Before we can win this war, we need to start acting like we are at war.


ulags. I'll show you gulags, Democretards. A Superprecedent®, Settled Law™ of a gulag:

In 1950 2005, Congress, concerned about communism islamofascism, passed the Detention Act of 1950 2005. The Detention Act of 1950 2005 (the "Act") can be found in the series of books called the "Statutes at Large" in any law library. This law gave the government the capability to arrest and detain those people or groups which were deemed to be subversive and a threat to the government of the United States, and hold people in detention camps around the country.

As the concern over the conflict in Korea Iraq grew, Congress's anxiety over the existence of communist islamofascist groups located in the United States also grew. A survey was ordered to assess available confinement facilities in the United States. The Department of Justice recommended that the camps located at Army and Airforce bases, and former prisoner-of-war camps [and current detainee-of-war camps like Club Gitmo (©Maharushi)], be made available to be used as detention camps. It was also determined that it would also be more cost effective to repair existing camps than it would be to build new camps. In 1952 2007, Congress appropriated $775,000[,000] for the activation and rehabilitation of six[ty] camps.

After you've thought emoted that one over a bit, scroll through Now Playing on your TiVo and find/watch episode 9066 of the reality show Fear Factor sponsored by Post Conspiracy-Nuts®. Better yet, if you like classic sitcoms you'll cry "Whee doggie!" when you hear this one's theme song blaring in Dolby Surround:

This is the story about a man named Debs. A raving socialist who wanted gummit to keep his family fed. Then one day he was protesting World War One and up through the courts came his unanimous conviction. Sedition that is, obstructing recruitment, Treason with a capital T....

....although [Eugene] Debs did not advocate for violence of any kind, merely decrying the imperialist nature of the war won him a federal prison sentence. He had given the offending speech in Canton, Ohio on June 16, 1918. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, esteemed in legal circles today, delivered the opinion of the Court that upheld Debs' conviction....Justice Holmes found that Debs had "obstructed the recruiting and enlistment service of the United States" because he spoke out against the war.

Specifically, Justice Holmes cited two passages uttered by Debs: "You need to know that you are fit for something better than slavery and cannon fodder" and "Don't worry about the charge of treason to your masters; but be concerned about the treason that involves yourselves"....these remarks resulted in Debs being sentenced to 10 years in prison [gulag] with all nine justices of the US Supreme Court concurring in the judgment....

Fast forward through four score and seven years of settled precedents...

We know you don't want us to win in Iraq. If you did, you'd want us to stay until the job was done. What job, you ask? Since you aren't known for your recall abilities (only your ability to get recalled), I'll remind you: It's the job of fully honoring our domestic and international commitments to make Iraq a verifiably Crimes Against Humanity-free, Weapons of Mass Destruction-free, and Terrorist Sponsor-free country, which it wasn't by any stretch of the imagination before our alliance removed the cancer of Saddam Hussein's regime and its totalitarian aggression from the region. It's the job that falls under the category Providing for the Common Defense of our nation and all her citizens. Since you aren't known for your ability to realize when "your" country's facing clear and present threats either, here's another reminder: Saddam Hussein's regime was harboring our enemies, was involved in their attacks on our country (links, ties, connections, and then some), and was working to give them weapons of mass destruction. But you just keep screaming "hype" and MoveOning left along:

As you approach the camp gates, you'll recognize among your fellow future gulagians more than a few very familiar faces. For example, such subversive, traitorous pinkos as leaders of the aptly named Code Pink, of which your beloved patron saint of chiggers and fire ants Windy Wheezin' of the Dynamited Levee is all but, if not already a member, and which willfully obstructs the recruiting and enlistment service of the United States, to the injury of both the service and the United States — a felony under 18 U.S.C. 2387, as is the attempt by Occupation Watch, which it co-founded, to get our troops to mutiny and desert their posts en masse. Competing against Ted al-Qennedy in the camp's Low Dive & Dog Paddle Championship will be Ramsey Clark and his NeverANSWERers, who'd never act to stop war or end racism started by such bigoted, warmongering madmen as Saddam Hussein and Slobodan Milosevic, simply because their group is too busy serving as an active propaganda agency for bigotted, warmongering madmen. Soloists in the Detainees Choir's rendition of "All We Are Asking Is Give Terrorists A Chance" include Veterans for Peace Surrender members who, unlike academicians who merely support deserters (never our soldiers) or try to obstruct recruitment, conspire in actually aiding and abetting desertions. While serving up lunch at the Durbin-Hinchey Dining Hall for hungry campers returning from their grueling mornings of trying to invent new ways to compare our troops' commander-in-chief to Adolph Hitler, are none other than the artistic and intellectual members of NION (Nothin' In Our Noggins) whose state of unconscionableness rivals that of Aboop Mooseflab al-Zitcoward's most feverish, vitriolic, anti-America ravings. Just part of the diverse multi-culture of camp life you're going to find and enjoy there, Democretins.

But, but, but — drivel it out, Democrasshat — but, but Bush lied and stuff, yeah, Bush lied, you know, and kids died!, and, you know, no blood for oil! — finished? — and, like, you know — (apparently not) — there were no weaponed of mass destuckion — wow, nearly a complete phrase there — Bush knew!, like, he knew! the attacks would happen, and, and, and Bush don't care about black people! — now you're getting off track — and, and just want taxcuts for the rich!, not forthechildren!, just thetoponepercent! — that $500 check I got must mean I'm a toponepercenter too, huh? — like, and, you know, is is, I don't recall, everybody does it let's moveon — O.K. — just about sex! — that's — Bush=hitler!! — really — Bushlied!!! — quite — polpotgulagconcentrationcamp!!!! bloodforoil!!!!! — enough!

So "Bush lied"? Let's try something that you'll find completely novel. It's called laaaaahjik. Ready? (Nevermind, dumb question.) Here's what the president said about Iraq: He said what happens there

matters to you, to your children and to the future, because this is a challenge we must face not just in Iraq but throughout the world. We must not allow the 21st century to go forward under a cloud of fear that terrorists, organized criminals, drug traffickers will terrorize people with chemical and biological weapons the way the nuclear threat hung over the heads of the whole world through the last half of this century. That is what is at issue.

Then he added that our enemies

may deploy compact and relatively cheap weapons of mass destruction — not just nuclear, but also chemical or biological, to use disease as a weapon of war. Sometimes the terrorists and criminals act alone. But increasingly, they are interconnected, and sometimes supported by hostile countries.

In conclusion he agreed that

It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.

And he

looks forward to a democratically supported regime that would permit us to enter into a dialogue leading to the reintegration of Iraq into normal international life.

Even years later he contended that

there was a substantial amount of biological and chemical material unaccounted for. That is, at the end of the first Gulf War, we knew what he had. We knew what was destroyed in all the inspection processes and that was a lot. And then we bombed with the British for four days in 1998. We might have gotten it all; we might have gotten half of it; we might have gotten none of it. But we didn't know.

Oh, all right. I lied. Those aren't President Bush's words. They're the words of former president Billjob Lecherson Qlinton.

Let's try again, then. Here's what Condoleeza Rice said about Sodamn Insane:

It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.

Now this much is undisputed. The open questions are: what should we do about it? How, when, and with whom?

Oops, did it again. I lied, Dhimmifibs died. Hilldabeast Chickenhawk'em al-Qlinton said that.

O.K. I'm only going to say this once. I will not use quotes from that woman — Madam Notsobright. Instead, this is what Colin Powell said about the evilness of doing nothing to remove such threat before it affects our and the world's security:

We believe that he needs to fulfill all the Security Council obligations and that that is an appropriate way to deal with him.

Not only that, Secretary Powell said that

Saddam Hussein, armed with chemical and biological weapons, is a threat to the international community.

Secretary Powell then said that the

record will show that Saddam Hussein has produced weapons of mass destruction, which he's clearly not collecting for his own personal pleasure, but in order to use....

Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.

Speaking to college students, Secretary Powell advised that the world has not

seen, except maybe since Hitler, somebody who is quite as evil as Saddam Hussein.

Secretary Powell said that, should the Iraqi despot

break out of the box that we kept him in...[one] scenario is that he could in fact somehow use his weapons of mass destruction....

Another scenario is that he could kind of become the salesman for weapons of mass destruction — that he could be the place that people come and get more weapons.

Then Secretary Powell said that if history has taught us anything, it is that

if you don't stop a horrific dictator before he gets started too far — that he can do untold damage.

If the world had been firmer with Hitler earlier, then chances are that we might not have needed to send Americans to Europe during the Second World War.

Less than a year later, Secretary Powell emphasized that

We are now dealing with a threat, I think, that is probably harder for some to understand because it is a threat of the future, rather than a present threat, or a present act such as a border crossing, a border aggression. And here, as the president described in his statement yesterday, we are concerned about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's ability to have, develop, deploy weapons of mass destruction and the threat that that poses to the neighbors, to the stability of the Middle East, and therefore, ultimately to ourselves.

Drats, you caught me with my brooches down. Don't go turning blue in the face now. I'll admit it. It was Madam Allblithe who said all that. But we were never alone in the White House together!

To make up for all this lying, I'll stop with these few quotes from Karl Rove on Iraq which I'm sure you're going to just love:

As long as Saddam remains in power and in confrontation with the world, the positive evolution we and so many would like to see in the Middle East is less likely to occur. His Iraq remains a source of potential conflict in the region, a source of inspiration for those who equate violence with power and compromise with surrender, a source of uncertainty for those who would like to see a stable region in which to invest.

You bet he was thinking of Halliburton when he added that "invest" remark. Then the Rovester cranked up his eeevil rightwing mindcontrol machine and sent out this eeeevil message to every programmable redstater robotvoter who wasn't living under 7,500 feet of solid neutronium, safe from its eeeeevil brain-altering carrier waves:

Change inside Iraq is necessary not least because it would help free the Middle East from its preoccupation with security and struggle and survival, and make it easier for its people to focus their energies on commerce and cooperation.

For any stragglers living atop high mountaintops and whatnot, he let loose an eeeeeevil amplified pulse which caused his wildly misinformed dumbiacs to believe that the president

has said that over the long-term, the best way to address the challenge Iraq poses is "through a government in Baghdad — a new government — that is committed to represent and respect its people, not repress them; that is committed to peace in the region."

No lie. What I mean is, is that, yes, actually, it, uh, well, is. I so sincerely regret that you caught me lying to you again. Those are really the words of Sandy Burglar. Oh and by the way, I lied about stopping too:

Really, just need a couple more. On the up and up, here's what Donald Rumsfeld said about the "elected" dictator (no, not President Bush, Dhimmoonbats; the bearded guy — that scruffy-looking one whose last known address was a drained septic tank): Secretary Rumsfeld told us

it's clear that we have been unable to strike any kind of a productive relationship with Saddam Hussein, and as soon as Saddam Hussein is no longer the head of that government, that there's new regime that follows him, that we will look forward to finding ways in which we could engage them in a much more productive fashion, particularly after they comply with all of the UN sanctions. There's an eagerness on our part to do that. But I think as long as he remains in office as the head of that state, it's unlikely that we could have anything but the current policy in place, with very little prospects for relief.

All right. Done. And that wasn't Donald Rumsfeld who said this. (What were you expecting?) They're Secretary of Defense William ruShtowar Cohen's words. (Just in case you're keeping score, I lied about needing moore also.)

Lies, all lies! The most serious, most blatant kinds of lies. A huge tangled knot of lies. So were they all "execut[ing] a comprehensive and sustained plan of deception" too? Why would Thomas Graham, Jr. — Bill Qlinton's special representative for arms control, non-proliferation, and disarmament — start the warning balls rolling with speeches about why Iraq, Lybia, and Iran "must be prevented from acquiring weapons of mass destruction at all costs," if they weren't getting ready to execute such a plan? ("At all costs"; isn't that — how do you Libericans say it? — rather extreme?) Why were HolyJoe Lieberman, Dianne Finkenstein, Barbara Milquetoastski, Tom Dasshole, Hanoi John F'in' al-Qerry, Bob Graham-nuts, Harold Fjord, Tom Lantos, Tom Judgers-Not-Jurors Harkin, Barbara NARAL-darling Boxer, Robert KKKleagler-elf Byrd, Weasley Clark, Jacques ChIraq, John Hairwarts, Dick Gumphardt, Jumpin' Jim Jeffords, Tedfish al-Qennedy, Carl NoRice Levin, Patty Osama-Schoolbuilder Murray, Nancy bitterPill-O'See, Soddom&Sons Productions™ filmmaker Scott Ritter, John TriggerPuller Rockefeller, and Henry Waneman helping them to pull off that plan as well? Does this mean Qlinton=Hitler?

The answer, of course, is it wasn't nor is a plan of deception. It's something you DemoSorosickos completely stopped doing right after America elected a Republican to her highest office and you became pathologically obsessed and blinded by your incomparable Sole Quest™ to grab power for just yourselves and your own benefit and selfish interests — ours and our country's be damned. It was and is facing reality:

The network of terrorist organizations which attacked us on and before September 11, 2001, and which is still attacking us and our allies today (our troops are "us" too, by the way, Deceiverats), is part of an international conspiracy to oust the United States completely from any and all involvement in the Middle East and thus undermine and effectively defeat our vital national security interests in that region. Those interests include our treaties with Egypt, Israel, and Jordan, our access to that portion of the world's energy supply market, and our rooting out and destroying every source of ongoing buildups and readiness for mass-murderous attacks on our and our allies' civilian populations. States currently assisting that terrorist network — namely, Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Sudan, and Syria — are part of this conspiracy. Thanks to our present reality-based executive branch, Iraq no longer is.

Knowing these threats we were facing from an Iraq occupied by a known terrorist-supporting, massgrave-digging, ceasefire-breaking enemy of international peace and security — for example, too,

A senior Iraqi official has now admitted that their two large Unmanned Aerial Vehicles — one developed in the early 90s and the other under development in late 2000 — were intended for delivery of biological weapons.

(emphasis added) — it's a Good Thing we ground his regime into dust when we did, rather than just muleheadedly respected his country's sovereignty (unlike he did regarding Kuwait's) and outright ignored his continuous violations of that cease-fire agreement which he himself signed (not only precluding any peace treaty, but meaning we were still at war with him). Or perhaps you rather we'd left the world to the proven mercies of Uncle Saddam and just taken the chance, regardless how slimmer it became, that none of those UAV's nor something like them would've wound up hovering over San Francisco, or that a thousand of its residents wouldn't have smelt sweet apples before they all violently vomited and died? Are you so willing to literally bet your life — as well as ours — on a hope that avoiding the "mistake" of removing such an international war criminal from power and, instead, forever trying to contain him, when all previous attempts at that have miserably failed, will somehow increase our security?

Nonetheless, you just keep on moving on, Deludedrats, burying your heads in the sand and blaming our country and our country's president during wartime for everything under the sun — including our increasing utter refusals at the ballot box to hire you for any public position that might require you have more responsibility than expert, frequent use of the latest-model mop or broom. Just see how much more of our trust you'll never earn when you again go out and attempt to sabotage our country's war efforts with your openly subversive and seditious "movement" towards denying her the total, final victory she must have over death-loving terrorists if she's to preserve both herself and those rights you're now so irresponsibly abusing. Continue giving aid and comfort to such terrorists whose most insidious utterings against those efforts, and whose causes, based on their real hatred for America and her leaders, have become increasingly indistiguishable from your own — even as they're bent on eradicating all who aren't like them, including you.

In the meantime, while you're hoping they're "probably not capable of building even a crude nuclear weapon," while you're opposing every effort we're making to keep those from being you moonbatards' famous last words, while you're primping and pimping your "movement" for and on every Terrorphile-Stream Media network from Al-jazeera to Al-CNN (Callit-iNsurgency-Notterrorency), while you're busily trying to plant those bright neon signs of weakness flashing We're Not United! Handringers Oasis! Appeasers Resort & Hotel! so attractively in the terrorists' eyes, while you're screaming we can "win without war," while you're asking "why attack Iraq when there were greater threats to the security of our nation?" as if in the event we ever did go after any of those "greater threats" you wouldn't come out against that as well, while you're offering nothing in the way of any cognizable alternative other than "hey, I know, let's retreat and surrender! that'll make it all better," while you're more concerned about why the terrorists hate us than about why the few we haven't captured, killed, or permanently scattered yet haven't stopped breathing, while you're calling unprecedented free and open elections, unprecedented democratic and constitutional guarantees, and unprecedented hope for the tens of millions of lives we helped liberate from brutal oppression and murderous fascism nothing but a "quagmire," while you're vying for the title of Sycophant of the Millennium exclusively awarded by backstabbing "allies" like Grance and Fermany, while you're holding on to your blind faith that Sodumb & Bin Dumber "hated each other" even in the face of more and more facts repeatedly proving you wrong, while you're continually moaning "no WMDs found" even after we continued to find more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more evidence of them, while you're moonbattily howling that we need to forsake our international obligations and just abandon the Iraqi people and their country to international terrorists who're just dying to make it their base of operations against the whole world, while you're screeching how much these cowardly child-targeting and child-killing vipers need to be understood and called benign-sounding names like "insurgents," "militants," or "freedom fighters" instead of demanding we do whatever it takes to obliterate them all off the face of the earth so they won't be able to ever again exist as anything more horrible than a bad memory, while you're feeling we still have the luxury of waiting around for help from Saddam's most-favored nations that won't ever arrive, and wouldn't ever be reliable or adequate even if it did, rather than acting now to save people threatened by terrorists and their state sponsors, while you're burying your duly departed International (sic[k]) "Freedom" Center Centre and Osama Theme Park, while you're ringing your hands over the islamofascist invasion of EUrabia, while you're <moonbatalert>blaming everyone except the terrorists</moonbatalert> when there is a warning the latter might attack us just like you'd blamed everyone except yourselves and the terrorists when there was no warning they would, while you're abusing what little official power you have in bullying any of our wartime congressional leaders with your manifestly trumped-up, solely politically-motivated indictments just for your own party's sake, interests, and welfare and never for the American public's, while you're superglued on stupid, while you're desperately trying to convince us you have at long last reanimated your sole but long-dead cranial neuron, and while, out of your base frustration at and hatred for an America in which you justifiably possess no real power, you're otherwise acting dupably and duplicitously on behalf of our craven enemy in furtherance of his aims, don't ever recall this: Every time your "movement" stages an anti-war anti-America protest, not only do you overtly give aid and comfort to that enemy but you divert police resources and manpower away from helping find his spies and operatives on our own soil. That's because the police have to look out for you instead of being on the lookout for them. If I were a terrorist bent on killing American "infidels" in a "martyrdom operation," I'd have no difficulty figuring into my surveillance or attack plans one of your protests as a diversionary tactic, knowing full well that law-enforcement presence around key infrastructure targets is necessarily going to be reduced. Emote that one over too.

With all this willful, hate-based subversiveness, sedition, advocating of mutiny and desertions, sabotaging of our war efforts, and giving of overt aid and comfort to our enemy, you aren't helping us win this war at all, Deleakerats. Indeed, you'd rather our country retreat into isolationism, renege on her international obligations, wait only until more muslumass-murderous attacks have left thousands more of her citizens dead (and get blamed for those too), and yet still do nothing afterwards but offer any of her surviving ones more counseling. That's the surest way to lose this war and plunge our country — out of sheer desperation and utmost necessity — into a very real paranoid police state. While you may want that, no truly freedom-loving citizen does. The latter knows in his bones that, to quote a great president, "there is no peace without victory."

Predictably, you don't get this. You miserably fail to realize, as the TeddyJo al-Qennedy Resignation Petition (Guardian WatchBlog) puts it:

We do have enemies, and our enemies have chosen this war and this battleground. We cannot retreat from it. Whether we like it or not, whether we agree on how we got there or not, we are at war with them in Iraq now. The recent horrific beheading of Nick Berg shows us exactly what kind of people those enemies are, and what they want. We must rid the Middle East of these terrorists — that's what the War on Terror is all about. And Ted Kennedy [and each and every other Traitorat] has repeatedly given aid and comfort to the enemy in various ways in the course of this war.

Your own words and deeds keep proving it's pointless to ever hope you'll get any of this and somehow change.

Gulagton Hotel & Resort Polpotville, Traitornia( partial guest list )
Bin Laden Cafeteria: Tom Andrews, Joan Baez, Medea Benjamin, David Bischel, Jane Bright, Cher, Noam Chomsky, David Cortright, David Cross, Kelly Dougherty, Daniel Ellsberg, Jodie Evans, Melvin A. Goodman, Tim Goodrich, Woody Harrelson, Dustin Hoffman, Michael Hoffman, Rickie Lee Jones, Dolores Kesterson, Lila Lipscomb, Serge Louchnikov, Kevin Martin, Nadia McCaffrey, Ray McGovern, Bill Mitchell, Robert K. Musil, Sue Niederer, Jeff Norman, Sean O'Neill, Patton Oswalt, Rick Overton, Edward Peck, Lou Plummer, Nooshin Razani, Jonathan Richman, Susan Sarandon, Susan Shaer, Cindy Sheehan, Martin Sheen, Michelle Shocked, Fernando Suarez del Solar, Celeste Zappala, Dante Zappala, Howard Zinn. Che Guevara Recreation Centre: Brian Becker, Leslie Cagan, Stanley Cohen, Danny Glover, Barbara Lee, C. Clark Kissinger, John Walker Lindh, James McDermott, Michael Moore, Lynne Stewart, Oliver Stone. Waterbucket Brigade: Dick Durbin, Jay Rockefeller, Ron Wyden.		Taliban Memorial Soccer Stadium: Aimee Allison, Amy Hagopian, Charlie Anderson, Sarah Bardwell, Medea Benjamin, Peter Camejo, Pat Dooley, Eve Ensler, Jodie Evans, Dennis Kyne, Craig Rosebraugh, George Soros, Gloria Steinem. Surrender Seminar: Saundra Addison-Britto, Brenda Allen, Medea Benjamin, Sophie Bloch, Jacqueline (Jackie) Cabasso, Kelly Campbell, Kymberlie Quong Charles, Alona Clifton, Felicia Eaves, Chuck Fager, Lisa Fithian, George Friday, Joseph Gainza, Liz Rivera Goldstein, Van Gosse, Christopher Harrison, Leslie Kielson, Maleena Lawrence, Judith LeBlanc, Cliff Suk-Jae Lee, Siu Hin Lee, Rahul Mahajan, Jessica Marshall, George Martin, Cristina Martinez, Michael T. McPhearson, David Meieran, Gael Murphy, Efia Nwangaza, Michael O'Gorman, Baltazar (Bal) Pinguel, Bryan Proffitt, Amy Quinn, Virginia Rodino, Ann Roesler, Nancy Romer, Sobukwe Shukura, Fernando Suarez del Solar, Denise Thomas, Prasad Venugopal, Susan Wenger, Bob Wing.

Now, mind heart you, I'm not suggesting that anyone question your patriotism. On the contrary. I'm demanding that the blazingly clear lack of it you repeatedly show in overtly giving my country's cruelest enemies valuable aid and comfort (to them) in time of war, subject you both to federal-court trial for knowing and willful acts of treason and, pending the jury's verdict, to immediate detention in those gulags you ceaselessly complain exist on our soil. In the manifest certitude you are again proven wrong, this time with regard to their existence, then I'm also demanding that that be remedied as well.

To put it most succinctly:

Get in the damn fight, or stay out of the way until it's over. Stop trying to undermine the morale of our military and our people at home.

We have appropriated vast sums, not only for our own protection, but also to strengthen freedom throughout the world. We are capturing terrorist leaders right and left, thus weakening their ability to successfully attack us. We are, in short, doing all we are capable of doing to confront and permanently remove a clear, present, and continuing danger to the security of the United States. And still you want us believe we aren't making any progress?

That's why I believe you must stay out of the way until "the damn fight" is over. Then it'll be an easier fight, over in a matter of years instead of decades, since you won't be anywhere around again actively hindering it. You'll personally have all the free health care and all the free public housing you could ever want. We won't even require that you pay any taxes for an "unjust and unnecessary" war. We'll be making all your dreams of not ever becoming involved or associated in any way with our country's upcoming victory over global terrorism come absolutely true.

Of course there may not be a John Ashcroft coming after you in the middle of the night. But there will be an Alberto Gonzoles. You know, the person you claim did everything but draw up the blueprints for the Gulag at Gitmo® because of a memo he received which said laws prohibiting torture do "not apply to the President's detention and interrogation of enemy combatants." So you can take great discomfort in the thought feeling that he has more experience at the job of gulaging than his predecessor, Mr./Ms. Enemy Democombatant.

What? You're saying this might be considered cruel and unusual punishment? Doubtful. As in previous total wars, even our federal courts recognize that our nation is fighting for its survival as a free nation, that treason threatens her survival, that "sedition against the United States is a crime against the nation," and that Congress may take and has taken steps "to provide for the common defense, to preserve the sovereignty of the United States as an independent nation, and to guarantee to each State a republican form of government," among which include treating "seditious conduct as a matter of vital national concern." Bringing you moonbatraitors to justice is only a matter, then, of presenting "sufficient evidence":

We are not unmindful of the fact that the United States is now engaged in a total war for national survival and that total war of the modern variety cannot be won by a doubtful, disunited nation in which any appreciable sector is disloyal. For that reason our enemies have developed psychological warfare to a high degree in an effort to cause unrest and disloyalty. Much of this type of warfare takes the form of insidious propaganda in the manner and tenor displayed by petitioner's three pamphlets. Crude appeals to overthrow the government or to discard our arms in open mutiny are seldom made. Emphasis is laid, rather, on such matters as the futility of our war aims, the vices of our allies and the inadequacy of our leadership. But the mere fact that such ideas are enunciated by a citizen is not enough by itself to warrant a finding of a criminal intent to violate Section 3 of the Espionage Act. Unless there is sufficient evidence from which a jury could infer beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to bring about the specific consequences prohibited by the Act, an American citizen has the right to discuss these matters either by temperate reasoning or by immoderate and vicious invective without running afoul of the Espionage Act of 1917. [Hartzell v. United States, 322 U.S. 680, 689]

The biggest evidence, of course, is the uncontested fact you did not and still do not want us to defeat our enemies — including Iraq's fascist dictator, with whom we were still at war even before we found enough will to finally "finish the job" of removing him, and now his longtime al-Qaeda pal Aboob Zitcoward — and have done and are still doing every overt thing within your rapidly fading powers to effectively prevent us from defeating them. You are traitors to your country. You are traitors to freedom. You are, far unlike anyone else, concerned about no one and nothing but yourselves and how you may seize and hold power. You're no better than the islamofascists we're fighting. Like you, they would, if given the chance, impose on everyone else a regime of total hopelessness and fear in which their subjects have no right to choose anything except complete submission under shari'a or, in your case, liberal law. Gratefully, this nation's free citizenry shows no intention of ever submitting to either.

I'm fully aware that it's incredibly futile to ask you to recall that, without any fair warnings, our enemy reduced two of our tallest buildings to rubble, targeted and killed thousands of our and other nations' civilians, seriously wounded tens of thousands more, and formally declared war on us. Yet not even one Defeatistrat member of Congress bothered to submit the first resolution formally declaring war against him or any of his state supporters. At least several Republicans did.

Obviously, in accordance with his capabilities, our enemy has no intention of fighting a limited war with us. So why are you thinking feeling we must try to fight one with him now? Do you yourselves not have the will to fight anything else? Even when it is necessary and proper to defend our way of life?

In a war of attrition, our enemy believes that any apparent lack of will on our part, and no such lack on his, gives him the better hope of becoming the victor. A war of annihilation, not attrition, on the other hand is one that he is totally incapable of waging against anyone right now. But not us. Given his and our capabilities, it is the only one where he is always, fatally placed at a disadvantage. Then why are you wanting to practicably hand him that limited-war advantage he desires? Why are you not demanding that we fight, instead, the kind of war he can never win? Are you suggesting we wait until he grows strong enough so he can engage us in a fair fight? Being the master at the waiting game that he is, this is exactly what our enemy desires too. For the sake of our way of life, about which you've never shown any unselfish concern, we should give him no such chance:

We should issue fair warnings to civilian populations for them either to promptly evacuate before we turn Damascus into Dresden and Tehran into Tokyo, or to immediately begin rising up against and liberating themselves from their aggressive, terrorist-supporting oppressors so we can move in quickly to join and assist them. The choice of which one happens would be theirs, not the terrorists' nor the oppressors' harboring those terrorists. In a war against global aggression by fascists who hold a collective death wish, whose highest rank in their cowardly shadow-hidden force is "martyr," whose only real targets are civilians, and who must rely wholly on a supportive or at least passive population to harbor or hide them, it truly is a stark matter of being with us or with the terrorists. If our goal is to defeat them completely and forever, we must allow no in between. This applies to you too, Dhimmirats.

Imagine Iraqi democracy. It isn't hard to do. Nothing terrorists can hope for. No religion of jihad too. Imagine all the Iraqi people, living their lives in freedom.

Imagine no Middle East tyrants. I wonder if you can. No Syrian and Iranian ones. Freedom also for every woman. Imagine all Islamic peoples, each sharing an equal vote.

You may say I'm a dreamer. But I'm not the only one. When you're transported to your gulags, then we'll start to win this one.

	5:13 PM

Comments (registered users)