Custom Search

Sunday, September 30, 2007

Middle East News-Hell Freezes Over

Kind of a mixed bag of treats here.

First we will start with the titled piece.

Hell must have frozen over because the AP is bringing us good news from Iraq. (Thats right, Associated Press and good news from Iraq, in the same sentence I said it!!!!)

BAGHDAD - U.S. and Iraqi forces killed more than 60 insurgent and militia fighters in intense battles over the weekend, with most of the casualties believed to have been al-Qaida fighters, officials said Sunday.

The U.S. Embassy, meanwhile, joined a broad swath of Iraqi politicians — both Shiite and Sunni — in criticizing a nonbinding U.S. Senate resolution seen here as a recipe for splitting the country along sectarian and ethnic lines.

U.S. aircraft killed more than 20 al-Qaida in Iraq fighters who opened fire on an American air patrol northwest of Baghdad, the U.S. command said.

The firefight between U.S. aircraft and the insurgent fighters occurred Saturday about 17 miles northwest of the capital, the military said.

The aircraft observed about 25 al-Qaida insurgents carrying AK-47 assault rifles — one brandishing a rocket-propelled grenade — walking into a palm grove, the military said.

"Shortly after spotting the men, the aircraft were fired upon by the insurgent fighters," it said.

The military did not say what kind of aircraft were involved but the fact that the fighters opened fire suggests they were low-flying Apache helicopters. The command said more than 20 of the group were killed and four vehicles were destroyed. No Iraqi civilians or U.S. soldiers were hurt.

"Coalition forces have dealt significant blows to Al-Qaida Iraq in recent months, including the recent killing of the Tunisian head of the foreign fighter network in Iraq and the blows struck in the past 24 hours," military spokesman Col. Steven Boylan told The Associated Press.

Iraq's Defense Ministry said in an e-mail Sunday afternoon that Iraqi soldiers had killed 44 "terrorists" over the past 24 hours. The operations were centered in Salahuddin and Diyala provinces and around the city of Kirkuk, where the ministry said its soldiers had killed 40 and arrested eight. It said 52 fighters were arrested altogether.

The ministry did not further identify those killed, but use of the word "terrorists" normally indicates al-Qaida.

In a separate operation, U.S. forces killed two insurgents and detained 21 others during weekend operations "to disrupt al-Qaida in Iraq networks in the Tigris River Valley."

Intelligence led to a raid early Sunday that netted what the U.S. military called 15 rogue members of the Mahdi Army militia at an undisclosed Baghdad location.

The mainstream of the militia, the armed wing of anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's organization, has been ordered by the religious leader to stop attacks on U.S. and Iraqi forces.

But many one-time members of the group have split off and are acting independently of al-Sadr's control. Some have gone to Iran for training and are receiving weapons and financing from the Islamic regime in Tehran.

The Senate resolution, adopted last week, proposed reshaping Iraq according to three sectarian or ethnic territories. It calls for a limited central government with the bulk of power going to the country's Shiite, Sunni or Kurdish regions, envisioning a power-sharing agreement similar to the one that ended the 1990s war in Bosnia. Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden, a Democrat presidential candidate, was a prime sponsor.

In a highly unusual statement, the U.S. Embassy said resolution would seriously hamper Iraq's future stability.

"Our goal in Iraq remains the same: a united, democratic, federal Iraq that can govern, defend, and sustain itself," the unsigned statement said.

"Iraq's leaders must and will take the lead in determining how to achieve these national aspirations. ... attempts to partition or divide Iraq by intimidation, force or other means into three separate states would produce extraordinary suffering and bloodshed," it said.

The statement came just hours after representatives of Iraq's major political parties denounced the Senate proposal.

The Iraqi's had ruled out that idea previously so this is no big surprise.


John Bolton, the former US ambassador to the United Nations, was invited to a meeting organised by the Global Strategy Forum, where he said:

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, was "pushing out" and "is not receiving adequate push-back" from the west.

"I don't think the use of military force is an attractive option, but I would tell you I don't know what the alternative is.

"Because life is about choices, I think we have to consider the use of military force. I think we have to look at a limited strike against their nuclear facilities."

He added that any strike should be followed by an attempt to remove the "source of the problem", Mr Ahmadinejad.

"If we were to strike Iran it should be accompanied by an effort at regime change ... The US once had the capability to engineer the clandestine overthrow of governments. I wish we could get it back."

The fact that intelligence about Iran's nuclear activity was partial should not be used as an excuse not to act, Mr Bolton insisted.

"Intelligence can be wrong in more than one direction." He asked how the British government would respond if terrorists exploded a nuclear device at home. "'It's only Manchester?' ... Responding after they're used is unacceptable."

Mr Bolton, now a fellow at the conservative thinktank the American Enterprise Institute and the author of a forthcoming book called Surrender is Not an Option, was applauded by delegates when he described the UN as "fundamentally irrelevant".

More Iran News:

The Telegraph reports that the American air force is working with military leaders from the Gulf to train and prepare Arab air forces for a possible war with Iran, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal.

An air warfare conference in Washington last week was told how American air chiefs have helped to co-ordinate intelligence-sharing with Gulf Arab nations and organise combined exercises designed to make it easier to fight together.

Gen Michael Mosley, the US Air Force chief of staff, used the conference to seek closer links with allies whose support America might need if President George W Bush chooses to bomb Iran.

Pentagon air chiefs have helped set up an air warfare centre in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) where Gulf nations are training their fighter pilots and America has big bases. It is modelled on the US Air Force warfare centre at Nellis air force base in Nevada.

Jordan and the UAE have both taken part in combined exercises designed to make sure their air forces can fly, and fight, together and with American jets.

The conference was long-planned to discuss developments in air warfare technology, but the question of possible hostilities involving Iran was discussed.

Last but not least, for your extreme amusement, we have a GAY Ahmadinejad, compliments of Stop the ACLU.

Western Union


Update on Foiled Terror Attack in Germany

The update then a repost of the original story for those that hadn't heard of it.

One of the suspects from the foiled terror attack in Germany is on the run in the UK.

A KEY suspect in the alleged plot to mount an attack in Germany on the scale of 9/11 is on the run in Britain, German security officials disclosed yesterday.

Scotland Yard counterterrorism detectives are hunting the man, who escaped from Germany after a plot to explode bombs at Frankfurt airport and a US airbase. The collective power of the bombs would have exceeded those in Madrid and London in 2004 and 2005.

The plot was foiled on September 4 when three men were arrested at a rented holiday apartment near the central German town of Kassel. Police recovered chemicals and bomb-making equipment which investigators believe would have led to the biggest loss of life since the 9/11 attacks in America six years ago.

About 10 other members of the gang were said by German prosecutors to have escaped and one is now in Britain. The arrested three - two of whom were German nationals who had converted to Islam - were alleged by prosecutors to be members of an Al-Qaeda splinter group called the Islamic Jihad Union.

Original post on September 5, 2007:

(Wolfgang Rattay/Reuters--German special forces police officers escorting a suspect from the German Federal Court of Justice in Karlsruhe today. )

First the story, then the trend, then some analysis.

The Story:

Three men in German, Islamic militants, have been arrested as suspects in a large scaled plot to attack an air base at Ramstein and the Frankfurt international airport, all frequented by Americans.

According to the New York Times:

They were planning massive attacks,” the German federal prosecutor, Monika Harms, said at a news conference, outlining a vast six-month investigation. She said that the suspects had amassed huge amounts of hydrogen peroxide, the main chemical used to manufacture the explosives used in the suicide bombings in London in July 2005.

Ms. Harms said the two German suspects were converts to Islam who had trained in terrorist camps in Pakistan. They had amassed 1,500 pounds of hydrogen peroxide to make explosives, which they had hidden and were preparing to move when they were arrested on Tuesday afternoon. Officials said they also had military grade detonators.

“This would have enabled them to make bombs with more explosive power than the ones used in the London and Madrid bombings,” Jörg Ziercke, head of the German Federal Crime Office, said. Mr. Ziercke said the suspects belonged to a radical Islamic group with “close links” to Al Qaeda.

German officials were visibly relieved by the arrests, which they said were a six-month investigation involving 300 people from the police and prosecutor’s office. On Wednesday, police raided 41 houses and apartments across Germany, seizing computers and other evidence.

The three men were arrested in Medebach-Oberschledorn in the German state of North Rhine-Westphalia on Tuesday afternoon. Around 20 police were involved in the arrests, and there are reports that shots were fired. According to the Associated Press, the three men were staying in a vacation apartment. Local newspaper Hessische-Niedersächsische Allgemeine reported that police from Germany's elite GSG-9 unit had stormed the flat. Raids also later took place in other federal states, according to media reports.

According to information obtained by SPIEGEL ONLINE, the three men were Daniel S. from the state of Saarland and Fritz G. from Neu-Ulm in Bavaria, both of whom are German converts to Islam, as well as Adem Y., who is believed to be from Turkey. The three, who had apparently founded a terrorist cell, have been under intensive investigation for several months. All three men were considered radical Islamists and had contact with Islamist groups in Germany and Pakistan.

The Trend:

Yesterday we posted about the Danish Police arresting eight men with al-Qaeda links in connection with another terror plot.

Eleven raids carried out in the greater Copenhagen area, leading to eight arrests is being credited with preventing a terrorist bombing linked to al-Qaeda.

The Director General of the PET (Police Intelligence Service), the Danish Police, these men arrested are quoted as being "militant Islamists with direct connections to international groups such as al-Qaida." The suspects are said to be between 19-29 yrs of age.

Buildings in the city's southern suburb of Ishoej and its Noerrebro district - both with large immigrant populations - were among those cordoned off by police.

The suspects had been under surveillance for some time and Danish investigators had liaised with "several foreign co-operation partners" before making the arrests, police said.

Not long ago, you might remember police arrested two men in Goosecreek, SC., for being in possession of explosive devices. Goose Creek, S.C., according to U.S. Today is the home of the Naval Weapons Station which houses a military brig where enemy combatants have been held.

Hat Tip to Michelle Malkin, we see that those two men have been indicted on charges of carrying explosives across state lines and one was indicted on terror charges.

Just yesterday, I told you about federal grand jury investigating the Goose Creek case asking for DNA and hair samples from one of the suspects. Now, the mystery unclouds further. Via AP breaking news: (Hat tip-reader William A.)

Two University of South Florida men indicted on charges of carrying explosives across state lines; one indicted on terror charges.

June 29th, reports from London, yet another incident involving two cars with explosive materials.

The London bomb plot allegedly planned by a cell of doctors failed early last Friday morning because a medical syringe used as part of the firing mechanism caused a malfunction, ABC News has learned.

According to nonclassified documents reviewed by ABC News, and confirmed by multiple sources, both mobile telephones initiated firing mechanisms rigged inside a Mercedes E 300 parked several yards from the front door of Tiger Tiger nightclub failed despite multiple calls to the cell phones designed to remotely trigger the devices.

Had the fuel-air bombs successfully ignited into a superhot fireball filled with roofing nails, casualties were almost a certainty among the 500 or so patrons who partied late at the 1,700-person occupancy nightclub that perhaps best symbolizes London's vital nightlife scene.

We updated that story here and here also.

June 2007, a plot regarding the JFK Airport:

May,in Wapo, a terror plot foiled to kill our soldiers at Ft. Dix:

CHERRY HILL, N.J., May 8 -- A group of would-be terrorists, allegedly undone after attempting to have jihad training videos copied onto a DVD, has been charged with conspiring to attack Fort Dix and kill soldiers there with assault rifles and grenades, authorities said Tuesday.

Five men -- all foreign-born and described as "radical Islamists" by federal authorities -- allegedly trained at a shooting range in Pennsylvania's Pocono Mountains to kill "as many soldiers as possible" at the historic Army base 25 miles east of Philadelphia. A sixth man was charged with helping them obtain illegal weapons.

Lets go back to August of 2006 when 21 people in connection with a terrorist plot to blow up aircraft flying from the United Kingdom to the United States.

The plot was "intended to be mass murder on an unimaginable scale," Metropolitan Police Deputy Commissioner Paul Stephenson said. The UK's threat warning level has been raised to "critical" -- meaning "an attack is expected imminently."

The trend? All failed terror plots by Islamic extremists.


9/11 was a well thought out attack that took years to plan and coordinate but the foiled plots of late show us that their organizational skills aren't what they used to be.

In December of 2006 Newsweek reported that bin Laden’s representatives gave bad news to the Taliban: Qaeda fighters are shifting to a new front: IRAQ.

Dec. 15 issue - During the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, three senior Qaeda representatives allegedly held a secret meeting in Afghanistan with two top Taliban commanders.

The confab took place in mid-November in the remote, Taliban-controlled mountains of Khowst province near the Pakistan border, a region where Al Qaeda has found it easy to operate—frequently even using satellite phones despite U.S. surveillance.

At that meeting, according to Taliban sources, Osama bin Laden’s men officially broke some bad news to emissaries from Mullah Mohammed Omar, the elusive leader of Afghanistan’s ousted fundamentalist regime. Their message: Al Qaeda would be diverting a large number of fighters from the anti-U.S. insurgency in Afghanistan to Iraq. Al Qaeda also planned to reduce by half its $3 million monthly contribution to Afghan jihadi outfits.

All this was on the orders of bin Laden himself, the sources said. Why? Because the terror chieftain and his top lieutenants see a great opportunity for killing Americans and their allies in Iraq and neighboring countries such as Turkey, according to Taliban sources who complain that their own movement will suffer.

We have seen, countless times, in the news that al-Qaeda had decided to make Iraq their "central battlefield" and have sent some of the best trained and organized fighters to Iraq.

As the news has been reporting, quite frequently these days, we are killing and capturing al-Qaeda in Iraq, they are not able to train their fighters as they once were able because of our military in Afghanistan and our attacks upon their training camps and they have resorted to internet guides to train wannabe terrorist online, bomb making guides online, guides on how to kidnap Americans, guides to create your own homegrown al-Qaeda cells and how to attack military installations.

They have been forced to start training people online, which could be one explanation of why these people are so inept nowadays, why their plots are being foiled and why many of their groups are being captured in Denmark, Germany, London and in the U.S..

Does this mean we cannot be attacked successfully? No, unfortunately it would only take one plot to slip through the cracks to cause us massive damage, which is why our intelligence agencies need whatever tools necessary to prevent a plot from seeing success, here at home or abroad.

People can piss and moan all they want about FISA and NSA, but the fact is, they are trying to kill us, as all these foiled plots prove without a doubt and it is up to our government, whoever is president, to protect us and hinder al-Qaeda's, or anybody that shares al-Qaeda's ideology, abilities to attack us.

To ignore the trend of unsuccessful plots or to wave them away because they were unsuccessful, without bothering to acknowledge the work and intelligence that went into making them unsuccessful, is to deny the reality of the world we live in today.

So, when you watch the news and see a plot that has been foiled, it is easy to look at it as "just one plot", but to ignore the big picture of the constant attempts that are being foiled, is idiocy, you have to understand that they will not stop trying and we must, as a country, as a nation and as an international community worldwide, protect ourselves and keep on the offensive.

Reacting after an attack in a defensive action and one that comes too late, after hundreds or thousands of people have died and that is unacceptable.

Question to leave here with: Would you rather we continue to foil these plots before an attack, or would you rather let countless amounts of people die, then react?

I know what my answer is.

[Update]Michael van der Galiën has his first piece up at Pajamas Media and in it is this little tidbit:

When the German police understood – through wiretapping and email surveillance – that the three had no intention to call off the plans and had started building chemical bombs, they acted. Police units forced their way into the vacation home where the three were located and arrested them. One was able to flee, but not for long: A police officer used his gun to detain him. When the police looked at the material found at the sight, they saw that Fritz, Daniel and Adem had collected 730 kilograms of explosive materials. The same type of chemical bombs were used in the London bombings, but they were a lot smaller: only some 3 to 5 kilograms.

Something to think about the next time someone tries to tell you that the ability to wiretap and email surveillance does nothing to protect us.

Convicted Killers Caught After Escaping From Utah Jail


A Wyoming sheriff's detective says Danny Martin Gallegos and Juan Carlos Diaz-Arevalo had stolen a vehicle and guns at knifepoint in Manila, Utah last night near the jail and fled on Interstate 80.

When authorities stopped them, the convicts climbed out of the SUV each holding a gun. Gallegos was shot in the stomach and taken to a Wyoming hospital in critical condition. Diaz-Arevalo ran but was immediately caught by authorities and booked into a county jail.

This has resulted in a deputy, who was in charge at the time of the escape, resigning.

Gallegos and Diaz-Arevalo slipped out of an outdoor courtyard through a door with a cluster of county inmates on their way to an adjoining garden. From there, they scaled a 12-foot-high fence topped with razor wire and made it to a roof, where they jumped to freedom.

Ellsworth said problems that contributed to the escape have been corrected.

"I don't want to describe them publicly for security reasons," he said in a statement.

Now lets hope they really did correct those problems that led to the convicts ability to escape.

Netflix, Inc.


Can we question their patriotism yet?

Hat tips to Michelle Malkin and Take Our Country Back for this, right of the bat, before I dive in. Outstanding work, Michelle and Snooper.


To set aside the temper and let the words come out rationally...

The left goes into a frenzy when we question their sense of patriotism. They snarl, they growl, they demand that the right not DO that, proudly proclaiming themselves to be every bit as patriotic as the next person.

Where is the proof? We have taking out a full page ad to call our commanding general in Iraq a liar. We have Cindy Sheehan and her disgraceful disrespectful behavior that dishonors the memory of her son. We have the defacing of the Wall...

And now we have Oakland International Airport not allowing Marines and Soldiers into the main terminal.

From The National Review Online:

Saturday, September 29, 2007

Spitting on the Marines [Michael Ledeen]

Here is an e-mail from a Marine chaplain recently returned from Iraq. The story speaks for itself—lousy treatment of our troops at our own airports. He writes about Oakland, and while checking around I find that this is a common experience. I hope that one of our leaders will find a way to put an end to such behavior.

Marines and Soldiers Returning from Iraq not allowed into Oakland terminal.

On September 27th 204 Marines and soldiers who were returning from Iraq were not allowed into the passenger terminal at Oakland International Airport. Instead they had to deplane about 400 yards away from the terminal where the extra baggage trailers were located...

And they wonder WHY we become furious with them? They wonder WHY we look at THEM with the same contempt in which they look at US? They wonder WHY WE stand fast WITH our troops while they pay lip service to "protecting the troops" by demanding that they be withdrawn from the job that they have signed on to DO?

From DailyKos, where they've never met a supporter of the troops or our war effort that they haven't tried to discredit:

Michael Ledeen has never seen a "spitting on the troops" story he didn't like. In this post, entitled "Spitting on the Marines," [woo hoo!] he tells us about an email he received:

Guess what? You Kossacks are going to LOVE this.


I'm going to whisper it, ok?

Michelle Malkin obtained the Oakland Airport response and received verification that the story is true.

I have also obtained the Port of Oakland’s response about the incident to Captain David Epstein of the Reserve Officers Association. The Port official blames a lack of “clear communication” from the charter airline hired by the military. In other words: it’s the troops’ fault:

Thank you so much for sharing with me the information you had regarding the incident at the airport. As you know sometimes the way things appear initially regarding an incident turn out to be different after looking into the details. We checked into this once you had called me and raised your public relations concern, so again thank you. Here is the background information I have about the incident as well as the procedures and policies that affected decision-making that day.

In the case of North American Airlines Flight #1777, a military charter flight that arrived at OAK on Thursday, September 27, aircraft parking and passenger service arrangements were coordinated and approved in advance between the ground handling company and Airside Operations. The airport received information that the passengers were not TSA-screened at their originating airport and that weapons were on-board the aircraft. Together with our security partners, the airport made a decision to park this aircraft at a remote location on the tarmac. It is the responsibility of the charter airline that its operation is compliant with TSA screening requirements.

Upon landing and parking at OAK, the pilot-in-command advised the ground handling company that the parking and passenger handling provisions did not meet expectations. Upon learning this, Airside Operations and Aviation Security worked with the ground handling company and other law enforcement partners to coordinate a plan that was satisfactory to the pilot and passengers, and which was compliant with all airport safety and security standards.

Oakland International Airport (OAK) makes customer service a priority for all its passengers, whether they are traveling on commercial, military or general aviation aircraft. Charter airlines operating at OAK can choose to contract with a number of ground handling companies. Ground handlers coordinate flight services such as passenger handling, and aircraft fueling, cleaning and catering. It is the responsibility of ground handling companies to communicate aircraft and passenger operational needs to OAK’s Airside Operations Office in advance so that special accommodations can be coordinated to ensure that all airport operational, safety and security concerns are addressed.

The scheduled arrival and departure time of the flight is set by the aircraft operator. Time is needed to refuel the aircraft, perform maintenance inspections, refresh the catering, and give passengers time to stretch to break-up long travel periods. An analysis of the incident and prior correspondence between OAK’s Airside Operations and the ground handler determined that the airport did not receive clear communication in advance from the charter airline that was hired by the military.

I am out of town starting tomorrow for a convention. If you have any further inquiries about this incident and the way it was handled, Rosemary Barnes who is part of our Public Affairs team would be happy to speak with you. You may also call Joanne Holloway, the acting manager of the Port’s Community and Customer Relations Department.

Kindest regards,
Marilyn Sandifur
Port Spokesperson
Port of Oakland

Well isn't that just DANDY?

But then, can you really expect much more from an area that promotes the Folsom Street Fair and their promotional poster for this year of The Last Supper done by gay men in leather (Oakland is about 15 miles from San Francisco)?

Can we REQUEST that another state secede from the Union? Just an idea...

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man.


Fourth Consecutive Drop in Military Deaths--UPDATE- A letter from the front, Baghdad

AFP, via Breitbart is reporting that the U.S. Military deaths are at the lowest levels in 14 months.

US military losses in Iraq for September stood at 70 on Sunday, the lowest monthly figure since July last year, according to an AFP tally based on Pentagon figures.

The figure also marks the fourth consecutive drop in the monthly death toll following a high of 121 in May. June saw 93 deaths, July 82 and August 79. The monthly toll in July 2006 was 53.

Two US soldiers were killed on Saturday in separate incidents, pushing the overall toll of American losses since the March 2003 invasion to 3,801.

A surge in US troop numbers saw an extra 28,500 personnel deployed from mid-February, mainly in Baghdad and the neighbouring province of Anbar, although commanders said most were not in combat positions until May.

US commanders say the strategy is starting to work and that levels of violence are dropping, allowing for a possible drawdown of the 160,000 or so troops now deployed.

"The trend is certainly in the right direction," US military spokesman Rear Admiral Mark Fox told a press conference in Baghdad.

"The surge unquestionably is what has been the catalyst that has created the opportunity to have more forces operating in more places at the same time and to deny Al-Qaeda and the extremists safe-haven and to take away sanctuaries."

The surge started late, it should have been done years ago, but since it began there have been less U.S. Military deaths and more terrorists death and captures, showing that the surge and the new counterinsurgency strategy that has been implemented, has indeed, made a difference and created an atmosphere where al-Qaeda has no place to hide and are on the run, not only from our forces but from the Iraqi citizens themselves.

All this might be why the Democratic politicians options in Iraq are few.

After President Bush's announcement this month of a limited troop drawdown and a continuation of the "surge" strategy through next summer, the key question for centrist Democrats in the presidential race is no longer whether U.S. forces will remain in Iraq but what size, mission and length a post-buildup, post-Bush force would take on. Even if the Democratic hopefuls decline to offer specifics, some of the people mentioned as possible defense secretaries under a Democratic White House offer a vision of a U.S. presence in Iraq that does not differ markedly from that of the Bush administration.

"There's a fairly narrow band of choice here, a relatively limited set of options," said David Kilcullen, an Australian counterinsurgency expert who has advised Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq. "I think a Democratic or Republican administration will be doing fairly similar things."

The bottomline is that no matter how loud the screaming and screeching gets on the far left liberal side of the blogosphere and media, it doesn't matter if a Republican takes the White House in 2008 or a Democrat, when it comes to strategy, they will all be doing the same thing that Bush is doing now.

They can promise "change" all they want, but conditions on the ground determine what changes will be made, not polls nor public opinion.

A hard lesson for the Democratic politicians, but from their answers the other night at the debate, one they are starting to come to terms with, even if their far left base are incapable of understanding.

In their debate Wednesday night in Hanover, N.H., none of the three top Democratic presidential candidates would promise to have the U.S. military out of Iraq by January 2013 -- more than five years from now.

"I think it would be irresponsible" to state that, said Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.).

"I cannot make that commitment," added former senator John Edwards of North Carolina.

And Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) put it simply when she outlined the dilemma that Democratic presidential aspirants face on Iraq. "It is very difficult to know what we're going to be inheriting," the party's front-runner said.

The last paragraph of the Wapo piece says it all:

Ultimately, however, it appears now that no matter who inhabits the White House, the United States may be resolved -- or resigned -- to an enduring presence in Iraq. "America has taken a deep breath," Kilcullen said, "looked into the abyss of pulling out, and decided, 'Let's not do it yet.' "

The tide has turned for the better in Iraq, not just a small one month turn, but two, then three and now four months in a row.

We are winning and only those that are blinded by rage and hatred could actually hope that the tide will turn the other way, yet there are many wishing for exactly that.

For some, the politics trump our and the Iraqi's victory and triumph.

One has to wonder how they look at themselves in the mirror if they cannot even find joy in the fact that more terrorists are being killed and captured, and less U.S. Military members and less innocent Iraqi citizens are being murdered.

[Update] Gateway Pundit shows us that 5 million children returned to school in Iraq.

Just more progress that our media tries to sweep under the rug.

[Update] A letter from the front, in Baghdad, from a soldier.


While the situation is always fragile, we have the initiative. (The enemy) can hide from us but he cannot hide from his neighbor.

Once abandoned streets are now filled with families and budding entrepreneurs who continue to open new small businesses every week.

We have made available grants for small businesses in our area and they have become immensely popular as you can imagine. I cannot walk the streets without children asking me for a soccer ball and "chocolate" (meaning any kind of candy) and adults asking for a micro grant application or for the status of the one they already filled out. They use these grants to open new businesses or improve their existing one and it is working well.

Our area now has a men's fashion store, fish markets, pharmacies, bakeries, and even two new gyms. We recently helped refurbish a once neglected clinic into a first-class location for health care. ...Our medical platoon recently spent several hours with local doctors and nurses treating patients for everyday aches and pains with donated medical supplies from a humanitarian organization. I even watched our physician's assistant pull a watermelon seed out of a young girl's ear (sound familiar to anyone?).

We also recently completed work on a soccer field that is used nightly by the young people here. Much to our surprise, on the opening night, each team had "1-4 CAV" printed on the back of their soccer jerseys. ...

Other good news: ... 1-4 CAV has the highest re-enlistment rate of any battalion-level unit in all of Baghdad and A Troop has the highest re-enlistment rate of any company-level organization in all of Baghdad for this fiscal year.

Go read the whole thing. Still more that our media refuses to tell you or show you but our troops are finding ways to tell Americans what is happening and about the progress they are making and seeing on a daily basis.

Bless them.

Sopranos Deal of the Week 468x60


9/12 has made Thomas Friedman Stupid--Presenting him the Rubber Chicken Award

Thomas Friedman wrote an opinion piece in the NYT today claiming that 9/11 has made America stupid and we need a 9/12 President.

Like all good satire, the story made me both laugh and cry, because it reflected something so true — how much, since 9/11, we’ve become “The United States of Fighting Terrorism.” Times columnists are not allowed to endorse candidates, but there’s no rule against saying who will not get my vote: I will not vote for any candidate running on 9/11. We don’t need another president of 9/11. We need a president for 9/12. I will only vote for the 9/12 candidate.

What does that mean? This: 9/11 has made us stupid. I honor, and weep for, all those murdered on that day. But our reaction to 9/11 — mine included — has knocked America completely out of balance, and it is time to get things right again.

Jules Crittenden takes him to the woodshed for that remark.

Sure has made some people stupid, no question. Friedman is writing against Giuliani as the “9/11″ candidate, saying we need a 9/12 candidate. Which, as an attempt to be clever, is pretty stupid, too. 9/12, you’ll recall, was the day after 9/11. Pretty much the day its been ever since. I don’t know what you were thinking about that day. I actually was thinking about international tourism, just like Friedman wants us to. But I was working out a travel itinerary for Afghanistan.* Friedman wants to get everyone thinking about travel to the United States. A lot of people were thinking about that on 9/12, too. Jose Padilla, Richard Reid, to name a couple.

A note to Thomas Friedman:

has knocked America completely out of balance, and it is time to get things right again.

It did not knock America off balance Thomas, it woke us up to the reality that we could be attacked on our own soil.

In complete intellectual dishonesty Mr. Friedman deliberately ignores that we have not had a successful attack on our soil since then, but not from lack of trying.

Remember Fort Dix Thomas?

May 2007:

Six Islamic radicals were arrested yesterday for planning to “conduct an armed assault on the army base (Ft. Dix, NJ) and to kill as many soldiers as possible.”

Does Goose Creek, SC. ring a bell Thomas?

August 2007:

Two men are being detained in Goose Creek, S.C. for being in possession of explosive devices. Goose Creek, S.C., according to U.S. Today is the home of the Naval Weapons Station which houses a military brig where enemy combatants have been held.

Update, September 2007:

In a 12-minute video posted on YouTube, an Egyptian man wearing a white shirt, khaki pants and rubber gloves explains in Arabic how to turn a toy boat into a bomb.

His name is Ahmed Abdellatif Sherif Mohamed, and last month he was arrested in Goose Creek after authorities found four PVC pipes containing a mixture of potassium nitrate, kitty litter and sugar in his car’s trunk.

Mohamed told FBI agents he made the video to teach “those persons in Arabic countries to defend themselves against the infidels invading their countries,” according to federal court documents released late Tuesday.

Specifically, he told the FBI “the technology which he demonstrated in the tape was to be used against those who fought for the United States.”

JFK, the London Airports with American based Airlines meant to cause more massive amounts of deaths than 9/11.

Germany, Denmark.....any of this ringing a bell Thomas?

Before 9/11, America was complacent, arrogant even, watching terrorism run rampant abroad and attacks against our interests as well as our military that were abroad.

We had warnings but too many of us were like Thomas Friedman and did not wake up, just hit the snooze button, turned over and went back to sleep.

February 26, 1993: World Trade Center in New York, USA, badly damaged by a massive bomb planted by Islamic terrorists. The car bomb was planted in an underground garage and left six people dead and more than one thousand people injured.

November 13, 1995: Seven foreigners, including a number of US servicemen, are killed in bomb attack on National Guard training centre at Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

June 25, 1996: Islamic radical terrorists opposed to the western military presence in the Gulf region, explode a truck bomb next to a USAF housing area at Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, killing 19 American servicemen and 385 injured.

August 7, 1998
: US Embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar-es-Salem, Tanzania, heavily damaged by massive bomb attacks. In the Nairobi attack 247 people were killed, including 12 Americans, and 4,000 injured. Ten people were killed and 74 injured in Tanzania incident. US intelligence blames Islamic groups linked to Saudi dissident Osama Bin Laden.

October 12, 2000
: USS Cole attacked by suicide bombers and 17 sailors killed and 13 injured. Attack blamed on Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda network.

December 30, 2000: Bomb explodes outside US embassy in Manilla, Phillipines.

September 11, 2001:Two hijacked airliners flown into World Trade Centre in New York,
USA, resulting in the deaths of some 3,000 people. Another hijacked airliner strikes the Pentagon in Washington, DC, killing 189 people and injuring 86. Another 44 people die when a hijacked airliner crashes in Pennsylvania after the passengers clash with their hijackers. Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda networked blamed for the attack.

If it were up to people like Thomas Friedman, we would have all shrugged and went about our business....thank heavens it wasn't up to the very stupid Thomas Friedman.

America did not get stupid Thomas, you did.

We woke up, we realized that sitting back and continuing to allow ourselves to be attacked without responding, without doing everything in our power to prevent those attacks, and without making states that sponsor terror understand they will suffer for sponsoring terror, would be the truly "stupid" thing.

So, Thomas, I do not give a damn who you would not vote for.

As we showed yesterday, the "majority" of Americans do not agree with you on this one.

(Click image to go to original page where you can click and enlarge all the results)

But the IBD/TIPP Poll taken last week found Americans solidly behind such measures as warrantless wiretaps, detention of terrorist suspects in foreign prisons and keeping open the prison at Guantanamo Bay.

THE QUESTION: Do you support or oppose the following actions by the U.S. government intended to protect the nation?

Breakdown of answers:

Wiretapping terrorist suspects without a court warrant:

Not sure/refused 3%

Increased surveillance:

Not sure/refused 5%

Detention of non-U.S. terrorist suspects in foreign jails:

Not sure/refused 9%

The U.S. Patriot Act, which expands the authority of agencies to pursue information that may be used to foil terrorist plots:

Not sure/refused 4%

Disallowing some people from flying on commercial airplanes because they may represent potential security threats:

Not sure/refused 5%

Keeping suspected terrorists or enemy combatants at the Guantanamo Bay detainment camp:

Not sure/refused 9%

Americans by and large, got smart on 9/12 Thomas, one has to wonder where you were when common sense and brains were handed out.

Thomas Friedman, with his stupid opinion about America being stupid becomes the third recipient of Wake up America's RUBBER CHICKEN AWARD.

The only requirement for winning this award is to have made the stupidest or most asinine comments or publication in the previous week.

You have earned it Thomas Friedman, congratulations.

(Additional thought- If you want to offer Tommie boy a rubber chicken of your own or send him the graphic or this piece, you can.

For information on Op-Ed submissions, call (212) 556-1831 or send article to To write to the editorial page editor, send to

Others discussing this, via memeorandum:
Strata-Sphere, Wizbang, Conservative Belle, Stop the ACLU, The Van Der Galiën Gazette, Don Surber.

Sirius Satellite Radio Inc.


Saturday, September 29, 2007

President Bush Enjoys Mini-Surge Of His Own

[Update below] 10/1/07

(Click image to take you to poll page)

President Bush's rating among Americans regained more lost ground in September, with the IBD/TIPP Presidential Leadership Index rising another 6% to 40.2. That's up 16% from its all-time low of 34.7 in June and the first time the index has topped 40.0 since March. The improvement came despite a sharp 29% drop to new low of 11.4 in Democrats' opinion of the president. That was offset by improvements of 8% to an eight-month high of 77.9 among Republicans and 21% to a 2007 high of 34.0 among Independents.
(Hat Tip to Take Our Country Back)

Head must be exploding across the left side of the blogosphere. As reports of the surge and progress come in and America sees them, Bush's ratings are steadily rising, month after month.

The news gets worse for them though. 9/10/07.

(Click image to go to original page where you can click and enlarge all the results)

In a rare public speech, CIA Director Michael Hayden complained last week the public support for aggressive methods used in counterterrorism is waning and leading toward a pre-9/11 complacency.

But the IBD/TIPP Poll taken last week found Americans solidly behind such measures as warrantless wiretaps, detention of terrorist suspects in foreign prisons and keeping open the prison at Guantanamo Bay.

THE QUESTION: Do you support or oppose the following actions by the U.S. government intended to protect the nation?

Breakdown of answers:

Wiretapping terrorist suspects without a court warrant:

Not sure/refused 3%

Increased surveillance:

Not sure/refused 5%

Detention of non-U.S. terrorist suspects in foreign jails:

Not sure/refused 9%

The U.S. Patriot Act, which expands the authority of agencies to pursue information that may be used to foil terrorist plots:

Not sure/refused 4%

Disallowing some people from flying on commercial airplanes because they may represent potential security threats:

Not sure/refused 5%

Keeping suspected terrorists or enemy combatants at the Guantanamo Bay detainment camp:

Not sure/refused 9%

About Investor's Business Daily:

Founded in 1984, Investor's Business Daily revolutionized stock market coverage. IBD is now recognized as a leading commentator on the key issues of our time. IBD editorials are rigorously researched, presenting under-reported - or simply unreported - facts that give you a better insight into the truth behind the headlines.

In other polls, Rasmussen to be exact, pessimism about the war is also slowly declining, 49% of Americans feel congress is doing a lousy job vs 15% thinking they are doing a good job.

Three years of declining numbers are slowly turning around as support rises for the war on terror. The numbers are still, admittedly, low, but since this new trend is only 2-3 months old vs the three years they had to decline, the rise is significant in meaning and as long as we continue to keep getting reports of progress and success in Iraq, those numbers will continue to climb, while congressional numbers have a good possibility of continuing to decline.

This might be the reason that Congress, very quietly, approved a stop gap measure of more funds until a long-delayed appropriations process is completed.

The Senate agreed on Thursday to increase the federal debt limit by $850 billion -- from $8.965 trillion to $9.815 trillion -- and then proceeded to approve a stop-gap spending bill that gives the Bush White House at least $9 billion in new funding for its war in Iraq.

Additionally, the administration has been given emergency authority to tap further into a $70 billion "bridge fund" to provide new infusions of money for the occupation while the Congress works on appropriations bills for the Department of Defense and other agencies.

Translation: Under the guise of a stop-gap spending bill that is simply supposed to keep the government running until a long-delayed appropriations process is completed -- probably in November -- the Congress has just approved a massive increase in war funding.

The move was backed by every senator who cast a vote, save one.

Senate Roll Call can be found here.

Congress Roll Call found here.

So far I am only seeing a couple heads exploding, (check the comments in that last link) but as the news spreads, I will update this with reactions.

[Update] More heads exploding, on cue.

Completely Unnecessary, Captain Proton Takes The Trib, Moonbat Juggernaut

More reactions.

(Note to Completely Necessary- It was called a trackback, not a comment. Perhaps you should learn a little more about what you speak of before speaking.--Spree)

[Update 10/1/07] Just as a point of interest, RCP averages from polls show that Bush's approval rating is higher than that of the Congress. Bush has 32.8% Approval and Congress has 25.3% Approval.

Each poll has differing numbers (because they all poll different groups of people) but all agree on one thing. Bush is more popular than Congress and his numbers are rising and theirs are dropping.

Spin that.


Mixed Bag of Treats-- 9/29/07

A few interesting articles and blog posts today.


The LA Times shows that the border fence has doubled.

New barriers have had an effect in San Luis, once one of the busiest crossing points in the nation. Immigrants by the hundreds would jump over the steel-mat fencing and disappear into nearby neighborhoods.

That route is now blocked by two new layers of fencing: a 15-foot-high steel-mesh secondary barrier and a chain-link fence topped with barbed wire.

The number of illegal immigrants apprehended daily in the area has dropped from 800 to as low as 15, according to Border Patrol officials.

Border experts say it is too soon to determine the overall success or failure of the effort, pointing out that previous fencing projects, most notably in San Diego, shifted immigrant traffic elsewhere.

U.S. Border Patrol Chief David V. Aguilar, in an interview in San Diego, said the plan to complete about 225 more miles of fencing next year would anticipate shifts in immigration patterns, much of it controlled by smuggling rings. "For the first time," Aguilar said, "we're getting ahead of where the criminal organizations are going to go."

The NYT with "New Group Boasts Big War Chest and Rising Voice".

With a forceful message and a roster of wealthy benefactors, Freedom’s Watch has quickly emerged from the crowded field of nonprofit advocacy groups as a conservative answer to the 9-year-old liberal, which vehemently opposes the Iraq war.

Wapo has a good report on William Jefferson and the prosecution case against him.

Before searching Rep. William J. Jefferson's (D) New Orleans home in August 2005, FBI agents confronted him with a video that showed him accepting $100,000 from a government informant, according to a prosecution document filed yesterday in federal court in Alexandria.

Afterward, the Louisiana Democrat sank back into a couch in his living room and "with total dejection remarked 'what a waste,' " according to the government account, which did not elaborate on his comment.

Jefferson then "questioned how his reputation could survive" and expressed concern whether the search warrant affidavit could be permanently sealed to keep the information from being made public, according to the document.

Meanwhile, on the same day, FBI agents found $90,000 of the $100,000 in marked bills in Jefferson's freezer at his Capitol Hill home. The government alleged that Jefferson took the money from a Virginia businesswoman who was working as an informant, to bribe a Nigerian official in a business deal.

The pretrial document provides a glimpse into the public corruption investigation's early months. It was among 14 answers filed yesterday by the U.S. Attorney's Office in Alexandria in response to motions filed this month by Jefferson's lawyers.


Miss Beth's Victory Dance has a great piece reagrding Iran and the obligation to act.

Take Our Country Back
brings us more writings from Forrest Langley.

Bottom Line Up Front brings us more good news from Iraq.

Right Truth with "No Jews in State Department program, no Jewish bullets in Iraq, Afghanistan".

Don Surber
shows us the week that was.

Tanker Brothers brings us good news Friday.

Let Freedom Ring with "Brian Bilbray Rips Pelosi"

All the above are excellent reads, so have at em!!!

Tracked back by:
Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup from Pirate's Cove...

Sirius Satellite Radio Inc.


Groups that George Soros Touches Turns to Dust, Not Gold

(Hat Tip tip Gateway Pundit for the image.)

George Soros is a very very rich man that believes if he throws enough money around he can buy America.

If being rich was the only means to judge a man, then he would be considered very successful, but instead, it seems that politically motivated groups that this "Midas" touches, doesn't turn to gold but turns to dust.

Lets start with Media Matters and their connection to Soros:

Media Matters can no longer deny its Soros affiliation because "once you have the names (of donors), once you know that Peter Lewis is involved, you can't deny it," said Horowitz, who as a conservative, co-founded the Los Angeles-based Center for the Study of the Popular Culture and Front Page, a news and commentary website.

Horowitz said he is not surprised that Brock's group altered its statement after being questioned about donations. "[Brock is] a guy who turned on his friends. He was a sleazy gossip sort of writer when he was on the right, and he's a sleazy gossip writer on the left, and an unscrupulous one on both sides," Horowitz said.

First Media Matters tried to smear Bill O'Reilly, which has been shown to be another instance where they have cherry picked comments, shown them to their readers, then when the complete transcript comes out, they are shown to be the liars they are.

Juan Williams in a Time piece takes them and CNN to task for this with "What Bill O'Reilly Really Said to Me".

So, O'Reilly says to me that the reality to black life is very different from the low-life behavior glorified by the rappers. He told me he was at a restaurant in Harlem recently and there was no one shouting profanity, no one threatening people. Then he mentioned going to an Anita Baker concert with an audience that was half black, and in sharp contrast to the corrosive images on TV, well dressed and well behaved.

I joked with O'Reilly that for him, a guy from Long Island, a visit to Harlem was like a "foreign trip." That's when he brought up his grandma. He said she was prejudiced against black people because she knew no flesh-and-blood black folks but only the one-dimensional TV coverage of black criminals shooting each other and the rappers and comedians glorifying "gangsta" life and thug cool. He criticized his grandmother as irrational for being afraid of people she really did not know.

I defended his grandma.

After watching all those racist, minstrel images of black people, I argued, she is right to buy into stereotypes of blacks as ignorant, oversexed and violent. And I said while I worried about his grandma having racist images justified in her mind I had bigger worries.

The most pernicious damage being done by the twisted presentation of black life in pop culture is the self-destructive message being beamed into young, vulnerable black brains. Young black people, searching for affirmation of their racial identity, are minute by minute being sold on the cheap idea that they are authentically black only if they imitate the violent, threatening attitude of the rappers and use the gutter language coming from the minstrels on TV.

The lesson from the rappers and comedians is that any young brother or sister who is proud to be black has to treat education with indifference, dismiss love and marriage as the business of white people and dress like the rappers who dress like prisoners — no comb in the jail so they wear doo-rags all day, and no belts so their pants hang down around their butts.

That was the heart and soul of the conversation between O'Reilly and me. The point of the whole exchange was to defeat corrupt, untrue and racist images of real black people.

So imagine how totally astounded I was when I heard O'Reilly was attacked on the basis of that radio conversation as a "racist." He was slammed for saying he went to a restaurant in Harlem and had a good time. He was slammed for saying the audience at the concert was nicely dressed. The suggestion was that O'Reilly had racist preconceptions about the restaurant and the concert crowd.

That twisted assumption led me to say publicly that the attacks on O'Reilly amounted to an effort to take what he said totally out of context in an attempt to brand him a racist by a liberal group that disagrees with much of his politics. But the out-of-context attacks on O'Reilly picked up speed and ended up on CNN, where one commentator branded me a "Happy Negro" for allowing O'Reilly to get by with making racist comments without objection.

Busted on that bit of cherry picking and misleading their readers, Media Matters then tries again with Rush Limbaugh, which we discussed extensively yesterday and today, proving agains how they distorted, lied, showed only partial transcripts and led the whole left side of the blogosphere as well as the Democratic politicians that take their marching orders from the left side of the blogosphere, right off a cliff with them.

Media Matters has just given up its credibility in favor of lying and distorting and misleading its readers. DUST.

Air America, which I am sure everyone remembers, had to file for bankruptcy:

Through an emergency bailout plan, a coalition of wealthy liberal political activists are poised to at least temporarily save Air America Radio. On the way: as much as $8 million in sorely-needed cash to fund ongoing operations.

With particular support from San Francisco and Silicon Valley multimillionaires, the group has an unusual number of contributors from outside the Beltway.
According to Human Events, the organization's key members include:

Rob Stein
Andrew Rappaport
Simon Rosenberg
Mike McCurry
Steven Gluckstern
Ann S. Bowers
Albert Yates
Marc and Susie T. Buell
Anne Bartley
Alan Patricof Donor
Bren Simon Donor
Chris Gabrieli Donor
Rob Reiner Donor
George Soros Donor Financier
Peter Lewis Donor
Air America. DUST.

America Coming Together, also financed by George Soros has just been fined the third largest fine in the history of the FEC, for violating campaign finance laws.

The fine was $775,000 they had to pay as settlement.

we now have the 527 Group, America Coming Together, financed by George Soros and labor organizations that sunk more than $100 million into campaign activities intended to help Democrats in the 2004 elections.
America Coming Together. DUST. and their connection to George Soros:

Soros, who has financed efforts to promote open societies in more than 50 countries around the world, is bringing the fight home, he said. On Monday, he and a partner committed up to $5 million to, a liberal activist group, bringing to $15.5 million the total of his personal contributions to oust Bush.

MoveOn has just had two amendments/resolutions, one from the senate and one from the house that has condemned their attack ad against General Petraeus, a four star general.

That ad backfired bigtime.

Rasmussen shows that 58% of Americans disapproved of the ad making false accusations against General Petraeus and only 23% approve.

Twenty-three percent (23%) of Americans approve of an ad run in the New York Times “that referred to General Petraeus as General Betray Us?” A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 58% disapproved. Those figures include 12% who Strongly Approve and 42% who Strongly Disapprove.

Self-identified liberals were evenly divided—45% approve and 39% disapprove. However, only 19% of moderate voters approve while 62% disapprove.

It gets worse for and the Democrats:

Forty-seven percent (47%) of all adults say that “stunts like the ad” hurt the cause they believe in. Only 12% believe they help the cause while 17% say there is no impact. Twenty-four percent (24%) are not sure. Again, political liberals are divided with 27% saying they help and 32% taking the opposite view. Fifty percent (50%) of moderates and 57% of conservatives say that these sorts of events hurt the cause the group is trying to promote.

Captain's Quarters explains how the news gets even worse from looking at the cross tabs over at Rasmussen. DUST.

Democrats association with

Liberal powerhouse MoveOn has a message for the "professional election losers" who run the Democratic Party: "We bought it, we own it, we're going to take it back."

In a scathing e-mail from the head of MoveOn's political action committee to the group's supporters on Thursday targets outgoing Democratic National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe as a tool of corporate donors who alienated both traditional and progressive Democrats.

"For years, the party has been led by elite Washington insiders who are closer to corporate lobbyists than they are to the Democratic base," said the e-mail from MoveOn PAC's Eli Pariser. "But we can't afford four more years of leadership by a consulting class of professional election losers."

Under McAuliffe's leadership, the message said, the party coddled the same corporate donors that fund Republicans to bring in money at the expense of vision and integrity.

"In the last year, grass-roots contributors like us gave more than $300 million to the Kerry campaign and the DNC, and proved that the party doesn't need corporate cash to be competitive," the message continued. "Now it's our party: we bought it, we own it, and we're going to take it back."

More on and their association with George Soros from CNN Money:

The Left: The smear ad published against Gen. Petraeus has drawn attention to its sponsor, But the fingerprints of the group's chief financial backer, George Soros, were all over it.....


And since 2003, tearing down what he views as the "fascist" tyranny of the United States, as he has put it, is "the central focus of my life."

Through networks of nongovernmental organizations, Soros intends to ruin the presidency of George W. Bush "by any legal means necessary" and knock America off its global pedestal. "His view of America is so negative," says Sen. Joe Lieberman, who, like Gen. David Petraeus, has been a target of Soros' electoral "philanthropy." "The places he's put his money are ... so destructive that it unsettles me." Soros' aim seems to be to make the U.S. just another client state easily controlled by the United Nations and other one-world groups where he has lots of friends.

Best known among these groups is, a previously small fringe-left group to which Soros has given $5 million since 2004. Bulked up by cash, the group now uses professional public relations tactics to undercut the Iraq War effort, with its latest a full-page New York Times ad that branded Gen. Petraeus "General Betray Us."

The "shadow party, George Soros and Hillary Clinton: (That link is to Red State)

" The Shadow Party was conceived and organized principally by George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Harold McEwan Ickes -- all identified with the Democratic Party left."

"As of August 2004, the husband-wife team of George Soros and Susan Soros had contributed $13,120,000 to Shadow Party groups and operations, second only to Soros' longtime friend and collaborator, insurance mogul Peter B. Lewis ($14,175,000). The third leading donor was Jane Fonda ($13,085,750), followed by Hollywood producer Stephen Bing in fourth place ($9,869,014). Other major funders of the Shadow Party include the Tides Foundation and the Open Society Institute."

"When the Clintons left office, Soros dedicated himself to restoring Hillary to the White House."

" When Soros targets a country for "regime change," he begins by creating a shadow government -- a fully formed government-in-exile, ready to assume power when the opportunity arises. The Shadow Party Soros has built in America greatly resembles those he has created in other countries, prior to instigating a coup."

"Hillary Clinton tries to minimize the depth of her involvement with the Center for American Progress. But persistent press leaks confirm that she -- and not its official President, John Podesta -- has ultimate authority at CAP."

Air Americas troubles are public after they had to file for bankruptcy, Media Matters in this last week has just destroyed their own credibility, and their attack against General Petraeus managed to turn most of the country against them and rally them behind General Petraeus, America Coming Together had to settle with a $775,000 settlement for claims of finance fraud.

What do all these groups have in common?

George Soros.

The man that thinks he can buy America, the man that funds which is the organization that has stated publicly they own the Democratic party.

Ashes to Ashes, Dust to Dust.


Rush Limbaugh & Phony Soldiers #2: The Anatomy of a Smear: "Phony Soldiers" Is a Phony Story

[Update] Text of Clear Channel, CEO's letter in response to Harry Reid.

10/2/07-This was left in the comment section of this post and I am putting it on top--

I am a soldier in the U.S. Army. I served for a year in Iraq. Senator Reid, where are these "thousands" of soldiers who oppose the war? I didn't meet them in uniform. I submit, Senator Reid, that they are a product of your putrid imagination -- phantom, phony soldiers indeed.

Senator Reid, the thing about this war that frustrates us soldiers more than anything else are the intentional, malicious and subversive efforts by you and your cronies to undercut our mission. You, Senator Reid, are a far more virulent enemy of the United States than anything we have confronted in Iraq. We can deal directly with the enemies we face in combat. Be thankful that we have to deal with you through more civil means. (John Breland)

The troops know who supports them and who doesn't. [End Update] (This has been added to all relevant posts)

An update on yesterdays bruhaha with Rush Limbaugh and Media Matters deliberate attempt to misrepresent his words on his show.

My original post will be below this so you can read everything for yourself and decide instead of letting cherry picked portions of the show (the ones that media matters cherry picked)mislead you.

From Rush Limbaugh's website:

I want to illustrate something for you today, folks. I've done it before. I want to do it again. I call this the anatomy of a smear, and what this is is a great illustration of the liberals and the Democrat Party playbook for '08, which is underway now. The morning update on Wednesday dealt with a soldier, a fake, phony soldier by the name of Jesse MacBeth who never served in Iraq; he was never an Army Ranger. He was drummed out of the military in 44 days. He had his day in court; he never got the Purple Heart as he claimed, and he described all these war atrocities. He became a hero to the anti-war left. They love phony soldiers, and they prop 'em up. When it is demonstrated that they have been lying about things, then they just forget about it. There's no retraction; there's no apology; there's no, "Uh-oh, sorry." After doing that morning update on Wednesday, I got a phone call yesterday from somebody, we were talking about the troops, and this gentleman said something which you'll hear here in just a second, prompting me to reply "yeah, the phony soldiers."

That comment, "phony soldiers" was posted yesterday afternoon on the famous Media Matters website, which is where all leftists go to find out what I say. I have a website, and I have a radio program that reaches far more people than Media Matters could ever hope to, but the critics of this program never listen to this program. They never go to my website. All they do is read Media Matters and they get the lies and the out-of-context reports. They assume it's all true because they want it to be true, and then they start their campaigns. This has led to me being denounced on the floor of the House. Howard Dean has released a statement demanding I apologize; Jim Webb; John Kerry issued a statement, three Congress people went out on the floor of the House last night and said some things, and it's starting to blossom now in the Drive-By Media. So this is the anatomy of a smear, and this is how it starts. The same group is trying to get Bill O'Reilly into problems because of some innocent comments that he made about going to dinner at a restaurant in Harlem. So the illustration begins with just a sample report from MSNBC whose content is produced almost exclusively by Media Matters for America and This is this morning with the anchorette Contessa Brewer reporting on the phony soldier controversy, spawned by me.


RUSH: That was the transcript from yesterday's program, talking about one phony soldier. The truth for the left is fiction that serves their purpose, which is exactly the way the website, Media Matters, generated this story, fiction, out of context, did so knowingly. What is amazing is that after all of the examples of how this organization is simply a Democrat Party Hillary Clinton front group; how they constantly do this; how they take things out of context and embarrass themselves and get things wrong; they still have credible so-called journalists and others, members of Congress, Democrat Party, who treat what they say as gospel. Not one member of the media, not one congressman, nobody has called our office to ask, "Did you really say this? And what did you mean by it?" The reason this does not work, ladies and gentlemen, is that I have a 19-and-a-half-year record on this program of being one of the most devoted supporters of US military personnel in uniform that there is.

The effort here is simply to discredit people that they consider effective and powerful on the right ginning up, leading up into the '08 elections. They cannot beat us in the arena of ideas. They cannot challenge what we say and refute it and come out on top, so this is the anatomy of a smear. I'll show you how it works when we come back after the break. We have a bunch of sound bites here from Jim Webb, Jan Schakowsky, Frank Pallone, Democrats and senators, plus the Kerry statement that I read to you, all that coming up right after this.

Read the whole thing if you care for "context" instead of cherry picked comments.

Or listen to fridays show where Rush replays the whole thing, less than a minute after the "phony troop" comment Rush clarifies the whole thing by mentioning Jesse Macbeth by name.

Once again, Media Matters misrepresents, then the whole left side of the blogosphere jumps on the bandwagon and then the Democratic politicians, being led to the slaughter BY the left side of the blogosphere, follows suit.

Below I am reposting yesterdays post on this (which includes the full transcript instead of the "portions" that Media Matters decided to show their readers).

More from Influence Peddler.

Original Post from 9/28/07:

I waited to post about this because I wanted to be able to see the whole transcript instead of the cherry picked portions the left used to get their readers all up in arms.

The transcript can be found at The Rush Limbaugh website:

RUSH: Mike in Chicago, welcome to the EIB Network. Hello.

CALLER: Hi, Rush, how you doing today?

RUSH: Fine, sir, thank you.

CALLER: Good. Why is it that you always just accuse the Democrats of being against the war and that there's actually no Republicans that can possibly be against the war?

RUSH: Well, who are these Republicans? I can think of Chuck Hagel, and I can think of Gordon Smith, two Republican senators, but they don't want to lose the war like the Democrats do. I can't think of who the Republicans are in the anti-war movement.

CALLER: I'm not talking about the senators. I'm talking about the general public. You accuse the public and all the Democrats of being, you know, wanting to lose --

RUSH: Oh, come on, here we go again. I utter the truth, and you can't handle it so you gotta call here and change the subject. How come I'm not also hitting Republicans? I don't know a single Republican or conservative, Mike, who wants to pull out of Iraq in defeat. The Democrats have made the last four years about that specifically.

CALLER: Well, I am a Republican, and I listened to you for a long time, and you're right on a lot of things, but I do believe that we should pull out of Iraq. I don't think it's winnable. I'm not a Democrat, but sometimes you gotta cut the losses. I mean, sometimes you really got to admit you're wrong.

RUSH: Well, yeah, you do. I'm not wrong on this. The worst thing that can happen is losing this, getting out of there, waving the white flag.

CALLER: I'm not saying that, I'm not saying anything like that.

RUSH: Of course you are.

CALLER: No, I'm not!

RUSH: The truth is the truth, Mike.

CALLER: We did what we were supposed to do, okay, we got rid of Saddam Hussein; we got rid of a lot of the terrorists. Let them run their country now. Let's get out of there and let's be done with it. We won it.

RUSH: I'm never going to be able to retire. It's not going to work. You are depressing me.

CALLER: Well, sometimes, like you said, the truth hurts, Rush. Sometimes it hurts.

RUSH: I have explained this so many times. I can't believe that you actually listen to this program a lot, because you've heard me say what I'm going to say to you. War is never "plottable" on a piece of paper or on a map. It never goes exactly as anybody thinks it's going to go because nobody can predict the future, for one thing.

CALLER: That's true.

RUSH: Thank you. So what's happening now is that the very enemy that blew us up on 9/11 is facing us in Iraq. We can't cave in defeat and run out of there and say, "Hey guess what, we won, we got Saddam." We are going to be setting ourselves up for future disasters. We will never be able to have any other nation trust us as an ally when we have to go in there again. If we pull out of there before we take care of this, Mike, we're just going to have to do it sometime later at greater cost.

CALLER: Are we ever going to take care of it, though? How long do you think we're going to have to be there to take care of it?

RUSH: Mike, you can't possibly be a Republican.


RUSH: You can't be Republican.

CALLER: Oh, I am definitely Republican.

RUSH: You sound just like a Democrat.

CALLER: No, but seriously, Rush, how long do we have to stay there?

RUSH: As long as it takes.

CALLER: How long?

RUSH: As long as it takes. It is very serious. This is the United States of America at war with Islamofascists. Just like your job, you do everything you have to do, whatever it takes to get it done, if you take it seriously.

CALLER: So then you say we need to stay there forever?

RUSH: No, Bill -- (Laughing) or Mike. I'm sorry. I'm confusing you with the guy from Texas.

CALLER: I used to be military, okay, and I am a Republican.

RUSH: Yeah.

CALLER: And I do listen to you, but --

RUSH: Right, I know. And I, by the way, used to walk on the moon.

CALLER: How long do we have to stay there?

RUSH: You're not listening to what I say. You can't possibly be a Republican. I'm answering every question; it's not what you want to hear, and so it's not even penetrating your little wall of armor you've got built up. I said we stay to get the job done, as long as it takes. I didn't say forever. Nothing takes forever. That's not possible, Bill. Mike. Whatever. Nobody lives forever, no situation lasts forever, everything ends. We determine how do we want it to end, in our favor or in our defeat? With people like you in charge, who want to put a timeline on everything -- do you ever get anything done in your life? Or do you say, "Well, I wanted to have this done by now, and it's not, so screw it"? You don't live your life that way. Well, hell, you might, I don't know. But the limitations that you want to impose here are senseless, and they, frankly, portray no evidence that you are a Republican.
Another Mike. This one in Olympia, Washington. Welcome to the EIB Network. Hello.

CALLER: Hi, Rush. Thanks for taking my call.

RUSH: You bet.

CALLER: I have a retort to Mike in Chicago, because I am serving in the American military, in the Army. I've been serving for 14 years, very proudly.

RUSH: Thank you, sir.

CALLER: I'm one of the few that joined the Army to serve my country, I'm proud to say, not for the money or anything like that. What I would like to retort to is that, what these people don't understand, is if we pull out of Iraq right now, which is not possible because of all the stuff that's over there, it would take us at least a year to pull everything back out of Iraq, then Iraq itself would collapse and we'd have to go right back over there within a year or so.

RUSH: There's a lot more than that that they don't understand. The next guy that calls here I'm going to ask them, "What is the imperative of pulling out? What's in it for the United States to pull out?" I don't think they have an answer for that other than, "When's he going to bring the troops home? Keep the troops safe," whatever.


RUSH: It's not possible intellectually to follow these people.

CALLER: No, it's not. And what's really funny is they never talk to real soldiers. They pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and spout to the media.

RUSH: The phony soldiers.

CALLER: Phony soldiers. If you talk to any real soldier and they're proud to serve, they want to be over in Iraq, they understand their sacrifice and they're willing to sacrifice for the country.

RUSH: They joined to be in Iraq.

CALLER: A lot of people.

RUSH: You know where you're going these days, the last four years, if you sign up. The odds are you're going there or Afghanistan, or somewhere.

CALLER: Exactly, sir. My other comment, my original comment, was a retort to Jill about the fact we didn't find any weapons of mass destruction. Actually, we have found weapons of mass destruction in chemical agents that terrorists have been using against us for a while now. I've done two tours in Iraq, I just got back in June, and there are many instances of insurgents not knowing what they're using in their IEDs. They're using mustard artillery rounds, VX artillery rounds in their IEDs. Because they didn't know what they were using, they didn't do it right, and so it didn't really hurt anybody. But those munitions are over there. It's a huge desert. If they bury it somewhere, we're never going to find it.

RUSH: Well, that's a moot point for me right now.

CALLER: Right.

RUSH: The weapons of mass destruction. We gotta get beyond that. We're there. We all know they were there, and Mahmoud even admitted it in one of his speeches here talking about Saddam using the poison mustard gas or whatever it is on his own people. But that's moot. What's more important is all this is taking place now in the midst of the surge working, and all of these anti-war Democrats are getting even more hell-bent on pulling out of there, which means that success on the part of you and your colleagues over there is a great threat to them. It's frustrating and maddening, and why they must be kept in the minority. I want to thank you, Mike, for calling. I appreciate it very much.

Here is a Morning Update that we did recently, talking about fake soldiers. This is a story of who the left props up as heroes. They have their celebrities and one of them was Army Ranger Jesse Macbeth. Now, he was a "corporal." I say in quotes. Twenty-three years old. What made Jesse Macbeth a hero to the anti-war crowd wasn't his Purple Heart; it wasn't his being affiliated with post-traumatic stress disorder from tours in Afghanistan and Iraq. No. What made Jesse Macbeth, Army Ranger, a hero to the left was his courage, in their view, off the battlefield, without regard to consequences. He told the world the abuses he had witnessed in Iraq, American soldiers killing unarmed civilians, hundreds of men, women, even children. In one gruesome account, translated into Arabic and spread widely across the Internet, Army Ranger Jesse Macbeth describes the horrors this way: "We would burn their bodies. We would hang their bodies from the rafters in the mosque."

Now, recently, Jesse Macbeth, poster boy for the anti-war left, had his day in court. And you know what? He was sentenced to five months in jail and three years probation for falsifying a Department of Veterans Affairs claim and his Army discharge record. He was in the Army. Jesse Macbeth was in the Army, folks, briefly. Forty-four days before he washed out of boot camp. Jesse Macbeth isn't an Army Ranger, never was. He isn't a corporal, never was. He never won the Purple Heart, and he was never in combat to witness the horrors he claimed to have seen. You probably haven't even heard about this. And, if you have, you haven't heard much about it. This doesn't fit the narrative and the template in the Drive-By Media and the Democrat Party as to who is a genuine war hero. Don't look for any retractions, by the way. Not from the anti-war left, the anti-military Drive-By Media, or the Arabic websites that spread Jesse Macbeth's lies about our troops, because the truth for the left is fiction that serves their purpose. They have to lie about such atrocities because they can't find any that fit the template of the way they see the US military. In other words, for the American anti-war left, the greatest inconvenience they face is the truth.

Makes a little more sense with the reference to Jesse Macbeth which we recently showed that he was, indeed, a "phony soldier" and that was the portion that the left, and the Democratic politicians, conveniently left out of their little narratives yesterday. (Although had the context not been provided, I was ready to rip Rush a new one and I still think he could have made it a little clearer that he was referring to the Macbeth's of the anti-war lefts world)

No one claims that there are not soldiers against our actions in Iraq but their numbers do not compare to the active military speaking up in support of the mission, their numbers do not compare to the numbers of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans that are in support of the mission and their numbers do not come close to comparing to the veterans that support the troops and their mission.

When the anti-war left can start producing those kinds of numbers, then perhaps they will be given more credibility to their arguments.


The American Legion:

The American Legion was chartered by Congress in 1919 as a patriotic, mutual-help, war-time veterans organization. A community-service organization which now numbers nearly 3 million members -- men and women -- in nearly 15,000 American Legion Posts worldwide. These Posts are organized into 55 Departments -- one each for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, France, Mexico, and the Philippines.

The American Legion's national headquarters is in Indianapolis,Indiana, with additional offices in Washington, DC. In addition to thousands of volunteers serving in leadership and program implementation capacities in local communities to the Legion's standing national commissions and committees, the national organization has a regular full-time staff of about 300 employees.

They represent three million veterans and here are a couple of their statements.

RENO, NV, August 31, 2007, American Legion Reaffirms Support for War on Terror.

Nearly 6,000 delegates unanimously re-affirmed The American Legion’s support for the war on terrorism during the organization’s 89th National Convention in Reno, Nevada.

“We must continue to stand by the president and advocate for adequate funding for our troops that is not contingent on a set date for troop withdrawal,” said National Commander Paul A. Morin. “Our support of Resolution 169 is unwavering.”

Resolution 169 was first passed at The American Legion’s 87th National Convention in Honolulu and re-affirmed last year in Salt Lake City. It resolves that The American Legion urges all Americans and freedom-loving people stand united in their support of the global war on terrorism and united in their support of the troops. It further resolves that national commander of The American Legion disseminate accurate information to ensure the united support of the American people.

The American Legion, which by its own constitution is nonpartisan, urges that the people support both the president who sent the troops to war and Congress, which authorized the action.

Several speakers at The American Legion National Convention pointed out that the current strategy in Iraq appears to be working. “Tired of the indiscriminate violence and turned off by al-Qaeda’s Taliban-like ideology, many sheiks, tribes and local citizens are rejecting al-Qaeda,” said Gen. David Petraeus, who addressed the convention from a videotape produced in Iraq. He added that troops have been aided enormously by “the increasing assistance of everyday Iraqis.”

WASHINGTON, D.C., September 11, 2007, Legion: Support Surge, Troops, Petraeus.

The National Commander of the nation’s largest veterans organization today called for “much resolve and patience” by Congress and the American people on the war in Iraq after Multi-National Force Iraq Commander Gen. David Petraeus’s testimony before Congress.

National Commander Marty Conatser voiced The American Legion's continued support for the "surge" in Iraq and the improving security environment.

"Gen. Petraeus forcefully and effectively reported measurable gains to the joint session of the House Armed Services and Foreign Affairs Committees and his honest and professional assessment reinforced what I had seen in Iraq in the last month," Conatser said.

"General Petraeus's assessment that the military objectives are in large measure being met plus his reasonable proposal for a troop draw down prove the wisdom of the “surge” strategy,” Conatser explained.

He also applauded Gen. Petraeus's view that failure to follow through would be a ‘"rush to failure."’

“I visited Iraq in August and met with troops and Gen. Petraeus,” Conatser said. “There is no doubt in my mind, a premature troop withdrawal from Iraq would be disastrous for the Iraqis and the United States.”

Conatser said the troops he spoke with there said they’ve seen significant change and real improvements in the security environment, echoing what Gen. Petraeus told Congress today.

“The Senate confirmed Gen. Petraeus to change direction in Iraq,” Conatser added. “He’s doing that but change does not happen overnight and his “surge” strategy just became fully implemented in mid-June when the requested reinforcements finally arrived.

“In the broader context, this report to the Congress today demonstrates progress in the global war on terrorism,” the national commander said. “We agree with the Multi-Nation Force Iraq Commander that this will be a long struggle but we support our nation's forces and their leadership for the long haul.”

Two weeks ago, The American Legion unanimously re-affirmed The American Legion’s unwavering support for the war on terrorism during the organization’s 89th National Convention in Reno, Nevada. Resolution 169 also points out that the United States was “suddenly and without provocation, attacked by terrorists on September 11, 2001.” It adds, “The global war on terrorism is a just war, aimed at protecting the very foundations of freedom and freedom-loving people everywhere.”

Conatser, a retired sergeant major with the Illinois National Guard, fully supports Resolution 169.

“I am proud that The American Legion passed Resolution 169, which reminds people that supporting the troops also means supporting their mission. Iraq is part of the Global War on Terrorism. I always believed that but after seeing it firsthand, I am more convinced than ever,” he said. “Everything I saw in Iraq last month points to the fact that the “surge” is working.”

The National Commander also addressed recent personal attacks on Iraq’s top military commander.

“For anyone or group to portray Gen. Petraeus as a traitor is outrageous and downright despicable,” Conatser said. “The military leader I met with is an honest, dedicated patriot who is succeeding given the very difficult mission before him. He should be commended not condemned for his 35 years of selfless service to our nation.”

With a membership of 2.7-million wartime veterans, The American Legion was founded in 1919 on the four pillars of a strong national security, veterans affairs, Americanism, and patriotic youth programs. Legionnaires work for the betterment of their communities through more than 14,000 posts across the nation.
Add to that the Gathering of Eagles and Rolling Thunder.

Challenge to the anti-war left: Produce any organization that represents 3 million veterans as we have just produced.


Vets For Freedom:

Vets for Freedom is a nonpartisan organization established by combat veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our mission is to educate the American public about the importance of achieving success in these conflicts by applying our first-hand knowledge to issues of American strategy and tactics—namely "the surge" in Iraq. We support policymakers from both sides of the aisle who have stood behind our great generation of American warriors on the battlefield, and who have put long-term national security before short-term partisan political gain.

Vets for Freedom is the leading voice representing troops and veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Vets for Freedom represent more than 7,000 veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Here are there news articles and press releases.

Challenge to the anti-war left: Produce any organization that represents over 7,000 IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN veterans. Veterans that have fought in either Iraq or Afghanistan.


Appeal for Courage:

Appeal for Courage is a non-partisan, grass-roots effort to communicate to Congress the troops' desire to remain in Iraq until our mission is complete. We feel calls to retreat embolden our enemy and hurt our support within the American public and Iraqi people. We accept no funding from any source, and do not speak for any group or organization other than those military members who have signed the Appeal.

3285 Active Military Members have signed this appeal.

As an American currently serving my nation in uniform, I respectfully urge my political leaders in Congress to fully support our mission in Iraq and halt any calls for retreat. I also respectfully urge my political leaders to actively oppose media efforts which embolden my enemy while demoralizing American support at home. The War in Iraq is a necessary and just effort to bring freedom to the Middle East and protect America from further attack.

Challenge to the anti-war left: Produce 3285 Active Military Members speaking up publicly against the mission.

The far left liberal anti-war, anti-military will jump on one, two or ten, military members that has fought in Iraq and some of them, such as Jesse Macbeth are, indeed, as Rush stated, phony soldiers... others are soldiers that have served and simply disagree with our actions in Iraq and the ones that DID serve deserve the respect of being listened to, but, they receive no more credibility than the thousands that are speaking up in favor of our missions, in Iraq or elsewhere.

When you have 10 or 20 or even a hundred that are telling you one thing and you compare that to thousands that are telling you something else, you must use common sense.

Why would anybody give more credence to hundreds than they would thousands?

It makes no sense at all and yet that is what the anti-war left does on a daily basis.

What the left has done with Rush Limbaugh's comments is exactly what they have done with their use of the soldiers they trumpet the words of.

The deliberately hide the "context".

More from Hot Air, Right Wing News, Take Our Country Back and Captain's Quarters.

Shop the Sopranos Section at