Terrorists, Marxists, Leftists and the Democrats

Terrorists, Marxists, Leftists and the Democrats

By Lance Fairchok

Venezuelan Dictator Hugo Chavez is rattling his sword, deploying troops, and hoping to distract his increasingly agitated populace from the domestic policies that are dragging Venezuela deeper into the poverty and dysfunction of socialism. It is inevitable that as the economy declines, shortages spread, food become scarce, and crime skyrockets, a foreign enemy will be found to blame for the woes Chavez’ absurd policies cause.

Chavez is angry because some Marxist terrorists he was fond of died in a Colombian raid. You see, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) provided money to the tune of 150,000 dollars to Chavez while he was imprisoned after a failed coup attempt in the early 90’s. Their relationship is a cozy one, and now that he has power, he has become their benefactor, earning the affectionate code name of “angel,” and funneling millions of oil dollars into their revolutionary coffers.
Colombia, a nation long suffering the depredations of this vicious Marxist narco-terrorist gang, struck out successfully at some of its leaders, harbored in neighboring Ecuador. They were able to kill Raul Reyes, the number two military commander of FARC, a man with the blood of an untold number of innocents on his hands.
Reyes was not a nice man.  His resume includes the kidnapping hundreds of civilians, including tourists, participation in village massacres and terror bombings.  Many of his victims were executed after they were kidnapped.  Some were killed to prevent their rescue by security forces.  Some where tortured.  Reyes was sentenced in absentia for a long list of brutal crimes: the deaths of 13 policemen and 18 soldiers, the murder of a judge, a physician, three judicial officials, the ex-minister of Culture Consuelo Araújo, congressman Diego Turbay and his mother, catholic monsignor Isaías Duarte, Governor of Antioquia Guillermo Gaviria, former minister Gilberto Echeverri, and a dozen members of the Valle del Cauca Assembly. He was behind a nightclub bombing that killed 36 people in Bogotá. The list of victims that lay uncounted and unrequited in jungle graves will certainly be just as long.  By every definition of justice and every concept of decency, Reyes should have been killed long ago.
The FARC is not a liberation movement, nor are they “Freedom Fighters.” They are nothing more than smugglers, bandits and thieves whose modus operandi uses bombings, assassination, cocaine trafficking, kidnapping, extortion, hijacking and terror. FARC has its ideological roots in the Marxist revolutions that gave us the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, the Sendero Luminoso in Chile and the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. To understand the meaning of the word evil, merely glance at the history of these groups.
With the help of Chavez, FARC is attempting to legitimize and mainstream itself, much as the genocidal PLO transformed, with the aid of useful idiots like Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, from criminal terrorists to pseudo-statesmen. Democrats in Congress, succumbing to lobbying from FARC sympathizers and Marxist apologists, are stalling military aid and a free trade agreement. Undermining a close ally, in a despicable attempt to undermine President Bush and any success he might claim in South America. The Colombian people be damned, and the consequences, well, when are they ever a concern? The long view is an anathema to the left.
Chavez, Evo Morales of Bolivia and Ecuador’s Rafael Correa demand the UN sanction Colombia for attacking its mortal enemy, calling it “fascist” and “criminal.” Chavez described the raid as “cowardly murder, all of it coldly calculated.” United by their populist Marxist ideology, and having made the pilgrimage to Havana to receive the blessing of Castro, all three leaders provide material support to the terrorists of FARC, actively undermining the safety and security of the Democratic nation of Colombia who is a major trading partner of all three.
The Venezuelan government has funneled support to radical groups in Mexico, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Ecuador, Bolivia and Argentina. A sizable weapons shipment from Venezuela was recently uncovered in Veracruz, likely en route to leftist Mexican guerrillas. South America’s axis of evil seeks out the like minded, reaching out to Syria and Iran, and letting Hezbollah operate freely in their countries. Flush with renewed ideological vigor, Venezuelan oil revenues and the drug activity Chavez coordinates the new Socialist hegemony will likely plunge South America into decades of violence and upheaval.
Chavez has purchased 100,000 Kalashnikov assault rifles from Russia, the modernized AK-103 as well as the license to produce the rifle and its ammunition in Venezuela. It will only be a matter of months before terrorists, rebels and drug gangs all over the region have the new fully automatic Kalashnikovs or Venezuelan surplus weapons. Soon after will come explosives and rocket propelled grenades.
A member of the cult of Che Guevara, Hugo Chávez’ revolutionary ideology will inevitably spread from the barrel of a gun, and before he topples, the destruction and misery he causes will condemn much of South America to economic and social ruin. The American left, blind as always to the horrors visited upon the world by this misbegotten ideology, will enable and support the death of not one, but several democracies.
Found on a laptop in the terrorist camp and released by Colombian security services, a series of letters between FARC hierarchies confirms the substantial support of FARC by Hugo Chavez. A passage from one letter is particularly troubling:
“The gringos will ask for an appointment with the minister to solicit him to communicate to us his interest in discussing these topics. They say that the new president of their country will be Obama and that they are interested in your compatriots. Obama will not support “Plan Colombia” nor will he sign the TLC (Colombian Free Trade agreement). Here we responded that we are interested in relations with all governments in equality of conditions and that in the case of the US it is required a public pronouncement expressing their interest in talking with the FARC given their eternal war against us.” Raul Reyes, FARC Terrorist Commander
Some very foolish and self-important persons feel they can represent themselves as emissaries of a new US administration to the despots and terrorist groups in South America. They may or may not have been speaking with Obama’s blessing. That they talked to FARC at all, and it is not loudly condemned, is chilling. The US has had several congressional delegations visit the region recently. Who was on them? The arrogance and stupidity of so undermining our elected government boggles the mind. Whether it is visiting terror states with American blood on their hands or treating with murderers who currently hold American hostages, it is the sheerest folly and must be denounced and brought into the light of day.
Colombia’s president, Alvaro Uribe, is a determined and capable leader. He has done much to rebuild his war torn nation. His approval rating is an unheard of 80%. He has taken the countryside from guerillas and drug traffickers; the murder rate is less than half that of a decade ago, kidnapping is becoming rare and brutal thugs, from both sides of the political spectrum are brought to justice. He has demobilized 30,000 militia members. The economy is booming. FARC is loosing ground, attacked by police, citizens outraged by their cruelty and a reformed and capable military. Their safe havens are no longer safe. Mr. Uribe is a defender of freedom and democracy that deserves our profound respect, our support and most of all, our loyalty.
Facing imminent defeat, the Marxist killers are using other tactics, the tactics of deceit and disinformation. They are tapping into the gullible left in the United States to influence policy. Using their own words to charm the vain and muddled leadership of the Democrats and appealing to their various ideologies, FARC has succeeded in straining US-Colombian relations and undermining US support for the Colombian Free Trade agreement and military aid. Singing in harmony with the activists of the lefts largest causes such as unions, the MoveOn.Org/Clinton/Soros alliance and everyone else from enviro-fanatics, the NAACP, and Code Pink, they have played Pelosi’s party for the fools that they are.
Colombia will survive. They have been born of the fiery crucible of South American nationhood, uniting as few nations do behind a capable and enlightened leader, a leader that does not promise utopia, but actual prosperity and security. They get it.
If we let the Democrats undermine our alliance with Colombia to appease the far left, no international agreement is safe. Foreign policy becomes just another political tool and our alliances merely matters of political convenience. If we abandon Colombia, as we abandoned Vietnam, we simply will not be trusted. But then, if you believe Hugo Chavez is good for Venezuela you should not be trusted with running a boy scout troop. If you think talking to FARC will get hostages released and atrocities stopped, you are a fool.



By Charles Johnson

The Chicago Tribune has a lengthy article looking into Barack Obama’s youth, and the claims he made in his best-selling memoir, and discovers (imagine my surprise) that there are some rather serious discrepancies between the stories Obama tells and the reality.

Remember reality?

The not-so-simple story of Barack Obama’s youth.

More than 40 interviews with former classmates, teachers, friends and neighbors in his childhood homes of Hawaii and Indonesia, as well as a review of public records, show the arc of Obama’s personal journey took him to places and situations far removed from the experience of most Americans.

At the same time, several of his oft-recited stories may not have happened in the way he has recounted them. Some seem to make Obama look better in the retelling, others appear to exaggerate his outward struggles over issues of race, or simply skim over some of the most painful, private moments of his life.

The handful of black students who attended Punahou School in Hawaii, for instance, say they struggled mightily with issues of race and racism there. But absent from those discussions, they say, was another student then known as Barry Obama.

In his best-selling autobiography, “Dreams from My Father,” Obama describes having heated conversations about racism with another black student, “Ray.” The real Ray, Keith Kakugawa, is half black and half Japanese. In an interview with the Tribune on Saturday, Kakugawa said he always considered himself mixed race, like so many of his friends in Hawaii, and was not an angry young black man.

He said he does recall long, soulful talks with the young Obama and that his friend confided his longing and loneliness. But those talks, Kakugawa said, were not about race. “Not even close,” he said, adding that Obama was dealing with “some inner turmoil” in those days.

“But it wasn’t a race thing,” he said. “Barry’s biggest struggles then were missing his parents. His biggest struggles were his feelings of abandonment. The idea that his biggest struggle was race is [bull].”

Then there’s the copy of Life magazine that Obama presents as his racial awakening at age 9. In it, he wrote, was an article and two accompanying photographs of an African-American man physically and mentally scarred by his efforts to lighten his skin. In fact, the Life article and the photographs don’t exist, say the magazine’s own historians.  Sunday, March 9, 2008


Vote McCain and you’re a sexist pig racist Islamophobe

Vote McCain and you’re a sexist pig racist Islamophobe, by J. Lewis

James Lewis
We all knew the race-gender-homophobe card would be played at some point in this election. Well, it just happened. Mark this date on your calendar: On Sunday, May 8, 2008 the Big Guns of the Left fired both barrels at the same moment. If you’re agin’ Obama or Hillary, you are the embodiment of evil. Islamaphobia has just been added to the heavy burden your soul will have to bear. And don’t you dare deny it.

Here’s WaPo’s subsidiary Newsweek, ready to nail your writhing despicable sexist skin to the wall:
“America is not ready for a female president. I have typed and deleted that sentence five times. It appalls me. It goes against everything I grew up hearing, everything I tell my daughter. But I have come to believe it. I have been convinced not just by nasty bloggers or by Limbaugh the Comic Insult Dog. It’s not because of the far more disturbing bias I have seen in otherwise respectable political commentators, as they gleefully declared Hillary Clinton’s campaign dead and deader. Or even because 34 percent of adults recently confirmed in a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll that they do not think America is ready for a woman president (compared with 26 percent who said we weren’t ready for a black president). Nope, I expected all that. It’s the people I know and respect who have convinced me. It’s the people who have no qualms about making sexist comments and jokes about Hillary-Those cankles! Her pantsuits! Iron my shirt!-who’ve convinced me that, in America, we still do not like our women powerful.” 
It’s your jokes that convict you!
Then there’s Nicholas Kristof, career propagandist for the New York Times, writing in the NYT-subsidiary The International Herald Tribune:  
“The ugliest prejudices in this campaign season are not directly about race. … Sexism seems more of a factor. Americans have typically said in polls that they are less willing to vote for a woman than a black, and Shirley Chisholm (a black woman who ran for president in 1972) always said that she encountered more prejudice because of her sex than her race.

Yet the most monstrous bigotry in this election isn’t about either race or sex. It’s about religion. The whispering campaigns allege that Obama is a secret Muslim planning to impose Islamic law on the country. Incredibly, he is even accused — in earnest! — of being the Antichrist. Proponents of this theory offer detailed theological explanations for why he is the Antichrist, and the proof is that he claims to be Christian — after all, the Antichrist would say that, wouldn’t he? The rumors circulate enough that Glenn Beck of CNN asked the Rev. John Hagee, a conservative evangelical, what the odds are that Obama is the Antichrist.”

You see, Kristof is addressing our European friends, and the question is not, “Is there racism in America?” but rather, “Of all the sins America is guilty of, which is the most despicable? Is it race, gender, favorite sexual sports, religious hatred?” Because you are automatically assumed to be guilty. There is no absolution, you’re destined for Hell if you don’t vote Democrat.
Why is the Left firing at its real enemies — that is, you and me — right now? Because Hillary and Obama are at each other’s throats, of course, and this thing is going to end up with enraged Democrats tearing at  each others’ throats at the convention. It’s the Clintons who dropped the “Hussein” card on Obama. It’s Obama who dropped the “incompetence” card on Hillary — a deadly insult from a feminist point of view. So the Left is fighting the Left.
Solution? Look for outside scapegoats. You, you and you! You’ll do. Up against the wall!
As Puritan Divine Jonathan Edwards famously said, you are all sinners in the hands of an angry God! Oops, no, forget I said that. There’s no God at the New York Times. Scratch that. No, you’re sinners in the hands of all righteously angry progressive Peoples of Oppressed Races, Genders, and Sexual Tastes!!!
Islamophobia has been added to the list of your sins — and don’t you dare deny it, buddy, because we can see your crimson soul with our special brain-o-meter! At least if you’re the New  York Times or the Washington Post.
What’s missing in all this is a gay candidate, so that non-Leftists can be accused of homophobia on top of everything else. Perhaps this gap will be filled in by election time, and that we will get a chance to be beaten up and bullied for our sins against gays as well.
When we get to the general election — huffing and puffing from the long grind — we’ll have white-bread John McCain and his attractive blonde wife. Nobody will have to say a word. Imagine McCain versus Obama or Hillary on TV.   You know who’s the embodiment of Evil. Don’t even check your TV Guide.
James Lewis blogs at dangeroustimes.wordpress.com/



By Ed Morrissey

When attempting to defuse an embarrassing situation, the best strategies rely on early and full disclosure in the hope that the eventual revelations prove anti-climactic. Barack Obama apparently hasn’t learned this yet, but the Tony Rezko trial may wind up schooling Obama on the principle. The Chicago Sun-Times reports that Rezko and his associates provided three times as much money for Obama than the presidential candidate has admitted:

During his 12 years in politics, Sen. Barack Obama has received nearly three times more campaign cash from indicted businessman Tony Rezko and his associates than he has publicly acknowledged, the Chicago Sun-Times has found.

Obama has collected at least $168,308 from Rezko and his circle. Obama also has taken in an unknown amount of money from people who attended fund-raising events hosted by Rezko since the mid-1990s.

But seven months ago, Obama told the Sun-Times his “best estimate” was that Rezko raised “between $50,000 and $60,000? during Obama’s political career.

Obama, who wants to be the nation’s next president, has been purging some of those donations — giving charities more than $30,000 he got from Rezko and three of his business partners referenced in Rezko’s federal indictments. All three attended a lavish fund-raiser Rezko hosted for Obama four years ago.

Obama, however, has kept $6,850 from others who also are referenced in Rezko’s indictments. Obama also has hung on to contributions from doctors whom Rezko helped appoint to a state-government panel involved in some of Rezko’s alleged fraud schemes.

The connections to Obama have received more attention, thanks to the local Chicago media rather than their national counterparts. One of Rezko’s associates turns out to be Ali D. Ata, who worked in Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich’s administration. Ata now faces fraud charges for writing a letter on state letterhead on behalf of Rezko that lied well enough to get millions of dollars in loans. Rezko brought Ata into Obama’s camp as a contributor.

There is also Joseph Aramanda. He faces no charges in the Rezko scandals, but Aramanda allegedly played a role in a scheme Rezko used to exploit the Illinois state teachers fund. Aramanda also had a son who worked on Obama’s staff, and he also contributed to Obama’s campaign.

All of this — and more — centers on the Rezko-Obama relationship. Obama has tried to minimize his connections to Rezko, understandably, as Rezko sinks deeper into his federal trial. The Sun-Times and other Chicago newspapers keep finding more and more connections and showing that Rezko was more than just a contributor to an election campaign. Obama and Rezko have significant ties, and at the very least it calls into question how Obama could have remained ignorant of his friend’s corruption while at least indirectly benefiting from it.

He might convince people he had no knowledge of it. However, as more connections come to the light, the best he can argue is that he is so naive and unschooled that he couldn’t see corruption where it obviously exists. If so, how can he argue that he’s sophisticated enough to run the nation?

UPDATE: This story comes from June 2007.  I didn’t notice that when I first read the story.  It’s interesting, though, that no one has thought to follow this up since then, at least not in the national media.  I think this shows why the Chicago media displayed such frustration in last week’s press conference in Texas in that their national colleagues haven’t exactly lit up the wires in picking up on their work.  Sunday, March 9, 2008


The Epicycles of Global Warming

The Epicycles of Global Warming

By James Lewis

When True Believers begin to harbor doubts, they don’t immediately give up the faith. It’s too scary; too much pride and money has been invested; too many jobs and reputations are on the line; and they need to find a new reason to live. So they always try to add on new wrinkles and qualifications to their crumbling story.

Today that’s happening with the global warming cult.
“Human-caused global warming” has now officially been re-named “climate change” to explain the inconvenient truth that the winter of 2007-8 was the coldest in a century, in spite of all those tons of “greenhouse gas” being spewed into the air from all the new factories in China and India. Worldwide temps dropped 0.6 of a degree C in one year.   That may not sound like a lot, but it’s more than all the ballyhooed warming in the preceding century. 
If you want to see cult therapy at work, read John Tierney in The New York Times. Tierney is a skeptic who now conducts recovery therapy for the faithful on his Tierney Lab page. It looks like someone at the NYT has finally caught on to the hoax but won’t admit it. So they hired Tierney to break it to the True Believers as gently as possible. Watch how the readers’ blogs are resisting his gentle skepticism; it scares them. They are just Obama suckers who would have fallen for Bill Clinton, when he still had his magic mojo.
In the 1960s social psychologists studied a doomsday cult which made the big mistake of predicting the day of Armageddon.  When that day came and went without crisping the world, the cult leaders didn’t admit they were wrong. Instead, they discovered reasons why doomsday had been postponed. It was a triumph of faith over facts. That’s how stock market bubbles and busts work. It’s how the jihadi Armageddon cult of Tehran will crumble, if we’re all very lucky.
How can this super-cold winter happen? It’s got all the faithful a little worried. Climate modeling teams all over the world are sweating 24/7 to deal with it. They are producing epicycles for their models, to hang on the warming story.
“Epicycles” are cycles on top of cycles.  When traditional astronomy began to collapse in the years before Copernicus, True Believers reacted by adding lots of little cycles on top of the great cycles of the planetary orbits, to protect their faith. Trouble is, they had to add so many cycles on top of cycles that eventually, the whole system became a laughingstock. Ultimately you could explain anything you wanted — after the fact.
The Polish astronomer Nicholas Koepernick — called Copernicus —  pointed out that a sun-centered planetary model could get rid of all those epicycles with elegant simplicity. You only had to assume that the planets are going around the sun, not the earth. Suddenly all those cycle-on-cycle orbits simplified into near-circular ellipses. But he only saw the page proofs of his book De Revolutionibus on his death bed. He didn’t want to share the fate of Giordano Bruno, who was burned at the stake, or Galileo Galilei, who was put under house arrest by Pope Urban VIII and forbidden to publish in the last years of his life.   Because mobs of True Believers can get pretty nasty before they give up.   
Today we see a spate of new computer models showing up in science journals, each one attempting to rescue some piece of the ecological goose that laid the golden egg. These are often not called “models.” With utter dishonesty, they are labeled “new studies of the climate.” But they are not empirical studies at all. They are little math models with new epicycles, but still based on the same gross oversimplifications. To reassure the True Believers, they always end with the same punch line: Yes, Virginia, there really is a global warming faerie, and all the doom-sayers are right.
How good are the assumptions in these models? Well consider the fate of Ferenc M. Miskolczi  (pronounced Ferens MISkolshee), a first-rate Hungarian mathematician, who has  published a proof that “greenhouse warming” may be mathematically impossible. His proof involves long equations, but the bottom line is that the warming models assume that the atmosphere is infinitely thick. Why? Because it  simplifies the math. If on the other hand, you assume the atmosphere is about 100 km thick (about 65 miles) — which has the big advantage of being true — the greenhouse effect disappears! No more global warming.  
Miskolczi once worked for NASA, but resigned in disgust when they would not allow him to publish his work. (It appeared in the peer-reviewed Hungarian journal Weather, and looks legit). So it’s the global warming faithful of NASA Goddard Space Center, notably True Believer Godfather James Hansen — who are always complaining to the media about Bush Administration censorship — but who have ended up censoring their own scientific skeptic. Cosmic justice for NASA, you might say.
Censoring skeptics is an admission of weakness. That’s why Pope had to shut up Galileo — he couldn’t win on the facts. The science establishment is now going after the Galileos of our time for the same reason, because orthodox scientists are pretty frail human beings and don’t really like to be wrong. Reasoned skepticism is not something our papacy of politicized science wants to hear. Off with their heads! 
That’s the real global warming tragedy — a speculative bubble in science, which happens all the time, has now been protected by the politicians, and allowed into an ugly and expanding volcanic pressure point. It is threatening to erupt and engulf climate modeling around the world. Scientists are pretty ruthless with open failure.
Politicized science is a far bigger disaster than NASA’s Challenger tragedy. Americans understood the Challenger tragedy as a technical mistake at the leading edge of space exploration. What we cannot understand or forgive is corruption of scientific inquiry to push a money agenda.
When this farce is finally exposed, heads must roll. Not for being wrong about the global warming hoax, because anybody can be wrong — but for politicizing normal scientific debate. Politicized science kills science. This is one festering boil that has to be lanced.
James Lewis blogs at dangeroustimes.wordpress.com/

Wafa Sultan Clashes with Egyptian Islamist Part 1 & 2