Stating The Obvious

STATEMENT #1: Whatever means of fighting the war against Islamic Fundamentalism is the slightest bit effective, the American Soviet Socialist Union will rabidly oppose it:

Cases in point:

"Detainee abuse"

In an effort to show that on the Bush Administration's evil watch the U.S. military has been systematically mistreating prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan with tacit approval or even outright encouragement from its civilian superiors, the American Civil Liberties Union has been demanding the release of dozens of internal military investigative reports. But the two reports on U.S. detainee policy just released in response to an ACLU lawsuit paint a picture quite the opposite of what the ACLU expected.

Though heavily redacted to remove operational details, the reports (by Brigidier Generals Richard Formica and Charles Jacoby) show a Pentagon open to criticism and change, and determined to guarantee detainees the humane treatment promised by President Bush when the war on terror began....

Predictably, the ACLU has cried "whitewash." But what we are seeing is the refusal by Administration critics to see anything other than the "torture narrative" they have constructed.

And that's because their torture narrative is part of the "land of make-believe" they've constructed, a delusionary bubble they inhabit to escape the reality that their dark, blind religion doesn't work and isn't popular or relevant in the real world - and neither are they.

Tracking terrorist finances (h/t CQ)

"The revelation of the CIA's financial spying program is another example of the Bush Administration's abuse of power. The invasion of our personal financial information, without notification or judicial review, is contrary to the fundamental American value of privacy and must be stopped now. It seems the Administration feels entitled to flip through all of our checkbooks. How many other secret spying programs has the Bush administration enacted without Congress, the courts or the public knowing? We need a full accounting of what information has been demanded by the U.S. government, how they have used it, with whom it was shared, and how they intend to repair this grave breech of trust. This program is a glaring example of how this government thinks nothing of widespread abuse of power.

"The government contends that the program is legal since Swift is ultimately a messaging service and not a bank, exempting it from U.S. banking laws. However, Swift is established and owned by banks to assist directly in banking activities. Swift is subject to both U.S. and European law, and it is wrong for the U.S. to demand information without following the established channels.

"Once again, this Administration has performed an end-run around the legislature, allowing for no Congressional approval or oversight, and violating the freedoms Americans falsely believed they could take for granted. Congress should call them to account."

Once again, the ACLU is full of crap. There are, and have been, no abuses of the Swift project, and the ACLU doesn't pretend to cite any. There are no statutes or regulations violated by the Swift project, and the ACLU doesn't pretend to cite any, because the blabbermouth New York Times story explicitly said so.

Which, of course, raises the question of why they felt the overpowering "need" to blow the lid off a "story" that had nothing story-worthy inside, like the Titanic's safes or Al Capone's vault. The Bush Administration has not only kept Congress scrupulously informed of the Swift project, but the President has openly proclaimed on many occasions over the past nearly five years that tracking terrorist finances was one of the prime GWOT tools his government would be using to deprive the enemy of operating resources. And now his political enemies have done another favor for the nation's enemies (and Dubya is highly pissed about it).

Lastly, there is, and can have been, no possibility of the Bushies "flipping through our checkbooks" because, according to an Instapundit emailer who actually worked on the Swift project....

SWIFT is not used for individuals. It is used for processing money transfers, stock transfers and bond transfers from companies, governments, banks, insurance companies and NGO's. [emphasis added]

Moreover, our personal financial information IS available to the government at anytime - through, among other avenues, the Internal Revenue Service. Funny, but you never hear the ACLUniks bitching about that.

The Instapundit emailer concludes:

What the NY Times has essentially done is open up to the terrorists the trails of all their transactions and how the banking procedures of money laundering was done for them by the system. They have essentially stopped dead the ability to track this money and keep it from being put in the hands of our worst enemies. Whether the terrorists might have guessed that their money was being transferred is a moot point. The NY Times had told them that their worst fears have been realized and that they need to find another way to move money around the world. They know it for sure now.

Sounds to me like it's the Times and the ACLU that are abusing power - power they're trying to blatantly steal from a Bush Administration that was elected to it.

But then as far as the Left is concerned, Republicans are not fit to hold power at all, democracy be damned, so any wielding of it by "this Administration" they will consider perforce to be "abusive." And the resulting civilian deaths from terrorist attacks that could have otherwise been prevented but for the Times' usurpations? They'll be Bush's fault, of course - for "failing to connect the dots."


STATEMENT #2: Howard Dean is a moron

As Dave Barry often says, I swear I'm not making this up:

The head of the Democratic Party blamed the Bush Administration's "failed political leadership and lack of foresight and planning" for turning U.S. soldiers into targets for the Iraqi insurgency.

Um, maybe I'm being too logical here, but in war aren't all soldiers "targets"? Isn't that kind of the point? And the risk that every member of our armed forces incurs when they volunteer to serve?

What does Dr. Demented think the military is, a frigging khaki Peace Corps? And doesn't this clearly and candidly indicate that al Donka will never, EVER project U.S. force ANYwhere in the world where American troops might, you know, get shot at?

Personally I think the presence of American forces in Iraq makes the "insurgency" targets. Much, much bigger ones. Just ask "Emir" Zarqawi.


STATEMENT #3: Jack Murtha is an elderly Howard Dean

American presence in Iraq is more dangerous to world peace than nuclear threats from North Korea or Iran, Representative John Murtha, D-PA, said to an audience of more than 200 in North Miami Saturday afternoon.

Murtha is Cindy Sheehan after a makeover. Murtha is pissed that his fifteen minutes of fame are up and he can't fight the hook because he might risk a broken hip. Get this mouthy old bastard back to the dementia ward ASAP, and let Diana Irey drive the twinkiemobile.