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

Category: Terror War

  • Washington Post; nonpartisan my pink butt

    So the House passed the same stupid defense spending bill that was vetoed by the President and sent it to the Senate AGAIN. The Washington Post didn’t bother to post the story on it’s website until nearly noon today and they entitled the piece “Senate GOP Blocks $50B War Funding Package” (Ed. Note: They changed it last night to; “Funding Bill for Iraq War Falls Short in Senate Vote”) pushing the culpability for the failure of funding off on Republicans;

    By Shailagh Murray
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Friday, November 16, 2007; 11:44 AM

    Senate Republicans blocked the latest Democratic effort to end the Iraq war, rejecting a $50 billion funding package that would require President Bush to begin withdrawing U.S. troops.

    The 53-45 vote fell seven short of the 60 votes needed for the measure to clear Republican procedural hurdles.

    But wait – what’s this:

    A GOP alternative, which would have provided $70 billion with no strings attached, failed 45-53, or 15 votes short of the 60-vote threshold.

    Oh, so the story’s title could have been “Democrat Caucus Blocks $70B War Funding Package” just as easily – or even “Senate Fails to Fund War”, but neither of those would fit the WaPo’s editorial policy.

    In another Washington Post story, Pelosi blames Congress’ low approval ratings on the Senate;

    In an interview at the U.S. Capitol, Pelosi said the Democratic takeover of Congress had raised expectations on action to end the conflict in Iraq, and that the Senate’s initial willingness to tackle immigration reform followed by its failure to do so left the American public disappointed in Congress.

    The House on Wednesday night passed spending legislation that sought to tie funding for the Iraq war to hard deadlines for beginning troop withdrawals, a proposal that has little hope of passage in the Senate.

    “People thought it was a problem that could be solved and when it didn’t happen I think it was a big disappointment,” she said. “Usually those low numbers relate to expectations and there were high expectations” on both Iraq and immigration.

    Maybe Congress’ low approval ratings are because Democrats made promises they never intended to keep. They need the war to win next year – all they have to do is keep sending legislation they know will be vetoed to play to the whacky wing of the Left. Don’t believe me? Let’s go back to the first WaPo story;

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) said he may bring the Democratic bill back to the floor in December, but he and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have asserted that Bush would not receive more war funding this year unless the president accepts Democratic withdrawal terms.

    Why would they continue to send legislation that was dead on arrival if they intended to end the war? And Washington Post carries their water for them.

  • Where’s the war? (UPDATED)

    Reading the usual newspapers and wire services this morning, I was surprised to find that there’s no mention of the war in either Iraq or Afghanistan. D’ya think we’re weary of the war and that’s why the Washington Post doesn’t even have it’s usual link to the US casualties on the front webpage? Nope, I don’t think that’s the reason at all. The war is beginning to go the way it should have gone four years ago. But that doesn’t stop Democrats from yapping. From the Washington Times’ S.A. Miller and Sean Lengell;

    Top Democrats yesterday rejected reports of U.S. military progress in Iraq, saying victory remains “out of reach” as long as political divisions roil Baghdad.

    “It’s not getting better; it’s getting worse,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat. “The goal remains out of reach.”

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, said the reduced violence in Iraq wasn’t enough to win her support for the mission.

    “Certainly any time our military is engaged in military action, we want the best possible outcome for them, and they have produced that,” she said. “But their sacrifice and their courage has not been met by any action on the part of the Iraqi government.”

    Pelosi is talking through her ass, by the way. If they’d wanted “the best possible outcome” for the troops, they would have shut their stupid mouths four years ago until the job was done – then they can yap to their hearts’ content.

    So what’s it take to convince the Democrats that the war is being won? Yesterday the Iraqis took up one of their most controversial issues, the inclusion of former Ba’athists in the political process – the equivalent of Germans letting the former Nazis back into their process.

    From the Times article;

    Sen. Joe Lieberman, a hawkish Connecticut independent, said the war critics “remain emotionally invested in a narrative of retreat and defeat, even as facts on the ground show that we are advancing and winning.”

    They’re not “emotionally invested”, Joe, they’re politically invested in defeat. They have no emotions beyond their fear of being shown to be fools by Republicans.

    “Democrats can’t acknowledge the fact that our troops are winning the war against al Qaeda in Iraq without admitting that they’ve been dead wrong on the biggest national challenge of our generation at the same time,” said House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican.

    “Had Republicans not stood their ground and prevented Democrats from forcing a retreat — on numerous occasions, especially in the early months of the year — who knows how firmly entrenched al Qaeda in Iraq would be today and what kind of strikes they’d be planning,” he said. “It’s a scary thought that could have been a reality.”

    Make that “most Republicans” – some greasy little cowards scrambling for that “maverick” label, cough-Hagel-cough, capitulated to the Left for purely political reasons.

    The Democrats want to encourage massive US casualties in the middle east, they want to encourage Iranian and al Qaeda strikes against the US – then they can use them in the 2008 campaign. Why else would Pelosi, et al. visit Iran’s poodle, Syria? To make the Arabs think we’re a bunch of cowards and fools – to insure them that no matter what they do to us or our allies, we’ll just turn the other cheek for them.

    Why else would Harry Reid continue to say that the war is lost, that surge wasn’t working even before it started? Because they’re a bunch of traitorous cowards who’ve bet their careers against the United States ever being successful at anything. They keep their jobs as long as they can convince voters that our revolution was a fool’s errand, as long as they can convince voters that we’re all failures.

    America used to be about winning. Fausta lists the 19 terrorist attacks against the US that have been thwarted since 9-11-2001. Gaius at Blue Crab Boulevard says, “The Democrats may spend their days paddling up and down denial, but the reality is that trying to lose in Iraq is not a good strategy for rebuilding America’s foreign relations.” Chickenhawk Express quotes Harry Reid’s latest trip down denial;

    Take for instance, Harry Reid’s comments today about the war in Iraq…

    “Every place you go you hear about no progress being made in Iraq,” said Senate Democratic majority leader Harry Reid. “The government is stalemated today, as it was six months ago, as it was two years ago,” Reid told reporters, warning US soldiers were caught in the middle of a civil war “It is not getting better, it is getting worse,” he said.

    Makes ya wonder, doesn’t it? Now contrast Reid’s words with these words from Michael Yon, someone actually on the ground in Iraq (h/t Wake Up, America);

    I can’t remember my last shootout: it’s been months. The nightmare is ending. Al Qaeda is being crushed. The Sunni tribes are awakening all across Iraq and foreswearing violence for negotiation. Many of the Shia are ready to stop the fighting that undermines their ability to forge and manage a new government. This is a complex and still delicate denouement, and the war may not be over yet. But the Muslims are saying it’s time to come home. And the Christians are saying it’s time to come home. They are weary, and there is much work to be done.

    Doesn’t sound like they’re talking about the same war, or even the same country, does it?

    Perhaps the media quit reporting on the war because they can’t get it right. Confederate Yankee reprints a letter that an Army LTC wrote to the Guardian to straighten out one of their reporters.

    UPDATED: The Senate failed to pass the bloated, same old stupid Democrat trick of trying to set a withdrawal date for Iraq while holding the troops hostage with defense spending – the same stupid political ploy that’s failed four times this year (link to AP/Yahoo story);

    Four Republicans joined Democrats in voting for the measure: Sens. Gordon Smith of Oregon, Olympia Snowe of Maine, Susan Collins of Maine and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska.

    Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., was the lone Democrat opposing it because he said it did not go far enough to end the war.

    The Republican proposal to pay for the Iraq war with no strings attached failed by a vote of 45-53, which was 15 short of the number needed to go forward.

    Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said this week that if Congress cannot pass legislation that ties war money to troop withdrawals, they would not send President Bush a bill this year.

    Instead, they would revisit the issue upon returning in January, pushing the Pentagon to the brink of an accounting nightmare and deepening Democrats’ conflict with the White House on the war.

    In the meantime, Democrats say, the Pentagon can use some of its $471 billion annual budget without being forced to take drastic steps.

    “The days of a free lunch are over,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

    So, the party that claimed to be the party of fiscal responsibility won’t pass a defense bill in the time of war. And blithering buffoon Lil’ Chuckie Schumer – the king of free lunches – doesn’t give a tiny rat’s ass about funding the troops as long as he can run over Congressional aides to get to the cameras and say “the days of a free lunch are over” to get his stupid goofy mug on TV.

    If you stupid ass Democrats send this incompetent bunch of boobs back next year, you deserve everything they won’t give you. More on the Senate at Crotchety Old Bastard,  Michele Malkin, Blackfive and Gateway Pundit.

  • Another Day, Another Victory For Political Correctness and Loss for Security

    As I told you HERE the LAPD had planned to map where Muslims lived to provide them with an idea of where trouble could start. Well, they wussed out. The big bad LAPD buckled under the protest of CAIR, the ACLU and others.
    We hear the hackneyed line Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. That’s nice, if misguided. I submit that those who value inoffensive behavior over safety are doomed to suffer the will of those not concerned with niceties. Breitbart and AFP have the story. If people claiming to be Presbyterians were strapping on explosive laden vests and blowing themselves up in public places, they’d need to be watched. But, that isn’t the reality we find ourselves in. Yes, we are told that Islam is the “Religion of Peaceâ„¢” and indeed, the majority of Muslims are peaceful, law abiding people. The cold hard fact is, that the majority of terrorists in the world today claim to be Muslim. It is irresponsible NOT to look closely at Muslim communities and groups.

  • Democrats living in a time warp

    With resounding military successes occurring everyday in Iraq, with more and more areas of Iraq falling under the control of the Iraqi military and Iraqi police, the Democrats are bound and determined that they want credit for pulling the troops out. So they’ve tied funding to the war to a complete withdrawal of US troops by the end of next year. from the Wall Street Journal’s David Rogers;

    The Iraq war debate erupted anew in Congress as the House approved additional military funding but only after Democrats attached conditions that set the goal of ending U.S. combat operations by the end of next year.

    Adopted 218-203, the measure gives the Pentagon $50 billion in emergency funds to sustain military operations until next spring, when a more extensive debate is expected after lawmakers receive a new report from Iraq commander Gen. David Petraeus.

    But the White House immediately said it would veto the “bridge” funding unless the House restrictions are removed, and the resulting stalemate will almost certainly run into next month — and possibly next year.
     
    Republicans accused Democrats of pursuing a “fool’s game” that ignores progress made on the ground in Iraq. Democrats countered that the war’s cost and strain on the U.S. military has become a threat to American security, and strong action by Congress is needed to force a change in policy by the president.

    Yea-uh-uh, the Democrats are worried about our security – that’s why they’re coming out against an attack on Iran. The Washington Times’ S.A. Miller and Sara A. Carter reports that Democrats are still living in 2006 when they thought they could control troop deployments (and before President Bush demonstrated to them that they couldn’t);

    The bill mimics Democrats’ previous challenges to Iraq policy and likely will stall emergency funds, which would pay for about three months of warfare while lawmakers debate the rest of the $196.4 billion war-funds request for 2008.

    The top Democrats — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada — say they will withhold troop funds for at least the rest of the year if Mr. Bush does not accept the pullout timetable.

    “There is a growing sense within our caucus that it is time to play hardball,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, Massachusetts Democrat and outspoken war critic. “This is George Bush’s war. He started it. He’s got to finish it.”

    Well, then let him finish it, numbnuts. Steny Hoyer still thinks it’s January 2007, according to the Washington Post;

    Democrats know that but say that their efforts to limit the war since taking control of Congress in January are a political — and, some say, moral — necessity. “The American people voted for change,” House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said yesterday. “We ought to extricate American men and women . . . from refereeing a civil war.”

    Seein’s how Sunnis and Shi’ites are both engaged in killing al Qaeda, how’s it a civil war, dumbass? Michael Goldfarb (The Weekly Standard blog) writes the Army credits that cooperation with the decline in IED attacks (which occured at about the same time the Washington Post spent a whole week on IED attacks);

    So what is the explanation? Meigs reels off the numbers for Noah Shachtman:

    What Meigs was able to share, however, were statistics on the number of tips locals gave to coalition forces in Iraq – and number of IED caches found by those troops. As you might expect, there’s a heavy correlation between the two. About 8,500 tips came in September of 2006; by May, the number had peaked at more than 24,000. In August, the figure was approximately 19,200. Similarly, the number caches found – about five per day in September, 2006 – jumped to more than 20 per day in May. After a dip over the early summer, that figure has been steady in recent months, at about 15.

    The Times reports that Hoyer is moving the goal post;

    “What has not happened is what the administration predicted would happen, [that] an environment would be created where political reconciliation would occur,” Mr. Hoyer told reporters on Capitol Hill. 

    As if to answer Hoyer, the Iraqis take up discussing allowing Ba’athists back into the process – one the Left’s prerequisites for success. (h/t Ace of Spades)

    Of course, the recurring theme is that the war is Bush’s fault. The Post quotes Murtha;

    “We want a plan in Iraq. . . . We want stability in the Middle East,” Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), chairman of the Appropriations defense subcommittee, said minutes before the vote. “We want to put a plan in place that holds the president accountable.”

    The problem is that when it turns out all rosy, the Democrats will be held accountable for their total disregard for the safety of our troops and the nation.

    Michele Malkin sums up the whole Democrat effort last night in one simple phrase;

    “Stop pestering me, Code Pink! I beg you to stop!”

    Michele also listed the linguine-spined cowards of the Republican party who voted with the Democrats;

    The 4 Republicans who supported the withdrawal bill: English (PA), Jones (NC), Shays (CT), Walsh (NY)

    One voted “present:” Lewis (GA)

    And 11 didn’t vote: Bono, Carson, Cubin, Doyle, Hastert, Jindal, Mack, Oberstar, Pearce, Sessions, Weller

    Gateway Pundit reports that Democrats are bailing on Pelosi in larger numbers;

    Sadly, Speaker Pelosi has failed to pick up any Republican backers to cut and run with the democrats from Iraq since she took over the House in January. And, 5 more democrats bailed on the party since July.

    No matter how hard Democrats try to make it George Bush’s war, it’s still going to cost them in the end for their treasonous waivering which has prolonged the conflict – their treasonous waivering which goes back to 1969.

  • AP’s editorial shift

    I always know when a headline in the Wall Street Journal leads to an AP wire story. For example, today the blurb on the front page read “U.S.-led troops lobbed a grenade that destroyed a house and killed 15 militants as well as a civilian woman and two children in southern Afghanistan.” AP always has to mention the civilians. But I read the story anyway – because a single grenade that can kill 18 people and destroy a house is of some interest to this aging infantryman;

    A militant ambush in central Afghanistan, meanwhile, left four police officers dead and two others wounded, a police chief said.

    The troops in southern Afghanistan were raiding compounds suspected of housing bomb makers in the Garmser district of Helmand province Sunday when militants attacked them with heavy fire, the statement said. Coalition forces responded with small-arms fire, killing several militants, it added.

    “During one of the engagements, several militants barricaded themselves in a building on the compound and engaged coalition forces with a high volume of gunfire. Coalition forces used a single grenade which killed the attacking militants,” the statement said. “However, the building the militants were fighting from collapsed.”

    Of course, they say US-led coalition troops which means there were no Americans involved, except maybe an advisor – but it just sounds better to add the “US” part to rile up anger at Americans instead of blaming the poor brown people. But the amazing part of the story is yet to come;

    “When militants knowingly engage coalition forces with innocent people in the background, it only shows the extremists’ complete disregard for innocent lives,” Maj. Belcher added in a statement.

    It wasn’t possible to verify the coalition claims. Qari Yousef Ahmadi, a Taliban spokesman, said that only three militants were killed during the battle and 15 other victims were civilians. Mr. Ahmadi’s claims aren’t always reliable.

    Whoa, Nelly! The AP has finally admitted that their Taliban sources “aren’t always reliable”? Since when? It would have been nice if they’d said that back six years ago instead of just mentioning that now. Next thing you know, they might admit that maybe all of those beheadings they’ve been reporting from Iraq were all just fantasies of al Qaeda plants in the Iraqi Police like Curt from Flopping Aces has been reporting all along.

    Maybe we’re winning the war against the media as well as the radical Islamists. But, then I’ve always been a dreamer.

  • Britain’s Daily Telegraph Pulls Staff From Pakistan

    Britain’s Daily Telegraph Newspaper has withdrawn it’s correspondents from Pakistan in fear of reprisals over a stunningly frank editorial from last week that referred to Pervez Musharraf in, well, less than flattering terms. Much less than flatering: In the old parlance, General Pervez Musharraf is “our sonofabitch”. He has failed to stamp out extremist groups and close the madrassas that inspire them. He has allowed the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan to fall into the hands of assorted jihadis.and But that should not blind Britain and America to the fact that their “sonofabitch” in Pakistan is a spent force.
    I find this refreshing. It is nice to see a major newspaper avoid the parsing of words that passes for journalism in this day and age. What is so wrong with calling a spade a spade? The biggest problem I have with today’s rampant political correctness is the abject fear most people have of calling things as they see them. Facts are facts and if calling Musharraf “Our sonofobitch” is crass, it is also directly on point. What surprises me about this story is that I have yet to see widespread condemnation of the Daily Telegraph by the rest of the MSM. Let us hope against hope that this editorial sparks a change in reporting.
    Breitbart/AFP Story Daily Telegraph Editorial “Bankrupt relationship”

  • Another Day, Another Genuine Hero Ignored by The Media

    1LT Walter B. Jackson, became, last Friday only the seventh soldier in the past 32 years to be awarded the Distinguished Service Cross.

    Lt. Jackson’s citation in part reads: 

    “Upon regaining consciousness after being shot, second lieutenant alternated between returning fire and administering first aid to the Soldier. Second Lt. Jackson was hit again with machine gun fire as he helped carry his wounded comrade to safety, but he never faltered in his aid. Although his own severe wounds required immediate evacuation and surgical care, 2nd Lt. Jackson refused medical assistance until his wounded comrade could be treated. Second Lt. Jackson’s selfless courage under extreme enemy fire was essential to saving another Soldier’s life and is in keeping with the finest traditions of military service…”

    Despite how much the MSM claims to support the troops, they are AGAIN scooped by the bloggers.

    Lieutenant Jackson has all my respect and admiration.

  • LAPD Plans to Map Muslims

    KSEQ/AP Story
    In a move born of common sense, the LAPD wants to map out the metropolis’ Muslim communities to know where terrorist attacks may come from. The usual suspects are up in arms about this calling it racial profiling. Well, Hell yes, it is profiling. But, that is to be expected when the vast majority of terrorists in the world just happen to be Muslim. There are an estimated 500,000 Muslims in Los Angeles, Orange and Riverside counties.There were 19 hijackers on 9-11, and none were Presbyterians, nor, Baptists, nor Hasidic Jews. The terrorism that plagues the Middle East is not perpetrated by Methodists or Mormons. To take a closer look at the followers of a religion whose followers have recently exploded without warning is fine with me. To ignore them in the name of ecumenicism is extremely foolish.