Atlas Shrugs

Pamela Geller, Part II - Front Page Interview

Front Page magazine is running part II of my interview with Jamie Glazov here. If you missed part I, go here. Today we talked about Aqsa Parvez. Women -- it's what the war is really about.

IRAN: The Silence of the Media

I have a piece today in the Canada Free Press on the perfidy of the media in their lack of coverage of the Iranian revolution. This historic event has cataclysmic implications for the course of human events; instead, the media obsesses over the cocktail of drugs has-been Michael Jackson was using to assuage the pain of his oh so tragic life. Ugh.

Go here and read every word. It's a thrilla.

 

Excerpt:

Despite Obama’s passivity, Iran and its henchmen are blaming America for the uprising. Hezbollah’s deputy leader, Sheikh Naim Qassem, said Thursday: “The extent of Western and American involvement in Iran’s internal affairs is now clear. What is going on in Iran is not a simple protest against the results of the presidential election. There are riots and attacks in the streets that are orchestrated from the outside in a bid to destabilise the country’s Islamic regime.”

As that regime strikes back hard, I do not believe the movement has been quelled, but I do believe it has been silenced. And this is partly due to the failure of the Western media. The mainstream media fearlessly took on Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney. They were so tough on those who didn’t share their ideological views. They had no fear of those they ridiculed, marginalized, tongue lashed mercilessly. Who can forget how they climbed all over each other to get embedded into Iraq so that they could make America look terrible?

But when it came to really doing their job, they have been absent on Iran. Why weren’t they clamoring to get into Iran to cover an historic, cataclysmic event? CNN has been the only news network to cover Iran in any depth. FOX has been negligent in its lack of coverage. Left leaning sites on the Internet have been leading the way – notably the Huffington Post, whose reporter Nico Pitney has been almost a singular voice in speaking up for the Iranian protesters. And blogs like Revolutionary Road and Get Honest Third Eye deserve commendation for doing the job the mainstream media has not been doing. Get Honest Third Eye had the first video that showed an Iranian being shot on camera by government officials. The shooting occurs while the person filming is quite far away, but the video then shows closer images of his body.

It is indelible images like those that reveal the full horror of what has been going on in Iran. But now, Iran’s citizen journalists have gone dark. The tweets are not coming in. “New” twitters, pro-Ahmadinejad (twitters with ironic names like “antifascista”) have been tweeting vile propaganda. The media can talk about Michael Jackson all day, with no news coming out of Iran to distract them.

The only losers are those who are yearning to be free.

Lappen Interviews Geller: Part III The Evils of Islamic Political Ideology

"The oppression of non-believers exists in every Islamic country. Shari'a law is oppressive. All those terrible acts committed in the name of Islam---honor killings, clitorectomies, death for apostasy, death to hypocrites---all happen under shari'a law. This is not under in any way, shape or form compatible with Democratic law. There's no such thing as a little shari'a law. It's like being a little bit pregnant." Pamela Geller

Right Side News just published part three of my comprehensive interview with the distinguished journalist Alyssa Lappen.

Among those fiercely opposing such religious and human rights apartheid, has been the incomparable AtlasShrugs publisher, Pamela Geller. In this third interview in an exclusive Right Side News series, investigative journalist Alyssa A. Lappen continues her discussion with Geller---this time on Islamic oppression of non-Muslims. [Read Part One here; read Part Two here]

The Evils of Islamic Political Ideology: Oppression of non-Muslims Part Three

Islamic Oppression of non-Muslims

By Alyssa A. Lappen
RightSideNews Copyright © 2009 

[....]

On these shari'a (i.e., Islamic law) concepts rest the Muslim contention that the United Nations' 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is inadequate: The UDHR neither appoints Muslims guardians of humanity, nor restricts the rights of non-Muslims and women. Therefore, 56 Muslim nations in the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) consider the Universal Declaration of Human Rights obsolete and irrelevant. They want "an independent permanent body to promote human rights" among U.N. member states "in accordance with" the Cairo Declaration and its foundational shari'a legal code---denying all essential human rights to non-Muslims and women.

The OIC ultimately hopes to replace universal human rights with universal shari'a law, granting superiority to the Muslim ummah ("nation") while imposing dhimmitude, --- i.e., intense, institutionalized subservience, probably best described as human rights apartheid --- upon all others. Indeed, the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI), rooted in shari'a law and adopted in August 1990 at the 19^th Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers, like the Qur'an presupposes that mankind is already obliged to follow all commandments of Islamic law:

"[N]o one as a matter of principle has the right to suspend in whole or in part or violate or ignore [fundamental rights and universal freedoms for Muslims] in as much as they are binding divine commandments, which are contained in the Revealed Books of God and were sent through the last of His Prophets to complete the preceding divine messages thereby making their observance an act of worship and their neglect or violation an abominable sin, and accordingly every person is individually responsible ... for their safeguard. (emphasis added)

The OIC has been building pressure for years. In December 2005, Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal revealed his "Mecca Declaration" to a Jeddah "preparatory meeting of OIC ministers"---a 10-year "plan of action to confront the challenges of the 21^st century" to counter a "harsh offensive on Islam from enemies abroad and some of its own children with deviant ideologies." Turkish OIC secretary general Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu praised the plan as a "roadmap for Islamic common action."

Indeed, the OIC has always adulated tyranny and oppression, conforming to the classical Islamic ideology of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna---and his contemporary Hajj Amin al-Husseini. Upon his 1929 appointment as Jerusalem mufti, al-Husseini circulated faked postcards of Al Aqsa mosque flying a "Zionist" flag atop the Temple Mount to inflame Muslim hatred and violence against Jerusalem's Jewish majority. [1] The Muslim Brotherhood mimicked this very "defense" of Islam by establishing the OIC after a lone lunatic man set fire to Al Aqsa in 1969. The MB in this way conveniently wall-papered its hope of eliminating the "Zionist occupation" --- that is, of entirely purging Jews and Judaism from the ancient Jewish capitol, just as Mohamed had purged Jews from Mecca and Arabia.

In March 1970, "pending the liberation of Jerusalem," the First Islamic Conference of Ministers of Foreign Affairs established its Jeddah General Secretariat. (No surprise that the OIC now wants to wrest sovereignty over the Temple Mount from Israel.) In 1973, the OIC planned to discriminate further by creating the Islamic Development Bank (IDB) "in accordance with the principles of the Shari'a."

For decades afterwards, longtime World Union of Progressive Judaism (WUPJ) representative, historian David G. Littman, warned of a concerted effort at the U.N. to supplant universal human rights with the shari'a-based discriminatory system of dhimmitude. He was correct.

In May 2007, 36^th Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers (ICFM) in Islamabad resolved to impose human rights apartheid through a new Islamic Charter on Human Rights, a Convention on Women's Rights in Islam and an Islamic Covenant Against Racial Discrimination. The ICFM also seeks U.N. "observer status" for various "interested non-governmental organizations (NGOs)," undoubtedly including many Islamic "charities." 

Naturally, Muslim leaders deny their discriminatory intentions. At the 6^th Session of the Human Rights Council on Dec. 10, 2007, for example, Pakistan Ambassador to the U.N. Masood Khan falsely contended on OIC behalf that its 56 Muslim member nations had "made substantial contributions to the development of the Universal Declaration and the two International Covenants," concerning matters of "religious freedom, social justice, the indivisibility of human rights and the right to self-determination."

Yet Islamic and African countries that regularly violate human rights dominate the HRC, which favors Islamic blasphemy laws making it a capital offense to quote Qur'anic passages or shari'a law, much less to criticize Mohammed in any forum at the U.N. This shari'a-based mindset takes Islam as inviolable---and all that that implies.

Thus in 2008 the Geneva office of the 47-member U.N. Human Rights Council---where historian Littman is an NGO---began implementing shari'a principles even as it made the very word verboten. On March 26, 2009, followed the 23-nation HRC "simple majority" passage of a Pakistani resolution to protect "against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general."

As Islamic scholar Ann Elizabeth Mayer notes in Islam and Human Rights: Tradition and Politics,

[N]o theory in international law ... supports the notion that fundamental human rights may be curtailed --- much less permanently curtailed --- by reference to the requirements of any particular religion. Under international law, non-Muslims cannot be legally deprived of their rights by the use of Islamic standards. There is also no warrant under international law for Muslims being deprived of their rights due to governmental application of restrictions taken from Islamic law." (Mayer, Westview Press, 2^nd edition, p. 64) 

[...]

AAL: Does oppression of others under Islam vary or is it more or less universal?

Atlas: The oppression of non-believers exists in every Islamic country. Shari'a law is oppressive. All those terrible acts committed in the name of Islam---honor killings, clitorectomies, death for apostasy, death to hypocrites---all happen under shari'a law. This is not under in any way, shape or form compatible with Democratic law. There's no such thing as a little shari'a law. It's like being a little bit pregnant. Shari'a taints the law. You cannot introduce this bad blood into good law and end up with good law.

It is like the [1958 classic horror movie] "The Blob. The more the blob consumes, the bigger it gets, the more it eats, the more it morphs into something bigger and bigger. Society is then completely overwhelmed. And we see it in America. We see the introduction of shari'a in America. When workers in Greeley [Colorado] or Emporia [Kansas] insist on prayer time in the work place, this is a form of Islamic supremacism. So are foot baths in public places like airports or universities, or Muslim-only prayer rooms in universities. They are special rights for special classes. So are special prayer rights for a special class, in this case Muslims in public schools, that is, giving Muslims special prayer times or closing schools on Muslim holidays. Some places like Seattle, Washington have also introduced special swim time for Muslims in public pools, often paid by taxpayers' public, government funds.

In and of itself, it seems innocent. So, the boy needs to pray. It's no big deal. Give him a special place and time for prayer. But this is what Muslims do. It is part of the [Islamization] movement. This needs to be seen in the context of an overall assault on a society. Muslims who have left their countries to escape this oppression should be speaking out the loudest but they are not.

AAL: Aren't there are some ex-Muslims and a handful of Muslims speaking out about the assault on Western Democratic values?

Atlas: Wafa Sultan is the only American in decades whom threats have forced to live in hiding. She should be hidden in White House. The media's lack of coverage of her case is criminal. Hers should be a cause célèbre. Her situation is among the most damaging to freedom of speech.

AAL: What's the prognosis for positive change?

Atlas: If the hate crime laws pass under a very Islamic-sympathizing president, then voices and websites like mine will be shut down. It will be over. The line in the sand rests on freedom of speech. That is the basis of this country.

Even ugly speech. We see and saw this in "death to the Jews" rallies. We saw it the last generation, in 1970s Nazis rallies Skokie, Illinois. That is freedom of speech. The media demonizes the Tea Parties [protesting Obama's profligate spending.] This is not an Islamic issue. But it is part of the leftist Islamic issue. You see the demonizing of free speech. This is the most dangerous development. The demonization of Geert Wilders is very dangerous.

AAL: Don't you think that U.S. citizens are starting to yell "basta," enough? 

Atlas: The April headlines in the New Haven paper were the exception, not the rule. Tea Parties, nationwide, are more routinely painted as a sinister Republican movement, organized by right wing extremists and clowns. In New York, the media used that description even though an estimated 13,000 people attended the Tea Party there.

These people never went to a rally before. They feel the heat. They feel the hot breath of government on their necks. They feel a fascist reality taking hold. They see enslavement in their workplaces, and the encroaching government controls. People came who voted for Obama. They said they made a mistake. There were business owners. People spoke about the oppressive taxation and the nationalization of banks, auto companies, and the impending bailouts of media.

Once we have a bailout of media, it is over. Who will insult the leader, when he is signing the paycheck?

AAL: What are you talking about. Bailing out the media, the networks?

Atlas: Yes, there is talk of bailing out local newspapers, on the East and West coasts, bankrupt metropolitan newspapers, as well as MSNBC and NBC. Yes. There is talk of reclassifying newspapers as nonprofit organizations. There are all kinds of ways to skin a cat. One includes subsidies to go to the NBC parent company, General Electric, through Obama's much-touted "cap and trade," his purported energy renewal program. Obama does not call this nationalization. But we have an Orwellian president who never calls things by their real names. The government has banned the term "war on terror." He calls war a "contingent operation." The word "terrorism" has been replaced by "man made disaster." Obama has removed the enemy from all public discussions.

AAL: How is this related to Islamic oppression of non-Muslims.

Atlas: If you look at history, this is how Muslims have conducted Islamic jihad. And in the modern world, Orwellian language has entered the Islamic sphere, too. Obama does not want us to say the word "jihadi." These men are not conducting "jihad." They are suffering from "mental illness." So according to Obama, every jihadi is just mentally ill.

Meanwhile, the U.S. State Department has set all kinds of new immigration quotas from countries that are the worst state sponsors of terrorism. They are terrorist nations. The State Department does not call them that. But Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt are terrorist nations. And from these countries, the U.S. Is now importing the largest invasion of enemy combatants in the history of man. We are experiencing an invasion of a foreign enemy, of a very large proportion.

AAL: So, while freedom of speech is itself a huge issue, we are no longer discussing freedom of speech alone. We're talking about freedom, period. Just plain freedom.

Atlas: Yes. We are literally abdicating American sovereignty. The Obama administration, along with the Muslim globalists, paint everything as a global problem. And for global problems, there can only be global solutions. So we see the rise of a transnational movement, which advocates abdicating U.S. sovereignty to the U.N. And the U.N. is driven by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC).  And they are, as you have reported before, the creation of the Muslim Brotherhood. OIC objectives are clear. It is a sinister machination. It is made up of 56 nations, plus "Palestine." They unwaveringly vote together as a single bloc. No one ever goes off the Islamic reservation. Their issue is Islamic supremacy. That is the definition of Islam. They impose Islam. They pass UN resolutions against "defamation of Islam." That is code for freedom of speech. They never discuss the defamation of Judaism or Jews or Christianity. That is the OIC currency. So yes, the worldwide global conspiracy, the fact of Islamic jihad is tied into all things. It is embedded in schools and universities. The Saudis give millions and millions of dollars to affect their curricula with mendacious teachings and textbooks, whose distribution they fund through various "non-profit" organizations, by overwhelming local communities and also in co-ordination with U.S. textbook companies themselves.

There's a lot more. Go. Read it all. Best copy of interview here.

Pamela Geller OpEd at American Thinker: Fast Times at Disaster High

I've penned a new editorial over at American Thinker - Fast Times at Disaster High:

Go, hurry let them know what you think in the comments!

ATLAS ON FOX! BLUE EYES ON RED EYE, TIVO IT!

Foxy Atlas! Tonight, tonight won't be just any night ....................Foxy Atlas. A first. Atlas on Fox. can you dig it, baby?

Insomniacs, something to stay up for! Early to bed. TIVO!

I will be on RED EYE with Greg Gutfield on Fox news late tonight (check your local listings for time). Joining Greg tonight: filmmaker Jake Rademacher; Alison Rosen, self-professed pop culture expert; Breitbart.com's Andrew Breitbart, and Pamela 'Atlas' Geller, author

Makeup!

 

 

The set!

 

 

Bill Shultz and "Pinch"

Red Eye has a clip! View here 

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrl Bloggers

John Over at Right Wing News and the Conservative Grapevine did a up close and personal series of interviews with the right's most  blogalicious babes. It's a great post (without or without me - with me is better.) Read it ......it's delish, because it's personal. A she thang.

Props to the inestimable Hawkins. Original stuff.

Blogging While Female: 5 Conservative Women Bloggers Talk About Gender Issues And The Blogosphere

He interviewed  five top conservative bloggers  Michelle Malkin, who needs no intro (I mean really)Liz Mair, a blogger who is now the Republican National Committee’s , eCampaign Communications Director, the extraordinarily talented Rachel Lucas, Amanda Carpenter, reporter/columnist/vlogger for Townhall, who is also the author of The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy's Dossier on Hillary Clinton, Ericka Anderson, news producer/reporter for Human Events, who also blogs at Redstate and Atlas.

It's very good stuff.  Pull quotes:

Michelle: "liberal racism is much more rampant than liberal sexism. As an example of that, here we are engaged in this whole debate of the use of Barack Obama's middle name. Again, I find it amusing in terms of liberal double standards that none of these people who are so worried about middle name calling had anything to say when Keith Olbermann went on cable TV and started invoking my foreign sounding maiden name (Maglalang) as some sort of game winning argument. There he is going Mag-la-gong, Mag-la-gong, mispronouncing it...I think if I weren't a conservative, there would have been more of an uproar about it or at least some principled liberal would have said, 'That's a really dumb way to argue against somebody. Can we all just grow up?' But, no, no, that didn't happen."

Atlas:  "I don't need equal rights....I'm already equal. I don't need somebody telling me something that's already a fact. All these women like Gloria Steinem, "Oh we made it happen for you!" You didn't make it happen for me. That whole movement...is rooted in Marxist-Leninist propaganda....I'm not a feminist, I'm an anti-feminist."

Rachel: "I think a lot of blogs by people who complain that they don't get much traffic? Those blogs tend to be very boring. If you can read the exact same material on 10,000 different blogs and all they're doing is repeating the same thing and it's not very well written, I don't know what they expect."

Amanda: "There was a graduate assistant who had photoshopped 400 pages of pornography of me onto the university website that the administration would not do anything about...I had to print it off and take it to the police station because the...campus people said, well, you know it's free speech. ...Do you know how demeaning it was to have print that off and take it somewhere? It wasn't me, but it was lifelike."

Ericka: "I think that women...are more apt to be criticized harshly. People come up with dirty names and talk trash about women, not because it's more accepted, but because...it's a lot easier for people to toss around words that are derogatory towards women...Also, My picture is up next to my work, and you get a lot of (critical) comments about the pictures." 

* Which blogger had 400 pages of photoshopped pornography with their face on it posted.
* Which blogger had to actually move to insure their families safety.
* Which blogger quit blogging because of "hate mail and some of it was borderline bad stalker material."
* Which blogger was photoshopped in sexual positions with sexual positions with senior Bush administration officials
* Which blogger received this piece of hate mail,

"I just saw you against John Soltz, How about you show your support for the war, and sign up... Hopefully you would get shot in the head. dumb slag."

This is definitely one article you'll want to take a look at.

ATLAS INTERVIEW: Bat Yeor Interview

My Bat Yeor transcript is up here. I cannot thank Pim's Ghost enough for doing  yeoman's work in transcribing the interview. I am forever in her debt. Video, audio and transcript.

So my VALENSTEYN

Listen to MARK STEYN AND I GO AT IT! Click to play.

What a delicious guy. Great news, Great show. Great guy. Honestly, I could have chatted on that man until 4:30am only to break for a coffee and a post. The bad news? Tech difficulties.  As the flurries of emails started to alert me - the show went down 34 minutes in  just as Mark was getting juicy on Joe Wilson. Loyal Atlasites got creative and called into the show and hear the rest via phone. I love ingenuity!  Fingers are crossed that the podcast caught it all - it has not been uploaded yet. UGH. But at the last minute I grabbed my trusty microcassette recorder and captured the closing few minutes of Steyn discussing  who he likes for president.  The last whispered expletive is mine (sorry about that, didn't realize I was on and I was pissed.)

Lets hope the Alan, the master builder of internet radio captured the whole broadcast  for podcast or heads are gonna roll (whoops, there it is.)

UPDATE: The podcast caught the whole show. Whew! Click on the black arrow on the left.

My past shows can be heard here.

UPDATE: Blog Talk Radio says it was my fault. Apparently I didn't schedule the time. YIKES!

Whatever. The podcast has it all. The birth of the future is never smooth.

Ambassador Dore Gold Interview: THE FIGHT FOR JERUSALEM

MARK YOUR CALENDERS:
NEXT ATLAS ON THE AIR:TUESDAY 9 PM EST
AMBASSADOR DORE GOLD  The Fight For Jerusalem.

Here's the audio: Download doregold21.mp3 run time 45 minutes

Once again, the indispensible  Alan over One Jerusalem.org has put together a blogger interview withAmbassador Gold to discuss his must read  new book The Fight For Jerusalem. Joining us was Ed Lasky of American Thinker,  Pastorius from CUANAS, Omri from Mere Rhetoric, Anne from the wonderful Boker Tov Boulder,  Avi Green from Tel Chai Nation, Meryl at  Meryl Yourish.com, Bennett of Dale Damos, David from Soccer Dad (speaking of the  Soccer Dad, he provided us with links to background here and here),

Jerusalem has always been at the heart of the battle between Islam and the West.  

From the Crusades until today, expansionist Islam has understood the significance of resting control over Jerusalem. For them, taking Jerusalem is tantamount to driving a spear into the heart of Judeo-Christian civilization.  

Dore Gold's new book is a brilliant historical and contemporary analysis of The Fight For Jerusalem.

Dore has unearthed facts, quotes,and photographs that give positive proof that Jerusalem is a primary target of our enemies. This is a must read for policy makers, bloggers, elected officials, reporters, and everyone else who cares about the future of the West.

In fighting the denial of temple (an historical lie repeatedly made famous by Yassar Arafat), the first thing Gold has done  in the fight for Jerusalem is to assemble the historical data on which the Jews base their  stake in Jerusalem. He authenticates to the world that we existed in Jerusalem and even then the Jews were  a proud, self governing state.

A withdrawal from Jerusalem would empower radical Islam. "Terrorism is not based on political grievance."

Prevailing wisdom says if Israel gives land back the terrorists will stop. But just the opposite is the case. Jihadi terrorism comes from a sense of victory. The founding of al qaeda came from the perceived Jihadi victory in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union.

Withdrawal from Jerusalem would result in a terror tsunami.

I kicked off the Q&A with the perceived powerlessness of the people of Israel in the ongoing hostilities in the Islamic/Israeli was. There is an obvious unhappiness and acute frustration with the current Olmert administration - what is happening, what action will th people be taking. Why the impotence.

Ambassador Gold said after Olso, Gaza and all the land givebacks - attempts to make peace with the Palestinian Arabs - have resulted in greater bloodshed. He said he believed the people of Israel are confused. They have suffered a "period of confusion.  Now is the time for the people of Israel get back to their roots and reclaim their pioneering spirit. Stand up for Israel. This was a large part of the reason he wrote the book.

"Investment in Abbas is a wasted investment."

"Withdrawals have led to preconditions for a new war"

"Giving back Gaza created an new al qaeda sanctuary in Gaza."

In 1863, the Jews were the majority in Jerusalem. Before the British empire, before Balfour .........according to the British Foreign office, there were 15,000 residents in Jerusalem  -  8,000 wer Jews. Jerusalem was a Jewish city even then in 1863.

Gold is very smart and the audio must be listened to. His encyclopediac knowledge of Middle Eastern history gives enormous weight to his take on modern day Israel and the facts on the ground in the Islamic war on the West. It is Gold's approach that I believe should prevail in Israel (and the West.)

The Fight For Jerusalem. Buy the book now so that when I interview him on my show Tuesday you can call with questions that matter. It seems to me the fight for Jerusalem is much bigger than Jerusalem, it is the fight we are all in. The fight for the West.

On the Phone with Tony Snow

I HAD THE HONOR TO TAKE PART IN A WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE CALL WITH BLOGGERS TO DISCUSS THE PRESIDENT'S SPEECH ON THE WAY FORWARD IN IRAQ

White House Press Secretary Tony Snow and Brett McGurk, Director for Iraq, National Security Council,  discussed President Bush's speech on the way forward in Iraq today at 4 PM with a small group of bloggers. Joining me was Austin Bay,  Lori Byrd, Wizbang, John Hawkins - RightWing News, Human Events Online, Redstate , NZ Bear among others.

Here's the audio (about 40 minutes) :Download tonysnow110.mp3

Tony stated simply that it is , "essential we succeed."

"Iraqis must be placed in the lead. The Iraqis do not have capacity to safeguard public security in the short run."

Austin Bay is saying  if you're gonna win this, you've got to win neighborhoods. Neighborhood by neighborhood.
Concentrating our efforts on the provincial level. Taking a regional approach

"We must enlist neighbors/ friends to contribute to Iraq. We have to engage Iraq's neighbors."

Tony would not go into detail on Iran and Syria although he acknowledged their destabilizing  role in Iraq. My question, which I did not get a chance to ask was  about the Iranians sponsoring much of the terror in Iraq. And what of those  senior members of Iran's elite guard having been captured in Iraq.

Someone else asked about both Iran and Syria and  Snow said he would not go into detail on what is going to be done about Iran as it would hit the world press "in a nanosecond."

That for me was the most telling moment of the phone call, Snow's reluctance to discuss Iran in any meanigful way. Something is up. And I am satisfied as long as we have a plan, a  counter strategy to Iran's grand, sinister plans in their region. Their serpentice reach extends as far as Hamas, Hezbollah, - all of Iran's foreign legions.

Tony believes we need an open debate about this in from of the American people

Main points: The President's New Iraq Strategy Is Rooted In Six Fundamental Elements:

Let the Iraqis lead;

• Help Iraqis protect the population;
• Isolate extremists;
• Create space for political progress;
• Diversify political and economic efforts; and Situate the strategy in a regional approach.

Key Elements Of The New Approach: Security

Iraqi:

• Publicly acknowledge all parties are responsible for quelling sectarian violence.
• Work with additional Coalition help to regain control of the capital and protect the Iraqi population.
• Deliver necessary Iraqi forces for Baghdad and protect those forces from political interference.
• Commit to intensify efforts to build balanced security forces throughout the nation that provide security even-handedly for all Iraqis.
• Plan and fund eventual demobilization program for militias.

Coalition:

• Agree that helping Iraqis to provide population security is necessary to enable accelerated transition and political progress. ·         Provide additional military and civilian resources to accomplish this mission.
• Increase efforts to support tribes willing to help Iraqis fight Al Qaeda in Anbar.
• Accelerate and expand the embed program while minimizing risk to participants. Both Coalition And Iraqi:
• Continue counter-terror operations against Al Qaeda and insurgent organizations.
• Take more vigorous action against death squad networks.
• Accelerate transition to Iraqi responsibility and increase Iraqi ownership.
• Increase Iraqi security force capacity – both size and effectiveness – from 10 to 13 Army divisions, 36 to 41 Army Brigades, and 112 to 132 Army Battalions.
• Establish a National Operations Center, National Counterterrorism Force, and National Strike Force.
  Reform the Ministry of Interior to increase transparency and accountability and transform the National Police.

Key Elements Of The New Approach: Political

Iraqi:

The Government of Iraq commits to:

Reform its cabinet to provide even-handed service delivery.

Act on promised reconciliation initiatives (oil law, de-Baathification law, Provincial elections). Give Coalition and ISF authority to pursue ALL extremists.

All Iraqi leaders support reconciliation.

Moderate coalition emerges as strong base of support for unity government.

Coalition:

• Support political moderates so they can take on the extremists.
• Build and sustain strategic partnerships with moderate Shi'a, Sunnis, and Kurds.
• Support the national compact and key elements of reconciliation with Iraqis in the lead.
• Diversify U.S. efforts to foster political accommodation outside Baghdad (more flexibility for local commanders and civilian leaders).
• Expand and increase the flexibility of the Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) footprint. Focus U.S. political, security, and economic resources at local level to open space for moderates, with initial priority to Baghdad and Anbar.

Both Coalition And Iraqi:

• Partnership between Prime Minister Maliki, Iraqi moderates, and the United States where all parties are clear on expectations and responsibilities.
• Strengthen the rule of law and combat corruption.
• Build on security gains to foster local and national political accommodations.
• Make Iraqi institutions even-handed, serving all of Iraq's communities on an impartial basis.
• Key Elements Of The New Approach: Economic

Iraqi:

• Deliver economic resources and provide essential services to all areas and communities. ·         Enact hydrocarbons law to promote investment, national unity, and reconciliation.
• Capitalize and execute jobs-producing programs.
• Match U.S. efforts to create jobs with longer term sustainable Iraqi programs.
• Focus more economic effort on relatively secure areas as a magnet for employment and growth.

Coalition:

• Refocus efforts to help Iraqis build capacity in areas vital to success of the government (e.g. budget execution, key ministries).
• Decentralize efforts to build Iraqi capacities outside the Green Zone.
• Double the number of PRTs and civilians serving outside the Green Zone. Establish PRT-capability within maneuver Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs).
• Greater integration of economic strategy with military effort.
• Joint civil-military plans devised by PRT and BCT. Remove legal and bureaucratic barriers to maximize cooperation and flexibility.
• Key Elements Of The New Approach: Regional

Iraqi:

• Vigorously engage Arab states.
• Take the lead in establishing a regional forum to give support and help from the neighborhood.
• Counter negative foreign activity in Iraq.
• Increase efforts to counter PKK (Kurdistan Workers' Party).

Coalition: ·  Intensify efforts to counter Iranian and Syrian influence inside Iraq.

• Increase military presence in the region.
• Strengthen defense ties with partner states in the region.
• Encourage Arab state support to Government of Iraq.
• Continue efforts to help manage relations between Iraq and Turkey.
• Continue to seek the region's full support in the War on Terror.

Both Coalition And Iraqi:

• · Focus on the International Compact.
• · Retain active U.N. engagement in Iraq – particularly for election support and constitutional review.

EXCERPTS FROM THE PRESIDENT’S ADDRESS TO THE NATION

Tonight President Bush will address the Nation from the White House to lay out his plan for a new way forward in Iraq. 

On the new strategy:

Tonight in Iraq, the Armed Forces of the United States are engaged in a struggle that will determine the direction of the global war on terror – and our safety here at home.  The new strategy I outline tonight will change America’s course in Iraq, and help us succeed in the fight against terror. 

On the role of the Iraqis:

Only the Iraqis can end the sectarian violence and secure their people.  And their government has put forward an aggressive plan to do it. 

On securing Baghdad:

Our past efforts to secure Baghdad failed for two principal reasons:  There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to secure neighborhoods that had been cleared of terrorists and insurgents.  And there were too many restrictions on the troops we did have.  Our military commanders reviewed the new Iraqi plan to ensure that it addressed these mistakes.  They report that it does.  They also report that this plan can work…and Prime Minister Maliki has pledged that political or sectarian interference will not be tolerated. 

On what Iraq must do:

I have made it clear to the Prime Minister and Iraq’s other leaders that America’s commitment is not open-ended.  If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the American people – and it will lose the support of the Iraqi people.  Now is the time to act.  The Prime Minister understands this. 

On the economic component:

A successful strategy for Iraq goes beyond military operations.  Ordinary Iraqi citizens must see that military operations are accompanied by visible improvements in their neighborhoods and communities.  So America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced.

On protecting the American people:

The challenge playing out across the broader Middle East is more than a military conflict.  It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time … In the long run, the most realistic way to protect the American people is to provide a hopeful alternative to the hateful ideology of the enemy – by advancing liberty across a troubled region. 

On what victory in Iraq will look like:

     The changes I have outlined tonight are aimed at ensuring the survival of a young democracy that is fighting for its life in a part of the world of enormous importance to American security…The question is whether our new strategy will bring us closer to success.  I believe that it will … Victory will not look like the ones our fathers and grandfathers achieved.  There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship … A democratic Iraq will not be perfect.  But it will be a country that fights terrorists instead of harboring them – and it will help bring a future of peace and security for our children and grandchildren.

On bringing our troops home:

[To]step back now would force a collapse of the Iraqi government … Such a scenario would result in our troops being forced to stay in Iraq even longer, and confront an enemy that is even more lethal.  If we increase our support at this crucial moment, and help the Iraqis break the current cycle of violence, we can hasten the day our troops begin coming home.

The Highlights of the Iraq Strategy Review is now available on the White House website in PDF format here.  

CAROLINE GLICK LIVE ON ATLAS RADIO

Set your clocks. Caroline Glick will be live with me tonight to discuss the end of the world as we know it.

TONIGHT ATLAS ON THE AIR: CAROLYN GLICK 7 PM EST

CLICK HERE TO LISTEN LIVE` 

 
CALL IN:(347) 996-3944

Read Jews Wake up - it should have read People, Wake up but I guess Glick was rousing those on the frontline.

UPDATE: Sorry for the automatic play of the previous button. BlogTalkRadio is still getting their acto together. Anyway, I took it down. I love BLOGTALKRADIO! Building a platform, one blogger at a time.

CLICK HERE FOR THE GLICK PODCAST. One hour, one on one,  with the Glick.

UPDATE: Calling on Righteous Muslims  - great post, go there.

Atlas Chats with Bill Frist

Paul over at Powerline, Jim at Gateway Pundit, Eric Erickson over Red State, John Hawkins at RWN, Dean Barnett .......  joined me in a pre-election pow wow. The issues we covered;
Powerline on Tennessee
Atlas on Bolton and the UN
Barnett on Lieberman
Gateway on Missouri
Frist believes, as I do, that the Republicans are going to keep the House and the Senate. Frist also  believes, as I do,  that Bolton must be confirmed. And he will do everything in his power to help make that happen. Woot.

As far as his candidacy for Presidency ............

Here's the audio..............gotta run into town. Will transcribe later.

Download Frist1101.wav (run time 20 minutes)

UPDATE: Jim at Gateway Pundit has a comprehensive post here

Paul at Powerline remarked;

On a more general level, Frsit is heartened by the fact that when he speaks with small groups of voters (as he regularly does on the campaign trail), the economy comes up, and in a positive way, more often and earlier in the discussion than was the case a month ago. This is good news, indeed.

After the election, Frist intends to run an aggressive "lame duck" session, focusing in particular on pushing for the confirmation of John Bolton. When that's all over, he'll return to Nashville, having fulfilled his 1994 promise to limit himself to two terms, and decide whether to pursue the presidency. Frist told us he would make that decision in January.

Frist referred several times to his blog and seemed to take particular pride in a several of his posts which chide the Democrats.  We know the feeling.   

 

Atlas Interview: Mark Steyn Warns US

Mark Steyn Interview: Money quote (for Atlas)  (minute 7:47, Part II)

Pamela: Hi this is Pamela from Atlas Shrugs.....

Mark Steyn: Hi Pamela. Big fan of yours

Pamela: YAY!

From Steyn? I can die and go to heaven now. My day, month, year is made. Totally

Here's the audio in two parts, anyone who wants to convert to MP3?  UPDATE: Ewin did.

Download mark_steyn_part_i.mp3

Download steyn_20061026_2.mp3

Mark Steyn (!) conducted an interview with a group of us - one of One Jerusalem.org's Newsmaker interviews. The sagacious Stein is one of the most important voices of our generation. His latest book America Alone: The End Of The World As We Know It (if you haven't read it buy it.) His book and his writings are a warning to America and the free world. His message echos Paul Belien's exhortation against the welfare state.

Someday soon, you might wake up to the call to prayer from a muezzin. Europeans already are.

And liberals will still tell you that "diversity is our strength"—while Talibanic enforcers cruise Greenwich Village burning books and barber shops, the Supreme Court decides sharia law doesn’t violate the "separation of church and state," and the Hollywood Left decides to give up on gay rights in favor of the much safer charms of polygamy.

The future, as Steyn shows, belongs to the fecund and the confident. And the Islamists are both, while the West—wedded to a multiculturalism that undercuts its own confidence, a welfare state that nudges it toward sloth and self-indulgence, and a childlessness that consigns it to oblivion—is looking ever more like the ruins of a civilization.

Europe, laments Steyn, is almost certainly a goner. The future, if the West has one, belongs to America alone—with maybe its cousins in brave Australia. But America can survive, prosper, and defend its freedom only if it continues to believe in itself, in the sturdier virtues of self-reliance (not government), in the centrality of family, and in the conviction that our country really is the world’s last best hope.

Steyn argues that, contra the liberal cultural relativists, America should proclaim the obvious: we do have a better government, religion, and culture than our enemies, and we should spread America’s influence around the world—for our own sake as well as theirs.

On Iran, Stein has written;

If we’d understood Iran back in 1979, we’d understand better the challenges we face today. Come to that, we might not even be facing them. But, with hindsight, what strikes you about the birth of the Islamic Republic is the near total lack of interest by analysts in that adjective: Islamic. Iran was only the second Islamist state, after Saudi Arabia—and, in selecting as their own qualifying adjective the family name, the House of Saud at least indicated a conventional sense of priorities, as the legions of Saudi princes whoring and gambling in the fleshpots of the West have demonstrated exhaustively. Hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue—though, as the Royal Family has belatedly discovered vis-à-vis the Islamists, they’re somewhat overdrawn on that front. The difference in Iran is simple: with the mullahs, there are no London escort agencies on retainer to supply blondes only. When they say “Islamic Republic,” they mean it. And refusing to take their words at face value has bedeviled Western strategists for three decades.

According to Stein, it is the intersection of the East and West that is at issue. In his travels through Europe that he found the most hostile Muslims in ........ France.

In once homogeneous Western cultures they have become, in a generation, bi-cultural. History was on the march very quickly in Europe.

The Democrats were so condescending on Iraq somehow George W. has squandered the good will of France and Germany. But it wasn't so, if you were in Chirac's position with an enormous  population of Muslims under 20 and unemployed, he had little choice.

Big government is a national security issue. The welfare state weakens the great

No responsible political party at this time should be proposing entitlements. Exactly what Paul Belien said in our VLOG interview here.

Rogue countries observe Kim Jong Il  and think if he gets away with it, why can't I? So psycho states ...........

Even our friends in the world begins to doubt America's will. Reasonable countries will conclude America is not a reliable leader. America will not survive as a beacon of liberty.

He believes the current global conflict with Islam has its roots in history. We must contain its worst elements. Islam has changed dramatically over the last four decades. Jihadism has gone mainstream.

"Demography is a critical component to the fall of the West."

"How hard a nut multiculturalism to crack is a major problem."

I asked Steyn if he thought it was possible to get elected in America on an America is alone, no welfare state platform. I told him his warning echoed Belien against the welfare state but people vote with their wallets and could such a platform survive a jihad loving, welfare loving media. Condi Rice was vigorously pursuing a multilateral foreign policy which runs counter to what is necessary.

STEYN: " On that last point for example, I agree  with you. There are certainly elements in the Bush administration that agree with you on that too. That in fact, the State Department, the sort of striped pants permanent bureaucracy has succeeded in miring the second term of this administration in generally pointless diplomacy. But I don't believe there isn't any downside to running against the the United Nations. Unless you happen to be on certain of the coastal regions of America and certain  Ivy League college towns, you could run on an anti-UN platform and be elected almost anywhere in this country. You would be demonized by the New York Times as some Neanderthal but I don't think the American people would mind. I think they'd be broadly supportive of that.

But the point to understand  here Pamela is that you can't suddenly introduce some  these things six weeks before an election. You've got to .....some of these things need to be out there and you've got to be planting the seeds for them and changing the people's minds beyond the political process really.

You've got to be changing people's minds on a lot of the conventional wisdom on welfare, conventional wisdom on multi-culturalism wherever they raise their heads.

The advantage that America has is that a lot these countries are going to be going over the precipice before America and it's hard to argue that Europe is the way we ought to go when every time you switch on the evening news there's buildings in flames and "youths" as they call them hurling Molotov cocktails into police stations.

"What is pathetic about this Bush hatred is its pathetic parochialism This pathetic idea that there aren't any questions is ludicrous. "

Ann of Boker Tov Boulder asked a wonderful question because Steyn gave the most interesting and achievable objectives . She said that it was all so depressing and what did Steyn see as a best case scenario?

Best case scenario would look something like this;  Certain European countries, mainly European countries, will see whats happening in other parts of the continent and take steps not to be sucked down with the European Union.

The best case scenario in the Middle East would be if  we succeed in establishing a place for politics in the Middle East that is outside the mosque. At the moment, because of the repressiveness of the Mubarak sand the House of Saud, the only political space for politics  is inside the mosque. If you can create some democratic space outside the mosque there's a chance you can midwife  not perfect countries but more moderate countries that would greatly kind of lower the kind of jihad fever.

Best case scenario for Canada is it decides to get real and join the anglosphere and stop pretending to part of the European Union in the wrong hemisphere and decides to be more like Australia.

The best case in America is we accept that in a two party system  it would be helpful to have two sane parties. And the Democratic party decides that the outmoded European ideas are absolutely useless. That is wants to take at the minimum a kind of Tony Blair line on national security but at the same it also wants to go to self reliance and traditional notions of American liberty when it comes to domestic issues.

Turn back the jihadists tide. Latin America which is being subverted by the jihad at the moment, becomes a beacon of restored Christendom. We effect  regime change in Iran and we basically secure Israel in an environment in which we stop fetishizing the Palestinians in this death cult of depravity.

We are highly unlikely to win on all those fronts so one or two or four or more of those can be chipped away.

How fookin brilliant is that?

Other bloggers on the call included the IRIS blog, Avi Green of Tel Chai nation, Pastorius of Infidel Bloggers Alliance,  American Thinker,  Warren Cozak, Jerry Gordon of Israpundit, Wizbang, Tigerhawk, Rick of Jewish Current Issues, John Hawkins Right Wing News,  Omri at  Mere Rhetoric who wrote a great post here

His read of the emergence of European multiculturalism is casual: "we need more plumbers, but we're certainly not going to do that work... we'll bring in kind of violent unassimilated immigrants, and to make ourselves feel better about their violent unassimilated we'll celebrate our tolerance for it". The causality between demographics, cultural exhaustion, and the welfare state is probably impossible to untangle, but his description is certainly how it happened on the ground - and it's certainly why journalists and authors find it so hard to criticize the "youths" that are rioting now.

On the other hand, he's not trading on any simplistic nostalgia for a Europe that never existed. We're not dealing here with a simple Huns-at-the-gate scenario: political Islam is not just barbaric primitivism. Rather, it is the intersection of the East and West, the Muslim world and the Christian world. In several places he alluded to the standard academic trope for this, which is that it's the intersection between the developing world and modernity - people driven by an ancient ideology who now have access to planes. It seems like he's still marked by the shock of traveling to Europe and the Middle East after 9/11 and discovering that France's Muslims were far more hostile and alienated than the people that he met in the Arab world. Osama Bin Laden might have lived in a cave, but the Hamburg 9/11 terrorists and the French gangbanging rioters live in apartments and have televisions.

He's also quite skeptical about the potential for secular values or secular movements to form a bulwark against political Islam as it spreads across the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. He took time out to criticize the anti-theism of Chris Hitchens and the New Atheism of Richard Dawkins as empirical failures (he didn't use either of those labels, although that's what he was alluding to - Hitch's anti-theism is well-known, and Wired just posted an essential article on New Atheism). They might be sound in theory, but they're simply not appealing enough to form the basis for an ideology that can provide a backbone to the people who'll be fighting the good fight for the next two or three generations. As he said, "history is on the march very quickly in Europe"

Listen to it all.................

UPDATE: Check out TIGERHAWK's most excelent review of Steyn's new book here.

Atlas Interview: Dick Morris on the Clintons

How rich that after my Clinton VLOG FLOG I would have the opportunity to interview Dick Morris.  If anyone knows Clinton it's Morris.
One Jerusalem. org once again sets up the penultimate Clinton interview with Ann, Boker tov, Boulder, John, Gateway Pundit Alan, One Jerusalem Jerry, Israpundit, Broadsword,  Liberally Conservative.

Here is the audio, it runs about 25 minutes. Download dick_morris_92706.wav

Mr. Morris has had a varied public career. He has earned a reputation for being one of America's leading political commentators and experts in the art of politics. Mr. Morris is best known as a central strategist in Bill Clinton's re-election campaign for President of the United States.

Last week, Mr. Morris and Eileen McGann published a critical article about the Clinton's that the Main Stream Media largely ignored. Entitled "Emir's A Gusher for Bill and Hillary" the op-ed charges that Bill Clinton and those in the inner circle of both Clintons have enjoyed large financial benefits from Clinton's relationship with Sheik Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum. This story involves the controversial Dubai ports deal. NY POST OpEd here

Since publication of this largely ignored column the news media has been hotly debating President Clinton's handling of   the hunt for Osama bin-Ladin. Did he do enough or didn't he? Did Senator Clinton know that her campaign consultants were on the payroll of the Sheik?

Today on ABC News— - Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich believes former President Clinton's blow up during an interview on "Fox News Sunday" -- and the escalating war of words over whether he or President Bush mishandled opportunities to catch or kill Osama bin Laden before the Sept. 11 attacks -- was premeditated to shore up support for Democrats ahead of the November midterm elections.

"I think that as the most experienced professional in the Democratic Party, he didn't walk onto that set and suddenly get upset," Gingrich said. "He probably decided in advance he was going to pick a fight with Chris Wallace."

This, Gingrich said, may have been a good strategy.

"I think as a calculated political decision, it's reasonably smart," he said.

Dick Morris is a blog reader. And so he spoke effusively of the participants  conducting the interview. He digs my blog - "nice site"

Hillary of course is running for reelection in New York and while I doubt she can be defeated but it will be terribly important in her presidential race f she does better or worse than she did against Lasio 4 years ago. If she wins by more than 12 points than I think it's going to be a huge ratification on her Senate career  that really does not deserve ratification on the other hand if she wins by 5 or 6 7 or 7 % I think she is going to have a lot of explaining to do as to why she get elected by 12 and the reelected by only 5 or 6.

I think the relationship between the Clintons and the Emir of Dubai really is going to be the dominant scandal of the 08 election when Hillary runs. I think the rapport and this relationship really is in a sense the new Whitewater  or the new Watergate of their careers.

[...]

 

Clearly we can infer that Clinton had a big role in bringing the Emir in and then the other question was we don't know how Clinton is being compensated for this. We do know he was being paid a flat fee plus a percent of the commission on the investments. We don't know how much that is. The disclosure form that Hillary filed and the Senate only requires that she indicate whether or not he is being paid more than a thousand dollars a year, and of course he is. But there is a substantial basis for believing that this could be a very large sum that he receives annually and an even larger sum after 5 years.

[..]

The flip side of this is that their is an increasing close political relationship between the Emir and his political interests and the Clintons.

Morris thinks should point our lasers on this scandal and stay tuned;

It's very significant. Obviously the public policy issues are that you have this foreign head of state paying conceivably an enormous amount of money to the husband of a United States Senator and conceivably the husband of a President or at least a Presidential candidate.

The implications  for influence peddling and all of that are very severe.

And this Emir is a barbarian. He has been indicted in the Miami courts of kidnapping two and three year old boys from Pakistan, Bangladesh, etc brought to Dubai for camel jockeying. The lawsuit was brought by the parents of kidnapped children. And of course Dubai has been cited for human rights violations particularly in its abuse/treatment of women by the US State department.

When Jerry asked Morris about the Clinton relationship with the current Saudi Ambassador to the US (Clinton classmates at the University of Georgetown) - Morris didn't know that. Further he asked about Clinton's special visas to issued to characters with ties to terrorism and again, Morris was unaware - but thought it needed investigating, researching and suggested Jerry follow up with the former Governor of  Tennessee Ray Nabus (Clinton's former Ambassador to Saudi Arabia - not a Clinton loyalist).

I asked Dick why he jumped to the other side and come out blasting.

I did not jump to the other side. I strongly supported his welfare reform.

I said that was Republican.

His work on crime, balanced budget......[...]

Yes, but I have always been more of a Republican

And he outlined his history of working for and with Republicans

......but there were really three points of departure. I really hated how Hillary would have these secret police go out and investigate the women he [Bill] was involved with. Not to reform to him or divorce him but simply to cow the women into silence so that he could get elected

Strongly disapproved her running for Senator from New York. I am New Yorker and the last thing she is a New Yorker.

And then finally after 9/11. Anyone looking at that and reading the  9/11 report has to understand on terrorism Clinton was a dismal failure.

[..] It's not Bill Clinton I am opposing so strongly it's Hillary Clinton because she'd be a terrible, rotten President. She is a European Socialist, with that kind of view that we have to increase taxes not to pay for programs but to redistribute income. She would very much like to see 40 45% of our economy going taxes like they do in Sweden, France and Germany with staggering effects on the economy.

I followed up with the Chris Wallace meltdown. I thought it was deliberate, that Clinton is calculated but with the internet and blogs he could never get away with those lies. What was he thinking.?And while he didn't think the rage was planned, he did agree with me that there is nothing that Clinton ever does that is not calculated.

Clinton's no more in control of himself as when he is going through a rage.  His "rages" are not flying off the handle, not losing control, they are the ultimate form of control.
[...]
The closer you get to the truth the more vociferous he is in his indignation

Listen to it all.............good stuff on Sandy Berger.

And the dialogue gets better. The Weekly Standard reports;

Warning Signs
Hillary Clinton attempts to rewrite history.
by Thomas Joscelyn

YESTERDAY, in the wake of President Clinton's interview on Fox News, Senator Hillary Clinton defended her husband's counterterrorism track record. Reacting to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's assertion that the Bush administration "was at least as aggressive" in the eight months preceding September 11, 2001 as the Clinton administration was in the years prior, the former first lady remarked:

"I'm certain that if my husband and his national security team had been shown a classified report entitled 'Bin Laden Determined To Attack Inside the United States' he would have taken it more seriously than history suggests it was taken by our current president and his national security team."

Apparently referring to the August 6, 2001 presidential daily briefing, which was entitled "bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US," Senator Clinton suggested that her husband did not receive the same type of warnings that President Bush did.

In fact, President Clinton signed a similar classified document--which contained an explicit warning from the U.S. Intelligence Community that bin Laden intended to strike inside the United States, more than two years prior to leaving office. And the U.S. intelligence community collected numerous pieces of intelligence concerning bin Laden's determination to strike inside the United States during President Clinton's tenure. In addition to the failed plot against the World Trade Center in 1993 and the failed al Qaeda plot against LAX airport in 1999, there were clear indications that bin Laden's terror empire intended to strike targets in the continental United States.