I’m all for two things regarding Libya:

  1. The fall of the Colonel.
  2. Free people exercising Liberty.

In respect to those two things; Libya is a positive so far.  And I’m glad, I think, that we assisted in the struggle.

However, there is circulating a draft constitution for the new, as of yet formed, government.

Part I Article I?

Islam is the Religion of the State, and the principal source of legislation is Islamic Jurisprudence (Sharia).

I’m kinda not so down with the whole “established religion” thang.  I bet the Left isn’t either.

What gives?

I think that taking a suspected criminal into custody and slamming his fingers in th desk drawer to find out who the murderer is is okay.

I think that keeping a suspected terrorist awake for 48 hours in order to get him to tell me where the other terrorists are is is okay to.

The Left doesn’t.


The latest fabrication of the Left is Rumsfeld and his “view” that enhanced interrogation methods don’t work.

Let’s see what he says:

Sounds like Rumsfeld is clear.

“Unquestionably it works … It produced an enormous amount of very very valuable intelligence information.”

I’m not sayin’ – I’m just sayin’

Okay, so, Obama decided that we had to support the Western coalition that wanted to offer air cover to the rebels in Libya.  I think I’m alright with that.  I remain okay with that even though I have friends who are against that very action.

However, we sent our dog into that fight with the explicit expectation that we were gonna simply remove the ability of the government mow down it’s people using airplanes and helicopters.

More and more we are seeing the scope of the mission increase until finally today we see this:

(Reuters) – President Barack Obama has signed a secret order authorizing covert U.S. government support for rebel forces seeking to oust Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, government officials told Reuters on Wednesday.

I don’t like Obama, never have.  However, I have tried to find aspects of his governing that I can accept; Libya was one.  But by signing these secret orders I can’t defend his actions.  I can’t say that he is acting with that “global coalition” that gave him some moral standing.

If you wanna take out a leader of a corrupt State – have at it.  Just say it.  Plain and simple.  So simple that maybe even a real  life guy in Texas could understand.

We’re pushing two weeks now in the US involvement in Libya.  I’ve tried to resist from commenting on the situation because I really wanted to make sure my opinion was more my thoughts and feelings rather than a partisan message surrounding Obama.

I’m not going to get into the constitutionality of what took place.  I’m convinced that either:

  1. It IS constitutional
  2. It doesn’t matter if it isn’t

Either way, we’re over there and involved.  For better or for worse.

Read More

Look, I get it.  Some of us are okay with military action in order to protect our interests.  Others, not so much.

Some folks would like the US to lead in International affairs.  Again, others would rather we took a more passive role and involve ourselves only insomuch as we are part of a larger coalition.

Be that as it may, we are seeing, and will continue to see, how a world reacts with America acting as a partner, not a leader.

As an aside, I am curious.  Can anyone describe the substantial difference in Libya breaking one single UN resolution that makes force okay while Iraq breaking multiple UN resolutions did not justify force?

So, I pointed out yesterday that reporters aren’t very good at reporting.

And then, just today, they’re back at it:

Reuters) – A Somali-born teenager was arrested on Friday for attempting to detonate what he thought was a car bomb at a Christmas Tree lighting ceremony in Oregon, officials said.

The whole article is 457 words.

Number of times the reporters referrenced his religion?  Zero.

Number of times the word Muslim appeared?  Zero.

Number of times the word Islam appeared?  Zero.


So, the Obama administrations latest attempt to “Talk and Communicate” with the world’s bad guys closed another chapter:

Iranian lawmakers have rejected Sen. John Kerry’s request to visit their country, saying the United States needs to change its policies toward Iran before such talks can be effective, according to Iran’s semi-official Fars News Agency.

I have always maintained that discussing things like health care, the economy and terrorism are subjects that lend themselves to public debate.  While there is some gamesmanship going on to be sure, there is no real “statecraft” going on.

When it comes to international diplomacy, there is a need to be purposefully subtle about our intentions.  At times, out right deceitful.  To that end, the government can not be expected to be completely transparent when it comes to things of this nature.

It’s why I have always suspected that we invaded Iraq for reasons that none of us have even debated.  I’m pretty sure it had nothing to do with oil, WMD, terror or revenge.  Maybe it had something to do with Iran?

We are spending a lot of time talking about profiling.  Who should be profiled and who shouldn’t.  There’s even talk about NOT profiling at all.

I have to wonder why.  Why would we NOT use all the information we have?

For example, without even talking about nationality, race, religion or sex we could profile on:

  1. One way ticket purchases bought day of.
  2. One way ticket purchases bought with cash.
  3. Passengers boarding without either checked or carry on luggage.
  4. People who are on ANY watch list.
  5. Passengers who board International flights WITHOUT passports.
  6. If the age of the passenger is between 17 and 40, bump up suspicion quotient.
  7. If the passenger is boarding without family, bump up suspicion quotient.

Then, after building a list of who we SHOULD profile, we could build a list of people we could rule OUT:

  1. Anyone aged 65 or more.
  2. Anyone aged 18 or less.
  3. Women traveling with children.

There is a LOT more that we can do.  There is more we SHOULD do.