Natural Family Blog

October 7, 2008

Thoughts on War and Presidents

John Glenn (DEMOCRAT) said this ----- It should make us all think a little:

There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq in January. In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January. That's just one American city, about as deadly as the entire war-torn country of Iraq .

When some claim that President Bush shouldn't have started this war, tell them the following :

FDR (DEMOCRAT) led us into World War II. Germany never attacked us; Japan did. From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost ... an average of 112,500 per year.

Truman (DEMOCRAT) finished that war and started one in Korea . North Korea never attacked us. From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost ... an average of 18,334 per year.

John F. Kennedy (DEMOCRAT) started the Vietnam conflict in 1962. Vietnam never attacked us.

Johnson (DEMOCRAT) turned Vietnam into a quagmire. From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost ... an average of 5,800 per year.

Clinton (DEMOCRAT) went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent. Bosnia never attacked us. He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.

This one is a fact that makes me mad..

In the years since terrorists attacked us, President Bush has liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida, put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran, and, North Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people. And the Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking.

But Wait, There's more.

It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno (DEMOCRAT) to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51-day operation.

We've been looking for evidence for chemical weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton (DEMOCRAT) to find the Rose law firm billing records.

It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.

It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida !!!

Our Commander-In-Chief is doing a GREAT JOB! The Military morale is high!
The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to realize the facts.

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 4:53 AM

Front Page: Geert Wilders War

The kicker in this article was here:

"At one point, Wilders presented what he called a lesson in “Islam 101.” It went like this: “Islam is not a religion. It’s a political ideology. If you want to compare it then the only thing you can compare it to is communism. It’s a totalitarian ideology.” Lest there be any misunderstanding, Wilders added that there was no such thing as moderate Islam. “Sure, there are moderate Muslims,” he said. “But there is no moderate Islam.”

Kindred themes feature in his film “Fitna.” To say that Wilders does not present Islam as a religion of peace is to put it mildly. “Fitna” juxtaposes graphic footage of Islamic terrorism – including the 9-11 attacks, the Madrid train bombings, and the beheading of Nicholas Berg – with Koranic verses and clips of Islamic clerics preaching murder of non-Muslims and Jews. Low-budget and unabashedly one-sided – Wilders seems uninterested in the possibility that there is more to foundational Islamic texts than murderous calls to arms – it is not exactly a polished work, something Wilders readily concedes. “I’m a lawmaker not a moviemaker,” he says. But like its creator, the film is nothing if not direct."

I have long believed that the terrorists are using religion to cover their communism from the blind in the west. Arafat was a revolutionary marxist and only agreed to tone down the political rhetoric when convinced that it was the best way to fool the west.

I pray for Geert Wilders, that he will be protected from harm and able to stand up for Freedom and Democracy in Europe.

Jenny Hatch

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 4:38 AM

September 25, 2008

Michael J. Totten at Commentary Magazine: Al Qaeda’s Defeat In Iraq

Click on the banner to get to Tottens Blog

Al Qaeda’s Defeat In Iraq

Al Qaeda lost in Iraq partly because American soldiers and Marines outsmarted and outfought them, but also, just as importantly, because the Iraqi people themselves rose up in resistance.

Iraqis aren’t the only ones who have soured on Al Qaeda lately.

Last year the Pew Research Center surveyed Muslims in 16 different countries. Support for suicide bombers has declined in nearly every country that was also surveyed in 2002, and the decline is dramatic almost everywhere. The only Muslim communities surveyed where support for suicide bombers remains at greater than 50 percent are, unsurprisingly, the Palestinian territories of the West Bank and Gaza.

The United States could not have prudently allowed itself to yield the field to Al Qaeda in either Iraq or Afghanistan by being wholly distracted from one or the other. Both fronts were crucial for Al Qaeda, which means both were crucial for the United States. It doesn’t matter if we like the fact that we have been embroiled in a hot war with Al Qaeda in two countries at once. That’s just how it is.

If Al Qaeda hadn’t poured all those resources into Iraq, they likely would have poured them into Afghanistan. And the U.S. very well may have lost the war by this time. Afghanistan, at the very least, would be in much worse shape than it is. And it’s not looking good even now. Independent foreign correspondent Michael Yon, who is hardly known as a pessimistic defeatist, still insists we’re losing the war in Afghanistan. Meanwhile, the U.S. has all but won the war in Iraq even though Iraq was in much worse shape recently and the war there did not last as long. Iraq, as it turned out, was an easier place to fight Al Qaeda and other sundry insurgent and terrorist groups than Afghanistan.

Obama is rightly worried about the safe havens Al Qaeda has created in Pakistan, and it’s to his credit that he refuses to let up about it. But for years he’s been entirely blasé about the safe havens Al Qaeda created in Iraq–in Ramadi, Fallujah, Baqubah, Mosul, and parts of Baghdad. For years he has aggressively promoted a policy of abandoning the fight in that country which quite obviously would have allowed Al Qaeda to preserve those safe havens and possibly even expand them.

He finally admitted the surge worked after wallowing in denial about it for a year and a half while those of us who actually worked in Iraq knew he was wrong. It’s time for him to admit that one of the results of the surge is that Al Qaeda lost its war in Iraq and was not given time to reconstitute."

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 2:19 PM

September 10, 2008

NRO: David French Bearing Witness to Virtue

Bearing Witness to Virtue

Defending the honor of those in uniform.

By David French

Diyala Province, Iraq — Every now and then I get e-mails from friends and family members with subject lines like “Can you believe this?” or “This will make you mad!” Invariably they link to some form of radical rant that either slanders soldiers or so completely departs from the reality I see and experience on the ground in Iraq that I laugh out loud. I typically read and dismiss these messages. In a nation of 300 million, there will always be “those people” — individuals so consumed with ignorance, dominated by hatred, and obsessed with the political cause of the moment that they lose all perspective. But as I prepare to wrap up my deployment and head back home, I’ve changed my mind.

We simply cannot let lies pass unopposed.

Those of us who have been here — who have spent a year (and typically more) of our lives in this place — must speak the truth. Unless we do, yesterday’s slander can become today’s conventional wisdom and tomorrow’s history.

One week ago, I opened one of those e-mails which linked to an insidious article not from some fringe blogger fond of words like “rethuglican” or “Bushitler,” but from a respected member of the mainstream media, a self-described conservative who has occupied space in the most coveted perches of political commentary. Andrew Sullivan, writing from The Atlantic Monthly’s website, compared Russia’s aggression against Georgia with the United States Army in Iraq with the following words:
Just imagine if the press were to discover a major jail in Gori, occupied by the Russians, where hundreds of Georgians had been dragged in off the streets and tortured and abused? What if we discovered that the orders for this emanated from the Kremlin itself? And what if we had documentary evidence of the ghastliest forms of racist, dehumanizing, abusive practices against the vulnerable as the standard operating procedure of the Russian army — because the prisoners were suspected of resisting the occupying power? (Emphasis added).
I was appalled. As an officer in the 2d Squadron, 3d Armored Cavalry Regiment (LTC Paul T. Calvert, Commanding) in eastern Diyala Province, I serve in a unit which is at the very tip of the spear in the Diyala Province, arguably now the central front of the war and one of Iraq’s bloodiest provinces. As a judge advocate, one of my core functions is detainee operations. So I know and have lived our “standard operating procedure.”

I first wanted to write to enlighten Mr. Sullivan about the way our soldiers truly behave. I wanted to tell him of the young men who risk death to capture men they could have killed. I wanted to tell him we are so careful with our detainees that the single worst injury ever suffered by any of the hundreds of men our squadron detained even momentarily was a scraped knee. I wanted to describe our procedures for collecting evidence — procedures so demanding that soldiers have braved IED-laden roads to obtain sworn statements from troops in the field so that detainees could be prosecuted according to the rule of law.

But I realized that all of that would be futile. I realized that Sullivan (and others like him) would slander the 99 percent of soldiers who do the right thing by reference to the 1 percent (or less) who commit crimes. And in the minds of many who inhabit Beltway coffeehouses, cubicles in Brussels, and university lecture halls, we could die doing right . . . but they will still define us by those who do wrong.

So if I can’t persuade Andrew Sullivan, perhaps the Iraqis can. After all, they’ve lived with our “standard operating procedure” every day for more than five years. Who knows the Army better than they?

So, Mr. Sullivan, I have a few questions for you: If “the ghastliest forms of racist, dehumanizing, abusive” practices are our “standard operating procedure” why do the al-Qaeda terrorists I’ve seen (and I’ve personally been face to face with more than 100) often visibly relax when they enter Coalition custody? Why do they so frequently and readily surrender rather than even try to escape our allegedly vicious detention? Why do they sometimes plead to remain in our facilities? If individuals are arbitrarily “dragged off the streets” for “torture and abuse,” why do civilians, including the smallest children, pour out of their homes to see and greet American soldiers when we walk through their villages? Why do they hide behind their mud and stone walls only when they fear reprisals from our enemies or suspect an imminent firefight? If we are such monsters, why do sheikhs and everyday citizens beg for us to stay with them, rather than living in dusty combat outposts in the heart of their communities?

Perhaps Iraqi citizens would shut their doors in fear if they learned about the army from Mr. Sullivan’s columns rather than from their personal interactions. Perhaps insurgents would fight to the death every time rather than face our “racist, dehumanizing” detention if they attended a panel discussion at your average university. Perhaps children would run screaming in fear if they saw almost any of Hollywood’s recent “important” films about the war. But they don’t see any of that. Instead, they see and experience the U.S. Army as it is, warts and all. And while they chafe at the presence of foreign soldiers (as any proud people would), they are making their choice. For more than five years they have seen the contrast between our soldiers and the terrorists and militias. And unlike Andrew Sullivan, they can tell the difference.

Because nothing less than history is at stake (and so few have seen the truth with their own eyes), it’s time for those of us who’ve been here to set the record straight. We must testify to the brutality of our enemies — just two days ago, al-Qaeda thugs in our area of operations shot a two-month-old infant in the face. More importantly, we must bear witness to the courage and virtue of our brothers- and sisters-in-arms.

Some try to define the 99 percent through the actions of the 1 percent.

We can never let that happen.

— David French is a senior counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund and a captain in the U.S. Army Reserve. He is winding down his first deployment in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 11:57 AM

September 9, 2008

Jewish World Review: Thomas Sowell: The Vision of the Left

The Vision of the Left

"Very few people have either a vested interest or an ideological preference for a world in which there are many inequalities.

...For those who bother to study history, it was precisely the opposite policies in the 1980s — pouring tons of money into military equipment — which brought the Cold War and its threat of nuclear annihilation to an end.

The left fought bitterly against that "arms race" which in fact lifted the burden of the Soviet threat, instead of leading to war as the elites claimed.

Personally, I wish Ronald Reagan could have talked the Soviets into being nicer, instead of having to spend all that money. Only experience makes me skeptical about that "kinder and gentler" approach and the vision behind it."

Peace Through Strength!!!

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:54 AM

Debbi Lee speaks to Blue and Gold Star families at the RNC

Debbie Lee, mother of Navy Seal Marc A. Lee, who was killed in combat in Iraq, addresses a rally of Gold Star and Blue Star families, sponsored by FamiliesUnitedMission.com, in St. Paul, Minn., on September 1, 2008, the opening day of the Republican National Convention.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:47 AM

September 1, 2008

International Herald Tribune: U.S. hands back security of Anbar Province

U.S. hands back security of Anbar Province
By Dexter Filkins

Iraqi security forces carrying Iraqi flags during the handover ceremony in Ramadi, Anbar Province, on Monday. (Pool photo by Wathiq Khuzaie, via Reuters)

Monday, September 1, 2008

RAMADI, Iraq: Two years ago, Anbar Province was the most lethal place for American forces in Iraq. A U.S. marine or soldier died in the province nearly every day, and the provincial capital, Ramadi, was a moonscape of rubble and ruins. Islamic extremists controlled large pieces of territory, with some so ferocious in their views that they did not even allow the baking of bread.

On Monday, U.S. commanders formally returned responsibility for keeping order in Anbar Province, once the heartland of the Sunni insurgency, to the Iraqi Army and police. The ceremony, including a parade on a freshly paved street, capped one of the most significant turnabouts in the country since the war began five and a half years ago.

Over the past two years, the number of insurgent attacks against Iraqis and Americans has dropped by more than 90 percent. Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia has been severely degraded, if not crushed altogether, in large part because many local Sunnis, including former insurgents, have taken up arms against it.

Since February, as the security situation improved, U.S. commanders have cut the number of marines and soldiers operating in the province by 40 percent.

The transfer of authority codified a situation that Iraqi and American officers say has been in effect since April: The Iraqi Army and police operate independently and retain primary responsibility for battling the insurgency and crime in Anbar. The United States, which had long done the bulk of the fighting, has stepped into a backup role, going into the streets only when accompanied by Iraqi forces.

But the dynamic that has brought such calm to Anbar, welcome as it is, seems fragile. Many former insurgents now man the local police forces, or remain on the U.S. payroll as loosely supervised gunmen working for the so-called Sunni Awakening Councils.

But with most of the Sunni population having abstained from voting in 2005, many are now claiming that the present arrangement leaves them unrepresented. Local Sunni leaders have warned that provincial elections must go forward if violence is to be averted.

Still, as the parade marched along Ramadi's Main Street on Monday, the signs were mostly good. The ceremony was a primarily Iraqi affair, with the U.S. marines wearing neither helmets nor body armor, nor carrying guns. The festive scene became an occasion for celebration by Iraqis and Americans, who at several moments wondered aloud in the sweltering heat how things had gone from so grim to so much better, so fast.

"Not in our wildest dreams could we have imagined this," said Mowaffak al-Rubaie, the Iraqi national security adviser, who flew in from Baghdad. "Two or three years ago, had we suggested that the Iraqis could take responsibility, we would have been ridiculed, we would have been laughed at. This was the cradle of the Sunni insurgency."

Indeed it was. Anbar Province became the most intractable region after the toppling of Saddam Hussein in April 2003. More than 1,000 American marines and soldiers have died in the province, a quarter of the total U.S. toll.

Anbar's second city, Falluja, was the scene of the biggest battle of the war, in which nearly 100 Americans died and more than 500 were wounded.

Bordering on three countries, Anbar was also considered the primary transit point for foreigners entering Iraq.

The fighting devastated much of Anbar. Falluja, a city of 250,000, was razed, and large parts of Ramadi, a city of 500,000, were reduced to ruins.

By the summer of 2006, insurgents had tried to kill Anbar's governor, Mamoon Sami al-Rashid, 29 times. They failed with Rashid, but that was an exception. Rashid's immediate predecessor, Raja Nawaf, was kidnapped and murdered. His deputy, Talib al-Dulaimi, was shot and killed. The chairman of the Anbar provincial council was also murdered. Rashid's personal secretary was beheaded and most of his ministers went into hiding.

What finally broke the stalemate, according to former insurgents and local leaders, was a local revolt against Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, the radical insurgent group believed to be led primarily by foreigners. As the group began to expand its goals beyond killing Americans to include sectarian assassinations and imposing a fundamentalist Islam, local tribal leaders struck back and reached out for help to U.S. forces. The "Sunni Awakening" was born, and it soon spread across the Sunni areas of Iraq.

Saadi al-Faraji used to be a gunman for a local group called the Islamic Movement of Holy Warriors, which focused mainly on attacking Americans. Then, in 2006, Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia tried to take over his group and force them to kill Iraqis who worked for the government, including police officers.

"Qaeda declared that we were apostates, and they demanded our heads, because we would not kill Iraqi soldiers or Iraqi police," Faraji said.

The Islamic Movement of Holy Warriors began attacking Qaeda fighters at about the same time that a local Sunni sheik named Abdul Sattar abu Risha struck a deal with the Americans and formed the first Awakening Council. The Islamic Movement formed its own Awakening Council, and today, Faraji is a colonel in the Iraqi police.

As for his view on Americans, Faraji said they had evolved.

"They made mistakes, and so did we," he said. "The past is past."

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:20 PM

August 26, 2008

Denver DNC: Hippy Hygiene Kits

Lots of Hippies roaming the streets of Denver this week.

I passed out a few Hippy Hygiene Kits to Moonbats during our Pro Troop Rally on sunday.

Go read this Hillarious Westword Article written by Jared Jacang Maher, he pretty much nailed it. (Except for the Anti Abortion Mockery, I completely agree with his analysis) - From anarchists to aging hippies, they're all part of protestation nation. Slide Show: Ten Protestors you'll meet at the DNC.

Here is the replay of the movie I made last year:

Jenny Hatch

Hot Air Correspondent Jason Mattera goes undercover at the 2008 Democrat National Convention

More Photos, movies, etc....at Peoples Press Collective

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 9:01 AM

August 24, 2008

American Victory Coalition, Brian Ivers Speech and Ward Churchill is a criminal!

Why was this person following me around my home in Louisville the past few days???

This past week I helped to promote this rally in the local media. I did not take many pictures or videos because I was interviewed by so many news outlets and did not have time. I did happen to get this footage of Marine Brian Ivers. His amazing speech was the highlight of the rally for me. Here is a clip from it, with a few photos that I took of the demo.

You Tube Version

Jenny Hatch

Dale Lanhams Slide Show on Flicker

The Rocky Mountain News got a picture of me wiping my nose with my UN Flag Hankie. It is picture number ten in this slide show.

Rocky Mountain News Coverage of our Rally

El Marco's photos at Looking at the Left.

The only question I really have is why did a couple of young anti-war activists start hanging around my house as soon as I put info about our Pro War Rally on my blog and at Free Republic? Just what were you dudes doing following me down South Boulder Road while I biked my son to kindergarten???

And what was that guy in a car with a Colorado License plate number 415-MZE doing following me from my house to the rally? (Did you see me blow you kisses out my window and wave when you were waiting at the light by South Boulder Road and Hwy 42?) Yes you, in your green peace shirt, short black hair, and sunglasses. I reported your car to the Denver Police. And I will be carrying my camera with me these next few weeks, so if you show your ugly face around my house or my family again, I will be making a stalking report to the Louisville Police.

I was looking at the videos put together by the Denver Post and saw this familiar face in the crowd. What exactly were you going to do when you quickly walked up to my bike last thursday?

You really should take lessons from Ward Churchill on how to intimidate and threaten a political oponent. He stalked me to Wal Mart and then waited for me and my sons to come out and threw some nasty chemical on us.

Much more effective than just simply following us around town for a couple days. See he thinks it is OK for him to use American Free Speech to cover his ugly heiny, But he believes it is just fine to bully and intimidate a woman and her children. I was sick for a whole year after his attack. You are all a bunch of miscreant losers to me.

Here is a picture of me taken a week after the chemical attack.

It was when I watched a report like this one of Griff Jenkins getting roughed up by Churchill's body guards that I decided to publicly accuse him the same way I did the night of the attack on Free Republic.

BARF! "Nobody touches Ward while he's here."

If you would like to learn about real bravery, real valor, and honest to goodness real american values,

Go Here to Learn More about Brian Ivers

Brian Ivers bravery entered into the Congressional Record by Marilyn Musgrave

HONORING BRAVERY OF MARINE
STAFF SGT. BRIAN IVERS
HON. MARILYN N. MUSGRAVE
OF COLORADO
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Wednesday, September 10, 2003

Mrs. MUSGRAVE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today
to honor Marine Staff Sgt. Brian Ivers for his
bravery in the face of combat during Operation
Freedom in Iraq. Mr. Ivers is a resident of Fort
Collins and is a Police Officer of that fair city.
Serving his country on active duty in the
Fox 2nd Battalion, 23rd Marine Regiment, 1st
Division, his company was ordered to rescue
a group of Marine artillerymen who took a
wrong turn in the town of Al Gaharraf. Encountering
a near blinding sand and rain storm
as they entered the town, no air support could
be provided.

Staff Sergeant Ivers’ platoon came under
fire as they entered Al Gaharaff. As the first
platoon dismounted, they immediately engaged
with the enemy. Sergeant Jim Cawley’s
platoon worked to suppress the enemy long
enough to allow Sergeant Ivers’ platoon to
enter the town.

Sergeant Cawley’s platoon fought a gun
battle while occupying a building. A grenade
was launched into the building and leveled
many of the marines because of the concussion.
Enemy fire had increased all around
them while they were returning fire. One of the
marines was trapped inside the building.

Staff Sergeant Ivers attempted to rescue
him. In his own words, Brian said, ‘‘I got up to
get him as I thought I could just grab his hand
and drag him out. As I moved along the wall,
rounds began to punch holes out of the concrete
in front of me. I turned to go back to
where I had just come from and was struck in
the side with a round. The force of it spun me
around and at the time I thought I had been
hit in the kidney.’’

Later, Brian would realize that the bayonet
had taken the impact of the round, deflecting
it to his flack jacket, thus saving his life. His
platoon was in contact with the enemy for over
a half hour and was running low on ammunition.
They were finally told to pull out because
air cover was expected. A tank showed up
about 40 minutes later.

Brian’s ribs were blue with bruises. Months
later, Brian found out that he had broken the
eleventh rib—a good reminder that their battle
had saved a unit of the eleventh Marines.
Because he received a wound while in combat,
Staff Sergeant Brian Ivers will receive the
Purple Heart. Mr. Speaker, we are so fortunate
to live in this great country where freedom
is something that we rarely have to think
about and often take for granted.

Denver Post Moonbat Video

A few more videos, this was the one where I noticed the person who had been stalking me for the past few days.

Fox News smack down....(F bomb alert)

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:53 PM

August 21, 2008

American Victory Coalition organizational thread at Free Republic

Go to This Thread at Free Republic to learn more about the American Victory Coalition and the organizational efforts around the Pro Troop Rally in Denver this sunday!

Jenny Hatch

More Links Below:

Footage from the DNC in Chicago in 1968

The moonbats want to recreate 1968 this weekend in Denver:

DNC Disruption

Michelle Malkin: Recreate ‘68 threatens Democrat convention in Denver

Human Events: Recreate 68

This would be an ideal time to join Patriots in Denver who plan to stand up for our Troops, Our President, and The War on Terror.

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 8:03 AM

August 20, 2008

Press Release: Pro Troop Demonstration during DNC in Denver

Pro-Troop Demonstration brings Iraq / Afghanistan Vets and Military Families to Denver
The American Victory Coalition brings a Pro-Victory/Pro-Troop message to Denver and the
Democratic National Convention

Where: Pioneer Monument, on the northwest corner of Colfax Avenue and Broadway
When: Sunday, August 24th 10 a.m. to 2 p.m.

Invited participants include Families United for Our Troops and Their Mission, and Vets for Freedom.

Americans from near and far will assemble in Denver, CO to show their support for our troops and their missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. For details and updates: www.LookingAtTheLeft.com

"One of the rally’s organizers recalls “One of my best friends went on three tours to the middle east, and died last year. His mom told me that when she told him she saw my pro-troops activism on a Denver Nine news story, he burst into tears while serving in Iraq.” Our troops need to know that the American public and our representatives in Washington have the resolve to see their missions completed. Public demonstrations of support on the home front boost the troops’ morale."

I have been helping Rona to organize the rally this week and was thrilled when she mentioned my friend Joe Mangus in the press release for our event.

Go Here to Learn More about Joe.

Joe and Jen just before he deployed to Iraq. Joe served in the first gulf war, and went to Iraq twice during this recent conflict before he died an untimely death last year.

He was a hero to our family long before the War started though. When our son Andrew was born in 1996, Joe was one of the first volunteer firemen to show up at our house after our home birth. Both Andy and I needed Emergency Transport and Joe ended up in the Ambulence with Andrew. He offered a prayer for our son that made an immediate difference in his vital signs as they traveled to the hospital. We will always love Joe for the hero he is.

The whole press release is located below:

Pro-Troop Demonstration brings Iraq / Afghanistan Vets and Military Families to Denver
The American Victory Coalition brings a Pro-Victory/Pro-Troop message to Denver and the
Democratic National Convention

Where: Pioneer Monument, on the northwest corner of Colfax Avenue and Broadway
When: Sunday, August 24th
10 a.m. to 2 p.m.

Americans from near and far will assemble in Denver, CO to show their support for our troops and their missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. For details and updates: www.LookingAtTheLeft.com

One of the rally’s organizers recalls “One of my best friends went on three tours to the middle east, and died last year. His mom told me that when she told him she saw my pro-troops activism on a Denver Nine news story, he burst into tears while serving in Iraq.” Our troops need to know that the American public and our representatives in Washington have the resolve to see their missions completed. Public demonstrations of support on the home front boost the troops’ morale.

Our enemies understand that military strength is nothing without national support. George Orwell put it best in his 1941 essay Pacifism and the War "If you hamper the war effort of one side, you automatically help out that of the other...Pacifism is objectively pro-fascist. This is elementary common sense."

Anti-war demonstrations today are generally organized by surprisingly radical anti-democratic groups. Even the most benign sounding organization in the coalition organizing the anti-war protest in Denver, a Quaker group called The American Friends Service Committee, supports America’s unilateral disarmament and supported the Vietnamese Communists, Pol Pot, Fidel Castro, and the PLO. This is but one example.

The rally location is adjacent to the anarchist/pacifist groups' main anti-war demonstration. The rally will also be face to face with Democratic Convention Delegates gathering for the DNC Host Committees Welcome Party.

Dynamic speakers from Vets for Freedom and prominent Colorado vets, who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, will speak at the rally about their experiences and the importance of never surrendering to those who have vowed to destroy America and our allies. Debbie Lee, mother of the first Navy Seal to lose his life in Operation Iraqi Freedom, will also address the crowd. She has been a leading spokesperson supporting the efforts of U.S. troops fighting in the war on terrorism.

Invited participants also include Families United for Our Troops and Their Mission, a not-for-profit, non partisan organization consisting of Gold and Blue Star families (whose loved ones have been killed or injured in battle, or who are still in harm’s way) and Americans who share a deep appreciation for our men and women in uniform. It is also comprised of patriotic Americans who have a desire to show their support for America’s heroes and their families.

The rally's purpose is to show the world America’s true colors: strength, compassion, and resolve in the war on terror. This is an opportunity for patriotic Americans to fight for the troops that are fighting so courageously for America. The organizers welcome everyone who wants to show their support for victory in the war against radical Islamic extremists and the regimes that support them.

Press contact for information: Rona Wronker, American Victory Coalition, 303 459-4931, rona@images76.com
Debbie Lee is available for interviews. She is very articulate and would make a great guest for your show / subject for an article.
She can be reached at 623-537-5322 , cell phone 541-400-0177 or crazilee007@msn.com

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 8:38 AM

August 15, 2008

Weapons of Mass Destruction? Jack Cashill shares the facts

I have heard rumors that Edwards mistress gave birth to a child who looks remarkably like him:

I wonder if the press would have covered National Enquirer salacious speculation if it was about Mitt Romney.....hmmmm

Naw...they could not even cover a dead girl in DC - Mary Mahoney

Ann Coulter has some choice words about Sleazebag Edwards...

Go here to read the conservative version of The Onion.

Here is Cashills whole article from World Net Daily: My comments are in italics.

What Rielle Hunter can tell us about WMDs
Exclusive: Jack Cashill points out media have dealt with 2 stories remarkably similarly

Posted: August 14, 2008
1:00 am Eastern

By Jack Cashill

There has been a little buzz surrounding John Edwards and his alleged affair. Because the only source has been the National Enquirer we have decided not to cover the rumors or salacious speculations.

– Tony Pierce, Los Angeles Times, July 24

When the media refuse to look for something, whether that something be a high-profile bimbo or a low-yield nuclear bomb, the result will be the same: They won't find it.

The saga of Saddam's WMDs is chock-a-block with Rielle Hunter's, people with extraordinary stories to tell if only someone would bother asking. A sampling:

Richard Butler

In the year 2000, Richard Butler wrote a book called "The Greatest Threat." The subtitle of the book spells out its stark thesis: "Iraq, Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Growing Crisis of Global Security."

Butler was not exactly a neocon. A leftist and an internationalist, the Australian arms-control expert had overseen UNSCOM, the unlovely acronym for the United Nation Special Commission on disarming Iraq.

After being booted from Iraq in late 1998, Butler considered Iraq's ongoing plea of innocence "the blackest lie."

"It would be foolish in the extreme," he writes of Saddam, "not to assume that he is developing long-range missile capabilities, at work again on building nuclear weapons, and adding to the chemical and biological warfare weapons he concealed during the UNSCOM inspection period."

The people who breakfast on the New York Times, snack on NPR and dine on the "CBS Evening News" know as little about Richard Butler as they did about Rielle Hunter a week ago, which was nothing at all.

Click on the image of Liar Joe Wilson to get the facts on the Yellow Cake.....It must suck being Joe Wilson today. I wonder which Hollywood actor will play him in the movie? we already know Nicole Kidman will play Val....but who is going to go pay nine bucks to watch this lie of a farce at the movies???

Here is the rest of Jack Cashills column:

Spencer Abraham

In July 2004, the BBC reported on a press conference in which U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham claimed that the U.S. had removed 1.77 tons of enriched uranium from Iraq the month before.

Abraham called the removal a "major achievement." Just as suddenly as the story appeared, however, it disappeared. Not a word was heard of it from the major American media.

Liberal bloggers, as expected, would labor to dismiss the importance of the find as they do all finds, but the mainstream media did not want to know about it at all.

The fear that the uranium find might have been as "major" as Abraham suggested kept them even from asking him why the story had been withdrawn.

Douglas Feith

In his exhaustively documented 2008 book, "War and Decision," former Undersecretary of Defense Feith provides the single best account of the role WMDs played in the planning for war.

The New York Times and Washington Post, among others, could not trouble themselves to review it. The Post gave two reporters a one-day deadline to cherry pick excerpts from an unedited manuscript of Feith's book and write something up. And that, the Post decided, was enough.

To keep its readers informed about WMDs, the Post did review Scott McClellan's comically mistitled, "What Happened." McClellan had not a clue as to what happened in Iraq. Feith did. Better to feature McClellan.

Gen. Georges Sada

I was able to question the former Iraqi air force general when he visited the Kansas City area. I came away totally convinced of his character and his credibility.

In his 2006 book, "Saddam's Secrets," Sada revealed that Saddam had many of Sada's pilot colleagues ferry WMDs to Syria in the run-up to the war – a strategy that would have made perfect sense.

The major media had no time for Sada and even less time to follow the trail to Syria.

Don Bordenkircher

Bordenkircher served two years as national director of prison and jail operations in Iraq. In that capacity, he spoke to about 40 prisoners, who "boasted of being involved in the transport of WMD warheads to Syria."

WorldNetDaily found Bordenkircher's revelations worth sharing. The mainstream media apparently have not.

Paul Gaubatz

Working with the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, Gaubatz began searching for WMD soon after Baghdad fell.

His sources confirm what Bordenkircher and Sada had been told: namely that Iraqis and Syrians, with Russian supervision, moved the bulk of the WMD to Syria.

With the help of Iraqi civilians, Gaubatz identified four WMD sites. The external signs of chemical activity were unmistakable: missile imprints, decontamination kits, atropine needles and the like.

Says Gaubatz, "The Iraqis and my team had no doubt WMDs were hidden in these areas." Extricating the materials from deeply fortified bunkers in an unsecured war zone would prove to be no easy matter.

The insecurity of the situation in Iraq may help explain why the Bush administration has not spoken out about these and other WMD revelations.

In his memoir, "At the Center of the Storm," former Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet, a Clinton appointee, sheds some light on White House reticence.

"Sometimes," he writes, "it is even useful to have positive accomplishments misperceived as failures, to throw foreign governments and rogue organizations off the scent."

The major media seem to have played right into the White House's hands. Having taken the political hit in 2004 and survived, the Bush administration likely used the media's willful blindness to keep the bad guys in the dark about Iraq's WMDs.

The administration's openness about the recent removal of a 550 metric ton yellowcake cache suggests a change in strategy in a newly secure Iraq.

To be sure, the major media and the liberal bloggers have done their best to downplay the potency of the material and the political significance of its removal. After all, they tell us, everyone knew the yellowcake was there all along.

But the question has to be asked: If everyone knew it was there, why were the Democrats so eager to pull American troops and cede the yellowcake to whoever controlled the ground?

The fact that a Canadian uranium producer was willing to pay tens of millions of dollars for the yellowcake suggests its potential for future harm in the hands of al-Qaida or other terrorists.

The Democrats, however, did not want to know the potential of the yellowcake any more they did the paternity of Ms. Hunter's baby. They don't want the public to know either, and the media have obliged them.

For several years now, the Democrats have inflamed the passion of their governing coalition around the treasonous falsehood that "Bush lied."

The truth about Iraq's WMD program, they rightly fear, would only cool that passion before a more useful lie can take its place.

"Truth," they say, "is the first casualty of war." But historically, at least, a nation's leaders have sacrificed the truth to help their side win.

Not this time.

Thanks Jack!

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 9:51 PM

August 14, 2008

Claudia Rosett at NRO: Georgia and the American Cowboy

Georgia and the American Cowboy

I watch something like the invasion of Democratic Georgia on my television screen and all of my Libertarian impulses are out the window and I just want to go smash some Marxist Heiny.

Rosetts article is a great read and my Neo Conservative tendencies and impulses are fired up when I read about emerging democracies being bullied and rolled over by Russian tanks.

She wrote:

"With Russia’s military blasting its way into neighboring Georgia, this sure seems like a moment when the world could use a democratic super-cop.

Good luck. Right now, we don’t have one.

America effectively resigned from the much-reviled role of lone superpower five years ago, after toppling the Taliban in Afghanistan in 2002, and defying the Oil-for-Food devotees at the United Nations to overthrow the tyranny of Saddam Hussein in Iraq in 2003. Since then, President Bush, to his credit, has stuck with the fight in Afghanistan and Iraq — a display of determination and firepower which goes far to explain why almost seven years have passed since September 11 without another major attack on U.S. shores.

But in dealing with other major threats to the free world, the White House has hung up its spurs, turned in its badge, and handed over the remaining items in the global-security portfolio to the soft-power ministrations of our globe-trotting diplomats."

No easy answers in these difficult times. One side of me would love to bring all the American Troops home and let the nations fight it out amongst themselves, but my other side understands how many families around the world are grateful for so called American Imperialism and intervention, and I would hate for them to feel like we had abandoned them to the thugs just so we could enjoy our freedoms and luxuries without one of our soldiers dying or being permanently maimed.

I honestly don't know what is best in the Georgia situation. No doubt thinkers much more intelligent than me are already on it, going through every possible scenario for the best outcome. I am simply praying for peace and that this wonderful country is able to retain its sovereignty.

Jenny Hatch

UPDATE August 15, 2008

Phyllis Schlafly balances out the argument with her take on territorial integrity.

And Pat Buchanan talks about blowback and chickens coming home to roost from bear baiting.

No easy answers....

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 8:22 AM

June 7, 2008

Fox News: Greta Van Susteren interviews Jenny McCarthy "On the Record" on her sons Autism

I thought this interview was the best one Jenny has done so far. Thanks Fox and Greta for taking the time to do such a great interview.

Jenny Hatch

PS Who does not bother to be "fair and balanced" on this blog, and thus will NOT share the recent letter from the American Academy of Pediatrics on Autism and the Green our Vaccines Rally.

My blog Mission Statement is "Healthy Families Make A Healthy World". Vaccines are being used by Globalist Elitists to implement a Population Reduction Agenda in our society. Because of that fact, I do not, nor will I ever trust a Big Pharma Vaccine for me or my children and will go to jail rather than allow my little ones to be poisoned.

Here are three documentary movies that will help educate you about these statements of fact:

David Ayoub, M.D. goes through the relations of Mercury to Autism as well its connections to “National Security Study Memorandum 200”; for population control. Showing its shocking connections to today’s G.A.V.I. Are powerful forces really trying to help the poor people or could it be for another agenda; the sterilization of the poor?

This is an upsetting video, so brace yourself.

Endgame by Alex Jones

We Become Silent

These are my three favorite videos that expose the frauds of the Pharmaceutical Companies.

Take the time to give them a look. Then the Vaccine Story will make sense to you as a consumer of health care. These movies and the types of information they contain explain WHY I call the Medical Profession, and the Pharmaceutical companies that give them their marching orders, the Whore of Babylon as described in the Book of Revelations in the Bible.

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 6:59 AM

May 27, 2008

Debbie Lee Memorial Day Message

Hello, my name is Debbie Lee, and my son, Marc Alan Lee was the first Navy Seal killed in Operation Iraqi Freedom, so you can imagine that days like today - Memorial Day - are tough days for me. I miss Marc so deeply, yet I am so proud of my Hero, my Mighty Warrior! He loved his country and was so proud to serve in the military and to dutifully undertake the missions he served on - he understood how important it is for America to win the war on terror.

Jenny Hatch

Memorial Day is not a once-a-year holiday for me - everyday is Memorial Day for me as I remember the little boy who grew into a Hero. I remember his smile, his love, his laughter, his hugs, but most of all his sacrifice. As a nation we have declared this as a day to remember those who have given their lives serving their country in the military. We can never fully repay their sacrifice.

I'm not sure if you've heard the news reports or not, but a contingent of liberal, spineless, gutless politicians in Congress have decided to hold up funding for our troops - and are using them as pawns in their political playground to force our military to surrender to the terrorists.

I spent last Christmas with our troops in Iraq, and I can't even put into words just how amazing these young men and women are. It's such a dishonor and disservice to our honorable men and women in uniform to be thousands of miles away from family, friends and their homes, while here on the home front anti-military radicals and anti-war politicians are trying to undermine their missions.

My son gave up his voice in service to his nation -- but I can be his voice, and work to make sure that those still serving on the frontlines of Iraq and Afghanistan have the support of Americans back home. Let's show our troops that they are unconditionally supported by the American people - and let them know not to be distracted or depressed by the shameless acts of some Members of Congress.

Move America Forward, the nation's largest pro-troop organization, has put together an effort to send the largest number of care packages to U.S. troops in history. Between now and the 4th of July we are asking Americans to sponsor care packages that we will send to our heroic military men and women who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. We need you to join us by sponsoring care packages and helping us reach this historic goal.

** SPONSOR A CARE PACKAGE - CLICK HERE **

My son gave up his life for this country because he knew that the series of attacks against Americans by Islamic jihadists/terrorists had to be stopped. Our country could no longer look the other way and pretend that there wasn't an enemy that was determined to destroy our nation. So Marc volunteered to serve his nation, as an elite Navy Seal, and he and so many others joined our military knowing that they might have to sacrifice their own lives for the freedoms of our nation, for you, for me.

The United States of America is a great nation thanks in large part to all those in uniform who have shed blood and given their lives to ensure that this remains the shining city on a hill that President Ronald Reagan once spoke of -- a land of freedom, of liberty, of decency, of opportunity.

Let's use this day to show our military men and women currently serving overseas how much we appreciate them. Please, join me in this wonderful effort to send the largest shipment of care packages in history to our troops.

** SPONSOR A CARE PACKAGE - CLICK HERE **

Thank you for taking the time to read my note. I wish you and your family a blessed Memorial Day, and I thank all of you who have supported Move America Forward's pro-troop activities to date, and those to come in the future.

- Debbie Lee
Gold Star Mom, Move America Forward

P.S. Also, be sure to mark your calendars for June 26th! On that day we're going to have a huge special broadcast hosted by Melanie Morgan & Michelle Malkin and featuring radio giants Sean Hannity & Mark Levin and all sorts of celebrities - plus reports from our troops on the frontlines. It's called "From the Frontlines" and it will mark a sort of Grand Finale push to our historic care package drive. We'll tell you more about this incredible effort in the days to come, I just had to give you a little sneak peak as to what was in the works!

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 6:34 AM

May 20, 2008

Real Clear Politics:IRAQ WRAPUP 1-Al Qaeda crackdown yields 100 "critical" militants

Top Sadaam General Arrested in Mosul.

BAGHDAD, May 19 (Reuters) - Iraqi and U.S. forces have arrested about 100 suspects thought to be crucial to the operations of militant groups in al Qaeda's last haven of north Iraq, the commander of U.S. forces in the area said on Monday.

The Iraqi military launched an offensive against al Qaeda in the northern city of Mosul and surrounding Nineveh province on May 10. It has been largely Iraqi-led, with U.S. forces playing a support role.

Gunmen from Sunni Islamist al Qaeda regrouped in Nineveh after being pushed out of other parts of Iraq. The U.S. military says Mosul is its last major urban stronghold, from where its fighters still stage suicide bomb attacks and asassinations.

"They have arrested upward of about 1,250 individuals, of which about 100 are critical targets," Major-General MarkHertling told Reuters in a telephone interview from Mosul.

"In the last several weeks, we have either captured or killed several AQI (al Qaeda in Iraq) emirs (commanders), some suicide cell leaders, some military cell leaders," he said, adding that some were from other groups with loose links to alQaeda.

"Some of them are very senior. I'm talking about militaryemirs, battalion level commanders in al Qaeda," he said.

Mohammed al-Askari, spokesman for Iraq's Defence Ministry,said Iraqi forces had captured one of the Mosul leaders of al Qaeda on Sunday.

Abdul Khaleq al-Sabawi, head of al Qaeda's military organisation in Mosul, was arrested near Tikrit, half-way between Mosul and Baghdad, in Salahuddin province and taken back to Mosul, he said.

Many of the others arrested in the raids were criminals, Hertling said, but the operation had also yielded some al Qaeda fighters the government had not previously known about. Two hundred on a list of al Qaeda targets were still at large.

"We are getting some intelligence that they have been very disrupted," Hertling said. "We've significantly reduced the number of attacks in the city."

The number of attacks attributed by the U.S. military and Iraqi officials to al Qaeda has fallen notably in recent weeks.

U.S. officials blame al Qaeda for most big bombings in Iraq, including an attack on a Shi'ite shrine in Samarra in February 2006 that set off a wave of sectarian killings that nearly tipped Iraq into all-out civil war.

An influx of U.S. troops last year and a decision by Sunni Arab tribes to turn against al Qaeda enabled U.S. and Iraqi forces to push the militants out of Baghdad and the western province of Anbar, their former strongholds.

The U.S. military says al Qaeda in Iraq is largely foreign-led but that its foot soldiers are mainly Iraqis.

Jenny Hatch

al Qaeda links to Sadaam? Naaaaah. Every thinking person in America knows there is no connection between Sadaam Hussein and Terrorists.

The Bush Doctrine which Helen Thomas absolutely refuses to believe and understand:

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 9:16 AM

This just in from Melanie Morgan at Move America Forward

Go Here to read Melanies Blog

The Jihadists Admit Defeat in Iraq

"A prolific jihadist sympathizer has posted an ‘explosive’ study on one of the main jihadist websites in which he laments the dire situation that the mujaheddin find themselves in Iraq by citing the steep drop in the number of insurgent operations conducted by the various jihadist groups, most notably Al-Qaeda’s 94 percent decline in operational ability over the last 12 months when only a year and half ago Al-Qaeda accounted for 60 percent of all jihadist activity!

The author, writing under the pseudonym ‘Dir’a limen wehhed’ [‘A Shield for the Monotheist’], posted his ‘Brief Study on the Consequences of the Division [Among] the [Jihadist] Groups on the Cause of Jihad in Iraq’ on May 12 and it is being displayed by the administration of the Al-Ekhlaas website—one of Al-Qaeda’s chief media outlets—among its more prominent recent posts. He's considered one of Al-Ekhlaas's "esteemed" writers.

The author tallies up and compares the numbers of operations claimed by each insurgent group under four categories: a year and half ago (November 2006), a year ago (May 2007), six months ago (November 2007) and now (May 2008). He demonstrated that while Al-Qaeda’s Islamic State of Iraq could claim 334 operations in Nov. 06 and 292 in May 07, their violent output dropped to 25 in Nov. 07 and 16 so far in May 08. Keep in mind that these assessments are based on Al-Qaeda's own numbers.

More here:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CODE PINK SUFFERS PR MISFIRE
AS MEDIA MOCKS THEIR
COVEN OF WITCHES

When Move America Forward learned that the media would be covering Code Pink's day of witches, crones and sirens to protest the Marine Recruiting Center in Berkeley, CA we decided to mobilize our staff and some supporters to stage a counter demonstration.

We figured this was a perfect opportunity to help Code Pink make a fool of themselves, and that is exactly what happened.

We stood there with our American Flags, and brooms (so that Code Pink witches could jump on them and fly away to a country more to their liking... perhaps Iran or Syria or the like). We sang patriotic songs, and most importantly we talked to reporters to give them the other side of the story.

This video covers yet another Code Pink protest at the Marine Corps Recruiting Office in Berkeley, this time dressed up as "witches and crones," on May 9, 2008. It is part of a larger report on the protest at http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=20

Note: Invoking a little fun from the Wizard of Oz, one of our signs said "Dorothy would drop her house on Code Pink witches!"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TOP AL QAEDA IN IRAQ LEADER
IS ARRESTED IN MOSUL!

Photo: Iraqi Security Forces in Action

This story is good news for those who support the U.S.-led Coalition in the war on terror, and it's also tricky for opponents of our troops' missions (including the news media).

>>> READ THE NEWS STORY - HERE

A senior Al Qaeda in Iraq leader has been arrested in Mosul, where Iraqi Security Forces have been cracking down on Al Qaeda forces who have been driven out of almost all other portions of the country. Here's the best part - he was a general under Saddam Hussein before joining Al Qaeda in Iraq.

But the tricky part for the media and anti-war activists is that if we captured a senior Al Qaeda in Iraq operative in Iraq, then that means we are fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq, despite what the media and some anti-war leaders have tried to convince you wasn't happening.

Turns out they've been caught lying - yet again!

Go Here to read Pete Hesgeths report about the Sons of Iraq at National Review

Jenny Hatch

YOUR VOTES HELPED MAKE
MILITARY MOM, PATTI PATTON-BADER,
"AMERICA'S FAVORITE MOM!"

We sent out a notice to all MAF members and supporters asking them to cast their ballots for Patti Patton-Bader, the founder of the pro-troop charity, Soldier's Angels.

We were hopeful Patti could win the category of America's Favorite Military Mom.

But we were pleasantly stunned when so many of you (along with members of Soldiers Angels, Gathering of Eagles, Free Republic, et. al) that Patti was voted America's Favorite Mother - period. No category win for Patti, she won the entire package.

NBC even had a live video feed from Iraq where her son who is in the Army was able to congratulate her, wish her a Happy Mothers Day, and let her know how much he loved her. Way to go everyone!

OUR TROOPS FACE ENEMIES
OVERSEAS & AT HOME

While our troops are fighting Islamic terrorists overseas, they face anti-war activists here at home who constantly attack them and their missions.

Support Move America Forward's efforts as we defend our troops and their missions here on the home front, while our troops bravely defend us all on the frontlines overseas.

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 8:38 AM

May 13, 2008

Blog: I never get tired of being right all the time...

How many communists does it take to discredit an Anti War Movement???

Really great post about the under belly of the anti war moonbats

Jenny Hatch

QUOTE

I'll be discussing ANSWER's communist origins.

But first, let's review. ANSWER was formed three whole days after 9/11 and immediately organized a protest against our efforts to capture Osama bin Laden. Since that demonstration of their allegiance to al-Qaeda, their work on behalf of America's enemies has continued unabated.

Now let's have a look at the people behind ANSWER.

ANSWER was founded by members of the International Action Center (IAC), a front group for the Workers World Party.

And if you think "Workers World Party" sounds like the name of a communist organization, you're right! It is.

The purpose of the IAC is to put together "grass-roots" organizations that will further the goals of the Workers World Party. Among these organizations are ANSWER and a few of the groups that make up ANSWER's "steering committee."

Other organizations founded under the aegis of the IAC include supposed anti-war groups like Vote No War Funding, Stop War On Iraq, and People Judge Bush; a self-described "Marxist Youth Organization" called FIST ("Fight Imperialism Stand Together"); the Committee to Stop the U.S. War in Colombia, which supports two communist rebel groups in that country; the New York Committee to Free the Cuban Five, which advocates the release of five Cuban agents convicted of espionage in the United States; the Association of Mexican American Workers, which fights for the "rights" of Mexican invaders; two producers of communist propaganda, the People's Video Network and Leftbooks; and No Draft No Way, which seems to be made up of people who haven't figured out that the draft was abolished over thirty years ago.

The IAC is also behind several groups devoted to freeing convicted cop-killer and left-wing cause celebre, Mumia Abu-Jamal. These include the Mumia Mobilization Office, Youth and Students for Mumia, Rainbow Flags for Mumia, and Millions 4 Mumia.

Betcha thought I was going to post a picture of Mumia here, didn't ya? Nope, that's Daniel Faulkner, the cop Mumia murdered. And here's Maureen Faulkner, the woman Mumia made a widow.

By the way, ever notice how the leftists who claim Mumia was framed for Daniel Faulkner's murder never seem all that concerned about finding the real killer? If I were a cynical man, I might believe the whole "free Mumia" thing was politically-motivated.

Anyway, many of the organizations started by the IAC seem to exist only on paper. They're run out of the same New York offices, use the same phone numbers, and have many of the same members. So why does the IAC go to the trouble of setting up these phony organizations? Simple. To create the illusion that there are teeming multitudes of people who support their little crusades and causes.

In addition to its other pet projects, the IAC is mixed up with something called the International Anti-Occupation Network.

This "network" was put together by the Brussels Tribunal, a collection of self-described "academics, intellectuals, and artists" from all over the world.

Actually, they're just a bunch of pompous, self-righteous leftists pretending like they have some authority to pass judgment on the United States. In their literature, they refer to the people murdering our troops in Iraq as a "popular national resistance" which "deserves the support of people everywhere." So much for supporting our troops.

Believe it or not, the International Action Center is headed up by a former Attorney General of the United States, Ramsey Clark.

Ramsey was the AG from 1967 to 1969, under President Lyndon B. Johnson (a Democrat, of course!)

A few years later, Ramsey took a little jaunt to North Vietnam to offer his support to the communist government of that country, at a time when we were at war with them. Amazingly, when Red Ramsey returned to US soil, he was not arrested, tried, and executed for treason. Instead, he was invited to come before Congress and talk about his Asian adventure, like some kind of returning dignitary.

Ramsey told Congress the American POWs in Vietnam were well-treated by their communist captors. The returning POWs, themselves, gave somewhat less positive accounts of the treatment they received. At least, the ones who actually survived long enough to come home.

Not content to collaborate with our North Vietnamese enemies, Red Ramsey's spent the last thirty years providing support and legal counsel to just about anyone who expresses a desire to kill Americans. These have included Middle Eastern dictators like Ayatollah Khomeini, Moammar Gadhafi, and Saddam Hussein.

Ramsey was pretty tight with Saddam, actually. On the eve of the Gulf War, he traveled to Iraq to console Saddam personally. He did so in his capacity as the head of the National Coalition to Stop US Intervention in the Middle East. This "coalition" opposed the liberation of Kuwait by our military, but, tellingly, refused to condemn Saddam's invasion of Kuwait. Naturally, it was another front group for the Workers World Party.

Years later, when Saddam was facing prosecution for crimes against humanity, Red Ramsey volunteered to serve on his defense team. Here he is making an ass of himself at Saddam's trial, seconds before he was forcibly removed from the courtroom.

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 3:56 PM

May 7, 2008

War Protestors Frustrated

Boo Freaking Hoo

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 8:11 AM

May 1, 2008

Townhall: Victor Davis Hanson - The half won/half lost war

Go Here to read Hansons latest. Really good analysis of the current state of the war.

"After years of learning how to fight an unfamiliar war in Afghanistan and Iraq, and to protect us at home, we are finally getting most things right. But if our soldiers and intelligence agencies have learned how to win, our politically correct diplomats and the American consumer haven't — and are doing as much at home to empower radical Islam as those on the front lines are to defeat it."

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 6:13 PM

April 19, 2008

Wall Street Journal: Michael Yon - Let's Surge Some More

Another great Yon Piece in the Journal....

QUOTE:

A young Iraqi translator, wounded in battle and fearing death, asked an American commander to bury his heart in America.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 1:22 PM

The Long War Journal: When Sons of Iraq grow up

Sons of Iraq Story

During General David Petraeus' testimony to Congress on the progress of the war in Iraq, he referred to the great security gains of the last year, which largely hold even in the face of clashes between Shia militias and government forces in Sadr City, Basrah, and much of the South. General Petraeus credited a substantial portion of those security gains in many areas of Iraq in the last year to the duel phenomena of Sahawa (Awakening) councils and the formation of local security teams from out-of-work men fed up with violence.

The Anbar Awakening started in Ramadi as armed opposition to al Qaeda in Iraq. The movement grew and morphed into a political and military movement that expanded throughout Anbar and swept west, north, and south throughout the largely Sunni areas of Iraq. As the Awakening Councils formed, they raised paramilitary security forces with assistance and instruction from the Coalition forces in their respective towns.

In some areas these local security fighters were directly raised and employed by a town’s Awakening Council; in others, local security groups developed on their own without a connection to the Awakening movement. As the trend spread, Coalition commanders began to adopt the local security model to provide jobs and protection for the Iraqi people in their areas.

At the beginning, the names of different security groups were as mixed as the outside opinions of them. The first local security fighters appeared in Ramadi and Fallujah, where cynical soldiers called them the “Good Bad Guys.” As the trend grew, Americans in other areas dubbed groups “Concerned Local Citizens” or “Neighborhood Watch”; Iraqis in Baghdad called themselves “Knights of the Two Rivers.”

Local forces were variously lauded as patriots and vilified as opportunistic militiamen. American civilian leaders and the press worried that the military was “arming both sides in a civil war.” Many military leaders appreciated the extra temporary security, but worried what would happen when the local forces were inevitably asked to stand down in favor of Iraqi government forces.

Almost a year has passed since the rise of the local security forces, which now number more than 91,000. The Government of Iraq refers to all armed groups contracted by the Coalition as “Sons of Iraq” regardless of origin, and has stated the intention of integrating about 20 percent into the security forces and disbanding the rest when they are no longer needed for security."

Praying for Iraq....

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 1:14 PM

March 18, 2008

Ron Paul Revolution: Thoughts on the war: Does Iraq have the right to fail as a Democracy?

I was a strong Romney supporter until he left the presidential race. Now I am 100% behind the platform of Ron Paul of Texas.

How is that possible for a Bush supporter who has vocally supported the war and is a self described neo con? Wether we have a socialist like Bill Clinton using the American Military as a Meals on Wheels, or a George W. Bush using the military to support our Allies and financial interests, the fact is that the American Tax Payers have payed for all of this military intervention and our economy is shaky.

I believe it would be a wonderful experiment to see what would happen if we brought all of our troops home, placed them on our border, and focused on fixing our problems here on the homefront. And if anyone attacks us (terrorist or otherwise), we respond quickly and unapologetically with our military, wether the attack is in America or towards Americans abroad.

I agree with Dr. Paul that quote:

"They claim they will eventually get the troops out of Iraq, but the danger is that they simply plan to move them around to other countries, not bring them home."

The last thing I want to see is our troops being used by the United Nations to help them set up a World Government. And the globalists in our government believe this is the year to take huge steps towards that goal. Dr. Paul is the only candidate left who will protect American Sovereignty and defend the constitution from the Socialists who are working overtime to get a someone elected who will further erode American Independence, and get our economy and people under the iron fist of an unelected world court and world government.

Conventional wisdom suggests that Ron Paul is not electable, but I will continue to cheer for him and his platform until he is completely out of the race.

A recent message from Ron Paul:

I agree with this analysis from Dr. Paul written today at WND

Monday, March 17, 2008

TEXAS STRAIGHT TALK
The crumbling U.S. empire
Ron Paul blames worthless currency, exhausted military for nation's fall

Posted: March 16, 2008
6:57 pm Eastern

By Ron Paul

House Democrats recently adopted a budget with massive tax hikes, many of which are directed at those Americans who can least afford them.

By allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire in 2010, this budget will raise income taxes not only on those in the highest income brackets, but raises the lowest bracket from 10 percent to 15 percent as well. Estates would again be taxed at 55 percent. The child tax credit would drop from $1,000 to $500. Senior citizens relying on investment income would be hurt by increases in dividend and capital gains taxes. It's not just that the Democrats want to raises taxes on the rich; they want to raises taxes on everybody.

The problem is, policing the world is expensive, and if elected officials insist upon continuing to fund our current foreign policy, the money has to come from somewhere. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have already cost us more than $1 trillion.

The Democrats' budget gives the president all the funding he needs for his foreign policy, so one wonders how serious they ever were about ending the war. While Democrats propose to tax and spend, many Republicans aim to borrow and spend, which hurts the taxpayer just as much in the long run.

Supporting a welfare state is expensive as well. More than half of our budget goes to mandatory entitlements. The total cost of government now eats up more than half of our national income, as calculated by Americans for Tax Reform, and government is growing at an unprecedented rate. Our current financial situation is completely untenable, and the worst part is, as government is becoming more and more voracious, the economy is shrinking.

The bottom line is that Washington has a serious spending addiction. While both parties debate how to raise the revenue, both parties seem happy to spend more than $3 trillion of your money in various ways.

While some in Washington criticize the war in Iraq, very few are criticizing the interventionist mindset that got us into the war in the first place. Many so-called "Iraq war critics" criticize this administration rather than truly oppose the decades-old policies that led to war. They claim they will eventually get the troops out of Iraq, but the danger is that they simply plan to move them around to other countries, not bring them home. The American people want peace. Minding our own business is the best way to achieve it. Not only is it also a whole lot cheaper, but free trade and friendship with other countries benefits all involved.

This spending spree is exactly the wrong policy for an economy on the brink of recession. History has shown that all empires eventually crumble under a worthless currency and with an exhausted military.

Since too many of our nation's leaders haven't taken the time to learn from history, we are seeing mistakes repeated through recently enacted policies such as the new House budget.

I have spent the past few months thinking about Iraq and Afghanistan. I am not a military leader and I have not visited those countries. Nor do I know anyone who lives in those countries. But I have studied history. When I was pondering this blog entry last night, for some reason the documentary biography about Gandhi kept coming into my mind. I went to You Tube to find a couple of clips from the movie starring Ben Kingsley and share them with you dear reader to make a point.

Can anyone doubt that Indian Independance has been a resounding success???

The women in India are even getting into Unassisted Childbirth!

I suppose there are some members of the United Kingdom who even sixty years later believe it would have been best for the Brits to have stayed in India to "keep the peace", and prevent the civil war that errupted once they left.

And the temptation to be the Peace Keepers of the world is a mighty temptation for the west.

Where to put the line between nation building, spreading democracy, and giving our brothers and sisters living under tyranny a helping hand to pull them out from under the boot of godless socialism and communism?

That is the great debate raging today.

How much should we who live in freedom do? How many lives lost? How much money spent? Will all of this effort be wasted if we pull out now? I know these are the questions that plague our society.

I am someone who believes it is a form of bigotry to say that certain peoples are not able to govern themselves. That certain personalities and temperments are not fit for Democracy. This is the most crass form of bigotry, because it denies our God Given endowment as articulated in the Declaration of Independence.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

I have been pleased to watch family and friends serve in Iraq, and have been grateful for the efforts of the American Military. And I do not want our soldiers pulled out before Iraq can take care of its own security. I acknowledge the efforts to help each province of Iraq to become independant and able to provide the rule of law for the citizens of Iraq. Some have said that Shia, Sunni, and Kurd cannot co-exist. I don't know wether they can or not, I like to think they could. Some nations are not able to reconcile ethnic and religious differences, and that is why Pakistan came into existance after India became free.

Yet I have to listen to the words of Gandhi when thinking about Iraq and the future of the middle east:

"Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes."

"Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right."

So, who gets to decide when to step back and let the ebb and flow of democracy make a stand in the middle east? Some say that the next American President will be the one to decide, and so that means the future of Iraq is in the hands of the American Voter.

After thinking long and hard about this topic, going back and forth in my own mind, I have decided to side with Ron Paul on this issue. His stance is the Constitutional Rules of Engagement for war. His belief is the protectionist and isolationist view that has always been my political view. It is why I voted for Pat Buchanan a few years back, and why I was for Alan Keyes when he ran for president in 2000. I voted for Bush because he wanted to pull back from too much involvement in international affairs. And an Al Gore as president was nauseating.

I understand why President Bush took on the task of fighting jihad. And I am not naive about the threats to our security. Neo NeoCon, the blogger wrote a great piece about pacifism last year, and I agree with her analysis.

QUOTE:

"Cal Thomas has written an article at RealClearPolitics entitled “Unending War,” in which he discusses the tendency of Bush’s opponents to ascribe the longevity of the war against Iraq to the President’s warmongering desires. But Thomas rightly points out that the warriors who are really unlikely to give up until decisively defeated are our opponents in this war."

All presidential candidates have outlined what they plan to do about the war if elected. I am curious to see what would happen if Ron Paul was elected and he brought our troops home and set in place his Foreign Policy of Freedom.

QUOTE:

"Ron Paul has always believed that foreign and domestic policy should be conducted according to the same principles. Government should be restrained from intervening at home or abroad because its actions fail to achieve their stated aims, create more harm than good, shrink the liberty of the people, and violate rights. Does that proposition seem radical? Outlandish or farflung? Once you hear it stated, it makes perfect sense that there is no sharp distinction between the principles of domestic and foreign policy. They are part of the same analytical fabric. What would be inconsistent would be to favor activist government at home but restraint abroad, or the reverse: restraint at home and activism abroad.

Government unleashed behaves in its own interests, and will not restrict itself in any area of life. It must be curbed in all areas of life lest freedom suffer. Ron Paul's singular voice on foreign affairs has done so much to keep the flame of a consistent liberty burning in times when it might otherwise have been extinguished. He has drawn public attention to the ideas of the Founders. He has alerted people to the dangers of empire. He has linked domestic and foreign affairs through libertarian analytics, even when others have been bamboozled by the lies or too intimidated to contradict them. He has told the truth, always. For this, every American, every citizen of the world, is deeply in his debt. We can't but be deeply grateful that Ron Paul's prophetic words have been collected in this book. May it be widely distributed. May its lessons be absorbed by this and future generations."

-- Foreword to "A Foreign Policy of Freedom" by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

I have not turned my back on the war, nor do I believe that it has been a total failure or a mistake. I believe the Iraq war has been an important step in the fight against radical jihad, and something had to be done to avenge those who died on 9-11 and during the past attacks on our soil ie: the first world trade center attack and the oklahoma city bombing. (Read Jayna Davis: The Third Terrorist to learn of the middle east connection to the bombing of the Murrah federal building.) I have studied her work and believe Sadaam recruited two americans to assist with that bombing in the heartland of our country.

I am curious to see what General Petreus says at his congressional testimony next month. I KNOW that the surge is working, and I know that the hard work of our soldiers this past year made it happen.

Yet this analysis by Alain Gresh, editor of Le Monde diplomatique and a specialist on the Middle East makes me ponder and question stated goals for the future.

"So, does anybody care? As Michael Massing reported in The New York Review of Books, the US press group McClatchy set up an office in Baghdad and started a blog, "Inside Iraq," dedicated to the lives of the ordinary Iraqis in whom the US press has no real interest. As troop casualties have fallen, US media coverage of the war has diminished, reinforcing the idea that the war is being won; if it’s not on television, it can’t be happening.

Leila Fadel, McClatchy’s bureau chief in Baghdad, said: “Americans believe their soldiers are working for the greater good. The Iraqis don’t see that. They see people who are here for their own self-interest -- who drive the wrong way on roads, who stop traffic whenever they want to, who they have to be careful not to get too close to so that they won’t be shot.” A contributor to "Inside Iraq" described how US soldiers beat a schoolboy who threw a stone at them. Why had he thrown it? “These are foreign soldiers,” he said. “This is an occupation.” Fadel says it is a common feeling among Iraqis: “Everybody I speak to thinks this. They don’t have power in their own country.”

The late Jean-François Revel, of the French right, was outraged that the Iraqis did not turn out to greet their liberators with flowers. A few months after the invasion he wrote: “As in all Arab countries, the Iraqis demonstrate a generalised xenophobia, directed against all westerners... We are dealing with people who are incapable of governing themselves but who won’t let anyone else do it.”

US leaders were unable to understand the reaction of Iraqis: their rejection, despite their hatred of Saddam Hussein, of colonialism, rooted in a painful history and the memory of the long British occupation. The White House didn’t listen to Iraqis in 2003. Is it ready to listen now? Recent successes, however limited, have reduced domestic pressure on the Bush administration to withdraw troops, and have mollified international hostility. But this respite has not persuaded the outgoing president to change strategy; quite the contrary.

The UN mandate, finally granted to coalition forces in 2004, a year after the invasion, expires next December. The White House does not seek to renew it, preferring to replace it with a bilateral agreement (negotiations with the Iraqi government are expected to end before the summer). There is confusion about the nature of this agreement and the Senate has insisted on its right to ratify it; but the administration claims that since it does not explicitly cover US participation in the defence of Iraq or the construction of permanent bases, such ratification is unnecessary."

Mr. Gresh's analysis and acceptance of the Surge and the fact that it has reduced the violence in Iraq does make him a credible voice in my mind. I too question American plans to set up military bases and assign "Peacekeepers" in a region that has written its own constitution and has set up an elected government of the people. And while I have been proud that people like my brother made it happen by helping this new Democracy, I don't like the overbearing assumption that they are not capable of doing it without our help. Our own Benjamin Franklin replied "a republic, if they can keep it" when asked what the Constitutional Congress had created. It may take Iraq a hundred years to reach a level of stability that feels like "peaceful co-existence of Kurd, Sunni, and Shia" to Americans. But I believe if the people of Iraq want to do the work of preserving their own toddling democracy, they should have the power and authority to do it in their own way without American Busybodys interfearence.

I agree with Dr. Paul, that our own troubles at home need our focus and attention. Our own republic is shaky And I would like to see a complete return to constitutional principles and accountability.

While I believe detente was a collasal failure and gave a wink and a nod to various muslim tyrants to do whatever they wanted at home, I believe the other extreme of American Nation Building that would stomp all over the rights of individual citizens of various countries is untenable and I personally don't want to pay for it.

We are living in interesting times and I look forward to the upcoming election and am curious to see how it all plays out.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 4:29 AM

March 17, 2008

The Daily Show spanks Code Pink

I was cracking up as I watched this report. Too Too funny.

Code Pink exposed at Front Page Magazine

QUOTE

"Unless you travel in Marxist circles or work for the FBI or CIA, the names of the Code Pink moms may not ring a bell with you, though you’ve probably been reading news reports about their collective exploits for years. In the wake of their war against capitalism and self-determination, they’ve left a trail of anarchy and destruction that has cost property owners, corporations and consumers millions of dollars.

Naturally, they’ve toned their Marxist rhetoric down for their stint with Code Pink. Though they’ve taken great pains to differentiate themselves from the other, more radical anti-war protesters, they are one and the same. The leaders of Code Pink didn’t merely take part in the Washington and San Francisco protests that made international headlines – they also organized them. In the process, they’ve provided a rare public glimpse of the faces behind the modern, highly organized American Marxist movement. Needless to say, these women have little in common with the carpool moms of America."

Jenny Hatch

Here is a montage I put together last year to support my friends who were going to the anti war demos to counter demonstrate.

And my friend Dale Lanham of the Colorado Gathering of Eagles sent a recent email sharing his own activism around the Berzerkley Event. A whole group of Coloradoans traveled to California to stand up for the Marines in Berkley.

Debbie Parish, Colorado Marine Mom kicks some moonbat hiney, questioning the military credentials of the dude she was yelling at. And Dale Lanham states the fact that all of the Winter Soldier Attrocities were fabricated during the Viet Nam War.

Dales Words on his blog about these two moonbats:

"Later I found out that this IVAW member was a deserter from the Gulf War, not just any deserter, but the FIRST DESERTER…. Before the first shot was fired, he was running away because he was scared. Debbie’s words were right, “he’s not a real man, and a phony Marine”. The short person in the end claims to be a Vietnam Vet and proud of his sabotages during the Vietnam War. These two are typical of those who will be lying to the media event at Winter Soldier. They are indeed Coward’s and Saboteur’s, dishonorably discharged and have spent time in the Brig for their disgraceful actions — who will attempt to dishonor our current warriors next week."

Colorado Eagles to Berkley Part One

Colorado Eagles to Berkley Part Two

Colorado Eagles to Berkley Part Three

Gathering of Eagles vs. the Iraq Vets against the war

Debbie Parishs After Action Report

Sgt Eamon Kelly and his mom Elizabeth Kelly.

Jenny Hatch
Retired Patriot Street Activist, but proud supporter of our President, Our Troops, and ALL of The Missions around The War on Terror.

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 5:19 PM

March 15, 2008

Email from Kimberly Kagan of the Institute for the Study of War

I am a fierce supporter of this Institute and the work of Kimberly Kagan. She gave a powerful speech last year at GOE III in Washington DC. I hosted the film from C-span on my blog last spring. Here is a replay: (With a few minutes of editorial commentary put together by yours truly)

And her email:

Dear Institute Supporters -

We're approaching another critical juncture in the debate over Iraq and the courses of action available to the United States. As many of you know, General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker will be testifying before Congress in early April. With this in mind, we are working hard to produce detailed and informational reports to contextualize the situation on the ground and help shape that debate. There are a number of products on the ISW website to check out in advance of their testimony. Here are a few of the highlights from www.understandingwar.org:

While al-Qaeda in Iraq networks have largely been degraded in central Iraq, the fight against al-Qaeda continues in the north. The city of Mosul, in Ninewah province, has been central to the fight, as U.S. and Iraqi Forces are preparing for a large offensive. Eric Hamilton’s commentary, Targeting the AQI Networks in Southeast Mosul, details the preparatory operations in Mosul from January to March. Elsewhere in Iraq, Coalition Forces have continued to batter al-Qaeda networks under Operation Phantom Phoenix, the follow-on to the successful Corps offensives of late 2007.

Last month, General Ray Odierno redeployed from Iraq. As Commander of Multi-National Corps-Iraq from late 2006 to early 2008, he played an integral role in designing and implementing the successful 2007 campaign plan. In their recent article, The Patton of Counterinsurgency, ISW President Kimberly Kagan and Frederick W. Kagan detail his success in reducing violence in Iraq over the last year.

In early March, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad arrived in Iraq, in what was the first visit by Iranian leadership since the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s. Yet, his visit highlighted the growing Iranian influence in Iraq and the region. ISW has produced several research products on the issue of Iranian activity. Marisa Cochrane’s backgrounder on the Growing Threat of Special Groups in Baghdad details the spike in the destabilizing activity of Iranian-backed militias in the capital since January 2008. She has also created an interactive Map of Special Groups Activity, which charts incidents of Iranian-sponsored activity throughout Iraq over the last year. For a comparative study of Iranian activity in the region ISW President Kimberly Kagan, Frederick W. Kagan, and Danielle Pletka have co-authored a report on Iranian Influence in the Levant, Iraq and Afghanistan.

The role of Sons of Iraq groups has also received much attention in recent weeks. Farook Ahmed details the importance of these local security volunteers throughout Iraq and some of the controversy surrounding them in his backgrounder on the Sons of Iraq and Awakening Forces. Farook has also commented on the recent protests by Sons of Iraq Groups in Diyala Province, where they have clashed with the Iraqi Security Forces in the area. ISW will continue to cover the issues surrounding these groups because, as Coalition Forces draw down troops in the next few months, the Sons of Iraq will become increasingly instrumental in augmenting the Iraqi Security Forces and maintaining security gains.

Finally, we have added new reference materials to our website that are certainly worth a look. Nathaniel Rabkin’s Arabic News Summaries are updated weekly and provide reporting, analysis, and insight on relevant stories in the Arabic press. For the latest data on violence trends, check out the Iraq Statistics Reference-March 2008.

You can find all of ISW’s products on the site: the lengthy and fully documented Iraq Report, which narrates the most important developments in the campaign; backgrounders, which are shorter essays on narrower aspects of the war; static and interactive maps developed by ISW to help readers navigate the war; webcast interviews with U.S. commanders in Iraq; historical background on earlier phases of this ongoing conflict; geographic and thematic overviews that aid learning about the war; and the monthly order of battle describing the disposition of Coalition forces.

We encourage all of you to take time and visit.

Sincerely,

Kimberly Kagan

President

Institute for the Study of War

1900 M Street NW, Suite 810

Washington, DC 20036

(202) 293 - 5550

kkagan@understandingwar.org

www.understandingwar.org

Kimberly Kagan

Here is the second half of the Gathering of Eagles III rally in Washington DC

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 9:32 PM

February 21, 2008

Gold Star Mother Spanks the Berkeley City Council

Round up of all of the recent controversy swirling around Berkeley California and the Marine Corp Recruitment Office found here at Move America Forward.

Berkeley Report - Protest of the City Council

PATRIOTS IN BERKELEY: AFTER-ACTION REPORT

We had someone holding up our silenced marine sign all day

MONDAY – February 11th

For Move America Forward staff, our pro-troop demonstration against the Berkeley City Council actually started the day before when we sent off MAF Director of Operations Ryan Gill in a 10-foot moving truck. His mission was to secure supplies, and pick up MAF spokesperson and Gold-star mom Debbie Lee who flew in from Arizona to the Oakland airport.

The remaining staff spent the day in Sacramento faxing and emailing out last minute press releases and media advisories. Most of us went home around 11 pm, with plans to leave Sacramento by two in the morning to get there before five. I slept for about an hour and a half, woke up at 1 in the morning and was in the office by about 2:15. Some of our staff bypassed sleep altogether, as there was much prep work to be done in the final hours before we stood our ground in support of our troops. We weren’t packed up and on the road until about 3:00 AM and we stopped for a quick breakfast at Denny’s before hitting the road again and arriving in Berkeley at almost 5:00 AM.

Other supporters were traveling via car and caravan from Oregon, Nevada, Colorado and Southern California. People went to great efforts to make it to this important event.

TUESDAY – February 12th

By 4:30 AM Ryan Gill arrived at the rally location along with Debbie Lee. Blue Star Mom,Deborah Johns – whose son is a Recon Marine who served in Iraq for three tours of duty, arrived moments later.

By 5:00 AM I arrived in Berkeley along with MAF Deputy Executive Director, Mary Pearson, and MAF Grassroots Coordinator, Joe Wierzbicki. We were joined by about two-dozen pro-troop supporters, including Gold Star Father Scott Conover and his wife, Julie. The enemy was also present with about two-dozen or so anti-military protestors and already it looked like the scene was turning ugly.

As we approached Martin Luther King, Jr. Way I got a call from Ryan on the phone, saying, “It’s hot already, already some people have been knocked down and everyone’s getting in each others faces.”

The mood may have been hot, but the morning air was freezing cold.

When we turned the corner of MLK Way, I saw why Ryan had said that the situation was boiling over at critical mass. There was an angry mob on the street, about to tear itself apart as anti-war and pro-troop supporters were clashing in close quarters! Cameras were already everywhere, lighting up the area of the park, despite the fact that it was still dark as midnight and only the pale, dull yellow light of some streetlamps bathed the streets of Berkeley.

As soon as we parked I jogged down to the corner where the mob was self-imploding upon itself. I squeezed between some cameras just in time to jump between Scott Conover and some anti war protester who was jabbing his finger in Scott’s face and yelling angrily while holding a sign depicting images from Abu Ghraib prison.

“This is the reality of War” he said, “The US Military is a bunch of war criminals!”

“My son was not a war criminal!” responded Scott, who seemed ready to tear the man apart, and from the looks of it, sizing up the difference in size between Scott and the anti-war guy, it looked as if he could. “#$% you! You are a traitor you piece of #@$%!”

EMOTIONS RUN HIGH

A nice scene of our patriots facing the City Council building

The sign on the top of that pole the guy in tan pants is holding said ‘Independents’ were unhappy with the city’s decision...not just far-right republicans here, as some members of the city council claimed!

But Scott pulled himself back, cooled off and thanked me for stepping in, I know that Scott is familiar with MAF, but we had never met before so it was a good way to get introduced.

I looked across the street and saw several police vehicles parked. Across the park there was another one parked at the opposite end of the street. Yet I could see no police officers, and the throngs of angry protesters were boiling with rage.

When I looked across the street again I saw that there were now some police congregating around the crosswalk. I walked over and picked one to introduce myself to, I told him I was the communications director for MAF and he didn’t seem very interested. Okay, fine, well I asked what we were going to do about getting a handle on the situation over there across the street. I was told I would have to make a phone call and talk to his Lieutenant.

POLICE FINALLY STEP IN

Around 5:30 or 6:00, as the crowd got bigger, more pandemonium ensued. At one high point of craziness, one of our supporters, a really big guy in a red sweater, was literally pushing back a whole line of anti-war people, wading into several at a time and slowly forcing them back. The effort only served to enrage others to push back and soon the whole crowd was tussling. I still had no clue what the police were doing, so several people jumped in, myself and this anti-war guy holding a sign that said ‘dialogue corner’ were jumping in between people and holding our hands out to try and keep the crowd away from each other. It was only sort-of working, but finally the police formed a single column and marched through the middle, putting a line in between. I was caught on the anti-war side of the line, and while for a moment the crowd was separated, we were still all yelling at each other.

I got a phone call from the police dispatch telling me to come across the street and speak with Lieutenant Hart of the Berkeley PD. Hart told me that Code Pink had voluntarily decided to bring their people across to the other side of the street at 7:00 am. I was pretty sure that our permit said they weren’t supposed to be on our side anyways, but Hart told me her understanding was that despite the permits, neither side was prohibited or guaranteed to be in either location, the park or the city council.

One of the Code Pink ladies, Rae, kept trying to talk to me, saying things like, “oh, you look like someone who’s trying to keep order and control your people. You have a cool head.” She kept trying to tell me to control my people and saying we were being aggressive. it was obvious to me that the Code Pinkos were the ones provoking and egging people on, and had deliberately marched across the street from their permitted area into our area to show the families of dead soldiers pictures of bloody mutilated bodies of innocent Iraqis blown up by insurgents or pictures of dead soldiers. She was pissing me off, trying to get me to admit that our people were being overly aggressive by being nice to me or whatever. Finally she went away.

I couldn’t wait till 7 am, which did eventually come around, and much of their crowd did establish itself on the other side. We had our space, for the most part – though there remained a couple of leftist agitators straggling on our side—when MAF Chairman Melanie Morgan arrived on the scene shortly after 6:00AM.

Scott Conover, a Gold-Star dad, talks with this one guy who stayed on our side of the street most of the day...

I talked to the guy for a while too, he was willing to listen, but made ridiculous assertions...what a kook

Melanie had heard about the melee and even though she was in the middle of her radio program, she left it and rushed down to Berkeley so she could rally her troops! We all got into a circle and around the megaphone held a little impromptu press conference, with our Blue and Gold-Star parents taking turns speaking to the crowd about their stories of the service and sacrifices of their children and their disgust, contempt and frustration with the Berkeley City Council.

This scene from early in the morning, Melanie Morgan took off -DURING HER RADIO SHOW- to support us when open war seemed imminent

Mark Crowley, Gold-Star dad, talks about his son Kyle’s story

Debbie Lee, Gold-Star mother of Marc Allen Lee, who was the the first US Navy S.E.A.L killed in Iraq

Deborah Johns, Blue-star mother of Will Johns who has served three tours in Iraq

THE INTRUSION

World Can’t Wait and Code Pink crowds mix and mingle in front of the city council chambers

It was not long after most of the Code Pink people had gone across the street that they were already back on our side, encroaching on our territory. Several Code Pink people, and some members of World Can’t Wait came over and got into a confrontation with Scott Conover. This one young man, he looked like he could have been Arabic (but I don’t want to assume anything) was wearing a keffiyah around his neck and was screaming something about millions of Iraqis dead and millions more displaced.

At first I was just trying to keep him safe from ole’ Scott Conover, but when he started yelling about American barbarity and economic sanctions and millions of dead Iraqis, I had to yell at him. How dare these people say that we’re somehow responsible for Saddam Hussein’s rape and domination of his own countrymen because we didn’t want to do business with an aggressive nation!

Soon enough he slinked back behind Code Pink’s reps, Zanne Joi and Rea, who were back again. I asked them what their people were doing over on our side and they tried to tell me it was because the portable bathrooms were on our side of the street and we needed to let them use it. I looked around and noted that we were probably about 50 yards away from the porta-potty and there was actually a small crowd of anti-war people over here and they didn’t look like they were waiting to use the john.

Marine Corps Motorcycle Club!! woo!

Our side of the street: lined with patriots armed to the hilt with flags and patriotic slogans!

This only got worse and worse, more anti-war people kept coming over onto our side. It didn’t look like the permit we had worked so hard to get meant much of anything at all. It was close to, but not quite 8:00 AM now, and there were a bunch of kids trying to skateboard on the cement structures over on our side. They were skating around at high speeds very close to our supporters, many of which are seniors and who were startled and alarmed by the aggressive actions of these kids jumping around them. Code Pink leader, Medea Benjamin, stood in the middle of them, egging them on. It was disgusting to see her provoking hostile actions by young people to advance her leftist, hate-America agenda.

Her antics worked and these kids had no respect for our wishes, in fact we were amazed, every other word out of these kids mouths was “F$%K” or “F$%KING.”

World Can’t Wait passed out huge stacks of orange bandanas to young kids who skipped school and encouraged them to approach and provoke pro-military supporters

Many of our supporters were getting very irritated so we decided to try giving some ground to the anti-war crowd, hoping they would settle down. Unfortunately there were still a growing number of anti-war people, especially young kids, coming over and invading our permitted side of the street. I saw several older men across the street, dressed in all black, handing out orange scarves by the handful to eagerly awaiting mobs of youngsters, many of whom were also in black. In typical World Can’t Wait fashion, they tied the scarves to obscure their faces. Soon our side of the street was inundated with very rude, very confrontational World Cant Wait-ers and some Code Pinkos to boot.

Another anti-war protester (left) who argued a bit with veterans on our side

I left the situation to go post a couple pictures to the Move America Forward website and by the time I came back the police had cordoned off a section of about a third of the space up front and blocked it with a line of bicycles. You could still go around the small line, which many did do, but it helped a little to keep the crowds to themselves. I was a little peeved that we had just lost about a third of our real estate, but I was more satisfied that there was less confrontation and thus less a lesser chance someone was going to get hurt.

The police, when the situation was getting desperate, did step in and seperate the crowds, which we do appreciate, thank you Berkeley PD!

MEDEA BENJAMIN: FOUNDER & LEADER OF CODE PINK

Medea Benjamin was walking all along through our area. I marvel at this woman, she is SUCH an opportunist. One of her favorite tactics is to spot a TV camera that’s either filming a crowd or scene, or doing an interview, and she will go up and stand in the background of it, making sure that she is visible and attempt to either soak up some of another person’s screen-time or try to make a scene and attract an interview.

So I decided to try and beat her at her own game, just a little. I spotted Medea, she was standing behind one of our supporters who was interviewing with a reporter and cameraman. So I found a “Support our Troops and Their Mission” sign leaning up against a nearby tree, grabbed it, and stood right next to Medea, holding the sign right behind her head. She didn’t seem to notice that, or she ignored it, knowing that she didn’t want to get nasty in front of TV.

Someone asked her something or she might have been trying to tell the camera something about “the Iraqis don’t want us there, they hate the US military” and I tried to tell her “That’s not true.”

I have just returned from spending Christmas with our troops and was not about to let Medea Benjamin make false statements to the media about America’s brave warriors. We argued about what the troops were doing: she gave me the same old tired lines…we target civilians, we bomb whole cities indiscriminately, we torture and terrorize civilian populations.

I responded by saying that “No, the troops over there know and love the Iraqis and the Iraqis know the troops, they know each others names, each other stories, and care about each others safety.” Medea literally laughed at my assertion until I told her that I only knew this because I had been to Iraq and had seen it for myself. She went stone faced pretty much immediately.

Her response? “Well, how many times have you been to Iraq?”

”Only once,” I told her, “two weeks in Baghdad, with the US Army.”

“Well, I’ve been to Iraq five times.” She seemed like she almost stuck her tongue out and went ‘nyah’ and stormed off back to her own side.

THE FLAG

A while later I just happened to be standing over somewhat near the bikes, across from the World Can’t Wait crowd and I heard several people, in a somewhat alarmed tone of voice, saying “They’re burning flags! They are burning flags!”

I look over and here is this girl:

A young lady with the Wold Can’t Wait crowd burned TWO smaller flags, which she STOLE from our side...they obviously didn’t bring their own flags to burn so they burned ours!

I stood there and watched her, just staring at her as the flags burned up, I almost felt like crying, my heart was breaking for how stupid and hopeless these kids are, and she looked back and smirked at me, like she knew what she was making people feel by her actions

So somehow she got a hold of one of our flags we had available at our Move America Forward table, and burned it right in my face, with a clear intention of agitating us. Fortunately, for her and her friends, this did not cause the pro-military forces to storm their way through the police to teach those kids a lesson, although I think they were just about incensed enough to do so.

THE INVASION

The day wore on, in the morning the size of the pro-troop crowd was strong and the participants were vibrant and energetic, then as the first few hours passed both the size of the crowd and its enthusiasm seemed to wane – on both sides. seemed to But as the sun rose higher in the sky and warmed this area of the East Bay it seemed like people were again just appearing out of nowhere and the numbers of our supporters steadily grew towards the 12:00 noon hour. Code Pink was also finding more supporters, but as both crowds grew, ours was taking the lead.

As the day wore on our numbers swelled, peaking at over a thousand strong

Maybe they were just bored, maybe they just did not want the TV cameras to see our side with more than theirs again, but whatever the motivation, Code Pink and World Can’t Wait decided to push further into our side. This angered a number of our people as there is a road with four lanes (two lanes in each direction) separating our groups, which should have meant that both sides stayed in their permitted areas. But the City of Berkeley told the cops to not interfere with Code Pink’s efforts to form phalanxes of agitators who would come over in waves with the intention of pushing through our supporters, screaming in their faces, and denouncing our great nation.

The forces of Code Pink and World Cant Wait weren’t satisfied with their own side of the street, so they frequently came over to our side to try and provoke our people, interfere with our media interviews, and generally act stupid

Father and son who came down to Berkeley to support the Marines

With the crowds both growing and more and more people congregating on the pro-troop side of the street, the police line separating us had disintegrated. People from both sides were pouring into the grassy field and there was a huge mass of people gathered around our table and in the surrounding area.

The police were hard at work...gaurding each other (well, they did help us out a few times)

With the police still doing nothing to keep the crowds separated I noticed a huge crowd of police huddled over in one corner, far away from the mob of pro-troop and anti-war activists who were thus free to either rip each others heads off or engage in healthy discussion. Many chose the former, a few chose the latter. But as disturbed as I was by the number of confrontations that turned violent during this time, I was also encouraged to see some peaceful debate going on as well.

Young vet argues with a teen whose knowledge of terrorism is most likely limited to video games

We on the other hand, had to plug our noses while the anti-war crowd walked among us trying to cause as many problems as possible

It got really creepy when a huge number of the World Can’t Wait crowd started organizing themselves into columns and marching in step, making a wide encirclement of our patriots. They did not outnumber us, but having people CIRCLE around you feels unnerving.

Nancy, who is Medea Benjamin’s personal assistant, actually LIKES our Code Pink shirts with the communist hammer-and-sickle calling their group traitors. She said she was coming back to make a donation to MAF for one

ALTERCATIONS

One of our supporters was assaulted by a teen who actually used his skateboard to hit her.

Joe was tackled by a group of about 20 World Can’t Wait kids intent on burning a flag they had stolen from us. What happened was, Joe was standing around the table we put in the middle of the rally, it had our t-shirts and a box full of flags to hand out. Joe saw that three of the girls from WCW snatched one of our larger hanging flags mounted on a wooden dowel and were walking off with it. Joe followed them, at a distance, and observed them meeting up with some other kids, one of which brandished a lighter.

Joe says the kids were debating whether to take the flag back across the street to the other side or to just burn it right there. The boy with the lighter insisted they burn the flag immediately, and lit his lighter. Well Joe then swooped in and grabbed our flag from the girl holding it, but he couldn’t get it completely away. She and her two friends still had a hold on one corner of the flag and started screaming wildly, as several kids tugged at the flag and Joe on the other side had the rest of the flag in a death grip.

Then about 15 more kids started jumping on Joe, trying to get him to release the flag that was being held by 4 or 5 other kids who intended to light it up. Joe tried to march the flag back to safety, but the kids were all over him, punching, hitting, slapping…hell, they even PINCHED him all over…everywhere! But Joe was still holding a death grip on the flag, he did not want to see it get burned. The dowel it was mounted on was broken into six pieces, the flag stretched and possibly ripped by now. Anti-military protestors were shouting at Joe as if he was the aggressor saying, “Does it make you feel like a big man to pick on little kids?”

Then a small tender lady came up to Joe, rubbed his left hand and said, “I’m on your side, come with me, I don’t want to see anything bad happen to you. Come on, the deck is stacked against you and these kids will just try to get something bad to happen to you or get your arrested.” Her calming logic convinced him to let go and walk back to the MAF booth., We don’t know what happened to the flag that Joe relinquished, we pray it was not burned disgracefully by these punk kids.

Unfortunately, I would be willing to bet that poor flag no longer proudly flies the stars and stripes. We later asked if flag-burning is legal in Berkeley. Apparently is it illegal to burn an American flag in Berkeley, but you wouldn’t know it by watching how this protest was handled by law enforcement.

Also at this time there were mobs of other kids trying to mess with our sound system. We had a sound permit for only four hours, and we were just playing some music with it before our principle spokesperson (Melanie!) returned. But the WCW kids were actually trying to cut the wires leading to the speakers with a knife! The Lafayette Flag Brigade pushed the kids away and before the wires had been cut through. They appealed to the cops to step in and so something and were told that they were on their own.

Another confrontation occurred when some of the WCW teens assaulted a member of the College Republicans who were agitating the Code Pink side of the street. When the police arrested two WCW people in relation to this assault, and took them into the police station, the WCW crowd rallied and marched over to the police station under the leadership of Medea Benjamin and began chanting and laying down in front of the Berkeley Police Station screaming “Let them go! Let them go!”

I still have not received information about whether that kid was released or charged with something.

This woman tries to show a Marine how helicopters fly. On her platter is a scene of broken up bodies of toy soldiers with fake blood all around...disguisting

TAKING BACK THE FIELD

If nothing else, this commotion served one purpose: it gave our side the opportunity to reorganize on our side while all the WCW and Code Pink crowd were crowding the police station. This time, we did NOT let the WCE or Code Pink back on our side. And police or no police, we KEPT THOSE ANTI-TROOP PUNKS OUT of our area – including the kids - as Melanie decided it was time to rally our supporters together and focus everyone on the work that we needed to do as the Berkeley City Council meeting start time approached.

Our people made a strong showing, we had that sidewalk packed from corner to corner!

Army Rangers “Lead the Way” Hummer!

Taking the microphone into hand she quickly whipped the pro-troop crowd of patriots up into a joyous frenzy! I was in a meeting with MAF Executive Director Cat Moy and some people from the city, discussing the plan for the council meeting later, but I could hear Melanie working the crowd from up on the second floor of the building.

After the rally and the speeches, I was back in the park again, trying with Cat to spread the word among our members about our plans for getting into the City Council meeting.

This young lady’s boyfriend just deployed to Iraq, GOOD LUCK SOLDIERS (don’t they make a sweet couple?)

Also, the back of her sign was irresistably clever

Many people noticed this “Semper Fidelis” banner flying overhead for several hours during the day. The sight of it flying over Berkeley brought many cheers and lifted the spirits of many patriots!

THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING

We had to find members to go into the council chambers LONG before the council was scheduled to hear the item regarding the Marines – as in FOUR to FIVE HOURS ahead of time. Despite the complete lack of logic behind this demand, the city INSISTED that we send in our supporters at 4:30 PM where they would be forced to sit through another City Council meeting, THEN sit through all the preliminary items on the regular City Council meeting, until the city finally brought up the Marine Corps item. Only then would our people would be allowed to speak, after which they would be allowed to leave the meeting and be replaced by more pro-troop supporters until every single last person had the chance to speak, both from the pro-troop side and the anti-war side.

Medea Benjamin (the Osama of Code Pink herself) admires the shiny reflective polish of the handrail as she steps up the stairs into the City Council chambers

If we did not have 30 people agree to this demand then they would give the seats to the Code Pink, International ANSWER, and the anarchist World Can’t Wait crowd.

Fair? Vaguely
Smart? Yes, if you want to obstruct the ability of those with an opposing viewpoint to express themselves at your little city council meeting.

We found some supporters who were basically willing to ‘jump on the grenade’ and sit through 5 grueling hours of the bizarre left-wing City Council hearing, so that we could have some seats saved. We sent in our bravest and resigned ourselves to waiting and watching.

STREET PROTESTS

By now the police had aligned themselves in the middle of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Way, the WCW and Code Pink crowds had been expelled from our side, the American flag-waving, pro-troop supporters were standing hundreds upon hundreds of people strong and the police took the opportunity to create a line straight through the middle, closing down the street and taking up positions between.

I talked to the young lady pictured here in the reflective sunglasses and some of her friends who came by from Berkeley High School. It was awesome to see people their age with their heads screwed on straight. They told me that they catch a lot of flack from fellow students and their teachers for their beliefs. Hows that for tolerance!

Both sides were still active, and the streets were filled with camera crews rushing from one point to another, covering the chants of protestors at each other from across the street and yelling on their bullhorns in impromptu policy debates! I saw Leigh Wolf from the College Republicans debating WCW through megaphones and he was absolutely STUMPING all the anti-war people!

“Why did you people come here, give me one good reason why the Marines should have to go” he said.

They answered back… “We don’t want them here. They are preying on children.”

Leigh pounces on them, “Are you aware that is an OFFICER RECRUITING STATION? It’s also MY recruiting station, that’s where I SIGNED UP!” He retorted. “Do you know there is only one way to be recruited in an officer recruiting station, that’s if you have a four-year degree, do you think that people who have gone to college for four years can’t make a decision about the military?”

They were practically speechless. “Let someone else talk!” one of them shouted. Classic.

This young man, also from Berkeley High, was proudly waving this ‘don’t tread on me’ flag

ANOTHER FLAG BURNING

The scene turned very ugly when another flag was burned by the anti-war protesters. The night-sky was illuminated by a pillar of flames. One minute I was standing around, the next I heard a LOUD pop and a crowd of people running towards something. I looked and saw what appeared to be a street sign ON FIRE raining down flames onto a bicycle chained to the street sign.

At first I thought it was a Molotov cocktail someone had thrown because I could see chunks of flaming debris laying around the street and literally oozing from the top of the street sign and onto the bikes below.

What happened was, the anti-war people set another flag on fire, but it was a large flag and the flames got out of control so they threw it up on the street sign on the corner of Martin Luther King Jr. Way and a sign directing people to the “Peace Wall.” Pieces of the flag had fallen on the bikes below and caught them on fire. The loud pop I heard was from the bike’s tires and the “burning rubble” all around was pieces of flaming rubber from the tire.

There was a huge crowd around the bike, I was yelling at people to back up and let the police take care of the situation. I thought for sure that with a fire clearly burning that any second now police were going to rush in and surround the area, so we should back up. But nobody backed up, and no police came. I went up to one of the officers standing guard in the street.

For the third time that day, anti-war protesters burned an American flag. In this incident, they threw the flaming banner up onto a street sign, where pieces of it fell on a couple bicycles chained below.

The tires of the bike caught fire, popped loudly, and the burning rubber melted all over the bikes ruining them. I was standing nearby and a father and his very young son came over to see that thier bikes were ruined.

Some of the World Can’t Wait people started screaming, saying we did it, and saying “Get the (f-word) Out of Our Town!”

“Hey guys, I don’t know if you’re aware of this, but there’s something on fire over there, I don’t know for sure but I thought, you know it might be dangerous or something, did you have any plans to check it out?” I asked some random officer. He muttered something I could not hear, so I left him alone. The fire went out and the owner of the bikes came over to inspect the damage.

Police did absolutely nothing...appalling
Little kid got his bike burned by the same angry mob his dad brought him to protest with…pretty sad.

ENDGAME

We waited and waited until the city council finally took up the resolution on the Marines. My voice was gone by then. When the floor became open for discussion the City Council began hearing our voices, five from Code Pink, five from Move America Forward, and back again and again over and over. We sent in our supporters five at a time, as five came out.

It was awesome for me to see that there were a lot of young people on our side, but I wonder if she knows that the City Council IS the commie occupation of Berkeley!

29 Languages, 29 ways to say I Am (a proud) American!

Old Glory was, as it always is, well represented at MAF events!

With the star spangled banner flying everywhere on our side, the anti-war crowd kept mocking us, asking why we would ‘love a stupid flag’ or ‘worship a piece of cloth’ they don’t realize that true Americans LOVE AND WORSHIP what our flag represents, real freedom and liberty, something they don’t understand!

Ryan delivered the fat stack of over 18,000 petitions, plus hundreds more we collected hand-signed at the rally, and more still that we had not printed out, totaling well in excess of over 20,000.

All of our spokespeople gave their stories, from Deborah Johns and Debbie Lee to Gold Star Fathers Kevin Graves and Mark Crowley.

We had residents of Berkeley who were ashamed at the actions of the city, people from Berkeley High School, Cal Berkeley, even a high school teacher.

One Berkeley resident who supported our efforts had been on the phone during the day with Dr. Alvita King, the niece of Martin Luther King, Jr. who gave her advice on how to communicate her views in a manner that was peaceful yet forceful.

We had veterans who had come from all across the country, some Vietnam vets who had actually BEEN to Berkeley after Vietnam and had been treated SO incredibly poorly, had been SPAT on by it’s residents back then.

We had comments from Iraq war vets a few wounded even who were proud of the work they had done and that their fellow soldiers were still doing over there.

And so it went for hour after hour. After it was all over, the council made comments and discussed their options amongst each other. Many in the council expressed, in comment, a seemingly sincere recognition that the Marines were being discriminated against and were owed an apology.

Some wanted to apologize to the city for bringing such shame and disgrace upon the city and its residents. One councilmember even thought an apology was in order for giving preferential speech rights to Code Pink over those on the pro-troop side.

It actually sounded like there was a majority on the council who wanted to take meaningful action to rectify their transgressions.

But when it came time to vote on the resolution that offered the biggest retreat from their previous anti-military actions the “swing votes” on the council – despite having issued statements of apology in their comments – deliberately abstained so that the move to undo the most egregious misdeeds fell one vote short. They wouldn’t vote “NO” but they would also not vote “YES” – obviously fearful of the fury that would have been directed upon them by their base: Code Pink, International ANSWER and the anarchists who comprise the radical Left in Berkeley. . Thus the motion to send a letter of apology was defeated. Code Pink retained their special permits, the city will still try to kick the Marines out by having the city attorney attempt to exploit the “don’t ask don’t tell” policy. And their statement endorsing Code Pink and encouraging Berkeley residents to “impede” the work of any military recruiters in Berkeley still stands..

I was seeing red. Code Pink rejoiced. All of our supporters were deeply disappointed. For the veterans most of all, it was another slap in the face to them, another cutting-off-at-the-knees.

Are you proud of yourself Berkeley? You’ve done it again (disgraced yourselves and your town).

But there was a realization that gradually spread over our contingent of staff at Move America Forward: the City Council had not only made a partial retreat, but a majority of council members had verbally acknowledged the wrongful nature of their actions. They didn’t have the guts to vote this way on the record – for the political reasons mentioned above – but we nonetheless heard them say the impossible: THEY KNEW THEIR ACTIONS WERE INDEFENSIBLE.

The portable restrooms provided for the people at the protest were vandalized by the anti-war people, inside, phrases like “NO WAR”, “(F-word) Bush” and Anarchy symbols were spraypainted on the walls

THIS IS WAR

We vow to continue the fight, to carry on the struggle again, in Berkeley if we have to, or in any other city across this nation, wherever the fight takes Move America Forward.

Tired and physically just beat and exhausted, we came home. My bed and my two kitties Tereza and Tomas were waiting for me when I got home at 4:00 am.

“Meow!” They were hungry.

If you attended the rally and have a story to post up about your experiences, pictures, or links to youtube videos, etc, etc, etc, SEND THEM TO me! Also if you have comments or further information that would contribute to the richness or accuracy of this blog post, please email me at mafbloggerdanny@gmail.com and I will include them in the Berkeley Report

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 4:37 AM

January 26, 2008

NRO: Mark Steyn

First They Came for Piglet

One of Steyns best:

QUOTES:

"The British home secretary would respond that not all moderate imams are as gung-ho to detonate moppets. Which is true. But, by insisting on re-labeling terrorism committed by Muslims in the name of Islam as “anti-Islamic activity,” Her Majesty’s government is engaging not merely in Orwellian Newspeak but in self-defeating Orwellian Newspeak. The broader message it sends is that ours is a weak culture so unconfident and insecure that if you bomb us and kill us our first urge is to find a way to flatter and apologize to you."

"This is now a recurring theme in British life. A while back, it was a local government council telling workers not to have knick-knacks on their desks representing Winnie-the-Pooh’s porcine sidekick, Piglet. As Martin Niemöller famously said, first they came for Piglet and I did not speak out because I was not a Disney character and, if I was, I’m more of an Eeyore. So then they came for the Three Little Pigs, and Babe, and by the time I realized my country had turned into a 24/7 Looney Tunes it was too late, because there was no Porky Pig to stammer “Th-th-th-that’s all, folks!” and bring the nightmare to an end."

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 11:25 AM

American Imperialism?

Thanks to my friend Ruth for sharing these quotes with me.

DEFENDING AMERICA'S HONOR

Here are a few military comebacks...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

When in England at a fairly large conference, Colin Powell was asked by the Archbishop of Canterbury if our plans for Iraq were just an example of empire building' by George Bush.

He answered by saying, 'Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return.

It became very quiet in the room.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Then there was a conference in France where a number of international engineers were taking part, including French and American. During a break one of the French engineers came back into the room saying 'Have you heard the latest dumb stunt Bush has done? He has sent an aircraft carrier to Indonesia to help the tsunami victims. What does he intend to do, bomb them?'

A Boeing engineer stood up and replied quietly: 'Our carriers have three hospitals on board that can treat several hundred people; they are nuclear powered and can supply emergency electrical power to shore facilities; they have three cafeterias with the capacity to feed 3,000 people three meals a day, they can produce several thousand gallons of fresh water from sea water each day, and they carry half a dozen helicopters for use in transporting victims and injured to and from their flight deck.. We have eleven such ships; how many does France have?'

Once again, dead silence.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A U.S. Navy Admiral was attending a naval conference that included Admirals from the U.S., English, Canadian, Australian and French Navies. At a cocktail reception, he found himself standing with a large group of officers that included personnel from most of those countries. Everyone was chatting away in English as they sipped their drinks but a French admiral suddenly complained that, 'whereas Europeans learn many languages, Americans learn only English.'

He then asked, 'Why is it that we always have to speak English in these conferences rather than speaking French?

Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied 'Maybe it's because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so you wouldn't have to speak German.

You could have heard a pin drop.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A group of Americans, retired teachers, recently went to France on a tour.
Robert Whiting, an elderly gentleman of 83, arrived in Paris by plane. At French Customs, he took a few minutes to locate his passport in his carry on. 'You have been to France before, monsieur?' the customs officer asked sarcastically. Mr. Whiting admitted that he had been to France previously. '

Then you should know enough to have your passport ready.'

The American said, 'The last time I was here, I didn't have to show it.'

'Impossible! Americans always have to show your passports on arrival in France!' The American senior gave the Frenchman a long hard look.

Then he quietly explained. 'Well, when I came ashore at Omaha Beach on D-Day in '44 to help liberate this country, I couldn't find any Frenchmen to show it to.'

I love the American Military. My brother who is serving in Bahrain recently was able to meet President Bush and Condoleeza Rice as they traveled to the region. He said that the president told his group during a short speech in the Embassy in Bahrain that whenever oppressed people have Freedom dangled in front of them, they always grasp it.

Let Freedom Ring.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:15 AM

January 14, 2008

Vets For Freedom

Pete Hegseth Debates the cause of the Iraq War on the BBC

Pod Cast of the Whole Debate

On December 11, 2007, in London's grand Westminster Hall, Vets for Freedom Executive Director Pete Hegseth, and his esteemed debating partner William Shawcross, achieved an unexpected, and dramatic, upset. The sold-out audience of over 2,200 was swayed—overwhelmingly—by their defense of the motion, "The surge is working, let's win before we leave."

Of the 455 "undecided" voters who arrived in the hall, over half (234) later voted to support Hegseth and Shawcross. By contract, the "leave Iraq now" position gained only 67 votes and the "negotiated settlement" position gained just 64 votes. Overwhelmingly, previously undecided voters left the hall convinced that we must win in Iraq.

"There is nothing we can do about the pre-conceived notions people held when they entered the hall," said Hegseth "but I'm ecstatic that we were able to convince so many people about the merits of the ‘surge' and the need to win in Iraq. I was told it would be a hostile audience; but these results proves that anyone, anywhere can be convinced, provided they hear the facts on the ground."

Overall, the "negotiated settlement" position received the most final votes, however it had overwhelming support before the debate began. But in a dramatic turn, the Hegseth/Shawcross position overtook the "leave Iraq now" position in the final tally, overcoming a 129-vote deficit from the initial vote. See complete results below.

The debate will be shown in its entirety on BBC World during the weekend of January 5/6, and Vets for Freedom will send out a notice when it appears.

David Bellavias Book House to House is a must read.

I completely endorse and support and work of Vets for Freedom!

Jenny Hatch

Death Blow to Defeatists

January 14, 2008, 6:00 a.m.

Death Blow to Defeatists
Yesterday we were losing in Iraq, today we are winning.

By Pete Hegseth

“Iraq’s parliament has adopted legislation on the reinstatement of former Baath party supporters to government jobs.” (AP, 1/12/08)

For anyone who truly understands the stakes in Iraq, the achievement of national “political benchmarks” has never been an effective metric of success. Sure, Iraqis passing laws at the national level is important, but not more important than neighborhood-level security and grassroots political progress.

I learned this the hard way in Samarra, Iraq. Absent strong local security forces and fair, representative government at the neighborhood level, local populations never felt “more secure,” no matter how much useless (or useful) legislation was passed at the national level. Iraqis need to see a better life in their neighborhood, not hear more promises from Baghdad.

And for the past six months — because of General Petraeus’s new counter-insurgency strategy and the courage of 165,000 Americans — Iraqis have seen hope (one might even say “audacious hope”), and they have responded. Bolstered by American commitment, and weary of al-Qaeda brutality, the Iraqi people — Sunni and Shia together in many areas — have started cooperating at the local level.

As a result, violence continues to plummet, with attacks throughout Iraq down 60 percent since June and civilian deaths down 75 percent from a year ago. Iraqis are returning home by the tens of thousands. The incoming flow of foreign fighters have been cut in half. And despite a “surge” of troops, American combat deaths are near all-time monthly lows in Iraq. This is all wonderful news.

All the while, the Defeat-o-cratic leadership in Congress (Reid, Pelosi, & co.) and the Defeat-o-cratic presidential candidates have done everything they can to deny — obvious — progress. I cite two very recent examples from the “clinging to defeat” caucus: First, four days ago Majority Leader Reid said in a statement, “As President Bush continues to cling stubbornly to his flawed strategy, al-Qaeda only grows stronger.” Tell that to al-Qaeda in Iraq, Mr. Majority Leader…those you can still find alive. And while a few defeated fighters may flee elsewhere, they have lost in Iraq. And losing is not an effective recruiting tool for jihadists.

Second, in a recent presidential debate, Senator Obama had the “audacity” to suggest that security improvements in Anbar Province were due to — you’re not going to believe this — the Democratic election gains in 2006! I’ve heard some twisted logic in my days, but that one takes the cake.

Apparently the Sunnis in Anbar were incentivized to rise up by the prospect of abandonment, and reacted accordingly. This sloppy — and overtly political — argument doesn’t pass the Counterinsurgency 101 test. Only when populations are empowered — through more security — can they take on the “occupiers” (read: al-Qaeda). When dealing with al-Qaeda, abandonment means slaughter and subjugation.

So, with their “defeat in Iraq” talking points in shambles (what happened to the “religious civil war with no end in sight” talking point?), this weekend’s news was a deathblow to defeatists. The Iraq parliament passed national de-Baathification legislation, and the New York Times printed it on the front page, which means it must be important, right?

For months the only argument the antiwar crowd could cling to was: “The surge has not brought about the national-level political progress it was intended to induce.” Ergo: We lose, bring ‘em home. While this argument requires a “willing suspension of disbelief” in light of recent improvements in Iraq, it was “technically” true.

No more.

The Iraqi parliament, flaws and all, came together — Sunni, Shia, and Kurd — to craft a law that relaxes restrictions on the right of former-members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath party to fill government posts. The law will reinstate thousands of Baathists in government jobs from which they had been dismissed shortly after the war.

In short, less than five years after the fall of a genocidal Sunni dictator — who killed thousands of Shiites and Kurds — a democratically elected Shia government granted de-facto “amnesty” to former Baathist co-conspirators. Kind of makes our domestic illegal-immigration “amnesty” debate look silly, doesn’t it?

We should expect more progress in Iraq, although results will be mixed and the streets will not be quiet soon. But this groundbreaking settlement is a testament to the potential for political reconciliation, provided the security environment is stable enough to allow politicians to peek out from behind their sectarian divisions.

The Iraqi government still has a great deal left to achieve, but today they’ve shown us what real political reconciliation looks like. Democratic leaders in Congress — and on the campaign trail — should take a lesson from the Maliki government. Swallow your pride, admit you were wrong about the surge, and get behind our courageous military.

Some courageous Democrats will do just that, others will continue to trumpet MoveOn.org talking points. The members who embrace MoveOn should remember that the American people may not like the war in Iraq, but they hate losing. Now that we’re winning, they won’t stand for talk of defeat.

In the meantime, the real credit must go to the courageous leaders who had the conviction to commit to Iraq when the outlook was bleak. Thank you, President Bush. Thank you, General Petraeus. Thank you, Ambassador Crocker. Thank you, Senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman. Thank you to the 165,000 troops in Iraq. And thank you to the 3,921 fallen heroes of the Iraq war…your sacrifice was not in vain.

Yesterday we were losing in Iraq, today we are winning. Let us continue…together.

— Lt. Pete Hegseth, who served in Iraq with the 101st Airborne Division from 2005 to 2006, is executive director of Vets for Freedom.

The Vets who make up Iraq Veterans against the War inspired me to make this movie back on September 10th, 2007 while General Petreus was making his report to congress!

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 4:27 PM

January 11, 2008

NYT: AYAAN HIRSI ALI Book Review of The Suicide of Reason

In this recent Book Review Titled Blind Faith Ms. Ali not only reviews this new book, but also shares many interesting insights into the difference between the western mind, especially the American Mind, and the mind of those raised in Tribal cultures.

Here is the first paragraph of the review:

"Several authors have published books on radical Islam’s threat to the West since that shocking morning in September six years ago. With “The Suicide of Reason,” Lee Harris joins their ranks. But he distinguishes himself by going further than most of his counterparts: he considers the very worst possibility — the destruction of the West by radical Islam. There is a sense of urgency in his writing, a desire to shake awake the leaders of the West, to confront them with their failure to understand that they are engaged in a war with an adversary who fights by the law of the jungle."

Kudos to the Times for including anything written by Hirsi Ali.

Her piece was an excellent analysis of the difference between group think and the power of one. Because Americans, even leftist Americans, have been raised in a culture that prizes the individual, and puts the strong arm of the government behind that individual to live the best life they want to live, many American thinkers do not understand those who have been raised in a culture of submitting ones own will to the goals of the group overall.

Ms. Ali is much more optimistic about the ability of those raised in such cultures to make an intellectual shift than is the author of the book she reviews. Perhaps because she made that shift herself she feels that it is much more possible than Lee Harris.

I'm always looking for gospel connections with everything I read, and it must be remembered that Jesus Christs message from the very beginning was one of teaching his followers the value of the individual. Over and over again in scripture he taught this principle. Perhaps the most eloquent was when he said that he is the Good Shepherd.

And this passage from the Book of Matthew in the New testament outlines this principle perfectly:

"11 For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. 12 How think ye? if a man have an hundred asheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray? 13 And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray. 14 Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish."

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, is the author of “Infidel.”

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 4:29 AM

October 10, 2007

Hugh Hewitt: About Basra

Read it!

"Thanks to an assist from Michael Yon, I was able to interview Lt. Colonel Patrick Sanders, commanding officer of Fourth Battalion the Rifles, stationed near Basra."

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 8:09 AM

October 8, 2007

WND: Terrorists endorse Hillary

Interesting Article

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 12:11 PM

Michelle Malkin: My Union made me attend the anti-war rally

Go read this withering report from Malkin about an anti war moonbat told by his union to attend an anti american event.

And the Free Republic chat that started the whole exposure of this fraud.

More at American Thinker.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:32 AM

Front Page Mag: More disgusting evidence of sexual perversion at the highest levels of Hamas

This article backs up the contentions of the book I recently read called The Haj by Leon Uris.

It is disgusting to read, so tread lightly mamas.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:27 AM

The Hill: More about Plame, Plame, Plame and all Wilson all the time

Novak: Wilson did not forcefully object to naming of CIA wife in column.

After five million, two hundred, and seventy three thousand, and twenty five hundred, and seven stories on this so called scandal......can we finally, now, admit....it was a NON-event???

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:21 AM

Victor David Hanson: Doomsday Debunked

The Middle East is not falling down.

Jenny Hatch

Pajamas version, with great comments.

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:17 AM

Christopher Hitchens at Vanity Fair: A Death in the Family

When you have a few minutes go read this account by Hitchens. It brought me to tears.

A Death in the Family.

Jenny Hatch

PS In my school girl enthusiasm, I used to think that every patriot who fought in the Revolutionary War was as convicted and gung ho as George Washington. I even believed that every soldier who died was happy to go, knowing that he had fought for the most important cause humanity had ever engaged in.

When as an adult I began to read Biographies of Washington which painted a much more clear picture of reality, I was absolutely gobsmacked at the level of corruption, betrayal (Sure we all heard of Benedict Arnold), infighting, petty squabbles, and reversals that defined the Revolutionary War of America.

Yet aren't we glad they persevered?

I believe our Iraqi friends, when looking back two hundred years from now will have a similar sense of purpose and vision, understanding that the cause of Freedom is ALWAYS worth the fight, and yes, the deaths that accompany the fight.

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:09 AM

October 6, 2007

Pajamas Media: Secret Bush/Aznar memo sparks controversy

Read the whole thing...it really backs up Ion Pacepas claim that Sadaam had been taught by the soviets to do everything he could to protect the documentation of the WMD's no matter what.

"Pacepa: Contemporary political memory seems to be conveniently afflicted with some kind of Alzheimer's disease. Not long ago, every Western leader, starting with President Clinton, fumed against Saddam’s WMD. Now almost no one remembers that after General Hussein Kamel, Saddam’s son-in-law, defected to Jordan in 1995, he helped us find “more than one hundred metal trunks and boxes” containing documentation “dealing with all categories of weapons, including nuclear.”

He also aided UNSCOM to fish out of the Tigris River high-grade missile components prohibited to Iraq. That was exactly what my old Soviet-made “Sãrindar” plan stated he should do in case of emergency: destroy the weapons, hide the equipment, and preserve the documentation. No wonder Saddam hastened to lure Kamel back to Iraq, where three days later he was killed together with over 40 of his relatives in what the Baghdad official press described as a “spontaneous administration of tribal justice.” Once that was done, Saddam slammed the door shut to any UNSCOM inspection.

FP: So was any Sãrindar plan activated?

Pacepa: Certainly. The minimal version of the Sãrindar plan I made for Libya’s Gaddafi. Soon after I was granted political asylum in the US, Gaddafi staged a fire at the secret chemical weapons facility I knew about (the cellar underneath the Rabta chemical complex). To be sure the CIA satellites would notice that fire and cross that target off its list, he created a huge cloud of black smoke by burning truckloads of tires and painting scorch marks on the facility. That was written in the Sãrindar plan. To be on the safe side, Gaddafi also built a second production facility, this time placed some 100 feet underground in the hollowed-out Tarhunah Mountain, south of Tripoli. That was not in the Sãrindar plan.

FP: It is undeniable, therefore, that Saddam had WMDs, right?

Pacepa: In the early 1970s, the Kremlin established a “socialist division of labor” for persuading the governments of Iraq and Libya to join the terrorist war against the US. KGB chairman Yury Andropov (who would later become the leader of the Soviet Union), told me that either of those two countries could inflict more damage on the Americans than could the Red Brigades, the Baader-Meinhof group and all other terrorist organizations taken together.

The governments of those Arab countries, Andropov explained, not only had inexhaustible financial resources (read: oil), but they also had huge intelligence services that were being run by “our razvedka advisers” and could extend their tentacles to every corner of the earth. There was one major danger, though: by raising terrorism to the state level we risked American reprisal. Washington would never dispatch its airplanes and rockets to exterminate the Baader-Meinhof, but it might well deploy them to destroy a terrorist state. We therefore were also tasked to provide those countries secretly with weapons of mass destruction, because Andropov concluded that the Yankees would never attack a country that could retaliate with such deadly weapons.

Libya was Romania’s main client in that socialist division of labor, because of Ceausescu’s close association with Colonel Muammar Gaddafi. Moscow kept Iraq.

Andropov told me that, if our Iraq and Libyan experiment proved successful, the same strategy would be extended to Syria. Recently, Libya’s Gaddafi admitted to having WMD, and the CIA inspectors found them. Why should we believe that the almighty Soviet Union, which had proliferated WMD all over the world, was not able to do the same thing in Iraq? Every piece of armament Iraq had came from the former Soviet Union—from the Katyusha launchers to the T72 tanks, BMP-1 fighting vehicles and MiG fighter planes. In the spring of 2002, just a couple of weeks after Russia took its place at the NATO table, President Putin and his ex-KGB officers who are now running Russia concluded another $40 billion trade deal with Saddam Hussein’s tyrannical regime in Iraq. That was not for grain or beans—Russia has to import them from elsewhere."

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 9:42 AM

Huff Po: Explanation for why the SNL "Iran so far" vid was pulled from You Tube

Go Here and Here to read the explanations.

More Here

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 9:30 AM

October 4, 2007

Gateway pundit has the withering video Fox News Put together....Pandoras box is OPEN

This is an awesome video montage of various comments by democrats.

Go Here to View.

Did Democrats really want the public to look back at all of the ugly antiwar attacks from the past four years... by Democrats?

What were they thinking?.

Here's the Democratic antiwar montage, via Hannity & Colmes:

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 8:56 PM

Communist ties to Anti War Movement

World Net Daily

Daivd Corn (please note the date on this one)

Instapundit

Gateway Pundit

"Reuters today reported that the two main groups organizing the antiwar protests on Iraq. ANSWER Coalition and Troops Out Now are associated with the communist World Workers Party:

Saturday's protest, sponsored by the Troops Out Now Coalition, came two weeks after an antiwar event sponsored by the ANSWER Coalition, which drew roughly 10,000 people. ANSWER also sponsored a rally in March.

The groups' agendas are similar, opposing what they call "imperialist" U.S. policy not only in Iraq but toward countries like Cuba and Iran -- which has alienated some supporters.

"There's all of these peripheral issues that you're going to be associated with, whether you want to or not," said Hamilton College history professor Maurice Isserman.

Both groups' leaders were associated with the Workers World Party, which advocates a shift toward a Soviet-style planned economy. But a 2004 dispute prompted some members to form the splinter Party for Socialism and Liberation.

Members of the splinter group stayed active in the ANSWER Coalition, and the remaining members of the Workers World Party formed the Troops Out Now Coalition, Troops Out Now spokesman Dustin Langley said.

WOW! The media finally outs the Communists!

And finally some nice commentary from Sweetness and Light.

Quote:

"Amazingly, the article even hints at the fact that some of the protesters might not have America’s best interests at heart:

Both groups’ leaders were associated with the Workers World Party, which advocates a shift toward a Soviet-style planned economy.

Well that is one way of sugar-coating a hardcore revolutionary Communist organization.

Here is how Discover The Networks describes them:

Workers World Party

The Workers World Party (WWP) is a Marxist-Leninist sect that was founded in 1959 by Sam Marcy. Marcy and his followers were members of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) until 1958, when they split from SWP because, unlike that organization, they supported the… 1956 Soviet invasion of Hungary, and the regime of Mao Zedong in China…

Advocating socialist revolution and the abolition of private property in the United States, WWP is a staunch supporter of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro and North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Il…

WWP also supported the Soviet invasions of Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan. During the Cold War it always sided with the Communists, against America. In the 1960s, Marcy himself led demonstrations against the Vietnam War and called for the victory of the Vietcong.

Still, isn’t it funny how our watchdog media have never mentioned the names of these crackpot groups in any of the tens of thousands of fawning stories about the anti-war demonstrations they have previously produced.

But an excuse for the low crowd numbers must be found. So Reuters suddenly discovers that International ANSWER, United For Peace And Justice, Code Pink and the Workers World Party are “radicals”:

The groups’ agendas are similar, opposing what they call “imperialist” U.S. policy not only in Iraq but toward countries like Cuba and Iran — which has alienated some supporters…

Never mind that these are precisely the same people who have come out for every so-called anti-war demonstration in the US for the last ten years.

This is what passes for “journalism” in the 21st century."

And it is the very reason that the Media is DYING!

ha heeee ha heh heh.....snort....ha

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 8:41 PM

October 3, 2007

Rush Limbaughs "Phony" soldiers: Smackdown by Melanie Morgan

Been hearing alot these days about democratic outrage over a statement Rush Limbaugh made about Phony Soldiers.

Melanie Morgan outlines the various phonys and the strung out media who lapped it up and spewed it out to the American People:

Go Here to read her withering report.

Jenny Hatch

PS: They still smell

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 3:48 AM

Nancy and Elizabeth debate The Surge on The View

Nancy Pelosi was on the View the other day. She and Elizabeth Hasselbeck had a little debate about the surge.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 3:38 AM

October 2, 2007

Keith Olbermann thinks David Horowitz is the "WORST person in the world!"

Keith really needs to get a clue.

Read the whole story on Davids Blog here.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:38 AM

October 1, 2007

Jerusalem Post: Caroline Glick

Ahmadinejad's overlooked message

"During his visit to New York this week, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad attacked every basic assumption upon which Western civilization is predicated. Ahmadinejad offered up his attacks while extolling his vision of Islamic global domination.

Refusing to note his existential challenge to the Free World, the Western media concentrated their coverage of his trip on his statements regarding specific Western policy goals. His rejection of the UN Security Council's authority to take action against Iran's illicit nuclear weapons program; his championing of the Palestinian cause and Israel's destruction; his denials of Iranian support for terrorism, and his attacks against the US were widely reported. So too, his insistence that Iranian women enjoy full rights and that there are no homosexuals in Iran received banner headlines.

...The thing of it is that aside from blind narcissism, there is a reason that the West ignores the dangers facing it. The Western media ignored Ahmadinejad's message, just as it has insistently ignored the messages of bin Laden and Fatah throughout the years, because Westerners have a hard time believing that anyone would want to abide by the Islamic world view which denies mankind's desire for freedom.

But no matter how ugly an ideology is, in the absence of real competition it gains adherents and power. The only way to ensure that jihadists' demonic views are defeated is by stridently defending and upholding the fundamental principles on which the Free World is based. And the West hasn't even begun to take up this challenge.

As a result, it has handed its enemies two victories already. It has demoralized its potential allies in the Islamic world, and it has failed to rally its own people to defend themselves.

In spite of what the West would like to believe, Ahmadinejad and his allies from Ramallah to Waziristan, from Gaza to Kandahar to Baghdad, are not negotiating. They are fighting. Rather than ignore them or seek to find nonexistent common ground, we must defeat them - first and foremost on the battleground of ideas."

And the ultimate battleground comes down to how the women of this world are going to live. I love my faith because at every juncture during my time on this earth I have been taught the principles of freedom. I was taught by my parents that a great war was waged in heaven before the world was even created. The fight was over how we mortals we going to live here on earth.

Satan, or Lucifers plan was to enslave us and force obedience, thus ensuring every child of God made it safely back home.

Jesus Christs plan was for freedom. He proposed that we be given free will and choice about how we would live our lives. Then, knowing we would screw up royally as individuals, he offered himself as Savior to provide a way for us to repent and make things right, as individuals. We all have the responsibility to work out our own salvation during this probationary time on the earth.. The atonement was his offering to humanity to allow us to heal from the sins, hurts, and injustices that would result from mere mortals having freedom in a world of blood, war, and danger.

Heavenly Father allowed us as his children to fight it out, and one third of the hosts of heaven, billions of souls, decided Satan was on to something. So they followed him. Two thirds of the hosts of heaven, even more billions of souls, decided that Jesus Christ had the best plan and sided with him. Father cast satan and his followers out of heaven, and Life began on earth with our first parents, Adam and Eve. Did the battle go away? Heck no. It is raging right now in the hearts of men and women on this earth. In every home, community, school, work place, university, religion, country, and most importantly in the marketplace of ideas.

The fight between freedom and slavery rages.

I have sided with those fighting for freedom, for democracy, for individual rights, and sovereignty from those people, religions, and ideologies that deprive men and especially women of their rights of self determination.

And I am heartsick that so many Americans, even some of my freedom lovin' mormon momma friends have allowed themselves to be seduced by political correctness when it comes to the various wars that are being waged in that marketplace of ideas. They spout the various lines that have been drum beat into their minds during years and years of socialistic education, and the more educated and longer time my friends have spent in university, the more difficult it is for them to see the various realities and fights for what they truly are.

I was talking to my best friend on saturday and we just hashed through everything once again. I praise her for her open mind and willingness to at least listen to me. As she talked about the incompatibility of muslim life with American Democracy and American Imperealism and questioned the American Military staying in Iraq for years to come, I asked her what she knew about Japan. Did she consider that the Japanese had a good solid democratic country? "Sure", was the reply.

I challenged her to consider that without US help after WWII in setting up a Democracy, Japan would not have been able to establish itself as a thriving beacon of freedom in the orient.

I told her that as President Bush said in a recent address that elites in America believed the Japanesse women were too subservient to their husbands to learn how to vote and participate in the democratic process. And I asked her if Muslim women were any different from us or japanese women.

I bless her that she was listening and pondering my words. Her husbands family comes from Pakistan, and he has struggled mightily to assimilate into US culture. Her whole family is muslim on her husbands side and she loves them very much. Her husband is one of the best husbands and fathers I have ever known, and works very hard to provide for his family. He does not practice the muslim faith of his family, and has been very supportive of my friend living an LDS lifestyle and teaching it to their children. She was listening as I talked and it was joyful to at least have a chance to discuss without anger or blind spewing of the talking points so many have been fed by media and education.

I asked her, "don't you think all women want the same thing? The right to keep what we work for, the right to give birth to our children unmolested, and then raise them with the teachings and values that are important to us?" She agreed. I told her I believe wholeheartedly in this struggle for freedom that is going on in Iraq and Afganistan. I think she understood my passion a little better, and it was nice, because so often I feel like people in my life dismiss me as a freedom fanatic.

Many of my friends in Boulder, even my mormon friends, I find unwilling to even discuss rationally political ideologies. It is very frustrating.

We have all been confused by the various ideologies that bash around the planet. I pray for the day when all of the blinders come off and the sugar coating of all that would seek to rob individuals, families, and nations of their sovereignty are exposed as the diabolical enemies to freedom that they are, and we have the courage to accept the truth and then live the way that we were destined with light and truth as the beacon of our lives.

It really does come down to a fight between freedom and slavery. I continually pray for our sisters in the middle east, that they will be set free to live the life they choose in terms of education, livlihood, marriage, children, and religion. I pray that all women will receive these tremendous blessings and opportunities the world over and that the men who love them will be able to provide for their families unmolested by crazy fanatics disrupting family life at every juncture.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:35 AM

September 30, 2007

Townhall Radio: Jerry Newberry interviews Debi Lee

The National Defense recently had Debi on talking about the Move America Forward Tour to DC.

Go Here to listen to the podcast.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 8:03 PM

August 30, 2007

JWR: The rise of the Fantasists

Caroline Glick

"As the cliche goes, "A conservative is a liberal whose been mugged by reality." Like most cliches, this one exposes a larger truth. Namely, people often base their views on their fantasies of how the world should be than on the reality of how the world actually is.

Following this line, the September 11, 2001 attacks can be seen as a large-scale mugging. After the attacks, the same American people that had ignored the threat of totalitarian Islam since the Iranian revolution first categorized the US as the Great Satan back in 1979, acknowledged the danger and recognized it was at war. The overwhelming majority of Americans supported President George W. Bush when he said that the US would fight to destroy all global terror organizations and take down the regimes that sponsor them."

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 8:12 AM

Videos of our troops in Iraq

Buying Bread in Iraq

Troops having fun in Iraq

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 8:04 AM

Michael Tottens Mideast Journal

Michaels thoughts on the Surge: Go here

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:57 AM

August 28, 2007

Michael Yon, The Ghosts of Anbar Part II

Ghosts of Anbar Part II

Over the past several years, while working into a strategic fatigue, our military has made an amazing transformation in how it conducts this war. Gone, for instance, are heavy-handed tactics, replaced by multi-dimensional counterinsurgency strategy rolled out simultaneously with targeted kinetic battles, like those recently with the 3/2 Stryker Brigade Combat Team in Baqubah.

Arrowhead Ripper was merely the latest experience that underlines the Army’s rapidly-growing expertise. Yet the Marines have adapted faster and seem poised to win the war in their battle space. In fact, it’s been Army officers who have told me repeatedly over the past several years that nobody is successfully morphing to meet this war faster than the Marines. Of course, Army officers who compliment Marines always say, “But that didn’t come from me.”

...Some of these men will admit they were insurgents who switched sides because they realized that they are more likely to get what they want with a stable government. Al Qaeda promised them everything under the baking sun, yet al Qaeda killed people who smoked—and Iraqis like to smoke. They killed people who had satellite dishes or televisions, but al Qaeda would be drinking and with prostitutes.

Iraqis have told me some interesting anecdotes about the religious technicalities of prostitution. They are not supposed to have sex out of wedlock, so they marry the prostitute (and the house of ill-repute has the proper religious authority present to make the marriage), and then they divorce the prostitute after completing their business. Another rumor in the area is that al Qaeda tried to force shepherds to make their female sheep wear underwear. This is one I have heard all over Iraq."

Sheep in diapers.....that is really weird! I wonder how the terrorists feel about Great Danes??

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 2:54 PM

August 22, 2007

George Bush Speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW)

President Bush Attends Veterans of Foreign Wars National Convention, Discusses War on Terror
Kansas City Convention and Entertainment Center
Kansas City, Missouri

9:46 A.M. CDT

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all. Please be seated. It's good to be with you again. I understand you haven't had much of a problem attracting speakers. (Laughter.) I thank you for inviting me. I can understand why people want to come here. See, it's an honor to stand with the men and women of the Veterans of Foreign Wars. (Applause.) The VFW is one of this nation's finest organizations. You belong to an elite group of Americans. (Applause.) You belong to a group of people who have defended America overseas. You have fought in places from Normandy to Iwo Jima, to Pusan, to Khe Sahn, to Kuwait, to Somalia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq. You brought security to the American people; you brought hope to millions across the world.

As members of this proud organization, you are advocates for the rights of our military veterans, a model of community service, and a strong and important voice for a strong national defense. I thank you for your service. I thank you for what you've done for the United States of America. (Applause.)

I stand before you as a wartime President. I wish I didn't have to say that, but an enemy that attacked us on September the 11th, 2001, declared war on the United States of America. And war is what we're engaged in. The struggle has been called a clash of civilizations. In truth, it's a struggle for civilization. We fight for a free way of life against a new barbarism -- an ideology whose followers have killed thousands on American soil, and seek to kill again on even a greater scale.

We fight for the possibility that decent men and women across the broader Middle East can realize their destiny -- and raise up societies based on freedom and justice and personal dignity. And as long as I'm Commander-in-Chief we will fight to win. (Applause.) I'm confident that we will prevail. I'm confident we'll prevail because we have the greatest force for human liberation the world has ever known -- the men and women of the United States Armed Forces. (Applause.)

For those of you who wear the uniform, nothing makes me more proud to say that I am your Commander-in-Chief. Thank you for volunteering in the service of the United States of America. (Applause.)

Now, I know some people doubt the universal appeal of liberty, or worry that the Middle East isn't ready for it. Others believe that America's presence is destabilizing, and that if the United States would just leave a place like Iraq those who kill our troops or target civilians would no longer threaten us. Today I'm going to address these arguments. I'm going to describe why helping the young democracies of the Middle East stand up to violent Islamic extremists is the only realistic path to a safer world for the American people. I'm going to try to provide some historical perspective to show there is a precedent for the hard and necessary work we're doing, and why I have such confidence in the fact we'll be successful.

Before I do so I want to thank the national Commander-in-Chief of the VFW and his wife, Nancy. It's been a joy to work with Gary and the staff. Gary said, we don't necessarily agree a hundred percent of the time. I remember the old lieutenant governor of Texas -- a Democrat, and I was a Republican governor. He said, "Governor, if we agreed 100 percent of the time, one of us wouldn't be necessary." (Laughter.)

But here's what we do agree on: We agree our veterans deserve the full support of the United States government. (Applause.) That's why in this budget I submitted there's $87 billion for the veterans; it's the highest level of support ever for the veterans in American history. (Applause.) We agree that health care for our veterans is a top priority, and that's why we've increased health care spending for our veterans by 83 percent since I was sworn in as your President. (Applause.) We agree that a troop coming out of Iraq or Afghanistan deserves the best health care not only as an active duty citizen, but as a military guy, but also as a veteran -- and you're going to get the best health care we can possibly provide. (Applause.) We agree our homeless vets ought to have shelter, and that's what we're providing.

In other words, we agree the veterans deserve the full support of our government and that's what you're going to get as George W. Bush as your President. (Applause.)

I want to thank Bob Wallace, the Executive Director. He spends a lot of time in the Oval Office -- I'm always checking the silverware drawer. (Laughter.) He's going to be bringing in George Lisicki here soon. He's going to be the national commander-in-chief for my next year in office. And I'm looking forward to working with George, and I'm looking forward to working with Wallace, and I'm looking forward to hearing from you. They're going to find an open-minded President, dedicated to doing what's right. (Applause.)

I appreciate Linda Meader, the National President of the Ladies Auxiliary. She brought old Dave with her. (Applause.) Virginia Carman, the incoming President. I want to thank Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs Gordon Mansfield for joining us today. I appreciate the United States Senator from the state of Missouri, strong supporter of the military and strong supporter of the veterans, Kit Bond. (Applause.) Two members of the Congress have kindly showed up today -- I'm proud they're both here: Congressman Emanuel Cleaver -- no finer man, no more decent a fellow than Emanuel Cleaver -- is with us. And a great Congressman from right around the corner here, Congressman Sam Graves. Thank you all for coming. (Applause.)

Lieutenant General Jack Stultz, Commanding General, U.S. Army Reserve Command, is with us today. General, thanks for coming. Lieutenant General Bill Caldwell, Commanding General, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, is with us today, as well. General Caldwell, thank you for your service. (Applause.)

Thank you all for letting me come by. I want to open today's speech with a story that begins on a sunny morning, when thousands of Americans were murdered in a surprise attack -- and our nation was propelled into a conflict that would take us to every corner of the globe.

The enemy who attacked us despises freedom, and harbors resentment at the slights he believes America and Western nations have inflicted on his people. He fights to establish his rule over an entire region. And over time, he turns to a strategy of suicide attacks destined to create so much carnage that the American people will tire of the violence and give up the fight.

If this story sounds familiar, it is -- except for one thing. The enemy I have just described is not al Qaeda, and the attack is not 9/11, and the empire is not the radical caliphate envisioned by Osama bin Laden. Instead, what I've described is the war machine of Imperial Japan in the 1940s, its surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, and its attempt to impose its empire throughout East Asia.

Ultimately, the United States prevailed in World War II, and we have fought two more land wars in Asia. And many in this hall were veterans of those campaigns. Yet even the most optimistic among you probably would not have foreseen that the Japanese would transform themselves into one of America's strongest and most steadfast allies, or that the South Koreans would recover from enemy invasion to raise up one of the world's most powerful economies, or that Asia would pull itself out of poverty and hopelessness as it embraced markets and freedom.

The lesson from Asia's development is that the heart's desire for liberty will not be denied. Once people even get a small taste of liberty, they're not going to rest until they're free. Today's dynamic and hopeful Asia -- a region that brings us countless benefits -- would not have been possible without America's presence and perseverance. It would not have been possible without the veterans in this hall today. And I thank you for your service. (Applause.)

There are many differences between the wars we fought in the Far East and the war on terror we're fighting today. But one important similarity is at their core they're ideological struggles. The militarists of Japan and the communists in Korea and Vietnam were driven by a merciless vision for the proper ordering of humanity. They killed Americans because we stood in the way of their attempt to force their ideology on others. Today, the names and places have changed, but the fundamental character of the struggle has not changed. Like our enemies in the past, the terrorists who wage war in Iraq and Afghanistan and other places seek to spread a political vision of their own -- a harsh plan for life that crushes freedom, tolerance, and dissent.

Like our enemies in the past, they kill Americans because we stand in their way of imposing this ideology across a vital region of the world. This enemy is dangerous; this enemy is determined; and this enemy will be defeated. (Applause.)

We're still in the early hours of the current ideological struggle, but we do know how the others ended -- and that knowledge helps guide our efforts today. The ideals and interests that led America to help the Japanese turn defeat into democracy are the same that lead us to remain engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The defense strategy that refused to hand the South Koreans over to a totalitarian neighbor helped raise up a Asian Tiger that is the model for developing countries across the world, including the Middle East. The result of American sacrifice and perseverance in Asia is a freer, more prosperous and stable continent whose people want to live in peace with America, not attack America.

At the outset of World War II there were only two democracies in the Far East -- Australia and New Zealand. Today most of the nations in Asia are free, and its democracies reflect the diversity of the region. Some of these nations have constitutional monarchies, some have parliaments, and some have presidents. Some are Christian, some are Muslim, some are Hindu, and some are Buddhist. Yet for all the differences, the free nations of Asia all share one thing in common: Their governments derive their authority from the consent of the governed, and they desire to live in peace with their neighbors.

Along the way to this freer and more hopeful Asia, there were a lot of doubters. Many times in the decades that followed World War II, American policy in Asia was dismissed as hopeless and naive. And when we listen to criticism of the difficult work our generation is undertaking in the Middle East today, we can hear the echoes of the same arguments made about the Far East years ago.

In the aftermath of Japan's surrender, many thought it naive to help the Japanese transform themselves into a democracy. Then as now, the critics argued that some people were simply not fit for freedom.

Some said Japanese culture was inherently incompatible with democracy. Joseph Grew, a former United States ambassador to Japan who served as Harry Truman's Under Secretary of State, told the President flatly that -- and I quote -- "democracy in Japan would never work." He wasn't alone in that belief. A lot of Americans believed that -- and so did the Japanese -- a lot of Japanese believed the same thing: democracy simply wouldn't work.

Others critics said that Americans were imposing their ideals on the Japanese. For example, Japan's Vice Prime Minister asserted that allowing Japanese women to vote would "retard the progress of Japanese politics."

It's interesting what General MacArthur wrote in his memoirs. He wrote, "There was much criticism of my support for the enfranchisement of women. Many Americans, as well as many other so-called experts, expressed the view that Japanese women were too steeped in the tradition of subservience to their husbands to act with any degree of political independence." That's what General MacArthur observed. In the end, Japanese women were given the vote; 39 women won parliamentary seats in Japan's first free election. Today, Japan's minister of defense is a woman, and just last month, a record number of women were elected to Japan's Upper House. Other critics argued that democracy -- (applause.)

There are other critics, believe it or not, that argue that democracy could not succeed in Japan because the national religion -- Shinto -- was too fanatical and rooted in the Emperor. Senator Richard Russell denounced the Japanese faith, and said that if we did not put the Emperor on trial, "any steps we may take to create democracy are doomed to failure." The State Department's man in Tokyo put it bluntly: "The Emperor system must disappear if Japan is ever really to be democratic."

Those who said Shinto was incompatible with democracy were mistaken, and fortunately, Americans and Japanese leaders recognized it at the time, because instead of suppressing the Shinto faith, American authorities worked with the Japanese to institute religious freedom for all faiths. Instead of abolishing the imperial throne, Americans and Japanese worked together to find a place for the Emperor in the democratic political system.

And the result of all these steps was that every Japanese citizen gained freedom of religion, and the Emperor remained on his throne and Japanese democracy grew stronger because it embraced a cherished part of Japanese culture. And today, in defiance of the critics and the doubters and the skeptics, Japan retains its religions and cultural traditions, and stands as one of the world's great free societies. (Applause.)

You know, the experts sometimes get it wrong. An interesting observation, one historian put it -- he said, "Had these erstwhile experts" -- he was talking about people criticizing the efforts to help Japan realize the blessings of a free society -- he said, "Had these erstwhile experts had their way, the very notion of inducing a democratic revolution would have died of ridicule at an early stage."

Instead, I think it's important to look at what happened. A democratic Japan has brought peace and prosperity to its people. Its foreign trade and investment have helped jump-start the economies of others in the region. The alliance between our two nations is the lynchpin for freedom and stability throughout the Pacific. And I want you to listen carefully to this final point: Japan has transformed from America's enemy in the ideological struggle of the 20th century to one of America's strongest allies in the ideological struggle of the 21st century. (Applause.)

Critics also complained when America intervened to save South Korea from communist invasion. Then as now, the critics argued that the war was futile, that we should never have sent our troops in, or they argued that America's intervention was divisive here at home.

After the North Koreans crossed the 38th Parallel in 1950, President Harry Truman came to the defense of the South -- and found himself attacked from all sides. From the left, I.F. Stone wrote a book suggesting that the South Koreans were the real aggressors and that we had entered the war on a false pretext. From the right, Republicans vacillated. Initially, the leader of the Republican Party in the Senate endorsed Harry Truman's action, saying, "I welcome the indication of a more definite policy" -- he went on to say, "I strongly hope that having adopted it, the President may maintain it intact," then later said "it was a mistake originally to go into Korea because it meant a land war."

Throughout the war, the Republicans really never had a clear position. They never could decide whether they wanted the United States to withdraw from the war in Korea, or expand the war to the Chinese mainland. Others complained that our troops weren't getting the support from the government. One Republican senator said, the effort was just "bluff and bluster." He rejected calls to come together in a time of war, on the grounds that "we will not allow the cloak of national unity to be wrapped around horrible blunders."

Many in the press agreed. One columnist in The Washington Post said, "The fact is that the conduct of the Korean War has been shot through with errors great and small." A colleague wrote that "Korea is an open wound. It's bleeding and there's no cure for it in sight." He said that the American people could not understand "why Americans are doing about 95 percent of the fighting in Korea."

Many of these criticisms were offered as reasons for abandoning our commitments in Korea. And while it's true the Korean War had its share of challenges, the United States never broke its word.

Today, we see the result of a sacrifice of people in this room in the stark contrast of life on the Korean Peninsula. Without Americans' intervention during the war and our willingness to stick with the South Koreans after the war, millions of South Koreans would now be living under a brutal and repressive regime. The Soviets and Chinese communists would have learned the lesson that aggression pays. The world would be facing a more dangerous situation. The world would be less peaceful.

Instead, South Korea is a strong, democratic ally of the United States of America. South Korean troops are serving side-by-side with American forces in Afghanistan and in Iraq. And America can count on the free people of South Korea to be lasting partners in the ideological struggle we're facing in the beginning of the 21st century. (Applause.)

For those of you who served in Korea, thank you for your sacrifice, and thank you for your service. (Applause.)

Finally, there's Vietnam. This is a complex and painful subject for many Americans. The tragedy of Vietnam is too large to be contained in one speech. So I'm going to limit myself to one argument that has particular significance today. Then as now, people argued the real problem was America's presence and that if we would just withdraw, the killing would end.

The argument that America's presence in Indochina was dangerous had a long pedigree. In 1955, long before the United States had entered the war, Graham Greene wrote a novel called, "The Quiet American." It was set in Saigon, and the main character was a young government agent named Alden Pyle. He was a symbol of American purpose and patriotism -- and dangerous naivete. Another character describes Alden this way: "I never knew a man who had better motives for all the trouble he caused."

After America entered the Vietnam War, the Graham Greene argument gathered some steam. As a matter of fact, many argued that if we pulled out there would be no consequences for the Vietnamese people.

In 1972, one antiwar senator put it this way: "What earthly difference does it make to nomadic tribes or uneducated subsistence farmers in Vietnam or Cambodia or Laos, whether they have a military dictator, a royal prince or a socialist commissar in some distant capital that they've never seen and may never heard of?" A columnist for The New York Times wrote in a similar vein in 1975, just as Cambodia and Vietnam were falling to the communists: "It's difficult to imagine," he said, "how their lives could be anything but better with the Americans gone." A headline on that story, date Phnom Penh, summed up the argument: "Indochina without Americans: For Most a Better Life."

The world would learn just how costly these misimpressions would be. In Cambodia, the Khmer Rouge began a murderous rule in which hundreds of thousands of Cambodians died by starvation and torture and execution. In Vietnam, former allies of the United States and government workers and intellectuals and businessmen were sent off to prison camps, where tens of thousands perished. Hundreds of thousands more fled the country on rickety boats, many of them going to their graves in the South China Sea.

Three decades later, there is a legitimate debate about how we got into the Vietnam War and how we left. There's no debate in my mind that the veterans from Vietnam deserve the high praise of the United States of America. (Applause.) Whatever your position is on that debate, one unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America's withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like "boat people," "re-education camps," and "killing fields."

There was another price to our withdrawal from Vietnam, and we can hear it in the words of the enemy we face in today's struggle -- those who came to our soil and killed thousands of citizens on September the 11th, 2001. In an interview with a Pakistani newspaper after the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden declared that "the American people had risen against their government's war in Vietnam. And they must do the same today."

His number two man, Zawahiri, has also invoked Vietnam. In a letter to al Qaeda's chief of operations in Iraq, Zawahiri pointed to "the aftermath of the collapse of the American power in Vietnam and how they ran and left their agents."

Zawahiri later returned to this theme, declaring that the Americans "know better than others that there is no hope in victory. The Vietnam specter is closing every outlet." Here at home, some can argue our withdrawal from Vietnam carried no price to American credibility -- but the terrorists see it differently.

We must remember the words of the enemy. We must listen to what they say. Bin Laden has declared that "the war [in Iraq] is for you or us to win. If we win it, it means your disgrace and defeat forever." Iraq is one of several fronts in the war on terror -- but it's the central front -- it's the central front for the enemy that attacked us and wants to attack us again. And it's the central front for the United States and to withdraw without getting the job done would be devastating. (Applause.)

If we were to abandon the Iraqi people, the terrorists would be emboldened, and use their victory to gain new recruits. As we saw on September the 11th, a terrorist safe haven on the other side of the world can bring death and destruction to the streets of our own cities. Unlike in Vietnam, if we withdraw before the job is done, this enemy will follow us home. And that is why, for the security of the United States of America, we must defeat them overseas so we do not face them in the United States of America. (Applause.)

Recently, two men who were on the opposite sides of the debate over the Vietnam War came together to write an article. One was a member of President Nixon's foreign policy team, and the other was a fierce critic of the Nixon administration's policies. Together they wrote that the consequences of an American defeat in Iraq would be disastrous.

Here's what they said: "Defeat would produce an explosion of euphoria among all the forces of Islamist extremism, throwing the entire Middle East into even greater upheaval. The likely human and strategic costs are appalling to contemplate. Perhaps that is why so much of the current debate seeks to ignore these consequences." I believe these men are right.

In Iraq, our moral obligations and our strategic interests are one. So we pursue the extremists wherever we find them and we stand with the Iraqis at this difficult hour -- because the shadow of terror will never be lifted from our world and the American people will never be safe until the people of the Middle East know the freedom that our Creator meant for all. (Applause.)

I recognize that history cannot predict the future with absolute certainty. I understand that. But history does remind us that there are lessons applicable to our time. And we can learn something from history. In Asia, we saw freedom triumph over violent ideologies after the sacrifice of tens of thousands of American lives -- and that freedom has yielded peace for generations.

The American military graveyards across Europe attest to the terrible human cost in the fight against Nazism. They also attest to the triumph of a continent that today is whole, free, and at peace. The advance of freedom in these lands should give us confidence that the hard work we are doing in the Middle East can have the same results we've seen in Asia and elsewhere -- if we show the same perseverance and the same sense of purpose.

In a world where the terrorists are willing to act on their twisted beliefs with sickening acts of barbarism, we must put faith in the timeless truths about human nature that have made us free.

Across the Middle East, millions of ordinary citizens are tired of war, they're tired of dictatorship and corruption, they're tired of despair. They want societies where they're treated with dignity and respect, where their children have the hope for a better life. They want nations where their faiths are honored and they can worship in freedom.

And that is why millions of Iraqis and Afghans turned out to the polls -- millions turned out to the polls. And that's why their leaders have stepped forward at the risk of assassination. And that's why tens of thousands are joining the security forces of their nations. These men and women are taking great risks to build a free and peaceful Middle East -- and for the sake of our own security, we must not abandon them.

There is one group of people who understand the stakes, understand as well as any expert, anybody in America -- those are the men and women in uniform. Through nearly six years of war, they have performed magnificently. (Applause.) Day after day, hour after hour, they keep the pressure on the enemy that would do our citizens harm. They've overthrown two of the most brutal tyrannies of the world, and liberated more than 50 million citizens. (Applause.)

In Iraq, our troops are taking the fight to the extremists and radicals and murderers all throughout the country. Our troops have killed or captured an average of more than 1,500 al Qaeda terrorists and other extremists every month since January of this year. (Applause.) We're in the fight. Today our troops are carrying out a surge that is helping bring former Sunni insurgents into the fight against the extremists and radicals, into the fight against al Qaeda, into the fight against the enemy that would do us harm. They're clearing out the terrorists out of population centers, they're giving families in liberated Iraqi cities a look at a decent and hopeful life.

Our troops are seeing this progress that is being made on the ground. And as they take the initiative from the enemy, they have a question: Will their elected leaders in Washington pull the rug out from under them just as they're gaining momentum and changing the dynamic on the ground in Iraq? Here's my answer is clear: We'll support our troops, we'll support our commanders, and we will give them everything they need to succeed. (Applause.)

Despite the mistakes that have been made, despite the problems we have encountered, seeing the Iraqis through as they build their democracy is critical to keeping the American people safe from the terrorists who want to attack us. It is critical work to lay the foundation for peace that veterans have done before you all.

A free Iraq is not going to be perfect. A free Iraq will not make decisions as quickly as the country did under the dictatorship. Many are frustrated by the pace of progress in Baghdad, and I can understand this. As I noted yesterday, the Iraqi government is distributing oil revenues across its provinces despite not having an oil revenue law on its books, that the parliament has passed about 60 pieces of legislation.

Prime Minister Maliki is a good guy, a good man with a difficult job, and I support him. And it's not up to politicians in Washington, D.C. to say whether he will remain in his position -- that is up to the Iraqi people who now live in a democracy, and not a dictatorship. (Applause.) A free Iraq is not going to transform the Middle East overnight. But a free Iraq will be a massive defeat for al Qaeda, it will be an example that provides hope for millions throughout the Middle East, it will be a friend of the United States, and it's going to be an important ally in the ideological struggle of the 21st century. (Applause.)

Prevailing in this struggle is essential to our future as a nation. And the question now that comes before us is this: Will today's generation of Americans resist the allure of retreat, and will we do in the Middle East what the veterans in this room did in Asia?

The journey is not going to be easy, as the veterans fully understand. At the outset of the war in the Pacific, there were those who argued that freedom had seen its day and that the future belonged to the hard men in Tokyo. A year and a half before the attack on Pearl Harbor, Japan's Foreign Minister gave a hint of things to come during an interview with a New York newspaper. He said, "In the battle between democracy and totalitarianism the latter adversary will without question win and will control the world. The era of democracy is finished, the democratic system bankrupt."

In fact, the war machines of Imperial Japan would be brought down -- brought down by good folks who only months before had been students and farmers and bank clerks and factory hands. Some are in the room today. Others here have been inspired by their fathers and grandfathers and uncles and cousins.

That generation of Americans taught the tyrants a telling lesson: There is no power like the power of freedom and no soldier as strong as a soldier who fights for a free future for his children. (Applause.) And when America's work on the battlefield was done, the victorious children of democracy would help our defeated enemies rebuild, and bring the taste of freedom to millions.

We can do the same for the Middle East. Today the violent Islamic extremists who fight us in Iraq are as certain of their cause as the Nazis, or the Imperial Japanese, or the Soviet communists were of theirs. They are destined for the same fate. (Applause.)

The greatest weapon in the arsenal of democracy is the desire for liberty written into the human heart by our Creator. So long as we remain true to our ideals, we will defeat the extremists in Iraq and Afghanistan. We will help those countries' peoples stand up functioning democracies in the heart of the broader Middle East. And when that hard work is done and the critics of today recede from memory, the cause of freedom will be stronger, a vital region will be brighter, and the American people will be safer.

Thank you, and God bless. (Applause.)

END 10:29 A.M. CDT

Paul and I listened to this speech live this morning. I believe it was one of the finest I have ever heard during President Bushs Presidency!

Jenny Hatch

UPDATE: Next day:

Photo courtesy of Palomino

Radio Blogger has the Knee Jerk democrat response to the Presidents Speech:

"Here's Hillary's comment.

"The surge was designed to give the Iraqi government time to take steps to ensure a political solution to the situation. It has failed to do so."

Now we go to Ted Kennedy.

"...political reconciliation continues to elude Iraq’s leaders."

Now let's hear from Harry Reid, a national political leader so feckless he makes al Maliki look positively Jeffersonian.

"It is time to change direction in Iraq, and congress will again work to do so in the fall."

Read the Radio Blogger Commentary, it is really good.

Jen

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:20 PM

Front Page Magazine: The Surge Straddle

The Surge Straddle

Jacob Laksin

Quote:

"As an exercise in counterintuitive reasoning, see if you can identify the authors of these recent quotes:

“More American troops have brought more peace to more parts of Iraq. I think that's a fact.”

“The military aspects of President Bush's new strategy in Iraq ... appear to have produced some credible and positive results.”

“We’ve begun to change tactics in Iraq, and in some areas, particularly in Al Anbar Province, it’s working.”

A White House spokesman? General Petraeus? A Fox News talking head or a FrontPageMag.com columnist?

None of the above. All three quotes come courtesy of top Democratic senators. The first is from Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois; the second is from Michigan’s Carl Levin; and the third is from none other than Hillary Clinton.

That may come as a surprise. Despite his newly discovered appreciation for the armed forces, Sen. Durbin is best known for sliming American troops at Guantanamo Bay as the effective heirs of “Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others — that had no concern for human beings.” Still, Durbin is apparently willing to acknowledge that these savages, coldly indifferent to human suffering, are bringing “peace” to Iraq."

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:10 PM

Bill O'Reilly: How much Far Left Lunacy can America Take?

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:48 AM

David Horowitz: Does the Left Know Who The Enemy Is?

Does the Left Know Who The Enemy Is?

"Does anyone wonder where the Tom Hayden-Jane Fonda SDS radicals went? The ones who chanted “Hey, hey LBJ how many kids did you kill today?” and cheered on the Communists in Vietnam, and went into the streets to demand America’s withdrawal from Vietnam and became suddenly silent when our troops were pulled and the Communists proceeded to slaughter two-and-a half million Cambodians and Vietnamese? Well today they are the heart and soul of the Democratic Party, calling for a capitulation in the war in Iraq and referring to George Bush as Hitler, or perhaps merely suggesting that his mentality is fascist, while insisting and that America’s war in Iraq is a mask for conquest and imperial goals.

These aging New Lefties are also busy digging graves for the Jews in the Middle East by pretending that the genocidal Muslims in the Palestinian territories are really victims and that they only express genocidal desires because they’re frustrated and reduced to desperation by American and Israeli power. The lefties I’m referring to are grouped around magazines like the Nation and the American Prospect and websites like Daily Kos and Common Dreams; their organizations are among the netroots and Democratic Party caucuses like the “Campaign for America’s Future,” which are mandatory stations on the road to the White House for the current crop of Democratic presidential candidates."

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:42 AM

Front Page: Padilla Guilty as Charged

GUILTY

“We will probably never know if [José] Padilla was a would-be terrorist,” declared the New York Times in a March editorial. Five months on, the Times might consider issuing a retraction. In a ruling that powerfully bolsters the Bush administration’s prosecution of the war on terror, Padilla was yesterday convicted on terrorism-conspiracy charges in a Miami criminal trial."

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:40 AM

August 20, 2007

Cliff May: Petraeus's progress getting harder to deny

Petraeus's progress getting harder to deny

“The only thing this surge will accomplish is a surge of more death and destruction.” That was the prediction of blogger and anti-war activist Arianna Huffington back in December of last year -- one month before the Senate unanimously confirmed Gen. David Petraeus as commander in Iraq."

"...Operation Phantom Strike, if it is successful, will mean more “death and destruction” – mostly for America’s sworn enemies. No doubt, the anti-war crowd will both oppose that and pronounce it a failure even before it’s fully underway. But other Americans – if they learn what is really happening in Iraq -- will support the troops. Most will favor giving them the time and resources they need to complete their mission."

Go Iraq Go!

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 10:07 PM

August 8, 2007

Gold Star Mother Debbie Lee interviewed on the radio

I listened to this radio program last night and it was really awesome to hear Debbie Tell her sons story first hand. He was killed in action in Iraq.

Here is the blurb from the radio show sight:

"Debbie Lee is a Gold Star Mom and the mother of the first Seal, Marc Alan Lee, killed in action in Iraq on August 2, 2006. Debbie was in town for a Memorial Service at Fort Rosecrans for Marc along with many of the Seal Team. Debbie also shares with us her year she has had and the many wonderful things that have happened to her. A very upbeat Mom who takes great pride in being the Mom of a hero and the principles he believed in. An excellent interview you will not want to miss nor the surprises she shares along the way."

and the LINK to the Mp3 file.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 4:32 AM

August 7, 2007

Hugh Hewitt believes if the New Republic wants to survive Foer has to go!

Go Here to read the whole story

"Michael Goldfarb in the Weekly Standard has just broken news on the Weekly Standard that can only result in the firing of, at the minimum, Franklin Foer, editor of the once-respected New Republic. You simply cannot publish anti-military stories, inflammatory and controversial on their face, without subjecting the wild claims to the most strict fact-checking measures possible. Yet Mr. Foer, it now appears, did just that."

These goons in the left media just don't get the fact that the Viet Nam days are over. No more will they be able to print bogus stories about military atrocities that did not happen to give much aid and comfort to the other side. I have an idea for Mr. Foer....why don't you take a trip, over to Iraq. You know, like a real reporter, and look around for yourself. Talk to our soldiers, watch them work, and then take the time to write an op ed for the New York Times about what you saw.

This "education" might be just the right step Mr. Foer, for getting your journalistic credentials back.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 6:54 AM

August 1, 2007

Michael Yon: Bread and Circus Pictures from Iraq

Check out these pictures from Iraq by the awesome Michael Yon: Go Here

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 6:02 PM

Womens Health News: Freebirthing Profiled in Wa Po

I love this ladys site: Go read her take on the recent Wa Po Article

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 6:02 PM

Hugh Hewitt: Turning Point in the war

Turning Point: Go Here

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 5:50 PM

July 30, 2007

NYT: Op-Ed Contributor: A War We Just Might Win

A War we just might win:

"VIEWED from Iraq, where we just spent eight days meeting with American and Iraqi military and civilian personnel, the political debate in Washington is surreal. The Bush administration has over four years lost essentially all credibility. Yet now the administration’s critics, in part as a result, seem unaware of the significant changes taking place.

Here is the most important thing Americans need to understand: We are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, at least in military terms. As two analysts who have harshly criticized the Bush administration’s miserable handling of Iraq, we were surprised by the gains we saw and the potential to produce not necessarily “victory” but a sustainable stability that both we and the Iraqis could live with.

After the furnace-like heat, the first thing you notice when you land in Baghdad is the morale of our troops. In previous trips to Iraq we often found American troops angry and frustrated — many sensed they had the wrong strategy, were using the wrong tactics and were risking their lives in pursuit of an approach that could not work.

Today, morale is high. The soldiers and marines told us they feel that they now have a superb commander in Gen. David Petraeus; they are confident in his strategy, they see real results, and they feel now they have the numbers needed to make a real difference."

Amazingly Positive article from two Brookings Institutution members.

I wonder how long the drum beat of No Progress in Iraq will continue to pound over the next few months until Democrats are forced to accept that Iraq has in fact been improved by the Surge?

I could feel the thrill coming off the page at Iraq the Model as he documented the Soccer Win of his country this past weekend.

Such an amazing experience for that country to feel the pride and joy of a winning moment. Go read the post here, it was awesome.

Two big compelling news stories this week from Iraq.

It's all good!

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 10:47 PM

NYT: Op-Ed Contributor: A War We Just Might Win

A War we just might win:

"VIEWED from Iraq, where we just spent eight days meeting with American and Iraqi military and civilian personnel, the political debate in Washington is surreal. The Bush administration has over four years lost essentially all credibility. Yet now the administration’s critics, in part as a result, seem unaware of the significant changes taking place.

Here is the most important thing Americans need to understand: We are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, at least in military terms. As two analysts who have harshly criticized the Bush administration’s miserable handling of Iraq, we were surprised by the gains we saw and the potential to produce not necessarily “victory” but a sustainable stability that both we and the Iraqis could live with.

After the furnace-like heat, the first thing you notice when you land in Baghdad is the morale of our troops. In previous trips to Iraq we often found American troops angry and frustrated — many sensed they had the wrong strategy, were using the wrong tactics and were risking their lives in pursuit of an approach that could not work.

Today, morale is high. The soldiers and marines told us they feel that they now have a superb commander in Gen. David Petraeus; they are confident in his strategy, they see real results, and they feel now they have the numbers needed to make a real difference."

Amazingly Positive article from two Brookings Institutution members.

I wonder how long the drum beat of No Progress in Iraq will continue to pound over the next few months until Democrats are forced to accept that Iraq has in fact been improved by the Surge?

I could feel the thrill coming off the page at Iraq the Model as he documented the Soccer Win of his country this past weekend.

Such an amazing experience for that country to feel the pride and joy of a winning moment. Go read the post here, it was awesome.

Two big compelling news stories this week from Iraq.

It's all good!

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 10:47 PM

July 28, 2007

Newsmax: Homeland General: Attack 'Could Happen Any Day'

Homeland General: Attack 'Could Happen Any Day'

"The U.S. military commander in charge of defending the U.S. homeland said Tuesday that he believes there are al-Qaida cells in the United States or people working to create them.

Air Force Gen. Victor "Gene" Renuart said that while the terrorism threat within the nation's boundaries has increased in the past year, officials have strengthened intelligence sharing, particularly in an effort to shore up weaknesses in security at U.S. ports.

"I believe there are cells in the United States, or at least people who aspire to create cells in the United States," Renuart said in an interview with The Associated Press. "To assume that there are not those cells is naive and so we have to take that threat seriously."

He added, "Am I concerned that this will happen this summer, I have to be concerned that it could happen any day."

Other U.S. officials last week said they did not know of al-Qaida cells in the United States.

Renuart, who took over the job as the head of U.S. Northern Command just four months ago, said that to counter the growing threat, the military also needs to create two more brigade-size units to be available to respond to nuclear, chemical and biological incidents at home - because currently there is only one. A brigade is about 3,500 troops.

Renuart's comments came in the wake of a national intelligence report released last week, which concluded that al-Qaida is using its growing strength in the Middle East to plot attacks on U.S. soil.

Port security has long been identified as a key weak point, including the need to scan cargo containers coming into the country by ship.

Renuart said officials are expanding their use of sensors and other technologies that allow them to track ships, including their location, their speed and other commercial information. And, while he would not provide details, he said there has already been "real payback" in terms of identifying vessels of concern and either checking or boarding them well before they got into U.S. waters.

"Because the national intelligence estimate talks about the vulnerability of ports, and because of the importance that we place on the movement of a variety of goods through those ports, finding ways to improve that is a really important element of our day to day work," Renuart said.

At the same time, he said it will be a year or two before he is able to pull together the military units he needs to better be able to respond to a chemical, biological or nuclear disaster in the U.S.

The units, he said, will be made up of active duty, reserves and National Guard troops. And while portions of the brigades will be located in different states, they will be expected to train together and be able to respond quickly to a disaster.

Overall, Renuart said that as the terror threat increases, the nation's ability to detect problems has also improved.

The intelligence report, he said, is a "summary of drumbeats, and the drumbeats are getting more prevalent out there. You cannot afford to ignore that." But he said, a few years ago, the nation was not as able to hear and interpret those drumbeats."

A Mother Thinks About Nuclear Survival

Provident Living Q&A

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:10 AM

July 26, 2007

Incredible! George S Patton's New Speech-Iraq & modern world

George Patton on the War on Terror: (Profanity alert)

Al Qaeda faces rebellion in the ranks

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 6:42 AM

July 21, 2007

Confederate Yankee: A Matter of lessening credibility

A matter of lessening credibility

The Yankee takes on the New Republic.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 1:53 AM

Protein Wisdom: Everything that rises must converge: Vietnam edition

Everything that rises must converge: Vietnam edition

"From Breitbart TV (via Tom Maguire and Don Surber), here’s the Darling of Davos, John Kerry, laying out some Brahman truthiness for the proles on C-Span:

Sen. John Kerry said during a C-Span appearance that fears of a bloodbath after the US withdrawal from Vietnam never materialized. He says he’s met survivors of the “reeducation camps” who are thriving in modern Vietnam. An award-winning investigation by the Orange County Register concludes that at least 165,000 people perished in the camps.

Well, sure. But those were just the stubborn ones who refused to be “re-educated.” And sometimes you have kill off 165,000 people to save them.

Not to mention a couple million Cambodians — though the “war protesters” of that era, and their historical apologists, like to lay those deaths at the feet of Nixon and Kissinger in precisely the same way today’s anti-war crowd is angling to lay any Iraqi civil war and sectarian purge at the feet of Bushco, once they’ve forced a retreat and created a power vacuum."

More on this topic from Tiger Hawk: Reinventing history

"The Democrats, many of whom have labored mightily to compare Iraq to Vietnam in the hope of sustaining the "quagmire" narrative, find that the comparison is suddenly and maddeningly inconvenient. After all, Vietnamese and Cambodians suffered a great deal of violence and persecution in the years following the American withdrawal from Indochina and nobody -- other than Iranians, perhaps -- wants to see similar ugliness in Iraq.

Fortunately, John Kerry, who knows all about the advantages and disadvantages of invoking Vietnam for political ends, has hit upon a solution. Rather than admitting that there is a huge risk that violence will escalate in Iraq as it did after the American withdrawal from Indochina, he is reinventing the history of the earlier war and claiming that no such bloodbath occurred.

It will be interesting to see whether other Democrats follow Kerry off that cliff."

It will indeed...

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 1:48 AM

July 20, 2007

The JAWA report: Iraqis and American Soldiers dancing in Anbar streets!

JAWA:

Iraqis/Troops Dancing in the Streets!

Celebrating the Anbar Awakening:

Go Watch this video at Jawa, its really cool!

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 8:10 AM

Breitbart: Valerie Plame's Lawsuit Dismissed

Valerie Plame's Lawsuit Dismissed

"WASHINGTON (AP) - A federal judge dismissed former CIA operative Valerie Plame's lawsuit against members of the Bush administration Thursday, eliminating one of the last courtroom remnants of the leak scandal.

Plame, the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, had accused Vice President Dick Cheney and others of conspiring to leak her identity in Plame said that violated her privacy rights and was illegal retribution for her husband's criticism of the administration.

U.S. District Judge John D. Bates dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds and said he would not express an opinion on the constitutional arguments. Bates dismissed the case against all defendants: Cheney, White House political adviser Karl Rove, former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby and former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage."

It bothers me somewhat to even give this case space on my blog, and I know that this last parting PIFF from the moonbattery of Wilson and his wife will go on for generations to come in certain peoples minds and in certain places in the deep dark recesses of the media and on the web, but hopefully, outside of the perfunctory Olivery Stone movie, this whole farce is over.

More here:

Instapundit

Pajamas

Hot Air

Quote from Hot Air:

"For the reasons given above, plaintiffs have failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted with respect to their four causes of action asserted directly under the Constitution. Furthermore, this Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claim for public disclosure of private facts."

"So the AP has evidently mischaracterized the ruling, and this case is dead, dead, dead."

Maybe Mr. Stone can give it a good hollywood ending, you know, Bush is impeached for crimes against humanity, Cheney is assasinated by a disgruntled Halliburton employee, and Scooter is given a lobotomy for even daring to try to defend himself from these imbeciles.

And of course, how can we forget the harbingers of truth themselves, the Wilsons?

Hmmm, a good Hollywood ending....

Valerie is ensconced in the White House as Head of the Thought Police in Hillarys Cabinet, and Ol' Joe himself is made Secretary General of the United Nations....Uhhh, can't do that, cause Bill Clinton has his eye on the job. Maybe Hill could make "Honest Abe Wilson" head of the "lost and secret files and documents" unit of her in house secret police force.

Nawwww.....

UPDATE: Movie about the Judith Miller part of this story is being cast and written....Ugghhhhh.

"'Truth' lures writer-director Lurie

Political drama parallels Plame case

By MICHAEL FLEMINGRod Lurie will next direct his script "Nothing but the Truth," a drama about a D.C.-based female newspaper reporter who outs a CIA agent and is imprisoned for refusing to reveal her source.

Cast is mobilizing for an October production start. Talks are under way for Kate Beckinsale to play the journalist, Matt Dillon the prosecutor, Vera Farmiga the CIA agent, Edie Falco (in her first role since "The Sopranos") the editor of the newspaper that published the story and Alan Alda the attorney who tries to free the reporter from jail.

Marc Frydman will produce and the Yari Film Group will finance. Bob Yari bought the spec script after working with Lurie on the Josh Hartnett-Samuel L. Jackson starrer "Resurrecting the Champ," which the Yari Film Group releases next month.

"Nothing but the Truth" parallels the case of Valerie Plame, whose status as a CIA agent was exposed in the media after her husband, Ambassador Joe Wilson, wrote a New York Times op-ed piece charging the Bush administration with manipulating intelligence to justify the invasion of Iraq.

Former New York Times reporter Judith Miller went to jail to protect her sources, and Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was convicted of perjury, making false statements to federal investigators and obstruction of justice. President Bush commuted his 30-month jail sentence.

Lurie, who tackled D.C. politics with his breakthrough film "The Contender," aims to start his pic well ahead of a WB project that will be told from the vantage point of Plame and Wilson.

Jez and John Butterworth are already scripting the Warner pic and Akiva Goldsman and Jerry and Janet Zucker are producing."

I'm starting to feel really nauseated just reading these words...bleeech....

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:44 AM

July 13, 2007

The White House: President Bush: Press Conference by the President

Press Conference by the President

"As President, my most solemn responsibility is to keep the American people safe. So on my orders, good men and women are now fighting the terrorists on the front lines in Iraq. I've given our troops in Iraq clear objectives. And as they risk their lives to achieve these objectives, they need to know they have the unwavering support from the Commander-in-Chief, and they do. And they need the enemy to know that America is not going to back down. So when I speak to the American people about Iraq, I often emphasize the importance of maintaining our resolve and meeting our objectives."

President George W. Bush
July 12, 2007

Not so fast, says a democrat controlled congress, who seem to forget that they have absolutely no authority over the war except as related to funding it. Nancy, Harry, why don't you two go read the constitution and remind yourselves WHO the commander in chief of our armed forces is.

HuffPo: House Votes for Withdrawal From Iraq

"Within hours, the House voted to withdraw U.S. troops by spring.

The House measure passed 223-201 in the Democratic-controlled chamber despite a veto threat from President Bush, who has ruled out any change in war policy before September.

......A few hours after Bush's remarks, Democratic leaders engineered passage of legislation requiring the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops to begin within 120 days, and to be completed by April 1, 2008. The measure envisions a limited residual force to train Iraqis, protect U.S. assets and fight al-Qaida and other terrorists.

The vote generally followed party lines: 219 Democrats and four Republicans in favor, and 191 Republicans and 10 Democrats opposed.

Rep. Jo Ann Emerson, R-Mo., voted for troop withdrawals for the first time, contending that while she still opposes a swift pullout, "staying in Iraq indefinitely is equally unacceptable."

"The report makes clear that not even the White House can conclude there has been significant progress," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif."

To Bush and others who seek more time for the administration's policy to work, she said, "We have already waited too long."

Here is the text of President Bushs whole press conference, (With video and audio links).

Paul and I watched it live and we were both thrilled by his continued strong stance.

Text of Conference, with questions and answers by the press included (My comments are in intalics):

10:31 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. Thank you. Yesterday, America lost an extraordinary First Lady and a fine Texan, Lady Bird Johnson. She brought grace to the White House and beauty to our country. On behalf of the American people, Laura and I send our condolences to her daughters, Lynda and Luci, and we offer our prayers to the Johnson family.

Before I answer some of your questions, today I'd like to provide the American people with an update on the situation in Iraq. Since America began military operations in Iraq, the conflict there has gone through four major phases. The first phase was the liberation of Iraq from Saddam Hussein. The second phase was the return of sovereignty to the Iraqi people and the holding of free elections. The third phase was the tragic escalation of sectarian violence sparked by the bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra.

We've entered a fourth phase: deploying reinforcements and launching new operations to help Iraqis bring security to their people. I'm going to explain why the success of this new strategy is vital for protecting our people and bringing our troops home, which is a goal shared by all Americans. I'll brief you on the report we are sending to Congress. I'll discuss why a drawdown of forces that is not linked to the success of our operations would be a disaster.

As President, my most solemn responsibility is to keep the American people safe. So on my orders, good men and women are now fighting the terrorists on the front lines in Iraq. I've given our troops in Iraq clear objectives. And as they risk their lives to achieve these objectives, they need to know they have the unwavering support from the Commander-in-Chief, and they do. And they need the enemy to know that America is not going to back down. So when I speak to the American people about Iraq, I often emphasize the importance of maintaining our resolve and meeting our objectives.

As a result, sometimes the debate over Iraq is cast as a disagreement between those who want to keep our troops in Iraq and those who want to bring our troops home. And this is not the real debate. I don't know anyone who doesn't want to see the day when our brave servicemen and women can start coming home.

In my address to the nation in January, I put it this way: If we increase our support at this crucial moment we can hasten the day our troops begin coming home. The real debate over Iraq is between those who think the fight is lost or not worth the cost, and those that believe the fight can be won and that, as difficult as the fight is, the cost of defeat would be far higher.

I believe we can succeed in Iraq, and I know we must. So we're working to defeat al Qaeda and other extremists, and aid the rise of an Iraqi government that can protect its people, deliver basic services, and be an ally in the war against these extremists and radicals. By doing this, we'll create the conditions that would allow our troops to begin coming home, while securing our long-term national interest in Iraq and in the region.

When we start drawing down our forces in Iraq it will be because our military commanders say the conditions on the ground are right, not because pollsters say it will be good politics. The strategy I announced in January is designed to seize the initiative and create those conditions. It's aimed at helping the Iraqis strengthen their government so that it can function even amid violence. It seeks to open space for Iraq's political leaders to advance the difficult process of national reconciliation, which is essential to lasting security and stability. It is focused on applying sustained military pressure to rout out terrorist networks in Baghdad and surrounding areas. It is committed to using diplomacy to strengthen regional and international support for Iraq's democratic government.

Doing all these things is intended to make possible a more limited role in Iraq for the United States. It's the goal outlined by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group. It's the goal shared by the Iraqis and our coalition partners. It is the goal that Ambassador Crocker and General Petraeus and our troops are working hard to make a reality.

Our top priority is to help the Iraqis protect their population. So we have launched an offensive in and around Baghdad to go after extremists, to buy more time for Iraqi forces to develop, and to help normal life and civil society take root in communities and neighborhoods throughout the country. We're helping enhance the size, capabilities and effectiveness of the Iraqi security forces so the Iraqis can take over the defense of their own country. We're helping the Iraqis take back their neighborhoods from the extremists. In Anbar province, Sunni tribes that were once fighting alongside al Qaeda against our coalition are now fighting alongside our coalition against al Qaeda. We're working to replicate the success in Anbar and other parts of the country.

Two months ago, in the supplemental appropriations bill funding our troops, Congress established 18 benchmarks to gauge the progress of the Iraqi government. They required we submit a full report to Congress by September the 15th. Today my administration has submitted to Congress an interim report that requires us to assess -- and I quote the bill -- "whether satisfactory progress toward meeting these benchmarks is or is not being achieved."

Of the 18 benchmarks Congress asked us to measure, we can report that satisfactory progress is being made in eight areas. For example, Iraqis provided the three brigades they promised for operations in and around Baghdad. And the Iraqi government is spending nearly $7.3 billion from its own funds this year to train, equip and modernize its forces. In eight other areas, the Iraqis have much more work to do. For example, they have not done enough to prepare for local elections or pass a law to share oil revenues. And in two remaining areas, progress was too mixed to be characterized one way or the other.

Those who believe that the battle in Iraq is lost will likely point to the unsatisfactory performance on some of the political benchmarks. Those of us who believe the battle in Iraq can and must be won see the satisfactory performance on several of the security benchmarks as a cause for optimism. Our strategy is built on a premise that progress on security will pave the way for political progress. So it's not surprising that political progress is lagging behind the security gains we are seeing. Economic development funds are critical to helping Iraq make this political progress. Today, I'm exercising the waiver authority granted me by Congress to release a substantial portion of those funds.

The bottom line is that this is a preliminary report and it comes less than a month after the final reinforcements arrived in Iraq. This September, as Congress has required, General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker will return to Washington to provide a more comprehensive assessment. By that time, we hope to see further improvement in the positive areas, the beginning of improvement in the negative areas. We'll also have a clearer picture of how the new strategy is unfolding, and be in a better position to judge where we need to make any adjustments.

I will rely on General Petraeus to give me his recommendations for the appropriate troop levels in Iraq. I will discuss the recommendation with the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I will continue consultations with members of the United States Congress from both sides of the aisle, and then I'll make a decision.

I know some in Washington would like us to start leaving Iraq now. To begin withdrawing before our commanders tell us we are ready would be dangerous for Iraq, for the region, and for the United States. It would mean surrendering the future of Iraq to al Qaeda. It would mean that we'd be risking mass killings on a horrific scale. It would mean we'd allow the terrorists to establish a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they lost in Afghanistan. It would mean increasing the probability that American troops would have to return at some later date to confront an enemy that is even more dangerous.

The fight in Iraq is part of a broader struggle that's unfolding across the region. The same region in Iran -- the same regime in Iran that is pursuing nuclear weapons and threatening to wipe Israel off the map is also providing sophisticated IEDs to extremists in Iraq who are using them to kill American soldiers. The same Hezbollah terrorists who are waging war against the forces of democracy in Lebanon are training extremists to do the same against coalition forces in Iraq. The same Syrian regime that provides support and sanctuary for Islamic jihad and Hamas has refused to close its airport in Damascus to suicide bombers headed to Iraq. All these extremist groups would be emboldened by a precipitous American withdrawal, which would confuse and frighten friends and allies in the region.

Nations throughout the Middle East have a stake in a stable Iraq. To protect our interests and to show our commitment to our friends in the region, we are enhancing our military presence, improving our bilateral security ties, and supporting those fighting the extremists across the Middle East. We're also using the tools of diplomacy to strengthen regional and international support for Iraq's democratic government.

So I'm sending Secretary Gates and Secretary Rice to the region in early August. They will meet with our allies, reemphasize our commitment to the International Compact of Sharm el Sheikh, reassure our friends that the Middle East remains a vital strategic priority for the United States.

There is a conversion of visions between what Iraqi leaders want, what our partners want and what our friends in the region want, and the vision articulated by my administration, the Iraq Study Group and others here at home. The Iraqis do not want U.S. troops patrolling their cities forever, any more than the American people do. But we need to ensure that when U.S. forces do pull back that terrorists and extremists cannot take control.

The strategy that General Petraeus and the troops he commands are now carrying out is the best opportunity to bring us to this point. So I ask Congress to provide them with the time and resources they need. The men and women of the United States military have made enormous sacrifices in Iraq. They have achieved great things, and the best way to begin bringing them home is to make sure our new strategy succeeds.

And now I'll be glad to answer a few questions, starting with Ms. Thomas.

Q Mr. President, you started this war, a war of your choosing, and you can end it alone, today, at this point -- bring in peacekeepers, U.N. peacekeepers. Two million Iraqis have fled their country as refugees. Two million more are displaced. Thousands and thousands are dead. Don't you understand, you brought the al Qaeda into Iraq.

Come on Helen, what a stupid analysis of the situation....

THE PRESIDENT: Actually, I was hoping to solve the Iraqi issue diplomatically. That's why I went to the United Nations and worked with the United Nations Security Council, which unanimously passed a resolution that said disclose, disarm or face serious consequences. That was the message, the clear message to Saddam Hussein. He chose the course.

Q Didn't we go into Iraq --

THE PRESIDENT: It was his decision to make. Obviously, it was a difficult decision for me to make, to send our brave troops, along with coalition troops, into Iraq. I firmly believe the world is better off without Saddam Hussein in power. Now the fundamental question facing America is will we stand with this young democracy, will we help them achieve stability, will we help them become an ally in this war against extremists and radicals that is not only evident in Iraq, but it's evident in Lebanon, the Palestinian Territories and Afghanistan.

We're at the beginning stages of a great ideological conflict between those who yearn for peace and those who want their children to grow up in a normal, decent society, and radicals and extremists who want to impose their dark vision on people throughout the world. Iraq is obviously -- Helen, it's got the attention of the American people, as it should; this is a difficult war and it's a tough war. But as I have consistently stated throughout this presidency, it is a necessary war to secure our peace.

I find it interesting that as this young democracy has taken hold, radicals and extremists kill innocent people to stop its advance. And that ought to be a clear signal to the American people that these are dangerous people and their ambition is not just contained to Iraq. Their ambition is to continue to hurt the American people. My attitude is we ought to defeat them there so we don't have to face them here, and that we ought to defeat their ideology with a more hopeful form of government.

Terry.

Q Mr. President, you're facing a rebellion from Republican -- key Republican senators who want you to change course and begin reducing the U.S. combat role. Given the mixed report that you present today, how do you persuade Republicans to stick with you as they look ahead to the next elections?

THE PRESIDENT: A couple of things. First of all, I respect those Republicans that you're referring to. I presume you're referring to friends of mine, like Lugar -- Senator Lugar, Domenici, yes. These are good, honorable people. I've spoken to them and I listen very carefully to what they have to say.

First of all, they share my concern that a precipitous withdrawal would embolden al Qaeda. And they also understand that we can't let al Qaeda gain safe haven inside of Iraq. I appreciate their calls and I appreciate their desire to work with the White House to be in a position where we can sustain a presence in Iraq.

What I tell them is this, just what I've told you, is that as the Commander-in-Chief of the greatest military ever, I have an obligation, a sincere and serious obligation, to hear out my commander on the ground. And I will take his recommendation. And as I mentioned, to talk to Bob Gates about it, as well as the Joint Chiefs about it, as well as consult with members of the Congress, both Republicans and Democrats, as I make a decision about the way forward in Iraq.

And so I -- you know, I value the advice of those senators. I appreciate their concerns about the situation in Iraq, and I am going to continue listening to them.

Toby.

Q Mr. President, in addition to members of your own party, the American public is clamoring for a change of course in Iraq. Why are you so resistant to that idea, and how much longer are you willing to give the surge to work before considering a change in this policy?

THE PRESIDENT: First, I understand why the American people are -- you know, they're tired of the war. There is -- people are -- there is a war fatigue in America. It's affecting our psychology. I've said this before. I understand that this is an ugly war. It's a war in which an enemy will kill innocent men, women and children in order to achieve a political objective. It doesn't surprise me that there is deep concern amongst our people.

Part of that concern is whether or not we can win; whether or not the objective is achievable. People don't want our troops in harm's way if that which we are trying to achieve can't be accomplished. I feel the same way. I cannot look a mother and father of a troop in the eye and say, I'm sending your kid into combat, but I don't think we can achieve the objective. I wouldn't do that to a parent or a husband or wife of a soldier.

I believe we can succeed and I believe we are making security progress that will enable the political tract to succeed, as well. And the report, by the way, which is, as accurately noted, is being submitted today, is written a little less than a month after the full complement of troops arrived.

I went to the country in January and said I have made this decision. I said what was happening on the ground was unsatisfactory in Iraq. In consultation with a lot of folks, I came to the conclusion that we needed to send more troops into Iraq, not less, in order to provide stability, in order to be able to enhance the security of the people there. And David asked for a certain number of troops -- David Petraeus asked for a certain number -- General Petraeus asked for a certain number of troops, and he just got them a couple of weeks ago.

Military -- it takes a while to move our troops, as the experts know. You just can't load them all in one airplane or one big ship and get them into theater. We had to stage the arrival of our troops. And after they arrived in Iraq, it took a while to get them into their missions. Since the reinforcements arrived, things have changed.

For example, I would remind you that Anbar province was considered lost. Maybe some of you reported that last fall. And yet, today, because of what we call bottom-up reconciliation, Anbar province has changed dramatically. The same thing is now beginning to happen in Diyala province. There are neighborhoods in Baghdad where violence is down. There are still car bombs, most of which have the al Qaeda signature on them, but they're declining. In other words, so there's some measurable progress.

And you asked, how long does one wait? I will repeat, as the Commander-in-Chief of a great military who has supported this military and will continue to support this military, not only with my -- with insisting that we get resources to them, but with -- by respecting the command structure, I'm going to wait for David to come back -- David Petraeus to come back and give us the report on what he sees. And then we'll use that data, that -- his report to work with the rest of the military chain of command, and members of Congress, to make another decision, if need be.
Yes, Martha.

Q You talk about all the troops now being in place, and only in place the last three weeks or a month. Yet three-quarters of the troops for the surge were in place during the period when this July interim report was written. Are you willing to keep the surge going, no matter what General Petraeus says, if there is no substantial Iraqi political progress by September?

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. You're asking me to speculate on what my frame of mind will be in September, and I would just ask that you give -- General Petraeus to come back and brief me. And then, of course, I'll be glad to answer your questions along that line.

Q But there has been no substantial political progress, even with three-quarters of the troops in there.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I mentioned --

Q Will you keep that going through September, even if there isn't?

Give it up moron, he told you what he intended to do.

THE PRESIDENT: Martha, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, we have felt all along that the security situation needed to change in order for there to be political progress. It's very hard for a young democracy to function with the violence that was raging. Secondly, there's a lot of -- a lot of the past that needs to be worked through the system. I mean, living under the brutal tyrant Saddam Hussein created a lot of anxiety and a lot of tensions and a lot of rivalry, and it's going to take a while to work it through. But they couldn't work through those tensions and rivalries in the midst of serious violence.

And so the strategy was, move in more troops to cause the violence to abate. And that's what David Petraeus will be reporting on.

Yes, Jim.

Q Thank you, Mr. President. A question for you about the process you're describing of your decision-making as Commander-in-Chief. Have you entertained the idea that at some point Congress may take some of that sole decision-making power away, through legislation? And can you tell us, are you still committed to vetoing any troop withdrawal deadline?

Have you entertained the idea that Congress could stage a revolt and completely ignore their constitutional duties and take over YOUR JOB???

THE PRESIDENT: You mean in this interim period? Yes. I don't think Congress ought to be running the war. I think they ought to be funding our troops. I'm certainly interested in their opinion, but trying to run a war through resolution is a prescription for failure, as far as I'm concerned, and we can't afford to fail.

I'll work with Congress; I'll listen to Congress. Congress has got all the right to appropriate money. But the idea of telling our military how to conduct operations, for example, or how to deal with troop strength, I don't think it makes sense. I don't think it makes sense today, nor do I think it's a good precedent for the future. And so the role of the Commander-in-Chief is, of course, to consult with Congress.

Q So if Reed-Levin or anything like it were to pass and set a --

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I would hope they wouldn't pass, Jim. But I --

Q But what if they've got --

THE PRESIDENT: Let me make sure you understand what I'm saying. Congress has all the right in the world to fund. That's their main involvement in this war, which is to provide funds for our troops. What you're asking is whether or not Congress ought to be basically determining how troops are positioned, or troop strength. And I don't think that would be good for the country.

David.

Q Mr. President, you've said many times this war at this stage is about the Iraqi government creating a self-sustaining, stable government. Last November, your own CIA Director, according to The Washington Post, told you about that government: "The inability of the government to govern seems irreversible. He could not point to any milestone or checkpoint where we can turn this thing around." And he said, in talking about the government, that it's balanced, but it cannot function.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes.

Q When you heard that, since that point, you think of how many hundreds of soldiers have been killed, how much money has been spent. Why shouldn't people conclude that you are either stubborn, in denial, but certainly not realistic about the strategy that you've pursued since then?

THE PRESIDENT: You know, it's interesting, it turns out Mike Hayden -- I think you're quoting Mike Hayden there -- was in this morning to give me his weekly briefing, and I asked him about that newspaper article from which you quote. His answer was -- his comments to the Iraq Study Group were a little more nuanced than the quotation you read.

He said that he made it clear the current strategy in Iraq wasn't working -- this is his recollection of the briefing to the Iraq Study Group. He briefed them to the fact it wasn't working and that we needed a change of direction. He also said that those who suggest that we back away and let the Iraqi government do -- this is in November 2006 -- let the Iraqis handle it, don't understand the inability of the Iraq government at that time to take on that responsibility.

He then went on to say -- this is what he -- his recollection of his conversation -- was that our strategy needed to help get the violence down so that there could be political reconciliation from the top down, as well as the bottom up.

There has been political reconciliation, Martha, from the bottom up. Anbar province is a place where the experts had -- an expert had said that it was impossible for us to achieve our objective. This was the part of the country of Iraq where al Qaeda had made it clear that they would like to establish a safe haven from which to plan, plot further attacks, to spread their ideology throughout the Middle East. Since then, since this November 2006 report, and since that statement to the Iraq Study Group, things have changed appreciably on the ground in Anbar province.

And they're beginning to have the same change -- because the people on the ground there are sick and tired of violence and being threatened by people like al Qaeda, who have no positive vision for the future. And there's been a significant turn, where now Sunni sheikhs and Sunni citizens are working with the coalition to bring justice to al Qaeda killers. And that same approach is being taken in Diyala.

And so there's a lot of focus, and should be, frankly, on oil laws or elections. But remember, there's another political reconciliation track taking place, as well, and that's the one that's taking place at the grassroots level. Mike Hayden talked about that, as well.

Q But you think you've been realistic about the strategy and what's possible?

THE PRESIDENT: Well -- thank you for the follow-up -- nothing has changed in the new room. Anyway -- yes. As I told you last November, right about this time, I was part of that group of Americans who didn't approve of what was taking place in Iraq because it looked like all the efforts we had taken to that point in time were about to fail. In other words, sectarian violence was really raging. And I had a choice to make, and that was to pull back, as some suggested, and hope that the chaos and violence that might occur in the capital would not spill out across the country, or send more troops in to prevent the chaos and violence from happening in the first place -- and that's the decision I made. So it was a realistic appraisal by me.

What's realistic, as well, is to understand the consequences of what will happen if we fail in Iraq. In other words, people aren't just going to be content with driving America out of Iraq. Al Qaeda wants to hurt us here. That's their objective. That's what they would like to do. They have got an ideology that they believe that the world ought to live under, and that one way to help spread that ideology is to harm the American people, harm American interests. The same folks that are bombing innocent people in Iraq were the ones who attacked us in America on September the 11th, and that's why what happens in Iraq matters to the security here at home.

So I've been realistic about the consequences of failure. I have been realistic about what needs to happen on the ground in order for there to be success. And it's been hard work, and the American people see this hard work. And one of the reasons it is hard work is because on our TV screens are these violent killings, perpetuated by people who have done us harm in the past. And that ought to be a lesson for the American people, to understand that what happens in Iraq and overseas matters to the security of the United States of America.

Yes, ma'am.

Q But, sir, on that point, what evidence can you present to the American people that the people who attacked the United States on September the 11th are, in fact, the same people who are responsible for the bombings taking place in Iraq? What evidence can you present? And also, are you saying, sir, that al Qaeda in Iraq is the same organization being run by Osama bin Laden, himself?

THE PRESIDENT: Al Qaeda in Iraq has sworn allegiance to Osama bin Laden. And the guys who had perpetuated the attacks on America -- obviously, the guys on the airplane are dead, and the commanders, many of those are either dead or in captivity, like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. But the people in Iraq, al Qaeda in Iraq, has sworn allegiance to Osama bin Laden. And we need to take al Qaeda in Iraq seriously, just like we need to take al Qaeda anywhere in the world seriously.

Let's see here. Working my way around here. Sheryl.

Q Mr. President, in Jordan in November, you stood by Prime Minister Maliki and said he's the right guy for Iraq. Given this report card today and given the lack of top-down political reconciliation, can you tell the American people that you still believe he's the right guy for Iraq?

THE PRESIDENT: I believe that he understands that there needs to be serious reconciliation, a need to get law passed; firmly believe that. I have had a series of conference calls with the Prime Minister, as well as the presidency council. The presidency council, you have the President Talabani, you have the two Vice Presidents, al-Mahdi and Hashimi as well as the Prime Minister. And I have urged them to work together to get a law passed. It's not easy to get law passed through certain legislatures, like theirs. There's a lot of work that has to be done. And I will continue to urge, but --

Q Do you have confidence in them?

THE PRESIDENT: I'm almost through with the first one; I'll come back to the second one.

And so I'll continue to urge the Iraqis to show us that they're capable of passing legislation. But it's not just us, it's the Iraqi people. And what really matters is whether or not life is improving for the Iraqi people on the ground.

And, yes, I've got confidence in them, but I also understand how difficult it is. I'm not making excuses, but it is hard. It's hard work for them to get law passed. And sometimes it's hard work for people to get law passed here. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't continue to work to achieve an objective, which is a government that is able to provide security for its people and provide basic services, and, as importantly, serve as an ally against these extremists and radicals.

Yes, sir.

Q Thank you, Mr. President --

THE PRESIDENT: No, not you. Michael.

Q Oh.

THE PRESIDENT: Okay, was that harsh?

Q Yes.

THE PRESIDENT: Like the new hall, I should have been more gentle? (Laughter.) Do we ever use "kinder and gentler"? No.

Go ahead, Michael. And then you're next.

Q If I could just switch subjects for a second to another big decision you made recently, which was in the Scooter Libby case.

Barf, gag, I feel myself getting very very very nauseated at this point.....ug urp.....bleeech

THE PRESIDENT: Yes.

Q You spoke very soberly and seriously in your statement about how you weighed different legal questions in coming to your decision on that commutation. But one issue that you did not address was the issue of the morality of your most senior advisors leaking the name of a confidential intelligence operator. Now that the case is over -- it's not something you've ever spoken to -- can you say whether you're at all disappointed in the behavior of those senior advisors? And have you communicated that disappointment to them in any way?

Why didn't you dudes in the press go after Armitage???? He's the one who suffers from leaky mouth syndrome.....

THE PRESIDENT: Michael, I -- first of all, the Scooter Libby decision was, I thought, a fair and balanced decision. Secondly, I haven't spent a lot of time talking about the testimony that people throughout my administration were forced to give as a result of the special prosecutor. I didn't ask them during the time and I haven't asked them since.

I'm aware of the fact that perhaps somebody in the administration did disclose the name of that person, and I've often thought about what would have happened had that person come forth and said, I did it. Would we have had this, you know, endless hours of investigation and a lot of money being spent on this matter? But it's been a tough issue for a lot of people in the White House, and it's run its course and now we're going to move on.

Wendell.

Q Mr. President, you have spoken passionately --

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, I'm sorry.

Q Are you taking it away from me?

THE PRESIDENT: I am --

Q After doing the "fair and balanced," you're going to take it away -- (laughter.)

Q Ohhh. (Laughter.)

Q You're going to come back to me, sir?

THE PRESIDENT: You got the mic -- a possession deal, you know what I'm saying? (Laughter.)

Q Thank you, sir. You have spoken passionately about the consequences of failure in Iraq. Your critics say you failed to send enough troops there at the start, failed to keep al Qaeda from stepping into the void created by the collapse of Saddam's army, failed to put enough pressure on Iraq's government to make the political reconciliation necessary to keep the sectarian violence the country is suffering from now from occurring. So why should the American people feel you have the vision for victory in Iraq, sir?

THE PRESIDENT: Those are all legitimate questions that I'm sure historians will analyze. I mean, one of the questions is, should we have sent more in the beginning? Well, I asked that question, do you need more, to General Tommy Franks. In the first phase of this operation, General Franks was obviously in charge, and during our discussions in the run up to the decision to remove Saddam Hussein after he ignored the Security Council resolutions. My primary question to General Franks was, do you have what it takes to succeed? And do you have what it takes to succeed after you succeed in removing Saddam Hussein? And his answer was, yes.

Now, history is going to look back to determine whether or not there might have been a different decision made. But at the time, the only thing I can tell you, Wendell, is that I relied upon our military commander to make the proper decision about troop strength. And I can remember a meeting with the Joint Chiefs, who said, we've reviewed the plan. I remember -- and seemed satisfied with it. I remember sitting in the PEOC, or the Situation Room, downstairs here at the White House, and I went to commander and commander that were all responsible of different aspects of the operation to remove Saddam. I said to each one of them, do you have what it takes? Are you satisfied with the strategy? And the answer was, yes.

We have worked hard to help this country reconcile. After all, they do have a modern constitution, which is kind of a framework for reconciliation. And after all, there was a significant series of votes where the people were given a chance to express their desire to live in a free society. As a matter of fact, 12 million Iraqis went to the polls.

What happened then, of course, is that the enemy, al Qaeda, attacks the Samarra Mosque, which, of course, created anxiety and anger amongst the Shia. And then all of a sudden the sectarian violence began to spiral. Reconciliation hadn't taken hold deep enough in society to prevent this violence from taking hold. And so I have a -- you know, I've got to decide whether or not it's okay for that violence to continue, or whether or not it makes sense for us to try to send more troops in to quell the violence, to give the reconciliation process further time to advance.

My concern is, is that as a result of violence and killing, there would be chaos. Now that's a state of affairs that thugs, like al Qaeda, need to survive. They like chaos. As a matter of fact, they like to create chaos in order to create conditions of fear and anxiety and doubt. Out of that chaos would come -- could come a further escalation of violence in the Middle East. And this is what's important for the American people to understand: That violence and that chaos would embolden extremist groups, whether they be Shia or Sunni, and they would then be into competition with each other.

Such chaos and violence would send a mixed signal to the Iranians, who have stated that they believe Israel ought to be wiped off the map. People would begin to wonder about America's resolve. Al Qaeda would certainly be in a better position to raise money and recruit. And what makes all this scenario doubly dangerous is that they have proven themselves able to attack us and kill nearly 3,000 of our citizens. And they would like to do it again.

And, therefore, the strategy has got to be to help this government become an ally against these people. What happens in Iraq -- and I understand how difficult it's been. It's been hard. I have received a lot of inspiration, however, from meeting with our troops, who understand the stakes of this fight, and meeting with their families. And we owe it to our troops to support our commanders -- smart, capable people who are devising a strategy that will enable us to succeed and prevent the conditions I just talked about from happening.

Ed -- no, John. Just kidding.

Q Thank you, Mr. President. Your administration has cited al Qaeda leaders such as Zawahiri as saying that if we leave prematurely, it would be a glorious victory for al Qaeda. But the reason that we can't leave or haven't been able to leave is not because we're getting defeated in any way militarily, it's because the Iraqis can't get it together so far. So why can't we counter those messages, and obviously not withdraw precipitously, but begin some sort of gradual withdrawal that prevents ethnic cleansing, but also allows our military to get out?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, there's a lot of discussion about a scenario in which our troop posture would be to guard the territorial integrity of the country of Iraq, to embed and train, to help the Iraqi security forces deal with violent elements in their society, as well as keep enough Special Forces there to chase down al Qaeda. As a matter of fact, that is something that I've spoken in public about, said that's a position I'd like to see us in.

However, I felt like we needed to send more troops to be able to get the situation to quiet down enough to be able to end in that position.

And in terms of my own decision making, as I mentioned earlier, I definitely need to be in consultation, and will be, with General David Petraeus, who asked for the additional troops in the first place -- troops which have been in place, fully in place for about three weeks.

And so I would ask members of Congress to give the general a chance to come back and to give us a full assessment of whether this is succeeding or not. And it's at that point in time that I will consult with members of Congress and make a decision about the way forward -- all aiming to succeed in making sure that al Qaeda and other extremists do not benefit from a decision I might have to make.

Mark.

Q Yes, sir, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, sir. Mark. (Laughter.)

Q Thank you. Thank you, sir. How comfortable are you -- sir, how comfortable are you with your Homeland Security Secretary saying, in the face of no credible intelligence of an imminent threat against the United States, that he has a gut feeling that one is coming this summer? And, sir, what does your gut tell you?

THE PRESIDENT: My gut tells me that -- which my head tells me, as well -- is that when we find a credible threat, I'll share it with people, to make sure that we protect the homeland. My head also tells me that al Qaeda is a serious threat to our homeland, and we've got to continue making sure we've got good intelligence, good response mechanisms in place, that we've got to make sure we don't embolden them with -- by failing in certain theaters of war where they're confronting us, that we ought to continue to keep the pressure on them. We need to chase them down and bring them to justice before they come home to hurt us again.

And so it's a -- this is a serious issue that is going to outlast my presidency. As I say, this is the beginning stages of what I believe is a ideological conflict that -- where you've got competing visions about what the world ought to be like. What makes this more difficult than previous conflicts is that there's the asymmetrical use of power -- in other words, IEDs and suicide bombers are the main tactical device used by these thugs to try to achieve strategic objectives.

Their objective is to impose their vision on the world. Their objective is to drive the United States out of parts of the world. They want safe haven. They love a society where women have no rights, just like the society that they worked to impose with the Taliban on the women of Afghanistan. That's their vision. And it's in our interest to defend ourselves by staying on the offense against them. And it's in our interest to spread an alternative ideology.

We have done this before in our nation's history. We have helped people realize the blessings of liberty, even though they may have been our enemy. And freedom has an amazing way of helping lay the foundation for peace. And it's really important, as we head into this ideological struggle in the 21st century, that we not forget that liberty can transform societies.

Now, the interesting debate is whether or not a nation like Iraq can self-govern; whether or not these people even care about liberty. As you've heard me say before, I believe -- strongly believe -- that freedom is a universal value; that freedom isn't just for Americans, or Methodists, that freedom is universal in its application. And so when they voted in '05, I wasn't surprised -- I was pleased that the numbers were as big as they were, to defy that many threats and car bombers, but I wasn't surprised.

I also was not surprised at the resounding success of the various Iraq elections, I predicted success in a couple of chat rooms I was in, laughed to scorn, and then banned and thrust off the board when I called my liberal anti-war friends on their hypocrisy.... Go Here to read the whole story...

And this is the real challenge we face. And Iraq is just a part of a broader war against these jihadists and extremists, Mark. It is a -- we will be dealing with this issue for a while, just like we dealt with other ideologies for a while. It takes time for ideologies to take root.

I firmly believe that you'll see the democracy movement continue to advance throughout the Middle East if the United States doesn't become isolationist. That's why I've told you that I'm making sure that we continue to stay diplomatically involved in the region. Condi Rice and Bob Gates will be traveling there in early August, to continue to remind our friends and allies that we're -- one, we view them as strategic partners; and, secondly, that we want them to work toward freer societies, and to help this Iraqi government survive. It's in their interests that Iraq become a stable partner.

And I believe we can achieve that objective. And not only do I believe we can achieve, I know we've got to achieve the objective, so we will have done our duty. This is hard work. And one of the things I talked about in the opening comments was, do we do it now, or basically pull back, let the Gallup poll or whatever poll there are decide the fate of the country? And my view is, is that if that were to happen, we would then have to go back in with greater force in order to protect ourselves, because one of the facts of the 21st century is that what happens overseas matters to the security of our country.

Ed.

Q Good morning, Mr. President. Given the events on the ground in Iraq and the politics here at home, has U.S. military deployment to Iraq reached the ceiling, or can you allow any further military escalation?

THE PRESIDENT: You're trying to do what Martha very skillfully tried to get me to do, and that was to --

Q Can I have a follow-up?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, you can, because you're about to realize I'm not going to answer your question -- (laughter) -- except to say this: There's going to be great temptation to -- not "temptation," you won't be tempted, you will actually ask me to speculate about what David Petraeus will talk to us about when he comes home. And I just ask the American people to understand that the Commander-in-Chief must rely upon the wisdom and judgment of the military thinkers and planners. It's very important that there be that solid connection of trust between me and those who are in the field taking incredible risk.

And so, Ed, I'm going to wait to see what David has to say. I'm not going to prejudge what he may say. I trust David Petraeus, his judgment. He's an honest man. Those of you who have interviewed him know that he's a straight shooter, he's an innovative thinker. I was briefed by members of the CODEL that came back, that said that it appeared to them that our troops have high respect for our commanders in Baghdad, as do I.

Now, do you have a follow-up, perhaps another subject, another area, another --

Q Same subject.

THE PRESIDENT: Same question?

Q Different approach.

THE PRESIDENT: It's a different approach; yes, good. (Laughter.)

Q How hard is it for you to conduct the war without popular support? Do you, personally -- do you ever have trouble balancing between doing what you think is the right thing and following the will of the majority of the public, which is really the essence of democracy?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, it is. And, first of all, I can fully understand why people are tired of the war. The question they have is, can we win it? And of course I'm concerned about whether or not the American people are in this fight. I believe, however, that when they really think about the consequences if we were to precipitously withdraw, they begin to say to themselves, maybe we ought to win this, maybe we ought to have a stable Iraq.

Their question, it seems like to me, is, can we succeed? And that's a very important, legitimate question for anybody to ask. I think many people understand we must succeed, and I think a lot of people understand we've got to wait for the generals to make these military decisions. I suspect -- I know this, Ed, that if our troops thought that I was taking a poll to decide how to conduct this war, they would be very concerned about the mission. In other words, if our troops said, well, here we are in combat, and we've got a Commander-in-Chief who is running a focus group -- in other words, politics is more important to him than our safety and/or our strategy -- that would dispirit our troops.

And there's a lot of constituencies in this fight -- clearly the American people, who are paying for this, is the major constituency. And I repeat to you, Ed, I understand that there -- this violence has affected them. And a lot of people don't think we can win. There's a lot of people in Congress who don't think we can win, as well, and therefore their attitude is, get out.

My concern with that strategy, something that Mike Hayden also discussed, is that just getting out may sound simple, and it may affect polls, but it would have long-term, serious security consequences for the United States. And so, Ed, sometimes you just have to make the decisions based upon what you think is right. My most important job is to help secure this country, and therefore, the decisions in Iraq are all aimed at helping do that job. And that's what I firmly believe.

A second constituency is the military. And I repeat to you, I'm pretty confident our military do not want their Commander-in-Chief making political decisions about their future.

A third constituency that matters to me a lot is military families. These are good folks who are making huge sacrifices, and they support their loved ones. And I don't think they want their Commander-in-Chief making decisions based upon popularity.

Another constituency group that is important for me to talk to is the Iraqis. Obviously, I want the Iraqi government to understand that we expect there to be reconciliation top down; that we want to see laws passed. I think they've got that message. They know full well that the American government and the American people expect to see tangible evidence of working together; that's what the benchmarks are aimed to do.

But they also need to know that I am making decisions based upon our security interests, of course, but also helping them succeed, and that a poll is not going to determine the course of action by the United States. What will determine the course of actions is, will the decisions that we have made help secure our country for the long run?

And, finally, another constituency is the enemy, who are wondering whether or not America has got the resolve and the determination to stay after them. And so that's what I think about, Ed.

You know, I guess I'm like any other political figure -- everybody wants to be loved, just sometimes the decisions you make and the consequences don't enable you to be loved. And so when it's all said and done, Ed, if you ever come down and visit the old, tired, me down there in Crawford, I will be able to say I looked in the mirror and made decisions based upon principle, not based upon politics. And that's important to me.

Thank you all for your time. I loved being here at this new building. Thank you.

Q Can we just ask you about the al Qaeda intelligence report, please?

THE PRESIDENT: What was that? This is amazing.

Q I know, I know.

THE PRESIDENT: The new me.

The al Qaeda intelligence report.

Q The intelligence analysts are saying al Qaeda has reconstituted in areas of Pakistan, saying the threat to the West is greater than ever now, as great as 2001. What's --

THE PRESIDENT: Okay --

Q Okay, you tell us what --

THE PRESIDENT: I'm glad you asked, thank you. Thank you, I appreciate that opportunity to --

Q Thank you for coming back, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: I'm happy to do it. This is not the new me. I mean, this is just an aberration. In other words --

Q It's over next time.

THE PRESIDENT: -- I'm not going to leave and then come back because somebody yells something at me.

Q Like China.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, exactly. (Laughter.) Thank you, David. I appreciate that. Exactly.

There is a perception in the coverage that al Qaeda may be as strong today as they were prior to September the 11th. That's just simply not the case. I think the report will say, since 2001, not prior to September the 11th, 2001.

Secondly, that because of the actions we have taken, al Qaeda is weaker today than they would have been. They are still a threat. They are still dangerous. And that is why it is important that we succeed in Afghanistan and Iraq and anywhere else we find them. That's our strategy, is to stay on the offense against al Qaeda.

Elaine asked the question, is it al Qaeda in Iraq? Yes, it is al Qaeda, just like it's al Qaeda in parts of Pakistan. And I'm working with President Musharraf to be able to -- he doesn't want them in his country; he doesn't want foreign fighters in outposts of his country. And so we're working to make sure that we continue to keep the pressure on al Qaeda.

But no question al Qaeda is dangerous for the American people, and that's why -- as well as other people that love freedom -- and that's why we're working hard with allies and friends to enhance our intelligence. That's why we need terrorist surveillance programs. That's why it's important for us to keep -- you know, would hope Congress would modernize that bill. And that's why we're keeping on the offense.

Ultimately, the way to defeat these radicals and extremists is to offer alternative ways of life so that they're unable to recruit; that they can use -- they like to use frustration and hopelessness. The societies that don't provide hope will become the societies where al Qaeda has got the capacity to convince a youngster to go blow himself up. What we need to do is help governments provide brighter futures for their people so they won't sign up.

And the fundamental question facing the world on this issue is whether or not it makes sense to try to promote an alternative ideology. I happen to think it does. They say, he's idealistic. Yes, I'm idealistic, but I'm also realistic in understanding if there is not an alternative ideology presented, these thugs will be able to continue the recruit. They'll use hopelessness to be able to recruit. And so it's -- thank you for asking that question.

Thank you all.

END 11:30 A.M. EST

Thank you Mr. President. You still have a devoted and strong supporter in this Neo Con Mama. I have every hope and confidence that Iraq will be a thriving democracy in the near future, and look forward to traveling there to enjoy a wonderful vacation with my family.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:42 AM

Hugh Hewitt:Michael Yon reports from Baquba, Iraq that the surge appears to be working

Michael Yon reports from Baquba, Iraq that the surge appears to be working

"HH: Now yesterday, Harry Reid said on the floor of the Senate that the surge has failed. Do you think there’s any factual basis for making that assertion, Michael Yon, from what you’ve seen in Iraq over the last many months?

MY: He’s wrong, he’s wrong. It has absolutely not failed, and in fact, I’m finally willing to say it in public. I feel like it’s starting to succeed. And you know, I’m kind of stretching a little bit, because we haven’t gone too far into it, but I can see it from my travels around, for instance, in Anbar and out here in Diyala Province as well.

Baghdad’s still very problematic. But there’s other areas where you can clearly see that there is a positive effect. And the first and foremost thing we have to do is knock down al Qaeda. And with them alienating so many Iraqis, I mean, they’re almost doing it for us. I mean, yeah, it takes military might to finally like wipe them out of Baquba, but it’s working. I mean, I sense that the surge is working. Reid is just wrong."

WOO HOOOOOO!!!

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:37 AM

July 10, 2007

Front Page: Anti War Moonbat puts bullet in heart of War Hero and Media yawns....

Media Silence on Antiwar Violence

Patrick Poole:

Airforce Airman Jonathan Schrieken, 22, is fighting for his life after being shot in the heart while standing outside his home near McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey on July 4th by a gunman intending to make an antiwar statement. Airman Schrieken, a loadmaster with the 6th Airlift Squadron based at McGuire, remains in critical condition at a Camden, New Jersey hospital. The antiwar gunman, Matthew J. Marren, killed himself after shooting Schrieken and left two suicide notes explaining that he was “mad at the government”.

Meanwhile, the establishment media ignores the story. The initial Associated Press report on the incident never mentions Marren’s motive for shooting Schrieken. The first media outlet to discuss Marren’s intent to make an antiwar statement on the 4th of July by killing a member of our military was Phillyburbs.com, and the story has only gained national attention after a post over the weekend at LittleGreenFootballs.com.

A member of Marren’s family described to Phillyburbs.com his reasons behind the attack:

Marren’s aunt, Terina Henderson of Trion, Ga., said she spoke to Marren’s mother yesterday who told her Marren left two notes, one in his home and one in his car, indicating he was upset with the government.

She said she did not know the exact wording in the notes, but said Marren was “mad at the government and wanted to make a statement … that’s why he did what he did on the Fourth of July.”

Over at LGF, a friend of the Schrieken family described the attack:

He had been on leave here in Ohio and got back to his home off base and was unpacking stuff from his car when this 22 year old guy walked up to him and asked him if he lived in the house. When Jon said yes, the guy said “not any more” and shot him point blank in the chest. He tried to shoot him again, but his gun jammed. Jonathan made it into the house. The guy then shot himself.

This makes it clear that Marren had nothing short of murder on his mind. Providentially, the gun jammed, allowing for Schrieken to escape into his house, where he lived with several other Airmen.

If Airman Schrieken had been an abortionist or homosexual, this story would be front page news for the New York Times and the lead story on CBS News with Katie Couric for at least the next month. But since Schrieken is serving in the military, even his hometown newspaper, the Columbus Dispatch, has ignored this story."

My prayers are with Airman Schrieken as he fights for his life.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 1:09 PM

July 8, 2007

NRO: Victor Davis Hansen: Virtual War

Virtual War: We are on a collective animal farm

"For our more engaged and partisan elites, these outrages are more cause for politicking that prompt the old blame game. “The War on Terror” is now a mere bumper sticker, some sort of discredited neocon conspiracy to enrich Dick Cheney and shill for Israel, as the Left alleges unnecessary war abroad and at home a police state followed from trumping up the danger from radical Islam.

Like an oxygen-starved fish flopping about on the pier, we are frenetic, but also exhausted from the press wars over WMD, Halliburton, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, Joe Wilson, and Valerie Plame. Most of those associated with the Iraqi war are either gone or had their reputations nearly ruined: Paul Bremmer, Douglas Feith, Scooter Libby, Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet, and Paul Wolfowitz. Dick Cheney and George Bush are demonized as more the real threats for trying to stop al Qaeda than al Qaeda is for trying to wipe us out.

In short, we are much madder at ourselves than we are at the Islamic radicals who wage war to kill us. So while the terrorists keep at it, we keep at it too — suing in our courts over the rights of terrorists and enemy combatants.

Our senators demand only one answer from our generals — how soon can we flee the ‘mess’ in Iraq? Didn’t the Bush administration’s unwillingness to give aid to Hamas, or to negotiate with Syria and Iran, or sending too few or surging too many to Iraq cause our problems?

Can’t we subpoena the president, the vice president, or at least impeach somebody to express our furor? Isn’t there a word in the English lexicon worse than “the worst” for some blathering news reader to rant about George Bush each night on television?

We may disagree over why Westerners are bickering among themselves and why Muslims want to blow up innocent civilians. But the better question is Why does it all continue?

Simple. So far the Islamic radicals have failed to repeat mass murder of the magnitude of September 11.

Their only success in killing Westerners is in Iraq, and to a lesser extent Afghanistan. And in the postmodern Western paradigm of least resistance, thus the response is simple. Get out of Iraq, then most of our losses cease and the good life goes on and on.

It is hard to describe the leftist approach to the present war, much less to lump together all its various strains. But a common, though unspoken, assumption is simply that so far Western intelligence services, law enforcement, and the U.S. military have so infiltrated, thwarted, scattered, or killed off enough jihadists that for the moment the Islamists no longer possess the ability to kill thousands more Westerners.

As long as that dodge from the terrorist bullet continues, we are thus freed up to bicker and slur — but only up to a certain fuzzy point where even the loud Left is somewhat hesitant to repeal the Patriot Act, stop wiretaps, shut down Guantanamo, withdraw from Iraq, ease up in Afghanistan, and let Iran be Iran. Do all that and today’s incompetent jihadists who can’t even light up a propane tank might well have better luck with a dirty bomb. We are on a collective Animal Farm: Good wiretaps bad!

The result is that we are ever so insidiously slouching back into a 1990s Clintonian mood of lackadaisicalness. If we get out of Iraq and 9/11 passes its sixth anniversary in quiet, we can relax and keep feeding al Qaeda a few diplomats, attaches, or soldiers in godforsaken places where they ought not be anyway.

If worse comes to worse, and al Qaeda gets greedy and harvests more than a few dozen, there is always the cruise missile or Operation Desert Something to bomb camps. But then we blink and get to go back to Paris, Anna Nicole’s ghost, Halliburton, and Dick Cheney’s shotgun. Soon the old Democratic two-step may return: Launch a Clinton cruise missile, followed by the landing party of Jimmy Carter to blame the launcher.

I wouldn’t suggest that such a strategy won’t work. While we speak, the formidable powers of globalized communications and commerce, Western popular culture, seductive egalitarianism, consumerism, and informality are relentlessly tearing down the hierarchies within the Muslim world.

Hence follows the real rage of the radical Islamists at our DVDs, Internet, cell phones, CDs, jeans, T-shirts, and belly buttons. Those manifestations of a frantic culture seems to drive Dr. Zawahiri himself almost to the point of giving up his Western-inspired infomercials.

Perhaps, there is no antidote to Westernization. In the end, Ahmed and Buffy will alike soon be smirking to a morning show or on The Simpsons, fake listening to rap, hypnotized by video games, discussing our addictions with worldwide Oprah, and nodding to Anderson Cooper’s banalities anyway.

But until we get there, in the exhaustion after Iraq, we are returning to our therapeutic attitude about the harvesting of our citizens here and there. We caricature and slander those in the West who install video cameras, interrogate killers at Gitmo, slug it out in Anbar — all on the expectation that Islamic killers won’t harvest any more than a half dozen or so Westerners each month.

And mostly those reaped in this virtual war will be soldiers, diplomats, or random citizens supposedly in the wrong job, in the wrong place, and at the wrong time."

George Orwells Animal Farm

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:58 PM

July 6, 2007

New York Times: G.I.’s Forge Sunni Tie in Bid to Squeeze Militants

G.I.’s Forge Sunni Tie in Bid to Squeeze Militants

QUOTE:

"The American military has struggled for more than four years to train and equip the Iraqi Army. But here the local Sunni residents, including a number of former insurgents from the 1920s Revolution Brigades, have emerged as a linchpin of the American strategy.

The new coalition reflects some hard-headed calculations on both sides. Eager for intelligence on their elusive foes, American officers have been willing to overlook the past of some of their newfound allies.

Many Sunnis, for their part, are less inclined to see the soldiers as occupiers now that it is clear that American troop reductions are all but inevitable, and they are more concerned with strengthening their ability to fend off threats from Sunni jihadists and Shiite militias. In a surprising twist, the jihadists — the Americans’ most ardent foes — made the new strategy possible. Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, a predominantly Iraqi organization with a small but significant foreign component, severely overplayed its hand, spawning resentment by many residents and other insurgent groups.

Imposing a severe version of Islamic law, the group installed its own clerics, established an Islamic court and banned the sale of cigarettes, which even this week were nowhere to be found in the humble shops in western Baquba to the consternation of patrolling Iraqi troops.

The fighters raised funds by kidnapping local Iraqis, found accommodations by evicting some residents from their homes and killed with abandon when anyone got in their way, residents say. A small group of bearded black-clad militants took down the Iraqi flag and raised the banner of their self-proclaimed Islamic State of Iraq.

“They used religion as a ploy to get in and exploit people’s passions,” said one member of the Kit Carson scouts, who gave his name as Haidar. “They were Iraqis and other Arabs from Syria, Afghanistan, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. They started kicking people out of their houses and getting ransom from rich people. They would shoot people in front of their houses to scare the others.”

Collaborations like the one with the scouts in Baquba are slowly beginning to emerge in other parts of Iraq. In Baquba they face some notable obstacles, primarily from the Shiite-dominated provincial and Baghdad ministries that are worried about American efforts to rally the Sunnis and institutionalize them as a security force.

But with Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki’s government showing scant progress toward political reconciliation and the American military eager to achieve a measure of stability before its elevated troop levels begin to shrink, American commanders appear determined to proceed with this more decentralized strategy — one that relies less on initiatives taken by Iraqi leaders in Baghdad and more on newly forged coalitions with local Iraqis.

A West Point graduate, Idaho native and former Mormon missionary who worked for two years with Chinese immigrants in Canada, Captain Richards commands Bronco Troop, First Squadron, 14th Cavalry Regiment. When the 31-year-old officer was first sent to Buhritz in mid-March as part of a battalion-size task force, he encountered a deeply entrenched foe who numbered in the thousands.

Many of the members of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia were ensconced in a sprawling palm grove-laden sanctuary south of Baquba and east of the Diyala River. The area, which is still under the group’s control, is still so replete with arms caches, insurgent leaders, fighters and their supporters that American soldiers have taken to calling it the Al Qaeda Fob, or forward operating base in American military jargon.

The insurgents also had a firm grip on the city, the provincial capital of Diyala, which Abu Musab al-Zarqawi made the center of his self-styled Islamic caliphate before he was killed in an airstrike near Baquba last year. The key supply and communications lines between the insurgents’ rural staging area and the city ran through the Buhritz, making it vital ground for Al Qaeda."

...."Captain Richards rejected a group of Shiite police recruits from Baghdad, fearing they might be penetrated by Shiite militias. Determined to get his scouts hired, he loaded 50 scouts and other residents on his Stryker vehicles and drove them to the provincial headquarters over the insurgent-threatened roads.

Today, the police number only 170, a fraction of the police force in adjoining areas. The small police force, made up of scouts and Sunni residents, was provided with only two trucks, seven radios and a paltry supply of ammunition that the Sunni residents have managed to supplement by buying ammunition on the black market from corrupt Interior Ministry officials in Baghdad. Another 150 scouts participate as unpaid monitors in a neighborhood watch program to guard key routes in and out of the area that Captain Richards oversees."

Stripling Warriors in Iraq!

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 3:26 PM

July 5, 2007

Michelle Malkin: Zawahiri’s new fireside chat

Zawahiri’s new fireside chat:

Video Link

SITE notes that Zawahiri quotes from Bob Woodward’s book and a PBS documentary in a broadside against Saudi Arabia, and lauds the jihadis use of the Internet. Interestingly, there is no mention of the most recent jihadi attempts in London and Glasgow. They must be in the studio cutting that one now.

Jenny Hatch

Posted by Jenny Hatch at 6:26 PM