Greyhawk Says:

Greyhawk has a piece up about the Ny Slimes. I cannot, at this moment, relate the verbiage here. Justice would not be served to the article.

Go read it.

Now.

The piece is entitle:

NY Times names WOT’s dead; tosses their heroism

There Are Very Few Men Left In Congress...Most Are Cowards

And quite a few have given aid and comfort to the enemy, all in the name of the infectious disease of political correctness, multiculturalism and identity politics.

AMENDMENT XIV

Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.

Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2.

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,* and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4.

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5.

The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

But, But, But, Syria Is Our Friend...Just Ask Kucinich

In recent days, 9/3/07, Kucinich (honor title not included for a reason), paid a visit to one of our enemies. In this video, we find coming from his own treasonous mouth, the following:

"I feel the United States is engaging in an illegal occupation." Kucinich goes on to give effusive praise for the actions of Syrian President Assad.

What else did this dishonorable US presidential aspirant say?

Kucinich:Well, of course, my presence in Syria, in meeting President Assad, is so that people are aware that there are people in Congress, and in this case, a presidential candidate, who believes that Syria has a very important role to play in bringing about security and participating in a political process, which will help create the conditions which can lead to peace. But this must come about from communication, and so those of us who want to see this change are in a position to model the change that we hope to occur. So it was important to meet with his Excellency to exchange views as to how we can create a more peaceful world.

Lady In Blue: So how did the meeting go?

Kucinich: It went good. It was a meeting where President Assad showed a real desire to play a role in helping to create a peaceful settlement of the conditions in Iraq, as well as a grander approach towards creating peace. So it was a very important meeting, and I felt honored to have the chance to speak with him. To me, Americans have an increased understanding today of how wrong the war was and is, and I think they're looking for a new direction, and that's certainly what I am offering.

I have a question. I am detecting a parallel universe here and this is reminiscent of another time with a different player with the same message. Can anyone name that which I am alluding to?

Israel is our ally. Have we always been friends? No, not really but have we always protected each other? Mostly. Hizzbolah launches rockets into Israel from Syrian territory. Iran funds and arms Hizzbolah. What sort of picture is this painting? Anyone?

Not a single soul on the left ever offers up what is so "illegal" about the war.

Not a single soul within the Leftinistra ever offers up the evidence and that which leads them to claim this is an "illegal occupation" of Iraq.

As "Kucinich goes on to give effusive praise for the actions of Syrian President Assad", what exactly, has President Assad done that deserves such accolades? Where is the evidence? And I do not mean some article in some newspaper or network socialist leaning outfit anywhere, either.

If you desire to witness for yourself the depths that this cretin called Kucinich will go to dredge the bottom feeders of society all in the name of a vote, view the rest of the interview as he sits in Indian Country.

Why do I use the term Bottom Feeder? At the Truthers for Peace Festival in San Fran Wacko on 9/8/2007, we find individuals such as this:



Imagine that...Bottom Feeders. Naturally, we cannot escape from the used up hippies. Spell check anyone?



Kucinich? I think this fruit loop is worse than Hillary and that says quite a bit.

Catch the wave.

Presidential Candidate Kucinich Blasts Bush ‘Illegal Occupation’ on Syrian TV

I heard bits and pieces of this display of absolute treason today on the Dennis Prager today and I was going to get around to posting this video as soon as I found it. Well, I found it. Hat Tip to Breitbart and the video can be found at Daily Motion.

Listen to the whole display of treasonous verbiage being sewn all over the Middle east on Syrian TV and then continue reading.

Den910tmm
Uploaded by luvnews

Todd Anthony posted this in the comments section at Wake Up America:

Traitor:

1. a person who betrays another, a cause, or any trust.
2. a person who commits treason by betraying his or her country.

Betray:

1. to deliver or expose to an enemy by treachery or disloyalty: Benedict Arnold betrayed his country.
2. to be unfaithful in guarding, maintaining, or fulfilling: to betray a trust.
3. to disappoint the hopes or expectations of; be disloyal to: to betray one's friends.
4. to reveal or disclose in violation of confidence: to betray a secret.
5. to reveal unconsciously (something one would preferably conceal): Her nervousness betrays her insecurity.
6. to show or exhibit; reveal; disclose: an unfeeling remark that betrays his lack of concern.
7. to deceive, misguide, or corrupt: a young lawyer betrayed by political ambitions into irreparable folly.
8. to seduce and desert.

NOT different meanings: one word is the ACT of betraying, the other is a noun.

Do you see? Can you discern?

Kucinich: "I feel the United States is engaging in an illegal occupation." Kucinich goes on to give effusive praise for the actions of Syrian President Assad.

So, does this prove that Kucinich sides with the enemies of this country and if so, should he be elected as President of The United States? Or, should he be placed in shackles?

Syria, as has been shown time and time and time again, has either been allowing fighters to join Al Qaida in Iraq, been allowing Al Qaida sanctuary in Syria or sending Iranian Terror Troopers to pass through their border with Iraq. Syria is not our ally. Syria is a puppet regime of Iran.

Kucinich has conducted an anathema...aiding and abetting; lending aid and comfort; to our enemies.

If their were any men left in CONgress, this issue would be addressed.

MoveOn.org Calls Petraeus a Traitor...Oh Really?

Oh. Really? Which law did the General violate?

Did he violate the Sedition laws?

18 U.S.C.A. § 2384 (2000), a federal statute that punishes seditious conspiracy, and 18 U.S.C.A. § 2385 (2000), which outlaws advocating the overthrow of the federal government by force.

Did he violate the Subversion laws?

TITLE 50 > CHAPTER 23 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 783

Did he violate the treason laws?

TREASON - This word imports a betraying, treachery, or breach of allegiance.

The Constitution of the United States, Art. III, defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort. This offence is punished with death. By the same article of the Constitution, no person shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

Certainly not but several members of the KOSmonoffs and the MoveOnDotFakeOrgasm crowds surely have.


MoveOn.org Calls Petraeus a Traitor
Do Democrats in Congress agree?
by Pete Hegseth
09/09/2007 5:28:00 PM

Tomorrow--as General David Petraeus provides his Iraq assessment to Congress--the antiwar group MoveOn.org is running a full-page advertisement in the New York Times under the headline: "General Petraeus or General Betray us? Cooking the books for the White House."

Let's be clear: MoveOn.org is suggesting that General Petraeus has 'betrayed' his country. This is disgusting. To attack as a traitor an American general commanding forces in war because his 'on the ground' experience does not align with MoveOn.org's political objectives is utterly shameful. It shows contempt for America's military leadership, as well as for the troops who have confidence in him, as our fellow soldiers in Iraq certainly do.

General Petraeus has served this country for over 35 years with honor, distinction, and integrity. And this is not just about General Petraeus. After all, if General Petraeus is "cooking the books," then the entire military chain of command in Baghdad, and all the staff, military and civilian, who have been working with General Petraeus are complicit, since Petraeus did not write his report in isolation. They are all, apparently, 'betray[ing] us.'

MoveOn.org has been working closely with the Democratic congressional leadership --as an article in today's Sunday New York Times Magazine makes clear. And consider this comment by a Democratic senator from Friday's Politico: "'No one wants to call [Petraeus] a liar on national TV,' noted one Democratic senator, who spoke on the condition on anonymity. 'The expectation is that the outside groups will do this for us.'

So, veterans who served in Iraq ask the Democratic leaders in Congress: Does MoveOn.org speak for you? Do you agree with MoveOn.org? Or do you repudiate this despicable charge?

MoveOn.org has helped frame the core choice: Whom do we trust to run this war--MoveOn.org and its allies in Congress, or Gen. David Petraeus and his colleagues?

Pete Hegseth is executive director of Vets for Freedom and an Iraq War veteran.

I wonder who has committed treason and who hasn't...

Buzz at meme

The Romper Room In DC "IS" Back In Session

I was wondering if the donation I sent in to the Senate Finance Committee ever got that Rubber Room for ReidCo installed.

ReidCo, in his infinite infidelities to this country - our Troops - We The People - Patriotism - The Flag - Truth - and any number of other national treasures he himself has shat upon, is still in denial and that is not "fonetics" for the river in Egypt.

I was waiting to write about this...this...poor excuse of a man until a few things were cleared up in my head. Namely, I was waiting for a former comrade to firm up some things and as Dean pointed out, ReidCo and his Merry Band of Losers in Nevada could not muster up more than MAYBE 50 unamerican moosetwits to counter the Fight For Victory Tour. My "confirmation" came from an individual that cannot and will not be named. Round One goes to Move America Forward.

That being said, like I needed confirmation, ReidCo has violated several laws of the land. Harry Reid is the Ring Leader and IAW the Constitution of the United States, should be removed from office by law enforcement officials but, there are no men left in DC. They have been polluted by PC.

What has ReidCo violated? Unlike the Moonbat Fruit Loop Brigades which claim that "BushCo" has violated the Constitution of the United States and NEVER offering up what exactly the infraction was according to the Constitution, it is clear that which ReidCo has not only broken but fractured. And, here it is.

The 14th Amendment of the Constitution.

Amendment 14

3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.

But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Along these lines, I LOVE what Invincible Armor had to say many months ago.

Impeach Senator Harry Reid

The power to set Foreign Policy resides only in the Presidency.

"War in Iraq lost": US Democrat leader

Apr 19 01:50 PM
US/Eastern

The war in Iraq "is lost" and a US troop surge is failing to bring peace to the country, the leader of the Democratic majority in the US Congress, Harry Reid, said Thursday.

"I believe ... that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week," Reid said, on the same day US President George W. Bush was giving a speech at an Ohio town hall meeting defending the war on terror.

The right to impeach public officials is secured by the U.S. Constitution in Article I, Sections 2 and 3, which discuss the procedure, and in Article II, Section 4, which indicates the grounds for impeachment: "the President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

Possibly, a better form of impeachment might be giving soldier's families, relatives of Iraqi's killed by the terrorists, and those trying to ensure Iraq's future 30 minutes in a locked room with Senator Harry Reid. Alone. No press. Leaving only a video to show to Nancy Pelosi, Schumer, et al.

Michelle Malkin has a better idea.
Never Yet Melted has some thoughts

Also see:
Frontline America
Right Wing Champ
Gateway Pundit
Sweetness & Light
Ridgecrest Blog
Blogical Conclusions has some relevant questions for the Hairy Reed

As ReidCo and PelosiCo meddle with their fellow losers and whiners, the pressures from the current Administration, behind the scenes, (3-day bombing plan I am sure) have caused Iran to release another American hostage.

Nearly in the same time frame, it has been shown that the counter-insurgency is reaping success upon success. The Leftinistra within the camps of ReidCo and PelosiCo are allergic to success in Iraq. They break out in immature and impractical tirades of stupidity.

Does anyone remember these words? They can be found here (screen shot). This was way back in April...a millennium to the Microwave Society of America:

The war in Iraq "is lost" and a US troop surge is failing to bring peace to the country, the leader of the Democratic majority in the US Congress, Harry Reid, said Thursday.

"I believe ... that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week," Reid told journalists.

Reid said he had delivered the same message to US President George W. Bush on Wednesday, when the US president met with senior lawmakers to discuss how to end a standoff over an emergency war funding bill.

"I know I was the odd guy out at the White House, but I told him at least what he needed to hear ... I believe the war at this stage can only be won diplomatically, politically and economically."

This is what has ReidCo in a tizzy fit:

THE US troop surge in Iraq has thrown al-Qa'ida off balance and produced a dramatic reduction in sectarian killings and a drop in roadside bombings.

David Petraeus, the top US commander in Iraq, said the build-up of American forces in Baghdad since late January had produced positive outcomes. These included the killing or capture of al-Qa'ida fighters, causing the terrorist group to lose influence with local Sunnis.

The strategic gains against insurgents would lead to a changed and possibly longer-term role for Australian troops, shifting from security operations to a focus on training Iraqi soldiers and police.

General Petraeus told The Australian during a face-to-face interview at his Baghdad headquarters there had been a 75 per cent reduction in religious and ethnic killings in the capital between December last year and this month, a doubling in the seizure of insurgents' weapons caches between January and August, a rise in the number of al-Qa'ida "kills and captures" and a fall in the number of coalition deaths from roadside bombings.

"We say we have achieved progress, and we are obviously going to do everything we can to build on that progress and we believe al-Qa'ida is off balance at the very least," he said.

Now, the historically most international embarrassing CONgress in our nation's history is back in session after a "much needed recess", ReidCo is desperately trying to go back in time as if the successes in Iraq have not taken place and wants to change direction. I wish he would make up his mind. Before there was pretty much a stalemate in Iraq and he wanted to change direction. Most of America wanted a victory but he wanted to cut and run. Now that we are winning, he wants to cut and run again. Somebody really needs to get Reid that Rubber Room. No matter what is going on in Iraq, this pathetic excuse for a man wants to cut and run, take his ball and go home. Maybe he should have stayed on recess and gotten that warm pint of milk with those graham crackers and curled up with his blanky and taken a nap for a few hundred years.

Listen to the whining...my own three sons NEVER got away with whining like this...EVER! To this day, the only time whining is tolerated is if a viable solution is offered. No solution? No whining. PERIOD. I guess Reid's parents failed him.

Democrats also today convene the first of a series of hearings on Iraq policy as they await multiple reports on conditions in Iraq and prepare to challenge the president, who sought to preempt Democratic criticism with his surprise visit to Iraq Monday. Hearings are set for every day in either the House and Senate through the middle of next week.

Democratic leaders, who before the break had resisted most efforts on striking a compromise with Republicans on Iraq policy, have shown some new willingness to try to get together on legislation that could clear Congress. But they do not appear ready to completely abandon their push for a withdrawal.

“Many of my Republican colleagues wanted to hold off until September before joining the fight to change course in Iraq,” said Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader. “Now that time has come and every objective assessment of the president’s strategy has shown that it has failed to deliver the political solution it promised. I am willing and ready to help my Republican colleagues keep their word by working in a bipartisan way to change course in Iraq.”

No matter what it is, there needs to be a change in direction. HEY! REID! The campaign trail ended MONTHS ago, moron!

With the recent trip to Iraq by GWB, it has been stated that if things keep going like they are going, we just might be able to have a troop coming home party. ReidCo ignores that and continues to lust after that Rubber Room.

What bothers me the most about ReidCo is the inherent and inbred ignorance they exhume and no matter the good news, it isn't what they want. They ran on a platform knowing damn well they were lying through their teeth. Even the reforms (political) that are taking place after a one-year stretch in time, ReidCo thinks that the Microwave Mentality should extend automatically because ReidCo thinks so.

It is time to burn up the fax machines, the email servers and the snail mail trails once again.

We are in a fight for our very survival.

Contact your Senatraitors and DEMAND Victory over our international enemies and if that includes the likes of ReidCo, so be it.

Contact your Representatraitors and DEMAND Victory over our international enemies and if that includes the likes of PelosiCo, so be it.

For more data on the laws violated by ReidCo and PelosiCo, look here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and for where they are headed, go here.

Reid Opens Door to Pact With Antiwar Republicans

Why is Reid so bent on losing the war, demoralizing the troops in the field and emboldening the enemy?

Hasn't he yet heard the news or is he purposefully being the idiot we all know him to be? What is his major malfunction and more importantly, can he be repaired?

LAS VEGAS -- Saying the coming weeks will be "one of the last opportunities" to alter the course of the war, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said he is now willing to compromise with Republicans to find ways to limit troop deployments in Iraq.

Reid acknowledged that his previous firm demand for a spring withdrawal deadline had become an obstacle for a small but growing number of Republicans who have said they want to end the war but have been unwilling to set a timeline.

I am convinced that Reid is mentally deficient and he needs to retire, step down or otherwise. He has become a Clear and Present Danger.

Read more at memeorandum

In other news

President's prerogative

the Captain says Reid is quivering in fear

Tack back: Wake Up America

Advocating The Overthrow of the United States

Martin Lewis and the Huffington Post has crossed The Line. Not only has "mister" Lewis crossed The Line, he has absolutely ZERO understanding of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Neither does Dishonorable Representative Murtha but that is yet another issue.

The ill-educated and self-anointed judge, jury and executioner of GWB, out of the symptomatic manifestations of the BDS psychotic break-down, has no idea that there are consequences to one's words...especially in print.

The defective slog has taken bits and pieces of a document and order of orders out of context and has applied them to his dementia. There is no distinction between the role of the Presidency and the role of the President as CIC. Relieving the President of the United States as CIC is the same thing as relieving the President of the Presidency. Naturally, this is what the Moonbat Fruit Loop Brigades desire and there is nothing of substance and legal precedence to substantiate the ignorant desire.

I am no attorney nor do I claim any such stature. However, I can read and I do know the UCMJ inside out and backwards. The poor ill-informed "mister" Lewis, on the other hand, does not. He should become familiar with the following:

§ 2385. Advocating overthrow of Government

Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or

Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or

Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

As used in this section, the terms “organizes” and “organize”, with respect to any society, group, or assembly of persons, include the recruiting of new members, the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.

Dissent is one thing. Disagreeing is one thing. An attempt to call upon the military for an organized and methodical decapitation of the Head of State is something else.

From the Sage of The Captain's Quarters:

Lewis quotes extensively from the Uniform Code of Military Justice, but clearly his scholarship does not extend to the Constitution. The command of the armed forces follows from the president's election to office, and cannot be separated from the office itself. Bush isn't C-in-C because he got appointed to that position, but because the American electorate voted him into that role. In other words, the military cannot arrest the C-in-C but leave the President in power, and to argue otherwise is to demonstrate complete ignorance.

Dale Franks from Q and O:

Lewis then goes on to expound the most outrageously stupid legal theory, based on the Uniform Code of Military Justice, that would authorize such a move.

It's difficult to know where to begin to even address this kind of neutron star density of stupidity.

First, the president is not subject to the authority of the UCMJ, since the president is an elected civilian official, not a military member in any sense. Indeed, the Constitution prohibits any military member from holding any other Federal office or position of trust. Only uniformed military members are subject to the UCMJ, so none of its articles apply to any civilian, including the president. As such an court-martial convened to try the president would be invalid and unconstitutional on its face.

Wake Up America states:

Ok, fit of laughter over.

Let's be clear about something here.

The President is the top of the chain of command for ALL branches of the military.

HE'S STILL A CIVILIAN!

The President is not SUBJECT to UCMJ (for those of you who don't know because you haven't been in the military or just don't know because, well, you just don't know, that stands for Uniform Code of Military Justice).

Let me say this one more time, and I want it to be put forth as matter of public record MY OWN response to Martin Lewis' suggestion.

Here it is.

Ready?

HAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!!!!

Ok, I'm out of breath...

Someone notify the Centers for Disease Control before this virus reaches pandemic proportions?

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

(oh my stars and garters that's just funny)

From the Daily Pundit:

What follows is a tramp through the lower fever swamps of the leftist mind not seen since Seven Days In May. At least in that movie, the coup was being plotted by evil military wingnuts. This dumbass leftard Martin Lewis has decided that the coup should come from the left, because the president won’t listen to his generals.

Lewis shows he is effectively ignorant of how the constitution works, but that doesn’t stop his little jerk-off fantasy. He seriously believes that Gen. Pace actually has an obligation to save the nation by “relieving” the president of his “command.” Of course, being a nutsack, Lewis doesn’t consider the practical angle of first having the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff going completely insane. Or the rest of the Chiefs tying him to his chair after relieving him of his command. Or, if it actually got down to it, the rather large phalanx of humorless Secret Service agents just itching to protect the president from a military take over of the United States.

I just love it when the left puts it’s neofascist wet dreams on record.

From Blue Crab Boulevard:

I guess we shouldn't be too hard on Lewis. After all, it isn't as if Brits are up to speed on the whole written Constitution thing. But what is HuffPo's excuse?

There is more over at memorandum.

As I have stated over and over on this blog and in many forums, dissent is one thing. Disagreeing is one thing. An attempt to call upon the military for an organized and methodical decapitation of the Head of State is altogether something else entirely.

Perhaps the idiots over at the sad excuse for journalism Huff and Puff Ariana The Plane Was Going That Way Anyway Post should instruct their contributing dunder-dolts in American Law:

United States Code
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 115 - TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES

Section 2382. Misprision of treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.

Section 2388. Activities affecting armed forces during war

(a) Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully makes or conveys false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies; or Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or willfully obstructs the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, to the injury of the service or the United States, or attempts to do so - Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

(b) If two or more persons conspire to violate subsection (a) of this section and one or more such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be punished as provided in said subsection (a).

(c) Whoever harbors or conceals any person who he knows, or has reasonable grounds to believe or suspect, has committed, or is about to commit, an offense under this section, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(d) This section shall apply within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States, and on the high seas, as well as within the United States.

I love the domino affect the Victory At Hand in the War In Iraq is having on the Leftinistra. The opening to the Abyss of Obscurity for the Leftinistra is growing wider and wider day by day.

More Moonbat Whining Loser Crap Mongers

I'm not going to dignify these loser-defeatist Fruit Loop Brigade Morons by replying to their obvious errors in logic and patriotism. Plain and simple, these KOSmonoffs are brain dead.

BarbinMD / Daily Kos:
A Question For Senate Republicans

Link Search: Google, Ask, Technorati, Sphere, and IceRocket

+

Discussion: The Rude Pundit, Booman Tribune and Grasping Reality …

–

Discussion:

Rude One / The Rude Pundit: The "Petraeus Report" and More Smoke and Mirrors:

Booman Tribune: Iraq: Preparing for the Big Con

Brad DeLong / Grasping Reality with Both Hands: It Would Be Good for the Republic If the Republican Party Dissolved Itself Today


The Democratic Party Leadership should be hauled off to prison for life for the all so obvious and documented PUBLIC betrayals and aiding and abetting the enemy.

What laws have they openly broken again?

Morons.

Why The New York Times Can Legally Help The Enemy in The War on Terror

Why is that? Here is a "teaser" and after clicking the link provided, make your own determination and IF you have the moral fortitude, YOU will take the appropriate action accordingly.

As for myself, I agree with some folks when they demand that AG Gonzales should step down but for differing reasons. HE IS NOT DOING HIS DAMN JOB!!

There are laws on the books dealing in Subversion, Sedition, and Treason. In a time of war, the actions of the publishers, editors and owners of the now defunct "Main Stream Media" are subject to investigations for criminal activity and aiding and abetting the enemy; in this case, the Islamic Jihadists that declared war on the United States LONG before 91101.

In July 2007, the Washington Post gave a Hezbollah supporter full coverage of an online column on Jihadism, and in June 2007, both the New York Times and the Washington Post printed editorials by a Hamas figure.

This week, the New York Times has provided online columns on August 8 and August 9 dedicated to brainstorming new ideas on how Jihadists can attack and kill Americans. The New York Times author, Dr. Steven Levitt, a writer on economics, used his online August 8 column "If You Were a Terrorist, How Would You Attack?" to offer some new ideas to Jihadists on ways to murder Americans, and suggested some specific tactics that Jihadists can take to improve both the level of terror and effectiveness of such murders. Then Dr. Levitt invited the general public to offer their own suggestions on how Jihadists might be able to kill Americans, stating "I'm sure many readers have far better ideas. I would love to hear them." And disturbingly, many hundreds of readers obliged Dr. Levitt by offering horrific suggestions to help Jihadists. This was not yet enough for the New York Times, and so on August 9, Dr. Levitt wrote a second online column "Terrorism, Part II", where he defended his right to recommend murder ideas to terrorists, by explaining that there are a "virtually infinite" number of American vulnerabilities, and by claiming that the "terrorists are incompetent" or the "terrorism threat just isn't that great".

Not once in either column does Dr. Levitt ever use the word... "Jihad" or "Jihadists". In Dr. Levitt's view, the threat is only from incompetent criminals that he calls "terrorists", and that view of terrorists as mere "criminals" was echoed the same day by former NATO leader Wesley Clark in another New York Times column "Why Terrorists Aren't Soldiers".

Visit the blog and read the rest.

I, and others that have equal trepidation towards those that support the enemy, wonder why these cretins have not been charged with "crimes against the flag". Could it be that "Compassionate Conservatism" has no courage in this regard? I wonder.

United States Code
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 115 - TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES

Section 2382. Misprision of treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.

Section 2388. Activities affecting armed forces during war

(a) Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully makes or conveys false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies; or

Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or

willfully obstructs the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, to the injury of the service or the United States, or attempts to do so - Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

(b) If two or more persons conspire to violate subsection (a) of this section and one or more such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be punished as provided in said subsection (a).

(c) Whoever harbors or conceals any person who he knows, or has reasonable grounds to believe or suspect, has committed, or is about to commit, an offense under this section, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(d) This section shall apply within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States, and on the high seas, as well as within the United States.

An amendment to 18 U.S.C. § 2385 which, taking specific cognizance of the current threat from Islam, establishes that the preaching of Jihad is tantamount to knowing and willful advocacy of “overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States”; that whoever, in accordance with the doctrine of Jihad, “prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States” shall be “fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.”

Any questions? Which CONgress Critters have violated The Law of The Land? Which Domestic Organizations have violated the Laws of The Land? Which Political Organizations outside the CONgress have violated The Laws of The Land? Which individual citizens have violated The Laws of The Land? Have we no men left in DC or are there only cowards remaining? (btw, I was present when these similarly spoken words were uttered a few years back). Don't believe it? Tough.

My original post: If You Were An Idiot NYT Blogger...


Subversion
Sedition
Treason
Tokyo Rose

Hillary and Kerry To Waste More Time and Money

I wonder if they will sponsor another Overnight Pajama Party and bring in hundreds of cots that no one will use. Perhaps the Loser Reid has started a tradition for unpopular CONgress Critters? Hillary could supply the cigars and Kerry could provide the mustard.

By Stephen Dinan and Sara A. Carter
July 21, 2007

Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and John Kerry yesterday announced a bill to force the Pentagon to begin planning how to withdraw from Iraq, fighting back after a top Defense Department official said that publicly talking about pulling out "reinforces enemy propaganda."

After calling earlier this year for a briefing on how the Pentagon would withdraw its troops, Mrs. Clinton received a reply by letter this week that she said amounts to "impugning the patriotism of any of us who raise serious questions." She said she will ask the defense secretary to intervene and repudiate the letter, written by Undersecretary Eric S. Edelman.

"I sent a serious letter on a matter of national security to the secretary of defense, and in return received a political response," said Mrs. Clinton, who has been touting her Pentagon request in her presidential campaign.

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said he would look into the exchange.

"I had not seen Senator Clinton's reply to Ambassador Edelman's letter until today. I am looking into the issues she raised and will respond to them early next week," Mr. Gates said, adding that he supports both congressional oversight and congressional debate on Iraq.

In his letter, Mr. Edelman, a former ambassador to Turkey, defended the new U.S. security strategy and then said talking about withdrawal publicly is a bad idea.

"Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq, much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia," wrote Mr. Edelman, who Mr. Bush placed in his current post using a recess appointment after Senate Democrats stalled his nomination in 2005.

Mr. Edelman also said the Defense Department has a policy of not releasing operational plans.

(the story continues on page 2...go read the rest)

So, seeing AND knowing that these actions ENCOURAGE THE ENEMY, these two idgits are going to press on ENCOURAGING THE ENEMY.

Isn't that wonderful news? They are going to continue with creating scenarios in which more of our troops they claim to support will be KIA, MIA or wounded.

Support such as this we could do with out...n'est pas?

A Call To Censure Murtha

I second that motion. Any "AYES" out there? As I have posted at least a dozen times on this blog and many more comments made on other blogs regarding Murtha, the whole issue had a stench of politicizing for political gain from the onset.

My posts on Murtha can be found here and here.

Hat Tip to Amy Proctor!!

A Marine being cleared of wrongdoing in the Haditha murders of Iraqi civilians wants John Murtha censured for saying he killed civilians “in cold blood”. Another Marine is suing. OORAH!

Other pieces by Amy Proctor:

RELATED POSTS:

A Suspicious Piece to the Haditha Puzzle

The Unraveling of Haditha-Part I

The Unraveling of Haditha-Part II

Amy Proctor has a video on this censure issue and I have placed it in my VODPOD above.

Murtha: a boil-a festering, infected boil on the ass of society...a Clear and Present Danger.

No Words Required

Call To Action...Support The Troops...Censure CONgress

In a previous post entitled Axis of Defeatists, I pointed out the sillyness of the Cut and Run rhetoric and others have pointed out that "redeployment" is a military term which means NOT what the current milquetoast CONgress Critters are implying it means. If you don't know what the term means, don't make up a meaning to suit your uneducated stupidity. Go look it up.

The Lame Stream Media has been outed upon several "events" and I am going to surmise one here and now. We Conservatives, especially the Reagan Era Conservatives, know for a FACT that there is Leftist Propaganda Machinations throughout the Lame Stream Media, in print and broadcast. It has been proven. Deny it all you want to...the facts remain.

In recent days, GWB and scads of CONgress Critters tried to get the Shamnesty Bill through and crammed down the Nation's throat. Democrat, Independent and Republican alike said, "Hell NO!". GWB and many CONgress Critters (D, R & I) and far-left Moonbat Brigades were upset with "us". The Media was having a Hay Day with it because it was PLAINLY obvious that the Executive and the Legislative branches were NOT listening to "us" and we were NOT buying into the crappola and all they could do was blame Bush. It was an opportunity to "show the world" how lame GWB was. Several Democrats even said as much. "We The People" were heard because the lame Stream Media saw a way to PROVE their "points" as dictated by their string pullers in the Camp of The Leftinistra.

Now, here we are, facing another "stab the troop in the back" episode with the lamest CONgress in the Nation's history, with an approval rating HALF of the approval rating of GWB, and we are to "believe" that the majority of Americans are WITH the lowest approved of CONgress in history. Does that seem even remotely feasible? The Lame Stream Media is using this as another opportunity to "show the world" that GWB is lame. And he is not. I may not agree with GWB ALL the time but he IS correct (mostly) on the GWOT. We fight them there so we don't fight them here. The problem with that has been amply discussed in other posts, namely, the ROE. Why aren't the majority being heard this time around?

This brings up an issue that the LAMEST CONgress in history will NOT address and it is way past time to continue to let them slide on it. This Nation is at war. PERIOD. The laws apply.

United States Code
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 115 - TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES

Section 2382. Misprision of treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.

Section 2388. Activities affecting armed forces during war

(a) Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully makes or conveys false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies; or

Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or

willfully obstructs the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, to the injury of the service or the United States, or attempts to do so - Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

(b) If two or more persons conspire to violate subsection (a) of this section and one or more such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be punished as provided in said subsection (a).

(c) Whoever harbors or conceals any person who he knows, or has reasonable grounds to believe or suspect, has committed, or is about to commit, an offense under this section, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(d) This section shall apply within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States, and on the high seas, as well as within the United States.

And why won't "they" address it? Because "they" protect their own...in CLEAR violation of said law. There are bigger fish to fry...you and I. Clearly, MANY in CONgress have violated these LAWS yet, "they" are ABOVE the law. Yes? No? Maybe? Read them and decide. And they whine about Libby's commutation...smoke and mirrors.

Pelosi violated the Logan Act and cowards did nothing. All she did was to go on a Mission of Her Own Agenda, an unsanctioned trip to Israel and then Syria, an enemy Nation of the United States and Israel (our ALLY), which she BOTCHED so badly Israel was livid.

There are CONgress Critters and Lame Stream Media moguls and puppets thereof, running around committing seditious and subversive and treasonous acts all around us and COWARDS in CONgress do NOTHING? In a time of WAR?

The Censure rules need to be enforced as well.

This is a Call To Action, I suppose. Demand Justice Be Served on those bent on causing The United States harm, in the long run. Write, call, fax and email...FLOOD them like we did over the Shamnesty issue.

Don't our troops deserve better action on our part than that which we accomplished over Shamnesty?

The "Quit Iraq" Caucus

Such a grand title for an article, yes? Ralph Peters of the NY Post says it very well.

EVEN as our troops make serious progress against al-Qaeda-in-Iraq and other extremists, Congress - including Republican members - is sending the terrorists a message: "Don't lose heart, we'll save you!"

Iraq's a mess. Got it. The Bush administration has made so many mistakes I stopped counting a year ago. But we've finally got a general in Baghdad - Dave Petraeus - who's doing things right. Iraqi politicians are still disgracing themselves, but our troops are killing America's enemies - with the help of our former enemies.

Al-Qaeda-in-Iraq is suffering a humiliating defeat, as fellow Sunni Muslims turn against the fanatics and help them find the martyrdom they advertise. Yet for purely political reasons - next year's elections - cowards on Capitol Hill are spurning the courage of our troops on the ground.

The frantic political gamesmanship in Congress would nauseate a ghoul. Pols desperate for any cover and concealment they can get have dragged the Iraq Study Group plan from the grave.

Masterminded by former Secretary of State Jim "Have Your Hugged Your Saudi Prince Today?" Baker, the report is a blueprint for a return to yesteryear's dictator-smooching policy (which helped create al Qaeda - thanks, Jimbo!).

That Baker report reminds me of cheap horror films where the zombies just keep coming back - except that zombies retain a measure of integrity.

But if Republicans are rushing to desert our troops and spit on the graves of heroes, the Democratic Party at least has been consistent - they've supported our enemies from the start, undercutting our troops and refusing to explain in detail what happens if we flee Iraq.

So I'll tell you what happens: massacres. And while I have nothing against Shia militiamen and Sunni insurgents killing each other 24/7, the overwhelming number of victims will be innocent women, children and the elderly.

Why anyone with any kind of intelligence levels are listening to a group of people whose approval ratings is HALF of GWB's is a odious concept.

BlandlyUrbane of DeMediacratic Nation has some things to say as well.

Perhaps bringing up the laws which are being violated by the "Quit Iraq" caucus is in order.

In posts here, and here, we find the following:

Expulsion, Censure, Reprimand, and Fine: Legislative Discipline in the House of Representatives

Summary

The House of Representatives is expressly authorized within the United States Constitution (Article I, Section 5, clause 2) to discipline or “punish” its own Members. This authority of the institution of the House to discipline a Member for “disorderly Behaviour” is in addition to any criminal or civil liability that a Member of the House may incur for particular misconduct, and is a device or procedure designed not so much as merely a punishment of the individual Member, but rather ultimately as a measure to protect the institutional integrity of the House of Representatives, its proceedings and its reputation.

Congressional discipline of a Member by the House of Representatives is done by the House itself, without the necessity of Senate concurrence, and may take several forms. The most common forms of discipline in the House are now “expulsion,” “censure,” or “reprimand,” although the House may also discipline its Members in others ways, including fine or monetary restitution, loss of seniority, and suspension or loss of certain privileges. In addition to such sanctions imposed by the full House of Representatives, the standing committee in the House dealing with ethics and official conduct matters, the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, is authorized by House Rules to issue a formal Committee reproach in the form of a “Letter of Reproval” for misconduct which does not rise to the level of consideration or sanction by the entire House of Representatives. Additionally, such Committee has also expressed its disapproval of conduct in informal letters and communications to Members.

The House may generally discipline its Members for violations of statutory law, including crimes; for violations of internal congressional rules; or for any conduct which the House of Representatives finds has reflected discredit upon the institution. Thus, each House of Congress has disciplined its own Members for conduct which has not necessarily violated any specific rule or law, but which was found to breach its privileges, demonstrate contempt for the institution, or which was found to discredit the House or Senate. When the most severe sanction of expulsion has been employed in the House, however, the conduct has historically involved either disloyalty to the United States Government, or the violation of a criminal law involving the abuse of one’s official position, such as bribery.

United States Code
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 115 - TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES

Section 2382. Misprision of treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.

Section 2388. Activities affecting armed forces during war

(a) Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully makes or conveys false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies; or Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or willfully obstructs the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, to the injury of the service or the United States, or attempts to do so - Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

(b) If two or more persons conspire to violate subsection (a) of this section and one or more such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be punished as provided in said subsection (a).

(c) Whoever harbors or conceals any person who he knows, or has reasonable grounds to believe or suspect, has committed, or is about to commit, an offense under this section, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(d) This section shall apply within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States, and on the high seas, as well as within the United States.

Madame Traitor Pelosi has also violated The Logan Act:

Did Nancy Pelosi Violate the Logan Act?

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply himself, or his agent, to any foreign government, or the agents thereof, for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

That is the complete text of the Logan Act, passed by the U.S. Congress on January 30, 1799, and in force to this day.

Did Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (and others) violate that act during a much-publicized, self-authorized trip to Syria?

The answer, like the law itself, is simple and straightforward: Yes.

Nancy Pelosi qualifies as “any citizen of the United States,” with no exemption as Speaker of the House.

Nancy Pelosi acted “without authority of the United States,” which, in matters of foreign policy, resides solely and exclusively in the executive branch of the U.S. Government, meaning the President of the United States and his designees. The President of the United States specifically disapproved of the Pelosi trip to Syria, asked her not to go and criticized her thereafter.

Nancy Pelosi directly commenced “correspondence or intercourse” with officers and agents of a foreign government.

Nancy Pelosi, by her own statements, intended and attempted to influence the “measures or conduct” of that foreign government. Those measures and that conduct directly relate to disputes or controversies with the United States (and its allies).

That the measures and conduct of Syria are among the worst of nations is of considerable concern from the standpoint of U.S. foreign policy, but is irrelevant from the standpoint of the Logan Act, which does not grade the behavior of countries or delineate among them for the purposes of its strictures.

That Speaker Pelosi says she said nothing on her trip that differs from the positions of the President is also irrelevant, from the standpoint of the law, and either woefully ignorant or ignorant and spiteful, from the standpoint of international relations.

The current policy of the U.S., as made by the executive branch, is to isolate Syria. That may be right; it may be wrong; it may not even matter. It is not, however, anywhere within Speaker Pelosi’s prerogative to tangibly interfere or even interpose herself by meeting directly with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for the purposes of any “diplomacy.”

Pelosi’s defenders make much of the fact that she is Speaker of the House of Representatives and only behind the Vice President in order of succession to the Presidency. That may get heads nodding on television talk shows, but falls with a thud against the words of the U.S. Supreme Court, recognizing the “exclusive power of the President as the sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations” or “the decision of the executive is conclusive.”

(Contrary to the mistaken assertions of some, presidential succession is not specified in the Constitution, but in statutory law made by Congress, subject to change, as it has changed in the past. No Speaker has ever succeeded to the Presidency. Even if one ever does, that will never make the legislative branch the executive branch or allow anyone in the legislative branch to adventure past the separation of powers that is one of the cornerstones of our government.)

It is far more pertinent to ask another question regarding Pelosi’s role as Speaker of the House. What does it say to this country that she openly violates a law made by the very legislative body of which she is the putative leader? If she disagrees with the law, for any reason, it is her job to try to change it, not to violate it, no matter how much she may disagree with the foreign policy positions of a duly-elected President.

The Logan Act may be old and no one ever before prosecuted for violating it. But it is neither ill-founded nor archaic, particularly in a time of world unrest and significant domestic tension regarding U.S. policy toward that unrest. The law does not preclude all legislators’ discussions with foreign leaders, such as fact-finding, but only those which have the unauthorized intent to influence those leaders.

As recently as September 2006, the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct of the House issued a memo to all members and officers that cautioned against activities that implicate the Logan Act, albeit intended as a warning to outgoing members. Similarly, in February 2006, the Congressional Research Service prepared a survey of the Logan Act for Congress. While neither document is particularly respectful of the law, there should at least be no one in Congress claiming not to understand it (including Speaker Pelosi’s Republican fellow travelers).

There is no question that many Americans and many in Congress disagree strenuously with foreign policy positions of the Bush Administration. Any and all, including Speaker Pelosi, may say so, loudly and often, in Congress, in the public square. But none of us, including Speaker Pelosi, has the right to conduct any foreign policy, without specific authorization of the President.

Now, Speaker Pelosi and Congressman Tom Lantos, Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, are openly discussing a diplomatic trip to “dialogue” with Iran. In the Byzantine world of foreign relations, that’s like trying to dismantle a nuke wearing only a head scarf for protection.

The Washington Post called Speaker Pelosi’s mission to Syria “foolish.” Vice President Cheney called it “bad behavior.” We call it felony

Jihad and Kennedy

Ted Kennedy's Jihad
By