Pope Gets Letter From Ahmadinejad
"VATICAN CITY -- Pope Benedict XVI received a letter Wednesday from Iran's hardline president about the recent U.N. Security Council resolution imposing sanctions against Tehran for refusing to compromise on its nuclear program, Iran's state-run news agency reported.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's letter was delivered by Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki after the pontiff's general audience at the Vatican's Paul VI hall, the Vatican said.
The Vatican did not release details of the content of Ahmadinejad's letter, but Iran's state-run IRNA news agency said the note focused on Saturday's Security Council vote approving sanctions against Iran in the standoff over its nuclear program.
The Vatican said Benedict stressed his apolitical role in his brief meeting with Mottaki...."
It seems as if Ahmadinejad is trying to get some sympathy from the Vatican in his efforts to belittle the Bush Administration. Granted, the Vatican will stay as apolitical as possible, they should support the West's efforts to thwart any Islamic nuclear program.
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Thursday, December 21, 2006
Friday, December 15, 2006
Scott Macleod & Mahmoud-Monkey Ahmadinejad: Love at first sight
Sorry for the disappearing act, I'm recovering from a dreadful cold and a dreadful week of the "news". It's hard to blog on the constant assault of our troops, administration, and Commander-in-Chief. It's even harder to blog when our "press" fastidiously recognizes the enemy.
Continuously we hear stories of troop distress, Pelosi-purging, and anti-American sentiment. It's a challenge to weed through it all but more importantly, try and promote the truth so the uninformed public does know. These are truly trying times.
And then I read this.
Ahmadinejad's Ambitions
In an exclusive interview, the Iranian President - and Person of the Year candidate - discusses his conference questioning the Holocaust, his letter to the American people and the state of his nuclear plans
I am sick and tired of these "reporters" that are sympathizing with the enemy:
Ahmadinejad was as spirited as ever - answering questions with questions ("Do you not believe in God?"), correcting the interpreter's translations (he understands some English but prefers not to speak it) and laughing when he felt he had scored a rhetorical point.
I am sick and tired of these "reporters" asking unobtrusive, easy questions to tyrants:
"Why did you write your recent letter to the American people?"
"Was this a public relations exercise to improve your image, or do you really want a dialogue with the United States?"
"The Baker-Hamilton commission recommended the U.S. initiate a dialogue with you. If the Bush Administration reached out to Iran, are you ready to talk to President Bush now?"
This type of interview where an anti-Semitic, murdering dictator is put on a pedestal instead of being questioned on his Jew-hating, Islamofascist ideals. Bush, Cheney, and any current politician is virtually harassed and verbally assaulted by the press while tyrannical enemies are being indulged and praised.
The 21st century media is a joke.
Continuously we hear stories of troop distress, Pelosi-purging, and anti-American sentiment. It's a challenge to weed through it all but more importantly, try and promote the truth so the uninformed public does know. These are truly trying times.
And then I read this.
Ahmadinejad's Ambitions
In an exclusive interview, the Iranian President - and Person of the Year candidate - discusses his conference questioning the Holocaust, his letter to the American people and the state of his nuclear plans
I am sick and tired of these "reporters" that are sympathizing with the enemy:
Ahmadinejad was as spirited as ever - answering questions with questions ("Do you not believe in God?"), correcting the interpreter's translations (he understands some English but prefers not to speak it) and laughing when he felt he had scored a rhetorical point.
I am sick and tired of these "reporters" asking unobtrusive, easy questions to tyrants:
"Why did you write your recent letter to the American people?"
"Was this a public relations exercise to improve your image, or do you really want a dialogue with the United States?"
"The Baker-Hamilton commission recommended the U.S. initiate a dialogue with you. If the Bush Administration reached out to Iran, are you ready to talk to President Bush now?"
This type of interview where an anti-Semitic, murdering dictator is put on a pedestal instead of being questioned on his Jew-hating, Islamofascist ideals. Bush, Cheney, and any current politician is virtually harassed and verbally assaulted by the press while tyrannical enemies are being indulged and praised.
The 21st century media is a joke.
Thursday, December 07, 2006
In Its Entirety
Media Shows Irrational Hysteria on Global Warming
"The Public Has Been Vastly Misinformed," NCPA's Deming Tells Senate Committee
12/6/2006 5:57:00 PM
To: National Desk
Contact: Sean Tuffnell of the National Center for Policy Analysis, 972-308-6481 or sean.tuffnell@ncpa.org
WASHINGTON, Dec. 6 /U.S. Newswire/ -- David Deming, an associate professor at the University of Oklahoma and an adjunct scholar with the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA), testified this morning at a special hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. The hearing examined climate change and the media. Bellow are excerpts from his prepared remarks.
"In 1995, I published a short paper in the academic journal Science. In that study, I reviewed how borehole temperature data recorded a warming of about one degree Celsius in North America over the last 100 to 150 years. The week the article appeared, I was contacted by a reporter for National Public Radio. He offered to interview me, but only if I would state that the warming was due to human activity. When I refused to do so, he hung up on me.
"I had another interesting experience around the time my paper in Science was published. I received an astonishing email from a major researcher in the area of climate change. He said, "We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period." "The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was a time of unusually warm weather that began around 1000 AD and persisted until a cold period known as the "Little Ice Age" took hold in the 14th century. ... The existence of the MWP had been recognized in the scientific literature for decades. But now it was a major embarrassment to those maintaining that the 20th century warming was truly anomalous. It had to be "gotten rid of."
"In 1999, Michael Mann and his colleagues published a reconstruction of past temperature in which the MWP simply vanished. This unique estimate became known as the "hockey stick," because of the shape of the temperature graph. "Normally in science, when you have a novel result that appears to overturn previous work, you have to demonstrate why the earlier work was wrong. But the work of Mann and his colleagues was initially accepted uncritically, even though it contradicted the results of more than 100 previous studies. Other researchers have since reaffirmed that the Medieval Warm Period was both warm and global in its extent.
"There is an overwhelming bias today in the media regarding the issue of global warming. In the past two years, this bias has bloomed into an irrational hysteria. Every natural disaster that occurs is now linked with global warming, no matter how tenuous or impossible the connection. As a result, the public has become vastly misinformed."
---
The NCPA is an internationally known nonprofit, nonpartisan research institute with offices in Dallas and Washington, D. C. that advocates private solutions to public policy problems. NCPA depends on the contributions of individuals, corporations and foundations that share our mission. The NCPA accepts no government grants.
"The Public Has Been Vastly Misinformed," NCPA's Deming Tells Senate Committee
12/6/2006 5:57:00 PM
To: National Desk
Contact: Sean Tuffnell of the National Center for Policy Analysis, 972-308-6481 or sean.tuffnell@ncpa.org
WASHINGTON, Dec. 6 /U.S. Newswire/ -- David Deming, an associate professor at the University of Oklahoma and an adjunct scholar with the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA), testified this morning at a special hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. The hearing examined climate change and the media. Bellow are excerpts from his prepared remarks.
"In 1995, I published a short paper in the academic journal Science. In that study, I reviewed how borehole temperature data recorded a warming of about one degree Celsius in North America over the last 100 to 150 years. The week the article appeared, I was contacted by a reporter for National Public Radio. He offered to interview me, but only if I would state that the warming was due to human activity. When I refused to do so, he hung up on me.
"I had another interesting experience around the time my paper in Science was published. I received an astonishing email from a major researcher in the area of climate change. He said, "We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period." "The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was a time of unusually warm weather that began around 1000 AD and persisted until a cold period known as the "Little Ice Age" took hold in the 14th century. ... The existence of the MWP had been recognized in the scientific literature for decades. But now it was a major embarrassment to those maintaining that the 20th century warming was truly anomalous. It had to be "gotten rid of."
"In 1999, Michael Mann and his colleagues published a reconstruction of past temperature in which the MWP simply vanished. This unique estimate became known as the "hockey stick," because of the shape of the temperature graph. "Normally in science, when you have a novel result that appears to overturn previous work, you have to demonstrate why the earlier work was wrong. But the work of Mann and his colleagues was initially accepted uncritically, even though it contradicted the results of more than 100 previous studies. Other researchers have since reaffirmed that the Medieval Warm Period was both warm and global in its extent.
"There is an overwhelming bias today in the media regarding the issue of global warming. In the past two years, this bias has bloomed into an irrational hysteria. Every natural disaster that occurs is now linked with global warming, no matter how tenuous or impossible the connection. As a result, the public has become vastly misinformed."
---
The NCPA is an internationally known nonprofit, nonpartisan research institute with offices in Dallas and Washington, D. C. that advocates private solutions to public policy problems. NCPA depends on the contributions of individuals, corporations and foundations that share our mission. The NCPA accepts no government grants.
http://www.usnewswire.com/
-0-
/© 2006 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Define "Winning"
Recently the new nominee for the Secretary of Defense has claimed that 'he doesn't believe that we're winning in Iraq.' Here's an excerpt from Breitbart in which Gates is quoted:
Gates, 63, said he believes President Bush wants to see Iraq improve to the point where it can govern and defend itself, while seeking a new approach. "What we are now doing is not satisfactory," Gates said.
"In my view, all options are on the table, in terms of how we address this problem in Iraq," he added.
Asked point-blank by Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., whether the U.S. is winning in Iraq, Gates replied, "No, sir."
Much of the hearing's questioning focused on whether Gates would provide independent advice to Bush, and the former CIA director assured the committee that he would not shirk from that duty.
(Emphasis added)
Now what I find interesting is what Drudge points out today about Tony Snow disagreeing with the situation. I find it quite odd that prior to his nomination that he's throwing the administration and Rumsfeld under the bus. Gates is lining us up for more problems if he already isn't seeing eye-to-eye with the administration.
I expect the SoD to be a loyal individual to our President and to serve him, as we would expect from an employee. We will succeed in Iraq as we are winning the battle. Wars do not last months and democracies don't grow overnight. Our success is not only covered up by the MSM but also by the liberal mouthpieces that only know how to disagree.
HT: Drudge
Gates, 63, said he believes President Bush wants to see Iraq improve to the point where it can govern and defend itself, while seeking a new approach. "What we are now doing is not satisfactory," Gates said.
"In my view, all options are on the table, in terms of how we address this problem in Iraq," he added.
Asked point-blank by Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., whether the U.S. is winning in Iraq, Gates replied, "No, sir."
Much of the hearing's questioning focused on whether Gates would provide independent advice to Bush, and the former CIA director assured the committee that he would not shirk from that duty.
(Emphasis added)
Now what I find interesting is what Drudge points out today about Tony Snow disagreeing with the situation. I find it quite odd that prior to his nomination that he's throwing the administration and Rumsfeld under the bus. Gates is lining us up for more problems if he already isn't seeing eye-to-eye with the administration.
I expect the SoD to be a loyal individual to our President and to serve him, as we would expect from an employee. We will succeed in Iraq as we are winning the battle. Wars do not last months and democracies don't grow overnight. Our success is not only covered up by the MSM but also by the liberal mouthpieces that only know how to disagree.
HT: Drudge
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
