Member Login

You are not currently logged in.

» Register
» Lost your Password?

Article Archives


Finally, we’re learning one of Israel’s two best lessons in fighting terrorists. Israel, Sharon in particular, figured out a long time ago, that the enemy wasn’t a phenomenon, it was individuals: terrorists, not “terrorism.” So the solution was to forget about defeating some “ism” and hunt down and kill specific terrorists personally.The latest example took place this Sunday, September 26, when Israeli agents planted a bomb under the driver’s seat of Izz al-Deen Sheik Khalil’s SUV, and blew the senior Hamas leader up to the Moslem Bordello in the Sky.Taking this lesson to heart, US forces have begun targeting specific terrorists in Iraq. On September 22, US fighter jets nailed the “grand mufti” or spiritual leader of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s Tawid and Jihad terrorists, Omar Youssef Jumah. Using the nom de guerre Abu Annas al-Shami, Jumah was fond of issuing fatwas proclaiming that Allah approved of beheading infidels. No more fatwas for you, Omar. You’re a good terrorist now.We’re learning at last to give Islamofascists what they want. They say their greatest strength is that they prefer death to life, while our greatest weakness is to love life more than death. If they love death, hey, no problem, happy to oblige.Now it’s time to learn the second great lesson in national security we can learn from Israel.



Perhaps the most extraordinary summer of my life was when I was 17 years old. It was 1960, and I spent it in the jungles of South Vietnam hunting tigers. I was by myself with a Vietnamese hunting guide named Ngo Van Chi, and I was after one tiger in particular. He was a man-eater. He had killed and eaten so many people - over 20 - that he had a name: Ong Bang Mui, “Mr. Thirty,” the number associated with death. This was in the Central Highlands of South Vietnam, inhabited by tribespeople collectively known as Montagnards (mon-tan-yards), French for mountain people. They are Malayo-Polynesian, not Mongoloid Oriental, who first populated these mountains thousands of years ago - long before the Vietnamese came, whether the Tonkinese in the north or the Annamese in the south. The Montagnard people I was with were known as the Co Ho. They had no modern weapons, only spears and cross bows. So when Ong Bang Mui leaped into one of their villages and dragged off a villager to be eaten, they had little defense. They had little defense also from the Communist Viet Cong. The sight of a village in smoking ruins and dead babies stuck onto sharpened poles is a sight one never forgets. The Co Ho and other Montagnard tribes were such peaceful, gentle people. It was impossible for anyone who got to know them, such as I and so many American soldiers, not to develop a deep and abiding fondness for them. They welcomed me into their huts, most always built on stilts, and were always gracious and kind - although I must admit they loved getting me way too drunk on their rice wine.



It wasn’t too long ago that the DNC folks were giddily predicting Democrat majorities for the House and Senate this November. The darkest gloom has replaced the giddiness. It’s dawned on them that Kerry is singlehandedly sinking their hopes.



This is the text of a briefing I am giving to Senate and Congressional staffers on Capitol Hill this morning.The Reagan Doctrine was above all a paradigm-shift. We weren’t going to try and outlast the Soviets anymore, we were going after them. We didn’t want peace with them, we didn’t want to get along with them, we wanted them gone, history, da svedanya, adios and goodbye. Support of various anti-Soviet insurgencies was a conscious assault on the structure of the Soviet Empire. The goal wasn’t simply freedom for this or that Soviet colony, but the full collapse of the Empire as a whole, which ultimately meant the collapse of the Soviet Union itself.This strategy… worked. The Reagan Doctrine is the most spectacularly successful geopolitical strategy of modern times. The question now is: where and how can such a strategy be best applied to the War on Islamofascism?I think the “where” is Iran. Iraq is a job for the United States Military. Iran is not -- not in the sense of the 3rd ID taking Tehran. During the Cold War, we needed US and NATO forces in Europe capable of blocking a Soviet invasion, say through the Fulda Gap. But we didn’t need US soldiers to fight in the jungles of Nicaragua or protest in the streets of Prague and Budapest. What we needed - and what we had -- were large numbers of people living in these countries willing to struggle for their own freedom. This is what we need, and this is what we have, today in Iran.The main obstacle in implementing a Reagan Doctrine for Iran is the same we had with implementing a Reagan Doctrine for the Soviets: Squishes in the White House and the State Department. In the 1980s they were Michael Deaver, Dick Darman, Jim Baker, and George Shultz. Today they are Robert Blackwill, Richard Armitage, and the entire Near East Bureau at State.Thus to implement a policy of regime change in Iran, there must be a strategy of regime change in the National Security Council and the State Department.



Media reports that the "insurgency" is gaining ground are no more genuine than Dan Rather's memos on President Bush's National Guard service. Contrary to vague news reports of a "widening conflict," an analysis of where casualties are being inflicted indicates the conflict is still restricted largely to the Sunni triangle areas where it has always been. Two thirds of the country and three quarters of the population are relatively peaceful."You may hear analysts and prognosticators on CNN, ABC and the like talking about how bleak the situation is here in Iraq, but from where I sit, it's looking significantly better now than when I got here," says a US Marine. "It is very demoralizing for us here in uniform to read and hear such negativity in our press. It is fodder for our enemies to use against us and against the vast majority of Iraqis who want their new government to succeed."Are you listening, Senator Kerry?



In my last column I ended with:

Another option with Outlook is to use the Save Settings wizard in the tools folder to backup your settings. For example, settings include your rules, accounts, and the accessibility of your address book. Yes the .pst file will restore it as will the folders above, but the settings will restore them just the way you had them. It worked for me.
Since then I found there’s a tool to save your settings for all the applications in Microsoft Office 2002 or 2003. That includes Microsoft Word, PowerPoint, Microsoft Access (for those of you who use this great Departmental-sized database) and Microsoft Excel.



Jack Kennedy would "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe." For Kennedy: "Only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility -- I welcome it." It is ironic that in this time and in this place, the direct descendent of those words, and the virile passions they convey, can be found coming from the mouth and heart not of the Massachusetts Democrat John Kerry, but of his opponent, the Texas Republican George W. Bush. Yesterday, addressing the den of jackals, thieves, petty dictators and other international flotsam -- which goes by the name of the United Nations General Assembly -- President Bush echoed the brave, necessary words of the once Prince of Camelot:



I used to live in Washington DC. But for the past while now, I, like so many millions of other Americans, have been residing in Rotflmao City. It’s a fun place to be, but it can be exhausting. A number of my muscles, such as those attached to my rib cage, have become achingly sore. It’s a very distracting place to be. You keep losing your focus, and keep being uncontrollably seized by convulsive behavior. Yet I, like so many others, don’t have a choice. We’re all going to be living here for the next several weeks.Moving to Rotflmao City is easy. All you have to do is read a news item like this:Datelined September 21, 2004, ABC News ended its story on the activities of the Republican and Democratic presidential candidates for the day with this closing line:

President Bush will address the UN at 10:30 a.m. All day long, he will be meeting with world leaders. John Kerry appears on "Live with Regis and Kelly," before moving on to Florida for more campaigning.
See what I mean? You have no choice in the matter - without warning, you’re instantly transported to Rotflmao.



This is the full Introduction to John Fund’s new book, Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy . A friend of mine for many years, John is on the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal and writes the WSJ’s Political Diary column. You’ve seen him often on Fox News - it’s always enjoyable to see John rhetorically slap Alan Colmes around.John has written a very important book, and it could not be more timely. The Democrats are masters at stealing elections, and new rules regarding such things as “provisional ballots” and mass absentee voter fraud give them more opportunities than ever. John’s book is sobering and frightening. The Democrats have gone around the bend this year with rage. Their ends-justifies-the-means Marxist morality - as exhibited by Dan Rather claiming forgeries are fine if they contain a “core truth” - gives them the rationale to commit whatever fraud necessary to “win.” Please read John’s Intro - and please buy John’s book! -JW Our nation may be on the brink of repeating the 2000 Florida election debacle, but this time in several states, with allegations of voter fraud, intimidation and manipulation of voting machines added to the generalized chaos that sent our last presidential contest into overtime. There is still time to reduce the chance of another electoral meltdown, both this year and in future years. But this will not happen unless we acknowledge that the United States has a haphazard, fraud-prone election system befitting an emerging Third World country rather than the world's leading democracy.



How do you think the sanctimonious people at TV's "60 Minutes" would portray a company charged by the FCC with "serious indecency violations," that made expensive settlements with employees and others because of injuries related to asbestos and other hazardous material exposures, underfunded its employee pension, is legally accused of securities violations, employs those who widely distributed forged documents in an effort to destroy political opponents, failed to dismiss or discipline employees who violated the company code of conduct, owned offshore enterprises that paid little or no U.S. corporate tax, and operated in and/or dealt with countries harboring terrorists? The company that engaged in all of these practices is Viacom, parent company of CBS, which produces "60 Minutes." The folks at "60 Minutes" remind me of the preacher who damns the sinners every Sunday, but then is caught in the brothel.