Pajama Journal

Subpoena Heat Continues To Make Constitution Smolder

2007-07-08T12:26:00.000-04:00

"...that kind of legal twisting makes the logic ligament of the brain twitch.

We can’t sue against a secret programs used against us, because they’re secret.

I would hope even advocates of the program would be wondering, “Well, what recourse do the American people have to challenge such Executive power?”

The short answer? The Constitution." - Matthew Funk

read more | digg story

The Unhappiest Place On Earth

2007-07-06T21:05:00.000-04:00

A sober and heartbreaking look at the reality of childhood in Palestine.

read more | digg story

Peace Takes More Than A Word

2007-07-06T16:40:00.000-04:00

"Israel and its supporters must discern which is the better partner to broker peace with - the one that promises war and acts on it with total authority, or the one that promises peace and exploits its lack of authority to continue a war." Matthew Funk

read more | digg story

Bloody Lambs

2007-07-03T16:22:00.000-04:00

My political sparring partner, Matt, of Driving Too Fast, has inspired me to comment on Bush's commute of Scooter's prison sentence.

If you are going to spare the lamb, spare the damn lamb. Bush comes off like he is trying to appease his critics with a half-assed half-measure. I would rather see him go whole hog, or whole lamb as the case may be.

Matt says, in part..

"You don’t sacrifice the lamb. You just stab it a little.
Who is appeased in that equation? Not the deity waiting for the sacrifice. Not the lamb’s owner. For sure not the damn lamb."

I have read pages and pages of comments condemning Bush. As a people we seem to have so much righteous energy! One of the more popular rants is that Libby is the only person ever to have been pardoned for obstruction of justice.

Before this particular tidbit is accepted as truth by virtue of continuous echo, lets review some recent history.

G.W. Bush Pardons (117)
Clinton's Pardons (456)
Bush Sr. Pardons ( 77)
Reagan's Pardons (406)
Carter's Pardons (566)
Ford's Pardons (409)
Nixon's Pardons (926)

I didn't bother to count how many of these pardons or commutations were for obstruction. I saw several from Clinton's list alone and only scanned the others. Look at the numbers. Can any reasonable person believe that Scooter Libby is more deserving of hard time than the hundreds upon hundreds of other pardons we never hear a peep about?

The news cycle will play this up until some new bloody thing comes along to beat on. They are selling conflict. When are we going to stop buying it wholesale and using our own brains to decide what we are enraged about? Darfur anyone? Now there is a conflict I could get righteously enraged over.

Should we be spending the next couple of months debating the justness of Scooter's already sealed fate, or should we be demanding answers for why things like this are still happening? For the record, the only candidate I have seen showing appropriate passion for resolving the genocide in Darfur is Joe Biden.

I want more from this country. I want more from our press and our leaders. I want to demand outrage and action. I don't want to accept that we can't do more than squabble over our differences. While we are sitting in our air-conditioned living rooms, kicked back in our over-stuffed La-Z Boys, debating pizza or Chinese take-out, while we whine about Scooter not doing hard time; people are being raped, tortured, murdered and starved to death because we can't pay attention long enough to help.

I Made a Widget!

2007-06-28T22:53:00.000-04:00

Driving Too Fast Down The Middle Of The RoadWidgetbox

Ok.. I made two.

One for my step-Dad's recipes - Vito's Meatballs (look down) and one for my favorite author's blog - Driving Too Fast Down The Middle Of The Road (look up). You can download and install it on your blog too. What fun!

Vito's Meatballs

2007-06-28T21:38:00.000-04:00

To The Archives

2007-06-27T15:21:00.000-04:00

Having recently installed WordPress for a friend, I've decided I want it.

I've been writing, admittedly sporadically, with blogger software for the last 4 years or so. I don't have much confidence in blogger exporting successfully to WordPress.

So, after considering the options, and the fact that I have let this site become outdated after the 2004 elections, I think that I might archive everything here and start fresh.

After all, It's almost time to defeat Hilary.. might as well have all my widgets in order.

Feel free to leave objections to this plan in the very rarely used, even by spammers, comment feature below.

Wake The %*^& Up America

2007-04-12T17:56:00.000-04:00

Wait. Can I say that? (Turned out my Mother insisted that I can not.)

Al Qaeda bombs the Iraqi parliament in the middle of The Green Zone during a security crack down, eight people are dead, and what are the American headlines about? An asshat named Imus.

Most Americans do not understand the war, the reasons for it, or the enemy we are fighting. (Here is a great place to start reading up on that: Driving Too Fast Down The Middle of The Road) Why? Because we are too busy worrying about important things like Imus the Asshat. Who by the way was an asshat before he said anything about nappy headed hos, and as an asshat was perfectly within his rights to speak like one regardless of what Asshat Al Sharpton or Asshat Jesse Jackson thinks. See how easy it is to get distracted?

We all need to wake up and start paying attention to what's important. Why are our headlines all screaming for us to read about Imus when we need to be informed about what our enemy is up to and how we are handling the threat? Most of us are not even really sure who we are really fighting in Iraq. Our media needs to pull its collective head out of its collective ass and start telling us the real story.

We need to stop forking over our attention like a bunch of drooling ignoramuses for stories like Imus Is An Asshat and CBS Fired Him or the even more informative one about how Rudy Guliani doesn't know how much a gallon of milk costs. So the hell what? Neither do I. Who buys a whole gallon at a time if you don't have a bunch of cereal eating kids around? Not me and apparently not Rudy. I plan to have my 12 year old conduct a survey on how the average American contacted by random phone calls responds to the same questions. I am betting 9 out of 10 do not have any more of a clue. See? Distracted again.

We are so incredibly spoiled in this country to have the liberty and privilege to sit around groaning and complaining with such idiocy about things that do not matter. We must begin to wake up and understand what is important and worthy of our attention. You can bet that al Qaeda is not debating political correctness or the price of tea in China (or the price of milk in Alabama for that matter). No, they are busy figuring out how to deal the biggest blow to our morale and how to work our own propaganda machine against us. They are paying attention. It is time we did.

Bravo, Nancy, Bravo

2007-04-06T15:30:00.000-04:00

I have been increasingly upset over the divide in this country but this week Nancy Pelosi did indeed prove there is something that America can agree on. Contrary to the nonsensical point she attempted to make this morning, about sending a message of unity to President Assad, we do not agree on the message we want him to receive.

From Breitbart
...the California Democrat said. "It became clear to President Assad that even though we have our differences in the United States, there is no division between the president and the Congress and the Democrats on the message we wanted him to receive."

There is a good deal of division among both parties on what the right message to send is. Words, bombs, diplomacy or isolation, a valid argument can be made for each. What we can agree on, is that it was not her place to deliver any message.

Right or wrong the Commander-in-Chief of the United States has chosen isolation as the means to deal with Syria. Her trip undermines that objective in a clear and serious way. Even asked by the administration not to interfere she chose to do so anyway. Reasonable people on both sides of the aisle are embarrassed by her trip. Even the Washington Post weighed in on the error of Nancy's ways with a scathing editorial.

From: Pratfall in Damascus
...Ms. Pelosi's attempt to establish a shadow presidency is not only counterproductive, it is foolish.

The Wall Street Journal brings up the issue and I am very interested to see how the Logan Act applies to this publicity grab of a trip.

§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply himself, or his agent, to any foreign government, or the agents thereof, for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

18 U.S.C. § 953 (2004).

The way I read it, Nancy should be thinking about hiring an attorney. In a more perfect world the administration would have the hutzpah to charge her. I don't expect that she will be charged but she damn well should be brought to account for her irresponsible and foolish behavior.

The enemies of this country have and will continue to use her like a pawn for their propaganda and to further undermine the respect and influence of our President. How can we expect the world to respect us and our policies if we do not respect each other?

M.C. Funk at Driving Too Fast Down The Middle Of The Road goes to the heart of the matter with this:

Our allies and enemies abroad don't see the Democrats as the cavalry, rushing in to save the imperilled world from unilateral barbarism. They just see an America split by internal strife, and a hazardous executive with its hands not tied, but merely encumbered. Put plainly, they just see weakness.

When The Washington Post, NewsMax, The Wall Street Journal and USA Today are all on the same page, one has to conclude that maybe there is hope after all. Maybe we can stand together on something, even if it is just telling Pelosi to stand down.

Kerry calls the United States an International Pariah

2007-01-28T14:14:00.000-04:00

John Kerry Slams His Own Country At Davos

Jan 27 2007 7:52PM
http://sayanythingblog.com/index.php

Here’s John Kerry speaking while sitting just a few feet away from Mohammad Khatami, the former President of the Iranian terror state.

Kerry was asked about whether the U.S. government had failed to adequately engage Iran’s government before the election of hard-liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2005.
Kerry said the Bush administration has failed in addressing a number of foreign policy issues.
“When we walk away from global warming, Kyoto, when we are irresponsibly slow in moving toward AIDS in Africa, when we don’t advance and live up to our own rhetoric and standards, we set a terrible message of duplicity and hypocrisy,” Kerry said.
“So we have a crisis of confidence in the Middle East — in the world, really. I’ve never seen our country as isolated, as much as a sort of international pariah for a number of reasons as it is today.”…
Kerry criticized what he called the “unfortunate habit” of Americans to see the world “exclusively through an American lens.”

The Bush administration walked away from Kyoto? Methinks the Senator is revising history:

On July 25, 1997, before the Kyoto Protocol was finalized (although it had been fully negotiated, and a penultimate draft was finished), the U.S. Senate unanimously passed by a 95–0 vote the Byrd-Hagel Resolution (S. Res. 98), which stated the sense of the Senate was that the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol that did not include binding targets and timetables for developing as well as industrialized nations or “would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States”. On November 12, 1998, Vice President Al Gore symbolically signed the protocol. Both Gore and Senator Joseph Lieberman indicated that the protocol would not be acted upon in the Senate until there was participation by the developing nations. The Clinton Administration never submitted the protocol to the Senate for ratification. . . .
The current President, George W. Bush, has indicated that he does not intend to submit the treaty for ratification, not because he does not support the Kyoto principles, but because of the exemption granted to China (the world’s second largest emitter of carbon dioxide). Bush also opposes the treaty because of the strain he believes the treaty would put on the economy; he emphasizes the uncertainties which he asserts are present in the climate change issue.

It was a unanimous Senate (with five abstainers) as well as the Clinton administration who walked away from Kyoto. The current administration walked away from Kyoto as well, but for the same reasons as the Clinton administration. Kerry himself, in fact, voted for the Byrd-Hagel Resolution to keep us out of Kyoto. Yet here he is now, a decade later, dishonestly accusing the current administration of isolating this country from the world on an issue like Kyoto that Kerry himself opposed for the very same reasons the Bush administration opposes it.

Why should we believe anything that comes out of this guy’s mouth? It’s bad enough that he’s sitting next to one of America’s enemies bad mouthing his own country, but he’s flat-out lying in what he’s saying as well.

Oh, and stopping off to give an autograph to a guy who supports executing gays for being gay is a real nice touch. But don’t expect any of the gay rights groups to hold Kerry accountable for that, though.

~~~

If you have a really strong stomach, you can watch the video here.

Before and After

2007-01-18T12:17:00.000-04:00

Before Bush announced troop surge:

"We have to consider the need for additional troops to be in Iraq, to take out the militias and stabilize Iraq, I would say 20,000 to 30,000." House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Rep. Silvestre Reyes in an interview with Newsweek on Dec 5.

Sen. John Kerry,told NBC's "Today" show that the borders of Iraq "are porous" and said "we don't have enough troops" there.

Sen. Joseph Biden Jr., appearing on ABC's "Good Morning America,"
"I'm going to send him the phone numbers of the very generals and flag officers that I met on Memorial Day when I was in Iraq, There's not enough force on the ground now to mount a real counterinsurgency."

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid on ABC's "This Week" Dec 17, 2006: "If it's for a surge, that is, for two or three months and it's part of a program to get us out of there as indicated by this time next year, then, sure, I'll go along with it,"

Nancy Pelosi in her pre-Speaker days on May 30, 2004, on Meet The Press:

MR. RUSSERT: Would you send more American troops in order to stabilize the situation?

REP. PELOSI: Yes.

After:

""We don't have the capability to escalate even to this minimum level" Rep. Silvestre Reyes to the El Paso Times hours after Bush's speech.

Source

Isn't This News Worthy?

2007-01-09T17:54:00.000-04:00

Press Release

Did the 9/11 Commission receive all the documents it requested? Davis Releases Berger Report

January 9, 2007

By David Marin (202)225-5074

Washington, D.C. – Oversight and Government Reform Committee Ranking Member Tom Davis (R-VA) released the following statement today on a committee report that sheds important new light on Sandy Berger’s theft of classified documents from the National Archives. The report makes it clear that the full extent of Mr. Berger’s document removal can never be known, and consequently the Department of Justice could not assure the 9/11 Commission that it received all responsive documents to which Mr. Berger had access.

“My staff’s investigation reveals that President Clinton’s former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger compromised national security much more than originally disclosed,” Davis said. “It is now also clear that Mr. Berger was willing to go to extraordinary lengths to compromise national security, apparently for his own convenience.

“The 9/11 Commission relied on incomplete and misleading information regarding its access to documents Mr. Berger reviewed. No one ever told the Commission that Mr. Berger had access to original documents that he could have taken without detection.

“We now know that Mr. Berger left stolen highly classified documents at a construction site to avoid detection. We know that Mr. Berger insisted on privacy at times to allow him to conceal documents that he stole. One witness with a very high security clearance believed he saw Berger concealing documents in his socks.

“Mr. Berger’s review of documents did not conform to the usual requirements for reviewing classified documents in a secure facility and under strict supervision. The Archives staff’s failure to contact law enforcement immediately and their contacts with Mr. Berger about the missing documents compromised the law enforcement effort.

“The compromised law enforcement effort contributes to reduced confidence that the 9/11 Commission received all the documents it requested. The execution of a search warrant before Mr. Berger knew there was an investigation would have either located additional documents or enhanced confidence that he stole no others than those he admitted to taking.

“The public statements of the former chief of the public integrity section, Noel Hillman, were incomplete and misleading. Because Mr. Berger had access to original documents that he could have taken without detection, we do not know if anything ‘was lost to the public or the process.’

“The Justice Department’s assertion that Mr. Berger’s statements are credible after being caught is misplaced. One wouldn’t rely on the fox to be truthful after being nabbed in the hen house. But the Justice Department apparently did.”

###

Staff Report- Sandy Berger's Theft of Classified Documents: Unanswered Questions (PDF)

A message from Col. George E. "Bud" Day

2006-10-25T10:44:00.000-04:00

POWs LAWSUIT COULD FORCE KERRY TO COME
CLEAN ON VIETNAM ‘WAR CRIMES’ CHARGES

When John Kerry slandered an entire generation of men who fought in Vietnam he branded them as "war criminals." Today, much of the same thing is being said about our young men and women in Iraq.

Now, a lawsuit filed in Philadelphia’s Court of Common Pleas will test the very foundation of Kerry’s anti-war persona for the first time. It isn’t dubious medals or Kerry’s disputed service record in Vietnam that is being called into question. This time Kerry may finally be forced to answer for the events that launched his public career, one that made him an anti-war hero for many American liberals and a turncoat for millions of Vietnam veterans.

The lawsuit challenges the basis, the factual accuracy of then Lt. (j.g.) Kerry’s acrimonious testimony before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971. It was there Kerry’s public career was catapulted with his now ubiquitous portrayal of American soldiers as murderers, rapists and torturers "who ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam . . . [and] razed villages in a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan."

For the anti-war, anti-American protesters, the American soldiers are the "terrorists," and the enemies are the victims of a barbaric U.S. military which tortures and murders defenseless civilians.

That false premise, one of the most vicious and enduring smears spawned by Kerry 35 years ago, will also be put to the test once Kerry’s true "Band of Brothers" are put under oath in a Philadelphia courtroom.

The background to this lawsuit is long and complex, but even a condensed version is rich in irony and poetic justice.

It had it roots in 2004 with the documentary Stolen Honor: Wounds that Never Heal. Many may recall the film, although it is probably best known for not being seen, suppressed after Sinclair Broadcasting Company courageously announced it was going to air the documentary in its entirety. Thanks to Kerry and his liberal colleagues in the Senate and their enablers in the mainstream media, Sinclair was browbeaten into withdrawing the film, its broadcast license threatened by a Kerry campaign manager in 2004. The film’s producer, Carlton Sherwood, a Pulitzer Prize and Peabody Award-winning investigative reporter, interviewed former POWs for the documentary.

I was among those whom Sherwood, a decorated Marine combat veteran himself, asked to participate in Stolen Honor. I was a POW for nearly six years, held in North Vietnam prison camps, including the notorious Hanoi Hilton, a place of unimaginable horrors — torture, beatings, starvation and mind-numbing isolation. When Kerry branded us "war criminals," he handed our captors all the justification they needed to carry out their threats to execute us. Thanks to Kerry, Jane Fonda and their comrades in the anti-war movement, our captivity was prolonged by years. The communists in Hanoi and Moscow couldn’t have had a better press agent to spread their anti-American propaganda.

To guarantee Stolen Honor would never be seen by anyone — not even theatre-goers — the producer was slapped with a libel and defamation lawsuit.

That lawsuit was filed by a long-time anti-war disciple of the Massachusetts Senator. He was one of Kerry's key war crimes "witnesses," one of several on whom Kerry claims he based his Senate testimony.

The lawsuit put a unique spin on the definition of defamation, claiming that Stolen Honor had damaged the public reputations of himself, Kerry and others by simply quoting their own words and criticisms of America during the Vietnam war!

The POWs and the wives of POWs who participated in Stolen Honor refused to abandon the facts conveyed in the film. For some of us, it was the first time since our release by the Communists in 1973 that we were able to have our voices publicly heard, to tell our stories about the consequences of Kerry’s treachery. In 2005, we formed a nonprofit organization, the Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation (VVLF), to gather records, documents and other materials to form a fact-based, educational repository for students and scholars of Vietnam history and to tell the true story of the American soldiers in Vietnam. The VVLF’s mission is "to set the record straight, factually, about Vietnam and those who fought there."

For our efforts, we were promptly sued by two long-time anti-war Kerry followers and VVAW members. It was clear that Kerry not only wanted to punish us for Stolen Honor; he intended to use surrogates to sue us into permanent silence and financial ruin.

Forced to spend huge sums to defend ourselves from these frivolous lawsuits, we have filed a countersuit against these Kerry surrogates and intend to reveal the truth about the lawsuits and their sponsors. We believe that we can prove that the purpose of nearly two years of litigation was to protect John Kerry, to drain us financially and spiritually, and to prevent us from setting the record straight.

At stake is ultimately nothing less than the integrity of the American military in Vietnam, the honor of the men who served their country, the nobility of those who gave their lives, and the truth of America’s history in Vietnam. Until or unless we do correct the existing record, the American military may never be free of the myths and smears of Vietnam, its honor and integrity cleansed as it fights to defend freedom at home and around the world.

Our mission is hardly over. We hope you will join us in fighting this battle . . . for our soldiers, then and now. For more information about Vietnam, the foregoing litigation, or to make a donation, please access the VVLF website now — Go Here Now.

Col. George E. "Bud" Day
Director and President,
Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation

Col. George E. "Bud" Day, USAF (Ret.,) was a POW in North Vietnam for five years, seven months and 13 days. He served in three wars (WWII, Korea, and Vietnam) and earned the Medal of Honor. He is the Air Force’s most decorated living veteran. He is the Director and President of the Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation, Inc., an organization created to better educate and inform the public about the Vietnam War, its events, its history, and the men and women who sacrificed to serve their country. Please go here to read Col. Day’s statement in its entirety.

Kerry says he will "Kick Ass" in 08

2006-09-14T18:48:00.000-04:00

Swift Boat Leader Responds to Kerry

by John O'Neill
Posted Sep 14, 2006

John Kerry recently volunteered that he was prepared to “kick [the Swift Boat Veterans’] ass from one end of America to the other” and that he would “demolish” us. He ought to take a Christmas cruise to Cambodia to calm down. Maybe he could take a side trip to tour “Genghis Khan” ruins.

It is a little difficult to imagine Kerry (“I voted for it before I voted against it”) kicking the most decorated living serviceman, Bud Day, a Congressional Medal of Honor recipient, or our salty commander, Adm. Roy Hoffman, anywhere. Perhaps Kerry had in mind using a “Rice Fanny Grenade” as he did by mistake on himself shortly before leaving Vietnam. If so, based on the record, he is in far more danger than anyone else.

Kerry and his friends certainly seem to show much greater anger and hatred toward us than toward the murderous al Qaeda terrorists. This is actually a positive thing. Based on his record of switching to adopt the North Vietnamese position in 1971 and (after voting to send our kids to Iraq) proposing to cut and run in Iraq, it is likely that Kerry will be endorsing our positions by 2008 and (in his words) “Swift Boating” himself. If not, it is OK. After living for 34 years with his claim that our comrades, living and dead, were like the army of Genghis Khan, we will always remember and be grateful for the support of the American people in 2004. Nothing he will ever say can demolish that or will speak nearly so loudly.

Mr. O'Neill is a Houston attorney who clerked for Chief Justice William Rehnquist during the Supreme Court's October 1974 term. Last year he authored the New York Times #1 bestseller, Unfit for Command.

Ann's Latest

2006-07-04T17:07:00.000-04:00

June 28, 2006

WHEN WILL NYT REVEAL ONE OF AL QAEDA'S SECRET PROGRAMS?
By Ann Coulter
Legal Affairs Correspondent, Human Events

In the latest of a long list of formerly top-secret government anti-terrorism operations that have been revealed by the New York Times, last week the paper printed the details of a government program tracking terrorists' financial transactions that has already led to the capture of major terrorists and their handmaidens in the United States.

In response, the Bush Administration is sounding very cross -- and doing nothing. Bush wouldn't want to get the press mad at him! Yeah, let's keep the media on our good side like they are now. Otherwise, they might do something crazy -- like leak a classified government program monitoring terrorist financing. Continued...

Sleep Last Night??

2006-01-29T00:15:00.000-04:00

Bed a little lumpy...

Toss and turn any...

Wish the heat was higher...

Maybe the a/c wasn't on...

Had to go to the john...

Need a drink of water...

Yes... It is like that!

Count your blessings, pray for them, talk to your Creator and

the next time when...

the other car cuts you off and you must hit the brakes,

you have to park a little farther from Walmart than you like,

you're served slightly warm food at the restaurant,

you're sitting and cursing the traffic in front of you,

or the shower runs out of hot water,

Think of them.

Live and Let Spy

2005-12-24T21:54:00.000-04:00

by Ann Coulter
Posted Dec 21, 2005

Apart from the day the New York Times goes out of business -- and the stellar work Paul Krugman's column does twice a week helping people house-train their puppies -- the newspaper has done the greatest thing it will ever do in its entire existence. (Calm down: No, the Times didn't hold an intervention for Frank Rich.)

Monday's Times carried a major expose on child molesters who use the Internet to lure their adolescent prey into performing sex acts for Webcams. In the course of investigating the story, reporter Kurt Eichenwald broke open a massive network of pedophiles, rescued a young man who had been abused for years, and led the Department of Justice to hundreds of child molesters.

I kept waiting for the catch, but apparently the Times does not yet believe pedophilia is covered by the "privacy right." They should stop covering politics and start covering more stories like this.

In order to report the story, the Times said it obtained:

-- Copies of online conversations and e-mail messages between minors and the creepy adults;

-- Records of payments to the minors;

-- Membership lists for Webcam sites;

-- Defunct sites stored in online archives;

-- Files retained on a victim's computer over several years;

-- Financial records, credit card processing data and other information;

-- The Neverland Ranch's mailing list. (OK, I made that last one up.)

Would that the Times allowed the Bush administration similar investigative powers for Islamofacists in America!

Which brings me to this week's scandal about No Such Agency spying on "Americans." I have difficulty ginning up much interest in this story inasmuch as I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East, and sending liberals to Guantanamo.

But if we must engage in a national debate on half-measures: After 9/11, any president who was not spying on people calling phone numbers associated with terrorists should be impeached for being an inept commander in chief.

With a huge gaping hole in lower Manhattan, I'm not sure why we have to keep reminding people, but we are at war. (Perhaps it's because of the media blackout on images of the 9/11 attack. We're not allowed to see those because seeing planes plowing into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon might make us feel angry and jingoistic.)

Among the things that war entails are: killing people (sometimes innocent), destroying buildings (sometimes innocent) and spying on people (sometimes innocent).

That is why war is a bad thing. But once a war starts, it is going to be finished one way or another, and I have a preference for it coming out one way rather than the other.

In previous wars, the country has done far worse than monitor telephone calls placed to jihad headquarters. FDR rounded up Japanese -- many of them loyal American citizens -- and threw them in internment camps. Most appallingly, at the same time, he let New York Times editors wander free.

Note the following about the Japanese internment:

1) The Supreme Court upheld the president's authority to intern the Japanese during wartime;

2) That case, Korematsu v. United States, is still good law;

3) There are no Japanese internment camps today. (Although the no-limit blackjack section at Caesar's Palace on a Saturday night comes pretty close.)

It's one or the other: Either we take the politically correct, scattershot approach and violate everyone's civil liberties, or we focus on the group threatening us and -- in the worst-case scenario -- run the risk of briefly violating the civil liberties of 1,000 people in a country of 300 million.

Of course, this is assuming I'm talking to people from the world of the normal. In the Democrats' world, there are two more options. Violate no one's civil liberties and get used to a lot more 9/11s, or the modified third option, preferred by Sen. John D. Rockefeller: Let the president do all the work and take all the heat for preventing another terrorist attack while you place a letter expressing your objections in a file cabinet as a small parchment tribute to your exquisite conscience.

I Never Knew His Name

2005-11-16T11:38:00.000-04:00

The true face of Muslim martyrdom.
November 11, 2005, 8:22 a.m.

By Chaplain Carlos C. Huerta

Mosul, Iraq — It is October 11 as I write this, the day before Yom Kippur. The Day of Atonement is supposed to be a day of fast, reflection, and prayer for the Jews: a time when I reflect on my own actions and intentions from the previous year. But the images I carry into my fast are sad ones, of someone else’s child, a Muslim child. There is blood spattered on my uniform despite the fact that I haven’t been hit or wounded. And yet it is B-positive blood, my own blood, mixed with the blood of a nine-year old Iraqi boy who was observing his fast during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

Today there was a terrorist attack at a place most people have never heard of. Unless you’re a soldier stationed here, the name Tal Afar would probably be insignificant to you. But Tal Afar means a lot to me.

Today some terrorists decided to kill some Iraqi citizens — good Muslims — in order to discourage them from voting on Saturday on the new constitution. These terrorists called themselves Muslims and claimed that what they did was for Allah. But their connection to Islam is about as true and strong as Timothy McVeigh’s connection to Christianity. What they did is so contrary to the holy teachings of the Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) that to say their name in the same breath as Islam is considered sacrilege.

I was at the Combat Support Hospital — known as CASH — when the call came: Terrorists had hit, no American casualties, but 22 Iraqis wounded, five of whom were children under the age of twelve. I stood on the tarmac watching as the MEDEVAC choppers came in one at a time to deliver the wounded. Many of the wounded had no legs, or deep chest, head, and abdominal wounds. I noticed the children, two in particular who had severe head trauma. I followed them into the ER and then watched our physicians struggle in the OR to stabilize them. After the physicians did what they could, the children were taken to the ICU. I helped carry their stretchers into the ICU and stood by to see if I could help. I had a serious conversation with G-d and pleaded with him to take care of these kids — kids who should be playing soccer, or doing their homework for school the next day, or helping their parents get ready for supper. Both of these children had skulls so badly shattered that their heads needed to be bandaged to keep their brains in. I watched as the nurses and medics gave them pint after pint of blood and as their head bandages turned from white to red. I held the youngest one’s hands, reassuring him to the extent I could.

As they were giving the youngest his third pint of blood, I heard the nurse say that they were running low on O Positive, the universal donor, and that due to the tremendous internal bleeding, this child would need more. I asked what blood type he was, and it turned out both children were B Positive, my own blood type. I went to the head nurse and asked if I could donate blood for the youngest child and they quickly hooked me up and took a pint. After giving it, I went back to see him; he already my blood hooked up to him and surging in his veins.

I held his tiny hand and watched as the monitors told the story: His heart was in trouble owing to the brain trauma. I watched as he fought for his life, fighting to breathe. But I knew he was dying and there was nothing I could do. This innocent Muslim child, who had been observing Ramadan the way a child does, was now dying despite the fact that my blood was moving though his veins, despite the fact that I pleaded with G-d to do what I thought was right, to keep him alive. But G-d had other plans.

I didn’t want this boy to die hearing the strange sounds of a hospital and a foreign language. I wanted him to be comforted by the last sounds he heard, by words that were close to his heart, words that spoke of home and faith. I started to recite the Holy Koran to him.

My close friend, a fellow clergyman, Imam Burgos, the imam for the United States Military Academy, had helped me learn Surahs of the Holy Koran, and I chanted these out to the boy in Arabic. As I chanted, I heard the monitor go flat-line. I held his little hand, as my blood moved through his tiny pure heart that could no longer bear the evil of this world.

I held his hand and cried — cried for a boy whose name I didn’t know, for an innocent Muslim child who gave his life for his G-d, Allah, for his country. He was the true face of Muslim martyrdom. With tears streaming down my face, I looked down and noticed blood on my uniform. His blood, my blood, our blood had dripped from his open head wound onto my uniform.

An hour or so later I walked away into the waiting area as they prepared his body for transport. There I met Chaplain Mark Greschel, a Catholic priest. He looked at me and knew that I was in trouble. He sat with me, somehow knowing that the pain we felt was best not mixed with words. He quietly put his arms around me, and we both sat there in silence. I thought to myself, isn’t this the kind of world we are fighting for — a world where an Imam teaches a Rabbi words from the Holy Koran to comfort a young Muslim boy, and that rabbi himself is comforted by a Christian, a Catholic priest.

On this day before Yom Kippur, the Jewish Fast Day, the Day of Atonement, I ask myself: What is Ramadan all about? Is it about killing, or is it about seeking out G-d through fasting and prayer? For those of us who choose not to carry hatred and prejudice in our hearts, the answer is simple. For the holy Islamic community, Ramadan is a time of introspection, of hope, of belief that if we all work together, we can truly build a better world for all our children, even those whose names we don’t know. There is so much that we can learn about faith and G-d through other religions; there is so much that our Muslim brothers and sisters can teach us about our Creator, about personal sacrifice and selfless service. But if we consider their faith only with mistrust, hatred, and indifference, then this nine-year-old angel with his faith in G-d means nothing. Then we have diminished our own faith in G-d. If we objectify the Muslim people as well as those who don’t share our exact views on the nature of G-d, if we see them as less than our brothers and sisters, then we as a human race are lost.

There are many Americans who ask why we’re here. Why are we sacrificing so many American lives and placing so many in harm’s way? What is the purpose of it all? Well, I don’t really know the big picture. But from my small sector of the battlefield, the reason I am here is to give “the least of these,” my children over here, a shot at “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” — just like my other children living in America.

I didn’t give birth to him, but on this fast day in Ramadan, on this day before Yom Kippur, I lost a son, someone who had my blood coursing through his body. And for him, I choose not to hate, I choose to follow the path that the great Sheik Ibn Arabi followed when he said, “Love is my Faith and my religion and wherever its caravans take me, that is where I shall follow, for love is my religion and faith.” Let us join hands with our Muslim brothers and sisters and let this be the message of Ramadan that we carry in our hearts and take with us. G-d has a new Muslim angel in Paradise. I hope to tell you his name one day when I meet him again.

— Chaplain Carlos C. Huerta is Jewish Community chaplain in Mosul, Iraq.

From Iraq The Model

2005-09-11T15:20:00.000-04:00

Iraqi soldiers donate to Katrina victims:
(Hat tip:ITM reader).

“On behalf of myself and all the People of Tadji Military Base; I would like to console the American People and Government for getting this horrible disaster. So we would like to donate 1.000.000 Iraqi Dinars to help the government and the People also I would like to console all the ASTs who helped us rebuilding our country and our Army. We appreciate the American's help and support. Thank you".

These were the words of Colonel Abbas Fadhil, commander of the Taji military base.
The donated money is little, less than 700 $ and it can do practically nothing but the spirit and and words mean quite a lot.
- posted by Omar @ 23:51

Update

2005-06-29T18:45:00.000-04:00

I have not posted in months now because I am totally frustated with the idiocy that has become our political system. I had not planned on posting again anytime soon, however today I read a post by an Iraqi that I wish every last war critic and arm chair general would read.

From Iraq The Model

Wednesday, June 29, 2005

Talk less, think more and do more.

It's visible to everyone that debates over the war in Iraq, war on terror, invasion or occupation or whatever you may name it are at peak levels right now.

The process is being questioned, criticized and discussed more profoundly than at any time in the last two years but you know what? That's not happening in Iraq; you can find such discussions and accusations in America but you can't find them in Iraq.

As a matter of fact there are some similar debates here in Iraq but at very limited levels; in the National Assembly there are 83 members who signed a declaration where they accused the government of treason because it asked the multinational troops to remain for another year in Iraq and they said that the government ought to demand a timetable for withdrawal and they're also planning to organize protests and rallies to put more pressure on the government.

However, on the streets, such demands are not popular among everyday Iraqis who are more concerned about finding solutions for their daily life problems whether the solutions came form the government, the Americans or from Martians. As for the other 192 members of the Assembly, they find such demands irrational and inconvenient at least for the time being.

Those 83 Sadrists and Fadhela party members as well as some other Islamists want to embarrass the government and use slogans that sound great and patriotac to undermine the public support the current government enjoys.

This reminds me of the communists and the pan-nationalists back in the 1st half of the 20th century when they demanded the ousting of British troops and the result was a disaster; all they wanted was power and the deterioration didn't end since then.

The truth is that with very few exceptions, most people and politicians here have thrown this argument behind their backs long time ago; whether they're supportive of the war/liberation or against it and whether they want the coalition to stay forever or they want the troops to leave now, they are now living and discussing the present and planning for the future trying to get the best results possible out of the current situation, each party from it's own perspective.

We're living through probably the most critical phase of this conflict; a phase where firm decisions and clear stands are needed more than ever, while sterile arguments can do nothing but weaken our position against our common enemy; the global terrorism.

I wasn't in touch with media and blogs when the September attacks happened but I heard a lot about the great sense of patriotism and the beautiful unity that grew among different political trends in America at that time and this is a time where such unity must be revived.
This is not the right time to argue about "why we went to this war".

It is time to think together for a way to win this war which none of us can afford to lose.

It doesn't really matter if Saddam had connections with Al-Qaeda prior to 2003 or not and it does not matter if he had the ability to attack the west with WMDs or not. What really matters here is how to protect the world from terrorism. Al-Qaeda is present and active in Iraq today; we all know this and this terror group's lethal power cannot and must not be underestimated.

Yesterday for example, interior ministry in Saudi Arabia uncovered a new list of wanted Al-Qaeda members with 36 names on it, 21 of who are believed to be residing in Iraq right now.

Can anyone tell me how can these terrorists be stopped from moving their zone of action to other countries if they weren't intercepted right here and right now? There's no doubt that once Iraq falls in their hands they will start looking for other battle grounds and they will search for the "greatest Satan" in other places.

It is the American existence in Iraq that attracted them to a great extent and when there are no Americans in Iraq Al-Qaeda will not simply drop their weapons and start a normal life, they will seek other places where they can find, and kill Americans.

What I want to say here is that it is our fate to fight terrorism on our own land and we (the majority) have accepted to challenge this fate the day we abandoned Saddam and welcomed our freedom but that's not the case for you in America. Actually we've got no other choice but to fight and keep fighting until we win over the terrorists because otherwise we'll have to submit to their will and the damage would be irreversible.

Fighting terrorism for us in Iraq is a matter of life or death so we have no choice but to keep fighting until we kill or lock in jail every one of them and we're doing this whether the world supported us or not but in case we failed, the consequences will not be confined by Iraq's borders. You (the west) can step back and wait for the terrorists to knock on your doors at any minute or you can put your s*** together and fight them while they're thousands of miles away.

This is war, it's not a picnic and don't think that we're enjoying it and we're not expecting you to enjoy it either. By quitting now some might think that needless losses are going to be avoided but that's-in my opinion-is a very shortsighted way of thinking because quitting now will only expose America and the rest of the world to a much greater threat.

I was talking about this to one of my friends and he described this war in an interesting way, he said "this war is much like a fierce boxing match; you punch and you get punched but even if you're stronger than your opponent you should not allow him to catch his breath at any round because he might then give you a surprising punch when the next round begins and knocks you down".

So my advice to the American politicians on both sides but especially those on the left side is: grow up, this is not the time to seek political wins and it's not the time to use other's mistakes to get some publicity.

We're facing very tough times so use your skills to find solutions.
Bottom line is, talk less, think more and do more.

He's Hoping Nobody Noticed?

2005-03-03T14:13:00.000-04:00

Watchdog Asks Kerry To Keep His Word To American Public

WASHINGTON, D.C., Feb. 2, 2005 – Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today asked Sen. John F. Kerry to keep his word to the American public and sign a Standard Form 180 (SF 180), “Request Pertaining to Military Records.” On Sunday, Jan. 30, 2005, during an appearance on the NBC News show “Meet the Press,” moderator Tim Russert asked Sen. Kerry (three times) if he would sign an SF 180 and release all of his military records. On the third attempt Sen. Kerry answered Mr. Russert plainly:

MR. RUSSERT: Would you sign Form 180?

SEN. KERRY: Yes, I will.

In a letter hand delivered to Sen. Kerry’s Capitol Hill office, Judicial Watch asked him to execute the SF 180 immediately and thereby put to rest the controversies surrounding his service as a U.S. Navy officer.

Judicial Watch requested Aug. 2, 2004, release of Sen. Kerry’s military service records under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. Navy Personnel Command withheld 31 pages of documents because Sen. Kerry refused to sign an SF 180, releasing them to the public. The records pertained to: “Personnel service jackets and service records; and correspondence and records in both automated and non-automated form concerning classification, assignment, distribution, promotion, advancement, performance, recruiting, retention, reenlistment, separation, training, education, morale, personal affairs, benefits, entitlements, discipline and administration of naval personnel.”

Much of the information concerning Sen. Kerry’s questionable awards for valor and allegations concerning his actions both on active duty and as an inactive Naval Reserve officer was detailed in the best-selling book Unfit for Command, by John E. O’Neill and Jerome R. Corsi, PhD.

“Sen. Kerry has yet to come clean with the American people,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “We hope he will finally keep his promise to release his military records.”

[To read the "Meet the Press" transcript, click here. To view the letter from Judicial Watch, click here (for html version, click here).]

Judicial Watch is a non-partisan, educational foundation that advocates transparency, integrity and accountability in all aspects of government, politics and the law.

COMPLAINT FILED AGAINST JOHN KERRY

2005-03-03T14:07:00.000-04:00

WITH FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION OVER LOAN AND REPORTING VIOLATIONS

John Kerry for President, Inc. Failed to Report Contribution of Mrs. Teresa Heinz Kerry

(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) against John Kerry for President, Inc. for failing to report a campaign contribution that appears to be in excess of legal limits.

A review of the reports John Kerry for President, Inc. (the Committee) submitted to the FEC indicates that the Committee received $850,000 in unsecured loans from the candidate, including $100,000 identified as personal funds. The Committee also reports receiving $5,539,965.80 from the candidate in proceeds from secured loans.

A loan guarantor is considered a contributor, subject to campaign contribution limits, until the loan is repaid. (See: 11 C.F.R. 100.52.) This regulation applies to a spouse as well as any other related or unrelated individual. A Boston Herald news article published on February 25, 2004, reports that the official City of Boston property assessment value of the home John Kerry shares with his wife is $6.6 million as of January 1, 2003. The Committee received $5,539,965.80 in loans secured at least in part by the value of the Kerry family home, of which Mr. Kerry could at best have an undivided interest of approximately $3.3 million, depending on the form in which the property is held.

This evidence suggests the Committee failed to report a campaign contribution from Mr. Kerry�s spouse, Mrs. Teresa Heinz Kerry, to the extent that her property rights in the Kerry family home or any other jointly held property are pledged as collateral for any or all of the secured loans received by the Committee. It also suggests that her contribution is in excess of the $2,000 maximum aggregate campaign allowed by law.

Quite simply, Senator Kerry's loan raises questions and the FEC needs to investigate, stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

A copy of the complaint is available by clicking here (Adobe Acrobate Reader Required)

Applause in the Airport?

2005-03-03T10:45:00.000-04:00

Beyond the Beer Commercial

By Matt Friedeman, PhD
February 10, 2005

(AgapePress) - Rick from Winona, Mississippi, called my state-wide talk radio program this week. Sometimes, you get a phone call that ought to be read in the broader market.

On the program that day we were discussing the report that some Europeans were disgusted with the Super Bowl commercial of American soldiers getting applause in an airport. The critics thought it too extreme in its patriotism and a possible incitement to further war.

At any rate, Rick (he asked us not to use his full name) called to talk about his experience coming back recently from the fields of war. His words (and they are worth your time reading, only lightly edited):

"I heard you talking about the Super Bowl commercial. I'm a Marine, a re-con Marine. I just got back from overseas, the second week of December, actually. I was injured overseas, so that's why I'm home now.

"But the whole time I was [there, in recovery] we watched the news to see what's going on. And we saw the protests, and we saw what the media was saying about what's going on, and we were worried about what we were actually going to face when we came home. We didn't know what to expect, to be honest with you. From the news media we were seeing, the whole country was basically telling us we're a bunch of jerks.

"I thank God that the troops that are there don't see the news coverage. I thank God every day, because there'd be ten times the number getting killed, just because it would so un-motivate [sic] them.

"Back to the story: there were seven other soldiers that came home with me that day. We flew into JFK, and we were talking on the way back: What's going to happen? What will we be facing? Is it going to be like the Vietnam era, are there going to be people spitting at us?

"We didn't know. We had that much trepidation about it.

"We get into JFK, we step out of the breezeway into the main terminal, and directly in front of us was an elderly gentleman carrying a bag. And he immediately stopped, set his bag down, and the first thing we all thought was, 'Oh, Lord, here we go already.' He just stopped and looked at us for a second, and then tears came to his eyes and he saluted us.

"And -- I'm breaking up now [editor's note: with tears] -- every one of us just started crying like babies. Everybody in the terminal -- I kid you not, at least two to three hundred people -- just started clapping, spontaneously. To me, it was so much worth what we were doing, to realize that people over here actually get what we were doing. We weren't over there because it's fun. We're over there doing a job.

"When I saw the Super Bowl commercial, I just started bawling like a baby again because that was something totally unexpected. We had no idea that people actually appreciated what we're doing, from what we see on the news. We thought we were going to come back and get eggs thrown at us. It was so refreshing to know that what we were seeing on the news is just a bunch of garbage that's being concocted by the media, that 99.9 percent of the country doesn't believe that way.

"I have a couple of more months of recovery. I got hit with a concussion and have some internal damage, but I'm feeling up, doing well, and hopefully I can get back over there with my boys."

It caused some tears in this talk show host's eyes to know there were tears in his. Appreciation, smiles, handclaps -- they can go a long way when a nation is at war, regardless of what the media and some Europeans might think.

From Alaa, an Iraqi blogger

2005-03-01T16:29:00.000-04:00

"Finally, we heard the speech of President Bush Loud and clear. He, and the American people and their British and other valiant allies have much to do with this event. All I can say is that this man has all the essential traits of character that distinguishes the great men of history; the insistence and utter conviction and the perseverance and steadfastness in the face of all doubters and detractors. This was no ordinary election, and it was not simply to elect a constituent assembly. It was the answer of the people, what they really thought about the liberation, what they really thought of the ideas preached by the president. This was a message by the Iraqi people to the American people and their great president. It was the heart of Iraq answering the heart of America that voted to give the President the mandate to finish the task; it was the answer that the common people of Iraq gave by braving danger and exposing their life and that of their children and families to death, this was their way to make their voice heard.

Well, thank you Mr. President, we heard you; and I am sure you also heard us."

I TOLD YOU SO

2005-02-25T01:52:00.000-04:00

I'd just like to remind you all that I TOLD YOU SO. Remember when I said this?

Sunday, September 19, 2004

Stock Tip of the Day:
The art of picking a winning stock is a very fickle thing, however, there are some rules of thumb that can help avoid the common mistakes. One of those is doing a little research to check how much stock the board of directors and the CEO personaly own. If the people running the company are dumping stock, a reasonable person may conclude there is trouble on the horizon.

So I was walking through the financials today and low and behold what do I see? Viacom's chairman and CEO dumps stock, no doubt in response to the memo I sent him (in 14 pt Times New Roman) telling him my plans to boycott all viacom companies and C-BS sponsers.

Now I'm not an expert, I havn't got a clue what I am talking about and I am in fact anti-Viacom biased but none the less you should take my advice and dump every single share of Viacom sooner than soon.

No insider trading here. No Siree.

Uhhuh so today I read this.. (click here for the whole article)

Viacom's already depressed stock fell 73 cents, or 2 percent, to $35.44 this afternoon on the New York Stock Exchange. The $18.4 billion net loss translated to $10.99 a share. In the comparable quarter of 2003, Viacom posted a net loss of $385.4 million, or 22 cents a share.

Check back for the next Pajama Journal Stock Tip. They are obviously worth waiting for.