Robbers and Stupid Posters Don't Get It

The sad-sacked Leftinistra idiots at a place called "Crooks and Liars" have NO clue about the UCMJ, nor do they have a clue about the Oath of Service a military member swears BEFORE ever entering into service.

Having said that, I will add that this particular group of uneducated jerks do side with those elements that espouse Marxism/Stalinism and philosophies akin to the mentally unbalanced. Their cause? It is non other than a cowards plea (Lt. Ehren Watada) to appeal to the emotions of the weak-kneed and spineless, such as the drones at Crooks and Idiots.

The guest blogger is a unit called miss kitty...more like sad pussy.

This drone cites the 5th Amendment under the United States Constitution and as a military member, that doesn't apply. Anyone in the military knows that.

When we swore the Oath, the ramifications of that Oath was completely and totally explained. Not only that, during the transition of training from the civilian mindset to the military mindset, we were granted many an opportunity to "go home". There is a point of no return. The coward Matada reached that point long before IT became the whining little imp IT has become.

Military members are not granted the luxury of choosing which wars we fight and which ones we do not. Get over it.

Personally, I hope he hangs for dereliction of duty. Or, they can paint a permanent Yellow Streak down the little imp's backsides.

Axis of Defeatists

NYSlimes story:G.O.P. Senators Press to Change Strategy in Iraq

In offering the proposal on Friday, Senators John W. Warner of Virginia and Richard G. Lugar of Indiana were seeking to reach that elusive goal when the Senate resumes its debate next week. The two senators, among the most respected Republican voices of military and foreign policy, are seeking to attract Democrats as well to the plan, which also urges Mr. Bush to seek a new war authorization from Congress in September.

Washington Compost: Two GOP Senators Defy Bush On Iraq

Defying Bush even as his team fanned out to press Congress for more time, Sens. John W. Warner (Va.) and Richard G. Lugar (Ind.) unveiled a measure requiring the White House to begin drawing up plans to redeploy U.S. forces from frontline combat to border security and counterterrorism. But the legislation would not force Bush to implement the plans at this point.

LASlimes: GOP senators seek new way out of Iraq

President Bush faced a new challenge to his Iraq war strategy Friday when two key Republican lawmakers proposed forcing the White House to submit a plan to start redeploying troops by the end of the year.

Sens. John W. Warner of Virginia and Richard G. Lugar of Indiana — former committee chairmen and authorities on foreign and military affairs — called on Bush to be prepared to shift away from a combat role.

Question. Who is the CIC? Do we have a rebirth of wannabe Generals? When it comes to winning a shooting war that was declared on the United States long before 91101, who should the President of The United States listen to? Armchair Generals? Former disgruntled Commanders? Commanders in the field? Socialist Democrats, aka liberals? Socialist Republicans, aka RINOS? Far left communist troll groups such as Code Pinko and A.N.S.W.E.R.?







Weekly Standard: Keep on Surgin'

President Bush is absolutely right. But in a way his admonition to Congress at his press conference last week was unfair. He's correct that Congress can't run a war. But this Congress doesn't want to run a war. It wants to lose a war. Congress can, in principle, achieve this, and the Democrats who control this Congress are doing their best to bring it about.

Charles Krauthammer: Deserting Petraeus

"The key to turning [Anbar] around was the shift in allegiance by tribal sheiks. But the sheiks turned only after a prolonged offensive by American and Iraqi forces, starting in November, that put al-Qaeda groups on the run."

Finally, after four terribly long years, we know what works. Or what can work. A year ago, a confidential Marine intelligence report declared Anbar province (which comprises about a third of Iraq's territory) lost to al-Qaeda. Now, in what the Times's John Burns calls an " astonishing success," the tribal sheiks have joined our side and committed large numbers of fighters that, in concert with American and Iraqi forces, have largely driven out al-Qaeda and turned its former stronghold of Ramadi into one of most secure cities in Iraq.

Vets For Freedom:

Next week, politicians in Washington, DC are poised to sell out America's safety because election season is near. As veterans, we cannot allow this to happen. The information battle Vets for Freedom was planning for September is upon us in July, therefore we must adapt, overcome, and do something immediately. Our collective voice must be heard on Capitol Hill, and it must be heard now!

Opinion Journal: Crocker and Petraeus speak some truths, if Senators are listening.

Ryan Crocker, the U.S. Ambassador in Iraq, is a 36-year career diplomat who has served under seven administrations in Iran, Syria, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Pakistan. He's no partisan gunslinger. So it's worth listening to his views as Congressional Democrats and a growing number of Republicans press for a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq on the excuse that the Iraqi government hasn't met a set of political "benchmarks."

"The longer I'm here, the more I'm persuaded that Iraq cannot be analyzed by these kinds of discrete benchmarks," Mr. Crocker told the New York Times's John Burns in an interview on Saturday, referring to pending Iraqi legislation on an oil-sharing agreement and a relaxation of de-Baathification laws. "You could not achieve any of them, and still have a situation where arguably the country is moving in the right direction. And conversely, I think you could achieve them all and still not be heading towards stability, security and overall success in Iraq." Mr. Crocker's comments are a useful reminder of the irrelevance--and disingenuousness--of much Washington commentary on Iraq. For proponents of early withdrawal, the "benchmarking" issue has provided a handy excuse to make the Iraqi government rather than al Qaeda the main culprit in the violence engulfing their country.

Terry McCarthy:

MCCARTHY TO PETRAEUS: Are you concerned that the U.S. political clock could start ticking too fast and undermine security here? Undermine confidence here?

PETRAEUS: Obviously, that's in the back of our minds. And there is not a great deal we can do about it, other than to continue to press forward.

No morale issues there among the troops, is there?

Michael Yon takes note of the CONgress and the would-be Armchair Generals to task in the following releases from his tours with the Real Heroes fighting the war so the Leftinistra can be as foolish as they so choose to be.
Feasting On the Moveable Beast
Second Chances
Baqubah Update
Bless the Beasts and Children Update
Arrowhead Ripper
Bless the Beasts and Children

As I write this post, I see through the RSS feeds that Spree has posted a piece from The Fourth Rail...

Bill Roggio from Fourth Rail Takes MSM to the Woodshed

The bottom line? The Axis of Idiots are doing their best to lose this war all for the glory of Political Power and Political Gain. The same Axis of Idiots refuse to listen to the military members as they post and write about the war.

This nation is in trouble and we need to Take Our Country Back.

You Are A Terrorist If...

The picture here says it all...HAT TIP to Miss Beth...






As you read the following release from JB Williams, also keep in mind this post previously published and the links therein.

If you Harbor, Train, Arm, Fund

or in any way Support Terrorism

You Are a Terrorist!

Written by JB Williams

©2007 USA

Following rather than leading Britain and Europe, America is indeed well on its way to losing the international war on terrorism. Though each of these nations has stated the correct position on terrorism on many occasions for benefit of their respective voters, they have all failed to adhere to those words in practice. Each remains under increasing threat of terror attack as a result.

• If you harbor terrorists, you are a terrorist.
• If you assist with the arming and or training of terrorists, you are a terrorist.
• If you provide logistical or financial support for terror activities, you are a terrorist.
• If you work against those who are trying to hunt, capture or kill terrorists, you are a terrorist.
  

Terrorism is defined in general terms as the use of violence or the threat thereof, specifically aimed against unsuspecting civilian targets, for the purpose of coercing entire societies by way of fear, for political purposes. In short, it’s the use of extreme violence against defenseless targets in an effort to force an extreme agenda upon the masses through death, destruction and fear.

Whether you are a member of PETA, the Taliban, Al Qaeda or part of some rogue third world dictatorship, you are free to harbor any extreme belief system you choose. However, you are not free to use extreme violence against civilian targets in pursuit of those belief systems. You are not free to use the death and destruction of innocent civilians or properties to promote your agenda through fear. This is terrorism… and it must not be allowed to stand, much less expand.

For more than thirty years, the west has tried to understand, negotiate with or appease extremists around the globe who see terrorism as their only means of accomplishing their ill conceived agenda for the world.

Though many dangerously misinformed civilians wrongly compare terrorists to “freedom fighters” of some insane sort, freedom is never the agenda of anyone willing to use terror against the free, to accomplish that agenda.

Today we are again being told by our governments, more than five years after we responded to the worst terror attacks in human history on 9/11 that Al Qaeda has reconstituted and has stepped up efforts to hit American and European civilian targets. Had we taken the war on terror seriously at any point over the last thirty years, this would not be the case.

Osama Bin Laden remains at large almost six years after 9/11. The entire world knows he has been operating from within Pakistan since escaping capture in the Tora Bora region of Afghanistan years ago. The Musharraf government in Pakistan has tried to work with western allies to hunt, capture and kill Bin Laden and members of his Al Qaeda network. But they have refused to go after terrorists in the tribal regions of their country known to harbor and support terrorists like Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

As a result, both have been able to reconstitute under safe harbor in Pakistan. Though the Musharraf government does not appear to be harboring these terrorists, their countrymen are. If you harbor terrorists, you are a terrorist. This region of Pakistan must be treated as such immediately and if Musharraf can’t do it, we must.

It is widely known that the current government of Iran is harboring, training, funding, arming and generally promoting terror activities in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Lebanon and the West Bank. If you harbor, train, arm or fund terrorists, you are a terrorist.

In addition, Iran is on a fast track to long range nuclear capability and the current government has been openly specific about their intentions once they are armed with such capability. Every moment that passes without treating this regime like the terrorists they are, is a moment they use to become stronger.

We know that Syria has been a sponsor of international terror almost since the beginning of time and that they have been funneling arms and soldiers into Iraq and Lebanon in support of ongoing terror operations. If you harbor, train, arm or fund terrorists, you are a terrorist.

We are at war with terrorists in more than sixty countries around the globe, including our own and all of our allies. We are not at war with any of these nations.

But because terror networks reside and operate within these countries, none of these countries can be exempt from military operations meant to hunt, capture or kill terrorists. None of them can be a safe harbor for terrorists.

If you are not with us, you are indeed against us. This was the first fundamental rule of engagement for the war on terror, established less than 24 hours after 9/11. Yet it is not being adhered to by western allies even six years later and today, the west is once again bracing for further terror attacks.

How many more innocent civilians in the west have to die before our governments realize that tough talk alone will not protect the innocent? How much damage must be done to our societies, our financial systems, our government offices, before they begin to act on their tough words?

It’s now clear that Musharraf can not get the job done in Pakistan. We know that Iran is not going to comply with international demands to stop its nuclear proliferation without being forced to comply and yet that they can not be allowed to complete their agenda. We know that both Syria and North Korea are on dangerous paths in support of international terrorism. We know that much of Europe is already on its knees with Islamic extremists running roughshod over their own cities.

At what point will our governments take serious action to end this threat once and for all?

This is a very unconventional war that will only be won through unconventional means. More and more ground troops with their hands tied via insane rules of engagement means only more and more dead troops and a protracted war that will result in more civilian casualties here and abroad.

Meanwhile in Washington, Democrats have been sending a clear message of defeat and disengagement from the war on terror since the moment they voted to send troops into harms way. Now, an increasing number of spineless Republicans, more concerned about their political skins than the troops on the ground, are joining Democrats in that message.

My message to the Code Pink members of our diverse society is this, NOBODY in America likes or wants war you self absorbed dumbasses! Get over yourselves! Nobody in America wants to revisit 9/11 or worse either. If you’re not with us in this regard, you too are against us…

I have a few vital (as in life and death) questions for every American, especially political leaders, who are calling for the “redeployment” of American troops out of Iraq, each of which demands a coherent honest answer.

1) “Redeployment” is a military term used to describe the moving of troops from one field of active war operation to another. When you “redeploy” our troops out of the field of operation in Iraq, you are planning to “redeploy” them to which new field of operation in the ongoing war against international terrorism? Until such time that the enemy is on American doorsteps, recalling troops home is disengagement from the war, not “redeployment.”

2) If military force is off the table for Iran, how do you plan to immediately stop Iran from ever achieving its goal of nuclear proliferation?

3) If we do pull our troops out of Iraq, exactly what are your specific expectations for what happens next in Iraq, the region, Europe and America, in both the immediate and long range future? This question must be answered before an intelligent decision can be made concerning Iraq withdrawal.

Anyone calling for troop “redeployment” without offering answers to these elementary questions at the same time can not be trusted to recommend military policy anywhere anytime.

These questions are so fundamental that even to call for “redeployment” of troops without offering answers to these questions smacks of gross ignorance and incompetence. People willing do make such a dangerous error in policy statements can not be allowed to make policy, especially during a time of war and ongoing threat to civilian populations.

Once these questions are answered, the American people can decide whether or not they agree with those assessments. But until then, “redeployment” is nothing more than a rhetorical political term used to fire up the anti-war crowd without providing any coherent leadership on the matter.

If you harbor, train, fund or in any way support terrorism, you are a terrorist! That includes defunding or undermining those engaged in the war to stop terrorism, even from the halls of congress! When done for political gain, it’s cowardly as well.

Can I make it any clearer?

Sadly, even if people like Lugar and Warner read this, they will never heed it. They are obviously worried about re-election, not winning the very real war on terror or even stopping the next 9/11... They are following Democrats in search of safe political harbor, not leading anyone.

RUN AWAY!!!

From CNN

Report: Al Qaeda steps up efforts to hit U.S.

Al Qaeda is stepping up its efforts to sneak terror operatives into the United States and has acquired most of the capabilities it needs to strike here, according to a draft U.S. intelligence assessment, The Associated Press has learned.

The draft National Intelligence Estimate is expected to paint an increasingly worrisome portrait of al Qaeda's ability to use its base along the Pakistan-Afghan border to launch and inspire attacks, even as Bush administration officials say the U.S. is safer nearly six years into the war on terror.

Naturally, we should withdraw.

From CNN

House passes bill to bring troops home in '08

President Bush vetoed a war-spending bill with a similar withdrawal date in May and has threatened to spike any new effort to set a timetable for a U.S. pullout. His Republican allies in the House said the new measure has no chance of passage.

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, said Thursday's mixed report on the progress of the war shows it's time for American troops to come home.

"President Bush continues to urge patience, but what is needed -- and what the American people are demanding -- is a new direction," she said.

Earlier Thursday, Bush said a report on U.S.-set benchmarks for Iraq shows "satisfactory progress" in eight areas. He admitted that there is "more work to be done."

Naturally, we should withdraw. Sounds like a broken record.

From CNN

Iraq pullout legislation will be vetoed, Bush says

President Bush will veto a defense appropriations bill being debated in the Senate if it includes an amendment setting a timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq, the White House said Tuesday.

Senate Democratic leaders have said they plan to bring forward an amendment from Sens. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, and Carl Levin, D-Michigan, that calls for beginning a redeployment of U.S. troops in as little as four months, to be completed by next spring. House Democratic leaders announced late Tuesday that they would bring a similar proposal to a vote by the end of the week.

Naturally, we should withdraw.

Webb amendment vote

Senators on Wednesday refused to bring to a vote an amendment written by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Virginia, that would set time limits between U.S. troop rotations in Iraq and Afghanistan, to give troops more time at home.

The tally was 56 to 41, failing to receive the 60 votes required to cut off debate on the amendment so a vote could be held.

Republicans voting for cloture:
• Sen. Norm Coleman, Minnesota
• Sen. Susan Collins, Maine
• Sen. Chuck Hagel, Nebraska
• Sen. Gordon Smith, Oregon
• Sen. Olympia Snowe, Maine
• Sen. John Sununu, New Hampshire
• Sen. John Warner, Virginia

Indepdents voting against cloture:
• Sen. Joseph Lieberman, Connecticut

Senators not voting:
• Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kansas
• Sen. Tim Johnson, D-South Dakota
• Sen. David Vitter, R-Louisiana

Naturally, we should withdraw.


CBS News has the same sort of stories here...

I agree with this statement:

Quote: "I don't think Congress ought to be running the war. I think they ought to be funding the troops."-President Bush


NRO:

Left's Cries Of Support Ring Hollow

"...Which brings me to Iraq, the American soldiers involved, the antiwar crowd which condemns their efforts — yet contend they support the troops — and the feverish waving of the interim assessment of progress — or the lack thereof — being made on the ground (which began days before the assessment’s release, and two months before Gen. David Petraeus is to formally report on the status of operations and progress in Iraq)..."

Quote: "I believe the Left’s approach to supporting the troops is utterly disingenuous and condescending."

Naturally, we should withdraw.


Naturally, we should withdraw. The "real surge" has started about 3 weeks ago and 18 benchmarks have not been met. 8 of the 18 have, in 3 weeks. There we have that Instant Success Syndrome again.

Naturally, we should withdraw.

As Wake Up Americans posted this morning:

Initial Benchmark Assessment Report : Iraq-UPDATE Congress cowards are back on the merry-go-round, VETO time again.

And then this afternoon...

Congressional Merry Go Round

And Miss Beth has this to say:

Brought to You by The "Religion of Peace."

Iran begins executions for adultery and other violations
By Nazila Fathi
Tuesday, July 10, 2007

TEHRAN: The Iranian government confirmed Tuesday that a man was executed by stoning last week for committing adultery, and said that 20 more men would be executed in the coming days on morality violations.

A judiciary spokesman, Alireza Jamshidi, told reporters on Tuesday that a death sentence by stoning had been carried out last week near the city of Takestan, west of Tehran, despite an order by the chief of the judiciary, Ayatollah Mahmoud Shahroudi, not to permit such executions.

"The verdict was final, and so it was carried out for the man but not for the woman," the ISNA news agency quoted Jamshidi as saying.

He said the 20 additional executions were for such things as "rape, insulting religious sanctities and laws, and homosexuality." Most executions in Iran are hangings, often in public and at the scenes of the alleged crimes.

The police arrested about 1,000 people in May during a so-called morality crackdown. Jamshidi said 15 more men were being tried on similar charges and could receive death sentences.

The daily newspaper Etemad Melli reported Monday that Jaffar Kiani, 47, who had been convicted of adultery, was executed by stoning on Thursday in the cemetery of a small village near Takestan. "Villagers said the sentence was carried out by the local judge and authorities," the newspaper reported.

Kiani and his partner, Mokarameh Ebrahimi, 43, who has two children, were scheduled to die on June 21, but the execution was put off by Ayatollah Shahroudi.

The liberal left in this country should take note. Gay Pride Parades and the decadent lifestyles of homosexuals are not tolerated by Islam.


NATURALLY, WE SHOULD WITHDRAW.

DNC Exit Strategy

Another Jackass…
Another Jackass…
Wednesday, February 28, 2007 3:44 AM

Liberals…when is someone going to authorize Hunting Season???????