For years whenever the crazed antics and threats from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad haved raised alarm bells, a push back by supercilious liberals and TV Iran “experts” counter the nation’s government is complex and in many ways the holocaust denying madman is not really in control. They point out that the nation is a “democracy” where moderation exists and the nation, if just left to its own devices, will march toward freedom.

So my question is this, if crazy-pants doesn’t run the nation and we shouldn’t fear what is going on, how come Iran developed an air defense system, is raising uranium enrichment, is developing predator drones and seems to be building alliances and defenses to start a War against Israel and the West? Regardless of who is actually calling the shots, it is pretty clear Iran is not seeking to spread peace and love as it develops a war machine.

It seems to me that in the time we have wasted NOT blowing the Iranian nuclear plants to hell the nation has developed, with the help of Russia, the means to grow their arsenal and protect it. They have also, in that time, silenced their opposition, cracked down on people who actually want to participate in the aforementioned democracy and have pretty much told us the plan moving ahead is to make life miserable for sanity and freedom.

I was heartened and emboldened by the summer protests in Iran, but fear that these protesters represent a small fraction of Iranians. A fraction increasingly behind bars or facing worse consequences for registering their discontent at a sham election. My hope is that an open rebellion will occur and the Iranian government will be overthrown. My hope is that liberty will reign and the leadership will face imprisonment or death for their crimes. I see little evidence any of this will happen. I see instead, a government consolidating power and following through with a dangerous agenda it verbalizes every chance it gets.

Attacking Iran would leave us with yet another quagmire. Like Afghanistan or Iraq, I don’t see what a post overthrown Iran would look like. With that said, I don’t see a positive outcome if we let Iran continue on its current destructive path. I do believe, very strongly, our world is furthering down a path toward a global war. I believe Iran is one of many surrogates for Russia and China, booby traps meant to distract the West and bleed it dry. While we exhaust diplomacy Iran builds arsenals. If we finally address the issue, we will undoubtedly face a force aided by two powers with massive military resources and dozens more nations ready to join in the fight against us. In short, we have no good options and they get worse by the day.

While I abhor neoconservatism, embracing an odd mix of isolationism and economic globalism instead, their agenda would have been best if it was seen through. First Afghanistan, then Iraq, then Iran and Syria in a massive and definitive blow to Islamic extremism and rogue nationalism. Instead we had the befuddled leadership of men like Donald Rumsfeld and a weird collection of progressives and nation-building conservatives who quickly gained, then lost, the mainstream media and the American people. Now we have a mess, a terrible track record of building nations and every reason to drag our feet. All the while Russia, China and Islamic extremism are growing in power and influence while our nation goes bankrupt.

I don’t believe there are any good solutions but we reached the point for a decision a LONG time ago. Bush did nothing, Obama is doing nothing, Congress is asleep and Israel kept on a leash. All I know is that every day without real action, is one day Iran, China and Russia have to further their plan.

A couple quick things I want to point out:

1) We have been talking about a growing “youth movement” in Iran for 30 years. Wouldn’t all those “youth” have grown up and taken over the country by now?

2) Watch how things are reported. Take this article for instance. The first TWO words are “hard-line” and describe Ahmadinejad, while “pro-reform” is used to describe challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi in the first paragraph. Nearly every article you read in Western newspapers contains something similar, Financial Times calls A a “fundamentalist” and M “more moderate.”

There is a name for this; framing. The article establishes a frame through which you see the world and then paints the picture.

3) Now notice a pattern in reporting. It actually follows a rather similar trend in reporting of our own elections.

a) Turnout expected to be ENORMOUS and unprecedented due to the ((historic)) nature of the race. Every election is historic either because of the race, gender, creed of the candidate. The uniqueness of the race “old rivals, bitter rivals, resurrection of a flawed or fallen candidate etc.” or simply because it could change things from one leader to another.

b) That turnout represents large voter interest which MUST mean the vote is going to be very close;
“If no candidate gains more than 50 per cent of the votes today, which seems very likely.” Quote from the previously linked FT article.

c) The unique nature of the election is giving huge fears of election rigging. Weird “signs” of rigging like asking for more ballots for this, unprecedented election are presented. Of course more ballots are needed if turnout is high. If more ballots were not requested it would be used as a sign of rigging.

With this chain of events readers are left to interpret the picture through the frames already established. Who would be more likely to rig an election, a “moderate, reformer” or a “fundamentalist, hard-liner”?

In the weeks leading up to the election I kept reading that support for the “reformist” candidate had been growing and an unprecedented close election was on the way. How was this known? Well, I have no idea. I did not see opinion polling. Instead I saw fluff like the reform minded one likes to tweet, use Facebook & go on YouTube. MUST be clearly connecting with that growing “youth movement” & brings to mind the “small donors” of 2008, doesn’t it?

The only real “polling” was showing a clear win for the fundamentalist, hard-liner, holocaust denier but that was reported in “state-run” media and was always rejected in Western stories or news reports. Since any alternative media was shut down, no clear picture could be reported. SO our media just went with the story that the race must be close because of the “historic” nature. No evidence, just seemed right to the and it is what was being seen by “watchers” of the elections. Who were the “watchers” why policy experts for think tanks and “experts” who were current and former Government, military and intelligence officials. Surely THEY had no axe to grind and no agenda.

So what am I getting at here? Don’t believe what you read. Now that the election has taken place “BOTH SIDES” are claiming victory. Shocker. Those handy suggestions that vote rigging would be involved? Yeap, calls are coming out that vote rigging happened. Predictable? You bet!

It never seemed likely to me that Ahmadinejad wouldn’t. Frankly I don’t believe free elections ever truly take place in Iran anyway. Yet even if they did I never saw actual evidence that the vote would go any other way. I just saw a lot of suspicious Western reports that suddenly made it seem as though this “reformer” who has been out of the limelight for a few decades was capturing the same tired “youth” vote that is talked about whenever “reform” is discussed in Iran. A youth movement that always seems to talk big before any major action by the government in Iran is taken and then suddenly disappears.

Now I for one am more than supportive of any and all attempts to overthrow the reigning government in Iran. I would like Ahmadinejad & the theocracy that really runs the establishment to be sent to the fiery pits of hell. If propaganda and misinformation spread into that nation help us reach that goal, great. I just personally am getting a little tired of that propaganda being presented as real news in this country. It is further evidence that all of the news we read and hear, especially what is reported about ourselves, is a lie or at best a distortion of the truth.

It is interesting to me that the left believes the case for War in Iraq was a conspiracy pushed by the Bush administration and supported by the media; yet everything they read about Obama and the evil of capitalism is true. It is interesting to me that the right believes a “liberal media” is out to assassinate the character of every Republican candidate and destroy capitalism but trusts that the altruistic vision presented by the military-industrial-media complex is righteous.

What I am saying is that as our military might and our economy collapse and our foundation is buckling under the weight of growing challenges from the world, honest assessments of ourselves and the challenges we face may be paramount to our own survival. Yet the only vehicle for delivering those assessments, en mass, is beyond corruptible and the populace of our nation beyond gullible.

There is a great deal to be learned from what is transpiring in Iran right now and what has transpired in our own country over the last few years. Sadly, our nation has been so polluted by propaganda and misinformation I don’t know that any of us are capable of education.

Reports suggest that North Korea has moved a long-range missile, believed to be capable of reaching Alaska, to a launch pad where it can be launched within a week.

Yonhap News Agency is reporting North Korea has launched another missile, this one a short-range from the East coast.

Earlier NK fired a surface-to-air and one surface-to-ship missile. There were in addition to a nuclear capable missile and the detonation of a nuclear device yesterday.

Story from the Associated Press

On February 16th 1804 Lieutenant Stephen Decatur, Jr., leading a small group of US Marines, boarded a captured Tripolitan ship and drove it toward the USS Philadelphia a captured frigate standing ashore of Tripoli where American sailors where being held hostage. The marines stormed guards and with help from American ships Decatur set the Philadelphia ablaze to deny Tripolitan sailors the use of the vessel. The marines then captured the city taking the fight directly to “the shores of Tripoli.”

For many years the fledgling United States paid enormous ransom to pirates; one of the very first actions taken by the third president of the United States Thomas Jefferson was to end ransom payments and stand boldly against the Muslim tyrants who threatened our nation’s interests abroad. The First Barbary War set a precedent for future President’s in dealing with those who would practice extortion against our government; it lead to a peace treaty and though the United States, light on resources during the War of 1812 did give in to these tyrants again for a short time, our nation once again stood against pirates in the Second Barbary Wars, a course of action that has kept American vessels free from attack since.

Yesterday Somali pirates attempted to take an American vessel and now holds one of our own, the vessels pilot Richard Phillips, hostage. In a brave act Phillips gave his freedom for his crew; an action that speaks volumes about the legacy and prosperity of our American resolve.

The lesson of Thomas Jefferson must live on. Our nation and our corporations must NOT pay ransom or give into the demands of those who use hostility and brutality to extort concessions. Our vessels must be safe and free from circumvention. Such attacks have been appeased by other governments and corporations around the world, we must not follow their lead. As we did in the early 1800’s we must do now, we must not see this as a singular action but as a declaration of War.

The course of action is clear. We must rescue our man, either through intervention or subterfuge. Our negotiation cannot have any outcome other than his safe release, ideally with these vandals captured and imprisoned. If we must hand over millions as a show payment, then that is what we should do. Once that money has been exchanged we must track these men back to their mothership(s) and set them ablaze or sink them.

Regardless of the outcome of this incident we must locate the centers for larger pirate operations and destroy them now. Our response must be disproportionate to the current circumstance but equal to the viciousness they have visited upon other nations. If we do not declare zero tolerance and War then we will simply face further and worsening attack.

Now is not the time to talk about economic inequality or the plight of these barbarians. God gives us all equal liberty and free will, the decisions of man entrap us. Those in Somalia and other nations must learn self-governance and build their own destinies. We cannot accept criminal acts or threats to our own liberty and soverienty no matter their own suffering. These are not individuals to be lumped into stereotypes, used as marketing slogans for socialism and internationalism, they are thieves corrupted by the notion that they must take from others what they are unwilling or too inept to build for themselves.

While I do not support Obama the man, I support the office of the President and the powers given as Commander-in-Chief. If he acts, he will have my support and I am sure the support of all sensible Americans who believe in the Constitution and ask that he uphold the oath of his office. If he gives into appeasement, if he betrays the oath of his office, he will have my fury and sow the seeds of further discontent with those Americans who value freedom, sovereignty and the rule of law.

This just in, Israeli President Shimon Peres has picked hard-line Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu to form a new government.

Depending on the type of government Netanyahu, who was Prime Minister of Israel from 1996 to 1999. It has been suggested that the new Obama administration had reservations about Netanyahu as his rhetoric and plans for an administration may conflict with their approach of a new engagement with Palestinians.

If you blinked it is possible you missed yesterday’s news that President Obama had decided to send 17,000 troops to Afghanistan in what some see as a “mini-surge”; a plan that will hopefully bring stability to the nation. This decision follows a series of bombings alleged to have come from American predator drones inside of Pakistan; these actions have raised the ire of many in that nation but appear to make good suggestions by then candidate Obama that he would strike inside of Pakistan to reach and destabilize the networks of Islamic fascism.

There are many reasons to believe that this “mini-surge” will not have the same effect that President Bush’s surge had in Iraq. These wars, while extensions of one another, are very different. Afghanistan presents major logistical issues; there appears to be few internal leaders ready and waiting to take leadership of a unified nation while the tribal, ethnic and religious divisions that exist seem incapable of truly unifying into a collective. The border with Pakistan, whose government itself is on the brink of collapse, presents a very unique problem. Further operations into that nation could spark either a Civil War, coup de’etat or result in a series of unpredictable events resulting in the destruction of any chance toward to establish peace. Even the least of our worries, that the status quo will continue in Pakistan, is not an ideal outcome because Pakistan gives aide and comfort to our enemies.

When one considers the enormity of these challenges, one cannot possibly deny our Commander-in-Chief their wholehearted and overwhelming support. In deciding to strengthen the force in Afghanistan, President Obama has made his first major decision as the leader of our nation’s defense. Every preconception he walked into office with will be tested and he now must embrace the solemn duty of sending men and women into harms way knowing their souls were sent to battle not by his predecessor but instead from his command.

The left chose to use every moment of President Bush’s terms to indict our nation because of their distrust and dislike of his personality and persona. This is a path that cannot be embraced by those of us on the right. While I personally disagree with the President on nearly every issue foreign, domestic and economic, I respect the office and understand the demonstrable importance of winning our War against Islamic fascism. In pursuit of our nation’s defense, I have no doubt the president will find nothing less than the full faith, confidence and support of the Republican Party, American conservatives and all people who believe that our liberty must from time-to-time be defended from the brutal hand of tyranny and intolerance.

While I will not always agree with the actions President Obama takes in this respect, I will always regard his right as commander to take them. If a course of action continually leads to the weakness of our nation’s defense, I will use all available means to voice my dissent but never will I tarnish the good name of our armed forces or indict the totality of our nation in the way that many on the left chose to do over the last eight years.

I support our President and hope that he will guide our forces to victory, not just in Afghanistan but in every conflict small and large they may face in the coming years. I hope that he will command our mighty forces with clarity of thought and confidence in purpose. Our enemy is cunning but our resolve for freedom has proven triumphant over far stronger and better equipped enemies.

As long as our President is willing to stand up to the challenge of securing our liberty, he will have my full support.

We are actually fighting more than just the War on terrorism, but it seems no one wants to acknowledge it leaving reports like this one just lone bits for tiny consumption.

The number of attacks on US government, defence companies and businesses rose by a third in 2007, to 43,880 incidents affecting five million computers, according to the claims by the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission.