poor, and the Progressive News says that it would create a disproportionate burden on the poor.  And what is the truth?  Under the FairTax the so-called "poor" would pay no federal income tax, no social security tax, no Medicare tax, no capital gains tax ... none of it.  The consumer goods they buy would cost essentially the same as they did under the old income tax scheme, and they would receive the prebate that would completely reimburse them for the sales tax they pay on all purchases right up to the poverty level.  Now that is what the Progressive News calls a disproportionate burden on the poor.

Moving on ...

What about the "...letting the rich pay only a fraction of their wealth ..." line?  Guess what?  We have a federal income tax, folks.  Not a wealth tax.  The rich don't pay taxes on their wealth now ... just on their income.  Many rich people are out of the income-earning business now and have been for quite some time.  They dip into their pool of wealth and spend a million bucks for a motor home and the federal government gets nothing.  Not so under the FairTax.  The motor home will still cost around a million bucks ... but $230,000 of it goes to the federal government.  This is what Progressive News calls " ... letting the rich pay only a fraction of their wealth."  Finally we have a tax reform idea that actually taxes wealth!  And the left ignores it. 

Now this next line from the Progressive News is entirely predictable.  They refer to the FairTax as a 30% sales tax.  Let's see ... you buy something for $100 and $23 goes to the federal government.  Now when I went to a government school $23 was 23% of $100.  Things may have changed in the way we teach math ... but I think that old rule still holds. 

I've explained this all before ... but the FairTax is calculated as an inclusive sales tax because that is the way we calculate income taxes.  Simply put, if you earn $1000 and you're in a 25% tax bracket, you pay $250 in taxes.  If you spend $1000 and the FairTax rate is 23% you pay $230 in taxes.

So why do opponents like to quote the 30% rate for the FairTax but not for the income tax?  Very simple.  Because they favor the income tax over the FairTax.  They like the way that the income tax can be used for social engineering.  They love the fact that under the income tax favors can be granted to friends while punishment can be meted out to enemies.  So they quote the income tax at it's correct inclusive rate while quoting the FairTax at a false exclusive rate.  They know that the American people aren't exactly bright enough to discern the difference ... so the tactic works for them.

Why do these people hate the FairTax so?  The FairTax accomplishes several goals dear to the left for decades.  It un-taxes the poor and taxes wealth!  What's not to love?

It's just this simple.  Take a look at the people who love the FairTax, and the people who loath it.  You will  find that those who love the idea have an appreciation of their sense of individuality and want to handle much of the responsibility for their own lives.  Those who oppose the FairTax generally disdain the idea of individualism and feel that America is great because of its government.  Since the passage of the FairTax would constitute the largest transfer of power from government to the people in the history of our Republic, it is something that the left must fight.  "

http://boortz.com/nuze/200608/08292006.html#fairtax

Entry #546

Un broadcast Israeli troop movement to Hezbollah

Given the revelation that over time Sharia law has been tightly interwoven into UN "rules" this comes as absolutely no surprise. 

UN is supposed to sponsor democracy ..... Sharia is not democracy, and to have given Hezbollah the heads up on where Israeli troops were amounts to war crimes. 

Wonder if they'll try themselves for war crimes???????????????????????????????  Naah, the fox loves being in the hen house making up rules as it goes along.

"What did you do in the war, UNIFIL?
You broadcast Israeli troop movements.
by Lori Lowenthal Marcus
09/04/2006, Volume 011, Issue 47
Source The Weekly Standard


"DURING THE RECENT month-long war between Hezbollah and Israel, U.N. "peacekeeping" forces made a startling contribution: They openly published daily real-time intelligence, of obvious usefulness to Hezbollah, on the location, equipment, and force structure of Israeli troops in Lebanon.

UNIFIL--the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, a nearly 2,000-man blue-helmet contingent that has been present on the Lebanon-Israel border since 1978--is officially neutral. Yet, throughout the recent war, it posted on its website for all to see precise information about the movements of Israeli Defense Forces soldiers and the nature of their weaponry and materiel, even specifying the placement of IDF safety structures within hours of their construction. New information was sometimes only 30 minutes old when it was posted, and never more than 24 hours old.

Meanwhile, UNIFIL posted not a single item of specific intelligence regarding Hezbollah forces. Statements on the order of Hezbollah "fired rockets in large numbers from various locations" and Hezbollah's rockets "were fired in significantly larger numbers from various locations" are as precise as its coverage of the other side ever got.

This war was fought on cable television and the Internet, and a lot of official information was available in real time. But the specific military intelligence UNIFIL posted could not be had from any non-U.N. source. The Israeli press--always eager to push the envelope--did not publish the details of troop movements and logistics. Neither the European press nor the rest of the world media, though hardly bastions of concern for the safety of Israeli troops,

 
provided the IDF intelligence details that UNIFIL did. A search of Israeli government websites failed to turn up the details published to the world each day by the U.N.

Inquiries made of various Israeli military and government representatives and analysts yielded near unanimous agreement that at least some of UNIFIL's postings, in the words of one retired senior military analyst, "could have exposed Israeli soldiers to grave danger." These analysts, including a current high ranking military official, noted that the same intelligence would not have been provided by the U.N. about Israel's enemies.

Sure enough, a review of every single UNIFIL web posting during the war shows that, while UNIFIL was daily revealing the towns where Israeli soldiers were located, the positions from which they were firing, and when and how they had entered Lebanese territory, it never described Hezbollah movements or locations with any specificity whatsoever.

Compare the vague "various locations" language with this UNIFIL posting from July 25:

Yesterday and during last night, the IDF moved significant reinforcements, including a number of tanks, armored personnel carriers, bulldozers and infantry, to the area of Marun Al Ras inside Lebanese territory. The IDF advanced from that area north toward Bint Jubayl, and south towards Yarun.

Or with the posting on July 24, in which UNIFIL revealed that the IDF stationed between Marun Al Ras and Bint Jubayl were "significantly reinforced during the night and this morning with a number of tanks and armored personnel carriers."

This partiality is inconsistent not only with UNIFIL's mission but also with its own stated policies. In a telling incident just a few years back, UNIFIL vigorously insisted on its "neutral ity"--at Israel's expense.

 

On October 7, 2000, three IDF soldiers were kidnapped by Hezbollah just yards from a UNIFIL shelter and dragged across the border into Lebanon, where they disappeared. The U.N. was thought to have videotaped the incident or its immediate aftermath. Rather than help Israel rescue its kidnapped soldiers by providing this evidence, however, the U.N. obstructed the Israeli investigation.

 

 

For months the Israeli government pleaded with the U.N. to turn over any videotape that might shed light on the location and condition of its missing men. And for nine months the U.N. stonewalled, insisting first that no such tape existed, then that just one tape existed, and eventually conceding that there were two more tapes. During those nine months, clips from the videotapes were shown on Syrian and Lebanese television.

Explaining their eventual about-face, U.N. officials said the decision had been made by the on-site commanders that it was not their responsibility to provide the material to Israel; indeed, that to do so would violate the peacekeeping mandate, which required "full impartiality and objectivity." The U.N. report on the incident was adamant that its force had "to ensure that military and other sensitive information remains in their domain and is not passed to parties to a conflict."

Stymied in its efforts to recover the men while they were still alive, Israel ultimately agreed to an exchange in January 2004: It released 429 Arab prisoners and detainees, among them convicted terrorists, and the bodies of 60 Lebanese decedents and members of Hezbollah, in exchange

 
for the bodies of the three soldiers. Blame for the deaths of those three Israelis can be laid, at least in part, at the feet of the U.N., which went to the wall defending its inviolable pledge never to share military intelligence about one party with another.

UNIFIL has just done what it then vowed it could never do. Once again, it has acted to shield one side in the conflict and to harm the other. Why is this permitted? For that matter, how did the U.N. obtain such detailed and timely military intelligence in the first place, before broadcasting it for Israel's enemies to see?

Lori Lowenthal Marcus is president of the Zionist Organization of America, Greater Philadelphia District.  "

 

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/622bqwjn.asp

Entry #544

Smart Jury (joke)

My cousin sent me this.

Smart Jury 

In a criminal justice system based on 12 individuals not smart
enough to get out of jury duty, here is a jury to be proud of!!!

A defendant was on trial for murder. There was strong evidence
indicating guilt, but there was no corpse. In the defense's closing
statement the lawyer, knowing that his client would probably be
convicted, resorted to a trick. "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I
have a surprise for you all," the lawyer said as he looked at his
watch. "Within one minute, the person presumed dead in this case
will walk into this courtroom."

He looked toward the courtroom door. The jurors, somewhat stunned,
all looked on eagerly. A minute passed. Nothing happened.

Finally the lawyer said, "Actually, I made up the previous
statement. But you all looked on with anticipation. I, therefore,
put it to you that you have a reasonable doubt in this case as to
whether anyone was killed, and I insist that you return a verdict of
not guilty."

The jury, clearly confused, retired to deliberate.  A few minutes
later, the jury returned and pronounced a verdict of guilty.

"But how?" inquired the lawyer. "You must have had some doubt; I saw
all of you stare at the door."

The jury foreman replied: "Yes, we did look, but your client didn't."

Entry #543

"Hail to the Chief

From Powerlineblog.com ..... if you remember I've never thought Pres. Bush was dumb. 
 
"Hail to the Chief

 

I had the opportunity this afternoon to be part of a relatively small group who heard President Bush talk, extemporaneously, for around forty minutes. It was an absolutely riveting experience. It was the best I've ever seen him. Not only that; it may have been the best I've ever seen any politician. If I summarized what he said, it would all sound familiar: the difficult times we live in; the threat from Islamic fascism--the phrase drew an enthusiastic round of applause--the universal yearning for freedom; the need to confront evil now, with all the tools at our disposal, so that our children and grandchildren can live in a better and safer world. As he often does, the President structured his comments loosely around a tour of the Oval Office. But the digressions and interpolations were priceless.

The conventional wisdom is that Bush is not a very good speaker. But up close, he is a great communicator, in a way that, in my opinion, Ronald Reagan was not. He was by turns instructive, persuasive, and funny. His persona is very much that of the big brother. Above all, he was impassioned. I have never seen a politician speak so evidently from the heart, about big issues--freedom, most of all.

I've sometimes worried about how President Bush can withstand the Washington snake pit and deal with a daily barrage of hate from the ignorant left that, in my opinion, dwarfs in both volume and injustice the abuse directed against any prior President. (No one accused Lincoln of planning the attack on Fort Sumter.) Not to worry. He is, of course, miles above his mean-spirited liberal critics. More than that, he clearly derives real joy from the opportunity to serve as President and to participate in the great pageant of American history. And he sees himself as anything but a lame duck, which is why he is stumping for Republican candidates around the country.

It was, in short, the most inspiring forty minutes I've experienced in politics."  Posted by John at 08:25 PM

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/015081.php

"Hail to the chief, take 2

 

On the heels of John's eyewitness account of President Bush speaking extemporaneously before a friendly group in Minnesota yesterday afternoon comes Kathleen Parker's column with her own eyewitness account of President Bush at an off-the-record luncheon with a hundred or so supporters. Like John, Parker was impressed:

What I witnessed was revealing. Not only was the man fluent in the English language and intellectually agile, he was knowledgeable on a wide range of subjects raised during a 90-minute Q&A. Someone apparently had been slipping intellectual-curiosity tablets into Bush's cola.

Toward the end, one of the guests said, "Mr. President, I think if Americans could hear you speak the way you have today, you'd have a 95 percent approval rating."

I think that's almost true. Not 95 percent, obviously, but he'd surely have a higher than 30 percent approval rating were he better able to explain what he's thinking. Bush does know; he just can't seem to say.

Why? Parker has a theory:
My theory dovetails with something one of his most acerbic critics, columnist Molly Ivins, once wrote: "George W. Bush sounds like English is his second language.'' That's because it's true. "Washington English'' is a second language for Bush; "Texas English'' is his first.

When he tries to speak Washington English, which is the way Bush thinks presidents are supposed to speak -- over-enunciating and sprinkling his comments with awkward aphorisms -- he fumbles. He forgets what he's saying because the thoughts and words are not his own.

This is also when his annoying sibilance kicks in. The "terroristsssssss," he says when "terrorists" would do. My guess is he over-enunciates to cover his prairie accent, but the effect is, well, sssssstrange.

Tapes of Bush as governor of Texas reveal none of the malapropisms for which he is now infamous. That's because in Texas, he speaks his native tongue -- dropping syllables and esses without fear of criticism or embarrassment. That kind of freedom seems to liberate the man's mind and his mouth.

Anyone who speaks before cameras knows the taste of humility and can relate to the agony of being George Bush.

(I can relate.) During the Reagan administration, occasionally discouraged conservative supporters theorized that Reagan was the victim of misguided advisers and counseled "Let Reagan be Reagan." Taken together, John and Parker make a compelling case to explain the mystery of George Bush: "Let Bush be Bush!"    Posted by John at 08:25 PM
Entry #542

"Texas Sheriffs Say Terrorists Entering US from Mexico

Why we need the border welded shut yesterday. 

Contact your senators, representatives and demand action NOW. 

Amnesty means letting our guard down for these guys, too.

"Texas Sheriffs Say Terrorists Entering US from Mexico
By Kevin Mooney
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
August 21, 2006

(CNSNews.com) - The chief law enforcement officers of several Texas counties along the southern U.S. border warn that Arabic-speaking individuals are learning Spanish and integrating into Mexican culture before paying smugglers to sneak them into the United States. The Texas Sheriffs' Border Coalition believes those individuals are likely terrorists and that drug cartels and some members of the Mexican military are helping them get across the border.

Sheriff Sigifredo Gonzalez of Zapata County, Texas told Cybercast News Service that Iranian currency, military badges in Arabic, jackets and other clothing are among the items that have been discovered along the banks of the Rio Grande River. The sheriff also said there are a substantial number of individuals crossing the southern border into the U.S. who are not Mexican. He described the individuals in question as well-funded and able to pay so-called "coyotes" - human smugglers - large sums of money for help gaining illegal entry into the U.S.

Although many of the non-Mexican illegal aliens are fluent in Spanish, Gonzalez said they speak with an accent that is not native.

"It's clear these people are coming in for reasons other than employment," Gonzalez said.

That sentiment is shared by Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.).

"For years, Muslims and other 'Special Interest Aliens' from places other than Mexico have been streaming into the U.S. across our porous border," Tancredo told Cybercast News Service. "These people are not paying $50,000 or more a head just to 'take jobs no American will do.'

"Terrorists are working round the clock to infiltrate the United States," he added. "Congress and this administration must address this gaping hole in our national security and they must do it now."

Patch with Arabic lettering lion's head and paratrooper wingsSome of the more high profile pieces of evidence pointing to terrorist infiltration of the U.S. have been uncovered in Jim Hogg County, Texas, which experiences a high volume of smuggling activity, according to local law enforcement.

"We see patches on jackets from countries where we know al Qaeda to be active," Gonzalez explained.

The patches appear to be military badges with Arabic lettering. One patch in particular, discovered this past December, caught the attention of federal homeland security officials, according to Gonzalez and local officials familiar with the investigation.

Patch with Arabic lettering depicting airplane flying toward towersSheriff Wayne Jernigan of Valverde County, Texas, told members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee in March about one patch that read "midnight mission" and displayed an airplane flying over a building heading towards a tower. Translators with DHS have said some of the various phrases and slogans on the items could mean "martyr," "way to eternal life," or "way to immortality."

Gonzalez told the House International Relations Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation in July that the terrorists are getting smarter.

"To avoid apprehension, we feel many of these terrorists attempt to blend in with persons of Hispanic origin when entering the country." Gonzalez stated. "We feel that terrorists are already here and continue to enter our country on a daily basis."

Sheriff Arvin West of Hudspeth County, Texas, told Cybercast News Service that he believes some Mexican soldiers are operating in concert with the drug cartels to aid the terrorists.

"There's no doubt in my mind," he said, "although the Mexican government and our government adamantly deny it."

Statistics made available through the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) show more than 40,000 illegal aliens from countries "Other Than Mexico," designated as OTMs, were apprehended by the U.S. Border Patrol in the period ranging from October 2003 to June 2004, as they attempted to cross the southwestern border. An overview of border security challenges produced through the office of Texas Gov. Rick Perry indicates that almost 120,000 OTMs were apprehended while attempting to cross into the state from January through July 2005.

Local authorities are particularly concerned about illegal aliens arriving from Special Interest Countries (SICs) where a radical version of Islam is known to flourish. Perry's office cites Iraq, Iran, Indonesia and Bangladesh among those countries. A Tancredo spokesperson said the list also includes Afghanistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and Yemen.

As Cybercast News Service previously reported an internal audit of DHS that combines the number of illegal aliens arriving from SICs with the documented instances of illegal aliens arriving from countries identified as being state sponsors of terrorism (SSTs) yields a grand total of over 90,000 such illegal aliens who have been apprehended during the five year period from fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 2005.

The border security report delivered by Perry's office focuses attention on the "Triborder region" of Latin America, which spans an area between Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay.

"The Triborder Region is a focal point of Islamic extremism," the report states. "Al Qaeda leadership plans to use criminal alien smuggling organizations to bring terrorist operatives across the border into the U.S."

Carlos Espinosa, a press spokesman for Tancredo, said his office is aware of a training camp in Brazil that actually teaches people from outside of Latin America how they can assimilate into the Mexican culture.

"They come up as illegal aliens and disguise themselves as potential migrant workers," Espinosa said. "
Entry #541
Page 551 of 587
Guest