One Toke Over the Line...

Know this:

I have had enough. The line has been crossed. If I ever witness such as this, I will NOT REST until I see legal action taken against the "parents" involved. I would encourage the rest of you who still love our country to do the same.

Hat tip to Miss Beth for this from Malagent's Domain :

Child Attacked Over Soldier Costume

On my way home tonight I was drawn into an incident that has me so angry that I could not even write about it until I calmed down a bit.

In a residential neighborhood I stopped at an intersection and witnessed several children who appeared to be fighting a few yards from my vehicle. At first it did not seem real serious, however, one of the children said something that caused me to pay more attention. He said “You’re a terrorist just like your dad, I’m going to kill you just like the Iraq is gonna kill him.” It was then that I realized what was going on. A young boy, probably 10 or 11 was dressed as a US soldier, he was pinned on the ground while a group of four or five other boys where hitting and kicking him while at least two older people in costumes watched.

I left my truck in the street and got out just as one boy picked up a softball sized rock and headed towards he boy pinned on the ground. He was yelling “MURDERER” over and over. I yelled at the boy with the rock who dropped it and ran as he saw me. The others did not stop attacking the boy on the ground until I pulled them off of him. It was at this point the two older people started screaming at me. “What are you doing to my boys, leave them alone!” They were the mothers of two of the attackers. I told them I was calling the police and they all ran off.

The boy who had been attacked was crying and told me his father was serving in Iraq so he had decided to dress “like a soldier” for Halloween. He told me the attackers were his friends and that after one of the mothers start calling him and his dad a murderer his friends joined in and then attacked him.

Although he was bleeding he did not appear to be seriously injured and was very adamant that he did not want police or medical help. When I went to move my truck and call the police the boy disappeared into the neighborhood.

I’m still not sure whether I’m more disturbed by the children’s actions or the two mothers standing there watching. Were they going to let the boy be hit with a rock larger than a softball? Why did they allow the fight in the first place?

What kind of environment is required for ten year old boys to attack & threaten death over a soldier costume? I can only imagine the things they here at home and I can only imagine ho much worse these kids while be in the teens and as adults.

Had the assailants been a little older I’m afraid I would have been in jail before it was over. Given the fact they were literally children, I did nothing more then pull them away from the victim.

I really don’t give a damn what one’s position on the Iraq war or any war for that matter, but to allow this situation to happen is flat out wrong.

Happy F’N Halloween!

My first question is how can two "mothers" stand idly by and allow a gang of kids to beat the hell out of another one? What kind of MOTHER would do that? And over a kid paying tribute to his soldier father by dressing up AS a soldier for Halloween?

One word comes to mind.

Inverted.

When two grown women who have born children stand idly to the side and allow their offspring to gather a group of other kids to beat and kick another child, these women are NOT mothers; they are progenitors of terrorism. THIS is an act of home grown domestic terrorism.

Think that poor kid being wailed on wasn't terrorized? Ask five or six of your closest friends to start beating the hell out of you and telling you they're going to kill you. Make sure that two of their mothers are standing nearby watching and doing nothing.

There are not enough words to express the anger I feel, not ONLY as a veteran, but as a citizen. This is unacceptable. The hatred of the left for our troops has now taken the form of violence against someone who ISN'T EVEN OLD ENOUGH TO BE ONE. It's an attack on the family of one of our soldiers, a man who, I am sure, is asking himself right now "this is what I enlisted to protect? A country that hates me so much that my family isn't even safe?"

I don't know who this family is, I don't know who the soldier is, but brother, I'm proud of you for wearing the uniform and it speaks volumes to me that your son respects you enough that he would show you the honor of wanting to be like his old man. Well done, and God bless you.

To the two "mothers" who stood aside and allowed their children to attack another child? There will be a reckoning. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but there will be a reckoning. I don't know what it will be, and I'm not making any threats; it would be futile to do so as I have no idea who you are, nor do I want to know. What goes around comes around. There will be an accounting for your own act of evil.

To our veterans, this is a wake up call if I've ever seen one. Be vigilant, be alert, and be strong. Our enemy at home has played their next card. This incident will go unpunished by the law, but there will be others. This is just the first, I'm sure. Be ready to make the law accountable for acts of violence against our troops and their families.

To the left, enough. Our troops are there to protect you, show them a little respect. Without our troops, you certainly wouldn't have the freedom to protest. Or would you rather a police state that censors every word, every thought, every freedom? That's the kind of world you're actually advocating when you stand against our nation and our military defending us from those in the world who would see our nation fall.

Enough.

I could go on, I could say so much more...SO much more...but I'm trying to keep this at a level where any age can read it, so I'll keep the poison that this has raised inside me for another outlet...something productive, I can assure you, but I won't go into the cursing rampage that I could go into over this tonight here.

THAT, my liberal leftist hater friends, is called taking the high road.

And no, as much as I would probably like to, I won't go out looking for some moonbat to wail on.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


.

A Constitutional Stand earns a Mental Evaluation?

I heard about this on Steve Gill this morning and I have to say, it really set me off.

From TownHall:

College Admins: If You Favor Second Amendment Rights, You Must Be Crazy
By Jon Sanders
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Send an email to Jon Sanders

A Minnesota college student was suspended and ordered to undergo "mental health evaluation" for his response to campuswide e-mails from school officials concerning the Virginia Tech massacre.

The college, Hamline University, a private, liberal-arts institution affiliated with the Methodist Church, has a policy on "Freedom of Expression and Inquiry" that guarantees that Hamline students will be "free to examine and discuss all questions of interest to them and to express opinions publicly or privately."

With such a strong guarantee on students' "freedom from censorship and control" by the university, student Troy Scheffler's e-mail must have been horrifically bad to warrant such a crackdown. Right?

Wrong. What Scheffler did was make a gun-rights case for concealed-carry permits on campus to help ward off potential Cho Seung-Huis before they strike Hamline. This was no monstrous act; in fact, it was in line with public debate across the nation following Cho's rampage, not to mention an issue of perennial debate in America. Many researchers, most notably John R. Lott Jr., have shown conclusively that gun ownership itself wards off crime while laws banning guns lead to increases in crimes. Criminals are less likely to strike if they have reason to believe their prospective victims could be armed.

Scheffler had written in his April 17 e-mail reply to David Stern, Hamline vice president of student affairs, that "Considering this university also pushes 'diversity' initiatives like VA Tech, maybe its 'leadership' will reconsider [Hamline's] ban on conceal carry law abiding gun owners... Ironically, according to a few VA Tech forums, there are plenty of students complaining that this wouldnt have happened if the school wouldnt have banned their permits a few months ago."

He added, "I just dont understand why leftists dont understand that criminals dont care about laws; that is why they’re criminals... Maybe this school will reconsider its repression of law abiding citizens rights."

Two days later, Hamline President Linda Hanson e-mailed the campus about Virginia Tech. Scheffler replied to that e-mail also, expanding upon his comments to Stern.

In both messages, Scheffler made it clear to all but the most hysterically inclined person that his advocacy of concealed-carry permits was to protect the students from criminals. Scheffler recognized that this protection would be afforded primarily by predators' foreknowledge that any one of the students at Hamline could shoot back, but also – given that the administrators had both brought up the VT massacre – by students being able to stop a killing rampage before it got started.

In short, what Scheffler wrote was no preamble to a blood-lusty explosion of violence. At worst it was crude criticism of the university administration combined with a stark assessment of the true risk of a concealed-carry society like Virginia Tech's: total defenselessness against a Columbine-inspired mass murderer. Regardless, it should have been protected by the university's stated policy guaranteeing free expression.

Nevertheless, on April 23 Scheffler received a hand-delivered letter from Dean of Students Alan Sickbert that informed him his e-mails were "deemed to be threatening and thus an alleged violation of the Hamline University Judicial Code" and that he was placed on "interim suspension" to be lifted only after he agreed to a psychological evaluation by a licensed mental health professional...

So the kid does what the administration asks, sends his opinion, taking a Constitutional stand on the matter, and he's suspended and told he has to have a psych evaluation before he's allowed to return to school? Is Hamline College in some place other than the United States? Is this a lesson to be learned, that when a college administration asks for opinions, they really don't want to hear what you think? Such elitist thinking. It's no wonder academia is viewed as being a bunch of pompous leftist blowhards who have no substance.

I don't normally advocate this, but my advice to Mr. Scheffler is to get a good lawyer and sue them for violating his constitutional rights of free speech. Totally unConstitutional behavior on the part of Hamline College.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


.

Can we question their patriotism yet?

Hat tips to Michelle Malkin and Take Our Country Back for this, right of the bat, before I dive in. Outstanding work, Michelle and Snooper.

Now.

To set aside the temper and let the words come out rationally...

The left goes into a frenzy when we question their sense of patriotism. They snarl, they growl, they demand that the right not DO that, proudly proclaiming themselves to be every bit as patriotic as the next person.

Where is the proof? We have MoveOn.org taking out a full page ad to call our commanding general in Iraq a liar. We have Cindy Sheehan and her disgraceful disrespectful behavior that dishonors the memory of her son. We have the defacing of the Wall...

And now we have Oakland International Airport not allowing Marines and Soldiers into the main terminal.

From The National Review Online:

Saturday, September 29, 2007

Spitting on the Marines [Michael Ledeen]

Here is an e-mail from a Marine chaplain recently returned from Iraq. The story speaks for itself—lousy treatment of our troops at our own airports. He writes about Oakland, and while checking around I find that this is a common experience. I hope that one of our leaders will find a way to put an end to such behavior.

Marines and Soldiers Returning from Iraq not allowed into Oakland terminal.

On September 27th 204 Marines and soldiers who were returning from Iraq were not allowed into the passenger terminal at Oakland International Airport. Instead they had to deplane about 400 yards away from the terminal where the extra baggage trailers were located...

And they wonder WHY we become furious with them? They wonder WHY we look at THEM with the same contempt in which they look at US? They wonder WHY WE stand fast WITH our troops while they pay lip service to "protecting the troops" by demanding that they be withdrawn from the job that they have signed on to DO?

From DailyKos, where they've never met a supporter of the troops or our war effort that they haven't tried to discredit:

Michael Ledeen has never seen a "spitting on the troops" story he didn't like. In this post, entitled "Spitting on the Marines," [woo hoo!] he tells us about an email he received:

Guess what? You Kossacks are going to LOVE this.

Ready?

I'm going to whisper it, ok?

Michelle Malkin obtained the Oakland Airport response and received verification that the story is true.

I have also obtained the Port of Oakland’s response about the incident to Captain David Epstein of the Reserve Officers Association. The Port official blames a lack of “clear communication” from the charter airline hired by the military. In other words: it’s the troops’ fault:

Thank you so much for sharing with me the information you had regarding the incident at the airport. As you know sometimes the way things appear initially regarding an incident turn out to be different after looking into the details. We checked into this once you had called me and raised your public relations concern, so again thank you. Here is the background information I have about the incident as well as the procedures and policies that affected decision-making that day.

In the case of North American Airlines Flight #1777, a military charter flight that arrived at OAK on Thursday, September 27, aircraft parking and passenger service arrangements were coordinated and approved in advance between the ground handling company and Airside Operations. The airport received information that the passengers were not TSA-screened at their originating airport and that weapons were on-board the aircraft. Together with our security partners, the airport made a decision to park this aircraft at a remote location on the tarmac. It is the responsibility of the charter airline that its operation is compliant with TSA screening requirements.

Upon landing and parking at OAK, the pilot-in-command advised the ground handling company that the parking and passenger handling provisions did not meet expectations. Upon learning this, Airside Operations and Aviation Security worked with the ground handling company and other law enforcement partners to coordinate a plan that was satisfactory to the pilot and passengers, and which was compliant with all airport safety and security standards.

Oakland International Airport (OAK) makes customer service a priority for all its passengers, whether they are traveling on commercial, military or general aviation aircraft. Charter airlines operating at OAK can choose to contract with a number of ground handling companies. Ground handlers coordinate flight services such as passenger handling, and aircraft fueling, cleaning and catering. It is the responsibility of ground handling companies to communicate aircraft and passenger operational needs to OAK’s Airside Operations Office in advance so that special accommodations can be coordinated to ensure that all airport operational, safety and security concerns are addressed.

The scheduled arrival and departure time of the flight is set by the aircraft operator. Time is needed to refuel the aircraft, perform maintenance inspections, refresh the catering, and give passengers time to stretch to break-up long travel periods. An analysis of the incident and prior correspondence between OAK’s Airside Operations and the ground handler determined that the airport did not receive clear communication in advance from the charter airline that was hired by the military.

I am out of town starting tomorrow for a convention. If you have any further inquiries about this incident and the way it was handled, Rosemary Barnes who is part of our Public Affairs team would be happy to speak with you. You may also call Joanne Holloway, the acting manager of the Port’s Community and Customer Relations Department.

Kindest regards,
Marilyn Sandifur
Port Spokesperson
Port of Oakland

Well isn't that just DANDY?

But then, can you really expect much more from an area that promotes the Folsom Street Fair and their promotional poster for this year of The Last Supper done by gay men in leather (Oakland is about 15 miles from San Francisco)?

Can we REQUEST that another state secede from the Union? Just an idea...

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


.

I say she's both...

From Samuel Taylor Coleridge's The Rime of the Ancient Mariner

Water, water, every where,
And all the boards did shrink ;
Water, water, every where,
Nor any drop to drink.

The very deep did rot : O Christ !
That ever this should be !
Yea, slimy things did crawl with legs
Upon the slimy sea.

About, about, in reel and rout
The death-fires danced at night ;
The water, like a witch's oils,
Burnt green, and blue and white.

(...)

Her lips were red, her looks were free,
Her locks were yellow as gold :
Her skin was as white as leprosy,
The Night-mare LIFE-IN-DEATH was she,
Who thicks man's blood with cold.

Is it there a reason that we aren't seeing a poll showing Rudy ahead of Hillary? Is there some sort of unspoken agreement between the dinosaur media outlets that they are keeping this from us? Hat tip to The Influence Peddler for their posting, Hillary Clinton: Albatross or Millstone, on a story that you AREN'T seeing in the dinosaur media...yet. I predict that after enough of us in the blog world start talking about it, it, like so many other stories that bloggers have broken in the past year or so, will soon be a major talking point by the reluctant Jurassic era outlets...

In Swing Districts, Democratic Enthusiasm Is Harder to Come By

By Chris Cillizza And Shailagh Murray
Sunday, September 23, 2007; Page A02

Conventional wisdom dictates that Democratic voters are thrilled with their choices for president, bursting at the seams to rally behind Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) or whoever gets the party's nod next year.

A recent survey by Democratic pollster Celinda Lake, however, showed Clinton and Obama trailing former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani (R) in the 31 Democratic-held House districts regarded as most imperiled in 2008, and even potentially serving as a drag on those lawmakers' reelection chances.

The poll was conducted in August but has not been previously reported. It paints a "sobering picture" for Democrats, according to a memo by Lake and Daniel Gotoff that accompanies the poll report.

Giuliani takes 49 percent to Clinton's 39 percent, while the former mayor's lead over Obama is far smaller, 41 percent to 40 percent. "Despite Obama's relative advantage over Clinton, both candidates are significantly underperforming against the generic Democratic edge in the presidential and even against party identification," Lake and Gotoff wrote.

So.

Guliani ahead of Clinton by ten points, and the dino's aren't reporting it. It makes you wonder what, exactly, ARE they any good for any more? Kudo's to WAPO for being the first to carry it.
I'm sure there were many, many tight sphincter muscles as the story went to press. I'll let ya'll decide why I would say that.

Personally, and I know there are those out there who don't agree with me, that's their right, but I'm with Fred. I've made no bones about that since BEFORE he was a candidate, even before he started "testing the waters."

For the main stream media to SIT on a story for over A MONTH is irresponsible journalism, in my book.

Ten points.

And if you take a look around at Democrats across the country, and listen to what they are saying, they ain't happy. They were counting on 2006 to be the year that everything changed for them. Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it. What has Congress actually DONE since the Democrats took the majority last election? They've renamed a few post offices, and put forth bill after bill that has been shot down like Mallards and Canada Honkers during duck season.

It's been the season of change for the Democrats, all right. It's been a real wake up call for the country exactly how deeply the party leadership is willing to go to shoot themselves in the foot. Wait, scratch that analogy, everyone knows that TRUE leftinistra's are pro gun control, so they wouldn't be shooting anything but dirty looks and the middle finger while they defecate on the American flag...


Is that REALLY what we want for America?

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

.

...but don't even THINK of starting an ROTC program....

I am constantly amazed by the number of people willing to just GREET a terrorist or an enemy leader with open arms and make them feel like they're just part of the family.

Have we always been this way and I just really didn't realize it because I was focusing on self interests more and was too BUSY to notice? Or have we really and truly headed for the deep end of the pool when we haven't even gotten our swimmies off yet? (swimmies - those inflatable little things that you blow up on your kids arms when they're little and go swimming. Or at least that's what my daughter called them when she was two and three.)

It's an amazing thing, reading Ayn Rand's Fountainhead, that I notice things even more differently than after first reading (at spree's suggestion, hat tip for that) Atlas Shrugged.

Socialist influence doesn't go after the poor or the middle class. It goes after the bored wealthy, those who they can make feel guilty for their wealth, not those who made their money by EARNING it, but more those who INHERITED it. That, and through sufficiently disgusted (and in many cases, disgusting) entertainers who make it "fashionable" (Barbara Streisand comes to mind here for her many causes through the years, as does Jane Fonda).

What better place to indoctrinate young wealthy heirs and heiresses than at the Ivy League colleges and universities they attend?

Columbia University has invited Mahmud Ahmadinejad to speak at their college.

From the Anti-Defamation League:

ADL Calls On Columbia University To Rescind Invitation To Iranian President Ahmadinejad

New York, NY, September 20, 2007 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today called on Columbia University to reconsider its decision to host Iran's president at a question and answer session with faculty and students. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is scheduled to speak September 24 at a forum sponsored by the university's School of International and Public Affairs.

A similar invitation to Ahmadinejad was revoked last year by Columbia President Lee Bollinger.

"It is inappropriate and a perversion of the concept of freedom of speech," said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. "Columbia University has no moral imperative, no legal imperative, no social imperative to give Ahmadinejad a platform, which he would not give them in Tehran. Why give him the credibility and the respectability of a major institution of higher learning? What message does that send to the students? This is not what the First Amendment is all about."

So.

Columbia University will invite a man who is KNOWN to sponsor and promote acts of terrorism and who personally calls for the extermination of the nation of Israel.

Interesting.

But they won't allow an ROTC program on their campus for those students who wish to pursue a career in the armed forces?

From FrontPage Magazine:

Prior to the late 1960s, Columbia’s current anti-US military atmosphere seems to have been almost nonexistent. Indeed, as early as 1916 an ROTC program was instituted on campus, where it matured and grew during the two World Wars, the Cold War, the Korean War, and even part of the Vietnam War era. Producing some of the finest naval officers ever to serve our country, at one point Columbia was actually churning out more Navy ensigns per year than even the US Naval Academy. In 1968, however, the university’s administration expelled all ROTC programs from campus in order to appease the sometimes-violent student protesters who opposed the Vietnam War – one of whom actually decimated Columbia’s ROTC offices with a Molotov cocktail.

The university’s ban on ROTC remained in place until a 1980 decision to not only allow its students to participate in the ROTC program at nearby Fordham University, but also to have a record of ROTC classes displayed on their Columbia transcripts. In 1990 however, this policy came to an end. While Columbia students could still take part in ROTC programs on neighboring college campuses, their transcripts no longer reflected that participation. To this day, ROTC classes are not considered part of the regular curriculum of studies. When the military recently forced Columbia to allow on-campus military recruiting (under the banner of the Solomon Amendment, which allows for the denial of federal funding to colleges that prohibit or prevent ROTC or military recruitment), the university’s president openly urged students not to interview – because of what he called the military’s discrimination against homosexuals.

Such is the nature of Columbia’s assault on American patriotism and self-defense – by no means unique in the world of higher education. Such is the intensity of academia’s dogged effort to instill, in the mind of a new generation, contempt for all this country does . . . and is.

Very interesting indeed...

Aren't you just on PINS AND NEEDLES for your sons and daughters to go there?

Fortunately, Columbia University students are exercising their First Amendment rights and protesting this outrage. You have to sign up for a Facebook account in order to follow the link, but it's worth it to get the information to help rally to protest this.

##############
PROTEST! RALLY!
#############
Click here for more details on the Rally, for bussing information, and to RSVP:

http://columbia.facebook.com/event.php?eid=6098347650

WHEN: Monday, September 24, 1:00-3:00

WHERE:

COLUMBIA STUDENTS (w/ Columbia ID's): On campus, outside Lerner Hall

NON-COLUMBIA STUDENTS: The Columbia Gates. 116th and Broadway - we have secured a permit to stage a protest there.

Click here for more details:

http://columbia.facebook.com/event.php?eid=6098347650

WHO: YOU and your friends, along with Hillel, Hasbara, StandWithUs, Amcha, ZOA, The David Project, Columbia student groups, concerned citizens. Expected attendance is in the thousands.

WHAT TO BRING: Flyers and posters (see below for links). There will also be many people handing out information, flyers, posters, stickers, banners, etc.

Click here to get protest signs: http://www.standwithus.com/signs.asp
http://www.adl.org/iran/iran_posters.asp

Click here for flyers:
http://www.ajc.org/atf/cf/{42D75369-D582-4380-8395-D25925B85EAF}/NYTimes_Iran_09202006.pdf
http://www.ajc.org/atf/cf/{42D75369-D582-4380-8395-D25925B85EAF}/AJC_Times_IHT_01272006.pdf

WHY:
Remember - the world is watching. This is a monumental opportunity to make our voices heard. Generations will ask us, What did we do to protest? Where were we?

Video: Ahmadinejad "Death to Israel" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FckLO8HcNyo&mode=related&search=

Video: On the Holocaust: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykd-syzZ4ZY&NR=1


NEED A RIDE?

Hasbara Fellowships will be organizing busses from various campuses and points around the city.

They are planning to provide busses from: NYU, Rutgers, Baruch, Queens, Hofstra, Brooklyn, and from the earlier rally in front of the UN. YU and Stern students probably have their own busses, ask around.

We also need people to step up and be campus leaders to organize the bussing and rallying. Please be in touch.

More details will be forthcoming.

For more information, and to volunteer, please contact Jenn Cogan at jcogan@aish.com or 347 585 0060.

For more information on the Rally and bussing, go to:

http://columbia.facebook.com/event.php?eid=6098347650

SPEAK OUT, Americans, let the world know that we WILL NOT pander to terrorists!

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


.

MoveOn.org calls Petraeus a traitor, earns an RC award

[Updates below as well as a link to part #2 of this thread]

I don't know...

When I can remember...

Being quite...

So...

Pissed...................

Do you ever reach a point of anger where your blood just chills inside of you and you have the most calm, collected, cold rational thought processes running despite the rage? That's where I am now.

Why, you ask? I'm glad you asked that.

The LEFT have taken a whole new slant (as if they weren't slanted enough already) in their efforts to make us look like a nation of damned fools. I am so sick and tired and fed up with MoveOn.org and groups like them...

They're playing right into the hands of our enemies around the world, especially with this, their latest stunt:

MoveOn.org Calls Petraeus a Traitor
Do Democrats in Congress agree?
by Pete Hegseth
09/09/2007 5:28:00 PM

Tomorrow--as General David Petraeus provides his Iraq assessment to Congress--the antiwar group MoveOn.org is running a full-page advertisement in the New York Times under the headline: "General Petraeus or General Betray us? Cooking the books for the White House."

Let's be clear: MoveOn.org is suggesting that General Petraeus has 'betrayed' his country. This is disgusting. To attack as a traitor an American general commanding forces in war because his 'on the ground' experience does not align with MoveOn.org's political objectives is utterly shameful. It shows contempt for America's military leadership, as well as for the troops who have confidence in him, as our fellow soldiers in Iraq certainly do.

General Petraeus has served this country for over 35 years with honor, distinction, and integrity. And this is not just about General Petraeus. After all, if General Petraeus is "cooking the books," then the entire military chain of command in Baghdad, and all the staff, military and civilian, who have been working with General Petraeus are complicit, since Petraeus did not write his report in isolation. They are all, apparently, 'betray[ing] us.'

MoveOn.org has been working closely with the Democratic congressional leadership --as an article in today's Sunday New York Times Magazine makes clear. And consider this comment by a Democratic senator from Friday's Politico: "'No one wants to call [Petraeus] a liar on national TV,' noted one Democratic senator, who spoke on the condition on anonymity. 'The expectation is that the outside groups will do this for
us.'

More...

Sunday, September 09, 2007

Don't Question His Patriotism! [Cliff May]

MoveOn.org, it seems, is questioning the patriotism of Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq. Tomorrow, the anti-war group is running a full-page advertisement in the New York Times under the headline: "General Petraeus or General Betray us?"

Folks, this is about as original as "Elvis the Pelvis" was. What makes it SO MUCH WORSE is that the world is watching us to see how we, as a nation, and our government, will react to the report. And what are they seeing? Such divisive tripe as this.

WE CAN NOT CONTINUE TO GO ON ALLOWING OUR NATION TO BE RIPPED APART BY THOSE WHO WISH TO DESTROY US NOT ONLY FROM THE OUTSIDE BUT FROM WITHIN AS WELL.

Is it going to take an escalation of things into violence, again, within this nation for us to unite AS a nation? Let me warn you of this, those of you who are BUCKING for a second "Civil War" in the United States: the MINUTE lines are draw and ranks are formed for us to do battle against one another, do you HONESTLY THINK that the rest of the world is going to stand idly by and let us duke it out amongst ourselves may the best side win? HELL NO! Russia and China are watching this with baited breath, mark my words. The Taliban and al-Queda are CHEERING us on to continue to pull apart internally. Our ALLIES are watching us to see what happens. And we have MoveOn.org planning to run this add calling the top general in Iraq a traitor because they don't like the war.

TOUGH.

No one in their RIGHT MIND likes war. But sometimes things have to be done to protect our way of life.

IF WE CONTINUE DOWN THE PATH THAT WE ARE TAKING, one very, VERY similar to the path we took prior to 1860 in this nation, and find ourselves fighting each other, you can BET YOUR SWEET ASS that there will be foreign factions who will be MORE THAN WILLING to jump into the fray to make sure that we are finally and ultimately destroyed as a nation.

To those American citizens supporting MoveOn.org: if you seek traitors, take a long, hard look in the mirror and ask yourself, honestly, is the organization that you are supporting working in the best interests of your country?

To the Congress and the Senate: How much longer will you continue to work at odds and allow our nation to become more divided? How much longer will you allow leadership within the House and the Senate who blatantly seek the division of the American people? How much longer will you continue to make political partisan play out of something that is so literally life and death, NOT JUST for our troops, but for our citizenry as well? HOW MUCH LONGER will a political party have WEEKLY CONFERENCES with a group SUCH AS MoveOn.org, paying credence to them RATHER THAN THE PEOPLE WHO PUT THEM IN OFFICE? We the people are watching you, and we will remember what you do, and how you respond.

To the American People in general: how much longer will you allow yourselves to listen to the rantings of a sick and deranged old man HIDING IN A CAVE and telling you what to believe? How much longer will you listen to those who would see our nation discredited LIE to you by telling you that we are fighting an illegal war? How much longer will you continue to support leaders who clearly have their own political survival in mind rather than doing what is right for our nation, and what best protects our nation. How much longer will you IGNORE the threat of radical Islam that calls for our destruction by focusing on lines drawn on a map rather than the VERY REAL problem that this ideology CROSSES national boundaries and involves a multinational group that may or may NOT have the support of any particular government or governments.

To the New York Times: disgraceful.

This war, the war on terrorist groups, the war that John Edwards has called a "bumper sticker war," has long lasting implications for more than a handful of reasons.

Our world changed on 9/11. We cannot forget that, no matter how much we would like to do so.

Traitor my leathery ass.

You know, I have personally not said anything untowards in regards to the generals who dissented in conducting operations in Iraq. As a soldier (once a soldier, always a soldier), I understand that there is a difference between peace time leadership and war time leadership. I could understand the dissenting opinions of the peace time general staff. No way would I call them traitors. They served our nation, they did their duty, and they voiced their opinions. General Petraeus has served our nation, as well, and he has done so IN THE CAPACITY of a war time general.

MoveOn.org has gone TOO FAR with this one. Too far.

I call on Congress, and I call on the American people, to hold them accountable for their sedition.

MoveOn.org wins the Rubber Chicken Award for this week, hands down.


Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


(NOTE: Instead of leaving you with the advertisements I usually have at the bottom of each post, I will leave you with one of the videos from Freedoms Watch) [30 second video.]


Wounded Veteran:



.

[Update] Despite the Democrats and Move On Org. doing everything in their power to discredit General Petraeus, or perhaps because of those attempts, the NYT/CBS poll, with obvious bias in how they asked questions, STILL showed one little gem. 68% percent of the American population trust the militray more than anyone else on the war.

I think they have overplayed their hand and the public sees this.

[Update #2] Pete has another piece out asking whether Democrats will denounce Move On for this ad, or whether they will be complicit in Move On's actions by staying silent. If they do not speak out against Move On because of the fear of the orgination, then they will, rightly so, continue to be associated in everyones mind with this group.

PART #2 OF THIS THREAD, INCLUDING REACTIONS FROM THE POLITICIANS CAN BE FOUND HERE.




.

Sowing the seeds of dissent

It has been said repeatedly since WUA was launched, by myself as well as others, that a great deal of the leftinistra mindset and attitude can be traced directly back to Soviet doctrine that called for spreading discontent, dissent, and mistrust from within the populace of the United States. In my column
Just when you thought it was safe to go back onto the playground... and An American Communist: Hillary Clinton & The Democrats, we both cited examples of how the left takes their cue from communist doctrine.

And yet people read such as those two examples and pass them off as being "conspiracy theorist."

Would the admissions of a former KGB operator help to make it more convincing?

From the Wall Street Journal:

Propaganda Redux
Take it from this old KGB hand: The left is abetting America's enemies with its intemperate attacks on President Bush.

BY ION MIHAI PACEPA
Tuesday, August 7, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

During last week's two-day summit, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown thanked President Bush for leading the global war on terror. Mr. Brown acknowledged "the debt the world owes to the U.S. for its leadership in this fight against international terrorism" and vowed to follow Winston Churchill's lead and make Britain's ties with America even stronger.

Mr. Brown's statements elicited anger from many of Mr. Bush's domestic detractors, who claim the president concocted the war on terror for personal gain. But as someone who escaped from communist Romania--with two death sentences on his head--in order to become a citizen of this great country, I have a hard time understanding why some of our top political leaders can dare in a time of war to call our commander in chief a "liar," a "deceiver" and a "fraud."

I spent decades scrutinizing the U.S. from Europe, and I learned that international respect for America is directly proportional to America's own respect for its president.

[...]

Sowing the seeds of anti-Americanism by discrediting the American president was one of the main tasks of the Soviet-bloc intelligence community during the years I worked at its top levels. This same strategy is at work today, but it is regarded as bad manners to point out the Soviet parallels. For communists, only the leader counted, no matter the country, friend or foe. At home, they deified their own ruler--as to a certain extent still holds true in Russia. Abroad, they asserted that a fish starts smelling from the head, and they did everything in their power to make the head of the Free World stink.
The communist effort to generate hatred for the American president began soon after President Truman set up NATO and propelled the three Western occupation forces to unite their zones to form a new West German nation. We were tasked to take advantage of the reawakened patriotic feelings stirring in the European countries that had been subjugated by the Nazis, in order to shift their hatred for Hitler over into hatred for Truman--the leader of the new "occupation power." Western Europe was still grateful to the U.S. for having restored its freedom, but it had strong leftist movements that we secretly financed. They were like putty in our hands.

[...]

The final goal of our anti-American offensive was to discourage the U.S. from protecting the world against communist terrorism and expansion. Sadly, we succeeded. After U.S. forces precipitously pulled out of Vietnam, the victorious communists massacred some two million people in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. Another million tried to escape, but many died in the attempt. This tragedy also created a credibility gap between America and the rest of the world, damaged the cohesion of American foreign policy, and poisoned domestic debate in the U.S.

Unfortunately, partisans today have taken a page from the old Soviet playbook. At the 2004 Democratic National Convention, for example, Bush critics continued our mud-slinging at America's commander in chief. One speaker, Martin O'Malley, now governor of Maryland, had earlier in the summer stated he was more worried about the actions of the Bush administration than about al Qaeda. On another occasion, retired four-star general Wesley Clark gave Michael Moore a platform to denounce the American commander in chief as a "deserter." And visitors to the national chairman of the Democratic Party had to step across a doormat depicting the American president surrounded by the words, "Give Bush the Boot."

Chilling, no?

Does it better explain Bush Derangement Syndrome?

To those of you who have been, or still ARE, the puppets whose strings are pulled by your communist puppet masters, can you see, a little more clearly, why we so calmly tell you that you are being duped by failed Soviet doctrine?

What more can we do here other than to present to you the truth as we uncover it, to convince you, the American people, that you are being played by forces foreign to our nation, people who have no interest in our national interests, groups who would loving nothing more than to see our culture, our way of life, our FREEDOM, destroyed and swept aside?

Go read the article in full. It's very fascinating and revealing, and it mirrors so MUCH of what I personally have researched and studied through the years myself.

Democrats, if there is any patriotic spirit to you at all, you need to seriously, SERIOUSLY, reevaluate those at the head of your party. Republicans, I'll say this to you as well; remain vigilant.

Marxist-Leninist communism failed once. We DO NOT need to try to revisit it here in the land of the free, and the home of the brave.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

.