The Real Ugly American

WE HAVE MOVED

2006-01-23T20:28:00.000-08:00

Check out the new site here:

Bigger, Better and Uglier than ever!!!!!!!!!!

THEREALUGLYAMERICAN.COM

No Posts For The Next Few Days

2006-01-17T05:52:00.000-08:00

I have some folks helping me work on some new stuff for the blog behind the scenes. It should be done in the next few days. So I will be unable to post for a little while.

I will let you know as soon as the work is done. Hopefully you will like it.....

Terrorists Buying Untraceable Cell Phones In USA.

2006-01-14T08:02:00.000-08:00

*****Update****

the FBI office in Midland Texas has now said:

"There is no known link or demonstrated link or any other kind of link at this point between the people here and any terror cell,"

This completely contradicts the previous reports from ABC.

Oh and to the Moonbats commenting on this thread. I am a Liberal Democrat.

**************

This one hits close to home. Michelle Malkin has this story about terrorists buying large quantities of throw away cell phones. One of the towns mentioned Hemet California is about 15 minutes from my house. Here is an excerpt:

Federal agents have launched an investigation into a surge in the purchase of large quantities of disposable cell phones by individuals from the Middle East and Pakistan, ABC News has learned.
The phones -- which do not require purchasers to sign a contract or have a credit card -- have many legitimate uses, and are popular with people who have bad credit or for use as emergency phones tucked away in glove compartments or tackle boxes. But since they can be difficult or impossible to track, law enforcement officials say the phones are widely used by criminal gangs and terrorists.

...Law enforcement officials say the phones were used to detonate the bombs terrorists used in the Madrid train attacks in March 2004.

...The FBI is closely monitoring the potentially dangerous development, which came to light following recent large-quantity purchases in California and Texas, officials confirmed.

In one New Year's Eve transaction at a Target store in Hemet, Calif., 150 disposable tracfones were purchased. Suspicious store employees notified police, who called in the FBI, law enforcement sources said.
In an earlier incident, at a Wal-mart store in Midland, Texas, on December 18, six individuals attempted to buy about 60 of the phones until store clerks became suspicious and notified the police. A Wal-mart spokesperson confirmed the incident.

So you don't think the war on terror is real?

Believe it people. These guys are here maybe not in your neighborhood but somewhere close and they want you dead. Btw Hemet is a "small town". It is about 90 miles south east of Los Angeles, and 85 miles north east of San Diego. It is in the high desert at the base of the San Jacinto Mountain range. Until recently Hemet is pretty remote not near any major freeway and was just a place you would pass through if you were going camping in the mountains maybe stopping to gas up or get some fast food. It was a farming and ranching community. There have been a lot of new homes being built over the last few years as folks can no longer to buy houses in LA or San Diego.

The point is the terrorists are not only in the big cities. They are in the small towns either hoping to buy necessary supplies like these cell phones hoping the hay seeds won't notice what they are up to or they may even be planning to attack small town America.

The Sensible Mom is following up on the source of this story.

AJ Strata connects this story to the NSA leak story.

There you go Risen. If you ever needed evidence you are a Benedict Arnold this is it. And if we do get attacked because of these adjustments by terrorists - you and the NY Times will have the blood of innocents on your hands.

RELIAPUNDIT says he was the first one to connect the dots between this story and the NSA leak story and he is not very happy:

LL of these large sales came RIGHT AFTER the NYTIMES NSA leak (12/15/05). Though this is circumstantial, it is HIGHLY SUGGESTIVE that the leak alerted the sleeper cells HERE (and perhaps elsewhere), and that they are adapting their SOP's as a result; thus, they are making it tougher for us to prevent an attack.

The most amazing part of this story is the reaction from Glenn Greenwald.

If you’re interested in viewing the results of mixing sickly paranoia with abject stupidity -- or if you want to catch a glimpse of what our country will look like once the most rabid Bush followers have full reign over it -- I highly recommend this genuinely disturbing post from Michelle Malkin.

but his commentors go much much farther than that:

Malkin should be on her knees "thanking" Jim Risen (as only a horrid little slut can do) for his expose of this practice.
actor212

Malkin and her ilk deserve to be deported!
Paranoid Schizophrenic

suspicious right-i suspect michelle is a double agent working for the chinese commies-

Michelle your cover is blown-i hope we're listening to all of her calls-it's for her own good
Anonymous

It's obvious somebody needs to ...

paco

that last comment by Paco was recently moderated (thankfully). lets just say he insulted and threatend Ms. Malkin physically.

Or how about this reaction from Tbogg.

Since the Great Oklahoma Backpack Bomber Scare of 2005 went the way of Jack Abramoff's career, Michelle Malkin needed another threat to the homeland to get all nipply about and she found it in swarthy types buying cell phones. Quickly, Commisioner! Turn on the Crazy Ass Racist Bitch Signal!

Tbogg claims to be : "Faithful husband, soccer dad, basset owner, and former cowboy"

I wonder if he talks to his kids like that at soccer practice?

Thankfully none of these folks were working at Wall mart.

At least NewsHog has some common sense even if he can't resist a few jabs at the Right and Michelle in particular.

I will give Malkin her due when she says that we all should be willing to report behaviour we thought was suspicious. I did, on one occasion right after 9/11. I have no idea if anything came of it but I am still glad I did. It may well be the case that, at least in the Texas incident ABC reports, there is some link between these bulk purchases and terrorism:

There will be more to this story I am sure.

Kyoto Be Damned!

2006-01-12T06:25:00.000-08:00

Plants Produce "greenhouse gasses!" That’s right NPR’s morning edition reported this morning that scientists in Europe have made an astonishing discovering. All leafy plants (that includes trees) produce methane. In fact they produce as much as ONE THIRD of all methane gas in the world.

Other scientists who were at first skeptical are now accepting the research as valid. They are now questioning the effectiveness of Kyoto. You see one of the Kyoto provisions says that if countries exceed their allowed amount C02 production (C02 is a “greenhouse gas”) they could make up for it by planting trees which convert C02 into oxygen.

OOPS it appears by planting trees you are just substituting one greenhouse gas for another.

Oh and on another note India declared it will not comply with Kyoto C02 production goals.

If you believe Global Warming is happening or not (I am pretty convinced it is)

And/or if you believe it is man made or can be countered by man (I am far more skeptical of this) then maybe its time for plan B ehh?

KYOTO IS DEAD.

This post is linked to these bloggers who are hosting Open Trackbacks: Wizbang,

Alito Too Smart For Democrats and other news

2006-01-11T07:33:00.000-08:00

At least that seems to be the general consensus.

Personally I think an attempt to block a nominee to the SCOTUS for ideological reasons is wrong. However this dance that is being performed is great for Democracy imo. Judge Alito is proving to the country just how much he knows about the law and demonstrating why he is qualified to serve on the court.

I think Captains Quarters has the best excert of the day:

Like the bad lawyer he has proven himself to be, Schumer asked one question too many:
SCHUMER: Does the Constitution protect the right to free speech?

ALITO: Certainly it does. That's in the First Amendment.

SCHUMER: So why can't you answer the question of: Does the Constitution protect the right to an abortion the same way without talking about stare decisis, without talking about cases, et cetera?

ALITO: Because answering the question of whether the Constitution provides a right to free speech is simply responding to whether there is language in the First Amendment that says that the freedom of speech and freedom of the press can't be abridged. Asking about the issue of abortion has to do with the interpretation of certain provisions of the Constitution.

The NYT says Judge Alito did very well on the first day of questioning:

WASHINGTON, Jan. 10 - If Senate Democrats had set out to portray Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. as extreme on issues ranging from abortion to government surveillance of citizens, they ran up against an elusive target on Tuesday: Samuel A. Alito Jr. For nearly eight hours, Judge Alito was placid, monochromatic and, it seemed, mostly untouchable.

The Washington Post takes the same angle:

It was beginning to look as if the Democrats had shown up to a knife fight without a knife yesterday.

It was beginning to look as if they'd just been woofing when it came to the Supreme Court confirmation hearings of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. That they'd written a check full of bluster that a lackluster series of questions couldn't cash.

Everyone of course is talking about this story. Here are some of the better blog takes from the left:: Bark Bark Woof Woof, firedoglake, Althouse, The Heretik,

From the Right: Decision08, Ankle Biting Pundits, As Usual Alexandra from All Things Beautiful is particularly insightful and thorough.

Ian from The Political Teen was allowed in the room for about 2o minutes. Congrats Ian on being able to witness history firsthand.

The Political Pitbul is Live Blogging the hearings.

If the Republicans want to maintain their majorities in The House and Senate they should take Hugh Hewitt's advice when selecting new leadership. If whoever they choose for Majority Leader is eventually tied to the Abramoff scandal it will be very hard for them to recover in 2006.

The Volokh Conspiracy offers some poll results mentioned in this CNN story that claims the American Public is growing more skeptical of the secret NSA program recently exposed in a series of NYT stories and James Risen's new book. I checked the article myself. You can click on a link for some of the poll questions. Here are the results they allow you to see.

Question: Do you think the Bush administration has gone too far, has been about right, or has not gone far enough in restricting people's civil liberties in order to fight terrorism?

Answers: About Right 40%, 19% Not Far Enough (editors note: Thats 59% who feel the Bush admin has done enough or not gone far enough)

38% Gone Too Far, and 3% No Opinion.

Question: As you may know, the Bush administration has been wiretapping telephone conversations between U.S. citizens living in the United States and suspected terrorists living in other countries without getting a court order allowing it to do so. How closely have you been following the news about this?

46% Somewhat Closely, 29% Very Closely, 16% Not Too Closely, and 9% Not At All,

and the final question:

Question: Do you think the Bush administration was right or wrong in wiretapping these conversations without obtaining a court order?

50% Right, 46% Wrong, and 4% No Opinion.

What the article does not tell us is who was sampled, what were their political affiliations, were there any more questions and what was the wording of those questions?

This is once again an example of the press not being transparent. Why won't they give us access to everything in the poll?

I for one would like to know how the 25% of the people who answered they were either not following this story very closely or not at all to question two answered questions 1 and 3. Does anyone else think this is important?

Don't you want to know how people who have basically admitted to being ignorant of the details of this story answered?

Internet Cowards....

2006-01-10T07:54:00.000-08:00

I don't know about the wisdom of this new proposed amendment to the 1934 communications act, but I agree with La Shawn Barber completely on this one. This is one of my pet peeves about the intraweb. Before starting this blog, I posted frequently on a few internet message boards, and I have played online video games for several years. It always amazed and infuriated me when people would not just cross but leap over the bounds of socially acceptable behavior simply because they were anonymous. Saying things they would never say in person for fear of a well deserved beating, or in the case of video games, intentionally harming other players for pure amusement. Taking pleasure from the other player’s pain / inconvenience / loss etc.

I put up a recent example in my post "The Last Goodbye" where some anonymous coward insulted a Vietnam vet on a message board after he had posted this story and a heart wrenching personal account.

This worm had the gaul to call to make this comment:

They were stupid, Patriotism gets you nothing but a body bag.

Now if this guy had said this in a bar room, instead of the virtual room he was in (a message board) he would have been pummeled. Most likely he would have never said it fearing the beating he would get. So why does he say it on the web?

Because he is a coward. I have asked myself many times what could be done to make these people behave, or bring some type of justice to them. The only answer I can come up with is the sad pathetic lives they must lead is punishment enough.

I would love to see these cowards get what they deserve but I doubt a federal law is the right way to do it.

Sister Toldjah doesn't think this is such a good idea either.

Oprah and Her Fans Victims Of Fraud!

2006-01-10T06:21:00.000-08:00

Whats worse than a career criminal drug addicted, drunken scumbag on crack?

How bout a pathetic little weasel of a frat boy who pretends to be one and defrauds over a million people with the help of an unwitting national television host?

The Smoking Gun has blown the lid off of this story.

After reading the TSG story I do have to wonder who was falling for this crap.

This post is linked to the following blogs who have Open Trackbacks today: Don Surber, Adam's Blog, Right Wing Nation,

Pork Busters Update

2006-01-09T11:39:00.000-08:00

Being a Democrat I am supposed to hate Republicans. Well I don't in fact I find myself agreeing with the GOP far more than the Democratic leadership these days. However The GOP is in charge of both houses of congress right now and as John Fund tells us today they are spending far more of our money on pork barrel spending projects than ever before. The latest culprit being "earmarked" projects.

Earmarks are the latest way for congressmen put their votes up for sale. I.e. Ted Stevens notorious "bridge to nowhere". If the GOP doesn't clean up its act they are gonna find themselves out on their ears.

For the latest check the porkbusters website. Call your senator call your congressman tell them you want them to cut the pork barrel spending in your district and state.

Moonbats Support The Troops? : Smash Vs. Filner

2006-01-09T06:41:00.000-08:00

So you know the tired mantra by now. "I support the troops I just don't support this war". Well Listen to the audio and read the transcript here from Smash who attended a town hall meeting this weekend with Congressman Filner in San Diego (my home town) and you tell me if Congressman Filner or his friendly audience was supporting Smash.

First a little background. Smash is a veteran of the Iraq war. Congressman Filner is a card carrying political opportunist and Bush hater. You will quickly notice how the crowd turns on Smash as soon as he asks a tough question. As Smash describes it, people were glaring at him, and asking him to give up the mike.

Now if these people truly supported they troops wouldn't they allow the man to speak and engage the Congressman in a substantive discussion?

Of course not because they are freakin liars. They don't support they troops. In fact they don't give a damn about the troops that is if they are troops who actually believe in what they are fighting for. Actions speak far louder than words and Congressman Filner's actions and his constituent’s actions speak volumes.

Michelle Malkin has more. The Moderate Voice has a pretty even handed article but the comments section reveals a not so moderate voice by the host or his guests.

I was especially impressed by this comment from Laura who questioned Smash's courage:

(link)Laura:
Now
I wonder if the Indepundit would have the courage to confront the man who really
should be questioned about the Iraq war, that would be president Bush of course.

I bet Laura normally supports the troops but made an exception for Smash because of the evil things he dared say to Congressman Filner.

The Debate Link says this exchange demonstrates why he will never join the anti-war movement.

The Smoking Room addresses Filners rhetoric and exposes it for the utter nonsense that it is.

Troops Take On Murtha And Moran

2006-01-09T06:26:00.000-08:00

Michelle Malkin has the video that you absolutely have to watch One is of recently discharged Sgt. Mark Seavey who just came back from his deployment to Afghanistan. The other is a retired General reading a letter from the mother of a soldier who was killed in Iraq.

As you will see both of these men say the troops moral is high as is that of their families. They also state very clearly no matter who many times Murtha and Moran tell us they "support the troops", they troops don't see it that way.

Joe Klein Advises The Democrats On How to Stay Out of Power

2006-01-09T05:31:00.000-08:00

In this article posted yesterday for Time's online edition. Mr. Klein explains why Dems still don't get it when it comes to National Security.

Klein tells us the NSA surveillance program was working and the NYT story has definitely tipped off the enemy:

But these concerns pale before the importance of the program. It would have been
a scandal if the NSA had not been using these tools to track down the bad guys.
There is evidence that the information harvested helped foil several plots and
disrupt al-Qaeda operations.

There is also evidence, according to U.S. intelligence officials, that since the New York Times broke the story, the terrorists have modified their behavior, hampering our efforts to keep track of them—but also, on the plus side, hampering their ability to communicate with one another.

Anyone else see the Risen interview with Tim Russert where the smug self important little twerp tells us his article was an important public service?

It seems he was right and the terrorists are very grateful.

Klein Concludes with:

The latest version of the absolutely necessary Patriot Act, which updates
the laws regulating the war on terrorism and contains civil-liberties
improvements over the first edition, was nearly killed by a stampede of Senate
Democrats. Most polls indicate that a strong majority of Americans favor the
act, and I suspect that a strong majority would favor the NSA program as well,
if its details were declassified and made known.

In fact, liberal Democrats are about as far from the American
mainstream on these issues as Republicans were when they invaded the privacy of
Terri Schiavo's family in the right-to-die case last year.

But there is a difference. National security is a far more important
issue, and until the Democrats make clear that they will err on the side of
aggressiveness in the war against al-Qaeda, they will probably not regain the
majority in Congress or the country.

Spot on. The Dems are completely out of touch with reality and the American People again. Nearly everyone understands the government spying on terrorists especially terrorists inside the country is a good thing and is no way similar to the Nixon era watergate scandal no matter how often the Dems try to tell us it is.

Mr. Klein also exposes a recent attempt by Nancy to score political points, and mislead the American People. Betsy’s page discusses that here. The Strata-Sphere has more:

Can it be any clearer? If any other President asked us to put national security
first, even the worse civil rights abusers in our history, the lunatic left
would align themselves with America first. But this is Bush - the object of
their undying hate.

Read the whole thing.

My Comments To Professor Rosa Brooks

2006-01-08T10:06:00.000-08:00

Professor Brooks appeared on Hugh Hewitt's radio program last week to discuss a recent editorial she had written for the LA Times. In the Editorial Professor Brooks raises the possibility of GWB being impeached if the Dems somehow gain control of the congress in 2006. She also suggests there is some merit to the Dems claims. She specifically and repeatedly mentions the recent NSA story.

The funny thing is as soon as the questions turn from small talk to Brook's editorial she admits almost immediately that the NSA story is a minor issue and in her words:

the NSA wiretapping scandal, is in some ways, the least of it.It seems to me that that looks more like a technicality than for instance, possibly deliberately misleading people about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq

Then why did she make that the focus of virtually her entire article?

She also admits pretty quickly that she is not an expert on the subject and can't really say with any authority if what the Bush admin did was any violation of the law at all. Read this telling exchange:

HH: So they specifically reserved the question to one side, and the foreign intelligence surveillance court appeals board, in In Re Sealed Case number 2, also said no, the president has the authority to do this. So given that the federal authority...
RB: Well, you know, Hugh, I mean, you've got the case law at your fingertips, and I'm not going to challenge you on it, because I don't. And this is actually why, as I said a few minutes ago, this seems like the least of it to me. I mean, this seems to me to be an open question. You know, I'm not an expert on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or the case law behind it. I don't know.

Ok so she admits she really doesn't know what she is talking about fine. Now this brings me to the part of the interview that I took exceptional issue with. I have a serious problem with people who make outlandish claims that have already been demonstrably and repeatedly proven false. Call me crazy but it just makes me see red when people do this and even more so when they get away with it. I am just funny that way. Here is where Professor Brooks repeats the tired meme of "there are no links between Iraq and Al Qaeda".

possibly deliberately misleading people about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, links between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda, potential violation of federal law on interrogations and detentions policy, and speaking specifically of the torture statute in the war crimes statute.

now anyone who wants to know and anyone who has read the 9/11 report, anyone who has read The Connection by Stephen F. Hayes or any of his 2 dozen or so articles on this topic know that there is no dispute. Saddam Hussein gave money, and training, held meetings, publicly praised (including the 9/11 attacks) and gave safe harbor to numerous terrorists. There are mountains of documentary evidence, including photos, documents, and witnesses supporting this.

Again call me crazy but I just expect a College professor to know what she is talking about before making an outlandish claim like this in one of the largest newspapers in the country or on a national radio show.

So I felt compelled to call Hugh that day and point it out. I also felt compelled to comment on Professor Brooks' blog and gave her some reference material so she can no longer claim ignorance of the facts. Here are my Comments on Professor Brooks blog:

I actually called in that day to gloat about the Texas win over USC but also to comment on your apparent complete ignorance of the numerous documented ties between Saddam and Al Qaeda. as well as various other well known terrorist organizations.

Or are you one of the people who believe Abu Sayyaf leaders called Iraqi intelligence agents to discuss their night out bowling?

In case you have missed the over 2 dozen articles Stephen F. Hayes has written on the topic here are a few samples. Pay particular attention to the last one where he documents that Saddam trained THOUSANDS of terrorists in Iraq during the 4 years prior to the invasion. This particular claim has been confirmed by 11 government officials.

Mr. Hayes writes:

“The photographs and documents on Iraqi training camps come from a collection of some 2 million "exploitable items" captured in postwar Iraq and Afghanistan. They include handwritten notes, typed documents, audiotapes, videotapes, compact discs, floppy discs, and computer hard drives.”

Now you may have been ignorant before but that excuse is gone for you professor Brooks. I truly hope you are honest enough to leave this particular falsehood out of your repertoire in future articles or interviews on national radio programs.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/378fmxyz.asp

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/167gwjtp.asp

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/804yqqnr.asp

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/550kmbzd.asp

Am I out of line?

Should't we expect serious people writing for major newspapers and appearing on national radio shows to know what they are talking about?

Hugh suggested he would have her back on the program. I hope he asks her specifically about the ties between Saddam and Al Qaeda. She seems like a nice lady, and she did not come across as a partisan hack or ideologue. I hope she has the intellectual honesty to admit she was wrong.

Hugh talks a little bit about that interview in the context of the impending doom of the MSM here. I don't know if Michael Hiltzik will ever appear on Hugh's show again. I am leaning towards no.

Ted Kennedy's Editorial On Alito: Your Kidding Me Right? / Open Track Back Weekend!

2006-01-07T08:34:00.000-08:00

First of all for Ted Kennedy to question anyone’s credibility is a joke. Take a look at his editorial in today's Washington Post.

As you may notice Kennedy fails to address Alito's qualifications for the court at all. There is good reason for that. The man is one of the most qualified judges to be nominated to the court in the last 50 years. Alito just received the ABA's highest rating of "Well Qualified" for the job.

First Kennedy takes Issue with Alito's 1990 job application for a position in the AG's office under Ed Meese. In that application Alito stated his "deep disagreement with Warren Court decisions."

So What? Do you think Justice Ginsberg (who was an ACLU attorney before her appointment to the SCOTUS) had strong views on the Warren Court decisions or any other court for that matter?

Newsflash Judges are people too. People have political and philosophical views especially people who work in politics and government.

#2 Kennedy suggests Alito's membership in the Concerned Alumni of Princeton some how disqualifies him for the job. Is he serious?

#3 Kennedy cites Alito's failure to recuse himself in a 2002 case in which three Vanguard companies were named parties. Kennedy of course fails to mention any specifics about the case. Maybe this is damning maybe it isn't but I would bet dimes to donuts if it was Kennedy would have been far more specific.

#4 Kennedy says Alito pledged to be absolutely impartial in cases against the government despite his many years of service in the government. Sounds pretty reasonable and pretty typical. Lots of Judges served as prosecutors or government attorneys before their appointment to the bench. Kennedy again uses broad accusations and no specifics when he says

"But in case after case involving the actions of U.S. marshals, IRS agents and other government officials, he has sided with the government and against the citizens, even when his fellow judges have told him he was off-base."

He doesn't mention any particular case, or any specific incident that would indicate a pro government bias on Alito's part. If Kennedy knows something we don't he should put down his glass of scotch for a moment and share.

And finally #5 Kennedy says: His promise to leave his personal beliefs behind when he became a judge : That's what he told me in 1990 he would do.

and claims Alito's appearing and speaking at Federalist Society meetings somehow betrayed that promise.

IS THIS ALL KENNEDY"S GOT?

Because if it is Alito is going to sail through confirmation just like Roberts did. Justifiably so.

This is an Open Trackback Post. If you have something you would like to share this weekend just leave a link to this post in the main body of your post and then leave a trackback here. I will put them up on the main page as I see them come in

Other folks with Open Trackbacks this Weekend: Stop The ACLU, Stuck On Stupid, Linkfest Haven, The Bullwinkle Blog, The Uncooperative Blogger, NIF, Point Five, Don Surber,

Read them, if you have a blog link to them.... I did.

Freedom Folks linked with: It's Your Ass Folks
The Young Conservatives linked with: Abramoff, DeLay, And Alito
The Florida Masochist linked with: All in the word of Allah
The Florida Masochist linked with: The Knucklehead of the Day award

Mexico The West's Best Chance Of Survival? My Take On Mark Steyn's Article

2006-01-05T20:00:00.001-08:00

If you haven't read Mark Steyn's piece yet do it right now.

For those who don't have 15 minutes. Here are the main points:

Most people reading this have strong stomachs, so let me lay it out as baldly as I can: Much of what we loosely call the Western world will not survive this century, and much of it will effectively disappear within our lifetimes, including many if not most Western European countries.

Yet while Islamism is the enemy, it's not what this thing's about. Radical Islam is an opportunistic infection, like AIDS: It's not the HIV that kills you, it's the pneumonia you get when your body's too weak to fight it off.

They know they can never win on the battlefield, but they figure there's an excellent chance they can drag things out until Western civilization collapses in on itself and Islam inherits by default.

That's what the war's about: our lack of civilizational confidence. As a famous Arnold Toynbee quote puts it: "Civilizations die from suicide, not murder"--as can be seen throughout much of "the Western world" right now. The progressive agenda--lavish social welfare, abortion, secularism, multiculturalism--is collectively the real suicide bomb.

Steyn hits it dead on. We are not losing, and can not lose the war against Islamofascism except by refusing to fight it, and refusing to reproduce and reinvest in and re-assert our own western culture. Not only are most Europeans and a good percentage of of Americans not willing to fight, they are unwilling to accept the fact that we are in a war for the very survival of our civilization.

He also offers these eye opening statistics:

"Replacement" fertility rate--i.e., the number you need for merely a stable population, not getting any bigger, not getting any smaller--is 2.1 babies per woman. Some countries are well above that: the global fertility leader, Somalia, is 6.91, Niger 6.83, Afghanistan 6.78, Yemen 6.75. Notice what those nations have in common?

Scroll way down to the bottom of the Hot One Hundred top breeders and you'll eventually find the United States, hovering just at replacement rate with 2.07 births per woman. Ireland is 1.87, New Zealand 1.79, Australia 1.76. But Canada's fertility rate is down to 1.5, well below replacement rate; Germany and Austria are at 1.3, the brink of the death spiral; Russia and Italy are at 1.2; Spain 1.1, about half replacement rate. That's to say, Spain's population is halving every generation. By 2050, Italy's population will have fallen by 22%, Bulgaria's by 36%, Estonia's by 52%.

By 2050, there will be 100 million fewer Europeans, 100 million more Americans--and mostly red-state Americans.

Just to recap those bald statistics: In 1970, the developed world had twice as big a share of the global population as the Muslim world: 30% to 15%. By 2000, they were the same: each had about 20%.

and follows with these poll results:

According to a poll taken in 2004, over 60% of British Muslims want to live under Shariah--in the United Kingdom.

and finally this conclusion:

If a population "at odds with the modern world" is the fastest-breeding group on the planet--if there are more Muslim nations, more fundamentalist Muslims within those nations, more and more Muslims within non-Muslim nations, and more and more Muslims represented in more and more transnational institutions--how safe a bet is the survival of the "modern world"?
Not good.

So as Steyn says this is a battle of attrition fought more in the bedroom than on the battlefield. I agree completely.

Which brings me to something I have been thinking about and contemplating posting on for quite some time. One of the strengths of the United States over the last 2 centuries has been its ability to take immigrants and incorporate them into society hence the nick name "the melting pot". Unlike European countries or any other country in the world for that matter, immigrants to the United States have proudly considered themselves "Americans" no matter their country of origin. That certainly isn't the case in France, or Germany, or Italy. Ask any immigrant in those countries what nationality they consider themselves to be and they will tell you Turkish, or Armenian, or Kurdish, or Somali, etc. I have asked them myself. Never is the answer "I am German" or "French".

Now here is the unfortunate twist. Due to our fairly recent immigration policy we have created an entire generation of immigrants mostly from Mexico but to a lesser extent from all over Central and South America who still consider themselves "Mexican" or "Brazilian" or El Salvadoran". Only because we have forced them to.

I am completely against illegal immigration but our country thrives on immigrants. Like it or not these people are here to stay. They are not going home next week, or next year or six years from now as President Bush would like us to believe. So why don't we embrace them?

Why don't we encourage them to become Americans?

No matter how poorly considered the law to have been they have broken it and need to be penalized but that penalty needs to also be handed out with a path toward citizenship that can be earned.

Why am I bringing this up now and how in the heck does it relate to Mark's article?

Well The fact is Mexico is our next door neighbor and Mexicans, have a whole lot more in common with Americans than Egyptians, or Nigerians. We share they same religion (Mexico and Brazil have the 2nd and 3rd highest Christian populations in the world next to the United States). Most of Central and South America is Catholic. They have a hard work ethic which is one of the major factors that led them to leave their families and lives behind in their home countries in the first place. They have high birth rates which if you didn't get the message above in Mark's piece WE DESPARATELY NEED.

We share a common history being discovered, and colonized by the Europeans. Hell the entire Southwestern USA used to be part of Mexico as the names San Diego (my home town) Los Angeles, San Francisco, El Paso, and Las Cruces would suggest.

So my answer to Mark Steyn's dilemma begins with the "Americanization" of our existing 12 million or so Mexicans, Guatemalans, El Salvadorans, et al. Secondly I suggest we encourage more "LEGAL" immigration from these countries and give them preferential status over European, Middle Eastern, and African immigrants. The next step is making a serious effort to end the kleptocracy governments of Mexico and the southern Americas. Again starting with Mexico, by simply putting an end to the corruption and replacing the oligarchies these countries could be very much Like the USA. Most of them are rich in resources. Mexico certainly is.

We should encourage the Mexican government to send us their citizens for the foreseeable future. We will welcome them with open arms but they will be our citizens, and as a condition of this new Mexican friendly immigration policy we should require and even subsidize Mexican schools to teach every Mexican child English. As that becomes established we should extend this policy farther south.

Sounds like a long term strategy doesn’t it?

As Mark pointed out the Islamists are thinking long term.

The fact is the people of Mexico and eventually South America could be the West’s best hope of winning this war of attrition or reproduction however the case may be.

And again to draw from Mr. Steyn's article:

In July 2003, speaking to the U.S. Congress, Tony Blair remarked: "As Britain knows, all predominant power seems for a time invincible but, in fact, it is transient. The question is: What do you leave behind?"

If we can not encourage the people of

Mexico

and the Southern America's to become us at least they will be much more like us by the time we have committed civilizational suicide. That is something we could be proud of leaving behind, and just may give modernity a fighting chance.

Other People talking about Mark Steyn's Article: Peak Talk,Bird of Paradise, Deep Keel, The Only Republican In San Francisco, UNCoRRELATED, Sun Comprehending Glass, All Things Beautiful, scottish-right, Pekin Prattles, OKIE on the LAM,

Hugh Hewitt has an even larger list of bloggers discussing this article.

In a related article check out this post titled The Other War at Freedom Folks. If you haven't figured it out already, my suggestion would partially address this problem as well. We will still need much better border enforcement but it should effectively stop the flood of hard working, legitimate immigrants and leave only the criminal elements to police.

instead of looking South Heliopause is looking north WAY NORTH. Something I am also very in favor of btw.

Open Trackbacks can be found today at these fine blogs: Third World County, Adams Blog, Bloggin' Outloud, Don Surber, TMH's Bacon Bits,

I have read and linked to them you should to!

The Must Read Piece Of 2006!

2006-01-05T08:04:00.000-08:00

This article by Mark Steyn is the early must read of the year. Not only do you need to read it you need to show it to every left wing moonbat you know. It might, just might slap a few of them in the face hard enough to wake them up to the real imminent threat the western world is facing.

Here is an excerpt to give you an idea of the gravity:

Most people reading this have strong stomachs, so let me lay it out
as baldly as I can: Much of what we loosely call the Western world will not survive this century, and much of it will effectively disappear within our lifetimes, including many if not most Western European countries. There'll probably still be a geographical area on the map marked as Italy or the Netherlands--probably--just as in Istanbul there's still a building called St. Sophia's Cathedral. But it's not a cathedral; it's merely a designation for a piece of real estate. Likewise, Italy and the Netherlands will merely be designations for real estate. The challenge for those who reckon Western civilization is on balance better than the alternatives is to figure out a way to save at least some parts of the West.

That's what the war's about: our lack of civilizational confidence.
As a famous Arnold Toynbee quote puts it: "Civilizations die from suicide, not murder"--as can be seen throughout much of "the Western world" right now. The progressive agenda--lavish social welfare, abortion, secularism, multiculturalism--is collectively the real suicide bomb. Take multiculturalism. The great thing about multiculturalism is that it doesn't involve knowing anything about other cultures--the capital of Bhutan, the principal exports of Malawi, who cares? All it requires is feeling good about other cultures. It's fundamentally a fraud, and I would argue was subliminally accepted on that basis. Most adherents to the idea that all cultures are equal don't want to live in anything but an advanced Western society. Multiculturalism means your kid has to learn some wretched native dirge for the school holiday concert instead of getting to sing "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer" or that your holistic masseuse uses techniques developed from Native American spirituality, but not that you or anyone you care about should have to live in an African or Native American society. It's a quintessential piece of progressive humbug.

Live Blogging The Rose Bowl!

2006-01-04T17:22:00.000-08:00

This is my first Live Blogging deal so here goes

Texas just won the Toss.

And they elect to kick off.

The kick is 3 yards deep in the end zone and Reggie Bush is brought down at the 12 on the return.

First play from scrimage Bush ran out of bounds for a loss 2nd and 12.

Lienert was nearly sacked on the last two plays 3 and out BABY!

btw Kieth Jackson Rules! have you ever heard him say "ALL AHHH BAMMM AAHHHHH"

GAHHHHH. Texas fumbles the punt return. USC has the ball on the 46. Huge hit right in the face **Ouch***

Huge play #37 David Kirtman makes a great catch at the 7 and gets leveled. 1st and goal USC.

TOUCH DOWN LenDale White for USC. Texas better not make any more mistakes like this one or its gonna be all over early.

USC stops Texas on 4th and 1 at the 50! USC Ball.

Texas fails to convert on 3rd down and Texas freaking blows it with a stupid face mask penalty. 1st down USC. This could get ugly folks.

Whooo Hooo Texas Stops USC on 4th down. They take over on downs deep in their own territory.

another fumble by Texas luckily they recover it. Early on its apparent to me Texas can definitely play with USC they just need to calmn down. 4th down Texas punts it away. USC takes over at their own 17 yard line.

Ahhhh poooo little reggie bush just fumbled the ball. His 2nd of the ENTIRE YEAR! Texas Ball Baby. (some times its better to be lucky then good)

Texas puts together a nice drive but ends with another unforced fumble. Fortunately they recover and kick the field goal.

Score 7 - 3 USC.

WHOOOO amazing interception by Texas in the endzone. Texas ball on their own 20. I don't think USC has seen a secondary like this all year.

WOW. Option PLAY TUCHDOWN TEXAS BABY!

and they miss the PAT. 9 - 7 Texas.

It looked like they were trying to rush the extra point to avoid a review of the touchdown play. Vince Young may have been down before he lateralled.

USC has to punt on 4th and 17. Texas returns the punt to the 50 yard line. Could it be 16 to 7 going into half time?

Stay tuned.

Hey so whos checking the blog from Marylands Western Australia? I see you been there for the whole game eh mate?

Chime in and let us know who ya are.

TOUCH DOWN TEXAS Taylor with a 30 yard run!

and the PAT is good this time. 16 - 7 Texas.

Texas just misses another interception In fact it looks to me like they just got robbed. The DB had possesion the ball came out after he hit the ground. Oh well Its not the first time USC has benefitted from friendly refs.

Lienert has no where to thrown and is ran out of bounds at the 47.

Lienert just got rocked after a nice scramble for 10 + yards. Time out USC so matt can get rid of the stars in his eyes.

40 seconds left in the first half USC with the ball at the Texas 17 and BOOM Lienert goes down sacked by Frank Okham for a 4 yard loss!

Lienert has no where to throw and goes down again!

USC makes the 43 yard field goal. 16 - 10 Texas with 2 seconds left in the first half. That kick was nearly blocked btw.

16 - 10 at half time and pete carol looks a little worried.

2nd half getting ready to start 3 mins ETA. Texas will be receiving.

Texas brings it out to the 29 but there is a penalty on the play...... Holding on the Horns first down at the 19 to start the half.

3rd and 6 from the 23..... VY goes deep but the pass is incomplete. Looked like pass interference to me but of course no call. Here is the punt. Fair catch at the 48 and another flag. Block in the back on USC they start from their own 38

Nice completion at the Texas 22.... 1st and 10 USC. Then SC had to call a time out to avoid the delay of game penalty.

LenDale White with a bruising run down to the Texas 4. 1st and goal USC.

White with a 4 yard run for the TD the PAT is good 17 - 16 USC. That missed extra point could be big. This just in LenDale White is one big boy.

Texas starting from their own 20. Young keeps it for 7. Then hands off the Charles for another 20! Young runs another draw for 15 more! Texas first and 10 from the USC 45!

Another Texas first down pass complete from young at the USC 25!

Charles runs it up inside for another 10 to the USC 15. Then Young runs it in himself DIVING FOR THE TOUCHDOWN!

That was a damn impressive drive. and great answer to SC's score. Way to keep The big Mo HORNS.

The PAT is good. 23 - 17 Texas with 8:34 left in the 3rd quarter. Comercial time out.

If you havent heard Vince Young is a stud.

MONSTER HIT By aron Ross at the line of scrimage. No gain on the pass play. 2nd and 11 for SC. ... Pass complete to Smith for 6. 3rd and 5 to go. Fred Davis makes the catch at the 45 yard line of Texas. 1st and 10 USC

Nice 25 yard completion to #8 1st and 10 USC at the Texas 20. The run goes no where 2nd and 10. Little dump off pass for 9 yards and USC gets away with a holding call.
pass is incomplete. caught out of bounds. 4th and 1. White up the middle TOUCHDOWN.

extra point is good 24 - 23 USC.

Texas has a long way to go again fielding the kickoff in the 8 yards deep in the end zone. They start at their own 20.

SC player comes out shacking his arm. Young hits Thomas for a 1st down nice diving catch. 1st and 10 at the 35.

Young shakes off the rush like water and takes it all they way down to the USC 20 yard line GO GO GO. Just misses taking it to the house for the touchdown. ...

Ooo now thrown for a big loss. Sweet makes the catch at the 15 yard line 3rd and 5. pass complete but 4 yards short of the 1st down.

Nice D from SC.

here comes the field goal unit. Ok it looks like the 3rd quarter just ended. Well see the field goal after the commercial...... And he misses it GAH!

SC takes over after the missed field goal and completes and 8 yard pass to Dwane Jarret. He is having a good night. Moore tries the run it outside and gets STUFFED!

Kieth Jackson says LenDale "White is like an 18 wheeler runnin down hill tonight". I love this guy.

Texas has a defender down. Defensive end Robinson.

White with a huge hole inside takes it all the way down to the Texas 26. Bush finally breaks one outside and flys down the sideline for the TOUCHDOWN. diving into the endzone. At least thats the call but it looked like he was out of bounds to me...... after the review the TD stands.

the extra point is good. 31 - 23 USC.

Looks like SC was trying some kind of on sides kick. Texas starts at their own 30 with the short kick. VY has all day to throw the ball. ALMOST another Texas fumble ***whehh.**.... Wait a minute here comes the replay... .. after the review the play stands incomplete.

WIDE open Texas first down at the SC 35 yard line. Texas marching down the field now with another first down inside the SC 25 yard line.

On 2nd and 10 Young keeps it and runs for 5 yards. 3rd and 5. Texas needs a TD on this drive.

He runs for 3 it looks like short of the first. fubmles it again *damn it* but TX recovers. Texas is gonna kick a field goal....... and makes this one 31 - 26 USC.

If Texas looses this game its gonna be their own fault. The just seem more nervous than USC. No doubt Texas has the talent to win this game.

another dump off pass goes for 25 yards and tack on 15 after that for roughing the passer. all the way to the 31 yard line of Texas. White up the middle for 9.

Lienert to Jarret for the 20 yard TD pass. with 2 Texas defenders all over him. 2 Texas players down on the play they colided going after Jarret.

The PAT is good 36 - 24 USC

VY makes the USC Defense look silly and runs it in 17 yards for the TD. Texas just marches down the field easily. The extra point is good. 36 - 31 USC with 4:03 left to play.

GREAT GAME EH?

Texas needs a defensive stop now.

Whats the over under on how many NFL players are gonna get drafted between these two teams? I say 22.

3rd and 7 at midfield. This is a big big play coming up. 2:22 left to play. White is stoped short of the first down! OHHH the ball comes out but right into the hands of the WR smith!

STOPPED ON 4TH DOWN. TEXAS TAKES OVER ON DOWNS! AT MIDFIELD. WE GOT OURSELVES A GAME GIRLS.

USC comes with a serious blits. VY dumps it off and avoids the sack. another man comes hard for young again no sack but he hurries the pass and incomplete. 3rd and 12.

Pass complete for 5 yards short of the first but a flag looks like a late hit or face mask on USC........ Yes Face Mask 5 yard penalty 1st down!

Another 9 yard completion from Young 2nd and 1. they are reviewing the play to see if it was fumbled but Carter was obviously down.

Young gets the 1st down and steps out of bounds for the 1st down.

Wide open pass to carter inside the USC 14 and out of bounds!

Texas goes for it all with a pass in the end zone tremendous catch after being Tipped but its..... Out of bounds.

Young keeps it and runs it down to the 8. Texas calls time out with 30 seconds left to play.

MAN THIS REMINDS ME OF A CHARGER GAME! down to the wire.

pass in the end zone batted away! Texas needs 5 for the first and 8 for the touchdown.

YYYYYYAAAAAHHHHHHHHH WHHOOOOO )(&@#_Q)$(&"PI)_{*YWEF)(UF}_(JWDV{)_(*+)_$%+_(*

VINCE YOUNG RUNS IT IN FOR THE TOUCHDOWN BABY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

INVINCABLE says my boy Dan Fouts! (Charger Great) 39 - 38 Texas.

TEXAS IS NUMBER 1!!!

Poor little Pouty Petey Carol.

Texas is going for the 2 point conversion to make it a 3 point game.

And the 2 point conversion is good! USC needs a touchdown in 19 seconds. Its all over except the crying girls.

Lienert hits a shuffle pass to Bush for a nice gain with 8 seconds left. IT AINT GONNA HAPPEN.

5..4..3..2..1.... FINAL SCORE TEXAS 41 USC 38.

as Dandy Don used to say TURN OUT THE LIGHTS THE PARTY"S OVER.

Reggie Bush may have taken home the Heisman but Vince Young was obviously the best man on the field tonight. Over 200 yards rushing. 3 walk in touchdowns. AMAZING.

This cant be real they just said VY had 447 yards passing? 392 yards rushing? and 7 touchdowns in the last 2 rosebowls!

WOW.

I gotta give it to Pete Carol he gave a classy post game interview.

WHAT AN AMAZING GAME! USC fans got nothing to be ashamed of.

Hearbreaking News 12 of 13 West Virginia Miners Are Dead

2006-01-03T20:55:00.000-08:00

****Update****

I awoke this morning to what seemed surreal news. The same news channels that were reporting 12 of the 13 miners were alive last night were not reporting in reality 12 of the 13 men trapped in a West Virginia coal mine explosion were dead. The lone survivor is in critical condition.

Please pray for these families. What they are going through is unimaginable.

**********

MSNBC Rita Cosby is reporting right now that 12 of the 13 miners have just been found alive!
The 13th miner was found dead earlier today.

The towns church bells are ringing and family members are cheering in the streets.

Wow.

***Update****

CNN and Fox are now also reporting on 12 of the 13 miners being found alive. A press conference will be held soon.

USC Is Going Down In Flames Baby!

2006-01-03T10:43:00.000-08:00

****Update*****

Welcome Hugh Hewitt Fans. I am Live Blogging the game Here:

*****************************************

Whooo Hooo The Rose Bowl is Tomorrow and the national championship is on the line!

Let’s take a break from politics for the moment and get pumped up for Texas' inevitable Crushing of USC Tomorrow!

Let's start with the Texas fight song!

here is the music and here are the lyrics:

The Eyes of Texas are upon you,
All the live long day.
The Eyes of Texas are upon you,
You can not get away.
Do not think you can escape them
At night or early in the morn-
The Eyes of Texas are upon you
'Till Gabriel blows his horn.

now I want everyone to record this music and sing it loud every time Texas scores another touchdown tomorrow. I promise the fun you have will be exponentially increased with each additional USC fan in the room.

Here are the reasons why USC’s ignominious defeat is unavoidable!

TEXAS vs. usc (By GM Roper)

Courtesy of George of GM's Corner.

Not very long ago, I posted this graphic of the University of Texas Longhorn, with TEXAS superimposed above it:

Not willing to let things slide, some worthy, but ultimately losing USC fan posted on this very same blog this graphic:

Kind of puny as graphics go, only 150 pixels wide and a mere 200 tall. Nothing like my robust 250 pixel wide and 225 pixel tall graphic of the GREAT TEXAS LONGHORN

But I digress. The real reason my worthy (but ultimately gonna lose fellow conservative and otherwise brilliant) blogger bud posted such a small graphic is because if you enlarge the graphic to where you can see what is going on, you see this:

You really can't blame him though, who wants to publicize that the TROJAN mascot is rooting for TEXAS?

HOOK 'EM HORNS!

USC Stinks Texas Will Crush Them Volume 5

Well I missed a few days due to some other more important stuff than USC embarassing itself in the rosebowl. Thursday will be another huge news day(pray that it is all good) with the elections in Iraq. So I thought I should lighten up the blog a bit and give the geniuses at USC a little more to chew on.

USC tailback LenDale White "I don't know nothing about Texas,"
Vince Young is the better open field runner here's something Bush never will be: 6-5, 230 pounds. Those are the dimensions of Vince Young. Bush? He's 6-0, 200. Don't think size matters in the open field? Think again. All things being equal, I'll take the guy who's 6-5, 230 pounds over the 6-0, 200-pounder, any day.
Vince Young's legs beat Matt Leinart's arm: I've seen it many times. You have, too. And get this: Young can do it all himself. That's what makes his legs more deadly than Matt Leinart's arm.
Mack Brown's a better recruiter than Pete Carroll: Guess which school ranks No. 1 in Rivals.com's 2006 recruiting rankings? That's right, it's Texas.
Horns would hook USC at neutral site: I've got your "neutral site" right here: Pasadena, Texas. Yep, play this game in Pasadena, Texas. Then we'd have ourselves a real y'allgame, and Texas wins going away.

hat tip to The Sporting News for some great reasons why Texas is gonna lay the smack down on USC in the Rose Bowl!

USC Stinks Texas Will Crush Them Volume 4

Ok I just learned that the Longhorns have a secret plan for their Rose Bowl Match up with the Trojans. Now this tactic was used famously once before but everyone knows academics are not a USC strong point so odds are they have never heard of it. Here is the concept. sshhhhhhh don’t tell any Trojan fans.

No Way the Trojans see this coming!

HOOK'EM HORNS!

USC Stinks Texas Will Crush Them Volume 3

More reasons why I dislike USC and why Texas will Crush Them in the Rose Bowl.

Hugh Hewitt hates USC
I could never afford to attend U$C
They play in a weak division with weak opponents
they cheated to beat Notre Dame!
They have their own Monopoly game!
Sam Donaldson went to USC!

Reasons I Dislike USC and Why Texas Will Destroy Them In The Rose Bowl Volume 2

So here is volume 2 of the reasons I dislike USC and Why Texas will Destroy them in the Rose Bowl. This feature will continue until they are crushed at the Rose Bowl or until I am selected in the MSM Blogger Draft being conducted over at Hughhewitt.com which ever comes first. Who am I kidding, this will contine until their embarrassing Rose Bowl loss regardless of my MSM Blogger Draft status.

Here are some more reasons why I Dislike USC and why Texas Will Destroy them in the Rose Bowl.

They barely beat Fresno State.
You cant spell sucks without USC
Robert Scheer Still teaches at USC even after the LA Times figured out what a hack he is

Again reader suggestions on why USC sucks in general and specifically why Texas will kick the snot out of them are welcomed and encouraged.

Reasons I Dislike USC and Why Texas Will Destroy Them In The Rose Bowl Volume 1

Thats right I am adding a new feature today and will run it up to the Rose Bowl for two primary reasons:

1. I really don't like USC
and
2. Hugh Hewitt says it couldn't hurt my MSM Blogger Draft Status.

There will be no rhyme or reason or particular order just what ever comes off the top of my head. Reader suggestions are most definitely welcomed and encouraged.

1. USC is in Los Angeles and being from San Diego I hate everything about Los Angeles.
2. OJ went there and was qouted saying this last January by msnbc.com:

“I’ll be in the stands cheering as loud as anybody for USC,” Simpson told The
Associated Press in a telephone interview Monday.

“I can’t wait. I always follow SC — always have, always will,” he said.

3. The LA Times loves USC.
4. The LA Times loves USC.
5. Brad Pitt was a Trojan in that lame movie and USC is named the Trojans.
6. Hook em Horns just sounds cool.

Now for your looser USC fans I asked my friend and bean counter Tiberious Graccus over at DSOTW to guest blog while I was spending some time with the wife in the mountains last week. Well he and his wife are both USC Alum's so he snuck in a few pro USC posts. If you want to see them here are the links: Here, and Here,

As you can see there is no comparison in creativity. The guy go to USC after all so give him a break ok?

Ghouls Attempt To Play Politics With WV Mining Tragedy

2006-01-03T09:24:00.000-08:00

I found this shocking post at MYDD via Michelle Malkin.

Here is an excerpt:

Undoubtedly, some will criticize me for placing blame on President Bush here. The defense will be that Bush didn't cause the explosion that collapsed the mine. My response will be that he didn't do anything to prevent it. In fact, if anything, the actions of his administration made the situation worse.

Now if the comments of this ghoul don't make you angry the following comment posted by someone calling himself boilermaker surely will.

But they voted for him...West Virginia went for the guy by a nine point margin if I am not mistaken.

Cruel thing to say to the bereaved if it comes to that. But, if you vote based on race, southern strategy, Gay marriages and other so-called moral values at the expense of your future welfare...you deserve your fate, whatever that fate might be.

Here was my comment in reply.

Your ghoulish attempt to make political points out of this tragedy shames you more than any words I could offer.

Boilermaker on the other hand who goes even farther and suggests these miners got what they deserved for voting for Bush deserves a punch in the mouth. I hope he has the courage to travel to WV right now and deliver this message in person to the miners families. Of course he won't because he is a coward on the internet.

I am sorry this had to be my first post of the New Year.

Ogre is also pissed about this.

No, the utter and complete hatred of President Bush knows no end for those on the left. Even though as of the writing of this post the fate of the miners trapped in WV is unknown, that doesn't stop complete and utter lunatics from, yes, you guessed it, blaming Bush!!

I don't think he has read the comments section yet.

***Update****

The Authoer of the post now has others agreeing with his vile position. Again the cowards say this from the safety of the internet:

posted by Teknofyl:

Did anything Bush do positivly impact that situation? Clearly the whole "two exits is one too many" approach was not helpful here, in hindight... how much money did the company save by no putting in the extra shafts? How much would they be worth now?

Bush makes horrible decisions (whaever criteria you think he uses, and no one really know except for him because they are so bad and schitzo), and people die.
The man SHOULD be impeached, convicted, and removed from office. Of course, Cheney as well... this tragedy is another clear example of how Bush's approach to public policy is toxic to anyone who isn't on the plus-side of his whims.

Overtkaen by Events read the comments section as was as disgusted as I was.

If you didn't know one of my favorite bloggers Don Surber lives in West Virginia. He has a great post up about mining in particular and the dangerous work that West Virginian's do in general. I would really like to know what Don thinks of these ghouls.

These bloggers are also covering the mining story. Scared Monkeys, Eu Rota, WizBang, Froth Slosh B'Gosh, and

Thank You To GM and Tiberius Gracchus!

2006-01-02T11:57:00.000-08:00

Happy New Year Everyone! and a Huge Huge Thank You to both George from GM's Corner and Tiberius Gracchus from Dumb Shit Of The Week for filling in while I was gone.

Make both of their blogs regular reads. If you thought what they did here was good you will really enjoy their blogs.

I am glad to see they had some fun while I was out, too bad it will all be at Tib's expense when USC gets embarrassed in the Rose Bowl.

Posting will still be light as I caught the flu while on vacation but I will try and get some stuff up ASAP.

GM's Last Post

2006-01-01T19:25:00.000-08:00

Below, you will find my last post for my friend, The Real Ugly American. It is lengthy, but worth the read I think. I want to thank TRUA for the opportunity to help out on his blog, and I want to thank Tiberius Gracchus for all the fun with the back and forth on the TEXAS vs. USC upcoming fiasco (for USC that is).

I hope that all of you will add GM's Corner to your regular reads, as I have done for this fine blog. TRUA is a friend, a champion and a real true American (the ugly part is only reflected in his mirror - LOL)

Cheers, May the Good Lord Bless each and every one of you and may 2006 be such a wonderful year, it will ALWAYS be looked on as one of your best years.

GM Roper

Diagnosing The Left

2006-01-01T19:22:00.000-08:00

Polipundit's DJ Drummond has maybe hit on a severe form of mental illness. As a Mental Health professional, I'm concerned about what the disorder is, how it begins - that is what is the genesis of the disorder and how can it be treated. Drummond calls this form of insanity Political Compulsive Disorder. Now, there will be many in the field, psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers etc who will not agree that this is a mental disorder at all, but that would be because of their own political proclivities; one must believe that one who thinks he is Napoleon, doesn't think he has a problem!

Drummond notes that:

Democrats know full well that their tactics of slander and defeatism are not working to win elections, yet they just will not consider their position in any kind of mature light. Strange. Yet we have seen this before, and the problem seems to be based on raw emotion overriding better judgment."

This is a good beginning of the description. Surely they can read polls and know that the majority of the American electorate are supporting the use of wiretaps, believe that they are legal and even Bush's ratings have gone UP since these yahoos got on this particular meme, but that doesn't seem to stop them. Point in fact, since the 60's, the United States voter has generally shown that they distrust Democrats with national security issues. Yet in 2004 they nominate a man who served in Vietnam for only 3 months or so of a normally 12 month rotation, gets 3 wounds none of which required more than a bandaid, at least one of which was rejected for a Purple Heart by the treating physician (yet Kerry manuvered one anyway - by hook or crook we don't know) and opted out of Vietnam based on having three Purple Hearts. Then the man comes back and scathingly trounces his fellow troops, calls them war criminals, consults with the enemy in Paris and many years later, gets up on the podium at the DNC and gives the silliest, sloppiest most unprofessional salute I have ever seen (and since I grew up in the Army and served in the Army, I've seen plenty of them) and the Democrats think they have a winner. Infact, Markos M. of The Daily Kos goes so far out on that proverbial limb, he projects Kerry the Winner.

What is the left's response to The Daily Kos for that sloppy, unbelievable, insane prediction? They make DK the number one blog in the blogosphere. How's that for insanity?

But, I digress, and the opening topic today is DJ Drummond's diagnosis of the left. Lets take a look at some of the other mental health issues that the conservative blogosphere has put out:

John Moore, a good friend believes that the appropriate diagnosis is Cognition Disorder of Progressives and offers a number of symptoms for the same:

utopian thinking - A delusional belief that the patient knows simple, side effect free solutions to all social problems. In some cases this is associated with psychotic delusions of grandeur.

anthroplastic ideas - a delusion that behavioral conditioning, performed by the government, will cure all behavioral and social problems, i.e., will change all non-CDP people into CDP . Implicit in this delusional system is the idea that people can be "programmed" to be "perfect."

This symptom leads to a reflexive, vehement resistance by the patient to even the idea that people may have immalleable characteristics. The worst known example is that of Pol Pot, who attempted to remove all undesirable influences in the belief that the perfect socialist man would then emerge.

anti-theistic rebellion - an emotional antagonism against Christianity... probably caused by an abnormal persistence of adolescent rebellion... may also be related to the need to avoid counter-arguments to desired policies (see utopiate thinking, above). This ranges from a mere antagonism to Christianity to a hatred of religions of all forms. Generally the more "western" a religion is, the more it is hated. Thus these patients may accept primitive and animalist belief systems.

naturist delusion - a sincere belief that mankind is evil and nature is benign. The incidence of this symptom is inversely related to the practical experience that the patient has with nature. Self hatred is a feature in this area. Typical thinking includes a belief that mankind is a cancer on earth, and that earth (viewed as a feeling being) will retaliate with a deadly virus.

The utopian view of nature is remarkable in that most patients are also believers in evolution, which has resulted in vast amounts of suffering and cruelty in the natural arena.

environmental spasm - the patient experiences episodes of manic activity on behalf of "the environment." The delusional nature of this is evidenced by the misanthropic attacks on all works of man, and also by the focus on visible or totemic objects... for example, the Mount Graham Red Squirrel or the Spotted Owl.

An example of the paradoxical nature of these delusions is given by the Red Squirrel and the Santa Barbara Sand Fly. The Squirrel, a subspecies of the very common Red Squirrel, is fought for aggressively, while the Sand Fly, equally at risk and a truly distinct species, inspires little passion.

The patient usually is obsessed only with cute or cuddly animals, which is probably a displacement of the nurturing urge, itself unfulfilled due to abortion.

control obsession - this is the tendency of the patient to strive for excessive control over others, through government action. This is probably a projection of an unconscious fear of losing control over ones' self, even though the conscious manifestation is viewed as "compassion."

racist/feminist hypocrisy - the patient passionately advocates discrimination based on sex or race, while loudly proclaiming opposition to policies which are "racist" or "sexist."

overemotional perceptions - the patient is far more concerned with how a social action "looks" or "feels," and resists or denies objective evidence to the contrary, This also leads to very superficial cognition about matters of significant impact, as the patient merely gets the "feel" of the issue rather than truly understanding it.

sexual dysfunction - the patient is highly anxious about sexual matters, and this is manifested as:
Obsession with sexual and gender roles.
Passionate embrace of most non-traditional sexual preferences.
A need to define individuals by their gender or sexual preference, and make social policy as if everyone were equally obsessed.
A need to constantly push the envelope of indecent art.

John is probably on to something, but there is also something missing. For example, John calls this a cognition disorder which indicates faulty wiring in the brain, and while this may be true, it doesn't encompass the irrational part of the disorder that is exhibited by the Democrats/leftists. The Assistant Village Idiot believes that the tendency to want to "rule" is the direct result of being highly intelligent. He may be on to something. Didn't the left taut Kerry's obvious (to them at least) superior intelligence based on nothing more than the ability to speak in public with a solid Kennedyesque cadence? In fact, they kept that one going until it turned out that Bush made slightly better grades than Kerry did in college. As the AVI noted:

All you folks who think that the world would be better if the smart people were in charge – drop that idea. I have never interacted with a group that had screwier ideas, listened less, or postured more. Everyone arrived with the idea at long last, people I can reason with, but the discussions were as petty and unreasonable as everywhere else. Higher vocabulary and more formulas, same arguments

OK, we've included in the run-up to making a good diagnosis at least one factor, the intellectual/cognitive dysfunction exhibited by the oh-so-highly-intelligent members of the left and the Democratic party, we'll keep that in mind."

But, as Drummond noted that this disorder is also based in emotion, raw unreasoning emotion. Rush Limbaugh has noted in the past that the right thinks, the left feels. And I think there is something to this and we may be able to add another factor to our workup for a functioning diagnosis. One of my very favorite people in the Blogosphere is Dr. Sanity. She, as a practicing Psychiatrist has looked at the seeming mental illness of the left. Too, she recently did a post called PsychbloggerTouch And Go survey of mental health professionals who blog and does a regular "Carnival Of The Insanities," a not to be missed weekly carnival. Perhaps her most important work in her blog is describing Narcissism and Society in three parts. You absolutely must read the whole thing, but here is a teaser:

In some ways, the rise of human civilization from the cave to the present day has resulted because of attempts through the Rule of Law and social controls to set limits on the unrestrained Grandiose Self. This is primarily due to the destructiveness of the Narcissistic Rage generally associated with that part of the Self.

Because of this, the Grandiose Self has received a bad reputation philosophically, morally, and politically. The natural development of Governments and Religions (which ultimately are an expression of the Idealized Parent Image/Omnipotent Other side of the Self)have all too often attempted to ruthlessly suppress the Grandiose Self--much to the detriment of the individual AND the success of the particular society or religion.

In fact, despite the obvious truth that governments, nations, and religions are in a much better position to wreak far more systemized misery and death on human populations, it is almost always the Grandiose Self that gets the blame. As Wretchard at The Belmont Club pointed out in a recent post, a review of the 20th century, for example, shows that all the "people's revolutions" supported by the Left and purportedly for the purpose of "freeing" large populations of people; resulted instead in enslaving them and increasing authoritarian rule.

Without a political or economic framework that is able to incorporate what we refer to as "human nature" into its calculations, all so-called "perfect" societies and ideologies will at best simply fail in the real world; and at worse cause untold human suffering. With the best of intentions (this is perhaps debatable), the social engineers of philosophy, political science, and economics have caused so much more slavery, misery and death on a grand scale--that the grandiose CEO's of the largest corporations can be considered mere pikers by comparison.

Another Psychblogger who attempts to look at one issue of diagnosis is Shrinkwrapped who looks at the left's inability to face reality in the war against Islamic Fascism in this post The Left's Inadvertant (?) Anti-Americanism. A note, if one sees a reality that no one else can fathom, either the "see'er" is a dreamer with a view of the future, improbable as it seems, or the "see'er" is psychotic, that is out of touch with reality. The focus of Shrinkwrapped's post then is that the left is either covertly or overtly helping the other side and is, as George Orwell noted:

Pacifism is objectively pro-fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side, you automatically help out that of the other."

So far, we have looked at diagnosing the left as Political Compulsive Disorder, Cognitive Disorder of Progressives (bolstered with the Assistant Village Idiot's "Intelligence isn't everything"), an excellent case for Narcissim, the refusal of the left to "see" what the war really is.

My own contribution to the fray is Acquired/Induced Bush Derangement Syndrome. BDS is a term coined by another psychiatrist, Dr. Charles Krauthammer. Krauthammer's premise is that the left is so traumatized by the election of George Bush in the 2000 election, that they have lost all ability to reason. That they are indeed Deranged. Vintage Krauthammer:

Moreover, Dean is very smart. Until now, Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS) had generally struck people with previously compromised intellectual immune systems. Hence its prevalence in Hollywood. Barbra Streisand, for example, wrote her famous September 2002 memo to Dick Gephardt warning that the president was dragging us toward war to satisfy, among the usual corporate malefactors who ``clearly have much to gain if we go to war against Iraq,'' the logging industry -- timber being a major industry in a country that is two-thirds desert.

It is true that BDS has struck some pretty smart guys -- Bill Moyers ranting about a ``right-wing wrecking crew'' engaged in ``a deliberate, intentional destruction of the United States way of governing'' and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, whose recent book attacks the president so virulently that Krugman's British publisher saw fit to adorn the cover with images of Dick Cheney in a Hitler-like mustache and Bush stitched-up like Frankenstein. Nonetheless, some observers took that to be satire; others wrote off Moyers and Krugman as simple aberrations, the victims of too many years of neurologically hazardous punditry.

My poor contribution to this is the effect that this has had on to be pitied Cyndy Sheehan. The degree of insanity of which is indicated in that post's comment section by one "Fred" (not to be confused with our dearly beloved TEXASFRED). Fred's comment:

A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest." Even so, there will be real consequences for Bush and his misanthropic henchman. It is just unfortunate that we will all have to suffer until this veil of righteousness is lifted. In the meantime, PEACE. I hope you make a lot of money, as that seems to be the real religion followed by Bush and his fellow traitors. Worship away, and perhaps you will build a sufficient fortress to keep the masses at bay for a few days when they get tired of being told to "eat cake".

In an update on the post I made regarding BDS "Pandemic" I noted that EJ Dionne had succumbed:

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.

So, to the mix we add an inability of the left to see where they fit into the political dialectic. This obviously needs much more study, so a second part (following the example of the good Dr. Sanity) will follow in the near future. Until then, look kindly on your lefty friends, they just can't help themselves.

Xposted at GM's Corner

Stay The Course America!

2005-12-30T06:20:00.000-08:00

If you read nothing else this weekend, read this and ponder what it means when a middle easterner asks America to "Stay The Course!"

An excerpt to whet your appetite:

"It's difficult for me to argue that the United States must do more. It's very hard pleading for foreign assistance. It's hard to ask a country that already has 150,000 troops deployed in a single Middle Eastern country, has domestic terrorist threats, and is plagued by horrendous natural disasters to do more."

Another LONGHORN Touchdown!

2005-12-29T16:08:00.000-08:00

Notice dear readers that Tiberius Gracchus has, in the post below this, and his "Oklahoma" posting has put a significant emphasis on "suck." Not that there is any thing wrong with that of course, and far be it from me to cast disparaging remarks about a fellow blogger, but only a USC fan (or a liberal) (ooooohhhhh, that's mean GM...ed... Yes, I know) would mistake a joyous expression of obviously another LONGHORN TOUCHDOWN for a LEWENSKI. But, since Tiberius Gracchus was kind enough to put up a picture of another LONGHORN TOUCHDOWN on HIS Entry (though you notice that he characterized the photo with an overlay indicating his predilection) I will be most appreciative, especially in the really big game coming next week, we will be seeing FAR MORE of these shots than we will of USC players jumping for joy. I'm just sayin'!!!

Oh, and Tiberius Gracchus, you have a LONG way to go before you can top this TEXAN but I appreciate your tryin', I really do! It'll make you stronger in the end, 'cause you don't get stronger pushing against a weaker foe. ;-)

In Texas, football is a labor of love...

2005-12-29T12:09:00.000-08:00

But I guess, don't ask, don't tell.

TEXAS vs. usc

2005-12-28T18:54:00.000-08:00

Not very long ago, I posted this graphic of the University of Texas Longhorn, with TEXAS superimposed above it:

Not willing to let things slide, some worthy, but ultimately losing USC fan posted on this very same blog this graphic:

Kind of puny as graphics go, only 150 pixels wide and a mere 200 tall. Nothing like my robust 250 pixel wide and 225 pixel tall graphic of the GREAT TEXAS LONGHORN

But I digress. The real reason my worthy (but ultimately gonna lose fellow conservative and otherwise brilliant) blogger bud posted such a small graphic is because if you enlarge the graphic to where you can see what is going on, you see this:

You really can't blame him though, who wants to publicize that the TROJAN mascot is rooting for TEXAS?

HOOK 'EM HORNS!

Face it, people : Life Just Sucks

2005-12-28T15:51:00.000-08:00

More and more people are answering more and more surveys, and with the current lack of news, the media has decided that it all means that more and more Americans think life sucks.

Of course, they don’t reveal what percentage of the sample population queried were lefties, for whom life is an endless series of disasters since Johnson decided not to run for re-election around a million years ago.

This brilliant analysis, however, was included in the story:

The survey, part of a broader study of American society conducted by the university every two years, found that troubles were greatest among those with low income, poor education levels and among unmarried mothers.

They get PAID for this shi’ite?

(Crossposted at Dumbshit of the Week)

The NY Times; Ain't They Somethin'

2005-12-28T04:33:00.000-08:00

My friend Seth, over at Hard A'starboard is down on the New York Times, as all thinking individuals are and he links his story to the always interesting Michele Malkin. But, Seth says it better than ever I could:

No, New York Times, We're Not Done With You Yet...
...and we won't be until everybody in America knows what a ~~lying~~, ~~treasonous~~, ~~shameless~~, ~~bogus~~, ~~idiotarian~~, ~~leftist propaganda generating~~, thoroughly liberal-biased source of disinformation you have become, abusing the reputation you earned back in the days when you were a respectable newspaper.

Columnist and blogger extraordinaire Michelle Malkin puts in her two cents, as succinct and on-point as always

. Anyone who thinks the times isn't a biased lefty rag is obviously not a thinking person!

Why is Oklahoma so windy?

2005-12-28T01:27:00.000-08:00

I've spent many moons in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma, doing training seminars for a company I worked for.

Many a native Oklahoman has been asked "Why is Tulsa, hell, why is Oklahoma so windy?"

The most common reply -- "Because Kansas blows -- and Texas sucks!"

I rest my case.

I would just hate to be a Texan on January 4 -- because there's gonna be weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth when SC beats the everlovin' crap out of that whiney bunch of Texas-weenies in Beautiful Downtown Pasadena.

Sorry, girls, you're gonna get pwnd.

The Eyes of Texas

2005-12-27T16:35:00.000-08:00

Little did I know that when The Real Ugly American asked me to help out with this blog whilst he traveled, little did I know that there would be a USC fan also helping out. Then, I read on the blog that this USC fan really thinks that USC will win the National Championship against
TEXAS

of all schools! Well folks, that just ain't gonna happen. So, without further ado:

The Eyes of Texas are upon you,
All the live long day.
The Eyes of Texas are upon you,
You can not get away.
Do not think you can escape them
At night or early in the morn-
The Eyes of Texas are upon you
'Till Gabriel blows his horn.

And That Folks is THAT!!!

Stalin loved the monkeys...

2005-12-27T13:47:00.000-08:00

Breeding a race of Supermen -- not just for Nazis any more!

(Crossposted on Dumbshit of the Week)

USC pwns

2005-12-27T09:38:00.000-08:00

OK, he's gone. Now we can have some serious USC fan spam...

Actually, although I'm sorely tempted to post something really over the top about my Trojans, and rub RealUgly's face in the fact that the Boys from Troy own college football, and (except for a brief interlude having something vaguely to do with buying team members, but probably trumped up out of other school's jealousies) always have, and always will, I think I'll restrain myself and just post a really run-on paragraph.

Fight On for ol' SC
Our men Fight On to victory
Our Alma Mater dear,
looks up to you
Fight On and win
For ol' SC
Fight On to victory
Fight On!

The Silence Of The Candidate

2005-12-27T03:42:00.000-08:00

Hillary is silent! What's that you say? Hillary, the mouth, silent? Ann Althouse suspects that Hillary knows that speaking out against the wire-tapping of folks here in America calling friends perhaps associated with Al Qaeda is a loosing proposition. Could be!

Hillary didn't get where she is by being dumb (although she is, from my point of view, nowhere near as brilliant as she and everyone else thinks she is - shrewd perhaps, but not brilliant). The fact of the matter is, as a commenter on Althouse noted:

"Scarcely anyone will admit to it, but most people are perfectly willing to sacrifice a little freedom for security. The revelation that the government is taking proactive measures against terrorism - even ones which may well be illegal, if not unconstitutional (see Orin Kerr's comments here) is reassuring. Of course, most people are also aware that there is something socially unacceptable about admitting ass much, but when you vote, it's just you and a ballot paper, and I think people get pretty honest about what they think when they vote."

I couldn't have said it better myself. And this, my beloved readers will indicate that Hillary is much smarter than the rest of the Democratic herd. Though that isn't saying much.

A tip of the GM Chapeaux to Ann Althous and the Instapundit

Cross Posted at GM's Corner

Be Back Soon / Meet GM's Corner and TiberGuest Bloggers

2005-12-26T21:57:00.000-08:00

Yup the wife and I will be up in the mountains for a few days so I have asked my friends George from GM's Corner, and Tiberius Gracchus from DumbShitOfTheWeek to keep you folks entertained.

They are both great bloggers you should check them regularly. Hopefully this week will give you a good sample.

See you all Next Year!

Hello from Conservative America

2005-12-26T20:02:00.000-08:00

Greetings to all. My name is GM Roper and I promised The Real Ugly American I would help out with a post or twelve while he is on his sojourn. I hope to keep you entertained with a little humor, a little politics and perhaps a mental health tip or three. Normally, I hang out at GM's Corner but you can also sometimes find me at The Wide Awakes or at South Park Republicans. First post (hmm, isn't this your first post?...ed... While I'm at it, let me introduce "...ed" Roger Simon's Muse who sometimes comes to haunt me... NO, this is an introductory post and it doesn't count!.. Oh...ed!)... where was I, oh, yes... First post up sometime tomorrow. See you then.

GM

Robertson and Rockefeller leaked Top Secret NSA Program?

2005-12-26T12:25:00.000-08:00

This is one of the things I love about the blogosphere. When the MSM refuses to follow a story the bloggers run with it and get to the truth. This is exactly what is going on right now with the NSA leak story.

AJ Strata over at The Strata-Sphere blog, is all over this story with a theory that sounds pretty likely to me. Judge Robertson (the FISA judge who supposedly resigned in protest) actually was either forced to resign to chose to do so before being forced while under investigation for leaking this story in the first place.

We will know for sure if Robertson starts missing days on the bench on the DC circuit court - a position he has not resigned yet. But one he cannot retain while under investigation.

Is he clearing his docket of cases so he can go on a hiatus? We will know soon enough. Judge Roberts is due to be assigned emergency cases at the US District Court January 1-2, 20o6. We shall see if that status remains for the time being. Robertson is also assigned Motions Court for February.

If Robertson is under investigation, it should be ‘leaked’ fairly quickly.

You have to read the whole thing.

Dr. Sanity follows up on the double standard of the left and the MSM. With The left calling the leakers hero's in this case, and the MSM treating the coverage of this leak completely different than the Plame leak.

M ichelle Malkin has some analysis of this story in todays Washington Post. Michelle suggests that reporters covering blogs should actually read them first:

The Washington Post profiles one of my favorite milbloggers, Bill Roggio, who runs The Fourth Rail and ThreatsWatch. Another ground-breaking milblogger, Michael Yon, gets a mention. The article's undertone is critical of Bush administration efforts to reach out to the blogosphere, and paints milbloggers as "weapons" in an "information war." The WaPo's take on bloggers as tools easily exploited by one major political party or the other is typical--and typically misinformed. Again, I ask: Is it too much to expect reporters who write about blogs to actually read them?

Not a bad idea. If you have ever read Michael Yon, or Bill Roggio, or the Dawn Patrol at Mudville Gazette, then you know their stories are far more credible than the various MSM reports. If you haven't then do yourself a favor and start reading them today. Contrary to what some would lead you to believe these milbloggers report the good the bad and the ugly as nearly all milbloggers do.

Outside the Beltway is also talking about this article, and bloggers role in "the information war"

Quite interesting. Politicians and their handlers have understood the power of the "alternative media" going back at least to the 1992 presidential campaign, when Bill Clinton used back door venues like the Don Imus and Arsenio Hall shows to reach voters. Given the rise of the blogosphere as an information medium, it was only a matter of time before those seeking to get their message out would turn there. Indeed, I've been getting emailed press releases from congressional offices, party officials, interest groups, and others for months now.

I hope you all had a very Merry Christmas and the left overs last you until the new year.

How To Respond To A Moonbat

2005-12-24T10:16:00.000-08:00

Yesterday Zatara took issue with my charge of moonbattery from the left and made several comments including this:

Just out of curiosity, how is moonbattery (interesting term there) to call a clearly unconstitutional grab for power what it is?

Over the past week or so, there were daily revelations of this administration abusing the already broad powers it has for wiretapping, investigating, and harassing private invidiuals that have not been charged or evenly vaguely connected with a crime.

Actions like those take place in wonderful nations like Burma and Cuba... they make the ghosts of Stalin's past cackle with glee. This is not how an open and free society acts.

Of course served a Dish like that I could not resist:

comparing our government conducting warrently searches or wire taps on people in the US communicating with terrorists outside the country with countries like Cuba is Moonbattery.

Comparing it with Stalin is foolish at best.

I as you do not want the government spying on my every day activities. Unless you are cooperating with terrorists I don't think you have anything to fear yet.

Go and read the opinions of the Constitutional Law Professors I mentioned in this post and previous ones. You will find either you are falling for the moonbats hyperbole or you are yourself in fact a moonbat.

I do hope for your sake it is the former and you still have a chance to listen to reason.

Well Unfortunately either Zatara is just being stuborn and doesn't want to admit to being so poorly informed or indeed he/she is a moonbat.

1) If being a Libertarian means that I expect, nay demand, the government follows a truely strict interpretation of the Constitution then I hate to see what so called Conservatives are.

Despite what some "law and order" politicians believe, the 4th Amendment is not there to protect the guilty, but the innocent. It's not there to hamper investigations but it's there to make sure that the investigators do their job correctly the first time and ge the guilty party.

I'm sorry you don't care about your individual rights... I guess you weren't using them and let the government take them away, for your own safety of course.

and of course I responded again:

You seem to continually confuse criminal surveillance (at worst a group of organized criminals trying to steal our money) with foreign intelligence surveillance ( people who have publicly stated they are at war with our entire country including you and want you, your family and everyone you know and love dead and all your civil rights violated for the rest of history).

Now if you don't see that fundamental difference then you Sir/Madame are a freaking lights out moonbat.

But this is what I wish I had said. Rick at Right Wing Nuthouse has the prefect response for moonbat constitutional absolutionists like Zatara. So Zatara I hope I haven't run you off yet. If you would endulge, please read the following excerpt from Right Wing Nuthouse:

I will take a back seat to no one in my support for the Bill of Rights – ALL TEN OF THEM. Liberals usually like to stop at about #8. After all, the 9th and 10th Amendments limit the power of the federal government vis a vis the states and the people which is a total anathema to your average lefty. Come to think of it, liberals aren’t very supportive of the 2nd amendment and even several parts of the 1st – like freedom OF religion. In fact, looking at a liberal’s translation of the Constitution, it would probably appear very similar to one of those documents requested of the CIA under the FOIA; so much of it would be blacked out that about all you’d be able to read is the page number.

That said, what has me breathing fire this morning is the idea that, in order to prevent the greatest of catastrophes – a nuclear weapon being exploded on American soil – people actually want the government to get a warrant to aim a Geiger counter at someone’s house. This is nuts. This is lunacy. This is as close to suicidal as one can get without actually putting the gun to your head.

I guess we’re really in trouble now. The Constitutional absolutists (I’m beginning to include some of the more pompous libertarians out there who are starting to annoy me more and more every day) are acting as if this is some kind of gigantic abstract game we’re playing. I can assure you that al Qaeda is not playing games. And the people who are currently responsible for seeing that the last thing you see isn’t a bright flash in the sky followed by the sighting of a mushroom shaped cloud are, thank the Lord, not playing games either.

What is not serious is this spate of revelations regarding what the government is doing to prevent the destruction of the United States. What is not serious is this internet-wide hand wringing over what appears more and more as a sensible, rational, response to a threat posed by an enemy that has sworn to destroy us – or perhaps many of you have forgotten that salient fact.

And the next person that quotes Ben Franklin’s warning about security and liberty is going to get a pie in the face – or my boot up their ass. Ben Franklin didn’t have to worry about a goddamn nuclear weapon going off in Philadelphia while he was romping between the sheets with some harlot. He could afford to be smug. We can’t.

You have to read the whole thing. Folks like Zatara allying themselves with idiots like Daschle, and the Kos Kids, and the Washington Monthly Whackos are gonna get us all freaking killed.

Right Wing Nut House isn't the only one putting the wood to idiots today. Michelle Malkin lays the smack down on the NYT for once again getting the story wrong. Their only possible excuse is incompetence or intentionally misleading their readers.

Hugh Hewitt socks LA Times whacko Tim Ruttan right in the eye with Ruttans own words and mocks the little twit for being the intellectual coward that he is.

The trouble with Rutten and other MSM apologists is that they have never, ever had a job remotely close to national security operations, and get most of their understanding of the business of intelligence from Ludlum novels and bar conversations with people who say they know spooks. The irony is that the close of Rutten's column is spent telling people that newspapers are too disorganized to conspire to do much of anything except get the paper out. He is asserting that if only you knew what went on in newspapers, you wouldn't be so quick to criticize them --that readers should defer to his "inside" knowledge of the way it really is.

Enough of the critics and their demands for candoor from self-serving, ideologically extreme and unswervingly Ahabite nutters in the newsrooms! Papers are to be worshiped, reporters exulted (and paid more) and never ever rebuked for endangering the national security!

Next week from Rutten: Why newspaper subscriptions should be mandatory, why PBS should have Bill Moyers as its boss, why reporters' salaries should be tax exempt, and why the publication of National Intelligence Estimates on a real time basis is actually good for the country.

But if he's going to slander me or some other radio show host again, perhaps he can borrow the spine to do so by name.

I am glad to see Christmas has brought out all this brotherly love.

The Carnival Of Christmas

2005-12-23T10:53:00.000-08:00

Adam's Blog has a great post up for Christmas. With links to some wonderful charities, and lots of links to other bloggers christmas wishes, touching stories, and things to remind you what Christmas is all about.

It is a must read.

For my part I would like to remind you all once again it is Thank A Soldier Week. I encourage you all to not only take a moment of your time to follow the link and email a soldier but do something special with your family for Christmas and have everyone send an email during your Christmas gathering.

Merry Christmas Everyone!

You We Didn't Vote For! / Open Trackback post

2005-12-23T08:03:00.000-08:00

Tom Daschle has an OpEd in todays Washington Post saying Congress never granted the President the powers he asserted to conduct "warrentless searches" to monitor people in the United States communicating with terrorists abroad.

Well I have news for Mr. Daschle. YOU DO NOT SPEAK FOR US ANYMORE. That's right it appears Mr. Daschle didn't get the memo. The voters booted his ass out of office a year ago. The first Senate party leader to lose a race for re-election in 50 years. Why do you think that happened Tom?

Maybe we didn't agree with your judgement, your obstructionism, or your partisan political hackery over the best interest and safety of the American people.

So Tom doesn't think the president has the authority. Several constitutional law professors do, and many of those who disagree with the president politically admit this is a grey area in the law intentionally left this way by the Supreme Court.

Oh well as they say in the blogosphere "you are so 5 minutes ago Tom" move along.

****Update****

Just one Minute in his post Be Careful What You Wish For argues a criminal prosecution of the NSA leaker/s is not such a good idea.

Here is part of his reasoning and background.

However - waaay back when, in the summer of 2003, I noted a possible end game for a Plame investigation, and further noted that, by a large, leaks are a good thing in a free and democratic society.
My guess - the best course for annoyed righties (such as myself) would be to note vigorously the absurd double standard of the Fitzgerald prosecution, keep it in mind as one more justification for the pardon of Libby and others (if necessary), and move on.

I have to say as a non beltway insider. Pardons just come off as slimey to me as I think they do to most of the electorate. I think Michael Ledeen's sugestion is far easier to digest and actually would accomplish more than political victory. It might just make us all a little safer. Now there is a novel idea!

Captain's Quarters tells us Daschle: Democrats Clueless On 9/12, Too:

Former Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle writes an op-ed in today's Washington Post (which the Post covers as a news item on page A04, just in case its readers miss it) claiming that the declaration of war granted to Bush after 9/11 specifically limited his war powers. It's a must-read, if only to demonstrate that either the Democrats have to be the worst historical revisionists still received by polite society or have been truly clueless about the nature of the war on Islamofascist terror since its start.

Daschle actually makes a case for both in his essay:

Read the whole thing.

The Strata-Sphere has an exelent post on Daschle's colum, how the left is once again heading over the cliff on this issue, and how the MSM is hslping them along.

Apparently Brilliant at Breakfast hasn't read the opinions of Cass Sunstein, or John Eastman, Or Orin Kerr, and actually puts stock in Daschle's hackery. Maybe she hasn't had breakfast yet?

Just a Bump in the Beltway can't resist the call to moonbattery:

Daschle, clearly in an effort to be polite, left out two key terms: fascism and impeachment. With the statements made by the leaders of this administration over the past week, there can be no other rational conclusion for what is taking place and what must be done.

**************
Thats right this is an open track back post. If you have something interesting to share please leave a trackback. I will move them to the main page as I see then throughout the day. Just be sure to leave a link to This Post in the main body of the post you trackback here.

The Right Nation linked with: Open Trackback Holiday
TMH's Bacon Bits linked with: Top Ten (Profound) News Headlines
Freedom Folks linked with: I Am Ashamed
Freedom Folks linked with: Merry Christmas to All!
Tel-Chai Nation linked with: More mistakes made by Spielberg in promoting Munic
Don Surber linked with: How The Rudolph Stole Christmas

Thank you to these folks who also have Open Trackbacks today: Third World County, TMH's Bacon Bits,

Be sure to stop by and read them.

La Shawn Barber's Liberal Views.......

2005-12-22T21:32:00.000-08:00

Thats right in her fantastic post Do You Hate Black People, La Shawn offers up several examples of failed liberal policies, tired liberal mantras and offers several new ideas. Which as I have always maintained is the "Liberal Thing to do".

Doing the same thing over and over because thats the way its always been done is the very definition of conservative. Liberals are suposed to recognize when things are broken and try new ideas sometimes even radical ideas to fix them.

Here is an excerpt from La Shawn's post:

One of the government policies I hate is skin color preferences, which I’ve written about ad nauseum and will continue to do so as long as it exists. So-called affirmative action was intended to include more blacks in the candidate pool, but it has become the biggest entitlement program ever conceived. It has nothing to do with so-called racial discrimination and everything to do with lowered standards.

Apparently, it’s difficult to find black job candidates and potential university students with credentials comparable to whites. On the one hand, some blacks claim that credentials are comparable, but whites need a “push” to hire or admit. On the other hand, some blacks claim that “comparable” is relative. Just because a black person has a lower score, it doesn’t mean he’s not qualified for a job or admission. It is reasonable, however, to set hiring and admissions criteria, and if your score is below the threshold, you are, by those standards, not qualified. Unfortunately, some blacks — not all, thank goodness — see racial motives behind everything.

I hate “affirmative action” because it’s immoral, unconstitutional, embarrassingly unfair, and undignified.

If blacks with comparable credentials are being passed over, blanket skin color preference policies are not the remedy. Courts are where such disputes should be heard. If blacks are passed over because they don’t have comparable scores, we need to address the problem at a much earlier stage. We all know how dumbed down government schools have become. Get the socialist bureaucrats out of the front offices and demand better for your kids. Fight for school choice, support rigorous standards, and advocate excellence, not mediocrity. And for the love of God, stop making excuses. Discipline your children to turn off that idiot box and study. Embrace and reward studious behavior and penalize laziness.

Some in the "Black Liberal Establishment" may call La Shawn a "Traitor", or an "Uncle Tom", or a "House Slave".

I will call her a "Real Liberal". I hope she isn't offended.

As La Shawn is often so good at doing, Her post has lots of other folks talking. See what JunkYardBlog has to say, Tapscott's Copy Desk follows up on the media bias La Shawn Exposes in her post. Independent Conservative has a transcript of the exchange between Mike Wallace and Morgan Freeman. Honestly I am not quite sure what Vision Circle is talking about. Maybe you can figure it out.

An Open Letter To Harry Reid (Hint its not polite)

2005-12-22T21:05:00.000-08:00

My Friend George at GM's Corner let off a little steam today and called a spade a spade. Here is his open letter to Harry Reid:

A short sample:

Did you learn nothing from the loss of Dear Leader Daschle? Do you not understand that this country is at war with a relentless enemy who wants nothing but your death, and the death of everything you say you hold dear? Have you not listened to those terrorists who proclaim the desire for a new Caliphate? Do you not remember the beheading of hostages in a brazenly cowardly attempt to sway public opinion or who murdered, yes murdered over 3000 Americans in a wanton terrorist attack?

I have to say George is right on target. As long as feckless partisan hacks like Reid are leading the Democratic Party we will forever be in the minority.

Hezbollah Scamming Canadian Cell Phone Users For Terrorist Activities!

2005-12-22T20:31:00.000-08:00

Check this out courtesy of The Flying Lumberyard:

While clueless Liberal Bloggers in Canada bash Bush on domestic security in the U.S., the terrorist group Hezbollah is evidently still in the business of scamming Canada's Rogers Communications cell phone customers with clone numbers.

A quote from a December 19, 2005 story by Endagadget: "Susan Drummond - who was stuck with a bill for over $10,000 for calls to countries such as Libya, Pakistan, Russia and Syria - recorded comments made by a Rogers security exec, who admitted that the company had suffered cloning problems at the hands of Hezbollah going back as far as 1997."

Check out The Flys Blog and read the whole thing.

Thank a Soldier Week

2005-12-21T08:51:00.000-08:00

Please follow this link and send an email to thank a Soldier. It only takes a moment. In fact here is an idea if you wanna do something really special for christmas.

Where ever your family gathers for Christmas Eve or Christmas day pull up this link and have everyone in the family send an email.

Last I checked about 36,000 folks had sent emails. If everyone does this with an average family gathering of 10 we should have over 350,000 emails by Christmas day.

Don't know what to say? Just say Thank You.

Greyhawk at Mudville Gazette has a very touching thank you from Congressman Joe Wilson's words

Here are some emails from other folks taking time to Thank our Soldiers.

**Please know that I join millions of Americans who are very thankful for your service to our country. As a veteran from the Vietnam era, I appreciate the risks and sacrifices you all are making. Merry Christmas to you, your comrades in arms, and your loved ones at home.**

**I am Brazilian and I would like to thank the American soldiers for their huge efforts in Iraq. Keep on doing what you're doing! Keep on fighting for the freedom.**

**Thank you so much for your defense of our country. I know that you endure many hardships and make many difficult sacrifices, and I want you to know that it IS appreciated here, despite what the "mainstream media" says. It is people like you that make me proud to be an American.**

The Left is loosing it again with the NSA story

2005-12-20T19:47:00.000-08:00

****Update****

Check out the NSA Surveillance: Blog Post Roundup over at Concurring Opinions. It is terrific.

Be sure to read this post by University of Chicago Law School Professor Cass Sunstein:

The authorization for the use of military force (AUMF) says, "the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons."

****Update**** I found some more over at Atrios. Comon you guys aren't trying.

Nazi Bush: I am the power! I will protect! I will decide! I will allow! Thou shalt have no gods before me! Thou shalt not have the Constitution as a graven image!
JT | 12.21.05 - 10:25 am | #

Hey, hey
I saved the world today
Everything's okay
Now the bad thing's gone away.

But it hasn't. It still lurks at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Derelict | 12.21.05 - 10:27 am | #

Is it because we're sick in the head?
BlakNo1

Perhaps it's because we wish Bush were dead...
Vicki | Email | 12.21.05 - 10:29 am | #

I'm still shaking with anger over the illegal domestic spying.

The Bushes are criminals. May there never be another Bush in public office for as long as the universe exists.
Sallyh,Grandmere Poissonniere | Email | Homepage | 12.21.05 - 10:31 am | #

Nanci and Barbra are comm'in with impeachment for ya bushie....PANIC!
wisedup | Email | 12.21.05 - 10:32 am | #

Will historians be talking about the chimp period as "the end of the Republic" as in the case of Rome?
JT | 12.21.05 - 10:32 am | #

Perhaps it's because we wish Bush were dead...
Vicki

WORD!
Terry C, Feminazi Moonbat | 12.21.05 - 10:34 am | #

Don't just read this post read the comments section at Unclaimed Territory.

Here is a Sample:

I asked this question:

The Ugly American said...

btw you guys do understand how this works right?

Our special opps guys capture a terrorist in Afghanistan or Iraq. Joe citizen here in the U.S. Shows up on that terrorists incoming or outgoing calls. That guy is then monitored.

Not the government deciding to tap your phone for attending a protest march.

Do we agree this is what we are talking about?

and got these answers:

Dont_Feed_The_Meter said:

No, this is about another - egregious - example of the rampant abuse of authority and power and a willingness to deny and defile the very substance of the laws that the American Revolutionaries fought for, with a deceitful and pernicious intent.

Jake - but not the one said...

TUA, there are so many things to fear. Why pick terrorism? Why not tackle the issue rationally, with money and appropriate threats, and yes, even appropriate action. Not including invading Iraq - what was not a terrorist threat at all, then or now.

Glenn Greenwald said...

How do you know this? The only way to know is to have judicial oversight to make sure there is no abuse. That's why it's so crucial to only allow surveillance only with a warrant.

you get the idea.

And the Washington Monthly Whackos are off the chart:

Yes, constant war helps greatly in controlling the proles. We have always been at war with Eurasia.

Posted by: George Orwell on December 20, 2005 at 8:47 PM

Good point, Kevin. I'd add that this administration has consistently demonstrated an unserious attitude toward terrorism. From neglecting the 'Bin Laden determined to strike inside U.S.' memo to underfunding homeland security to bungling the aftermath of the Afghanistan invasion, Bush has shown that he only cares about terrorism inasmuch as it provides an excuse for doing things he wanted to do anyway --- cut taxes, invade Iraq, and as we are learning now, strip away American's civil liberties.

Posted by: ChristianPinko on December 20, 2005 at 8:48 PM

I'm not obligated to follow the law. Therefore, anything I do is legal.

Posted by: Shorter Bush on December 20, 2005 at 8:48 PM

Of course, given the one-party autocracy of the present incarnation of Republicans, and their lust for executive power, I doubt if we'll be seeing any small or big "d" Democratic presidents any time soon.

Posted by: R. Porrofatto on December 20, 2005 at 8:57 PM

I think saying his intentions were good is giving this guy way, way too much credit. This is the callous man who fiddled while New Orleans drowned. Do you honestly believe that he was wiretapping people because he loves his fellow citizens so much he's horrified to imagine they might become victims of terrorism?

There's not doubt that he is droning on and on about how he's doing this to protect us. But come on. Like all megalomaniacs this guy doesn't give a crap about anyone but himself.

Posted by: DanM on December 20, 2005 at 9:03 PM

Now this is funny or scary depending on how you look at it. Bob here actually suspects he just might be insane yet can not compel himself to take his meds.

The scariest thing about this is that Bush and the GOP have *every incentive in the world* to let another terrorist attack happen, so we can all stop our quibbly little doubts as to whether or not we're still "at war."

Seriously. Think about it. Think about the recent F grade from the 9/11 Commission two months ago.

I don't mean to get all moonbatty; I don't know whether I'm quite cynical (enough) yet to believe that Bush, for all his demonstrated cluelessness and/or mendacity, actually goes to bed at night dreaming of another great, unifying gift from Osama -- another "new Pearl Harbor" to "awaken our moral purpose" as it said in the Clinton-era PNAC docs.

What I *do* know is that his polls would spike and his arguments would prevail with most of the public.

What a nasty thought, huh.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on December 20, 2005 at 9:08 PM

Too late Bob you just did get "all moonbatty".

On another note why do people feel compelled to offer up detailed theories on the internet explaining what they think the NSA is doing ?

Are they trying to prove how smart they are to their anonymous fans?

Do they even care that they may just be right and that our enemies just might learn something they didn't know before?

I just don't understand posts like this one from Asymmetrical Information.

Also, using this approach makes it very difficult to obtain individual warrants, because the rate of number turnover would be high, and the number of simultaneous taps large. Not to mention that the vast majority of lines tapped would have nothing to do with terrorism, although itâ€™s sounding like the FISA court may be pretty mellow on that score. It also sort of explains what the risk is in revealing this program, since now suspects would know that any international call they made, even if it was from a brand new phone to a â€œcleanâ€ number in a safe country, would be tapped.

If you have come across any moonbats commenting on this story please share and I will put em up on the main page.

Bloggers with Open Trackbacks today: Third World County, Diane's Stuff, Is It Just Me, bRight & Early, Adam's Blog, TMH's Bacon Bits, Cao's Blog,

Please visit them and say hi and don't forget to tip your waitress.

The NSA Story A Layman’s Perspective

2005-12-20T05:45:00.000-08:00

****Update 3:15 pm*****

Welcome Hugh Hewitt Readers. Hugh actually inspired me to start this blog so it is great to have you all. I have been in meetings all day and didn't know you would be stopping by. I hope you don't mind the mess.

/bow and big thanks to Hugh.

****Update****

Thanks to The Talking Points Memo and Hugh Hewitt for a link to this letter from Jay Rockefeller. There is now no doubt he knew exactly what was happening and did not stop it at the time. Instead he chose to play politics. Disgraceful.

If Senator Rockefeller was truly concerned about this as he states in his letter he should have worked it out quietly with the Whitehouse to come to some agreement on what was and was not kosher with the main goal being the safety of the American People. Not the Democrats chances at gaining back congress in 2006.

Check out Bill Baar who is a disgusted Dem like me.

**** *************** ************ **********

All I know is this is far too complicated for me to know the answer to. Let the Legal experts and Con Law Professors argue out the minutia and their complicated constitutional positions. What I do know is I don’t want our president running roughshod over the constitution. I also know I don’t want bureaucratic BS getting in the way of preventing terrorist plots designed to kill as many Americans as possible.

It appears President Bush used a loophole to authorize the NSA wire taps. The constitutional / legal arguments aside, is anyone really arguing that these wiretaps were a bad thing?

If our military or intelligence agencies capture a terrorist’s cell phone with Americans Phone #s on it, then those Americans phone calls should be monitored immediately. If that’s not legal or constitutional then it should be.

I think the questions about the constitutionality and legality of this policy are justified. I understand the concept of the slippery slope. This legislation should be very narrowly defined and leave no ambiguity about what does and does not qualify for monitoring phone calls of citizens/aliens/ or residents with terrorist ties.

This story should have never seen the light of day. We should not be talking about this for the world to see, alerting our enemies to our abilities and tactics. Whoever leaked this story needs to be found and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

What should have happened is Senators or Congressmen in either party who took issue with this policy should have raised this privately with the Whitehouse and drafted legislation that clarified what was and was not kosher and got on with the business of protecting the citizens of the United States.

I am not letting the President off the hook on this one either. It seems the administration knew this was a grey area at best. They should have brought this up with responsible Democratic leaders (see Joe Lieberman) and quietly attached an amendment buried in some other innocuous sounding bill thereby keeping our enemies in the dark.

Our nation’s leaders have failed us all by playing politics with all of our lives.

You have to read John McIntyre's post today where he explains how the Dems are not only playing politics they are playing losing politics. How far can they fall? Is the Democratic Party headed for it's place in history next to the whigs?

Will there be a place for Dems like me to run?

I think Just one Minute has the best round up on this topic.

I was very interested in this particular bit of information:

A high-ranking intelligence official with firsthand knowledge said in an interview yesterday that Vice President Cheney, then-Director of Central Intelligence George J. Tenet and Michael V. Hayden, then a lieutenant general and director of the National Security Agency, briefed four key members of Congress about the NSA's new domestic surveillance on Oct. 25, 2001, and Nov. 14, 2001, shortly after Bush signed a highly classified directive that eliminated some restrictions on eavesdropping against U.S. citizens and permanent residents.

Former senator Bob Graham (D-Fla.), who chaired the Senate intelligence committee and is the only participant thus far to describe the meetings extensively and on the record, said in interviews Friday night and yesterday that he remembers "no discussion about expanding [NSA eavesdropping] to include conversations of U.S. citizens or conversations that originated or ended in the United States" -- and no mention of the president's intent to bypass the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

The high-ranking intelligence official, who spoke with White House permission but said he was not authorized to be identified by name, said Graham is "misremembering the briefings," which in fact were "very, very comprehensive." The official declined to describe any of the substance of the meetings, but said they were intended "to make sure the Hill knows this program in its entirety, in order to never, ever be faced with the circumstance that someone says, 'I was briefed on this but I had no idea that -- ' and you can fill in the rest."

By Graham's account, the official said, "it appears that we held a briefing to say that nothing is different . . . . Why would we have a meeting in the vice president's office to talk about a change and then tell the members of Congress there is no change?"

I am sure there will be more later.

Go Go Govenator!

2005-12-19T17:09:00.000-08:00

I am by no means happy with everything the Govenator has done since voting for him in the special election (the first time I ever voted Republican for Govenor) but on the whole this guy has been a breath of fresh air. Cutting the defict, blocking one bill Gill Sedillos repeated attempts to give drivers licencses to Illegal Aliens, campaigning for desperately needed yet unpopular reforms, repealing the car tax, and recently denying clemency to the multiple murderer Monster Williams.

Stories like this one remind me why I voted for him and why I most likely will again.

Here is an excerpt:

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Monday told officials in his hometown in Austria to remove his name from a sports stadium and stop using his identity to promote the city. The governor's request came after politicians in Graz began a petition drive to rename the stadium, reacting to Schwarzenegger's decision last week to deny clemency to condemned inmate Stanley Tookie Williams. Opposition to the death penalty is strong in Austria.

In a letter that began "Dear Mister Mayor," Schwarzenegger said he decided to spare the Graz city council "further concern" should he be forced to make other clemency decisions while he's governor. Another inmate is scheduled to be executed in California Jan. 17.

"In all likelihood, during my term as governor, I will have to make similar and equally difficult decisions," Schwarzenegger said in the letter. "To spare the responsible politicians of the city of Graz further concern, I withdraw from them as of this day the right to use my name in association with the Liebenauer Stadium."

Keep it up Govenator.

The Daily Pundit has an update on one of the Govenator's bad decisions.

True Liberals Support Democracy!

2005-12-19T08:41:00.000-08:00

As promised here is my response to Glenn Greenwald of Unclaimed Territory. I address his comments point by point starting with:

(1) I did not say that pro-war advocates never mention Iraqi dead civilians killed by the U.S. military. I said they rarely mention it, which is undeniably true. And those who do mention it do so in order to dismiss it as a sufficient reason for opposing the war (or, as in your cites, to complain about the coverage it is getting).

Rather than once again accusing you of making false claims I will ask you for examples. What you will find while searching for them are far more detailed reports than the MSM ever gives.

It can’t be denied that 30,000 dead Iraqis packs a significant emotional punch. And it’s at least 30,000 dead, since that’s an American estimate. I’m not interested in bickering over the number or the identity of each of them. Other estimates from months ago put the number at 100,000 civilians, and the important point is that no matter what number you want to believe, it’s a huge amount of innocent Iraqi people who were killed by this war. Even pro-war advocates – perhaps especially them, since the war is purportedly being fought to liberate Iraqis – must feel some strong sense of sorrow and remorse over this huge number of deaths.

Yes 30,000 people killed is a tragedy on a tremendous scale. And no 30,000 is the highest reputable estimate by non U.S. Governmental sources. It falls somewhere between 27 and 31,000. You say you are not interested in bickering over the number yet you cite yet another bogus source. Other than your flawed logic this is the biggest problem I had with your first post. You fill it with inaccurate and often grossly exaggerated propaganda. I have to question why this is. Are you just completely uninformed or is it intentional?

The 100,000 number you cite was long ago debunked.

I can not speak for others but of course I feel sorrow and remorse for the Iraqi people who have lost their own lives or those of their loved ones. I feel sorrow and remorse for those who have been injured. However at the same time I feel extreme joy and pride for my country and our men and women in uniform who have helped the Iraqi people remove a ruthless dictator who oppressed, tortured, and murdered those same people for 30 years.

Now for some real numbers over 300,000 of his own people killed by execution, chemical attacks, and torture. Over 1 million killed in his wars. I would say 30,000 is a very small price to pay to end that 30 year killing spree.

I am sure you have heard the term “Freedom isn’t Free”. Rush said it well.

Your argument however brings about a larger one. If you are arguing that the U.S. bares a large part of the responsibility for these 30,000 deaths (and I do not argue that) then you also have to admit we bare a large responsibility for the million before. You also have to admit if you are being intellectually honest that we have a moral responsibility to end that cycle of torture and death. As a Liberal I can not ignore that moral responsibility.

But the reason pro-war advocates are able to still favor the war despite the existence of huge numbers of dead Iraqi civilians is the same reason that I can oppose the war despite the emergence of democratic elections in Iraq – while it has a strong emotional effect, it does not, in itself, speak to whether the war is, on balance, a war that we ought to have fought or should keep fighting, particularly from the perspective of U.S. interests — which is, for me at least, what determines whether this war is a good idea.

You can absolutely make that argument just don’t claim to be a liberal when you do. You sound like a Vietnam era Republican. As a liberal I support my country promoting Democratic elections and removing murderous dictators from power. Especially when said dictator is a sworn enemy of the United States and has been proven to support our enemies as Saddam Hussein did.

(2) When I said that the existence of elections in Iraq is a neutral event, I did not mean, and did not imply, that the elections would have happened in the absence of our occupation. They clearly would not have. What I said was that they are neutral from the perspective of U.S. interests. Elections by themselves do not advance U.S. interests. Whether U.S. interests are advanced depends on who gains power by virtue of the elections. I have yet to hear anyone explain how U.S. interests will be advanced by these elections if they end up installing in power a Shiite theocracy loyal to Iranian mullahs or worse. Does anyone have an explanation as to how that can be?

And this I disagree with, first on the basic premise and secondly on the likelihood of a Shiite theocracy coming to power. First of all free and fair elections are in U.S. Interests no matter where they are held. As a liberal I hold this as a core belief. I believe in the nature of free people to make wise decisions in the long run (yes I know our own elections sometimes call that into question) but somehow in the end everything seems to turn out ok.

I am sure you know Iraq is one of if not the most secular country in the Middle East. This alone greatly diminishes the likelihood of a theocracy emerging. In fact the early returns from these historic elections seem to show secularists getting a significant percentage of votes. Why don’t we wait until we hear the final results, and see what coalition government is formed before taking firm positions on this one?

(3) If democracy is intrinsically helpful to U.S. security, do you actually favor taking steps to rid countries like Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan and Saudi Arabia of their unquestionably dictatorial but intensely pro-U.S governments and replace them with a democratically elected government which is almost sure to be anti-American if not outright sympathetic to, and cooperative with, Muslim extremists?

Yes I do. I do not believe in real politic I think it was one of the most shameful policies of our history.

This is not the cliched argument that is often advanced to demonstrate the hypocrisy of the Bush Administration’s pro-democracy rhetoric. It is a genuine question about whether we really are willing to commit ourselves to democracy in this region even if it means – as it almost certainly will – that U.S. interests will be harmed in the process.

Again I disagree with your basic premise and hope you can now admit you are not a classic liberal. Maybe we should start calling folks who argue as you have neo-liberals. You are all for democracy in the world as long as it is good for us. Let me turn your question around and ask you do you believe the United States should support dictators if it is in our national interest?

Please do not mistake me for some naive idealist. I do understand we can not fight every evil everywhere in the world simultaneously. However I strongly believe we are obligated as a nation to do what we can when we can.

The 20th Century is full of examples of governments which were initially elected democratically but then become despotic. Adolph Hitler is but one of many such examples. And there are plenty of democratically elected leaders who are anti-American today, with Hugo Chavez being the most prominent, but not only, example around today. The mere existence of a democratically elected government does not even remotely assure us that the government will be pro-U.S., and in the case of Shiite religious dominated Iraq, there is every reason to believe that it will not be.

Now again I have to question your knowledge of history or your intentions. Either you know this is untrue or you are willingly spreading propaganda in an attempt to advance your argument. Hitler did not rise to power Democratically.

Neither did Hugo Chavez. Now if you wish to be stubborn and insist they did, you have to at least admit they did not retain power Democratically.

Open Trackbacks today at: Third World County, The Land of Ozz, Is It Just Me,

Response from Glenn Greenwald of Unclaimed Territory

2005-12-18T09:56:00.000-08:00

I sincerely appreciate Glenn coming back to answer my reply to his original post at Unclaimed Territory. Britt Hume said something on Fox Sunday this morning that is very true. War brings out passions. Although Glenn and I are about as far apart as possible on this issue, I think we are both on the same side here in wanting our country to be safe from terrorism while maintaining our civil liberties.

Here is Glenn’s reply from the comments section. I have moved it to the main board simply because it deserves to be read:

I intended to answer this post in a post of my own but I blogged today about the NSA eavesdropping controversey and consequently did not have time to do so. But these are the points in reply I wanted to make:

(1) I did not say that pro-war advocates never mention Iraqi dead civilians killed by the U.S. military. I said they rarely mention it, which is undeniably true. And those who do mention it do so in order to dismiss it as a sufficient reason for opposing the war (or, as in your cites, to complain about the coverage it is getting).

It can’t be denied that 30,000 dead Iraqis packs a significant emotional punch. And it’s at least 30,000 dead, since that’s an American estimate. I’m not interested in bickering over the number or the identity of each of them. Other estimates from months ago put the number at 100,000 civilians, and the important point is that no matter what number you want to believe, it’s a huge amount of innocent Iraqi people who were killed by this war. Even pro-war advocates – perhaps especially them, since the war is purportedly being fought to liberate Iraqis – must feel some strong sense of sorrow and remorse over this huge number of deaths.

But the reason pro-war advocates are able to still favor the war despite the existence of huge numbers of dead Iraqi civilians is the same reason that I can oppose the war despite the emergence of democratic elections in Iraq – while it has a strong emotional effect, it does not, in itself, speak to whether the war is, on balance, a war that we ought to have fought or should keep fighting, particularly from the perspective of U.S. interests — which is, for me at least, what determines whether this war is a good idea.

(2) When I said that the existence of elections in Iraq is a neutral event, I did not mean, and did not imply, that the elections would have happened in the absence of our occupation. They clearly would not have. What I said was that they are neutral from the perspective of U.S. interests. Elections by themselves do not advance U.S. interests. Whether U.S. interests are advanced depends on who gains power by virtue of the elections. I have yet to hear anyone explain how U.S. interests will be advanced by these elections if they end up installing in power a Shiite theocracy loyal to Iranian mullahs or worse. Does anyone have an explanation as to how that can be?

(3) If democracy is intrinsically helpful to U.S. security, do you actually favor taking steps to rid countries like Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan and Saudi Arabia of their unquestionably dictatorial but intensely pro-U.S governments and replace them with a democratically elected government which is almost sure to be anti-American if not outright sympathetic to, and cooperative with, Muslim extremists?

This is not the cliched argument that is often advanced to demonstrate the hypocrisy of the Bush Administration’s pro-democracy rhetoric. It is a genuine question about whether we really are willing to commit ourselves to democracy in this region even if it means – as it almost certainly will – that U.S. interests will be harmed in the process.

The 20th Century is full of examples of governments which were initially elected democratically but then become despotic. Adolph Hitler is but one of many such examples. And there are plenty of democratically elected leaders who are anti-American today, with Hugo Chavez being the most prominent, but not only, example around today. The mere existence of a democratically elected government does not even remotely assure us that the government will be pro-U.S., and in the case of Shiite religious dominated Iraq, there is every reason to believe that it will not be.

Of course I disagree with most of what Glenn just said. I will reply to his comments tomorrow. I would also like to say that if you are a conservative who likes to read well said if not well reasoned arguments from the left, I strongly recommend stopping by Unclaimed Territory regularly.

More Bias at the BBC? / Open Trackback Weekend

2005-12-17T08:44:00.000-08:00

Well you tell me. Wednesday the BBC ran this story interviewing two former U.S. Soldiers serving in Iraq both had some critical things to say about our efforts and what conditions on the ground are. The problem is these two guys are completely unrepresentative of what the overwhelming majority of troops on the ground are saying. So why wouldn't the BBC at least offering a differing opinion or offer a disclaimer that these two men are the exception not the rule?

Here is an excerpt:

GR: "We are coming to a time now when we seriously need to think of withdrawal plans... I think that troops on the ground right now are instigating and motivating the insurgency to attack coalition forces rather than helping to keep the peace in Iraq, so I think that in a lot of cases we do need to draw down.

read the whole thing and then please you tell me was this article bias?

Trackbacked to: Stop The ACLU, Oblogotory Anecdotes, TMH's Bacon Bits, Stuck On Stupid, Adam's Blog, California Conservative, Diggers Realm, Point Five, Is It Just Me, The Uncooperative Blogger,

This is an open trackback post. If you have something interesting to share please leave a trackback but be sure to leave a link to this post in your post otherwise your trackback will be deleted. I will be checking in regularly and putting your trackbacks up on the main page as they come in all weekend.

TMH's Bacon Bits linked with Top Ten (Profound) News Headlines
Freedom Folks linked with Heartening, Yet Disheartening
The Right Nation linked with Sleepy Weekend Open Trackback
Peakah's Provocations linked with Sunday Open Post Extravaganza (yes he did this on Saturday I am Suing)

All Things Beautiful linked with Europe Thy Name Is Cowardice (editors note: I was going to link to this article myself, you must read the whole thing)

***Note*** This trackbacks were just added. something screwy going on with Haloscan. Even though they were sent yesterday I just saw them for the first time today. Sorry for the delay in getting them up folks:

The Florida Masochist linked with: The Knucklehead of the Day award
freedom folks linked with: Christmas Parody Songs
freedom folks linked with : Who Voted Mexico into Congress?
Adam's Blog linked with : Men of the Year

How Far Will the Defeatists Go?

2005-12-16T05:24:00.000-08:00

Well I may have found it. I was going to make this mornings post about the twits commenting at The Washington Monthly who can be every bit as vile as the Kos kids (thanks Decision 08 for compiling the top 10). However one of them was good enough to link to this post by Glen Greenwald on his blog Unclaimed Territory. I have intentionally avoided the non sequitors and straw men he raises in his article.

Other than the onslaught of insults there are quite a few inaccuracies in his post like this one:

Pro-war bloggers are almost always silent whenever the latest Iraqi police station is blown up or guests at another Iraqi wedding party are slaughtered by American bombs.

The intended pejorative aside, his claim is plain untrue. Bloggers who have supported the war in Iraq are usually the first ones to report on insurgent attacks or coalition operations. They also provide much greater detail and analysis of nearly every development in Iraq than the MSM. Unlike Mr. Greenwald I won't condemn lefty blogs I am unfamiliar with. Perhaps he could provide some links to the liberal blogger equivalents of Michael Yon, Major K, or Bill Roggio Iraq The Model, who are on the ground in Iraq providing first hand accounts.

Then he says this:

George Bush recently revealed that he believes that 30,000 Iraqi civilians have lost their lives as a result of this war -- 30,000 Iraqi civilians dead-- and I don’t recall
reading much in pro-war precincts about that

Now Mr. Greenwald seems like an intelligent fellow. (At least he has access to a good thesaurus). So such an obvious error as his this statement is either intentional or that of a delusional ideologue completely out of touch with reality. To quote the President and the article Mr. Greenwald linked to:

"I would say 30,000, more or less, have died as a result of the initial incursion and the ongoing violence against Iraqis,"

It doesn't say anything about civilians. The total includes Iraqi Military killed in the initial invasion; insurgents killed in the ongoing violence, and yes thousands of civilians killed by both unintentional collateral damage by coalition troops and who were specifically targeted by the insurgents / terrorists.

But Mr. Greenwald doesn't stop there he compounds his error/lie with the next line:

and I don’t recall reading much in pro-war precincts about that.

If he doesn't recall reading about it then either he never did any research, or he is simply a liar.

It was the bloggers that support the war who exposed the biased and incorrect headlines of MSM news organizations around the world. It was the topic of the moment, as is evidenced here, here, here, and here for example.

Let’s move on to the ridiculous with this line from Mr. Greenwald:

Democratic elections are not inherently helpful to American interests.

Far from original as numerous defeatists echoed the same line yesterday. Being that we are a Democratic country and knowing that democratic countries do not go to war with each other this statement is demonstrably wrong. Yes Mr. Greenwald Democratic Elections are inherently helpful to American Interests.

But lets be fair and put Mr. Greenwalds last comment in context it was followed with this:

Elections are what produced the intensely anti-American Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, not to mention the Chancellorship of Adolph Hitler. Iran itself has had parliamentary elections -- some legitimate and some not, and yet it remains the greatest Middle Eastern threat to American interests.

I have to wonder if he intentionally left out the word "Democratic" from the examples he provided knowing full well they were not.

and in his conclusion Mr. Greenwald had this to say:

it should not be a surprise that the only people yelling about these elections are the ones who want to dance around, cynically exploiting the emotions of yesterday, all in pursuit of some sort misplaced and unwarranted sense of vindication.

To which there is really only one rebuttal:

http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/uploaded_images/oo186-761084.jpg

Well as I was linking to Decision 08's Top 10 Kos Kid comments from yesterday I noticed he has some things to say about Mr. Greenwald as well. I would say great minds think alike but I don't want to insult Mark.

Iraq celebrates a New Democracy! / Moonbats Around The World Unite!

2005-12-15T07:33:00.000-08:00

Not because they really give a damn about Iraq one way or the other. Simply because they hate the United States so much. As you will see people around the world are predicting even actively rooting for a bloody civil war to justify their own pathetic cynical and racist views of the world.

Of course a 70+% turnout means nothing because the Americans chose the candidates and stopped large blocks of people from voting. Unless they are confusing Iraq with Iran these people are flat out insane.

This is one of the things I like about the BBC. For stories like this one they allow readers from all over the world to comment. Which I always find more interesting and valuable than the actual article. Here is a sample of reaction to the historic elections in Iraq Today:

The insurgency results from the reality of Iraq: that it is not a natural country, with a common culture, ethnicity, religion etc. It comprises 3 quite distinct groups. A loose federation is the most we can hope for. Even in prosperous, democractic UK the Irish, Welsh and Scots have been grumbling about their lot for centuries.
James, London

I'm from outside Iraq. I can't visualize Iraqis could accept the newly elected president if the election now held would be under some foreign influence and interference.Better it is to let the Iraqis run their election campaigns freely and have their favorite personality as their most suitable president to have the country back to their environment that they deserve and desire longingly!
ARShams
Creative Liivng Spirit, Hyderabad (Sindh), Pakistan

A never ending civil war has just begun, and Prez. Bush will go into history as the root cause.
Faiyaz, Glasgow

First off, where are the Iraqi responses here? Oh? Most don't have the technology to even READ this? Who would have thought. A few have responded you say? Well, most likely of an upper echelon, I doubt their opinion can count for the majority. Second, who are we, North American and Western European for the most part, to have any say in how successful this will be, and if it's the correct action? Have we been over there? Do we live there, under the military control of an invader? Yes, democracy is good, in places where it's feasible. However, democracy in some countries is like fitting a square into a circular hole.
Annie, Urbana, Il

This "election" is a sad joke in Iraq's history. A popular vote held in accordance to the whims and biases of this proud nation's imperialistic overlords and their regional puppets... This is indeed a powerful blow against the very concept of national sovereignty. This spreading of Western-style "democracy" and "freedom" to the non-Western world ought to be a sobering reminder to the rational peoples of this world that the Christian crusading zeal is, unfortunately, alive and well in our day and age.
Alexander
Alexandrovich, Portland, USA

We are not blinded, no. We can SEE what the US has done to this country, and we can see that the government the US has put in place is a joke, as are these elections. It's not that we don't want to see elections, but we want to see free and secure ones. Until the US puts its troops in Iraq under UN control, I won't support anything they US does there, no matter how well they manage to spin it. The Iraqis were infinitely better off under Saddam, and everyone with eyes can see it. Except the uncritically patriotic flagwaving Bushies, that is.
Jean, Paris

Here was my reply for the frog:

Congratulations to the people of Iraq! Shame on the people of Europe and the world who wish them failure.

Thank you To Jean for reminding me why I wouldn’t piss on france if it was on fire. You pathetic little pig.

For some reason the BBC moderator thought that was offensive and censored me.

Now the Chinese weigh in with great moral authority.

the foreign army should go out! otherwise ,the voting in Iraq is no use.the freedom is for the US TO kill the Iraq people,but for the Iraq people!Go out!the US.
shawn, beijing

YAH Its just like gunning down 20 peasants in a fishing village after taking their land to build a factory in errrrrr. Wait a minute not it isn’t.

But the comments weren’t all bad. Here are some from actual Iraqi’s:

I have voted back in Januray and I have voted in October and tomorrow I will
vote again.Iraq deserves a fair governemnt that rules by the law and only the
law and we will build this with our votes, sweat and blood with the help of our
friends in the US, UK and other coalition countries.Iraq will become a shining
beacon again and we will give whatever it takes to restore Iraq's position and
reputation among other nations as a nation of peace, prosperity and civilization.
Omar., Baghdad

Yes, I am Iraqi and I exercised my right last evening by casting my ballot. Yes, the Democratic process in Iraq is legitimate and Yes, we Iraqis say THANK YOU AMERICA and mostly a big thank you to all the American GIs who are in the line of fire to help the birthing of our Iraqi Democracy.
Hassan Hassan Hillawi, Toronto, Canada

I am an Iraqi and I voted here in London. The queue outside the polling station lasted for over an hour. Unlike last year’s elections, no groups are boycotting this time. Shias, Sunnis and Kurds all took part to get their voice heard.All eyes of the world are on these elections. The polling stations have been observed by all kinds of analysts and national observers, there’s no room for illegitimacy!
F Jawad, London, United Kingdom
And here are some heartwarming comments from people around the world who see history in the making.

Iraq has seen a new dawn free from terror and rustic medevial rule of the tyrrant.This is the new beginning where liberated Iraqis can live in peace. It is a first step, a milestone, towards the liberation of human race in the 21st century.Siddharth Gaur, New Delhi, India
I can't imagine how your mind works but as up to 71% of Iraqi people are going to vote it is a day for global celebration. It is their country which HAS been freed by the US and UK to chose their own way forward.After 30 years of tyranny it was always going to take time to re build - this is real life not a computer game.
Anon, UK
"Iraqis are electing their first full-term government since the US-led invasion in 2003" Come on BBC 71% of Iraqis believe this was a Libaration not invasion.Shaun, Nottingham It is a 'moral victry' for exploited Iraqi peoples & also a big victory for 'human liberty'Best of Luck
Debu, New Delhi

Lastly some very good advice from a commenter in Iran:

Salaam,
I have a simple but very important advice for the people of Iraq: Look at Iran carefully and don't repeat the mistakes we did after 1978 revolution. Religion must no must not be mixed with politics, with economy, with sport, with nothing except a person's own conscience.Thanks
Davoud, Iran

This is the story of the day arguably the story of the year so lots of folks are talking about it today in the blogosphere. As usual Alexandra from All Things Beautiful puts it all in perspective.
Clarity and Resolve has some moving comments from Iraqis.
The Glittering Eye has lots of links to photos and reports from Iraq.
Decision '08 has a great post called The Antidote To Terror.
Why would Zarqawi (and note also, many Arabic language media outlets) want people to be scared to vote? Surely they know the vast majority of votes in Sunni areas will go to people who want the U. S. out, and this is, after all, about the United States and its brutal policies, right?
read the whole thing.

Democracy Is Born Today!

2005-12-14T19:40:00.000-08:00

********Update**********

The polls are now closed and by the accounts at Iraq the Model it went very well. Turnout was high and other than a few mortars landing in the green zone this morning violence was minimal.

First I have to say the reporters at Iraq the Model did an amazing job!

Congratulations to the people of Iraq. Now the work begins.

Just like in Afghanistan before, history is about to be made in Iraq. I don't know about the rest of you but I could not stop the tears of joy from streaming down my face when I saw the pictures and read the comments from the people of Afghanistan who were so proud, and so moved by the process.

Yes the Iraqi people have already voted twice and the referendum on the constitution, and the vote for the interim government were historic in their own right, but those votes could almost be viewed as practice for this one. This time they are electing a government to a 4 year term. This almost certainly will be one of the most important days in Iraq's history for generations to come. The consequences of this vote will be felt around the world.

Our children will read about this in their history class.

If like me you can not wait for the 5 o'clock news, and don't trust the MSM in general then Iraq the Model and Pajamas Media are the places to be. Iraq The Model has eight correspondents based in eight different Iraqi provinces who will be submitting several waves of election updates and photos exclusive to Pajamas Media.

If you are religious please pray for the safety and wisdom of the Iraqi people, and our brave men and women in

Iraq

who have sacrificed so much to bring this day about.

Democracy is born today in the Middle East.

God bless and Godspeed to the people of Iraq.

USC Stinks Texas Will Crush Them Volume 5

2005-12-14T19:11:00.000-08:00

USC tailback LenDale White "I don't know nothing about Texas,"
Vince Young is the better open field runner here's something Bush never will be: 6-5, 230 pounds. Those are the dimensions of Vince Young. Bush? He's 6-0, 200. Don't think size matters in the open field? Think again. All things being equal, I'll take the guy who's 6-5, 230 pounds over the 6-0, 200-pounder, any day.
Vince Young's legs beat Matt Leinart's arm: I've seen it many times. You have, too. And get this: Young can do it all himself. That's what makes his legs more deadly than Matt Leinart's arm.
Mack Brown's a better recruiter than Pete Carroll: Guess which school ranks No. 1 in Rivals.com's 2006 recruiting rankings? That's right, it's Texas.
Horns would hook USC at neutral site: I've got your "neutral site" right here: Pasadena, Texas. Yep, play this game in Pasadena, Texas. Then we'd have ourselves a real y'allgame, and Texas wins going away.

hat tip to The Sporting News for some great reasons why Texas is gonna lay the smack down on USC in the Rose Bowl!

interesting reads 12.14.05

2005-12-14T05:38:00.000-08:00

Stop the ACLU has found yet another ACLU dirty deed.

In an age when local governments are consistently cash strapped, a local government has been carrying on a long standing tradition of plowing snow from parking lots for the town’s houses of worship. A practice which has been going on for as long as anyone in the community of Bellingham, Rhode Island can remember; until now.

A town resident, Ernest Godbout called the American Civil Liberties Union who in turn sent their customary threat letter. Upon review by the town’s legal counsel, it was advised that the town should end the practice. source

Captain Ed has this story on the New York Times yet again spreading rumor and innuendo.
There are two options Bias or incompetence. You decide.

This is all over the net today but Michelle Malkin has the freeze frame of Iraqi American Betty saying "Anybody who doesn't appreciate what America has done, and President Bush, let them go to hell!"

I don't think the DNC will be using her for any of their 2006 congressional campaigns.

Media Reality Check has a fantastic piece analyzing network coverage of happenings in Iraq.

Of course, those optimistic Iraqis don’t watch ABC, CBS and NBC every night. A new Media Research Center study of network evening news coverage of Iraq during October and November found the networks maintained the same negative approach
our team found during a review of Iraq news during the first nine months of 2005. In spite of a successful constitutional referendum in October, the start Saddam’s trial for mass murder, successful U.S. offensive campaigns along the Syrian border and the return of a number of cities and town to full Iraqi control, the networks continued to offer mainly downbeat coverage of the situation in Iraq.

Right Wing Nut House a great take on what to believe and not believe in polls. This looks like a cool blog in general btw I will be checking back.

Speaking as a Democrat I completely agree with Vodka Pundit in this take "So here's something to keep in mind this election year: Vote for hawks, not for parties."

The Last Goodbye

2005-12-13T06:12:00.000-08:00

This article was brought to my attention by a Vietnam Vet that I met over the internet on the same message board that inspired me to start this blog. I know him only as Docski (his handle on the forums). I am reposting this on the blog today with his permission. I have also asked him if he would like to make any comments about this article or the current war. I will follow up with another post after Doc and I speak.

Docski posted this after another regular on the board had made some vile comments about active duty military serving in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as insulting Vietnam Vets.

This was his introduction to the article:

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 know. 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.

Here is the article Doc posted for us:

The Last Goodbye By Lynne Duke

They lie in a pile on the red clay of Vietnam.

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, picked off or blasted apart for 12 hours by NVA snipers and grenades.

U.S. forces throw hellfire onto that hill. Jets crater the area. Gunships rocket enemy bunkers; Gatling guns fire 6,000 rounds per minute, pulverizing flesh and bone. And the napalm fires burn.

But the NVA is relentless. It turns chopper after chopper into Swiss cheese. One takes 182 hits, wounding the whole crew; in another, a pilot dies.

Suddenly a Huey flies in fast and low, just drops from the sky, slips in under a blanket of ferocious cover fire. The chopper slides onto the hilltop, within feet of the Marines. Ron Zaczek, a Marine crew chief, jumps out with a crewmate to haul the survivors aboard. It takes only seconds.

The young Marines are sprawled on the deck. Clarence R. Carlson and Steven D. Lopez are bloodied and dazed. Carl Friery is clinging to life. Zaczek tries in vain to stuff Friery's intestines back into his gaping abdomen. Then he just rocks him gently, whispering helplessly, "There, there. There, there."

The chopper struggles for lift. It skids and bounces, nearly crushing the four dead men on the ground. Zaczek remembers one face. Oddly clean, calm, facing the sky. Its blond eyelashes flutter as the Huey's rotor whips the air and finally lifts the bird.

The dead remain where they lie. It is the last time any Marine will see the bodies of Heinz Ahlmeyer Jr., James N. Tycz, Samuel A. Sharp Jr. and Malcolm T. Miller.

They recede into the distance, into the past, already a haunting memory. Vietnam's red earth has claimed them.

If they have had no proper burial, the spirits of the dead wander. That is what Buddhists believe. To bring them home, to put them to rest, the spirits must be guided -- with prayer, with incense.

So a villager from Huong Hoa district in South Vietnam placed burning incense around the mesa of Hill 665 on an April day in 2003 when the red earth would start disgorging its buried secrets.

Ahlmeyer. Tycz. Sharp. Miller. Today their families will finally mark their return.

For 38 years, their families have waited. They have waited for some physical remnant: a bone, a tooth perhaps, even just a dog tag. Something to bring them closure. Today they will have their wish, with full military honors for the fallen soldiers, at an Arlington National Cemetery ceremony that will end their uncertainty and close a bitter chapter of the Vietnam War.

Lost in the infamous hill battles of Khe Sanh, the missing men of Breaker patrol were among the many abiding mysteries of a war from which there are still more than 1,800 listed as missing in action.

The job of finding them was left to anthropologist Sam Connell, who specializes in the ancient civilizations of the Maya and Inca. He'd signed on with the Pentagon's Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command (JPAC) in 2002 to lead excavation teams. The work is a blending of archaeology and forensics, not unlike a criminal investigation. The search for remains is never simple, especially with the passage of time. Remains of almost 750 U.S. MIAs have been found since the Vietnam War's end. The cases that linger are the most challenging.

"So now," says Connell, "it's the cases like this, where you're on a cliff face or you're piecing together a more complex history."

Hill 665 was indeed complex -- a troubled place, its terrain disturbed.

Near the old demilitarized zone and the Laotian border, 665 had been bombed and cratered repeatedly. It had been picked over by scavengers searching for scrap metal or by bone traders looking for human remains to sell or barter.

The secrets of Hill 665 had eluded investigators for years. There had been but a few random clues and no dots to connect them.

U.S. officials in the capital, Hanoi, met with a steady flow of local people trying to sell information or human remains, though U.S. policy prohibits investigators from buying. Often, the clues offered little beyond the obvious: Someone died. But who? Where? In which battle?

And those questions weren't easy to answer, because the location of the Breaker incident was in dispute for several years. In 1993, a search was mounted, but it turned out that the coordinates were wrong and investigators found nothing.

The case was shelved until 1998 when a villager scavenging for metal found boots atop Hill 665.

But a backlog of hundreds of other Vietnam cases delayed the Breaker investigation. (Not to mention the 78,000 MIA cases from World War II or the 8,000 from the Korean War that JPAC is also investigating.) Delays were as simple, sometimes, as the weather: Investigative trips are limited to those few months each year that aren't in monsoon season.

Finally, in 2002, a test excavation was conducted atop Hill 665. It turned up a few boots.

"So I come in the next year thinking, 'Oh, they already have [their] boots,' " says Connell.

Launching a more extensive dig, "immediately I find three or four other boots. Then we began excavating, and I find 11 boots, which is more than the four men had."

The team also found C-ration containers, combs, toothbrushes, toothpaste tubes, bits of socks, artillery casings, sandbags.

The discoveries, at first, made no sense. Obviously, other battles had been fought there. Other U.S. troops had occupied that hill. (Later Connell would learn that the 101st Airborne Division had set up a firebase on Hill 665, unknowingly atop the Breaker patrol's remains.)

"In warfare," says Connell, "things are messy like that."

Connell's team hired about 50 villagers to sift the dirt through mesh screens that would tease out even the smallest fragment. They found snaps, a 1964 penny, cartridge casings, wing nuts, a battery, a ballpoint pen case, belt buckles, fragments of a plastic insect-repellent container.

And by the end of the two-week mission, the searchers also had found 31 individual teeth or tooth fragments, plus fragments of bone.

Connell could tell right away that the incisors did not have the shovel shape of Asian incisors. And dental fillings, which some of these teeth had, are not commonly found in the less developed world.

In Hanoi, a review panel of U.S. and Vietnamese experts agreed the teeth were American. The teeth fragments were stored inside evidence bags, placed in a flag-draped casket and flown to JPAC headquarters at Hickam Air Force Base in Hawaii. There, the JPAC laboratory would try to identify them.

Dear Mom, Dad and Sis: Well, I'm just fine. They took Hill 861 and 881 and things are beginning to quiet down. We can sit on our chairs out in the back of the tent and watch the jets and B-52s make the runs on 811.

Lance Cpl. Samuel A. Sharp Jr.'s last letter home to San Jose, Calif., sounds like a Vietnam picnic -- watching the bombing runs. It was dated May 7, 1967, as the infamous hill battles of Khe Sanh were ending.

He was 20 and tall, son of a Navy man, and a worshiper of John Wayne. He joined the Marines to be with Ed, his best friend. From Vietnam, he sent his little sister a fiver for her 18th birthday. Janet Caldera, 56, of Spokane, has kept it all these years. Love, frozen in time.

Dear Mom and Pop . . . Our company has been hit pretty hard, too, with casualties; 100 percent casualties in one of our eight-man patrols hit by mortars while waiting for helicopters to pick them up. . . . Mom and Dad, I have had opportunities to write sooner than tonight, but I hope you will understand that writing about an unpopular war like this one is not easy. . . . I had an interruption just now. Our lieutenant passed me the word that we go in at 7:30 a.m. tomorrow. None of us want to go, but that's our job and I pray I will never fail to do it. Your Marine Son, Neil.

Sgt. James Neil Tycz was a soldier's soldier. The men trusted him. He knew the jungle, had been on several patrols. Back home in Milwaukee, he ran cross-country, played some tennis. He'd thought of becoming a priest. In Vietnam, he sometimes led the men in prayer before they departed on patrols.

Tycz's last letter arrived home in Milwaukee on May 9, 1967. He died the next day, at age 22.

They all have their stories, these families. They are wonderful in their ordinariness, precious with each recollection.

How Navy Petty Officer 3rd Class Malcolm T. Miller, the hospital corpsman, didn't have to be there in Vietnam, could have avoided it by taking advantage of the sibling rule, since he had an older brother already stationed at Tan Son Nhut, says their sister, Sandra Miller Keheley, of Madison, Ga. (His brother, Air Force Sgt. Wes Miller, returned home alive.)

Second Lt. Heinz Ahlmeyer Jr., a graduate of the State University of New York at New Paltz, had completed Officer Candidate School when he was shipped to Vietnam. Hill 665 was his first patrol.

Guts and devotion were his defining traits, says his big sister, Irene Healea, of Watertown, Tenn. Since his death, SUNY New Paltz has given out an award each year in his name, for a student with just those attributes.

The families received their telegrams long ago, confirming the deaths and the Marines' inability to recover their remains. The families held their memorial services. They gathered up their memories and assembled them in photo albums, on walls, in keepsake chests. They carried their heartache. The years did not erode their longing, their unspoken wish that it was a mistake.

"In the early days, after the war ended, anytime prisoners of war were brought home you'd always hope," says Tycz's older brother, Phillip D. Tycz, 62, of Plano, Tex. "You're told it's a definite killed in action, but until you have remains, you never know."

The Vietnam War mushroomed into a broad social and political force. But for these families, it remained deeply personal. They received briefings over the years from JPAC or its predecessor agencies. They knew the contours of the search, its ups and downs.

Life went on. And yet they remained emotionally tethered to Hill 665, Khe Sanh, 1967.

For Keheley, when the phone call came earlier this year with word that the remains had been positively identified, it was as if her brother had died all over again.

"I had to leave work. I couldn't deal with it," says Keheley. "I thought after all these years it would be easy. But it's like knowing that someone you love is dying and even when the time comes it's still hard to take. That's how it was. I just started crying, and I had to go home."

They roll themselves in their ponchos and sleep in a circle in the tall grass. One man keeps watch.

Technically, they accomplished their mission: Put down on Hill 665 by chopper at 5 p.m. on May 9 to check enemy movement into the area. Breaker patrol had radioed back to the Khe Sanh base that it had found a series of empty but recently used NVA bunkers and spider holes, perhaps for a company-size contingent.

That's well over 100 men. And they are only seven.

They could have left the area and hunkered down elsewhere. But they didn't. And around 10 p.m., the NVA return. They walk right up to Breaker patrol's position. Pfc. Lopez sees them.

"They walked up to the side of the circle that I was facing, and the first one or two people that came in, I shot them," recalls Lopez, now 56, seated in his kitchen in La Plata, uncomfortably recalling events he's rarely spoken about in 38 years.

Hill 665 lights up and stays that way for 12 hours.

Ahlmeyer and Tycz get hit in the first volleys. Tycz was the patrol leader, showing the higher-ranking Ahlmeyer the ropes on his first patrol.

"Ahlmeyer was hit harder than Tycz and started moaning, and they threw grenades at the sounds," says Friery, now 59, on the phone from Longmont, Colo., where he lives on military disability after a long struggle with post-traumatic stress disorder.

The recollections of Friery and Lopez complement the account of the battle written by Lawrence C. Vetter Jr. in his 1996 book, "Never Without Heroes," about Marine recon units in Vietnam.

"Grenades were flying around and rolling right around the position," says Lopez, a radio man on the patrol, who today is a public school behavioral specialist.

Tycz, like them all, is throwing back grenades. One explodes near his head. Soon he is dead. Lance Cpl. Clarence R. Carlson takes shrapnel from the blast.

Both radios are hit. Carlson mixes and matches parts and rigs up a working unit. He starts calling for artillery support. He hands the radio off to Lopez, who is shot in the chest but stays on the air.

Sharp takes a round to the chest, too. Pfc. Friery crawls over to him. His best friend in Vietnam is beyond help. A grenade lands next to Friery. He throws it back and is hit with gunfire in the gut.

Then Miller, the corpsman, takes a round, gushing blood from a femoral artery. Carlson tries to stanch the flow from Miller's leg and another grenade blast wounds them both. Miller asks to be propped up with a gun, which Carlson does. And Miller slumps over. Dead.

All ears in the region are on the Hill 665 radio traffic. Marines back at the Khe Sanh base are virtually begging to be sent in to help the men of Breaker.

So many U.S. rockets and gunships are shooting at NVA positions on 665 that huge globs of damp jungle soil rain down on the patrol, recalls Friery, the other radio man. He passes out when he is hit again by another grenade.

Carlson and Lopez scrounge among the fallen for more ammunition. They pile the dead -- their own and the enemy's -- as a barricade around their position. They kill many NVA, says Lopez, but they are outmanned.

Carlson tries to throw a grenade, is shot in the arm, then drops the grenade and takes shrapnel in the back when he tries to dive away from it. He injects himself with morphine. Then he is shot in the leg.

The NVA troops are so close that Lopez can hear them talking, hear them dragging their dead through the tall grass. He is calling in air support all the while.

"Drop it closer! Drop it closer," he was quoted as saying in a wire dispatch in The Washington Post on May 11, 1967.

Though he doesn't remember all the details now, Lopez says, "I know that I asked for napalm. I was asking for anything I could get. And then I asked for more and more."

By daybreak, the fires are menacing.

"Scarface, this is Breaker," Lopez radios at one point, according to Ron Zaczek's 1994 book, "Farewell, Darkness." Lopez's pleading transmission would haunt Zaczek for decades: "We're burning. You gotta get us out. Scarface, you gotta get us out. We're burning up."

Lopez explains: "We were all pretty much engulfed in flame, but it wasn't a roaring inferno. It was spots of fire and you could negotiate it, if you were on your toes." A very big "if."

By the time Zaczek's Huey flies in, Lopez has chest, leg, head and abdomen wounds. Carlson is equally shot up and blasted. Friery is effectively disemboweled and will be hospitalized for nine months.

After the rescue, the Khe Sanh Marine command orders the all-out bombing of Hill 665.

The men received Purple Hearts, including the dead. Carlson was awarded the Silver Star; Lopez and Tycz won the Navy Cross.

The four flag-draped caskets arrived Sunday at Dulles International Airport on a United Airlines flight from Hawaii. Four hearses awaited them. Military escorts saluted.

The caskets of Ahlmeyer, Tycz and Miller each contained a folded green blanket. Wrapped inside were a few teeth, positively linked to each man by the JPAC. Atop the blanket lay a dress-blue uniform, pressed and laid out with all their ribbons and decorations. Sharp's remains were put to rest beside his father last month in San Jose. The fourth casket at Dulles represented the group, and held teeth and bone fragments found on Hill 665 that were circumstantially linked to the four men.

The hearses left Dulles in a convoy, carrying the dead from a long-ago war.

The caskets will be interred today at Arlington National Cemetery.

Friery planned to be there today. Lopez said he, too, would go. Other men of Alpha Company, 3rd Reconnaissance Battalion, 3rd Marine Division, have looked forward to this event for weeks, and so have Zaczek and those who manned the gunships for the Breaker rescue. Mission accomplished, they want to say: Breaker patrol is home. They want to put to rest their private demons from Hill 665, too.

From each family, scores of relatives and friends have come. They will receive the folded flags and hear the volleys of rifle fire, the sounding of taps.

They have waited so long. So long to say goodbye. Again.

I will never have the opportunity to meet these men and thank them. Hopefully I will get to meet Doc one day in person and thank him for his service.

If you know any vets, or activy duty, or if you see a soldier, airman, sailor,marine , or coastgaurdsman, on the street, or at the mall please thank them for their service.

Trackedback at Wizbang for their Saturday Carnival.

Ted Rall Scumbag / Liberal Reaction To His Bile

2005-12-12T07:50:00.000-08:00

So I found a link to this article by Ted Rall over at Right Wing News. Needless to say when I read it I was livid. Here is an excerpt but please read the whole thing:

Soldiers, they say, must obey orders. However, "just following orders" wasn't an acceptable excuse at the Nuremberg trials, where the charges included waging a war of aggression. Do our government's poorly paid contract killers deserve our "support" for blindly following orders?

...What are members of the military to do? They should certainly refuse to applaud when Bush uses them as backdrops to his logo-ridden pro-death pep rallies. Moreover, just as Muslim leaders were pressured to speak out against Islamist extremists after 9/11, soldiers ought to step forward to condemn the atrocities at Bagram, Fallujah and Guant�namo in letters to newspapers and other public venues.

The military used to be an honorable calling. Not under Bush. Ethical Americans considering a military career should seek a civilian job until a lawful, elected government has been restored in Washington and we have withdrawn our forces from occupied Afghanistan and Iraq. Those who are already enlisted should refuse to reenlist. Soldiers trapped by "stop loss" orders should apply for conscientious objector status (which is difficult to obtain) or refuse deployment based on the unlawful order principle. And if all else fails, there's always desertion."

I was going to post a blistering screed calling Rall every name in the book and pointing out once again what was wrong with the left today. But I was watching pre-game football stuff and put it off for a while. After I had cooled down I thought it might be more interesting to hear what bona fide liberals thought of this article. In other words not traditional Liberals like me. So I emailed 3 that I have read, or linked to and this is what they had to say.

Marc Cooper:

“I put Rall in the same category as Ann Coulter... don’t take him seriously enough to engage him. He's a blabbering fool. ”

Well said Marc.

From The Scribe:

This writer, in my opinion, represents an extreme left wing view not shared by many of the liberals I know. I am opposed to this war and have been from the beginning. I think that it is indeed possible to support the troops and oppose the war; additionally I think it’s possible to not support the president and this administration, but still support the soldiers.

I found the ideas expressed in this article to be unrealistic and unreasonable. Too much burden is placed upon the soldiers who are trained to follow orders without question. I agree that soldiers should refuse to obey to clearly immoral orders; short of that, they have to use their best judgment. The responsibility for engaging in a war is the responsibility of our leaders. The average soldier, especially at the “grunt” level, cannot be expected to weigh all the profound philosophical, ideological, ethical and legal issues surrounding a military action they’ve been deployed to.

I do not agree with the premise or the general assertions made by the author. It certainly does not represent my views or the views of those around me, even if we do oppose the war.

Great job Scribe.

Finally John from Salems Lots had this to say:

My opposition to Iraq lies in different coordinates from Mr. Rall. I view the war in Iraq as a geo-political mistake. After we leave, the theocracy evolving from a Shiia takeover will align with Iran, making a true terror-supporting state that much more powerful. The civil war that will occur after we leave will result in many more deaths and a destabilized region.

Does this mean that our troops are evil thugs that should desert the cause? Does this mean that we can’t or shouldn’t support our troops? Of course it doesn’t mean that, despite the fact that there are thugs – small in number – among our troops who have set our cause back by torture and degradation of prisoners.

Our troops have done and will continue to do wonderful things. Mr. Yon’s blog is a testimony to the true nature of what our men and women are largely about. There is a perceived disconnect between lack of support of the war, and support for our troops, but I believe that there are many of us who pray for, and support every man and woman over there without believing in the war itself.

Our troops overall have been doing a good job in a horrible situation. I admire the vast majority of troops who do not only NOT torture, but believe in the Iraqi people and the cause. I also admire the soldier mentioned in Rall’s article that refused to follow the order to shoot what probably were just normal Iraqi citizens. The administration has placed these troops in a horrible situation. If we stayed there 20 years or 50 years, we could continue to do a lot of good, but sadly our presence there is often impetus for terrorism (not from our folks), but for those people who will gladly give up their lives to rid the middle east of any vestige of American influence.

On broad terms, I agree with Rall’s opposition to the war, but I couldn’t disagree any more with his premise that the troops are war criminals. When history is written many years from now, I honestly believe the criminals will be found in the halls of this administration who have managed to line the coffers of corrupt contractors and war profiteers. Sadly, those people will be living off the spoils of the war, while the veterans will remain underpaid and under-appreciated, and even worse, the people of Iraq will still be wondering just what the hell happened.

Now while John responds with the most extreme view of the three folks I asked to comment, hopefully you agree he falls far short of the moonbat whacko Rall. The problem is Rall is the guy who gets his articles and his infamous comics published in major newspapers every week. I do think its safe to say he is not representative of the mainstream left. So the next question is why is this guy still employed by major MSM outlets?

I invite any of you who consider yourselves to be on the left to comment and tell us if Ted Rall speaks for you.

Tracked Back to: MacStansbury, Bloggin Outloud, Third World County, Land of Ozz, Right Wing News,

Right Wing of the Gods isn't very impressed with Mr. Rall. I hope the responses above make him feel a little better.

Conservative Dialysis also has comments on Mr. Rall's article.

There is No Doubt Of Links Between Saddam and Al Qaeda

2005-12-10T12:25:00.000-08:00

Again kudos to Elendil for a thoughtful and well stated response to my previous post. In your reply you plead ignorance to some basic facts about the ties between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Hopefully after reading this that objection will be removed. I warn you now the post will be long simply because the evidence of ties between the two are extensive. I will not list every bit of evidence but hopefully this will give you an idea of just how much information there truly is.

Please also understand that nowhere do I claim that “ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda proves or even suggestions Iraq had any involvement in the attacks on our country on 9/11.” I also find that point to be irrelevant to the basic disagreement between the hard core left and people like myself.

core left and people like myself.

I am not familiar with all the items that you list, and that's probably half the issue. There has been a polarisation in the discourse, so that while I've heard, for example, of Saddam paying compensation to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers,

Good so you at least acknowledge that Saddam supported some terrorists. That is important and relevant in showing his lack of compunction in doing so.

I had not heard of any phone records. I don't think it would be honest of me to say that's simply because I don't have full access to American media. We are all subject to confirmation bias, whether we admit it to ourselves or not, and very few of us have the time to keep up with these issues.

Well let’s start here. If you wish to speak intelligently on this issue you need to read The Connection by Stephen F. Hayes.

It is extremely well sourced and is quite compelling. I will tell you now the typical leftist response is “he is a right wing hack” or something of that nature. Mr. Hayes is no doubt on the right. What they never address are the actual facts contained in the book. All of his sources are provided and consist of agencies like The CIA, DOD, DIA, Senate Intelligence Committee, and numerous ranking officials of foreign governments and their intelligence services. There are literally dozens of documented links between Iraq and Al Qaeda covered in the book in great detail like this story in chapter 10 which you have not yet heard.

On October 2 2002 shortly before 8:30 pm Sergeant first class Mark Wayne Jackson and a fellow Special Forces soldier stopped at a café and karaoke bar just outside the gate of camp Enrile Malagutay located near Zmboanga city in Mindanao, an island in the southern Philippines. Leaders from the terrorist group from Abu Sayyaf one week earlier promised a campaign of terror aimed at the “enemies of Islam” westerners and Filipinos who make common cause with them. Abu Sayyaf has long been affiliated with Al Qaeda and was founded with the help of Osama bin Ladens brother in law. Al Qaeda supported the group with cash and trained its fighters in Afghanistan.

No one paid much attention to a Young Filipino man when he parked his Honda motorcycle in front of the cafe and began examining its tank. Seconds later a homemade bomb inside the motorcycle exploded killing the motorcyclist instantly. The front of the café was blown away. Six nearby stores were damaged. Sergeant Jackson was killed and his companion seriously wounded.

Eyewitnesses identified the bomber as a member of Abu Sayyaf.

Exactly one week after the attack Filipino authorities found an unexploded bomb on the playground of the san Roque Elementary school also in Zamboanga city. The bomb was to have been detonated by a cell phone. Filipino investigators analyzed the calls to and from that phone. Several piqued their interest, including calls to and from two Abu Sayyaf leaders. One call that stood out had been placed seventeen hours after the bombing that killed sergeant Jackson to an Iraqi intelligence agent named Hisham Hussein who was working as the second secretary at the Iraqi embassy in Manila.

On February 14^th 2003 Hisham Hussein was asked to leave the Philippines for conduct incompatible with his diplomatic status. Officials there had been watching him for months and stepped up their monitoring after discovering his contacts with Abu Sayyaf. “He was surveiled and we found out he was in contact with Abu Sayyaf and also pro-Iraqi demonstrators.” Says a Philippine government source. Philippine intelligence was able to monitor their cell phone calls. Abu Sayyaf leaders called Hussein right after the bombing. They were always talking”

Andrea Domingo, immigration commissioner for the Philippines, said “studying the movements and activities of Iraqi intelligence assets in the country including radical Islamists, revealed an established network of terrorists headed by Hisham Hussein. A subsequent analysis of Iraq embassy phone records indicated that Hussein had been in regular contact with Abu Sayyaf leaders both before and after the Zamboanga city bombing.

Hamsinaji Sali, an Abu Sayyaf Leader had claimed that Iraq had provided the group with arms and funding. 1 million pesos (about $20,000) each year since 2000.

Hussein also met with members of the New Peoples Army a communist opposition group included on the State Department’s list of foreign terrorists groups, in his office at the Iraqi embassy. The Philippine national Police later uncovered documents in an NPA compound that is says prove the Iraqi embassy had provided funding for the group.

Two additional Iraq embassy employees were expelled days later, as were several Iraqi nationals suspected of collaborating with Islamic terrorists.

Mathew Daley U.S. Deputy assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs articulated the concerns about Abu Sayyaf in congressional testimony on March 26, 2003. We’re concerned that they have what I would call operational links to Iraqi intelligence services. ….there is good reason to believe that a member of the Abu Sayyaf Group who has been involved in terrorist activities was in direct contact with an IIS officer in the Iraqi Embassy in Manila”.

I hope you found that informative.

Now on to the next point.

The other items you list do not strike me as compelling evidence of a link between the Saddam regime and Al Qaida. Saddam's praise for the attacks could be more about his dislike for America than his liking of Al Qaida. The existence of AQ people travelling freely in Iraq does not necessarily imply that they were welcome there. ... but the _underlying_ reason why they are not compelling is a bit more complicated.

Let’s dissect this paragraph.

The other items you list do not strike me as compelling evidence of a link between the Saddam regime and Al Qaida.

You are absolutely correct but when added to the countless other items linking Saddam to Al Qaeda they are undeniable.

Saddam's praise for the attacks could be more about his dislike for America than his liking of Al Qaida.

Again true. However this is one of the grand understatements in history. Saddam was a sworn enemy of the United States. On his orders American and allied planes enforcing the “no fly zones “in northern and southern Iraq were fired upon regularly for over 12 years. Saddam ordered the assassination of a former president of the United States.

From Inconvenient Facts by Stephen F. Hayes:

* Later that same month--March 1993--Wali al Ghazali was approached by an Iraqi Intelligence officer named Abdel Hussein. Ghazali, a male nurse from Najaf, met another IIS agent named Abu Mrouwah who gave him an urgent mission: assassinate former President George H.W. Bush on his upcoming trip to Kuwait. On April 14, Kuwaiti police found Ghazali and other Iraqi Intelligence assets with two hundred pounds of explosives in a Toyota Landcruiser. Ghazali, the would-be assassin, told a Kuwait court that he had "been pushed by people who had no mercy." He said: "I fear the Iraqi regime, the Iraqi regime pushed me."

And then:

The existence of AQ people travelling freely in Iraq does not necessarily imply that they were welcome there

Only to someone completely ignorant of the facts:

Abu Musab al Zarqawi traveled to Iraq in May 2002. He lived in Baghdad with the knowledge--and perhaps sponsorship--of the Iraqi regime. A passage from p. 337 of the Senate Intelligence Committee report cites a CIA report called Iraqi Support for Terrorism: "A variety of reporting indicates that senior al Qaeda terrorist planner al Zarqawi was in Baghdad [redacted]. A foreign government service asserted that the IIS knew where al Zarqawi was located despite Baghdad's claims it could not find him." More, from p. 338: "Al Zarqawi and his network were operating both in Baghdad and in the Kurdish-controlled region of Iraq. The HUMINT reporting indicated that the Iraqi regime certainly knew that al Zarqawi was in Baghdad because a foreign government service gave that information to Iraq."

Let’s move on to your next point.

Many leftwing commentators stated that the link would be unlikely for practical and ideological reasons. Rather than quote Juan Cole at you, I'll give you the words from DITSUM 044-02 itself, where the DIA opined "Saddam’s regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements. Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control."

With this belief in place, the leftwinger sees the list above as circumstantial evidence, perhaps supporting, but definitely not proving the link. There's a higher weight of evidence required to convince someone of something they think is unlikely.

Without questioning the motives behind leftwing commentators reasoning, competence or reporting, there is ample evidence, easily available, and frequently reported, of Saddam cooperating, supporting and promoting “Islamic Revolutionary Organizations”. I.e. giving money to Islamic Jihad, Hamas, The Islamic Brotherhood, Abbu Sayyaf as the previously unknown to you story revealed.

Saddam Hussein hosted regular conferences for terrorists in Baghdad throughout the 1990s. Mark Fineman, a reporter for the Los Angeles Times, reported on one such gathering in an article published January 26, 1993. "There are delegates from the most committed Islamic organizations on Earth," he wrote. "Afghan mujahideen (holy warriors), Palestinian militants, Sudanese fundamentalists, the Islamic Brotherhood and Pakistan's Party of Islam." One speaker praised "the mujahid Saddam Hussein, who is leading this nation against the nonbelievers. Everyone has a task to do, which is to go against the American state."

So can we dismiss the idea of Saddam being reluctant to support Islamic Fundamentalists?

Then there's the issue of suspicion....

The left generally suspects that the Administration had ulterior motives in invading Iraq. When they observe that the threat WMD from Iraq was vastly overestimated, they will likely conclude that the latter was a consequence of the former. The issue of an AQ-Iraq connection is viewed as another part of this deception, and is doubted in much the same way.

I should say on the issue of "deception" that there is a strong current of thought in leftwing circles that the Administration behaved like lawyers rather than scientists. i.e. they reached their conclusion first, and then found the evidence to support it second, rather than the other way around. This runs the gamut from "they believed their own bs" to "they lied". (For the record, I am in the former group.) It also finds expression in the phrase "reality-based community", which is a rejection of the idea that one should conduct foreign policy in this way.

Again I do not question your sincerity but this time I will absolutely question the sincerity of the left in general especially those “in the know” who had reported the Iraq Al Qaeda connection as a given for years. The same is true for President Clinton’s administration.

* The Clinton administration cited an "understanding" between Iraq and al Qaeda in its 1998 indictment of Osama bin Laden. "Al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq."

As you can see the connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda was known and openly cited long before George W. Bush came in to office. So you may be suspicious of GWB’s motives (which also is illogical but that is an entirely different argument) but hopefully this canard that he invented the Al Qaeda Iraq connection can be put to rest.

No the bias was in favor of Al Libi’s testimony corroborating similar intelligence already in hand.

Bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee Report (p. 331):
"Twelve reports received [redacted] from sources that the CIA described as having varying reliability, cited Iraq or Iraqi national involvement in al Qaeda's [chemical, biological, nuclear] CBW efforts."

Take particular note of this other than Al Libi there are 11 other sources citing Iraq cooperating with Al Qaeda on WMD.

The only logical conclusion when your mission is protecting the lives of 300 million Americans from two sworn enemies who have both vowed to do everything in their power to destroy United States is one of caution and believing the worst of our enemies.

Now I promised you numerous links and here they are from Stephen F. Hayes article in the weekly standard Inconvenient Facts:

On March 28, 1992, the Iraqi Intelligence Service compiled a 20-page list of terrorists the regime considered intelligence assets. Atop each page was the designation "Top Secret." On page 14 of that list is Osama bin Laden. The Iraqi Intelligence document reports that bin Laden "is in good relationship with our section in Syria." The document has been vetted and authenticated by the Defense Intelligence Agency. The existence of the document was first reported on CBS's 60 Minutes. It has been widely ignored.

Saddam Hussein hosted regular conferences for terrorists in Baghdad throughout the 1990s. Mark Fineman, a reporter for the Los Angeles Times, reported on one such gathering in an article published January 26, 1993. "There are delegates from the most committed Islamic organizations on Earth," he wrote. "Afghan mujahideen (holy warriors), Palestinian militants, Sudanese fundamentalists, the Islamic Brotherhood and Pakistan's Party of Islam." One speaker praised "the mujahid Saddam Hussein, who is leading this nation against the nonbelievers. Everyone has a task to do, which is to go against the American state."

* Abdul Rahman Yasin is an Iraqi who mixed the chemicals for the bomb used in the first World Trade Center attack on February 26, 1993. We know this because he has confessed--twice to the FBI and once on national television in the United States. He fled to Iraq on March 5,1993, with the help of an Iraqi Intelligence operative working under cover in the Iraqi Embassy in Amman, Jordan. A reporter for Newsweek interviewed Yasin's neighbors in Baghdad who reported that he was living freely and "working for the government." U.S. soldiers uncovered Iraqi government documents in postwar Iraq that confirm this. The documents show Yasin was given both safe haven and financing by the Iraqi regime until the eve of the war in Iraq.

According to numerous press reports, the deputy director of Iraqi Intelligence, Faruq Hijazi, met face-to-face with Osama bin Laden in 1994. Bin Laden asked for anti-ship mines and al Qaeda training camps in Iraq. There is no indication that Iraq made good on his requests.

That same year, according to internal Iraqi Intelligence documents authenticated by the U.S. intelligence community and reported in the June 25, 2004, New York Times, a Sudanese government official met with Uday Hussein and the director of Iraqi Intelligence to facilitate the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda.

According to the New York Times, the same Iraqi Intelligence document said that bin Laden earlier "had some reservations about being labeled an Iraqi operative" and that "presidential approval" had been granted to the Iraqi Intelligence service to meet with him. Bin Laden "also requested join operations against foreign forces" in Saudi Arabia. At bin Laden's request, Saddam Hussein also agreed to broadcast on Iraqi television sermons of an anti-Saudi cleric.

* The 9/11 Commission reports that Iraq and al Qaeda had a series of "friendly contacts" that did not appear to have developed into a "collaborative operations relationship." The final report provides details of meetings between senior Iraqi Intelligence officials and al Qaeda terrorists throughout the spring and summer of 1998 and indicates that "Iraqi official offered bin Laden a safe haven in Iraq."

The offer of asylum was also included in the Senate Intelligence Committee's unanimous, bipartisan review of prewar intelligence. From p. 335 of the Senate report: "A [CIA Counterterrorism Center] operational summary from April 13, 1999, notes four other intelligence reports mentioning Saddam Hussein's "standing offer of safe haven to Osama bin Laden."

This, from p. 316 of the Senate Intelligence Committee report: "From 1996 to 2003, the [Iraqi Intelligence Service] focused its terrorist activities on western interests, particularly against the U.S. and Israel. The CIA summarized nearly 50 intelligence reports as examples, using language directly from the intelligence reports. Ten intelligence reports, from multiple sources, indicated IIS 'casing' operations against Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty in Prague began in 1998 and continued into early 2003. The CIA assessed, based on the Prague casings and a variety of other reporting, that throughout 2002 the IIS was becoming increasingly aggressive in planning attacks against U.S. interests."

* Page 331 of the Senate report: "Twelve reports received [redacted] from sources that the CIA described as having varying reliability, cited Iraq or Iraqi national involvement in al Qaeda's CBW [chemical and biological weapons] efforts."

* Abu Musab al Zarqawi traveled to Iraq in May 2002. He lived in Baghdad with the knowledge--and perhaps sponsorship--of the Iraqi regime. A passage from p. 337 of the Senate Intelligence Committee report cites a CIA report called Iraqi Support for Terrorism: "A variety of reporting indicates that senior al Qaeda terrorist planner al Zarqawi was in Baghdad [redacted]. A foreign government service asserted that the IIS knew where al Zarqawi was located despite Baghdad's claims it could not find him." More, from p. 338: "Al Zarqawi and his network were operating both in Baghdad and in the Kurdish-controlled region of Iraq. The HUMINT reporting indicated that the Iraqi regime certainly knew that al Zarqawi was in Baghdad because a foreign government service gave that information to Iraq."

* More recently, Hudayfa Azzam, the son of bin Laden's longtime mentor Abdullah Azzam, told Agence France Presse that the Iraqi regime worked closely with al Qaeda in Iraq before the war. "Saddam Hussein's regime welcomed them with open arms and young al Qaeda members entered Iraq in large numbers, setting up an organization to confront the occupation," he said in an interview published August 29, 2004. Azzam added that al Qaeda fighters "infiltrated into Iraq with the help of Kurdish mujahideen from Afghanistan, across mountains in Iran" and that once they arrived, Saddam "strictly and directly" controlled their activities.

Page 176 the connection.

Barham Salih, Prime minister of the Kurdish Regional Government in Sulaimaniya lost 5 of his body guards in an assassination attempt on his life by Ansar Al Islam in April 2002.

The normally soft spoken intellectual Salih when asked about the notion that Saddam did not support Islamic Radicals in Kurdistan “bullshit” he says. Yes they hate each other, but they are very utilitarian. Saddam A secular infidel to many jihadists, had no problem giving money to Hamas. This debate about whether Saddam worked with Al Qaeda is stupid. The proof is there.

Kurdish intelligence sources believe that the Iraqi regime supported Kurdish Islamic extremists for years. “It’s strictly utilitarian- they had no problem working together to take on the Big Evil and their Kurdish Surrogates” says Salih.

From Stephen F. Hayes No Terrorism in Iraq Before The War?

CIA Analysis, January 2003: Iraqi Support for Terrorism, (p. 314 of Senate Intel Report):
"Iraq has a long history of supporting terrorism."

CIA Analysis, January 2003--Iraqi Support for Terrorism, (p. 314 of Senate Intel Report):
"Iraq continues to be a safehaven, transit point, or operational node for groups and individuals who direct violence against the United States, Israel and other allies."

Bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee Report (p. 315):
"The CIA provided 78 reports, from multiple sources, [redacted] documenting instances in which the Iraqi regime either trained operatives for attacks or dispatched them to carry out attacks."

Bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee Report (p. 316):
"Iraq continued to participate in terrorist attacks throughout the 1990s."

Bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee Report (p. 316):
"From 1996 to 2003, the [Iraqi Intelligence Service] focused its terrorist activities on western interests, particularly against the U.S. and Israel."

Bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee Report (p. 316):
"Throughout 2002, the [Iraqi Intelligence Service] was becoming increasingly aggressive in planning attacks against U.S. interests. The CIA provided eight reports to support this assessment."

The 9/11 Commission Report (p. 66):
"In March 1998, after bin Laden's public fatwa against the United States, two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraq Intelligence. In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with bin Laden."

Now you may ask if this information is so easily accessible why is this all coming from one man?

To which I would answer if this information is so easily accessible (and it is) why isn’t anyone else reporting on it when these absurd claims of no links between Iraq and Al Qaeda keep surfacing?

Even though they are less thorough or frequent or detailed Mr. Hayes is not completely alone in the dark.

One of the first WTC bombers was living in Iraq with support of Sadaam the day we invaded.

From CBS News:

Abdul Rahman Yasin is the only participant in the first attempt to blow up the World Trade Center in 1993 who was never caught. Yasin, who was indicted in the bombing but escaped,[b] was interviewed by CBS News' Lesley Stahl in an Iraqi installation near Baghdad last Thursday, May 23.[/b] Stahl's report appeared on 60 Minutes, Sunday June 2nd

From CNN News:

Abu Abbas, a convicted Palestinian terrorist who masterminded the 1985 hijacking of the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro on which a wheelchair-bound American was killed, was captured by U.S. Special Forces in the outskirts of Baghdad, U.S. Central Command said Tuesday

From Laurie Mylroie Saddam's Terrorist Ties:

Nonetheless, the director of Iraqi intelligence informed the palace that the vice chairman of Sudan's governing National Islamic Front would be sending a leader of Egyptian Islamic Jihad - a group headed by Ayman al-Zawahiri, who subsequently became Osama bin Laden's deputy - to Baghdad on a Sudanese plane carrying meat.

You will find several other articles from Ms. Mylroie in the link I Provided as well.

Now Again I have only supplied a small sample of the evidence that is publicly available. This obviously does not include the counless documents we will either never see or at least not see for many many years. I hope you agree with me that this is compelling, convincing, and the end of the argument about ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda.

Tracked back to: Is it Just Me, Otismaster, Choose Life, Stop The ACLU, The Uncooperative Blogger, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, Point Five, 10ft2ft, Adam's Blog, TMH's Bacon Bits, bRight & Early, Jo's Cafe, All Things Beautiful,

Thoughtful Response From The Left

2005-12-10T08:23:00.000-08:00

The comments to follow are from Elendil of Rummy's Diaries, who posted a very thoughtful comment to my last post. She is admitedly on the left and offered some very good explanations as to why folks of her persuasion do not believe in the ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda. I will follow up with a response on the main page shortly. For now here are her comments:

Okay, as the token leftist in the room I'll try to answer your question, as you seem to be sincerely interested in the answer.

I am not familiar with all the items that you list, and that's probably half the issue. There has been a polarisation in the discourse, so that while I've heard, for example, of Saddam paying compensation to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers, I had not heard of any phone records. I don't think it would be honest of me to say that's simply because I don't have full access to American media. We are all subject to confirmation bias, whether we admit it to ourselves or not, and very few of us have the time to keep up with these issues.

The other items you list do not strike me as compelling evidence of a link between the Saddam regime and Al Qaida. Saddam's praise for the attacks could be more about his dislike for America than his liking of Al Qaida. The existence of AQ people travelling freely in Iraq does not necessarily imply that they were welcome there. ... but the _underlying_ reason why they are not compelling is a bit more complicated.

Many leftwing commentators stated that the link would be unlikely for practical and ideological reasons. Rather than quote Juan Cole at you, I'll give you the words from DITSUM 044-02 itself, where the DIA opined "Saddam’s regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements. Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control."

With this belief in place, the leftwinger sees the list above as circumstantial evidence, perhaps supporting, but definitely not proving the link. There's a higher weight of evidence required to convince someone of something they think is unlikely.

Of course, it works the other way too. If you already think it's likely that Saddam and AQ would cooperate, then the items you list are seen as confirmation of this, and the circumstantial nature of them becomes less relevant.

Then there's the issue of suspicion....

The left generally suspects that the Administration had ulterior motives in invading Iraq. When they observe that the threat WMD from Iraq was vastly overestimated, they will likely conclude that the latter was a consequence of the former. The issue of an AQ-Iraq connection is viewed as another part of this deception, and is doubted in much the same way.

I should say on the issue of "deception" that there is a strong current of thought in leftwing circles that the Administration behaved like lawyers rather than scientists. i.e. they reached their conclusion first, and then found the evidence to support it second, rather than the other way around. This runs the gamut from "they believed their own bs" to "they lied". (For the record, I am in the former group.) It also finds expression in the phrase "reality-based community", which is a rejection of the idea that one should conduct foreign policy in this way.

The example of al-Libi then becomes a pointed lesson about this error. Because the Administration already had their conclusion, they only found what they had already decided was true. Even when presented with differing opinions from within, the selection bias was in favour of using the false testimony.

For those with the more extreme view (i.e. "they lied"), the use of the testimony despite knowing about contradictory evidence becomes more sinister. Perhaps they even tortured him specifically so that they could extract false evidence from him? I cannot really speak on that though, because although I've mused on it I've decided it's not very parimonious.

elendil

I have added her to my blog roll based on this comment and will be visiting her blog in the days to come to see what she has to say. The Purpose of Elendil's blog:

An archive of information on human rights abuses, prisoner abuse, and torture committed by the Coalition of the Willing in the Global War on Terror.

The Left Tries To Tell Us Again No Ties Between Iraq and Al Qaeda!

2005-12-09T08:27:00.000-08:00

There is a story in today’s New York Times with this headline:

Qaeda-Iraq Link U.S. Cited Is Tied to Coercion Claim

The left leaning blogs and moonbats are again clamoring with glee offering this as proof that “there were no links between Iraq and Al Qaeda”. Of course Daily Kos leads the way. What I do not understand is what these people can’t seem to understand.

The Connections between Iraq and Al Qaeda are well documented and voluminous regardless of the veracity of this particular story. Phone records don’t lie, Al Qaeda linked terrorists captured in Iraq days after the invasion are not a fantasy, Abu Mussab Al Zarqawi (the self proclaimed leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq) traveled freely from Afghanistan to Iraq and traveled freely within Iraq before the invasion. Saddam Hussein openly praised the attacks on 9/11. One of the first WTC bombers was living comfortably in Iraq long before the invasion.

These things are facts not in dispute. Now add the countless other sources which are not as concrete as the previously mentioned compiled by the CIA, DIA, DOD, and foreign governments and it is compelling evidence that only a fool would ignore.

So the question is why are they ignoring it? Are they really this stupid? Or do they hate George Bush in particular and Republicans in general so much that they would be willing to ignore the overwhelming evidence even to the extent of putting their own lives and the lives of every American at risk for it?

In their defense maybe it’s because they read the New York Times. This article as so many other NYT articles is poor reporting at best and intentionally misleading at worst. My belief is the latter.

Here is paragraph 5 from the article:

A government official said that some intelligence provided by Mr. Libi about Al Qaeda had been accurate and that Mr. Libi's claims that he had been treated harshly in Egyptian custody had not been corroborated.

So a high ranking Al Qaeda terrorist claims he was coerced. Is that a surprise to anyone?

You all know that in the Al Qaeda handbook, captured by British police in 2000 instructs all of their operatives to claim coercion and torture regardless of their treatment right?

You can read lesson 18 of the Al-Qaeda manual titled Military Studies in the Jihad Against the Tyrants here.

Let’s assume he was tortured by the Egyptians. I am certainly not beyond accepting that possibility. That by no means automatically discounts what Al Libi said.

Again the NYT story says so in throw away paragraph 5:

A government official said that some intelligence provided by Mr. Libi about Al Qaeda had been accurate

The article goes on for two pages misleading readers to believe charges by partisans like Senator Levin as fact. Insinuating that everything Mr. Libi said about Iraq’s ties to Al Qaeda was untrue. A reader who is justifiably dubious of the NYT may pick up on these numerous misrepresentations. A card carrying Bush hater on the other hand would just shake a finger and say “See I told you they made it all up!”

It truly is incomprehensible to me. Maybe a lefty can explain it. All I ask is please do not try to tell me that hard evidence that exists and is not in dispute does not exist. Please don’t tell me that Abu Sayyaf terrorists (a group linked to Al Qaeda in the Philippines) called Iraqi Intelligent agents to discuss when they were going bowling. Don’t tell me as Howard Dean did that Abu Mussab Al Zarqawi only came to Iraq after we invaded. Because if you do I can only conclude you are a liar or a fool.

I should mention that Poliblog has a very nice post on the issue of torture alone that is well said.

tracked back to: Third World County, Stray Dog, Adam's Blog, Is It Just Me?, Right Wing Nation, Stuck On Stupid,

Another Left Wing Whacko Pulls Hoax On MSM

2005-12-08T06:21:00.000-08:00

At least that’s what it looks like to me. Michelle Malkin has done a great job researching this story and what she has dug up definitely calls the professor’s original claims into question.

When I first heard the story I wondered why two Christians would beat the guy up. The bigotry he was spewing is pretty common these days. Well thanks to the likes of Michelle and Sean Gleeson who flat out says Mirecki is a liar and with a very funny post points out just how far fetched his story is.

What did they say, exactly? I guess it was something like, “This mild
assault is payback for your famously controversial opinions against us
fundamentalist Christians, Mirecki. Don’t let us catch you south of Lawrence
again.” Or maybe not. But I am forced to guess, because Mirecki won’t tell what
the men said to him.

In order to accept this story, you would have to believe that these two
rednecks were acquainted with the world famous Paul Mirecki, and recognized him
in the dark (the sunrise in Kansas that morning was 7:25), from behind, on a
rural highway. (Either that, or they were staking out this unknown stretch of
road, somehow knowing that Mirecki would aimlessly drive by, thinking of
things.) And that Mirecki drove himself to the hospital afterwards, without
remembering where the crime took place.

Just some basic stuff:

He can't identify the people who attacked him
He can't tell exactly where it happened. (or why he was in this general area)
He exaggerated the extent of his injuries
His story sound pretty hard to believe on its face (he gets out of his car to talk to two strangers who have been tailgating him for some time, one who is holding a large blunt object in the middle of no where)
Oh and professor Mirecki has resigned his chairman ship of the KU religious studies department.

Of Course the MSM has not reported any of the questions raised on the blogosphere.

Hopefully this fraud gets prosecuted just like former Claremont assistant visiting professor Kerri Dunn who was sentenced to a year in prison and fined $19,00 for faking a hate crime against her back in 2004. Just like this guy she was trying to raise publicity and sympathy for her whacko positions.

Maybe the MSM will report that. Unfortunately Mirecki did not report any property damage like Dunn did (her big mistake). Insurance companies don't mess around with frauds and that is surely why she was prosecuted. Otherwise she would have just faded from the headlines with supporters swearing her story was true.

Others reporting and talking about this story include: Doc Rampage who says the professor should provide a picture of his injuries, Rhymes With Right isn't buying the professors story, Hard Starboard is in wait and see mode, The Subjective Scribe seems to agree the Mirecki's story is fishy but doesn't miss the opportunity to bash Michelle for being dubious. I guess he went to the CBS school of it's fake but true? Of course Daily Kos is buying this frauds story hook line and sinker.

UN Fails Again

2005-12-08T05:05:00.000-08:00

Three Cheers for John Bolton. This is exactly why GWB sent John Bolton to the UN, to call them on their Fecklessness, hypocrisy, and corruption.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton issued a statement
Tuesday unequivocally condemning the bomb attack in the Israeli town of Netanya
that killed at least five people. The unusual action came after a U.S. attempt
to have the statement issued by the Security Council was rejected.

Diplomats attending the meeting say several Council members raised concerns
about language in the U.S.-drafted document. Ambassador Bolton, however, blamed
Algeria for quashing the measure by objecting to a passage urging Syria to close
offices of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, which claims responsibility for the attack. "Other governments had questions about particular language. We were perfectly prepared to engage in discussions about constructive suggestions, but Algeria categorically refused to name Syria and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad," he said.
The U.S. envoy later read the text of the statement to reporters, and lashed out at the Council for what he called "failing to speak the truth".

He said "you have to speak up in response to these terrorist attacks.
It's a great shame that the Security Council couldn't speak to this terrorist
attack in Netanya, but if the Council won't speak, the United States
will."

Wait Algeria refuses to name Syria and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad?

Islamic Jihad has claimed responsibility for the attack and promises more to come! Syria openly not only allows them have offices in Syria but financially supports them. And here was the reply from the anti-Semitic terrorist supporting / enabling members of the UN:

Algeria's U.N. Ambassador Abdallah Baali said he had objected to what he called a "lack of balance" in the U.S.-drafted statement. He noted that Russia and other countries had also raised concerns about the tone of the document.

In other words "it was only a bunch of Jews" that these murderers blew up. Balance? What Balance? A terrorist organization planned, executed, and bragged about killing innocent people. It is disgusting.

Does any one remember the hew and cry from the mealy mouthed Democrats on Boltons Nominations? They were so afraid of him "offending" members of the U.N. Well I AM OFFENDED WHEN TERRORISTS BLOW PEOPLE UP. The UN members who protect them need to be offended, they need to be shamed. If this does not stop either they or we need to leave the UN.

More on this story at Israpundit, Abracadabra, and Atlas Shrugs,

Also trackbacked to: Liberal Common Sense, THM's Bacon Bits, and Is It Just Me? ,

USC Stinks Texas Will Crush Them Volume 4

2005-12-08T04:50:00.000-08:00

More Lies From The Left!

2005-12-07T05:28:00.000-08:00

This morning I visited Blogenlust for the first time. Through a link on Memeorandum to his post Cognitive Dissonance Is Dead. The title fits but I do not think the author intended to be referring to himself.

Now I do not know if he is an misinformed nitwit or a liar but it has to be one of the two.

He begins his argument here:

One of the tenets of the administration’s pre-war rhetoric was the mantra that
Saddam Hussein gassed and tortured his own people, which of course he did. But, that fact was always contrasted to the ideals for which we stood, and for which
we would fight to bring to the Iraqi people. Verse
Two:

(Note blogenlust states he believes the accusations against Saddam to be true) He then quotes these remarks by the president in Oct. 2002.

"On Saddam Hussein’s orders, opponents have been decapitated, wives and mothers of political opponents have been systematically raped as a method of intimidation, and political prisoners have been forced to watch their own children being tortured.

America believes that all people are entitled to hope and human rights, to the non-negotiable demands of human dignity. People everywhere prefer freedom to slavery; prosperity to squalor; self-government to the rule of terror and torture."

So far so good, but here is where he goes off the track:

The force of the argument was such that even when no weapons of mass destruction were found, and the connections to al Qaeda were discredited, it could still stand on its own as reason enough to continue the fight.

Let’s address this lie first.

Did you ever read the 9/11 report sir? Did you ever read the Senate intelligence committee’s report addressing Saddam’s connections to Al Qaeda sir?

I direct you to conclusions 90 -99 on pages 26 and 27 in the link provided above. here are two of them:

Conclusion 94: The CIA reasonably and objectively assessed in Iraqi Support for Terrorism that the most problematic area of contact between Iraq and al_Qaida were the reports of training in the use of non-conventional weapons, specifically chemical and biological weapons. This if followed by approximately 3 lines of censored info.

Conclusion 95: The CIA’s assessment on safehaven 0 that al-Qaida or associated operatives were present in Baghdad and in northeastern Iraq in an area under Kurdish Control – was reasonable.

Have you ever heard of Abu Musab Al Zarqawi Sir?

You do know he traveled freely between Iraq and terrorist camps in Afghanistan long before the invasion of Iraq right?

Have you ever read this book by chance?

The Connections between Saddam and Al Qaeda are WELL DOCUMENTED. Maybe you believe an Abu Sayyaf terrorist called an Iraqi Intelligent in the Philippines shortly after detonating a bomb killing US Marines to go bowling that evening. That of course would make you a fool or a liar. To which do you plead sir?

Blogenlust goes on:

So, it was surprising to learn that even after the torturous regime of Saddam
Hussein had been disposed, we continued to torture Iraqis.

Now with all due respect Mr. Blogenlust please, please tell me you are able to make a distinction between the dictator Saddam ordering the decapitation, rape, and torture of children of his political opponents, and a small number of low level military personnel who humiliate their prisoners by forcing them to wear women’s clothing, or lay nude in a pile, or even intimidate them with dogs?

Or do you actually believe that this behavior is widespread in our military?

This is one of the most ludicrous charges of leftist propogandists. Are you one of them? or are you what they like to call a useful idiot?

Or hopefully you believe as I and most Americans do that all though these were no doubt not the only infractions conducted by US. military personnel they are also no doubt isolated incidents.

I would sincerely appreciate an answer to this question.

Even if these soldiers were under the direct order of the president (and I do not believe nor accept that ever occurred) there is no comparison between the two. NONE.

Do we agree sir?

Do you acknowledge that the soldiers found to have committed these acts have been prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law?

And to answer your final question sir:

How we can continue to believe we’re the world’s moral watchdog, while keeping a
blindeye to the documented torture and abuse we commit is beyond my comprehension.

It is beyond your comprehenstion because for some unexplainable reason you do not seem to understand that when we as a society find people who have commited these kinds of acts they are prosecuted and convicted and sent to prison for their actions. This would include every officer in the military and every politician in our government right up to the president of the United States. They are not elevated as heroes or allowed to appoint themselves as leaders (see Abu Mussab Al Zarqawi cutting off the head of Nicholas Berg for example).

Trackbacked to : Third World County, MacStansbury, Right Wing Nation, TMH's Bacon Break, Is It Just Me?,

USC Stinks Texas Will Crush Them Volume 3

2005-12-07T05:22:00.000-08:00

More reasons why I dislike USC and why Texas will Crush Them in the Rose Bowl.

Hugh Hewitt hates USC
I could never afford to attend U$C
They play in a weak division with weak opponents
they cheated to beat Notre Dame!
They have their own Monopoly game!
Sam Donaldson went to USC!
This will surely fool the simpletons at USC

Iraqi Security Forces Not Making Progress?

2005-12-06T17:37:00.000-08:00

At least Michael Stickings over at The Moderate Voice doesn't think so and he bases it on this interview in the AP with Iraqi Vice President Ghazi al-Yawer.

The training of Iraqi security forces has suffered a big "setback" in the last six months, with the army and other forces being increasingly used to settle scores and make other political gains, Iraqi Vice President Ghazi al-Yawer said Monday.

Michael later asks the question "But shouldn't his claim be taken seriously?"

In a word Michael......... NO.

I have a question of my own. Do you ever read any of the American Milbloggers on the ground in Iraq?

I do, and I take their word over the honorable VP.

Howard Dean Shames the Democratic Party Again!

2005-12-06T17:08:00.000-08:00

Honestly every time this guy opens his mouth I ask myself why I keep trying. Is he insane? Is he such a callous partisan hack that he will literally say anything for political gain?

ie. this interview yesterday.

"idea that we're going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong,"

Is he a compulsive liar?

And we need a force in the Middle East, not in Iraq but in a friendly neighboring country to fight (terrorist leader Musab) Zarqawi, who came to Iraq after this invasion.

Now he either knows this is untrue, he should it is well documented and he did run for president last year so it is reasonable to assume he has some basic information on the war against Islamofascism. Zarqawi was in Iraq long before the invasion. He traveled freely to and from Iraq and Afghanistan and even to Baghdad often.

Lots of folks are talking about this today including Captains Quarters who does a nice job of pointing out how the MSM is trying very hard to ignore Deans comments.

Scrappleface has a new Christmas Carol just for Howard.

JustOneMinute isn't buying Deans Strategic Redeployment angle.

Big Lizards says insanity runs in the Dean family.

Michelle Malkin has a nice round up of other posts on Howard the Coward.

Unfortunately Jonathan Turley is Wrong on Parental Notification

2005-12-06T08:28:00.000-08:00

At least in California he is. We just had a vote and proposition 73 which would force doctors to notify parents if their children were seeking an abortion lost by 52.6% to 47.4%. My wife and I were shocked.

I liked Professor Turley's article and agree the abortion absolutists are harming our country. Unfortunately in some places they out number thinking people.

Reasons I Dislike USC and Why Texas Will Destroy Them In The Rose Bowl Volume 2

2005-12-06T05:39:00.001-08:00

Here are some more reasons why I Dislike USC and why Texas Will Destroy them in the Rose Bowl.

They barely beat Fresno State.
You cant spell sucks without USC
Robert Scheer Still teaches at USC even after the LA Times figured out what a hack he is

Again reader suggestions on why USC sucks in general and specifically why Texas will kick the snot out of them are welcomed and encouraged.

Open Trackbacks today at: Adam's Blog, Choose Life, Those Bastards, Pursuing Holiness, Basil's Blog,

*****Update***** Welcome Deadspin Readers!

Be sure to check out other posts on Why USC Sucks Here, Here, Here, and Here.

ARGHHH! Just as I was Getting Psyched up For Some Good Ol Los Angeles Bashing.....

2005-12-05T14:30:00.000-08:00

Smash at Indepundit had to hit me with this latest San Diego Scandal. Now come on Smash we all know San Diego is the origin of everything that is right and good in California.

Well at least his next post had some good news. It seems the surrender monkeys at Code Pink just cant seem to get a reall good protest rally off the ground in front of Balboa Naval Hospital in a town where half the population is either active duty or ended up moving there after their military service. I guess you don't have to be smart to join code pink.

Oh and the Chargers kicked the snot out of the Raiders again. WOOT! Yes San Diego still has a football team unlike LA which had to steal its team from Oakland, then had to give it back, yet still roots for them for some strange reason. Hey didn't the Padres whoop up on the Dodgers again this year?....yah I think they did.

Now Comon Smash join me in some good ol USC Bashing!

Reasons I Dislike USC and Why Texas Will Destroy Them In The Rose Bowl Volume 1

2005-12-05T10:35:00.000-08:00

“I’ll be in the stands cheering as loud as anybody for USC,” Simpson told The
Associated Press in a telephone interview Monday.

“I can’t wait. I always follow SC — always have, always will,” he said.

3. The LA Times loves USC.
4. The LA Times loves USC.
5. Brad Pitt was a Trojan in that lame movie and USC is named the Trojans.
6. Hook em Horns just sounds cool.

Check back frequently for more reasons USC sucks in general and why they will loose The National Championship in The Rose Bowl.

McCain in 08?

2005-12-05T06:00:00.000-08:00

Major Garret of Fox news was just on the Bill Bennet Show and stated “many many things are moving in John McCain’s direction for 2008”.

He cited as evidence this exchange between McCain and Tim Russert on Meet the Press yesterday:

MR. RUSSERT: The Pentagon, in fact, was paying Iraqi journalists to
publish articles favorable to the United States' position. The Los Angeles
Times first reported it. The Pentagon has now admitted it. Should
they stop it?

SEN. McCAIN: If these are accurate stories and written by
legitimate people, then I don't think there's anything wrong with it. If
they are not accurate and they are made up by different people, then, of course,
it should be stopped.

MR. RUSSERT: But here we are trying to teach democracy...

SEN. McCAIN: Yeah.

MR. RUSSERT: ...and freedom of the press...

SEN. McCAIN: Yeah.

MR. RUSSERT: ...and lack of state-sponsored censorship if you
will and we're paying Iraqis to print articles?

SEN. McCAIN: Well, I don't know if that's a standard practice or
not in Iraq. If these are accurate stories, we should make every effort to
get them out if they're accurate. We're in a propaganda war where this is
a war for the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people as well. I think we
need more details as to exactly what went on, but if it's legitimate...

MR. RUSSERT: But in principle you have not problem paying the
Iraqis...

SEN. McCAIN: But if that's the standard procedure in Iraq, if
that's what you need to do to get a story in one of these newspapers, but it has
to be accurate and it has to be done by a legitimate person. I understand
these are men and women who serve in our military that are responsible for these
stories. If that's the only way you get stories in, then I'm not terribly
offended by it, Tim.

I think Garret is right in his analysis. John McCain does a much better job on issues like this one than the Bush administration who sent out Stephen Hadley to answer questions about this story. Hadley did not serve the administration well with his mealy mouthed answers.

People who believe we are in a war for our very civilization, can look at John McCain’s position on Iraq and the greater war on terror and feel comfortable he will fight to win first and play politics second. He also comes across as a straight shooter in the rest of the interview. He has no problem admitting many mistakes were made in the war, but is also quick to praise the administration, and mention that mistakes are made in all wars. Shrewd very shrewd.

If you are a John McCain fan or not you must admit the man plays politics very well. He is the Republican darling of the MSM. The every day registered Democrat loves him. I would vote for him as would most Democrats. If he gets past the primaries he could win one of the biggest landslides in American History.

Now I should say that several months ago when McCain actively participated in the gang of 14, I called the Hugh Hewitt show and stated: ”John McCain just lost any chance at winning the Republican nomination”. Well I was dead wrong. I think Major Garret is right. If the war on terror is still the number one issue facing this country during the 2008 election (and I believe it will be) then McCain has a very strong advantage over his potential opponents in the Republican primaries.

I learned my lesson with my earlier prediction and should have known better at the time. Politicians count on the short memories of the American People when it comes to elections. John Kerry is a walking example of this; changing positions as often as his socks, all the while keeping a straight face when claiming his position has been consistent all along. By the way the gang of 14 has been much less harmful to President Bush’s appointments than some believed (including me). I think McCain can explain his position to many Republicans satisfaction in the primaries especially if Judge Alito gets confirmed.

No doubt a lot will happen between now and 2008 but John McCain seems to have a fighting chance at the nomination.

What do you think? am I crazy? Would any of you Republicans vote for McCain in the primaries? how bout the dems if he was nominated would you vote for McCain over Hillary or god forbid Kerry again?

Open Trackbacks today at: Basil's Blog, Bloggin' Outloud, The Land of Ozz, Third World County,
Is it Just Me,

Well Still No Phone Call From MSM Blogger Draft!

2005-12-04T16:21:00.000-08:00

UPDATE:

Hugh says I am on the bubble! Do you think its time to start making salary demands?

************************************************************************************

That’s right round 4 has come and gone and no call from the MSM Blogger Draft being conducted at Hugh Hewitt's site. I thought I at least had the skills to play in the EU league. I know the BBC, or Le Monde could use me. Come on are you telling me I couldn't improve the writing and readership at the Guardian?

Surely Le Monde would have paid for this story.

Oh well I guess I remain a free agent for now.

Where are guys like Bobby Bethard who are willing to take a chance on a relatively unknown from a small school when you need em?

Trackbacked at Basil's Blog,

If You Want To Understand Our Enemy, You Must Read This!

2005-12-04T13:31:00.000-08:00

If you have ever wondered what motivates the Islamofascists we are fighting today, or if you have ever offered an opinion on the subject, you should go to All Things Beautiful right now and read this post by an anonymous Professor of Islamic Medieval History in Israel. I promise after doing so, you will know more than you do now.

There are few articles as brilliant as this one that absolutely must be read by any Layman who ever wishes to understand our enemy and speak intelligently on the subject of Islamofascism. Alexandra and the Professor have inspired me to begin compiling them.

Here is the introduction to the article:

The following article attempts to address two specific questions germane to the debate about Islam today: first, is there a specifically anti-Christian (as opposed to generally anti-"Infidel") strain in Islam; and, second, is private, non-statal Jihad a modern aberration or, rather, an integral and religiously respectable component of the Islamic tradition? Since the paper was addressed to a group of historians, it assumed a certain background knowledge of the larger question of Jihad which the readers on this site may understandably lack. This background is, however, all the more necessary in light of the concerted apologist effort to "prettify" the Islamic concept of Jihad post-9/11. Here, then, is some clarification regarding the duty of Jihad in Islam: The Prophet Muhammad, according to the Islamic tradition, was sent by God in the 7th century with Allah's perfect, final revelation, embodied in what was later (according to the tradition, in the 650s) collected into the volume called the Qur'an.

Here are the final two paragraphs.

One of the great cultural tendencies of the Islamic world is to view the world through the prism of the paradigms of classical Islam, much in the same way that someone raised in a strict Protestant tradition views people or events through Biblical archetypes, and speaks of contemporary figures as being second Jezebels, Herods, Judases and so forth. Thus, for the devout Muslim viewing the world through the prism of the classical tradition, America becomes the second 'Ad of the Qur'an, an arrogant and godless people doomed to destruction; the Western forces in 'Iraq become the Crusaders; and so forth. Any state peopled largely by Christians, therefore, however secular the state and however nominal the Christians, corresponds to the "Rome" of the classical Sunni tradition in the eyes of the volunteer Jihadist drawing his inspiration from the early Sunni sources.

Finally, in conclusion, we might ponder the fact that at certain key moments in history, religious tolerance- or the lack thereof- can have repercussions far into the future. Just as the anti-Jewish statements of the New Testament at the time of its writing have reverberated for millenia, because they came at a formative and normative moment in the crystallization of a religious tradition, so the state of hostility and warfare towards Christians and their leading polity entered into the Muslim tradition at a crucial moment, when Sunni Islam was being formed. It is this crucial timing which has had such a lasting effect, which we are still feeling 12 centuries later.

Now if that hasn't piqued your interest I don't know what will. I will warn you it is a long piece but every word is well said. I would sincerely appreciate to hear a response from an Islamic scholar on this piece and encourage them to dispute anything they felt to be inaccurate.

Thank you Professor, and Thank you Alexandra.

I am Back, What Did I Miss?

2005-12-03T09:30:00.000-08:00

It seems like more of the usual.

The secular extremists have their panties in a wad over Christians trying to remind people what the Christmas holiday is all about. How dare those dastardly Christians.

Hugh Hewitt has started a fantasy draft where bloggers are drafted by the MSM. I didn't make the cut. Guess I need a new agent. Maybe TO's guy is available.

More retired generals have come out and said Congressman Murtha is dead wrong. Including Major General Bob Scales.

ASMAN: we are joined by Retired Army Major General Bob Scales. Very happy Thanksgiving to you, General. Good to see you.

MAJ. GEN. BOB SCALES, U.S. ARMY, RET.: Happy Thanksgiving, David.

ASMAN: Thanks a lot. Now, we hear from Congressman Murtha of course that he has talked to the troops in Iraq and of course at the hospitals, he visits the wounded troops quite a bit, says that he hears it's going very badly. On the other hand, I have got to tell you, I have been meeting with troops down in Florida, people from the Fourth Anglico and others, and others saying, "We think the war is going great." So, what are you hearing?

SCALES: Well, I think the war is going very well. As you know, I was over there last month. I spent some time not only with American forces but probably more importantly with Iraqi forces. And I got a chance to see how this transfer of authority and transfer of power is going to occur over the next year or so.

And at least, you know, from what I saw at the tip of the spear, among frontline Iraqi soldiers, they are beginning to build that confidence and that desire to take over the mission. And I think that probably is the most important thing that's happened in 2005 is an awareness of the Iraqis that, very soon, this is going to be their war, because it's their country.

ASMAN: Now, of course, a caveat that I should have put in there right at the beginning is every war is tough. This war is particularly tough. We face an enemy that has no scruples at all. Today they just let off some suicide bombs in front of children. They have done that before but how could Congressman Murtha get it so wrong?

SCALES: Well, remember now, Congressman Murtha is a Vietnam combat veteran, like me, and every week John Murtha goes to Bethesda and to Walter Reed Army Hospital to talk to the soldiers who have been wounded, in some cases maimed, and I'm sure this has had a psychological impact on him. Because it certainly brings back many of the memories that I have experienced from my time in combat. And it's understandable but -- and the other good point I guess here is that Congressman Murtha has a right to express his own opinions, and he has done so, and we should respect that.

ASMAN: Of course, but...

SCALES: ...having said that, I believe the war is going a great deal better than Mr. Murtha thinks it is.

ASMAN: Now, Mr. Murtha, of course, is a veteran of Vietnam. Vietnam is a place where the war at home played a huge part in the way it was perceived overseas, particularly in Vietnam. General Giap, who I think you know, a North Vietnamese general, after the war said the following about the propaganda battle that was being waged.

He said quote, "We were not strong enough," speaking of the North Vietnamese communists, "to drive out half a million American troops, but that wasn't our aim. Our intention was to break the will of the American government to continue the war." Now is this the aim of our current enemy?

SCALES: Well, of course it is. There is another great quote from Ho Chi Minh, who once said in 1964, "We will kill a few of them. They will kill many of us, and they will tire of it first." The center of gravity always when you fight the United States is the will of the American people. And the will of the American people is always measured in both the duration, the time it takes to fight a war, and casualties.

There is no doubt that from Korea to Vietnam to Desert Storm to this war, our enemies have always sought not to win, so much, as to avoid losing. Hang on long enough for the Americans to tire of it and go home. We are beginning to see some of that sentiment expressed in the American people today.

NZ Bear catches Russ Feingold telling us all to ignore the elected Iraqi government on NPR.

Stop the ACLU has this very sad and frightening story.

The Supreme Court of Hawaii has ruled that unborn children are not “human beings,” and therefore women cannot be prosecuted for causing the death of babies by harmful behavior during their pregnancies.

The unanimous decision overturns the manslaughter conviction of 32-year-old Tayshea Aiwohi, who was found guilty in connection with the death of her newborn son by smoking crystal methamphetamine shortly before his birth.

“I’m extremely happy and grateful,” said Aiwohi. “I believe [the case] changed me into a better person and I just hope to share that with others.”

The woman allegedly admitted to using the drugs for three days before the birth and took a “hit” on the morning her son was delivered.

Creating News 101

2005-11-29T22:44:00.000-08:00

Let's see. Leftie peaceniks need attention to counter the good news from Iraq. Foreign terrorists in Iraq, stung by recent screwups (if you can call mass murder at a wedding in Amman a "screwup") need some positive news for the Arab Street against "The Crusaders". Sounds like a ready-made recipe for some nice, dramatic cooperation. No one gets hurt, everyone gets what they want.

So, in a shocking new development, some "Christians" get "kidnapped" in Iraq. It really doesn't get better than this.

My prediction is that these "peace lovers" get released a few days after the news cycle tires of this pathetic story.

Since this is the first time 99.9% of anyone has heard of this group, it's amazing to read today's razor-sharp release from the group -- which includes this description of their activities in Iraq of late:

In a "Statement of Conviction," the long-term Team members stated that they "are aware of the many risks both Iraqis and internationals currently face," and affirmed that the risks did not outweigh their purpose in remaining. They express the hope that "in loving both friends and enemies and by intervening non-violently to aid those who are systematically oppressed, we can contribute in some small way to transforming this volatile situation."

CPT does not advocate the use of violent force to save lives of its workers should they be kidnapped, held hostage, or caught in the middle of a conflict situation.

Christian Peacemaker Teams has been present in Iraq since October 2002, providing first-hand, independent reports from the region, working with detainees of both United States and Iraqi forces, and training others in non-violent intervention and human rights documentation. Iraqi friends and human rights workers have welcomed the team as a nonviolent, independent presence and asked that the team tell the their stories. CPT teams host regular delegations of committed peace and human rights activists to conflict zones, who join teams in working with civilians to document abuses and develop nonviolent alternatives to armed conflict. The CPT Iraq Team has hosted a total of 120 people on sixteen delegations over the last three years.

Christian Peacemaker Teams is a violence reduction program. Teams of trained peacemakers work in areas of lethal conflict around the world.

In addition to the Iraq Team, teams of CPT workers are currently serving in Barrancabermeja, Colombia; Hebron and At-Tuwani, Palestine; Kenora, Ontario, Canada; and on the Mexico-United States border.

Pretty good stuff, considering that they have not exactly gotten much press over the last few years. Amazing what a kidnapping can do for top-of-mind awareness. Nice going, guys. Earned media is a beautiful thing.

Of course, if I'm wrong, these bozos give new meaning to the term "useful idiots".

The Real Ugly American

WE HAVE MOVED

No Posts For The Next Few Days

Terrorists Buying Untraceable Cell Phones In USA.

Kyoto Be Damned!

Alito Too Smart For Democrats and other news

Internet Cowards....

Oprah and Her Fans Victims Of Fraud!

Pork Busters Update

Moonbats Support The Troops? : Smash Vs. Filner

Troops Take On Murtha And Moran

Joe Klein Advises The Democrats On How to Stay Out of Power

My Comments To Professor Rosa Brooks

Ted Kennedy's Editorial On Alito: Your Kidding Me Right? / Open Track Back Weekend!

Mexico The West's Best Chance Of Survival? My Take On Mark Steyn's Article

The Must Read Piece Of 2006!

Live Blogging The Rose Bowl!

Hearbreaking News 12 of 13 West Virginia Miners Are Dead

USC Is Going Down In Flames Baby!

TEXAS vs. usc (By GM Roper)

HOOK 'EM HORNS!

USC Stinks Texas Will Crush Them Volume 5

USC Stinks Texas Will Crush Them Volume 4

USC Stinks Texas Will Crush Them Volume 3

Reasons I Dislike USC and Why Texas Will Destroy Them In The Rose Bowl Volume 2

Reasons I Dislike USC and Why Texas Will Destroy Them In The Rose Bowl Volume 1

Ghouls Attempt To Play Politics With WV Mining Tragedy

Thank You To GM and Tiberius Gracchus!

GM's Last Post

Diagnosing The Left

Stay The Course America!

Another LONGHORN Touchdown!

In Texas, football is a labor of love...

TEXAS vs. usc

HOOK 'EM HORNS!

Face it, people : Life Just Sucks

The NY Times; Ain't They Somethin'

Why is Oklahoma so windy?

The Eyes of Texas

Stalin loved the monkeys...

USC pwns

The Silence Of The Candidate

Be Back Soon / Meet GM's Corner and TiberGuest Bloggers

Hello from Conservative America

Robertson and Rockefeller leaked Top Secret NSA Program?

How To Respond To A Moonbat

The Carnival Of Christmas

You We Didn't Vote For! / Open Trackback post

La Shawn Barber's Liberal Views.......

An Open Letter To Harry Reid (Hint its not polite)

Hezbollah Scamming Canadian Cell Phone Users For Terrorist Activities!

Thank a Soldier Week

The Left is loosing it again with the NSA story

The NSA Story A Layman’s Perspective

Go Go Govenator!

Top Stories 12/19/05

True Liberals Support Democracy!

Response from Glenn Greenwald of Unclaimed Territory

More Bias at the BBC? / Open Trackback Weekend

How Far Will the Defeatists Go?

Iraq celebrates a New Democracy! / Moonbats Around The World Unite!

Democracy Is Born Today!

USC Stinks Texas Will Crush Them Volume 5

interesting reads 12.14.05

The Last Goodbye

Ted Rall Scumbag / Liberal Reaction To His Bile

There is No Doubt Of Links Between Saddam and Al Qaeda

Thoughtful Response From The Left

The Left Tries To Tell Us Again No Ties Between Iraq and Al Qaeda!

Qaeda-Iraq Link U.S. Cited Is Tied to Coercion Claim

Another Left Wing Whacko Pulls Hoax On MSM

UN Fails Again

USC Stinks Texas Will Crush Them Volume 4

More Lies From The Left!

USC Stinks Texas Will Crush Them Volume 3

Iraqi Security Forces Not Making Progress?

Howard Dean Shames the Democratic Party Again!

Unfortunately Jonathan Turley is Wrong on Parental Notification

Reasons I Dislike USC and Why Texas Will Destroy Them In The Rose Bowl Volume 2

ARGHHH! Just as I was Getting Psyched up For Some Good Ol Los Angeles Bashing.....