• Right Place Photo Caption Contest Hall of Glory Top 25

    meister.jpeg About Me
    BlogmeisterUSA's Guidelines for Commenting
    My Blog at Newsbusters
    My Writings at Family Security Matters
    My Writings at The American Thinker
    I Also Blog at Lifelike Pundits
    National Summary Interviews Me
    Read "The Americans" by Gordon Sinclair
    PELOSI_DEMOCRAT_TREASON-1.jpg More About the Fighting 101st Keyboardists

August 22, 2007

Al-Maliki May Not Be First Choice, But He Was Elected!

This may seem a little off-putting, to be sure:

Iraq's prime minister lashed out at American criticism, saying Wednesday that no one has a right to put timetables on his elected government.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki blamed the U.S. presidential campaign for the recent tough words from the Bush administration and from other American politicians.

"No one has the right to place timetables on the Iraq government. It was elected by its people," he said at a news conference in Damascus at the end of a three-day visit to Syria.

"Those who make such statements are bothered by our visit to Syria. We will pay no attention. We care for our people and our constitution and can find friends elsewhere," al-Maliki said.

And now Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) is spouting off that al-Maliki should be ousted. Way to make friends, there, Carl.

Am I happy that al-Maliki made gestures to Syria and is now planning on doing so to Iran? Of course not! But our making ultimatums and threats isn't going to help matters any. In fact, it may drive the Iraqi government into the arms of the enemy. And we can't have that.

Look, we wanted for the Iraqis to hold free elections to choose their own leaders. They did that. Now we have to work with the leaders the Iraqis elected. After George W. Bush was elected (twice), there was a lot of grousing by people around the world who really should have kept their mouths shut...after all, Bush was elected by a majority of the American people. Our elections are up to us, not the rest of the world. And so it is with Iraq: they made their choice, and it's not up to us to moan and carp on about it.

And as for the criticism that the Iraqi government took the month of August off and calls for them to come back now to work on important issues, I say this: our Congress traditionally takes the month of August off. We have many critical issues on the table right now, yet I don't see any of al-Maliki's congressional critics rushing back to Washington in order to get to work before September.

So cool your jets, everyone. We need to forge a working relationship with al-Maliki and his government. Otherwise, the blood, sweat and tears we've shed in Iraq may have been for naught after all.

On a tip from: Cookiewrangler

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:14 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

August 20, 2007

Ahmadinejad to Visit Iraq

This morning, Cookiewrangler sent me the link to this story:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is planning to make his first visit to Iraq, the highest level trip by an Iranian leader since the fall of Saddam Hussein.

Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki invited Ahmadinejad after he visited Tehran earlier this month, the ISNA student news agency reported.

"This invitation has been accepted and the preparation is underway. When the trip becomes definite we will make an announcement," Mottaki said in Iran's holy second city of Mashhad late on Sunday.

She asks: "WHY, WHY -- Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki invited Ahmadinejad -- here we are losing people and these two are getting friendly???"

While I'm certainly not thrilled that Ahmadinejad is being welcomed with what seems to be open arms by Prime Minister al-Maliki, I can, I think, understand why he is. You see, al-Maliki is in a very precarious position. With American Democrats and RINOs clamoring to pull out of Iraq as quickly as possible, he's likely very worried about the aftermath of such a situation. Iraq is not yet capable of fending off a serious advance by Iran or any other sizable and unfriendly Middle Eastern nation. So what to do? Make a friendly overture to the biggest bully in the sandbox and hope that, if the occasion arises, that the bully will remember the suck-up gesture and not be too cruel as a result.

Al-Maliki is buttering both sides of the bread. And we have the political pandering of the Democrats and RINOs to thank for it.

Any other thoughts on this situation? Comments, please!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:06 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

August 13, 2007

U.S. Pullout = Bad

"Heh, heh, I wrote, 'Pullout.'"

Does anyone think John Murtha, my home state's biggest disgrace, read this story?

WASHINGTON U.S. troops could withdraw from Iraq within months, but if Iraq's government remains politically deadlocked, it probably would collapse and the nation would descend into chaos, a war game organized by the U.S. Army concluded earlier this month.

No Shiite. The war game also concluded that an American withdraw would result in human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together - mass hysteria.

Wyatt Earp

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 06:00 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

August 10, 2007

Iraq's Troubles Are Finally Over!

Why? Because the United Nations will be undertaking a much larger role there. Read on:

UNITED NATIONS - The Security Council voted Friday to expand the United Nations' role in Iraq in a move aimed at promoting talks among ethnic and religious rivals and winning support from the country's neighbors.

The resolution, approved unanimously, authorizes the U.N., at the request of the Iraqi government, to promote political talks among Iraqis and a regional dialogue on issues including border security, energy and refugees.

Okay boys, pack it up. We're not needed anymore. The U.N. has everything under control. I mean, they did such a bang-up job in Bosnia, Somalia, and IRAQ, right?

Anyone with three brain cells knows this already, but I'll write it anyway: the U.N.'s next successful mission will be its first.

Wyatt Earp

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:30 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

July 02, 2007

Bless the Beasts and Children

The title to this post is the title of a recent post by journalist Michael Yon, the embedded independent journalist who continues to report about incidents in Iraq that the rest of the media refuses to touch with a ten-foot pole. I was first directed to it by my husband yesterday, and Hot Air links to it today. Here's Yon's intro:

On 29 June, American and Iraqi soldiers were again fighting side-by-side as soldiers from Charley Company 1-12 CAVled by Captain Clayton Combsand Iraqi soldiers from the 5th IA, closed in on a village on the outskirts of Baqubah. The village had the apparent misfortune of being located near a main roadabout 3.5 miles from FOB Warhorsethat al Qaeda liked to bomb. Al Qaeda had taken over the village. As Iraqi and American soldiers moved in, they came under light contact; but the bombs planted in the roads (and maybe in the houses) were the real threat.

The firefight progressed. American missiles were fired. The enemy might have been trying to bait Iraqi and American soldiers into ambush, but it did not work. The village was riddled with bombs, some of them large enough to destroy a tank. One by one, experts destroyed the bombs, leaving small and large craters in the unpaved roads.

The village was abandoned. All the people were gone. But where?

Where indeed? It's a question you can probably guess the answer to on your own, but I'll tell you now: al-Qaeda murdered them. An entire village. Click here to read the entire post, accompanied by photos. Photos are of a graphic nature. If you have any squeamish tendencies, do not say I didn't warn you.

These are the kind of people whom Iraq war critics side with when it comes to the "rights" of prisoners? Murderers of civilians, including women and children? It wasn't even a question of plunder, as all the village livestock was killed as well. Every form of life, brutally extinguished.

Scoff if you will at what I'm about to say, but this is what we can expect more of if America and her allies pull out of Iraq before the Iraqis are capable of warding off their enemies on their own. What happened to this small village outside of Baqubah has everything to do with conquest, fear and intimidation. "Join us or you're next."

Michael Moore's Minutemen indeed.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:36 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

May 22, 2007

Iran's Fingers Plunge Deeper Into Iraq Pie

Iran, along with al-Qaeda, is planning a summer offensive in Iraq that is aimed at convincing us to withdraw from Iraq for good.

Why am I not surprised? And with the current makeup of Congress, Iran realizes it has a good chance of succeeding.

Thanks, Nancy and Harry. Thanks alot.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:51 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

US Doctor Convicted of al-Qaeda Support

Via al-Reuters:

A federal jury convicted a Florida-based doctor on Monday of supporting al Qaeda by swearing allegiance to the group and attempting to help treat wounded fighters.

Rafiq Sabir, 52, was found guilty of conspiracy to provide material support to al Qaeda and providing or attempting to provide material support or resources and faces a maximum of 30 years in prison when he is sentenced September 12.

His lawyer is whining that his conviction is because of the "erosion of constitutional rights" since 9/11. No, he was convicted because jurors were convinced that he and his cohorts pledged support to al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden in the name of Islamic jihad.

And Safir was no illegal alien like three of the "Fort Dix Six." He was born and raised in New York.

Have fun in prison...

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:27 AM | Comments (61) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

May 16, 2007

Surrender Monkeys to Protest in San Fran, Carson City and Las Vegas

Are you ticked off at Congress and its so-called leaders over their cut-and-run stance in Iraq? Do you live in or near San Francisco, Carson City or Las Vegas? Move America Forward (headed by the lovely Melanie Morgan) is staging protests at the regional offices of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Here's the press release:

Living, breathing, Surrender Monkeys, will lead crowds of patriotic Americans protesting the efforts by Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, to undercut support for the missions of our troops in Iraq.

The monkeys (waving white surrender flags) along with pro-troop supporters will be conducting protests outside the district offices of Harry Reid & Nancy Pelosi on Thursday, May 17, 2007 at 10:30 AM Pacific Time.

Protests will take place outside the district offices of Senator Harry Reid in Las Vegas and Carson City, as well as outside of Speaker Pelosis San Francisco district office. Monkeys will be leading the San Francisco & Las Vegas protests.

The protests are being organized by Move America Forward (website: www.MoveAmericaForward.org), the nations largest grass-roots, pro-troop organization and will be called Surrender is Not an Option. The protests will include picketers carrying white surrender flags to mock the defeatist approach offered by Reid & Pelosi at these office locations:

NANCY PELOSI: 450 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco, CA 94102


** 333 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Suite 8016, Las Vegas, NV 89101 AND

** 600 East William Street #302, Carson City, NV 89701

The anti-war movement and their leaders in Congress have gotten too far ahead of themselves and they are now going to experience the backlash from the American people. If these anti-war advocates wont stand behind our troops then maybe they should stand in front of them on the frontlines in Iraq and Afghanistan, said Melanie Morgan, Chairman of Move America Forward.

Move America Forward will also be debuting a new ad that takes Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to task for their war is lost attitude towards the war in Iraq.

Were not going to sit back any longer and allow politicians and anti-war groups like votevets.org to undercut our troops, were starting to fight back, said Melanie Morgan.

For more information please visit www.MoveAmericaForward.Org


I'm a former resident of Nevada, and while I'm thankful Harry Reid is not my senator (I have to live with Chris Dodd), part of me wishes I still lived in the Silver State so I could take part in this event. (I used to live about 15 miles north of Carson City.)

These two are a disgrace and deserve to know that we've had it with their shenanigans. If you can, please consider attending!!! And if you blog about it, be sure to pass along the link!

This picture is next to the word "defeat" in the dictionary

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:11 AM | Comments (47) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

May 01, 2007


As promised, Bush has used the veto stamp on the Iraq spending bill. The reason he vetoed it is because it includes a mandatory pull-out date, not because he doesn't want to fund the troops.

The expected whining has begun.

Democrats chose this day to present the bill to Bush because it's the fourth anniversary of the famous speech on the USS Abraham Lincoln, where the "Mission Accomplished" banner was prominently displayed behind the president. However, here's something I doubt many know: That banner was not ordered by the White House, but by the Navy, in honor of the USS Abraham Lincoln having stayed out on a 290-day mission, which was a long mission for them.

Free Republic has the details.

h/t: Mark Levin Show

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 05:38 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

April 27, 2007

Al-Qaeda Bigwig Nabbed

UPDATE: Head on over to Captain's Quarters for updates to this story. As Ed says, "It's a good thing we're committed to staying in Iraq, isn't it? Because if we left, then we couldn't catch AQ commanders before they had a chance to get situated in Iraq and start killing people by the dozens."

One of al-Qaeda's "highest ranking and senior operatives" was captured last week and is now at Club G'itmo. Abd al Hadi al-Iraqi was intercepted while on his way to Iraq to take over "operations" there.

Now that Saddam Hussein has been dispatched, perhaps Ramsay Clark will be available to take over al-Iraqi's case?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:07 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

April 26, 2007

On Iraq: National Interests and Honor

This is a must-read article at National Review by Joseph Morrison Skelly. I'm acquainted with him personally, and so am always happy to promote anything he does. Here's one interesting bit:

Innumerable Iraqi men and women have placed their trust in American national honor. One Iraqi official, when asked recently if the United States military should leave his country, had this to say: About your question, me and approximately all Iraqi people want that the U.S. Army stay in Iraq now, because if your Army left my country, our future will be destroyed and the freedom that we get, it will be lost. I hope that the American government will still help us until we reach the required safety and freedom.

Read it all. (Think Harry Reid will? Naaah, I didn't think so either.)

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:09 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

March 27, 2007

Senate Passes Iraq Spending Bill Calling for Scheduled Pullout

Details here.

However, do not despair. Listening to Rush today, he said he thinks the Republicans figured it would be best to get the bill through the Senate as quickly as possible so that President Bush could wield his as-yet-unused veto pen. And with the vote this close, getting enough votes to override the veto will be extremely difficult.

I'm keeping the faith...how about you?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 05:37 PM | Comments (30) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

March 22, 2007

Mandate Schmandate

If the Democrat Party won a mandate back in November, why are they so divided on the issue of Iraq?

Democratic Party leaders are facing a caucus deeply divided on the issue and hold only a narrow majority in Congress. With their hands tied if just a few members stray, Democratic leaders are finding it tough to pass legislation that would require Bush to start bringing troops home.

If the Dems think that voters wanted to see more backbiting and less cooperation in Congress than ever, then they'd better think again. According to a Gallup poll taken just last week, the approval rating for Congress is at 28%, with 64% of respondents disapproving. President Bush had better ratings in the same week, although the media would rather you not find that out.

Stunts like Barbara Boxer's rudeness toward Republican committee members during televised hearings may amuse the folks over at CNN, but average Americans are getting tired of this kind of behavior.

It's time for the Dems to either put up or shut up...and please, start acting like grownups!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:14 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

March 15, 2007

Dems Predict Passage of Iraq Bill

They may be predicting, but it ain't over until the last vote is counted. This MyDD post lists Congressional Blue Dog Dems who are not yet on board to vote "yes."

Here's the list. If your rep is among them, give a jingle and let him/her know why voting "yes" would not be in our country's best interest...nor chances for re-election next year.

Michael Arcuri (NY-24)

John Barrow (GA-12)

Melissa Bean (IL-08)

Dan Boren (OK-02)

Jim Cooper (TN-05)

Bud Cramer (AL-02)

Lincoln Davis (TN-04)

Joe Donnelly (IN-02)

Brad Ellsworth (IN-08)

Bob Ethridge (NC-02)

Kirsten Gillibrand (NY-20)

Baron Hill (IN-09)

Tim Mahoney (FL-16)

Jim Marshall (GA-08)

Mike McIntyre (NC-07)

Collin Peterson (MN-07)

John Salazar (CO-03)

Joe Sestak (PA-07)

Heath Shuler (NC-11)

Gene Taylor (MS-04)

Thanks to Dan Riehl for the e-mail!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:33 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

March 09, 2007

Gathering of Eagles: Let Them Know You're Coming!


As I've mentioned before, I'm attending the Gathering of Eagles next Saturday, March 17th, at the Vietnam War Memorial in Washington DC, along with Aaron.

If you're planning to go, please do the organizers a favor and sign this petition...they need to have an idea as to how many people to expect. Since conservatives don't hire people to staff their rallies (we prefer to have people who believe in the cause more than a paycheck), it's important that as many people who can attend, do.

If you can't, please do your part by passing the petition to others who may be able to attend, and if you have a blog, please publicize the rally as much as you can. Our military needs our support!

See you there!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 03:41 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

March 06, 2007

NBC: Iraqis Want Us to Stay; Terrorists Want Us Out

Shocking but true: NBC, a charter member of what Rush Limbaugh likes to call the "drive by media," has actually broadcast what conservatives have known all along from sources like Michael Yon and others.

Brian Williams, NBC Nightly News anchor, reporting from Iraq for MSNBC.com:

"They do not want us to leave. They want to see the police come through," says U.S. Army Col. John Charlton.

"The people here are very glad to see us very hesitant for us to go. They want us to stay and to keep beating down the insurgents," U.S. Army Lt. Col. Charles Ferry says.

Brian Williams (to Col. Charlton): You just said, They don't want us to leave. That's the 10th time today I've heard that. I've got to go back to the States and do a newscast that every night has another politician or 12 of them saying, We have got to get out of that godforsaken place.

NewsBusters has more from the actual television broadcast, regarding the view taken by terrorists. Reporter Richard Engel:

"Some say they are just waiting to see how long the U.S. will stay and how long this surge will continue. It was obvious, the U.S. announced surge, they said where the U.S. troops were going and the militia decided they fought the U.S. two-and-a-half years ago, didn't have a lot of success. They decided this time they're going to wait it out, see if political pressure in the U.S. can help them win this time."

Hear that Nancy? Harry? Hillary? Obama? All other naysayers?

While this is encouraging, I have come to expect so little from the MSM that I am afraid this may only be a blip on the radar. Still, credit must be given to Williams for going against the rip tide. In today's media groupthink, any deviation from the norm is welcome.

h/t: Scott Malensek

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:34 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

February 19, 2007

What Mandate?

So the Dems think November 2006 gave them a mandate to cut and run in Iraq? Think again. Investor's Business Daily shows some interesting poll results. Take special note of the percentages by party:


To quote the IBD editorial: We'd have to go back to Benedict Arnold to find Americans as eager as Murtha & Co. to see an American defeat on the battlefield.


h/t: Blue Crab Boulevard

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:57 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

February 16, 2007

Dems Look To Cut Off Funding...But Won't Admit It

This AP article is entitled Dems Risk Image Woes Over Iraq War Moves. In it, we learn that Dems are trying to balance their image versus what they'd like to do in order to stick it to President Bush over Iraq.

John Murtha wants to "redirect" money and "redirect" troops. "Redirect" is code for "cut off." After all, where will the troops and money be redirected to? Is Murtha still thinking about sending them to Okinawa?

This quote says it all:

"They don't want to be a scapegoat for the Bush administration's failures," [former Rep. Martin] Frost said. "This is Bush's war, and there should be no confusion about who's war it is, and Democrats should not set themselves up to have that done to them."

Bush's war? Isn't this America's war? After all, 29 Democrat senators voted "Yea" to H.J. Resolution 114: A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.

Some of those who voted yes are among today's most vociferous Iraq opponents: John Edwards, Harry Reid, John Kerry, Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Tom Harkin and Jay Rockefeller, just to name a few. (Note that Edwards, Biden, Clinton and Dodd are all presidential hopefuls for 2008, and are all hoping to appeal to the far left party base.) They all had the same intelligence that President Bush did. They all had an opportunity to look into the situation before they voted, but they're now saying, "If we had known then what we know now..." "Bush lied..." "Faulty intelligence..." Hindsight is not very helpful when trying to move forward. Many people thought Saddam Hussein had WMDs prior to that vote in 2002, and it's likely he did. However, the five months President Bush spent trying to get other nations and the ever anti-American U.N. on board gave Saddam plenty of time to spirit whatever he had out of the country, perhaps to Syria.

But that's the problem with today's Democrat Party, and has been the problem for the past thirty or so years. They are appeasers and apologists to whom it's more important to be liked by the rest of the world than to take care of America first, but they're afraid that the electorate will figure it out. So they come up with such brilliant schemes as "non-binding resolutions" and "redirecting money and troops," hoping that the problem will slowly go away without them having to reveal their true colors (the primary color being yellow). Working together for a common cause is not on their agenda.

And so it's come to this. Democrats say they support the troops, but hobbling President Bush and their own quest for power is more important to them than proving it. It's what happened 1975 when Congress cut off funding for our efforts in Vietnam, and they're going to try to do it again. And we can look forward to the Iraqi people being sacrificed over there so that Democrats can congratulate themselves over here.

They're not risking their image. They're confirming it.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:29 AM | Comments (70) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

February 12, 2007

The Real Children of War

My take over at American Thinker.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:46 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

February 03, 2007

Michael Yon Gives Us "The Hands of God"

Michael Yon has the kind of stories you won't hear from the MSM, because he isn't afraid to go right to the source. He also isn't afraid to tell us about what good things are happening in Iraq.

This is a story that shows how, while there are some people with only hatred in their hearts, there are others who would willingly sacrifice themselves in order to save others. It goes to show that all may not be lost in Iraq. We need to give people like this a chance.

Please be sure to read it.

h/t: learner

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

February 02, 2007

Nancy Pelosi and Troop Levels: Then and Now

May 2004:

At the time of the interview, 137,000 U.S. troops were in Iraq along with roughly 25,000 international forces, according to an ongoing tally compiled by the Brookings Institution, a liberal-leaning think tank based in Washington, D.C.. That level was down from February 2005, when violence in Iraq had spiked and U.S. troop levels had increased to 160,000 10,000 more than the initial troop force when the war began.

Pelosi said at the time that it is imperative to use U.S. diplomacy "to get more foreign, international troops on the ground. And we have to truly Iraqatize internationalize and Iraqatize the situation." But she also criticized the administration, specifically then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, for dismissing the initial recommendation by Army Chief of Staff Gen. Eric Shinseki to deploy 300,000 troops to fight the Iraq war.

"The clear and present danger facing the United States is terrorism. We have to solidify, we have to stabilize the situation in Iraq. As the [then] secretary of state [Colin Powell] has said, you break it, you own it. We have a responsibility now in Iraq there, and we have to get more troops on the ground."


"Adding more combat troops will only endanger more Americans and stretch our military to the breaking point for no strategic gain. And it would undermine our efforts to get the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wrote in a letter released Friday afternoon.

What a difference a change in George Bush's mind makes...

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:42 AM | Comments (13) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

January 27, 2007

Protest and Counter-Protest

As you know (according to the MSM), tens of thousands of anti-war protesters joined Hanoi Jane, Code Pink, and other likeminded "America Sucks First" people in Washington, D.C. today.

Tens of thousands?

Aaron of Lifelike Pundits was there, and according to an e-mail he sent me and some other friends, it was more like 5,000 people. He has a post-in-progress about attending a "rally for the troops" counter protest. Check it out, and be sure to keep going back for updates.

Andrea Shea-King also discusses the protest over at The Radio Patriots. I like her final analysis:

What will these instant gratification-addicted whiners do when we're battling the savages at the gate ten or twenty years from now? Poor pacifist babies. They're cranky. They've already reached their maximum endurance level. Give them a Binkie pacifier and tell them to go suck on it. The grown ups will take care of things while these spoiled brats nap in their clueless slumber. I swear, they need adult supervision...

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 05:08 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

January 25, 2007

Have You Signed the Pledge?

5823 people have signed The Pledge thus far. Will you?

"If the United States Senate passes a resolution, non-binding or otherwise, that criticizes the commitment of additional troops to Iraq that General Petraeus has asked for and that the president has pledged, and if the Senate does so after the testimony of General Petraeus on January 23 that such a resolution will be an encouragement to the enemy, I will not contribute to any Republican senator who voted for the resolution. Further, if any Republican senator who votes for such a resolution is a candidate for re-election in 2008, I will not contribute to the National Republican Senatorial Committee unless the Chairman of that Committee, Senator Ensign, commits in writing that none of the funds of the NRSC will go to support the re-election of any senator supporting the non-binding resolution."

Click here to add your name. And spread the word! Maybe our elected GOP senators will finally get the message.

Thanks to HNAV.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:36 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

January 19, 2007

Why One Soldier Joined the Fight

Michelle Malkin tells us about the death of 23-year-old 2LT Mark Daily in Mosul. She also posts his MySpace entry as to why he joined the Army in order to join the fight in Iraq. A snippet:

I joined the fight because it occurred to me that many modern day "humanists" who claim to possess a genuine concern for human beings throughout the world are in fact quite content to allow their fellow "global citizens" to suffer under the most hideous state apparatuses and conditions.

Interesting and touching. Be sure to read it all.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:01 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

January 17, 2007

Michelle Malkin is Back from Iraq

Check out what she has to report here. Lots of good information and pictures to illustrate, with a promise of much more to come in the next few days.

Stand-out quote: "The troops I met ask only three things of their fellow Americans back home: time, patience, and understanding of the enormous complexities on the ground." She also suggests loudmouths Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews make the same trip she did. Don't expect them to take her up on it...they prefer their comfy anchor chairs to the rigors of a war zone.

Sorry, Malkin-haters; she made it home safely in spite of your wishes to the contrary.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:03 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

January 15, 2007

Two More Hangings in Iraq

In what might be called an anticlimax, two of Saddam Hussein's top aides were hanged early this morning.

Saddam's half-brother, Barzan Ibrahim, was Iraq's intelligence chief and Awad Hamed al-Bandar was the head of the Revolutionary Court. They were found guilty along with Saddam of killing 148 Shi'ites in 1982.

Perhaps in an effort to stem the criticisms that erupted after Saddam's execution two weeks ago, the video was shown to reporters, but there are no plans as of yet to let anyone else see it.

The usual suspects begged Iraq not to hang the men, including the UN.

According to reports, Barzan's head was severed during the hanging, which has prompted accusations of mutilating the body after death.

What I find interesting is that while many are demanding that Iraq's new government take responsibility for itself, those same voices are complaining when that same government does something they don't like. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Two more place settings, please!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:47 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

January 04, 2007

Some Thoughts on Saddam's Final Journey

I finally decided to watch the "unofficial" video of Saddam's hanging last night. I guess I had to get my courage up because no matter how much I know he deserved his fate, watching someone die is no laughing matter. It's a serious moment, not one that should be given to hooting and hollering. I admit to having a few knots in my stomach as I watched. (If you haven't seen it yet and wish to, just go to Google and enter "Saddam video hanging" or something similar and you should find it with no problem.)

The quality of the video wasn't that great, as the person holding the illicit cell phone kept moving it up and down, so that often the viewer is just looking at the floor or the ceiling. However, it was held in place long enough to see the noose put around Saddam's neck, see the trap door open and hear its crash, and see Saddam a moment later, eyes lifeless.

And so the Butcher of Baghdad is no more. Certain European whinemongers and their American counterparts are denouncing the death penalty in general and the death penalty for Saddam in particular. For example, Tim Hames of the Times of London called the execution "offensive," saying that Mainstream middle-class sentiment in Europe now regards the death penalty as being as ethically tainted as the crimes that produced the sentence." (What the European press thinks and what the middle-class they claim to represent thinks might actually be two different things, according to this poll.)

Jeff Jacoby reminds us that under Saddam, children were doused in gasoline and burned, used as human shields, and entire families were executed in the blink of an eye, among other atrocities. If "mainstream middle-class sentiment in Europe" equates burning children alive with hanging the man responsible for burning them, then mainstream middle-class sentiment in Europe, to quote Mr. Bumble, "is a ass -- a idiot."

In days of yore, criminals were hanged publicly in England, and not always for murder. The people who went to see the hangings considered it a festival day of sorts, not as a solemn occasion meant to deter further crime. And let us not forget that during the French Revolution and the period after it, known as The Terror, rich aristocrats and those considered to be traitors to the revolution were publicly beheaded by the thousands on the guillotine. So forgive me if I look at current European sentiment against the death penalty with a jaundiced eye.

Saddam was given a trial, something he didn't afford the victims of his own brutalities. His death was quick and relatively painless, which again was not something he considered when ordering the deaths of thousands of his own citizens. Iraq and indeed the world is better off without him. Those who want to whinge about it are free to do so. Meanwhile, Iraqis can now breathe a little easier, knowing that there is no way this monster can ever come back to power. Jeff Jacoby calls it an "act of moral hygiene." I couldn't put it better myself.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:52 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

January 02, 2007

"That Poor Saddam..."

Over the weekend, Gateway Pundit pointed to a number of posts by leftwing bloggers that were apparently unhappy with the hanging of Saddam Hussein over the weekend for whatever various and sundry reasons they chose to use.

Today, Clifford May over at NRO has a great response to those who would play devil's advocate regarding the hanging of the Butcher of Baghdad:

Imagine that Saddam had not been executed. Imagine that he had been sentenced to life in prison.

Now imagine that a group of pro-Saddam terrorists seizes an elementary school. They say they will kill all the students and teachers if Saddam is not released within 24 hours.

Should Saddam then be released? Or should several dozen innocent children and their teachers be killed?

Is it not better that we have guaranteed that it will never be necessary to make such a choice?


h/t Ex-Donkey

Those who can't say "good riddance to bad rubbish" should have their
heads examined...

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:38 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

December 20, 2006

Al-Qaeda Big Caught in Iraq

Don't expect this to make front-page news in the NY Times:

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - U.S.-led forces captured a senior al-Qaida leader who was responsible for hundreds of civilian deaths and housed foreign fighters who carried out suicide bombings, the U.S. military said Wednesday.


The leader, who was not identified, was arrested in a raid in Mosul on Dec. 14, the military said in a statement.

"The terrorist leader was attempting to flee from the location when Coalition Forces chased him across a street and detained him," the statement said.

It said the suspect served as al-Qaida's military chief in Mosul in 2005, and then took up the same job in western Baghdad.

"During that time, he coordinated car vehicle-borne improvised explosives device attacks and kidnap for ransom operations in Baghdad," the military said. It cited reports that said he organized an attempt to shoot down a U.S. military helicopter in May this year.

Excellent! (in my best Mr. Burns voice)

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:18 AM | Comments (37) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

December 19, 2006

Hillary Pulls a Kerry

All-but-officially-announced 2008 presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton is saying she wouldn't have voted for the war had she known what she knows now.

"Obviously, if we knew then what we know now, there wouldn't have been a vote," she said in her usual refrain before adding, "and I certainly wouldn't have voted that way."

Hindsight is 20/20, Mrs. Clinton. I might not have done a lot of things in my life either, had I known in advance of all the pitfalls or difficulties I would encounter. Part of life is making decisions and then dealing with the consequences that result. Wishful thinking isn't productive, but we're seeing a rash of left-leaning politicians now repeating similar canards because they know a portion of their base is upset with them. Sorry, but we can't turn back the clock.

Perhaps she's worried about possible rival Barack Obama, who has the luxury of not having been in the Senate when the vote for war was taken, and can wave his unsullied opposition like a flag to those fickle-minded folks who were for the war before they were against it.

Politicians like Hillary Clinton do a disservice to our military and even our country by their mewling about what they would have done if only... I wish I could hear more of them saying, "All right, we're committed. What can we do to ensure victory?" And in case anyone wonders what victory is, here's a primer: Victory in Iraq entails leaving only when the Iraqi government and its military are able to defend themselves from those who would seek to destabilize this democracy while still in its infancy.

h/t: Cookiewrangler

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:25 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

December 18, 2006

Dodd Continues Middle East Tour

Chris Dodd, (D), Connecticut's other senator, continuing his tour of the Middle East, now says that he would support a temporary increase in troops in order to secure the country.

"Show me some demonstrable evidence that they're coming together as a people - Shias and Sunnis, sitting down and recognizing that they have an obligation to come together as a people - then I'd be willing to support some additional people if we needed it in order to get the job done."

This is Dodd's third trip to Iraq. The highlight of his trip, of course, is when he'll be visiting Syrian President Bashar Assad.

White House spokesman Tony Snow last week criticized the trips of Dodd and other senators to Syria, saying they were "inappropriate." But afterward, Dodd called Rice and she gave him the questions.

The senator, who is traveling with Sen. John F. Kerry, D-Mass., expected no diplomatic breakthroughs in Damascus. "I don't expect President Assad to say, `Dodd, you're such a great guy, I'm going to do everything you expect me to do,"' he laughed.

The self-deprecating humor is such a nice touch, especially since Dodd and Kerry are over-stepping their bounds by speaking to a head of state that our own administration does not want to have relations with. What is it with these over-inflated gasbags in our Senate who think that they can influence our foreign policy? Only our president is allowed to set foreign policy. But as these two buffoons hope to sit in the Oval Office in a couple of years, rules and regulations be damned.

According to the Eagle-Tribune:

Kerry claims he's not about to criticize U.S. policy while on foreign soil. But he did just that while standing in Cairo, Egypt's capital, last week. Kerry, as reported by the Associated Press, said the Bush administration's refusal to talk to Syria and Iran is "a mistake" and "the kind of policy that's got us into trouble" in the region.

Kerry and his fellow senators may believe they are merely "fact-finding" in the Middle East, and they may get a number of their constituents to believe that. But those with a different agenda in the Middle East, those who like Syria's Assad and Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad seek maximum chaos and the frustration of U.S. interests in a peaceful, democratic Iraq, see the senators differently.

They see the crack in U.S. resolve in the Middle East. The traveling senators give them just the lever they need to pry it open. The senators' message is: Bush may not listen to you - but we will.

Kerry's visit to Syria serves Assad's interests more than those of the United States.


On a more amusing note: as a publicity builder, the tour seems to be a bust for Dodd. I can't find any pictures of him taken during this trip, thus far while his traveling partner has garnered a few.

Dodd Plans Talks With Middle East Leaders

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:34 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

December 12, 2006

Press Winning in Iraq

According to a USA Today poll, a majority of Americans are pessimistic of our chances of winning in Iraq, and support a pullout within a year.

When we went in three years ago, I thought it was supposed to be a war to topple Saddam and help create a stable Middle Eastern country that would be free of al Qaeda and other terrorist forces. I had no idea we'd be fighting the MSM. Moreover, I wouldn't have thought that the MSM would come out ahead.

Thanks to the constant press grousing and focus on only the bad (never the good) in Iraq, those Americans who can't be bothered to seek out alternative news sources are being spoonfed exactly what the defeatist, leftwing press wants them to hear. Remember when your parents told you never to believe everything you read? That old adage is truer now more than ever.

Unfortunately, too many people are more interested in finding out what happens next to the sleazy women on Wisteria Lane than what our soldiers are actually accomplishing overseas.

And that's a real pity.

Reverse Vampyr has a few quotes you should read regarding the freedom you take for granted.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:30 AM | Comments (22) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

December 05, 2006

Quote of the Day

Political change doesn't win wars. That's what we've learned, painfully and horribly. Only winning wars wins wars. ~ John Podhoretz

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:24 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

November 27, 2006

Man Immolates Self to Protest War

UPDATE (3:18 pm): Warner Todd Huston over at NewsBusters has more on this topic. And Moonbattery reported on it a couple of weeks ago.

Malachi Ritscher doused himself in gasoline and set himself ablaze near a Chicago highway off-ramp in protest of war in Iraq. (It took days for him to be identified, and it took longer for people to figure out what he did and why.) He left behind this statement:

"Here is the statement I want to make: if I am required to pay for your barbaric war, I choose not to live in your world. I refuse to finance the mass murder of innocent civilians, who did nothing to threaten our country," he wrote in his suicide note. "... If one death can atone for anything, in any small way, to say to the world: I apologize for what we have done to you, I am ashamed for the mayhem and turmoil caused by my country."

Apology accepted. Now that we have that out of the way, let's win in Iraq.

In all seriousness, this man was described as one who dealt with bouts of depression by friends and family. That he chose to burn himself to death with the excuse that it might help stop the war is sad, but it should not be seen as anything other than one person's tragic inability to cope with life.

Some, however, took the bait:

"This man killed himself in such a painful way, specifically to get our attention on these things," said Jennifer Diaz, a 28-year-old graduate student who never met him but has been researching his life. Now, she is organizing protests and vigils in his name. "I'm not going to sit by and I can't sit by and let this go unheard."

One wonders if Miss Diaz would hold a vigil in the name of a soldier who sacrificed himself in battle in the service of our country? A soldier whose presence assures us that we will be able to hold such protests and vigils? A soldier who did not enter the military to end his own life, but to protect ours?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:14 AM | Comments (31) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

November 12, 2006

Melanie Morgan and Joe and Jan Johnson on Andrea Shea-King TONIGHT

What the MSM won't tell you:

Conservative radio show host Melanie Morgan and Gold Star Family Joe
and Jan Johnson, will join me on the radio tonight. The Johnsons have
just returned from Iraq.

Melanie chairs Move America Forward, the organization that arranged for
several Gold Star Families to secretly travel to Iraq this past week.

Tonight Melanie will bring one of those families on the Andrea Shea
King Show with her -- Joe and Jan Johnson, who will share their
experiences while in Iraq.

Melanie co-authored a just released book, American Mourning, which
features the Johnson family who went to Iraq to see for themselves what
is going on over there and to tell the troops that there are Americans
who support and believe in their mission.

While in Iraq, the Gold Star Families were on hand to witness the
reactions to Saddam's death sentence, the democratic takeover of
Congress, and Rumsfeld's resignation. In addition to meeting the
troops, the families were able to meet with many high-level Iraqi
government officials. For more on the trip, go to Move America Forward.

The Andrea Shea-King Show, produced by Mark Vance, airs on Sunday
nights in Orlando and can be heard live on the internet on WDBO 580 AM
at 9 PM EST. Join some our listeners in the live in-show chat room. And
you can call the show toll-free at: 1-800-329-5858

Tonight at 9 EST. It will be interesting. Promise.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:34 PM | Comments (24) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

November 10, 2006

Which Will it Be?


BAGHDAD, Iraq - President Jalal Talabani said Thursday that he had been assured by Democrat congressional leaders during a recent visit to Washington that they had no plans for a quick withdrawal of U.S. forces.

Or this:

George McGovern, the former senator and Democratic presidential candidate, said Thursday that he will meet with more than 60 members of Congress next week to recommend a strategy to remove U.S. troops from Iraq by June.

I leave you to guess.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:33 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

September 29, 2006

"Thank You For Making Me Safe"

Go to Anna's site for the text that accompanies this wonderful photo. Have a box of tissues handy.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:40 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

September 28, 2006

A Must-See Photo

Think our soldiers are busy bollocking things up royally in Iraq? Think they're beasts whose only interest is in killing innocents?

Take a look at this. It says much more about our guys over there than the MSM wants you to know.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:30 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

September 14, 2006

Was Judge Abdullah al-Amiri Nominated By Clinton?

You might think so after reading this exchange during Saddam Hussein's trial:

Questioning a Kurdish witness Thursday, Saddam said, "I wonder why this man wanted to meet with me, if I am a dictator?"

The judge interrupted: "You were not a dictator. People around you made you (look like) a dictator."

"Thank you," Saddam responded, bowing his head in respect.

So much for an unbiased courtroom.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:57 AM | Comments (15) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

September 11, 2006

American Guards Preferred at Abu Ghraib

This news is a couple of days old, but perhaps some of you have not seen it...after all, since it portrays American soldiers in a positive light, there isn't going to be much coverage:

The notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad is at the centre of fresh abuse allegations just a week after it was handed over to Iraqi authorities, with claims that inmates are being tortured by their new captors.


Some of the small number of prisoners who remained in the jail after the Americans left said they had pleaded to go with their departing captors, rather than be left in the hands of Iraqi guards.

"The Americans were better than the Iraqis. They treated us better," said Khalid Alaani, who was held on suspicion of involvement in Sunni terrorism.


The witness said that even in the thieves' section prisoners were being treated badly. "Someone was shouting 'Please help us, we want the human rights officers, we want the Americans to come back'," he said.

I do like how the Telegraph felt it necessary, however, to show a picture of Lynndie England holding a prisoner on a dog leash. We don't want anyone to forget how Americans torture!

No comment was available from Dick Durbin or Ted Kennedy.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:42 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

August 18, 2006

The Minutemen Recognize Their Leader

An Iraqi militant (read: Islamofascist) group has used scenes from Fahrenheit 9/11 in a video that they say is made up of attacks on U.S. soldiers. The video is also used to mock President Bush.

"After all, there are honest and influential guys in America and if Mr Moore can talk to you like that, so can I," the Rashedeen narrator says.

Michael Moore must be proud. I'm surprised he hasn't mentioned this prominent recognition of his work on his website yet! Well, give it time. I'm not sure, though, how Moore can be considered honest and influential. It must be in the eye of the beholder...

Inspiring Islamofascists everywhere

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:31 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

June 27, 2006

It Shouldn't Have to Be Said...

Wonder why the news coming out of Iraq is usually bad? Chalk it up to MSM spin. There's plenty of good news to balance the bad, but you won't hear it from the usual sources.

Jeff Emanuel of Town Hall lists many of the good things our soldiers have done since we first toppled Saddam Hussein in 2003. You can see them here.

No, it shouldn't have to be said that our soldiers do more good than bad. Unfortunately, the ideologically blind MSM hasn't figured that out yet, and won't for the forseeable future.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:25 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

Welcome to the War Zone

Many of you may have heard of this already, but I first heard of it yesterday when reading Page Six of the New York Post. (Rhetorical question: why is it called Page Six when it's not actually on page six?)

Anyway, Pat Dollard, a former Hollywood flack, has created a documentary about Iraq called Young Americans that he is trying to sell to HBO. In my opinion, since it seems to put American soldiers in a positive light, HBO will not be too excited about acquiring it.

You can get a preview on Dollard's website, PatDollard.com.

I loved Dollard's comments about George Clooney (although he never actually mentions Clooney's name):

While Dollard was careful not to name names, he told Page Six that he went into "a black rage" while in Iraq after reading a certain movie star's pompous pronouncements online.

"I read something on the Internet in which someone was patting himself on the back for having the courage to oppose the war," Dollard recalled. In an obvious reference to Clooney, who owns a villa in Italy, he said, "They actually equate bravery with speaking out against the president because [losing fans] might cost them one less servant at their Italian villa . . . It put me into a black rage and made me sick to my stomach."

This was good too:

Dollard says his enthusiasm for the war has left some of his former showbiz colleagues cold. "Being a Republican in Hollywood today is not much different than being a communist in Hollywood in the 1950s," he said. "I'm not trying to overstate the case, but the reality is there is a blacklist in Hollywood. It's very McCarthy-like. It just shows the hypocrisy of the left."

So much for the "chill wind" that Tim Robbins famously referenced in front of the National Press Club. Think Dollard will get invited to speak at their annual luncheon like Robbins was?

Don't bet your milk money.

Check out the trailer of Young Americans. And, if it doesn't get bought up by a major media concern and goes straight to DVD, consider buying it. Our soldiers deserve for their stories to be told by someone who doesn't despise them and their mission.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:07 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

June 21, 2006

WMDs Do Exist

Big news:

We hear that 500 chemical munition shells were found in Iraq back in 2003. I first heard about this in the car tonight, listening to Mark Levin on WABC.

Michelle Malkin has more details.

I'm not a conspiracy theory nut, but I do wonder why this news has been held back for so long. Someone sat on it. Who and why?

Glenn Reynolds says:

Stay tuned. WMD wasn't the big issue for me, but it certainly has been turned into a keystone of the war debate, which may turn out to have been a mistake for war opponents.

My thoughts exactly. Now that the cat is out of the bag, how many war opponents will be prepared to eat crow?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:08 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

No Outrage to Spare for Soldiers

We all remember the outrage surrounding detainees at Abu Ghraib being photographed in kinky positions.

We all remember the outrage surrounding the charge (now disproven) of Korans being flushed down the loo at Gitmo.

We all remember the outrage surrounding the kidnapping, brutal torture and death of two American soldiers just last week.

Scratch that last one please.

Kos called the signs of torture before death "quaint." (hat tip: reverse_vampyr)

To my knowledge, neither the ACLU, Amnesty International nor the UN have called for any investigation. (We all know how quickly they react to any allegations of torture of al Qaeda detainees.)

What about Hollywood? Surely Susan Sarandon or Martin Sheen must have something to say. Or even that pseudo-celeb Cindy Sheehan. What if her son had been brutally tortured before his death?

Michelle Malkin calls the silence from the left "deafening." It's more than deafening, it's threatening to shatter my eardrums.

Groups who prattle on about the well-being of al Qaeda and other terrorist detainees in US custody couldn't give a hoot about the torture of American soldiers. Cries about the Geneva Convention when it comes to captured terrorists are noticably missing when American soldiers are kidnapped, tortured and killed. Why?

It has nothing to do with consideration for the well-being of anyone, and everything to do with working against the US, and George W. Bush in particular.

Jeff Emanuel of Town Hall:

There is no question that these two murdered soldiers, and all others lost in Iraq and elsewhere in the world, are to be mourned. Both Kristian Menchaca and Tom Tucker left behind families, friends, and other loved ones. Given that fact, and the fact that, due to an overriding love of America and belief in its ideals, they volunteered to serve their country even though they fully understood that they might one day have to make this ultimate sacrifice, it is supremely important—even necessary—that, along with a loving family, they leave behind a grateful nation. America should recognize these men as examples of the myriad heroes which make up our all-volunteer military, and should realize that, without supporting the mission the troops are doing—and the cause for which they are volunteering to give their lives, should it come to that—it is not possible to support the troops themselves. The tide has turned in the battle to win the peace in postwar Iraq, and those who have stood on the sidelines for the past three years—or, worse, who have actively worked against the cause of freedom and democracy in that nation—are dangerously close to being remembered (if they are remembered at all) not for their support of human rights, but for their self-righteous fight against them—all in the name of their hatred of America, and of George W. Bush.

Menchaca and Tucker committed the sin of being volunteer soldiers in Iraq under the command of President Bush. Therefore, no sympathy is forthcoming. Their cases are not considered human rights cases, but well-deserved deaths. Because the left will do anything they can to demoralize our troops and the American public, these men will not be the subject of outrage from either our leftwing politicians or their mouthpieces.

There is no outrage to spare because it is being wasted on those whose cases do not deserve it.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:20 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

June 16, 2006

House Rejects Iraq Pullout Timetable

Via Breitbart, tip from Drudge:

The House on Friday handily rejected a timetable for pulling U.S. forces out of Iraq, culminating a fiercely partisan debate between Republicans and Democrats feeling the public's apprehension about war and the onrushing midterm campaign season.

In a 256-153 vote, the GOP-led House approved a nonbinding resolution that praises U.S. troops, labels the Iraq war part of the larger global fight against terrorism and says an "arbitrary date for the withdrawal or redeployment" of troops is not in the national interest.

Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) conceded in her usual gracious manner, calling the war a "grotesque mistake." Jack Murtha (D-PA) said, "It's not a matter of stay the course. It's a matter of change direction." That direction being back, not forward.

Democrats complained "the debate and vote as a politically motivated charade." Why? The Dems are the ones calling for a pullout, then whine about charades when they are called on their bluff and lose. This is not the first time the Dems have cried foul regarding such a vote; last November a vote regarding an immediate pullout received only three yeas. This was also called "a political stunt that prohibited thoughtful debate on the issue" by the Dems.

You may remember that back in November the Senate also rejected a call for a specific pullout date.

In other words, Dems talk the pullout talk, but can't walk the pullout walk. It's, er, surprising that they can't seem to stick to their principles...

Pulling out before we are sure that the Iraqi government and its military can successfully ward off al-Qaeda and other terrorist attacks is tatamount to abandoning the sheep to the wolves. Then what would all of our involvement have amounted to? Nothing. And if, as a result, Iraq fell to the terrorists, guess who would be portioning out the blame and who would be receiving it?

If you're interested in how your representative voted, the roll call tally is here.

More discussion:
Ex-Donkey Blog
Iowa Voice
Blue Crab Boulevard

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 02:04 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

June 15, 2006

This I Gotta See!

From the Washington Times:

A criminal defense attorney for a Marine under investigation in the Haditha killings says he will call a senior Democratic congressman as a trial witness, if his client is charged, to find out who told the lawmaker that U.S. troops are guilty of cold-blooded murder.

Attorney Neal A. Puckett told The Washington Times that Gen. Michael Hagee, the Marine commandant, briefed Rep. John P. Murtha, Pennsylvania Democrat, on the Nov. 19 killings of 24 Iraqis in the town north of Baghdad. Mr. Murtha later told reporters that the Marines were guilty of killing the civilians in "cold blood." Mr. Murtha said he based his statement on Marine commanders, whom he did not identify.

Mr. Puckett said such public comments from a congressman via senior Marines amount to "unlawful command influence." He said potential Marine jurors could be biased by the knowledge that their commandant, the Corps' top officer, thinks the Haditha Marines are guilty.

"Congressman Murtha will be one of the first witnesses I call to the witness stand," Mr. Puckett said yesterday.

No comment yet from Murtha, of course. Do you think we could call the statements from Murtha a leak if he was announcing information that wasn't supposed to be publicized?

I'm sure the press will treat Murtha in the same way others in government who are accused of leaking information...after all, the MSM is a neutral, unbiased source of news and information. (Unlike this blog, of course. At least you always know where I'm coming from on an issue.)

Favorite song: "Six Months in a Leaky Boat" by Split Enz

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:52 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

Ad Campaign Says Thank You to Troops

Move America Forward will begin an ad campaign next week totting up some of the major accomplishments of our troops in Iraq.

Click here to see the ad.

My only complaint is that this is still being called a "war on terror," when it should be called a "war on Islamofascism." Still, we take the kudos for our troops where we can get them. Nice job!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:31 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

June 13, 2006

Some Thoughts on Haditha

Sorry I've been MIA the last few days...Internet service is down at home, and I didn't come into work yesterday due to a nasty case of poison ivy (something that is becoming a yearly event).

Have any of you wondered why the press is out to make Haditha the latest example of everything that is wrong in our miltary and Iraq? There have been no charges brought forth yet in the Haditha investigation. You wouldn't know that, however, with headlines like Haditha: Memories of a Massacre and The Shame of Kilo Company. Is the press milking this unfortunate incident in order to prove Iraq is a quagmire? Why do they seem more concerned about these civilian deaths than the ones that occurred under Saddam Hussein's watch?

My husband pointed out an interesting little nugget to me the other day, and it's worth thinking about.

The military continues to be the most admired institution in America, according to the latest Harris Poll.

A total of 47 percent of Americans said they have a "great deal" of confidence in the military. Some 38 percent of Americans said they had "only some" confidence and 14 percent said they had "hardly any" confidence in the military.

The military was followed in the poll by small business - a new category in 2005 - with 45 percent of Americans saying they had a great deal of confidence; colleges and universities, 38 percent; the Supreme Court, 33 percent; and Medicine, 31 percent.

At the bottom of the survey, released March 2, were law firms at 10 percent, Congress at 10 percent, organized labor at 12 percent, major companies at 13 percent and the press at 14 percent.

Remember when Walter Cronkite used to be the "most trusted man in America?" (Click here to see how much he deserved the moniker.)

Call me crazy, but somehow I don't see the press being exalted over coming in dead last in an opinion poll where the military ranks as number one. Think about it: who makes up a majority of the press? People who vote Democrat and hold views further to the left than mainstream Americans. And, we know what leftists usually think of the military...

Wild speculation on my part? Maybe. What do you think?

Michelle Malkin points out a disgraceful cartoon.

Technorati: , , , ,

More trusted than the press

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:39 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

June 09, 2006

A Great Big Thank-You

While the chattering classes are busy wondering if the death of al-Zarqawi will make a difference in Iraq and here at home on the border (!), others see the significance of his death and are responding appropriately.

My friend Aaron over at Lifelike Pundits (where I also blog...but not lately...I've been a bad girl!) has a great tribute to those who were responsible for this important victory in Iraq. Click here to see it.

Nice job, Aaron!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:54 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

June 08, 2006

al-Zarqawi: Dead as a Doornail

Best news I've heard in a while:

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the al-Qaida leader in Iraq who waged a bloody campaign of suicide bombings and beheadings of hostages, has been killed in a precision airstrike, U.S. and Iraqi officials said Thursday. It was a long-sought victory in the war in Iraq.

Al-Zarqawi and seven aides were killed Wednesday evening in a remote area 30 miles northeast of Baghdad in the volatile province of Diyala, just east of the provincial capital of Baqouba, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said.

I also heard on the radio that he didn't die right away, but died as a result of injuries sustained in the attack. If that's true, then the news is even better.

Of course, al-Qaeda is already calling his death a martyrdom and that it only strengthens their resolve to continue the fight. No surprise there.

I'm only waiting, though, for the naysayers on the left to cheapen this victory with continued discussion of Haditha and questioning why, if we could get al-Zarqawi, can't we get Osama bin Laden?

More coverage:

Lucky Dawg News
Michelle Malkin
Captain's Quarters
GOP and the City
Mein Blogovault

Has reserved seating in hell

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:56 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

June 07, 2006

This Is a Letter from Iraq

With a great big hat tip to Right Wing Prof over at Right Wing News, here's a letter recently published in the Ridgefield Press. For those of you who do not live in Connecticut, Ridgefield is located in northwestern Fairfield County, right on the New York state border. It is a small (population between 25,000-30,000) but wealthy town full of blue voters, and so the dismay expressed in the following letter (written by a soldier stationed in Fallujah) is not surprising.

Jun 2, 2006
COMMENT: Letter from Iraq: They're not supporting the troops
By Anthony Ippoliti

I am fortunate enough to receive The Ridgefield Press every few weeks and enjoy keeping abreast of the local issues currently pressing in our small town. I am a U.S. Marine Infantryman currently serving in Fallujah, Iraq, and my mother usually includes The Press in the many care packages she sends me.

Since we have very limited access to telephones, The Ridgefield Press is the primary means by which I receive local news.

Almost every week, I open The Press and find an article or letter to the editors denouncing the coalition effort in Iraq. Invariably, the individuals behind these anti-war letters and rallies mask their political agendas by asserting that they "support the troops but not the war." People like Vince Giordano, Paul Sutherland and Anne Stubbs are pictured in the April 13 edition of The Press carrying a yellow-ribboned coffin and signs that say "Bring Them Home Now." They read off the names of the dead and claim to "show support for our troops" while urging lawmakers to "bring them home." They believe that the U.S.-led coalition should never have entered Iraq and that the current effort is a never-ending quagmire that has made no progress. They believe that things are progressively getting worse and think that our forces should just pick up and leave.

They do all this under the pretense that they are supporting the troops. However, what they are really doing is using our lives and the issue of our safety and well-being as a means to achieve a political end.

• • •

My primary concern is the assertion that these individuals support the troops in Iraq but not our mission. It boggles my mind that this logic is actually utilized on a large scale.

Supporting the troops but not the war is like saying that you support filmmakers but not making films. One cannot claim to support an individual in a given profession but not support what the said profession entails. This is essentially a slap in the face to those in the service.

How protesting the job we are doing in Iraq while demanding our withdrawal constitutes supporting us is beyond me.

Furthermore, I am particularly interested in how these people support us, specifically. I have never once received a letter from an individual who claims to "support the troops, not the war." Not a single Marine I know has received anything that could be considered remotely supportive from any of these people or the groups they represent. We have received phone cards, hygiene supplies, food, etc. from members of state and local government, radio stations, schools, private individuals and organizations, but never once from any group claiming to "support the troops, but not the war."

I ask again: How can these groups claim to support our troops while telling us that what we are participating in is wrong?

How can they support us if they are essentially saying that our blood and sacrifices have all been given in vain?

How can they support us if they say that our comrades and brothers who have been wounded or killed in action have done so for a hopeless and morally questionable cause?

• • •

I reply to the questions I pose with a simple answer: They can't. As a matter of fact, I assert with a considerable degree of confidence that their efforts make our already difficult job even more difficult. I'll go so far as to say that their rallies and protests cost more and more servicemen their lives and limbs every day.

I support my assertion with evidence gathered first hand. I see the Iraqi people every day. The protesters do not. I speak with the Iraqi people every day. The protesters do not. I don't sit behind a desk and do paperwork or resupply efforts in the military. I am an Infantry Marine and I walk the sewage-filled streets of this city every single day.

In Fallujah, the people watch Al Jazeerah. However, they also watch CNN. A lot of them fear that the United States will soon cut and run. The people of Iraq see when our country is divided. When they see rallies to "Bring The Troops Home," they see that as a sign that we will end our efforts prematurely.

Furthermore, they know that the insurgents will not end their efforts early. That leads them to the conclusion that when we leave, the insurgents will still be there. Therefore, if they help us, their lives and the lives of their loved ones will be in great jeopardy the minute we leave — if we don't finish the job.

Much that they see on American television leads them to believe that we intend to abandon our efforts before the new Iraqi government is capable of defending itself and its citizens.

• • •

The actions of these aforementioned organizations and the heavy media coverage their rallies often generate serves as fuel for the insurgency. Insurgents believe they can drive us out through the idea of "death by a thousand cuts." The longer they persist in their efforts, the more the American public becomes disenchanted with the coalition effort.

The insurgency sees this as a result. These criminals will continue to kill Iraqi civilians, Iraqi Police, Iraqi Army and coalition forces so long as they see that their efforts are alienating the American public from its military.

And for those of you that aren't up to speed with the situation in Iraq, the insurgents attack and kill established public services (such as Iraqi police and Iraqi army) more often than they attack coalition forces. As a matter of fact, an explosive-laden insurgent blew himself up last week outside the Iraqi police station that is attached to our compound.

The insurgents aren't fighting simply to drive America out of Iraq. They are fighting to destroy any semblance of the Iraqi government so that they can impose their will on its people.

Publicly protesting our efforts in Iraq fuels the insurgency. Doing it under the pretext of "supporting our troops" is disgraceful.

• • •

Let me now emphasize that I respect an American citizen's right to voice his or her opinion in a public forum. Such a right is granted in the U.S. Constitution.

However, voicing one's opinion in such an irresponsible way is something I do not support. Additionally, using deployed service members as a mask to serve your purely political purpose is downright shameful. If your desire is to protest the war, then protest the war, but don't use me or any reference to our troops as a tool to bolster your purpose.

I'll summarize by saying this: Organizations such as The Ridgefield Coalition to Stop the War do not support our troops. No matter what they say or what is printed on the signs they carry, they effectively do the opposite of support us. They downright hurt us.

Such organizations damage the morale of the men and women in the armed forces and progressively cause them to believe less and less in the mission at hand. The conditions here are difficult as it is. Opening a month-old edition of The Ridgefield Press and reading an article about an anti-war demonstration that uses our troops in an effort to mask its true cause doesn't help.

Please do not feign support while effectively telling us that we are fighting for an unworthy cause. I think I speak for an overwhelming majority of our troops when I ask organizations like The Ridgefield Coalition to Stop the War to discontinue using Marines, soldiers, airmen and sailors as a means to serve a political end.

You are neither supporting us nor honoring us. You are doing the exact opposite.

Well said...however, it's a shame that he had to spend his free time writing it.

Technorati: , , ,

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:47 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

May 31, 2006

Wanting Haditha to Be True

David's Medienkritik, ever vigilant in exposing anti-American bias in the German media, gives us this gem today. The web page of the state-sponsored news program ARD tagesschau claims in a headline that U.S. Marines participated in a massacre in Haditha and murdered Iraqi civilians.

As Ray D. points out:

Certainly, if an investigation and trial determine that the soldiers in question are, in fact, guilty of murder and participation in a massacre, they should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. But the bottom line is that the German media has no right to conclusively label the killings murders (and thus imply that the soldiers are murderers) until all the facts are known and until said soldiers are found guilty and convicted.

This is a point I made in my post from earlier this month regarding John Murtha's ranting and raving over the incident. (Note to commenter "boredbrit": Lame insults don't get you far in the marketplace of ideas. Come up with something intelligent to back your claims next time.)

Ray D. continues:

Ironically, the same ARD journalists who can't seem to stop screaming about the denial of judicial due process to Guantanamo inmates are not even willing to afford the same privilege to American soldiers, despite the fact that American soldiers stood guard for decades and guaranteed their freedom of speech during the Cold War. In the ARD world, Guantanamo terrorists are innocent until proven guilty, American soldiers guilty until proven innocent.

Islamic terrorists good, American soldiers bad. This seems to be the mindset of the European chattering classes, and is illustrated beautifully by this piece in ARD.

"But civilians have died!" you say. "Those who did it must pay!" Is this truly what the German media is concerned about? I don't think so, and neither does Ray D.:

This is about shaming the United States of America and those who supported the war, regardless of the facts, right or wrong. This is about seizing the moral high ground, pure and simple. The killing of two dozen Iraqi civilians suddenly matters to the German media elite. Why? Because it has the potential to discredit the United States, Bush and supporters of the war. Conversely, the same media cynics stood by and largely ignored the mass murder of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians during the Hussein regime. Today they stand by and ignore the fact that their own government continues to promote trade with a government guilty of an ongoing campaign of mass murder in Sudan.

Bottom line: There is an investigation in place. Once its findings are known, and if the soldiers are court martialed and found guilty, then we can call them murderers. However, we must wait for that day to come before we can start putting on our "Down With Marines" party hats. Even then, however, there is no real cause for celebration. Here's commentary from Blue Crab Boulevard's Gaius' son, who is currently stationed in Iraq (hat tip Brainster):

My squad leader is sitting right beside me, and we just compared notes on
how many IEDs we've been through. We counted six each. One of them hit my truck, one of them hit his. I can tell you from firsthand experience that after an IED goes off, every soldier's first instinct is to start shooting at everything in sight that's moving. Someone has just tried to kill you, and you can't kill him back. That said, we've never gone on a shooting rampage after an IED. On the other hand, all the roadside bombs we've encountered have only resulted in minor injuries. To play devil's advocate, I can't imagine how it feels to lose a friend and comrade to an unseen enemy. If the Marines in question are found guilty of committing a crime, I will partially understand their emotions even if I abhor their decision.


The above is the military man in me talking. As a human being, I have a
natural and visceral reaction to this story that turns my stomach. If it is indeed true, these men should suffer the most severe punishment imaginable.


However, the most absolutely important thing to remember in this situation
is that these men HAVE NOT been proven guilty. All that exists right now is
rumor and innuendo. There is no proof, no convictions. Right now, there isn't even a trial.

There are always two sides to every story. Too bad the leftwing German press hasn't figured that out yet.

Technorati: , ,

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:21 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (1) | Iraq

May 18, 2006

Murtha's Latest Outrage

Could this man be any more outrageous?

Rep. John Murtha, an influential Pennsylvania lawmaker and outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, said today Marines had “killed innocent civilians in cold blood” after allegedly responding to a roadside bomb ambush that killed a Marine during a patrol in Haditha, Iraq, Nov. 19.

The incident is still under investigation by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service and Multi-National Forces Iraq.

See that? Still under investigation.

The Marine Corps originally claimed that a convoy from the Camp Pendleton, Calif.-based Kilo Company, 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines, hit a roadside bomb that killed Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas, 20, of El Paso, Texas, and the ensuing firefight killed 15 Iraqi civilians — casualties the Corps at first claimed were killed in the bomb blast — including seven women and three children.

A March 27 Time magazine report published claims by an Iraqi civil rights group that the Marines barged into houses near the bomb strike, throwing grenades and shooting civilians as they cowered in fear. The report prompted calls for a Pentagon probe.

“It’s much worse than was reported in Time magazine,” Murtha, a Democrat, former Marine colonel and Vietnam war veteran, told reporters on Capitol Hill.

How does he know it's much worse than what Time reported? The article says that a spokesman for Murtha could not add to his remarks, and a military spokesman said he didn't know where Murtha could be getting his information.

Is it true? Maybe. That's why an investigation is underway. Murtha was "generous" in saying that combat stress was a contributing factor in the alleged incident. But for him to denounce our Marines in the field before the official investigation is completed not only demoralizes our troops, but gives the enemy more cause to believe that the war in Iraq is losing to a war of ideologies at home.

Please don't bring up the fact that Murtha was in the Marines himself. Former military service doesn't excuse his current behavior. That's like saying a former cop should be given a pass if he commits a crime. We're at war fighting an enemy that will not quit until it is ground into dust. Public bloviating by Murtha and his cronies hurts our cause. Free speech? Sure. Responsible speech? Nope.

Question: Who's investigating Murtha's despicable conduct?

Playing politics with our boys on the battlefield

More: Confederate Yankee, Stop the ACLU, Hugh Hewitt

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:01 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

April 19, 2006

Just Another Day for Michael Moore's Minutemen

This is one of the most horrendous things I have heard about lately:

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Separate groups of gunmen entered two primary schools in Baghdad on Wednesday and beheaded two teachers in front of their students, the Ministry of State for National Security said.

"Two terrorist groups beheaded two teachers in front of their students in the Amna and Shaheed Hamdi primary schools in Shaab district in Baghdad," a ministry statement said.

A ministry official said he believed the attacks were aimed at "intimidating pupils and disrupting learning."

This is called killing two birds with one stone: getting rid of teachers who are trying to bring their students into the 21st century, and showing the kids that if they try to improve their lives in a way the terrorists don't approve, a grisly death awaits.

It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood, folks.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:38 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

April 13, 2006

Libby: Plame's Name Not Authorized for Leak

From Bloomberg.com:

A former top administration official said President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney authorized him to discuss with reporters intelligence on Iraq's weapons program and didn't authorize leaking a CIA agent's name.

Former Cheney chief of staff I. Lewis ``Scooter'' Libby, in documents filed late last night in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, said Bush and Cheney only authorized him to disclose once-classified details from a National Intelligence Estimate paper that they believed supported the president's claims that Iraq was attempting to buy nuclear material in Niger.

Will this be the top story on the "major" networks? Don't bet the farm.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:35 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (2) | Iraq

March 31, 2006

Mistakes Made, News At 11

Why is this news?

BLACKBURN (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice accepted on Friday the United States had probably made thousands of errors in Iraq but defended the overall strategy of removing Saddam Hussein.

Surprised? You shouldn't be. Of course mistakes were made. Mistakes are made in every war. Our government and our military do not have the luxury of 20/20 hindsight when making daily decisions.

Just more grist for the anti-war gristmill.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

March 13, 2006

Progress in Iraq: The Human Variable

Obviously those who say that there is no progress in Iraq don't read beyond the NY Times and Washington Post front pages. Take this article from Stars and Stripes. Think we'll be reading about this in the MSM?

While some Iraqi army units outside the capital remain months away from operating independently, Iraqi units in the core of Baghdad are among the country’s most developed, forging a path that many U.S. and Iraqi officials hope will lead to nationwide stability and the eventual drawdown of U.S. forces here.

That's been the plan all along, hasn't it? To help the Iraqi government and military stand alone? The problem is, you can't put an exact time on how long it will take.

Like many Iraqi army leaders, those here in Baghdad say they still depend on American air support for large-scale operations. They also say they need more heavy weapons, more vehicles, more high-tech communications equipment.

“We can do these patrols, but the coalition forces cannot leave us until we get enough power. Help from the coalition is still required,” said Col. Abbas Rihy El Azauwi, commander of an Iraqi battalion that borders the International Zone.

When a child first signs up for swimming lessons, is it possible to predict that he will be a competent swimmer in six months? A year? Two years? No. We can't predict something like that because it involves a human variable. The Iraqi army is the same. They're trying, but they're rebuilding an entire army from scratch -- using men, not machines.

U.S. soldiers are working with Iraqis to create training programs to help them maintain the progress they have gained working with the Americans. That includes not only designing training programs but helping the Iraqis develop a permanent rhythm of assigning some soldiers to public security duties while sending others to training programs.

“These are all new concepts for them because they didn’t think about them to this level of detail,” said Maj. Bill McClary, who heads a battalion-level military transition team.

Time frames for U.S. troop withdrawal remain hazy, but the process for carefully weaning the Iraqi army units from American support may be in sight.

“The goal for [the U.S. troops] is ‘How do we write ourselves out of the equation?’” McClary said.

And that's a decision I'd like to see made by military leaders who know what they're doing, not a bunch of yahoos in Congress trying to score political points.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

February 01, 2006

Soldiers Ask: What's the Big Deal?

From UPI:

The American media stood up and took notice when an improvised explosive device grievously injured an ABC News crew Sunday.

In Iraq, and throughout the military, there is sympathy and concern for anchor Bob Woodruff and cameraman Doug Vogt, but there is also this question:

"Why do you think this is such a huge story?" wrote an officer stationed in Baqubah, Iraq, Monday via e-mail. "It's a bit stunning to us over here how absolutely dominant the story is on every network and front page. I mean, you'd think we lost the entire 1st Marine Division or something.

"There's a lot of grumbling from guys at all ranks about it. That's a really impolite and impolitic thing to say ... but it's what you would hear over here."

To be honest, I was wondering the same thing...but, not being in the line of fire myself, my saying it didn't exactly have the same kind of impact.

"The point that is currently being made (is that) that press folks are more important than mere military folks," a senior military officer told UPI Tuesday.

The unavoidable consequence of war is this: People are savagely wounded and killed. Soldiers in Iraq watching the coverage on satellite television and reading the news on the Internet are getting the impression that the press has only just discovered this fact.

It's not quite as simple as that, of course. Military personnel often express frustration that the media harps on military casualty reports at the expense of what they consider their successes in Iraq.

Exactly. But I hope the military isn't looking for that to change anytime soon.

"It's just a bit frustrating to see something so dramatized that happens every day to some 20-year-old American -- or worse to 10, 30-year-old Iraqi soldiers or cops alongside us. Some of the stories don't even mention the Iraqi casualties in this attack, as if they're meaningless," wrote the officer in Baqubah.

Kathryn Montgomery, a professor at American University's School of Communication, has been thinking the same thing.

"When you see the kind of coverage this story is getting it draws attention to the lack of coverage that hundreds of cases don't get," said Montgomery.

Having a personal connection to someone injured or killed on the battlefield is a relatively rare experience for journalists. Fewer than 1 percent of the U.S. population is part of the military; very few reporters have served. The war is comfortably distant, until a fellow journalist is affected. It could have been me, we think. The full weight of war is hard to comprehend until it happens to you, or someone you know, or someone like you.

Yep. And how many elite journalists hang around with ordinary soldiers back home? I don't think there's much in the way of empathy between the media and the military. Just ask Joel Stein.

Woodruff and his crew knew the risks. I do wish them a full recovery. But it would be nice if the media took a step back to think about how skewed their coverage has been and continues to be.

I won't hold my breath, though.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:01 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

January 30, 2006

Quote of the Day

Regarding Joel Stein et al not supporting the troops:

When they say "I support the troops, get them out of Iraq and home now" respond by saying "Hey I support the Democrats, get them out of Congress and back home now!"

DoubleU, a reader over at Lifelike Pundits.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (1) | Iraq

January 24, 2006

Joel Stein Doesn't Support the Troops

He's a jerk. But at least he's an honest jerk.

But blaming the president is a little too easy. The truth is that people who pull triggers are ultimately responsible, whether they're following orders or not. An army of people making individual moral choices may be inefficient, but an army of people ignoring their morality is horrifying. An army of people ignoring their morality, by the way, is also Jack Abramoff's pet name for the House of Representatives.

Brought to you by your friends at the LA Times, natch.


h/t: Cookiewrangler

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

January 17, 2006

More Body Armor Flap

This time, it's from an idjit from Connecticut (but thank goodness he's not my rep):

HARTFORD — Rep. Rob Simmons, recently back from a visit to Iraq, said Monday that he will recommend hearings into delays in providing body armor protection for U.S. troops.

"It’s taken far too long to deploy," Simmons, R-2, said. "It’s not getting out to the field."

He singled out armor that protects the shoulders and underarms as particularly needed.

Asked what’s holding up the delivery of the body armor, he said, "bureaucracy. It’s unacceptable."

What is it about being elected to Congress or the Senate that makes you an automatic expert on military matters? He's just looking to score brownie points with the electorate, plain and simple. I'd rather let the Pentagon and each division of the military work out what they need and then make their requests before Congress -- not have Congress decide what's necessary because it's politically expedient.

At least this guy isn't blaming President Bush for the body armor issue like some politicians we know and, er, love. Then again, I don't think a run for president is in the immediate future plans of Rep. Simmons.

Funny thing too, about this article: I heard this bit on the news on the radio on my way in this morning, which is why I sought it out online. On the radio, Simmons was quoted as saying that morale among the troops is high. Somehow that bit didn't make it into this New Haven Register article.

As Gomer Pyle would have said, "Surprise, surprise, surprise!"

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:45 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

January 08, 2006

Congressman Filner: A Moonbat's Views on Iraq

Yet another congressman held a town hall-type forum where supposedly all viewpoints are welcomed. Except, of course, the viewpoints opposite of those held by the person holding the forum (and, apparently, much of the audience).

Smash over at Military Outpost went to such a forum being conducted by anti-war Congressman Bob Filner.

Here's the question Smash asked:

We all want the war to end, and the troops to come home safely -- especially those of us who have been there. But, putting aside for the moment your differences, and the differences of most of those here, with the current administration on the policies that got us to where we are today:

Are you committed to the success of our military in Iraq, or are you resigned to failure?

Click here to read the good congressman's answer.

Frankly, I can't believe that someone like him got elected. Based on the transcript provided, his public speaking skills are horrendous and his grasp of what he's discussing is tenuous at best. Someone buy this guy a clue.

I am not impressed. And he's from California! What a shock.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 05:24 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

January 07, 2006

Birds of a Feather


"They’re frustrated by this mission...Peter Pace told me this last night: They know militarily they can’t win this." Rep. John Murtha, D-PA


"The idea that we're going to win the war in Iraq is just plain wrong." Howard Dean, failed Democratic presidential candidate and current DNC chairman.


"The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not "insurgents" or "terrorists" or "The Enemy." They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow -- and they will win." Michael Moore, self-styled man of the working class and maker of the leftist propaganda film Fahrenheit 9/11.


"I congratulate [the Islamic nation] for the victory of Islam in Iraq." Ayman Al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Ladin's second-in-command

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:15 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

January 06, 2006

Soldiers Dying in Iraq: Another Parent's View

We've been hearing a lot about losing a child in war from Cindy Sheehan and now, from Paul Schroeder, who wrote a piece for WaPo entitled A Life, Wasted. These parents are grieving and obviously believe the war is wrong. And the MSM loves to hear from them.

They don't love to hear from folks like Robert Stokely, who also lost a son in combat over in Iraq. Stokely's story appears on Crazy Politico's Rantings. Click here to read it. It's a moving tribute to a loved son who believed in what he was doing and had no illusions about the possible consequences.

Crazy Politico asks, "Will the Washington Post print this?" My guess is no. But if enough of us (as in irresponsible bloggers) link to it, plenty more people will see it than might see it in the WP.

h/t: Brainster


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:05 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

December 23, 2005

History as it Relates to Today

Nepotism alert: Both of the following articles I'm featuring are by people I know personally. But since I don't make money on this blog, who's going to care?!

Article one: Written by Joseph Morrison Skelly for NRO, it compares the crossing of the Delaware by George Washington and his troops on Christmas Day, 1776 to our mission in Iraq. The opening paragraph:

On the night of December 25, 1776, with the winter wind whipsawing the water, with waves ripping across the bows of their leaky boats, and sheets of ice impeding their path, American soldiers rowed across the merciless river, from Pennsylvania to New Jersey. The city of Trenton was their objective. On the evening of December 25, 2005, American soldiers, like their Colonial-era predecessors, will traverse swift, unforgiving currents, but in a distant land. Victory in Operation Iraqi Freedom is their aim. Perhaps this Christmas, when Americans gather to exchange presents with their families and friends, they can take a moment to recall the heroism of those soldiers who helped to win our independence in 1776 by crossing the Delaware River, and pause to reflect on the courage of those soldiers who are preserving it for us in 2005 by crossing the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers in Iraq. This simple act must be our gift to them.

Skelly knows both about history and about Iraq. He is a college professor of history in New York City, with a PhD, and is also an officer in the National Guard who recently spent a year in Iraq. I first wrote about him on my blog back in August. Please be sure to read the whole article, as it makes many poignant observations.

Article two: On his site The Anthropogene, John features an article written by Portugese chroniclers regarding the fall of the Hindu city Vijahyanagar at the hand of Muslim invaders back in 1565. The point of the city's existence at that time was to repel Muslims. Alas, the day came when it fell.

The third day saw the beginning of the end. The victorious Mussulmans had halted on the field of battle for rest and refreshment, but now they had reached the capital, and from that time forward for a space of five months Vijayanagar knew no rest. The enemy had come to destroy, and they carried out their object relentlessly. They slaughtered the people without mercy, broke down the temples and palaces; and wreaked such savage vengeance on the abode of the kings, that, with the exception of a few great stone-built temples and walls, nothing now remains but a heap of ruins to mark the spot where once the stately buildings stood. They demolished the statues, and even succeeded in breaking the limbs of the huge Narasimha monolith. Nothing seemed to escape them. They broke up the pavilions standing on the huge platform from which the kings used to watch the festivals, and overthrew all the carved work. They lit huge fires in the magnificently decorated buildings forming the temple of Vitthalasvami near the river, and smashed its exquisite stone sculptures. With fire and sword, with crowbars and axes, they carried on day after day their work of destruction. Never perhaps in the history of the world has such havoc been wrought, and wrought so suddenly, on so splendid a city; teeming with a wealthy and industrious population in the full plenitude of prosperity one day, and on the next seized, pillaged, and reduced to ruins, amid scenes of savage massacre and horrors beggaring description.

What does this piece of history have to do with anything? Think about how Vijahyanagar and how it was destroyed: "seized, pillaged, and reduced to ruins, amid scenes of savage massacre and horrors beggaring description." 9/11 comes to mind, as do the tactics used by Islamic terrorists in Iraq and elsewhere around the world--killing civilians indiscriminately in an attempt to terrify and destroy.

Read it all and see if you agree.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:29 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

December 22, 2005

One of the Most Ironic Statements Ever

I am not writing about the transit strike today, because there is only so much one can say about it...

While trawling today's news stories, one about the trial of Saddam Hussein caught my eye. Sure he's been ranting about physical abuse while being imprisoned (of course, he doesn't offer to show the bruises), but that's to be expected. His half-brother, however, said something that made my jaw drop.

Barzan [Ibrahim al-Tikriti ], who has emerged as the most outspoken of the defendants, eclipsing even Saddam, complained about the way the trial was being televised. It is being broadcast with a delay of 30 minutes to allow court officials to censor images and sound.

Occasionally the officials have cut the sound, usually when Saddam or Barzan have been speaking.

"If the sound is cut off once again, then I don't know about my comrades but I personally won't attend again," Barzan said on Thursday. "This is unjust and undemocratic."

Coming from a man who was part of one of the most murderous dictatorial regimes in modern history, this has to be one of the most ludicrous claims of all time. He should be grateful he's even getting a trial and not being handed over to the people for a special brand of vigilante justice.

He's on trial for the murder of 148 people in the 1980s after a failed assassination attempt on Saddam Hussein's life. Was there a trial for them?


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:13 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

December 16, 2005

All Hail Iraq!

I haven't blogged yet about the election in Iraq yesterday--partly because I've been so darn busy, and partly because so many others have done such a bang-up job. However, I would be remiss if I neglected to say something regarding this historic precedent.

It's been a long haul this past two and a half years since we first went into Iraq. We kept hearing the word "quagmire" bandied about by disgruntled Democrats who voted to authorize military action, but then regretted their action when party radicals had a hissy fit.

We've had to endure the likes of Cindy Sheehan, who used and abused her status of a parent who lost a child in combat in order to further her own leftwing agenda.

We've had to read scads of negative coverage by the MSM who, because of their deep loathing of Republicans in general and President Bush in particular, will do whatever they can to make any progress in Iraq seem impossible.

However, what we here at home have had to endure is nothing compared to what our military deals with on a daily basis--not to mention what the Iraqi people are living with.

Read More "All Hail Iraq!"

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:58 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

December 13, 2005

World Not Helping with Saddam's Trial

Via Breitbart:

The world has shirked its duty to help prosecute Saddam Hussein, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Tuesday. "The international community's effective boycott of Saddam's trial is only harming the Iraqi people, who are now working to secure the hope of justice and freedom that Saddam long denied them," Rice said.

I guess Condi has a higher expectation of the world than I do. Frankly, it doesn't surprise me that the "international community" is ignoring Saddam's trial. If the countries who had a hissy fit when we went into Iraq actually paid attention to the trial of its deposed leader, they might actually have to admit that Saddam was an evil b*stard who tortured and killed millions of Iraqis while he raped the country of its assets for his own personal gain.

Every country who claims to support the UN and its interests would have to admit that the UN fell down on the job by not enforcing its own resolutions against Iraq, as well as its major botching of the Oil for Food program--a program designed to help Iraqis during a period of sanctions, but that ended up lining Saddam's pockets with even more ill-gotten wealth under Kofi Annan's watch.

In other words, the trial of Saddam serves only to remind the world that they screwed up. What young babies can't see they think no longer exists--so it goes with the world and Saddam on trial.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:14 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

December 05, 2005

The Big Black Book of Horrors

Reader PCWhoopass clued me in to this article in The Weekend Australian.

WITH the trial of Saddam Hussein under way, those in the God-damn-America camp find themselves uncomfortably wedged. Should they justify their opposition to the war by downplaying Saddam's crimes while sheeting home blame for the present turmoil to the US and its allies? Or do they opt for the defence of moral equivalence, conceding that Saddam was indeed a monster but those US presidents who once backed his regime, including George H.W. Bush, are the real monsters.

The best riposte to this warped analysis is a scholarly and sober 700-page volume recently published in France, of all places. Le Livre Noir de Saddam Hussein (The Black Book of Saddam Hussein) is a robust denunciation of Saddam's regime that does not fall into the trap of viewing everything in Iraq through a US-centric prism. The writers - Arabs, Americans, Germans, French and Iranian - have produced the most comprehensive work to date on the former Iraqi president's war crimes, assembling a mass of evidence that makes the anti-intervention arguments redundant.

Intrigued? You might well be. The fact that the book has authors from multiple countries helps to ensure a balanced view of not only the current war in Iraq, but the events that led up to the war...events the left seems to gloss over in its zeal to discredit George W. Bush.

"The American war was perhaps not a good solution for getting rid of the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. But, as this book shows, after 35 years of a dictatorship of exceptional violence, which has destroyed Iraqi civil society and created millions of victims, there wasn't a good solution," Kutschera writes.

The entire article is a must-read, as it includes excerpts from people whose families were executed and more. I wish I could read the book itself...

Read More "The Big Black Book of Horrors"

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:16 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

November 29, 2005

Kidnapped in Iraq

Al-Jazeera broadcast an insurgent video Tuesday showing four peace activists taken hostage in Iraq, with a previously unknown group claiming responsibility for the kidnappings.

I'm sorry that they were kidnapped and I hope they are rescued alive. However, why are we surprised this happened? It's bad enough that Iraqis who join the army and the police, as well as average Iraqi citizens, must fear for their lives via carbombings and execution-style murders. But these so-called Western peace activists go into the middle of a warzone and expect to be left alone by a bunch of people who consider their very existence to be an abomination to the "true faith"? When will lefties understand that Islamofascists don't want anything to do with Westerners, peaceful or no, and they will fight until they have either won or been pulverized?

These are the same sort of people who demonize the American military for making a few captured al Qaeda operatives and other scum stand in a corner for a few hours or get a little chilly with the hope of getting information that will save not only American lives but the lives other Westerners, as well as Middle Easterners who want nothing to do with the likes of al Qaeda. Would the American military start lopping off heads to make their point? I don't think so.

It's a hard way to learn a lesson. Unfortunately, some people still refuse to listen to teacher.

More on this topic from:

Mein Blogovault
Third Wave Dave
Marathon Pundit

The Bernoulli Effect on Urban Myths of the Iraq War
The Museum of Leftwing Lunacy on Only Liberals...

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 05:05 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

Lieberman: Spread the Word

Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) has just returned from Iraq, and wants President Bush to outline the successes he saw firsthand when Bush gives the nation a progress report on Wednesday.

"We do have a strategy," he said. "We do have a plan. I saw a strategy that's being implemented."

What is some of that good news?

"The Iraqi Security Forces are fighting hard. They're fighting well. They are not cracking under pressure, as you see in some armies, and they are making a tremendous contribution," Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, deputy director, plans and strategy, U.S. Army Central Command, told a Heritage Foundation forum Monday.


The senator said he hopes Bush will emphasize details of progress Wednesday.

"There are more cars on the street and an amazing number of satellite dishes on rooftops," the senator said, "and what seems like millions of cellphones.

"Most exciting is the political stuff. ... There is a campaign going on there for the Dec. 15 National Assembly elections and there are a lot of independent television stations and newspapers covering it."

Yes, there is good news in Iraq...and if the White House doesn't promote it, who will? Certainly not the Democrats, who are hoping to use the quagmire they are trying to create as a way to gain seats in Congress next year. Certainly not the MSM, which, despite vehement protestations of neutrality, despises George W. Bush and anything he promotes, especially the war in Iraq.

Earlier this month, Bush and Cheney finally began speaking out against those idjits who have tried to make it seem like the White House pulled a fast one on the vote to go to war. (How is it that a man the left deems mentally deficient was able to fool so many progressive intellects? Is he stupid or does he have an evil brilliance? Please let us know; you can't have it both ways.)

Let's hope Bush takes Lieberman's advice and continues to promote the positives in Iraq. What has he got to lose?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:15 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

November 21, 2005

Albright: All the Answers

"I'm gonna party like it's 1999." Well, that's what it feels like whenever Newsweek or another MSM outlet goes running to Madeleine Albright for all of the answers on our current foreign policy. In a recent hurlworthy interview with Newsweek, Ms. Albright shared her pearls of wisdom regarding the situation in Iraq. Of course, she had little, if anything, good to say. Here are a few highlights:

NEWSWEEK: Is there a conflict between key democratic rights—particularly in the area of women’s rights—and the cultural dictates of Islam?
Madeleine Albright: Islam itself and the Qur'an are not actually antiwoman. [The Prophet] Mohammed was married to a businesswoman. It is more the culture of particular Arab countries and not Islam. And I think that what we all have to do is make clear that women’s rights do not undermine anybody’s system. It’s a matter of empowering women, so that societies are actually more stable, not less stable.

She makes it sound so simple! "What we all have to do is make clear that women's rights do not undermine anybody's system." Albright is obviously missing the point. Radical Islamists believes that women have no rights whatsoever. That is one of the cornerstones of their belief system. Hearing platitudes from the U.S., whose culture is considered evil by Islamists, say that women's rights won't undermine radical Islam is like Heidi Fleiss telling the Catholic Church that a little extramarital sex isn't going to undermine anything they believe in either.

NW: What will it take for Iraq to make the next step from holding basic elections to a full-fledged independent democratic state?
MA: It’s very hard for people to exercise their democratic rights anywhere when they are terrified and there are suicide bombings and a general sense of chaos. Also, when the economic situation is so dire. So everything goes together. There has to be an improvement in the security situation, the reconstruction efforts have to be such that they provide people with jobs and [a] sense of the future and then democracy can flourish. While people did turn out to vote, which I think is quite remarkable, it’s very difficult when the situation in the security arena is so tenuous.

It's also very hard to exercise democratic rights when one doesn't have any, as under Saddam Hussein's rule. Sure it was remarkable that people actually turned out to vote despite all of violence. Think about it: Approximately 60% of eligible voters (including women) turned out for January's election, and 63% voted for the constitution back in October. This is amidst the constant threat of bombings and other violence by those who see democracy as evil. Compare this with the turnout for the recent U.S. presidential election--which, according to this graph, was about the same as the first Iraqi turnout. Considering American voters don't have to dodge bullets and bombs, shouldn't our voting citizens turn out in higher numbers? Albright's backhanded compliment to the Iraqis does them no favors.

NW: The report says that “the U.S. has done a poor job of explaining its policies in the region and spreading its message about democracy and reform.” In September, President Bush sent Karen Hughes, the recently appointed under secretary of State for public diplomacy, on a listening tour of several Muslim countries. What was she able to accomplish, and what do you think should be the next step?
MA: It was clearly a very first voyage of hers into this arena, but it didn’t strike me as a particularly great success. I think it’s very important that this post has been filled with somebody of such high rank and visibility, but it’s a hard job, and you have to go into societies and have some sensitivity for the various issues.

But did she accomplish anything? What should be the next step? Albright neatly sidesteps the question.

Read the entire interview for yourself. It's almost as if Albright was still on the Clinton administration's payroll. Get ready to do the Time Warp...


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:20 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

November 01, 2005

Al Qaeda Isn't in Iraq...Is It? (Or, What Media Bias?)

For those Michael Moore-ites who claim that al Qaeda isn't in Iraq, please keep reading:

BAGHDAD, Iraq – A Saudi-born member of al Qaeda involved in smuggling foreign fighters into Iraq was killed Oct. 29 as he attempted to flee Coalition Forces.

Multiple intelligence sources and tips from concerned citizens led Coalition Forces to a location near Ubaydi where a senior Saudi al Qaeda foreign fighter facilitator known as Sa’ud (aka Abu Sa’ud) would be located. Upon arrival at the location, Coalition Forces attempted to secure the vehicle containing Sa’ud and other terrorists when the driver tried to escape. Coalition Forces shot at the vehicle, killing Abu Sa’ud and three unknown terrorists.

Abu Sa’ud, a Saudi extremist, was a senior al Qaeda terrorist who funneled foreign fighters and suicide bombers into Iraq. Intelligence sources believe that Sa’ud recently arrived from Saudi Arabia to shore up the leadership of al Qaeda in Iraq foreign fighter and terrorists cells whose previous leaders have been captured or killed in recent months.

Coalition Forces were informed that an alleged meeting was being arranged in the coming days in which Sa’ud was to take control of foreign fighter facilitation in the al Qaim and Husaybah region. It was also believed that Sa’ud would take on a more active role in the planning and execution of operations against Coalition Forces.

All emphasis mine. It's getting so hot for al Qaeda in Iraq that even the guys they send in to replace the middlemen who were killed are being killed.

What's really upsetting about this is that I haven't seen a single headline about this from the usual MSM sources. I saw several outlets refer to a soldier who died from a roadside bomb yesterday, and FOXNews has an article about increased success in finding IEDs before they detonate, but nothing about this guy.(Please let me know if you see something I haven't.)

This should be top news, but it's buried beneath the usual gloom and doom. What media bias? It's in the news you don't hear as much as the news you do.

h/t: husband-dude


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:28 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

March 20, 2005

A "Militant" is Not a Soldier

Janet Schmitdt Zapan writes in the commentary section of today's Washington Post about how her father, a soldier in Vietnam, was captured by the North Vietnamese and tortured to death...literally.

It's a touching, and at the same time, disturbing story. Zapan obviously continues to feel the pain of her father's untimely and horrific death. Anyone with an ounce of pity would sympathize with her, as I do.

The main problem I have with her commentary piece is that she compares what her father went through to what so-called militants in Iraq are going through today when captured by U.S. forces.

These days, the unspeakable aspects of my father's death have reared back into focus through the most shocking of sources: Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay and Afghanistan. How many of us trusted in unwavering U.S. adherence to the principles of the Geneva Convention? We committed to the accord, in good part, as a way of securing the protection of our own soldiers. Yet, recent, mounting evidence reveals that the United States has been engaging in abhorrent interrogation methods sanctioned from the executive branch down.

The difference, Ms. Zapan, is that your father belonged to an official army of an official country.

The Geneva Convenion states:

A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:
1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well
as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:
(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) That of carrying arms openly;
(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

Please note the contitions. Today's Islamofascists fighting coalition forces in Iraq cannot be recognized for they wear no uniform. They hide explosive devices underneath clothing. They do not follow the recognized ordinances of war. Dare I mention that they also don't do their best to avoid civilian casualties? In fact, they seem to thrive upon it. You remember Nick Berg and the others, don't you? Until the Islamofascists in Iraq (and elswhere) begin playing by the rules, then the rules don't apply to them. Period.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:36 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

    ENDORSEMENTS "Your stupid requirements for commenting, whatever they are, mean I'll not read you again." ~ "Duke Martin", Oraculations
    "One of the worst sites I've read." ~ Frank A. Niedospial