War On Terror Officially Over

Oh I feel so much better now and you should too. The War on Terror is Officially over. Why? Because the Democratic Party Says so. They have banned the use of the words "Global War on Terror" from the 2008 Defense bill. Now we have a war in Iraq and a war in Afghanistan and and an action in the Horn of Africa. Don't you feel so much safer?

I find it so hard to believe that we have a democratic congress that is so interested in petty political partisanship that they would waste OUR MONEY to think of and execute this. Do they think its going to Go away now. Do they think that the Islamic terrorists we are fighting on a worldwide basis are going to hear about this stupidity and say...Allah Be Praised We can go home now.

So when when a school bus in the district of the man who dreamt up this nonsense Missouri Rep. Ike Skelton, gets destroyed by a homicide bomber, what is Ike gonna do? Deny it happened because there is no "Global War on Terror."

It never ceases to amaze me how people in the US Congress do not read the terrorist own words. Hey Ike Don't believe me---believe them. This is a Global Islamic Jihad against the great Satan (Ike thats what they call us). Get off your fat pitooey and read a newspaper. STOP BEING AN EFFING POLITICIAN AND START BEING AN AMERICAN. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Denying The War

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, April 04, 2007 4:20 PM PT

War On Terror: In a sly semantic move, a Democrat House Committee secretly ordered the removal of all references to the "Global War On Terror," nonchalantly claiming it wasn't political. Who are they fooling?

The Military Times reported that Erin Conaton, a staffer on Missouri Rep. Ike Skelton's House Armed Services Committee, banished the term "Global War On Terror" from the 2008 defense bill, in a Mar. 27 memo to Democrats.

A minor move? It really isn't .

In doing this, she undercut the war by atomizing it into "the war in Afghanistan," "the war in Iraq," "the action in the Horn of Africa." It was a highly political move to legitimize the idea that there's no longer a common mission in this war. It reflects the Democrats' real agenda of de-funding the war by branding it "meaningless," an ominous echo of the Vietnam era.

This time it arises from three junk myths, outlined by Vice President Dick Cheney Monday in a Birmingham, Ala., speech:

• That the war on Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11.

• That it's possible to support troops without supporting victory.

• That cutting and running from Iraq will put the U.S. in a better position to fight terrorists elsewhere.

Is it coincidence that one of the loudest proponents of these myths is Conaton's boss, Democrat Skelton?

"GOP objections to our efforts to clarify legislative language represent the typical Republican leadership attempt to tie together the misadventure in Iraq and the overall war against terrorists," Skelton said. "The Iraq War is separate and distinct from the war against terrorists, who have their genesis in Afghanistan and who attacked us on 9/11, and the American people understand this."

So to heck with Conaton's claim about being "above politics."

Democrats do not want to look our global enemy in the eye. Cold-blooded terrorists struck our nation first for no reason other than to see us dead.

As Manhattan burned, New York's Union Square almost at once became a leftist camp-out of banners and candles that twisted the valid rage of 9/11 into a blame-America-first therapy session.

Myths swirled that Israel knew of the plot and tipped off the Jews in the towers beforehand. That morphed into Michael Moore's preposterous tales of President Bush's 9/11 incompetence, and moved on to far more extreme "Loose Change" fantasies about Bush organizing 9/11 himself, a theory now favored by Rosie O'Donnell.

The dangerous thing is that as memories of 9/11 fade, about a third of Americans, according to a poll, are starting to believe the myths.

The Democrats' refusal to call the global war on terror by its name is part and parcel of this. By refusing to see the enemy, or Iraq's central role in terrorism, it's far easier to break the war up into parts and recast each front as a quarrel President Bush picked. It can all be solved by ad hoc efforts like Nancy Pelosi's Syrian "diplomacy."

But semantic shifts will not negate the fact that this real war won't be won by denying the identity of the very enemy we fight. Closing our own eyes won't blur the global terrorists' vision.