Wednesday, August 31, 2005

An Apology to Iraq

... for the American media. Talk about a handicap. It's like 'Bagdad Bob' under new management.

Send Help

LittleGreenFootballs has a good list and discussion of ways you can contribute to hurricane Katrina relief.

Satellite image:

New Orleans, Looting & the Case for Gun Ownership

Michelle's coverage of the looting in New Orleans is the best argument for gun ownership I've ever seen.
Late Tuesday, Gov. Blanco spokeswoman Denise Bottcher described a disturbing scene unfolding in uptown New Orleans, where looters were trying to break into Children's Hospital.

Bottcher said the director of the hospital fears for the safety of the staff and the 100 kids inside the hospital. The director said the hospital is locked, but that the looters were trying to break in and had gathered outside the facility.

The director has sought help from the police, but, due to rising flood waters, police have not been able to respond.
I was in a children's hospital not long ago, and this is just plain evil. If just one doctor or nurse in that hospital had access to a loaded gun, the looters would disperse (all but one or two anyway). And no, the looters are not looking for food.
Looters swarmed the Wal-mart on Tchoupitoulas Street, often bypassing the food and drink section to steal wide-screen TVs, jewelry, bicycles and computers. Watching the sordid display and shaking his head in disgust, one firefighter said of the scene: "It’s a f---- hurricane, what are you gonna do with a basketball goal?"
There's no excuse for this crap.
Meanwhile, the folks at Kos are cheering on the looters:
"I'd loot too! It's quite insane there is no food, water, electricity or housing. I would take whatever is available to survive and make myself comfortable and not worry about paying for it.

I don't think people are stealing TV sets.

Where the hell is Bush. He should be there right now. The entire city of New Orleans is largely destroyed. That's reason enough for a President to appear"
Wrongo! These people most definitely ARE stealing TV sets. They are quite clearly planning to profit from this situation, and to the lunatics at Kos it's all Bush's fault, as usual. What would they have him do? Land his helicopter on the Superdome and part the waters like Moses did with the Red Sea? It's like they hate him for not being Superman.

Tuesday, August 30, 2005

Random Quote

"When belief in any idea becomes a matter of faith--and one's own identity is defined by that faith--then the psyche will do anything necessary to distort or deny any truth that contradicts that belief."
- Dr. Sanity

PREVIOUS: I am sensing a trend.

Why is Sandy Bergler STILL not in jail?

Recalling a question I had raised in an earlier post (see also here): "And why the hell isn't Sany Berger in Jail yet?" brought my attention to this item from the National Ledger.
"...government prosecutors have requested no jail time — just a $10,000 fine and the temporary removal of his security clearance."
Well, that clears that up, no? Sandy Berger admitted to stealing five "code-word" classified (more secret than top-secret) security documents from the National Archives. He admitted to destroying three of the five documents. He admitted that he lied to federal investigators by telling them initially that he merely removed the documents “by accident.” How much time did Martha Stewart do for lying to federal investigators? And her claim that she had had a stop-loss order with her broker, though found to be false, was not a deliberate attempt to weaken national security by altering the historical record of our government's reactions to terrorism, like Sandy's lying was clearly meant to do. Sandy gets a slap on the wrist, and government prosecutors throw the book at Martha Stewart? What a joke.

Good news from Iraq, part 34

"We all know it's a dangerous place. But the thing that I want people to understand is that they only see those one or two instances in the country that are negative. You don't really hear about the 100 things that have gone good." - Maj. Joe Leahy
Via Chrenkoff. Kudos to the Tampa Tribune for allowing criticism on their pages of the American media for not reporting positive news from Iraq.

What Media Bias part 3,976

Here is what Colonel Thomas Spoehr, director of materiel for the Army staff, told New York Times reporter Michael Moss:
Last year, senior leaders of the Army became aware of technological developments which make it possible to improve the "Interceptor" body armor worn by our troops.
The "Interceptor" consists of a vest, two SAPI (small arms protective insert) plates worn in the front and the back, and "backing" material around the plates. The plates are made of boronic carbide, the second hardest substance known to man (only diamonds are harder) but fairly light weight. The plates will shatter a standard rifle bullet, and the backing catches the bullet fragments to prevent injuries from shrapnel.

The "Interceptor" is the best body armor manufactured in the world today, and represents a remarkable improvement over the protective vests worn by our troops in the first Gulf War, and Somalia in 1993. Those vests could protect against shrapnel, but a rifle bullet would cut right through them. Those vests weighed 24 lbs each. The interceptor ensemble — which can stop an AK-47 bullet fired from just 10 feet away — weighs just 16 lbs. But the vest isn't perfect. There are some special types of ammunition that can penetrate the boronic carbide plates. Last year Army leaders became aware of improvements that could be made to the SAPI plates that would protect against most (though not all) of these special types of ammunition.

There is little evidence insurgents in Iraq are using the special types of ammunition that can defeat the "Interceptor." But the Army wanted to be proactive, to defeat a potential threat before it emerged. "We're taking what we think is a prudent step to guard against a step (the insurgents) could take, but that's a step that really hasn't developed yet," Spoehr said.

Altering the formula by which the SAPI plates are manufactured is not a simple process, since these plates must be manufactured to extremely precise (1,000ths of an inch) dimensions. "Making one of these plates is like making one of those tiles that protects the (space) shuttle from heat," Spoehr said. Yet though the specifications weren't set until early in January, new plates were being manufactured — and delivery begun to U.S. troops — in March. Those familiar with the Pentagon's procurement process recognize this as lightning speed.
And here is what Michael Moss subsequently wrote in the New York Times:
"For the second time since the Iraq war began, the Pentagon is struggling to replace body armor that is failing to protect American troops from the most lethal attacks of insurgents.

"The ceramic plates in vests worn by most personnel cannot withstand certain munitions the insurgents use. But more than a year after military officials initiated an effort to replace the armor with thicker, more resistant plates, tens of thousands of soldiers are still without the stronger protection because of a string of delays in the Pentagon's procurement system."
Classic case of taking good news and turning it into bad news -- the NYT "news" article was just another hatchet job. RaTHer than "fake but accurate," this NYT story is not-fake but not-accurate. Well, ok -- some of the NYT story does appear to be fake, like the part about "failing to protect American troops from the most lethal attacks of insurgents." Insurgents aren't using the "special" amunition. The Army is just being "proactive."

What Media Bias part 3,975

Here we have NPR's Mariam Sobh just making up quotes out of thin air and blatant Jew hatred. NPR evidently feels this is unbiased reporting.

Sunday, August 28, 2005

This picture says it all

I know, I said I wouldn't say any more about Cindy Sheehan, but if I post a picture does that count?

Here's a close up:

Yes, that's Al Sharpton over Cindy Sheehan. I think David Duke is in there somewhere, too, but mostly it's media propagandists with cameras.

Friday, August 26, 2005

What media bias part 3,974

How bizarre. How much you wanna bet that if the "news" paper had been publishing letters, for two years (!), from a little girl to her father about how proud she was of him and what a hero he is, they would have at least checked to see if her father was actually in "Irak." Well, at least the Chicago Tribune didn't fall for it.

"...most of the media seems asphyxiated with defeatism..."

Excerpt from a Washington Times article:

"...there have been more casualties by accidents and reckless behavior off-duty than in Iraq and Afghanistan. Why are protesters not upset about that? Sadly it appears that much of the media are obsessed with defeatism. Even the message of the protesters — contradictory, false and confused as ever — is made front-page headline news every day. The few people they can exploit to push this defeatist agenda are made to appear to speak for all of us. That just isn't true.
Contrary to all the bad news, I see everyday that our soldiers are motivated and eager to contribute and participate in our nation's military missions. This is a very proud and important time to be serving. Considering that out of a population of 285 million, less than one-tenth of one percent are going to war right now, and considering the huge impact we are having on the world, this is a wonderful time to be a soldier in the U.S. Army."

-- Sgt. Joe Roche is with the 12th Aviation Battalion and stationed at Fort Belvoir.

Thursday, August 25, 2005

Saddam - al Qaeda links

Lots of Saddam - al Qaeda connections here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.
UPDATE: This may be the best evidence to date of a Saddam - 9/11 link, but there's more here.

Protesting the Wounded

How pathetic does your little world have to be for you to crawl out of your hole each morning and march yourself down to the Walter Reed Army Medical Center to make the wounded and their families feel like total shit all day long? These people make me sick:
When he was a patient at the hospital, Pannell said he initially tried to ignore the anti-war activists camped out in front of Walter Reed, until witnessing something that enraged him.

"We went by there one day and I drove by and [the anti-war protesters] had a bunch of flag-draped coffins laid out on the sidewalk. That, I thought, was probably the most distasteful thing I had ever seen. Ever," Pannell, a member of the Army's First Cavalry Division, told Cybercast News Service.

"You know that 95 percent of the guys in the hospital bed lost guys whenever they got hurt and survivors' guilt is the worst thing you can deal with..."
Code Pink Women for Peace organizes the protests at Walter Reed - they are also one of the groups financing Cindy Sheehan's camp-out at Crawford Texas.

Wednesday, August 24, 2005

Bottom Line

You would think the loonies on the left would get tired of preaching defeat, or at least get tired or being wrong and getting slapped down all the time. Slap! Slap! Splat!

Pure Evil has risen from the Middle East to kill thousands upon thousands across the globe. We know now how these subhumans like to butcher children - Jewish, Russian, American, Iraqi, it's all the same to them as long as innocents die. As they themselves have said, they seek death while we seek life. They consider that their strength. They mindlessly destroy in the name of their religion, while we rebuild. Whose side are you on?

Some Thoughts on Casualties

From Powerline:

"We are conducting an experiment never before seen, as far as I know, in the history of the human race. We are trying to fight a war under the auspices of an establishment that is determined--to put the most charitable face on it--to emphasize American casualties over all other information about the war.

Sometimes it becomes necessary to state the obvious: being a soldier is a dangerous thing.

Even in peacetime. The media's breathless tabulation of casualties in Iraq--now, over 1,800 deaths--is generally devoid of context. Here's some context: between 1983 and 1996, 18,006 American military personnel died accidentally in the service of their country. That death rate of 1,286 per year exceeds the rate of combat deaths in Iraq by a ratio of nearly two to one.

That's right: all through the years when hardly anyone was paying attention, soldiers, sailors and Marines were dying in accidents, training and otherwise, at nearly twice the rate of combat deaths in Iraq from the start of the war in 2003 to the present. Somehow, though, when there was no political hay to be made, I don't recall any great outcry, or gleeful reporting, or erecting of crosses in the President's home town. In fact, I'll offer a free six-pack to the first person who can find evidence that any liberal expressed concern--any concern--about the 18,006 American service members who died accidentally in service of their country from 1983 to 1996."

Tuesday, August 23, 2005

'Monday Evening' tears the Democrats a new one

Again. It's painful, but necessary.
The national party has become increasingly hostile to anyone who is not a defeatist and/or conspiracist. It is no longer a question of the discreditable slogan, “America, right or wrong.” It’s that the Democratic party has come to be dominated by people who believe, “America, wrong no matter what.”

The last war these people won is Vietnam; Are they so eager to recapture their youth that they will support any anti-American insurgency?
No, I don't think it's funny, it's pathetic, and I wish that grown-ups like Lieberman could speak for Democrats raTHer than moonbats like Kennedy. Anymore, all they stand for is higher taxes, abortion on demand, and vote-fraud.

What media bias part 3,973

This AFP article headline reads, "Bush tars Iraq war protestors as isolationists," yet aside from the initial assertion, nowhere in the article, nor in the transcript of the press conference referenced, is the word isolationist, or anything remotely close, used. Apparently, they are basing this headline on the following quote:
"I think those who advocate immediate withdrawal from not only Iraq, but the Middle East, are advocating a policy that would weaken the United States," said Bush.
This isn't "tarring" anybody. I do not see how any reasonable person could draw that headline from this quote or any other quote in the transcript. Just one more example of the *spit* unbiased *spit* media hard at work.

A new breed of terrorist

Kidnapping corpses to get what you want - and it works! Check this out. Apparently, in the UK this is legal. These people didn't like it that some farmer was breeding guinea pigs for medical research and so dug up and kidnapped the farmer's dead grandmother. The farmer gave in and is closing down the business. Isn't grave-robbing a crime in Britain? If someone tried this in the US, they'd be thrown in jail (or otherwise institutionalized).

Apparently, Democracy is Contagious

No wonder the Pope wouldn't visit their mosque

More news you won't find reported in the *spit* mainstream press *spit*

and it's all good. More here and here.

A Steven Den Beste Sighting

in the comments of this Able Danger post at Captain's Quarters blog.

Sunday, August 21, 2005

My first and last word on Cindy and Casey

If I could choose one Cindy Sheehan article that sums up my view, this would be it. The way the MSM has used Cindy to bash Bush is despicable though predictable. Mostly, it's the things they left out, like asking "Why won't Bush meet with Cindy Sheehan?" without noting that he already did, or filtering out the psycho things that Cindy has been saying, quite publicly, and not mentioning the letter that her family wrote to Cindy asking her to stop what she is doing and come home. And I find it interesting that the MSM has not found any other military family member newsworthy.

Cindy has said a lot of crazy things, but one statement in particular that seemed to resonate with the left bothers me: Cindy said, on camera, that "this country is not worth dying for." I am deeply offended by that statement. I think her son Casey would have been offended by that statement as well. Casey was not a child when he signed up nor was he a child when he reenlisted. (I guess if you think the government is supposed to take care of everyone then it must follow that its citizens are reduced to the status of children - but I digress.) He was fully aware, just like all soldiers know when they enlist, that it was possible that he would be in dangerous situations where he could die. People join the armed forces partly because they love their country and are willing to put their lives on the line for it. That is part of what makes you human - being willing to risk your life for the people you love. And it is the people of this country, the families, that are the country. FDR didn't win World War II, millions of Americans did. For anyone, including his own mother, to imply that Casey Sheehan died for no reason or worse, for a lie, is repulsive. Casey died in the most honorable way possible - defending that which he loved.

Gas is relatively Cheap

So, you think the price of gas is through the roof? You're tinking of trading in your minivan for a compact car? Dare to compare.

Saturday, August 20, 2005

Iraq War Debate

Wow. This debate is just amazing - a war within a war - although I wish they would back up their statements with references more often. Statements like, "Bush and his top officials endlessly drew connections between 9-11 and Iraq...," fall pretty flat. I was there too, and that just didn't happen. When one makes a statement that is false, it throws everything else into doubt that isn't tied down. All in all, a great laundry list of talking points relating to the WOT from both sides of the issue, and an excellent illustration of intelligent minds in fierce combat, unyielding, and not finding common ground. It does seem like Swanson resorts to name-calling first, which disqualifies him of course, though I couldn't help but wish that this particular dual could end the old fashioned way - in the mortal wounding of the defeated.

Friday, August 19, 2005

An Interrogation

This interrogation of an "insurgent" by Iraqi security should be aired in the US, but it won't be thanks to our *spit* unbiased *spit* media.

I've got your Exit Strategy right Here

The Texas Army National Guard is headed for Kosovo. KOSOVO! Where is the clamor from the media and from the peace activists to bring the troops home - from Kosovo? I thought Clinton promised our troops would be home by Christmas, 1999.

Antiepistrophe THIS

This VDH piece on the "biteback effect" should be read in conjunction with this piece on shame from Dr. Sanity. And both of these reminded me of this commentary on childish adults by Stolinsky. I think these three essays fit quite nicely together.

PREVIOUS: Give me liberty or give me death.

Wednesday, August 17, 2005

Deuce Four

I could read Michael Yon all night.
"...the Deuce Four has killed well over 150 terrorists in this neighborhood in the past 10 months. But almost none of those made the news, and those that did had a few key details missing.

Like the time when some ISF were driving and got blasted by an IED, causing numerous casualties and preventing them from recovering the vehicle. The terrorists came out and did their rifle-pumping-in-the-air thing, shooting AKs, dancing around like monkeys. Videos went 'round the world, making it appear the terrorists were running Mosul, which was pretty much what was being reported at the time.

But that wasn't the whole story. In the Yarmuk neighborhood, only terrorists openly carry AK-47s. The lawyers call this Hostile Intent. The soldiers call this Dead Man Walking.

Deuce Four is an overwhelmingly aggressive and effective unit, and they believe the best defense is a dead enemy. They are constantly thinking up innovative, unique, and effective ways to kill or capture the enemy; proactive not reactive. They planned an operation with snipers, making it appear that an ISF vehicle had been attacked, complete with explosives and flash-bang grenades to simulate the IED. The simulated casualty evacuation of sand dummies completed the ruse.

The Deuce Four soldiers left quickly with the "casualties," "abandoning" the burning truck in the traffic circle. The enemy took the bait. Terrorists came out and started with the AK-rifle-monkey-pump, shooting into the truck, their own video crews capturing the moment of glory. That's when the American snipers opened fire and killed everybody with a weapon..."

Sunday, August 14, 2005

The Congressional Record on Able Danger

The particulars of the "Able Danger" project and the 9/11 Commission Omission story were contained in a speech delivered on June 27, 2005 on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives by Curt Weldon of Pennsylvania. It is in the Congressional Record. To view it, go here and type "able danger" in the search box, in quotes. Funny how nobody noticed it. I wonder if the speech was on C-Span.

Saturday, August 13, 2005

How to Know if you're a Moonbat

I've used the term "moonbat" a couple of times in my posts, so just in case anyone is confused and wondering whether they just might be a moonbat, you can go here and/or here to find out.

"Confusing But Not False"

Not as cute as "fake but accurate" of course but shows promise, don't you think? NARAL pulled its anti-Roberts ad because it was a lie, and their star, bombing victim Emily Lyons, has coined a new phrase to describe and defend NARAL's blatant dishonesty:
Lyons admitted to the Associated Press Friday that the ad, which NARAL pulled, is "confusing, but not false."

...Lyons appears in the ad and tells viewers about the bombing that injured her, even though it occurred seven years after the brief Roberts filed. The ad never mentions the reasons for Roberts' brief...
All Roberts' brief said was, "You're applying the wrong law!" That's it. He wasn't condoning violence in any way and he couldn't have defended Lyon's abortion clinic bomber unless he had a time machine. Hmmm.... "Confusing but not false" ... kinda has a nice ring to it. Sort of academic sounding, and we haven't had a humorous cliche in a while. It has the same connotation as "fake but accurate" - "we lied our asses off but what we said was true" - but more nuance. What a charming little alternative universe these people live in. I guess it all depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is.

Friday, August 12, 2005

Hang the Traitors

Wasn’t it Kissinger who recused himself from the 9/11 Commission early on due to supposition that he had a conflict of interest because he was a prior secretary of state – thirty years ago? But Jamie GoreLick was ok though she was the #2 person in Clinton’s Department of Justice rather than Nixon’s National Security Advisor or Ford’s Secretary of State. Makes sense to me. Not! To any rational mind, Jamie GoreLick had a much, much bigger conflict of interest than did Henry Kissinger. Seems to me, Jamie GoreLick was put on the 9/11 Commission for a very specific reason – to deflect blame from the Clinton administration. Well, mission accomplished Jamie! Well done! Except for one thing – despite your rush to publish your best-selling novel and cement the history books in a tightly wrapped package, it ain’t over.

Apparently the 9/11Commission decided early on to blame our failure as a nation to stop 9/11 from happening on the intelligence community rather than the Clinton administration which stripped both the intelligence community and law enforcement community of their ability to act. Why you ask? Just look to see who stood to lose if the Department of Justice and the “Wall” that separated international from domestic intelligence was implicated. Jamie S. GoreLick, creator of the “Wall,” 9/11 Commissioner, and #2 person in Clinton’s Department of Justice.

GoreLick never had to take the witness stand and explain why her "Wall" was enacted in the first place. That is the most relevant question the 9/11 Commission could have asked, and it is the one that it could not ask thanks to the fact that the one person who had had more to do with enacting the wall than anyone else was on the Commission itself.

The worst part about all of this is that the 9/11 Commission staff is going into the National Archive, tomorrow(!), to cover their tracks and make sure there is no remaining evidence that could implicate the Commission itself, and they are doing it right under our noses and going “Nyah! Nyah!” as they’re doing it. What’s their official reason for camping out at the National Archives tomorrow? Are they planning on revising their report? The 9/11 Commission is investigating itself now? Investigating their own cover-up? Isn’t that like sending an accused murderer to investigate the crime scene? No way! They just graduated from investigators to suspects. Their credibility is shot! We’ve got the motive (to save their careers, and a sweet book deal), the murder weapon (socks, a la Sandy Bergler), the body (the truth, as mangled as it may be), and they’ve been caught red-handed (by Congressman Curt Weldon). The 9/11 Commission must be really desperate at this point. Wouldn’t you be? If they’re going to raid the National Archives, again, then there’d better be cavity searches before they’re allowed to leave. I’m not joking! If it’s good enough for Martha Stewart, it’s good enough for the 9/11 Commission. They already had their chance when Sandy Bergler raided our tippity-top-secret archives in October 2003, just after the 9/11 Commission was alerted to Able Danger the first time – you know, that time they conveniently forgot about when writing up their report/novel but just now suddenly remembered when someone publicly rubbed their nose in it. The second time they were alerted to Able Danger, which they also said they forgot about, was ten days before their report was released (July 2004), too late to do anything about (yeah right) though it blows a hole in their report so big you could fly a Boeing 747 through it.

UPDATE: Poof! Down the memory hole it goes, and with the collaboration of the NY Times to boot. They've already hit the National Archives. According to Dr. Sanity's website:
Staff members now are searching documents in the National Archives to look for notes from the meeting in Afghanistan and any other possible references to Atta and Able Danger, [9/11 Commission spokesman] Felzenberg said.
That is a direct quote from a NY Times article that no longer exists, because the article has disappeared - what is left in its place is this article which has the same URL but a different title than the earlier one and makes no reference to the National Archives. The new article says:
''He could not describe what information had led to this supposed Atta identification,'' the [9/11 Commission's] statement said of the military [intelligence] official.
The relevant data discussed by the officer showed Atta to be a member of an al-Qaida cell in New York City from February to April 2000, the [9/11 Commission's] statement said.
Like I said before, the 9/11 Commission's credibility is shot. I hate to be the first to say it, but we're gonna have to start all over again with a new 9/11 Commission. Most of the data is already there except for the stuff they and Sandy Bergler destroyed - much of it needs to be looked at again and reevaluated, starting with the Prague Connection. You see, the reason that the 9/11 Commission discounted the Able Danger report on Mohammed Atta being in the U.S. prior to June, 2000 was because they needed to discount the Prague connection for political reasons.
"There was no way that Atta could have been in the United States at that time, which is why the staff didn't give this tremendous weight when they were writing the report," Mr. Felzenberg said. "This information was not meshing with the other information that we had."
This is what happens when you have politicians acting as investigators. So if one data point doesn't jive with the data coming from the immigration office, you just toss it? If Atta was not in the country then how could Able Danger, in 2000 more than a year prior to 9/11, identify him as an al Qaeda terrorist and ask to share information with the FBI?

Iraqis Help Soldiers Find Bombs; Stolen Child Recovered

Bunches of good news from Iraq every day. Our news media just won't report it.

Thursday, August 11, 2005

Able Danger

What was in Sandy Berger's Pants? Inquiring minds want to know.

It is an undisputed fact that former President Clinton's national security adviser, Sandy Berger removed documents with the highest possible security classification from the National Archives, hid those documents in his clothing, took them home with him, and destroyed some of those documents. It will never be known exactly what information was destroyed, but we can be sure it was something that Sandy Berger did not want the 9/11 Commission to include in its report. What do you suppose was in those papers that could have been worth risking a jail sentence and sacrificing his career? Who was Berger protecting? Bill Clinton? Richard Clarke? As Dr. Sanity notes, it sure would be interesting to know what Berger knew about Able Danger and if he wrote a memo, or signed off on one, that specifically related to Able Danger, and whether he and Clark wrote notes that ultimately prevented the distribution of information that would have led to the arrest of the 9/11 hijackers in 2000. Hmmmm.... turns out we could've arrested Mohammed Atta and three of the other 9/11 hijakers back in 2000 and possibly stopped 9/11 from happening. Well that kinda changes everything, don't it? I wonder what was scribbled in the margins that had to be burned - something like, "What? Me worry?"

Adding insult to injury, it turns out that the "bi-partisan" 9/11 Commission was briefed by military intelligence about the Able Danger project, twice, but chose to ignore it - like Able Danger didn't exist. It certainly disn't exist in their report. As Ed Morrissey notes:
After over 24 hours of denying that anyone had told the Commission about the secret project, their spokesman now says that commission officials met with a uniformed officer who told them about the identification of Mohammed Atta and three other 9/11 hijackers in 2000, over a year prior to the attacks.
What does that mean for the Commission's findings? It meant that the cornerstone of their conclusions no longer fit the facts. Able Danger showed that the US had enough intelligence to take action -- if the government had allowed law enforcement and intelligence operations to cooperate with each other.
...[Wall? What wall?]...
So what did the Commission do? It ignored those facts which did not fit within its predetermined conclusions.
The 9/11 Commission has some 'splainin' to do. And why the hell isn't Sandy Berger in jail yet?

Hollywood at War

The War is about to get very, very ugly right here at home according to Hollywood filmmaker Jason Apuzzo:
”…with box-office numbers trending down, studio executives are suddenly greenlighting movies they can describe to shareholders as 'controversial' or 'timely.' Whether the films are anti-American or otherwise demoralizing to the war effort is apparently immaterial. Its appetite whetted by "Fahrenheit 9/11"'s $222 million worldwide gross, Hollywood thinks it's found a formula for both financial security and critical plaudits: noxious anti-American storylines, bathed in the warm glow of star power.”
Nevermind that “The Passion of the Christ” made twice as much as "Fahrenheit 9/11." There is no way that money is the motivating factor here.

Apuzzo goes on to describe ten revolting movie plots already in production. Here’s a sample:
"No True Glory: The Battle for Fallujah." Universal has attached Harrison Ford to star as real-life General Jim Mattis - in this story blaming the White House for the deaths of fifty Marines in one of the Iraq war's deadliest battles. Based on the book of the same name by Bing West.
Hollywood has shifted strategies, says Apuzzo. Instead of Michael Moore, this time around it’ll be George Clooney, Jamie Foxx, Hugh Grant, Harrison Ford, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Kirsten Dunst, and they’ll all be entertaining as hell. Their attacks will be subtle, but the subtext and purpose should be obvious to anyone paying attention – they do not want America to win. In the WOT, Hollywood is on the wrong side. We need to fight back by working together to produce movies like “The Passion,” “The Incredibles,” and “Serenity,” or just something that portrays our military as it is. Or, I suppose we could start prosecuting people for treason. Would Congress have to declare war first? What would it take to make that happen?

Excuse me while I go short-sell some stock.

Wednesday, August 10, 2005

Michael Schiavo Named Guardian Of The Year

I've become numb. The irony and almost limitless depravity is making me sick. Go ahead. Read the article. The money quote:
Most guardianship association members are appointed by judges ...

"We see a lot of situations where family steps away," said association President-elect Michelle Kenney. "He stuck by. He didn't walk away."
Got that? He didn't walk away! Didn't move in and have an adulterous relationship (and two kids) with another woman or anything like that. No! Presumably, Michelle Kenney said this with a straight face! Michael Schiavo "stuck by" his wife, Terri. He "didn't walk away" like other families do. Like Terri's real family did? The ones who wanted to take care of her? The ones who didn't want to kill her by starvation? By slow torture? Her family who BEGGED Michael and his accomplice, Judge Greer, to let them care for Terri?

Sick, sick, twisted, subhuman scum. I am so glad I don't live in Florida. Excuse me while I puke.

It's Only a Flesh Wound

Another quiz: "Which Holy Grail Character Are You?"
Here's how I scored:

The (Invincible) Black Knight
No one shall pass beyond your defended territory, which you will defend to the death and multiple amputation.

Tuesday, August 09, 2005

Capitalism and Morality

Awesome post on capitalism and morality from Dr. Sanity. Don't miss it.

It's the End of the World as we Know It

Sunday, August 07, 2005

The time has come to say goodbye to tyranny And that includes Africa. Even orphans without shoes in Djibouti get it:
"These kids aren't stupid, and they aren't hopeless. They share the natural optimism of youth with every other kid born anywhere else in the world. Their optimism and ambition aren't misplaced, but they require a few basic preconditions to be realistic--a normal government, and a normal free-market economy. Given those fundamental realities, and with an occasional helping hand ... there is no reason why these girls' hopes should be futile. The world--the African world especially, but with far too much support from Western enablers, including, sometimes, the U.S.--has tolerated corrupt, tyrannical and cruel governments in sub-Saharan Africa for far too long."
They say that one sure sign of insanity is when one does the same thing over and over again hoping for a different result. It keeps failing but they keep doing it over again. Other ideas might seem unlikely to work, but have worked nicely elsewhere nonetheless (i.e., free market capitalism and open competition), but no matter how much success such methods have had, those in power refuse to try them for fear of losing control.

The Stories They Chose Not to Tell

What about the heroes? Yes, many of us have heard of Sgt. First Class Paul R. Smith, Sgt. Leigh Ann Hester and Sgt. Rafael Peralta and many other modern American heroes, but too many have not because the mainstream press has chosen instead to focus on names like Scott Peterson, Lyndie Englund, and Natalie Halloway. And now they blame us, the public for a lack of interest and 'zeal.' What a crock. When will the Times realize that they are the problem?

UPDATE: Jason over at IraqNow writes a letter to the NYT that is just too good to miss. A taste:
You raised the specific instance of SFC Paul Ray Smith, who was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for an action in which he lost his life -- and of course, blame the President for your failure to get the story.

But the record shows that in February 2004, just about everyone on the planet had the story. Except the New York Times. Hell, even the Australian media picked it up.

Now, granted, your staff is operating at a significant handicap: Apparently, you have entire editorial units, entire copy desks, and fact checkers who don't even know what a Congressional Medal of Honor is.

This, in and of itself, is symptomatic of the yawning chasm between the class of people from which you draw your editorial staff and the class of people you serve.

This is an example of the immense deficit you're running in your collective fund of information when it comes to covering military affairs.

This, in and of itself, is dysfunction.

Bill Keller, your paper is stumbling around like a drunken fool, and it's gotten to the point where you're ruining your reputation. Military men have already all but washed their hands of your crap coverage in exasperation. We already know you are too wrapped up in your own neurosis to cover our fighting men and women with any degree of accuracy.

Yes, some people like Blackfive, Greyhawk, Cori Dauber, and myself, have already tried, on numerous occasions, to stage an intervention. But your illness has already caused a lot of people to give up on you.

Saturday, August 06, 2005

Nope. No Bias at USA Today.

Check out this "news" article in yesterday's USA Today - specifically the last paragraph:
Truman will be remembered as the president who brought us both victory and peace in a war that was justified and necessary. By contrast, self-proclaimed "War President" George Bush has brought us neither victory nor peace in the Iraq war, which former president Jimmy Carter this week called "unnecessary and unjust."
What a crock of shit. If Jimmy Carter had done his damn job when Iran was kidnapping American diplomats for 444 days, the twin towers would still be standing today. Besides, the article happens to be about Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the A-bomb; what does this paragraph have to do with the rest of the article? Not a damn thing. I can't believe that Mr. Neuharth is actually getting paid for writing such trash.

Wake Up!

This post nails it. Don't worry, I won't post pictures of the beheadings, the bombing victims, the acid baths, the cutting off of limbs, ears and tongues, the chipper shredders, etc. (though the pictures and videos are out there and easy to access), but I do believe that we need to see or at least be aware of what it is we're fighting against. The MSM only tell us when American troops do something bad. They spent three months obsessing over "abuses" by a couple reservists at Abu Graib, but they don't spend more than one day covering the insurgents' targeting and massacre of Iraqi children. People like Galloway have crossed all the way over the line, but at least he understands that we are in a war - he's just on the wrong side of it. George Galloway is a traitor, fighting against his own country. More people would support this war if they knew about the atrocities, the sheer evil committed by those we're fighting against.

Friday, August 05, 2005

From Iran with Love (NOT)

Thursday, August 04, 2005

It's what puts the 'Jizz' in al Jizzeera

I came across this article recently and was a tad disturbed. This is probably every Islamofascist's wet dream.
"It is as if Bin Laden started by scheduling 'American Hiroshima' for 8-6-2005 and then worked backwards to arrive at 9-11-2001 as the precursor," [Matuszak] speculates.
According to captured al-Qaida leaders and documents, bin Laden's terrorist network has a plan called "American Hiroshima" involving the multiple detonation of nuclear weapons already smuggled into the U.S. ... Al-Qaida has obtained at least 40 nuclear weapons from the former Soviet Union – including suitcase nukes...
I don't know the veracity of their information, but I've heard similar claims before. It's what al Qaeda members say when they're interrogated.

Then I turned on the tv today and saw Zawahiri's face. What'd he say? Nothing. Just the usual "We're gonna kill you and it's all your fault" bullshit. (His "blame the victim" attitude sounds so familiar... did Zawahiri go to journalism school?) But why has he chosen now to climb out from under his rock? The timing seems quite convenient to me. I think al Jizzeera held on to this tape until today, the day before a key date to the terrorists: the 60th anniversary of the dropping of "Little Boy" on Hiroshima. (I know, the bomb was dropped on August 6th, but it is already August 5th in Japan, so tomorrow is the anniversary.) The last video from the terrible butt-buddies (Zarwahiri and bin Laden) was last October, just before the presidential elections, remember? Bin Laden told us he would only kill people who voted for Bush (red states). Do I actually believe that al Qaeda bought suitcase nukes from former Soviet special agents and smuggled them across the Mexican border with the help of MS-13 and is right now ready to set them off in dozens of US cities this weekend? Um, no. I think it is more likely that they would try to poison our water supply but what do I know...?

Remember that debate a couple weeks ago about Cogressman Tancredo's response to a question on a radio show:
Campbell: Worst case scenario, if they do have these nukes inside the border, what would our response be?"

Tancredo: "There are things you could threaten to do before something like that happens, and then you have to do afterwards, that are quite draconian."

"Well," Tancredo continued, "what if you said something like, 'If this happens in the United States and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you could take out their holy sites.'"

Campbell: "You're talking about bombing Mecca?"

Tancredo: "Yeah. What if you said, we recognize that this is the ultimate threat to the United States, therefore this is the ultimate response."
For his answer, Tancredo was criticized from all sides. But think about it. What would be the response to a bunch of nukes going off in American cities? Just think about that phrase: "holy sites." You know what? New York is every bit as holy as Mecca. Denver is just as holy as Medina. Every city in America is "holy." Podunk, Arkansas is holy. If we're considering worst case scenarios, then would we continue to fight with one arm tied behind our back even if our cities were incinerated and millions of our people murdered? No. I don't think so. How do I put this in human terms: If someone kills my son and is threatening to kill my daughter, and you're standing between me and my enemy, defending him, then you're just as dead as he is.

Bomb Mecca? Medina? "The nature of the terrorist threat is unambiguously Islamic and is not so much a deviation from Muslim tradition as an appeal to it." I don't think the option should be completely off the table, but there may be better options. Tehran? Damascus? They're either allies or enemies. (And they're definately not allies.) One thing is for sure. America will not just roll over and die. If you kill us, we will kill you back.

It's time somebody on our side started thinking about worst case scenarios, because that's what the terrorists are thinking about. A wall across the Mexican and Canadian borders would help, too.

Air America Hires Dan Rather as Scandal Spokesman

Satire from ScrappleFace:
Mr. Rather said he looks forward to "telling the true story" about the Air America executive who borrowed $800,000 from a Bronx, New York, agency which normally helps children and Alzheimer's patients.

"On the surface, I'll grant you, these charges look bad," said Mr. Rather. "But is there really that much difference between helping little children and helping the staff of Air America? And is it really malfeasance to take money intended for people who can't remember anything, and give it to a liberal radio network?"
Funny because it's true.

Wednesday, August 03, 2005

Iraqi Public Opinion

One would think that Iraqi public opinion would be newsworthy in the U.S. particularly since we have invested so much blood and treasure in Iraq. Here we find a comprehensive survey of Iraqi public opinion (in PowerPoint slides). Funny. I must have missed it when all the mainstream news outlets reported this very interesting and relevant information.

Tuesday, August 02, 2005

New California

Mean Ol' Meany fisks a letter writer in "The Country of New California." Go read it - it's hilarious. I would just add that if the country of "New California" consisted of only blue counties, rather than blue states, then New California would have no food. Also, including the state of California as a "blue state" greatly biases thoses economic figures (technology, fruit/produce, wine, etc. - California on its own would be the fifth largest economy in the world), but California itself is just one earthquake away from becoming a red state (i.e., almost all of the counties in California east of the San Andreas fault are red).

Monday, August 01, 2005

President Appoints John Bolton as Ambassador to the United Nations

A recess appointment due to the continued filibuster by Senate Democrats. Watch it here. (Isn't it great that we don't have to rely on tv for raw news footage anymore?) Clinton made 140 recess appointments but Bush makes one and its "devious" and "shameless" according to people like Senator Edward Kennedy (D). The quote of the day however has to be from Frank Lautenberg, himself the beneficiary of a "recess appointment" when the (un)Democratic Party of New Jersey dumped Torricelli amid accusations of ethical impropriety just weeks prior to the 2002 elections and changed candidates in direct violation of New Jersey State election laws:
"It's sad that even while the president preaches democracy around the world, he bends the rules and circumvents the will of Congress in appointing our representative to the United Nations."
This from Lautenberg. What a hypocrite. And for the record, the will of Congress was circumvented when he and his demonrat buddies filibustered Bolton not once but twice.