Nina May

McAuliffe says, “This administration just doesn’t get it, our economy is adrift today, they want to see leadership . . . . The President has not talked about how we get the economy going.” But despite what Terry says, The American people think the President and Republicans have led on the economy. In a recent Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll, 55% of voters disagreed “with those who say Republicans are . . . not paying enough attention to the economy.”

Then, while throwing stones at Bush and Republicans, Terry denies he made millions from an Enron/Worldcom style free-for-all, by saying on ABC’s “This Week”, “First of all, you have no idea if I made one penny, Sam. I was merely an investor in a company.” But, that’s not what he told the New York Times. “[I]n 1997 . . . Mr. Winnick offered Mr. McAuliffe an opportunity to invest in a new Internet-related venture that would own and operate undersea fiber-optic cables. The venture, now known as Global Crossing Holdings, had potential risks and rewards. It also faced myriad regulatory issues in Washington and around the world. For Mr. McAuliffe and all the other early investors, Global Crossing turned out to be a bonanza. Mr. McAuliffe says his initial $100,000 investment grew to be worth about $18 million, and he made millions more trading Global’s stock and options after it went public last year. And recently, Mr. McAuliffe said he took a telecommunications deal to Mr. Winnick that Global Crossing will put money into. Mr. McAuliffe says he is a dealmaker and a matchmaker.”

And again, while Terry is castigating Bush for touring the country we forget that HE was the moving force behind the infamous Lincoln Bedroom fund-raisers at the Clinton White House. McAuliffe’s first fundraising] project was to organize breakfasts, luncheons, and coffees with the President for about twenty ’major supporters’ at a time – to ’offer these people an opportunity to discuss issues and exchange ideas with the President. McAuliffe’s second [fundraising] project was to offer the very top supporters ’overnights’ at the White House.

Then, referring to the President’s Economic Forum in Waco Texas this month, Terry McAuliffe claimed that “The problem is no Democrats are invited to the Economic Forum” . . . . but at least 43 of the Forum attendees have donated to Democrat candidates and party organizations. Since 1990, Forum attendees have given over $255,000 to Democrats.

The PACs Of Economic Forum attendees the Teamsters, Seafarers, Carpenters, And Operating Engineers Unions have contributed more than $8,000,000 to Democrats in the past two election cycles, over $6,600,000 more than they have given to Republicans.

The PACs of some corporations whose CEOs are attending the economic forum have given approximately equal contributions to both Democrats and Republicans, including The American Medical Association (AMA), American Express, The New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), And Hewlett-Packard.

Guest speakers at the forum are respected leaders in their fields – not just “A bunch of donors.” Panelists include Doug McCarron, General President of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters; Tom Donohue, President and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; Michael Novak, business ethicist at the American Enterprise institute; Charles Schwab, Chairman and CEO of Charles Schwab, Inc; Karen Kerrigan, President of the Small Business Survival Committee; John Chambers, President and CEO of Cisco Systems; Glen Barton, CEO of Caterpillar; and Charles Vest, President of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Attendees include more than twelve university professors who are experts in their fields – Not just “A bunch of donors,” as Terry classified them. These experts, among others, include Michael Useem, Director of the Center for Leadership and Change Management at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business; Terry Maness, Dean of Baylor University’s Hankamer School of Business; Susan Dudley from the Mercatus Center at George Mason University; Richard Burkhauser, a Cornell University professor and expert in Social Security, disability, retirement and pension policies; John Shoven of Stanford University; Jonathon Skinner, a professor of economics at Dartmouth College; Jagdish Bhagwati of Columbia University; Jim Henderson and Joe McKinney, professors of economics at Baylor University; and Mark Pauly, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania.

It must be difficult for liberals to decide, from minute to minute, which moral high ground they are going to perch their hypocritical dynasty upon. Where to begin? In no particular order let’s just plumb the depths of their inconsistencies. One minute the news is abuzz with the brilliant findings of sex experts that sex with children is not only normal, but alas, healthy. Except of course if it happens to be with Catholic priests. That sin is then far more egregious than Muslims who imprison women and force young girls to marry as young as eight, keeping millions of people in virtual oppression, while, of course extolling the virtues of Islam over Christianity. (You guys saw this coming didn’t you?)

Then, while President Clinton uses our military as a cover-up for his sexual indiscretions, authorizing the bombing of two sovereign nations, with showing no hard evidence that either were culpable of a crime, Bush is attacked for a fourth generation sale of a photo he has probably never seen. Forget all the rose garden ceremonies with Bill Clinton, and every victim of every crime ever committed against man, since the beginning of time, appearing not only on the DNC website, but in their money-for-photos mass mailings. Did I hear someone say Columbine and . . . guns are bad? Any crime committed with a gun, and Bill was there mugging for the cameras and getting a piece of the photo action on the side.

So Reagan is the only one with Alzheimer’s? Did we all forget that when Bill Clinton, on several occasions had the opportunity to not only kill Osama Ben Laden, but extradite him to America for trial, he refused because he didn’t want to get big bad Saddam Hussein mad at him? Now that is courageous. But somehow, it is George W. Bush’s fault that 20 crazy men, training here in America, under Bill’s watch, with his immigration group asleep at the wheel, fly planes into buildings? The same people castigating him for his lack of prophetic skills are the very same voices chiding Tom Ridge for telling us of the plans they have foiled. He is met with, stop scaring the American people. We don’t want to hear what you stopped or prevented, or what might happen . ..that is not good for the economy.

So, let’s get it straight . . .do they want to know when an attack might occur or not? Do they want it to be foiled so lives are saved . . . or not? Or do they just want to continue collecting faux political arrows for their pathetically empty quiver to try and skewer a president trying to protect them . . . .and the rest us.

And now Mr. Rogers goes to Cuba under the same delusional cloud that hovers over Bill Clinton, that somehow he is still relevant. I guess during his trip they didn’t bother to take him to the prisons filled with people who have voiced disagreement with his charming host. He was not told that, in spite of the embargo by America, that the rest of the world still trades freely with Cuba and guess what . . . nothing has changed. Free trade has not flung wide the prison gates and set the captives free, it has done exactly what every Republican president has said it has done since the imprisonment of millions of people . . .it has served to prop up a petty dictator whose ideas died with the dinosaurs but who still receives the hushed whispers of adoration by Communists/Fascists who get a strange tingle around power.

And let’s not forget the poster boy of the radical left . . . the one and only . . . Yes Sir, it’s Arafat. In short, he is Israel’s Timothy McVeigh. He felt he had a just cause, worthy of taking out hundreds of lives, but the citizens of this civilized nation saw differently, and in their very civilized fashion, without a peep or boo from the usual anti-capital punishment suspects, he was fried. (Short diversion into “Inconsistentville”). .. capitol punishment is ok, IF, they agree that the crime is horrible enough …and not before.) OK, so, we have yet another petty little dictator who was not real good at either history or geography, holding an entire nation hostage by blowing up school buses and pizza parlors, and guess what . . . the liberals of the world love this guy. Now, why didn’t they rally behind Timothy McVeigh? Why didn’t they champion his cause of the struggle against the oppressive, successful, western bastion of democracy . . . the USA? His PR guy obviously was not as cunning and clever as Yes Sir’s.

So, I leave you with this. As we dissect every single meeting that President Bush has had with people who told him that Osama Bin Laden was armed, dangerous, and aimed, yet once again at the US . . . will we do the same for the man who REALLY caused all this to happen . . . Bill Clinton? I think the dems have bitten off a little more than they can chew in their total and absolute disdain and abhorrence of the American people. They see us as willing sheep to the media slaughter, believing every little tail and fiction they spin in their webs of hypocrisy. But this time, it is up to the American people to say, ok, we might be comatose, and have the attention span of a gnat, but we aren’t stupid. And . . . if the American people buy into this, and believe the spin and decide in two years that the Republicans are bad and they need a new president like Jimmy Carter or Billy Clinton, then I guess I just wasted 20 minutes of my life by writing this. Better that, than 3000 more innocent people killed with spins, lies and hypocrisy.

Hopefully, since the ruling by the Federal Appeals Court Panel that the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional, more people will finally get it that judicial appointments are important. If people are concerned about the ruling and feel that the courts might be eyeing the Declaration of Independence and some favorite patriotic hymns for censorship, then now is the time to contact the Senators who are sitting on judicial nominations and tell them to do their job . . .or find another one.

But what is very interesting about the finger pointing in this 2 to 1 vote is that the democrats are quick to point out that the wackiest explanation for the ruling, came from a Nixon appointee. That means this guy has been there for over a quarter of century and was appointed when the Senate understood the mandate of Advise and Consent. He was there before religious profiling was common place with judicial appointees and a president’s choice was considered the prerogative of the victor. Neither party was trying to ’’stack’’ the court by providing a litmus confirmation process. He was obviously considered, by President Nixon, a fellow Californian, to be a good, honest, competent judge.

So what happened in 25 years to make an otherwise sane man, think that a pledge that millions of Americans have been reciting for over a hundred years, is suddenly unconstitutional? What has happened in America that a second grader complaining about being taught about the legitimacy of alternative lifestyles is silenced and ridiculed, but another who complains that just hearing the word ’’God’’ is offensive can have her day in court?

Where is the American Civil Liberties Union to express outrage at this court sponsored censorship? Remember, they are the ones that feel that libraries should not have any filters on their computers in case perverts want to come in and download porn next to your little girl. She has no right to be offended by that. Her rights are silenced. But if that someone says the pledge of Allegiance in that same library, uttering those very offense words, ’’under God,’’ then somehow she should be protected from this horrible act.

Where are the Hollywood elite who still write their movies about the McCarthy blacklisting era where people’s views were inspected, dissected and silenced if they did not conform to the views of a small group of bullies. They are incensed that not only were views silenced, but that freedoms were denied of people who, by association, were considered to be enemies of the state. Is God not worthy of their righteous indignation? Are words that have been uttered by millions of American citizens for almost 50 years not worthy of their usual rhetoric of First Amendment protection? No one is ever forced to say the pledge . . . so to determine that it is unconstitutional calls into question every utterance in this land of the word God or the use of a reference to His deity. God Bless America could become outlawed in public buildings.

We have been there, done that, and have dozens of tee-shirts from communist countries who went down this same, dead end road, only to find that the gods they erected for themselves were gods that determined who was more valuable, and considered by the state, to be worthy of life. We have seen people imprisoned for their beliefs, their faith, the color of their skin, the political party they belong to, what books they have in their homes, whether they wear glasses and can read . . . etc. And it all begins with the government deciding that it knows best, above any and all, imagined or real, Supreme Being, and that all reference to said Being must be outlawed so that the perfectible man might have final and complete control over his own destiny. Except that, to insure this happens properly, it is only a handful determining what that destiny should be for the rest of us. It is one father determining that his 2nd grade daughter is somehow offended, because HE says she is, therefore the rest of the class, and the country should be summarily silenced. If I am offended by him, can I have him silenced? Where does it end?

This decision is a wakeup call to Senators who have been playing fast and lose with the constitution themselves, and taking on as their constitutional duties, the selection of judges. But it should serve as a much bigger wakeup call to the rest of America that has slipped into a state of complacency on issues that seem on the surface, benign inconveniences, while the foundation of their very liberties, freedoms and . . . country are being eroded and reconfigured in the image of a handful of people who arrogantly believe they know what is best for everyone. That is demagoguery which leads to tyranny, which leads to people on their knees praying to God for liberation from this man-made hell.

Now, EVERYONE Knows What The Terrorists Are Planning to Do . . .

Arafat warned that if Israel does not withdraw from Palestinian held territory immediately, “enabling our people to practice their legitimate rights of establishing the independent Palestinian State with Jerusalem as its capital, the whole region will witness a disastrous explosion that will impact not only the region but the stability of the whole world.” [The Jerusalem Post Internet Edition, June 8, 2002]

Now, if it was Osama Bin Ladin saying this, everyone would be outraged and insist upon turning up the heat to bring him to justice. But suddenly, when his fellow terrorist in arms, hiding behind a self-proclaimed position of “world leader” says this, everyone quickly dons their appeasement posture and says, “We better listen to him, he will do it you know.”

What happened to the words of almost every American president, forced to answer to terrorists demands; “We do not deal with terrorists”? Why then do we continue to negotiate with the most infamous exporter of terrorism in the world? A man who encourages innocent young people to do his dirty work for him, while taking money from his partner-in-murder, Saddam Hussein . . . who has recently upped the anti for families whose kids strap on dynamite for his sake.

The big question is . . . if this man has such little value for human life, if the parents of these kids who encourage them to kill themselves, have such little regard for their own children, why should the world worry that they are being killed? Their own parents don’t even care. They are getting paid to have their children kill themselves. They are getting rewards in heaven for getting killed . . . oh, only if they take some more innocent people out with them though. How hypocritical. And we deal with this man as though he is a legitimate leader, a trustworthy broker of peace? The only type of peace that Yassar Arafat will be satisfied with is spelled . . . P-I-E-C-E. A piece of each Palestinian child for a larger piece of land that never belonged to him in the first place.

How do you deal with thugs, murderers, terrorists? You deal with them consistently. You don’t encourage this behaviour by elevating one that happens to be recognized by other world nuts as a leader . . . just because he says he is. Why not take someone like a Timothy McVeigh then, and instead of executing him as the terrorist and thug that he was, elevate him to position of leader of a “just cause,” give him a platform from which to speak, and pressure those with integrity and courage to accept that this man’s cause far outweighs whatever means he employs to make that cause a reality.

That is the concept of situational ethics at its best and is the byproduct of an educational system that has sapped common sense and decency from our elected leaders. If the situation warrants a terrorist act, then that is acceptable. If we don’t agree with the cause, then the terrorist is executed. How can you rule and lead with such inconsistent standards of justice?

When Arafat promises there will be a large explosion that will impact the entire world, the media elite get this warm tingle all over that justice for the poor Palestinians will be served. They don’t recoil in horror and insist that this madman be taken out . . . like they clamour for the removal of Osama Bin Laden . . . or Timothy McVeigh. What is the difference? Are we supposed to wait now and see what that big explosion is and where? Will we only act if it affects America?

When you prop up a petty dictator like Yassar, then you reap what you sow . . . and we have allowed a master-terrorist to walk amongst us, unmolested, as a legitimate voice of freedom and peace. If there is such an explosion, and we don’t treat this man as the enemy of civility that he is, then we have no one to blame but ourselves for the deaths such a promised explosion will cause. Can America live with that? Can we live wi th a known terrorist amongst us, holding all our lives as hostage to his demented demands? The choice is ours . . . while we still have the freedom to make it.

Now, EVERYONE Knows What The Terrorists Are Planning to Do . . . so the Dems can stop pointing fingers at Republicans (especially when they gave Clinton a free pass for 8 years)

We recently had the opportunity to conduct a detailed review of a captured Al Qaeda training tape. The tape was apparently produced for Al Qaeda internal use and did not appear to be an external propaganda production. The tape showed Al Qaeda operatives engaging in a number of training exercises including small arms firing ranges, live-fire room entry, and numerous mixed live-fire/role-player type of scenarios.

Scenarios included: Assassinations, Kidnappings, Bombings, and Small unit raids on various types of targets. The training depicted in these scenarios was clearly for export according to an intelligence expert that commented on the tape.

“None of these training scenarios depicts the type of fighting that Al Qaeda engages in within Afghanistan.” Detailed planning, diagramming and walk-through’s followed by live-fire exercises were the norm. There were a lot of role playing, scenario type of interactions. The role players made aggressive moves simulating resistance at various points throughout the scenarios. All such resistance was met with immediate and brutal
countermeasures by the terrorists. There was no presumed compliance on the part of the terrorists.

The effort to produce detail and realism in training was impressive. These people are using extremely effective training methods!

The following points were seen REPEATEDLY and ROUTINELY throughout the training exercises:

1. Use of standard military small unit tactics with multiple elements. (Assault, Security and Support elements)
2. Coordination with sub-elements via hand-held FM radios.
3. Use of pick-up trucks by the assault element to conduct raids/assassinations (shooters concealed in bed of truck).
4. Use of Motorcycles by the security element (as well as in the historical role as a shooting platform for drive by shootings/assassinations.)
5. Use of explosives upon withdrawal from the objective.
6. Use of vehicle horn to signal withdrawal (and initiation of explosives.)
7. Detailed planning and rehearsal of all actions.
8. Exercise of prisoner handling procedures. From initial contact, to search and control, to execution of prisoners. Role players could be heard begging not to be killed (IN ENGLISH). Terrorists practiced commands in English also.
9. Multiple man room entries. Typically one or two, 2-man teams that assumed a back to back position near the center of the room.
10. Distraction devices used prior to room entry. Fuse lit devices (improvised?)
11. Multiple breach points into structures and into individual rooms.All scenarios were practiced live-fire. Including those that involved role players. Paper targets and role players were interspersed in the same scenarios. (The terrorists showed good muzzle awareness and control.) The weapons handling was NOT haphazard. All terrorist operatives carried and fired their weapons using the same techniques.

Some specific weapons handling idiosyncrasies are:

1. Handguns were carried in high ready.
2. Long guns (AK variants) were carried and fired rotated 90 degrees (ejection port up)

Specific scenarios included:

1. Targeting of law enforcement officers in ambush / assassinations.
   • Faked disabled vehicle with shooters concealed in trunk of car or bed of truck. When officer stops his vehicle behind “disabled vehicle” assault is initiated by driver blowing horn. Target was first engaged with rifle fire from the vehicle, terrorists then debussed to administer “coup de grace” at close range.
   • An explosive device was thrown into the LE vehicle on exfiltration. This was one of a number of scenarios that were shown first as a diagram and explanation, then progressing to dry fire walk through and finally to a live-fire exercise. Target location was shown as a 6 lane divided highway with the terrorist vehicle located just prior to the exit/cloverleaf (to allow multiple exfiltration routes and security overview.
   • There aren’t any such highways in Afghanistan and damn few in the Middle East. In one iteration of this scenario the security/overwatch element was exercised firing on possible responding LEOs.
2. Residential assassination. Innocuous looking person (weapon concealed) knocks on door of residence. Stands in view of peephole and answers question from resident through closed door. When resident opens door terrorist draws and fires, emptying weapon into victim.
3. Assassination on golf course. Target was on the green (at the pin/flag.) A Rocket Propelled Grenade (RPG) was fired at a vehicle adjacent to the green (VIP security element?) to initiate the hit. Target was then engaged with rifle fire.
4. Two and four-man live-fire room entry (2-man back to back technique) with target discrimination (shoot/no shoot targets).
5. Raid on compound (Kidnapping). One person taken. Initiated with RPG. Initiation was when Guard Shack was taken out with grenades. Primary target building was engaged with RPG. Primary target building was entered through multiple breach points (through explosive breach of wall and through windows.) Exfiltration was by truck with motorcycle security element in overwatch positions.
6. Drive up kidnapping of target walking down the street.
7. Use of tunnels/storm drains/sewers for infiltration and exfiltration during raids.
8. Rappelling from roof of building to make entry on upper floors was shown on more than one occasion.
9. Motorcycle drive-by target practice. Shooter stands up on rear pegs and extends arms over driver. Excellent muzzle awareness and control.
10. Grenades thrown into second story windows by motorcycle drive-bys.

MULTIPLE SCENARIOS/EXERCISES involved raids on buildings with a large number of occupants (school or office building?)

These raids followed a standard pattern:

1. Covert/surreptitious entry into building and movement to initial points.(Rifles hidden on persons and in bags/cases carried into building.)
2. Initiation with extreme violence of action. Any resisters are shot.
3. Immediate positive control and search of prisoners. Any resisters, or anyone they don’t like the look of, are shot.
4. Segregation of prisoners into manageable groups. (Explosives were displayed to gain psychological dominance over prisoners.)
5. Movement of selected prisoners in small groups to the roof where terrorists posture and make statements for the press/cameras.
6. Prisoners executed one-by-one in front of the press/cameras.
7. All scenarios involving prisoners ended in execution of the prisoners and none included a plan for exfiltration of the terrorists. They plan to kill the prisoners and to die in place.

The major take home lesson here is that although the enemy is known to be seeking the ability and opportunity to use weapons of mass destruction and of an unconventional nature, such as hijacked airliners, they are also spending a lot of time training to carry out attacks the old-fashioned way. Attacks executed by small groups of dedicated personnel equipped with little more than small arms.

There is information to the effect that the “perfect day” as seen by Al Qaeda would combine attacks designed to produce the maximum number of casualties with attacks that would give them the opportunity to get “face time” on the news channels to deliver their rhetoric.

For maximum effect these attacks would take place nearly simultaneously at multiple geographically separate locations.

We need to address, in training and in personal preparation, the differences between a typical criminal victimization and a terrorist incident in terms of early recognition and appropriate response. I.E. The typical bank robbery vs. finding yourself in the middle of a terrorist attack on a “financial institution” (as per the recent FBI warning.)

If you find yourself in the middle of one of these attacks, there will not be time for the SWAT team to intervene on your behalf. Compliance will buy you only a very little time. If you are identified as a potential problem to the terrorists you will be shot!

(They are training to spot Law Enforcement, Security and Corrections Officers as well as armed citizens.) If, by feigned compliance, you make it through the first cut you can expect to be physically restrained and then controlled with threats to the rest of your group and to the other groups.

“We will blow up the women and children in the next room if any of you do not do exactly as we say!”

Your ultimate fate, if you d not resist, is to be ritually executed in front of the television cameras.

In my opinion the best time to act is most likely to be at the initiation of the attack.

Once the terrorists are consolidating on the objective it will be very difficult to take effective action. You must plan on providing effective resistance at the first opportunity! Shoot, move and communicate. Seek cover, use your weapon as required. Attempt to acquire a better weapon system at the first opportunity (do you know how to place an AK into operation?) Keep in mind that before any terrorist action there are many opportunities to interrupt their cycle by detecting their pre-mission activities.

This is where we all can be of assistance. Pay attention to what is going on around you as you go about your daily business. Investigate and report any unusual or suspicious activity that you observe (note vehicle make and model, license plates, personnel descriptions etc.)

A suicide bomber blew himself up at an ice cream parlor in an outdoor mall near Tel Aviv yesterday, also killing two others including a 2-year-old girl whose bloodstained carriage lay on its side after the blast amid a tangle of white plastic chairs. About 20 were wounded.

Now, tell me again, why we are supposed to have compassion for this cause? These people are clones of Timothy McVeigh.

If we condone this type of action, no matter how “worthy” their cause, then we owe McVeigh an apology and invite that same type of terrorist activity here in the United States.

If they are all destined to kill themselves, and that is the highest goal they can attain spiritually, then why does the world go nuts when the Israelis beat them to the punch?

So, they only get a dozen virgins if killed by someone else in their “holy war”? To justify this type of activity is to condone cowardice, murder and nihilism, and it changes the paradigm of their commitment to the cause, and the actions of those trying to stop the carnage.

This is not rocket science.

If you have a group of people, bent on self-destruction, willing to blow themselves up in order to take out innocent babies, then perhaps the time has come to help them achieve that goal.

They can’t have it both ways . . . they can’t call the Israelis murderers, while the PLO, et al, embrace the concept of suicide. They have already determined that their life is cheap, and only has value in death, so what is the point of calling the Israelis murderers when they are just trying to prevent this madness from infecting innocent people.