Political Correctness Strikes Again!

A search of today's news sources on the Internet including those from the USA, Britain and Germany failed to find any reference to the use of the word "torture"in story about the British 15 hostages.
The papers all over the world have headlines quoting Amnesty International and other U.S. hating ilk calling the conditions at Guantanamo "cruel conditions". The word torture is used frequently. But in all the stories about the 15 Britts confinement there is not one instance where the word "torture" was used.
This is despite the fact that in the post release interviews the hostages related the fact that for 13 days they had been kept in isolation, blindfolded , handcuffed, slept on the floor, and interrogated all night on many occasions.
The only time they were together, they were lined up against a wall blindfolded and subject to the sounds of cocking weapons. This caused some to fear they were about to be executed. They were threatened with seven year jail terms if they did not confess
The First Sea Lord admiral Johnathon Band in typical British understatement, was quoted in the "Times online": "it appeared the confessions made to the Iranians( that they were in Iran's sea space) have been made under a certain amount of psychological pressure".
Being handcuffed, blindfolded and kept in solitary confinement alone qualifies as mental torture. But the "PC" press has left that word out of all coverage.
Roget's Thesaurus refers to torture as repeated afflicting of suffering or annoyance. I think their treatment qualifies unless only Americans are allowed to be called torturers.
In an act of total arrogance the Iranian Ambassador in London referred to the hostage release as, "a show of good will, and now it is up to the British government to proceed in a positive way. We will welcome in general any steps that will defuse tensions in the region".
This representative of the midget megalomaniac in Tehran never considered for a second that the taking of the "15" WAS AN ACT OF WAR, and everything would "calm down" if Iran stopped the pursuit of nuclear weapons.

But this is not a remote possibility. What happens next?

Re-Thinking Free Trade and NAFTA

In 1994 the NAFTA agreement involving the U.S.A. Canada and Mexico was signed to the extreme displeasure of Unions and Presidential hopeful Ross Perot.
Since the agreement many automobile manufacturing jobs have been lost to Mexican cheap labor. The same thing has happened to the manufacturing of clothing and head wear, but these jobs have not been lost to Mexico.
With President Nixon's re-opening trade with China in the 1970's the steady flow of jobs manufacturing textiles and head wear has been to the sweatshops of China and third world countries.
You cannot go into a department store or sports shop without finding the majority of the caps, shirts and shoes are made in Vietnam, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Nicaragua or the Philippines.
Most of the labor is done in "sweat shop" conditions by children as young as 5 years old. These children make an average of five dollars a day for 10-12 hours work with no benefits, in cramped non-climate controlled conditions.
In Indonesia 12 year old children work 70 hours a week making shoes to be sold by American companies in the U.S.
The Nike "Air Max" shoes that sell for $140.00 and the sports shirt with the famous Nike "swirl" selling for $39.00 are both made in Pakistan.
Half the worlds soccer balls are made in Pakistan by children as young as five years old working for $5.00 a day!
In the GAP stores you can find pricey clothing that was made in Saipan by Chinese women working for a monthly salary of $60.00. The same amount of profit the Gap makes on average for every shirt sold.
The once mighty steel industry has declined to the point where exports of U.S. steel have declined from 79 million tons in 1989 to 52 million tons in 2001. At the same time our imports of steel from Taiwan has increased by 133%.
This shift from an exporting surplus to an import consumer is estimated to have cost over 500 million dollars in National income, and cost the consumer of products made of steel from 1.9 billion dollars to 4 billion dollars a year.
Much of the blame must be laid at the feet of the Unions whose contract demands exceeded that which the steel companies could absorb and still be profitable.
Not all the blame is at the unions feet. The "free Trade" policies of our government have made many countries wealthy that were previously considered "third" world countries. China is a perfect example. They now produce 418 million tons of steel even though they have scarce iron and steel resources.
Millions of skilled laborers who were part of the United States military industrial complex have lost their jobs to foreign countries. This happening is much to the delight of the leftists who hate the military and await the time when labor unrest will allow them to begin the American equivalent of the 1917 Russian revolution.
My concern is the lack of the ability to produce adequate tanks, ships, and guns in the event that we find ourselves in a full scale war in the future.
Lest you forget even the uniforms worn by many servicemen are made in foreign countries. Have we made ourselves weaker by allowing unfettered Free Trade?

Lets Not Extol The "i5" British Release

Before we accept the inevitable liberal claptrap the Media will spoon feed the American public about the magnanimous gesture of the Ahmadinijad release of the 15 abducted "Britt's". Let us consider what actually took place before these illegally captured sailors and royal marines were "pardoned". For their capture the Commander of Irans Coast Guard was given a medal. Shown in the picture to the left.
In the first place how can you pardon people who have been illegally abducted?
It also is interesting to note that the day these military personnel were released. The U.S. released an Iranian diplomat in Baghdad. This man was captured in February, 2007.
The U.S. announced that it is making plans to allow Iranian "diplomats" to visit the five Iranian Revolutionary Guards captured a few weeks ago near the Iraq town of Irbil.
Prior to the release of the British military personnel the British sent a message to the Iranian Foreign Minister that "it will not happen again". Meaning the British have realized that Iran has demonstrated that they can't be trifled with. They have the capacity to take action and that will undoubtedly make the British more careful that they don't "invade Iranian waters again.
This lack of action appears on the surface to be a diplomatic victory for Iran. What it really does is show how weak the British Empire has become. It also gives more courage and resolve to the Muslim Extremists to continue their terrorists activities of kidnapping and bombing all "infidels" until the whole world accepts "that there is no God but Allah".
The minute The released personnel landed in England the Prime Minister condemned the killing of four British soldiers who were victims of an IED. In his statement on the steps of Blair House he said: "Iran is guilty of backing, financing and arming Iraqi terrorists".
We have not seen the end of this type of terrorism and unless we eradicate the Islamist radicals they will be blowing up Main Street USA before long

Iran Laid In Wait For "Brits"

Anyone that thinks the Iranians capture of the 15 British sailors and royal marines was anything but a planned abduction is living in a world of denial.
This unprovoked seizure of these 14 men and one woman in two rigid rubber boats was a long planned for attack.
On January 11th, 2007 five Iranian "diplomats were apprehended near Najaf, Iraq by U.S. Forces. These men have been identified as members of the Iranian secret organisation "QUDS".
This group of Revolutionary Guards are the elite training and supply source for the Mahdi Army, Hezbolla, Badar Organisation and Hamas. They also are responsible for their own terrorism. An example is the bombing of Kobar Towers in Saudi Arabia.
They are also responsible for supplying the Shia terrorists in Iraq with the armour piercing IED's used to blow up Humvees with military personnel aboard.
These terrorist leaders report directly to the Ayatollah Ali Khomeini, and were assisted in their development by the current President of Iran, Ahmadinjad, while he was serving in the Revolutionary Guard.
They are located throughout the world and are believed to have covert operations here in America.
Their headquarters in Iraq is located in Najaf, but their headquarters in Iran are in the abandoned American Embassy building in Tehran.
The word "QUDS" is Arabic for Jerusalem.
U.S. General John Abizaid, before he was relieved, claimed that the Quds in Iraq, were training and providing weapons to Shia death Squads.
These are the terrorists who killed four American soldiers they captured near Karbala when they ambushed the Americans driving black SUV's and wearing American army uniforms on 1/20/07. A clear violation of the Geneva Convention the leftists in this Country claim they are entitled to.
The Iranians were lying in wait for the opportunity to capture any troops that were a supporting force to the U.S. effort in Iraq, as a retaliation for the capture of the Quds.
They want them back before they are forced to give up valuable information about their activities here in The U.S.
But don't tell the Democrats that the continuing war in Iraq is helping save lives here at home. It will fall on dead ears and closed minds!

A Traitor By Any Other Name Is Still A Traitor

The actions of the U.S. House and Senate leaders is approaching what this blogger believes fulfills the following definition.

"Traitor" is defined in the law as one who commits treason. Treason entails aiding an enemy of the United States. For example, Black's Law Dictionary (7th ed. 1999) gives the primary definition of "traitor" as "A person who commits treason against his or her country."
That same legal dictionary defines "treason" as "The offense of attempting to overthrow the government of the state to which one owes allegiance, either by making war against the state or by materially supporting its enemies."

The announcement by the Senate majority leader that he and Senator Kerry have agreed to co-sponsor a bill introduced by Senator Fiengold, cutting off funding for the troops in Iraq by March 31,2008. This bill will be introduced if President Bush vetoes the current bill requiring that troops begin to withdraw from Iraq next year. This deceration and commitment puts them in a place of infamy and gives indirect aid and comfort to the enemy.

In the past there have been other members of the government who were found guilty of treason for their actions. A few had served in sensitive government positions. Robert Hansen in the FBI, Aldrich Ames was in the CIA, Carl Pitts also in the FBI and Johnathan Pollard a Naval Intelligence person. All four were convicted of treason for spying or giving sensitive and secure information to another country.

Then you have Lynne Stewart and John Phillip Walker. Walker was a native born American captured in Afghanistan while fighting for the Taliban. Ms. Stewart was a radical activist New York lawyer convicted of aiding Islamic terrorists in Egypt. Specifics in her case indicate she gave aid to those who plot the killing of certain persons in Egypt who opposed blind cleric Omar Abel-Rahman.

These people gave aid to people who were not actually waging a suicidal war against the U.S. But these infamous three Senators will be giving aid to an enemy that is planning to destroy this country. I believe this makes these people traitors!

How long will the Americans stand by and watch these hateful individuals give aid and comfort to the Radical Islamists without calling for their impeachment or recall?

Loss of Military Might Is The Problem

On the way to the 21st Century the public will to have their tax dollars spent on maintaining military might has been lost in Great Britain, and almost abandoned here in the U.S., thanks to the Clinton's hate for the military.
The result of loosing a military power that is respected and feared by all potential adversaries is evident in the capture in the recent past of the fifteen Royal Marine and British sailors by the Iranians.
Their capture was unlawful and unprovoked, and the failure to release them despite diplomatic efforts is testament to Iran's attitude toward Britain's lack of military strength.
In the days of the Great Royal Navy and "gun-boat" diplomacy this would never have happened.
Winston Churchill would not have allowed this hostage situation., The parading of the British military through the streets and on television is positive evidence of the lack of respect for Great Britain's ability to do anything about it!
For those who don't know what happened the following is an encapsulated version of the events.
A British frigate was in the waters off Iraq and Iran to intercept smugglers of weapons to Iraq. The 14 men and one woman were dispatched in small rigid rubber boats with only side arms and rifles to board a small ship suspected of smuggling weapons.
The two boats were supported by one helicopter overhead. But-- the group was intercepted by six fast Iranian heavily armed gunboats with superior fire power and personnel. Before the 15 could fire their weapons to protect themselves from the Iranians they had to be fired upon. This ridiculous "rule of engagement" is mandatory for all military under the control and command of the U.N. Aside from the fact that the first fire from an enemy might kill some or all the British. This is no way to send soldiers or sailors into a potential battle if you intend to win!
The Iranians forced the 15 to surrender without firing a shot. This action was questioned by Major General John Thompson of the British Army. He described the whole affair as a "cock-up" and asked why the 15 did not fire their weapons. It is sad when senior military personnel send troops into battle without knowing the "rules of engagement".
This is also why the United States should never allow our fine troops to be commanded by the UN or any other World Organisation.
The 15 military personnel are still captive despite Britain's representative to the UN request for support from this "cesspool"on the Hudson, to pass a Security Resolution condemning the abductors and demand an immediate release. The resolution was killed by the negative votes of China and Russia!
The once powerful British are now hoping for the release of the "15" by sending a diplomatic "promise to never enter Iranian waters without Iran's permission. They should send a threat to deliver a cruise missile from one of their submarines that I am sure is in the waters nearby. But the "Brits" won't, because their will to fight has been lost. The same can be said about most of Europe.
Thus, we are alone in this fight, and the people had better realize this before the laws we must obey are written by Sharia Imams, not our Congress.