posted November 30, 2006 04:37 PM            

So, what gives? is Ahmadinejad a democrat in disguise or are democrats the enemy of the Great Satan, the United States...like Ahmadinejad?

Given the aid and comfort democrats have given to terrorists, especially terrorists in Iraq and terrorist supporting nations in the Middle East; given their constant attacks on America and their unrelenting attacks on our military forces, it's impossible to distinguish democrats from the enemies of America.

November 30, 2006
Democrat Ahmadinejad
Vasko Kohlmayer

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - the man who has repeatedly vowed our destruction and who routinely refers to our country as the ‘Great Satan' - has just sent a letter to the American people. Astonishingly, his missive reads like a statement from the Democratic National Committee. Rife with complaints about Katrina, excessive military spending, Iraq misadventure, lack of social programs and neglect of the poor and homeless, it is virtually indistinguishable from the rants of Murtha, Pelosi, Kerry, Durbin or Schumer.

The question that begs asking is this: How is it that America's sworn enemy uses arguments, phrases and criticisms that are identical to those used by members of the Democratic Party?

I would suggest that this rhetorical convergence is a result of a shared loathing. Ahmadinejad despises America and so do large numbers of Democrats. It is enough to watch them seethe with anger when speaking of America's traditions, principles and institutions to see that this is indeed so. They loathe America's capitalism, her culture of individualism, her spirit of enterprise, her exceptionalism, her religion, and her accomplishments. They would like nothing better than to tear it all apart and follow the failed path of Old Europe even as it is slouching toward its doom.

posted November 30, 2006 07:36 PM              

quote:

---

Thanks, Rush!
For calling The American Thinker a "brilliant new blog"on your show of September 23, 2004

---

posted November 30, 2006 11:48 PM            

quote:

---

Thanks, Rush!
For calling The American Thinker a "brilliant new blog"on your show of September 23, 2004

---

Did I do that...errr, I mean, did Rush do that?

Nah, couldn't be!

PS: Nice picture. Looks like my brand of cigar too.

posted December 01, 2006 08:40 AM            

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed a letter to the "noble Americans" on Wednesday in which he said he was certain that the American people detested the Bush administration's policies and offered to work with ordinary Americans to reverse them.

Ahmadinejad, who evidently gets his information about America directly from the New York Times, is convinced that the mid-term election results were a backlash against "the many wars and calamities caused by the U.S. administration."

From his letter, he seems to think that he can manipulate public opinion and therefore coerce American foreign policy.

It is obvious where he got the idea. One need only read through his letter once to figure it out. His letter sounds like he was quoting from a Democratic political speech:

There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Bush administration lied to get us into war. The war on terror is eroding American civil rights protections. The Bush administration is running roughshod over the Constitution. The war is all about oil.

It all sounds familiar, doesn't it? Even his solution has a ring of familiarity about it – if America would just stop supporting Israel, withdraw from Iraq and pack up and go home, so would the terrorists. The war is a Republican war, not an American war.

It is clear from Ahmadinejad's letter that he views the Democratic takeover of the Congress in the mid-term elections as a personal victory, as well as a victory for the Islamic world.

"You know well that the U.S. administration has persistently provided blind and blanket support to the Zionist regime, has emboldened it to continue its crimes, and has prevented the U.N. Security Council from condemning it. Who can deny such broken promises and grave injustices towards humanity by the U.S. administration?"

Ahmadinejad has heard the same rhetoric being expounded endlessly by Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Howard Dean, Dick Durbin and Jack Murtha for months, and evidently, he thinks that Howard Dean and Company are representative of the view of most Americans.

"Let's take a look at Iraq," he wrote. "Since the commencement of the U.S. military presence in Iraq, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed, maimed or displaced. Terrorism in Iraq has grown exponentially. With the presence of the U.S. military in Iraq, nothing has been done to rebuild the ruins, to restore the infrastructure or to alleviate poverty. The U.S. government used the pretext of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but later it became clear that that was just a lie and a deception."

Now that the American people have come to our political senses, Mahmoud wants to be our friend. It isn't America that he hates; it's really the Bush administration.

He didn't really mean all that stuff about America being the "Great Satan" – he was just needling Bush. (Oh, and sorry about the whole hostage crisis thing back in '70s.)

I suppose one can forgive ol' Mahmoud for thinking that the Democratic win in the mid-terms means he has friends in America. He has much in common with them.

He loathes America. So do the Democrats on the far left. He loathes American capitalism. So does the far left. He hates American Christianity. So does the far left.

Ahmadinejad seems to instinctively recognize that the Democrats on the American left are his most valuable ally in his war against the United States. That's why his letter sounds so much like it was written by Howard Dean and Company.

posted December 11, 2006 10:38 AM            

Mad dash to defeat
Posted: December 11, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Tom Flannery

With the Democrats winning control of both the House and Senate in last month's midterm elections, their long-running campaign to orchestrate a disastrous U.S. defeat in Iraq has really kicked into high gear. And as with every other item on the Democratic Party agenda, the charge is being led by – who else? – the liberal media.
NBC got the ball rolling by announcing with great pomp and seriousness that its news personnel would officially begin referring to the Iraq war as a "civil war." No sooner was the announcement made than NBC talking heads began telling us how courageous and historically important this decision was (just in case we didn't catch on from all their posturing and preening about it).

Most notably, left-wing loon Keith Olbermann – who's so full of himself that he actually ends his broadcasts with the line "Good night, and good luck" – declared in a duly somber tone that the move was nothing less than a "Walter Cronkite moment."

By that, Olberboyy was referring to Cronkite's infamous 1968 on-air decree that Vietnam was an unwinnable war. This, of course, came on the heels of the Tet offensive, a horrendous defeat for the North Vietnamese which the liberal media duplicitously managed to morph into a horrendous defeat for American forces. Not that they were taking sides.

Cronkite's pronouncement is widely believed to have turned U.S. public opinion irreversibly against the war and essentially sealed America's eventual defeat and disgrace in Vietnam. For good measure, the media made sure to portray our soldiers throughout the conflict as butchers and baby-killers – with the help of traitors like John Kerry – while all the time assuring us how much they "supported the troops."

As Olberboyy inferred, the liberal media still look back on their sabotaging of that war against communist aggression as one of the high points in American journalism, and now they're hoping that history will repeat itself. More precisely, they're hoping they can manipulate a repeat of history by convincing the American people that Iraq has devolved into unmitigated anarchy ("civil war").

After all, they know that the accepted identification of Iraq as being embroiled in civil war will destroy whatever resolve remains among the American population for victory there. As Democratic Sen. Jack Reed, a member of the Armed Services Committee, put it: "If it's a civil war and only a small portion of it involves al-Qaida operatives, then it's suddenly not the central front in the war on terror, it's a struggle by Iraqis for political power. That means the rationales for this [war] are severely undercut."

So having bombarded us with negative-news-only coverage of the war for years, NBC and the other media outlets which have followed their lead are now trying to drive the proverbial final nail into the coffin of the noble Iraqi experiment. We even had CBS News Chief Foreign Correspondent Lara Logan lecturing Gen. John Abizaid, the top U.S. Commander in Iraq, on a recent installment of "60 Minutes" about how the U.S. should properly "manage the defeat" in Iraq.

Iraq is without question a bloody mess and President Bush has made his share of strategic blunders, but the violence is contained primarily to Baghdad and the Sunni Triangle. So the idea that the country has erupted into widespread civil war is simply misleading. It's "North Vietnam wins big in the Tet offensive" all over again.

As if this deceitful designation weren't bad enough, we now also have the Iraq Study Group suggesting that the U.S. give the terrorists in Iraq a guarantee we'll be gone within a year, negotiate with the terror-sponsoring states of Iran and Syria, and start carving up Israel yet again in another desperate attempt to appease our sworn enemies. It's no wonder Rush Limbaugh calls this the "Iraq Surrender Group."

To his credit, even in the face of continuous media criticism and their salivating over the delusional recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, President Bush understands the stakes. He has vowed not to abandon the fight "before the mission is complete," stating: "If they [the terrorists] succeed in undermining fragile democracies, and drive the forces of freedom out of the region, they will have an open field to pursue their goals." Consequently, he said we can "accept nothing less than victory for our children and our grandchildren."

The only other option is cutting and running, leaving Iraq as a terror stronghold and the terrorists themselves – the megalomaniacal monsters devoted to our destruction – more emboldened than ever.

posted December 11, 2006 11:18 AM            

TEL AVIV – A key Hamas official has confirmed reports from last week the terror group held meetings with "important Democrats."

Ahmed Yousuf, chief political advisor to Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, told the Maannews Palestinian news website that Hamas officials met recently with high-ranking American figures, "especially members of the Democratic party."

He said Hamas also met with European leaders, including members of the British parliament.

Yousuf did not say when the meetings took place or which members of the Democratic party the terror group allegedly held dialogue with, but he stated the meetings were fruitful in introducing the Hamas political vision.

Last week, Maannews quoted a Hamas source claiming the terror group met with a delegation of "important Democrats" who expressed interest in relations with Hamas even if it doesn't recognize the right of Israel to exist.

Stacie Paxton, a spokeswoman for the Democratic National Committee, told WND the party was not aware of any meeting.

According to the report, the alleged meeting with the Democrats took place in a European country following a series of preliminary meetings with representatives from the British and French governments.

The source told Maannews the Democrats expressed an understanding with the Hamas principal of not recognizing Israel and applauded Hamas' willingness to accept a long-term cease-fire with the Jewish state in exchange for an Israeli withdrawal to what is known as the pre-1967 borders – meaning an evacuation of the Gaza Strip, West Bank and eastern sections of Jerusalem.

Last month, overall Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal said his group would accept a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza and eastern Jerusalem.

Israel withdrew from Gaza last summer. Since then, Palestinian terror groups have been regularly firing rockets from the territory into nearby Jewish cities. The West Bank is within rocket firing range of Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and Israel's international airport.

The Maannews report quoted the Hamas source as claiming prior meetings with European representatives "broke the ice" and facilitated the alleged talks with Democrat officials. The source claimed Britain and France recently discussed with the terror group the possibility of breaking an international financial embargo imposed on the PA since Hamas won parliamentary elections earlier this year.

The source claimed Britain and France are "coming to terms" with the Hamas position of mediating the so-called Israeli-Palestinian conflict with a long-term cease-fire instead of final status negotiations in which the PA would agree to peace with Israel in exchange for a Palestinian state. The source said the two countries asked Hamas for a position paper outlining ideas for a long-term truce with Israel.

Ghazi Hamed, a spokesman for Hamas, told WND he could not comment on the report.

A senior Hamas official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told WND Hamas "has relations" with "influential American and European elements."

The official said he could neither confirm nor deny whether Hamas held any meetings with Democrats.

Hamas, responsible for scores of deadly suicide bombings, shooting attacks and rocket launchings against Israeli civilians, is classified by the U.S. State Department as a terrorist organization.

The U.S. reportedly has been working to bolster PA President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party against Hamas. The U.S. considers Fatah to be moderate.

Terrorists: 'Vote Democrat'

Last month, just prior to U.S. midterm elections, WND conducted a series of exclusive interviews in which prominent Middle East terrorist leaders said they hoped Americans would sweep the Democrats into power because of the party's position on withdrawing from Iraq – a move, the terrorists explained, that would ensure victory for the worldwide Islamic resistance.

The terrorists told WND an electoral win for the Democrats would prove to them Americans are "tired." They rejected statements from some prominent Democrats in the U.S. that a withdrawal from Iraq would end the insurgency, explaining an evacuation would prove resistance works and would compel jihadists to continue fighting until America is destroyed.

They said a withdrawal would also embolden their own terror groups to enhance "resistance" against Israel.

"Of course Americans should vote Democrat," Jihad Jaara, a senior member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group and the infamous leader of the 2002 siege of Bethlehem's Church of the Nativity, told WND last month.

"This is why American Muslims will support the Democrats, because there is an atmosphere in America that encourages those who want to withdraw from Iraq. It is time that the American people support those who want to take them out of this Iraqi mud," said Jaara, speaking to WND from exile in Ireland, where he was sent as part of an internationally brokered deal that ended the church siege.

Jaara was the chief in Bethlehem of the Brigades, the declared "military wing" of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party.

Together with the Islamic Jihad terror group, the Brigades has taken responsibility for every suicide bombing inside Israel the past two years, including an attack in Tel Aviv in April that killed American teenager Daniel Wultz and nine Israelis.

Muhammad Saadi, a senior leader of Islamic Jihad in the northern West Bank town of Jenin, said the Democrats' talk of withdrawal from Iraq makes him feel "proud."

"As Arabs and Muslims we feel proud of this talk," he told WND. "Very proud from the great successes of the Iraqi resistance. This success that brought the big superpower of the world to discuss a possible withdrawal."

Abu Abdullah, a leader of Hamas' military wing in the Gaza Strip, said the policy of withdrawal "proves the strategy of the resistance is the right strategy against the occupation."

"We warned the Americans that this will be their end in Iraq," said Abu Abdullah, considered one of the most important operational members of Hamas' Izzedine al-Qassam Martyrs Brigades, Hamas' declared "resistance" department.

"They did not succeed in stealing Iraq's oil, at least not at a level that covers their huge expenses. They did not bring stability. Their agents in the [Iraqi] regime seem to have no chance to survive if the Americans withdraw."

Abu Ayman, an Islamic Jihad leader in Jenin, said he is "emboldened" by those in America who compare the war in Iraq to Vietnam.

"[The mujahedeen fighters] brought the Americans to speak for the first time seriously and sincerely that Iraq is becoming a new Vietnam and that they should fix a schedule for their withdrawal from Iraq," boasted Abu Ayman.

The terror leaders spoke as the debate regarding the future of America's war in Iraq became the central theme of last week's elections, with most Democrats urging a timetable for withdrawal and Republicans mostly advocating staying the course in Iraq.

Terrorists laugh at Pelosi's comments

Many Democrat politicians and some from the Republican Party have stated a withdrawal from Iraq would end the insurgency there.

In a recent interview with CBS's "60 Minutes," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, stated, "The jihadists (are) in Iraq. But that doesn't mean we stay there. They'll stay there as long as we're there.

Pelosi will become House speaker when the new Congress is seated in January.

WND read Pelosi's remarks to the terror leaders, who unanimously rejected her contention an American withdrawal would end the insurgency.

Islamic Jihad's Saadi, laughing, stated, "There is no chance that the resistance will stop."

He said an American withdrawal from Iraq would "prove the resistance is the most important tool and that this tool works The victory of the Iraqi revolution will mark an important step in the history of the region and in the attitude regarding the United States."

Jihad Jaara said an American withdrawal would "mark the beginning of the collapse of this tyrant empire (U.S.)."

"Therefore, a victory in Iraq would be a greater defeat for America than in Vietnam."

Jaara said vacating Iraq would also "reinforce Palestinian resistance organizations, especially from the moral point of view. But we also learn from these (insurgency) movements militarily. We look and learn from them."

Hamas' Abu Abdullah argued a withdrawal from Iraq would "convince those among the Palestinians who still have doubts in the efficiency of the resistance."