A sickly 95 year-old woman in a wheel chair was forced to remove her adult diaper in order to board an airplane. Can we please cut the crap and admit that a sickly, incontinent 95 year old woman in a wheelchair is not a terrorist threat? I’m pretty sure that none of the 9/11 terrorists, the shoe bomber, underwear bomber, the terrorists in the first trade center bombing, etc fit this profile.

There are certain people more likely to be terrorists. When will we start to openly admit this fact?

Afghanistan's President, Hamid Karzai, has been critical of the United States.

Barack Obama wants to bring 30,000 soldiers home by November 2012, while the Pentagon thinks he should hold off until 2013. My guess is that Obama wants to make it look like he’s serious about removing soldiers from Afghanistan leading up to the Presidential Election. Unfortunately, this isn’t good enough.

I’d like to see all of our soldiers come home in a matter of a couple of months. Some would say that this is unreasonable, and that it would jeopardized alleged gains we’ve made in the region. I say that’s nonsense. We’ve spent hundreds of billions of dollars on military spending and public works projects in Afghanistan. That’s bad, but the worst part are the soldiers who were injured or killed. Afghanistan is benefiting from out presence much more than the United States. We need to leave.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai has often criticized the United States and NATO forces. Here is an excerpt from his latest rant:

“If they continue their attacks on our houses, then their presence will change from a force that is fighting against terrorism to a force that is fighting against the people of Afghanistan,” he said. “And in that case, history shows what Afghans do with trespassers and with occupiers.”

U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenbarry with Afghanistan's President, Hamid Karzai

To his credit, Karl Eikenbarry, the U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan had a strong response to the Afghans’ rhetoric:

“Mothers and fathers of fallen soldiers, spouses of soldiers who have lost arms and legs, children of those who lost their lives in your country – they ask themselves about the meaning of their loved one’s sacrifice,” he continued.

“When I hear some of your leaders call us occupiers, I cannot look at these mourning parents, spouses, and children in the eye and give them a comforting reply.”

U.S. soldiers are being asked to protect and build a nation for people who don’t like them, and don’t want them there. As for Hamid Karzai, a lot of his comments are probably meant to gain support from his people and appear strong. Of course, if the United States Military were to leave, that would mean that Afghanistan’s security forces would be solely charged with protecting their nation. I wonder how secure that makes Mr. Karzai feel.

Omar Bin Laden, one of Osama Bin Laden's sons

Omar Bin Laden, one of Osama Bin Laden’s sons, is thinking about taking legal action against the United States for his murder, and for his burial at sea. Here is an excerpt from a letter reportedly attributed to Omar Bin Laden:

‘We hold the American President (Barack) Obama legally responsible to clarify the fate of our father, Osama Bin Laden, for it is unacceptable, humanely and religiously, to dispose of a person with such importance and status among his people, by throwing his body into the sea in that way, which demeans and humiliates his family and his supporters and which challenges religious provisions and feelings of hundreds of millions of Muslims.’

So, someone who has killed thousands of people deserved better? I don’t think so. As far as his funeral service, he received much better treatment than I would have provided. Omar Bin Laden complains that his burial at sea “challenges religious provisions.” Many religions look down on cremation, but isn’t that exactly what happened to thousands of people on September 11, 2001? Did those people have a choice? Did their families?

Osama Bin Laden was evil, and was treated far better, and more respectfully than he deserved. As for his “importance and status among his people” which number in the “hundred of millions,” those with common sense shouldn’t care. I really don’t care about the feelings of a person who idolizes one of the most evil men to ever walk the face of the Earth.

Osama Bin Laden's son Omar Bin Laden and his wife Zaina Bin Laden

South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham

Could someone please tell South Caroline Senator Lindsay Graham that he is clueless. His latest idea is for the United States to establish a permanent military base in Afghanistan. This is a lousy idea on so many levels.

For one thing, the U.S. claims it doesn’t want to be seen as an occupier. Well, wouldn’t establishing a military base contradict our message? I think so, but what do I know.

Next, we have the cost factor. Afghanistan is a hopeless mess that barely deserves to be called a country. We’ve already lost too many lives and spent too much money there. We need to leave Afghanistan (and Iraq) immediately in order to save American lives and money.

While I’m on the topic, I have a request for the decision makers. Can we learn how to fight wars efficiently and effectively? From what I’ve seen, we have the wherewithal to win wars quickly, with very few casualties. The American deaths and financial costs occur when we get into nation building and infrastructure repair. This is going to sound cold, but in the future, can we just destroy what we need to destroy and get the heck out of there? It would save countless lives and money.

In case the Senator doesn’t realize it, we are facing a massive fiscal crisis. Removing forces from Iraq and Afghanistan is a necessary part of the cuts that will be needed to finally balance our budget. Looking past these costs are ignorant and wasteful.

Iranian Flag

Did you know the United States Navy refers to the Persian Gulf as the Arabian Gulf? Personally, I really don’t care what they call it, but the Iranian Government is angry. Of course, the Navy went on to explain that no disrespect was intended.

I’m really happy the Navy cleared up their intent. After all, we wouldn’t want to make the Iranian Government angry at us. If they were mad, they might start to do bad things like smuggle weapons to terrorists who would then use them to kill U.S. soldiers, enrich uranium for use in nuclear weapons, threaten to wipe Israel off the map, or send long range missiles to Venezuela. No, we wouldn’t want to get them angry and cause any of those things to happen.

In this video, a woman recounts her experience going through security at a U.S. airport with her children. She decided to opt-out of the full body scan because of fears about radiation and the images that would be produced. Instead, the male security officer groped her body, including her genitals and breasts. After he was finished with her, he wanted to move on to her daughters. Please check out this video. Should this be happening in the United States?

My only solution is to boycott the airlines. If the government is going to continue this sort of intrusive search, then consumers should find an alternate means of transportation.

Let me begin by stating that Muslims have every legal right to build a mosque at that location. As long as all local zoning laws are satisfied, there’s no reason why it shouldn’t be built. Yet, while this building would seem to serve a function similar to that of a Jewish community center or a YMCA, only a fool can’t see the difference.

On September 11th, 2001, the United States was attacked. The nineteen terrorists were Muslims, they were members of Al Qaeda, which is an Islamic terrorist group, and if I remember correctly, there were several news reports of widespread celebrations in the MIddle East when news of the attack broke. I know the perpetrators were extremists, and I’m certainly no theologian, but it’s rather obvious that there is a propensity toward violence in Islam that is not found in Judaism or Christianity. To deny this is disingenuous.

Even if you only agree with part of my argument, you would probably point out that the Ground Zero Mosque will be run by Feisal Abdul Rauf, a moderate Imam. Of course, this isn’t true. Shortly after 9/11, he blamed the United States for being an “accessory” who brought on the 9/11 attacks. By the way, he also says the United States has more blood on its hands than Al Qaeda. Remember, this is someone referred to as a moderate Muslim.

I would prefer to see the mosque built somewhere else. If all legal requirements are met, then there is no reason why it shouldn’t be allowed to be built. Of course, mosque supporters shouldn’t be surprised when a majority of Americans oppose a mosque on this particular site. 3,000 Americans were killed by 19 Muslims, who were backed by an Islamic terrorist organization, then widely celebrated in the Middle East. If the mosque is built, we don’t need to like it, and we certainly don’t need to pretend we are fine with it.

Is it just me, or does Michael Bloomberg seem pretty quick to dismiss the idea of a foreign terrorist? Not only that, but he seems intent on pinning it on a conservative who might not like the recent health care bill. Not surprisingly, it looks like Mayor Bloomberg was 100% wrong.

Authorities have arrested 30 year old Faisal Shahzad who was trying to escape on a flight to Dubai. Shahzad came to the United States form Pakistan in 1999 and became a U.S. citizen in 2009. It seems that many officials, like Michael Bloomberg, are reluctant to admit that this terrorist act might have originated from a foreign country, even though there is some supporting evidence.

For one thing, Faisal Shahzad admits to creating the bomb, traveled to Pakistan for 5 months to receive training, and several people from Pakistan who know Shahzad have been arrested. Maybe it’s me, but that looks suspicious. Plus, we also have proof that Hakimullah Mehsud, the leader of Pakistan Taliban, who was thought to be killed, is actually alive and making threats. The timing of the video of Mehsud and Shahzad’s attempted bombing could be a coincidence, but it deserves a close look.

It seems like many liberals were almost hoping that a conservative, anti-Obama American was responsible for the attack. After all, if they were right, it would just be more evidence of how crazy and irrational conservatives can be. All Shazad’s arrest does for me is to make me question our immigration policy even more.

There are already complaints about the new regulation relating to the increased cost of new automobiles and the reluctance to do anything to improve global warming, since many find the science inconclusive. As for the cost, it could be substantial. New car prices may rise up to $1,000. That’s certainly nothing to sneeze at, but this extra cost will certainly pay for itself in reduced fuel costs. Besides, once the car companies begin making more fuel efficient cars on a large scale, the economies of scale will likely kick in and bring this upfront increase down.

As for those who oppose the more stringent standards based on their skepticism of global warming, I offer this advice: Put that aside for a moment. Whatever you think about global warming, there is no doubt that our nation faces a major problem: Our reliance on foreign oil. I really don’t like that we get so much of our oil from the Middle East and other hostile countries. One of America’s chief goals should be to become energy independent. The Obama administration recently stated that more drilling will be allowed off the U.S. coast. The increase isn’t as expansive as I’d like, but it’s a step in the right direction to increase our domestic supply. By also increasing our fuel efficiency standards, we will be decreasing our domestic demand. If domestic supply continues to rise while domestic demand continues to drop, then we will be heading in the right direction.

Of course, you might still disagree with me. If you do, then feel free to continue opposing these new standards while driving inefficient vehicles. I’m sure the terrorists who live in Middle Eastern countries who benefit from your decision will thank you.

Representative James Clyburn feels that Republicans are “aiding and abetting” terrorism. How are Republicans doing this? By criticizing Barack Obama! According to James Clyburn, criticizing the President and offering an opinion to the American people is considered “aiding and abetting terrorism.” In Mr Clyburn’s world, it is better to just sit quietly and allow the country’s leader to run roughshod over the nation. A totalitarian regime headed by Barack Obama might be Mr. Clyburn’s idea of a utopia, but it certainly isn’t mine.

What I find laughable is James Clyburn’s propensity to criticize Republicans on this matter, and MSNBC’s decision to flash pictures of people wearing anti-socialism shirts at rallies. These are the people MSNBC considers terrorists? These are the people Representative Clyburn is worried about? Here’s a little advice for Mr. Clyburn: Focus on the real terrorists.

We’ve had Democrats voice their disgust with interrogation techniques such as waterboarding, conditions at Guantanamo Bay, and military tribunals. Perhaps they should spend less time demonizing conservatives and more time actually trying to find and punish actual terrorists.