"I don't know how many times we have heard the president say, 'We will stand down as the Iraqis stand up.' I don't want to hear that anymore. It seems to me that that mantra no longer stands. That is, we have to start bringing our troops home." — Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, June 2006.
"[T]he Swift Boat vets lied and lied and lied about everything. How many lies do you get to tell before someone calls you a liar? How many times can you be exposed in America today?" — John Kerry, who has been exposed as a liar regarding his Purple Hearts, a liar regarding his "Christmas in Cambodia," a liar regarding the release of his complete military records, ad infinitum...
"Now, as a result of the massacre-hungry media blitz, Iraq's Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki has denounced U.S. indifference to civilian casualties in the most virulent terms, accusing troops of near-daily attacks against innocent Iraqis. While John Kerry and his war-crimes contingent, together with their media lemmings, will see this as a confirmation of U.S. atrocities and the hopelessness of the situation in Iraq, the reality of Maliki's remarks is far different. Maliki's denouncement represent a calculated move—likely with U.S. assent—to hold together the country's fragile new governing coalition, which is dependent on keeping the Sunnis at the table in the face of media-fed popular discontent. It's one more example of domestic constraints driving international relations in the Muslim world.
"These savage media attacks received their biggest shot in the arm with Congressman John Murtha's pronouncements describing the incident as though he were an eyewitness: "There's no question in my mind about what happened here... They killed four people in a taxi and then, in addition to that, they went into the rooms and killed them. [I]t's something that we cannot excuse." Even if—God forbid—Murtha is correct, his use of our troops as a lever to slam the Commander in Chief, publicly condemning the American military in wartime, is absolutely unforgivable. His accusations place our soldiers in even greater jeopardy as tempers run high on the "Arab street." In short, Murtha & Co. have once again given aid and comfort to the enemy at this critical time. We pray the good citizens of Pennsylvania remember this treason come November.
~ Editor, Patriot Post.
Thank you for this excellent post, PsyOp.
PING to #1.
I believe this should be sent to our Senators and Representatives in Congress, and everyone to whom we have the opportunity to send it.
You may have already seen this outstanding article.....but I did not want to take the chance. New updates on last page.
The Boston Herald | June 27, 2006 | Jules Crittenden
Some people just don’t get it.
Five years on, some people remain unaware that this is war; that we are facing an enemy that will do anything in its power to destroy us. The fact that on any given day we are free to fly around the world, drive our cars without restriction and buy as much food as we like in rich variety seems to have confused them.
The lack of U-boats attacking the shipping lanes has lulled some people into thinking this is not actually a war. Not a real war, certainly not a good war, not like World War II. They mock the very notion that it is a war, having fun with the name “Global War on Terror.” They put forward the notion that, like almost everything else in our American lives, this thing that has been called a war is a choice. A bad choice.
Who can blame them? Even fighting in this war, unlike most of the great wars our that threatened our existence in the past, is a choice made by a small percentage of Americans who have joined the Armed Forces.
George Bush, while announcing that we were at war five years ago, made a decision to encourage Americans to go about their business as usual. Rather than mobilizing the country for war, he decided he could fight this unconventional war by unconventional means, and with the forces already at hand. Normalcy had its uses as a weapon. It showed that our enemy could not hobble us.
In other respects, it was a mistake. With our military now hyperextended in Iraq, we could use an army twice as large or even larger. Our enemies are emboldened by the belief that we are tied down in Iraq. Iran, correctly identified by Bush as an evil menace, is doing everything it can to live up to that reputation. Somalia, which we walked away from under Bill Clinton, is now under the control of al-Qaeda sympathizers. Syria, at best, turns a blind eye to the terrorists who torment Iraq. The Taliban in Afghanistan have stepped up operations to an unprecedented level in an effort to destablize that country.
Bush chose not to treat this as total war, insisting it could be done with some finetuning of the resources at hand. His domestic opposition has taken that idea several steps farther, insisting Islamic terrorism is a police problem that does not require military force and certainly not the suspension of some legal niceties. After all, they do not consider it an actual war of the sort faced by Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Delano Roosevelt when they destroyed cities and imprisoned anyone who threatened the security of the nation.
Ironically, Bush has been so effective with his approach, that there has not been an attack on the mainland United States since 9-11. That has allowed his opposition to maintain that all the unpleasant things Bush has had to do domestically and abroad are unnecessary, or the very least excessive. They’ve had the freedom to nitpick at the execution of the war, expressing indignation at every misstep, while ignoring major accomplishments, which they see after all as the accomplishments of an unnecessary war based on global intelligence failures that, in hindsight, they cast as lies.
By now the all-American anti-American agenda is all too familiar. Dead American soldiers in Iraq are a political scorecard. The tens of thousands killed since by Islamic terrorists and Baathist ... also America’s fault. The hundreds of thousands killed by Saddam Hussein? A historical footnote.
Purposeful terrorist bombings of civilians, hostage-takings and the broadcasting of gruesome murder are met with silence while accidents of war are cast as war crimes and the misdeeds of a few rogue American soldiers are trumpeted endlessly, in the guise of dissent. There is a political fight between the White House and the CIA, and all of a sudden, the anti-everything crowd is intensely interested in maintaining government secrecy and wants to know who spoke the name of Valerie Plame.
But when it comes to actual substantive issues of national security...
The New York Times has revealed details of secret government surveillance of terrorist financing practices. It was the first of three newspapers to report on the program, and has established itself as the national leader in revealing government secrets with its publication last year of details of the tracking of phone calls and email without warrants.
Its editors have dismissed the notion that this information may be useful to our enemy. They have dismissed the notion that their newspaper may in fact be giving terrorists information that will help them evade detection, and in that way contribute to future murderous attacks.
The New York Times editors are hiding behind the idea of freedom of the press. That has been slowly evolving in recent decades into a freedom without responsibility -- the overarching new American value. It is the value that allows seemingly reasonable people to think we can wish away our problems. It is the value that allows seemingly reasonable people to see our elected president as the enemy.
Our actual and very real enemy purposefully murdered nearly 3,000 people on one day, and has repeatedly attacked civilians other free nations, killing hundreds of people in Europe and Asia, not to mention the thousands of innocents purposefully murdered in Iraq. This enemy has pursued weapons of mass destruction, and given the opportunity, will use them to kill as many of us as possible. They know that militarily, for now, they cannot beat us. But they are patient. They believe, based on past experience, that with our low tolerance for blood we will falter, pull out, and abandon our allies. That will provide them with the opportunity to control nations, to control armies, to control resources. Maybe then we’ll have something more closely resembling total war that Bush’s domestic opposition can finally recognize as a good and necessary war, in which national security must be respected, and excesses in the defense of freedom will be seen in the context of their time, like the carpet bombing of cities, the internment of American citizens and the suspension of habeas corpus. Like the brutalities of the Pacific war and Sherman’s March through Georgia.
But that kind of war - the fabled Good War - belongs to another time. A simpler time. It is probably something that only exists in the rearview mirror anyway.
There are some people who will never get that. Their actions show that they are not worthy of the freedoms that American soldiers have died to give them. Those freedoms are theirs anyway, the birthright of even the most despicable self-centered coward who is born American. But there comes a point when you have to ask, which side are they on? There comes a point when even professional capriciousness and misguided idealism - to be charitable - have to be labelled for what they are: Giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Treason.
I'm reminded of a scene in Saving Private Ryan when a german psyops officer said (in german) "The Statue of Liberty is kaput!".
The capt mused. "The Statue of Liberty is kaput... that's disconcerting."
Had to laugh at that one.
Rep. John Murtha, that stalwart supporter of the troops, has been awarded the John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award for his valiant and repeated calls for us to raise the white flag and cut and run in Iraq. Yet it was JFK himself who once famously declared, "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." The award recipient doesn't seem to share that sentiment, which would logically seem to be a prerequisite. President Kennedy, please call your office. ~ The patriot Post.
Back in 2003, Dixie Chicks' star Natalie Maines made headlines when she announced to a London audience, "[W]e're ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas." The Chicks thus alienated fans, and a large number of country music stations opted not to play their music any longer.
Now, the trio has released a new album featuring the single "Not Ready to Make Nice," and, as Brent Bozell astutely notes, "They asked themselves: How can we get ourselves featured on the cover of TIME and hailed on CBS's '60 Minutes' just before the new CD comes out? Easy. Trash George W. Bush again." So Maines pontificated in her TIME interview, "I don't feel [President Bush] is owed any respect whatsoever," while Marty Maguire displayed the group's arrogant attitude toward fans: "I'd rather have a small following of really cool people who get it, who will grow with us as we grow and are fans for life, than people that have us in their five-disc changer with Reba McEntire and Toby Keith. We don't want those kinds of fans. They limit what you can do." And saying stuff like that limits how many albums you sell.
Nice to see that they have had to cancel over half of their scheduled concerts. They must be feelin' good about that. I know I am. It's good to see traitors get what they deserve.
"Rep. John Murtha, who last year called for the immediate pullout of U.S. troops from Iraq, [has] accused an entire Marine company of murdering 15 Iraqis 'in cold blood.' Mr. Murtha claims he received his information from sources inside the Pentagon, which is conducting an investigation into the Nov. 15 incident in the town of Haditha. That investigation is not yet completed, which makes Mr. Murtha's accusation not only irresponsible, but an egregious violation of ethical conduct by a sitting congressman. Mr. Murtha concedes that he has not read any part of the Pentagon's unfinished report. All he has are his 'sources.'... The incident in question occurred when a roadside bomb struck a Humvee carrying Marines from Kilo Company, 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines, killing Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas. What happened next is the subject of the Pentagon investigation, but 15 Iraqis were in fact killed... What's important to remember is that if the Marines did act outside the rules of combat, they will be tried by a military court martial—not by Jack Murtha, a former Marine who should know better. Which makes us wonder if there's an ulterior motive behind his indefensible comments: 'Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood,' he said. Mr. Murtha is actually accusing the Bush administration of murder, because of the 'pressure' it has put on U.S. troops... Mr. Murtha obviously has a problem with the Bush administration and the Iraq war. Fair enough. But he should leave the troops out of his vendetta." — The Washington Times. May 2006.
"I have been writing about terrorism for 25 years always using the official U.S. definition [of the word 'terrorist'], but that definition is un-usable, and the reason is that when you use that definition it turns out, not surprisingly, that the U.S is one of the leading terrorist states, and the other states become terrorist or non-terrorist depending on how they are relating to U.S. goals." — Noam Chomsky, MIT professor, jihadist sympathyser, traitor and "seditionist-at-large".
"Morale is slipping in Iraq. Fighters are growing doubtful of success. A comprehensive strategy for winning the conflict is nonexistent. Is this an assessment of the U.S. military? No, it is an assessment about the insurgents who oppose the elected Iraqi government. While U.S. opinion polls show a growing number of Americans are pessimistic about the prosecution of the war, documents authored by an al-Qa'ida operative and seized by U.S. soldiers...offer hope to the American side that success may be closer than we think... From comments made by al-Qa'ida leader Osama bin Laden and others, we know the terrorists believe America will give up as it did in Vietnam, Lebanon and Mogadishu when a majority ceases to support an operation. This is the main strategy of the terrorists. The documents not only underscore that strategy, they reveal the terrorists' frustration in their inability to make it work beyond an occasional car bombing, attack on a police station or civilian gathering... These documents ought to encourage not only the U.S. government, but also American public opinion, that the virtues of patience and commitment are likely to achieve the stated objectives of freedom and a self-sustaining Iraqi government." — Cal Thomas.
“Any appeasement of tyranny is treason to this republic and to the democratic ideal” William Allen White