..
.
(?)
.
.
DERRY – U.S. Democratic Rep. Carol Shea-Porter accused President Bush of fear-mongering yesterday, insisting the nation is not more vulnerable to a terror attack without the electronic surveillance legislation he wants in place.
"This really is a big scare tactic. Nothing terrible is going to happen" New Hampshire’s 1st District representative said at a town hall meeting in Derry’s Municipal Center.
Really? How does Ms. Shea Porter know this? Does she believe that the lack of further attacks following September 11th, 2001 is simply because our enemies have somehow seen the light? Let’s remember Osama bin Laden’s words from his 1996 "Declaration of Jihad against the United States" in which he takes note of how he and his followers will engage the US:
Today your brothers and sons, the sons of the two Holy Places, have started their Jihad in the cause of Allah, to expel the occupying enemy out of the country of the two Holy places. And there is no doubt you would like to carry out this mission too, in order to re-establish the greatness of this Ummah and to liberate its’ occupied sanctities.
Nevertheless, it must be obvious to you that, due to the imbalance of power between our armed forces and the enemy forces, a suitable means of fighting must be adopted i.e using fast moving light forces that work under complete secrecy. In other word to initiate a guerrilla warfare, were the sons of the nation, and not the military forces, take part in it.
And as you know, it is wise, in the present circumstances, for the armed military forces not to be engaged in a conventional fighting with the forces of the crusader enemy (the exceptions are the bold and the forceful operations carried out by the members of the armed forces individually, that is without the movement of the formal forces in its conventional shape and hence the responses will not be directed, strongly, against the army) unless a big advantage is likely to be achieved; and great losses induced on the enemy side (that would shaken and destroy its foundations and infrastructures) that will help to expel the enemy defeated out of the country.
The question for Shea Porter is who does she believe? Obviously, she doesn’t give a whit about President Bush or any of his intelligence advisors. What of Bin Laden? Is he simply "fearmongering" too? Remember, he issued the above words in 1996 and the events of September 11, 2001 followed. I know that he and the other leaders of the radical Islamic movement have only stepped up their rhetoric in the years since.
And of course, while he hasn’t yet run his mouth like Shea Porter (that I’m aware of, anyway), our other Congressman (sigh), Paul Hodes, hasn’t helped, either. In a press release from the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), it is noted that
After continually blocking a vote on bipartisan FISA legislation this week, Paul Hodes (NH-02) and the Democrats are leaving town without reauthorizing the Protect America Act, stranding our law enforcement with outdated laws and simultaneously putting millions of American lives in danger. House Republican leaders and the President of the United States said that they were committed to remaining in Washington until the people’s business is done, but Paul Hodes and the Democrats have chosen inaction and are skipping town, allowing the current FISA law to expire this Saturday, February 16, 2008.
“Paul Hodes and his Democrat Party in Washington proved once again today that they have completely squandered their new majority in favor of political games, reckless tactics and an extremely liberal legislative agenda,” NRCC Communications Director Jessica Boulanger said. “Delaying a vote on this critical legislation is completely irresponsible.”
Indeed. Our two freshmen Democrats "representing" the Granite State in Congress continue to bring shame to themselves and our state as they press forward with their blind allegiance to the Pelosi/Reid agenda of retreat and surrender in the face of an implaccable enemy. Again from today’s UL:
A strong opponent of the war, Shea-Porter said the billions of dollars spent each month financing military action in Iraq is slowing down medical research and infrastructure needs at home.
"If we take a dollar from you and send it to Iraq, that’s one less dollar for a particular disease or a bridge that we desperately need. We can’t keep paying forever," she said. "I know we’ve got enemies, but we’ve got limited resources also."
Why is it that liberal Democrats only care about taxdollars when it comes to the military? What diseases will be cured when Shea-Porter and Bin Laden have their way? The "disease" of being an infidel? What bridge will be built when Shea-Porter and Bin Laden finally defeat the enemy, George W. Bush? All the money will be needed to build mosques and to pay the costs of cleaning up the rubble of our once great cities and burying the dead. There’ll be nothing left to build a bridge– except for the one to the 7th century…
Again, from Osama bin Laden in 1996:
Those youths will not ask you for explanations, they will tell you singing there is nothing between us need to be explained, there is only killing and neck smiting.
There he goes again… fearmongering. Tell bin Laden to put a cork in it– Shea Porter is on the scene and has no time or use for such scare tactics…
[UPDATE]
Don’t just take my word for it– consider this roundup of opinion & thought on the matter– and notice, not all of them are Republicans…
CHAIRMAN OF THE SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE SEN. JAY ROCKEFELLER (D-WV): “What people have to understand around here is that the quality of the intelligence we are going to be receiving is going to be degraded. It is going to be degraded. It is already going to be degraded as telecommunications companies lose interest.” (Sen. Jay Rockefeller, Floor Remarks, 02/14/08)
DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE MIKE MCCONNELL: “We are already losing capability due to the failure to address liability protection.” (DNI Mike McConnell, Op-Ed, “A Key Gap In Fighting Terrorism,” The Washington Post, 02/15/08)
FBI DIRECTOR ROBERT MUELLER: “Well, I would say, in protecting the homeland it’s absolutely essential. In this — it’s absolutely essential we have the support, willing support of communication carriers.” (Select Committee On Intelligence, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 02/05/08)
CIA DIRECTOR MICHAEL HAYDEN: “These are very fragile relationships. We lost industrial cooperation, at CIA, with partners on the mere revelation of the SWIFT program in public discourse. Not because they were doing anything related to that program whatsoever but just the fear that the vulnerability they would have to their smooth functioning of their business had caused people, who are otherwise patriotic and committed, to back away from their totally lawful cooperation with our agency.” (Select Committee On Intelligence, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 02/05/08)
DNI MCCONNELL: “Expiration Of The Act Would Lead To The Loss Of Important Tools The Intelligence Community Relies On To Discover The Plans Of Our Enemies.” (Permanent Select Committee On Intelligence, U.S. House Of Representatives, Hearing, 02/07/08)
DNI McConnell: House Democrats Have D
one “Grave Damage To Our Capabilities To Protect The Nation.”
DNI MCCONNELL: “Before I start, I want to thank you, Chairman Rockefeller and Ranking Member Bond and members of the committee and the staff sitting behind you, and the reason for that thanks is all the effort over the months to get the FISA legislation passed through the Senate with an overwhelming majority, passed two days ago, bipartisan support, and I think it is commendable. I believe, under this committee’s leadership, we now have a bill that is essential for our community to do its job in protecting the country. The Senate bill needs to be enacted now into law. If it is not, whether the bill is extended or expires, either way, it will do grave damage to our capabilities to protect the nation if we don’t have your bill passed.” (Select Committee On Intelligence, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 02/14/08)
DNI McConnell: With Expiration Of The PAA, We Now “Have To Satisfy A Probable Cause Standard” To Monitor Any New Terrorist We Identify
DNI MCCONNELL: “…it’s very important that I highlight for this committee what else happened. What else? One, we lose the ability to compel the carriers to help us. Two, there is no liability protection for the carriers. Therefore, they’re thinking twice about helping us, making it much more difficult. And, three, this is a very dynamic situation. While we may have something on some key targets that we’re working, recruitment, training, different names, different personalities will pop up. Under the Protect America Act, that was manageable. So if it expires, that new dynamic is not — it would put us back in a position, under the old FISA legislation, in which we would have to satisfy a probable cause standard if collection were obtained in the country, meaning a wire in the United States. So there is some level of protection, but it’s not where we need to be.” (Select Committee On Intelligence, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 02/14/08)