of Saddam and terrorism connections: (emphasis mine)
"Among the documents released last week was a translation of a three-page Iraqi Intelligence memo regarding a wave of attacks to be conducted by the Saddam Fedayeen.... The undated document was apparently prepared in response to orders given on May 5, 1999.
According to those orders, the Fedayeen Saddam was "to start planning from now on to perform special operations (assassinations/bombings) for the centers and the traitor symbols in the fields of (London/Iran/self-ruled areas) and for coordination with the Intelligence service to secure deliveries, accommodations, and target guidance." The execution of the plan would take place in several steps. After the IIS selected 50 "fedayeen martyrs," they were to receive training at an IIS school. Those who passed the tests would be assigned targets. "The first ten will work in the European field (London). The second ten will be working in the Iranian field. The third will be working in the self-ruled field."
It would have been nice to have all this information coming out recently about 2 yrs ago. It would have saved us a lot of yakking and arguing about it, that's for sure.
Maybe now Great Britain won't be so mad at Tony Blair.
Saturday, March 25, 2006
of Saddam and terrorism connections: (emphasis mine)
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 9:42 PM
I watched another episode of FX's "Black/White. I also read some quotes from the participants after the show in People magazine. It was an interesting look at misconceptions that each race has about the other. I thought the most interesting thing was the difference in the attitudes of the kids. The kids really didn't seem that interested in exploring all aspects of race. The black kid said he didn't really see a problem. His mother was mad at him for letting white kids get away with using the "N" word while he was made up to be a white kid. He said it didn't bother him. I don't think my generation gets it that the young people today don't see epithets has bad. (which is too bad)
I'm just going to put my general view of things out there. I read a saying recently about why you should never tell your problems to people. It said 80% don't care and 20% are glad you have them. It made me think that that is just about the way I see white people's reaction to black concerns. 80% don't care and 20% are glad they have them. In other words I don't think white people see much of a problem because of all the gains made in the last 30 years and the laws that have been passed. And there is the small portion that is simply racist.
Let's be honest. The only reason Democrats make such a big deal out of black concerns is for the votes. Period. The Democrats are as much of a good ole boy white party as the Republicans are and that is the simple truth.
The one person that I think has a real handle on white/black issues is someone you might be surprised at my mentioning. Dave Chappelle. That's right, the comedian. Let me say upfront that I don't like the cussing, the vulgarity, and the use of the "N" word in his comedy, but so much of it is hilarious because there is so much truth to it.
I watched his interview with "Inside The Actor's Studio" and I was blown away with his insight into black/white differences. We laugh at the things we either know to be true or we know to be what people think are true. If you get a chance to see that interview on BRAVO, watch it. He really has profound and true things to say. He also portrays how damaging "fame" is and why he had to walk away from it last year.
Today some people use race for political reasons and that is the main problem. What it really comes to down to just getting to know one another. It doesn't matter if we have different styles or different ways of looking at things. We are all human. We all enjoy laughter, food, good music, and love. There are differences in general in everyone who grows up in a certain culture or even a certain town. Kids who grow up in New Jersey have a different way of talking than kids growing up in Mississippi. They have different tastes in foods and clothes. It is the same way with those raised in black neighborhoods and those raised in white neighborhoods. Differences are what make us interesting to each other.
Politically there are those who make a living off continuing to harp on black victimization like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and those just making a living doing excellent work like Condi Rice and Colin Powell.
After all that I saw and experienced growing up during the civil rights movement in Mississisippi, I can say without a doubt that everything has changed for the better for blacks. There is about as level a playing field as there is ever going to be. That is not to say that there still isn't racism. There will always be racism. You can't have a perfect society.
But we can have a better one. Let's just keep working on having a better one.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 2:25 PM
Ace has this from the author of the book "V is for Vendetta" (The new hollywood movie): (emphasis Ace's)
"V for Vendetta" was specifically about things like fascism and anarchy.
Those words, "fascism" and "anarchy," occur nowhere in the film. It's been turned into a Bush-era parable by people too timid to set a political satire in their own country. In my original story there had been a limited nuclear war, which had isolated Britain, caused a lot of chaos and a collapse of government, and a fascist totalitarian dictatorship had sprung up. Now, in the film, you've got a sinister group of right-wing figures — not fascists, but you know that they're bad guys — and what they have done is manufactured a bio-terror weapon in secret, so that they can fake a massive terrorist incident to get everybody on their side, so that they can pursue their right-wing agenda. It's a thwarted and frustrated and perhaps largely impotent American liberal fantasy of someone with American liberal values [standing up] against a state run by neo-conservatives — which is not what "V for Vendetta" was about. It was about fascism, it was about anarchy, it was about [England]. The intent of the film is nothing like the intent of the book as I wrote it. And if the Wachowski brothers had felt moved to protest the way things were going in America, then wouldn't it have been more direct to do what I'd done and set a risky political narrative sometime in the near future that was obviously talking about the things going on today?"
When is Hollywood going to stop trying to preach their idiotic political agenda by pretending to make "thoughtful films?" We get it. Ok. We get it. You hate President Bush. You (wrongly) think conservatives want to take away civil liberties, create a theocracy, kill all the gays, and that the war is all about oil. WE GOT THE MESSAGE.
Luckily, no one is buying it.
Now, can we get back to some good family entertainment?
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 12:17 PM
Friday, March 24, 2006
Ten (and a half) reasons why Republicans—yes, Republicans—are the best party in bed.
Funny. Naughty, but funny.
via commenter at Ace's.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 3:00 PM
I was reading this e-mail from a soldier in Iraq to Hugh Hewitt. Here is it in part:
"As it currently stands, the MSM is not telling the whole truth and actually siding with the enemy on occasion. They'll jump at the chance to report completely unsubstantiated claims by Iraqis of killings or theft or abuse that simply isn't credible when you know even the first thing about the American "militry" (as Ware calls it). They give the ruthless killers the benefit of the doubt every time, just to spread more nonsense about us.
Most soldiers don't follow the news back home, and it's a good thing,
because it would make them sick to know how they're being portrayed in the media. But I must be a bit of a masochist, because I can't seem to get enough. And it certainly takes a toll when you read time and time again in the NYT about things you know to be untrue or misrepresented.
The media wants us to lose, and they're doing their damndest to see it happen. But I have faith that the American people are too smart to fall for that trick twice."
I understand his frustration with the media, but I am not convinced that they want us to lose. I think they just don't believe in this war, so they are just more apt to report things badly because that is the way they see it.
I also think that there is some elitism involved here. Many in the media see themselves as above it all. I think they view our soldiers as being young and ignorant. I don't think they, in general, understand anything about passion or committment for our country. They are taught in journalism school to be skeptical. While that is a good thing to be in journalism, it shouldn't keep one from trying to be objective and report the good along with the bad.
I also think that this generation of reporters, taught by liberal professors, only remember Vietnam and the disaster that it was. They only see WWI and WWII as some far away historical event. War to them is bad. Always bad. When one is taught that all things are equal and someone's wrong may be another man's right, why would you ever see a need to fight for anything?
And finally, Their dislike for Bush is so intense that it colors their reporting whether they mean for it to or not. They realize that if Iraq goes well in any sense, then Bush will be remembered as a great President who bravely fought the war on terrorism. I don't think they can abide by that.
So I don't think they want us to lose, but they don't want us to win either.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 12:16 PM
ABC News has this:
March 23, 2006 — Over the last 24 hours, ABC News has been reading hundreds of messages sent in by viewers in response to President Bush's claim that the media are undermining support for war in Iraq.
Viewer opinions ran the gamut, but the vast majority believed the media were biased in their Iraq coverage.
I have to give ABC some credit in actually thinking of asking people if they feel the media is undermining the war. Maybe this will wake them up to why Fox News is so popular. The American people want both sides of a story, not just the one the media sees as the right one.
The message board is still open if you want to chime in.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 12:05 PM
The Peace Activists saved by our boys yesterday had this addenda posted at 9pm EST last night by the radical left-wing Christian Peacemakers Team:
Addenda 23 March 2006, 9 p.m. ET
We have been so overwhelmed and overjoyed to have Jim, Harmeet and Norman freed, that we have not adequately thanked the people involved with freeing them, nor remembered those still in captivity. So we offer these paragraphs as the first of several addenda:
We are grateful to the soldiers who risked their lives to free Jim, Norman and Harmeet.
Not adequately thanked the people involved? You're damn right you haven't.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:24 AM
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Stumbled onto this interesting blog written by a woman living in Iran. They just left for vacation. She had this to say:
"Hoo ha! On our first vacation in a long, long time. The flight from Iran was uneventful. By the end of our flight, not one woman was wearing a headscarf."
I can only imagine the relief to take that oppressive piece of material off.
Anyway, look through the blog. It's a glimpse into a country that I am sure I will never get to see.
via Harry's Place
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 11:58 PM
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 11:43 PM
No finer example of liberal elitism can be found than reading the transcript from HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" with Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen debating Richard Beltzer.
Beltzer believes that our soldiers are all stupid and uninformed. He knows everything of course, because he reads 20 newspapers a day. Ros-Lehtinen does gives him a bit of smackdown though.
It really must get chilly up there on Mount I'm smarter than everyone else.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 4:44 PM
Drudge has an e-mail sent by ABC News exective saying:
"Are you watching this? Bush makes me sick. If he uses "mixed messages" one more time, I'm gonna puke."
Does anyone seriously believe that a person like this can make sure the news is reported in an objective fashion? I know this doesn't surprise anyone, but at least it verifies everything rightwing bloggers say about the MSM.
ABC News says the producer is "mortified."
Yeah. He should be.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 4:26 PM
Regarding a bill passed in December by the House that would make unlawful presence by illegal aliens in the United States currently a civil offense, into a felony, Hillary Clinton had this to say:
"It is certainly not in keeping with my understanding of the Scriptures," Clinton said, "because this bill would literally criminalize the Good Samaritan and probably even Jesus himself."
Imagine for a moment Rick Santorum saying something to that effect about any issue. Why is it that liberal Democrats can yak about Jesus and no one bats an eye, but when a conservative does then we are on our way to theocracy?
Well, I know the answer, do you?
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 9:45 AM
A slew of celebrities gathered in NYC Monday night for an anti-war benefit concert titled "Bring 'Em Home Now!" Cindy Sheehan and Susan Sarandon (soon to be playing Cindy in a bio-pic) took the stage, as did the ever classy Margaret Cho. Go here and scroll down for a look at a few of Cho's classier jokes. Moveon.org cultural director sings with Moby. And Peaches has a special song about the war. Read the title.
I want my lefty commenters to take a good look. These are the guys on your side. They even booed a Vet who was speaking against the war.
Update: Karol from Alarming News was at the concert.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:26 AM
after accidently referencing Condi Rice with the word "coon."
Referring to Condi taking the NFL Commissioner's job, The host said:
"She's been chancellor of Stanford. She's got the patent resume of somebody that has serious skill. She loves football. She's African-American, which would kind of be a big coon. A big coon. Oh my God. I am totally, totally, totally, totally, totally sorry for that."
This is ridiculous. He obvious liked Rice and was bragging on her. He meant to say "coup." They said what he did was "unforgivable." Excuse me? One can't have a slip of the tongue? He did not mean to say the word. It's like saying sh*t when you are trying to say ship.
Poor guy. Another victim of Political Correctness gone wild.
via Radio Equalizer
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 1:11 AM
The liberal's heads may explode.
ABC News has this: (emphasis mine)
"Osama Bin Laden Contact With Iraq"
"A newly released pre-war Iraqi document indicates that an official representative of Saddam Hussein's government met with Osama bin Laden in Sudan on February 19, 1995 after approval by Saddam Hussein. Bin Laden asked that Iraq broadcast the lectures of Suleiman al Ouda, a radical Saudi preacher, and suggested "carrying out joint operations against foreign forces" in Saudi Arabia. According to the document, Saddam's presidency was informed of the details of the meeting on March 4, 1995 and Saddam agreed to dedicate a program for them on the radio. The document states that further "development of the relationship and cooperation between the two parties to be left according to what's open (in the future) based on dialogue and agreement on other ways of cooperation." The Sudanese were informed about the agreement to dedicate the program on the radio.
The report then states that "Saudi opposition figure" bin Laden had to leave Sudan in July 1996 after it was accused of harboring terrorists. It says information indicated he was in Afghanistan. "The relationship with him is still through the Sudanese. We're currently working on activating this relationship through a new channel in light of his current location," it states.
(Editor's Note: This document is handwritten and has no official seal. Although contacts between bin Laden and the Iraqis have been reported in the 9/11 Commission report and elsewhere, (e.g. the 9/11 report states "Bin Ladn himself met with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Khartoum in late 1994 or early 1995) this document indicates the contacts were approved personally by Saddam Hussein.
It also indicates the discussions were substantive, in particular that bin Laden was proposing an operational relationship, and that the Iraqis were, at a minimum, interested in exploring a potential relationship and prepared to show good faith by broadcasting the speeches of al Ouda, the radical cleric who was also a bin Laden mentor.
The document does not establish that the two parties did in fact enter into an operational relationship. Given that the document claims bin Laden was proposing to the Iraqis that they conduct "joint operations against foreign forces" in Saudi Arabia, it is interesting to note that eight months after the meeting — on November 13, 1995 — terrorists attacked Saudi National Guard Headquarters in Riyadh, killing 5 U.S. military advisors. The militants later confessed on Saudi TV to having been trained by Osama bin Laden.)
"Osama bin Laden and the Taliban"
Document dated Sept. 15, 2001
An Iraqi intelligence service document saying that their Afghani informant, who's only identified by a number, told them that the Afghani Consul Ahmed Dahastani claimed the following in front of him:
That OBL and the Taliban are in contact with Iraq and that a group of Taliban and bin Laden group members visited Iraq. That the U.S. has proof the Iraqi government and "bin Laden's group" agreed to cooperate to attack targets inside America. That in case the Taliban and bin Laden's group turn out to be involved in "these destructive operations," the U.S. may strike Iraq and Afghanistan. That the Afghani consul heard about the issue of Iraq's relationship with "bin Laden's group" while he was in Iran."
Like I have said before, we could find WMD's buried beneath one of Saddam's mansions with a note from Saddam to Bin Laden and the left would still figure out a way to say it was planted by Karl Rove. Nothing will ever convince them that Bush was right. Bush always said that he didn't want a monster like Saddam ready to give terrorists what they needed to hurt us. Perhaps Bush didn't even know how close Saddam came.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 12:43 AM
I sit and watch C-span for over an hour while it was showing New Orlean's people lined up at a mike to complain to Mayor Nagin and some sort of "Bring Back New Orleans" commission. From what I gathered Nagin has told them that in certain sections of the city they can only rebuild "at their own risk." In other words they would not have city services for many years. No policemen, no emergency services and the like. As you can imagine, people were not happy. They were giving people 3 minutes each to say their piece.
There were a few with well stated speeches regarding the Army Corp of Engineers and the rebuilding of the city, but the ones that really got to me where the elderly. Many were wondering about some personal problem they were having with their insurance company or regarding bills and such. I said out loud, "I could never be on a city council because I would want to solve every single person's problem that came to us." Another relative (who shall remain nameless) said, " I was just thinking that I could never be on a city council because I would call them all idiots." (Am I too nice?)
When I hear from an elderly person about a problem like this I always wonder where are their children or grandchildren? Why don't we take care of our own anymore? When I was serving Meals On Wheels I had so many homes where I knew the children lived close by. I wondered why they couldn't be bothered to fix their parents lunches and put them in the refrigerator. But I would tell myself that there could be many reasons.
My heart just went out to the elderly women who didn't seem to have anywhere else to turn but a stupid townhall meeting with a bunch of bureaucrats who would no more remember her problem than her name.
Anyway, New Orleans is such a mess. And it doesn't look like it's going to get better anytime soon. One priest reminded Nagin about his statement regarding God being mad at New Orleans and then read the paper where it said that one knew New Orleans was coming back because the famous strip clubs had re-opened. He wondered if this was how Nagin wanted New Orleans to come back.
Now I don't know if Nagin really believed that God was mad at the city, (I certainly don't) but if he did, then one would think that the Priest might have given him something to think about. But money talks. It always does. And right now all New Orleans has is the French Quarter and the tourism dollars. I wish there were more money to be made making jazz music than stripping, but I'm afraid that isn't the case.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 12:20 AM
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
"I am AL QUDS jeans, the jeans of choice for Islam as the inspiration comes from here and it is to this world that they refer.The precious stimuli and suggestions that come from the sacred Arab World and from ordinary, every day life are captured and brought to fruition in AL QUDS jeans satisfying the needs of a couture fashion line which arises from the most "cultural" gesture of the street: jeans made to pray in, jeans for those who choose a different path. It is a wider concept because it is a step made for the World, seductive original and distinguished."
I'm sorry. I don't mean to make fun, but "jeans made to pray in?" That just made me laugh.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:50 PM
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:47 PM
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:45 PM
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:32 PM
Instapundit has a link to the Jon Stewart Show with video of Jon's interview with George Sada, number 2 man in the Iraqi Air Force during Saddam. He is on the national security council now in Iraq. His book is called "Saddam's Secrets." He says without a doubt that Saddam had WMD's and hid them and Syria before the war. He says he saw them himself.
You watch the video. You tell me if you believe him. No comments unless you watch the video please. (click on the "Georges Sada" link)
Isn't it sad that this will probably be the most looked at interview that he gives?
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 4:01 PM
My regulars know how much I enjoy Jeff at Protein Wisdom. To say that he is different from me would be a massive understatement. Yet, we still vote the same way. To me that shows how big the GOP tent is.
Jeff is a talented writer and scholar. When he wants to be funny, no one is funnier. When he wants to post all serious, no one gets to the meat of the story with the depth that he does.
For some reason the leftwing bloggers love to rag on him. It's jealousy I suppose, but I just don't get it. Why do these bloggers even read Jeff? I mean, I read the news, I read liberal opinion in the news, but I don't read liberal bloggers. Why would I? I use to be liberal. I know exactly where they are coming from. There hasn't been a new idea in the liberal world in some 40 years. If you know a liberal blogger that has new idea, let me know. That would be news.
They would rather spend their time ragging on people like Jeff, insulting his creativity, than to come up with any good ideas of their own. Now, to be fair, Jeff does bring some of it on himself with his ummm.... not so gentle responses. But my advise to those who don't like Jeff...Don't read him! Simple.
I am sure he will get along fine without you.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 2:31 PM
I am going to post on reading Ann Coulter's book "How to Talk To A Liberal (if you must)." I started reading it at my Mom's and haven't gotten back to it. I have a terrible cold. It is driving me crazy. I did want to mention something at the beginning of the book though.
As everyone here knows I have a thing about PERSONAL behavior. Politics is one thing, but how you act in your own personal life is really what defines you as a person. People can get angry over issues and policies but at the end of the day I want to know what kind of person you are. (Please save me your whining over how AWFUL Ann is, you don't know her and neither do I)
Anyway, remember when Bush first took office and the stories went around about the Clinton staffers vandalizing the offices? I heard they took off all the "W's" in the keyboards. Well, that seemed childish to me, but what could you really expect from those guys after all. Bush just brushed it off in his usual nice way. I read in Ann's book that the accounting office shows that the Clinton staffers did $15,000 worth of damage to the white house offices.
$15,000!!!!!!!!!!!!! I just couldn't believe it!!! It's like they were some punk rock band trashing a hotel room! How....redneck can you get????? These guys are suppose to be ladies and gentlemen. They are suppose to be professionals. There is just no excuse for that kind of behavior.
Am I the only one appalled by this? It shows the utter lack of class those people had. I cannot believe that it was just brushed under the rug. It might seem like a little thing to most of you, but to me something like that tells me all I need to know about someone.
I had to get that off my chest. Now, if I could only get this cold off of it.
Update: In an effort to dispute this, jandrew looked up the report from the incidents Ann mentioned in her book and in fact confirmed all that Ann Coulter said. A Summary of damages is on page 2. A listing of costs is in there too. They could never arrest anyone in trashing our White House, which is a national treasure, because no one would admit to it and the Bush administration would not seek damages. This report just proves to me what trashy people these guys were.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 12:11 PM
LONDON - "Has anyone ever actually seen a rainbow-colored sheep? That's surely what a few British toddlers are asking.
Teachers at nursery schools in Oxfordshire, England, have asked children to change the words of "Baa, Baa, Black Sheepto avoid the possibility of offending anyone."
Whatever shall the pot call the kettle then????
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 12:07 PM
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
Here is "a special, double-length article from the upcoming May/June issue of Foreign Affairs, presenting key excerpts from the recently declassified book-length report of the USJFCOM Iraqi Perspectives Project." It is described as this:
"For the first time since the end of World War II, American analysts did not have to guess what had happened on the other side of a conflict but could actually read the defeated enemy's documents and interrogate its leading figures. To make the most of this unique opportunity, the U.S. Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM) commissioned a comprehensive study of the inner workings and behavior of Saddam Hussein's regime based on previously inaccessible primary sources. Drawing on interviews with dozens of captured senior Iraqi military and political leaders and hundreds of thousands of official Iraqi documents (hundreds of them fully translated), this two-year project has changed our understanding of the war from the ground up. The study was partially declassified in late February; its key findings are presented here."
It is fascinating. Saddam absolutely believed that France and Russia would never allow the U.S. to invade Iraq. Then during the invasion Saddam also believed that he was winning. He hid his air support in the belief that he would rather save them for securing regional power. Even more amusing (if it weren't so sad) is Saddam's cat and mouse game with WMD's. He was so determined that the Arab world think that he indeed had WMD's, that he sent memos that only increased suspicion by international intelligence. The whole regime seemed to be a plot from some ridiculous comedy. Over and over there are made up operations and reports. Take this for example:
"One senior Iraqi official alleged that the commission's leaders were so fearful of Saddam that when he ordered them to initiate weapons programs that they knew Iraq could not develop, they told him they could accomplish the projects with ease. Later, when Saddam asked for updates on the nonexistent projects, they simply faked plans and designs to show progress."
Why did they lie? Well, you would too. This excerpt explains:
"A 1982 incident vividly illustrated the danger of telling Saddam what he did not want to hear. At one low point during the Iran-Iraq War, Saddam asked his ministers for candid advice. With some temerity, the minister of health, Riyadh Ibrahim, suggested that Saddam temporarily step down and resume the presidency after peace was established. Saddam had him carted away immediately. The next day, pieces of the minister's chopped-up body were delivered to his wife."
As was obvious during the invasion, the Saddam army was not exactly a force to be reckoned with. In order for Saddam to inspire his troop leaders, he decides to invoke Allah:
"Saddam told his officers that Allah wanted to insult the United States by giving his strongest personal abilities to the materially weak Iraqis."
Although it was well known that Saddam was not a relgious man, he seemed more than willing to invoke Allah if it would garner loyalty to him. The thing that sticks out to me in this report is that Saddam was so delusional with trumped up power mainly based on fear, that it is a scary thing indeed to imagine him with any real access to obtaining more power in the region and hurting the United States.
The left will never admit it, but Al Queda would have happily given him what they could and he would have happily accepted it and ordered those so afraid of him to do even the unthinkable.
A power hungry man is a scary thing, but a delusional power hungry monstorous dictator is something that should never be allowed.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 4:35 PM
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 1:47 PM
Because most women in America don't share the values that these women share:
"Led by former FCC Commissioner Susan Hess and Jones MediaAmerica exec Edie Hilliard, a Seattle-based MoveOn.org supporter, the fledgling operation claims its programming will focus on lifestyle topics, rather than politics.
With Jane Fonda, Rosie O'Donnell, Billie Jean King and Gloria Steinem providing financing, in addition to Hilliard's far-left background and that of its newly-hired hosts, however, will this really be possible?"
Simply put, we don't want to be preached to by women who took a movement designed to liberate women in the workplace and provide equal opportunity for them and turned it into an abortion loving, man hating, sexual exploitation driven, prozac taking coalition of losers in life.
The story is here.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 1:30 PM
Here is the Press conference with the President this morning and his exchange with Helen Thomas. Always fun. But I think this is what we call a smackdown.
Here's the transcript.
The Helen Thomas exchange:
BUSH: Helen, after that brilliant performance at the Gridiron, I am...
QUESTION: You're going to be sorry.
BUSH: Well, then, let me take it back.
QUESTION: I'd like to ask you, Mr. President -- your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime.
Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is: Why did you really want to go to war? From the moment you stepped into the White House, your Cabinet officers, former Cabinet officers, intelligence people and so forth -- but what's your real reason? You have said it wasn't oil, the quest for oil. It hasn't been Israel or anything else. What was it?
BUSH: I think your premise, in all due respect to your question and to you as a lifelong journalist -- that I didn't want war. To assume I wanted war is just flat wrong, Helen, in all due respect.
BUSH: Hold on for a second, please. Excuse me. Excuse me. No president wants war. Everything you may have heard is that, but it's just simply not true.
BUSH: My attitude about the defense of this country changed in September the 11th. When we got attacked, I vowed then and there to use every asset at my disposal to protect the American people.
Our foreign policy changed on that day. You know, we used to think we were secure because of oceans and previous diplomacy. But we realized on September the 11th, 2001, that killers could destroy innocent life.
And I'm never going to forget it. And I'm never going to forget the vow I made to the American people, that we will do everything in our power to protect our people.
Part of that meant to make sure that we didn't allow people to provide safe haven to an enemy, and that's why I went into Iraq.
BUSH: Hold on for a second. Excuse me for a second, please. Excuse me for a second. They did. The Taliban provided safe haven for Al Qaida.
BUSH: That's where Al Qaida trained and that's where...
BUSH: Helen, excuse me.
That's where -- Afghanistan provided safe haven for Al Qaida. That's where they trained, that's where they plotted, that's where they planned the attacks that killed thousands of innocent Americans.
I also saw a threat in Iraq. I was hoping to solve this problem diplomatically. That's why I went to the Security Council. That's why it was important to pass 1441, which was unanimously passed.
And the world said, "Disarm, disclose or face serious consequences." And therefore, we worked with the world. We worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world.
And when he chose to deny the inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did. And the world is safer for it.
QUESTION: Thank you, sir. Secretary Rumsfeld...
BUSH: You're welcome. I didn't really regret it. I kind of semi-regretted it.
via Hugh Hewitt
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:39 AM
Jack Kelly quotes Army veteran Bill Roggio on the news coverage in Iraq:
"The reporting on Operation Swarmer is a microcosm of the sub-par reporting on the Iraq war," Mr. Roggio said. "Events are immediately placed into a political context. Commentary is often mixed in with reporting. There is little understanding of operational intent or how the military even works. Operations are viewed as individual events, and not placed in a greater context. Failure and faulty assumptions are the baselines for coverage and analysis. Success is arbitrarily determined by a reporter or editor's biases. The actions of the U.S. and Iraqi military are viewed with suspicion and even contempt."
via Blogs for Bush
What do you think Roggio is referring to? Well, let's see. Here is a description of what happened with Operation Swarmer from Operation Iraqi Freedom:
Operation Swarmer included more than 1,500 troops from the Iraqi Army’s 4th Division, the U.S. 101st Airborne Division and 101st Combat Aviation Brigade. The Soldiers isolated the objective area in a combined air and ground assault.
More than 50 Attack and assault aircraft and 200 tactical vehicles participated in the operation. Troops from the Iraqi Army’s 4th Division, the “Rakkasans” from the 187th Infantry Regiment and the “Hunters” from the 9th Cavalry Regiment assaulted multiple objectives. Forces from the Iraqi 2nd Commando Brigade then completed a ground infiltration to secure numerous structures in the area.
Initial reports indicate a number of weapons caches were captured, containing artillery shells, IED-making materials and military uniforms. Iraqi and Coalition troops also detained 41 suspected insurgents.
And what about the Iraqi forces we have been training?
The Iraqi security force continues to take the lead in operations – last week 35 percent , 174, of the 502 operations were ISF-independent operations which were completely planned, rehearsed and conducted by Iraqi forces.
One example of a fully-independent operation was a counterinsurgency operation March 15. Soldiers from 7th Iraqi Army Division conducted the operation in an area known as the “Triad” region in western Al Anbar Province. It was the first time an operation was planned, rehearsed, and executed entirely by the Iraqi Army in this area. A Coalition Military Transition Team accompanied the Iraqi soldiers as they searched for insurgents and weapons caches in the towns of Albu Hayatt and Khaffajiah.
But THIS is how Time.com reported Operation Swarmer with the headline "On Scene: How Operation Swarmer Fizzled":
"But contrary to what many many television networks erroneously reported, the operation was by no means the largest use of airpower since the start of the war. ("Air Assault" is a military term that refers specifically to transporting troops into an area.) In fact, there were no airstrikes and no leading insurgents were nabbed in an operation that some skeptical military analysts described as little more than a photo op. What’s more, there were no shots fired at all and the units had met no resistance, said the U.S. and Iraqi commanders."
No mention of the insurgents captured or IED making materials found (which probably saved untold number of lives) Which story do you think the American public will read? And we wonder why the American people are discouraged with Iraq. I don't expect the stories to be all positive, just fair.
Too much to hope for I suppose.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:23 AM
Monday, March 20, 2006
I remember the days when I use to wait patiently for my political magazines. I would snatch them from the mailbox and read them cover to cover. My favorite for some 20 years was National Review. Oh, how I loved reading Florence King. I would read her column first. "The Florence King Reader" is one of my favorite books. (If you haven't read it, go buy it and do so now)
I haven't heard from her in a long while. NRO found a article written recently by her with her usual southern wit and scorn. It is for the ladies I'm afraid. Not about politics, but "female troubles" and a subject that I never write about but will tell you now..... Doctors. I hate Doctors. I hate Doctor appointments. I hate the red tape. I hate the way Doctors are only in it for the money now. I hate hate hate everything medical. Miss King gives you the reason why.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 3:07 PM
Right Wing News saw the movie:
"V for Vendetta begins in England, 2020, which is run by fascist Christians
who murder gays, exaggerate the threat of terrorism, and who literally appear to
listen in on everybody in Britain. If that sounds like some sort of Chomskyian
vision of America, that's because the filmmakers intended it that way. In fact,
the film goes out of its way at every turn to draw parallels between the bizarro
world left-wing view of America is becoming and the dystopian Britain of the
Political dissidents are jailed, criticism of the government is not
allowed, gays are murdered, you see prisoners in Abu Ghraib style hoods, the
government carries out germ warfare attacks and blames terrorists for them, the
media is controlled by the government, and art is banned. All of this is done by
the cartoonishly evil "Conservative" Party which is supported by at least one
pedophilic priest, government operatives called "fingers" who apparently rape
women for being out after curfew, and armies of generic government thugs."
It just so happens that I was watching MTV last night where they were interviewing the producer, director, and actors in the movie. If I had not seen those interviews I would have thought that RWN was exaggerating. Trust me. He is not.
The producer openly admitted that he was trying to draw parallels between the government in this movie and the Bush admininistration. The book this movie was based on was written 25 yrs ago in reaction to the Thatcher administration in Great Britain. But I suppose all conservative governments are alike to those who see the world throught leftwing looney glasses. The actress in the movie even says that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Maybe in this actress's leftwing world one can't tell the difference, but the rest of us can.
The sad thing is that the people who made this movie, people like Michael Moore and the rest, honestly believe Christians would murder gays, ban art, and take away all civil liberties if given the chance. I don't know which is more pathetic, believing such garbage or trying to convince the American people to believe it.
They are free to keep trying to make us believe it. (unless we truly do take over and kill them of course) It only makes them look more ridiculous than they already do.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:44 AM
Amazon.com last week modified its search engine after an abortion
rights organization complained that search results appeared skewed toward
Until a few days ago, a search of Amazon's catalog of
books using the word "abortion" turned up pages with the question, "Did you mean
adoption?" at the top, followed by a list of books related to abortion.
Amazon removed that question from the search results page after it
received a complaint from a member of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive
Choice, a national organization based in Washington.
"I thought it was offensive," said the Rev. James Lewis, a retired Episcopalian minister in Charleston, W.Va. "It represented an editorial position on their part."
Patty Smith, an Amazon spokeswoman, said there was no intent by the company to offer biased search results. She said the question "Did you mean adoption?" was an
automated response based on past customer behavior combined with the site's
spelling correction technology.
She said Amazon's software suggested adoption-related sources because "abortion" and "adoption" have similar spellings, and because many past customers who have searched for "abortion" have also searched for "adoption."
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:31 AM
Many thanks to BigDog, Dave in Texas, and MacStansbury for guest blogging for me! I haven't even had time to read what they posted (I admit I'm a bit scared to) Heh. I had a wonderful time at the beach. I may post some pictures tonight or tomorrow.
The only thing that I really hate about traveling is the unpacking. Ugh. I haven't watched the news for a week so I need to catch up today.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:20 AM
Sunday, March 19, 2006
Was just sent this joke by a friend:
One day a florist goes to a barber for a haircut. After the cut he asked about his bill and the barber replies: "I'm sorry, I cannot accept money from you; I'm doing community service this week." The florist is pleased and leaves the shop. Next morning when the barber goes to open there is a thank you card and a dozen roses waiting for him at his door. Later, a cop comes in for a haircut, and when he goes to pay his bill the barber again replies: "I'm sorry, I cannot accept money from you; I'm doing community service this week." The cop is happy and leaves the shop. Next morning when the barber goes to open up there is a thank you card and a dozen donuts waiting for him at his door.
Later, a Republican comes in for a haircut, and when he goes to pay his bill the barber again replies: "I'm sorry, I cannot accept money from you; I'm doing community service this week." The Republican is very happy and leaves the shop. The next morning when the barber goes to open, there is a thank you card and a dozen different books such as "How to Improve Your Business" and "Becoming More Successful."
Then a Democrat comes in for a haircut, and when he goes to pay his bill the barber again replies: "I'm sorry, I cannot accept money from you; I'm doing community service this week." The Democrat is very happy and leaves the shop. The next morning when the barber goes to open up, there are a dozen Democrats lined up waiting for a free haircut.
And that, my friends, illustrates the fundamental difference between the right and the left.
Same friend sent me a joke for the Dem's amusement:
George W. Bush and a secret service agent are taking a stroll whenthey come upon a little girl carrying a basket with a blanketover it.
Curious, Bush asks the girl, "What's in the basket?"
She replies, "New baby kittens," and she opens the basket toshow him.
"How nice," says Bush. "What kind are they?"
The little girl says, "Republicans."
Bush smiles, pats the little girl on the head and continues on.
Three weeks later, Bush is taking another stroll, this timewith Karl Rove. They see the little girl again with the same basket.
Bush says, "Watch this, Karl --- it's really cute."
Theyapproach the little girl. Bush greets her and asks how the kittens aredoing, and she says, "Fine."
Then, smirking, he nudges Rove with his elbow and asks thelittle girl, "And can you tell us what kind of kittens they are?"
She replies, "Democrats."
Aghast, Bush says, "But three weeks ago you said they wereRepublicans!"
"I know," she says. "But now their eyes are open."
Posted by BigDog at 9:51 PM
Well it's been a fun week-weekend guest posting here with RWS' blessing. I can't think of anything she'll feel like she has to edit, I can think of a few things she'll wince about. Good for me.
I tried to irritate the snot outta of the regulars, but I only scored with ck. She cracked me up though, so it was a good week.
Will leave you all with this. I learned this week that out of 300 million Americans, it is estimated that 100 million of us are related to someone who inprocessed through Ellis Island. Think about that for a moment. From the late 1880s until 1956, some 22 million immigrants came through Ellis... and saw this when they arrived.
Some were sent back. Some families were separated for years. But 98% of them came through, and became us.
We are truly a nation of immigrants. Loveable, faithful mutts.
God bless you all, on the left and the right. Thanks Sparkle, for the invite.
Posted by Dave in Texas at 9:47 PM
A reason to believe Instead of insurgency the talking points have changed to how
So what's the truth? The principle in determining truth should be to apply the factual indicator test. A civil war is a visible event whose indicators includes the insubordination of armed units, mass refugee flows, the rise of rival governments, etc. The test is whether those events are being observed. What famous individuals say about a situation is a shortcut for encapsulating a factual assessment; it describes reality as public figures see it but is not the reality itself. That remains a mystery until developments unfold. One interesting indicator of how the US military sees the situation are its plans to turn over large parts of the country to Iraqi forces.
Sunnis might soon become victims of an ethnically hostile Iraqi army in a Civil
War. Going from a boast of conquest to a portrayal of victim is usually an
indicator of something. In my view, the shift of meme from the "insurgency" to a
"civil war" is a backhanded way of admitting the military defeat of the
insurgency without abandoning the characterization of Iraq is an American
fiasco. It was Zarqawi and his cohorts themselves who changed the terms of
reference from fighting US forces to sparking a 'civil war'. With any luck,
they'll lose that campaign too.
Now, if the medea loses their campaign. Like Vietnam, we can win everywhere but at home.
Instead of insurgency the talking points have changed to how
Posted by BigDog at 5:13 PM
Anti-war protesters in SLC, elsewhere lament apathy
''There are not enough young people here,'' said Paul Perchonock, 61, a physician. ''They don't see themselves as having a stake.''
Or..... They simply don't agree.
''It's very disappointing, especially in Washington, D.C.,'' she said. ''You think this is the place where people come to make things happen. I'm just not sure why there aren't more people here today.''Your opinions are a distinct minority. Glad I could help.
More conceit from the Left: 'Law & Order' actor: I know more about war than troops
According to actor and comedian Richard Belzer, American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are too uneducated to be expressing support for the U.S. military mission since they're just "19 and 20-year-old kids who couldn't get a job" and "they don't read twenty newspapers a day."
In one sentance, he demonstrates his ignorance.
Leftists p***ing match: Senator fires back at U.S. family upset with seal hunt
In her response, Senator Céline Hervieux-Payette said that what she finds horrible is "the daily massacre of innocent people in Iraq, the execution of prisoners – mainly blacks – in American prisons, the massive sale of handguns to Americans, the destabilization of the entire world by the American government's aggressive foreign policy, etc."
What a hoot! I wonder why she bothered to reply. Apparently all the other Senators got a letter too, she was the only one to respond.
In their letter, the McLellans said they love Canada and have Canadian ancestors but cancelled a trip to Canada last year because of the seal hunt and will scrap plans for one this year if the spring hunt goes ahead, La Presse said.
Canadian ancestors?? Cancelling a vacation is an empty threat/gesture at best.
Update on Swarmer: Iraq Assault Was Military, not Political Effort, Officials Say
Posted by BigDog at 12:38 PM