Wednesday, November 14, 2007

A Victory in New York

Governor Spitzer now intends to drop his crusade to give illegals, drivers licenses. This is a major win for all tax-paying "legals" in New York. The people have spoken and Spitzer now has time to come up with more crazy policies instead of tackling major issues such as reform. It seems to me as it is business as usual in Albany.

Tuesday, November 6, 2007

The Case for Iraq

I do not believe President Bush has made an effective case for the Iraq war to the American public. If he had, I don't think that the war would be as unpopular as it is today. Some people do not see the implications of an American loss or they want America to be defeated. I will try to make my own case for the war in Iraq. President Bush had made some early errors with the war. Instead of the "weapons of mass destruction" (WMDs) argument, he should have stuck with the 17 U.N. violations, connections to terrorism, and a brutal dictator. We knew he had WMDs because he had used them in the past but the risk of not finding any would be greater then the strength of the argument. This is what gave the anti-war activists fuel for their accusations of "lies and exaggerations" by the Bush administration. We knew he was in violation of the U.N. agreements and we could prove both the supporting of terror and a brutal dictator. Bush's use of the WMD argument to go to war not only proved incorrect but also damaged the entire war effort and public sentiment.

The 17 U.N. resolutions that Saddam Hussein was in violation of can be read @ http://www.state.gov/p/io/rls/fs/2003/18850.htm

The next topic people have a real problem with and I don't know why. I have heard people say that Saddam Hussein had no ties to terrorism but that is simply not true. He had ties to terrorism. Maybe not strong ties with Al-Qaeda but certainly ties. The Weekly Standard had a great article on terror training camps in Iraq in the years leading up to the war @ http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/550kmbzd.asp

Saddam Hussein has also gave out millions of dollars to Palestinian families of suicide bombers. In a region in the world where there is high unemployment and poverty is normal, a $10,000 check can make all the difference and can certainly be motivation for more bombings. There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein sponsored terror, see CBS News @ http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/14/world/main543981.shtml

According to ABC News, over 10 million dollars had been given out and each family received $25,000 for a suicide bombing and $10,000 for a death caused by the nation of Israel. http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=129914&page=1

Audio tapes from meetings with Hussein and other government and military leaders in the mid-1990s show that Hussein was intentionally hiding their efforts of WMDs from the U.N. see ABC News @ http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/Investigation/story?id=1616996

Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi was one of the links that the Bush Administration used to justify the war in Iraq. There were reports that Al-Zarqawi received medical treatment in Baghdad for his leg that was wounded in Afghanistan during the U.S. led attack on the Taliban. The first story was that his leg was amputated but later officials backtracked and stated his leg was just wounded. Al-Zarqawi had a long history of terrorism dating back to 1989 when he entered Afghanistan to help fight off the Soviets. Al-Zarqawi is a link to Iraq and terrorism. It is no coincidence that after receiving medical treatment in Baghdad before the Iraq war, he became the leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq after the war started. For a history and biography of Al-Zarqawi see: http://www.answers.com/topic/abu-mussab-al-zarqawi

It goes without saying that Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator. He used chemical weapons on his own people, killed political enemies or anyone he wanted to get rid off or who was in subordination. He implemented rape and torture rooms and built and filled mass graves. His gassing of the Kurds in just one day killed 5,000. That is almost twice as many that died on September 11th, 2001. The difference is that the attacks on September 11th for done by a groups of terrorists while the gassing of the Kurds was done by a nation. The Washington Post had an article on the gassing of the Kurds, please see: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/29/AR2005042901191.html

This brings up the next major topic: What if we lose?
This is the worst case scenario, second only to nuclear devices being detonated inside the United States. A loss will embolden the enemy and will only strengthen themselves in bodies and money. The group was formed after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. For a more detailed history see the Council on Foreign Relations @ http://www.cfr.org/publication/9126/ The terrorist group was strengthened after they drove the Soviets out. If a group of rag-tag thugs can defeat the Soviets, they believe they can defeat anyone. If they are successful in making the United States withdraw with its tail between our legs, they will do something that no one had done in the history of the World has done: defeat two major superpowers, the Soviet Union and the United States.

We can not let this happen. I think that the War in Iraq is justified. Even if you do not feel that the war is justified, Saddam Hussein was an evil man who supported terror, killed his own people, and was in violation of 17 U.N. resolutions. A timetable or withdraw would be a mistake. If history teaches us anything, we most stomp them. Please do not support a timetable or withdraw from Iraq, we can not let them defeat us. Our country and way of life is on the line.

Friday, November 2, 2007

Global Warming: Fact or Figment of Alarmists' Imagination?

Turn on the news, open a newspaper, or stand at the water cooler and you will eventually hear that the world is falling apart and it is due to global warming. First off, very few people will disagree that there is global warming. That is not for debate (at least not here). The issue of debate is whether man is the sole contributor of this increase or is it occurring naturally. There are plenty of websites on both side of this argument to look for answers but which is correct? I believe in the "there are two kinds of people in this world" saying. In this case, there are two kinds of people in this world: people who believe the alarmists and people who don't! The alarmists are not a new group of people, they have been around probably since the dawn of time. Every generation has heard that oil is running out. Most often the alarmists will also give a time line such as "oil will run out in 20 years". The world has heard it since the 1800's and the fact remains no one knows when we will run out of oil. Is it possible that the oil companies themselves are doing this to drive up the price? I don't know.

Several years ago the Bird Flu was the story of the day. The following are headlines I collected from the web about the bird flu: "NPR: Bird Flu Deaths in Thailand Raise Pandemic Fears" (December 8, 2005), "Britain prepares for bird flu death toll of thousands" (August 7, 2005), and "U.N. backs off 150m flu deaths" (September 30, 2005). These head lines were meant to invoke fear in you. The alarmists were on to something. But then something happened. Actually, nothing happened. The pandemic never happened. There have been 204 deaths from the bird flu since the 1990's. If you believe the hype, 36,000 people die each year from the "normal" flu in America, see CBS news:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/01/07/health/main535605.shtml

Another example was SARS. I thought that the world was going to end in 2003 because of SARS. What happened? Again, nothing happened. There wasn't a SARS pandemic. Going back a few more years, Y2K was going to cause planes to drop from the sky, nuclear missiles to be launched, and turn your expensive laptop into a paperweight. When the clocks struck midnight, nothing happened. After three failed attempts by the alarmists (bird flu, SARS and Y2K), the new "sky is falling" is "man-made" global warming.

In the 1970's, the alarmists stated there was "global cooling", see what Newsweek and Time Magazine said:

http://www.denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm

www.junkscience.com/mar06/Time_AnotherIceAge_June241974.pdf

How can we have a "global cooling" scare in the 1970's and now thirty years later we have "global warming" scare? If a weatherperson can not accurately predict the weather in 3 days, how can a scientist predict global climate 20, 50, or 100 years out? Many against the global warming argument point to the flawed nature of the computer models being used to conduct the global warming studies. Some would argue (myself included) that the earth is too complex for a computer model. To say that a computer models is 100% accurate is to say that we know everything about the earth and how it works. That can not be true hence the models are flawed. Members of the left, have also tried to down play the number of scientists who have signed a petition (over 19,000) that rejects the mainstream view on global warming. To view the petition, click on the link below:

http://www.oism.org/pproject/

What is the truth? An Inconvenient Truth? To be honest, I have not seen it. I have seen clips and read excerpts but I refuse to watch it. I do not have to watch it to know that it is filled with lies and exaggerations. You can read about 35 Inconvenient Truths about Al Gore's movie from the Science and Public Policy Institute here at the link below. The nine lies identified by the British judge are included as well.

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html

One possible cause of global warming is an increase in solar flare activity. According to the American Institute of Physics, if there is a link between solar activity and the temperature of the earth, the effects may over ride the human impact on the planet. See below:

http://www.aip.org/pnu/2003/split/642-2.html

According to NASA, the planet Mars is also heating up. They state that the planet's temperature, in the last 30 years, rose approximately 1 degree Fahrenheit. Using photos from two Mars missions, scientists also state that the polar ice caps are melting. Click the link below to view the NASA article:

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/research/2007/marswarming.html

Every year NOAA releases their Hurricane season prediction. It was predicted that there was a good chance of a above-average hurricane season. To read this years prediction, click below.

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2007/s2864.htm

As the Hurricane season comes to a close, 2007 will rank as the most inactive in 30 years! To read more, click on the link below:

http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/

Here's the rundown on global warming:

1. The computer models are flawed. The earth is too complex.
2. If the weatherperson can not predict the weather in 3 days in one geographic location, how can scientists predict how the earth will be in 100 years.
3. If hurricanes are a indicator of global warming, how come we had two off years when in both 2006 and 2007 "above average" hurricane seasons were predicted.
4. Increased solar flare activity could be helping to increase the temperatures on earth.
5. Mars is also experiencing global warming. Last time I checked Mars did not have industry and automobiles to cause an increase in temperatures.

Thursday, November 1, 2007

Next Stop, Iran?

Iran, North Korea, and Syria are all major problems for America but who is going to deal with them? President Bush is under attack from anti-war groups and private citizens for the war in Iraq. President Bush has not let up even under increasing pressure, especially from the left (and some on the right) to end the war. But President Bush is right. The War on Terror does run through Iraq. There is no doubt that Saddam was a sponsor of terror and a cruel man. He used biological and chemical weapons on his own people. He cut checks to families of suicide bombers. He was not innocent. Even though President Bush was correct with the liberation of Iraq, did the war in Iraq prevent us from defending ourselves against future enemies including Iran and Syria? Iran, according to reports, is fairly close in being able to use long-range missiles to hit targets increasingly further away, including American interests in Europe. The president of Iran has stated many times that Israel should be wipe off the map. What if they had the capabilities to add nuclear warheads to those missiles? Is this something we can afford to do? I do not think so. So what is the answer and how should Israel be involved in all this?

I do not think that President Bush will attack Iran before the upcoming election. If Bush does not do it, who will? Sen. Clinton (D-NY), if elected, will treat the War on Terror as a police action. There will be warrants, courts, and arrests. This is not the way to fight terrorists. The terrorists are listening and watching us for their next move, especially the nation of Iran.
Terrorists would like nothing more than for the American public to elect a weak liberal, who will take weak action against our enemies. This is a dangerous move. We need strength not weakness with foreign policy. If the actions of former President Bill Clinton are any indication of the views and actions of Hilliary, we are all in trouble. We need a strong leader for this new era. I am looking for a leader who will not down play the importance of each innocent American life taken by terrorist thugs. We will need a leader who will stand up and say that this will not be tolerated. I want someone to say that for every American killed by terrorists, 1000 will be killed on their side. We need to put fear in them and not the other way around. We need to go on the offense and not just with defense.

We Will Never Forget

We Will Never Forget