al-Qaeda in Iraq

Just ran across this, written by the AP, so take it with a grain of salt. At least they are stating up front it is unconfirmed.

Al-Qaida in Iraq on Thursday denounced Iraqi Sunni politicians who met recently with Jordan's King Abdullah II, calling them and the monarch "traitors."

The statement, posted on an Islamic militant Web site, did not mention a summit Thursday between Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and
President Bush. Both leaders met separately with King Abdullah before their talks in Amman, Jordan.

Instead, al-Qaida in Iraq — the country's most feared Sunni Muslim militant group — lashed out at a string of Iraqi Sunni Arab politicians who held talks with Abdullah ahead of the summit.

"The traitors of Jordan's meetings, whether they know it or not, have entered today in a pact with Satan to fight the men of God," al-Qaida in Iraq said in its statement.

The authenticity of the statement could not be confirmed. It was posted on a Web forum often used to issue militant statements and was signed by the "Islamic state in Iraq," the so-called Islamic government that the group declared earlier this year and that now issues all its messages.

Al-Qaida has long demonized the U.S.-allied Jordanian monarch and in the past has targeted Iraqi Sunnis it sees as cooperating with the Shiite-led Iraqi government or the United States.

The statement called on "the lions and free men of Jordan" to prepare themselves to confront the king.

Abdullah met earlier this week in Amman with Harith al-Dhari, head of the influential Association of Muslim Scholars, a hardline Sunni Arab group known to have links to some factions within Iraq's 3-year-old Sunni-led insurgency. The king also met with Iraq's Sunni Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi and Iraq's most powerful Shiite politician, Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim.

I suppose these are the al-Qaeda in Iraq that NANCY PELOSI DENIES EXISTS.

House Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told reporters on Wednesday that she feels it is "sad" that President Bush continues to blame Iraqi insurgent violence on al Qaeda.

"My thoughts on the president's representations are well-known," Pelosi said. "The 9/11 Commission dismissed that notion a long time ago and I feel sad that the president is resorting to it again."

(SNIP)

Displaying a series of slides and charts, the spokesman for the multinational forces in Iraq claimed that "since October of 2004, we have now killed or captured over 7,000 al Qaeda in Iraq terrorists."

According to Major General William Caldwell, because Iraq still has a "government moving forward" with "institutions in place," and because al Qaeda in Iraq seeks "anarchy" instead of power, the current situation should not be considered a "civil war."

"We don't see an organization out there that's looking to assume the control of this country, but rather just to create anarchy, to create death, to create destruction, and that's in fact what we're combatting right now," Caldwell said.

Then the last paragraph of the article says volumes.

Caldwell didn't have an answer to the question. "We also, you know, look at that also very closely, try to identify exactly what percentage it is," he said. "What we do know is that al Qaeda in Iraq are the most well-funded, produce the most sensational attacks than any element out there. So that's where we put our predominant effort against."

So, as I point out here, is Pelosi just a liar or actually this stupid? I suppose those 7,000 are some sort of figments of Bush's imagination, huh Madame Squeaker?

Hot Air is also discussing this.

Another Front in the War: The Internet

Consider this an open trackback, just send me a ping and I will get it up asap.

Yesterday I got a news release from Centcom that I signed up for...

New Periodic Magazine Related to Technology and Internet Security Published by al-Fajr Information Center

The first issue of what is indicated to be a period magazine, “Technical Mujahid” [Al-Mujahid al-Teqany], published by al-Fajr Information Center, was electronically distributed to password-protected jihadist forums Tuesday, November 28, 2006.

This edition, 64-pages in length, contains articles that primarily deal with computer and Internet security, in addition to other pieces explaining Global Positioning System (GPS) satellites and video types, editing, and encoding into different formats. The editors of the publication state that it was written to heed the directives of the Emir of al-Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, and his call for technical support. Material such as this, regarding anonymity on the Internet, concealing of personal files locally on a computer, and utilizing all schemes of encryption, is to serve as electronic jihad, and a virtual means of supporting the Mujahideen.

Like individual postings made by jihadist forum members concerning Internet security and protection of incriminating files, or manuals that were provided by the Global Islamic Media Front for the same, the “Technical Mujahid” demonstrates the technical acumen of the jihadists. Articles like, “The Technique of Concealing Files from View” and “How to Protect Your Files, Even if Your Device was Penetrated,” were written for the intermediate to advanced user, and describe a variety of methods and software that provide security. Links to download referenced software, such as the VMware virtual machine, and key generators to unlock features are also given by the editors. Another writer discusses PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) software and determines that its encryption is not adequate for the needs of the Mujahideen.

Another article, The Last Card: We Need it in their Homeland, written by a member of the information office of the Islamic Army in Iraq, like the editorial contained in the magazine and an introductory message, emphasizes the great purpose of jihad in the information sector. This front is determined by the author to be “a main pillar in the battle of Islam against the Crusaders and the polytheist belief”. To this end, advertisements for the most recent Juba sniper video from the Islamic Army in Iraq and a news caption about its release on DVDs in Iraq, is used as an example.

For future issues, the editors urge members of the jihadist Internet community to submit articles in the field of technology for publishing. They write: “My kind, technical Mujahid brother, the magnitude of responsibility which is placed upon you is equal to what you know in the regard of information. Do not underestimate anything that you know; perhaps a small article that you write and publish can benefit one Mujahid in the Cause of Allah or can protect a brother of yours in Allah. This way you will gain the great reward with the permission of Allah”.

I bring this up because now Reuters is reporting that The U.S. government has warned U.S. private financial services of an al Qaeda call for a cyber attack against U.S. online stock trading and banking Web sites beginning Friday, officials said on Thursday.

The officials -- a person familiar with the warning and a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security -- said the Islamic militant group aimed to penetrate and destroy the databases of the U.S. stock market and banking Web sites.

The next front in the war? They have already figured out how to use our media and our political system...is it any surprise they would now try to use the internet for more than just recruiting?

[UPDATE] 12/01/06- Reuters has another report on this issue.

OTB Trafic Jam.
Linkfest Haven.
Conservative Cat.
Third World County.
Blue Star Chronicles.
Pirate's Cove.
Is it just me.


Tracked back by:
Maybe He Should Have Stuck with Whispering from Conservative Cat...
The Knucklehead of the Day award from The Florida Masochist...
Lead or no lead? from The Florida Masochist...
No surprise at all from The Florida Masochist...

Whose Bright Idea is it to Deal with Iran?

ABC has come out with an exclusive showing smoking-gun evidence of Iranian support for terrorist in Iraq.... anyone showing surprise here?

U.S. officials say they have found smoking-gun evidence of Iranian support for terrorists in Iraq: brand-new weapons fresh from Iranian factories. According to a senior defense official, coalition forces have recently seized Iranian-made weapons and munitions that bear manufacturing dates in 2006.

This suggests, say the sources, that the material is going directly from Iranian factories to Shia militias, rather than taking a roundabout path through the black market. "There is no way this could be done without (Iranian) government approval," says a senior official.

Are you starting to get that warm, fuzzy feeling yet?

So for those people (Iraq Study Group) that propose we deal or negotiate with Iran about security in Iraq, I would suggest you get your heads out of your asses.

Iranian-made munitions found in Iraq include advanced IEDs designed to pierce armor and anti-tank weapons. U.S. intelligence believes the weapons have been supplied to Iraq's growing Shia militias from Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, which is also believed to be training Iraqi militia fighters in Iran.

Evidence is mounting, too, that the most powerful militia in Iraq, Moktada al-Sadr's Mahdi army, is receiving training support from the Iranian-backed terrorists of Hezbollah.

Two senior U.S. defense officials confirmed to ABC News earlier reports that fighters from the Mahdi army have traveled to Lebanon to receive training from Hezbollah.

So, correct me if I am wrong, anyone, but isn't this sort of like sticking your hand into a fire to treat a burn???

Brian over at Iowa Voice is saying the same thing I said here and here. If everyone would have left Israel alone, Hizbullah wouldn't be a problem NOW in Iraq or in Lebanon, courtesy of? You guessed it!!!! IRAN.

In my minds eye we should deal with Iran, just not in the ways that the liberal Dems and the Study Group is proposing. My idea of dealing with Iran is to take down the regime of the lunatic, Ahmadinejad. This idiot is deliberately adding fuel to the fire in Iraq to force us to negotiate with him, to force our hand into asking him for help.

His help is now being proven. He is HELPING to destabilize Iraq. He is HELPING to cause countless deaths.

I am with Riehl World View on this one:

This should be dealt with as an act of war and a few cruise missiles into some number of weapons factories would seem to me to be a proportional response. Or maybe we can send Jim Baker over to help carry Iranian weapons into Iraq.

Couldn't have said it better myself. So what say you Baker? Willing to do it?

On a side note, since I am dealing with anti-semitic jagoffs here, you MUST check out Woman Honor Thyself and take a look at her Doozie of the daY: Dhimmi Carter piece. Talk about disgusting behavior!!!!

Others Discussing this:
Power Line.
Prairie Pundit.
Hot Air.
Atlas Shrugs.
Hyscience.

Enemy Propaganda from our Media Update

[UPDATE] 830pm Glenn Beck is talking about the Jamil Hussein on his show and telling AP to produce Jamil and that the story will not be let go til answers are found.

[UPDATE #2] BizzyBlog has some additional info.

[UPDATE #3] 12/01/06- Curt over at Flopping Aces has more updates plus more on that news conference that I pasted part of below, with a with the questions and answers. AP still stands by their story, but has not produced the fraud Jamil Hussein, nor pictures, nor any proof.

UPDATE 1545hrs PST

Centcom also sent me a more in-depth memo on the press briefing today. It is quite lengthy so I will have it available to download soon.
Here are a few interesting Question & Answers:

Q There is conflicting news about burning six people in one of the Baghdad neighborhoods. What is the truth about this incident?

A This is another rumor; we dispatched our forces to the area where the rumor claimed the burning took place and found nothing. We also send a team to Al-Dab Aladly (medical center) and I was in touch with this center. No one can confirm any burned, dead body was received. MOD also has no information about this incident, either.

[...]Q Are there any changes or modifications in the Baghdad security plan or new measures that have been added to this plan?

A Iraq does not have only one city. Iraq has 18 provinces and their hot security is deteriorating in four provinces. The ministry doing its best to control the security in these provinces. Our responsibility does not stop in Baghdad; yes we put more effort here than in other provinces. In this past week, after the Sadr City incident, we have use most of our resources and capability in hunting down terrorists and dismantled many terrorist networks. Regarding the Baghdad security plan, it is controlled by security partners, and that is why you do not see us in some sectors of Baghdad. But we are coordinating activities and operations in every step of the process.

UPDATE 2115hrs PST

As most of you have noticed the statements coming from the AP have been slightly incredible. They can't produce evidence that Jamil Hussein is real, they can't produce any proof that any bodies we're burned except for 5 witnesses. 3 unnamed, 1 one recanted, and 1 has been proven to have lied about his employment.

That's it...

Curt is really keeping up with this, so keep checking back with him.

11/30/06

Michelle Malkin has the latest in the saga about our media spreading rumors and trying to pass it off as actual news.

Long Story short, Curt from Flopping Aces noticed that the source AP was using had been used before and after contacting Centcom, discovered this "source" was not actually a police officer as AP claimed. Centcom asked AP to correct their story, AP refused and this is where we are.

From Malkin.

From CPATT PAO:

BG Abdul-Kareem, the Ministry of Interior Spokesman, went on the record today stating that Capt. Jamil Hussein is not a police officer. He explained the coordinations among MOI, the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Defense in attempting to track down these bodies and their joint conclusion was that this was unsubstantiated rumor.

He went on to name several other false sources that have been used recently and appealed to the media to document their news before reporting. He went into some detail about the impact of the press carrying propaganda for the enemies of Iraq and thanked "the friends" who have brought this to their attention.

AP did attend the press conference.

She then went on to ask for more details and Lt. Dean provided her with this:

Ministry of Interior Weekly Press Conference Thursday, November 30, 2006

By Brig. Gen. Abdul Kareem Khalaf Al-Kenani
Ministry of Interior spokesman

Press conference synopsis:

1. Media, especially satellite news channels, must adhere to
responsible practices:

a. MOI is monitoring coverage, and will insist on corrections to
false reports.

b. Unnamed sources should not be used. Two recently named sources
do not work for MOI. Contact MOI PAO for official information.

c. Rumors are rampant, and media should be careful to check with
official sources about information to avoid spreading false rumors.

2. MOI succeeded in a number of operations against terrorists in
Baghdad.

a. The Baghdad Sniper was apprehended, and information gained from
him led to the arrest of 30 others in his organization.

b. Two unauthorized "courts" that had issued death fatwas were
broken up.

c. A kidnapping cell, including one that raped a young girl, was
arrested.

Statement:

This press conference will cover MOI operations from Nov. 23 to 29, 2006.

Before we start the weekly briefing, I have some points to highlight and to remind the brothers that work in the media, especially the Satellite television Channels. We meant by this note to stress the ministry of interior's intention that we believe in free press and truthful press, in order not to confuse what the free press presents and the misleading media show, where the latter's intention is to make the situation in Iraq worse than what it is.

The press release issued by the ministry of interior has three main points: First, a warning to the satellite TV. Channels continue broadcasting false news, and based on that we have formed a special observation room to monitor these TV stations; the purpose of this unit is to determine the fabricated and false news that hurts and gives the Iraqis a wrong picture that the security situation is very bad, when the facts are totally different.

After the monitoring process, we will contact those TV stations by presenting them with the mistakes and errors they committed by broadcasting such false news, hoping they will correct these false reports on their main news programs. But if they do not change those lying, false stories, then we will seek legal action against them.

For example, we have some of the respected news outlets that deal with news fast and have a relation with many TV channels and the media in general, who distributed a story quoting a person called Jamil Hussein. Afterward, we searched our sources in our staff for anyone by this name-- maybe he wore an MOI uniform and gave a different name to the reporter for money. And the second name used is Lt. Maythem.

However, all of you know that the ministry of interior has a large public affairs office and its official spokesman, and we are ready to answer any questions you may have. Therefore, you should contact MOI PAO for all your needs to get real, true news. Based on that, we strongly deny any relation with those two names. In order to serve you better and strengthen the relationship with MOI, do not take statements that have no meaning and do not represent any official. We would like this note to be helpful to you and any statement made by those persons to be ignored.

The second subject is rumors. The ministry received in a week more than 12 cases of claims, one stating 50 killed were there, 200 kidnapped here, 30 corpses found there etc. And when we dispatched our forces and investigators to the locations, we found nothing.

On this note, I would like to thank some of the brothers in the media who are cautious and take the extra step to make sure the news he gets is correct or not, by contacting the ministry to verify any news through us that they hear or receive. Not only (do we reply), but we also give them more detail than they expected, and we hope others will follow suit. Also, we ask our people, please do not take any news or give it credibility, except from a well-known source with a name and an address that is part of the security ministries, etc., such as a minister or police station commander. Or if it is from the MOD or MOI, the name of the officer, his rank, his unit, etc. It is not enough to say "a source from the ministry of interior."

Doing otherwise, you will end up helping the spread of the rumors and make them reality, even thought it was a false rumor. This rumor business -- if a large issue, it will take a long time to cover it, but the purpose of the rumors is to disrupt life and make the security apparatus busy with other things than its main tasks. We will end up following rumors instead of hunting terrorists and criminals.

The third subject is, this week the strikes we made against the al-Qaeda terrorist organization in Baghdad were many and very strong in Baghdad. Before my arrival to this press conference, I was informed that one of the three who were just captured or detained is Mazer Al-Jubouri, aka the Baghdad Sniper, and his group. He admitted many things that are very important and very dangerous and our forces used this information about his network and conducted raids in the past 24 hours and detained 30 terrorists.

Those terrorists executed several explosions in Palestine and Beirut streets, and the New Baghdad area. He also admitted that their base is in Diyala province, which supplied them with money, weapons and explosives. They are now under investigation and we think this cell or network has been dismantled.

This week also, we dismantled what are called "courts" in northern and southern Baghdad, and detained the two persons who issued fatwas to kill the people. Our force dismantled what is called the Omar network, this criminal network that used to exercise its criminal activities in southern Baghdad. And they admitted many things about other terrorist networks and our forces are pursuing them now, as well as other networks for kidnapping.

One of them, we regret, kidnapped a girl and used narcotics on her and raped this little innocent young girl. We captured those criminals and the little girl is receiving medical attention. This is not Iraqis' culture. Just look how far down in debasement they have traveled. With regret, I told you that, because MOI activity does not hold in the media the position it deserves, and also to show the great sacrifice by MOI this week.

Please visit Flopping Aces and Michelle Malkin's site for the rest, it is a serious situation that not only is our media spreading nothing but rumor, but they are also, in effect, telling outright lies and refusing to correct them.

Jamil Hussein is a regular source for the AP and now, not only has Centcom told the AP repeatedly that the man is a fraud, but the AP has refused to issue corrections and although they were at this press conference, they still have not acknowledged their wrongdoings, as of this post.

We all know Iraq is not a pretty picture, but with reports that are being called outright lies by our military and the MOI, how are we to know exactly what is going on if we do not listen to our military.

Below is what our military is telling us.

The American Thinker:

Our contributor Sharon Tosi Moore is an officer in the United States Army Reserves, currently serving in Iraq. Today, she writes about the disputed report of Sunnis burned alive by Shiites.

"Sunnis Burned Alive in Revenge Attacks"

This headline was blared with authority and gleeful revulsion across every newspaper in the U.S. Even Stars and Stripes, the military newspaper overseas, declared this in 2-inch letters on its front page.

And why not? It is compelling story and a sure sign that sectarian tensions in Iraq have reached a new high (or low). THIS is surely the signal that Iraq has descended into new depths of barbarity and depravity. MSNBC's story is typical:

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Revenge-seeking militiamen seized six Sunnis as they left Friday prayers and burned them alive with kerosene in a savage new twist to the brutality shaking the Iraqi capital a day after suspected Sunni insurgents killed 215 people in Baghdad's main Shiite district.

Iraqi soldiers at a nearby army post failed to intervene in Friday's assault by suspected members of the Shiite Mahdi Army militia or subsequent attacks that killed at least 19 other Sunnis, including women and children, in the same neighborhood, the volatile Hurriyah district in northwest Baghdad, said police Capt. Jamil Hussein.

Sunni "eyewitnesses" confidently denounced the Shiite-dominated government for their inaction. There were bold claims that the Iraqi Army stood by and did nothing as this horrifying crime happened. People around the world braced themselves for the spectacular reprisals that would surely come from the Sunni. The press practically salivated at the bloodshed (and glorious headlines) that would be forthcoming.

A winning situation all around.

Except, well, except for the tiny little detail that the incident most likely never happened. A week has gone by and no charred bodies were produced. No dramatic funeral parades, with all the attendant wailing and gnashing of teeth, occurred. Not one photo. No grand reprisals. Not even any speeches (and it is hard to imagine Iraqi religious leaders miss an opportunity to make speeches). Just a few remarks from the Iraqi government, largely ignored by the U.S. press, that all reports showed that that particular district had been quiet, and pleading the Iraqi people for calm.

No one thought to question this unusual divergence from normal protocol.

The gullible press swallowed the initial claims whole. Of the major news sources, only TIME Magazine used the word "reportedly" in their headline. Besides, there are always new and dramatic stories of gore and bloodshed in Iraq and no one has the time to check their sources carefully or to go back and correct erroneous reports.

A review of the databases that painstakingly record every single incident in Iraq shows no evidence or report of the event. It is hard to believe that something as momentous as this would have escaped the notice of both the U.S. military and the entire Iraqi government. And yet not one major news organization has recanted their article. The story has been allowed to stand, and as such has become a truth. It is now just one more legend that will be confidently repeated as truth in future histories of the conflict.

To be sure, there are manifold horrors unfolding in Iraq, and the media does have a responsibility to report each and every one. However, perhaps it would be wise for the press to once in a while ask questions first and report later.

A good point and one the AP should heed.

We will end up following rumors instead of hunting terrorists and criminals.

This comment is very telling, the AP in their carelessness and refusal to admit that their longtime source is either entirely made up, or a fraud at best, is endangering the mission in Iraq. Once again as I pointed out about the NYT, this should be considered treason.

In law, treason is the crime of disloyalty to one's nation or state. A person who betrays the nation of their citizenship and/or reneges on an oath of loyalty and in some way willfully cooperates with an enemy, is considered to be a traitor.

These media outlets should be held accountable when they endanger American soldiers lives.


To catch up:
Reporters Source in Iraq Proven False.
Enemy Propaganda From Our Media.
Putting the Brakes on the Media Spreading Propaganda.
Enemy Propaganda Update.

Others discussing this:
The Jawa Report.
Hot Air.
Gateway Pundit.
Prairie Pundit.
Junkyard Blog.
Don Surber.
Stop the ACLU.

Keep up with who is discussing this at memeorandum.

The Corrupt UN.

This latest piece from BBC is not at all surprising, nor is it new.

Children have been subjected to rape and prostitution by United Nations peacekeepers in Haiti and Liberia, a BBC investigation has found.

Girls have told of regular encounters with soldiers where sex is demanded in return for food or money.

A senior official with the organisation has accepted the claims are credible.

The UN has faced several scandals involving its troops in recent years, including a DR Congo paedophile ring and prostitute trafficking in Kosovo.

The assistant secretary-general for peacekeeping operations acknowledges that sexual abuse is widespread.

"We've had a problem probably since the inception of peacekeeping - problems of this kind of exploitation of vulnerable populations," Jane Holl Lute told the BBC.

In January of 2005, another article was released dealing with the rampant problem of sexual abuse.

LAST MONTH A CLASSIFIED UNITED Nations report prompted Secretary General Kofi Annan to admit that U.N. peacekeepers and staff have sexually abused or exploited war refugees in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The worst of the 150 or so allegations of misconduct--some of them captured on videotape--include pedophilia, rape, and prostitution. While a U.N. investigation into the scandal continues, the organization has just suspended two more peacekeepers in neighboring Burundi over similar charges. The revelations come three years after another U.N. report found "widespread" evidence of sexual abuse of West African refugees.

Sex scandals are not the only form of corruption that the UN is responsible, but not held accountable for: Oil for Food-

In 1991, he UN Security Council slapped sanctions on Iraq for invading Kuwait and to force Iraq's full disarmament of its unconventional weapons. But the sanctions appeared to hurt ordinary Iraqis and not Hussein. So the Oil for Food program was hatched in 1996, which allowed Iraq to sell oil and use the proceeds to purchase food and humanitarian supplies. Over the next seven years the UN says the program fed 27 million Iraqis, saved a least a half a million children from malnutrition, helped fight diseases, and cleared 135 million square feet of land of mines.

But Hussein was allowed to choose his own business partners for the program. This allegedly enabled him to game the system. He is said to have hauled in $5.7 billion from illicit oil sales and $4.4 billion more in kickbacks, while his partners skimmed a portion as well, the US General Accounting Office reported in March. Analysts say he used some of the money to buy weapons.

Then we have Kofi Annan's aide shredding thousands of documents:

"Hell no!" was Kofi Annan's bullish response when asked last week if he would resign over the oil-for-food scandal.

The UN secretary-general's office was in full spin mode following the release of the eagerly awaited Volcker Interim Report on questions of conflict of interest involving Annan, whose son Kojo was employed by the UN oil-for-food contractor Cotecna.

The report was immediately greeted with unconvincing and rather desperate shrieks of "exoneration" by the UN's senior leadership after Paul Volcker controversially found "no evidence that the selection of Cotecna in 1998 was subject to any affirmative or improper influence of the secretary-general in the bidding or selection process."

However, a closer reading of the report reveals serious failures of leadership at the United Nations, the destruction of thousands of critically important documents by the UN chief of staff, and previously undisclosed meetings between Kofi Annan and Cotecna executives, all of which make a mockery of UN claims of vindication.

It is hardly surprising that Volcker has struggled to find evidence of "improper influence" if a great deal of vital evidence has ended up in a shredder. Despite UN protestations, this latest report will add to a growing picture of mismanagement, incompetence, and unaccountability in a world body in deep crisis and in serious need of reform.

The most significant finding in the Volcker Report is undoubtedly the revelation that Kofi Annan's then-Chief of Staff Iqbal Riza authorized the shredding between April and December 2004 of thousands of UN documents--the entire UN Chef de Cabinet chronological files for the years 1997, 1998 and 1999, many of which related to the oil-for-food program.

We also have the fact that the UN has video tapes related to the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers by Hizbullah.

A defense ministry delegation examined Wednesday morning in Geneva footage from two videotapes related to the kidnapping of the three IDF soldiers by Hezbollah in October last year and which is in the United Nations' possession. They also examined seven bloodstained items taken from two vehicles believed to have been involved in the operation.

IDF officers viewed the video footage for the first time about two weeks ago at UN headquarters in New York. The initial conclusions from viewing the tapes and items was that experts were needed to get any information about the condition of the three Israelis.

The three soldiers - Adi Avitan, Omar Sued and Beni Avraham - were kidnapped on the northern border in the Har Dov area. At the time, Israel insisted that the UN was in possession of footage related to the abduction, but senior members of the world body, including Secretary-General Kofi Annan, vehemently denied the existence of any videotape.

Embarrassed UN leaders apologized to Israel after it emerged two months ago that UNIFIL soldiers had filmed events the day after the kidnapping, including the vehicles used by Hezbollah in the abduction. An internal UN investigation found that UN officials had been guilty of a "lapse of judgement" but that there had been no intentional effort to conceal the footage.

One that did not recieve a lot of attention was the incident, caught on Video of Terrorists using UN vehicles to carry out attacks. This was back in 2004.

The United Nations and Red Cross have been providing cover for terrorists – literally. And American taxpayers are footing some of the bill.

An Israeli television station aired footage of armed Arab terrorists in southern Gaza using an ambulance owned and operated by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees. Palestinian gunmen used the UNRWA emergency vehicle as getaway transportation after murdering six Israeli soldiers in Gaza City on May 11. The footage shows two ambulances with flashing lights pull onto a street. Shots and shouts ring out during the nighttime raid. A gang of militants piles into one of the supposedly neutral ambulances, clearly marked "U.N." with the agency's blue flag flying from the roof, which then speeds away from the scene.

All in all, Kofi Annan, being in charge, should be held accountable for the corruption that he has made no attempt to stop.

Others discussing this:
Hot Air.
Captain's Quarters.
It Shines for All.
Blue Crab Boulevard.
[Update] More from lawhawk at a Blog for All.

Related:
Bolton Smacks Down the UN.

The Problems of Winning and Election

One of the many difficulties for the "winners" of this past elections is that now the focus is on them. The Democrats seem to have forgotten this. So now Wapo, who was one of the Dems biggest cheerleaders before the elections is now focused on them, and apparently, not liking what they are seeing.

Now, the Dems are expected to actually keep those promises they made before the election and they are already failing dismally in the eyes of the public. Nancy's Murtha fiasco was just the tip of the iceberg, the first sign that the Dems that won, have no intention of "cleaning up congress" as they promised.

Wapo points out:

It was a solemn pledge, repeated by Democratic leaders and candidates over and over: If elected to the majority in Congress, Democrats would implement all of the recommendations of the bipartisan commission that examined the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

But with control of Congress now secured, Democratic leaders have decided for now against implementing the one measure that would affect them most directly: a wholesale reorganization of Congress to improve oversight and funding of the nation's intelligence agencies. Instead, Democratic leaders may create a panel to look at the issue and produce recommendations, according to congressional aides and lawmakers.

Because plans for implementing the commission's recommendations are still fluid, Democratic officials would not speak for the record. But aides on the House and Senate appropriations, armed services and intelligence committees confirmed this week that a reorganization of Congress would not be part of the package of homeland-security changes up for passage in the "first 100 hours" of the Democratic Congress.

"I don't think that suggestion is going anywhere," said Rep. C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.), the chairman of the Appropriations defense subcommittee and a close ally of the incoming subcommittee chairman, Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.). "That is not going to be their party position."

It may seem like a minor matter, but members of the commission say Congress's failure to change itself is anything but inconsequential. In 2004, the commission urged Congress to grant the House and Senate intelligence committees the power not only to oversee the nation's intelligence agencies but also to fund them and shape intelligence policy. The intelligence committees' gains would come at the expense of the armed services committees and the appropriations panels' defense subcommittees. Powerful lawmakers on those panels would have to give up prized legislative turf.

But the commission was unequivocal about the need.

"Of all our recommendations, strengthening congressional oversight may be among the most difficult and important," the panel wrote. "So long as oversight is governed by current congressional rules and resolutions, we believe the American people will not get the security they want and need."

Now Democrats are balking, just as Republicans did before them.

Well, well well!!!!! Who is surprised...show of hands?

Sister Toldjah has links to the MANY times Pelosi spoke about implenting the 9/11 Commission recommendations. Take a look at Nancy's Words before the election.

Brian at Iowa Voice says it perfectly:

First off, that whole “We’ll do what the 9/11 Commission recommended” was a load of hooey in the first place. Most of it WAS already done, at least according to this article from USA Today…which was, convieniantly, reported on AFTER the libs won the election:

Democrats poised to take control of Congress say they’ll work to implement the unfinished business the 9/11 Commission recommended to better protect America from terrorists. But it won’t be easy. Much of what the commission proposed has been accomplished, at least in some measure. And many other proposals won’t get through because they’re either too expensive or face stiff political opposition.

The next pledge they’re going to break is the “oh, we won’t raise your taxes (snicker…tee-hee…guffaw!)” pledge. And then the “oh, we won’t be spending a lot of money. We’re going to be responsible (he-he, snicker!)”You just know that at the DNC on Election Day, when it was clear the Dems had won, Howard Dean turned to his staff and said “Holy crap, they bought it!” in disbelief.

All in all, the fun part of all this for me, is watching the Democrats and the left side, especially the blogosphere realize that now that the Dems have the majorities, THEY are in the lime light and it seems that the very people that helped place them there are now seeing that the campaign promises were never meant to be kept. They were simply a line that the Dems were feeding the left, and was swallowed whole.

I rarely have much good to say about The Washington Post, but I am gonna break with that tradition in this case to say... Good for you for actually calling their hand on it.

Others Discussing this:
Captain's Quarters with Another Campaign Promise Bites the Dust.
Strata-Sphere with Flyby.
QandO with "Promises, Promises."
Macsmind "Democrats renege on campaign promise.
Prairie Pundit Dems break promise on 9/11 report implementation.

Pullback but No Timeline

Wow, why didn't Bush think of that!!!! According to NYT and Wapo, the Iraq Study Group will be releasing their report and in it are their recommendations, one of which is to pullback, but without a timeline. Sound familiar. All this time and money spent on a bipartisan opinion that basically takes 100 pages to say, keep up what we are doing.

But the recommendation includes a series of conditions and qualifications that would govern any drawdown of forces, the source said. "It describes a process by which combat brigades could be pulled out, but there wasn't a specific timetable on it," he said. The source demanded anonymity because members of the bipartisan panel have been pledged to secrecy until the report is officially issued Dec. 6.

(SNIP)

The recommendations in the still-secret report were agreed to after three days of closed-door discussions. The report, which is about 100 pages, will offer a comprehensive look at regional political and security issues as well as the troubled U.S. deployment in Iraq, according to sources close to the panel.

For weeks, the panel has debated reaching out to both Syria and Iran, an approach that the Bush administration has so far firmly rejected. Commission members have also backed the idea of a regional conference to bring all the neighbors into the process of stabilizing Iraq.

Now, I already explained why negotiating with Iran is a bad idea in my post "Would YOU negotiate with Hitler", you don't negotiate with a madman, a deal with only one party acting in good faith is not a deal at all.

Under the recommendations of the commission, led by former secretary of state James A. Baker III and former congressman Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.), the emphasis of the U.S. military presence in Iraq would shift from fighting the insurgency and containing sectarian violence to backing up Iraqi security forces dealing with those problems.

Once again, hasn't this been the ultimate goal all along? The problem has been getting to that point and getting the Iraqi's trained to the point where we COULD get to that point. Geeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeezzz!!!

This approach would place less emphasis on combat operations and more on logistics, intelligence and training and advising Iraqi units. Also, a large residual combat force would be required to protect all the personnel involved in those operations and to provide a security guarantee to the Iraqi government.

Thus, even if the combat forces were withdrawn, the person familiar with the group's thinking noted, the recommendation envisions keeping in Iraq a "substantial" U.S. military force.

Some people knowledgeable about the group's deliberations said it might be possible in a year or two to halve the U.S. military presence, to about 70,000 troops. Earlier reports that said that the group simply had decided to call for withdrawing combat forces from Iraq were "garbled," the source familiar with the panel's recommendations added. "It wasn't as specific as that, and it was a lot more conditional," he said. He declined to discuss those conditions.

"We reached a consensus, which in itself is remarkable," said another source close to the 10-member panel of prominent Republicans and Democrats. Divisions had been deep in the run-up to this week's final deliberations.

The findings dovetail with recommendations being considered by the military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, who are conducting their own review of Iraq policy. That group is leaning toward an option that involves a brief surge of troops in Iraq, followed by a partial drawdown and a shift from combat operations to training and advising, according to sources familiar with the process. Troops would remain in Iraq for five to 10 years under this option, which is known within the military as "go long."

All in all, even the study group realizes what the left and the Dems seem unwilling to even consider, that stabilization is a must, total defeat is not an option. Strategic tactics are constantly going to need to be changed until we find (yes, that DIRTY word) a "winning" strategy.

Amy Proctor has a must see piece showing General Abizaid doing an interview. (she has the video)

Final exchange:

LOGAN: We hear very little about victory in Iraq these days, we hear a lot about how to manage the defeat..

ABIZAID: (cocking head and looking puzzled) What defeat?

LOGAN: (correcting herself) How to minimize the defeat....

ABIZAID: That’s your word. Defeat is your word, not my word. Can Iraq stabilize? Yes, Iraq can stabilize.

LOGAN: Is that victory now, is that what victory will look like in Iraq just “stability”? That’s what we’re aiming for?

ABIZAID: Victory in Iraq is the nation at peace with its neighbors. And Iraq hasn't been at peace with its neighbors in a long time. It is a country that respects the rights of its citizens. It's a country that can defend itself. It's a country that's not a safe haven for terrorists. Exactly what form of government they choose to develop I think would be a uniquely Iraqi solution to the problem. But the fact that they will come to a solution where they've gotta take into account the rights and desires not only of ethnic groups of individual, rights and desires, is actually a revolutionary change in the Middle East.

LOGAN: Increasingly in this country, people are talking about how to manage defeat in Iraq. There's a loss of support for the war very clearly shown at the present. Not a loss of support for the military or for the soldiers.

ABIZAID: Again, let me say I don't think people in the country are trying to figure out how to manage defeat in Iraq. I think people in the country are trying to figure out how to manage our involvement in Iraq so that Iraq can stabilize. You just can't walk away from these problems of the Middle East and hope that things are gonna get better. Look, many people have said we're already at the beginning of World War III.

LOGAN: Are we?

ABIZAID: No. We're not. And our involvement in the region will prevent it.

Check out the video, well worth the watch... this is our military telling us how it REALLY is, not politicians, not the MSM, a General and a smart one at that.

Abizaids words to Clinton:

As General Abizaid stated to Senator Clinton, “When I come to Washington, I feel despair. When I’m in Iraq with my commanders, when I talk to my soldiers and Iraqi leadership, they are not despairing,” said General John Abizaid, the head of US Army’s Central Command or CENTCOM.

That sums it up perfectly, The Dems feel despair, they have already given up, the military who is in Iraq, does not feel despair, they see the progress that is being made...the progress that certain people in Washington refuse to acknowledge.

Jules Crittenden has a very good take on this, check out his views.

In another article from Wapo, they quote Bush making it clear that drawdown at this time is completely unrealistic.

AMMAN, Jordan, Nov. 30 -- President Bush delivered a staunch endorsement of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki Thursday morning and dismissed calls for U.S. troop withdrawals from Iraq as unrealistic, following a summit meeting in which the two leaders discussed speeding up the turnover of security responsibilities.

All in all, it seems that we are going to continue to try to stabilize Iraq, as we should.... to leave Iraq before the job is done, would simply lead to us having to go back at a later date to an even messier situation. It isn'tpretty, it isn't ideal, but it is the right thing to do.

Lebanon should have taught us the danger of leaving a job half done, as should have Vietnam, in which our leaving before the job was done cost the Vietnamese 2.25 MILLION lives.

Others discussing this:
186 k per second has Iraq Study Group-Cut and stay the course before we run? (Gotta love this guy)
Blue crab Boulevard on Pushing Back.
Sister Toldjah says show us the plan, man.
The Adventures of Chester has a followup on Going Native.
Power Line on the Gathering Swarm.
Captain's Quarters thinks it is a Strange Consensus on Iraq.
Hot Air.



Related Posts:
Appeasement Doesn't Work.
Ramifications of a Job Half Done.
Ramifications of a Job Half Done Part #2.
Definition of Civil War: Is it Exactly a "Bad" Thing?
Would YOU Negotiate with Hitler?

I pledge allegiance to........

I think I'm going to run for public office, maybe dog catcher or something, haven't decided yet. What I HAVE decided, however, is that I'm going to follow in the lead of Minnesota's Keith Ellison, (thanks Jim) who will take his oath of office by swearing in not on the Bible, as traditionally done in this country, but on the Koran, or Quran, however it's being spelled these days.

Yes, I've decided that I want to take my oath of office on not one, but TWO books that I consider to be very, very important: Action Comics #1, which introduced Superman to the world, and Detective Comics #27 in which the world was introduced to Batman. I'm sure that my wishes will be respected, no matter how it flies in the face of tradition in this country, as we are a nation of all inclusiveness and what not.

I'm welcome to suggestions for the addition of other books...

Others Posting:
Hot Air.
Stop the ACLU.
Riehl World View.
Dennis Prager of Townhall.

Putting The Brakes on Media Spreading Propaganda

Hat Tip to the Anchoress for the email and LFG for the heads up.

Cross Posted from LFG:

UPDATE at 11/29/06 9:45:45 am:

LGF reader Glen K. forwarded an email he received from CENTCOM today, indicating that the Iraqis are planning a rebuttal to the continuing AP claims about Jamil Hussein:

From: MNC-I PAO Victory Main JOC
[mailto:MNF-IPAOVictoryMainJOC@iraq.centcom.mil]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 9:14 AM
To: [deleted]
Cc: MNC-I PAO Victory Main JOC
Subject: RE: [U] RE: Could you confirm that the letter below was sent
by CENTCOM

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Sir:

I have just learned from Mr. Costlow, mentioned below, that Brig. Gen. Abdul-Karim Khalaf, the official Ministry of Interior spokesmen, will begin his regularly scheduled press conference at noon tomorrow with a statement that Capt. Jamil Hussein, is not a Baghdad police officer or an MOI employee.

Yesterday, coincidently, the Iraqi Ministry of Interior issued a press release warning of spreading propaganda aimed at broadcasters. The text of this statement follows:

A Statement from the Ministry of Interior

After media became free in Iraq and expressed the will of all without the government interfering, unfortunately, some satellite TV channels began misleading public opinion and disclosing chaos for a particular political agenda, by broadcasting propaganda that harms people and tries to shake the trust in security forces.

Such satellite channels are trying to affect Iraqi unity and claim that information was stated by a security source without mentioning the source. Information sources should be well-known and reliable, and to avoid repeating such unfair actions, MOI warns the media and insists on defending the people’s security and safety. MOI will take all immediate preventive procedures against media that broadcast propaganda, because such media intend to repress the will of Iraqis in fighting terror and crime.

We would like to mention that such procedures we do not consider as chaining true free media, but it is a legal defense for Iraqi security and the safety of our people.

If you have any additional questions, please let us know.

Vr,
LT Dean

Michael B. Dean
Lieutenant, U.S. Navy
MNC-I Joint Operations Center
Public Affairs Officer

michael.dean@iraq.centcom.mil
MNCI-PAO-VictoryMainJOC@iraq.centcom.mil
Multinational Corps - Iraq
Public Affairs Office

About time we stop letting the news outlets spread propaganda instead of truth. Good for the Iraqi's!!!!

Previous Post:
Treason and the New York Times.

More on Enemy Propaganda being reported with Michelle Malkin, Mary Katharine Ham and Gateway Pundit.
Flopping Aces, who got this ball rolling.
Please note on Malkins page where the picture that the AP uses in the caption about the "supposed" burned sunni's, when clicked through, is actually a dead Shia!!!!!! That kind of deliberate distortion borders on complete dishonesty by the AP.

Treason and the New York Times

Once again I am struck by the level of disloyalty certain media outlets have for America. Can these acts be considered treason? Personally, I think it is a very good question.

Following is the text of a Nov. 8 memorandum prepared for cabinet-level officials by Stephen J. Hadley, the national security adviser, and his aides on the National Security Council. The five-page document, classified secret, was read and transcribed by The New York Times.

As it states, this is a classified document, many are discussing the content, but in my mind, the deliberate act of treason should be the focus. The behavior of the NYT , as well as CNN in showing the sniper video a while ago, should be in taken into consideration.

The actual definition of the word treason says quite a bit:

1. the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2. a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.

Is this not what the New York Times as well as a few others is guilty of?

In law, treason is the crime of disloyalty to one's nation or state. A person who betrays the nation of their citizenship and/or reneges on an oath of loyalty and in some way willfully cooperates with an enemy, is considered to be a traitor.

This is not the first time the New York Times has leaked classified information, the most recent judgement against the New York Times allowing prosecuters to review their phone records is another instance where the New York Times disloyalty to our country endangered American lives.

The Supreme Court yesterday refused a request from the New York Times to stop federal prosecutors from examining the telephone records of two of its reporters, part of a grand jury probe of an alleged leak in a terrorism-funding investigation.

The court's decision not to get involved opens the way for U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald in Chicago to review the telephone records of Times reporter Philip Shenon and former reporter Judith Miller. He has said the statute of limitations will expire on Dec. 3 on certain offenses a grand jury is investigating, and on Dec. 13 on others.

The Times had asked Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to stay an appeals court ruling in the government's favor. She referred the matter to the full court, and it declined yesterday in a one-sentence order that did not state its reasoning.

It was the second time in as many years the court has refused to get involved in a case pitting the government against the Times, and it lets stand a ruling that is the latest in a string of court decisions to go against media organizations that resist revealing confidential sources.

The current case arises from Fitzgerald's post-Sept. 11, 2001, investigation of possible links between al-Qaeda and two U.S.-based Islamic charities, the Holy Land Foundation and the Global Relief Foundation.

In December 2001, the Times reporters learned of plans to freeze the groups' assets, and called for comment shortly before FBI agents raided the offices. Fitzgerald is trying to find out if any government officials illegally leaked information to the reporters, and said disclosure of the government's plans tipped off the charities, endangering law enforcement officials. The Times disputes this.

The first amendment should never be allowed to be used as an "excuse" for treason, for betraying your country, especially at a time of war.

The New York Times should be held accountable and perhaps be brought up on charges of treason. The fact that information is classified, usually means it is NOT for public consumption and after reading this memo, there was absolutely no need for the American people to know, the only benefit the NYT had was betraying this fine country.

The same can be said for CNN, in the sniper video coverage. The graphic video of 10 sniper attacks was obtained by CNN -- through intermediaries -- from the Islamic Army of Iraq, one of the most active insurgent organizations in Iraq.

(In law, treason is the crime of disloyalty to one's nation or state. A person who betrays the nation of their citizenship and/or reneges on an oath of loyalty and in some way willfully cooperates with an enemy, is considered to be a traitor.)

Terrorists working hand in hand with CNN.... again, is this not what the above definition of treason states? Does it not state that "cooperation with the enemy" IS treason? Didn't CNN cooperate with the enemy by showing a video that the enemy supplied because the enemy wished it? If this is not treason, what exactly is? Working with or for the enemy as CNN and the New York Times has been guilty of, should result in prosecution.

There is a vast difference between news and betraying your country and it is about time the line in the sand is drawn.

Others discussing this:
Sister Toldjah.
Macsmind.
Gateway Pundit.
PoliBlog.
Right Wing Guy.
Michelle Malkin.
Right Truth.

More on Enemy Propaganda being reported with Michelle Malkin, Mary Katharine Ham and Gateway Pundit.
Flopping Aces, who got this ball rolling.
Please note on Malkins page where the picture that the AP uses in the caption about the "supposed" burned sunni's, when clicked through, is actually a dead Shia!!!!!! That kind of deliberate distortion borders on complete dishonesty by the AP.

Guerillas in the mist...

Hat tip to Snapped Shot and Atlas Shrugs for this one...

I come from a family of news junkies. From my earliest memories, I can remember my parents having the evening news on every evening, followed by the local news, while they read the newspapers. CNN was a GODSEND for my mother, especially during times when a breaking story would interupt whatever else was on for a quick report. She would consider this, I suppose, an alert for her to go find out more on CNN when the news break would end. I suppose this is some sort of genetic trait that was passed along; my late grandfather would demand, I am told, complete silence while the news was on, and my brother and I have both followed along this path to some extent with our college studies, his a degree in journalism and work as an editor for a newspaper, mine a degree in history and in political science.

I can remember from a very young age watching news segments reporting Islamic guerillas in their training camps. I'm dating myself here, but I remember watching the news during the Yom Kippur War and seeing the images of mostly Egyptian and Syrian troops in their positions, armed and ready to fight Israel. This is just one incident of many through the years. The media has established itself, long ago, as being more than willing to show "jihadist" scenes to the world.

Are they cheerleading for the terrorists? I'd say that they are, and as I've just pointed out, it's not a new thing. The time has come for the dinosaur media to be told, in no uncertain terms, that by showing support for terrorists what they do borders on treason.

Personally, I've a gullet full of their vile crap.

I hope the rest of you feel the same way, and we can get something done about it.

I gotta say this

According to Daily Mail, women talk more than men.

It is something one half of the population has long suspected - and the other half always vocally denied. Women really do talk more than men.

In fact, women talk almost three times as much as men, with the average woman chalking up 20,000 words in a day - 13,000 more than the average man.

I have only one very, very, very profound thing to say about this...... DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don Surber says a little more.

Much Ado About Nothing

After all the hype and the public "outcry" about the NSA program, it seems that the government has, indeed, built protections into the programs at the same time as protecting our country.

This IS an AP report, so take it with a grain of salt.

The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board received a long-awaited briefing on the secret program last week by senior members of the National Security Agency.

Two of the five board members told The Associated Press on Monday they were impressed by the safeguards the government has built into the NSA's monitoring of phone calls and computer transmissions and wished the administration could tell the public more about them to ease distrust.

"If the American public, especially civil libertarians like myself, could be more informed about how careful the government is to protect our privacy while still protecting us from attacks, we'd be more reassured," said Lanny Davis, a former Clinton White House lawyer.

Alan Raul, a former Reagan White House lawyer and the board's vice chairman, said the group "found there was a great appreciation inside government, both at the political and career levels, for protections on privacy and civil liberties."

"In fact, I think the public may have an underappreciation for the degree of seriousness the government is giving these protections." said Raul, author of a book on privacy and civil liberties in the digital age.

Pointing out the obvious, so many have criticized the program, without any proof that it was violating any civil liberties.... will they now apologize or simply ignore the fact that our government has done everything possible to protect us AND protect our privacy also?

To give credit where it is due, the Wapo piece also acknowledged Lanny Davis's pleasant surprise.

One member, Lanny J. Davis, a White House lawyer in the Clinton administration, said in an interview that he was "pleasantly surprised" by the privacy protections built into the program. He declined to discuss the program in detail because of secrecy restrictions.

"I was astonished at the extent to which they are all concerned about the legal and civil liberties and privacy implications of what they were doing," Davis said. "It was a constant theme of concern, awareness and training way beyond what I expected."

Davis said the briefings convinced him that the program had been carefully constructed from the start. "It was clear that as they thought about it, they put it together in a way that minimized problems to the best extent that they could," he said.

Now lets see if the Dems and the left side of the aisle acknowledges the same thing....that maybe, just maybe, the administration was able to enable a "tool" and protect our privacies at the same time.

Doubtful.

Hasting NOT Next Intelligence Committee Chairman

Pelosi makes the right decision for a change and then follows it up with yet another lie. Continued from my ealier post today "LIARS!!!! Pelosi and co."

House Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi has told Florida Rep. Alcee Hastings that he will not be the next chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, the two Democrats announced Tuesday.

"I have been informed by the speaker-elect that I will not serve as the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in the 110th Congress. I am obviously disappointed with this decision. As we learn in Ecclesiastes, however, for everything there is a season," he said in a press statement.

"Congressman Alcee Hastings and I have had extensive consultations, and today I advised him that I would select someone else as Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. Alcee Hastings has always placed national security as his highest priority. (The lie) He has served our country well, and I have full confidence that he will continue to do so," Pelosi said in a separate release.

In comments over the weekend, Hastings left the impression he was resigned to not receiving the chairmanship from Pelosi, due in large measure to his impeachment from the federal bench in 1989 relating to a FBI bribery sting involving two convicted racketeers. He was acquitted in the criminal trial, but then was impeached in the Senate and removed from his post for fabricating the evidence that secured his acquittal.

Hastings, who will be serving his eighth term beginning next year, had public support from many quarters, including from the Congressional Black Caucus and Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts, who will lead the Financial Services Committee next session.

At least Pelosi showed the brains not to commit political suicide before officially taking up the speaker position.

Others discussing this:
The State.
Macsmind.
Townhall.
Hot Air.
Reuters.

My related posts on Pelosi:
Democratic Dilemma.
Pelosi Lies about Murtha.
The Murtha Meltdown.
Pelosi LOSES.
Hillary Pelosi Catfight.
The New Squeaker of the House.
Squeaker of the House Defends Rangel Linkfest.
LIARS!!!! Pelosi and co.