Smelling the possibility of some political advantage leading up to the 2008 election, Democrats practically tripped over themselves getting up to the microphones to express their “outrage” over the revelation that the CIA had erased tapes of the interrogations of top terrorists. (Chicago Tribune, Toronto Star) In one of the few (known) intelligence successes of the post 9-11 era, these interrogations produced information that was “actionable,” accurate and resulted in the disruption of terrorist activities.

The CIA’s stated rationale for erasing the tapes was to protect the identity of the agents involved in the interrogation. This certainly seems reasonable given the fact the e-mail written by the agency’s director, Michael Hayden, to explain the erasure to CIA personnel was in the hands of the Associated Press within hours of distribution at Langley. (The Register) However, he neglected to mention that agents would need not only protection from al-Qaeda, but also several American Senators, Congressman, and left-wing activists.

Yesterday was a “bad news day” for Iranian President Ahmadinejad as news of the 30,000 lbs “bunker buster” bomb became common knowledge with the funding requests to produce and deploy a weapon that has been under development for years. (Well, seriously under development since Clinton left office, when the term “penetration” resumed its primarily military, rather than sexual, significance when discussed in the Oval Office.) In a defense “supplemental” budget item, the B2 bomber would be retrofitted to deliver this weapon. Having a credible conventional weapons capability that could destroy underground nuclear facilities could be the “big stick” that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice needs to jump start serious negotiations.  (Fox video Special Report)

The Iranians are not a state I think that will change its behavior….just through talking to them.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Oct. 24, 2007

Naturally, the Democrats, and Ron Paul (R?-TX), are already complaining about this weapon and threatening to “defund” it. Why? Because, they are the Party of Defeat! Anything that could potentially contribute to a US victory in the War on Terror is an anathema to virtually every major Democratic Party leader, with the possible exception of Joe Lieberman, who was forced to run as an independent when challenged by a left-wing fringe candidate from within his own party.

This new weapon system would provide “strategic and tactical flexibility” for political and military leaders according to sources familiar with the capabilities of this “unconventional-conventional weapon.” There will be no need to “go nuclear” in order to terminate, or seriously degrade, Iran’s nuclear ambitions once this weapon system is deployed. It may even help our spineless European “allies” rapidly evolve into vertebrates with regards to their dealings with the religious dictatorship in Tehran. After all, an armed strike against Iran’s apocolyptic facilities would almost certainly degrade Iran’s ability to export oil. “Junkies” can become quite compliant when their “supply” is threatened.

While a single weapon system may not represent a military solution to the Iranian theocratic dictatorship’s intransigence in negotiations to end its nuclear weapons capability, it could certainly be the “catalyst” that results in a “paradigm shift” in our dealing with the current Iranian regime.

Oh, by the way, this is also a weapon that is rumored to be increasing UBL’s “pucker factor.” It’s hard to enjoy paradise with 72 virgins while you are entombed for eternity in a collapsed cave.

In a moment of political theater designed for domestic Russian consumption, Putin pounded on his political chest by “dissing” Secretary Rice and Secretary Gates with a more than “fashionably late” arrival to their meeting yesterday while delivering a message that the planned anti-ballistic missile shield in Europe would trigger ominous changes in US-Russia relations. He hinted that this could potentially trigger a new Cold War. (Chicago Tribune, “From Russia, little love for U.S. plan;” LA Times, “Rice and Gates get nowhere with Putin” in St Louis Today; Australian Broadcasting Company, “US rejects Russian appeals to halt missile scheme;” Mangalorian Star, “Putin threatens to withdraw from arms treaty;” AP in Pravda “Putin makes Condoleezza Rice laugh in Moscow;” MSN Video)

Condi reiterated the facts that Russia has nothing to fear from an anti-ballistic missile system for Europe — especially one in which they’ve been asked to participate! Putin would do more to further Russian relations with former Warsaw Pact nations (damaged by years of Soviet-era occupation) by working towards their common defense and economic development than actively posturing to block such activities. Could you imagine the “fallout” if a former “Eastern Block” nation were hit by an Iranian nuclear, chemical or biological device? Even if it were delivered by Teheran’s terrorist proxies? The damage to Russia’s relationships with its neighbors would take decades to repair until memories of Moscow’s Ayatollah-friendly policies faded.

However, it must be too much for a former KGB officer, like Putin, to accept that the US really isn’t a threat to his nation even if we are increasingly friendly with their formerly occupied neighbors. Unfortunately, Russian history doesn’t lend itself to a national psyche that favors cooperation with foreign powers over confrontation — especially in light of their internal politics that involve a multitude of ethnic and religious factions, many of whom have been savagely suppressed. It may be many years, until a new generation of Russian leaders that grew up in the post-Soviet era, before there are fundamental changes in our relationship with the Russians.

Until then, Condi’s consistent message will be essential if we are to reach a resolution to these areas of friction with our former arch enemy. She will stress political and personal liberty (BBC, “Rice holds Russia rights meetings”), continue to make offers “to partner” in strategic defense, anti-terrorist activities, and economic development until there is a generation of Russian leaders willing to listen. It may be a long wait. Hopefully, the rest of Europe and the world won’t just learn to work around Russian intransigence, thus leading to further isolation of Russia and increasing the possibility of political instability. (Khaleej Times, “Assertive Russia;” New Europe, “Five countries agree on JV to build Odessa-Brody-Gdansk”)

Yesterday’s Jerusalem Post published M. J. Rosenberg’s (Director of the Israel Policy Forum’s Washington Policy Center) op-ed Condi gets it right. (link) Predictably, there will be hard-liners, Israeli and Palestinian, that will reject the author’s thesis.  More than likely, they’ll simultaneously accuse Secretary of State Rice of being a shill for the other side. (Not even John Kerry could “flip-flop” fast enough to accomplish that feat!)

Rice’s position is precisely right. America should not boycott Palestinians who recognize Israel and oppose terrorism just because they serve in a government with people who don’t.

Dr. Rice’s recent accomplishments in the Middle East, however modest and subject to being impeded, or even derailed, by the winds of domestic and regional politics in the US, Israel, the Palestinian Authority, the EU, Russia and, of course, the UN — not to mention the possibility of terrorism at any moment by any of a myriad of “splinter” groups; are on the threshold of breaking the “glass ceiling” of Middle East peace. Rosenberg asserts that the progress made by Condi’s ongoing efforts has set the stage for the equivalent of a Palestinian-Israeli Shanghai Communique.

The original, the joint statement that concluded President Nixon’s historic 1972 visit to Communist China, was short on substance, but nonetheless, arguably, marked the beginning of one of the most important geopolitical shifts of the last century and hastened the end of the Cold War.

Not much happened during the visit.. ..pictures of a US president in Beijing, shaking hands with Chairman Mao and visiting the Great Wall, were more significant than any agreement reached.. ..In fact, it was near-impossible to reach any agreement because the two sides agreed on virtually nothing.

Nixon’s national security adviser, Henry Kissinger, and Mao’s foreign minister, Chou En-Lai, drafted the so-called Shanghai communique which stated that the two sides had met, held “frank and honest” discussions, and hoped to meet again. Unable to state areas of agreement, the communique stated areas of disagreement.. ..Nevertheless, the joint statement changed the world by asserting that despite the differences, the process of reconciliation had begun.

Time will tell if this analogy is correct, but there is cause for cautious optimism if these recent reports are any indication: Time, “Condi Diary: Pushing Peace in the Desert,” Haaretz, “Olmert agrees to resume open-ended talks with Abbas,” Jerusalem Post, Rice: Abbas, Olmert to meet biweekly on ‘political horizon’,” Al-Jazeerah, “Condi’s Delicate Condition, but Hope is on the Horizon”

The admonition to “Pray for the peace of Jerusalem” is as timeless now, as it ever was.

The Democratically-controlled House succeeded in doing what Speaker Pelosi said it would.  In “voting to end the war” (It would seem by any means necessary, even surrender, or worse, “starving” our troops in the field for critical funding.), she is trying to accomplish what, up until now, al-Qaeda, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and all the Islamic terrorists combined have been unable to do —  force a retreat (euphemistically called “redeployment”) by US forces in the War on Terror.  And all she had to do was bang her Speaker’s gavel to have almost all of the Democratic congressmen (and congresswomen) line up like pigs at the feeding trough as she poured out a mere $642 million dollars of taxpayer cash in order to get them to forget about our troops.  These are pigs that even an Ayatollah could love.

In spite of the mainstream media in full spin mode, the American public will see this for what it is — a betrayal of our military men and women, their families, and ultimately the entire country.  This vote and the pork barrel spending required to make it happen are going to “fatten up” these Congressional “piggies” for electoral slaughter in 2008.  So, in recognition of your legislative “victory,” Nancy, here’s a “Mission Accomplished” banner just for you!

If you want to use this image on your website, or blog, feel free to do so.  (Although, we would appreciate a link back to us.)  Just be sure to copy and save the image to your own server in order to protect our website’s bandwidth.

From the bleak tribal region of Pakistan, known as Waziristan, where Osama Bin Laden has been rumored to be hiding from time to time; there are reports — attributed to Secretary of State Rice, who presumably has the best intelligence available from hi-tech satellites to possibly even special ops forces (Pakistani, and possibly others) on the ground, that fighting has broken out between tribal forces and foreign “extremists” that have long used the rugged terrain as a safe haven for their activities.  (Source: Pakistan’s Dawn Edition)  

Remember how the special operations troops closely integrated to with the Northern Alliance proved crucial to battlefield success in Afghanistan?  Did we learn an important lesson?

For an idea of how rugged the terrain is, take a look at this video from the UK Guardian.  It’s tough to survive, much less fight under such conditions.  Hundreds of Pakistani troops have been killed in recent fighting.  (We wonder if there isn’t some way to send a “Care Package” to those troops to show our appreciation for their sacrifices?  Looks like they’ve pulled the toughest assignment in the Pakistani Army — largely because of pressure from the US.)

It would appear that the foreign terrorists have finally “worn out their welcome” with the Waziristan tribes that have hosted them for years in a perversion of the Islamic tradition of hospitality.  Initially, the deal that Pakistani President Musharraf struck last year with the Waziristan tribal leaders was not a welcome development in Washington.  (Pak Tribune)  However, Musharraf is a shrewd politician, having survived assassination attempts, failed coups, and frequent civil unrest.  And it looks like he may have again proven his political mettle.  After the Waziristan tribes concluded the agreement with the central government, there were reports that some tribal leaders were murdered as “collaborators” by the foreign fighters who had previously been their welcome “guests.”  This blunder by the terrorists may be an opportunity for progress that has been elusive for years.  Dr. Rice’s comprehensive “hearts and minds” approach towards the region, although it may take years to fully bear fruit, will be essential if the current split between the indigenous population and foreign terrorist “squatters” is to be exploited.

(Note to terrorists: If you plan on killing your hosts in the future, it’s generally wise to do so on your way out of town.)

Yesterday, Glenn Kessler in his Washington Post article, entitled “Rice’s pre-election appearances buck tradition — Secretary of State is expected to stay above the partisan fray,” reported on Condi’s pre-election activity with a rather critical tone. While Dr. Rice has largely avoided the megabuck politcal fundraising circuit with its infamous “rubber chicken” and photo ops (typically available for an additional donation), she has, as Kessler points out, been on talk radio quite a bit.

There are two reasons why Dr. Rice has taken on a higher profile than previous Secretaries of State. First, in these midterm elections, the War on Terror, foreign policy issues and Iraq have taken on dominent roles. So, in order to counter the Democrats’ disinformation campaign and to bypass their stooges in the mainstream media, Condi is speaking directly to the American people via talk radio. (Mark your TV Guide, program your TIVO; she’ll be making an election eve appearance Monday with Fox’s Neil Cavuto.) She’s becoming our nation’s “current events” teacher clearly explaining US foreign policy. Hopefully, this will be successful against the Democrats’ “stealth strategy” to hide shrill, ultra-left leaders like Pelosi and Reid right before the election while roling out Dems perceived as more “moderate” like Wesley Clark — who thinks the stars on his former uniform will blind Americans to the fact that Democratic anti-terror “redeployment” plans are just an eloquent way to surrender.

Second, even if she isn’t aware of it herself, recent past Secretaries of State (Thank God!) didn’t have a “date with destiny” to be our nation’s next commander in chief.

The confrontation between the Clintons and Condi that erupted after Bill’s interview with Chris Wallace on September 24^th was (is?) based on the claim, by Clinton, that he left behind a “comprehensive plan” on counter terrorism for the Bush administration when he left office. In making his point he relied heavily on Richard Clarke, author of Against All Enemies. (Amazon) Watch our video highlights of this controversy (link, click on the “play” button to start), then read the transcript of this “background briefing” given by Clarke to a group of reporters, including Fox’s Jim Angle. (We’re trying to see if there are any recordings, audio or video, of this briefing.) Could this be the “smoking gun” that clearly demonstrates who’s telling the truth?

Clinton: “I tried and failed. When I failed, I left a comprehensive anti-terror strategy and the best guy in the world, Dick Clark, who got demoted.”

Clarke (August 2002): “I think the overall point is, there was no plan on Al Qaeda that was passed from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration.”

Rice: “What we did in the eight months was at least as aggressive as what the Clinton Administration did in the preceding eight years.”
“We were not left with a comprehensive strategy to fight Al-Qaeda.”

Actually, Condi was being modest when she said that she and the Bush Administration were “at least as aggressive.” Under her guidance, the counter terrorism budget was quintupled, and the plans for implementing a much more aggressive counter terrorism effort were already underway when 9-11 occurred. This was the result of Bush’s order to “stop swatting flies.” Remember, many of the Clinton-era impediments were still in place, such as barriers to intelligence sharing between the CIA and FBI, and these had to be overcome, as well. Also, with this more aggressive attitude, and although it’s a moot point now, can anyone imagine that Bush and Condi would’ve refused to “pull the trigger” on UBL, on multiple occasions, as Michael Scheuer, PhD, contends the Clinton administration did? (Scheuer is a 22-year veteran of the CIA and now a CBS News analyst. He’s the author of Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror, and Through Our Enemies’ Eyes: Osama bin Laden, Radical Islam, and the Future of America, make sure you read the updated 2005, revised edition, of the later book. It contains a lot of new information.)

(more…)

Our enemies in the Global War on Terror (GWOT) are economically dependent, in large part, on support from oil-exporting countries. As Secretary of State, Dr. Rice has spoken of how energy “warps” our foreign policy. Without much fanfare, Dr. Rice at the Department of State, in conjuction with the Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman (bio), has managed to launch an international alternative fuels effort, bring former rivals China and India on board, and help demonstrate US environmental sensitivities abroad. Intentional, or not, this is yet another way that Dr. Rice is getting ready for the Oval Office. She’ll have a major component of her energy policy in place the day she takes the oath of office. (link to “Energy Security as a Global Partnership” by Paul E. Simons, link to State Department press release “Investing in Innovative Energy Technologies”, link to testimony of James L. Connaughton, Chairman, White House Council on Environmental Change before the House Committee on Government Reform)

The following is from the Congressional hearing for the International Relations Budget for Fiscal Year 2006 where Dr. Rice testified and submitted prepared statements in response to questions from Committee Members. (link)

…addressing climate change requires a sustained effort by all nations over many generations. Developing and bringing to the marketplace transformational energy technologies will be key. To this end, the United States has launched five important multilateral partnerships:

1. The International Methane to Markets Partnership;

2. The International Partnership for a Hydrogen Economy:

3. The Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum;

4. The Generation IV International Forum; and,

5. The Global Earth Observation initiative.

In addition, the United States has established bilateral climate partnerships with 14 countries and regional organizations that together with the United States account for over 70% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

(We must thank the staffers from the offices of Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, (R-FL); Katherine Harris (R-FL); and Thomas Tancredo (R-CO) who responded to our requests for information about Secretary Rice, alternative fuels, energy policy and climate change. They responded with voluminous materials. We’ll be busy reading for a long time and buying more fax machine toner this afternoon!)

Life in Las Vegas taught me many years ago that if you want to truly understand something that you have to follow the money.  That’s what Secretary Rice did with her Mideast trip.

First, she makes an unannounced trip to Baghdad to deliver the message, “Get to work!  The meter is running.”  Then, she goes to Kurdish dominated Northern Iraq to cement relations with Kurdish leaders.  It is interesting to note that Secretary Rice’s State Department webpage today featured on the front page not her trip to Baghdad, nor her trip to London, but her trip to visit the Kurds.  A subtle way to let the world know which of the three she considered most important.  (article by AP’s Anne Gearan)

The US is looked upon very favorably by the Kurds.  Our intervention stopped Saddam’s “final solution” for them, and now Saddam is on trial for genocide — a trial that provides an international soapbox for them to showcase their suffering under Saddam.  The fact that the French, Germans, and Russians all “looked the other way” isn’t lost on the Kurds, either.

 Dr. Rice’s Iraqi trip, regardless of the actual words that may have been spoken during the few hours that she was ”in-country” clearly communicated to Sunni and Shi’a leaders in Baghdad that they need to ”step up to the plate.”  By meeting with the Kurds apart from the leaders in Baghdad, Condi is already making preparations to make sure that the oil wealth of Northern Iraq (where most of Iraq’s oil is located) will not become a treasure chest for terrorists similar to Iran — even if the leaders in Baghdad fail to unite the nation.  It’s a powerful message, much of it non-verbal, let’s hope it motivates the warring factions in Iraq to stop fighting each other and start seriously negotiating to insure their country’s future.

Turkish leaders, who now probably regret (even if only in private) that they were less than completely helpful to the US during the last Gulf War, are worried about the Kurds in Northern Iraq fomenting Kurdish separatists in their own country.  (Newsweek article, “Whatever is necessary”)  They want a unified Iraq because they see it as a way of keeping demands for Kurdish autonomy in check.

For more information about the Kurds visit the website “The Other Iraq,” from the group that produced the “Thank you, America” television spots.  Are these efforts aimed at gaining support in America for eventual Kurdish independence, or greater autonomy within Iraq?  We’ll see.

(Links to the Kurdish English language videos that have recently aired in the US are on the “Other Iraq website in case they haven’t aired in your area.)

In response to Bill Clinton’s outburst to Chris Wallace on FOX News, Condoleezza Rice set the record straight.  Bill said that he did everything he could to fight terorism while president.  He said he even a left a complete plan on how to fight Al-Qaeda for Bush.  He then concluded that Bush did nothing for 8 months.

     Condoleezza responded yesterday morning.  She said no such plan was left for the Bush administration. 

     Hillary Clinton, in the first lob of the 2008 Presidential race,  defended Clinton’s treatment of the terrorist threat.  She then said that Clinton wasn’t the one who ignored a report titled “Bin Ladin determined to attack within the United States”.

    Condistas already know about that report.  it was discussed during the 9/11 hearings.  Dr. Rice was on the stand when Sen. Biden asked her the title of the report.  After she responded with the title, she tried to explain that the report gave no details about when or where the attacks would be.  Sen. Biden interrupted , of course.  He said he just asked for the title. 

    There is a bigger picture here:  Hillary took this opprtunity to politicize the War on Terror and 9/11.  Condoleezza in her staterments this morning made it cleat that we shouldn’t be finger-pointing and blaming each other over this. 

   We can count on more of this from the Democrats as 2008 approaches. 

Condi was interviewed by Katie Couric on “60 Minutes” tonight. You should go here if you missed it. There are lots of video clips, including ones that didn’t air.

There is also a comments section on the page. Many comments show support for her running for President in 2008. We should all add our own comments to that page!

Katie did ask Condi about running for President. This segment didn’t air on TV, of course. She said that elected office “probably” isn’t for her. (link) Despite this statement, “60 minutes” set up an online poll asking “Should Condoleezza Rice run for President?” The results are currently 50/50. Let’s get on there and vote!

Katie asked her about her views on abortion. This clip didn’t air, either. (link) She said she supports parental notification and opposes late term abortion, but she would not ban abortion.

My favorite part of the interview was when Condi drew parallels between the bombings and terrorism committed on African-Americans during the segregation days and the bombings and terrorism in the Middle East. (link) These are both instances where people were fighting for freedom and being terrorized because of it. She said that when people say “Iraq isn’t ready for democracy.” it reminds her of when people used to say “Black people are simple people. They aren’t ready for the vote.” In another unaired clip, Katie asks her about cooking fried chicken. (link) I found this a little racist and rude.

Katie also accuses her of growing up shielded from the horrors of the civil rights movement. Condi responds “Until bombs started going off in the neighborhood.” (link) (What a great response!) This clip was also unaired. In the end, Condi turned out great and very Presidential. This is a great start to stirring the presidential pot.

Condoleezza Rice has an interview in this month’s Essence magazine. I will warn you, only the first part of the interview is available free on the website. You have to actually buy the magazine to get the complete interview. They ask a lot of the tough questions, but Condi answers with confidence and intelligence as always.

They ask her about the war in Iraq: “Do you still think it was a good idea?” She answers, “Absolutely.”

They ask her what she thought about Hurricane Katrina , seeing the people on the rooftops waiting to be rescued. She replies, “I knew that we had a terrible crisis on our hands, a terrible tragedy. You know, there are these pockets in America where race and poverty come together in a really terrible way. It was quite clear that in the poorest parts of New Orleans, people didn’t have the means to get out. I remember seeing school buses underwater and thinking, It’s a pity that they weren’t evacuated on those school buses before they went underwater.

But I will tell you what I deeply resented. I resented the notion that the President of the United States, this President of the United States, would somehow decide to let people suffer because they were Black. I found that to be the most corrosive and outrageous claim that anybody could have made, and it was wholly and totally irresponsible.”

She also later says if African-Americans truly cared about Africa, they should know that U.S. assistance to Africa has tripled since Bush has been in office.

Condi proves once again her strong convictions and impeccable Presidential qualifications. To read her complete life story, which in my opinion , is second only to the life of Ronald Reagan, you have to read “Condi: The Condoleezza Rice Story” by Antonia Felix. This is an absolute MUST READ for all Condistas. Most of my quotes for talking points come from this book.

Yesterday, Secretary Rice released the following statement in recognition of the fifth anniversary of 9-11.

broadband video, audio

A real effort for peace, or disinformation? Visit CAIR’s website and decide for yourself.

In a ploy for media exposure (Nothing wrong with that, we do it, too!), the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has established “Not in the Name of Islam,” an online petition and website where Muslims can publicly denounce violence done in the name of their religion. This morning a representative of the group appeared on the Fox News program, Fox and Friends - Weekend. Is this what we’ve waited for for so long from the Muslim community in the US? Haven’t we been asking since 9-11, and before, “Where are the ‘moderate’ Muslims that denounce acts of terrorism? Where are the protests in the “Arab street” against those that perpetrate violence in the name of the ‘Religion of Peace?’” Here’s the text of the online pledge:

We, the undersigned Muslims, wish to state clearly that those who commit acts of terror, murder and cruelty in the name of Islam are not only destroying innocent lives, but are also betraying the values of the faith they claim to represent. No injustice done to Muslims can ever justify the massacre of innocent people, and no act of terror will ever serve the cause of Islam. We repudiate and dissociate ourselves from any Muslim group or individual who commits such brutal and un-Islamic acts. We refuse to allow our faith to be held hostage by the criminal actions of a tiny minority acting outside the teachings of both the Quran and the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.

As it states in the Quran: ‘Oh you who believe, stand up firmly for justice, as witnesses to God, even if it be against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it be against rich or poor; for God can best protect both. Do not follow any passion, lest you not be just. And if you distort or decline to do justice, verily God is well-acquainted with all that you do.’ (Quran 4:135)

While this may seem like a positive development at first glance, a little investigation reveals some disturbing associations of the CAIR, its officers, its financiers and the public relations tactics they use to further their political and religious agenda — an agenda that seems to be more ominous than their publicly stated one, as a “nonprofit 501(c)(4), grassroots civil rights and advocacy group.”

(more…)