Pelsoi: "So this is almost as if God has spoken."

This confirms something I have said before, that is, the Democrats have staked their game for rule and relevance in the anti-democratic rulings of the courts . Court rulings, specifically, Supreme Court rulings have the weight of sacred decrees for liberals. If you doubt it, check out what Nancy Pelsoi has said about all the high court's rulings generally and the Kelo vs. City of New London specifcally.

Q Could you talk about this decision [Kelo etc.]? What you think of it?

Ms. Pelosi. It is a decision of the Supreme Court. If Congress wants to change it, it will require legislation of a level of a constitutional amendment. So this is almost as if God has spoken. It's an elementary discussion now. They have made the decision.

Courtesy Ramesh Ponnuru at The Corner (emphasis added).

Actually, rereading my post linked above is spot on. In talking about the Schiavo case and Judge Greer's ruling, I quoted Jonathan Last's reference to Lincoln who said of Douglas: he takes a judge's ruling (Dred Scot decision) as a "Thus saith the LORD." Without reason or justification, liberals (like Douglas) take a human construct and give it divine sanction and weight. They have set aside not only conscience but even a standard and the desire to be able to judge something as wrong or right--even fear that the people or the people's representatives would vote on the issue.

Here is Lincoln's extended comments on Douglas:

This man [Douglas] sticks to a decision which forbids the people of a Territory from excluding slavery, and he does so not because he says it is right in itself,--he does not give any opinion on that,--but because it has been decided by the court; and being decided by the court, he is, and you are, bound to take it in your political action as law, not that he judges at all of its merits, but because a decision of the court is to him a "Thus saith the Lord." He places it on that ground alone; and you will bear in mind that thus committing himself unreservedly to this decision, commits him to the next one just as firmly as to this. He did not commit himself on account of the merit or demerit of the decision, but it is a "Thus saith the Lord." The next decision, as much as this, will be a "Thus saith the Lord." There is nothing that can divert or turn him away from this decision.

Short-Term Memory

The guys over at Powerline point out that the Congressional resolution that authorized military action in Iraq was quite clear about the connection between the war in Iraq and 9-11 and the War on Terror. Kerry, et al. have no excuse.

President Bush and the Media's Caricature of Him

Gerard Baker of The London Times interviewed Bush recently:

In person Mr Bush is so far removed from the caricature of the dim, war-mongering Texas cowboy of global popular repute that it shakes one’s faith in the reliability of the modern media.

To Senator Durbin, From James Warner, Former POW

Significant update to my post below to Durbin's outrageous claim that Guantanamo prisoners sufferings resemble those found in Nazi camps, Soviet gulags, or Pol Pot's torture cells.

A former POW of Vietnam War, James Warner, replies to Durbin.

Guess What They Are Talking About in Iraq?

Over at Iraq the Model, Omar has this to say:

It's visible to everyone that debates over the war in Iraq, war on terror, invasion or occupation or whatever you may name it are at peak levels right now. The process is being questioned, criticized and discussed more profoundly than at any time in the last two years but you know what?

That's not happening in Iraq; you can find such discussions and accusations in America but you can't find them in Iraq.

NY Times Editorial on Bush's Ft. Bragg Speech

This editorial shows, perhaps, the cause of the left's criticism of Bush's vision on the war on terror and the current war. Though before going in Iraq, there was less certainity that there was no connection. Since the WMD's have not been found immediately following the war, it seems critics everywhere--in particular, Kerry, Kennedy, other Congressmen, even President Clinton--assume that Iraq had no WMD's and that there clearly is no smoking gun connection between Iraq and bin Laden (ie 9-11).

There is even some resentment (highlighted below, emphasis mine) that Bush keeps 9-11 foremost in our minds when reminding us of the need for constancy. I can't believe that they would have had such a problem with FDR invoking the memory of Pearl Harbor keep America focused on pursuing the difficult European theater of WW II against Germany, obviously not involved in Pearl Harbor.

We did not expect Mr. Bush would apologize for the misinformation that helped lead us into this war, or for the catastrophic mistakes his team made in running the military operation. But we had hoped he would resist the temptation to raise the bloody flag of 9/11 over and over again to justify a war in a country that had nothing whatsoever to do with the terrorist attacks.

More:

No one wants a disaster in Iraq, and Mr. Bush's critics can put aside, at least temporarily, their anger at the administration for its hubris, its terrible planning and its inept conduct of the war in return for a frank discussion of where to go from here. The president, who is going to be in office for another three and a half years, cannot continue to obsess about self-justification and the need to color Iraq with the memory of 9/11. The nation does not want it and cannot afford it.

At what point do the critics see that our unity against our enemies is of greater importance than a war conducted to their refined sensibilities. Intelligence and the fog of war do not allow for the certainity of knowing lies beyond our vision at this point. But, with enemies certainly resolved and enabled to strike us and our allies, and have struck since 9-11, what side do the critics want to error on? Bush has chosen. And I am glad he did. Let's stick to it. His critics embolden desperate enemies and indicate a lack of understanding the enemy, as Rove jokingly said. In so doing, they seem to say that they would rather error on the side of the enemy.

Kelo vs. City of New London -- Just Kidding, right, Mr. Souter?

Those familiar with Supreme Court's silly and unconstitutional rulings these last few weeks, will know our robed masters (Justice Souter included) decreed, in Kelo v. City of New London, that a city could condemn private property if the property could be shown to generate greater revenue for the city than the private owner. The ludicrousness of this is already coming home to roost. At first, in a light hearted way, Watley Review reported that NYC wanted to condemn New Jersey for development. And, today, news has it that the stakes go up.

Logan Darrow Clements, CEO of Freestar Media, has filed a claim against Justice Souter's New Hampshire home in order to build a new hotel/restaurant. Supposedly, this is legitimate. The hotel will be called "The Lost Libery Hotel" and the restaurant "Just Desserts Cafe".

Quoth:

Clements, CEO of Freestar Media, LLC, points out that the City of Weare will certainly gain greater tax revenue and economic benefits with a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road than allowing Mr. Souter to own the land.

Further:

"This is not a prank" said Clements, "The Towne of Weare has five people on the Board of Selectmen. If three of them vote to use the power of eminent domain to take this land from Mr. Souter we can begin our hotel development."

Tony Blair's son to intern for Republican David Dreier

According to this BBC report, Euan Blair, set to complete his degree in ancient history at Bristol University, is to intern for the chairman of the House's Rules Committee, David Dreier. Evidentally, that he has chosen a Republican rather than a Democrat to intern for has raised a few eyebrows. And that he has chosen not just any Republican but Dreier (a regular Hugh Hewitt guest and a leader of center-right politics) should cause more wonder.

Michael Lewis on the lessons of Coach Fitz

Last week (11 June 2005), Saturday Morning Edition's Scott Simon interviewed Michael Lewis on his book, an expansion of his NY Times article (28 March 2004), about his high school baseball coach, Billy Fitzgerald ("Fitz"). Lewis recalls his years of play with Fitz at Isidore Newman School in New Orleans and thereby the value of athletics for youth and how a change in parents' views of athletics and schools threaten a legend. Said headmaster, Scott McLeod,

''The parents' willingness to intercede on the kids' behalf, to take the kids' side, to protect the kid, in a not healthy way -- there's much more of that each year,'' he said. ''It's true in sports, it's true in the classroom. And it's only going to get worse.'' Fitz sat at the very top of the list of hardships that parents protected their kids from; indeed, the first angry call McLeod received after he became headmaster came from a father who was upset that Fitz wasn't giving his son more playing time.

Evidently, since Lewis' NY Times article was published, Fitz's job was saved and the headmaster McLeod lost his job instead. As of October last fall, according to the school's website, they've hired a new headmaster.

Hattip: Camile, over at Book Moot.

Remember Amensty's "Gulag" Charge of Gitmo?

In the Washington Post, Pavel Litvinov, a former Gulag prisoner, speaks out on Amensty International Irene Khan's comparison of Gitmo as "the gulag of our time."

Real Torture

NY Times documents some real torture, just found in Iraq.

"Get that Sucker!"

Did you hear about this? From the Shreveport Times:

Beauticians beat up would-be burgler.

Mitchell tripped the robber as he tried to leave and cried aloud "get that sucker" as the group of about 20, nearly all women, some wielding curling irons, bludgeoned him until police arrived.
---
Jared Gipson, 24, of Shreveport was charged with armed robbery, Shreveport police said. He will be booked into the City Jail once he is released from the hospital.

Durbin and Gulags, Death Camps, and Pol Pot

Senator Dick Durbin (IL)

• Durbin's full speech, 14 June 2005, in the Senate
• "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."
• Comments on Gitmo, 15 June 2005
• Statement on Previous Comments, 17 June 2005
• From Spike O'Dell Interview, WGN 720, Chicago, 17 June 2005 (Via Hugh Hewitt).
• Q. No regrets on the statements you made?
  
  Durbin: No, I don't, and I'll tell you why. I went to the floor and read a memo from the FBI. This isn't something I made up. It was a memo that was unclassified, was disclosed, and I'm going to take, if I can ask you to bear with me, I'm going to read the highlights of it because it really sets the stage for my comments....[reads investigator memo] It goes on and on and on. I read this into the record because there has been a lot of controversy about what is happening in Guantanamo Bay where we have held 500 to 700 people for some times up to two and a half years with no charges. The Supreme Court has ruled that this Administration's new interrogation policy under Secretary Rumsfeld violates basic rights and I said if I just read this to you and you didn't know where it came from, where would you think this could happen? In the Nazi regime, in the soviet regime? Sadly it happened under Americans. Now the point I was trying to make is, we have departed from standards of conduct which presidents of both parties have played by for over 50 years, and we shouldn't be doing this....
• ---
  
• Q. I guess one of the reasons people are having such a hard time with this one, is when comparisons are made and you use names like Nazis and Soviet gulags, when you are talking Nazis there were what, 9 million people killed in the camps there. The gulags had about 3 million and so forth. And I know Gitmo is not the Holiday Inn down there, but I don't think anyone has died down there, have they?
  
  Durbin: No, that's true. In all fairness, they did not. But I don't believe we were dealing with deaths at Abu Ghraib either. We were dealing with a situation where when people saw the digital camera photographs, they said "My God! Americans should not be involved in that kind of conducrt." Now I will not demean or diminish the terrible atrocities that were commtted by the Soviets and the Nazis. The points I was, the point I was trying to make there was, if I just read this to you and say "What kind of country, what kind of governemtn would do that," and you'd think of some of the most repressive regimes in history. Sadly this FBI report says its being done by our government. I don't know who in our government. But it should stop....

Commentary (UPDATED 19 June):

• John Podhortz on Durbin stepping "Over the Line"
• Boston Herald's editorial calling on Durbin's resignation
• Michele Malkin has a roundup of what the Gulags, Pol Pot, and Nazis were really like, roundup of MSM's reactions, from Friday, including some remarks from Cheney. In other words, go read Malkin.
• Newt Gingrich sends all Senators a letter justifying censuring Dubin (Courtesy of Powerline).
• Mark Steyn on Durbin's slander.

Revisiting Iraq and Al Qaeda evidence

LAST UPDATED: 22 JULY 2005

(For a chronological and comprehensive listing of commentary and evidence, go to Archive News' Connect the Dots.)

------------------------ The Newsmakers -------------------------------

President Bush

• on Iraq and Al Qaeda, after Cabient meeting (17 June 2004)
• on Persevering in Iraq, Ft. Bragg (28 June 2005)

9-11 Commission Report and Staff Findings

• transcript of Commissioner Fred Fielding and Chicago U.S. Attorney Pat Fitzgerald (indicted bin Laden in 1998), regarding the allegation in the 1998 bin Laden indictment about an understanding between Iraq and al Qaeda (15 June 2004)

History News Network's compilation of newsmakers on topic.

------------------------ Commentators -------------------------------

Edward J. Epstein

• on mysteries of 9-11 and questions the Commission never addressed
• on Havel denying NY Times story relating Havel calling Bush to deny the meeting of Iraqi intelligence and Mohammed Atta in Prague
• on what is known of the meeting
• his article in Slate on the matter

Steve Hays on

• "Why Can't the CIA Keep Up with the New Yorker?" (13 September 2002)
  
• "A Match Made in Hell" (2 February 2003)
  
• "Maureen Dowd's Intelligence" (15 February 2003)
  
• "The Al Qaeda Connection" (12 May 2003)
  
• "Immigrant, Journalist, Iraqi Spy" (11 July 2003)
  
• "The Al Qaeda Connection" (11 July 2003) (Judge Merritt's report (via Instapundit))
  
• "Saddam's Al Qaeda Connection" (1 September 2003)
  
• "Dick Cheney Was Right" (20 October 2003)
  
• "Osama's Best Friend" (3 November 2003)
  
• "The Saddam-Osama Memo (cont.)" (19 November 2003)
  
• "Newsweek's 'Case'" (20 November 2003) (Newsweek's article (19 November 2003))
  
• "Case Closed" (24 November 2003)
  
• "The Clinton View of Iraq-al Qaeda Ties" (29 December 2003)
  
• "Cheney vs. Powell" (11 January 2004)
  
• Weekly Standard Editorial "Two Collin Powells" (19 January 2004)
  
• "More Connections" (3 June 2004)
• "The Connection" (7 June 2004)
• "Cutting Through the Fog" (23 June 2004)
• "Who is Ahmed Hikmat Shakir?" (23 June 2004)
• "Body of Evidence" - correcting CNN's error (30 June 2005)
• "The Mother of All Connections" - an Iraqi/alQaeda detainee (9 July 2005)
• "The DIA and CIA Go MIA" - American Intel's failure to connect the dots (17 July 2005)
  
• "Another Link in the Chain" - the creation of Ansar al Islam (22 July 2005)
  

Thomas Joscelyn

• "The Four-Day War" - Saddam's helpmate under Clinton's bombing (19 July 2005)
  

Cliff May

• "The Offended 'Offensive'" - Regarding Bush' Persevering Speech, Ft. Bragg, (29 June 2005)

Andy McCarthy (bio)

• "Iraq and Militant Islam" - legitmacy of links (1 June 2004)
• "Iraq and al Qaeda" -Questsions the Commission doesn't answer (17 June 2004)
• "It's All About 9-11" - Regarding Bush's Persevering Speech at Ft. Bragg (29 June 2005)
• Regarding Replies to his 29 June 2005 article (30 June 2005)
• "Case Not Dismissed" -Ahmed Hikmat Shakir & the 9/11 Commission (1 July 2005)
  

Richard Miniter on

• "The Iraq Al Qaeda Connections " Tech Central Station (25 September 2003)

Laurie Mylroie

• "How Terror Investigations Can Go Wrong" WSJ (26 December 2001)
• "Another Mistaken Conceptzia" Jerusalem Post (4 December 2002)
• "Understated" NRO (5 February 2003)
• "The Circle of Terror" NRO (19 February 2003)
• "The Baluch Connection" WSJ (18 February 2003)
• KJ Lopez Interviews Laurie Mylroie NRO (11 September 2003)
• Angelo Codevilla's Review of Mylroie's "Bush Vs. Beltway" NRO (1 November 2003)
• "'Al Qaeda Dunnit!' Think Again!" NRO (24 November 2003)
• Frontpage Interview: Saddam and 9/11 (8 January 2004)

Powerline on the relationship

Robert L. Pollock "Enemies Together: Clinton Was Right" WSJ (24 June 2004)

William Safire "The Zeiklow Report" -NYT (21 June 2004)