a fine guy, but his ROE in Afghanistan suck. Bigtime.
The Times compiled an informal list of the new rules from interviews with U.S. forces. Among them:
• No night or surprise searches.
• Villagers have to be warned prior to searches.
• ANA or ANP must accompany U.S. units on searches.
• U.S. soldiers may not fire at the enemy unless the enemy is preparing to fire first.
• U.S. forces cannot engage the enemy if civilians are present.
• Only women can search women.
• Troops can fire at an insurgent if they catch him placing an IED but not if insurgents are walking away from an area where explosives have been laid.
'Only women can search women' in ALL circumstances? Warning prior to searches? NO night searches? Sounds like bullshit to me.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Sunday, November 15, 2009
I go away for the weekend and the bastard does it
again. I was off at the big Tulsa Gun Show with Dad; lots of shooty goodness and some real reminders of what the economy is like: fewer people- especially today- and lots less business done. At about noon, where it was real busy in previous years, many fewer people around, and a number of dealers saying sales were way down.
And when I get home, check mail & such, and find this crap: Obama found another member of foreign royalty to bow down to.
Dammit, it makes me wish I'd bought ammo. A LOT of it. We may need it at this rate when some bozos decides that since the President is such a subservient wuss that he won't mind all that much if they attack us.
By the way, Mr. President,
"The Chinese internet has been flooded with pages and pictures praising Obama and comparing him to Mao Zedong."
It may be a surprise to you, but being compared happily to the worst mass-murderer in world history is NOT a friggin' compliment. Unless, of course, you LIKE said slimeball.
Oh, for God's sake- I was about to publish when found this. Our freaking PRESIDENT apparently still can't bring himself to behave properly.
Shit. I guess he's too busy trying to figure how to betray the troops in Afghanistan and the US in general to be bothered with such things. After all, why salute a nation he doesn't like?
And when I get home, check mail & such, and find this crap: Obama found another member of foreign royalty to bow down to.
Dammit, it makes me wish I'd bought ammo. A LOT of it. We may need it at this rate when some bozos decides that since the President is such a subservient wuss that he won't mind all that much if they attack us.
By the way, Mr. President,
"The Chinese internet has been flooded with pages and pictures praising Obama and comparing him to Mao Zedong."
It may be a surprise to you, but being compared happily to the worst mass-murderer in world history is NOT a friggin' compliment. Unless, of course, you LIKE said slimeball.
Oh, for God's sake- I was about to publish when found this. Our freaking PRESIDENT apparently still can't bring himself to behave properly.
Shit. I guess he's too busy trying to figure how to betray the troops in Afghanistan and the US in general to be bothered with such things. After all, why salute a nation he doesn't like?
Friday, November 13, 2009
A whole mess of stuff this morning
As a number of others have already pointed out, the mainstream media are doing their best to turn a mass murder committed by someone who worshipped at the same mosque as two of the 9/11 hijackers, made repeated attempts to contact al-Qaeda-supportive clergy, and shouted “Allahu Akbar” at the start of the attack into something other than an Islamic terrorist attack.
If this wasn’t such a dreadfully serious matter, it would almost be funny watching Democrats insist that there’s no elephant in the bathtub. Perhaps the most bizarre of these claims is that of Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, who insists that the core problem behind Fort Hood is that “America loves guns.”
And all the violent crime and shootings in Chicago is just because the rest of us don't want to follow him down the drain, uh huh. And here's a quote for all the Soviet lovers:
(Anne Applebaum’s Gulag: A History (2003) describes how prisoners in the Soviet work camp system did not refer to the society outside the barbed wire as “freedom.” They called it bolshaya zona, or “the big prison zone”: “larger and less deadly” than the camps, but not fundamentally different.)
Biden has ties to a corrupt mess? And the New York Effing Times covers for him? Well, whoda thunk it? Problem is, their own past stories kind of mess with the narrative:
Blogger Tom Maguire is somewhat incredulous at the Times' assertion Biden was "influenced by Mr. Galbraith’s thinking but [does] not advocate such a partitioning of the country." In fact, Maguire unearths this op-ed Galbraith wrote for, well, The New York Times some two years ago:
If this wasn’t such a dreadfully serious matter, it would almost be funny watching Democrats insist that there’s no elephant in the bathtub. Perhaps the most bizarre of these claims is that of Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, who insists that the core problem behind Fort Hood is that “America loves guns.”
And all the violent crime and shootings in Chicago is just because the rest of us don't want to follow him down the drain, uh huh. And here's a quote for all the Soviet lovers:
(Anne Applebaum’s Gulag: A History (2003) describes how prisoners in the Soviet work camp system did not refer to the society outside the barbed wire as “freedom.” They called it bolshaya zona, or “the big prison zone”: “larger and less deadly” than the camps, but not fundamentally different.)
Biden has ties to a corrupt mess? And the New York Effing Times covers for him? Well, whoda thunk it? Problem is, their own past stories kind of mess with the narrative:
Blogger Tom Maguire is somewhat incredulous at the Times' assertion Biden was "influenced by Mr. Galbraith’s thinking but [does] not advocate such a partitioning of the country." In fact, Maguire unearths this op-ed Galbraith wrote for, well, The New York Times some two years ago:
IN a surge of realism, the Senate has voted 75-23 to acknowledge that Iraq has broken up and cannot be put back together. The measure, co-sponsored by Joe Biden, a Democratic presidential candidate, and Sam Brownback, Republican of Kansas, supports a plan for Iraq to become a loose confederation of three regions — a Kurdish area in the north, a Shiite region in the south and a Sunni enclave in the center — with the national government in Baghdad having few powers other than to manage the equitable distribution of oil revenues.
Picking up where Maguire left off, here's a New York Times op-ed directly authored by Biden from 2006 where he advocates partitioning Iraq. And here's another New York Times article from 2007 -- "Biden plan for 'soft partition' of Iraq gains momentum." Here's the New York Times covering a campaign ad Biden ran in Iowa where he advocates his plan to partition Iraq. I could go on.
What happened here is clear -- Joe Biden advocated policies in Iraq that his adviser Galbraith also advocated. Galbraith profited handsomely off those policies through close ties to oil companies. Does anyone think that if this story were about an adviser to Dick Cheney profiteering as a nexus between powerful politicians and oil companies that the paper would dishonestly obscure the relationship between the two men?
Hey, but that would be about Darth Cheney, so that's different!
From Crittenden on the Ditherer in Chief:
It’s not quite a strategic retreat, more of a retreat into strategizing as Obama dithers about the dithering, informs his national security team it’s back to Square One. Scratch everything, back to the drawing board. He wants to stop thinking about the war until he can figure out the peace part. OK, that may not be exactly how senior administration officials put it, but at this point, inaction speaks louder than words.
...
Military officials said Obama has asked for a rewrite before and resisted what one official called a one-way highway toward war commander Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s recommendations for more troops. The sense that he was being rushed and railroaded has stiffened Obama’s resolve to seek information and options beyond military planning, officials said, though a substantial troop increase is still likely.
Ha ha, his resolve to keep dithering has been stiffened! Good one. AP scribbler with a keen sense of irony or AP scribbler without a clue?
(Well, in fairness, even if the president did declare back in 2008 this war was a vital national security interest, and he did signal last spring he was on board with counterinsurgency, and even if he did appoint Gen. Stanley McChrystal to get the job done in May, the general’s recommendations only arrived in August, and the president didn’t look at them until, what, late September, and he’s been really busy this whole time letting Congress bollix his health-care initiative, throwing Eastern Europe under the bus and flying to Copenhagen, that kind of thing, so he’s only been able to squeeze in seven high-level national security meetings, or is it eight? Is it so unreasonable to ask for new options on top of the new options that he asked for on top of the new options that McChrystal gave him? Meanwhile, China’s ass wants kissing and then we’re into the holidays … )
Hell with it. Things to do...
Based on what's been coming out, if he'd been a nutty islamist
the Army wouldn't be screwing with him; since he's not...
How is it that a Army Major can make treasonous remarks and still hold his job and then go and murder 13 people, but CJ tries to exercise his rights of free speech and then gets his life turned upside down? What the hell is this about? How can this happen?
How is it that a Army Major can make treasonous remarks and still hold his job and then go and murder 13 people, but CJ tries to exercise his rights of free speech and then gets his life turned upside down? What the hell is this about? How can this happen?
ACORN and NEA; more coming from Big Government
and Big Hollywood. ACORN first:
Since I woke up to the news that ACORN had sued the U.S. government to get its federal funding back, it struck me as obvious that ACORN is in the process of trying to get its mojo back absent any real investigations by the Holder Justice Department, the Democratic-controlled Congress, and the Jerry Brown sham investigation in California – not to mention the so-called “internal investigation” whose chief investigator was picked by number one ACORN defender, John Podesta, and SEIU head Andy Stern, whose union is deeply aligned with the troubled “community organizing” group.
Despite all the evidence we have published that exposes ACORN as both corrupt and criminal, no other mainstream media organization has shown any signs of investigating ACORN despite countless angles and document trails. So I knew I had to go down to the protest on Bundy Drive to ask ACORN protesters a few questions.
Note the line at Insty: There are more videos to come next week. I wonder when the major media will get off their bigoted asses and actually start to cover this?
And on the NEA mess,
Chairman Landesman’s claim that Yosi Sergant, the former NEA Communications Director, acted “unilaterally” on the controversial August 10th conference call is not only beginning to erode, but new documents obtained by Judicial Watch under the Freedom of Information Act show that another federal employee thought the arts effort was entering murky legal waters.
Since I woke up to the news that ACORN had sued the U.S. government to get its federal funding back, it struck me as obvious that ACORN is in the process of trying to get its mojo back absent any real investigations by the Holder Justice Department, the Democratic-controlled Congress, and the Jerry Brown sham investigation in California – not to mention the so-called “internal investigation” whose chief investigator was picked by number one ACORN defender, John Podesta, and SEIU head Andy Stern, whose union is deeply aligned with the troubled “community organizing” group.
Despite all the evidence we have published that exposes ACORN as both corrupt and criminal, no other mainstream media organization has shown any signs of investigating ACORN despite countless angles and document trails. So I knew I had to go down to the protest on Bundy Drive to ask ACORN protesters a few questions.
Note the line at Insty: There are more videos to come next week. I wonder when the major media will get off their bigoted asses and actually start to cover this?
And on the NEA mess,
Chairman Landesman’s claim that Yosi Sergant, the former NEA Communications Director, acted “unilaterally” on the controversial August 10th conference call is not only beginning to erode, but new documents obtained by Judicial Watch under the Freedom of Information Act show that another federal employee thought the arts effort was entering murky legal waters.
In an email dated July 30, 2009, Nellie Abernathy, a representative of the federal program United We Serve, sent an email to Sergant to inquire of his interest in attending a meeting regarding 9/11 events – the culmination day of the United We Serve campaign. In the email Abernathy states (emphasis added):
“Just got off the phone with [redacted]. They’re interested in helping produce some 9/11 events and will be in DC next week. Any chance you could join us for a meeting Tuesday morning? Or does this fall into that sketchy grey we might get arrested area?”
Sergant responded, “I’d love to.”
The subject of the email correspondence was entitled “rock the vote,” which presumably should have been redacted (blacked out) in the subject line given that the organization is a non-government group and the other subject lines in the email chain were redacted.
Same question as on ACORN; probably same answer: Only when they think they have to or lose everything.Thursday, November 12, 2009
If this Obamacare scheme is so damned good,
why do they have to threaten to jail you if you don't take part?
Stone: Do you think it’s fair to send people to jail who don’t buy health insurance?
Pelosi: … The legislation is very fair in this respect.
I heard the audio earlier; he asked three times as I recall and never got an actual answer from this bitch.
Back to this leftist insistence that we're all paranoid to even think this way, to even define "freedom" in an antique, right-wing fashion, meaning "stuff you are permitted to do or not do without penalty and coercion from the state:" It is especially risible to me, in gallows-humor way, that the left continues to call us lunatics for fretting about increasing state control and increasing state coercion and increasing state outlawing of previously-legal behavior and freedoms even as, in their very first bill out of the socialist box, they propose jailing Americans for engaging in unobjectionable behavior which no one ever before dreamt of being a crime.
...
Right out of the box. The state here -- Pelosi, Reid, Obama -- are claiming that they can imprison people for behavior that has never before even been hinted as being a crime, on the theory that such behavior constitutes unpatriotic economic behavior which is detrimental to the state's balance sheets.
"Fascism, as they say, tends to come with a smiling face, and there's hardly a face more surgically stretched into smiles than Nancy Pelosi's, quite chipper and blithe as she proposes that she will begin filling America's prisons with a whole new category of criminal, the economic saboteur."
Cartoon thanks to Theo
Stone: Do you think it’s fair to send people to jail who don’t buy health insurance?
Pelosi: … The legislation is very fair in this respect.
I heard the audio earlier; he asked three times as I recall and never got an actual answer from this bitch.
Back to this leftist insistence that we're all paranoid to even think this way, to even define "freedom" in an antique, right-wing fashion, meaning "stuff you are permitted to do or not do without penalty and coercion from the state:" It is especially risible to me, in gallows-humor way, that the left continues to call us lunatics for fretting about increasing state control and increasing state coercion and increasing state outlawing of previously-legal behavior and freedoms even as, in their very first bill out of the socialist box, they propose jailing Americans for engaging in unobjectionable behavior which no one ever before dreamt of being a crime.
...
Right out of the box. The state here -- Pelosi, Reid, Obama -- are claiming that they can imprison people for behavior that has never before even been hinted as being a crime, on the theory that such behavior constitutes unpatriotic economic behavior which is detrimental to the state's balance sheets.
Think about what a broad, all-encompassing term "economics" is. 80% of our waking hours are spent in economic activity of one sort or another. The state here is asserting the right to imprison people for behavior they consider not actually morally reprehensible or harmful as other crimes are, but instead merely detrimental to the Great Push Forward, the state's master plan of economic health and well-being.
"Fascism, as they say, tends to come with a smiling face, and there's hardly a face more surgically stretched into smiles than Nancy Pelosi's, quite chipper and blithe as she proposes that she will begin filling America's prisons with a whole new category of criminal, the economic saboteur."Cartoon thanks to Theo
President B. Hussein Cartman Obama votes 'Present' (updated)
on Afghanistan.
President Barack Obama does not plan to accept any of the Afghanistan war options presented by his national security team, pushing instead for revisions to clarify how and when U.S. troops would turn over responsibility to the Afghan government, a senior administration official said Wednesday.
He got the damned study from his commanding general in the country, spent a month playing games refusing to 'officially' receive it, then started playing more games to delay, and now this.
Among the options for Obama would be ways to phase in additional troops, perhaps eventually equaling McChrystal's full request, based on security or other conditions in Afghanistan and in response to pending decisions on troops levels by some U.S. allies fighting in Afghanistan.
If he doesn't know that we can't count on most of the allies we have there, he's far more stupid than I think he is; Gordon Brown won't even supply enough choppers for his own damned troops, for instance. British troops and others are fine fighters when they're allowed to be; but most of their governments have deliberately hamstrung them. And this 'eventually' means "Drag it out as long as possible so I can find a way to cut and run without calling it that." Or so I'm convinced.
Obama's top military advisers have said they are comfortable with the pace of the process, and senior military officials have pointed out that the president still has time since no additional forces could begin flowing into Afghanistan until early next year.
A: YOUR fat ass isn't being shot at, and dealing with IEDs, I'm sure you're very comfortable.*
B: Every Effing Day you clowns delay a decision means the enemy gets another day of thinking you don't want to win, and it encourages them; and Every Effing Day makes getting any additional troops there drag farther and farther out. And makes it that much harder for them to get the damned job done.
Update: thoughts on the matter from Uncle Jimbo
I am not an expert on ret. LTG Eikenberry, but his ideas seem to be complete fantasy. His last tour in country was as Commander of Combined Forces Command- Afghanistan from 2005-2007. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that when things there went completely into the shitter?
*Am I being unfair? Maybe. Right now, I don't care.
President Barack Obama does not plan to accept any of the Afghanistan war options presented by his national security team, pushing instead for revisions to clarify how and when U.S. troops would turn over responsibility to the Afghan government, a senior administration official said Wednesday.
He got the damned study from his commanding general in the country, spent a month playing games refusing to 'officially' receive it, then started playing more games to delay, and now this.
Among the options for Obama would be ways to phase in additional troops, perhaps eventually equaling McChrystal's full request, based on security or other conditions in Afghanistan and in response to pending decisions on troops levels by some U.S. allies fighting in Afghanistan.
If he doesn't know that we can't count on most of the allies we have there, he's far more stupid than I think he is; Gordon Brown won't even supply enough choppers for his own damned troops, for instance. British troops and others are fine fighters when they're allowed to be; but most of their governments have deliberately hamstrung them. And this 'eventually' means "Drag it out as long as possible so I can find a way to cut and run without calling it that." Or so I'm convinced.
Obama's top military advisers have said they are comfortable with the pace of the process, and senior military officials have pointed out that the president still has time since no additional forces could begin flowing into Afghanistan until early next year.
A: YOUR fat ass isn't being shot at, and dealing with IEDs, I'm sure you're very comfortable.*
B: Every Effing Day you clowns delay a decision means the enemy gets another day of thinking you don't want to win, and it encourages them; and Every Effing Day makes getting any additional troops there drag farther and farther out. And makes it that much harder for them to get the damned job done.
Update: thoughts on the matter from Uncle Jimbo
I am not an expert on ret. LTG Eikenberry, but his ideas seem to be complete fantasy. His last tour in country was as Commander of Combined Forces Command- Afghanistan from 2005-2007. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that when things there went completely into the shitter?
*Am I being unfair? Maybe. Right now, I don't care.
Insty pointed to an article titled Face it: the Democratic Party
is not for women. Basically, long rant about how allowing the Stupak amendment is 'an attack on reproductive rights'. So I went and took a look.
Ok. So an amendment saying 'The Federal Government can't take money away from other people to pay for your abortion' is 'an attack on reproductive freedom'. Uh huh.
This may be hard for some to understand, but you don't have a right to rob other people to pay for something for yourself. Period. The fact that you think you have a right to take money from others to pay for your abortion indicates you think you're owed. And I've got news for you: you're not.
Ok. So an amendment saying 'The Federal Government can't take money away from other people to pay for your abortion' is 'an attack on reproductive freedom'. Uh huh.
This may be hard for some to understand, but you don't have a right to rob other people to pay for something for yourself. Period. The fact that you think you have a right to take money from others to pay for your abortion indicates you think you're owed. And I've got news for you: you're not.
The Fort Hood murderer mess just gets better
and better.
"Put it this way," says one official familiar with the conversations that took place. "Everybody felt that if you were deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, you would not want Nidal Hasan in your foxhole."
...
One official involved in the conversations had reportedly told colleagues that he worried that if Hasan deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, he might leak secret military information to Islamic extremists. Another official reportedly wondered aloud to colleagues whether Hasan might be capable of committing fratricide, like the Muslim U.S. Army sergeant who, in 2003, killed two fellow soldiers and injured 14 others by setting off grenades at a base in Kuwait.
So why nothing done? "It would be too difficult and expensive", "We might be discriminating against him if we act", ...were not aware, as some top Walter Reed officials were, that intelligence analysts had been tracking Hasan's e-mails with at least one suspected Islamic extremist since December 2008. And then we come to the finale:
And finally, Hasan was about to leave Walter Reed and USUHS for good and transfer to Fort Hood, in Texas. Fort Hood has more psychiatrists and other mental specialists than some other Army bases, so officials figured there would be plenty of co-workers who would support Hasan — and monitor him.
So. They didn't want to deal with the trouble of taking action against a guy who scared hell out of them, they didn't want to be seen as being nasty toward a muslim, nobody bothered to point out that along with the other stuff he was contacting the enemy and- kind of the crowning glory of this bullshit- "When he transfers he won't be our problem any more." Isn't this just the kind of reasoning you want from doctors who'll be dealing with wounded and troubled soldiers?
Hope these useless bastards feel real damned good about their cowardice now.
"Put it this way," says one official familiar with the conversations that took place. "Everybody felt that if you were deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, you would not want Nidal Hasan in your foxhole."
...
One official involved in the conversations had reportedly told colleagues that he worried that if Hasan deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, he might leak secret military information to Islamic extremists. Another official reportedly wondered aloud to colleagues whether Hasan might be capable of committing fratricide, like the Muslim U.S. Army sergeant who, in 2003, killed two fellow soldiers and injured 14 others by setting off grenades at a base in Kuwait.
So why nothing done? "It would be too difficult and expensive", "We might be discriminating against him if we act", ...were not aware, as some top Walter Reed officials were, that intelligence analysts had been tracking Hasan's e-mails with at least one suspected Islamic extremist since December 2008. And then we come to the finale:
And finally, Hasan was about to leave Walter Reed and USUHS for good and transfer to Fort Hood, in Texas. Fort Hood has more psychiatrists and other mental specialists than some other Army bases, so officials figured there would be plenty of co-workers who would support Hasan — and monitor him.
So. They didn't want to deal with the trouble of taking action against a guy who scared hell out of them, they didn't want to be seen as being nasty toward a muslim, nobody bothered to point out that along with the other stuff he was contacting the enemy and- kind of the crowning glory of this bullshit- "When he transfers he won't be our problem any more." Isn't this just the kind of reasoning you want from doctors who'll be dealing with wounded and troubled soldiers?
Hope these useless bastards feel real damned good about their cowardice now.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
I really didn't need to read even more 'diversity' bullcrap
on this day, but we can't let this pass without spreading the word around. First, from the freaking NAVAL ACADEMY,
Here we go.
You really need to read it all to get the full flavor of A: the bullshit itself and B: the Academy playing word games to cover things up.
Some more on this bullcrap from Diana West here.
And finally, we have Congress screwing with the Coast Guard Academy in the name of Diversity!
Washington (AP) - The House voted overwhelmingly for a bill that includes a provision giving members of Congress a say over who is admitted to the U.S. Coast Guard's 1,000-cadet service academy in New London, Conn.
The measure -- part of a multi-billion-dollar authorization bill that passed 385-11 on Friday -- was sponsored by Rep. James Oberstar, D-Minn., who argues that congressional nominations are needed to help increase the number of blacks enrolled at the academy and graduate as commissioned officers.
Don't you just love this shit? "I don't care who got the best scores or who's more qualified, I want more blacks in the academy no matter what!" Rep. Oberstar, you bigot, I don't give a rats ass about the skin color of who's in the Academy; I care that the people who work hard and try for it get a fair shot at it. Period. Screw you and your 'diversity' bullcrap.
Here we go.
Leaders of the U.S. Naval Academy tinkered with the composition of the color guard that appeared at a World Series game last month so the group would not be exclusively white and male.An affirmative statement of fact. Keep this para in mind as we move forward. This is the core truth of what happened.
Accounts differ on whose names were added to the color guard roster, or purged from the list. But the net result was that one of the six who marched on the Yankee Stadium field Oct. 29, Midshipman 2nd Class Hannah Allaire, was selected because her presence would make the service academy look more diverse before a national audience.Accurate - though it would have been two of six if one of the Diversity Selectees did not forget his shoes and cover.
You really need to read it all to get the full flavor of A: the bullshit itself and B: the Academy playing word games to cover things up.
Some more on this bullcrap from Diana West here.
And finally, we have Congress screwing with the Coast Guard Academy in the name of Diversity!
Washington (AP) - The House voted overwhelmingly for a bill that includes a provision giving members of Congress a say over who is admitted to the U.S. Coast Guard's 1,000-cadet service academy in New London, Conn.
The measure -- part of a multi-billion-dollar authorization bill that passed 385-11 on Friday -- was sponsored by Rep. James Oberstar, D-Minn., who argues that congressional nominations are needed to help increase the number of blacks enrolled at the academy and graduate as commissioned officers.
Don't you just love this shit? "I don't care who got the best scores or who's more qualified, I want more blacks in the academy no matter what!" Rep. Oberstar, you bigot, I don't give a rats ass about the skin color of who's in the Academy; I care that the people who work hard and try for it get a fair shot at it. Period. Screw you and your 'diversity' bullcrap.
Guess who would dictate the rules
governing our entire financial system, up to and including dismantling a large bank or financial institution if it deemed it presented a risk to the economy? Can you say White House czar? I thought that you could.
And the corrupt Sen. Dodd is right in the middle of putting this pile of steaming crap together.
Kind of like Rep. Rangel writing tax laws he won't obey.
And the corrupt Sen. Dodd is right in the middle of putting this pile of steaming crap together.
Kind of like Rep. Rangel writing tax laws he won't obey.
Yeah, THIS'LL scare the Democrat Party
It's really more of a "pause," than a boycott. Boycotts sounds so final, and angry. Whereas this campaign is temporary, and is only meant to help some friends - President Obama and the Democratic party - who have lost their way. We are hopeful that via this campaign, our friends will keep their promises.
Then you get to the FAC, and 'Won't this help the Republicans?':
We are not calling for a boycott of donations to the DNC. We are simply calling for a pause until the party follows through on its campaign promise to repeal DADT and DOMA, and pass ENDA.
So it's not a boycott, they're just calling it that. And they'll punish the Democrats by not giving them the money now.
Got a question: do they actually believe Obama gives a damn about them and their concerns?
Well, one of the lessons we can learn
is to tell people like Michael T. McPhearson just how full of shit they are. War is taking a heavy physical and mental toll on our troops. The physical injury is easier to see. The mental wounds are many times invisible until it is too late. It is not a new lesson. We saw social and political questions deteriorate unit cohesion of our military forces in the Vietnam War. and so freaking on. Hey, McPhearson, this asshole had never been in the field! He'd been treated with special consideration every damned step of the way, so piss off, asshole.
And, of course, Zogby: After providing support for survivor families, an immediate concern that must be addressed is how best to secure the vision of a diverse military so eloquently articulated by the President and General Casey.
Got that? The 'immediate concern' is 'diversity'. Not weeding out the jihadi dirtbags, oh no. Screw you too, Zogby.
And, of course, Zogby: After providing support for survivor families, an immediate concern that must be addressed is how best to secure the vision of a diverse military so eloquently articulated by the President and General Casey.
Got that? The 'immediate concern' is 'diversity'. Not weeding out the jihadi dirtbags, oh no. Screw you too, Zogby.
I don't think the standard "So that's why we didn't catch it"
are going to work.
A senior government official tells ABC News that investigators have found that alleged Fort Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan had "more unexplained connections to people being tracked by the FBI" than just radical cleric Anwar al Awlaki. The official declined to name the individuals but Congressional sources said their names and countries of origin were likely to emerge soon.
Questions already surround Major Hasan's contact with Awlaki, a radical cleric based in Yemen whom authorities consider a recruiter for al Qaeda. U.S. officials now confirm Hasan sent as many as 20 e-mails to Awlaki. Authorities intercepted the e-mails but later deemed them innocent or protected by the first amendment.
Throwing out the magic words 'First Amendment' doesn't cut it; he was a serving military officer making contact with an al Qaeda recruiter. THAT should have had the red flag waving and maybe a flare going off. Instead,
The FBI said it turned over the information to the Army, but Defense Department officials today denied that. One military investigator on a joint terror task force with the FBI was shown the e-mails, but they were never forwarded in a formal way to more senior officials at the Pentagon, and the Army did not learn of the contacts until after the shootings.
Ah, yes. They were 'shown', but the 'formalities' weren't taken care of, so... And we're supposed to TRUST these clowns?
Meanwhile, in a true G-Man effort to look like they're doing something,
In Texas, an hour before a memorial service for the Fort Hood victims, four FBI agents showed up at the Killeen mosque where Hasan prayed and searched a trash bin outside. The mosque president was clearly upset when he had to return from traveling to the service to sign a document handed to him by agents, apparently authorizing the search.
The FBI would not comment on what the agents were looking for at the mosque a full five days after the shooting, but motivation remains the focus.
And, of course, the Outrage Is Flowing:
"We're concerned any time a house of worship is searched in this fashion," said Ibrahim Hooper, national communications director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Washington, D.C.-based civil rights group. "And we would follow up to see if there was probable cause for the search and if it was carried out in the appropriate and legal manner."
First off, Hooper, if I recall correctly it's been long settled that what you throw in the trash the police can dig through without a warrant; that's been covered in many cases in the past. So your 'concerns' you can shove up your ass, you're just as subject to that as anyone else.
Second, 'apparently' authorizing the search? In other words "We can search the trash without their permission, but while we'd do that to anyone else, for a mosque we need something signed giving 'permission' ." Or so it seems to me. I may be wrong, but right now I'm not willing to give these people ANY benefit of the doubt.
A senior government official tells ABC News that investigators have found that alleged Fort Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan had "more unexplained connections to people being tracked by the FBI" than just radical cleric Anwar al Awlaki. The official declined to name the individuals but Congressional sources said their names and countries of origin were likely to emerge soon.
Questions already surround Major Hasan's contact with Awlaki, a radical cleric based in Yemen whom authorities consider a recruiter for al Qaeda. U.S. officials now confirm Hasan sent as many as 20 e-mails to Awlaki. Authorities intercepted the e-mails but later deemed them innocent or protected by the first amendment.
Throwing out the magic words 'First Amendment' doesn't cut it; he was a serving military officer making contact with an al Qaeda recruiter. THAT should have had the red flag waving and maybe a flare going off. Instead,
The FBI said it turned over the information to the Army, but Defense Department officials today denied that. One military investigator on a joint terror task force with the FBI was shown the e-mails, but they were never forwarded in a formal way to more senior officials at the Pentagon, and the Army did not learn of the contacts until after the shootings.
Ah, yes. They were 'shown', but the 'formalities' weren't taken care of, so... And we're supposed to TRUST these clowns?
Meanwhile, in a true G-Man effort to look like they're doing something,
In Texas, an hour before a memorial service for the Fort Hood victims, four FBI agents showed up at the Killeen mosque where Hasan prayed and searched a trash bin outside. The mosque president was clearly upset when he had to return from traveling to the service to sign a document handed to him by agents, apparently authorizing the search.
The FBI would not comment on what the agents were looking for at the mosque a full five days after the shooting, but motivation remains the focus.
And, of course, the Outrage Is Flowing:
"We're concerned any time a house of worship is searched in this fashion," said Ibrahim Hooper, national communications director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Washington, D.C.-based civil rights group. "And we would follow up to see if there was probable cause for the search and if it was carried out in the appropriate and legal manner."
First off, Hooper, if I recall correctly it's been long settled that what you throw in the trash the police can dig through without a warrant; that's been covered in many cases in the past. So your 'concerns' you can shove up your ass, you're just as subject to that as anyone else.
Second, 'apparently' authorizing the search? In other words "We can search the trash without their permission, but while we'd do that to anyone else, for a mosque we need something signed giving 'permission' ." Or so it seems to me. I may be wrong, but right now I'm not willing to give these people ANY benefit of the doubt.
In interviews with the media, leaders of the Muslim Community Center
have painted a portrait of Hasan as a quiet, unassuming Muslim more interested in finding a wife than debating world politics. They express shock at his killing spree and, appropriately, condemn it. But a closer look behind the doors of the mosque and inside the conversations between the engineer and the doctor reveal a more complex picture of a young first-generation American Muslim man living a life of dissonance between his identity as an American and his ideology as a Muslim who had accepted a literal, rigid interpretation of Islam, akin to the puritanical Wahhabi and Salafi interpretations of Islam that define the theology of militancy inside the Muslim world today, according to community members who knew Hasan.
“So many times I talked with him,” said Akhter, a community leader who is sort of like a mosque gadfly, challenging congregants to reject literal, rigid interpretations of Islam. “I was trying to modernize him. I tried my best. He used to hate America as a whole. He was more anti-American than American.”
Despite all the conversations, Akther said, “I couldn’t get through to him. He was a typical fundamentalist Muslim.”
Which is exactly the fact that so much of our media and PC-at-any-cost morons do not want to recognize; or if they do, don't want anyone allowed to mention it. It hurts their poor brain to have to recognize that a real enemy is out there, and it interferes with their plans to re-make this country in their PC image.
Second, it's that 'they condemn it, but behind the mosque doors' crap that's going to lead to real trouble; sounds very nice to say "This was a terrible act, etc.", but when we find that off camera they're praising the bastard, how are we supposed to trust them?
Third, the muslims who actually want to change things, stop the "Kill all people of other beliefs" crap, are more in danger from their mosque brethren than from some beloved-by-the-media redneck.
Found thanks to Tim Blair
“So many times I talked with him,” said Akhter, a community leader who is sort of like a mosque gadfly, challenging congregants to reject literal, rigid interpretations of Islam. “I was trying to modernize him. I tried my best. He used to hate America as a whole. He was more anti-American than American.”
Despite all the conversations, Akther said, “I couldn’t get through to him. He was a typical fundamentalist Muslim.”
Which is exactly the fact that so much of our media and PC-at-any-cost morons do not want to recognize; or if they do, don't want anyone allowed to mention it. It hurts their poor brain to have to recognize that a real enemy is out there, and it interferes with their plans to re-make this country in their PC image.
Second, it's that 'they condemn it, but behind the mosque doors' crap that's going to lead to real trouble; sounds very nice to say "This was a terrible act, etc.", but when we find that off camera they're praising the bastard, how are we supposed to trust them?
Third, the muslims who actually want to change things, stop the "Kill all people of other beliefs" crap, are more in danger from their mosque brethren than from some beloved-by-the-media redneck.
Found thanks to Tim Blair
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Why the Department of Homeland Security missed Hasan
And apparently the Effing.B.I. was using the same method
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)