The Black Republican

Whether you are a John McCain fan or not, this article written by John McCain in 1973 is well worth the read.

I may be an Army guy, but you gotta hand it to those Navy boys. Following the ruckus over the summer where a Board of Supervisors committee considered banning The Blue Angels from the city's Fleet Week festivities, the team's high-speed, low-drag pilots apparently decided to tell San Franciscans what they thought of the idea. With style, baby.

Absolute Moral Authority

Don't hold your breath until it actually happens, Murtha will no doubt attempt to hide behind a privilege of the elite, the protection granted Congressmen under the Speech and Debate clause. This law allows Congressmen to say just about anything about anybody without fear of legal jeopardy. you know, just the way an elite class should be treated.

"Murtha, a former Marine. accused Marines of "cold-blooded murder and war crimes'' during the Haditha incident. Frank Wuterich, a Marine sergeant involved in the incident, has sued Murtha for libel and invasion of privacy over his comments.

According to AP, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer wants Murtha to explain why he made this statement and any documents he has related to the incident.

From the AP: 'You're writing a very wide road for members of Congress to go to their home districts and say anything they choose about private persons and be able to do so without any liability. Are you sure you want to do that?'' Collyer said, adding later, ''How far can a congressman go and still be protected?""

Politico is not in favor of Collyer's ruling;

"Frankly, I don't understand this ruling at all, and I wouldn't be surprised if it is appealed by the Justice Dept. and/or House general counsel's office on behalf of Murtha. Murtha, who can say some inappropriate things once in a while, was clearly acting in his capacity as a lawmaker when he made the comments and is thus protected by the Speech or Debate Clause from any type of prosecution for official acts."

But, even if Murtha can not be prosecuted for his words, mustn't he be held to explain if they are true. The Marine involved here has had his reputation smeared, where else can he go to get his good name returned? And could that ever happen without a direct confrontation and refutation of Murtha? The object of the wrongful defamation suit, while we may want it to be a diminished and punished Murtha, is to set the record straight and return a good man's reputation. If the truth also hurts Murtha, well that is just too bad, he brought it upon himself. Only an unambiguous public decision showing Murtha to be have been wrong will achieve a reversal of the damage done in public to this Marine. Murtha should be forced to appear and either defend his remarks with facts and supporting evidence, or he must say that he is a liar. Only after he is placed under oath in a court of law, with cameras present I might add, so that all the world can see, can Murtha be excused from the ramifications of his remarks. Perhaps, as a member of the elite, he can not be held legally accountable for what he has so far said, lucky elitists, civility and equal protection under the law requires that he at least be held to tell the truth once, under oath and with the threat of perjury attached. Surely even the elite are not above telling the truth, once in awhile.

Yesterday, I was moved by the reaction of my coworkers, who all seemed riveted to news reports of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visit to New York, to wonder aloud if perhaps we might find some silver lining in the disgraceful invitation by Columbia University for the Iranian theocrat to speak in a "distinguished lecture series".

Unlike many liberals, who can't contemplate the possibility that they're wrong, I regularly like to test my thinking and the logic of my ideology by playing Devil's Advocate. So I asked, "Could Americans be getting a good look at the evil this man represents? Could this help resolve some quarters of the American continent to confront Iran more directly?"

History suggests not.

Seventy years before this week’s invitation to Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Columbia rolled out the red carpet for a senior official of Adolf Hitler’s regime, according to research by Prof. Stephen Norwood of the University of Oklahoma, who is completing a book on the academic community’s response to Hitler in the 1930s....

In 1936, the Columbia administration announced it would send a delegate to Nazi Germany to take part in the 550th anniversary celebration of the University of Heidelberg. This, despite the fact that Heidelberg already had been purged of Jewish faculty members, instituted a Nazi curriculum, and hosted a burning of books by Jewish authors. Prof. Arthur Remy, who served as Columbia’s delegate to the Heidelberg event, later remarked that the reception at which chief book-burner Josef Goebbels presided was “very enjoyable.”...

Eventually, in the late 1930s, Butler would change his position and speak out against the Nazis. Unfortunately, it was too late to undo the damage he already had done by helping to legitimize the Hitler regime....

According to Israel’s ambassador, inviting Ahmadinejad to speak is the equivalent of “inviting Hitler to [speak] in the 1930s,” because “appeasing fanatics and granting them legitimacy leads to genocide and war.” Will some future Columbia president one day look back at the invitation to Ahmadinejad and say the same thing?

Cox & Forkum

There could be stories like this on the news every night, but we never see them. Watch and be amazed by the courage of our troops - and even moreso, their dedication to the mission and each other.

* Where do you suppose Rep. Murtha was off to in such a hurry? Running from the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch, perhaps?

Big hat tip to the good people at HotAir!

Today was the last day in office for Alberto Gonzales. And, while we had our complaints with him over the handling of the illegals who broke into our country, we had no complaint with the firings which lead to his departure. Firing US Attorneys is a power vested in the executive branch and the President chose to exercise that power, no crime, no scandal, no reason for the President or the AG to explain why. It shouldn't have become the political quagmire the Democrats MoveOnocrats made it out to be.

I don't want to get into a protracted summary of Gonzales' career as AG, it had good points and bad, as all careers do. But, there is one aspect for which he deserves the unending praise of all the American people; on his watch we were not attacked again. It is no small thing that the terrorists have failed to get us again. And Alberto Gonzales was a big part of the reason why we have been so safe.

Were Mr. Gonzales to never do a good thing with the rest of his life he has done himself proud already. And for that contribution alone he deserves our thanks, and our respect.

Now we can only hope that the next guy does as well. And we pray that the obstructionists in Congress allow him to begin sooner rather than later, for we need to maintain the vigil, the enemy will not rest while we delay.

MoveOn.org has run an ad in the NY Times in which they ask "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?". Of course the good General can never betray them for they have never been on the same side as is the patriot now leading our troops in Iraq.

It makes far more sense for Americans to ask MoveOn.org why they betrayed us.

Forgive me for not having the exact quote; this morning on Fox News Rep. Duncan Hunter said something close to this:

'The Democrats have spent the last three years telling the President to listen to his Generals on the ground in Iraq, now that he is doing that they criticize him for listening to his Generals'

I understand that he also had a well phrased set of opening remarks before General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker began their report to Congress. I'll keep looking for transcripts of these two Hunter gems and will post same when found.

When I'm not pretending to be the reincarnation of a dead president, I'm known by an older (and far stranger) moniker that's a portmanteau of two names, together referencing my favorite cartoon character - not to mention the entity who first introduced me to conservatism.

Some people unfairly label the cartoonist Berkeley Breathed as "liberal" (I think it's his first name that cements the idea). But his work - if not exactly "fair" to some Republicans over the years - has certainly taken aim at the extremes and sacred cows of both parties and all ideologies. Though an ardent opponent of labels, he has said he's closest to a libertarian.

Today, Breathed's work is earning a stamp of disapproval many cartoonists take pride in - he's hit a target too close to the mark, and some of the newspapers that carry him have refused to publish it. Ironically, I find the content of the strip to be rather mild, but it's no surprise that it's generated furor since it relates to the media's favorite taboo-that-shall-not-be-attacked these days... ISLAM.

Since the interests of the First Amendment, my own politics, and the fate of the Republic are all in alignment, I'm proud to offer this taste of revolt against today's liberal intelligentsia. For the full strip, please take a trip over to Salon, where (give credit where credit is due) modern liberalism apparently still contains some measure of liberality.

(Incidentally, that's my alter-ego on the left.)

The FBI is seeking to interview the two men shown in the above picture. If you know where they can be found call: 202 622-0460.

FBI Press Release

The Seattle FBI and the Washington Joint Analytical Center (WAJAC) are requesting the public's assistance in identifying the two individuals pictured below. These men have been seen aboard Washington State Ferries on several occasions and have exhibited unusual behavior, which was reported by passengers. While this behavior may have been innocuous, the FBI and WAJAC would like to resolve these reports.

Taranto

Additionally: The Seatle newspapers are not cooperating with the FBI, for fear they may hurt somebody's feelings.

Just doing my part to help this spread. Funny that they say this is "going viral" because, while it is getting around the internet and blogosphere like a virus, there are far too many people living in this country who look upon the condition these words convey - patriotism - as an illness or affliction that needs to be cured. I just wish that there were more people immune to that kind of thinking.

Hat tip to Rick for finding this.

UPDATE: Uncle Jimbo over at BlackFive has the scoop on who the poet in this video is - SSGT Lawrence E. Dean II. And he also has this to say about SSGT Dean's motivation:

Here is the coolest thing, the piece is titled She Called, well She is his Grandma and the piece is his explanation to her of why he would go to war. WOW!

Another hat tip to Rick for finding this as well.

I was going to try to post something witty or profound about the Democrats killing the John Doe amendment to the final homeland security legislation but, as they very often do, those mighty penmen over at Cox & Forkum have captured all I could have said (and then some) in one brutally direct illustration. As they say, brevity is the soul of wit.

OK, I've been on vacation the past week and a half and am just now trying to do some catch-up. To that end I have compiled a list of some observations over that time:

Continue reading "A Pseudo Religion, Real Racism, and True Terror." »

This is for pure entertainment value, and it does contain a couple of words they can not say on AM radio, mostly funny the language won't put you off.

Iowahawk delivers guest commentary by UK terrorist doctor.

LGF

Over at the blog Gates Of Vienna there is a post answering critics who were disappointed with the blog for presenting a Danish video depicting the ritual burning of a likeness of Mohammad. Personally, I found the video refreshing, but then I have been secretly contemplating having a T-shirt made reading I draw Mohammad cartoons in my basement, even though I don't have a basement, can't draw, and don't look that good in T-shirts anymore. Silliness aside, I am not Muslim and do not feel bound by the tenets of religions other than my own (if I had one), so, when I see others demonstrating their freedom from religion I want to applaud. Especially if the religion to which they are not conforming is one which insists on the conformity of all people, believers, or not; I instinctively rebel. And I am glad others feel as I do.

Baron's post explains that many others feel the same, and he defends well his presentation of the video. He also believes the Danes are only the first voices of many that will be heard, but for now they are standing alone in a politically correct world, beckoning us to join them.

I keep returning to the Danes because they offer something to the rest of the West that nobody else can give: they are willing to stick it to the Man.

That’s why they inspire us. That’s why the Danes are leading the Counterjihad. That’s why the burning of Mohammed resonates so loudly throughout the infidel world.

"Just 14% of Americans have a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in Congress.

This 14% Congressional confidence rating is the all-time low for this measure, which Gallup initiated in 1973."

You might say that I made a leap of judgment by claiming that 86% of Americans believe Congress sucks, but I beg to differ. Only 14% have a "great deal or quite a lot of confidence", and any other rating for an institution with so much control over ours lives (in a time of war no less) is so sub-standard that it equates to the colloquial term; so Congress sucks! And while I am not afraid to point out that this Congress is run by Democrats, party affiliation alone is not the cause of our displeasure with these bums. Whether they have a D, or an R, or an I in front of their names they are not getting the job done. On the whole they seem to lack common sense. They are easily swayed by political correctness. And, mostly they worry too much about winning re-election and making side deals under the table. When they do attempt to pass a bill it gets loaded with pork, which they now call by a new name, earmarks, in the insulting belief that we are too stupid to see that we are being taken.

They regularly behave less like Statesmen and more like confidence men. They use the English language in such a way that native speakers need an interpreter to sort out what their Congressman has just said. And then you find that you don't like half of what they meant and don't trust them to keep their word on the other half. Need I go on?

Basically, there is little wonder that Americans are discouraged by this bunch of insider trading, lying, demagogue, propagandists. After all, we are paying for that government, and it isn't that one we are sold each election year. Or is it? I'll have to wait for the translation.

Btw, there is a portion of our money that we feel is being used well.

"By way of contrast, 69% of Americans have a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in the military, which tops the list."

Very funny stuff, if you are not an Islamofacist.

" National Lampoon's 72 Virgins
Two idiot college students unwittingly join an Al Qaeda cell in order to get the 72 virgins promised to terrorists when they die."

To see the video short and vote for the full-length movie, go here

LGF

I just finished watching the Robot Chicken Star Wars special on Comedy Central. I hope that's why I burst out laughing when I saw this. This one's stupid and real.

If you want to see what real civil war looks like, look at Gaza today. And if we leave Iraq early it will deteriorate to Gaza-like levels. And both political parties know this to be true, and that is why we are still there today.

With Hamas and Fatah once again demonstrating how barbaric they can be it seems a good time to bring the 2002 perspective of comedian Larry Miller to mind once again, for absolutely nothing has changed in the last five, or fifty years in that part of the world.

Miller reminds us that there are no "Palestinians", as the term is currently used, and suggests "adjacent jew-haters" as the more accurate term. He really gets going on page two.

"Okay, so the Adjacent Jew-Haters want their own country. Oops, just one more thing. No, they don't. They could've had their own country any time in the last thirty years, especially two years ago at Camp David. But if you have your own country, you have to have traffic lights and garbage trucks and Chambers of Commerce, and, worse, you actually have to figure out some way to make a living. That's no fun. No, they want what all the other Jew-Haters in the region want: Israel. They also want a big pile of dead Jews, of course--that's where the real fun is--but mostly they want Israel. Why? For one thing, trying to destroy Israel--or "The Zionist Entity" as their textbooks call it--for the last fifty years has allowed the rulers of Arab countries to divert the attention of their own people away from the fact that they're the blue-ribbon most illiterate, poorest, and tribally backward on God's Earth, and if you've ever been around God's Earth, you know that's really saying something. It makes me roll my eyes every time one of our pundits waxes poetic about the great history and culture of the Muslim Mideast. Unless I'm missing something, the Arabs haven't given anything to the world since Algebra, and, by the way, thanks a hell of a lot for that one.

shyboy, even if he did confuse Larry Miller for Dennis Miller

I'm really sick of these Monday-morning generals coming out against the war. Most of them have no more right to open their fat mouths than any other citizen, and their biases - especially the one against anything that will get their brothers-in-arms killed - are always suspect. But among all the efforts to sway public opinion, one guy may have the best shot at making a difference in American policy.

I must admit, I never thought I'd see see him on Tim Russert's show.

Ever wonder what affect the Main Stream Media has had on the historical aspects of the war in Iraq based on the way they present the news? While facts are facts, the way in which those facts are presented is vital. Context is key, and the MSM cannot but help inject their anti-war, anti-Bush bias into their coverage. After having watched this clip I couldn't help but wonder how different the support for this war would be were the MSM the least bit supportive in their coverage.

The following is a partial list of unlikely events whose chances of proving true are greater than are the odds that the current immigration bill will solve the open border situation.

Videotape proves existence of Loch Ness Monster

Sandy Berger tells whole story, wasn't covering up Clinton's mistakes.

Radical Islam is a religion of peace.

Laywer TB patient had greater good in mind.

Valerie Plame tells the truth.

Creationists prove Earth is 6000 years old.

Not making the list is the seemingly impossible news that the Beatles Sgt. Pepper album is forty years old. Where have all those years gone? (A live cover for your listening/viewing enjoyment here)

Lesbian loudmouth Rosie O'Donnell is the last person I wish to be talking about, and if you are also bored by her act, please accept my apologies for inflicting her upon your thoughts. Today it was announced that she would not be completing the final three weeks of her time on the View television show, she punked out after the sole conservative on the show held her accountable for her own words. Imagine that, an adult has to defend their own words, what have we come to (insert sarcasm here)?

On her blog Rosie's assertion that we have killed 655,000 innocent Iraqis and therefore we are the terrorists is being defended. Some other goof is making the defense, and it is laughable.

According to the contributor, Rosie wasn't calling our soldiers terrorists, just America. She says the troops are dupes who are only following orders; the real terrorists are those back here who are in command. Which we all understand to translate into, "it's Bush's fault".

Of course that is ridiculous. Even if there were orders from on high for our soldiers to kill civilians, which is so much crap in itself, any soldier who obeyed such an order would be equally guilty. Anyone who goes to the movies knows that. Didn't she see A Few Good Men? Don't these Hollywood types see each other's works? (Sure we could cite statute and code of conduct and real life situations to make the point, but that would be too real for the truthers, and since I could not recall a standup comic explaining the point, I went to next best source for the pseudo-intelligent, the movies).

In that movie two enlisted men are ordered to give a third soldier a "Code Red", which is an illegal beating used as inducement to conform. LCpl Dawson and PFC Downey follow the orders too well resulting in the death of PFC William T. Santiago. At the murder trial of Dawson and Downey their commanding officer breaks down on the stand and admits that he ordered the "Code Red". But, Col. Jessup's confession does not exonerate his soldiers, for by the military rules of conduct they were expected to disobey the illegal order. So, even when, in that situation, the boss was shown to have ordered the wrong thing, the perpetrators did not get a pass.

So, even if the BusHitler and Darth Cheney had ordered the execution of civilians, (yeah right, like that would happen), any soldier who followed that order would also by guilty. Meaning, that in spite of the denial on her blog, and Rosie's own suggestion, post-comment, on the View that she wasn't calling our troops terrorists; she was calling them terrorists. And she was wrong. And now she is being the coward, turning tail, cutting and running, and living in a state of denial.

In so many ways Rosie has become the perfect metaphor for the left in America; loud and wrong, angry and unpatriotic, dumb and dumber by the minute. Also, I believe Rosie and left know they are wrong, but are too vain and too invested in their hate America attitude to admit their errors. If they come clean they will lose the support of their fellow travelers, they would lose their support system of like-minded loons, and they are too fragile to face the ostracism that would follow. Cowards all.

Additional- Math problem:
If 655,000 Iraqis die in four years, how many died on average each day?
365 days in a year times four equals 1460. Subtract one day for the leap year which happens once every four years, and we have 1459 days. Divide 655,00 by 1459 and we get 448.94. So, by that metric, about 449 Iraqis have died each day since May 1, 2003? As bad as it has been over there, I do not remember one single day when that many people have died. And our anti-American press agents would have surely told us if 449 people were killed in a twenty four hour period. I say that 655,000 dead, is a myth.

First the Chinese swipe the Disney characters and now the madmen who pretend to follow Mohammad do the same using Mickey as tutor to future homocide bombers. Naturally the American left is not concerned. Nor is Porky Pig, but then I repeat myself.

When the 2008 Presidential election is finally over those colorful maps showing states which voted Republican in red and states which voted Democrat in blue needs an adjustment. Next time red for Republicans, and yellow for Democrats.

Since Ayman al-Zawahiri decided it was a smart tactic to taunt the USA over the Democrats' idiotic surrender bill, Don Surber thought it was only fair to give al Qaeda a taste of their own medicine:

What would you call a campaign that after 4 years had achieved only 1% of its goal — despite throwing everything it has into that effort?

Incompetent? A failure? Ridiculous.

I’d call it al-Qaeda.

ABC News has a new tape from Ayman al-Zawahiri: “Al Qaeda No. 2 Wants 200,000-300,000 U.S. Dead in Iraq”

Really? 300,000 U.S. dead.

After 4 years, the casualty list shows 3,300 American dead.

At this rate, al-Qaeda will meet its goal of 200,000 in about 2353. I’ll be 400 years old then.

Someone needs to do some serious subtraction; several hundred of the Coalition forces in Iraq have died of accidents, illnesses, friendly fire, and attacks by non-Al Qaedans.

And how many Al Qaedans have the US and its coalitian partners killed in the same time?

They can try recruiting replacements, true; but the US reenlistment/retention rate for Iraq Liberation veterans remains very high, as do enlistment rates overall.

Methinks that at the present rate and ratio, Al Qaeda will run out of jihadis long before the Coalition runs out of troops.

It appears the surge is working.

Terrorists bemoan recent setbacks in 'War on Freedom'
Call on bin Laden to cut his losses
May 1, 2007
Sources: Rooters News Agency and Non-associated Press

Following the deaths of both Abu Musab Al-zaqawi and Abu Ayyub al-Masri, the decimation of the ranks of Al Qaeda in Iraq, and the growing unpopularity of foreign insurgents among Iraqis, some senior terrorists affiliated with Al Qaeda have called upon Usama Bin Laden to withdraw all of his troops from Iraq by October.

The war in Iraq "is lost" and Al Qaeda attacks are failing to bring an Islamic state to the country, spokesman of the Salafist Group for Preching [sic] and Combat, Harry Sheikh Reidari, said Thursday. "I believe ... that this war is lost, and continuing attacks are not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme blows to our network in Iraq recently," Reidari told journalists. "Iraq has diverted resources from our greater 'War on Freedom'. It would be best if we withdrew, leaving only a small force to train Iraqi jihadists, and redeployed our other forces to Afghanistan to continue with a Holy War that everyone can support."

One of the mistakes the Bush administration made early on was to completely avoid releasing any information about enemy fighters killed in action. Their intent was noble, an effort to head off the mistake in the Vietnam era of providing incorrect and inflated numbers in an effort to "prove" success over the enemy, i.e. the "body bag" scandals. But by providing absolutely no information at all during the War on Terror, the administration has promoted the unintended impression that our troops are the only ones dying, which led inevitably to the infamous "grim milestone" reports from the DLM every time our casualty count trips another zero in the total.

So I'm heartened to see a headline in Pajamas Media (heh, where else?) that shows a nice set of numbers about the Afghanistan campaign without ever mentioning how many American deaths it took to produce them: "40,000 Afghan Babies Live. 136 Taliban Die."

We are winning, Harry Reid.

It's hard to suggest that Mark Steyn has outdone himself again when you've read his stuff so much, and seemingly said such a thing a hundred times. Yet here we are again.

This week, both the House and the Senate voted for defeat in Iraq. That's to say, Congress got tired of waiting for deadbeat insurgents to get their act together and inflict devastating military humiliation on U.S. forces. So America's legislators have voted to mandate the certainty of defeat. They want the withdrawal of American forces to begin this October, which is a faintly surreal concept: Watching CNN International around the world, many viewers unversed in America's constitutional arrangements will have been puzzled by the spectacle of a nation giving six months' notice of surrender. But the cannier types in the presidential palaces will have drawn their own conclusions.

If it's not one thing these days, it's another.

These people getting us all into one heapful of trouble.

Click picture to read the story.

Howard says vote helps the enemy. President to veto bill. Democrats vow to stay with surrender and defeat tactics until their poll numbers change for the worse. American citizens continue to want security and request more Jeff Foxworthy appearances to remind them of what is important. And, sure we are tired of hearing about our men dying in the desert, but we understand that no good will come from leaving the job half finished either. Fight them there, or fight them here, as long as the enemy wants to harm us we have that choice to make. Fighting them there is the right decision.

I've generally avoided using this term with the disdain that some have adopted over the years of our struggle against militant Islamists. Once, I quoted someone else using it. Once, I used it inside scare quotes, while querying those who use it more liberally. And once, I used it as the sarcastic do (but only in the RSS excerpt, which most people won't see), out of a fit of pique regarding one of the rituals of the Shiite sect that disgusts me.

But now I use it bluntly. In one of the articles I link to above, I mentioned (as I must have innocently believed at the time) that Islam as taught in America was relatively liberal, and not at all the same strand as that which we are fighting. So one has to wonder if the enemy has infiltrated Pittsburgh, or if Pittsburgh is no longer a part of America.

Prove me wrong. Dispute me, please. Moderate American muslims, convince the DemocratLiberalMedia Party to help you shout down this animal, or you're going to lose what support you have left among those people who have tried to remain dispassionate about the necessary reform you are NOT conducting within your communities. This isn't about prejudice, this is about survival, and if you're not going to help us protect you by clearly differentiating yourself from the enemy, we're going to be forced to conclude that you too are the enemy.

There are few things on this earth more despicable than a scum-sucking Congressman. They are beginning to rival the terrorists.

Graphic Content Warning! (the title is NOT a metaphor)

A wonderful video supplied by the folks at Military.com shows a new technique when creating a terrorist propaganda video:

1. Film planning session
2. Film trip to attack
3. Get ambushed by your target
4. Run away!
5. Die
6. Quit directing and become the star!
   (using your own camera, picked off your rotting corpse)

Or maybe not so much regret or sadness after all.

Ace of Spades (w/comments)

We can't all be heroes because somebody has to sit on the curb and clap as they go by. - Will Rogers

Hat tip to JackStraw via Ace

If you thought there was a chance that Fred Thompson might not eventually enter the presidential race, consider this piece of evidence hanging out at RedState, posted by da Man himself.

Some in the West seem part of Iran's propaganda war; claiming that the release of the hostages was a victory that proves the Iranian dictatorship can be reasoned with. To misrepresent unpunished piracy as a victory is as Orwellian as the congressional mandate banning use of the term "the global war on terror." What are we — Reuters?

And, I might add, he's speaking the language of the blogosphere with remarkable adeptness. Between his choice of venue and his snarky use of anti-MSM language, here's someone who (at the very least) is being given great advice about how to formulate a script in the new media. After eight years of domestic defensiveness and mangled prose, choosing another hard-nosed, politically-adept, conservative Hollywood actor (like Dutch, God rest his soul) might just be what the Republican party needs most in 2008.

Valerie Plame finally spoke in public, and while under oath she contradicts the CIA's version of how Plame's husband became involved in WMD discussion.

"Plame said she did not select her husband for a CIA fact-finding trip to Niger. Wilson later wrote in a newspaper column that his trip debunked the administration's prewar intelligence that Iraq was seeking to buy uranium from Africa.

"I did not recommend him. I did not suggest him. There was no nepotism involved. I did not have the authority," she said.

That conflicts with senior officials at the CIA and State Department, who testified during Libby's trial and told Congress that Plame recommended Wilson for the trip."

One has to wonder what authority is required to make a suggestion. Sounds like doublespeak to me. A family trait perhaps, as it is now known that while Mr. Wilson's op-ed column had purported that his finding in Niger had debunked the pre-war intelligence it had actually contradicted his oral reporting’s to the CIA which had reinforced the prevailing belief that Iraq had been seeking uranium. Wilson's assertion that Vice President Cheney had sent him to Niger has also been shown to be in error. One has to wonder if the truth is ever in these two, Wilson and Plame.

PLAME COVER BLOWN YEARS BEFORE

Wilson has also made a big deal out of his assertion that his wife's cover was blown as a way to punish him, and that such exposure of her CIA employment put her at risk. But, those too are lies, and ones which she must have known as lies. For her cover had been blown twice before Novak reported it, once during the Clinton administration. You can't blame Bush for that one, (though we certainly expect the nut job Bush haters to try.). This revelation, that she was a known spy, may explain one part of this story which always bothered me. Why send the diplomat husband to spy and yet leave the spy wife (and WMD expert) at home when she was decidedly more qualified for the mission? The obvious answer now is that she could no long spy, her cover was already blown!

And, there is no evidence to support his paranoid accusation that the White house was out to get him as retribution. That is just partisan paranoia on his part.

Her exposure as a spy within the intelligence community created far greater danger, to her and the nation, than did her exposure to the public. Keeping her spy status secret from the public is only valuable when it helps to keep it secret from the intelligence community. A spy is in danger from the other spies, not from the public. The other spies already knew about her.

INDICT PLAME ON PERJURY

I don't buy her lame explanation on how her husband was chosen for the mission. Her own bosses say that she was the one who got his name in the mix. So, she just perjured herself. Time for a special prosecutor? No, just have AG Gonzales fire back with an indictment charging her with lying to Congress. I know it is not a crime when a Congressman lies, but surely it is a chargeable offense when a sworn witness lies to Congress.
Her appearance and testimony at this late date is no mistake either. This was a staged event, her testimony a manufactured and no doubt practiced parcel of deceit. Fitzgerald would have her in irons if she was a Republican. Ask Libby. He is convicted and she is walking around free; as long as that is the case don't talk to me about equal justice.

Shown above is the response I received in July '06 from one of our best and brightest, Doc Lee, an American soldier. Somehow I failed to mention this Psychological Operations campaign when it came to my attention, way back in June 2006. And, then I failed to mention this letter he sent, my bad. But I did participate by sending a few refrigerator magnets. I included one which I had featured here previously. And it took some deliberation before I decided that it was okay to send a religious themed magnet to a Muslim country. But Doc Lee did not see it as an negative, as witnessed by his mention of it in the letter above, and as evidenced by the picture from his website in which it is shown prominently, View image

Doc thought it to be appropriate, so I am glad that I sent it. I hope that it did some good, as he suggested it might in his letter.

What Doc and his men were doing over there is antithetical to the image the Democrats are so bent on promoting of our military. Dick Durbin portrays them as torturers. John Kerry says they are terrorizing women and children in the dark of night. And it seems that all but a handful of Democrats wish to convince us that they are losing, and that their efforts are misguided. When in fact they are over there courageously promoting human dignity and working hard to reinforce the image of America as a friend to all those who wish to live in peace. While doing all they are allowed to do to eliminate the threats presented by the bad ones.

I, for one, am glad to know that men such as Doc are on my side. And, I hope he, and all of our fighting men know that most Americans are on their side.

According to The New York Times, Saddam Hussein seems to have been a casualty of Holy War.

As of late Friday, some Iraqi officials remained engaged in a heated debate about how swiftly to carry out Mr. Hussein’s death sentence.

An Iraqi official close to the negotiations expressed deep disappointment that, after years of forensic investigation, detailed litigation and careful deliberation, the process could be compromised in the final hours by politically driven haste.

“According to the law, no execution can be carried out during the holidays” said another official, “After all the hard work we have done, why would we break the law and ruin what we have built?”

The Muslim holiday of Id al-Adha begins Saturday for Sunnis and Sunday for Shiites, who now control the government.

Iraqi law seemed to indicate that executions were forbidden on the holiday.

But Judge Haddad was dismissive of those concerns, injecting some of the sectarian split that is pervading the country. “The official Id in Iraq is Sunday,” he said.

As for Mr. Hussein’s sect, he said, “Saddam is not Sunni. And he is not Shiite. He is not Muslim.”

Perhaps the War on Terror is a religious fight after all - but not the one most people think.