This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Antiwar crowd

  • So now Fox is the enemy?

    Now we discover that it was Rupert Murdoch who is pulling the strings for the war against terrorism, thanks to brilliant Bernie Sanders and Michael Moore wannabe Robert Greenwald, according to Breitbart;

    Condemning the Fox News Channel as a warmonger that’s agitating for a U.S. attack on Iran, documentary filmmaker Robert Greenwald and independent U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders announced an “online viral video campaign” Wednesday calling on television news organizations “not to follow Fox down the road to war again.”
    Greenwald, the director behind “Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism” and “Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price,” has compiled a new three-minute video that mashes clips from Fox’s coverage of the 2003 invasion of Iraq and its aftermath with recent coverage of possible U.S. military action against Iran.

    The video and an accompanying “open letter” to ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC and CNN—viewable at http://www.FoxAttacks.com—urge news organizations to ask tough questions about administration policy on Iran and say citizens should pressure them to do so.

    I guess it never occured to either of them to investigate something like Hussein’s ties to al Qaeda or the failures of the Clinton Administration to defend us against terrorists, or even the repressive government of Iran. It’s just a lot easier to justify an attack against a news agency than it is to justify an attack against people who are actually killing other people.

    But that’s the kind of people the new flatlanders who’ve invaded Vermont send to the Senate to represent them – other idiot flatlanders.

    According to the Washington Examiner, fingers are flying on Capitol Hill about who’s to blame for 9-11 intelligence failures;

    P.J. Crowley, a Clinton aide on the National Security Council staff and now an analyst at the Center for American Progress, said the elder Bush started the decline.

    The CIA’s release this week of an internal report critical of the agency’s pre-Sept. 11 intelligence work has sparked a new debate on who is to blame — Democrats or Republicans.

    Sen. Christopher Bond, R-Mo., vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, issued a statement Wednesday charging that “drastic cuts in funding to intelligence agencies during the 1990s made it difficult for the CIA to do its job.”

    He said renewed attempts to blame Bush are “an unwarranted cheap shot.”

    Experts estimate that the intelligence budget was about $40 billion in 1990. By 1998, the sixth year of Bill Clinton’s presidency, it had dropped to $26.7 billion. In the next two years it rose above $30 billion, then took a quantum leap after Sept. 11 to about $45 billion today.

    Um, fellas, let’s not lose sight of who’s really to blame here – the Islamists and Syria and Iran. Instead of fighting over decades old funding cuts, lets pull together and beat these clowns.

  • Politics of the surge

    Bad news for the Democrats is always good news for the country. And the bad news is that the latest strategy in Iraq seems to be working. Even Der Speigel, the German publication and certain writers for the NY Times can’t help but notice that Iraq is a becoming a safer place. And of course the Left is rushing out to blunt the good news and provide al Qaeda, the Democrat Party’s military arm, some hope. from the Washington Examiner;

    Pro-surge analysts contend al Qaeda is on its heels and desperate in the face of a six-month-old U.S. troop reinforcement.

    But Anthony H. Cordesman, a military analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, offered a gloomy assessment.

    “Al Qaeda is far from defeated. It still has major support from some tribes, and significant al Qaeda operating areas exist,” Cordesman said. The struggle against al Qaeda has become perhaps the most important military objective in Iraq. The outcome will likely determine whether warring sects can reconcile and whether U.S. troops can start coming home next year.

    […]

    While the U.S. command has trumpeted the killing and capturing of scores of al Qaeda leaders this summer, Cordesman concluded, “Al Qaeda continues to show considerable resilience in rebuilding its leadership and key cadres.”

    As if to underscore Cordesman’s analysis, al Qaeda struck this week in what may turn out to be its most deadly coordinated attack of the war. Four massive truck bombs exploded in three Iraq villages near the Syrian border. The death toll may reach 500.

    So because the cowards are still able to attack unarmed citizens with massive stocks of home-made explosives, that proves we’re not doing damage to al Qaeda.

    Curt of Flopping Aces illustrates the internals from the latest propaganda poll from CNN;

    Quite curious how in the world CNN can spin a poll where they ask a question of only half a sample and proclaim it proof that America distrusts our military leaders:

    Of course, the reason that Americans can’t trust their military officers (if it were even true) is because they don’t get the news of the war from outlets like CNN. they have to get the truth from sources like Bill Roggio;

    Al Qaeda in Iraq continues to face opposition from Sunni insurgent groups. In the Buhriz district in Diyala province, the 1920s Revolution Brigades assisted Iraqi police in fending off an attack of upwards of 60 al Qaeda fighters. Multinational Forces Iraq identified the Sunni insurgents as the “Baqubah Guardians,” however IraqSlogger reported the al-Ishreen Revolution Brigades (1920s Revolution Brigades) engaged in the fight. Multinational Forces Iraq described the fighting, and notes the coordination between the insurgent group, the local police, and US attack helicopters:

    And you have to red all the way to the bottom of the Examiner story to read;

    “I think that we are within sight of defeating this organization in Iraq if we continue to press, but it will be able to conduct periodic spectacular attacks for a long time to come,” he said. Cordesman conceded that the six-month surge of five U.S. Army brigades and 30,000 extra Iraqi troops in Baghdad “did enable [the coalition] to make some gains against al Qaeda.”

    Most analysts also agree that Anbar province, once the most restive Sunni area in Iraq, has become one of the quietest, as Sunni tribal leaders end an alliance with al Qaeda and join the coalition. Attacks in its two largest cities — Ramadi and Fallujah — are down sharply.

    And outlets like the Washington Post and the Associated Press still call al Qaeda “Sunni insurgents” just in case someone might get the idea that this isn’t a civil war like it was a year ago;

    U.S. troops clashed with suspected Sunni insurgents holed up in a mosque north of Baghdad and launched an air-to-ground Hellfire missile into the structure. One American soldier was killed in the fighting, the military said Friday.

    The soldier was killed and another was wounded when troops stationed at a nearby outpost came under heavy small-arms fire from the Honest Mohammed Mosque late Thursday in Tarmiyah as they targeted about six insurgents who were believed sheltered inside, according to the military.

    And the Washington Post buries on page 18 that there is a coalition taking root among Sunnis, Kurds and some of the Shi’ite factions in Iraq;

    As Iraqi politicians flew north on Thursday to survey the devastation in two villages ruined by bombings, Shiite and Kurdish political leaders in Baghdad announced the formation of a new alliance intended to begin mending the fractured government and defuse the forces behind such violence.

    For weeks, politicians have discussed an alliance among the four leading Shiite and Kurdish parties, with the hope that marginalized Sunni factions would join the coalition. But politicians from the largest Sunni bloc in parliament said they would remain apart from the new group, asserting that the ruling Shiites still have not met their demands for greater participation. The Sunnis’ stance effectively undermines the coalition’s chances of breaking the political gridlock that has frustrated U.S. and Iraqi officials.

    And of course, they blunt the good news with minority opinions where they should find some hope instead;

    “We have lost hope, frankly, that this coalition will be the ideal solution to the strangling political crisis that the country is going through,” said Abdul Kareem Samarrae, a Sunni lawmaker, on al-Hurra television. “We hope that this is a genuine chance to solve those problems, but we think that this is merely a political cover for a government in its last few days or weeks.”

    What the media and the Democrats have disregarded is that the reason the surge is working is because Americans have demonstrated our resolve to the Iraqis – for the last three years iraqis have been reticient about making any real commitment to their own security because of the cut-and-run talk that pours out of the crooked mouths of Demorats and their willing accomplices in the press.

    The surge proves to Iraqis that this President and this administration is committed to the Iraqi people, while the Democrats are committed to their defeat – and the defeat of this nation as well.

  • Eugene Robinson; hyperpartisan bitter hack

    I’ve never hidden my disdain for Eugene Robinson, probably the worst columnist ever hired by any media outlet in the history of western civilization, and today will not be any different. His unmitigated drivel appears every week in the Washington Post  – it’s poorly researched and poorly written. And entirely partisan – right down to the punctuation.

    Today he tried to formulate a case against Karl Rove. Besides beginning the piece with childish bitterness and what he probably thought was a down-home witticism about the door hitting Rove in his behind (which came off like playground taunt more than witty), Robinson couldn’t help but play to the ignorant Democrat stereotypes of Republicans;

    Rove’s reputation as the great political thinker of his era took a severe beating in November, when, despite his confident predictions of a Republican victory, Democrats took control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

    But let’s give the man his due. Karl Rove managed to get George Walker Bush elected president of the United States, not once but twice. Okay, you’re right, the first time he needed big assists from Katherine Harris (speaking of lipstick) and the U.S. Supreme Court, but still. Honesty requires the acknowledgment that Rove was very good at what he did.

    Yeah, that pesky Supreme Court always ruling with the law instead of with the Democrats, and so what if Katherine Harris followed procedures – she should have just done what Robinson wanted her to do. How dare that woman wear lipstick!

    For crying out loud. Did hack Robinson have to troll through Democratic Underground archives to rekindle his misbegotten anger at the rule of law?

    The problem, of course, is that what Rove did and how he did it were awful for the nation.

    Rove announced he was quitting as White House deputy chief of staff in an interview with the Wall Street Journal, saying that while he knew some people would claim he was just trying to elude congressional investigators, “I’m not going to stay or leave based on whether it pleases the mob.” That’s the man, right there in that quote: Benighted fools who don’t blindly trust his honesty or fully appreciate his genius are nothing more than “the mob.”

    Hey, Eugene, notice how awkward that first sentence sounds? Was your editor taking the day off?

    And if you ever took the time to look at the Left from a nonpartisan perspective (that’ll be the day, huh, Genie) you’d see they look like a mob. They want to investigate legal activity by the Republicans, they want to impeach a President for doing his job within the confines of the law, they want to subpeona law abiding citizens to appear in front of their kangaroo committee hearings for no other reason than to please goofballs in pink boas – and goofball columnists at the Post. They waiting in drooling anticipation for Scooter Libby to go to jail and whine like two-year-olds when he doesn’t.

    When the same Constitution that has served us so well for more than 200 years gets in their way, they declare that we should rewrite it to suit them. When the Supreme Court rules against their nefarious sidestepping of the rule of law, we have to change the Court. Have you seen the weirdos and goofballs that show up at these leftist “rallies”? They’re a fricken’ mob, Genie.

    Rove didn’t invent “wedge” politics, but he was an adept practitioner of that sordid art. When Bush was campaigning in 2000, he proclaimed himself “a uniter, not a divider.” But the Bush-Rove theory of politics and governance has been divide, divide, divide — either you’re “with us” or “against us,” either you’re right or you’re wrong, either you should be embraced or attacked without quarter.

    No he didn’t invent wedge politics – that was your boys that did that. When Republicans won the 1994 midterms, it was the Left that was screaming that children were going to starve to death in their school seats, that Black churches were going to be burned in the South, that old people were going to be cast out into the street and forced to live on cat food.

    And I remember a time when George Bush tried to be a uniter – I remember him and Teddy Kennedy smiling while he signed the “No Child Left Behind Act” – and within days Kennedy was condemning the very same act he’d written himself. I remember nearly every Democrat in Congress voted for the PATRIOT Act, and then condemned it. I remember when every Democrat thought Hussein had weapons of mass destruction – but how many admit it now?

    Don’t hand me that crap, Genie. If Rove did anything, he made it politically costly for Democrats to propagate their lies. Grow the hell up, Junior.

    Yesterday, in remarks on the White House lawn, Rove praised Bush for putting the nation “on a war footing” after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. But that’s precisely what Bush failed to do. Rather than try to foster a spirit of national solidarity and shared sacrifice, he persisted with tax cuts designed to please his wealthiest supporters. Rather than engage critics of the war in any meaningful dialogue, Bush accused them of wanting to “cut and run.” Rather than actually practicing the bipartisanship he disingenuously preached, Bush governed with a hyperpartisan political agenda.

    A hyperpartisan agenda? I guess the word partisan has lost it’s currency with overuse so we have resort to fabricated superlatives now. Since when is letting working Americans keep their own money dividing America. And how is Democrats wanting to protect Iraqis from Diego Garcia not cutting and running? How is “Bring the troops home now” not cutting and running? What is there to discuss about that? Other than just caving into partisan hacks like yourself. 

    Let me tell you, you half-witted buffoon, if its at all possible for anything to be “hyperpartisan”, it’s policizing the war, it’s placing our national security, our standing in the world in jeopardy for a few votes, and a few kudos from the pink boa-wearing hags. It’s refusing to believe that there is a danger in the world that’s greater than the opposing political party.

    Hyperpartisanship could probably be personified by three Democrat Congressmen standing on the roof of Saddam Hussein’s palace and declaring that Saddam Hussein is a more honest broker than the President of the United States. Hyperpartisan, indeed.

    Rove’s new job will be to put lipstick on Bush’s hideous legacy — and, in the process, freshen up his own.

    History will do that, without Rove’s help. However, you and your ignorant, ranting shit-for-brains friends might want to ask Bill Clinton if he knows anyone at Revlon that can get you a deal on lipstick in bulk.

  • Democrats target 12 GOP seats

    Democrats are planning for failure in Iraq, but if their misinformation campaign that they’re waging against our natonal security doesn’t work after they get the report from the Pentagon next month, they’ve targeted 12 Republicans in vulnerable districts with another misinformation campaign. Washington Times’ Sean Lengell writes;

    “This August we’re going district by district to urge Republicans to stop obstructing progress and work with us to end the war in Iraq,” said Rep. Chris Van Hollen, Maryland Democrat and DCCC chairman. “Republicans who continue to vote in lock step with the President Bush’s failed Iraq policy will be held accountable.”

    Well, Chris Van Hollen, my Congressman, I’m holding you accountable for every American death in Iraq for voting and making statements that are in lockstep with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Mookie al Sadr, Iran’s Mikey Dinnerjacket, Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro and the rest of the anti-US crowd of clowns.

    In fact, I’m seriously considering a run at your seat – in a heavily Hispanic district, I have a shot at beating you and your lily-white country club, Prius-driving crowd, too. If the Army decides they don’t want me back. So you might worry about your own seat.

    The ads are running in the districts of Reps. Christopher Shays of Connecticut, Mark Steven Kirk of Illinois, Joe Knollenberg of Michigan, Jon Porter of Nevada, Mike Ferguson of New Jersey, Heather A. Wilson of New Mexico, James T. Walsh of New York, Deborah Pryce of Ohio, Phil English, Jim Gerlach and Tim Murphy of Pennsylvania, and Dave Reichert of Washington.

    They’re underestimating Jim Walsh, my former Congressman. He has alot of support in conservative Syracuse.

    The koolaid-drinking doesn’t end with Bethesda hippie/yuppie Van Hollen;

    “The American people want a new direction in Iraq yet President Bush and his Republican allies are stubbornly supporting a policy that is making America less safe,” DNC Chairman Howard Dean said.

    Americans want to win in Iraq, Howie. Your problem is that you get all of your information from the internet, not from the American people. Just because those fat cows dressed in Pink are the most vocal, doesn’t mean they represent anyone except themselves.

    The Democrats are going to pay a huge price for listening to the hairy-armpitted women and the pony-tailed bald guys – just like Howard Dean paid a huge price for thinking the internet Left represented the Democrat Party before Iowa in 2004.

  • Rakkasan: SGT Aguina is mentally ill

    Robin at Chickenhawk Express sent me this link to the comments section of the Daily Kos  from the Angry Rakkasan, otherwise known as Brandon Friedman, one of Jon Solz‘ strokin’ buddies in the VoteVets front organization for attention-starved former Army captains who couldn’t make the Majors’ list.

    Freidman accuses the young buck sergeant, David Aguina, who confronted “Lil Mac” Clarke and his half-witted poodle Jon Solz with the facts of the surge at the YearlyKos Convention, of suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome because he doesn’t stand with Rakkasan, Clarke and Solz on the facts of the “surge”;

     We need to get to the bottom of this.  This is a soldier who needs some help–whether it’s more training in military bearing and discipline or treatment for complex PTSD, we just don’t know yet.  Either way, he’s being exploited by the right-wing blogs.

    Yeah, like the Left wing blogs aren’t using Friedman, Clarke and Solz  – at least their mental problems are more easily recognizable – penis envy. Now I haven’t seen a picture of Brandon, but I think Solz and Clarke must’ve got waivers for their height and weight in order to join the military – they’re the shortest little peckerheads I’ve ever seen to have worn a uniform. Since I can’t find a picture of Freidman, I gotta guess he’s the tall one – he has to be.

    As far as Aguina’s bearing and discipline, I think you’d better start with that gelding Solz. Aguina acted entirely professional, his bearing and discipline were just fine. It’s that pussy Solz that needs to be taught how to be a leader and not some power-starved lap dog for a retired diminutive general. If I had been in SGT Aguina’s shoes that day, the maintainence crews would still be picking pieces of Solz out of the ventilation system.

    Robin also tells us that Friedman gave the opposing response to a presidential radio address back in July. I guess he doesn’t think the Left is using him like a two-bit whore for that, huh? Those fat cows over at Code Pink must be falling all over their worn out udders to get seen with him. 

    And Friedman apparently plans on stalking young Sergeant Aguina;

     I would like to get contact information for Sergeant Aguina, if anyone has it.  I’m also working through VoteVets.org to get it.  I want to speak with him, Iraq veteran-to-Iraq veteran without any consideration of rank.  I’m willing to listen to him, as well as to give him some advice.

    Yeah, Brandon, I’d like to get your contact information, too. You ain’t worth listening to, but I’ve got some advice for you. Probably the same advice your first platoon sergeant had for you.

  • Beauchamps; it ain’t over yet

    I pretty much put the Beauchamps story behind me, it was worth a lot of traffic, I met some new people and I made my point – an indisputable point. My last word on Scott Thomas Beauchamps was “Told ya”.

    Well now I read from Little Green Footballs that The New Republic can’t believe its lyin’ eyes;

    We’ve talked to military personnel directly involved in the events that Scott Thomas Beauchamp described, and they corroborated his account as detailed in our statement. When we called Army spokesman Major Steven F. Lamb and asked about an anonymously sourced allegation that Beauchamp had recanted his articles in a sworn statement, he told us, “I have no knowledge of that.” He added, “If someone is speaking anonymously [to The Weekly Standard], they are on their own.”

    And the left still clings to the fairie tales of Beauchamps; from the Washington Post;

    Mark Feldstein, a journalism professor at George Washington University, called the Army’s refusal to release its report “suspect,” adding: “There is a cloud over the New Republic, but there’s one hanging over the Army, as well. Each investigated this and cleared themselves, but they both have vested interests.”

    See, the Army is “suspect” more than the New Republic is suspect for their shoddy journalistic procedures – especially if you check with “journalism” teachers. Um, I wonder why that is?

    Even the New York Times gets a quote exhonerating the troops;

    “We are not going into the details of the investigation,” Maj. Steven F. Lamb, deputy public affairs officer in Baghdad, wrote in an e-mail message. “The allegations are false, his platoon and company were interviewed, and no one could substantiate the claims he made.”

    And yet, the NYT still doubts the Army’s statement. Why? Well, for the same reasons they think President Bush did cocaine and went AWOL – there’s no evidence supporting it, so it must be true.

    Any halfwit who spent even a day in the Army knows that those stories Beauchamps wrote are false. Especially since some of the stories were written before Beauchamps even got to Iraq (even New Republic admits that the melted-face contractor story supposedly happened in Kuwait while Beauchamps’ unit was staging for deployment to Iraq- if it happened at all). The Onion called it Pre-Traumatic Stress Syndrome back in November.

    Regardless, the damage is done – both to our troops reputation and to the New Republic. The Beauchamp Tales will be spun at every anti-war rally from now until the troops come home and repeated millions of times on the internet as reasons we shouldn’t support the troops – just like the “Bush was AWOL” and “Bush the coke-head” tales get repeated ad nauseum.

    Personally, I’d really like to take the high road, like Baldilocks – one of the classiest ladies on the internet – but I’m afraid if I ever bump into Beauchamps…well, he’d better practice begging for mercy now. And falling down and ducking.

  • Beauchamps recants fables/Kos defends Solz

    Well, I guess Michael Goldfarb of National Review Online has received confirmation from the Army that Scott Thomas Beauchamps has recanted his fantabulous tales of war;

    Separately, we received this statement from Major Steven F. Lamb, the deputy Public Affairs Officer for Multi National Division-Baghdad:

    An investigation has been completed and the allegations made by PVT Beauchamp were found to be false. His platoon and company were interviewed and no one could substantiate the claims.

    According to the military source, Beauchamp’s recantation was volunteered on the first day of the military’s investigation. So as Beauchamp was in Iraq signing an affidavit denying the truth of his stories, the New Republic was publishing a statement from him on its website on July 26, in which Beauchamp said, “I’m willing to stand by the entirety of my articles for the New Republic using my real name.”

    So, I expect that any moment now, he’ll be labeled a Karl Rove plant. Probably The New Republic will be fingered in the conspiracy, as well.

    All the things I want to say about Beauchamps, but I’m too much of a gentleman (and my Dad reads this sometimes) can be found here at Absolute Moral Authority (h/t to Beth at My Vast Wing Conspiracy).

    An Army Lawyer speculates on the charges and punishments but he neglects my favorite; failure to repair. Everyone is guilty of that one no matter what they do.

    In other drivel, the Angry Rakkasan, ( at http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/5/3940/86488 sorry you’ll have to copy and paste the address into your browser, I’m not linking to that drivel) three days after the incident, more than two days after the internet had been running the video (um, we know what we saw Rakkie), tells the “real story” about Solz and the sergeant he mistreated for all of the world to see. Well after the obligatory “all of you right wingers should join the military if you love the war so much” chickenhawk crap, he explains that the young buck sergeant was at the convention the day before;

    The sergeant immediately zeroed in on General Clark and engaged him in a conversation.  Eventually, I noticed Clark pull the soldier aside and move away from the rest of the crowd.  I could see that the General was getting agitated.  I later learned that the soldier had been lecturing him, telling him that the U.S. military should stay in Iraq and that General Clark should support the President’s policies.

    Clark is said to have told the sergeant that, while he respected the sergeant’s opinion, political activism while in uniform was both inappropriate and illegal—and to do it at the much-publicized YearlyKos Convention would put the soldier in an unnecessary and precarious legal position.  He told the sergeant firmly but politely that it would be in the soldier’s best interest to leave.  And that was the end of it until the next day.

    Rakkie goes on to call the young sergeant a “troll” and ends with another “chickenhawk” rant against Michelle Malkin and Matt Drudge. Now see here’s my problem with the story; there’s nothing that says what, exactly Little Mac Clarke said to the young sergeant – only second-hand hearsay and Rakkasan’s interpretation of facial expressions.

    And I don’t give a tiny rat’s ass how Rakkasan, Clarke or any other number people interpret military directives on the subject, the sergeant said nothing political while in uniform, he didn’t say that he represented any official military policy or office, and the YearlyKoz, from it’s own website;

    US-based (but globally focused and inclusive) non-partisan grassroots political action community that uses the Internet and blogs as primary tools for: expressing viewpoints, building consensus, acting to change the status quo, mobilizing huge numbers of people and informing each other and the world about current events, grassroots actions, networks, meetings, policy and more.

    Get that? It’s a “nonpartisan, grassroots” convention. So what did the soldier do wrong?

    Solz on the other hand, was completely wrong. No military leader would degrade and threaten a subordinate in public like that. If the soldier had been more of an asshole like I’m an asshole, he’d have made Solz either file charges against him or show him in public what he’d done wrong. I’m sure dorkboy’s head would’ve exploded on camera if it’s been me. Except that I probably wouldn’t have worn my unifrom to the event.

    But what choice did the sergeant have? As you’ve read for yourselves, this pussy Rakkasan trotted out the chickenhawk meme twice in his piece. Once at the beginning and once at the end – as if he has some absolute moral authority over who is allowed to criticize the Left and who isn’t. (And suggesting Matt Drudge and Michelle Malkin join the military – c’mon. All Matt Drudge did was link to the story, and I’m not sure Michelle would do her unit much good – she’s barely the size of an ammo pouch) I’m sure the young sergeant wore his uniform as insulation against that intellectually vacant charge that I’ve had thrown at me whenever one of my posts get linked up to Kos or HuffPo.

    And why did it take three days for this to published? The Right had been tired of blogging about the incident by the time Rakkasan trotted out this defense. Seems to me that Kos would’ve defended itself Friday night instead of Sunday morning. That tells me that they had to recon the net to see what was being said and then manufacture a defense.

    A bad defense at that – full of gaping holes.

    Rick Moran at Right Wing Nut House and Pajamas Media has an interview with young man now known to be Sergeant David Aguina, age 25, US Army Reserves.

  • Who’s afraid of the big, fat terrorist?

    Big, fat goofball, Adam Gadahn, the so-called American al Qaeda, is threatening us again for the umpteenth time, according to CBS News;

    American al Qaeda leader Adam Gadahn says al Qaeda will continue to target the United States at home and overseas, singling out U.S. embassies as a target, in a new Internet video released by as Sahab, the propaganda wing of al Qaeda.

    “We shall continue to target you at home and abroad, just as you target us at home and abroad, and these spy dens and military command and control centers from which you plotted your aggression against Afghanistan and Iraq, and which still provide vital moral, military, material and logistical support to the Crusade, shall continue to be legitimate targets for brave Muslims,” says Gadahn, who hails from Orange County, Calif. “Stop the Crusade,and leave the Muslims alone.”

    And there’s the money quote; stop the crusade and leave Muslims alone. Think he’s talking to our troops? Nope, they’ll fight anyone anywhere to defend the nation – from all enemies foreign and domestic. Think he’s talking to the President? Nope, the President isn’t afraid of threats from some pudgy halfwit from California. And, apparently neither are the Iraqis nor the Afghans who are killing al Qaeda operatives in droves, too.

    Nope he’s talking to Democrats – they’re the ones cringing from the outcome of this war against goat herders like Gadahn. They’re the ones who think that we can’t win this war. Democrats even invented a useless term like asymetrical warfare to project their cowardice and sense of hopelessness on the American people.

    Mostly, the Democrats are afraid that Americans might just win this war. You’ve got their candidates attacking our allies in the war against terror like Pakistan and Columbia, while they visit our enemies like Syria and Venezuela. And folks like over-fed, small-penised Adam Gadahn give them hope.

    Um, if you think that “war is not the answer”, you didn’t understand the question.