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

Category: United Nations

  • Ward Reilly the VVAW Ranger

    I’ve seen Robert Ward Reilly at several IVAW events including the Winter Soldier hearings last March (a year ago today, as a matter of fact). He looks pretty scraggly in that picture, but believe me, he looks worse in person. Notice the cammie jungle fatigues cut into short-sleeves and the boonie hat so that he looks like a real Hollywood version of a Vietnam veteran. Yeah, well, he’s not a Vietnam veteran. He was in Germany for his whole tour – that’s not news, actually. About four years ago Tim Blair blew his cover. Reilly said he never claimed to be a Vietnam veteran;

    I served, proudly, for 32 months in Germany in the 1st & 16th(Rangers) as a mortar gunner, starting in 1971, when I volunteered for the infantry at age 17.(With 2 full years left in the ground war in Viet Nam)

    I went where the army sent me…that what soldiers do. I could have just as easily been sent to Viet Nam, but I got lucky.

    Well, that part about “two full years left in the ground war” isn’t exactly true. Reilly joined in October 1971 – ground forces in Vietnam were being reduced and by August 1972 all combat forces had been withdrawn.

    That “(Rangers)” in Reilly’s statement jumped out at me when I first read it, so I did a little research and found that the 16th Infantry Regiment call themselves “Iron Rangers” and that’s why Reilly added it to his bio – hoping to scare every one into thinking he was a Ranger.

    It’s like the 7th Infantry putting (Cottonbalers) on their unit designation because that’s their nickname (from the Battle of New Orleans when they fought the British from behind cotton bales). Could we assume that they’re actually qualified to bale cotton?

    The actual ranger battalions used to be part of the 75th Infantry regiment (before they became the 75th Ranger Regiment) and did use the “(Ranger)” in their official designation. Reilly seems to be manipulating that fact.

    Just to make sure, I requested a FOIA on Reilly;

    No Jump school, no Ranger school – just Reilly’s manipulation of the language for the ignorant civvies.

    By the way, I did Reilly a favor before I posted this FOIA. The Records Center left his social security number on the form and I blackened it out. We’re not in the business of screwing people – just publishing the truth about the more disingenuous ones.

    In his AAR of last year’s Winter Soldier in Silver Spring, MD, Robert Ward Reilly writes that he can identify with the IVAW folks, because he’s “been there”, too;

    I knew that the WSIA would be a success. I knew how important it would be historically, because I have “been here” before, when I was a GI Resister in the infantry from 1971 to 1974, the last time a GI Resistance was necessary, and I payed [sic] dearly for my stand. It is extremely hard to resist inside the military. But we did, and Vietnam can now be used as the model for those that say “we will never leave Iraq.” The same people said that about Vietnam, and today there isn’t a single US soldier stationed in Vietnam, in spite of the plans to never leave there.

    See, if you didn’t already know that Reilly wasn’t a Vietnam Vet, from reading that paragraph, you’d get the impression that he did serve in Vietnam. Also, in that paragraph, he said that he “payed [sic] dearly for [his] stand” against the Vietnam War. I wondered about that, too. His “stand” was actually four weeks of being AWOL and being declared a deserter for a few weeks in May and June of 1973 (Spring time in Bavaria). The war in Vietnam was essentially over, US combat troops were all withdrawn in August of 1972 – so why’d he desert? Oh, yeah, here’s the Form 2-1;

    Robert Ward Reilly left the military as a corporal after three years in the drawn-down military after a stint on the desertion roster. I don’t know how he figured he “payed” for any stand.

    Yeah, I’ve watched Ward Reilly marching the IVAW clowns in their protests (I’ve got the video somewhere in my archives) counting cadence like he’s a drill sergeant. He was an Eleven-Charley E-4 deserter who joined at the end of the Vietnam War (when it was essentially over) the year before the draft ended.

    Reilly is just another pretender on the VVAW rolls.

    Correction: The video I have of Reilly marching the IVAW clowns and VFP geezers actually has Bill Perry counting cadence while Reilly holds the bullhorn for him (because Perry can’t hold the mike, the bullhorn and his bag of LCDs – Little Chocolate Donuts – all at the same time).

  • Here it comes

    My regular readers might remember that back in January, I wrote that the Democrats were coming for veterans’ earned benefits at this post;

    A new report from the Congressional Budget Office shows why some military retirees and veterans could face higher out-of-pocket costs if the Obama administration and Congress take bold moves to reform the U.S. health system and to make federal health programs more efficient.

    Among 115 “options” presented, though not endorsed, in the CBO report, several focus on raising Tricare out-of-pocket costs for retirees and one targets families. Others would tighten access to VA hospitals and clinics, or raise VA health fees, for veterans with no service-connected conditions.

    Well, making one of my countless daily stops at Blackfive, I see that they’ve started dropping hints that it’s coming. By “they” I mean General Black Beret himself;

    Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki confirmed Tuesday that the Obama administration is considering a controversial plan to make veterans pay for treatment of service-related injuries with private insurance, but was told by lawmakers that it would be “dead on arrival” if sent to Congress.

    No official proposal to create such a program has been announced publicly, but veterans groups wrote a pre-emptive letter last week to President Obama opposing the idea after hearing the plan was under consideration. The groups also noticed an increase in “third-party collections” estimated in the 2010 budget proposal—something they said could only be achieved if the VA started billing for service-related injuries.

    Personally, I’d like to see the list of veterans groups that wrote letters to Obama. In February I warned about more chatter from the CBO;

    J. Michael Gilmore, assistant director of the Congressional Budget Office, testified that by increasing fees for military health care and restructuring pay raises, the Pentagon could save about $111 billion between fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2026.

    The House Budget Committee’s ranking Republican, Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, agreed that personnel costs were a problem. “DoD’s health care spending is increasing at an unsustainable rate,” he said.

    And back in December, John Murtha was making noise about cutting health care expenses, too;

    But he said the military could find savings by reforming its healthcare system, addressing military compensation, and reducing operations and maintenance costs.

    But it’s inevitable at this point – they can’t afford to provide health care they promised to veterans but they want to give health care to everyone. Democrats know that national health care is futile, yet they’re going to force the square peg into the round hole any-damn-way. And guess who gets to take it in the ass first.

    Veterans and the military always take it in the ass for the Democrats – and then a Republican comes along, tries to rebuild the system, and the liberals cry about “massive defense spending”. And then when the clowns get back in charge, they begin dismantling the military again. Those goofballs who voted for Obama are going to begin to wish for Bush to be back. Well, not the ones who didn’t get the benefits any way.

    Yeah, if Bush had made noises about cutting the VA they’d be screaming from the rooftops – but this gets a little blurb in the back water pages of CNN. I wonder how some of those VSOs who were “excited” about Shinseki are feeling now. But those of us with memories beyond last week know it was inevitable that Shinseki was going to screw us to the wall.

  • Sleight of mouth

    We’ve all heard the yammering recently as the Democrat White House tries to change the subject from it’s own failures to their criticism of what the President calls “cable chatter”. Press secretary Gibbs has been quick to attack CNBC’s Rick Santelli and Jim Cramer for their criticism of the President’s agenda. Gibbs even admits that it’s counterproductive, according to the Washington Times;

    “It may be counterproductive. I’ll give you that,” said White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, when asked about his repeated verbal jousting with Mr. Limbaugh and other media personalities who have criticized President Obama.

    But that hasn’t stopped him. Life long Democrat and Obama supporter Jim Cramer has responded to the most recent attacks against his commentary;

    So I will fight the fight against that agenda. I will stand up for what I believe and for what I have always believed: Every person has a right to be rich in this country and I want to help them get there. And when they get there, if times are good, we can have them give back or pay higher taxes. Until they get there, I don’t want them shackled or scared or paralyzed. That’s what I see now.

    If that makes me an enemy of the White House, then call me a general of an army that Obama may not even know exists — tens of millions of people who live in fear of having no money saved when they need it and who get poorer by the day.

    Ohio Republican congressman John Boehner writes in today’s Washington Post that this has been part of the Obama strategy all along, to distract the public from the malfeasance that’s happening right before our eyes;

    Make no mistake: This strategy did not develop out of thin air. Democratic pollsters began laying the groundwork for this effort last fall. What’s particularly regrettable is that all this is unfolding at a time our nation can least afford it.

    President Obama has said that we must change the way Washington operates in order to address the unprecedented challenges of today. I hope that those inside and close to the administration begin heeding his advice, because the change-the-subject campaign they are employing is the oldest trick in Washington’s book. This isn’t about the leadership of political party officials or the influence of radio hosts. It’s about the need for both parties to work together toward real solutions to end this recession and put Americans back to work.

    Democrats know they’re creating a REAL SEVERE crisis out of a run-of-the-mill crisis by compounding the damage to the economy. Cramer, of whom I’ve been critical in the past, writes that he longs for higher taxes on the rich and greatly expanded environmental projects, but that now isn’t the time. The Democrats won’t wait for the time, though – they learned that in 1993 their grasp of power is tenuous when the people handed Congress to the Republicans for the first time in 50 after Democrats barely failed to enact their healthcare plan. They knew that if they waited to enact their far-reaching socialist plans, they might miss another opportunity to enslave the vote to their will.

    Now Democrats are trying to distract the public from what they know in advance will drive us deeper into a recession, maybe even a depression with their mismanagement of the economy – while in public they attack private citizens who disagree with them and carry out a show-trial against Karl Rove who they suspect of being guilty of doing the same thing they’re doing at the DOJ right now.

    So where are our watchdogs in the media?

  • Colombia, the new Israel

    Mora at Babalu Blog writes that the United Nations is getting bored with just bashing Israel so they’ve found themselves a new democracy awash in a sea of thugs at which they can aim their false outrage;

    The UN is now demonizing Colombia alongside Israel as a nation whose human rights record must meet UN scrutiny and condemnation.

    While Zimbabwe dies of cholera.
    While Venezuela slides into a dictatorship.
    While Darfur runs from genocide.
    While Russia turn into a hell with no future.
    While Burma goes ignored by the outside as monks are beaten and killed and aid is denied
    While business as usual goes on in red China.
    While Cuba continues to abuse truth tellers like Dr. Oscar Elias Biscet and harass Yoani Sanchez. While Cuba artificially impoverishes 9 million people to keep them servile and controlled. While Cuba continues to imprison 1000 people, many up on no charges at all except ‘dangerousness.’ While Cuba gets away with destroying libraries and mob-lynching dissidents. While Cuba refuses to allow anyone at all to leave the vortex legally.

    Never mind that: Israel and Colombia are the real problem you see.

    Well, actually, the United Nations does that because if they get outraged at Zimbabwe, Cuba, Darfur, etc… they’d have to actually do something about it to remain a legitimate human rights defender. As long as they point and yell at the more innocuous offenders, they never really have to actually accomplish anything and their high-paying jobs in cushy offices are secure. And if they actually started making a difference in the world, they’d lose their jobs to peaceful coexistence – can’t have that, can we?

    From the link;

    Colombia was also criticised recently by Human Rights Watch, which said that President Alvaro Uribe’s administration “hampers justice efforts” by obstructing investigations into its alleged links with paramilitaries.

    Um, Human Rights Watch was actually ejected from Venezuela a few months back. When will they get their panties bunched about Chavez?

  • WaPo Global; Mugabe bad, but not that bad

    I wrote the other day about liberal guilt and their inability to find any reason to use force against tyrants who abuse their own people. It reaches near-comic extremes today in the Post Global section of the Washington Post in an article by Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar entitled “No Moral Ground to Oust Mugabe Alone“. His whole argument is based on the naive assessment that Mugabe is bad, but he’s not as bad as other African rulers have been;

    Robert Mugabe is indeed an odious ruler with blood on his hands. But since when is that a disqualification to rule? The world has long been full of rulers even more odious and bloodthirsty than he.

    Isn’t that an enlightened approach to world politics? Mugabe’s thugs chopped up an opponents wife while she was still alive. He’s been murdering entire families since he was given his power in 1980. Pressure from the civilized world has failed to make him change one iota. Even Nelson Mandela, Mugabe’s fellow traveler, has abandoned him;

    Former South African president Nelson Mandela said there is a “tragic failure of leadership” in Zimbabwe. His remarks at a dinner in London Wednesday was the first time he has spoken publicly about Zimbabwe’s political crisis.

    The Brits have stripped of his knighthood finally;

     “This action has been taken as a mark of revulsion at the abuse of human rights and abject disregard for the democratic process in Zimbabwe over which President Mugabe has presided,” a Foreign Office spokesman said.

    Despite all of this, Mugabe still refuses to budge and give Zimbabweans a break;

     President Robert Mugabe refused Tuesday to give into pressure from Africa and the West, saying the world can “shout as loud as they like” but he would not cancel this week’s runoff election even though his opponent quit the race.

    South Africa’s ruling party issued a toughly worded statement calling on Mugabe’s government to stop “riding roughshod” over the opposition headed by Morgan Tsvangirai, who quit the presidential contest and sought shelter in the Dutch Embassy.

    But this Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar doesn’t think that anything Mugabe does rises to the level that reaches  a crisis worthy of intervention from the real world. I’m betting there are many Zimbabweans that would disagree with his pompous arrogance to let them suffer because it doesn’t affect his family.

  • Liberal guilt vs. White Man’s Burden

    Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Burma, the Sudan, Tibet, Iran are all countries with which we’re all familiar of the terrible depravations portions of the respective populations suffer nearly every day. Their particular oppressors use liberal guilt to continue their brand of governance.

    Zimbabwe’s Mugabe blames the United Kingdom for his political opposition, Venezuela’s Chavez warns that “the Empire” of the US wants Chavez dead for Venezuela’s oil, Iran’s Ahmadinejad almost daily warns of a US invasion. The Myanmar government hides behind the Chinese while maintaining it’s brutal repression under the guise of protecting the country from foreign instigators.

    The United Nations act concerned about these pockets of oppression, but they do nothing to further their intentions than wring their hands and make lofty speeches. Mostly because the members are all engaged in various degrees of oppression themselves and they worry that actually enforcing the tenets of human rights might someday come to their own countries.

    Despite the rhetoric of the American Left, there is case to be made for the use of force to relieve the sufferings of people around the world. The “peace-at-any-cost” crowd can’t justify not removing radical entities from the world stage while they complain about the imagined deprivations they suffer under the Bush Administration. We have a responsibility to make the world safer for all people, as the premier defender of human rights – the city on a hill.

    The UK has a moral responsibility to end the brutal regime of Robert Mugabe since they actually facilitated his installation three decades ago. Since the United Nations has hardly been able to summon the fortitude to even mention Mugabe, they’ve outlived their usefulness. When corrupt dictators have an equal voice in the UN as civilized nations, thecollective voice is muted.

    The world knows what they won’t admit – the US isn’t prone to non-judicial use of military power and the UK isn’t looking to rebuild it’s empire. If ever there was a time or a place to use the threat of military force to remove repressive governments, it’s in those nations I listed above. If the United Nations can’t get their act together, and they’ve proven time-and-again that they can’t, the civilized nations have a responsibility to heal these aberrations using any means possible.

    Why should one more person suffer because the Left feels guilty about the judicial use of force? What’s the real humanitarian choice here?

  • Bush to meet with al-Bashir

    This morning the Washington Post worries that President Bush isn’t being hard enough on Sudan for their behavior against the residents in Darfur;

    Sometime in the next few weeks, a special envoy of President Bush plans to meet with Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, whose government sheltered Osama bin Laden and pursued a scorched-earth policy in southern Sudan that resulted in more than 2 million deaths.

    Bashir’s government has been accused by Bush of participating in a “genocide” in Darfur, the only U.S. government use of such a strong accusation. Yet Richard S. Williamson’s visit to Khartoum follows a series of direct contacts by senior Bush administration officials with the Sudanese president, including Secretaries of State Colin L. Powell and Condoleezza Rice, Rice’s deputies, and several special presidential envoys.

    Bush has spoken to or exchanged letters with Bashir on numerous occasions, underscoring how White House policy has departed from his pointed public call to shun talks with radical tyrants and dictators.

    Of course, the Washington Post totally ignored the Darfur emergency during the previous administration. The only news we got of the situation there was from Christian missionaries because the “main stream” press didn’t figure anything that happened in Africa was important enough for the Clinton Administration since they did so poorly in Somalia.

    Things like Darfur are more in line with the UN’s charter, though,, rather than the US policy. But, the UN is too busy getting their armed forces laid according to the Gateway Pundit;

    We’re from the UN and we’re here to help.

    The BBC reported:

    Children as young as six are being sexually abused by peacekeepers and aid workers, says a leading UK charity.
    Children in post-conflict areas are being abused by the very people drafted into such zones to help look after them, says Save the Children.

    The most shocking aspect of this abuse is that most of it goes unreported and unpunished, a new report argues, with children too scared to speak out.

    The UN has said it welcomes the report, which it will study closely.

    Yeah, like they studied the report on the oil for food program.

    The world is supposedly enraged because we “unilaterally” dealt with Saddam Hussein, yet they expect us to unilaterally deal with Kosovo, Bosnia, Sudan and now the Sudan.

  • UN to investigate US racism

    Yeah, we need to keep funding this POS organization (REUTERS Link);

    A special U.N. human rights investigator will visit the United States this month to probe racism, an issue that has forced its way into the race to secure the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination.

    Visit? From where? New York City isn’t in the US?

    “The special rapporteur will…gather first-hand information on issues related to racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance,” a U.N. statement said on Friday.

    His three-week visit, at U.S. government invitation, will cover eight cities — Washington D.C., New York, Chicago, Omaha, Los Angeles, New Orleans, Miami and San Juan, Puerto Rico.

    Race has become a central issue in the U.S. election cycle because Sen. Barack Obama, the frontrunner in the battle for the Democratic nomination battle, stands to become the country’s first African American president.

    There isn’t somewhere else in the world where there’s a little more racism to investigate? Like Africa where tribes murder each other by hundreds of thousands. How about Thailand – almost every week there’s a story about the ROP beheading some priest or monk there. But no, this “special rapporteur” has already made a name for himself;

    In a report last year he said Islamophobia had grown worldwide since the September 11 2001 attacks on the United States, carried out by al-Qaeda militants.

    I wonder if there was an uptick in Islamophobia after the Madrid bombings, the London bombings, the Bali bombings….

    Little Green Footballs knows him, too;

    Doudou Diène was last seen at LGF when he was denouncing Denmark for racism—for publishing the dreaded cartoons of Mohammed: UN on Wrong Side of Cartoon Jihad.

    So, I wonder how this investigation will turn out (No, not really).