Phony Soldiers? Nah, Phony Patriots

Welcome Instapundit Readers, Thanks Glenn!

Having stubbed their toe on the MoveOn.org's Betray Us adv., and having made fools of themselves with remarks like "willing suspension of disbelief," having uttered decades ago comments saying Americans had "cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan." Having made themselves look like fools by stating that General Petraeus cleared his report with the white house first (in spite of him saying otherwise). Having said our Marines were cold blooded murderers in Haditha, having said they were terrorists terrorizing Iraqi women and children in the dead of night, having blown up the actions of half a dozen jerks at Abu Ghraib into a routine "torturing of prisoners" theater wide. And who can forget Dandy Dick Durban comparing our soldiers to Nazi's? Having shown high dudgeon at the flushing of a Koran down the toilet (what fools these democrats be, to paraphrase Willy Shakespeare) you can't even flush a comic down the toilet) these fools now are trying to weasel out by pointing the finger elsewhere.

The Democrats loudly decried any calling of them "unpatriotic" when no one was saying any such thing (as Willy Shakespeare should have said in a play "Methinks they doth protest too much."). The Democrats have unfailingly claimed that they support the troops, just not what the troops do.

Now, to get the spotlight off of themselves, to make "Much Ado About Nothing" (sorry Willy, you just have too many usable quotes and paraphrases and I'm having too much fun with this to easily let go) they are pointing their fingers at Rush Limbaugh for having used the words "Phony Soldiers" in a conversation with a caller when he was obviously, in the context of the discussion, referring to folks like Jesse Macbeth whom the left IDOLIZED until it was proven he was indeed a phony soldier; referring to folks like Scott Thomas, who happened to be a real soldier, but who reported phony actions which were then published in a national magazine (though of small import) which still hasn't acknowledged that Scott Thomas BEAUCHAMP had a PHONY story to tell.

John Kerry and his "Winter Soldiers" schtick was full of phony soldiers all telling the same sordid though utterly false tales of murder and mayhem. Indeed, there were a few real bad guys (Mi Lai anyone?) but these, as in Abu Ghraib were not only a small minority, but when found out were prosecuted.

So now, having spoken his perception of the truth, the left responds with lies. Wesley Clarke wants him taken off Armed Forces Radio. Well, GENERAL (insert sarcasm) if you want to take a poll and see if the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan agree with you... what do you want to bet that the tally will be 94-6 AGAINST you? If not more-so. Limbaugh is on AFR because the TROOPS ASKED FOR HIM TO BE THERE and he has shown in his own inimatable fashion that he has supported the troops far more than a fired Commander of NATO Forces. I thank you for your service General, but I'll thank you more to keep your leftish ideas to yourself.

41 Senators had the balls to write to the owner of Clear Channel Communications and he had the balls to tell them to go jump in the lake. Good For Him!!!

Technorati Tags: Politics, Limbaugh, Phony Soldiers, Democrats

12 HOURS!

You are on a dark lonely road out in the middle of nowhere, up ahead you see an accident and pull up. Then you notice that it is your spouse behind the wheel of the car wrapped around the tree. It is obvious that your spouse is gravely injured and unresponsive. You pull out your cell, hoping you are in range and dial 911 with some difficulty because the tears blur your vision. An operator comes on, you advise the operator of the need for an immediate ambulance and medical care and the operator calmly says, "I'm sorry, you will have to make application and it will be at least 12 hours before we can get a medivac chopper to you."

Think about that scenario and keep it in the back of your mind as I tell you about three kidnapped G.I.s as blogged by Ace at Ace of Spades HQ:

Last May, Iraqi terrorists kidnapped three American soldiers.

American intelligence officials searched for cyber-signals about the kidnapping... and actually found them. They found the kidnappers talking to each other on-line.

However, they had to stop listening because the signals were passing through an American-based server and under the law that meant there could be no eavesdropping without a warrant.

So they stopped listening in on foreign terrorists holding kidnapped American soldiers.

For ten hours, officials worked to get "emergency authorization" to resume eavesdropping.

This then required the personal okay of AG Gonzales, who couldn't be reached for two hours.

12 Hours! One of the soldiers has been recovered, dead, mutilated, tortured. 12 Hours! Almost immediately, American forces had a live listen to the kidnappers but couldn't listen. 12 Hours!

Ace goes on to note:

The law has been changed to expressly permit eavesdropping in this situation, and some Democrats such as Rep. Reyes (D) are arguing for a rollback to the previous rule."

12 hours that may have made a difference. 12 Hours!

The rules are now that in an emergency you don't need permission to "listen in." 12 Hours! And some want to go back to that? Bastards!

We find ourselves back on that lonely road, watching the rescue chopper touch down. 12 Hours! The medics find two bodies. Your spouse who died of the injuries and you, who died of a broken heart! 12 Hours!

A tip O' The GM Derby to Larwyn

Mahmoud & Michael X³

Political Cartoonist Michael Ramirez has had a field day with Mahmoud AhMADinejad these last few days, first with the Iranian PUNK President wanting to go to the Twin Towers memorial site, next with his SPEECH harangue at Columbia University and lastly with his INTEMPERATE asinine rant at the United Nations. So, for those of you not familiar with this outstanding cartoonist, I present the three above noted Editorial Cartoons true life portraits of Mahmoud.

First, the real reason he wanted to visit the Twin Tower Site:

Continue reading "

Mahmoud & Michael X³

"

Crescent of Betrayal

On September 11, 2001 terror struck America. The plan, led by Osama bin Laden, was an attempt to bring down the United States for imagined slights to Saudi Arabia and Islam. At least that was the communique from Al Qaeda.

Two passenger jets slammed into the Twin Towers in New York City, one into the Pentagon in northern Virginia and one, taken back by intrepid passengers didn't get to its destination of either the Capital Building or the White House. That plane, United Flight 93 plowed into a field in Pennsylvania killing all aboard, the hijackers, the passengers, and the hopes and dreams of the family members of the passengers.

A memorial has been planned on that site, initially called the "Crescent of Embrace" it was designed with a multitude of similarities to an Islamic worship center. Protests by the public resulted in a superficial name change and slight design changes, but it seems as though the "artist" that designed the memorial site is too deeply in love with his design to hear clearly the objections from America and the family members of the victims of Flight 93. The design elements that are objected to are detailed in the book "Crescent of Betrayal" by Alec Rawls and is available as a download here at Crescent of Betrayal.com

Cao, writing at Caos Blog says:

Alec Rawls also blogs at Error Theory and exposes there not only the hypocrisy of the media on this issue, but leftist thought processes which seem to be totally divorced from rational thinking. Does one have to be a conservative to think that planting an Islamic flag on the crash site doesn’t honor the crew and passengers who fought the terrorists on that fateful day?"

Six Minutes 'Till Midnight!

The clock below this paragraph is from the ACLU and is from their site (I won't link to their site, and while I could have hot-linked the clock to use their bandwidth, I didn't - the image rests on my server) with a post on "Surveillance Society" meaning of course that we are almost certainly doomed to being in an Orwellian 1984ish society. Balderdash!

Who are we kidding? We are not anywhere near being a surveillance society unless you want to count security checks in trains, busses, airports etc. Those are however likely targets and a little surveillance of crowds looking for bad guys is a good thing. The ACLU would have you think Uncle Sam (and others) are looking over your shoulder daily and while there is plenty of that going on, we are not close to 1984 by any stretch of the imagination.

We are however, at a real Six Minutes To Midnight and we are being pushed closer by the surrendercrats, the multiculturalists and folk like Bollinger at Columbia. To those of you who think that the war on islamofascism is a bushism brought about only by Bushco with Dick Cheney behind the curtain are not only kidding yourselves, you are really making it easier for the islamofascists. Interesting isn't it that both Mahmoud Ahmandinejad and bin Laden have both given the same talking points of the democrats.

The nutroots at Kos and MoveOn are too busy idolizing Ahmandinejad and demanding an end to the war to recognize what kind of life they would have should the islamofascists take over a significant part of the world. There are bad people out there and they do not subscribe to the same kind of "liberty" that the nutroots seem to dream about. Without security there is no liberty.

There are times when I truly think that the lunatics are running the asylum and looking at the shenannagans of Congress (both Republicans and Democrats) doesn't make me think less so.

Six Minutes 'Till Midnight indeed. Just not what you think!

Crescent Bowl of Embrace Betrayal

My blog friend Cao has an important post up regarding the memorial to the heroes of Flight 93 in a field in Pennsylvania. The elements of the memorial are so much like a mosque that it is amazing that more people aren't up in arms. Cao has documented carefully the elements and how they fit into the memorial making it like a mosque.

Had the designers made it with all the elements of a Christian Cathedral can you imagine the hue and cry in as much as it is being built with public monies? Why the designer and supporters are masking their intent is beyond me, anyone with a lick of sense can see. Here is a tidbit, after reading this, head on over to Cao's Blog and read the whole thing:

THIS Flight 93 memorial isn’t to honor our heroes; it honors the TERRORISTS who attacked us that day. It would be the biggest memorial mosque ever; on American soil; comemorating the 9/11 attack on the people on flight 93 in Pennsylvania. This is literally another Islamic hijacking. Where is the outrage?

I was thinking last night that terrorists believe that war is deception. This deception would be the biggest slap in the face of all time. Instead of making a monument to the courageous heroes on that flight who said ‘let’s roll’…the proposed design is dedicated to the terrorists of 9/11, and I doubt that if more people knew about it, they would support it.

Read the whole thing: "The Crescent “Bowl” of Embrace; a memorial mosque to the terrorists of Flight 93"

Impossible To Ignore

Bill Roggio is reporting as an EMBED with the Tenth Mountain Division in Iraq:

A crucial indicator of success or failure of the “surge” – the deployment of an additional five US Combat brigades and supporting soldiers – is the ability of US forces to involve the local population to provide for security. The crux of the General David Petraeus’ counterinsurgency plan for Iraq is to provide the security to allow the local, provincial, and central governments to move forward with political accommodations." [read the whole thing]

Of course, Bill, like most embeds has reported the "surge" is working far better than we learn from the mainstream media (i.e., The New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, CBS, NBC and ABC.) He reports:

The impact of the surge in the Haswa region is impossible to ignore. The Sunni insurgency has gone fallow while the Mahdi Army is under assault. Attacks on US forces have dropped significantly. Reconstruction projects are underway. The local markets are open and packed with people, while local farmers and merchants are looking to push their products to markets outside the region." [emphasis added]

"Impossible to ignore" - except by the Democrats questioning General Petraeus that is. Suspending disbelief indeed!

It Depends Upon the Meanings of "Associated" and "Betray"

As widely publicized, Moveon.org (which never moves on) ran a full page ad on Monday in The New York Times (discounted by $102,000) attacking Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, with the headline "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?"

At an important Congressional hearing, Gen. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker testified on the U.S. future in Iraq. At that hearing, this exchange took place:

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Florida): "...I offer my colleagues the opportunity to use this hearing to distance themselves from the despicable ad that was published today calling into question the patriotism of General Petraeus.”

Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii): "Point of order, Mr. Chairman! Nobody has to distance themselves from something they weren’t associated with.”

Liberals defended the ad and said that the inference that that the general is a traitor is wrong because "the word 'traitor' appears nowhere in the MoveOn.org ad.... The word 'betray' used by MoveOn in the ad implies many meanings, but does not directly imply 'traitor'."

Here are my thoughts:

• The ad is wrong and offensive to say that our commanding general in Iraq betrays our country.
• The Democrats do not consider that taking money from MoveOn.org, accepting its publicity, and participating at its convention is the same as associating with that organization.
• The word betray, when used in context of military leadership, clearly suggests that the general is a traitor.
• The Democrats are not distancing themselves from the ad, much less condemning it.

It's bad for a major suporter of Democrats to suggest that our general betrays us, it's bad for an elected U.S. represetative to not "distance" himself from such a statement, it's bad to hide behind the word "associated" and an unexplicable definition of it, and it's bad to defend the ad with a strange definition of "betray."

The Democratic dictionary sure keeps people confused (not to mention that they end sentences with prepostions.)

Can't the Democrats quit hiding behind words and just come out and say that the ad is wrong because they are loyal Americans and serve in Congress? (You don't have to answer that.)

But, just to show how simple this should be, the word "betray" has a clear meaning when used to describe a military person, it is offensive and misleading to use that term to describe this general, I have no association with MoveOn.org, yet, I can not only distance myself from its ad but, as a patriot, I condemn it as well.

Try it yourself. If we can show Democrats that we can condemn the MoveOn.org ad, then maybe they will know that it's possible.

In the meantime, people should be reminded of the cowardly refusal of the Democrats to do the right thing, and people should continue to pressure them to condemn disgusting attacks on a good and competent general. We wouldn't want the Democrats to be put into a position where others would say that they betrayed our soldiers and our country.

Berlin, September 11, 2001

Reprised from a prior posting.

It was the trip of a lifetime, planned, on board the SS Marco Polo with hundreds of fellow veterans, all courtesy of USAA travel. We had landed in Copenhagen, traveled to Tallinn, Estonia; to St. Petersburg, Russia; to Finland and Stockholm and then to Warnemunde, Germany where we were to take the train to Berlin. I was excited, taking my wife to Germany, land of my birth, home of many fond memories of my youth.

We disembarked at Warnemunde at 7:00 AM, for a three hour train ride to Berlin Arriving at 10:20 AM; 3:20 AM New York time a 7 hour difference. A cab ride shared with friends to the Brandenburg Gate. Walking through the Brandenburg gate, visiting Checkpoint Charlie and the Checkpoint Charlie Museum. Making a purchase of a piece of the Berlin Wall for my brother and other Berlin souvenirs for other family. Walking down Unter den Linden with a rain squall having made the street's damp and muggy. Waiting in line at the Bundestag but giving up when the rain started.

Grabbing a late supper we desperately hunted a cab to get back to the train station on time for the return trip and the cabbie, thinking we were just stupid tourists took the long way around. He was a little surprised when I let him know that I wasn't going to pay for the extra miles. Getting to the train station with a few minutes to spare, I looked up at the at the TV overhead and noticed a building on fire, but the train was boarding and I didn't have time to listen. It was probably just as well, my German was pretty poor anyway.

Settling down in the car with two others from the ship that we had befriended the train started on time. One of the passengers came in and said, America had been attacked. "What?" Confusion! By who, what happened? Questions flashing through my brain, concern on my wife's Face, rumor flashing from train car to train car!

Finally, one of the German guides came in and told us that the Twin Towers in New York had indeed been struck by planes and had since collapsed. Fear was on every face in the train.

It took longer than the trip down to get back to Warnemunde, a time that while only close to four hours, seemed like twenty four. All the time cut off from additional information. Worry traveled with us the whole way.

Arriving in Warnemunde we were warned that re-boarding the ship would take a while, and that we needed to be sure that we had no contraband and plenty of identification as everything would be closely checked. Our Guide said that the Deutsche Bundeswehr (German Army) was now in control of the port at Warnemunde and would be in charge of our safety. Walking the three blocks from the train station to the dock in the dark with only the occasional street lamp to guide us, and fear and worry accompanying us, we arrived safely to long lines.

Soldiers with grim faces and submachine guns at the ready stood guard along the dock and massed at the gangplank of our ship and the other cruise liner docked there. Two military vehicles were at the head of the dock with stern looking soldiers manning what appeared to be close to .50 caliber machineguns on the top of the armored personnel carrier type vehicles.

We slowly made our way to the ship, presented our passports and had our bags searched. On board at last, we made our way rapidly to our stateroom and turned on CNN. The scenes of the Twin Towers being struck, on fire, collapsing was played again, and again, and again. America! Struck by an enemy that cared not who he killed. Innocent civilians going about their jobs wiped out in a matter of minutes. Finally dropping off to sleep in the wee hours of the morning of the 12th, I slept fitfully, with images of fire and disaster haunting my dreams.

The rest of the trip was somewhat of a blur. I know we cruised the Kiel Canal to Amsterdam and then to Dover for the bus ride to London. In London, finally, at a hotel where we could decompress, the emotions hit, the tears flowed and anger coursed.

The next day, we traveled to the U.S. Embassy and went to the memorial garden set up by the peoples of England at the base of the statue of General Eisenhower. Some of the flowers and items left tore at my heartstrings, especially a little fire truck left by some small English child. Some of the photos of the memorial are below. The memories still haunt me from time to time. For the citizens of New York, it can only be worse.

PHOTOGRAPHS

The Flag at the Embassy, Half Mast

Candles left by the Wonderful People of England

Cards of Condolence, expressions of Love

The Flag in Flowers

The firetruck of a child reading in childish script "to all the firemen who died," the one photo that then, as now breaks my heart.

Thank you London, Thank you People of England, you took some of the pain away and left memories. Some bitter, some sweet, all worth having!

The Ultimate 9/11 Memorial Movie

Linked at STACLU and Texas Fred's

Moving Photos at Mudville Gazette

An updated post at The Bald Headed Geek

Cathouse Chat has T.H.E. videos.

Sheehan Bloviates Again.

Cindy Sheehan, semi-professional anti-war/anti-bush, political gadabout famously announced her retirement a couple of months ago stating that she was getting out because she was tired of a number of things, but included being called a media whore. Well, she came out of retirement again to announce she was running against Nancy Pelosi. Today, she came out of retirement again to protest the presence and one presumes the testimony of General Petraeus and was promptly arrested:

According to the information from the Capitol Police, Sheehan and the other three were shouting in a hallway.

Hmmmm, was it her presence? Nooooo! Was it the fact that she was protesting appropriately? Noooo! Was it because she was shouting and being her typical media whorish self? Yes! Retirement my ass.

Same Song, Second Verse

Same Song

Germany, circa 1930s

Second Verse

Palestine, circa 2007

Oh, THOSE Weapons of Mass Destruction

I think that we have a clue as to what happened to some of the WMD's that the U.N. inspectors said were not in Iraq. They were certainly right about these not being there.

Dangerous Iraq chemicals found stored at U.N. in NY

(Reuters) Aug 30, 2007 - United Nations officials found vials of dangerous chemicals, which had been removed from Iraq a decade ago, in a U.N. building in New York.... The material was phosgene, a chemical warfare agent.... The Iraqi weapons inspectors came across the material as they were closing their offices, which are housed in a building near the U.N. headquarters in Manhattan....

Oops. I bet that these guys were just as surprised as Hillary Clinton was when someone found the Rose Law Firm billing records in the private living area of the White House. Maybe Hussein or the U.N. thought to have Sandy Berger sneak out the rest of the WMD's in his socks.

Keep moving, folks. There's nothing to see here. No evidence of WMD's. Keep your eyes forward and keep moving. No talking.

Massachusetts: New Home for the Green/Islamofascist/Racist Party

My good friend blogging at Solomonia has picked up on a new development in the politics of that state, especially in Boston where the Greens, Islamofascists and anti-semites have banded together in their anti-american and anti-israel hatred:

First, understand that the Green Party (Green-Rainbow here in Massachusetts) view on Sudan is perfectly in sync with the Arab League/Islamist viewpoint:

We reject the racist mischaracterization of the situation in Darfur as "genocide" being perpetrated by “Arabs.” Only the government of the United States has labeled the conflict in Darfur as "genocide". Governments of other countries - as well as international bodies such as the UN, African Union and Arab League - have not. The false allegations against Sudan by U.S. leaders such as George Bush and Colin Powell are the same as their false allegations of WMD's in Iraq 4 years ago: an incitement and pretext for US aggression...

...We oppose the imposition of sanctions on the Sudanese government, particularly since U.S. sanctions since 1997 have selectively aided rebel groups who have exacerbated Sudan’s civil war. We oppose campaigns to divest from Sudan.

We oppose any military intervention in Sudan by Washington or any other foreign power. We note that African Union troops have been used as proxies for U.S. military operations in several countries in Africa, most recently for the US-Ethiopian invasion of Somalia...

...The United States should normalize relations with Sudan. Washington's hypocritical and false accusations against Sudan should be dropped. All sanctions against Sudan should be removed.

Translation: It's all an Imperialist plot.

And Naturally, the ACLU finds themselves in accord with this cabal:

[As an aside, in this they are joined by ACLU of Massachusetts employee Nancy Murray who also opposes divestment from Sudan, apparently as some sort of Zionist plot [correction: This particular email refers to divestment from Iran.]

This is a lengthy but fantastic read, I URGE you to go and finish the whole thing. Solomonia has done a terrific job of pulling all this together.

I'm Sick of "Second-Guessing Liberals"

Whenever I lose my head and read a liberal blog, I see the same repetitive anti-war comments claiming stupidity of President Bush and denouncing mistakes that he has made in Iraq. The liberals knew "from day one" what obstacles that we faced, but they just didn't mention them at the time. For example:

You can call me a “Monday moring quarterback” but I’ll stand on my record in seeing through not just the phony rationales for the war but the way its been waged and most of what’s followed from it. I understood from Day One that this debate started that the “WMD threat” was being hyped for purely political reasons. I knew from Day One that there was no strategic national security reason to invade Iraq and that we were being suckered by the neoCons’ crackpot agenda. I believed from Day One that Rumsfeld was going in with too few troops to successfully secure the country. I knew within weeks of the invasion that security was unraveling disastrously....

You get the point. From day one, the dark side had all the facts and all the answers. Right. Liberals are great at pointing fingers, but talk is cheap. What could they really do if asked before hostilities broke out?

I gave them a chance. After reading that French President Sarkozy said that diplomatic efforts to stop Iran's production of a nuclear bomb must work or that Iran would have to be attacked, I asked these left-wing liberal geniuses to prove what they could do.

For “everyone who knows all the facts and solutions from day one,” share your wisdom now on this (Iran's) WMD issue rather than wait to see what didn’t work.

Response has been somewhat quiet, but one person said that they were speaking no differently than Bush when he made a comparison of Iraq to Viet Nam, and would I attack him for second-guessing President Nixon? They never answer the question that is asked.

That's it! I'm sick and tired of their rhetoric and better than thou attitudes. Here is my rant.

To liberals and left-wingers regarding Iraq, you’re not even talking about the same thing. Bush discussed Viet Nam from a long-term historical standpoint and said that there were lessons to be learned from its aftermath. That’s different than finger-pointing and saying that the coach is doing it all wrong with each step and, in many cases, while the game is still being played and, at the same, time screaming and throwing bottles at the team and demoralizing the players on the field.

You’re already planning on halving the athletic budget when the team needs equipment and you want to yank the players off the field before they achieve victory. You’re the guys who sit by and watch the coach go for it on 4th and 2, and if it didn’t work, you say, “I would have kicked.” If the offensive line “surges” forward and the play does work for a first down, then you look the other way or say that it didn’t work despite the obvious down marker, and you hope that some idiots will believe you.

Well, if you know everything, why aren’t you coaching? Why didn’t you say something before the game was played or the play was run? It’s because you aren’t qualified and know less than you admit.

You guys are the biggest bunch of second-guessing whinners that I’ve ever heard, and you won’t even tell us what plays we should run against next week’s opponent, Iran, before that contest begins. Come on! Show us your coaching skills. At least let us know that you’re pulling for our team rather than the opponent, because it’s sure not clear.

The only people who respect your opinions and think that you’re brilliant are YOU yourselves.

Other people must sit back and laugh at the stuff that you write. I sure do.

We've made decisions with Iraq. We need to make decisions regarding Iran. Where are the wise people? Why, the Democrats, who were going to end the Iraq conflict, still cannot agree what to do to this day. Oh, they talked about it during the election (remember, talk's cheap), but they haven't done anything constructive.

The only people who are dumber than people who make bad decisions are those people who refuse to make decisions at all, because not making a decision is the same thing as letting someone else do it for you. It just gives you the false satisfaction of being able to blame someone else.

Liberals never have been good at taking responsibility. Now, we know that they aren't very good at giving advice either--just blame. I'm still trying to figure out why they consider themselves smart. That's one thing that I didn't decide for them.

Instead of "Monday Morning Quarterbacks," a better name for them might be "Monday Moron Quarterbacks."

Trash from Horton

Trashing the trashers who trash the trashers who trashed the trasher that trashed the military? Convoluted? Yes! Inaccurate? No! Let me explain.

In Harper's Magazine an article dated yesterday (August 24, 2007) and authored by Scott Horton (What is it with these fellows named Scott? Except Scott Johnson of Powerline of course!) appears that takes on the neo-con publications and news sources that have trashed The New Republic's reporting by one Scott Thomas (in real life, the husband of a TNR Staffer Scott Thomas Beauchamp). Thomas wrote an article of dubious (nay, not dubious, outright falsehood it seems) truth regarding the depredations by members of his unit in Iraq. I've reported on this in the past (here and here and my blogging partner Woody here, and others here and here and from fellow Munuvian Ace of Spades HQ here). Horton begins his trashing of the neo-cons thusly:

Over the last two weeks there was a flap over a piece published in The New Republic by an American soldier in Iraq named Scott Beauchamp. He described a number of gruesome scenes, some of which did not portray his fellow soldiers in the best of light. The piece drew ferocious blow-back from the Neocon war party, whose hallmark is complete control over the news on the ground and from the front ranks in Iraq. They viewed the report as a violation of their sacred monopoly and were determined to destroy Beauchamp and to lash out at The New Republic.

I have no idea whether Beauchamp’s story was accurate. But at this point I have seen enough of the Neocon corner’s war fables to immediately discount anything that emerges from it.

No idea "whether Beauchamp's story was accurate? Well wow and gee willikers Howdy, this here Horton fellow apparantly either can't read, or is so wrapped up in his own partisan shell that he can't make heads or tales of what is so patently ridiculous that even non veterans of Iraq had difficulty buying it. Not only that, but Messr. Beauchamp has "retracted" his story with the Army. It seems as though our essayest Horton (I wonder if he ever did hear the Who?) reads but understands only what he want's to.

I've bashed the Republicans and conservatives often enough so that I can honestly say that I think I can tell a scoundrel when I read one, but if seems if Mr. Horton lacks that particular ability. He relates a situation where he says that he is personally knowledgable about mis-reporting in the "neo-con Corner."

One example: back last spring, when I was living in Baghdad, on Haifa Street, I sat in the evening reading a report by one of the core Neocon pack. He was reporting from Baghdad, and recounted a day he had spent out on a patrol with U.S. troops on Haifa Street. He described a peaceful, pleasant, upscale community. Children were out playing on the street. Men and women were out going about their daily business. Well, in fact I had been forced to spend the day “in the submarine,” as they say, missing appointments I had in town. Why? This bucolic, marvelous Haifa Street that he described had erupted in gun battles the entire day. In the view of my security guards, with which I readily concurred, it was too unsafe. And yes, I could hear the gunfire and watch some of the exchanges from my position. No American patrol had passed by and there were certainly no children playing in the street. This was the point when I realized that many of these accounts were pure fabrications."

Horton obviously wants us to believe, though he doesn't say, that both his experience and the "neo-con" report occurred on the same day, on the same street during the same time frame. That may or may not have been the case for I've heard many stories about peaceful scenes that were later pictures of hell. Mr. Horton, does the difference between 8:00:00 AM and 8:46:41 AM on September 11, 2001 on a certain densly populated island in New York ring a bell? If he is accurate, and the two "images" are the same at the same time on the same day in the same place then certainly the author of the "bucolic" scene deserves condemnation of the worst kind. But, notice that Mr. Horton does not name the day of the so called fictious story or the author of the false scene. Why would that be Mr. Horton? If you know of it, and don't reveal it one has to wonder why. Maybe you just didn't think it important? This could be your chance at immortality Mr. Horton... go on, tell us who, when, and what exactly happened and I'll be one of the very first to condem the scoundrel.

But, I digress.

What’s interesting about this whole affair is not the Beauchamp story, but the response to it from William Kristol, the Weekly Standard, and their quite amazing ability to exercise total command and control over the public affairs operations at the Pentagon throughout the process.

Oh, yes, I've heard about all the amazing powers of William Kristol and his ability to mesmerize the PAO at the Pentagon. Not only that, but he is controling my typing even as I post this AND controling the minds of all those that read this post and (shudder) believe!

Horton then brings up Jonathan Chait as a witness for the prosecution:

The best volley in this exchange so far was fired yesterday by Jonathan Chait. He titles his piece “The Thuggery of William Kristol” [I won't link to Chait, if you really want to, go and Goggle it.] and he goes straight for the jugular:

Offering up [Kristol’s] interpretation of why TNR would publish such slanders, he concluded, in an editorial titled, “They Don’t Really Support the Troops”:

”Having turned against a war that some of them supported, the left is now turning against the troops they claim still to support. They sense that history is progressing away from them–that these soldiers, fighting courageously in a just cause, could still win the war, that they are proud of their service, and that they will be future leaders of this country.”

In just two sentences, this passage provides a full summary of the decrepit intellectual state of neoconservatism. First, there is Kristol’s curious premise that tnr only published this essay because we have “turned against” the war. If Beauchamp’s writings were tnr’s attempt to discredit the war, why would his first contribution describe a pro-American Iraqi boy savagely mutilated by insurgents? For that matter, why would we work to undermine the war by publishing a first-person account on the magazine’s back page rather than taking the more straightforward step of, say, editorializing for withdrawal?"

Well, Mr. Chait, I can surmise that he discussed the boy being "savagely mutilated" to lend credence to his faux-reporting.

Horton ends his piece with this little bit of trash:

"...his comments left me thinking back to Bush’s awful Weimar speech from yesterday. Did Bill Kristol have a hand in that atrocity as well? In any event, that speech was clearly stained with Neocon DNA."

Ohhh Mr. Horton. You are sooooo clever aren't you?

There you have it folks, the brilliant left as exemplified by Messrs. Horton and Chait, are supporting the faux-reporting of Scott Thomas Beauchamp, admitted and proven liar. This then, ends my trashing of the trashers (Horton and Chait) who trash the trashers (Kristol) who trashed the trasher(Beauchamp) that trashed the military. Now does my opening sentence make more sense?

Technorati Tags & Filed under: Leftist Agenda, Bozo Alerts,Media, & War on Terror

Ouch!

Guess this guy never heard that you reap what you sow!

H/T to Vinnie at Ace of Spades HQ

Connecting The Dots

Yesterday I received an e-mail from the incomparable Larwyn. Larwyn is an amazing lady that scours the internet and sends a select few of us updates on who is writing what, what about and what she thinks about it. She is a resource that all too often refuses to take credit for anything she does. Well, I for one (and all of her many, many fans I'm sure) really appreciate this Lady and all that she does. But, I digress, she sent me the following email with the links imbedded. She has connected the dots for all of us to see the evil that is islamofascism and the utter insanity of so very many; and now that the dots are connected, I wonder if any on the left will have the fortitude to see and call a spade a spade.

From Larwyn:

Dr Sanity would like to call what Islam preaches daily to their masses, the hatred and fear of the West A SERIOUS CASE OF WESTOPHOBIA I would be happy if we would finally call it something to counter "Islamophobia", if Infidelophobia or Kaffirophobia won't do, Westophobia is fine with me, with this one disclaimer.

Westophobia can't really be used to only label Islamists, it encompasses every sect and ideology who hates Western civilization. The LEFTISTS suffer from Westophobia and Condi's getting a case of it, trying to talk the vibrant capitalistic democracy of Israel into an appeasement of the thugs of Palestine, Syria, Lebanon and therefore, also Iran.

What other than Westophobia can explain the gnashing of teeth and tearing of hair by the left over THE JOSE PADILLA CONVICTION?
"For Le Monde Al Jazeera on the Seine , Jose Padilla's guilty verdict symbolizes the excesses of America's war on terror."
Had certain parties in our State Dept and Media not suffered from Westophobia, the wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq would have been handled quite differently with some real "excessess" of America's power. Too worried about the Arab Street , who hate us anyway, Powell & Armitage allowed Turkey to deny us our assault route down from the North. Turkey, who the ADL does not wish to offend by calling the genocide of the Armenians, genocide TARSY FIRED? FIRE FOXMAN! NO MORE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE DENIAL . Of course, 80% of ADL members probably vote for Dems, which proves their self hate. Has to be self-hate when a people make decisions to fight a war with Rules of Engagement that give all the benefits to the enemy. ROE's which kill their own.

So the big question now, will Westophobia, this self hate, influence G. W. Bush to become LBJ in planning the bombing of Iran? That's what SANE is asking, that's what Pierre is asking. The Same-Old Same-Old or Iraq-Iran and the Vietnam Redux That's what this cadre of "where do we find such men" are probably wondering, as they deal with the many, who should long ago have felt our full wrath. Those responsible for Defeating the enemy at Donkey Island near Ramadi .

And what is an even greater proof of the rampant Westophobia than The Bestialization of Intelligence /nihilism in action... Lost Posterity. As we build monuments to our enemies More Flight 93 Memorial Lunacy, some get it Burnett Sr: "Withhold my son's name from 9/11 Islamic Memorial" and "She Called", and some wish to hurry our destruction by any means Global Warming Litigation Planned By Blue States even tho the climate alarmists were wrong before: Newsweek '75: Scientific Consensus on Global Cooling. They would burden us with taxes for Socialized Medicine the Hillary Way and even Soviet Sanitarium Redux

Be thankful that we still are blessed with those who strive and work to improve the whole world, while parasites wait for this new gift The carbon nanotube extravaganza.

Oh, we will share it with the world, it is our way.

They will laugh as they manipulate that tiny paper battery charged with the blood of a hostage to power up the trigger in the planted bomb.

She'll Call again and again until we cure ourselves or our Westophobia and call her out, unequivocally, asking no quarter and giving none.

No wonder we're confused and some think Hurricane DEAN is God's Wrath against Bush and lastly, a needed

An Icon for Our Age

"Great fleas have little fleas
Upon their backs to bite 'em.
And little fleas have lesser fleas,
And so ad infinitum"
-- DeMorgan, (1915)

And Larwyn, thanks!

A Matter of Perspective and Counterjihad

Everyone with even a modicum of knowledge about the world around them recognizes a photograph of the Coliseum. The Coliseum is, as Baron Bodissy says "Italy’s iconic monument." In fact, this post was conceived as a result of reading this morning his entry at Gates of Vienna on the counterjihad movement: "The Counterjihad Calendar" (which by the way, deserves a full read on your part, and placing the Gates of Vienna on your favorites page.)

Gates of Vienna, in it's banner notes "At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe. We are in a new phase of a very old war." True, and yet, too many people in Europe, in the western hemisphere and indeed too many in the Muslim world absolutely fail to recognize that there is a war of ideology going on that may in fact be one of the least recognized, but longest running war of ideology in the history of mankind. A war fraught with danger for our culture, our way of life, our choices in religious belief and indeed, our choices in something so minor as how we choose to dress on any given day.

As I noted, the war, and it really is a war, is not understood by many, though there are a number of folk who do. We even have a presidential aspirant who has said publicly that there is no war, that it is a "bumper-sticker war." This was, of course met with derision from many, but for too many, it remains a truth. And our own societal freedoms are guaranteeing that this ignorance continues.

To illustrate my point, let me show you another photograph. This too is a photograph of the Coliseum, but from an entirely different perspective, from the interior looking from one passageway into the main arena. Same Italian iconic monument but a shot that few would recognize, because it is foreign to their experience. Thus my basic point, if something is foreign to your experience, you will have difficulty recognizing it.

Years ago, I was teaching psychology at our local university and I illustrated perspective by asking my students if they were on a plain in Africa, would they be able to recognize a water buffalo that was a quarter of a mile away but appeared to be about the size of a BB because of the distance. 100% of the students would answer yes (though always a few hesitated). Then I would ask if someone raised in thick jungle, who had never seen a plain would be able to identify a water buffalo at the same distance, or would their perspective distort their perception. Typically, a few students would have read the chapter in advance and would know that the individual might see a "bug" because only bugs appeared to be that size. It is a matter of perspective.

This underscores, I think, that you cannot understand a threat in that which you do not perceive a threat. Thus, those that truly believe that we are only in a bumper-sticker war, do not have the vaguest notion of what the threat is, or if they do, willfully choose to ignore it. And why would that be? Is it a calculated ploy designed for partisan advantage, or is it truly a total and complete lack of knowledge/belief in what is before their very eyes?

If it is a lack of knowledge, there is absolutely no excuse. Knowledge of the threat of jihad goes back at least as far as the Siege of Vienna. More recently the evidence is plain to see in terms of what has happened dating from March 1973 when US Ambassador Cleo Noel and charge d'affaires, George Moore were murdered by Black September in Khartoum, Sudan. Black September of course had been active before that in the murder of Israeli athletes in Munich in 1972 and before that in the attempted overthrow of the King of Jordan. Coming forward, the number of incidents of both state sponsored terrorism and islamofascist (jihadist) terrorism has increased dramatically. There are those intellectual midgets that claim that the "insurgents" (read terrorists) in Iraq are only there because we invaded Iraq. This is, of course, head-in-the-sand given the number and devastation of terrorist acts prior to March 2003. Not that it would matter to the so-called "loyal opposition" (and yes, I used so-called as a deliberate snark).

The Koran calls for everyone to be converted to Islam, one way or another; by persuasion of faith, or by the sword.

"Dhimmi was the name applied by the Arab-Muslim conquerors to indigenous non-Muslim populations who surrendered by a treaty (dhimma) to Muslim domination."

From the same source:

Dhimmitude: the Islamic system of governing populations conquered by jihad wars, encompassing all of the demographic, ethnic, and religious aspects of the political system. The word "dhimmitude" as a historical concept, was coined by Bat Ye'or in 1983 to describe the legal and social conditions of Jews and Christians subjected to Islamic rule. "

We see this practically everyday in the news. Recently, a Dutch Bishop said that Catholics should be praying to Allah:

Speaking on the Dutch TV programme Network on Monday evening, Bishop Muskens says it could take another 100 years but eventually the name Allah will be used by Dutch churches. And that will promote rapprochement between the two religions."

Rapprochement? I don't think so.

Piggy banks have been banned in parts of England, some courts in the European Union are allowing polygamy ("German law is treating polygamous marriages to be legally valid as long as the marriage was concluded in a country that permits polygamy"), there is repression of reports of anti-semitism because the "perpetrators" were Muslims and Pro-Palestinians, news papers refuse to reprint cartoons, books critical of Muslims are pulled from the shelves, etc., etc., etc.

The direct and proximate cause of all of this is that the individuals behind it are not aware of the ultimate goal of the jihadists/islamofascists. They don't have the perspective and for whatever reason you wish to ascribe to it, they will not see. And that presents a danger to me, to my child, and my future grand children. That I cannot tolerate. So, count me as a counterjihadist.

UPDATE: Andrew Anthony has penned a remarkable set of three pieces that explain how a committed liberal turned in "The Day Reality Hit Home: Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3. Read all three, don't let a lack of perspective lull you into a sense of apathy. (H/T to J.J. Doherty)

Iraq - Talk's Cheap [Updated]

It's one thing to say something to get elected. It's another thing to make it work. The Democrats told us during the last fall elections that they will get us out of Iraq within months. How's that program coming along? Now, let's see how those words compare to the ideas of leading Democrats in the Presidential race today.

Democrats Say Leaving Iraq May Take Years

Even as they call for an end to the war and pledge to bring the troops home, the Democratic presidential candidates are setting out positions that could leave the United States engaged in Iraq for years.

John Edwards, the former North Carolina senator, would keep troops in the region to intervene in an Iraqi genocide and be prepared for military action if violence spills into other countries. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York would leave residual forces to fight terrorism and to stabilize the Kurdish region in the north. And Senator Barack Obama of Illinois would leave a military presence of as-yet unspecified size in Iraq to provide security for American personnel, fight terrorism and train Iraqis.

...Among the challenges the next president could face in Iraq, three seem to be resonating the most: What to do if there is a genocide? What to do if chaos in Iraq threatens to engulf the region in a wider war? And what to do if Iraq descends into further lawlessness and becomes the staging ground for terrorist attacks elsewhere, including in the United States? ....

Talk's cheap. Responsible action is hard. But, honesty with the American people doesn't take any effort, and the Democrats won't even do that.

[Update]

My goodness, now The New York Times is beginning to provide cover for Democrats who know that reality cannot be doused with rhetoric. We cannot pull all of our troops out of Iraq immediately. Isn't that what we have been telling them? However, the NY Times makes sure to let people know that we have already lost.

Wrong Way Out of Iraq

...That closely follows the script some Americans now advocate for American forces in Iraq: reduce the numbers — and urban exposure — but still maintain a significant presence for the next several years. It’s a tempting formula, reaping domestic political credit for withdrawal without acknowledging that the mission has failed.

...The United States cannot walk away from the new international terrorist front it created in Iraq. It will need to keep sufficient forces and staging points in the region to strike effectively against terrorist sanctuaries there or a Qaeda bid to hijack control of a strife-torn Iraq. ....

Help NY Times Brainstorm for Terrorists

Yes, a blog author for The New York Times wants attention and asks readers to offer suggestions to the terrorists on how best to attack the United States. Americans have ingenuity and are practical, so the terrorists might appreciate a little American know-how.

If You Were a Terrorist, How Would You Attack?
By Steven D. Levitt

...Hearing about (the new TSA) rules got me thinking about what I would do to maximize terror if I were a terrorist with limited resources. ...I’m sure many readers have far better ideas. I would love to hear them. ...So by getting these ideas out in the open, it gives terror fighters a chance to consider and plan for these scenarios before they occur.

Yeah, right. The New York Times and college professors writing for them are so well known for wanting to fight terrorists. Do you recall the image from this post?

The author praised his father, Dr. Michael Levitt, in his article. His dad specializes in the study and treatment of flatulence. He couldn't have made a better producer of it than his own son.

Now, we could ask people to think how the terrorists should attack The New York Times, but it's unlikely that terrorists would hurt one of their biggest allies.

Good Morning Vietnam

Adrian Cronauer has a few choice words about the Dems and pullout talk from Iraq. Go read the whole thing.

H/T: Jeremayakovka

More On Scott Thomas - The Intrepid GM Grabs His Magnifying Glass And His Calabash Pipe, Puts On His Deerstalker Cap and Solves The Case.

I've been following the Scott Thomas Beauchamp (or is that Beauchump?) story since the "story" broke in The New Republic. Via the incomparable and magnificent LARWYN, I've been able to keep up with all the key players enjoying the discomfiture of TNR as they backtrack, waffle and crawdad (if you don't know what crawdad means, you haven't been to the South very often have you?). One of the more serious investigators has been Ace, a fellow Munuvian and an all around great blogger. But I digress. Ace has been following the machinations of TNR closely as has Dan Riehl (Faux TNR masthead courtesy of Dan) and as I noted, both have been doing an absolutely outstanding job.

One of the posts I read (I'm too tired to track it down now after slogging through a days worth of progress notes, and billings) noted finding the blog of said Scott Thomas (Beauchamp) that he wrote while in the Army stationed in Germany. And one of Scotts posts had a photograph which I reproduce for you here:

along with the caption:

Train ride to Wurzberg: 11 Euro
Two Steins of Beer: 12 Euro
Having a girlfriend that embodies racial perfection: priceless

Now, I suspect that you, like me, have a whole bunch of blogs that we enjoy, even if we get to them only once in a while. Such are my friends at Misunderestimated Germans, and I recognized that photo. It is a photo of Claudia Heym who, along with Michael Meyn and Jürgen Krafzik write Misunderestimated Germans. At least, I was pretty sure it was so I wrote Michael with whom I've enjoyed exchanging comments and emails from time to time. Sure enough, it was indeed a photo of Claudia (and somewhere I heard taken around 2002) and, from their website here is their banner (reduced in size);

Let me repeat Scott Thomas' caption: "Train ride to Wurzberg: 11 Euro - Two Steins of Beer: 12 Euro - Having a girlfriend that embodies racial perfection: priceless" and you can tell that the implication is that Claudia is Scott Thomas' girlfriend. Nicht wahr? Ahhh, but I know that in 2002 Scott wasn't in Germany when that photo was taken, and that Claudia and Jürgen are very good friends and I suspect, though I cannot know as yet, that Jürgen would be very surprised to know that Scott's girlfriend is an embodiement of "racial perfection."

Not only is that a shameful and crass statement, especially given the country that is hosting Thomas, but he didnt' even know the young lady as far as I can tell. Perhaps Mr. Scott Thomas Beauchamp is not only a fabulist, but a cultural/ethnic bigot as well.

More and more, it's looking like Mr. Scott Thomas Beauchamp has done for The New Republic what typhoid did for Mary, or what Steven Glass did for...... get my drift?

UPDATE: Damn, this is fun. Or, as Sherlock Holmes has said:

when one has eliminated the impossible, whatever is left must be the truth, no matter how unlikely it may seem."

Dan Riehl has MORE on this story... yeppers, damn fun!

UPDATE 2: John Tabin at The American Spectator has more (including a link to this article. (H/T to Michael Meyn at Misunderestimated Germans)

McCain Rips the Dems and A Few Reps a New Fanny - Good For John McCain

I'm not a big fan of John McCain. If he should, against all odds win the Republican Nomination, I'll vote for him, but I won't like it. Any of the Democrats currently running would be so much worse. But you know, if you are a decent human being, you acknowledge when your political opponents are right, and in this, McCain is absolutely correct. Only a very few Demcrats in the house and only Joe Lieberman in the Senate will listen to what McCain is saying, the rest are too befuddled to either understand him, or too blinded by a quest for raw power to listen in the first place.

McCain Campaign HQ: WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) today delivered the following statement on the Senate floor about the Levin-Reed Iraq Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for FY ’08:

“Mr. President, I oppose the amendment offered by the Chairman and the Senator from Rhode Island that would mandate a withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq.

“The debate that has taken place on this floor for some months now comes down to this. It is a simple choice. The sponsors of this amendment would have us legislate a withdrawal of U.S. combat forces from Iraq within 120 days of enactment, leaving in place only forces authorized to carry out specific narrow missions. That is one choice, to force an end to the war in Iraq and to accept thereby all the terrible consequences that follow. The other is to defeat this amendment, to give General Petraeus and the troops under his command the time and support they have requested to carry out their mission, to allow them to safeguard vital American interests and an Iraqi population at risk of genocide.

“That is the choice, Mr. President, and though politics and popular opinion may be pushing us in one direction, to take the easy course, we as elected leaders have a greater responsibility. A measure of courage is required. Not the great courage exhibited by the brave men and women fighting today in Iraq and Afghanistan, but a smaller measure, the courage necessary to put our country’s interests before every personal or political consideration.

“I would like to spend a few moments reviewing the state of affairs in Iraq today. The final reinforcements needed to implement General Petraeus’ new counter-insurgency strategy arrived several weeks ago. From what I saw and heard on my recent trip, and from briefings and reports since then, I believe that our military, in cooperation with the Iraqi security forces, is making progress in a number of areas. The areas where they are operating have not suddenly become safe – they have not – but they do illustrate the progress that our military has achieved under General Petraeus’s new strategy.

“The most dramatic advances have been made in Anbar Province, a region that last year was widely believed to be lost to al Qaeda. After an offensive by U.S. and Iraqi troops cleaned al Qaeda fighters out of Ramadi and other areas of western Anbar, the province’s tribal sheikhs broke formally with the terrorists and joined the coalition side. Ramadi, which just months ago stood as Iraq’s most dangerous city, is now one of its safest. In February, attacks in Ramadi averaged between 30 and 35; now many days see no attacks at all – no gunfire, no IEDs, and no suicide bombings. In Falluja, Iraqi police have established numerous stations and have divided the city into gated districts, leading to a decline in violence. Local intelligence tips have proliferated in the province, thousands of men are signing up for the police and army, and the locals are taking the fight to al Qaeda. U.S. commanders in Anbar attest that all 18 major tribes in the province are now on board with the security plan, and they expect that a year from now the Iraqi army and police could have total control of security in Ramadi. At that point, they project, we could safely draw down American forces in the area.

“The Anbar model is one that our military is attempting to replicate in other parts of Iraq, with some real successes. A brigade of the 10th Mountain Division is operating in the areas south of Baghdad, the belts around the capital which have been havens for al Qaeda and other insurgents. All soldiers in the brigade are “living forward,” and commanders report that the local sheikhs are increasingly siding with the coalition against al Qaeda, the main enemy in that area of operations. Southeast of Baghdad, the military is targeting al Qaeda in safe havens they maintain along the Tigris River, and Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, commander of operations there, recently reported that attacks on civilians in his area of operations were down 20 percent since April and civilian deaths had declined 55 percent. These and other efforts are part of Operation Phantom Thunder, a military operation intended to stop insurgents present in the Baghdad belts from originating attacks in the capital itself.

“In Baghdad, the military, in cooperation with Iraqi security forces, continues to establish joint security stations and deploy throughout the city in order to get violence under control. These efforts have produced positive results: sectarian violence has fallen since January, the total number of car bombings and suicide attacks declined in May and June, and the number of locals coming forward with intelligence tips has risen. Make no mistake – violence in Baghdad remains at unacceptably high levels, suicide bombers and other threats pose formidable challenges, and other difficulties abound. Nevertheless, there appears to be overall movement in the right direction.

“North of Baghdad, Iraqi and American troops have surged into Diyala Province and are fighting to deny al Qaeda sanctuary in the city of Baqubah. For the first time since the war began, Americans showed up in force and did not quickly withdraw from the area. In response, locals have formed a new alliance with the coalition to counter al Qaeda. Diyala, which was the center of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s proposed “Islamic caliphate,” finally has a chance to turn aside the forces of extremism.

“I offer these observations, Mr. President, not in order to present a rosy scenario of the challenges we continue to face in Iraq. As last weekend’s horrific bombing in Salahuddin Province illustrates so graphically, the threats to Iraqi stability have not gone away. Nor are they likely to go away in the near future, and our brave men and women in Iraq will continue to face great challenges. What I do believe, however, is that, while the mission – to bring a degree of security to Iraq, and to Baghdad and its environs in particular, in order to establish the necessary precondition for political and economic progress – while that mission is still in its early stages, the progress our military has made should encourage all of us.

“It is also clear that the overall strategy that General Petraeus has put into place – a traditional counterinsurgency strategy that emphasizes protecting the population, and which gets our troops off of the bases and into the areas they are trying to protect – that this strategy is the correct one. Some of my colleagues argue that we should return troops to the forward operating bases and confine their activities to training and targeted counterterrorism operations. That is precisely what we did for three and a half years, Mr. President, and the situation in Iraq only got worse. I am frankly surprised that my colleagues would advocate a return to the failed Rumsfeld-Casey strategy. No one can be certain whether this new strategy, which remains in the early stages, can bring about ever greater stability. We can be sure, however, that should the United States Senate seek to legislate an end to the strategy as it is just commencing – should we do that, Mr. President, then we will fail for certain."

Good for you John, good for you!

Another Dreaded Dimwitted Dodo Award Dispatched to Doltish Dummies Declaring Dhimmitude

I'm always amazed that seemingly intelligent individuals on an individual basis can morph into a mindless mob of malicious miscreants. Yet, I am presented again and again with evidence that this is so. In fact, the evidence is so overwhelming that anyone with less than a room temperature IQ could see it without it being pointed out.

The latest proof of this is Nancy Pelosi's Democratic Congress pushing another useless call for withdrawal from Iraq. I mean, its not like they haven't tried this before since taking over congress in January. In fact, they've tried it on a number of occasions in a variety of ways. which of course, reminds me that the definition of Absolute Insanity is to keep doing the same thing and expecting the results to be different.

Do the Democrats (DIMocrats?) really believe that by passing a measure to end the war in Iraq with less than an absolute veto proof majority is going to keep President Bush from vetoing any measure that passes a conference committee and is sent to the President? Or, as is far more likely, is this a political posture designed to placate the far left fringe who post at MyDD, Atrios, Daily Kos, Huffington, et cetera, et cetera, & et cetera?

So, if I read this correctly, this is indeed an effort to undermine the president by kowtowing to the far left, to slip (in Chuck Schumer's words) a pointed dagger into the heart of our troops. Let alone of course, the people of Iraq who will pay the ultimate price for the mendacious posturings of Pelosi and Reid. And for that reason, and for that reason alone, I have chosen to present the Dimwitted Dodo Award Dispatched to Doltish Dummies Declaring Dhimmitude to all 223 members of the United States House of Representatives for this egregious violation of the trust placed in them.

UPDATE: John Weidner at Random Jottings has more and it seems that the whole thing was a complete and total sham, from the git-go!

Congress could, of course, stop funding the Iraq Campaign at any moment. but that would require them to take responsibility for the results. The ice-hearted animals could care less if another Cambodia occurs, if millions of brown-skinned foreigners die, as long as the responsibility is diffused. Cowardly dogs, I spit upon you!

Read the whole thing!

Boots On The Ground - The Information Wars

There are a couple of wars going on now, there is the one in Iraq and the one in Afghanistan, those are shooting wars, wars in which people are killed, wars in which ground is cleared and wars in which there is a concerted effort by Al Qaeda and other islamofascists to manipulate allied thinking and emotions via the press and the internet.

In the case of the latter two , press and internet, the enemy is doing a fair job of presenting for us, a picture that we are "losing" but that is a false picture. The hell that is the islamofascist technique on the ground is well presented by photo journalist Michael Yon who is documenting the war with words and photos that have earned him the title of the gulf war's "Earnie Pyle."

But Yon's truth telling is offset by the representatives such as the AP and Reuters, by the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times just to name a few. There, and from the mouths of most Democrats in Congress, and a few of their "republican" friends tell the story of defeat, demanding withdrawal and this is reinforced by anti-war protesters, left leaning blogs and word of mouth, often distorting or leaving out vital information.

And this is the information war the title of this post refers to. Americans are generally a fairly bright people, often able to sort through the muck and find the nuggets, able to tell the difference between a politician proclaiming he was a hero in a long ago war, and the heroes we see in Iraq such as Brad Kassel. Too, from Iraq, we get personal dispatches, not official ones mind you, but personal dispatches that describe what is really happening and this information doesn't get the play that it should.

Several days ago, I was sent such a dispatch, winding it's way through a multiplicity of forwards until it was sent to a friend of mine, a retired LtCol of Marines who forwarded it on to me. Searching through the internet I found the dispatch published at Small Wars Journal, the blog of a number of authors. According to the "about us" post,

The SWJ Blog is a multi-author blog powered by a coalition of the willing and highly able. In general, SWJ Bloggers are too busy actually doing things to blog about them all of the time. We are one of their many outlets for the work they do. But the new media can be a wonderful thing, and we are honored that they have accepted our invitation to use our hammer when there is a nail out there that they wish to hit on the head with a blog entry.

SWJ Bloggers are free to post what and when they want, without editorial interference. Through their years of professional achievement, they've shown us they merit our trust and this vehicle for their thoughts. By pooling together, we achieve enough volume to keep things fresh for our readers, and we gain a little extra synergy from the huge mountain of talent. But individual contributors are, in essence, writing their own blogs. Our list of “active” bloggers have all indicated their support of our general direction and their ongoing intent to contribute from time to time, but nothing more. They will post when the mood strikes, and when their other commitments allow, on topics of their choice.

And this was the source of the dispatch sent by one Dave Kilcullen, and the dispatch is one piece of information the so called MSM has yet to print. Kilcullen writes:

I’ve spent much of the last six weeks out on the ground, working with Iraqi and U.S. combat units, civilian reconstruction teams, Iraqi administrators and tribal and community leaders. I’ve been away from e-mail a lot, so unable to post here at SWJ: but I’d like to make up for that now by providing colleagues with a basic understanding of what’s happening, right now, in Iraq.

This post is not about whether current ops are “working” — for us, here on the ground, time will tell, though some observers elsewhere seem to have already made up their minds (on the basis of what evidence, I’m not really sure). But for professional counterinsurgency operators such as our SWJ community, the thing to understand at this point is the intention and concept behind current ops in Iraq: if you grasp this, you can tell for yourself how the operations are going, without relying on armchair pundits. So in the interests of self-education (and cutting out the commentariat middlemen—sorry, guys) here is a field perspective on current operations. [I'm one of the commentariat middlemen and I'm not offended]

Kilcullen goes on to say:

When we speak of "clearing" an enemy safe haven, we are not talking about destroying the enemy in it; we are talking about rescuing the population in it from enemy intimidation. If we don't get every enemy cell in the initial operation, that's OK. The point of the operations is to lift the pall of fear from population groups that have been intimidated and exploited by terrorists to date, then win them over and work with them in partnership to clean out the cells that remain – as has happened in Al Anbar Province and can happen elsewhere in Iraq as well.

The "terrain" we are clearing is human terrain, not physical terrain. It is about marginalizing al Qa’ida, Shi’a extremist militias, and the other terrorist groups from the population they prey on. This is why claims that “80% of AQ leadership have fled” don’t overly disturb us: the aim is not to kill every last AQ leader, but rather to drive them off the population and keep them off, so that we can work with the community to prevent their return.

So, is the surge working, are our troops rescuing Iraqis from intimidation? You'll have to read the rest to find out for yourselves. And if, as I suspect by reading this far, you are willing to find out for yourselves, you'll bookmark SMJ. I have.

Articles of Surrender to Political Correctness.

I Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of England hereby declare that my government will no longer allow anyone in this government to mention members of the Religion of Peace in any connection with the terroristic acts recently attempted in Glasgow or in London. I take this action for a number of reasons,

To keep from offending any member of the RoP lest they have a temper tantrum and threaten to behead those who insult Islam.

To insure that all members of the RoP understand that we are no longer talking about the "War On Terrorism" because afterall, that is merely the phraseology of the cowboy George Bush.

To reassure the people of England absolutely understand that we have too long degraded our asian brothers and kept them from fully expanding their caliphate as their religion demands.

to insure that I keep my head, cause I'm truly afraid of these blokes.

In the very near future, I will require that all females of the English Crown dress in full RoP niqabi so that our fine women folk will not inflame the sexual desires of the resident Moslem men as everyone knows that members of the RoP cannot control their passions. To insure that there is true domestic tranquility, I require that the military turn over all arms to be kept under lock and key in the nearest Mosque, so that when we are attempted to defend ourselves and our way of life, as surely we will be if these Muslim Terrorists hooligans continue their campaign of bombing, beheading, burning and brandishing of swords and knives let alone gas canisters we won't be tempted to use extreme force against our friends, the members of the RoP.

Lastly, to make sure that each citizen of our great country understand where our future lies, I hereby order the following flag to be used at all official government offices, buildings, and any ceremony.

Posted by GM Roper at 03:48 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

Reality Check For The Anti War Crowd

My friend Chrys writing at Pettyfog has a terrific article up by Pete Hegseth of the Vets for Freedom. Go read it here. And you wonder why the Anti-War Crowd is looked on with disdain by the majority of Americans? Now you know.

Innocent Children - Heartless bastards

Human suffering during war is bad, it has been so for tens of thousands of years and will never get better. War is hell it has been said, and the incumbent suffering of the victims of war, both on the battlefield and off is heart wrenching at times, and at times so sorrowful that one has to step back, take a deep breath and know that eventually, some good will come from the tragedy.

And so it was in central Baghdad when Iraqi soldiers and members of the 82nd Airborne looked over the wall into an orphanage for children with special needs. According to CBS reporters there to record the incident:

They saw multiple bodies laying on the floor of the facility," Staff Sgt. Mitchell Gibson of the 82nd Airborne Division told CBS News chief foreign correspondent Lara Logan. "They thought they were all dead, so they threw a basketball (to) try and get some attention, and actually one of the kids lifted up their head, tilted it over and just looked and then went back down. And they said, 'oh, they're alive' and so they went into the building."

Inside the building, a government-run orphanage for special needs children, the soldiers found more emaciated little bodies tied to the cribs. They had been kept this way for more than a month, according to the soldiers called in to rescue the 24 boys.

"I saw children that you could see literally every bone in their body that were so skinny, they had no energy to move whatsoever, no expression on their face," Staff Sgt. Michael Beale said.

"The kids were tied up, naked, covered in their own waste — feces — and there were three people that were cooking themselves food, but nothing for the kids," Lt. Stephen Duperre said."

The photographs under the read more link are heart breaking. They show the worst that man can do when dealing with retarded or otherwise mentally deficient children. Having spent years working with the mentally retarded, I know both how many needs they have, as well as the true joy on their faces when they have, after much trial and error learned something new. They need to catch the bastards that did this and open a very large can of whoop-ass on them, then sentence them to 50 years hard labor for each child they abused.

Warning, these photos are graphic

Continue reading "Innocent Children - Heartless bastards"

These Changing Times

The Youtube video below is by one Albert Gore. Remember him, once Vice President of these here United States? Ole Albert was giving a speech in 1992 running for election (he won too!) and he was running against Pappy Bush, you remember him doncha? He was George's Pap., President number 41 and he had beat Saddam sumpin bad back in the gulf war O' 91.

Well, I'm digressen' agin, Ole Albert, his speechifying is just sumpin to beholt of why he actually sounds pret near edukated, least wise, fer as I kin tell. Any who, ole Albert he taking Pappy Bush to the woodshed for not going all the way and taking out Saddam, ne'er mind that he weren't allowed ta cause of that there wha-cha-ma-call-it Yewnited Natshuns.. or sumpin like that.

Any ways, now ole Albert is all agin the war that he wanted and spent 8 years sayin we needed it. Damned if I kin figger out these here college edukated folk.

Ya'll be good now, ya hear?

H/T toBig Dog

Iran Shipping Arms and Explosives to the Taliban

Breaking news from ABC:

NATO officials say they have caught Iran red-handed, shipping heavy arms, C4 explosives and advanced roadside bombs to the Taliban for use against NATO forces, in what the officials say is a dramatic escalation of Iran's proxy war against the United States and Great Britain.

"It is inconceivable that it is anyone other than the Iranian government that's doing it," said former White House counter-terrorism official Richard Clarke, an ABC News consultant.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stopped short earlier this week of blaming Iran, saying the U.S. did not have evidence "of the involvement of the Iranian government in support of the Taliban."

But an analysis by a senior coalition official, obtained by the Blotter on ABCNews.com, concludes there is clear evidence of Iran's involvement.

"This is part of a considered policy," says the analysis, "rather than the result of low-level corruption and weapons smuggling."

Already the left is discounting the story claiming the MSM has always hyped a war for the administration. The real story here may be that Richard Clarke, absolutely no fan of the Bush Administration said ""It is inconceivable that it is anyone other than the Iranian government that's doing it."

There is no doubt in my mind however, that Bush will ignore this provocation because he is so enmeshed with other things such as the Amnesty Bill (go ahead, call it what it is) and the war in Iraq.

Currently there are also 4 Iranian American hostages being held on bogus spy charges and there are some indicators that we are going to negotiate their release. My suggestion would be 40 or 50 cruise missiles targeted at Iranian military installations. Then deny we did it. After all, that is the Iranian strategy.

President Dennis J. Kucinich and "The Bomb"

In last nights New Hampshire edition of the Democrat Party Pander-A-Thon Debate, Dennis J. Kookycinich Kucinich stated:

But what I intend to do is to be a president who helps to reshape the world for peace -- to work with all the leaders of the world in getting rid of all nuclear weapons..."

Hop into our little time machine and lets see how that worked out.

Whooooooooooosh, the year, 2009. The first 100 days of the new president... day 43:

Thank you for joining me on this conference call Mr. President and Mr. President

You're Welcome Mr. President, and hello to you Mr. President

Thank you Mr. President, and to you Infidel, Death To America

Continue reading "President Dennis J. Kucinich and "The Bomb""

Propaganda Disguised As Multiculturalism

A Nurse that I knew quite well, worked in a large hospital in East Texas near the Port of Beaumont. She worked in the intermediate coronary care unit (CCU) and one day, a Saudi national who was an officer of a ship docked at the port was admitted after experiencing some coronary issues. On the night shift, the Nurse walked in to check on the patient and he demanded a cup of coffee. Knowing that he was due for tests later that morning she explained to the "gentleman" that he was NPO (nothing by mouth) because of the tests he was to have. The Saudi became very demanding, raised his hand as if to strike the Nurse and said "Bring me coffee or I beat you." I'd like to think the Nurse would have tossed him out the 3rd floor window, but knowing her, I suspect that she handled it much more professionally while thinking how much effort it would have taken to toss him out of the third floor window. The next day his doctor told him in no uncertain terms that if he ever treated a staff member like that again, he would call the authorities. End of story.

Another friend and her daughter, again in East Texas, had just returned from Saudi Arabia where she and her daughter lived with the woman's husband and he was employed by Aramco. The story was that her daughter (16 at the time) had been raped by a Saudi and the Saudi had been captured by the Saudi police in the act as it were. He was executed and the victim was sentenced to 20 lashes for "tempting" the Saudi. Before sentence could be "carried out" Some Aramco employees managed to smuggle her out of the country and home again.

So, imagine my thinking when I was sent an email with a story of a village in New Hampshire by the name of Amherst. It seems that the middle school decided to have a little cultural exposition and used the culture of Saudi Arabia as its model.

For one night, on May 9, the quaint colonial town of Amherst, New Hampshire, was transformed into a Saudi Arabian Bedouin tent community, with the help of 80 seventh-graders at the Amherst Middle School. The weather cooperated, providing 85 degree temperatures to give an authentic Saudi feel to the evening.

More than 250 guests arrived at the open tent and were welcomed with an Arabic greeting of “Marhaba” by students at a Saudi customs desk.

During the check-in, guests selected a traditional Arabic name for their name badge and completed an actual Saudi customs form, which warned in bold letters “Death for Drug Trafficking ” at the top.

Once inside, guests were encouraged to circulate among 14 different stations created by the students.

The Arabic food-tasting station offered four entrées, curried chicken, lamb, tomato chicken with cardamom, and Moroccan chicken, served with pita breads, hummus, and couscous. Fresh fruits, cardamom coffees, and spice teas were also served.

Flowing fabrics hung from the ceiling separated the family and men-only dining sections. The tables were set on large rugs and lowered so that the diners sat on the floor.

Only the seventh-grade boys were allowed to host the food stations and the Arabic dancing, as the traditions of Saudi Arabia at this time prevent women from participating in these public roles.

Dressed in traditional Arabic wear—long plaid kilts, white shirts and turbans—the boys offered food and entertained guests. The Arabic dancers enthusiastically performed to music and encouraged male visitors to join their dance.

Seventh-grade girls hosted the hijab and veil stations, where other female guests learned how to wear the required head covering and veils. An antique trunk full of black abayas worn by women, and white robes worn by the men, were available for guests to try on.

Cultural items displayed throughout the room included Arabic books, games, food, and newspapers and magazines.

An Islamic religion station included a Muslim prayer rug with a compass imbedded in it to locate Mecca, readings on the Islamic faith, call to prayer items and prayer beads.

Younger visitors gravitated to the Arabic listening station, the Arabic coloring book stations and the mural, while visitors of all ages found the slide shows of Saudi Arabia to be captivating.

The “open tent” was created to encourage participants to reach out and learn from people around the world, and to promote curiosity and cultural understanding.

The article was accompanied by a photograph of this truly charming young fellow decked out in traditional Saudi regalia and note the beatific smile on this young man's face.

Then of course, there were some adult and adolescent females attending the festivities:

Now, I have lived in other countries, and visited many more from Finland to Panama, from Canada to Grand Caymen, from Jamaica to Mexico and I think it is fine to learn about other countries, other peoples, other cultures, but did the adults in Amherst really think this through? If you look above, the young man would be raised in a country where he would be taught that it is good and proper to stone homosexuals to death, where it was his right to have multiple wives, near slave-like servants and that he could beat his wife if she displeased him. The young people in the second photograph would be beaten as a matter of course for not having their heads covered, for showing ankles or wearing clothing that allowed their breasts to be "seen" and the young woman would be beaten severely and possibly raped for allowing her legs to show like that and entice the baser passions of Saudi men. I suspect none of this was explained at any of the "stations" set up by the kids.

Too, I suspect that no one attending the gala event was given some of the ... well, shall we say less civilized aspects of the Saudi culture. Things such as having a hand removed from your body forcibly for even minor theft. Such as women being required to walk behind their men and knowing that they are not allowed out of the house without a male escort.

I suspect, with a certainty that none of the "stations" mentioned that the death to drug dealers would be not by hanging, not by lethal injection, but having their heads chopped off in the public square. I'm also pretty sure that all of the gala goers wouldn't be told that they could not, by law practice their Christian (let alone Jewish) religion in Saudi Arabia and if they were Muslim, and converted to Christianity, the penalty may well be death. I bet no one told the celebrators that they would be forbidden to take a Bible into the country, or be able to visit Mecca.

I'm pretty sure, nay, I'm absolutely positive that in Amherst, New Hampshire you will not find members of the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice, who, when confronted with a burning school, forced the adolescent girls back in the burning building (where at least 14 girls perished). Their crime, trying to escape the fire but not being fully dressed in the hajib and veil of Saudi Arabian culture.

Yep, propaganda disguised as multiculturalism. And that is a shame, because when only part of a culture is presented, there truly can be no learning and the Saudi culture is nothing any American Citizen should want to emulate. Our own country, for example, cannot possibly be understood unless you know the full story, from the founding through slavery and the Civil War to the Jim Crow era and right up to now. Ahhh, but in Amherst, a good time was had by all.

H/T Cinnamon Stillwell

Think The MSM Is Not Being Manipulated In Iraq?

Think Again!

H/T Instapundit

Democratic Candidates Having It Both Ways

It's nice to be for something and against it at the same time--if you're a Democratic candidate for the Presidency. Everyone is happy and nothing gets done. It takes skill, though.

Senate Rejects Iraq Funding Cut Off Bill

The Senate on Wednesday rejected legislation that would cut off money for combat operations in Iraq after March 31, 2008. The vote was a loss for Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., and other Democrats who want to end the war. But the effort picked up support from members, including presidential hopefuls previously reluctant to limit war funding - an indication of the war's unpopularity among voters. The proposal lost 29-67 on a procedural vote, falling 41 votes short of the necessary votes to advance.

Well, the vote failure was a sure thing, so why not vote for legislation popular with the Left as long as you know that it will not pass? And, then, you can make a wishy-washy statement to please people on the other side, too.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a Democratic presidential front-runner, previously opposed setting a deadline on the war. But she said she agreed to back the measure "because we, as a united party, must work together with clarity of purpose and mission to begin bringing our troops home and end this war."

Sen. Barack Obama, another leading 2008 prospect, said he would prefer a plan that offers more flexibility but wanted "to send a strong statement to the Iraqi government, the president and my Republican colleagues that it's long past time to change course."

"I'm not crazy about the language in the Feingold amendment, but I am crazy about the idea that we have to keep the pressure on," said Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., who also wants the Democratic presidential nomination.

Is this true leadership? Why is it so hard for them to make a decision, take a stand, and stick with it?

It's getting to the point that they were for the war before they were against it, before they were for it again, after they were for something in-between, before they said what they thought they were for before they realized that they didn't mean what they said, after they....

We Ran, You Ran, They Ran from Iran

No, this is not a lesson on nominative case personal pronouns. It's a commentary on the world's current non-action against a likely nuclear threat.

World leaders feared weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but did nothing beyond twelve years of resolutions and taking bribes until President Bush took action. Since then, the Left has attacked the decision to invade that country and our military conduct there. Now, we have a similar situation in Iran.

Before we do something stupid, will representatives of the Left please, please tell us how to end Iran's nuclear weapon program before the fact rather than after the fact of that country completing their weapons goal? I don't want any more Monday morning quarterbacking.

Here's one proposal from that "mean" John Bolton, who was blocked by the Democrats from continuing as our U.N. Ambassador.

We must attack Iran before it gets the bomb

Iran should be attacked before it develops nuclear weapons, America's former ambassador to the United Nations (John Bolton) said yesterday (05/15/07).

...Iran has 'clearly mastered the enrichment technology now...they're not stopping, they're making progress and our time is limited', he said. Economic sanctions 'with pain' had to be the next step, followed by attempting to overthrow the theocratic regime and, ultimately, military action to destroy nuclear sites.

...Mr Bolton's stark warning appeared to be borne out yesterday by leaks about an inspection by the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of Iran's main nuclear installation at Natanz on Sunday. ...

What will it take for world nations to get on board and stop the construction and spread of nuclear weapons by terrorist countries? Are they waiting for another disaster worse than 9-11?

Rather than asking presidential candidates about Iraq, journalists should be asking them about handling Iran--and North Korea. In the meantime, if cadidates would like to volunteer their ideas and if MoveOn.org and the Democrats (one and the same) have any solutions, then please let us hear them now rather than when it's too late.

This is a problem that cannot wait on political posturing. It requires courage and statemanship today.

Biting The Hand And Being Careful What You Ask For That Feeds You Cause You Just Might Get It

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has long protested its innocence of fostering terrorism through the teachings of its Wahabbist schools. This, despite the vast majority of the 9/11 hijackers and Osama bin Whosis being Saudi's. In fact, it would seem that the Saudi's are truly two faced; wanting peace and saying the same with one, and decrying the west, christians, jews and saying kill them all with the other. Now, the terrorists are biting at the Saudi's and they will indeed be sorry for what they asked, because it looks like they are getting it. From Strategy Page:

Some details of terrorist operations in Saudi Arabia have been getting out, in the wake of the recent round up of 172 terrorist suspects, and the seizure of weapons, explosives and plans. There were seven different terrorist cells involved in those arrests. One of the cells had a safe house in Syria, where meetings with terrorist groups in Iraq were conducted. The Saudis are not happy with the links between terrorists inside Saudi Arabia, and Iraqi Sunni Arabs. The Saudis have told the Iraqi Sunni Arabs that the Sunni Arab nations in the regions will not bail them out, and that they must make peace with the Shia Arab majority. Many Sunni Arabs, throughout the region, do not agree with this. But they are a small minority. Most Sunni Arabs are appalled at the body count the Sunni Arab terrorists have created in Iraq. While most of the dead are Shia Arabs, a growing number are Sunni Arabs, killed either by the suicide bombers, or by Shia Arab death squads looking for revenge. While most Sunni Arabs would like to see Sunni Arabs running Iraq, there was revulsion at Saddam Husseins methods, and even greater distaste for the subsequent mayhem by his followers.

I have no sympathy for the Saudi King, the Saudi Princes and all their dreck, their Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (The Religious Police), none what-so-ever, although I do feel for a majority of the Saudi peoples.

H/T: Instapundit

The Torch Is Passed, Now, What Shall YOU Do?

Every once in a while you come across something! Something you may have seen 10 dozen times over a lifetime. Something that you have seen, or read, or observed, or even merely glanced at and passed on. But then, someone, somewhere will point out something special in that oft observed bit of info or thing, or poem, something very special and it grabs you and won't let go. It holds you by the strings of your life. Seizes the moment and makes you glad to see it in a fresh new light.

Such was the event today as I skimmed my emails and came across one from some folk in Houston with a link to Freedom Force and there, I came across this poem, that indeed grabbed me by the throat. To all of our fallen, especially those who have fallen in the war on terrorists, this is dedicated:

In Flanders Fields the Poppies blow
Between the crosses row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky,
The larks still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead short days ago,
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow.
Loved and were loved
and now we lie in Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe;
To you from failing hands we throw The Torch;
be yours to hold it high
If ye break faith with us who die,
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
in Flanders fields.

Are you listening Harry Reid and all you other Dhimmicrats?

Surrender is Not an Option

Full Disclosure: I'm not a John McCain fan, I don't support his canidacy for President of the United States and I won't be voting for him in the primaries. However, McCain has started a petition that I fully support:

The supplemental appropriations bill that passed the Senate on March 27, calling for a date certain withdrawal from Iraq, is nothing more than a guaranteed date of surrender.

It is a refusal to acknowledge the dire consequences of failure, in terms of the stability in the Middle East and the resulting impact on the security of all Americans, whether home or abroad.

Democrats have chosen the politically expedient position of failure rather than putting aside the small politics of the day in the interest of our nation and the values upon which this nation rests.

We the undersigned remain steadfast in our support for the war against terrorism and mindful of the consequences of failure in Iraq, even if Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid refuse to acknowledge those consequences.

We support our troops and the new strategy and believe it should be given the opportunity to succeed. American national security interests are directly at stake. Success or failure in Iraq is the transcendent issue for our foreign policy and our national security. People say they want to defeat the terrorists, but if we withdraw from Iraq prematurely, it will be the terrorists' greatest triumph.

If we leave Iraq based on an artificial timetable, al Qaeda will be free to plan, train for and conduct operations from Iraq just as they did in Afghanistan before 9/11.

Signed, [YOUR NAME]

I urge all of my readers to go to this site and Sign The Petition

Even McCain can come up with a good idea now and again.

Then And Now; When Will We Learn?

The blindfolded gentleman on the left is one of the hostages from the United States Embassy in Tehran circa 1979. From a PBS article:

On November 4, 1979, an angry mob of young Islamic revolutionaries overran the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, taking more than sixty Americans hostage. "From the moment the hostages were seized until they were released minutes after Ronald Reagan took the oath of office as president 444 days later," wrote historian Gaddis Smith, "the crisis absorbed more concentrated effort by American officials and had more extensive coverage on television and in the press than any other event since World War II."

The action by the mad mullahs in Iran and the ensuing hoopla by the media, the anger of the Americans and the gross incompetence of Jimmah Cahtuh, in part led to the landslide victory of Ronald Reagan one year later. But the mad mullahs weren't through fomenting troubles in those days, and they certainly aren't through now. Through the intervening decades the mad mullahs have continued to push the envelope, supporting terrorism, hatching plans of war, of nuclear armament, aggression and plans for a new holocaust; in spite of the fact that they deny the first one.

Many on the right (and perhaps a few on the left) warned then as now that these mad-men believe that they have divine blessings to carry out their plans to make the world an Islamic paradise. By hook or by crook, by direct aggression or by subterfuge they will not stop until they are stopped by internal revolution or by external threat.

When Carter was defeated by Reagan, the mullahs believed that Reagan would not be a patsy as Carter had been and that Reagan would not be shy about giving Iran the thump on the noggin they so richly deserved for their act of war. No, they figured they had pushed that envelope about as far as they could so to rub Carter's face in the mud, they released the hostages minutes after Reagan was sworn in as President.

Fast forward some twenty-seven and a half years and we find a British patrol vessel doing a routine search of a ship at the skirts of Iranian territorial waters and the process begins again. Thus, we have this photograph of three of the British hostages being held by the mad mullahs. As I noted here, there are serious consequences for ignoring (and thus rewarding) bad behavior. The world needs to rise up together and slap down the islamofascist mentality and the appeasement a la Neville Chamberlin will not work any better today than it did in the thirties. In fact, given the speed with which munitions, explosives and WMD can be moved around the world, considerably less well then it did in the thirties.

And yet, we have our own brand of yo-yo's in this country (and hell yes I question their patriotism and their judgement) and in government that openly side with the islamofascists by setting dates for pulling out. Some folk either don't get it, or they are too stupid to understand that anything we do that even convey's the tiniest wavering will be used by these murderous thugs. Yes, I said thugs, murderous, contemptable thugs, those that see nothing wrong with deliberately, with malace aforethought, blowing up children in order to advance their cause. Oh, I know, there will be yahoo's on the left that will say "Well, the US has dropped bombs and killed children." Yes, that is certainly true, but the canard is obvious on its face, one is a deliberate act with intended death of children, one is a deliberate act with unintended death of children but an intended tactical act of warmaking and not terrorism; and if you can't see the difference, don't bother trying to make the argument because you are wrong.

We pray for the safe release of the British military kidnapped by Iranian thugs, but equally, we pray that good people will wake up and see the danger before it is too late. I fear they won't, because they have a political agenda that is inimical to western interests, but I can pray that they will.

A Must Read: Four Years In

There are common posts (I write a lot of those at times) and uncommon posts, posts that grab you, make you think and sometimes puts your heart where it needs to be. Such is the most recent from Vanderluen at American Digest.

Four years in. An inch of time. Four years in and the foolish and credulous among us yearn to get out. Their feelings require it. The power of their Holy Gospel of "Imagine" gospel compels them. Their overflowing pools of compassion for the enslavers of women, the killers of homosexuals, the beheaders of reporters, and the incinerators of men and women working quietly at their desks, rise and flood their minds until their eyes flow with false tears while their mouths emit slogans made of cardboard. They believe the world is run on wishes and that they will always have three more.

[...]

Four years in to the most gentle war ever fought, a war fought on the cheap at every level, a war fought to avoid civilian harm rather than maximize it. Picnic on the grass at Shiloh. Walk the Western Front. Speak to the smoke of Dresden. Kneel down and peek into the ovens of Auschwitz. Sit on the stones near ground zero at Hiroshima and converse with the shadows singed into the wall. Listen to those ghost whisperers of war.

Four years in and the people of the Perfect World ramble through the avenues of Washington, stamping their feet and holding their breath, having their tantrums, and telling all who cannot avoid listening that "War is bad for children and other living things." They have flowers painted on their cheeks. For emphasis. Just in case you thought that war was good for children and other living things.

There were children and other living things on the planes that flew into the towers. They all went into the fire and the ash just the same. But they, now, are not important. Nor is the message their deaths still send us when we listen. That message is to be silenced. The rising brand new message is "All we are say-ing is give...." And it is always off-key.

[...]

Four years in and the fools in the streets multiply. They are tired of the war, but full of themselves.

Read every word, it is important, it is accurate and it is a devastating indictment of the anti-war sufferers of BDS and other leftish maladies.

Threats? We Don't Need No Stinkin' Threats!

Heute Deutschland, Morgen Die Welt (Today Germany, tomorrow the world!) So rang the promise of the Third Reich, a motto that was not to be. However, it has been taken up by a new monster, one not directly related to the Nazi's except for their hatred of the Jews and determination to be the rulers of the entire planet. Yes, I'm talking about the islamofascists. Today, they have infiltrated much most of the middle east with their dispicable and murderous ideology.

Joe Noory at ¡No Pasarán! has both the video and a good translation from these vile creatures threatening Germany and Austria because of their participation in the NATO approved campaign in Afghanistan. The fellow in the video has, of course, covered his face in a black hood (hmmm, reminiscent of our own brand of racists the KKK - same ideology, different color disguise). For the full effect of both the video visit Joe at ¡No Pasarán! This site has been on my blogroll for a long time and it ought to be on your favorites as well.

America Loves a Winner

When I watched "Patton" again the other night for the upteenth time, I thought about its opening speech and that Americans would do better to take Gen. Patton's advice from back then rather than that of the Democrats today. Patton's speech is worth reading and hearing to remind us of American pride and our will to win. The actual written words and the video recreation can still inspire those of us today who want our nation to succeed.

Many forgot Gen. Patton's WWII advice during the Viet Nam conflict, and those people who let us down were not the soldiers fighting. Today, we face a similar problem with people who put their politics above our nation's success and reputation. Just so that others of us can remember and appreciate the message of winning, let's take time to absorb it one more time.

The Famous Patton Speech

Men, this stuff that some sources sling around about America wanting out of this war, not wanting to fight, is a crock of bullshit. Americans love to fight, traditionally. All real Americans love the sting and clash of battle. You are here today for three reasons. First, because you are here to defend your homes and your loved ones. Second, you are here for your own self respect, because you would not want to be anywhere else. Third, you are here because you are real men and all real men like to fight. When you, here, everyone of you, were kids, you all admired the champion marble player, the fastest runner, the toughest boxer, the big league ball players, and the All-American football players.

Americans love a winner. Americans will not tolerate a loser. Americans despise cowards. Americans play to win all of the time. I wouldn't give a hoot in hell for a man who lost and laughed. That's why Americans have never lost nor will ever lose a war; for the very idea of losing is hateful to an American.

Here is a link to the entire actual and unedited speech of Gen. Patton to his troops along with an interesting and detailed description of it. It comes from the first chapter of a book titled The Unknown Patton by Charles M. Province. Take the time to read it and think about what this should mean for us today.

General Patton's Address to the Troops

Next, view the below recreation of the speech in the film's opening scene. As fine a performance as George C. Scott provides, I can only imagine what the real speech must have been like and how it motivated our troops and made them determined to win.

There's nothing that I can add. The speech says it best. Just think about how this applies to us today.

That's all.

The Arm Chair Generals

It appears we have appointed our worst generals to command forces, and our most gifted and brilliant to edit newspapers!

In fact, I discovered by reading newspapers that these editor/geniuses plainly saw all my strategic defects from the start, yet failed to inform me until it was too late.

[...]

Continue reading "The Arm Chair Generals"

Evacuate Iraq - Now, why didn't Bushco Think of That?

Received from a very good friend "larwyn" just today. I told her to blog, but she won't, she just sends exciting emails ...

Subject: 60 Minutes wants to evacuate Iraq - It's just like taking the refugees from Viet Nam!

Without the my Sunday shot of Brit Hume as panelist - FNC is covering each burning bush in Orange County. Now I get the facination, it's the O.C. and a thumbnail of the fire while broadcasting Fox News Sunday, just wouldn't do. But I've digressed

According to 60 Minutes (and Ted Kennedy), we should open our doors to any Iraqi who wants to flee "the terrible mess we have made in Iraq". Per their presentation, lives are in danger because they "helped American soldiers". Lets extrapolate that - any Iraqi who joined the police force, the Iraqi army, worked for any contractor or any coalition force, could be considered to have their "lives in danger" from the "insurgents". Let's throw in all the Shia targeted by the Sunnis. And all the Sunnis targeted by the Shia. And all the terrorists in Iraq are certainly in a position of having their "lives in danger".

Have I missed anyone? Anyone who has any plans to ever go to the market may be considered to also have their "lives in danger".

Actually, this could be an evil plan by Darth Cheney. When no one is left in Iraq - Halliburton will unfurl their flag and claim salvage rights to Iraq.

War, how it is seen, how it is!

Would a war by any other name be just as odious? If we called it something else, would young and brave men and women still enlist to fight for our country? Would ideologues on the other side, still strap explosives on their person or load up their vehicles with explosives and detonate themselves in the midst of men in commerce, children playing, and mothers out for a stroll or soldiers from a number of countries trying to bring peace? Would the nay-sayers still be against any war or expression of war not suited to their purposes?

It has been called the "War on Terror" the "Global War on Terror" with acronyms like WOT and GWOT, but is it really? Is it a war against the people of the Middle East who were just minding their own business? Questions abound, few answers are apparent. Yet, if we continue to use the same old tired and overused verbage, I foresee no amount of discourse that will ever produce agreement on our goals, aims, and strategies. So I propose a new way to look at our goals and aspirations, a "re-framing" if you will.

Continue reading "War, how it is seen, how it is!"

Thank You Mr. Harris

As I have noted before on this blog, there are times when I am blown away by comments made by others. Such a comment was left on one of the forums I subscribe to in response to an essay by Professor Abraham Miller (Dr. Miller is emeritus professor of political science, University of Cincinnati. He served three terms as chairman of the Intelligence Studies Section of the International Studies Association and is a former Bradley Fellow at The Heritage Foundationl) in which Professor Miller asserts:

We should leave Iraq. No, not because we had ill intentions in going there, and certainly not because we didn’t find weapons of mass destruction. We should leave Iraq because as a society we no longer deserve the sacrifice of the young men and women we have sent into harm’s way to defend us.

We no longer have a moral claim on them, and if, anything, we are a failed society no longer worthy of sacrificing the best of us to protect the least of us.

If this were a client in my counseling practice I would state that the client is experiencing despair and despondency. Howver, that is not the case, this is a political position brought about by Professor Miller's viewing the war in Iraq, the Democratic Party's response to and position on that war, a plethora of bad news coming out of the middle east and other sundry bad news. The following are, according to Professor Miller, part of the reason:

A church just down the street from the Berkeley campus posted a banner that proclaims, “There is no such thing as a little torture.” Do you think they are talking about the beheading of Nick Berg, the charred bodies of American contractor swinging from a bridge, or all those souls that are discovered almost daily in shallow graves in Iraq whose bodies reveal the telltale signs of torture?

Obviously not. They are talking about Abu Ghraib, and they fail to understand the difference between putting a bag over someone’s head and beheading them.

Our media had an apoplectic fit over the false rumor that Korans were being flushed down the toilets at Guantanimo. But has the media ever asked what happens to those bibles confiscated by the Saudis?

Michael Chertoff, Secretary of Homeland Security, has issued a memo that eliminates the word “Muslim” from connection with the word "terrorists." Terror operations are officially undertaken by “extremists.” So, our nation is threatened by “extremists” of a generic variety, and our soldiers in Iraq are fighting “generic extremists.

You can’t fight the enemy if you are afraid to acknowledge what you are fighting. “Better dead than insensitive” is the new motto of American society. We can’t use common sense to profile probable terrorists, for that would be insensitive. It is far and away better to have another 09/11 than to have a complaint from the Council on American Islamic Relations or the American Civil Liberties Union.

I have a difficult time faulting his enumeration of the problems, but I have a difficult time saying that because of the problems, we have lost moral authority as a nation to prosecute a war against a hateful foe even if the hordes of hell stand against us. Fortunately for me, there are other wiser folk who have a solid answer for Professor Miller, one that I hope you appreciate as much as I do. The response comes from one Lawrence Harris, who posts on the same forum. Mr. Harris has graciously allowed me to post his reply in full, so while it is a long read, I'm hoping you will read every word and send me a comment about what you truly think. Mr. Harris will be reading the responses.

Continue reading "Thank You Mr. Harris"

From The Front in Afghanistan

A very good friend, talented writer of a blog and regular columnist for SFGate, Cinnamon Stillwell receives updates from a serviceman in Afghanistan. He has graciously agreed that his dispatches can be sent out but asks, for obvious reasons regarding the "enemy" that his name be changed. My comments are below!

1/27/07: Ladies and Gents, security report follows; as you can see, we have our regular report dissemination back. Couple of insights, starting to warm up here already so snow will soon melt and we will be back to fun and games again. However, there is a definitive difference going into the campaign season as opposed to last, no NATO/ISAF newbie transition.

There is a strong force assembling, unlike last year, and the combat multipliers such as Harriers and F-16s are in place. We may possibly get additional combat aircraft platforms. This is a critical year here and on 31 Jan we will get a new NATO/ISAF Commander, General Dan K McNeil. Gen McNeil was Asst Div Cdr at 2ID Korea, has Commanded the 82d Airborne Div and XVIIIth Airborne Corps. It is just a matter of our being proactive and executing a very sound operational plan, and yes, disrupting his actions cross border.

Just so you know, the Afghan official assassinated in Kabul was same Governor of Bamyan Province under the Taliban who oversaw the destruction of the Buddhist statues. Any great loss? Not in my book.

Much is changing in regards for the ANP training, perhaps we can see an overall improvement.

Lastly, will someone please tell our leftist peace lovers, opportunist Republican leaders, and Hollywood heroes that under islamic sharia law, they are no movies, art, music, freedom of speech or religion, no democratic political process, heck there is nothing but being subjugated to the rule of mullahs/clerics/ imams (and they think Christians are bad). They will be told to pray five times a day and women such as Boxer, Pelosi, and even Rosie would not be allowed out of the home.

Now, we are just trying to give some people a chance and opportunity to have protests and rights like them in the future. So let us do our job over here and maybe one day Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins, Jane Fonda, and others can have a protest seminar in Baghdad and make action movies with Matt Damon shot on location in Uruzgan province of Afghanistan.

Tell them we are not abandoning people like we did in Vietnam resulting in how many millions being slaughtered. Tell the Congress if they cut funding these young Men and Women Warriors, and not the disgruntled ones, they will never forgive them.[emphasis added]

Regards from Sunny Kandahar
Someone Serving In Afghanistan

1/21/07: Ladies and Gents, security report follows; there is a rumor that the fuel tankers that caught on fire here in staging area resulted from arson. Arson by the Pakistani drivers who wanted to get new trucks.

If you read in some papers Taliban propaganda states that they are going to open up their own schools this year. They can say that all they desire, aint gonna happen. They certainly made a positive impact on the Afghan educational system by burning some 180 schools this past year. Now, that is what I call a religion of peace.

Not much else to report...which is kinda a good thing!

Regards
Someone Serving In Afghanistan

I wonder if the Republicrats (that oh-so-unhealthy blend of Liberal/Stupid Republicans and Liberal/Even Stupider Democrats) see the Irony of saying so many nice things about the quality of LT. Gen. Petraeus' leadership, ability to make strategy and all the other encomiums they heaped on him only to decry the strategy he has authored. Make no mistake boys and girls, passing this stupid resolution about the surge is just going to make the jihadists delighted. Why, they might even order extra coffee with their 72 golden raisins and anyone that doesn't think so is either addled, cannot think their way out of a wet paper sack or see only a way to take a whack at Bush and Company.

Sign The Petition!

NZ bear has put up a petition to the Republicans in Congress regarding the shameful "resolution."

If the United States Senate passes a resolution, non-binding or otherwise, that criticizes the commitment of additional troops to Iraq that General Petraeus has asked for and that the president has pledged, and if the Senate does so after the testimony of General Petraeus on January 23 that such a resolution will be an encouragement to the enemy, I will not contribute to any Republican senator who voted for the resolution. Further, if any Republican senator who votes for such a resolution is a candidate for re-election in 2008, I will not contribute to the National Republican Senatorial Committee unless the Chairman of that Committee, Senator Ensign, commits in writing that none of the funds of the NRSC will go to support the re-election of any senator supporting the non-binding resolution.

If you would like to sign this petition, and I urge you to do so, please click on NZ Bears petition page. The troops in Iraq will thank you for it. As Glenn Reynolds noted:

OLD CONVENTIONAL WISDOM: "Rumsfeld and Bush should have listened to the generals."

NEW CONVENTIONAL WISDOM: Shut up, generals.

Indeed!

Update: This thing has been up less than two hours and already has over 1600 signatures. Mine is number 1476.

Say No More!

A tip 'O The GM Derby to Big Dog

How To Lose A Sale, And Piss Off America At The Same Time

Last Friday, Cinnamon Stillwell, a good friend and fellow blogger alerted me to an almost unbelievable "sales" response to one of our troops stationed in Iraq. The troop, one Sgt. Jason Hess serving with the U.S. 1st Cavalry Division in Iraq. Sgt. Hess was inquiring about better mats for his troops to sleep on. Here is his email to Discount Floor Mats of West Allis, Wisconson:

To Whom it may concern:
Do you ship to APO addresses? I'm in the 1st Cavalry Division stationed in Iraq and we are trying to order some mats but we are looking for who ships to APO first.

SGT Hess

Continue reading "How To Lose A Sale, And Piss Off America At The Same Time"

A Simple Round Of Applause

Dallas-Fort Worth Airport, Gate D-18, approximately 9:00 AM, the crowds were fairly thick all waiting to either depart or just arriving. I was sitting in a chair reading a novel, waiting for our flight to be called.

In the background I heard someone clap, then another, and another, and another. Looking around I noticed that people were stopping what they were doing, putting their luggage down, laying their packages aside and clapping. Above, on the walkway strode heroes, returnee's from Iraq, dressed in their desert camoflage and sand colored boots. Black soldiers, white ones, red and brown ones, yellow ones. Male and female soldiers, tall and short, heavy and thin but all in uniform, all with either faces strong in determination or smiling at the prospect of seeing family again.

There must have been over 100 of them as they marched by. The applause grew and grew, till everyone in sight, men and women, boys and girls were applauding the returning soldiers. Most of us stood, some, in wheelchairs could not, but you could see that in their hearts they were standing. And the troops continued to file out, down the walkway, through the crowds. Last November the Democrats convinced a majority of Americans that the war in Iraq was not a good thing, but today, in DFW Americans of all types, of all political beliefs, of all voting persuasions applauded the true heroes, the soldiers who represent the finest that America is, and will always be.

A simple round of applause, but one that meant so much!

One More Death Doesn't Really Matter

Executions bother me. A lot! For moral and religious reasons, I am anti-abortion, anti-euthanasia because, except in war and self defense, I feel that God has given us life and we should be loathe to take it. For this reason, I am also against capital punishment and that sets me apart from many of my fellow conservatives. The pending hanging of Saddam Hussein is no different. As Rick Moran called it; "A Sad Ending To A Sad Chapter In History".

And yet, I do not feel sorry for Saddam Hussein, for he is as worthy of the death sentence as anyone has ever been. But we should also take a look at what Moran has termed the

... difference between his regime and the regimes of dozens of others around the world is only a matter of degree – thousands dead or tortured instead of hundreds of thousands. It says a lot about humanity at this stage of our evolution as a social species that we can be so sanguine about the murderous depredations of a Robert Mugabe or a Islom Karimov simply because the body count hasn’t achieved the elevated status of a Saddam or a Kim Jung Il. We in the civilized world can tune out the cries for succor from the oppressed rather easily – international law, free flow of oil, international commerce, even the War on Terrorism – take your pick. One excuse is as good as another.

Recently, Kofi Annan in an address to Human Rights Watch stated:

Sixty years after the liberation of the Nazi death camps, and 30 years after the Cambodian killing fields, the promise of "never again" is ringing hollow. The tragedy of Darfur has raged for over three years now, and still reports pour in of villages being destroyed by the hundreds and of the brutal treatment of civilians spreading into neighboring countries.

And yet, and yet the world stands by and says little as the member states of the UN put the governments of tyrants on the Human Rights Commission. Where is the sense in that? Where was Kofi Annan's speech in 1994? For

... there has been scant mention in the media of the plain fact that it was Mr. Annan, when he was head of the United Nation's peacekeeping office, who could have prevented the slaughter of 800,000 Tutus and their sympathizers in Rwanda in 1994.

Maj. Gen. Romeo Dallaire, head of a U.N. peacekeeping mission in Rwanda, urgently pleaded with Mr. Annan to intervene before the killings began, because Mr. Dallaire knew of the preparations for the genocide. Mr. Annan refused to act, or to say anything publicly.

This appalling complicity in the horrors that followed has been documented in a book, "We Wish to Inform You That Tomorrow We Will Be Killed With Our Families: Stories From Rwanda" (Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1998), by Philip Gourevitch.

The lethal silence of both Mr. Annan and President William Jefferson Clinton was also reported, in unrefuted detail, on a "Frontline" broadcast titled "The Triumph of Evil." The show was made in collaboration with the BBC and broadcast on PBS on Jan. 26, 1999.

It would seem that tyrants come and go, and tens of thousands, nay, millions have died as a result of civilized society's refusal and/or inability to come to grips with the brutal regimes of the world. And the murder goes on.

If the UN had done its job in 1991 through 2003, would the Iraq war have been necessary? Would Saddam now be facing the gibbet? Had Chamberlin recognized the futility of appeasing Hitler, would so many have died in a world wide war? If it were not necessary in the subjugation of Hitler's Nazi Germany, would Roosevelt have made common cause with the likes of Stalin? Would we have made common cause with Iraq because of our fight with the mad mullahs of Iran? I don't know the answer to these questions, though I have my thoughts. I do know that there are many, many more tyrants like Saddam that deserve hanging. Wouldn't it be better for all if the UN were a real United Nations and slapped down every tyrant that dares to raise his ugly head and attempt to stand with civilized nations? Who knows? And until we, as a world, are willing to stand for real human rights and not just a set of nattering nabobs who are more interested in only decrying the real or imagined violations of the "western world" as opposed to the real violators.

We have a chance to reform the UN now, to set forth principles of human rights that stand for something. It will not be easy, there will be those who favor inaction and the status quo over the tough choices. There will be those who will use programs such as "Food for Oil" for their own enrichment and hypocritical blathering about "the children" when they care not a whit for the children but are vastly interested in lining their own pockets.

It will take tremendous political courage to stop the slaughter, it will take uncommonly brave men and women ready to take up arms and let the dictators of the world know that their time has come, that they can no longer wantonly brutalize their own people. It doesn't matter if its stoning gays in Pakistan, the willful slaughter of Christians and animists in Africa, engineering pogroms in Russia or China or any other violation of the rights given by God to all of us. We need to start, now, not tomorrow. We need to put into practice what Annan said (as opposed to what he has done for all these years) "the promise of "never again" can no longer ring hollow. It will take our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor to end this scourge. If many of us, as a people, can deplore the starvation and death by dehydration of a Terri Schiavo, cannot we also agree that the brutality of tyrants must come to an end?

All Together Now: "Awwwwww!!!"

From YNet News:

The UN Security Council decision to place sanctions on Iran has "ruined Christmas," according to Iranian state media.

The Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) said in an editorial on Tuesday: " On the eve of the auspicious birthday of Jesus Christ when all Muslim and Christian believers extend best wishes to each other on the onset of the new year, leaders of Christian states took an unacceptable action toward Iranians by passing a resolution against (Iran's) national nuclear program which surprised every individual in Iran ."

The IRIB described the sanctions as "surprising," as "the Islamic Republic of Iran has designed the national nuclear program for civilian use and all Iranian nuclear sites are under (the) supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)."

Awwwww, poor 'lil tykes.

Hat Tip to Glenn Reynolds

"What If's" on WWII and Iraq

In a recent comment, G.M. mentioned a post by Assistant Village Idiot, a regular and appreciated commenter on this site. (AVI doesn't mention the name of the village where he is the assistant, but let's hope that it's not the same village that Hillary Clinton wants to raise our kids.) But, to the point, AVI's post was "Change One Thing in WWII to improve the outcome." It makes for interesting thought and allows us to ask a lot of "what if's".

Now, a lot of people are asking "what if's" about the war in Iraq, and we have recently seen the results of the Iraq Study Group, which told us what it believes that we should be doing in that area of the world. The connection with AVI's post is that we may be asking a lot of "what if's" about Iraq in the future, just as we have with WWII, depending upon whether or not we accept the recommendations of this committee--and, many of those questions and answers could be similar.

Newt Gingrich, my former congressman, is a former history professor, and he has created interesting assessments in two articles of the group's recommendations and ties them into the response to World War II to deal with Hitler. After you read AVI's post, go to Newt's and see if we have learned anything from history.

The Baker-Hamilton Report: A Prescription for Surrender
by Newt Gingrinch 12/11/2006

The release of the report confirms a Washington establishment desire to avoid conflict and confrontation by "doing a deal." In the 1930s, that model was called appeasement, not realism, and it led to a disaster. Today, we need a Churchill not a Chamberlain policy for the Middle East.

Next....

Overview of the Iraq Study Group Report
by Newt Gingrinch 12/11/2006

Two weeks ago I outlined in the Winning the Future newsletter Eleven Key Tests for the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group report. I asked whether the report would make a real contribution in helping us win the war against the Fanatic wing of Islam, or whether it was simply going to be one more establishment effort to hide defeat so the American political system can resume its comfortable insider games without having to solve real problems in the larger world.

Here are the 11 key tests from two weeks ago and a brief assessment for how the ISG’s published report stacks up: (go to article)

Of course, this discusses future courses, which should be our focus. If you want to do "Monday morning quarterbacking" on Iraq, you can find plenty of that on the left-wing blogs, if you can stand them.

So, based upon where we are and what we have learned from history, what should be our future policies and actions in the mideast? I don't want a lot of "what if's" years from now. I want us to win this war and to do it right. How can we best do that? Who will be right?

Eating Their Own

My friend Jeremayakovka has written one of the best essay's on revenge, the palistinian brouhaha, and "eating their children." This is a must read. Go there, read, comeback and comment. You won't be disappointed.

An Indictment of PC

Jeff, writing at A Little More To The Right notes that the British Foreign Office has capitulated to the islamo-fascists:

Cabinet ministers have been told by the Foreign Office to drop the phrase ‘war on terror’ and other terms seen as liable to anger British Muslims and increase tensions more broadly in the Islamic world.

The shift marks a turning point in British political thinking about the strategy against extremism and underlines the growing gulf between the British and American approaches to the continuing problem of radical Islamic militancy. [Guardian]

This seems like a sad day in England, and, as Jeff notes:

Rooted by American liberals and led by liberals worldwide, western civilizations around the world are voluntarily capitulating, waving truce flags, to Islamofascism. The technique used by Mohammadans is as centuries-old as the culture their system oppresses their people with - brute force, the edge of the sword. Allah’s mandate to them is to overcome the world through savage bloodshed. We know it, we’ve seen it, it’s history.

Yet the loudest voices in society - liberal idiots - drive appeasement policy through their gestapo tactics of name-calling and their incredible success through character assassination to back away from the fight.

Read the whole post (especially the comments) then come back and comment.

Nutjob

Nuff said!!!

A tip 'O The GM Derby to Dr. Sanity

I am a War Monger!!!

I am a war monger, there, I've said it and I make no apologies for it. I support the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, I support going to war against the Sons-of-Bitches that rule Iran and Syria and I support a takedown of the hypocrites that are the Royal Family of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. I take this stance because I know full well the dangers of islamofascists and their ilk. I have seen the nature of the beast and I am worried that a majority of Americans and Europeans do not. I have seen the scourge of islamofascism in the hole in the ground once occupied by twin towers of stunning architecture and commerce, in the torn up landscape of a field in Pennsylvania and in the hole through offices in the Pentagon. I have seen it in the delusional and psychotic meanderings of leftists that purport to "prove" that Bush was behind the attacks. I have seen it in the cries of airline passengers blythfully going about their business, only to have their day disrupted in fire and death. In the agonized faces of their family members posting pictures of missing family members wondering if they were safe, or God forbid, murdered.

I volunteered to be enlisted in the Army fully expecting to go to Vietnam though that didn't happen. I and my wife went on a dream vacation to the baltics and was in Berlin when 4 hijacked planes slammed into the heart of what it is to be an American. I volunteered again only to be told that I was too old, and now I am too ill.

But I have a voice, through this blog and through communication opportunities only dreamed of in my youth. I have friends who have been at the pointed tip of the spear who tell me that as a country worth dying for, we have largely lost our way. I have seen with my own eyes places like Bergen Belsen made possible because stripped pants folk like Neville Chamberlin thought appeasement more important than defense of liberty. I have read some of the Iraqi Study Group's report and their so called recommendations and I hear a whisper of "peace in our time."

I have heard it said that the ISG is less about the war in Iraq, than it is about the political angst in America. I cannot disagree with that assertion! I have watched seemingly rational people decry the President in the most foul terms imaginable. I have listened to liberal types say that the war in Iraq was and is about oil. I have seen America's psychosis up close and it isn't pretty.

I worry about the kind of world in which it is OK to worry about the feelings of 6 Imam's being taken off of an airplane, but not OK to worry about why people became afraid in the first place. I have seen the President talk about "The Religion of Peace" while hours before I saw practitioners of the Religion of Peace dancing in the streets with faces of absolute joy at the destruction of the Twin Towers and the firey, crushing death of 3000 Americans.

I, cringingly, watched an American in Iraq, there to help the Iraqi people have his head cut off with a knife. I know of videos of an American reporter experiencing the same fate. I have seen photographs of an American Warship with a gaping hole in its side, of embassys bombed and occupied, of barracks bombed with explosives driven there in a car or truck.

I have watched Israel pounded again and again by rockets fired by men who have no compunction about putting their fellow adherents at risk or by the innocent civilians who were to be killed by the rockets.

I have seen, over the years, a complete degeneration of the left into an almost psychotic flight from reality. Doc Sanity says it well:

- The left and the Democrats (and anyone else) are delusional if they think that Iran and Syria would be helpful in calming things down in Iraq (unless they are using some definition of "helpful" that I am not familiar with--one which suggest that pouring oil on a fire is helpful, for example);

"- The Democrats' spurning of John Bolton's nomination is a triumph of appeasement and denial;

"- The political left repeatedly demonstrates contempt for the concept of free speech and most of the values of this country, including political and economic freedom; [Note: To which GM's Corner adds the voice of Cinnamon Stillwell]

"- The left and the Democrats systematically subvert the truth and exhibit a peculiar rhetorical solidarity with terrorist regimes and terrorist fanatics--just ask the President of Iran, who regularly uses their talking points;

"- The left long ago abandoned the liberal philosophy and have happily sunk into moral and intelluctal bankruptcy.

"Just read about anything in my sidebar or archives to see that I never refrain from saying what I really think as directly as possible. My overarching emotion toward today's left and their wholly owned subsidiary, the Democratic party, is not hate, but pure, unadulterated contempt (consult a dictionary if you don't know the difference).

"I reserve the emotion of hate for the Islamofascist terrorist thugs, and I am very proud to monger that hate for the kind of bestiality and barbarism they routinely exhibit. That the left is unable to realize or accept that it is their own ideology that sanctions the bestiality and barbarism is their problem, not mine.

"If you are a Democrat or an adherent of leftist/socialist/communist ideology and you are offended by my analyses--tough shit.

I know, deep in my bones that many on the left will say "Oh, no, not us, we love the America that could be." Yeah, right, the America that could be theirs to control, where one cannot make the decision to eat transfat in New York, where one cannot educate their child at home according to the dictates of their conscience. Where every clause and amendment in the Constitution is loaded with emanations and penumbras, but amendments such as the Second and Tenth don't mean what they clearly say they mean without resorting to penumbra or emanations.

I have read people like Shrinkwrapped who in his wisdom noted that we cannot get a clear picture of what is really happening in Iraq when the picture is deliberately distorted, when lies become "truth" and when sharp, and in your face color pictures tell a tale that is a setup and no where near the truth:

We now know that the same kind of distortion and overt propaganda is an important element in the delegitimization of our efforts in Iraq. The case has been made, and it is a powerful indictment, that the news media's success in depicting the murderous insurgency as being composed of the victims of American aggression and as currently winning in Iraq, has gone a long way in recruiting and maintaining the insurgency. More recently we have seen that AP, once thought of as a non-partisan purveyor of information, has not only used questionable sources for their reporting, but is untroubled by all the evidence of their failures.

This would include such luminaries as the Associated Press defending the use of non-existant spokesmen to report burning of mosques and bodies that did not happen, and then denying that they are. As Glenn Reynolds noted "HOLE. SHOVEL. DIGGING."

There is a war going on, a war against terrorism and its ally disinformation, and it is a war that we may be in very real danger of losing. And that is why I am, and shall remain a war monger to my dying breath.

U.N. Dithers over Iranian Nukes!

The Iranian Mullocracy has won another round in the U.N. as the representatives of the United States, Great Britian, China, France, Russia and Germany failed to reach an agreement.

Six world powers made "substantive progress" but failed to reach an accord Tuesday on a U.N. resolution to punish Iran for defying demands to halt its nuclear program, the French Foreign Ministry said after talks in Paris.
Tehran made a new threat of retaliation if the powers opted for sanctions.

"We made substantive progress on the scope of the sanctions targeting proliferation-sensitive activities. There remain several outstanding issues, upon which we will reflect over the coming days," the French ministry said in a statement. "We are now close to a conclusion of this process."

And this is a surprise because???????

A Christmas Gift!

Yesterday I noted a comment from Donna U. and the link was to Wounded Warriors.

Being the curious type, I clicked on her name and went to the Wounded Warriors website and read everything there. I was touched by the photo of the Marine saluting with the stump of his forearm, and the dedication that this Marine had obviously given to his profession of arms.

I donated $100.00 to the cause, both as a Christmas gift and as an expression for my love of those who serve to protect us and end up paying a huge price. We are the privileged ones, here safe at home because rough men stand ready to do violence in our behalf. We can do no less. Please, if you can, go to the Wounded Warriors site and make a contribution, any small amount will help, and any large amount will be used to support those who have given so selflessly for our benefit.

Thanks!

Islamo-fascism. A word frought with meaning to both the left and the right. Some may prefer the term jihadist, others islamist. But, in reality, regardless of what it is called, it is the same darkness of the heart. To some these are terms used only by an "islamo-phobe" by others, an apt description of the pseudo-political/quasi-religious expression of a group of people that have decided that their way to salvation is jihad and martyrdom. Would that it were not so, but it is, like it or not, and it describes "A Certain Darkness of the Heart."

Remember November 4th, 1979? That was the day an act of war was perpetrated on the United States in the form of the Islamic Republic of Iran's invasion of, and occupation of the United States Embassy. Unfortunately for the United States and the 52 hostages held for the majority of the 444 days of captivity (the original number of hostages was 66 but 14 were released over a period of time for a variety of reasons) this act of war was not met by any action by the then President of the United States, Jimmy Carter. Carter had allowed the Former Shah of Iran, Reza Pahlavi who had stepped down in January of 1979 and the so called Islamic Republic, fronted by the "students" felt that America was "corrupting" their republic. The Iranians, of course, had no intention of interveining in the occupation of the embassy, though it should be obvious that the release of the hostages was later engineered by the Iranian governmnet because of their fear of what might happen when Ronald Reagan replaced Casper Milquetoast Jimmy Carter. Reagan had not focused much blaming Carter, but he did promise to rebuild the military and once again take America forward. The absolute landslide (almost 51% of the popular vote and almost 91% of the electoral vote) indeed must have given the Iranian's pause. Their "Islamic" republic faced with massive military retaliation from the United States as opposed to the withering leadership of Carter learned not to challenge the US like that again. But that didn't stop them for long, by 1983, using their proxy Hezbollah they once again attacked the Great Satan, this time not with students, but with bombs.

I recall the bombing of the Marine Barracks in 1983 and a fierce anger that welled up inside at a group of people that were willing to kill to make a pseudo-political point. President Reagan, rightly or wrongly, had sent the United States Marines into Lebanon to help quell the violence and hopefully bring about a solid peace. The French had also sent troops in with the same intent.

Sadly, one side of that conflict decided that a political statement had to be made and it was best made by committing an act of wanton murder. Car bombs in the Marine Barracks and in the French Foreign Legion Barracks killed 300 people as they slept in their beds or made quiet converstation, while they wrote letters home or played cards to while away the time. Reagan's response, to our later detriment was to pull out the troops and thereby set the stage for the radicalization. This singular act of the islamo-fascists was not about bringing peace to the area or retaliating against evil invaders; it was about fostering further hatred and bloodshed. The factions that perpetrated this act did not want peace, did not want a cessation of the bloodshed, did not want anything that might reconcile the differences between the factions engaged in essentially civil war for that would not suit their aim.

It is a truism in behavior modification that behaviors you want repeated you reward, and behaviors you want extinguished you either punish, cease rewarding and allow them to fall by the wayside. This has been proven time and time again in human behavior and the islamo-fascists have been amply rewarded time and again by the non-reaction, or worse, the placid acceptance of terrorism as a fact of life in this modern, psychotic reality we call the present. And yet, our leaders (and those of the western world) have not learned that truism. From Carter, to Reagan, to Bush 41 to Clinton to Bush 43, all have fallen short of the need to smack down this latest incarnation of the vile fascist ideology. True, all but Carter has lobbed more than a few bombs. Reagan punished Kadaffi with a few attacks, Bush 41 pushed back Saddam from Kuwait with mostly the approval of the world, Clinton lobbed a few missles and bombing runs, but in large, they all have not focused on the danger presented by the islamo-fascist. Indeed, neither has most of the world and the cancer has grown apace.

In current political thinking, the war in Iraq is not seen as a war against the islamo-fascist by most, it is seen rather, by many, as a flawed expidition based on inadequate at best, or faked intelligence at worst. Yet, the idea was sound, take out Saddam, a drive a wedge between two state sponsers of terrorism. Both Iran and Syria are part and parcel of the growing mindset of islamo-fascism present in the world today, and indeed, other middle east states join in this enterprise on the stealthy side. Some more so like Saudi Arabia who exports a Wahabbist extreemism to some less so like Pakistan whose intelligence apparat openly sides with Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

9/11 focused us on the need to destroy Al Qaeda in it's hatred of the US and the western world. Let no one doubt that Bin Laden and his fellow travelors want to do that indeed. From the train bombings in Madrid to the bus bombings in London, to the attempted attacks in Germany, to the nighclub bombs in Bali, and the "car burning" orgies of Paris, and the attempt to take down a dozen airliners plotted in England, there is a war going on, a war that is concieved in the mindset of the islamo-fascists and carried out across the globe.

We, in the west have political leaders who call Islam the "Religion of Peace" and perhaps it is. There is certainly evidence in the Koran to support that declairation. There is also evidence in the old testament of the Bible to state that there is much in the Judeo-Christian that is warlike and blood-thirsty. Yet, there are differences too. Much of the Koran is filled with extortations to force the non-muslim into either dihimmitude or death. You won't find that in the New Testament. You will see Muslim street demonstrations calling for the death of the so called "Great Satan" or Israel and the Jews, or even England, but you won't find huge crowds of Christians or Jews calling for the death/destruction of say Saudi Arabia or Syria or Iran, though, given the actions of those three countries that may come in the future, in fact, demonstrations against Syria and to a lesser extent Iran are now ongoing in Lebanon following the implication of at least Syria in multiple political assasinations, but that is for a latter post. You seldom (never?) see Christians rioting in the streets because Christ was the subject of a cartoon. A cartoon for Pete's Sake. And the Muslim Rioters? Why they held up signs saying "Death" and "Behead" to those who depict Mohammad in a cartoon. Not to say anything about shooting a nun in the back because the Pope quoted an Emperor speaking hundreds and hundreds of years ago.

Part of the current political divide in this country over the war in Iraq and the war on terrorism, between those who support the "pull out" crowd or at least support something similar and those who support the effort in Iraq and continuing the war on terrorism is the degree to which the individual, clique, political party or tribe see the threat of islamofascism.

In organizational psychology courses and management courses political tactics within an organization are often discussed. There are a number of such tactics and Andrew DuBrin has written extensively on their use and their benefits as well as their drawbacks. The internal conflict between Democrats and Republicans, or, if you will, between left of center and right of center often revolves around taking the opposite side of the argument, regardless of the rightness of any given argument. Thus, if the right calls for stern measures against islamo-fascists the left takes either an appeasement approach or the vaunted (but oh-so-difficult) cut and run approach. The political tactic often used in this conundrum is "embrace or demolish." In other words, do it my way or I'll cut you to pieces; if you do not see it my way, see my vision, I will make your life miserable. The Democrats famously used this as "The Politics of Personal Destruction" implying that the Republicans were the one's using this tactic, when in fact, it was entirely mostly the Democrats who used said politics. This is not to say that the Republican's didn't do their share. So we get such stellar terms as Rethuglicans, Dimocrats, etc. I've even used some of these terms myself, and meant them too. But no one has called me anything if not partisan and I make no claim to be otherwise. Anothe tactic is called "manipulate classified information." The Democrats accuse Bush 43 of doing just that when he gave reasons for going into Iraq, the Democrats believed it too, until they saw that they could make political hay out of saying "Bush Lied."

But this is not about the left or the right, except in-so-far as it applies to what to do about the islamo-fascists.

U.S. interests have been attacked again and again by the islamo-fascists. 1993 the first bombing of the World trade center, killing 6, wounding more than 1000. 1996 bombing of the U.S. military housing complex in Dhahran,Saudi Arabia, killing 19 American servicemen and wounding hundreds of people. 1998, bombing of two US Embassy's (again, and act of war according to international law) in both Keyna and Tanzania killing 264 people and wounding thousands. 2000 an attack against a US warship the USS Cole killing 17 and wounding 39. 2001, flying two airplanes full of passengers into the World Trade center, the Pentagon and one plane in which the passengers fought back but the plane crashed into a field killing all onboard. And still the mayhem goes on in Iraq where Muslim kills Muslim in sectarian violence and Al Qaeda and their ilk and supporters in Syria and Iran egg the whole process on.

It should be a truism that if someone says that they want to kill you, you should believe them and take appropriate action. To date, many of us on the left and the right take Al Qaeda and the other islamo-fascists at their word, but disagree on what to do.

We have seen what doing nothing will do and we have seen it since the waining days of the Carter Administration. You cannot talk to these people for they think talking is just another way of whiling away the time until they can cut your head off. You cannot reason with these people for they are bereft of reason. Here recently, we had 6 Imams or Islamic Scholars loudly praying, acting "suspicious" and otherwise deliberately causing a ruckus. They excused this by saying that we, of the west, should have knowledge and understanding of Islam. They on the other hand, have no need to understand the very understandable fears of 6 Islamic men, acting strangely in a plane and reacting the way in which the passengers did. It boggles the mind.

And yet the need to do something should be paramount to all in the west, regarless of whether they consider themselves left or right, but that does not seem to be the case. For if we do not, we acques to this darkness of the heart, and we will drink bitter tea for a long time to come before the west finally rises up and smacks down the new fascism running rampant in the world. The Pope has been threatened in his upcoming trip to Turkey, Iran threatens to annihilate Israel. Gazans rain rockets on Israel for getting out of Gaza. CAIR defends the indefensible and the world stands by, watches, and shrugs its collective shoulders.

Perhaps Dr. Sanity said it best regarding the 6 Imams issue, but with applicability to my whole theme:

And, even more than all that, I am thoroughly disgusted with all western leaders who continually seek to appease what cannot be appeased; who in their cowardly fashion spout multicultural and politically correct nonsense as they sell-out Western values and freedoms; who want to endlessly "dialogue" with barbarians; who want to protect the rights of those who want to kill us; and denounce anyone who has the courage to stand up to the monsters of Islam. I am filled with inarticulate anger at the western media who, rather than fulfilling its historic mission to tell truth to power, now uses its enormous power to silence the truth.

The darkness of the heart continues to grow, and we have no will to sap its strength or its rate of growth.

Technorati tags: Islam, terrorism, religion, islamo fascism, Politics

Filed under: War on Terror, Middle East Politics and Terror, and Militaria.

Group Think - The Democrats and Their Allies

Group Think is not a term coined by George Orwell. Though it might seem appropriately attributed to him. Group Think was coined by sociologist and journalist William Hollingsworth "Holly" Whyte in 1952 and expanded on by psychologist Irving Janis in the 60's. It refers to systematic errors made by a "group" when making collective decisions. Specifically, the symptoms (Janis and Mann, 1977), if you will, of Group Think are:

Illusion of Invulnerability: Members ignore obvious danger, take extreme risk, and are overly optimistic.

Collective Rationalization: Members discredit and explain away warning contrary to group thinking.

Illusion of Morality: Members believe their decisions are morally correct, ignoring the ethical consequences of their decisions.

Excessive Stereotyping:The group constructs negative sterotypes of rivals outside the group.

Pressure for Conformity: Members pressure any in the group who express arguments against the group's stereotypes, illusions, or commitments, viewing such opposition as disloyalty.

Self-Censorship: Members withhold their dissenting views and counter-arguments.

Illusion of Unanimity: Members perceive falsely that everyone agrees with the group's decision; silence is seen as consent.

Mindguards: Some members appoint themselves to the role of protecting the group from adverse information that might threaten group complacency.

The purpose of this polemic then is to take a look at the symptoms of Group Think as applied to the current incarnation of the Democratic Party in light of their taking control of Congress this coming January. This is not, if I need to say it, solely the problem of the Democrats. Indeed, there is more than adequate information available to lay many of the same foibles on the Republicans who controled congress from 1994 to 2006 especially in the later years of that span of time. Indeed, group think on the part of the Republicans is in part, why they lost.

As for the Democrats, let us look at each of the 8 symptoms and see what we can see.

Illusion of Invulnerability: Members ignore obvious danger, take extreme risk, and are overly optimistic.

The Democrats have become to be known as the party of "cut and run." This is not just hyperbole from the Republicans but a natural outgrowth of comments made by such worthy lights (lites?) of the Democratic party as Jack Murtha (D-Pa) who want's to deploy to say.... Okinawa. Okinawa??? Either Murtha has absolutely no sense (likely) or he has no concept of distance or geography. Too, the last time I looked, Okinawa was a prefecture of Japan. Did Murtha ask our allies in Japan if we could house 150,000 armed troops there? I don't think so.

Too, the Democrats (and one in particular, a banned commenter here in fact) have taken conservatives to task for stating that Al Qaeda and it's media allies in the MSM are glad to see the Democrats in control of congress. Well, either those folks can't read, or the evil Rove has planted those stories in the MSM.

The fact of the matter is that the Democrats in their zeal to prosecute a war against this administration have been very blind to the very real dangers of Al Qaeda and other islamo-fascist ideologies, thinking perhaps, that 9/11 was merely a reaction to having a Bush at the helm. Reality is that the United States and it's allies have been under attack by islamo-fascism since the early 80's and that Iran has already committed an act of war against the US when it seized our Embassy in Tehran. Wake up Democrats, the danger is real and you aren't fooling us, though you are likely fooling yourselves.

Collective Rationalization: Members discredit and explain away warning contrary to group thinking.

One only has to go to any liberal blog or website to see this in action. In Daily Kos, MYDD, Huffington Post and others you can see (read) any number of snide, ad hominem attacks against anyone who dares comment against the tide of reactionary vision presented in those sites.

Illusion of Morality: Members believe their decisions are morally correct, ignoring the ethical consequences of their decisions.

This tidbit is particularly galling. The infamous "Culture of Corruption" when typed into Google yields some 17 million plus cites. Wow, you would think every Republican in the United States would be serving a life sentence. Yet the fact of the matter is that the Democrats are quite two faced about this. Yes, there is indeed corruption in politics, no more so on the right than on the left however. Reid, Pelosi, Murtha, Hastings all have the stink of corruption about them that are either proven, or under investigation. Reid and his land deals, Pelosi and earmarks, Murtha an undicted participant in ABSCAM the FBI sting operation regarding corrupt Arabs and bribing members of congress, and good ole Alcee Hastings. A federal judge impeached by a Democratic House, convicted and removed from office by a Democratic Senate but about about to be appointed as head of the House Intelligence Committee by Pelosi as a sop to the congressional Black Caucus because they lost one of their members (Jefferson, D-La) who is under investigation for accepting bribes (Jefferson was the Democrat who's congressional office was raided with subpoenas by the FBI). Corruption? The finger pointing at the Republicans leaves several fingers pointing back at the Democrats. Yet, Reid couldn't wait to announce from the Library of Congress that there was a Culture of Corruption headed by the Republicans. Of course, the Library of Congress prohibits political grandstanding in its facilities, but that shouldn't stop ole Reid.

Excessive Stereotyping:The group constructs negative sterotypes of rivals outside the group.

As I noted before, the Republicans are no slouches when it comes to sterotyping Democrats, but those Democrats sure are masters at this technique. In fact, the "no blood for oil," "Bush lied...," and even going back to the Vietnam War period with "Baby Killer." These phrases became such stereotypes that for a number of years after Vietnam, movies and TV shows, as often as not, were about "crazed killers." The Democrats have been successful at painting conservatives and Republicans as racists, anyone who disagrees with their concept of affirmative action as racist; those who object to the gay lifestyle on religious grounds are labled "homophobes." The word homophobe of course is really an irrational fear of a homosexual, but I doubt that any one of a religious conviction could be truly termed "irrationally" afraid. I have, from a philosophical point of view, no problems with gay folk, no problems with civil unions (though I'm ambivalent about gay marriage) but I have been called a homophobe by some when they hear I'm conservative. The slinging of ad hominem by the left seems to far exceed that of the right in my opinion (look at the foul language used by some liberal commenters on this site - all of whom I've banned when it gets out of hand). Some blogs seem to tolearate that kind of language from the left or the right, I won't. But, I digress

Pressure for Conformity: Members pressure any in the group who express arguments against the group's stereotypes, illusions, or commitments, viewing such opposition as disloyalty.

Joseph Lieberman! Need I say more?

Self-Censorship: Members withhold their dissenting views and counter-arguments.

I think suspect know that there are a large number of conservative Democrats, I've voted for some of them over the years. Yet, you do not hear them, see them ever speak up against the liberal leadership. It has often been said and amply demonstrated that in the Democratic party, you have to tilt liberal to get the presidential nomination or any Democratic ticket place, but you absolutely must tilt back to the center or even slightly right of center (Bill Clinton anyone?) to get elected. Of course, then, typically the tilt is back to the left. A cogent example of this is the rightward tilt (not to the conservative dark side so to speak) of the followers of her Pelosiship but now that the election is over, back to the left.

Illusion of Unanimity: Members perceive falsely that everyone agrees with the group's decision; silence is seen as consent.

Four words: The Global Warming Consensus. Of course, it doesn't matter that consensus isn't proof, and that there really is not a consensus among all climate scientists (which, despite their denial includes, must include meteorologists and hurricaneologists). If you don't speak up, you must agree. If you speak up, there goes your research money. It is the same with a variety of topics whether it be abortion, stem cell research etc. There are many, many Democrats who do not believe in the GW fantasy, abortion or stem cell from embryo research but who are either freightened into silence by the ugly name calling of the liberals or who just don't think about it and vote Democrat anyway.

Mindguards: Some members appoint themselves to the role of protecting the group from adverse information that might threaten group complacency.

Two words: Joe Wilson.

Again, let me note that Republicans share many of the same foibles with the Democrats. So, with the Republicans seeking "bi-partisanship" (note, the only ones really wanting that are the losing party or wimps in the winning party or scoundrels peacemakers who don't intend to grant it anyway) The Democrats getting up a full head of steam to do what they think they can do anyway the next two years ought to be a target rich environment for any thinking conservative (or even any thinking liberal though that is probably an oxymoron).

AUSSIE POSTER GIRL SINGS TO THE "DIGGERS"

I don't know How the heck I missed this at my friend's Kit and Heidi's blog Euphoric Reality. The singer, Beccy Cole sings this ballad for the "Diggers" or, Australian Troops fighting the war on terror "on the other side of the world." So, withouth further ado I present it now, enjoy!

50 years, Freedom Comes Hard Sometimes

Last year at this time I published a remembrance of the Hungarian Revolution. This yeat, the 50th Anniversary of that Uprising is better noted on the pages of The Wall Street Journal. A sample:

Returning from school, I too spent the afternoon on the street; I was now part of the crowd standing on the square. The Soviet star had been installed on the top of the cupola only a few weeks before; they had done a really good job. The square was echoing the thundering rhythm of this cheerful demand but, it seemed, there was no one around to hear it: The Parliament building with its turrets and traceries loomed darkly, somberly and silently in the background. Perhaps there was some light up in the cupola hall. Perhaps they did hear it up there and thought it better to yield to the people's will.

Yet they turned off the public lighting of the square instead. A roar of indignation rose from the crowd, and it was to be feared that people would fall upon the building to tear it apart with their bare hands. Fires were started immediately; they set newspapers and pamphlets ablaze and held them up high. Wildfire-like, the quickly dying lights spread in waves above the heads. The silence had a solemnity about it; the sheer beauty of the waves of fire enchanted everyone for a moment. It was probably at this point that I lost my sketching board and my T-square. Then, high above, the ruby light of the star went off; it was the downsized replica of the Kremlin's famous star in Moscow. The square was completely dark now. In the soft and warm evening, autumn had a certain pungent, foggy edge to it; one could sense the Danube's metallic smell. The silence of a crowd always has a massive weight. It took some time before the square would dare believe that its demand had been heard, and then amongst triumphant, thunderous cheers the public lighting was turned on again.

A great read, go forth, read and come back here to comment.

NYTimes Does An About Face

Those self rightous blankety blanks at the New York Times publish a Mea Culpa on the SWIFT banking story.

There were reasons to publish the controversial article, but they were slightly outweighed by two factors to which I gave too little emphasis. While it’s a close call now, as it was then, I don’t think the article should have been published.
[...]
I haven’t found any evidence in the intervening months that the surveillance program was illegal under United States laws. Although data-protection authorities in Europe have complained that the formerly secret program violated their rules on privacy, there have been no Times reports of legal action being taken. Data-protection rules are often stricter in Europe than in America, and have been a frequent source of friction.

And these are the folks that want us to trust them on matters of knowing which security matters they can publish.

And where are the self righteous bloggers on the left? Will they publish a Mea Culpa also or will their BDS continue to blind them.

Read the whole NYT article then come back and comment.

A tip 'O The GM Derby to Instapundit

Westboro Baptist Church: Non Islamic Islamofascists?

In Iran they HATE GAYS and hang them from cranes. In Iraq under Saddam Hussein they threw them from buildings. In Saudi Arabia gays are beheaded or stoned to death. In fact, one of the most virulent anti-homosexual people in the world are the islamofascists who rule in Iran and Saudi Arabia.

You are probably thinking why am I including Saudi Arabia in with other islamofascists. It is simple; because Saudi Arabia supports and spreads the Wahabi sect of Islam. I totally discount their so called alliance with the west as they actively work to bring down their allies.

But, I digress. Islamofascists do not support human rights, and they use their perverted thinking to support the murder of homosexuals. Oddly enough, in this they have their own supporters in this country, CAIR for one. C.A.I.R. who immediately objects to anyone saying anything negative about Islamic culture, even if it is true (especially when it's true...ed.). Another group actively supporting the anti-homosexual agenda of the islamofascists is, counter-intuitively, a supposedly Christian church, the Westboro Baptist Church headed by one Fred Phelps, a vile creature who was once disbarred for badgering a witness and calling her a "slut" apparently because as a court reporter, she didn't get him a transcrapt soon enough, he sued her for 22K or some largish amount. As it turned out, the lack of transcripts had no effect on the trial he needed them for. Not a nice man this Mr. Phelps.

His daughter was recently on Fox news defending her schtick!

Shirley Phelps-Roper (and no, I'm NOT related to this poor excuse for a Christian) comes off as a harridan who is in perfect alignment with the islamofascists. In fact, their history is one supporting fascists such as Saddam Hussein:

In 2003, before the fall of Saddam Hussein during the Iraq War, Phelps wrote Hussein a letter praising his regime for being, in his opinion, "the only Muslim state that allows the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ to be freely and openly preached on the streets."[30] Furthermore, he stated that he would like to send a delegation to Baghdad to "preach the Gospel" for one week. Hussein granted permission, and a group of WBC congregants traveled to Iraq to protest against the U.S. The parishioners stood on the streets of Baghdad and heavily patronized Baghdad establishments holding signs condemning Bill and Hillary Clinton and anal sex.

As well as supporting Fidel Castro:

Phelps has repeatedly championed Fidel Castro for Castro's stance against homosexuality; in 1998 Harper's magazine published a letter Phelps sent to Castro in which he praised Castro and lambasted the U.S. In 2004, when a pro-homosexual Cuban refugee announced plans to travel to Cuba, Phelps sent another letter to Castro "warning" him of the man's plans and requesting travel visas for a group of WBC congregants so that they could follow the refugee around Havana with signs bearing anti-U.S. and anti-homosexual slogans. Castro also ignored that appeal."

It is quite odd to hear "Our Lord Jesus Christ" coming from those mouths. I've always been taught that Christ was love. I've always been taught that all of us are God's children. It is obvious that an non-Islamic fascist such as Phelps and his followers could grow up in this great land and not learn that lesson.

Hey Mr. Phelps (I've known Reverands, They have been my friends and my relatives and you sir are no Reverand!), my late brother in law was gay, and he was more of a man than you could ever hope to be.

A tip 'O The GM Derby to Msunderestimated.

Diversity and Political Correctness Run Amok!

Dangerously Subversive Dad has a post noting the ultimate in Diversity and Political Correctness.

It seems that a policeman in England, who happens to be a muslim, has been excused from having to guard the Israeli Embassy on "moral grounds,"

PC Alexander Omar Basha told chiefs he was unable to carry out duties at the London embassy — a top terror target — due to moral grounds after Israeli bombings in Lebanon.

DSD is obviously upset about this, but also upset by a Tory, specifically one Richard Barnes:

Richard Barnes, a Tory member of the Metropolitan Police Authority, accused senior officers of lacking tact. He said: ‘I think it was crass management in the first place. They should have recognised there could have been a problem and not suggested this officer be posted at this embassy."

"The Met keep banging on about diversity, but this case shows they have learned very little at all."

Officer Barnes, this is not about "diversity" this is about "Political Correctness" and it is monumentally stupid. As DSD notes:

The Tory Party has purely and simply endorsed racism here. The idea that any public servant is free to make moral judgments and then decide to exclude their service from those they deem unfit, immoral or evil for that service is a truly disgusting and pernicious one."

"I got mugged last week, and my mum last year. So I'm not serving you in this Post Office cos you're black and so were the muggers."

"So what if someone ripped off your veil and spat in your eye? I may be a copper but I dont like Muslims, I was on a tube train on 7/7."

"No, I'm not letting you through the ticket barrier - you're obviously a Sikh judging by that turban, and Sikhs killed the Prime Minister back in India, the bastards. As a good Hindu I reserve the right not to let you on the train."

"No way son, I know this is a youth club for everyone but well, you have to understand that as a Jew I feel you bear some responsibility for what is happening to the Palestinians. So you're not getting in."

DSD is right on the money, but the original jerk in this little drama, Alexander Omar Basha is not only wrong, he is so far off the mark as to be ludicrous. Which of course, brings me to a "moral" argument from the other side of the coin:

Two Realities

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to heaven, we were all doing direct the other way - in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only. - Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities

The above quote is given by Dr. Sanity in a heartfelt and terrific posting on her blog. Go read it, ponder its meaning and then come back and comment.

Clinton: It Depends Upon What the Definition of "The Truth" Is

The Democrats are trying to claim some kind of victory with former President Clinton's eruption on his FOX interview, but Dick Morris, who worked for the Clinton's and knows the score, disassembles Clinton and his claims.

The real Clinton emerges
By Dick Morris, 09/26/06

From behind the benign façade and the tranquilizing smile, the real Bill Clinton emerged Sunday during Chris Wallace’s interview on Fox News Channel. There he was on live television, the man those who have worked for him have come to know – the angry, sarcastic, snarling, self-righteous, bombastic bully, roused to a fever pitch. The truer the accusation, the greater the feigned indignation. Clinton jabbed his finger in Wallace’s face, poking his knee, and invading the commentator’s space.

But beyond noting the ex-president’s non-presidential style, it is important to answer his distortions and misrepresentations. His self-justifications constitute a mangling of the truth which only someone who once quibbled about what the “definition of ‘is’ is� could perform.

Read the balance of the article to see how various Clinton claims on fighting terror come apart once truth is defined by standards other than his; i.e., the honest truth.

Once again, we're seeing a former Democratic President working hard and after-the-fact to resurrect his legacy years later, ala Jimmy Carter. Do they think that we can't read history? Maybe some can't, but their failures are being exposed. And, it's too bad that the media cares more about protecting the reputations of these men than in exposing their failures to protect Americans.

9-11 as "Covered" by a Psycho Former President [Updated]

If you had to name a living former President who is a liar and sociopath, who might he be? Well, if you want to see a psycho-president in action, then catch former President Clinton in his interview for FOX News Sunday with Chris Wallace, which discusses the President's failures in fighting terrorism and to dispose of Osama Bin Laden. You'll want to see the entire interview this Sunday, but here's part of it, and I understand that there are other similar exchanges within that interview:

A bit dog barks, and Bill Clinton come across a pit bull when he's questioned. G.M. covered strong reactions of President Clinton and his supporters on recent and related revelations in his posts The Path to 9-11, Inaccurate? and The Path To 9-11: The Left Is A Comedy For Our Times. Wouldn't it have been better to write a good history when one is in office than re-write the actual one after he leaves?

But, I'm not interested in assessing blame. There are far more complications on dealing with terrorists than those to which I'm privy. However, when responsiblility or failure is clear in some areas, why can't Clinton be a man and own up to it and quit trying to cover himself by dragging down others? I don't lose respect for someone, but gain it, when he's honest and admits his failings. I suspect that this will be the pattern for as long as Clinton lives. Students of history and future policy decision makers deserve accuracy to guide them in directing our policies going forward.

(P.S. - To help out you Lefties shouting that President Bush is a liar, there is a difference between out-right lying and passing along information believed to be true from normally reliable sources but later having it questioned.)

[Update]

Bill Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, believes that it was partly an act when Bill Clinton "lost his temper" with Chris Wallace.

LET'S DO A THOUGHT experiment: Perhaps Bill Clinton, an experienced and sophisticated politician, knew what he was doing when he made big news by "losing his temper" in his interview with Chris Wallace. Perhaps Clinton's aides knew what they were doing when they publicized the interview by providing their own transcript to a left-wing website as soon as possible Friday evening, and then pre-spun reporters late Friday and Saturday. Maybe it was just damage control. Or maybe Clinton did what he wanted to do when he indignantly defended himself, blasted the Bush administration, and attacked Fox News. What could Clinton have been seeking to accomplish? Three things.

Continued in article:
Why Clinton "Lost His Temper"
The former president knew what he was doing.

Maybe Wm. Kristol is right, but I'm not sure that this was all an act. It's probably true that Bill Clinton did intend to produce spin for the Democrats and for his legacy, but I still have to believe from experiences that psychopaths cannot help their rage, and I have to think that even Bill Clinton couldn't turn purple simply on cue, although his bullying was surely intended. He's cunning, but he's still nuts.

Muslims Prove Benedict's Quote Of Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Paleologus Correct

Pope Benedict:

The emperor [Manuel II Paleologus] must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: "There is no compulsion in religion". According to the experts, this is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur'an, concerning holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the "Book" and the "infidels", he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached". The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable."

The "rational" Muslim response? Burning five Christian Churches, killing in cold blood by shooting a nun in the back, killing a Christian in Baghdad for the sin of being Christian, Violent Demonstrations, burning the Pope in effegy. The Pope issued a "clarification" indicating that he didn't mean to insult any Muslam but that clarification wasn't enough it seems to the "rational" Muslims rioting.

The Pope also noted in his speech at the University of Regensburg:

Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. "God", he [the Byzantine emperor] says, "is not pleased by blood - and not acting reasonably is contrary to God's nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats... To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death..."

Victor Davis Hansen noted:

... by quoting from the emperor rhetorician Manuel Paleologus—whose desperate efforts at strengthening the Morea and the Isthmus at Corinth a generation before that awful Tuesday, May 29, 1453 all came to naught—the Pope failed to grasp that under the tenets of radical Islam of the modern age, context means little, intent nothing, learning less than zero. If a sentence, indeed a mere phrase can be taken out of context, twisted, manipulated to show an absence of deference to Islam, furor ensues, death threats follow, assassins load their belts—even as the New York Times or the Guardian issues its sanctimonious apologies in the hope that the crocodile will eat them last. "

Note the furor of the hordes protesting what the Pope didn't say, note the rampage over some silly-assed cartoons, note the slaying of a film-maker in the Netherlands, note the death threats against a British-Indian novelist, note the irrationality and the total lack of reason in those rampaging.

This is not the reaction of an ordered society, this is either the calculated manipulation of the "mob" by those with an ulterior motive, or, it is the reaction of a 7th century society so deeply mired in its belief system that it cannot conceive of a mindset different than its own. Bill Cork, writing in Built On A Rock asks:

Can you discuss the presumption out of which you operate? Can you explain how the expressions of Muslim law, as lived out in your societies, are consistent with other teachings of your own religion, not to speak of thinking about basic human rights, which the rest of the world has arrived as via...you know...centuries of...reasoned thinking?"

The answer is, of course, that the rioting Muslims (not to be confused with all Muslims) believe in the very tenets that Manuel II said that they do, spreading of their "faith" by the sword. Just ask the Fox newsman and cameraman. And, as a last bon mot, a last item in this little post, consider this:

Cross Posted at The Real Ugly American and at The Wide Awakes

UPDATE: The Howard Government has blasted the imams in Australia and has figuratively read them the riot act:

The Howard Government's multicultural spokesman, Andrew Robb, yesterday told an audience of 100 imams who address Australia's mosques that these were tough times requiring great personal resolve.

Mr Robb also called on them to shun a victim mentality that branded any criticism as discrimination.

"We live in a world of terrorism where evil acts are being regularly perpetrated in the name of your faith," Mr Robb said at the Sydney conference.

"And because it is your faith that is being invoked as justification for these evil acts, it is your problem.

"You can't wish it away, or ignore it, just because it has been caused by others.

"Instead, speak up and condemn terrorism, defend your role in the way of life that we all share here in Australia."
A tip 'O The GM Derby to The Instapundit

How Refreshing!

The Democrats Plan For The War On Terror

Now the TRUTH can be told; my super-duper, secret, covert, undercover operative has discovered the democratic party's plan to conduct the war on terror.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

If You Think Bush Is Bad, Try Lincoln

My good friend and fellow conservative Tim Birdnow has an interesting piece on Mr. Lincoln's presidency and notes that if the Bush Administration were run in the same way as the Lincoln Administration there would be hell to pay. An exerpt:

Of course, Lincoln did many things which earned him disrepute in his day; he suspended the writ of Habeas Corpus, threw critical newspapermen in the slammer for being, well, critical, issued martial law wherever he thought it might help the war effort, etc. Critics of the Bush Administration simply don`t realize how mild the provisions in the Patriot Act are, nor how gentle and law-abiding Bush is compared to Lincoln. The treason of the New York Times would have landed the editors and half of the news staff in prison without charge or possibility of parole if Lincoln were president instead of Bush. He didn`t put up with any nonsense.

Go, read the whole thing then come back and comment (and drop a comment for Tim as well).

A Motto Even the Islamofascists Can Understand!

"Lan astaslem."
I will not submit, I will not surrender!

A tip 'O The GM Derby to Michele Malkin and to Dr. Sanity for the pointer.

The Path To 9-11: The Left Is A Comedy For Our Times

The subject of 9-11 is frought with pathos. It is both a sad remembrance and an act of war. But, on the 5th anniversary of this tragic day, the American Broadcasting Company (ABC) has decided to show a production of a "Docu-Drama" called "The Path To 9-11". Now, in and of itself, that is nothing remarkable, the history of the socalled "docu-drama" is long and comical for its historical inaccuracies and/or outright fiction, witness the productions of "Death Of A President" in England for example (which many have defended on the grounds of "free speech").

Yet, let a shibboleth of the left be challenged (Clinton was a terrific - though perhaps oversexed president) and watch the fur fly. The reaction of much of the left is almost comical, nay, it is entirely comical and I'll take a few snippits from here and there to prove my point.

First up my friend Marc Cooper (a self identified "progressive") posts "The ABC's of Panderning" in which he states:

L.A. Times media columnist Tim Rutten perfectly nails the shameless shlockmeisters at ABC who think it's just spiffy to capitalize on the pain of the 5th anniversary 9/11 to broadcast one more manufactured piece of dreck -- a two part "docudrama" on the Twin Tower attacks powered by blatant right-wing spin.

Now, Marc is a friend of mine, and my 'blogfather' if you will and I highly respect him and his blog (though that does not apply to some of his more vociferous commenters). But gee could the rhetoric be more appalling, could the prose be a little more turgid? Understand please, as a progressive, Marc is no friend of the Bushes or the Republicans, but having said that, he is no friend of the Democrats either.

More amusing (if that is indeed the word) are some of the comments from that blog entry. This one for example:

NeoDude Says:
September 9th, 2006 at 9:14 am

When has Right-Wing Nationalists (SALUTE!!!), in any Western tradition, not exploit a national tragedy?

Oh gosh, "Right-Wing nationalists." Codewords for fascists perhaps? Oh, the humanity!

How about this one (if you are a fan of conspiracy theories you will LOVE this one):

r. l. c. Says:
September 9th, 2006 at 10:14 am

It really is obvious what happened here. These projects don’t get made overnight and when ABC Entertainment (NOT the news division) OK’ed this Bush was riding high - just been reelected and had increased majorities in both houses of Congress. And what were the pundits saying? Why the GOP wiould be ruling the roost for a long time to come and the Dems were in “Disarray� (a town near Vegas, I believe). So why not get in bed with right wing crazies? They would be in position to help the Mouse with issues like Intellectual Property and Media Ownership. Its not personal, just business.

(Hell Robert Iger was a Clinton Contributor, as were a lote of ABC/Disney Execs)

Sure the Dems would complain but what could they do? Well its now two months from an election that will probably produce a tsunami for them and the miniseries don’t look so hot now does it? That is what happens when you listen to experts!

Can you say "off base?"

But Marc's commenters are rational compared to others (although that is obviously not saying much). For example, Ann Althouse has a terrific post on some of these left-wing rantings here and she has a link pointing to something called "AMERICAblog" with some suggestions to sue, boycott etc Disney, ABC and Apple because of the so called docu-drama. A sample:

Certainly we're going to be live-blogging the show, Sunday and Monday. I'd appreciate those of you in Australia and New Zealand, if the show does air there shortly, please give us feedback as to what they cut and what's still in the show? It will give us a window as to what defamatory material Disney/ABC insisted on keeping in the show, which will help the lawsuits and our organizing.

Secondly, when the show airs in the US, if Disney/ABC still run it, I want to be sure a number of us are live-blogging it to list the defamation and the errors. If Disney/ABC insist on making a cartoon out one of the blackest days in America history, then we will hold them responsible."

Aren't these the same guys who "demand" freedom of speech on campuses and other venues? Does that apply only to speech from their side? Funny, I thought that speech was free for ALL OF THE UNITED STATES. I guess not. But I digress, as funny as the posting is, some of the comments (over 380 of them) are even funnier (or would stranger be a better word choice?) For example, this little bon mot:

I think iTunes is a really good place to hit Steve Jobs and Apple. It is direct and to the point, and it is not platform-based.

It is OUTRAGEOUS that they are offering this as a free download.

They would notice immediately if there was a slack-off in sales.

I have already written to Steve Jobs and the iTunes crew about this.
samia | 09.09.06 - 6:38 pm |

Wow, but this is mild compared to:

It appears that the governments use of the MSM for propaganda distribution is becoming extremely transparent. If we, as Americans, cannot stop this from happening, or becoming any worse, then we have lost the control of our public servents, and more drastic actions must be taken. Boycotts/leaflets/emails/videos/ demonstations etc.
Joe Danger | Homepage | 09.09.06 - 6:43 pm |"

Joe Danger, what a nom-de-pixel that is. Ok lets see, the government controls the MSM enough to make it a propaganda arm of the Bushies. So, how did the NYTimes sneak by with those "expose's" of our efforts to listen in to Al Qaeda or monitor financial transactions? Hmmmmm?

OK, how about this one:

As well as an organized and long-term boycott of Disney and ABC, we should use this opportunity to call for reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine.
nervesofsteel | 09.09.06 - 6:50 pm |"

OK, now that really is scary. The fairness doctrine was less about fairness than it was a way to silence the broadcasters (radio and TV) from airing any "political" speech because the so called doctrine would allow opposing views time on air. General Managers would have a scheduling nightmare and we'd loose talk radio and have to go back to elevator music. No thanks! One more reason not to elect Democrats or liberal Republicans. Oh, and by the way, the above commenter's nom-de-pixel is "nervesofsteel" More like "nerves-of-tinfoil." What a frightened little bunny!

The latest (well, maybe not the absolute latest) lefty "talking point" (I'm being generous here you understand) is that this is NOT the same as Michael Moore's fatuous "Farenheit 9/11" which everyone now says was a "polemic." A polemic?

WordNet
po·lem·ic (p-lmk): adj : of or involving dispute or controversy [syn: polemical] n 1: a writer who argues in opposition to others (especially in theology) [syn: polemicist, polemist] 2: a controversy (especially over a belief or dogma)

Really, seems to me that at the time many on the left didn't see any controversy at all, it was truth and a terrific slam on the Bush Administration (note: Marc Cooper, always his own man, saw it different and the vast majority of his commenters agreed - at the time, not now; now it's just a polemic).

Again, I digress, the whole point of this little exercise is to point out the utter insanity of the left in regards to this docudrama. Reminds me of the "revised" words of the Bard: "The left doth protest too much, methinks."

Cross posted at The Real Ugly American

Update, I've only scratched the surface of the left's response to "The Pathway to 9-11" but James Joyner at Outside The Beltway has looked at how "The Left Remembers 9-11." It's an excellent read and I'm in awe of his article.

Lt. Col. Jerry Dickerson - In Memorium

A number of months ago I joined the 2996 project to memorialize one member of the two thousand ninehundred nintysix individuals who lost their lives on September 11, 2001. I selected Lt. Col Jerry Dickerson for a number of reasons, though I did not have the honor of knowing him. First, my dad was Army as was Lt. Col. Dickerson. Two, I had been to the Pentagon a number of times and had travled the corridor near where he died. Lastly, because I was in the Army and the United States Army still holds a special place in my heart as my dad, granddad and great grandad were all soldiers.

Then, last month I was contacted by "Roci" who writes Rocinante's Burdens. Roci was a personal friend of Lt. Col. Dickerson and asked if I was willing to swap names or transfer my choice to him so that he could memorialize his personal friend. How could I say no to that kind of request.

Unfortunately, by the time we made the swap, all 2996 names had been assigned and I decided that Roci would do a much better entry than I. So, Roci has done so and it is a great read, and following the links contained in his entry, a few tears welled up, a lump developed in my throat and I agree with Roci... "Here's to Jerry, a better man than I"

So, go read Roci's entry, say a prayer or two for Jerry Dickerson and may Almighty God grant that his family finds peace and strength through the coming years.

The Path to 9-11, Inaccurate?

Footage NOT from ABC

This may not be the full story, but isn't it interesting given the looney left's almost rabid denial. Then too, if the LL and the Dems don't shut up, maybe more and more people will be looking. Wouldn't that be a hoot?

Unverified but Heartwarming

Scrolling through the blogosphere this early am, reading Dr. Sanity which took me to Captain's Quarters which took me to... oh, hell, I forget, but somehow I ended up at Tim Blair which took me to the comments which took me to this:

From the daughter of a Soldier.

Last week I was in Melbourne attending a conference. While I was in the airport, returning home, I heard several people behind me beginning to clap and cheer.

I immediately turned around and witnessed one of the greatest acts of
patriotism I have ever seen.

Moving through the terminal was a group of soldiers in their uniforms, As they began heading to their gate everyone (well almost everyone) was abruptly to their feet with their hands waving and cheering. When I saw The soldiers, probably 30-40 of them, being applauded and cheered for, it hit me. I’m not alone. I’m not the only red blooded Australian who still loves this country and supports our Troops and their families.

Of course I immediately stopped and began clapping for these Young Unsung heroes who are putting their lives on the line everyday for us so we can go to school, work, and enjoy our home without fear or reprisal.

Just when I thought I could not be more proud of my country or of our service men and women a young girl, not more than 6 or 7 years old, ran up to one of the male soldiers. He knelt down and said “hi,� the little girl then asked him if he would Give something to her daddy for her. The young soldier didn’t look any older than maybe 22 himself, said he would try and what did she want to give to her daddy.

Suddenly the little girl grabbed the neck of this soldier, gave him the biggest hug she could muster and then kissed him on the cheek. The mother of the little girl, who said her daughters name was Courtney, told the young soldier that her husband was a Corporal and had been in Afghanistan for 11 months now. As the mum was explaining how much her daughter, Courtney, missed her father, the young soldier began to tear up.

When this temporarily single mum was done explaining her situation, all of the soldiers huddled together for a brief second. Then one of the other servicemen pulled out a military looking walkie-talkie. They started playing with the device and talking back and forth on it. After about 10-15 seconds of this, the young soldier walked back over to Courtney, bent down and said this to her, “I spoke to your daddy and he told me to give this to you.� He then hugged this little girl that he had just met and gave her a kiss on the cheek. He finished by saying “Your daddy told me to tell you that he loves you more than anything and he is coming home very soon.�

The mum at this point was crying almost uncontrollably and as the young soldier stood to his feet he saluted Courtney and her mum. I was standing no more than 6 feet away as this entire event unfolded.

As the soldiers began to leave, heading towards their gate, People resumed their applause. As I stood there applauding and looked around, there were very few dry eyes, including my own.

That young soldier in one last act of moment turned around and blew a
kiss to Courtney with a tear rolling down his cheek.

We need to remember everyday all of our soldiers and their Families and
thank God for them and their sacrifices.

At the end of the day, it’s good to be an Australian.

This was sent by email from someone to someone to someone. I have no idea who initiated it, no idea who posted it at Tim Blair, nor do I expect to ever know, but I've seen applauding at airports, I've seen little girls run up to soldiers (maybe their own dads) and I've seen the tears. So, maybe this is true and even if it is total fiction, fiction has a place in the blogosphere when it expresses a point of view. Then there is this little factoid, warmhearted fiction from the right is labeled as ... wait for it... "mush" by the left, but they have their own fictions: Joe Wilson and the outing of his wife, Richard Clark giving Condaleeza Rice the lowdown on Al Q, Bush stealing the elections... so, oh yes, the left's fiction is not in the least heartwarming and is only damaging. But, that's politics I guess.

Genocide, Volkerenmoord, Genozid, Genocidio, Génocide

Regardless of the language, "Genocide" has a mind numbing connotation. One only has to look at some of the concentration camps in eastern Europe during World War II, or some of the mounds of skulls in Cambodia following the reign of Pol Pot to understand the anathema the word conjures.

Wikipedia:

Genocide is defined by the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) Article 2 as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such: Killing members of the group; Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

In the last century alone (1901-2000) the following acts of genocide occurred:

Bosnia-Herzegovina: 1992-1995 - 200,000 Deaths
Rwanda: 1994 - 800,000 Deaths
Pol Pot in Cambodia: 1975-1979 - 2,000,000 Deaths
Nazi Holocaust: 1938-1945 - 6,000,000 Deaths
Rape of Nanking: 1937-1938 - 300,000 Deaths
Stalin's Forced Famine: 1932-1933 - 7,000,000 Deaths
Armenians in Turkey: 1915-1918 - 1,500,000 Deaths

The number of citations for "Never Again" are numerous, in fact, each word in this sentence is a separate link to a "Never Again" article.

Yet, here in this day and age, a group of folk are preaching genocide in at least two areas of the world.

First, Iran and it's madman president claims there was no genocide during WWII, (if he said that in Germany, would he be prosecuted? In Germany denial of the Holocaust is a crime) yet, he also says that Iran will wipe Israel off the face of the earth and kill all the Jews. Genocide is actively taking place, also in Darfur where the Janjaweed are activly killing as many African nativists and Christians as possible, while the world stands by. The United States, Russia, France, England, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, South Africa, Brazil, Japan all stand by, watching it happening in Darfur, and afraid to stop it in Iran, either because the Mullah's might unleash that monster or the riots in the arab street might start.

At this stage of the game, who gives a damn? Concepts such as "Never Again" have lost meaning if we don't collectively, as a people, step in and do something. Kofi Annan calls it genocide, but stands by while such stalwarts in human rights as Sudan and Saudi Arabia, Cuba and Ethiopia, are placed on the Commission On Human Rights of the United Nations. The Commission also has some real members such as Germany and England, the United States and Hungary and others, but don't expect any real action there. In spite of the ongoing genocide in Darfur, the commission voted overwhelmingly to censure Israel for essentially taking the war to it's attackers.

Never Again? Well, it's happening again in Sudan at the hands of the Janjaweed and will happen again in Israel at the hands of the insane Mullahs of Iran. And, of course, the UN says self defense is not a human right so, Israel, bend over and get ready.

UPDATE: My friend Gail at Crossing The Rubicon 2 has more including this sad little bit of anti-semitism.

Harm? What Harm?

Alexandra at All Things Beautiful has a terrific post up on the "harm" of being forced to convert to Islam. A must read for sure! Go read and come back here and comment on what you think.

Russell Shaw - Is This Guy For Real?

WILL THE REAL RUSSELL SHAW PLEASE STAND UP?

Confused? Can't figure out if Russell Shaw is as his photograph on the Puffington Host, or a Pig, or a Death's Head? Well, after his latest, join the club, many others can't figure it out either. Because you see, Russell Shaw is a liar, a conman or perhaps evil in disguse as a member of the "reality based community" (or what ever the far left calls themselves these days). You decide:

That realization has led my brain to launch a political calculus 180 degrees removed from my pacifist-inclined leanings. An entirely hypothetical yet realpolitik calculus that is ugly, and cold-hearted but must be posited:

This is a type of calculus that Pentagon war games planners and political consultants do all the time- a combination of what-if actions and consequences that are unpleasant to consider but are in the realm of plausibility.

What if another terror attack just before this fall's elections could save many thousand-times the lives lost?

I start from the premise that there is already a substantial portion of the electorate that tends to vote GOP because they feel that Bush has "kept us safe," and that the Republicans do a better job combating terrorism.

If an attack occurred just before the elections, I have to think that at least a few of the voters who persist in this "Bush has kept us safe" thinking would realize the fallacy they have been under.

If 5% of the "he's kept us safe" revise their thinking enough to vote Democrat, well, then, the Dems could recapture the House and the Senate and be in a position to:

Block the next Supreme Court appointment, one which would surely result in the overturning of Roe and the death of hundreds if not thousands of women from abortion-prohibiting states at the hands of back-alley abortionists;

This guy, despite his claims to the contrary, wonders if another terrorist attack wouldn't sicken enough Americans so that they would vote democratic and thus bring about all kinds of "goodies" that the Democrats want.

I can't figure it out, is he for real, a pig or a death's head? What say YOU?

Palestine, Refugees and Honesty

In a series of threads on this Blog and on Marc Cooper's blog I've engaged an ideological opponent who writes under the name of Ahmed. Ahmed resents the support that I have given Israel in the war against Hezbollah and has accused me of a variety of things, not the least of which is xenophobia (a morbid or irrational fear of strangers) and of being less than honest:

Woodruff i was asking Gm Roper about a specific but very important claim he made which ive argued is not only totally false but also quite revealing in its dishonesty and historical ignorance

The issue being discussed was the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians at the re-establishment of the State of Israel and the Arab treatment of Jews at the same time. I maintained at the time that while some 600,000 + Palestinians left Israel some 1,000,000 plus Jews were expelled from Arab lands.

Ahmed took umbrage at my characterization of the differences and claimed that I was being dishonest and historically ignorant. Woody, my blogging partner rose to my defense with the following:

When G.M. gets back in circulation, he can take this up further with you. But, rest assured, he discusses issues honestly and intelligently. If you dispute his facts, then clear those up. If you dispute his honesty, then that "fact" of yours is wrong. [emphasis added]

Ahmed, will, I'm sure, be understanding if I disagree with his assessment. But he has a point of sorts, there is a lot of misunderstanding about what happened at the founding of Israel, what happened to both Jewish and Arab refugees and what the history says, especially since I'm being accused of being historically ignorant. Well, Ahmed, here are a few facts. You will, no doubt, dispute the source of these, but there are numerous citations to back up the quotes as you will see, some Israeli sources, some Arab sources and some United Nations sources, but all with substantial agreement that a substantial number of Arabs left the burgeoning state of Israel for a couple of reasons, but were not forced out at the point of a gun or by the evil Israeli IDF thugs in jackboots. So, lets begin the recitation shall we.

Continue reading "Palestine, Refugees and Honesty"

Those Amazing, Troubled, Terrific, Wonderful Kids

I work with kids, lots and lots of kids, some are a real pain, some are classical troubled kids, all are terrific in different ways. One group of kids I have worked with have been placed in a Juvenile Boot Camp for a variety of infractions, all serious but none serious enough to warrant being sent to The Texas Youth Commission. There, in addition to the counseling provided by my organization for substance abuse, these kids work with Drill Instructors, School Teachers, Counselors and Juvenile Probation Officers as well as with a number of volunteers.

Don't get me wrong, these kids have put themselves in hack, and they will have to work themselves out of it. Having said that, they are all still terrific kids with a bright future if they work at it. Most of them come from poverty, some of them from broken homes, many of them were abused in one way or another but all of them deserve a second chance.

Working with a group of volunteers these terrific kids have done a number of memorials to those slain on September 11, 2001. In 2004 they held a memorial service complete with a flag ceremony, taps, color guard and the whole 9 yards. This year, they painted the somewhat fanciful but hauntingly real mural pictured above. They have talent, often wasted, but real talent indeed.

So, I'm going to ask you, my beloved readers, a favor. These terrific kids, the same ones who can be a real pain, can also be future solid citizens. Please post a comment addressed to "Dear Kids," and give them a word of encouragement. If they can see that they have the support they need to make some real changes in their lives, you will be proud to have them as neighbors and friends. So, come on and make a comment, offer a word of encouragement and watch some kids turn it around. Thanks!

In about a week or ten days, I'll be printing up the comments and taking them out to the Camp for the kids to post on their memorial wall and copies for them to keep.

Offensive? Oh, You Just Have No Idea How Offensive I'm Going To Be!

The cute little girl to the left is Hanna Edwards and she is wanting to travel with her family to the southern part of France. Hanna is from England where learning to not be offensive has been taken to a new level. So, what is offensive about the photograph of Hanna? Why, her skin is showing on her shoulders, that is highly offensive to ...wait for it... ...wait... "muslims." Now, how anyone can find the bare shoulders of a 5 year old offensive is beyond me, but some dufus in the Passport Office of Ye Merry Olde England told Hanna's Mom... well, I'll let the Telegraph tell you:

Hannah Edwards's mother, Jane, was told that the exposed skin might be considered offensive in a Muslim country.

Might be offensive? Might be??? Who gives a rats behind if some muslim is offended by a child's bare shoulders. What is offensive is the Marine Barracks in Lebanon in 1983. What is offensive is the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia. What is offensive is what happened to the USS Cole. What is offensive is the first attack on the Twin Towers. What is offensive is September 11, 2001 when three thousand completely innocent civilians were murdered in one fell swoop and muslim fanatics danced in the street in Palestine Uulating for joy. What is completely and totally offensive is a bunch of islamo-fascists rioting over some damn cartoons. What is completely offensive is asking Israel to respond "proportionately" while not saying one damn word about rockets loaded with ball bearings to inflict damage to civilians being launched into civilian areas by Hezbollah. What is offensive is having little old grandma's from Peoria and Congressional Medal Of Honor Recipients from Arizona seperated for "special" screening on a random basis while people who actually fit the profile of "terrorist" are given a pass lest we be accused of "racial profiling."

What is offensive is a couple of Islamofacists being willing to "blow up" themselves and their infant child by carrying "liquid explosives" in the baby's bottle. What is Offensive is organizations like CAIR being more concerned with the "image" of Islam from the media than they are concerned with the "image" of Islam from a bunch of terrorists who kill civilians and cut the heads off of others to make a political point. A political point for Pete's sake."

What is offensive is listening to the garbage of the Islamofascists day in and day out, and worrying about "offending" them. Well, I have only one one thing to say to people who would be offended by a little girl's shoulders. (warning, not work/child friendly!

Continue reading "Offensive? Oh, You Just Have No Idea How Offensive I'm Going To Be!"

War on Terror: No. 1 Election Issue?

I wonder, with today's terror events, which Democratic nominee from Tuesday, Lieberman or Lamont, the voters of Connecticut would trust more to protect their interests in the war against terror.

If the election were held next week rather than last Tuesday, maybe some people would have waken up to the terror threat and switched their vote. At least Lieberman will give them another chance with his independent run.

Instead of having thousands of deaths this week, intelligence stopped the planned attacks and have kept us from another 9-11 at home. Give appropriate credit for that and worry if we change direction. I highly suspect that Lamont would cater to the radical left who supported him, which would weaken our intelligence and cripple our fight against terrorist thugs.

When November arrives, maybe a lot of people will look around and decide that the war on terror takes priority over other issues and that the Republicans, with all their faults, offer the best choice for protecting our nation--as they did in the cold war.

The Utter Insanity Of The Islamo-Fascists

Yep, utter insanity. The forces of Iran, Syria and Hezbollah have stated that they will attack and destroy Israel and the United States. Gents, before you engage in that desire for wanton killing and bloodshed, please be aware of the consequences of that action: This is the USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76):

And, if that isn't enough, please be aware of her sister ships located behind the Ronald Reagan; the USS Kitty Hawk (CV 63) (middle), USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) and their associated carrier strike groups. A one, two, three punch you REALLY don't want to mess with. that is, unless you are "utterly insane."

The choice is yours, and yours alone ... put away your foolish and unsupportable ideology, invest in your own peoples and live long and prosper, or die. You choose!

Media's "Reliable" Source in Lebanon

Did you know that Hizbollah had a media relations department? It stands to reason that this is real, as shared by LGF. This must be the source of the national media's slant on the conflict in Lebanon and where the MSM picked up on the phrase "Israel's Disproportionate Response." Why didn't they give proper credit, though?

Nice logo on the card. Give Mr. Afif a call and ask him if he's talked with anyone from the NY Times in the last hour.

Mark Steyn

Mark Steyn: "British Muslims fear repercussions over tomorrow's train bombing."

Mark Steyn on Sudan:

Two years ago, you may recall, Sudan was elected to the UN Human Rights Commission at a time when the government’s proxies were busy slaughtering and gang-raping their way round Darfur. The last thing one needs when one’s got a hectic schedule of mass murder on one’s plate is a lot of tedious paper-shuffling committee meetings in New York, but Sudan’s ambassador, Elfatih Mohammed Ahmed Erwa, gamely rose to the occasion by announcing, upon joining the Commission, that he was very concerned about human rights abuses at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib."

Do you suppose the concepts are related? Nah, that would presuppose something else Steyn said:

In the scheme of things, launching a plot to behead the Prime Minister of Canada would not seem to be an obvious priority. No doubt they would have preferred to behead the President of the United States. But no problem. We are all infidels.

The multicultural society posits that each of its citizens can hold a complementary portfolio of identities: one can simultaneously be Canadian and Jamaican and gay and Anglican and all these identities can exist within your corporeal form in perfect harmony. But, for most Western Muslims, Islam is their primary identity, and for a significant number thereof, it's a primary identity that exists in opposition to all others. That's merely stating the obvious. But, of course, to state the obvious is unacceptable these days, so our leaders prefer to state the absurd. I believe the old definition of a nanosecond was the gap between a New York traffic light changing to green and the first honk of a driver behind you. Today, the definition of a nanosecond is the gap between a Western terrorist incident and the press release of a Muslim lobby group warning of an impending outbreak of Islamophobia."

The Perfidy Of A Frog

From Ha'retz comes this:
Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, whose country is a main backer of Hezbollah, met his French counterpart in Beirut on Monday for talks on resolving the crisis in Lebanon.

and this quote:

Iran is a significant, respected player in the Middle East which is playing a stabilizing role, French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said Monday, during a visit to Lebanon.

"It was clear that we could never accept a destabilization of Lebanon, which could lead to a destabilization of the region," Douste-Blazy said in Beirut.

"In the region there is of course a country such as Iran--a great country, a great people and a great civilization which is respected and which plays a stabilizing role in the region," he told a news conference." [emphasis added]

Kermit says "It isn't easy being green," and I would add that it isn't any easier being stupid, but French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy seems to have mastered it.

A tip 'O The GM Derby to James Taranto

Pallywood Exposed

There is a tendency, including in myself, to see video on TV news as something taken on the fly and a fairly accurate portrayal of what occurred. Please, take the next few minutes to watch this film. You will never see "war" in the middle east again in the same way.

For the left, this should (but probably won't) help them see that what they see is not what they see. See?

A tip 'O The GM Derby to MsUnderestimated

UPDATE: More on the use of human tragedy as propaganda here. I'm never, ever going to look at war photographs in the same way again. You need to read this update, all of it and then come to a conclusion about the morality about Israel's actions. Hezb'ollah: "We tell the whole story TALE!!! Those of you castigating Israel, you're being manipulated. Don't you get it? These animals don't give a damn about the civilians, about the UN peacekeepers, about the Lebanese and for sure don't give a damn about the Israeli civilians.

UPDATE II: Supplied by Oyster at Soy Como Soy, is this lengthy, but well worth viewing video.

Moral Equivalence, Disproportionality and Stupidity

Tis now the very witching time of night, When churchyards yawn and hell itself breathes out Contagion to this world."

...William Shakespeare: Hamlet; Act III, scene ii

What better to describe the sheer arrogence of those decrying the defense of Israel when attacked by Hezb'ollah? Victor Davis Hansen, writing in National Review Online puts forth a lexicon to describe the reaction of the world, the left and those who do not believe in Israel's right to exist. A sample:

“Collateral damage� refers mostly to casualties among Hezbollah’s human shields; it can never be used to describe civilian deaths inside Israel, because everything there is by intent a target.
[...]
“Disproportionate� means that the Hezbollah aggressors whose primitive rockets can’t kill very many Israeli civilians are losing, while the Israelis’ sophisticated response is deadly against the combatants themselves. See “excessive.�

Anytime you hear the adjective “excessive,� Hezbollah is losing. Anytime you don’t, it isn’t.
[...]
“Eyewitnesses� usually aren’t, and their testimony is cited only against Israel.

Of course, anything VDH writes is worth reading, but this "lexicon" is worth reading in its entirety and I urge you to follow the link and do so.

This brings up, of course, a larger question. What do we do about the mini-war going on right now in Southern Lebanon? Negotiate? With terrorists or their supporters in the UN or Iran or Syria? Why for pete's sake? The terrorist organization known as the "Party of God" or Hezb'ollah has no intention of keeping an agreement, Iran most certainly set up this little war to keep the G8 focus off of their nuclear weapons program (and if you don't really believe that they have one, then you are no where near as bright as you think you are and your ability to read and understand facts is less than your ability to read chicken entrals) and to get the Arab/Muslim world to rise up against Israel:

DOHA, Qatar (CNN) -- With a poster of the burning World Trade Center behind him, Osama bin Laden's top lieutenant appeared on tape Thursday calling on Muslims to join the fight against Israel and "rise up seeking martyrdom and attack the crusaders and Zionists."

Crusaders and Zionists indeed. Notably, this yo-yo made his tape standing in from of a poster of the burning WTC. And they wonder why we take up arms against them and in defense of liberty.

In today's Wall Street Journal's Opinion Journal Leslie Gelb calls for "negotiations" with Syria, Iran, and if necessary Hezb'ollah and Hamas. Wow, could he be any more dense? Folks, this is not about Israeli aggression, this is about an ideology called islamofascism that is out to destroy everything you believe in, to kill you and yours or to convert you to Islam in "dhimmitude." Well, I don't know about you, but I'll submit when hell freezes over, when Bin Laden converts to Christianity or when the Democrats quit their quest for power and begin governing.

Cross Posted in The Real Ugly American

A tip 'O The GM Derby to Dr. Sanity

Tracked at Stop The ACLU!

With Apologies to Edwin Starr

Edwin Starr - War (Updated)
U.N.! - huh - yeah -
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing
Say it again y’all

Well, if people oppose war and want peace, then why do so many put their faith in an organization that fails so miserably at achieving peace? Why has the United Nations had bases in Lebanon for 28 years for the purpose of achieving peace in that region without anyone noticing that something was not working?

The Great U.N. Delusion
Find another false idol to worship, multilateral fetishists -- the U.N. is a failure
By Jonah Goldberg, July 21, 2006

...it would be one thing if the U.N. actually, you know, worked. But the problem is that the history of the U.N. is a history of unrelenting failure. Oh, not in immunizing kids and feeding starving people. The U.N. gets a passing grade there, though certainly not an A.

No, the failure comes in precisely the arena that supposedly justifies the U.N.'s existence: global peace and security. And that's where the delusion comes in. The folks at United Nations Plaza have proved themselves to be either well-intentioned incompetents or cagey, crapulent kleptocrats.

The left is so quick to blame the U.S. for not achieving peace while they ignore the long-standing failures of their global god.

United? We Can Only Hope So!

Angel, writing in "Woman, Honor Thyself" has a post up asking if we can put "United" back in "United States Of America." It is a must read!

Cross posted at The Real Ugly American

Letter From A Marine

In my local paper today, there was a letter from a Marine who had served in Iraq. He was responding to someone who had written to the Editor condemning the Marines who are being investigated in the incident in Hidatha. His letter was something that reached my heart and even without his permission, I would like to reproduce it here for you, my beloved readers, it is that touching and that important:

To The Editor:
In response to Lee B.'s letter on Haditha:

I guess you were there at Haditha to witness these acts of desperation. I am a Marine combat veteran who served at Haditha in Iraq's Al Anbar province.

Maybe I missed you there when my fellow Marines would get ambushed on a daily basis in Haditha, or when my patrol was shelled by mortars and two juveniles were spotting for the insurgent mortar team.

I guess you were there when two Marines from my company were killed when their patrol was ambushed in the city, hit by an IED (improvised explosive device) under the watchful eyes of Iraqi civilians in the area who did nothing to warn them it was there. An IED is usually an artillery round, sometimes several artillery rounds tied together and set off by a remote control device. It is intended to cause massive trauma and death. The insurgents use this indiscriminately and they don't care if civilians are near our patrols.

Were you there when we found 10 Iraqi civilians beheaded, left on the side of the road by insurgents? Or when our sniper team caught two individuals planting two IEDs along our patrol route. One of them was a police officer, the other was a teenager. They were eliminated under our ROEs (rules of engagement), which define what they were doing as a hostile act and hostile intent.

I'm sure you remember going house to hourse, clearing each building in Haditha, or getting shelled every day while you set up and guarded a voting site for the citizens of Haditha. We were willing to provide escort for them because of the insurgency in Haditha, but I read there were no insurgents there, just women and children.

Haditha is a very active insurgent region. I can's answer for my fellow marines with Kilo 3/1 because I was not there with them. But I have experienced their struggle and fought in the same area. You say the firs casualty of war is truth. Well then, with all due respect, go to Iraq and see the truth for yourself. It will open your eyes. Semper fi.

Rene A.
Alamo, Texas.

I've never met Mr. A, though he lives in a town just a few miles from me. I've never been to Iraq. But I can tell you this, Mr. A.'s letter smacks of truth, hardship and a firm knowledge of the combat conditions in Iraq and I honor him for his service. Mr. A. some day, I hope you will let me buy you a beer.

Did'ja Notice?

Has anyone besides me noticed that the left accepts the scientist's "consensus" on "Global Warming" cause "scientists" know better, but doesn't accept the Arab worlds "consensus" that Hezb'ollah is the aggressor here and needs to be stopped in spite of the fact that as muslims they probably know better also?

What is it with consensus? Is it the ruling meme or not? The world wants to know!!

“Cry ‘HAVOC’ and let slip the dogs of war!�

No Pasaran has an interesting commentary:

Western tofs given to marching in the streets and staging absurd, Self Indulgent antics for the death of their ideological alignments and opponents last month are in no position to demand (an odd sort of) peace this month out of the other side of their mouths.

He is right of course, the left has a lengthy history of asking for peace, but what is peace? Is it just the absence of war? Or is it something else. Is it justice where an ideaological strain doesn't seek to dominate the world according to some 7th century madman? Is it where any faith can take another faith on its own merit and let it be? Is it where one nation can freely trade with another with out fear of being overwhelmed? Is it where children and women have rights, where gay's aren't stoned or thrown from buildings, where reporters aren't beheaded just becuse they are Jews?

It is all this and more. But to insure peace, we must also ask whom are we dealing. With terrorists? With rogue states? Can anyone name a rogue state that has kept its promises? Nazi Germany? The Soviet Union? North Vietnam? North Korea? Iran? Saddam's Iraq? No, none of these. How about Hezb'ollah? Hamas? The PLA? No, none of these either. So, in the current strife I'm curious as to why the left, the EU, etc are asking for "restraint" on the part of Israel because of the death of civilians? Did those same entities ask for restraint on the part of Hezb'ollah or Hamas or the PLA? No? Why am I not surprised.

War is a very nasty business as numerous countries in the last 100 years or so have discovered when they tried to subjigate other peoples, and yes, that includes the invasion of Iraq. A very nasty business and people and children and women die and property is destroyed. John Stewart Mill noted:

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

Perhaps Patrick Henry, in a single speech said it best:

For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
[...]
"I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry Hezb'ollah for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves..." (wording changed for effect)
[...]
"They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard terrorist shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power." (wording changed for effect)
[...]
"It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"

If this makes me a cheerleader for the Israelis or a "fighting 101^st keyboardist, so be it.

Drawing Says It All!

Found this at Dr. Sanity's place. She has an amazing ability to cut to the root of the problem.

As Dr. Sanity Says:

If you are unable to distinguish a moral difference between the two images below, then you have something obscuring your vision. Ideology perhaps?

Doc, I couldn't agree with you more.

Can This Be Confirmed?

From YNET News comes this tidbit:

The IDF has found that Hizbullah is preventing civilians from leaving villages in southern Lebanon. Roadblocks have been set up outside some of the villages to prevent residents from leaving, while in other villages Hizbullah is preventing UN representatives from entering, who are trying to help residents leave. In two villages, exchanges of fire between residents and Hizbullah have broken out. (Hanan Greenberg)

Does anyone know if this can be confirmed? If so, Hizb'Allah is even worse than even I thought, and that is saying something. What would the arabic be for the name "Party of the Devil?"

A tip 'O The GM Derby to ¡No Pasárn!

Refreshingly Undiplomatic

"What they need to do it to get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this sh*t."
...................George W. Bush, not realizing that a mic was picking up his words to Tony Blair, Prime Minister of England.

A tip 'O The GM Derby to Katheryn Jean Lopez of NRO's "The Corner"

Is Stupidity Necessary In "The Academy?"

This week, I've not spent much time scouring the blogosphere as I got ready for my first internet radio show (which didn't go very well given some technical glitches (see the post below). So, today when I resumed looking for some interesting items to share with you, my beloved readers of the left and the right, I visited an old friend's blog Reasonable Prudence by Todd Pearson and noted his "pique" at the University of Wisconson-Madison.

It seems that academic freedom includes teaching B.S. (and no, that doesn't stand for Bachelor of Science). A professor there (actually, he is a part time lecturer), if one can reasonably call him one who professes, is teaching a course in which he holds forth that the collapse of the Twin Towers on 9/11 was "9-11 was probably an American operation to launch a war on Islam countries." This is a part of the course that Kevin Barrett will be teaching entitled "Islam: Religion and Culture." Of course, he also must believe then that flight 93 didn't occur or that the Pentagon was not hit by a plane as opposed to some of the loonier claims by paranoid conspiracy folk on the left (and maybe a few on the right as well, though I've not seen those.)

Vinnie, blogging at Jawa Report (another mu.nu blog) has a video up that is very impressive and lays that conspiracy b.s. to rest in "Myth Busted." I've copied it from YouTube for your education, elucidation and your edification and because it's my blog. Thanks Vinnie, thanks Todd!

When Free Speech Isn't

I'm wondering when folk on the left will learn that the First Amendment does not mean that free speech and a free press does not have consequences. I have every right to stand up to someone and call them any name I want. I also have the responsibility to accept the consequences for those actions and if the consequence is a punch in the nose, I don't have the right to claim that my freedom of speech is being restricted.

The Dixie Chicks should have figured this out by now. I'm not sure that they have.

The New York Times is claiming that it has a right to publish the SWIFT program even though they had been asked not to because of National Security questions. Yet, the NYTimes felt that it's right to publish (First Amendment Rights) trumped the governments need for secrecy. Too bad, now there will be consequences and those consequences will be the sole responsibility of the NYTimes.

Those Consequences may include charges being filed against the leaker (here's hoping there are), charges filed against the reporter and publisher (again, here's hoping) and significant possibility that al Qaeda and their fellow islamo-fascists have adjusted their money laundering schemes and that good people in Iraq, including our military, in Afghanistan and around the world may die. Hey NYTimes, don't like that. Tough, that is the consequence of your actions perhaps and it rests solely with you for exercising your rights to free speech.

Of course, I'm not the only one thinking so; check out these editorial cartoons:

Continue reading "When Free Speech Isn't"

CAIR Holds Forth: Nobody Listens!

From CNS News:

A former Muslim chaplain at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp who was accused of espionage and aiding the enemy before being cleared in 2004, said the prison remains a "potent symbol" for questioning the U.S. commitment to human rights and should be closed.

"If we close Guantanamo it would be a great first step," James Yee said at a Capitol Hill news conference Tuesday sponsored by the Council for American Islamic Relations."

Gee, you think Yee might have an ulterior motive such as a CAIR push? Nah, CAIR wouldn't do that would they? I mean, after all, their title comes from AMERICAN-ISLAMIC Relations... Equally American, right?

Full Disclosure: I think CAIR is far more concerned with Islamic superiority than ever it was about relationships with America or Americans. But, that is just my opinion. What is yours?

A tip 'O The GM Derby to Espella Humanzee

UPDATE: For a more thourough Fisking of these idjits (CAIR that is) go here Jihad Watch has done a search on the condemnation of killing Israeli civilians by CAIR... The results will not surprise you in the least!

The Lack of Palpable Outrage Defines The MSM

BEGIN RANT!

I've not posted on this topic, the brutal murders of Pvts. Menchaca of Texas and Tucker of Oregon. Mostly because I've been outraged, yes, outraged. Not at the islamofascists, I have come to expect this kind of inhuman, ungodly behavior from these dogs. But, I expected more from the MSM. Really, I really did, and I'm outraged that I'm not getting it.

In fact, doing just a cursory search of recent "headlines" by Reuters (spokesmen for Al Qaeda) and other papers reveils plenty of "outrage" but none for the wanton slaughter, yes, slaughter of two soldiers. The outrage over Gitmo was palpable, the outrage over Abu Ghraib was palpable, the outrage over the "massacre" at Haditha was palpable; in fact, the MSM is frequently outraged over the actions of our government and our troops even though in each case the military justice system was already in place and functioning before the press was aware of the situation. Indeed, the Haditha incident may not be anything else except Marines functioning under the current rules of engagement according to some of those participating in that action.

Reuters headline for June 20th?

Iraq Qaeda leader killed two US soldiers

" And for the 24th?

US raid in Iraq sparks outrage

Only the second headline was about "Outrage" over the arrest of a suspected terrorist leader:

U.S. forces hunting al Qaeda insurgents raided the home of a senior Sunni Arab religious leader in Iraq on Saturday, seizing him and four suspected terrorists, the U.S. military said.

The arrest of Sheikh Jamal Abdel Karim al-Dabaan sparked outrage among Iraq's Sunnis. The Iraqi Islamic Party, whose leader is one of the country's vice-presidents, condemned it and many government officials in predominantly Sunni Salahaddin province suspended work in protest, the deputy governor said.

The U.S. military said it had been acting on intelligence gathered following the killing of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, in a U.S. air strike on June 7."

Well, excuuuuusssseeeee me! The Islamists are free to express outrage over the arrest of a person who very well may have had lots to do with the wanton murder of hundreds of Iraqis but those dogs cannot express any outrage over the ongoing butchering and wanton murder of US Soldiers and Iraqi non-combatants?

I have ceased to expect that the MSM will ever get it through their thick skulls that we are at war, that the islamofascists are figuratively sub-human animals that slaughter in what they believe to be God's name. That the islamofascists would just as soon behead folk from the LA Times, the NY Times, Reuters etc as a soldier. Does the name Daniel Pearl ring a bell? His beheading is still available on the internet and no, I won't provide a link for this travesty of propaganda.

Perhaps Robert Fisk would care to be "re-interviewed" by the Al Qaeda folk? After all according to this:

"They started by shaking hands. We said "Salaam aleikum" – peace be upon you – then the first pebbles flew past my face. A small boy tried to grab my bag. Then another. Then someone punched me in the back. Then young men broke my glasses, began smashing stones into my face and head. I couldn't see for the blood pouring down my forehead and swamping my eyes. And even then, I understood. I couldn't blame them for what they were doing. In fact, if I were the Afghan refugees of Kila Abdullah, close to the Afghan-Pakistan border, I would have done just the same to Robert Fisk. Or any other Westerner I could find." he understands

To be honest however, I don't. I don't understand at all how any western newsman, any civilized newsman who expresses so much "outrage" at Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, Falluja or Haditha isn't equally outraged at the senseless slaughter perpetrated by the islamofascists and report on it in the same tone. Shame, shame on you all!

End Rant!

Ain't That The Truth!

When a party's leadership is unable to unite behind a clear position on the No. 1 national security issue facing America, it is not ready to govern. And that is the situation in which the Democrats now find themselves. Last week Democratic leaders produced an election year agenda that said nothing about fighting the war on terror. House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi blurted out the reason: 'We don't even have a party position on the war,' she told reporters" -- Washington Times political columnist Donald Lambro.

A tip 'O The GM Derby to Opinionjournal's Political Diary

Subway Attack Foiled... By Al Qaeda

According to the latest issue of Time online a terrorist plot (in 2003) was foiled 45 days short of execution time by a direct order of OBL's number two man:

Al-Qaeda terrorists came within 45 days of attacking the New York subway system with a lethal gas similar to that used in Nazi death camps. They were stopped not by any intelligence breakthrough, but by an order from Osama bin Laden's deputy, Ayman Zawahiri. And the U.S. learned of the plot from a CIA mole inside al-Qaeda. These are some of the more startling revelations by Pulitzer Prize-winning author Ron Suskind, whose new book The One Percent Doctrine is excerpted in the forthcoming issue of TIME. It will appear on Time.com early Sunday morning.

Read the whole thing.

Hydrogen Cyanide is a fatal gas. The discovery of plans for a device to distribute the gas was discovered on a computer in Saudi Arabia that belonged to a "Bahraini jihadist captured in Saudi Arabia early in 2003." The Times also makes mention of a CIA Mole in al Qaeda (thanks Times for revealing so damned much information) codenamed Ali (hmm, if it's a CIA undercover operative, isn't the Times guilty of Outing?).

I'm getting really sick of all the leftoids in this world who continue to believe that there is no war on islamofascism/terrorism. Had this attack been launched, would the lefties be demanding retribution, or would they wonder "...why they hate us so?" I suspect the latter. Damn them, damn them all.

A tip 'O The GM Derby to Jihad Watch

New York Times Weighs in on Haditha

and surprise surprise they can't resist portraying the story in the most negative light possible. The article headline reads Contradictions Cloud Inquiry Into 24 Iraqi Deaths. Six journalists contributed to the report John M. Broder, David S. Could, John Kifner, Carolyn Marshall, Eric Schmitt, and Thom Shanker. Mr. Broder write the article.

The piece lays out what it calls several contradictions. I will point out several facts they have left out, and several facts they have misrepresented.

Lets start with paragrpah 3:

Investigators and townspeople have said that marines overreacted to a fatal roadside bombing and shot the civilians, only one of whom was armed, in cold blood.

Which investigators? Marine investigators or the Iraqi human rights group who's founder is connected to the insurgency?

Paragraph 6:

The 24 Iraqis killed included 5 men in a taxi and 19 other civilians in several houses, where, marines have contended, their use of grenades and blind fire was permitted under their combat guidelines when they believed their lives were threatened.

and the beginning of paragraph 7:

However, investigators have found evidence that the men in the taxi were not fleeing the bombing scene

The Marines contend there were no markings on what the NYT and several other news organizations are reporting to be a taxi. It was just a car with a bunch of guys standing around it who then tried to run away from the scene after a road side bome exploded. Here is an excerpt from a June 11th Washington Post article where Staff Sargeant Frank D. Wutterich who led a squad of Marines that day was qouted:

Puckett said that while Wuterich was evaluating the scene, Marines noticed a white, unmarked car full of "military-aged men" lingering near the bomb site. When Marines ordered the men to stop, they ran; Puckett said it was standard procedure at the time for the Marines to shoot suspicious people fleeing a bombing, and the Marines opened fire, killing four or five men.

In Paragraph 13 the NYT article gets around to acknowledging that the car was unmarked but only in passing and for someone paying attention admits they and other news organizations have been incorrectly describing the vehicle in question:

Wuterich, the leader of the squad, told his lawyer, Neal A. Puckett, that he had quickly set up a defensive perimeter around the convoy and called in the casualty report. He said he had seen a white car, now usually referred to as a taxi, containing a driver and four young men. The marines suspected that those men were spotters for the bomb.

Do you call un marked white cars taxis? I don't. Why are the NYT, TIME, and other media organizations calling it a taxi?

and then there is this from the Washington Post article from Iraqis who claimed to witness the events:

Iraqis in the Haditha neighborhood interviewed in recent weeks said the vehicle was a taxi carrying a group of students to their homes and that the driver tried to back away from the site, fleeing in fear.

So the un named investigators have concluded that both the Marines and the Iraqis were lying and that these men were not attempting to flee the scene?

Let's move on to the rest of Paragraph 7 of the NYT article:

However, investigators have found evidence that the men in the taxi were not fleeing the bombing scene, as the marines have told military officials. Investigators have also concluded that most of the victims in three houses died from well-aimed rifle shots, not shrapnel or random fire, according to military officials familiar with the initial findings.

How did they make this determination? the bodies were buried long before any investigation started. The families of the dead have refused to allow the bodies to be exhumed. How can they determine the cause of death, let alone if they claim the victims were killed by rifle fire what type of rifle was used. Couldn't insurgents have killed them with AK-47s as some have speculated?

Or even fired "well aimed" shots to the head after the victims were already killed by Fragmentation grenades to stage a masacre?

The NYT admits as much in the next paragraph:

The bodies have not yet been exhumed for autopsies, and defense lawyers can be expected to challenge the narrow use of photographic evidence on these points.

Next Paragraph:

The houses where the killings took place show no evidence of the violent room-clearing assault described by the marines and their lawyers, the officials said.

Again the investigation did not begin until months after the incident. Either this conclusion was based on photographs or by inspecting these houses several months after the fact. Why would anyone leave the houses un repaired for that long?

On the second page of the article the NYT reports the conflicting Iraqi accounts:

Some described the men as students on their way to a technical college in Baghdad, and said they had been shot while still sitting in the car. Others said they had been pulled from the car, ordered to lie on the ground and then executed.

Obviously some of these Iraqi eyewitnesses if not all are lying. Now its just a matter of degree.

The article then goes on to give some uncontested background about Haditha being a hot bed of insurgent activity, and hostile to US forces.

The next serious error comes in paragraph 36:

The wounds of the dead Iraqis, as seen in photographs and viewed by the morgue director, were not consistent with attacks by fragmentation grenades and indiscriminate rifle fire, Colonel Watt found. The civilian survivors said the victims were shot at close range, some while trying to protect their children or praying for their lives. The death certificates Colonel Watt examined were chillingly succinct: well-aimed shots to the head and chest.

Photographic evidence is inconclusive and the Iraqi morgue director cited has been connected to the insurgency.

In Paragraph 37 near the end of the article the NYT admits what I concluded from the start:

if the marines had violently cleared the houses using automatic weapons and fragmentation grenades, there would be lots of damage and bullet marks in the walls.Early investigators said they found no such evidence, although the walls may have been patched before they arrived.

Well What do you know.

Near the end of the article the Times offers this summary:

About a dozen enlisted marines, including Sergeant Wuterich and Sergeant Wolf, who engaged in or witnessed the shootings are under investigation for possible charges ranging from dereliction of duty to murder. A number of their superiors, up to the division level, are also under scrutiny for failing to report the events accurately and respond appropriately.

Two mid-level officers, including Captain McConnell, have already been relieved, for reasons not yet made public.

No mention of the possibility of the entire event being staged. The story never mentions that no Iraqi came forward until months after the shooting. No mention that an incriminating video that has been offered as evidence was taken at least a day if not several days after the events occured, or that the man supplying the video was connected to the insurgency. No mention that an un named Reuters cameraman was cited in a report they filed the day after the attack saying:

A cameraman working for Reuters in Haditha says bodies had been left lying in the street for hours after the attack.

He says the town has been virtually shut down for the past two days as US and Iraqi forces try to impose order.

No mention that as of today Reuters has failed to name the mystery cameraman or make him availble for interviews to determine what he eyewitnessed that day. I have spoken to both the Iraq Bureau Chief and Media Relations people with Reuters about this. They have told me they will ask if he is willing to come forward but as a policy they do not publicize the names of employees who are not sourced in the original story for safety reasons.

I have Iraqi journalist friends in Baghdad. I understand the danger any Iraqi who cooperates with western media or reports negatively about the insurgency faces, but several Marines careers and lives are on the line here. This reporter needs to come forward and speak to US investigators if not to the press.

Related posts:

Haditha a Hoax?

Headlines 6.10.06

More on Haditha

Marines Tell Their Side of the Story

What Does Reuters Know About Haditha?

Candian Terror

John Vinocur writes in Time Select (Subscription required):

Here's the skirmish line: establishment forces against renegades drawing the conclusion that when it comes to Muslim extremism and homegrown groups of Muslims engaged in anti-Western violence, Canada's self-definition as Not The United States (or France or the Netherlands — hey, the Canadians would never force assimilation on an immigrant!) is a conceit that shields this country neither from hatred or reality.

The establishment's all-is-well reflexes can be extraordinary. After arresting 17 alleged Islamic extremists, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police insisted they "represented a broad strata of our community. It's hard to find a common denominator." Toronto's police chief, Bill Blair, even said, "I would remind you that there was not one single reference made by law enforcement to Muslims."

What does it take for some folk to understand that this is a war between civilization and the forces of darkness and islamofascism?

A tip 'O the GM Derby to No Pasaran

A Haditha Coverup? Not what you would expect.

QandO tipped me off to a possible hoax in Haditha. I have no idea what happened in Haditha, nor do any "bloggers" who weren't there. The Marines that were there know, the investigators possibly know, but much of the media and bloggers, especially those that are bent on fostering a new "My Lai" for Iraq are blowing smoke.

A good example is the "coverup" of the initial reporting. Sweetness and Light has a GREAT post on some of the bs from our MSM. Go read it all. A teaser:

In fact, Time had originally reported that it was Human Rights Watch who had provided the tape. They then retracted that and claimed that it came from Hammurabi which works with Human Rights Watch. And now they have backed off even that.

Note that even now Time still does not correct the intentionally false portrayal of the source of the videotape that they gave in all of their original stories and interviews."

American Thinker has also done a good job of questioning if there is a MSM "coverup." A teaser:

Evidence accumulates of a hoax in Haditha. The weblog Sweetness & Light has done an estimable service gathering together the articles which cast substantial doubt on the charge of a massacre of civilians at Haditha . Because the blog is too busy gathering and fisking the news, I offered and the publisher accepted my offer to put what he has uncovered in a narrative form.

Having done so, I can tell you that the story has a whiff of yet another mediagenic scandal like the TANG memos or the Plame “outing.� While the Marines quite correctly will not comment on the case pending the outcome of their investigation, I am not bound by those rules, and I will sum up the story for you.

Go read it too, then come back and tell me what you think.

A tip 'O the GM Derby to QandO

Dumb, dumber, dumbest

Oyster, my very good friend and frequent commenter here runs the EXCELLENT blog Soy Como Soy! In a HUGE public service, she waded through blogs and blogs and crap and crap and ... well, you get the idea ... to find one of the stupidest if not the stupidist comments on the death of al Zarqawi. She found a really masterful example. A teaser, but go read the whole thing:

Edited on Thu Jun-08-06 07:52 AM by wizdum
...anyway and this convenient web site is most likely run by the CIA. Now they'll have to invent a new "terrarist" to chase all over Iraq, while continuing to look for weapons of mass destruction. I wonder what fancy name they'll come up with for a "Al Qeada in Iraq" leader?

Besides, if you like this blog, you will LOVE hers.

Zarkawi is DEAD!

Zarkawi has been killed!

From Fox News:

BAGHDAD, Iraq — Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Al Qaeda-linked militant who led a bloody campaign of suicide bombings, kidnappings and hostage beheadings in Iraq, has been killed in a U.S. air raid north of Baghdad, Iraq’s prime minister said Thursday.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said al-Zarqawi was killed along with seven aides Wednesday evening in a house 30 miles northeast of Baghdad in the volatile province of Diyala.

“Today, al-Zarqawi was eliminated,� al-Maliki told a news conference, drawing loud applause from reporters as he was flanked by U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and U.S. Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq.

Al-Maliki said the air strike was the result of intelligence reports provided to Iraqi security forces by residents in the area, and U.S. forces acted on the information.

“Those who disrupt the course of life, like Al-Zarqawi, will have a tragic end,� he said.

Khalilzad added “the death of Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi is a huge success for Iraq and the international war on terror.�

The Jordanian-born militant, who is believed to have personally beheaded at least two American hostages, became Iraq’s most wanted militant, as notorious as Usama bin Laden, to whom he swore allegiance in 2004. The United States put a $25 million bounty on his head, the same as bin Laden.

Those who live by the sword, shall die by the sword!

A tip of the GM Derby to Gribbit's Word

What Is With The Beheading With These People?

Fifteen of the seventeen Islamic radicals arrested in Canada appeared in Court today. According to a Canadian website:

Terror suspect accused of wanting to behead prime minister: lawyer

BRAMPTON, Ont. (CP) - One of the suspects in a Toronto terror plot is accused of wanting to behead Canada's prime minister, his lawyer said Tuesday.

Lawyer Gary Batasar says the allegations against his client are very serious and include his personal threat against the prime minister.

Steven Chand is also accused of plotting to storm and bomb various buildings, he says.

Chand is among 17 people accused of plotting to stage a massive terrorist attack in southern Ontario.

Fifteen of the 17 people facing charges are in court today.

Family members who arrived to support them were met by a horde of media from across Canada and the U.S.

"The allegations... are quite serious, including storming and bombing of various buildings," Batasar told a crowd of reporters outside the Brampton, Ont., courthouse.

"There's an allegation that my client personally indicated that he wanted to behead the prime minister of Canada."

Canadians have been oh-so-very "tolerant" of their Muslim citizens, and yet, this is their payback. I'd like to be able to say I'm surprised, but I'm not. When will the rest of the world, including the Moslem world wake up to the terrorists and their mentality? If you have an answer, please leave it in a post. As Dymphna at Gates of Vienna says:

At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe. We are in a new phase of a very old war."

If Only There Were More Men Like Him

A Day In The Life Of...:

Your alarm goes off, you hit the snooze and sleep for another 10 minutes.
He stays up for days on end.

You take a warm shower to help you wake up.
He goes days or weeks without running water.

You complain of a "headache", and call in sick.
He gets shot at, as others are hit, and keeps moving forward.

You put on your anti war/don't support the troops shirt, and go meet up with your friends.
He still fights for your right to wear that shirt.

You make sure you're cell phone is in your pocket.
He clutches the cross hanging on his chain next to his dog tags.

You talk trash on your "buddies" that aren't with you.
He knows he may not see some of his buddies again.

You walk down the beach, staring at all the pretty girls.
He walks the streets, searching for insurgents and terrorists.

You complain about how hot it is.
He wears his heavy gear, not daring to take off his helmet to wipe his brow.

You go out to lunch, and complain because the restaurant got your order wrong.
He does not get to eat today.

Your maid makes your bed and washes your clothes.
He wears the same things for months, but makes sure his weapons are clean.

You go to the mall and get your hair redone.
He doesn't have time to brush his teeth today.

You are angry because your class ran 5 minutes over.
He is told he will be held an extra 2 months.

You call your girlfriend and set a date for that night.
He waits for the mail to see if there is a letter from home.

You hug and kiss your girlfriend, like you do everyday.
He holds his letter close and smells his love's perfume.

You roll your eyes as a baby cries.
He gets a letter with pictures of his new child, and wonders if they'll ever meet.

You criticize your government, and say that war never solves anything.
He sees the innocent tortured and killed by their own government and remembers why he is fighting.

You hear the jokes about the war, and make fun of the men like him.
He hears the gun fire and bombs.

You see only what the media wants you to see.
He sees the bodies lying around him.

You are asked to go to the store by your parents. You don't.
He does what he is told.

You stay at home and watch TV.
He takes whatever time he is given to call and write home, sleep, and eat.

You crawl into your bed, with down pillows, and try to get comfortable.
He crawls under a tank for shade and a 5 minute nap, only to be woken by gun fire.

You sit there and judge him, saying the world is a worse place because of men like him.
If only there were more men like him

And a tip of the GM Derby to my wonderful daughter Jennifer for the email with the above in it.

Linked at Woman, Honor Thyself and The Mudville Gazette

Time For Some Drastic Changes

Almost anyone who reads this blog knows how I feel about the Islamo-Fascists. I despise them and all they stand for. Whether it be because of the highly publicized beheadings, their treatment of gays and women, their constant ranting against Israel and the West in general. Islamo-Fascists are the bottom of the barrel. So, I propose some changes.

The changes I propose are pretty drastic and anyone who knows me and or has read this blog may be shocked. They may say "Wait, this can't be GM. He isn't this radical, not this right wing."

And you would be wrong. I've been pushed too far and I won't go into the why's and hows.

I propose the following constitutional amendments.

1. The first amendment be altered to outlaw the Islamic faith as practiced by Wahhabists.

2. That a new amendment be ratified so that any Wahhabi Muslim be required to wear a RED cartoon of Muhammad on their Clothing over their hearts, that they not be allowed to serve in any governmental office of any kind, that they not be allowed to be licensed in any profession and that they not be allowed to attend any Mosque.

3. That camps be set up in the desert in any of the following states: Arizona, Texas, Utah, Nevada or California to house any Wahhabi Muslim that is caught without their badge or who breaks any law what-so-ever, including traffic and littering laws.

4. That a constitutional amendment be ratified to deport to any other Muslim country each person in the camp in no more than 5 years following a hearing on their crimes.

OK, the entire part of this essay above this sentence is total bull. I do not believe in any of the above, I do not advocate any of the above, I do not support any of the above.

But the news is reporting that there is a country that supports much the same kind of restrictions for religious minorities and that country is Iran.

AhMADinejad, the psychotic President of Iran reportedly urged the passage of these new restrictions, reminiscent of Nazi Germany, after the laws had languashed in the Iranian Parliment for two years.

Public outcry however has been slight, with a few exceptions. Google "Iran and religious Minorities and you fail to find mention of this in the first 30 or so entries. I didn't search further, but even changing the search terms didn't produce any recognizable results. The only "link" that I could find was this one. Oh, I know, the lefties here may say "WHAT? Newsmax? That Right Wing Rag?" I would not necessarily disagree with you, but what if it is right?

Jews must wear yellow patches, Christians red and other religious minorities blue. This from a country where the mad president denies the Holocaust, but promises to start one by wiping out Israel. This from a country that despite world opprobrium is still working on obtaining nuclear weapons, this from a country so backward they hang gays and rape victims and other disturbed people. This from a country that "declared war" on the United States by occupying it's soverign territory in the waining years of the Carter administration.

World, you better wake up, there is trouble brewing and you are collectively sitting on your duff.

Linked at Woman Honor Thyself

Update: According to the Debka File, the descriminatory wording MAY NOT BE in the final bill:

The outcry was sparked when Iranian exiles in Toronto reported to the Canadian National Post that Tehran had passed a law ordering Jews to wear the Yellow Star, Christians a red ribbon, and Zoroastrians a blue article of clothing.

Haroun Yeshaya, until recently head of Iran’s Jewish Committee, denied knowledge of such a clause.

However, the law has not been finally enacted, and speakers in the majlis debate proposed that non-Muslim minorities be made to wear distinctive clothes, yellow being the preferred color for Jews.

Speaking Truth To Idiocy

Imagine if you will, two cars in a race on parallel tracks. One car is an Indy job with a huge well tuned engine and a 100 mile absolutely flat raceway, no curves, no obstructions, clear driving. The other is a 1932 Model A Ford poorly maintained, with a bad cylinder and gunked up carburetor. It's road is potholed, rough, partly unpaved and has many pieces of junk on the surface but is, however, 10 miles shorter.

Car one is Iran, car two is those who are trying to head off Iran's development of nuclear diplomacy. Which really has a chance to win? If you said the first, give yourself a prize (might I suggest a swift belt of Glenfiddich just before the Iranian nuke explodes over Israel).

That's illogical Roper, you might say, well, yeah, but it may be also the truth. I'll grant that relationships between the US and Iran is not an automobile race, but it is a race none-the-less. Because right now, there is a concerted move in diplomatic circles and in the mainstream media (MSM) to make the United States in general and George Bush in particular the bad guy in this danse macabre. And the good guys are about to take it in the chops.

Don't believe me? In today's Wall Street Journal is an article by one Amir Taheri outlining the failed diplomacy and policies of the past (Carter, Brzezinski, Clinton, etc.) and how it is currently being touted as the only way to get the irrational and psychotic Iranian regieme to "give up" their nuclear ambitions. And, seemingly, it is based on the failed policies of the past. In his article, Taheri noted:

Something interesting is happening with regard to the crisis over Iran's nuclear ambitions. Slowly the blame is shifting from the mullahs to the Bush administration as the debate is redirected to tackle the hypothetical question of U.S. military action rather than the Islamic Republic's real misdeeds. "No War on Iran" placards are already appearing where "No Nukes for Iran" would make more sense.

The attempt at fabricating another "cause" with which to bash America is backed by the claim that the mullahs are behaving badly because Washington refuses to talk to them. Some of this buzz is coming from those who for years told the U.S. to let them persuade Iran to mend its ways. They include German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier and his British and French colleagues in the European Union trio that negotiated with Iran for years. Preparing to throw in the towel, they now say the U.S. should "directly engage" Iran. That would enable them to hide their failures and find a pretext for blaming future setbacks on the U.S."

So, why this new meme? Actually for a couple of reasons, not the least of which is Bush Derangement Syndrome. But it is misplaced anger, and typical of the misdirection of the Anti-Bush left. And no, I'm not (this time) saying the whole left, or even the majority of the left, but for damn sure a significant portion of the left that gets to set policy and gets to set the flavor of political debate for the larger left.

Let's go back, as Taheri does to John F. Kenndy, perhaps the last semi-conservative Democratic President. Conservative? Who are you kidding Roper? The conservatives denounced Kennedy as a bleeding heart liberal when he was President. That is correct, but that was then and this is now and we have the advantage of hindsight. Kennedy made some very conservative moves as President, not the least of which was cutting ruinous tax-rates. But, I digress. Kennedy made somewhat of a hash of the Cuban Missle crisis. In order to get missiles out of Cuba (which were already against international law) he pledged two things. One, to remove missles from Turkey and two to promise not to take military action against Cuba. The end result of this "bargaining" was to set a policy that today we still have to deal with and left Cuba via the dictates of Castro to attempt to spread revolution throughout vulnerable parts of the world. As Taheri noted:

Instead of being punished, Castro and his Soviet masters were doubly rewarded for undoing what they shouldn't have done in the first place. And Castro was free to do mischief not only in Latin America but also in Africa, the Arabian Peninsula and the Persian Gulf, often on behalf of Moscow, right up to the fall of the U.S.S.R."

This is the "sophisticated leadership" that the Democrats and the left would have us follow. Notice how well that worked?

Kennedy was, however, only the first link in a chain of failed positions. Then came Jimmah Cartuh (some spellings have it as Jimmy Carter) who beat the hapless Ford for the Presidency in 1976. Carter then presided over perhaps the most miserable excuse for a presidential administration in the world with possibly the exception of U.S. Grant. When the Mullah's took power in Tehran and foisted their criminal theocracy on Iran, Carter sent them a congratulatory note. Again from Taheri:

In 1979, soon after the mullahs seized power, Mr. Carter sent Ayatollah Khomeini a warm congratulatory letter. Mr. Carter's man at the U.N., a certain Andrew Young, praised Khomeini as "a 20th-century saint."

Saint indeed. And then for some 400 days, the Ayatollah Khomeini and his thugs (one of which is now President of Iran) committed an act of war by seizing the United States Embassy, soverign ground of the United States and holding hostage some 50 plus of its staff. Yes indeed, a real "Saint" that Khomeini. It was not until the inaugeration of Ronald Reagan and the realization that he wouldn't play patty cake with them that they finally released the hostages. There is a lesson here for those of you on the left that really think: you can't deal with these folks, they don't understand or give a damn about diplomacy, they only understand that when their opponent won't back down, that they will.

Taheri goes on to say:

A more dramatic show of U.S. support for the mullahs came when Mr. Brzezinski flew to Algiers to meet Khomeini's prime minister, Mehdi Bazargan. This was love at first sight -- to the point where Mr. Carter approved the resumption of military supplies to Iran, even as the mullahs were executing Iranians by the thousands, including many whose only "crime" was friendship with the U.S. The Carter administration's behavior convinced the mullahs that the U.S. was a paper tiger and that it was time for the Islamic Revolution to highlight hatred of America. Mr. Carter reaped what he had sown when the mullahs sent "student" fanatics to seize the U.S. embassy compound, a clear act of war, and hold its diplomats hostage for 444 days. "The Carter administration's weakness was a direct encouragement to [anti-American] hard-liners," wrote Ibrahim Asgharzadeh, one of the hostage-takers, years later.

Mr. Brzezinski's op-ed took the title "Been There, Done That," meant as a sneering nod to events that led to the liberation of Iraq. A more apt title, however, is: "Been There, Done That, Learned Nothing" -- a nod to Mr. Brzezinski's failure to learn the lessons of Iran even three decades later."

Did you read that? ""The Carter administration's weakness was a direct encouragement to [anti-American] hard-liners."

Continue reading "Speaking Truth To Idiocy"

Cindy Sheehag Watch

Whoops, I really meant Cindy Sheehan Watch. A new site by a great guy John Pendleton. Go and read and support his efforts.

United 93

Just came home a little while ago from the theater. Beloved esposa and I went to see United 93 and I walked out with a lump in my throat, tears in my eyes and a renewed resolve that these heroes will never be forgotten. The movie opened with the islamo-fascists praying to Allah for success. Success in killing innocents which is about a big a perversion of faith as I can think of. No better perhaps than all of the other religious wars mankind has fostered, but harrowing none-the-less because these were our people, our times.

I remember being in Berlin, Germany on 9/11 and as we boarded the train to return to Warnemünde, we first heard about the attacks on the World Trade Center. When we were able to board ship again, we stood transfixed by the carnage we saw and first heard of the crash of United 93.

I cannot express the fullness of the feelings I felt watching this movie, I cannot express my deep seated anger and hostility to the islamo-fascists. I cannot!

Go see this movie, what ever you do. It is not a typical movie drama, there is little character development, only a window onto heroism, and, yes, cowardice of the foes of freedom. We need more movies like this, lest we forget. Perhaps the LA Times (of all papers) says it best in an Op-Ed piece entitled Draft Hollywood. A quote:

Such self-examination and reform are part of the measure of our greatness. But there's a difference between a humble nation confessing its sins and a country of flagellants whipping themselves for every impure thought. Since the '60s, we have had, it seems, an endless string of war movies, from "Dr. Strangelove" to "Syriana," in which the United States is depicted as wildly aggressive and endlessly corrupt — which, in fact, it's not; which, in fact, it never has been.

In taking our self-examining ethos to these extremes, we have lost a kind of wisdom, wisdom that acknowledges the complexity of human life but can move through it to find the simple truth again. While assessing the intricate failings of our moral history, many of us have lost sight of the simple truth that the system that shapes us is, in fact, a great one, that it has moved us inexorably to do better and that it's well worth defending against every aggressor and certainly against as shabby and vicious an aggressor as we face today.

Not only have we lost this kind of wisdom, but I think that a handful of elites — really only a handful of academics, journalists and artists — has raised up a golden counterfeit in its stead. With this counterfeit wisdom, they imagine themselves above the need for patriotism; they fantasize they grasp a truth beyond good and evil, and they preen themselves on a higher calling than the protection of our way of life. And all the while they forget that they imagine and fantasize and preen only by the grace of those who fight and die and stand guard to secure those freedoms that our system alone guarantees.

When war comes, as it always will, and when it is justified, as it is now, some nuances and shades of gray have to be set aside. It is time, instead, for faith and for ferocity. Our enemies have these weapons, after all. Our movies should inspire us to have them too."

Again, see this movie, it is time well spent. As the LAT noted, it is indeed time for Faith and for Ferocity.

LISTEN UP AMERICA

THIS IS IMPORTANT, THIS IS ABOUT HEROES! TURN YOUR SPEAKERS UP, CLICK ON THIS LINK AND PREPARE TO MEET AMERICA AT IT'S FINEST.

Tip of the GM Derby to My friend Lt. Col Tad, USMC (Ret) for the email. Thanks Tad, you too are one of America's heroes.

U.N. to Iran: "Get rid of nukes or face 12 years of paper resolutions!"

Here we go again. A radical Mideastern country run by a mad man threatens to use weapons of mass destruction against another country and the U.N. cannot decide to do anything about it. Liberals will be working overtime to blame Bush for this.

Iran threatens Israel if US acts "evil"

Iran threatened on Tuesday to attack Israel in response to any "evil" act by the United States and said it had enriched uranium to a level close to the maximum compatible with civilian use in power stations.

The defiant statements were issued shortly before world powers met in Paris late on Tuesday to plan their next moves after Tehran rejected a U.N. call to halt uranium enrichment.

US could seek Iran sanctions outside UN: Bolton

With no clear sign the United States can win U.N. support for sanctions against Iran, the Bush administration said on Tuesday it could work instead with like-minded nations to punish Tehran for its nuclear programs.

The United States, which has its own sanctions on the Islamic republic, is lobbying for the United Nations Security Council to impose international sanctions on Iran but faces resistance from veto holders Russia and China.

Arab Teens Defused

Makes sense to me. Why question the word of three young Arab males with explosives? No profiling necessary.

Teens Planned Blow-out

Three teenagers from the Arab town of Qalansawe were arrested after 150,000 detonators were found in the house of one of them. The teenagers, age 15 and 16 were taken to a police station for questioning where they claimed that the detonators meant for their personal use. (Raanan Ben-Zur)

History Test

Please pause a moment, reflect back, and take the following multiple choice test. The events are actual events from history. They actually happened! Do you remember?

1. 1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by
a. Superman
b. Jay Leno
c. Harry Potter
d. a Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40

2. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by
a. Olga Corbett
b. Sitting Bull
c. Arnold Schwarzenegger
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

3. In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by:
a. Lost Norwegians
b. Elvis
c. A tour bus full of 80-year-old women
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

4. During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by:
a. John Dillinger
b. The King of Sweden
c. The Boy Scouts
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

5. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by:
a. A pizza delivery boy
b. Pee Wee Herman
c. Geraldo Rivera
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

6. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by:
a. The Smurfs
b. Davey Jones
c. The Little Mermaid
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

7. In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a US Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by:
a. Captain Kidd
b. Charles Lindberg
c. Mother Teresa
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

8. In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by:
a. Scooby Doo
b. The Tooth Fairy and The Sundance Kid
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

9. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by:
a. Richard Simmons
b. Grandma Moses
c. Michael Jordan
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

10. In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by:
a. Mr. Rogers
b. Hillary Clinton, to distract attention from Wild Bill's women problems
c. The World Wrestling Federation
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

11. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take out the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers. Thousands of people were killed by:
a. Bugs Bunny, Wiley E. Coyote, Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd
b. The Supreme Court of Florida
c. Mr. Bean
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

12. In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against:
a. Enron
b. The Lutheran Church
c. The NFL
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

13. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by:
a. Bonnie and Clyde
b. Captain Kangaroo
c. Billy Graham
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

12-13 correct = Conservative, Proud, Probably Republican and A History Buff.
10-11 correct = Conservative, Proud, and A History Buff.
07-09 correct = Probably a bit too Progressive for most readers of this Blog.
05-06 correct = Progressive or liberal, unable to learn from history.
03-04 correct = Not at all able to learn from history, asks "Why do they hate us?"
00-02 correct = Your name is either Kennedy, Murtha, Pelosi, Reid, Zinni or perhaps Zarqawi or you are a member of that group of raggamuffins called Al Qaeda.

Nope, ......I really don't see a pattern here to justify profiling, do you? So, to ensure we Americans never offend anyone, particularly fanatics intent on killing us, airport security screeners will no longer be allowed to profile certain people. They must conduct random searches of 80-year-old women, little kids, airline pilots with proper identification, secret agents who are members of the President's security detail, 85-year old Congressmen with metal hips, and Medal of Honor winning and former Governor Joe Foss, but leave Muslim Males between the ages 17 and 40 alone lest they be guilty of profiling. Let's remind this to as many people as we can so that the Gloria Aldreds and other dunder-headed attorneys along with Federal Justices that want to thwart common sense, feel doubly ashamed of themselves -- if they have any such sense. As the writer of the award winning story "Forrest Gump" so aptly put it, "Stupid is as stupid does."

From The Annals of The New York Times: An Alternate History

Apr 6, 1989 2:10 PM EDT
by U. Gottabee Kiddin
New York
WORLD'S CHRISTIANS PARTICIPATE IN RIOTING

In the early spring of this year, photographer Andres Serrano published a photograph of a crucifix of Jesus submerged in a vat of urine. Initially the exhibit, on view with other works of art including the far less controversial Madonna and Child II which featured immersion in the same fluid attracted little attention except from a few art aficionados.

When word eventually got out that this work had been supported by a $15,000.00 grant from the National Endowment of the Arts, the fundamentalist outrage was palpable. Hearings were held in the US Senate by Jesse Helms and Alfonse D'Amato which included the comments following this.

From the Congressional Record:

Mr. President*, several weeks ago, I began to receive a number of letters, phone calls, and postcards from constituents throughout the Senate concerning art work by Andres Serrano. They express a feeling of shock, of outrage, and anger.

#2. They said, "How dare you spend our taxpayers' money on this trash." They all objected to taxpayers' money being used for a piece of so-called art work which, to be quite candid, I am somewhat reluctant to utter its title. This so-called piece of art is a deplorable, despicable display of vulgarity. The art work in question is a photograph of the crucifix submerged in the artist's urine.

#3. This artist received $15,000 for his work from the National Endowment for the Arts, through the Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art.

In New York, Washington, Paris, London, Berlin and in much of the Middle East rioting broke out in indignation that a revered religious icon was immersed in urine. In Saudi Arabia King Fahd bin Abdul Aziz led 10,000 Muslims on a march proclaiming the sacrilege of having a revered prophet treated in such a cavalier manner.

In Berlin, the anger that was felt by the German Government was equally obvious. Chancellor Helmut Josef Michael Kohl noted that all of Germany stood behind the Christians who were angry. In Paris, François Mitterrand noted "We are all Christians now!

New York seems to have been the hardest hit with cars up and down 5th avenue being torched by angry Christians. Many with signs saying "Behead the heretics." Yet, there are those who strongly support freedom of expression, however when they marched in Central Park, they were set upon by a screaming mob and pummeled within an inch of their lives. No arrests were made however as the police seemed to have vanished from the area around Central Park.

In Washington, President Bush called for calm and rational reflection on the meaning of the sacrilege and to take action in the form of passing laws against such sacrilege again. This was strongly supported in the United States Senate most notably by Senators Kennedy, Biden, Byrd, Dodd and Thurmond.

Borders Bookstores, parent of Walden Books have removed all "art" books from their shelves because of the fear that Christians might trash the stores and harm their staff and customers.

In an Editorial in the New York Times yesterday, this paper and its publisher came out strongly against the trashing of peoples religious icons:

We heartily condem any attempt to claim under the guise of free expression and the First Amendment that willfully denegrates a great world's religion.

This reporter stands firm in solidarity with the editors of this paper.

This is of course, fiction. Sadly, it is not April Fool's fiction.

UPDATE: Via Dr. Sanity comes this bit of truly chilling future history. Read it if you dare. It's long but totally frightening

This Child - This Beautiful, Battered Child

There is another War on Terrorism, the war against the treatment of women and children in Afghanistan, Iran, and much of the middle east. Treatment that is condoned, maybe even incouraged by the so called Religion of Peace.

Let me introduce Gulsoma, now 12 years old. She was "married" at age 5 and the story of her life so far would break the heart of all but the least human of us. Gulsoma is a beautiful child, with a warm engaging smile, a winsome healthy look about her. But the smile hides scars beyond belief. At the bottom of this essay, you can find out what I mean. You can find her whole story here in a story by Kevin Sites. Read the whole thing.

Some of the scars are from beatings, some are from her being forced to be a table top where her "family" cut their food on her bare back. Nice people these.

Part of my growing disdain for the left, the feminists, the progressives is an increasing anger that they do not understand that their promotion of "Women's Rights" seems to end where the islamofascists begin. Why is that, where does this hypocracy come from. Why aren't they shouting from the rooftops about this?

I'll have a lot more respect for them if they do, until then, no respect at all.

Cross posted at my new blog home.

Borders/Walden Books -> Cowards!

One of my favorite authors in the blogosphere, and there are many, many of them, just take a long look at the blogrolls on my sidebar, is Robert Bidinotto. Robert is a major factor in the Individualist movement and is the editor of The New Individualist plus, he is a very nice guy.

I've been following Robert's open letter to the folk at Borders and the increasing number of protests to the policies of Borders that have capitulated to the islamofascists. Let me give you a hint of Robert's excellent open letter:

Not only is your policy ethically disgusting and counter-productive, it is completely nonsensical. With many thousands of book and magazine outlets in this country, there is absolutely no reason for Borders to believe that its stores, staff, and customers would be singled out for harm. Yet despite all of this, Borders does stand out: as the first and most gutless of them all. It is the first American bookstore chain to adopt a policy that I have labeled "anticipatory capitulation": advance surrender in the face of a mere hypothetical threat.

Terrorism and fanaticism are the gravest menaces of our age. Our nation is dispatching thousands of soldiers abroad to meet that threat to our liberty and our modern way of life. But after 9/11, it should be clear that all of us -- not just our soldiers -- are on the front lines of this war.

If we value our rights and freedoms, all of us must stand together and resolute in the face of threats, intimidation, and violence. The worst possible message we can give to terrorists or to anyone else willing to initiate force is that we do not stand united against them -- and that their tactics work

Robert has done an excellent job of nailing the cowards at Borders/Walden Books, you really need to read all of it.

THEN Robert follows up with High Noon At The Borders. A small sample:

Gary Cooper won the Oscar for his stoic portrait of Will Kane, the lonely marshal. It was seen then, and since, as a great allegory of the lone hero in corrupt times.

Not surprising, then, that I was reminded of High Noon while reading the sophistry served up by Borders and some of its online apologists. They, like fine citizens of Will Kane's Hadleyville, offer every lame excuse for failing to stand up to the bullies of our own time:

Look, I run a private business, and I have the right to carry or not carry whatever I want on my shelves.... It's not my business to fight terrorists -- that's what I pay taxes to the government for.... I don't want to OFFEND my customers/employees.... I want to PROTECT my customers/employees.... Why don't we look at things from THEIR point of view; how would YOU like to have your religion insulted?.... After all, it's only one little magazine.... Hey, this is a business decision; don't give me all that abstract principle stuff....

And on and on the excuse-making goes. But everyone knows what it's really all about.

It's about cowardice in the face of bullies. Period. It's no more complicated than that.

I hold this guy in Total Awe, if you don't have the Bidinotto blog on your favorite places/book marks, you don't know what you are missing.

I have blogged about the overt cowardice of the MSM here and here and to this list we can add Universities and of course the everpresent sufferors of Bush Derangement Syndrome as noted by Stephen Green Samizdata "Throws Down The Gauntlet" and ends with this quote:

"Cowardice does not make you safe. It makes you a safe target
........... - D.Amon"

UPDATE: From Cox and Forkum

Exactly!

To Freed Hostages - You're Welcome. So, be Christian about it.

How typical of the left. The organization and families of American activists, operating under a Christian banner and who were kidnapped and held hostage in Iraq, have not acted very Christian after they were freed by our armed forces. A simple "thank you" would have sufficed, but none came. Not only that, they blamed OUR government for the kidnapping and referred to our soldiers who freed them simply as occupiers. Still, our military does the right thing and risks the lives of soldiers to save even Americans who don't like them or appreciate them.

Here is coverage on the rescue of and responses about the three remaining workers of Christian Peacemaker Teams--freed in Baghdad and saved from the fate of another member who was murdered by terrorists in the region: The New York Times, Associated Press, and Canada's Pulse 24. What you don't see is any appreciation to our forces--but, only disdain for them. Am I missing something?

Maybe members of the Christian Peacemaker Teams should actually take a moment to learn lessons about an ungrateful heart or spirit of ingratitude by going here, here, or here--just in case they don't remember where they misplaced their Bibles.

via Drudge Report

Greetings From Hungary

I don't always respond to comments, part of the purpose of this blog is to put things out there and let the commenters have a go in response. But, I can't not put this comment up. I received this from a young fellow named Peter who is a student in Hungary in response to an older post here.

Peter, I don't know who you are, or where you live, but God bless you son, God bless you!

I dont know how to begin, so i just begin, and can just hope, that someone will read this comment. Im a Hungarian student, and its really good to see, that foreigners are also interested in Hungarian history, or at least a part of it. This year (2006) will be the 50th anniversary of 1956 october 23. Its kinda "funny" or maybe weird, that some things are getting to look like, as they were in 1956. The elections will be in April, and the current PM is selling a lots of stuff, and a complete idiot. (For example he sold the Budapest Airport) He also has a few interesting thing, that i wont list, because it would be nearly endless (illegal company for example). A few days ago the members of parlament, wanted to ask him about his things, but he didnt show up on that meeting. We can just hope, that his part (MSZP , hungarian socialist part) will not win the elections, otherwise, we can expect another uprising. We did it once, and we will do it again, if we need to.

Greetings from Hungary

Peter

The GM Straw Poll

OK, it's time to vote, 2008 is here in a virtual poll.

Blogging Soldier in Iraq...Interview with The Real Ugly American

My very good friend The Real Ugly American has a great post up. It is an interview with Sgt. T.F. Boggs who blogs at T.F. Boggs A sample of TRUA's interview:
TRUA: "Can you tell us some of the things you have seen American Soldiers do for Iraqi children?"

Sgt. Boggs: I have seen soldiers do great things for Iraqi children from everything to giving them food, candy, clothes, toys, and wheelchairs. I have seen soldiers play games with them, hold them, hug them, smile and laugh with them. We see that Iraqi children need our help and we are willing to go to great lengths to provide for them. As soldiers we get aid to drive, shoot, build, and keep order but we help children because it is the morally right thing to do, it is completely selfless and I believe the children know or will come to realize that.

Read this entry from Sgt. Boggs, it should make you think about what is really going on with our troops in Iraq.

It is a terrific interview and I hope you will read it all as well as read all of Sgt. Boggs efforts.

Let Us Hope Germany Doesn't Go Down This Road Again

INTRODUCTION: On December 11th, 2005 Atlantic Review and GM's Corner hosted the first of what we hope will be a long blog carnival of articles regarding the relationship between our two countries. Joerg Wolf had the initial idea and proposed it to me and we both took off. The first carnival was published simultaneously in Germany at Atlantic Review and here. I believe that that was a first for the carnival meme. The second carnival is due to be published on March 25th at Statler & Waldorf in Germany and at American Future on this side of the Atlantic (Note: American Future is the new home of Dr. Demarche, one of my favorite bloggers).

From Agora comes this tidbit published in Jyllands-Posten (famous for the Muslim outcry following the publishing of 12 cartoon's featuring Mohammad) regarding a movement in Germany that has "gone to the prosecutors of several states to hinder the dissemination of the Quran. According to the indictment, the Quran is not just a religious and historic book, but also a political book, which is incompatible with the constiution."

As a staunch advocate of freedom of speech, this reminds me too much of the willingness of some to censor that which they cannot combat with ideas. This was, indeed, the nature of the Muslim rioting over the Mohammad Cartoons and the deserved, but too often muted, condemnation of those rioting. I am a firm believer that freedom of speech and all it's "problems" is far more democratic than attempting to shut down the ideas with which we are either not familiar, or perhaps not comfortable.

Banning the Quran is far too close to the book burnings of the Nazi era in Germany, the novel Fahrenheit 451, and even the destruction of rock and roll records seen in this country not too many moons ago and even the really, really stupid McCain-Feingold Act of today.

If the West is to win this war of ideas, a couple of things must be made perfectly clear to all. 1) Democratic governance is prime including free speech, universal sufferage, and the rights of minorities; 2) terrorism in any form will be met with staunch resistance and harsh penalties; 3) we cannot stoop to the fascistic level of those we are fighting against because if we do, we become like them.

Continue reading "Let Us Hope Germany Doesn't Go Down This Road Again"

Appeasement Or Real Politik?

Marc Schulman has an interesting post up at American Future.

From The Telegraph:

School textbooks should be reviewed for intolerant depictions of Islam and other faiths by experts overseen by the European Union and Islamic leaders, the European Parliament was told yesterday. The call for a special committee to examine religious education in schools came from Hans-Gert Pöttering, the German Christian Democrat who heads the largest group of MEPs. Pöttering suggested that the EU could co-operate with the 56-nation Organisation of the Islamic Conference, which has its headquarters in Saudi Arabia, to create a textbook review committee that could help to choose the experts to sit on the committee.

At least the cave wasn't complete:

Mr Pöttering, the head of the centre-Right, but largely federalist European People's Party, said the work of building bridges between Islam and the West had to "begin with young people".

He also called for similar tolerance in the Islamic world, holding up examples of anti-Semitic cartoons taken from the Middle East and suggesting a parallel review should be made of Islamic school books.

It's good to see that the proposal was immediately condemned as "appeasement" by Charles Tannock, a British Conservative MEP:

Marc notes:

This sounds like an exercise in political correctness and appeasement. I don't see why we should be bringing children into this debate.

After all, it is not the "children" that are currently the problem on either side. It is only the adults that don't understand the consequences of appeasement.

Last Warning

From Memri comes this little bit of terroristic threat. The so called Al Qaeda Undercover Soldier threatens the US with massive damage. Read the whole thing.

Purported "Al-Qaeda Undercover Soldier, U.S.A": Last Warning to American People - Two Operations Will Occur; Your Homeland Security Agency Must Surrender; States Far Away From Washington, D.C. Such as Arizona Will Be Hit; We Await Orders From Our Commander Osama Bin Laden; America Will Be Brought to its Knees

Continue reading "Last Warning"

More Wafa Sultan, M.D. taking on the Irrational Aspects of Islam

Wafa Sultan, listen and then comment.

Thanks to Dhimmi Watch

Milosevic is Dead!

Slobodan Milosevic was found dead in his cell this morning. According to the Wall Street Journal he apparantly died of natural causes. Milosevic was on trial in the Hague for crimes against humanity by leading his country to slaughter tens of thousands from a would be break-away provence. Milosevic frequently and vociferously denied guilt. One would suspect that Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao and others would claim the same.

I don't know whether to be happy that the world is better off without one more madman or to mourn the fact that justice is denied. Perhaps the only justice meted out here was when his immortal soul found itself condemed to hellfire.

According to the WSJ:

A figure of beguiling charm and cunning ruthlessness, Mr. Milosevic was a master tactician who turned his country's defeats into personal victories and held onto power for 13 years despite losing four wars that shattered his nation and impoverished his people.

Mr. Milosevic led Serbia, the dominant Yugoslav republic, into four Balkan wars, but always managed to emerge politically stronger. The secret of his survival was his uncanny ability to exploit what less adroit figures would consider a fatal blow.

Each time he would bounce back, skillfully reinventing himself in a series of political transformations -- as a devout communist, a reform-minded nationalist, and again as a communist at a time when most of the world had abandoned Marxist ideology.

He once described himself as the "Ayatollah Khomeini of Serbia," assuring his prime minister, Mr. Panic, that "the Serbs will follow me no matter what." For years, they did -- through wars which dismembered Yugoslavia and plunged what was left of the country into social, political, moral and economic ruin.

But in the end, his people abandoned him: first in October 2000, when he was unable to convince the majority of Yugoslavs that he had staved off electoral defeat by his successor, Vojislav Kostunica, and again on April 1, 2001, when he surrendered after a 26-hour standoff to face criminal charges stemming from his ruinous rule.

Few will mourn his passing, and certainly not this blogger!

Insta-Update: Austin Bey has more, and it is well worth reading

To Rape An Unveiled Woman

clicking on the "Continue Reading" link immediately below will show a graphic photograph of a rape victim. The link provided will take you to a valuable and very serious post. Continue reading "To Rape An Unveiled Woman"

Tolerance - Redefined

Jackie Mason and Raul Felder penned (pixilated?) a scathing indictment of the Muslims who practice Islamofascism, their anti-semitism, and their totatl irrationality. A sample:

The Muslims have pronounced their verdict. The cartoon man has been found guilty. The real crime is, of course, not being a Muslim. Now that they have established the crime, they have also pronounced the sentence. Even if you never saw or heard of the cartoon, you deserve to be hit with rocks, your car wrecked, and your embassies destroyed because you are an infidel � and incidentally, there are no appeals. There was even television coverage of a Muslim religious leader screaming in some unintelligible language. However, on the bottom of the screen the translation appeared. This religious leader was shouting that whoever drew the cartoon should have his hands cut off. This hardly seems for us to be a reasonable penalty for somebody taking a piece of paper, picking up a pen, and drawing something.

Ending with:

Everyday Muslim and European newspapers insult and degrade Jews as animals and rodents, which is not only insulting but, additionally, encourages the hatred of Jews. But did you ever hear any Jewish authority anywhere demanding that we find any of these cartoonists so that we can choke them to death or cut them up. Did you ever hear of an Israeli death squad searching for a cartoonist? If the Jewish people applied the same insult standard requiring a death sentence no Muslim would be safe now, anywhere in the world. Could you picture a Jew deciding that he has the right to kill but you have no right to draw an insulting picture?

Nobody has ever died from a cartoon [until Muslims began the killing]. If the worst thing the Nazis ever did had been to draw cartoons of death camps instead of putting Jews in them, six million Jews would be alive today. When was the last time any country decided to kill a Muslim anywhere in the world because they felt insulted? But the Muslims have created a new international law called the "insult law." This means they have the right to kill you whenever they please, and you have no right to do anything about it. If a Muslim were walking down a street in Israel with a picture of an insulting cartoon in hand, no Israeli would threaten his life. They would be too busy celebrating the fact that it was a cartoon and not a bomb.

H/T to Vanderleun at American Digest

Hamas: An Ideology Of Hate
Israel: Hamas Intended Victim

Mark Lavie has written extensively on Hamas. Meryl Yourish asks for wide distribution of this column. Send the link to all your friends via e-mail. Lavie predicts that the election of Hamas does not bode well for peace. They, he notes, have no intention of changing. They have no intention of backing down. Read it all! It is that important!

H/T: Meryl Yourish

The "NEW" Peace Plan

My good friend Raven who writes at And Rightly So also writes at Southpark Republicans. She put up a recent post at SPR that is usually attributed to leftish Robin Williams. Now, a search on the internet of Robin Williams Plan yields many scoffs at the so called RWP but that doesn't matter. And, I suggest that it doesn't matter who came up with this. The plan is brilliant in concept, easy to implement and will absolutely work. (Insert wry grin here). Without further introduction, I hereby steal and publish The NEW Peace Plan:

1) The US will apologize to the world for our "interference" in their affairs, past & present. You know, Hitler, Mussolini and the rest of them 'good old boys'. We will never "interfere" again.

2) We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with Germany, South Korea and the Philippines. They don't want us there. We would station troops at our borders. No more sneaking through holes in the fence.

3) All illegal aliens have 90 days to get their affairs together and leave. We'll give them a free trip home. After 90 days the remainder will be gathered up and deported immediately, regardless of who or where they are. France would welcome them.

4) All future visitors will be thoroughly checked and limited to 90 days unless given a special permit. No one from a terrorist nation would be allowed in. If you don't like it there, change it yourself, don't hide here. Asylum would not ever be available to anyone. We don't need any more cab drivers.

5) No "students" over age 21. The older ones are the bombers. If they don't attend classes, they get a "D" and it's back home baby.

6) The US will make a strong effort to become self sufficient energy wise. This will include developing non polluting sources of energy but will require a temporary drilling of oil in the Alaskan wilderness. The caribou will have to cope for a while.

7) Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries $10 a barrel for their oil. If they don't like it, we go someplace else.

8) If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we will not "interfere". They can pray to Allah or whomever, for seeds, rain, cement or whatever they need. Besides' most of what we give them is stolen or given to the army. The people who need it most get very little, if any anyway.

9) Ship the UN Headquarters to an island some place. We don't need the spies and fair weather friends here. Besides, it would make a good homeless shelter or lockup for illegal aliens.

9b) Use the buildings as replacement for the twin towers.

10) All Americans must go to charm and beauty school. That way, no one can call us "Ugly Americans" any longer.

Now, ain't that a winner of a plan.

"The Statue of Liberty is no longer saying'Give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses.' She's got a baseball bat and she's yelling, 'You want a piece of me?'" -

''We won't stop the protests until the world obeys Islamic law.''

Mark Steyn gets it right. When will the West learn and when we do learn what will we do about it? Read the whole thing.

H/T: Instapundit

Why bullies get away with it

Kathy Krajco who writes At The Zoo has a terrific post up on pacifism, bullies and what to do. Read it all.

Are We Fighting Islam Or Islamofascism? There Is A Difference!

Olaf from extrablog, a blog from germany and a new friend recently sent a track back to the Photoshop efforts below contributed by Jeremy Brown/Dr. Sanity. Too, Olaf asks a good question and one that I think deserves an answer. His question, as presented in his blog is:

Would you try to enrage the Ummah, all the Muslim communities in the world, if your brother, your husband or your friend was in Iraq or in Afghanistan?"

Olaf goes on to state:

The Enduring Freedom Coalition fights terrorism, not Islam. So shouldn't we. Many Muslim nations are our coalition partners: Djibouti, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, United Emirates, Yemen and more."

First, let me say that I have the utmost respect for anyone's faith if that faith is expressed in terms of kindness, charity and love. I also expect that the faith of others will exhibit the same tolerance for my faith, and the faith of still others.

Having said that, let us take a look at the Ummah. The Ummah is described as the worldwide community of those of the Moslem faith and the question directly asks would I deliberately insult the worldwide community of Muslims if I had a relative or friend fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan. The underlying question is will the Muslim faithful harm my relatives or friends if they are offended by me. There in lies the threat. If insulted, will my friends/family be harmed by those who are insulted? Those are the terms of the debate. Do we knuckle down to the threat of violence by a so called community of believers?

Going back to the 80's, we have the Marine Corps barracks bombing, the WTC (This coming Sunday is the 13th Anniversary of the WTC bombing in '93), the US Embassies in Africa being bombed, the USS Cole, Military Barracks in Saudi Arabia, and of course 9/11. These attacks were not initiated by Baptists, Anabaptists, Confuscians, Buddists, Methodists, Catholics, Hindus, anamists, pagans, Mormans atheists or agnostics. They were carried out by Muslims of a particular mindset that we call Islamofascists. Those rioting and burning and killing and threatening to behead the insulters are also Muslims upset that someone had the temerity to draw cartoons of Mohammad. The countries that Olaf mentions, while nominal partners in the so Called Global War On Terror (GWOT) have neither discouraged nor put down the riots. In fact, many "official" spokesmen (read Imams) of some of these countries continue to urge greater violence up to and including offering a bounty of a million dollars for the execution of one of the cartoonists. So, are they complicit in the rioting and threats of violence, or are they willing dupes or are they really, part of the problem all along?

In normal circumstances, I deplore making fun of the faith of others. But these circumstances are not normal. One does not react to a damned cartoon with threats of beheading. One does not react to a damned cartoon with acts of war (attacking and burning the Danish Embasssy). One does not react to a damned cartoon by murdering people of other faiths (Christians murdered by Muslims in Nigeria = and in this case, the Christians rioting back and killing Muslims).

Islam is a faith, no more, no less. In my faith, Islam is wrong, that the Son of God is Jesus the Christ. But not everyone shares my faith and that is OK. I did not riot or burn or kill when Piss Christ was published, when a rapper wraps a crown of thorns around his head for a Rolling Stone issue and I have no respect for those that would. The threat of violence by the Islamofascists because they are "offended" is offensive to anyone who is at least semi-civilized.

The countries mentioned by Olaf are indeed part of the GWOT, but they are also part and parcel of the problem. Olaf, take a look at some of the cartoons published in the pseudo-official papers of the countries you mentioned. The slurs against Christians, Jews and other Non-Muslims are horrific. Yet, are we not THEIR partners in the GWOT? Do they not have an equal obligation to not "offend" us? In order to obtain respect, one must give respect. Respect is not the fear of reprisal, respect is the full acknowledgement that one does not have to believe as you do in order to be accorded the same rights as someone that does.

I have no quarrel with Islam. My quarrel is with any Muslim that is not willing to give the same respect that he or she demands. My quarrel is with those that believe that it is ok to toss out death sentences against those that do not cower in fear of the threat of violence. My quarrel is with Islamofascism. There really is a difference.

UPDATE: Captain Ed puts it pretty well methinks:

In fact, most Muslim journalists who have criticized the response to the cartoons find themselves either in jail or facing arrest, and the article itself provides a very telling look into why. The isolation and persecution of these journalists show that the riots and demonstrations represent mainstream Islam, despite the multicultural pablum given by most pundits over this eruption. Friends and relatives of these reporters remain silent for fear of violent retribution. A significant moderate faction within Islam has been cowed into almost-complete silence by the ascendant violent and radical factions."

H/T Shrinkwrapped and as Shrinkwrapped notes:

Islam is under tremendous pressure and the Islamofascists are winning. The Moderate Muslims are unable or unwilling to confront their violent and vicious coreligionists, some significant percentage are basically in agreement that all non-Muslims are inferior, and there is no tradition of democracy or self-governance to fall back on."

UPDATE # 2: David Bernstein writing in the Volokh Conspiracy weighs in with a quote from his You Can't Say That that addresses the paucity of the argument of not offending (Muslims, or any others for that matter):

One price of living in a free society is having to tolerate those who intentionally or unintentionally offend others. The current trend, however, is to give offended parties a legal remedy, so long as the offense can be construed as "discrimination." Yet the more the American legal system offers people remedies for offense, the more they are likely to feel offended. This is true for two reasons. First, as economists point out, when you subsidize something, you get more of it. Therefore, if the legal remedies of antidiscrimination law, particularly monetary remedies, subsidize feelings of outrage and insult, we will get more feelings of outrage and insult, a net social loss. Second, economists have also noted the psychological endowment effect, which, in effect, means that people tend to consider something they own to be more valuable than it would be if they did not own it. Similarly, once people are endowed with a right, they tend to overvalue it and react passionately when it is interfered with.

Unfortunately, Americans increasingly coddle and even reward the hypersensitive, perversely encouraging ever more hypersensitivity. In one notorious incident, a Washington, DC city official was forced to resign for using the word "niggardly" at a meeting because the word sounded like a racial epithet, even though it is actually an innocent synonym of Scandinavian origin for "miserly." It should hardly be surprising, then, that people are suing for and winning damages when they are offended by colleagues at work, when they are excluded by private clubs or turned down as roommates, or when they are fired from church-run schools after reneging on promises to obey church doctrine. Neither should it be surprising that legislatures are increasingly succumbing to the temptation to expand the laws to protect from discrimination every group with a grievance, including the vertically challenged (short people, protected in San Francisco and Michigan), the body-pierced (among those protected in various jurisdictions, including Washington, DC, that ban discrimination based on personal appearance), recovering drug addicts (protected by the federal Americans with Disabilities Act and local equivalents), and the Hell's Angels (protected, along with other motorcycle gang members, in Minnesota).

Preserving the liberalism that defines the United States, and the civil liberties that go with it, requires Americans to show a certain level of virtue, including a phlegmatic tolerance of those who intentionally or unintentionally offend and sometimes�when civil liberties are implicated�even of those who blatantly discriminate. A society that undercuts civil liberties in pursuit of the "equality" offered by a statutory right to be free from all slights, protected by draconian antidiscrimination laws, will ultimately end up empty-handed with neither equality nor civil liberties to show for its efforts. The violation of civil liberties required to achieve this kind of equality will diminish constitutional restraints on the government, while the additional power garnered by the government, introduced for noble reasons, will end up in the hands of people who use it to promote their own interests. In these days of the Oprahization of public discourse, when even presidential candidates swear that they feel the public’s pain, asking Americans to display a measure of fortitude in the face of offense and discrimination is asking for a lot. But in the end, it is a small price to pay for preserving civil liberties."

UPDATE # 3: Always on Watch provided this link. A sample:

I see it like this. You can sleep in peace and comfort today, and pay the price later when you wake up in hell�and I am not talking about that hell that Satan lives in, but the hell that Islam intends to bring to the whole world soon. Or you can sacrifice your peace now and make sure that future generations will never have to fight. The choice is yours."

Gleefully Stolen From Dr. Sanity 'Cause It Is Too Good Not To Share!!!

Poster Created by Jeremy at Who Knew based on an Idea by Dr. Sanity. At any rate, this tells it exactly how it is and I'm hoping others will share it too. Doc, hope you don't mind!

Europe, The MSM, and Others Flunk Psychology 101

Intro to behavior modification: If you want to see an increase in a specific behavior, reward that behavior. If you wish to see a decrease in a specific behavior, punish it.

Ivan Pavlov proved this beyond a shadow of a doubt with his experiments in conditioning. Most everyone remembers Pavlov I'm sure. He hooked up a dog to a harness, rang a bell and gave the dog meat powder to induce salivation. In time, the pairing of the bell and meat powder conditioned the dog to salivate and finaly when only the bell was rung, the dog salivated.

A number of years ago, this conditioning was hammered home when I made a trip to the local grocery store. A harried mom with a todler in the basket seat walked down the candy aisle. Suddenly, the kid's eyes lit on the bag of candies, his face screwed up and without another word, mom reached for the bag of candy, placed it in the basket and the kiddo was all smiles. Wonder how long it took the kid to condition mom?

All this comes to mind following a recent entry by Dr. Helen Smith in her Dr. Helen blog in which she states:

You would think that governments as well as people in general would understand that appeasing and rewarding negative behavior doesn't work. It's basic psychology 101--but one that not even most psychology professors understand or put to use. And apparently, this concept is foreign to many of the politically correct persuasion outside the classroom as well--for them, their feeling of moral "superiority" trumps human nature and causes liberals to turn a blind eye to justice and acts of violence."

"In Bruce Bawer's new book, While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within,the side effects of the appeasement of Muslims by the Danish government are clear--as their government pumps more and more welfare money into the pockets of disgruntled Muslims, the rate of violence against "infidels" there increases."

One would think that this lesson would have been learned long ago, if not by the efforts of Neville Chamberlain than at least from the effects of non-response to the multiple attacks by the Islamofascists of Bin Laden and company. Time and time again the western response to Islamofascist terrorism has been placating the "Arab Street" which has, in turn, shown it's absolute disdain for western culture by raising the stakes again and again.

This is becoming a sickening ritual. According to Publius Pundit:

The municipal government in Volgograd has decided to close down a local newspaper for printing a cartoon showing Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, and Moses watching a crowd of clashing people while saying, “We never taught them to do that…� The mayor of the city is quoted as saying that the paper was shut down in order to prevent inter-religious strife; meanwhile, the prosecutor-general is looking to file charges." [emphasis added]

For the life of me, I cannot understand why the west is allowing the threat of mob rule to dictate what the west can and cannot do. Islamofascists have no power other than the threat of violence. Using that threat they have bullied the West into believing that any hint of disrespect to any muslim will result in immediate and violent protest; and the West has bought into the threat.

The answer? Stand up to the Islamofascists and slap them down HARD every time. Jail them, deport them, treat them with the same disdain that they have treated us; our constitutional protections do not extend to those who use violence or threaten to use violence as a means of intimidation. As Dr. Helen notes:

Too bad European countries haven't learned this lesson--appeasement of violence doesn't work."

UPDATE: Nicholas Stix writing at The Intellectual Conservative has some thoughts on reversing the Muslim threat.

Multi-Cultural Cowardice

In August, 2001 my wife and I landed at Copenhagen (København) for the start of a two week Baltic Cruise. The sights and sounds of Copenhagen with its delightful Danish character, the visual presence of other countries, nationalities and cultures obvious to anyone who was willing to look and the aroma of uniquely Danish Bakeries made this part of the trip a tiny bit of heaven.

Towards the end of the cruise (with yet another five days to go) we were in Berlin on September 11, 2001. These two bits of travel information are now deeply imbedded in my psyche; 9/11/01 for obvious reasons, and Copenhagen and Denmark given the current cartoon controversy.

I've not commented on the cartoon kafuffle for a couple of reasons; first, because I'm still recovering from surgery, but more importantly because one of my lessons learned in life is that I need to think through what I want to tell you dear reader and not go off half cocked. So, this post may be lengthy and for that I apologize in advance.

The so called "evening news" (as opposed to the evening information that someone wants you to see) is replete with images of angry Muslim's rioting over the publication in Denmark of a series of drawings of Mohammad. They are angry because it is disrespectful to show "images" of Mohammad. They are angry because mob thinking has taken over and replaced any ability to reason (and I'm not real sure that reasoning is one of their strong points anyway). Drawings of Mohammad have been made for hundreds of years, commissioned usually by other Muslims. However, that seems to be a moot point. Instead, we are treated to video of death and destruction, the burning of the Danish Embassy, Denmark advising its people to flee the Middle East in general, and Pakistan in particular and even plastic statues of good old Ronald McDonald being torched. This is a culture I'm supposed to respect?

The mentality of those in the mob is not questionable! It is, actually, bizarre. What other culture would brandish signs saying "Behead the cartoonists," or offer million dollar bounties for the death of a cartoonist (apparently too ignorant to understand that there were a dozen different artists involved)? And yet, and yet, we are being asked to "understand" that they have been insulted, that they have had their sacred religion mocked, and that our inability to "understand" is akin to another holocaust.

It strains the fabric of rationality. Thomas Szasz once made quite a stir with the publication of "The Myth Of Mental Illness" in which he basically argued that those labled mentally ill were merely "differently abled" and society was at fault for not doing the right thing. Now, like then, it is the fault of Western Culture and Western Values that has triggered the rioting, death and destruction. What utter nonsense!

Modern western "liberalism" holds forth that multi-culturalism is the only way to go. That the true meaning of a multi-cultural society is acknowledgement that no one culture is better than another, just different.

multiculturalism n : the doctrine that several different cultures (rather than one national culture) can co-exist peacefully and equitably in a single country

It is increasingly demonstrable that the culture represented by the majority of middle eastern Muslims are in fact, unable to live with others. Does not play well with others as a kindergarten teacher might say of a todler!

Much has been written regarding the failure of European countries to allow assimilation of Muslims into their society and in part, that may be true. But I think another part of this equation needs to be an honest acknowledgement that Muslims (many? most?) do not want to integrate into the society into which they have moved.

Pat Santy of Dr. Sanity has written extensively on Narcissism in a three part series. In part three of her series, she describes what happens to the grandiose narcissist or someone in narcissistic rage, two parts of which include:

(1) The Grandiose Self is dominant, and the individual exhibits:
• Continual claims for attention and admiration
• Cold and uncaring behavior toward others
• Sees others only as an extension of the Self to be manipulated and/or eliminated as needed; not able to relate to people as people or separate from oneself
• Grandiosity
• Hypochondria, or an obsession with individual body parts and illness and
(3) When the Idealized or Omnipotent Object is dominant, the individual exhibits:
• Rigid adherence to a belief system/ Ideal
• Willingness to sacrifice people for the Ideal ("their own good")
• Others are seen as omnipotent and all-powerful or all-good
• Intolerance of mistakes
• Unforgiving of transgressions�especially those against the IDEAL
• Tendency not to acknowledge flaws in the IDEAL

This is obviously a personality disorder that cannot be applied to an entire culture, but, and this is a big but, but, there are aspects of this that absolutely apply. Another "Psych-blogger" Sigmund, Carl and Alfred notes:

To understand what is perceived to be a moderate Islamic culture, a bit of history is in order. There have been- and there remains- religious and social groups that have successfully transitioned from a narrow and confined world to a broader and more inclusive one. Traditional Catholics and Jews, for example, have successfully integrated into society and have retained their identity and religious identities. In fact, the traditional and 'orthodox' communities of each of those faiths is undergoing a tremendous resurgence.

This reality is quite easily attributable to the idea that one can be traditional and at the same time, inclusive and integrated into the community at large. This becomes a reality because the 'reformation' of the community and faith have the blessings of the community and faith. There is more than a tacit understanding that life moves forward. While Christians await the second coming and Jews await the arrival of the Messiah, the understanding is clear. Life as we know it will go on. Our spirituality will have acquired a new dimension, but our day to day lives will not be much different.

The opposite is true of Islam in just about every iteration. The ideology has morphed into one that looks backward. Much of Islam sees 'progress' in faith as a regression to earlier times. That occurs in one of two ways. In one interpretation, as the Islamic prophecies come to pass, life as we know it indeed changes. Technology as we know it becomes verboten- we are to live life in the way Mohammad did, simple and pure. There is another version- that we, kafirs, will exist only to serve Muslims, the fruits of our labors are to be enjoyed by Muslims only.

Is there then a point to this? And of course, my answer is an unequivocal yes. My point is is that we have not been willing to stand up and call bad behavior exactly that, bad behavior. When it comes to Abu Ghraib or Gitmo we decry the behavior of individuals and institutions. When it comes to offending others, we say to ourselves "shame on us." but when it comes to calling down bad behavior by a backwards and intolerant culture, we say nothing.

This cannot stand. If, in the totality of time, any culture is to survive, it must be as a compliment to other cultures. A culture cannot stand by itself and exist worldwide, for as surely as those that uphold Darwin, there will be changes and a culture will alter. This is equally true of a universal Moslem Culture. Should the so-called Caliphate be established, it will soon dissolve into chaos as individuals seek to aggrandize power unto themselves. This is human nature and not just a happenstance.

We of the west must not flinch from this task. A blind allegiance to multiculturalism will benefit no one. It is one thing to tolerate another culture as being valid, it is entirely another to tolerate a culture that seeks your overthrow and demise.

Recently in the news there was a Gay group demanding that Israel pull out of the west bank and cease "persecuting" the Palestinians. Hmmm, what is wrong with this picture. Have these gay folk no idea how the vast majority of the adherents of Islam view homosexuality? Do they not think they may be signing their own warrants? In England, some banks are no longer using that age-old symbol of savings; the ubiquitous "Piggy Bank" because Muslims might be offended by pigs. Excuse me? Did these idiots ever worry about offending Jews who also don't eat pork? Never mind, rhetorical question.

As a society, as western culture we must be willing to call a spade a spade. The intolerance of the “typical� Moslem culture that riots in faux anger at a few damned cartoons cannot be allowed to stand. The entire world must stand up, shout “enough� and be willing to hurt someone’s feelings if need be.

Not to do so is exquisitely illustrated by Cox and Forkum:

It is time to rock the boat and rock it hard!

UPDATE: The Salient, a Harvard newspaper published the cartoons with Editor Travis Kavulla stating that the paper had an obligation to report the news. Listen folks, the cartoon upheaval in the Middle East has cost nineteen people their lives so far, that is more than sufficient evidence that collectively they have lost their minds. The Associate Dean of the college Judith H. Kidd stated in an email to the Salient that: “some segments of the campus...may be sufficiently upset by the publication of the cartoons that they may become dangerous.� Good grief! Warning some that others may become dangerous, and not warning those that "may become dangerous" - "Not On My Watch You Don't."

H/T to Sissy Willis at SISU

UPDATE # 2: Tigerhawk asks if we need to grant tolerance to those who refuse to be tolerant. Good Question and I like his answer. H/T Glen Reynolds who agrees: "Tolerance is a two way street. Those who do not grant it, have no right to demand it."

UPDATE # 3: Dymphna of Gates of Vienna(scroll down in the comments) notes:

Islamophobia is on the rise because Islamists are volatile, supremacist, and very much loose cannons in the public sphere. Islamophobia is the result of Muslim behavior. It wasn't a bunch of yeshiva students who set off bombs in London or Madrid.

Unless Islam can shed its present violent acting-out, Islamophobia will continue to rise. Bombs, hate talk, demands for special treatment, and contempt for the country in which they live will endear them to no one."

Sounds right to me!

UPDATE # 4: Ed Morrissey says:

When our media has the testicular fortitude to report on terrorists honestly, then they will have gained the moral authority to lecture any White House on censorship and the responsibility of fully informing the public. Until then, such demonstrations as we saw this week by the White House press corps only stands as a perverse monument to the media's hypocrisy and venality.

H/T Instapundit

UPDATE # 5: One of the commenters on Bill Quick's Daily Pundit said it as well as can be said:

Newspapers and Television news shows are not showing the cartoons out of fear of what that might cause. Terror at what might happen to them, their homes, their lives.

Terror, as in 'Terrorism'.

The West's shining fundamental tenet, the First Amendment, has been attacked by Islam, terrorized.

And it fell faster than the World Trade Center.

No planes were needed, no bombs. No innocent victims needed to have their heads sawn off.

They used our foolish nature, our tolerance, our multiculturalism, our determination to believe the best about people and fashioned it into a spear--and rammed it into our heart.

They didn't merely destroy buildings this time. They took aim--and hit, our very souls.

Linked at The Bullwinkle Blog

Muhammad Cartoons: Flush Out Offenders and Wipe Away Problem

- G.M. is still recovering nicely and communicated that it would be nice if we did a post on the controversy over the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. Naturally, in his interest, I warned him that some Muslim may not like it and could stand on his oxygen tube. Nevertheless, as a good soldier, I follow orders. It's his hide, and he's not around to deny this, anyway...so, here goes. Well, why is there controversy? Why are people apologizing over these cartoons or else running for the hills if they don't?

Do you remember when The National Endowment for the Arts funded and defended art work offensive to decent people and Christians? They felt that they could take money from taxpayers and use that money to insult those taxpayers by claiming freedom of speech and expression. (Hey, guys, do your freedom of speech thing with your own money.) Nevertheless, we were forced to pay for "Piss Christ," a crucifix submerged in a plastic container filled with the artist's own urine. Did you have any problem with that? Did you see tens of thousands of people protesting in the streets and threatening death to the artist? No, and I also sure didn't see any liberals rushing to apologize for the offending art work. But, this is different...or, maybe, they're scared to death of retaliation.

But, I have to agree that the Muhammad depictions have gotten out of hand. In fact, the White House has denounced changes to some government bathroom facilities, as they relate to this issue. I am presenting this only as a public service to show examples of offensive material and what types of things we should avoid and not pass along. I know that you will respect the spirit of this and take it with the sincerity offered. I suspect that G.M. would agree, but I'm probably lucky that he hasn't gotten out of the hospital yet.

Click on the "Continued" link to view the latest controversial art.

Continue reading "Muhammad Cartoons: Flush Out Offenders and Wipe Away Problem"

Can Congress Stand Up?

This war on terror is serious to some of us. To others, it's an excuse to find fault with President Bush and his policies regarding just about everything. So many groups and experts claim the threat isn't important enough to justify spying, on the very (non) people who seek to harm us. Media outlets are at war too, with the Adminstration. Always living in some past decade, the Democrats/Liberals are not progressive with their actions.

Continue reading "Can Congress Stand Up?"

Super Sunday for Super Conservatives

Warning to all our readers: Do not attempt to fly over the Super Bowl on Sunday. There could be life-changing repercussions: Air Force says it will shoot Super Bowl TFR violators. Nuts. Just one more experience that I will never have thanks to Islamic terrorists...well, if I wanted to. When I was at the airport the other day I thought about how we would amuse our kids for hours by taking them out there and going all over the concourses and letting them watch the big planes up close. Then, we would ride the train around the terminal. The kids loved it, and it was great entertainment all for the price of parking your car. No more.

On to the Super Bowl.... I don't have the time or expertise to elaborate, but I'm picking the Steelers over the Seahawks by two in a game to be decided in the final minutes. Part of the reason is sentimental, so the pick is not entirely with logic, and you would be crazy to make any bets based upon what I say. (I picked the Braves and Red Sox to be in the last World Series--another misguided sentimental pick.) This site by CBS Sports has more on the game, and you can track the game play-by-play with all the statistics here.

I'm sorry to report that no liberals will be able to enjoy the game, as their lives are consumed with fretting over President Bush, the military, capitalism, and, mainly, the fact that they are not in power. For the rest of you, tell us your pick and enjoy the game on Sunday. We can go one evening without worrying about the world.

"This Makes It Real"

ABC's Bob Woodruff was wounded in Iraq covering the Iraqi forces. He and his cameraman suffered serious but not fatal wounds and are being treated in Germany.

That is the story so far, but the blow-dried talking heads want to make this into a cause célèbre. On ABC's "Good Morning America," Diane Sawyer, Elizabeth Vargas and ABC News President David Westin talked about Woodruff's injuries:

SAWYER: "To that point, being in the Iraqi vehicle was part of the story. The story right now is the Iraqi troops traveling with the American troops."

VARGAS: Are they prepared enough to take over the security of Iraq so that American forces can come home? That is the big single issue in Iraq right now, and I covered the story when I was there, Bob was out covering the story. You can't assess their readiness unless you're traveling with them and observing them do their job.

WESTIN: My initial reaction is we've all talked about this as a very real possibility, but this makes it real. I mean, we've talked about it, we knew someone was going to get hurt. We discussed what can we do to try to minimize that risk, how cautious can we be. But now it's really one of us, and two of us, actually. What choice do we have? As long as the United States is over there, and our men and women are over there and they're in harm's way, this is a story we have to...[emphasis added]

Excuse me? The wounding of an American newsman makes it real? So much for the two thousand plus American troops who have given their lives, so much for the thousands of Iraqi's murdered by Al Qaeda and their fellow travelors. That wasn't "REAL." But this is!

Idiots!

"This Makes It Real"

ABC's Bob Woodruff was wounded in Iraq covering the Iraqi forces. He and his cameraman suffered serious but not fatal wounds and are being treated in Germany.

That is the story so far, but the blow-dried talking heads want to make this into a cause célèbre. On ABC's "Good Morning America," Diane Sawyer, Elizabeth Vargas and ABC News President David Westin talked about Woodruff's injuries:

SAWYER: "To that point, being in the Iraqi vehicle was part of the story. The story right now is the Iraqi troops traveling with the American troops."

VARGAS: Are they prepared enough to take over the security of Iraq so that American forces can come home? That is the big single issue in Iraq right now, and I covered the story when I was there, Bob was out covering the story. You can't assess their readiness unless you're traveling with them and observing them do their job.

WESTIN: My initial reaction is we've all talked about this as a very real possibility, but this makes it real. I mean, we've talked about it, we knew someone was going to get hurt. We discussed what can we do to try to minimize that risk, how cautious can we be. But now it's really one of us, and two of us, actually. What choice do we have? As long as the United States is over there, and our men and women are over there and they're in harm's way, this is a story we have to...[emphasis added]

Excuse me? The wounding of an American newsman makes it real? So much for the two thousand plus American troops who have given their lives, so much for the thousands of Iraqi's murdered by Al Qaeda and their fellow travelors. That wasn't "REAL." But this is!

Idiots!

Osama and Cognitive Dissonance

On January 19th, Osama bin Laden released an audio tape full of bluff, bluster, and outright lies. In his tape, OBL stated that Al Qaeda was ready to launch another attack or series of attacks on the United States, but, that we could escape our fate if we accepted a negotiated truce. In this so-called truce, OBL and company would rebuild Afghanistan and Iraq and we could leave the Gulf States and the Middle East to their kind and kindly ministrations. To seal the bargain, OBL stated that his faith prevented him from lying, subterfuge, and dishonesty; as if the hijackers on September 11 were open and aboveboard. ABC news reports, in part:

In the tape, bin Laden spoke in a soft voice, as he has in previous recordings, but his tone was flatter than in the past and had an echo, as if recorded indoors. He presented his message with a combination of threats, vows his followers can fight forever and a tone of reconciliation, insisting he wants to offer a way to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

He even recommended a book for Americans to read - "The Rogue State," apparently a book of the same title by American author William Blum. He said it offers the path to peace - that America must apologize to victims of the wars and promise never to "interfere" in other nations - though it was not clear if these were conditions for the truce."

There is good reason for OBL to be so accommodating, and that is because he is losing his war against the United States, he knows it, but he has difficulty accepting it because all of his training, all of his experience (US Embassies, USS Cole, Mogadishu, Madrid, London, etc.) has told him that we cannot stand against him. Too, his radical and murderous form of Islam and his islamo-fascist advisors and sycophants tell him that there will be an ultimate victory by Allah via the likes of Al Qaeda. The differences between what he knows and what he can see has produced a significant cognitive dissonance.

In 1957, Leon Festinger published "A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance." This seminal work was based on observations Festinger and his associates made of a cult that expected the world to end by flood. Many in the cult became so enamored of the cult that they sold their homes, moved to the "headquarters" invested themselves heavily into the end-of-the-world dogma of the cult. Others were less enthusiastic, but believed none-the-less.

Festinger's observations, and subsequently his theory of Cognitive Dissonance arose when the predicted "end-of-the-world" did not happen when it was supposed to happen. The less "invested" one was in the cult, the greater the feeling that "I've been had." Indeed, and counter-intuitively perhaps, the greater the investment of time, money, self worth and deep belief, the more likely the person was to believe that they had not been taken in and in fact, because of their efforts, their faith, their hard work, the world had been saved.

Festinger also investigated what happens in the "lab." When students were taking part in an experiment, they had to sort spools and turn knobs a quarter turn. As you can imagine, this would quickly become tiring/boring. Festinger then upped the chances for forming dissonance. He told a few students that the lab assistant had fallen ill and would they talk a young lady into taking part in the experiment (individually of course, not as a group). Some were promised a dollar, others were promised twenty dollars to convince the young lady to take part in the experiment. The conversations probably went something similar to:

She: "I've heard that it is really boring."
He: "Oh no, it is quite interesting and even entertaining."

What Festinger found was that the individuals paid a dollar actually came to believe the "importance" of the task, while those paid twenty dollars acknowledged they were lying. In other words, the scant reward wasn't reason enough to lie, so the work (lying to the co-ed) must have been accurate. For those with a promise of higher pay, the lie was just a lie.

So, without all the psychological jargon that can be tossed in, cognitive dissonance occurs when there is discomfort felt at a discrepancy between what you already know or believe, and new information or interpretation. The new information or interpretation must be either accommodated or assimilated. In Piaget's terminology, assimilation occurs when new information is taken in that does not contradict that which is already "in our heads" if you will. In other words, if we believe X and Y comes along we "assimilate" if we take in Y but we are not required to alter X. Accommodation however is when we take in Y and X is thus altered, and altered almost beyond recognition.

For Osama his utter and unalterable belief in the rightness of his cause, the radical Muslim faith that tells him Allah will help him prevail, his Massadra upbringing that allows no other thoughts, no questions of Islam tell him that he will win. Against this, is the evidence of his eyes. He has lost 70% of his leadership, his friends have been tracked down and killed, disgusted and enraged Muslims in Jordan call for the blood of al-Zarqawi, A large body of Islam questioning the utility of mass murder of other Muslims in Iraq and elsewhere.

Shrinkwrapped has some excellent posts on cognitive dissonance.

To wrap up (no pun intended shrinkwrapped) OBL cannot balance his internal mindset, and his external world.

UPDATE: MEMRI states that the translation of the OBL tape was in error. According to MEMRI, OBL was stating that he would live up to a truce if WE offered it to him. I will leave it to others to decide if he is still in Cognitive Dissonance, or just plain psychotic. Or both! Hey Osama, no truce dude.

Hell of a Happy Blogoversary Dr. Rusty

Dr. Rusty Shakleford, esteemed author of the Jawa Report is celebrating his 2nd blogoversary. In celebration, his blog played a part in the capture and conviction of a terrorist. Way to go Dr. Rusty!

Recruiting and Retention is UP

Ryan James, a youngster from my town (and a budding young reporter) has GREAT news. Go read and follow his links.

I Am Coming

One of our regular readers, and a personal friend of mine sent this to me. It was so good, I had to share it with you. From an Anonymous Naval Aviator:

I Am Coming!

Dear Terrorists,

I am a Navy Aviator. I was born and raised in a small town in New England. I come from a family of five. I was raised in a middle class home and taught my values by my mother and father.

My dad worked a series of jobs in finance and my mom took care of us kids. We were not an overly religious family but attended church most Sundays. It was a nice small Episcopal Church.

I have a brother and sister and I am the youngest in my family. I was the first in many generations to attend college.

I have flown Naval aircraft for 16 years. For me the flying was never a lifelong dream or a "calling," it just happened. I needed a job and I liked the challenge. I continue to do it today because I feel it is important to give back to a nation which has given so much to me. I do it because, although I will never be rich, my family will be comfortable.

I do it because many of my friends have left for the airlines and someone has to do it.
My government has spent millions to train me to fly these multi-milliondollar aircraft. I make about 70,000 dollars a year and after 20 years will be offered a pension.

I like baseball but think the players make too much money. I am in awe of firemen and policemen and what they do each day for my community, and like teachers, they just don't get paid enough.

I respect my elders and always use sir or ma'am when addressing a stranger. I'm not sure about kids these days but I think that's normal for every generation.

I tell you all this because when I come for you, I want you to know me. I won't be hiding behind a woman or a child. I won't be disguised or pretending to be something I am not. I will be in a U.S. issue flight suit. I will be wearing standard US issue flight gear, and I will be flying a navy aircraft clearly marked as a US warplane.

I wish we could meet up close iin a small room where I could wrap my hands around your throat and slowly squeeze the life out of you, but unfortunately, you're hiding in a hole in the ground, so we will have to do this a different way.

I want you to know also that I am very good at what I do. I can put a 2,000 lb weapon through a window from 10,000 feet up. I generally only fly at night, so you may want to start sleeping during the day. I am not eager to die for my country but I am willing to sacrifice my life to protect it from animals like you.

I will do everything in my power to ensure no civilians are hurt as I take aim at you. My countrymen are a forgiving bunch. Many are already forgetting what you did on Sept 11th. But I will not forget!!

I am coming. I hope you know me a little bit better, see you soon...sleep tight.

Signed
A U.S. Navy Pilot
Our Soldiers are one
of our greatest assets!
God Bless

Tracked at Mudville Gazette

Hey, Liberals--If you support our troops, show it.

Some messages don't require further explanation, but is this too subtle for liberals to understand?

Found at and a thanks to Denny's in Atlanta

Iraq Strategy For Dummies

Ken Summers at It Comes In Pints? has the study guides for the Democratic and Media elites who are generally clueless about the war. Ken got the idea from a comment on Glenn Reynolds:

Some people are asking what's new about this strategy. The answer -- as Jon Henke notes -- is nothing, really. ("Naturally�after having paid more attention to the critics claiming there's no plan than to, you know, the actual plan�everybody is acting all surprised and confused. . . .This isn't the 'first time' the White House has disclosed the strategy for victory in Iraq, and the strategy isn't 'new'. This is something reporters really should know. . . . Granted, the White House should have done a better job at spreading this message from the very start. But it's sheer laziness and/or incompetence on the part of the media and critics to pretend that the Iraq strategy hasn't been widely available for a long time.")

What's new is that the White House is forcing people to pay attention to the plan, and to the fact that there is, and has been, a plan even though the press has ignored it. That many media outfits, as Henke notes, seem to think this is all new is merely evidence that they've been providing lousy war coverage all along.

But the White House, if a bit late in the day, is doing something it needs to do. You can't rely on bloggers to do it all.

I don't think the Dems will learn anything, even with a tutor, but it was nice of Ken to provide the study materials.

Good for the Iraqi people!

GM Votes for the Iraqi People. Care to Join Me?

Coming Home And The Last Goodbye

Every once in a while, you come across something so haunting, so deep and so stiring that it sticks in your mind like nothing else. This is such a story. I received an e-mail from a really good, though new, friend, Rick who writes The Real Ugly American. Rick asked me to share his post with all of my readers, and after looking at the post, I could not but comply.

There are those today who still think of the Vietnam Veterans as "terrorists" who leveled villiges reminiscent of the actions of Jenghis Kahn, who call our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan "idiots" and "mercenary's." That dear friends is a lie. Our troops are heros, proud and bloodied, but unbent. Heros all whose actions over the decades from The Battle of New Orleans through the assault on Fallujah have kept us free, and wrested freedom for others.

Rick's piece opens with an intro from Docski, a member of a vets forum:

Some here would call them idiots. Some would make fun of them for risking their lives for $75 a month in combat pay. I call them some of the bravest and finest people I have ever known. Hearts of Vikings.

Tycz and I patroled together on the Teams for 4 or 5 months. Doc Miller was my replacement. We buried them this past spring in DC.

and from the article that the above was an intro to:

Four dead men. One already is smoldering. The elephant grass is on fire. Three other Marines are still alive for now, but if the North Vietnamese Army doesn't get them, the fires surely will.

It is late morning, May 10, 1967, on Hill 665 northwest of Khe Sanh. A Marine reconnaissance patrol named Breaker is in trouble...

Read the whole thing, you will really miss something of merit if you don't.

When Is The World Going To Take Iran Seriously?

My blog friend Seth at Hard Astarbord has a new entry up on the Mad Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of the Rogue State of Iran. This "nation" is full of terrific people who have a government that is full of crap. Having said that, the recent pronouncements by Ah^MADinejad regarding our friends the Israelis is next to impossible to believe. Ah^MADinejad stated:

"Some European countries insist on saying that Hitler killed millions of innocent Jews in furnaces. Although we don't accept this claim, if we suppose it is true, if European countries claim that they have killed Jews in World War II, why don't they provide the Zionist regime with a piece of Europe? Germany and Austria can provide the regime with two or three provinces for this regime to establish itself, and the issue will be resolved. You offer part of Europe, and we will support it."

Seth reports that Mark Steyn has the lowdown in what has to be a must read column. Thanks Seth for the pointer.

Grunts Who Carry Rifles

Full Disclosure: I am not a combat veteran, though I served in the United States Army. I have not been shot at nor heard shots fired in anger. I did not serve overseas. But, I have a tremendous respect and profound gratitude for those that did. I am delighted to be the son and grandson and great grandson of "Lifers." Who, between them fought in 5 wars; the Spanish American war, WWI, WWII, Korea, and Vietnam. My great granddad was a Sergeant, my granddad a light Bird who was a P.O.W. in the Philippines. And my beloved and missed father who was a "full Bird" on retirement after 32 years of Active duty and three wars.

I am proud of any number of friends who are former Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines. I work with a number of them today. I have counseled a number of vets with posttraumatic stress disorder, lingering psychic wounds from Vietnam. I am proud of all of them as well; they served in hell.

I am proud of the service of Jack Murtha too. Nevertheless, that will not stop me from saying that he is very wrong, and if not senile, is certainly acting that way now. I take with umbrage those who call Murtha a coward, clearly, as his medals suggest he is not. However, that gains him nothing. A man can be a hero 40 years ago and off base today. The hero who was lucky enough to come home in the mid 60's recently said, regarding our military that they are "broken, worn out" and "living hand to mouth," He also said "I predict he'll make it look like we're staying the course," Murtha said, referring to Bush. "Staying the course is not a policy." Of course, Congressman Murtha may not realize that staying the course is as much a policy as getting out now.

I have serious doubts about the Honorable Jack Murtha at this point. The news has played up his "change" from a steadfast supporter of all things military to someone who has turned into an anti-war hero. I debunked this some two weeks ago here. Murtha's call for a pull out resulted in a bitterly fought resolution in the House of Representatives.

The Main Stream Press (the delightedly wicked "liberal press" which liberals fully deny and go to great lengths to "prove" that they are not because after all they are owned by corporations) has been having a field day. Several days ago Senator John "Do you know who I am" Kerry stated that American troops are terrorists:

And there is no reason, Bob [Schieffer on Face The Nation], that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women...

Kerry is of course, in the words of James Taranto a "haughty, French-looking Massachusetts gentleman who by the way served in Vietnam." Kerry is however, even in trouble with the Democratic party's so called base because, in the words of that famous liberal blogger Markos Moulitsas Opined

There's a little kerfuffle inside the Democratic Senate caucus over John Kerry's insistance [sic] in being part of the official party response to Bush's hilarious "plan" in Iraq. Reid originally had designated Sen. Jack Reed to provide the official response. Reed did the "prebuttal" yesterday and had a press conference set up for today.

However, John Kerry stomped over Reed by deciding he was going to hold a press conference this morning as well in a naked bid to steal the limelight. Eventually, Reid was forced to combine the two press conferences to try and maintain a unified Senate Democrat response, but Kerry's antics have generated some ill will.

Much ado about nothing? Perhaps. But several DC Democrats I've spoken to today were not happy with Kerry's antics. And given 1) Kerry's continued inability to clearly articulate a coherent position on the war . . ., and 2) the fact that Kerry voted for it (while Reed did not), it's not hard to see why.

Some of the comments are delightful, especially one near the very end where the commenter acknowledges that the Dem Party Base is "eating their own:"

What we don't need is a refighting of the primaries, or the campaign, with the perception that it was an easy win with 55% of America liking Bush, the war, and 70% believed in the Iraq-911 linkage. It was difficult playing the margins with the media accounting for such ignorance about the war.

The next election will still be difficult with corporate media liking the GOP, and the GOP organization counting the votes. There was nothing Kerry could have done differently in Ohio, so please get over it. The proof is not there or anywhere, definitively, without access to their machines, or a whistleblower.

We need less infighting and eating of our own. Kos posts something like this, and the spin machine comes out. I would say Kos is swiftboating Kerry with made up rumor and misinformation, just as he did during the campaign. He was paid by Dean, and that accounts for some of the resentment. [emphasis added]

But, I digress. The press is also lapping up Howard "Yarrrgggghhhhh" Dean's call for unilateral surrender in an interview with WOAI Radio in San Antonio, Texas:

I've seen this before in my life. This is the same situation we had in Vietnam. Everybody then kept saying, 'just another year, just stay the course, we'll have a victory.' Well, we didn't have a victory, and this policy cost the lives of an additional 25,000 troops because we were too stubborn to recognize what was happening."

Well, they are all wrong. However, that is not the point of this post. The point of this post is the damage they are doing to the Grunts Who Carry Rifles. As a psychotherapist, one of the things I do when I am working with a parent with an unruly and yes, sometimes even obnoxious child is to drill into their heads that they cannot be their child's friend, they have to be the parent; that there are some very simple behavioral truisms. The first of these is that behavior that is reinforced tends to continue, and behavior that is punished (and sometimes ignored) tends to decrease. In this case, the Democrats who are piling on the "get out now" bandwagon are reinforcing the behavior of the islamo-fascists. Dean alluded to Vietnam, not because it was true, but because that represents the epitome of the anti-war left. Mark Silverberg said it quite well:

In a recent article in the Washington Times, Arnaud de Borchgrave noted that during the Vietnam War, General Giap relied on the American peace movement to weaken American resolve. That had the effect of turning an American military victory into a political defeat. Former North Vietnamese General Staff officer Bui Tin once said that the peace movement was "essential to our strategy." In America, the open support of Hanoi by Jane Fonda, former Attorney General Ramsey Clark (now head of International ANSWER, which coordinates the largest protests) and others "gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses," Bui Tin said. "Through dissent and protest," the US "lost the ability to mobilize a will to win."

Notice that the "get out now" Democrats (and many others, truth be told) are reinforcing the belief that the islamo-fascists have that if they keep up the carnage, continue to psychologically (and physically?) dope up their ignorant followers into suicidal bombings, that the US will pull out and they will win, and then they will turn to other targets. Unfortunately for this to occur the US Military, their allies and the Iraqi's who have joined the police and military to establish a true democracy in the middle east will be harmed in the process. The very guys, described as Grunts (who carry rifles, wh drive trucks, who patch wounds and provide aid even to their sworn enemy in setting up schools, clean water supplies etc.) who will be killed, maimed and given a good dose of psychic-horror that will later morph into PTSD for a future generation of therapists to work with.

The other side of this equation is that behavior that is punished tends not to repeat itself. In the old USSR, acts of terrorism against the Soviet Union were dealt with swiftly and harshly. Terrorists who attacked and killed Russian officials in Lebanon a couple of decades ago were hunted down and "terminated with prejudice" in the spy-thriller vernacular.

Look, this is not rocket science so even the Democrats and wavering RINO's ought to be able to understand, the fastest way out of Iraq is to present a united front, to go after the terrorists with everything we've got, to track down and kill each and everyone we can identify. When the islamo-fascists understand this, they will wither on the vine and maybe, just maybe their movement will die an ignoble death.

But, I'm just as sure that won't happen, as I'm sure that John "Do you know who I am?" Kerry is not going to sign his SF 180. They have a blind side to reality. That is why Kerry still thinks he is the front-runner in the race for the Democratic nomination in 2008, why Howard Dean thinks he can utter defeatism from every podium he can get his hands on. That is why a former hero like Jack Murtha, who having gained the limelight with his bogus “turn around� now demands even more light on him with his "broken" comments. They don't get it, they just don't get it and the guys who bear the brunt of their stupidity, their intransigence, their anti-military ranting, the Grunts Who Carry Rifles will be the ones who pay the price.

So, the next time you hear one of these folk say that they "Support The Troops," call them what they are; LIARS!

Saddam and Weapons... Really? Yeah, Who'da Guessed it!

Ethan Wallison who writes the delightful Room 12a is revealing one more bit in the exposure of the lie of weapons acquisition by Saddam Hussein, former Swine Herd President of Iraq. This bit from London's Independent:

KIEV, Ukraine -- A Ukrainian presidential bodyguard who exposed the country's biggest political scandal, involving murder, corruption, and illegal arms sales to Saddam Hussein has returned home, vowing to put his former boss, Leonid Kuchma, behind bars.
Major Mykola Melnychenko fled Kiev in 2000 after revealing excerpts from secret recordings he made of Mr Kuchma which implicated the president in the murder of a journalist who had exposed the corruption of Mr Kuchma's 10-year rule.

Major Melnychenko has been provided with a bodyguard by the Ukrainian intelligence services since his arrival on Wednesday from the US where he was given political asylum in 2003. He was with a former Ukrainian MP, Oleksandr Yalyaskevych, also granted US asylum after claiming Mr Kuchma's henchmen had tried to kill him....[snip]

Major Melnychenko says he saw Mr Kuchma taking bribes, and recorded him allegedly authorising sales of sophisticated defence systems to Iraq in contravention of UN sanctions."

My friend Ethan wraps up with:

I guess in this instance, as in so many others, "containment" meant restraining one's impulse to collapse in gales of laughter at the impotence of the international sanctions imposed on Saddam."

You know, if Room 12a isn't a part of your regular blog reading regimine, it oughta be, it really oughta.

Reading Assignment!

If you don't read anything else in the next several days, you MUST read this

College "Teacher" in N.J. Urges Fragging of Officers In Iraq

One of my regular commenters, Tad a retired Marine Corps Lt. Col and a professor of History, and a good friend with whom I have shared many a repast over lo these many years sent me this heads up from the Washington Times. The lede graf:

A community college in northwestern New Jersey is investigating a part-time instructor who vowed to intimidate students who host conservative speakers at the school. The teacher also called for U.S. soldiers in Iraq to kill their superiors.

The article goes on to describe how student Rebecca Beach, a member of Young America's Foundation, a conservative group of students that offers speakers from the conservative side of the political spectrum. Ms. Beach sent a request to John Daly, adjunct instructor in writing and developmental English at Warren County Community College in Washington, N.J. requesting his support for an up-coming speech by Army Lt. Col. Scott Rutter, a Medal of Honor recipient.

The e-mail reply by Daly noted that the groups posters "looked like fascist propaganda." Daly also stated "capitalism has killed many more people" than the communists and that the "poor and working-class people" are recruited to "fight and die for Exxon and other corporations." OK, that is freedom of speech, one of the guarantees that the troops protect. Then Daly stated that "Real freedom will come when [U.S.] soldiers in Iraq turn their guns on their superiors." And that dear readers is not freedom of speech, that is incitement to commit murder.

The Washington Times reported:

College officials said they are treating the matter "as a personnel issue and will be addressing it according to the policies and procedures of the college."

"The viewpoints of this professor in no way depict the views of Warren County Community College, its administration or the Board of Trustees. The college does, however, support the Constitution, the First Amendment and the right to free speech," WCCC said.

Sounds to me like the college administration needs a fusion of backbone. At least Board Chairman Edward Smith has called an emergency board session to discuss this issue. Unfortunately, the college's President Dr. William Austin

...reiterates his statement that comments made by Mr. Daly are his own. The opinions Mr. Daly has expressed do not represent the views of the community college, administration, faculty, staff or students, nor do his views align with the college’s mission and core values."

Yeppers, it looks like Dr. Austin is in need of emergency backbone transplantation. Of course, if he get's one and does something about the urging of murder by Mr. Daly, the ACLU will doubtlessly weigh in but hopefully on the side of the college students for a change.

Exercising one's right to free speech (as did Mr. Daly up to but not including urging fragging) does not give one the right to shut up others. Nor, does it give license to urge the killing of superiors by soldiers engaged in a war against the islamo-fascist enemy. How is what Mr. Daly did different from an American teacher in 1942 urging American Forces not to fight the fascists and to kill their officers and what do you suppose would happen then?

As my friend noted,

For those of your who feel the ire that I do, you might send an email to yet another institution of "higher learning" where we are conducting our own madrassas.

For those of you desiring so, the phone number for the college (be sure and ask for Board Chairman Edward Smith or President Dr. William Austin) is (908) 835-9222. E-mail addresses (which mayor may not work - depending on recent e-mail volume) should be austin@warren.edu and smith@warren.edu. I'm sure of Dr. Austin's e-mail address, less sure of Smith's.

Linked at STACLU

Breaking News

JPost reporting: The Elaph Arab media website reported on Sunday that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the head of the al-Qaida in Iraq terror group, may have been killed in Iraq on Sunday afternoon when eight terrorists blew themselves up in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul.

The unconfirmed report claimed that the explosions occurred while coalition forces surrounded the house in which al-Zarqawi was hiding. American and Iraqi forces are looking into the report.

H/T Daily Intel Briefing Kilo Echo 4

Update, Iraq The Model is also reporting this, read the 100+ comments too.

Update 2, Yahoo news

Update 3, Dr. Sanity has more including a spanky photo.

Dems Cry "Foul;" But Who Is Kidding Whom?

The lefties and progressives as well as the Democrats are crying "foul, no fair" last night, and today, and for sure on all the talk shows tomorrow. The MSM will play it up as the Republicans grandstanding again, but the truth of the matter is that for once, the party of Harry Truman and John Kennedy lost a game they thought they had mastered.

And, the left is left in high dudgeon. My good friend Marc Cooper is livid, as are many of his lefty type commenters. Marc states:

After its midnight emergency session earlier this year in the midst of the Teri Schiavo carnival, I couldn’t imagine the U.S. Congress stooping even lower.

Not until last night, that is, when the House held up its Thanksgiving break to debate and vote on what is one of the most repellant political maneuvers in recent memory.

As the tide of public opinion turns against the war in Iraq, as a conservative Democrat like Jack Murtha calls for a troop withdrawal plan, the response of the Republican leadership is to play beanbag with American body bags."

There are several things wrong with this, first, I see absolutely nothing wrong (except in its execution) with congress having an emergency meeting to look at the execution by dehydration of an innocent woman. I am not willing to revisit the Schiavo case but that case was so fraught with injustices that some felt that they had to do something and congress critters can have an emergency session. Perhaps a bad choice of action, but the motive was good (and no, I don't need any lectures about how the road to hell is paved with good intentions). Second, this was not a "repellant political maneuver,� this was a bold (and bold faced) attempt to get the hysterical Democrats to put their money where their mouth is. Lastly, my dear friend Marc, the bean bag game is being played by the Dems, remember the "joy" at the 2000^th American casualty?

This whole episode has one cause, Democrat game playing. Starting with the idea that the repulsive Congressman John Murtha (D. Penn) had a "change of heart" on the Iraq war and was now thinking that a pull out was necessary. Because Murtha was a decorated retired Marine, the MSM played this for all it was worth. I've chronicled this "B.S." in a previous entry.

However, in my haste to call the Dems on their silly protestations, I didn't go far enough. So, I'll say it here. Murtha is a scoundrel. How's that for ya? Murtha's statement “a flawed policy wrapped in an illusion,� cannot be easily dismissed. Responding to Dick Cheney’s acid counterattack that “certain politicians� were “losing their memory� in supporting the war, Murtha replied: “People with five deferments� had no right to make such remarks. Oh yeah Jack, says who, you? He (Murtha) has been all over the map for partisan political advantage. Sure, he was a decorated combat veteran in Vietnam. So what? There is a despicable meme that only those who have been in combat before have the highest "moral authority" to speak against the war. Maureen “Dowdy� famously stated that Cindy Sheehan had "absolute moral authority" to call out against the war because she had lost her son Casey. Well, what about parents who have lost a child and still support the administration and the war in Iraq? What about the soldiers, sailors, Marines fighting this war, actually with boots on the ground who disagree strongly with Congress Critter Murtha? They have a right to question your "memory" don't they? In addition, you confer that right in your ridiculous statement.

Congress Critter Murtha proposed an immediate pullout. Oh, he didn't use those words "exactly" but this is nothing different than he said in September, 2003 at a publicity stunt press conference with Nancy Pelosi (D. Ca.) the House Minority Leader. On hardball, two or three days later, he told Chris Matthews regarding his vote to go to war:

I’m not blaming anybody else because I saw all the intelligence reports. All of them indicated we had imminent danger." [Imminent danger? That is something Bush never claimed!... so what, the Dems have beat that meme into the ground and now a lot of people believe it...ed]

So what are we left with? A highly partisan Democrat with a history of highly political stunts who happens to be a retired Marine who was in combat in Vietnam comes out against the war. That is nothing new; he has said the same things repeatedly since September 03 at the least. Then he proposes a pull out and the Republicans take him at his word and put out a resolution that calls for an immediate pull out. The Reps will, of course, vote against the measure but it is out there to give the Dems a chance to put their money where their mouth is so to speak. Here is Murtha's resolution in full:

Whereas, Congress and the American People have not been shown clear, measurable progress toward establishment of stable and improving security in Iraq or of a stable and improving economy in Iraq, both of which are essential to “promote the emergence of a democratic government�;

Whereas, additional stabilization in Iraq by U, S. military forces cannot be achieved without the deployment of hundreds of thousands of additional U.S. troops, which in turn cannot be achieved without a military draft;

Whereas, more than $277 billion has been appropriated by the United States Congress to prosecute U.S. military action in Iraq and Afghanistan;

Whereas, as of the drafting of this resolution, 2,079 U.S. troops have been killed in Operation Iraqi Freedom;

Whereas, U.S. forces have become the target of the insurgency,

Whereas, according to recent polls, over 80 percent of the Iraqi people want U.S. forces out of Iraq;

Whereas, polls also indicate that 45 percent of the Iraqi people feel that the attacks on U.S. forces are justified;

Whereas, due to the foregoing, Congress finds it evident that continuing U.S. military action in Iraq is not in the best interests of the United States of America, the people of Iraq, or the Persian Gulf Region, which were cited in Public Law 107-243 as justification for undertaking such action;

Therefore be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that:

Section 1. The deployment of United States forces in Iraq, by direction of Congress, is hereby terminated and the forces involved are to be redeployed at the earliest practicable date.

Section 2. A quick-reaction U.S. force and an over-the-horizon presence of U.S Marines shall be deployed in the region.

Section 3. The United States of America shall pursue security and stability in Iraq through diplomacy.

Sounds like an "immediate pull out to me" even with the tag "...earliest practicable date." at the end of Section 1. (copy of Murtha's Resolution courtesy of QuickRob

"No fair," cry the Dems, "how dare you?" Even that French Looking Senator from Mass who allegedly served in Vietnam had to pitch in saying "I won't stand for the 'swift-boating' of Jack Murtha." Oh, how dreary. First of all Senator Kerry, no one is "swift-boating" Murtha, everyone acknowledges his courage under fire. It was your so called "history" that was swift-boated because of the continuing doubts about your conduct. Just like no one questioned Max Cleland's patriotism they questioned his judgment and rightly so. We are also questioning Murtha's "sudden conversion" from hawk to dove. Come to think of it, Senator, perhaps we ought to question your intelligence if you think this is swift-boating because it indicates you still don't have any idea what the Swift Boat Vets were saying.

But I digress, the actions of the Democrats in the so-called debate were not only ludicrous, it was hilarious in the extreme. Think about it; a group of Democrats lambasting the Republicans for pulling a stunt that the Dems time and time again have pulled. Then we have the sight of Congress Critter Ford of Tenn. "charging" the other side of the aisle:

Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) drafted a simpler resolution calling for an immediate withdrawal of troops, saying it was a fair interpretation of Murtha's intent. Members were
heatedly debating a procedural rule concerning the Hunter resolution when Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-Ohio) was recognized at 5:20 p.m. Schmidt won a special election in August, defeating Iraq war veteran Paul Hackett, and is so new to Congress that some colleagues do not know her name.

She told colleagues that "a few minutes ago I received a call from Colonel Danny Bubp," an Ohio legislator and Marine Corps Reserve officer. "He asked me to send Congress a message: Stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message: that cowards cut and run, Marines never do."

Dozens of Democrats erupted at once, pointing angrily at Schmidt and shouting repeatedly, "Take her words down" -- the House term for retracting a statement. For a moment Schmidt tried to keep speaking, but the uproar continued and several GOP colleagues surrounded her as she sat down, looking slightly dazed. Presiding officer Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) gaveled in vain for order as Democrats continued shouting for Schmidt to take back her words. Rep. Martin T. Meehan (D-Mass.) yelled "You guys are pathetic!" from the far end of the Democratic section to the GOP side.

Just as matters seemed to calm a bit, Rep. Harold E. Ford Jr. (D-Tenn.) suddenly charged across the aisle to the GOP seats, jabbing his finger furiously at a small group of GOP members and shouting, "Say Murtha's name!" Rep. David R. Obey (D-Wis.), who had led the chants for striking Schmidt's comments, gently guided Ford by the arm back to the minority party's side.

All in all, great political theater. The Dems seemingly debating not having a vote on a resolution proposed as an antithesis of the one Murtha proposed as being un-fair and then voting damn near (403-3) lockstep against the resolution. Why? Because it required them to put their money where their mouth was and they couldn't do that, because this is not about the war, this is about bashing Bush and gathering as much political capital as possible while doing it. Anyone who denies that is not being fully honest.

Oh, and the three that voted for the resolution: Democrats Jose E. Serrano (N.Y.), Robert Wexler (Fla.) and Cynthia McKinney (Ga.). The only Democrats with enough guts to vote their conscience. I disagree with all three of these folk, but I admire their courage in standing up to the mealy-mouthed in their own party. And the six Democrats that voted "Present," maybe they are the biggest cowards of all.

Linked at STACLU

Blogburst Against The Trolls

Scrolling through links today, in the midst of writing a new post, I noticed my co-blogger on The Wide Awakes Cao who writes at Cao's Blog is asking for support for Grey Eagle. Grey Eagle writes at A Female Soldier 2 and has been receiving a lot of troll comments dissing the service of those who have volunteered for the service, and as a result are serving in Iraq. Trolls are a true pest in the blogosphere, but may be a part of the price of freedom. However, we can all stand up to the trolls and we should. Grey Eagle has this to say:

To those who have not devoted as much energy to the destruction of this website and my rights, I do want to thank you for your continued support and the wonderful email I receive daily. I want you to know that not only I read your message, but many of the other soldiers here read them as well. As the holidays approach us and we are away from our families that means a lot more then you will ever know. A special thanks to PJ and the Web Of Support community for their wonderful care packages that have arrived (if you wish to give please contact them). It was like Christmas here as we opened our boxes of treats. We have also received care packages from other caring individuals and we appreciated them so much. Just to know that we are not alone, and the world has not turned against us and our efforts can be a very moving and powerful moment for us when we get our mail and our packages.

Finally, I wish to say that a soldier wounded from shrapnel awoke the other day after being unconscious from his wounds. His eyes are etched into my memory as he discovered he was alive, safe, and among his fellow soldiers. In that moment, I knew that everything I had sacrificed in my life, that this holiday season away from my husband and children, that the lack of sleep, the long days, and my personal sadness at times from the separation are worth it. Sometimes there are causes worth serving that are greater then ourselves.

Grey Eagle, Thanks!

Linked at Cao's Blog

History of The Iraq War 1990-2003

Greyhawk has a lengthy history of the Iraq war and what led up to it. Great read, worth your time!

Linked at STACLU

Murtha's "Metamorphosis" Meme of MSM Merits Mockery

Much has been written regarding US Representative John Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat, "sudden" change of heart and his call for withdrawal from Iraq. Indeed he has caused an untold amount of angst among those who support the war because Murtha has always been considered a Hawk on matters military. Murtha is a retired Marine Corps colonel who received a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts in the "unpleasantness" in Vietnam. Murtha, however inspite of the gasps from the MSM is not saying anything new. Moonbat Pelosi:

Congressman Murtha made a compelling case about what has gone wrong in Iraq. For too long, the Bush Administration's approach to bringing stability to Iraq has relied on U.S. troops taking almost all the risks"... September 16, 2003

Or, how about this:

If congressional Democrats do start exerting some leverage over the administration, they may have John Murtha to thank. The 30-year House veteran is a hawkish defense expert who supported the Iraq war and is known for working with Republicans on military issues. His remarks last week were especially dramatic because Murtha is known as a low-key operator who rarely speaks in public. [yeah, except this article was written in mid MAY, 2004

His vote on valiant service of US troops: "Voted NO on approving removal of Saddam & valiant service of US troops. (Mar 2004)"

Oh yes, Murtha has been a hawk all right. Not! He has been a hero, he has been on the right committees, he has been a vocal supporter of the military often, he has been a partisan Democrat all along. So, the MSM is either trying to dupe us on Murtha's change of heart thinking we are stupid; or they are too stupid to look up where he has been since March '03. I think its the former, don't you?

“Unlike our Pres, our Vice-Pres, the Sec of State - Jack Murtha knows combat.� [ doubtless from a Dem in tonights debate ] "Yeah, so do the 150,000 troops in Iraq right now. And unlike the weenies in Congress, they have balls, courage, honor, and conviction of purpose." - Kit Jarrell comment at 1906 hours (7:06 PM for the civilians in here)

I've listened to the Dems castigate the Republicans in the debates because the Repubs had the temerity to essentially say put up or shut up. Pelosi (Moonbat, California) states that she has requested all of her caucus to vote for the resolution since it differs from Murthas in the timespan (murtha said ASAP in 6 months or so) the Repubs called his bluff and ok, you want out, let's vote on "immediately." So, the upshot is the dems are castigating the resolution, but for political purposes the dems will vote for it so they don't seem that they are saying pull out now, which of course is what most of them are saying but they can't say it out loud because they will look like the fools that they are. Well, at this stage of the game, they have been hoist on their own petard. Serves the bastards right.

Gateway Pundit has a hell of a lot more.

Linked at STACLU

Le Fromage Commence À sentir

The Cheese Is Beginning To Smell. As news about the riots in France begin to fade from the front pages, what has been learned? Are the rioters a new brand of islamo-fascists? Are they poor underprivileged youth with no idea of how to integrate into French society? Are they merely thugs, with a penchant for toasting marshmallows over Peugots?

Some answers can be found in the blogosphere with varying points of view.

Faceless Bureaucrat wonders why they are burning cars rather than looting stores.

Most Sincerely Folks wonders if the riots are a result of the practice of polygamy.

Mark Steyn believes that it's heading for a Eurabian war and Hugh Hewitt interviews Victor Davis Hanson

Gindy notes: "The riots maybe slowing down, but now French protestors are taking to the streets over the polygamy comments"

Les Français sont des de gens très drôles.

Linked at STACLU

Letter From The Front

Today I received an e-mail from greyhawk at The Mudville Gazette. The e-mail was forwarded from Sgt. Hook and included a link. Clicking the link one finds a letter from a Sgt serving in Iraq who has asked that his Mom "Be my voice." I'm reprinting the letter in full because it is a message that needs to be heard. Pass it on!

Mom,

Be my voice. I want this message heard. It is mine and my platoon’s to the country. A man I know lost his legs the other night. He is in another company in our batallion. I can no longer be silent after watching the sacrifices made by Iraqis and Americans everyday.Send it to a congressman if you have to. Send it to FOX news if you have to. Let this message be heard please…

My fellow Americans, I have a task for those with the courage and fortitude to take it. I have a message that needs not fall on deaf ears. A vision the blind need to see. I am not a political man nor one with great wisdom. I am just a soldier who finds himself helping rebuild a country that he helped liberate a couple years ago.
I have watched on television how the American public questions why their mothers, fathers, brothers, and sisters are fighting and dying in a country 9000 miles away from their own soil. Take the word of a soldier, for that is all I am, that our cause is a noble one. The reason we are here is one worth fighting for. A cause that has been the most costly and sought after cause in our small span of existence on our little planet. Bought in blood and paid for by those brave enough to give the ultimate sacrifice to obtain it. A right that is given to every man, woman, and child I believe by God. I am talking of freedom.

Freedom. One word but yet countless words could never capture it’s true meaning or power. “For those who have fought for it, freedom has a taste the protected will never know.� I read that once and it couldn’t be more true. It’s not the average American’s fault that he or she is “blind and deaf� to the taste of freedom. Most American’s are born into their God given right so it is all they ever know. I was once one of them. I would even dare to say that it isn’t surprising that they take for granted what they have had all their life. My experiences in the military however opened my eyes to the truth.

Ironically you will find the biggest outcries of opposition to our cause from those who have had no military experience and haven’t had to fight for freedom. I challenge all of those who are daring enough to question such a noble cause to come here for just a month and see it first hand. I have a feeling that many voices would be silenced.

I watched Cindy Sheehan sit on the President’s lawn and say that America isn’t worth dying for. Later she corrected herself and said Iraq isn’t worth dying for. She badmouthed all that her son had fought and died for. I bet he is rolling over in his grave.

Ladies and gentleman I ask you this. What if you lived in a country that wasn’t free? What if someone told you when you could have heat, electricity, and water? What if you had no sewage systems so human waste flowed into the streets? What if someone would kill you for bad-mouthing your government? What if you weren’t allowed to watch TV, connect to the internet, or have cell phones unless under extreme censorship? What if you couldn’t put shoes on your child’s feet?

You need not to have a great understanding of the world but rather common sense to realize that it is our duty as HUMAN BEINGS to free the oppressed. If you lived that way would you not want someone to help you????

The Iraqi’s pour into the streets to wave at us and when we liberated the cities during the war they gathered in the thousands to cheer, hug and kiss us. It was what the soldier’s in WW2 experienced, yet no one questioned their cause!! Saddam was no better than Hitler! He tortured and killed thousands of innocent people. We are heroes over here, yet American’s badmouth our President for having us here.

Every police station here has a dozen or more memorials for officers that were murdered trying to ensure that their people live free. These are husbands, fathers, and sons killed every day. What if it were your country? What would your choice be? Everything we fight for is worth the blood that may be shed. The media never reports the true HEROISM I witness everyday in the Iraqi’s. Yes there are bad one’s here, but I assure you they are a minuscule percent. Yet they are a number big enough to cause worry in this country’s future.
I have watched brave souls give their all and lose thier lives and limbs for this cause. I will no longer stand silent and let the “deaf and blind� be the only voice shouting. Stonewall Jackson once said, “All that I have, all that I am is at the service of the country.� For these brave souls who gave the ultimate sacrifice, including your son Cindy Sheehan, I will shout till I can no longer. These men and women are heroes. Their spirit lives on in their military and they will never be forgotten. They did not die in vain but rather for a cause that is larger than all of us.

My fellow countrymen and women, we are not overseas for our country alone but also another. We are here to spread democracy and freedom to those who KNOW the true taste of it because they fight for it everyday. You can see the desire in their eyes and I am honored to fight alongside them as an Infantryman in the 101st Airborne.

Freedom is not free, but yet it is everyone’s right to have. Ironic isn’t it? That is why we are here. Though you will always have the skeptics, I know that most of our military will agree with this message. Please, at the request of this soldier spread this message to all you know. We are in Operation Iraqi Freedom and that is our goal. It is a cause that I and thousands of others stand ready to pay the ultimate sacrifice for because, Cindy Sheehan, freedom is worth dying for, no matter what country it is! And after the world is free only then can we hope to have peace.

SGT XXX and 1st Platoon
101st Airborne Division (Air Assault)

Linked at Cao's Blog

BDS Pandemic; Dems, Liberals and Progressives Hardest Hit! UPDATED

EJ Dionne (long infected with BDS - Bush Derangement Syndrome) has had a hissy fit. He recently decided that he didn't like the way that Bush put the onus on the dems for the way they are touting the "Bush Lied" meme, in fact, I doubt if anyone else likes "... to be told their arguments make the troops' job harder. Who would want to hear they're undermining the war effort?" as Jonah Goldberg put it in National Review Online's "The Corner" Dionne writes:

Bush was not subtle. He said that anyone accusing his administration of having "manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people" was giving aid and comfort to the enemy. "These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America's will," Bush declared last week. "As our troops fight a ruthless enemy determined to destroy our way of life, they deserve to know that their elected leaders who voted to send them to war continue to stand behind them."

Bush was not subtle? OMG... EJ, where have you been for the last 2 and a half years. The Dems, including the vast majority of Dems in the Senate who signed onto the war, have been anything BUT subtle in their condemnation of Bush and the War. And, whether you like it or not, when they turn around and accuse Bush of everything but shorting the sheets of new recruits, they ARE undermining the morale of the troops, the vast majority of whom know EXACTLY why they are in Iraq and who re-up (reinlist) in record numbers. They ARE giving aid and comfort to the islamofascists who believe that if they hang on long enough, the US will belly up.

Well, guess what EJ, you have been called on your chicanery. The "Bush Lied" meme has been repeated so often, so loudly by so many that even the gullible people are beginning to doubt the goals and prospects of our efforts in Iraq. Just as they did in Vietnam. So, that part of the so called quagmire is true, the people are being lied to, consistently and persistently by the MSM and by folks like you. The master propagandist Josef Goebbels was right, tell any lie loud enough and often enough and people will begin to believe the lie.

And guess what? It is unpatriotic! You ought to be ashamed for writing such crap.

You can find more at Argghhh!, and at Hugh Hewitt and as Hewitt notes, even the republicans are getting in on the act.

UPDATE: Right Track has a good list of the Dems that Lied (well, if Bush did, so did these Dems)

“One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.�
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.�
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

“Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.�
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

“He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.�
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb 18,1998

“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.�
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry (D - MA), and others Oct. 9,1998

“Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.�
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

“Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.�
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

“There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.�
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.�
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.�
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.�
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.�
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…�
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.�
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002

“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.�
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

“He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do.�
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct 10, 2002

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.�
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.�
Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime… He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation… And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real.�
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

Don't Go Into the Light is reporting a Moonbat Meeting in response to Bush's "Push Back" speech!

Myopic Zeal has another fine entry exposing the Dems for the charlatans they are.

Michele Malkin has more. Money graf:

They were emboldened when they were successful in getting the President to say the "16 words" should not have been included in the SOTU speech. This was the beginning of the "Bush lied" mantra. Many even claimed that Bush admitted he lied about the 16 words when he said they should not have been included. More on that sequence of events here and here. [be sure and click on all the links... ed]

Lori Byrd of PoliPundit in one of the two links noted in Michele Malkin's paragraph above links to Mark Steyn in a blistering attack on the attackers

Click on this graphic:



(graphic courtesy of Michele Malkin)

And lastly, the incomparable Christopher Hitchens ties it all together with this pair of bon mots:

What do you have to believe in order to keep alive your conviction that the Bush administration conspired to launch a lie-based war? As with (I admit) the pro-war case, the ground of argument has a tendency to shift. I saw two examples in Washington last week. An exceptionally moth-eaten and shabby picket line outside Ahmad Chalabi's event on Wednesday featured a man with a placard alleging that Bush had prearranged the 9/11 attacks. I know a number of left and right anti-warriors who have flirted with this possibility but very few who truly believe it. (Even Gore Vidal, who did at one point insinuate the idea, has recently withdrawn it, if only on the grounds of the administration's incompetence.)

And:

A few little strokes of Occam's razor are enough to dispose of this whole accumulation of fantasy. Suppose that every single Iraqi defector or informant, funneled out of a closed and terrified society by the INC, had been a dedicated and conscious fabricator. How could they persuade a vast organization, equipped with satellite surveillance that can almost read a license plate from orbit, of a plain untruth? (Leave to one side the useful intelligence that was provided by the INC and that has been acknowledged.) Well, what was the likelihood that ambiguous moves made by Saddam's agents were also innocuous moves? After decades in which the Baathists had been caught cheating and concealing, what room was there for the presumption of innocence? Hans Blix, the see-no-evil expert who had managed to certify Iraq and North Korea as kosher in his time, has said in print that he fully expected a coalition intervention to uncover hidden weaponry.

And this, of course, it actually has done. We did not know and could not know, until after the invasion, of Saddam's plan to buy long-range missiles off the shelf from Pyongyang, or of the centrifuge components buried on the property of his chief scientist, Dr. Mahdi Obeidi. The Duelfer report disclosed large latent facilities that were only waiting for the collapse of sanctions to resume activity. Ah, but that's not what you said you were looking for. … Could pedantry be pushed any further?

We can now certify Iraq as disarmed, even if the materials once declared by the Saddam regime and never accounted for have still not been found. Why does this certified disarmament upset people so much? Would they rather have given Saddam the benefit of the doubt? Much more infuriating about the current anti-Chalabi hysteria is this: He turns up in Washington with a large delegation of Iraqi democrats, including a female Shiite ex-Communist, several Sunni dignitaries from the "hot" provinces, and the legendary Abdul Karim al-Muhammadawi, who led a genuine insurgency among the Marsh Arabs for 18 years. And the American left mounts a gargoyle picket line outside and asks silly and insulting questions inside, about a question that has already been decided. What a travesty this is. Not only do the liberal Democrats apparently want their own congressional votes from 1998 and 2002 back. It sometimes seems that they are actually nostalgic for the same period, when Saddam Hussein was running Iraq, and there were no coalition soldiers to challenge his rule, and when therefore by definition there was peace, and thus things were more or less OK. Their current claim to have been fooled or deceived makes them out, on their own account, to be highly dumb and gullible. But as dumb and gullible as that?

Linked at TMH Baconbits

Dr. Sanity - A Post Worth Reading

I have a friend. She has been my friend for almost a full year now and she is a blogger like myself. Her name is Pat Santy and she writes the blog Dr. Sanity. Dr. Pat is a practicing psychiatrist and is, like me, conservative. She authors a weekly post called the Carnival of the Insanities and has featured a post or two of mine over the last year.

But that is not the reason for this post. The reason for this post is that she won the Watcher's Council weekly "post of the week" with this post: "The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today's Left" and what a post it is. If my readers don't immediately click on the link and read it, then they aren't as smart as I think they are.

Dr. Sanity (her nom de plume or nom de pixel as it may be) also nominated this post of mine for the non-council post of the week but I didn't win. Who won was Stephen Green's Brilliant essay "The Arm of Decision", and folks, I gotta tell ya, I would have voted for the VodkaPundit myself on this weeks essays and if you don't go read that one, again you are not as smart as I think you are.

So, my deepest thanks to Dr. Sanity for the nomination, but more importantly my deepest congratulations too both authors for absolutely brilliant posts.

Mike's America: "Democrats will lie US into Iraq Defeat

Mike of Mike's America has a well documented, well thought out post on the Democrat stunts in congress. My favorite grafs:

At the direction of Senator Roberts, staffers on the Senate Intell. panel assembled several hundred statements by Republicans regarding Iraq, weapons of mass destruction and links to terrorism and paired them up with the intelligence reports that formed the basis for the conclusion. Along with Republican statements, those by Democrats were added as well. But before each statement was evaluated for it's veracity, staffers blocked the column revealing who said what.

A blind study, fair and impartial, to get to the truth with less opportunity for political grandstanding! Of COURSE Democrats objected!

Help Democrats Understand Iraqi War

The Democrats want answers as to why the U.S. is at war in Iraq. Maybe this picture will help them find a reason.

Thanks to the clever and nice guys at Sacred Cow Burgers(c) !

Any questions? Pass this on to any of your skeptic friends.

Linked at Cao's Blog

News Source From Central Command

The logo to the immediate left is from Central Command, a Unified Combat Command covering Iraq, Afghanistan and the middle east. Clicking on the logo, which you will find now on my side bar (scroll down a bit) will take you to the Central Command website where you can get upto date news and information that you won't get from the MSM.

This link will take you to a sign up for a weekly electronic newsletter and monthly Coalition Bulletin.

Information is the enemy of those who are anti-democratic!

Our Friends, Allies, Adversaries, The Saudis!

Once Upon A time, In A Land Far Away... A regional panjandrum by the improbable name of Muhammad bin Saud met a fellow panjandrum cum mystic, then a radical islamist, by the equally improbable name of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and decided together that the Arabian Peninsula had just too much freedom in the way Islam was practiced. Deciding that their fellow Islamic Arabs had just gotten too far off the beaten path to true salvation (can you see a cult beginning?) a plan to conquer everyone was put-together. The year? Around 1750 AD (the AD is Anno Domini, an Un PC designation meaning After Christ, for those raised in the PC version C.E. meaning Common Era). The TM's (Two Muhammads) put their plan into action and for the next 150 years, the family of Saud waxed and waned until the advent of another Saud, Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud who in that year captured Riyadh from the rival Al Rashid clan. Indeed, some of the worst trepidations visited on Muslims were visited at the hands of the Wahhabists Riyadh was the Al Saud ancestral capital, Saud was able to finalize his conquests by 1927, and the kingdom became Saudi Arabia.

The religious movement founded by Muhammad ibn abd al Wahhab is known today as the radical-islamofascistic sect Wahhabism, although the practitioners of that sect would disagree with that definition. They (and the Kingdom) prefer to call it Salafism and its members Salafists:

The term "Wahhab" (Wahh�bīya) refers to the movement's founder Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab. It is rarely used by members of this group today, although the Saudis did use it in the past.

The Wahhabis claim to hold to the way of the "Salaf as-Salih", the 'rightly guided or pious predecessors' as earlier propagated mainly by Ibn Taymiyya, his students Ibn Al Qayyim and later by Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab and his followers.

The term is considered offensive by some members who prefer to call themselves al-Muwahhidun (the monotheists) or the movement Salafism.

Saudi Arabia and its people are quite backwards in terms of social progress. They still practice beheading, amputation of feet and hands for theft, lashing, sometimes for months depending on the number of lashes prescribed by the "judge" who is really just a religious figure appointed by the King on the advice of the Supreme Judicial Council. All law is compatible with Shari'a (Islamic law) and is enforced by religious police ("mutaween" police) from the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice. In fact, these animals (one hesitates to call them police) prevented a number of school children from escaping from a burning dormitory because the girls weren't clad in headscarves and black robes as prescribed by religious law. Nor would these animals allow men to approach the girls to rescue them from certain death because they were unclad. As a result, 15 children died in the fire.

In 1938, oil was discovered on the Arabian Peninsula and the power to grow Wahhabism as envisioned by the TM's was closer and closer to fruition. In 1945, one of our most sophisticated Presidents, Franklin D. Roosevelt deigned to meet with Saud following the allied conference at Yalta. Oil revenue made the Kingdom rich beyond belief and allowed the expansion via funding construction of mosques and Qur'an schools around the world. Including schools in all of the western countries.

This growing of Islam via building of mosques, and the establishment of madrassas an Islamic religious school. A simple Google^TM search will yield over 10,900,000 internet sites mentioning "Islamic Schools."

What is taught in these schools is not the 3 Rs to be sure. The Islamic Schools League of America lists as it's vision:

The Islamic Schools' League of America envisions and works towards the day when Islamic schools will be the preferred centers for learning and leadership that nurture and encourage America's youth to develop their innate creativity and inquisitive nature in the pursuance of academic excellence while anchoring their hearts and souls in a moral framework of a God-centered life.

Really? Subjugating women, executing gays, cutting hands and feet off of thieves? That kind of "moral framework?" How about the dreaded religious police that allowed the 15 children to die? That kind of moral framework?

This is the problem with the Saudi's. I probably need not mention that the Saudi's have been the largest contingent by far of terrorists striking the WTC and Pentagon, of terrorists caught/killed in Iraq, and captured here in the United States as proponents of terrorism, money laundering in support of terrorism and the trashing of banking laws to support terrorists. Indeed, while the Kingdom purports to support the United States, and the WOT, the fact of the matter is that the scoundrels have actively supported the very institutions behind the terrorists. A survey last year showed that almost half of all Saudis support Osama Bin Laden

A good blog friend Joerg Wolf who writes for Atlantic Review has penned an excellent piece on the Saudis, their support of terrorism and how the United States is, one must assume through sheer stupidity and indifference, turning a blind eye to the practices of the Salifists. Joerg makes an excellent point:

According to the State Department, religious freedom is non-existent in Saudi Arabia. While Eritrea was punished for lack of religious freedom under the Religious Freedom of Information Act, Saudi Arabia got another waiver for half a year.

This cannot continue unless we are willing (and I for one am not) to submit to Islam in dhimmitude.

It is said that no one is as blind as those that will not see and this certainly applies to the apologists for the Saudi royal family and the practice of Wahhabism. It is an absolute fact that we are totally dependent, as a people and as an economy, on oil. Yet, we are more dependent on foreign oil (read Saudi and our non-friends the Venezuelans) than we were even in the long gas lines of the Carter years. Because the Saudi's own fully 25 percent of the known supplies of oil in the world, it is felt that we must cater to this socially, economically and politically backward government. Enough, perhaps, with a major drive towards energy independence, much as we did at Oak Ridge during WWII to develop nuclear power, we could wean ourselves from Saudi influence.

I also believe we should shut down every Islamic school in America (so should the English and the Europeans) as an absolute threat to western civilization, not because of the religious teachings of Islamic schools, but because Wahhbism preaches hate, overthrow of other forms of government and the establishment of the Wahhabi sect. It will be argued of course, that we are a free society with full freedom of religion. However, freedom of religion is not allowed in Saudi Arabia and 100 percent of the population is Islamic. Further, if you have so much as a stamp in your passport from Israel, you will not be allowed into Saudi Arabia. The belief in freedom of religion does not extend to making a suicide pact with ourselves. It is rapidly reaching a moral imperative that we do something about this pernicious sect, while we still can. I wonder if the The Islamic Schools' League of America envisions and works towards the day when Islamic schools will be the preferred centers for learning and leadership that nurture and encourage America's youth to develop their innate creativity and inquisitive nature in the pursuance of academic excellence includes their innate inquisitive nature when it comes to learning about God from a non-Wahhabi instructor? Somehow, I think not!

Other sites on a theme: Frank Gaffney, Daniel Pipes, Robert Spencer all at Front Page Mag. Jason Pappas at Liberty and Culture, Elenor at 6^th Column, Martin Walker writing in Walker's World, The American Congress for Truth (HT to Always On Watch with a great entry here) & others.

Linked at Euphoric Reality, at Mudville Gazette, at The Political Teen, Don Surber
Choose Life

Updated

Jonathan Steele Has A Hissy Fit!

Jonathan Steele writing in The Guardian seems upset that the Iraqi people told him and all the other naysayers to shove it. Steele writes:

The result was delayed by more than a week after officials said preliminary results showed an "unusually high" number of yes votes but, after checking, the election commission said it was satisfied the constitution had passed."

Oh, I see, the fact that the vast majority of Iraqi's want their own government, not terror by a minority sect, not by Zarqawi or other "insurgents" causes one to think that the vote should only have barely carried, if at all.

Iraqi voters overwhelmingly passed the new Constitution by a substantial margin of 79% to 21% and in doing so, said business as usual won't cut it anymore. The legal wrangling for the constitution allowed for rejection of the Constitution if 65% of the voters in at least three provinces voted "No" on the issue. When the vote was counted, two provinces rejected the issue and one voted "No" by a margin of 55% to 45%, short of the 65% required. The two provinces rejecting the constitution were Sunni strongholds of Anbar and Salaheddin and a third (a near miss electoral wise) Nineveh, did not. Nineveh is the location of the city of Mosul where feelings have run high, but has a mixed religious base of both Sunni and Shia.

It is obvious that the minority Sunni's are angry and upset about loosing the power they held under Saddam and are worried about a couple of real issues under the new Constitution. One of those is sharing oil wealth based on where the oil is located. Most of the oil in Iraq is located in Shia and Kurdish dominated provinces and how they spend the money derived from sales is an issue, one that really must be looked at in the future for all Iraqi's, not just based on "who is in power."

Nevertheless, this is not a killer issue unless made so by the Sunni. It is precisely Sunni intransigence that allowed the current interim government to be established by boycotting the January elections. The Sunni realized the folly of that and overwhelmingly voted in the October election, but in insufficient numbers to defeat the draft constitution.

Naysayers, have long held that the Iraqi people are incapable of voting for themselves, that civil war is on the brink, that Iraq is "united" in wanting to throw out the Coalition troops, and that there is an "insurgency" going on. Nothing could be further from the truth. Michael Yon, on the ground with troops discusses the election in the recent Weekly Standard (and his site here)and lays out the issues, the vote and the results.

Jonathan Steele however will have none of it. Steele writes:

But many observers fear the constitution will undermine Iraq as a state. It minimizes the role of the army by devolving security to local militias, is obscure about who is in charge of taxation, leaves oil revenues to the provinces, and allows local religious authorities the final say on family matters. The state will only have control over "current" oil production; future development can be sold to foreign companies.

The Iraqi people have spoken, get used to it Jonathan!

A tip of the GM Chapeaux to Glenn Reynolds

Linked at TMHBaconbits and Euphoric Reality and Oblogatory Anecdotes

The MSM Lies Continue

Remember not too long ago when John Martinkus reported that US troops desicrated muslim bodies for Psy-Ops purposes? The stink that followed as all "reality based" lefties raised a ruckus about the no good rotten US forces? Turns out that it was a total fabrication, with proof and with cooberation from a lefty journalist no less. Jason Coleman has the whole story... read it all and follow all the links.

UPDATE: Euphoric Reality has Information on Muslims burning people ALIVE. Disgusting.

The Vote, The Voters, The Constitution and Zarqawi's Al Qaeda

In darkness now, Baghdad and all of Iraq prepares for the night after a long day, a day in which the vast majority of those elegible to vote on an Iraqi constitution did just that. They braved threats and intimidation from Zarqawi and his band of thugs, they went out into the streets and they voted. They voted in numbers that puts the majority of the democracies to shame. It appears that something approaching, or perhaps over, 70% of the registered voters exercised their franchise. A great victory for the forces of freedom in Iraq and for the Iraqi people.

From NPR just a few hours ago:

Polls close in Iraq after millions of people cast their ballots in a vote on whether to approve their new constitution. Voting got off to a slow start in Baghdad as Iraqis waited to see if the insurgent-promised attacks would emerge. But for the most part, the day was quiet, with only scattered reports of minor attacks."

Of course, just the other day, NPR was of a different mindset:

A suicide car bomb in Basra kills two people. The attack comes amid increased fighting among rival Shiite militias. Violence is spiraling in the southern city, and British and American authorities say Iran and Lebanon's Hezbollah may be supplying Shiite groups in Iraq."

Indeed, Zarqawi comes out of this looking like someone not in control of all his faculties. Didn't he promise total disruption, didn't he promise to defeat the vote? Bill Roggio writing in The Fourth Rail says it as well as I've seen it anywhere:

Al Qaeda and their insurgent allies still tried to disrupt the election with violence. The following list of attacks is the extent of the terrorist's reach. Behold the might of al Qaeda and its fearsome Ramadan Offensive:

- Gunmen fired on two polling stations in Baghdad. No injuries.
- Office of the Iraqi Islamic Party is torched in Fallujah. No injuries.- Office of the Iraqi Islamic Party is struck by a roadside bomb in Baghdad. No injuries.
- Office of the Iraqi Islamic Party is destroyed in an attack in Baiji. No injuries.
- Terrorists blow up the home of the local Iraqi Islamic Party chief in Ramadi. No injuries.
- Five security guards wounded in a car bombing near a mosque in Kirkuk.
- Four civilians wounded in a roadside bombing targeting a U.S. patrol in Baghdad.
- Fifteen insurgents arrested as they prepared to attack polling centers in Mosul. No injuries.
- Power cut in 70% of Baghdad after power lines are sabotaged north of the city.
- Two police wounded in roadside bombing while patrolling near a polling station in Baghdad.
- Civilian killed by sniper fire near polling station in Baghdad.
- Three insurgents attacked an empty polling station South of Basra, and are captured. No Injuries.
- One policeman is wounded after a roadside bomb exploded near a polling station in western Baghdad.
- Fighting reported between a small band of insurgents and U.S. troops on patrol in Ramadi. No casualties reported. (NOTE: Emphasis added)

Seth at Hard Astarboard has an excellent piece (with several links well worth reading as well) on the current state of Iraq and that we and the Iraqi people are indeed "winning" though perhaps not in the eyes of the MSM. I've blogged about the "lies of omission" from the MSM before. Yet, the Iraqi people remind me of the aeronautical engineers who said that from a design standpoint, the lowly bumblebee could not fly. Someone forgot to tell the bumblebee. Likewise, those that said Arabs in the Middle East would never "take to democracy" forgot to tell the Iraqi's

Hooray for Iraq, hooray for the Iraqi people, hooray for Democracy!

Linked to Iraqi Freedom at Right On The Right and Stop the ACLU's Freedom Party & The Political Teen, as well as the Mudville Gazette

Celebrating Bravery - Part II

Today is the 5th Anniversary of the attack on the USS Cole. Remember the fallen in your prayers and remember also the heroes that saved the USS Cole from further harm by their quick actions. Brave men and women all.

The USS COLE Memorial dedication ceremony was conducted at Naval Station Norfolk Virginia on 12 Oct 01, commemorating the one-year anniversary of the terrorist attack in Aden, Yemen. The Memorial honors the 17 sailors who lost their lives and the crew for their heroic actions to save the ship.

The Memorial was made possible because of contributions to the Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society from thousands of private individuals and businesses across the country. The Memorial design began as a vision of USS COLE crewmembers. The ship then joined forces with Navy architects and the Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society to bring to life their vision. The memorial is a gift of the Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society to the Navy. This Memorial will fulfills an important objective of the Memorial Fund for USS COLE set up by the Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society and the Navy.

On behalf of the USS COLE family, we would like to express our heartfelt appreciation for all of your support and prayers. Without your assistance, the USS COLE Memorial would not have been possible. Thank you.

UPDATE: Those murdered by islamofascist are - Kenneth E. Clodfelter - Richard Costelow - Lakeina M. Francis - Timothy L. Gauna -Cherone L. Gunn - James R. McDaniels - Marc I. Nieto - Ronald S. Owens - Lakiba N. Palmer - Joshua L. Parlett - Patrick H. Roy - Kevin S. Rux - Ronchester M. Santiago - Timothy L. Saunders -Gary G. Swenchonis Jr. - Andrew Triplett and Craig B. Wibberley.

Differing Definitions

Always On Watch has a great post up on how Islam is looked at. Read the whole thing.

Suicide Bomber In Norman, Oklahoma?

Jeff Blanco has a terrific post up titled: Move along, there's nothing to see here." and asks why the MSM isn't reporting this as an act of terror.

Read the Whole Thing.

The Truth, But Not The Whole Truth!

Remember this photograph so prominently displayed by the San Francisco Chronicle but picked up by other organizations?

Click on the picture to get the WHOLE story sans any attempt at lying by telling a partial truth.

Now, tell me again how the MSM isn't biased?

A Tip of the GM Chapeaux to Polipundit

IFC Plans Scrapped - A Win For The Good Guys!

The so called "International Freedom Center (IFC) has been Scrapped. Governor Pataki (R-NY) announced that the IFC would be moved from the WTC memorial and moved elsewhere. The IFC board announced that moving the IFC would not be possible and scrapped the idea.

Now, that seems strange to me. If the IFC were truly about freedom, if the ideas presented in it were not about how evil America is (with plans to include past history such as slavery and the indian wars) than it should stand on it's own elsewhere. That they scrapped the idea entirely indicates, to me at least, that the whole reason for the IFC was to blame the victim for the attacks on the WTC.

The announcement from Take Back The Memorial was simple, direct and elegant:

We are very pleased to announce that Governor Pataki has announced the removal of the International Freedom Center (IFC) from Ground Zero. See The Washington Post for details."

"Every since June 8, 2005 when Debra Bulingame's op-ed, The Great Ground Zero Heist, appeared in the Wall Street Journal, we have fought together for the preservation of the dignity of Ground Zero. With your help, we have achieved a major victory toward that goal."

"We will continue to monitor the plans for Ground Zero to ensure that a fitting and proper memorial is built; one that is respectful of the victims murdered that day, their families, the first responders, and the American people."

"A press release on the removal of the IFC from the 15 family member groups is expected in the next 24 hours and we will post it at Take Back The Memorial as soon as it becomes available."

"Thank you again for your support, prayers, and dedication. We simply could not have done this without you."

It is notable that Hillary Clinton (running for President and doing this for political gain?) came out in favor of banning the IFC from the WTC site.

The concerned families of the WTC victims, numbering over 2000 were strongly against the inclusion of the IFC at the WTC grounds. Notably, the Washington Posts' article cited above stated:

The IFC proposed a museum that celebrated American ideals of freedom and tolerance, with exhibits on such leaders as Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr., as well as documents like the Declaration of Independence and the South African constitution."

What the Post "forgot" to include in its slightly liberal slant was that the IFC would also contain denunciations of the attempts to prevent integration by people such as Bull Conners, George Wallace etc., highlight the ills, mistakes and missteps of the USA in it's 230 year history (and we've made a bunch of them) and NOT put the responsibility for the WFC attack directly where it belongs - on the Islamo-Facists.

Cox and Forkum Posted a couple of Cartoons that really gets to the core of the matter here and here.

Michael Yon, in a non-related post perhaps said it best about good people using information when they had access to good information:

Much world travel has convinced me that the “average American� is a good person. But even a good person needs information in order to act effectively on their best impulses. Oftentimes, good things do not happen simply because information does not make it to the right people."

The Take Back The Memorial people, the congress critters from New York and elsewhere, the former Mayor of New York, Rudi Guiliani and many of you who signed the petition enabled those in power to reach the right decision in the time allocated for that decision. This truly was "A Win For The Good Guys!"

Reportage And The Iraq War ~ A View From The Home Front!

I have always admired Chris Muir, from his first cartoon to the most recent days of Day By Day. Chris is able to state clearly what most of America really thinks in regards to all the liberal shibboleths as reported in the so called Main Stream Media (MSM). There is a major difference between reporting the war from what really is going on, and reporting the war with a hidden political agenda as the cartoon above accurately points out. There is a major difference between what is going on in Iraq and what the MSM is telling you is going on in Iraq. The MSM won't tell you that, I just did! (Uh, Mr. Mondale, that is how you are supposed to say it...)

And significant differences there are! Not just in the quality of the reporting, but in the focus. One tries to portray a quagmire, the other a quality of life missing in Iraq for decades, if not tens of decades and the difference is telling. From the MSM:

BAGHDAD � Heavy fighting surged Friday in the Euphrates River city of Ramadi, police and hospital officials said, and the U.S. military reported the deaths of two more soldiers around the militant stronghold west of Baghdad.

In the Iraqi capital, a suicide bomber on a public minibus set off an explosives belt as the vehicle approached a busy terminal, killing at least five people and wounding eight, police said.

Also in Baghdad, gunmen killed a member of the commission that keeps former officials in Saddam Hussein's Baathist regime out of the Iraqi government, police said. Thirteen members of the commission have been killed since it was created two years ago.

Seven of the 29 U.S. troops killed this month have died in or near Ramadi. The latest deaths occurred Thursday, one in a roadside bombing between Ramadi and nearby Fallouja, the other in a gun battle in Ramadi. Those slayings raised to at least 1,912 the number of U.S. service members who have died since the Iraq war began in March 2003.

So, in the first four paragraphs (from what I've been told, that is where most readers stop unless it is really gripping) what have we learned from this tidbit of reportage? We learned that 1) heavy fighting and two more deaths; 2) a suicide bomber killed five; 3) gunmen killed a commission member, one of 13 killed in the last two years; 4) Seven of the nine US servicemen killed this month have died in or near Ramadi and that 1912 service members have been killed since 2003 Killed, killed, killed, killed. What, no mention of Quagmire? No comparison to Vietnam? Methinks the LATimes is falling down on their job, the MSM may revoke their liberal status.

Of course, it is absolutely not fair to pick on the LATimes (though Oh That Liberal Media! does it very well) So, let us take a quick gander at the NYTimes (no, not their expensive, overpriced, excessively liberal and hackneyed Op-Ed page) again, the first four paragraphs:

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- The leader of Iraq's largest Shiite political organization joined the country's most revered and powerful Shiite cleric Saturday in a strong public push for voter support of a new constitution, three weeks ahead of a national referendum.

Also, suicide car bombers killed five Iraqis in and near the capital, and the U.S. military said a soldier died in a roadside bombing Friday night in southeast Baghdad. The death raised to 1,913 the number of U.S. service members who have died in Iraq since the war started in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count.

In Basra, the country's southern oil hub and headquarters for Britain's 8,500-strong force, an Iraqi judge said he renewed homicide arrest warrants for two undercover British soldiers who allegedly killed an Iraqi policeman trying to detain them.

The Britons were rescued from jail early this week by British troops using armor to crash through the prison walls. In a sign of continuing tensions and Iraqi fury over the British operation, Katyusha rockets were fired at U.S. and British facilities in the city Saturday, causing no casualties.

OK, we learned 1) Shiite Cleric and politico join forces to support a vote for the constitution. You have to get to the 11th paragraph before the reporter mentions the minority Sunni could bloc the constitution by voting en masse against it; 2) 5 Iraqis killed and an American Serviceman killed bring the total to 1913 (note the higher count than given by the LATimes - only by one, but hey, who's counting?); 3) Arrest warrants issued for Brit soldiers who are; 4) broken out of jail by other brits. The fourth paragraph is particularly interesting, maybe we should look at it again:

The Britons were rescued from jail early this week by British troops using armor to crash through the prison walls. In a sign of continuing tensions and Iraqi fury over the British operation, Katyusha rockets were fired at U.S. and British facilities in the city Saturday, causing no casualties.

OK, Brits broke two Britons out of jail, the Iraqis are pissed at them so they fire rockets at the Brits and the Americans. Hey, what did we have to do with them being angry at the Brits? Oh, yeah, I forgot, Tony Blair is Dubya's Poodle - gee, I hate it when I forget those things. So, politicking, killed, arrest warrants, rockets. Still not convinced?

OK, two for two... lets take a look at the number three leading liberal paper in the country, the Washington Post:

BAGHDAD, Sept. 23 -- A suicide bomber driving a minivan with passengers aboard blew himself up near a bus depot in the center of the capital on Friday, killing seven people and wounding 20, police said.

The charred wreckage of the van smoldered in the hot sun while Iraqi police hurried onlookers away from the scene of the blast in Tayaran Square. The square, a major local bus terminal, was crowded with people enjoying the Friday holiday. Blood pooled in the streets around the station, a simple, open-air transit point surrounded by a brick wall.

As insurgents have stepped up attacks on crowds of civilians in public places in recent months, bus stations and markets have been frequent targets. A series of car bombings at the main bus station and a nearby hospital in Baghdad in August killed more than 40 people.

Three American soldiers also died Friday, the U.S. military said in statements. Two were killed by roadside bombs, one near Balad, about 50 miles north of Baghdad, and the other in southeastern Baghdad, the statements said. The third soldier was killed by small-arms fire in Ramadi, 60 miles west of the capital.

Once again into the breech dear readers. We learned from this tid bit of information that 1) a suicide bomber killed 7 and wounded 20; 2) a charred van smoldered while there was blood on the streets; 3) insurgents have stepped up attacks on civilians, killing over 40 in August (gee, had to reach back to last month for a high enough figure?) and 4) three more American Soldiers were killed. So, for the WaPo we have killed, burning & blood, killed and killed.

Gentle reader, if you are not convinced by now, you are either willfully ignorant or blind or can't see beyond your own prejudices. But, don't take my word for it. Lets take a look at different reporting, say by Chris Muir's friend, Michael Yon. Michael Yon has been reporting dispatches from the front lines where he has been embedded with our troops and he is doing this on his own, at his own expense. From Michael's And Now, The Rest Of The Story:

The formula followed by foreign (non-Iraqi) journalists here is different than that used by the local papers back home. Western media cannot free-range Iraq, asking questions and jotting answers on notepads, particularly where insurgents cut off the heads of anyone they do not agree with, later posting "news" videos of their own. Here in Iraq, where bullets are often the background noise, most news agencies get their daily facts spoon-fed straight from the military. The basic building block for just about any news item reported in mainstream press is something called a SIGACT.[READ THE REST]

A quick read of this and you will find out that there is a whole lot you haven't found out if you rely on the MSM (And here, I've used three newspapers as my foil, but you get the same info from the broadcast networks as well.) I'm not going to give a four paragraph review of Michael's latest, for Michael's dispatches from the front have been blogged on here, here, here and here by yours truly. You can also judge for yourself by reading any of his dispatches located here

Many of my leftish friends (and yes, this rightie does have lefty friends) say that the MSM can't possibly be liberal or biased to the left because they are owned by corporations. As if corporations staff the newsrooms, editorial desks, or go to journalism school. The fact of the matter is is that a corporation is interested in the bottom line, and they don't really care how they get a better bottom line. Those staffing the MSM do indeed have a leftish bias. Denying that means that you are only fooling yourself because the rest of us can see what the bias is, clear as day.

As Michael noted, the job of the MSM is not to report news, but to sell advertisements. To do that, they must have readers that the advertisement reaches and blood sells. But, you'd think that a little ballance would be appropriate wouldn't you? Report on the bombing by terrorists (they are NOT insurgents! ...ed.) by all means, but also report on the increasing hope the people of Iraq have in their own government and constitution. Report on the strife, but also report on the schools being built and staffed, on the increase in a free press and the absense of a secret police.

If the goal is to sell advertising, a larger audience just might make a difference to the purchaser of the advertising.

Update: Welcome Instapundit Readers. Please leave a comment whether you agree or disagree.

Info Theory

Just Don't Build It Here

I like Jeff Jarvis, I don't always agree with him on many issues; either I'm too far to the right on some or he is too far to the left. Having said that, I admire the heck out of his writing skills and this piece is absolutely amazing. Go, read, reflect then drop him a comment. Do Not Build It. Not Here!

Info Theory

The Empress of Fifteen Minutes

The Deceased Gentleman, whose portrait appears to the left of this paragraph is Napoleon II. He isn't much as historical folk go, he didn't last very long as is noted in this from Wikipedia:

Three years after his birth in Paris, the First French Empire - to which he was heir - collapsed, and Napoleon Bonaparte abdicated the throne in favour of his infant son, who was taken by the empress to Chateau Blois in April 1814. In 1815, after his defeat at Waterloo, Napoleon again abdicated in favour of his son.

The Chamber of Representatives and Chamber of Peers recognised him as Emperor from the moment of his father's abdication (22 June 1815), but the entrance of the Allies into Paris (7 July) put an end to this short-lived regime. Despite his nominal reign, he is not normally referred to as "Napoleon II" except by Bonapartists who also call him the King of Rome. Nevertheless, the next Napoleon to come to the throne of France took the name Napoleon III in deference to him."

For 16 days, Napoleon II was "Emperor" and the equivalent of todays "15 minutes of fame" as envisioned by Andy Warhol. So, who is the Empress of Today's "15 minutes?" Why none other than Empress Cindy Sheehan I. It is said that history repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce and Ms. Sheehan has descended into Farce with a capital "F."

Woody, my blogging partner in crime, noted below:

When nuts from the left get vocal, their words alone are enough to make one just shake his head and walk away stunned."

Oh, Woody, you ain't just whistling Dixie partner. But, her latest pronouncement that New Orleans is an "occupied city." is more than nuts, it's Farce, again with a capital "F." "...pull our troops out of occupied New Orleans and Iraq." My God Ms. Sheehan, have you gone completely and irrevocably nuts? Wait, that was a rhetorical question! It doesn't need answering, really, it doesn't. Please, don't feel the need to put up another Huffington Post, I mean, it is bad enough that you put this one up, another may well cause massive cardiac arrests across the nation.

But Sheehan as Farce isn't limited to pronouncements on New Orleans, take a look at some of these quotes from the Empress of 15 minutes:

I look back on it, and I am very, very, very grateful he did not meet with me, because we have sparked and galvanized the peace movement," Sheehan told The Associated Press. "If he'd met with me, then I would have gone home, and it would have ended there."

you will find this and other quotes at WILLisms.com here but more importantly is this graph showing the rise, and fall, of Cindy Sheehan. Note where I've circled two spots, the first when she started to become the MSM story, the second when she began her meteoric fall from the spotlight. The more she fell, the more bizzare her comments.
Note that she began her rise on August 3rd, and her fall on August 18th. Note also that this is the same length of time that Napoleon II was Emperor. The first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.

Maureen Dowd, that paragon of punditry, 99 and 97/100ths percent pure (bull), fatuously said of Cindy Sheehan that because she lost her son in war, she had "absolute moral authority." Now, even Dowd ought to be able to figure out that all the other mothers who are proud of their sons and daughter's sacrifice even as they grieve their loss far out number the Sheehan's and so the moral authority ought to "tilt away" from Sheehan. And so it does.

Sheehan's writing in The Huffington Post is a miasma of pseudo-intellectualism with really little to say, and nothing to contribute. A few of the comments at the post are equally execrable:

Another well put post Cindy. We finally got another radio station here in California, in the central valley that is normally sickening with Limbaugh crap shows and Hanity types etc. Its a bit far left, but its sure nice to hear another view after 15 plus years of the same old same old conservative garbage, and whacky Christian right mularkey [sic]. Just wanted to see, keep plugging away. You need to consider running for political office one day. You have what it takes no doubt, and you represent a HUGE amount of people and they way they think. Everything is not right or left in the country. There are millions like you and I who can think clearly without touting party lines.

but others justifiably take her to task:

As a New Orleanian who was THERE with my family during the storm and fled the town with a loaded weapon the following evening because of the looting that we SAW with our own eyes, I cannot possibly fathom how you could say or think such lunacies. HOW DARE YOU! I hope you read these comments, and I hope you apologize for thinking you know about a situation that you never even saw. My family was there. We saw. We now know fear for our lives, and the lives of those around us.

Thank GOD for the national guard presence. They have brought stability to the city, and they are not shooting anyone who is not a threat to somebody's life. Soldiers are not robots. I was back in the city last Thursday and spoke with some of them. They don't want to shoot anybody. Thankfully, nobody I spoke to had to do so.

But until you wade in water up to your waist after dark with a loaded weapon and a flashlight for defense, drive a car through water over its bumper and over limbs that should pop your tires just to get out of a situation where you think somebody is going to kill you, don't you DARE tell me that you can understand the dynamic of what occurred in New Orleans following Katrina. Kindly leave our region and leave us alone.

The First Time As Tragedy, The Second Time As Farce.

Cindy has had her 15 minutes, and more, she has devolved from a grieving mother to a clown spouting nonsense after nonsense after nonsense. So put a sock in it Cindy, end the Farce.

Update: Saturday linkfests for some great reading in addition to the above: The Political Teen, Stop The ACLU, Cao's Blog, My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, Euphoric Reality, Basil's Blog, Wizbang, and the Mudville Gazette

Photographs and Memories

All of the photographs contained on this posting are from a variety of blogs with one thing in common. They remember 9/11/01 and they tell the story of those memories. Click on the photograph to see the site I got it from. If you tear up as I have, that's OK. If you get angry and furious and want to lash out at the animals that did this, that is OK too. If you want to curl up in a ball and hide from the world, that is NOT OK. Regardless of your feelings about the war on terrorism and on terrorists, please remember this; good people have died to maintain freedom, let us remember them.

Note: this Photographic History will stay up for one week and will be added to the whole time. If you have a photograph from a blog, and you would like to see it included, include the URL in the comments section, if it YOUR blog, please link/trackback to this entry.

Continue reading "Photographs and Memories"

Berlin, September 11, 2001

It was the trip of a lifetime, planned, on board the SS Marco Polo with hundreds of fellow veterans, all courtesy of USAA travel. We had landed in Copenhagen, traveled to Tallinn, Estonia; to St. Petersburg, Russia; to Finland and Stockholm and then to Warnemunde, Germany where we were to take the train to Berlin. I was excited, taking my wife to Germany, land of my birth, home of many fond memories of my youth.

We disembarked at Warnemunde at 7:00 AM, for a three hour train ride to Berlin Arriving at 10:20 AM; 3:20 AM New York time a 7 hour difference. A cab ride shared with friends to the Brandenburg Gate. Walking through the Brandenburg gate, visiting Checkpoint Charlie and the Checkpoint Charlie Museum. Making a purchase of a piece of the Berlin Wall for my brother and other Berlin souvenirs for other family. Walking down Unter den Linden with a rain squall having made the street's damp and muggy. Waiting in line at the Bundestag but giving up when the rain started.

Grabbing a late supper we desperately hunted a cab to get back to the train station on time for the return trip and the cabbie, thinking we were just stupid tourists took the long way around. He was a little surprised when I let him know that I wasn't going to pay for the extra miles. Getting to the train station with a few minutes to spare, I looked up at the at the TV overhead and noticed a building on fire, but the train was boarding and I didn't have time to listen. It was probably just as well, my German was pretty poor anyway.

Settling down in the car with two others from the ship that we had befriended the train started on time. One of the passengers came in and said, America had been attacked. "What?" Confusion! By who, what happened? Questions flashing through my brain, concern on my wife's Face, rumor flashing from train car to train car!

Finally, one of the German guides came in and told us that the Twin Towers in New York had indeed been struck by planes and had since collapsed. Fear was on every face in the train.

It took longer than the trip down to get back to Warnemunde, a time that while only close to four hours, seemed like twenty four. All the time cut off from additional information. Worry traveled with us the whole way.

Arriving in Warnemunde we were warned that re-boarding the ship would take a while, and that we needed to be sure that we had no contraband and plenty of identification as everything would be closely checked. Our Guide said that the Deutsche Bundeswehr (German Army) was now in control of the port at Warnemunde and would be in charge of our safety. Walking the three blocks from the train station to the dock in the dark with only the occasional street lamp to guide us, and fear and worry accompanying us, we arrived safely to long lines.

Soldiers with grim faces and submachine guns at the ready stood guard along the dock and massed at the gangplank of our ship and the other cruise liner docked there. Two military vehicles were at the head of the dock with stern looking soldiers manning what appeared to be close to .50 caliber machineguns on the top of the armored personnel carrier type vehicles.

We slowly made our way to the ship, presented our passports and had our bags searched. On board at last, we made our way rapidly to our stateroom and turned on CNN. The scenes of the Twin Towers being struck, on fire, collapsing was played again, and again, and again. America! Struck by an enemy that cared not who he killed. Innocent civilians going about their jobs wiped out in a matter of minutes. Finally dropping off to sleep in the wee hours of the morning of the 12th, I slept fitfully, with images of fire and disaster haunting my dreams.

The rest of the trip was somewhat of a blur. I know we cruised the Kiel Canal to Amsterdam and then to Dover for the bus ride to London. In London, finally, at a hotel where we could decompress, the emotions hit, the tears flowed and anger coursed.

The next day, we traveled to the U.S. Embassy and went to the memorial garden set up by the peoples of England at the base of the statue of General Eisenhower. Some of the flowers and items left tore at my heartstrings, especially a little fire truck left by some small English child. Some of the photos of the memorial are below. The memories still haunt me from time to time. For the citizens of New York, it can only be worse.

PHOTOGRAPHS

The Flag at the Embassy, Half Mast

Candles left by the Wonderful People of England

Cards of Condolence, expressions of Love

The Flag in Flowers

The firetruck of a child reading in childish script "to all the firemen who died," the one photo that then, as now breaks my heart.

Thank you London, Thank you People of England, you took some of the pain away and left memories. Some bitter, some sweet, all worth having!

Letter Home From A Marine

Raven who writes at And Rightly So, one of my very favorite blogging type people had a note up today regarding a letter home from a proud member of the United States Marine Corps sent to the New Hampshire Union Leader. After reading the letter, and noting that it exactly mirrors my feelings, as well as those of Raven apparantly, I decided to reproduce the letter in it's entirety as well. It is a message worth reading and pondering. The Letter:

I AM a U.S. Marine serving in Iraq. I am in the utilities field, installing temporary power grids and purifying water for the U.S. forces in my area of operation. I hear a lot of news about why we should be here and why we shouldn’t.

Well, I am tired of reading the same news about the fact that we are here. The truth is that the decision was made to come here and now it is time to stop bickering about if it was a right or wrong decision. The decision was made, and there are only two options the elected officials of our country face.

One is to pack up and leave everything as it sits right now. The second is to see the decision through and make a thriving country with the potential to succeed.

If we go with the first option, then yes, there is a chance that the citizens of Iraq will overcome the struggle for independence from the insurgent forces on their own and become a legitimate democracy. But after being here and watching the people learn what true freedom is, you can see they are still in the beginning stages of understanding what it truly means. They have been oppressed for so many years that anything other than complete control over their decisions is very different and hard for them to comprehend.

I know these are pretty bold stereotypical comments. There are many educated citizens of Iraq who do know full well what a westernized democracy can mean for their nation, but in the same note the majority of these educated people were in the hierarchy of the old regime and have lost a considerable amount of power because of the change.

In the second option, seeing things through to the end, the United States will carry a heavy burden on the deficit and will not see any monetary gain from this aid we are providing to the Middle East for many years to come. In any normal business, if you saw this loss versus gain, you would be a wise person to cut your losses and move on, but this is not a business, this is a civilization. This concerns a whole nation of people and not just a few jobs lost due to layoffs. [emphasis added]

At this point you are probably wondering what my point is, or what option I side with. Well, I do not take any side and my point is only this:

We have elected officials in our government to make decisions to guide our nation in the future. They are privy to a lot more information that you or I have not had the opportunity to review. They have made decisions, and it is our job to follow. I do not question why or how; I get things done.

Instead of criticizing what someone should have done, help find the solutions to bring about a quicker resolution that will benefit all concerned, not just yourself.

As a Marine, I am proud knowing that each day that passes here in Iraq we make it that much safer for more than the 99 percent of the populace of Iraq. There is still a threat, and there are still deaths each and every day. That is unavoidable.

As for me, I say, “Aye, aye, sir� and applaud the fact that we do not abandon a job unfinished."

Staff Sgt. Edward G. Bowie is a Marine serving in Fallujah. He grew up in Bristol.

Good Find Raven. One ATTA-GIRL is in the mail for ya.

Lies OK If It Is "For The Children."

Not many things in life really get my dander up. Oh, sure, there are a few things, radical liberals, radical righties, Pat Robertson, Sy Hersch, a few others, but in general, I'm fairly well laid back most of the time. Until the other day that is. I came across one of the most grotesque, cruel, and yes, heartless hoaxes that I've ever seen.

Kodee Kennings has, for the last two years told her story in the pages of the Daily Egyptian at Southern Illinois University - Carbondale. An exerpt from one of the first articles:

Dan Kennings was trying to calm his daughter down, but he had trouble making her feel at ease because he was crying himself.

Kennings was about to leave Kodee, his only daughter, to fight the war in Iraq. He was trying to board a plane at Fort Campbell, Ky., which would eventually take him to the Kuwaiti desert.

But his daughter had other ideas.

In an attempt to delay his departure, Kodee swiped his helmet and refused to let go, saying he could not leave without his helmet.

Still in tears, Kennings took his helmet back from his 8-year-old daughter, but he still could not convince her he had to go. She refused to let go of his arms, and pleaded with her father.

That doubtlessly paints a pretty sad picture of a Soldier leaving his child with a guardian (the mother having died some time ago), tears, pathos, pulling at your heart strings.

For two years, readers who naturally fell in love with this child and her father, who followed his experiences in the war, the hurt and heartbreak when he came home on leave, and had to leave again. The trials and tribulations, for all to see. TV interviews, the child, the guardian, the father, all there, all human, all heartbreak. Then, word came back from Iraq that Sgt. Kennings, Kodee's father had been killed in combat.

And now the fraud becomes apparant. The Chicago Tribune wanted to cover the story, it called to find out when and where funeral services were to be held, to let Kodee Kennings know that she was well loved, not only by her dad and her guardian, but figuratively by the readers of the Daily Egyptian.

When the Trib called, if found out that there was no Sgt. Kennnings killed in Iraq, there was no Sgt. Kennings at all. From The Trib:

The Tribune went to southern Illinois to learn about the bond between Kodee and Dan Kennings, and the life Kodee would face without her hero.

Instead, eight days of reporting revealed elaborate fabrications and intricate lies. There is no soldier named Dan Kennings. The charming girl people came to know as Kodee Kennings is someone else entirely, a child from an out-of-state family led to believe that she was playing a part in a documentary about a soldier.

Using role players who say they were duped--including an employee of a local Christian radio station--the woman at the center of the hoax spun a remarkable wartime tale so compelling it grabbed the hearts of young journalists, university faculty members and readers, leaving them blind to the possibility it could be a ruse.

The reasons behind the lies remain unclear. There appears to have been no monetary motive, but the scope of the deception is staggering.

To say the least!

The story continues:

On Saturday morning, cars began pulling into the gravel parking lot of a one-story American Legion hall in Orient, Ill., about 30 miles northeast of Carbondale, for a memorial service. Hastings and Kodee got out of a red Pontiac Grand Am, the little girl wearing an Army uniform shirt that hung down to her knees.

People inside the memorial service said both Hastings and Kodee were in tears. A video showed Kennings in his fatigues speaking with a group of children at a church, and there was a scrapbook filled with pictures of Kennings straddling a tank cannon or huddling with other soldiers.

Tribune reporters continued asking questions, and some students and a faculty member were growing increasingly hostile because of suggestions that Kennings did not exist. By Tuesday night, however, Brenner was pacing nervously outside a Dairy Queen in Carterville, Ill., talking to Hastings on his cell phone. He handed the phone to a Tribune reporter, and Hastings said she would come to the Dairy Queen and listen to questions.

Brenner, 25, said he was still convinced of Kennings' existence and defended Hastings for trying to protect a little girl.

Hastings pulled into the parking lot in the same red car she'd driven to the memorial service. She was told that the military denied Kennings' existence and that the name Colleen Hastings appeared in no public-records databases in Illinois. She was asked for a driver's license and for a death certificate for Kennings. With each question, Hastings shook her head no.

After Brenner spoke to her for a minute alone, she drove off.

State records show that the car is registered to a woman living in Marion, and on Wednesday a reporter was there looking for the woman's granddaughter, Jaimie Reynolds.

When she came out of the house, Reynolds was the same woman who had been at the Dairy Queen as Colleen Hastings.

Sitting on the back porch and wearing a long-sleeved Southern Illinois University shirt, her face flush from crying, Reynolds admitted that she had pretended to be Hastings. She said that Kennings was an invention, and later explained that those who met him actually had met Trovillion, the acquaintance who believed he was acting in a film.

She said, and the Tribune confirmed, that she had been a radio and television production student at the university. She graduated in 2004, putting her there alongside the very people she was deceiving.

Reynolds acknowledged the little girl is the daughter of friends and said she persuaded the parents to let her bring the child to Carbondale regularly by saying she was filming a documentary about a soldier killed in Iraq.

"We told her it was for a movie," Reynolds said.

Reynolds alleged that the scheme was Brenner's idea. She also said she fell in love with Brenner, making it that much harder for her to stop the lie.

The staff at the Chicago Tribune did a great job and we are in their debt. But what of the perpetrators, why go to such lengths? To express anti-war sentiment? To garner another "Pulitzer?" Why?

I'm ticked, and I hope you are too.

A Video You MUST Watch

NOTR writing at ROFASix, an excellent blog, and one well worth putting on your blogroll (I have) has a terrific post up on a debate between LA psychologist Wafa Sultan and Algerian Islamist Ahmad bin Muhammad over Islamic teachings and terrorism. The video here. As NOTR states:

Ahmad, sounding much like Teddy Kennedy, cuts loose with a tirade of anti-Bush, Hitler analogies, while even managing to slip in the A-bomb and Spanish American War. It is chilling to see what Muslims are hearing from their Imams. “We are the Victims,� he yells at Wafa Sultan."

NOTR also supplies a link to the transcript (English) of the "debate." Actually, calling it a debate is somewhat misleading, the Psychologist presents solid evidence, the Professor calls himself a victim and hurls ad hominem attacks. Check and Mate Professor - you loose.

Chuck Hagel Redux

I was taken to task by a commenter regarding my use of "idiot," "idotarian," and "RINO." (See first comment here.) The commenter rightly noted that the Senator is a Vietnam vet who was decorated, has some purple hearts and a distinguished career before coming to the senate. My commenter is correct. But that doesn't give the good Senator a pass when he goes overboard and says something really stupid. Another example of the good Senator's fatuous remarks:

We should start figuring out how we get out of there [Iraq]," Hagel said on "This Week" on ABC. "But with this understanding, we cannot leave a vacuum that further destabilizes the Middle East. I think our involvement there has destabilized the Middle East. And the longer we stay there, I think the further destabilization will occur."

OK, let us analyze this bit of "punditry".

But with this understanding, we cannot leave a vacuum that further destabilizes the Middle East." - - - OK, if I understand Hagel correctly, if we leave precipitously, we create a vacuum [of power] that will lead to the middle east being destabilized, OK, I'll buy that!

I think our involvement there has destabilized the Middle East. - - By this statement, I understand that the Good Senator is saying that by going to the middle east, in particular Iraq, we have destabilized the middle east. Are you following this?

And the longer we stay there, I think the further destabilization will occur." - - got it, if we stay we will destabilize the middle east!

"So, beloved students," as my philosophy professor used to say, "let us review what we have discussed." By going in we destabilized, by leaving we destabilize, by staying we destabilize. Well, that sums it up, the middle east is doomed to destabilization.

Please note, I am neither a Democrat or a Republican, though I tend to vote republican most of the time, I will always vote for a conservative Democrat over a wild-assed liberal Republican any day of the week. I am a conservative, but with a mind of my own and I tend to associate with like thinkers but we don't think alike, nor should we. I say this because I don't want to be accused of mindlessly bashing Senator Hagel, of name calling, of ad hominem attacks (ad hom·i·nem - adj: Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason) I am attacking Chuck Hagel's ability to think clearly and to enunciate what he means. His attacks on VP Dick Chenney, on our efforts in the war in Iraq and the global war on terrorists have the effect of encouraging those we are fighting, increasing their belief that if they just hang on long enough, the American people will demand a pullout and leave them the field.

My commenter made this statement:

Given his history, he probably has a pretty good idea of the "consequences" our troops face in combat."

I agree whole heartedly. Chuck Hagel spilled his blood on the battlefields of Vietnam. He felt the ferocity of the enemy in that war, he felt firsthand the effects of an encouraged North Vietnam who hung on despite many defeats becacuse they believed then, correctly, that if they did, political pressure would force the US out. And that is what happened. I would expect that Chuck Hagel does have a pretty good idea of the consequences our troops are facing, and his actions and words have increased, in some measure, their risk.

Of this I am certain.

Chuck Hagel is no doubt a good man, but in this controversy, one of his making, he is an idiot expressing idiotarian ideas. I guess however I should apologize for calling him a RINO. That is for registered Republicans to decide.

UPDATE: Those of you doubting my claim from my earlier post here and this post that the Left is claiming Chuck Hegel as their own, need to read this from the Washington Post. Nuff said!!!

Who Is Chuck Hagel And Why Is He Crapping On The Military?

A lot of anti-military stuff in the news today, and there are still those that don't think the MSM leans left. The USS Iowa was in the news when the idiotarians in San Francisco voted to NOT have the venerable battleship be permanently docked there. At least, that's what this report says:

The USS Iowa joined in battles from World War II to Korea to the Persian Gulf. It carried President Franklin Roosevelt home from the Teheran conference of allied leaders, and four decades later, suffered one of the nation's most deadly military accidents.

Veterans groups and history buffs had hoped that tourists in San Francisco could walk the same teak decks where sailors dodged Japanese machine-gun fire and fired 16-inch guns that helped win battles across the South Pacific.

Instead, it appears that the retired battleship is headed about 80 miles inland, to Stockton, a gritty agricultural port town on the San Joaquin River and home of California's annual asparagus festival.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a former San Francisco mayor, helped secure $3 million to tow the Iowa from Rhode Island to the Bay Area in 2001 in hopes of making touristy Fisherman's Wharf its new home.
But city supervisors voted 8-3 last month to oppose taking in the ship, citing local opposition to the Iraq war and the military's stance on gays, among other things.

"If I was going to commit any kind of money in recognition of war, then it should be toward peace, given what our war is in Iraq right now," Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi said.

Feinstein called it a "very petty decision."

"This isn't the San Francisco that I've known and loved and grew up in and was born in," Feinstein said.

Harrumph; that's got to be the FIRST time I agreed with Feinstein. But this story has a happy ending at least, Stockton, California is ready to give the grand old lady a home.

The real reason for this post is that idiot Charles Timothy (Chuck)Hagel, Idiotarian-Nebraska. Now, don't get me totally wrong, Hagel is not a bad man, he is just not a wise man at this juncture. He is a Senator, he has been elected several times, he is a loving father and husband, he has a distinguished biography, is a Vietnam Vet, and has a pretty significant record of supporting the military. But not now, not when he can garner microphone time, headlines and the sure knowledge that the MSM loves nothing more than a contrarian Republican (How much play time will Feinstein get for supporting the Iowa vs the Board of Supervisors of SF?).

Hagel has stated:

We’re past that stage now because now we are locked into a bogged-down problem not unsimilar, dissimilar to where we were in Vietnam..."

Hagel also said.

The longer we stay, the more problems we’re going to have.

Hagel mocked Vice President Dick Cheney's assertion in June that the insurgency in Iraq was in its "last throes," saying the U.S. death toll has risen amid insurgent attacks.

"Maybe the vice president can explain the increase in casualties we're taking," the Nebraskan told CNN.

"If that's winning, then he's got a different definition of winning than I do."

Hagel wouldn't call for immediate withdrawal, agreeing in principle with President Bush, but he did believe that we would be "withdrawing troops from Iraq next year."

Now, it doesn't take rocket science to know that the VP was correct, the terrorists are running out of time, they are losing their base and the effectiveness of the Iraqi army and police forces are increasing. At the tail end of WWII, both the Germans and Japanese grew more brutal and fought harder, just as the terrorists are now. And notice, I didn't call them "insurgents." That is something they definitely are not. They are terrorists, plain and simple and while they have killed and maimed US Troops, they have done far more harm to the Iraqi civilians and police.

When a RINO like Hagel takes to the microphone and makes pronouncements like the ones above, he lends strength to the nay-sayers. "Oh, My, listen to that Hagel fellow and he is a member of the President's party... maybe the Democrats are right."

Well I've got news for you Senator, our troops are taking casualties; that goes along with being in a war. They volunteered for duty, they knew what they were doing. What they didn't volunteer for is some idiotarian in the states making their job harder. What they didn't volunteer for was a group of US Government officials calling them Nazi's (Are you listening Durban?) What they didn't volunteer for is the negative attitude that you are giving off. Don't like the war? Fine, take your case to the President. But what the hell happened to disagreements stopping at the water's edge?

Our folks over there have a job to do and they are doing a damn fine job of it. Read Michael Yon's reports, Black-five, The Mudville Gazette's Dawn Patrol, find out what progress we are making against a determined enemy that doesn't care about anything but killing. Grow up Senator, next time you want to speak out, think about the consequences to the troops, and not just your pretty face on TV or in print.

Announcing The Truth Project: Promoting the Dissemination of the Truth about Islam.

A group of right thinking bloggers have announced the formation of The Truth Project. You can find the announcement for the blog here at Always On Watch. What is interesting in the announcement are the multitude of comments, some laudatory, some not so laudatory. Guess which ones are not laudatory, lefty's or righties? At any rate, this ought to be good reading regardless of your political POV.

Acquired/Induced Bush Derangement Syndrome

On December 5, 2003 Dr. Charles Krauthammer, a trained psychiatrist coined a new term for a then recently discovered psychiatric syndrome. Then name of that syndrome became known world wide as "Bush Derangement Syndrome" and it apparently afflicts approximately 30% of the populace of the United States, 50% of England, 75% of Germany and 137.33% of the population of France (They always did go overboard on these things.)

The term became so well known and applied to so many, that if you do a Google Search you will get about 11,000 entries. A Yahoo Search produces almost 38,000 entries and a Dogpile search of other search engines lists 65 search engines with BDS listed.

Although not listed in DSM IV-TR (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision) of the American Psychiatric Association, it's definition is fairly clear as postulated by Dr. Krauthammer.

BUSH DERANGEMENT SYNDROME: the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency -- nay -- the very existence of George W. Bush.

The signs and symptoms of BDS are all around us, afflicting some otherwise seemingly intelligent and articulate people. This is especially true since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq and the Taliban in Afghanistan. Perhaps, in the case of Afghanistan, it is because the predicted mass starvations and 10's of thousands of American Body Bags weren't filled, though too many were. Perhaps in Iraq, it is because the terrorists have been re-branded as insurgents and "freedom fighters." What ever the source, BDS is the symptom, rationality remains the cure.

Today, BDS has a new, very public, very sympathetic, very grieving celebrity; a mother named Cindy Sheehan. In fact, I propose that Ms. Sheehan is afflicted with a new variety of BDS which I shall name Acquired/Induced Bush Derangement Syndrome. Like Dr. Krauthammer, I will give a definition:

Acquired/Induced Bush Derangement Syndrome: In an otherwise normally grieving individual, A/I BDS is the presence of irrational thinking patterns, of a paranoiac mindset that allows the victim to espouse such phrases as

We wanted to use the time for him to know that he killed an indispensable part of our family and humanity,"

and

We need to get our troops out of Iraq. The only reason Bush wants to stay there is because his buddies are getting rich and feasting off the blood of our children,"

that has been fostered by those individuals who attempt to portrey Mr. Bush in as bad a light as is humanly possible regardless of the consequences to others.

Note the phraseology, "...he killed an indispensable part of our family..." and "...feasting off the blood of our children." A number of conservative bloggers indicate that Ms. Sheehan has "flip-flopped" on the issue, being somewhat glowing regarding her meeting with President Bush in Fort Lewis in 2004 and how she feels now. Drudge, Malkin, O'Reilly and others have made note of what she said then and what she is saying now. Media Matters for America Attempts to "de-bunk" the conservative POV and states that Ms. Sheehan didn't put the same meaning to what she said as did the conservatives. Well, dear readers, I'd have to say that there are some qualitative differences in the two POV's of Ms. Sheehan, but I'm not her so I can neither guess her motivations nor her thought patterns, though she and others seem to have no problem guessing the motivations of Mr. Bush.

I do know however, that the MSM is playing this up for all it's worth, a grieving mother attempting to accost the President to let him know how much the death of her son has affected her. Well, Duh! Of course it has. If you Google "Cindy Sheehan" you will get, are you ready for this, some 729,000 hits. Seven Hundred Twenty Nine Thousand. I checked out the first 10 pages (some 100 mentions) and found that the vast majority of these mentions were from left wing blogs/sites.

I'm not going to question the grief that Ms. Sheehan is experiencing. I know that when my sister died in 1990, my parent's still felt the grief to the very day that they died, eight and ten years later. That is not disputable. What I'm curious about is who is behind the media circus that this has caused. Is Ms. Sheehan, despite her belief that the war was a mistake, being used because of her grief? In the counseling/psychology/psychiatry profession, secondary relationships between the therapist and client are forbidden by both law, and by codes of ethics precisely because the client is in a emotionally vulnerable position.

Can I prove that Ms. Sheehan is a victim of A/I BDS? No, but I know grief and how it affects people. I know that unscrupulous individuals will stop at nothing to gain their goal. I know that Ms. Sheehan is a grieving mother, one who has lost her son tragically.

I also know that this has a significant impact on her family with lines drawn in the sand as it were. Ms. Sheehan and some family members on one side, Grandparents and other family on another side, each claiming the high road. That in and of itself is a tragedy.

But politics, the war, and media attention tend to focus on tragedy. The end result is that Ms. Sheehan makes intemperate statements that Mr. Bush killed her son. No Ms. Sheehan, Islamo-fascists killed your son. They killed thousands in New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia. They have killed hundreds of thousands of their own people, they have used bombs, suicide bombers, chemicals, retarded teen-agers and children as bomb carriers, they have used ambulances to deliver ordinance and they have used terror to foster their fascistic POV with the stated goal of bring Shaira law to the world, a world under a Caliphate where Islam is the only religion allowed.

That Ms. Sheehan and others don't see this is also a tragedy, for they have their heads collectively buried in the sand. And a storm is coming!

The Mudville Gazette has more

Avoiding Profiling Like The Plague

Since the entire leftist establishment has decided that profiling is immoral, the New York Transit Authority has decided that random searches will commence of all living things on the New York Subway system. This tiny feline was caught trying to bring in a bag of explosives from the surface, ran but was cornered near a windowsill in a building nearby. The Mayor of New York, Mayor Bloomberg has stated that he is ambivalent about sending Kitty to Guantanamo's Camp X-Ray and may decide to send the cat to Rikers Island where the liklihood of abuse is much, much less. More as this story develops.

And a grateful tip of the GM Chapeaux to EnlightenmentReactionary

Mama's Boy

If you want to read something that will grab you and not let go, go to Conservative Punk and read this by my new friend, Robert Jones. Good stuff!!

Jimmah Cartah, Ex-President Exposes......Himself!

Following up on Woody's post below, I am adding that I am disgusted with this poor excuse for a statesman. Jimmah has all the stature of, as the french would say "Un Ver," a worm, well, actually, I hold worms in much higher regard.

A link fest of others who also see it the same way that I do.

Protein Wisdom's ""Jimmy Carter: Guantanamo 'is a disgrace to the USA'" here
Betsy Newmark of Betsy's Page: Jimmy Carter is a Disgrace
Captain Ed with Jimmy Carter Insults American Military On Foreign Soil
Left Noose: Stick a Putrid Peanut In It Carter
Macsmind with No President Carter, You're Disgraseful
Johnathan and Wanda Rantings with Jimmy Carter Needs To Shut His Pie Hole
Peter Fisher In Renew America has Yes Jimmy Carter, It's Our Entire Fault

Each of these sites has multiple links that you need to read and comment sections you need to read also. Jimmah, you are an ass Sir, Plainly and Simply an ass. Shut up, go home and let adults handle the world. You tried, you messed it up, and others have taken your place. Have the decency to butt out!

The Fools Around Us Will Be Nigh The Death Of Us!

Stupidity comes in all forms, shapes and sizes. There are lefty fools, commie fools (low may their numbers be), righty fools (although to my way of thinking far fewer of them than of the lefty variety). There are libertarian fools, socialist fools (a whole lot of that variety) and then there are the PC fools. Oh, I know, some of you folk will say "Hey, wait, PC is a product of the right." And you'd be wrong to say that. As a therapist, I've heard time and time again from my peers: "Don't be judgmental." What a load, wrapped in PC and expressed as an escape from making a decision.

As human beings, we cannot help but be judgmental, it is part of our nature. What the left still hasn't learned, and I don't think they will EVER learn is that words mean things.

In the case of the word "judgmental" I offer you the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language definition:

Of, relating to, or dependent on judgment: a judgmental error.

Inclined to make judgments, especially moral or personal ones: a marriage counselor who tries not to be judgmental.

"A marriage counselor who tries not to be judgmental." Ok, let us parse this for a moment. Mary and Joe come to you for marriage counseling. Joe has been having an affair, which he recently "broke off" but has been still calling his "ex" girlfriend. He drinks heavily and becomes abusive when intoxicated. He gambles their savings away. Your job is to help this marriage survive, both say that they want that. Are you really going to be "non-judgmental" and let Joe's transgressions go by the wayside? Of course not, not if you are ethical. Now, you cannot be denigrating of Joe as a person, that would not be appropriate, but calling his behavior? Too often, the term "non-judgmental" is used across the board and such usage is inappropriate.

I submit that we are judgmental from the moment that we wake up and decide whether or not to sleep a bit longer or to get up. I typically wake up around 4 or 4:30 AM. I "choose" not to stay in bed, but get up, fix some coffee, do a little posting perhaps, read the day's dispatches perhaps, or catch CNN or Fox (quietly of course, my bride is still asleep). When I choose to get up I have made a judgment. When I pick out my clothes for the day, I have made a judgment; when I choose who to sit next to on the bus or train or subway, I have made a judgment.

When Mohammad Atta got on board that plane in the morning of 9/11, he made a judgment. When John Kerry made that silly salute he made a judgment. When you opened up this web page, you made a judgment. When Mayor Flower-Mountain Bloomberg decided to have every 5th subway passenger searched but not profile 18-35 year old Arab or South East Asian young men, he made a judgment. And a truly stupid one at that.

I wonder, daily, what it is going to take to get people to wake up out of their PC slumber and recognize that there is an identifiable group of people that want to kill us. Those people are not little girls (fourth photo down from the top), grannies or gramps in wheelchairs, Roman Catholic Nuns or retired Medal of Honor winners. No, these folk are of a certain type (H/T to Robert Bidinotto's blog) and they do indeed mean to do us ill. Jihad Watch (link to the immediate left) notes:

The funeral of British suicide bomber Shehzad Tanweer was held in absentia in his family’s ancestral village, near Lahore, Pakistan. Thousands of people attended, as they did again the following day when a qul ceremony was held for Tanweer. During qul, the Koran is recited to speed the deceased’s journey to paradise, though in Tanweer’s case this was hardly necessary. Being a shahid (martyr), he is deemed to have gone straight to paradise. The 22-year-old from Leeds, whose bomb at Aldgate station killed seven people, was hailed by the crowd as ‘a hero of Islam’.

Some in Britain cannot conceive that a suicide bomber could be a hero of Islam. Since 7/7 many have made statements to attempt to explain what seems to them a contradiction in terms. Since the violence cannot be denied, their only course is to argue that the connection with Islam is invalid. The deputy assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Brian Paddick, said that ‘Islam and terrorists are two words that do not go together.’ His boss, the Commissioner Sir Ian Blair, asserted that there is nothing wrong with being a fundamentalist Muslim.

Mr. Deputy Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, you are absolutely and totally wrong. The vast, vast, vast (I could add a couple of more here) majority of terrorist attacks (yes Reuters, I used the "T" word - scroll down for the T word entry) were carried out by Muslims. Not Baptists, Not RC Nuns, Not Buddist Monks, Not little girls and Not aging Afro-American Grandmothers. No, they have been carried out by: MUSLIMS, specifically, males between the ages of 16 and 35.

The terrorists are just that, terrorists. Judge William Young got it right when he sentenced Richard Reid, the “Shoe Bomber� in January of this year as reported in CNN:

You are not an enemy combatant. You are a terrorist. You are not a soldier in any war. You are a terrorist. To give you that reference, to call you a soldier gives you far too much stature. Whether it is the officers of government who do it or your attorney who does it, or that happens to be your view, you are a terrorist.

And we do not negotiate with terrorists. We do not treat with terrorists. We do not sign documents with terrorists.

We hunt them down one by one and bring them to justice.

So war talk is way out of line in this court. You're a big fellow. But you're not that big. You're no warrior. I know warriors. You are a terrorist. A species of criminal guilty of multiple attempted murders."

If the worthy Judge can call a terrorist a terrorist, why can’t we profile for terrorism? “Well because, GM, that’s racist and judgmental.�

I’m beginning to think that no one is thinking. Or if they are thinking, they’re not thinking clearly. What is it about our fear of hurting someone’s feelings, of this namby-pamby, wishy-washy cant (Hypocritically pious language) that doesn’t allow us to make judgments when our lives and our civilization is at stake?
We cannot profile, because we must not appear to be racist or judgmental. Oh my gosh! You are a transit cop walking your beat. Over your radio, you hear “Be on the lookout for a 6 foot plus caucasian male with flaming red hair who is wanted for bombing a bus. Subject is wearing red suspenders, blue jeans and a white windbreaker jacket with no shirt underneath.“

Do you bother to look at grandmas, at children, at African Americans, at Arab Americans or do you look for someone fitting the profile, the description? The answer ought to be easy, but under Mayor Bloomberg’s orders, you can’t do that because the description includes the word Caucasian. Of course, I’m being sarcastic. But failure to profile those that fit the terrorist profile is not sarcastic, it is flat out criminal. Paul Sperry's NYTimes as noted in Bidinotto’s blog above states:

Critics protest that profiling is prejudicial. In fact, it's based on statistics. Insurance companies profile policyholders based on probability of risk. That's just smart business. Likewise, profiling passengers based on proven security risk is just smart law enforcement.
Besides, done properly, profiling would subject relatively few Muslims to searches. Elderly Muslim women don't fit the terrorist profile. Young Muslim men of Arab or South Asian origin do. But rather than acknowledge this obvious fact, the New York Police Department has advised subway riders to be alert for "people" in bulky clothes who sweat or fiddle nervously with bags.

Well, a lot of people wear bulky clothes. A lot of people fiddle with their bags. And for that matter, a lot of people sweat. Could the Police Department be any more general in describing the traits of an Islamic suicide bomber? Could its advice be more useless?
Truth be told, commuters need to be most aware of young men praying to Allah and smelling like flower water. Law enforcement knows this, and so should you. According to a January 2004 handout, the Department of Homeland Security advises United States border authorities to look out for certain "suicide bomber indicators." They include a "shaved head or short haircut. A short haircut or recently shaved beard or moustache may be evident by differences in skin complexion on the head or face. May smell of herbal or flower water (most likely flower water), as they may have sprayed perfume on themselves, their clothing, and weapons to prepare for Paradise." Suspects may have been seen "praying fervently, giving the appearance of whispering to someone. Recent suicide bombers have raised their hands in the air just before the explosion to prevent the destruction of their fingerprints. They have also placed identity cards in their shoes because they want to be praised and recognized as martyrs."

Did you get that? A description of the "typical" terrorist "According to a January 2004 handout, the Department of Homeland Security..." Profiles are used all the time in a variety of contexts from insurance companies to the FBI looking at the liklihood of a certain criminal meeting certain behavioral criteria. You profile when you screen applicants for a job. The list is endless, yet, because of our penchant for PC, because we are so afraid of being tagged racist we don't use the noggins that God gave us.

Recently, to convince America that "Moderate Muslims" are not supporting terrorism at all,

a Fatwa was issued by Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA) issued the fatwa, and the Council on American - Islamic Relations (CAIR) organized the press conference, stating that several major U.S. Muslim groups endorsed the fatwa.

Steven Emerson, author of the article also notes:

In fact, the fatwa is bogus. Nowhere does it condemn the Islamic extremism ideology that has spawned Islamic terrorism. It does not renounce nor even acknowledge the existence of an Islamic jihadist culture that has permeated mosques and young Muslims around the world. It does not renounce Jihad let alone admit that it has been used to justify Islamic terrorist acts. It does not condemn by name any Islamic group or leader. In short, it is a fake fatwa designed merely to deceive the American public into believing that these groups are moderate. In fact, officials of both organizations have been directly linked to and associated with Islamic terrorist groups and Islamic extremist organizations. One of them is an unindicted co-conspirator in a current terrorist case; another previous member was a financier to Al-Qaeda.

Also:

The Chairman of the Fiqh Council, Taha Jaber Al-Alwani, is an unindicted co-conspirator in the case against Sami al-Arian, the alleged North American leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, whose trial began in June 2005 in Tampa, Florida. Mr. Alwani has been named in court documents as an official of several entities in northern Virginia suspected of being connected to terrorist financing. Documents released in the Al Arian trial show that Alwani funded the Islamic Jihad front groups in Tampa."

The justly acclaimed Norm Geras notes in a recent article:

Human rights are an indispensable part of a morally decent society (though the eager embracing of victimhood is not, and there's no doubt that the discourse of human rights has, along with multiculturalism, encouraged many to regard the status of victim of rights-violation as the most attractive one going, and hence to reach for it at the slightest provocation). But protection from those whose direct intention is to kill the innocent is also indispensable. Such protection may require us to be more ready to accept defensive policies which constrain, or in emergency infringe, individual rights than we've hitherto been accustomed to."

Robert Bidinotto also waits and wonders when Islam will honestly rise up and condem the terrorist clique within.

To put an end to this screed, being judgmental is both normal and human and entirely appropriate in this day and age; the age of terror. Failure to use appropriate tools in this war (profiling) because of fears of not being politically correct is both foolhardy and criminal. When will we wake up to the enemy's tactics? Not too late I hope. There are voices out there that are raising the issue, are there ears to hear and brains to decipher?

Update: A doff of the GM Chapeaux to Gail at Crossing the Rubicon2 for this NY Times article. Read it all!

Update #2: 60 minutes interview with "part of the problem" Again, read it all.

Update #3: A doff of the GM Chapeaux to Glen Reynolds for this. Once again, read it all.

Update #4: Dr. Sanity has more thoughts on the bogus "fatwa" (notice the scare quotes Reuters?)here and here from the President of Iran and here on the distortion of reality by the MSM and perhaps the PC'ers as well? As usual, this terrific lady and psychiatrist nails it smack dab on the head. Read it all links included!

Update #5: Michael Totten has an excellent post on how the war on terror affects tourism, both in our big cities, London, Europe and the Middle east. Thoughtful and as usual, well written.

Update #6: My Dog Vinnie at My Pet Jawa takes on CAIR... Fatwa city!

Michael J. Totten: The Logic Of Pacifism

Michael Totten has penned (pixeled?) a brilliant essay on the "Logic of Pacifism over at Tech Central Station. A sample:

Several commenters blamed the 7/7 terrorist attacks in London, in one way or another, on regime-change in Iraq. Markos Moulitsas Zuniga (Daily Kos) described the attacks as consequences of the war. Professor Juan Cole characterized them as blowback. Paul Reynolds at the BBC said they were Britain's punishment.

Only those who opposed the invasion of Iraq trot out this argument, though. Many of them either minimize or entirely ignore the fact that the invasion of Afghanistan and the toppling of the Taliban enraged Islamists as much if not even more so. The Taliban, after all, are fellow Islamists. The Baathists, from the point of view of Islamists, are socialists and infidels."

More:

It's real simple. If invading Iraq was a bad idea because it enraged Al Qaeda and handed them fodder for recruitment propaganda, then invading Afghanistan was likewise a bad idea because that, too, enraged Al Qaeda and handed them fodder for recruitment propaganda. If military action provokes retaliation, and retaliation must be avoided, then any and all military action must be avoided always and everywhere. Fighting the enemy anywhere at all will produce exactly the same result: they won't like it and will want to fight back. That always happens in war. Otherwise it wouldn't be war."

Totten ends with:

Those who think invading Afghanistan was wise and invading Iraq was a mistake can and will have pacifist logic thrown at them by others (like British MP George Galloway) who also opposed removing the Taliban. If you know how to argue with pacifist opponents of regime-change in Afghanistan, then you know how to argue with pacifist opponents of regime-change in Iraq."

Those that fail to understand that we cannot, must not abandon this war will also be those that can't understand why the Islamo-Fascists will, if you will allow the bloodythirsty phrase, have lined them up against the wall. This war is not about nice, not about understanding motivations, not about differences in culture. This war is about a mindset held by the Islamo-fascists that we will be conquered and either submit (dhimitude) or die.

Further evidence that this war preceeded 9/ll and both Afghanistan and Iraq is provided by The Anchoress (caution, strong photographic evidence that may shake a pacifists belief) who writes:

Let’s not forget bin Laden’s own words in 2001 rallying against the West and trying to convince the world that our efforts in Afghanistan were unjust because, “there is no evidence of the involvement of the people of Afghanistan in what happened in America.� (H/T Glenn Reynolds) Rather like those insisting the same about Iraq, today."

Tell us some more how terrorists are only responding to regime change in Iraq, and how if only we would obey the “insurgents� there and leave Iraq, all of this would end. Tell us that some more, Mr. Galloway, tell us that some more, ladies and gentlemen of the press. Tell us all about it you tired, phoney, so-called intellectuals and sophisticates. Tell us how terror that has existed for decades is all the fault of George W. Bush and his poodles Tony Blair and John Howard (Trey Jackson has a terrific video of Howard telling it like it is here."

The Anchoress could also have included the bombing of the Moscow Metro here:

The Marine Barracks bombing


followed only seconds later by the bombing of the French Paratroopers headquarters
and the US Embassy bombing 6 months earlier

Moral Relativism And Terrorism

Yesterdays post concerned the Sound Of Silence from the Muslim world regarding the ongoing terrorism; New York, London, Madrid, Russia, Chechnya, Nairobi, Rydiah, Baghdad, Cairo, Lebanon, Jerusalem, Qandahar. If a Christian sect with world wide membership committed the same kinds of atrocities against Catholics or perhaps Muslims, what do you suppose the headlines of the world would say? Exactly and there-in lies the problem. Some folk, blinded by their inability to say ill of the so-called 3rd world, by their inability to face the reality of this struggle, indeed, perhaps even hoping that in some way, the western democracies will receive their comeuppance.

This is the Moral Relativism of today. A relativism where the BBC removes the word terrorist from its site and puts up "bombers" in less than 24 hours after the bombs went off in London. A world where the morally blind wonder "Why do they hate us so." A world where CAIR is more concerned with Muslims being offended than with what may happen to those same Muslims if, say, a nuclear device is ever set off in a large city that is likely to have a hefty Muslim population. A world where an Imam can denounce terrorism in English on television, then get up in his pulpit and in Arabic praise the islamo-fascists, note their ascension into heaven and the rewards of martyrdom. This topsy-turvy world.

In yesterdays Opinion Journal, the online edition of the Wall Street Journal, James Taranto writes:

Now and then a terrorist actually takes the trouble to explain his motives. London's Daily Telegraph reports on the trial of the man who allegedly (and now confessedly) murdered Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh:

Mohammed Bouyeri, a baby-faced 27-year-old with dual Dutch-Moroccan nationality, broke his vow not to co-operate with the Amsterdam court by admitting shooting and stabbing his victim last November.

"I take complete responsibility for my actions. I acted purely in the name of my religion," he told its three-strong panel of judges.

"I can assure you that one day, should I be set free, I would do the same, exactly the same." . . .

Bouyeri then turned to the victim's mother, Anneke, in the public gallery, and told her he felt nothing for her. Mrs. van Gogh watched as he read out from what appeared to be a statement: "I don't feel your pain. I have to admit that I don't have any sympathy for you. I can't feel for you because you're a non-believer."

This had nothing to do with Israeli "occupation" of "Palestinian lands," America's "unilateral invasion" of Iraq, "torture" of prisoners at Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib, the widening "income gap," or any of the other litany of complaints that the terror apologists trot out. Islamist terrorism arises from religious fanaticism and hatred, plain and simple.

In 2002, in a Harper's Magazine article, George McGovern (yes, that failed presidential contender) writes:

President Bush has said repeatedly that the terrorists hate us because of our freedom. I don't believe that. The world's people have always admired our freedom. What they don't like is the arrogance and indifference to world opinion inherent in so much of our international policy.

Well Senator, you were wrong, the terrorists hate us because they are taught to hate us in their perverted religious system. And no, you dunderheads that think I'm castigating all Muslims, I'm not. I'm castigating those in that religion that spew hate. Just as I would any preacher or rabbi that got up in a pulpit and did the same.

If western civilization is ever ground under the heel of islamo-fascism, it will not be because of their strength of arms on the battlefield, it will be because of terrorism and more importantly, our own complacency by saying nothing to the radical Imams.

Tony Blair, Prime Minister of Great Britain expressed surprise and disappointment on learning that the islamo-fascists who set off the four bombs were British citizens of Pakistani descent. But why should he or anyone be surprised? There have been in London and elsewhere numerous Imam's preaching hate, defiance, jihad in England for some time. Perhaps the English, believing that if they were "tolerant," practiced "multi-culturalism" and opened their arms to the oppressed of the old British Empire that they would be safe from internal attack. All this while the Islamic heretics in their midst used the cover of Islam to preach hate, destruction, JIHAD

The Dutch/Moroccan Mohammed Bouyeri along with the young Brits (Shehzad Tanweer, Mohammad Sidique Khan, Hasib Hussain, and may have done the world a favor by exposing the real reason they are terrorists - their faith. Still others, such as this young man give ample evidence of the paucity of the multiculturalist left. The terrorists, islamo-fascists, jihadists, suicide bomber, what ever you wish to call them do this out of religious fervor, they are most often, middle class or better, educated and captured by a religious wasteland of hate.

There can be no doubt that the lack of outcry against the terrorists from the vast majority of Muslims will work against their own civil liberties, and against ours. During WWII, numerous Japanese-Americans were interned in what can only be called a massive racial animus aimed at anyone of Japanese descent. This interning also happened for "some" German-Americans, but nowhere near to the extent that the West Coast Japanese-Americans were interned. Those of the Muslim faith are generally identifiable by their garb or by their appearance. Should more such attacks occur, I dread the loss of freedoms that will occur for all of us.

Border restrictions that pale beyond what is current, identity cards, loyalty oaths, all the makings of a police state both in this country, and in Europe. And though it will be understandable in terms of a people blindly striking out in "self defense" it will not be a pretty sight.

One answer to this scourge is to stand up firmly, vociferously and loudly and condemn terrorism to the highest degree humanly possible. The whole world, united against a true fascistic ideology that does not care who it strikes. Old, young, retired, children, men, women, combatants, non-combatants, Christian, Jew, Moslem, Buddhist, Animist, atheist, poly-theist, black, white, brown, yellow, tan, red. Indian, Native American, German, French, British, Sudanese, South African, Brazilian, all will become targets because as in the words of Mohammed Bouyeri:

"I take complete responsibility for my actions. I acted purely in the name of my religion,..."

"I can assure you that one day, should I be set free, I would do the same, exactly the same."

"I don't feel your pain. I have to admit that I don't have any sympathy for you. I can't feel for you because you're a non-believer."

As Robert James Bidinotto noted in his blog:

This moral inversion is fueled by toxic philosophy. Thanks to a long gray line of ideological dope-pushers, Western intellectuals, politicians and cultural leaders are addicted to the self-destructive hallucinations of moral relativism, altruistic self-sacrifice, cultural self-loathing and political appeasement of sworn enemies. Self-blame, along with cowardly calls for more "understanding" and "restraint," are their only knee-jerk responses in the face of each new outrage.

UPDATE: Via Instapundit
In an interview with John Howard, PM of Australia:

...these people are opposed to what we believe in and what we stand for, far more than what we do. If you imagine that you can buy immunity from fanatics by curling yourself in a ball, apologising for the world - to the world - for who you are and what you stand for and what you believe in, not only is that morally bankrupt, but it's also ineffective. Because fanatics despise a lot of things and the things they despise most is weakness and timidity. There has been plenty of evidence through history that fanatics attack weakness and retreating people even more savagely than they do defiant people.

Another Update: Mudville Gazette has has a great list of reads up GWot Central as it were.

Update #3, Jeff Jarvis calls a spade a spade:

What they did is a crime. That's all it is, nothing more. A crime.

But when we treat it as something else, when we try to understand it, when we grant the veil of political correctness -- of understanding, even tolerance, invoking fuzzy words like "otherness" -- we risk spreading the crime, making it if not acceptable then at least understandable for others. It is a cousin of glamorizing crime, of turning these scum into ideological, religious Bonnies and Clydes.

Update # 4: Tim Birdnow has a nifty little post up at the Bird Blog.

Bidinotto Strikes A Blow For The Repudiation Of Terrorism From the Muslim World

Robert James Bidinotto (RJB for brevity) is a writer whom I have enjoyed reading for at least the last few months. I don't remember how I got to his blog, but get there I did and I've not regretted it in the least. According to his "About Me" section of his blog Mr. Bidinotto

...is an award-winning writer, editor and lecturer who reports on cultural and political issues from the philosophic perspective of principled individualism.

As of July 2005 Robert became editor of The New Individualist, the monthly magazine of The Objectivist Center, a philosophic research and advocacy organization. In the previous year, he was editor of Organization Trends and Foundation Watch, monthly publications of the Capital Research Center -- a private watchdog group that monitors the activities of nonprofit advocacy organizations and foundations. Robert also serves as a senior fellow of the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise.

I've read a lot of his stuff, had an argument with him in which he corrected me for misreading his name below someone else's comment which was actually placed at the top of his comment(and he was right too... damn it) but I have also enjoyed the intellect behind what he writes. RJB is a thinker in a world of feelers. I'd like to think I'm close to that level, but I've no illusions. This guy makes his living writing, and his latest not only will make you think, but will leave you breathless if you have any sense at all. Of course, judging from some commenters on some of his posts, they don't have any judgment, but that is the subject of another post.

In his latest, RJB tackles the question of why there is no massive and sustained condemnation from the Muslim world and Muslim leadership for the terrible destruction wrought by the islamo-fascist terrorists:

If there really is some sort of ongoing war between "extremists" and "moderates" for the soul of Islam, it appears to be one of the quietest contests in the history of ideological warfare.

Whatever the ancient history of Islam, in distant days when more enlightened thinkers and civilized rulers prevailed, I see precious little evidence that these sorts represent any significant part of contemporary Muslim thinking or leadership. If they do, they certainly haven't been very vocal, or active, about rooting out the terrorists in their midst and repudiating their views.

When a supposedly Christian fundamentalist nutcase, Eric Rudolph, bombed U. S. abortion clinics and gay nightclubs, he was forced to live a marginal, virtually reclusive life hiding in a remote rural area.

Not so Muslim terrorists, who arise from even the upper classes of Muslim nations by the tens of thousands, and find vast social infrastructures of sympathizers -- including governments -- throughout the Islamic world, eager to shelter, support and protect them.

"But wait," some cry. "Just recently the leaders of the Muslim world denounced the attacks on London." Yes, they did, and the Imam's in their Mosques called for more blaming this bombing on maybe Jews, maybe the US, maybe... Oh, the seeming paranoia runs rampant. But, really, it is not paranoia, it is subterfuge and misdirection.

Director of London's Al-Maqreze Centre for Historical Studies Hani Sibai[as reported in MEMRI...ed.]: There are No "Civilians" in Islamic Law;The Bombing is a Great Victory for Al-Qa'ida, Which "Rubbed the Noses of the World's 8 Most Powerful Countries in the Mud"

In an interview, Al-Siba'i noted:

I think that British Prime Minister Tony Blair made a grave error when he spoke before the investigation and claimed that the perpetrators of these acts were acting in the name of Islam. I think that he will pay the price for this grave error in the future. No possibility should be ruled out. We do not rule out the possibility that it was done by the intelligence agency of another Western country hostile to Britain. We do not rule out countries... or some Zionist Americans who wanted to overshadow the G-8 summit. But at the same time, we do not rule out the Al-Qa'ida organization.

That baffles me to no end, that anyone could calmly sit there, look at the history of recent terrorist attacks and calmly blame Israel or the US. Now, I too believe that the attack doesn't have to have come from Wahhabi fundamentalist islamo-fascists. It could have come from ... oh, say WWII German agents planted in a cell sixty-five years ago, but I wouldn't even bet YOUR mortgage payment on it.

There is a major disconnect between what the average Muslim hears in the Mosque from Wahhabist Imam's and this for example. While the photo's from Bahrain are greatly appreciated in terms of saying to the terrorists "Enough!" it is, not enough.

More from MEMRI:

Under the title "Expel Extremism Today," Al-Arabiya TV Director-General Abd Al-Rahman Al-Rashed wrote: "For over 10 years now, I myself and other Arab writers have warned against the dangers of the reckless handling of the extremism that is now spreading like a plague within the British community.

"It was never understood why British authorities gave refuge to suspicious characters previously involved in terrorist activities. Why would Britain grant asylum to Arabs who have been convicted of political crimes or religious extremism, or even sentenced to death? Not only were they admitted to this country, but they were also provided with accommodation, a monthly salary, and free legal advice for those who want to prosecute the British government.

"The answer, I believe, is what... I call 'blind generosity.' This bizarre reasoning stuns individuals such as students who wish to establish careers abroad and whose [applications for British] citizenship are rejected. These people do not have criminal records like the others [to grant them entry].

Bidinotto goes on to note that much of the current "stance" of the "global Islamic community" has at least roots in the refusal of the moral relativists to call a spade a spade if you will forgive the "contract bridge" reference. He notes that

Noted New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, certainly no right-winger, is only one of the latest to call upon Muslims to clean up their own stables.

But Friedman is only one of a very few voices calling out in the wilderness. The huge silence is deafening if you will. RJB goes on to say:

How many years, and how many more bloodbaths, will it take? And how long do we in the West patiently tap our feet, waiting for such reforms in the absence of any visible signs that they are taking place? Don't we have a right at some point to pronounce judgment on the Islamic culture itself?

And has that point now come? or even long since passed?

Among Western cultured classes, it is, of course, considered bad form to even ask such questions. Such words smack of (shudder!) intolerance -- intolerance being the only thing intolerable to moral relativists. Let Muslim fanatics shoot babies, bomb nightclubs and buses and subways, chop off the heads of Red Cross nurses, hijack civilian airliners and ram them into civilian office buildings...and their immediate (and only) response is to wail: "How did we drive them to these desperate acts?" Let the victims demand violent retribution, however, and their immediate (and indignant) response is: "Warmongers!"

This moral inversion is fueled by toxic philosophy. Thanks to a long gray line of ideological dope-pushers, Western intellectuals, politicians and cultural leaders are addicted to the self-destructive hallucinations of moral relativism, altruistic self-sacrifice, cultural self-loathing and political appeasement of sworn enemies. Self-blame, along with cowardly calls for more "understanding" and "restraint," are their only knee-jerk responses in the face of each new outrage.

Robert Bidinotto has written what may be a masterpiece in the effort to have Muslims condemn the terror caused by Muslims and I encourage you to read every word of his essay. He has a multitude of links to other sources and has well documented his thesis. If you are a blogger, I encourage you to add him to your blogroll. I have.

Its About Time

Bahrain - probably not effective, but it is at least a start. Maybe when the rest of the Muslim world wakes up and this becomes The Muslim Creedo... but sadly, not until then.

Take The Log Out Of Your Own Eye Before You Complain About The Mote In Someone Else's Eye

The Imam's are "worried!" Oh please! You want to insure that there are no retalitory actions, then begin to police your own "Racist Right Wing" Islamo-fascists. Start a call from the pulpit against them. Issue a Fatwa or Twenty! Scream it from the Minarets that this is a perversion of Islam. Maybe then, maybe you can rest easy. Hypocrites!

From the Times Online:

MUSLIM leaders voiced fears yesterday that racist right-wing groups are already seeking to stir up hatred against their community after the bomb attacks.

Talks were being held with police and local authorities to ensure the security of mosques and areas where there are large Islamic populations.

Although the Government emphasised that it would not “jump to conclusions� about responsibility for the attacks, there was a grim acceptance among many community leaders that the perpetrators would turn out to be extremists linked to their religion.

A Tip of the GM Chapeaux to Danny Carlton

"Steyn Online" - On Target!

Mark Steyn is one of my favorite Brit Authors. He is funny, irreverent, thoughtful, acerbic, piquant, and did I mention funny? He is also an excellent judge of political inanities and the meaningless drivel of the far left. In addition, Steyn has a way of getting to the core of the GWoT and it's fight against the islamo-fascists. In his latest (here) Steyn reviews the political thinking surrounding OBL, the Madrid bombing, the Bali bombing and ties it together and wonders "what will Britain do?"

Me too Mr. Steyn, but I suspect that as in WWII, they will stand tall and proud and will not give in to the new threat of fascism, and every thinking person in the world will stand with them.

A tip of the GM Chappeaux to The Mudville Gazette

In Solidarity - We Are All Brits Today

Today, July 7, 2005, England has been attacked by the forces of darkness. The same forces that attacked the United States in 2001 and Spain in 2004. When will the world at large learn that these are evil people. When will the forces of freedom and democracy learn that you cannot negotiate with these people, that they need to be expelled from humanity. These islamo-fascists are the scourge of the earth and need to be wiped out in their entirety. 100% of them, if they are 18 or older, they need to die. Judgmental? Angry? Infuriated by those who want to "undestand" these beasts and figure out "why do they hate us so?" Damn betcha I am, and I make NO APOLOGIES for it. England, we stand with you, we will not falter. I am adding a smaller version of the flag below to my sidebar and it will remain there until this war is won. I urge all bloggers, to go here and copy the flag for your own blog.

A grateful thanks to Are You Conservative

Update: Danny Carlton at JackLewis.net Has an excellent compilation of sources up... go visit.

"Baath" is synonymous with crime.

A

A Tip of the GM Chappeaux to Michael Totten

The Radical Left, The Left and The War On Terror

This is going to be another rant (I feel the necessity of them more and more often listening to and reading the MSM - perhaps some bourbon will help).

But first, beloved readers, I want to state very clearly that this rant is directed at Moonbats in general, and not necessarily at the left, many of whom are articulate expounders of their point of view. Some who comment on this blog, my friend Jim Hitchcock comes to mind, has always been polite and for the most part, reasonable. There are others of the left that have not been. I don't "ban" them because I do believe in free speech with a few exceptions on my blog explained here:Rules On Commenting. Having said all the above, don't get offended (well, OK, you can if you wish, but only if the shoe fits - if it doesn't fit, this was not aimed at you).

//Begin Rant//
The left is all a-twitter over the President's speech, still calls from the moonbats to shut down gitmo, still claiming the Prez said Saddam was linked to 9/11. What the heck is the matter with these people. In the Washington Times there is an editorial by one James H. Warner who spent over 5 years in a North Vietnamese POW camp. His story tells of torture, his story tells Dandy Dick Durbin what a real concentration camp is like:

"On the first of June [1969...ed.], I was put in a cement box with a steel door, which sat out in the tropical summer sun. There, I was put in leg irons which were then wired to a small stool. In this position I could neither sit nor stand comfortably. Within 10 days, every muscle in my body was in pain (here began a shoulder injury which is now inoperable). The heat was almost beyond bearing. My feet had swollen, literally, to the size of footballs. I cannot describe the pain. When they took the leg irons off, they had to actually dig them out of the swollen flesh. It was five days before I could walk, because the weight of the leg irons on my Achilles tendons had paralyzed them and hamstrung me. I stayed in the box from June 1 until Nov. 10, 1969. While in the box, I lost at least 30 pounds. I would be curious to hear Mr. Durbin explain how this compares with having a female invade my private space, and whether a box in which the heat nearly killed me is the same as turning up the air conditioning."

Did you get that Dick? FIVE friggin months in that box... FIVE, Count them you sorry excuse for a US Senator 1..2..3..4..5. Has ANYONE at Gitmo had a comparable experience? Even ONE? Your sorry excuse for an apology needs to become REAL, no wonder the American people don't trust most Democrats in national elections. Hey Dick, whatcha gonna do when the good people of Ill. retire you?

Warner finishes his column with:

"The argument that detainees at Guantanamo are being treated badly is specious and silly. In the eyes of normal Americans, Democrats believe this argument because, as Jeanne Kirkpatrick said 20 years ago, they "always blame America first." This contributes to the increasing suspicion, in red states, a problem that Democrats are aware of and are trying to counter, that Democrats cannot be trusted with our national security. Only the Democrats can change this perception, most recently articulated by White House adviser Karl Rove. The ball is in their court and I am certain there are steps that they can take to change this perception, but making silly arguments about imaginary bad treatment of enemy detainees is not a move in the right direction."

Oh, but no, I'm not done... The moonbats demand an exit strategy. Right in the middle of a war. That'll show the islamofascists how long they have to hang on won't it? I discussed that below. The islamofascists are just salivating at the idea that we may give them an expected date of victory. No chance folks, the President said, and I quote:

"The terrorists do not understand America. The American people do not falter under threat, and we will not allow our future to be determined by car bombers and assassins.

America and our friends are in a conflict that demands much of us.

We accept these burdens because we know what is at stake.

We fight today because Iraq now carries the hope of freedom in a vital region of the world, and the rise of democracy will be the ultimate triumph over radicalism and terror.

And we fight today because terrorists want to attack our country and kill our citizens, and Iraq is where they are making their stand.

So we'll fight them there, we'll fight them across the world, and we will stay in the fight until the fight is won.

America has done difficult work before. From our desperate fight for independence to the darkest days of a civil war to the hard-fought battles against tyranny in the 20th century, there were many chances to lose our heart, our nerve or our way.

But Americans have always held firm, because we have always believed in certain truths. We know that if evil is not confronted, it gains in strength and audacity and returns to strike us again. We know that when the work is hard, the proper response is not retreat, it is courage. And we know that this great ideal of human freedom entrusted to us in a special way and that the ideal of liberty is worth defending."

Those that demand a timetable for withdrawal are either too naive to understand who is our enemy, or too stupid to understand that we must win this war. And, I can hear it now..."Then why don't you join up Roper, you were in the Army." Hey, I tried, I was in Berlin on 9/11 and as soon as I got home I called and offered my services...too old they said. Well, I'm not too old to tell you what I think and to stand up for what I believe in.

Still not done.

I'm sick of the complaints that Bush mislead the country and that the Downing Street Memos "PROVE" that. Well, according to Tony Blair (Oh, you know Tony don't you? He's the Prime Minister of England - The guy that LIVES at 10 Downing Street) According to the AP:

"LONDON - British Prime Minister Tony Blair said Wednesday the "Downing Street memos" paint a distorted picture, and he insisted that the Iraq war was not predetermined by the United States.

"People say the decision was already taken. The decision was not already taken," he said in an exclusive interview with The Associated Press.

Blair added he was "a bit astonished" at the intensive U.S. media coverage about the leaked memos, which suggested the White House viewed the war with Iraq as inevitable.

One last thing. I'm also sick of those who say that Saddam had no linkage to terrorists and/or Al Qaeda. the following are reproductions of PDF files.

Cutting and Running is not an option, only winning this war is viable. We have the troops, we have the means, we must have the will in order to succeed.

Prosecuting The War On Terror!

One of my favorite quotes for prosecuting the current Global War on Terror is this:

"...we will surprise ourselves by facing up to the reality that you can't be a great power unless you are prepared to risk your own citizens' lives. If we discover the strength of character to do the right thing, there is still the question of whether European nations will also be prepared to join in."

Now, I have to admit a bit of subterfuge, I left out part of the above quote because it really wasn't about the GWOT, it was about Kosovo. Here, is the full quote:

Barring a sudden collapse of will on the part of Serbia, there seem to be two possibilities: Either we will shame ourselves by accepting the elimination of Kosovo's Albanians as a fait accompli (perhaps while continuing to throw bombs at Serbia now and then), or we will surprise ourselves by facing up to the reality that you can't be a great power unless you are prepared to risk your own citizens' lives. If we discover the strength of character to do the right thing, there is still the question of whether European nations will also be prepared to join in.

Let's make a couple of changes in the above, e.g.:

Barring a sudden collapse of will on the part of Serbia islamofascists, there seem to be two possibilities: Either we will shame ourselves by accepting the elimination of Kosovo's Albanians Iraqi freedom as a fait accompli (perhaps while continuing to throw bombs at Serbia the islamofascists now and then), or we will surprise ourselves by facing up to the reality that you can't be a great power unless you are prepared to risk your own citizens' lives. If we discover the strength of character to do the right thing, there is still the question of whether European nations will also be prepared to join in.

Of course, standing up for what is right, regardless of what the cost may be is totally foreign to a hack like Paul Krugman who recently said in an NYTimes column:

Let me explain. The United States will soon have to start reducing force levels in Iraq, or risk seeing the volunteer Army collapse. Yet the administration and its supporters have effectively prevented any adult discussion of the need to get out.

Adult discussion? Not too many years ago, Krugman said this:

I remember once (during the air phase of the Gulf War) seeing John Kenneth Galbraith making pronouncements on TV about the military situation, and telling friends that if I ever start pontificating in public about a technical subject I don't understand, they should gag me.

Well, get out the gag. Krugman has no idea of what he was talking about and certainly has no expertise in anything except bashing Bush and anything Republican/conservative or to the right of Paul Krugman. But, I digress, let's get back to that supposed "adult discussion." I've heard that before from those that let their anti-Bush feelings overcome their ability to think rationally (as one of my commenters recently noted "if the shoe fits... wear it.") While I don't object to any discussion from the opposit side of the fence regarding the GWOT or Bush or Republicans, I object like hell to any attempt to shut down discussion with ad hominem attacks designed not to further discussion, but to shut it down.

I can hear it now, "But you do, your commentors do, the right does it all the time." Correct, but I at least can try to minimize it. There are those on the left that use it with every argument to the exclusion of any other type of argument. And its childish, and its non productive and having said that, I understand that anyone can be pushed into it. But Krugman's comment is a typical ad hominem attack. "Adult discussion," and if you argue against a draw down, you aren't being adult. Right Mr. Krugman!

In other blogs, such as QandO Jon Henke discusses Krugman's column. In fact, I borrowed the Krugman quote from his posting for which I give a tip of the GM Chapeaux. Other blogs also rip apart Mr. Krugman. Tigerhawk does a good job, even if he says he needs a chill pill following that. So does Keith Burgess-Jackson over at the Anal Philosopher

Krugman's column (and no, I won't link to it... go to the NYTimes if you want to read that) notes the "increasing" poll numbers showing the GWOT is running out of steam in terms of the support given by the American People. And that is true too, but not for the reasons the left and Krugman would have you believe. The reason is simple, Americans respond to the news, and the news is negative. If you ask a poll question and slant it, you can get any answer you want. For example, compare the following two poll questions on the GWOT:

1. Given the increase in the number of casualties, should the US consider setting a deadline for getting out of Iraq?
2. Given the increase in the number of casualties among the insurgents, and the increase in the frequency of the capture of insurgents, should the US consider getting out before the job is done?

You can get almost any response from a poll if you want. That's why G.W. Bush doesn't pay attention to them (which of course leads to the question as to why Bill Clinton paid so much attention to them) and why touting polls is a meaningless exercise in the discussion. In fact, polls showing that Kerry was behind and staying behind were denied by the left with "Polls don't show what is going on." Unless of course the polls run against Bush, in which case polls are the Oracle at Delphi.

Krugman is such a hack, I wonder why I waste my time dissing him. Maybe I need to take one of Tigerhawks Chill Pills.

Oh, before I go, the quote about putting our soldiers at risk as a measure of "the strength of character to do the right thing." Heh, that was from Krugman too. And for once, he was right.

Major HT to Donald Luskin

News from Iraq

Greyhawk at The Mudville Gazette has a five part series up, the fifth instalment posted today. It is long, and you also need to read the other four parts, but it is without a doubt, along with Michael Yon's reporting one of the absolute best views of what is really going on. Really going on as opposed to what the leftwing MSM is telling you. Now, if you really don't want your mind messed up with facts, don't bother, in which case you are probably one of my more radical lefty readers (and I love all of ya), but if you want to know what is happinging, where there are boots on the ground, this is required reading.

Karl Rove is Worse Than Durban.... NOT!!!!

Karl Rove is being castigated because he accused "Liberals" (not Democrats per se) of well, being liberals and not wanting to aggressively go after the islamofascists. Well, Kenneth Mehlman, RNC chair has an answer:

Immediately After 9/11, MoveOn.Org Petition Urged “Moderation And Restraint� And Use Of “International Judicial Institutions.�

“We, The Undersigned, Citizens And Residents Of The United States Of America … Appeal To The President Of The United States, George W. Bush … And To All Leaders Internationally To Use Moderation And Restraint In Responding To The Recent Terrorist Attacks Against The United States.� (MoveOn.Org Website, “MoveOn Peace,� http://web.archive.org/web/20021127190638/peace.moveon.org/petition.php3, Posted 9/13/01, Accessed 6/23/05)

“We Implore The Powers That Be To Use, Wherever Possible, International Judicial Institutions And International Human Rights Law To Bring To Justice Those Responsible For The Attacks, Rather Than The Instruments Of War, Violence Or Destruction.� (MoveOn.Org Website, “MoveOn Peace,� http://web.archive.org/web/20021127190638/peace.moveon.org/petition.php3, Posted 9/13/01, Accessed 6/23/05)

“[W]e Demand That There Be No Recourse To Nuclear, Chemical Or Biological Weapons, Or Any Weapons Of Indiscriminate Destruction, And Feel That It Is Our Inalienable Human Right To Live In A World Free Of Such Arms.� (MoveOn.Org Website, “MoveOn Peace,� http://web.archive.org/web/20021127190638/peace.moveon.org/petition.php3, Posted 9/13/01, Accessed 6/23/05)

Just After 9/11, Liberal Filmmaker Michael Moore Derided “Terror And Bloodshed� Committed By Americans. (David Brooks, Op-Ed, “All Hail Moore,� The New York Times, 6/26/04)

Just After 9/11, Moore Blamed America’s “Taxpayer-Funded Terrorism� And Bush Administration For Terrorist Attacks. “We abhor terrorism – unless we’re the ones doing the terrorizing. We paid and trained and armed a group of terrorists in Nicaragua in the 1980s who killed over 30,000 civilians. That was OUR work. You and me.…Let’s mourn, let’s grieve, and when it’s appropriate let’s examine our contribution to the unsafe world we live in.� (Michael Moore Website Archive, “Death, Downtown,� Posted 9/12/01, www.michaelmoore.com, Accessed 7/27/04)

Michael Moore Said U.S. Should Not Have Removed Taliban After 9/11. Moore: “Likewise, to bomb Afghanistan – I mean, I’ve never understood this, Tim.� (CNBC’s “Tim Russert,� 10/19/02)

Liberal Donor George Soros Claimed America Should Have Treated 9/11 Attacks As Crime, Responded With Police Work. “War is a false and misleading metaphor in the context of combating terrorism. Treating the attacks of September 11 as crimes against humanity would have been more appropriate. Crimes require police work, not military action. To protect against terrorism, you need precautionary measures, awareness, and intelligence gathering – all of which ultimately depend on the support of the populations among which terrorists operate. Imagine for a moment that September 11 had been treated as a crime. We would have pursued Bin Laden in Afghanistan, but we would not have invaded Iraq. Nor would we have our military struggling to perform police work in full combat gear and getting killed in the process.� (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 18)

Soros Said The Execution Of 9/11 Attacks “Could Not Have Been More Spectacular.� “Admittedly, the terrorist attack was a historic event in its own right. Hijacking fully loaded airplanes and using them as suicide bombs was an audacious idea, and the execution could not have been more spectacular.� (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 2)

Soros Said War On Terror Had Claimed More Innocent Victims Than 9/11 Attack Itself. “This is a very tough thing to say, but the fact is, that the war on terror as conducted by this administration, has claimed more innocent victims that the original attack itself.� (George Soros, Remarks At Take Back America Conference, Washington, DC, 6/3/04)

Liberal Democrats Urged Restraint, Blamed America:

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH): “‘The Time For Peace Is Now,’ [Kucinich] Declared Optimistically July 11, Two Months To The Day Before Terrorists Hit The Pentagon And The World Trade Center. … Sitting In His Capitol Hill Office Last Week, Near A Window Where He Could See The Smoke Rising From The Pentagon On Sept. 11, Kucinich Insisted He Is More Optimistic Than Ever That People Worldwide Are Ready To Embrace The Cause Of Nonviolence.� (Elizabeth Auster, “Offer The Hand Of Peace,� [Cleveland, OH] Plain Dealer, 9/30/01)

Kucinich: “Afghanistan May Be An Incubator Of Terrorism But It Doesn’t Follow That We Bomb Afghanistan …� (Elizabeth Auster, “Offer The Hand Of Peace,� [Cleveland, OH] Plain Dealer, 9/30/01)

Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-HI): “Only Now Are We Trying To Figure Out What Is Islam. Maybe If There Was A Department Of Peace, They Would Be Able To Say, ‘Uh-Oh, We’ve Got Some Problems With These People,’ … I Truly Believe That If We Had A Department Of Peace, We Would Have Seen [9/11] Coming.� (Ethan Wallison, “War A Challenge For Peace Caucus,� Roll Call, 10/1/01)

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA): “I Am Convinced That Military Action Will Not Prevent Further Acts Of International Terrorism Against The United States.� (Eddy Ramirez, “Calif. Congresswoman Alone In Vote Against War Powers Resolution,� [University Of California-Berkeley] Daily Californian, 9/17/01)

Al Sharpton (D-NY) Said That The Attacks On The World Trade Center Are Evidence That “America Is Beginning To Reap What It Has Sown.� (Adam Nagourney, “Say It Loud,� The New York Times, 12/1/02)

Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) Claimed Osama Bin Laden Could Be Compared To “Revolutionaries That Helped To Cast Off The British Crown.� “‘One could say that Osama bin Laden and these non-nation-state fighters with religious purpose are very similar to those kind of atypical revolutionaries that helped to cast off the British crown,’ Kaptur told an Ohio newspaper, The (Toledo) Blade.� (Malie Rulon, “Lawmaker Compares Osama, U.S. Patriots,� The Associated Press, 3/6/03)

Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) Said The United States Would “Pay Every Single Hour, Ever Single Day� That Bombs Were Dropped In Afghanistan. “‘How much longer does the bombing campaign continue?’ Biden asked during an Oct. 22 speech at the Council on Foreign Relations. ‘We’re going to pay every single hour, every single day it continues.’� (Miles A. Pomper, "Building Anti-Terrorism Coalition Vaults Ahead Of Other Priorities," Congressional Quarterly Weekly, 10/26/01)

“The Bombing Campaign, [Biden] Said, Reinforced Existing Stereotypes Of The United States As A ‘High-Tech Bully …’� (Miles A. Pomper, "Building Anti-Terrorism Coalition Vaults Ahead Of Other Priorities," Congressional Quarterly Weekly, 10/26/01)

Gov. Howard Dean (D-VT) Said Osama Bin Laden Not Guilty. Dean: “I Still Have This Old-Fashioned Notion That Even With People Like Osama, Who Is Very Likely To Be Found Guilty, We Should Do Our Best Not To, In Positions Of Executive Power, Not To Prejudge Jury Trials.� (“Dean Not Ready To Pronounce Osama Bin Laden Guilty,� The Associated Press, 12/26/03)

Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) To High School Students: “How Would [Muslims] Look At Us Today If We Had Been There Helping Them With Some Of That Rather Than Just Being The People Who Are Going To Bomb In Iraq And Go To Afghanistan? … War Is Expensive Too … Your Generation Ought To Be Thinking About Whether We Should Be Better Neighbors Out In Other Countries So That They Have A Different Vision Of Us.� (Gregg Herrington, “Senator Asks Students To Ponder,� The [Vancouver, WA] Columbian, 12/19/02)

Sen. John Kerry (D-MA): “[W]ar On Terror Is Far Less Of A Military Operation And Far More Of An Intelligence-Gathering, Law-Enforcement Operation.� (The Iowa Brown & Black Coalition Presidential Forum, Des Moines, IA, 1/11/04)

Kerry: “[W]hat We’ve Learned Is That The War On Terror Is Much More Of An Intelligence Operation And A Law Enforcement Operation.� (NPR’s “All Things Considered,� 3/19/03)

Converse with a US Marine

Want to know what a grunt thinks? Go here: The Wide Awakes!

Future History?

Reuters/Al Jazeera
June 14, 2011

(Paris-United Eurabia) Since the Caliphate was established in Eurabia in 2009, and the War On Infidels (WOI) won, a number of war criminals have been brought to justice at the International Court of the Hague. To date, the heads of the former Governments of the so-called "European Union" were taken into custody following a fierce uprising of former Arabs who, with careful planning, were situated in key points in Eurabia. Chirac, Schroeder, Villapin, were tried, found guilty of Anti-Islamic hatred and executed by beheading.

Currently, the war in England continues apace with the English government in exile retreating to Scotland. The rest of the so-called British Isles are firmly in the hands of our beloved Jihadists aided by our brothers who infiltrated England over many years. Tony Blair is reportedly holed up in a cave in Scotland, but will soon be found, tried, found guilty and executed.

In America, we are fully in control of New England and most of the east cost, Washington D.C. and a good part of the Floridian Peninsula. Our beloved Jihadists are firmly in control in the former states of Washington, Oregon and California. Despite a strong and implacable foe waging an illegal guerilla war in southern California, there is no doubt that we will be victorious.

Elsewhere, New Madrasses have been established in Moscow, Krakow, Warsaw, Budapest, Vienna, Rome, Madrid and London. Each new Madrass is charged with teaching the young the glories of Islam and the joy's of martyrdom and enlisting their help in the war against the infidels.
In the remaining portion of the United States, we continue to use their internal laws against them and to date, CAIR and the Islamic Council have brought suits against the majority of State Governors for hate crimes in that they have denounced Islam and have desecrated the Holy Qu’ran.

Prisoners captured in the WOI are routinely converted to Islam or beheaded. The savings in food, the number of guards needed etc is significant and frees up money to fight the infidel.

New York City has continued to have decontamination teams eradicating the radioactivity following the successful bombing of Wall Street with a small tactical device delivered by our brothers in Iran.
Last week, the blasphemer Salmon Rushdie was surrounded in a villa off the coast of Sardinia but shot himself in the head 5 times before he could be captured. May his stomach roast in the fires of hell forever.

The Islamic Council continues to search for the remains of the former President Jimmy Carter, accidentally immolated during our successful drive on Americus, Georgia. When found, he will be enshrined in Mecca for all the services rendered in closing the so-called prison camp Guantanimo.

We continue to offer rewards for the heads of former President GWBush and President Hillary Clinton and doubtless, they will be found in the fullness of time.

Recent offers by the Gang of Fourteen to negotiate a cease-fire have been rejected because we have decided that their leader, John McCain has reportedly some Jewish blood in him. The trees and stones have called out for his death.

Next week, another report on the war against the infidels.
Until then, this is Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf: The Iraqi Minister of Information Reporting.

Wahhabi Central?

Mustang at Social Sense/Wide Awakes and Always On Watch have jointly written an excellent wake up call to the danger our way of life presented by the Wahhabism:

"Reaching into America is the goal of the Wahabbists. They are capable, as we have seen, to do great harm to the American people, our guests, our institutions, and the economy, but there is no possibility that Jihadists can destroy America from an outward invasion. These people do realize that American is within their grasp through subterfuge, and they are doing it almost in plain sight of us all, if only we would open our eyes to the truth."

Read the whole thing.

THE MYTH OF MORAL EQUIVALENCE

The the intellectual support for the Islamo-fascist assault on liberal democratic legitimacy involves a very complex, comprehensive, multifaceted strategy. First, it involves a demonstration of the failure of Western democracies to meet their own standards which are regarded as utopian measuring rods. Second, it proceeds by continuous falsification of Islamo-fascist practices and assertions of Islamic loyalty to basic Western values. At the same time that it is suggested that we do not respect our own values, it is claimed by the Islamists that they do. Our flaws are exaggerated, theirs are simply denied. Third, the conclusion is, of course, inexorably arrived at, that there is, at best, not a dime's worth of difference between these two modes of governance.

Full disclosure: I didn't write the above, I edited it and substituted islamo-fascism (and related terms) for the Soviet Union in an essay originally written by Jeane J. Kirkpatrick "The Myth of Moral Equivalence"

Which brings us to the purpose of this essay. There have been a multitude of writers of the left/liberal/progressive/Democratic Party types who decry the conduct of the war on terror based on actions taken by some blockheads (I'm trying to be polite in describing these folk) in mistreating prisoners taken in the war on terror.

Indeed, there is a large body of reportage describing how we have failed of our idealism as a nation by engaging in "torture" and other behaviors that have damaged our view of ourselves, damaged our reputation in the world and in the so called, much vaunted but entirely illusory "arab street."

In a recent post on gulags the comments from those on the opposite side of the aisle came fast and furious. Of a total (to date) 26 comments fully 14 of those comments were from the left taking issue with me. That is well and good, the whole idea behind my essay, and indeed this blog, is to post my beliefs and thoughts and to engender argument from those opposed to my ideas. To this extent I have, at long last, succeeded. The intellectual battle is thus joined.

From the left comes the argument that America and American style democracy is a failure because of Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, sending and the evidence that proves this was supplied by by none other than one George Soros:

"After an introduction by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, billionaire financier George Soros told left-wing activists at a Washington function today the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal in Iraq is comparable to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States."

Also:

"In January, Soros told an audience at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace no less than the future of the planet hinges on the results of the presidential election.

"I'm ready to put my money where my mouth is," he said. "2004 is not an ordinary election. It's a referendum on the Bush doctrine. The future of the world hangs in the balance."

Uhhh, George, you lost. America voted for Bush and by extension, the War on Terrorists.

Yeppers, a true moral equivalence. What's the problem with the left, and please note, I'm not talking about Democrats, I'm not talking about liberals or progressives, I'm talking about the left, the hard core those who are so intellectually dishonest that they cannot tell the difference between abuse of prisoners (which has happened, only a person with their brain disengaged could say it didn't) and the stoning of gay folk, the execution by beheading of prisoners, the beating of women for a myriad of reasons, the imprisonment and sometimes execution of Christians in Saudi Arabia, the enslavery, torture (the real thing, not just abusive treatment), and execution of animists in Sudan. These are not equal behaviors.

I'm sure this post will bring out those who argue that we have failed of our promise. But war, and here we didn't start this war, is an awful thing. Bad things happen in war. We know this, any intellectually honest person knows this. Yet, we also give Quran's to our muslim prisoners. Do you honestly believe that Al Qaeda gives bibles to those they have captured. Do you think that those captured by the islamists in Iraq have access to legal cousel or courts? Do you honestly believe that their actions are the equivalent of ours?

This is the framework of the radical left. The left with an agenda. The agenda is simple, express outrage in logical and seemingly intelligent terms and decrease the effectiveness in the war on terrorists. Enlist Muslims in the condemnation of the trashing of the Quran and ask for more "sensitivity" in understanding the islamo-fascist. Don't believe me, how about "QURAN DESECRATION:
Far Worse than Abu Ghraib" by M.A. Muqtedar Kahn here.

The truth about Abu Ghraib is bad enough, in fact, it's sickening that American Soldiers could stoop so low. But the facts are also that those involved were also being investigated before the scandle broke, that charges were filed and courts martial were scheduled. Do those proposing a moral equivalence purport to tell us that the islamo-fascists would have done the same to those who beheaded helpless prisoners? I don't think so.

A friend recently sent me an e-mail that speaks to the differences between how we specifically and the west in general treat muslims and how we in turn are perceived by those self same muslims:

"Running the risk of sounding like one of those weird "conspiracy theorists," I must say that I do firmly believe that there is a very sophisticated, multi-faceted program to in time, supplant western culture (e.g., Christianity) with Islam. Remember, Islam is not "just" a religion; it is also a political power structure. When I say multi-faceted, I am saying that there is a concerted effort under foot to dismantle western culture, simultaneously, on several fronts. Farakan is working overtime to convert increasing numbers of African Americans, CAIR is working to indoctrinate school children through their programs of providing "free literature" and guest speakers to our public schools, more and more Muslims are becoming school teachrers, the Saudi government funds Madrassas almost exclusively, there are increasing numbers of mosques going up throughout US cities, there is a massive effort to garner political support for Islam within the Congress (Conyers), and through the ACLU and CCR lobbies, much effort is being placed on having Christians denounced as part of a "hate campaign" against the "tolerant" faith of Islam. MY concern is that this is working all too well, most Americans are not paying attention, and then what causes my deepest level of concern is that "they" are using "our" constitution to achieve their goals.

I am not advocating any kind of red-neck hoe-down here . . . but I am saying that if the various investigative agencies of the U. S. government aren't looking carefully enough, we will soon see [radical-Wahabbi] mosques spewing their filth to the direct and long term detriment to American culture. It is already in full swing in Europe; we are next. I recently read an article where a Swedish teenaged girl was found guilty of being "insensitive" to minorities for (are you ready) wearing a small symbol the the national ensign. So you see, in some western countries, citizens are not even permitted to display national pride because it offends minority sensitivities. Could that happen here? It already does, in terms of the so-called "hate" crimes where even speaking truth can lead to lawsuits. One lady author living in NYC was recently indicted in Italy for publishing a book that speaks the truth about Islam, and Italian Muslims filed a criminal complaint.

One person with whom I correspond, he is Greek American who lives in NYC, told me not long ago that he fully expects American cities will look similar to Beruit within another generation or so. I hope he is wrong, but I fear that he is not. I think my underlying concern is that the longer we wait to confront "the enemy within," the more difficult it will be to sort things out in defense of the American way.

The American way -- where foreigners are welcomed to our shores with the expectation that they will embrace us, learn our language, educate their children, work hard, serve America when it is necessary, and take their places by our side. Muslims are being told to do just the opposite -- "remain apart, trust Christians not, do not offer a helping hand, even when they do good things for you, use the infidel's system against the infidel," and that kind of sh**. And, of course, dumb asses that we are, we do not perceive any of this as being a problem."

Now I know that there will be some who decry this kind of language, but will also use equally intemperate language, indeed perhaps worse, to describe the author of the e-mail. Some of the terms I have been called in various forums are not to be believed (well, if you read DU, you can believe it).

An Arab who is also a Christian states it fairly well:

"The following is my analysis of Islamic invasion of America, the agenda of Islamists and visible methods to take over America by the year 2020! Will Americans continue to sleep through this invasion as they did when we were attacked on 9/11?

1) Terminate America’s freedom of speech by replacing it with hate crime bills state-wide and nation-wide.

2) Wage a war of words using black leaders like Louis Farrakhan, Rev. Jesse Jackson and other visible religious personalities to promote Islam as the original African-American’s religion while Christianity is for the whites! Strange enough, no one tells the African-Americans that it was the Arab Muslims who captured them and sold them as slaves, neither the fact that in Arabic the word for black and slave is the same, “Abed.�

3) Engage the American public in dialogues, discussions, debates in colleges, universities, public libraries, radio, TV, churches and mosques on the virtues of Islam. Proclaim how it is historically another religion like Judaism and Christianity with the same monotheistic faith.

4) Nominate Muslim sympathizers to political office for favorable legislation to Islam and support potential sympathizers by block voting.

5) Take control of as much of Hollywood, the press, TV, radio and the internet by buying the corporations or a controlling stock.

6) Yield to the fear of imminent shut-off of the lifeblood of America – the black gold. America’s economy depends on oil, (1000 products are derived from oil), so does its personal and industrial transportation and manufacturing -41% comes from the Middle East.

7) Yell, “foul, out-of-context, personal interpretation, hate crime, Zionist, un-American, inaccurate interpretation of the Quran� anytime Islam is criticized or the Quran is analyzed in the public arena.

8) Encourage Muslims to penetrate the White House, specifically with Islamists who can articulate a marvelous and peaceful picture of Islam. Acquire government positions, get membership in local school boards. Train Muslims as medical doctors to dominate the medical field, research and pharmaceutical companies. Take over the computer industry. Establish Middle Eastern restaurants throughout the U.S. to connect planners of Islamization in a discreet way. Ever notice how numerous Muslim doctors in America are, when their countries need them more desperately than America?

9) Accelerate Islamic demographic growth via:
Massive immigration (100,000 annually since 1961) No birth control whatsoever – every baby of Muslim parents is automatically a Muslim and cannot choose another religion later. Muslim men must marry American women and Islamize them (10,000 annually). Then divorce them and remarry every five years – since one cannot have the Muslim legal permission to marry four at one time. This is a legal solution in America. Convert angry, alienated black inmates and turn them into militants (so far 2000 released inmates have joined Al Qaida world-wide). Only a few have been captured in Afghanistan and on American soil. So far – sleeping cells!

10) Reading, writing, arithmetic and research through the American educational system, mosques and student centers (now 1500) should be sprinkled with dislike of Jews, evangelical Christians and democracy. There are 300 exclusively Muslim schools with loyalty to the Quran, not the U.S. Constitution.

11) Provide very sizeable monetary Muslim grants to colleges and universities in America to establish “Centers for Islamic studies� with Muslim directors to promote Islam in higher education institutions.

12) Let the entire world know through propaganda, speeches, seminars, local and national media that terrorists have high-jacked Islam, not the truth, which is Islam high-jacked the terrorists. Furthermore in January of 2002, Saudi Arabia’s Embassy in Washington mailed 4500 packets of the Quran, videos, promoting Islam to America’s high schools--free. They would never allow us to reciprocate.

13) Appeal to the historically compassionate and sensitive Americans for sympathy and tolerance towards the Muslims in America who are portrayed as mainly immigrants from oppressed countries.

14) Nullify America’s sense of security by manipulating the intelligence community with misinformation. Periodically terrorize Americans of impending attacks on bridges, tunnels, water supplies, airports, apartment buildings and malls. (We have experienced this too often since 9-11.)

15) Form riots and demonstrations in the prison system demanding Islamic Sharia as the way of life, not American’s justice system.

16) Open numerous charities throughout the U.S. but use the funds to support Islamic terrorism with American dollars.

17) Raise interest in Islam on America’s campuses by insisting that freshman take at least one course on Islam. Be sure that the writer is a bonafide American, Christian, scholarly and able to cover up the violence in the Quran and express the peaceful, spiritual and religious aspect only.

18) Unify the numerous Muslim lobbies in Washington, mosques, Islamic student centers, educational organizations, magazines and papers by internet and an annual convention to coordinate plans, propagate the faith and engender news in the media of their visibility.

19) Send intimidating messages and messengers to the outspoken individuals who are critical of Islam and seek to eliminate them by hook or crook.

20) Applaud Muslims as loyal citizens of the US by spotlighting their voting record as the highest percentage of all minority and ethic groups in America.

This site shows a few of the "debates" between the author of the above and Muslim leaders. Yep, Morally Equivalent for sure.

For a last argument, let us return to Jeane J. Kirkpatrick:

"But whenever anyone suggests that the world is dominated by superpower rivalries, they imply that we have some goal other than fostering and preserving a world of independent nations. Otherwise the concept of superpower rivalry makes no sense. But if there is only one power which seeks to undermine and subvert the independence of nations, then there is no question of superpower rivalry, and there isn't even a question of a contest between the United States and that imperialistic power. There is a contest between the imperialistic power and all other countries who desire to preserve their independence.

UPDATE: Babalublog has a terrific post up about the true sense of what a real gulag is. No attempt at moral equivalence here. Good Job Val Prieto. Good damn job!