Hooray, its a victory for conservatives, and for America today, because President Bush signed the border fence bill into law. It was passed by the Senate shortly before they recessed for the elections, and Bush just signed it today. It contains the authorization to DHS to build 700 miles of fence along the US-Mexico border, an increasing source of illegal immigration into this country.

This should help Republicans, by showing conservatives and moderates that their party is the one that is tough on border security, and that the Republicans are the people to keep this country safe. And if the Republicans want to stand two swishes of a monkey's tail in November, they must continuously point out that Democrats will severely cripple this country's efforts to combat terrorism, and keep our country safe.

There are a few problems with the bill however. First, it does not require that the fence be built, only gives the money to DHS and "suggests" it be used for fence building. Second, by all estimates, 1.2 billion will not be enough money to build 700 miles of fence. Indeed, a 14 mile stretch of fence cost over 125 billion. John Kyl addressed this problem however, because he said that congress would approve new funding of the fence every year, and that after 3 years, 370 miles should be complete - effectively sealing off Arizona from Mexico.

The first problem, however has not been addressed. I hope that the government sticks with this plan, and keeps working until the entire fence is built, but if the liberals take control of congress, we can't be sure the funding will stick. And, with President Bush's own... bizarre position on illegal immigration, we can't be fully guaranteed that he will have the political will to stick with this project.

Yet still, we should not lament too much. It is a drastically improved scenario from where we were last year, with the illegal protests, and other such nightmares.

Though I do have one question. Since when does it cost 1.2 billion dollars to put up a fence? I know 700 miles equates to a lot of fence... but that seems like a lot of money for a fence. It's probably not, knowing how the government works, but still, it seems funny that the government would require this much money to build, of all things, a fence.

This is an important victory for Free speech, as well as just an interesting bit of news. Remember the Danish cartoon hullaballoo earlier this year? Seven Danish Muslim organizations sued the publisher of the cartoons for Libel, claiming that the cartoons implied that all Muslims were terrorists.

This comes from the court that ruled on the case. "But there is no sufficient reason to assume that the cartoons are or were intended to be insulting ... or put forward ideas that could hurt the standing of Muslims in society."

And they are absolutely correct. A Muslim Imam, however, said that the organizations will appeal the case to a higher court, because they still believe it is libel. I have another question, that is more of a legal question than a political one. Can libel be pursued against a religion? I don't think so, though I am not sure (any lawyers reading this will be able to answer my question I'm sure). I know you can libel a person, and perhaps an organization. But is it possible to libel a religion?

And if so, wouldn't libel against Christians and Jews occur on a minute-by-minute basis within the Islamic countries? Yet, you don't see any Christians or Jews suing because of libel. This however, is the quote of the week to be sure. This quote comes from Ahmed Abu-Laban, an Imam from Copenhagen who has been instrumental in bringing this lawsuit to court. He says:

"Freedom of speech has been the issue from the beginning. It is seen differently in Europe than we see it."

I'll say.

This isn't really a surprise. The loyalty of the French government to the cause of freedom and democracy has always been... questionable. However, in choosing to side with the Chinese on Iran, they have proven that not only has their time on the world stage passed, but that France is perhaps a danger to the world due to the incompetence of their government.

What have these nations done? They've issued a joint statement, calling on North Korea to cease nuclear tests, and calling on Iran to comply with the UN resolution deadline that passed nearly two months ago. Really effective measures, I'd say. With friends like these....

China and France have shown an obvious unwillingness to see sanctions imposed against Iran and their nuclear programs, and I have a feeling they only agreed to sanctions against North Korea because nuclear weapons were involved (and because their friends the Chinese signed off on it).

There's really not much else to say - the French bashing has enough prior references on this blog to suffice, so I'll refrain from a large majority of it here. But the French government is a danger to the world, because they do not recognize the threat they face from islamic terror, and they are not willing to help out the people that do - the United States, and Great Britain. And until Chirac learns what kind of threat is out there, he will continue to live in his own naive little world, where he can't be hurt.

And then the French government building gets bombed by a suicidal Jihadist, and maybe then he'll wake up.

By all accounts, the press conference President Bush gave today, was one of his more remarkable during his term. He is explaining US strategy in Iraq to those who doubt the justice in our cause, and hopefully it will help to energize both the Republican base, and moderates who may have otherwise voted Democratic.

"We're winning and we will win, unless we leave before the job is done," he said at the conference today. This is extremely important, because Bush has infamous PR problems. It is good to see him taking the important issues - namely the war on islamic fascism - to the people, and explaining the governments stance on them, as well as what the Administration is doing.

Another problem for the Bush administration, is that many people feel that the administration is unable, or at least unwilling to admit when it has made a mistake. I tend not to believe this - the Bush administration is generally OK at admitting when it blunders - but the American people are what matter in this election. He addressed this, with the following:

"I know many Americans are not satisfied with the situation. I'm not satisfied either," he said.

More important to the Conservative cause, as well as to our victory in the war on islamic fascism, he addressed US strategy, as well as our ability to cope with the growing sectarian violence in the country. This quote in particular is of importance; "We are making it clear that America's patience is not unlimited."

This is meant generally to appeal to the moderates who are growing weary of the war, and perhaps even some liberals pushing for troop withdrawl. However, it is also a clear statement to the American people that we need to hold on a while longer in order to achieve victory.

However, it is also a statement - to the Iraqi government - that they need to get moving. I support this war, believe me. But it does anger me to see the Iraqi government flounder so much in the wake of war. However, I do remember that it took the US much longer than 5 years to establish a functioning government, and furthermore, we weren't fighting a sectarian civil war.

That said, Iraq could be making a stronger effort to crack down on terrorism within its borders - and hopefully Bush will convince the Iraqi government to get moving.

Regardless, the speech is definitely good for the elections, because it will only serve to help Republicans. Bush needs to continue making these kinds of speeches throughout the next 2 weeks, because it is quite possibly the only way the Republicans will maintain control.

North Korea issued a statement today, in which they said South Korea would "pay a high price," if they fell in line with the United States and other world powers in calling for sanctions against North Korea. This statement comes from the "Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the Fatherland."

I don't have a particularly great amount of things to say about this, I just thought it was noteworthy, because South Korea has expressed a previous reluctance to implement the sanctions agreed upon by the "international community." We should just keep this in mind as we decide in the future what to do with North Korea.

North Korea is a danger that cannot be ignored. Indeed, by ignoring it, we put ourselves in a worse position relative to Iran, because when Iran gains nuclear technology (perhaps bought from the North Koreans), all this will be relatively minor indeed.

We should perfect our strategy now, so when Iran has nukes, we know what to do, and we do not hesitate. And make no mistake, Iran will be far worse then North Korea, because Iran has every intention of USING their nuclear weapons against Israel or the US (whichever it can hit first).

Republicans, who last week were sagging in poll after poll, are experiencing a revival this week, as the base seems to increasingly come out in support of conservative candidates (as well as a few moderates), and because Republicans are becoming more successful at winning swing voters.

Despite the MSM continuously attacking Republicans, and ardently rooting for Democrats in November, despite the smear campaign waged by Democrats, and despite the relatively unpopular war, Republicans are still hanging in there. This shows several things. First, it shows the resilience of the party. Even when Republican congressmen go on national TV and say they expect Republicans to lose the house - not a very encouraging message to the base of your party, I would think - Republicans still gain on their challengers.

The Republicans in the key races - Missouri and others are also gaining steam as we approach the polling date in November. This is important, because some of these close races are must-wins for Republicans, if we are to keep the majority in the Senate. So, it increasingly looks like the US Senate will remain firmly in Republican hands.

The House however, is a different story. Because of the resurgance of Republicans in Senate polls, it gives me some optimism about the house, however the House is very touchy. If the Republicans maintain their majority, I don't believe it will increase. It may decrease, and we may lose the majority. This is particularly odd, since the House Republicans are far more conservative than their Senate counterparts - and appeal more directly to the base.

We must keep fighting until the election date, and hope the American people realize the importance of the War on Terror, and fully realize what we must do to win. We must also hope they realize and understand that Democrats will not be able to protect this country as Republicans have, and despite the casualties, Iraq is a necessary war that must be fought against vicious Islamic Fascists.

Condi Rice urged the UN security council today, to adopt a resolution immediately that will impose sanctions on Iran for its international nuclear defiance. This comes after Iran launches a second centrifuge (for "civilian" purposes, of course), and openly defy the "international community," and more importantly the United States, on a daily basis.

Of course the Chinese oppose this measure. The Chinese delegate to the Security council said that it is premature to assume the SC is in the position to impose sanctions against Iran, or that there is a need to levy sanctions.

I ask, what does Iran have to do to make the Chinese believe it is time to levy sanctions? The Security Council passed a resolution calling for Iran to stop all nuclear enrichment activities by August 31. That was nearly two months ago. Iran has not stopped, but has indeed DOUBLED its nuclear capacity. Is this not enough defiance of the "international community" that China hails as so profound?

Does Israel have to be smouldering under a mushroom cloud before the Chinese realize Iran is a problem? No. Even then, China will still want to explore diplomatic possibilities, because the Iranians are, in the end, peaceful people forced to take harsh measures because of US imperialism.

Condi was wrong on one point though. "For the international community to be credible, it must pass a resolution now that holds Iran accountable for its defiance."

It's too late. The international community has no credibility left as far as I'm concerned. They failed in Iran, they failed in North Korea, they failed in Lebanon, they failed in Iraq, and they only achieved a modest victory in Afghanistan (the rest of it was of US doing). What credibility do they have left? They are friends with most of these dictators and islamo-fascists.

Send the UN to HAITI.

Peter Hoekstra, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, suspended a Democratic staff member because he leaked high level intelligence to the New York Times last month. This has to do with the NIE that came out, that Democrats were so "happy" over, even though it just helped the Republican cause (but don't say that to the lefties).

The staffer requested a document from the Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte on September 20th, and received the NIE on September 21st. Two days later, the story "magically" appears in the New York Times - information that was classified and should never have been leaked.

And what are the implications? The implications are that Democrats do not care about the national security of this country - they care only about making Bush look bad. They felt the NIE would benefit Democrats, and (regardless of whether it actually helped them or not), they apparently felt that concerns about our security don't trump their desire for power over the congress.

And this is of serious concern. Not only is the NYT out to subvert our intelligence efforts, and undermine the global war on islamic-fascism, but the democratic staff members of the House intelligence committee - frequently privy to high-level classified information - are releasing information, and exploiting it for purely political purposes.

Shouldn't the national security of our country be more important then random political attacks? I understand the Democrats are frustrated with losing power. But instead of changing their radical message into something the American people can understand and agree with, they just use the security of our nation as fodder for the political mortars.

Another reason to elect Republicans.

Diane Sawyer is on top of things in here recent interview with North Korean General Ri Chan Bok, an obvious spokesman for the NK regime. I have a question though - why is Diane Sawyer interviewing North Korean generals in the first place? The North Korean reaction to the US and UN proposals is obvious - they've already told us what their reaction is (not pleased, to say the least).

Why do we need our annoying news anchors going over there and interviewing generals who spout more senseless propaganda to eager leftists all over America anxious to swallow this information at face value. And what did Gen. Ri have to say? That it is America's fault of course. He assured Sawyer that the weapons were only for "defense," and that they would not be sent to third parties.

Because we know the word of North Korea is so good. Just ask Clinton. I particularly like this non-biased question. "Can the general guarantee or reassure the American people that this nuclear information will not be passed to terrorists?" Sawyer asks.

Of course he can't. What a stupid question. He will say he can, and he'll offer his assurances that, were it not for the evil and imperialist US empire, he wouldn't have to seek nuclear weapons, and he will only use them if aggressive action is taken against the innocent state of North Korea. But this is of course, all bogus propaganda.

The problem is, leftists believe it. I don't know if its because they're gullible, or stupid, or just totally unwilling to believe America can do anything right. Regardless, lefties buy into this nonsense, and that hurts our country.

I think these dictators play games with each other. They try to see which of them can be the most dangerous, and the most annoying, and get the most publicity. It seems like every time the attention is focused on one dictator in one part of the world (there's 4 regions where they abound: the mideast, Asia, Africa, and South America), a dictator in another part strikes up some angry rhetoric, and the attention shifts to said dictator.

Enter Ahmadinejad.

In a live broadcast on state-run television today, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad claimed that Israel is a "counterfeit and illegitimate regime that cannot survive."

First off, never trust anything you hear on "state-run" television. That is a sure sign that whatever you hear is totally wrong. Dictators utilize state TV to spread their message to the masses, and they isolate the people so that the truth is never revealed.

I really don't have much else to say about Ahmadinejad, other then something should be done about him before he goes from being an international annoyance, to a certifiable pain in the a$$.

The New York Times has made far less money off their leftist newspaper the New York Times, the paper responsible for leaking national security secrets on an almost daily basis. The NYT president claims the fall is because "Our third-quarter results reflect the continued weakness in the print advertising marketplace."

Maybe, just MAYBE it's because people are sick and tired of reading a newspaper that lambasts president Bush on a daily basis. Maybe it's because people are sick and tired of reading a newspaper that digs into our national security secrets, and then reveals them to terrorists and everyone else. Maybe people are sick of reading the articles that display an openly liberal bias every single day.

Maybe people are getting their news from other sources, New-media like the Blogs or Talk Radio. I'm not surprised the NYT profit dropped - in fact, I'm surprised it didn't drop more. The NYT is, at this point, worthless for giving what it's supposed to - the news. If you're a nutso leftist, looking to find "experts" to qualify your wacko assumptions, the NYT is your paper. If, like most people, you're a self-respecting American, who trusts in the greatness of our nation and wants to see us make the world a safer place, then you probably won't like the NYT.

Though I have to say the NYT isn't ALL bad.

The crosswords are pretty decent.

This is a very interesting story. According to the Chinese delegation to Pyonyang, Kim Jong Il expressed his "deepest regret," about NK's recent nuclear tests, as well as their threat to conduct more tests. He also said that NK would return to international talks if Washington backs off its threats to economically isolate the country.

"If the U.S. makes a concession to some degree, we will also make a concession to some degree, whether it be bilateral talks or six-party talks," Kim said to the Chinese delegation, reportedly. He also said he "is sorry about the nuclear test," according to the same Chinese newspaper.

Though this is funny at first glance, we must analyze it closer. First, I do not believe KJI is telling the truth. He's no sorrier then Hitler was. But he is good at playing the international game, and this will no doubt pull the Russians and Chinese away from sanctions. How likely are these two weak-willed nations to impose tough sanctions on a nation that has expressed regret about their actions?

The fact is, the nuclear tests took place. If KJI were truly sorry, he wouldn't have conducted the tests in the first place. The US needs to send a very clear message to Kim Jong Il - don't make diplomacy a game. If you do, there are consequences. And if you launch nukes, regardless of how sorry you are, you will be sorrier still when you reap the results of what you have done.

Does anybody really doubt this is just another ploy on the international level by Kim Jong Il? How else could he have survived this long? He's darn good at playing this game, because the apparently gullible Chinese and Russians buy into his nonsense whenever he spouts it off. I'm still calling for the sanctions and the threat of military action if North Korea does not comply. They must be forced into a corner from which they have only two ways out - compliance or war.

Unfortunately the United States and the "international community" have not yet forced KJI into this corner. And until we do, he will continue to defy the world, and in particular the United States. Furthermore, he will be able to build a more powerful nuclear weapon, one that could be really damaging if released at surface level.

President Bush issued a statement today, in which he said the United States would make every effort to stop North Korea from transferring their nuclear know-how to Iran, al Qaeda, or other terrorist organizations. He also said that the communist regime would face "grave consequences," if they proliferated to terrorists.

Unfortunately, he failed to point out how exactly the US would respond, and what we would do to alleviate the threat if nuclear weapons were sold to terrorists. When asked questions by reporters, he dodged answering, saying that North Korea would just face "grave consequences," if they sold nuclear technology to terrorist groups.

I think Bush should tell us (the American people) exactly what he means to do. Obviously, he has pushed for UN sanctions, that passed unanimously. Unfortunately, because the UN resolution does not have a clause in it that allows for military enforcement of the document, it is unlikely that its demands will ever be implemented. So, it is reasonable to assume that the US has another strategy.

I think Bush should tell us what it is. He should say - launching a nuke is an act of war, and though we're not ready to make war just yet, let it serve to a warning that if North Korea continues on their chosen path, there will be military retaliation the next time there is a threat deemed against the United States.

This doesn't seem unreasonable to me. The US needs the NK threat alleviated. However, we are not prepared to make war just yet. So, I think its safe to issue a warning to North Korea - and then back up that warning by putting our planes and bombs into position - that any further hostile action will be seen as an act of war, and will provoke a US response.

The response doesn't have to be extremely powerful. Several planes with precision-guided bombs will take out key NK targets in a matter of hours, and the US could successfully set back the North Korean nuclear program, as well as the North Korean government. North Korea doesn't have nearly the force to resume a ground war - so the US and South Korea is pretty much safe - plus the DMZ is the heaviest minefield in the world.

This is one thing the American people are frustrated about with the Bush administration. Now, I understand the need to keep some things secret, especially about National Security, and especially about war. But would it really hurt the Bush Administration to tell the American people a little bit about what our strategy in North Korea will be in the future if the UN resolutions don't hold? It would also deliver a clear and harsh notice to the North Korean government. Then we will see how mad Kim Jong Il really is. Will he be willing to risk war with the United States? Or will he back down? This is how diplomacy against rogue regimes like Kim's must be pursued. That, and with tons of US explosive ordinance.

Condi Rice, speaking from Japan today, has said that the US is prepared to use its full military might to defend Japan in case of a North Korean attack. This became a necessity - the reaffirmation of this alliance - after NK's provocative acts of nuclear defiance. It also serves a greater purpose - subverting a nuclear arms race in Asia that could put nuclear weapons in the hands of some very unstable people.

But I'm finally glad to hear somebody inside the US government say the US is prepared to use force against North Korea if the situation becomes bad enough. Now, I don't think North Korea will attack Japan - I don't know though, because KJI is nuts. I think he'd want to go after South Korea or the US forces in the region first, before taking on Japan. Even so, it is good for us to reaffirm our alliance, and even better that we say we are prepared to use military force.

This announcement comes after North Korea has said they plan to launch a second nuclear test sometime in the near future. I think at this point, it is vital that the US develop a cohesive policy for dealing with North Korea. The UN doesn't seem to be working very well - especially since the resolution cannot be enforced by the military, and hence, cannot be enforced at all - and our other options have been exhausted.

We need to send a clear message to North Korea that they cannot mess with the US and hope to get away with it. I don't mean a worded message. We can rely on the UN for strongly worded statements of distaste. I'm thinking perhaps a few buzzes of Kim's palace by F-18's at top speed. Or maybe a few bombs dropped in abandoned areas or on abandoned North Korean buildings. Not enough to really hurt anybody, but enough to show Kim that the US is serious about this, and that he cannot mess with us and get away with it.

We should follow that up by saying we're fully prepared to use our military power if necessary to stop Kim Jong Il from testing more nuclear weapons, and from selling this technology to people like Osama Bin Laden, or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - the last people on the planet (even after KJI) we want to control nuclear weapons.

Overall though, its good to (as I've said) here someone in the government say we're prepared to use force if necessary (albeit under highly unlikely conditions).