Not So Young But Angry Conservatives Unite

Getting sick of the progressively worse slant and obvious bias of the media? Got booted out of other sites for offending too many liberals? Make this your home. If you SPAM here, you're gone. Trolling? Gone. Insult other posters I agree with. Gone. Get the pic. Private sanctum, private rules. No Fairness Doctrine and PC wussiness tolerated here..... ECCLESIASTES 10:2- The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of a fool to the left.

Friday, July 29, 2005

Insult to Injury: Van Gogh's Son Assaulted



Brussels, 28 July (AKI) - The 14-year-old son of controversial film director Theo van Gogh, slain by an Islamic extremist last November, is said to have been threatened and assaulted by Moroccan teenagers in Amsterdam and insulted by his classmates. The allegations were made during an interview the boy's grandparents gave to the Dutch television channel Nova. Amsterdam police have not confirmed any threats or aggression against Lieuwe van Gogh.The family lawyer, Gijs de Westelaken, specified that after the murder, which profoundly shocked Dutch society, Lieuwe was attacked by some young Moroccan youths while he was walking the dog. The boy is said to have suffered bruising, but only spoke about the incident to his mother and did not lodge a police complaint.On another occasion he is said to have been threatened with a pistol by two young men of North African descent in the neighbourhood where his father had lived. Neighbours called the police but when they arrived the attackers had fled. According to his grandparents, Lieuwe was also subject to harrassment and insults at school, and was forced to change class after various classmates told him "it is a good thing your father is dead". An Amsterdam police spokesman said that in the aftermath of the murder of the filmmaker, they were in frequent contact with the boy's mother and that Lieuwe had been under police protection for a period.The Dutch director - a descendent of the painter Vincent van Gogh - caused controversy with his film 'Submission', broadcast in the Netherlands last August, which criticised the treatment of women in Islamic society. He was murdered as he cycled to work in Amsterdam last November. The assailant shot Van Gogh and slit his throat. A letter was also pinned to his chest with a knife, quoting the Koran and threatening the Dutch-Somali MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who wrote the script for the film.A young radical Islamist was on Monday given a life sentence for the murder. Dutch-Moroccan Mohammed Bouyeri, 27, had confessed to the killing during his trial and told the court he would do it again if he had the chance. Van Gogh's killing shocked the Netherlands, which is known for its tolerant attitudes and laws, and sparked attacks on mosques and ethnic unrest around the country. Bouyeri was born and raised in Amsterdam, and there is no clear information on how and why he turned to radical Islam.

Religion of peace, huh?

Reminder: if the radicals kill your parents, they will rub your nose in it and try to make sure you join them.

Simple Life Renewed, WHY?

These are the times, when I must yell and scream and cry to God, WHY?!?!?!?!?!?

Simple Life is renewed for ANOTHER SEASON.


Rant on or post on how "reality TV" sucks!

All Four July 21 London Bombing Suspects in Custody

Still being confirmed, but the British police and intel nabbed all four of the suspects in the July 21 attacks, which were described as botched.......


Kudos to the London Police and all its hard work, and apparent success.

Keep your fingers crossed.

Frist goes against Bush Stem Cell Position

This could get interesting. Apparently, Senator and Majority Leader Bill Frist, a normal Bush supporter, is differing in stem cell research. Frist, a former doctor and physician, is for funding in certain forms of stem cell research. Bush is normally against it.


Oliver Stone: Bush Is Wrong Leader, In Spite of 9/11

Conspiracy Nut and Historical Revisionist Oliver Stone has made a recent 9/11 Film. It will have Nicolas Cage and be about a NY Port Authority Officer, and others trapped inside the WTC before they climbed out of the rubbed of Ground Zero. Sounds fine, right?

It may not be right. Here's why.....

Oliver was quoted as saying how Bush "misused his power after 9/11," and being "angry about our involvement in Iraq and the violence of it all."

Oliver Stone is lecturing us on violence when 11 years ago he came out with NATURAL BORN KILLERS which glorified trash TV, serial killers, and our own callousness to violence. Yeah, let's take his commentary on the evils of violence, when he had legs and heads blown off every minute in PLATOON.

Oliver Stone, went to add that he was upset on the failure of ALEXANDER at the box office. He blamed the youth and their lack of caring for history. No, Ollie, their folks and even they know you're a frickin nutcase.

Stone's next film will be revisionism at best, and a distortion and blame USA flick at the worst.


Well, JFK, Stone skewered the US Government, courts, military, and local law enforcement as being accomplices in JFK's death. He started with weird autopsy facts and ballistics reports and branched out and embelished and lied from there.

Nixon, with Anthony Hopkins (great great actor) was somewhat better, but played heavily into the Nixon The Monster theories. And of course, downplayed accomplishments in getting the US out of Vietnam, opening doors with China, and negotiating with the USSR. Let's not forget his efforts to calm the rising crime rate. Sadly, Nixon, was paranoid and ambition did him in in a Macbeth/Shakesperean manner, said Stone. Actually, Nixon was human. Durh, Ollie.

Platoon, inept and cold officers, sadistic and ruthless sergeants, and the drugged up, the cowardly, and the murderous idiots comprised out army in Nam. Thanks Ollie! The names on the Wall appreciate it, NOT!



Thursday, July 28, 2005

Missing Person ALERT

Something off a blog I post at. On a serious note, if you know any info, call the listed authorities.

This is a photo of Cheryl Ann Magner.
She has been missing since the beginning of June. She was last seen in Marin County, Ca.
Please ,anyone who has seen this 17 year old girl please call 415-472-2994. This is her mother's phone number...please do not call unless you have information that would be helpful.Or call the San Rafael police dept. @ 415-485-3000 or
Any information or help would be greatly appreciated by the family.

Good Reason Why Dick Cheney should run for President....

Here's a GREAT REASON for Dick Cheney to run for and win as President of the US.....

Helen Thomas, will shuffle loose her mortal coil. She'll take herself out of the gene pool.


TEXT: Veteran wire reporter Helen Thomas is vowing to 'kill herself' if Dick Cheney announces he is running for president.The newspaper HILL first reported the startling claim on Thursday. MORE

San Diego to ACLU: We're Keeping our Memorial Cross, Shove It!

Well, the ACLU won't like this. San Diego citizens overwhelmingly voted to keep a war memorial that is a cross from being bulldozed, by order of the ACLU.

Read this and focus on the arrogant attorney.

After 15 years of adverse court rulings, the citizens of San Diego voted to save the city's historic Mt. Soledad cross.
The conflict arises from an ACLU lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the 29-foot concrete structure, which has been the center of a war memorial on city land since 1954.
According to an unofficial count, 75 percent of voters decided they want to transfer the city owned site to the federal government where it would be designated as a war memorial.

A memorial there since 1954, and the ACLU wants it gone. Not shocking. Bravo to the MAJORITY of Californians who are sick and tired of the ACLU and its godless stance.

The ACLU's beef, the federal government SHOULD NOT have any crosses or other religious paraphenalia as it may be an implicit endorsement of religion. I suppose the ACLU would love to take white out to the Declaration of Independence and US Constitution as God is mentioned in there. Too bad, most of the US sees these snakes as what they really are.


Hold on, there's more:

But ACLU attorney James McElroy insists the vote is meaningless.
"It still doesn't mean a damn thing," he said, according to the San Diego Union-Tribune. "Voters should have never voted on it. It's a waste of taxpayers' money."

This worthless scum is angry because the vote went against him and his client. It doesn't matter, since it's not what you think, right Jimmy? F#CK YOU.

The battle began in 1989 when Phillip Paulsen, an atheist, filed suit, and a court ordered the city to remove the cross. San Diego responded by placing the property up for sale, with the approval of 76 percent of voters. But the subsequent sale was ruled unconstitutional after Paulsen objected, arguing the sale had the effect of preserving the cross.

Paulsen is welcome to leave the US if he hates the fact that about 75% of the US is religious. Did Paulsen even fight in the war? Or is he some stupid hippy reject who hates everything. Bet this ass isn't even married. Paulsen, take a hint, LEAVE.

Paulsen argues that the cross is a violation of the First Amendment's ban on government establishment of a religion

Point out the section, because it doesn't exist. The church did not establish a church, they put up a memorial which is a cross, which is a memorial to many who were also Christian. Do you think we should remove the rows of white crosses also? Probably.

Here's something I have to say to the pushy and militant atheists and God haters. Shut up. Just leave us alone. If you hate religion, form your own part of the world and move there. I hear North Korea is pretty nice this year. Also, if you think you can whine and ruin this country, because your hate for God and the fact God didn't choose to fulfill your selfish desires, think again. We're not budging and we're sick of your crap.

We know you don't believe in God. And you are in for a shock when he meets you, and you don't go to Heaven. Enjoy explaining your hate then, Paulsen, McEllroy and the other godless punks of this world.

Not all artwork is America Bashing

In response to recent American Bashers posing as artists, moderates and conservatives have responded with their own brand of artwork.


Patriotic Display Aims to Counter War Protest Art
Supporters of the war in Iraq are gathering patriotic artwork to counter the display of a what they consider an offensive painting in the building housing the state attorney general's office.The conservative group Move America Forward plans to display the artwork Thursday on the sidewalk in front of the building at 1300 I Street in downtown Sacramento.It's a response to a painting by Bay Area attorney Stephen Pearcy that shows a red-white-and-blue map of the U.S. in a toilet with the text "T'anks to Mr. Bush." Pearcy explained it was his way of expressing how the country, with the passage of the Patriot Act, was "going down the toilet."The painting is part of an exhibit by law professionals on display in the cafeteria of the building.Pearcy is no stranger to controversy. He raised the ire of many last spring when he hung the effigy of an American soldier at a house he owns in Land Park. The Move America Forward display is not the only response to the painting, however. Pearcy told News10 he has also hate mail via the Internet. Much of it was similar in tone to a message from an Illinois man, who graphically suggested Pearcy should be blindfolded and shot in the head."They don't like it on my private residence, they don't like it when it's in a public place," Pearcy said. "Seems to me they just don't like it, no matter where it is. They just don't want the message to be out there."Pearcy acknowledged he has also received a great deal of positive feedback for his protest art. He and some of his supporters plan to be outside the attorney general's office Thursday afternoon when Move America Forward offers its display of patriotic artwork.


Webb's World: Reasoning With Terrorists?

Read this, great article by Tedd Webb.


Webb's World 07/27/05
By Tedd Webb

Heard Wed. mornings at 6:40 AM on Newsradio 970 WFLA-Tampa

Also available on, & 441 Clear Channel station web pages across America.

I have several close friends who do not believe we are in any danger from terrorists. They do not buy into the theory that it’s “them against us”. Them being Islamo Fascists, and us being everyone else.

That seems to be the mindset of a lot of Liberals who feel “if we just examined ourselves, we would find out why they are angry”. They are angry because we are not Islamo Fascists. It’s that simple.

Check out Egypt, London, and the rest of the bombings around the world. One thing in common. A Radical Muslim was behind it. They even blow their own people up, if their people do not follow the bouncing ball.

It’s time to wake up, we are targets, we will be hit again. Until the entire planet unites in its efforts to curb this mindset, we will be in for a long haul.

Mohammed Atta’s father was quoted in Egypt last week as saying he is happy about the bombings in London, feels there should be and will be many more. He will not be happy until he sees the Islamic flag flying over England, France, America and the entire world. He also said this war could last 50 years.

Oh my, what will those calling Iraq a quagmire, call such a prolonged campaign? And that coming from the horse’s mouth, I don’t think many are ready for such a jaunt.

That’s how I see it!

God blessTeddy


OK, as you know Geena Davis, is a Democrat. Not an obnoxious one on par with Martin Sheen or Meryl Streep, but admits liberal leanings. However, Davis also admits to favoring some conservative positions. Her new show, Commander in Chief, will air on ABC this fall. It's not supposed be a West Wing type show, but Davis says it will tackle with politics. However, she also said it will focus on her character, the first female President of the US, and her immediate family and closest advisors. Interesting premise, but I wonder if or how heavy handed it will get.

Wait and see.


Wednesday, July 27, 2005

Nooooooooooooooo! Dammit! Rummy You MORON!

OK, there's bad news. The White House and Defense Secretary are now insisting we take out the phrase, WAR ON TERROR for STRUGGLE AGAINST FUNDAMENTALISM MINORITIES. What a PC Whitewash! What Gutless Stuffed shirt in a suit thought this up?

It's war, regardless of what you morons say!


Shall we have changed the Civil War from The War Between The States to White Bigots versus Other White Bigots?


I am mad now!

Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees! Good Numbers!

Well, per some of the media, not that will EVER get airplay on the Alphabet Soup Networks, but gets some play. We and our allies have killed or captured over 50,000 of the terrorists and mass murderers in Iraq!


Read on: 50,000 Iraqi insurgents dead, caught
By Sharon BehnTHE WASHINGTON TIMESJuly 26, 2005
U.S. and Iraqi forces have killed or arrested more than 50,000 Iraqi insurgents in the past seven months, a former top general who has headed repeated Pentagon assessment missions to Iraq said yesterday. Gen. Jack Keane, a former deputy chief of staff for the Army, also said the United States has a good picture of the leadership of the vicious insurgency but less of an idea about its mid- and lower-level ranks. "We know who they are," he told a lunch gathering sponsored by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. He said the eight to 10 leaders "occasionally meet -- we've recorded that -- not just in Iraq, but in Jordan and Syria." Gen. Keane's remarks provided a rare insight into the extent of U.S.-led operations against an insurgency that has been responsible for hundreds of deaths in the past few weeks alone. Pentagon officials previously had been quoted as saying 15,000 to 16,000 Iraqis were in custody in Iraq, but spokesman Lawrence DiRita was unable to comment last night on the 50,000 figure offered by the general. "I would highly doubt that anyone has a good handle on the numbers," he said. "I'm not aware of what General Keane has been told, but I know of no number that has been provided to the secretary, briefed by the commanders, or is being tracked by anyone." Gen. Keane, noting that the numbers probably were higher now, said, "In the past six to seven months, we have killed or captured 50,000 insurgents." The retired general has traveled to Iraq twice in uniform and twice as a civilian to assess progress there for the U.S. military.

Very nice, boys, and girls. Keep up the good work! And tie the noose around these goatbanging sacks of amphibian sh#t!


It's still a rough war, but this is news we needed.

Thanks for nothing ABC, NPR, CNN, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, HN, BBC, ITN, and the other Leftie Propaganda tools.

I swear to tell the truth, whole truth and nothing but....

"I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me Allah." may be the new phrase North Carolina Courts may have to issue if the ACLU wins its proposed suit against North Carolina for swearing in witnesses and other court participants in with a Bible, which has been done since 1789.


Ridiculous if you ask me. Since America is 80% Christian, or says it is, why not humor us? If you know Allah and he knows you, why raise a stink on which book you are sworn in with? Well, the ACLU is glad to answer that and are stripping us of our identity again.

State law allows witnesses preparing to testify in court to take their oath either by laying a hand over a "Holy Scripture," by saying "so help me God" without the use of a religious book, or by using no religious symbols.
"We hope that the court will issue a ruling that the phrase 'holy scripture' includes the Quran, Old Testament and Bhagavad-Gita in addition to the Christian Bible," said Jennifer Rudinger, executive director of the ACLU of North Carolina.

North Carolina is gonna fold. I know it. Since the Diversity Freaks want US the Majority to be like everyone else, expect some gutless judge or US Attorney to cave in. The minute the Ten Commandments went, expect Bibles, old symbols and paintings in the courthouse, and even a judge's demeanor to change. And court officers, you better hide or throw away your cross or Star of David. Those are unwelcome in the new world order. Now, the Islamofascists, they are fine, since they are the religion of peace or pieces or whatever......

If this happens in the Deep South, expect the rest of the US to follow suit. Although, there is one comfort. The judges and decisions are for STATE COURTS, not FEDERAL COURTS. So, there may be a glimmer of hope that sanity could prevail.

If not, God Help Us, because Allah may not......

British Muslims Mull Leaving UK since Bombings

Well, you knew this was coming.....



Two-thirds of Muslims Thought of Leaving Britain

Two-thirds of British Muslims have considered leaving the country after the July 7 London bombings, a new poll reveals.
The figure shows that Muslims, to a considerable degree, fear anti-Muslim backlash in Britain due to the suicide attacks.

The Guardian/ICM poll of more than 1,000 British Muslims disclosed:

63 percent said they had thought about whether they want to remain in the UK. Among those aged 35 or over, the figure is 67 percent.

20 percent of those surveyed said that they or a family member have faced abuse or hostility from non-Muslim Britons since the bombings - meaning that tens of thousands of Britain's Muslims may have suffered from increased anti-Muslim sentiment.

80 percent believe that Britain's involvement in Iraq was a factor leading to the bombings, compared to about 65 percent of all Britons polled earlier this month.

57 percent said that Muslim clerics - and leaders - failure to root out extremists is a factor behind the bombings.

90 percent believe violence has no place in a political struggle.

But on a disturbing note, 5 percent said that more attacks would be justified.

And another poll commissioned by the London Daily Telegraph found that 10 percent of Muslims feel "not at all loyal" to Britain, 56 percent said they "can understand" why the bombers did what they did, and 1 percent - which would be 16,000 out of the nation's 1.6 million Muslims - feel that Western society is decadent and Muslims should seek to bring it to an end "if necessary by violence."

Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Green Day Nominated for being Politically Conscious?

Conscious? These twerps? Give me a f#$kin break!

Read this guy, he put it into better words....


From today's Washington Post, in an article on the VMA nominations:

Green Day's eight nominations include six for their socially conscious song "Boulevard of Broken Dreams" and two for the "American Idiot," which also is the name of their critically acclaimed album.
Socially conscious? I don't own the album, but last December I vacationed with a family member who did, and listened to it on the plane. Catchy tunes, no doubt. But nothing short of an all-out Bush-Bash. Why don't we examine these 'socially conscious' lyrics.

Ah-Ah Ah-Ah Ah-Ah Ahhh Ah Ah-Ah Ah-Ah Ah-Ah deep! Granted, Boulevard of Broken Dreams isn't as much of an outright Bush-Bash as American Idiot.

Don't want to be an American idiot. Don't want a nation under the new media. And can you hear the sound of hysteria? The subliminal mindf**k America.

Well maybe I'm the faggot America. I'm not a part of a redneck agenda. Now everybody do the propaganda. And sing along in the age of paranoia.

Socially conscious? More like socially retarded. I just hate all of these singers and bands and actors who think we care what they have to say. I use this analogy often on my radio show, and I'll give it to you here.
Actors and singers are like prostitutes. I pay them for a service, to entertain me, and when they're done providing that service I don't want to hear word one from them. I'm paying them for a service, not for their opinion. However, they seem to think that since we fork over dough for their stuff that it automatically means we care about them and their opinion. Not so, Streisand and company. Get on the stage, sing your songs and leave.
Specifically towards Green Day, it's a shame that perfectly good tunes have to be ruined by politicizing the lyrics.

Enjoy my writing? My blog is at:

I enjoyed this guy, great rant. And very true. I want a political expert, I'll flip to Fox News or the net or turn on News and Talk Radio. I want some asinine assessment on the world by a singer, gimme a celebrity.

Enjoy MTV, you lemmings. I'll be watching something else that Thursday or Friday, if I'm not out.


Who's Really Civilized?

OK, since watching the shuttle launch today, I am of course feeling pride at the US and the Free World launching into exploration yet again. I also find it odd, that we who have advanced in technology and in thinking, are called the barbarians. Let's analyze some of the logic here.

The Islamic Cleric Bakri, called America the evil Empire and Britain a land ripe for destruction. This from a guy who urged on suicide bombers to blast, and murder men women and kids in the London subways and on their landmark red double decker buses. Bakri wants the Brits dead by savage means, but says he is civilized. Sure, Bakri, whatever.

The Germans called us warmongers for stepping up to defeat evil in Iraq and in the Cold War. Warmongers? Irony from the land that brought us panzers, blitzkriegs, U-boats, The Einsatzgruppen, and The Final Solution. Germany says it is pacifist, and welcoming. And in another breather sealed off its borders and is making immigration harder. The Germans say we are uncivilized in how we're not letting in everyone else into the US, but they have strictly enforced quotas on Turks and other non-white immigrants. Germany is talking out of both sides of its mouth and apparently from both of its faces.

The left says America is a thinking man's nightmare, much like the Middle Ages. Sure, this from the morons who are for a late term abortion procedure that would make the hooded torture and rack attendants cringe. Yes, we're soooooo enlightened offing 30 million and counting unborn children. God Help us if we get anymore "enlightened."

The Radical Muslims says the West is a land of degradation and stagnation. Well, I got two comparisons for them. First, degradation is what they do to the women making them wear Burkahs all year round. Degradation is taunting a hostage before sawing off their head and chanting Allah Akbar. Degradation is something that the majority of supposed moderates sit by and watch, and privately contest, but do nothing about. Second, stagnation happens when you live in the 7th Century, while we're launching space shuttles, satellites, and creating better things for a better standard of living.

So, who is civilized and who is not?

The land that guarantees equality under the law(yeah we had segregation and other problems), no life liberty and property without due process (unless you're our Supreme Court ruling in private property matters). The inventors of the airplane, cotton gin, anesthesia, space shuttle, and other marvels. The land that shed blood from over 2 Million dead in defense and preservation of our liberties and saving allies and other lands from tyranny. The land that has freedom of religion? Are we uncivilized?

Or is the land that guarantees law by an angry mullah and no due process civilized? The inventors of jihad, Hezbollah, and filming beheadings? A region that is forced to live in the 7th century due to radical minorities? Are they more civilized? They could be if they acted against the terrorists and radical sheikhs and mullahs.

Civilization is a choice, not just a birthright.
Civilization is willingness to progress and carry the best of our heritage with us.
Civilization is technological advancement with the realization of our Creator giving us brains to accomplish much for good, if we so choose.
Civilization is NOT Terrorism.
Civilization is NOT stoning women for adultery or honor killings in the family.
Civilization is NOT killing 3,000 men women and kids on a single day in New York, DC or elsewhere.

We're not perfect here, but we intend on moving forward. The enemy, the leaders, intend on going a few steps back, and could give whole new meaning to The Dark Ages.

Now, again, who is civilized and who is not.

Proud Day for NASA, USA, and mankind

Shuttle Discovery launched today, no problems..... so far.

Shuttle Discovery Blasts Into Orbit
By MARCIA DUNNThe Associated PressTuesday, July 26, 2005; 10:59 AM
CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. -- Discovery and seven astronauts blasted into orbit Tuesday on America's first manned space shot since the 2003 Columbia disaster, ending a painful, 2 1/2-year shutdown devoted to making the shuttle less risky and NASA more safety-conscious.
At stake were not only the lives of the astronauts, but also America's pride in its technological prowess, the fate of the U.S. space program and the future of space exploration itself.
"Our long wait may be over. So on behalf of the many millions of people who believe so deeply in what we do, good luck, Godspeed _ and have a little fun up there," launch director Mike Leinbach told the astronauts right before liftoff.
Space program employees and relatives of both the Discovery and Columbia crews watched nervously as the shuttle rose from its pad at 10:39 a.m., climbed into a hazy midsummer sky, pierced two decks of clouds, and headed out over the ocean in the most scrutinized launch in NASA history. Two chase planes and more than 100 cameras documented the ascent from every possible angle to capture any sign of flying debris of the sort that doomed the last flight.
There was no immediate word from NASA on launch damage to the spacecraft. The multitude of images will not be fully analyzed _ and NASA will not give a final verdict on whether Discovery is safe to return to Earth _ until halfway through the 12-day flight.
The fuel-gauge problem that thwarted a launch attempt two weeks ago did not resurface before liftoff, to NASA's great relief, and the countdown was remarkably smooth. The space agency had been prepared to bend its safety rules to get the shuttle flying.
NASA did not immediately say how the sensors performed during the climb to orbit, but everything appeared to go well.
A TV camera mounted on Discovery's giant orange external fuel tank provided an unprecedented view of the shuttle's climb to orbit and the tank being jettisoned back toward Earth as designed.
During the mission, commander Eileen Collins and her crew will deliver supplies to the international space station and test new techniques for inspecting and patching the shuttle in orbit.
The 114th shuttle liftoff came after painful self-examination on NASA's part, extensive safety modifications to the spacecraft and many months of hurdles and setbacks. A launch attempt July 13 was scrapped after one of four critical hydrogen-fuel gauges in the external tank failed just two hours before liftoff.
Hundreds of engineers chased the problem, which had cropped up three months earlier in a fueling test. In the end, they could not fully explain the trouble but fixed some bad electrical grounding inside the shuttle in hopes that might solve it.
The space agency said it was prepared to relax a rule, instituted after the 1986 Challenger explosion, that required that all four gauges be working for launch.
NASA Administrator Michael Griffin said the shuttle was as safe as NASA could make it, but was still a risky venture.
"Some things simply are inherent to the design of the bird and cannot be made better without going and getting a new generation of spacecraft. That's as true for the space shuttle as it is for your toaster oven," he told The Associated Press on the eve of launch.
Columbia was brought down by a suitcase-size piece of foam insulation that broke off the big external fuel tank during liftoff and caused a gash that allowed hot gases into the wing during the return to Earth 16 days later on Feb. 1, 2003. But NASA could barely make out the blow in the photographs of the launch because the few available images were poor.
The space agency added more and better surveillance cameras for Discovery's launch and sent up a pair of camera-equipped planes to chase the flight. Pictures will also be taken from space, by the astronauts themselves and spy satellites. Also, once Discovery arrives at the space station on Thursday, the two residents will photograph the shuttle as it completes a slow flip.
NASA's chief acknowledged a lot is riding on the flight: the shuttle program, the space station program, President Bush's plan to send astronauts back to the moon and on to Mars _ and seven lives.
"It's about hope, it's about imagination, it's about the future, and when you take away a great space program, you take away a lot of people's future," Griffin told the AP. "What's riding on this flight is people's hope for the future."
Thousands descended on Cape Canaveral for the launch, including first lady Laura Bush, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, her brother-in-law, and members of Congress, as well as relatives of the 14 fallen Columbia and Challenger astronauts. They sang the national anthem just minutes before liftoff.
In addition to Collins, the crew members are pilot Jim Kelly; Soichi Noguchi of Japan; Stephen Robinson; Andrew Thomas; Wendy Thomas; and Charles Camarda.
Griffin's message to the lost crews' families: "We have left no stone unturned that we know of to make this flight and every other one as safe as we can do it."
In all, nearly 50 safety improvements were made to the shuttle in the wake of Columbia tragedy. The fuel tank was extensively redesigned, with less foam insulation than before but extra heaters to prevent a dangerous buildup of ice once it is filled with super-cold liquid propellant. NASA feared falling ice could be as lethal as chunks of foam.
Also, dozens of motion and temperature sensors were embedded in the wings to detect any blows from debris.
The space agency also revamped the way it makes decisions and listens to dissenting views, especially from lower-level employees. Columbia accident investigators blamed the catastrophe in part on a broken safety culture, or a tendency to downplay risks and discourage engineers from speaking up.
Unlike the Columbia astronauts, who had no knowledge of the gaping hole in their spacecraft's wing and no realistic way of plugging it, the Discovery crew has a variety of inspection and repair techniques on board. But they are all untested. And even the best of the bunch could not fix a hole the size of the one that destroyed Columbia.
The astronauts will try out the repair kits on deliberately broken samples of thermal tiles and panels. They will practice working with goo and other patching materials and different types of brushes, putty knives and a caulking gun.
They also will spend their first full day in space using a remote-control, 50-foot boom to inspect the shuttle's most vulnerable areas _ the wings and nose cap _ for any cracks and holes.
If any serious damage is found, NASA will have to choose between attempting repairs or, more likely, moving the shuttle crew into the space station for at least a month to await rescue by space shuttle Atlantis, which is already being readied for liftoff. Both scenarios are extremely risky.
Faced with so many uncertainties, the liftoff was a relatively solemn affair. NASA did not plan to hold the usual post-launch party.
Griffin said he had no intention of celebrating until he hears Collins announce "wheels stop" at touchdown. "We'll be thrilled with every successful step we complete," he said earlier this month, "but you won't see people really let go until they have landed safely."
Discovery is hauling an almost three-year back order of supplies and replacement parts to the half-built space station and its two residents. Construction has been on hold since the last shuttle visit in late 2002.


Tony Blair: Iraq was NO EXCUSE for Terrorism

Tony Blair, sounding more like a Churchill than a Chamberlain said this.....

Blair: Iraq no excuse for terror

Tony Blair has vowed not to "give an inch to terrorism" and said Iraq was no excuse for the London bombings.
He acknowledged Iraq was being used to recruit terrorists, but insisted the roots of extremism were much deeper.
He said 11 September 2001 was a wake up call for the international community, but argued some people "then turned over and went back to sleep again".
The prime minister was speaking to reporters after talks about new terror laws with Tory and Lib Dem leaders.
We are not going to deal with this problem, with the roots as deep as they are, until we confront these people at every single level Tony Blair
He said: "Let us expose the obscenity of these people saying it is concern for Iraq that drives them to terrorism. If it is concern for Iraq then why are they driving a car bomb into the middle of a group of children and killing them?"
"We are not going to deal with this problem, with the roots as deep as they are, until we confront these people at every single level - and not just their methods but their ideas," he added.
"11 September for me was a wake up call. Do you know what I think the problem is? That a lot of the world woke up for a short time and then turned over and went back to sleep again."

In a 75 minute media conference Mr Blair also said there was "no justification for suicide bombing whether in Palestine, Iraq, in London, in Egypt, in Turkey, anywhere. In the United States of America, there is no justification for it. Period".
Earlier, after the talks in Downing Street, Conservative leader Michael Howard said the prime minister was seriously considering allowing the use of "phone tap" evidence in courts.
They also discussed extending the time suspects can be held without charge.
But despite his desire "to work together in the face of great danger", he said they saw extreme difficulties with calls from the police to extend the time a terrorist suspect can be held without charge from 14 days to three months.
Mr Kennedy said "reasonable progress" had been made in the talks and he hoped this would continue in a measured way so "we don't surrender basic civil liberties in the process".
Downing Street has said Mr Blair still intends to listen to "considered advice" before supporting the use of telephone call recordings at trials.
There is already agreement on proposals to create new offences of engaging in acts preparatory to terrorism and of indirect incitement to terrorism.
25 July - Second man arrested near Curtis House, north London
24 July - First man arrested near Curtis House
24 July - Man arrested in Tulse Hill, south London
22 July - Two men arrested in Stockwell, south London
Police meanwhile continue to hunt the men behind Thursday's failed bomb attacks on three London Underground trains and a bus.
They are holding five other men in connection with the attacks - but the five are not suspected of being bombers themselves.
On Tuesday officers found a large amount of "possible" explosives at a block of flats in New Southgate, north London, where bomb suspect Yasin Hassan Omar had been living since 1999.
The other bombing suspect named so far, Muktar Said Ibrahim, 27, has also been linked to the same flat.

TRACKS OF THE BOMB SUSPECTS All journeys started between 12:20 and 12:25 . Times approx.

OVAL: Man boards northbound Northern Line train at Stockwell and tries to set off bomb between Stockwell and Oval, where he leaves the train. He is chased out of the station at 1235 BST, but escapes towards Brixton.
HACKNEY: Man, identified by police as Muktar Said Ibrahim - or Muktar Mohammed Said - also sets off from Stockwell. Boards Number 26 bus at 1253 at Bank. Police believe he was carrying bomb in a grey and black rucksack, and tried to detonate bomb while on board. Gets off in Hackney Road, near junction with Colombia Road, at 1306.
WARREN STREET: Man named as Yasin Hassan Omar, boards Tube train at Stockwell carrying a bomb in a purple rucksack, police say. Later tries to set off bomb on a northbound Victoria Line train between Oxford Circus and Warren Street, detectives say. Seen without rucksack at 1240 in Warren Street Station before running towards exit and vaulting over ticket barriers.
SHEPHERD'S BUSH: Man wearing dark blue baseball cap and carrying small rucksack enters Westbourne Park Tube station and gets a train travelling towards Shepherd's Bush on Hammersmith & City Line. Tries to set off bomb at 1225 before escaping, probably through window at the end of the carriage, and running along the tracks.


Monday, July 25, 2005

Former UK PM Major: Deport Haters and Terrorist Supporters

From Former Prime Minister John Major:

Deport all who 'spit hate' - Major 25 July 2005
People who "spit hate" at the British way of life should be deported, Tory former Prime Minister John Major said.
Mr Major spoke of the "uncomfortable reality" that many terrorists were born or lived in the UK but had been taught to hate its culture.
"There seem to be many people who, for reasons that are irrational, dislike the Anglo-Saxon way of life," he said.
He called for heavier penalties for those who incited violence at this "particularly sensitive time".
"Always difficult to balance this against freedom of speech but I think, at the moment, it is justifiable to protect the public," he argued.
Mr Major added: "As far as those who literally spit hate at our country and there are some of them - they spit hate at our country and they incite - I personally would be prepared to deport those where it is clear that what they are doing is causing civil unrest and may cost other people, as a result of that, their lives."
He also called for more CCTV cameras to deter the threat and the use of intercept evidence in courts. Interviewed on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme, Mr Major urged the Government to consult widely over new anti-terror legislation.
"They are going to have to carry people with them at this moment," he warned.
He also defended the controversial shoot-to kill policy that led to the death of Jean Charles de Menezes.
"I rather prefer the expression shoot to protect rather than shoot to kill - I think that is a more accurate description of what happened."

Jane Fonda, Protesting ANOTHER WAR.

Let's do 'The Time Warp' again! Let's do 'The Time Warp' again!

That's right, straight out of the 1960s and 1970s, Jane Fonda is going around the US, drumming up more dissention against our troops and the liberation of Iraq. And instead of being Hanoi Jane, she's now Falafel Fonda. Same traitor, same methods, DIFFERENT times.

Someone tell her that the Vietnam War is over, and that her Oscar for Going Home was due to political pressure.


OK, the fact that Jane Fonda is a traitor is not a suprise. However, the fact she's backstabbing the troops after supposedly apologizing for sitting on a North Vietnamese ack ack gun, that was used to shoot down our planes and men, and is now doing this is sickening. Jane said she got support from Vietnam vets. Yeah, name one, Jane. Also, find out which ones had REAL DUTY, not those paper jockeys and liberals posted elsewhere. And don't count John Kerry. His service is less genuine than the Purple Hearts he swindled his way into getting.

She apologized to up her book sales, which sucked. Talked out of one side of her mouth to push a crappy J-Lo Movie, which tanked also. She was a greedy frickin seditionist.

Wow, I miss the days where a President could line up the traitors and shoot them for treason.

Can we question thier patriotism?

Here's a site that may get your blood pressure going.

The name is enough of a reason....

Dishonoring Our Dead Troops

Here's a roll call on various incidents involving our dead troops being exploited, disgraced, and memorials being vandalized. I find it odd that the left is so whiny about compassion but are picketing, crashing, or ruining any respect for our dead.


Here are the incidents.

1. Pennsylvania Lt. Governor, and radical liberal, crashes a funeral, passing out business cards and still slamming the war(which our troops are fighting in).

Governor will apologize for this:

2. Ohio vandals, damage and destroy flags put up as memorials to dead troops.

3. Protestors picket an Oklahoman soldier's funeral.

Here's the protestor's flyer....

And the libs say WE have not respect for the dead.

Defend them if you can......

If this were a gay funeral and it were picketed, you hypocrites would be up in arms.....

Friday, July 22, 2005

Democrat Principal orders teacher to take down Bush pic

Freedom of Academics my ascot. Read this link and story:

Grand Old Party Pooper?
Teacher says principal ordered Bush portrait removed from classroom
JULY 21--A New York woman claims that she was forced from her teaching post by an elementary school principal who objected to her Republican activism and last year ordered the removal of a portrait of President George W. Bush from the educator's Long Island classroom. In a federal discrimination lawsuit, Jillian Caruso, 26, claims that she was improperly forced to resign her job by Birch Lane Elementary School principal Joyce Becker-Seddio, the wife of state Assemblyman Frank Seddio, a Brooklyn Democrat. In her U.S. District Court complaint, a copy of which you'll find below, Caruso contends that she was retaliated against by Becker-Seddio because of her political work, which has included volunteering at last year's GOP convention and membership in the Republican National Committee. Caruso, who taught first and third graders at Birch Lane, also claims that when the principal spotted the Bush portrait late last year--it was hanging among photos of other U.S. presidents--she "became outraged and insisted that the picture be removed." Caruso, who complied with that order, has named the Massapequa Union Free School District as the sole defendant in her action, which seeks unspecified monetary damages and a reappointment to her prior teaching post.

John Howard's Response to Terrorism

Why Australia rocks as an ally.



JOHN HOWARD [K. J. Lopez]This quickie transcript was just sent to me by someone who described it as "a direct, devastating bitch-slap to the nonsense that the U.S., Britain and Australia brought this on themselves from any other leader":

PRIME MIN. HOWARD: Could I start by saying the prime minister and I were having a discussion when we heard about it. My first reaction was to get some more information. And I really don't want to add to what the prime minister has said. It's a matter for the police and a matter for the British authorities to talk in detail about what has happened here. Can I just say very directly, Paul, on the issue of the policies of my government and indeed the policies of the British and American governments on Iraq, that the first point of reference is that once a country allows its foreign policy to be determined by terrorism, it's given the game away, to use the vernacular. And no Australian government that I lead will ever have policies determined by terrorism or terrorist threats, and no self-respecting government of any political stripe in Australia would allow that to happen.

Can I remind you that the murder of 88 Australians in Bali took place before the operation in Iraq.

And I remind you that the 11th of September occurred before the operation in Iraq.

Can I also remind you that the very first occasion that bin Laden specifically referred to Australia was in the context of Australia's involvement in liberating the people of East Timor. Are people by implication suggesting we shouldn't have done that? When a group claimed responsibility on the website for the attacks on the 7th of July, they talked about British policy not just in Iraq, but in Afghanistan. Are people suggesting we shouldn't be in Afghanistan?

When Sergio de Mello was murdered in Iraq -- a brave man, a distinguished international diplomat, a person immensely respected for his work in the United Nations -- when al Qaeda gloated about that, they referred specifically to the role that de Mello had carried out in East Timor because he was the United Nations administrator in East Timor. Now I don't know the mind of the terrorists. By definition, you can't put yourself in the mind of a successful suicide bomber. I can only look at objective facts, and the objective facts are as I've cited. The objective evidence is that Australia was a terrorist target long before the operation in Iraq. And indeed, all the evidence, as distinct from the suppositions, suggests to me that this is about hatred of a way of life, this is about the perverted use of principles of the great world religion that, at its root, preaches peace and cooperation. And I think we lose sight of the challenge we have if we allow ourselves to see these attacks in the context of particular circumstances rather than the abuse through a perverted ideology of people and their murder.

PRIME MIN. BLAIR: And I agree 100 percent with that. (Laughter.)

Troops Citicize Durbin, Kennedy Insults

Troops who work at Guantonamo and other basis had criticism for Senators Durbin and Kennedy.

About damn time:

T-Shirts To Cops: You Can't Search Us

I wonder how the NYPD feels about this latest snide behavior from the far left?


Here's the article:,weblee,66189,5.html

Sure, wear that shirt, talk back to cops that resemble Tony Soprano or Ving Rhames and see how far you can get smacked across the subway station. People are dying in London and other areas due to suicide bombers, with hidden weapons, how selfish can these morons be?

Here's what MAY HAPPEN:

T-Shirt Wearer: Excuse me, I need to get onto my train.
Cop: Stand over there sir, we gotta search you.
T-Shirt Guy: Uh, read the shirt, pig. If you can read.
Cop: I DO NOT CONSENT TO A SEARCH. Well, I don't consent to you being a pain in the ass, so get over there.
T-Shirt Guy: I'll call my lawyer.
Cop: I'll call back up, pal. Actually, I don't need back up. I got Sparks.
T-Shirt Guy: Who's SPARKS? I want his badge and rank also.
Cop: Sparks is Mr. Taser. (pulls out Taser, zaps liberal)
(T-shirt guy goes down like a White House intern)
Cop: Bet you didn't consent to that, but you were resisting arrest. You wanna endanger lives, go endanger you own. You don't do that in MY CITY.

The above was fictional, but funny.

The below is true:

Even Mayor Bloomberg and the NYPD Commish support what has to be done.

Suck it up, it's wartime, you whiny little leftist Village Voice punks.

British Cops shoot supposed terrorist in subway

Serves the little turd right. Cops say stop, you stop. If he was innocent then what was he running for? Also, after the past two weeks, who can blame the British cops for tossing aside tea and crumpits PC mannerisms for Churchillian East Ender action.

Bravo, chaps. One down, many more to go.,,30000-1189920,00.html

UPDATE: Man shot in subway not terrorist, but Brazilian tourist. He's innocent of that, but the hell did he run? Why? If I was a cop, I'd be nervous also.

Thursday, July 21, 2005


Read this article:

Or read it here:

Column: London flirts with appeasement


As Britain tries to absorb the shock of 7/7, some voices are urging what would amount to the appeasement of the terrorists.
Experience, however, shows that the appeaser becomes a more attractive target for the terrorists. The appeased terrorist concludes that, having won a battle, he should press for victory in his war against a weakened adversary. Appeasing terrorists was tried by French president Fran ois Mitterrand in the 1980s, and made France the most-targeted Western country for a decade.
Mitterrand launched his appeasement weeks after becoming president in 1981. He released all the 31 convicted terrorists in French prisons and lifted the ban on pro-terrorist publications and illegal radio stations. He also abolished the State Security Court, set up to deal with terrorism, describing it as a Nazi-style outfit. He let the Basque terrorists of ETA use French territory as a base against Spain and allowed various Palestinian groups and the Irish Republican Army (IRA) to operate in Paris.
Mitterrand feted Yasser Arafat, then regarded as the godfather of terror, and traveled to Cyprus to court Libya's dictator Muammar Gaddafi, the principal paymaster of international terror at the time. Mitterrand's appeasement included the Khomeinist regime in Teheran and led to an exchange of ambassadors and high-level contacts.
The French leader emphasized the ideological propinquity of his Socialist party with "other radical movements," meaning terrorist groups, that were also "striving for justice." At one point Mitterrand even talked of the "common roots" of the French Revolution and the Khomeinist takeover in Iran.
IN 1984 Mitterrand's policy led him into vetoing an American plan for joint G-7 action against international terrorism. In a meeting with then vice president George Bush, who headed a special anti-terrorism unit created by president Ronald Reagan, Mitterrand argued that the only way to deal with the threat was to "address the grievances" which were "often caused by Western policies." Not surprisingly terrorists of all denominations began to see France as a safe haven.
Abu Nidal and Carlos visited Paris for business and pleasure. Imad Mughniyeh, a Lebanese terrorist on the American "most-wanted list" dropped in for shopping holidays. Ayatollah Ruhallah Khomeini sent his nephew, one Massoud Hendizadeh, to set up a terror headquarters in Paris. The Islamic Embassy in the French capital became the center of operations for Europe. Later, when French police issued an arrest warrant for Vahid Gorji, the man who headed the Iranian terror headquarters in Paris, Mitterrand arranged for him to be put on the first flight to Teheran to escape prosecution.
Payback for Mitterrand's policy started with the assassination of General Rene Audron, a senior member of the French Defense Ministry, in 1985. A few months later Paris was hit by a series of bomb attacks, including on two major department stores in which 35 people were injured on Christmas Eve.
In February 1986 a major shopping arcade and a hotel on the Champs Elys e were bombed. The wave of attacks continued with the bombing of the Forum des Halles and the attempted blowing up of the Eiffel Tower.
By March 1986 France was the victim of a full-scale terror campaign, including a suicide operation in which two Arab terrorists were killed on the Champs Elys e. Attacks on the Paris Metro, Orly Airport and shopping centers created a climate of fear. Dozens of other plots, including an attempt to derail a high-speed train, were nipped in the bud by the police.
Throughout the Mitterrand appeasement a total of 93 people were killed and more than 800 wounded in terrorist attacks in France. To these must be added 17 Iranian dissidents who were killed by hit-squads from Teheran.
But this was not all. Fifty-three French paratroopers were killed in a suicide attack in Beirut in 1983. Also in Beirut a pro-Syrian group assassinated France's ambassador, while a Khomeinist gang held the French ambassador in Teheran hostage for several days. A total of 37 French citizens were held as hostages in the Middle East, and two murdered in cold blood, by the same terror groups that Mitterrand had tried to appease.
France is not alone in having tried appeasement and failed. Algeria, Egypt, Germany, Saudi Arabia and more recently Spain have had similar experiences. The British should know that any appeasement of terrorists could put them in an even greater danger.

THIS is ridiculous

Now, while me and The Lord have an understanding on alternate lifestyles and the gay and lesbian choices, I DO NOT CONDONE WHAT IRAN IS DOING.

Again, not my choice of lifestyle, but Iran doesn't give you CHOICE in anything.

Iran hangs two men, guilty of homosexuality.

Robert Fisk, Gloating Over Terrorism


The reality of this barbaric bombing
If we are fighting insurgency in Iraq, what makes us think insurgency won’t come to us?
By Robert Fisk - 08 July 2005

"If you bomb our cities," Osama bin Laden said in one of his recent video tapes, "we will bomb yours." There you go, as they say. It was crystal clear Britain would be a target ever since Tony Blair decided to join George Bush’s "war on terror" and his invasion of Iraq.

Fisk, you are an arrogant one, aren't you? London was a terrorist target before Iraq. Maybe you forgot back in 2001-2002, the British police stopping ricine and gas plots that were planned long before 9/11 and long before Iraq. Britain is a target, regardless of your rationale. The War on Terror is not just George Bush's, you arrogant turd. It's a war against us and them. Us, the good guys, the civilized, which includes the newly liberated in Iraq & Afghanistan, and those in Lebanon and other lands yearning freedom. Them, well YOU and the terrorists you sympathize with.

We had, as they say, been warned. The G8 summit was obviously chosen, well in advance, as Attack Day.

Sure, Fisk, whatever. If they wanted to hit the G8, they'd have done it THERE. Also, in November 2003, the British embassy in Istambul and a British Bank skyscraper were bombed in Turkey, while Bush was in London. Timing is a bitch, isn't it?

And it’s no use Mr Blair telling us yesterday that "they will never succeed in destroying what we hold dear". "They" are not trying to destroy "what we hold dear". They are trying to get public opinion to force Blair to withdraw from Iraq, from his alliance with the United States, and from his adherence to Bush’s policies in the Middle East.

They ARE trying to hurt what most of England holds dear. Everyday life, security, freedom from fear. Apparently that went over your flat head, Fiskie. Public opinion? Yeah, I wonder what your article is trying to do. You made your mind up to blame the US for this attack. You sicken me. US Foreign policy in the Middle East? We inherited that from you, wanker. Didn't BRITAIN manage the Middle East from 1919 to 1945 or so? Didn't BRITAIN ask our help in Iran with the Shah? Didn't Britain occupy the Suez Canal when Nasser tried to block all shipping from it? Point one finger at us, four more are aimed at you, governor. No use telling Blair? No use telling you to maybe, I dunno, remember who the REAL ENEMY IS.

The Spanish paid the price for their support for Bush - and Spain’s subsequent retreat from Iraq proved that the Madrid bombings achieved their objectives

Spanish Armada- sunk by Britain's choppy seas, and smaller yet agile English raiding vessels. Spain also had a civil war, and sided with the Nazis. Don't lecture on Spain's bravery. They gave up and the terrorists won. Spain is still nabbing terrorists, thank God.

- while the Australians were made to suffer in Bali.

Bali was in 2002, you MORON! That was before Iraq! Bali had nothing to do with Iraq, you pustulent Douche Bag! Australia is SENDING MORE TROOPS to Iraq, and is not leaving. Terrorists did not suceed in toppling Australia. When the Aussies had hostages, they didn't negotiate and pay off like others, they sent in troops and rescued them.

It is easy for Tony Blair to call yesterdays bombings "barbaric" - of course they were -
but what were the civilian deaths of the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq in 2003, the children torn apart by cluster bombs, the countless innocent Iraqis gunned down at American military checkpoints?

Asshole, your side said there were over 100,000 dead in Iraq due to the invasion. It's more like 25,000. Also, Saddam slaughtered ALOT more kids and innocents than we did. Notice that the mass graves are not in service anymore? Or do you even care about that?

Where's your compassion for the newly freed Iraqis? come on Fisk, we're waiting.

When they die, it is "collateral damage"; when "we" die, it is "barbaric terrorism".

Nick Berg, Paul Johnson, and other beheaded is barbaric terrorism. The terrorists die, that's fine by me. And you can join your allies as far as I am concerned.

If we are fighting insurgency in Iraq, what makes us believe insurgency won’t come to us?

No one ever said that, moron.

One thing is certain: if Tony Blair really believes that by "fighting terrorism" in Iraq we could more efficiently protect Britain - fight them there rather than let them come here, as Bush constantly says - this argument is no longer valid.

Notice most terrorists are flooding into Iraq and most of the so-called insurgents are Saudis, Chechens, Pakistanis, Asians, and other Muslim extremists. It is working. Do you prefer we kill them there or let them flood into Hyde Park and shoot up your people?

To time these bombs with the G8 summit, when the world was concentrating on Britain, was not a stroke of genius. You don’t need a PhD to choose another Bush-Blair handshake to close down a capital city with explosives and massacre more than 30 of its citizens. The G8 summit was announced so far in advance as to give the bombers all the time they needed to prepare.
A co-ordinated system of attacks of the kind we saw yesterday would have taken months to plan - to choose safe houses, prepare explosives, identify targets, ensure security, choose the bombers, the hour, the minute, to plan the communications (mobile phones are giveaways).

Like 9/11, you moron. No one announced Bush going to Florida, when they planned it in 1998. As I recall, they didn't care who was in office. These are terrorists, you moron, not psychics.

Co-ordination and sophisticated planning - and the usual utter ruthlessness with regard to the lives of the innocent - are characteristic of al-Qa’ida. And let us not use - as our television colleagues did yesterday - "hallmarks", a word identified with quality silver rather than base metal.

Mmm Hmmm, like the terrorists time bombs to blow up Humvees and your troops in Iraq. Al Qaeda, imagine that.

And now let us reflect on the fact that yesterday, the opening of the G8, so critical a day, so bloody a day, represented a total failure of our security services - the same intelligence "experts" who claim there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq when there were none, but who utterly failed to uncover a months-long plot to kill Londoners.

Wrong priorities as usual. Upset about Iraq, and less so about Londoners dying. Where was your compassion on 9/11? He didn't mention that once.

Trains, planes, buses, cars, metros. Transportation appears to be the science of al-Qa’ida’s dark arts. No one can search three million London commuters every day. No one can stop every tourist. Some thought the Eurostar might have been an al-Qa’ida target - be sure they have studied it - but why go for prestige when your common or garden bus and Tube train are there for the taking.

Your own lax security needs scrutiny, now doesn't it? We learned, so why don't you?

And then come the Muslims of Britain, who have long been awaiting this nightmare. Now every one of our Muslims becomes the "usual suspect", the man or woman with brown eyes, the man with the beard, the woman in the scarf, the boy with the worry beads, the girl who says she’s been racially abused.

Hogwash, there are no mass pogroms. You probably aren't so concerned rather just using it.

I remember, crossing the Atlantic on 11 September 2001 - my plane turned round off Ireland when the US closed its airspace - how the aircraft purser and I toured the cabins to see if we could identify any suspicious passengers. I found about a dozen, of course, totally innocent men who had brown eyes or long beards or who looked at me with "hostility". And sure enough, in just a few seconds, Osama bin Laden turned nice, liberal, friendly Robert into an anti-Arab racist.

Racism, classic cry of the liberals. Racial profiling: Yeah 19 of 19 hijackers are from the same area of the world, and are part of the same radical sect of Islam. That's called being minimally observant. Take your racism cries and tell it to the kin of the 56 dead in London, or try that song and dance with the 3,000 families of those lost on 9/11.

And this is part of the point of yesterday’s bombings: to divide British Muslims from British non-Muslims (let us not mention the name Christians), to encourage the very kind of racism that Tony Blair claims to resent.

Let them step forward and help then. If not, they associate with the terrorists. SPEAK NOW OR FOREVER HOLD YOUR PEACE.

But here’s the problem. To go on pretending that Britain’s enemies want to destroy "what we hold dear" encourages racism; what we are confronting here is a specific, direct, centralised attack on London as a result of a "war on terror" which Lord Blair of Kut al-Amara has locked us into.

Terrorism encourages anger, and the enemies are out to destroy anyone they do not like. Your pretending is letting them think they can keep doing this. Also, the War of Terror is one that you would have been targeted in, Iraq or no Iraq. Blame the dead, blame the victims, but never the terrorists. You disgust me.

Just before the US presidential elections, Bin Laden asked: "Why do we not attack Sweden?"
Lucky Sweden. No Osama bin Laden there. And no Tony Blair.

Sweden also caved into gay marriage, but is letting a majority of militant Islams into their country, I don't see the two mixing well. No Tony Blair? Well, Tony DID get re-elected. As did John Howard in Australia, George W Bush in the US, and Berlusconni in Italy. These men all fought the enemy and still are and retain office. The cowards will retain safety but will pay a higher price later.

Here's where the troll Fisk posts:
go to top

London Rocked by Blasts in Subway, again

Unconfirmed casualties and damage, but 3 stations evacuated due to terrorists' bombs. More news wil come in.,2933,163186,00.html

This happened 2 weeks ago, today, no coincidence.

Wednesday, July 20, 2005

Canada Legalizes Gay Marriage

Numero Cuatro, number four, number vier.

Canada is now the fourth country to legalize gay marriage. Nice work, hosers, aye.


Canada 4th Nation to Legalize Gay Marriage

By ROB GILLIES, Associated Press Writer 20 minutes ago
Canada legalized gay marriage Wednesday, becoming the world's fourth nation to grant full legal rights to same-sex couples.
Supreme Court Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin signed the legislation making it law, hours after it was approved by the Senate late Tuesday night despite strong opposition from Conservatives and religious leaders.
The bill grants same-sex couples legal rights equal to those in traditional unions between a man and a woman, something already legal in eight of Canada's 10 provinces and in two of its three territories.
The legislation drafted by Prime Minister Paul Martin's minority Liberal Party government easily passed the Senate, which essentially rubber stamps any bill already passed by the House of Commons, which passed it late last month.
The Netherlands, Belgium and Spain are the only other nations that allow gay marriage nationwide.


Ken Livingstone, You Stupid Moron

Ken, you frickin moron, you D-Bag supreme! WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU THINKING?

Here's what he said:

"A lot of young people see the double standards, they see what happens in (U.S. detention camp) Guantanamo Bay, and they just think that there isn't a just foreign policy," he said.
Police say they believe there is a clear link between bin Laden's al Qaeda network and the four British Muslims who blew up three underground trains and a double-decker bus on July 7.
"You've just had 80 years of Western intervention into predominantly Arab lands because of a Western need for oil. We've propped up unsavory governments, we've overthrown ones that we didn't consider sympathetic," Livingstone said.

Blah blah blah, Red Ken shows his true colors. Blame his own government and people, but not the terrorists. Idiot. Yeah, Ken, London wasn't hit by terrorists in the 1980s or 1970s. And I don't mean IRA, I mean Libyans, Iranians, and Palestinians. Who did you blame it on then?

"I think the particular problem we have at the moment is that in the 1980s ... the Americans recruited and trained Osama bin Laden, taught him how to kill, to make bombs, and set him off to kill the Russians to drive them out of Afghanistan."

Yeah, we trained others besides Bin Laden and not ALL OF THEM went wacko like Osama. It worked did it not?

"They didn't give any thought to the fact that once he'd done that, he might turn on his creators," he told BBC radio.

Nice Mary Shelley analogy there, Kenny. Did you think that up on your own?


Minutemen and Old Vets Attacked by California Radicals

This is no lie, rather an e-mail I got sent by a guy at

Read this:

Dear Americans, Reinforcements are needed in Campo, Ca. immediately to support a group of California Minutemen who have deployed for border observation and reporting activities from July 16 through at least August 7 (and beyond). Calling all Minuteman Patriots! Our brothers and sisters in the movement to secure our borders need your help. Jim Chase, a veteran, patriotic Minuteman needs reinforcements in Campo, California! The enemy reared it's ugly head in a despicable display of anti-American sentiment over the first weekend of the Campo operation. I encourage all California and Arizona Minuteman volunteers to assist Jim and fellow Minuteman volunteers on the border in Campo. We must bring national attention to the effort in Campo. Call every elected public servant in California to have the courage to visit the Minutemen on the border like Senator Morrow did this past weekend. Let the nation see the hooded domestic terrorists assault elected officials and see how local law enforcement idly stands by and allows the rights of citizens to be violated. Contact Jim for directions and assignments. 760-644-0857. I visited the group accompanied by a California state senator and his aides, last Saturday. We witnessed the literal siege of VFW Post #2080 by about 60 belligerent, death-threatening anti-Americans twice during that day. The Mexican brown berets, stormed the VFW Lodge, damaging signs and other property. They were eventually repelled by the late-arriving San Diego County Sheriff's Dept. No arrests were made. The California state senator and his aides took serious note of the hostilities and violence conducted by the Nazi-like, anarchist brown berets. Americans...these goons are incurably evil and have a history of routinely suppressing the First Amendment rights of Americans through acts of violence and threats of death. Our First Amendment rights of freedom to peacefully assemble and speak are in serious jeopardy, and it is time a stand is taken to preserve these rights. The rampage was orchestrated by Armando Navarro, a known anti-American racist, who holds a comfortable, taxpayer funded, tenured position as a professor (of hate and blood-letting?) at the University of California - Riverside, Ca., and who has devoted his life to promoting the Mexican conquest of the seven southwestern US states. He calls for the conquest to be carried out by force, if necessary. One California Minuteman volunteer, Jim Woods, was physically assaulted by a gang of ten of Navarro's thugs as he sat in his car alone at a border outpost. He was physically restrained in his car seat by the brown berets, who threatened to kill him. They stole his keys from the ignition and left him stranded without food or water for several hours. When Jim Woods identified two of the gang members to the Sheriff's Dept. and asked for an arrest, no action was taken by the Sheriff's deputies. One deputy just responded to Mr. Wood's plea for help with "Oh, you just lost your keys," despite repeated pleas to the contrary from Mr. Woods. I am returning to Campo this week. Volunteers from anywhere in the United States are welcome to join me as soon as possible. Two minuteman groups from Texas have already committed to arrive this week. I am also requesting reinforcements from Chris Simcox's Minuteman Civil Defense Corps in Tombstone, Az. and from select members of another well-known California border watch group that operates independently from The Minuteman Project. Navarro's anarchist's attempted to shut down, and trash, the VFW lodge because the lodge allowed thirsty and hungry California Minutemen volunteers to purchase food and water from its restaurant. Their attempts to bring down the U.S. flag were thwarted. Our goals: 1. Protect the rights of ALL Americans to freely and peacefully assemble without being physically assaulted, or threatened with violence to maim or kill them. 2. Protect America's war veterans at VFW Lodge 2080, in Campo, Ca. from being battered by literal thugs with clubs and to protect the property of that lodge from being destroyed. 3. Simultaneously, volunteers are forming to protest at the Univ. of Ca. - Riverside, demanding the ouster of Navarro from his department at a state funded institution, which Navarro has selfishly turned into a department of tyranny. Americans, saddle up! Let's Roll! Contact California Minutemen in Campo, Ca. at 760-644-0857...asap. The VFW lodge address is 361 Sheridan in Campo, Ca. Be warned that the roving gangs of adversaries engaging the California Minutemen WILL physically attack you if they outnumber you. I repeat, they WILL physically attack you. Stay in groups, and stay LEGALLY armed with pepper spray...tasers...etc. Sidearms are legal in certain areas in Campo. Confer with Jim Chase on the issue of sidearms. I am remaining unarmed, but will have legally armed body guards with me while I am in Campo. Remember, remain passive. However, that does not mean you cannot defend yourself against threats to your safety by incoherrent mobs of gangsters who are determined to do you physical harm. It truly is a sad day in America when the First Amendment rights are preserved only for those who carry the biggest stick. The alternative is to remain a cringing little mouse and forever relinquish your unalienable rights to peacefully speak or assemble. Good Luck, Americans. May God, patriotism, and country be with you.

See you in Campo.

Jim Gilchrist

What Makes a Protestor/Liberal Activist Tick

OK, this may seem slipshod to some of you, but here it goes.

Recently I was asked what protestors do when they are not campaigning against cars, The Bush Administration, Halliburton, beef, cigars, judges, and even toys. I had a discussion here are some of the points.

First, let's look at what protestors do. They march, and rehash old protest chants and songs from Vietnam. They get ticked off at everything that is above their understanding. They all attend the SAME protests, every time. They are forever complaining about the state of affairs, but offering no solutions. In short, they do not put their money where their mouth is.

Yes, they march. They march on Washington on inauguration day, they march on the G-8 Summits, the Supreme Court, Halliburton, stockholders meetings, and against the Ten Commandments. What else do they do? Well, they must have understanding bosses or no jobs, because my boss would fire me if I skipped work and was later seen on TV dragged off by two masked riot cops. Also, if the protestors do not work, where does their salary come from? Uncle George, Soros? Aunt Jane Fonda, that was a big settlement in the Ted Turner divorce.....
Yeah they march, and their funds are unknown.

They rehash old, inane, and irritating protest chants. They rehash- "Hey hey LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?" Now it's, "George Bush, CIA, how many kids did you kill today?" And let's not forget, "Violence doesn't settle scores, we don't want YOUR F---ING WAR!" Now, that is "Tony Blair, what a bore! WE DON'T WANT YOUR F---ING WAR!" Original thought is bye bye, apparently. Why? Well, the same radical students of yesteryear are now radical leaders marching. Despite being of age to collect social security or retire, you have Tom Hayden, Hanoi Jane, Dennis Kucinich, and others trading in kicking cops to organizing from behind the scenes and fuming on Capitol Hill. They rehash what they think may work the second time around.

The protestors are ANGRY, at everything. When it's not Amnesty International protesting Gitmo (sure were quiet when Nick Berg was beheaded), or PETA protesting Kentucky Fried Chicken (awww they slaughtered chickens. What the hell else is poultry for?), or just mad at the economy (which IS improving). The protestors who say they are for better economics and for the poor are usually spoiled, middle class, elitist, nihilists who ARE NOT African, Asian, Middle Eastern, or factory workers. They are angry at everything. At the G-8, they burn cars, destroy shops and punch at cops. This year, they tried it in Scotland and the Scottish did not put up with it. No real violence, but the mayor of Edinburugh, or wherever it was, just put his foot down. Bully, to you Mr. Mayor. Why so angry, protestors? I thought you were flower children? Make love not violence? Right? (chirping crickets)

Same protestors are usually at the same rallies. The idiots who protested the Iraq War, in London, also tried to egg Prime Minister Blair and President Bush's motorcades in the 2003 State Visit to Britain. The protestors who laid down in traffic in 2003 in New York, to protest the war, were visible at New York City's GOP Convention. In 2001, when Bush was inaugurated and they were hauled off and cuffed, the same bozos were out in 2005, trying to interrupt and ruin the inauguration, which they failed miserably at. Notice a pattern? It's the same protestors every stinking time. There are no new members. There is no massive groundswell. Sorry, it's the same people and it's counterproductive.

Complain about everything, but have solutions for nothing. There is the constant shrill bleeting of STOP THE WAR, improve benefits, let more immigrants in. However, the loud chanters are at a loss for words, when we call their bluff and ask them what their better solution is? Got quiet, real quick. Jack of all trades, but experts in nothing. Many complain about Greenspan, Bush, Blair, and others, but offer no counterplans. They say the regime is an ignorant lot, while many uptop have college degrees, masters, and doctorates. Half the protestors are college drop outs and or have not finished formal education. We're stupid, but you kept cutting class and aren't finished yet. Sure......

I do still wonder, if these economic champions are so committed to improving things, why aren't they giving money? If jobs are so bad, why aren't they working to create a need for more workers? If the economy sucks, why not improve it with your work and your earnings? Easy, they're too busy protesting everything.

More hypocrisy, courtesy of the loud and liberal left.


Good post from

From Mary Jo Kopechne

I would have been 65 years of age this year.

Read about me and my killer below:
When Sen. Ted Kennedy was merely just another Democrat bloating on Capitol Hill on behalf of liberal causes, it was perhaps excusable to ignore his deplorable past.
But now that he's become a leading Republican attack dog, positioning himself as Washington's leading arbiter of truth and integrity, the days for such indulgence are now over.
It's time for the GOP to stand up and remind America why this chief spokesman had to abandon his own presidential bid in 1980 - time to say the words Mary Jo Kopechne out loud.
As is often the case, Republicans have deluded themselves into thinking that most Americans already know the story of how this "Conscience of the Democratic Party" left Miss Kopechne behind to die in the waters underneath the Edgartown Bridge in July 1969, after a night of drinking and partying with the young blonde campaign worker. But most Americans under 40 have never heard that story, or details of how Kennedy swam to safety, then tried to get his cousin Joe Garghan to say he was behind the wheel.
Those young voters don't know how Miss Kopechne, trapped inside Kennedy's Oldsmobile, gasped for air until she finally died, while the Democrats' leading Iraq war critic rushed back to his compound to formulate the best alibi he could think of.
Neither does Generation X know how Kennedy was thrown out of Harvard on his ear 15 years earlier -- for paying a fellow student to take his Spanish final.
Or, why the US Army denied him a commission because he cheated on tests.
As they listen to the Democrats' "Liberal Lion" accuse President Bush of "telling lie after lie after lie" to get America to go to war in Iraq, young voters don't know about that notorious 1991 Easter weekend in Palm Beach, when Uncle Teddy rounded up his nephews for a night on the town, an evening that ended with one of them credibly accused of rape.
It's time for Republicans to state unabashedly that they will no longer "go along with the gag" when it comes to Uncle Ted's rants about deception and moral turpitude inside the Bush White House.
And if the Republicans don't, let's do it ourselves by pa**ing this forgotten disgrace around the Internet to wake up memories of what a fraud and fake Teddy really is.
The Democratic Party should be ashamed to have the national disgrace from Massachusetts as their spokesman.
And the GOP needs to say so out loud.
Posted by: IraqVet at July 20, 2005 11:33 AM


The father is not only unremorseful or sympathetic to London and 9/11, he hopes more happens.

Sick bastard.....

The father of one of the September 11 hijackers said today he had no sorrow for what had happened in London and claimed more terrorist attacks would follow.
Egyptian Mohamed el-Amir, whose son Mohamed Atta commandeered the first plane that crashed into the World Trade Centre in New York, said there was a double standard in the way the world viewed the victims in London and victims in the Islamic world.
El-Amir said the attacks in the US and the July 7 attacks in Britain were the beginning of what would be a 50-year religious war, in which there would be many more fighters like his son.
Speaking to a CNN producer in his apartment in the upper-middle-class Cairo suburb of Giza, he declared that terror cells around the world were a "nuclear bomb that has now been activated and is ticking".
Cursing in Arabic, el-Amir also denounced Arab leaders and Muslims who condemned the London attacks as being traitors and non-Muslims.
He passionately vowed that he would do anything within his power to encourage more attacks.

Tuesday, July 19, 2005

Schumer and Leahy Lead Charge Against Roberts

Transcript: Leahy and Schumer
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
WASHINGTON — A full transcript of the Democrats' response to President Bush's July 19, 2005, remarks announcing Judge John G. Roberts as his Supreme Court nominee:
LEAHY: Everybody ready?
The president has announced his choice. Now the Senate has to rise to the challenge and do its work.
To fulfill our constitutional duties, we need to consider this nomination as thoroughly and carefully as the American people deserve.
It's going to take time and the cooperation of the nominee and the administration. After all, a member of the Supreme Court is there for all people in this country, no matter what their party.
And that means that Republicans as well as Democrats have to take seriously our constitutional obligations on behalf of all Americans. We have to ensure the Supreme Court remains a protector of all Americans' rights and liberties from government intrusion and that the Supreme Court understands the role of Congress in passing legislation to protect ordinary Americans from special interests abuses.
No one is entitled to a free pass to a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. Someone confirmed today can be expected to serve on the court until the year 2030 or later.
How the nominee views precedent, whether he regards (inaudible) law, how he will exercise the incredible power of a Supreme Court justice to be the final arbiter of our rights and the meaning of the Constitution, all of these raise very different considerations than in the lower court.
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, whom I voted for for the Supreme Court, is a model justice. She brought a fair and open mind to the bench; she decided cases without a political agenda; she's widely respected as a jurist of common sense and practical values. She didn't prejudge cases.
And I regret that the extreme right has been so critical of her and was so adamantly opposed to her successor sharing her judicial philosophy.
The Constitution calls on us in the Senate to examine nominations to the court, not to rubberstamp them. I look forward to hearings that are going to inform the Senate and all Americans. I'll work with Chairman Specter to have a fair hearing. It's going to take a fair amount of time to do that. But we will do it.
There will be thorough hearings. And I really do not expect any issues that go to the qualifications, the honesty, the integrity and the fairness — the fairness — of a Supreme Court justice to be off limits.
All those questions can be asked.
Chuck Schumer is the Democrat who represents us on the subcommittee who handles nominations. I'd like to turn it over to Senator Schumer.
SCHUMER: Thank you, Senator Leahy. And thank you for your leadership.
There's no question that Judge Roberts has outstanding legal credentials and an appropriate legal temperament and demeanor. But his actual judicial record is limited to only two years on the D.C. Circuit Court.
For the rest of his career, he has been arguing cases an as able lawyer for others, leaving many of his personal views unknown.
For these reasons, it is vital that Judge Roberts answer a wide range of questions openly, honestly and fully in the coming months.
His views will affect a generation of Americans, and it his obligation during the nomination process to let the American people know those views.
The burden is on a nominee to the Supreme Court to prove that he is worthy, not on the Senate to prove that he is unworthy.
I voted against Judge Roberts for the D.C. Court of Appeals because he didn't answer questions fully and openly when he appeared before the committee.
For instance, when I asked him a question that others have answered, to identify three Supreme Court cases of which he was critical, he refused.
But now it's a whole new ball game for those of us who voted against him, for those of us who voted for him and for Judge Roberts.
I hope Judge Roberts, understanding how important this nomination is — particularly when replacing a swing vote on the court — will decide to answer questions about his views.
Now that he is nominated for a position where he can overturn precedent and make law, it is even more important that he fully answers a broad range of questions.
I hope, for the sake of the country, that Judge Roberts understands this and opens questions — sorry, and answers questions — openly, honestly and thoroughly.
And there's one thing that I want to say that is unequivocally great about Judge Roberts. He's a Bills fan.
LEAHY: I'll leave that last line alone.
Go ahead.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) 2001 and 2002 you did not move Roberts out of committee. In 2003, when he did come up for a vote, you were the ranking member. You did vote for him. Could you explain your past positions on him?
LEAHY: You know, I was only chairman for 17 months. During that time I moved more of President Bush's nominees than the Republicans did I think in 30 months. So you can only move so many.
During the time that they were in the majority, they had several months that they were in the majority, they didn't bring his name up at all. They didn't bring up any judges. I moved them very quickly.
I will look at him as a Supreme Court nominee.
You know, the way I look at it is this: District courts and the courts of appeals, they're bound by the law as interpreted by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, however, can interpret the law any way it wants. It's an entirely different standard.
I want to have some idea how he will interpret it.
We have, right now, the most activist Supreme Court in my lifetime. No Supreme Court of my lifetime has overturned or undercut more laws passed by Congress than this Court has, everything from Violence Against Women on through, environmental laws, employment laws, all of these things.
This is a very, very activist court. I want to know whether he's going to be like that, somebody who would eagerly and willingly overturn settled law.
QUESTION: Senator Schumer, when you first heard the name John Roberts, what was your gut reaction?
SCHUMER: Well, my gut reaction...
QUESTION: He didn't have enough experience, or what did you think?
SCHUMER: Well, he's one of those nominees that you have a lot of questions about. There are some very good things about him. He's a bright mind. There are some things. He's not answering questions.
So he's, you know, it might have been — with a handful of nominees, I was not going to say anything, you know, definitely, no matter who the nominee was. But with some nominees, you might have said: well, there's a darn good shot that's going to be a consensus nominee. With others, you'd say: There's a darn good shot it's not going to be a consensus nominee. He's in the middle.
QUESTION: Senator Leahy, in your discussions with the White House, did this question of release of information (OFF-MIKE) does that come up at all?
LEAHY: Well, in the general discussions we've had, we've said that we — this is a different era than it was 30 or 40 or 50 years ago.
We expect full answers.
Obviously — and I said this again to the president tonight when I spoke with him — that we need some time. All of us want to go through everything he's written or said.
Now, I'm sure there will be some who rush out and say, "I'm going to vote for or against him," but I believe that those of us on the committee like Senator Schumer and I who have actually read several of those, I think we want to read them a lot more thoroughly.
Like Senator Specter, I like making up my mind based on what's there. I expect full answers.
You know, we had the Estrada battle. There they would not answer what were legitimate questions, questions that have been answered by Clinton nominees. Had he answered them, he may well have been sitting on the court today.
SCHUMER: Let me just say one other thing about that to augment what Patrick has to say. I think it's going to be very important — remember, he's only had two years where he's been a judge.
All the rest of the time, he was arguing cases for someone else, whether it was the U.S. government or private clients when he was at Hogan & Hartson.
And so, therefore, not only should he be fully answering questions about his own views, but we will — we hope we don't have to go through what happened with Miguel Estrada, when we asked for some of the papers and arguments when they worked in the Justice Department, that we didn't get them.
It's going to be very important, particularly for a Supreme Court nominee replacing a swing vote on a divided court, that we get all the information and people don't throw up barriers to that information.
As Patrick said, that's what caused the entire Senate not to — or many in the Senate not to support Miguel Estrada. That's what caused me not to vote for him then, not to vote for Judge Roberts then.
But as I said, it's a new ball game. And as long as he answers the questions fully and openly and gives us the documents that we request, we can be able to explore his views.
LEAHY: When I meet with him tomorrow, that's one of the first things I'm going to stress.
QUESTION: In your opinion, did the consultation process work to your satisfaction? And, if it did, does it have any impact on how you move forward with the nomination?
LEAHY: You know, I'm still going over that in my own mind. I think that the president has spent a lot of time listening to our views. In many ways, it was not the extensive consultation that I recall from both President Clinton and President Reagan, but it was certainly more extensive than some of the consultation this administration has been known for before.
The president told me he listened to our views. I expressed to him the extent of what I thought the consultation was — which I won't repeat here — but it is what it is.