President Obama has made a “categorical” decision not to release any photos of Usama bin Laden’s dead body, according to the White House, citing concern that doing so could inflame sentiment against Americans.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Wednesday that the president consulted his national security team and ultimately decided it would be too risky to release any images of the body. Obama also determined the administration has already proved bin Laden is dead, he said.

Really? These radical sons-of-bitches flew airplanes filled with innocent people into buildings filled with innocent people, watched them burn or jump to their deaths, then celebrated on the streets of the Middle East. How much more inflamed can they get?

When all is said and done, this is just another weak-assed decision made by a weak-assed individual who is more worried about who likes him then what is right. These radicals are from the stone age, and the only proof of death they will accept is a picture or video. They hate us to the point of automatically believing the exact opposite of anything we say. Obama standing at a podium saying Bin Laden is dead won’t convince anyone in the Middle East of that fact. It isn’t like we’re talking about rational, thinking people here.

Crap. I was just about to write a post on how well I thought Obama had handled this whole situation, then he goes and does this.

To be clear, no one is questioning whether or not people have a right to build a house of worship on any private property which they own. This issue does not concern rights or laws. Rather, it concerns propriety.

The World Trade Center site and its immediate surrounding area is hallowed ground, consecrated with the blood of innocents. Those innocents were murdered by radical Islamic terrorists who believed that by killing these innocents their God would honor them. Upon learning of the events of September 11, 2001 the vast majority of Muslims world-wide looked the other way and kept their mouths shut. Whether they meant to or not, by doing so they gave their tacit approval to the atrocity.

The Muslims involved with this project claim that they are building this “community center/mosque” to foster understanding and facilitate dialog between all faiths and peoples. Yet, by insisting on building this mosque on the Ground Zero Site, these very same Muslims display a complete lack of sensitivity towards the feelings of a majority of the people of New York as well as America. It seems that Muslims, for the most part, are unwilling to show a sensitivity to the culture of Americans, while at the same time demanding that Americans show sensitivity to Islamic culture.

None of this even begins to cover the Islamic tradition of building mosques on the sites of their conquered enemies.

If you must build a mosque, build it elsewhere. Just as with a Christian church, a mosque is nothing more than a building. What counts is what the people inside the building are doing.

WASHINGTON (AP) – Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton say last week’s historic joint talks with Iran were a limited success.

Clinton says the session in Geneva yielded three agreements that buy time for the U.S. to assess Iran’s seriousness about negotiations. In the meantime, she says the U.S. will continue to move toward additional sanctions if Iran won’t back off from its nuclear program.

Anyone who has paid any attention to Iran over the past thirty years knows that these talks will fail. It doesn’t matter who conducts the talks, what incentives are offered, or what threats are made, Iran will continue to pursue nuclear weapons.

They see the acquisition of these weapons as their ticket to respectability among the world’s powers, maybe even parity with the United States. They also see them as the best way to eliminate Israel in one fell swoop.

The best chance we had of destabilizing the Iranian government was just after the elections when the people of Iran were contesting the results. A show of support for the people who were protesting at that time could have encouraged them to take the next step. However, because the current occupant of the White House has absolutely no clue with regards to Foreign Policy, nothing was done and the protests faded. I have been saying for months how dangerous it was having someone in the White House who doesn’t know what he’s doing, and now the world knows.

The only serious option left on the table now is military action. You can talk until you’re blue in the face, but you’ll never get anywhere with Iran. They’ll do what they always do; play for time by saying the right things while all the while continuing to do whatever they want. Strategic bombing of Iran’s two uranium refining facilities, as well as a few of their larger missile launching sites, would be enough to get their attention and slow their nuclear ambitions to a crawl. Then, we could deal with them from a position of strength rather than weakness. Strength is, after all, the only real thing which Iran understands.

Unfortunately, the current occupant of the White House still thinks he can talk his way out of anything. So, the rest of us can all look forward to a nuclear-armed Iran in the not-too-distant future. Yes we can!

This picture was captioned: All this 9/11 worship is ghoulish and downright silly.

A day of commemoration for nearly three thousand innocent people killed by radical Islamic terrorists, and Liberals make it the butt of a joke. Words fail me.

While you are remembering and honoring those lost, please take a moment to remember one more thing:

Barack Obama takes these people seriously.

These images were taken from Right Wing News. which brought them to my attention.

A report posted on Islam Watch, a site run by Muslims who oppose intolerant teachings and hatred for unbelievers, exposes a prominent Islamic cleric and lawyer who support extreme punishment for non-Muslims — including killing and rape.

A question-and-answer session with Imam Abdul Makin in an East London mosque asks why Allah would tell Muslims to kill and rape innocent non-Muslims, including their wives and daughters, according to Islam Watch.

“Because non-Muslims are never innocent, they are guilty of denying Allah and his prophet,” the Imam says, according to the report. “If you don’t believe me, here is the legal authority, the top Muslim lawyer of Britain.”

The lawyer, Anjem Choudary, backs up the Imam’s position, saying that all Muslims are innocent.

As far as I’m concerned, Ann Coulter was right.

The bill Congress sent me would take away one of the most valuable tools in the War on Terror — the CIA program to detain and question key terrorist leaders and operatives. This program has produced critical intelligence that has helped us prevent a number of attacks.

The program helped us stop a plot to strike a U.S. Marine camp in Djibouti, a planned attack on the U.S. consulate in Karachi, a plot to hijack a passenger plane and fly it into Library Tower in Los Angeles and a plot to crash passenger planes into Heathrow Airport or buildings in downtown London. And it has helped us understand Al Qaeda’s structure and financing and communications and logistics.

Were it not for this program, our intelligence community believes that Al Qaeda and its allies would have succeeded in launching another attack against the American homeland.

The main reason this program has been effective is that it allows the CIA to use specialized interrogation procedures to question a small number of the most dangerous terrorists under careful supervision.

The bill Congress sent me would deprive the CIA of the authority to use these safe and lawful techniques. Instead, it would restrict the CIA’s range of acceptable interrogation methods to those provided in the Army Field Manual.

Think about it: The Democrats in Congress are perfectly fine with terrorists flying planes into buildings, just as long as the CIA didn’t use harsh interrogation techniques in an attempt to stop them. Do you really think that these people have the safety of the American people as their first priority?

Some Democrats went on the record with their thoughts on Bush’s veto:

This president had the chance to end the torture debate for good, yet he chose instead to leave the door open to use torture in the future,” said Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

…

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the nation’s ability to lead the world depends on its morality, not military might. “We will begin to reassert that moral authority by attempting to override the president’s veto next week,” said Pelosi, D-Calif.

…

Sen. Jay Rockefeller, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said he had heard nothing to suggest that the CIA, through enhanced interrogation methods, had obtained information to thwart a terrorist attack. “On the other hand, I do know that coercive interrogations can lead detainees to provide false information in order to make the interrogation stop,” said Rockefeller, D-W.Va.

…

“The president’s refusal to sign this crucial legislation into law will undermine counterterrorism efforts globally and delay efforts to rebuild U.S. credibility on human rights,” said Elisa Massimino, Washington director for Human Rights First.

Do you notice anything missing from the above statements? Not one of these Democrats said anything about the safety of the United States or it’s citizens. They mention “our credibility” with other nations. Rockefeller, without, of course, citing any sources, openly calls Bush a liar when he says that these techniques have not provided any information which proved to be useful. In typical Democrat fashion, instead of addressing a policy issue the Senator instead uses the issue to make a personal attack on the President. Does that sound like someone who cares about your safety? No, it doesn’t. What it sounds like is just another liberal whose hatred of George Bush has so infected his thought process that everything he says or does must make the President look bad. BSD at it’s worst.

If the worst happens this November and a Democrat is elected, the one change you can bet money will happen is this: The War on Terror will be lost by a bunch of liberal buffoons who are more interested in their own political power and what other countries think of us than they are about the safety of this country and it’s citizens. When they’re finished stripping the military of the funds needed to keep them equipped and ready to fight, and instead using that money to fund more and more entitlement programs, the country will suffer another terrorist attack of the magnitude of 9/11 or bigger.

But hey, that’s OK, right? At least we will not have mistreated any terrorists trying to find anything out. Remember, according to the Democrats, that is what is most important.

WASHINGTON (AP) – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi lashed out at Republicans on Thursday, saying they want the Iraq war to drag on and are ignoring the public’s priorities.

“They like this war. They want this war to continue,” Pelosi, D- Calif., told reporters. She expressed frustration over Republicans’ ability to force majority Democrats to yield ground on taxes, spending, energy, war spending and other matters.

“We thought that they shared the view of so many people in our country that we needed a new direction in Iraq,” Pelosi said at her weekly news conference in the Capitol. “But the Republicans have made it very clear that this is not just George Bush’s war. This is the war of the Republicans in Congress.”

Asked to clarify her remarks, Pelosi backed off a bit.

“I shouldn’t say they like the war,” she said. “They support the war, the course of action that the president is on.”

“And that was a revelation to me,” she said, “because I thought the American people’s voices were so—and still are—so strong in this regard.”

Democrats painting Republicans as warmongers is hardly new, but for Pelosi to paint the President’s continued support for the strategy advocated by his military leaders as “a revelation” is absurd. The President has never wavered in his support of the effort put forth by the troops, unlike the Democrats who continue to look for ways to hang the troops out to dry. If Congress would spend more time on the legislative issues which are its mandate, rather than trying to take over as Commander-in-Chief of the military, perhaps she wouldn’t be so frustrated.