Showing posts with label War. Show all posts
Showing posts with label War. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

American Spring? [Dan from New York]

Dan from New York:

There is certainly a lot going on abroad, but let’s not get so distracted we forget there’s a desperate need for regime change here at home. Here’s a promising bit of news that should buoy America’s democracy-loving "rebels."

March 30, 2011

Obama Gets Lowest Approval, Reelect Score Ever, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; More Voters Oppose U.S. Involvement In Libya


But let’s not take anything for granted. Keep punching until the bell rings on November 6, 2012. Obama is going to spend $1,000,000,000 (one billion!) to put us into another trance-like state. And that figure doesn’t include the free pass he gets from the White House-run legacy media.

Gee. Those numbers certainly come as a surprise. We now interrupt this presidential vacation for another crisis.








BREAKING Libya: Obama's Waterloo or Ours? [Dan from New York]

Dan from New York:

Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Obama tell us all Monday night that he was handing off to NATO, yada, yada, yada?

Exclusive: Obama authorizes secret help for Libya rebels (Reuters)




And to think, the people who yell the loudest about saving the Constitution, i.e., conservatives and the Tea Party, are completely AWOL when it comes to Obama’s blatant power grab and end-run around Congress.

To be fair, Dan, a Constitutional attorney who happens to have a radio show with 9 million listeners patiently explained the other day why Obama's actions were constitutional (MP3).

But those who believe in the Constitution -- conservatives, that is -- don't twist it to meet their contingencies. We leave that up to the would-be despots of the Left.

Which isn't to say any conservative can explain Obama's actions.

Nor why the President notified the collection of tyrants, kooks and freaks known as the Arab League of his actions before he told Congress.

Oh, well (*smacking forehead*)... that's Obama!


Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Iran Prepares Its Revolutionary Guards for Armageddon

"We have a strategy drawn up for the destruction of Anglo-Saxon civilization... we must make use of everything we have at hand to strike at this front by means of our suicide operations or by means of our missiles." -- Hassan Abbasi, "strategic adviser" to Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

"We are in the process of an historical war between the World of Arrogance [the West] and the Islamic world, and this war has been going on for hundreds of years... Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and Zionism? ...you had best know that this... goal [is] attainable." -- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

"We have established a department that will take care of England. England's demise is on our agenda." -- Hassan Abbasi

PJM contributor 'Reza Kahlili':

I was informed by my contacts in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard that the Basij had started work on a film that had the approval of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The purpose of the project: to inform Muslims across the globe of the immediate coming of the last Islamic messiah. As my English translation of the film makes clear (watch it exclusively at PJTV), the Iranian leaders, now more than ever, feel that all the stars are aligned for such event.

Ever since the Iranian Revolution of 1979, the Islamic rulers of Iran have declared themselves representatives of God on Earth, believing their mission is to pave the way for the reappearance of the Shiites’ 12th imam, Mahdi.

Who is Mahdi?

According to 'Twelver' Shi'a Mulims, Imam Hujjat al-Mahdī ( المهدى) is the 12th Imam and the Mahdi, the ultimate savior of mankind. Twelver Shi'as believe that Muhammad was born in 868 and has been hidden by God (referred to as occultation) to later emerge to fulfill his mission.

Twelver Shi'as cite various references from the Qur'an and reports (Hadith) from Muhammad and the twelve Shi'a Imams. These texts predict the reappearance of Muhammad al-Mahdi which would, in accordance with God's command, bring justice and peace to the world by establishing Islam throughout the world.

Shi'as believe that Muhammad al-Mahdi will reappear when the world has fallen into chaos and civil war emerges between the human race for no reason. At this time, it is believed, half of the true believers will ride from Yemen carrying white flags to Mecca, while the other half will ride from Karbala, in Iraq, carrying black flags to Mecca. At this time, Muhammad al-Mahdi will come wielding God's Sword, the Blade of Evil's Bane, Zulfiqar (Arabic: ذو الفقار, ðū l-fiqār), the Double-Bladed Sword.

As mayor of Tehran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is reported to have constructed a boulevard to prepare for the Mahdi. A year later, as Iran's president, he budgeted $17 million for a blue-tiled mosque in Jamkaran that is directly tied to the Mahdi's return.

In 2006, The Washington Post reported:

The expansion [of the city of Qom] is driven by an apocalyptic vision: that Shiite Islam's long-hidden 12th Imam, or Mahdi, will soon emerge -- possibly at the mosque of Jamkaran -- to inaugurate the end of the world. The man who provided $20 million to prepare the shrine for that moment, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has reportedly told his cabinet that he expects the Mahdi to arrive within the next two years.

In a speech several years ago, Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stated, "Our revolution's main mission is to pave the way for the reappearance of the 12th Imam, the Mahdi."

Anton La Guardia, writing in London's Daily Telegraph: "Iran's president actually relishes a clash with the West in the conviction that it would rekindle the spirit of the Islamic revolution and [possibly] speed up the arrival of the Hidden Imam."

In 2007, after an endless series of threatened UN sanctions, Ahmadinejad announced:

As God promised, the oppressors will have their noses rubbed in the dirt. Now they are fulfilling this promise by themselves... Let it be known that in whatever we do, I see the hand of God and the hidden imam at every moment.

Princeton professor Bernard Lewis observes, "There is a radical difference between the Islamic Republic of Iran and other governments with nuclear weapons. This difference is expressed in what can only be described as the apocalyptic worldview of Iran’s present rulers."

On the holy topic of suicide bombing (martyrdom), Ahmadinejad recently asked: "Is there art that is more beautiful, more divine, and more eternal than the art of martyrdom? A nation with martyrdom knows no captivity."

Iran doesn’t fear retaliation if they attack Israel or the United States because a final global struggle against an evil enemy will present them with the privileges of martyrdom as taught in Islam, Lewis wrote. Death is not a deterrent, it is a reward.

The most dangerous leaders in history are those like Hitler, Hirohito and Ahmadinejad, fueled by a totalitarian ideology and a mystical belief system. Ahmadinejad accepts that the return of the 12th Imam is imminent. Furthermore, he is certain of his own duty to hasten the Mahdi's return. This explains the many years of hidden preparation as Iran built its nuclear weapons, which are designed to both mete out punishment to the non-believers and pave the way for the apocalypse.

Given the willful incompetence of the UN and the IAEA, Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons has continued unchecked.

They are very close now to achieving their goal..

Currently this movie is being distributed throughout the Basij and Revolutionary Guards’ bases. The producers are in the middle of translating it into Arabic, with the purpose of mass distribution throughout the Middle East. Their intention is to incite further uprisings, with the hopes of motivating Arabs to overthrow U.S.-backed governments.

'Reza Kahlili' describes the goal as follows: "The annihilation of Israel and Allah’s governance of the world."


Monday, March 28, 2011

President Obama: We Had to Support Al Qaeda in Libya To Prevent a Refugee Crisis That Could Hurt the Muslim Brotherhood's Rise in Egypt

Of course, I'm reading between the lines of President Obama's speech.

...In the face of the world’s condemnation, Qaddafi chose to escalate his attacks, launching a military campaign against the Libyan people. Innocent people were targeted for killing. Hospitals and ambulances were attacked. Journalists were arrested, sexually assaulted, and killed. Supplies of food and fuel were choked off. Water for hundreds of thousands of people in Misurata was shut off. Cities and towns were shelled, mosques were destroyed, and apartment buildings reduced to rubble. Military jets and helicopter gunships were unleashed upon people who had no means to defend themselves against assaults from the air...

...America has an important strategic interest in preventing Qaddafi from overrunning those who oppose him. A massacre would have driven thousands of additional refugees across Libya’s borders, putting enormous strains on the peaceful –- yet fragile -– transitions in Egypt and Tunisia. The democratic impulses that are dawning across the region would be eclipsed by the darkest form of dictatorship, as repressive leaders concluded that violence is the best strategy to cling to power...

I'm still confused about "The Obama Doctrine" -- if, indeed, there is one apart from poll-watching.

No mention of the 400,000 lives lost in Darfur, Sudan.

No word on the slaughter of the civilians involved in Iran's Green Movement, arguably the most strategic 'democracy movement' in the Middle East.

Precious few words on the Muslim Brotherhood's burgeoning alliance with Egypt's military, an ominous portent for anti-Western sentiment.

Or the scores of civilians killed in Syria, a rebellion that could severely wound the interests of Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas.

Yet nearly every American would support killing Gaddafi. We still owe him for Pan Am Flight 103, which shredded 270 people. Among them were 35 students from Syracuse University and scores of infants.

There are humanitarian crises erupting throughout the Arab world. Given Al Qaeda's involvement with Libya's rebels, I have yet to figure out the administration's logic.


Update: Libyan Rebel Radio: 'Brothers Who Fought in Iraq And Afghanistan, Now Is the Time to Defend Your Land!'


Hat tip: Memeorandum. Linked by: Michelle Malkin and Weasel Zippers. Thanks!

White House: Operation Supporting Al-Qaeda in Libya Could Last Months

If you're confused as to the mission, duration and scope of Operation Unlike Bush Wars This One Is Justified Because Hey Look A Squirrel, today's statement from SECDEF Robert Gates should clear things up.

US officials: Libyan operation could last months


AP - U.S.-led military action in Libya has bolstered rebels fighting Moammar Gadhafi's forces, but the international operation could continue for months, the Obama administration says...

...Ahead of President Barack Obama's national address Monday to explain his decision to act against the Libyan leader, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said in appearances on the Sunday talk shows that the intervention had effectively rendered Gadhafi's forces defenseless against air attacks and created the conditions for opposition advances westward.

In interviews taped Saturday, Gates and Clinton also defended the narrowly defined U.N. mandate to prevent atrocities against Libyan civilians and said the U.S. had largely accomplished its goals...

The mission, according to President Obama, is not to kill Muamar Gaddafi. Nor is it to topple his regime. Nor is it, apparently, to do anything but secure the blessing of an amorphous international collection of kooks.

Now that it's been confirmed that rebel forces include Al Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood fighters, all of the operation's goals are clear. Crystal.


Sunday, March 27, 2011

Goldilocks Clinton: Saddam Hussein was too mean, Assad isn't mean enough, but Gaddafi was just right!

If anyone can make sense of the gibberish emanating from the Obama foreign policy team, please let me know.

U.S. Won't Intervene in Syria as Assad Differs From Qaddafi, Clinton Says


Bloomberg - Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the U.S. won’t enter into the internal conflict in Syria the way it has in Libya... Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad’s security forces clashed with protesters in several cities yesterday after his promises of freedoms and pay increases failed to prevent dissent from spreading across the country.

Clinton said the elements that led to intervention in Libya -- international condemnation, an Arab League call for action, a United Nations Security Council resolution -- are “not going to happen” with Syria, in part because members of the U.S. Congress from both parties say they believe Assad is “a reformer.”

“What’s been happening there the last few weeks is deeply concerning, but there’s a difference between calling out aircraft and indiscriminately strafing and bombing your own cities,” Clinton said, referring to Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi’s attacks on the Libyan people, “than police actions which, frankly, have exceeded the use of force that any of us would want to see.”

“Each of these situations is unique,” Clinton said, referring to the Middle Eastern countries dealing with change and unrest, a list that now includes Yemen, Jordan, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Syria and Bahrain.

Let's try to deconstruct the Democrats' foreign policy philosophy:

• Attacking Saddam Hussein's despotic regime in Iraq: Yes, then no (also: accuse Bush and/or the world's intelligence communities of lying).

• Supporting U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak in Egypt against the vicious Muslim Brotherhood: No.

• Attacking Muamar Gaddafi in Libya for slaughtering his own people: Yes.

• Attacking Iranian puppet Bashar Assad and his Hezbollah apparatus for slaughtering his own people: No.

• Attacking Iran and its pre-nuclear terror regime for slaughtering its own people: No.

"We need better judgment when we decide to send our young men and women into war, that we are making absolutely certain that it is because there is an imminent threat, that American interests are going to be protected, that we have a plan to succeed and to exit, that we are going to train our troops properly and equip them properly and put them on proper rotations and treat them properly when they come home. That is an argument we are going to have an easier time making if they can’t turn around and say: But hold on a second; you supported this. That’s part of the reason why I would be the strongest nominee on this argument of national security." --Candidate Barack Obama, Democratic Debate, 31 January 2008

I would pay good money to see this man polygraphed.


Hat tips: Memeorandum, People's Cube (artwork) and Brad. Linked by: Michelle Malkin. Thanks!

Thursday, March 24, 2011

It would appear that only one demographic group meets the demanding Napolitano standard for terrorists: white conservatives

News flash: the most dangerous domestic terror threats these days aren't Islamists, MS-13 gang members, or even ex-SEIU revolutionaries.

No, the most diabolical terrorists are Constitutional conservatives who have asked that the federal government enforce its own immigration laws.

...In a document dated March 21, 2011, the Pottawattamie County [Iowa] Emergency Management Agency in conjunction with the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP), Pottawattamie county officials outlined their emergency response plan for a mock school shooting/terrorism exercise scheduled for Saturday, March 26, 2011, at Treynor Community Schools.

The plan, Operation Closed Campus, is described as a full scale plan and exercise used to educate players in the proper response of a domestic terrorism or school shooting.

Troublesome to parents and community members is the proposed scenario to be acted out by the students, staff, faculty members, and emergency response teams.

The scenario details two white males, ages 17 and 18, with ties to anti-immigration groups and gun enthusiasts, opening fire on a group of minority students, hitting a Hispanic student.

The scenario then develops into “full-scale chaos” with both white male suspects shooting indiscriminately.

Makes sense.

Because all of the other man-caused disasters in the last 20 years have involved anti-immigration gun enthusiasts.


Hat tip: D&S.

"Media watchers said it was a 'news article' -- Reuters' term for its regular excretion of Leftist propaganda."

President Obama prefers to use the term Kinetic Military Action for War. And Man-Caused Disaster for Terrorist Attack. And, like Big Brother, certain media outlets have embraced the Statists' doublespeak. Exhibit A: Reuters, attempting to cover yesterday's horrific terror bombing in Jerusalem that killed one woman and wounded 30.

A bomb planted in a bag exploded near a bus stop in a Jewish district of Jerusalem on Wednesday, killing a woman and injuring at least 30 people, in an attack police blamed on Palestinian militants.

...Police said it was a "terrorist attack" -- Israel's term for a Palestinian strike. It was the first time Jerusalem had been hit by such a bomb since 2004.

...Over 500 Israeli civilians died in 140 Palestinian suicide bomb attacks from 2000 to 2007. More than 4,500 Palestinians were killed by Israeli forces in the same period. [Ed: Moral equivalence alert.]

...On Tuesday, Israeli strikes in the Gaza Strip killed four Palestinian civilians, including three children playing football, and five militants, medical officials said.

...Israel launched a three-week war on the impoverished coastal enclave in 2009, killing about 1,400 Palestinians and drawing heavy international censure. Hamas, which seized control of Gaza in a 2007 coup, had mostly held fire since then.

Gaza is impoverished because it is an armed military camp at war with both Egypt and Israel. The West Bank is an armed military camp at war with both Jordan and Israel.

The barbaric assaults on Israeli civilians have been going on for decades, not because of any "peace movement", but because Hamas wants to exterminate infidels. Hell, it's in their damn charter.

A more despicable propaganda piece you'd be hard-pressed to find, which is why Reuters deserves its handle of Al Reutzeera.


Hat tip: Memeorandum.

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

It just keeps getting better and better: 'Mistress of Disaster' Jamie Gorelick On President Obama's Short List for FBI Director

Word around the Beltway has it that longtime Democrat operative Jamie Gorelick is one of the favorites for the FBI director role under President Obama. What could possibly go wrong?

Well, for starters, it's not often that the same person plays key roles in two -- count 'em, two -- trillion-dollar disasters.

In 2004, observers were "astonished" to discover that a key member of the 9/11 Commission had a fatal conflict-of-interest. Jamie Gorelick had served as a Deputy Attorney General under Bill Clinton from 1994 to 1997.

It was later revealed that Gorelick had established a pre-Patriot Act "wall" that prevented the foreign intelligence and criminal investigative communities from collaborating.

Her 1995 memo, entitled "Instructions on Separation of Certain Foreign Counterintelligence and Criminal Investigations", stated explicitly that they would "go beyond what is legally required, [to] prevent any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance that FISA is being used to avoid procedural safeguards which would apply in a criminal investigation."

The result: shortly before 9/11, Gorelick's wall "specifically impeded the investigation into Zacarias Moussaoui", the so-called "20th hijacker."

At the time, an enraged FBI investigator wrote a memo to headquarters which included the sentence, 'Whatever has happened to this -- someday someone will die -- and wall or not -- the public will not understand why we were not more effective..."

The 2004 disclosure that Gorelick's service as a 9/11 Commissioner was the archetypical conflict-of-interest should have triggered a cacophony of complaints and demands for a new investigation. Instead, the mainstream media turned deaf and dumb and the controversy faded into the background.

Gorelick's "wall" wrapped a blindfold around America just when it needed its vision to stop the attacks that killed thousands and which sucked a half a trillion dollars out of the economy.

Where did Gorelick turn up next?

Though she had no training or experience in finance, Gorelick was appointed the Vice Chairman of Fannie Mae and served in the role from 1997 to 2003. During that six-year period, she earned over $26 million.

During Gorelick's tenure, FNMA suffered a $10 billion accounting scandal, an ominous harbinger of the firm's looming troubles. One of the falsified transactions helped FNMA hit earnings targets for 1998, which triggered bonuses for top executives including nearly $800,000 to Gorelick.

Put simply "Jamie Gorelick was one of the Fannie executives who benefited from inflated bonuses based on Enron-style accounting."

In 2002 Business Week interviewed Gorelick concerning the health of FNMA. She responded, "We believe we are managed safely. We are very pleased that Moody's gave us an A-minus in the area of bank financial strength -- without a reference to the government in any way. Fannie Mae is among the handful of top-quality institutions."

Less than a year later regulators "accused Fannie Mae of improper accounting to the tune of $9 billion in unrecorded losses."

Today, of course, FNMA is on taxpayer-funded life support, currently trading at 27 cents a share. Its implosion devastated investors around the world. And because it was thought to have been "managed safely" (Gorelick's words), many top-flight financial services companies held its stock.

In 2008 it was revealed that top insurer AIG was toppled, in part, because it held $600 million in Fannie and Freddie. Roughly $4 billion in those stocks were held by insurers before the implosion, according to rating agency A.M. Best.

Put simply, FNMA's collapse helped touch off the entire financial crisis.

It's not often that one person plays such a key role in two unmitigated disasters.

Democrat Jamie Gorelick is just such a person; that is why she has earned her nom de guerre "The Mistress of Disaster".

What do you call someone with a Midas Touch, only instead of gold everything they touch turns to s***? That's what Gorelick's got.

Oh, and did I mention that Gorelick was also involved with subprime mortgage securitization?

I'm guessing we could link her family to a few other catastrophes if we did the legwork. Where were her parents when the Hindenberg exploded, for instance?


Update: "AFTER HER 9/11 AND HOUSING DEBACLE BACKGROUND who better for FBI Director than Jamie Gorelick?"


Linked by: Michelle Malkin, Ace o' Spades and Legal Insurrection. Thanks!

Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Didn't FDR execute a few people for doing what this ex-SEIU official is caught on tape espousing?

Runner-up headline: Caught on Tape: Ex-SEIU Hack Openly Plots to Collapse America's Free Market System and Overthrow the United States Government

I've said it before and I'll say it again. You can't be a progressive and honestly take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. The progressive agenda is completely, utterly at odds with America's highest law.

And no one makes this more clear than ex-SEIU official Steve Lerner, who patiently explained a few days ago how the Democrats, the unions and the Soros globalists are helping to destroy the United States from within.

The headings are my "reader's digest" version -- but the words are those of the Leftists who are plotting to destroy you, your children and your way of life. But don't listen to me: listen to them.

W: We’re going to hear from Steve Lerner next, of SEIU, the Architect of the Justice for Janitors campaign. Currently, he’s working on partnering with unions and groups in Europe and South America, it’s building campaigns to hold financial institutions accountable.

The Left's Goal: to Destabilize the United States Financial System


S. Lerner: It seems to me that we’re in a moment where we need to figure out in a much more, through direct action, much more concrete way how we really are trying to disrupt and create uncertainty for capital, for how corporations operate. And it may sound like that’s a crazy thing that in a moment of weakness we could deal with it, but the thing about a boom and bust economy, it is actually incredibly fragile, because it’s not based on real way, well, it’s based on gambling and all of that. And so there are actually extraordinary things that we could do right now that would start to de, destabilize the folks that are in power and start to rebuild a movement...

Start by Collapsing the Banks


...And for example, 10% of homeowners, going back to where you started, who are under, a quarter of all people who own a home are under water. Right? Their home is under water, they’re paying more for it than it’s worth. Ten percent of those people are now in strategic default, meaning they’re refusing to pay but they’re staying in their homes. That’s totally spontaneous. Right? They figured out it takes a year to kick me out of my home because the mort, the foreclosure’s backed up. I’m going to say I won’t pay. It’s just what business does, it’s a good, a good business decision. If you could double that number, you would make banks, put banks on the edge of insolvency again.

How the Left Will Accomplish Collapse of the System


And so the question would be, what would happen if we organized homeowners in mass to do a mortgage strike. Just say if we get, and, and, if we get half a million people to agree, we’ll all not, we’ll agree we won’t pay our mortgages, it would literally cause a new financial crisis.

Let's go after J.P. Morgan!


...So, a bunch of us around the country are thinking about who would be a really good company to hate? We decided that would be JP Morgan Chase. …. And so we’re going to roll out over the next couple of months what will hopefully be an exciting campaign about JP Morgan Chase that is really about challenge the power of Wall Street. And so what we’re looking at is in the first week of May, we get enough people together – we’re starting now – to really have a week of action in New York with the goal of … I don’t want to go into any details because I don’t know which police agents are in the room, but the goal would be that we would roll out in New York the first week in May—

We're Going to Foment Civil Unrest and Break Down the Civil Society


[We] …connect three ideas – that we’re not broke, there’s plenty of money; they have the money, we need to get it back; and that they’re using Bloomberg and other people in government as the vehicle to try to destroy us. And so that we need to take on those folks at the same time and that will start here. We’re going to look at a week of civil disobedience, direct action all over the city, then we’ll roll into the JP Morgan shareholder meeting, which they moved out of New York because they were afraid, I guess, of Columbus, where there’s going to be a ten state mobilization to try to shut down that meeting. And then looking at bank shareholder meetings around the country and try to create some moments like Madison, except where we’re on offense instead of defense. Where we have brave and heroic battles challenging the power of the giant corporations, and we hope to sort of inspire a much bigger movement about redistributing wealth and power in the country.

'Create Conditions of Ungovernability' (Overthrow the Government)


W: You were talking about why unions are so invested because of their pension plans and why ungovernability, as Frances Fox Piven and Cloward taught us, you know, poor peoples’ movements are successful when they create conditions of ungovernability. And then you win victories...

If we had a real Attorney General, Lerner would be arrested on the spot for plotting to overthrow the United States government. For waging war against the American people and our Constitution.

I hear that used to be a crime. In fact, if memory serves, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt executed a few American citizens on that charge.


Hat tip: Protein Wisdom.

Vying for the Krugman award, liberal econ blogger Barry Ritholtz markets the standard progressive fare: Fox-bashing propaganda

What exactly this story has to do with economics is beyond me, but Barry Ritholz's popular econ blog -- The Big Picture -- ran a headline earlier today that read "Fox News: Less Honest than Dictatorships."

Well, the post is nothing but a copy-paste of a CNN rush transcript that boils down to the following dialogue.

WOLF BLITZER, HOST: On another related – unrelated matter – maybe it is related – I want you to explain what you know about this suggestion Fox News reporting that you, a Reuters crew, some other journalists, were effectively used by Gadhafi as a human shield to prevent Allied fighter planes from coming in and attacking a certain position.

Explain what you know about this.

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, this allegation is outrageous and it’s absolutely hypocritical. You know, when you come to somewhere like Libya, you expect lies and deceit from the dictatorship here. You don’t expect it from the other journalists...

...So for them to say and call this – to say they didn’t go and for them to call this and say this was government propaganda to hold us there as human shields when they didn’t even leave the hotel, the correspondent didn’t leave the hotel and go and see for himself, is ridiculous.

We were taken there. We went in through the security. We filmed the building. We were given 15, 20 minutes to do that, five minutes in Gadhafi’s tent and then we were taken out... And I was literally physically pushed back on the bus when we left... That’s how quickly the government officials wanted to get us out.

Of course, the real story is simple. Jennifer Griffin simply reported what her sources in the defense community told her. No less a source than the left-leaning MediaBistro reported after CNN's diatribe that "Jennifer Griffin [is] sticking by report on journalists being used as human shields in Libya".

Griffin did not get into the media-on-media fracas touched off by her report earlier today in which British sources told her their mission last night was cut short because of the presence of the Western journalists and several Libyan civilians...

“They felt that the civilians and journalists had effectively been used as human shields and that was frustrating to them,” said Griffin tonight. “It was a very close call. In fact one official told me that there was a Reuters crew literally on a spot where they were going to drop a missile.”

...Griffin is sticking by her original report that “the Libyan government is using journalists as human shields.”

In fact, yesterday The New York Times -- not exactly a mouthpiece for the conservative right -- ran a story headlined "At Qaddafi Compound, a Human Shield."

For that matter, earlier today London's Daily Express ran with a screaming all-caps lede that read "COLONEL GADDAFI’S SUPPORTERS SURROUND HIS HOME AS HUMAN SHIELDS."

Finally, Amnesty International -- a true right-wing conspiracy if there ever was one -- even published a FAQ regarding Gaddafi's use of human shields ("What about reports that Libya is using ‘human shields’?"

It's in CNN's interest -- given that its ratings are trailing the Hallmark Channel and airport radar -- to foment a "controversy". And leftist econ blogger Barry Ritholz is more than happy to oblige, so long as it means his analysis consists of typing an inflammatory headline, followed by [Ctrl]+[C] and [Ctrl]+[V].

Somewhere, Paul Krugman is green with envy.


Sunday, March 20, 2011

Top 25 #ObamaMissionNames [Bumped & Updated]

Well, the real name -- supposedly -- was "Operation Odyssey Dawn". So the big hash-tag tonight last night listed some alternatives. My favorites?

25. @_EternalRuler_ Operation "bitter Libyan clingers".
24. @irishspy Operation Enduring Narcissism
23. @NotChrisRock Operation Brazilian Wax
22. @Hanif_Ali Operation so that's what the red button does
21. @OMFGitzDLAU Operation, STOP! Hammer Time.
20. @breeannehowe Operation France Backed Me Into A Corner
19. @directorblue Operation Enduring Urkel
18. @TheWardini Operation tear down this tent
17. @dancurry Operation Bracketus Interruptus
16. @krmullins1964 Operation Beer Summit!
15. @AmishFlyers66 Operation Nine Months In The Senate Didn't Prepare Me For This Sh**
14. @krmullins1964 Operation One Term President!
13. @directorblue Operation Waffle Ditherer
12. @jwehrle Operation Back Nine
11. @voltnation Operation Chevy Volt
10. @iowahawkblog Operation Unlike Bush Wars This One Is Justified Because Hey Look A Squirrel
9. @directorblue Operation Panty-Waist
8. @iowahawkblog Operation Summer's Eve
7. @MDMRN Operation Organizing for Libya
6. @xKidAndroidx Operation Call of Duty
5. @libertys56 Operation Nobel Peace Prize
4. @sgo2267 Operation If Michael Moore Calls Tell Him I'm Not In
3. @TRMirCat Operation FINE! I'll do something
2. @_EternalRuler_ Operation "Why can't I just eat my waffle?"
1. @timharder Operation Double Standard

Bonus #ObamaMissionNames:

5. @JimmyJames38: Operation Husky Kid Body Slamming Flea Sized Bully
4. @IowaHawkBlog: Operation Cognitive Dissonance
3. @The_Gnu_JGH: Operation My Own Private Kosovo
2. @djsmuzz: Operation Aimless Fury
1. @ToddRoberts1962: Operation Start without Me
0. @directorblue: Operation Merciless Unicorn


What I Like About Obama

Via Glenn Reynolds, the blog comment of the day, month and/or year.

What I like about Obama

Obviously, the biggest problem with Bush was sending the military into an Arab Muslim country that hadn't even attacked us. Among the several things that made that offensive were

• the rush to war - it was only several months after the possibility of military involvement was raised that combat operations began

• lack of United Nations sanction - only 17 relevant resolutions were ever passed before they were enforced


• lack of Congressional oversight - the President authorized the use of military force based on the flimsy pretext of a bill passed by Congress titled "Authorization of the Use of Military Force", rather than seeking a document that had the words "declaration of war" in it; that's every bit as bad as getting no Congressional approval at all

• obvious financial motives - clearly no one approved of the murderous dictator or sought a normal working relationship with him besides the French; at the same time, one couldn't help but be suspicious of the fact that the population we were ostensibly protecting was located conveniently near the oil fields

• stretching our military - we were overburdened as it was, and our brave military despite its courage lacked the resources for yet another operation

• inflating our military - the only way to keep the bloodthirsty Pentagon beast fed was to give it the hordes of jobless young men who had no prospects in an economy that saw unemployment skyrocket above 4% in most states

• ignoring our generals - the decision to go to war was made by political hacks who had never worn a uniform

• inflaming the Arab Street - despite some touchy-feely talk about Islam, it was impossible for the Muslim world not to notice how the President made repeated, insistent proclamations of his Christianity, how he only ever used the military against Muslim targets, and how at the time the war started he'd kept the concentration camp at Guantanamo open for over a year

• wasting money - it was completely irresponsible to commit the military to an expensive mission when the President's fiscal mismanagement had resulted in a budget deficit of over $150 billion in 2002

But anyway, what I really like about Obama is that he's gone 29-3 in his bracket picks over the first two days. You have to spend a lot of time watching college basketball to be that good.

Wow. I recommend putting ice on that.


Saturday, March 19, 2011

JudicialWatch: Misunderstanderers of Islam Recruiting Youngsters to Slaughter Children of Non-Believers

JudicialWatch has released documents it obtained from the Defense Department that detail an organized campaign by Islamofascists to recruit children and to launch terrorist attacks against the children of "non-believers".

• Extremist groups in Saudi Arabia and Yemen used religion as the main mechanism for recruiting juveniles. Extremist groups preferred juveniles who were poor or involved in illegal activities since they made easy targets for recruitment.

• Extremist groups are not looking for a particular characteristic in a recruit, but prefer juveniles who are poor or are involved in drinking and drugs. The juveniles are looking for happiness and fulfillment in their lives, and they have not found it. For these reasons they are susceptible to being brainwashed by extremist groups.

• No juvenile has resisted taking part in an operation. Most juveniles are eager to participate after hearing a religious speech given by one of the trainers at the camp.

• The Terrorist and Extremist Groups (TEGS) justify their attacks on young children (ages 5 through 17) by claiming that the children are either non-believers or children of non-believers. The attacks on children are deliberate actions.

• The attacks on children are psychological operations against non-believers to prevent them from organizing against the TEGS. The TEGS attack schools and buses to maximize psychological effect. Attacks against children in schools and buses are used because they are easy targets. The attacks are conducted to show non-believers how little the TEGS think of non-believers’ lives who are against Islam.

• The TEGS consider attacks on children legitimate. The TEGS believe the attacks on children are a religious good deed and attackers will go to heaven. The TEGS encourage their members to launch attacks on children.

• Juvenile females are recruited into the extremist groups, but not for operational purposes. The juvenile females become brides for extremist members.

If you're waiting patiently for America's un-indicted co-conspirators like CAIR to denounce these 7th century barbarians, I'd advise you not to hold your breath.


After standing idly by for three weeks waiting for the world to step up, Obama launches Tomahawk attacks, stating that he "cannot stand idly by"

Bold, decisive action. That's what I think of when I contemplate the presidency of Barack Obama. Not Motown parties, not golf, not pickup basketball games, not NCAA brackets, not fundraisers, not vacations, not pontificating about the benefits of public sector unions, no, none of those things.

Just bold, decisive action.

President Obama said today he authorized U.S. missile strikes on Libya as part of a "broad coalition" seeking to protect Libyan citizens from attacks by dictator Moammar Gadhafi.

"This is not an outcome the United States or any of our partners sought," Obama said from Brazil, later adding: "But we cannot stand idly by when a tyrant tells his people that there will be no mercy."

Obama, who is starting a five-day tour of Latin America, also said he is "deeply aware of the risks of any military action, no matter what limits we place on it," and "it's not a choice that I make lightly."

Using the word "coalition" five times in a three-minute address, Obama said, "we are answering the calls of a threatened people, and we are acting in the interests of the United States and the world."

Obama also repeated that he will not use ground troops in what has been dubbed "Operation Waffle Ditherer".

Okay, I made up that last part.

Although my operation name is probably a little bit more apt than "Aurora Dawn", considering as how the mad despot of Libya has been slaughtering people for three weeks now.