Texas Rainmaker
Coming of Age in the Blogosphere…
September 3rd, 2006 10:41 am

It used to be a sign of success when you received an “Instalanche” or found your the victim of misquoting in the MSM.

But now it appears the real coming of age, is a mention in an al-Qaida jihad video.

Congratulations, Robert and Daniel!

Robert explains why he thinks the dorky al-Traita kid mentioned him in the new threat video:

Maybe Adam Gadahn is angry with me for describing him a couple of years ago as he appears in an old photo: as a “pudgy, long-haired American kid who appears to be locked in a desperate, losing struggle to grow a beard.” Adam, I see from more recent photos that you have won that struggle, for which I congratulate you. In your larger struggles, however, you will not prevail.

Daniel also responds:

I note your offer for me to change sides in the current war. But I am faithful to my own religion, to my own country, and to my civilization. I will do my part to defeat radical, totalitarian Islam and to usher in the emergence of a modern, moderate, and good-neighborly Islam in its place.

Looks like just someone got his Azzam handed to him.

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (1) Comment

It’s a shame that Jimmy Carter-appointee Anna Diggs Taylor saw fit to rule against a tool for defending citizens that has repeatedly proven successful… including this past week when thousands of innocent men, women and children were spared “The Big One“.

Let’s remember who the plaintiffs are in this case:

They include Noel Saleh, a man who has proudly admitted funding Hezbollah, Mohammed Abdrabboh, a Palestinian attorney who admits in this very lawsuit that he represents terrorism suspects (despite having sworn prior to the contrary), Nabih Ayad, whose friends “openly donated millions to HAMAS and privately raised money for Iraqi insurgents at a Los Angeles area fundraiser,” and Nazih Hassan, a member of a group founded with HAMAS money.

It’s interesting what these plaintiffs claimed about the surveillance program, too:

The ACLU filed the lawsuit in January on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say the program has made it difficult for them to do their jobs. They believe many of their overseas contacts are likely targets of the program, which monitors international phone calls and e-mails to or from the U.S. involving people the government suspects have terrorist links.

They “believe many of their overseas contacts are likely targets” of a program which monitors communications with people outside the U.S. suspected of having “terrorist links”? Well, no wonder they don’t want the government to know what they’re saying or plotting.

The ACLU says the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which set up a secret court to grant warrants for such surveillance, gave the government enough tools to monitor suspected terrorists.

In 1978, the 32-bit VAX systems were the industry standard (only being used by large institutions), and cell phones were used by less than 500 people around the world. A law established in that year to regulate the “electronic surveillance and physical search of persons engaged in espionage or international terrorism against the United States on behalf of a foreign power” is outdated in this day and age of instant messaging, disposable cell phones and an enemy who’s repeatedly tried to exploit our security gaps in furtherance of their declared goal to kill us all. Asking investigators to jump through hoops that could take hours or days when a lead could go cold in less than an hour is dangerous.

Opponents of this security program (which is supported by over 60% of Americans) paint it as a system designed by George W. Bush and a few buddies on the golf course in an attempt to install a fascist dictatorship in America. What they fail to acknowledge is the oversight of this system includes it being periodically reviewed by Congress (including Democrats like Nancy Pelosi).

To say nothing of what 5 former FISA judges have said about the program:

…a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act does not override the president’s constitutional authority to spy on suspected international agents under executive order.

“If a court refuses a FISA application and there is not sufficient time for the president to go to the court of review, the president can under executive order act unilaterally, which he is doing now,” said Judge Allan Kornblum, magistrate judge of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida and an author of the 1978 FISA Act. “I think that the president would be remiss exercising his constitutional authority by giving all of that power over to a statute.”

So bottom line, this case is about Carter appointee incorrectly ruling on an ACLU-concocted lawsuit on behalf of admitted anti-American terrorist sympathizers challenging a type of program that has succeeded in thwarting massive terror plots on multiple occasions, claiming the President is wilfully breaking the law, despite the program having Congressional oversight and overwhelming support in the Justice Department, the legal community and the American public.

While our minimum wage airport security officials are focusing on shaving cream and toothpaste, the terrorists are being handed a gaping loophole in security by the liberal Left and their terror-loving “plaintiffs”.


Old Soldier wants to thank the ACLU for being so helpful… to terrorists.
Confederate Yankee correctly identifies one of the ACLU’s tactics in securing this bad judgment… forum shopping.
The Great One” weighs in.
Volokh analyzes the decision.

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (10) Comments

From the Sun Online:

HATE-filled mums willing to sacrifice themselves and their BABIES are being hunted in the war on terror.

Security sources confirmed last night that alleged “baby bombers” were among those arrested over the plot to massacre thousands by downing transatlantic flights.

Those being quizzed included a husband and wife with a six-month-old infant.

The discovery prompted fears that there were fanatical mothers in secret al-Qaeda cells in Britain ready to become suicide bombers — and to die with their tots in their arms.

And it emerged as the reason why women at airports were ordered to drink from their babies’ bottles before being allowed to board flights during last week’s massive alert.

Ah… the religion of peace. Ain’t islamofascism grand? Sick bastards.

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (6) Comments
How to Catch a Terrorist…
August 10th, 2006 3:01 pm


“During the investigation an unprecedented level of surveillance has been undertaken and that surveillance has had as its objective to gather intelligence and evidence in support of the investigation,” he said.

“We have been looking at meetings, movements, travel, spending and the aspirations of a large group of people. This has involved close co-operation not only between agencies and police forces in the UK but also internationally.

This wasn’t the first successful use of surveillance.

It worked in January of this year.

…and back in 2002.

…and November, 2001.

If these busts had occurred in the U.S., we’d be reading about the ACLU’s lawsuit on behalf of these jihadis and hearing calls for impeachment from the liberal Left.

But, of course, if the attacks had not been prevented using such surveillance methods, we’d be reading about the lawsuits on behalf of terror victims and hearing calls for impeachment for allowing it to happen.

Bottom line… the best way to catch a terrorist is to imagine what a liberal would do… then do the exact opposite!

UPDATE: Looks like our own liberal-hated surveillance system picked up some of this “chatter”:

The Guardian newspaper, citing unidentified British government sources, said that after the arrests a message was sent to Britain telling the plots, “do your attacks now.” That message was intercepted and decoded earlier this week, The Guardian said.

A U.S. congressman briefed by intelligence officials, who did not want to be identified because of the sensitivity of the investigation, said U.S. intelligence had intercepted terrorist chatter.


cross-posted at GOPBloggers

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (2) Comments
The “Peace” Movement
July 25th, 2006 7:07 am

Talk about your all-time confusion. I’ve been misled for years on the meaning of the word “peace”. According to the dictionary, it means, “The absence of war or other hostilities.”

But according to the Left, it means something very different:

Nobel Peace Prize recipient has this to say about President George W. Bush:

“Right now, I would love to kill George Bush.”

How peaceful of her.

And don’t forget what they call the Religion of Peace:

At least five people have been killed in Afghanistan as protests against European cartoons mocking the Prophet Muhammad swept across the country.


Hardline Islamic courts shut cinema halls and barred residents from watching the World Cup, prompting scores of civilians to protest the ban in which two people were killed, court officials and residents have said.

The gunmen loyal to the Joint Islamic Courts (JIC), cut electricity, cleared cinema halls and warned residents against watching the football tournament in areas they control, forcing a violent protest late on Saturday in which two people were killed, residents said Sunday.


19 men affiliated with al-Qaeda hijacked four commercial passenger jet airliners. Each team of hijackers included a trained pilot. The pilots of two teams crashed two planes into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City, one plane into each tower, causing both towers to collapse within two hours. The pilot of the third team crashed a plane into the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia. Passengers and members of the flight crew on the fourth hijacked aircraft attempted to retake control of their plane from the hijackers; that plane crashed into a field in rural Somerset County, Pennsylvania. Approximately 3,000 people died in these attacks.

Of course, they also have their Peace Protests:

A protest march of at least 1,500 demonstrators against war in Iraq turned violent Sunday in downtown Brussels when dozens of youths clashed with police and attacked American-owned businesses.

Masked, stone-throwing youths broke windows at a McDonald’s fast food restaurant and a Marriot hotel, as well as a local temporary employment agency.

Let’s also not forget how they defined the Clinton years as the longest period of “Peace” and prosperity. A period when we saw:

- The first World Trade Center bombing (March, 1993)
- The bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma City (April, 1995)
- The bombing of a U.S. military barracks in Saudi Arabia (June, 1996)
- The bombing of U.S. embassy in Kenya (August, 1998)
- The bombing of U.S. embassy in Tanzania (August, 1998)
- The attack on the U.S.S. Cole (October, 2000)

Maybe Bush was wrong to declare a “War on Terror”. If he’d followed the Left’s example and declared a “Peace on Terror” we could’ve eliminated more terrorists by now. We could’ve sent in “peace” activists to unleash “peace” on them instead of our brave soldiers. Peaceful threats, peaceful protests and peaceful, and simultaneous, coordinated bombings of their residences. Maybe that’s what John Kerry was referring to when he called for a more sensitive war.

UPDATE: Condoleeza Rice has just declared that “the United States wants an “urgent and enduring” peace” in the Hezbollah conflict. Maybe she’s had a moment of clarity like me!

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (5) Comments

In the past few months, the New York Times has published classified information, national security secrets and faked pictures to harm the U.S. military in the global war on terror.

But if you were still doubting whether the New York Times was working with our enemies, doubt no longer (hat tip: LGF):

Joao Silva for The New York Times

The caption:

A sniper loyal to Shiite cleric Moqtada al Sadr fires towards U.S. positions in the cemetery in Najaf, Iraq.

[New York Times Assistant Managing Editor] Michele McNally: “Right there with the Mahdi army. Incredible courage.”

And the terror-loving Pulitzer folks will surely reward photographer Joao Silva for the “courage” of hanging out with terrorists as they try to kill our brave men and women.

It’s so nice that the Times can have such a cozy relationship with terrorists.

Let ‘em know what ya think:

The New York Times
229 West 43rd Street
New York, NY 10036
Fax: (212)556-3622

Michelle has more, including an Michael Moore-ish editorial from the aljazeera-affiliate New York Times.
HotAir has more on the photographer’s book deal.

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (7) Comments
Remembering the 7/7 Attacks
July 7th, 2006 9:11 pm

Remember the victims.

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (0) Comments


Update: For those of you who may not realize it, this case was brought by Osama bin Laden’s own bodyguard/limo driver. Keep that in mind as you defend his “rights”.

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (41) Comments
The Old Gray Lady Jihadi
June 23rd, 2006 10:53 pm

al-Qaida has a new message out:

Al-Qaida’s No. 2 leader paid tribute to the slain Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in a video Friday, extolling him as “the prince of martyrs” despite the rocky relationship that the terrorist leader in Iraq had with the al-Qaida command.

This message has been brought to you by the New York Times, proudly serving jihadists for 17 years… whose motto is, “If it ain’t secret, it ain’t news!”

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (2) Comments

After the death of islamonutjob, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, troops found documents indicating the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq was losing confidence in their ability to be successful.

The situation and conditions of the resistance in Iraq have reached a point that requires a review of the events and of the work being done inside Iraq. Such a study is needed in order to show the best means to accomplish the required goals, especially that the forces of the National Guard have succeeded in forming an enormous shield protecting the American forces and have reduced substantially the losses that were solely suffered by the American forces. This is in addition to the role, played by the Shi’a (the leadership and masses) by supporting the occupation, working to defeat the resistance and by informing on its elements.

As an overall picture, time has been an element in affecting negatively the forces of the occupying countries, due to the losses they sustain economically in human lives, which are increasing with time. However, here in Iraq, time is now beginning to be of service to the American forces and harmful to the resistance for the following reasons:

1. By allowing the American forces to form the forces of the National Guard, to reinforce them and enable them to undertake military operations against the resistance.

2. By undertaking massive arrest operations, invading regions that have an impact on the resistance, and hence causing the resistance to lose many of its elements.

3. By undertaking a media campaign against the resistance resulting in weakening its influence inside the country and presenting its work as harmful to the population rather than being beneficial to the population.

4. By tightening the resistance’s financial outlets, restricting its moral options and by confiscating its ammunition and weapons.

5. By creating a big division among the ranks of the resistance and jeopardizing its attack operations, it has weakened its influence and internal support of its elements, thus resulting in a decline of the resistance’s assaults.

6. By allowing an increase in the number of countries and elements supporting the occupation or at least allowing to become neutral in their stand toward us in contrast to their previous stand or refusal of the occupation.

7. By taking advantage of the resistance’s mistakes and magnifying them in order to misinform.

But despite the terrorists documents of despair, John Murtha is there, right on cue, to boost the terrorists’ morale.

We’re not making progress,” said Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), a Marine Corps veteran who has emerged as his party’s leading opponent of the war.

Murtha then joined 189 of his Democrat colleagues to vote against a resolution that would “declare that the United States will prevail in the Global War on Terror.”

(Isn’t it ironic that good news for America coincides with bad news for Democrats? Isn’t it also ironic that it’s almost impossible to distinguish between Democrats’ and terrorists’ view of who’s winning the war on terror? It’s not a coincidence.)

So, terrorists, have no fear, some in America want you to know that, despite your own lack of confidence, all is not lost.

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (57) Comments

Texas Rainmaker is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).
Graphics by: Margolis Media Works | Style by: Lisa Sabin - E.Webscapes

Copyright © 2003-2006

Users Online



    • HuckPac.com

    • sidediv

    • sidediv


    Fatal error: Call to undefined function wswwpx_fold_category_list() in /home/texasrai/public_html/wp-content/themes/rainmaker/sidebar.php on line 62